Book study leading to mastery

[Sahaj Nath]

"When you are deluded and full of doubt, even a thousand books of scripture are not enough. When you have realized understanding, even one word is too much."

-- Fen Yang

 

 

 

the qualities you bring to your path are more important than the external particulars. books can be a waste of time. they can even obscure what is otherwise simple and organic.

 

and,

 

a single book can prove to be all a person needs to accomplish the Great Work of Awakening.

 

 

know thyself. absent that, any path can be a waste.

[GrandmasterP]

Master Xuyun taught that...

"The patriarch, Hanshan (1546-1623), once said, There are practitioners who get enlightened first and then start their cultivation, and those who practice first and then get enlightened. However, there are two kinds of enlightenment: insight through reason and insight through experience. If a person realizes Mind by following the teachings of the Buddha and the patriarchs, it is considered insight through reason. One with such an experience will only have a conceptual understanding. In all circumstances he will still be powerless. The mind of the practitioner and the environment are separate and do not reach totality. Therefore, his experience is an obstruction. It is called simulated Prajna and is not real practice.

 

On the other hand, those who become enlightened through practice stick to their methods in a straightforward manner until they force themselves into a corner. suddenly their last conceptual thought disappears and they completely realize Mind. It is like seeing your father at a cross road there is no doubt. It is like drinking water: only the person drinking knows if it is warm or cold. There is no way to express it. This is real practice and enlightenment. Afterward, the practitioner will still have to deal with different mental states that arise in accordance with his experience. He will still have to get rid of strong karmic obstructions and wandering and emotional thoughts, leaving only pure Mind. This is enlightenment by experience."

Edited May 16, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Simple_Jack]

Good to read, but it's essential not to believe

 

To even bother engaging Buddhist practice requires the mental factor of faith [skt. shraddha] in the overall schema of the 37 factors of awakening. Otherwise, there's going to be no incentive to carry out the principles for practice.

 

zazen and zen can be practiced without orthodox Buddhism .

 

Yet, Zen is not entirely divorced from the buddhadharma, regardless of the rhetoric of "A special transmission outside the scriptures". The archaic and vague sayings used throughout the records of the Zen masters are couched in the meaning and language of the Buddhist sutras. The mythological dissemination of the Zen lineage to Huike involves Bodhidharma handing off the Lankavatara Sutra as a symbol of authenticating the transmission of the 'mind-seal'. The narrative of the 6th patriarch's awakening involves his overhearing an individual reciting verses from the Diamond Sutra before becoming a monk; while the catalyst for his great awakening involves a private dialogue with the 5th patriarch reciting lines from the Diamond Sutra thereby transmitting the 'mind-seal'. Even Huineng recites passages from the Diamond Sutra, Nirvana Sutra, etc. to his audience as attributed in the Platform Sutra. There is also the example of Hanshan (Cold Mountian), who is famous for his poems, but mentioned by Nan Huaijin in his "The Story of Chinese Zen", where it's described he used the Shurangama Sutra as the basis for his meditation while on retreat in the mountains, serving as his authentication of progress towards awakening (translation of the sutra with Hanshans commentary by Charles Luk - http://www.buddhistische-gesellschaft-berlin.de/downloads/shurangamasutralukuanyu.pdf).

 

Yes, he learned from living masters with some sort of realization: he didn't study a "canon of text".

 

What he learned from these masters was the jhana of nothingness and the jhana of neither perception nor non-perception (summary of Buddha's life story according to the Pali canon: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/buddha.html).

[Simple_Jack]

Buddhism's a slippery term too.

And "orthodox' as a descriptor of anything at all is slipperier than oiled banana skins on an outdoor ice rink in the rain.

Not so sure that enlightenment or whatever follows that slippery concept necessarily depends on zen being Buddhist nor any other particular path as such.

Nor even on 'zen' per se.

'Isness' just 'is'.

 

If you read the records of the Zen masters you'll find that they commonly discuss emptiness, buddha-nature, karma, the 6 realms of samsara, the 6 paramita's of the bodhisattva path, etc.

[Simple_Jack]

This topic appears from time to time in posts on other topics but I haven't seen a topic dedicated to this question of book study in cultivation.

 

Below is a quote from page 11 of Master Nan-Huai-Chin's "Working Towards Enlightenment."

 

Note that Nan-Huai-Chin has been recognized as being Enlightened by a number of masters of the Buddhist tradition.

 

"Suppose people wanted to become buddhas - to study the Buddha Dharma. If they were to take these works listed above (about 25 Buddhist scriptures), and spend three to five years of effort reading and studying to enter deeply into them and put their contents into practice, this would definitely be enough. It would be best if everyone could awaken without departing from the scriptures and treatises. Some think that all that is necessary is to cultivate practice and do meditation work. They think that it is not necessary to read the scriptures and treatises. This is absolutely wrong. We must recognize that in doing meditation work, if we do not clearly understand the principles, if our views are not correct, then our meditation work will not be able to get on the right track. In other words, if our meditation work is not done well, it is just because we have not mastered the principles involved."

 

I've expressed similar sentiments towards the 'McMindfulness' memes:

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/33965-the-course-in-buddhist-reasoning-and-debate/?p=532280

 

Sati or 'mindfulness', in itself is not a unique feature of Buddha's teaching, everyone uses some degree of attention in their everyday lives, sati as a mental factor, is utilized as sustained attention on an object. Attention is developed when we can continually sustain it on an object of focus for extended periods of time. Naturally, this is the primary factor that leads to the development of samadhi. In Buddhism, sati only becomes a liberating factor, when it is combined with the 37 factors of awakening, and the Buddha's teaching on the 3 seals of anicca, dukkha, anatta (for Mahayana its 2-fold emptiness). The 3 seals are a very basic component of Buddhism and is particularly emphasized in Hinayana; 'mindfulness' of the arising and passing of the 5 aggregates via the 6 sense doors are taught as the primary means towards stream-entry. All Theravada traditions emphasize this when teaching vipassana whether it's in the style of the Burmese or Thai traditions, Mahasi Sayadaw's and S.N. Goenka's teachings, etc.

 

Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction (MBST), and the related Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT), are very effective therapeutical techniques nonetheless.

[GrandmasterP]

I see that GrandmasterP has just posted this over on favorite quotes:

 

 

 

 

 

The unstated assumption here is that there is one level of mastery. I would rather say that there is an inherent tendency toward relaxation and coming to one's senses in human nature that anyone can experience, and descriptions that are made using the notion of a completed infinity ("Tao", "Zen") are subject to paradox and contradiction.

 

The assumption is so unstated as not to exist Mark.

The anonymous writer accepts teachers or no teachers and simply makes the point that teachers can serve a useful purpose.

Departing from the quote for my own embroidery I add that it is 'easier' to stick to cultivation with a teacher and that a teacher who is there and present can differentiate instruction to suit individual student's needs.

No book, DVD nor online course can do so.

What the writer definitely claims is that there is no such thing as a quasi-magical 'transmission' from a teacher to a student and in doing so he issues a challenge, for any who may choose to reflect upon; our Tibetan ( for one example) Buddhist chums affirmations that transmission is a thing posited on the necessity of magical transmission from a somehow-power- imbued 'teacher'.

We cultivate, teachers can facilitate more effective cultivation.

Here's an bang up to date example from my own little world.

An academic colleague designed an online and distance ' blended learning' degree module.

Part time students who all work full time jobs could come home from work hit the computer and submit course work by email having watched 'webinar' lectures and, in theory; partake of group interaction via virtual common room/skype meeting-hubs to network with their peers.

In practice that has not happened. It is tough to remain motivated to study after a day's work when surrounded at home and in one's own home by family and other distractions.

Dinosaur that I am I have continued to invite working students into the university on any of three evenings a week between 6 and 9 pm where they can hear the same lecture at one of those three times to suit themselves, network with others who turn up and use the facilities. They get one hour contact with me as a group and then have access to me between 7 and 9 to discuss progress and iron out any wrinkles or just hit the computer and bang out their written course work. I'm there to field any questions and to chat.

We all drink a lot of tea and work gets done in time for 'on time' and definitely up to standard. Thus far we have fifteen clear ' Distinctions' ( 95%+) and all who have completed are well above the national average and passing grade (70%) in our subject area. No one has submitted anything to achieve less than 80%, most are above.

With an external final-examination board on June 25th my blended learning colleague has yet to receive one single completed piece of course work from his 'students' few of whom he has met in person since they first enrolled last September.

I on the other have almost completed final marking in preparation for Internal Quality Assurance checks beginning next week.

The confident learners completed last month, the 'next to confident' have completed during this past week so I now have time to focus on and with the five ( out of 74) hesitant learners who need my undivided time and attention next week and (hopefully not) into half term vac the week after next.

Sometimes Mark, the old ways are the best ways and old fashioned teaching pays dividends.

There is no magic to it beyond hard work and diligence on the part of each learner and present-facilitation of that laudable effort by their teacher.

Edited May 17, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[LAOLONG]

blank scroll are the true Buddha teaching in

http://books.google.co.il/books?id=eRBXJThEuJsC&pg=PA286&lpg=PA286&dq=monkey+chinese+book+blank+scroll&source=bl&ots=swezC4AN8W&sig=VhXEOWQ20F8qNMtP4629Vubadvk&hl=iw&sa=X&ei=-1x3U9dGxLjtBtKsgLgD&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=monkey%20chinese%20book%20blank%20scroll&f=false

[Simple_Jack]

What the writer definitely claims is that there is no such thing as a quasi-magical 'transmission' from a teacher to a student and in doing so he issues a challenge, for any who may choose to reflect upon; our Tibetan ( for one example) Buddhist chums affirmations that transmission is a thing posited on the necessity of magical transmission from a somehow-power- imbued 'teacher'...

 

Funny you mention this because Malcolm, a Loppon/Acharya in the Sakya lineage, recently clarified 'transmission' according to Tibetan Buddhism on the DW forum:

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=16286&start=120

 

Empowerments are not mystical transmissions, they are a very specific method with a precise dependent origination that requires the guru and the disciples' active, simultaneous, cooperative participation...

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=16286&start=160

 

An empowerment is something that arranges a profound dependent origination between someone's body, speech and mind and the three kāyas of the result. Therefore, it is not so that one does not receive the empowerment if one does not realize the nature of the mind.

 

An empowerment is first of all a method for inducing realization, for example, when Indrabhuti I attained Buddhahood by receiving the Guhyasamaja empowerment. Failing that, we have sadhanas, which is the method connected to the empowerment to produce realization. When we receive an empowerment, we agree to follow various samayas until we attain buddhahood. People who do not receive empowerments do not have those samayas.

 

He summarized what an empowerment basically is in Tibetan Buddhism:

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=4386&start=100

 

Transmission requires two people, a person giving transmission and a person receiving transmission. They must somehow be related to each other through the act of delivering the substance of transmission which is act of communication by a speaker to a hearer via sounds, words and symbols at minimum. In Vajrayāna there is are further experiential transmissions which come about when the teacher deliberately induces specific experiences in a student. But again, it is through sound, words, and symbols. Taste, sight, touch, etc., these experiences are symbols.

[GrandmasterP]

Aye sound good but we all know what store our Tibetan et al chums invest in lineage transmission.

For all Malcolm's erudition there's presumed to be magic in it.

For example the same materials delivered via a non lineage teacher are deemed not to work.

Ya gotta have the leathery little guy in an orange frock and silly hat doing it or it don't work.

Edited May 17, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Mark Foote]

"I dig a pygmy!"

 

Lots to laugh about. Thanks, all!

 

Spotless, I picked up a copy of Henry Clarke Warren's "Buddhism in Translation" at Moe's in 1977, I believe it was. I was living in a transient hotel in Chinatown Oakland (yes, there is a two-block area of Oakland that constitutes a Chinatown), in a little room under the stair, where I had to shift my body to actually do the "plow". I remember walking around Lake Merritt and kind of blacking out as I walked, thinking, "oh, this is what the cessation of perception and sensation means." Many years later, having read the Pali Canon sutra volumes (the first four Nikayas, the fifth is suspect), I know that the reference is to the cessation of habitual activity (or the exercise of will) in perception and sensation. Yet physically, the experience was a guiding light for me for a long time, and the book was an eye-opener as to the voice of Gautama and what he said.

 

Simple_Jack, I would agree. My guiding light now is in SN V in the chapter "Kindred Sayings on In-Breathing and Out-Breathing", in the description of "concentration on in-breathing and out-breathing", and here Gautama outlines a practice he describes as his own before enlightenment, and as the way of life of the Tathagatha (and so, after enlightenment, both). Woodward translates it as "concentration", Horner in the Middle-Length Sayings translates it as "the (mind-)development that is mindfulness of in-breathing and out-breathing".

 

A practice that no one in the world teaches today, to the best of my knowledge, for reasons I go into in my article in the signature; basically, it involves the induction of trance out of necessity in the relaxed movement of breath, and the second particular of the practice is a trance-phenomena for which the exercise of will is anathema (comprehending the long inhalation as long, the long exhalation as long, the short inhalation as short, the short exhalation as short, while inhaling or exhaling). The fundamental contradiction in meditation, to exercise intent while abandoning choice.

 

That would be why Gautama described the power of concentration with the words, "making self-surrender the object of mind, one lays hold of concentration, one lays hold of single-pointedness of mind". That would be why thought is applied and sustained in the first meditative state, and thought applied and sustained is abandoned in the second.

 

The descriptions of the meditative states are never given these days, but there are very physical descriptions Gautama gave, and although I don't walk the meditative states and I believe that "only zazen can sit zazen" (as Shunryu Suzuki said), I find them helpful. Again, if anyone is interested, they are in the article in my signature.

 

GrandmasterP, I will beg to differ, regarding the assumption that there is only one state of mastery, although you might say I'm quibbling. For example, a black belt in judo is awarded for winning a certain number of contests at a competition with a number of fellow first-degree brown belts (presuming the instructor approves of the award). There are degrees of black belt. Some are awarded because one of a black-belt teacher's students has achieved a black-belt, or a higher degree of black belt. Some are awarded through competition. Some at the high end are awarded for life-time contributions to the art of judo. All are black-belts, and express (at least initially) some kind of quantum leap in performance over the first-degree brown belt rank.

 

My point would be that when I was thrown by a sixth-degree high-school national champion of Japan, there was a remarkable gentleness and lack of effort on his part, that stood in stark contrast to most of American-born teachers I had encountered. The philosophy was different. Europeans and Americans tended to believe in strength, and win their matches on the mat. Japanese judoka tended to rely on balance, and win their matches with standing techniques. Obviously, the truth is that a combination of balance and strength is necessary, but the tenacious strength and balance of the bones the Japanese masters exhibited is the more natural and the more enduring course, if you ask me.

 

The example a master provides can be paramount to conceiving of the study in the first place. The inspiration provided by a master of an art-form (including scholarship) is invaluable, in my experience. And yet, lacking such, one can still hack and hew through the literature of a civilization, rather it's "Introduction to Metamathematics", my current curse ("not the most brilliant in the class", as my brain has been described), or the Pali Canon. Hack and hew because, in most cases, the real work requires a willingness to discern and discard the irrelevant and the unproven at every step of the way, and to look to the most natural and enduring for what will be a life-long part of daily living.

 

The degree of mastery of a teacher is one of the things that gets hacked and hewed in making a teaching one's own, but the example and the inspiration of those who embody gentleness and compassion in the forms of daily living endures. I feel fortunate to have been exposed to some amazing teachers, and I feel some ire when I hear McMindfulness tauted as Buddhism because of the ignorance such a claim perpetuates with regard to the actual teachings of Gautama the Buddha.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Mark Foote

[Cheshire Cat]

To even bother engaging Buddhist practice requires the mental factor of faith [skt. shraddha] in the overall schema of the 37 factors of awakening. Otherwise, there's going to be no incentive to carry out the principles for practice.

 

I started the practice of buddhist meditation without reading a single sutra. I had an open mind that wanted just to see if it works.

After some time, I was really fascinated with this matter and I wanted to have a look at the marvelous and profound sutras.

 

Reading the sutras, their fantasy-stories, their philosophical assertions that have nothing to do with the real nature of practice... I lost faith in the buddhadharma.

 

Nonetheless, I still practice shamata and vipassana and not a single bodhisattva appeared to me to show that the mahayana-sutra stuff is real.

 

I have faith... in the Nature of the mind.

I may have faith in a teacher... if someday one will show up.

I don't have faith in scriptures.

Edited May 18, 2014 by DAO rain TAO

[Sahaj Nath]

"My Guru ordered me to attend to the sense 'I am' and to give attention to nothing else. I just obeyed. I did not follow any particular course of breathing, or meditation, or study of scriptures. Whatever happened, I would turn away my attention from it and remain with the sense 'I am'. It may look too simple, even crude. My only reason for doing it was that my Guru told me so. Yet it worked!"

 

--Nisargadatta Maharaj

[Spotless]

Many conscious awakened beings have chosen to pen their words.

The value of these writings is beyond valuation.

 

What leads to mastery is a messy soup of many things and as we are not cut from a cookie cutter, the recipe is different every time.

[doc benway]

"My Guru ordered me to attend to the sense 'I am' and to give attention to nothing else. I just obeyed. I did not follow any particular course of breathing, or meditation, or study of scriptures. Whatever happened, I would turn away my attention from it and remain with the sense 'I am'. It may look too simple, even crude. My only reason for doing it was that my Guru told me so. Yet it worked!"

 

--Nisargadatta Maharaj

Nisargadatta shares with us the importance of devotion and trust in the guru.

This is the fuel. The view is the foundation. And the practice is mindfulness and connectedness.

Edited May 18, 2014 by steve

[Harmonious Emptiness]

"My Guru ordered me to attend to the sense 'I am' and to give attention to nothing else. I just obeyed. I did not follow any particular course of breathing, or meditation, or study of scriptures. Whatever happened, I would turn away my attention from it and remain with the sense 'I am'. It may look too simple, even crude. My only reason for doing it was that my Guru told me so. Yet it worked!"

 

--Nisargadatta Maharaj

 

The attentive guidance of a master could easily take the place of textual study, imho.

I suppose the question, is whether extensive textual study can take the place of a master in guiding our practice.

[GrandmasterP]

Study surely can enhance cultivation and , to me; biographies or autobiographies of experienced cultivators from all traditions and none make for more interesting reading that most other books.

Those are all 'about' cultivation though they aren't cultivation itself hence I do think that 'for' cultivation actually 'doing' cultivation trumps book study about cultivation.

Doing cultivation with a teacher beats all else 'in my book'.

 

:-)

Edited May 18, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Mark Foote]

Nisargadatta shares with us the importance of devotion and trust in the guru.

This is the fuel. The view is the foundation. And the practice is mindfulness and connectedness.

 

I would go you one better and say that what Nisargadatta shares is exactly the practice.

 

In my estimation, the sense "I am" that Nisargadatta refers to is the study of Olaf Blanke as he investigates clinically induced out-of-body experience and its implications, here. I'll quote from Blanke's article (section 5.1) concerning autoscopic phenomena, or AP:

 

"...In summary: A conflict between tactil/proprioceptive/kinesthetic and visual information coupled with a conflict between visual and vestibular information can, in some cases, give rise to a feeling that the self is in two places simultaneously, which can result in suicidal tendencies in the individual as they attempt to re-establish a unitary self at all cost."

 

Blanke's research indicates that the sense of self depends on a coordination of tactil/proprioceptive/kinesthetic and visual information coupled with a coordination of vestibular and visual information. That is to say, the sense "I am" is actually an interplay between the sense of vision and two other senses, maybe three if you count gravity as a separate sense.

 

Everyone experiences this interplay, it's natural and it's everyday, until you actually learn to distinguish the particular senses. At that point, it's still natural, but it appears almost supernatural.

 

 

"Be aware of where you really are twenty-four hours a day. You must be most attentive."

 

("Zen Letters, Teachings of Yuanwu", trans. Thomas Cleary and J. C. Cleary, pg 53)

 

 

"My Guru ordered me to attend to the sense 'I am' and to give attention to nothing else. I just obeyed. I did not follow any particular course of breathing, or meditation, or study of scriptures. Whatever happened, I would turn away my attention from it and remain with the sense 'I am'. It may look too simple, even crude. My only reason for doing it was that my Guru told me so. Yet it worked!"

 

--Nisargadatta Maharaj

 

 

As I wrote on my blog awhile back, "I would suggest that the eyes are open in zazen for their influence in resetting the vestibular sense and providing a continuity in the sense of location, yet in zazen the proprioceptive sense must be allowed to influence the sense of location almost as though the eyes are closed. It's a trick, a lot like falling asleep with your eyes open." That trick is where the movement of breath and the natural induction of trance comes in.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Mark Foote

[MooNiNite]

lao Tzu, " Abandon book learning." Tao Te Ching

[Tibetan_Ice]

 

I would go you one better and say that what Nisargadatta shares is exactly the practice.

 

In my estimation, the sense "I am" that Nisargadatta refers to is the study of Olaf Blanke as he investigates clinically induced out-of-body experience and its implications, here. I'll quote from Blanke's article (section 5.1) concerning autoscopic phenomena, or AP:

 

"...In summary: A conflict between tactil/proprioceptive/kinesthetic and visual information coupled with a conflict between visual and vestibular information can, in some cases, give rise to a feeling that the self is in two places simultaneously, which can result in suicidal tendencies in the individual as they attempt to re-establish a unitary self at all cost."

 

Blanke's research indicates that the sense of self depends on a coordination of tactil/proprioceptive/kinesthetic and visual information coupled with a coordination of vestibular and visual information. That is to say, the sense "I am" is actually an interplay between the sense of vision and two other senses, maybe three if you count gravity as a separate sense.

 

Everyone experiences this interplay, it's natural and it's everyday, until you actually learn to distinguish the particular senses. At that point, it's still natural, but it appears almost supernatural.

 

 

"Be aware of where you really are twenty-four hours a day. You must be most attentive."

 

("Zen Letters, Teachings of Yuanwu", trans. Thomas Cleary and J. C. Cleary, pg 53)

 

 

"My Guru ordered me to attend to the sense 'I am' and to give attention to nothing else. I just obeyed. I did not follow any particular course of breathing, or meditation, or study of scriptures. Whatever happened, I would turn away my attention from it and remain with the sense 'I am'. It may look too simple, even crude. My only reason for doing it was that my Guru told me so. Yet it worked!"

 

--Nisargadatta Maharaj

 

 

As I wrote on my blog awhile back, "I would suggest that the eyes are open in zazen for their influence in resetting the vestibular sense and providing a continuity in the sense of location, yet in zazen the proprioceptive sense must be allowed to influence the sense of location almost as though the eyes are closed. It's a trick, a lot like falling asleep with your eyes open." That trick is where the movement of breath and the natural induction of trance comes in.

Hi Mark,

I think Blanke and you have missed the point.

 

There is a large pool of liquid-like awareness in the center of the central channel by the heart. The substance "feels like you".

 

Not only does it feel like YOU, it is loving, blissful, silent, peaceful and luminous (like liquid light).

 

This is the sense of I AM that Nisargadatta is referring to.

 

This liquid light is found in smaller amounts throughout the body, and is even present in small amounts in the astral body.. In reality though, this liquid light pervades all existence in small amounts.

 

There is a channel from the heart to the eyes, called the Kati channel, from which this liquid light, the sense of I AM, can emerge in such density that the experience is overwhelming and revealing. When it first comes out, it is like someone turned on a fire hydrant in slow motion. When you are experiencing the effect, you have the overwhelming feeling that you are everything. The sense of self is in the sky, in the trees, in the blades of grass... There is nowhere that does not feel like you. It is so intense!

 

Further, you cannot locate any point where can place your attention when the liquid light comes out.

 

The reason for keeping the eyes open is not to provide a sense of location, but to help open the Kati channel.

 

In zen, once the body falls away and you gain access concentration, it "feels" like your arms are no longer in the position that you placed them. They can float around as can your legs or even your whole sensation of body. But that is not the feeling of sense, the I AM. It is only a small part of it. If you keep focusing on the bigger I AM, you can trace it back to the heart area where it is so dense and powerful that you won't understand how you could have ever missed it.

 

Anyone who is familiar with the occurrence of the senses shutting down during practice will quickly tell you that any hypothesis that sense of self which is based on the senses or a subset of them is incorrect or just partially true. It is not that which is constructed by the conceptual mind through garnering sense data from the various sheaths (etheric, astral, mental..) which is the sense of self, it is that which remains after the senses have shut off, the subject has dissolved and the luminous clear water-like light reveals itself.

 

Edited May 18, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice

[Mark Foote]

Anyone who is familiar with the occurrence of the senses shutting down during practice will quickly tell you that any hypothesis that sense of self which is based on the senses or a subset of them is incorrect or just partially true. It is not that which is constructed by the conceptual mind through garnering sense data from the various sheaths (etheric, astral, mental..) which is the sense of self, it is that which remains after the senses have shut off, the subject has dissolved and the luminous clear water-like light reveals itself.

 

"When (the individual) knows this thus, sees this thus, (their) mind is freed from the canker of sense-pleasures and (their) mind is freed from the canker of becoming and (their) mind is freed from the canker of ignorance. In freedom is the knowledge that (one) is freed and (one) comprehends: 'Destroyed is birth, brought to a close the (holy)-faring, done is what was to be done, there is no more of being such or so'. (They) comprehend thus: 'The disturbances there might be resulting from the canker of sense-pleasures do not exist here; the disturbances there might be resulting from the canker of becoming do not exist here; the disturbances there might be resulting from the canker of ignorance do not exist here. And there is only this degree of disturbance, that is to say, the six sensory fields that, conditioned by life, are grounded on this body itself." (MN III 108-109, Pali Text Society III pg 151-152)

 

I'm no saint, nor do I aspire to be. For me it's about letting go in action, not so much blissful states. At some point, the relaxed distinction of the senses is letting go in action; I notice Gautama did not shy away from it, but the above passage does not mention that he found a kind of happiness even in the state where the cankers cease and the only disturbance is the sensory fields (call 'em 9, in the age of science).

 

We will have to differ, concerning the practice of "I am".

Edited May 18, 2014 by Mark Foote

[Tibetan_Ice]

 

"When (the individual) knows this thus, sees this thus, (their) mind is freed from the canker of sense-pleasures and (their) mind is freed from the canker of becoming and (their) mind is freed from the canker of ignorance. In freedom is the knowledge that (one) is freed and (one) comprehends: 'Destroyed is birth, brought to a close the (holy)-faring, done is what was to be done, there is no more of being such or so'. (They) comprehend thus: 'The disturbances there might be resulting from the canker of sense-pleasures do not exist here; the disturbances there might be resulting from the canker of becoming do not exist here; the disturbances there might be resulting from the canker of ignorance do not exist here. And there is only this degree of disturbance, that is to say, the six sensory fields that, conditioned by life, are grounded on this body itself." (MN III 108-109, Pali Text Society III pg 151-152)

 

I'm no saint, nor do I aspire to be. For me it's about letting go in action, not so much blissful states. At some point, the relaxed distinction of the senses is letting go in action; I notice Gautama did not shy away from it, but the above passage does not mention that he found a kind of happiness even in the state where the cankers cease and the only disturbance is the sensory fields (call 'em 9, in the age of science).

 

We will have to differ, concerning the practice of "I am".

I was discussing the sense of self, the I AM, as per my experiences, what Nisargadatta said and the oversimplified rendition by Blanke.

 

Why you have pulled this into the Buddhist arena, where there is no self is beyond me.

 

I think you are implying that the realization of self is not the final step, and I would agree. Nisargadatta said that one must go beyond the I Am. In Buddhist terminology, the jhanas are stepping stones and not the final consummation.

 

Perhaps Buddha broke down the state of the I AM into its constituent parts with the form and formless jhanas.

 

And just to mention, there are some Dzogchen teachings that do say that the natural state is pure bliss...

 

[Mark Foote]

I was discussing the sense of self, the I AM, as per my experiences, what Nisargadatta said and the oversimplified rendition by Blanke.

 

"It may look too simple, even crude." --Nisargadatta

 

If you are looking for a bliss-state, I can't blame you, yet I think you may yet find that what Nisargadatta was referring to is something else entirely, and not so different from what Gautama taught:

 

 

“(Anyone)…knowing and seeing eye as it really is, knowing and seeing material shapes… visual consciousness… impact on the eye as it really is, and knowing, seeing as it really is the experience, whether pleasant, painful, or neither painful nor pleasant, that arises conditioned by impact on the eye, is not attached to the eye nor to material shapes nor to visual consciousness nor to impact on the eye; and that experience, whether pleasant, painful, or neither painful nor pleasant, that arises conditioned by impact on the eye—neither to that is (such a one) attached. …(Such a one’s) physical anxieties decrease, and mental anxieties decrease, and bodily torments… and mental torments… and bodily fevers decrease, and mental fevers decrease. (Such a one) experiences happiness of body and happiness of mind. (repeated for ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind)

 

Whatever is the view of what really is, that for (such a one) is right view; whatever is aspiration for what really is, that for (such a one) is right aspiration; whatever is endeavour for what really is, that is for (such a one) right endeavour; whatever is mindfulness of what really is, that is for (such a one) right mindfulness; whatever is concentration on what really is, that is for (such a one) right concentration. And (such a one’s) past acts of body, acts of speech, and mode of livelihood have been well purified.”

 

(MN III 288-290, Pali Text Society III pg 337-338)

 

 

Add to the six senses that Gautama knew equalibrioception and proprioception, and there's a breeze in the room.

 

Blanke is looking to pin down the science of the sense of self, that's the sense of self that can cause a person to want to commit suicide if they have it in two places at once. Maybe you haven't had that experience, Tibetan Ice, and maybe you have; I hope not. I sure haven't. But I believe Blanke, when he says that he believes it's an aberration in the way the eyes interact with the vestibular sense and the way the eyes interact wth proprioception.

 

If I had to hazard a guess, I would say Nisargadatta stumbled into a connection between freedom of movement in the sense of self and these interactions. For those like myself who are more challenged at including the interplay of proprioception in the sense of location, a "body-position challenge" might be helpful, like the ones described in the Wikipedia article on proprioception, and relaxation in the movement of breath to get the ball rolling.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Mark Foote

[Simple_Jack]

I started the practice of buddhist meditation without reading a single sutra. I had an open mind that wanted just to see if it works.

After some time, I was really fascinated with this matter and I wanted to have a look at the marvelous and profound sutras.

 

Reading the sutras, their fantasy-stories, their philosophical assertions that have nothing to do with the real nature of practice... I lost faith in the buddhadharma.

 

Nonetheless, I still practice shamata and vipassana and not a single bodhisattva appeared to me to show that the mahayana-sutra stuff is real.

 

I have faith... in the Nature of the mind.

I may have faith in a teacher... if someday one will show up.

I don't have faith in scriptures.

 

In this case 'faith' was derived from your practice of Buddhist meditation, and the fact that you have continued to practice shamatha-vipashyana confirms that you still have 'faith' (or if it's more favorable for you to view it as 'confidence') in those methods, whether or not you have accepted the buddhadharma's definition of liberation. Not bothering to speculate on which mystical aspects of the Mahayana sutras you've most likely taken too literally, but considering your comments from the previous page and here, it should be kept in mind that the Mahayana narratives are meant to be metaphorical representations by which to convey an ideal, particularly that of the narratives in which the buddhas and bodhisattvas have made the vow to 'liberate all sentient beings'.

[nononothing]

My personal experience is YES.

 

Ten years ago, I tried meditation persistently, besides getting some good feelings, I got nothing. As soon as I stop daily meditation, everything went back to what they were.

 

One year ago, I started asking why, then I read a lot of books including Dao De Jing and some Buddhist scriptures. I think deeply. But I rarely meditate, if not never. Now waves after waves of realization hit me. I have got my third eye open, confirmed by an advanced Taoist Alchemy Sifu. I have seen demons. I have my Kundalini going stronger and stronger.

 

Maybe reading and thinking is not for everyone, but it works for me. I have a rather strong science and logical mind.

 

P.S., to avoid misleading people, practice did play a role in my progress. Early last year, after a few months of reading and thinking, I got my Micro Cosmic Orbit opened rather quickly following Mantak Chia's Testical Breathing. After that, the flow of chi and wisdom start to flow stronger and stronger, without doing any practice on regular basis.

Edited May 19, 2014 by nononothing

[nononothing]

I started the practice of buddhist meditation without reading a single sutra. I had an open mind that wanted just to see if it works.

After some time, I was really fascinated with this matter and I wanted to have a look at the marvelous and profound sutras.

 

Reading the sutras, their fantasy-stories, their philosophical assertions that have nothing to do with the real nature of practice... I lost faith in the buddhadharma.

 

Nonetheless, I still practice shamata and vipassana and not a single bodhisattva appeared to me to show that the mahayana-sutra stuff is real.

 

I have faith... in the Nature of the mind.

I may have faith in a teacher... if someday one will show up.

I don't have faith in scriptures.

You have to look past the words and fancy descriptions. they are baits for minds that only get attracted by fancy stuff. In advanced level, Buddha says everything he said and described do not exist at all.

 

The practice helps you to clear and open your mind only. You still need to understand the scripture to make real progress.

Edited May 19, 2014 by nononothing