Buddhism - a paradox?

earl said:
"Suppose Malunkyaputra, that a man has been wounded by a poison arrow, and his friends and family are about to call a doctor. Wait, he says, I will not let this arrow be removed until I have learned the caste of the man who shot me. I have to know how tall he is, what family he comes from, where they live, what kind of wood his bow is made from, what fletcher made his arrows. when I know these things, you may proceed to take the arrow out and give an antidote for the poison. What would you think of such a man?"

"He would be a fool, blessed One...His questions have nothing to do with getting the arrow out, and he would die before they are answered."

"
Click to expand...
That is a great quote, which I agree and disagree at the same time... While it is a waste of time to ponder questions that are either unanswerable or unhelpful in the short term, knowing all you can about source of your trouble IS important.

An easy rebutal to that phrase would be "It is important to know those things to make sure it doesn't happen again".

Thanks.
 
They give, they might be wrong, you MAY follow, they just being honest and a friend of You
 
I'm under the impression that at the heart of Buddhism is the edict:

"Anything we teach could be wrong; we are fallible, learn for yourself"

And yet Buddhism seems fairly steeped in traditions and doctrines across the different schools.

Does this mean that my initial impression is flawed, or does it mean that Buddhism is its own paradox?

Simply a curious question. :)
Click to expand...
This is why i love buddhism. It does not force you to follow, it encourages thinking for yourself, which is what more religions need, and hardly ever do.
 
human1111 said:
That is a great quote, which I agree and disagree at the same time... While it is a waste of time to ponder questions that are either unanswerable or unhelpful in the short term, knowing all you can about source of your trouble IS important.

An easy rebutal to that phrase would be "It is important to know those things to make sure it doesn't happen again".

Thanks.
Click to expand...

let me see if i understand...

using the analogy given...

your contention is that if the man did know who made the arrow, that would somehow prevent him from being shot by another arrow?

:confused:
 
Postmaster said:
I think this applies to all religions of the world. Although I'm not one to answer this I would say yes. In Christianity we have the Old Testament telling us an Eye for an eye but in the New Testament telling us to forgive.



"Anything we teach could be wrong; we are fallible, learn for yourself"


That phrase is great :)^

I live my life in a paradox philosophy, nothing is right, yet everything is right. I have been doing so for the past year.
Click to expand...

Hey Postmaster, just a quick correction, the eye for an eye verse in context is God directing his people in a legal system under a theocracy. If I kill one of your cows in return I will give you one of mine back...hence an eye for an eye. IT has nothing to do with forgiveness, in fact many verses in the OT talk to about forgiving just like the NT which means their is no paradox. Food for thought streetbob
 
earl said:
Bananabrain, I essentially agree with you, but then I'd make both a heretical buddhist and a heretical monotheist. The school of buddhism I mostly associate with is zen and it very much stresses the importance of getting beyond the artificial confinement of words and concepts to what simply "Is." Similarly, the approach to Christian mysticism I would relate to is the apophatic one- to simply stop trying to imagine & out-think "God" allowing whatever "Is" to manifest within for you. For me, the meeting point for all mystical paths is in the "cloud of unknowing." Take care, Earl
Click to expand...

Hi,

For me, a post like clear water; thanks for that Earl. I see irony in zen being the practice "beyond words" but if you search for books on the subject on Amazon (.com) you get 67,816 (and counting!).

s.
 
in fact many verses in the OT talk to about forgiving just like the NT which means their is no paradox.
Click to expand...

Check out this website and some of the forums...

(moderator edit)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bananabrain said:
heh.

the paradox of dharma viewpoints for me is that you guys talk about the non-reality of G!D in exactly the same terms that we use to explore the absolute reality. that always cracks me up - that we agree on almost completely nothing in practical terms yet have such a meeting of minds in mystical terms.

b'shalom

bananabrain
Click to expand...

Your point is well taken. Mystics tend to arrive at the same place. The Buddhism found in the Pali canon, I would say, tends to go for the apophatic methodology. For example, our self is not the five holding aggregates of form, sensation, imagination, experience, and sensory consciousness. The exception is that nirvana (Pali, nibbana) is understood to be positive, that is, ultimate reality (Pali, parama-sacca) which is increate.

In the Mahayana canon, especially in the Lankavatara Sutra and the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, it (i.e., the absolute) appears to be much more positive. The methodology towards realizing it is more kataphatic. In some of the schools of Ch'an (Ja., Zen) the emphasis is on seeing Buddha Mind which could best be described as a noetic animative power which because we are so attached to the body, we are unable to commune with in our ordinary lives.


Blessing,


Asanga
 
PainterMan6661 said:
Hi,
Well why do they follow his teachings ?
Buddha didnt follow anyones teachings ?
Buddha didnt sit in temples reading Dhamas and following rules etc.
He got out there and discovered the truth for himself.

I didnt mean you try to become another Buddha.
You become your own Buddha/Christ whatever.
Click to expand...


Nice... Nice, like it....
 
I, Brian- good point to make- the idea always was, I thought, that buddha himself was not a man who believed in following tradition blindly, for the sake of it... in the brahmana sutra, he explains this nicely, and says summat along the lines of- what makes a brahman? its aint the outfits, or sticking slavishly to the rules or the noble birth which makes a person brahman... but by thought, and action, one is brahman...

a big gold star to u, painter man... this is my whole point entirely, especially here, in the forum... what the buddha might or might not have said is not the point, but to utilize the teachings so that u can gain what he did for urself, that's the point...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top