Originally posted by Pegembara:According to Buddhism. a normal person usually views existence as permanent, satisfactory and having an essence. But reality is some thing quite different and is somewhat counterintuitive.
Our senses tell us that things are substantial and real but is this “reality”.
Let us try a thought experiment the way Einstein did with his theory of relativity.
Imagine that we are viewing things and events happening on Earth from a distant planet. We know that light takes time to travel and scientists have informed us that some stars are only detected long after the original stars have died out. If we are not aware of this fact, we would think that those stars are still there. Suppose the same thing happened to Earth.
So we see all the events taking place on Earth, the wars, famines, births, deaths, marriages, the World Cup, etc. Even the trees, mountains, lakes etc appear real and substantial. But the “reality” is all these things that we know to be true from seeing and hearing are an illusion. The Earth is gone but we remain convinced that this is not so. We see our families and friends doing their things. We have moments of joy, happiness, anger and sadness, getting involved in things. But in reality they don’t even exist anymore!
You see. Our senses deceive us into believing that the world and everything in it truly exist. We grab on to existence as though it is something permanent and substantial whereas in truth everything is slipping away and nothing is substantial. There is nothing we can hold on to as real. All that we can perceive can only come through our senses. There is a time lag between contact of our retina and form, eardrums and vibrations and the actual process of seeing or hearing. Everything that we see or hear no longer exist. There is nothing that we can hold on to as permanent in such a world.
The world of our senses is neither existent or nonexistent but is dependent on the activity of our senses.
In this experiment what is real becomes unreal. What we “know” to be substantial and permanent is in fact a conjuror’s trick.
The actual process of seeing or hearing takes place in microseconds between for example the light travelling from an object to reach the retina and eventually registering in the brain as visual consciousness. But the underlying principle is similar.
The objects for sights, sounds, smells, taste and sensations are no longer there by the time they register in our consciousness. They have already slipped away.
This is the one meaning of impermanence(anicca). When we are convinced that this is so, we become disillusioned as our reality fades (viraga) and finally disappears(nirodha). We know now that nothing whatsoever is to be clung to. We begin to give up things that we previously thought was important(patinisagga)
Incidentally, I was just reading these paragraphs by Daniel Ingram :
We are typically quite sloppy about what are physical sensations and what are mental sensations (memories, mental images, and mental impressions of other sensations). These two kinds of sensations actually oscillate back and forth, a back and forth interplay, one arising and passing and then the other arising and passing, in a somewhat quick but quite penetrable fashion. Being clear about exactly when the physical sensations are there will begin to clarify their slippery counterpart that helps create the illusion of continuity or solidity: flickering mental impressions.
Coming directly after a physical sensation arises and passes is a separate pulse of reality that is the mental knowing of that physical sensation, here referred to as “consciousness” (as contrasted with “awareness” in Part III). By physical sensations I mean the five senses of touch, taste, hearing, seeing, and smelling. This is the way the mind operates on phenomena that are no longer there, even thoughts, intentions and mental images.
well said pegembara, thanks for sharing
Hi Pegembara,
Thanks for this very well written and insightful post. There are several comments I want to make:
According to Buddhism. a normal person usually views existence as permanent, satisfactory and having an essence. But reality is some thing quite different and is somewhat counterintuitive.
Our senses tell us that things are substantial and real but is this “reality”.
The 'cause' and 'conditions' that make a person views existence as permanent, unchanging and independent are equally important. Without the clarity of the cause, we will not be able to practice the right way.
The world of our senses is neither existent or nonexistent but is dependent on the activity of our senses.
The "world of our senses" is neither existent nor nonexistent; hence neither created nor self-existing.
The 'world' is an activity itself. The senses, the mental factors, the forms do not alienate each other from before beginning. Therefore there is no 'the world' besides these ongoing activities.
When seen in such a way, the 'dualistic and inherent view' of an 'observer observing the observed' collasped into sunyata. Consequently 'dual' and 'substantial' is not 'valid' in such a 'view'. This is what AEN (An Eternal Now) meant by implicity 'non-dual' in his earlier post.
This is the one meaning of impermanence(anicca). When we are convinced that this is so, we become disillusioned as our reality fades (viraga) and finally disappears(nirodha). We know now that nothing whatsoever is to be clung to. We begin to give up things that we previously thought was important(patinisagga)
Not so much of becoming disillusioned; rather with the maturing of this view, the mind releases itself from any forms of 'holding'.
There are 2 additional points that I think are important:
1. Anatta is not Sunyata
2. Although whatever arises is empty of inherent essence, it must also be understood that it is vividly clear, present and luminous. The passing scent, the taste, the scenery, the arising sound, the arising thought...these magical appearances are themselves primordially pure, they are the Dharmakaya.
Just my 2 cents.
Originally posted by Thusness:The 'cause' and 'conditions' that make a person views existence as permanent, unchanging and independent are equally important. Without the clarity of the cause, we will not be able to practice the right way.
Can I ask you to quickly elaborate a bit more on what is meant by,
"The 'cause' and 'conditions' that make a person views existence as permanent, unchanging and independent are equally important."
Originally posted by realization:Can I ask you to quickly elaborate a bit more on what is meant by,
"The 'cause' and 'conditions' that make a person views existence as permanent, unchanging and independent are equally important."
Hi Realization,
It is our existing ‘view’ that we use to orientate ourselves. The existing view assumes the existence of 'space, time and 'I from start as a truly established fact. We think, analyze and understand within the logical structure of this ‘view’.
Taking self enquiry for example, asking “who am I” already presumes the existence of “I” therefore even when we experience a non-dual, non-conceptual state, the mind is quick to reify a pure state of experience into an ultimate Self. Similarly when we practice, we think in terms of disassociation from transience instead of total embracement. We can’t ‘totally’ and ‘completely’ let go of anything when this ‘view’ runs deep in us. Hence It is important to embrace fully the 'right view' of anatta and dependent origination when we practice.
Originally posted by Thusness:
Hi Realization,It is our existing ‘view’ that we use to orientate ourselves. The existing view assumes the existence of 'space, time and 'I from start as a truly established fact. We think, analyze and understand within the logical structure of this ‘view’.
Taking self enquiry for example, asking “who am I” already presumes the existence of “I” therefore even when we experience a non-dual, non-conceptual state, the mind is quick to reify a pure state of experience into an ultimate Self. Similarly when we practice, we think in terms of disassociation from transience instead of total embracement. We can’t ‘totally’ and ‘completely’ let go of anything when this ‘view’ runs deep in us. Hence It is important to embrace fully the 'right view' of anatta and dependent origination when we practice.
Thusness: ... even when we experience a non-dual, non-conceptual state, the mind is quick to reify a pure state of experience into an ultimate Self. Similarly when we practice, we think in terms of disassociation from transience instead of total embracement ... Hence It is important to embrace fully the 'right view' of anatta and dependent origination when we practice.
Thinking aloud ...
Hence, being mindful and recognising it when these less than conducive habitual tendencies surface, is neccesary. Being very familiar with 'right view' of anatta and dependent origination is important if we are to not fall back into ingrained tendencies ...hence, must internalise 'right view'.
thanks!
This is a very interesting topic and i see that alot of bros does speak from good stands and experience.Personally I feel we should not make things so complicated when they are not suppose to be that way.Seeing(in the supposed correct way) is very simple and with no additional labels or thoughts to it.you wont need to compare texts, say"wow! its like this!"
further contemplate what it is,it will flow on by itself(with the correct meditative conditions) and if one is a mature practioner they will know that this is the beginning of deeper insight and they will have to move on.What i want to say is.At the time where all conditions of samadhi and sati are balanced right view or i should say meditative right view will arise and one will know..its an auto thing,just like one is brushing teeth or eating rice.
Its better to find out what are the conditions that causes these seeing state to arise and then make such states to arise again(by meditating of course) because they are beneficial for deeper insights and not ponder or add on to explain what really happen.Just my honest opinion and not to offend anyone here. :)
Originally posted by lastime:This is a very interesting topic and i see that alot of bros does speak from good stands and experience.Personally I feel we should not make things so complicated when they are not suppose to be that way.Seeing(in the supposed correct way) is very simple and with no additional labels or thoughts to it.you wont need to compare texts, say"wow! its like this!"
further contemplate what it is,it will flow on by itself(with the correct meditative conditions) and if one is a mature practioner they will know that this is the beginning of deeper insight and they will have to move on.What i want to say is.At the time where all conditions of samadhi and sati are balanced right view or i should say meditative right view will arise and one will know..its an auto thing,just like one is brushing teeth or eating rice.
Its better to find out what are the conditions that causes these seeing state to arise and then make such states to arise again(by meditating of course) because they are beneficial for deeper insights and not ponder or add on to explain what really happen.Just my honest opinion and not to offend anyone here. :)
Hi thanks for sharing your opinion, but I have to respectfully disagree with you. It is important and helpful to read up on what constitutes right view even if it may be confusing at times.
After all right view/prajna/wisdom is the most important thing that separates Buddhism from all other religions. Before the Buddha achieved enlightenment, it is important to remember that the practice of Samadhi (right effort, concentration, mindfulness) was already well established in India, but without the proper guidance, some ascetics were led astray, being attached to jhana states and misuse of supernatural powers and thus were unable to discern the Dharma.
Such details can be helpful in guiding us in our meditation practice. This way, we can make our meditation sessions more productive, i remember i have heard a fellow forumer saying that it was his experience that even though he was not as disciplined, more diligent meditators got "stuck" at certain stages he had already experienced because they did not have right view.
It is important to share our experiences so we can see if our experience tallies up with the various stages to enlightenment, so we do not fall into the trap of being satisfied with what we have achieved or worse, delusion.
Originally posted by lastime:This is a very interesting topic and i see that alot of bros does speak from good stands and experience.Personally I feel we should not make things so complicated when they are not suppose to be that way.Seeing(in the supposed correct way) is very simple and with no additional labels or thoughts to it.you wont need to compare texts, say"wow! its like this!"
further contemplate what it is,it will flow on by itself(with the correct meditative conditions) and if one is a mature practioner they will know that this is the beginning of deeper insight and they will have to move on.What i want to say is.At the time where all conditions of samadhi and sati are balanced right view or i should say meditative right view will arise and one will know..its an auto thing,just like one is brushing teeth or eating rice.
Its better to find out what are the conditions that causes these seeing state to arise and then make such states to arise again(by meditating of course) because they are beneficial for deeper insights and not ponder or add on to explain what really happen.Just my honest opinion and not to offend anyone here. :)
Hi Lastime,
Try not to think or practice this way. This too is my honest advice. In all vehicles, be it Theravada, Mahayana or Vajrayana, there is no descrepency in starting with right view.
The path you described may be suitable for prayeka-buddha, but to penetrate on our own and give rise to right view is beyond ordinary practitioners. As I have said in my earlier post, ‘right view’ does not arise even in a non-dual, non-conceptual meditative state and ignorance (wrong view) runs far deeper than deep Samadhi. I do not know what sort of merits are require to arise such a condition.
Next with regards to ‘simplicity’ in practice, it is often wrongly understood. Simplicity is quite an advance stage and does not arise before we have sufficiently dissolved our ‘inherent and dualistic’ view. It only becomes ‘simple’ because practitioners so clearly see the nature of reality.
Lastly, no worries about ‘offending anyone’. I believe your motive is sincere and thanks for sharing your opinion. :)
Originally posted by Synasta:Hi thanks for sharing your opinion, but I have to respectfully disagree with you. It is important and helpful to read up on what constitutes right view even if it may be confusing at times.
After all right view/prajna/wisdom is the most important thing that separates Buddhism from all other religions. Before the Buddha achieved enlightenment, it is important to remember that the practice of Samadhi (right effort, concentration, mindfulness) was already well established in India, but without the proper guidance, some ascetics were led astray, being attached to jhana states and misuse of supernatural powers and thus were unable to discern the Dharma.
Such details can be helpful in guiding us in our meditation practice. This way, we can make our meditation sessions more productive, i remember i have heard a fellow forumer saying that it was his experience that even though he was not as disciplined, more diligent meditators got "stuck" at certain stages he had already experienced because they did not have right view.
It is important to share our experiences so we can see if our experience tallies up with the various stages to enlightenment, so we do not fall into the trap of being satisfied with what we have achieved or worse, delusion.
Well said Synasta.
Originally posted by Thusness:Hi Lastime,
Try not to think or practice this way. This too is my honest advice. In all vehicles, be it Theravada, Mahayana or Vajrayana, there is no descrepency in starting with right view.
The path you described may be suitable for prayeka-buddha, but to penetrate on our own and give rise to right view is beyond ordinary practitioners. As I have said in my earlier post, ‘right view’ does not arise even in a non-dual, non-conceptual meditative state and ignorance (wrong view) runs far deeper than deep Samadhi. I do not know what sort of merits are require to arise such a condition.
Next with regards to ‘simplicity’ in practice, it is often wrongly understood. Simplicity is quite an advance stage and does not arise before we have sufficiently dissolved our ‘inherent and dualistic’ view. It only becomes ‘simple’ because practitioners so clearly see the nature of reality.
Lastly, no worries about ‘offending anyone’. I believe your motive is sincere and thanks for sharing your opinion. :)
Even the Buddha had to remember the right view of dependent origination through recalling his past life which led to his awakening.
Right view is so essential that Buddha placed it as the *first* of the eightfold path... without establishing right view right from the start, we will not be able to attain fruition no matter how diligent we are.
And yeah, the Dharma is deep and profound, not to misunderstand that it is simple.
Oversimplifying things make us fail to penetrate deeply into the essence, thinking we have understood.
Here are some things said by Buddha to contemplate:
"This doctrine is profound, hard to see, difficult to understand, calm, sublime, not within the sphere of logic, subtle, to be understood by the wise." Majjhima Nikaya
....................
....................
Staying at Savatthi. "Monks, there once was a time when the Dasarahas had a large drum called 'Summoner.' Whenever Summoner was split, the Dasarahas inserted another peg in it, until the time came when Summoner's original wooden body had disappeared and only a conglomeration of pegs remained. [1]
"In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.
"In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about.
"Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves."
~ Ani Sutta
Hi too to Synasta,Thusness and AEN for all your replies to nicely explain your points :)
Maybe before i should self intro myself abit before people think I start shooting off or being abit aggresive to share which is not my real purpose here because bringing others doesnt not interest me to the least bit,but i do hope people will think and look at the path in a different or perhaps a more realistic and achivevable view:)
I am someone who is more into meditation myself first and sutta studies came later in my life.I have studied under afew master of the theravada sri lankan and thai forest tradition.(however im am still learning and learning....)
Maybe i should reply all of you base on this stanza that AEN posted:
"This doctrine is profound, hard to see, difficult to understand, calm, sublime, not within the sphere of logic, subtle, to be understood by the wise." Majjhima Nikaya
In terms of right view,I do not think and never express that one should not share at all,because the path ahead sometimes is not always taken alone.sharing is needed but have anyone here think before,if you approach a sitting with so much views will it cloud the realities that should be seen?
I agree with Synasta view on the diff of buddhism and others but now i ask u back,in terms of right view,are we trying to achieve path and fruits right view based on personal experience or just believeing and further sealing this confirmation on the text or on someone who we think is the expert in this field? is this suppose to the the type of right view one should have?
Details to share on the practice is good but i see alot of people are quoting texts and suttas to prove them self and to explain the doctrine,ok now not doing a personal attack here but to AEN,to your seeing,how long and how sure your seeing experience is true and consistent and how dreamy and miragy does it turns to be if you see it personally?
Dear Thusness,at the turning point of realisation do you think there will be a teacher beside you to tell you which stage of knowledge you are at ?
please do not bring in the savaka or paceeka thing into here that is quite off tangent.If yiou can get a teacher who can guide someone within thought moments beside us do let me know because I wanted a teacher like this too :)
non-dual and non conceptual samadhi is just a condition where by the mind merge into the object/mind itself at the point there is only the knowing condition.It is known in many tradition that such stage does not producue wisdom BUT without strong samadhi how do one proceed on to the wisdom step?
in terms of my simplicity "not within the sphere of logic" which im also trying to say its not by reading memorising or by fables or quotes or comparision that the true understanding is achieved. The text did say such stage is advanced but there is of course ways to reach this stage which is not in the range of reading so much suttas but putting effort in mindfulness and concentration.
To AEN,heres a trick question on dependent origination,It is well known that the buddha can see his past life and one mode of dependant orgination is done this way.However in modern times,for yogis with weak physic tendency but are training on dependent orgination since they cannot see DO in terms of past life how is it to be done? please do now seek out the suttas or talks or books for this answer:)
What Im trying to say is I see alot of people who have alot of potiental to move on and scale higher but yet prefer/enjoy "zhi shang tan bing" The way the path can be progress is not easy HOWEVER it is not so difficult to the extend that one always need to read the text to understand it,there are qualifed people around even in sg who can bring us,if right view forever stay on the text we will end up as book worms and not buddhist.
thank you for this sharing :)
Originally posted by lastime:Hi too to Synasta,Thusness and AEN for all your replies to nicely explain your points :)
Maybe before i should self intro myself abit before people think I start shooting off or being abit aggresive to share which is not my real purpose here because bringing others doesnt not interest me to the least bit,but i do hope people will think and look at the path in a different or perhaps a more realistic and achivevable view:)
I am someone who is more into meditation myself first and sutta studies came later in my life.I have studied under afew master of the theravada sri lankan and thai forest tradition.(however im am still learning and learning....)
Maybe i should reply all of you base on this stanza that AEN posted:
"This doctrine is profound, hard to see, difficult to understand, calm, sublime, not within the sphere of logic, subtle, to be understood by the wise." Majjhima Nikaya
In terms of right view,I do not think and never express that one should not share at all,because the path ahead sometimes is not always taken alone.sharing is needed but have anyone here think before,if you approach a sitting with so much views will it cloud the realities that should be seen?
I agree with Synasta view on the diff of buddhism and others but now i ask u back,in terms of right view,are we trying to achieve path and fruits right view based on personal experience or just believeing and further sealing this confirmation on the text or on someone who we think is the expert in this field? is this suppose to the the type of right view one should have?
Details to share on the practice is good but i see alot of people are quoting texts and suttas to prove them self and to explain the doctrine,ok now not doing a personal attack here but to AEN,to your seeing,how long and how sure your seeing experience is true and consistent and how dreamy and miragy does it turns to be if you see it personally?
Dear Thusness,at the turning point of realisation do you think there will be a teacher beside you to tell you which stage of knowledge you are at ?
please do not bring in the savaka or paceeka thing into here that is quite off tangent.If yiou can get a teacher who can guide someone within thought moments beside us do let me know because I wanted a teacher like this too :)
non-dual and non conceptual samadhi is just a condition where by the mind merge into the object/mind itself at the point there is only the knowing condition.It is known in many tradition that such stage does not producue wisdom BUT without strong samadhi how do one proceed on to the wisdom step?
in terms of my simplicity "not within the sphere of logic" which im also trying to say its not by reading memorising or by fables or quotes or comparision that the true understanding is achieved. The text did say such stage is advanced but there is of course ways to reach this stage which is not in the range of reading so much suttas but putting effort in mindfulness and concentration.
To AEN,heres a trick question on dependent origination,It is well known that the buddha can see his past life and one mode of dependant orgination is done this way.However in modern times,for yogis with weak physic tendency but are training on dependent orgination since they cannot see DO in terms of past life how is it to be done? please do now seek out the suttas or talks or books for this answer:)
What Im trying to say is I see alot of people who have alot of potiental to move on and scale higher but yet prefer/enjoy "zhi shang tan bing" The way the path can be progress is not easy HOWEVER it is not so difficult to the extend that one always need to read the text to understand it,there are qualifed people around even in sg who can bring us,if right view forever stay on the text we will end up as book worms and not buddhist.
Thanks for sharing. :)
Originally posted by lastime:Hi too to Synasta,Thusness and AEN for all your replies to nicely explain your points :)
Maybe before i should self intro myself abit before people think I start shooting off or being abit aggresive to share which is not my real purpose here because bringing others doesnt not interest me to the least bit,but i do hope people will think and look at the path in a different or perhaps a more realistic and achivevable view:)
I am someone who is more into meditation myself first and sutta studies came later in my life.I have studied under afew master of the theravada sri lankan and thai forest tradition.(however im am still learning and learning....)
Maybe i should reply all of you base on this stanza that AEN posted:
"This doctrine is profound, hard to see, difficult to understand, calm, sublime, not within the sphere of logic, subtle, to be understood by the wise." Majjhima Nikaya
In terms of right view,I do not think and never express that one should not share at all,because the path ahead sometimes is not always taken alone.sharing is needed but have anyone here think before,if you approach a sitting with so much views will it cloud the realities that should be seen?
I agree with Synasta view on the diff of buddhism and others but now i ask u back,in terms of right view,are we trying to achieve path and fruits right view based on personal experience or just believeing and further sealing this confirmation on the text or on someone who we think is the expert in this field? is this suppose to the the type of right view one should have?
Details to share on the practice is good but i see alot of people are quoting texts and suttas to prove them self and to explain the doctrine,ok now not doing a personal attack here but to AEN,to your seeing,how long and how sure your seeing experience is true and consistent and how dreamy and miragy does it turns to be if you see it personally?
Dear Thusness,at the turning point of realisation do you think there will be a teacher beside you to tell you which stage of knowledge you are at ?
please do not bring in the savaka or paceeka thing into here that is quite off tangent.If yiou can get a teacher who can guide someone within thought moments beside us do let me know because I wanted a teacher like this too :)
non-dual and non conceptual samadhi is just a condition where by the mind merge into the object/mind itself at the point there is only the knowing condition.It is known in many tradition that such stage does not producue wisdom BUT without strong samadhi how do one proceed on to the wisdom step?
in terms of my simplicity "not within the sphere of logic" which im also trying to say its not by reading memorising or by fables or quotes or comparision that the true understanding is achieved. The text did say such stage is advanced but there is of course ways to reach this stage which is not in the range of reading so much suttas but putting effort in mindfulness and concentration.
To AEN,heres a trick question on dependent origination,It is well known that the buddha can see his past life and one mode of dependant orgination is done this way.However in modern times,for yogis with weak physic tendency but are training on dependent orgination since they cannot see DO in terms of past life how is it to be done? please do now seek out the suttas or talks or books for this answer:)
What Im trying to say is I see alot of people who have alot of potiental to move on and scale higher but yet prefer/enjoy "zhi shang tan bing" The way the path can be progress is not easy HOWEVER it is not so difficult to the extend that one always need to read the text to understand it,there are qualifed people around even in sg who can bring us,if right view forever stay on the text we will end up as book worms and not buddhist.
Thank you for the reminder that practice is ever so important, after Right View has been understood.
As for whether insights gained by fellow practitioners are "miragey" or not, that's for them to know really. So far, I have understood from fellow forummers that when insight is arrived at, the sureness and knowingness is undeniable and inshakeable. I thank them for sharing their travel guide with us; a travel guide that not only includes maps, but also snapshots of landmarks enroute to the destination.
Sharing the finer points of how insight may be achieved is important, so that people don't get stuck at certain phases of insight. Using analogies also helps most of us understand concepts that may otherwise be difficult to fathom.
It is precisely because we may have weak psychic tendencies, that it is all the more important for more insightful practitioners to give pointers on how the nature of reality may be realised. I mean it, as in truly realised, and not 纸上谈兵 as you say. I'm sure that those who share their insights here are doing this in the interests of everyone.
"If right view forever stays on the text we will end up as book worms and not buddhist."
Most surely agree with your above statement :)
how long and how sure your seeing experience is true and consistent
There is no doubt at all. There cannot be doubts. I am not sure what you mean by 'how long'? As it is permanent for me... not a passing state. It is a realization, not a passing experience.
how dreamy and miragy does it turns to be if you see it personally?
Everything is just like a bubble, like a dream, popping in and out of existence. There is nothing solid, nothing substantial in reality at all.
its not by reading memorising or by fables or quotes or comparision that the true understanding is achieved
Of course that is not necessary. But you need to at least have a good grasp and understanding of Buddha's teachings first, i.e. you need to have right view. Not asking you to memorise all his words. After establishing right view through learning, you need to practice to contemplate them in direct experience before insight arise.
To AEN,heres a trick question on dependent origination,It is well known that the buddha can see his past life and one mode of dependant orgination is done this way.However in modern times,for yogis with weak physic tendency but are training on dependent orgination since they cannot see DO in terms of past life how is it to be done? please do now seek out the suttas or talks or books for this answer:)
They have to study the teachings and contemplate on them carefully. You cannot arise insight without establishing the right view by understanding the Buddha's teachings and then further contemplate them. That is why the Buddha stressed that you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.'
if right view forever stay on the text we will end up as book worms and not buddhist.
This is very true of course. To understanding something conceptually and not do further contemplation will not result in direct experiential insight.
That said, to practice without first having a good grasp of the teaching, of having the right view, will not result in fruition.
lastime,nice chat :)
Apart from 'Thusness 7 stages' and 'On Anatta, etc...' article in my blog, here's two articles I wrote which should provide a better context of what I was saying...
(This article was written by me after the arising insight.) My commentary on Bahiya Sutta