Buddhas

[Jundo]

Re: Buddhas

Yes! Both equally empty (but also not 'illusion' in a derogatory sense). As an aside, I suspect that Dogen Zenji was also thinking along these lines when he proclaimed that there was only one Buddha-Dharma, as this is precisely the point at which all sectarian differences collapse in emptiness. We can see by this that tolerance towards other sects, views, religions is not only a 'nice-to-have' in Buddhism, but rather directly results from the above as a necessary consequence.

Gassho
Bansho

I always think of it as a movie or a dream. It is real, but it is not what you think it is. There's no denying that a movie is real, it's just not what it depicts. In that way, even an 'illusion' is 'real'. It is a real illusion.

Chet

[NOTE FROM JUNDO]:

I think that some of this is just Buddhist semantics, and some folks who disagree on the meaning of "real" and "illusion". But this also goes to the question of what is the ultimate point of practice.

For Dogen (unlike for many in Eastern religions, including Buddhism), the light from the projector and the blank white screen of the theatre were not "Truth", in contrast to which the movie was an "illusion". Not in the least.

Instead, the film is the theatre realized, the very meaning and fruition of the show. The light and screen are made "real" by the story, and find their true function in the performance, for otherwise they are but blank and empty and colorless. One might even say that one cannot separate one from the other without killing the whole thing! So, you cannot realize the "illusion" of the film, because there is nothing without the film ... only a cold, dead, meaningless room with empty seats. Thus, we can even forget about the white screen, forget that the actors are actors much or most of our day ... which may even be the best way to appreciate the spectacle!

Now, that being said, in our practice we do need to realize that this "film" is, in whole or part, a creation of the mind ... so that: change the mind, change the film. Angry mind, angry film ... calm mind, calm film (I simplify here, because the epic story is more complicated than just that!). Resist the film (i.e., wish it were a different film, and that one were sitting in a different theatre), and it will be a rough experience to sit through it. Embrace and act out and fall into the film, and the viewer is "at one with the story" with all of body and mind.

Now, Bansho, a question for you from me:

I still feel that encouraging folks to practice with "mountains are mountains /mountains are not mountains / mountains are mountains again" and "relative and absolute" (as in our bookclub selection) still is very worthwhile. That's why I like to use the "jazz" analogy with Dogen, as I see him playing a beautiful variation on the original "classical" and structured theme. In other words, as opposed to some who teach that "one must learn to taste the absolute in the relative" (one must learn to see the movie as an "illusion"), Dogen was expressing that "one can only encounter that which is the absolutely alive right there" (savor the film, grab some popcorn and jump right in, for it is the reason and absolute expression of the whole show brought to life).

Or, in the music analogy, don't listen for the silence behind the music, or think the music a fiction ... but realize that the music is the silence is the whole point of the gig! Man, grab a horn and start blowing!

Practice is enlightenment. The playing of the music is enlightenment. The watching/acting of the film is enlightenment.
(granted that how you play or act makes all the difference. As Bansho said, act like a heroin junkie ... that is your film and show. Act like a peaceful Buddhist ... that is your film and show)

But before you get to the point where one can thoroughly appreciate the complicated existential Jazz of Dogen's variations on "samsara is nirvana", one should first start with the basic chords of "mountains are not mountains" and "there is an absolute, there is a relative". Like starting to learn the piano with black keys and white keys. Knowing that there is light and a white screen and actors doing a performance has some value too ... although perhaps not even the most important perspective in encountering the whole show.

What do you think?

(Bill too, any perspective on this as our in-house Jazz guy?)

Gassho, Jundo

PS - Here is another analogy I like to use, if some folks don't see the point. Imagine a garden, in which some Eastern teachings teach that the "flowers and weeds" are an illusion, and the purpose is to "see the source" (see the naked soil) from which they arise. Or, slightly different , those that teach "always see the soil when viewing the flowers and weeds", because the soil must be seen.

Well, to do so kills the garden! Seeing the "flowers and weeds" as an illusion like that, or always having to "see the soil when you see the flowers and weeds" kills the garden.

Because the "flowers and weeds" are the whole reason and life of the garden, the garden (including the soil) brought to fruition. The soil is just dirt without that. You can even forget about the soil much or most of the time (although it is good to bring it back to mind from time to time ... when mulching and such! )

So, appreciate and be "at one with" the garden, each flower and weed ... perfectly a jewel in its way. Such is Liberation!

And that being said, nothing to stop us from also nurturing flowers and picking weeds! (Water the weeds, neglect the flowers = the "garden of the heroin junkie". Water the flower and pull the weeds = the "garden of the Buddhist practitioner").

[will]

Re: Buddhas

Ponder these words for a while, if you like:

"Practice is enlightenment."

Neither statement of fact nor fiction.

W

Re: Buddhas

Yes! Both equally empty (but also not 'illusion' in a derogatory sense). As an aside, I suspect that Dogen Zenji was also thinking along these lines when he proclaimed that there was only one Buddha-Dharma, as this is precisely the point at which all sectarian differences collapse in emptiness. We can see by this that tolerance towards other sects, views, religions is not only a 'nice-to-have' in Buddhism, but rather directly results from the above as a necessary consequence.

Gassho
Bansho

I always think of it as a movie or a dream. It is real, but it is not what you think it is. There's no denying that a movie is real, it's just not what it depicts. In that way, even an 'illusion' is 'real'. It is a real illusion.

Chet

[Bansho]

Re: Buddhas

Hi Chet,

If you keep talking like this, the pretty soon we'll be talking about 'your' truth and 'my' truth - and at that point, we might as well not talk at all.

Well, I certainly hope it doesn't come to that. I enjoy talking with you.

If you really think Dogen was being literal when he said 'two sides', well, I think you're still filtering your experience through thought.

Everyone goes crazy with Nagarjuna's 'two realities' doctrine, but the reality of the matter is, there are not really two realities! One can approach from either of these two sides conceptually, but neither of these 'two sides' exists. If Dogen was adamantly claiming any 'reality' to either of these 'two sides' (dude, the duality is right there!), then he is, in fact, an idiot.

I do not think Dogen was an idiot.

Neither do I, Chet. Which is why I think that he sincerely means what he says here. To stay in keeping with your reference to the Madhyamika doctrine of 'two realities': Dogen isn't contrasting conventional (Skt. samvrti) with absolute (Skt. paramartha) reality here. The 'sides' he's referring to here are both samvrti. However, each 'side' is, at the same time, an expression of ultimate reality, paramartha. This is why, as you correctly say, there are utimately no two realities. Both 'sides' are equivalent in their emptiness and, as such, are manifestations of ultimate reality, both are affirmed and neither is given preference over the other. This is why we needn't seek.

Ah! Both illusion. Equally empty. I see. As long as you must at some point conceive - better to realize that your conceptions are empty. Is that what you're driving at?

Yes! Both equally empty (but also not 'illusion' in a derogatory sense). As an aside, I suspect that Dogen Zenji was also thinking along these lines when he proclaimed that there was only one Buddha-Dharma, as this is precisely the point at which all sectarian differences collapse in emptiness. We can see by this that tolerance towards other sects, views, religions is not only a 'nice-to-have' in Buddhism, but rather directly results from the above as a necessary consequence.

Gassho
Bansho

[Jundo]

Re: Buddhas

Bansho, thank you for a very elegant presentation.

I sometimes present Dogen as a jazz musician, and our practice as hearing and playing jazz music. The "Truth" of the music is not to demand silence or a single harmonious tone, but is actually each note as a wonderful expression of Truth ... note by note, one by one and in groups, in all its syncopation and freedom. In such case, note and silence (the spaces between the notes) are not two ... ... each note is Truth, all the space between the notes is Truth, note-silence-note not even distinguishable as separate ... one great composition, the silence now music, the Truth of which is realized in the very playing!

The Harmony is to be discovered in-&-as the very harmonies and disharmonies, cause silence alone is just empty and silent ... a dark stage. The music -is- the Truth!

While the music is a kind of illusion, a dream within a dream, it is thus as real as real can be ... real hot jazz, vibrant sound, alive! Can you dig that sound?

Some folks opine that only the "Silence", or the "Single Harmonious Tone" or "One Original Key" is Truth ... and the point of what we are seeking (but that's kinda dull to me!). They say the noise of the band gets in the way of Truth. Instead, I think Dogen is telling us to stop seeking ... and just LISTEN and PLAY with our whole body and mind ... body and mind dropped away. If you can't dig it in the sound, you will not find it in the silence.

Anyway, I don't think that I am making this set any better by sitting in.

Bansho, you take this solo.

Gassho, Jundo

Re: Buddhas

Hi Chet,

If you keep talking like this, the pretty soon we'll be talking about 'your' truth and 'my' truth - and at that point, we might as well not talk at all.

Well, I certainly hope it doesn't come to that. I enjoy talking with you.

If you really think Dogen was being literal when he said 'two sides', well, I think you're still filtering your experience through thought.

Everyone goes crazy with Nagarjuna's 'two realities' doctrine, but the reality of the matter is, there are not really two realities! One can approach from either of these two sides conceptually, but neither of these 'two sides' exists. If Dogen was adamantly claiming any 'reality' to either of these 'two sides' (dude, the duality is right there!), then he is, in fact, an idiot.

I do not think Dogen was an idiot.

Neither do I, Chet. Which is why I think that he sincerely means what he says here. To stay in keeping with your reference to the Madhyamika doctrine of 'two realities': Dogen isn't contrasting conventional (Skt. samvrti) with absolute (Skt. paramartha) reality here. The 'sides' he's referring to here are both samvrti. However, each 'side' is, at the same time, an expression of ultimate reality, paramartha. This is why, as you correctly say, there are utimately no two realities. Both 'sides' are equivalent in their emptiness and, as such, are manifestations of ultimate reality, both are affirmed and neither is given preference over the other. This is why we needn't seek.

Ah! Both illusion. Equally empty. I see. As long as you must at some point conceive - better to realize that your conceptions are empty. Is that what you're driving at?

That is the human condition and that is why our Zen ancestors are so adamant in telling us to stop seeking. There is no reality to be found apart from... this.

You mistake resignation with realization! You really think this? Really?

Oh, quite the contrary. It's far from being resignation. It's neither chasing, nor running away. It's fully abiding in 'this' reality - which is ultimately no different, and certainly no better than - 'that' reality. We immerse ourselves in practice just where we are.

Gassho
Bansho

Indeed.

Gassho

Chet

[Bansho]

Re: Buddhas

Hi Chet,

If you keep talking like this, the pretty soon we'll be talking about 'your' truth and 'my' truth - and at that point, we might as well not talk at all.

Well, I certainly hope it doesn't come to that. I enjoy talking with you.

If you really think Dogen was being literal when he said 'two sides', well, I think you're still filtering your experience through thought.

Everyone goes crazy with Nagarjuna's 'two realities' doctrine, but the reality of the matter is, there are not really two realities! One can approach from either of these two sides conceptually, but neither of these 'two sides' exists. If Dogen was adamantly claiming any 'reality' to either of these 'two sides' (dude, the duality is right there!), then he is, in fact, an idiot.

I do not think Dogen was an idiot.

Neither do I, Chet. Which is why I think that he sincerely means what he says here. To stay in keeping with your reference to the Madhyamika doctrine of 'two realities': Dogen isn't contrasting conventional (Skt. samvrti) with absolute (Skt. paramartha) reality here. The 'sides' he's referring to here are both samvrti. However, each 'side' is, at the same time, an expression of ultimate reality, paramartha. This is why, as you correctly say, there are utimately no two realities. Both 'sides' are equivalent in their emptiness and, as such, are manifestations of ultimate reality, both are affirmed and neither is given preference over the other. This is why we needn't seek.

That is the human condition and that is why our Zen ancestors are so adamant in telling us to stop seeking. There is no reality to be found apart from... this.

You mistake resignation with realization! You really think this? Really?

Oh, quite the contrary. It's far from being resignation. It's neither chasing, nor running away. It's fully abiding in 'this' reality - which is ultimately no different, and certainly no better than - 'that' reality. We immerse ourselves in practice just where we are.

Gassho
Bansho

Re: Buddhas

Hi Chet,

Is it not more important to wake up to reality than to awaken to the reality only of a Buddhist practitioner? To only wake up to the reality of being a Buddhist practitioner is to wake up the state of being a shackled slave. The purpose of Buddhist practice is not to develop perfection as a Buddhist practitioner.

It is to awaken to reality, which is not fundamentally 'Buddhist' in any way.

We always awaken to a reality of... something. There is no 'independent' or 'objective' reality which exists apart from this which we can experience. This is what Dogen Zenji means when he says the following:

Genjo Koan[/i]":e4y346yt]When we use the whole body and mind to look at forms, and when we use the whole body and mind to listen to sounds, even though we are sensing them directly, it is not like a mirror’s reflection of an image, and not like water and the moon. While we are experiencing one side, we are blind to the other side. [My emphasis.]
-- Nishijima & Cross

Gassho
Bansho

If you keep talking like this, the pretty soon we'll be talking about 'your' truth and 'my' truth - and at that point, we might as well not talk at all.

If you really think Dogen was being literal when he said 'two sides', well, I think you're still filtering your experience through thought.


Everyone goes crazy with Nagarjuna's 'two realities' doctrine, but the reality of the matter is, there are not really two realities! One can approach from either of these two sides conceptually, but neither of these 'two sides' exists. If Dogen was adamantly claiming any 'reality' to either of these 'two sides' (dude, the duality is right there!), then he is, in fact, an idiot.

I do not think Dogen was an idiot.

Even when listening 'with the whole body', the mind leaps forward to greet the bodily sensations and in so doing constructs a conception! In reality, there are no 'gaps' - nothing to sense 'directly' or otherwise - and no one to sense it.

That is the human condition and that is why our Zen ancestors are so adamant in telling us to stop seeking. There is no reality to be found apart from... this.

You mistake resignation with realization! You really think this? Really?


IMHO, IANAT

Chet

[Bansho]

Re: Buddhas

Hi Chet,

Is it not more important to wake up to reality than to awaken to the reality only of a Buddhist practitioner? To only wake up to the reality of being a Buddhist practitioner is to wake up the state of being a shackled slave. The purpose of Buddhist practice is not to develop perfection as a Buddhist practitioner.

It is to awaken to reality, which is not fundamentally 'Buddhist' in any way.

We always awaken to a reality of... something. Thinking otherwise is delusion. There is no 'independent' or 'objective' reality which exists apart from this which we can experience. This is what Dogen Zenji means when he says the following:

Genjo Koan[/i]":27wg5unm]When we use the whole body and mind to look at forms, and when we use the whole body and mind to listen to sounds, even though we are sensing them directly, it is not like a mirror’s reflection of an image, and not like water and the moon. While we are experiencing one side, we are blind to the other side. [My emphasis.]
-- Nishijima & Cross

That is the human condition and that is why our Zen ancestors are so adamant in telling us to stop seeking. There is no reality to be found apart from... this.

Gassho
Bansho

[CharlesC]

Re: Buddhas

Is it not more important to wake up to reality than to awaken to the reality only of a Buddhist practitioner? To only wake up to the reality of being a Buddhist practitioner is to wake up the state of being a shackled slave. The purpose of Buddhist practice is not to develop perfection as a Buddhist practitioner.

It is to awaken to reality, which is not fundamentally 'Buddhist' in any way.

Maybe there is no reality other than the way we lead our lives. It's just that some ways work better than others.

:Charles

Re: Buddhas

Hi,

How many evangelical Christians awaken? Would someone need to be wary of me for pointing out that it's most likely very few?

Chet

Well, that may be like comparing football and baseball. In fact, they may "awaken" in their own way, appropriate for them ... I do not know or wish to say.

I was just talking about the use of the word "awaken" in the little corner of religion with which I am involved.

Gassho, J

That's just the question, isn't it: what does one awaken to?

If we cultivate the practice of the Buddha-Dharma, we will surely awaken to the existence of a Buddhist practitioner.

Likewise, if we cultivate the practice of injecting heroin into our veins, we will surely awaken to the existence of a heroin junkie.

It's our responsibility to decide what we want to do with our lives and to what we wish to awaken to. There's no escaping this and no one else can do it for us.

Kukkuravatika Sutta[/i]":27wxyt4y]Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was living in the Koliyan country: there is a town of the Koliyans called Haliddavasana.

Then Punna, a son of the Koliyans and an ox-duty ascetic, and also Seniya a naked dog duty ascetic, went to the Blessed One, and Punna the ox duty ascetic paid homage to the Blessed One and sat down at one side, while Seniya the naked dog-duty ascetic exchanged greetings with the Blessed One, and when the courteous and amiable talk was finished, he too sat down at one side curled up like a dog. When Punna the ox-duty ascetic sat down, he asked the Blessed One: "Venerable sir, this naked dog-duty ascetic Seniya does what is hard to do: he eats his food when it is thrown on the ground. That dog duty has long been taken up and practiced by him. What will be his destination? What will be his future course?"

"Enough, Punna, let that be. Do not ask me that."

A second time... A third time Punna the ox-duty ascetic asked the Blessed One: "Venerable sir, this naked dog-duty ascetic Seniya does what is hard to do: he eats his food when it is thrown on the ground. That dog duty has long been taken up and practiced by him. What will be his destination? What will be his future course?"

"Well, Punna, since I certainly cannot persuade you when I say 'Enough, Punna, let that be. Do not ask me that,' I shall therefore answer you.

"Here, Punna, someone develops the dog duty fully and unstintingly, he develops the dog-habit fully and unstintingly, he develops the dog mind fully and unstintingly, he develops dog behavior fully and unstintingly. Having done that, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of dogs. But if his view is such as this: 'By this virtue or duty or asceticism or religious life I shall become a (great) god or some (lesser) god,' that is wrong view in his case. Now there are two destinations for one with wrong view, I say: hell or the animal womb. So, Punna, if his dog duty is perfected, it will lead him to the company of dogs; if it is not, it will lead him to hell."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....057.nymo.html

It's not necessary to interpret the portion regarding Punna's reappearance after death literally to understand the point of this discourse. If we "develop dog behavior fully and unstintingly", we don't have to wait. We will awaken to that very dog-existence - here and now.

Gassho
Bansho

Is it not more important to wake up to reality than to awaken to the reality only of a Buddhist practitioner? To only wake up to the reality of being a Buddhist practitioner is to wake up the state of being a shackled slave. The purpose of Buddhist practice is not to develop perfection as a Buddhist practitioner.

It is to awaken to reality, which is not fundamentally 'Buddhist' in any way.

Chet

Chet

[Bansho]

Re: Buddhas

Hi,

How many evangelical Christians awaken? Would someone need to be wary of me for pointing out that it's most likely very few?

Chet

Well, that may be like comparing football and baseball. In fact, they may "awaken" in their own way, appropriate for them ... I do not know or wish to say.

I was just talking about the use of the word "awaken" in the little corner of religion with which I am involved.

Gassho, J

That's just the question, isn't it: what does one awaken to?

If we cultivate the practice of the Buddha-Dharma, we will surely awaken to the existence of a Buddhist practitioner.

Likewise, if we cultivate the practice of injecting heroin into our veins, we will surely awaken to the existence of a heroin junkie.

It's our responsibility to decide what we want to do with our lives and to what we wish to awaken to. There's no escaping this and no one else can do it for us.

Kukkuravatika Sutta[/i]":2xk8ut4w]Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was living in the Koliyan country: there is a town of the Koliyans called Haliddavasana.

Then Punna, a son of the Koliyans and an ox-duty ascetic, and also Seniya a naked dog duty ascetic, went to the Blessed One, and Punna the ox duty ascetic paid homage to the Blessed One and sat down at one side, while Seniya the naked dog-duty ascetic exchanged greetings with the Blessed One, and when the courteous and amiable talk was finished, he too sat down at one side curled up like a dog. When Punna the ox-duty ascetic sat down, he asked the Blessed One: "Venerable sir, this naked dog-duty ascetic Seniya does what is hard to do: he eats his food when it is thrown on the ground. That dog duty has long been taken up and practiced by him. What will be his destination? What will be his future course?"

"Enough, Punna, let that be. Do not ask me that."

A second time... A third time Punna the ox-duty ascetic asked the Blessed One: "Venerable sir, this naked dog-duty ascetic Seniya does what is hard to do: he eats his food when it is thrown on the ground. That dog duty has long been taken up and practiced by him. What will be his destination? What will be his future course?"

"Well, Punna, since I certainly cannot persuade you when I say 'Enough, Punna, let that be. Do not ask me that,' I shall therefore answer you.

"Here, Punna, someone develops the dog duty fully and unstintingly, he develops the dog-habit fully and unstintingly, he develops the dog mind fully and unstintingly, he develops dog behavior fully and unstintingly. Having done that, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of dogs. But if his view is such as this: 'By this virtue or duty or asceticism or religious life I shall become a (great) god or some (lesser) god,' that is wrong view in his case. Now there are two destinations for one with wrong view, I say: hell or the animal womb. So, Punna, if his dog duty is perfected, it will lead him to the company of dogs; if it is not, it will lead him to hell."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....057.nymo.html

It's not necessary to interpret the portion regarding Punna's reappearance after death literally to understand the point of this discourse. If we "develop dog behavior fully and unstintingly", we don't have to wait. We will awaken to that very dog-existence - here and now.

Gassho
Bansho

Re: Buddhas

Do you think it's problematic to try to continue to improve the methods whereby people realize truth?

Chet

[Jundo]

Re: Buddhas

How many evangelical Christians awaken? Would someone need to be wary of me for pointing out that it's most likely very few?

Chet

Well, that may be like comparing football and baseball. In fact, they may "awaken" in their own way, appropriate for them ... I do not know or wish to say.

I was just talking about the use of the word "awaken" in the little corner of religion with which I am involved.

Gassho, J

Re: Buddhas

How many evangelical Christians awaken? Would someone need to be wary of me for pointing out that it's most likely very few?

Chet