The Final Dhyana

[Harmonious Emptiness]

So I've been thinking about how in the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna is told that his final state of mind will determine what happens to him after death. Also, that it was said by Hui Neng and probably others that, essentially, one moment of hatred erases erases all merit and one moment of Buddha mind erases all demerit and they will continue to cancel each other out.

 

Now, when someone is on their deathbed, it's not uncommon for them to be at peace with losing their worldly attachments. So, is this the purpose of Buddhism? To have this mind at the end of our lives so that we will not be tossed back into the cycle?

 

If we don't cultivate during life, then perhaps if we die peacefully we will later think about our attachments and return for Samsara.

 

If we can cultivate the same mind as we must have on our deathbed, perhaps we can find Nirvana in life

[Hannibal]

If you are familiar with the Abhidhamma Pitaka, the Buddha describes the though process at the moment of death as one which conditions further existence. The object of the though process can be one of the following: (1) an action which one has performed during his/her life, which is experienced as if it is being relived (as a side note, this is a common theme in many near death experiences), (2) some sort of symbol that was present at the time of and is representative of that particular action, (3) a symbol of the place in which one is destined to be reborn (which is more related to the sum of past karma rather than the current state of mind). One of these three will be experienced during the dying moment, and in turn lead into the next existence.

[Hannibal]

I guess what I was getting at, is that unless we go beyond in the here and now, we are bound to come back. More importantly, given our general ignorance of karmic propensity, there is no saying when we will again be born in a place where we will be able to practice. Practice in the here and now my friend.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

If you are familiar with the Abhidhamma Pitaka,

 

(3) a symbol of the place in which one is destined to be reborn (which is more related to the sum of past karma rather than the current state of mind). One of these three will be experienced during the dying moment, and in turn lead into the next existence.

 

Thank you for bringing that...

 

Hmm. So the symbol depends on past karma, which may be erased by being in Buddha Mind, Dhyana, etc.. So if one is truly in Dhyana at that time, then.... But, still, to be in Dhyana at that time I believe requires cleansing of karma throughout one's life, practicing non-attachment. This reminds me of another verse, near the end of The Surangama:

 

Manjusri: "While I am addressing my Lord Tathagata, he is hearing, at the same time, the transcendental Sound of Avalokiteshvara. It is just as though, while we are in quiet seclusion of our Dhyana practice, there should come to our ears the sound of the beating of drums. If our minds, hearing the sounds, are undisturbed and tranquil, this is the nature of perfect accomodation"

 

Seems that this discipline is necessary almost, and that it helps one to understand the discipline needed at the last time.

 

Perhaps to look at life with same resolve as one would have at the last time is useful to understand Dhyana/non-attachment here, and now...

[xabir2005]

So I've been thinking about how in the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna is told that his final state of mind will determine what happens to him after death. Also, that it was said by Hui Neng and probably others that, essentially, one moment of hatred erases erases all merit and one moment of Buddha mind erases all demerit and they will continue to cancel each other out.

 

Now, when someone is on their deathbed, it's not uncommon for them to be at peace with loosing their worldly attachments. So, is this the purpose of Buddhism? To have this mind at the end of our lives so that we will not be tossed back into the cycle?

 

If we don't cultivate during life, then perhaps if we die peacefully we will later think about our attachments and return for Samsara.

 

If we can cultivate the same mind as we must have on our deathbed, perhaps we can find Nirvana in life

Attaining Nirvana is not so easy.

 

You need deep realization and practice to overcome afflictions. In fact only an 8th bhumi Bodhisattva is truly above the samsaric tides.

 

By the way, in life it's all easy. At death, the pain and suffering is like a hundred times worse, so don't think its as easy as it seems.

[xabir2005]

This by Ken Wilber is very important:

 

http://www.kenwilber.com/blog/show/214

Still, this was without doubt the most horrific experience my life, and I commented frequently to friends that I honestly didn't see how people who didn't meditate could possibly endure something like this, let alone make it an occasion for levity and luminosity.

[Informer]

 

By the way, in life it's all easy. At death, the pain and suffering is like a hundred times worse, so don't think its as easy as it seems.

 

Ah, so I take it you have died before and remember it?

[xabir2005]

Ah, so I take it you have died before and remember it?

Nope, my Taiwanese teacher did, four times NDEs and he said death experience is very painful - he said when you experience death you will remember what I said and realize it's correct.

[Informer]

If you don't even know by experience if there is such a thing as rebirth, much less 'freedom from rebirth', then you can only take this by faith.

 

 

Didn't you just say in the other thread that you can't know then, and therefore must be taking this by faith and faith alone, and you are uttering it as fact?

Edited September 24, 2011 by Informer

[xabir2005]

Didn't you just say in the other thread that you can't know then, and therefore must be taking this by faith and faith alone, and uttering it as fact?

Don't know what you mean.

 

Yes, as I said earlier, this has to be taken by faith.

[xabir2005]

Unless you have direct experience. Then you don't need faith because it is a natural conviction.

Edited September 24, 2011 by xabir2005

[Informer]

Nothing has to be taking on faith, this is not the way of a seeker atleast.

[xabir2005]

Nothing has to be taking on faith, this is not the way of a seeker atleast.

In Buddhism, certain things should be taken by faith first. This includes karma and rebirth.

 

Faith is one of the five powers that lead to liberation.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Strengths

Edited September 24, 2011 by xabir2005

[Informer]

In Buddhism, certain things should be taken by faith first. This includes karma and rebirth.

 

This just makes me think what other things you have been convinced of and accepted by faith alone.

[xabir2005]

This just makes me think what other things you have been convinced of and accepted by faith alone.

Like what?

[Informer]

I don't think it is for me to say, only you can find that out.

[xabir2005]

I don't think it is for me to say, only you can find that out.

In case you think it is anatta (which you seem so against), I have direct realization and experience of anatta. I don't take this by faith currently since it is directly realized.

 

But even so, before realizing it in October 2010, I had some faith in it since I knew about it many years ago. Otherwise I wouldn't be bothered to investigate it, or take it seriously.

 

Therefore, faith in Buddha's teachings is important for progress.

 

Of course that doesn't mean mentally understanding and directly realizing and experiencing it are the same - they are very different. I can explain anatta since I think 2006 or 2007, but it is a form of theoretical knowledge. Since I went through the I Am phase realization (February 2010 to August 2010), there was also a time when my view and experience is pretty much about Self and the background source. But because I had some faith in Anatta, I continued my investigation. When I realized directly in October 2010, it is a permanent shift of perception and direct experience of anatta is now effortless for me.

Edited September 24, 2011 by xabir2005

[Informer]

In case you think it is anatta (which you seem so against), I have direct realization and experience of anatta. I don't take this by faith currently since it is directly realized.

 

But even so, before realizing it in October 2010, I had some faith in it since I knew about it many years ago. Otherwise I wouldn't be bothered to investigate it, or take it seriously.

 

Therefore, faith in Buddha's teachings is important for progress.

 

So you admit that it is not anatta after all, only that that is what you were told it was.

 

I don't have a problem with anatta, my only problem is with absolute statements stated as facts.

[xabir2005]

So you admit that it is not anatta after all, only that that is what you were told it was.

 

I don't have a problem with anatta, my only problem is with absolute statements stated as facts.

No ideas what you are talking about. Anatta is anatta, it is very clear what it means.

 

Anatta means empty of inherent self, and all notions of being (existence) and non-being (non-existence) are positions that are unfounded, when you have direct realization the reality is simply the five aggregations that are empty of self.

Edited September 24, 2011 by xabir2005

[Informer]

If the heart-center is not what is at the root of the religion of buddhism, then I personally feel it has been misinterpreted. If unbound love is not what will put an end to all suffering, nothing else will.

 

I believe that every religion was originally intended to point at that piece of heaven that is within us all, that of love and compassion. There is nothing greater in this living realm than that in my eyes.

[xabir2005]

If the heart-center is not what is at the root of the religion of buddhism, then I personally feel it has been misinterpreted. If unbound love is not what will put an end to all suffering, nothing else will.

 

I believe that every religion was originally intended to point at that piece of heaven that is within us all, that of love and compassion. There is nothing greater in this living realm than that in my eyes.

Love and compassion are important qualities, but in itself they do not lead to liberation. They are the four brahma viharas that lead to rebirth in a higher realm of brahma existence, but not liberation.

 

Therefore as Namdrol states:

 

Whoever is attached to a result for this life, is not a Dharma person.

 

The purpose of Dharma is liberation, not feeling better in this life. The purpose of Dharma is not the cultivation of mundane compassion, and so on.

 

The purpose of Dharma is to control afflictions, then overcome them, and finally, to attain a state of total omniscience and freedom.

 

 

Since the root of afflictions and clingings is the view of inherent existence, the insight into twofold emptiness (emptiness of self and emptiness of phenomena) is what brings an end to afflictions and sufferings.

 

You can have all the love and compassion which is noble and yet the view of self, phenomena, as having inherent existence, leading to grasping, afflictions and sufferings... have not been uprooted.

Edited September 24, 2011 by xabir2005

[Informer]

Love and compassion are important qualities, but in itself they do not lead to liberation. They are the four brahma viharas that lead to rebirth in a higher realm of brahma existence, but not liberation.

 

Therefore as Namdrol states:

 

Whoever is attached to a result for this life, is not a Dharma person.

 

The purpose of Dharma is liberation, not feeling better in this life. The purpose of Dharma is not the cultivation of mundane compassion, and so on.

 

The purpose of Dharma is to control afflictions, then overcome them, and finally, to attain a state of total omniscience and freedom.

 

Since the root of afflictions is the view of inherent existence, the insight into twofold emptiness (emptiness of self and emptiness of phenomena) is what brings an end to afflictions and sufferings.

 

 

Nothing else is required but love to end suffering. I don't suffer, only feel love. This requirement is that of all human's not just a few. When we all share this, there is nothing else stopping a heaven on earth. No one will suffer. You don't need to find some deep dark void to hide in, you need open the heart-center and help others do the same. Then cultivate it. That is it.

 

Then how would there be suffering? hmm? Do you mean personal suffering of individuals being alleviated? That is hardly an end to suffering, because even if you are not suffering others are.

 

This is a clear as day to me, why do you seem to struggle so?

[xabir2005]

Nothing else is required but love to end suffering. I don't suffer, only feel love. This requirement is that of all human's not just a few. When we all share this, there is nothing else stopping a heaven on earth. No one will suffer. You don't need to find some deep dark void to hide in, you need open the heart-center and help others do the same. Then cultivate it. That is it.

 

Then how would there be suffering? hmm? Do you mean personal suffering of individuals being alleviated? That is hardly an end to suffering, because even if you are not suffering others are.

 

This is a clear as day to me, why do you seem to struggle so?

Love in itself cannot bring an end to suffering. Wisdom and insight will.

 

And yes, wisdom brings an end to personal suffering, but you can only help others end their suffering if you have wisdom to teach others. In other words, you can only make someone else liberated if you are liberated. You can only make someone else happy if you are happy, you can only make someone else wise if you are wise, and so on.

 

Buddha was enlightened before he could teach others and bring an end to their suffering. Of course he had compassion for others, but compassion in itself cannot help others without wisdom. Of course, wisdom without compassion will not bring a lot of benefit to other people either. But do not be mistaken that compassion itself can end suffering.

Edited September 24, 2011 by xabir2005

[xabir2005]

Love in itself cannot bring an end to suffering. Wisdom and insight will.

 

And yes, wisdom brings an end to personal suffering, but you can only help others end their suffering if you have wisdom to teach others. In other words, you can only make someone else liberated if you are liberated. You can only make someone else happy if you are happy, you can only make someone else wise if you are wise, and so on.

 

Buddha was enlightened before he could teach others and bring an end to their suffering. Of course he had compassion for others, but compassion in itself cannot help others without wisdom. Of course, wisdom without compassion will not bring a lot of benefit to other people either. But do not be mistaken that compassion itself can end suffering.

p.s. 'Make' is a wrong word.

 

Nobody can 'make' someone else enlightened. They can only guide and point, like what the Buddha did.

[Informer]

Wisdom is not just of one person, it is the culmination of wisdom from every being that wishes to share. Share with humanity as one, it is on the internet everywhere. Your personal wisdom will never match the wisdom of humanity as a whole. No one man's wisdom can match that. We have that!