help explain a tiny part of the Shurangama Sutra

[beoman]

Greetings yet again Beoman

 

I see you have many questions added on to the 'tiny' one you started off with haha!

 

Greetings CowTao! Thanks for your kind words. Haeh yes while asking more questions I did find it funny how much they evolved from just a few phrases in the sutra. Makes me think that the buddha might not have been exaggerating when he said the biggest merit was transmitting sutras.

 

That, imo, is highly commendable. Doubt, and doubt again, as the Buddha had implored to all, until you yourself come to experiential and conclusive insights to all your own inquiries. These insights are relevant only to your own unfolding wisdom. It really does not matter so much to find the right answers... sometimes asking the right questions far outweigh the vitality of answers, which in most cases simply mean one has reached a dead-end. Do not get too keen on dead-ends, as my teacher used to tell me years ago.

 

I am sure my learned friend Xabir will eventually address some of the questions you have expressed here. I assure you they are all very valid questions too. Some you will get a satisfactory understanding. Those (answers) that do give you some satisfaction, i would say caste them aside. Those that do not satiate your 'thirst' are the ones you ought to be more keen on.

 

You might be disappointed to learn that i have no answers to offer you, and moreover, even if i have, they would only be valid in regards to my own unfolding wisdom - therefore i would prefer to simply invite you to continue investigating your doubts, go to the very end if you can. Keep looking, dig deeper, and find the never-ending answer to the question, "Who am I?"... For some people, this is a life-time's worth of study, while for other more fortunate souls, realization comes pretty quickly. But that should not be the focus. On the contrary, one's main concern ought to be the sole willingness to look at the question with burning earnestness and absolute honesty in the finding out. That's all i can offer you, i'm afraid.

 

I actually find this a satisfying answer in a way! It encourages me to keep searching, to do the work and meditate on my own. Also recently I haven't been sure what I want out of life. I knew I wanted to find the answer to this question, but I didn't know why. Now I still don't know why . I just know it's important to me. And your words (and everyone else here's) reinforce that belief. Some o my friends ask me how knowing that answer would be applicable to real life. I don't know.. Maybe we're all misguided .

 

So thank you, and I guess I'll keep searching for now. Hopefully it will end at some point.

 

I dont have access to a computer with Internet (just a phone) so I'll have to read these interesting replies a few days from now.

 

(As for the name i picked, well, its very simple: 'Cow', for me, is a symbol of peaceful abiding. 'Tao' is the Way of becoming. Together, they are a play on the word 'Kowtow', which could be taken to mean 'respect another with humility', to acknowledge another's abilities, and/or to always try to regard others as more knowledgeable and wiser than myself, and to remind myself to keep that in mind as often as possible. Thanks for asking, btw.. If it means anything, the name given me at birth is Ananda, which is not anything so special. Its a Sanskrit name suggested by my grandfather (and which my parents liked too, i guess) who is Sri Lankan, and speaks that language. Its quite a common name in that country and some other parts of South-east Asia. )

 

Much blessings! Keep on with the great questions!! Someday, it will all become clear... even when its not, it will. Ah ha!

 

Hehe awesome name. I like double layers of meanings. Mine would just mean "man that makes a 'beo' sound for no real reason". But then again that might describe me well because I do many things for no real reason .

[Mark Foote]

Hi Mark Foote,

 

Although I agree that the Pali Suttas are the closest representation to the words of the original appearance of the Buddha, I disagree that Shurangama Sutra is a sutra that is fully faith based rather than verifiable through personal experience.

 

Shurangama Sutra is actually a meditation sutra, it actually provides the method, and tells you how to practice and investigate so that deep experiential wisdom will arise, as well as the many different kinds of meditation experience and pitfalls that one may encounter during the process. It also talks about the importance of samadhi and precepts. That is why many Ch'an/Zen teachers use this text a lot as reference - it is a very helpful and informative guide. It is deeply experiential. They are truly the words of an enlightened master - whether it was the Buddha or not. I can verify the Sutra for myself, because I can see some of my experiences being described there.

 

That said, with regards to the authenticity of Mahayana Sutra, I think those interested to know may find this thread - Are Mahayana Sutras Taught by Buddha? - enlightening.

 

 

Hey, Xabir2005, thanks for the note. Of the Shurangama Sutra, I have only read bits and pieces; the bits and pieces I have read struck me as unsatisfactory to me, but I realize that's a personal preference. I should confess that I don't regard the Gautamid as having been perfect, although I will prostrate myself over and over in this lifetime to his memory for the gift that he has given us all, I feel that way about it as do so many others. Not perfect, meaning he understood the relationships that are involved in well-being and taught about them but I think he struggled with how to teach others and with the social relationships at the time. I bring this up here because our struggle today, if you look at where civilization has taken humanity, is still how to teach others and the social relationships that go into keeping the planet alive.

 

I personally need a practice that brings me back to these points, and that confesses imperfection and the complete knowledge of the student as well as the teacher.

 

p.s.- great link! loved that debate, you can guess which side I come down on (ha ha!).

Edited August 1, 2010 by Mark Foote

[Vajrahridaya]

How Buddhism Is Different According to Buddha in Shurangama Sutra:

 

(Hinduism and Monistic traditions is at fault in 41, 42, 43, 44

Some Taoists at fault in 46, 47)

 

Also maps well with Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment = http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html

 

 

QUOTE

(41) Ananda, you should know that the good person has thoroughly seen the formations skandha as empty, and he must return consciousness to the source. He has already ended production and destruction, but he has not yet perfected the subtle wonder of ultimate serenity.

 

He can cause the individual sense faculties of his body to unite and open. He also has a pervasive awareness of all the categories of beings in the ten directions. Since his awareness is pervasive, he can enter the perfect source. But if he regards what he is returning to as the cause of true permanence and interprets this as a supreme state, he will fall into the error of holding to that cause. Kapila the Sankhyan, with his theory of returning to the Truth of the Unmanifest (Like what is discussed in the Upanishads), will become his companion. Confused about the Bodhi of the Buddhas, he will lose his knowledge and understanding.

 

This is the first state, in which he creates a place to which to return, based on the idea that there is something to attain. He strays far from perfect penetration and turns his back on the City of Nirvana, thus sowing the seeds of eternalism.

 

(42) Further, Ananda, the good person has thoroughly seen the formations skandha as empty. He has already ended production and destruction, but he has not yet perfected the subtle wonder of ultimate serenity.

 

He may regard that to which he is returning as his own body and see all living beings in the twelve categories throughout space as flowing forth from his body. If he interprets this as a supreme state, he will fall into the error of maintaining that he has an ability which he does not really have. Maheshvara, who manifests his boundless body, will become his companion. Confused about the Bodhi of the Buddhas, he will lose his knowledge and understanding.

 

This is the second state, in which he creates a specific ability based on the idea that he has such an ability. He strays far from perfect penetration and turns his back on the City of Nirvana, thus sowing the seeds for being born in the Heaven of Great Pride where the self is considered all-pervading and perfect.

 

(43) Further, the good person has thoroughly seen the formations skandha as empty. He has already ended production and destruction, but he has not yet perfected the subtle wonder of ultimate serenity.

 

If he regards what he is returning to as a refuge, he will suspect that his body and mind come forth from there, and that all things in the ten directions of space arise from there as well. He will explain that that place from which all things issue forth is the truly permanent body, which is not subject to production and destruction. While still within production and destruction, he prematurely reckons that he abides in permanence. Since he is deluded about non-production, he is also confused about production and destruction. He is sunk in confusion. If he interprets this as a supreme state, he will fall into the error of taking what is not permanent to be permanent. He will speculate that the God of Sovereignty (Ishvaradeva) is his companion. Confused about the Bodhi of the Buddhas, he will lose his knowledge and understanding.

 

This is the third state, in which he makes a false speculation based on the idea that there is a refuge. He strays far from perfect penetration and turns his back on the City of Nirvana, thus sowing the seeds of a distorted view of perfection.

 

(44) Further, the good person has thoroughly seen the formations skandha as empty. He has already ended production and destruction, but he has not yet perfected the subtle wonder of ultimate serenity.

 

Based on his idea that there is universal awareness, he formulates a theory that all the plants and trees in the ten directions are sentient, not different from human beings. He claims that plants and trees can become people, and that when people die they again become plants and trees in the ten directions. If he considers this idea of unrestricted, universal awareness to be supreme, he will fall into the error of maintaining that what is not aware has awareness. Vasishtha and Sainika, who maintained the idea of comprehensive awareness, will become his companions. Confused about the Bodhi of the Buddhas, he will lose his knowledge and understanding.

 

This is the fourth state, in which he creates an erroneous interpretation based on the idea that there is a universal awareness. He strays far from perfect penetration and turns his back on the City of Nirvana, thus sowing the seeds of a distorted view of awareness.

 

(45) Further, the good person has thoroughly seen the formations skandha as empty. He has already ended production and destruction, but he has not yet perfected the subtle wonder of ultimate serenity.

 

If he has attained versatility in the perfect fusion and interchangeable functioning of the sense faculties, he may speculate that all things arise from these perfect transformations. He then seeks the light of fire, delights in the purity of water, loves the wind's circuitous flow, and contemplates the accomplishments of the earth. He reveres and serves them all. He takes these mundane elements to be a fundamental cause and considers them to be everlasting. He will then fall into the error of taking what is not production to be production. Kashyapa and the Brahmans who seek to transcend birth and death by diligently serving fire and worshipping water will become his companions. Confused about the Bodhi of the Buddhas, he will lose his knowledge and understanding.

 

This is the fifth state, in which he confusedly pursues the elements, creating a false cause that leads to false aspirations based on speculations about his attachment to worship. He strays far from perfect penetration and turns his back on the City of Nirvana, thus sowing the seeds of a distorted view of transformation.

 

(46) Further, the good person has thoroughly seen the formations skandha as empty. He has ended production and destruction, but he has not yet perfected the subtle wonder of ultimate serenity.

 

He may speculate that there is an emptiness within the perfect brightness, and based on that he denies the myriad transformations, taking their eternal cessation as his refuge. If he interprets this as a supreme state, he will fall into the error of taking what is not a refuge to be a refuge. Those abiding in Shunyata in the Heaven of [Neither Thought nor] Non-Thought will become his companions. Confused about the Bodhi of the Buddhas, he will lose his knowledge and understanding.

 

This is the sixth state, in which he realizes a state of voidness based on the idea of emptiness within the perfect brightness. He strays far from perfect penetration and turns his back on the City of Nirvana, thus sowing the seeds of annihilationism/nihilism.

 

(47) Further, the good person has thoroughly seen the formations skandha as empty. He has already ended production and destruction, but he has not yet perfected the subtle wonder of ultimate serenity.

 

In the state of perfect permanence, he may bolster his body, hoping to live for a long time in that subtle and perfect condition without dying. If he interprets this as a supreme state, he will fall into the error of being greedy for something unattainable. Asita and those who seek long life will become his companions. Confused about the Bodhi of the Buddhas, he will lose his knowledge and understanding.

 

This is the seventh state, in which he creates the false cause of bolstering and aspires to permanent worldly existence, based on his attachment to the life-source. He strays far from perfect penetration and turns his back on the City of Nirvana, thus sowing the seeds for false thoughts of lengthening life.

END QUOTE

 

Buddha warned (in Shurangama Sutra) against taking Consciousness as a permanent Spiritual Self:

 

QUOTE

(33) Further, in his practice of samadhi, such a good person's mind is firm, unmoving, and proper and can no longer be disturbed by demons. He can thoroughly investigate the origin of all categories of beings and contemplate the source of the subtle, fleeting, and constant fluctuation. But if he begins to speculate about self and others, he could fall into error with theories of partial impermanence and partial permanence based on four distorted views.

 

First, as this person contemplates the wonderfully bright mind pervading the ten directions, he concludes that this state of profound stillness is the ultimate spiritual self. Then he speculates, "My spiritual self, which is settled, bright, and unmoving, pervades the ten directions. All living beings are within my mind, and there they are born and die by themselves. Therefore, my mind is permanent, while those who undergo birth and death there are truly impermanent."

 

......

 

Because of these speculations of impermanence and permanence, he will fall into eternalism and become confused about the Bodhi nature. This is the third eternalist teaching, in which one postulates partial permanence.

 

......

 

Finally, if your pure, bright, clear, and unmoving state is permanent, then there should be no seeing, hearing, awareness or knowing in your body. If it is genuinely pure and true, it should not contain habits and falseness. (Often considered by the higher or more subtle stages of delusion as the mysterious "Will of God", which is not the same as seeing what the Buddha taught as "Pratityasamutpada; Interdependent Origination, and one will not see how deep the scars of karma go)

 

How does it happen, then, that having seen some unusual thing in the past, you eventually forget it over time, until neither memory nor forgetfulness of it remain; but then later, upon suddenly seeing that unusual thing again, you remember it clearly from before without one detail omitted? How can you reckon the permeation which goes on in thought after thought in this pure, clear, and unmoving consciousness?

 

Ananda, you should know that this state of clarity is not real. It is like rapidly flowing water that appears to be still on the surface. Because of its rapid speed, you cannot perceive the flow, but that does not mean it is not flowing. If this were not the source of thinking, then how could one be subject to false habits?

 

If you do not open and unite your six sense faculties so that they function interchangeably, this false thinking will never cease.

 

That's why your seeing, hearing, awareness, and knowing are presently strung together by subtle habits, such that within the profound clarity, existence and non-existence are both illusory. This is the fifth kind of upside-down, minutely subtle thinking.

[Mark Foote]

no, this ridiculous concept is a perversion of buddha's words about cultivating the self. it was perverted in the West by the western newagee "gurus" to mean that one does not need a teacher to receive the secret method. This perversion a) helps to sell what they peddle and 2) justifies them not having a transmission themselves.

 

Most historians regard the Pali Cannon, and especially the first four volumes of the Nikayas, as the source closest to the actual words/teachings of Gautama who was later called the Buddha. Here's a passage from the Digha Nikaya volume two, the Maha-Parinibana sutta, which is the sermon material connected with the Gautamid's decease:

 

"What more does the community of bhikkhus expect from me, Ananda? I have set forth the Dhamma without making any distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrine; there is nothing, Ananda, with regard to the teachings that the Tathagata holds to the last with the closed fist of a teacher who keeps some things back. Whosoever may think that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus, or that the community depends upon him, it is such a one that would have to give last instructions respecting them. But, Ananda, the Tathagata has no such idea as that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus, or that the community depends upon him. So what instructions should he have to give respecting the community of bhikkhus?

 

Now I am frail, Ananda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my eightieth year, and my life is spent. Even as an old cart, Ananda, is held together with much difficulty, so the body of the Tathagata is kept going only with supports. It is, Ananda, only when the Tathagata, disregarding external objects, with the cessation of certain feelings, attains to and abides in the signless concentration of mind, [19] that his body is more comfortable."

 

I took this from the "accesstoinsight" website, here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html

[goldisheavy]

This is actually very easy to explain. I have no idea why xabir wrote a book about it.

 

Assume the eye is what sees. If that's the case, since you are not your eye, how do you see? You're going to say the eye has to pass the signal somewhere, right? Like into your brain perhaps? Visual cortex perhaps? OK, but since you are not a visual cortex, how do you see? Beyond the visual cortex, the signal in the brain is no longer visual in nature, and yet visual cortex alone cannot explain you seeing. Eventually, but with great difficulty, you'll have to say that it's the whole brain that sees and you will have to identify yourself with the brain.

 

Of course by the time you move the function of seeing from the eyes and into the brian, you will agree that eyes are not what sees anything. Then you'll have a task of proving that you are not the brain.

 

To prove that you're not the brain is a little more complicated, but not impossible. For example, in the dream you may have a dream brain, so does this mean you have multiple brains? One brain for waking and one for dreaming? Which brain is you? Then you may respond that only one brain is real, the brain you use now to read this, and the dream brain is a figment of this brain's imagination. If that's the case, I will then reply, if you accept that a brain can be a figment of another brain's imagination, then is it possible that this brain right here and now is a figment of imagination of another brain somewhere else? And you'll have nothing intelligent to reply to this.

 

So basically there is no good reason, other than a lazy assumption, to think that you are a brain.

 

There are other ways to disprove that you're a brain besides the one I've listed above. For example, you can examine objects of consciousness and conclude that no object of consciousness is what it is from its own power. Rather, all objects appear as they do due to some external-to-the-object context. Since the brain itself is an object of consciousness, since we can see it in the formaldehyde jar, we can refer to it in speech, like we refer to any other object, that means the brain is what it is only due to the external-to-itself context. So that means there is informational context outside the brain that is responsible for making the brain seem what it is. That means cognition is not happening in the brain, because cognition is precisely this awareness of context. So this is another way to prove that you are not the brain.

 

So now you can be absolutely certain that eyes are not what see.

Edited August 7, 2010 by goldisheavy

[goldisheavy]

Can you say that the thought of your mother is the past of the thought of the girl? No link!

 

Past? No. Context? Yes. Everything contextualizes everything else.

[Procurator]

If that's the case, I will then reply, if you accept that a brain can be a figment of another brain's imagination, then is it possible that this brain right here and now is a figment of imagination of another brain somewhere else? And you'll have nothing intelligent to reply to this.

 

 

largely becouse that the posited question is irrelevant to the topic at hand, as well as meaningless in itself.