How do you strike a balance between knowledge and practice?
-
Well by no means do I consider myself knowledgeable or well read, but I do like to read up on the dharma a bit. There's always this warning that I hear, that a person might get too caught up by conceptual knowledge of the dharma and this can affect his/her progress in awakening. How do you avoid becoming a victim of your own concepts? Do you all have a method(s) to strike a healthy balance between practising and knowledge?
-
You must know something first before you can put it to practice. If you don't know maths, how do add or subtract? So, knowledge is what one knows - the facts, information, skills and understanding that one has gained, usually thru learning or study (education), discovering and experience (from self or others).
However, don't get the mistaken notion that knowledge is just theory. I say this because this is what I am afraid some might draw this line. Knowledge is gain thru learning and learning includes theory and practical. When I studied chemistry I was taught both theory and practical. However, for sex education it was just only theory!
-
There are theories like gravity. Its not yet fully understood but totally felt.
There are theories like mathematics, flawless in execution but only a concept of mind.
What is it that you are seeking....
-
Practise comes from heart, book reading comes through the mind. The heart is wiser than the mind because the spiritual heart has more Light. People usually say the compassionate heart, and the illumined mind. Before the mind is illumined, it is unlit. The mind can be illumined by the heart, just because the heart has more Light. The mind cannot be illumined just by reading. That kind of reading is only information gathering and nothing more. Some became bloated with ego from readng too much. They think they became greater than others just because they have read more than others and so they are proud. Humility comes from the heart, not from the mind. All the goodness of mankind comes from the heart. The heart of kindness, love, peace, concern, empathy, etc, all comes from the heart, never from the mind. The heart has to guide the mind only then will the mind be safe. The mind is like a knife. You can use this knife to cut someone or use it to cut an apple and share your fruit with others. The mind without guidence from the heart is dangerous. Look around you, all the masterminds of evil are mentally very developed. But their clever minds are all unlit. There is no light in their minds, that is why they can't see what is right from wrong. If you keep thinking about the spiritual heart, its light will someday shines into your mind and guide it from there. But you must always keep on thinking and feeling the heart. There are some great minds who are/were being guided by the kind heart, such as Mother Teresa, President Nelson Mandela and Dr Tan Cheng Bock. Their minds listened to their hearts and they acted according to the conscience from their hearts. Their life stories can teach you something wise.
-
Originally posted by Urdhaytb:
Practise comes from heart, book reading comes through the mind. The heart is wiser than the mind because the spiritual heart has more Light. People usually say the compassionate heart, and the illumined mind. Before the mind is illumined, it is unlit. The mind can be illumined by the heart, just because the heart has more Light. The mind cannot be illumined just by reading. That kind of reading is only information gathering and nothing more. Some became bloated with ego from readng too much. They think they became greater than others just because they have read more than others and so they are proud. Humility comes from the heart, not from the mind. All the goodness of mankind comes from the heart. The heart of kindness, love, peace, concern, empathy, etc, all comes from the heart, never from the mind. The heart has to guide the mind only then will the mind be safe. The mind is like a knife. You can use this knife to cut someone or use it to cut an apple and share your fruit with others. The mind without guidence from the heart is dangerous. Look around you, all the mastermind of evils are mentally very developed. But their clever minds are all unlit. There is no light in their minds, that is why they can't see what is right from wrong. If you keep thinking about the spiritual heart, its light will someday shines into your mind and guide it from there. But you must always keep on thinking and feeling the heart. There are some great minds who are/were being guided by the kind heart, such as Mother Teresa, President Nelson Mandela and Dr Tan Cheng Bock. Their minds listened to their hearts and they acted according to the conscience from their hearts. Their life stories can teach you something wise.
What if one is of one heart and mind?
-
Originally posted by Urdhaytb:
Practise comes from heart, book reading comes through the mind. The heart is wiser than the mind because the spiritual heart has more Light. People usually say the compassionate heart, and the illumined mind. Before the mind is illumined, it is unlit. The mind can be illumined by the heart, just because the heart has more Light. The mind cannot be illumined just by reading. That kind of reading is only information gathering and nothing more. Some became bloated with ego from readng too much. They think they became greater than others just because they have read more than others and so they are proud. Humility comes from the heart, not from the mind. All the goodness of mankind comes from the heart. The heart of kindness, love, peace, concern, empathy, etc, all comes from the heart, never from the mind. The heart has to guide the mind only then will the mind be safe. The mind is like a knife. You can use this knife to cut someone or use it to cut an apple and share your fruit with others. The mind without guidence from the heart is dangerous. Look around you, all the mastermind of evils are mentally very developed. But their clever minds are all unlit. There is no light in their minds, that is why they can't see what is right from wrong. If you keep thinking about the spiritual heart, its light will someday shines into your mind and guide it from there. But you must always keep on thinking and feeling the heart. There are some great minds who are/were being guided by the kind heart, such as Mother Teresa, President Nelson Mandela and Dr Tan Cheng Bock. Their minds listened to their hearts and they acted according to the conscience from their hearts. Their life stories can teach you something wise.
I am blinded by your statement: "The mind can be illumined by the heart, just because the heart has more Light."
I have heard of brilliant mind, not brilliant heart. Where does the heart get the Light?
-
When the mind surrenders its limited freedom to the heart, it becomes one with the heart. It's like a drop of water entering into the ocean and become one with the ocean. Mother Teresa is a good example. When our mind has learnt the art of surrender to the heart, it is a very great blessing. Higher than the heart is the divine Light within the heart. That is the source of all wisdom. Meditation on the spiritual heart (heart chakra) will bring forth the qualities of the heart.
-
Originally posted by I No Stupid:
I am blinded by your statement: "The mind can be illumined by the heart, just because the heart has more Light."
I have heard of brilliant mind, not brilliant heart. Where does the heart get the Light?
You have not heard of the brilliant heart, but have you heard of the compassionate heart of Lord Buddha? It was his compassionate heart that promted him to leave his kingdom to seek the Truth and only then his mind became illuimined. His mind followed his heart.
PS: You have never heard of the brilliant heart because on one says so. I didin't say brilliant heart. You have never heard of light within the heart because no one told you so, so you didn't know, but I knew because someone taught me so and even show me so in his meditation, writings and spiritual ways.
-
The knowledge from your well read is hearsay of others, the most is surrounding earth and human sphere, therefore it is conceptual and it generates karma. The knowledge of buddha dharma is from your own universal heart, and it aides you with an enlarging view beyond time and space of commonality that bridge harmoniously, while simultaneously residing at “tranquilizied” compassion. There are many methods, I use chanting of the inherent Namo Amitabha Buddha, and directed towards pureland of inherent Amitabha that having the vow of our heart & mind to achieve complete liberation from the delusion of samsara world
“The word nien-fo [Buddha Recitation] is originally a Chinese translation of the Sanskrit compound Buddhanusmrti, meaning ‘the recollection or the bearing in mind (anusmrti) of the attributes of a Buddha.’ The practice of Buddhanusmrti itself has a long his tory in India, extending back to well before the rise of Mahayana Buddhism…
“An early form of Buddhanusmrti (Buddha Remembrance or Buddha Recitation) can be found in the Nikayas of the Pali Canon: ‘In the Nikayas, the Buddha … advised his disciples to think of him and his virtues as if they saw his body before his eyes, whereby they would be enabled to accumulate merit and attain Nirvana or be saved from transmigrating in the evil paths.’ ” D. T. Suzuki, The Eastern Buddhist / Vol. 3, No. 4: 317 #2146
When the term and its practical lore were introduced to China, they came as a highly developed meditative system, with ties to a diversity of Buddhist scriptures and deities. Amitabha and the Pure Land sutras represented but one among many such systems. The major Indian sources and early Chinese treatises on Buddhanusmrti treat it as a complex practice involving several different approaches to contemplation.
At its most basic level, Buddha-mindfulness begins with visual recollection of the thirty-two major marks and eighty minor excellencies of the Buddha’s glorified ‘body of form’ (Skt/rupa-kaya). Progressing to successively deeper levels of practice, one may dispense with recollection of the Buddha’s physical form and instead contemplate his boundless spiritual powers and omniscience until one ultimately arrives at the Buddha’s formless essence of enlightenment itself – a practice known as mindful recollection of the Buddha’s ‘body of truth or reality’ (Skt/Dharma-kaya). Thus, although Buddhanusmrti may take a particular Buddha or Bodhisattva (such as Amitabha) as its starting point, it ultimately grounds itself in universal Mahayana truths.
This feature plants Buddhanusmrti firmly within the mainstream of Mahayana Buddhist practice, connecting it with the meditations on emptiness that we more often associate with the Perfection of Wisdom and other less devotional traditions of Buddhist scriptures.”Lopez / 95: 360-361
-
Koans. Koans cannot be solved by intellectual.
-
Lastime I was thinking abt the meaning behind flower sermon. I think the whole day also dunno the meaning. Maybe it's beyond logical analysis.
-
jui, do you have a meditative practice yourself?
studying the dharma must be complemented with true inner insight practice. otherwise wisdom will not arise
-
Originally posted by Blacktron:
Lastime I was thinking abt the meaning behind flower sermon. I think the whole day also dunno the meaning.
Maybe it’s beyond logical analysis.
There are many books like the one you mentioned. Very complicated and confusing. Books written by realised masters are very easy to understand. Most books were written by unenlightened writers. At most, they try to interpret what they know. It's very much like the blind leading the blind. When someone has been to a place many times, their explainations will be very clear and vivid. Those who never been there could only imagine what its like and when they try to explain, it's very complicating because they are using the complex human mind to explain. When a Master explain something, they dun need too many words. Their minds are very clear and tranquil. Like a calm sea that is so calm that you can see what's at the bottom of the sea. Most minds of ordinary writers are like the choppy sea when it is stormy, so all you end up is confusion.
-
Blind lead blind both drop into hole.
-
Knowledge is what you know, practice is put your knowledge into actions. Buddhism is both knowledge and actions. You must know first before you can put into practice. That is my understanding. Correct me if I'm wrong.
-
Good to learn Dharma concepts but cannot neglect the cultivation of the mind. There is no one-fit-for all answers. Though i think it will be useful to know oneself - like your strength and weakness. For example, i know i have some anger issue, so i try practise metta meditation to help overcome this problem. However, I can't overcome my anger issue solely relying on learning dharma concepts. When i learn how to do metta meditation, teacher also teaches some basic understanding on metta sutta and the meditation techniques. He also provided guided meditation. Then we have to practise daily at home to overcome our bad habits. But if one just solely do the practice without any understanding, then also in danger of practising wrongly. Perhaps one good way to balance is to aware the amount of time you have spent on cultivating the mind and learning Dharma concepts.. then make the adjustment accordingly.
-
Originally posted by Blacktron:
Blind lead blind both drop into hole.
Disagree. So far I have not seen a blind falling into a hole. Am I blind?
-
Thank you all for your replies. I'll keep them in mind as much as possible.
Amitayus48 thank you also for the history lesson of nien fo.
AEN: I'm not sure if this constitues "meditative practice", but everyday during lunch time I'll take a walk by myself and watch my footsteps, breathing, surroundings without labelling whatever is felt, seen, heard etc. Basically whenever I'm walking anywhere I'll do this. Lunch itself is eating meditation... as much as possible lah. Eat slowly, observe without labelling as much as possible. Repeat practice on the walk back to office.
Sitting meditation, not as frequently as I should. When I do it's usually shamatha though. Trying to start doing it everyday from this month, hopefully I'll spare myself lame excuses this time.
-
Jui, you should be doing fine. Just keep up your learning and apply what you learn in your life. Should you be interested in vipassana meditation, or other direct paths like dzogchen, mahamudra, or the path I followed which is a mixture of selfinquiry and other direct contemplations, its good to seek an experienced teacher who can guide you.
-
Thanks for the advice AEN :)
-
Buddhist practice involves three complementary aspects – view, meditation and action. The ‘view’ is what corresponds to the metaphysical perspective, investigation of the ultimate nature of things, of the phenomenal world and of the mind. Once this view has been established, ‘meditation’ consists of familiarizing oneself (distinctively) with that view and integrating it through spiritual practice into the stream of consciousness in such a way that the view becomes second nature (post-meditation). ‘Action’ is the expression in the outer world of the inner knowledge acquired through ‘view’ and ‘meditation’. Afterwards, it becomes a matter of applying and maintaining that knowledge in all circumstances.
In this way, it seems reasonable that Buddhist ideas can perfectly well impregnate someone’s mind, bringing them many benefits without their necessarily renouncing what they do. In theory, there are said to be eighty-four thousand approaches, or entrance doors, in Buddhism. The large number is to indicate, in fact, anyone can start wherever they are. To climb Mount Everest, you could set out from the traffic jams of a Los Angeles suburb or from the lush greenery of Ireland’s countryside. The goal is the same, but the ways you might travel are different. In the same way, on the spiritual path we all have to start at a point where we find ourselves, each with a different character, set of disposition, intellectual and belief structure. Everyone can find the particular means tailored to their needs, allowing them to work on their thoughts, gradually setting themselves free from the yoke of the negative emotions, and finally perceive the ultimate nature of the mind.
Yet, simple though it might seem at first, the liberation of thought is neither an optimistic view of things nor a collection of recipes without any basis or outcome. The techniques it uses are derived from a ‘contemplative science’ thousands of years old, built up at the cost of considerable effort by hermits practicing, quintessentially, for hours a day over twenty or thirty years of their lives. It is inevitable that, without taking some steps in the context of their own experiences to see what it’s all about, some people will feel doubtful about any knowledge obtained using such unfamiliar methods. Every science has its own instruments, as without a telescope one cannot see the moon’s craters, as without contemplative practice one cannot see the nature of the mind…
Nevertheless, Buddhism doesn’t claim to have discovered any new truths. The very notion of ‘newness’ is, of course, foreign to any spiritual knowledge, which aims at recognizing the very nature of things. But what distinguishes Buddhism from a purely intellectual analysis is that it’s derived from direct contemplation of the nature of the mind. It’s acquired by experience, not just conceptual reasoning. Nor is it knowledge that’s left as theory, like a doctor’s prescription left on your bedside table without the medicine having ever been taken. It’s actually put to work to eliminate from the stream of mind everything that veils its underlying nature…
Perhaps most reasonably, to become a Buddhist one’s not obliged to adopt the cultural context in which Buddhism was born and in which it was able to develop in the East. Rather the essence of Buddhism isn’t ‘Buddhist’, its universal because it touches the basic mechanisms of the mind. Buddhism considers each person has to start where they are and use the methods that match their nature and their personal capacities. That specific flexibility and richness of possibilities could be useful to anyone without Buddhism renouncing its fundamental values.In this manner, Buddhism is a search that concerns any human being, Buddhist or not. Perhaps one could say it is not a question of how Buddhism fits into one's life, but rather how one's life fits into Buddhism.
As such, it becomes neither a matter of adapting the teachings of Buddhism nor establishing a balance between knowledge and practice, but of being sure to understand its very essence – which doesn’t need any adaptation, for it corresponds to the deepest preoccupations of anyone, whoever and wherever they may be.
-
Originally posted by AtlasWept:
Buddhist practice involves three complementary aspects – view, meditation and action. The ‘view’ is what corresponds to the metaphysical perspective, investigation of the ultimate nature of things, of the phenomenal world and of the mind. Once this view has been established, ‘meditation’ consists of familiarizing oneself (distinctively) with that view and integrating it through spiritual practice into the stream of consciousness in such a way that the view becomes second nature (post-meditation). ‘Action’ is the expression in the outer world of the inner knowledge acquired through ‘view’ and ‘meditation’. Afterwards, it becomes a matter of applying and maintaining that knowledge in all circumstances.
In this way, it seems reasonable that Buddhist ideas can perfectly well impregnate someone’s mind, bringing them many benefits without their necessarily renouncing what they do. In theory, there are said to be eighty-four thousand approaches, or entrance doors, in Buddhism. The large number is to indicate, in fact, anyone can start wherever they are. To climb Mount Everest, you could set out from the traffic jams of a Los Angeles suburb or from the lush greenery of Ireland’s countryside. The goal is the same, but the ways you might travel are different. In the same way, on the spiritual path we all have to start at a point where we find ourselves, each with a different character, set of disposition, intellectual and belief structure. Everyone can find the particular means tailored to their needs, allowing them to work on their thoughts, gradually setting themselves free from the yoke of the negative emotions, and finally perceive the ultimate nature of the mind.
Yet, simple though it might seem at first, the liberation of thought is neither an optimistic view of things nor a collection of recipes without any basis or outcome. The techniques it uses are derived from a ‘contemplative science’ thousands of years old, built up at the cost of considerable effort by hermits practicing, quintessentially, for hours a day over twenty or thirty years of their lives. It is inevitable that, without taking some steps in the context of their own experiences to see what it’s all about, some people will feel doubtful about any knowledge obtained using such unfamiliar methods. Every science has its own instruments, as without a telescope one cannot see the moon’s craters, as without contemplative practice one cannot see the nature of the mind…
Nevertheless, Buddhism doesn’t claim to have discovered any new truths. The very notion of ‘newness’ is, of course, foreign to any spiritual knowledge, which aims at recognizing the very nature of things. But what distinguishes Buddhism from a purely intellectual analysis is that it’s derived from direct contemplation of the nature of the mind. It’s acquired by experience, not just conceptual reasoning. Nor is it knowledge that’s left as theory, like a doctor’s prescription left on your bedside table without the medicine having ever been taken. It’s actually put to work to eliminate from the stream of mind everything that veils its underlying nature…
Perhaps most reasonably, to become a Buddhist one’s not obliged to adopt the cultural context in which Buddhism was born and in which it was able to develop in the East. Rather the essence of Buddhism isn’t ‘Buddhist’, its universal because it touches the basic mechanisms of the mind. Buddhism considers each person has to start where they are and use the methods that match their nature and their personal capacities. That specific flexibility and richness of possibilities could be useful to anyone without Buddhism renouncing its fundamental values.In this manner, Buddhism is a search that concerns any human being, Buddhist or not. Perhaps one could say it is not a question of how Buddhism fits into one's life, but rather how one's life fits into Buddhism.
As such, it becomes neither a matter of adapting the teachings of Buddhism nor establishing a balance between knowledge and practice, but of being sure to understand its very essence – which doesn’t need any adaptation, for it corresponds to the deepest preoccupations of anyone, whoever and wherever they may be.
Well said. In particular, “The techniques it uses are derived from a ‘contemplative science’ thousands of years old, …”. Siddhartha Gautama in deep contemplation discovered the Noble Truths. He had lived amongst the ascetics and yogis who practiced meditation, and he spent considerable waking hours mulling over why there is ‘birth, ageing, sickness and death’. He would have had debated long and hard with Brahmin priests and nobles, spiritual gurus and intellectuals of the day. All these require intellectual prowess. And Siddhartha had lots of it.
Your concluding paragraph is succinct.
-
AtlasWept did it again! Thanks... To I No Stupid: you missed this part, "But what distinguishes Buddhism from a purely intellectual analysis is that it’s derived from direct contemplation of the nature of the mind. It’s acquired by experience, not just conceptual reasoning. Nor is it knowledge that’s left as theory, like a doctor’s prescription left on your bedside table without the medicine having ever been taken. It’s actually put to work to eliminate from the stream of mind everything that veils its underlying nature…"
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
AtlasWept did it again! Thanks…
To I No Stupid: you missed this part, “But what distinguishes Buddhism from a purely intellectual analysis is that it’s derived from direct contemplation of the nature of the mind. It’s acquired by experience, not just conceptual reasoning. Nor is it knowledge that’s left as theory, like a doctor’s prescription left on your bedside table without the medicine having ever been taken. It’s actually put to work to eliminate from the stream of mind everything that veils its underlying nature…”
Going back to Buddhism began as a philosophy ...., I have stated that Siddhartha came up with the Noble Truths by deep contemplation of a 'burning issue' he had in his mind for 6 yrs - the encounters he had when he sneaked out of the palace. This is as good as saying "derived from direct contemplation of the nature of the mind". I had never proffered the term 'purely intellectual analysis' and it certainly wasn't my position but the suggestion of others.
I also said that the 4NTs are not just strict theory but are meant to be put into practice, especially the 4th since that is the solution (way). And I have compared the 4 steps in the Noble Truth as similar to a problem-solving technique. Therefore, any ordinary visitor (other those who had a fixation) will not consider the 4NTs as just knowledge only for theoretical discourse! It never occurred to me that way when I first learned the 4NTs!
Do not confuse how the 4NTs came about with ‘experiential realization’. The day Siddhartha was ‘awakened’ and became the Buddha, he was confronted with the problem of explaining himself. The problem was that his experience (the process by which he arrived at the 4NTs) transcended language and he was initially daunted by the impossibility of conveying it to others. As we all know, he found a way and he often explained by way of metaphor. When one wants to convey an experience which eludes denotative language, it is natural to resort to metaphors. The use of metaphor and analogy is even more characteristic of his preaching than the use of the parable is for Jesus.
Thank you for bringing this up and I think I have nailed the coffin.
-
To jui: http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=4875&p=50535#p50535 Loppon Namdrol: "Study widely and deeply. Dharma learning is like making a deposit in the bank for this and future lives. Panditas attain buddhahood faster than kusulis. N ....... Sonam Wangchug wrote: "Panditas attain enlightenment quicker than kusuli's? How is this so? could you post something in support of this thanks" Sakya Pandita addresses this question extensively in his reply to Nyemo Gomchen: There are two kinds of Buddhist panditas and Buddhist kusalis i.e. the panditas and kusalis of the perfection vehicle will become Buddhas, but it takes a long time, three incalculable eons and so on. The pair of panditas and kusalis of the secret mantra vehicle quickly attain Buddhahood because of the arrangement of inner interconnections. In addition, a so called “pandita� is described as “A scholar in the foundation of outer and inner objects of knowledge.� A so called “kusali� is described as “One who inwardly has the most dedication inwardly after severing all outer distractions.� In terms of actual perfect Buddhahood: first, having become knowledgeable about all objects of knowledge the pandita has severed doubt through hearing, reflection and meditation. Then, because of severing doubt through meditating which makes samadhi essential, gradually attains Buddhahood after actualizing the Dharma of realization is a pandita. A kusali necessarily has the same basis, but when considered alone, a pandita is closer to Buddhahood. Now then, if it is wondered whether there is a conflict with the statement in The Ratnakuta sūtra: Compared with someone who listens for ten eons and then gives explanations to others, when someone who meditates for just a moment, the merit of the latter is greater than the former. The intent of that: the intention is that mediation is when a scholar understands the meaning of the object of meditation, but without understanding what sort of beneficial qualities can there be? Also Vinaya states: Don’t meditate in mountain retreats without being a master of the canon. The Abhidharmakośa states: Possessing basis of discipline, hearing and reflection, is best applied in meditation. And as the Āry�charya N�g�rjuna states: Without relying on convention, the ultimate will not be realized, without realizing the ultimate, nirvana will not be attained. Therefore, since it is said many times “…liberation is attained in this life by listening the categories from all the sutras�, it is said that “…if one is not liberated by hearing, later on one should meditate.�