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.
"And what is the space property? The space property may be either internal or external. What is the internal space property? Anything internal, belonging to oneself, that's space, spatial, & sustained: the holes of the ears, the nostrils, the mouth, the [passage] whereby what is eaten, drunk, consumed, & tasted gets swallowed, and where it collects, and whereby it is excreted from below, or anything else internal, within oneself, that's space, spatial, & sustained: This is called the internal space property. Now both the internal space property & the external space property are simply space property. And that should be seen as it actually is present with right discernment: 'This is not mine, this is not me, this is not my self.' When one sees it thus as it actually is present with right discernment, one becomes disenchanted with the space property and makes the space property fade from the mind.
The contemplative process appears to be conceptual. Whatever space ie. cavities or holes within the body is no different from the space outside. Just like water within the body and water outside. There is no difference scientifically. In terms of elements it is also viewed the same.
Water is just water, atoms just atoms, metabolic processes just that etc. It is a process of deconstructing the body (body contemplation). It is another way to view the body as "ëmpty" like foam. Until you reach consciousness....
"There remains only consciousness: pure & bright."
The Blessed One said: "A person has six properties, six media of sensory contact, eighteen considerations, & four determinations.
These are the six properties: the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, the wind property, the space property, the consciousness property.
Metta
1
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
I'm not sure I see a difference between inner space as in the spaces in the body or outer space as in the space in a room or between cosmic bodies.
I see a difference with inner space as in the vastness of mind but only because that space takes up no physical space. I can probably explore it much easier too.
I may not be able to see up my nose but I can easily draw attention to my nasal cavity through other means. So I think I must disagree with you and say it's harder to observe outer space without a telescope than it is to observe inner space without a microscope.
@lobster said:
Starting with reading 'Zen in the Art of Archery'. I was recently doing shikantaza meditation for about the last year.
Great book. You will remember this:
"In this respect Zen is akin to pure introspective mysticism. Unless we enter into mystic experiences by direct participation, we remain outside, turn and twist as we may. This law, which all genuine mysticism obeys, allows of no exceptions. It is no contradiction that there exists a plethora of Zen texts regarded as sacred. They have the peculiarity of disclosing their lifegiving meaning only to those who have shown themselves worthy of the crucial experiences and who can therefore extract from these texts confirmation of what they themselves already possess and are, independently of them" (Eugen Herrigel, Zen in the Art of Archery, trans. R. F. C. Hull (New York: Pantheon Books, 1953), 24).
@lobster said:
Without enlightenment, the end of Dukkha, is Buddhism just a quirky hobby?
No, because enlightenment is on the path, not at the end of the path.
Chao-Chou: What is the way?
Nan-Chüan: It is our everyday mind.
Chao-Chou: Is it necessary to realize it?
Nan-Chüan: To intend to realize the Way is opposed to the Way. [...]
The Way does not depend on what you know or what you do not know.
If you know it, your knowledge is just speculative ideas.
If you don't, your ignorance is like the inanimate.
When you have no doubts, the unlimited universe will open in front of
you, and no discrimination is possible.
I see a difference with inner space as in the vastness of mind but only because that space takes up no physical space. I can probably explore it much easier too.
I tend to explore spaciousness rather the emptiness between physical placement.
I think it is perfectly valid to focus on the space in the nostrils, or the space in the chest where air enters etc. In fact the only formal technique I can remember doing, is focussing on the space above the top lip over which air moves whilst breathing or the tip of the nose ... http://breathmeditation.org/the-breath-of-life-the-practice-of-breath-meditation
Spaciousness is for me, relaxation or letting go of these focussing techniques into just being. This is different to just monkey minding all over the place for which focussing of some sort is useful ...
@iamthezenmaster said:
I still believe we are all enlightened beings , we just have to wake up and realise this.
I'm not even sure we have to wake up.
Some days I take a deep breath and I could swear I've crossed some kind of threshold and I'm there.
All of a sudden, things add up.
@DhammaDragon said:
I'm not even sure we have to wake up.
We do. If possible. We do.
The spiritual life is rewarding in itself. Without doubt. Waking up makes sense of our life, understanding of our true potential and the means to embody that sense.
Which strangely and surprisingly is no different from:
Within Mahayana texts, this state is referred to as Hinayana – or ‘Small Vehicle’ – enlightenment, and is considered a stage of incomplete development. A mind with no thoughts has not yet fully ‘turned around’ as the Lankavatara Sutra describes, and is not yet functioning with wisdom and compassion. It is a mind devoid of any profound functionality and is viewed as a trap within Ch’an thought, often described as ‘sitting atop of a hundred foot pole’.
@Namada an example I can think of is Khenpo Gyamptso Tsultrim Rinpoche 'progressive stages of meditation on emptiness' which interestingly reads from right to left in the pages. He talks about 5 views of emptiness. The Theravadan sounds more like the Shravaka view though that's maybe not worth anything one lineage making summation of another like saying Christ was a Buddhist or what have you.
So anyhow there are five views presented and it is put forth that there is a subtler understanding as you refine and refine. At the same time the point is also made that you can study the Shravaka view and become enlightened. The other four views are: cittamatra, sautantrika, prasangika, and shentong.
I think 'bigger' refers to the wish to enlighten all people, nay all beings. A bigger amount of people included so 'vast'.
The ambition to be enlightened can be a wholesome motivating factor, but eventually, you will need to drop it to actually become enlightened. Or so I've heard.
The Myth of Enlightenment
One idea that really hampers us is to believe that people get 'enlightened,' and then they’re that way forever and ever. We may have our moments, and if we get sick and have lots of things happening, we may fall back. But a person who practices consistently over years and years is more that way, more of the time, all the time. And that’s enough. There is no such thing as getting it.
@Namada said:
Its easier to drive around in a small vehicle
So theravada is a stage of incomplete development according to Mahayana texts?
As somone who believes a meditation cushion should preferably be on castors or a Rotisserie (this allows one to easily spin around a complete set of shrines), I have complete alignment with the smallest turning circle.
I also believe monks/teachers should be placed in full lotus on a monastic conveyer belt. Thus allowing laity to await their favourite unfolding. A bit like luggage handling at airports ...
Mahayana infidels should go through 'customs' and a full body check. Who knows what they will come up with ...
@Shoshin said: "Samsara - Mind turned outwardly lost in its projection !"
"Nirvana - Mind turned inwardly recognising its true nature!"
It's all in the 'mind'...So it would seem
My all-time favourite, similar to yours, @shoshin, is by Chögyam Trungpa: "Nirvana means dwelling in peace and openness, and Samsara means dwelling in one's neurosis."
@Shoshin said:
It's all in the 'mind'...So it would seem
In the first verse of the Dhammapada, which has been translated as "The pairs," "Dichotomies," "Opposites," we find different translations which point to the fact that, yes, in Bikkhu Silacara's words: "In all, the primal element is mind; pre-eminent is mind; by mind is all made."
All experience is made by mind, from both mano, as the mental sense organ, and manas, deliberate willed thinking.
In the Mahamangala Sutta, (Rhys-Davids translation) "Beneath the stroke of life's changes, the mind that shaketh not, without grief or passion, and secure, this is the greatest blessing."
And this quizzical verse from the Anguttara Nikaya (ii 46 - F. L. Woodward translation), "For my friend, in this very body, six feet length, with its sense-impressions and its thoughts and ideas, I do declare to you are the world, and the ceasing of the world, and likewise the Way that leadeth to the ceasing thereof."
Our mind, or the quality of our mind, or right view, determines our lives, shapes our actions.
@Earthninja said:
I've never heard of anybody with a mind with no thoughts...
It is absolutely true that Buddha Mind = No thought. We as conscious thinking beings can be aware of and attuned increasingly to this 'stillness without a point of being'.
How can we not think about this point? ... or speak of it in sensible terms to develop a sense of it?
I don't see what's wrong with thoughts, it's one of 6 ways experience. Thoughts with belief are the problem. There are living enlightened beings today that still have thoughts. They just don't believe them like we do.
Thoughts come and go by themselves.
Papaji says quietness is the raft that will ferry is to the other side, he means doesn't mean no speaking or no thoughts. He means remaining as pure awareness.
@Earthninja said: I don't see what's wrong with thoughts, it's one of 6 ways experience. Thoughts with belief are the problem. There are living enlightened beings today that still have thoughts. They just don't believe them like we do. Thoughts come and go by themselves.
Yes, we don't have to take thoughts so seriously, we don't have to identify with them so strongly.
@Daozen said:
The ambition to be enlightened can be a wholesome motivating factor, but eventually, you will need to drop it to actually become enlightened. Or so I've heard.
We actually already are enlightened. Nothing to pick up or drop. What is dropped is the unawareness or factors impeding this motivating knowing. This is not an intellectual acceptance but experiential Dharmic Gnosis.
So even when enlightenment whispers 'I am always here in absence', we hear Nothing as in the next post ...
@lobster said:
We actually already are enlightened.
I don't think so because If that were really true then that would mean that dukkha would not be a Truth. The Buddha did say that this is the Noble Truth of dukkha in his first discourse.
Comments
Not necessarily. Likewise we also tend to get pulled by objects internally because the space is uninteresting.
Eg. Thoughts, thoughts ... (space).. thoughts..thoughts..thoughts
Sounds, sounds ........... sounds.
Feeling, feeling ......... feeling .......... feeling
Sensation........sensation..............sensation ........
Hopefully the situation becomes ....................thought..............................thought..................................
Sorry but you have completely confused me here. I wasn't referring to the sense bases but to the space property as described in MN140, about half-way down here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.140.than.html
Yoga helps immensely with noting the inner spaces in your body. Sensation is just as valid as sight. To me, anyhow.
My bad.
The contemplative process appears to be conceptual. Whatever space ie. cavities or holes within the body is no different from the space outside. Just like water within the body and water outside. There is no difference scientifically. In terms of elements it is also viewed the same.
Water is just water, atoms just atoms, metabolic processes just that etc. It is a process of deconstructing the body (body contemplation). It is another way to view the body as "ëmpty" like foam. Until you reach consciousness....
"There remains only consciousness: pure & bright."
Metta
I'm not sure I see a difference between inner space as in the spaces in the body or outer space as in the space in a room or between cosmic bodies.
I see a difference with inner space as in the vastness of mind but only because that space takes up no physical space. I can probably explore it much easier too.
I may not be able to see up my nose but I can easily draw attention to my nasal cavity through other means. So I think I must disagree with you and say it's harder to observe outer space without a telescope than it is to observe inner space without a microscope.
Great book. You will remember this:
No, because enlightenment is on the path, not at the end of the path.
Nan-Chüan: It is our everyday mind.
Chao-Chou: Is it necessary to realize it?
Nan-Chüan: To intend to realize the Way is opposed to the Way. [...]
The Way does not depend on what you know or what you do not know.
If you know it, your knowledge is just speculative ideas.
If you don't, your ignorance is like the inanimate.
When you have no doubts, the unlimited universe will open in front of
you, and no discrimination is possible.
Sorry about the format of my comment, but I am new to tablets and have a hard time copy-pasting...
Be a dragon not a drag on ...
just a thought ...
http://m.wikihow.com/Copy-and-Paste-on-iPhone,-iPad,-or-iPod-Touch
and now back to the enlightenment
Thank you, @lobster ♡♡♡
Sorry, just trying to copy/paste an image...
@lobster, I can't download pictures...
This one was pure fluke...
@federica: please, how can I download pictures from my gallery on the tablet or copy pictures from the net and download them?
Note: I can do it on the computer, but not on the tablet.
Soo sorry, but I don't know how I did it...
Sorry, @lobster...
I tend to explore spaciousness rather the emptiness between physical placement.
I think it is perfectly valid to focus on the space in the nostrils, or the space in the chest where air enters etc. In fact the only formal technique I can remember doing, is focussing on the space above the top lip over which air moves whilst breathing or the tip of the nose ...
http://breathmeditation.org/the-breath-of-life-the-practice-of-breath-meditation
Spaciousness is for me, relaxation or letting go of these focussing techniques into just being. This is different to just monkey minding all over the place for which focussing of some sort is useful ...
@lobster - I had to read the 2nd paragraph twice, thinking "are you serious..?"
I prefer the 3rd paragraph.
Quite serious. I have placed a link that explains a focussing type meditation in detail in the above post.
That is actually a well-known and taught technique...
@Lobster -Yes, thank you❤️
@federica - this is the first time Ive heard/read, mediating on the space in the nostrils....
Then again, there will be many more first time
Beginner's Mind @Zenni... Beginner's Mind
@Shoshin - I googled "beginner's mind' to learn how to be one.
Lol, your "name" !!
What an excellent way to be constantly reminded.
The more I tried to grasp enlightenment the more it kept on slipping through my fingers.
I still believe we are all enlightened beings , we just have to wake up and realise this.
(partial) solitude, Zen-meditation, and books n stuff about the human race and their ways should do the trick
I'm not even sure we have to wake up.
Some days I take a deep breath and I could swear I've crossed some kind of threshold and I'm there.
All of a sudden, things add up.
We do. If possible. We do.
The spiritual life is rewarding in itself. Without doubt. Waking up makes sense of our life, understanding of our true potential and the means to embody that sense.
Which strangely and surprisingly is no different from:
Before Enlightenment chop wood carry water, after Enlightenment, chop wood carry water.
Before Enlightenment chop wood carry water, after Enlightenment, chop wood carry water.
Actually, it is precisely in the midst of the most menial activities that this epiphanies take place.
Emptiness is just the beginning? [Lobster faints]
Its easier to drive around in a small vehicle
So theravada is a stage of incomplete development according to Mahayana texts?
@Namada an example I can think of is Khenpo Gyamptso Tsultrim Rinpoche 'progressive stages of meditation on emptiness' which interestingly reads from right to left in the pages. He talks about 5 views of emptiness. The Theravadan sounds more like the Shravaka view though that's maybe not worth anything one lineage making summation of another like saying Christ was a Buddhist or what have you.
So anyhow there are five views presented and it is put forth that there is a subtler understanding as you refine and refine. At the same time the point is also made that you can study the Shravaka view and become enlightened. The other four views are: cittamatra, sautantrika, prasangika, and shentong.
I think 'bigger' refers to the wish to enlighten all people, nay all beings. A bigger amount of people included so 'vast'.
I think it's all skillful means, and that enlightenment is enlightenment whichever route you take.
It's just Mahayana propaganda! Hinaphobia!
The ambition to be enlightened can be a wholesome motivating factor, but eventually, you will need to drop it to actually become enlightened. Or so I've heard.
Thich Nhat Hanh says that clear vision, seeing things as they really are, is Enlightenment.
"Samsara - Mind turned outwardly lost in its projection !"
"Nirvana - Mind turned inwardly recognising its true nature!"
It's all in the 'mind'...So it would seem
As somone who believes a meditation cushion should preferably be on castors or a Rotisserie (this allows one to easily spin around a complete set of shrines), I have complete alignment with the smallest turning circle.
I also believe monks/teachers should be placed in full lotus on a monastic conveyer belt. Thus allowing laity to await their favourite unfolding. A bit like luggage handling at airports ...
Mahayana infidels should go through 'customs' and a full body check. Who knows what they will come up with ...
My all-time favourite, similar to yours, @shoshin, is by Chögyam Trungpa:
"Nirvana means dwelling in peace and openness, and Samsara means dwelling in one's neurosis."
Outstanding ... oh wait ... is samsara and Nirvana the same place when openly and peaceably inviting everyone to participate in ones neurosis?
Zen in the Art of misdirection ... not my plan ... I'm off to join the neurotic Hinayanists before I get Zenned.
I disagree.
Ok no problem, but just out of curiosity what do you disagree with @bookworm ? And why ?
In the first verse of the Dhammapada, which has been translated as "The pairs," "Dichotomies," "Opposites," we find different translations which point to the fact that, yes, in Bikkhu Silacara's words: "In all, the primal element is mind; pre-eminent is mind; by mind is all made."
All experience is made by mind, from both mano, as the mental sense organ, and manas, deliberate willed thinking.
In the Mahamangala Sutta, (Rhys-Davids translation) "Beneath the stroke of life's changes, the mind that shaketh not, without grief or passion, and secure, this is the greatest blessing."
And this quizzical verse from the Anguttara Nikaya (ii 46 - F. L. Woodward translation), "For my friend, in this very body, six feet length, with its sense-impressions and its thoughts and ideas, I do declare to you are the world, and the ceasing of the world, and likewise the Way that leadeth to the ceasing thereof."
Our mind, or the quality of our mind, or right view, determines our lives, shapes our actions.
It is absolutely true that Buddha Mind = No thought. We as conscious thinking beings can be aware of and attuned increasingly to this 'stillness without a point of being'.
How can we not think about this point? ... or speak of it in sensible terms to develop a sense of it?
Here is the Buddha's best and most complete attempt
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flower_Sermon
I don't see what's wrong with thoughts, it's one of 6 ways experience. Thoughts with belief are the problem. There are living enlightened beings today that still have thoughts. They just don't believe them like we do.
Thoughts come and go by themselves.
Papaji says quietness is the raft that will ferry is to the other side, he means doesn't mean no speaking or no thoughts. He means remaining as pure awareness.
Yes, we don't have to take thoughts so seriously, we don't have to identify with them so strongly.
Yes indeed.
http://bigthink.com/overthinking-everything-with-jason-gots/get-away-from-me-mr-zen
We actually already are enlightened. Nothing to pick up or drop. What is dropped is the unawareness or factors impeding this motivating knowing. This is not an intellectual acceptance but experiential Dharmic Gnosis.
So even when enlightenment whispers 'I am always here in absence', we hear Nothing as in the next post ...
I don't think so because If that were really true then that would mean that dukkha would not be a Truth. The Buddha did say that this is the Noble Truth of dukkha in his first discourse.