Consciousness in Zen Buddhism and how it relates to Vedanta

[dwai]

My spiritual mentor is a venerable spiritual stalwart who was a direct disciple of two jivanamuktas in the Hindu tradition (one being the Shankaracharya of the Sringeri Math), a student of a Zen lineage holder (3rd generation dharma heir of Hsu Yun). He is a most spectacular individual, who somehow took it upon himself to guide me (as to why, is mystifying for me, but I'm not complaining  ). Well, he asked me to read a book titled "Zen: The Dawn in the West", by Roshi Philip Kapleau. I've already done some studying of the buddhist sutras and found myself agreeing with everything the Buddha had said anyway.

 

I'm halfway through the book and in it I found the most lucid, pragmatic and no-nonsense directions and advice about meditation and the spiritual approach, that I thought I'd recommend it here. At the same time, I found a beautiful illustration of the model of consciousness according to (Zen) buddhism, which piqued my interest. I have taken that model and added a correlation to the Vedantic model of consciousness (Being actually) which some might find of interest.

 

In the above diagram, the left hand side is from the original book and the right hand side is my addition. It becomes infinitely clear that there is a wonderful overlap between the Buddhist model and the vedantic models.  In the buddhist model, the first 6 levels of consciousness map very neatly into the vedantic (and actually samkhya) model of the five tanmatras (associated with the sense functions) and part of the mental apparatuses that identifies with the body (ego). The mind, intellect aspect of the antahkarana seem to correlate with the level 7 (termed manas in the buddhist model) while the chitta aspect (storehouse of impressions) seems to correlate with the 8th level or "relative Alaya consciousness". This also seems to correlate with the causal body (kārana sharira) which is said to contain the karmic seeds (samsakaras) from which spring forth actions and consequences in a cyclical manner.  At level 9, is absolute Alaya consciousness, which he labels "Formless Self or True-Nature". This maps very nicely as Atman (Vedantic model).

 

Somethings to ponder for sure. I hope this will lead to "peaceful" explorations of the areas of consensus, which has always been my primary interest.

Edited February 7, 2019 by dwai

[Zen Pig]

7 minutes ago, dwai said:

I found the most lucid, pragmatic and no-nonsense directions and advice about mediation and the spiritual approach, that I thought I'd recommend it here.

I have come to see, that Zen , like many spiritual traditions, develop due to different people's character. 

i find Zen straight forward (even when it's not), the cutting away of our ideas about life,  and a direct slap upside the head.

Many others find there path in spiritual forms like  bhakti yoga, which is more heart centered, and emotive. Or the sufi direction which is a combination of both.

It seems like the old saying goes, "there are many paths to the top of the mountain" comes to mind, and our own personality gravitates to ones that rings true for us;  good post.

[3bob]

considering the historic Buddha had "Hindu" based or related  ascetics teaching him up to (if I remember correctly?) the Buddhist 8th liberation then there is no wonder that there are some overlaps in the systems...still the no-self teachings are in direct contradiction to Vedanta and if one is part of either school then they can not be on fence about same or correlate and interpret both as they see fit and remain in said schools.

[Zen Pig]

5 minutes ago, 3bob said:

then they can not be on fence about same or correlate and interpret both as they see fit and remain in said schools.

good call. that is why I am not in a "school" or religion, or belief system. For me, and all I can speak to is my experience,  life seems , so far to me more than "black or white, this or that, up or down,,,,,,,, " you get my point.  Once I am locked into a box of belief, then the delight of the journey  stops.  

[dwai]

1 hour ago, 3bob said:

considering the historic Buddha had "Hindu" based or related  ascetics teaching him up to (if I remember correctly?) the Buddhist 8th liberation then there is no wonder that there are some overlaps in the systems...still the no-self teachings are in direct contradiction to Vedanta and if one is part of either school then they can not be on fence about same or correlate and interpret both as they see fit and remain in said schools.

The "No self" is only part of the teaching as I understand it. It is as important as the "neti neti" process goes in Advaita vedanta, for instance. All that is not the Self, is discarded as "not self, not self", which includes identities, labels, memories, relationships, body, mind etc that define said "personality".  Which leads to the relative alaya consciousness level, where in infinite mind-streams seem to exist (infinite waves from the diagram in OP). Yet, they too are only appearances in the absolute alaya consciousness, which is the True nature/formless Self.

Edited February 8, 2019 by dwai

[Zen Pig]

26 minutes ago, dwai said:

All that is not the Self, is discarded as "not self, not self", which includes identities, labels, memories, relationships, body, mind etc that define said "personality".  Which leads to the relative alaya consciousness level, where in infinite mind-streams seem to exist (infinite waves from the diagram in OP). Yet, they too are only appearances in the absolute alaya consciousness, which is the True nature/formless Self.

for me, this is where vedanta and zen diverge.  In Zen, we look for the very simple "suchness" of life. nothing is left out,  to say, "I am not that", while a great tool for self realization, gets kind of fucked up by folks, especially in the west who develop a belief about these statements that were designed to start one on the path, to shake up our long held beliefs.  

For me, so far, and that can always change,  I am memories, relationships, mind, wind, rain, sun, earth, everything.  If I divide "me" from these things, then this is duality by definition.   Everything, is both an inseparable part of the "all", and at the same time unique.  

weird shit.

[dwai]

1 hour ago, Zen Pig said:

for me, this is where vedanta and zen diverge.  In Zen, we look for the very simple "suchness" of life. nothing is left out,  to say, "I am not that", while a great tool for self realization, gets kind of fucked up by folks, especially in the west who develop a belief about these statements that were designed to start one on the path, to shake up our long held beliefs.  

For me, so far, and that can always change,  I am memories, relationships, mind, wind, rain, sun, earth, everything.  If I divide "me" from these things, then this is duality by definition.   Everything, is both an inseparable part of the "all", and at the same time unique.  

weird shit.

Different ways, but should lead to same result  

[3bob]

2 hours ago, Zen Pig said:

for me, this is where vedanta and zen diverge.  In Zen, we look for the very simple "suchness" of life. nothing is left out,  to say, "I am not that", while a great tool for self realization, gets kind of fucked up by folks, especially in the west who develop a belief about these statements that were designed to start one on the path, to shake up our long held beliefs.  

For me, so far, and that can always change,  I am memories, relationships, mind, wind, rain, sun, earth, everything.  If I divide "me" from these things, then this is duality by definition.   Everything, is both an inseparable part of the "all", and at the same time unique.  

weird shit.

 

in some  schools - all of that- (or Shakti) is not, nor never separate from the transcendent (beyond name & composite forms)  yet the transcendent is always free from limitation by particular  forms.

[3bob]

3 hours ago, dwai said:

The "No self" is only part of the teaching as I understand it. It is as important as the "neti neti" process goes in Advaita vedanta, for instance. All that is not the Self, is discarded as "not self, not self", which includes identities, labels, memories, relationships, body, mind etc that define said "personality".  Which leads to the relative alaya consciousness level, where in infinite mind-streams seem to exist (infinite waves from the diagram in OP). Yet, they too are only appearances in the absolute alaya consciousness, which is the True nature/formless Self.

 

neti, neti, does not negate Atman, while no-self does per traditional Buddhist interpretations...and we know that traditional Buddhists never accept the doctrines related to Atman.

[3bob]

Anyway finding and seeing common ground is noble,  yet we do not have or hear lineage holders (Guru's) of Hindu or Buddhist schools saying their teachings are really the same when it comes to Atman and no self...nor about many other key points of doctrines. (or that they end up with the same realization, liberation, enlightenment, or in the same realms along  with the same deities, or even in some cases with the same deity being recognized but given far less or little importance depending on the schools)    

Edited February 8, 2019 by 3bob

[dwai]

32 minutes ago, 3bob said:

Anyway finding and seeing common ground is noble,  yet we do not have or hear lineage holders (Guru's) of Hindu or Buddhist schools saying their teachings are really the same when it comes to Atman and no self...nor about many other key points of doctrines. (or that they end up with the same realization, liberation, enlightenment, or in the same realms along  with the same deities, or even in some cases with the same deity being recognized but given far less or little importance depending on the schools)    

You see, Lineage holders have a responsibility to transmit their lineage. There are those who follow the Avadhuta path, who are not bound by such responsibilities.  

 

And I know from very reliable sources that jivanamukta hindu pontiffs, Zen lineage holders and Daoist masters say exactly what you claim they don't say, but in private, to a select few worthies. Why? Because others are not ready to hear this truth. 

 

In any case, do you have any observations about what was shared in the OP?

 

[Jonesboy]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

You see, Lineage holders have a responsibility to transmit their lineage. There are those who follow the Avadhuta path, who are not bound by such responsibilities.  

 

And I know from very reliable sources that jivanamukta hindu pontiffs, Zen lineage holders and Daoist masters say exactly what you claim they don't say, but in private, to a select few worthies. Why? Because others are not ready to hear this truth. 

 

In any case, do you have any observations about what was shared in the OP?

 

 

I would love to know of any Zen lineage holders who would say that the Buddha was wrong.

 

Also, are you saying that all realizations are the same as stated by the hindu view regardless of tradition? Any such differences expressed are just misguided teachers/teachings?

[3bob]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

You see, Lineage holders have a responsibility to transmit their lineage. There are those who follow the Avadhuta path, who are not bound by such responsibilities.  

 

And I know from very reliable sources that jivanamukta hindu pontiffs, Zen lineage holders and Daoist masters say exactly what you claim they don't say, but in private, to a select few worthies. Why? Because others are not ready to hear this truth. 

 

In any case, do you have any observations about what was shared in the OP?

 

 

I'd say the "in private to a select few worthies" idea could get very dicey...along with the "Why" that  you mention.  Btw. Zen is one school of Buddhism, and Hinduism has God only knows how many - so do you include all of those?   I'd also add imho that it is more than only the  responsibility for lineage holders to transmit their lineage but it also of key importance to their working M.O. that they do not practice  mix-ups of other M.O.'s from other schools.

 

I like the Tattva diagrams or charts in comparison to Buddhist ones.

[rideforever]

The problem with that diagram is that it does not indicate the purpose that existence is seeking in creating beings.   As we see in nature everything has a purpose and goal, that of evolution.   How does the creation of beings contribute towards that goal, how does realisation contribute towards that goal ?

To undo or kill yourself is not in the nature of Nature.   Nature grows crops, it harvests, it grows in intelligence, power and speed.   It is not do things as a game.

 

Second thing it misses is the word YOGA = UNION.
Union is a bridge with two ends.
What are the two ends ?

 

[dwai]

44 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

I would love to know of any Zen lineage holders who would say that the Buddha was wrong.

 

Also, are you saying that all realizations are the same as stated by the hindu view regardless of tradition? Any such differences expressed are just misguided teachers/teachings?

Just different  levels of teaching for different levels of students. 

 

we CAN agree to disagree though

[dwai]

16 minutes ago, rideforever said:

The problem with that diagram is that it does not indicate the purpose that existence is seeking in creating beings.   As we see in nature everything has a purpose and goal, that of evolution.   How does the creation of beings contribute towards that goal, how does realisation contribute towards that goal ?

There is no answer to this. The questions exist in duality but no answer. In nonduality there is no need for questions or answers. 

16 minutes ago, rideforever said:

To undo or kill yourself is not in the nature of Nature.   Nature grows crops, it harvests, it grows in intelligence, power and speed.   It is not do things as a game.

 

Second thing it misses is the word YOGA = UNION.
Union is a bridge with two ends.
What are the two ends ?

 

Yoga? This knowledge brings about the end of yoga and all seeking   

[rideforever]

Dwai I think you have brought about the end of seeking long ago, maybe never started.

[3bob]

from my limited under-standing Self-realization does not bring an end to one's evolution/work or seeking  until there is final merger of soul and Soul or soul (body) and the Self,   which only God knows how long that may take?  Thus there are all sorts of advanced and Self-realized beings who have attained moksha  (or freedom from the cycles and karma's of birth and death)  but not yet final merger.

[Jonesboy]

3 hours ago, dwai said:

Just different  levels of teaching for different levels of students. 

 

we CAN agree to disagree though

 

You do know that goes against history and doesn’t make any sense.

 

Zen clearly refutes atman and places Brahman as inferior to the Buddha but you are saying that is lower level teachings? That for those advanced students all of that is just bs, it’s all the same?

 

 Yes we CAN agree to disagree.

[freeform]

14 hours ago, dwai said:

And I know from very reliable sources that jivanamukta hindu pontiffs, Zen lineage holders and Daoist masters say exactly what you claim they don't say, but in private, to a select few worthies.

 

There’s discussion and there’s practice. 

[Everything]

38 minutes ago, freeform said:

 

There’s discussion and there’s practice. 

Discussion leads to martial arts.

Practice leads to conversation.

[dwai]

13 hours ago, freeform said:

 

There’s discussion and there’s practice. 

Ideally there should be practice even during discussion  

[Spotless]

On 2/8/2019 at 1:25 PM, 3bob said:

from my limited under-standing Self-realization does not bring an end to one's evolution/work or seeking  until there is final merger of soul and Soul or soul (body) and the Self,   which only God knows how long that may take?  Thus there are all sorts of advanced and Self-realized beings who have attained moksha  (or freedom from the cycles and karma's of birth and death)  but not yet final merger.

It does not bring an end to unfolding and “work” but it does end seeking in the sense of looking outside oneself for definitive answers.

 

Patience and Presence replace seeking. “Answers” are not sought - insight unfolds in no-inertia.

 

”work” is very real yet it is not in effort. A very great deal of unfolding awaits the Self-Realized.

[Everything]

On 8-2-2019 at 10:25 PM, 3bob said:

from my limited under-standing Self-realization does not bring an end to one's evolution/work or seeking  until there is final merger of soul and Soul or soul (body) and the Self,   which only God knows how long that may take?  Thus there are all sorts of advanced and Self-realized beings who have attained moksha  (or freedom from the cycles and karma's of birth and death)  but not yet final merger.

What spotless said, but also, I want to point out, that it actually doesn't take long at all! The only thing that takes long and requires effort, is to not be a perfect blend of physical and non-physical. 

The reason is, if you do nothing, you are literally automatically resetting into your natural default state of being this self realised way. 

 

Infact, even if you do something that causes variance or deviation from your true nature, you can never EVER be disconnected from who you really are, untill you die, and then you are becoming your greater truer self. Thus the experience is exiliration.

 

But you are there, and this is so for everyone on the planet, at the very least, a few times each day. 

 

So you could say, you are accidentally allowing yourself to be enlightened, every single day, atleast for a short period of time. But often it goes unnoticed. Because, you have no comprehension that it is happening. And if you don't notice it, you don't feel it. 

 

But when you do, you will instantly feel enlightened, because just noticing when you are allowing yourself to be enlightened, is a life changing experience, hence it also is directly felt energy motionally when one stumbles across their own natural enlightenment, not by accident. But by deliberate, resistance free thought and focus. Or thought free focus and awareness altogether.

 

Then after a while of meditation, you are so familiar with the state of enlightenment, you can just allowed it at will, and then yeah, endless unfolding in many good ways takes place. You can begin to think inspired thought that is actually in harmony and in alignment with your true nature.

 

And that is always possible here and now. Because you will only ever exists here and now, forevermore. As all is here and now is forever. 

 

But we have so many habbits don't allow ourselves to be who we really are. So don't say it is something you just achieve and its yours forever. Enlightenment either is or it isn't in the moment! And no one is perfect. Even Jesus wasn't there all the time. 

 

So often it is said, if you want to be enlightened, then just lighten up on yourself! Don't be so hard on yourself. Because it will always be infinitely times more easy than you make it out to be. 

Edited February 10, 2019 by Everything