XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen
From: invalid@invalid.invalid
Ned Ludd wrote:
>
> "brian mitchell" wrote in message
> news:8gu7vbhk6v4dlqf11npoku6gn5087pvup4@4ax.com...
>> "Ned Ludd" wrote:
>>
>>> Where is that Theravada quote? It's a great quote. Nagarjuna
>>> used it, I believe, to help monks NOT think about women, but the
>>> quote is actually just a description of a human being, any human
>>> being. Ah yes...
>>> ---
>>> Full of many kinds of filth, producer of much excrement, as ripe as a
>>> midden-pool, a tumor, a great wound filled up with pus and blood, as
>>> though
>>> sunk in a cesspit the body oozes water and ever filth outflows. Tied
>>> together by sixty tendons and plastered with plaster of flesh, tightly
>>> jacketed with skin - with no value, this body of filth. A connected
>>> skeleton
>>> of bones bound together with sinew cords producing various postures by
>>> conditioned things combined. Set out with certainty of death and near to
>>> King Mortality but having rejected it just here a man goes as he likes.
>>> Covered over with ignorance and tied with the fourfold tie, enmeshed in
>>> the
>>> net of tendencies this body sinks in the flood. Hitched to the five
>>> hindrances and so, affected by thoughts, accompanied by craving's root and
>>> wrapped by delusion's wrappings - this body continues on, made to go by
>>> kamma's means, its existence in the end destroyed, all sorts of beings
>>> perish. Those ordinary people, blinded fools, thinking their bodies belong
>>> to them fill up the fearful cemeteries and seize repeated birth. Those who
>>> abandon this body as one would a dung-smeared snake, having vomited
>>> being's
>>> root, will, taintless, Nibbana attain.
>>> - Verses of the Elder Bhikkhus 567-576
>>> ---
>>>
>>> So, can we agree that this is a valid description of each and
>>> every one of us?
>>
>> Absolutely not, for the flesh is the avenue of all delights, at least
>> if one includes the brain in the flesh.
>>
>> Isn't that quote just as dualistic in intent, body vs mind, as
>> dividing consciousness into watcher and watched? There's quite a
>> puritanical streak to be found in Buddhist texts, imo.
>>
>
> Of course it is dualistic. It's the worst kind of dualism, because
> it makes people hate their bodies. You, me and everyone is alive
> because 30 trillion cells in our body are working their asses off
> 24/7 to keep us alive.
>
> 'Puritanical' is a pale indictment of much Buddhist thought. Are
> we on the same page that the original, over-arching, fundamental
> goal of Buddhism, was the elimination of desire, to the point of
> "not returning", ie. not coming back, not continuing the endless
> cycles of samsara?
>
> How bleak is that? What kind of medicine is that quote? If we
> are to assume that all the sutras are medicine set forth to combat
> a disease, what medicine is the above "Body Bag" quote, from the
> Sutta Pitaka? And by extension, how powerful and deadly is the
> disease that it is set forth to combat?
>
> Ned
>
>
Unfortunately "much Buddhist thought" is not the message delivered by the
Buddha, but other peoples' thoughts on the subject. What was his message,
exactly? As long as you are owned by desire you are fucked, but you can
become the master of your self, and move beyond suffering. That's it in
one sentence. The ending of reincarnation should more properly be
considered a Hindu contribution to the mess, imo.
--
email: noname.1234567.abcdef@gmail.com
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
