Tagged: language Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts
-
hardie karges
-
hardie karges
It doesn’t matter what language the Buddha spoke…
Dharma is the same in any language. It only matters that you speak the truth, as best you know it. Because there is more than one kind of truth, and intent is primary. On the one hand there is mere propositional truth, in which a statement is either true or false based on the definitions inherent to the observable facts. On the other hand, there are opinions which may be subject to interpretation. Whether something is red or not can generally be agreed upon quite easily, subject to shifting shades and tones.
But whether the weather is cold or not might be heavily determined by what you are accustomed to. Then there is the kind of truth that relies on deep contemplation. This is the kind of truthâand thoughtâthat philosophers like the Buddha specialized in. And here extra care is necessary. Because this kind of thought was largely pre-scientific and so avoided much of the rigor that scientific thought was subject to, albeit often only in the final testing.
Because deep thought is still invaluable in the conceptual phase of scientific thought, as Einstein himself recounts when remembering some of his happiest moments. But their truth can only be ascertained by thorough testing, which Platoâs Allegory of the Cave will never be subjected to, nor will Buddhaâs Four Noble Truths. Because this is a different kind of truth, not a truth of the agreement of propositions in a logical syllogism. Thus, these are largely subjective truths which can only be agreed upon by consent or inspiration. And these may be the best kind of truths, because they become personal and must be assimilated.
-
hardie karges
-
hardie karges
-
hardie karges
Buddhism and the Parable of the Poisoned ArrowÂ
First the Parable of the Prejudicial Porpoise: If it looks like a fish, and acts like a fish, it still might be a mammal, or a shark. Now I donât spend a lot of time composing parables, or sutras, but if the shoe fits, then Iâll wear it. The point is that things are not always what they seem, and the wise man with limited funds might help himself a bit by defining his circumstances carefully. Â
The Buddha once said, of course, that the important thing is not whether the criminal was a man or a woman, nor what he or she was wearing, but stopping the flow of blood in the wound, so that the victim can resume a normal life as soon as possible. But sometimes all that extra knowledge can pay off, such as what kind of poisons are involved, the age of the victim, or the exact location of any projectile or sharp-edged object. Â
So, with all due respect to the Parable of the Poisoned Arrow, Gulamalukya Sutta, and its prohibitions warning again abstract metaphysical abstractions, there is no prohibition against useful knowledge. In this respect Buddhism is in perfect sync with Science and unforgiving to sometimes useless metaphysics. Â
As always the Middle Path pays off, that Goldilocks âsweet spotâ that sometimes defies categorization, and that is at least part of the point. Precise definitions are inherent to Science but sometimes useless to logic. Canât decide? Split the difference. Make the big decisions later. The important thing is to do something Now, even if it seems almost like nothing…
-
Dr B
My personal view of the poisoned arrow teaching can be summed up with a diagnosis I knew was coming, that I had cancer! But I refused to shoot myself with extra arrows: can it be cured, whatâs the treatment, will I die, how long have I got, will it be painful blah blah all in my head. Natural questions maybe, but not before the diagnosis I knew was coming!
-
hardie karges
Yes, cancer is a difficult experience, given all the hype around it. I was there myself some fifteen years ago, borderline stage 3 with the prostate, and here I am now, almost feeling guilty that I didn’t suffer more, like so many do. TBH I usually default to Science, but that wasn’t a good option 2500 years ago. Cheers…
-
-
hardie karges
-
Dr B
Just bought the bookđ I hope itâs good!
-
-
hardie karges
To be Reborn in the Spirit of the BuddhaÂ
Every day should be a re-Birth day, in spirit, not DNA. And, as much as I hate to get involved in the Buddhist rebirth debates and disputes, Iâll have to say that I probably like the Christian use of that term ârebornâ more than I like the Buddhist flirtation with Hindu reincarnation. Because the Christian usage is almost always phrased as âreborn in the spirit of the Lordâ or something like that, which seems healthy, not superstitious. It might even be for Christians what mindfulness is for Buddhists, a simple way of being, more than anything else.
The Tibetans donât even pretend otherwise, of course, as they scour the countrysides looking for someone who looks a lot like what a Dalai Lama should look like, while the Mahayanists settle for multiple Buddhist manifestations presumably emanating from some eternal source, and the occasional black-belt Bodhisattva who will assert himself on the field of spiritual battle to prove that such a thing is still possible, the rare individual doing what enlightened beings do, saving the world and making it better for others.
But leave it to the Theravadins to do what Buddha himself did, training himself to a fine fit of a spiritual soldier, ready to forego random desires and craven cravings in order to reduce suffering in the long run and promote inner peace in the short run. And leave it to the Theravadins to walk for months nonstop, too, to promote world peace. Thatâs what the Buddha would do. Note: I support all schools and sects of Buddhism, but Iâm especially proud of Thai Theravadins right now. Theyâve truly shown the world something with their Walking for Peace…
-
hardie karges
-
hardie karges
-
hardie karges
Buddhism 202: No Self Means no SelfishnessÂ
Selfishness is a refuge only for the wicked and the ignorant, because it is no refuge at all. And this is possibly the best definition of the Buddhist doctrine of anatta, i.e. non-self, or no-self, that it is the opposite of selfishness. Thatâs only partially true, though, and is, or was, really more of a point of distinction between an emerging Buddhism and a rapidly evolving âHinduismâ, i.e. the Brahmanism of the 5th century BC and its eternal Brahmin and its cosmic self.
And that Buddhist doctrine was later expanded into the equally or even more famous shunyata âemptinessâ which took the impermanence and unimportance of the self and expanded it to almost everything, or at least everything pretentious enough to pretend to permanence or even importance. But selfishness is among the worst kileshas, or Buddhist sins, on a par with hate, greed, craving, and anger.
Life is not a popularity contest. If you engage in false flattery, then you’ll only have false friends. If you engage in selfishness, youâll only have yourself to blame for the craven half-hearted character that you might become in the process. Because selfishness does not elevate the self, such as it is. It can only degrade it, or whatâs left of it. Selfishness is that imaginary self at its worst, grasping and clinging like no tomorrow. And thatâs the honest truth. Because there is no tomorrow. There is only today. And today will soon go away and become something permanent, in the past, hard and cold. Letâs stay warm.
hardie karges and 
streaming consciousness... 
Dr B 10:43 pm on May 26, 2026 Permalink |
Bought the book, really enjoying it đđď¸
hardie karges 4:40 am on May 27, 2026 Permalink |
Thank you! I appreciate the feedback…