Bliss and Enlightenment by James Swartz

[dwai]

Quote

Is enlightenment or self realization the same as the experience of limitless bliss?

When someone accustomed to identifying with the ever changing content of the mind wakes up to non-duality, the awakening is interpreted as a very positive event. When the mind reasserts itself, agitation and dullness reappear; when agitation and dullness are no longer acceptable, the mind becomes a seeker. The feeling of peace and bliss, which is an interpretation of non-duality by the mind, is brought on by the absence of suffering and not because awareness feels good. If you have been suffering a toothache for days and the tooth is extracted, it is the absence of pain that feels good, not the bliss of the extraction. You have actually just gone back to normal, not attained an exceptional state. 

Enlightenment does not feel like anything. It is simply the hard and fast knowledge that I am limitless, partless awareness. When this knowledge is firm, it has a very positive effect on the mind but it does not convert the mind into an endless bliss machine. However, it infuses the mind with a sense of authenticity, wholeness and rock solid confidence. Henceforth the individual knows that it can weather any existential storm. When you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are awareness, you no longer desire to feel good because you know you are the source of goodness. This is not to say that a more or less constant feel good happiness is not possible. It can be attained by the consistent application of self knowledge to the mind or by the practice of the yogas. 

When enlightenment or self realization is touted as the experience of limitless bliss, it is usually believed that the bliss of the self is superior to the transitory bliss encountered in daily life. But all experiences of bliss, whether they are born of sensory experience, the discovery of some unknown object or spiritual practice like meditation, are the fullness and limitlessness of the self reflecting in the body-mind. The bliss belongs neither to the self nor to the body-mind. It belongs to the relationship between them.

 

[old3bob]

some schools use this chart as a descriptive  pointer, other schools have somewhat different charts as pointers.

 

#1 below is inherent with the soul and is said to be the purest category of Freedom/Bliss... Parasiva shown before #1 is, but is not said to be of a category thus is beyond a this or that description...

 

[Mark Foote]

4 hours ago, old3bob said:

some schools use this chart as a descriptive  pointer, other schools have somewhat different charts as pointers.

 

#1 below is inherent with the soul and is said to be the purest category of Freedom/Bliss... Parasiva shown before #1 is, but is not said to be of a category thus is beyond a this or that description...

 

 

Gautama the Buddha's description of his enlightenment, from Culasunnatasutta ("Lesser Discourse on Emptiness"):

 

…[an individual] comprehends thus, ‘This concentration of mind … is effected and thought out. But whatever is effected and thought out, that is impermanent, it is liable to stopping.’ 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 Vol III pg 151-152)

 

 

Admittedly, he describes the six senses (including the mind) as the "disturbance" left in his attainment.

 

Elsewhere, he does associate a happiness with the above attainment ("the cessation of ['determinate thought' in] perceiving and feeling"), and he advises his attendant Ananda how to respond, if others doubt that happiness:
 

… the situation occurs, Ananda, when wanderers belonging to other sects may speak thus: ‘The recluse (Gautama) speaks of the stopping of perceiving and feeling, and lays down that this belongs to happiness. Now what is this, now how is this?’ Ananda, wanderers belonging to other sects who speak thus should be spoken to thus: ‘Your reverences, (Gautama) does not lay down that it is only pleasant feeling that belongs to happiness; for, your reverences, the Tathagatha (the “Thus-Gone One”, the Buddha) lays down that whenever, wherever, whatever happiness is found it belongs to happiness.

 

(MN I 400, Pali Text Society MN Vol. II pg 69)

 

 

Gautama paints a very different picture of enlightenment, from that of the chart (IMHO).

(pain in the rear, that the Dao Bums mini-editor interprets "bracket s bracket" as a command to turn on line-thru!)

 

 

Edited July 6, 2023 by Mark Foote

[old3bob]

That Buddhist quote is way overly convoluted to me...

The pure is pure and simple, so simple and astonishing that mind can not encircle it with concepts.  Btw,  did not the historic Buddha proclaim, "Wonder of wonders!" 

Edited July 6, 2023 by old3bob

[Mark Foote]

8 hours ago, dwai said:

"Enlightenment does not feel like anything. It is simply the hard and fast knowledge that I am limitless, partless awareness."
 

(James Swartz)
 

 

Ran across a sermon the other day where Gautama said that some of his followers were enlightened "through the mind", and others were enlightened another way.  Darned if I can find it now, scanning the indexes of the first four Nikayas.  Turns out there are digitized versions of the first four Nikayas available online (https://obo.genaud.net/backmatter/indexes/idx_downloads.htm, down the page), and maybe when I get done downloading those versions, I can search again (turns out the digitized versions were in Pali, darn).

I know Stirling is also big on "hard and fast knowledge" as enlightenment.  

I remember reading Alan Watts when I was fifteen and sixteen.  Although I understood what he had to say, I didn't feel any less wrapped up in my head.  I appreciate now what Shunryu Suzuki had to say:
 

So, when you practice zazen, your mind should be concentrated in your breathing and this kind of activity is the fundamental activity of the universal being. If so, how you should use your mind is quite clear. Without this experience, or this practice, it is impossible to attain the absolute freedom.

 

(“Thursday Morning Lectures”, November 4th 1965, Los Altos; emphasis added)

 

All my writing lately has been centered around the placement of attention as a function of the movement of breath.  That's a natural occurrence, but my part is relaxation, calm, detachment, and cessation (of the exercise of volition), to the extent that I can find them.  When I see the renewal in accepting my part, how I should use my mind is quite clear, and what I get out of that clarity is more physical than mental.

 

Edited July 6, 2023 by Mark Foote

[Mark Foote]

54 minutes ago, old3bob said:

That Buddhist quote is way overly convoluted to me...

The pure is pure and simple, so simple and astonishing that mind can not encircle it with concepts.  Btw,  did not the historic Buddha proclaim, "Wonder of wonders!" 

 

“Wonder of wonders! Intrinsically all living beings are Buddhas, endowed with wisdom and virtue, but because men’s minds have become inverted through delusive thinking they fail to perceive this.”

 

(attributed to Kegon Sutra, in "The Book of Equanimity", Shoyoroku, case 67 
https://studylib.net/doc/8804661/shoyoroku-67)

 

 

From Wikipedia (Buddhāvataṃsaka Sūtra):

 

The Buddhāvataṃsaka-nāma-mahā­vaipulya-sūtra (The Mahāvaipulya Sūtra named “Buddhāvataṃsaka”) is one of the most influential Mahāyāna sutras of East Asian Buddhism. It is often referred to in short as the Avataṃsaka Sūtra. In Classical Sanskrit, avataṃsaka means garland, wreath, or any circular ornament, such as an earring. Thus, the title may be rendered in English as A Garland of Buddhas, Buddha Ornaments, or Buddha’s Garland. In Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, the term avataṃsaka means “a great number,” “a multitude,” or “a collection.” This is matched by the Tibetan title of the sutra, which is A Multitude of Buddhas ("sangs rgyas phal po che").

 

Modern scholars consider the Buddhāvataṃsaka to be a compilation of numerous smaller sutras, many of which originally circulated independently and then were later brought together into the larger mature Buddhāvataṃsaka. Many of these independent Buddhāvataṃsaka sutras survive in Chinese translation.

 

... Japanese: Daihōkō Butsu-kegon Kyō (大方広仏華厳経), usually known as the Kegon Kyō (華厳経). This title is identical to Chinese above, just in Shinjitai characters.

 

 

His first utterance to another person, to the naked ascetic Upaka (MN I 171, "The Aryan Quest", Pali Text Society vol I p 214):

 

Victorious over all, omniscient am I,

Among all things undefiled,

Leaving all, through death of craving freed,

By knowing for myself, whom should I point to?...

 

After a brief exchange, Upaka walked on down a different road.  

 

 

Edited July 6, 2023 by Mark Foote

[old3bob]

“Wonder of wonders! Intrinsically all living beings are Buddhas, endowed with wisdom and virtue, but because men’s minds have become inverted through delusive thinking they fail to perceive this.”

 

the term "Buddhas" is being pointed to as being intrinsic,  ok...    the term "Self" is also used to point to that which is intrinsic.   Why is it that Buddhist Lama's and Hindu Sat-Guru's seldom or almost never get together for tofu and tea - ask them for I can only guess.

 

Edited July 7, 2023 by old3bob

[Mark Foote]

16 hours ago, old3bob said:

“Wonder of wonders! Intrinsically all living beings are Buddhas, endowed with wisdom and virtue, but because men’s minds have become inverted through delusive thinking they fail to perceive this.”

 

the term "Buddhas" is being pointed to as being intrinsic,  ok...    the term "Self" is also used to point to that which is intrinsic.   Why is it that Buddhist Lama's and Hindu Sat-Guru's seldom or almost never get together for tofu and tea - ask them for I can only guess.

 

From "The Recorded Sayings of Zen Master Joshu", translated by James Green (also spelled Chao-chou, Zhaozhou):

 

The master questioned two new arrivals. The master asked the first one, “Have you been here before?’ The monk said, “No, I haven’t.” The master said, “Go have some tea.”

 

The master then asked the other monk, “Have you been here before?” The monk said, “Yes, I have.” The master said, “Go have some tea.”

 

The monk asked, “Setting aside the fact that you told the one who’d never been here before to go have some tea, why did you tell the one who had been here before to go have some tea?” The master said, “Head monk!” The head monk said, “Yes?” The master said, “Go have some tea.”

 

 

Of course we have to wonder, under what circumstances would Joshu not have recommended, "Go have some tea"?

 

I like the "Wonder of wonders!" statement, but I very much doubt that it's something Gautama the Shakyan ever said. 

The thing I like about Gautama's teaching:  the science of the relinquishment of volition in action, and the emphasis he placed on a way of living that included that experience. 

The experience of a sense of freedom when volition is abandoned, that's built-in, intrinsic in our nature. 

When volition in inhalation and exhalation is abandoned in favor of a singular presence of mind and automatic activity in the movement of breath, there's a sense of freedom.  Gautama pointed out specifics in concentration, and in the mindfulness that makes a return to the abandonment of volition, at least in the movement of breath, possible.  I am finding his specifics increasingly useful.

Nevertheless, for me some anatomy is also useful, and I think maybe that's where the diversion of paths occurs.  I would say the anatomy is there in all the teachings, although it's mostly taught through physical proximity or symbolic representations.  I like Cheng Man-Ch'ing's characterization of the three levels and nine stages in the development of ch'i, which comes down to relaxation, inclusion in one-pointedness, and awareness of the role of ligaments, leading to "perfect clarity".

Edited July 7, 2023 by Mark Foote

[Mark Foote]

16 hours ago, old3bob said:

“Wonder of wonders! Intrinsically all living beings are Buddhas, endowed with wisdom and virtue, but because men’s minds have become inverted through delusive thinking they fail to perceive this.”

 

the term "Buddhas" is being pointed to as being intrinsic,  ok...    the term "Self" is also used to point to that which is intrinsic.   Why is it that Buddhist Lama's and Hindu Sat-Guru's seldom or almost never get together for tofu and tea - ask them for I can only guess.

 

Friend Karan's comment on another thread that I thought might interest you, old3bob:
 

Interesting comments. Apech is right, of course, that the term "Hinduism" is a recent British-era invention ("Hind" is 'India' in Persian) so maybe it would have been better to say there was interchange of ideas between the Tibetan dharmas and the Shakta, Shaiva, Kaula dharmas extant in that time and place. That there was such interchange is corroborated by scholars like Alexis Sanderson. Also, something interesting about the word "tantra" — it can also be seen as derived from tanu + tra (the body method), as opposed to "mantra" (mana + tra — the mind method). That's just a linguistic aside of course; it doesn't prove anything about which practices fall under which rubric. I only mention it because this doesn't show up in English translations, though it's kind of obvious for speakers of most Indian languages.

(https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/54847-going-back-to-vipassana-style-meditation-for-a-while/?do=findComment&comment=1008131)

 

[Sahaja]

The word “defilement”  has always put me off. Seems to imply duality and also a rejection of part of oneself that even if it isn’t the best part is still a part. 

[old3bob]

1 hour ago, Mark Foote said:

Friend Karan's comment on another thread that I thought might interest you, old3bob:
 

Interesting comments. Apech is right, of course, that the term "Hinduism" is a recent British-era invention ("Hind" is 'India' in Persian) so maybe it would have been better to say there was interchange of ideas between the Tibetan dharmas and the Shakta, Shaiva, Kaula dharmas extant in that time and place. That there was such interchange is corroborated by scholars like Alexis Sanderson. Also, something interesting about the word "tantra" — it can also be seen as derived from tanu + tra (the body method), as opposed to "mantra" (mana + tra — the mind method). That's just a linguistic aside of course; it doesn't prove anything about which practices fall under which rubric. I only mention it because this doesn't show up in English translations, though it's kind of obvious for speakers of most Indian languages.

(https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/54847-going-back-to-vipassana-style-meditation-for-a-while/?do=findComment&comment=1008131)

 

 

the better term is Sanatana Dharma,  which btw is  not founded by a human being like most other ways.  (and has no single Pope like figure) 

 

 add in:  "What are the main beliefs of Sanatana Dharma?

According to the notion of sanatana-dharma, the eternal and intrinsic inclination of the living entity (atman) is to perform seva (service). Sanatana-dharma, being transcendental, refers to universal and axiomatic laws that are beyond our temporary belief systems".

Edited July 7, 2023 by old3bob

[old3bob]

 

"This beautiful passage is from the beginning of the eighth chapter of Chandogya Upanishad. The meaning is quite clear.

 

8.1.1 This body is the city of Brahman. Within it is an abode in the shape of a lotus [i.e., the heart], and within that there is a small space. One must search within this space and earnestly desire to know what is there.

8.1.2 If the disciples ask, ‘This body is the city of Brahman; within it is an abode in the shape of a lotus [i.e., the heart], and within that there is a small space; what is it that one must search for within this space, and what should one earnestly desire to know?’—the teacher should reply:

8.1.3 [The teacher replies:] ‘The space in the heart is as big as the space outside. Heaven and earth are both within it, so also fire and air, the sun and the moon, lightning and the stars. Everything exists within that space in the embodied self—whatever it has or does not have’.

8.1.4 If the disciples ask the teacher, ‘If in this body [brahmapura] are all this, all things, and all desires, is there anything left behind when the body gets old or perishes?’—

8.1.5 —in reply the teacher will say: ‘The body may decay due to old age, but the space within [i.e., brahmapura] never decays. Nor does it perish with the death of the body. This is the real abode of Brahman. All our desires are concentrated in it. It is the Self—free from all sins as well as from old age, death, bereavement, hunger, and thirst. It is the cause of love of Truth and the cause of dedication to Truth. If a person strictly follows whatever the ruler of the country commands, he may then get as a reward some land, or even an estate’.

8.1.6 Everything perishes, whether it is something you have acquired through hard work in this world or it is a place in the other world which you have acquired through meritorious deeds. Those who leave this world without knowing the Self and the Truths which they should know are not free, no matter where they go. But those who leave this world after knowing the Self and the Truths which they should know are free, no matter where they are."

[stirling]

On 7/6/2023 at 2:09 PM, old3bob said:

That Buddhist quote is way overly convoluted to me...

The pure is pure and simple, so simple and astonishing that mind can not encircle it with concepts.  Btw,  did not the historic Buddha proclaim, "Wonder of wonders!" 

 

The Buddha is attempting to be precise, which is something I love about Buddhism, but I don't know how helpful that is to your average meditator, OR Buddhist. Similarly, I think the silo-stack of ttatvas, the Vissudimagga, and Mahasi Saydaw’s The Progress of Insight amongst other models are well beyond what most will experience. These could be used by a realized "being" to help diagnose a student, but no student is EVER going to properly understand how these types of jargon relate to experiential knowledge. Besides, the fact is that the "path" is different for each person, and upon completion it is realized there was never a path at all, and the teachings were NEVER the vehicle for the complete understanding.

 

These sorts of things are models ONLY, not the actual thing. Even the mighty Nagarjunas brilliant descriptions of emptiness were intended at pointers, scaffolding, or logical exercises - the map, NOT the territory. 

 

Quote

I know Stirling is also big on "hard and fast knowledge" as enlightenment. - Mark Foote

 

Not knowledge but "gnowledge", as in gnosis". Only experiential, non-conceptual, moment-to-moment, permanent perspective shift counts here. Enlightenment recognizes itself. It can see sunyata at varying depths in this moment, and is an instrument of prajna in this moment. 

-

(As a side note, I am abundantly sure the Buddha would see that the "sense doors", like every else, are merely conceptual and are therefore empty of existence, and thus no "canker" at all. This is obvious to every "person" I have ever met with complete understanding.)

 

 

 

Apologies for formatting... advanced editor isn't working for me this AM.

 

[stirling]

On 7/6/2023 at 7:07 AM, dwai said:

However, it infuses the mind with a sense of authenticity, wholeness and rock solid confidence. Henceforth the individual knows that it can weather any existential storm. When you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are awareness, you no longer desire to feel good because you know you are the source of goodness. This is not to say that a more or less constant feel good happiness is not possible. It can be attained by the consistent application of self knowledge to the mind or by the practice of the yogas. 

 

All of this is true, but I would add that there is a sense of limitless clarity, the ability to see how moment to moment events connect with each other, and, (my opinion) a satisfying contentment and "rightness", as though things are interlocking without effort and couldn't be any other way. This DOES engender, IMHO, a sort of relaxation and "bliss"- not like you are on drugs, or anything, but more like that feeling of relaxation after a busy day when you know there is nothing left to accomplish.

[Mark Foote]

On 7/8/2023 at 11:39 AM, stirling said:

 

The Buddha is attempting to be precise, which is something I love about Buddhism, but I don't know how helpful that is to your average meditator, OR Buddhist.
 

 

 

I'm still convinced that in his best lectures, he was teaching himself.  In my experience, others can only hear what I myself need to hear, at the moment that I need to hear it, and I'm confident that's the same for everyone. 

I'm forty years reading his teachings in the first four Nikayas, using the Pali Text Society's translations.  They begin to make sense, in terms of my experience. 

 

Part of the difficulty for me has been my lack of attention on the relationship between the relaxation of muscles and the calm stretch of ligaments, as my attention shifts with the center of gravity.  People have varying degrees of inherited or acquired familiarity with the coordination of such, and with the subsequent relinquishment of volition in favor of automatic activity in the movement of breath. 

 

Especially for someone who believes in science as I do, there's a difficulty in acquiring a coordination without an accompanying cause-and-effect framework of understanding to sustain it.  I guess I have such a framework now, from primarily Western medical research. 
 

 

On 7/8/2023 at 11:39 AM, stirling said:

 

Not knowledge but "gnowledge", as in gnosis".
 

 

Whatever… is material shape, past, future or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, mean or excellent, or whatever is far or near, (a person), thinking of all this material shape as ‘This is not mine, this am I not, this is not my self’, sees it thus as it really is by means of perfect wisdom. Whatever is feeling… perception… the habitual tendencies… whatever is consciousness, past, future, or present (that person), thinking of all this consciousness as ‘This is not mine, this am I not, this is not my self’, sees it thus as it really is by means of perfect wisdom. (For one) knowing thus, seeing thus, there are no latent conceits that ‘I am the doer, mine is the doer’ in regard to this consciousness-informed body.”

 

("Greater Discourse at the Time of the Full Moon", MN III 18-19, Pali Text Society Vol. III pg 68)

 

"Gnosis"--something like, "perfect wisdom"?  In the passage above, Gautama links "perfect wisdom" to the cessation of volition in action of the body, the absence of a "doer".  

The above reflection belongs to reflection on impermanence, in the lecture I cited.   Contemplation on impermanence in connection with an inbreath or an outbreath is the 13th of the elements of mindfulness that Gautama said made up his way of living, followed by contemplation of dispassion (the painful, pleasant, or neutral of feeling), contemplation on cessation (of "determinate thought" in action), and contemplation of "casting away" (of the notion of a "doer").
 

 

On 7/8/2023 at 11:39 AM, stirling said:

 

Only experiential, non-conceptual, moment-to-moment, permanent perspective shift counts here. Enlightenment recognizes itself. It can see sunyata at varying depths in this moment, and is an instrument of prajna in this moment. 

-

(As a side note, I am abundantly sure the Buddha would see that the "sense doors", like every else, are merely conceptual and are therefore empty of existence, and thus no "canker" at all. This is obvious to every "person" I have ever met with complete understanding.)

 

 

In the passage where Gautama describes "the cessation of ('determinate thought' in) feeling and perceiving", he states that "only the disturbance of the six sensory fields" is still present.  That, after explicitly stating that the three cankers are absent.  The cankers are given in that description as the cankers of sense-pleasures, becoming, and ignorance. 

 

I like to think of the cankers as attachments, to the present, or the future, or the past.

 

[stirling]

1 hour ago, Mark Foote said:

In my experience, others can only hear what I myself need to hear, at the moment that I need to hear it, and I'm confident that's the same for everyone. 

 

Well... we agree here for sure. The teaching that is needed is always present when and where it is needed. Having said that, what about teaching from parking tickets, Amitahba, sunsets, orangutans, Padmasambhava, the Dao Bums, Dogen, sandwiches, Tseng T'san, Britney Spears, Mahayana, Shunryu Suzuki, Gatorade, Tsongkapa, and the myriad other enlightened appearances that drop you a line moment to moment? I have had, and met, multiple enlightened teachers as well, if you prefer ones with better packaging. They are everywhere!

 

Quote

I'm forty years reading his teachings in the first four Nikayas, using the Pali Text Society's translations.  They begin to make sense, in terms of my experience.

 

Unless you are enlightened, the teachings you are reading are not yet making sense. Understanding the technique of one method is fine, but it is entirely the actions of an individual following conceptual directions, not understanding. Enlightenment 100% WON'T make sense to you. Choosing teachings because they resonate with some idea you have about enlightenment is a mistake. Enlightenment doesn't make sense because it is ineffable and doesn't correspond to any intellectual idea you have read, or system you think will bring it about. (Having said that, it will also be 100% familiar to you.)

 

Quote

Part of the difficulty for me has been my lack of attention on the relationship between the relaxation of muscles and the calm stretch of ligaments, as my attention shifts with the center of gravity.  People have varying degrees of inherited or acquired familiarity with the coordination of such, and with the subsequent relinquishment of volition in favor of automatic activity in the movement of breath. 

 

If this is a stumbling block, then another technique is probably the way in you need. Struggling for years with a practice is not the Middle Way. There are as many Dharma Doors in as there are beings... no need to be attached to a single one. 

 

Quote

Especially for someone who believes in science as I do, there's a difficulty in acquiring a coordination without an accompanying cause-and-effect framework of understanding to sustain it.  I guess I have such a framework now, from primarily Western medical research. 

 

Science and methodology are fine, but really only has application in the Relative understanding. Science is for modeling limited subsets of interactions in the Relative world, NOT for understanding the Absolute which includes the entire fabric of reality.

 

Quote

Scientific modelling is a scientific activity, the aim of which is to make a particular part or feature of the world easier to understand, define, quantify, visualize, or simulate by referencing it to existing and usually commonly accepted knowledge. It requires selecting and identifying relevant aspects of a situation in the real world and then developing a model to replicate a system with those features.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_modelling

 

Having a system you can follow and diligently applying it without attachment to success is the way, but it is important to understand that the system is not the cause of enlightenment.  This is why the Buddha says you can ditch the raft once you have crossed the river. 

 

Cause and Effect are relative constructs. Enlightenment is a shift in perspective where the cause and effect universe can been seen to exist as a subset of the Absolute. Form is emptiness, emptiness is form. They are the same, and yet the Relative is the one that arises and passes away. The Absolute is always present and, once seen, omnipresent.

 

Dependent origination, Thich Nhat Hhan's "interbeing", and even Nagarjuna's Madhymaka are all just scaffolding to allow the thinking mind to have some vague idea about a territory that is impossible to label or describe with subject/object language. They are pointing tools, not the real territory.

 

Quote

Whatever… is material shape, past, future or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, mean or excellent, or whatever is far or near, (a person), thinking of all this material shape as ‘This is not mine, this am I not, this is not my self’, sees it thus as it really is by means of perfect wisdom. Whatever is feeling… perception… the habitual tendencies… whatever is consciousness, past, future, or present (that person), thinking of all this consciousness as ‘This is not mine, this am I not, this is not my self’, sees it thus as it really is by means of perfect wisdom. (For one) knowing thus, seeing thus, there are no latent conceits that ‘I am the doer, mine is the doer’ in regard to this consciousness-informed body.”

("Greater Discourse at the Time of the Full Moon", MN III 18-19, Pali Text Society Vol. III pg 68)

 

This is a fine explanation of "no self", but "emptiness" goes MUCH deeper than this. It is not just what WE have no-self, it is that NOTHING has self. Even space and time are empty. 

 

Quote

"Herein, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: 'In the seen will be merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely what is cognized.' In this way you should train yourself, Bahiya.

"When, Bahiya, for you in the seen is merely what is seen... in the cognized is merely what is cognized, then, Bahiya, you will not be 'with that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'with that,' then, Bahiya, you will not be 'in that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'in that,' then, Bahiya, you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two. Just this is the end of suffering." - Bahiya Sutra, Buddha

 

I know that for some reason you discount it, but this is a far better exposition on emptiness, in my opinion, because it is obvious that it is not just "self" that is empty. It ALL is.

 

Quote

"Gnosis"--something like, "perfect wisdom"?  In the passage above, Gautama links "perfect wisdom" to the cessation of volition in action of the body, the absence of a "doer".  

 

Prajna is the best term for it, IMHO.

 

Quote

With nothing to attain, a bodhisattva relies on prajna paramita, and thus the mind is without hindrance. Without hindrance, there is no fear. Far beyond all inverted views, one realizes nirvana. All buddhas of past, present, and future rely on prajna paramita and thereby attain unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment. - Heart Sutra, Buddha

 

In this case the reference is to resting in Rigpa, sitting in Shikantaza, or enlightened mind as it naturally is, quiet and empty,. This is the nature of Mind itself, as it naturally is, stainless and perfect.

 

Quote

The above reflection belongs to reflection on impermanence, in the lecture I cited.   Contemplation on impermanence in connection with an inbreath or an outbreath is the 13th of the elements of mindfulness that Gautama said made up his way of living, followed by contemplation of dispassion (the painful, pleasant, or neutral of feeling), contemplation on cessation (of "determinate thought" in action), and contemplation of "casting away" (of the notion of a "doer").

 Yes... I know. I have read it before.  In what other trainings by the Buddha does he go over this specific method?

 

Quote

In the passage where Gautama describes "the cessation of ('determinate thought' in) feeling and perceiving", he states that "only the disturbance of the six sensory fields" is still present.  That, after explicitly stating that the three cankers are absent.  The cankers are given in that description as the cankers of sense-pleasures, becoming, and ignorance. 

 

I like to think of the cankers as attachments, to the present, or the future, or the past.

 

Hmmm. I wonder what is meant here by "disturbance of the six sensory fields" precisely. In any moment I can see that the sense fields are both empty of intrinsic existence, and that what was once attributed to them individually is just the arising and passing of the dharmakaya, therefore there ARE no real "sensory fields' or anything that could disturb them. This would seem to negate the statement as phrased?

 

I looked up Ayatana on Wikipedia, and if you search "empty" you can see that one of the minor insights is in seeing through the reality of individual sense doors. One example from the page. 

 

Quote

The sense bases include two sets of six: six sense organs (or internal sense bases) and six sense objects (or external sense bases). Based on these six pairs of sense bases, a number of mental factors arise. Thus, for instance, when an ear and sound are present, the associated consciousness (Pali: viññāṇa) arises. The arising of these three elements (dhātu) – ear, sound and ear-related consciousness – lead to what is known as "contact" (phassa) which in turn causes a pleasant or unpleasant or neutral "feeling" or "sensation" (vedanā) to arise. It is from such a feeling that "craving" (taṇhā) arises. (See Figure 1.) Such an enumeration can be found, for instance, in the "Six Sextets" discourse (Chachakka Sutta, MN 148), where the "six sextets" (six sense organs, six sense objects, six sense-specific types of consciousness, six sense-specific types of contact, six sense-specific types of sensation and six sense-specific types of craving) are examined and found to be empty of self.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Āyatana

 

You might know more about this, as the Tripitaka isn't my primary area of study?

[S:C]

1 hour ago, stirling said:

Science and methodology are fine, but really only has application in the Relative understanding. Science is for modeling limited subsets of interactions in the Relative world, NOT for understanding the Absolute which includes the entire fabric of reality.

 

Quote

Scientific modelling is a scientific activity, the aim of which is to make a particular part or feature of the world easier to understand, define, quantify, visualize, or simulate by referencing it to existing and usually commonly accepted knowledge. It requires selecting and identifying relevant aspects of a situation in the real world and then developing a model to replicate a system with those features.

This is something that intuitively I understand and understood this at this point. But only intuitively. It seems so counterintuitive still, that you cannot ‚cross borders’ with the intellect alone ever and not even for deductions.

 

Why isn’t there a way for science to explain it? When will mountains again be just mountains?

What again helps there? I seem to forget…

 

Thanks @stirling, that aspect came just at the right timing for me! 

[old3bob]

 

 

[stirling]

1 hour ago, stellarwindbubble said:

Why isn’t there a way for science to explain it? When will mountains again be just mountains?

What again helps there? I seem to forget…

 

Thanks @stirling, that aspect came just at the right timing for me! 

 

To take this further: How many variables would it take to properly model reality? 

 

It is good at this juncture to properly explore the idea of dependent origination (the idea that all phenomena must arise dependent on OTHER phenomena) contemplatively and experientially.

 

 

[Mark Foote]

2 hours ago, stirling said:

 

To take this further: How many variables would it take to properly model reality? 

 

It is good at this juncture to properly explore the idea of dependent origination (the idea that all phenomena must arise dependent on OTHER phenomena) contemplatively and experientially.

 

 

The weather models are getting better!

Speaking of the six senses, one of my favorite descriptions of the eight-fold path:

 

(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.

 

("Mahasalayatanikasutta", MN III 288-289, Pali Text Society vol III p 337-338)

 

I think it might be necessary to experience the cessation of "determinate thought" in feeling and perceiving in order to see sense, sense object, consciousness from contact, impact, and feeling as described.  Can't say I've been there, but the four contemplations that I described previously (on impermanence, on dispassion with regard to the pleasant/painful/neutral of feeling, on cessation of "determinate thought" in action, and on casting away of the latent conceit that "I am the doer")--those have relevance to me as a way of living, and I appreciate that the eight-fold path is not as it might appear at first glance.

"In my experience, others can only hear what I myself need to hear, at the moment that I need to hear it, and I'm confident that's the same for everyone."  That being so, why not use "I" instead of "you"?

Somebody loves that fifth Nikaya (Bahiya Sutta, Ud 1.10 PTS: Ud 6).  I'm running with Warder, who says the fifth Nikaya is a composition of later date--sort of like John, versus the synoptic gospels (versus my favorite, Thomas).

I can return to "one-pointedness of mind" and automatic activity in inhalation and exhalation, provided I can rest my weight in the ligaments and "make self-surrender the object of thought":
 

Body and mind dropped off is the beginning of our effort.
 

(Eihei Dogen, “Dogen’s Extensive Record, Eihei Koroku, #501, tr Leighton and Okumura p 448)

 

Automatic activity in inhalation and exhalation is not necessarily simple:

 

If you are not disturbed by the sound of the bluejay when you are reading something, the blue jay will come right into your heart, and you will be a bluejay, and the bluejay will be reading something.

 

(“Sound and Noise”, a video of Shunryu Suzuki [sfzc.org])
 

Gautama I believe returned to "one-pointedness" and automatic activity in inhalation and exhalation as the fifteenth element of the mindfulness that made up his way of living.  He practiced to establish the "survey-sign" of that concentration.  Many others who teach also practice to cessation (of "determinate thought" in action of the body) and then  utilize the "survey-sign" to return to that experience as required, yet they lack the words to describe their way of living as precisely as Gautama.

Gautama only had one miracle.

 

Edited July 10, 2023 by Mark Foote

[stirling]

10 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

The weather models are getting better!

 

Hahahaha! True! Though it seems dependent on where you live, and which service is interpreting. For some reason most weather predictions where I live aren't great, but Wunderground (for whatever reason) is quite accurate.

 

Still, I would say that the amount of variables needed to truly model ANY aspect of reality would be... ALL of them. Considering that we couldn't even name a small portion of those variables (including when and where a beetle shits in a field, and when the wind blows a particular leaf off of a rock on a desolate road in the Montana) the task is and will probably always be impossible. 

 

Quote

Speaking of the six senses, one of my favorite descriptions of the eight-fold path:

 

(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.

("Mahasalayatanikasutta", MN III 288-289, Pali Text Society vol III p 337-338)

 

This is a great passage! It does a nice job of discussing the no-self of the sense doors. The last bit (my bold) IS the Prajna that I mentioned in the previous post. This isn't the ONLY set of criteria, or way in which to approach it by a long shot, and it ISN'T a practice. It is a set of conditions. A practice for it might be noticing in meditation that this is always already so. When the mind is quiet and empty ALL 6 sense (including mind) arise and pass without volition already. It isn't something to force, or "do" as a "self" it is something to notice. It is learning to disidentify the mind with being our "self", and to disidentify the arising and passing of events and phenomena in the dharmkaya as actions we take (out of "volition" or doership, if that helps). So, the noble 8 Fold Path is not a list of things to do, it is a series of interlocking aspirations. Practicing it is not achieving it, it is put into action effortlessly by having Wisdom, or Prajna. Prajna arises naturally in the mind that isn't perturbed or contrived.

 

Quote

I think it might be necessary to experience the cessation of "determinate thought" in feeling and perceiving in order to see sense, sense object, consciousness from contact, impact, and feeling as described.  Can't say I've been there, but the four contemplations that I described previously (on impermanence, on dispassion with regard to the pleasant/painful/neutral of feeling, on cessation of "determinate thought" in action, and on casting away of the latent conceit that "I am the doer")--those have relevance to me as a way of living, and I appreciate that the eight-fold path is not as it might appear at first glance.

 

Yes. This one way in amongst many. It is the delusion that you are separate from what you experience and are, in any way, in charge or in control of that which surrounds you. I have insight into this. 

 

You would probably need to experience this many many many times, before you understand what it is you are looking at. In fact, you DO already experience this many, many, times every day. Examples where it is most obvious could include when you are driving, riding, a bike, or playing an instrument. You can't do these successfully by attempting to guide action with your mind. You have to learn to drop thinking about the process of doing them and just inter-be with the process of them. This is inter-being and effortless activity without recourse to mind is what you are looking for. Your practice could simply be noticing that it is happening and surrendering your delusory control of whatever process is happening. 

 

Quote

"In my experience, others can only hear what I myself need to hear, at the moment that I need to hear it, and I'm confident that's the same for everyone."  That being so, why not use "I" instead of "you"?

 

You lost me there. This is your quote, yes?

 

Quote

Somebody loves that fifth Nikaya (Bahiya Sutta, Ud 1.10 PTS: Ud 6).  I'm running with Warder, who says the fifth Nikaya is a composition of later date--sort of like John, versus the synoptic gospels (versus my favorite, Thomas).

I remember your position on this, and respect it. From my perspective, regardless of whether the source is the Buddha or not, it is Right View. It has been around for a couple thousand years, and still gets taught by enlightened masters the world over. If it is obviously (to me) Right View, and is supported by the body of teachers for many lifetimes. That is all that matters to me. It is a pointer, and a clean accurate one. There are plenty of teachings from realized sources that aren't the Buddha that I prefer to the Tripitaka teachings. There were even teachings from enlightened beings, such as the Upanishads and the works of Patangali that predate the Buddha that are absolutely valid and worth reading  What matters to ME is that teachings are expressed from the perspective of Right View. 
 

Quote

I can return to "one-pointedness of mind" and automatic activity in inhalation and exhalation, provided I can rest my weight in the ligaments and "make self-surrender the object of thought":
 

Body and mind dropped off is the beginning of our effort.
 

(Eihei Dogen, “Dogen’s Extensive Record, Eihei Koroku, #501, tr Leighton and Okumura p 448)

 

 

 

That's good. Now notice that it happens on or off the cushion. "Zazen gets up and walks around" our mutual friend Kobun once said.  

 

Take a day and do 40 minute sits with 15 minutes of Kinhin in there and notice that not only do body and mind drop out, but also doership and agency do, amongst a great many other things (everything!). This practice is VERY clean and simple and 100% achieves what you are attempting to do. When body and mind have dropped out, where exactly do "ligaments" fit in? They don't. If they do, you haven'd dropped body and mind yet. Ligaments and the rest are mind generated delusions when you are "actualizing the myriad things". 

 

Quote

Automatic activity in inhalation and exhalation is not necessarily simple:

 

I disagree. You do it all day! See above. Where body and mind drop off, ALL activity takes care of itself effortlessly. It could be you are still attempting to watch the breath? If so, understand that watching the breath is merely a way in. When, in your practice, you start to realize that there have been moments when you lost the breath and your mind was quiet and empty, you should then switch your practice to watching for those gaps in and learning by non-grasping how to slowly extend those gaps. That simple resting in those gaps is shikantaza, and is what you are aiming for.

 

Quote

 

If you are not disturbed by the sound of the bluejay when you are reading something, the blue jay will come right into your heart, and you will be a bluejay, and the bluejay will be reading something.

 

(“Sound and Noise”, a video of Shunryu Suzuki [sfzc.org])

 

 

"We" are is always where awareness is. Where attention is captured by phenomen,a awareness becomes that phenomena.This isn't a problem, just how awareness is. It is in trying to CONTRIVE how and where awareness is that we step away from enlightened mind. 

 

Quote

Gautama I believe returned to "one-pointedness" and automatic activity in inhalation and exhalation as the fifteenth element of the mindfulness that made up his way of living.  He practiced to establish the "survey-sign" of that concentration.  Many others who teach also practice to cessation (of "determinate thought" in action of the body) and then  utilize the "survey-sign" to return to that experience as required, yet they lack the words to describe their way of living as precisely as Gautama.

 

Sure. It is one way in, but can't be achieved when the mind is convinced it is in charge and "doing" something. Returning in my experience is best accomplished by watching where we hold tension in the body or mind and dropping attachment to those. Once the ligaments, and everything else have been dropped there is just resting in things as they are, the "nature of Mind". 

 

Quote

Gautama only had one miracle.

 

[Mark Foote]

4 hours ago, stirling said:

 

... (The eight-fold path) ISN'T a practice. It is a set of conditions. A practice for it might be noticing in meditation that this is always already so. When the mind is quiet and empty ALL 6 sense (including mind) arise and pass without volition already. It isn't something to force, or "do" as a "self" it is something to notice. It is learning to disidentify the mind with being our "self", and to disidentify the arising and passing of events and phenomena in the dharmkaya as actions we take (out of "volition" or doership, if that helps). So, the noble 8 Fold Path is not a list of things to do, it is a series of interlocking aspirations. Practicing it is not achieving it, it is put into action effortlessly by having Wisdom, or Prajna. Prajna arises naturally in the mind that isn't perturbed or contrived.

 

 

I think that's supported in the Middle-Length sayings, as the "cankerless" eight-fold path.  Here's the portion concerned with right view:

 

Whoever makes endeavor for the riddance of wrong view, for the attainment of right view, that is his right endeavor. Mindful, [one] gets rid of wrong view; mindful, entering on right view, [one] abides in it. This is… right mindfulness. Thus these three things circle round and follow after right view, that is to say: right view, right endeavor, right mindfulness.

 

As to this… right view comes first. And how… does right view come first? If one comprehends that wrong purpose is wrong purpose and comprehends that right purpose is right purpose, that is… right view. And what… is wrong purpose? Purpose for sense-pleasures, purpose for ill-will, purpose for harming. This… is wrong purpose. And what… is right purpose? Now I… say that right purpose is twofold. There is… the right purpose that has cankers, is on the side of merit, and ripens unto cleaving (to new birth). There is… the right purpose which is [noble], cankerless, supermundane, a factor of the Way. And what… is the purpose which is on the side of merit, and ripens unto cleaving? Purpose for renunciation, purpose for non-ill-will, purpose for non-harming. This… is right purpose that… ripens unto cleaving. And what… is the right purpose that is [noble], cankerless, supermundane, a component of the Way? Whatever… is reasoning, initial thought, purpose, an activity of speech through the complete focussing and application of the mind in one who, by developing the [noble] Way, is of [noble] thought, of cankerless thought, and is conversant with the [noble] Way–this… is right purpose that is [noble], cankerless, supermundane, a component of the Way.
 

(MN III 71-78, Vol III pg 113-121)

 

 

Quote

 

 

Yes. This one way in amongst many. It is the delusion that you are separate from what you experience and are, in any way, in charge or in control of that which surrounds you. I have insight into this. 

 

 

Out of control as usual, there you go again, Stirling... ha ha.

 

 

Quote

 

You would probably need to experience this many many many times, before you understand what it is you are looking at. In fact, you DO already experience this many, many, times every day. Examples where it is most obvious could include when you are driving, riding, a bike, or playing an instrument. You can't do these successfully by attempting to guide action with your mind. You have to learn to drop thinking about the process of doing them and just inter-be with the process of them. This is inter-being and effortless activity without recourse to mind is what you are looking for. Your practice could simply be noticing that it is happening and surrendering your delusory control of whatever process is happening. 

 

 

(That being so) why not use "I" instead of "you"?

 

 

Quote

I remember your position on this, and respect it. From my perspective, regardless of whether the source is the Buddha or not, it is Right View. It has been around for a couple thousand years, and still gets taught by enlightened masters the world over. If it is obviously (to me) Right View, and is supported by the body of teachers for many lifetimes. That is all that matters to me. It is a pointer, and a clean accurate one. There are plenty of teachings from realized sources that aren't the Buddha that I prefer to the Tripitaka teachings. There were even teachings from enlightened beings, such as the Upanishads and the works of Patangali that predate the Buddha that are absolutely valid and worth reading  What matters to ME is that teachings are expressed from the perspective of Right View. 
 

 

For me, there's nobody else offering the insight into concentration and the insight into the role of concentration in daily living that Gautama offers.  I am also floored by the voice attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of Thomas, and the cases and commentaries of some of the Ch'an and Zen teachers.  Dogen's "Genjo Koan" continues to be a favorite.  

The notion that "determinate thought" is action, and that "the activities" (the actions of "determinate thought") cease in the stages of concentration, that's the heart of the matter to me.  The difficulty in conveying "zazen gets up and walks around" as an experience, is the difficulty of conveying the cessation of "determinate thought" in the activity of inhalation and exhalation as an experience.  It depends on "one-pointedness", and that depends on the relinquishment of activity in the body in a manner similar to falling asleep. 

I practice that aspect of concentration all the time, in falling asleep.   

 

Quote

 

When body and mind have dropped out, where exactly do "ligaments" fit in? They don't. If they do, you haven'd dropped body and mind yet. Ligaments and the rest are mind generated delusions when you are "actualizing the myriad things". 

 

 

 

The final level in the development of ch’i concerns “chin”.  According to the classics, “chin comes from the ligaments”. 

The three stages of the final level are:

 

“t’ing chin, listening to or feeling strength”; “comprehension of chin”; “omnipotence”. 

 

((“Three Levels” from “Cheng Tzu’s Thirteen Treatises on Ta’i Chi Chuan”, Cheng Man Ch’ing, trans. Benjamin Pang Jeng Lo and Martin Inn, p 77-78))

 

 

Another translator rendered the last stage above as “perfect clarity” (“Master Cheng’s Thirteen Chapters on T’ai-Chi Ch’uan”, Douglas Wile, p 57). In my estimation, “perfect clarity” is “the pureness of (one’s) mind” that Gautama associated with “the cessation of inbreathing and outbreathing” in the fourth concentration.

 

The Tai Chi classics emphasize relaxation. For me, calm is also required with regard to the stretch of ligaments, if “automatic movement” is to be realized.  The stretch of a ligament prior to strain is small (6%), and I would say that automatic movement is only initiated at the edge of the range. 

 

Cheng Man Ch’ing mentioned a Chinese description of seated meditation, “straighten the chest and sit precariously” (ibid p 21)–I think that also speaks to the necessity of calm.

(A Way of Living)

 

 

That's from the last post, on my site.  Regarding "the pureness of (one's) mind":

 

In my experience, the “placement of attention” by the movement of breath only occurs freely in what Gautama described as “the fourth musing”:

 

Again, a (person), putting away ease… enters and abides in the fourth musing; seated, (one) suffuses (one’s) body with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind so that there is not one particle of the body that is not pervaded with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind.

 

(AN III 25-28, Pali Text Society Vol. III p 18-19, see also MN III 92-93)
 

 

The “pureness of mind” refers to the absence of any intention to act. Suffusing the body with “purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind” is widening awareness so that there is “not one particle of the body” that cannot become the location where attention is placed. 
 

I would say that the placement of attention by the movement of breath is actually a common experience for everyone, if at no other time, then in falling asleep.  That begs the question:  why teach something that is already a common experience? 

 

Fundamentally speaking, the basis of the way is perfectly pervasive; how could it be contingent on practice and verification?  The vehicle of the ancestors is naturally unrestricted; why should we expend sustained effort? Surely the whole being is far beyond defilement; who could believe in a method to polish it? Never is it apart from this very place; what is the use of a pilgrimage to practice it?

 

(Eihei Dogen, “Koroku Kukan zazen gi”, tr Carl Bielefeldt, “Dogen’s Manuals of Zen Meditation” UC Press 1988 p 175)

 

 

Dogen’s questions are rhetorical, but I nevertheless believe they have an answer:  there’s a particular frailty of the human body that can require practice to overcome, at least for some people.

 

(also from "A Way of Living")

 

 

Quote

I disagree. You do it all day! See above. Where body and mind drop off, ALL activity takes care of itself effortlessly. It could be you are still attempting to watch the breath? If so, understand that watching the breath is merely a way in. When, in your practice, you start to realize that there have been moments when you lost the breath and your mind was quiet and empty, you should then switch your practice to watching for those gaps in and learning by non-grasping how to slowly extend those gaps. That simple resting in those gaps is shikantaza, and is what you are aiming for.

 

 

 

The sixteen elements of Gautama's way of living were sixteen elements of mindfulness, four with regard to the body, four with regard to feelings, four with regard to mind, and four with regard to state of mind, each element to be observed in conjunction with an inhalation or exhalation.  "One-pointedness of mind" in conjunction with thought applied and sustained constituted the first concentration, in Gautama's teaching, and apparently he spent most of his time in that state of concentration.

 

Especially in the rainy season, he spent most of his time in that state of concentration, so perhaps easier when most of one's time is spent in meditation.  As you suggest!

 

 

Quote

 

 

"We" are is always where awareness is. Where attention is captured by phenomen,a awareness becomes that phenomena.This isn't a problem, just how awareness is. It is in trying to CONTRIVE how and where awareness is that we step away from enlightened mind. 
 

 

My emphasis, in your text--couldn't agree more.  Here's Dogen's version:

 

When you find your place where you are, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point. When you find your way at this moment, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point… 

 

(“Genjo Koan”, Dogen; tr. Kazuaki Tanahashi)

 

 

"Way at this moment", widening awareness to include not only the senses (including equalibrioception, graviception, proprioception, and occuloception) but what lies beyond all the senses in the placement of "one-pointedness".

 

Here's the part about zazen getting up and walking around (or the "wind (which is) reaching everywhere" fanning Baoche):

 

Although actualized immediately, the inconceivable may not be apparent.

 

(ibid)

 

 

Quote

 

 

Sure. It is one way in, but can't be achieved when the mind is convinced it is in charge and "doing" something. Returning in my experience is best accomplished by watching where we hold tension in the body or mind and dropping attachment to those. Once the ligaments, and everything else have been dropped there is just resting in things as they are, the "nature of Mind". 

 

 

 

 

Got, not milk, but "one-pointedness"?  where awareness is

Edited July 10, 2023 by Mark Foote

[stirling]

18 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

I think that's supported in the Middle-Length sayings, as the "cankerless" eight-fold path.  Here's the portion concerned with right view:

 

I agree. 

 

Quote

Out of control as usual, there you go again, Stirling... ha ha.

 

I am DEFINITELY out of control.

 

Quote

(That being so) why not use "I" instead of "you"?

 

I suppose I could use "one", but it seems awkward? You seem interested in understanding agency/doership/"indeterminate thought and action", so I am sharing the most obvious places to look in my experience. Does that answer your question?

 

Quote

For me, there's nobody else offering the insight into concentration and the insight into the role of concentration in daily living that Gautama offers.  I am also floored by the voice attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of Thomas, and the cases and commentaries of some of the Ch'an and Zen teachers.  Dogen's "Genjo Koan" continues to be a favorite.

 

Advice on concentration and insight in daily living is all over the place in Buddhism, isn't it? I pointed to where you can get complete insight into the aspect you are exploring in my last post here.  I think what you might mean is that the SPECIFIC expression of advice in this one statement is what is attractive to you? It is worth pondering that these are all the same voice, giving teaching on myriad ways in. Even a tax adjustor could be showing you your attachment or delusions around increase/decrease or lack/abundance. 

 

The Genjo Koan is beautiful. I am reminded of the first lines which are magically apropos to what I am getting at above:

 

Quote

As all things are buddha-dharma, there is delusion and realization, practice, birth and death, and there are buddhas and sentient beings. 

 

As the myriad things are without an abiding self, there is no delusion, no realization, no buddha, no sentient being, no birth and death. - Genjo Koan, Dogen

 

 

Quote

The notion that "determinate thought" is action, and that "the activities" (the actions of "determinate thought") cease in the stages of concentration, that's the heart of the matter to me.  The difficulty in conveying "zazen gets up and walks around" as an experience, is the difficulty of conveying the cessation of "determinate thought" in the activity of inhalation and exhalation as an experience.  It depends on "one-pointedness", and that depends on the relinquishment of activity in the body in a manner similar to falling asleep.

 

I know your feelings on this.
 

Quote

Another translator rendered the last stage above as “perfect clarity” (“Master Cheng’s Thirteen Chapters on T’ai-Chi Ch’uan”, Douglas Wile, p 57). In my estimation, “perfect clarity” is “the pureness of (one’s) mind” that Gautama associated with “the cessation of inbreathing and outbreathing” in the fourth concentration.

 

"Perfect clarity" is the same as "don't know" or "beginner's mind", or the mind in Rigpa or Shikantaza. 

 

Quote

Shikantaza (只管打坐) is Dogen's Japanese translation of the Chinese phrase zhǐguǎn dǎzuò (只管打坐 / 祇管 打坐),[1][web 1] "just sitting."[2][3] The phrase was used by his teacher Rujing, a monk of the Caodongschool of Chan Buddhism, to refer to the meditation-practice called "Silent Illumination" (Chinese: 默照禅), or "Serene Reflection," taught by the Caodong master Hongzhi Zhengjue (1091-1157).[2] In Japan, it is associated with the Zen Soto school. In shikantaza one does not focus attention on a specific object (such as the breath); instead, practitioners "just sit" in a state of conscious awareness. - Shikantaza entry on Wikipedia (my bold)

 

In Shikantaza, body and mind drop away, but sometimes some pointers are needed to recognize just what that means. I'd wager this isn't hard for you and you are already doing it, or HAVE done it. 

 

Quote

The “pureness of mind” refers to the absence of any intention to act. Suffusing the body with “purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind” is widening awareness so that there is “not one particle of the body” that cannot become the location where attention is placed. 

 

This very technique is also used in Tibetan Buddhisms "sky gazing" instruction. Having the widest possible gaze causes the mind to go quite, as the small amount of extra effort required quiets the mind without introducing a meditation object (like the breath) so that the object becomes "everything". There are some simple techniques one can use to get the gaze to be more and more panoramic, and eventually beyond what you would imagine is physically possible. If you have complete insight, the gaze naturally begins to widen in this way and STAYS this way.
 

Quote

Fundamentally speaking, the basis of the way is perfectly pervasive; how could it be contingent on practice and verification?  The vehicle of the ancestors is naturally unrestricted; why should we expend sustained effort? Surely the whole being is far beyond defilement; who could believe in a method to polish it? Never is it apart from this very place; what is the use of a pilgrimage to practice it?

 

(Eihei Dogen, “Koroku Kukan zazen gi”, tr Carl Bielefeldt, “Dogen’s Manuals of Zen Meditation” UC Press 1988 p 175)

 

These questions aren't rhetorical, IMO, they are pointers. He is advocating for sitting in "open awareness"/shikantaza. This is why such sitting is also referred to as "actualizing the fundamental point". It is nothing less than resting in enlightened mind, and is not different than enlightenment while the mind rest there. He literally means "actualizing enlightenment". 

 

Quote

"One-pointedness of mind" in conjunction with thought applied and sustained constituted the first concentration, in Gautama's teaching, and apparently he spent most of his time in that state of concentration.

 

How does sustained thought enter in here? This sounds like a poor translation or something. Thought is a construct of "mind", the 6th sense door. The buddha would see the input of all sense doors as just dharmakaya, undifferentiated and not particularly important I can't see a buddha spending time in sustained thought. There isn't a reason to do so. Things occur naturally and perfectly where they are, without any kind of pondering. 

 

Quote

Dzogchen is the practice of Buddhas, not the practice of beings. - Dalai Lama

 

For "dzogchen" substitute "shikantaza" here. Same difference. The mind of a person "actualizing the fundamental point" is the same as a buddhas

 

Quote

Especially in the rainy season, he spent most of his time in that state of concentration, so perhaps easier when most of one's time is spent in meditation.  As you suggest!

 

 

 

Quote

My emphasis, in your text--couldn't agree more.  Here's Dogen's version:

 

When you find your place where you are, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point. When you find your way at this moment, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point… 

 

(“Genjo Koan”, Dogen; tr. Kazuaki Tanahashi)

 

 

Right on! Same as I was saying above with the Dalai Lama's quote.

 

Quote

"Way at this moment", widening awareness to include not only the senses (including equalibrioception, graviception, proprioception, and occuloception) but what lies beyond all the senses in the placement of "one-pointedness".

 

Yes, and more! Including the entire arising and passing of the dharmakaya in attention, mind quiet and empty. There is no-self where there is resting here. 

 

Quote

Although actualized immediately, the inconceivable may not be apparent.

 

Absolutely! The difference between shikantaza and enlightenment. Where there is enlightenment, shikantaza (or dzogchen) arise naturally as the underlying way reality IS, no effort required. This is why I doubt the buddha would be sustaining any thought. 

 

Quote

Got, not milk, but "one-pointedness"?  where awareness is

 

Everywhere. Nowhere. 

Edited July 11, 2023 by stirling

[Mark Foote]

On 7/11/2023 at 8:07 AM, stirling said:

 

Fundamentally speaking, the basis of the way is perfectly pervasive; how could it be contingent on practice and verification?  The vehicle of the ancestors is naturally unrestricted; why should we expend sustained effort? Surely the whole being is far beyond defilement; who could believe in a method to polish it? Never is it apart from this very place; what is the use of a pilgrimage to practice it?

 

(Eihei Dogen, “Koroku Kukan zazen gi”, tr Carl Bielefeldt, “Dogen’s Manuals of Zen Meditation” UC Press 1988 p 175)

 

These questions aren't rhetorical, IMO, they are pointers. He is advocating for sitting in "open awareness"/shikantaza. This is why such sitting is also referred to as "actualizing the fundamental point". It is nothing less than resting in enlightened mind, and is not different than enlightenment while the mind rest there. He literally means "actualizing enlightenment". 

 

 

 

That's actually the statement that introduces "Fukan zazen gi", the instructions for zazen that were the first thing Dogen wrote on his return from China (and which he continued to rewrite over the years, per Bielefeldt's "Dogen's Meditation Manuals").

In the "Koroku Fukan zazen gi", he continues:

 

And yet, if a hair's breadth of discrimination exists, the gap is like that between heaven and earth; once the slightest like or dislike arises, all is confused and the mind is lost.

 

What mind is that, somebody asks...

I don't think Dogen equates "open awarenss" with shikantaza, in any of his writings (but I could be wrong on that--give me an example, if you can). 

 

From Jiryu Mark Rutschman Byler's "Two Shores of Zen":
 

“Shikantaza not here,” he insisted in elementary English, pointing to his head. “Not here,” he continued, pointing to his heart. “Only point here!” He drove his fist into his lower belly, the energy center that the Japanese call hara.

 

("Two Shores of Zen", Jiryu Mark Rutschman-Byler, https://nozeninthewest.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/TwoShoresofZenExcerpts.pdf)

 

  

Dosho Port reviewed Jiryu Mark Rutschman Byler's "Two Shores of Zen", and wrote:

 

I too trained at Bukkokuji in 1990-91 and find Jiryu’s  descriptions of his experiences very evocative and quite similar to my own. Harada Tangen Roshi is the real deal. Everyplace is different but if you want a clear view of Bukkokuji and get a sense of practice in Japan, read this book. 

 

(https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfoxzen/2010/01/two-shores-of-zen-are-western-sanghas-all-of-that.html)
 

 

Quote

 

How does sustained thought enter in here? This sounds like a poor translation or something. Thought is a construct of "mind", the 6th sense door. The buddha would see the input of all sense doors as just dharmakaya, undifferentiated and not particularly important I can't see a buddha spending time in sustained thought. There isn't a reason to do so. Things occur naturally and perfectly where they are, without any kind of pondering. 

 

 

 

Twice now I have written a long anotated reply, and twice lost it to the Dao Bums editor, which sometimes removes quantities of new text when "control-z" is used (which I do by habit, to back off something I want to correct).
 

Herein… the (noble) disciple, making self-surrender the object of (their) thought, lays hold of concentration, lays hold of one-pointedness.  (The disciple), aloof from sensuality, aloof from evil conditions, enters on the first trance, which is accompanied by thought directed and sustained, which is born of solitude, easeful and zestful, and abides therein.
 

(SN v 198, Pali Text Society vol V p 174; “noble” substituted for Ariyan)

 

Gautama identified sixteen elements in his "intent concentration on in-breathing and out-breathing" (Woodward), or "the (mind-)development that is mindfulness of in-breathing and out-breathing" (Horner, "Anapanasati").  In the chapter in SN V entitled "About In-breathing and Out-Breathing" (SN V 310, PTS SN V 275), he says that "the intent concentration on in-breathing and out-breathing" was his way of life when he was as yet the Bodhisattva (280), and he says that the concentration is the best way of life, the Tathagatha's way of life (289).  Horner translates all but the initial element of the sixteen beginning with "thinking...".  Here's Woodward's translation--setting up mindfulness with the sixteen I think does require thought applied and sustained, initial and sustained, directed and sustained:

 

… Setting mindfulness in front of (oneself), (one) breathes in mindfully and mindfully breathes out.

 

As (one) draws in a long breath (one) knows: A long breath I draw in. [As (one) breathes out a long breath (one) knows: I breathe out a long breath.] As (one) draws in a short breath (one) knows: A short breath I draw in. As (one) breathes out a short breath (one) knows: I breathe out a short breath.

 

Thus (one) makes up (one’s) mind:

 

I shall breathe in, feeling it go through the whole body. Feeling it go through the whole body I shall breath out.

Calming down the bodily aggregate I shall breathe in. Calming down the bodily aggregate I shall breathe out.

 

Thus (one) makes up (one’s) mind:

 

Feeling the thrill of zest I shall breathe in. Feeling the thrill of zest I shall breathe out.

Feeling the sense of ease I shall breathe in. Feeling the sense of ease I shall breathe out.

 

(One) makes up one’s mind:

 

Aware of all mental factors I shall breathe in. Aware of all mental factors I will breathe out.

Calming down the mental factors I shall breathe in. Calming down the mental factors I shall breathe out.

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.

 

(One) makes up one’s mind:

 

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.

The way I practice:

 

I begin with making the surrender of volition in activity related to the movement of breath the object of thought.  For me, that necessitates thought applied and sustained with regard to relaxation of the activity of the body, with regard to the exercise of calm in the stretch of ligaments, with regard to the detachment of mind, and with regard to the presence of mind.  I find that a presence of mind from one breath to the next can precipitate “one-pointedness of mind”, but laying hold of “one-pointedness of mind” requires a surrender of willful activity in the body much like falling asleep.
 

 

Quote

 

Absolutely! The difference between shikantaza and enlightenment. Where there is enlightenment, shikantaza (or dzogchen) arise naturally as the underlying way reality IS, no effort required. This is why I doubt the buddha would be sustaining any thought. 

 

 

Everywhere. Nowhere. 

At such time as the breath can place awareness anywhere in the consciousness-informed body, the activity of inhalation and exhalation is effortless.

At one time I actually had Kobun's  etymology of "shikantaza" up on Wikipedia.  That got removed by later editors.  

Shikantaza sounds very strong. Shikan is understood as identical to zaza. Shikan means "pure", "one", "only for it". Ta is a very strong word. It shows moving activity. When you hit, that movement is called ta, so "strike" is ta. Za is the same as in the word zazen, sitting. To express the whole character, shikantaza is actually quite enough, but not enough until you experience it. Shikantaza is sitting for itself. You may say pure sitting for itself, not for something else. 

(https://www.jikoji.org/intro-aspects)

 

 

At such time as the breath can place awareness anywhere in the consciousness-informed body, the activity of inhalation and exhalation is effortless.  Can this be arrived at?  Can shikantaza be arrived at?

 

Edited July 12, 2023 by Mark Foote

[old3bob]

much in the way of abstractions and foreign jargon which is hard to fathom for those not part of a particular group,  along with contests to see who is best at juggling such things...so it goes with most religions or ways.

Edited July 12, 2023 by old3bob