small self to big self to no self
-
it is still good to have a rough idea so you wont get confused in the future
-
Yes, it is important for beginners to know the purpose of Buddha's teachings. What did Buddha realise ? No self. 缘起性空，本性空寂. Buddhism should not spread like the olden days which emphasize too much on reincarnation which ends up many people thinking that being a Buddhist is to have a better reincarnation in the 6 paths.
In fact, my 1st knowledge of no self is from this forum. In the past, I only know how to chant Amitabha. At least when I attend the Zen course, I'm not so lost. I have rough idea of what is no self.
慧律法师once said that this is the topic that all Buddhists must learn because Amitabha will be teaching this topic in Pureland. So, why wait till going to Pureland if you can learn it here.
-
I am not evading topics like no self or emptiness.
-
Originally posted by Almond Cookies:
But meditative experiences and levels of insight /stages of enlightenment might confuse begginer.
No begginer can understand that.
How can people whose insight in reality have not risen understand that.
Maybe you can see it this way instead. The many threads on this forum are like repositories of information. If you're not ready at the moment for certain complicated expositions, you can choose not to read them for the time being. However, should you need that information in future, you can be almost sure something you need to know has been discussed
-
Thanks realisation for your advice.
-
at first i didn't see pg1(simply miss it) and see pg 2, i thought where the big-self come from. first i thought it's the ordinary people's "i" where normal people like to say. I, I, I, 我我我. but no, it's not that. :D
but Master Sheng Yen explain it nicely.
i especially like the "application" 起用 portion of sunyata. :)
You will feel that your own self-nature is the same as that of all Buddhas, and the self-nature of Buddhas is universal throughout time and space. You will spontaneously apply your wisdom and wealth, giving to all sentient beings everywhere, throughout all time and space.
truely "interconnectedness" or "Maha in nature" or "non-dual luminosity aspect". ;)
at first i thought and wonder how is this not link to self liberating arahathood of hinayana (�乘自了汉) ? or where's the mentioning of bodhicitta toward all sentient beings? but Master Sheng Yen explain it nicely.
/\
-
http://www.sanbo-zen.org/cow09_e.html
The Zen Master's commentary on Stage 9 of the Ten Oxherding Pictures shows clear insight into Anatta.
Let's now appreciate the verse by Master Kakuan:
Having come back to the origin and returned to the source,
you see that you have expended efforts in vain.
You are now back to your starting point. How much effort you needed for that! Occasionally you encouraged yourself washing your face with the ice-chilly basin water, or you sank into desperation listening to frogs croaking in the dusk outside, or you kept sitting in defiance of the pains in the legs or of unbearable fatigue. Many times you have felt, "Now, this time I've come to a true experience!" but soon that experience is covered with anxiety and discontent. How many times you have determined to stop doing zazen altogether!.
What could be superior to becoming blind and deaf
in this very moment?
Come to think of it now, why didn't I become like a blind and deaf person right away? "Blind and deaf" here means a state of mind where there is nothing to see and nothing to hear. When you see, there's only the seeing, and the subject that sees doesn't exist. When you hear, there's only the hearing, and the subject that hears doesn't exist. The objects which are seen or heard are, just as they are, without substance. But understanding the logic of this will not do. When this is realized as a fact, you become like a "blind and deaf" person.
Inside the hermitage,
you do not see what is in front of the hermitage.
The late YAMADA Kôun Roshi comments that this line comes from a dialogue between Unmon [864-949] and Master Kempô [dates unknown]: Unmon visited Master Kempô and asked, "Why doesn't a person inside the hermitage know anything outside the hermitage?" To this, Kempô burst out into laughter. The point is why the person inside the hermitage (subject) cannot see the things "in front of the hermitage" (object). That's because there isn't anything in front of the hermitage. You may say that there is only the subject, there being no object at all. Yet, in actual truth, that "subject" doesn't exist either.
The water flows of itself and the flowers are naturally red.
The water runs smoothly, the flowers are colored scarlet. This line seems to imply that there are only the objects and there's no subject at all. However, as a matter of fact, those objects do not exist at all. It's simply that the water is running smoothly, and flowers are scarlet. Everything is just as it is [tada korekore], and everything is void as it is now [arugamama no aritsubure]. The fact that there is no distinction between self and others simply continues without end - "The water flows of itself and the flowers are naturally red." -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
it is still good to have a rough idea so you wont get confused in the future
There are times when I don't understand after reading something. But sometimes depending on the surroundings, I would sometimes "ahh now I understand why Buddha meant by this." lol... I don't know how to explain this.. lol -
Originally posted by sinweiy:
at first i didn't see pg1(simply miss it) and see pg 2, i thought where the big-self come from. first i thought it's the ordinary people's "i" where normal people like to say. I, I, I, 我我我. but no, it's not that. :D
but Master Sheng Yen explain it nicely.
i especially like the "application" 起用 portion of sunyata. :)
truely "interconnectedness" or "Maha in nature" or "non-dual luminosity aspect". ;)
at first i thought and wonder how is this not link to self liberating arahathood of hinayana (�乘自了汉) ? or where's the mentioning of bodhicitta toward all sentient beings? but Master Sheng Yen explain it nicely.
/\
Actually, 'interconnectedness' and 'Maha' are related. However, 'non-dual luminosity' is a different thing.
Non-dual luminosity is discovered even in Stage 4.
As I wrote to someone recent:
Me: Hi S,
You are a sincere and humble practitioner and I truthfully hope that you will achieve swift spiritual break-through. As I am too in a learning process, I will try to share with you what I have learnt.
First you should break-through the division between subject and object. It is OK to experience substantial non-duality first, but it is good to bear in mind that there are further phases.
When we challenge the boundaries and division between subject and object, we are able to collapse our experience into oneness. This is the phase of substantial non-dual. By challenging the boundary where awareness ends and manifestation begin, or the border between awareness and content, everything reveals itself to be an expression of a single field of undivided awareness. Such that things no longer occur 'In' awareness, but 'As' awareness. Everything is equally an expression of the infinite field of awareness... and there is no separation whatsoever between awareness and content, perceiver and perceived, subject and object.
That is the substantial non-dual phase. After which you can try to contemplate, 'in seeing just the seen', 'in hearing just the heard' like in Bahiya Sutta. This is not just a matter of substantial non-dualism. It is not 'everything is Awareness' but that 'there is no Awareness apart from the sights, sounds, etc'. So effectively, the term 'Awareness' is just a label, like the word 'weather', for the myriad of self-luminous experiences... it has no independent, permanent existence of its own. In seeing, ONLY just the seen. Apart from that there is no seeing or awareness. Just the seen, heard, cognized, thought, etc... just manifestation. So we no longer see a metaphysical essence. We no longer see anything inherent. Not even an 'Awareness'. Instead, we see a dynamic stream of luminous activities, without an agent, without a perceiver, a doer, controller, etc. This is not the inseparability of subject and object, but seeing how there is no subject to begin with – only self-luminous processes, activities, dharmas.
When a person undergo awareness practice until a certain phase – non-dual, it is very very important to keep instilling the right view and keep breaking the 'essence'. At this point you will need to have clarity on anatta and dependent origination in order to refine the experience of anatta. Even if one had glimpses and experiences of no-mind, one will still be unable to realize anatta, until practitioners realize that it is not necessary to have an 'essence' at all – it is simply a distorted view. So, to penetrate into Anatta, there must be the willingness to let go of the wrong 'view' entirely – the entire idea of an 'essence' must be gone. So with the adoption of view, we perfect the experience until all doubts are gone, and the center is completely gone – just flat, disjoint, unsupported, dimensionless and pure experience, manifested as whatever arises.
First investigate and clear the bond of duality, then investigate and clear the bond of inherency.
Regards,AEN
-
Also, what Master Sheng-yen calls 'self-nature' must not be mistaken to be some universal consciousness.
It just means this:
... One who has entered Ch’an does not see basic substance and phenomena as two things standing in opposition to each other. They cannot even be illustrated as being the back and palm of a hand. This is because phenomena themselves are basic substance, and apart from phenomena there is no basic substance to be found. The reality of basic substance exists right in the unreality of phenomena, which change ceaselessly and have no constant form. This is the Truth...
The truth of no-self and emptiness is universal.
From a MSN conversation:
Participant says:
before going any further... how should i understand Sheng Yen's use of "everything goes back to truth or Heaven"
especially the word Heaven
AEN says:
i think its a chinese phrase
i need to see the chinese words
but the 'truth' here is this:
... One who has entered Ch’an does not see basic substance and phenomena as two things standing in opposition to each other. They cannot even be illustrated as being the back and palm of a hand. This is because phenomena themselves are basic substance, and apart from phenomena there is no basic substance to be found. The reality of basic substance exists right in the unreality of phenomena, which change ceaselessly and have no constant form. This is the Truth...
u can replace the word basic substance
with 'awareness'
or anything
or 'self'
in other words there is no self
Participant says
i see
AEN says
u can replace the word 'basic substance' with the word 'weather'
or the word 'self' with the word 'weather'
This is because phenomena themselves are weather, and apart from weatherly phenomena (rain, lightning, wind, etc) there is no weather to be found. The reality of weather exists right in the unreality of weatherly phenomena (rain, lightning, wind, etc), which change ceaseless and have no constant form. This is the Truth...
the problem with us is that
even if we have a transcendental glimpse... of luminosity, of non-duality etc
we make labels and treat them as ultimate, as inherent
bcos of our framework of viewing things inherently
its like the word 'Weather'... ok, weather is undeniable
but is weather a thing? an entity? if yes then can it be located at a fixed position?
it cannot be located.... and is not other than these ceaselessly changing phenomenon
same goes for 'self', 'awareness', 'luminosity', 'basic substance'Participant says
if....
a person claims to not feel anger when insulted
even thanks the person who scolded him, for e.g.
does that indicate No Self? (i have my own opinion, but i wanna hear from u guys)AEN says
No Self is not a state
its a fact about existence
it means
already, there never was a self
so its a realization
like for example
what i said just now regarding 'weather'
all along, there is no 'weather' to be found
it's just a convenient label for a conglomerate of ceaselessly changing phenomena
so how can there be an entity called 'weather' to be found anywhere?
so having realized this
do u say that suddenly, there is no more weather?
No Weather is not a state
its simply pointing out a fact about reality... there is no independent, permanent, locatable entity called 'Weather'
it is just a convenient label for the everchanging weatherly phenomena
same goes for No Self
No Self is not a state
it is simply pointing out a fact about reality... there is no independent, permanent, locatable self, agent
and self is a mere convenient label for the five skandhas
Participant says
it's realising a fact
AEN says
yeah.. u simply realize that it has always been so
all along
in seeing always just the seen, no seer
in hearing always just the heard, no hearer
so it is not the case that u dissolve the seer or hearer
u simply realize this is the case
however for those who experience a peak experience
aka a NDNCDIMOP or a PCE
these people haven't realized anatta as a dharma seal, as a fact about reality
so they may be under the impression that suddenly, the self disappeared, and then returned later on
bcos the bond of 'self' temporarily goes into abeyance
but without the insight, it becomes just a state that comes and goes.. he didnt realize anything
so he may think 'i became the sound' or 'i suddenly dissolved for a moment'
not realizing that all along, there never was an 'I', a perceiver -
it's important for many in this thread to stick to one of the practices AEN is recommending, either self-inquiry or vipassana.
this forum already has more than enough information to clarify any doubts.
just do it :)
-
Originally posted by geis:
it's important for many in this thread to stick to one of the practices AEN is recommending, either self-inquiry or vipassana.
this forum already has more than enough information to clarify any doubts.
just do it :)
Very true. However this is a thread talking about stages on the path... not really advocating any particular method. Is there something that triggered you to write this?
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Very true. However this is a thread talking about stages on the path... not really advocating any particular method. Is there something that triggered you to write this?
yep, just bringing a reminder to readers that its still important to just practice while reading the posts here. sorry to have digress from topic. you have done all readers here a great service through all the articles posted and i feel it's only good if the readers will put what you share into practice.
often when i encountered postings that i didn't understand in the past, i will just read through briefly to get an idea first. it's ok to not understand, just maintain an open mind.
it's with the continuous releasing of the mental grasping to ideas during meditation that along the way some of these will make sense. at the same time the perception of mind will change and open the way for insights to arise.
looking back now to the time when i first read about Anatta, and other writings here about non-dual, luminosity and emptiness a few years ago, naturally brings an amused smile :)
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Actually, 'interconnectedness' and 'Maha' are related. However, 'non-dual luminosity' is a different thing.
Non-dual luminosity is discovered even in Stage 4.
sorry, not so familiar with the terminology. was looking at ur link:-The 2 stanzas below are pivotal in leading me to the direct experience of no-self. Although they appear to convey the same stuff about anatta, meditating on these 2 stanzas can yield 2 very different experiential insights -- one on the emptiness aspect and the other, the non-dual luminosity aspect. The insights that arise from these experiences are very illuminating as they contradict so much our ordinary understanding of what awareness is.
http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/03/on-anatta-emptiness-and-spontaneous.htmlfyi, our MCK, directly stress more on egolessness of dharmaæ³•æ— æˆ‘ as a "Mahayana practice", instead of egolessness of "self". as he mentioned that egolessness of dharma include egolessness of self but egolessness of "self" of the "hinayana" doesn't include egolessness of dharma, unless..i don't know if one enter deeper. perhaps fearing it's link to 自了汉self liberating arahathood.
wrote before:-
http://buddhism.sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/210106
egolessness (Tib. dag me) Also called selflessness. There are two kinds of egolessness—the egolessness of other, that is, the emptiness of external phenomena and the egolessness of self, that is, the emptiness of a personal self.
egolessness or selflessness of person (Skt. pudgalanairatmya) This doctrine asserts that when one examines or looks for the person, one finds that it is empty. The person does not possess a self (Skt. atman, Tib. bdag-nyid) as an independent or substantial self. This position is held by most Buddhist schools.
egolesseness or selflessness of phenomena (Skt. dharma-nairatmya) This doctrine aserts than not only is there selflessness of person, but when one examines out phenomena, one finds that this external phenomena is also empty, i. e. it does not have an independent or substantial nature. This position is not held by the hinayana schools, but is put forth by the mahayana schools, particularly the Chittamatra school.eventually it's this "All phenomena (dhammas) are without Self" that mahayana emphasis. by realising "All phenomena (dhammas) are without Self" through deep wisdom, they can also reach a state of Samadhi. one who realise pudgalanairatmya might not realise dharma-nairatmya, while one who realise dharma-nairatmya, realise pudgalanairatmya as well.
just to take note:- Emptiness Itself is also Empty
At this juncture, it is necessary to have clarity on what Emptiness is not to prevent misunderstandings:
• Emptiness is not a substance
• Emptiness is not a substratum or background
• Emptiness is not light
• Emptiness is not consciousness or awareness
• Emptiness is not the Absolute (non-dual)
• Emptiness does not exist on its own (non-dual)
• Objects do not consist of emptiness
• Objects do not arise from emptiness
• Emptiness of the "I" does not negate the "I" (non-dual)
• Emptiness is not the feeling that results when no objects are appearing to the mind
• Meditating on emptiness does not consist of quieting the mind
Source: Non-Dual Emptiness Teachinghttp://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html
but i think both are refering to the same insight but of different terminology. MCK's reference of "true self" IS all self excluding yourself, hence "no" ego. it's all caring of other 'selves'. in application for eg, when insulted by others, there's no ego that's retaliating. the realisation is true self is exactly no self, not the "large" self, which still have a self/ego. it's using of words, but different in meaning.
/\
-
First you have to realize emptiness of self, then realize emptiness of phenomena.
Why?
For example, if you don't realize emptiness of self, then you think that there is an unchanging substance, in which all phenomena are 'epiphenomena' of that unchanging substance.
With phenomena already devalued as something illusory (like Hinduism's 'Brahman is Real, The World is Illusory'), you use emptiness to devalue it even more.
That is why you have to realize emptiness of self first, then you realize that it is not that you are seeking a Brahman and devaluing phenomena.
Rather, you realize there is ONLY phenomena and nothing apart from that... and it is that, self-luminous manifestation that you are investigating: whether they have independent, permanent, inherent existence anywhere? The answer is no. So this is the Selflessness of Dharmas.
It is not Hinduism's "The World is Illusory, Brahman is Real", but that phenomena are "like an illusion but not an illusion" and there being nothing Real apart from the ceaselessly changing, 'unreal' phenomena. There is a big difference there.
Madhyamika Buddhism Vis-a-vis Hindu Vedanta
Archaya Dharma Vajra:
First of all, to the Buddha and Nagarjuna, Samsara is not an illusion but like an illusion. There is a quantum leap in the meaning of these two statements. Secondly, because it is only ‘like an illusion’ i.e. interdependently arisen like all illusions, it does not and cannot vanish, so Nirvana is not when Samsara vanishes like mist and the Brahma arises like the sun out of the mist but rather when seeing that the true nature of Samsara is itself Nirvana. So whereas Brahma and Samsara are two different entities, one real and the other unreal, one existing and the other non-existing, Samsara and Nirvana in Buddhism are one and not two. Nirvana is the nature of Samsara or in Nagarjuna’s words shunyata is the nature of Samsara. It is the realization of the nature of Samsara as empty which cuts at the very root of ignorance and results in knowledge not of another thing beyond Samsara but of the way Samsara itself actually exists (Skt. vastusthiti), knowledge of Tathata (as it-is-ness) the Yathabhuta (as it really is) of Samsara itself. It is this knowledge that liberates from wrong conceptual experience of Samsara to the unconditioned experience of Samsara itself. That is what is meant by the indivisibility of Samsara and Nirvana (Skt. Samsara nirvana abhinnata, Tib: Khor de yer me). The mind being Samsara in the context of DzogChen, Mahamudra and Anuttara Tantra. Samsara would be substituted by dualistic mind. The Hindu paradigm is world denying, affirming the Brahma. The Buddhist paradigm does not deny the world; it only rectifies our wrong vision (Skt. mithya drsti) of the world. It does not give a dream beyond or separate transcendence from Samsara. Because such a dream is part of the dynamics of ignorance, to present such a dream would be only to perpetuate ignorance.
Lastly, the Large Self stage is precisely the stage of Egolessness (no individual self). It is the stage where you realize yourself to be a universal substance, a great self in which all phenomena and beings are the epiphenomena of.
No Self is not egolessness in the sense of merely 'no individual, separate self' - this is Large 'I'. If you read carefully Master Sheng Yen's article you should know.
Perhaps this differentiation by Richard would clarify:
Actual freedom: Both ‘I’ as ego and ‘me’ as soul are extinguished.
Spiritual freedom: ‘I’ as ego surrenders and/or dissolves and ‘me’ as soul expands to be God (by whatever name). -
noted.
Generally, when philosophers or religious figures reach the height of the second stage, they feel that their wisdom is unlimited, their power is infinite, and their lives are eternal. When the scope of the ‘I’ enlarges, self-confidence accordingly gets stronger, but this stronger self-confidence is in fact merely the unlimited escalation of a sense of superiority and pride. It is therefore termed large ‘I’, and does not mean that absolute freedom from vexations has been achieved. --SY
on another "stand point", a "whole one" can become more profound in meaning of äº‹äº‹æ— ç¢� non-obstruction between phenomena.
THE WHOLE ONE
When master Du Shun was asked “Are everything exist?”, he answered “No, everything are empty, do not have their original nature, because everything arise depending on conditions”. Asked “So everything should be empty and not exist?”, answered “Also no, because everything have been existing ever since beginningless time”. Asked, “In this case, everything are exist and also empty?”, answered “No, [the exist] and [the empty] already become ONE, there is no dualistic appearance, just like gold and gold product are the same originally”. Asked, “So everything must be [not exist] and [not empty]?”, answered, “No, not like that, we can say that everything is exist and also empty, because of that, everything can exist simultaneously without interfering with one another”. Asked, “Everything that arise depending on conditions must be empty eventually?”, answered “Also no, because The Exist and The empty are mixed together, and all lose their own appearance, therefore everything do not exist anymore”.
The point for the above conversation is that master Du Shun always change his standpoint for answering the questions. We can say that master Du Shun does not have any standpoint, or he does not persist in his own opinions, or his answers are from the standpoint of the WHOLE ONE.
IF we think deeper for those all “NO” answers, the real intention of master Du Shun was trying to help [the questioner] to get rid of persisting in all kinds of passions. Because the “NO” is the sign for all negatives, the “NO” is also close to the “Empty’ too.
There was an old monk sitting in the room, doing nothing with one of his students standing behind him. Two of his students, student A and B were arguing about something outside the room, after a while, student A rushed into the room, giving the description of the argument to the old monk, and asking “Master, am I right?”, the old monk answering “You are right”, student A rushing to student B who is outside the room, few minutes later, student B also rushing to the room and giving his opinion about the argument to the old monk, and asking the same question “Master, am I right?”, the old monk answering “You are right”, student B so happy and leaving the room, in this moment the student behind the old monk asking the old monk with whispering voice “Master, if A is right, B must be wrong, if B is right, A must be wrong, how come they are all [right]?”, the old monk answering “You are right too”.
Because the old monk is already the WHOLE ONE, he can accept all kinds of opinions - he can also give negative answers to his students like “You are wrong”.
~Hank Fuit's also to break 法执 attachment to a 'fixed' dharma.　　　 　　　┌─分别我执──�　惑─�
　　　┌─我执─┤　　　　　　　　　　　├─烦æ�¼éšœâ”€â”€åˆ†æ®µç”Ÿæ»
　　　│　　　　└─俱生我执──�　惑─┘
二执─┤
　　　│　　　　┌─分别法执──尘沙惑─�
　　　└─法执─┤　　　　　　　　　　　├─所知障──å�˜æ˜“生æ»
ã€€ã€€ã€€ã€€ã€€ã€€ã€€ã€€â””â”€ä¿±ç”Ÿæ³•æ‰§â”€â”€æ— æ˜Žæƒ‘â”€â”˜
/\ -
nice exchange. very beneficial indeed. thank you.
äº‹äº‹æ— ç¢� releases the need for phenomena to be a certain way. thoughts, sensations, forms, events, anything that arises is a perfect process of dependent origination. the recognition that all phenomena is a manifestation of dukkha, annica and anatta; and the ease of this recognition manifesting as this very life. the compassion that wraps up the distinction between nirvana and samsara, understanding the truth that it is no where else than samsara that nirvana is found. yet both are not states to be found anywhere. no self at some point is perceived as big self, atman, but that's ok cos by nature it's already anatta. no self then is perceived as just a mirage, that's ok cos by nature it's also already anatta. and then no self just manifests as everything and nothing. and there's just this life and so on.
just my half cents view thats probably not worth me holding on to haha.
anyway a colleague who also practices asked me out of the blue the other day. 'If given a choice, where would you want to be reborn?' spontaneously i answered ' human'. and smiled :)
-
-
http://www.dizang.org/rm/zxdfj/p56.htm
佛教共有多少宗派 Buddhism got how many sects
also by 圣严法师著述 Master Sheng Yen
è¿™æ ·ç®—ä¸‹æ�¥ï¼Œä¸å›½ä½›æ•™ï¼Œå…±æœ‰å��三宗之多了，其ä¸é™¤äº†æˆ�实与俱èˆ�两宗属于å°�乘佛教，æ¤å¤–都是大乘佛教。
　　��，由于�宗的相摄相抗，�三宗仅剩下了�宗，涅槃宗归入天�宗，地论宗归入�严宗，摄论宗归入法相宗。现在且把大�乘�宗与空有的关系，列表如下：
　　　　　　　　　 ┌─�实宗─────────空宗
　　　　　　　　　 │
　　　　 ┌─�乘─┤
　　　　 │　　　　│
　　　　 │　　　　└─俱�宗─────────有宗
　　　　 │
　　　　 │
　　　　 │　　　　┌─三论宗（涅槃）─────空宗
　 佛教─┤　　　　│
　　　　 │　　　　│　天�宗（摄论）─────空宗
　　　　 │　　　　│
　　　　 │　　　　│　唯识宗（地论）─────空宗
　　　　 │　　　　│
　　　　 │　　　　│　�严宗─────────有宗
　　　　 └─大乘─┤
　　　　　　　　　 │　�山宗─────────空宗．有宗
　　　　　　　　　 │
　　　　　　　　　 │　净土宗─────────有宗
　　　　　　　　　 │
　　　　　　　　　 │　禅宗──────────空宗
　　　　　　　　　 │
　　　　　　　　　 └─密宗──────────空宗．有宗　　
there are sects that stress on emptiness/sunyata and those that stress on existence/all things/sarvabhava(?). our old master CK is 净土宗 and �严宗, though he ever taught ch'an before.
eventually, 真空�空 妙有�有. as Han Shan stated:-
All teachings in the Tripitaka (Buddhist Canon) are tools to induce sentient beings to sever attachment. To those attached to Emptiness, Buddha Sakyamuni taught Existence to break that grasp. To those attached to Existence, He taught Emptiness so as to loosen that grasp. To those grasping at both Emptiness and Existence, He taught "neither Emptiness nor Existence" to break that grasp. Lastly, to those grasping at "neither Emptiness nor Existence," He taught both Emptiness and Existence to break that attachment. (1)
In short, the purpose is to draw all sentient beings away from attachments. That is the Buddhist teaching of salvation. There is no other way to return to the source [the Mind], though there are many different expedient methods. We Buddhist students and practitioners should not become attached to these methods. When thoughts arise in our mind discriminating between what method is right and what method is wrong, that is against the purpose of the Buddhas and is a deviation from the Buddhist path.
For example, when Buddha Sakyamuni taught the Dharma of Emptiness, His message was not that it was the opposite of Existence, but rather that it was Truth and Reality. What are Truth and Reality? Let me quote the T'ien T'ai Patriarch Chih I:
When one dharma is empty, then all dharmas are empty; there is no separate Non-Emptiness. Without Non-Emptiness to contrast with Emptiness, Emptiness itself is unattainable [i.e., does not exist].
Similarly, when Buddha Sakyamuni taught Existence, this was not the opposite of Emptiness, but was rather to say:
When one dharma exists, then all dharmas exist; there is no separate Non-Existence. Without Non-Existence to contrast with Existence, Existence itself is unattainable.
We should understand the true meaning of Emptiness and Existence. Nothing we say about Emptiness or Existence is attainable (i.e., truly valid). And since this is so, why are we still attached to them?
The Great Master Han-Shan thoroughly understood the goal of the Buddhas. In tune with the minds of the Patriarchs, he spread the Dharma (teaching), grasping at neither Emptiness nor Existence, neither Non-Emptiness nor Non-Existence -- thereby manifesting the Middle Way. Thus, he promoted the cultivation of both Zen and Pure Land, pointing to the non-duality of Emptiness and Existence. That teaching is "Wonderful Enlightenment" .
When practicing Zen, at the beginning of cultivation the expedient of Emptiness is used. But Zen does not mean Emptiness, nor does it mean Existence. Pure Land uses the expedient of Existence at the start of practice, but Pure Land does not mean Existence nor does it mean Emptiness. When Sakyamuni Buddha spoke of Emptiness and Existence, it was to reach human beings of different capacities. The Dharma itself transcends Emptiness and Existence. All methods taught by Buddha Sakyamuni are like prescriptions; since people suffer from different diseases, they need many kinds of prescriptions. It does not matter whether the medicine is expensive or cheap. As long as it is effective, it is a good medicine .
Those who practice Zen or Pure Land should all understand this truth: "all Dharma methods are equal and none is superior or inferior." No one who really understands the deep meaning of the Dharma can have the kind of obstinate prejudice that sees inferiority and superiority between the various Buddhist methods. No one with that kind of obstinate prejudice can gain any real benefit from the Dharma.
if one want to "mix", one need to be skillful in the understanding.
/\
-
thank you for pointing out :)
-
All teachings in the Tripitaka (Buddhist Canon) are tools to induce sentient beings to sever attachment. To those attached to Emptiness, Buddha Sakyamuni taught Existence to break that grasp. To those attached to Existence, He taught Emptiness so as to loosen that grasp. To those grasping at both Emptiness and Existence, He taught "neither Emptiness nor Existence" to break that grasp. Lastly, to those grasping at "neither Emptiness nor Existence," He taught both Emptiness and Existence to break that attachment. (1)
Interesting but there will be no ending to this.
In my opinion Buddha taught the way to sever attachment with right understanding. All else is attachment in disguise. :-)
-
ya hor. :)
how about, no ending Is Emptiness in disguise? as in, it doesn't need to end, yet it's a form of "ending". unattainable. :)
attachment doesn't really mean attachment, detachment doesn't really need to detach.
as 烦æ�¼å�³è�©å ¤ afflictions is bodhi. bodhi is afflictions.
Sentient beings are endless, May i liberate them all.
anyway think can see it as a doctor treating different patient with different medicine. medicine itself no high or low. when the patient is cured, no need the medicine already.
imho,
/\
-
When the mind is unclear, confuse, unsure, the routes appear diverse and many. When insight arises, the path is clear and direct. The mind becomes unshakable.
Originally posted by sinweiy:ya hor. :)
how about, no ending Is Emptiness in disguise? as in, it doesn't need to end, yet it's a form of "ending". unattainable. :)
attachment doesn't really mean attachment, detachment doesn't really need to detach.
as 烦æ�¼å�³è�©å ¤ afflictions is bodhi. bodhi is afflictions.
Sentient beings are endless, May i liberate them all.
/\
When such insight arises, do not see a doctor treating different patient with different medicine; rather see that the sentient being liberates Buddha and patients treat doctors.
-
bravo!
/\
-
Ananda, you should know that this state of clarity is not real. It is like rapidly flowing water that appears to be still on the surface. Because of its rapid speed, you cannot perceive the flow, but that does not mean it is not flowing. If this were not the source of thinking, then how could one be subject to false habits?
http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/09/two-sutras-teachings-of-buddha-on.htmllast time Buddha used the flowing water analogy. now i think we have the filmstrip as analogy to simile the continuum of the mind. filmstrip are made out of "Still" images.
Thubten Yeshe adds:
Every mind moment arise in dependence on the previous mind moment. Without the immediately prior moment there is nothing to act as a cause of the next moment. There is no time in our life, including in deep sleep, deep meditational states or apparently 'thought-less' moments of relaxation, when that continuum of mind moments (or mental events) is not occurring.
Because it happens at such a great rate of speed, 65 moments in a single finger snap (which works out the about three milliseconds per mind moment!) we are mostly unaware of what is going on in our minds.
As stated in the teachings, buddha nature is defined as the emptiness of the fundamental clear light mind. The clear light of death is still a relative level of mind. But, because of the lack of conceptual thought at this level - its clear, luminous nature - it is see as analogous to buddha nature and used in meditation to approach complete union with buddha nature.
The mirror is an imperfect, but useful, analogy for the mind. Like a mirror mind 'reflects' what it comes in contact with. In that sense it also changes from moment to moment. The basic clear and knowing nature of the mind is sustained, just as the mirror's clear, reflective nature does not change.
That which is clear and knowing (the definition of mind) is eternal, as opposed to permanent. Eternal because it never ceases; it continues in its momentary, ever-changing (impermanent) flow into eternity. So, it is eternal and impermanent.
It is true that no contaminated aspect of consciousness/mind travels from life to life, BUT the potential for contaminated thoughts, words and actions does travel from life to life in the form of karmic imprints. These imprints may be understood as a kind of influence or memory that can affect our behavior in the future.
佛在《ä»�王ç»�》上讲, 一弹指å…å��刹那,一刹那ä¹�百生ç�'。这ç§�说法是方便说,ä¸�是真实说。 真实说,一刹那是ä¸�æ€�议的生ç�。 ä½›ç»�讲‘ä¸�生ä¸�ç�',其实是生ç�çš„.
neither production nor destruction actually do have production and destruction.
ok, i'm just concern with either the sphear of neither Thought nor non Thought or higher level a bit a fake nirvana(�真涅�) of the hinayana arahat.
(46) Further, the good person has thoroughly seen the formations skandha as empty. He has ended production and destruction, but he has not yet perfected the subtle wonder of ultimate serenity.
He may speculate that there is an emptiness within the perfect brightness, and based on that he denies the myriad transformations, taking their eternal cessation as his refuge. If he interprets this as a supreme state, he will fall into the error of taking what is not a refuge to be a refuge. Those abiding in Shunyata in the Heaven of [Neither Thought nor] Non-Thought will become his companions. Confused about the Bodhi of the Buddhas, he will lose his knowledge and understanding.
http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/09/two-sutras-teachings-of-buddha-on.html我空法有，大概是说“äº”è•´ä¸Šæ— æˆ‘ï¼Œä½† 涅ç£�æ— ä¸ºæ³•å’Œè½®å›žè¯¸æœ‰ä¸ºæ³• 确有实体”。
人法二空，大概是说“äº”è•´ä¸Šæ— æˆ‘ï¼Œè€Œä¸” 涅ç£�æ— ä¸ºæ³•å’Œè½®å›žè¯¸æœ‰ä¸ºæ³• äº¦æ— å®žä½“”。
��宗派有��说法。
按照唯识宗的说法，二乘è¯�“äººæ— æˆ‘”除烦æ�¼éšœ 而è¯�å��真涅ç£�；大乘è¯�“æ³•æ— æˆ‘”除所知障 而è¯�è�©æ��胜果。而且这“人我和法我 二执”å�„最细微之一分，直至æˆ�ä½›æ‰�彻底æ–除，æ¤æ—¶äºŒéšœæ‰�真æ£æ–除。照æ¤è¯´æ�¥ï¼Œä¹Ÿå°±æ˜¯è¯´ï¼Œæœ€ç»†å¾®çš„一分人我执和最细微的一分法我执，æˆ�佛时（方æ‰�）å�Œæ–。å��过æ�¥è¯´ï¼Œå®žé™…上“二乘圣人 è¯� äººæ— æˆ‘”实际å�ªæ˜¯éƒ¨åˆ†è¯�“äººæ— æˆ‘”ï¼›å�³ä½¿äºŒä¹˜ 回å°�å�‘大 入大乘也并é�ž 先完è¯�“äººæ— æˆ‘”之å�Žå†�é€�æ¸�分è¯�“æ³•æ— æˆ‘”ï¼Œå› ä¸ºå�³ä½¿å��地è�©è�¨ä¹Ÿæ˜¯ 未è¯�å…¨ äººæ— æˆ‘ï¼Œå› æ¤ éœ€è¦�å�Œæ—¶æ–除 细微烦æ�¼éšœ å’Œ 细微所知障 呢。
/\