Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

[Rich]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

That’s a good question, I think. Why, when we are all perfectly aware that discourse is part of the Path of Understanding (and yes I mean whole and complete understanding, not simple intellectual ‘knowledge’), why do we seem to have an aversion to it? Why do we talk about the Way only to deride talking about the Way?

Because its dangerous in the sense that the talking can lead one into a dream, a delusion, a confusion. But if the talking leads one to actually just sitting or the just sitting mind then its a wonderful thing.

There were times when some zen masters felt that talking was so dangerous that when asked a question they would only do something like hold up one finger or hit the ground.

The will to the truth is the same action as just sitting. (don't know where this came from but it sounds like good speech :lol: )

[Myoku]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

There were times when some zen masters felt that talking was so dangerous that when asked a question they would only do something like hold up one finger or hit the ground.

Sounds like a reasonable approach to me ...
_()_
Myoku

[Jundo]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

There were times when some zen masters felt that talking was so dangerous that when asked a question they would only do something like hold up one finger or hit the ground.

Yes, we can talk and philosophize about these subjects ... whether God is 1 or 6 or 1/2 or none or all of those. Is God purple or red or is God all colors? Does God have a nose, and does He scratch it when it itches?

But notice that God or Gods ... if there is/are a God(s) ... has not posted a comment.

Or, maybe God has ... through all of us! 8)

Or, maybe God (if God talks) talks in a language hard to hear.

Or, maybe silence is the best description of God!

Or, maybe silence is the best description of Silence!

Or hitting the ground, holding up a finger or yelling MU! or KWATZ!!

Or all of the above, and none of those, at once.

So ... just chop wood, fetch water. If there is a God, perhaps She made you, the wood and water simply for that.

Whatever the case ... stand silent ... yell KWATZ! ... scratch your nose ... chop wood.

Gassho, Jundo

[doogie]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

Brains are stupid; the mind lies. How are my little gray cells supposed to comprehend the true nature of the universe when it refuses to believe that these two coffee tables are the same size? http://www.michaelbach.de/ot/sze_shepardTables/ It's fun to exercise the little guys, and to dream up all sorts of grand delusions (I make my living that way ... occasionally), but I wouldn't trust my head jelly to tell me the truth about anything. For that I'll turn to my ass.

[Graceleejenkins]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

Dogen wrote (in Shobogenzo Shoaku Makusa .. Not Doing Evils) ...
Y

...

It is not that evils do not exist, but that there is only "not doing." It is not that evils do exist, but that there is only "not doing." Evils are not emptiness; it is "not doing." Evils are not form; it is "not doing." Evils are not "not doing," for there is only "not doing." For example, spring pines are neither non-existent nor existent; they just are not done. Autumn chrysanthemums are neither existent nor are they non-existent; they just are not done. The buddhas are neither existent nor non-existent; they are "not doing." Pillars, lamps, candles, whisks, staffs, and so forth, are neither existent nor non-existent; they are "not doing." One's own self is neither existent nor non-existent; it is "not doing."

...



http://scbs.stanford.edu/sztp3/translat ... ation.html

Gassho, J

Jundo, I don't even have a glimmer of understanding on this. Could you try saying it differently? Grassho, Grace.

[Porpoise]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

Non-duality cannot be understood by the mind. And it doesn't need to be. It has to be experienced. It has to be understood from a whole new place. Place of no mind. No self. No no self, and no no mind.

I came across this passage from the Malunkyaputta Sutta:

"Then, Malunkyaputta, with regard to phenomena to be seen, heard, sensed, or cognized: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Malunkyaputta, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress."

[Jundo]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

Dogen wrote (in Shobogenzo Shoaku Makusa .. Not Doing Evils) ...

It is not that evils do not exist, but that there is only "not doing." It is not that evils do exist, but that there is only "not doing." Evils are not emptiness; it is "not doing." Evils are not form; it is "not doing." Evils are not "not doing," for there is only "not doing." For example, spring pines are neither non-existent nor existent; they just are not done. Autumn chrysanthemums are neither existent nor are they non-existent; they just are not done. The buddhas are neither existent nor non-existent; they are "not doing." Pillars, lamps, candles, whisks, staffs, and so forth, are neither existent nor non-existent; they are "not doing." One's own self is neither existent nor non-existent; it is "not doing."

Jundo, I don't even have a glimmer of understanding on this. Could you try saying it differently? Grassho, Grace.

Hmmmm. I will try.

There's this wondrous Wholeness ("Emptiness") in which there are no separate "things" to be done, nothing lacking and in need of doing, no separate "people" to be doing things, i.e., Emptiness is a great "Not Doing" (even though Emptiness is, by a simultaneously true perspective, also this world of things to do, good and bad, and people to do them!). So, Dogen is playing on both Emptiness as a great "Not Doing" and playing on the phrase "Don't do bad (evil)". Got the pun?

So, he is saying something like "oh, sure there are evil actions in this world, but ultimately all is the "Not Doing" (Emptiness). On the other hand (another simultaneously true perspective), there is no evil in Emptiness ... and it is all the "Not Doing" too. In whatever case, it is all Emptiness, the "Not Doing". Flowers and trees are also beyond either existence or non-existence (they exist, but then again, not really) ... and are all Emptiness, the "Not Doing". Same with Buddhas, candles, stones, ... and Grace ... all there but not there ... all the "Not Doing"! God or no God ... still, all the "Not Doing". 8)

Even forget about words and labels like "form vs. emptiness" ... and just throw yourself in the great "Not Doing"

Do you get a bit of Dogen's word play here? (Or is "nothing doing" with my explanation? :wink: )

Gassho, J

PS - Dearest Grace, even being with a loved one in hospice is the Great "Not Doing". :?

[Jundo]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

I came across this passage from the Malunkyaputta Sutta:

"Then, Malunkyaputta, with regard to phenomena to be seen, heard, sensed, or cognized: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Malunkyaputta, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress."

Thank you, a nice passage with a South Asian Buddhist "Theravadan" feel. Not quite the emphasis on "Emptiness" of the Mahayana, such as Dogen above, but a lovely way to express "non self" too. Perhaps it might be interpreted as something like ... if what is seen is just seen, without thought of seen or seer, subject or object, or mental judgments and categorizations about what is being seen ... then the "you" is out of a job.

In Emptiness too there is no separate seen or seer, judgments and categorizations ... and the "you" is out of a job.

So, not so different really.

Gassho, J

[Graceleejenkins]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

Hmmmm. I will try.

There's this wondrous Wholeness ("Emptiness") in which there are no separate "things" to be done, nothing lacking and in need of doing, no separate "people" to be doing things, i.e., Emptiness is a great "Not Doing" (even though Emptiness is, by a simultaneously true perspective, also this world of things to do, good and bad, and people to do them!). So, Dogen is playing on both Emptiness as a great "Not Doing" and playing on the phrase "Don't do bad (evil)". Got the pun?

So, he is saying something like "oh, sure there is evil actions in this world, but ultimately it is all the "Not Doing" (Emptiness). On the other hand (another simultaneously true perspective), there is no evil in Emptiness ... and it is all the "Not Doing". In whatever case, it is all Emptiness, the "Not Doing". Flowers and trees are also beyond either existence or non-existence (they exist, but then again, not really) ... and are all Emptiness, the "Not Doing". Same with Buddhas, candles, stones, ... and Grace ... all there but not there ... all the "Not Doing"! God or no God ... still, all the "Not Doing". 8)

Even forget about words and labels like "form vs. emptiness" ... and just throw yourself in the great "Not Doing"

Do you get a bit of Dogen's word play here? (Or is "nothing doing" with my explanation? :wink: )

Gassho, J

PS - Dearest Grace, even being with a loved one in hospice is the Great "Not Doing". :?

Ahh--I missed the pun.

[alan.r]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

Thank you, a nice passage with a South Asian Buddhist "Theravadan" feel. Not quite the emphasis on "Emptiness" of the Mahayana, such as Dogen above, but a lovely way to express "non self" too. Perhaps it might be interpreted as something like ... if what is seen is just seen, without thought of seen or seer, subject or object, or mental judgments and categorizations about what is being seen ... then the "you" is out of a job.

In Emptiness too there is no separate seen or seer, judgments and categorizations ... and the "you" is out of a job.

So, not so different really.

Gassho, J

I've been rereading Genjokoan again and I've been struck several times by the way Dogen re(visions) the Heart Sutra: it's almost as though he's tipping his hat at the Theravada tradition a little. Without going into too much detail, when the Heart Sutra says, "form is emptiness, emptiness nothing but form" we all know that Dogen famously writes "Form is nothing but form, emptiness nothing but emptiness." He does this in order to kind of kill the language of duality occurring in The Heart Sutra. What's more interesting to me is this: whereas the Heart Sutra focuses on the idea of emptiness heavily, saying essentially that the five aggregates, because there are empty, don't exist: "no form, no sensation, no perception, no formation, no consciousness," it's almost as though Dogen wants to save us from a mistaken understanding when he refers to the five aggregates as instances of Prajna Paramita: "The twelve sense fields are instances of Prajna Paramita Also there are eighteen instances of prajna: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind " etc..." In any case, this is striking to me because while the Heart Sutra focuses on emptiness, Dogen basically is suggesting that just because the five aggregates are empty doesn't mean that they don't express reality; doesn't mean that we don't still live through them; doesn't mean that we can just discard them; doesn't mean that they are the hurdles to enlightenment; in fact, what I think Dogen is getting at is that these aggregates are expressions of impermanence and no-self, which is reality. In this way, while still focusing on the Mahayana idea of emptiness, I feel as though Dogen tips his hat to the Theravada tradition, kind of winking, saying, "Yeah, we can work with these aggregates; impossible to escape them anyway, and why." Of course, I could be way off.

Anyway, just a ramble.

Gassho,
Alan

[Jundo]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

Thank you Alan.

I sometimes say that, for Dogen, the separate things, people and events of the world are so unreal when viewed as Emptiness, that they all come back the other way ... thus rebounding each as Real as Real can be, each a precious jewel in its own way. All is a dream perhaps ... but a dream of a dream within a dream, a dream that is just plain wonderfully dreamy! Dream On, Oh Dreamer!

I also want to highlight what Dogen wrote in Shoaku Makusu too ...

Because this is so, to act on the assumption that "if [evil already] is 'not doing,' then I can just do as I please" would be exactly as [mistaken as] walking north while expecting to arrive in [the south].

...


Every good is not existent, is not non-existent ... it only is devoutly practicing. ... Devoutly practicing even one good among the every good causes the entirety of dharmas, the whole body, and reality itself to devoutly practice together.

It may all be a dream in Emptiness, including good and evil just a dream. But what happens in this dream can be greatly up to us. So, even though "doing good" is a dream, and there is nothing to do ... we should devoutly practice doing good. Do good, and the whole of reality does its best too.

Something like that.

Whether there is a God or no God ... do Good.

Gassho, J

[alan.r]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

I sometimes say that, for Dogen, the separate things, people and events of the world are so unreal when viewed as Emptiness, that they all come back the other way ... thus rebounding each as Real as Real can be, each a precious jewel in its own way.

That's a wonderful way of saying it. So Precise. Thank you.

Gassho,
Alan

(oh, and I meant to say I was re-reading Realizing Genjokoan; the specific part from Dogen was from Maka Hannya Haramitsu)

[Jinyo]

Re: Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

thanks for that Alan/Jundo - I still find the heart sutra challenging to understand.

Gassho

Willow

[Omoi Otoshi]

Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

It may all be a dream in Emptiness, including good and evil just a dream. But what happens in this dream can be greatly up to us. So, even though "doing good" is a dream, and there is nothing to do ... we should devoutly practice doing good. Do good, and the whole of reality does its best too.

I think I read this ten times. I wholeheartedly agree with what you say here. This dream is the only reality we get and what happens in it can indeed be greatly up to us! Very nicely put, thank you.

Gassho,
Pontus

[Omoi Otoshi]

Non-duality from the Zen and God Thread

Thank you, a nice passage with a South Asian Buddhist "Theravadan" feel. Not quite the emphasis on "Emptiness" of the Mahayana, such as Dogen above, but a lovely way to express "non self" too. Perhaps it might be interpreted as something like ... if what is seen is just seen, without thought of seen or seer, subject or object, or mental judgments and categorizations about what is being seen ... then the "you" is out of a job.

In Emptiness too there is no separate seen or seer, judgments and categorizations ... and the "you" is out of a job.

So, not so different really.

Gassho, J

I've been rereading Genjokoan again and I've been struck several times by the way Dogen re(visions) the Heart Sutra: it's almost as though he's tipping his hat at the Theravada tradition a little. Without going into too much detail, when the Heart Sutra says, "form is emptiness, emptiness nothing but form" we all know that Dogen famously writes "Form is nothing but form, emptiness nothing but emptiness." He does this in order to kind of kill the language of duality occurring in The Heart Sutra. What's more interesting to me is this: whereas the Heart Sutra focuses on the idea of emptiness heavily, saying essentially that the five aggregates, because there are empty, don't exist: "no form, no sensation, no perception, no formation, no consciousness," it's almost as though Dogen wants to save us from a mistaken understanding when he refers to the five aggregates as instances of Prajna Paramita: "The twelve sense fields are instances of Prajna Paramita Also there are eighteen instances of prajna: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind " etc..." In any case, this is striking to me because while the Heart Sutra focuses on emptiness, Dogen basically is suggesting that just because the five aggregates are empty doesn't mean that they don't express reality; doesn't mean that we don't still live through them; doesn't mean that we can just discard them; doesn't mean that they are the hurdles to enlightenment; in fact, what I think Dogen is getting at is that these aggregates are expressions of impermanence and no-self, which is reality. In this way, while still focusing on the Mahayana idea of emptiness, I feel as though Dogen tips his hat to the Theravada tradition, kind of winking, saying, "Yeah, we can work with these aggregates; impossible to escape them anyway, and why." Of course, I could be way off.

Anyway, just a ramble.

Gassho,
Alan

I liked that very much Alan,

Gassho,
/Pontus