Is Buddhism a complete path?

[blue eyed snake]

10 hours ago, Bindi said:

“Absolute emptiness” is a philosophical view, not reality, instead of absolute emptiness in reality absolute completeness should be the ideal, all levels of the human being functioning and integrated. 

 

Not a Buddhist, thus I looked for some sort of definition of absolute emptiness. 

 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sunyata-absolute-emptiness-jetsun-milarepa-jaume-gil-termens/

 

Quote

 

Maintain the state of undistractedness, and distractions will fly away. Dwell alone, and you shall find the Friend. Take the lowest place, and you shall reach the highest. Hasten slowly, and you shall soon arrive. Renounce all worldly goals, and you shall reach the highest Goal.

If you follow this unfrequented path, you will find the shortest way. If you realize Sunyata (the absolute Emptiness), compassion will arise within your hearts; and when you lose all differentiation between yourself and others, then you will be fit to serve others.

 

 

 

Reading this i would say oh yes, it does exist, it not just a philosophical concept although there is a lot of philosophizing and analyzing going on around these concepts. 

and yes, when you analyse things you can come to the conclusion there must be something like absolute emptiness 

 

when you taste it though, even the smallest sip will convince you for the rest of your life. 

 

 

 

 

[Apech]

24 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

In a lot of the posts, we're not saying at all what's to be done at sitting time during meditation though.

This actually stays intact, unaffected by this discussion.

 

We're instead saying there are important exercises missing and some of the goals of the curriculum are false premises.

This is because the view is wrong on some fronts, because it's based on religious dogma ( ie the skandhas being empty of self ) instead of facts.

 

It's not a matter of doing insight meditation differently, just realising its limitations and showing the gaps can be filled outside the practice, with different non-overlapping work.

 

Today I don’t have the energy but everything you say here is wrong.

[snowymountains]

Just now, Apech said:

Today I don’t have the energy but everything you say here is wrong.

 

That's fine but I'm not looking at it theologically, just pointing to what's treated differently a couple of thousands of years after the Buddha passed.

[Apech]

7 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

In full subject/object form this would be

 

You find the ideas bizarre

 

Which could also be about the "you" part, not the "ideas" part - and to be clear to avoid misinterpretations, I clearly do not mean this neither in a pathological nor a personal sense.

To spell it out even more clearly, no implication of something being "wrong" with you is meant by this, "you" could be anyone instead of you in specific.

 

Rather what I mean is that sometimes demolishing religious dogma also has to do with us, not the arguments against the dogma, as it's a complicated process.

 

The context matters, and in this case the context is an open discussion where a member asked for reasons to abolish or question the Buddhist dogma.

Which is why sometimes arguments showing objective ( as in not relying on religious dogmas) flaws in the dogma are presented against mostly self-referential points from within the dogma.

In this process an argument such as but the Buddha had a perfect enlightenment doesn't hold because we're not discussing it from a self-referential theological point of view.

You haven’t demolished any dogma and I don’t even know why you think you have.

[snowymountains]

Just now, Apech said:

You haven’t demolished any dogma and I don’t even know why you think you have.

 

Well, you're free make what you want of it 🙂

 

But in 2024 the downsides of relying on dogmas are known, and modern approaches can be looked at instead of relying on an ancient text for what is empty of self or not.

 

And then anyone can make their own decisions.

Which is the point of writing.

 

Of course someone's free to believe what they want because eg the Buddha had a perfect enlightenment, taking refuge in the Jewels makes it obvious etc.

Someone who wants to take a purely theological view, will take a purely theological view.

[doc benway]

11 hours ago, Bindi said:

“Absolute emptiness” is a philosophical view, not reality, instead of absolute emptiness in reality absolute completeness should be the ideal, all levels of the human being functioning and integrated.

 

In my experience, the realization of absolute emptiness is indistinguishable from the realization of absolute completeness.

They are one and the same. I’m not eloquent or scholarly enough to put it into philosophical terms and I don’t ask anyone to take my word for it. Just thought it worth sharing my experience. I think this relates to my earlier comments regarding what is emphasized in Bön and Buddhist teachings regarding emptiness, clarity, and union. 

[old3bob]

the word dogma can get like a slippery slope,  the word vehicle is often a much better term in my understanding,  and lets not forget that the historic Buddha (among other teachers and ways ) also taught about setting down the "raft" at some point...

Edited February 14 by old3bob

[doc benway]

2 hours ago, Apech said:

 

Most Buddhist Dzogchen teachers are Nyingmapa which upholds the Prasangika madhyamika - which is a kind of ultimate scepticism regarding the reification of anything and thus emptiness is emphasised.

 

I’m relatively certain that the Bönpos and Nyingmapas both teach the prasangika madhyamaka view, although I will try to confirm that when I have some time. 

[liminal_luke]

36 minutes ago, steve said:

 

In my experience, the realization of absolute emptiness is indistinguishable from the realization of absolute completeness.

They are one and the same. I’m not eloquent or scholarly enough to put it into philosophical terms and I don’t ask anyone to take my word for it. Just thought it worth sharing my experience. I think this relates to my earlier comments regarding what is emphasized in Bön and Buddhist teachings regarding emptiness, clarity, and union. 

 

This resonates -- thanks!  

 

I used to study with a qigong master who, after a practice session, would instruct his students to feel themselves "one with the universe."  Taoism leans towards an infinitely expanded self; Buddhism towards no self.  I suspect this too is all the same.

 

We are so small between the stars, so large against the sky

And lost among the subway crowds I try to catch your eye

 

-- Leonard Cohen

[Sahaja]

While I don’t follow this path, I believe that it contains complete paths for those who are able to complete them. However I think that it is extremely difficult to reach enlightenment on any path if that is the definition you are using. I use paths as there are many variations in approaches and methods that fit under the broad umbrella term Buddhism (some of which I think would have left the historical Buddha scratching his head!)

 

I believe that there are equally valid paths outside this umbrella. One needs to find that which fits them to have a chance for “success” or reach “completion” on any path. I think this personal fit is as important as the perceived  intrinsic validity of any specific path.   From an early age when I was first exposed to Buddhism there was something in it that didn’t resonate with me. However it does with others and that is wonderful. Clearly it has excellent methods for working with the mind and the jhanic states that all paths could benefit from.
 

as far as Jung is concerned, while I think he promulgated some unique interesting views and showed openness to non Western concepts,  I think the stuff he said about westerners not being able to follow these non western paths was absolute nonsense and to me reflects the darkness of his time and place. 

[old3bob]

we often hear about compassion in Buddhism but not Grace which could be said to have an aspect of compassion but it is still different.  So without Grace as is apparently implied in Buddhism any Tom, Dick, Harry, Jane or Susan could work they way to enlightenment by various powers of the mind... which is something I do not  buy into for Grace is not a power of the mind but something far greater!

Edited February 14 by old3bob

[Apech]

Something to chew on :

 

"My advice, don't be a ""Buddhist.""

At the end of the day, it's all about personal gain, fame and business.

Just be a person with a good heart, that's the meaning of a true Dharma practitioner.

We live in illusion and appearance of things.

There is a reality to this.

We are that reality.

When you understand this you see you're nothing,

and being nothing, you are everything.

That's all. "

Kalou Rinpoche 

 

 

My father said about enlightenment many very beautiful things that were beyond my comprehension, which led me to forge my own version: becoming a Buddha was to never be agitated, angry or jealous again. I must have been six or seven years old then and I blame myself for being lazy. Plus I used to be silly. I believed that if I accessed Awakening, I would overcome these problems, become sturdy, be healthy, be free from my fears and flaws. Better yet, lighting would erase any negative memories I might have experienced.

Inspired by this happy conclusion, I once asked my father: "When I have accessed enlightenment, will I still remember myself?" Of who I used to be? "

He said to me "It's not like that. Awakening is more about self discovery.

He added: If you have a handful of diamonds but don't know what they are, you'll treat them like pebbles. Once you recognize that they are diamonds, you can exploit their precious qualities. Becoming a Buddha is like discovering a diamond in your hand. You discover yourself, you don't get rid of yourself. "

Yongey Mingyour Rinpoche - From Confusion to Clarity.

[Mark Foote]

15 hours ago, Bindi said:

“Absolute emptiness” is a philosophical view, not reality, instead of absolute emptiness in reality absolute completeness should be the ideal, all levels of the human being functioning and integrated. There is a Self, there is a doer which may be called Shakti/Siva. 
 

 

 

Sorry for the premature entry, there! 

I'm a fan of Gautama's delineation of the cessation of "determinate thought" in speech, deed, and mind through the induction of successive states of concentration, and of his description of the fourth of the initial concentrations as the cessation of ("determinate thought" in the activity of the body in) inhalation and exhalation.

Although he never said as much, the fact that he described the "further" states after he described the four initial states does imply that the cessation of the activity (the action by habit or volition) of the body precedes the cessation of the activity of mind.  

I left out your description of the union of Shakti/Siva in the central channel, as a prerequisite to the completion you describe in the paragraph above.  For me, speaking of a union in the central channel implies the same kind of concern with the body as a prerequisite to mental or spiritual "completion" that Gautama had.

 

Edited February 14 by Mark Foote

[blue eyed snake]

33 minutes ago, Apech said:

Plus I used to be silly.

 

we all were 

 

i really like your post and it made me think of this little part from the golden flower.

this, as all daoist texts is not so clearcut as what you posted, but it came up with me

 

this is chapter 3

Quote

2.When one begins to apply this charm, it is as if in the middle of existence there is nothingness. When in the course of time the work is completed and beyond the body there is a body, it is as if in the middle of nothingness there is existence.   

https://thesecretofthegoldenflower.com/ch3.html

[Mark Foote]

6 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

This is because the view is wrong on some fronts, because it's based on religious dogma ( ie the skandhas being empty of self ) instead of facts.
 

 

 

 

“So I, … being liable to birth because of self, having known the peril in what is liable to birth, seeking the unborn, the uttermost security from the bonds–nibbana–won the unborn, the uttermost security from the bonds–nibbana; being liable to ageing because of self, having known the peril in what is liable to ageing, seeking the unageing, the uttermost security from the bonds–nibbana–won the unageing, the uttermost security from the bonds; being liable to decay… won the undecaying; …liable to dying… won the undying; … liable to sorrow… won the unsorrowing… ; liable to stain because of self, having known the peril in what is liable to stain, seeking the stainless, the uttermost security from the bonds–nibbana–won the stainless, the uttermost security from the bonds–nibbana. Knowledge and Vision arose in me: unshakable is freedom for me, this is the last birth, there is not now again-becoming.”

 

(MN I 167, Vol I p 211)

 

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.
 

(MN III 18-19, Vol III p 68)

 

 

As (one) dwells in body contemplating body, ardent… that desire to do, that is in body, is abandoned. By the abandoning of desire to do, the Deathless is realized. So with feelings… mind… mental states… that desire to do, that is in mind-states, is abandoned. By the abandoning of the desire to do, the Deathless is realized.
 

(SN V 182, Pali Text Society V p 159)

 

 

These are the secret words which the Living Jesus spoke and Didymos Judas Thomas wrote. And He said:

 

Whoever finds the explanation of these words will not taste death.

 

(The Gospel According to Thomas, coptic text established and translated by A. Guillaumont, H.-CH. Puech, G. Quispel, W. Till and Yassah ‘Abd Al Masih, p. 3 log. 1, ©1959 E. J. Brill)

 

 

[silent thunder]

Quote

2.When one begins to apply this charm, it is as if in the middle of existence there is nothingness. When in the course of time the work is completed and beyond the body there is a body, it is as if in the middle of nothingness there is existence.   

 

Reminds me of what I think is a chan saying:

 

When beginning the work, first there is a mountain.

Then in the midst of the work, there is no mountain.

When the work is finished there is a mountain again.

Edited February 14 by silent thunder
Added quote to clarify what i was referring to...

[doc benway]

2 hours ago, old3bob said:

we often hear about compassion in Buddhism but not Grace which could be said to have an aspect of compassion but it is still different.  So without Grace as is apparently implied in Buddhism any Tom, Dick, Harry, Jane or Susan could work they way to enlightenment by various powers of the mind... which is something I do not  buy into for Grace is not a power of the mind but something far greater!

 

While Buddhists may not use the word grace, they often speak of blessings which I think are closely related to grace.

[Mark Foote]

6 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

Of course someone's free to believe what they want because eg the Buddha had a perfect enlightenment, taking refuge in the Jewels makes it obvious etc.

 

 

 

Gautama's insight into the nature of suffering, which is generally taken to be his enlightenment, apparently followed his attainment of the cessation of ('determinate thought' in) feeling and perceiving.  Here's Gautama's description of his experience of "the cessation of feeling and perceiving":
 

…[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 p 151-152)

 

 

Took him six years and two prior teachers to attain that cessation. I don't expect to attain it.  For such as me, Gautama did speak of the mindfulness that made up his way of living as "something perfect in itself, and a pleasant way of living besides."

 

That mindfulness appears to have been a particular pattern of thought initial and sustained, coupled with the experience of "one-pointedness".  Part of that thought initial and sustained was "contemplating cessation I shall breath in; contemplating cessation I shall breathe out"--I would contend that the actual cessation of "doing something" with regard to the body in inhalation and exhalation, "doing something" by habit or volition, was at least an occasional part of his way of living.

 

Shunryu Suzuki described the cessation of "doing something" with regard to the body as "just sitting".  I would have to guess that "just sitting" was a regular part of Shunryu Suzuki's practice on the cushion, and that he could invoke the same kind of experience through his mindfulness in daily living.

 

 

Edited February 14 by Mark Foote

[snowymountains]

33 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

 

 

 

“So I, … being liable to birth because of self, having known the peril in what is liable to birth, seeking the unborn, the uttermost security from the bonds–nibbana–won the unborn, the uttermost security from the bonds–nibbana; being liable to ageing because of self, having known the peril in what is liable to ageing, seeking the unageing, the uttermost security from the bonds–nibbana–won the unageing, the uttermost security from the bonds; being liable to decay… won the undecaying; …liable to dying… won the undying; … liable to sorrow… won the unsorrowing… ; liable to stain because of self, having known the peril in what is liable to stain, seeking the stainless, the uttermost security from the bonds–nibbana–won the stainless, the uttermost security from the bonds–nibbana. Knowledge and Vision arose in me: unshakable is freedom for me, this is the last birth, there is not now again-becoming.”

 

(MN I 167, Vol I p 211)

 

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.
 

(MN III 18-19, Vol III p 68)

 

 

As (one) dwells in body contemplating body, ardent… that desire to do, that is in body, is abandoned. By the abandoning of desire to do, the Deathless is realized. So with feelings… mind… mental states… that desire to do, that is in mind-states, is abandoned. By the abandoning of the desire to do, the Deathless is realized.
 

(SN V 182, Pali Text Society V p 159)

 

 

These are the secret words which the Living Jesus spoke and Didymos Judas Thomas wrote. And He said:

 

Whoever finds the explanation of these words will not taste death.

 

(The Gospel According to Thomas, coptic text established and translated by A. Guillaumont, H.-CH. Puech, G. Quispel, W. Till and Yassah ‘Abd Al Masih, p. 3 log. 1, ©1959 E. J. Brill)

 

 

 

The exercise is a critical evaluation though, not to see if Buddhism is textually self consistent nor a comparison to Christianity.

 

the point I'm making is that religious texts are not a good reference for these things, eg Jung is simply more evolved 🙂 and more modern research even more evolved and refined.

 

So one can keep the meditations and some practices which are good but complement what's missing, as stuff is missing, and use something better in terms of framework.

Otherwise they'll be trapped in ancient dogma and then "call it fate" or even ..karma

Edited February 14 by snowymountains

[Mark Foote]

1 minute ago, snowymountains said:

 

The exercise is a critical evaluation though, not to see if Buddhism is textually self consistent nor a comparison to Christianity.

 

the point I'm making is that religious texts are not a good reference for these things, eg Jung is simply more evolved 🙂 and more modern research even more evolved and refined.

 

So one can keep the meditations and some practices which are good but complement what's missing, as stuff is missing, and use something better in terms of framework.

Otherwise they'll be trapped in ancient dogma and then "call it faith" or even ..karma
 

As you've no doubt heard me write a million times now:
 

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.

 

When necessity places attention, attention takes place as a point, a point that can shift and move.  

About a decade ago, I wrote:

 

If you do any seated or even standing meditation in the morning, you may see why I’m referring to the practice as “waking up and falling asleep”. In waking up, I am looking to relinquish my activity, and allow the place of mind to generate activity out of the stretch I find myself in. I have a description of the translations of motion in the lotus, yet in the end I am convinced that everything I need to know I learn by being where I am, as I am. I just have to be open to it.

 

(Post: “I tried your practice last night”- humbleone, from “The Dao Bums”)

 

 

[old3bob]

32 minutes ago, steve said:

 

While Buddhists may not use the word grace, they often speak of blessings which I think are closely related to grace.

 

ok, but it depends on who or what is giving those blessings...so if the Self is giving the blessing through Sat Guru it can be called Grace,  if a human like a yogi (who by said title is not Sat Guru) is giving those blessings it is not the same although still important.

[Barnaby]

5 minutes ago, old3bob said:

 

ok, but it depends on who or what is giving those blessings...so if the Self is giving the blessing through Sat Guru it can be called Grace,  if a human like a yogi (who by said title is not Sat Guru) is giving those blessings it is not the same although still important.

Right now, I consider that it’s always the Self that’s giving the blessings. It’s just that it’s a higher iteration of the Self that we may not always be able to access without resorting to artifice.

[Mark Foote]

3 hours ago, old3bob said:

we often hear about compassion in Buddhism but not Grace which could be said to have an aspect of compassion but it is still different.  So without Grace as is apparently implied in Buddhism any Tom, Dick, Harry, Jane or Susan could work they way to enlightenment by various powers of the mind... which is something I do not  buy into for Grace is not a power of the mind but something far greater!
 

 

 

 

When a presence of mind is retained as the placement of attention shifts, then the natural tendency toward the free placement of attention can draw out thought initial and sustained, and bring on the stages of concentration:

 

… there is no need to depend on teaching. But the most important thing is to practice and realize our true nature… [laughs]. This is, you know, Zen.

 

(Shunryu Suzuki, Tassajara 68-07-24 transcript from shunryusuzuki.com)

 

 

(Shunryu Suzuki on Shikantaza and the Theravadin Stages, emphasis added)

 

 

Not possible to embody the free placement of attention through the exercise of will, or volition.  I would say the embodiment of the free placement of attention is grace in action, and grace apart from action is just a concept.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 14 by Mark Foote

[old3bob]

33 minutes ago, Barnaby said:

Right now, I consider that it’s always the Self that’s giving the blessings. It’s just that it’s a higher iteration of the Self that we may not always be able to access without resorting to artifice.

 

umm, I'd say artifice in that instance would be a dead-end-stop, thus instantly seen through...

Edited February 14 by old3bob

[Keith108]

10 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

In an open discussion you are free to counter the points, though for objectivity to be there, with out self-referencing the dogma.

 

Otherwise calling it bizarre and then dropping out to go back call it again and drop out again, is simply passive aggressive behaviour.

 

Guilty as charged. It's a bad habit of mine. I don't feel like putting in the energy to go back and forth while we talk past each other. It's painfully obvious we won't ever be on the same page on this. It's not passive aggressive, though. Just a sense of bewilderment. 

 

9 hours ago, Elysium said:

Offer some perspective instead of snide remarks in umbrealla of hand sign emojis perhaps then?

 

I did offer a perspective. I was basically called a dogma spewing fundamentalist. Again, no snide-ness. Just confusion. It feels like if the thread were titled "Let's talk about baseball." And then a discussion about cabinet making ensued.  

 

8 hours ago, steve said:

 

Welcome to the DaoBums!

 

I like it here...until the conversation turns to Buddhism. I just need to exercise the self control needed to stay out of these threads. 

 

_/|\_