Zen is not Buddhism, Zen is not meditation.

[Cobie]

 

18 hours ago, stirling said:

… Zazen and Shikantaza meditation … fits perfectly with Cha'an for a good reason... it's where it comes from. 

Exactly!

‘zen’ is the Japanese pronunciation of the Chinese ‘ch'an’. 

禪 zen = 禪 ch'an (chan2 - homonym of Sanskrit  ध्यान - dhyāna). https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/禪 

‘Kanji’ means ‘Chinese characters’ (Kanji 漢字 : 漢 han4 - Chinese language; 字 zi4 - characters).

 

 

Edited September 7, 2024 by Cobie

[Tommy]

I believe that Chan started when Bodhidharma went to China to spread Buddhism. The monks at the temples were all expecting lectures and speeches. And, I think Bodhidharma was more of a demonstration type of teacher. There are stories of him sitting in a cave for nine years. What does it teach us? IDK. Guess I still got a long way to go??

[stirling]

15 hours ago, Tommy said:

I believe that Chan started when Bodhidharma went to China to spread Buddhism. The monks at the temples were all expecting lectures and speeches. And, I think Bodhidharma was more of a demonstration type of teacher. There are stories of him sitting in a cave for nine years. What does it teach us? IDK. Guess I still got a long way to go??

Mystics have experiential knowledge of enlightenment. The value of the mystic is that they SEE enlightenment in this moment without "self", time, or space and can tell you what that looks like, and what it means. Their experience is direct and experiential, existing without doubt, and their teaching is the same pointing precisely to what enlightenment is, not to what a tradition things you should "do". 

 

Monastics and traditions want to codify enlightenment into a to-do list, or map, without realizing that it is impossible. They pointlessly argue dharma amongst themselves, clinging to rites, practices and rituals, but can't really come to any conclusion. No two "people" have ever realized the nature of reality in the same way, doing only one practice, or "everyone" would.

 

What Bodhidharma is teaching from his example is simply "seek stillness"... and "do it a lot". This really is the simplicity of the path offered by Zen, or Dzogchen, or by most true mystics. 

 

I wouldn't discount Bodhidharma's other written teachings, however... for example his version of the precepts:

 

Quote

Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the everlasting Dharma, not raising the view of extinction is called “not killing.”

 

Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the ungraspable Dharma, not arousing the thought of gain is called “not stealing.”

 

Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the Dharma of nonattachment, not raising the view of attachment is called “not being greedy.”

 

Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the inexplicable Dharma, not expounding a word is called “not lying.
 

Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the intrinsically pure Dharma, not arousing ignorance is called “not being intoxicated.”

 

Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the faultless Dharma, not talking about sins and mistakes is called “not talking about others’ faults and errors.”

 

Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the Dharma of equality, not talking about self and others is called “not elevating oneself and putting down others.”

 

Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the genuine, all pervading Dharma, not clinging to a single thing is called “not being stingy.”

 

Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the Dharma of no-self, not contriving a reality of self is called “not being angry.”

 

Self-nature is inconceivably wondrous; in the Dharma of oneness, not raising a distinction between Buddhas and beings is called “not slandering the Three Treasures.”

 

- The One-Mind Precepts of Bodhidharma

 

Do you see how conceptualization of separateness is a road to endarkenment? Look carefully.

 

What is the difference between the relative and the absolute? Compare the standard precepts with these. Anyone who TRULY understands these precepts shine with the light of the absolute.

[Tommy]

9 hours ago, stirling said:

Mystics have experiential knowledge of enlightenment. The value of the mystic is that they SEE enlightenment in this moment without "self", time, or space and can tell you what that looks like, and what it means. Their experience is direct and experiential, existing without doubt, and their teaching is the same pointing precisely to what enlightenment is, not to what a tradition things you should "do". 

I think this is what attracts me to Zen. Pointing exactly to it and not saying what needs to be done.

 

9 hours ago, stirling said:

Monastics and traditions want to codify enlightenment into a to-do list, or map, without realizing that it is impossible. They pointlessly argue dharma amongst themselves, clinging to rites, practices and rituals, but can't really come to any conclusion. No two "people" have ever realized the nature of reality in the same way, doing only one practice, or "everyone" would.

Codifying and a to do list is what traditional teaching is of regular subjects like math and physics. One thing leads logically into the next.

 

9 hours ago, stirling said:

What Bodhidharma is teaching from his example is simply "seek stillness"... and "do it a lot". This really is the simplicity of the path offered by Zen, or Dzogchen, or by most true mystics. 

Seek stillness? Do it a lot? For nine years straight, sit facing the wall of a cave?? I heard stories where he left his image in the cave wall. Still, I feel like it is when he took the tile and started polishing it into a mirror. Not possible for this me. But, thank you.

[stirling]

43 minutes ago, Tommy said:

I think this is what attracts me to Zen. Pointing exactly to it and not saying what needs to be done.

 

Me too.

 

43 minutes ago, Tommy said:

Codifying and a to do list is what traditional teaching is of regular subjects like math and physics. One thing leads logically into the next.

 

Absolutely. There is nothing logical about enlightenment, it is always here, always now, with no-one to enlighten. 

 

Quote

The awakened mind is turned upside down and does not accord even with the Buddha-wisdom. - Hui Hai

 

43 minutes ago, Tommy said:

Seek stillness? Do it a lot? For nine years straight, sit facing the wall of a cave?? I heard stories where he left his image in the cave wall. Still, I feel like it is when he took the tile and started polishing it into a mirror. Not possible for this me. But, thank you.

 

30 or 40 minutes of resting the mind in its own nature a day, with some pointing would probably be fine. That is what I would suggest. It IS the middle way, after all. 

[Lairg]

10 hours ago, stirling said:

Monastics and traditions want to codify enlightenment into a to-do list, or map, without realizing that it is impossible

 

On the other hand Existence might be intelligent and systematic.

 

If so, there are preconditions for entry into deeper functionality within Existence.

 

Obvious preconditions for humans include:

 

- control of physical desires

- control of emotional desires

- control of mental energies including thoughts

- opening of the heart to cosmic intent

- release of personal karma

- discharge of dense substances in the light-body/aura

- alignment with various higher flows

- intent to Oneness

 

That is mostly sufficient for first stage enlightenment.  Some spirits using the human format have remote issues as well

 

It seems that almost 1 in 2000 of adult humans on the surface of this planet has achieved that.

 

Who can  test such propositions?  Better to take a vote?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Thursday at 03:48 AM by Lairg

[stirling]

11 hours ago, Lairg said:

On the other hand Existence might be intelligent and systematic.

 

If so, there are preconditions for entry into deeper functionality within Existence.

 

Obvious preconditions for humans include:

 

- control of physical desires

- control of emotional desires

- control of mental energies including thoughts

- opening of the heart to cosmic intent

- release of personal karma

- discharge of dense substances in the light-body/aura

- alignment with various higher flows

- intent to Oneness

 

That is mostly sufficient for first stage enlightenment.  Some spirits using the human format have remote issues as well

 

It seems that almost 1 in 2000 of adult humans on the surface of this planet has achieved that.

 

Who can  test such propositions?  Better to take a vote?

 

Existence, as a term, implies something that has a reality of its own, which would be beyond the parameters of the Absolute. How could there be preconditions where the field of awareness and all of phantom separate objects in it have always already been enlightened? If someone had managed to create a solid set of preconditions for passing from duality to non-duality, wouldn't it have happened thousands of years ago? There IS value in reading the accounts of those that have done it, but that doesn't mean it will happen that way for "you".

 

Every spiritual teaching takes a limited set of parameters and suggests you attempt to manipulate them in a way conducive to awakening. There IS some seeming consensus on which are the most important, but it is much tangled in language and practices. Ultimately what is being pointed to - what is trying to be realized - doesn't belong to any language or practice, and can't be realized by acting on a limited set of parameters.

 

Here is my attempt at a simplified, but still corrupted-by-language description: What is needed is really a simple shift of perspective, noticing that the assumption that we are a "self" operating in a sea of separate things is illusory, created by constantly reinforcing a false belief. If you stop reinforcing the false belief it eventually collapses, since it has no reality beyond one's belief in it.

 

The steps you list COULD be factors for someone, or not at all (to the degree that you deeply believe in "cosmic intent", and "light-body/aura") they reinforce a belief in one's separateness. 

 

Stages of enlightenment? There is only one realization. That realization doesn't change, but how deep it is, and what that means does.

 

Just my opinion. 

[Lairg]

5 hours ago, stirling said:

Existence, as a term, implies something that has a reality of its own, which would be beyond the parameters of the Absolute.

 

In the Hindu tradition, Existence is periodic.  The Mahapralaya is the gap between one set of universes disappearing and the new set emerging.

 

The Absolute (The Source of All) is.   

 

The Source of All seems to experience through its periodic manifestation of Existence.

 

Why TSoA wishes to experience is beyond me.

 

The TSoA has threads into most humans

 

6 hours ago, stirling said:

The steps you list COULD be factors for someone, or not at all (to the degree that you deeply believe in "cosmic intent", and "light-body/aura") they reinforce a belief in one's separateness.

 

There is a process by which the human achieves its design functionality within the Oneness.   The steps listed are the basis of that achievement for most humans. 

 

5 hours ago, stirling said:

Stages of enlightenment? There is only one realization.

 

That is not what I observe

 

You may like to read A Treatise on Cosmic Fire

 

https://archive.org/details/alice-a-bailey-a-treatise-on-cosmic-fire

 

It was written about 1920.  The author said it was for the benefit of third degree initiates at the end of the 20th century.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[stirling]

14 minutes ago, Lairg said:

In the Hindu tradition, Existence is periodic.  The Mahapralaya is the gap between one set of universes disappearing and the new set emerging.

 

Adapting your chosen non-dual spiritual system:

 

Quote

Atyantika refers to the liberation of one's sense of self. Atyantikapralaya is achieved with the knowledge of God, which occurs when one loses oneself in service to the Paramatman, the Supreme Self. This involves the recognition that most of the cause and effect that occurs in the phenomenal universe is maya, an illusion, and that all that has a beginning and an end is not real. One conquers avidya (ignorance) with the realisation that there is no distinction between one's own Atman (Self) and the Paramatman. When one finally realises this truth, one's sense of self dissolves into and unites with Brahman, and one achieves mukti (liberation). - Wikipedia (my underlines)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pralaya#Atyantikapralaya

 

Liberation, in this sense, is from all arisings and passings, from all dualities, and from the "I" that experiences them. That INCLUDES all of the previous "pralayas" and "periodic universes and existences, or it wouldn't be liberation. This is enlightenment.

 

14 minutes ago, Lairg said:

The Source of All seems to experience through its periodic manifestation of Existence.

 

Why TSoA wishes to experience is beyond me.

 

The TSoA has threads into most humans

 

There is a process by which the human achieves its design functionality within the Oneness.   The steps listed are the basis of that achievement for most humans.

 

There is ultimately no "source" as a separate thing, no development, no human, no journey, no processes. As the Buddha says:

 

Quote

 

Sariputra, all things and phenomena are marked by emptiness;

they are neither appearing nor disappearing, neither impure nor pure,

neither increasing nor decreasing.

 

Therefore, in emptiness,

no forms, no sensations, perceptions,

impressions, or consciousness;

 

no eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, mind;

no sights, sounds, odors, tastes,

objects of touch, objects of mind;

 

no realm of sight and so on up to no realm of consciousness;

no ignorance and no end of ignorance,

 

and so on up to no aging and death,

and no end of aging and death;

 

no suffering, accumulation, cessation, or path;

no wisdom and no attainment.

 

With nothing to attain,

bodhisattvas rely on prajna-paramita,

and their minds are without hindrance. - Buddha, Heart Sutra

 

 

 

14 minutes ago, Lairg said:

That is not what I observe

 

When, when you mind is still, or when you think about it or read a book?

 

Quote

 

You may like to read A Treatise on Cosmic Fire

 

https://archive.org/details/alice-a-bailey-a-treatise-on-cosmic-fire

 

It was written about 1920.  The author said it was for the benefit of third degree initiates at the end of the 20th century.

 

 

I am familiar with the author, having read some Crowley and Golden Dawn stuff years ago, but not this book. Sounds interesting, but, like you, I'm more convinced by what I see.

[stirling]

Quote

I. There is one Boundless Immutable Principle; one Absolute Reality which, antecedes all manifested

conditioned Being. It is beyond the range and reach of any human thought or expression.

The manifested Universe is contained within this Absolute Reality and is a conditioned symbol of it.

In the totality of this manifested Universe, three aspects are to be conceived. - Alice Bailey, A Treatise on Cosmic fire

 

Using your link - Bailey talks about the absolute reality on the first page... which is where it belongs, IMHO. The absolute isn't some crazy OTHER place or time in the universe, is it always RIGHT here, right now. Where you are, what is happening is reality. Full realization is seeing this absolute reality in this moment, all of the time. This is what enlightenment is. Enlightenment is what you are: You are not a person having an experience of awareness, you are awareness having the experience of a person.

 

Notice how she says, "three aspects are to be conceived". The moment conception happens one is in la la land simply making things up. Right above that she says that Absolute is beyond the range of human thought and expression. I find that very interesting. She should have stopped there, I think.

 

Quote

We sense the world to be real because we feel our body to be real, and vice-versa. This is the primordial illusion. People think that the world is ancient. Actually, it arises with your consciousness  - Nirsagadatta Maharaj

 

Quote

You see yourself in the world while I see the world in myself. To you, you get born and die; while to me, the world appears and disappears. - Nisargadatta Maharaj

 

If you want to create a phenomenal (illusory) universe, the natural place to begin is with an "I". Most of the time, when your mind creates an illusory phenomenal universe this is where it starts. I starts like this: "I am late to my appointment". In the moment that you and the late appointment are created, so are "self" and "other", calendars, months, all cycles, time, space, lateness, earliness, etc. etc., in short, ALL dualities. The cascade happens a different way every time, though always beginning with self/other. It is easy to experiment with this. Learn to meditate until you are able to sit for short period of time with the mind still. Allow a thought to arise and watch as the thinking mind kicks in... the illusory story of reality is restored. 

 

It sounds a little crazy, but you do it over and over again every day. 

[Lairg]

If you are happy, that is sufficient.

 

For myself I wonder about the design functionality of Earth humanity.   Is it decorative, or does it have purpose?

 

 

[stirling]

1 hour ago, Lairg said:

If you are happy, that is sufficient.

 

For myself I wonder about the design functionality of Earth humanity.   Is it decorative, or does it have purpose?

 

My experience is that the stories we tell about the world are ultimately unsatisfactory because we know deep down that they are flawed for a reason we can't quite put a finger on. This was true for me, anyway. That reason is the Absolute.

 

The story can be anything you want it to be, full of drama, purpose, and destiny, as long as you can let go of it being any kind of real, cohesive cosmology.

 

If you are happy, that is sufficient.   ...sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

[Lairg]

 

The Absolute is the construct used by humans to refer to that which is unchanging.

 

Decades ago I noticed that what was unchanging always retreated before me.  That still continues.

 

Perhaps human concepts do not map what is Real

 

1 hour ago, stirling said:

let go of it being any kind of real, cohesive cosmology.

 

Is that because of inadequacy of human constructs?

 

Or perhaps the cosmos is random and therefore not suited to a coherent account?  If so, what is the meaning of being human?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[stirling]

12 hours ago, Lairg said:

The Absolute is the construct used by humans to refer to that which is unchanging.

 

Agreed. The "Absolute" is only a pointer to a no-self/no-time/no-space construct that is omnipresent and unchanging. 

 

12 hours ago, Lairg said:

Decades ago I noticed that what was unchanging always retreated before me.  That still continues.

 

It is worth looking at how things are when the mind is still. The moment thoughts prevail a cloak goes over the mind, and the "Absolute" is obscured. The longer you can rest your mind in the stillness of the "Absolute" the deeper your appreciation of it gets. 

 

12 hours ago, Lairg said:

Perhaps human concepts do not map what is Real.

 

Yes! Just like the concept of the "Absolute", what we map is our story about how things are, not the deeper reality. Yes, what is pointed to by the concept "Absolute" is real, but thinking about how it must be obscures its nature. 

 

Bailey is pointing to it here, and tells you the mechanism of its obscuration:

 

Quote

I. There is one Boundless Immutable Principle; one Absolute Reality which, antecedes all manifested

conditioned Being. It is beyond the range and reach of any human thought or expression.

The manifested Universe is contained within this Absolute Reality and is a conditioned symbol of it. - Alice Bailey, A Treatise on Cosmic fire

 

...just as Seng T'san does here:

 

Quote

The more you talk and think about it,
the further astray you wander from the truth.

 

Stop talking and thinking
and there is nothing you will not be able to know.

 

To return to the root is to find the meaning,
but to pursue appearances is to miss the source.

 

At the moment of inner enlightenment,
there is a going beyond appearance and emptiness.

 

The changes that appear to occur in the empty world
we call real only because of our ignorance.

 

Do not search for the truth;
only cease to cherish opinions.

 

Do not remain in the dualistic state;
avoid such pursuits carefully.

 

If there is even a trace
of this and that, of right and wrong,
the Mind-essence will be lost in confusion. - Seng T'san, Tsin Tsin Ming

 

12 hours ago, Lairg said:

Is that because of inadequacy of human constructs?

 

Not at all. It is because we have identified with our thoughts, imagining that they are "I", instead of the clean, clear, empty awareness that is always below them. It is actually a very simple misconception. 

 

12 hours ago, Lairg said:

Or perhaps the cosmos is random and therefore not suited to a coherent account?  If so, what is the meaning of being human?

 

Examine this for yourself. What meaning exists when the mind is still and silent? This is DIRECTLY where to look. 

[Mark Foote]

On 4/10/2025 at 8:32 PM, Lairg said:

 

The Absolute is the construct used by humans to refer to that which is unchanging.

 

Decades ago I noticed that what was unchanging always retreated before me.  That still continues.

 

Perhaps human concepts do not map what is Real

 

 

 

"Everything changes, work out your own salvation"--last words of Gautama the Shakyan

 

Some real stuff:
 

The frailty of the lower spine emerged with studies made in the 1940’s, studies that established that the discs of the lumbar spine cannot, on their own, withstand the pressure of lifting significant weight.

In the 1950’s, D. L. Bartelink concluded that pressure in the “fluid ball” of the abdominal cavity takes load off the structure of the spine when weight is lifted  (“The Role of Abdominal Pressure in Relieving the Pressure on the Lumbar Intervertebral Discs”; J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1957 Nov; 39-B(4):718-25). The pressure in the “fluid ball” is induced by activity in the abdominal muscles, and Bartilink was able to establish that in weight lifting, the pressure induced is proportional to the weight lifted.

Bartelink theorized that animals (as well as humans) make use of pressure in the abdominal cavity to protect the spine, and he noted that breathing can continue even when the abdomen is tensed:
 

Animals undoubtedly make an extensive use of the protection of their spines by the tensed somatic cavity, and probably also use it as a support upon which muscles of posture find a hold…

Breathing can go on even when the abdomen is used as a support and cannot be relaxed.

(ibid)

In the 1980’s, Gracovetsky, Farfan and Lamay suggested that in weight lifting, the abdominals work against the extensor muscles of the spine to allow the displacement of the fascial sheet behind the sacrum and spine:

If this interpretation is correct, it would partly explain why the abdominal muscles work hard during weight-lifting. They apparently work against the extensor muscles. Furthermore their lever arm gives them considerable effect. In fact, we propose that the effect of the abdominal muscles is two-fold:  to balance the moment created by the abdominal pressure (hence, the abdominal muscles do not work against the weight lifter) and to generate abdominal pressure up to 1 psi, which would help the extensors to push away the fascia.

It is essential that the supraspinous ligament and the lumbodorsal fascia be brought into action to permit weight lifting without disk or vertebral failure. … It must be kept in mind that in some circumstances ligament tension may reach 1800 lb., whereas no muscle can pull as hard.

(Gracovetsky, S., Farfan HF, Lamay C, 1997. A mathematical model of the lumbar spine using an optimal system to control muscles and ligaments. Orthopedic Clinics of North America 8: 135-153; bracketed added)

 

Dr. Rene Cailliet summarized these findings:
 

In the Lamy-Farfan model the abdominal pressure is considered to be exerted posteriorly against the lumbodorsal fascia, causing the fascia to become taut…. thus relieving the tension upon the erector spinae muscles.

(“Low Back Pain Syndrome”, ed. 3, F. A. Davis Co., pp 140-141)

Farfan, Lamay and Cailliet referred to the “lumbodorsal fascia”. That fascia is now more commonly referred to as the “thoracolumbar fascia”.

There may be another factor at work in the stretch of the thoracolumbar fascial sheet. Behind the sacrum, the fascia can be stretched rearward by the mass of the extensor muscles as they contract. As H. F. Farfan noted:
 

There is another peculiarity of the erector muscles of the spine. Below the level of the fifth lumbar vertebra, the muscle contracts in a compartment enclosed by bone anteriorly, laterally, and medially. Posteriorly, the compartment is closed by the lumbodorsal fascia. When contracted, the diameter of the muscle mass tends to increase. This change in shape of the muscle may exert a wedging effect between the sacrum and the lumbodorsal fascia, thereby increasing the tension in the fascia. This may be one of the few instances where a muscle can exert force by pushing. 

(“Mechanical Disorders of the Low Back”, H. F. Farfan;1973 Lea & Febiger; p 183)
 

Farfan mentions a “wedging effect” on the “lumbodorsal fascia” caused by the mass of the extensor muscles as they contract. The extensor muscles run in two sets behind the spine, one on either side of the vertebral column, and the wedging effect of the extensors on the thoracolumbar fascial sheet can therefore alternate from side to side. That is likely the source of the commentary made by Ch’an teacher Yuanwu in case 17 of “The Blue Cliff Record”:

 

… Hsiang Lin said, “Sitting for a long time becomes toilsome.”  If you understand this way, you are “turning to the left, turning to the right, following up behind.”

(“The Blue Cliff Record”, Yuanwu, tr. Cleary & Cleary, ed. Shambala, p 114)