stirling

OK, then. Failed in the second sentence!?!? As a Soto priest, I must say that I am a little disappointed. Have you been reading ewk's posts on Reddit by any chance? I think you will find most Soto and Rinzai priests study Ch'an with quite a bit of enthusiasm. What is understood about Zazen and Shikantaza meditation, which is that it is the actualization of enlightenment, fits perfectly with Cha'an for a good reason... it's where it comes from. Or better still, Zen teaches that you are ALREADY swimming, and always have been. ...including Soto and Rinzai... ...or, more clearly, Zen is about just being with things as they are, and realizing that mind is not "I". In a sense, this is true. In the same fashion, Dzogchen is not Buddhism either. Zazen and Dzogchen (Tibetan Buddhism) are just being, Buddhism is a methodologies and practices. A Buddha doesn't HAVE to meditate, meditation is practice that is already "just being", or enlightenment, whether we realize it or not. The practice of Atiyoga (Dzogchen) is considered the highest path in Tibetan Buddhism, as it is no path at all. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have, though you might have to be satisfied by my "bastardized" version.

When we are at home, we have an identity we adopt with our families. When we we are out with our friends there is another. At work we have yet another identity. Which is the real "I"? In my experience, NONE of the above. There isn't one. Our stories about the "self" arise in the context of the whole undifferentiated field of experience in the moment we occupy. The ingredients of the "self" we adopt is only a small part of that experience. To the degree that we identify with what arises, the "self" that appears in the moment become the aperture through which we shade our reality. We might be a parental figure, a spiteful co-worker, a subservient partner, or any role we adopt and make real. In the tradition I work in, the antidote is to learn to identify the clean, clear awareness that is present in every moment with meditation, and realize that IT is what we are, and not grasp on to the components of identity.

Moment to moment the perceived phenomena of the world arise, along with your thoughts of the future, or memories of the past, all of it interconnected, arising together, forming both your past and your imagined future. We create our stories of the past, and imagined future, on this basis. What we are in charge of is how we respond, our intention, for the next moment, but even THAT is conditioned by what is arising.

You are right - posted on the wrong thread. _/\_

.

In an absolute sense, a teacher with realization knows that they are provided for and doesn't generally worry about where livelihood comes from. Whether they have wealth or live very simply isn't necessarily relevant. Their identification is (ever increasingly) with the "awareness" of being, not with "self"hood. From the Heart Sutra: In a relative sense, being a dharma teacher isn't generally a high-paying gig, though there are exceptions. This is especially true if you don't have insight. If you DO have insight, the world at large isn't interested in it, and those that are remain skeptical from years of being told that enlightenment is somehow impossible. If you are a planner, best to have some other form of income from before awakening, or a continuing day job. - If it matters: I don't think Beth Upton, for example, is living a glamorous life. I have two friends who are known for their plethora of published books that live near me, both ordained, and neither are rolling in cash or doing seminars in Sedona. ...back to chopping wood and carrying (tap) water.

So far, so good, on the face of it. 👍🏻 Dana IS a proposition in Buddhism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dāna#Buddhism Speaking for myself, I feel it can complicate the teacher student relationship. I don't accept payment, but DO have students that have asked to give "dana". I support them doing so IF it is for the efficacy of the teachings, and comes from their gratitude in having found and applied them. The money goes to buy supplies, etc. for the zendo. Some teachers actually ask for payments because it weeds out the serious students from those that aren't. I get that, but it isn't the way I do things. The dharma is free and always has been. It is everywhere, 24/7. It is on the back of cereal boxes, and is spoken by Britney Spears, if you know what you are looking for. Still, it helps sometimes to have someone show you where to look.

The offer was actually for Parsival, but I am happy to take questions from anyone interested in Zen or Dzogchen practice, or enlightenment, here or privately.

In Zen, watching the breath is a preliminary practice intended to develop enough concentration for open awareness meditation. When you sit Zazen do you experience even brief periods when the mind is still and quiet and/or are you able to let arising thoughts pass without engaging the "thinking mind"? If so, it is fine to let go of watching the breath and move fully into just experiencing "open awareness" in Zazen. This type of meditation is not different from the experience of enlightened mind (which is no practice at all), and is therefore complete, requiring no other practice be added. I am a priest in the Soto Zen tradition. You are welcome to message me privately.

I thought, since the board seems to have bogged down in the pointless intellectual dissection of what "non-dual" means, that it might be nice to take a moment to reaffirm that the insight that is known variously as enlightenment, realization, alignment with the Dao, realization of the Self, etc. isn't some unattainable nonsense, or we wouldn't BE here talking about it. It is in fact attainable in this lifetime, and happens ALL THE TIME. I have recently connected with a number of newer board members who have this understanding, and know a number of others on the board who have as well. It remains possible in any moment. In this spirit I would like to re-share a document by a well-regarded Tibetan teacher that always warms my heart. Keep in mind I am not (and he would not) say that his suggested practices and lineage are not the ONLY practices or lineage that might make one available to have the accident of insight. There are an infinite number of gates to realization. In fact, most of the realized people I have met weren't doing any practice at all when it occurred. Deep bows, to anyone working day after day to chip away what obscures complete realization.

The Tsin Tsin Ming is one of my favorite Ch'an (early Zen) documents - a remarkably concise appraisal of Duality and it's close companion Non-Duality, and the difference between them from the perspective of enlightened mind. I love all of S'eng Tsan's work, but in particular, his grumpy style on this one always makes me laugh. Some pull quotes: Emptiness exists outside intellectual dissection. Non-duality is the spaciousness of reality beyond appearance and emptiness. Meditation in open awareness is the field in which dichotomies of self/other dissolves. Rest the mind in its own nature and this field of emptiness reveals itself. It isn't any kind of mystery, it is VERY simple. Being divided amongst our dharma brothers is pointless. Why can't we support each other on the path instead. Getting lost in the minutiae of which practice, and right and wrong is a waste of time. Excelsior! I could go on, but in the interest of brevity will just link to the full text. Full text: https://terebess.hu/english/hsin.html#3

It was intended as a thread about Buddhism... just as a thread on the very real potential to awaken in the present, in every moment for every being.

Is everybody have fun over here?

There IS no situation between us. I have asked you nicely not to reply to my posts, and for a short time you honored my offer, but your anger and fascination with me (a complete stranger) makes it impossible for you to leave me alone. Here, again, you are defaming me, misquoting me and projecting on to me whatever fear or bias you have concocted. I could easily have ignored you, but your fascination with me led me to wonder whether I might be of some service. At this point it looks like you have decided to burn another bridge here.

Thoughts are not experience, they happen in the mind, not in the world.

Is someone expecting others to adopt the idea of non-duality? It IS delusional to adopt ANY philosophy, IMHO. Ideas are just ideas, regardless of the depth of your belief in them. The same goes for memories of experiences. They aren't reality. I only trust what can be seen in experience in this moment. I can see the non-dual nature as we speak.

Enlightenment is seeing the reality of non-duality. I'm not endorsing it, I'm talking about the topic of this thread and from my personal experience with it. Non-duality is a real thing that any experienced meditation student that has sincere curiosity can see for themselves, with the direction of a realized teacher. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointing-out_instruction Complete realization is somewhat rare, but far from impossible. All of my teachers and their teachers are realized, as well as a number of my friends and colleagues.

Non-dual philosophy is an idea. Ideas can be adopted or dropped at any time. Actual non-dual understanding is not a conceptual idea, it is an experiential understanding. It is enlightenment. It doesn't have a perspective or come from one. Adopting it as a philosophy is pointless, because it is not an intellectual position and can't be understood from as an intellectual point of view.

For there to be an inside or outside "world" there would have to be a "duality", as well as a separate observer to own that internal "world".

You can't just "adopt" it. It happens because of a permanent experiential insight. Remember when you realized that Santa/Father Christmas wasn't real? Imagine that there was a moment when you realized that separateness or dualities weren't real. It can't be unseen, because it has always been the underlying reality, and you can't MAKE it happen because it is clear that what happens in the world has never been up to "you"... there isn't one.

If you have insight, it is your "external" world too, or, to be more clear, there ISN'T an internal or external world... that is just another duality that falls away. Yeah... not 5 year old friendly. Sorry. How about this: The relative view and absolute view see the same thing, the same "world", except the "non-dual" absolute sees through the illusion of perceiving a landscape of separateness, or "dualities".

Non-duality is actually the LACK of a point of view. There is no subject or object to own a view. It doesn't have pluses or minuses, and isn't a choice. No-one exists to choose or not choose, it is simply the reality as it is. Anyone who used a "non-dual" excuse to justify their actions cannot possibly truly understand it.

We are used to seeing things from the perspective of being a separate person in a world of objects who moves in time and space. There can be a permanent shift of perspective where instead there is an endless, infinite field of un-labeled phenomena fluxing here, now, lacking space, time, or anything that has existence of its own or could be labeled. One way to describe it, amongst countless, inadequate ways of labeling it, is that this is seeing the "non-dual" nature of reality. It looks mostly the same in both perspectives except that the salient quality that pervades all of it is this "non-duality" or "emptiness".

I appreciate your clarification and future caution. _/\_

Certainly the Buddha suggested jhanas as training, but didn't mention the aspects you are discussing, which isn't to say they aren't or can't be valid. Having followed the well-known Pali descriptions of jhana practice, I haven't arrived at the same phenomena, and they certainly aren't what led me to complete the path. The Buddha promises the end of suffering. My experience is that these particular proofs or events aren't necessary for that goal. None of that means that I don't find them interesting. I admit to being a little confused by Freeform's description of 1st jhana in that last paragraph. The first jhana still includes a "self", thoughts, etc. Oneness doesn't appear until the meditation is formless... Oh... I've seen some truly unbelievable stuff, seeing a little light emit from someone would be strange, but not the craziest thing I have seen. My point is really that, based on MY understanding of these practices and enlightenment itself, none of these things make sense together. Had to look that up, unsurprisingly. Does the practice you are talking about include building an "immortal vehicle"? I can see how someone would want that. It is quite clear to me at the same time that the body isn't any more special than any other aspect of the dharmakaya, and that birds singing, cars driving by, leaves falling, and a cat yawning are all just as much "I" as anything the apparent body does, and none of them are "I". I have 25 years of Dzogchen/Nyingma under my belt, so definitely have heard of those things, and actually witnessed the paranirvana of one of my late teachers. It isn't that I think these things are impossible, but just that linking them to the jhanas doesn't make any sense to me. I also certainly have experience with using substances and altering consciousness. Haha. How so? _/\_