Split thread: Who avoids death in buddhism?

[RichardH]

Hi Jundo. You also know me, and you know that what you are describing is not a revelation. When "just sitting", where is Richard , Jundo, Life, death, beginning, ending... or for that matter the absence of these? That is how we practice, and one is the flowing... on the cushion and off the cushion. ...and there are dolled up corpses, squeamish kids, and distraught daughters.... and today, a leaky roof.

...and by the way, personally.. to be curmudgeonly about it... I have valued the interactions on this thread. Sometimes discussions at Treeleaf turn into a stream of appreciation for everything you or Taigu says. I respect that, but I am glad to have this discussion adult to adult. If that looses me friends.. that's ok

Gassho, Daizan/ Richard

[Jinyo]

Hi there - I have found this thread really useful and given it a lot of thought.

Just need to clarify that I'm not mis-understanding any teaching given here.

Zen, or no Zen, the process of grief results in our locating our loved ones 'someplace' after death. It may be in the universe (the sky, trees, mountains,etc as TNH teaches) or simply as an abiding presence within our hearts and minds.

I'm not too concerned about an afterlife - if there be any such thing. As you teach Jundo - we are the flowing all along - and that's what seems to count.

The only point I was reaching to clarify is that our small self prevaricates and sometimes loses a connection with the absolute/unity (we shift away from the connection -the absolute never shifts away). Sometimes we are lost in an abyss of 'no hope' (I think this is what Richard was pointing to?) so that we don't 'always' embrace our true nature.

But - within this 'no hope' we sit zazen and re-affirm (practice is re-affirmation?). Connecting to an 'ineffable freedom' (Richard's words) literally cracks open the defences and armouring we wrap around our fear.

I understand that we also (at times) may need a verbal shock or some other shock to break through to an understanding. I admit I'm not good with this (you mention temperament Jundo ) but given time I'm able to make a necessary shift. I also accept that I'm a free agent and that if I feel this style of teaching is not suited to my temperament I can elect to leave.

Well - life is full of 'shocks' and 'knocks' - and most times these prove to be a gateway to deeper understanding.

I do feel this to be a place of learning and support - I mean - if we knew/understood it all - what would be the point of spending time here?

Thank you all for your practice,

Gassho

Willow

[RichardH]

Hi willow.. Jundo is offering the teaching , I was just making conversation. So please don't let me muddle that. Sitting Zazen is no problem of a self, large or small, connecting with anything, and no problem of losing or having hope, because it already full and whole. Just sitting.

My talk of hope and funerals was about language and how we pick it up and experiences with that. It was maybe not an appropriate subject, because it can confuse things for people.
Gassho

[Jinyo]

I was not confused by what you wrote Richard - if I've misunderstood something I'm sure Jundo will correct.

Gassho

Willow

[RichardH]

I was not confused by what you wrote Richard - if I've misunderstood something I'm sure Jundo will correct.

Gassho

Willow

When I was talking about hope, I was talking about the hope of ego to live forever. Not ego as a little self as opposed to our true deathless nature, but ego as the thought of “I”. It is only a thought, an instant of confusion, but a deeply ingrained one. . The idea put forward was that any suggestion of a deathless nature is seized upon by ego ... That is basically it. It is a chronic issue among people coming to Zen. A real challenge of means. Something to look at.

...and just my opinion! , as a Mahayana, Zen, fellow. gassho

[Jinyo]

Yes - thank you Richard - I understand you clearly now.

I think it's inevitable that we bring different views/interpretations and muddles to this message board. It's not quite the same as talking/trying to understand another's words/meaning in real time - when an immediate clarification may be given and the conversation/dialogue continues in the light of this.

I often look back at what I've written - no matter how much effort I've put in to trying to communicate well - and feel I haven't expressed what I was really trying to get across at all.

Anyhow - one tries

Gassho

Willow

[RichardH]

There is a long history and deep grounding in Sutra for these terms and means that I'm talking about , and I don't want to just come across as iconoclastic or ignorant of that . It was a grinding twenty years on the cushion before I could actually Just Sit A good part of that time was weaning off the drug of eternalism, and subtle grasping.. It could just be that I am especially stupid, but maybe not. Gassho.

[Jundo]

Ah, this whole thread is absolutely hopeless! **

** (zen guys, in their Koany way, often say one thing, but mean the opposite ... maybe pointing to something even more wonderful than human being's selfish judgement of "hope" or "hopeless". )

Anyway, the Buddha's original formulation of Buddhism in India seems to have been, not about how great and cool it would be to be "reborn", but about rebirth as not a good or desirable thing, and that the cycle of birth-death-rebirth is something to halt and escape from. When Buddhism came up to China, some historians say that the Chinese culture was a bit more open to living life ... with the Taoist emphasis on trying to stay alive as long as possible ... and that Chinese culture was not as negative and pessimistic about life as traditional Indian views. So, the Chinese were quite a bit more about appreciating this life, living it well, with somewhat less emphasis about escaping from the bus ride. It became much more about realizing enlightenment ... and Buddha ... in this life, somehow shining right in all the sometime ugliness, birth and death, of this world. Zen Buddhism, of course, came from that Chinese soil. It seems very likely that the original Buddhist formulation there merged with Chinese sensibilities about living in harmony with "the Way", the Tao. The Chinese were more about heading to a Buddha's "Pure Land" or heaven where life could pleasantly continue (but with only the beautiful parts).

Chinese Buddhism ... Zen ... is also about "escaping" this life ... but much more about "escaping" to that place without time or walls even as and while still chained up inside the prison serving a long sentence ... "escaping" even while fully throwing oneself into living this life ... all at once. The Pure Land and Prison as one.

The Chinese (and Japanese who followed) were very clear to say that the early Indian Buddhist formulation ... which they called the "Lesser Vehicle" (the Hinayana, in contrast to their "Greater Vehicle", the Mahayana) was wrong. Actually, what they said was that the Buddha in the old Suttas was preaching to people who couldn't handle the Mahayana teachings, so he preached a "watered down" version first for people who couldn't handle more. Different people need to hear different ways of putting things.

Personally, I believe that the Chinese may have tinkered with the founder's original vision a bit, but they truly were on to something.

Gassho, J

[RichardH]

Hi Jundo . Do you see me as having a Hinayana position? ... as dealing with Mahayana /Theravada issues? Theravada (the present day “Hinayana” .....looks around for offended stares) represents a range of practices and views. I was drawn to Zen because Theravadin teachings were (it became painfully clear) one-sided, forsaking the world... even though most Theravadins do not live like that. The world, life, being born , is not a mistake. I rejected and reject that. The world hurts, but existence in time and space is like that. I was drawn by a sense of responsibility for suffering in the world, and the Bodhisattva vows. The teachings on the extremes of Eternalism and Nihilism in early Buddhism made inevitable the realization that Nirvana and Samsara are not two, along with natural compassion. In other words... can we please be clear....I'm not a Theravadin mole. I am a practicing Mahayanist not by choice.

Thank you for being patient with me. I'll drop this thread now because there is no comunication. Gassho, Daizan/ Richard

[Jundo]

Hi Jundo . Do you see me as having a Hinayana position? ... as dealing with Mahayana /Theravada issues? Theravada (the present day “Hinayana” .....looks around for offended stares) represents a range of practices and views. I was drawn to Zen because Theravadin teachings were (it became painfully clear) one-sided, forsaking the world... even though most Theravadins do not live like that. The world, life, being born , is not a mistake. I rejected and reject that. The world hurts, but existence in time and space is like that. I was drawn by a sense of responsibility for suffering in the world, and the Bodhisattva vows. The teachings on the extremes of Eternalism and Nihilism in early Buddhism made inevitable the realization that Nirvana and Samsara are not two, along with natural compassion. In other words... can we please be clear....I'm not a Theravadin mole. I am a practicing Mahayanist not by choice.

Thank you for being patient with me. I'll drop this thread now because there is no comunication. Gassho, Daizan/ Richard

I wasn't thinking of you at all when I wrote it, Richard. Please don't be so sensitive. You seem to be taking many of my comments lately very personally, when they are not about you at all. I was telling newcomers about a bit of Buddhist history and how the flavor changed a bit when it came to China.

Gassho, J

[RichardH]

I wasn't thinking of you at all when I wrote it, Richard. Please don't be so sensitive. You seem to be taking many of my comments lately very personally, when they are not about you at all.

Gassho, J

very true. Thank you.

Gassho Daizan/Richard