Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Without Manifestation

edited June 2013 in Philosophy
Not Knowing":the ultimate deconstruction
The Ultimate description of "That"

Everything manifesting as That is a mistaken idea

Without manifestation

Buddha The Diamond Sutra: "We refer to it as a world, but there is no world."

There is no such thing as a manifestation
cuts through and destroys the manifestation
concept and all that goes with it

Don't be drawn in

Otherwise "you" will believe in the attachment
concept and be seductively deluded into all that
that state brings

Beware of believing or believing in believing

Because believing has nothing to do with anything

Beware especially of what makes sense



Jeffreyupekka

Comments

  • misecmisc1misecmisc1 I am a Hindu India Veteran
    There is no such thing as a manifestation
    Also, there is no such thing as without manifestation.
  • lobsterlobster Veteran
    Beware especially of what makes sense
    Good plan but I feel we should be more wary of what does not make sense . . .
  • CittaCitta Veteran

    Not Knowing":the ultimate deconstruction
    The Ultimate description of "That"

    Everything manifesting as That is a mistaken idea

    Without manifestation

    Buddha The Diamond Sutra: "We refer to it as a world, but there is no world."

    There is no such thing as a manifestation
    cuts through and destroys the manifestation
    concept and all that goes with it

    Don't be drawn in

    Otherwise "you" will believe in the attachment
    concept and be seductively deluded into all that
    that state brings

    Beware of believing or believing in believing

    Because believing has nothing to do with anything

    Beware especially of what makes sense



    This strikes me as utter tosh.

    _/\_
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    Reminds me of Bodhidharma's Wake-up Sermon. :)
    The essence of the Way is detachment. And the goal of those who practice is freedom from appearances. The sutras say, Detachment is enlightenment because it negates appearances. Buddhahood means awareness. Mortals whose minds are aware reach the Way of Enlightenment and are therefore called Buddhas. The sutras say, "Those who free themselves from all appearances are called Buddhas." The appearance of appearance as no appearance can’t be seen visually but can only be known by means of wisdom. Whoever hears and believes this teaching embarks on the Great Vehicle" and leaves the three realms.
    ...

    Whoever knows that the mind is a fiction and devoid of anything real knows that his own mind neither exists nor doesn’t exist. Mortals keep creating the mind, claiming it exists. And Arhats keep negating the mind, claiming it doesn’t exist. But bodhisattvas and Buddhas neither create nor negate the mind. This is what’s meant by the mind that neither exists nor doesn’t exist. The mind that neither exists nor doesn’t exist is called the Middle Way.

    If you use your mind to study reality, you won’t understand either your mind or reality. If you study reality without using your mind, you’ll understand both. Those who don’t understand don’t understand understanding. And those who understand, understand not understanding. People capable of true vision know that the mind is empty. They transcend both understanding and not understanding. The absence of both understanding and not understanding is true understanding. Seen with true vision, form isn’t simply form, because form depends on mind. And mind isn’t simply mind, because mind depends on form. Mind and form create and negate each other. That which exists exists in relation to that which doesn’t exist. And that which doesn’t exist doesn’t exist in relation to that which exists. This is true vision. By means of such vision nothing is seen and nothing is not seen. Such vision reaches throughout the ten directions without seeing: because nothing is seen; because not seeing is seen; because seeing isn’t seeing. What mortals see are delusions. True vision is detached from seeing. The mind and the world are opposites, and vision arises where they meet. When your mind doesn’t stir inside, the world doesn’t arise outside. When the world and the mind are both transparent, this is true vision. And such understanding is true understanding.

    To see nothing is to perceive the Way, and to understand nothing is to know the Dharma, because seeing is neither seeing nor not seeing and because understanding is neither understanding nor not understanding. Seeing without seeing is true vision. Understanding without understanding is true understanding.

    True vision isn’t just seeing seeing. It’s also seeing not seeing. And true understanding isn’t just understanding understanding. It’s also understanding not understanding. If you understand anything, you don’t understand. Only when you understand nothing is it true understanding. Understanding is neither understanding nor not understanding.
    misecmisc1Jeffrey
  • CittaCitta Veteran
    edited June 2013
    Well that strikes me as utter tosh too. Even if it is attributed to a mythical being of whose
    very existence is now widely seen as doubtful. Gnomic tosh and willful obscurantism.
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    All the Chan patriarch say the same, from the 1st to the 6th! And those that follow them also. :)
  • CittaCitta Veteran
    edited June 2013
    Appeals to authority are not going to convince me that it is anything but gnomic tosh.
    But perhaps clarity is kryptonite for some.
    It is also the kind of material that caused any interest in Zen to shrivel on my vine.
    But..its a big Dharmic world.
    And I am a simple minded man.
    My assumption is that if someone posts something they expect feedback.
    There is mine.
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    My point was that these people are not mythical beings. :)
  • CittaCitta Veteran
    Bully for them.
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    Response to a Logician
    by Milarepa
    I bow at the feet of my teacher Marpa.
    And sing this song in response to you.
    Listen, pay heed to what I say,
    forget your critique for a while.

    The best seeing is the way of "nonseeing" --
    the radiance of the mind itself.
    The best prize is what cannot be looked for --
    the priceless treasure of the mind itself.

    The most nourishing food is "noneating" --
    the transcendent food of samadhi.
    The most thirst-quenching drink is "nondrinking" --
    the nectar of heartfelt compassion.

    Oh, this self-realizing awareness
    is beyond words and description!
    The mind is not the world of children,
    nor is it that of logicians.

    Attaining the truth of "nonattainment,"
    you receive the highest initiation.
    Perceiving the void of high and low,
    you reach the sublime stage.

    Approaching the truth of "nonmovement,"
    you follow the supreme path.
    Knowing the end of birth and death,
    the ultimate purpose is fulfilled.

    Seeing the emptiness of reason,
    supreme logic is perfected.
    When you know that great and small are groundless,
    you have entered the highest gateway.

    Comprehending beyond good and evil
    opens the way to perfect skill.
    Experiencing the dissolution of duality,
    you embrace the highest view.

    Observing the truth of "nonobservation"
    opens the way to meditating.
    Comprehending beyond "ought" and "oughtn't"
    opens the way to perfect action.

    When you realize the truth of "noneffort,"
    you are approaching the highest fruition.
    Ignorant are those who lack this truth:
    arrogant teachers inflated by learning,
    scholars bewitched by mere words,
    and yogis seduced by prejudice.
    For though they yearn for freedom,
    they find only enslavement.
  • pegembarapegembara Veteran
    edited June 2013
    Appearances are empty. They are impermanent, dukkha and not self.
    seeker242 said:

    Reminds me of Bodhidharma's Wake-up Sermon. :)

    The essence of the Way is detachment. And the goal of those who practice is freedom from appearances. The sutras say, Detachment is enlightenment because it negates appearances. Buddhahood means awareness. Mortals whose minds are aware reach the Way of Enlightenment and are therefore called Buddhas. The sutras say, "Those who free themselves from all appearances are called Buddhas." The appearance of appearance as no appearance can’t be seen visually but can only be known by means of wisdom. Whoever hears and believes this teaching embarks on the "Great Vehicle" and leaves the three realms.
    ...

    image
    "Just as when boys or girls are playing with little sand castles: as long as they are not free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, that's how long they have fun with those sand castles, enjoy them, treasure them, feel possessive of them. But when they become free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, then they smash them, scatter them, demolish them with their hands or feet and make them unfit for play.
    "In the same way, Radha, you too should smash, scatter, & demolish form, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for form.
    "You should smash, scatter, & demolish feeling, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for feeling.
    "You should smash, scatter, & demolish perception, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for perception.
    "You should smash, scatter, & demolish fabrications, and make them unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for fabrications.
    "You should smash, scatter, & demolish consciousness and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for consciousness — for the ending of craving, Radha, is Unbinding."
    SN 23.2
  • CittaCitta Veteran
    edited June 2013
    Words about words about words.... :) And maybe useful to others. So I will stop being a dog in the manger and withdraw.

    _/\_

  • edited June 2013
    Citta said:

    This strikes me as utter tosh.

    Fall back 3000 miles.

  • CittaCitta Veteran
    Consider it done...I mean why not ?
  • I consider the Diamond Sutra to be a text for extremely advanced practitioners, much more advanced than I am (and I am extremely conceited about my practice.)

    Let's take this one for now, although my philological naivete regarding Mahayana texts means that my only basis for choosing it was its google rank. I am happy to refer to a different translation if it's preferable.

    The Buddha's preamble in chapter 2 is
    It is possible to attain perfect tranquility and clarity of mind by absorbing and dwelling on the teachings I am about to give."
    In other words, this is a capstone teaching, one intended for bringing mind to "the highest, most fulfilled and awakened mind," as Subhuti puts it.

    Anyone here ready to jump straight in to the "highest, most fulfilled and awakened mind" from where you are now? Complete disidentification from all defilement, not an ounce of concern about impending aging, death, illness, sorrow lamentation, despair, the entire mass of stress?
    ... if a disciple still clings to the arbitrary illusions of form or phenomena such as an ego, a personality, a self, a separate person, or a universal self existing eternally, then that person is not an authentic disciple."
    Anyone here abandoned all clinging to notions of self?
    ...he should practice compassion and charity without regard to appearances, without regard to form, without regard to sound, smell, taste, touch, or any quality of any kind.
    How's your boundless compassion going, guys?
    ...there will be some who are virtuous and wise, and while practicing compassion and charity, will believe in the words and phrases of this Sutra and will awaken their minds purely. After they come to hear these teachings, they will be inspired with belief. This is because when some people hear these words, they will have understood intuitively that these words are the truth."

    "But you must also remember, Subhuti, that such persons have long ago planted the seeds of goodness and merit that lead to this realization. They have planted the seeds of good deeds and charity not simply before one Buddhist temple, or two temples, or five, but before hundreds of thousands of Buddhas and temples. So when a person who hears the words and phrases of this Sutra is ready for it to happen, a pure faith and clarity can awaken within their minds."
    rivercanekarmablues
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    I personally got a lot from the diamond sutra. Thich Nhat Hanh has a nice commentary that helped me to understand. The eightfold path is also according to the Mahayana a very advanced teachings. We just can't seem to avoid these. The whole notion of a prajnaparamita is that we already did away with a being. The heart sutra does away with it also. Actually the shorter the sutra means that it is for inspiration or for those can understand (as you say). The longer sutras have more information for those who need it.
    riverflow
  • But Jeffrey, it is obvious from your posts here that you haven't done away with the notion of a self/being (and neither have I, not rying to start a pissing contest.) How are you going to do so? I don't think the answer is in the Diamond Sutra, as from its perspective that is foundational material. Same goes for the Heart Sutra.

    I agree that the transcedent 8FP is advanced material.
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    fivebells said:



    Anyone here ready to jump straight in to the "highest, most fulfilled and awakened mind" from where you are now?

    Sounds like zen "sudden school" enlightenment. :)

  • I did a related dzogchen practice for years. It probably did contribute to the "sudden" progress when I switched to a more rational, directed approach.
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    I think it's a good idea to read through the diamond sutra once and pick up on the vibes.

    Buddha said his dharma is 'good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good at the end'.

    It's intuitive rather than logical.
    rivercanelobster
  • Have a look at this http://www.headless.org/

    Douglas Harding

    The best day of my life—my rebirthday, so to speak—was when I found I had no head. This is not a literary gambit, a witticism designed to arouse interest at any cost. I mean it in all seriousness: I have no head.

    It was eighteen years ago, when I was thirty-three, that I made the discovery. Though it certainly came out of the blue, it did so in response to an urgent enquiry; I had for several months been absorbed in the question: what am I? The fact that I happened to be walking in the Himalayas at the time probably had little to do with it; though in that country unusual states of mind are said to come more easily. However that may be, a very still clear day, and a view from the ridge where I stood, over misty blue valleys to the highest mountain range in the world, with Kangchenjunga and Everest unprominent among its snow-peaks, made a setting worthy of the grandest vision.

    What actually happened was something absurdly simple and unspectacular: I stopped thinking. A peculiar quiet, an odd kind of alert limpness or numbness, came over me. Reason and imagination and all mental chatter died down. For once, words really failed me. Past and future dropped away. I forgot who and what I was, my name, manhood, animalhood, all that could be called mine.(Was he in samadhi?) It was as if I had been born that instant, brand new, mindless, innocent of all memories. There existed only the Now, that present moment and what was clearly given in it. To look was enough. And what I found was khaki trouserlegs terminating downwards in a pair of brown shoes, khaki sleeves terminating sideways in a pair of pink hands, and a khaki shirtfront terminating upwards in—absolutely nothing whatever! Certainly not in a head.

    It took me no time at all to notice that this nothing, this hole where a head should have been was no ordinary vacancy, no mere nothing. On the contrary, it was very much occupied. It was a vast emptiness vastly filled, a nothing that found room for everything—room for grass, trees, shadowy distant hills, and far above them snowpeaks like a row of angular clouds riding the blue sky. I had lost a head and gained a world.
    rivercane
  • upekkaupekka Veteran
    AT LAST It IS THE FULL CIRCLE

    Keep Up The Good Works Fella, I Mean federica :)
  • What do you mean, @upekka?
  • upekkaupekka Veteran
    fivebells said:

    What do you mean, @upekka?

    i mean Five Ball, Saint

    :)
  • upekkaupekka Veteran
    upekka said:

    fivebells said:

    What do you mean, @upekka?

    i mean Five Ball, Saint

    :)
    Or

    Dear Dhamma Dhathu

  • I miss that guy. But I think I have a bit of a different take than he does. :)
  • FlorianFlorian Veteran
    Citta said:

    Appeals to authority are not going to convince me that it is anything but gnomic tosh..

    It was not an appeal to authority. It was an explanation. Because you thought it was tosh you saw it as an appeal to authority. If you had understood it you would have seen it as an explanation.


  • CittaCitta Veteran
    Citta said:

    Words about words about words.... :) And maybe useful to others. So I will stop being a dog in the manger and withdraw.

    _/\_

    I am unclear which part of 'I shall withdraw ' is ambiguous.
  • FlorianFlorian Veteran
    edited June 2013
    Doesn't seem ambiguous to me. Sorry to have missed the relevent post. I became a little un-equininimous when you dismissed a good comment as tosh.

    But I slightly regret my words above since they may convey a wrong impression. I was making a general point. If I say, during a discussion of motion, 'Newton said that F=MA' this may seems like an appeal to authority, or it may seem like an explanation, depending on who is reading it.





  • I am unclear which part of 'I shall withdraw ' is ambiguous.


    The "I"
  • CittaCitta Veteran
    edited June 2013
    Gosh I bet it took a long search through The Big Book Of Zenny Cliched Solipsisms to come up with that gem. :)
Sign In or Register to comment.