stirling

I started a protracted reply to your message, but lost it as I haven't logged in for a few days. I'll simply say this: Your link to the "Buddha" entry on Wikipedia does a fine job. The link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Buddha#Understanding_the_historical_person The first line is a far as one needs to go, IMHO (and as far as I will go): Are some of the works attributed to the Buddha written in what appears to be the same voice? Sure... why not? Is it the Buddhas voice? I don't know how we could know for sure, but I would say that it is someone with authentic realization, and that this is all that matters to me. In my opinion, all dharma is the emanation of the dharmakaya. While I think some of it is more direct than other parts, even those have their purpose - suiting those who feel a need to believe they are "doing" something. To argue the "true" or "authentic" dharma, however, is to misunderstand its essence. Definitely. Insight into the nature of reality, and the simple actualizing of enlightenment in open awareness are absolutely "supernatural" in that they transcend (but include) the relative nature of reality. The absence of insight is the only reason this isn't plainly seen. The intent to surrender the self is seen for what it always was, a delusion that there was ever anything or anyone to offer to surrender. I differ with you here. Kobun is absolutely describing non-doership, which is the natural state of enlightened mind where self (and self as "controller" of a "body" is understood to be a delusion. We CAN get tastes of this in meditation, being that open awareness differs from enlightened mind ONLY due to lack of Wisdom/insight. Meditation IS actualizing enlightenment, as Dogen will tell you. All that is required is dropping "self", and with it the delusion of agency (the illusion of bodily control) ) for complete understanding. This is the natural state! It is the simple difference between enlightenment/realization/Wisdom and the lack thereof. Not every "transmitted" lineage holding Soto (or Rinzai) Zen teacher I have met is realized by a long shot, which I have my misgivings about. There are also plenty of non-Buddhist teachers and others that DO have realization and aren't "people" in the conventional sense, and so have seen through the delusion of agency. You might like Loch Kelly's book "Shift Into Freedom". It is full of similar exercises intended to "unhook" awareness from its imagined constraints in "self". https://www.amazon.com/Shift-into-Freedom-Open-Hearted-Awareness/dp/1622033507 If you have real interest in the jhanas, I can heartily recommend Leigh Brassington's book: http://rc.leighb.com/index.html Amongst many of the Buddhist communities of all schools, his book is revered. My teacher even purposely took a course with him at Tassajara and quotes his teachings about them. It is important to remember that these are STATES, not any permanent insight. The point of learning to rest in them is that they are analogous to levels of realization and so make them more familiar when they naturally arise in practice. _/\_ Bows to you.

Delightful to get a few minutes of Blanche's time, even posthumously. Her kindness was always contagious!

Evidence for the Buddha as a historical is very thin on the ground. I could point at the Wikipedia page for the Buddha for this, but I don't think this is a surprise to anyone. The teachings are what they are - efficacious and pithy. We are lucky to have them, regardless of who or when they are from. Indeed. Love Kobun Chino Roshi. After enlightenment the default way of being is open awareness, so I would say that in any idle moment "resting in the natural state" is how the mind is in any realized body/mind. When you quote Kobun - "zazen gets up and walks around" - this is what is being indicated. The Tibetan traditions really emphasize the portability of this way of being. It can be present anywhere, at any time. The mind in shikantazaa/dzogchen is not contrived, or in any temporary "state" it is at the ground level of what being is. I don't know anything about Rutschman-Byler, but this focus on the hara wouldn't agree with any of my training, UNLESS what is meant is that hara focus can be accomplished in shikantaza, which I am sure it can. Being that the hara, like the senses, is ultimately empty, attention can come the area of the hara like any other place where sensation or attention appears. Yes! Sometimes both teachings in the same sentence! That is a pity. The business of Buddhist centers is a tough one. I think there are going to be some shifts coming soon even from behemoths like the SF Zen Center. In my opinion Nagarjuna is Buddhism's Einstein. He brilliantly illustrated the very real implications of Dependent Origination, and your previous quote of his is perfect for this purpose: Or, as Ken Wilber would say, "Absolute reality includes, but supersedes relative reality". Objects of the mind all have provisional reality, but not absolute reality. If it helps to point to an energy center as a teaching tool, why not? But energy centers are ultimately only relative teachings - the absolute understanding that these things are merely projections is always still present and always encapsulates them. Nicely said by all 4 of you. Glad to have a fellow Zen presence to bounce ideas off of.

There are problems with these too. Hasn't only one of the vedas survived? How would we know if the pre-written vedas texts were preserved up to the point that one was recorded? While the Buddha has been said to have lived to be 80, is there any recorded proof (not that it matters)? Historical documentation of the Buddha's existence at all is thin on the ground, just as it is with Jesus. I was being generous with the age of 30... taken from a remembered fact about the average documented age of Europeans in the 1700's. I'm sure the average age of someone in Asia 500 years before Jesus was lower. I could probably google the most recent research for these things and post them here, but I don't think it is what is important about these teachings. There is this drive toward materialism in our Western society to try to reify religious ideas and figures using facts, and have them be "authentic" in some way. My experience is that putting this burden on the teachings trivializes what is actually important about them. What really matters is whether they are efficacious in a practical way - do they work, and (where there is deep understanding of them)... do they really address and embody the transformative shift in perspective that they portend. I am very satisfied that the body of Buddhism and the Upanishads (amongst others) directly point to the aspect of non-duality always present in this world. That is what I think truly matters.

The monks that might have heard Syd speak probably didn't even live to be 30. I appreciate your interest in authenticity, but to expect there to be 500 years of people with photographic memories that passed down the teachings of one chap seems far fetched to me. Even so, I respect that this is your belief - there is enough in that narrow selection to do the job. Sure. A teacher using "skillful means" will start with teaching some to watch the breath and teach others shikantaza, each according to their abilities. The relative is a bridge to the absolute, and not just in Buddhism. The synchronicity of Suzuki's near death in the water and Kobun's drowning while at Vanya's Felsentor is an interesting parallel I had forgotten about! I remember Blanche recalling at a Kobun memorial gathering how, one morning, she set off to teach mindfulness and discovered she had buttoned her blouse one button off. That was something I loved about Blanche, she didn't feel like she was enlightened. After she received transmission, she asked Kobun what she should teach, and he said, "whatever you like", something like that--she found that reassuring. My own late teacher (one of Blanche's transmitted teachers) told me something similar - to trust Wisdom to determine what to talk about in a dharma talk. She always put a small piece of paper with a few notes up the sleeve of her robes, and very occasionally would pull it to see if she had covered everything (or anything) she had set out to speak about. Sometimes it would be about something completely different. She loved that! Consciousness arises from contact in one of the six senses--I don't experience it that way, but I believe Gautama experienced it that way, perhaps just in the cessation of feeling and perceiving (lecture "The Great Sixfold (Sense-) Field" in MN III). (Quote: Gautama said he returned to "that state of concentration in which I constantly abide" after he spoke.) For sure, but this teaching about 6 senses is itself a relative teaching. When seen from "self", we impute 6 senses. Ultimately there are no senses just perceptions arising and passing. "Color and Light". The "state of concentration in which I constantly abide" is shikantaza (vs. zazen), which is also precisely dzogchen... resting in open awareness (emptiness) watching the play of the dharmakaya arise and pass away. I'm sure you know what I mean... it is what happens when the "technique" or watching the breath drops away and there is just presence and stillness. Therein lies the rub. Did Gautama give practical advice? Yes. Is it possible to intentionally drop mind and body? Yes and no. For the most part, we're left with the situation Foyan described at his monastery as "two illnesses"--looking for the ass while riding the ass, and riding the ass unable to dismount the ass. Foyan concluded by saying "you are the ass", but I think it's ok to relax the current activity of breath, find calm in the face of involuntary activity, detach the mind, and find some presence of mind. When "purity by the pureness of mind" can be found, then I really am the ass, fine. All of the Syd's advice is practical, but practical for whom? He was a teacher in the presence of students in most of his sutras. He seems to have known his audience in whichever of the bodies of his teaching you consider... so he gives relative teachings AND he gives absolute teachings. "In the seeing, just the seen" (Bahiya sutra) is PITH instruction, regardless of who you think passed it on. Pure absolute teaching. Just as "form is emptiness, emptiness is form" is. No messing around... no practices, no prevarication. Yes, I am a fan of this kind of thing. That's why the Oakland Zen Center and Reverend Akiba have been raising money (from Japan) and building a finishing school for American Zen teachers in Lower Lake, California (Tenpyozan). http://www.tenpyozan.org/ Wow... that's great! I'll have to ask my teacher about her take on that one. It's a great idea, depending on who is running it. Insight often comes with 10 years of "finishing". Zen "sickness" happens in all traditions, though it may not have a name. Many will naturally be driven to run away to a cave or monastery for this period. This is where having a tradition and a teacher really come in handy. Even if I don't attain the cessation of feeling and perceiving, and see for myself the truth that Gautama realized in that attainment, the teaching that he and others left behind has helped me like a miracle, somehow. As I said, even the words of his disciples, words approved by him at the time, seem a little off the mark to me in their additions. The story about Gautama holding up a flower--turns out the Mandarva trees blossomed out of season, and Mahakasyapa encountered a naked ascetic holding one who relayed the news about Gautama's death. Kasayapa proceded to the town with Gautama's funeral pyre, and after his circumabulations, he took the bowl and robe (it's in DN Mahaparanirvana Sutta). Wordless transmission! Yes, I do believe there are masters whose physical presence can teach, but it's best when the presence is accompanied by a few words (IMHO). That is what really set Gautama apart. For sure! Just sitting every day, doing practices like metta, and rolling around the ideas of the teaching are enough to begin to seriously soften the "2nd arrow". Many in the "mindfulness" movement find out that even their secular practice is going to bring up their obscurations one by one. The way out is through. This is where the Tibetan traditions really shine - the Vajrayana tradition REALLY gets bodhicitta and using daily experiences as teachings in a way that no other traditions do. (see above?) I've quoted that first part of "Two Shores of Zen" by Jiryu Mark Rutschman-Byler before, but I'll quote it again. … “Shikantaza not here,” he insisted in elementary English, pointing to his head. “Not here,” he continued, pointing to his heart. “Only point here!” He drove his fist into his lower belly, the energy center that the Japanese call hara. I'm not saying that when the autonomic activity of the body comes out of the placement of attention by the movement of breath, attention is always in the hara, but it does happen that way a lot. Nevertheless, at such time, "there is not one particle of the body that is not pervaded with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind"--the mind that moves, even if it's in the hara. I'm ultimately fine with energy centers, chakras, the hara, whatever conceptual teachings get used to localize non-local phenomena, but ultimately these are relative teachings. They are "pointing at the moon". The "hara" isn't a place, just as the border of two provinces, countries, or states are just conceptual designations when seen from the air. Nothing wrong with that (skillful means), but I am inclined to point directly first and see how that goes first. Not opposed to teachers, but as I'm sure you know, zazen is a teacher. Ah, but do you afford any teachers but Syd the same (or at least some) of the respect or deference? What makes you think the teachers or your daily encounters with the world are different from your zazen?

Honestly I would say "earth humans" are some of the most obnoxious beings out there... but that's what comes of belief in intrinsic existence. I agree that learning to still the mind leads to some very interesting abilities of discernment, and I have seen some STRANGE things, but confess that humans all still seem like humans to me.

Quite right. Does that mean someone wouldn't announce or share that their understanding that all appearances, senses and thoughts are empty of "self"? It would be pointless, naturally, since the emptiness of "self" is the understanding that the entirety of the dharmakaya is already enlightened, and yet this is the first thing most of those that have this insight are compelled to do. It is precisely what the Buddha did - he shared his understanding with others. He declared his awakening in his first sermon.

You raise and interesting point: How are we defining "ego" (or "self"?) in this context. I've met a number of more obnoxious outgoing people with insight. At least one that I haven't met (but am entirely convinced by) Is a very boisterous outgoing personality that is not afraid to talk about his insight, OR get attention for the non-profit dharma-based projects he is working on.

I think you are saying that you only trust a portion of the Tripitaka teachings to be authentic dharma, is that correct? Are you also saying to you don't trust the written or spoken dharma of later teachers? I guess I would keep in mind that, like many religious historical figures, the first written accounts were made many years after the initial events. In this case the Pali Canon is mostly 500 years after the life of the historical Buddha. Being that we apparently aren't even sure who shot JFK, I think expecting the exact words, or even complete intention, of what the Buddha MIGHT have said could only truly have been preserved IF it had been passed verbally down through enlightened teachers. It still would be unlikely to be the exact words of the Buddha, so pouring over every word would be folly, IMHO. It is the INTENT the matters, and the only way to be sure about what that intent was would be to have a complete understanding (Wisdom/Prajna) of the topic at hand. I would say that no-self is the experience of being. Non-conceptual. This is when zazen sits zazen. Suzuki knew this intimately... completely. He wasn't watching his breath when he sat. Watching the breath is akin to picking up the raft and pointless carrying it with you after you have crossed the river. Unnecessary. Not sure if you knew this but Blanche ALSO had complete understanding: This is the back of her rakusu. It says, "Finished". Oh... absolutely. It becomes deprecated, from the sense of being what "we" are, to being just another sensory input on awakening. In fact, the six doors are eventually realized to be empty like everything else - there ARE no doors, just unlabeled perceptions in consciousness arising and passing. I'm sure. This "state", which is no state at all, is just shikantazaa/dzogchen/open awareness. I would guess that he probably just got his posture right and dropped/surrendered all of his "doing". With practice, this is really all it takes. It does take a bit to allow the stillness to well up, but making this seem like there is a procedure just gives you one more thing you'll need to drop eventually. I think you'd be surprised at how many there are, though I agree that something like 60% of "transmitted" teachers may not be enlightened. The standards for this are lax, IMHO. Buddhism wasn't created because it was almost impossible to become enlightened, but because it is ABSOLUTELY possible to become enlightened. Why else would Syd bother, right? Why dedicate yourself to an impossible task, or keep writing new perspectives and practices about it. I think you said you met Blanche... there's at least one you've met. If you met Suzuki, that is certainly two. Kobun would make three... I could go on and on, and these are just the dead people. I ask this question because I am wondering if you believe in the efficacy of teachings from anyone alive (or even someone labeled the Buddha in a sutra, but not meeting your personal criteria) but also because I believe it is of great benefit to seek out and meet and work with those who have this insight.

I not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying that the message in it not obviously the same as your "Majjhima-Nikaya, Pali Text Society Vol III"? Are you discounting the Bahiya Sutra because it isn't somehow as authentic as the other Tripitaka Buddhist documents? Yes. It's seemingly about the realization of impermanence. I think it's more clear here: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.01.irel.html My bold here: Ignorance is not understanding the true nature of reality, and insight into no-self. "Volitional activities" come to be because of belief in a separate self, or objects with intrinsic existence. You can stop there. Insight into no-self is the cure. Even if you don't have insight, "zazen sits zazen" because there is no "self" sitting it. "Zazen gets up and walks around" because there is no "self" getting up and walking around. These are intentional koans. They are teachings from enlightened beings. It is impossible to sit zazen if it is an activity "you" are doing. It isn't a matter of getting the right sequence of events in place. When your mind is quiet and empty you have arrived at the heart of the matter, meditation or not. Even just pondering these ideas could be enough to awaken someone, which is why anyone would say such things in the first place. Years ago at a sesshin when I asked Kobun's transmitted student and abbot of Hokoji, teacher Ian Forsberg, "What is is the difference between quiet empty mind in shikantazaa and enlightened mind", his answer was, "No difference." Slightly off topic: Do you believe that there are enlightened teachers in the world right now?

That's good stuff. Very much like the Bahiya Sutta: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.10.irel.html "Knowing and seeing eye as it really is", and "In the seen will be merely what is seen" are the same thing, of course... seeing all appearances as having "no-self", or as "empty" of any intrinsic existence. Actually, I'm going to disagree with you here. The Buddha's "final concentration" happens all the time to people. It isn't necessary to concentrate to see the deeper reality of emergent phenomena. In fact, to see the deepest layer of reality requires NO effort... requires noticing where there is efforting and dropping that contrivance wherever it is appearing. Surrendering to things as they are. While, in the early stages of learning shikantazaa, some effort is often required to establish concentration, once (what the Tibetans would call) "the view" is established, it is all about letting go of any effort that establishes resting in the natural state of "open awareness". "Open Awareness"/shikantaza/dzogchen is both vipassana and samantha. This resting is the activity of ALL enlightened beings. It is no practice at all - it is ACTUALIZING enlightenment. This is what Dogen means when he says: There are competent meditators all over the world that drop self and other and actualize enlightenment every day, millions of times a day, whether sitting on the cushion or just being astounded by the stillness of the forest or a rainbow. I'm sure you do it too. In those moments there IS no difference between that presence or the perfected Buddha. Enlightenment is just NOTICING this.

I love Donald Hoffman. I use his stuff often for more science-centric students to get them to let go of reifying their experience. I often share this one: https://www.ted.com/talks/donald_hoffman_do_we_see_reality_as_it_is

Along the same lines: From: https://tricycle.org/article/six-questions-b-alan-wallace/

In this case, we aren't talking about some individual aspect that appears to be a subcategory of the human experience, but instead the way experiencing IS. There is the experience of things happening, and no person or conscious decision on what actions appear to happen. Pure doing. No blinking of the eye, emotion, acceptance or rejection or heart. Just being. Complete Wu Wei. It isn't that spontaneity is positive or negative, it is simply being with things as they are.

If you can sit in meditation and have the mind be quiet and empty for a few moments you have finally managed to look at the fountain of "spontaneity". Trying to contrive this moment through your actions so it is "natural" or "perfect" is missing the mark. Being in alignment with the Dao isn't something one "does", it is dropping all the "doing" and just being present with what is happening in this moment.

I think, if doership has at least been called into question, then the chance for tumbling the whole charade is great. To be honest, I haven't met anyone that has teased apart doership and not had the whole contrivance fall down around them. I would put my primary focus on repeating this "state" and seeing if collapsing the view of "self" might be possible by this route. I recently read eminent Buddhist scholar Ken McLeod talking about the Eightfold Path and how it isn't meant to be achievable properly by one without insight, but should be considered entirely aspirational. (I'll be damned if I can find where this happened, as I'd love to share it... I may still!) The reason for this is "Right View": it is ONLY achievable with true insight. "Right View" IS Wisdom, or ("prajna"). The rest of the Eightfold Path happens when proper understanding of reality is there. So, with this in mind, "Right Knowledge" and "Right Freedom" begin to make more sense if we are adding them. https://www.parallax.org/mindfulnessbell/article/dharma-talk-the-eightfold-path-2/

This happens a lot, which is why many of us (especially Westerners) ending up seeking teachings in multiple schools. At its base is a confusion that somehow it is the teacher, texts, or practices that is what illuminates. Ultimately it is NONE of those things.

This is just silliness. An arahant may realize attachment and aversion, but that doesn't mean that feelings and thought never come up, or that they suddenly live some supernaturally pure life. The Buddha (as an arahant) got angry, experienced pain, etc. It is possible that an arahant couldn't be seduced, however. When you are able to watch phenomena arise and pass moment to moment, you can watch desire arise like any other thing in mind/body. That doesn't mean that the arahant wouldn't end up deciding to go with those thoughts/feelings as they arise, however. Unaided? He had the same lessons in impermanence that we all do. Any Vajrayana teacher worth their salt would tell you that life experiences are amongst the most powerful "teachers" of all! There are also the Pratyekabodhi - those who become enlightened with no exposure to dharma of any flavor other that the world itself, which is the arising of the dharmakaya, or the "teaching body" of all buddhas itself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratyekabuddhayāna Pratyekabodhis are real. I have met one. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharmakāya

Even without "self" emotions seem to arise. Without "self", fear and anger (which is also fear) mostly drop away or become momentary, since there isn't a "self" to injure. Emotions themselves are like thoughts or any other phenomena, arising naturally by themselves without "self" due to causes and conditions in the world. Phenomena, including emotions, don't necessarily belong to us, but might arise in a situation where we are part of what is happening, but that doesn't need to be processed or liberated, like seeing a picture of a starving child, or seeing two people kissing who are obviously in love, or a beautiful vista. The emotion is an inextricable part of the moment, arising now and passing.

There is "waking up", and there is "growing up" I often say to my students. The "growing up" is working your way through your emotions and personal karmic obscurations. A path without this piece is definitely doing it the hard way. I would definitely start with "Untethered Soul", by Michael Singer: https://www.amazon.com/Untethered-Soul-Journey-Beyond-Yourself/dp/1572245379/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=untethered+soul+by+michael+singer&qid=1678144989&s=books&sprefix=untethered+soul%2Cstripbooks%2C166&sr=1-1 I probably teach this book every few years as new students cycle through. The practices are very simply and incredibly effective. I find that the Tibetan Buddhist schools have the best "growing up" teaching material, especially the Lojong material. Taking life experiences as the path is a very powerful practice that is completely portable and possible to do ALL the time. My recommendations on that front are: https://www.amazon.com/Great-Path-Awakening-Cultivating-Compassion/dp/1590302141 or to keep it Zen, Norman Fischer's excellent, more accessible, but not quite as powerful (to me) book on the topic: https://www.amazon.com/Training-Compassion-Teachings-Practice-Lojong/dp/1611800404 If you haven't already, I'd also incorporate Metta and Tonglen practices into your routine. We are fortunate to to have so many practices to help us. A good therapist, or even a BUDDHIST therapist (they exist!) can be a great resource too.

Very much like:

I share your interests, for sure. IMHO the differences are primarily with the relative teachings, but yes. I also think it is fine for people to safeguard the cultural aspects of practice for sure. Enlightenment itself is always acultural.

Agreed. This is the same realization as non-doership in Daoism (Wu Wei) and Advaita Vedanta. Its knowledge IS the non-dual realization. Exploring the larger implications of realizing that you aren't the doer is the way in.

After 25 years in Nyingma, it honestly wasn't a great leap to come to Soto. Zen is VERY much like Dzogchen. Both developed alongside Taoism and Chan, IMHO, and are profoundly influenced as a result.

You might be more impressed then with the teachings of a Tibetan master - this is good stuff, IMHO: https://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-masters/rongton/excellent-path-great-vehicle ...or, to bring it full circle and keep it Zen, how about a note from Mel Weitsman, teacher to both Blanche, dharma "godfather" to MY late teacher, AND teacher to the amazing Norman Fischer: https://berkeleyzencenter.org/dharma-talk/sojun-mel-weitsman-three-doors-of-liberation/ - I agree - practices and conceptualizations are endless, I vow to forsake them! What are rafts for, when no-one listens anymore? - Kobun headed Jikoji where my teacher was a long time resident, and a couple of my personal teachers also resided and ran sesshin - Doug Jacobs, and Ian Forsberg. Jikoji is a magical place, and the dharma still flows strong there, whoever might be in charge. I'm not tired. It's still early! Let's listen to The Clash and slam some dharma doors! Only 83,999 to go!