File spoon-archives/bataille.archive/bataille_1999/bataille.9902, message 10


Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 19:03:05 -0500 (EST)
From: Marsha Faizi <mfaizi-AT-rbnet.com>
Subject: Re: Yada! Yada! Yada!


Don Soncha wrote:

>Not all Buddhists base their religion on memory and recitation, Faizi.

I agree with you on this, Don Soncha. But I have known many who are like
that. I think that anytime that you make thought into a religion, it greatly
diminishes the thought. 

>You
>gotta appreciate the first great name in Buddhist thought after the Buddha,
that
>Nietzschean of Tibet, Nagarjuna, founder of the Madhyamaka.  

I have some appreciation of that thinker. I have read excerpts. Pretty
interesting concept that I think explains plenty. 

>Get you a copy of
>the Madhyamakakarika.  All things are empty of inherent existence, he
>proclaims.  

I think that there is some truth in this. I have thought about it long and
hard. Things are caused. Cause and effect.

>Nothing has essence.  Everything is relative.  Because the self is
>caused, it has no real, fundamental existence.  

I understand that the thing that is myself has been caused. There can be no
ego in the place that cause is understood. There can be nothing in the place
that cause is understood other than effect and effect is always subject to
cause. Therefore, there is no inherent existence. 

>Hence, there's nothing to
>memorize, nothing to recite.  

Nothing at all to memorize and recite. The narrow path is one that must be
forged by one's own hand. There is no path to enlightenment to be followed.
If that was so, then, there would be any number of enlightened human beings
and, obviously, there are not. It is not a matter of following A to B to C
to get to a certain place. Indeed, to do so would mean the adding on of
delusion rather than the taking away of delusion. 

>Everything is imputed by the mind, says Nagarjuna,
>even the absence of inherent existence itself!  

I agree with this.

>The reason yer academicians
>suffer the way they do, he would have said, is because they don't see
things the
>way they really are.  

I agree with that.

>Consequently, and I think contrary to your claim, a
>Buddhist of this sort understands that a proper denial of this stupid
>conception

A Buddhist who could truly understand this concept could never be a follower
of religion. I have some acquaintances who are more knowledgable about
Buddhism that myself. Though they have studied much of Buddhism and admire
the thought of Buddha and Nagarjuna, they are not followers. Like myself,
their view is that there is no path to be studied but a path that must be
forged by one's own hand; that one will suffer on this way but not forever.

With no intention of arrogance, I say that I am on this path. Took me many
years to come to it. As happens with many people, I rather fell flat on my
face with a shitload of delusion on my back. I consider that I was fortunate
to have survived that. Though it was a hardship at the time, I also realize
that I was  fortunate to have fallen flat on my face with a ton of delusion
on my back.  Realizing my good fortune, I know that I can never delude
myself again. I realized that I cannot afford that; that, if I fall into
delusion, it could well be my demise. That is all right, of course. We all
have to die but I prefer to die by my own hand than to be victim of cause
and effect that is product of delusion. 

>of inherent existence requires a correspondingly deep and sustained familiarity
>not with anything memorizable, but to the contrary, with a meditation on
>emptiness; 

It is the confrontation with true emptiness; the realization that there is
nothing for you in this world. Not just a meditation on emptiness but the
reality of that emptiness. This does not involve some mere exercise. You can
pretend it till the cows come home based on some meditation. But I say that
you do not know emptiness until all your delusions fall through. 

It is a fine thing if one can prepared for such an occurrence. But I am not
convinced that this is possible. 

>the very thing, I think you properly trounce academicians for
>neglecting through idolatry!

Precisely. I think that many people who profess to be followers of Buddha
are academicians who will never know emptiness. 

Faizi

>Gifting a nod no more truly established than chaos....

Same to you, Don Soncha.


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005