Comments on: Wise words from my wife the bodhisattva, part 2

By: Doug 陀愚

Doug 陀愚 — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 05:17:24 +0000

Not at all, and welcome to the JLR!

By: -

Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:49:35 +0000

Well here is what I found interesting; If I start practicing loving kindness or whatever with everything because everything is a part of the buddha, then I find that I at least, am refusing to acknowledge the reality of the thing, and instead am clinging to the idea of Buddha which I project onto the thing and then worship/accept it. Grin, this is the danger of an insight which is not mine. For me of course.
p.s I hope you don’t mind me butting in.

By: Doug

Doug — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 09:42:25 +0000

Well, the ending is pretty anti-climactic. I found the rosary, brushed it off, and put it in it\’s rightful place. As for the meaning behind what my wife said, she just said to treat everything with reverence, not just this or that.

By: Doug

Doug — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 09:42:21 +0000

By: Kendall

Kendall — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:08:44 +0000

Your posts seems to be missing an end piece. After this discussion with your wife, did you go looking for the rosary, or did you decide to continue not worrying about it? That’s, in part, made me curious about the rosary being Buddha, and why you should care more about it getting lost. Did your wife feel you should care more for a material item, or was it because you added the word Buddhism into your explanation of why you didn’t feel it was important? I was just curious.

By: Doug

Doug — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:59:06 +0000

jmcleod76: I consulted a fellow I know online (ordained Shingon priest) and he said that there really isn’t much difference between them. They are essentially interchangable, except that one name derives form one sutra, while another uses a somewhat different name.

warriortwo: Good to see you. I know people lurk from time to time, but it’s always nice when someone pops in to say hi.

By: warriortwo

warriortwo — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:34:58 +0000

I have no other commentary than to say I am still out here enjoying the blog!

By: jmcleod76

jmcleod76 — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:21:56 +0000

I’m certainly no expert on the various Buddhas, having a faily minimalistic practice, myself, but my understanding is the “Maha” is just a prefix meaning something along the lines of “great,” an honorific. In which case, wouldn’t Mahavairochana Buddha, just be Great Vairochana Buddha? In other words, same “guy,” just a different way of addressing him.

Again, no expert here, but that seems right to me.

By: Doug

Doug — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:35:53 +0000

Welcome to the JLR and thank you for the correction. Yes, you’re right, that is Vairocana Buddha, which is not quite the same as Mahavairocana Buddha. I should go find out how exactly they differ though.

Amusingly, I did write much of the Wikipedia article, but admittedly I cobbled it together from scattering of sources, so it really does need more work. Haven’t been able to find a lot definitive sources though since most of the information is esoteric in nature. Ah well.

Thanks again!

By: Wamae

Wamae — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:53:51 +0000

Great post!

Your wife the bodhisattva really knows how to cut straight to the heart of the matter

I just have a tiny correction to something you wrote; you said the Daibutsu of Todaiji is Mahavairocana; it’s actually an image of Vairocana Buddha who is central to the Kegon school, and appears in the Flower Garland Sutra…Now Wikipedia tends to conflate the two but that isn’t strictly accurate.

Of course, ultimately, Buddha is Buddha is Buddha