A place to ask a Zen teacher. Experimental forum.
Moderator: Spiritual Do-gooder
- Posts: 1718
- Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2017 12:02 am
- Location: Zandvoort, The Netherlands
Crystal wrote: ↑
Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:06 am
On page 45 of his book "Small Boat, Great Mountain" Ajahn Amaro says:
But the Buddha’s response was brief and succinct. He replied, “The cessation of grasping is deathlessness.” That’s it.
ps all grasping occurs due to past activities/attachments, hence linked to self-identification.
Even in our daily activities we can observe that every thought arises due to the past, there really isn't such a thing as present mind (thus no future or past mind can be grasped) remarkable, this transient phantasy called "mind" Simply by not grasping at appearances, mind disappears with the scene. Simple yet difficult since the cessation of grasping is not an activity of mind, so not something we can "do"
Ah well old news, or sperm (birth) knowledge as I like to say. The space between heartbeats, ah.
- Posts: 88
- Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 5:18 am
- Location: tallahassee, florida
great sage eofh,
eternalism is an attachment to view.
the unborn is freedom from views/attachments. but if attached to, then it can also be a view.
these words are themselves views. anything that can constructed, imagined can be held onto.
what's left then, if there's nothing to hold onto?
the three jewels and sentient beings.
thus, practice continues.
- Posts: 929
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:20 am
- Location: Southern Arizona desert, USA
Just for clarifications’ sake: how do you parse the difference between the “Dangerous and Grievous Error of eternalism” and what in the spoken words of Lord Buddha he called the Deathless?
I think that The Deathless is just the Unborn, while eternalism is unjustified wishful-thinking about what has been born, and hence attachment to it.
(Guo Gu, excellent to see you posting. Here's to your health!).