forestofclarity

From the Sutra of Hui Neng, trans. Red Pine: What do we mean by a form that is ‘no form’? To be free of form in the presence of forms. And ‘no thought’? Not to think about thoughts. And ‘no attachment,’ which is everyone’s basic nature? Thought after thought, not to become attached. Whether it’s a past thought, a present thought, or a future thought, let one thought follow another without interruption. Once a thought is interrupted, the dharma body becomes separated from the material body. When you go from one thought to another, don’t become attached to any dharma. Once one thought becomes attached, every thought becomes attached, which is what we call ‘bondage.’ But when you go from one thought to another without becoming attached to any dharma, there’s no bondage. This is why ‘no attachment’ is our foundation. Good friends, ‘no form’ means externally

I've practiced Buddhism in a number of traditions, and never once was taught to try consolidating and empty mind or singing the name of the Buddha. Many forms of Buddhism are based on insight, and sometimes this insight is joined with shamatha or tranquility (not necessarily stillness). Tranquility actually comes according to many Buddhists from relaxing fixation, not forcibly stilling the mind. If the mind stills naturally, it still naturally, but this is not necessarily an aim or a requirement. As Hui Neng said: Chanting the name of the Buddha has a bit more to it then sitting around singing all day as well.

I forgot to mention this was a self-portrait.

I took a photo to accompany the video:

I don't think it is alien, I think it was lost. Pierre Hadot and Peter Kingsley have excavated evidence of ancient Greek practices. I read one of Plato's writings that specifically referenced oral teachings with exercises. If I were to speculate, I would think the practices were once there but have been lost.

I think Stoicism from a Buddhist POV would work with the sila (morality) aspect, but it ultimately lacks the liberating samadhi and prajna. I think Stoicism can be useful in adapting Buddhist types ideas into Western language. I think Pyrrhonism would be more on point given its overlap with Madhyamaka. As for Taoists, there is nothing in Stoicism comparable to aligning one's channels and working with the body-mind on a deep level. There is no qigong, neigong, or neidan in Stoicism. Unfortunately, the only remnants of Stoicism are written directions. We do not have any oral instructions or access to the exercises they used. Nor do we have living teachers of the tradition that can pass it along. Accordingly, I imagine one would largely be working with the shallower aspects of the mind. But it would be better than practicing nothing.

To nitpick a little, fully realized Buddhahood would be samyaksambodhi, whereas what (I've been taught anyway) is that the beginning stages of enlightenment start with breaking the first three fetters (out of 10) in Theravada or having a stable realization of emptiness which is the first Bhumi (our of 10) in Mahayana.

I wouldn't say any post is necessarily offensive, but some are more likely to produce offense or negative feelings in others. Personally, I think confrontation, as a spiritual tactic, works with people who know each other and have some trust established. Online, I see it just produces arguments, bad feelings, etc. Which is not to say that I'm somehow above it all by any means. Sometimes when people say outlandish things, they want attention, praise, honor, etc. I don't think that is the case here. I think there is a likelihood that he is suffering from a physiologically based mental illness. It is not uncommon in real life spiritual circles, and I imagine is even more prevalent online. And of course, spiritual practice itself can be quite destabilizing. People can approach it differently--- some will agree potentially reinforcing the delusions. Others may be polite, pretending what is being said doesn't sound like mental illness. Others may deride, which may not be the best strategy in such cases. No solutions here, just a different view.

Have you considered whether the person you are taking as your spiritual teacher (in whatever form) may have some issues of his own, possibly including some mental illness? I'm not saying that he is or isn't---- I don't know him and I am not a doctor. But having spent a lot of time around mentally ill people, his posts parallel the thinking that I've heard from mentally ill people (a generalized lack of stability, a tendency to meander, making wild connections). I think you made some great points, but I have found that people tend to enjoy sarcasm and cutting wit less upon hearing it than they do upon saying it.

As a parent, you can use it to your advantage. Some years ago, when my son was 5-6, the song Pumped Up Kicks got a lot of airplay. It is essentially about a school shooting. With some power of suggestion, this is what my son heard (and still hears to this day). All the other kids with the pumped up kicksYou'd better run, better run, out run my gun momAll the other kids with the pumped up kicksYou'd better run, better run, faster than my bullet brother You know, just a song about racing your family members.

Totally agree. I had a very powerful mystical experience in the Christian tradition many years ago. I was unable to deepen or sustain it, and eventually it faded. Some years later, during Buddhist retreats, the same experiences manifested. I was very surprised. However, the names applied were different, and many of them did not have specific names. Now, as I delve in Taoism, I see explanations of various experiences that fit what I initially experienced perfectly, except they have different names and explanations. Same experience, different names and explanations. I think this is how traditions are. They begin with the experiential realization, but one cannot pass that. Rather, what one can pass are the names and explanations. Then we get attached to the names and explanations, completely forgetting the experience. Over time, the names and explanations may become very rigid, much like concepts and mental habits become rigid. Sounds a lot like the whole original mind (yuan shen), acquired mind (shi shen) in Taoism. There are certainly points of contact between mystics of all traditions.

When the proverbial S started to hit the proverbial F, I made two purchases I do not regret when the gyms closed: a Weider weight bench (i.e. Total Gym rip off) and a stationary bicycle. A modest investment ($200ish) with great returns. Also, I have found that riding a bicycle is great. I'm in Colorado, so I can ride on a trail for quite a ways. Sometimes it is good with an audiobook, a youtube video (listen only) or podcast. Sometimes it is good just to meditate in motion.

Oh the Bardos. I've been getting a lot of Bardo teachings over the past year, before COVID. It is funny because initially they seem like a death teaching, but the bardo experience is everywhere. One of my favorite practices these days is yogic napping, sometimes in the West called liminal dreaming. You lay down to take a nap, and let your mind drift in and out of the hypnogogia. You can literally watch the body dissolve and reform, and the waking and non-waking states arise and pass. It is how I like to do bardo prayers. With a little experience in liminal and regular dream yoga, it is amazing how the bardo teachings really come to life. Yes, I agree. Sometimes these posts just spill out in contact with, and not necessarily in response to, other's posts.

Emptiness, not nothingness. Nothingness would be nihilism. What appears is expressions of the dharmakaya (however you define it). However, lacking any unitary, independent, permanent substance to them, they are empty. Last night, I dreamed I was in a house. It was very detailed, ornate, elaborate. There were these old lamps that didn't work well. They would sputter before coming on. The house had old wall paper, and many rooms with moody yellow lighting. It was an old house, probably from the early 20th century. Something entered into the house, very loudly and aggressively, coming for me. I forgot I was dreaming (connate ignorance). I took the expressions of my mind (the house, the lamps, my dream body, the monster) as real (co-emergent ignorance). Because of this, I had fear arise (emotional obscuration). What if instead, I recognized that I was dreaming and relaxed? Even though there was nothing to grasp or let go of? Well, then I would have been able to walk through walls. But there are degrees of lucidity in a dream. From a little lucid, to completely awake. Even when completely awake in the dream, the dream rules still apply. It takes some time to undo the mental habit that prevents you from walking through a wall. Last night, I didn't. I woke myself up. In so doing, the dream world dissolved, and the waking world emerged much the same way, with the same level of detail.

What do you mean when you say "isn't actually there?"

Buddhism is very befuddling to the intellect. That is why Nagarjuna spent so much time dismantling the intellect and showing its limitations (although not negating it completely). Consider emptiness. Things are empty, yet they appear. That doesn't make any sense. But why does it have to make sense? The universe feels no need to fit itself into our human made concepts. We should adjust to what happens rather than expecting what happens to adjust to us. When that doesn't work, I see it as a process of removal. Buddha nature is inherent, like gold crusted in rock, or a white cloth dyed blue, or [insert preferred example]. The gold may be in that rock, but until you clean it, polish it, and recognize its value, it might as well be a rock. Those positive acts don't change the nature of the gold, but without them the gold won't come through.

In an empty, interdependent universe, definitions are slippery things. Here, I'm like "do you mean a complete idiot like Jigme Lingpa, or a complete idiot like certain unnamed political figures?" It reminds me of an old joke: one time, there was a hunting camp in a place where brigands and outlaws dwelled. On of the hunters was coming back from an evening hunt. He had a little knowledge of spirituality. When the camp guard heard the approach, the guard yelled: "Who goes there?" And the hunter, being clever said, "No one!" The guard, being a little more knowledgeable, yelled back "Not yet you're not!" Better to leave the pot on the stove, lest one gets burned.

Just to add another conceptual stick on the log--- some teachers offer the formless view first. A sort of reverse Lam Rim. They offer the formless teachings first, and go down progressively so each student can meet the teaching according to their own capabilities. I used to have fierce opinions on this, but holding to thoughts a little more loosely, it seems to me that any approach is going to depend on each student. For some, the quick path is not quick at all, and they will muddle around conceptually when they could have been cultivating meritorious conduct. Others may not have the capacity for more formalized Tibetan practices, and some teachers may require decades of preliminary training before they even think about anything else. Mahamudra was (per Prof Reggie Ray) initially a householders path, and even Gampopa taught it apart from Tantra IIRC. I agree with @steve that there are cultural differences. Ngondro to a teenage Tibetan raised in a monastery may be a different experience that Ngondro to a 35 year Western householder who may have raised a family, progressed through formal education, and/or started a business. I am told there are often key psychological differences between the two cultures. Personally, I needed to spend some time drinking, smoking, and chasing samsara before I was fit for any dharma. And having one's life falling apart can be a good reminder of impermanence and the defects of samsara. I guess it depends on how broadly one wishes to use the words "preliminary" and "path." It seems to me that when you're on the path, there is a "higher power" that sort of directs you where you need to go if you are listening (and that can be a big if).

Why do you say that? And we're talking arhats here, not mere stream enterers or once returners.

I really don't think any Buddhist path is dual. Mahayana especially, with its focus on emptiness--- by definition, in an empty universe, there is no basis upon which to erect any dualities. Some folks think that Shravaka is dual, because they discover the emptiness of self but not phenomenon, but I tend to agree with Ju Mipham Rinpoche that this is a bunch of pish-posh--- how could you discover the emptiness of self without also discovering the emptiness of phenomenon?

This is funny because I had a different experience. One of my catechism teachers (also in a small Midwestern town) told us that at a certain age, we should listen for the small voice. She was very precise about it, stating that often one would hear a ringing in the ears before. Others in the class had a similar experience. I never experienced any such thing. It would have been interesting if she had been your teacher. I cannot say whether the priests would have been on board or not. What I didn't learn until much later is that although externally I am very visual and thought oriented, internally I am very somatic. If she had told me to feel for a higher presence, things may have turned out differently. Other people are more visual--- they get images, etc. in their minds.

You're talking folk Christianity here. Like folk Buddhism, where people pray to Buddhas for money. A more cogent view, in my opinion, is found in the philosophy of David Bentley Hart. You will find a much larger God there than you would normally find in your neighborhood church. Perhaps a God too large for any one religion.

1. Be careful. The habit of meditation you install now can persist for quite a period of time. Treat meditation with a healthy respect. You are, in mind, doing brain surgery on yourself. I would be careful about narrowing, too much focusing, fixating, etc. This stuff can cause knots and blocks that can be hard to remove later. I would urge a soft focus over a strong focus. 2. Read up on it. Find what styles you are interested in, and what you will actually do. Try to get a sense of what traditions and traditional teachers say. This is important for the next step. Once you find what you are interested in, then: 3. Find a teacher you trust and who's instructions you will follow. You may have to try out a number of teachers. In this day and age, many teachers are available online and/or have online programs to follow. Take advantage of this. Meditation is best learned from a person. If you can't or won't, then at least follow a program. 4. Relax! It is better to take your time and learn the basics now then have to go back and redo it later. Also, there is no hurry. It takes time to grow flowers and develop your mind.

I think we generally start off with some sort of provisional faith, but over time, that provisional faith is replaced by direct experience. Once you have the experience, you no longer need the provisional faith. In ancient India, it was said there were three things that pointed to truth, and you need all three: the scriptures, the teachings of your teacher, and your own personal experience. Having one or two but not all three is not enough. When you have all three, even a glimpse, then the teachings spring into your mind stream and come alive. It is like learning to find dragons. At first, you read about dragons, maybe buy some paintings and so on. Maybe you even look around and see some dragon tracks and old scales. One day, you find some one to teach you. They show you how to track dragons, where to look for dragons, and what signs to look for when you've seen one. Perhaps you see a dragon's tail. For some people, they will say this isn't a dragon, it is a snake. But it isn't, it is the dragon. Over time, you begin to see more and more of the dragon. Some people, who are really dedicated, may even be able to tame and train the dragon. Some might even fly. People stop at various points: some with books, some with the tail, some before they can fly. Some people say if you can't fly, you don't really have a dragon. Many points of view. It may be the case that Bodri/Nan didn't resonate, because at the time I had very little experience. I went looking through his website looking for this quote for you, and I can see much of what I missed. Here is the quote for the way beyond cause and effect:

For me, prajna doesn't necessarily mean to he same thing in different traditions, or even the same thing in the same tradition. And of course, we students understand everything a little bit differently. In Theravada in my experience, prajna referred to insight that arose from properly applying sila and samadhi. Specifically, it related to insight into no self, impermanence, and the unsatisfactory nature of phenomenon. In some Mahayana contexts, it may refer to insight into emptiness. In Zen contexts, prajna may refer to spontaneous actions that arise when the acquired mind is set aside. Master Nan offers another definition. In some Dzogchen teachings, it may mean different things in Sutra, Tantra, and Dzogchen contexts. Who is right? By what standard is right established? Is it a strong feeling? How strong? In my mind, all conceptual views are partial. How can it be otherwise in a complex, interconnected, non-separate, ever changing universe? A word or a concept is necessarily partial and limited, an attempt to isolate what cannot be isolated and fix what cannot be fixed. And what is a word or concept anyway? How do we know Master Nan isn't lying to us, or giving a provisional teaching, or was mistranslated? And of course, if prajna is acquired, if it has causes and conditions, then the dissolution of the causes and conditions (which is inevitable in a constantly changing universe) will lead to the dissolution of prajna. Similarly, it is said that when merit is exhausted, even the gods die. What good is a million eons of pleasure once it vanishes without a trace? PS: Back in 2005-2006, Nan and Bodri were the talk of the Taobums. I played a night of poker and did something I never had before: I played sober. I cleaned up and won well over $100. I used it to buy How to Measure and Deepen Your Spiritual Realization. Good times.