Making a measuring stick out of formlessness

[sean]

Is wind more formless than water or rock?

 

Is a blank sheet of paper more formless than a canvas with art on it?

 

Is the beautiful little blissful bindu you feel in your deepest meditation more formless than your loudest sneeze on a crowded subway?

 

Is any perception, no matter how subtle you imagine it to be, ultimately any more formless than a perception filled with bold color and feeling?

 

Relatively speaking, the concept of formless only makes sense contextually. Something can be said to lack form only in relation to something else that has particular qualities conceived of as representing form within that context. For example, improvisational dance might be said to lack form. But this only makes sense in relation to other forms of dance and only within a context where, perhaps, structured rules of dance is being used as a definition of form. In reality, improvisational dance is full of form. It has as much form as any other style of dance or anything for that matter, its forms are merely invented spontaneously as opposed to being derived from previously designed choreography.

 

Gradients of form and the relative absence of form can be conceptualized, but, again, the absence of form only makes sense contextually. An empty pocket does not have emptiness in it. It just lacks materials we expect to find there, ie: coins, wallet. An empty vase is not filled with nothingness. It's filled with air, a very real substance in a gaseous state. It's this less solid quality, relative to the material of the vase, which encourages us to say there is nothing in the vase. There is a conception here of solid as representing form. The vase is the solid, so it's the form, air is gaseous, so it's formless; it's nothing. And deeper still, how often is it useful to discuss the air in a vase? How often do we succeed in focusing our eyes on air in a vase? These are also conceptions of form; that which is useful and capable of being distinguished. Oddly enough, perhaps it's for these very reasons that air, or more accurately, the space within a container, is frequently used as a metaphor pointing to an insight of formlessness. Formlessness is not useful in any kind of conventional sense. Formlessness is impossible to separate and focus on, since anything we can differentiate and focus on is, by definition, form. So air makes a great metaphor. But air is not literally more formless than anything else. True formlessness, like emptiness, infinity, enlightenment, Tao and God are beyond, while still including, what our mind's can conceive and grasp.

 

Yet how often are we under this misconception that we can somehow conceptually grasp formlessness and put it to work as a means of classification? How often do we classify the forms of spiritual traditions and their practices into a hierarchy of sophistication based on an imagined measure of so-called formlessness? Really, I am asking - how often do we do this, am I just speaking for my own silliness here?

 

Is sitting in the posture of zazen more formless than dancing?

 

Are spiritual traditions that directly discuss an idea of formlessness as a concept more formless than spiritual traditions that do not?

 

Are experiences from spiritual practices that explicitly attempt to experience formlessness actually more formless than spiritual experiences richer with imagery and meaning?

 

Is Zen Buddhism more formless than Christianity?

 

Is a stark room with no furniture, just a zafu and an austere monk closer to formlessness than a room filled with furniture, toys and a family playing?

 

 

Sean

[Cameron]

These are deep questions I hesitate to respond out of my own lack of understanding. 'I think' from a practitioners/practical point of view you need to experience the vast spaciousness and openess for yourself deeply before you can really have an opinion or perspective of these things. If you havent had a deep experience of spaciousness and vast being it's just intellectual understanding.

 

And, it might be a karmic thing, but for me the experience of vast being and space seems to be accompanied by a tremendous fear. Like the ego is slowly losing control of it's tight clutch and holding on to it's way of knowledge. Because the raw, honest truth is we don't really know. To experience this in every moment is hard, hard, hard. Much easier to say ok..that infinite nothingness is there..but I need to walk around defining and measuring things in order to run my life.

 

Otherwise..I don't know..it's sooo much. I think to really experience awakening and know these things for oneself(not intelectually) is saying bye bye to knowledge. But we love and cherish our knowledge.

 

So I think the Taoist practices offer a kind of nice meeting ground or way to navigate the inifinte being with our ego self that wants to define, measure, know stuff. Maybe Ime not ready for this raw state of being that doesn't need to define but am also not wanting to live from the state of ego knowing. So practices like inner smile become a nice bridge to harmonize and balance out all these different dimensions of self.

 

That might have had nothing to do with your post

[Smile]

Is sitting in the posture of zazen more formless than dancing?

.....

Is a stark room with no furniture, just a zafu and an austere monk closer to formlessness than a room filled with furniture, toys and a family playing?

My guess the mind makes the distinction. Or doesn't.

To me, I'm not at that state while dancing so my mind makes the difference. And usually the need for things around us reflects our inner state.

[thelerner]

Simply, yes, the first things are or at least tend to be more formless, ie simple more formless then complex.

 

Michael

[Todd]

I often find myself using "formless" as a designation for aspects of the world through which truth comes. It is a pointer to something which cannot be described.

 

Based upon that definition, ultimately, everything is formless. Of course this includes form. As someone for whom this is not apparent at all times, I find the concept of formlessness helpful. I have noticed that the more formless a practice the more powerful it is for me, though this is somewhat like saying the greener something is the more green it is.

 

Everything that can be observed has form. This includes "realized beings" and their teachings. It becomes a question of how much we rely on those observable aspects in our relationship with the teacher or teaching. How much does our relationship with them bring a recognition of what always is, and how much does it distract us?

 

The key factor seems to be not so much what the exernal form is, as whether I am following my integrity when I interact with it. I like formlessness, so when I am being honest with myself, I gravitate towards formless things. If there is not some degree of formlessness in the things that I do, it stands to reason that I might not be being totally honest with myself.

 

Is this movement in any way universal? Who knows? Its just a way I move in the world, and perhaps not for long. It is much nicer when formlessness only comes up in conversation.

Edited October 27, 2006 by Todd

[fatherpaul]

Is wind more formless than water or rock?

 

Is a blank sheet of paper more formless than a canvas with art on it?

 

Is the beautiful little blissful bindu you feel in your deepest meditation more formless than your loudest sneeze on a crowded subway?

 

Is any perception, no matter how subtle you imagine it to be, ultimately any more formless than a perception filled with bold color and feeling?

 

Relatively speaking, the concept of formless only makes sense contextually. Something can be said to lack form only in relation to something else that has particular qualities conceived of as representing form within that context. For example, improvisational dance might be said to lack form. But this only makes sense in relation to other forms of dance and only within a context where, perhaps, structured rules of dance is being used as a definition of form. In reality, improvisational dance is full of form. It has as much form as any other style of dance or anything for that matter, its forms are merely invented spontaneously as opposed to being derived from previously designed choreography.

 

Gradients of form and the relative absence of form can be conceptualized, but, again, the absence of form only makes sense contextually. An empty pocket does not have emptiness in it. It just lacks materials we expect to find there, ie: coins, wallet. An empty vase is not filled with nothingness. It's filled with air, a very real substance in a gaseous state. It's this less solid quality, relative to the material of the vase, which encourages us to say there is nothing in the vase. There is a conception here of solid as representing form. The vase is the solid, so it's the form, air is gaseous, so it's formless; it's nothing. And deeper still, how often is it useful to discuss the air in a vase? How often do we succeed in focusing our eyes on air in a vase? These are also conceptions of form; that which is useful and capable of being distinguished. Oddly enough, perhaps it's for these very reasons that air, or more accurately, the space within a container, is frequently used as a metaphor pointing to an insight of formlessness. Formlessness is not useful in any kind of conventional sense. Formlessness is impossible to separate and focus on, since anything we can differentiate and focus on is, by definition, form. So air makes a great metaphor. But air is not literally more formless than anything else. True formlessness, like emptiness, infinity, enlightenment, Tao and God are beyond, while still including, what our mind's can conceive and grasp.

 

Yet how often are we under this misconception that we can somehow conceptually grasp formlessness and put it to work as a means of classification? How often do we classify the forms of spiritual traditions and their practices into a hierarchy of sophistication based on an imagined measure of so-called formlessness? Really, I am asking - how often do we do this, am I just speaking for my own silliness here?

 

Is sitting in the posture of zazen more formless than dancing?

 

Are spiritual traditions that directly discuss an idea of formlessness as a concept more formless than spiritual traditions that do not?

 

Are experiences from spiritual practices that explicitly attempt to experience formlessness actually more formless than spiritual experiences richer with imagery and meaning?

 

Is Zen Buddhism more formless than Christianity?

 

Is a stark room with no furniture, just a zafu and an austere monk closer to formlessness than a room filled with furniture, toys and a family playing?

Sean

 

 

formless yes in the sense it is ungraspable

thought ends, it begins

thought begins, its unchanged

 

read my pm

 

peace

paul

[Wayfarer64]

Hi Sean & all-

 

As an artist I am often involved with the task of creating form from content. Or trying to express abstract ideas in impressionistic/expressionistic ways. So I see no formlessness in many of the instances given. I see content as taking on form. I think of the world as working from the inside out. As in we are spirits existing in human form, & our activities give our lives form and function too. But it is the content of our inner beings that goes on and on as energy and consciousness in many forms, as we change over time.

 

Those who knew me as a child would have a hard time recognizing me as an adult with no visual references in between. But the content of my personality -or that which dies -is the same person. The form has little resemblance to its own past forms for anyone not observant of the changes.

 

If these ideas are the content, these words are the form they take and the transference of them to your eyes is the function that I am giving them through my intention. Right intention makes right action and gives form to the content.

 

Function is the use of form to manifest content. When the air inside a vase is replaced with water and plant life its' function is realized.

 

I see the air in a vase as having the exact form of the inside of the vase. Every nook in there adds to and every bump takes from the volume of air in the vase. It is an eddy in the mass of air surrounding the globe and trapped in plants and fish lungs and the fuel used to send rockets into space.

 

And as breath is said to be qi , I wonder if that is the dharma level content of air and air is the form qi takes. Its functions are an ever changing array of exchanges.

 

Thanks for the chance to think about this stuff-

Namaste- Pat

Edited October 27, 2006 by Wayfarer64

[freeform]

Is sitting in the posture of zazen more formless than dancing?

 

Are spiritual traditions that directly discuss an idea of formlessness as a concept more formless than spiritual traditions that do not?

 

Are experiences from spiritual practices that explicitly attempt to experience formlessness actually more formless than spiritual experiences richer with imagery and meaning?

 

Is Zen Buddhism more formless than Christianity?

 

Is a stark room with no furniture, just a zafu and an austere monk closer to formlessness than a room filled with furniture, toys and a family playing?

Sean

 

As I tend to do with these discussions, my ideas are often based on what I'm currently studying/practicing. Since I've been listening to David Deida - my ideas here are gonna be framed through that lense.

 

zazen vs dancing,

stark room vs full room

etc.

 

I know the 'vs' is not necessary - but just to caricaturise (is that a word? - it is now!) the discussion for ease of explanation.

 

it's like the difference between death and flow, stillness and movement... zazen, stark room, empty vase all represent the unchanging, the still - tha yang... movement, dancing, visual excitement, noise, creativity - that's all yin.

 

Deida said something amazing - little masculine boys are always obsessed with death! - killing ants, 'pretend shooting' each other, playing dead, cowboys and indians... little feminine girls like pretty things, colours, textures, babies, music and movement... this relates to the masculine desire for permanance, unchanging stability 'single pointedness' whereas the female essence relates to change, flow, movement etc...

 

What you seem to be getting into here, Sean, is the 'yin within yang' and visa versa...

[Trunk]

Yup.

High level discourse.

[Spectrum]

"Great movements are not as efficient as small movements. Small movements are not as efficient as stillness.Stillness is the mother of eternal movement" - Wang Xian Zhai

[sean]

[Cameron]

I don't have a clue but am happy to see you asking these questions and hope you find answers.

[Wayfarer64]

A dear friend of mine (Mike Savage) - who was also a great painter would have loved this thread. Alas he died of an exploding pancreas in'98...

 

For years he worked on a very aetherial abstract water color painting. Over those several years it went through dozens of changes - many incredible and wonderous and every so often there would be a nearly blank piece of paper, with faint pastel hues and scratches and worn spots that became holes.

 

After a couple years there were pretty big holes in the paper. It made me crazy because so many of the stages were just beautiful and he could have begun a new piece of paper. Eventually he burned the paper and put the ashes in a jar for his girl friend at the time to have. I always wished he had given them to me; as I had known the life of that paper better than anyone else but him.

 

That once blank piece of paper had a real life for me. and ended up as ashes just as my mom and my dog did, and I shall also.

 

Many of the forms it took on really were very wonderous. Granted - he tended to show me the great stages, and not those that caused the radical erasures...But the symbolism of that painting's many incarnations seems an apt metaphore for what we are into here.

 

Mike was Man Ray's great-nephew and thought of himself as a DADAist -tho his mom said there were no modern DADAists...I always thought of that painting as an abstraction of a concept and then a nearly formless representation (ashes) of what had been a manifestation of so many visions over the years. From tree to pulp to blank paper to a spring -board for artistic wonderment - to ashes...

 

The last incarnation had the most content but was the most formless.

Edited October 29, 2006 by Wayfarer64

[TwoTrees]

Sean,

you can't help but to intellectually write.

You articulate your constant thought processes on EVERYTHING (and nothing, lol) in a way that gets the whole group going in an unrestrained collective/cooperative.

You got a book in the works, yet ?? I'd buy that in a second.

[Spectrum]

"But think about it. Is Enlightenment just a feeling we get in deep meditation?"

 

See your Koans are starting to form already.

[hagar]

Sean:

 

I've studied too much philosophy to actually know what to answer to the question.

It can't truly be demarcated intellectually.

 

But Lao Tzu can: The formless is never context-dependent:

 

Eleven

 

Thirty spokes share the wheel's hub;

It is the center hole that makes it useful.

Shape clay into a vessel;

It is the space within that makes it useful.

Cut doors and windows for a room; It is the holes that make it useful.

Therefore profit comes from what is there;

Usefulness from what is not there.

 

h

[mbanu]

[Wayfarer64]

I've come across some quotes that may add several new perspectives to this thread...

 

Your vision will become clear only when you look into your heart ... Who looks outside, dreams. Who looks inside awakens." -unknown author

 

"We practise illusory practise in an illusory way, in order to reach illusory enlightenment and deliver illusory beings from suffering.".

--From

- Khyungpo Naljyor, Foundation for the Preservation of the Mahayana Tradition

 

"Our imagination flies; we are its shadow on the earth."

- Vladimir Nabokov

 

"You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus."

- Mark Twain

 

"The world is but a canvas to the imagination."..

- Henry David Thoreau

 

"We completely deny the existence of a self-existent I, or a permanent, independent soul. Every aspect of your body and mind is impermanent: changing, changing, changing... "

- Lama Thubten Yeshe

 

"It's not just philosophy, not just words; it's knowing how the mind functions; only then can you develop loving-kindness; only then can you become a spiritual person"

- Lama Thubten Yeshe

 

"When we speak of mind, we speak of something that is not a thing in itself. In its most fundamental sense, mind is not something we can limit. We cannot say it has a particular shape, size or location, color or form, or any other limiting characteristic."..

- Kalu Rinpoche

 

"Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it."

-unknown author

 

"The nature of mind is like empty space, like the sky, which at present is filled with clouds and fog and mist and periodically has all kinds of activity such as hailstorms, snowstorms, rainstorms and thunder and lightning."

- Kalu Rinpoche

 

"We are not Human Beings seeking a Spiritual Experience... We are Spiritual Beings involved in a Human Experience.".+

- author unknown

 

"We are shaped by our thoughts; we become what we think. When the mind is pure, joy follows like a shadow that never leaves."

- The Buddha

 

"If you seek to understand the whole universe you will understand nothing at all but seek to understand yourself and you will understand the whole universe."

- Druidic Axiom

 

"If you tell a man there are 300 billion stars in the universe, he'll believe you. But if you tell him a parkbench has just been painted, he has to touch it to be sure."

- Lynn

 

I hope ya'all enjoyed them...

[sean]

Cam, thanks for the support.

 

Michelle, I imagine when I am in my 40's I will have ranted enough to be able to copy and paste a book together. heh. You will be the first to know.

 

Spectrum, yes! Koans. I am turning personal koans out loud here. Nothing more.

 

But Lao Tzu can: The formless is never context-dependent

Nice one, thank you.

 

Mbanu - when you come out of hiding here, I consider my post a great success. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I always know I can expect a unique angle from you. Wonderful wonderful metaphor with the trap.

 

Wayfarer, very thoughtful quotes, thanks for those.

 

 

Sean

[Ian]

My perspective on intellect has been developed simply by trying to maintain in meditation a state of felt sensation without thought.

 

It soon becomes apparent, within that context, that anything my intellect comes up with is simply the writhing of a parasite that doesn't want to die.

 

I was listening to one of Barry Long's Gold Coast talks at the weekend. To paraphrase roughly: "Every single thought you have is rubbish. It comes from your rotten stinking self."

 

The talk also had the most beautiful answer to a woman who'd lost her son. I was spellbound.

(not that that's relevant at all.)