How you apply Buddhism in life

[Seth Ananda]

I was reading just recently about the 3 kinds of Prajna, or Wisdom.

 

Book learning Prajna.

 

Meditation & practice Prajna.

 

Guru relationship Prajna [from pointing outs and transmissions...]

 

All 3 are essential for Buddhahood.

 

The article put Book learning Prajna as being crucial for helping get the meditation/practice Prajna.

 

I think one has to be very careful saying that something is 'just' Intellectual knowledge and theory. Seeing things clearly on an intellectual level, [right view] is considered a crucial element, and I have read some teachers [gelug] claim that If you have right view down pat, It can make up for deficiencies in other areas of ones practice... Right View, is sometimes heralded as a path in and of itself. {as it will naturally lead to one desiring to practice}

 

 

Seth.

[Seth Ananda]

 

Though, I want to add something before I continue: You are aware that the main goal of dream yoga is to not only maintain conscious awareness in the dreamstate in order to recognize dreams as the displays of non-dual empty-luminosity...But to actually carry this into everyday life in order to realize life's inherent lack of "substance," and nothing more but the dream-like displays that are neither existent nor non-existent. This is a very profound samadhi. Not like the mundane absorptions. In accomplishing this: Attachments and desires, that would normally pull you this way and that way in life; no longer have the effect on you like they did before. You no longer dwell on things so much.

 

 

Very cool Simple Jack

 

I have just started practising dream yoga. I would love it if you would give a run down of how to/you practice, or even start a thread on this great subject.

I have the books on it but I would love to know hints or personal elements you have found that help make this practice effective...

Seth

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited September 29, 2011 by Simple_Jack

[xabir2005]

I was reading just recently about the 3 kinds of Prajna, or Wisdom.

 

Book learning Prajna.

 

Meditation & practice Prajna.

 

Guru relationship Prajna [from pointing outs and transmissions...]

 

All 3 are essential for Buddhahood.

 

The article put Book learning Prajna as being crucial for helping get the meditation/practice Prajna.

 

I think one has to be very careful saying that something is 'just' Intellectual knowledge and theory. Seeing things clearly on an intellectual level, [right view] is considered a crucial element, and I have read some teachers [gelug] claim that If you have right view down pat, It can make up for deficiencies in other areas of ones practice... Right View, is sometimes heralded as a path in and of itself. {as it will naturally lead to one desiring to practice}

 

 

Seth.

right view itself guarantees nirvana even if it is merely accepted by inferrance or belief:

 

http://sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/415738

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited September 29, 2011 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited September 29, 2011 by Simple_Jack

[stan herman]

Yeah, but like you're always saying: Realization is what liberates. You can have all the intellectual understanding in the world, but that won't get you closer towards "nirvana."

 

 

We do make this matter so complicated, so difficult to understand. I suppose that's necessary in order to keep the conversations gong But at a point its simplicity should be respected and given due. Though it's less obscure and mysterious, it's useful to own the simplicity as a base against which to test each piece of complexity.

[Lucky7Strikes]

As you progress on the four yogas, afflictions and defilements steadily lose their control over you, until the point that habit-energies related to coming in contact with appearances are able to "self-liberate" since you see them to be just empty-luminous displays of Mind. The amount of effort involved in this "self-liberation" or maintaining "clear awareness" without dwelling; depends on just how much they are seen to be "insubstantial" and mere displays of D.O. "Self-liberation" is to not dwell on whatever arises without accepting or rejecting them.

 

I separated this out because I find some things in it that needs to be cleared up. You say it depends on how much they are seen to be insubstantial. Just what is the degree of insubstantiality? Can you share your experience with this?

 

To not dwell on whatever arises without rejecting them or accepting them is a confusing sentence. If you do not accept or reject whatever arises, you are inevitably dwelling in it. Actually you are not even dwelling in it, but being dwelled by it. How long it dwells is merely left to that very arising because you are neither accepting or rejecting it; its arising has become your whole being, as with the process of d.o. Or maybe you are talking about the duration or the impact of that dwelling. Like how long or the power of a certain thought. But ime the length and the power of thoughts are useful depending on what situation I'm in, or what type of thoughts they are. So liberating from those two qualities of length and impact can have negative consequences.

 

Maybe you are talking about the experience of owning thoughts or senses, due to our beliefs in "self." But all thoughts are ultimately owned in that they happen in (or as) your awareness. You can't disown thoughts. The difference is probably, as I mentioned before, of the degree of impact they can have to lead us to do one thing or another. Also, repetitions of that reaction, or habit, strengthens that pattern of reaction. You do not have to call these recurring negative impacting experiences "insubstantial" to loosen their effects, but just to understand and observe how and why they arise. Seeing it as insubstantial probably lessens their effect time after time. But what remains after you have insubstantiate (a made up word I realize, but you get the point) everything? Insubstantiate insubstantiate, empty out emptiness? Now you are just chasing your own tail.

[Lucky7Strikes]

"But this is my point. That you should share any personal or direct knowledge you have regarding these. And since you are reluctant, I get the feeling that you have no direct insight into any of these things you propound to be true."

 

The only people who know about my past lives are my teachers. I have a reason for not sharing this on an internet board. I intend to keep it that way.

 

"Yes, yes. Do not put this state of mind on a pedestal. It's just a psychological shift in viewing things. That's all. It has potential to lead to greater awakening, but there are other ways I can not dwell on things so much. It's not so super specially effective in removing attachments as you seem to think."

 

No, I don't mean just mere dissociation. I mean the actual afflictive states and habit energies "self liberating" without effort without acceptance or rejection or applying any "antidotes," according to whatever causes or conditions habit-energies arise. I use "not dwell" from the Diamond sutra, to try to make more sense.

 

"You don't haver to prove to me that you have good reading comprehension. That's not what I look for when I'm having a discussion. Share your experiences and verified knowledge."

 

I have in the past shared my experiences briefly on this board. I've shared in this thread my current experiences, but you don't understand what exactly I'm pointing to. You're just writing it off as merely intellectual.

I heavily edited the post.

[Lucky7Strikes]

right view itself guarantees nirvana even if it is merely accepted by inferrance or belief:

 

http://sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/415738

As a Christian will tell you that belief in God will get you eternal salvation. Man, who should I believe?

[Lucky7Strikes]

Yeah, but like you're always saying: Realization is what liberates. You can have all the intellectual understanding in the world, but that won't get you closer towards "nirvana."

Can you share your insight into the difference between them?

[Lucky7Strikes]

The only people who know about my past lives are my teachers. I have a reason for not sharing this on an internet board. I intend to keep it that way.

So you don't know, but base your knowledge on the faith of your teachers. Ok.

 

No, I don't mean just mere dissociation. I mean the actual afflictive states and habit energies "self liberating."

Can you describe this experience of self-liberating?

Edited September 29, 2011 by Lucky7Strikes

[C T]

Fair dinkum, folks.

 

How right is Right View?

 

The Bija Sutta lends insight . Take it whichever way you want, and therein the fruit awaits.

 

Anything which is affirmed will yield results accordingly.

 

Anything which is negated will also yield results accordingly.

 

How does one go about reaping auspicious fruits while simultaneously reducing accumulated karmic plaque?

 

The Bija Sutta points the way.

 

 

 

Hint ~ i found that the meaning (of the sutta) crystallized when i reflected on it while maintaining mindfulness of a steady breath flow. Try it out!

[Marblehead]

Anything which is affirmed will yield results accordingly.

 

Anything which is negated will also yield results accordingly.

 

Why all the affirming and negating? Isn't simple acceptance better?

[C T]

Why all the affirming and negating? Isn't simple acceptance better?

Acceptance can be a useful model, yes.

 

Its useful in dealing with most of life's circumstances, but as one moves away from the mundane and into the spiritual, especially in the areas of contemplative practices, the idea arises of exploring whether one is able to maintain a view which is free from both acceptance and rejection (or free from extremes, to put it another way). Hopefully, one will realize that its not really necessary to discriminate which is better ~ the aim is of course to simply remain watchful, but this takes practice.

 

So, to a certain extent, we can agree about the futility of trying to affirm or negate views, but in my projection, it points to the idea that acceptance need not be a factor since one cannot accept something fully without negating something else, in a subtle sort of way.

[C T]

- - dp - -

Edited September 29, 2011 by CowTao

[Marblehead]

Acceptance can be a useful model, yes.

 

Nice response. Thanks.

 

So, to a certain extent, we can agree about the futility of trying to affirm or negate views, but in my projection, it points to the idea that acceptance need not be a factor since one cannot accept something fully without negating something else, in a subtle sort of way.

 

Yes, 'acceptance' is only the next step beyond affirming and negating. And yes, 'acceptance' has very different meanings when used in a spiritual context than it does when used in a physical context.

 

Spiritually, I am back at working at the 'acceptance' stage and this is why your other post was of interest to me. I'll concern myself with the next stage, whatever that is, once I have attained 'acceptance'.

[mYTHmAKER]

Nice response. Thanks.

 

 

 

Yes, 'acceptance' is only the next step beyond affirming and negating. And yes, 'acceptance' has very different meanings when used in a spiritual context than it does when used in a physical context.

 

Spiritually, I am back at working at the 'acceptance' stage and this is why your other post was of interest to me. I'll concern myself with the next stage, whatever that is, once I have attained 'acceptance'.

 

Would you consider acceptance of opposing points of view to have any subtle negativity?

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

From the Diamond Sutra:

"World-Honored one, this true form is not true form and so the Tathagata calls it true form."

"This is why, Subhuti, Bodhisattvas and Mahasattvas should develop a clear, pure mind which does not dwell in form, sound, smell, taste, touch or dharma. They should develop a mind that does not dwell anywhere"

"Therefore Subhuti, Bodhisattvas should go beyond all conceptions of form and appearance in order to develop the Supreme Enlightenment mind."

"Subhuti, one who seeks anuttara-samyaksambodhi, in regard to all dharma, should thus know, thus perceive, thus believe, and comprehend: Do not give rise to the notions of dharma."

"Subhuti, the Dharma which the Tathagata attained is neither real nor illlusory."

"If all form and appearance are seen as illusion, the Tathagata will be perceived."

"Don't attach to form and be one with Suchness."

"If one perceives that all phenomena are not phenomena, one will perceive the Tathagata."

"One who looks for me in appearance,
Or pursues me in sound,
Follows paths leading astray,
And cannot perceive the Tathagata"

"How should this teaching be expounded to others? Without attachment to form, at one with Suchness. Why is this? Because:

All phenomena are like a dream, an illusion, a bubble, and a shadow.
Like a dew drop and like a flash of lightening,
Thus you should view them"

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Jeff]

Anyone care to redirect this discussion by discussing the contents of this post?

 

 

I have appreciated your L7S's discussion. L7S's intelligent questions not believing you and your thoughtful (and useful) responses have been excellent. Probably the best discussion since I joined the forum about a month ago.

 

Your ability to go on so long, demonstrates the "stillness" or "mental clarity" that you describe.

 

I am interested in continuing the discussion, but I think it would help to try to move the discussion to "noticeable" steps for L7S and others. So if you don't mind, a few questions...

 

By "mental clarity", have you noticed a drop in the number of concurrent thoughts threads that you have going on at anyone time? Many people have 3-6 (or more) going on constantly during there daily life. How many do you have? Is your "base" state silence?

 

Do you still experience Anger? Or, irritation?

 

Thanks.

 

[Marblehead]

Would you consider acceptance of opposing points of view to have any subtle negativity?

 

Ouch! Not a fair question. Hehehe.

 

To your question: Simple answer: Yes.

 

I say this based on the thought of how extreme these opposing points of view might be.

 

Example: If one has a point of view that goes totally against what I consider good morals and good virtues then all I could do would be accept that this person holds these views but I would not be able to accept the views themselves.

 

To me, being constantly pessimistic generates negativity so I would not accept this kind of behavior to be anywhere close to me.

 

Accepting that another person has such and such ponts of view is important otherwise we cannot talk with that person. Doesn't mean we have to accept those views for ourself.

[stan herman]

[Marblehead]

Seems to me 'acceptance' is easy IF... One recognizes that all views are invariably the products of 'Context' and 'Consciousness'.

 

Thanks Stan. Yes, spiritually, for others, whatever helps them through their life is fine with me as long as it doesn't include the elimination of other belief systems.

 

For myself, my spirituality must be compatible with my world-view beliefs. I think that this would be the only way to hold to a belief and be without inner conflict.

 

Still working on it. But then, I've got the rest of my life to get it done.

[mYTHmAKER]

Example: If one has a point of view that goes totally against what I consider good morals and good virtues then all I could do would be accept that this person holds these views but I would not be able to accept the views themselves.

 

In not accepting their views you don't necessarily have to bring negativity into play on your part.