no one can help?
Originally posted by Fire yp Lim:no one can help?
Each path will say it is the best. Zen will say it is the best and fastest, Pure Land will say it is the best and fastest, Dzogchen will say it is the best and fastest, Mahamudra will say it is the best and fastest, etc.
In the end the best and fastest is the one that suits you and you will practice it.
"Of two people who practice the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma, having a sense of Dhamma, having a sense of meaning — one who practices for both his own benefit and that of others, and one who practices for his own benefit but not that of others — the one who practices for his own benefit but not that of others is to be criticized for that reason, the one who practices for both his own benefit and that of others is, for that reason, to be praised."
— The Buddha, in the Anguttara Nikaaya (Gradual Length Sayings), AN 7.64, of the Pali Canon
The Practice, in a Nutshell
"… As for the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead
* to dispassion, not to passion;
* to being unfettered, not to being fettered;
* to shedding, not to accumulating;
* to modesty, not to self-aggrandizement;
* to contentment, not to discontent;
* to seclusion, not to entanglement;
* to aroused persistence, not to laziness;
* to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome':
You may categorically hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction…'"
- The Buddha, from the Gotami Sutta, AN 8.53
RAINCLOUDS
“This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "These three types of persons can be found existing in the world. Which three? One like a cloud without rain, one who rains locally, and one who rains everywhere.
"And how is a person like a cloud without rain? There is the case where a person is not a giver of food, drink, clothing, vehicles, garlands, scents, ointments, beds, dwellings, or lights to any brahmans or contemplatives, to any of the miserable, the homeless, or beggars. This is how a person is like a cloud without rain.
"And how is a person one who rains locally? There is the case where a person is a giver of food, drink, clothing, vehicles, garlands, scents, ointments, beds, dwellings, & lights to some brahmans & contemplatives, to some of the miserable, the homeless, & beggars, and not to others. This is how a person one who rains locally.
"And how is a person one who rains everywhere? There is the case where a person gives food, drink, clothing, vehicles, garlands, scents, ointments, beds, dwellings, & lights to all brahmans & contemplatives, to all of the miserable, the homeless, & beggars. This is how a person one who rains everywhere.
"These are the three types of persons who can be found existing in the world."
Not to contemplatives,
to brahmans,
to the miserable,
nor to the homeless
does he share what he's gained:
food,
drinks,
nourishment.
He, that lowest of people,
is called a cloud with no rain.
To some he gives,
to others he doesn't:
the intelligent call him
one who rains locally.
A person responsive to requests,
sympathetic to all beings,
delighting in distributing alms:
"Give to them!
Give!"
he says.
As a cloud — resounding, thundering — rains,
filling with water, drenching
the plateaus & gullies:
a person like this
is like that.
Having rightly amassed
wealth attained through initiative,
he satisfies fully with food & drink
those fallen into
the homeless state.”
- The Buddha, in the Itivuttaka of the Pali Canon, Iti 3.26
The Brahmin Vassakara, an important man in Magadha, came to the Lord and said:
“Good Gotama, for my part I say this, this is my opinion. If anyone
speaks of what he has seen, heard or sensed, there is no harm in him
saying: ‘This is what I saw. This is what I heard. This is what I
sensed.’ No harm can come from that.”
The Lord then replied:
“For my part, brahmin, I do not say that everything one has seen, heard
or sensed should be spoken of, and nor I do not say it should not be
spoken of.
If one speaks and unprofitable states grow, then one should not speak.
If one speaks and profitable states grow, then one should speak of what one has seen, heard, sensed and understood.”
Anguttara Nikaya. II,172
Candragomin points out:
thanks for sharing
You're welcome :)
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 has the most dedication inwardly after severing all outer distractions. In terms of actual perfect Buddhahood: the first, having become knowledgeable about all objects of knowledge, has severed doubt through hearing, reflection and meditation. Then, because of severing doubt through meditating which makes samadhi essential, the pandita gradually attains Buddhahood after actualizing the Dharma of realization. A kusali necessarily has the same basis, but when considered alone, a pandita is closer to Buddhahood. -- Sakya Pandita
Then Ven. Upali went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "It would be good, lord, if the Blessed One would teach me the Dhamma in brief such that, having heard the Dhamma from the Blessed One, I might dwell alone, secluded, heedful, ardent, & resolute."
"Upali, the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities do not lead to utter disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, nor to Unbinding': You may categorically hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction.'
"As for the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to utter disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding': You may categorically hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'"
Āry�kṣayamatinirdeśa-n�ma-mah�y�na-sūtra:
"Any
sūtr�nta which explains in a variety of different terms a self, a
sentient being, a living being, a personality, a person, an individual,
one born from a human, a human, an agent, an experiencer — teaching an
owner in what is ownerless — those sutras are called "of provisional
meaning". Any sūtr�nta which teaches emptiness, the signless, the
wishless, the unconditioned, the non-arisen, the unproduced, the
insubstantial, the non-existence of self, the non-existence of sentient
beings, the non-existence of living beings, the non-existence of
individuals, the non-existence of an owner up to the doors of
liberation, those are called "definitive meaning". This is taught in the
sūtr�ntas of of definitive meaning but is not taught in the sūtr�ntas
of the provisional meaning."
Candrakiirti, in his commentary on Naagaarjuna’s Stanzas on the Middle Way:
Some people insist that the Maadhyamikas are not different from nihilists, since the Maadhyamikas say that good and bad acts, the agent, the consequences of acts, and the entire world are empty of an inherently existing nature. As the nihilists also say that these things do not exist, the Maadhyamikas are the same as nihilists. We reply that this is not the case. Why? Because Maadhyamikas are proponents of dependent origination. Having apprehended causes and conditions, they explain that the entire present and future world is without inherent existence, because dependently originated.
deleted
Aá¹£á¹asÄ�hasrikÄ� PrajñÄ�pÄ�ramitÄ� SÅ«tra:
Like a magical illusion are those beings, like a dream. For not two different things are magical illusion and beings, are dreams and
beings. All objective facts also are like a magical illusion, like a
dream. The various classes of noble ones, from streamwinner to
buddhahood, also are like a magical illusion, like a dream. Even
nirv�ṇa, I say, is like a magical illusion, is like a dream. How much
more so anything else! Even if perchance there could be anything more
distinguished, of that too I would say that it is like an illusion, like
a dream. For not two different things are illusion and nirv�ṇa, are dreams and nirv�ṇa.
Nagarjuna
MMK 24:
The Buddha's teaching of the Dharma
Is based on twotruths:
A truth of worldly convention
And an ultimate truth.
Those who do not understand
The distinction drawn between these twotruths
Do not understand
The Buddha's profound truth.
Without a foundation in the conventional truth,
The significance of the ultimate cannot be taught.
Without understanding the significance of the ultimate,
Liberation is not achieved.
"Master Padma said: 'Whether you
meditate on emptiness or anything else, it is mistaken meditation
practice unless it becomes an effective remedy against disturbing
emotions and ordinariness. Something that does not counteract the
disturbing emotions and ordinariness is a cause for falling into
samsaric existence.
If any teaching
you study, reflect upon, or expound becomes an effective remedy against
your disturbing emotions as well as an aid for allowing the pure Dharma
to take birth in your being, then that is called a Mahayana teaching and
is unmistaken.
No matter how much you may be acclaimed as learned in
study, exposition, and meditation, if your intention is only the eight
worldly concerns, your activity is called a black Dharma practice.
In
any case, it is essential to meditate on appearance and existence as
being magical illusion, so as not to allow your attachment and clinging
to grow stronger and stronger.
"A great yogi" simply means being free from attachment and clinging.'"
When the [ultimate] truth is
explained as it is, the conventional is not obstructed; Independent of
the conventional, no [ultimate] truth can be found. - Nagarjuna
"Listen, listen, this wonderful sound brings me back to my true home."
-Gatha to the Bell.
the best way is no way, cos if there is a way then its inpermenant
What are your gathas?
.