tariki

Funnily enough it is Calvin I see as closest to the Shin perspective. Pure election. The problem - as I see it - is that he felt the need to square his understanding of grace with what believed as being the undisputable teaching of the Bible i.e. that some are NOT elected. Pure Land Buddhism obviously has no such need. Therefore Grace in the Pure Land tradition is free to become TRULY amazing! Obviously, there is a growing Universalism within the Christian Tradition. (The book "Patristic Universalism" is a good presentation of this from a Biblical perspective)

Just to add, my own experience is, in observing both self and others, is that any residue of thinking "I have contributed by accepting" is pernicious. I would put it that strongly.

Thormas, one little sentence written by Unno,in his book on Shin Buddhism, had had much influence on me..... "It is a necessary step on the path to recognise that what we first understood to be self power was in fact the working of Other Power." The interplay of jiriki ( self power ) and tariki ( other power ) is intrinsic to Shin ( Pure Land ) Buddhism. Once again, the words of a myokonin ( a Pure Land "saint" ), the cobbler Saichi... "O! Saichi, will you tell us of Other Power? Yes, but there is neither self power nor other power. What is, is the Graceful Acceptance only!" Buddhism is both non-theistic AND non-dual. ( Not that "all is One" but that all is not two )

Thanks Burl Uniquely unique? Thomas Merton, who crossed boundaries, spoke of God "being His own gift", Anyway, thanks.

Hi Burl, I've posted this link before. Heavy going and if you grasp more than half of it please explain it to me! http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-ADM/keenan.htm My own understanding was helped by my reading up of the zen guy Dogen, and I ran a thread on him on the "Other Wisdom Traditions" sub-section. Essentially, as I see it, it is about the "birth of Christ" in us, a truly incarnational Faith. My own experience is simply that any such birth is of grace, not works..........in Pure Land terminology, "things are made to become so of themselves" beyond our own calculations.

Steve, happy that you have joined the Ramblers. As I see it the core message/claim of Christianity is that the Universal became particular in one moment of time. As far as I can see, this is very much the heart of every Faith. The problem is that once the claim is made that "Jesus" is uniquely unique (!) the heart and core message is distorted and becomes the seed of division. Theologically, the Incarnation can be much better understood from a Mahayana perspective. The Greeks have had their day.

Thinking back my current understanding has not been the product of any "method" at all. Or, to put it another way, no ONE method. I really have just stumbled along - and still do.

Hi Thormas, not seeking to palm you off with second hand posts, but here is a link to a second hand thread ( ) that I opened some time ago. (all part of "living in the moment".... ) Just to say that the important word in definitive demarcation lines ​is the word "definitive", not "lines". Hopefully that makes it more clear. As far as "it", long ago I asked on Buddhist Forums, in respect of the oft quoted "Buddha's only point the way, each has to walk the path themselves", in the light of "not-self" (anatta), just WHO is asked to "walk the path". I think if anyone is serious about all this then the answer can only be found by "walking on". Here is the link.... http://tcpc.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/3184-the-preeminence-of-grace/ (Just to say, we have had the grandchildren here for a couple of days, and time has been rather limited)

Once again, it seems to me it is much about seeking to impose definitive demarcation lines. Imposed by a "self" that seeks to plot its own course and determine its very own "salvation". Virtually the polar opposite of grace.

As Rom has already implied, the idea of "physical noumenon" (physical only) seems antiquated. This partly because science has found that there are limits to our ability to measure ( remember the Terry Pratchett guy who either knew where he was or where he was going, but never both at the same time? ), some things seem pretty unrepeatable, and, science is telling us, there is definitely no independent frame of reference. Its easy to get stuck in a Newtonian cosmos, but science has moved on if we wish to know Reality in its fullness and depth. Alas, we love certainties, and as T S Eliot has said, we just can't stand too much reality.

Paradoxically, when there is no division, the unique individuality if each and every person, and each and every thing, is uncovered and known. I am revealed as a big fat self righteous frog, others come and go, telling their stories and moving on, others remain and tell more of their own particular experience. Each unique in each moment. As far as "thinking Christians", more a divisive group definition, where all individuality is lost in discrimination and judgement.

Burl, I think Joseph sees me as harmless. (Laughing face)

I see all division as damaging and harmful. It remains to be said that there is mileage in C S Lewis's contention that "hell is locked from the inside". Thus if we wish to divide then so be it. Of course, here I am a guest of sorts to Joseph's discretion, not subscribing to the 8 points of Progressive Christianity as such.

The heart of Pure Land is the Nembutsu. Not a calculation of logic, not a practice to gain anything or become anything. Just a cry of gratitude that Reality is the way it is. Thank you, gratitude. Sure, to begin with, the mind picks out what it experiences as "good", as "pleasure", but over time the "thank you" virtually becomes one with the breath itself, whatever the moment holds, gives or takes. And my own experience is that this does not evolve into a docile acceptance, a compliant going along with the "way of the world", but is truly transformative and positive.

​Hi Paul, I'm beginning to see that the "answer" is to be found in the "mystical", in knowing the eternal not as endless time but as a deepening of the present moment, Not some "new age" mumbo jumbo. The contrast between the linear time frame in which we find ourselves and Reality itself is worth investigation - in the world of science/physics as well as the mystical traditions of the world. Not finding new worlds, more seeing/knowing with new eyes - I think Marcel Proust said something like that. And for me the heart of any new seeing is found not on the meditation cushion or in the realm of the advanced intellect, but "around the kitchen sink", in the giving and receiving of love within the family, the day by day grind. In gratitude. There really is no mystery.

Maybe time for another sermon..... Recently I was called upon to give a speech at my daughter's wedding (oh yes, she had had the two little kiddies and now wanted to tie the knot) and the thought filled me with trepidation. "Oh" says Mrs Tariki, "just tell a couple of anecdotes about her when she was young." Problem was I had told them all.......over and over again. Then one old anecdote came to mind, one that I had always kept close to my heart, unshared. Perhaps the time had come to share it. So it formed the basis for my speech - one that was interrupted by my little granddaughter crying out "I'm hungry!" when I was in full flow.......at least I got one laugh. The anecdote. It was during the days of Band Aid, when every evening on the news we saw pictures of the famines in Ethiopia. I was taking my six year old daughter to school. As we walked along she looked up into the sky and said:- "I wonder if God is up there behind that cloud". Time for the wise dad to speak:-"Oh, God's not like that, God is everywhere". "Cor, he must be a fat bloke" she replied. Then we walked on a little further and she spoke again:-"Why did God create wasps?" Immediately I got the gist of it. A couple of days previously, having sandwiches in the back garden, a few wasps had begun dive bombing us, causing quite a stir. "Oh" says I, the wise father, "we mustn't judge the worth of anything by whether we like them or not. There is a reason why everything has been created." So we walked on and after a couple of minutes of further thought, my little daughter asks:-"Why did God create the people of Ethiopia?" I'm not sure what I said at the time. Probably some inanity. But all I said at the wedding was that our only answer is the live we lead. Well, not much of a sermon, more a blog. Where do we put these things?

For anyone interested here is a link to a Dharma talk on Four Quartets and the Dharma. http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol3/Dancing.htm Anyway, as far as I'm aware, THE END.

The moment of the rose and the moment of the yew-tree Are of equal duration ​(T S Eliot) The only extension to the present is intensity (Lama Govinda) One final garden........ I always love something man-made within the natural colours and shapes and blooms.

More from T S Eliot, these words really struck....... You can receive this: "on whatever sphere of being The mind of a man may be intent At the time of death"—that is the one action (And the time of death is every moment) Which shall fructify in the lives of others: And do not think of the fruit of action. Fare forward. ​ Much of the poem (Four Quartets) is above my head, but as one zen master said, there, at the point of not understanding, is your understanding.

At the still point of the turning world. Neither flesh nor fleshless; Neither from nor towards; at the still point, there the dance is, But neither arrest nor movement. And do not call it fixity, Where past and future are gathered. Neither movement from nor towards, Neither ascent nor decline. Except for the point, the still point, There would be no dance, and there is only the dance. ​​(T S Eliiot)

Footfalls echo in the memory Down the passage which we did not take Towards the door we never opened Into the rose-garden. My words echo Thus, in your mind. But to what purpose Disturbing the dust on a bowl of rose-leaves I do not know. (The Rose Garden, with lines from Four Quartets)

Hi Thomas, yes, my own post offered a counterpoint, drawn from the life of David Jones. There is more to renewal than merely the new, if it is genuine renewal. David Jones sought to re-present the past and its traditions. RE-present, present it anew, in his art and his poems. Each was "the thing itself" and not an attempt to represent anything. Thus, as I see it, he himself was renewed. I think the fact that many who knew him intimately described him as "childlike" holds some sort of clue. The thing is that he suffered deeply from depression, drank rather heavily at times and often gave the appearance of being a tramp, or at least unkempt. Well, there we have the "outcasts" in fellowship with Christ......or Jesus.....or whoever.

1. For me there are simply "values" 2. "Christ", in the broadest sense, if we wish to have another word than Reality. Everyone picks and chooses as far as the picture given of Jesus in the Gospels, meek and mild or with a whip. 3. Just the "natural" which can at times appear quite "super", at other times not.

"Our ends are beginnings" (Line from Four Quartets)