How would you counter this hypothesis to the ‘Enlightenment’ idea?

[galen_burnett]

@Michael Sternbach your reply to me of today, 11th sep. i’ll need to go back and reread the thread to remember in what context you mentioned archaeology and then reply more fully; but for now, sure, academia are hugely ignorant of the truth of the planet’s history; that it is in fact an extraterrestrial terraform, hollow, and has had at least settlements, if not whole civilisations, of people populate it throughout the last, probably, millions of years, much much more advanced than we are today in 2023. the ancient aliens documentary series is invaluable. all the religious icons in history, including the buddha, were most likely extraterrestrials—or even inter-terrestrials, or martians even, or maybe even inhabitants of the orion constellation. one needs to have some really quite soft and dry sand to bury ones head deep enough in now to be able to deny the mountains of evidence for all this. 

 

regarding the hominid reference: i may not like him, and found one joke he made about disabled people to be disgusting, but i still don’t really get why you’re calling him a proto-hominid; the ‘austra-‘ in australopithecus doesn’t seem to actually refer to australia, that ape was an african species, google tells me; and i don’t really see what beef you have with him otherwise… again, maybe i’ll get it when i reread the thread…

[stirling]

1 hour ago, galen_burnett said:

In that case it can’t be known, can’t be experienced—so it effectively doesn’t exist. Both knowledge and experience depend on a frame of reference, a Duality, a non-Unity, to have any meaning.

 

This is an interesting point. What we are discussing doesn't exist conceptually, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. We have experience of knowing things all the time that aren't conceptualized. Any time the mind is quiet and we are present with what is happening there is knowing, but without the conceptual overlay. Many of these are non-dual experiences, though we don't have the realization to see what they are. In most of them we can see that time, space, and self are all missing from the moment of experiencing. I have successfully guided many people to notice how this is and point it out (commonly called "pointing out instruction" in the Tibetan Buddhist traditions). 

 

Gnosis is:

 

Quote

...knowledge based on personal experience or perception. In a religious context, gnosis is mystical or esoteric knowledge based on direct participation with the divine.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism#:~:text=Gnosis refers to knowledge based,acquaintance with") the divine.

 

Setting aside religion, mysticism, esotericism, and the divine for a moment, this connection with things being nakedly as they are is presence with the void, and reality as it exists as the basis for all contrived appearances. With insight into its nature it is seen always everywhere. 

[Michael Sternbach]

45 minutes ago, galen_burnett said:

@Michael Sternbach your reply to me of today, 11th sep. i’ll need to go back and reread the thread to remember in what context you mentioned archaeology and then reply more fully; but for now, sure, academia are hugely ignorant of the truth of the planet’s history; that it is in fact an extraterrestrial terraform, hollow, and has had at least settlements, if not whole civilisations, of people populate it throughout the last, probably, millions of years, much much more advanced than we are today in 2023. the ancient aliens documentary series is invaluable. all the religious icons in history, including the buddha, were most likely extraterrestrials—or even inter-terrestrials, or martians even, or maybe even inhabitants of the orion constellation. one needs to have some really quite soft and dry sand to bury ones head deep enough in now to be able to deny the mountains of evidence for all this. 

 

Not that I would agree to your assumption of the Buddha and other avatars having been non-humans, or the timeline you are suggesting, but as far as the gist of your comment is concerned, you are quite correct, in my view.

 

45 minutes ago, galen_burnett said:

regarding the hominid reference: i may not like him, and found one joke he made about disabled people to be disgusting, but i still don’t really get why you’re calling him a proto-hominid; the ‘austra-‘ in australopithecus doesn’t seem to actually refer to australia, that ape was an african species, google tells me; and i don’t really see what beef you have with him otherwise… again, maybe i’ll get it when i reread the thread…

 

OMG! 😅😂🤭

 

Nah, I have no beef with good ol' Nungers. As at least the older forum members will know, we are just having fun to tease each other a bit from time to time. Not to mention the occasional "virtual sparring match" when we don't agree on a topic (which doesn't happen  very often, though). He is indeed one of the really knowledgeable and (I'll return the compliment) rational forum members.

 

At any rate, no hard feelings. 🙂

[stirling]

1 hour ago, galen_burnett said:

@stirling bruh… “bravely”?? it sounds a lot like you’re being pissy, and from that i could only conclude that my mere challenging the notion of ‘perpetual bliss’ has triggered you into a disgruntled state so as to feel the need to attack me. please quickly clear this up if i’ve misread you.

 

I am sorry if I have come off in some strange way.  Not my intention.

 

What I said was:

 

Quote

With great respect to the original poster who is trying so bravely to make sense of these ideas here, there are a number of problems with the initial proposition as it is presented that would require entirely re-stating the premise in a new way. It seemed difficult and possibly unskilful, so I haven't dived in for this reason. Life is also busy in a good way at present, so...

 

By "great respect" I mean "great respect". By "bravely", I mean one who is interested enough to ask the difficult questions with true curiousity and the intention to truly understand the topic. Your intial post seemed earnest, so I took it that way. I personally assume everyone is a friend until proven otherwise.

 

I see seekers in two flavors:

 

• Idealogues who have made their mind up about a particular constructed viewpoint

 

• Seekers who truly wish to understand the nature of reality and are open to the possibilities

 

I don't generally engage the former, but champion the latter. There is a receptivity, and genuineness in them. Someone who truly wants to know is someone I want to talk to. 

 

-

 

1 hour ago, galen_burnett said:

the rest of the thread addresses the difficulties of having a philosophy that can’t describe itself, especially such a one which also promises a golden heaven to the aspirant. 

 

It IS difficult, yes. I wouldn't personally believe anyone who told me about some "golden heaven" that exists somewhere else either. I am against beliefs... they just cause mental struggle. Beliefs are what we construct when we don't know through personal experience. If there is some benefit to a practice it should be something you can experience yourself. It should be transformative when practiced with openness. It should be do what it says on the label. 

 

1 hour ago, galen_burnett said:

you’re clearly heavily into these philosophies, so if you’re going to partake in the discussion of this thread you should really lay your opinion out straight on the idea of the existence of an attainable ‘perpetual-bliss’: is it real? is it not? or are you agnostic?

 

I DID express my opinion earlier in the thread. As I said previously, I don't buy a perpetual "bliss" exactly, but do know that there is a pleasurable "relief" (for lack of a better word) where there is seeing things as "empty" that is pleasant in the same way that a glass of cold water on a hot day is pleasant. Another analogy might be when you wake up thinking it is Monday and you have overslept, but then realize it is Sunday. With some guidance, anyone who practices meditation with the intention of allowing the mind to become quiet will experience this within a week or so of sitting. 

 

I am a Soto Zen priest, but that doesn't mean I don't recognize the teachings of Daoism, Sufism, Hinduism, etc. as valid, AND that also doesn't mean that any of the above are a belief system for me. Understanding how things are doesn't require a massive crenellated concretion of beliefs, it just requires creating the space that allows the underlying nature of things to well up. Nothing to buy, nothing to believe, nothing to worship. You could decide that there are qualities of both agnosticism and gnosticism in this, but that isn't really important.

[Daniel]

2 hours ago, galen_burnett said:

It seems odd to me that a monk would say something like that—thus seemingly denying any sort of attainable state of ‘perpetual-bliss’—yet continue to, presumably, sit in meditation for long hours every day, and also, presumably, encourage others to emulate his diligence as best they are able. Seems to me he’s not being straight with us: if there’s nothing to get from spending so much time on it, then why is he even doing it? a little daily meditation will do anyone good, but there’s a lot more to life than quiet meditation…

 

I don't know what the author of the quote believes about perpetual-bliss, I can only comment on what they are denying.

[Daniel]

7 minutes ago, stirling said:

I am sorry if I have come off in some strange way.  Not my intention.

 

It's not strange.  It's predictable.

 

7 minutes ago, stirling said:

I am a Soto Zen priest

 

This seems to be the intention.  Appeal to your own authority.

 

Flaunting your credentials guarantees .... oh nevermind.

 

If you would like your authority respected please produce proof of your priesthood.

 

Are you an accepted authority in a temple, community, or some organization?

 

Who bestowed this title on you?

 

Can you bring anything reliable?  Because your writing indicates to me a self-proclamation of achievement which is seeking validation.  Something which is the opposite of enlightenment or harmony with the dao as I understand it.

 

[liminal_luke]

...

Edited September 11, 2023 by liminal_luke

[Michael Sternbach]

1 hour ago, stirling said:

 

I am sorry if I have come off in some strange way.  Not my intention.

 

What I said was:

 

 

By "great respect" I mean "great respect". By "bravely", I mean one who is interested enough to ask the difficult questions with true curiousity and the intention to truly understand the topic. Your intial post seemed earnest, so I took it that way. I personally assume everyone is a friend until proven otherwise.

 

I see seekers in two flavors:

 

• Idealogues who have made their mind up about a particular constructed viewpoint

 

• Seekers who truly wish to understand the nature of reality and are open to the possibilities

 

I don't generally engage the former, but champion the latter. There is a receptivity, and genuineness in them. Someone who truly wants to know is someone I want to talk to. 

 

-

 

 

It IS difficult, yes. I wouldn't personally believe anyone who told me about some "golden heaven" that exists somewhere else either. I am against beliefs... they just cause mental struggle. Beliefs are what we construct when we don't know through personal experience. If there is some benefit to a practice it should be something you can experience yourself. It should be transformative when practiced with openness. It should be do what it says on the label. 

 

 

I DID express my opinion earlier in the thread. As I said previously, I don't buy a perpetual "bliss" exactly, but do know that there is a pleasurable "relief" (for lack of a better word) where there is seeing things as "empty" that is pleasant in the same way that a glass of cold water on a hot day is pleasant. Another analogy might be when you wake up thinking it is Monday and you have overslept, but then realize it is Sunday. With some guidance, anyone who practices meditation with the intention of allowing the mind to become quiet will experience this within a week or so of sitting. 

 

I am a Soto Zen priest, but that doesn't mean I don't recognize the teachings of Daoism, Sufism, Hinduism, etc. as valid, AND that also doesn't mean that any of the above are a belief system for me. Understanding how things are doesn't require a massive crenellated concretion of beliefs, it just requires creating the space that allows the underlying nature of things to well up. Nothing to buy, nothing to believe, nothing to worship. You could decide that there are qualities of both agnosticism and gnosticism in this, but that isn't really important.

 

Hi Stirling,

 

This sounds all quite interesting to me as I am currently "reviewing" my prior involvement with Buddhism, early on on my personal meandering path.

 

Having been a practitioner of Soto Zen myself back then, I can tell that the view you are expressing here is characteristic of that particular school of Buddhism. Zen is definitely very much experienced based, although it does have its specific metaphysical and literary framework (understated though these aspects generally tend to be). But it goes without saying that some of the other Buddhist schools are more talkative in this regard, and they also take different stands on the nature of enlightenment and ultimate reality.

 

The following excerpt from the Wikipedia article on 'Pure land' is quite conclusive in this regard:

 

In Chinese Buddhism, the pure land was commonly seen as a transcendent realm beyond the three realms (the desire realm, form realm and formless realm) into which one can be reborn after death.[59] This view of the pure land as a place was defended by masters of Pure Land Buddhism like Shandao. However, another interpretation of a pure land is that it is non-dual with our world. The Vimalakīrti Sutra was widely cited by exponents of this non-dual view of the pure land, often called "mind-only" pure land (wéixīn jìngtǔ 唯心淨土). This was most commonly defended by masters of the Chan / Zen school.[60] In the Platform Sutra for example, Huineng states that only the deluded hope to be born in a faraway land in the west, while the wise who know their nature is empty seek the Pure Land by purifying their minds.[61] These two views of the pure land led to many debates in Chinese Buddhism.[62]

In a similar fashion, according to the Huayan school patriarch Fazang, the ultimate view of the Buddha's Pure Land (derived from the Avatamsaka sutra) is that it is interfused with all worlds in the multiverse and indeed with all phenomena (dharmas).[63] This view of the Buddha's pure land is inconceivable and all pervasive. Since for Fazang, the entire Dharma realm is visible within each particle in the universe, the Pure Land is therefore contained in every phenomena and is non-dual with our world.[63]

Later Chinese thinkers similarly attempted to synthesize the two ideas. Yúnqī Zhūhóng (1535–1615) saw the pure land as an actual place which is a useful upaya (skill means) created by the Buddha. Once beings reach this realm, they realize that it is just mind. Real sages can see that both ideas are interconnected and thus can affirm both without any conflict.[64]

Similarly, Hānshān Déqīng (c. 1546–1623) taught a synthesis of these various ideas ideas.[65] According to Hanshan, there are three kinds of pure lands (associated with the trikaya, the three bodies of the buddha):[65]

the Eternal Land of Calm Illumination, also known as the pure land of mere-mind. This is the land where the Buddhas and bodhisattvas live.

the Majestic Land of True Reward, which refers to the Huayan view of a Pure land that pervades the entire universe and is interfused with every particle and phenomenon in existence.

the Incomplete Land of Expediency, which is the 'Western paradise" of Sukhavati taught in the Amitabha sutras, and is only one of a myriad of such skillfully manifested pure lands in existence. This land is associated with the nirmanakaya.

 

In this citation, I would particularly highlight the statement that "Real sages can see that both ideas are interconnected and thus can affirm both without any conflict," as well as the actual attempts at their reconciliation that are mentioned here.

 

Plato's cave metaphor has recently been brought up somewhere--I wasn't able to retrieve the post, however, it reminded me of my own reference to Platonist philosophy in a conversation I had not long ago with one of the Buddhist members of the forum. 

 

In that metaphor, the shadows seen on the wall of the cave--and taken as the only reality by those imprisoned inside it--are mere reflections of things that in actuality belong to a more universal order of reality. The parallels to *some* Buddhist schools of thought are IMO undeniable and even extend to the concept of a multi-layered more-than-physical universe found both in Platonism and some forms of Buddhism.

 

Above all, being a Zen-influenced natural metaphysicist, I was excited to learn now that I am not the only one to ever find this kind of perspective essentially compatible with the Zen view of 'ordinary' experiential reality as transcendent  empty! 🙂

 

That being said, I continue to be interested in finding a (personally) more satisfactory definition of the emptiness concept in philosophical terms (and quite frankly, I don't buy the notion that it can only be experienced but not talked about, yadda yadda).

 

For that matter, I am quite sure that apparently rather different systems (such as the Gnosticism you mentioned) have an understanding of this as well, even though couched in terms of their own.

 

 

A Buddhist-inspired cosmic vision (self-created digital image).

[helpfuldemon]

Enlightenment is the end of intellect, it is the understanding of life and Order, which does involve dualities such as joy and sorrow, pleasure and suffering.  When one attains enlightenment of ALL- they are then free to engage in it, or withdraw. for they see both the good and the bad of things.  The Bliss that is described is essentially the satisfaction of knowing.

[Nungali]

9 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

Well, they're generally unaware of the very existence of prehistoric civilisations. Even though things started shifting a bit with some of their more recent finds.

 

This is actually a topic that I pursue with great interest, as you can see, e.g., here:

 

Since I started that thread, I collected a lot more information and developed certain theories of my own. One day in the not-so-far future I am going to publish all this material in a comprehensive book.

 

On a related note, the Lost Civilisation topic plays a role also in my upcoming sci-fi novel Spacepunk I -- Humanity at the Crossroads. 

 

 

Well, I just like to imagine that, when the archaeologists of the future will dig up and carbon date his remains one day, they will be more than surprised to find a specimen of Australopithecus originating from our time. 😉

 

Ahhh , but the thing is .... Australia has no pre HSS hominid paleontology .... so I would be a double inaccurate human .

[Mark Foote]

8 hours ago, galen_burnett said:

... the average person still suffers, the average person does not abide in some celestial luminescence of shining bliss, which is often what people on spiritual-paths are seeking, which is what my complaint in this thread is—people deluded into thinking they can get that—...

 

and in the latter part of this same comment—you quite explicitly say that, yes, what the Buddha got was Enlightenment, and you even continue to give a brief description of it “cessation of determinate thought”, and you describe it as desirable. So why is this Enlightenment desirable then? and why is it “ultimate”? The way you talked about the Buddha still even in that state being unable to avoid slight disturbances smelled a lot like someone saying “well, nothing’s perfect, but certainly you will be happy 99% of the time”…
 

 

Here's Shunryu Suzuki, founding teacher of the S. F. Zen Center, on practice:
 

But usually in counting breathing or following breathing, you feel as if you are doing something, you know-- you are following breathing, and you are counting breathing. This is, you know, why counting breathing or following breathing practice is, you know, for us it is some preparation-- preparatory practice for shikantaza because for most people it is rather difficult to sit, you know, just to sit. 
 

(“The Background of Shikantaza”; Shunryu Suzuki Transcript, Sunday, February 22, 1970; San Francisco; shunryusuzuki2 dot com/detail1?ID=335)

 

 

Something from what I'm currently writing, about that:

 

Suzuki says that directing attention to the movement of breath (“following breathing… counting breathing”) has the feeling of doing something, and that “doing something” makes the practice only preparatory.

 

Although attention can be directed to the movement of breath, necessity in the movement of breath can also direct attention:
 

There can… come a moment when the movement of breath necessitates the placement of attention at a certain location in the body, or at a series of locations, with the ability to remain awake as the location of attention shifts retained through the exercise of presence.

 

(Common Ground)
 

There’s a frailty in the structure of the lower spine, and the movement of breath can place the point of awareness in such a fashion as to engage a mechanism of support for the spine, often in stages.

 

The cessation of "determinate thought" in the activity of the body in inhalation and exhalation, that's the last of those stages.  There's a cessation of "doing something", that requires an openness to the placement of attention anywhere in the body, with "not one particle of the body" left out.  

The difficulty is that with "the cessation of ("determinate thought" in) inhalation and exhalation" comes automatic activity in the body in inhalation and exhalation, and sometimes in other things.  Where to put that "other things" experience, in daily living!

Not a matter of bliss for me.  There's a happiness when determinate thought in the activity of the body ceases, but it's as Gautama said, happiness has ceased apart from equanimity.  Stay on the tight rope, there's a happiness.  The state prior to cessation, that's the one I'm working on--there's an ease, that's the state the sages are said to abide in  Unfortunately, buy one ticket ride one ride is not the case, as far as I can tell--ride all four rides, four balls in the air or none.

Gautama taught a way of living that included that "other things" experience.  I'm in it for that. I've seen activity of the body without determinate thought in more than inhalation and exhalation, and I get it that things beyond the range of the senses can be involved in walking me around.  The notion that "I am the doer, mine is the doer with regard to this consciousness-informed body" has taken a hit, for me.

 

The cessation of ("determinate thought" in) feeling and perceiving, not likely for me.  You're right, doesn't sound blissful, the disturbances associated with the six sense-fields. He said there was a happiness, but I'm guessing it's like the happiness of the cessation of determinate thought in inbreathing and outbreathing--thin!

Not easy, to allow the placement of attention by necessity in the movement of breath.  Not hard.  More from the write I'm working on:
 

If you are going to fall, you know, from, for instance, from the tree to the ground, the moment you, you know, leave the branch you lose your function of the body. But if you don’t, you know, there is a pretty long time before you reach to the ground. And there may be some branch, you know. So you can catch the branch or you can do something. But because you lose function of your body, you know [laughs], before you reach to the ground, you may lose your conscious[ness].

(“To Actually Practice Selflessness”, August Sesshin Lecture Wednesday, August 6, 1969, San Francisco, http://shunryusuzuki2.com/detail1?ID=281)
 

In my “Waking Up and Falling Asleep”, I wrote:

 

… 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 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.

 

(Waking Up and Falling Asleep)

Falling asleep is easier on the body than falling out of a tree, but the ability to grasp a branch before hitting the ground or to witness the placement of attention in the movement of breath before falling asleep, that’s the same. 


 

Edited September 12, 2023 by Mark Foote

[Nungali]

7 hours ago, galen_burnett said:

@stirling bruh… “bravely”?? it sounds a lot like you’re being pissy, and from that i could only conclude that my mere challenging the notion of ‘perpetual bliss’ has triggered you into a disgruntled state so as to feel the need to attack me. please quickly clear this up if i’ve misread you.

 

 

Oh ... there is noting in the state of perpetual bliss that stops one from launching a disgruntled attack .    

 

 

 

[Daniel]

8 hours ago, galen_burnett said:

Could you please explain that first line Daniel?

 

Sure.  "Non-dual is like light which is in very close proximity to the surface of the sun".

 

The imagery is, just beyond the surface of the sun, the light is so intense that there is nothing else but light.  It is a reality that consists of only extremely bright light and absolutley nothing else.  If an individual spark of light, ray of light, wave of light, were to somehow find itself in close proximity to the sun, it would virtually cease to exist, immediately assimilating into the light that that is coming from the sun.

 

Technically, the spark, ray, or, wave doesn't actually cease to exist.  It becomes infinitesimal, absolutely insignificant.  That's why I said 'like'.  It is 'like' light which is in very close proximity to the sun.  It's intended to be a very close approximation of non-dual.

[Nungali]

7 hours ago, galen_burnett said:

@Michael Sternbach your reply to me of today, 11th sep. i’ll need to go back and reread the thread to remember in what context you mentioned archaeology and then reply more fully; but for now, sure, academia are hugely ignorant of the truth of the planet’s history; that it is in fact an extraterrestrial terraform, hollow, and has had at least settlements, if not whole civilisations, of people populate it throughout the last, probably, millions of years, much much more advanced than we are today in 2023. the ancient aliens documentary series is invaluable. all the religious icons in history, including the buddha, were most likely extraterrestrials—or even inter-terrestrials, or martians even, or maybe even inhabitants of the orion constellation. one needs to have some really quite soft and dry sand to bury ones head deep enough in now to be able to deny the mountains of evidence for all this. 

 

 

regarding the hominid reference: i may not like him, and found one joke he made about disabled people to be disgusting,

 

?  Oh ?  I missed that one .

 

but i still don’t really get why you’re calling him a proto-hominid; the ‘austra-‘ in australopithecus doesn’t seem to actually refer to australia, that ape was an african species, google tells me; and i don’t really see what beef you have with him

 

Two years ago we met in Manila and had beef rendang together  .

 

 

 

otherwise… again, maybe i’ll get it when i reread the thread…

 

[Daniel]

19 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

So regardless of whether someone claims that they have permanently transcended dualism due to an experience they had or not, I am only looking for the presence of mind that allows me to return to cessation of activity in the movement of breath, as needed.  I feel drawn to that, and if someone else's words or presence is helpful in that regard, I'm grateful.  I'm the bigger fool if I don't hear the universe when the universe is talking, and the universe speaks through us all, blah blah blah...

 

The context of my comment is: starting ideological conflict by making negative assertions about others.  Setting that aside, I think everyone has something to teach, even if it is as a negative role model.  And, I don't doubt that it is likely that even those who are negative role models, are also positive role models, and could be very wise and experienced in their own chosen practice.

 

I hear you about the determinate thought, and breathing.  I understand that is where you are drawn and I noticed that in the podcast from June you posted.

[Daniel]

19 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

But the uncountable infinity is of a different size, says Cantor and most mathematicians (with the exclusion of the Satanic so-called Intuitionists).

 

Not really different sizes.  That's undetermined.  Just different types of infinity.  But I don't think Michael and I are considering numeric forms of infinity to be divine.  I know I'm not; that would be incomplete.  If I consider uncountable infinity, then I am lacking letters, and if I include all letters, what about words.  And if I include words, then what about ideas.  And once I include ideas, what about sentences, stories... it goes on and on and on and on.... keep going.... you're not there yet.

 

And then, all of the negations need to be included.  All the numbers which cannot be imagined, all the letters in all the languages which will never be spoken, all the ideas which will never be concieved, all the stories which will never be composed.

 

And then all the possibilities, the could-be, needs to be included as well.

 

Infinity = Everything that was + is + will be + wasn't + isn't + won't + could be.  That's completely literally absolutely infinite, and it is definitely omni-present.  Omni-present = is + isn't. Those are the two smallest components of infinity.

 

Edited September 12, 2023 by Daniel

[stirling]

Hello Michael!

 

3 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

Having been a practitioner of Soto Zen myself back then, I can tell that the view you are expressing here is characteristic of that particular school of Buddhism.

 

Very certainly Zen/Cha'n is one of my major influences, but I spent 20 years working in the Tibetan Nyingma tradition before that, so you could say Nyingma and Dzogchen are still very influential for me, and I teach some of those texts regularly. 

 

3 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

Zen is definitely very much experienced based, although it does have its specific metaphysical and literary framework (understated though these aspects generally tend to be). But it goes without saying that some of the other Buddhist schools are more talkative in this regard, and they also take different stands on the nature of enlightenment and ultimate reality.

 

I honestly think most Buddhism in the West is experience based, though I don't know that much about the Nichiren or Pure Land schools. In all cases, though what I am saying does not particularly differ from what my teachers or primary texts might have said, what I am expressing is my personal understanding. 

 

3 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

The following excerpt from the Wikipedia article on 'Pure land' is quite conclusive in this regard:

 

In this citation, I would particularly highlight the statement that "Real sages can see that both ideas are interconnected and thus can affirm both without any conflict," as well as the actual attempts at their reconciliation that are mentioned here.

 

I can see how:

 

Quote

 However, another interpretation of a pure land is that it is non-dual with our world.

 

...could be a provisional understanding used as a teaching scaffolding. My personal experience is that all abstractions such as realms or other worlds are empty of any reality of their own, incompatible with Nagarjuna's explanations of time, space, and self. My personal feeling is that Nagajunas explanation (most specifically the Shentong "emptiness of other" interpretation) is about as close as we are going to get to clear dialog about how "reality" is, though it is still flawed as he would have admitted.

 

3 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

In that metaphor, the shadows seen on the wall of the cave--and taken as the only reality by those imprisoned inside it--are mere reflections of things that in actuality belong to a more universal order of reality. The parallels to *some* Buddhist schools of thought are IMO undeniable and even extend to the concept of a multi-layered more-than-physical universe found both in Platonism and some forms of Buddhism.

 

That may be true, but I can only see cosmologies as conceptual constructs, not really having any reality that we can truly experience ourselves. I love cosmology (the stranger, fancier, more arcane and ornate the better) but in terms of reality I only trust what I can experience. Having said that, the further you get on the this path the more strange and metaphysical what you encounter becomes. Even those experiences have a certain relative reality of their own, though it is advisable to hold what is "real" lightly and without reification. 

 

3 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

Above all, being a Zen-influenced natural metaphysicist, I was excited to learn now that I am not the only one to ever find this kind of perspective essentially compatible with the Zen view of 'ordinary' experiential reality as transcendent  empty! 🙂

 

In my teens and twenties I was deeply interested in the supernatural and metaphysical. Buddhism (and "empty" reality) are FULL of such things and experiences. Experiencing them is the natural consequence of dropping tightly held beliefs and stopping the process of explaining them away. 

 

3 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

That being said, I continue to be interested in finding a (personally) more satisfactory definition of the emptiness concept in philosophical terms (and quite frankly, I don't buy the notion that it can only be experienced but not talked about, yadda yadda).

 

You can talk about it, but (as neo-Advaita chap Adyashanti says) you have intend to "fail well" in the best case scenario. It really isn't expressible, primarily because our language, which depends on subject/object relationships, is not suited to the task. It isn't a subject/object "thing" to experience. 

 

3 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

For that matter, I am quite sure that apparently rather different systems (such as the Gnosticism you mentioned) have an understanding of this as well, even though couched in terms of their own.

 

Oh, DEFINITELY. I think of them as different perspectives of the same thing seen through different facets of a prism. The same thing is looked at, but the descriptions will differ. 

[Daniel]

On 4/28/2023 at 6:52 PM, stirling said:

In 2015 I had insight/Satori and the next day drove to Jikoji, which was only 30 minutes from my house in the mountains looking for a teacher who could help me. I met Jana Drakka Roshi, herself a brown robe Soto priest, and my insight was recognized. I did weekly meditation, dokusan and the sesshin schedule at Jikoji for 3 years stabilizing my insight and in due course having the pleasure of getting to work with almost all of Kobun's core of dharma transmitted lineage teachers (Angie Boissevain, Michael Newhall, Ian Forsberg, Vanja Palmers and Doug Jacobson), and a number of well-known SF Zen Center alum. After a few years Jana suggested I sew MY robes for ordination (in SF with Blanche Hartman, her teacher) but Jana was soon diagnosed with and succumbed to cancer sadly. I was introduced to my current teacher, Ed Brown's only transmitted student a few months later. She agreed that I should continue sewing After a few years my robes are nearly completed, but rather than normal ordination I will be "lay entrusted" - a roshi, authorized to teach (though I already have been approved to teach and have my own sangha) but not in monastic line, but in the householder tradition, much like ngakpas of the Nyingma tradition like my original interest. 

 

OK, found it.  Not too difficult, for someone who wants to be sure their achievement is made public.  ...  a householder, lay entrusted.  In that same post, there's plenty of claims of empowerments being bestowed on them.

 

Edited September 12, 2023 by Daniel

[Daniel]

19 minutes ago, stirling said:

I spent 20 years working in the Tibetan Nyingma tradition

 

Don't forget to tell us about your credentials in the next post too, OK?

[liminal_luke]

I'm having one of those learning moments so common to the Bum experience.  People are fighting and I feel that old familiar urge to get into the ring, to write up a blockbuster post that, in my deluded fantasy at least, would set people straight.  In fact, I did write such a post earlier today but managed (just barely) not to post it.  I don't know what's harder, resisting the urge to spar on the forum or resisting glazed donuts.  So far today I'm two for two. No fighting, no maple bars. Yahoo!  What do ya think -- is enlightenment nigh?

Edited September 12, 2023 by liminal_luke

[helpfuldemon]

47 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

I'm having one of those learning moments so common to the Bum experience.  People are fighting and I feel that old familiar urge to get into the ring, to write up a blockbuster post that, in my deluded fantasy at least, would set people straight.  In fact, I did write such a post earlier today but managed (just barely) not to post it.  I don't know what's harder, resisting the urge to spar on the forum or resisting glazed donuts.  So far today I'm two for two. No fighting, no maple bars. Yahoo!  What do ya think -- is enlightenment nigh?

Systems and their methods are endless, and it is a road to infinite comparison in order to fully catalogue them all.  In the end, it is Wisdom and not method, that matters.

[Daniel]

29 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

What do ya think -- is enlightenment nigh?

 

According to the Zen Soto tradition, it appears that the dharma transmission is supposed to be produced from working side by side with their teacher, and cannot happen as a householder.  Of course, now that it has moved to the west, western values seem to dictate, yes, you too can be enlightened by declining a donut and nothing more.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_ranks_and_hierarchy

 

The third step is shihō, or denpo, dharma transmission.^{[web 4]} Dharma transmission is...

...the recognition of the transmission that took place long before the ceremony itself. In fact, it has nothing to do at all with the paper, with philosophy or with mystical experience. The 24 hours of the daily life shared by teacher and student are the content of the transmission, and nothing else [...] In Antai-ji, when you receive shihō after, say, eight or nine years, you will have sat for 15,000 hours of zazen with your teacher. Not only that, you also shared many thousands of meals with him, worked together in the fields for thousands of hours, spread manure, cut grass and wood together, side by side, you sweat together in the summer and froze together in the winter. You cooked for him and filled the bath tub for him, you know how he likes the temperature both of his soup and the bathing water. You also shared many drinks, probably. In each of these activities, the dharma is transmitted. None should be left out.^{[web 4]}

 

None of this should be left out.

 

29 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

People are fighting

 

It's not fighting, it's pointing out a deficiency.  It appears to be dharma.

 

Edited September 12, 2023 by Daniel

[liminal_luke]

6 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

According to the Zen Soto tradition, it appears that the dharma transmission is supposed to be produced from working side by side with their teacher, and cannot happen as a householder.  Of course, now that it has moved to the west, western values seem to dictate, yes, you too can be enlightened by declining a donut a nothing more.

 

 

I was just joking about the donut and enlightenment.  I do like to get involved in these discussions and know some of the lingo, but, honestly, it's a little above my pay grade.  Rather than aim for enlightenment, I'm just trying to be less nuts.  I'd like not to be so darn anxious all the time, to be more forgiving of foibles (my own and others), to overcome my addictive tendencies around food. Declining a donut won't get me enlightened but it does represent emotional growth.  For me, right now, that's enough. 

[liminal_luke]

27 minutes ago, helpfuldemon said:

Systems and their methods are endless, and it is a road to infinite comparison in order to fully catalogue them all.  In the end, it is Wisdom and not method, that matters.

 

Beautifully put.

[Daniel]

16 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

I was just joking about the donut and enlightenment.  I do like to get involved in these discussions and know some of the lingo, but, honestly, it's a little above my pay grade.  Rather than aim for enlightenment, I'm just trying to be less nuts.  I'd like not to be so darn anxious all the time, to be more forgiving of foibles (my own and others), to overcome my addictive tendencies around food. Declining a donut won't get me enlightened but it does represent emotional growth.  For me, right now, that's enough. 

 

I hear you.  I'm just wondering how far back this disconnect in the dharma transmission goes.  If it was broken when buddhism was brought to the west, that would explain a lot of what I am observing, and the OP is observing.  The dharma is not actually being transferred, but priests are being ordained anyway, and it's been happening for a long time?  If so, pretty much none of the priests and teachers are going to practicing dharma, teaching dharma, or living dharma.

 

Edit:  ... in the west.  pretty much none in the west.

 

Edited September 12, 2023 by Daniel