Regarding this Zen Doctrine of ours, since it was first transmitted, it has never taught that men should seek or learning from concepts. "Studying the Way" is just a figure of speech. It is a method of arousing people's interest in the early stages of their development. In fact, the Way is not something that can be studied. Study leads to the retention of concepts and so the Way is entirely misunderstood. Moreover, the Way is not something specially existing; it is called the Mahāyāna (great vehicle) Mind - Mind which is not to be found inside, outside or in the middle. Truly it is not located anywhere. The first step is to refrain from knowledge-based concepts. This implies that if your were to follow the empirical method to the utmost limit, on reaching that limit you would still be unable to locate Mind. The way is spiritual Truth and was originally without name or title. It was only because people ignorantly sought for it empirically that the Buddhas appeared and taught them to eradicate this method of approach. Fearing that nobody would understand, they selected the name "Way". You must not allow this name to lead you into forming a mental concept of a road. So it is said, "When the fish is caught we pay no more attention to the trap" (Chuang Tzû). When body and mind achieve spontaneity, the Way is reached and Mind is understood.
Author comment: This passage has a strong Taoist flavour. The quotation from Chuang and the use of the word Tao is used throughout ...
Question : As Taoism is pinned at arround the same time as Siddhartha's life (Middle Way) but in a diferent place, could there have been some "Way" teachings that preceded both, but "Not Speaking" about the exact same thing?
Laotzi's take was diferent then Confucius but more similar to Gautama's Middle Way ... strange coincidence? Or Truth has it's way of emerging out of bullshit no matter the historical context?
Submitted January 29, 2020 at 09:36PM by robeewankenobee https://ift.tt/2U8K8if
No comments:
Post a Comment