Welcome admin !

It is currently Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:33 am
Pathway:  Board index Resources Zen Links & Contacts Blogs

Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby desert_woodworker on Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:42 pm

Colin,

chankin1937 wrote:P.S. If there is no Zen, why are we posting in the Zen Forum?

Because it's "International".

And "because it's there" (here). If it were elsewhere, we'd be there, instead. (well, YOU asked!). :)

The name of the Forum is a conventionalization. Please DON'T take the name as an authority upon the matter of whether or not "Zen" exists. Anyway, of course it does not.

But there IS Zen Buddhism. That is undeniable, and is a boon, a blessing, as medicine, for the benefit of "oneself and others".

Hail!

--Joe
User avatar
desert_woodworker
 
Posts: 5974
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:09 am
Location: southern Arizona, USA

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby chankin1937 on Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:54 am

chankin1937 wrote:P.S. If there is no Zen, why are we posting in the Zen Forum?


Joe wrote: The name of the Forum is a conventionalization. Please DON'T take the name as an authority upon the matter of whether or not "Zen" exists. Anyway, of course it does not.
But there IS Zen Buddhism. That is undeniable, and is a boon, a blessing, as medicine, for the benefit of "oneself and others".


Hello Joe,
Let’s get this straight. You are saying there is no Zen but there is Zen Buddhism.
That is a blatant contradiction.
Admittedly modern expressions of Zen are full of them but that’s no excuse for an intelligent man to indulge in them.
Zen is the psychology extracted from the religion of Buddhism.
(The Christian religion uses the same psychology but in a more devious way.)
Colin
chankin1937
 

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby desert_woodworker on Tue Sep 29, 2015 1:42 pm

Colin,

chankin1937 wrote:
chankin1937 wrote:P.S. If there is no Zen, why are we posting in the Zen Forum?

Joe wrote: The name of the Forum is a conventionalization. Please DON'T take the name as an authority upon the matter of whether or not "Zen" exists. Anyway, of course it does not.
But there IS Zen Buddhism. That is undeniable, and is a boon, a blessing, as medicine, for the benefit of "oneself and others".

Let’s get this straight. You are saying there is no Zen but there is Zen Buddhism.
That is a blatant contradiction.
Admittedly modern expressions of Zen are full of them but that’s no excuse for an intelligent man to indulge in them.
Zen is the psychology extracted from the religion of Buddhism.
(The Christian religion uses the same psychology but in a more devious way.)

"Get it straight"? Surely, why not:

Zen Buddhism is what exists, not Zen. There is no Zen. Zen Buddhism exists. Zen Buddhism is medicine. "The whole world is medicine", actually. Zen Buddhism -- via its practices -- is a particularly efficacious and quick modality, as well as a regimen of "health-maintenance" for Mind after awakening. Maintenance of health is just as important as sudden restoration of health.

"Zen" is an adjective. It modifies the noun, "Buddhism". "Buddhism", you see, can stand to be a noun, because it represents (is a verbal symbol for... ) a body of existent medicine, practiced in Zen Buddhist circles. That medicine -- Buddhism -- is medicine for transforming (deluded) present consciousness so that it is not primarily operating from a fictitious (un-real) "self", but instead operates from the basis of innate Wisdom, and Compassion

Wisdom and Compassion are original-endowments in Humans, but they are just covered-up by self-ish-ness, and by the pernicious habits of mind of self-ish-ness. Wisdom and Compassion are not recognized until the overburden of the false "self" is entirely lifted (crushed; dissolved), and removed.

During treatment by the medicine, one may indeed wake up suddenly to the true self, the no-self mentioned in Zen Buddhist conversations. What is revealed upon that awakening, and the new life that begins at the moment of that awakening, is not "Zen" (because there is no such thing, since "Zen" is not a noun, but an adjective, remember?). What is revealed, and what begins, then, is just a true Human life, with Wisdom and Compassion arising just as it should, in seamless response to conditions and circumstances.

Now, I admit, that some people who have not undergone this transformation of Mind, this return to true operation of the genuine Human being, may have odd ideas of what exists and what does not exist (naturally!, ...as it's within the nature and purview of delusion to create phantasms and take them to be "real", and not just false bedevilments). But they're simply wrong, though, these people, as they find out, if (when) they awaken. There is no "Zen". To suppose otherwise is just the operation of false mind, still in need of medicine.

Anyway, "Zen" is an adjective, as you now see at least in a reasoned way.

Yet, the only way to be truly straight about it is to undertake correct practice, shuck the overburden, and truly awaken. That is the proper purpose of Zen Buddhist practice. And its use, too, in maintaining the properly-ordered original Mind of no-mind.

best,

--Joe

ps Gregory, sorry; this convo has been OT. It seemed an important tangent, though, but it can cease, now, because Colin now has it straight. TNX for your forbearance. -J.
:Namaste:
User avatar
desert_woodworker
 
Posts: 5974
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:09 am
Location: southern Arizona, USA

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby chankin1937 on Wed Sep 30, 2015 12:42 pm

chankin1937 wrote:; Let’s get this straight. You are saying there is no Zen but there is Zen Buddhism.
That is a blatant contradiction.
Admittedly modern expressions of Zen are full of them but that’s no excuse for an intelligent man to indulge in them.
Zen is the psychology extracted from the religion of Buddhism.
(The Christian religion uses the same psychology but in a more devious way.)


Joe wrote: "Zen" is an adjective. It modifies the noun, "Buddhism".


Hello Joe,
Usage overrules such pedantry.

Joe wrote:…….(deluded) present consciousness so that it is not primarily operating from a fictitious (un-real) "self", Wisdom and Compassion are original-endowments in Humans, but they are just covered-up by self-ish-ness, and by the pernicious habits of mind of self-ish-ness. Wisdom and Compassion are not recognized until the overburden of the false "self" is entirely lifted (crushed; dissolved), and removed.


When we use the pronoun “I” or refer to my “self” we can mean one of three things.
The first “I” (Self 1) is our awareness. This is the observer of all the sense data we receive and the employer of all conscious mental activity. Importantly it is also able to abstain from these activities. It is universally constant in all creatures with our kind of central nervous system.
The second “I” (Self 2) incorporates the first self and a collection of unique data relating to each individual - our experiences, our memories, our prejudices, ambitions, our morals (or lack of them) – the whole of our character and personality. It is a highly individual mental construct.
The third “I” (Self 3) is the gross physical body and incorporates the other two.

The self we are advised to lose (or is denied existence), is certainly not self (1). We need that one to experience anything. Nor are we referring to self (3) (although we do lose contact with that in meditation). The self we are referring to is self (2); that ever-changing and impermanent self; the mental construct of self. But we lose it not particularly because it pertains to the self but because it is a set of ideas and all of those must go in meditation. All three are valuable concepts in daily life and all three certainly exist, even though 2 and 3 change over time. They are totally real.

That is the proper purpose of Zen Buddhist practice. And its use, too, in maintaining the properly-ordered original Mind of no-mind.


“Mind of no-mind”. Hmm…..! Another contradiction?

ps Gregory, sorry; this convo has been OT. It seemed an important tangent, though, but it can cease, now, because Colin now has it straight. TNX for your forbearance. -J.


Hello Gregory,
He’s apologising for pedantically arguing that Zen doesn’t exist.
Colin
chankin1937
 

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby desert_woodworker on Wed Sep 30, 2015 2:25 pm

Colin,

chankin1937 wrote:He’s apologising for pedantically arguing that Zen doesn’t exist.

I see you giving more self-serving support to your outer-path views.

When you're taught and told the truth by folks here, you say that's "pedantry". When you try to support your outer-path manifesto, you call that "common sense". Ha ha ha ha HA!

Really, if you want to benefit at all from the function of reason, you should be consistent. Else, you give yourself the same wrong answers and information over and over again, while screening-out what can actually be of help, and a true description. Practitioners here know that an echo-chamber of the sort you service is not consistent with actual Buddhist practice (nor with healthy Human life). And it's not even "Scientific". What is it, instead? Errant, and pedantic.

There is no 'Zen'. There is Zen Buddhism, and its practices. Now, back to the topic at hand. Thanks; and thanks!, All.

--Joe
User avatar
desert_woodworker
 
Posts: 5974
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:09 am
Location: southern Arizona, USA

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby [james] on Wed Sep 30, 2015 7:58 pm

desert_woodworker wrote:Colin,

chankin1937 wrote:He’s apologising for pedantically arguing that Zen doesn’t exist.

I see you giving more self-serving support to your outer-path views.



Good grief! Can the two of you just shut up already?
Your incessant back and forth-ing is long past tedious and well into boring and annoying.

Now you are both apologizing to a third party for each other's statements. Too weird!

Hey Joe? What happened to your side of the agreement with Guo Gu? He'd translate the poem you were interested in and you would drop your Colin crusade. How is that working out?
User avatar
[james]
 
Posts: 347
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2011 12:07 am

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby desert_woodworker on Wed Sep 30, 2015 8:32 pm

James, thanks,

[james] wrote:Hey Joe? What happened to your side of the agreement with Guo Gu? He'd translate the poem you were interested in and you would drop your Colin crusade. How is that working out?

Guo Gu is a good man.

Life goes on. We respond to challenges and opportunities as they arise.

You?

(err-r, to save human-bandwidth, and people's eyesight, etc., no need to reply, eh?) :lol2:

Yours,

:Namaste:

--Joe
User avatar
desert_woodworker
 
Posts: 5974
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:09 am
Location: southern Arizona, USA

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby TTT on Thu Oct 01, 2015 2:19 am

Gregory Wonderwheel wrote:
desert_woodworker wrote:Gregory,

The attribution question continues to be an interesting one. This morning I am reminded of the funny little quip perpetrated (and now here repeated by me... ) on the same sort of issue, this time having to do with the authorship of the plays of Shakespeare. To wit:

"The plays of Shakespeare were either written by Shakespeare, or by somebody else of the same name."

;)

--Joe


Yes, and if Asvaghosa or Paramartha were alive to day I bet they would echo Yogi Berra's saying "I really didn't say everything I said."

_/|\_
Gregory


Ok so what did they say? And why?
For example if i say thet beer is bitter i drink it a lot. That is realy somthing i can grasp.

Kinde reguards.
Symbols of the sun, symbols of the snow
For those how go beyond, for those how go below.
TTT
 
Posts: 1704
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 8:38 am

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby Gregory Wonderwheel on Sun Oct 04, 2015 3:13 am

chankin1937 wrote: Thanks for your comprehensive reiteration of the translated work you posted earlier but it would be more easily comprehended by English speakers if you would use the accepted English translations of the foreign words you use. No offence intended: it would just make it so much easier to read.

would you please give one or a few examples? I'm always interested in feedback where something is not easily comprehended.



chankin1937 wrote:CMA is conscious mental activity.

Now that you say that, I do remember reading one of your posts using that term. I guess CMA would be a term for the activity of the six consciousnesses. But what about the semi- or sub- conscious activity of the 7th consciousness and the unconscious activity of the 8th consciousness? Do you have a handy acronym for subconscious and unconscious mental activity?

chankin1937 wrote:It is the perception, accumulation, recall and association of data and the direction of action. It was an attempt to gather into one phrase the panoply of actions available to our awareness. It is all thinking, all imagining, all the activities the awareness (called our original mind) can undertake.

Do the "alls" in "all thinking, all imagining, all the activities of awareness" indicate that you are using CMA for both conscious and unconscious activity?

chankin1937 wrote:Once we can abstain from CMA we have a mind empty of thoughts and full of bliss.

Naw, I'm not buying it. A mind empty of activity is not blissful. It is turned off.

chankin1937 wrote:Not because thoughts are errors or delusional nor because the world we live in is an illusion but because the psychology of the common human goal dictates that it be so. (I assume you haven’t read that either.)

I have no idea what philosophy or psychology this might be, but it is not Buddha Dharma and not any psychology that I have heard of. The phrase "the common human goal" doesn't make any sense to me when used as something associated wit the activity of "dictating."


chankin1937 wrote:1/ Solving problems and satisfying appetites demands efficient use of conscious mental activity. (CMA) We must think to survive.
2/ Once the problems are solved etc. CMA has completed its invaluable role and (ideally) we abstain from further using it, for the time being. Let it go.
3/ Simultaneously once our problems are solved etc. we feel content, fulfilled, happy.
4/ From 2/ and 3/ it becomes apparent that a reduction in CMA actually produces a feeling of happiness.
5/ It follows that practicing abstaining from CMA will produce higher and higher degrees of the feeling .
6/ To get our just and proper reward for our successful actions we must confine CMA to its specific role.
That is what the Buddha meant when he said:
Nirvana (profound peace-of-mind)is the extinction of dukkha.(obsessive thinking - random and habitual CMA)

If the entire history of the Earth is represented by a clock face, man appeared in the last minutes of one rotation. Our world does not depend on our viewing it in any sense. It exists independently of us and is very real. Our perception of it depends on its physical properties and the biology of our viewing apparatus - both of which are fixed entities and cannot be changed by the viewer – our awareness.

The reason why we abstain from CMA in meditation is because we are using the psychology of the common human goal to experience extremes of what is conventionally called happiness – profound peace of mind.
Thinking is not wrong or delusional, it just plays no part in our being happy, nor – more importantly - in meditation.
CMA is the invaluable tool our awareness uses to solve our problems etc. but once it has fulfilled its role, that tool can be temporarily laid aside. What is then revealed is beyond belief in every sense of the phrase.

All that is interesting but it is not what I would consider a correct view of meditation.

chankin1937 wrote:P.S. The philosophers I referred to were the writers of the Sutras and other religious texts. They are in some respects the Flat Earthers of our past. Perhaps its time to move on to a new more logical understanding.

And if you agree with any of that, I’ll eat my hat! :)
Colin


Right, thanks for reminding me that you appear to be more interested in the alteration and modernization of Buddha Dharma than in manifesting it in the West.

_/|\_
Gregory
Why you do not understand is because the three carts were provisional for former times, and because the One Vehicle is true for the present time. ~ Zen Master 6th Ancestor Huineng
User avatar
Gregory Wonderwheel
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 4221
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 3:07 am
Location: Santa Rosa, California

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby Gregory Wonderwheel on Sun Oct 04, 2015 3:52 am

chankin1937 wrote:Let’s get this straight. You are saying there is no Zen but there is Zen Buddhism.
That is a blatant contradiction.
Admittedly modern expressions of Zen are full of them but that’s no excuse for an intelligent man to indulge in them.
Zen is the psychology extracted from the religion of Buddhism.
(The Christian religion uses the same psychology but in a more devious way.)
Colin


The thing (dharma) about Zen (as Dharma) is that the words can get in the Way (dao, marga) or they can clarify. The difference is in the mind, not the words. Hui Neng called this the position of either turning the Sutra or being turned by the sutra.

Zen master Huangbo said there are no Zen teachers, but he also said, he did not say there is not Zen. Zen is mind. Mind is no-mind. Zen is no-mind.

A contradiction only exists in our mind when we see it that way.

The Diamond Cutter Sutra says the Dharma that is No Dharma is the Genuine Dharma. Or words to that effect. :<.<:

The mind that perceives the contradiction is Zen. The mind that clarifies the contradiction is Zen. There is Zen, but it is no-Zen. Only intelligent people can use contradictions. It is the confused and unintelligent people who are used by contradictions.

Buddhism is psychological religion, or religious psychology, depending on your point of view.
Zen is not extracted from Buddhism. Zen is the living breathing realization of Buddhism. So I do not see Zen as "an adjective" as much as I see it as a verb or adverb.

_/|\_
Gregory
Why you do not understand is because the three carts were provisional for former times, and because the One Vehicle is true for the present time. ~ Zen Master 6th Ancestor Huineng
User avatar
Gregory Wonderwheel
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 4221
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 3:07 am
Location: Santa Rosa, California

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby chankin1937 on Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:10 pm

chankin1937 wrote: Thanks for your comprehensive reiteration of the translated work you posted earlier but it would be more easily comprehended by English speakers if you would use the accepted English translations of the foreign words you use. No offence intended: it would just make it so much easier to read.


Gregory Wonderwheel wrote: would you please give one or a few examples? I'm always interested in feedback where something is not easily comprehended.


Hello Gregory Wonderwheel, I won’t waste your time on that one. I have since downloaded a Glossary of Pali and Buddhist terms (which I should have done in the first place). I’ll use it if I don’t understand a word

.chankin1937 wrote:CMA is conscious mental activity.


Gregory Wonderwheel wrote: Now that you say that, I do remember reading one of your posts using that term. I guess CMA would be a term for the activity of the six consciousnesses. But what about the semi- or sub- conscious activity of the 7th consciousness and the unconscious activity of the 8th consciousness? Do you have a handy acronym for subconscious and unconscious mental activity?


Yes, that’s called the autonomic nervous system. This is not something we should interfere with. As we are never aware of those, they are irrelevant to our quest.

chankin1937 wrote:It is the perception, accumulation, recall and association of data and the direction of action. It was an attempt to gather into one phrase the panoply of actions available to our awareness. It is all thinking, all imagining, all the activities the awareness (called our original mind) can undertake.


GW wrote: Do the "alls" in "all thinking, all imagining, all the activities of awareness" indicate that you are using CMA for both conscious and unconscious activity?


No, just those elements we are normally conscious of – CMA.

chankin1937 wrote:Once we can abstain from CMA we have a mind empty of thoughts and full of bliss.


GW qwrote: Naw, I'm not buying it. A mind empty of activity is not blissful. It is turned off.


We are aware. We can think or choose not to think. Whichever we choose, we remain aware.
What do you make of the following quotes?

The first lines of Dogen’s Lancet of Seated Meditation:
Essential function of all the Buddhas,
Functioning essence of all the Patriarchs
It is present without thinking,…..


Hsi Yun (a Zen Master who lived about 840 A.D.) had this advice to give:
" ...To make use of the mind to think (in the ordinary sense of the word) is to leave the substance and attach yourself to forms.... The pure mind, the source of everything, shines on with all the
brilliance of its own perfection, but the people of the world do not awake to it, regarding only that which sees, hears, feels and knows as mind. Because their understanding is veiled by their own sight, hearing, feeling and knowledge, they do not understand the spiritual brilliance of the original substance. If they could only eliminate all analytical thinking in a flash, that original substance would manifest itself like the sun ascending through the void and illuminating the whole universe without hindrance or bounds....
Neither hold to them (sight, hearing, etc.), abandon them, dwell in them
nor cleave to them, but exist independently of all that is above, below
or around you...."


...and what then remains? Awareness of the physical condition of the awareness empty of CMA -
but full of Nirvana.

In the Lankavatara Sutra we find:
"When all these (imaginings ) are put aside and there is a state of
imagelessness, then a conditiion in conformity with Suchness presents
itself, and the Buddhas will come together from all their countries and
with all their shining hands touch the head of this benefactor."


Huang-po says: "When no-mind (mushin -) is sought after by mind (cma), this is making a particular object of thought. There is only testimony of silence, it goes beyond thinking.
Therefore it is said that the Dharma cuts off the passage to words and put an end to all forms of mentation.


Lower down on the same page he says:
"The Buddha-essence is.....illuminating, peaceful and productive of bliss.

CH wrote…….snip.


GW wrote: All that is interesting but it is not what I would consider a correct view of meditation.


That is right. It is an explanation of why meditation works. How to meditate is well understood; abstain from CMA while remaining alert.

chankin1937 wrote:P.S. The philosophers I referred to were the writers of the Sutras and other religious texts. They are in some respects the Flat Earthers of our past. Perhaps its time to move on to a new more logical understanding.


They did their best and I have great respect for them. They introduced me to mediation and for that I am eternally grateful.

GW wrote: Right, thanks for reminding me that you appear to be more interested in the alteration and modernization of Buddha Dharma than in manifesting it in the West.


A rational explanation of why meditation works is what the human race desperately needs. Perhaps once they realise that wealth, fame and power are false goals and concentrate on achieving peace-of-mind – the common human goal - the world will be a better place.
Colin
chankin1937
 

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby chankin1937 on Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:57 pm

Gregory Wonderwheel wrote :The thing (dharma) about Zen (as Dharma) is that the words can get in the Way (dao, marga) or they can clarify. The difference is in the mind, not the words. Hui Neng called this the position of either turning the Sutra or being turned by the sutra.


I see it differently. (Surprise!) Zen instructs us how to meditate and indicates that it would be to our benefit to do so. We follow those instruction which imply that we don’t think about the instructions (or anything else) during meditation.

Zen master Huangbo said there are no Zen teachers, but he also said, he did not say there is not Zen. Zen is mind. Mind is no-mind. Zen is no-mind.


Perhaps he meant that there are no good teachers! :)

A contradiction only exists in our mind when we see it that way.


A contradiction is a contradiction. I can’t make any sense of “mind is no-mind”. Or that “Zen is no-mind”. If those statements need explaining, why not make their meaning clear in the first place?

The Diamond Cutter Sutra says the Dharma that is No Dharma is the Genuine Dharma. Or words to that effect.


??????

The mind that perceives the contradiction is Zen. The mind that clarifies the contradiction is Zen. There is Zen, but it is no-Zen. Only intelligent people can use contradictions. It is the confused and unintelligent people who are used by contradictions.


The modern trend seems to be to make contradictory statements hoping to convince students that only the speaker understands what he is saying – that he alone can explain. The truth is, what he is saying is nonsense. There are more efficient ways of transmitting the Dharma: make sense.
The Zen Masters managed to be perfectly clear.

Buddhism is psychological religion, or religious psychology, depending on your point of view.
Zen is not extracted from Buddhism. Zen is the living breathing realization of Buddhism. So I do not see Zen as "an adjective" as much as I see it as a verb or adverb.


I see it as the psychology extracted from the Buddhist religion. The direct pointing at the goal outside the ceremony and the scriptures.
Colin
chankin1937
 

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby desert_woodworker on Tue Oct 06, 2015 3:18 pm

Gregory Wonderwheel wrote:
desert_woodworker wrote: Hakeda writes:
"The Mind as phenomena (samsara) is grounded on the Tathagatha-garbha."

I find the word "samsara" useful, there. To equivalence "Mind as phenomena" (birth and death) and "samsara" has been helpful.

Hakeda translates translates “birth and extinction” 生滅 as “phenomena (samsara)” and so he translates 心生滅 as “the Mind as phenomena (samsara).” I think it would have been better if he had translated it as “the Mind as samsara (birth and death)” and left the term “phenomena” out of it. Sometimes “dharma” 法 is translated as “phenomena” when it means “things.” That’s bit of a reach to me, however translating “birth and extinction” as “phenomena” seems way too much of a reach to me. It is our birth and extinction that is the crux of the matter being discussed here and the term “phenomena” is too objectifying and externalizing, too philosophical for my tastes.

Gregory, check me on this... . Often, "birth and death" in Buddhistic reference is the play of thoughts, the roiling, boiling arising and passing of thoughts, while yet also engendering other thoughts (to arise, and pass... ). The thoughts, of course, can be called "phenomena", not as they pertain to presumed events or things existing and acting "outside" of us, but instead as what we are most immediately aware of, even before concept-formation. By arising and passing of "thoughts", I mean not the "sense-data" of 20th Century Western philosophical parlance, but thoughts -- or, otherwise, the sensation or apprehension of "movement", or "movements", of a presumed "mind" (belonging to a "self").

Well, I think this is the sort of "birth and death" Hakeda has in mind while he makes an equivalence with "samsara", as "birth and death" of "phenomena", "phenomena" being, again, the (sensation of or experience of the) arising and passing of "movements of mind". And to put samsara in contradistinction to nirvana, generally, nirvana is given to be the cessation of the process of such movement(s), and the disappearance of the previously presumed "mind" that had seemed to play host to them.

Of course, now, as for biological birth-and-death, well... as you know, there are approaches to Dharma which claim that all is "Mind", so that all "biology" and its ups and downs are a part of that, and not to be given a reified status on a basis presumed to be outside of Mind, nor on the authority of any conception that is a production of Mind. I'm not advocating "Mind-Only" (Vijñaptimatara, or Wei Shi), but I certainly lean that way, sometimes strongly!, sometimes not strongly enough. ;)

And so, we practice. :)

best!,

--Joe
User avatar
desert_woodworker
 
Posts: 5974
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:09 am
Location: southern Arizona, USA

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby chankin1937 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 12:46 pm

Hello all,
Hakeda writes:
"The Mind as phenomena (samsara) is grounded on the Tathagatha-garbha."


What do we know?
“The mind as phenomena” is the all we know of the world.
Pure, unburdened (by CMA) awareness is what the Buddha attained on becoming enlightened.
So what Hakeda is saying is:
You have to be aware to experience the world in all its aspects.
I agree with that.
Colin
chankin1937
 

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby Michaeljc on Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:23 am

Let’s get this straight. You are saying there is no Zen but there is Zen Buddhism.
That is a blatant contradiction.
Admittedly modern expressions of Zen are full of them but that’s no excuse for an intelligent man to indulge in them


Not only modern

Where is Zen when immersed in Zen (practice)?

Better to be a stupid wo/man

:)

m
User avatar
Michaeljc
 
Posts: 3578
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 3:36 pm
Location: Raglan New Zealand

Re: Discourse on Arousing Confidence in the Great Vehicle

Postby chankin1937 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 10:40 am

Michaeljc wrote: Where is Zen when immersed in Zen (practice)?


Hello Michaeljc,
Hopefully absent, like every other set of ideas – all other CMA.
Colin
chankin1937
 

Previous

Return to Blogs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 
RocketTheme Joomla Templates

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 157 on Mon Sep 19, 2016 8:44 am

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest