Buddhism a natural process of realization

As what I currently realized ...is human culture to attached to own understanding , defending own beliefs and accuse others being wrong ......awaken to Buddhism , one will realized this and realized that Buddhism is not a common human knowledge , is not something we know or something we seek to know or something that we will ever know ........discussing / debate will un-fold our knowledge , discover areas that we never been and perhaps even a factor for own realization .....
Dear Matt ...sorry in advance , perhaps if you read your own writing , you will realized your emotion in it ...I realized an increased of emotion in you ..and with such emotions will lead you into more suffering or joy .......
Awaken to Buddhism , one attachment on emotion will naturally reduced and leading to decrease of suffering or joy ..........

Nothingness as what I current realized is state of total 'nothing" ...free of Buddhism process ...a state without condition ........freedom of all

csee, is English your native language; I suspect not.  


So we are have a hard time understanding you stream of consciousness writings.

I'm not sure what you mean. The way I'd think of it is emotion being a mental object which arises in the mind, the cup. When you say "nothingness", do you mean emptiness, as in sunyata?

It might be helpful to get more familiar with some Buddhist terminology. I think you're talking about sunyata, so maybe look that up first?

Your 'common language' is familiar to your own mind, but not to most of us.  Making zero effort to help us understand leads me to wish you well, but I will no longer attempt to communicate.

Why not try a general Spiritual discussion site like - www.spiritualforums.com/vb/index.php

Csee, I agree debate is good, but it is not just disagreement. It should be about literally “coming to terms”. It is a process where people with different perspectives about similar things can learn from each other. In order to do that, terminology is absolutely essential.

It’s possible your understanding of “nothingness” is what we mean by “selflessness” or “emptiness”. However, the trained translators who have given English speaking people access to Tibetan Buddhism all seem to agree that emptiness does not, and emphatically cannot, mean nothingness. It is one of the most important distinctions in Tibetan Buddhism. Tsongkhapa explains it in terms of distinguishing “existence” from “intrinsic existence”, and it is one of the most pervasive aspects of his entire, three volume Great Treatise.

I am sure that in Chinese you are very good at explaining complex ideas in common language. His Holiness the Dalai Lama is extremely good at it, even in English. But for the serious topics he requires an exceptionally skilled translator, such as Thupten Jinpa.

Your ideas are not coming across adequately to many of us. You are clearly using English words, but they are strung together in ungrammatical clauses connected by ellipses. In order for us to understand your points, and debate or agree with you, first we need to agree on the meanings of important terms. Then we need to hear your thoughts expressed in discrete sentences. And, ideally, those sentences could be organized into paragraphs that present elements of a coherent argument.

Yes, the objective is to ultimately get beyond concepts and language, but we can’t get there without clarifying our concepts through language. Manifest concepts like afflictions, and subtle ones like emptiness and impermanence, can be expressed in language but a shared language is indispensable for the process.

Csee, my understanding of “terminology” is “defining our terms”. In reference to a specific text, we both need to understand what the author meant. It’s more personalized when we discuss between ourselves, but there are usually some assumed parameters. For instance, this is a Buddhist forum so we can assume terms used are generally accepted by Buddhists. However, I have only studied Tibetan Buddhism, primarily from the Prasangika/Gelug lineage. That is my frame of reference and I need to realize that other Buddhist schools may use the same terms but mean something different.

Can we start with your references to Buddhism as “my/your own process”? I agree that Buddhism is a solitary journey, but I don’t think any of us can work out the meaning of Buddhism on our own.

Buddha achieved enlightenment and provided us with instructions. Then he said we cannot rely on his word alone. We have to gain each realization ourselves. So each of us takes what we think Buddha said and tests it in our own minds and daily lives. But we need the guidance of a coherent system of knowledge and practice.

There’s benefit in having a broad knowledge of many philosophies, beliefs, and practices, and we must be able to think for ourselves. But I think we need to commit to a primary lineage. That way we are using a time-tested, holistic set of interpretations and practices handed down by past masters.

As you say, the final goal is beyond language and concepts. That’s why we need a reliable, coherent system of practice. The end result is not the concepts and practices, but it arises from them. I think that picking bits of dharma from here and there, then adding our own random ideas makes it harder to ultimately achieve true realizations.

Perhaps we are talking about different things, Csee. You have correctly identified my approach. I find that Buddhism patiently explains to me why I am not as caring and compassionate as I want to be and provides very specific instructions for becoming more so through a process of learning and practice.

I believe my learning and practice arise from an internal readiness to be awakened. But I believe that before I can awaken I need to understand why my present mindset always results in dissatisfaction and I need to establish a mental framework that helps me see the truth of things.

Regarding readiness, it is like the Bodhisattva deed of generosity as Shantideva explains it. Giving by itself is not the perfection of generosity. Generosity refers to an internal readiness, willingness, and motivation to give everything. But in order to fully cultivate that perfection one must actually give. So I would say that in order to realize a readiness to learn, I have to actually to the work of learning.

I believe Buddhism starts wherever the practitioner is and progresses from there. Where I am I need to understand these principles and intentionally apply them in my daily life. My attraction to Tibetan Buddhism is its extremely rich history of thought, debate, and practical application with regard to the causes of suffering and happiness. I belong in that milieu.

So here is my question: how do you arrive at Buddhist realizations without first attaining a conceptual understanding of the subtle distinctions that reveal the misunderstandings with which we have habitually distorted the worlds we construct with our minds?

(For clarity, my understanding of "realization" is that through familiarity a concept stops being an object the subjective mind thinks about, but joins with the mind by direct perception.)