Heartmind

[Vajrahridaya]

Thanks for attempting to answer my questions, Vajra. I am deeply dissatisfied with what I know of Buddhism, as a result. If I were to ever truly learn about it, for some reason which I can't fathom, I guess I'd need a teacher who was more capable of addressing my questions honestly and sensibly.

 

But don't let that reflect upon my opinion of you...I like you.

 

Thanks man. I'm sorry I failed.

 

Well not really. I'm quite alright with it, you have your process and it might never have anything to do with Buddhism as it appears at this time. You're obviously here on this board for the sake of deeper self evaluation or curiosity, which is already a wonderful thing.

 

I've enjoyed many of your posts over the years.

[Vajrahridaya]

About a fourth of the times I meditate, my body doesn't feel like it's there anymore, like I have no boundaries, but that's about as far as it goes.

 

 

 

I have experienced the feeling, but that doesn't mean it doesn't originate within the body... though I would like that to be the case... I just can't say I know things like this for certain.

 

I hear you. Doubt is a natural part of the path, and these doubts can be utilized for deeper self evaluation.

 

At least you haven't made any solid views concerning this and are open to new and exciting vantage points in relating to yourself.

 

Keep meditating, feed the longing to go deeper into your own nature. Feeding this longing will manifest outer conditions in your world experience that reflect this longing to go deeper. As in the people you meet and the situations you find yourself in, will arise in reflection to what you most desire in life.

[Aetherous]

Potential to experienced directly as well. Yes, formless, beyond 5 sense levels of reality are a part of the 5 sense level of reality.

 

Hadn't seen that you edited your post to say this. We're in agreement on that. _/\_

[tragblack]

Keep meditating, feed the longing to go deeper into your own nature. Feeding this longing will manifest outer conditions in your world experience that reflect this longing to go deeper. As in the people you meet and the situations you find yourself in, will arise in reflection to what you most desire in life.

 

Sure thing. I'll go along with this.

 

---

 

"Row, row, row your boat

Gently down the stream

Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily--

Life is but a dream."

[Vajrahridaya]

Sure thing. I'll go along with this.

 

---

 

"Row, row, row your boat

Gently down the stream

Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily--

Life is but a dream."

 

Throughout my life, I've used that song to liberate myself from more confining states of mind myself.

[Vajrahridaya]

Hadn't seen that you edited your post to say this. We're in agreement on that. _/\_

 

Yes, I edited a few things.

 

I've just re-edited to ad, "be" as well. Thanks!

[tragblack]

I've only recently realized what the lyrics mean... not sure why.

[Vmarco]

[Aaron]

Hey Aaron,

 

 

 

Well, I am asking questions hoping a knowledgeable Buddhist can answer me. I'm very open to actually understanding what the heart sutra was saying.

 

I'm not talking about "heartmind"...I agree with the way you describe that. I apologize, my diatribe about Buddhist lingo is a bit off topic. Might make a new thread just for that.

 

 

Hello Scotty,

 

I'm not sure if I've read the Heart Sutra. I think I might've read it when I was reading Zen for Americans. Most of what I'm describing comes from my own experience and my understanding of the fundamentals of original nature, which Buddhists call heartmind. I don't necessarily care for Buddhist lingo either, because I think much is lost when one uses terms rather than explaining the process. If you'd like I could recommend some books that might help you to understand this more clearly, one that comes to mind as being an excellent resource for understanding these terms is "The Buddhist Handbook" by John Snelling.

 

In my own opinion you have every right to ask someone to explain something in plain language. Many Buddhists use Buddhist terms like name drops in order to prove their extensive knowledge of the topic, but lack a basic understanding of the tenants and practice. If someone can't explain something in their own words, then most likely they have only a superficial knowledge of the topic.

 

Aaron

[Vmarco]

[Vajrahridaya]

People of wisdom, however, like the Mahasiddhas, have said that people fear their own light more than any darkness.

 

V

 

True, as the darkness hides while the light reveals. People are scared to be naked and revealed as merely a play, rather than a seriously factual existence.

[Vmarco]

[Aetherous]

“As a man who has devoted his entire life to the most clear-headed science to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: there is no matter as such.” Nobel Laureate Max Planck

 

"all matter is frozen or slowed down light." David Bohm

 

Object-ive or empirical truth is entirely a relative truth,...that is, relative to objects. However, what if objects were not real? What if atoms did not exist? Fifty years ago, high-school science teachers said that atoms were the basic building blocks of life. Thirty years ago, teachers said that if Earth and everything on it were squeezed into a solid sphere, that sphere would be the size of a soccer ball. Today, many teachers would agree that Earth, if the space between particles were removed, would actually be smaller than a marble.

 

To grasp that notion, take an object and look at it through a powerful electron microscope. What once appeared dense and durable now appears as many moving-spinning particles; as that view is microfied, what moments before seemed as moving particles is now seemingly empty space. Quantum cosmologists, some of whom are nearer to ontosophy than science, would say that there is nothing at all. Like Max Planck, perhaps they would agree that there is no matter as such. Nevertheless, most people still believe that space, time, and matter are continuous rather than discrete. Most people do not attempt to grasp ultimate truth. Instead, most people rely upon their beliefs to sustain an illusion that is untrue, for the survival of those beliefs depends on this reliance. People of wisdom, however, like the Mahasiddhas, have said that people fear their own light more than any darkness.

 

 

...what?

 

 

The body exists. If physicists want to examine particles and the space between, and even come to the conclusion that "nothing exists", it has no bearing on my direct experience of a body.

 

Why does the heart sutra say, "in emptiness, there is no body, etc"? Maybe it was just a poor translation.

[Aetherous]

[Vajrahridaya]

...what?

 

 

The body exists. If physicists want to examine particles and the space between, and even come to the conclusion that "nothing exists", it has no bearing on my direct experience of a body.

 

Why does the heart sutra say, "in emptiness, there is no body, etc"? Maybe it was just a poor translation.

 

It just means that the body is just appearance. Emptiness does not mean nothingness, it means non-inherent existence. The body has relative existence, not inherent nor intrinsic nor does it have self existence.

[Vmarco]

[Vajrahridaya]

What people are you referring to? I think it's more a case of non-Buddhists not jiving with the lingo.

 

Actually not, as mystics of other traditions also reveal this realization. There are Christian mystics and Sufi mystics who reveal this through their teachings based upon direct meditative focus as well.

[Aaron]

...what?

 

 

The body exists. If physicists want to examine particles and the space between, and even come to the conclusion that "nothing exists", it has no bearing on my direct experience of a body.

 

Why does the heart sutra say, "in emptiness, there is no body, etc"? Maybe it was just a poor translation.

 

In emptiness there is no body because it is the state that exists beyond the corporeal world. What it's talking about is the state reached when one has become aware of their original nature, buddha nature, or heartmind. In other words the face before you were born. Trying to explain a lot of this isn't easy, simply because it is reliant on experience and if one has never had the experience, then it is reliant on faith regarding the explanation.

 

One thing to keep in mind is that heartmind comes from the Pali word citta, (to the best of my knowledge), it is basically the idea that the heart and mind are one. When one can dismiss their notions of self, they can achieve an understanding of the true nature of their existence and understand the notion of heart and mind, the source and self, being one and the same. In understanding that they are one and the same one sees through the illusion of self and begins to see the underlying nature of existence. I don't even want to go into the body argument, but suffice it to say, you have a body, but it's only your perception of that body that makes it so.

 

Aaron

[Aetherous]

Vajra,

 

It just means that the body is just appearance. Emptiness does not mean nothingness, it means non-inherent existence. The body has relative existence, not inherent nor intrinsic nor does it have self existence.

 

Thanks for answering...that was my main issue with the heart sutra.

 

Must be a poor translation. There are easier ways to say such a thing than, "there is no body".

[Vmarco]

[Vajrahridaya]

[Aetherous]

Aaron,

 

In emptiness there is no body because it is the state that exists beyond the corporeal world.

 

Well that makes it even more confusing, since emptiness is supposed to be a concept regarding the nature of reality and not a state.

[Vajrahridaya]

Vajra,

 

 

 

Thanks for answering...that was my main issue with the heart sutra.

 

Must be a poor translation. There are easier ways to say such a thing than, "there is no body".

 

Well, it's not a poor translation. It was rather written for those that have already gone through all the different layers of Buddhist texts and meditative experiences. It's not really a beginners text per say. It just has to be understood within reference to everything else the Buddha taught. For a Buddhist, that's not so hard to grasp as a Buddhist would be an avid reader of Buddhas teachings in all it's appearances, or at least desiring as such.

 

You're not a Buddhist, so... it's quite understood why you would reject such statements having no real reference for these statements which a long time practicing Buddhist would.

 

It's all good dude. I have no problem with you wanting clarification. It's understandable! As without context for these statements, they are pretty rude and silly sounding as it takes a body of one type or another to even say or hear such statements.

[Aetherous]

Experience born of belief, can only be experienced through the condition of that belief,...a direct experience only occurs beyond conditions.

 

"Reality is merely an illusion, although a very persistent one." Albert Einstein

 

Because I believe that there is a body, I become aware of a body?

 

I am actually directly experiencing the body right now, free of conditions. I assure you, the body of Vmarco, as the body of Scotty, that the body exists!

[Vajrahridaya]

Aaron,

 

 

 

Well that makes it even more confusing, since emptiness is supposed to be a concept regarding the nature of reality and not a state.

 

He's talking about the meditative void, called Mahashunya in Hinduism, or one of the formless states of samadhi in Buddhism often misunderstood as "emptiness" as elaborated upon in Buddhism, which is not so. As the experience of Mahashunya and the formless states of samadhi are also inter-dependently originated and empty of inherent existence.