stirling

Is anyone here familiar with this teacher or his book? https://www.shambhala.com/authors/a-f/mattias-daly.html I just finished listening to this interview with him; his explanations were very clear and intelligible to this Zen teacher. https://www.guruviking.com/podcast/ep244-taoist-adventures-mattias-daly

I would imagine that they terminology in those sutras that came from Daoism was used because of the recognizably similar conceptual material.

The way in either Daoism or Buddhism refer to the "path" and practices, yes. While the highlighted qualia and terminology might be more specific in Buddhism, being in "alignment", or "wu wei" in Daoism, are no different than "Beginner's Mind", or non-doership in Advaita Vedanta for example. Enlightenment is enlightenment. The depth of that enlightenment depends on the degree to which dualities have been seen through and are no longer identified with. Edited to add: Those dualities INCLUDE attachment to specific practices and rites, which Stream Entry (Sotapanna) greatly reduces and arhatship dissolves entirely: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stages_of_awakening#Path_and_fruit

OK then. I feel this coming together. So I no longer have a "self" and have the day to day experience of "form is emptiness/emptiness is form". There is just objectless "beingness", but I haven't seen any luminous gold or red shiny balls precipitate. What would cause one to do so? Where would one see or find such a thing? This reminds me of some of the stories about the remains of dead Tibetan masters, and how the leave "pearls" after death: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Śarīra#

...and the terms "Dao" and "the way" appear in some of the last Buddhist Mahayana Sutras, originally authored in Chinese.

By being it seemed to me to be suggesting (to be)... presence without self, or awareness. No? I read it as a non-dual statement: When you sense form within emptiness, the it can only be called a true "emptiness"? The internal elixir is (neidan) in this case is... ?

To satisfy my own curiosity, and not specifically a question for YOU, Forest: IS it "about saving all sentient beings"? If not, then what? What might a short description of the desired end result of these practices include? Is there only ONE set of practices that might bring about this result? Why would these teachings be secret? What does "immortal" (if that is part of the desired result) mean in plain language? What is the day to day experience of an "immortal" like? Who or what chooses or determines a "chosen one"? These are NOT trick questions or the set-ups for a "gotcha". Surprised, but delighted to see something so common and available on the end of your link. Just in perusing the linked book: You could tell me that this is Tibetan Buddhism and I would buy it. These messages, while couched differently, are entirely familiar. It implies that this is all that needs to be done. What does the "next step" of your neidan work add to "true being"?

I don't think there is anything in our universe that doesn't co-create and intermingle. Having investigated a couple of these traditions as a non-scholar on this topic, I think it is obvious that Buddhism/Ch'an, Taoism, and other traditions definitely co-mingled in China and influenced each other. Rather than thinking about these "movements" as separate, I tend to think of them in terms of the teachers. Enlightened teachers (in my experience) have ZERO qualms about quoting some Rumi, Ramana Maharshi, or whatever valid dharma they have met with and recognized in order to wake up their students. This story of intermingling isn't so much about traditions as it is about well-known, recognized and well-traveled teachers picking up teachings as they move through the world and using them as skillful means.

Indeed! Big fan of "Clarifying the Natural State". Also worth reading the last few feet of the understanding: "Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness" by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche. Agreed. Absolutely. One need someone who has complete insight to help navigate maps like this. Self-diagnosis isn't always helpful, especially when you might never encounter some of the map locations (I'm looking at you here, Progress of Insight). So, what is your practice background?

You could be forgiven for thinking otherwise, truly. It looks like all of the rest of those books from that period. I would have blindly thought otherwise if I hadn't known the author.

Chanted this one over 100,000 times. Still do occasionally, when it comes to mind. Rededicate yourself to the path! It's worth thinking about.

Strange but true, the author is actually a well-educated student of Lama Zopa Rinpoche, a highly respected Tibetan teacher, and has been since the early 70's. I studied with both Landaw and Rinpoche in the early 2000's for a few years. Both know what they are talking about.

I am happy to leave this topic there, my friend. Thank you for an engaging and civil discussion. 🙏

You are meditating for therapy, but it is ineffective? If you don't want a teacher, I would suggest trying Jack Kornfield's "A Path With Heart". If you become adept at watching your thoughts, feelings and sensations you get to the point where any of them can arise in consciousness and dissolve without triggering an associated dialog. Worth learning to do. I agree with all of that, EXCEPT that anyone who sits will notice that their baggage comes up. It is part of why you meditate, and happens there, but also in your daily life. People often have deep trauma come up on long retreats, for a good reason. Most meditation centers will suggest retreat attendees think carefully about their psychological history before committing to retreats for this reason. If the the "Unus Mundus" is being conflated with the Tao, then I would disagree. Possibly there is a larger discussion of "self" that could be had to clarify this point. Couple of pints in a local pub? Certainly where there is illumination to what the "self" actually IS, interference slowly comes to a halt.

Yeah... that's a different thing. I was different after experimenting with LSD in my teens and twenties in much the same way. I was thankful for it, and would meet people at parties and often know intuitively that they had also had that experience. Also, when I discovered that taking an entry level dose of Klonipin could erase my anxiety it was quite an eye opener. The realization that most people didn't walk around in anxiety was a revelation... but not the same kind of eye opener that realizing that all appearances are empty of "self" and other... just not in any way comparable in scale. It is the second that permanently cured the off and on generalized anxiety I had enjoyed from childhood, not first and the associated therapy. I am NOT invalidating therapy, which I have found helpful in other contexts, merely talking about my personal experience. I'm curious, why are you meditating when you don't believe in the central premise for its existence - what it is supposed to be according the tradition (Zen) you say you practice in? It is INTENDED to dig up your personal stuff, and would actually train you to notice with curiosity when you become fixated with attachment or aversion. What? Nah. Self is a story you tell yourself moment to moment. Which of your "selves" is the true one? The one you inhabit when you are with your partner? Someone in a shop? With your parents? With an officer of the law when you have been pulled over? Self comes and goes, shifts and changes. It is possibly the easiest object to see impermanence in. This is not my experience, and I daresay that of many of my teaching peers. I am being honest here, not gaslighting you. Oh definitely therapy is helpful in working with conditioning for many people. Thank you for your service to them. Had to look it up, though I did enjoy reading Jung a bit in my 16 credits of psychology in college: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unus_mundus That's what I'm talking about (at least the part that I italicized)! Have you read Dogen by any chance: The restoration of the original state is the Tao. The behavior of a Buddha is "wu wei", alignment, presence. It is alignment and synchronization with everything, as it is happening moment to moment. It would be a little tough if there was a "self" in there thinking it had agency, wouldn't it?

Are you working with a teacher, or meditating? Let's hear more about that. From MY perspective, entirely off the top of my head, and with a 101 degree fever (so possibly missing some things): Your first insight might be the realization of just how unbearably noisy your mind is outside of meditation practice. If you are meditating at least 20 minutes a day or hopefully more, you will find that you become less reactive, more calm, and develop a "pause" before emotional outbursts that enables you to wait through the wave of emotion and respond in a more relaxed and kind manner. This would be one of the earlier hallmarks of a dedicated practitioner. You might have "pointing out' instruction from a teacher and now be able to recognize "emptiness" with some effort. In daily life you will begin to learn to see it in your meditation practice, and attempt allowing this to well up in during your day. Eventually you start to have "access concentration", a stableness and abiding in your meditation practice that allows using your practice for inquiry. There are a lot more things like this, but usually I just see it come up in a student as they develop. If you don't, but CAN have an in-person teacher, I would highly suggest it.

Absolutely. This is my experience. I agree, in terms of "requiring" sitting. Despite having an everyday experience of formlessness to a particular degree, I sit because there are deeper levels of formlessness available there... and I just love sitting, it is enjoyably effortless. Commonly, yes. I think of the mind as like a willow branch. You may bend the branch over and over to train it into a shape, like a chair, but at first it just bends back. Eventually, however, it increasingly stays where it is bent, until at some point it doesn't bend back. So it is with meditation. From the perspective of enlightened mind, WHO is doing the lifting? You say earlier: Meditation changes the mind, but what ACTUALLY precipitates awakening (if there IS anything) is unknown. If we DID know what it was we could skip meditation and just cut to the chase... but you can't. The best you can do, IMHO, is be "accident prone" as Suzuki suggests.

What is important is that it resonates with the "awakened", or those with "no-self"/arhats. These absolute teachings are the best attempts at conceptual explanation available from perspective of enlightened mind. Agreed. The language/belief system of science has the same problem, despite its ability to predictively model reality where the variables are limited. I would, of course, say that this is because the "common" experience of consciousness is not different from the "enlightened" experience EXCEPT for the perceptual overlay of distortion in between it and experiencing. I'm not sure I follow you here. What is labelled "relative" are the teachings that point to symbolic ideas about a subject/object world... but even those lead to absolute teachings. While some teaching may be intended to lead to "altered states" analogous to enlightenment (the jhanas for example) the overall intention points to nirvana which is NOT an altered "state" (something temporary) but a permanent shift in understanding that doesn't fade or change. It is reality, as it is, over years upon years and, as far as I can tell, the variety of human experience including: extreme pain, sleep, emotions, intoxication, etc., etc. The toolset is simple: bring conditioning into consciousness when the mind is quiet and empty and allow that thought to pass are you would any other thought. This has been used for thousands of years. For some without deep trauma and attachment to their distorted views, this would be enough. Others might need some help from an intelligent, experienced psychological professional such as yourself. Some might clear enough of their conditioning to awaken. Awakening, and the eventual dropping away of "self" permanently change our relationship to our conditioning. At this point conditioning becomes MUCH easier to drop, due to the shift in perspective. From the moment of "awakening" (satori in Zen) the "self" is like a fan that has had its plug pulled. Things experienced as "self" are generally seen for what they are and drop away. The old patterns arise in experience of their own accord and drop away when brought into the stillness of enlightened mind. The "tool" at this point is effortless, and just an automatic part of experience. Seeing reality as it is definitely completely removes conditioning, in my experience.

I would call this "pointing out" (from the Tibetan Buddhist traditions). I'm not sure how it is talked about in your video, but in my practice it is a demonstration of what "emptiness" is, and some instruction on how to find it. I probably end up doing something along these lines every few meetings with a student. Once a student sees and NON-CONCEPTUALLY understands "emptiness" they can learn to allow it to well-up in their experience with greater and greater degrees of success and confidence.

The teachings on the absolute are "maximalist" because the nature of reality is uncompromising. It can't be bent to encompass conceptual frameworks that we cherish. Intellectually, I completely get how the absolute can create cognitive dissonance, but it truly is the reality of things. Once seen and understood, there is no way understand the world in the way it was before... not that this is a burden... it is a great joy. The relative teachings, which include the realms, rebirth, etc. are not ultimately real, though as real as anything else you think is "real". Nirvana IS real, but is not some other place or thing other than what is happening in this moment. It is always right here. The relative teachings are where "religious" ideas live in the Buddhist teachings. The relative teachings are skillful means, where ability to work with the absolute teachings is still in development. The teachings on impermanence, and especially dependent origination are the bridge to the absolute teachings. The relative actually is ALWAYS pointing at the absolute. The absolute teachings (and the relative teachings couching absolute teachings) are not at all religious, once fully understood. Coming full circle: The meditation practice (in Zen/Mahamudra/Dgozchen) is, from the beginning, an absolute practice that cultivates insight into the non-dual nature of reality. The absolute isn't going to resonate with ANYONE'S ideas about how reality is.

Are you familiar with the Two Truths Doctrine? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_truths_doctrine#:~:text=The Buddhist doctrine of the,ultimate" (paramārtha) truth.

My group sits for 15 minutes at the beginning of our sangha meetings, but it isn't terribly relevant in the scheme of things. I encourage students to sit for at least 20 minutes a day, but hopefully more like 40 minutes at least once, or even twice a day. Sitting at least 40 minutes a day, with regular teacher check-ins is optimal, in my opinion. Sitting in nature, or walking when one is able to have a fairly quiet mind is VERY beneficial. I walk for an hour most days, and it is very productive. The Rinzai Zen school like to use koan study, but I have never bonded with it. The idea of backing the mind into a corner is in many traditions, including Advaita and Sufism, so I think must work for some percentage of practitioners. I don't know anything about Mr. Mitchell.

Which Buddhism do you mean? Some branches are religious and some aren't. Is resting in nirodha/cessation where the mind is still and quiescent religious? It isn't Buddhism that understands or explains thoughts, or mind, or the world, it is enlightenment. Buddhism is simply a vehicle to a destination. Once there is arriving, it doesn't retain the same importance. It is direct experience that is valued, not axioms. The knowledge we are looking for is never merely conceptual. It is ultimately unimportant if a conceptual construct around where thoughts come from exists. Complete understanding of the nature of reality makes such a questions nonsense, where the time, space, and self are seen through as illusions. This is the reason that Buddhism doesn't generally attempt to answer questions of cosmology. It is an experiential understanding, not some kind of denial or reformation of ones views that precipitates this. Definitely agreed. It is mysterious. Thoughts seem to come out of nowhere, and disappear. This is the true of all phenomena, including self, moment to moment. The world is a pulsing fountain of things arising and disappearing, moment to moment. Reminds me of: Which Buddhism? There is abundantly more insight in resting the mind in it's own nature than in either Buddhism OR psychology.

No need to wish! Sitting in open awareness and allowing the mind to become still is all that is required. Most people can begin to have glimpses of resting in awareness in a week or so, all it takes is your sincere wish to end suffering, or understand the nature of mind. This is a nice primer on what you are trying to accomplish and how to start by a lovely, lovely being: https://www.lionsroar.com/how-to-meditate-dzogchen-ponlop-rinpoche-on-mahamudra/

I've chatted with Soh a number of times and am satisfied that he knows what he is talking about. There aren't REALLY stages of awakening, so consider these an aid rather than a references. There are MANY maps of the enlightened territory, from the Four Stage map, the Bhumis, the Oxherding pictures, ad nauseum, and all of them seem to have useful aspects to them.