﻿Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 at 9:26 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Just as the majority of the Zen stories, the "Flower Sermon" is fictional. The reason I mentioned is that it shows that what is transmitted is nothing but the direct understanding of the nature of mind. When one sees the nature of mind, that is receiving the transmission from mind to mind. That's why it is said that there is nothing actually transmitted. In fact, there is nothing actually realised either. Not seeing is true seeing.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013 at 4:39 PM
Title: Re: Mushin and Chuang Tzu
Content:
Astus wrote:
Meido, thanks. I've enjoyed Takuan's work, a lucid presentation indeed, but the quote is very misleading.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 22nd, 2013 at 11:31 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
dude said:
"In Zen they talk about the wordless transmission, but they also clarify there is nothing actually transmitted."

That can't mean what it literally says.

Astus wrote:
What has been transmitted from Buddha to Kashyapa then?


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 22nd, 2013 at 11:29 PM
Title: Re: Mushin and Chuang Tzu
Content:
Astus wrote:
It does indeed. And it shows how mushin in matial arts is not Zen.

Luke said:
Then do you think that the quote by Takuan Soho which I posted in my OP is also "not Zen"?

I guess the first question in my OP really should have been "Is using the state of mind of mushin to improve one's performance of a martial art or another skill a Zen Buddhist idea or not?"

Astus wrote:
When it says, "is ready only to follow the dictates of the subconscious", either it's a bad translation or a very non-Buddhist idea. Using Zen to be a proficient killer, that's a perversion of the teachings. Zen is about becoming a buddha, it is about the perfection of bodhisattva action. Thinking that Zen is good for learning this or that skill is lacking the correct motivation, bodhicitta. It is mistaking Zen for some technique or therapeutic method. Zen is direct insight into the nature of mind. No insight, no Zen. One can use a calm mind to be more efficient in many things, yes. But that's just a calm mind, not Zen.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 22nd, 2013 at 9:15 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Jikan said:
Another way of making the same claim would be to say that Buddhism is a religion, no?

Astus wrote:
Partially. But even in a religion, that has a "theology" (i.e. a logical-philosophical system), it is a reasonable requirement that it is coherent. Even in Buddhist terms the way prana, etc. functions and exists can't be explained, it is an anomaly. Of course, we can say that higher Tantra cannot be connected to other teachings. But then there is no reason why we couldn't say that it is a teaching without valid basis within Buddhism itself. For instance, Tendai, Kegon and Hosso are different schools, but their teachings can be verified by different teachings and connected to each other. Also, none of them have a teaching that is taught beyond words (I mean, you don't need special transmissions to be able to read and study the Lotus Sutra and to benefit from it). In Zen they talk about the wordless transmission, but they also clarify there is nothing actually transmitted. So, if Mantrayana includes something else beyond verbal mantras, it seems logical to me to ask what that is.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 22nd, 2013 at 8:23 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Mirage,

Now we have arrived at the point then that all the unusual features cannot be explained or established and remains in the realm of personal belief. Similarly to the Zen transmission story, where this topic has started, there is nothing that could prove the existence of such phenomena besides relying on tradition and faith. Unlike the Zen lineages that can be shown to be historically inaccurate, but nonetheless existent to some level, supernatural abilities and events simply lack evidence and logical explanation. Another difference is that while there are living people who are members of different Zen lineages, there is yet to be someone who claims to have special abilities. On the other hand, it is said, and that's where we have started, that in the transmission of mantras there is something else besides mere words. And this claim cannot be verified, practically making it a myth.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 22nd, 2013 at 5:04 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Mirage,

What I'm looking for is a coherent explanation for rddhis and the rest. It is easy to say that it's just magic and you don't have to fit it into the larger Buddhist system. Alas, I don't want to do that.

I can see the practical value of Tantric/yogic methods, they are fine as skilful means. My problem is that the way they explain the reason for its functioning (energy channels, magic) does not hold up to analysis. I mean, nobody can visibly perform the mundane super-knowledges (moving through walls, walking on water, etc.), but one can in meditation with a mind-made body. So I say that it's an internal practice and not something observable in our shared (physical) world. From this comes the impossibility of mind to mind communication and such.

How is prana defined? What is it made of? What are its properties? What faculty perceives it? What kind of dharma is it? I have yet to see answers to these questions. As in your quote from Wangyal Rinpoche, there are different bodily feelings and an imagined system one works with and then believes that it's all because an unseen, unknown phenomenon called prana.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 22nd, 2013 at 3:57 AM
Title: Re: Mushin and Chuang Tzu
Content:
Astus wrote:
It does indeed. And it shows how mushin in matial arts is not Zen.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 22nd, 2013 at 3:49 AM
Title: Re: Mushin and Chuang Tzu
Content:
Astus wrote:
Not exactly. Zhangzi talks about following the natural appearance of things without contrivance. Zen talks about not attaching to ideas, seeing things clearly and acting compassionately. In Zen there is no natural order to follow or submit to.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 22nd, 2013 at 2:53 AM
Title: Re: Transgendered kids
Content:
Astus wrote:
I think that having a male or female genitalia is one thing, identifying with culturally defined gender roles is another.

If a child wants to identify with the opposite gender I see no problem, but he has to be aware of the difficulties (and will face them anyway). But under 18 no surgical or chemical modifications should be allowed.

Regarding Quite Heart's story, I say that people should stop mutilating (circumcision) children.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 22nd, 2013 at 2:22 AM
Title: Re: Mushin and Chuang Tzu
Content:
Astus wrote:
Mushin, that is, no-mind is a Zen term for prajnaparamita, and means non-abiding in any phenomenon, what is seeing their emptiness. And yes, it is the central idea of Zen, just as Mahayana.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 22nd, 2013 at 2:18 AM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Mirage,

People have six senses. The five physical senses deliver impressions from what we call the outer world. The sixth sense is our thoughts and emotions. It is this sixth sense, consciousness, that is capable of many magical and supernatural things. For instance, among the five eyes the first one is the physical and the rest are mental. The divine eye is capable of seeing heavens and hells, things far and close, and this is what an experienced meditator (of any religion or tradition) can use to see another's mind. This is not so unusual if we think about it a little, since dreams, visions, hallucinations and everyday imagination show us the virtually infinite abilities of the mind. The question is if what we see with the divine eye is not just imagination. The difference between what we call real and imagined is that we can't change real things by wishing so. Conventional reality has its rules. So, while I accept the existence of the six realms, its specifics (names of places and gods, etc.) as given in Buddhism is not definitive. There are many people who can travel to other worlds/realms by meditation (here using it as a very general term of spiritual techniques), but they experience more or less different things and they can't communicate with each other there. So, if a teacher transmits something not on the level of the five physical senses, in what realm does that happen and how can it be assured that anyone perceives it? What mental dharmas can be sent from mind to mind and what transmits them? Although both the teacher and the student are given specific instructions regarding visualisations and attitudes at the time of empowerment, it is not explained how blessings, etc. go from one person to another, if it is indeed a phenomenon transferred. Rather it seems that it is a matter of imagination, wishing so, just like in the case of the divine eye. However, if there is a way to establish the specifics of giving blessings, etc., I'm happy to hear about it.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, April 21st, 2013 at 9:04 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
mirage said:
So, what matters for us is that blessings and teachings can be conferred in this manner - by causing through the power of yogic concentration the forms in one mind to be represented in another by their close copies. Doesn't it suffice for the purpose discussed in this thread?

Astus wrote:
Non-direct contact between minds, that includes all sorts of communication (like this forum). The point of bringing up the distinction is to find what else could there be transmitted between teacher and student other than words. If we exclude direct interference we need a representation, something that conveys the message, something that creates a causal link. In case of merit transference, for instance, it is not that someone simply sends out merit to another person who then automatically receives it, but by informing the other person of one's merits and that other individual agreeing with the action that generated the merit, they share the merit, one because of the action, the other because of agreeing with the action. So, there is no "merit-energy transfer" in any literal sense. A teacher giving blessings has to announce the act of blessing and the receiver has to acknowledge it. That acknowledgement is the receiving, or accepting. That's why people can receive a guru's blessing who is not even in their presence, simply by guruyoga. Same at the time of empowerment, the recipients have to actively participate in it by visualising this and that. I'm not denying here the efficiency of any of those practices, I'm debating the idea that there is something mystical (prana, blessing, the seed of enlightenment, etc.) sent from teacher to the student, because it would entail interfering directly with another's mind-stream that skips the usual process of perceiving and comprehending.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, April 21st, 2013 at 7:59 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
I am still waiting for specific sources that preclude direct mental influence.  It is a given that direct mental influence is possible in just about every form of Buddhism I know about so I was hoping for you to spell out your argument against it in specific quotes rather than just a link to a general article on karma.

Astus wrote:
In Xuanzang's Demonstration of Consciousness Only (ch. 7, in Three Texts on Consciousness Only, p. 239; tr. Francis H. Cook) it is explained that immediate perception of another's mind is impossible:

[Objection:) External form is really nonexistent and presumably not the object of internal consciousness. The minds of others really exist, so why are they not also one's own objects [of consciousness]? 
[We reply,] who says that the minds of others are not the objects of one's own consciousness? We just do not not say that they are its immediate objects. That is, when a consciousness is born, it is devoid of real function, unlike hands, etc., that immediately grasp external things, or the sun, etc., that spreads its light and immediately illuminates external objects. [Consciousness] is only said to perceive the minds of others because it is like a mirror in which appear seemingly external objects. It cannot immediately perceive [others' minds]. What it immediately perceives are its own transformations. Therefore, a scripture says, "There is not the slightest dharma that is capable of seizing other dharmas. It is just that when consciousness is born, it appears resembling images and is said to seize things." As with having the minds of others as objects, so with form, etc.

Further explanation is found from Dan Lusthaus in Buddhist Phenomenology, p. 490-491.

It should be understood simply by considering that consciousness is a subjective experience. Making consciousness objective is not consciousness any more. Experiencing the same therefore requires an identical consciousness, and so on as I have already said.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, April 21st, 2013 at 6:26 AM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Karma Dorje,

The problem is about direct mental influence as was raised regarding the transmission of mantras. The same problem stands with any other sort of idea that involves such consciousness to consciousness contact. Only if this can be clarified it is possible to move on to the specifics like the termas, empowerments and the rest.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, April 21st, 2013 at 2:16 AM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Mirage,

The problem with the idea that buddhas can put thoughts into people's mind based on the person's receptiveness is that all buddhas continually work on liberating all beings. Therefore what happens is that only the individual's openness determines everything making the influence of buddhas meaningless. That is, buddhas have nothing to do and can't actually do anything, they are a meaningless extra with no actual relevance to anyone's life. Also, here we just simply skip the problem of a single moment of consciousness for multiple beings.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 20th, 2013 at 10:17 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Mirage,
I do not see why you insist so much on the impossibility of direct mental influence. I see this as dualistic thinking. In my opinion, direct mental contact no more contradicts karma than a physical contact does. Both are made possible and effectual by the presence of appropriate karma on both sides.
I insist on it because as I said I see it as contradicting karma. How is that an objection that it's dualistic thinking? You don't confuse your right hand with your left, and you don't quench your thirst by someone else drinking. Physical contact is not the same as intention, while thinking is intention. If one person can put thoughts into another's mind then the buddhas can make everyone enlightened.

As it says in your quote, Padmasambhava communicated teachings to disciples by words and deeds, and then those disciples remembered the teachings in a future life. It's not the same as Padmasambhava putting memories into another's consciousness.

The ability (abhijna) to read another's mind, i.e. telepathy, is not unique to a buddha. In the Visuddhimagga there is also a method given how to attain it (XII.3), and the Kosha (VII.56) mentions - but doesn't explain - three ways of doing it: by reading signs, by mantra, by meditation. In the usual enumeration (DN 2) of the mental states one can know by telepathy there are only general qualities and not specific thoughts. Consciousness is apparently momentary, so the question is if a single moment of consciousness can be the same for two beings, practically a "mind meld", where two streams of consciousness become one. It is like two objects occupying exactly the same space, which means that it's just one object. Since they have different causal background meaning that the effects should be different - we arrive at the problem of different causes creating the same result and then we also have to explain how a single mind can continue on two separate streams. Another option is what Dharmakirti mentions in his Samtanantara-siddhi (Wood: Mind Only, p. 217-218) that there is only a similar form appearing in one's mind that somewhat reflects another's consciousness. However, this is not a direct mental contact.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 20th, 2013 at 5:16 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
If we take as a starting premise that ultimately there is no me and you, then the problem of how can I influence/share/transmit to you really becomes redundant.

We all agree that conventional reality, as we perceive it, is not the way things actually are.  If somebody is acting intentionally within the sphere of the ultimate...

Some go as far as to say that there is no ultimate and relative reality/truth anyway, or that the perception of the duality of the two truths is an illusion.

Astus wrote:
In ultimate reality there is no coming or going, no birth or death. Transmission is meaningless where there is no you and me. Receiving the four empowerments requires that the disciple follows the steps, does the visualisations, etc., without what he doesn't experience anything (I'm talking practically here). Intentional action in ultimate reality does not exist. As for the unity of the two truths, it is seeing that conventional phenomena are indeed conventional, and there is no separate ultimate beyond the conventional.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 20th, 2013 at 5:11 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
mirage said:
Maybe I am missing something? Naturally these things are the result of karma. However, doesn't the karmic seed require supporting conditions to bring the appropriate result? I distinctly remember that it does.

Regarding direct mental influence - how, then, can we account for things like mind terma? While transmitting esoteric teachings to his realized disciples in Tibet, Guru Padmasambhava concealed many teachings with the blessings of his enlightened mind stream in the nature of the intrinsic awareness of the minds of his disciples through the power of “mind-mandated transmission” (gtad rgya); thereby the master and disciple became united as one in the teachings and realization. Here, the master has concealed the teachings and blessings, the esoteric attainments, as ter in the pure nature of the minds of his disciples through his enlightened power, and he has made aspirations that the ter may be discovered for the sake of beings when the appropriate time comes

Astus wrote:
We may separate karma (the person's mental habits) and non-karmic conditions (external phenomena, i.e. things perceived by the five senses). This still maintains the impossibility of direct mental influence.

As for explaining mind terma, I can ask the same question. Or, to turn it around, I may say that such thing is not possible. And to give it another turn, such teachings are based on insight into the nature of mind, so it is true that they are from Padmasambhava (or any chosen enlightened being), since, as we can see in guruyoga, the mind of the teacher and the student are ultimately the same.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 20th, 2013 at 4:15 AM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
mirage said:
This is a strange point of view that seems to imply that people are unable to interact with each other at all. You cannot hit me in the face because that would mean that I suffer the result of your own action.

As I understand it, I can be hit by you because I have some karma to be hit (cause) and you have karma to hit me (supporting condition). Without any of these, the result would not happen. The seed cannot grow without water, and it is pointless to pour water if there is no seed.

Astus wrote:
I didn't say people are unable to interact, I specified direct mental influence. We can communicate and experience others via the five bodily sensory faculties, but we can't do it directly from mind to mind.

Good and bad experiences are the result of karma. Meeting the Dharma is a result of karma. Being able to practice is a result of karma. This subject is covered in Vajrayana preliminary practices, isn't it?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 20th, 2013 at 12:55 AM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
I don't share your epistemological premises.  One person in samadhi can certainly impact others.  Much of the action to help others in Vajrayana is through this.

Can you please give me some sources for your ideas about karma that explain how samadhi has no impact on the environment and the surroundings of the meditator?

Astus wrote:
This http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/karma.htm should suffice. I can also cite further explanations from the Kosha or Yogacara sources if required. That is, karma is intentional action, nothing more, nothing less. Every individual experiences the effects of their own actions and not the actions of others. If one could experience the result of another's karma, that would mean that I suffer or enjoy the fruits of someone else's actions. One kills a man and another goes to hell for it. One practices the path and another attains enlightenment. Etc. So, what you are saying is that when one meditates another experiences the benefits of that meditation. Or, if in meditation someone can generate an intention in another's mind, that is taking control over another person's karma, which is again the case that one man's karma bears fruit for another (since the one influenced had no intention to do something but was made to do it by someone else's will). Not to mention the case that although the Buddha himself had superb samadhis, he couldn't make anyone neither liberated nor even a little better (and then consider infinite number of buddhas bringing everyone enlightenment just by meditation). And that's why I say direct mental influence is a violation of karma.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 20th, 2013 at 12:13 AM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
mirage said:
But how is it a problem? Even if it is possible to directly influence another mind, it can only result in providing supporting conditions for that mind. A teacher won't be able to create a new substantial cause in the student's mind, but he'll be able to support some existing causes, allowing them to actualize. This is no different from a physical interaction.

Astus wrote:
What would such a supporting condition be? Is it a thought, is it a feeling, is it a mental representation of a physical input?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 11:39 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
I have no clue what telepathy is.  One's state of mind is easily and commonly affected by the state of mind of others-- spend an hour in a room with a manic person or an extremely angry person and observe your own mental state.  I am not particularly concerned with some materialist explanation; it's empirically observable.  I don't believe that mind is an epiphenomena of matter.  There aren't any walls between one sentient being and another, only labels on percepts.

I don't know what you mean by violating karma... do you mean one person experiencing the karmic results of another?  This is clearly not what I have described.

Astus wrote:
What I mean is that if it is possible to directly influence another's mind - one can transfer thoughts, feelings, ideas, concepts, anything - then one can make another do or feel whatever one wants, basically violating the law of karma, because karma depends on what one chooses and defines how one experiences. Being in the same room with others, seeing and hearing how they behave, is not a direct mental influence. So, if there is anything communicated by a teacher to a student beyond what the five sensory faculties record, then there is a direct mental influence. If there isn't, the mentioned intention and energy pattern is either in a physically perceivable act or it doesn't exist.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 10:32 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
The transmission occurs through sympathetic influence-- the samadhi of the master creates an opportunity for the student to participate.

Astus wrote:
Do you mean telepathy? Or in what way is another person's state of mind a factor for another's state of mind? Wouldn't that be a violation of karma (if one can influence another's mind directly)?

Although the topic deals mainly with the Zen lineage, since it's generally about myths in Buddhism, a little trip into Vajrayana is permissible.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 6:40 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Jeeprs,

I think it's the opposite, people want a superior being to guide them and show the way, someone they can completely trust. And for that trust one has to believe in the purity and goodness of the other person, to appear someone like Jesus. And if you believe that the other person is a living saint and an omniscient buddha it is quite easy to surrender yourself to him in every aspect. This is the easy way. The more difficult path is when you have your own confidence and the teacher is there to help, to assist you, but not to overtake the control of your (spiritual) life. However, such confidence comes from one's own study and experience, from the personal faith in the Triple Jewel. Therefore it is up to the system to show the correct way to beginners that will teach them how to gain that confidence and not to give up yourself to a seemingly superior being.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 5:27 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
In Japanese:

http://jisho.org/words?jap=%E5%B8%AB&eng=&dict=edict
1: teacher; master; one's mentor;
2: () religious leader;
3: (Suffix) specialist;
4: (Noun) (Archaism) five-battalion brigade comprising 2500 men (Zhou-dynasty Chinese army)

examples:
医師 【いし】 (n,adj-no) doctor; physician
印刻師 【いんこくし】 (n) seal engraver
画師; 絵師 【えし; がし(画師)】 (n) painter; artist; painter supported by patron
思惑師 【おもわくし】 (n) speculator
楽師 【がくし】 (n) master musician
教師 【きょうし】 (n,adj-no) teacher (classroom)
技師 【ぎし】 (n) engineer; technician;
写真師 【しゃしんし】 (n) photographer
花火師 【はなびし】 (n) pyrotechnist; pyrotechnician


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 4:26 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
According to the understanding of Vajrayana, mantra is an intention and a energetic pattern that is transmitted from the guru to the student. it has nothing to do with ordinary language and can't be "learned" from books.

Astus wrote:
Can you explain what intention and energetic patter is in this case and how it is transmitted? And can you raise the same problem with non-Tantric teachings giving a reason for the requirement of a lineage?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Zen and different Pure Land views
Content:
zamotcr said:
So, according to the point of view, Pure Land can be seen as own Buddha's Nature, and also as a place, visible to "pure sentient beings", right?

Astus wrote:
It depends on what one wants to teach. Both are true, as it is explained by Seosan (see my first post here).


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 4:57 AM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
mirage said:
Simple: I do not consider my ability to distinguish a correct teaching from a correct sounding teaching to be infallible. If it was infallible, I probably woundn't need any teachings at all.

Furthermore, the very act of receiving a teaching personally is important. There is a common saying that repeating a mantra without having received it personally from a teacher is like trying to squeeze some oil out of a handful of sand.

Astus wrote:
The correct teachings are defined in the Buddhist canon, the Buddha himself taught them.

Zongmi wrote (Zongmi on Chan, p. 112):

"The sutras are like an inked marking string, serving as a model by which to establish the false and the correct. The inked marking string is not the skill itself; a skillful craftsman must use the string as a standard. The sutras and treatises are not Chan; one who transmits Chan must use the sutras and treatises as a norm."

And Yongming wrote (Conception of Chan in the Zongjing Lu, p. 248, 258):

"People develop understanding through texts. When people forget about the Buddha’s message, one safeguards the minds of beginners on the basis of [texts]. Whoever understands the teaching through the corpus of Buddhist writings will not create a mind and realm of objects in opposition to each other, but will realize the mind of the Buddha directly. What error is there in this?"

"Moreover, if one wants to investigate the Buddha-vehicle, one will read extensively from the treasure storehouse [i.e., Buddhist scriptures]. Each and every [scripture] forces one to understand the truth about one’s own self; utterance after utterance causes one to mysteriously unite with true mind. One simply should not grasp onto written texts as the highest meaning, forming [artificial] views according to the words. One should directly seek out the message written down in the corpus of Buddhist scriptures, tacitly uniting with the truth that is inherently implicit. At that point, the wisdom that does not depend on any teacher reveals itself, and the way of heavenly truth is no longer obscure."

Now, I'm not saying that teachers are unnecessary. There is a great value of someone who has studied, contemplated and practised the teachings, who has experience in the Dharma and compassion to teach it. However, there is nothing new a Buddhist teacher can say that are not already in the sutras. He can rephrase it for the student, give examples, etc., but the content is the same, just as the intention and the effect. A maths or a language teacher can't come up with new rules, he can only explain again and again until the student understands. A Dharma teacher has to do the same. In fact, even the sutras repeat the same things over and over.

So, what difference does it make if I hear a mantra from a teacher, from a friend, from a stranger or from the radio? The words are the same. What else is a mantra other than words? And I can ask the same about all the teachings there are in Buddhism.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 3:17 AM
Title: Re: Should secular Buddhism be tolerated?
Content:
Samanthabhadra said:
This empirical reality, the earth, the sun, the solar system, the trees, the buildings do not exist out there in the physical world. It is all inside your mind and it is only a state of mind. Vajrayana is not concerned with this world at all.

Astus wrote:
In that case what does it matter what kind of imaginary world one lives in? A round planet, a flat peninsula, or a disc resting on the backs of four huge elephants which are in turn standing on the back of an enormous turtle as it slowly swims through space.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 3:06 AM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
mirage said:
It is relatively easy to give correct-sounding teachings, especially if people assume you know what you are talking about (which is generally the case). Of course if what a teacher is saying clearly contradicts Dharma, then it is reasonable to be suspicious. But this alone is not enough to distinguish a real teacher from a fraud. I certainly don't mean that lineage is the only criterion for me. It is one of several necessary criteria.

Astus wrote:
Correct sounding and correct are not exactly the same. A teacher who teaches correct Dharma is a proper teacher. And besides giving correct teachings what else can a teacher do? They obviously don't make people magically enlightened because they have received magic powers from their own teachers. The only thing anyone can get from a teacher is a teaching. So, what difference does a lineage make?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 3:01 AM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Konchog1 said:
Hmm, I'm not quite sure I agree with you here. There is a lineage in the Gelug. It's just very complex. In Liberation in the Palm of Your Hand it says that the lineage starts with Shakyamuni and splits into lineages headed by Maitreya and Manjushri. These lineages are combined by Atisha and after Dromtonpa, splits into three headed by Gampopa, Potowa and Chaen Ngawa. These lineages are combined by Lord Tsongkhapa and continue in a straight line from there.

Astus wrote:
Practically any Buddhist who studied from different teachers can come up with a lineage, and all monks have an ordination lineage plus the Dharma lineage of their upadhyaya. In this sense there is nothing special about a lineage except for one difference. The nobility keeps record of their ancestors while ordinary people don't, however, everyone equally have ancestors going back to the unknown past. Similarly, in Buddhism there are those who claim to belong the a lineage - something that actually copies royal bloodlines, at least in Zen - and there are those who don't have such a record of their teachers' teachers. And what is the reason for showing a special ancestry? Not to insure the validity of their teachings but simply to raise themselves above the rest.

Can we say that only those with a lineage are enlightened? If so, Buddhism works only for a very few people, it is not an efficient teaching. However, if we say that there are many people who truly benefit from the teachings, distinguishing a few by a lineage is not about realisation or greatness but a claim for superiority (at least in the case of Zen).


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 2:43 AM
Title: Re: Zen and different Pure Land views
Content:
Astus wrote:
Here is a Zen way of showing the Pure Land (teaching of Huineng from the Platform Sutra):
“I will move the Western [Paradise] for you in an instant, so you will be able to see it right in front of you. Do you all want to see it or not?”
Those in the assembly all bowed their heads to the ground and said, “If we could see it here, how could we then want to be reborn there? We ask that in Your Reverence’s compassion you manifest the Western [Paradise] for us all to see!”
The master said, “[All of you in this] great assembly, [understand that] the very form-bodies of people in this world are the city walls [of the Pure Land]. Your eyes, ears, nose, and tongue are the gates [of the Pure Land]. Externally, you have five gates, and within is the gate of the sensory mind. The mind is the ground, and the nature is the king. The king resides on the mind-ground, and the nature exists just as a king exists. When the nature goes, the king is absent.When the nature is present, the body and mind continue. When the nature departs, the body disintegrates. ‘Buddha’ acts within the nature—don’t look for it outside your bodies! When one is deluded as to the self-nature, one is a sentient being, but when one realizes the self-nature, one is a buddha.
“Compassion is Avalokiteśvara, joy and equanimity are Mahāsthamaprāpta, the ability to purify is Śākyamuni, and universal directness is Amitābha. The self is Sumeru, desire is the ocean’s water, and the afflictions are the waves. The poisons are the evil dragons, the falsenesses are the ghosts and spirits, the enervating defilements are the fishes, lust and anger are the hells, and stupidity is the animals.
In the Pure Land school, however, the method is visualisation (teaching from the Visualisation Sutra):
I, the Tathāgata, shall now teach you, Vaidehī, and all sentient beings of the future how to visualize the Western Land of Utmost Bliss. By the power of the Buddha all will be able to see the Pure Land as clearly as if one were looking at one’s own reflection in a bright mirror. Seeing the utmost beauty and bliss of that land, they will rejoice and immediately attain insight into the non-arising of all dharmas.
Also, by using only the recitation of the name of Amitabha one may have visions of the Pure Land as did Honen, founder of the Japanese Pure Land school.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 2:32 AM
Title: Re: Should secular Buddhism be tolerated?
Content:
Samanthabhadra said:
First of all its not a fundamentalist approach, someone who goes with evidence is not a fundamentalist, stating that the earth is not flat is not a fundamentalist position. That's how silly your question is.

Astus wrote:
In Buddhist cosmology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jambudvipa#In_Buddhism is flat, surrounded by ocean, has Sumeru at its northern end and a huge tree in its centre. How does that match our modern understanding of a round Earth? It doesn't.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 12:51 AM
Title: Re: Zen and different Pure Land views
Content:
zamotcr said:
Then, would it be correct to say that maybe science will never find a Pure Land, because the observer perception, senses or mind is not pure, or something like this? So if someone is on a spaceship would not see the Pure Land because of his perception?

Astus wrote:
Correct. Not to mention that it's said Sukhavati is 10,000 buddha-lands away, i.e. farther than Captain Picard ever managed to go.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 12:47 AM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
mirage said:
It's a person's qualification/degree of realization that need verifying, not the exact content of their teaching.

Astus wrote:
And this is where I disagree. As one of the http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Four_reliances states: "Rely on the message of the teacher, not on his personality"

And Ven. Shengyan says (Zen Wisdom, p. 27-28),
QUESTION:

How does an ordinary practitioner recognize a false master?

SHIH-FU:

The most important thing in recognizing masters is to be able to judge whether they have a correct view of Buddhadharma. If their views of the Dharma are correct, then even if their behavior reveals some weaknesses, they should not be considered false masters. On the other hand, if teachers do not have a correct view of the Dharma, they cannot be considered authentic or virtuous masters.

Of course, this presupposes that the person making the judgment has some understanding of correct Dharma. Without an understanding of the Dharma, there is no way a practitioner can tell if a teacher is genuine or false.

Beyond this, there are some basic criteria that can be used in assessing masters. First, consider their causes and conditions. In other words, their actions should be based on a foundation of emptiness; there should be no attachment in what they do. Second, consider their causes and consequences, or karma. The sense of emptiness that guides the actions of virtuous masters (causes and conditions) should accord with their karma (causes and consequences). That is to say, their actions need to be guided by a sense of responsibility. They should, at all times, be clearly aware of the consequences of their actions. Thus, there is an intimate relationship between responsibility and non-attachment.

These, then, are the marks of virtuous masters: they have a correct view of the Dharma, their actions reveal no attachment and they have a clear sense of responsibility.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 19th, 2013 at 12:32 AM
Title: Re: Zen and different Pure Land views
Content:
Astus wrote:
In order to be able to accept buddha-lands, buddhas, deities and rebirth, one has to switch from objectivist-materialist to a subjectivist-phenomenologist view where appearances are experiential data. Then see how mental phenomena are definitive regarding all experience. Then it makes perfect sense that one can be born in the Pure Land just as one is born here because of karma.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 18th, 2013 at 11:25 PM
Title: Re: Should secular Buddhism be tolerated?
Content:
Astus wrote:
I assume by secular Buddhist what is meant is a person who is materialist and/or agnostic toward non-materialist assertions. It is a position where one doesn't have faith in teachings that are apparently without proof and contradict one's original view of the world. There are generally two types of secular Buddhists. Those who only focus on meditation and those who study Buddhist teachings. Both group expects results within this life and find Buddhism beneficial. The support scientific research and that way help spreading the teachings among those who are doubtful about the usefulness of the Dharma. Secular Buddhism should not only be tolerated but embraced, because that is a natural first step on the path for an educated modern person. In places where Buddhism is a traditional religion the majority of Buddhists look for material gain and a better next life, while secular Buddhists find the teachings about meditation and reality intriguing and good. The former is the simple believer with little knowledge, while the latter is someone with personal interest and enthusiasm. Since the lowest aspiration within Buddhism is the path of men and gods, both the simple believer and the secular Buddhist can be accepted as Buddhists.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 18th, 2013 at 11:07 PM
Title: Re: Zen and different Pure Land views
Content:
Astus wrote:
Here is one for you: http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=5650


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 18th, 2013 at 7:32 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
From the topic: http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=10684

Unknown said:
"Without fully and finally letting go one’s self-with-form, there can be no transmission — even if one has received innumerable transmission certificates from various lineages. The basis and source of transmission in Zen is the awakening to one’s selfless self. And this emerges precisely from the dropping away of self, once and for all. Remember the character I wrote on the board? That’s it. No one transmits anything to anyone; in other words, shin or kokoro transmits kokoro to kokoro by way of kokoro. That’s all."

http://beingwithoutself.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/sourceofzenwhotransmitswhat.pdf by Jeff Shore is a wonderful summary of the issue that combines both the Zen and the scholarly view.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 18th, 2013 at 7:30 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
there are several examples of correctly transmitted teachers abusing the naive belief in transmission itselt


PadmaVonSamba said:
Please identify five.
.
.
.

Astus wrote:
Known major cases (note that these are all outstanding teachers with large number of followers):

Taizan Maezumi, founder of Zen Center of Los Angeles and others
Seung Sahn, founder of Kwan Um Zen School
Joshu Sasaki, founder of Mount Baldy Zen Center
Daining Katagiri, founder of Minnesota Zen Meditation Center
Eido Shimano, founder of Dai Bosatsu Zendo Kongo-ji and New York Zendo Shobo-Ji
Richard Baker, heir of Shunryu Suzuki
Dennis Merzel, heir of Bernard Glassman


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 18th, 2013 at 6:31 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
mirage said:
Let us say that If I can trace the lineage reliably to one of the "big name" masters that are universally respected within the tradition as highly realized beings, then I will be content enough not to dig further.

Astus wrote:
That is, you would never study under for example Tsongkhapa, who had several teachers, but eventually established his own version of Buddhism for what he couldn't provide any predecessors? And any teacher who have received only visionary-mental transmissions or claimed reincarnation of a once famous person are all out of question (e.g. Asanga, Tilopa, Jigme Lingpa)? Not that there were no other orthodox teachers of the time within established communities, still, many outstanding masters were special because they came up with a new way of teaching and did not follow the existing methods.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 18th, 2013 at 5:53 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
mirage said:
There are negative examples for everything, since it is samsara we are dealing with, and there are no perfect sure-fire solutions for anything. I, for one, would never follow a guru whose qualification was not confirmed by his teacher, who in turn belongs to a recognised lineage.

Astus wrote:
How do you confirm a lineage? I show you three lineage tables, full of Chinese names. Can you tell which one is genuine and which one is fake? By the way, are you saying that you'd never study under any of http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=161830#p161830, or the Deshimaru followers?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 18th, 2013 at 5:26 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
mirage said:
I am not very familiar with situation in Zen, but maybe because it one of the precious few ways to deal with numerous charlatans and crazies who appear out of nowhere proclaiming themselves to be enlightened teachers? Who can judge if a particular person is qualified to teach? His own teacher. How do we know this teacher is qualified himself? Supposedly because it was confirmed by his own teacher, and so on back to Buddha. I find this idea very attractive, even though it might not always work exactly that way in practice. But it is at least some insurance.

Astus wrote:
Since the lineage of confirming and authorising a teacher is broken, the transmission is given based on several reasons and not always connected to the receiver's inner realisation, and there are several examples of correctly transmitted teachers abusing the naive belief in transmission itself, it does not work as an guarantee for quality. Yes, people want to feel safe, but it's a false belief based on an illusion. On the other hand, if instead of blindly accepting the myth of transmission, they would take the time to actually study and contemplate the teachings and assess a teacher by his knowledge and behaviour, that could be a lot safer. In fact, both knowledge and behaviour are relatively easy to measure. As for those who believe that "enlightenment" is the single qualifying factor, that's a very narrow and simple view, especially when they have no idea what enlightenment is.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 18th, 2013 at 4:43 PM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
I think the question is whether it is acceptable to be a Zen teacher without being a member of a lineage. If yes, the argument over having or not having transmission is irrelevant. If no, then history shows that there were and are respected teachers without lineage, plus historical data proves the idea of unbroken lineage as fictional. Then we should ask why Western Zen followers are obsessed with lineage. And I think the reason is that many fail to see the actual teaching of Zen, so instead go for the superficial story of transmission. They look at a record of Zen stories and understand only as far as the presence of a teacher and a student but fail to comprehend the actual interaction that happens. It is similar to those who believe that the most important thing about zazen is the posture and fail to see the mind as the true place of meditation.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 18th, 2013 at 4:48 AM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
As mentioned briefly earlier, some writings even present themselves as a kind of transmission in places with things like "may this writing confer the blessings of such and such...".

Astus wrote:
"Good friends, you should all recite this. If you practice according to it, you will see the nature through hearing these words. Although you may be a thousand li away from me, it will be as if you are constantly by my side. If you do not become enlightened through these words, then why have you gone to the trouble of coming a thousand li to see me?"
(Platform Sutra, ch. 6, tr. McRae)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 18th, 2013 at 4:29 AM
Title: Re: Myth in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
I have skipped most of the discussion, so I don't know if this has been mentioned before.

In today's Chinese Buddhism the Ven. Xuyun is the most outstanding teacher of Zen from whom many living teachers derive their lineage. It is said that Xuyun transmitted all five schools of Zen, and there are indeed monks who claim affiliation with one or more of those. What should be noted, however, is that the five school system is only a fabrication from the Song era that they came up with to categorise different groups of Zen teachers. On one hand, there were more than just five, on the other, the Fayan school (one of the five) never even existed. There are two descendants of Xuyun famous in the West: Ven. Xuanhua and Ven. Shengyan. Xuanhua belongs to the Weiyang lineage, a school that vanished long ago, and one can actually see a large gap in the transmission chart. This is a case of "remote succession" (yaosi 遙嗣), that is, one can claim transmission based on personal sympathy toward a dead teacher. Shengyan belongs to the Linji lineage coming from Xuyun, however, there are two problems with that and both because of having Zibo Zhenke in his chart. First, Zibo himself never claimed any succession and criticised those of his time who wanted to revive Zen based on the stories. Second, the dates of birth and death show that Zibo died years before his predecessor three generations back could even get a full ordination. So, the lineages of both Xuanhua and Shengyan show that it is not an unbroken transmission from generation to generation.

The reformer of modern Korean Zen was Gyeongheo from whom practically every living Zen teacher derives his lineage. However, Gyeongheo himself never received a Dharma transmission from anyone and even said that such a transmission has been long dead by his time. Another example from Korea is the Ven. Daehaeng Sunim, who was a well known teacher and who established a major organisation within the Jogye order, however, she has no lineage affiliation, no teacher, still she is regarded as an outstanding Zen master.

In Vietnam one of the most successful Buddhist organisations is the Truc Lam Zen that has the biggest training monastery in the country. It is a revival of the only Vietnamese founded Zen lineage that existed in the 13th and 14th century. The current reformer Thich Thanh Tu is of course not the direct descendent of any of the former patriarchs and has no Dharma transmission from anyone. Still, he is a major Zen teacher.

These are all modern examples of how lineage is not that definitive in Zen and people are perfectly capable of becoming outstanding teachers without an unbroken lineage.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 16th, 2013 at 6:16 PM
Title: Re: Emotion and Reason
Content:
Astus wrote:
In the Sabbasava Sutta ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html ) the relevant passages for emotions are §2 (restraining the 6 senses) and §6 (destroying sensuality, ill will, cruelty, unskilful mental qualities). Still, that's not the same as eliminating all emotions. In fact, there are the seven factors of enlightenment (§7) one has to develop what includes persistence (viriya), rapture (piti) and serenity (passaddhi).

And then there is a teaching like http://www2.hf.uio.no/polyglotta/index.php?page=fulltext&vid=30&view=fulltext where you are taught not to abandon anything but simply realise the non-arising of phenomena.

Unknown said:
One should speak like this – do not give up your passion (rāga), do not fight your aversion (dveṣa), do not clear away your bewilderment (moha), do not liberate (uccal-) yourself from your body (kāya), practise (car-) the bad things (akuśala), do not hold back (nigrah-) your views (dṛṣṭi), do not be conscious of the bonds [to the worldly things] (sāyojana), grasp for (parigrah-) the parts of the personality (skandha), amass (piṇḍīkṛ-) the spheres of sense-perception (dhātu), move about (car-) among the fields of sense-perception (āyatana), do not leave (atî-) the stage of fools (bālabhūmi), frequent (āgam-) the bad (akuśala), give up the good (kuśala), do not think of (manaskṛ-) the Buddha, do not reflect (cint-) on religious teachings (dharma), do not give offerings to (pūj-) the congregation of monks (sāgha), do not take the training (śikṣā) upon yourself (samādā-), do not seek (prārthaya-) the peacefulness of existence (bhavaśamana), do not cross over (uttṛ-) the river [of existence] (ogha). This kind of instructions one should teach and give to the bodhisattva in the beginning of his development (ādikarmika).
Why? Because this state of the moments of existence and nothing else is their [true] state (iyaṃ dharmāṇāṃ dharmasthitir shitir eva).
Foolish people (bāla) explain things (vyākṛ-) in accordance with moments of existence of arising (utpādadharma) and moments of existence of disappearance (nirodhadharma). But this sphere of all moments of existence distinguishes itself by being beyond thought-constructions (sa tu dharmadhātur nirvikalpaprabhāvitaḥ), and understanding the essential character of all these moments of existence in this way is awakening (ya eṣāṃ dharmāṇāṃ svabhāvasyaivamanubodhaḥ sā bodhir iti).
If he is taught in this way and does not become afraid, scared or terrified, then he is a bodhisattva not turning back in his development, one who has a part in the stage of never turning back (yady evam upadiṣṭo nottrasen na sātrasyen na sātrāsam āpadyeta sa vatāvaivartiko bodhisattvo ’vaivairtikabhūmibhāgīya iti jñātavyaḥ).


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 16th, 2013 at 4:27 PM
Title: Re: Mantras in Zen Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
In Hanshan's (1546–1623) time ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ming_Dynasty, mostly the reign of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wanli_Emperor ) there were strong financial, political, cultural and especially religious connection with Tibet (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet_during_the_Ming_Dynasty ). When Hanshan refers to mantras (in his http://chancenter.org/cmc/2011/10/13/essentials-of-practice-and-enlightenment-for-beginners/ ) it reflects the presence of Vajrayana, but not because it is something inherent to Chan. Note that Hanshan mentions the mantras as one of the last techniques (i.e. for more troubled people) to use and something that is especially good for removing obstacles.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 15th, 2013 at 7:35 PM
Title: Re: Emotion and Reason
Content:
Astus wrote:
Both emotion and reason are thoughts, mental phenomena. Relying on either an emotion or a reason are attachment. In fact, emotions go away in a short time but people can hang on their reasoning for a lifetime. An emotion gets its meaning from reasoning, and one considers a reason true because of an emotion. There is no ultimate logical truth, there is no obstructive emotion. Reasoning is believing in a series of concepts. Emotion is believing in a feeling. The problem is not with the concept or the feeling, but with believing them to be true and real.

Some thoughts to consider:

"That, Manjusri, is the way a sick bodhisattva should concentrate his mind; he should live neither in control of his mind, nor in indulgence of his mind. Why? To live by indulging the mind is proper for fools and to live in control of the mind is proper for the disciples. Therefore, the bodhisattva should live neither in control nor in indulgence of his mind. Not living in either of the two extremes is the domain of the bodhisattva."
(Vimalakirti Sutra, ch. 5, tr. Thurman)

"Noble sir, one who stays in the fixed determination of the vision of the uncreated is not capable of conceiving the spirit of unexcelled perfect enlightenment. However, one who lives among created things, in the mines of passions, without seeing any truth, is indeed capable of conceiving the spirit of unexcelled perfect enlightenment."
(ch. 8)

"Noble sons, there is a liberation of bodhisattvas called 'destructible and indestructible.' You must train yourselves in this liberation. What is it? 'Destructible' refers to compounded things. 'Indestructible' refers to the uncompounded. But the bodhisattva should neither destroy the compounded nor rest in the uncompounded."
(ch. 11)

There are of course other sutras that talk about how "passions are enlightenment" (煩惱即菩提).


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, April 14th, 2013 at 4:18 AM
Title: Re: Mantras in Zen Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
It is common to recite the names of buddhas (e.g. Amitabha) and bodhisattvas (e.g. Avalokitesvara), and there are dharanis (e.g. Great Compassion Dharani) that are usually part of the liturgy. The "Ten Shorter Dharanis" (十小咒) are part of the daily ceremony in Chinese Buddhism and you may consider them mantras because of their brevity. Mantras from specific sutras may be used by some practitioners. Here is an introduction: http://www.sutrasmantras.info/mantra0.html.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, April 14th, 2013 at 1:57 AM
Title: Re: 52 Stages of the Boddhisattva
Content:
Astus wrote:
The reason I said it is the Gandavyuha Sutra is because in T. Cleary's translation of the Avatamsaka Sutra, in Appendix 3 he introduces and translates Li Tongxuan's commentary to it which in fact outlines the 52 stages, and also the same commentary is referred to in Buswell's "Collected Works of Chinul" summing up the bodhisattva path. I did not hear of Zhiyi's work before.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, April 14th, 2013 at 1:39 AM
Title: Re: 52 Stages of the Boddhisattva
Content:
greentara said:
Astus, It's a very exacting list. If you look at the life of the doctor Jack Preger, you see a Boddhisattva in action. Working for decades on the streets of Calcutta (Kolkata) with the poorest of the poor. Tending people, not asking for money and no strings attached. A really good man and a great healer, reaching out a helping hand to all.

Astus wrote:
Being a good and caring person is not exclusive to Buddhism or bodhisattvas. Also, the bodhisattva path is not simply about being good and caring but bringing ultimate liberation to others and oneself.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 13th, 2013 at 4:38 AM
Title: Re: 52 Stages of the Boddhisattva
Content:
Astus wrote:
Saddharma Pundarika Sutra, that is the Lotus Sutra. Quite a few translations are available online. http://www.cttbusa.org/lotus/lotus_contents.asp.

The 52 stages system is based on the Gandavyuha Sutra, which is also the last chapter of the Avatamsaka Sutra.
Here are the stages in brief: http://sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/158325


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 12th, 2013 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: Zen and daimoku
Content:
Astus wrote:
http://www.sgilibrary.org/view.php?page=3&m=0&q=:

"unless one perceives the nature of one’s life, one’s practice will become an endless, painful austerity. Therefore, such students of Buddhism are condemned as non-Buddhist."

and

"Whether you chant the Buddha’s name,3 recite the sutra, or merely offer flowers and incense, all your virtuous acts will implant benefits and roots of goodness in your life. With this conviction you should strive in faith. The Vimalakirti Sutra states that, when one seeks the Buddhas’ emancipation in the minds of ordinary beings, one finds that ordinary beings are the entities of enlightenment, and that the sufferings of birth and death are nirvana. It also states that, if the minds of living beings are impure, their land is also impure, but if their minds are pure, so is their land. There are not two lands, pure or impure in themselves. The difference lies solely in the good or evil of our minds.
What then does myo signify? It is simply the mysterious nature of our life from moment to moment, which the mind cannot comprehend or words express. When we look into our own mind at any moment, we perceive neither color nor form to verify that it exists. Yet we still cannot say it does not exist, for many differing thoughts continually occur. The mind cannot be considered either to exist or not to exist. Life is indeed an elusive reality that transcends both the words and concepts of existence and nonexistence. It is neither existence nor nonexistence, yet exhibits the qualities of both. It is the mystic entity of the Middle Way that is the ultimate reality. Myo is the name given to the mystic nature of life, and ho, to its manifestations. Renge, which means lotus flower, is used to symbolize the wonder of this Law. If we understand that our life at this moment is myo, then we will also understand that our life at other moments is the Mystic Law.4 This realization is the mystic kyo, or sutra. The Lotus Sutra is the king of sutras, the direct path to enlightenment, for it explains that the entity of our life, which manifests either good or evil at each moment, is in fact the entity of the Mystic Law. If you chant myoho-renge-kyo with deep faith in this principle, you are certain to attain Buddhahood in this lifetime."


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 12th, 2013 at 4:39 PM
Title: Re: Zen and daimoku
Content:
Astus wrote:
Might be interesting: http://nichirenscoffeehouse.net/library/Hakuin.html


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 10th, 2013 at 9:33 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
MalaBeads,

You define Zen as "outside words and letters" and "an experiential school" and then say how erroneous it is to define Zen. What do you mean?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 10th, 2013 at 8:39 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sara,

What kind of Soto Zen do you mean to be gradual? Shikantaza is enlightenment from the very beginning and there is nothing to improve about it. On the other hand, in Hakuin's system people go through several stages in practice and they recognise various levels of attainment. Of the two it is in fact Rinzai that is gradual.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 10th, 2013 at 5:14 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
To avoid such confusion there are quite elaborate descriptions and terms in Buddhism. The problem can be is that Zen is generally viewed as the path of sudden enlightenment. Now that is resolved by teachers like Zongmi and Jinul who established the system of sudden enlightenment and gradual practice, but that is not used in Japanese Zen and so Western heirs of that tradition have this trouble of not being clear about the nature of enlightenment and the actual stages. Since apparently very few Zen master teach actual sudden liberation there is a great need for a proper description of the gradual process, something that is readily found in Mahayana.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 10th, 2013 at 4:58 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Kensho can mean so many things that, as I see it, it requires a definition if we are to understand each other. Now that we have it, it is quite easy to see what you mean when you say that Zen teachers are ordinary people.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 10th, 2013 at 3:57 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
seeker242 said:
Nice list. Do you think that if a person meets all of the above criteria, they can then rightly be given dharma transmission and called a official "zen master"?

Astus wrote:
There is no mention of any transmission. It is a guideline for those who are or plan to be teachers. There is no such thing as "official Zen master" in Buddhism, only in specific organisations. That is, if you set up a Buddhist community, you can create such a title, and that will be official there, but not necessarily for others.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 10th, 2013 at 3:47 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sara,

What you describe as kensho, that is the initial certainty arising about the Dharma, and that is the level of Faith. It is important, very much. But the first bhumi, as you could see, is a lot more than that, where such external issues that you describe are not problems and internally it is a lot more peaceful and free.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 10th, 2013 at 4:00 AM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
If we want to look for an ancient source that still has a clear explanation on the subject, it is Fayan Wenyi's "Ten Guidelines for Zen Schools" ( http://www.cbeta.org/result/normal/X63/1226_001.htm ) that was translated by Thomas Cleary in "The Five Houses of Zen" book. It describes the requirements of a teacher and how in his time most of the Zen communities and teachers fail to uphold the correct way.

His ten points (from Cleary's translation):
1. On false assumption of teacherhood without having cleared one's own mind ground
2. On factional sectarianism and failure to penetrate controversies
3. On teaching and preaching without knowing the bloodline
4. On giving answers without observing time and situation and not having the eye of the source
5. On discrepancy between principle and fact, and failure to distinguish defilement and purity
6. On subjective judgement of ancient and contemporary sayings without going through clarification
7. On memorizing slogans without being capable of subtle function meeting the needs of the time
8. On failure to master the scriptures and adducing proofs wrongly
9. On indulging in making up songs and verses without regard for meter and without having arrived at reality
10. On defending one's own shortcomings and indulging in contention
Thus, Fayan's criteria of a Zen teacher is that he should (1) be enlightened to the nature of mind, (2) don't attach to specific methods, (3) teach direct insight, (4) teach according to the situation, (5) clarify the two truths in teaching, (6) have appropriate training in the Dharma, (7) teach with insight and not just words, (8) know the scriptures, (9) don't write non-sense but clear and pleasant words, (10) don't disparage the Triple Jewels, the scriptures and the vehicles, and don't fail in upholding morality.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 10th, 2013 at 12:55 AM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
seeker242 said:
Thanks! So what do you call someone who has completed all of the above?

Astus wrote:
One who has gone through the bodhisattva path is called a buddha.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 9th, 2013 at 11:44 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Jikan said:
Is a Zen Master a bodhisattva?  someone on the first bhumi?
Is a Zen Master an arhat?
A Buddha?
???

Astus wrote:
From my perspective, a Zen teacher is anyone who teaches Zen. Since there are many forms and styles of Zen there are also many kinds of teachers. The fact of teaching Zen is no indication of one's attainment, neither is any sort of authorisation from any teacher. This is a minimalist approach based on the term itself "Zen teacher", similarly to "English teacher" or "Maths teacher". The idea of a "Zen Master" who knows things beyond comprehension and sees through the student, while there might be individuals like that, it is mostly a myth and pious imagination.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 9th, 2013 at 8:31 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
seeker242 said:
Avalokiteśvara is not a Buddha, even though he is already "saved from all suffering and distress"? How can one who is already saved from all suffering and distress, not be a Buddha?

Astus wrote:
Arhats are free from suffering and they are not buddhas either. Even a stream-enterer is free from the suffering of the three lower births. I recommend you look into this short summary: http://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-masters/patrul-rinpoche/stages-and-path.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 9th, 2013 at 7:24 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
seeker242 said:
I think it depends on which scripture you read. Chapter 25 of the Lotus Sutra describes Avalokitesvara as a bodhisattva who can manifest in a Buddha body, pratyekabuddha's body, or any kind of body, if needed to help the world, etc.

Astus wrote:
That's just one of the many inconceivable qualities of a bodhisattva, as the Vimalakirti and other sutras explain. It doesn't make them buddhas. Even Mara can appear as a buddha.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 9th, 2013 at 7:04 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
seeker242 said:
I would not go so far as to say that. Unless you consider killing him, and the Buddha and the patriarchs, to be an achievement. The zen teachers that I have met say things like "nothing I can say can help you", "I can't save you", etc, etc. That does not sound like dependence to me. It sounds like the opposite.

Astus wrote:
What need is there for a Zen teacher then? And what is authorisation about?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 9th, 2013 at 5:33 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
The first bhumi includes a number of qualities, the definition is usually derived from the Avatamsaka Sutra's chapter on the Ten Stages. Among other things, an arya bodhisattva has great compassion and doesn't fail in upholding the precepts bodily and verbally (mental perfection comes on the 2nd bhumi). He is also free from the suffering of mundane troubles.

"The bodhisattva naturally helps sentient beings without distinction or discrimination, but there is still a subject and object involved. This applies to a bodhisattva on the first through seventh bhumi."
(Sheng-yen: Complete Enlightenment, p. 202)

"At the first bhumi, a bodhisattva has transformed the sixth consciousness into the ‘wisdom of non-arising’—where afflictions no longer manifest outwardly, or arise."
(Sheng-yen: There is No Suffering, p. 30)

Other qualities described: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bh%C5%ABmi_%28Buddhism%29#The_first_bh.C5.ABmi.2C_the_Very_Joyous; http://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-masters/patrul-rinpoche/stages-and-path; http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/en/archives/sutra/level2_lamrim/initial_scope/safe_direction/qualities_arya_sangha.html

Considering the above, it would be impossible for an enlightened teacher to steal others' money or harass female disciples.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 9th, 2013 at 3:51 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sara,

As far as I know, all Buddhist schools (including Theravada) consider a bodhisattva to be a person aspiring for buddhahood. Mahayana is also called the bodhisattvayana because it considers the path of the bodhisattva as the definitive and superior way. This is reflected in the four major bodhisattva vows that in most Zen communities people recite regularly. Also, someone who has already reached the level of a buddha is a buddha and not a bodhisattva.

As shel said, the first bhumi is considered the first actual insight into emptiness by most schools. However, for instance Jinul says that the initial insight is the first stage of Faith (i.e. the 1st of the 52 stages, where the 1st bhumi is equivalent to stage 41), while others say that initial enlightenment (seeing nature) is equal to the 1st, or the 7th bhumi, or buddhahood. There was a discussion about it in this thread: http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=5102.

Since you say that kensho is not buddhahood it must be something below that level. Because you also say that Zen teachers are ordinary beings (pudgala), it can't be the 1st bhumi either (as that's where the path of the arya/noble bodhisattvas start). That leaves us the question what you actually mean by kensho. What is realised there? Is it the emptiness of self, the emptiness of the dharmas, the emptiness of the mind, or something else?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 9th, 2013 at 5:38 AM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sara,

There are various ways in Buddhism to categorise the different stages on the path. Various Zen teachers say different things about what level of enlightenment is attained at seeing the nature of mind. So, what interpretation is yours, or your teacher's, in this case? On what stage of the bodhisattva path a Zen master needs to be on?

The Ten Oxherding Picture doesn't really answer the above question as it is used only within the Zen tradition and doesn't specify its relationship to the bodhisattva path.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 8th, 2013 at 4:18 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sara,
It is about enlightenment. There is more than one stage of enlightenment before becoming Buddha's. A Zen Master is only guaranteed to be of the first step. Not complete Buddhahood.
Which stage of enlightenment is kensho, the first step? Is it the first of the Ten Faiths (十信), faith (信心)? Is it the first bhumi, i.e. the path of seeing? Or something else?

By the way, once there are stages, it is not the path of sudden but of gradual enlightenment.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, April 7th, 2013 at 9:36 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
Has this been your own experience?

Astus wrote:
My experience is very limited as I have only participated in the life of a couple of Zen communities and visited some others. That's why I also rely on other people's reports and even more on how the different groups and teachers describe their Zen.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, April 7th, 2013 at 8:59 PM
Title: Karma Purification
Content:
Astus wrote:
Karma is intentional act and it is repeated by habit. Habit is a conviction that doing something is correct. Getting rid of a habit starts with reviewing that conviction, proving it false to oneself, and then mindfully re-educating the mind according to the new understanding. This is taught in the Noble Eightfold Path as http://www.vipassana.com/resources/8fp5.php where one learns to avoid evil (akusala) and cultivate good (kusala). Other two important factors are http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_23.html of doing evil that strengthens the will not to repeat former errors nor create new ones.

In terms of practice, the above two (right effort, shame and fear) are encompassed in what is called http://kongmu.wordpress.com/2011/10/09/88-buddhas/ (懺悔) that is part of the daily liturgical practice in Chinese Buddhism and it is also prominent in the http://www.lamayeshe.com/?sect=article&id=394 of Vajrayana. There are also sutras about repentance, like the http://www.sutrasmantras.info/sutra29.html.

While formal practice helps reminding and indoctrinating ourselves the correct view, it is at the actual arising of an unwholesome intention when we can actually learn to let go of bad habits and stop repeating past mistakes. That is, purification doesn't mean that attachments are magically removed but through maintaining the right attitude one becomes mindful of good and bad thoughts. Seeing how wrong ideas lead to pain and suffering one can put an end to following and acting on them. This is purification on the relative level that brings about merit. The absolute purification is the complete practice of the Dharma whereby one attains liberation from samsara, and neither bad nor good thoughts are attached to.

"Ordinary people are stupid and only know they should repent for their past licentiousness—they do not know they should feel remorse for future errors. Because they do not have such remorse, their previous licentiousness is not extinguished and future errors continue to be generated. With previous licentiousness not extinguished and future errors continuing to be generated, how can this be called repentance?"
(Platform Sutra, ch. 6, tr. McRae)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 6th, 2013 at 9:06 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sara,

The common idea of Dharma-transmission is that an enlightened teacher confirms the enlightenment of a student. This has been passed down from Shakyamuni himself, making all person in the lineage equal to the Buddha. That is, a Zen teacher is a living buddha (活佛 - the Chinese term used for tulkus, whereas tulku means nirmanakaya, i.e. an emanation of a buddha; just to show how the Zen idea of transmission gives a similar (actually higher) level of importance as being a tulku in Vajrayana). What is being transmitted is the buddha-mind, in other words the level of enlightenment confirmed is the realisation of the dharmakaya, something that only perfectly enlightened buddhas know.

This concept of the Zen teacher comes down to actual practice in the form of absolute authority of the master in all religious issues where students are completely dependent on a teacher to achieve liberation. It is a control system where no one can claim enlightenment unless verified by the master, and receiving such verification is in itself a declaration of buddhahood. There are of course attempts to degrade the meaning of a Zen teacher, saying that he is only an ordinary fallible person, it's just that it doesn't agree with the otherwise upheld idea of the transmission of the enlightened mind. Every Zen student aspires to buddhahood and relies on the teacher to tell them when they are there or not, therefore the master is the sole judge about a student's progress, and since all disciples want to receive that confirmation they will constantly try to please the teacher. Because a student is stripped of all independent understanding, whatever the master says is correct or incorrect must be so.

If you say that transmission is not about enlightenment, the patriarchs are not at all equal to buddhas, it is not the realisation of buddha-mind that is confirmed, then what is the point of Zen?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 5th, 2013 at 9:30 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sara,

In both China and Japan the Zen school first struggled to take over the Buddhist monasteries and establish itself as the mainstream tradition. They used Dharma-transmission as a way to connect communities via the abbot and lay claim to higher authority. Then, once it was established, different groups within Zen worked for supremacy, again using Dharma-transmission.
You can look all this up in the various stages of the history of Zen in China (or just read the last one as it's short and online):

https://books.google.com/books?id=7A1NF9yR-U4C
https://books.google.com/books?id=5M4KAAAAYAAJ
https://books.google.com/books?id=WQXs14Qc8p4C
https://books.google.com/books?id=Y7sueo8jsYwC
http://www.scribd.com/doc/101923012/H-Welch-Dharma-Scrolls-and-the-Succession-of-Abbots-in-Chinese-Monasteries

I wrote "You call for control of who claims what title"
because you wrote
"We have credentials in Zen for a reason, for safety and to ensure people are actually being taught Buddhism, and not just somebody's impressions that they read from a book."

and I wrote
"you reject the idea of transparency and rigorous examination"
because you wrote
"Zen is a decentralized system. Once a person becomes transmitted, they are not necessarily required to be dependent upon an institutional authority any more. They have become a new institutional authority in and of themselves. That's the way Zen works. That's the way our system is. The reasons it's done that way is to foster diversity, like spreading different seeds to the wind, so that the teaching has the most likely chance of catching hold somewhere and taking root and being passed on. Each teacher has their own personality, opinions, experience, and way of looking at things and doing things."

You said:
"They are not above criticism. This is not a "guru" thing here, you are supposed to trust your own gut and intuition. That, is what they are teaching you to do."
but before that you compared the Zen teacher's authority to gurus:
"It's more like each Transmitted Master becomes a Dalai Lama in and of themselves, with the authority to have their own disciples."

Making each Zen teacher the local Pope instead of a parish priest. Naturally, attitudes toward a local vicar and the direct representative of the Eternal is quite different. On the other hand, Buddhism in general presents a logical teaching that can be comprehended freely by any intelligent person, it is open to scrutiny and rational debate. In fact, it is a point the Dalai Lama regularly emphasises. And this system that is supported by the idea of transmission from teacher to disciple is problematic.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 5th, 2013 at 6:35 PM
Title: Re: Sepperate category for Zen rather than under E Asia Budd
Content:
Astus wrote:
The Zen forum is the general section for the topic. It is in the East Asian category because it is a form of Mahayana developed in East Asia. If there were a form of Buddhism that has not appeared in the Tibetan or East Asian cultural area it could have its own section.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 5th, 2013 at 5:26 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sara,

You call for control of who claims what title but then you reject the idea of transparency and rigorous examination. It is true that regarding Dharma-transmission it was always a single person deciding on who to give it to. On the other hand, accepting such a transmission had bonding effects and the receiver then on was recruited into and joined to the giver's family line. And since it was more about collecting the best men under your banner the question was not whether you find someone to give it to you but whose offer you accept. This is quite different in the West where, as you say, receivers of transmission are free to do as they like and have no obligations toward the giver. Teachers here are not held responsible for the actions of their disciples, and the actions of the teacher are not reflected on their disciples, making transmission lack social value and responsibility.

On the other hand, because a teacher is believed to possess some special mystical knowledge and only a teacher can confirm a disciples knowledge he possesses immense and absolute religious authority. This spiritual power attracts people who lack understanding of the Dharma and desire someone else to tell them what to do (which is not bad in itself but is a fertile soil to empower charlatans and misguided gurus). When instead of rational enquiry and analysis only transcendental and otherworldly realisation is emphasised, there is no tool left in the hands of the disciples to measure the worth of a teacher. Again, this generates the opportunity for abuse.

If I understand correctly, your intention with this thread was to point out that a Zen teacher is not superhuman and therefore subject to common passions and errors, and you want to point this out to confront the ideas that generate guru-worship. I think this is not the best approach to solve the problem. The problem lies in how people think about Zen itself and the relevance of Dharma-transmission. This difference in opinion is what created the ongoing debate here.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 5th, 2013 at 5:32 AM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Sara H said:
Yes, Huseng, I do think there should be some institutional authority or credentialing in Buddhism.

I don't think that anybody should just be able to pick up a Buddhist book and call themselves a holy man.

I don't agree with that.

Astus wrote:
However, the title of Zen teacher in the West is given based on a single person's decision. If you have seen how it works in the Soto Zen school in Japan, there it's a bit more complicated. But even that is not exactly like a peer reviewed qualification that they do in academia and in many Buddhist schools (e.g. Jogye, Gelug). So, if you want institutional control then Western Zen is a poor choice in my opinion.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 4th, 2013 at 6:03 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Sara H said:
It's not meant to be understood by the head.
There is more than one way to understand something actually.
Most of what is written in Zen texts is meant to be understood from what has been refered to as "the mind of meditation"
In other words, if you've had a kensho, you get it, because you've experienced directly what they are talking about.
It then makes perfect sense. If you try to understand it from a logical or rational point of view, it doesn't work.

Astus wrote:
As I see it, either one understands something, comprehends how something works in a rational way, or not. Direct experience is where one does not use concepts. Thus, directly experiencing the nature of mind is what is called kensho. It's not a negation of understanding, nor something beyond understanding, it's simply not an explanation but an experience. However, once there is talk about something, it is intellectual. A teaching is necessarily bound to concepts. Following a teaching requires understanding of those concepts. Then the result can be the direct experience of emptiness.

Zen is a method where one doesn't go through a series of teachings and techniques but directly goes to insight into the nature of mind. How is that? By resting one's attention instead of pursuing phenomena. That's why neither explanations nor methods are needed. But usually without proper knowledge of Buddhism this direct style is insufficient to help people, so even in Zen they talk about watching the breath and pondering sayings.

As for the irrationality of Zen stories, please look at the second quote here: http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=154654#p154654.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 4th, 2013 at 5:41 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
muni said:
"Even existing dharmas must be discarded,
So how can we cling to Dharmas which don’t exist!
Ah ha! Futilely the Ancients busily pursued
enlightenment, then departed.
The countenance, existing of its own accord
I wonder who named it buddha or sentient being?
Even one true Dharma cannot survive.
Outside the window, the cherry tree
is singing this news".
http://naturalmind.wordpress.com/2008/12/08/the-miraculous-awakening-of-zen/

Astus wrote:
Diamond sutra, chapter 6 ( http://www.fodian.net/world/Vajra_Prajna_Paramita_Sutra.html ): "You must let go of dharmas. Even more so let go of non-dharmas." (法尚應捨、何況非法)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 4th, 2013 at 7:02 AM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
randomseb said:
the texts left by the patriarchs are not that confusing, once you understand that they are making references to the "thisness" of situations.

Astus wrote:
The teaching of "thisness" (tathatā) is quite an old one and it is explained extensively by various sutras and treatises. For instance, Vasubandhu's short definition is "the [true] nature of entities and the insubstantiality of entities" (Inner Science of Buddhist Practice, p. 241). Asanga discusses three types of tathatā in the Abhidharmasamuccaya (favourable, unfavourable, neutral), and matches it with other terms like selfless, emptiness and signless. So, when you say that Zen texts are only referring to a well established Buddhist teaching - instead of saying it directly - it just proves how much they lack clarity.

randomseb said:
Chan/Zen is not something that can be understood by intellectualism, unfortunately, but such can point out the way, right. This is not some westernism, this comes straight from the likes of Bodhidharma and the various early Masters. If you think you've understood via intellectual analysis, you are mistaken. This is clearly stated by those people.

Astus wrote:
Understanding is intellectual. Comprehending words is intellectual. Understanding a teaching without intellect is not understanding it at all. A thoughtless state is also quite useless and it is not wisdom. Mystifying it that it's impossible to understand only makes it ambiguous and something that is left to everyone's imagination. How could any of that be called "directly pointing to mind"?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 4th, 2013 at 12:56 AM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Huseng said:
The Indic literature, however, is far more consistent and coherent.

Astus wrote:
Zen literature is not just short stories and poems full of metaphors. There are many completely understandable teachings too from the Tang, Song and later eras. Zen has its own scriptures like the Shurangama and the Vajrasamadhi that form the basis of many other teachings, and generally most of the Zen teachers (and the audience) were familiar with the Mahayana corpus, thus many Zen works presuppose that knowledge.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 3rd, 2013 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Huseng said:
Best to get back to the basics: sūtra, śāstra, abhidharma and dhyāna.

Astus wrote:
Actually Zen itself has a huge literature that can be used just like other sutras and treatises. So we could say that instead of transmission a Zen teacher is someone who follows in the footsteps of previous teachers in terms of doctrine and praxis. For instance Thich Nhat Hanh, Xuanhua and Xingyun are all considered Zen teachers, but in fact it is not a central part of their teachings. Another example is Ting Chen's "The Fundamentals of Meditation Practice" ( http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/chanmed1.pdf ) that is described on BuddhaNet as Chan while in fact it is mostly Tiantai. Then defining who is a Zen teacher becomes more of a matter of identifying what constitutes Zen.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 3rd, 2013 at 5:36 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Huseng said:
I follow the line of thought of early Mahāyāna where you need to cultivate mental stamina through long-term meditative practices coupled with wisdom gained through scripture. If you combine the study of philosophy and scripture with long-term cultivation of samadhi and a moral lifestyle, then your three trainings are covered and you'll see progress.

Astus wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jinul and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanshan_Deqing did the same and both are regarded as major Zen teachers. It is not an unknown path even today.

Huseng said:
At that point what's the point of receiving transmission, or thinking someone is wiser than the flock just by virtue of having "received transmission"? It is all performance and largely a reflection of institutional, not spiritual, concerns.

Astus wrote:
I think most of us could give a list of a number of teachers we have received help from on our path. Among those teachers, good friends, there are some who were more influential in our progress than others. Depending on our inclinations we could say that we stand closest to this or that style of teaching, or perhaps a mixture of a handful of methods learnt here and there. This is how it worked before and how it works today for the majority. The idea of a Zen lineage is partially based on that natural phenomenon in the Buddhist community, it also contains a strong influence from ancestor worship and the aristocratic system, eventually transformed into a politically motivated structure (first the fight between Shenxiu's heirs, then between the "Northern" and "Southern" school, and so on, culminating in the superiority of the Linji lineage promoted in the Tiansheng Guandeng Lu (published in 1039) that was also the first to explicitly put down the so called five houses system). Debates surrounding the transmissions were never doctrinal but rather political, establishing claims to authority. Eventually it served as a unifying scheme within Chinese Buddhism and practically any aspiring monk or nun could present a transmission document as Holmes Welch reported. That is no different from how it happens in the Soto Zen church today where temple priests all possess a lineage chart as part of their position, thus its spiritual value is only nominal.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 2nd, 2013 at 9:05 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Jikan said:
Is it conventional to discuss kensho in public?

Astus wrote:
Depends on who you ask and what kensho you mean.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 2nd, 2013 at 4:17 PM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Staying with Soto Zen, I don't see how "kensho" is a relevant concept. There is no enlightenment to be found outside of shikantaza. From the beginning it is enlightenment-practice inseparably. It is enlightenment because no-thought is buddha-mind, and it is practice because one has to familiarise oneself with no-thought. A teacher then is anyone who is more familiar with shikantaza than you, otherwise there is a complex hierarchical structure within the Soto church based mainly on study and practice.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 2nd, 2013 at 4:43 AM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Here is a list of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_ranks_and_hierarchy in both Soto and Rinzai for Japanese Zen. In other countries, since there are no actual Zen schools (i.e. restricted to Zen), there is no specific system like those either. Generally the abbot of a monastery is considered the main teacher, otherwise the teacher of the meditation hall is the meditation master (chan teacher). None of them implies any connection with specific Zen methods or teachings.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 2nd, 2013 at 4:40 AM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Here are some clarifications from the Soto Zen side:

Authorization as Zen master?

Dharma transmission does not make you a zen master (what is that anyway? We will see soon...). It does not make you an osho (Japanese for "teacher") either. It is the first of three steps (shiho, ten-e and zuise), at the end of which you will officially be promoted to the rank of osho. In Japanese Soto-Zen, there more than 15.000 people with this rank. It is not as special as you might believe. If you have only shiho but not performed zuise yet, you are not regarded as a teacher of Zen. That, of course, does not man that you can not share your practice with others. Even if you are not a teacher, you can and should share your practice with others.

And what is a Zen master in the first place?

A Zen master, in Japanese, is a zenji. This title is reserved for the founder Dogen Zenji and all the abbots of the two main temples, Eiheiji and Sojiji. So at each time, there is usually only two zenjis alive, unless there is a zenji living somewhere in retirement (like Itabashi Zenji, who is the third zenji alive right now). So, to become a zenji is not impossible, but it is a long way and shiho alone is certainly not enough. Calling yourself a Zen master just because you have shiho is a joke.

Here is a detailed description of http://antaiji.dogen-zen.de/eng/adult45.shtml in 10 chapters.

A picture that sums up the path:


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, March 30th, 2013 at 7:46 AM
Title: Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Content:
Astus wrote:
It seems to me you are describing a specific training a Zen teacher would require. However, that is characteristic of a highly organised church, like Soto Zen, but not of traditions in other countries, where being a teacher is more about general recognition of fellow monastics and the laity rather then going through certain trainings and obtaining papers.

A big problem I see with the idea of measuring another's enlightenment is that there is no clear and transparent way to measure it. Then, calling it an esoteric and mystical thing that only a "fellow enlightened being" can validate leaves the disciples and the community blind and alienated from a central aspect of Zen. And this can be and is easily abused. Although there is the story of the unbroken transmission to back up this, clearly we see the lineage is only a myth.

Mahayanasutralamkara (17.10) writes:

One should serve a (spiritual) friend who is disciplined, tranquil, serene, outstanding in good qualities, energetic, rich in (knowledge of) scripture, awakened to reality, skilled in speech, compassionate, and indefatigable.

A friend with these qualities is the ground of service. "Disciplined" means that the senses are restrained due to moral discipline. "Tranquil" means that the mind is internally quieted by discipline in meditative concentration. "Serene" means the instinctual addictions are eradicated by the discipline of wisdom. "Outstanding in good qualities" means that he is unequalled and non-deficient. "Energetic" means that he is not indifferent to the welfare of others. "Rich in scripture" means that his learning is not inferior. "Awakened to reality" means that he understands reality. "Skilled in speech" means that he is skilled in the techniques of speaking. "Compassionate" means that his mind is free from the desire for material possessions. "Indefatigable" means that he teaches the Dharma continuously and reverently.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 27th, 2013 at 7:18 AM
Title: Re: Nonregression of Bodhisattvas
Content:
Astus wrote:
The question is regression to what. When it is taught that bodhisattvas on the 8th bhumi don't fall back, it means leaving behind the possibility of becoming an arhat. Non-regression on the 1st bhumi means guaranteed liberation, either as a sravaka or as a buddha. Not falling back from the initial awakening of bodhicitta means maintaining the determination to enlightenment and not leaving behind the path of liberation completely by rejecting the Three Jewels. This is probably different from how Kongtrul understood the issue.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 27th, 2013 at 1:04 AM
Title: Re: On the difficulty of recognizing the natural state
Content:
Astus wrote:
"What is it like to do nothing? I mean, really do nothing, nothing at all — no recalling what has happened, no imagining what might happen, no reflecting on what is happening, no analyzing or explaining or controlling what you experience. Nothing!"
( http://www.unfetteredmind.org/a-way-of-freedom )


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 25th, 2013 at 7:38 PM
Title: Re: On the difficulty of recognizing the natural state
Content:
Astus wrote:
Andrew108


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 25th, 2013 at 6:43 PM
Title: New Moderator: Kirtu
Content:
Astus wrote:
Please welcome him among our Global Moderators.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 25th, 2013 at 5:05 PM
Title: Re: Sutras by Length
Content:
Astus wrote:
The Great Prajnaparamita Sutra (大般若波羅蜜多經) is the longest in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taish%C5%8D_Tripi%E1%B9%ADaka, 600 fascicles (卷), although it is a collection of many sutras just like the Ratnakuta. The Avatamsaka Sutra (大方廣佛華嚴經) translated by T. Cleary is 80 fascicles.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 25th, 2013 at 4:49 PM
Title: Re: Mahayana and Traditions
Content:
seeker242 said:
This is "Ekayana"?

Astus wrote:
It depends on how you interpret Ekayana. It is generally understood to mean that sravakas eventually enter the bodhisattva path, thus negating the validity of sravaka realisation (arhat) as ultimate on its own right. Outside of the Faxiang/Hosso school this is usually accepted as the orthodox view. My point here, however, is that while there are many Mahayana schools, the bodhisattva path is not restricted to any of them.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, March 24th, 2013 at 10:00 PM
Title: Mahayana and Traditions
Content:
Astus wrote:
I see people struggling with what lineage or tradition to choose from in Buddhism. There are debates about the superiority and appropriateness of different methods and teachings. I believe that the Mahayana is truly the Great Vehicle, the path of the bodhisattva, not limited by geographical, cultural or historic factors.

One of the Four Great Vows is: Dharma-gates are measureless, I vow to learn them. Or: I vow to learn all the teachings. A bodhisattva masters any and all methods. The specific teachings are always skilful means, that is, they are valid only within a specific context and appropriate for a limited number of people. The wisdom of the bodhisattvas, however, is universal.

So, if you want to liberate all beings and attain the supreme enlightenment there can be no teaching that is unworthy of your attention. There is no fixed method you should attach to besides bodhicitta itself.

"The Lord speaks of the 'great vehicle'. Surpassing the world with its Gods, beings and Asuras, such a vehicle goes forth. It is the same as space, and exceedingly great. As in space, so in this vehicle is room for immeasurable and incalculable beings. Such is this great vehicle of the Bodhisattvas, these great beings. One neither sees its coming, nor going, and its abiding as such, does not exist. Thus one cannot get at any beginning of this great vehicle, nor at any end, nor at any middle. Yet, such is self-identical everywhere. Thus, hereof one speaks of a 'great vehicle'." ( http://fodian.net/world/0228_01.html )

"A man or woman setting out on the Great Vehicle imbued with ten indefatigable determinations will enter the stage of realization of Thusness, to say nothing of the stage of enlightening beings. What are the ten? The indefatigable resolution to see, attend, and serve all buddhas; to build up all roots of goodness without retreating; to seek all truths; to practice all the transcendent ways of enlightening beings; to fully accomplish all concentrations of enlightening beings; to enter successively into all ages; to thoroughly purify all oceans of buddha-lands in the ten directions; to lead all realms of sentient beings to perfect development; to carry out the practices of enlightening beings in all lands and ages; to fully attain each power of buddhas by maturing all beings through the process of practicing as many transcendent ways as atoms in all buddha-lands to mature each being. Men or women with faith who are imbued with these ten indefatigable determinations grow in all roots of goodness, leave all compulsive, routine mundane tendencies, drop out of all social castes, go beyond all stages of individual emancipation, are born in the family of all buddhas, fulfill the vows of enlightening beings, become pure with the attainment of all qualities of the enlightened, become clarified in all the practices of enlightening beings, develop all the powers of buddhas, overcome all demons and challengers, progress through all the stages of enlightening beings, and reach buddhahood." (Avatamsaka Sutra, ch. 39, p. 1171)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, March 23rd, 2013 at 12:57 AM
Title: Re: Logic vs Common sense.. .
Content:
Astus wrote:
Logic is about correct reasoning and not about deciding what is true or false, good or bad.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 22nd, 2013 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: Soul split into multiple mosquitoes?
Content:
Aemilius said:
If for example in one life you practice and study music, and you also work as an engineer, and you then you develop both careers to a high degree. Or you develop any number of different careers in a single life, or you develop them in two or more consecutive lives. Is it not now possible or even likely that this will act as a cause for the splitting of a single stream of existence into two or more parallel streams of existence?

gregkavarnos said:
No more than it is a cause for the splitting of a single stream of existence in this lifetime (ie not at all).

Astus wrote:
As Greg says.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, March 21st, 2013 at 7:23 PM
Title: Re: Not arising, not ceasing
Content:
Astus wrote:
http://www.sutrasmantras.info/sutra14.html

http://www.fodian.net/world/1564.htm#Investigation%20of%20Birth,%20Abiding%20and%20Perishing

"all Dharmas are empty of characteristics. They are not produced, not destroyed, not defiled, not pure; and they neither increase nor diminish."
http://www.fodian.net/world/0251.html

"Though the person exists in the dream, when [the dreamer] awakens, there is nothing that can be grasped. Like an [illusory] flower in the sky that vanishes into empty space, one cannot say that there is a fixed place from which it vanishes. Why? Because there is no place from which it arises! Amidst the unarisen, all sentient beings deludedly perceive birth and extinction. Hence this is called the turning wheel of birth and death."
http://www.fodian.net/world/0842/01_manju.htm

"Good son, the nature of the Tathaagata is really without any birth or death. It is for the sake of transforming sentient beings that he makes a show of being born or dying."
http://www.fodian.net/world/0375_15.html


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 20th, 2013 at 5:57 AM
Title: Re: Modern Education
Content:
Astus wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pAHEcYnaAE


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 19th, 2013 at 10:54 PM
Title: Re: Soul split into multiple mosquitoes?
Content:
Aemilius said:
There logically has to be a moment when one zygote actually splits in two!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin

Astus wrote:
A cell is not a constant thing but a living organism that has its own metabolism. For a cell to split into two it needs to gain mass, etc. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitosis.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 19th, 2013 at 10:45 PM
Title: Re: Soul split into multiple mosquitoes?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Aemilius,

Schizophrenia is not about more than one being existing in the same body, and multiple beings don't exist within the same mind. Even the name of the illness that you meant is Dissociative Identity Disorder, defined as "a disorder characterized by identity fragmentation rather than a proliferation of separate personalities" ( http://www.psychologytoday.com/conditions/dissociative-identity-disorder-multiple-personality-disorder ).

Analysis to the level of emptiness does not refute dependent origination on the phenomenal level. If you say that causality is not a fundamental law then anything can come from anything and reason(ing) has no meaning at all. Causation means there must always be a cause for an effect. If there is no cause there is no causality and we are back at the previous point about anything coming from anything/nothing. Will, intention, is at the heart of dependent origination as the defining factor of karma, very much within the law of cause and effect. An intention that is free from all causes would mean something coming out of nothing, plus it'd have the problem of becoming permanent and ineffective. Thus "free will" cannot be the cause for a split in the karmic stream.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 19th, 2013 at 8:12 PM
Title: Re: Modern Education
Content:
Astus wrote:
Here is an article on Swedish preschool childcare system: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21784716.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 19th, 2013 at 6:06 PM
Title: Re: Modern Education
Content:
Astus wrote:
I think this comparison of different feminisms are somewhat like different socialist ideas. There was the Soviet Socialist system, never really worked and eventually the whole ideology has disappeared. On the other hand, Western European social democracies are alive and they benefit many people. A radical https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separatist_feminism philosophy is only one smaller group, like the anarchists in left-wing politics or dhutanga practitioners among all the monks.

From a feminist point of view we could highlight how people are happy to blame here women for social problems without considering the fact that the majority of politicians and influential people are men, that the nations are led and controlled mostly by men, and even here the members are also mainly men. How come that it's still the woman's fault? Of course, the true sinner is Eve and the Almighty Lord has nothing to do with creating evil...


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 19th, 2013 at 1:44 AM
Title: Re: Modern Education
Content:
Unknown said:
Men can waste money on stuff as well, but putting women to work in an industrial economy instead of letting them raise their children and maintain a household in order to pay for senseless industries and inflated housing prices was a bad trade.

Astus wrote:
That has a lot more to tell about the whole social economics and expectations then individual women. Did you know that men had make up and fancy dress before the Enlightenment?

Unknown said:
There is no equality in that sense. Men and women are not equal in various ways.

Astus wrote:
There is no complete equality now, that is true, never said there is. The point of feminist movements was and still is to work on achieving equality. Plus, in a developed country very few men ever go to wars or work in hazardous environments.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 19th, 2013 at 12:57 AM
Title: Re: Modern Education
Content:
Astus wrote:
I understand that there are people who are against men. I believe that is a minority since every major nation in the world is still patriarchal, including North America.

While men can't breastfeed, it is only important in the first year of a baby's life, and there are many other things with a baby parents have to do. There are women soldiers and police officers, so I don't think they are necessarily excluded from those professions.

Unknown said:
feminism as it is understood and promoted in North America sees men as disposable and quite often undesirable

Astus wrote:
That's a very radical form of feminism, hardly the mainstream.

Unknown said:
It gives free license to women to behave in any way they wish

Astus wrote:
What special rules should apply to women that are not equally required of men? And why?

Unknown said:
In reality, it is an ideology catering to passions and ill-will, rather than concern for the collective well-being of society. The needs of the few are placed in the forefront ahead of the long-term well-being of the greater whole. One might cry on about inequalities, but if you want to talk about inequalities how about all the men who die in wars, or work dangerous construction jobs? How many men were drafted in WWII in comparison to women?

Astus wrote:
As I said, feminism generally is the idea of the equality of sexes. How is that an elitist view? And yes, men are also victims of gender bias.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 18th, 2013 at 11:42 PM
Title: Re: Modern Education
Content:
Astus wrote:
Huseng,

We may have different understanding of what feminism is about. I see it as the equality of sexes and not the superiority of women. Parenting is a job for fathers and mothers alike. It is in fact the disregard of the idea of equality that you can say mothers should stay at home. Why not the fathers? Why not try to find a system that is actually beneficial for the children and parents as well? Women are not better parents than men. Taking care of children is not a matter of which reproductive organ one has.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 18th, 2013 at 11:12 PM
Title: Re: Modern Education
Content:
Astus wrote:
The idea that feminism is the source of undisciplined youth in Canada sounds very strange. I haven't been to many places but in the EU, where the equality of sexes is a core value, I haven't heard of any country where public transport is unsafe or that travellers are harassed by unruly people. There are incidents, sure, but it's not normal.

Blaming women for not staying home for a larger social problem sounds to me very prejudiced and misogynistic.

The society in general should accept responsibility for children who are all taught at schools. Schools could teach correct behaviour. Films and other media could teach it too. In fact, we could say that since mostly men are the writers of TV programmes and computers games they cause the trouble.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 18th, 2013 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: Soul split into multiple mosquitoes?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Aemilius,

Selflessness doesn't mean "anything goes". There is also dependent origination, strict causality, the actual explanation of the lack of any permanent self. Saying that from a single karmic stream multiple streams can emerge is illogical because there would have to be a moment where three consciousness are exactly the same because they have the same causes. The same cause creating three different results at the same time is a violation of causality. Again, I'm not talking about any one of the three being the real self or all three being the real self, but simple causal relations.

The example of monozygotic twins don't fully match for it takes time for the cell to split and then develop different bodies, therefore there is not a single moment when from one thing two different things occur, unlike in moments of consciousness.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 18th, 2013 at 7:24 PM
Title: Re: Soul split into multiple mosquitoes?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Consciousness is momentary. Karma and dependent origination works on the basis of causal relationship between moments of consciousness. Splitting the stream of consciousness into multiple causal chains would mean that at the beginning there would be three identical beings, however, three of the same thing is just one thing, as at the time of one stream splitting into three new streams all three would have the same causal past making them identical. That's why I don't think one being becoming a multiple being is logical. This does not apply to emanations and magical multiplication since in those cases there are no multiple beings.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 15th, 2013 at 4:28 AM
Title: Re: Pureland study group anyone?
Content:
Astus wrote:
BDK translation (Inagaki & Stewart) in one book: http://www.bdkamerica.org/digital/dBET_ThreePureLandSutras_2003.pdf " target="_blank

Inagaki's Dharma Treasury that has the sutras (translation from both Kumarajiva and Xuanzang of the shorter sutra): http://www12.canvas.ne.jp/horai/dharma-treasury-index.htm " target="_blank


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 13th, 2013 at 5:26 PM
Title: Re: On the difficulty of recognizing the natural state
Content:
monktastic said:
I still don't see why these books are phrased so confusingly, but who am I to question TUR?

Astus wrote:
Confusion comes from fixating on specific words. That's why abhidharma, madhyamaka and yogacara have their own terminology. Sutras and individual teachers don't necessarily follow a strict philosophically clarified tradition and so they use words more loosely. Another reason why one of the four reliances emphasises meaning over words. If you understand the meaning the words are not confusing any more.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 13th, 2013 at 4:58 AM
Title: Re: On the difficulty of recognizing the natural state
Content:
monktastic said:
But if this is so, why all the brouhaha about the difficulty of recognizing it? This is what I cannot reconcile.

Astus wrote:
It's difficult because we always want something to be something, something to exist or not exist. But the main part is not about getting it right, this is the first step. You must not forget it either. As Wuxiang (aka Kim Heshang, 684–762) once taught in his three phrases: no recollection (of past/externals), no thought (of future/internals), do not forget (to maintain that) (無憶無念莫忘). Similarly to Garab Dorje's three statements.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 13th, 2013 at 4:18 AM
Title: Re: On the difficulty of recognizing the natural state
Content:
monktastic said:
What are some specific signs that one is in "the natural state"? What does it mean, experientially? Other than being free of acceptance and rejection, hope and fear -- which we've covered thoroughly, and which I deeply appreciate.

Astus wrote:
There are no signs. From early on signlessness (animitta) has been one of the characteristics of ultimate reality.

"What is the samadhi of signlessness apart from the samadhi of emptiness? If there is a remaining samadhi taking part in nirvana as its objective representation, this is called animitta samadhi. Again, animitta samadhi: The conditioned world has signs. Nirvana is signless. The conditioned world has three signs: arising, staying and passing away. Nirvana has three signs. Not arising, not staying, and not passing away. Thus the conditioned world has signs and nirvana is signless."
(Sariputrabhidharmasastra in "Nagarjuna in Context", p. 162)

From a practical advice:

"If you identify by thinking "It's emptiness,"
or thinking "It is signless and aspirationless:·
thinking "It is unidentifiable," thinking "It is completely pure,"
thinking "It is birthless," thinking "It is unperceivable,"
thinking "It has no nature:' thinking "It is without elaboration,"
thinking "It is not an object for analysis by speech or mind;'
thinking "It is uncreated and naturally present;' and so on,
however profound these thoughts, our recognition of emptiness
will not transcend the conceptualization of an arrogant mind.
Attachment to concepts leads to a fall into inferior states 
and a continuous ripening of karma from inferior actions."
(Lama Shang: The Ultimate Supreme Path of Mahamudra in "Mahamudra and Related Instructions", p. 86)

And just to show again what the essential nature of mind is:

"To realize that mind is empty of all empirical characteristics and devoid of any enduring essence is to realize the nature of mind. This insight will help you to understand the nature of the self as well. If you can realize this, you will also realize the nature of physical things to be empty of enduring essence. The result of understanding that emptiness is the nature of both the mental and physical realms is that you will no longer generate conflicting emotions in response to situations."
(Traleg Kyabgon: Ocean of Certainty, p. 110)

Just that short quote tells that emptiness has to be realised, which is the simple fact of the lack of anything graspable (i.e. any sign), from what comes freedom from (but not elimination of) emotions and ideas. Whatever concept you want to hold on to, that is mistaking illusion for reality, that is the root cause of ignorance. The nature of mind is that it is incomprehensible, that there is nothing at all to hold on to, to identify with, to discover, to realise; because suffering comes from attachment to something, and attachment is also the view that there is something to attach to. Thus the essential instruction is: relax. Relaxing means letting go of attachment. And that's it. Nothing more, nothing less. You can find proof of this any time. Just see what happens when you follow a thought and when you don't.

"Basic wakefulness is the very essence of the mind that fixates or thinks of something. Yet our dualistic fixation and thinking is like a veil that covers and obscures this luminosity.
In short, what is recognized is not a thing. What, then, do we recognize? We must experience naked wakefulness directly, and this occurs the instant that  our mind is stripped bare of conceptual thinking. That experience, therefore, is not a product of our fabrication. It simply is. The problem is that it is too near to us, just like something held so close to your eyes that it is difficult to see. Moreover, it is too easy. We would prefer something more difficult. Simply remaining free from concepts is extremely easy. The only difficulty is that it goes against our tendencies—we enjoy conceptual activity, we like to have something to take hold of. So, although it is easy to remain freely, our habitual tendencies pull us away from that state."
(Chökyi Nyima Rinpoche: Three Words in "Quintessential Dzogchen", p. 185-186)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 11th, 2013 at 6:54 PM
Title: Re: On the difficulty of recognizing the natural state
Content:
Anders said:
Not entirely. Without being certain, what I understand from the claims is that the view of Madhyamika and the prajnaparamita sutras is equivalent to Mahamudra - however, the methods for entering such realisation are not.

Astus wrote:
I think that where vipashyana is used in Mahamudra, in the tradition of Gampopa, the methods used are not different from what they teach in Madhyamaka. It's put together as analytical and resting meditation, the same way it was written in Kamalashila's and Atisha's meditation works. A difference here is that while in Madhyamaka first the appearances are analysed and then the mind, in Mahamudra the mind comes first and appearances later. This has some consequences of course and that's why Mahamudra is not exactly Madhyamaka.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 11th, 2013 at 5:39 PM
Title: Re: On the difficulty of recognizing the natural state
Content:
monktastic said:
- When you are in the natural state, your experience will be like [...timeless, duality-free, ...]

Astus wrote:
That is to refute wrong ideas about the nature of mind, but the same terms are used for emptiness. In fact, there is nothing more than the unity of emptiness and appearances (non-abiding awareness). So the problem seems to be your looking for something special.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 11th, 2013 at 1:12 AM
Title: Re: On the difficulty of recognizing the natural state
Content:
Astus wrote:
"Those who do not meditate with wisdom by analyzing the entity of things specifically, but merely meditate on the elimination of mental activity, cannot avert conceptual thoughts and also cannot realize identitylessness, because they lack the light of wisdom. If the fire of consciousness knowing phenomena as they are is produced from individual analysis of suchness, then like the fire produced by rubbing wood it will burn the wood of conceptual thought. The Buddha has spoken in this way."
( http://www.dalailamainaustralia.org/pages/?ParentPageID=176&PageID=211 )

Since vipashyana is the key method to attain certainty in the true nature of mind and phenomena, if you have trouble applying instructions found in Mahamudra, you can also try Madhyamaka.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 8th, 2013 at 5:54 PM
Title: Re: On the difficulty of recognizing the natural state
Content:
Astus wrote:
Although these are from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahui_Zonggao, they sound appropriate here:

"But people set up views of delusion and enlightenment and hold to interpretations of turning towards and turning away, wanting to understand this mind and see this inherent nature; thus this mind and this nature immediately flow into wrong paths, following the person's inversions, errors, and confusion. Hence enlightenment is not distinguished from delusion, nor the wrong separated from the correct. Because they do not fully understand the dreamlike illusion of "this mind" and "this nature," they falsely establish pairs of terms: they consider turning towards and turning away, delusion and enlightenment, as real, and accept this mind and this nature as true. They are far from realizing that whether true or not true, false or not false, worldly or world-transcending, these are merely provisional statements."
(Swampland Flowers, p. 83)

"You say that you have dull faculties. Try to reflect back like this: see if the one who can recognise the dullness is dull too or not. If you don't turn the light around and reflect back, you're just keeping to your dull faculties and adding more affliction. That would be adding illusory falsehood to illusory falsehood, laying on optical illusion on top of optical illusion. Just listen: the one who can know that sense faculties are inherently dull is definitely not dull. Though you shouldn't hold to this dull one, you shouldn't abandon it to study, either; grasping and rejecting, sharp and dull---these have to do with people, not with Mind. This Mind is one substance with all the buddhas of the three worlds: there is no duality.
If there were duality, the Dharma would not be of even sameness. "Receiving the teaching" and "transmitting Mind" are both empty falsehoods. Looking for truth and seeking reality seem even further off."
(p. 69)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 8th, 2013 at 7:32 AM
Title: Re: What's all this nonsense about sitting still?
Content:
Matylda said:
Well voice is superior to the written text in this sense that it comes from an enlightened master who can use words according to conditions and capacities, which text by its nature cannot... as for spoken word by living buddha what plays a role is 時所位, which is also crucial for skillful usage of the words of teachings... and 謂藉教悟宗 clearly sugests it.

Astus wrote:
How does 謂藉教悟宗 clearly suggest it for you? Just because it starts with 謂? It's simply explanatory (i.e. the meaning of it is "meaning" and not "saying") exactly as in the next section: 行入謂四行, that's why it was translated as that to English.

The sutras come from the Buddha himself, the treatises are written by enlightened masters, therefore in terms of source the written teachings are at least equal, if not superior, to oral instructions. The sutras and treatises address the different conditions and capacities, they can even have lists of them, unless you are proposing that the human mind today is somehow different in its workings from those of the past, in which case we need a whole new Buddhism. Is there anything a teacher can say that has not been already said before and written down several times? For someone transmitting the Buddhadharma, there can't be any difference between the spoken words and the canonical scriptures. It is true, however, that a teacher can give answers and instructions immediately while studying the Tripitaka takes time.

The Platform Sutra ( http://www.fodian.net/world/2008_10.html ) says: "Those who grasp at emptiness slander the Sutras by maintaining that written words have no use. Since they maintain they have no need of written words, they should not speak either, because written words are merely the marks of spoken language. They also maintain that the direct way cannot be established by written words, and yet these two words, 'not established' are themselves written."


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 8th, 2013 at 5:00 AM
Title: Re: What's all this nonsense about sitting still?
Content:
Matylda said:
Here teaching is wrongly pointed to be sutras and shastras.. however in the end of the clause text says 更不隨文教 which means it is not about written teaching and in the first part it starts from 謂藉教悟宗which points to oral teaching, i.e. oral instruction as a means, so note 6 is wrong since 更不隨文教 undermines it...

Astus wrote:
Regarding that note 15 says: " Scriptures are important as they provide guidance to enlightenment, but they can be misinterpreted or taken too literally. Also to study them as philosophy without practice will not lead to true understanding."

On the other hand, there is no mention of any oral teaching at all. Written texts are nothing but words on paper, and oral teachings are words by voice. Why would voice be a superior conveyor of words than paper?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 8th, 2013 at 12:31 AM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
Astus wrote:
The deviations you see in Zen today happened before in China and other countries too. You just have to read the laments of the masters of the era.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 8th, 2013 at 12:28 AM
Title: Re: On the difficulty of recognizing the natural state
Content:
Astus wrote:
Mahamudra manuals are usually easy to read and understand in my experience (like those from the 9th Karmapa and Dakpo Tashi). Thrangu Rinpoche is also a very plain speaking teacher. Look at this short instruction from http://www.rinpoche.com/teachings/4dharmas.pdf:

"Now we experience mind, yet if we try to find it, we can’t. It cannot be found. The reason it can not be found is that it has no inherent existence. It is empty. Does this mean the mind is nothing whatsoever? No, it is not mere nothingness, for the continuity of mind is unsevered; it goes on. It is mind that knows various phenomena. It is mind that illuminates various phenomena. Thus, we talk about the mind as being empty and luminous, or empty and clear. What one needs to do is to identify this union of emptiness and clarity and to practice meditation in terms of this union."

This is practically the same as it's taught in Madhyamaka meditation when one investigates mind. The point of it is to drop all sorts of reference points, all clinging to any identity, and open one's perception to all appearances without attachment.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, March 7th, 2013 at 1:00 AM
Title: Re: What's all this nonsense about sitting still?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Jikan, you are not alone. The celestial buddhas are also scratching their bald heads.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 6th, 2013 at 10:34 PM
Title: Re: What's all this nonsense about sitting still?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Awakening removed from everyday activity is of no value. The first paramita is giving, the second is ethical conduct. Lacking those two means that wisdom is still far away. In other words, harming others is not the functioning of the buddha-nature, nor is showing the wrong example for beings.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 6th, 2013 at 8:39 PM
Title: Re: What's all this nonsense about sitting still?
Content:
Astus wrote:
I think the measure of success on the path is the decrease of suffering, desire, anger, jealousy, and the rest of the unwholesome qualities in one's life. Sitting through days without moving, that's a different programme and usually a test of willpower ("I can do it!").


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 6th, 2013 at 7:21 PM
Title: Re: What's all this nonsense about sitting still?
Content:
oushi said:
Outline of Practice Many roads lead to the Path, but basically there are only two: reason and practice.

Astus wrote:
Note that "reason" is not rational mind but what is nowadays translated as principle (理). See the http://ctzen.org/sunnyvale/enUS/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=146&Itemid=57.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 6th, 2013 at 7:02 PM
Title: Re: What's all this nonsense about sitting still?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sitting still is only a small part of the Buddhist path. It is like a test environment where you have the opportunity to investigate how things are, where you have a short break from the everyday events to spend time with your study.

As for gaining insight from learning, it can work fine, if you have the right teachings and the correct motivation. Based on the words found in the books and heard from the teachers one can confirm it in personal experience. That's why the process is described as: listening, contemplating and realising. You hear/read about it, you understand it, and then check it in real life. This third part is what meditation is mostly used for at the beginning, to develop mental calmness and precision.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 6th, 2013 at 7:34 AM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
Astus wrote:
Consider this a little (Record of Linji, p. 17-18, tr. Sasaki):
Trembling with fright, like donkeys on an icy path, [you say to yourselves,] ‘I don’t dare disparage these good teachers for fear of making karma with my mouth!’
Followers of the Way, it is only a great teacher who dares to disparage the buddhas, dares to disparage the patriarchs, to determine the right and the wrong of the world, to reject the teachings of the Tripiṭaka, to revile all infantile fellows, and to look for a Person amidst fortunate and unfortunate circumstances.
Therefore, when I look back over the past twelve years for a single thing having the nature of karma, I can’t find anything even the size of a mustard seed. The Chan master who is like a new bride will fear lest he be thrown out of his temple, be given no food to eat, and have no contentment and ease. From olden days our predecessors never had people anywhere who believed in them. Only aft er they had been driven out was their worth recognized. If they had been fully accepted by people everywhere, what would they have been good for? Therefore it is said, ‘The lion’s single roar splits the jackals’ skulls.’
Of course, the 7th major http://www.ymba.org/bns/bnsframe.htm says: "A disciple of the Buddha shall not praise himself and speak ill of others, or encourage others to do so. He must not create the causes, conditions, methods, or karma of praising himself and disparaging others." But if it's not about praising yourself at the expense of others, that's a different matter.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 4th, 2013 at 9:14 PM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
oushi said:
The problem is that you are not the one who creates it (karma does).

Astus wrote:
That is denying personal responsibility for one's thoughts. Karma is one's own action, not some external force.

oushi said:
Koans are supposed to develop a break in reasoning chain through bombarding it with unsolvable problem. In this break, one is introduced to the Buddha Nature.

Astus wrote:
That's one way to use koans, and it's criticised by Cleary right in the OP.

oushi said:
I don't know how just sitting can be used to develop such an insight. It is rather contemplating the mind until one sees his nature, then it is just sitting.

Astus wrote:
Zazen is done with the understanding that one doesn't do anything with coming and going appearances. That's as simple as possible. Of course, it is possible to add various teachings, like momentariness of dharmas, the three characteristics of phenomena, emptiness, mind only, buddha-nature, etc., just to show that there is no point grasping at things, and that attachment is the very source of all problems.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 4th, 2013 at 6:59 PM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
oushi said:
All true, but the question is, how to stop the "ceaselessly seeking mind"?

Astus wrote:
That's fairly simple. You don't stop it, you just don't continue/create it. It's stated in the quotes from Linji, but the same is found in other instructions.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 4th, 2013 at 7:06 AM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
Astus wrote:
There is actually something to do, which is not generating samsara. In other words, although the nature of mind is already perfect, it is covered up by defilements. Cleaning the mind means not grasping at phenomena, not creating further trouble. The practice of letting go of appearances is itself stopping samsara and abiding in the buddha-mind by not abiding anywhere. This is what is done in zazen and this is the non-thought. Linji explains it very well:

The problem:

"If you engage in any seeking, it will all be pain. Much better to do nothing." (Record of Linji, tr. Sasaki, p. 19)

"Seeking buddha and seeking dharma are only making hell-karma. Seeking bodhisattvahood is also making karma; reading the sutras and studying the teachings are also making karma. Buddhas and patriarchs are people with nothing to do." (p. 17)

The solution:

"Bring to rest the thoughts of the ceaselessly seeking mind, and you will not differ from the patriarch-buddha." (p. 8)

"Followers of the Way, your own present activities do not differ from those of the patriarch-buddhas. You just don’t believe this and keep on seeking outside. Make no mistake! Outside there is no dharma; inside, there is nothing to be obtained. Better than grasp at the words from my mouth, take it easy and do nothing. Don’t continue [thoughts] that have already arisen and don’t let those that haven’t yet arisen be aroused." (p. 22)

In summary:

"It is because you cannot stop your mind which runs on seeking everywhere that a patriarch said, ‘Bah, superior men! Searching for your heads with your heads!’ When at these words you turn your own light in upon yourselves and never seek elsewhere, then you’ll know that your body and mind are not different from those of the patriarch-buddhas and on the instant have nothing to do—this is called ‘obtaining the dharma.’" (p. 28)

Dogen says in the http://www.stanford.edu/group/scbs/sztp3/translations/gongyo_seiten/translations/part_3/fukan_zazengi.html:

"Therefore, put aside the intellectual practice of investigating words and chasing phrases, and learn to take the backward step that turns the light and shines it inward. Body and mind of themselves will drop away, and your original face will manifest. If you want to realize such, get to work on such right now."

To emphasise the central point of the last two quotes above:

"An often-used Chinese expression, consisting of only four characters, describes the essence of Zen practice very accurately and very simply: "Turn the light and illuminate back." This expression is found in the records of Rinzai as well as Dogen, and many other Zen masters from early Zen to the present. It was an important term for Chinul, the father of Korean Son or Zen, and it is a kind of motto today for the university where I teach, a Zen-affiliated institution in Kyoto." (Jeff Shore: http://beingwithoutself.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/principles.pdf )


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 4th, 2013 at 3:10 AM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
Matt J said:
Baizhang's Wild Fox koan suggests that it is not so simple as yes or no.

Astus wrote:
I wouldn't rely on a single story to understand the relationship between karma and enlightenment. There are, after all, quite a few extensive treatises on the matter, and the sutras of course.

The bodhisattva career doesn't start at the 7th and 8th bhumis but way before that. A 1st bhumi bodhisattva is already on the 41st level in the usual 52 stages model and has very strong compassion, not to mention the wisdom with what the illusoriness of samsara is seen through. Such an enlightened noble being is capable of becoming an arhat, but doesn't do so in order to attain buddhahood.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, March 3rd, 2013 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
Astus wrote:
Dogen in both the Zazengi and Fukanzazengi uses Yueshan's story, saying ( http://www.stanford.edu/group/scbs/sztp3/translations/shobogenzo/translations/zazengi/zazengi.translation.html ): "Sitting fixedly, think of not thinking. How do you think of not thinking? Nonthinking. This is the art of zazen." (普勸坐禪儀 (T2580_.82.0001 a27-b01): 兀兀坐定。思量箇不思量底。不思量底如何思量。非思量此乃坐禪之要術也。 / 正法眼藏坐禪儀 (T2582_.82.0217c08-11): 兀兀ト坐定シテ。思量箇不思量底ナリ。不思量底。如何思量。コレ非思量ナリ。コレスナハチ坐禪ノ法術ナリ。)

So zazen is hishiryo (非 - non, 思量 - thinking), sometimes translated as " http://antaiji.dogen-zen.de/eng/zgi.shtml " or " http://www.wwzc.org/translations/zazengi.htm ". As Bielefeldt http://www.stanford.edu/group/scbs/sztp3/translations/shobogenzo/translations/zazengi/zazengi.supp.notes.html#anchor4, in the older version of Dogen's manual he simply quotes Zhanglu Zongze's Zuochanyi as the explanation of the actual mental practice: "Whenever a thought occurs, be aware of it; as soon as you are aware of it, it will vanish. If you remain for a long period forgetful of objects, you will naturally become unified. The is the essential of art of zazen.", and it is an instruction that has a longer history in Zen (see Bielefeldt's book on this: Dogen's Manuals of Zen Meditation). Practically it is the same as the http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=153955#p153955 and http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=154743#p154743.

Dogen's zazen is actually not as harsh as other Zen teachers like Shishuang Qingzhu where people never laid down (a practice criticised in the Platform Sutra). A difficulty is that in Soto Zen the word zazen is often used as a synonym of hishiryo, the enlightened view that should be practised regardless of one's activities. The problem is only when a practitioner believes that Zen is only for the time on the cushion, while in fact sitting comfortably is only training, preparation, an artificial environment to become strong. But since the only thing to be mastered is hishiryo by hishiryo, essentially there is nothing new developed or attained.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, March 3rd, 2013 at 10:09 PM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
Huseng said:
Not everyone agrees with this. In some strains of Mahāyāna thought, particularly the ekayāna, arhats are reborn outside the three realms and eventually must attain buddhahood.

Astus wrote:
But those who talk about the inconceivable rebirth of an arhat (and bodhisattvas) add that there is still conceptual obscuration.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, March 3rd, 2013 at 8:48 AM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
Astus wrote:
Nonin may not have meant it the way it appears to me, that's possible. Maybe "deeply awakened to our true nature" is just a superficial understanding of causality, or anything before the arya levels (i.e. actual insight into emptiness). And "No one can escape it" is not a doctrinal statement but rather a warning to the common people who may delude themselves with thoughts of transcendent enlightenment. I'm not excluding anything, it was simply strange at first.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, March 3rd, 2013 at 8:36 AM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
kirtu said:
The sitting posture itself is not identical to Buddhahood.  Deshimaru didn't mean that literally.  However sitting is needed to accomplish zazen (unless one has a handicap , in which case it would be difficult but not impossible).  But zazen is practice/enlightenment.  From the beginning.  In Zen, zazen is the gateway to directly discovering one's Buddhahood for oneself.

Astus wrote:
As I read it, you say that (1) sitting is required (unless not) for zazen, (2) zazen is practice-enlightenment, (3) zazen leads to the discovery of buddhahood. So, sitting is an ideal preparation for practice-enlightenmet but it's not the same. And although it is called practice-enlightenment, there is a further step to find buddhahood - or you meant probably that practice-enlightenment is buddhahood, or rather the realisation of buddha-nature, but not the same as ultimate enlightenment. That way we have 3 or 4 stages of Zen practice, although if I remember correctly Dogen didn't agree with Dongshan's five ranks. Nevertheless, it is now clarified that sitting itself is not actually liberation but only the first step on the path. Or am I distorting your point?


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, March 3rd, 2013 at 12:15 AM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
Astus wrote:
Kirt,

Yes, they teach counting the breath, focusing on the lower belly and sometimes even other things. How does that make the sitting posture identical to buddhahood?

"Only the posture of zazen is the true living Buddha. It is the only posture which inspires true respect in everyone. Through it, I will be able to face anything." ( http://www.abuddhistlibrary.com/Buddhism/C%20-%20Zen/Modern%20Teachers/Deshimaru%20Roshi/The%20Teachings%20of%20Master%20Deshimaru/teachings_of_master_deshimaru.htm )


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, March 2nd, 2013 at 11:57 PM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
Matt J said:
I don't see that at all.  Nonin writes (in my opinion) controversial things at times but this article is not one of them.

Are you a part of a formal Zen tradition?  There may be a disconnect between different teachings.

Astus wrote:
"We need to remember, however, that awakening is not a permanent event, that all of us, even those who have deeply awakened to our true nature and the nature of our relationship to the rest of the universe can fall into delusion in an instant and act badly, causing harm to ourselves and others."

"The law of cause and effect governs all our actions. No one can escape it, even the Zen Buddhist master who foolishly thinks that he or she is beyond it."

The impossibility of becoming free from karma, from samsara, sounds to me like denying nirvana. Saying that one is never permanently liberated means that the chain of dependent origination cannot be broken.

Would you say that Nonin's Zen is a teaching that promises no freedom, unlike other forms of Buddhism?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, March 2nd, 2013 at 11:07 PM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
Matt J said:
This is like saying, if you can swim in the ocean, why swim in a pool at all?

Sitting is important because it allows us to leave off everything else and collect ourselves.  Sitting in a proper posture is important because a proper posture facilitates relaxation and concentration.

Every teacher I've had, Zen, Theravada, and other, have started with sitting and then at some point say "now take your practice with you."  In my experience, zazen is the hardest to get but the easiest to take into daily life.

Astus wrote:
Then we are talking about a gradual development, just as in any other school, except that in Zen they forgot to provide the description of the stages.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, March 2nd, 2013 at 11:04 PM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
kirtu said:
It is important, it's just not absolutely critical as meditation is done with the mind.  But there is no other posture that facilitates long term deep concentration.

Astus wrote:
But concentration, attaining various levels of absorption, is neither the method nor the goal of Zen. I'm not questioning the yogic qualities of the posture, but they're not discussed in Zen works (except for Hakuin's tradition where it comes from outside of Buddhism), and they don't equal realising buddha-nature.

kirtu said:
For purification/Buddha repentance practice.

Astus wrote:
Not necessarily. It's Chan in motion.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, March 2nd, 2013 at 6:19 PM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
kirtu said:
Sitting is important because it reveals your own Buddhanature to you.  Zazen is a more intensive and direct practice than nembutsu for example although one can awaken to their Buddhanature through nembutsu as well.

Astus wrote:
I'm talking about sitting as a physical posture. People sit a lot every day in the office, at home, in a restaurant, in the car, etc. They sit because it is convenient. As Zhiyi writes (The Essentials of Buddhist Meditation, ch. 6, tr. Ven. Dharmamitra): "although it is true that this can be accomplished in any of the four deportments, still, for the study of the path, sitting is the superior posture." However, Huineng says (Platform Sutra, ch. 9, tr. McRae): "One is enlightened to the Way through the mind. How could it depend on sitting?" Even Dogen asks in the http://www.stanford.edu/group/scbs/sztp3/translations/gongyo_seiten/translations/part_3/fukan_zazengi.html: "How could that be limited to sitting or lying down?" And in the Bendowa ( http://www.wwzc.org/sites/default/files/Bendowa-book.pdf ): "This is not only practised while sitting, it is like a hammer striking emptiness; before and after, its ringing pervades everywhere. How can it be limited to a place?"

What makes sitting more intensive and direct? How does intensity and directness depend on sitting? This is asked not because sitting is wrong but because this single posture is emphasised as if it had some special meaning or quality. Thich Nhat Hanh likes to teach walking meditation, and once a Chan monk told me that doing prostrations is the best. Many simply say that posture is not that important. Dogen likes to refer to Shakyamuni's sitting for six years (which is not true) and Bodhidharma's nine years of wall gazing (rarely interpreted as seated meditation, as discussed in Broughton: Bodhidharma Anthology, p. 66-68) as proof of elevating the sitting posture to the level of ultimate accomplishment. If that is just a poetic way of talking about meditation there is no need to think too much about it, however, just as you said, when it is equated with enlightenment itself, some explanations for that would be good.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, March 2nd, 2013 at 5:21 PM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
These American "Zen masters" are just too subtle for me:
http://sweepingzen.com/unethical-practices/


Astus wrote:
What Nonin says in that article basically denies liberation and fails to use the teaching to the two truths.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 1st, 2013 at 9:07 PM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
kirtu said:
Not at all.  Actual zazen (seated meditation) is the essential element for kensho and satori.  But we take our zazen with us off the cushion - we don't leave it there.  Zazen is the start of enlightenment and is practice/enlightenment.  But until we see that, it's just practice.  But we take that with us no matter what we do.

Astus wrote:
If you can take zazen off the cushion then why is sitting, and in a specific posture, important at all? For instance, one can recite the nenbutsu or work on a koan anywhere in any posture.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 1st, 2013 at 8:33 PM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
kirtu said:
Taisen Deshimaru (and presumably others) talk about correct posture as a start, not an end.

Astus wrote:
Wouldn't saying such a thing compromise the idea of zazen equals enlightenment?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 1st, 2013 at 6:17 PM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
kirtu said:
Zazen shows you your own Buddhanature directly.
With zazen you can see your Buddhanature.

Astus wrote:
Although the proper posture is heavily emphasised, even to the level where for instance Nishijima explains the effects of zazen with the nervous system, but it is also acknowledged that "zazen" is not bound to any posture. Obviously, assuming a meditative posture is not restricted to Zen or even to Buddhism, so it could hardly be the direct realisation of anything. Focusing on the body is a simple way to give a focus of the meditation and allow the mind to settle. But that's nothing more than shamatha, a good way to begin practising meditation. On the other hand, the mental attitude is what matters, like what they call mushotoku (無所特), hishiryo (非思量) and shinjin datsuraku (身心脱落), all equal to shikantaza. Of course, those who maintain that Zen is about the correct posture will say these are wrong interpretations.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 1st, 2013 at 7:39 AM
Title: Re: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
Astus wrote:
The sources were given, they are both Thomas Cleary's books (as the title of the thread suggests) and their titles are also given with the page number. But if anyone wants more, like ISBN or date of publication I can also give that. Or, yes, you can search for it online.

How is it important?

The first quote is about zazen, in the book itself a note to Foyan's poem on sitting meditation. It is relevant to the idea that Zen is to be realised/accomplished/performed in proper sitting posture.

Three examples (not meant to be a critique of the individuals being quoted):

"You should be sitting straight up as if you were supporting the sky with your head. This is not just form or breathing. It expresses the key point of Buddhism. It is a perfect expression of your Buddha nature. If you want true understanding of Buddhism, you should practice this way. These forms are not a means of obtaining the right state of mind. To take this posture itself is the purpose of our practice." (S. Suzuki: Zen Mind, Beginners Mind; p. 26)

"Zazen is a physical practice. To sit in a chair and call it zazen is incorrect." ( http://hardcorezen.blogspot.hu/2011/11/sitting-in-chairs-is-not-zazen-part-one.html )

"During zazen, we have satori, we are Buddha, God. Without zazen, we have no such thing. So zazen is the holy posture, the highest. During zazen, the noblest holy mind manifests itself. What is holy in the world? Only the posture of zazen." ( http://www.abuddhistlibrary.com/Buddhism/C%20-%20Zen/Modern%20Teachers/Deshimaru%20Roshi/The%20Teachings%20of%20Master%20Deshimaru/teachings_of_master_deshimaru.htm )

The second quote is about how koans are viewed incorrectly as irrational and something that only an enlightened being can comprehend.

Quotes about koans:

"a paradox to be meditated upon that is used to train Zen Buddhist monks to abandon ultimate dependence on reason and to force them into gaining sudden intuitive enlightenment" ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/koan )

"An important part of kong-an practice is the private exchange between teacher and student wherein the teacher checks the student’s grasp of the point of the kong-an. Kong-ans are probably best known for the unusual, seemingly non-rational quality of their language and dialogues, and are not meant to be studied, analyzed or approached conceptually. The kong-an is an experiential tool that helps us cut through our thinking so that we can just perceive and function clearly." ( http://www.kwanumzen.org/about-zen/zen-practice/kong-an-practice/ )


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 1st, 2013 at 4:21 AM
Title: Cleary on Cultish Zen
Content:
Astus wrote:
"Foyan’s teachings on meditation, much like those of the ancient masters, are quite different from the obsessive compulsive attitudes inherited by Western Zen cultists from Japanese sectarians automatically following late feudal and neo-imperial models of Zen organization and discipline. Foyan’s teachings were evidently different from those of obsessive cultists of his own time too. Xutang (pronounced Syw-tahng), whose student Jomyo imported Zen to Japan in the thirteenth century, is on record as teaching, "It is essential not to become attached to the form of sitting; when you sit, you should do so in a suitably convenient manner. If you lack inner direction, you will uselessly weary your spirit.” Under the military authoritarian regimes that actually controlled most of the Zen establishments in feudal Japan, this original flexibility tended to give way to extreme disciplinarian rigidity."
(Instant Zen, p. 130)

"The irony in the obscurity of koans is that it derives mainly from linguistic and contextual gaps between sectarian Zen in Korea and Japan on the one hand and comprehensive classical Chinese Zen on the other. Offshoots of Korean and Japanese sects, not understanding the structure of the koans, have tended to make this aspect of Zen into a cult of secrecy, mystery, and/or simple mystification.
Imported to the West, this type of cult has given rise to the new coinage koanophobia, “fear of koans,” evidently on account of their exploitation for bafflement value. Added to the premise of koanic secrets of overwhelming importance held authoritatively by an autocratic potentate and an elite circle, in a cultural environment where self-esteem is considered a central value, the mystery-cult approach to koans has had the effect of intimidating and yet alluring those who are naive or inwardly uncommitted but nevertheless wish to think well of themselves."
(Kensho, p. xi)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 28th, 2013 at 9:01 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism and the Warrior
Content:
Nighthawk said:
How is a society to be run without the use of violence? I'm not talking about myself.

Astus wrote:
Buddhism is not a political philosophy and it was not meant to be such. Look at the http://www.ymba.org/bns/bnsframe.htm 11 (on politics), 21 (on violence and vengeance), 30 (handling worldly affairs) and 32 (harming beings in any way). In the http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc1/bmc1.ch05.html rule includes prohibition against "running messages and errands for kings, ministers of state, householders, etc. A modern example would be participating in political campaigns." Same thing mentioned in the http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.01.0.bodh.html in the Intermediate Section on Virtue: ""Or he might say: 'Whereas some recluses and brahmins, while living on the food offered by the faithful, engage in running messages and errands for kings, ministers of state, khattiyas, brahmins, householders, or youths, (who command them): "Go here, go there, take this, bring that from there" — the recluse Gotama abstains from running such messages and errands.'"

So when the question is about the relationship of Buddhism with being a warrior, it makes sense only on the personal level, because Buddhism is the path of liberation for the individual, just as karma is always personal. That's why my answer is: don't do it.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 27th, 2013 at 8:32 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism and the Warrior
Content:
Nighthawk said:
So then what is the solution to invasion, tyranny, islamic terrorism, crime etc?

Astus wrote:
Don't do it.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 27th, 2013 at 7:15 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism and the Warrior
Content:
Astus wrote:
I think what feels difficult to accept for many is that not every human is fit to be a Buddhist. Those who defend, support or commit violence are such, just like many others who believe that happiness comes from samsaric gains. That is taking refuge not in the Three Jewels but in other philosophies and faiths. Violence comes from anger, anger comes from fear, fear is based on ignorance.How could such a thing mean liberation, or even something wholesome?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 27th, 2013 at 5:51 PM
Title: Re: Sex Taboo's & applying Christianized thinking in Western
Content:
shel said:
A poem by Chizuko Karen Joy Tasaka, published today on SweepingZen.com ( http://sweepingzen.com/to-joshu-sasaki-roshi-roshi-you-are-a-sexual-abuser/ ) ...

Roshi, you are a sexual abuser
“Come” you say as you pull me from a handshake onto your lap
“Open” you say as you push your hands between my knees, up my thighs
fondle my breasts
rub my genitals
french kiss me

you put my hand on your genitals
stroke your penis
jack you off?
this is sanzen?

my friend—she was inji
sex with roshi

she tried to say no
you demanded, demanded, demanded
demon demand the force of a tornado

sex with roshi
for whose best interest?

I told you I don’t like it.
I asked you why you do this?
You said, “nonattachment, nonattachment, you nonattachment"

I told you as shoji, “women very angry, very upset”
I asked you why you do this.
You said: “Be good daughter to roshi, and good wife to G. [her husband].
Roshi, that is incest So many women trying to shake the shame from their voices of
Sex with roshi

We came to you with the trust of a student
You were our teacher
You betrayed us
You violated our bodies
You rape our souls

You betrayed our previous student-teacher relationship
You abuse us as women
You emasculate our husbands and boyfriends

Roshi, you are a sexual abuser
Your nuns you make your sexual servants
Your monks and oshos are crippled with denial
Roshi, Sexual Abuser.

–By Chizuko Karen Joy Tasaka (1951-2010)


(My bold above)


Astus wrote:
Thanks for bringing it here.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 27th, 2013 at 12:19 AM
Title: Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W
Content:
Astus wrote:
There is elite Buddhism and there is popular Buddhism, just as in other religions. You don't expect a Sunday churchgoer to be able to understand a theological work, and you don't expect a priest to do regular retreats like a monk. Buddhism could spread among the people by simple rituals, recitations and basic moral rules. But currently in the West even the Buddhists themselves have doubts about rebirth and karma, so how could merit making and ethical discipline establish a larger community? Zazen and deity visualisation, aren't those monastic practices? Recitation of Amita Buddha's name, prayer wheels, lighting incense, and most importantly community activities. As I see it, those who want some usual religious environment go to Christian groups. Buddhism could be popular among liberal minded and spiritual (New Age) people if its image were transformed into something colourful, lively and more open than conservative religions where contraception is a sin.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 26th, 2013 at 8:29 PM
Title: Re: Is the idea of "needing" a teacher just a control system
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
Sorry if I was not clear, I was not rofl about having Amitabha as a teacher, in Vajrayana we also have primodial teachers (like Vajradhara for example) but with the way it was presented:  you don't need a teacher, have Amitabha as a teacher.  It struck me as oxymoronic.

Astus wrote:
"If one wishes to see the Buddha then one sees him. If one sees him then one asks questions. If one asks then one is answered, one hears the sutras and rejoices greatly." (Pratyutpanna Samadhi Sutra, ch. 2. tr. Harrison)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 26th, 2013 at 6:52 PM
Title: Re: Is the idea of "needing" a teacher just a control system
Content:
Astus wrote:
Thanks for sharing that Anders.

The vows of Samantabhadra ( http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/samantabhadra.pdf ) represent the attitude one should have in order to obtain the mind set of a disciple and be able to learn the Dharma. And that is crucial to find the teacher in every situation.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 25th, 2013 at 7:55 PM
Title: Re: African Americans & people of Color, & Buddhism in the W
Content:
Huseng said:
Is this a western problem, or really just America?

kirtu said:
It's a western problem.  How many Gypsys are in the practice centers in German, Polish, Czech, Slovak place?  How many North Africans are welcome in French centers, etc?  I don't know the answers because I no longer live in Europe and haven't for a while but on trips to Austria and Germany for Kalachakra in 2006 and 2007 there were no minorities per se aside from Asian's.  Are there any First Nation people's in practice center's in Canada?  I've heard of some but is there a story there?  How about Black Canadians (I forgot to ask my African-American-Canadian relatives in Toronto what they call themselves but I only met them once)?

Kirt

Astus wrote:
Gypsies are often considered people who cannot integrate into the larger society. It's not simply a matter of skin colour but they are often considered a separate nation/ethnicity. Nevertheless, in Hungary there is a Buddhist community specialising in gypsies: http://www.jaibhim.hu/ Note that this group works among very poor people. So I'd say that it's not really a matter of colour but social status that decides how much one can relate to Buddhism at its current status. It is not the religion for working class. SGI provides a simple teaching with simple goals and active evangelising, so it works (at least in America).

Another unfortunate factor, at least in Hungary, is that the form of Buddhism that is popular among lower class people is often mixed with nationalistic ideals, something that gypsies can hardly relate to.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 25th, 2013 at 7:09 PM
Title: Re: Test Your Enlightenment
Content:
Astus wrote:
From the http://koreanbuddhism.net/master/dharma_talk_view.asp?cat_seq=32&content_seq=127&priest_seq=0&page=1:

"Empty your mind and reflect with clarity. You must have faith in the fact that the causal arising of each thought is actually non-arising." (32)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 25th, 2013 at 5:39 PM
Title: Re: Test Your Enlightenment
Content:
catmoon said:
It's a trap.

Astus wrote:
The appropriate word is: upaya.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 25th, 2013 at 5:37 PM
Title: Re: Test Your Enlightenment
Content:
oushi said:
Is there one person that thinks that thoughts come and stay? This very nature of thoughts is the cause of the problem. Because thoughts come and go, people do all they can to initiate them and sustain them. The main influence society does on a person is "you have to know!" and "you have to remember!". "We all know that thoughts come and go, that is why we have to deal with it".

Astus wrote:
Impermanence and causality are easily understood and accepted by everyone, and at the same time they are the fundamental teachings that lead to enlightenment. The error we can make with thoughts is to regard them as real, as meaningful, as true and thus identify with them and create attachments. Another way to say this is the false belief in a thinker, a being that thinks and creates the thoughts, or an entity that is behind/beyond/above thoughts, i.e. the belief in a self.

"Even when all sorts of thoughts do crop up, it's only for the time being while they arise. So, just like little children of three or four who are busy at play, when you don't continue holding onto those thoughts and don't cling to any [particular] thoughts, whether they're happy or sad, not thinking about whether to stop or not to stop them — why, that's nothing else but abiding in the Unborn Buddha Mind. So keep the one mind as one mind. If you always have your mind like this, then, whether it's good things or bad, even though you're neither trying not to think them nor to stop them, they can't help but just stop of themselves."
(Bankei Zen, p. 50. tr. Haskel)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 25th, 2013 at 6:04 AM
Title: Re: Test Your Enlightenment
Content:
kirtu said:
Right, this is the classic reversing the 12 links.  But jumping (seeing) the Tathagata nature directly is faster and better (IMHO).  Combining the two is Zen's own above and below practice/realization.

Did Zongmi or Yanshou teach about this?  Chinul of course did.

Kirt

Astus wrote:
Zongmi writes in the Chan Prolegomenon (Zongmi on Chan, p. 123):

"All dharmas are like a dream. All the noble ones have said the same thing. Thus, thought of the unreal from the outset is calm. Sense objects are from the outset void. The mind of voidness and calm is a spiritual Knowing that never darkens. It is precisely this Knowing of Voidness and calm that is your true nature. No matter whether you are deluded or awakened, mind from the outset is spontaneously Knowing. [Knowing] is not produced by conditions, nor does it arise in dependence on any sense object. The one word "Knowing" is the gate of all excellence. Because of beginningless delusion about it, you have falsely grasped body and mind as a self and produced such thoughts as passion and anger."

And then continues with the same as quoted already, identifying the essential practice of no mindfulness, i.e. no thought. Zongmi claims that only this teaching of the Knowing (or awareness) is the explicit method that covers both the essence and the function, while other schools (Hongzhou, Niutou, etc.) fail to achieve this completely. Yanshou directly quotes Guifeng to show the different interpretations of the nature of mind found in the Chan lineages at the beginning of the Guanxin Xuanshu, therefore both Zongmi and Yongming hold the Heze Chan as the most authentic. Yanshou writes (Integrating Chinese Buddhism, p. 175):

"This awareness is the essence of mind for all the sentient beings. "Mind" is its name and awareness is its essence. It is comparable to "water" being the name and wetness being its essence. This awareness is neither the awareness that distinguishes subject and object nor the awareness of illuminating wisdom that realizes enlightenment. Rather, it is natural and spontaneous awareness. It acts freely without intention. It follows conditions but does not change; and though it does not change, it follows conditions. That is why it is called empty tranquil awareness. "Empty and tranquil" means to be without characteristics. Because it has a powerful ability to understand, yet is without form, it is called numinous awareness without confusion. Thus it is also called tranquil awareness, tranquil illumination, formless awareness, or non-knowing awareness."

Then he quotes from the Zhaolun, thus showing how the teaching of emptiness is in agreement with this, what is followed by another explanation (p. 177):

"This awareness is true awareness, the same as empty tranquil awareness. It is also called "awareness of no-thought." If one has no thought and awareness, one is in the state of common people; if one has no-though and non-knowing, one is in the state of the two vehicles; if one has no-thought, but with awareness, one is in the state of the Buddhas. No-thought is empty and tranquil [awareness], and is also called "non-abiding awareness." Because if one abides in something, it is comparable to a person entering into a dark room and not being to see anything. But, if one does not abide in anything, it is like sunlight and moonlight illuminating and making visible all varieties of things."

Why did I say that seeing nature is knowing that thoughts come and go?

"But the essence of Suchness itself cannot be put an end to, for all things [in their Absolute aspect] are real; nor is there anything which needs to be pointed out as real, for all things are equally in the state of Suchness. It should be understood that all things are incapable of being verbally explained or thought of; hence, the name Suchness.
Question: If such is the meaning [of the principle of Mahayana], how is it possible for men to conform themselves to and enter into it?
Answer: If they understand that, concerning all things, though they are spoken of, there is neither that which speaks nor that which can be spoken of, and though they are thought of, there is neither that which thinks nor that which can be thought of, then they are said to have conformed to it. And when they are freed from their thoughts, they are said to have entered into it."
(The Awakening of Faith - Attributed to Ashvaghosha, p. 40)

"The Way needs no cultivation, just not defiling it. What is defilement? When you have a mind of birth and death and an intention of creation and action, all these are defilement. If you want to know the Way directly, then ordinary mind is the Way. What is an ordinary mind? It means no intentional creation or action, no right or wrong, no grasping or rejecting, no terminable or permanent, no profane or holy."
...
"Grasping good and rejecting evil, contemplating emptiness and entering concentration—all these belong to intentional creation and action. If one seeks further outside, he strays farther away. Just put an end to all mental calculations of the triple world. If one originates a single deluded thought, this is the root of birth and death in the triple world. If one simply lacks a single thought, then he excises the root of birth and death and obtains the supreme treasure of the dharma-king. Since countless kalpas, the deluded thoughts of ordinary man—flattery, deception, self-intoxication, and arrogance—have formed the one body. Therefore, the su¯tra says, ‘It is only by many dharmas that this body is aggregated. When arising, it is only dharmas arising; when extinguishing, it is only dharmas extinguishing.’ When the dharma arises, it does not say ‘I arise’; when the dharma extinguishes, it does not say ‘I extinguish.’ The former thought, the later thought, and the present thought—all successive moments of thought do not wait for one another, and all successive moments of thought are quiescent and extinct. This is called the ocean-seal sama¯dhi, which contains all dharmas."
(Mazu Daoyi in "The Hongzhou School", p. 123, 126)

"If someone can suddenly awaken to the correct cause, then he is at the stage of leaving defilement behind. He then shatters the three worlds and twentyfive forms of existence. Such a person knows that all phenomena, internal and external, are not real—arising from mind’s transformations, they are all provisional designations. There is no need to anchor the mind anywhere. When feelings merely do not attach to things, then how can things hinder anyone? Let the nature of other things flow freely, without [interfering by] trying to break apart or extend anything. The sounds that one hears and the forms that one sees are all ordinary; whether being here or there, one freely responds to circumstances without any fault."
(Guishan's Admonitions in "Zen Classics", p. 30)

"The One Mind alone is the Buddha, and there is no distinction between the Buddha and sentient beings, but that sentient beings are attached to forms and so seek externally for Buddhahood. By their very seeking they los it, for that is using the Buddha to seek for the Buddha and using mind to grasp Mind. Even though they do their utmost for a full aeon, they will not be able to attain to it- They do not know that, if they put a stop to conceptual thought and forget their anxiety, the Buddha will appear before them, for this Mind is the Buddha and the Buddha is all living beings."
(Zen Teaching of Huang Po, p. 29-30)

"If within a single moment deluded thinking suddenly ceases, [you will] thoroughly perceive your own mind and realize that it is vast and open, bright and luminous - intrinsically perfect and complete. This state, being originally pure, devoid of a single thing, is called enlightenment. Apart from this mind, there is no such thing as cultivation or enlightenment. 
... 
the illusory mind of delusion is originally rootless. You should never take a deluded thought as real and try to hold on to it in your heart. As soon as it arises notice it right away. Once you notice it, it will vanish. Never try to suppress thoughts but allow thoughts to be as you watch a gourd floating on water."
( http://chancenter.org/cmc/2011/10/13/essentials-of-practice-and-enlightenment-for-beginners/ )

These are just a few works to show that enlightenment simply depends on grasping or not grasping a thought, just as the Platform Sutra says about moments of buddhahood. The idea of "jumping directly" to see that the nature of mind is empty and aware is in fact not that immediate, it rather serves as a background for letting go of thoughts. That's why it is the first step in Baizhang's three steps system. Not clinging to phenomena is also in perfect agreement with the teachings on selflessness, emptiness, mind only and the rest. Talking about an inherent buddha-nature can sound like a special teaching, but when it comes down to practice it is no different from the rest.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 24th, 2013 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: Test Your Enlightenment
Content:
kirtu said:
Why did Yanshou feel a need to show that the teaching harmonize with Zen exactly?

Astus wrote:
There was a trend at the time of calling Zen a "special transmission outside the teaching" to separate it from other schools and to make it look superior. This naturally resulted in people rejecting studying the canon. As we know, eventually the idea of special transmission won and the mature Zen of the Song dynasty followed, and that was brought to Japan and eventually to the West.

kirtu said:
Seeing nature is beyond thoughts coming and going but that is a start.

Astus wrote:
Zongmi writes (Zongmi on Chan, p. 88; same quoted by Chinul in Collected Works, p. 290):

"If you find a good friend to show you [the path], you will all-at-once awaken to the Knowing of voidness and calm. Knowing is no mindfulness and no form. Who is characterized as self, and who is characterized as other? When you are aware that all characteristics are void, it is true mind, no mindfulness. If a thought arises, be aware of it; once you are aware of it, it will disappear. The excellent gate of practice lies here alone. Therefore, even though you fully cultivate all the practices, just take no mindfulness as the axiom. If you just get the mind of no mindfulness, then love and hatred will spontaneously become pale and faint, compassion and wisdom [prajna] will spontaneously increase in brightness, sinful karma will spontaneously be eliminated, and you will spontaneously be zealous in meritorious practices. With respect to understanding, it is to see that all characteristics are non-characteristics. With respect to practice, it is called the practice of nonpractice. When the depravities are exhausted, the rebirth process will cease; once arising and disappearing has extinguished, calmness and illumination will become manifest, and responsive functions will be without limit. It is called becoming a buddha."


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 24th, 2013 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: Is the idea of "needing" a teacher just a control system
Content:
Jikan said:
That's an important point.  One of the characteristics of beginners especially is that they don't see clearly.  Can someone who does not see clearly learn how to do so without an external agent arranging the situation?

Astus wrote:
Unless you are living together 24/7 no person can give a better assessment of your behaviour than yourself, not to mention all the emotions and thoughts that don't show on one's face. It is usually when we are with others that strong and weak feelings surface, that's why Dharma friendship is very useful. On the other hand, people can be perfect critics of themselves up to the level of self-loathing and narcissism, and the problem comes from using the wrong list of critical psychological attributes. So Buddhism gives many descriptions of the good (kusala) and bad (akusala) qualities (dharma). The Shakyamuni himself, before his awakening, practised with dividing thoughts to these two kinds ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.019.than.html ).


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 24th, 2013 at 10:14 PM
Title: Re: Is the idea of "needing" a teacher just a control system
Content:
Astus wrote:
One interesting idea I see coming up again and again that is supposed to prove that people need a teacher is that we ordinary humans are incapable of seeing what is actually going on in our mind, therefore we need another person to tell us and correct it. I think this is a popular belief influenced by the scientific idea of objective observation and psychological views originating from that. But as Chekawa's mind training ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojong ) text says: "Of the two witnesses uphold the principle one", i.e. you know best what goes on in your mind. It doesn't mean we can't cheat ourselves, but part of the practice is learning to see clearly.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 24th, 2013 at 9:50 PM
Title: Re: Test Your Enlightenment
Content:
Astus wrote:
Kirt,

It is actually quite easy to connect Yongming's Buddhism with Dogen's, although their general appearance is quite different, partly because Yongming lived just before the Song dynasty changes in Chan. Chinul for instance combines the teachings of Yongming and Dahui quite well.

Just sitting (只管打坐) is a combination of no-thought (無念, i.e. 非思量) with sitting meditation (坐禪). No-thought for Yanshou is the zong (宗), just as it is awareness/knowing (知) for Zongmi and ordinary mind (平常心) for Mazu. Yongming compares the two approaches and says (Integrating Chinese Buddhism, p. 191; end of the second question in the Guanxin Xuanshu) that the Hongzhou (Mazu) method works for those of the highest faculties while the Heze (Zongmi) path fits different capacities.

If it is true that just sitting equals seeing the nature (見性) then giving positive answers to all ten questions should be fairly simple. Let's see how it goes.

[1] Seeing nature is knowing that thoughts come and go.
[2] When there is no proliferation of ideas there is no attachment.
[3] There is no other meaning of the Buddhadharma but seeing nature.
[4] Not relying on preconceptions one sees and acts according to circumstances.
[5] Thoughts cannot stay even for a moment.
[6] Hope and fear, love and hate are only thoughts.
[7] Confusion and clarity are both without substance, one moment of consciousness is followed by another.
[8] Compassion comes with seeing nature, they are not two.
[9] Seeing how one's mind works shows how all minds work.
[10] Having or not having a thought is still clinging to a thought.

This kind of reductionist approach that is undoubtedly the Zen style can easily appear as a negation of the complexities of the path. In fact, it was one of Yanshou's primary goal to show that the teachings (教) harmonise with Zen (宗). That's why Albert Welter gave the title to his book "A Special Transmission within the Scriptures".


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 23rd, 2013 at 7:51 PM
Title: Re: Is the idea of "needing" a teacher just a control system
Content:
Astus wrote:
Rob,

There are a lot of things involved in the idea of a teacher. In general a teacher is just a person who teaches something. In Buddhism there are all sorts of teachers, that is, people who you can learn from different things. There are also specialists, people who know certain areas of Buddhism in depth. Let's say you want to study Yogacara. There are only a handful of English speakers who have thorough knowledge of Vijnaptimatra but a lot more who have some level of familiarity with it. If all you want is a basic understanding of Yogacara you can learn it in English and ask questions about points you find difficult from many teachers. However, if you aspire to become a specialist, you have to learn Chinese or Tibetan and because the problems you encounter become very technical you might have trouble finding the right person to consult with. So, do you need a personal teacher to know Yogacara? You don't. But because of your interest you might contact those who share your fascination with it and that way they become your spiritual friends (kalyanamitra).

A teacher can be an expert as I said above, but can also be a guide. People have different capacities - what usually means different levels of interest - and since the majority who study Buddhism don't have the inclination to go through the sutras and treatises, especially at the beginning, they rather rely on a single person they trust to present the Dharma in a simple and straightforward manner. But that's the case with almost everything and people usually prefer live talks and discussions rather than reading a book.

For those who only want to learn only on their own without any involvement in an actual community, well, I think it is very rare. Almost everybody wants to be with like minded people. And when it is not possible to meet in the physical space there are virtual groups like this forum.

Finally, there is the special case of the personal teacher where one follows a person to receive intensive education. It's like hiring a language teacher or a fitness trainer who you meet regularly and you get personalised instructions. Because true specialists are on high demand in a community only in specific situations is it possible to have such a tutor. Ideally a teacher knows the disciple very well, they have a close relationship, and that makes it possible to provide individual guidance. This is possible mostly in monastic and eremitic environments, or if you have a teacher living nearby whom you can visit any time you want. That's why only a few Buddhists have such a teacher. Even in a bigger monastery you see the abbot only once in a while, and becoming a personal disciple is a privilege.

In the Platform Sutra (ch. 2, tr. McRae) Huineng says,

"Because some people are stupid and some are wise, the stupid being the small and the wise being the great, the stupid ask questions of the wise and the wise preach the Dharma for the stupid. When a stupid person suddenly becomes enlightened, his mind opening forth, he is no different from a wise person.
...
If you can become enlightened yourself, don’t rely on external seeking— don’t think I’m saying you can only attain emancipation through [the help of] a spiritual compatriot other than yourself. This is not the case! Why? Within your own minds there is a spiritual compatriot [who will help you] become enlightened by yourself! If you activate the false and deluded, you will become all mixed up with false thoughts. Although some external spiritual compatriots may be teachers, they cannot save you."


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 23rd, 2013 at 7:46 AM
Title: Re: Test Your Enlightenment
Content:
seeker242 said:
Touche! Even funnier though would be if someone were to post on here and answer yes to every question, they would probably still be accused of being egocentric! "I got enlightenment" posts on Buddhist forums never seem to go over well.

Astus wrote:
Then Subhuti asked these monks, "Elders, have you ever achieved or realized anything?"
The monks replied, "Only presumptuous persons will claim they have achieved and realized something. To a humble religious devotee, nothing is achieved or realized. How, then, would such a person think of saying to himself, 'This I have achieved; this I have realized'? If such an idea occurs to him, then it is a demon's deed."

(The Demonstration of the Inconceivable State of Buddhahood in "A Treasury of Mahayana Sutras", p. 33)

Resolute Mind asked, "Have you, sir, attained the Surangama Samadhi?"
The Indra king replied, "Could the characteristics of 'attain' and 'not attain' exist within this samadhi?"
Resolute Mind said, "No."
The Indra king said, "Good youth, you should understand that when a Bodhisattva practices this samadhi, there is nothing that is attained in any of the dharmas."
Resolute Mind said, "Since your understanding is like this, you must have already attained the Surangama Samadhi."
The king said, "Good youth, I do not perceive that the dharmas have any place of residence. He who has no residence in all the dharmas has attained the Surangama Samadhi. Good youth, to reside in this samadhi is to be completely without residence in all the dharmas. If one is without residence, then one is without grasping. If one is without grasping, one is also without preaching."

(Surangama Samadhi Sutra, p. 32. tr. McRae)

The Buddha asked Mañjuśrī, “When a Bodhisattva sits in a bodhimaṇḍa, does he attain anuttara-samyak-saṁbodhi?”
Mañjuśrī replied, “When a Bodhisattva sits in a bodhimaṇḍa, he does not attain anuttara-samyak-saṁbodhi. Why not? Because the appearance of bodhi is true suchness. Not finding a speck of dharma to capture is called anuttara-samyak-saṁbodhi.
...
If there are those who say that they see bodhi and have attained it, we should know that they are the ones with exceeding arrogance.”

http://www.sutrasmantras.info/sutra13.html


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 22nd, 2013 at 8:07 AM
Title: Re: Test Your Enlightenment
Content:
kirtu said:
I see your wordy Yanshou and raise you just sitting.

Astus wrote:
They say that just sitting is practice-enlightenment and there's nothing beyond that, nothing to achieve at all. On the other hand, you sit silently till the end of your life. And if we scratch the rhetoric of just sitting a little bit we find that there's a lot more going on. So it can be that it is not Yanshou who talks too much but certain teachers say too little about what Buddhism is about. Mystifying enlightenment is of no use.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 21st, 2013 at 11:44 PM
Title: Test Your Enlightenment
Content:
Astus wrote:
I now present ten questions in order to form a framework [to test your understanding].

[1] Do you thoroughly understand seeing [one’s] nature, as if delineating and contemplating phenomenal forms similar to someone like Mañjuśrī?

[2] In everything you do—whether encountering situations or dealing with externals, seeing phenomenal forms or listening to sounds, raising a foot or lowering a foot, opening the eyes or closing the eyes—do you illuminate the implicit truth [ zong ] and comply with Buddhism?

[3] Do you read the teachings of each age and the statements of former patriarchs and masters, listening deeply and unafraid, completely understanding the truth in all of their teachings and not doubting it?

[4] In response to different [types of] difficult questions and all manner of trivial queries, are you able to provide [answers] according to the four kinds of eloquent responses and completely resolve the doubts that others have?

[5] At all times and in all situations, does wisdom shine forth unhindered and does thought after thought pass perfectly, without encountering a single dharma that is able to cause obstruction, or being interrupted for even a single instant?

[6] In all the occasions that present themselves to you in the external realm, whether contrary or agreeable, good or bad, do you resist [the desire to] elude them [on the one hand] and are you always conscious of destroying [any attachment to] them [on the other]?

[7] Within the realm of the mind and its objects comprised of a series of one hundred dharmas, do you get to see the extremely subtle essence-nature and the original point of rising of each and every [dharma], without confusing them with the circumstances of birth and death and the organs of sense and their objects?

[8] Regarding the four types of behavior—walking, standing, sitting, and lying—do you address others respectfully and exercise restraint when replying? And when wearing clothes and eating food, performing and carrying out [tasks], do you understand the true reality of each and every grade [in rank]?

[9] When listening to claims that there are Buddhas or there are no Buddhas, there are sentient beings or there are no sentient beings, do you sometimes applaud them and sometimes refute them, sometimes agree and sometime disagree, with a firm unwavering mind?

[10] When you hear about how all the different kinds of wisdom are able to clearly fathom how nature and form complement each other, how li and shi are unhindered, how nonexistence and existence are one and the same phenomena and do not reflect the origin [of phenomena] itself, and how the thousand sages appear in the world, can you avoid doubting it?

(Yongming Yanshou’s Conception of Chan in the Zongjing Lu, p. 273-274, tr. A. Welter)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 20th, 2013 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
Astus wrote:
Zen's antinomian/iconoclast nature is no truer than its egalitarian attitude. Both are literary topics but without relevance to actual life where monastic life was highly ritualised and regulated, and Zen was the rhetoric only of the elite monks and lay aristocrats. That actually makes American Zen quite special as it is connected to the Beat culture and a serious re-interpretation of Zen texts.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 19th, 2013 at 5:18 AM
Title: Re: Sex Taboo's & applying Christianized thinking in Western
Content:
Matylda said:
of course, and now, does it apply to buddha as well???

Astus wrote:
Shakyamuni Buddha lived as an example to all a renunciate life, perfectly celibate. Do you know of any Mahayana sutra where a buddha engages in sexual activity (outside of anuttarayogatantra texts)?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 19th, 2013 at 4:40 AM
Title: Re: Sex Taboo's & applying Christianized thinking in Western
Content:
Matylda said:
yes according to Lotus sutra yes... but it is not final exposition in zen... moreover I hope you know how the bodhisattva is viewed in zen. I cannot quote but one can find in Sogenji writings as far as I know...

Astus wrote:
"Monetary and sexual matters are a far more serious cause of misfortunes than poisonous snakes. One should most carefully stay away from them."
(Baizhang Zen Monastic Regulations, fol. 5, ch. 7, §6; p. 219. tr. Ichimura)

"Thus, [pure] conduct and observance [of precepts] is Dharma that is not to be neglected even for an instant."
(Dogen: SBGZ: Gyoji; vol. 2, ch. 30; p. 165. tr. Nishijima & Cross)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 19th, 2013 at 1:40 AM
Title: Re: Sex Taboo's & applying Christianized thinking in Western
Content:
Matylda said:
Well so now we have to remove all women from buddhist centers... there are plenty of teachers on YT speaking to the mixed audience very often mostly women who smile, and make jokes and so on, both Western and Asian teachers... what to do with that???

Astus wrote:
My point is that it's not a Christian, not a Hinayana, nor a modern idea to warn teachers about the dangers of having any kind of affair with women. It is also not acceptable to call such affairs a Dharma teaching, according to the Lotus Sutra.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 18th, 2013 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: Sex Taboo's & applying Christianized thinking in Western
Content:
Astus wrote:
The Lotus Sutra in chapter 14 says,

"Bodhisattvas Mahasattvas must not regard women's bodies as objects of desire and speak Dharma for them. They do not take delight in looking at women. If they enter the homes of others, they do not speak with young girls, maidens, widows, and so forth. ... If they speak the Dharma for women, they do not smile or laugh and let their teeth show, nor do they expose their chests. Even for the sake of the Dharma, they do not become familiar with them, much less for the sake of other matters!"


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 18th, 2013 at 12:48 AM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Something I recommend for all: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idVxRE8uM-A.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 17th, 2013 at 11:02 PM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Huseng said:
Even so, the idea is that you can look into the cosmos to see a reflection of present events and things to come. It isn't so much that the night sky acts as a causal mechanism.

I'm neither for nor against astrology for the record. I'm exploring how it worked in various Buddhist traditions. I can't deny, however, that many masters used and still use it.

Astus wrote:
And there are other popular methods too, like https://books.google.hu/books?id=3igRAAAAYAAJ and https://books.google.hu/books?id=c6Z8KqdF6LoC. I think that they are all very interesting as long as one doesn't try to explain how they can actually work because then it just falls apart.

Another way to rationalise divination techniques is to see them as tools to bring out one's intuition, something that they all heavily rely on. And if we can allow the mind to have a mystical insight into the fabric of the causal relations then on some level fortune telling might actually work, or perhaps they can be used to better understand ourselves similarly to dream interpretation.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 17th, 2013 at 10:46 PM
Title: Re: Sex Taboo's & applying Christianized thinking in Western
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Christianized thinking strikes again: http://sweepingzen.com/sex-in-a-sacred-space/!

Astus wrote:
The Kosha (p. 652) says that one of the four forms of illicit sex is: "in an unsuitable place: an uncovered spot, a caitya, an aranya". Same definition is repeated in other works. So, "sex in a sacred place" as misconduct is not a Christian idea.

Here's another thing from the Kosha (p. 604) that says some very relevant point (highlights from me).

"Sexual misconduct is much censured in the world because it is the corruption of another's wife, and because it leads to retribution in a painful realm of rebirth.
It is easy for householders to abstain from it, but it is difficult for them to abstain from all sexual activity: householders do not leave the world because they are not capable of difficult things.
The Aryans possess akaranasarhvara with regard to sexual misconduct, that is, they have obtained definite abstention from it; in fact, in their future existence, they will be incapable of violating this precept. Such is not the case concerning all sexual activity. As a consequence, the rules of discipline of the Upasaka contain only the renunciation of sexual misconduct: it is inadmissible in fact that the Aryans, in a subsequent existence, would be capable of violating the discipline of an Upasaka which could happen if this contained the renuncation of all sexual activity. Akaranasarhvara means akriyaniyama, (that is akriyayam ekantata, the certain abstention from one action)."

In brief: it is easy not to commit sexual misconduct for anyone, but aryans are definitely free from it. And just to clarify, a noble being (aryan) is someone who has attained at least the first level of enlightenment, in case of bodhisattvas the path of seeing. Therefore, if someone commits a sexual misconduct that is a clear and obvious sign that the person has no insight into emptiness, has no enlightenment whatsoever, and should be viewed as an ignorant human being (prthagjana).


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 16th, 2013 at 7:55 PM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Huseng said:
The Abhidharma-kośa-bhāsya states, "The collective force of the actions of beings produces the winds which create (nirmā) the moon, the sun and the stars in heaven."

The cosmos are a reflection of beings' actions in this sense rather than a causative force.

Astus wrote:
I'm OK with the principle that realms appear because of karma. On the other hand, the Kosha's cosmological view of the world is very much outdated, and I think even the Chinese knew that early on.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 16th, 2013 at 7:50 PM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Astus wrote:
PorkChop,

The mutual influence between mind and matter is quite obvious even on the everyday level, since people are mostly attached to and moved by stimuli in the five physical senses. At the same time one can also learn to be free from them. Related to this is that different people cling to different things, and even medication has to be adjusted to the individual. Considering that level of complexity in body chemistry and the large variety of responses to pills and such, astrology appears overly simplistic. And as already mentioned, the astrological systems are based on pre-modern cosmologies that don't exactly match the current state of astronomical knowledge.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 16th, 2013 at 7:23 PM
Title: Re: Sex Taboo's & applying Christianized thinking in Western
Content:
Astus wrote:
Matylda,

Are you saying that expecting a Zen teacher to follow common moral standards of a culture is beyond human abilities? An interesting idea.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 16th, 2013 at 8:37 AM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Let's follow then the idea of chemically influenced/generated emotions that can be then be controlled to some extent by constellations. The body of an arhat should change its chemical elements or even the body since a liberated person has neither anger nor desire. And that means a medically definable nirvana. One might even find a pill to gain enlightenment. Of course, you said that not all anger is a corporeal product. Do you mean there are bodily and mental anger at the same time or they are different kinds of anger? I'm no doctor but I think higher blood pressure and heavier breathing can show anything between overwhelming desire and burning hate, or even just good acting.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 16th, 2013 at 7:51 AM
Title: Re: Sex Taboo's & applying Christianized thinking in Western
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sara,

do you find that those of us discussing these matters here are falling for a common tabloid-style trick? Are there people here that say the problem is with the sex in these cases and not the power abuse? Neither Buddhism in general nor Zen in particular is popular enough to make it to the headlines of newspapers read by millions. All in all, Buddhism in the West is still a minor community made of educated middle class people mostly who don't really follow any Christian or conservative ideas but rather they tend to be quite liberal. So, let me ask you, where do you see the sort of puritan attitude towards Buddhist teachers?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 16th, 2013 at 7:12 AM
Title: Re: Sex Taboo's & applying Christianized thinking in Western
Content:
Sara H said:
That's what's interesting about this. "Sex Scandals"
Not  "Lying Scandal".

It's the sex aspect that people are being sensationalist about.

Astus wrote:
As I said before, "the scandal is not about sex itself, it is about abuse where a teacher lie about the nature of the relationship and with that causes harm to the person and to the sangha." And this is what matches the idea of "sexual misconduct", so calling it a "sex scandal" is quite appropriate. You say that the big issue for many is the sex, however, I don't see people surprised that lay Zen teachers have sex or even talk about it. Also, it wasn't simply about lying either, although in Baker's  case for instance there was also money involved. So, considering the basic five precepts, the one unbroken precept not yet on the list is actual murder. And this is not about secular law but Buddhist ethics that teachers are supposed to be examples of. Since you say that sex naturally creates drama then why is it only normal in a Buddhist context that supposedly enlightened teachers fall into such a base error? The answer is that it is not normal for a Buddhist teacher, it is not acceptable but harmful for the people involved and the community in general.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 16th, 2013 at 7:01 AM
Title: Re: Hyon Gak Sunim interviews Robert Thurman
Content:
Astus wrote:
Thank you, it was a great interview and Thurman has some very good ideas.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 16th, 2013 at 5:25 AM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
PorkChop said:
Second question: Yes, what are feelings of anger but a molecular compound in the blood stream?

Astus wrote:
In Buddhism samskara are not rupa, i.e. anger, etc. are not molecular compounds.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 16th, 2013 at 5:20 AM
Title: Re: Sex Taboo's & applying Christianized thinking in Western
Content:
Sara H said:
Since when is somebody abused by an orgasm?

Astus wrote:
If all was innocent and friendly sex why are people hurt? Who would complain about pleasure?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 15th, 2013 at 7:20 PM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
tigerdown said:
Do these largely rare cases among a handful of Buddhist monks mean that there is some systemic problem with ethics in Theradan, Tibetan, Taiwanese and other Buddhism? Of course not, and at least, no more than it would mean so in the American Zen world or Japanese Buddhism in general.

Astus wrote:
School shootings are also rare things, and it's not every day you find a dictator as the head of the state. Since we live outside of a war zone rape and murder are uncommon things too. Does low frequency mean there's nothing to worry about, nothing to watch out for? Also, the number of reported cases don't tell us the number of unknown issues, but it shows that people can get away with these things for decades, and it takes lot of effort for students to uncover the abuses to the public.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 15th, 2013 at 6:24 PM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
PorkChop said:
The first point is that Quantum Physics has shown that electrons with related orbits will continue to have related orbits even after being spread across vast differences.
The second point is that Astrophysics & Chemistry show us that all elements on the periodic table heavier than helium likely came from an exploding star some where, also when stars explode they scatter debris all across the cosmos.
Who's to say that the heavier elements that make up our bodies are not in some way linked to planets & stars in far off cosmoses, and that those elements don't somehow influence our behavior here on a periodic basis? mind bottling

Astus wrote:
Can someone identify the quantum connections in people's body? Can someone show how molecular things in one's blood influence traffic? No. But it always sounds good to say something about quantum physics.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 15th, 2013 at 6:09 PM
Title: Re: Sex Taboo's & applying Christianized thinking in Western
Content:
Astus wrote:
As you said, the scandal is not about sex itself, it is about abuse where a teacher lie about the nature of the relationship and with that causes harm to the person and to the sangha. A teacher marrying a student is fine, that is not about using one's higher status to cheat people into fake relationships. And it's never been about sex itself. So I find connecting the problem to some Christian puritanism is exaggerated.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 15th, 2013 at 7:20 AM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
I can certainly agree with that. I guess 'guilty' just sounded somewhat harsh to my ear. However, I do feel that Sasaki's fault is really of a different order of magnitude than that of the women he abused.

Astus wrote:
Agreed. However, to avoid future incidents, studying the actual teachings of the Buddha and the masters should be emphasised. It is really saddening that only a handful of Zen teachers tell people more than how to put their buttocks on the cushion.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 15th, 2013 at 5:26 AM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
@Astus Your post seemed to imply that there is a kind of symmetry as far as guilt or blame is concerned between the teacher and his disciples in this case.
Is that what you meant?

Astus wrote:
That was my intention, yes. Although we can say that the teacher is the one who misbehaved and took advantage of his students, the students were also at fault in neglecting the study of the Dharma.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 15th, 2013 at 1:46 AM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
Astus wrote:
... the disciples are guilty of being ignorants.

dzogchungpa said:
http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/guilty

Astus wrote:
"deserving of blame"


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 14th, 2013 at 9:08 PM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Huseng said:
So, quite early on astrology was a component of Mahāyāna, long before esoteric practices.

Astus wrote:
While many esoteric practices promise only worldly benefits it's developed into a path to liberation. Has astrology ever had anything more to offer then good days for insuring a male heir and such?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 14th, 2013 at 5:55 PM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
jeeprs said:
The http://www.tricycle.com/editors-view/buddha-stain discusses the Joshu Sasaki matter (may require subscription).

Astus wrote:
Just as in everyday life, the solution for ignorance is education. If those students knew even the basics of Buddhism they would have been aware that sex is not part of Zen training. So, while the teacher is guilty of sexual misconduct and power abuse, the disciples are guilty of being ignorants.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 14th, 2013 at 5:35 PM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Huseng said:
That's a pretty bold statement.

You're basically saying that plenty of adepts, many living today, who have spent their life practising and who some believe actually do read minds to some extent, are just superstitious believing in such embellished entertainment.

Astus wrote:
Basically, yes, although I wouldn't say it's purely superstition. You might be interested in this one, from Ven. Analayo: http://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/fileadmin/pdf/analayo/BuddhaOmniscience.pdf.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 14th, 2013 at 7:33 AM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
So all of the common siddhis are all just more made up stuff?  Well, if you are just going to dismiss anything in the teachings that doesn't accord with your current worldview and you think that conventional reality is actual, there's not much chance of common ground for us in this discussion.

Astus wrote:
Here is my view about it: http://eubuddhist.blogspot.hu/2012/09/buddhist-magic.html.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 14th, 2013 at 1:26 AM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
We see time and again throughout the Buddhist teachings where Buddha and his followers like Maudgalyayana are able to read the minds of others.  How do you propose this is possible if everything is distinct?

The stars don't reflect anything.  The constellations merely indicate the gestalt at the time of birth, and no star is any more important than any other (aside from the Sun, for obvious reasons).

Astus wrote:
Mind reading is only one of the many magical elements of stories, an embellishment for entertainment. If the Buddha could have read others' minds then for instance the monks who got themselves killed would not have received instruction on corpse meditation. Also, one mind connecting directly to another mind would allow the possibility of telepathy and thus transferring enlightenment without saying a word, or the whole system would have to collapse into a single consciousness.

What is indicating the gestalt?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 14th, 2013 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
Please tell me how you distinguish one stream of causal factors from another.  Where is the boundary that makes each distinct?

Astrology is most certainly not the magical influence of constellations on people.  No jyotish has ever said it is.  Rather one can take the seemingly external mandala of the time of birth as an indication of the karmic continuum of the seeming individual.  Constellations are a signpost, not a causal factor.

Astus wrote:
From one apple seed one apple tree grows, and not another one nor a pear tree or a dolphin. That is, it is a distinct causal continuum. What I do, say and think comes from my mind and leaves impression on my mind. Mixing the continuum would mean that what I think is what you remember, etc.

What causes the stars to reflect a person's karmic seeds? What makes one set of stars more important than others?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 13th, 2013 at 11:52 PM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
Are you saying that there are actual persons?  You do not agree that imagining that there are persons (viz. discrete entities) in the first place is simply delusion?

I haven't said a thing about magical influence.  I have only discussed astrology.

Astus wrote:
There is a distinct stream of causal factors, the series of the aggregates, that can be simply called a person. One continuum cannot be confused by another.

Astrology is the magical influence of constellations on people.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 13th, 2013 at 10:25 PM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Astus wrote:
My response is based on another of your replies here where you explain your original point regarding the illusoriness of a person.

Karma Dorje said:
Neither is a person. Neither is a cause nor a condition. In fact, no tangible "thing" can be found at all. Treating persons as if they are anything more than a designation and that there is some sort of fixed line between them is incoherent. I agree with your points that a being will experience the results of the causes they have accumulated. However, those causes require particular secondary conditions to manifest, and it is to these conditions that dedication of merit and the four magical activities are directed.

Astus wrote:
Saying that there are no actual persons and then equating it with magical influence to me does not add up, unless you deny causality and say that anything works.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 13th, 2013 at 5:32 PM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
No, I just find it ironic that astrology gets questioned as fictitious in the same thread where the wholly fictitious entity called "an individual person" is used as some sort of substantial basis.

Astus wrote:
Dependent origination is how the world works. To say that emptiness equals nothingness, that is, the disappearance of everything, is an annihilationist approach. Interdependence is emptiness and there is no emptiness outside of phenomena. A person is a mistaken idea as long as one doesn't understand that it is actually the functioning of the five aggregates, and the aggregates are mistaken as long as they are viewed as independent entities. The law of causality is dependent origination and it is the clear proof that all appearances are without an inherent nature. To say that there is no causality either as the function of things is to say that by eliminating all appearances one gains liberation, and not by realisation of emptiness.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 13th, 2013 at 8:03 AM
Title: Re: American "Zen"
Content:
Astus wrote:
First of all, in the West Zen has its strongest basis in America. There are so many good translations, studies and teachings already and more coming. To give my personal favourites: http://beingwithoutself.org/jeff/, http://www.wwzc.org/book/ven-anzan-hoshin-roshi and http://sanshinji.org/teachers/ (who is Japanese but has a community in Indiana and speaks English).


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 13th, 2013 at 7:54 AM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
So is there a "self" or isn't there?  What exactly constitutes the boundary between persons?

Astus wrote:
The whole merit transference topic came in to show that it is not magical thinking. Getting into another subject on the nature of continuum could be dealt with in another topic if you want to pursue it. I promise I answer there.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 13th, 2013 at 6:52 AM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
PorkChop said:
The link does qualify that saying that transfer of merit is only possible in certain situations; where the deceased is in an unhappy destination and waiting for offerings.

Astus wrote:
And that is because only certain pretas can hang around to know about the offering.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 13th, 2013 at 6:04 AM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Astus wrote:
PorkChop,

First the text clearly defines that transference happens when the receiver knows about it. Then it advises people to do good things that actually make merit. It actually follows what the Milindapanha says ( http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/milinda.pdf, p. 149), the section explained a bit by Dhammanando Bhikkhu http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php?t118.html. This also explains the Tirokudda Kanda Sutta, that offerings can be made to certain hungry spirits, but not just generally to anyone.

"According to the Theravada understanding of the Law of Kamma, we are the makers and heirs of our own kamma. Therefore, there is no question of “sharing/transferring” meritorious kamma to another. The concept of transference of merits contradicts this understanding." ( http://sasanarakkha.org/dhamma/2007/03/merits-can-they-be-transferred.html )


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 13th, 2013 at 5:19 AM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Astus wrote:
How the "transference of merit" happens? To quote from http://www.budsas.org/ebud/whatbudbeliev/307.htm I have already referred to:

"When the beneficiary is aware of the act or wish, then a mutual 'rejoicing in' merit takes place. Here the beneficiary becomes a participant of the original deed by associating himself with the deed done. If the beneficiary identifies himself with both the deed and the doer, he can sometimes acquire even greater merit than the original doer, either because his elation is greater or because his appreciation of the value of the deed is based on his understanding of Dhamma and, hence, more meritorious, Buddhist texts contain several stories of such instances.

The 'joy of transference of merits' can also take place with or without the knowledge of the doer of the meritorious act. All that is necessary is for the beneficiary to feel gladness in his heart when he becomes aware of the good deed. If he wishes, he can express his joy by saying 'sadhu' which means 'well done'. What he is doing is creating a kind of mental or verbal applause. In order to share the good deed done by another, what is important is that there must be actual approval of the deed and joy arising in the beneficiary's heart.

Even if he so desires, the doer of a good deed cannot prevent another's 'rejoicing in the merit' because he has no power over another's thoughts. According to the Buddha, in all actions, thought is what really matters. Transference is primarily an act of the mind."

For more discussion of this see this thread on DWT: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1068

To use a Mahayana explanation, it is practically the same. In Nagarjuna's MMK (17.4-5) there are seven types of action (karma) defined:

Speech and physical action:
Unobservable unrejected actions, and
Unobservable rejected actions;
As well as . . .
Virtuous and nonvirtuous actions
Derived from enjoyment;
As well as intention: All are maintained to be similar.
These seven phenomena are the kinds of action.

The transference of merit, just as explained above in the Theravada teachings, here is called "virtuous and nonvirtuous actions derived from enjoyment" (paribhogānvayaṃ puṇyam apuṇyaṃ ca tathāvidham / 從用生福德 罪生亦如是). Candrakirti explains this type of action (paribhogānvaya):

"So too, there is [karma that has] continuity with use; this means the merit—the virtue—that is continuous with use. ‘Use’ (paribhoga) is the employment (upabhoga) on the part of the Saṅgha and such of an item that has been given away (parityakta). [With that employment this karma has] continuity (anvaya)—in other words, there is a continuation (anugama) arisen in the continuum (santāna) of the giver, [and that continuation] is an accumulating of virtue. And [there is] the non-merit of that type—i.e., that has continuity with use. An example is the construction of a temple where beings are killed. From the use of that temple in such ways that beings are killed there, there arises in the continuum of those who built it the non-merit continuous with use. In this way, there is also nonmerit of that kind."

Why is it that it is impossible to transfer merit (or demerit) to another being without the other's knowing? Because that would mean that karma arises without intention, that one person's karma bears fruit for another individual, and that is contrary to the law of cause and effect in Buddhism. The continuum or series (samtana, defined in the Abhidharmasamuccaya (p. 69, and the Kosa on p. 1353) as "the momentary continuation of the aggregates, elements and spheres at each moment") of each person could take over another being, making the entire system of karma and the path to liberation chaotic and meaningless.

And it is because of the system of action and results that if constellations could define the events of one's life then good and bad things would not be the fruits of previous deeds, unless we can somehow establish that the stars and planets reflect one's karmic seeds.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 13th, 2013 at 1:33 AM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Huseng said:
Like I said, I met one PhD who studied the effect of celestial phenomena on organisms to demonstrate that what goes on in the skies has an effect on beings down below, and demonstratively so. He didn't get so far in academia with such ideas by the sounds of it.

Really? When you dedicate merit you're hoping your karma ripens in a way that directly benefits other beings. That's magical thinking (I'm not saying that as pejoratively because magic is essentially creating a willed change in consciousness which sets patterns in motion to some desired end).

Astus wrote:
One PhD student, that's not exactly the same as actual research, is it?

Have you checked in the scriptures how dedication of merit works? The one explanation I remember from Theravada sources (e.g. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/whatbudbeliev/307.htm ) is that the person one dedicates the merit to must know about it in order for to be transferred. And the reason for wishing all beings good is simply a personal practice and has no actual effect on others. If one could simply wish the merit to be transferred without the other's knowledge it'd result in the problem that buddhas could make all beings enlightened or at least free from ordinary suffering in no time.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 13th, 2013 at 12:49 AM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Huseng said:
Nobody ever actually proved that. A bunch of scientists signed some paper which said they denounced it as unscientific without any experimentation or evidence to prove it as irrational pseudoscience. It just doesn't jive with their theoretical framework, so they chucked it.

Astus wrote:
You can see for yourself some resources refuting astrology in the footnotes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology#Scientific_appraisal

By the way, when was there any proof of the relationship between planets and personality traits and everyday events? What kind of energy influences humans? How is it measured or perceived? etc.

Huseng said:
I don't think you can really escape the fact that Buddhism has a lot of magical thinking (in the sense of affecting reality by way of one's thoughts primarily), but at the same time there is what we would call a rational approach to certain things (like logic). Even the basic practices like merit dedication are essentially magic.

Astus wrote:
Sure, there are some magical aspects. The meaning of merit dedication, however, is not necessarily anything magical, as it's simply about relinquishing one's attachment to positive results and also sharing the joy of one's achievements. No magic in that.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 12th, 2013 at 11:50 PM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Karma Dorje,

It's not just that. Astrology is considered pseudo-science, because it wants to look like a rational system but it is not. There are many other areas of Buddhism that are clearly at odds with the modern world view, especially in areas that natural science covers (cosmology, elements, laws of physics, etc.) Since the greatest appeal of Buddhism in the West is its use of reasoning instead of relying on pure faith propagating astrology is against that. On the other hand, for those who are fine with supernatural things might be attracted to use Buddhist astrology, like other fortune telling systems.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 12th, 2013 at 7:09 PM
Title: Re: Does astrology matter to you?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Since astrology has its own tradition in the Western culture it'd be difficult to show how a Buddhist version is in any way more sensible.

"Career interests are advanced through clear, logical thinking and the sound application of good business sense. Financial interests look especially promising now, Virgo, so seize any opportunities for advancement that come your way. Working with others is likely to prove profitable, and could bring you closer to them, too. Roll up your sleeves and go to it. The results could surprise you." ( http://my.horoscope.com/astrology/free-daily-horoscope-virgo.html )


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 11th, 2013 at 8:40 PM
Title: Re: Ratnasambhava Buddha and pureland
Content:
Astus wrote:
The general method for meditation on any buddha is practically identical. You can do visualisation, you can recite his name, you may also find some mantras, you can contemplate his and his lands virtues, and of course have the wish to be born in his presence and his land.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 10th, 2013 at 6:59 AM
Title: Re: How is Mahayana Buddhism faring in Viet Nam nowadays?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Just because a country's government is dictatorial it doesn't mean that people can't practise their religion at all, it's just that it is under a certain amount of control. Even in North Korea there is a sort of Buddhist union organising things, South Asian Buddhist countries are also mostly dictatorships, etc. Buddhism lived fine under all sorts of kings and emperors. Democracy is a very new thing even in Western countries while religions can be thousands of years old.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 9th, 2013 at 1:22 AM
Title: Re: Process Philosophy and Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
At college I studied some Process Philosophy and Process Theology. But it couldn't come alive for me, unlike Buddhism, so it just remained philosophy (i.e. "words talking about words"). But it doesn't mean that it can't work for others, since I know the teacher really loved it. Stoic and Cynic philosophy are different for me.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 9th, 2013 at 12:55 AM
Title: Re: Thich Thanh Tu
Content:
Astus wrote:
I can't really tell, but it seems there are Western disciples if you look at their websites, the different community locations and the photos where you can see white lay people.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 8th, 2013 at 1:05 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist themed products
Content:
Astus wrote:
I think I'd change my mug to another that has Guan Yin on it.

And T-shirts with bodhisattvas and such are also cool.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 7th, 2013 at 6:51 PM
Title: Re: Lack of good translations of many Mahayana Sutras in Eng
Content:
Astus wrote:
I doubt that it's possible to give a clear definition of what makes a translation good. I've heard that there are better works than Kumarajiva's, however, since his have the prestige and sounds good in Chinese other translations are not used that often. It is the natural selection of translations. Which means that it's better to have more than less, and what is good for one can be bad for another. For a translation to become the definitive version requires either central force (like in Tibet and Theravada countries), or just trends that can change in different eras (like in East Asia).


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 7th, 2013 at 6:32 PM
Title: Re: Precepts in China and Japan
Content:
Astus wrote:
How does this discussion of gender roles have a relevance to following the Vinaya or other sets of precepts? The OBC follows the Japanese version of bodhisattva precepts, or a combination of different regulations. This is one thing. In Buddhism being a bhikshu/ni is defined by the Vinaya, that is another thing. Since the OBC does not follow the Vinaya calling their clergy bhikshu/nis is incorrect from the Vinaya perspective. From a different perspective than the Vinaya it is a different matter. But since the Vinaya is one of the three baskets it is regarded as the definitive source of monastic regulations by the majority of Buddhists. As we all know, Japan is the one main exception where the Vinaya ordination has long disappeared. OBC, following the Japanese practice, don't have Vinaya ordination either. Arguing that a non-Vinaya system is better than the Vinaya system is again a different subject. However, expecting those who regard the Vinaya as the definitive source of monastic regulations to agree calling non-Vinaya ordained people bhikshu/nis is unrealistic.

Anyway, why the need to be called a bhikshu/ni when it is acceptable to abandon the Vinaya system?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 6th, 2013 at 5:48 PM
Title: Re: Precepts in China and Japan
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sara,

I don't see the connection between the legal equality of sexes and the practice of a monastic order. Yesterday the House of Commons approved same-sex marriage in England and Wales, but it does not force any religious organisation to perform such a ceremony. Why? Because there is freedom of religion. Also, legal equality of the sexes does not force religious organisations to accept women into their clergy. So in actual practice I don't see why you connect secular legal concepts to religious institutions. Bringing up contraceptive methods as relevant to a celibate order is another strange thing. And if by birth control you also mean abortion, that is clearly against the precept of not taking life.

The Vinaya has proven its validity in several different cultures over a long time. What makes it dysfunctional today? It is still practised by humans just like before. How does the material wealth of a country change the daily life of a mendicant group that upholds poverty as a defining practice? Just as before, people still have sexual desires, and many rules in the Vinaya are meant to help avoid improper actions or being accused of such. How is that a bad thing?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 6th, 2013 at 3:57 AM
Title: Re: Shopping for a tradition
Content:
Astus wrote:
I don't see anything new about this "shopping for a tradition" except that it is compared to consumerism. True, poor farmers had little chance to spend time off the field pursuing spiritual goals, and those who did had to become monks. On the other hand, the nobility and the literati had enough freedom to pick and choose as they liked. In the imperial courts all sorts of religions were present and all of them were vying for support from the ruling class and especially the emperor. The development of the Zen school is closely connected to political powers from the very beginning, from the initial strengthening of Shenxiu's so called "Northern School", through Shenhui gaining support for his "Southern School", the rising of Mazu's "Hongzhou School" because of the newly gained freedom of local lords, and so on. Monasteries require the support of the wealthy and powerful. The more support you get the bigger the monastery becomes, plus all the benefits that comes with it. Lose that support and you can lose everything in no time. It was always in the interest of Buddhism, just as any organised religion, to gain legitimacy and financial aid from the lords of the land. To give a European example, the survival of Christianity and its becoming the dominant religion depended first on the Roman emperors and then the kings, and when later Luther got the support of Frederick III of Saxony he managed for the first time to secure the survival of a heretic sect (although others have tried before). So, it is not just that people are shopping for a tradition, but every religion must sell themselves.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 5th, 2013 at 6:18 PM
Title: Re: The significance of empowerments
Content:
Astus wrote:
To me it seems that the empowerments are teachings compressed into visual and verbal symbols in order to give an impression on the level of imagination, something that one can use for the practice once the meaning is known. It is somewhat like the short verses attached to longer teachings as memory aids, however, empowerment also has the elements of ritual giving emotional assurance that the practitioner can achieve high realisations and sets up a bond between teacher and disciple.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 5th, 2013 at 1:09 AM
Title: Re: Rhetoric of a Marginalized Yāna
Content:
pueraeternus said:
I always wondered if the sudden enlightenment and full enlightenment in one life paradigm is just a mirror of Sravakayana soteriology. From an exceeding difficult path that only mahasattvas can brave through for eons upon eons, we now have fast-track programs that promise liberation in 1 to a dozen or so lifetimes. Reminds me so much of good old boring stream-entry.

Astus wrote:
Another interesting thing about the sudden enlightenment in this life idea is how it dismisses and belittles the gradualist bodhisattva path. I'd say that the long-term bodhisattva teaching was not a very successful one in the end.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 4th, 2013 at 11:21 PM
Title: Re: Rhetoric of a Marginalized Yāna
Content:
Jnana said:
What I'm interested in exploring is how and why these strident criticisms developed. And also, if this kind of rhetoric is sustainable or even acceptable in the modern, pluralistic Buddhist world.

Astus wrote:
I can't say much about the origins, but regarding the second part we just have to look at what Mahayana have become. They maintain (most of them) the monastic rules, they promise liberation in this life (Zen, Tantra, etc.) or the next (Pure Land), and the laity is busy with devotional and merit making activities. Sectarian arguments against ancient Indian schools are rarely used, and only to point to some errors on the path. However, arguments come back are among Western Buddhists (like on this forum) where people get busy denigrating everything else but their own tradition.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 4th, 2013 at 7:11 PM
Title: Re: Rhetoric of a Marginalized Yāna
Content:
Astus wrote:
I think there are different stages. In "Nagarjuna in Context" (p.23) it says that the earliest known sutras (translated by Lokaksema) rarely refer to mahayana, hinayana and bodhisattvayana, it is more about doctrinal-practical differences rather than sectarian.

I can't remember where I read this, but the MMK seems to try to be an argument for general acceptance by all Buddhists and does not quote Mahayana sources or the bodhisattva idea. In terms of karma it strangely accepts certain abhidharmic ideas (MMK 17.14).


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 4th, 2013 at 3:31 AM
Title: Re: Advice
Content:
Astus wrote:
There is only one type of inferior tradition in Buddhism and that is what another tradition imagines to be so. Buddhism per definition is the path to liberation, no matter what tradition. Shingon (and Tendai, another Japanese school that maintains an esoteric tradition) are different from Tibetan Vajrayana in several ways, especially because it is East Asian Mahayana and therefore contains teachings unique to that cultural-religious sphere.

It is an important doctrine of Shingon that one can attain buddhahood in this body ( http://www.shingon.org/teachings/ShingonMikkyo/sokushin.html ), and you can also read Kukai's short work on it, the http://www12.canvas.ne.jp/horai/sokushingi.htm. (As a cultural footnote (not to be confused with Kukai's teaching) look at what https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokushinbutsu means.) So, as I said, it is only from the biased interpretation of another tradition that a school is inferior.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 4th, 2013 at 12:03 AM
Title: Re: Precepts in China and Japan
Content:
Astus wrote:
In Jiang Wu's "Enlightenment in Dispute" there is a brief discussion of the situation of ordination in Ming times. Since the 14th century it's been under control by the central government, restricting full ordination to 40 by county and 20 by town. In the early 16th century the ordination platforms in Beijing and Nanjing were closed by imperial decree, then at the beginning of the 17th century the triple ordination was started and spread by the new Chan movement, and only in the mid-18th century was the government control over ordination removed. It gives the example of the famous Chan master Hanyue Fazang who had been a member of the monastic community since he was a child, but because of the ban on ordination he got the complete precepts only at the age of 37.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 3rd, 2013 at 11:31 PM
Title: Re: chan/seon/rinzai/soto differences
Content:
Astus wrote:
Discussion regarding the differences in ordination and precepts: http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=11532


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 3rd, 2013 at 7:31 PM
Title: Re: Advice
Content:
Astus wrote:
If you consider Tantra your primary interest you can find Tibetan Vajrayana sources plenty in English. Shingon is a different matter and to pursue it you would soon find the need to learn Japanese because of the lack or English resources, not to mention ordination in Japan. Learning to read the canonical works is the next level. But it's not impossible, there is at least one Westerner who went through with it and he is a Shingon master living in Japan. Tibetan Buddhism is a lot easier path. In terms of ordination, however, if you were serious about becoming a monk, the easiest way is going for Theravada, second best is Taiwan and Korea.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 3rd, 2013 at 7:15 PM
Title: Precepts in China and Japan
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sara,

What I meant is that in Japan the full Vinaya ordination does not exist among indigenous Buddhist schools. It is another thing that married clergy is a common practice, but Zen traditions also have training monasteries where celibacy is upheld. However, celibacy (brahmacarya) in itself doesn't make one a monk in Buddhism, ordination (upasampada) does. And that's what I meant.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 3rd, 2013 at 4:21 AM
Title: Re: Can you Renew Precepts on your own in Zen / Chan Buddhis
Content:
Astus wrote:
What precepts do you mean? Lay precepts are for life, bodhisattva precepts are until buddhahood, monastic precepts are for life. What you can give back are the monastic (Vinaya) precepts, but to be re-ordained it takes the community to approve it. Otherwise you don't lose the other vows. You can do repentance on your own of course, and remind yourself of the vows you took.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 2nd, 2013 at 9:41 PM
Title: Re: Definitive versus Interpretable Sutras across Mahayana
Content:
zangskar said:
Buddhistdoor's Buddhism in a nutshell is here: http://wfcs.buddhistdoor.com/OldWeb/bdoor/archive/nutshell/index.htm
Best wishes, Lars

Astus wrote:
Big thanks to you!

Here's the link to the Tiantai panjiao system: http://wfcs.buddhistdoor.com/OldWeb/bdoor/archive/nutshell/teach70.htm.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 2nd, 2013 at 9:40 PM
Title: Re: Lack of good translations of many Mahayana Sutras in Eng
Content:
Astus wrote:
What you mean is how to produce high quality translations that contain the necessary references and such to make understanding easier. I assume that those who can read any canonical language also have at least a basic knowledge of their contents, so the translations made are acceptable. As an example, Blofeld studied Buddhist Chinese for decades before he published The Zen Teaching of Huang Po, and still Wright could write a book about how much it shows the influence of non-Buddhist ideas, i.e. Blofeld's own cultural background. So, is it a good or a bad translation? If all translators had to do as much study as Blofeld we could be quite short on Buddhist books in English. And just as Blofeld's work, there must be first something to make people interested. Like the Bible, classical works have to be re-translated regularly anyway to make them up to date with the current language, lest they sink into obscurity. I'm not against quality in translation, what I'm saying is that quantity has its benefits too. Also, while scholars can make a wonderful job, it relies mostly on Buddhists to spread their religion.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 2nd, 2013 at 8:08 PM
Title: Re: Lack of good translations of many Mahayana Sutras in Eng
Content:
JKhedrup said:
While the most favoured Sutras have been translated already, as you mentioned, I can't help but thinking it would be a tremendous resource to have the complete Mahayana Canon available in English.

Perhaps once translated Sutras seen as obscure long ago will have a new relevance in the modern period.

Astus wrote:
I think it's simply a matter of people who know the canonical language taking the initiative and publishing translations online. http://www.sutrasmantras.info/intro.html is a good example. I like what D. T. Suzuki wrote in his preface to the Lankavatara Sutra:

"As regards the English translation of the Sutra, I have decided after much hesitation to send it out to the public with all its many imperfections. It is a bold attempt on the part of the translator to try to render some of the deepest thoughts that have been nourished in the East into a language to which he was not born. But his idea is that if somebody did not make a first attempt, however poor and defective, the precious stones may remain buried unknown except to a few scholars, and this perhaps longer than necessary. And then things develop. As it is illustrated in the long history of the Chinese translations of the Buddhist texts, there must be several attempts before the work assumes something of finality."


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 2nd, 2013 at 8:02 PM
Title: Re: Definitive versus Interpretable Sutras across Mahayana
Content:
JKhedrup said:
Who was the main formulator of the Tian Tai system,and where can I read about him in English?

Astus wrote:
He was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhiyi. There isn't much you can read in English unfortunately, and the "Buddhism in a Nutshell" series on BuddhistDoor.com has been removed and I can't find any copy of it (it had a nice intro to all Chinese schools). Wikipedia has a few words on the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiantai#Classification_of_teachings.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 2nd, 2013 at 7:45 PM
Title: Re: Lack of good translations of many Mahayana Sutras in Eng
Content:
Astus wrote:
It seems to be that while Tibetan Buddhism followers tend to focus on shastras in translation, from Chinese most of the important Mahayana sutras have been translated already. For instance, all the sutras used in Korean novice training are available in English, although not the commentaries. There are individual translators who make most of the work, like Thomas Cleary, and there are a few groups like the Bukkyo Dendo Kyokai and the Buddhist Text Translation Society publishing different scriptures.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 2nd, 2013 at 7:35 PM
Title: Re: List your favourite top 3 Mahayana Sutras
Content:
JKhedrup said:
LOL If we're ever going to propose a Mahayana Sutra translation project to sponsors we need to figure out people's favourites, right?

Astus wrote:
Since people here can read English but only very few knows canonical languages there is a big chance that all the favourite sutras are already translated, perhaps even more than once. So, instead of favourites, those that are not yet translated but are still considered important by the majority of the traditions should be published in English. Of course there are some sutras that could use a new translation (e.g. Lankavatara and the bigger Prajnaparamita Sutras).


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 2nd, 2013 at 7:27 PM
Title: Re: Definitive versus Interpretable Sutras across Mahayana
Content:
Astus wrote:
In Chan there is no categorisation of definitive and interpretable sutras, however, there are a couple of scriptures that are used to represent the common view of Mahayana according to their position. Although Tiantai claims the Lotus and the Nirvana Sutras as the final teachings of the Buddha, I've seen no problem using other texts in explaining their doctrines. Huayan focuses on the Avatamsaka Sutra naturally as the primary source of their teachings, while Pure Land has the three main sutras and portions of other scriptures.

So, if we use the definitive-interpretable categories, it is simply a question whether a scripture expresses explicitly what a given tradition holds as its doctrine or not. And if not then the exegete has to work until it does. As an example, in Chan it was first https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuquan_Shenxiu who explained every sutra in a way to teach Chan, i.e. seeing the nature of mind. It is a feature of Chan that has been followed ever since.

On the other hand, in Japanese Pure Land Honen simply put aside all other sutras not directly relevant to birth in Amita Buddha's world without rejecting their content, but rendering them useless for anyone following the Pure Land path.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 2nd, 2013 at 7:09 PM
Title: Re: List your favourite top 3 Mahayana Sutras
Content:
Astus wrote:
Complete Enlightenment Sutra

Vimalakirti Sutra

Diamond Sutra

(are you making statistics?)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 2nd, 2013 at 3:57 AM
Title: Re: Have you read portions of the Pali canon?
Content:
Astus wrote:
The Digha, Majjhima and Samyutta Nikaya were among my first Buddhist books in English, and I'm working on obtaining the Anguttara. I haven't read them from beginning to end as I usually read suttas by topic. The Satipatthana Sutta (in "Heart of Buddhist Meditation" by Nyanaponika) was a teaching that helped me in the beginning decide on to further investigate Buddhism. ATI and metta.lk are sites I regularly use for references. Like Greg, I've also made some translations, only in my case to Hungarian.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 1st, 2013 at 2:00 AM
Title: Re: Question about Khenpo Gangshar's vivid awareness
Content:
deepbluehum said:
This might be your personal position or that of Mahayana scholars. But it's not the position of the Drikung Kagyu lineage. Or any Kagyu or Dzogchen lineage for that matter. Awareness of awareness is beyond the mind.

Astus wrote:
Here are a few quotes from you from Dzogchen instructions.

"For a person of best capability, mind is mind when it is still, and it is mind when it moves. Once you are convinced that mind is empty, there is no difference at all between stillness and movement. Whatever thoughts arise, whatever appears, is all the play of pristine wisdom. It is the profound perspective of all victorious ones: emptiness. Without adulterating it in any way, rest within that itself. Although occasionally there are regular thoughts, since they are liberated automatically within that state, it is only meditative absorption (samadhi). It is dharmakaya. It is innately occurring pristine wisdom. It is the Great Seal (mahamudra). It is the perfection of transcendent intelligence (prajnaparamita). It is like a burned rope: it cannot tie you up because it is empty of essence. The thought-like occurrence is actually the shining radiance of emptiness. There is no difference between thought and emptiness. So the Great Orgyen said: Since the essence of thought is empty, know it as dharmakaya." (Za Patrul Rinpoche: The Clear Elucidation of the True Nature - An Esoteric Instruction on the Sublime Approach of Ati)

"When it happens that you do get involved in thoughts that recollect the past or entertain the future, then let be directly in awareness. If a thought pattern continues, there is no need for a separate antidote since whatever takes place is liberated by itself. What occurs spontaneously is the radiance of your own mind. To see it with vivid clarity is the essential instruction!
It is your mind's natural disposition to spontaneously reflect. Consequently, spend your life within this state of carefree and pervasive openness, of undistracted nonmeditation, of knowing one thing that liberates all - in which all that appears and exists is dharmakaya, samsara and nirvana are indivisible, and arising and liberation are simultaneous. If you spend your entire life in spiritual activities within this kind of state, in which the thinker and the object of thought are an undivided unity, there is not a single doubt that you will capture the 'stronghold of nonregression' in this very life." (The Final Words of Tsele Natsok Rangdrö)

"All we have to do now is maintain our awareness. As a thought arises from the state of stillness, if we simply recognize it with that awareness, it will dissolve back into the nature of mind. Thoughts and emotions become like the waves on the ocean, rising and sinking back into its expanse, and we become like the ocean itself, vast, spacious and placid. Nothing remains for us to do apart from maintaining that awareness." (Sogyal RInpoche: Natural Great Peace)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 31st, 2013 at 11:21 PM
Title: Re: Question about Khenpo Gangshar's vivid awareness
Content:
rachmiel said:
Thanks, very clear.

How does awareness of awareness fit into the above? The friend of mine who suggested I try Gangshar's vivid awareness said that this is what Gangshar is talking about: to be aware of awareness itself. Which doesn't negate objects, but doesn't attend to them either. One attends to the awareness that enables these phenomena to arise in the first place.

Astus wrote:
Awareness of awareness is simply being aware of whatever appears without attaching to them. There are numerous similar terms depending on the tradition and the scripture. There is a possible misunderstanding of taking it literally as if there was a singular awareness that can be aware of itself, which is not possible.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 31st, 2013 at 8:53 PM
Title: Re: Question about Khenpo Gangshar's vivid awareness
Content:
rachmiel said:
Apologies for getting a bit analytical. I'm trying to avoid doing something that feels like vivid awareness, but is not. To do this, I need to know if I'm on the right track.

Let's say there are two main types of awareness: awareness of objects (physical and mental) and pure awareness (no objects).

Awareness of objects can be very obvious: I see a tree, name it (tree/maple), and think about that time as a kid when I climbed a maple tree and found a bird nest in it. Or it can be subtler: I see a tree, name it (tree), but I don't go beyond that in interpretation/storytelling. Or it can be even subtler: I see colors and shapes, but don't name them.

Pure awareness is awareness with no objects, no subject/object division. One simply IS awareness.

My question: Which of these types of awareness is vivid awareness? Specifically, is it the subtlest form of awareness of objects, in which one perceives sensations without naming them? Or is it pure awareness, in which there are no objects, just awareness itself?

Thanks!

Astus wrote:
First of all, an awareness without object is a fiction, it is only a theory, a false concept of self. When there is no duality of subject and object it means that one does not reify a self and a thing, and by grasping on one there is always the other, that's why Buddhism is not a monism nor a dualism. The emptiness of self and appearances means that there is no clinging to an inherently existing essence. But, it doesn't negate any ordinary phenomenon, the six faculties work perfectly well, but one knows and sees that all are dependently arisen and without substance. That's why in Dzogchen you don't create any special state, don't make any effort in achieving something, but simply let things come and go without attaching to them any importance. You are aware of everything but don't get stuck by anything. So, if you are wondering about what pure awareness, vivid awareness or anything like that is, just see how the thought appears, stays and goes, but don't try to hold on to it, solve it, respond to it or remove it. Also, look at the preliminaries given by Gangshar on how to analyse appearances, since that can help you clarify some difficult points.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 30th, 2013 at 9:51 PM
Title: Re: chan/seon/rinzai/soto differences
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sara,

I said that Japanese schools don't have full monastic ordination (i.e. according to the Vinaya) and not that there are no monasteries. Does the OBC observe the Dharmagupta Vinaya or another one?

No Caodong school exists in China as an individual organisation, although there is the Caodong lineage, however, that is only nominal and has no influence on daily monastic life.

The Meiji government only removed the punishment for breaking monastic regulations. They didn't force anyone to have families and live like a layman. It was a decision the Buddhist churches made themselves to allow people give up the previous rules. But this is a different subject and off topic.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 29th, 2013 at 4:15 AM
Title: Re: Nuns in Thailand ... cause a stir!
Content:
Astus wrote:
Let there be nuns!


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 9:43 PM
Title: Thich Thanh Tu
Content:
Astus wrote:
Ven. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thich_Thanh_Tu (1924- ) is a modern Vietnamese Zen teacher of the Truc Lam tradition with monasteries in Vietnam, Australia, USA and Canada.



Sources for his teachings and more:

http://www.truclamvietzen.net/Intro.htm
http://dieunhan.net/DN_English.html

An introductory work by him: http://dieunhan.net/EnglishBook%5CKeysToBuddhism.pdf


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 7:45 PM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
greentara said:
Astus, 'Who can't understand anything that happens", I don't wish to labour the point but what I'm trying to say is 'who can't understand anything?' There is no such person.
A 'lunatic' may only understand part of what you say or only have an inkling but to say a person can't understand anything....is very harsh and shuts the door to all communication.

Astus wrote:
As you say, there is no such person because I used it as an example, not as describing or addressing anyone particularly.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 5:06 PM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
Astus wrote:
Thanks for your recommendation.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 4:26 PM
Title: Re: Mandarin and English speaking Buddhists?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Earth Dragon,

I can only congratulate you for the website. Great stuff! I hope you find Mandarin speaking members here who are willing to assist in this great project. You should know, however, that there are already lot of freely available info in Chinese on the web.

JKhedrup,

http://www.unfetteredmind.org/ is surely an interesting teacher.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 4:18 PM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
Astus wrote:
Greentara,

I was talking generally about someone "who can't understand anything that happens", and not about any specific mental illness or such, as it was used only as an example.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 6:47 AM
Title: Re: What if transmission of Buddhism was egalitarian....
Content:
Astus wrote:
Transmission of Buddhism happened through people and texts. Today you might include audio and video recordings. What is being transmitted are the teachings, in one way or another. It is only natural for Buddhism to be egalitarian in receiving people to accept the teaching since it is the very goal of the teachers and texts to be spread far and wide. What might not be (and often isn't) egalitarian is the way religious power are given to certain people, how things are organised in different communities. On the other hand, people are free to create new communities.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 6:36 AM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
oushi said:
"Do nothing" sounds totally missed, as it is just opposite of doing something. "Nothing to do" is correct, as it is open for doing and non-doing.

Astus wrote:
There is "nothing to do" when one has finished with something. When there is nothing to do from the beginning, it means that everything is already fine. Unfortunately, most of us sentient beings are in samsara and it is not fine. So, there is something to do. How does it help in your view if we just tell ourselves that it is OK as it is? What changes? And if nothing changes, well, it is useless, it is not liberating, it is not the Buddha's teaching. Although Nagarjuna says that there is no difference between samsara and nirvana, but he also explains how and why that realisation is actually liberating. Linji too talks about realising that all phenomena are nothing but conceptual creations, illusions, and when one can actually see it that way, then there is nothing left to do. As you have quoted before, Linji sees the differences between practitioners and unties their mental knots accordingly. It's not that he just sits there telling everyone that everything is already perfect and they just shouldn't do anything. You say that "nothing to do" is where doing and not doing something are both possible, where one has the freedom. That is good. Still, how do you achieve that? That's what I'm asking.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 5:19 AM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
oushi said:
That is where his explanations ended, in not clinging to any thesis, any meaning.

Astus wrote:
That's where it's ended, not where it started. To reduce Linji's teachings to "do nothing" or "cling to nothing" is missing the most important message: the way to do it. Madhyamaka presents its own methods. And Chan does too. Although TNH's commentary to the Linjilu is titled "Nothing to Do, Nowhere to Go", it doesn't end with those six words on the cover.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 4:37 AM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
oushi said:
"Good" is "no differentiation" and it's not about wisdom in the sense of knowing. Teaching are always provisional, that is why they can be used freely. Zen teachings are full of paradoxes because language itself is limited, that is why masters often regret they said anything, as they had to use false tool. It is greatly used in Diamond sutra for example. It is because you cannot say anything about non-differentiation, as each and every words comes from differentiation.

Astus wrote:
Paradoxes in a teaching means contradiction, that means illogical, and that is nonsense. I see no use of nonsense teachings. Some teachings may seem contradictory in Buddhism, but only as long as one makes a mistake about their meaning. I find both Zen and the Diamond Sutra perfectly sensible.

Teachings are meant to guide people to liberation, to the ultimate. The way to guide should be understandable and reasonable so that people can comprehend and follow it. Using gibberish or confusing sentences have the contrary effect.

As Nagarjuna (MMK 24:8-10, tr. Samten & Garfield) writes,

"The Buddha’s teaching of the Dharma
Is based on two truths:
A truth of worldly convention,
And an ultimate truth.
Those who do not understand
The distinction between these two truths
Do not understand
The Buddha’s profound teaching.
Without depending on the conventional truth,
The meaning of the ultimate cannot be taught.
Without understanding the meaning of the ultimate,
Nirvana is not achieved."

The Samdhinirmocana Sutra (ch. 2, tr. Keenan) says,

"ultimate meaning is realized internally by each saint, while reasoning is attained in the give and take [of joint discussion] among common worldlings."

and

"the saints, being freed from language through their holy wisdom and insight in this regard, realize the perfect awakening that reality is truly apart from language. It is because they desire to lead others to realize perfect awakening that they provisionally establish names and concepts and call things conditioned or unconditioned."

In the commentary to the chapter by Asanga (Powers, p. 36):

"Moreover, [Buddha] clarifies and opens up [the meaning of the ultimate]. With respect to that, [Buddha] "clarifies"s by way of clarifying well [the meaning of the ultimate] due to presenting designations of doctrines. He "opens up" [the meaning of the ultimate] by way of teaching the meaning."


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 3:30 AM
Title: Re: basic Zen questions
Content:
Astus wrote:
Zen can utilise any meditation technique. Shikantaza is just one of them, while at the same time there are others too. So, if your question is about Shikantaza, then look at the first link by Okamura roshi.

The "mental technique" of Shikantaza is what is called no-thought (wunian/munen) in other Chan texts, the central method of sudden enlightenment since Heze Shenhui (or Huineng in traditional Zen history, see the Platform Sutra), otherwise called prajnaparamita in the sutras. It simply means not attaching to anything but being aware of everything at the same time. Just as Okamura writes, "In zazen we simply allow any thought, feeling or emotion to come up and then we simply let them go away; we actually do nothing." This is not shamatha nor is it vipashyana, if anything it is both at the same time. You don't block anything (shamatha - imperturbable), and you don't drop anything (vipashayana - aware).


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 2:50 AM
Title: Re: basic Zen questions
Content:
Astus wrote:
Many Zen groups provide instructions for newcomers. If they didn't you should just ask, or maybe it's on their website. Otherwise you can read online and in books.

Here is a good one from the Soto teacher Shohaku Okumura: http://antaiji.dogen-zen.de/eng/okumura-zazen.shtml

This is a classic teaching by the great Hanshan Deqing: http://chancenter.org/cmc/2011/10/13/essentials-of-practice-and-enlightenment-for-beginners/

You should also familiarise yourself with Zhiyi's shorter meditation instruction for a more in depth knowledge: http://kalavinka.org/kp_book_pages/ebm_book_page.htm


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 2:20 AM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
oushi said:
Take away meaning and everything is "wonderfully the same", because differentiation must be based on meaning. Without it, there it no way to differentiate.

Astus wrote:
What do you mean by differentiation? A monk, like Linji, has to be able to uphold 250 precepts. That involves a lot of discerning about what to do and what not to do. He also criticises monks who don't have wisdom,

"And then there’re a bunch of shavepates who, not knowing good from bad, point to the east and point to the west, delight in fair weather, delight in rain, and delight in lanterns and pillars." (p. 21, Sasaki)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 28th, 2013 at 12:18 AM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
oushi said:
Are you attached to relieving nature? Hmmm...

People are attached to things they perceive as extraordinary. Meaning give rise to importance, which is proportional to desire, which results in attachment. People are not attached to things they see as meaningless, unimportant and ordinary.

Astus wrote:
I don't know what you mean by "relieving nature".

Primary attachment lies in the five desires: food, sex, sleep, wealth, fame. Everyday things. Only religious Buddhists are infatuated by nirvana, buddhas, etc. (which is of course appropriate for Linji to talk about to monks). So, when Linji says, one should just go on eating and sleeping however one pleases, it is not the same as in the five desires. Although we can say that those are very ordinary things. But, as you said, they are very important to people and they give meaning to their lives. Still, who can live without food and sleep?


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 27th, 2013 at 11:54 PM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
oushi said:
Looks quite contrary to what you said.

Astus wrote:
I said ordinary events, nothing about being ordinary or not ordinary. What does "being ordinary" mean? As you quoted "Just be your ordinary selves with nothing further to seek, relieving nature, wearing robes and eating." Now, where is the difference here between common people and enlightened people doing the same thing? Attachment.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 27th, 2013 at 10:58 PM
Title: Re: What text(s) do you feel make a convincing case for Maha
Content:
Astus wrote:
I think the Vimalakirti Sutra is the best to make a point about what Mahayana is about. It is funny, easygoing, imaginative, philosophically deep and flexible, open to all sorts of inclinations.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 27th, 2013 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
oushi said:
If it is just colours, it's still meaning. But above all, desire to gain something through this act, which is also meaningless. It's not about being dumb, not at all. It's about dropping all, which requires great bravery, because it is not desired at all, to see oneself as meaningless. Ones acts and ideas, as meaningless... Ego will rebel. Still, it is meaningless struggle. "Buddha is an idle person".
Linji said:
But if you can stop your heart(mind) from its ceaseless running after wisps of the will, you will not be different from the Buddha and patriarchs.

Astus wrote:
Are you saying that one should turn into a piece of stone by dropping all? No perception, no acts. Or is it still perceiving and acting but like a lunatic who can't understand anything that happens?

In my opinion Linji simply talks about not making a fuss, not attaching unnecessary sentiments to ordinary events. Life goes on just as before but we have to take it easy, to see clearly because one is without attachment, identification to emotions and ideas. There are thoughts, there are feelings, one can understand perfectly what goes on, but they are all illusory, all momentary appearances in the infinite sequence of causality.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 27th, 2013 at 9:07 AM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
pueraeternus said:
I wonder if we can pinpoint more or less when in Buddhism does the primacy of the guru comes into play? Would that be the early stages of esoteric or vajrayana Buddhism?

Astus wrote:
Chan was never bound to having a teacher overlooking one's progress, although naturally most monks had elders to guide them. The abbot/master is an authority figure but not a guru, since he was the head of the entire monastery. The idea of a lineage - that gives the authority to the master - started in the 8th century when first (at least according to the earliest historical sources) a disciple of Shenxiu claimed primacy among fellow Chan teachers, and then Shenhui's claim to being the true heir and Huineng the real heir of Hongren (instead of Shenxiu).


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 27th, 2013 at 8:48 AM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
oushi said:
Relax, and drop the desire to perceive meaning.

Astus wrote:
I look at the monitor, drop all desire to perceive any meaning, and it is just colours. How does reducing one's mind to that of a butterfly attracted by light help? Sure, it doesn't ask questions. But on the other hand, a butterfly is not very wise either. I doubt Linji had this in mind.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 26th, 2013 at 6:20 PM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
oushi said:
Then draw further conclusions, as "independent Man of the Way lacks nothing at all", practitioner lacks nothing at all. That is a starting point, and you can easily start from here. Just apply it.

Astus wrote:
And that is where I ask you, how to apply? Linji says "kill", but how do you "kill"? If practitioners don't lack anything what is there to do? If there is nothing to do then nothing changes and it all remains just as before: samsara.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 26th, 2013 at 6:12 AM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
Astus wrote:
Let me ask then, taking a simple approach to Linji, what is his teaching in today's practical terms?

"Man of the Way" is simply an expression for "practitioner".


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 26th, 2013 at 4:18 AM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
oushi said:
Not only does Linji stay away from "no self", but most of his message affirms "True man of no status".

Astus wrote:
Well, the expression "true man without rank" (無位眞人) occurs in the Linjilu only in one story and used three times there. And that's it. Hardly a central teaching, although it is true that commentators and exegetes made the expression famous. Statements about how the things are empty appearances and names, however, comes up several times.

"All the dharmas of this world and of the worlds beyond are without self-nature. Also, they are without produced nature. They are just empty names, and these names are also empty." (Record of Linji, p. 19, tr. Sasaki)

And that's why, because appearances are indeed empty, dependently originated and mind made, there's nothing to hold on to, but rather to learn to let go of attachments.

"As for myself, I haven’t a single dharma to give to people. All I can do is to cure illnesses and untie bonds." (p. 22)

oushi said:
Certainly he does not talk to a farmer walking by, nor is his teaching directed only to advanced students.

Astus wrote:
The entire text makes several references to common Buddhist teachings and scriptures, something that a person new to East Asian Mahayana can make little sense of. There is no explanation of ethics, nor meditation methods, nor clarification of how to become free from delusions, or why. Linji himself admits,

"It is not that I understood from the moment I was born of my mother, but that, after exhaustive investigation and grinding practice, in one instant I knew for myself." (p. 22)

Although he talks about direct and sudden enlightenment, just like many other Zen teachers before and after him, he was not without extensive knowledge of Mahayana. Teaching the essential meaning of Buddhism is not difficult for one who realised it personally, but it doesn't mean that the audience can make an immediate step into profound emptiness. Even those who exclusively focus on the Zen teachings under the guidance of a teacher spend years or even decades fully comprehending it. That is clear proof how even the most direct and sudden teaching fails to deliver immediate awakening. Just consider a very basic Buddhist teaching, impermanence. It is seemingly very easy to understand, everybody knows that nothing lasts forever. But a true insight into impermanence is liberation, something that just doesn't happen to everyone hearing about the fact that all things die. And that's why I say that the Linjilu presents an advanced view of Mahayana. I don't mean that it is or should be restricted, no way. But it takes a certain level of familiarity with the Buddhist path to have an actual impact on a practitioner.

The Linjilu, which is not an actual record of verbal teachings but a literary work of the highly developed Chinese Buddhist community from the Song era, was meant for educated Chinese monks and literati. This distance a modern reader has to overcome first. A living teacher can express the Dharma in a way that is fitting for the cultural and linguistic environment of the students. And I'm not saying that Zen requires a teacher to be practised. Zen is, however, only found in the living realisation of the Buddhadharma. That is the difference between dead words and live words. The Linjilu must come alive first to the reader in order to be understood. And this is not a simple obstacle. Nevertheless, as long as one feels the affinity, it is the right path.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 25th, 2013 at 11:53 PM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
Astus wrote:
Training to realise emptiness, then training to integrate that realisation is the path of the bodhisattva. Linji says nothing else but urges people not to get lost in wrong ideas. However, telling people that there is no self and so there is nothing to attach to in itself doesn't help. That's why there are methods and teachings, to explain and to show to all sorts of people what the Dharma is about. Of course, when one talks to advanced students it's a different speech than when talking to beginners. Linji gives advanced teachings, not for beginners.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 25th, 2013 at 8:46 PM
Title: Re: Linjis teachings overlooked
Content:
Astus wrote:
I'm a great fan of the Linjilu, however, it is not a stand-alone teaching and can't be actually used for a complete path. I also don't see any contradiction between the Linjilu and Mahayana.

This is a recommended work: https://books.google.com/books?id=sNhj17-DNNgC


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 24th, 2013 at 8:09 PM
Title: Re: Causal closure & naturalism
Content:
Huseng said:
There indeed is with Dharmakīrti, though in the general Buddhist context when not dealing with materialists, it seems such a dichotomy is less of an issue. The idea of wheat seeds producing wheat and not oats as an analogy for mental causes causing mind rather than physical causes isn't so much about a mind-body dichotomy, but just identifying homogenous causes and effects.

Astus wrote:
A common reasoning in Buddhism is that thoughts don't come from matter because the cause of a thought must be a previous thought. The difference between Buddhism and dualist views is that Buddhism considers all things phenomenological and not separate substances.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 24th, 2013 at 8:08 AM
Title: Re: Question about Khenpo Gangshar's vivid awareness
Content:
deepbluehum said:
No one taught shamatha in Kagyu. The entrance into the mahamudra is aspiration and action bodhichitta. Pure Mahayana dharma. Leave Hinayana aside.

Astus wrote:
Check Jewel Ornament of Liberation, chapter 16: The Perfection of Meditative Concentration. Gampopa gives you ample reasons to practise shamatha. It is "Pure Kagyü Dharma".


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 23rd, 2013 at 5:52 PM
Title: Re: Question about Khenpo Gangshar's vivid awareness
Content:
Astus wrote:
As Jinzang advised, it's all about being aware instead of getting lost in thoughts and emotions. Vivid awareness is nothing more than that, so don't try to find any state or feeling that you consider "vivid awareness". Anchoring your attention to a simple object like breath or mantra makes easier to see when you are aware of what is going on and when your are lost in daydreaming. That's why generally the sequence of training is first samatha, then vipasyana, and finally resting (sometimes called the union of samatha and vipasyana).


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 23rd, 2013 at 12:24 AM
Title: Re: Question about Khenpo Gangshar's vivid awareness
Content:
rachmiel said:
I'm not so much focusing on these "snapshots," more just taking note of them as they flash by, then dropping each when the next appears. At least that's what it feels like ...

So is Gangshar instructing us not to even take note of the impressions that arise, as one does in Vipassana?

Astus wrote:
Correct. Noting things that appear is not relaxing, it's not natural. If you want to follow that style of Vipassana, it's fine, but that's a different path. Here what matters is that you don't fabricate anything. A thought, an emotion or a sense-impression appears, but you leave it alone. Don't hang on to it by generating further thoughts, etc., and don't repress it by trying to stop its presence. The vividness of awareness comes from not creating any reference point, you just take in the vista of appearances just as they are.

You might want to make use of a more detailed instruction, like this one: http://www.chagchen.com/


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 22nd, 2013 at 11:59 PM
Title: Re: Question about Khenpo Gangshar's vivid awareness
Content:
Astus wrote:
Look at what Gangshar says,

"At that time, there is no though of, "Sights and sounds are out there!" Everything appears without obstruction. There is also no thought of, "The perceiver, the six types of consciousness, is within!" Clear and nonconceptual naked awareness is unceasing. ... When you rest your mind in unfabricated naturalness, no matter what thought may arise, good or evil, happy or sad, the mind-essence which is free from concerns about joy or sorrow is clear and empty, naked and awake."

It's not about focusing on something, it is relaxing, i.e. not grasping at whatever appears. It is called being in the present because you are naturally with whatever occurs without obstructing or upholding, taking or rejecting anything.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 22nd, 2013 at 6:18 AM
Title: Re: We can, we cannot, we may, we may not.... arghhh!
Content:
Astus wrote:
I find that the worst type of discussions are about posturing. Either in the form of promoting yourself or promoting your teacher/tradition. They generate either pointless debates or ridicule. Asking for advice on your practice is risky but still OK, just be prepared for a wide range of opinions. Discussing Buddhist teachings for the sake of clarification or debate is fine as long as it doesn't degrade into personal attacks. And the important things to always keep in mind here are to remain calm, be kind, be clear and never make it or view it as personal.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 21st, 2013 at 8:57 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
Apparently you didnt read the top of the page(32) before you commented.

The very qoute I posted states to give up the 5 skandhas

Even gives an analogy of burning then and not caring cause they are not our self.

You do know the 5 skandhas themselves are produced from ignorance dont you?(do you need the sutra?)

Do you even know what Zhentong teaches?I think the true mistake is trying change The Buddha Nature sutras and Zhentong into something they are not.

Astus wrote:
It says that skandhas are neither I nor mine, that's what is to be given up, namely identification. Eliminating, destroying the skandhas would mean destroying your body and your mind, complete annihilation of all living functions. Apparently both the Buddha and his disciples were alive and well after their enlightenment, and they didn't lack their body or their mind.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 21st, 2013 at 8:06 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
So are you saying the Buddha was clinging to the skandhas when he told us to "give them up"?

Astus wrote:
The Buddha taught to give up attachment, give up desire, anger and ignorance. Those are the causes of suffering. The skandhas are not, that's why there is nothing to give up about them. What sane person would want to give up their hearing, rationality, etc.? This misunderstanding that the skandhas must be eliminated makes people think there must be a superego, a higher self and a heavenly nirvana. This mistake has nothing to do with shentong, yogacara or buddha-nature, but simply not comprehending the basics, the very essentials of Buddhism.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 21st, 2013 at 5:56 PM
Title: Re: So many schools
Content:
Astus wrote:
If you have trouble with faith in buddhas and bodhisattvas then Theravada is an easier choice here. You don't have to aim for becoming a monastic in the next life, rather you should work for attaining stream-entry, the first level of a noble disciple who is stable on the path to nirvana. As a stream-entrant one will never again be born in the lower realms and reaches liberation within 7 lives either as a human or as a god.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 20th, 2013 at 9:44 PM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
Matt J said:
This is a lower, provisional teaching for beginners.  And Brahman is not the creator--- Brahman is one without a second--- what is there to create?  Advaita also teaches Ajati Vada, depending on the context.

Astus wrote:
Where is the Illusion from then, if not from Brahman?


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 20th, 2013 at 7:42 AM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
songhill said:
It is much easier for us if you would provide the Sanskrit for your term "ultimate ground" and also the Sanskrit for "creator source." In addition, I don't think you should link ultimate ground & creator source. There can be absolute monism sans a supreme creator god. I refer you to the excellent work The Kunjed Gyalpo otherwise available on Amazon as The Supreme Source: The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde which has been translated into English by Andrew Lukianowicz.

Astus wrote:
Brahman is taught to be a creator, the source of all, in Advaita. Such an idea is rejected in Buddhism. I'm not the one claiming that Buddhism agrees with Advaita. Any kind of monism is also rejected, whether it is a material or spiritual substance.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 19th, 2013 at 8:06 AM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
Yes ultimate/true/real/ existance is taught in the third turning Buddha Nature sutras,so this view is upheld by the Sutras.this view is upheld by Zhentong practitioners
And Buddhists all across Taiwan and China.look on the Yogacara vs Dzoghen thread on this forum,you will see a Yogacara practioner from Taiwan upholding this view.

Any tradition that upholds the Third Turning as definite upholds this teaching in their traditions.

Astus wrote:
Can you show me a living Buddhist tradition where the view of an ultimate ground, a creator source is taught? It is neither Yogacara nor Zhentong.

Here it is from the Cheng weishi lun by Xuanzang, the primary work of East Asian Yogacara, refuting such erroneous views:

According to one doctrine, there is a great, self - existent deity whose substance is real and who is all- pervading, eternal, and the producer of all dharmas. This doctrine is unreasonable. If something produces something, it is not eternal, the noneternal is not all - pervading, and what is not all- pervading is not real. If the deity's substance is all- pervading and eternal, it must contain all powers and be able to produce all dharmas everywhere, at all times, and simultaneously. If he produces dharmas when a desire arises, or according to conditions, this contradicts the doctrine of a single cause. Or else, desires and conditions would arise spontaneously, since the cause [i.e., the deity] is eternal.
Other doctrines claim that there is a great Brahma, a Time, a Space, a Starting Point, a Nature, an Ether, a Self, etc., that is eternal and really exists, is endowed with all powers, and is able to produce all dharmas. We refute all these in the same way we did the concept of a Great Lord.
(Three Texts on Consciousness Only, p. 20-21)

And from the Mahayanasutralamkara (ch. 6, v. 2, 4) by Maitreya, a cardinal work in Yogacara and Zhentong:

The self-notion itself does not have the identity of a self, nor
does the (selfish being's) deforming habit; their natures are different.
Apart from these two there is no other (self), so it arises only
as an error; liberation is therefore the termination of a mere error.

How is it that beings, directly aware of the relativistic origin of
things, still resort to some other creator? What kind of darkness is
this through which the existent goes unseen and the nonexistent is
observed?
(The Universal Vehicle Discourse Literature, p. 50)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 19th, 2013 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
Jainarayan said:
Yes, I know that's the prevailing belief. If I'm not mistaken however, and I could be, there are schools of Buddhism that are either silent on it or do not reject the idea of a "ground of all existence" as Brahman is called

Astus wrote:
There is no such ultimate root of existence in the Buddha's teachings. See this sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.058.than.html. Do you know of any Buddhist tradition that teaches an ultimate "ground of existence"?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 19th, 2013 at 12:11 AM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
songhill said:
I would recommend that you take at look at the Sautrantikas.  They generally believed in the negative character of nirvana (it is the one Sankara criticizes according to Pande). In other words, nothing essentially survives — it is abhâva all the way down. As you probably know Buddhaghosa was no fan-boy of the Sautrantikas. He attacked them without mercy. For Buddhaghosa nirvana was positive, it brought peace of mind (santi), it was imperishable (accuti), and brought solace (assâswkarana). The list goes on of positives. One argument Buddhaghosa posed to the Sautrantikas that if the existence of nirvana is denied, the various Buddhist practices become fruitless. My own opinion of the Sautrantikas is they are nihilists.

Astus wrote:
Nagarjuna explains clearly that such interpretations of Nirvana are mistaken, illogical, unreasonable and doesn't agree with the Buddha's teachings: http://www.fodian.net/world/1564.htm#Investigation%20of%20Nirvana. See also: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.085.than.html, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.044.than.html#beyond and http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.174.than.html.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 18th, 2013 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
Jainarayan said:
At a very basic and simplistic level, Advaita says nothing exists of itself. Everything depends on Brahman, created by Brahman. What we see is the effect and result of māyā. Under the veil of māyā everything is interdependent and keeps us from seeing that Brahman is hidden. If Brahman does not create, nothing exists. We are Brahman: aham brahmasmi: "I am Brahman". To realize that is to attain enlightenment and moksha (not an easy thing). A tree does not exist, it is ultimately dependent on Brahman (via the earth, the soil, the water, the sun), so the tree is empty. Thich Nhat Hahn says that without a cloud paper does not exist; without the cloud the paper is empty.  Why does Brahman create?  It's fun, it's the recreation of Brahman.  Shankara says it is Brahman's nature to create, just as it is man's nature to breathe.

Astus wrote:
The idea of a creator god is refuted in Buddhism under the reasoning used in Madhyamaka against "production from other". There are problems with a creator god like "Who created the creator?", and "If the creator is eternal the creation must go on eternally", and "If creator and created are different how could one come from the other?", etc.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 18th, 2013 at 4:07 PM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
songhill said:
Putting nirvana under the category of dependently originated thingees [sic] is not something the Buddha taught.

Astus wrote:
True, because nirvana is not a permanent or impermanent thingee but the end of suffering, just as when a fire is extinguished we can't say that non-fire is some new thing, it's just the end of burning. If there were a new thing coming out of the end of suffering or appearing because of the elimination of ignorance it would be a dependently originated phenomenon.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 18th, 2013 at 6:58 AM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
So everything is without substance it is empty and dependently originated.

Is Enlightenment empty without substance and dependently originated?

(that is your definition of empty everything that is dependently originated correct?)

Astus wrote:
Indeed, as Greg said. Just look at the four noble truths. The first two tells about samsara and its cause, the second two about nirvana and its cause. Very simple.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 18th, 2013 at 6:56 AM
Title: Re: Akanistha
Content:
Astus wrote:
I have looked a bit around, but besides that the Akanistha is the place for non-returners, some general books on Buddhism indicate that regarding Maitreya there were different views about his place of eventual enlightenment, however, they don't give the sources. Also, the Avatamsaka Sutra follows the general pattern of descending from Tusita and does not involve the Akanistha as a place of enlightenment.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 17th, 2013 at 11:01 PM
Title: Re: Akanistha
Content:
Astus wrote:
In the Avatamsaka Sutra the Buddha's enlightenment happens in different places simultaneously. This is not the answer to the question, but maybe some useful information.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 17th, 2013 at 10:53 PM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
Astus wrote:
lowlydog,

Consciousness is momentary. "But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another." (SN 12.61). Also, there are six consciousnesses and not just one, and those six are not single units either, as there are innumerable moments of consciousness going on a day, plus the sixth consciousness is the four aggregates.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 17th, 2013 at 3:55 AM
Title: Re: chan/seon/rinzai/soto differences
Content:
Astus wrote:
What makes them different first of all is that Chan is Chinese, Seon is Korean, while Rinzai and Soto are Japanese. This affects their history, their style, their language. In terms of doctrines all of them are East Asian Mahayana.

Chan is not very organised, therefore the specifics in terms of favoured sutras depend mostly on the teacher, and since Chan is almost synonymous with Chinese Buddhism, its uniqueness lies mainly in those that represent Chinese Buddhism in general. If there is anything Chan specific in practices, it is the use of huatou. Because Chan is a loose term in China there is no conflict with using teachings and methods from any school.

Seon re-emerged in Korea in the 19th century and today its major organisation is the Jogye Order, the largest Buddhist church in the Republic. They have a basic curriculum for novice monastics that emphasises the combined study of Hwaeom and Seon, according to the tradition of Weonhyo, Jinul and Hyujeong. The primary Seon method is the hwadu, similarly to Chan.

Rinzai today follows the teachings of Hakuin who created a special koan curriculum for practitioners. Soto today follows the teachings of Dogen, as a result of 18th century changes (similarly to Rinzai), and in practice they focus on shikantaza. Like other Japanese schools, they lack full monastic ordination, and were influenced by Tendai doctrines.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 17th, 2013 at 2:54 AM
Title: Re: chan/seon/rinzai/soto differences
Content:
Astus wrote:
Is your question about their differences in doctrines, practices, ceremonies, scriptures, language, history, arts, organisation or something else?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 17th, 2013 at 2:48 AM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
lowlydog said:
Wisdom is not a thing.

Astus wrote:
There are a few pages on prajnaparamita, as the primary form of wisdom in Mahayana. Short definitions are also available.

lowlydog said:
Quite frankly, that question cannot be answered. Even in asking the question, there is an implication that the unmanifested is a “thing” – and hence can be explained with words and understood by thinking. Understanding the unmanifested happens at a deeper level than thought.

Astus wrote:
That is, you don't mean anything by "unmanifested", since nobody can conceive such a thing, in which case it cannot be used in an argument.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 17th, 2013 at 2:29 AM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
rachmiel said:
Perhaps the simplest and most direct way to get at what I'm trying to get at is to ask which of these is true.
1. Buddhism says there definitely is not brahman (ultimate real oneness/ground).
2. Buddhism says that there definitely is brahman.
3. Buddhism says sorry, dude, I'm not tawkin' about no brahman, because it is of no use to try to conceive the inconceivable.
If 3 is true, is there a hint of subtext of: I'm only saying this because to reveal the ultimate truth would confuse you (but in fact brahman *is* real).

Astus wrote:
The idea of an ultimate ground is refuted by various Buddhist teachers. From Kamalasila's Madhyamakaloka (Ryusei Keira: Madhyamika and Epistemology, p. 181-182; 184-185), the refutation of concepts like God, soul and others that are held by different Hindu sects to be the ultimate:

"first of all, those who imagine Isvara (i.e., "God") and so forth as having permanence and oneness acknowledge that [Isvara and so forth] have the property of influencing results produced successively, and therefore they also in fact acknowledge the absence of oneness by implication. This is because given that something which is one in nature is no different [later] from what it was [earlier] when it did not produce [results], then it could not produce [results] later, just as [it did not produce results] earlier. If, on the other hand, it did in fact produce [results], then because of the difference of character from its former state, its oneness would be undermined.
It is not correct either that this [Isvara] really has manyness. This is because it has been already proved earlier that simultaneously or otherwise [i.e., serially], there could not really be any connection between his continuum and that of the other things [that he creates].

...

Time (kala), Spirit (purusa), primordial matter (pradhana), Brahman and so forth, which are imagined by some people to be the causes establishing the various worlds, all the while being permanent and one in nature, are also acknowledged by those [same people] to possess, successively or simultaneously, the [manifold] natures of the various real or deceptive collections of entities [that constitute the different worlds]. Hence, the absence of oneness is in fact acknowledged by implication. Indeed, it is not correct that things which are one in nature could possess in this way the [manifold] natures of the various worlds.
If they [i.e., time etc.] are not established as being ones, they cannot logically be many either, for the latter [i.e., manyness] consists in being a collection of the former [i.e., ones]."


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 17th, 2013 at 2:13 AM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
lowlydog said:
something cannot be eternal. no-thing is eternal.

Astus wrote:
"No-thing"? Not a thing, nothing. If it is not something what does it matter if we call it eternal, impermanent, big, small, red or yellow? Talk about non-existent things is pointless.

lowlydog said:
I didn't just say the formless, did I. I said the unmanifested. Let try not to twist words shall we.

Astus wrote:
Unmanifested means what? Is it something that nobody sees, hears or perceives in any way? There is a word for it: speculation.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 17th, 2013 at 12:43 AM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
lowlydog said:
You are not taking into consideration the ultimate reality and how this statement rings true in the unmanifested(formless).

Astus wrote:
The ultimate truth in Buddhism is emptiness. The formless realms are just samsara.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 17th, 2013 at 12:41 AM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
lowlydog said:
Consciousness is permanent/eternal and Buddhism does not refute this. Advaita and Buddhism are the same teachings when understood(practically experienced) correctly.

Astus wrote:
Something eternal cannot change. A consciousness that cannot be conscious of anything new means a frozen consciousness. What is the use of such a thing?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 17th, 2013 at 12:28 AM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
Jeff said:
Advaita teaches "oneness" which can be described as interdependence.

Astus wrote:
Oneness means that everything has the same substance. Buddhism teaches that everything is without substance (nihsvabhava = empty) and dependently originated.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 17th, 2013 at 12:25 AM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
rachmiel said:
I'm not sure what you mean. Advaita does not think *anything* ultimately is/has parts. There is only brahman ... which, depending on frame of reference, is called Self (atman), God (Ishvara), pure awareness, etc. So what exactly does Buddhism refute?

So there is no ultimate substrate/reality in Buddhism? Awareness -- pure (object-less) or impure (subject/object) -- is just a skandha, hence empty (no independent existence)?

Astus wrote:
What I mean is that Advaita believes that there is an ultimate consciousness, but it is actually mistaking consciousness, certain forms of consciousness, to be something ultimate. For instance, in the Brahmajala Sutta ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.01.0.bodh.html ) the Buddha explains several forms of mistaking different meditative experiences as the ultimate reality.

An objectless consciousness is not possible (what is it conscious of without an object?). And yes, consciousness is an aggregate. Aggregate simply means a category of phenomena, not a unitary thing. Consciousness is always momentary (see: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.061.than.html ).


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 16th, 2013 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: Advaitin vs. Buddhist takes on awareness/reality
Content:
rachmiel said:
Are Advaita and Buddhism talking about the same thing here -- i.e. does pure awareness = vijnana -- but interpreting this thing radically differently?
Is there a Buddhist equivalent to Advaita's pure awareness / brahman?
Is there any ultimate substrate/reality in Buddhism? Or does Buddhism see "what is" as just a buncha ever-changing impermanent stuff in a grand web of inter-dependence?

Astus wrote:
1, Advaita thinks consciousness (vijnana) is/has an eternal part. Buddhism refutes it.
2. No, otherwise they'd be the same doctrine using different words.
3. Buddhism teaches interdependence.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 12th, 2013 at 7:25 AM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
Another attempt to deflect the question, another round of dancing around the subject, another four pages without receiving a straight answer.

Astus wrote:
So it is. Since I have presented both logical and canonical sources that literally state that there is no "true self" in Buddhism I see no need to keep repeating it. Let me know once someone has come up with a clear answer to what that self is they claim to exist.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 12th, 2013 at 12:21 AM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
songhill said:
This comes across to me as somewhat of put down. For those of us who have read reputable Buddhist scholars such as Pande and Hajime Nakamura, to name just a few, the doctrine of no-self was not in the original canon. It is part of postmortem Buddhism. Of the discourses I have read in the Samyutta-Nikaya, for example, the Buddha makes a clearcut distinction between the aggregates and his self. Self has nothing to do with the aggregates. In this sense the Buddha's self is beyond the reach and range of the aggregates. This also comports with the general English definition of "transcendent" of going beyond or exceeding usual limits. In this case, the limit would be the five aggregates which the Buddha says are "not my self."

Astus wrote:
I don't know what original canon you mean. Mahayana has a few large collections of canonical works and a number of generally accepted masters like Nagarjuna, Aryadeva, Asanga and Vasubandhu. A self beyond the aggregates is accepted by none of them, nor even by Theravada.

There are the four seals of Dharma that define the minimum requirements of a doctrine to be considered in harmony with the Buddha's teachings. Here's a little explanation of it by Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche: http://www.shambhalasun.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=1814. And here's a short sutra summing it up: http://www.fodian.net/world/0599.html.

You may insist on an ultimate self, but it contradicts the very basics of Buddhism. And to quote http://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-masters/mipham/individual-selflessness:

"If the self existed, the path to liberation would be impossible, because any system that professes belief in a self can not include a path for eliminating attachment to the self. If our attachment to self is not eliminated, our attachment to ‘mine’ will ensure that we never part from our clinging to the three realms, and it will therefore be impossible for us to find a means to gain freedom from samsara."


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 11th, 2013 at 5:15 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
Yes a True Self that exists beyond the aggreagates.
clinging to aggregates is listed as apart of dependent orgination which is rooted in ignorance.
the aggreagates themselves are apart of dependent origination the 5 aggreagates have as their souce ingorance,ignorance as their origin,they are born and produced from ignorance.
so if the 5 aggreagates are actually sourced,originate,anbd are born and produced from ignorance how does that fit into your views?

Astus wrote:
You believe in a true self beyond the aggregates, that is fine for a Hindu or some other religion, but in Buddhism there is no such thing. See the explanation in Nagarjuna's main work: http://www.fodian.net/world/1564.htm#Investigation%20of%20Self%20and%20Things.

Also, from Mipham:

"If there were an independent self distinct from the five aggregates, it should be observable, but since no such self can be observed, we must deny its existence. Were there a self transcending the conditioned aggregates, it would not have the characteristics required to perform actions or to experience happiness and suffering, and so on; rather, it would be unconditioned, like space, beyond either benefit or harm."
( http://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-masters/mipham/individual-selflessness )

Son of Buddha said:
So WHO is the one that is realising dependent orgination?
YOU STATED:(down below) "Again, I don't speak of any self that clings to the aggregates, it is something you do"
you rely more on this tainted self than i do my friend,"i" cannot realise Dependent origination,"i" cannot realise enlightenement for the "i" itself IS the property of Samsara.your view is of a self that is realising something as if the "I" truely is real.

Astus wrote:
Speaking in English without using personal pronouns is possible, although weird. The difference is whether one takes "I" as something eternal, substantial, independent and real or just as a conventional word.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 10th, 2013 at 11:11 PM
Title: Re: Italy and Teachers?
Content:
Astus wrote:
There are some Soto Zen temples in Northern Italy: http://global.sotozen-net.or.jp/eng/temples/outside_jp/index.html#page " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Further information on Italian Buddhist centres: http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/country.php?country_id=66 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 10th, 2013 at 6:40 PM
Title: Re: Impoverished Western Practitioners
Content:
Astus wrote:
As long as Buddhism is about having a teacher it remains a clerical system, like Brahmanism. When emphasis is put on study, practice and community, then it is possible to rely on each other instead of some figurehead. A bhikshu/ni is supposed to be sustained by begging and charity. Homeless people can manage that. How come that life as a renunciate today would be too expensive?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 10th, 2013 at 4:53 PM
Title: Re: Canon and doctrines, precepts.
Content:
Astus wrote:
There are two things one should pay attention for: harmlessness and compassion. These two are what essentially the bodhisattva's actions are guided by. Fused with wisdom it becomes the sila-paramita.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 9th, 2013 at 6:50 PM
Title: Re: Two opposing states cannot coexist without... (Dharmakirti)
Content:
Astus wrote:
Excluding impossible realities with reasoning uses the laws of logic, that is, that something is either true or false, no third option possible (excluded middle).


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 9th, 2013 at 6:05 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
undefineable said:
If you're saying that reality is made up of concepts, then how is there any reality for a being who has moved beyond concepts, i.e. an enlightened being, given that he or she cannot logically exist in any way whatsoever without one?

Astus wrote:
The problem is not in having or not having concepts. Suffering comes from believing that concepts are not just concepts but real things, because we are always happy to relate to things in a positive, negative or neutral ways, to identify with them, to attach to them.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 9th, 2013 at 5:56 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
No the person is an identity or personality.
it is that identity/personality which is clung to the 5 aggregates that makes a worldy person

Astus wrote:
That is your interpretation, not mine. If there were a self beyond the aggregates it had nothing to do with the aggregates themselves, could not even cling to them. That is because such a self would exist separately from the aggregates and wouldn't need them for its existence at all, nor have the attributes of the aggregates. That includes attachment itself, which is a function of the fourth aggregate (samskara).

Son of Buddha said:
really so believing that there is an ultimate essence is ignorance and the very cause of Samsara. I could of swore anything that was dependently arisen/dependent origination was ignorance and the very cause of Samsara.the 12 links of dependent origination has as its root and source ignorance,everything that is dependently arisen is rooted and produced in ignorance

so in your view if the Buddha/Emptiness is dependently arisen then he is produced from ignorance.

Astus wrote:
There are the twelve links of dependent origination but it is only a specific instance of dependent origination/interdependency. The Buddhist path itself is based on causes and effects, however, it leads to liberation and not suffering. The cause of enlightenment is the path of morality, meditation and wisdom, the direct cause is the very realisation of dependent origination.

Son of Buddha said:
also the "self" you speak of that clings to the 5 aggreagates is the worldly "i" personality/identity that thinks Astus will always be permenant,everlasting and unchanging this is called the super ego where one views his SELF as "I" have attained the highest.
this is the false self
it is not the True Self I speak of which is the Dharmakaya the body of attributes that which is NOT dependently arisen from Ignorance.

Astus wrote:
Again, I don't speak of any self that clings to the aggregates, it is something you do. Perhaps it is not clear for you what the aggregates actually are. They cover all the physical and mental functions that exist. That is, the five sensory faculties of the body, and every mental phenomenon from basic feelings and thoughts through complex ideas up to consciousness. There is in fact nothing else in this whole world. But if you think there is, well, let me know. Personally I have no knowledge of anything that is either not a physical object, a mental object or consciousness. Of course, if it is something else, nobody can see it, hear it, feel it or know about it.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 8th, 2013 at 10:46 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
oushi said:
Must he?

There is a profound problem with such a statements. You cannot know, that there isn't. You can only "not know" if there is. Opposite of "knowing" is "not knowing", not a different type of knowing.  Hidden substratum is there, as soon as you name it (make it "Bliss"). If you won't name it, there certainly won't be any "eternal self/soul/nature/etc".This way, nirvana is not a nihilistic black nothingness even if there is no such thing as "eternal self/soul/nature/etc". The problem lies in conceptualization, not in the nature of reality. There is no world to escape and no need to escape it.

Astus wrote:
What other description can you give for a path then a way between two points?

I don't see what problem you mean. You first say that one cannot know about an ultimate self, then you make its existent dependent on naming. Naturally, if something exists only nominally it is not something ultimate. How that helps with mistaking nirvana for annihilation is not clear to me. Reality is conceptual (nominal), and mistaking concepts for substances is indeed the problem.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 8th, 2013 at 9:31 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
oushi said:
I wouldn't oppose ignorance to knowledge, this is a misunderstanding. They often go hand in hand. Maybe you meant wisdom?
To see that there is no clinging is to see objects that can cling to each other, but are separate. Without objectifying, this problem does not arise, as objects and relations dissolve. This way, even knowledge(wisdom?), or liberation won't follow. You don't have to cut the world into two, and take the better half into nirvana.

Astus wrote:
Call it objectification or clinging, in terms of the path one has to make a difference between the starting point and the goal. The point is, however, that the problem is not with the object but the approach/attitude toward it (i.e. aggregates and clinging), and there is no hidden substratum of some eternal self/soul/nature/etc. behind it all.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 8th, 2013 at 5:02 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
A person is an individual personality "i" ego that which clings to the 5 aggregates
Donna sutta the Buddha is not a person.

You stated earlier the Buddha was a "person" so you have already labeled the Buddha an actual thing(person) and entity.you say the Buddha the person is free from defilement then you turn around and say No actual thing is permenantly free from defilement.

Astus wrote:
If you look at what I said, "person" is a superficial designation of the five aggregates and not some ego/I. That is "person = five aggregates", nothing more, nothing less. The five aggregates are not permanent. Defilement is believing that there is something permanent in the five aggregates, that is, imputing a self based on momentary experiences. For instance, believing that there is an ultimate essence is such a mistaken imputation, it is ignorance, the very cause of samsara. Such a belief includes thinking that buddha-nature means an ultimate essence/self. And that is, in other words, the "five clinging aggregates". So, the difference between ignorance and knowledge, suffering and liberation, is whether there is or there is not any clinging.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 8th, 2013 at 2:57 AM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
catmoon said:
Its an odd thing - suddenly threads all over the board are converging on a single topic - the nature of the self.

What does everyone think of the idea of locking them all and starting a new thread that would get everyone under one roof?

Astus wrote:
If you are happy to bring all raised issues under one thread without making the OP a huge one it sounds fine.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 8th, 2013 at 2:56 AM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
songhill said:
This is not something the Buddha said. The Buddha might say that form is not my self (ditto with the rest of the aggregates). We are already incorporeal but clinging to the aggregates and believing that we consist of aggregates (sakkaya) has made it seem otherwise for us. It a way, we have to give up the illusion of being particulate (khandha).

Astus wrote:
You interpret the Buddha's teaching on the aggregates in a way that it becomes eliminating the aggregates themselves, it is not something the Buddha himself said. And he could have never said it anyway. Why? Because speaking requires functioning aggregates.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 8th, 2013 at 12:52 AM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Songhill,

What do you say for this? "Removing form would mean that immediately one would become incorporeal, something that did not happen to the Buddha and his disciples."


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 7th, 2013 at 11:54 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Astus wrote:
The Satta Sutta ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn23/sn23.002.than.html ) says that one should "Practice for the ending of craving for form. ... feeling. etc.", and while it says that "smash, scatter, & demolish form ... feeling. etc.", the point is to remove craving toward form, etc., and not to remove form itself. Removing form would mean that immediately one would become incorporeal, something that did not happen to the Buddha and his disciples.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 7th, 2013 at 9:51 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
greentara said:
The great Master Dogen said, "To study the Buddha Way is to study the self, to study the self is to forget the self, and to forget the self is to be enlightened by the ten thousand things." To be enlightened by the ten thousand things is to recognize the unity of the self and the ten thousand things.

Astus wrote:
Dogen says "forget the self" from which you make "unity of the self and the ten thousand things". How so? Without self what do you unify? But if you have self to unify it is not forgotten.

On the other hand, Dogen continues with these words:

"To be confirmed by all dharmas is to cast off one's body and mind and the bodies and minds of others as well. All trace of enlightenment disappears, and this traceless enlightenment continues on without end." ( http://www.thezensite.com/ZenTeachings/Dogen_Teachings/GenjoKoan8.htm#wab4 )


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 7th, 2013 at 9:17 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
The True Self is the Dharmakaya,Buddha,Enlightenment,Pristine wisdom,clear light.
The Buddha is the "thing" that has these qualities(treasure storehouse)

If you had a cup of water,you would say  the cup has water in it.
If you had a cup that had nothing in it you would say the cup is Empty,so what is the cup empty of?
It is empty of everything but itself.this is known as Other-Emptyness.
Would you say the cup is empty of Cup also?no you can say it is empty of water or anything you put into the cup,but the cup will still be the cup.
Like wise so is Enlightenment it is empty of everything but itself.
If you say all of Samsara,defilements,suffering are all impermenant and empty,then turn around and say the Buddha is empty also,you are putting the Buddha in the catogory of the created,conditioned and impermenant along with all of Samsara.doing this is known as Empty-Empty.

Astus wrote:
"The Buddha is the "thing" that has these qualities"

A buddha means a person without defilements.

What is a person?
The five aggregates.
What are the defilements?
Desire, anger, ignorance.
Do we reach a "true self" by removing clinging?
No.
Do we annihilate everything?
No.
Could this person without defilements be called free from all suffering and full of wisdom and compassion?
Yes.
Are the defilements permanently eliminated?
Yes.
Could this be called a permanent state of liberation?
Yes.
Is there really an actual thing or entity that is permanently free from defilements?
No.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 7th, 2013 at 7:48 PM
Title: Re: Two opposing states cannot coexist without... (Dharmakirti)
Content:
Astus wrote:
I haven't really studied Dharmakirti, but I think if you look into abhidharma materials they discuss mental states, for instance that in a single moment there can be only one mental factor present.

Here is one good source on the classical Abhidharma Kosa: http://abhidharmakosa.wordpress.com/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 7th, 2013 at 5:19 AM
Title: Re: Essential Zen Practice
Content:
Astus wrote:
It is interesting that you bring up Dogen again while none of the three original quotes are from Dogen or even a Caodong teacher.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 7th, 2013 at 2:39 AM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Astus wrote:
There is an important difference between the five aggregates and the five clinging aggregates ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.048.than.html ), namely clinging itself. This clinging is not from outside the aggregates, it is not the same as the aggregates, but the attachment, desire toward them ( http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/3Samyutta-Nikaya/Samyutta3/21-Khandha-Samyutta/02-03-Khajjaniyavaggo-e.html ). There are ways people assume a self related to the aggregates, but even when it is believe to be beyond them is refuted ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.15.0.than.html#feelings3 ). As it is clear from the definition of the four noble truths, the five clinging aggregates is considered the fundamental source of suffering, while the abandonment of clinging - not the aggregates - is the liberation from suffering.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 7th, 2013 at 12:37 AM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
songhill said:
Looking for the self using the nets of the five aggregates is an impossible task. It isn't a particular shape or a pleasant feeling. It isn't a percept. It isn't a formation or consciousness. In addition, the five aggregates are produced by worldlings (S. iii. 152). The aggregates also belong to Mara the Buddhist devil (S.iii.189). From passage after passage, for example in the Khandhavagga of the Samyutta-Nikaya we learn that aggregates are not the self or not my self (na meso attâ).  From this we can surmise that the self is most intrinsic. It doesn't have to be made or produced. In a manner of speaking it finds itself by putting away desire for what is not itself (S.iii.78). But as we know, worldlings produce and crave the five aggregates which are suffering; which are not the self.

Astus wrote:
You think that because it is taught that the five aggregates are not self that there must be a self somewhere else. However, if there were a self outside of the five aggregates that self would be without any sensory ability or even consciousness. Who believes in an unconscious, inactive self, and what would be the point of such a self anyway? On the other hand, the Buddha teaches that people think something to be a self or a possession of the self among the five aggregates, and that's why he teaches again and again that the five aggregates are not the self. But imagining a self beyond the five aggregates makes no sense even in everyday terms, not to mention Buddhism. Nevertheless, if you find a self appealing that is without thoughts, feelings and sense faculties, go on. It's just I don't see what Buddhism has to do with that idea of a non-functional self.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 6th, 2013 at 9:36 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
Not self is a skillfull means to get too True self
not self tells us what is not enlightenment and leads us to what is.

Astus wrote:
If the teaching of no-self tells us what is not enlightenment, then the true self should tell what enlightenment is. However, I am still looking for a clear description of what that actually is. Yes, it is said that it is "permanent, joy, self and purity", but those are just qualities without telling the thing that has those qualities.

Just to give an example of what I'm looking for from those emphasising "true self", here is an explanation from Sallie B. King's book "Buddha Nature" that is a study of the Buddha Nature Treatise (Foxinglun):

"The essential point here is that the new teaching of atmaparamita is not in conflict with the old anatman teaching, but on the contrary is the fulfillment of it. The very anatman itself, when taken to its extreme (i.e., when perfected) is the atmaparamita. This teaching is logically parallel to the sunyavada teaching that emptiness or sunya is the characteristic or the own-being (svabhava) of all things. ... Though the language is new, the content of this message is not. What we have here is a variation on the theme enunciated previously, "Buddha nature is the Thusness revealed by the dual emptiness of person and things ... If one does not speak of Buddha nature, then one does not understand emptiness'' (787b ). Non-Buddhists are as wrong as ever in seeing a self in the changing phenomena of worldly flux." (p. 89)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 6th, 2013 at 6:55 PM
Title: Re: Essential Zen Practice
Content:
songhill said:
In Caodong (Soto) posture is very important. For Dogen Zenji, zazen appears to be enlightenment. For example, "Sitting is itself the treasury of the eye of true Dharma and the mystic mind of nirvana" (Carl Bielefeldt, Dogen's Manuals of Zen Meditation, p. 169). Dogen Zenji seemed to believe that one is already a Buddha so that zazen is not practiced to become a Buddha. When the adept can sit in zazen with no desire his Buddha-ness will begin to reveal itself.
"For Dogen, zazen is not waiting for enlightenment, but simply the practice of buddhas.  This practice is not to acquire something in some other times or in another state of consciousness or being.  It is actually the practice of enlightenment or realization right now.  And this enlightenment or realization for Dogen is naturally expressed in practice" ( Steven Heine, Dale Stuart Wright, Zen Ritual, p. 177).

Astus wrote:
Sitting meditation is just a small part of a Zen monastery's programme, initially assuming a sitting posture is helpful for beginners. But not even Dogen or Keizan regarded sitting itself as the only form of Zen.

"Give up the operations of mind, intellect, and consciousness; stop measuring with thoughts, ideas, and views. Have no designs on becoming a Buddha. How could that be limited to sitting or lying down?"
( http://www.stanford.edu/group/scbs/sztp3/translations/gongyo_seiten/translations/part_3/fukan_zazengi.html )

"Zazen means to clarify the mind-ground and dwell comfortably in your actual nature. This is called revealing yourself and manifesting the original-ground. In zazen both body and mind drop off. Zazen is far beyond the form of sitting or lying down."
( http://antaiji.dogen-zen.de/eng/zzyk.shtml )


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 6th, 2013 at 6:47 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Exactly.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 6th, 2013 at 3:58 AM
Title: Re: Essential Zen Practice
Content:
Astus wrote:
Zazen is not a matter of body posture, nor is it a method to achieve something. This is what the Platform Sutra (ch. 5) and later generations say.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 6th, 2013 at 3:51 AM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
songhill said:
The five aggregates are the noble or ariyan truth of suffering (S.v.425) subject to clinging consisting of material shape, feeling, perception, habitual tendencies and consciousness. As long as we cling to them (the aggregates) we doom ourselves to endless suffering. We have to transcend them. In addtion, besides being suffering the origin of suffering concerns the five aggregates.
"The desire, indulgence, inclination, and holding based on these five aggregates affected by clinging is the origination of suffering " (M.i.191). (Emphasis added.)

Astus wrote:
Clinging is the cause of suffering, not the aggregates. Removing clinging doesn't mean the elimination of the aggregates. It is understanding that there is no permanent thing, there is no self but only dependent aggregates that is the knowledge removing clinging. Imagining there is a real self inside or outside the aggregates is the ignorance causing clinging.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 6th, 2013 at 12:00 AM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
If you want to know what direct, non-conceptual experience is,
just wait until the next time you accidentally hit your thumb with a hammer.
You will immediately know without knowing.

Astus wrote:
All the five physical senses are non-conceptual, states like coma, swoon and deep sleep are without concepts, and meditative absorptions beyond the first level are without concepts too. A non-conceptual experience is not an "eternal self" or anything full of miraculous abilities. Not grasping on concepts, realising emptiness, prajnaparamita, that is also not a "pure being".


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 11:54 PM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
songhill said:
I am arguing for something that is ineffable and non-conceptual which transcends the mundane whirl, and is realizable—but is not like the hairs of a tortoise. Our Buddha-nature is truly real, the secular world that runs away from the teaching of Buddha-nature is not.


Astus wrote:
If it is beyond the six senses it is irrelevant to our life, it does not solve the problem of suffering, and no being can experience it. If it is within the six senses it is necessarily impermanent and empty. There is no third option.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 11:01 PM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
lowlydog said:
That depends on your definition of the word God. https://youtu.be/2MSaVFuc3EI " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

3. You cannot believe the truth at the ultimate level, nor can you satisfy your hunger by watching others eat, making truth at the ultimate level indescribable.

4. Exactly, words cannot describe the ultimate level of truth.

Astus wrote:
Do you know of a sutra where the Buddha talks about God?

As I said, if that ultimate level cannot be told or described there is nothing to talk about.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 10:59 PM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
So this was a lie then?  If Dharma is dharma and we need to look past words to see the truth, then even false words, if we look past them, contain the truth.

Astus wrote:
So the New Age sentiment of anything goes as long as you agree that anything goes.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 7:19 PM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
lowlydog said:
1. At the ultimate level Truth cannot be believed only experienced.
2. Truth is God, the law of nature is truth.
3. Tolle experiences truth, one cannot think truth.
4. Read his books.

Depends on how you interpret words, words have different meanings to different people.

Astus wrote:
2. Buddhism has no God nor does it consider any natural law ultimate.

Based on point 1 it follows that:

3. Since you cannot believe in truth you cannot tell what truth is, neither can one know what some other people experience, making truth completely incommunicable and subjective.
4. Since truth cannot be told it can't be written either.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 7:12 PM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
greentara said:
Astus, Does that mean  I think the sky is blue. I go up in a  plane and don't see blueness anywhere. I return to earth and  look up and again the sky is blue. Is this all illusion or can this 'small' insight wake us up?

Astus wrote:
Even physically the blue sky is an illusion, a result of the coming together of light, aerial conditions, the human eye and language. Not too long ago, before aeroplanes and such, in certain cultures people believed there is an ocean above our heads or a heavenly structure. From the personal perspective, even when you are looking at the sky you don't see it uninterruptedly in a continuity but there are moments of perception following each other, both physically and mentally. You don't keep the thought "blue sky" constantly in mind and you can't really keep your eyes open for long. There are further topics one can go through, like whether the sky is inside or outside, whether it is one or many, etc., as you can find in traditional Buddhist works. The result is that the "blue sky" is simply a dependently originated conceptual phenomenon.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 6:53 PM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
songhill said:
What it is is through realization; not through verbal expressions or conceps.

Astus wrote:
That means you are arguing for something that you cannot explain or describe. You could as well argue for the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the Invisible Pink Unicorn.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 6:44 PM
Title: Re: Essential Zen Practice
Content:
Astus wrote:
And what is that right practice in your opinion?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 7:09 AM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
Luckily in the Mahamudra tradition we have direct introduction (I do believe something of the sort exists in some Zen schools too?), if the student has the karma vipakka to successfully receive the introduction, this whole discussion disappears up its own...

Astus wrote:
I don't think there is any need for special tricks. The dialectical teachings of abhidharma, madhyamaka and yogacara should suffice perfectly.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 7:04 AM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
greentara said:
Astus, I know you are very sincere.... but can you please put in in your own words without overly using  'buddhist talk'  I would feel you're speaking from some sort of direct experience no matter if it were just the merest hint or inkling.

Astus wrote:
Direct experience is what is right in front of us. What is that? The physical and mental impressions experienced by us, There are sights, sounds, odours, tastes, tactile sensations and thoughts. Is there anything permanent of them? No. Some believe that awareness/consciousness is permanent, based on the idea that behind all experiences there is a single thing experiencing them all. But is there an awareness independent of something to be aware of? Not possible. If there is not something to be aware of we can't say that there is an awareness of it, just like if we don't see blue we don't say that nevertheless there is the seer of the blue. And in general, without seeing anything, when there is no visual perception at all, the act of seeing is not present either. That's why an independent awareness is not possible. Could there be anything else beyond our present experiences? Even if there were it would be nothing else but our imagination of such a thing as we have no other experience of it.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 5:27 AM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Astus wrote:
However, it is meaningless to say that "nirvana is hidden in every being", unless we are using a metaphoric or poetic language

PadmaVonSamba said:
Yeah, that's pretty much what it is.

Astus wrote:
And that's why I said buddha-nature is a skilful means.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 5:26 AM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
songhill said:
This nature, as in Buddha-nature, is not a sheer vacuum:
The atman is the Tathagatagarbha.  All beings possess a Buddha Nature: this is what the atman is.  This atman, from the start, is always covered by innumerable passions (klesha): this is why beings are unable to see it. — Mahaparinirvana-sutra

Astus wrote:
Then give the definition of what buddha-nature is and not what it is not.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 5:16 AM
Title: Re: Mind versus Self?
Content:
Astus wrote:
If buddha-nature is simply the lack of defilements then it is no different from how nirvana is defined in the four noble truths and other basic teachings. However, it is meaningless to say that "nirvana is hidden in every being", unless we are using a metaphoric or poetic language, or all we mean is the ability of beings to attain nirvana, which has not been denied in the first place, therefore the statement's sole function is to give some motivation to those lacking confidence.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 4:59 AM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
Empty of other not empty of itself.

Astus wrote:
What is itself?

PadmaVonSamba said:
itself means, if you reduce something down to its core, there is some single element of which something ultimately is.

Astus wrote:
Then what is the single element called buddha-nature?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 4:45 AM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
Empty of other not empty of itself.

Astus wrote:
What is itself?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
songhill said:
Strictly speaking, BN is not, satisfactorily, definable because it is inconceivable. But this may help.

O good man! Buddha-Nature is birthlessness and deathlessness; it is not going, not coming. It is not past, not future, and not present. It is not something that arises out of a cause; it is not the making of any cause. It is not something made; it is not a maker. It is not any outer form, nor is it not any form; it is not something with a name, nor is it something with no name; it is no name and no matter. It is not long, not short. It is not something that has come out [arisen] in the five skandhas, the 18 realms, and the 12 spheres. Hence, we say eternal.

Astus wrote:
There's another word for that definition in Buddhism: emptiness. The very lack of any substance, self, essence, being.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 1:46 AM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
songhill said:
Where does it say in the Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra that Buddha-nature is upaya or skillful means? MPN says, in fact:
"Again good sons! Just as all rivers flow to the sea, all Sutras and all forms of meditation lead ultimately to the Mahaparinirvana Sutra.  Why?  Because it expounds in the most excellent manner [the doctrine that all sentient beings] possess the Buddha-nature."
For the person who has realized and experienced this nature it is certainly not upaya. It's what makes a Buddha a Buddha.

Astus wrote:
I didn't say it is stated in the MPNS.

Can you define what the buddha-nature is and what is its relation to the five skandhas and eighteen dhatus?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 5th, 2013 at 12:19 AM
Title: Essential Zen Practice
Content:
Astus wrote:
"If a thought arises, be aware of it; once you are aware of it, it will disappear. The excellent gate of practice lies here alone."
(Zongmi on Chan, p. 123)

"Do not think of any good or evil whatsoever. Whenever a thought occurs, be aware of it; as soon as you are aware of it, it will vanish. If you remain for a long period forgetful of objects, you will naturally become unified. This is the essential art of tso-ch'an. Honestly speaking, tso'ch'an is the dharma gate of ease and joy."
(Dogen's Manuals of Zen Meditation, p. 181)

"One must not delve into thoughts that arise, whether good or bad. As soon as a thought arises, he must become aware of it. He must always be aware of what arises in the sphere of consciousness without losing clear discrimination, and without becoming dull or scattered. A myriad of years is nothing but one moment of thought, which is neither discontinuous nor continuous. This is the essential Way (or method) of Zen practice. Zazen is in itself the doctrinal gateway of “comfort and ease.”"
(The Baizhang Zen Monastic Regulations, p. 256)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 4th, 2013 at 10:02 PM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
Astus wrote:
greentara,

Buddha-nature as a self is a skilful means. How can we tell? The five aggregates are not the self and there is no self possessing them outside of the skandhas either. Besides that there is no possibility for any self. This is the teaching of no-self in Buddhism since the beginning. Misinterpreting the buddha-nature as an ultimate self is as wrong as taking emptiness to be nothingness, the extremes that are the clear marks of wrong views. The correct view, dependent origination, refutes both eternalism and annihilationism.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 4th, 2013 at 6:41 PM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
lowlydog said:
Hi Astus, I'm hoping that this clip from his book will answer your questions.

Astus wrote:
Says the same thing as the short quote.

1. Those who believe that their truth is the real truth are wrong.
2. The truth is universal.
3. The universal truth is what Tolle thinks is the truth.
4. Tolle's truth is some sort of essentialism that has not been specified in the quotes.

What is obvious, however, is that Tolle believes that the Hindu's atman is the same as buddha-nature, something that is not accepted in Buddhism.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 4th, 2013 at 5:59 PM
Title: Re: Every-minute Meditation.
Content:
Astus wrote:
A story about "doing one thing at a time".

Unknown said:
Seung Sahn would say, "When you eat, just eat. When you read the newspaper, just read the newspaper. Don't do anything other than what you are doing."

One day a student saw him reading the newspaper while he was eating. The student asked if this did not contradict his teaching. Seung Sahn said, "When you eat and read the newspaper, just eat and read the newspaper."
(Essential Zen, p. 15)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 4th, 2013 at 5:49 PM
Title: Re: "Zen is Going to Hell and It’s the Boomers’ Fault!"
Content:
Astus wrote:
It's natural selection. Species that are incapable of reproduction die out. In Buddhism the minimal requirement is transmitting the form. In Zen it should be the substance that is passed on, but when the teachers don't have it how could the students?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 4th, 2013 at 4:03 AM
Title: Re: Eckhart Tolle on christmas
Content:
lowlydog said:
What is the truth about Christmas?

In the history of Christianity, if you believe you are the sole possessor of the truth then that belief has the power to corrupt your actions, even to the point of insanity – whether it’s the Catholic Inquisition or a big shopping spree. The Truth is inseparable from who you are. If you look for it in ideas, beliefs, or even gifts from the store, you will be deceived every time.

The true meaning of Christmas is that the very Being that you are is Truth. This is what Jesus meant when he said, “I am the way and the truth and the life.”

Jesus speaks of the inner essence identity of every human being. Some Christian writers call this the “Christ within”. The real meaning of Christmas is to find that essential self that is universally experienced as the Christ within no matter what your cultural or religious upbringing is. As we approach the ceremonial date of the birth of Christ and as many of you gather with friends and family, perhaps standing in the silence of the Christ within can keep bringing you back to Being - the eternal life that Christ promised human kind.

Astus wrote:
How does this match with the Buddha's teachings?

"if you believe you are the sole possessor of the truth then that belief has the power to corrupt your actions, even to the point of insanity"

"Those who dispute, taking hold of a view, saying, "This, and this only, is true," those you can talk to. Here there is nothing — no confrontation at the birth of disputes." (Snp 4.8)

"The Truth is inseparable from who you are."

What "Truth"?

"the very Being that you are is Truth"

"If a bodhisattva abides in the signs of self, person, sentient being, or life-span, she or he is not a bodhisattva." (Diamond Sutra, ch. 3)

"the inner essence identity of every human being. Some Christian writers call this the “Christ within”."

"the assertion of philosophical views which are non-existent [i. e., not true], is meant that in the Skandhas, Dhatus, and Ayatanas, [some philosophers] assume the existence of an ego, a being, a soul, a living being, a nourisher, or a spirit. This is said, Mahamati, to be the assertion of some philosophical views which are nonexistent [i. e., not true]." (Lankavatara Sutra 2.XXV)

"the eternal life that Christ promised human kind"

"Regard heaven and earth and consider their impermanence.  Regard the world and consider its impermanence." (The Sutra of Forty-Two Sections Spoken by the Buddha, section 19)

What Tolle does in this short quote is first denying that there is a person or organisation in sole possession of the Truth, claims that there are many religions and spiritual traditions in possession of the Truth, to eventually say that what he calls the Truth is the Truth of everyone else, practically making himself the representative of everyone else and denying their own definition of their own truth. But as we can see, his teachings don't agree with the Buddha's, and it's also unlikely that mainstream Christians would accept his interpretation.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 3rd, 2013 at 6:05 PM
Title: Re: Online Philosophy & Buddhology Resources
Content:
Huseng said:
The THESAURUS LITERATURAE BUDDHICAE (TLB) is a multilingual presentation of Buddhist literature sentence by sentence in Sanskrit, Chinese, Tibetan, English, etc.

http://www2.hf.uio.no/polyglotta/index.php?page=library&bid=2 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Astus wrote:
You should read the topic more often: http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=138169#p138169 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 3rd, 2013 at 6:05 PM
Title: Re: Online Philosophy & Buddhology Resources
Content:
Huseng said:
The THESAURUS LITERATURAE BUDDHICAE (TLB) is a multilingual presentation of Buddhist literature sentence by sentence in Sanskrit, Chinese, Tibetan, English, etc.

http://www2.hf.uio.no/polyglotta/index.php?page=library&bid=2 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Astus wrote:
You should read the topic more often: http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=138169#p138169 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 1st, 2013 at 10:50 PM
Title: Re: Hua tou,mind on breath,reciting etc,which one and why?
Content:
Astus wrote:
If you are interested in Chan, you can start with these:

http://hsuyun.budismo.net/en/dharma/index.html
http://www.westernchanfellowship.org/reading/articles-for-newcomers-to-chan-and-zen-meditation/
http://chancenter.org/cmc/publications/free-literature/


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, December 29th, 2012 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: Remaining confirmed Enlightened Masters.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Within Buddhism the English word "enlightenment" can mean several things, depending on context and tradition. Outside of Buddhism it is even more complicated, and just because there is one word used it does not mean that it has the same meaning.

Since it seems to me that you are new to Buddhism, I recommend you start here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/index.html. This covers the basics. Once finished you can go to other topics, like the different Indian schools and how Buddhism developed in other cultures throughout Asia.

There are many teachers within Buddhism who can teach people the path to enlightenment. If there were none or just a few, Buddhism would be already dead or dying. Fortunately the Buddha's teaching and the Buddhist community is well and alive. And you are free to choose from the many available resources it has.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 28th, 2012 at 7:07 PM
Title: Re: The Commodification of Buddhism
Content:
Huseng said:
Why is it always one perceived extreme to another?

I'm saying recognize the dirty money for what it is and be open about it.

Recognizing one's own necessary evils does not necessitate taking extreme measures.

Astus wrote:
I see. Well, it'd be nice to see every person and organisation within capitalist economic systems saying that money comes from the exploitation of the working class and financial tricks. That would practically mean becoming Socialists. However, there is more than one point of view, thus money is not necessarily dirty, exploitation can be renamed opportunity and natural evolution, etc. As long as people can live in peace and security there is little need for political and economical questions. Alas, we don't live in Paradise. And if we think about it, there is nothing accomplished without work. Although if people were not so greedy we could manage providing the basics of food and clothing without much problem to everyone.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 28th, 2012 at 5:32 PM
Title: Re: What else to do. Waiting for Rainbow Body.
Content:
Inge said:
I find it strange that on a buddhist board, one of the worst things you can do, is to claim that buddhist methods actually works.

Astus wrote:
Strange indeed.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 27th, 2012 at 9:49 PM
Title: Re: The Commodification of Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Huseng,

It is an interesting mixture of socialist and romantic ideas. Because there is exploitation of the working class and the natural resources, Buddhists should return to a pre-modern state. Should Buddhists live like the Amish? That is quitting society and not liberating beings. Isn't there a bodhisattva in the marketplace as the perfect embodiment of Mahayana? The "dirt of the world" is not something outside to avoid. Commodification can be another term for skilful means. Buddhism must be meaningful in order to reach the people.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 26th, 2012 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: Template of the Mahayana sutras?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Mahayana Sutras were written texts from the beginning, unlike the agamas as we can see in the Pali Canon. The statement about the importance of a given sutra is like a self-advertisement in order to have the sutra be spread and preserved.

There are sutras describing meditation techniques and wisdom teachings besides moral subjects. Here are some popular ones: Vimalakirti Sutra, Diamond Sutra, Surangamasamadhi Sutra, Amitabha Sutra, Prajnaparamita in 8000 Verses Sutra, Lankavatara Sutra, Samdhinirmocana Sutra.

See some collections of Mahayana scriptures here:

http://fodian.net/world/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.sutrasmantras.info/sutra0.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www4.bayarea.net/~mtlee/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://lirs.ru/lib/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www2.hf.uio.no/polyglotta/index.php?page=library&bid=2 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.bdkamerica.org/default.aspx?MPID=81 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 26th, 2012 at 5:53 PM
Title: Re: "No Seeking" teaching of Linchi (Rinzai)
Content:
greentara said:
Astus, I think it's best to stay with what I know. I know I exist..... more then that I can't be sure of!

Astus wrote:
That knowledge is already enough. There is nothing else to be discussed in Buddhism.

"I know I exist" - this is the starting point. Then one has to look at what is it that exists. That's the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skandha#The_five_skandhas and the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skandha#Eighteen_Dh.C4.81tus. They are two ways of categorising our everyday experience.



There is nothing else that we can consider existing beyond those. Forms, sounds, feelings and ideas are all covered. And this is where one has to investigate, look at how they exist. This is called insight meditation, vipasyana. This is level one. Zen comes a couple of steps later.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 26th, 2012 at 3:52 AM
Title: Re: "No Seeking" teaching of Linchi (Rinzai)
Content:
Astus wrote:
Although this is from Menzan Zuiho's Jijuyu Zanmai, the sentiment is the same:

"If Zen indicated nothing but doing dhyana, it would be the dhyana of the six paramita, or the samadhi of the three studies. All bodhisattvas practice these, and since they all practice zazen, they would not select just one of those practices and give it the special name of marvelous mind of nirvana a, the eye of the storehouse of true dharma, and pass it down.
Even though there are many people who are said to be doing zazen, all of them are apparently doing the practice of the ordinary deluded followers of the two vehicles or following the provisional bodhisattva [way]. Those who know the Buddha Samadhi, the realm of the original awakening of the Buddhas, are rare. Because of this [misunderstanding] people concentrate on a koan to hasten awakening. They labor the mind to find the subject who sees and hears [kenmon no shujinko]. They sweep clear the distracted mind [monen] and think that no-mind [munen] is good."
(Zen Classics, p. 257-258)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 25th, 2012 at 10:03 PM
Title: Re: "No Seeking" teaching of Linchi (Rinzai)
Content:
greentara said:
Astus, It maybe premature to say that I am without form or substance .....even though the scriptures may say it's true.

Astus wrote:
Is there a thought, a feeling or any experience that you constantly perceive? If not, it can't be said there is a substantial thing anywhere. Nevertheless, you can still perform your daily tasks, interact with people and decide what you want to do next. Isn't that how it appears to you? That's why there is no need to seek anything beyond this mind.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 25th, 2012 at 5:50 PM
Title: Re: "No Seeking" teaching of Linchi (Rinzai)
Content:
Astus wrote:
When the Buddha talked about those with little dust in their eyes, it was about people who are capable of understanding the Dharma. That is, any Buddhist.

Enlightenment is not about gaining or getting rid of something. It is realising for oneself that there is nothing to gain or lose, which is the same as saying that there is nothing to seek, that the mind is originally perfect. The one reading this is without form or substance and there is no hindrance to its all encompassing activities. Isn't this true?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 25th, 2012 at 6:48 AM
Title: Re: "No Seeking" teaching of Linchi (Rinzai)
Content:
Astus wrote:
To answer the original question, the Extensive Record of Baizhang starts with these words,

"In language you must distinguish the esoteric and the exoteric; you must distinguish generalizing and particularizing language, and you must distinguish the language of the complete teaching and the incomplete teaching.
The complete teaching discusses purity; the incomplete teaching discusses impurity. Explaining the defilement in impure things is to weed out the profane; explaining the defilement in pure things is to weed out the holy.
Before the nine-part teaching had been expounded, living beings had no eyes; it was necessary to depend on someone to refine them. If you are speaking to a deaf worldling, you should just teach him to leave home, maintain discipline, practice meditation and develop wisdom. You should not speak this way to a worldling beyond measure, someone like Vimalakirti or the great hero Fu."
(Sayings and Doings of Pai-Chang, p. 29, tr. T. Cleary)

From the Record of Guishan,

"There was a monk who asked the Master, “Does a person who has had sudden awakening still need to continue with cultivation?” The Master said, “If one has true awakening and attains to the fundamental, then at that time that person knows for himself that cultivation and noncultivation are just dualistic opposites. Like now, though the initial inspiration is dependent on conditions, if within a single thought one awakens to one’s own reality, there are still certain habitual tendencies that have accumulated over numberless kalpas which cannot be purified in a single instant. That person should certainly be taught how to gradually remove the karmic tendencies and mental habits: this is cultivation. There is no other method of cultivation that needs to be taught to that person.”"
(Sun-Face Buddha, p. 24-25, tr. M. Poceski)

Hanshan Deqing http://chancenter.org/cmc/2011/10/13/essentials-of-practice-and-enlightenment-for-beginners/,

"This state of actualized-enlightenment can be further divided into shallow and profound realizations. If you exert your efforts at the root [of your existence], smashing away the cave of the eighth consciousness, and instantaneously overturn the den of fundamental ignorance, with one leap directly enter [the realm of enlightenment], then there is nothing further for you to learn. This is having supreme karmic roots. Your actualization will be profound indeed. The depth of actualization for those who practice gradually, [on the other hand,] will be shallow.
...
So called sudden enlightenment and gradual practice refers to one who has experienced a thorough enlightenment but, still has remnant habit tendencies that are not instantaneously purified. For these people, they must, implement the principles from their enlightenment that they have realized to face all circumstances of life and, bring forth the strength from their contemplation and illumination to experience their minds in difficult situations."

I think that saying "no seeking" requires loads of practices is contrary to Linji's approach to the matter.

"Bring to rest the thoughts of the ceaselessly seeking mind, and you will not differ from the patriarch-buddha. Do you want to know the patriarch-buddha? He is none other than you who stand before me listening to my discourse. But because you students lack faith in yourselves, you run around seeking something outside. Even if, through your seeking, you did find something, that something would be nothing more than fancy descriptions in written words; never would you gain the mind of the living patriarch. Make no mistake, worthy Chan men! If you don’t fi nd it here and now, you’ll go on transmigrating through the three realms for myriads of kalpas and thousands of lives, and, held in the clutch of captivating circumstances, be born in the wombs of asses or cows."
(Record of Linji, p. 8, tr. Sasaki)

"This threefold body is you, listening to my discourse right now before my very eyes. It is precisely because you don’t run around seeking outside that you have such meritorious activities."
(p. 9)

"What is my purpose in speaking this way? I do so only because you followers of the Way cannot stop your mind from running around everywhere seeking, because you go clambering aft er the worthless contrivances of the men of old."
...
"Virtuous monks, time is precious. And yet, hurrying hither and thither, you try to learn meditation, to study the Way, to accept names, to accept phrases, to seek buddha, to seek a patriarch, to seek a good teacher, to think and speculate.
Make no mistake, followers of the Way! Aft er all, you have a father and a mother—what more do you seek? Turn your own light inward upon yourselves! A man of old said:
Yajñadatta [thought he had] lost his head,
But when his seeking mind came to rest, he was at ease."
(p. 10)

"Outside mind there’s no dharma, nor is there anything to be gained within it. What are you seeking? Everywhere you say, ‘There’s something to practice, something to obtain.’ Make no mistake! Even if there were something to be gained by practice, it would be nothing but birth-and-death karma. You say, ‘Th e six pāramitās and the ten thousand [virtuous] actions are all to be practiced.’ As I see it, all this is just making karma."
...
"There are a bunch of blind shavepates who, having stuffed themselves with food, sit down to meditate and practice contemplation. Arresting the flow of thought they don’t let it rise; they hate noise and seek stillness. Th is is the method of the heretics. A patriarch said, ‘If you stop the mind to look at stillness, arouse the mind to illumine outside, control the mind to clarify inside, concentrate the mind to enter samādhi—all such [practices] as these are artificial striving.’"
(p. 17)

"Followers of the Way, true buddha has no fi gure, true dharma has no form. All you’re doing is devising models and patterns out of phantoms. Anything you may fi nd through seeking will be nothing more than a wild fox-spirit; it certainly won’t be the true buddha. It will be the understanding of a heretic."
(p. 20)

"I say to you there is no buddha, no dharma, nothing to practice, nothing to enlighten to. Just what are you seeking in the highways and byways? Blind men! You’re putting a head on top of the one you already have. What do you yourselves lack? Followers of the Way, your own present activities do not diff er from those of the patriarch-buddhas. You just don’t believe this and keep on seeking outside. Make no mistake! Outside there is no dharma; inside, there is nothing to be obtained. Better than grasp at the words from my mouth, take it easy and do nothing. Don’t continue [thoughts] that have already arisen and don’t let those that haven’t yet arisen be aroused. Just this will be worth far more to you than a ten years’ pilgrimage."
(p. 22)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, December 22nd, 2012 at 7:06 PM
Title: Re: When was the first exclusively Mahayana ordination?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Bhikkhu Sujato has a study: https://sites.google.com/site/sectsandsectarianism/home, that shows how different sects developed, not because of some doctrinal schism but natural evolution, as a result of historical circumstances. As he writes in the conclusion, "We cannot find any evidence anywhere for the formation of schools due to schisms in the narrow Vinaya sense."


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, December 22nd, 2012 at 2:56 AM
Title: Re: When was the first exclusively Mahayana ordination?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Exclusively Mahayana ordination, that was invented by Saicho of the Tendai school, who used only the Brahmajala Sutra and not the usual pratimoksha. In China the ordination has always been based on one or another set of Vinaya, eventually developing into using only the Dharmagupta Vinaya and the threefold ordination (novice + monk + bodhisattva).


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 20th, 2012 at 8:54 PM
Title: Re: Zen - Principles and Practices
Content:
Astus wrote:
True, as it was produced by the http://firstzen.org/.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 20th, 2012 at 8:49 PM
Title: Re: Why was E-Sangha controversial?
Content:
Astus wrote:
If anyone is interested, the major trouble in the Zen section of eSangha was about rebirth, a subject that was put into the TOS in order to avoid further debates. Both Jundo and Nonin got banned in the course of that issue, and of course personal heated debates with mods. The interpretation of buddhahood was never a subject of regulation as far as I remember.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 20th, 2012 at 8:03 PM
Title: Re: Zen - Principles and Practices
Content:
Astus wrote:
Interesting introductory film of the myth of Zen. The first half shows the rohatsu sesshin, a single event in an entire year of a monastery, as if Christianity were all about Lent. The second half shows different traditional Japanese arts associated to some extent with Zen, although that is debatable, since they are generally Chinese arts exported to Japan. Comparisons made between medieval Japanese and European culture sounded to me far fetched, especially when it connects a tea house (chashitsu) with a Gothic cathedral.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 18th, 2012 at 4:01 PM
Title: Re: Moral discipline is the central practical teaching..?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Before getting to Mahayana teachings, I recommend you go through these summaries of the Buddha's teachings based on the suttas, then you will see how detailed they actually are.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/wings/index.html

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/index.html


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, December 16th, 2012 at 7:09 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism in the Twenty First Century - Dr Alex Berzin
Content:
Astus wrote:
If "abandoning their heritage" is wrong for Asians, what about Westerners?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, December 15th, 2012 at 6:05 PM
Title: Re: How smart do you have to be to get it?
Content:
undefineable said:
On a level deeper than 'Buddhist' concepts, how do you see this? Could it begin from a desire to be free of self and no-self?

Astus wrote:
I don't know what depths you refer to. The will for enlightenment usually comes from understanding suffering and its causes.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, December 15th, 2012 at 12:13 AM
Title: Re: Falling asleep
Content:
Astus wrote:
You should check your surroundings if they are optimal. You should also consider what kind of meditation you are actually doing. There are traditional methods used against drowsiness in meditation.

From the http://antaiji.dogen-zen.de/eng/zzyk.shtml:

If dullness or sleepiness overcome your sitting, move to the body and open the eyes wider, or place attention above the hairline or between your eyebrows. If you are still not fresh, rub the eyes or the body. If that still doesn't wake you, stand up and walk, always clockwise. Once you've gone about a hundred steps you probably won't be sleepy any longer. The way to walk is to take a half step with each breath. Walk without walking, silent and unmoving.

If you still don't feel fresh after doing kinhin, wash your eyes and forehead with cold water. Or chant the "Three Pure Precepts of the Bodhisattvas". Do something; don't just fall asleep. You should be aware of the great matter of birth and death and the swiftness of impermanence. What are you doing sleeping when your eye of the way is still clouded? If dullness and sinking arise repeatedly you should chant, "Habituality is deeply rooted and so I am wrapped in dullness. When will dullness disperse? May the compassion of the buddhas and patriarchs lift this darkness and misery."

From the http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn46/sn46.053.than.html:

"Now, monks, on any occasion when the mind is sluggish, that is the wrong time to develop calm as a factor for awakening, concentration as a factor for awakening, equanimity as a factor for awakening. Why is that? The sluggish mind is hard to raise up by those mental qualities. Just as if a man, wanting to make a small fire blaze up, were to place wet grass in it, wet cow dung, & wet sticks; were to give it a spray of water and smother it with dust. Is it possible that he would make the small fire blaze up?"

"No, lord."

"In the same way, monks, on any occasion the mind is sluggish, that is the wrong time to develop calm as a factor for awakening, concentration as a factor for awakening, equanimity as a factor for awakening. Why is that? The sluggish mind is hard to raise up by those mental qualities.

From the http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.058.than.html:

"Well then, Moggallana, whatever perception you have in mind when drowsiness descends on you, don't attend to that perception, don't pursue it. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness.

"But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then recall to your awareness the Dhamma as you have heard & memorized it, re-examine it & ponder it over in your mind. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness.

"But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then repeat aloud in detail the Dhamma as you have heard & memorized it. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness.

"But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then pull both your earlobes and rub your limbs with your hands. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness.

"But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then get up from your seat and, after washing your eyes out with water, look around in all directions and upward to the major stars & constellations. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness.

"But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then attend to the perception of light, resolve on the perception of daytime, [dwelling] by night as by day, and by day as by night. By means of an awareness thus open & unhampered, develop a brightened mind. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness.

"But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then — percipient of what lies in front & behind — set a distance to meditate walking back & forth, your senses inwardly immersed, your mind not straying outwards. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness.

"But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then — reclining on your right side — take up the lion's posture, one foot placed on top of the other, mindful, alert, with your mind set on getting up. As soon as you wake up, get up quickly, with the thought, 'I won't stay indulging in the pleasure of lying down, the pleasure of reclining, the pleasure of drowsiness.' That is how you should train yourself.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 14th, 2012 at 10:04 PM
Title: Re: How smart do you have to be to get it?
Content:
Astus wrote:
"Reciting the nembutsu does not come from studying and understanding its meaning. There is no other reason or cause by which we can utterly believe in attaining birth in the Pure Land than the nembutsu itself. ... Even if those who believe in the nembutsu study the teaching which Shakyamuni taught his whole life, they should not put on any airs and should sincerely practice the nembutsu, just as an illiterate fool, a nun or one who is ignorant of Buddhism."

( http://www.jodo.org/teachings/teachings02.html )


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 14th, 2012 at 5:54 PM
Title: Re: Thich Nhat Hahn
Content:
Astus wrote:
When you ask "Is it Zen?", what you may have in mind is a story of Linji shouting or Dogen sitting all day. In fact, Zen is just a short word for Buddhism. Does TNH teach Buddhism?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 14th, 2012 at 8:07 AM
Title: Re: How smart do you have to be to get it?
Content:
Astus wrote:
It is the will to attain enlightenment, the decision to walk the path of liberation, giving birth to bodhicitta, the determination to become a buddha.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 14th, 2012 at 1:07 AM
Title: Re: Harrowing of Hell & Karandavyuha Sutra
Content:
Astus wrote:
When you have a compassionate supernatural being and a place where others suffer, it follows that such a being could as well travel to the underworld and help those poor sinners down there. Kshitigarbha is specifically the bodhisattva liberating hell beings.

Also see the mytheme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_to_the_underworld.

There is the Chinese https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Festival based on the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ullambana_Sutra where it is Mulian (Maudgalyayana, the arhat with magic powers) who saves his mother from hell.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 13th, 2012 at 10:14 PM
Title: Re: How smart do you have to be to get it?
Content:
Astus wrote:
"What I get all comes from my own mind - how could I be using some other power? It depends on whether or not the person in question is willing. If they themselves actually agree to develop the mind of enlightenment, even very ignorant people, who just know to drink when thirsty, eat when hungry, and feel attracted to the opposite sex - once they achieve the willing mind, then they can use this to discover that body does not exist and mind is only a name. When we are liberated in respect to body and mind, adverse and favorable situations and all the myriad differences all emit the light of our own mind. At this point, there is no place to put 'wisdom' much less 'ignorance'!"
(Zibo Zhenke: Discipline That Liberates, in "Zibo: The Last Great Zen Master of China" by J. C. Cleary, p. 112)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 13th, 2012 at 9:41 AM
Title: Re: Formal English Training
Content:
Astus wrote:
By training centres do you mean monasteries specifically designated as shugyou dera/doujou (修行 寺/道場) by one of the official Zen churches? Because of those, all Rinzai sects combined have only 33 in Japan, of which 20 belong to the Myoushinji tradition.

Here is a training temple of the Sanbo Kyodan group: http://www.tetsugyuji.com/index.html

However, if you extend this definition to all Zen centres (not necessarily Japanese) where one can regularly practice meditation and participate in retreat, there are quite a few in the West of those. Or if you mean monasteries where monks live, there are some of them too.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 13th, 2012 at 6:56 AM
Title: Re: Zen, doctrines and sutras
Content:
Astus wrote:
It is said that Zen is not based on written or oral teachings. On one hand, that means that the nature of mind is beyond concepts. On the other, Zen accepts the entire Buddhist Canon as authentic and does not make a single sutra or a set of sutras as their primary source. Nevertheless, there are certain sutras favoured by the tradition, mostly the popular scriptures in East Asia.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 13th, 2012 at 6:51 AM
Title: Re: Formal English Training
Content:
Astus wrote:
The http://onedropzen.org/ is an international Rinzai organisation with a training monastery in Japan where they speak English. The http://global.sotozen-net.or.jp/eng/ has several temples in Europe and America, plus all the Soto communities that are not members of the Japanese church. As for those who want to train in Japan, it seems only natural that one should first learn the language.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 12th, 2012 at 9:49 PM
Title: Re: Do Zen Buddhists fully accept rebirth as a truth?
Content:
Astus wrote:
There are people who disregard the teachings on rebirth and anything else they deem supernatural. Anyone can freely study and practice Buddhism without fully agreeing to every words of the Buddha before checking everything personally. It is actually a level of attainment within Buddhism when one has gained assurance via study and practice that the teachings of the Buddha are true. So you should not worry about your scepticism regarding rebirth. However, it should also be clear to you that rebirth is a fundamental teaching within Buddhism on which the entire path of liberation is based (i.e. without something to be free from there is no point in working for enlightenment).


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 12th, 2012 at 9:02 PM
Title: Re: How smart do you have to be to get it?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Being clever or not so clever is not an issue. The question is whether one has the dedication to the path or not. With the correct guidance - of course, what constitutes "correct" for someone depends on affinity - eventually anyone can attain liberation. With bodhicitta there is buddhahood, without bodhicitta there is no escape.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 11th, 2012 at 11:06 PM
Title: Re: East Asian Buddhist Schools?
Content:
icylake said:
in fact after 8-9th centuries, in Chinese buddhism, the "school" lost it's importance. only chan and pure land remained as distictive schools. and even those two schools were assimilated each other.

Astus wrote:
Chan as a school with its own organisation did not exist before the Song dynasty, but even then it just meant that a "Chan monastery" is a public monastery led by an abbot who is affiliated to the Chan lineage, but beyond that the monks' lives were as in any other monastery in the kingdom. Pure Land never had its own organisation, except for certain lay devotional communities. Tiantai was the major rival lineage, but again, it is an administrative issue rather than actual difference in daily monastic life. Strong distinct schools as in Japan never existed in China, because of the difference in regional and imperial government.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 11th, 2012 at 10:59 PM
Title: Re: the Four Mountains (Big Monasteries) of Taiwan
Content:
Huseng said:
Orthodoxy in this sense reflects a kind of Buddhism with many subtle Christian influences. I've often sensed in Taiwanese Buddhism a strong sense of appreciation for Catholicism. A lot of major Chinese Buddhist authors of the 20th century studied Christianity and even had a degree of contact with institutions like the Catholic Church. These exchanges still occur and are widely advertised as quite positive.

Astus wrote:
I didn't hear about that but it certainly explains a few things.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 11th, 2012 at 8:56 PM
Title: Re: East Asian Buddhist Schools?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Right now it shows that the service is temporarily unavailable, but this is a very good summary of Chinese Buddhist schools: http://www.buddhistdoor.com/OldWeb/bdoor/archive/nutshell/index.htm

This is a summary of the ten Chinese schools: http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/b3schchn.htm

Traditional view of karma and rebirth is practically identical in all schools.

One more important thing to know about Chinese Buddhism is that "schools" exist only in theory, they are simply philosophical and practical categories of different types of teachings, but monasteries and communities seldom if ever specialise in only one or two of the schools.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, December 10th, 2012 at 6:16 AM
Title: Re: What is "meditation"?
Content:
Rakshasa said:
Is mindfulness a form of calming (shamatha) or insight (vipassana)? Interesting that you say Shamatha is a form of calming the mind, I like allowing all the thoughts and mental activity to calm down just by sitting in lotus posture with erect spine and trying to relax every muscle of my body so I must be practicing Shamatha.

Where would you categorize "focusing" in the Buddhist scheme of meditation? Someone once told me that if you practice to stare at a candle light with complete focus for long time, you may develop psychic abilities. Since there is effort and mental focus required I dont think this could be classified as "Shamatha" (calming), right?

Astus wrote:
Mindfulness is the guardian of meditation, it keeps us on the object, and when the object is lost, we recognise that it is lost because of mindfulness. Mindfulness is a quality necessary for meditation, but it is not meditation in and of itself, since one has to be mindful when doing all sorts of things.

Focusing, being concentrated on a single object, can be used for calming the mind. However, focus alone is not meditation, because it can also result in a very agitated and narrow mind.

To be clear about the different qualities required for progressing on the path to liberation, I recommend you study the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhipakkhiy%C4%81dhamm%C4%81.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, December 9th, 2012 at 6:44 PM
Title: Re: What is "meditation"?
Content:
Astus wrote:
The two categories used are calming (samatha) and insight (vipasyana) to define meditation (bhavana). It is like this in Theravada and both Eastern and Northern Mahayana. The so called special forms like shikantaza and mahamudra are presented either as vipasyana or as the union of samatha and vipasyana.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, December 9th, 2012 at 6:09 PM
Title: Re: the Four Mountains (Big Monasteries) of Taiwan
Content:
Astus wrote:
I'd say Chung Tai for its Chan approach and DDM for its scholarly approach.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, December 8th, 2012 at 6:59 AM
Title: Re: Is Buddhism just as irrational as other beliefs?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Besides the encyclopaedic abhidharma, the psychological yogacara and the epistemological pramana teachings, there is a writing of the madhyamaka founder Nagarjuna (c. 2nd century CE), the Vigrahavyavartani ("The Dispeller of Disputes"), where you can see how the bases of rationality - logic and epistemology - is questioned and shown to be without any substantial foundation to rely on. So the question really is: what are rationality and irrationality if not simply conceptual constructs? The Buddha taught that grasping at such fixed views, believing them to be the exclusive truths, is the very source of all pain and dissatisfaction in life. Realising them to be what they really are, i.e. mental products, leads to freedom, compassion and wisdom.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 7th, 2012 at 5:25 PM
Title: Re: Is modernity bad for practice?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Here are some nice word from Keizan Jokin,
Monks these days are not stable in their conduct and do not thoroughly learn the major and minor forms of deportment and the internal and external mental arts, so it looks as if there is no monastic deportment. Even if mental states and physical deportment are like those of antiquity, if you have not clarified the realm of Mind, these are no more than the defiled state of humans and celestials. How much more do people who do not clarify the realm of Mind or control physical deportment receive the offerings of the faithful in vain and fall into the hells!
Thus, a former worthy said, "The world has deteriorated and people are lax. Even if one's mental states and physical deportment are not like those of the ancient holy ones, if one is able to clarify the one great matter thoroughly and intimately, perhaps one will not differ from all the Buddhas of the three times. He will become a brother of all the patriarchs and ancient worthies in history. From the beginning, there has been no triple world to escape, much less six paths to be traveled." Therefore, investigate thoroughly and study meticulously. Clarify the business beneath the patch robe. This one great matter has nothing to do with the three periods of the Dharma or differences between India, China, and Japan. Do not be sad about living in the evil time of the last days of the Dharma or hate being a resident of a peripheral land far away [from India and China].
Of course, even if any number of Buddhas came and tried to offer this one great matter, even their power would not suffice in the end. Therefore, this is not a path you can pass on to your children or a path you can receive from your father. You have to do it yourself, awaken to it yourself and acquire it yourself. Even though you practice for infinite eons, self-authentication and self-awakening happen in an instant. Once you rouse yourself, not so much as a hair in all of heaven and earth will get in the way. Once you reach this realm, nothing is hidden in the whole of eternity. How can there be anything to receive from Buddhas?
If you want to reach this realm completely, you must first abandon everything. You must not even seek the realm of Buddhas and patriarchs. Much less can there be any love or loathing of self or others. Just look directly within, without a hair of intellectualizing. There is without doubt something that has no skin or flesh. Its body is like space, without any specific form. It is like pure water, which is clear to the bottom. Completely clear and bright, you just have to know it thoroughly.

Now, how can I reveal this principle?

The water is clear to the very bottom;
The pearly gleams naturally, without need of cutting and polishing.

(Keizan Jokin: The Record of Transmitting the Light, on "Liangshan Yanguan", p. 215-216, tr. Francis Cook)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 7th, 2012 at 6:49 AM
Title: Re: If lust is desire...
Content:
Yudron said:
Exactly.  In my experience in a woman's body,  it's not sex that is any kind of problem for my practice, it would be dwelling on thoughts about sex, and then getting in to relationships with non-practitioners which ends up with a lot of wasted time doing things to please someone whose priorities are different than a practitioners time are.  Sex itself is no big deal, it's what we make of it.

I don't know if loosing semen creates all the problems some texts say they do, but in my body sex for me does not leave me depleted at all... I just feel a little healthier and happier afterwards... as I recall.

Astus wrote:
Loss of semen as loss of "vital energy", I leave this to those who follow such esoteric paths. If you look at it on the biological level there is no basis for such a belief (i.e. semen is continually reproduced anyway, with or without having sex).

In the Bloodstream Sermon of Bodhidharma it is written,

"But since married laymen don’t give up sex, how can they become Buddhas? I only talk about seeing your nature. I don’t talk about sex simply because you don’t see your nature. Once you see your nature, sex is basically immaterial. It ends along with your delight in it. Even if some habits remain, they can’t harm you, because your nature is essentially pure. Despite dwelling in a material body of four elements, your nature is basically pure. It can’t be corrupted."


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 7th, 2012 at 3:22 AM
Title: Re: Women can tell when you cheat
Content:
Astus wrote:
I don't believe that one's mental abilities depend on one's physical sex, and have not yet found any opposing reason or evidence to it. Otherwise we are stating that one sex is better in certain things than the other simply by birth.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 6th, 2012 at 9:45 PM
Title: Re: If lust is desire...
Content:
Astus wrote:
One more thing about celibacy is how it is present in the Western world. The Catholic Church clergy is (supposed to be) celibate. And I suppose I don't need to repeat all those incidents that made it to the news about the different forms of abuse, and there are many less known too. Not a positive image of celibate people at all.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 6th, 2012 at 6:26 PM
Title: Re: Women can tell when you cheat
Content:
Astus wrote:
Based on the article there are a few problems with the research.

“More masculine-looking men (were) rated as more probable to be unfaithful and having a sexual history of being more unfaithful.”
"Men, on the other hand, seemed to have no clue. They tended to perceive attractive, feminine women to be unfaithful, when there was no evidence that they were, the scientists noted."

So, if someone matches the stereotypical idea of man/woman it's more likely to be also unfaithful according to both sexes. And while men confessed their unfaithfulness to a greater extent, women did not, the reason being the social view of adultery that this article strengthens and follows.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 6th, 2012 at 4:39 PM
Title: Re: If lust is desire...
Content:
Astus wrote:
Let's first remove all the stories and ideas connected to sex and relationships. Then we're left with a fairly simple act that in and of itself is not more pleasurable than a dinner in the evening. Going directly to the opposite and of how sex is filthy and relationships are suffering, it goes nowhere but to frustration and anger. Also, creating a Buddhist myth of sex and relationships is as a romantic idea as the rest.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 6th, 2012 at 2:45 AM
Title: Re: Mindful of what in Buddhanusmriti?
Content:
Astus wrote:
With the recitation one is aware of the name in sound and thought. Reciting with a distracted mind is still recitation, but this time one only recites with the mouth but not the mind, i.e. one is not really conscious of the name in thought and the sound moves to the background of one's awareness. There are several techniques of buddha-remembrance that one can use, but the commonest form of recitation is just about intentionally and consciously reciting the name.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 4th, 2012 at 6:38 AM
Title: Re: Karmic Debt and Pure land?
Content:
Astus wrote:
If I understand your question right, you are asking whether it is possible or advisable not to do something bad. Karma is action, volitional action. You have to want to do it. There is also habit - the effect of past karma, i.e. previous acts - that makes doing certain things feel more natural than others. Having the habitual impulse to do something is not what is called "karmic debt" usually. Karmic debt is an informal expression for the results of our past deeds, like our birth. And to answer the question, we always have a choice about what we do, even if that is reduced to doing or not doing. It is always recommended to avoid doing harm to others. There are situations when we feel virtually incapable to resist a negative emotion burning in our heart and it seems easier to act on it than not to. However, if we can recognise the presence of such an impulse before doing anything, that is already half way to evade reaction to the feeling. When we have become aware of an emotion and we want to become free from it, what needs to be done is to use the recitation of the name and that way offer the whole problem to Amita Buddha. This way we avoid both acting on the impulse and suppressing the emotion.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, December 1st, 2012 at 6:55 PM
Title: Re: a true flame? a true jewel?
Content:
Astus wrote:
I think it goes like this. From the lowest level of a noble disciple ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.179.than.html ) enlightened beings follow a clear ethical conduct. A bodhisattva may go out of the boundaries of ethics driven by compassion, however, neither compassion nor the idea of skilful means are an excuse for misbehaviour in any situation (in the story of the ship captain bodhisattva he willingly took upon himself birth in hell as a consequence of murder). Therefore, either the teacher is truly realised and needs no special rules from the community, or the teacher is not enlightened and needs regulations and overview. There is no such thing as a naughty bodhisattva. Enlightened madness is what it is called, madness, therefore it should be treated as such.

The problem with the above traditionalist presentation is its extremity of pure-impure. Keeping up this division in general is useful to some extent, and that's how Buddhism operates in its established form, similarly to any organised religion. There is also the option to leave the whole enlightened-unenlightened question out of the business and see humans as humans. Spiritual attainments should not be organisational factors. In fact, they never are in the monastic structure. It is a Western mistake, a confusion, to think that teachers are necessarily enlightened. There is also a general misunderstanding about what enlightenment is. Abuses will continue as long as good willing teachers and writers fail to reform their presentation of Zen.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 30th, 2012 at 5:01 PM
Title: Re: a true flame? a true jewel?
Content:
Astus wrote:
In the article Batchelor discusses how the organisational structure - basically, the idea of a superior teacher - can be a major factor in the abuses in Zen and Tibetan Buddhism:

http://sweepingzen.com/buddhism-and-sex-the-bigger-picture/


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 30th, 2012 at 4:02 AM
Title: Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra
Content:
Astus wrote:
If there were a self beyond the aggregates, one could not touch it, feel it, think of it, or experience it in any way, because those are all within the aggregates. Something beyond the aggregates is beyond perception, beyond reality, therefore unreal and only a mental fabrication, an idea only. Realisation of such a self would also be impossible, as such a permanent self would either be already realised or never realised, since realisation is change and experience. A self beyond the aggregates has no function, therefore no existence.

"If the aggregates were self, it would be possessed of arising and decaying. If it were other than the aggregates, it would not have the characteristics of the aggregates."
( http://www.fodian.net/world/1564.htm#Investigation%20of%20Self%20and%20Things )

Commentary from the Zhonglun:

"If the soul existed apart from the five skandhas, the soul would not have the characteristics of the five skandhas. As it says in the verse: 'if the soul is different from the five skandhas, then it will not have the characteristics of the five skandhas'. Yet no other dharma exists apart from the five skandhas. If there were any such dharma apart from the five skandhas, by virtue of what characteristics, or what dharmas, would it exist?"

Commentary from the Prasannapada:

"And so, in the first place, the Self is not the aggregates; but it is also not reasonable for the Self to be different from the aggregates. For if the Self were something other than the aggregates, then the aggregates would not be its defining characteristics. For example, a horse, which is different from a cow, does not have a cow as its defining characteristic. In the same manner, the Self, when it is conceived as different from the aggregates, would not have the aggregates as its defining characteristics. Here, because they are conditioned (saṃskṛta), the aggregates arise from causes and conditions and their defining characteristics are occurrence, perdurance and decay. Therefore, if the Self does not have the aggregates as its defining characteristics, as you maintain, then the Self would not have occurrence, perdurance and decay as its defining characteristics. And in that case, the Self would either be like a sky flower, because it does not exist, or it would be like nirvāṇa, because it is unconditioned. As such, it would not be called the “Self,” nor would it be reasonable for it to be the object of the habitual sense of ‘I.’ Therefore, it is also not reasonable for the Self to be different from the aggregates. 
Alternatively, here is another meaning of the statement, “If the Self were different from the aggregates, the aggregates would not be its defining characteristics.” These are the defining characteristics of the five aggregates: (1) malleability, (2) experience, (3) the apprehension of an object’s sign, (4) conditioning, and (5) representation of an object. If, just as consciousness is asserted to be different from material form, the Self were asserted to be different from the aggregates, then the Self would be established with a distinct defining characteristic. As such, it would be apprehended as being established with a distinct defining characteristic, just as consciousness is apprehended as established with a defining characteristic distinct from material form. The Self is not, however, apprehended in that fashion; hence, there is no Self distinct from the aggregates.
Someone objects, «The Tīrthikas know of a Self separate from the aggregates, and they thus speak of its defining characteristics. Hence, this way of refuting the Self does not refute them. And the way that the Tīrthikas speak of a separate defining characteristic for the Self is stated in the following verse from Encountering Madhyamaka:
The Tīrthikas conceive of a Self that is by nature eternal; it is an experiencer without being an agent; it is devoid of qualities and inactive. The Tīrthikas’ system has come to be further divided in terms of this or that distinction in the qualities predicated of the Self.» (MAV 6.142)
We respond as follows. It is true that the Tīrthikas state a defining characteristic of the Self separate from the aggregates, but they do not state its defining characteristic after having perceived the Self in its actuality. Rather, through not properly understanding dependent designation, they do not realize, due to their fear, that the Self is merely nominal. Not realizing this, they depart even from conventional reality, and due to their false concepts, they become confused by what is merely spurious inference. Thus confused, they conceptually construct a Self due to their confusion, and they then state its defining characteristic. In the “Analysis of Factors in Action and their Object” (MMK 8), Nāgārjuna says that the Self and its substratum are established in mutual dependence on each other; and by saying this, he refutes the above notion of Self in even conventional terms."


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, November 28th, 2012 at 5:22 PM
Title: Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
No its not,tathagatagarbha is not eternalism,when Buddha spoke of eternalists in was never in realation to enlightenemnt/Tathagatgarbha but was in relation to the false self not being eternal.
nilhism and eternalism in Buddhist sutras are in realation to the tainted self(5 aggregates/Skandalas)

Buddhism teaches that nhilism is wrong view so Enlightenment doesnt cease(if it did cease then it would annhilate=nhilism
eternalism in Buddhism was in realation to the 5 Skandalas tainted self(as the Brahmas beleived the 5 Skandala self was eternal)the Buddha taught this eternalism was wrong view.

Astus wrote:
This idea that there is a true eternal self beyond the five aggregates is exactly the atman of outsiders and the teaching refuted by the doctrine of the five aggregates itself. If the buddha-nature were like that it would be indeed nothing but false teachings.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 26th, 2012 at 8:21 PM
Title: Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra
Content:
Huifeng said:
But the Prajnaparamita does not say that there is one path and one goal...

Astus wrote:
True.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 26th, 2012 at 5:53 PM
Title: Re: Is modernity bad for practice?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Putting aside whether this is true or not, what if modernity is bad for practice? The idea of a Dharma ending age is not a new one, and it's not stopped any school to continue with whatever they had been doing. There are some emphasising the difficulty of the times for hundreds of years now, mainly the Pure Land schools. In Zen they emphasise that regardless of the circumstances every being has buddha-nature and the possibility to attain enlightenment right now. Vajrayana has both concepts and claims that it is the most appropriate method especially for this dark age. All three schools embrace householders and say that being busy in everyday life is not a problem. And there is Vimalakirti and the idea of the householder bodhisattva.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 26th, 2012 at 5:17 PM
Title: Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra
Content:
Astus wrote:
Gregory,

How is the concept of One Vehicle an important one here? I mean, even the Prajnaparamita Sutra in 8000 Verses says right in the first chapter that prajnaparamita is required by both sravakas and bodhisattvas. So, we can say that there is actually only one path and one goal taught in different ways for different audiences.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 25th, 2012 at 1:06 AM
Title: Re: Is modernity bad for practice?
Content:
Astus wrote:
It is misleading to say that people are generally materialist just because state education consists mostly of non-religious subjects.

Huseng said:
No, I'm saying state education teaches materialism (without calling it materialism) as the default worldview. If you got educated in pre-modern Tibet your worldview would be thoroughly Buddhist with the whole cosmology, karma and rebirth taught as explicitly real and realistic, whereas now there is an alternative worldview.

This is why so many people (not just in the west, but in Asia too) have problems with the idea of rebirth and karma.

Astus wrote:
Should rebirth be part of education? One could as well make it a theistic view. It is the very idea of removing all religious ideas from public education that helped pushing back religions from the front. Teaching or studying science is not the same as materialism. I'm not a science fan and I've never really been interested in it. But bringing religion back into education sounds like a very bad move to me. Buddhism should be ready for the challenge and prove its teachings instead of expecting people to just follow because the Buddha said so. The Dalai Lama is very clever in emphasising that kind of attitude, returning to the Indian teachers where they had to argue and defend their views in face of others who followed many different kinds of world views. Buddhism started its career in the West first by donning the robe of a rational philosophy. Today it is studied and spread by its meditation methods of helping people. Buddhism must stay humanistic in the sense of something tangible and close to everyday life. That way it might have a chance of staying alive. I trust and believe in Buddhism because I know it works and I find it logical. If I had just followed my culturally ingrained instincts about spirituality I would have left Buddhism long ago for a nice Christian church or some other Western philosophy, because that's where my inclinations were.

As for practice, I don't see any special hindrances created by technology. Is it really more difficult today to become a renunciate than before? What is it that stops anyone from ordaining? The government is not a problem, nor is travel, unlike before. There are monasteries now even in Europe, America and Australia where one can go. Food is not a problem in any developed country. In fact, if one really wanted to imitate the early Buddhist community, being a homeless beggar is less risky today than in ancient India, and one can still access public libraries and internet, not to mention healthcare, soup kitchens and shelters.

Are people in general more exposed to sensual pleasures today? Sure, because the society can afford it. And that is what the majority is interested in. Not surprising at all in the realm of desire, is it? But nobody forces anyone to watch TV, play games and go to parties. People have enough wealth and free time to support the industries based on entertainment, beauty products, travelling, etc. At the same time, one can put that time and money into spiritual endeavours as well. And many do. In developed countries more people live in better conditions today than the lesser nobility and burghers/bourgeoisie did a few hundred years ago.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 25th, 2012 at 12:17 AM
Title: Re: Sex, Death And The Meaning Of Life
Content:
Astus wrote:
Interesting show. It makes me ask how it could have happened that while Buddhism have had these ideas about exchanging oneself with another, empathy, removing the concept of identity, that Dawkins gives as sources of making life better, never really became the norm in any Buddhist country or region.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 24th, 2012 at 8:43 PM
Title: Re: Is modernity bad for practice?
Content:
Astus wrote:
I think that the current era is more conducive to practice than it was in the past. In pre-modern Europe (approx. before 16th century, although we can say that since the middle of the 20th century it is post-modern) people took the Christian world view as evident and everything else was simply wrong. Buddhism could spread in the West exactly because of the loss of faith after World War 2 in both religion and science.  Explicit atheism in Europe is below 20% and even in the most atheist countries it doesn't go above 35%, while there are countries where organised religion is accepted by more than 90% (based on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Europe ). It is misleading to say that people are generally materialist just because state education consists mostly of non-religious subjects. But if you mean by materialist that people are greedy, there is nothing new about it. At the same time, with modernity came education and the accessibility of information. Again something that Buddhism greatly benefits of. In the pre-modern era the general population not just couldn't read but books were also a rarity.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 24th, 2012 at 2:15 AM
Title: Re: Are Tibetan Buddhism and Tantric Buddhism the same thing?
Content:
pueraeternus said:
I get the impression that in Nalandabodhi (Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche's organization), they do cater for those who only practice in the sutra tradition. Which is interesting, since I also had the impression that all the Tibetan schools lead their students to tantra, with sutra only as preliminary training.

Astus wrote:
The http://www.bodhipath.org/ of the Shamarpa is also mostly sutra teachings, i.e. Lojong.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 23rd, 2012 at 1:40 AM
Title: Re: Hidden Truths and Secrets in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
In the Anguttara Nikaya (3.131 / PTS: 1.282 / 3.129) the Paṭicchanna sutta says,

"Monks, there are these three things which are practiced in secret, not openly. What are they? The ways of womenfolk are secret, not open. Brahmins practice their chants in secret, not openly. Those of perverse views hold their views secretly, not openly. These are the three things. Monks, there are these three things which shine forth for all to see, which are not hidden. Which three? The disc of the moon shines for all to see; it is not hidden. The disc of the sun does likewise. The Dhamma-Discipline of a Tathagata shines for all to see; it is not hidden. These are the three things."
( http://www.fakebuddhaquotes.com/three-things-cannot-be-long-hidden-the-sun-the-moon-and-the-truth-buddha/ )

"Bhikkhus, these three are carried away covered, not openly. What three? Women are carried away covered not openly. Brahmanical mutterings are done under cover and Wrong view is covered not made manifest. Bhikkhus, these three when made manifest shine. What three? Bhikkhus, the moon shines when manifest, the sun shines when manifest and the Teaching and Discipline declared by the Thus Gone One shines when manifest and not when covered. These three shine when manifest and not when covered."
( http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-Nikaya/Anguttara1/3-tikanipata/013-bharanduvaggo-e.html )


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 22nd, 2012 at 9:59 PM
Title: Re: Hidden Truths and Secrets in Buddhism
Content:
Raksha said:
Buddhism was not to be found in books, and that what was truely precious was never even spoken, never mind sold in bookstores.

Astus wrote:
This idea is found already in the earliest Prajnaparamita sutras, expressing that emptiness is the absence of conceptual proliferation. And then on the same is stated in later traditions like Zen with the same intention.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 22nd, 2012 at 8:26 PM
Title: Re: Cultivating both Body and Mind in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Split topic: http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=10896


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 22nd, 2012 at 8:23 PM
Title: Re: Hidden Truths and Secrets in Buddhism
Content:
Raksha said:
Likewise in Buddhism, what you can read in books is only the tip of the iceberg.

Astus wrote:
What do you base this view on?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 22nd, 2012 at 6:41 PM
Title: Re: Cultivating both Body and Mind in Buddhism
Content:
Raksha said:
I meant 'truely secret and precious' since obviously all the Buddhist canon is precious. Equally obviously none of it is secret. What is not written down are the instructions from a teacher to his student. The things of the greatest value cannot be obtained for money, nor are they displayed openly. If I remember correctly Tibetans believe than Buddhist texts have little value unless they are accompanied by a textual transmission given by a qualified teacher. What do you suppose this transmission actually involves, why can't it be written down or bought at the local bookstore?

Astus wrote:
There are many texts considered that kind of oral instructions, upadesha, written down by students. And in these days you have not only books but video records too. What would be the purpose of such special secret teachings anyway? Throughout the history of Buddhism there were groups that claimed to possess such secret instructions. What "secret instruction" actually meant is that they could not prove that it's from a traditional source so they called it hidden. This has happened with the Mahayana sutras, the Tantras, the Zen transmission, and all the rest. What is also common about them is that today you have it all written down. And even if there were some special secret instructions, nobody could use it as a reason in a discussion like this, because of its secret nature.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 22nd, 2012 at 6:29 PM
Title: Re: Cultivating both Body and Mind in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Meido,

So, according to your quotes, focus on the belly and the feet helps calm the mind at the initial stages of meditation. Did I miss anything?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 22nd, 2012 at 6:14 AM
Title: Re: Cultivating both Body and Mind in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Meido,

What reason does Hakuin give that those practices result in realisation?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 22nd, 2012 at 5:59 AM
Title: Re: Five Mountain Zen Order & Paul Lynch
Content:
Astus wrote:
Yudron,

In Buddhism, generally speaking, there are no special rules for establishing yourself as a teacher. Technically, a small group of monks can establish a separate community without problem. In fact, even a single influential monk or nun with substantial followers can start a new monastery or even a new tradition. Lay people are free to do as they want. Nobody owns the Dharma and nobody rules the Sangha. What really matters in the end is whether one can get the necessary support, either from the general laity or from political power, that will provide the material basis of Dharma centres, monasteries, publishing, etc.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 22nd, 2012 at 12:06 AM
Title: Re: Cultivating both Body and Mind in Buddhism
Content:
Raksha said:
nothing truely secret or precious has EVER been written down in texts.

Astus wrote:
I guess you have not read this in the Buddhist canon.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, November 21st, 2012 at 10:52 PM
Title: Re: Cultivating both Body and Mind in Buddhism
Content:
lobster said:
The Buddha himself said, “There is one thing that when cultivated and regularly practiced, leads to deep spiritual intention, to peace, to mindfulness and clear comprehension, to vision and knowledge, to a happy life here and now and to the culmination of wisdom and awakening. And what is that one thing? It is mindfulness centered on the body.”
Elsewhere, Buddha said, “If the body is not cultivated, the mind cannot be cultivated. If the body is cultivated then the mind can be cultivated.”
http://mettarefuge.wordpress.com/2011/04/11/why-buddhist-practice-is-deeply-rooted-in-mindfulness-of-the-body/

Astus wrote:
That is the first section of the fourfold basis of mindfulness (satipatthana), called mindfulness of body (kayanupassana). It is not by training the body but by training the mind that one uses that technique, otherwise we could say that Buddhism also has such methods as cultivating water, earth, space, etc. that can all be objects of meditation.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, November 21st, 2012 at 7:12 PM
Title: Re: Cultivating both Body and Mind in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Raksha,

The Shaolin monastery was first associated with Bodhidharma around the beginning of the 8th century by the Northern School's lineage story. But connecting Bodhidharma with martial arts happened almost a thousand years later in 1642 (see Faure: Chan Buddhism in Ritual Context, p. 91 and McRae: Seeing Through Zen, p. 26).

For me to see connection with body cultivation and the path of liberation would require instructions given in the sutras and the writings of the masters. So far I have not encountered any sutra or manual in Mahayana Buddhism that teaches such techniques, unlike in Vajrayana.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, November 21st, 2012 at 5:48 PM
Title: Re: Cultivating both Body and Mind in Buddhism
Content:
Meido said:
As mentioned, in Zen there are body and breath practices predicated on an understanding of subtle energetics, energy centers, and their utility for the integration or embodiment of realization.  These are of course not practiced with reference to tantric texts.

Even basic meditation in Rinzai practice is concerned primarily with unifying a specific breathing method (involving a sealing of the pelvic floor and gathering of energy into the navel center) with one's bodily posture.  In other words, the mental "method" of practice is understood, established and deepened through a specific use of the body, not separately from it or even alongside it.

Astus wrote:
Let's add that that kind of Rinzai Zen technique started with Hakuin and used to strengthen the body to avoid illness generated by extensive asceticism. It does not lead to realising the nature of mind, nor is it used in any other Zen school outside of Hakuin's followers. There are of course others who do different forms of yoga, qigong, etc., but again, not for liberation itself but as supportive methods to maintain health. As such, they are not much different from a healthy diet and proper clothing.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, November 21st, 2012 at 7:39 AM
Title: Re: Cultivating both Body and Mind in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
The "Mushindokai" page refers to a Tantric form of practice. Others also refer to Tantric body practices. And the question in the OP was if there is any kind of body training in non-Tantric Buddhism. That's how my answer is no. Even the concept of the system of channels, winds and drops is unknown outside of Tantra, if they can be viewed as body related practices or explanations for such yogas.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 20th, 2012 at 11:41 PM
Title: Re: Cultivating both Body and Mind in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
I understand "cultivating body" as a practice used to attain liberation by training the body. Prostrations, etc. are bodily activities - just as reading, listening, reciting, etc. - meant to assist the mind, and by training the mind one reaches enlightenment. Therefore, there is no cultivation of body in Buddhism.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 20th, 2012 at 10:01 PM
Title: Re: Cultivating both Body and Mind in Buddhism
Content:
Jikan said:
Would you say that prostrations are primarily a meditative practice, or a practice for health?  How about circumambulation or pilgrimage?

Astus wrote:
They are not meant to train your body but to train your mind.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 20th, 2012 at 8:51 PM
Title: Re: Cultivating both Body and Mind in Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
I think what should be differentiated is that outside of Anuttarayogatantra the bodily practices, if used in any community or tradition, are not part of the path to enlightenment but are simply exercises for health. But even in AYT I'm not sure what could be considered actual body trainings.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 20th, 2012 at 7:47 AM
Title: Asian Classics Institute
Content:
Astus wrote:
It has an organised set of study materials online: http://www.acidharma.org/aci/index.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 19th, 2012 at 11:42 PM
Title: Re: Online Philosophy & Buddhology Resources
Content:
Astus wrote:
Thesaurus Literaturae Buddhicae
(multilingual presentation of Buddhist literature sentence by sentence in Sanskrit, Chinese, Tibetan, English, etc.)

http://www2.hf.uio.no/polyglotta/index.php?page=library&bid=2 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Database of Modern Chinese Buddhism

http://buddhistinformatics.ddbc.edu.tw/dmcb/Main_Page " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 19th, 2012 at 11:42 PM
Title: Re: Online Philosophy & Buddhology Resources
Content:
Astus wrote:
Thesaurus Literaturae Buddhicae
(multilingual presentation of Buddhist literature sentence by sentence in Sanskrit, Chinese, Tibetan, English, etc.)

http://www2.hf.uio.no/polyglotta/index.php?page=library&bid=2 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Database of Modern Chinese Buddhism

http://buddhistinformatics.ddbc.edu.tw/dmcb/Main_Page " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 19th, 2012 at 7:47 PM
Title: Holmes Welch the Chan Transmitter
Content:
Astus wrote:
The http://www.pragmaticbuddhism.org/node/12 and the http://www.cloudwater.org/index.php/ch-an-zen/our-lineage, practically the same lineage, claims that http://buddhistinformatics.ddbc.edu.tw/dmcb/Holmes_Welch_%E5%A8%81%E7%88%BE%E5%A5%87 transmitted the Linji Chan lineage of the http://buddhistinformatics.ddbc.edu.tw/dmcb/Jiangtian_chan_si_%E6%B1%9F%E5%A4%A9%E7%A6%AA%E5%AF%BA. Holmes Welch had Ven. T'ai-ts'ang in his book "The Practice of Chinese Buddhism, 1900-1950" as an important source of information on Chan history. In the same book Welch describes how Dharma transmission was a common practice of ensuring the succession of abbots in a monastery. He quotes from an account of the practice in the Kiangsu area: "In actuality this kind of "dharma transmission" has become a formality in the Ch'an sect. It is a million miles away from the dharma transmission by the direct imprint of mind on mind. This kind of dharma transmission is simply a traditional formality of genealogical succession." (p. 165) Stuart Lachs ( http://www.hsuyun.org/docs/english/pdf/DressingTheDonkey.pdf ) quotes from another work of Welch: "Dharma transmission is only an institutional sanctioning of a teacher bestowing membership in a teaching lineage and may be no more than, as Buddhist scholar Holmes Welch said “like [getting] a Flash Gordon pin.""

While Welch was interested in both Chinese Buddhism and Taoism, I can see no sign that he was also a Dharma teacher. And compared to his scholarly reports it appears to me strange to give him the position of a Chan master. Any other information on the subject is welcome.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 19th, 2012 at 12:00 AM
Title: Re: Mondo Zen, Integral Zen (tm)
Content:
Jinzang said:
If the goal of Zen is to see through delusion, how is a modernized Zen going to see through the delusions of modernism? The truth is neither tradition or modernism is going to save us, but it easier for a modern person to see the faults of tradition and resist them than to see the faults of modernism.

Astus wrote:
The delusion to be seen through is the attachment to identity. Modernism, traditionalism, and any other form of presentation are only meant to make the realisation accessible. As long as a teaching leads to correct view it is an authentic method. The important question is the efficiency of the way, not the embellishment used to attract people.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, November 14th, 2012 at 5:54 PM
Title: Re: How to get rid of clinging to self
Content:
Astus wrote:
The Buddha's basic remedy is the contemplation on the five aggregates and the 6-12-18 sensory fields. To see that whatever you call the I must be an aggregate, and all aggregates bear the three characteristics (impermanent, suffering, selfless) results in comprehending and even realising that there is no such thing as an I.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, November 14th, 2012 at 5:51 PM
Title: Re: Where is Mount Sumeru?
Content:
Astus wrote:
I remember reading somewhere that Sumeru can be identified as the Himalayas, and the spatial cosmology is mostly India, the southern continent of Jambudvipa.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 12th, 2012 at 7:19 PM
Title: Re: Mondo Zen, Integral Zen (tm)
Content:
Astus wrote:
Thanks Lance for sharing your experience.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 12th, 2012 at 2:23 AM
Title: Re: Mondo Zen, Integral Zen (tm)
Content:
Astus wrote:
The question is whether there is an option to just participate in whatever programme for free. Usually in any European country people can go in to a Christian church and just listen to the priest or minister. There are temples that are open for the public all day and they don't ask for anything. However, the major Christian organisations receive state support in many countries. That means that the buildings and the priests are paid indirectly by everyone. Buddhist organisations have that only in Asia. However, regardless if it's Christian or Buddhist, if there is a special programme, like a retreat, people are asked to pay. The system of donation works only when there are enough people willing to pay for those who can't pay, or rather when the people supported receive sufficient funds to run the organisation. Ultimately it is up to the people who pay, not those who ask for the money. So if the question is what we can do as individuals, it is choosing an organisation that we are happy to support regularly.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 11th, 2012 at 10:40 PM
Title: Re: Recommended reading on Buddhist philosophy
Content:
Astus wrote:
As for East Asian Buddhism, the Kuroda Institute has two series: http://uhpress.wordpress.com/books-in-series/kuroda-institute/, they contain many good works. Orthodox Chinese Buddhism by Ven. Shengyan is a good introduction to general Chinese Buddhism. Specifically about Zen, Steven Heine and Dale S. Wright edited a series published by Oxford University Press. Works by John R. McRae, Jan Nattier, Robert H. Sharp, Bernard Faure, Albert Welter, Robert E. Buswell Jr., Charles A. Muller, Taigen Dan Leighton and others are also recommended.

For the Abhidharmakosa, this is a useful blog: http://abhidharmakosa.wordpress.com/.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 11th, 2012 at 10:09 PM
Title: Re: Question about Korean Zen
Content:
Astus wrote:
As I've said here before, Korean Zen should not be reduced to a single entity. It shows a great diversity in terms of how Zen and Buddhism in general is approached and taught. Within the Jogye Order there are different groups with their own ideas and methods. Hwadu practice is the prevalent technique, but there are teachers who instead of that emphasise yeombul (buddha-remembrance), kongan or something else. The ganhwa method itself can be used in different ways. It shouldn't be forgot that calling it "Korean" Buddhism defines only its geographical and cultural situation, not its content.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 11th, 2012 at 9:58 PM
Title: Re: Mondo Zen, Integral Zen (tm)
Content:
Astus wrote:
How they manage their organisation is a different area than their doctrinal and practical teachings. If a commercial model works better than the one based on donations I don't see it as an error. Profit oriented spiritual enterprises are a problem when the money is not used for the welfare of the people but turned into the private wealth of the owners of the organisation. In fact, the Buddhist form of community is that there are no owners or leaders but only members. In practice, however, throughout the history of Buddhism the system produced strong managers and head teachers who had overwhelming influence over spiritual and financial matters. Is Mondo Zen about benefiting only those few at the top or is it about bringing the Dharma to more and more people?


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 11th, 2012 at 8:35 PM
Title: Re: Mondo Zen, Integral Zen (tm)
Content:
Astus wrote:
Jinzang,

People who are not already in Buddhism must have a reason to engage in Zen or any other form of Buddhist practice. It is not by accident that the Dalai Lama propagates the scientific research on meditation, it actually validates Buddhism and makes it more appealing to people than just a strange eastern religion. Self-help (pseudo-)psychology is a common entry point to the Dharma.

Why is it wrong? What is confirmed is how the practice should be done. Especially at the beginning it is important to have a clear understanding of what the method is about and to develop faith and aspiration. Otherwise, if people are left in the darkness and just told to sit silently it will hardly bring any good result. In the case of Zen in order to do it correctly one must first become experientially established in buddha-mind, or it is not Zen.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 11th, 2012 at 8:07 AM
Title: Re: Mondo Zen, Integral Zen (tm)
Content:
Astus wrote:
BuddhaSoup,

Yes, I've recognised that too. However, it might as well be viewed as a working technique. It doesn't determine anything about the cost of training and the way it is run. Instead of jumping to conclusions the facts should be checked first.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 10th, 2012 at 11:56 PM
Title: Re: Mondo Zen, Integral Zen (tm)
Content:
Astus wrote:
I've read the manual and besides its language and using some psychological terms and ideas it is within the limits of a Zen Buddhist training. In fact, to me it looks very good as a modern application of classical techniques. It is to the point, step by step and helpful.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 10th, 2012 at 8:09 PM
Title: Re: Mondo Zen, Integral Zen (tm)
Content:
Thus-gone said:
I'm sure it's helpful on a psychological level, and may even trigger some kind of opening experience, but I see no place for the deepening and integration of awakening that is the very essence of the Zen school.

Astus wrote:
What makes you say so? In their koan training they seem to really work on making people realise the essentials of Zen, and after that they also have a 60-day follow up programme to deepen the realisation. And depending on personal choice one could still continue practising with or without a group.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 10th, 2012 at 8:36 AM
Title: Re: Mondo Zen, Integral Zen (tm)
Content:
Astus wrote:
What I'm really missing is the description of the actual methods and teachings. There are all these praises about the teacher and the method, but no real information. However, by a simple search I've found their http://www.mondozen.org/_literature_104890/Mondo_Zen_Training_Manual_April_2012 that describes the whole process. It seems to me like a very interesting application of Rinzai Zen koan process transformed into a modern training. So, before any further critiques, I recommend everyone to read it.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 9th, 2012 at 8:59 PM
Title: Re: Mondo Zen, Integral Zen (tm)
Content:
Astus wrote:
It seems that the founders and members found Zen presented in America lacking in certain aspects, thus created this newer format. I consider it a natural evolution of modern (non-Buddhist) Zen.

Look at this bibliography: http://www.mondozen.org/resource_library/reading_list.htm " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 8th, 2012 at 12:18 AM
Title: Re: Why isn't Tendai popular in the West?
Content:
Astus wrote:
What I'm missing from Tendai are translations. Zen has most of the major sutras and masters translated to English, and there are many studies on the history and teachings. As for Tendai, there's not much one can study.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 4th, 2012 at 6:46 PM
Title: Re: Zen has No Morals
Content:
Astus wrote:
Here is something interesting from the wonderful Bankei,

Bankei Zen, tr. P. Haskel, p. 7 said:
A certain master of the Precepts School asked: "Doesn't your Reverence observe the precepts?"
The Master said: "Originally, what people call the precepts were all for wicked monks who broke the rules; for the man who abides in the Unborn Buddha Mind, there's no need for precepts. The precepts were taught to help sentient beings—they weren't taught to help buddhas! What everyone has from his parents innately is the Unborn Buddha Mind alone, so abide in the Unborn Buddha Mind. When you abide in the Unborn Buddha Mind, you're a living buddha here today, and that living buddha certainly isn't going to concoct anything like taking the precepts, so there aren't any precepts for him to take. To concoct anything like taking the precepts is not what's meant by the Unborn Buddha Mind. When you abide in the Unborn Buddha Mind, there's no way you can violate the precepts. From the standpoint of the Unborn, the precepts too are secondary, peripheral concerns; in the place of the Unborn, there's really no such thing as precepts. . . ."

Astus wrote:
So, there is no need for the precepts, because they don't violate it anyway.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 4th, 2012 at 2:32 AM
Title: Re: Why academics value Buddhism?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Talking about monasticism and academics, for instance Robert E. Buswell is both a scholar and ex-monk. He also wrote a book "The Zen Monastic Experience: Buddhist Practice in Contemporary Korea". Even today, the general system in Korea is that monks and nuns stay in a monastery for 2×3 months and then wander for 2×3 months.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 3rd, 2012 at 12:40 AM
Title: The Source of What: Who Transmits What?
Content:
Astus wrote:
"Without fully and finally letting go one’s self-with-form, there can be no transmission — even if one has received innumerable transmission certificates from various lineages. The basis and source of transmission in Zen is the awakening to one’s selfless self. And this emerges precisely from the dropping away of self, once and for all. Remember the character I wrote on the board? That’s it. No one transmits anything to anyone; in other words, shin or kokoro transmits kokoro to kokoro by way of kokoro. That’s all."

http://beingwithoutself.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/sourceofzenwhotransmitswhat.pdf by Jeff Shore is a wonderful summary of the issue that combines both the Zen and the scholarly view.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 2nd, 2012 at 9:12 PM
Title: Hsiu-hsiu-an Discourse on Sitting Meditation
Content:
Astus wrote:
This is said to be a 14th century Chan text that is used in Won Buddhism. Ryuei's blog has some commentary on it.

Translation by http://fraughtwithperil.com/ryuei/2011/09/13/hsiu-hsiu-an-discourse-on-sitting-meditation/:
Hsiu-hsiu-an Discourse on Sitting Meditation

Generally, to practice sitting meditation one must reach the highest excellence and ought to be naturally alert.

Cutting off thinking and yet not falling into dullness is called “sitting.” Remaining without passion in a passionate situation and without defilement when dwelling amidst defilement is called “meditation.”

Allowing nothing external to enter and nothing internal to leave is called “sitting.” Having no abode and depending on nothing while constantly lighting the way before one is called “meditation.”

Remaining unmoved when the outside world is moving and staying quiet and free from agitation in the middle of it all is called “sitting.” Turning the light back within to illuminate and discern the root source of all phenomena is called “meditation.”

Refraining from acting on the favorable and unfavorable circumstances one is faced with and likewise not being turned aside by the distractions of forms and sounds is called “sitting.” Illuminating the darkness so that the brightness exceeds that of the sun and moon and transforming matters so that virtue overcomes heaven and earth is called “meditation.”

Entering the samadhi free of distinctions when surrounded by distinctions is called “sitting.” Displaying the wisdom which discerns distinctions even when there are no distinctions is called “meditation.”

In summary, the blazing work of the function in accord with the correct substance of the absolute is called “sitting”; while attaining the sublime throughout one’s length and breadth and thereby finding no obstructions when dealing with any matter is called “meditation.” These words are just a summary because no amount of paper or ink can thoroughly exhaust [the real meaning of sitting meditation].

The Naga’s great samadhi is neither quiet nor moved. It is the true thusness of the wondrous substance, which has no appearance and no disappearance. It cannot be seen when looked upon nor heard when listened to. It is empty yet not empty; being yet not being. It is vast enough to encompass what has no boundaries yet so minute that it can enter what has no inside. It is the universal spirit of knowledge and wisdom, radiant light, longevity, the great moving power, the great function, unexcelled and inexhaustible.

Someone with an aspiration [to be enlightened] should examine this fully in order to act in accord with the great enlightenment. After the single voiced roar [of awakening] the multitudes of subtle powers will all be complete in oneself. How can this be compared with the powers of darkness outside the Way transmitted by those claiming to be teachers who take what they have gained to be the final goal?
Translation from http://www.wonbuddhism.org/doc/4.buddhist.sutra%28english%29/8.Hsiu.Hsiu.Am.Discourse.on.Meditation.pdf:
Hsiu-Hsiu Am Discourse on Za-Zen
Generally, to practice Za(sitting)-Zen(meditation) is to reach the mental state of highest excellence and to be in the state of complete alertness.
When the mind is devoid of any thought and yet no drowsiness takes place, it is called Za; if there is no passion in a condition which fans it and if one transcends defilements in which one is, it is called zen.
When neither external sense-object enters the mind, nor the mind goes out towards external things, it is called Za. If the mind is neither attached to anything nor depends on anything so that the constant light illuminates, it is called Zen.
If the mind is not moved when the external conditions shake it and if the mind is quiet and free from agitation, it is called Zen. If the light going out is turned inward so that the source of the self-nature is reflected, it is called Zen.
If the mind is not agitated either by favorable or adverse conditions, nor is it rolled over by color or sound, it is called Za; if the light surpasses the sun and the moon when it illuminates the dark area, and if virtue surpasses heaven and earth when transforming things, it is called Zen.
To enter the state of samadahi in a condition of discrimination is called Za; to have the discerning Prajna in the condition of no discrimination is called Zen.
In conclusion: to keep the true nature of samadhi serene while the mind works like a blazing fire is called Za; to attain boundless wisdom and thereby to do things without any obstruction is called Zen.
Za-zen can be summarized briefly as this. However no amount of ink and paper would be sufficient for a detailed illustration.
The great Samdahi of Naga is neither quiet nor moved; the wondrous nature of True Thusness is neither born nor annihilated. Neither can it be seen when looked at, nor can it be heard when listened to. It is empty and yet it is not; it exists and yet it does not. It is as vast as to envelop what has no boundary and it is as minute as to enter what has no inside. The magic power, light, longevity, great moving power and the application of the one who is enlightened to it are inexhaustible and limitless.
If one with an aspiration to be enlightened practices Za-Zen in a proper way until one attains the great enlightenment, one will be filled with various powers of wondrous spirit at the roar of awakening. How could this be compared with the wicked heretics who, with their instructions, claim to be teachers, and who take what they gain to be the final goal?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 1st, 2012 at 8:21 PM
Title: Re: Can a Buddha intervene with our karma?
Content:
Astus wrote:
lucidaromulus,

In chapter 25 of the Lotus Sutra it is told how Guanyin helps anyone who thinks of her. But as I said before, there is the condition of remembrance, actually making it a form of practice. However, if Guanyin were able to help people of her own free will nobody would have any trouble in life.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 1st, 2012 at 8:20 AM
Title: Re: Sri Simha in Zen/Chan lineage
Content:
Astus wrote:
Transmission in Zen is not really a historical matter. It is mind to mind, not hand to hand. If we focus on historical facts and religious legends the true intention is already lost.

"According to tradition, Master Chih died in the year 514, while Bodhidharma came to Liang in 520; since there is a seven year discrepancy, why is it said that the twp met? This must be a mistake in the tradition. As to what is recorded in tradition, I will not discuss this matter now. All that's important is to understand the gist of the matter."
(Yuanwu's commentary on the case of Bodhidharma meeting the emperor, in The Blue Cliff Record, tr. T. Cleary, p. 5)

"We learn that Shakyamuni Buddha inherited the Dharma from Kashō Buddha, and we learn that Kashō Buddha inherited the Dharma from Shakyamuni Buddha. When we learn the matter in this way, it will be the true succession of Buddha after Buddha and Ancestor after Ancestor."
(Dogen: Shisho in Shobogenzo, tr. H. Nearman, p. 171)

"Hõen of Tõzan said, "Even Shakya and Maitreya are servants of another. I want to ask you, who is he?""
(Gateless Gate, case 45, tr. K. Sekida)

"all of the buddhas and all of their teachings of peerless perfect enlightenment spring forth from this sūtra."
(Diamond Sutra, ch. 8, tr. C. Muller)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 1st, 2012 at 7:45 AM
Title: Re: Can a Buddha intervene with our karma?
Content:
Astus wrote:
If buddhas could change the karma of beings, then it follows that all beings would be enlightened, and there would be no need for personal effort of any kind, since the buddhas want to save everyone. However, when there is a teaching that says that some buddha or bodhisattva purifies one's karma, it is because one's own connection to the buddha that is generated through a specific practice. In the Lotus Sutra it is taught that Avalokitesvara can save one from practically anything starting with mundane troubles up to the root afflictions of the mind, but only if one correctly keeps in mind the bodhisattva. In the sutras about Amitabha buddha we learn that birth in his Land of Bliss is easily attainable even for one who committed the gravest crimes, if one remembers Amitabha with faith. In order to be purified by Vajrasattva there is a quite elaborate practice that includes visualisation, recitation and repentance. So it is not that buddhas just intervene in any being's karma. It is exactly because doing the proper practices (i.e. generating karma) that one can negate other karmic effects.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 31st, 2012 at 5:57 PM
Title: Re: what's the fundamental difference?
Content:
Astus wrote:
First it should be clarified what they are that you want to see the difference between. Theravada is a specific school that is based on Pali language canonical and extra-canonical works with several regional varieties in South Asia. Mahayana and Vajrayana are not schools, they don't have their own organisation or any fixed canon, they are rather types of teachings and practices. However, what people usually mean by Mahayana is every other existing Buddhist schools besides Theravada, and by Vajrayana it is usually Tibetan Buddhism. Therefore, for practical and historical reasons, Buddhism is divided to regional areas, that is: South (mainly Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Myanmar, Laos, Thailand; source is Sri Lanka), East (mainly China, Korea, Vietnam, Japan; source is China), North (mainly Tibet, Bhutan, Mongolia; source is Tibet). These three regions first of all use different canonical languages, developed on their own mostly without connection to the other two, and also represent distinct cultural areas. One more important thing is that they use slightly different monastic regulations, and since Buddhism's primary upholders are the monastics, the lineages are first of all defined by ordination type.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 29th, 2012 at 6:27 PM
Title: Re: All Buddhists Are Atheists
Content:
Astus wrote:
To me it seems that in Buddhism the common Indian deities/gods were gradually changed to bodhisattvas and buddhas in Mahayana, and naturally practices related to them developed from simple considering the buddha's and gods' good qualities into visualisations, prayers and rituals. If we drop the intellectual-philosophical explanation about the difference between buddhas and gods, and how everything is mind made and empty, on the everyday practical level in religious practice whether one prays to Tara, Guanyin or Virgin Mary for a son it makes no difference. Why is it not important if the being one prays to is a god or a buddha? Because the beings are easily exchangeable without affecting the content and the nature of the prayer and the ritual. Buddhism could incorporate Indian deities into its pantheon even as buddhas, like Tara, or in Japan they could reinterpret Shinto gods as bodhisattvas and buddhas. The latest example is Jesus as a bodhisattva.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 29th, 2012 at 5:07 PM
Title: Re: Sri Simha in Zen/Chan lineage
Content:
Yudron said:
I don't think the received history of the early Dzogchen lineage is "made up."  It is incomplete, however... and quite possibly was reconstructed based on oral history after the fact.

Astus wrote:
In any case, the two Simhas show know connection.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 28th, 2012 at 6:52 AM
Title: Re: Sri Simha in Zen/Chan lineage
Content:
Astus wrote:
The Indian lineage of Chan is taken from non-Chan sources and have nothing to do with Chan beyond the lineage concept that was created to legitimise Chinese teachers. I don't know who and when made up the Dzogchen lineage of the early teachers, but even the legends of the two Simhas don't match. Besides this accidental choice of name I see no connection here.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 26th, 2012 at 10:35 PM
Title: Re: What takes rebirth: body or mind?
Content:
Astus wrote:
It is said: "The samsaric body circles."
The actual nature of mind is free of elaborations,

This sounds like separating buddha-mind from deluded mind, a simple dualism. But it's nothing to do with materialism, as he says that it relies on the samsarik material and mental body. As for his reference to prana, I leave that to those who believe in Tantra.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 26th, 2012 at 4:30 AM
Title: Re: Do you think Non-Buddhist can become enlightened?
Content:
Astus wrote:
There is even a special term for those who are enlightened without following the teaching of a buddha and without starting a new era of teachings: pratyekabuddha.

Also, the Buddha only said that enlightenment requires following the noble eightfold path. He didn't say that people should follow him personally.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 25th, 2012 at 11:13 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism without a teacher
Content:
Astus wrote:
No need to worry about having or not having a teacher. You can learn the Dharma from the right books (there are many wrong books too) and online from the right sources (and not bad sources). How to tell the difference between right and wrong? Through studying and understanding the sutras and shastras. You can also ask many questions on this forum. There are teachers you can send e-mail to, if you you want. Even without personally meeting anyone the information you can get is enormous. And if you reach a point where you find that you could really use someone experienced to talk to you will be able to find the ways to travel.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 25th, 2012 at 9:11 PM
Title: Re: All Buddhists Are Atheists
Content:
Astus wrote:
Oushi,

Materialism - believing that everything is ultimately matter - is not a Buddhist view. In Buddhism the mind is not material.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 25th, 2012 at 8:22 PM
Title: Re: Bankei's "method" of abiding in the unborn
Content:
Astus wrote:
Matt,

Whatever appears, see that it is something born, not your real nature, and let it return to the unborn, let it dissolve on its own. You have to maintain grasping at an emotion or thought to make it stay, and grasping happens because you regard it as your real nature.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 25th, 2012 at 3:17 PM
Title: Re: Bankei's "method" of abiding in the unborn
Content:
Alex123 said:
Thank you for your reply. The point of difficulty is what to do, or how to stop states such as anger, anxiety, fear, lust, etc from arising at the future date? I understand that they occur spontaneously " on their own " and without having to make up conscious decision for such a state to arise.

Astus wrote:
Anger, anxiety, fear, lust, etc. don't arise spontaneously, we give rise to them by first identifying with our thoughts and making judgements about things being attractive, repulsive or uninteresting, then again holding the emotion generated by our thoughts thus eventually giving rise to action. When it seems that emotions or actions appear by themselves it is the case that we don't recognise our thought processes, which is ignorance, unawareness. That's why abiding in the unborn means that no ideas and impulses take over the control.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 25th, 2012 at 5:16 AM
Title: Re: Bankei's "method" of abiding in the unborn
Content:
Astus wrote:
Bankei teaches what has always been the main doctrine of Zen. It is the reverse of saying that one should see how things are empty, instead he points to this mind that thinks and feels as originally perfect. That is, it's not about letting go our attachments but realising that the mind is already without attachments. Because of that there is no development or gradual training involved here. The only source of problem, as he says, is exchanging the buddha-mind to all sorts of ideas and emotions. Why do we do that? Because we don't know yet that this mind is already unborn and functions perfectly. Seeing that it functions just fine means that we don't need to struggle, we don't need to come up with different solutions to our situation where we become motivated by craving and anger. We give birth to many attachments because we don't trust in the buddha-mind, we want to handle everything ourselves. That's why Bankei teaches about the unborn by showing how the mind recognises the sounds of dogs and birds, how the mind manages to direct our steps without effort or trouble. Those are immediate proofs of the buddha-mind's natural functions that we all know about already. This is not complicated at all.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 25th, 2012 at 3:27 AM
Title: Re: All Buddhists Are Atheists
Content:
Jnana said:
Well, right view is important. Without it non-conceptual jñāna doesn't occur. And without non-conceptual jñāna liberation can't be realized.

Astus wrote:
But very few Buddhists care about liberation, or believe that it is possible in this life for them. And even when some say it is important for them they lack the motivation to relinquish their own views. That's how stream entry and the first bhumi became traditionally high level goals when they were meant to be the entrance originally. Those who believe that buddhahood is just a single realisation away (sudden paths) tend to use it as an excuse for disparaging every other teaching while they themselves wait for some sort of miraculous enlightenment without knowing the path leading to it. Therefore accumulating merit and developing familiarity with the Dharma has to be regarded as an auspicious sign that the person will eventually conform with the teaching sometime in the future.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 24th, 2012 at 11:14 PM
Title: Re: Why not Theravada
Content:
Astus wrote:
Theravada is a lot smaller in terms of variety of teachings and texts. Mahayana includes everything there is in Buddhism.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 24th, 2012 at 10:33 PM
Title: Re: All Buddhists Are Atheists
Content:
oushi said:
Male and female gods are two fundamental functions of the mind. Male god makes objects out of female god, like you are doing it here. If you think you can find an object that is God, you will fail, also from the Christian point of view. God is the union of those two. There is a perfect reason why mention about this union. When you talk about the Buddha, you are talking about the same. Why do you talk about Buddha, when you are not talking about a historical person? Sasaki Roshi is neither the Buddha nor a sutra
I asked you before, "what is Buddha?", and you didn't seem to know. Sasaki is not a Buddha, and nothing but the Buddha.

Astus wrote:
Gods and mental functions generally define quite different things. This is again a confusion of terminology. Not to mention the use of male and female for non-biological non-beings is also problematic. If I talk about "the Buddha" I mean Siddhartha Gautama. If I say "a buddha" it is any being who achieved perfect enlightenment. I don't consider Sasaki roshi any of the two.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 24th, 2012 at 9:32 PM
Title: Re: All Buddhists Are Atheists
Content:
oushi said:
The problem of God lies not in religions, but in narrow minded people who, trying to grasp the teachings, objectified God.

I don't believe that there is anyone here (or even out there) that can refute Sasaki Roshi.

Astus wrote:
What male and female gods? And why even mention any god if it can't be even thought of? Also, Sasaki Roshi is neither the Buddha nor a sutra.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 24th, 2012 at 8:49 PM
Title: Re: All Buddhists Are Atheists
Content:
Astus wrote:
Interesting. She said God, but didn't mean God. She said Eternal, but didn't mean Eternal. Zen is very confusing. Nevertheless, it is now at least clear that there is neither God nor Eternal in Buddhism according to Rev. Jiyu.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 24th, 2012 at 6:45 PM
Title: Re: All Buddhists Are Atheists
Content:
Astus wrote:
Western Buddhists can be theists, atheists and anything else they want, because they generally lack both a traditional and an educated view of Buddhism. This is just individualism in use. And that's how people can't clearly define what Buddhism is or how it relates to other concepts. On the other hand, it is a great event to see the process of changing Buddhism to fit a new culture.

This is also an opportunity to reflect on our own ingrained assumptions and expectations, habitual views that we want things to match. Some prefer colourful gods and buddhas, some want scientific materialism. In my understanding the path to liberation is about recognising and overcoming such attachments. But Buddhism has many facets and gives something to people with all kinds of motivation to satisfy their grasping mind while at the same time teaching something good. That's why belief in God, gods or no god is generally not a problem. Even historically the Buddha left the laity to their own local faiths.

This is a fine article regarding the concept of God in Buddhism: http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/jackson.htm


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 24th, 2012 at 4:15 PM
Title: Re: Time to reform Buddhism entirely.
Content:
Astus wrote:
The only reform Buddhism always needs is more realised beings and less traditionalism-ritualism. But it is happening anyway.

"You are all already perfect buddhas."
"I'm not."
"OK, you're not."
(á la Life of Brian)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 24th, 2012 at 3:46 PM
Title: Re: Questioning Alayavijnana
Content:
Astus wrote:
anjali,

The idea that there is no subject-object in the alayavijnana is problematic already. The very definition of consciousness is that there is a subject consciousness being conscious of a mental object. If there were a stand alone, independent consciousness it would make it a substance, an eternal thing, an atman. Also, if the basis were pure there is no reason for impurity to arise. Pure mixing with impure to make a single consciousness is another problem, because it lacks the explanation for the connection between the two. By the way, in your quote it just gives an example but not an explanation of latent seeds, failing to address the problem of unconscious mental factors. Also, the seeds are not one but many mental factors, each with its own causal continuum of momentary existence and disappearance.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 24th, 2012 at 3:20 PM
Title: Re: Bankei's "method" of abiding in the unborn
Content:
Astus wrote:
Bankei gives a very simple method, the Unborn. The buddha-mind is the object of meditation, the basis, the method and the goal of the meditation. That's why clarifying first on the level of experience what the buddha-mind is is the most important thing in Zen.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012 at 8:04 PM
Title: Re: Time and re-inarnation
Content:
Astus wrote:
Since causes are followed by consequences, this is quite linear and makes it impossible to return to a previous state that was the cause of the present state, since the previous causes are already gone.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012 at 8:00 PM
Title: Re: Akshobhya and Amitabha
Content:
Astus wrote:
One can follow the idea of different gotras, sure. I personally believe in the universal potentiality of complete liberation, aka tathagatagarbha.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012 at 7:23 PM
Title: Re: Bankei's "method" of abiding in the unborn
Content:
Astus wrote:
A http://www.dharmanet.org/Bankei.htm.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012 at 4:20 PM
Title: Re: Essential Chan Buddhism: Heart of Chan - NYC Nov 7th, 2012
Content:
Astus wrote:
Here are some studies on Chan lineage history:
* highly recommended

*John R. McRae: Seeing through Zen: Encounter, Transformation, and Genealogy in Chinese Chan Buddhism
Albert Welter: Monks, Rulers, and Literati: The Political Ascendancy of Chan Buddhism
John R. McRae: The Northern School and the formation of early Chʻan Buddhism
Wendi Leigh Adamek: The Mystique of Transmission: On an Early Chan History and Its Contexts
*Morten Schlütter: How Zen Became Zen: The Dispute Over Enlightenment and the Formation of Chan Buddhism in Song-Dynasty China
Elizabeth A. Morrison: The Power of Patriarchs: Qisong and Lineage in Chinese Buddhism
*Jiang Wu: Enlightenment in Dispute: The Reinvention of Chan Buddhism in Seventeenth-Century China

And two extras not strictly on lineage:

Robert H. Sharf: Coming to Terms With Chinese Buddhism: A Reading of the Treasure Store Treatise
Albert Welter: The Linji Lu and the Creation of Chan Orthodoxy: The Development of Chan's Records of Sayings Literature


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012 at 3:56 PM
Title: Re: Bankei's "method" of abiding in the unborn
Content:
Astus wrote:
Matt,

Bankei has the answer for those questions. In short, the buddha-mind is without delusions, once found and one abides by it there is no hindrance or obstacle. If there is still identification with habits it is not the unborn.

Haskel: Bankei Zen, p. 82-84 said:
A monk who had come from Sendai in Oshu said: "Somewhere I seem to recall there being the expression, The mind enslaved to physical form.' I'm anxious to accord with original mind at all times, but how should I practice in order to do this? Please instruct me."
The Master replied: "In my school, there's no special form of instruction; and as for religious practice, there's no particular way for doing that either. People fail to realize that right within themselves they're fully endowed with the Buddha Mind they have from their parents innately, so they lose their freedom and talk about wanting to 'accord with original mind.' When you've realized that the Buddha Mind you have from your parents is unborn and marvelously illuminating, your hands and feet will function freely, and that's the working of the marvelously illuminating Buddha Mind which is unborn.
"As proof that your Buddha Mind is unborn and freely functioning: When you came from Sendai having heard about Bankei, you traveled a long way; but as you stopped for the night here and there along the road, you weren't thinking continuously about me. In the daytime, you looked around at all the sights, and if you had traveling companions, you talked to them. But even though you didn't walk along thinking about our meeting and deliberately keeping it in mind at every step of the way, in the end you arrived here at my place. This is what's meant by the Buddha Mind being unborn and perfectly managing things.
"Now, the herons you see in Sendai are white, without having to be dyed that way; and the crows, without being dyed, are black. And right here too, even though when you see them you're not deliberately trying to distinguish between the two, as soon as they appear before you, you know the white one's a heron and the black one's a crow. Without rousing a single thought, it's all smoothly managed, isn't it? . . . ."
Then, the monk asked: "I find it impossible to control all my passions and delusions. What should I do? It's simply proved too much for me, and I wish to receive your instruction."
The Master replied: "Your idea of wanting to control your passions and delusions is itself delusion, changing the Buddha Mind for delusion! Delusions don't have any actual substance when they arise. In fact, they're nothing but shadow figures, things you've seen and heard that pop up sporadically in response to circumstances."
Again, the monk questioned the Master: "What is enlightenment?"
The Master replied: "There's no such thing as enlightenment. It's a completely extraneous pursuit. To realize conclusively that the Buddha Mind you have from your parents innately is unborn and marvelously illuminating— that's enlightenment. Not realizing this makes you deluded. Since the Original Buddha Mind is unborn, it functions without thoughts of delusion or thoughts of wanting to be enlightened. As soon as you think of wanting to be enlightened, you leave the place of the Unborn and go counter to it. Because the Buddha Mind is unborn, it has no thoughts at all. Thoughts are the source of delusion. When thoughts are gone, delusion vanishes too. And once you've stopped being deluded, talking about wanting to attain 'enlightenment' certainly is useless, don't you agree?"


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012 at 3:19 PM
Title: Re: Pure Land location
Content:
Astus wrote:
If there is analysis to be applied to the Pure Land teaching, it has to follow the teachings of the Buddha to make sense. First of all, whatever realm is experienced by a sentient being is because of its karma, its mental habits. It is not that there is some independent external world that people just fall in or go to. The external is a result and reflection of internal factors. Buddha-lands are the results of each buddhas merit accumulated and vows made through their bodhisattva path over many kalpas. Being born in a land where there is a living buddha is also a matter of karma for beings, that is, their mental status. Different lands have their own conditions for beings to get there, and that's how going to the Western Land of Amita Buddha is relatively easy compared to many other buddha-lands.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012 at 5:49 AM
Title: Re: Bankei's "method" of abiding in the unborn
Content:
Astus wrote:
There are many lost and revived teachings in Buddhism. Since how and when teachings survive or are reborn is a complex religious and social matter, I don't consider it as an accurate measurement of the quality of any doctrine. The variety of teachings is also not a problem nor an issue of superiority, just as the Buddha gave many methods in order to lead everyone to liberation so are there many ways one can choose from freely even today.

As for instructions of abiding in the unborn, it can be put into modern everyday terms to make it clear to anyone. Abiding in the unborn means not giving birth to fixed ideas about whatever we experience. It is called unborn because it is without any concrete view, concept or feeling. Once a label that we believe to be real is attached to something there will be emotions and from emotions deeds, habits and new births. But if we understand that only the unborn is our true nature and not any thing that the mind gives birth to, there is no reason from then on to identify with passing experiences. Of course, the teachings of emptiness and selflessness are the same as this, there is nothing new invented, only the format changes.

In Bankei's words:

"That you do see and hear and smell in this way without giv-ing rise to the thought that you will is the proof that this in-herent Buddha-mind is unborn and possessed of a wonderful illuminative wisdom. The Unborn manifests itself in the thought "I want to see" or "I want to hear" not being born. When a dog howls, even if ten million people said in chorus that it was the sound of a crow cawing, I doubt if you'd be convinced. It's highly unlikely there would be any way they could delude you into believing what they said. That's owing to the marvelous awareness and unbornness of your Buddha-mind. The reason I say it's in the "Unborn" that you see and hear in this way is because the mind doesn't give "birth" to any thought or inclination to see or hear. Therefore it is unborn. Being unborn, it's also undying: It's not possible for what is not born to perish. This is the sense in which I say that all people have an unborn Buddha-mind."
(Waddell: The Unborn, p. 88)

Regarding Bankei's arduous practice, he explains:

"You can gather from what I've told you that my practice lasted many long years and that I came to realize my Buddha-mind only after great hardship. But you can grasp your Buddha-minds very easily, right where you sit, without that long, punishing practice. That shows the relation that links you to Buddhahood is stronger than mine was. You're all very fortunate indeed."
(p. 90)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 22nd, 2012 at 10:36 PM
Title: Re: Pure Land location
Content:
Nighthawk said:
What's your opinion about it? Do you see it as 10,000 galaxies away or as something in a separate dimension?

Astus wrote:
If I want to use today's cosmology I say it's galaxies. Another dimension is also fine, although then the meaning of distance and direction is lost. However, direction on galactic level is also problematic. And that's why classic Buddhist cosmology doesn't translate well to modern terms.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 22nd, 2012 at 9:44 PM
Title: Re: Pure Land location
Content:
Astus wrote:
Your questions are perfectly valid, no need to worry about that. The first problem is that Buddhism hasn't had the modern cosmology with what people understand the universe today. It is said that Sukhavati is 10,000 buddha-lands away to the West. It basically means: far away. One buddha-land covers a great trichiliocosm ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_cosmology#Sahasra_cosmology ), which is based on the single unit of a world system with mount Meru, the continents and the six realms. This does not convert to planets, solar systems or even galaxies. But if you want to, you may think that it's 10,000 galaxies away. Or you can also say that it's a separate dimension. And while we cannot reach another buddha-land by any known vehicle, in meditation it is possible.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 22nd, 2012 at 8:40 PM
Title: Re: Bankei's "method" of abiding in the unborn
Content:
Astus wrote:
Another thing about Bankei is that he taught openly to everyone. No special requirements, no secret techniques. The teaching of the buddha-mind includes everyone because all beings have the unborn without exception.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 22nd, 2012 at 5:44 PM
Title: Re: Esoteric practices in Hwa Yen
Content:
Astus wrote:
The first classic on Huayan is Dushun's meditation manual. Nothing esoteric in that, although it contains a Huayan-styled meditation. Chengguan studied first under a Chan teacher, while Zongmi, the so called fifth patriarch, was explicitly a Chan advocate.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 22nd, 2012 at 4:04 PM
Title: Re: Questioning Alayavijnana
Content:
anjali said:
I believe Xuanzang’s analysis of the alaya-vijnana is faulty. The alaya-vijnana is non-dual--subject/object duality haven't popped up yet. That comes at the next level. There is no perceiver and perception of separate objects. There is no grasper-grasping. Let me offer up a quote from Gampopa. I was reading from Gampopa Teaches Essence Mahamudra by Tony Duff a couple of days ago, and came across something that confirmed a suspicion I had.

Astus wrote:
Xuanzang teaches Yogacara and he gives a detailed analysis of the alayavijnana. Gampopa teaches Mahamudra and how the alayavijnana as a general teaching fits into it without giving the step by step details of it. The way the two present and interpret is different in that for Xuanzang the alayavijnana is basically ignorant, while for Gampopa it is just the obscured version of buddha-mind. Nevertheless, the problem of latent, unseen, unconscious mental phenomena still stands. Also, when there are many seeds we can't call it non-dual which would exclude both one and many.

anjali said:
At the level of alaya-vijnana both consciousness and karma are in a non-active state. They are both latent.

Astus wrote:
As you said, "an unconscious consciousness is a contradiction."


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 22nd, 2012 at 3:31 PM
Title: Re: Bankei's "method" of abiding in the unborn
Content:
Astus wrote:
As said before, the first and most important thing is to recognise the unborn. What is the unborn mind? Using Bankei's explanation, it is this mind that while you are reading hears the background noises, sees things around the monitor, feels the chair, and all of that happens without intentionally trying to perceive them. It is the awareness without fixing on a single object of attention, the naturally present knowing that does not require grasping anything in order to be aware and be able to interact. Once this is clear just keep it. Nothing else needs to be done. This is genuine and direct Zen, not http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=5105.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 22nd, 2012 at 3:15 PM
Title: Re: Essential Chan Buddhism: Heart of Chan - NYC Nov 7th, 2012
Content:
Astus wrote:
I doubt that there is any lineage from the Tang dynasty or from as late as the Qing. Even in Chan they had to reinvent the lineage several times and fill in the gaps of missing generations.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 22nd, 2012 at 5:24 AM
Title: Re: Essential Chan Buddhism: Heart of Chan - NYC Nov 7th, 2012
Content:
Astus wrote:
I wonder what kind of transmission is there in Huayan and Faxiang...


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 15th, 2012 at 5:45 AM
Title: Re: Questioning Alayavijnana
Content:
Astus wrote:
Yes, there was this point about the nature of mind or ground-mind I have not replied to. While theoretically we can say that alayavijnana is the same as tathagatagarbha, but as we can see in the descriptions, they don't actually match. One reason is that, just as Daniel Brown says, it is realising the dharmakaya, it is enlightenment, and not the experience of the storehouse-consciousness but in fact becoming free from karma. Another reason can be that not all Yogacara traditions teach universal buddha-nature, it is not essential to the Yogacara teaching, although it is true that in many cases there is a fusion of these two ideas, like in Mahamudra.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 15th, 2012 at 2:29 AM
Title: Re: Hindu defense against Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
To add one more thing besides the position of Buddha in the Hindu pantheon, Advaita Vedanta is believed to be the highest philosophy only by those who follow that specific school. There are other forms of Vedanta philosophies, and beyond that there are also other Hindu teachings. Hinduism is truly just a blanket term that covers lot of contradictory interpretations and even more religious practices. Just compare a vegetarian Vaishnava group like the ISKCON with a Shaivite movement like the aghoris where they eat human flesh.

As for the Hindu defence against Buddhism, the most famous apologist I am aware of is Adi Shankara. But I suppose there were others too who could be reviewed here. So, who has the knowledge to bring them here?


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 14th, 2012 at 9:56 PM
Title: Re: Questioning Alayavijnana
Content:
Astus wrote:
"After 8 pages on this topic do you believe anyone directly addressed the issues of your original post?"

Except for these last posts after my summary of the problem, no.

"It's object and form are undeterminate [aparacchinna]. Why? Because..."

I think it just explains that the alayavijnana is not bound to any specific form of perception, therefore everything can be within it.

Now I address your kind responses using Xuanzang's Cheng weishi lun (all quotes from "Three Texts on Consciousness Only"). He writes,

"THAT WHICH IT GRASPS is twofold: the seeds and the body provided with organs. "Seeds" refer to images, names [or words], and the perfuming of imagination. "Body provided with organs" refers to physical organs and the support of the organs. These two are what is grasped by consciousness" (p. 60)

"The term PERCEPTION means that the eighth consciousness as retribution has the function of perceiving its objects. The function of perceiving is the seeing part of this consciousness." (p. 61)

""Seeds" refers to all the impure seeds held by the consciousness that is retribution. They are included in the nature of this consciousness and are therefore its object of perception. Although pure seeds are connected with this consciousness, they are not included in its nature, and therefore they are not its perceptual object." (p. 65)

"The term IMPERCEPTIBLE [in Vasubandhu's verses] means that the mode of activity of this consciousness is extremely subtle and fine and therefore difficult to know thoroughly. Or, we may say that it is hard to know because the internal objects that it grasps and holds are extremely subtle, while the extent of the external world is hard to fathom. Why are the objects it grasps and the mode of activity of this consciousness difficult to know, [and how do we therefore know that it even exists!? Like consciousness that does not depart the body during the samadhi of cessation [of perception], it must be trusted to exist. You must admit that during this samádhi there is a consciousness, because the meditator is still classified as a sentient being, just as when the mind is functioning in a normal way. It is the same even at the final stages of the cessation of thought [in samádhi]. (p. 67-68)

So, in effect what Xuanzang says is that while the alayavijnana necessarily works as a consciousness with subject and object, it is actually imperceptible. The reason the alayavijnana is posited is simply to explain states where the normal six consciousnesses cease. This is also the same reason the bhavanga-sota/citta is put in to abhidhamma works and most likely copied from Yogacara.

"How do we know that apart from visual consciousness, etc., the eighth consciousness has a separate, independent substance? Through holy teaching and proper reasoning." (p. 83)

There is no experience of the alayavijnana, no pointing to the seeds, simply texts and arguments. While in his explanation Xuanzang repeatedly says that the alayavijnana is the true object of belief in self - i.e. there should be something any ordinary people experience about it to mistake it for a self - his reason for its existence is mostly a tautology: it must exist "because without this consciousness there is no mind to hold the seeds." (p. 90) Also,

"It must be granted that there is a real mind as retribution that repays projected karma, that is found in the three realms, is not interrupted, that changes into the body and world receptacle, and acts as a support for sentient beings. I We argue this I because (1) apart from mind, body and world receptacle are in fact nonexistent; (2) dharmas not associated with mind have no real substance; and (3) the evolving consciousnesses, etc., do not always exist. Without this consciousness, what changes into a body and world receptacle? Based on what dharmas can sentience be always established [in samadhi, etc.]?" (p. 94-95)

That is, there must be a continuous eighth consciousness otherwise we have no explanation of the continuity of mind/being. What shows well how the alayavijnana is an unconscious consciousness is that Xuanzang brings up nirodhasamapatti, cessation samadhi, where there is no conscious activity as an argument for alayavijnana.

"Apart from this [eighth] consciousness, no consciousness that does not leave the body would exist in someone in this samádhi. ... If you do not admit the existence of a consciousness that is subtle, homogeneous, constant, and omnipresent and sustains life, [heat,] etc., how can [the scripture] speak of a consciousness that does not desert the body?" (p. 104)

And that's why I say that the alayavijnana is nothing more than a provisional explanation of the working of karma, because in the Yogacara's own system it is admitted that it is a consciousness without anyone being aware of the functions it performs. And an unconscious consciousness is a contradiction in my view.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 14th, 2012 at 7:57 PM
Title: Re: Question about Korean Zen
Content:
Astus wrote:
As mentioned, Korean Zen is diverse. There is the Jogye Order, the largest Buddhist organisation, but there are also other ones, like the Taego Order or the Kwan Um Zen School that are not part of Jogye. Within the Jogye Order there are different vocations monastics can take (meditation, scripture, ritual) as their primary field of study before full ordination. That means that while Zen may seem the main form of Buddhist tradition, in fact all monastics are required to be proficient to some extent in the essential Mahayana doctrines as it is defined in Korea based on outstanding teachers like Wonhyo, Uisang and Jinul. And when we look into a narrower subject like the hwadu practice, different teachers instruct it in their own unique ways, if they use hwadu at all (mostly the Hanmaum School to which Chonggo sunim belongs where they don't use hwadu meditation).


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 14th, 2012 at 7:39 PM
Title: Re: Ch'an groups in the West.
Content:
Astus wrote:
In the UK (and affiliated centres in other European countries) there is the http://www.westernchanfellowship.org/, it is within the Dharma Drum lineage but a separate organisation.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 12th, 2012 at 7:33 PM
Title: Re: Akshobhya and Amitabha
Content:
Astus wrote:
If you are in the realm of humans your mind is human. It may have strong tendencies for another realm but it changes to that only at becoming (bhava). Disappearing from a realm is called death.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 12th, 2012 at 6:03 PM
Title: Re: The possibility of subforums for Rinzai and Soto Zen.
Content:
Astus wrote:
As a trial subforums have been created under Zen.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 12th, 2012 at 3:40 PM
Title: Re: What is the difference between an Arhat and Bodhisattva?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Just to add to this plethora of interpretations and ideas, in East Asian Buddhism - based primarily on the Lotus Sutra - arhats attain only a seeming nirvana and once they're awaken from it by the buddhas they continue their path to liberation as high level (8th bhumi) bodhisattvas. So, according to this view, there is only one kind of nirvana, that of the buddha.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 12th, 2012 at 3:30 PM
Title: Re: Questioning Alayavijnana
Content:
Astus wrote:
I think that if the whole alayavijnana idea is based only on logic it remains a convenient explanation of karma on a superficial level, but it falls apart quite fast under analysis.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 12th, 2012 at 4:30 AM
Title: Re: What is the difference between an Arhat and Bodhisattva?
Content:
Astus wrote:
First of all, there is a variety of interpretations about how arhats differ from bodhisattvas. Generally we can say that arhats are permanently free from samsara, while bodhisattvas have chosen to remain within samsara in order to help beings and accumulate merit to become buddhas. Because bodhisattvas eventually can become buddhas, it is said that because of their wish to become buddhas, they are superior to arhats in the sense that they have greater aspiration based on greater compassion, and that compassion and aspiration is what bodhicitta is.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 12th, 2012 at 1:33 AM
Title: Re: Questioning Alayavijnana
Content:
Astus wrote:
Anjali,

The problem making alayavijnana something other than consciousness clearly violates the core idea of Vijnaptimatra, that is, that all phenomena are mental phenomena.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 12th, 2012 at 1:26 AM
Title: Re: Questioning Alayavijnana
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
One way to think about it:  Is your anger at x always manifest or does it just manifest on certain occasions?  What happens to your anger at x when it is not manifest.

Astus wrote:
This is practically saying that anger has an permanent nature and a physical existence that has to be kept hidden until it occurs again.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 11th, 2012 at 10:48 PM
Title: Re: Questioning Alayavijnana
Content:
Astus wrote:
Regarding the hidden nature of the alayavijnana, my point was that as we are not aware of it right now, we are not conscious of it at this moment, then based on what reason can it be called a consciousness? What you don't think of is not your thought, and if you don't know you think of something it is not thought of at all. Same with a feeling that you don't feel, or a sight that you don't see. This is the same problem I have raised http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=113784#p113784, and some added explanation http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=113830#p113830 and even more http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=113967#p113967 if it's not yet clear.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 11th, 2012 at 9:22 PM
Title: Re: Change Tibetan Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
Originally it was Vajrayana forum, but it was changed because on one hand Tibetan Buddhism includes its own Mahayana interpretations. On the other hand, Shingon is different in many aspects from Tibetan Vajrayana (for instance it's heavily influenced by Huayan teachings). Also, Vajrayana in Bhutan and Mongolia are derivatives of Tibetan traditions and they still have close connections.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 11th, 2012 at 7:42 PM
Title: Re: The possibility of subforums for Rinzai and Soto Zen.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Tibetan Buddhism has its subforums, just as East Asian Buddhism. Based on the number of topics in the Zen subforum it does not seem necessary to further divide it. Plus, such a distinction exists only in Japanese Zen, and in the West, because of the majority Sanbo Kyodan groups, they are not really separate. Nevertheless, if you feel the need for a special section for a specific tradition for some reasons it can be arranged without problem.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 11th, 2012 at 4:41 PM
Title: Re: Questioning Alayavijnana
Content:
Astus wrote:
Matt,

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=114310#p114310 was my final conclusion on the matter.

viniketa,

The alayavijnana is unconscious because we are not conscious of it. Seeds are latent tendencies, and there are myriads of them.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 10th, 2012 at 3:01 PM
Title: Re: Whats the difference
Content:
Astus wrote:
I've seen that order before, can't remember where. But it is somewhat logical.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 10th, 2012 at 5:57 AM
Title: Re: Whats the difference
Content:
Astus wrote:
Regarding not fully focusing on the object:

"The importance of not focusing on the meditative object too intently should be emphasized here. You need to restrain your mind from wandering away from the meditation object, but you should also maintain a sense of relaxation. ... The function of the meditative object is to enhance your concentration. Simply be aware of the object, rather than grasping onto it or trying to focus on it too intently. An element of relaxation is extremely important here. You should not mistake the object of meditation for the function of meditation. The function of meditation is not to concentrate on a piece of wood or any other object."
(Traleg Kyabgon: Ocean of Certainty, p. 80)

"What is very important, the masters always advise, is not to fixate while practising the concentration of calm abiding. That's why they recommend you place only twenty five percent of the attention on mindfulness of the breath. But then, as you may have noticed, mindfulness alone is not enough. While you are supposed to be watching the breath, after a few minutes you may find yourself playing in a football match or starring in your own film. So another twenty five percent should be devoted to a continuous and watchful awareness, one that oversees and checks whether you are being mindful of the breath. The remaining fifty percent of your attention is left abiding, spaciously. Of course the exact percentages are not as important as the fact that all three of these elements-mindfulness, awareness and spaciousness are present."
(Sögyal Rinpoche: Natural Great Peace, p. 7)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 10th, 2012 at 4:31 AM
Title: Re: Whats the difference
Content:
Astus wrote:
Here is a summary from Tsele Natsok's Heart Lamp (p. 31-33) on the nine dhyanas. Interestingly, it is not under the section discussing shamatha but the chapter about "Faults and Qualities", sub-chapter "Clearing Away Specific Errors and Mistakes". The reason given is the fault of attaching to bliss, clarity and nonthought. What he originally defines as the proper practice of shamatha in Mahamudra is resting naturally without fixating on thoughts or appearances. So, his description of the dhyanas:
When resting evenly in shamatha, then, to be free from gross thoughts of perceiver and perceived, but still to be fettered by the concept of meditator and meditation object is called the "samadhi of the First Dhyana." Why is that? Because this is what is being meditated upon in all the abodes of the gods of the First Dhyana. Meditating in this way creates the cause for being reborn there as a god at the level of the First Dhyana.
Likewise, the second dhyana is to be free from the state of mind of concept and discernment, but still to experience the taste of the samadhi of joy and bliss.
The third dhyana is to be free from mental movement, but supported merely by the inhalation and exhalation of breath.
The fourth dhyana is to be free from all kinds of thoughts, a state of samadhi which is unobstructed clarity, like space.
Supreme among all the mundane samadhis, these are the foundation for vipashyana. If meditated upon with attachment, however, they become a deviation from Mahamudra causing rebirth as gods in the abodes of those dhyanas.
Furthermore, thinking "All phenomena are infinite like space!" or "This consciousness, free from partiality and nonexistent, is infinite!" or "Perception, being neither existent nor nonexistent, is not an action of mind!" or "This mind is voidness, which is nothing whatsoever!"Dwelling in the states of these four levels has the defect of straying into the four formless spheres of finality; called the Infinite Space, Infinite Consciousness, Neither Presence nor Absence, and Nothing Whatsoever.
The shravaka's samadhi of peace is the state of mind that has abandoned these four thoughts in which involvement in objects has been blocked, and in which you abide having interrupted the movements of the wind-mind. Although such a state is taught to be the ultimate shamatha, in this context it is not a faultless meditation unless embraced by vipashyana.
Each of these nine dhyanas of absorption has some temporary qualities, such as accomplishment of superknowledges and miraculous powers. Here, however, you should attain the ultimate result of complete enlightenment and not merely relative or superficial qualities. Thus, if these are accomplished naturally and you then cling to them or feel arrogant, know that to be a direct obstacle for enlightenment.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 10th, 2012 at 1:32 AM
Title: Re: Whats the difference
Content:
viniketa said:
This does seem to be the case.  Not sure how or why dhyana got "demoted", as the distinctions between levels was pretty close to the "eight consciousnesses".   Hum, maybe I just answered my own question...

Astus wrote:
I think the reason is that the dhyanas were first elevated to a very high position and accordingly their definitions changed. Even today there are a variety of teachers with different views regarding what the dhyanas actually stand for (especially among Theravada masters). Since it became so removed from actual practice, it was for the better that later teachers simply dismissed them as unnecessary or even misguided.


