Nothing to attain?

[sandworm]

Hey everyone, this is my first post after my introduction.

Let me preface my question by saying that I hope it doesn't cause any contention, as I suspect it might be a "hot topic." (though I could be wrong). I truly just want to know what your thoughts are.

For the last month I have been reading "Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha" by Daniel Ingram, who claims to be an arhat. I won't speculate one way or the other, it sounds like he is way more realized than I am, and his book has indeed inspired me to practice, so all is good.

Last night, I read a part in the book which I felt was almost slanderous about the "nothing to attain" schools of Buddhism. I don't have enough experience to judge these statements with any sort of clarity, so I thought I'd ask! Apparently the author worked his butt off at insight meditation and became an arhat through this hard work and discipline. According to him, there absolutely *IS* something to attain, and teaching the "nothing to attain" philosophy is confusing and damaging to students' practice (though it wasn't presented in such a nice and friendly way as I've written here).

I am confused here. I really have enjoyed and benefitted from my sitting zazen (though I am of course no arhat!!), as much as I've benefitted from insight meditation. This book has been a good inspiration for me to practice, but so has treeleaf and the work that Jundo and Taigu have done here.

Can anyone help me understand this? Why is there such contention, at least one-sided? Ultimately, is there something to attain, or isn't there? I don't imagine that one practice is better than another, are they simply approaching the goal from different directions as I suspect?

Much appreciated everyone.
Duane

[disastermouse]

If it could be attained, it could be lost...or never attained.

I'm certain there is something that could be attained by willpower and effort - possibly something very good. However, what is it that can never be won regardless of effort? What is the natural state of the mind? Is it enlightenment or confusion? What is I?

The only way to answer is to look. More people fail to realize it than not, and yet it's inescapable. A very funny joke, no?

Chet

[Dosho]

Duane,

People differ on their views of the dharma like any other religion or philosophy. Ultimately you'll have to answer those questions for yourself and decide their relevance to your practice.

Gassho,
Dosho

[Omoi Otoshi]

Ultimately, there is nothing with a separate, independant existance, so in the absolute sense, there is nothing to attain. But in the conventional, relative world, there sure is! We live in both the absolute and the relative, all the time. None is more "true" than the other. Although it is not so much about attaining as it is about dropping, losing, abandoning, giving up what we once thought was important, holy, precious, necessary, but wasn't. Leaving old destructive habits behind as we see them for what they are. So there is no "thing" to be attained. There's only getting rid of ignorance, aversion, unwholesome attachments to pleasures and wrong views, judging, expectations etc. In getting rid of the extra, we attain freedom, peace, wisdom, empathy. But don't go chasing anything out there, it's only chasing your own tail. You have it all, right here, right now. Trust youself completely. You are not your enemy.

Gassho,
Pontus

[Daitetsu]

Hi Duane,

To keep it short (which is sometimes hard for me):
What's an attainment "worth" if it is just a moment, something that is not applied to life?
To me Treeleaf Sangha is primarily about life, a living practice, applied Buddhism - not just a path to Satori/Kensho.
However, I don't claim that other paths are not practical.
As has already been said - you must find out for yourself which path fits best for you.

Gassho,

Timo

[sandworm]

Thank you guys, these are just the kind of answers I was looking for.
Do you think that by switching my practice from vipassana to zazen, whether temporarily or not, will derail the other? Is it effective or efficient to "zig zag" toward the goal (if there is one)?

[Saijun]

Hey everyone, this is my first post after my introduction.

Let me preface my question by saying that I hope it doesn't cause any contention, as I suspect it might be a "hot topic." (though I could be wrong). I truly just want to know what your thoughts are.

For the last month I have been reading "Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha" by Daniel Ingram, who claims to be an arhat. I won't speculate one way or the other, it sounds like he is way more realized than I am, and his book has indeed inspired me to practice, so all is good.

Last night, I read a part in the book which I felt was almost slanderous about the "nothing to attain" schools of Buddhism. I don't have enough experience to judge these statements with any sort of clarity, so I thought I'd ask! Apparently the author worked his butt off at insight meditation and became an arhat through this hard work and discipline. According to him, there absolutely *IS* something to attain, and teaching the "nothing to attain" philosophy is confusing and damaging to students' practice (though it wasn't presented in such a nice and friendly way as I've written here).

I am confused here. I really have enjoyed and benefitted from my sitting zazen (though I am of course no arhat!!), as much as I've benefitted from insight meditation. This book has been a good inspiration for me to practice, but so has treeleaf and the work that Jundo and Taigu have done here.

Can anyone help me understand this? Why is there such contention, at least one-sided? Ultimately, is there something to attain, or isn't there? I don't imagine that one practice is better than another, are they simply approaching the goal from different directions as I suspect?

Much appreciated everyone.
Duane

Hello Duane,

I would be very, very cautious about someone claiming to be an Arhat/Arahant--in my personal experience, the people that are most strikingly obvious Noble Disciples (in the Theravadin sense of the phrase) are also, coincidentally, those who will most studiously avoid talking about attainments. I'm not about to say whether he is or isn't as I don't know a thing about him, but all the same I would be cautious.

Before I came to Treeleaf, I practiced in a Theravadin school for several years (this has bearing because from what I can find about Mr. Ingram, he seems to approach things from a Theravdin perspective). In Theravada, practicing the Buddha-Dharma is also called "the karma leading to the end of karma." Now, ending karma--is that an attainment or not? Isn't attaining something planting the seeds for future Karma? In letting go of the five khandas, seeing through the illusion of a permanent "Self" (one of the markers of Stream-Entry, a comparatively less impressive "attainment" than Arahantship), what is attained? Who attains it?

A few years ago, I would have talked about Awakening or the Fruits of the Path or something. Now, I don't know.

I will say, though, that Zen is a much more demanding path in my experience than the Kammathana. There may be "nothing to attain," but realizing this "nothing to attain" takes energy, focus, discipline, and persistence. It takes flinging yourself, without reservation, into the practice each and every moment. It takes failure again and again, and starting over again and again. They don't call it "practice" for nothing!

And that's key--practice. If you have Doubt, EXCELLENT! Explore it. Find out why some say "attainment" and some say "non-attainment" and some go make a grilled cheese sandwich.

Ultimately, what is being talked around in this topic goes beyond words--say a word about it and you're wrong.

The only thing to do is to "practice the Way as though saving your head from fire."

That's my take, anyway.

In Gassho,

Saijun

[Geika]

I would not recommend switching meditation styles, but I also wouldn't say there is great harm in it, either. It is just good to focus. When I used to switch meditation styles a lot, I was forced to eventually ask myself the question, "What am I looking for with each of these different practices?"

I preferred trippy, eyes closed, mantra meditations to zazen, though I knew that zazen had the best, most piercing results. Eventually, zazen won out because it points directly to that which does not change.

[sandworm]

Thanks again everyone this has been very enlightening for me.
Amelia, you said that zazen points to what does not change. To me this feels like the exact opposite to vipassana which seems in my mind to point to what DOES change, the impermanence of sensation, etc. Is the difference really so great as to be completely opposite?

You said that zazen has the best, most piercing results. What do you mean by that specifically?
Duane

[Geika]

I guess you could say that because zazen points to what does not change, by negation it also points to what does change, so the difference is mute. They are just different practices, is all.

What I mean by "best, most piercing results" is that after I started practicing zazen, my intentions became more clear. I could see where I was fooling myself and to what I was I was clinging. Though zazen is not as peaceful or mesmerizing as some other meditations I've practiced, I have decided that it is the most beneficial.

[Omoi Otoshi]

Does and does not change is not so important in my opinion, Both can be right view. None holds the truth. Vipassana and Shikantaza eventually lead to the same essential practice. If you take a look at choiceless awareness for example, an advanced Vipassana practice, it's not so different from Shikantaza. I used to practice a Vipassana-style form of meditation when I first got interested in meditation and buddhism many years ago. For me it was natural to progress from that to Shikantaza, but for someone else the opposite may be true. Some say Shikantaza is an advanced and very difficult form of meditation, not suitable for beginners. That at least you should first study your thoughts, get to know your inner geography, count/follow your breath. But I like the approach practiced here. A beginnner's practice and the practice of an advanced student are more or less the same. The style of Shikantaza practiced here cuts to the chase and goes directly to the core. You may feel you are failing, but success in practice is an illusion anyway. Practice is enlightenment and enlightenment is practice, even if it won't always feel that way.

And by the way, what's the difference between an Arhat and an Asshat?

Gassho,
Pontus

[sandworm]

Haha looks like the difference is only a couple letters. Then again, a couple letters can obviously make all the difference

Well put, you guys, thanks again. This really helps. Looking forward to more zazen!

[Taigu]

Hi Duane,

Many important and wise things have been already said here.

Shikantaza is the ultimate practice and your life as it is your only goal.

To answer your question one has to live. Books won t do, they will add stuff on stuff.

When in the dokusan moment, a student is getting bare to the naked bones, it is attaining what has already been attained. The proof is in the pudding.

Nothing to attain means what Pontus and Chet meant. No separation with others and YOURSELF. What gets in the way is created by ten thousand expectations , even by a light agenda. Our effort is not to take things on board, acquire knowledge and realiisations, our direction is the practice of poverty: the self abiding the self, nothing extra.

Claiming we have anything is like bragging about having a nose and a pair of eyes!

Gassho

Taigu

[Jundo]

is there something to attain, or isn't there? ... what does not change, what does change

All these dichotomies! Let us pass beyond and through "either/or"!!

So many wise comments here in this thread. This subject of attaining-non-attaining comes up quite often, and here is the usual response from my mouth ...

--------------------------

Who ever said that there is "nothing to find" in, through and as this practice of "not seeking", no place to "get", no treasure to snare at the end of the rainbow?

Not me. I never would say such a thing. Then why pursue this path?

Who ever said there is no "enlightenment" to be achieved? I never would say that. It would not be Buddhism in that case.

What's more, this practice lets us be happy, joyful. Who said not? Not me.

Ya really got to pay attention to what is being said. You see:

Just because we are "not seeking" does not mean we are "not seeking" ... nor that there aren't wondrous marvels thus to find!

Enlightenment!

To the marrow sitting free of seeking ... is a dandy way thus to find that which can only be found by sitting radically free of seeking. Realizing that there is no where to "get to", and no place you can get or need get ... is finally getting somewhere that will revolutionize life, and put your "you" out of a job. One gets very far, one finally arrives ... by sitting still.

Being the "Buddha" all along, and having not a thing about you that is in need of change ... that does not mean you don't have some work to do to realize truly that you are the Buddha without need of change. To realize that you are never, from the outset, in need of change is a VERY BIG CHANGE! There is absolutely nothing about you and the universe (not two) to add or take away, and tasting that there is "nothing to add" is an irreplaceably important addition!

By being "goalless" we hit the goal ... a goal which is hit by being thoroughly goalless.

...

"Shikantaza" Zen practice is a radical, to the marrow, dropping of the self's demands that something needs to be attained to make this world "right", that something must be added or removed from our lives to make life complete, that something is defective and needs to be changed., that we need to get some place to find our "True Home".

HOWEVER, radically dropping, to the marrow all need to attain, add or remove, or change in order to make life right and complete --IS-- A WONDROUS ATTAINMENT, ADDITION and CHANGE TO LIFE! Dropping all need to "get somewhere" is truly finally GETTING SOMEWHERE! The True Home is here and everywhere! Abandoning all need in life's race to cross some finish line over a distant hill, is simply arriving at the finish line which is our every step!

ALL THAT, even as we continue to move forward, make choices, have preferences ... LIVE! Moving forward, yet as still and unmoving as a mountain or a stone ... having choices and preferences while choices and preferences are fully dropped, and we drop all demands to get somewhere ... living passionately, yet not a prisoner of passions ... at once, the still mountains walking, the stone women dancing ...

We fix what needs to be fixed .. in this world, in our life ... all without thought of something to repair. We clean what needs to be cleaned ... the messes and disasters and filthy oil spills ... yet there is no "clean" or "dirty".

GOT HOW THAT WORKS?

http://www.treeleaf.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?66-VITAL-POINTS-of-SHIKANTAZA-ZAZEN

--------------------------

HOWEVER ...

--------------------------

But we have to be very cautious here, not misunderstand … Saying that there is “no place to go, no destination” does not mean that there are not good and bad paths to get there! Saying “there is nothing that need be done” does—not—mean there is nothing to do. Saying that “nothing is in need of change” does—not—mean that “nothing is in need of change.”

Saying “we are already Buddha” is not enough if we don’t realize that, act like that!

Simple, exaggerated example …

Perhaps a fellow sits down to Zazen for the first time who is a violent man, a thief and alcoholic. He hears that “all is Buddha just as it is“, so thinks that Zen practice means “all is a jewel just as it is, so thus maybe I can simply stay that way, just drink and beat my wife and rob strangers“. Well, no, because while a thief and wife-beater is just that … a thief and wife-beater, yet a Buddha nonetheless … still, someone filled with such anger and greed and empty holes to fill in their psyche is not really “at peace with how things are” (or he would not beat and steal and need to self-medicate). In other words, he takes and craves and acts out anger and frustration because he does not truly understand “peace with this life as it is” … because if he did, he would not need to be those violent, punishing ways.

If the angry, violent fellow truly knew “completeness“, truly had “no hole in need of filling“, “nothing lacking” everything “complete just as it is” … well, he simply would not have need to do violence, steal and take drugs to cover his inner pain.

You see … kind of a non-self-fulfilling Catch-22.

http://www.treeleaf.org/forums/showthread.php?7692-Sit-a-Long-with-Jundo-Zazen-for-Beginners-%28Part-XIV%29

--------------------------

I don't know Mr. Ingram and whether he is an Arhat or just a hat (although he is certainly Buddha, as are all). He is described (by Vince Horn at Buddhist Geeks) ...

The author, Daniel Ingram (aka Dharma Dan) hasn’t been a meditator for 30-odd years, and doesn’t lead meditation retreats worldwide. He isn’t well-known, and doesn’t have a huge following. Instead he’s a MD who works in Kentucky, and who very quickly (in a decade or so) mastered the insight practices that were handed down from Gautama Buddha. He focuses on gaining insight through consistent and focused practice while at home, and while doing occasional retreats. What he claims is possible through practice sometimes flies in the face of what most current Western Buddhist teachers say.

Here are some talks by him.

http://vimeo.com/28182419

Gassho, J

[Jundo]

By the way, we also value vipassana "insight" into the working of the mind theatre, just as do all Buddhists of all flavors. However, the manifestation of that in Shikantaza is rather subtle ...

http://www.treeleaf.org/forums/showthread.php?9697-Vipassana-question&p=76928&viewfull=1#post76928