7th Precept - No Praise or Blame

[@mwarduwo6581]

Really enjoying this video series. thank you.

[@HardcoreZen]

Thank you!

[@macdougdoug]

"When you devalue others you are scratching at your body, when you are proud of yourself, you are scratching at the air" - These "others" that I devalue are actually ideas residing in my head. As for myself, I'm probably living there too.

[@Fakery]

Never be deceived by "others," it is a dangerous concept

[@epinardianguardian2979]

Good job. Opps.

[@sasefina]

A timely message! And really loving the combination of Kobun Chino’s commentary and your commentary. Thanks, Brad.

[@HardcoreZen]

Glad to be of service!

[@sylvanstrength7520]

In other words: Don't toot your own horn Don't rain on someone else's parade

[@HardcoreZen]

That's a good way to put it!

[@jamesderieg4158]

Love the way you are doing the precepts. Want to see Ziggy! His barking is a kind of cute part of the talks now and I want to know what he looks like. I think he is trying to be part of the video!

[@HardcoreZen]

He had appeared briefly in a couple of videos. I'll see if I can get him in another one.

[@Fakery]

Tricky indeed! Very much appreciate these videos 😊 Will you please explain the phrase "you must not create the causes, conditions, methods, or karma of..."? I cant tell if it's just round about spiritual mumbo jumbo to say "dont do that" or if it is more expansive

[@edgepixel8467]

It means don’t do the bad thing, either directly or indirectly. It means don’t do the bad thing itself, and also don’t do any things that might cause it to happen.

[@macdougdoug]

If I am allowed to guess that the phrase finishes with the word "suffering" - then my explanation is that it means : don't be so self centred. Good luck with that.

[@Tristan-watermelon]

I understand it that way, but I don't know if it's the textbook answer: cause = direct cause, conditions = indirect cause, methods = ?, karma = the state of your mind. E.g. if you think about "person x is so stupid", it creates a state of mind which makes it possible that you behave badly towards that person. This will only happen given the "right" conditions - e.g. if you get into a heated argument with person x. So if you and person x and any other people who contributed to this situation (of you getting into an heated argument), all these persons have created the conditions for all the negative things that follow from it. If person x attacks you first in the argument and you answer in a bad way, person x "caused" this. But you can't just say "I was just defending myself and overreacting", since you contributed to your bad karma (state of mind) and you let it happen to get into a heated argument (conditions). (Especially Buddhist traditionalists, like Theravadins, will likely understand karma differently, I guess.)

[@wadecleveland9001]

Yamantaka Tantra is for people with wealth and power who also want to practice Buddhism.

[@sephking4964]

First of all love the series so far! I've been looking for some material to read. I'm reading living by vow by Shohaku Okumura and may read Moutains and waters sutra next. What other books could you recommend on zen and otherwise? I looked at your recommendations on your website and didn't know when it was last updated and/if you had other stuff you could recommend. Thanks! (P. S sorry for ramble)

[@HardcoreZen]

I think I recommended a lot of books on that website page! (hardcorezen.info/FAQ) If you've finished all of those, I like The Most Important Point by Ed Brown. That's fairly recent. I like I Am That by Nisargadatta Maharaj. It's not Zen, but Advaita Vedanta. Very similar to Zen. The Final Truth by Ramesh Balsekar is very interesting. The thing is, though, it's more about practice than reading.

[@sephking4964]

@@HardcoreZenOf course, just such a book junkie in addition to my zazen practice. Thanks!

[@JP-lj2lq]

Thank you. I think I know how one will say 8 now?

[@HardcoreZen]

You'll see soon!

[@MrBreadisawesome]

This is definitely a tricky one

[@reservordawg]

Ethics are important. Sometimes it seems like we don't live in an ethical world and if one plays by those rules that would be a limit. Maybe that's not true.

[@bobbi2044]

Well, Roshi Elliston is right eh? No self and others, are One. IT has no praise or blame. We emulate the understanding of Buddha....But, at times, the bodhisattva is forced to discriminate for sake of oneself, and others; hence the precepts.

[@c.a.t.732]

The ten precepts are for monks and nuns, yes? Only the first five apply to the laity. Anyone Buddhist lay person who likes to attend musical performances (or even take part themselves) would not wish to take on the 7th precept, for instance.

[@HardcoreZen]

I don't know how it works in Theravada Buddhism. In Zen, the Ten Grave Precepts are given to both laypeople and monks/nuns. But the 7th precept in Zen is different. There is no Zen precept against attending or performing in musical events. However, Dogen relates some advice give to him by his teacher for being a monk, and his teacher advised monks not to watch singing and dancing.

[@c.a.t.732]

@@HardcoreZen Thank you for your thoughtful reply. In a book I have here called Buddhism Explained by Khantipalo the Theravada position on the precept in question is described as "to refrain from seeing shows, dances and all sorts of entertainments". A rather broad set of prohibitions! I've elsewhere seen it more narrow-focused to forbidding attendance to music and dance performances. But since it and the other Precepts 6 through 10 don't apply to laypersons I could safely ignore it as a working musician (who sometimes played for Middle Eastern and Celtic dancers) for nearly 40 years!

[@gregjustsitting]

the truth is not hidden from billionaires any more than anybody else. But why concern yourself with it anyways?

[@sheldonvideos]

Celebrate Genpo lately??? Tomorrow's lesson ought to be on hypocrisy.

[@osip7315]

at least he had a reason for being in zen, its the upright stupids volunteering their lives into vacuity that make one scratch one's head

[@bobbi2044]

you don't get it. you choose to hear what you want, and twist it the way you want. ask yourself why. how does that taste.

[@gunterappoldt3037]

If there is no self, who do you ask?

[@bobbi2044]

@@gunterappoldt3037 Attempt at humour?

[@gunterappoldt3037]

@@bobbi2044 not really, but an attempt to hint at some contradictions (or antinomies) inside the concept of the a n â t m a n and the "ideology" of awakening-insight-liberation. Since Buddhism began to spread, critiques kept wondering about this (Proto-)Kôan: What is this way of "saving"(or soteriology), if in "real reality" there exists neither a way, nor a saviour, nor somebody to be safed? Most answers seem to me to be rather elusive and/or exclusivist (à la the "Only a Buddha can understand another Buddha!", which is no answer in the strict logical sense, even if logic is stretched towards the "translogics" inside the root-metaphor of the "logos", or Pythagorean mathematico-mysticism). The best "analytic meditative" answer, I found just now, after my post, by re-interpretating some explanations around the topis of S û n y a t â and the S a m a d h i of things or thingness, in: Nishitani, Keiji, "Religion ...?", chapter 4, "The Position of S û n y a t â". They hint at some kind of "deep phenomenology" done the "old school" way of Chán/Zen, and also resonate with some Neo-Ruist approaches, formulated by Wáng Yángmíng and others.

[@bobbi2044]

how about we find your breaking point.

[@stevemarino5745]

This guy is so full of himself. All ego all the time. Your pet cat probably knows more about Zen than Brad, and your cat isn't a jerk.

[@HardcoreZen]

I am certain you are right.