tao.te.kat

>hen Buddha said there is no self, this should mean there is no reason to extinguish self because there is no self. There is no reason to believe that the practice of meditation is to extinguish the self. What we do when we practice meditation is to set things right, we learn the truth and realize our nature thru grace. That's right, "extinguising the self" is as silly as saying you want to extinguish unicorns. Ok, mimicking Bodhidharma, - I want to extinguish the self - Then show me your self - I cannot find it!!! - So it's extinguished! Is that silly. Buddhism is about removing suffering, and one way for it is understanding our mind completly. Understanding processes like pratītyasamutpāda and the absence (now, then and ever) of a concrete agent... Is not about not-thinking of course. You will always, always will hace intelectual thinking. Buddha did think in the sutras In Mahayana buddhism the attachment to samadhis and non-thought sends you to a formless realm but not to nirvana. So, why practice samadhi and non-thought?, well it has a place in the eigthfold path. It's mind trainig and also helps you to slowly see what is behind the noisy thought system, but without a clear view of it all, it's nearly useless. Remember the parable of calming the dirty waters. Is that. You can find people who has a kensho without meditating at all, just because of their natural self-inquiry (non formal). And you can find people reaching the nth jhanaa and no kensho, but worse, no wisdom or not that much understanding, or compassion or release from suffering. In Tibet the Meditational path starts AFTER the path of seeing, because the real meditation which is abiding in your realized nature accepting all (also thoughts) only happens after seeing (kensho). Best wishes

Alaya is deep and subtle, all its seeds flowing like a river. Because it might incorrectly be conceived as a self, I have not taught it to the ignorant. Sandhinirmocana sutra

>I don't consider Wikipedia to be authoritative in terms of spirituality It's just a question of commodity and I presume you did the same for the same reasons. I've read a lot of Mipham and Thrangu Rinpoche and some others you said (not all them) too. Our views are not exactly the same. No problem to me. I also know some Kagyupas and others have a Shentong view clearly or not so clearly. Anyway it's ok, not interested in endless debates about this. Thanks for your opinion. Best regards

Well you have tons of info to check it. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rangtong_and_shentong Where is said many times and very clear that: Classic Jonang shentong holds that while all relative phenomena are empty of inherent existence (svabhava), ultimate reality (paramartha-satya) is not empty of its own inherent existence.[3] In this view, ultimate reality, the buddha-wisdom (buddha-jñana) or buddha-nature (buddhadhātu), is only empty of relative and defiled phenomena, but it is not empty of its countless awakened qualities. That's the focal point. In fact shentong was even forbidden in Tibet for some time... And Jonang school (Shentong) is not recognized as an official tibetan school not even today. Shentong was suppressed by the dominant Gelug school for several hundred years, equally for political reasons as doctrinal reasons. In 1658, the Gelug authorities banned the Jonang school and its texts for political reasons, forcibly converting its monks and monasteries to the Gelug school, as well as banning shentong philosophy and books, thus making the rangtong position the overwhelmingly majority one in Tibetan Buddhism. https://dzokden.org/projects-en/equal-rights-for-the-jonang-tradition/ Not really that important in the end... but it posit an essence and self-existence for sunyata.

Nirvana understood as Parinirvana (after death) is one inexpressible in buddhism, So we dont really have a description at all. Buddha rejects to explain. But it doesnt change if you have atman or not. It's the same problen, isnt it? How will it be with atman? same doubt for me. The difference is if you have a heaven of Gods to go to or not (parinirvana is not). But regardless of atman or anatman... Nirvana in Samsara is mostly complete freedom from suffering so it's quite clear. Nirvana in meditation (also called nirvana with residue) usually is understood as reaching the right samadhi (the name can vary from school to school), but this is the lesser one.

> Just stupid realization of how dumb I can be at times. You sound wise to me. Keep the good job. Kensho will arrive. While observing thoughts and emotions coming and going, dont forget to be inquisitive about: then "what am I?" "what is this?" "from where am I then observing?" "what is my nature?" Then one day, a knot between the observation and the contents will break. That will be the first kensho that probably will not last... but...

It all spins around what one will consider a soul (Atta or Atman). For buddhism this Atman is impermanent and composed (not atomic) as anything is, for buddhism You can call it Atman anyway if you wish but for claryfying the difference with hinduism they call it not-atman (anatta or anatman). That's really all. It's just words as long as you understand the description that buddhism offers of your self. Call it as you wish. About the substance of this buddhist anatman, in Tibet there're two schools, one more orthodox than the other. The ortodhox Rangtong approach says that there's just the empty skandhas there, so there's really nothing there more than the parts that are itself composed and impermanent. We're not a thing, but a composed thing. There's no "core" anywhere that's more atman than the rest. The idea of self comes from confusing all these parts functioning with a more atomic self. The unorthodox but tolerated Shentong approach says that there's something, a substrate, an essence of somekind, with is devoid of any characteristic of any skandha, but it's there and it's permanent. Shentong means "other emptiness" because of that. So this can be seen as some form of Atta, as long as one understand that is devoid of any characteristic and functioning. It's more like the energy that moves us (not being really that), Sometimes it's been used the example of a lion made of gold. So gold really exists as such in that case. While for Rangtong gold will be also composed and impermanent. So sunyata, emptiness, is different for this two schools. For the first it's an absence. For the second it's some "thing" (not really a thing). Sunyata is the idea that a chariot is made of parts, and there's not "chariot essence" anywhere in the chariot. Just parts that made up a chariot. Rangtong says that. But Shentong says, ok, you're right there's no "chariot essence" but there's a global essence/substance in all. That's the two kinds of sunyata in tibetan buddhism. Same applies to you. For Rangtong there's no self-essence anywhere just parts. For shentong there's no self-essence anywhere just parts, but all the parts share a "other emptiness" substance or dimension that is beyond words. It's a bit like pan-psiquism but not abot consciousness but even less (consciousness is composed in buddhism).

Compassion is sweet-sorrow

>It seems to me that the eightfold path is one of putting things right I mostly agree. Maybe prajna will be a little bit more of an outcome, but the rest is putting things right. Sila for sure, that's the basic ground, and a lot of training the mind, that's "sharpening" the tool that is out of shape. A little less with prajna which is more like the outcome. But anyway, it's not linear at all. It's holistic. Some time ago I wrote (sorry it's auto translation to english): The spiritual path is an infinite virtuous circle, an spiral, really. The spiral occurs when the force of attraction of our own liberation and that of others is stronger than our desires, fears and ambitions in manifest reality. So each step brings us closer to our origin and our liberation. And vice versa, when the force of attraction of manifest reality is stronger, then the spiral continues to occur but moving us away from our center, increasingly alienated from what can bring us peace, serenity and equanimity. The virtuous spiral occurs because: Conceptual understanding attracts us and guides us in the process, initiating us in mental training. Mental training offers us the possibility of obtaining non-conceptual wisdom. Non-conceptual wisdom, which is a profound mental change, allows us to be effectively more complete and truly live the theoretical proposal, that is, this conceptual understanding is realized in a complete life. Integrity is intrinsically reduction of suffering and together with non-conceptual wisdom allows us to go deeper into mental training. and the virtuous cycle continues to spin until… the Liberation: Without conflicting mental tendencies, there is no conflict. Without conflict there is no rejection. Without rejection there is no suffering. Without suffering there is liberation.

>So practice is not so much for extinguishing the self. You cannot extinguish what isnt here. But to avoid confussion about what is and what is not a self, it's better, as said, to work on seeing clearly. Once clearly seen the mind, it doesnt matter the words. You know what exists and what doesnt. Call it self or not-self

Lankavatara is first and then Sandhinirmocana. Probably because they are quite "technical".

Ok, let's see. A Bodhisattva with a sword is always Manjushri, so we got that. Black Manjushri is Yamantaka, Cutting through (attachment) is literally what means Trekchö which is a Dzogchen set of practices or stage. I cant say much more... https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Yamantaka About Daoism or Kabala, I cannot help.

Color black or absolute darkness? The closest I can think of are the Dark retreats of Bon/Dzogchen, but not really related (I think) beause the main focus is not dissolution of aflictive states but: The time period dedicated to dark retreat varies from a few hours to decades. Dark retreat in the Himalayan tradition is a restricted practice only to be engaged by the senior spiritual practitioner under appropriate spiritual guidance. This practice is considered conducive for navigating the bardo at the time of death and for realizing the rainbow body.

Do as "the way" is quite common in all the Zen literature. But usually doesnt refer to Dao as understood in Daoism but as the way meanig the Zen way or the buddhist way. For example: “From thought-instant to thought-instant, no FORM; from thought-instant to thought-instant, no ACTIVITY—that is to be a Buddha! If you students of the Way wish to become Buddhas, you need study no doctrines whatever, but learn only how to avoid seeking for and attaching yourselves to anything.”― Huang Po, The Zen Teachings of Huang Po: On the Transmission of Mind

BTW, the Kagyu official lineage puts Naropa just before Marpa (thought it names also Maitripa). That's the info I had, but anyway is not that important: https://kagyuoffice.org/kagyu-lineage/

A traditional depiction of Marpa painted on a rock on Holy Isle, Firth of Clyde Marpa Lotsāwa (མར་པ་ལོ་ཙཱ་བ་ཆོས་ཀྱི་བློ་གྲོས་, 1012–1097), sometimes known fully as Marpa Chökyi Lodrö (Wylie: mar pa chos kyi blo gros) or commonly as Marpa the Translator (Marpa Lotsāwa), was a Tibetan Buddhist teacher credited with the transmission of many Vajrayana teachings from India, including the teachings and lineages of Mahamudra. Due to this, the Kagyu lineage, which he founded, is often called Marpa Kagyu in his honour.[1] Although some accounts relate that the Mahasiddha Naropa was the personal teacher of Marpa, other accounts suggest that Marpa held Naropa's lineage through intermediary disciples only.[2] Either way, Marpa was a personal student of the Mahasiddha Maitripa and of the dakini Niguma.[3] But anyway Maitripa is also Indian and his teacher Naropa. Doesnt change at all my argument about Mahamudra. You can see the lineagea as Naropa-> Marpa or as Naropa-> Maitripa-> Marpa. Doesnt change that the source of Mahamudra is fully Indian and then fully Tibetan. ZhuangZi is considered to have lived in IV AC so later than Buddha, but again, He, Sakyamuni learnt meditation from older sources. So meditation in Nepal/India at least, was quite older than VI AC. It doesnt change the argment neither. The point is that there was a lot of meditation in India prior to VI AC. Best wishes.

>My current view for what it is worth is that Dzogchen and Mahamudra derive from Zouwang. Meditation similar to Zouwang and others existed in India too even before Buddha. Jhanas were taught to Buddha by hinduists the VI century BC (in India-Nepal) So it's hard to tell. But meditation existed way before Buddhism and probably Daoism. And in Cnina and India. Both places. India for sure. On respect Dzogchen there's some debate, but Mahamudra origins are clearly from Indian Siddhas Tilopa and then Naropa. Marpa the translator came next and was the first tibetan to receive the teachings, then came the famous Milarepa. And his disciple, Gampopa build the foundations of what now we know as Mahamudra. The lineage here is quite clear and documented and comes from India. So for Mahamudra derivate from Zouwang it has to have come first to India and be adopted by the great siddhas of the time. Not impossible, but strange. Dzogchen origins are less clear. They revert to Padmasambhava, also indian (VIII century) that went to Tíbet but his life is quite a legendary one. And there's some suspicion that some Chan/Zen influences may be there from the time Moheyan (chinese Chan monk) went to Tíbet on the VIII century. From this time on, there's, no doubt some chinese influence in tibetan buddhism but the indian one is a lot more clear.

>Big fan of "Clarifying the Natural State". I did the translation of the book to spanish in case anyone is interested. at El blog de 道 | El blog de Tao (wordpress.com) >So, what is your practice background? Started some decades ago with zen but mostly by my own and friends, and switched to Essence Mahamudra which is mostly similar but more clear and without paradoxal language. But in the middle I studied Vedanta, the Thusness model, Dzogchen, etc... I'm semi-old... I've talked with John Tan and Soh from time to time. Very nice people. Best wishes.

Pure shikantaza is impossible prior kensho. It was know even for Bodhidharma so long ago (you can find it). Bodhidharma spoke of this in his Essay on the Dharma pulse: If someone without kensho tries constantly to make his thoughts free and unattached, he commits a great transgression against the Dharma and is a great fool to boot. He winds up in the passive indifference of empty emptiness, no more able to distinguish good from bad than a drunken man. If you want to put the Dharma of non- activity into practice, you must bring an end to all your thought-attachments by breaking through into kensho. Unless you have kensho, you can never expect to achieve a state of non-doing. Prior to kensho you do Zazen Which is not exactly the same. But they're not so different. So there's some confussion. Prior to the turning over described in the Lankavatara sutra (paravritti aka kensho in japanese) zazen is like self-liberation of thoughts in Tibet. You stay there, no point of focus, but attentive, if you get lost in a fantasy, you detect it, let it go and go back to be attentive. After kensho, shikantaza is just sitting because you shouldnt self-liberate, you just stay in front of thoughts when they appear, and you just stay when they dont appear. You are attentive and that's all. Because, as Bodhidharma said you're free and unattached to thoughts. So you achieve a state of "only-sitting" or non-doing.

Not very different of what already have been said: In Mahamudra they talk about Sutric Mahamura, Tantric Mahamudra and Essence Mahamudra. Essence Mahamudra is quite close to Dzogchen. The most important is recognizing your own nature and then the main path begins. Call it rigpa or essence or whatever. And the main practice is returning all the time to this rigpa-essence. So they're quite close. Sometimes they're considered "direct vehicles" because you train directly from scratch with buddha nature (only after recognition). That's my path. In tantric Mahamudra usually you will work with the Six yogas of Naropa (or Kalachakra or some other tantric teaching) together with the Mahamudra practices. And it's a gradual approach. Also sutric Mahamudra will be gradual too and there will be more focus on paramitas, prajna, four noble truths, etc... samatha and vipashyana, etc... More or less... A good reference for Essence Mahamudra can be "Gampopa teaches essence Mahamudra" (2 books) You have a lot of "Six yogas of Naropa" books And as for the main drawing of all the Mahamudra path any book from Dakpo Tashi Namgyal will do well.

>As seen from this mind, thoughts are the driving pulse of actions and desires. Without them then no action is possible. Do you think on walking while walking? Do you think on talking while talking? Do you think on driving while driving? Etc... In fact it's very rare that you're thinking about what you're doing in this moment (check it yourself). So it cannot be the driver of the current action. So no, thoughts, like action (it's a form of internal action) arise from a deeper ground, based on desires and attachments. So it's the reverse: desires, attachments, fears and the rest, motivate actions and thougths. You can check it yourself. That deeper ground is Alaya (eigth consciousness). ALso in the 12 nidanas, Bhavana (becoming) comes from Upadana (attachment)

Dzogchen history contains a lot of debate as is mostly based on relatively recent Termas (findings) that claim to be very old. But no proof of it. "Recent" means from XII century or so. A lot of information here (I hope it's allowed): Dzogchen Historiography - Dharma Wheel For example, Bardo Thodol is supposed to be a text from Padmasambhava (VIII century) but it was found on the XIV century by Karma Lingpa...

>then one afternoon, Visions began to fill the space of the wall, You probably already know but these visions are quite usual in Zen. They call them MAKYO. Makyō - Wikipedia

>when I do sitting and forgetting I have ‘memories’ which are not my own. Quite vivid and elaborate scenes and people which I realize I have never known or seen before. It’s quite weird. Me too, which is fun because I also "I am" a white cat with blue collar... Recalling other-life memories is an experience described in buddhism, it fits.

Not forgetting the four Mahamudra yogas which are, for me, the most detailed stages to be found in buddhism. Check Dakpo Tashi Namgyal. Also the five ranks of Tosan are very interesting, but less clear... There're many stage models in buddhism... The Thusness/John Tan model (adopted by Soh) is interesting and fits also some other models, but being so "clear" is also a problem because people have a tendency to focus too much on objectives, milestones, realization and results, and that is an hindrance. Also a way for a lot of self-deceit. But also of value, no doubt.