Are all forms of Buddhism Monistic?

mattityahu

mattityahu

Hopefully Orthodox
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Southampton, UK
Please forgive, for I'm a total noob when it comes to Buddhism. I've heard that some Buddhists (Zen?) use the phrase "If you see the Buddha, kill him", and that it means that you haven't realised that you are the Buddha, because all is one (monism). Is this right?

And if it is, what about things like love and hate, good and evil, are they all one and the same too?

Many thanks in advance,
Matt
 
Hi Matt,

Well I've yet to use the phrase myself, but welcome to IO :)

Separating stuff intellectually into good and bad, right and wrong, ugly and beautiful etc is essential and useful, it's how our minds work but it isn't reality. They are just different views. Reality is an undivided, ineffable whole. This whole is the ultimate Truth, but it doesn't help you to decide which top to put on.

Snoopy.
 
Snoopy said:
Hi Matt,

Well I've yet to use the phrase myself yet, but welcome to IO :)

Separating stuff intellectually into good and bad, ugly and beautiful etc is essential and useful, it's how our minds work but it's isn't reality. Reality is an undivided, ineffable whole. This whole is the ultimate Truth, but it doesn't help you to decide which top to put on.

Snoopy.
Click to expand...

So there is no difference in reality between love, hate, good, bad, the whole shebang?
 
mattityahu said:
Please forgive, for I'm a total noob when it comes to Buddhism. I've heard that some Buddhists (Zen?) use the phrase "If you see the Buddha, kill him", and that it means that you haven't realised that you are the Buddha, because all is one (monism). Is this right?

And if it is, what about things like love and hate, good and evil, are they all one and the same too?

Many thanks in advance,
Matt
Click to expand...
Dhammapada 1:1-5
1. All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts. If a man speaks or acts with an evil thought, pain follows him, as the wheel follows the foot of the ox that draws the carriage.
2. All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts. If a man speaks or acts with a pure thought, happiness follows him, like a shadow that never leaves him. 3. 'He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me,'--in those who harbour such thoughts hatred will never cease.
4. 'He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me,'--in those who do not harbour such thoughts hatred will cease.
5. For hatred does not cease by hatred at any time: hatred ceases by love, this is an old rule.​
Notice how there is a difference...



mattityahu said:
So if we are to be in touch with Reality then we should stop thinking in terms of the categories of good and bad?
Click to expand...
Attachment and aversion are the things that can lead to unskillful habits.
 
seattlegal said:
Dhammapada 1:1-5
1. All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts. If a man speaks or acts with an evil thought, pain follows him, as the wheel follows the foot of the ox that draws the carriage.
2. All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts. If a man speaks or acts with a pure thought, happiness follows him, like a shadow that never leaves him. 3. 'He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me,'--in those who harbour such thoughts hatred will never cease.
4. 'He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me,'--in those who do not harbour such thoughts hatred will cease.
5. For hatred does not cease by hatred at any time: hatred ceases by love, this is an old rule.​
Notice how there is a difference...
Click to expand...

Do you, then, disagree with Snoopy about whether there is a difference in Reality between them? Perhaps the passage is talking about practical reality (if, as Snoopy suggests, there is a distinction between the two).

Attachment and aversion are the things that can lead to unskillful habits.
Click to expand...

Could you possibly expand on this point and how it relates to what we've said so far?

Thanks,
Matt
 
mattityahu said:
So if we are to be in touch with Reality then we should stop thinking in terms of the categories of good and bad?
Click to expand...

No, because we also need to be "in touch" with reality with a small "r". They are both but two valid perspectives; one need not and should not reject one because one accepts the other.

IMO. :)

s.
 
Sorry, but how can they both be valid if they are contradicting perspectives on reality? There is only one reality, isn't there?

[I don't know whether those "realities" should have "R's" or not...]
 
mattityahu said:
I've heard that some Buddhists (Zen?) use the phrase "If you see the Buddha, kill him", and that it means that you haven't realised that you are the Buddha, because all is one (monism). Is this right?
Click to expand...

Zen often uses shocking and paradoxical stuff like this to try to shake us out of our regular mental grooves. This phrase doesn't seem so shocking now though of course as it's so well known! I think it basically means "Don't be a slave to teachings, you have to find the meaning of your life for yourself, within you." (But don't go to the other extreme and read nothing!)

Hence the need to meditate. :)

s.
 
mattityahu said:
Dhammapada 1:1-5
1. All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts. If a man speaks or acts with an evil thought, pain follows him, as the wheel follows the foot of the ox that draws the carriage.
2. All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts. If a man speaks or acts with a pure thought, happiness follows him, like a shadow that never leaves him. 3. 'He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me,'--in those who harbour such thoughts hatred will never cease.
4. 'He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me,'--in those who do not harbour such thoughts hatred will cease.
5. For hatred does not cease by hatred at any time: hatred ceases by love, this is an old rule.​
Notice how there is a difference...
Click to expand...
Do you, then, disagree with Snoopy about whether there is a difference in Reality between them? Perhaps the passage is talking about practical reality (if, as Snoopy suggests, there is a distinction between the two).
Click to expand...
Well, we might not agree as to theory, but as to practice, I think there is much we can agree upon. I'm a Christian, but I consider the Buddha to be one of my therapists.



Attachment and aversion are the things that can lead to unskillful habits.
Click to expand...
Could you possibly expand on this point and how it relates to what we've said so far?

Thanks,
Matt
Click to expand...
This is what relates to actual practice. Verses 3 & 4 above refer to the hatred and suffering resulting from attachment and aversion. (Attachment to aversive thoughts leading to hatred and continual suffering and anguish...these things can cease if we let go of the attachment and forgive others.)
 
Zen often uses shocking and paradoxical stuff like this to try to shake us out of our regular mental grooves. This phrase doesn't seem so shocking now though of course as it's so well known! I think it basically means "Don't be a slave to teachings, you have to find the meaning of your life for yourself, within you." (But don't go to the other extreme and read nothing!)
Click to expand...

OK, so what does the apparent paradox we've been talking about basically mean?
 
mattityahu said:
Sorry, but how can they both be valid if they are contradicting perspectives on reality? There is only one reality, isn't there?

[I don't know whether those "realities" should have "R's" or not...]
Click to expand...

The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth.

*and*

There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true.

~Niels Bohr
 
mattityahu said:
Sorry, but how can they both be valid if they are contradicting perspectives on reality? There is only one reality, isn't there?

[I don't know whether those "realities" should have "R's" or not...]
Click to expand...

OK, first off, this is just my take! Others may well contradict!....

What we are talking about is contradictory / paradoxical; that doesn't mean they can't be the truth.

Let's call everyday dualistic (polar opposites like good and bad) reality with a small "r".

Let's call the big ineffable one that includes all and is undivided, Reality with a big "R".

Now let's ignore the latter cos we can't talk about the ineffable. :p

So sticking to the first day to day reality.

An example:

My reality is that the Rolling Stones are good and The Beatles are bad. You can tell it's real by checking my CDs.

Your reality is that the Rolling Stones are bad and the Beatles are good.

Bingo! They are both valid and yet they are contradictory.

s.
 
seattlegal said:
The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth.

*and*

There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true.

~Niels Bohr
Click to expand...

Could you give an example where the opposite of a profound truth is also true?
 
Snoopy said:
OK, first off, this is just my take! Others may well contradict!....

What we are talking about is contradictory / paradoxical; that doesn't mean they can't be the truth.

Let's call everyday dualistic (polar opposites like good and bad) reality with a small "r".

Let's call the big ineffable one that includes all and is undivided, Reality with a big "R".

Now let's ignore the latter cos we can't talk about the ineffable. :p

So sticking to the first day to day reality.

An example:

My reality is that the Rolling Stones are good and The Beatles are bad. You can tell it's real by checking my CDs.

Your reality is that the Rolling Stones are bad and the Beatles are good.

Bingo! They are both valid and yet they are contradictory.

s.
Click to expand...

But isn't it clear that the Stones and the Beatles make different music? The difference is certainly actual to my primitive mind. And there either is an absolute standard of musical "goodness" or not.

(Btw, the Beatles are better than the Stones :p)
 
Snoopy said:
OK, first off, this is just my take! Others may well contradict!....

What we are talking about is contradictory / paradoxical; that doesn't mean they can't be the truth.

Let's call everyday dualistic (polar opposites like good and bad) reality with a small "r".

Let's call the big ineffable one that includes all and is undivided, Reality with a big "R".

Now let's ignore the latter cos we can't talk about the ineffable. :p

So sticking to the first day to day reality.

An example:

My reality is that the Rolling Stones are good and The Beatles are bad. You can tell it's real by checking my CDs.

Your reality is that the Rolling Stones are bad and the Beatles are good.

Bingo! They are both valid and yet they are contradictory.

s.
Click to expand...
Does this help? :p
comic2-867.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top