[MD] The MoQ and Politics? part 2 of 3

[MarshaV]

>> I once had responsibilities; I was a daughter, a mother, a wife, an IT
>> professional.  Now I have very small responsibilities and very few
>> needs, but I remember the pressure.
>> 
>> 
> Yes?  Well, I'd say I've been moving in the direction of what you describe,
> leaving old patterns behind, but I guess what I'm questioning in myself is
> that this choice I'm making seems to be exactly an evasion of
> responsibility.  You seem to have no qualms at all, whereas I do suffer
> from some niggling still small voices that I have more "duties" than I'd
> admit.  So yes, I see a difference in pressures between the two of us.

There is a time when one's attention should be oriented toward external 
duties, and there is a time when one's focus should be towards inner 
processes.  Society will constantly prescribe what the former should be, 
but for me the latter is to cultivate one's own understanding and virtue.  


>> I read that the Buddha once explained to his monks that the purpose of
>> living the spiritual life according the Buddha was to realize things that
>> should be fully understood.  I think the only thing he taught to achieve
>> this realization was meditation.  I suppose I can make that a responsibility.
>> 
>> 
> Just finished a book with a somewhat pertinent quotation... Lemme find
> it so we can see what the author's view has to offer us in a discussion of
> "responsibility".


> 
> "The essential teaching of the Lord Buddha was: "no more Rebirth" but
> this teaching was taken over, hidden, controverted, turned upside down
> and defamed into Zen, the invention of Mara the Tempter, Mara the insane,
> Mara the Devil -- Today whole big intellectual books are being published
> about "Zen" which is nothing but the Devil's Personal war against the
> essential teaching of Buddha who said, "Tho she is beautiful, and gifted,
> 'twere better for all of you to fall into a Tiger's mouth than to fall into her
> net of plans."... But a man is invested with all this trembling tissue, the
> Hindus call it "Lila" (Flower) and there's nothing he can do with his tissue
> save get him to a monastery..."
> 
> Desolation Angels, Jack Kerouac
> 
> Here, Ti Jean seems to be of the opinion that the whole world of fleshly
> duties brought about by romantic love is an ensnarement, a crime against
> our duty to self.  So in this regard, meditation IS an avoidance - a refusal
> to be taken in.  And yet, if all followed this teaching, we'd have no more 
> babies and the world would soon run out of humans.  That seems like a
> bad thing, to me.
> 
> What do you think?  I myself was intrigued to find a literary reference to
> "Lila", so it sorta popped out at me.


There are different flavors of Buddhism, many saturated with cultural ritual 
and prejudices.  I think if one sticks to the four truths taught by Buddha 
one cannot go wrong.  After that one needs to be careful to differentiate 
between the dogma and wisdom.  

I don't know about Zen's zazen  It's interesting, though, that the 
"dharma combat" that mentioned the other day was described as a Zen 
practice for advanced monks.  Seems there is more to Zen than "just sitting."  
Also I have heard the Zen has more written about it than any other form of 
Buddhism.  I happen to love Nargarjuna's MMK.  The more I read of it, the 
more I understand and appreciate its wisdom.  No dogma there!   I think in 
the Tibetan tradition meditation is as much about grounding one's 
understanding of emptiness as seeking realization.  Both.  

I wouldn't trust what any man or group of men might say about Lila, or 
women.  I understand her to represent the play, or dance, of life.  The men 
who denigrate Lila seem mostly afraid of their own inability to control their 
passions.   It's not just the Buddhists, the early Greeks and Romans were  
just as bad.  The three Abrahamic religions too.  Phooey!   


continued...   


___