"If you see a Buddha on the road kill him" was Propaganda

In the aftermath of a devastating purge of Buddhism from 841–845, during which more than a quarter million monks and nuns were forcibly returned to lay life and over 5,000 temples, monasteries and Buddhist libraries were destroyed, Linji Yixuan (d. 866), one of the most influential teachers in Chan history, took these teachings to their iconoclastic extreme, dismissing the great Buddhist scriptures as “hitching posts for donkeys” and encouraging anyone who happened to see “the Buddha” on the road to kill him.

Source

From Standford reasearch ito the subject of Chan or Chinese Buddhism which is a precusor to Zen or Japanese Buddhism... we can see that the often quoted; if you see a Buddha on the road kill him/her has roots in propaganda to cease the influence of it in Chinese society and not an actual tenant although, debate is something that plays heavily in Buddhism between it's own branches or factions as to it's meaningings no different than the many varied subjects found in the multitude of things seen, heard, smelled, tasted, or touched and sorted by the mind in ones experience.

Of course that is philosophy debate due to an ego bias of the self arguing with an ego bias of self in most cases instead of teaching to lay down the dukka or suffering of such bias and just be. That just being is simply just being, how we carry that being is intent... if we intend to be anything other than simply being, what is the intent? Is the Rhetoric to debate within oneself... not different than usual but wholly different than usual... the difference is skillful or unskillful by way of body, speech, and the mind that descriminated experience in both experience and a perception of inexperience in another. When it simply is just experience that arises moment to moment always subject or a slave to experience unless unbound to the self that seeks to control it's arising or passing which is simply the nature of all that arises and changes moment to moment then carry it out via a personal bias chasing a shadow or dragon of experience that no longer exists in one of non-acceptance of simply what is continually arising instead of simply accepting all experience as it continually arises in awareness of it arising or not... non awareness of what is continually arising is either an assumption of the percieved or expectation of that perception to fit that assumption instead of it simply being what it is a reflection of experience in that moment in which it arises.

So seeing a Buddha on the path? The desire to kill them can be manifested internal or external... and well the difference between internal struggle reflecting external struggle is really no different in energy to do so... yet the form it takes is very apparent in internal or external as far as the matter one has taken as being subject too by taking it as a subject or object of discrimination via the senses that give rise to all of this mass suffering internal and external attempting peace.

If there is struggle then let it commence as per usual and see that self or ego which desires to control such and for what intent or purpose to do so, either through body, speech and mind... or the 3 worlds, of Shambogakaya, Dharmakaya, or Nirmankaya.

a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness




i saw buddha on the road
i offered him some meat
oh...but he didn't refuse
and look what happened


" If there is struggle then let it commence as per usual and see that self or ego which desires to control such and for what intent or purpose to do so, either through body, speech and mind... or the 3 worlds, of Shambogakaya, Dharmakaya, or Nirmankaya."

observing the mind is endless
there is no ultimate contemplation

at least that's what we should tell the next Adam & Eve...

Actually it was the name of a popular book.
The meaning is to find the Buddha within, not the external Buddha of your sense vibration.
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

very interesting and helpful for me, at this moment.
thank you for posting. i have read about that quote on few sites or forums but your explanation rings true for my mind.

although there is still some confusion in my mind about complete understanding of your teaching, but basically we must learn to shut up and just be immersed in experience moment by moment without any clinging.
and when struggle/clinging arises in our mind we should abstain and observe so we can realize intent and desire and identify this self or part of ego.

at least this is how my mind is explaining this for now, if i am wrong please correct me.

also would you please be so kind and explain a bit about Shambogakaya, Dharmakaya and Nirmankaya?
there are many different explanations on the web, but i am interested in your view from experience and realizations, if you feel this information is appropriate for sharing here...if not than that is fine also.

a reply to: kibric

Whos porking? Is a current concern in society when its not oneself and either craving it or denying with aversion of biferential bias. A beggar simply accepts and does not choose so you posioned no one unless the intent was to posion in which case you simply posioned onself through that desire or intention. So if feeding the hungry was the intent then whos karma was it eating it?

Who's mind are you observing in that reflection? Self or other... if self look out into the world and point to it if other then do the same... each pointing will simply be an attachment to a percieved self. When doing the same inward no difference.

So theres self and no self in such reflections, being and not being in such reflections... if one sheds that reflection theres simply being... arising and non arising grasping or not grasping is that choice of intent.

The intent can be tempered by the sense organs by this ego grasping and form an illusory self a one that grasps and another one picks from... yet both bear the same fruit. The difference is intent in that grasping... is it for greed? Is it for hate? For some sort of happiness as an excuse? does that give rise to suffering in others or oneself?

That suffering or happiness also attached to an outcome of a desire to control what arises and passes comes from that intent... is it selfish in its grasping and intent or is it selfless in it's giving instead of simply taking?

So coming back around; no matter what your intent in the giving, it was his choice to bite and hunger lifted the meat to bite it... no difference than my sinking my teeth into your post.

The outcome? Does not matter unless one of us dicedes to cling to the intent behind the action... I intended to clarify your absolutes, and you saying the experience is endless did the same.

So where's the difference?

a reply to: cryptic0void

I cannot experience that book unless I have read it... just simply clarifying where it is thought to have originated through study of the term, as philosophy does arise and is often mistaken for the fruit... yes its all fruit but when we point with bias it somehow ceases to be all fruit. Even though fruit nor pointing actually exist... except in concept, it has to take place in experience to arise. Youre reading such a book and I myself not having read such a book is a differing of experience although we both have read books.

a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

i said meat but i thought pork...

" So if feeding the hungry was the intent then whos karma was it eating it? "

" so you posioned "
you did not put the poison in but you knew it was

a reply to: UniFinity

Since the path of the Buddhas awakening is intended to be the exact same path? All of our pointing becomes a different way. I simply hope the pointing I give points to that without giving anyone the finger instead of the proverbial moon... with moon being the commonly accepted metaphor known on the path to enlightenment itself, which is not the Buddha or awakened state but a reflection... just like the words hope that one sees the already awakened state or reflection instead of all of these various things attempting to point that theres no difference in all of these various things except in that pointing we choose to grasp.

I appreciate your echo of the path as you know it and I know it in speaking to be similar in pointing to what we have seen on it... if not different then oneness has been understood beyond all of these words of dukka or difference.

And theres simply being.

Hommage to the Buddha
Hommage to the Dharma
Hommage to the Sangha

originally posted by: cryptic0void
Actually it was the name of a popular book.
The meaning is to find the Buddha within, not the external Buddha of your sense vibration.
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

you might be interested in these

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

a reply to: carlore

Thank you

a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

.

*bow respectfully in silence for providing a bit more clarity*

and if i got it correctly, last part is very insightful...truth of three worlds in a shortest way possible.

a reply to: UniFinity

Silence in all 3 and what arises from moment to moment gets very interesting to observe... nonattachment to those arisings can become difficult depending on what arises or easy depending on what arises... the attachment makes all the difference.

When speech of the mind comes to peace and does not speak... it is like ease of the body without perception of pain and when all 3 are separate experience of what arises is beyond definition there is however the clear light of seeing yet no labeling of what is seen... the same is similar in all the other senses when not attached... or the 5 Buddha bodies one of sight, Smell, Taste, and Touch when there is no mind placed in discrimination of what arises, except to what arises as discrimination... of course reacting or not reacting to those arisings is of course also a choice even though it may be percieved ones choice of attachment to that perception is a choice to react or not.

Once there is clear seeing, it is said when one also hears clearly one becomes no different than the Buddha of compassion. Of course having attachment to hearing of various sorts beyond any reaction, one can have clear hearing and what one hears can be distrubing if so attached no different than before... full of suffering and pain yet not ones own but felt as ones own.

The path of Kandampa attemps to take all of the worlds pain and absorb it into oneself from such perception and aperception and donates positive accumilated karma to ease its suffering. Of course freedom always depends on where the mind is there it is... focusing on a particular perception will pull the mind into that sphere of consciousness.

I personally prefer clear seeing as it is always the same unless the body carries it to see something else under my own volition as per usual, letting the ear become legs to carry seems to bring a lot of stress and suffering into experience that does not normally exist to match with visual perception seeing is not necessarily believing but when one also has other sorts of hearing that is non differientiated in the same one as sight not a apart of that perception or aperception then it is just another bubble of experience not ones own moment to moment to moment... yet it arises and passes in one of the Buddha bodies of Sight, Sound, Smell, Taste, and Touch.

This is the difference between awake and asleep to the world of suffering... it exists yet it does not in its arisings in the 3 worlds except based on those attachments.

Knowing the arisings in those chosen attachments as a Boddhisattva or Buddha is the omnipotience of those attachments yet the reality is reality just not the one percieved moment to moment to moment they arise and they pass from our own cause and effect that creates karma and hence suffering.

I trying to make a choice between incarnated or reincarnated... I'd say Ive learned my lesson when focusing on pure hearing. Of course one is in control and one is not in those attachments just like always...



May all beings be happy and skillful in what and how suffering arises causing that happiness to cease is it from one self or other? Just simply being makes all the difference in its arising through that intent of action in either body, speech, or mind...

originally posted by: cryptic0void
Actually it was the name of a popular book.
The meaning is to find the Buddha within, not the external Buddha of your sense vibration.
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

Thanks man. I really couldn't figure out the meaning but now it makes sense. Thank you! "Sense vibration", I like it!

a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

From Standford research into the subject of Chan or Chinese Buddhism which is a precursor to Zen or Japanese Buddhism... we can see that the often quoted; if you see a Buddha on the road kill him/her has roots in propaganda to cease the influence of it in Chinese society

Well you sure have confused the # out of me with your OP because you are sort of calling out Linji Yixuan as having conspired with whatever force was decommissioning the Buddhist clergy for 4 years (841–845), when in fact the Stanford article calls out Linji Yixuan as being "iconoclastic" (a breaker of standard expected images a.k.a. "stereotypes").

His statement somehow seems to have galvanized the "true" political force in China (same as it's ever been) the "Rurality", in other words Linji Yixuan galvanized the rural "workers" of China in to a force that influenced literature so hard core that it redefined the "Imperial Identity" of China.

By the twelfth century, Chan had both religious and political prestige and the vast majority of public monasteries supported by the Song court were devoted to the practice of Chan (see Welter 2006).

plato.stanford.edu...

The Chinese have leveraged this force over and over again because they know it works; think "Falun Gong", now think about the force that communist China brought to bear trying to stop it's proliferation.

Anyway: WTF?



ETA: Also, for anyone reading this and wondering what I'm on about? No. It does not mean that the practices, and the expectant results of those practices, that may come from practicing "Falun Gong", or even Buddhism are dangerous somehow. It means that anything that people can get behind in large numbers is dangerous (to the communist Chinese). The Chinese prefer Buddhism and Buddhist/Taoist Qigong to get this political work done.

That's it.

a reply to: Bybyots

When so many monks became enlightened... what community could exist? So they all became laity to form the community and were asked for others to do the same. Japan avoided the disparity with mendicant monks and a no work no food policy...

Meaning an awakened being or buddha could be anywhere all over and in any walk of life... the kill meant test those professing without knowing. In such a manner it was an entire Buddha land...

a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

Just for the record I carry my ass to everywhere I sit... as do we all. If it brays pardon my manner.

originally posted by: kibric
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

i said meat but i thought pork...

" So if feeding the hungry was the intent then whos karma was it eating it? "

" so you posioned "
you did not put the poison in but you knew it was

Hoping you're alive... you said poisoned so many times I figured you ate it. No reply since, so I guess it was mine.

I'll read through the bardo in your honor abridged version: Carol Anne don't go into any light, nor attach to anything and the clear light of seeing eventually arises basically remain objective and not subjective to experience... and if any images of wombs appear with the head about to come out and you feel a pull of consciousness towards that also stay out of those then the dark night of the so called soul arises, where one will be questioned in a sort of life review answer and purge all of that truthfully in that experience to avoid as many hells as possible, and try to remain in the highest samadhi possible, there will be a lot of bliss for the good one has done and then offered heavens and all of that business one could possibly have desired while alive avoid those too, and you'll find yourself right back where you were hopefully not with maggots at both ends like I had, and well simply awake.

If you dont make it back? Aum Mani Peme Hung!

originally posted by: BigBrotherDarkness
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

BBD: Just for the record I carry my ass to everywhere I sit... as do we all. If it brays pardon my manner.

Compare Jesus to Buddha.

Huh?

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Both were a gas called breathing not attached to the matter... universe in universe out body no different than the universe. Mind simply a reflection of it without differentiation.

Of course none of this even matters if you dont mind.