Love, Loving-Kindness, Bonds, Attachment

[Mark Foote]

2 hours ago, TranquilTurmoil said:

 

"A Pilgrimage Can't compare to a Good Laugh

A good laugh can't compare to simply Letting Yourself Go

 

Once you are at peace,

letting yourself go

And leaving Change Behind

Only then do you enter the Solitary Mystery of Heaven"

 

-Zhaungzhi

 

 

Writing is a way to arrive at what I most deeply believe in, the thing I believe in beyond doubt.  I'm sure it's the same for everyone on Dao Bums, that's why we're here! 

 

That solitary mystery of heaven, for me is "one-pointedness of mind", as described in a commentary on one of Gautama the Buddha's teachings:
 

Ekodi-bhuta.  khanika-samadhina ekagga-bhuta samahita, 'by a momentary concentration become one-pointed and tranquillized.'

 

(from Sarattappakasini, Buddhaghosa's commentary on Samyutta Nikaya, footnote SN V 144, Pali Text Sociey V p 123-124)

 

 

That I think relies in turn on Gautama's definition of the power of concentration:

 

... making self-surrender the object of thought, one lays hold of concentration, one lays hold of one-pointedness of mind.

 

(SN V 200, Pali Text Society V 176)

 

 

Gautama had his practice of mindfulness, and it's not exactly the focus of Ajahn Chah's essay (couldn't you have picked something shorter, I confess I only skimmed the last two dozen paragraphs).  Here's the part about mindfulness of mind (yes, it's still a four-fold mindfulness in Gautama's way of living, just more specific than satipatthana):

 

"Aware of mind I shall breathe in. Aware of mind I shall breathe out."

 

(One) makes up one’s mind:

 

“Gladdening my mind I shall breathe in. Gladdening my mind I shall breathe out.

Composing my mind I shall breathe in. Composing my mind I shall breathe out.

Detaching my mind I shall breathe in. Detaching my mind I shall breathe out.

 

(SN V 312, Pali Text Society Vol V p 275-276)
 

What I have found really useful about that is the part about "gladdening the mind."  The same passage, rendered by a later Pali Text Society translator, was:

 

[One] trains [oneself], thinking: ‘I will breathe in… breathe out experiencing thought… rejoicing in thought… concentrating thought… freeing thought.’

 

(MN III 82-83, Pali Text Society III pg 124)

 

I find that when I can rejoice in thought, even if it's just to be glad that my mind still works, I'm more easily able to let go of thought, or to detach the mind and "by a momentary concentration become one-pointed and tranquillized".

 

By one-pointed, I mean present where I am as I am, even if that location of self-awareness moves.  It's something that happens naturally all the time, hence the "by a momentary concentration".  As koun Franz put it:

 

Some traditions take this very seriously, this idea of moving your consciousness around the body. I wouldn’t recommend dedicating your life to it, but as an experiment, I recommend trying it, sitting in this posture and trying to feel what it’s like to let your mind, to let the base of your consciousness, move away from your head. One thing you’ll find, or that I have found, at least, is that you can’t will it to happen, because you’re willing it from your head. To the extent that you can do it, it’s an act of letting go–and a fascinating one.

 

(“No Struggle [Zazen Yojinki, Part 6]”, by Koun Franz, from the “Nyoho Zen” site
https://nyoho.com/2018/09/15/no-struggle-zazen-yojinki-part-6/)

 

A momentary concentration:  "When you find your place where you are, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point." (Dogen, "Genjo Koan", Tanahashi and Aiken). 

 

Another great relationship practice, in my experience--to be grateful, whatever happens.

Thanks, Elliot, and good luck!
 

 

 

 

Edited July 8, 2022 by Mark Foote

[TranquilTurmoil]

@Mark Foote I very much appreciated that message. As someone who has struggled over the past year extremely willfully to get my awareness out of my head... even willfully trying to let go and unstructure my excessive willful, the quotes there were very poignant! When I was a young seeker at Blue Cliff Monastery at age 20 before everything took a turn towards the crazy and absurd, I asked a monk I referenced in the Thich Nhat Hanh appreciation thread, "How do you let go?"

 

Brother Phap Vu responded, "Well first you actually have to accept it (what you are trying to let go of).

 

I have found it is more easier for me to either struggle or resign myself to things both internal and external than it has been to accept it. It seems to be the task of a lifetime, that culminates in a gladdening of experience, and a stabilizing of experience, a detachment from the constant fluctuation and apparent turmoil of experience, and opens the profound door towards humor, light-heartedness, and gratitude.

 

 

[Mark Foote]

21 minutes ago, TranquilTurmoil said:

 

As someone who has struggled over the past year extremely willfully to get my awareness out of my head... even willfully trying to let go and unstructure my excessive willful, the quotes there were very poignant! When I was a young seeker at Blue Cliff Monastery at age 20 before everything took a turn towards the crazy and absurd, I asked a monk I referenced in the Thich Nhat Hanh appreciation thread, "How do you let go?"

 

Brother Phap Vu responded, "Well first you actually have to accept it (what you are trying to let go of).

 

I have found it is more easier for me to either struggle or resign myself to things both internal and external than it has been to accept it. It seems to be the task of a lifetime, that culminates in a gladdening of experience, and a stabilizing of experience, a detachment from the constant fluctuation and apparent turmoil of experience, and opens the profound door towards humor, light-heartedness, and gratitude.

 

 

Finding a compassionate view of another person's actions, regardless of the intention behind them, is a big part of feeling gratitude in my experience.  

Sometimes I have sat with anger for days (on and off), before I found a perspective that allowed release.  Uncertainty about another person's motives can be very unsettling, but again, compassion and gratitude for whatever I have shared with that person (and the knowledge that although the close relationship may be over, whatever love there was may continue in some other fashion) has always helped me move forward.

But yes, in particular with regard to the activity of the mind and particular thought, finding a way to accept and even appreciate my thought (if only as a process) has helped me find more of a rhythm in mindfulness.  And I'm convinced what I need is a rhythm, not a state of mind.

Edited July 8, 2022 by Mark Foote

[doc benway]

I love Zhuangzi’s teaching on the empty boat which I think relates to Mark’s point. Not only do we suffer as a consequence of grasping at our own sense of self but we suffer when we grasp at an illusory self in others.

[TranquilTurmoil]

^I'm not sure I know the teaching on the empty boat. Feel free to inform me. (I've only really read David HInton's translation of the Inner Chapters, although I've read it many times).

 

In brief moments a few months ago I felt like I had the capacity to glimpse some of what the Diamond Sutra alludes to, what Thich Nhat Hanh/Thay called signlessness... that just how my concept of myself is a illusory fabrication/radical conflation of phenomena that leads "me" to a deluded misperception of "myself"... that the same must be true of all others, that when someone is talking to me, their five skandahs come together in their particular way in that particular moment in time without clarity/genuine self-awareness, and we both take them to be their historical representation, in whichever way our perception seems to orient us. I can remind myself of that, and maybe use a bit of intentional effort to cultivate that insight or hold it in difficult moments, but I certainly have yet to gain sufficient stability and concentration to live that insight, or fathom it's larger implications. I do know that just a few years of intense suffering was unbearable in the midst of it, even with a spiritual path and aspiration. Unless all suffering is illusory, and one day it is all reconciled for all of us beings (whether illusory, provisional, or whatever) I still struggle with it. And yet, I struggle with it much much less when I have a certain quality of well-being that seems to come from a sense of belonging, connection, purpose. Maybe my need for those specific roots of well-being are provisional given what I am currently attached or averse to. But maybe not... I hope not.

[doc benway]

9 hours ago, TranquilTurmoil said:

^I'm not sure I know the teaching on the empty boat. Feel free to inform me. (I've only really read David HInton's translation of the Inner Chapters, although I've read it many times).

 

From the Outer Chapters: 山木. The Tree on the Mountain (English trans. by James Legge)

 

君曰：「彼其道幽遠而無人，吾誰與為鄰？吾無糧，我無食，安得而至焉？」市南子曰：「少君之費，寡君之欲，雖無糧而乃足。君其涉於江而浮於海，望之而不見其崖，愈往而不知其所窮。送君者皆自崖而反，君自此遠矣。故有人者累，見有於人者憂。故堯非有人，非見有於人也。吾願去君之累，除君之憂，而獨與道遊於大莫之國。方舟而濟於河，有虛船來觸舟，雖有惼心之人不怒；有一人在其上，則呼張歙之；一呼而不聞，再呼而不聞，於是三呼邪，則必以惡聲隨之。向也不怒而今也怒，向也虛而今也實。人能虛己以遊世，其孰能害之！

 

The ruler rejoined, 'The way to it is solitary and distant, and there are no people on it - whom shall I have as my companions? I have no provisions prepared, and how shall I get food? How shall I be able to get (to the country)?' The officer said, 'Minimise your lordship's expenditure, and make your wants few, and though you have no provisions prepared, you will find you have enough. Wade through the rivers and float along on the sea, where however you look, you see not the shore, and, the farther you go, you do not see where your journey is to end - those who escorted you to the shore will return, and after that you will feel yourself far away. Thus it is that he who owns men (as their ruler) is involved in troubles, and he who is owned by men (as their ruler) suffers from sadness; and hence Yao would neither own men, nor be owned by them. I wish to remove your trouble, and take away your sadness, and it is only (to be done by inducing you) to enjoy yourself with the Dao in the land of Great Vacuity. If a man is crossing a river in a boat, and another empty vessel comes into collision with it, even though he be a man of a choleric temper, he will not be angry with it. If there be a person, however, in that boat, he will bawl out to him to haul out of the way. If his shout be not heard, he will repeat it; and if the other do not then hear, he will call out a third time, following up the shout with abusive terms. Formerly he was not angry, but now he is; formerly (he thought) the boat was empty, but now there is a person in it. If a man can empty himself of himself, during his time in the world, who can harm him?

[TranquilTurmoil]

@steve

 

Thanks for sharing that. Chuang Tzu was my favorite from the moment I started reading the first inner chapter, but I was always a bit saddened, perplexed, disturbed by some of the implications of the work of his that I read, which I have an incomplete context to understand. From what I have heard or read about the story/myth of Lao Tzu, he left the world broken-hearted, because essentially people were unwilling or unwanting to be taught, saved, genuinely given wisdom+compassion. Zhuangzhi seemed to recognize this, and adapted to it from my perception, and he taught to see through the illusions of the transformations and changes of phenomena/life. But he also seemed indifferent too. There is a profound wisdom to such radical acceptance, but I figure why would sages, immortals, arhats, saints still need to protect themselves from harm, and wouldn't such people be indifferent to the temporary gain or loss of attainment as well that may come from being muddied by samsara? If we are all one body ultimately, what's the point of developing a heart to perfecton just for it to (from my limited vantage point) leave the body it was intertwined with behind... bringing other parts with it undoubtedly but still letting most of it fend for itself?

 

That doesn't mean I don't absolutely need a healthy amount of Zhaungzhi, living in a way where I'm not blindly following sentiment that seems true or good, but is merely a product of my conditioning that perpetuates a lack of clarity, wholeness... which is absolutely necessary to manifest genuine compassion, and love in it's truest and purest forms. But there has to be some difference in perception of what is Right View (between differing paths) I would infer... because I doubt that Zhaungzhi or Ajahn Chah have any less devotion to truth, any less inherent goodness than those who aspire to the bodhisattva path... and there is a difference between being a tree that bears fruit for all without discrimination and returns to Nibbana or a celestial abode at the end of their last physical lifetime (although I know next to nothing about the xian tian path, it just seems that the attitudes are similar from my limited vantage point), and being a tree that repeatedly plants itself again and again in undesirable places. But it seems wholly compatible with "Flowing in the low places that others disdain" "If you wish to ascend, first you must descend". So it brings me back to wondering what the difference in view between these paths are. I'm open to any response, I hope my sincerity in curiousity and humility comes through. And the last thing I could possibly want to do is have anyone disparage any path or get into argument.  

[Mark Foote]

19 hours ago, TranquilTurmoil said:

 

In brief moments a few months ago I felt like I had the capacity to glimpse some of what the Diamond Sutra alludes to, what Thich Nhat Hanh/Thay called signlessness... that just how my concept of myself is a illusory fabrication/radical conflation of phenomena that leads "me" to a deluded misperception of "myself"... that the same must be true of all others, that when someone is talking to me, their five skandahs come together in their particular way in that particular moment in time without clarity/genuine self-awareness, and we both take them to be their historical representation, in whichever way our perception seems to orient us. I can remind myself of that, and maybe use a bit of intentional effort to cultivate that insight or hold it in difficult moments, but I certainly have yet to gain sufficient stability and concentration to live that insight, or fathom it's larger implications. I do know that just a few years of intense suffering was unbearable in the midst of it, even with a spiritual path and aspiration. Unless all suffering is illusory, and one day it is all reconciled for all of us beings (whether illusory, provisional, or whatever) I still struggle with it. And yet, I struggle with it much much less when I have a certain quality of well-being that seems to come from a sense of belonging, connection, purpose. Maybe my need for those specific roots of well-being are provisional given what I am currently attached or averse to. But maybe not... I hope not.

 

 

Regarding the "few years of intense suffering (that) was unbearable", there are a couple of sermons in the Pali sermon volumes where elders in the Order in the time of Gautama went to visit someone who was considering "taking the knife", and tried to dissuade them from such action.  The recipients of these visits were monks who were gravely ill, and in severe pain (and thinking to end their own lives, to "take the knife").

If memory serves, the elder monks didn't always persuade the dying individual to bear up, no matter how they spoke about the dharma.  

 

What Gautama described as his way of living consisted of a particular mindfulness of body, feelings (the senses), mind (thinking mind), and state of mind.  He posited four elements of mindfulness in each of the four fields, and for "state of mind", the four were:

 

Contemplating impermanence I shall breathe in. Contemplating impermanence I shall breathe out.

Contemplating dispassion I shall breathe in. Contemplating dispassion I shall breathe out.

Contemplating cessation I shall breathe in. Contemplating cessation I shall breathe out.

Contemplating renunciation I shall breathe in. Contemplating renunciation I shall breathe out.

 

(SN V 312, Pali Text Society V p 275-276)

 

 

"Contemplating impermanence" is the awareness of the five skandhas you mention, with an acknowledgement with regard to phenomena, "this am I not".  

 

Dispassion concerns equanimity toward the pleasant, the painful, and the neither-pleasant-nor-painful.

The principal cessations are the cessations of "determinate thought" in speech, in deed, and in "feeling and perceiving".  That's the cessation of the exercise of will, of choice (volition), of habitual tendency in action.

Renunciation concerns the abandonment of the notion "I am the doer, mine is the doer" in the action of speech, body, and mind.  Renunciation follows from the observation of action in the midst of cessation, action that occurs while volition is absent.

You can read all sixteen elements of the mindfulness that made up Gautama's way of living at the bottom of my Early Record, if you're interested.

That Gautama described the sixteen as his way of living, and especially his way of living during the rainy season, says to me that Gautama frequently engaged his mind in a rhythm of the sixteen "contemplations". 

 

Gautama also spoke of states of concentration, and he described the first concentration as a state where thought is applied and sustained (as in the sixteen contemplations).  At the same time, he identified concentration with "one-pointedness of mind", something "laid hold of" by "making self-surrender the object of thought".  

Ten centuries later, the commentator Buddhaghosa described the instantaneous nature of the induction of "one-pointedness of mind":

'By a momentary concentration become one-pointed and tranquillized.' 

 

(Sarattappakasini, Buddhaghosa; footnote SN V 144, Pali Text Sociey V p 123-124)

 

 

How I describe "one-pointedness of mind", in the first essay in my PDF:
 

The practice I have in mind is a practice that everybody is already familiar with, even if they don’t think of it as a practice. What I’m referring to is waking up in the morning, or falling asleep at night; if you’ve ever had a hard time waking up or falling asleep, then you know that there can indeed be a practice!

 

In my experience, the practice is the same, whether I am waking up or falling asleep: when I realize my physical sense of location in space, and realize it as it occurs from one moment to the next, then I wake up or fall asleep as appropriate. This practice is useful, when I wake up in the middle of the night and need to go back to sleep, or when I want to feel more physically alive in the morning. This practice is also useful when I want to feel my connection to everything around me, because my sense of place registers the contact of my awareness with each thing, as contact occurs.

 

Just before I fall asleep, my awareness can move very readily, and my sense of where I am tends to move with it. This is also true when I am waking up, although it can be harder to recognize (I tend to live through my eyes in the daytime, and associate my sense of place with them). When my awareness shifts readily, I realize that my ability to feel my location in space is made possible in part by the freedom of my awareness to move.

(Waking Up and Falling Asleep)

 

 

An itinerant monk read the Diamond Sutra out loud in a marketplace in China, and a woodcutter, hearing one particular sentence, got a move on:
 

Let the mind be present without an abode.

 

(Translation Venerable Master Hsing Yun, from “The Rabbit’s Horn: A Commentary on the Platform Sutra”, Buddha’s Light Publishing pg. 60)

 

Edited July 9, 2022 by Mark Foote

[TranquilTurmoil]

In brief, @Mark Foote 

 

I think of the quote from Dharma Drum's translation of I believe Song of Mind (Xin Ming)

 

"Now it is non-abiding,

Now it is Original Mind.

Originally it did not exist,

"Origin" is the present moment".

 

Interestingly enough, Thich Nhat Hanh had as his most essential sutras the Sutta on the Full Awareness of breathing (which had 16 steps) and the Sutta on the Four Establishments of Mindfulness (Satipathhana I believe)... I neglected both of those all of these years until it hit me how essential and profound of a door the Four Establishments are, and how much there was to be benefitted potentially from skillfully reciting "Breathing in, I am aware of my body... Breathing Out, I smile to my body.... Breathing In, I am aware that I am breathing in, Breathing out, I generate a feeling of joy!" If i feel up to it, I'll check out what you pointed to later. 

[doc benway]

10 hours ago, TranquilTurmoil said:

So it brings me back to wondering what the difference in view between these paths are. I'm open to any response,

Some like to focus on the differences between paths and hopefully you’ll get some responses. I prefer to focus on the similarities because I can see how the paths converge and I find that far more supportive on my path. 

 

For me, the important thing is that the various wisdom traditions help people to connect with their fundamental, authentic selves. How that is defined may differ widely but I don’t get too wrapped up in words and concepts, at least I don’t find them as beneficial as getting my hands dirty and doing the work. Different individuals need different approaches and the important thing IMO is to be sensitive and open to what we each need.

 

Quote

I hope my sincerity in curiousity and humility comes through. And the last thing I could possibly want to do is have anyone disparage any path or get into argument.

It most certainly does.

🙏🏼❤️🙏🏼

 

 

[old3bob]

not to worry too much Tranquil T. , since for thousands of years Buddhists, Hindus (and an x number of other ways) have been disparaging each other in various ways, whether condescendly or in intensely debated attempts at refuting one another.  So as a human beings it is almost impossible to not put your team above others,  just as the Historic Buddha and many of his followers did in their time when it came to "Hinduism", or and for instance what the last living Satguru of Kashmir Shaivism said about Buddhism   (and as recorded in both such writings)

Edited July 10, 2022 by old3bob

[Mark Foote]

15 hours ago, old3bob said:

... for instance what the last living Satguru of Kashmir Shaivism said about Buddhism   (and as recorded in both such writings)
 

 

Sent me down the Wikipedia rabbit hole on that one, old3bob.  Very interesting, I learned a lot about the golden age of India, Nalanda, many of the texts that came out of Nalanda or were perhaps influenced by works from Nalanda.

What I did not find, however, was what the last living Satguru of Kashmir Shaivism said about Buddhism.  And of course, I'm dying to know!  Do you have a reference for me...

[Mark Foote]

18 hours ago, TranquilTurmoil said:

 

I think of the quote from Dharma Drum's translation of I believe Song of Mind (Xin Ming)

 

"Now it is non-abiding,

Now it is Original Mind.

Originally it did not exist,

"Origin" is the present moment".

 

Interestingly enough, Thich Nhat Hanh had as his most essential sutras the Sutta on the Full Awareness of breathing (which had 16 steps) and the Sutta on the Four Establishments of Mindfulness (Satipathhana I believe)... I neglected both of those all of these years until it hit me how essential and profound of a door the Four Establishments are, and how much there was to be benefitted potentially from skillfully reciting "Breathing in, I am aware of my body... Breathing Out, I smile to my body.... Breathing In, I am aware that I am breathing in, Breathing out, I generate a feeling of joy!" If i feel up to it, I'll check out what you pointed to later. 

 

Another verse from Song of Mind, that struck me:

Do not concern yourself with anything;
Fix the mind nowhere.
Fixing the mind nowhere,
Limitless brightness shows itself.
 

That's interesting, about Thich Nhat Hanh's favorite sermons.  Anapanasati would be the "Full Awareness of Breathing" you reference, I think, and that practice is the one Gautama described as his way of living, both before and after enlightenment (in SN V chapter on "concentration on in-breathing and out-breathing").  In Anapanasati, Gautama praises the assembly of monks for their various practices and attainments, and then launches into the description of "mindfulness of in-breathing and out-breathing" (MN III 82, Pali Text Society III p 124--this is the same practice translated in SN V as "concentration on in-breathing and out-breathing").  That he describes "mindfulness of in-breathing and out-breathing" after the other practices, gives the appearance that he is  advocating for the practice of "the mindfulness of in-breathing and out-breathing" most of all.

 

"Fix the mind nowhere".  I love Buddhaghosa's description:  'By a momentary concentration become one-pointed and tranquillized.'   As koun Franz said, the mind moving away from the head can't be made to happen--nevertheless, it happens. 

 

Amazing to me that Gautama never explicitly states that the "concentration on in-breathing and out-breathing" constitutes the first of the material concentrations, but there is so much that is simply assumed in the sermons.  I see where the Pali Text Society translator of the Middle-Length Sayings also points to things simply assumed as a difficulty in arriving at her translation of the volumes.  How would you know that cessation refers to the cessation of "determinate thought" in action, unless you happened to read the one sermon where Gautama states that determinate thought is action, and having determined, one acts in speech, body, and mind (AN III 415, Pali Text Society Vol III pg 294)?

And how would you know that one-pointedness of mind is synonymous with concentration, in Gautama's teaching, unless you read the passage about the five powers where he says so (SN V 200, Pali Text Society V 176)?  At least, to my knowledge he only says these things in one sermon,  each.  I think that means it was commonly understood, by his audience.

 

It's a catch-22.  Need a momentary concentration, to experience one-pointedness of mind in the contemplation of in-breathing and out-breathing, but need relaxation, calm, detachment, and surrender as in the contemplation of in-breathing and out-breathing to drop into one-pointedness of mind.  

Think I'll just concern myself with nothing, for awhile.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 10, 2022 by Mark Foote

[old3bob]

2 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

 

Sent me down the Wikipedia rabbit hole on that one, old3bob.  Very interesting, I learned a lot about the golden age of India, Nalanda, many of the texts that came out of Nalanda or were perhaps influenced by works from Nalanda.

What I did not find, however, was what the last living Satguru of Kashmir Shaivism said about Buddhism.  And of course, I'm dying to know!  Do you have a reference for me...

 

Well I don't have the full quote I was thinking of but for starters there is:   "Swami Lakshmanjoo, the last in this unbroken chain of Kashmir Shaiva Masters".  

 

Although what follows is part of it: 

"Moksha in Kashmir Shaivism and Indian Philosophy.
The view that ignorance is the cause of bondage and perfect knowledge the cause of freedom (moksha), is commonly accepted by all Indian philosophers. Yet, in reality, these philosophers have not completely understood the reality of knowledge and ignorance. Shaiva philosophy does not recognize the theories of Vaishnavites, Vedantins, Vijnanavadins (Buddhist) or Vaibhashika’s concerning liberation. Kashmir Shaivism holds that these schools do not move above the state of pralayakala, a state of unawareness similar to that of deep sleep devoid of dreams."

Edited July 10, 2022 by old3bob

[TranquilTurmoil]

20 hours ago, steve said:

Some like to focus on the differences between paths and hopefully you’ll get some responses. I prefer to focus on the similarities because I can see how the paths converge and I find that far more supportive on my path. 

 

For me, the important thing is that the various wisdom traditions help people to connect with their fundamental, authentic selves. How that is defined may differ widely but I don’t get too wrapped up in words and concepts, at least I don’t find them as beneficial as getting my hands dirty and doing the work. Different individuals need different approaches and the important thing IMO is to be sensitive and open to what we each need.

 

It most certainly does.

🙏🏼❤️🙏🏼

 

 

Thanks Steve  

 

I don't think comparative religion speculation is productive in most circumstances outside of willing and humble participants in a small or closed circle. I ask because the people who have the most context for my experience are Taoists (and have helped me quite profoundly in a much shorter time frame than the Buddhist mentors I have worked with over the last year tbh), and my heart is very much with the aspiration of Mahayana Buddhism. I'm glad to see that it doesn't seem to me that these two things are incompatible... but it gets blurry when the views on empathy from Taoists I have been in touch with seem to go so far in contrast with my heart's intuition... or concerning myself about the suffering of others beyond in a way of responding to what is directly in front of me. And I can't tell if their is a view that one cannot really decide to be any of these things: an arhat, an immortal, a bodhisattva... if that just happens naturally when one harmonizes with one's Truth. I also am currently going to a Theravada monastery that is half a mile from my house once or twice a week over the past month, and they tend to be anti-anything that is not dhamma/dharma. And they certainly emphasize dhamma over dharma.

 

Regardless, I think what resonates with me most is living from the heart, with great devotion, and great commitment to rooting out blindspots... even when it goes contrary to my emotional attachments, or even when it makes me bear discomfort I would never want to re-live. So I think in that sense a natural evolution occurs, and the most important thing is returning to what is genuine and sincere, and not getting lost in excessive introverted mind-contemplation.

 

To be continued.... however that unfolds. _/\_ <3

[doc benway]

21 hours ago, old3bob said:

So as a human beings it is almost impossible to not put your team above others, 

 

I think it is relatively easy.

It's simply a matter of recognizing that different approaches are more effective for different people. 

If there is an understanding that no concept or paradigm is perfect, it's easier not to get too attached to your team's playlist. 

[old3bob]

it wasn't easy for the following folks just in Zen, now was it?

                                      Take one                                                                                                         take two

“I put Samadhi foremost and wisdom afterwards.” Master Wanshi (cited in ZCLA [Zen Center of Los Angeles] Journal<>, p. 4)	“I put wisdom foremost and samadhi afterwards.” Master Engo (cited in ZCLA Journal, p. 4).
“Without it [satori] there is no Zen, for the life of Zen begins with the ‘opening of satori’.” Dr. Suzuki (Sohl and Carr, The Gospel According to Zen: Beyond the Death of God, p. 33)	“It’s not that Satori is unimportant, but it’s not that part of Zen that needs to be stressed.” (Shunryu Suzuki, Zen Mind, Beginners Mind, p. 9)
“The achievement of the aim of Zen, as Suzuki has made very clear… implies overcoming the narcissistic self-glorification and the illusion of omnipotence.” (Ross, World of Zen: An East-West Anthology, p. 199)	“I AM the Absolute.” The man who has realized Satori… being intensely aware of the infinite riches of his nature.” (Ross, World of Zen, pp. 67, 221)
“Enlightenment, when it comes, will come in a flash. There can be no gradual, no partial Enlightenment…. By no means can he be regarded as partially Enlightened.” (Huang Po in Ross, World of Zen, p. 69)	“There are, however, greater and lesser satoris.” (R. F. Sasaki in Ross, World of Zen, p. 26)
“If your effort is headed in the wrong direction, especially if you are not aware of this, it is deluded effort.” (Shunryu Suzuki, Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind, p. 59)	“Even if it [your effort] is in the wrong direction, if you are aware of that, you will not be deluded.” (Shunryu Suzuki, Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind, p. 61)
“So it can be said that a Zen which ignores or denies or belittles satori is not true daijo Buddhist Zen…. Today many in the Soto sect hold that since we are all innately Buddhas, satori is not necessary. Such an egregious error reduces Shikantaza, which properly is the highest form of sitting, to nothing more than bompu Zen, the first of the five types.”(Yasutani Roshi, Three Pillars of Zen, p. 45-46)	“Error has no substance; it is entirely the product of your own thinking.” (Huang Po, The Zen Teaching of Huang Po, p. 80)
“Zen is most emphatically not to be regarded as a system of self-improvement, or a way of becoming a Buddha. In the words of Lin chi, ‘if a man seeks the Buddha, that man loses the Buddha.” (Alan Watts, The Way of Zen, p. 125)	“Because searching one’s own mind leads ultimately to enlightenment, this practice is a prerequisite to becoming a Buddha. No matter whether you have committed either the ten evil deeds or the five deadly sins, still if you turn back your mind and enlighten yourself, you are a Buddha instantly.” (Yasutani Roshi, The Three Pillars of Zen, p. 161) “It is said in the Diamond Sutra: ‘those who relinquish all forms are called Buddhas (Enlightened Ones).’” (The Zen Teaching of Hui Hai, p. 53)
“Sages seek from mind, not from the Buddha; fools seek from the Buddha instead of seeking from mind.” (Blofield, The Zen Teaching of Hui Hai, p. 44)	“The Buddha is none other than Mind.” (The Three Pillars of Zen, pp. 283-284)
“In point of fact, Zen has no ‘mind’ to murder; therefore there is no ‘mind murdering’ in Zen…. Nothing really exists throughout the triple world; ‘where do you wish to see the mind?” (Lit-sen Chang, Zen Existentialism, p. 152, quoting D. T. Suzuki, Introduction to Zen Buddhism[New York: Philosophical Library, 1949], pp. 42-43)	“Zen purposes to discipline the mind itself, to make it its own master, through an insight into its proper nature. This getting into the real nature of one’s own mind is the fundamental object of Zen Buddhism.” (Chang, Zen Existentialism, quoting D.T. Suzuki, Introduction to Zen Buddhism, p. 40)

"One wonders, was the original face of the Zen practitioner smiling or frowning as he contemplated Zen contradictions?"

[doc benway]

If one chases the words and biases of various teachers and traditions, particularly if focused on their differences, it’s easy to get tangled in knots. If one follows a single credible path that makes good sense and sees signs of progress, there is little doubt of success. Of course each teacher will teach their view. The best teachers will recognize that there is no right view to the exclusion of others; rather the right view is what is right for each individual practitioner at any given point in their development.

[old3bob]

3 minutes ago, steve said:

If one chases the words and biases of various teachers and traditions, particularly if focused on their differences, it’s easy to get tangled in knots. If one follows a single credible path that makes good sense and sees signs of progress, that is little doubt of success.

 

agreed possibly

[Bindi]

35 minutes ago, steve said:

If one chases the words and biases of various teachers and traditions, particularly if focused on their differences, it’s easy to get tangled in knots. If one follows a single credible path that makes good sense and sees signs of progress, there is little doubt of success. Of course each teacher will teach their view. The best teachers will recognize that there is no right view to the exclusion of others; rather the right view is what is right for each individual practitioner at any given point in their development.

Signs of progress are so dependent on which path is followed, and these signs can be ultimately meaningless in the greater scheme of things. How would one know? 

[old3bob]

13 hours ago, Bindi said:

Signs of progress are so dependent on which path is followed, and these signs can be ultimately meaningless in the greater scheme of things. How would one know? 

 

the Still Small Voice roars and shatters doubt...

[doc benway]

18 hours ago, Bindi said:

Signs of progress are so dependent on which path is followed, and these signs can be ultimately meaningless in the greater scheme of things. How would one know?

 

How would one know what specifically? 

[paul_willis]

23 hours ago, steve said:

If one chases the words and biases of various teachers and traditions, particularly if focused on their differences, it’s easy to get tangled in knots. If one follows a single credible path that makes good sense and sees signs of progress, there is little doubt of success. Of course each teacher will teach their view. The best teachers will recognize that there is no right view to the exclusion of others; rather the right view is what is right for each individual practitioner at any given point in their development.

 

thanks for this

[Bindi]

4 hours ago, steve said:

 

How would one know what specifically? 

One can show evidence of all the signs that are expected in a particular method, because that is what the particular method is designed to actualise, but this isn’t an overall proof of anything, it merely proves that by following a particular method particular signs can be expected. How would one know whether any of these signs are actually valuable in an ultimate reality? 
 

3bob suggests the small voice within, but that hasn’t been very effective for the people in death cults, or suicide bombers for example. Belief systems can override the small voice within, and not just in obvious cases, but in less obvious cases as well. How would you know whether you’re following a belief system and it’s method or working towards ultimate truth? 

[doc benway]

11 hours ago, Bindi said:

One can show evidence of all the signs that are expected in a particular method, because that is what the particular method is designed to actualise, but this isn’t an overall proof of anything, it merely proves that by following a particular method particular signs can be expected. How would one know whether any of these signs are actually valuable in an ultimate reality? 

I'm not offering any proof of anything, just my own imperfect perspective.

Signs are of no value from the ultimate perspective, they are irrelevant.

All is complete and spontaneously perfected with no preference for signs or lack of signs.

 

Signs can be valuable from the relative perspective. 

How to know if signs are an indicator of spiritual progress?

One way is to look at the hundreds and thousands of writings and teachings from multiple wisdom traditions over millennia.

Another is to observe changes in one's own direct experience in relation to the presence or absence of certain signs. 

Some signs are so unquestionably clear that one simply knows with certainty, others are much more subtle and experienced guidance can be useful for interpretation.

 

Quote

3bob suggests the small voice within, but that hasn’t been very effective for the people in death cults, or suicide bombers for example. Belief systems can override the small voice within, and not just in obvious cases, but in less obvious cases as well.

No doubt there are risks and bad actors. 

I am an ardent disbeliever.

Question everything and everyone. 

Don't believe, just recognize what is known and what is not known and how to tell the difference. 

Be as familiar with signs of abuse and manipulation as for awakening and transformation.

Tibetans say it takes 12 years to know if a guru/path is right for you... don't commit too easily. 

 

Quote

How would you know whether you’re following a belief system and it’s method or working towards ultimate truth? 

I would say that there is a role for following your heart but equally important to be an educated consumer.

There are many questions we can ask ourselves - 

Does the path make sense to me and is it consistent with my values and lifestyle?

Is it empowering or does it make me a slave to a master or system?

Does my teacher embody the characteristics I would want to manifest in my life?

Do I feel more flexible more self-confident, more playful, easy and free or more serious and stressed?

Am I becoming more or less reactive in stressful situations?

Am I feeling and looking healthier in mind and body?

Am I more isolated or more connected?

How am I engaging with others, especially family and friends and how are they experiencing me? 

I think these are some things we can look to for guidance.

It can be a tough thing to see clearly for ourselves.