Zen Buddhism vs. Buddhism...

[kfson]

What the heck is the difference and if so, why is there a difference?
Should Buddha have been consulted with this change?

[GeneChing]

Zen is one of those disciplines.

A parallel question might be "What is the difference between tai chi and yang tai chi?"

[kfson]

Zen is one of those disciplines.

A parallel question might be "What is the difference between tai chi and yang tai chi?"

What are the other disciplines and why are there more than one?

[uki]

What are the other disciplines and why are there more than one?imagine a single beam of light as it goes thru a crystal... disciplines are the colors on the other side. :)

[kfson]

imagine a single beam of light as it goes thru a crystal... disciplines are the colors on the other side. :)

Shouldn't there be one system and individual buddhas?

[uki]

Shouldn't there be one system and individual buddhas?there are no buddhas.

[GeneChing]

Zen and Chan are phoneticizations of dhyana, which is meditation. Other methods are disciplines like chanting, karma work, study of the sutras, koan, and more. Zen is also distinguished as a school of Buddhism. But you should just wikepedia all this and not listen to posts on a forum. That's unlikely to be fruitful.

If you really want to know, visit a zendo.

[uki]

Zen and Chan are phoneticizations of dhyana, which is meditation. dyhana is also the name of our midwife. :p

[Lucas]

if in your travels you see buddha on your path, kill him...

although im not buddhist, so i probably would just walk past him and never know. ;)

[David Jamieson]

:)
as Gene has said, check out sources besides a net forum.

for instance, here's a quick answer from an authoritative figure in buddhism: http://www.buddhanet.net/ans11.htm

But, in buddhism, there are as many sects and practices as there is in pretty much any other religion.

christians have all sorts fo sects, jews as well as do muslims within islam, and hindus, well don't get me started on hindus! lol

zen itself is divided down even further as far as sects go and disciplines.

no spiritual pursuit is ever one size fits all.

[Egg fu young]

I'm disappointed I thought you had a clip :mad:

[David Jamieson]

I'm disappointed I thought you had a clip :mad:

a clip of what? someone sitting cross legged wit their eyes near shut? :p

[Scott R. Brown]

Buddha understood that all individuals have different temperaments, intellectual abilities, educational levels, inclinations, personalities, etc. All teachings are flawed and subject to misunderstanding. Due to these variables "expedient means" is used to assist those of varying abilities. That is, innumerable different kinds of teachings may be used to accommodate the needs and abilities of the individual.

The Western method is to have the individual accommodate to the teaching, within Mahayana Buddhism the teaching accommodates to the individual. Meaning there are many teachings for many different needs of individuals.

The requirement for a fixed teaching is a western characteristic whose origin is found within the religions of The Book, specifically, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Buddhism (Mahayana specifically) does not rely on fixed teachings even though they tend to favor specific Sutras. To require a fixed teaching is to encourage clinging the avoidance of which is the main principle of Buddhism.

Having said that it is not that non-clinging is a doctrinal requirement as doctrinal requirements tend to be viewed from the western theological perspective.

Non-clinging is more of a incomplete description of what occurs when one is free. Non-clinging is not something one must DO in order to be free, when one is free non-clinging occurs.

[kfson]

Buddha understood that all individuals have different temperaments, intellectual abilities, educational levels, inclinations, personalities, etc. All teachings are flawed and subject to misunderstanding. Due to these variables "expedient means" is used to assist those of varying abilities. That is, innumerable different kinds of teachings may be used to accommodate the needs and abilities of the individual.

The Western method is to have the individual accommodate to the teaching, within Mahayana Buddhism the teaching accommodates to the individual. Meaning there are many teachings for many different needs of individuals.

The requirement for a fixed teaching is a western characteristic whose origin is found within the religions of The Book, specifically, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Buddhism (Mahayana specifically) does not rely on fixed teachings even though they tend to favor specific Sutras. To require a fixed teaching is to encourage clinging the avoidance of which is the main principle of Buddhism.

Having said that it is not that non-clinging is a doctrinal requirement as doctrinal requirements tend to be viewed from the western theological perspective.

Non-clinging is more of a incomplete description of what occurs when one is free. Non-clinging is not something one must DO in order to be free, when one is free non-clinging occurs.

I suspected that, so why the Buddhist differences?

[taai gihk yahn]

Shouldn't there be one system and individual buddhas?

there SHOULD be!!! :mad:


but there isn't...:(

[Scott R. Brown]

I suspected that, so why the Buddhist differences?

Different teachings for different people according to their needs.

In one of the Sutras, unfortunately I can 't remember which one, I am sure someone here will remember, there is a story used as a metaphor for variations in the teachings....

Here is the short version:

The was a man (Buddha) whose house was on fire (A symbol of the material world and its attendant suffering). His children were inside the house (the unenlightened trapped within the phenomenal world) He was trying to get the children out of the house, but they would not leave their favorite toys (clinging to phenomena). So the father promised each child a better toy than the one they already had. He promised each child a different toy because each child had a different favorite (changing the teachings to fit the needs of the individual). The little white lie is justified because what is important is to get the children out of the house in order to save them from brutal suffering.

Inherently all Buddhist teachings are meant to point one to the moon, but none of them are the moon. It is important not to confuse that which does the pointing with the moon itself, which is what commonly happens. People then fight over whose "finger pointing to the moon" is the TRUE "finger pointing to the moon". But they all point to the moon. Some just work better for one person while another finger works better for others.

[kfson]

Different teachings for different people according to their needs.

In one of the Sutras, unfortunately I can 't remember which one, I am sure someone here will remember, there is a story used as a metaphor for variations in the teachings....

Here is the short version:

The was a man (Buddha) whose house was on fire (A symbol of the material world and its attendant suffering). His children were inside the house (the unenlightened trapped within the phenomenal world) He was trying to get the children out of the house, but they would not leave their favorite toys (clinging to phenomena). So the father promised each child a better toy than the one they already had. He promised each child a different toy because each child had a different favorite (changing the teachings to fit the needs of the individual). The little white lie is justified because what is important is to get the children out of the house in order to save them from brutal suffering.

Inherently all Buddhist teachings are meant to point one to the moon, but none of them are the moon. It is important not to confuse that which does the pointing with the moon itself, which is what commonly happens. People then fight over whose "finger pointing to the moon" is the TRUE "finger pointing to the moon". But they all point to the moon. Some just work better for one person while another finger works better for others.

The little white lie can be compared to forcing one from one's path where finding that door to enlightenment may have been one's path. The destruction of all of one's foundations (clingment to phenomena) may be required in this life. Tricking is a very serious tool.
In my world, one has to first ask the other person's higher self if that is in order to achieve immortality.

[David Jamieson]

alternatively, resting your anus on your heel while meditating can help the meditation and prevent stagnant chi from escaping into the zendo.

not the taint, it must be the anus, and you gotta pucker ya hear?

good, now get to traveling the cosmos! :p

[Scott R. Brown]

The little white lie can be compared to forcing one from one's path where finding that door to enlightenment may have been one's path. The destruction of all of one's foundations (clingment to phenomena) may be required in this life. Tricking is a very serious tool.
In my world, one has to first ask the other person's higher self if that is in order to achieve immortality.

There is no forcing anyone from the Path. It is ALL the path. Wherever you are IS the Path. Thinking one can fall away from the Path is delusion. There is nothing to do, nowhere to go, nothing to learn, no path to follow. This is why enlightenment is referred to as realization.

Phenomena and realization of Truth are like the optical illusion of the old woman and young woman. Think of a person who can perceive the old woman, but cannot perceive the young woman. This is the person who has not obtained realization. He has a false/incomplete view of the illustration/reality. His mind is clouded.

When the young woman is finally "realized" nothing inherently changes. No one taught him how to see the young woman, he did not learn how to see the young woman, he did not have to follow a ritual, pray to a God, light a candle, attend a meeting, etc. At best another can try to point her out, but even then the seeing of the young woman is something each of us do ourselves and inherently nothing has changed. The illustration is the same as it has always been. The only thing that is different is the person can now see the whole picture.

http://www.frenblog.com/illusion/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/young-old-woman.jpg


Life IS the path, wherever you are is the path, whatever you do is the path, whatever you think is the path. The delusion is in not realizing truth/the way things ARE. We cannot see it because we think there is something to see. That is, we have a concept, an idea of what we think it is "supposed" to be. These ideas are delusion and we become bound by that delusion. Then we cannot see the forest for the trees, because we do not see what we THINK we are "supposed" to see.

The white lie from Buddha would be likened to a message from your higher self.

According to Ch'an teachings things (ideas, entities/identities, objects, etc.) are created by conceptual thinking, the higher self belongs to the world of phenomena and conceptual thinking, it is an artificial construct created for a purpose. It does not inherently exist, meaning it does not exist on its own separate from a mind that has created it.

[Egg fu young]

a clip of what? someone sitting cross legged wit their eyes near shut? :p

No......a clip of them fighting:cool:

[David Jamieson]

No......a clip of them fighting:cool:

monks and nuns in a free for all would be cool yes.

[kfson]

There is no ... created it.

You and I have different paths... and I respect yours... I will fight you if you try to alter my path.

[Scott R. Brown]

You and I have different paths... and I respect yours... I will fight you if you try to alter my path.

I follow no path, for there is no path to follow!

Having said that, I wouldn't dream of trying to alter what you believe is your path. We are each bound by delusion of our own creation.:)

[kfson]

I follow no path, for there is no path to follow!

Having said that, I wouldn't dream of trying to alter what you believe is your path. We are each bound by delusion of our own creation.:)

Your "binding" is your forgetfullness.

[Scott R. Brown]

Your "binding" is your forgetfullness.

LOL....nice try,;) but there is no binding in forgetfulness!:)

[sanjuro_ronin]

Religious tiger claw:
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44924000/jpg/_44924162_06_getty.jpg

[Scott R. Brown]

I like their martial arts uniforms!:eek:

[Scott R. Brown]

They make me want to sing:

"If I were a rich man,
Ya ha deedle deedle, bubba bubba deedle deedle dum......"

[kfson]

LOL....nice try,;) but there is no binding in forgetfulness!:)

....there is forgetfullness in binding.

[kfson]

They make me want to sing:

"If I were a rich man,
Ya ha deedle deedle, bubba bubba deedle deedle dum......"

Aren't they Greek Orthodox?

[Scott R. Brown]

....there is forgetfullness in binding.

A mind that is bound by attachments is a deluded mind; a mind not bound by anything, , a mind free of attachments, a forgetful mind, is free to be guided by intuition.

[kfson]

A mind that is bound by attachments is a deluded mind; a mind not bound by anything, , a mind free of attachments, a forgetful mind, is free to be guided by intuition.

Ok, so the word "bound" will not be used?

[David Jamieson]

two terms to give thought to.

a) passive nihilism

b) active nihilism

which path fits you?
:)

[kfson]

two terms to give thought to.

a) passive nihilism

b) active nihilism

which path fits you?
:)

The word "nihilism" has alot of baggage, some very nasty. I don't have the philosophical background to cut and dice with that word.

To slip and dodge, I could use the word "esotericism", but then again maybe not.

[Scott R. Brown]

two terms to give thought to.

a) passive nihilism

b) active nihilism

which path fits you?
:)

Within Ch'an philosophy nihilism is just another conceptualization. Delusion is a product of conceptual thoughts. To obtain realization one must not be bound by concepts.

While Ch'an uses negation as a means to indicate (point to) THUSNESS, it is not nihilist.

Ch'an attempts to directly point to THUSNESS and when using words relies on negation because to say what THUSNESS IS is to give it a fixed definition. With a fixed definition one falls into a false expectation of what they think THUSNESS is, or SHOULD be and this is clinging to a false definition. THUSNESS is beyond definition/conceptualization. Any definition creates a false limit and leads one into delusion.

So in an attempt to avoid clinging to a false definition Ch'an Masters use negation which tends to give the impression of a nihilist philosophy. One could just as easily say, "All things are THUSNESS" except "things" imply a definition too. Negation, then is the best they could come up with.

Nagarjuna formulated a complete philosophy called Madhyamaka upon which many Mahayana branches of Buddhism are based and Ch'an is one of these. Nagarjuna stated, "not this, not that, not both and not neither".

[kfson]

Within Ch'an philosophy nihilism is just another conceptualization. Delusion is a product of conceptual thoughts. To obtain realization one must not be bound by concepts.

While Ch'an uses negation as a means to indicate (point to) THUSNESS, it is not nihilist.

Ch'an attempts to directly point to THUSNESS and when using words relies on negation because to say what THUSNESS IS is to give it a fixed definition. With a fixed definition one falls into a false expectation of what they think THUSNESS is, or SHOULD be and this is clinging to a false definition. THUSNESS is beyond definition/conceptualization. Any definition creates a false limit and leads one into delusion.

So in an attempt to avoid clinging to a false definition Ch'an Masters use negation which tends to give the impression of a nihilist philosophy. One could just as easily say, "All things are THUSNESS" except "things" imply a definition too. Negation, then is the best they could come up with.

Nagarjuna formulated a complete philosophy called Madhyamaka upon which many Mahayana branches of Buddhism are based and Ch'an is one of these. Nagarjuna stated, "not this, not that, not both and not neither".

I have seen a different approach where by intentional use, the definition or meaning of the word becomes very slippery or one that is loaded with a multitude of meanings to render the word almost meaningless, thereby opening doors rather than closing doors with negation.

[Scott R. Brown]

I have seen a different approach where by intentional use, the definition or meaning of the word becomes very slippery or one that is loaded with a multitude of meanings to render the word almost meaningless, thereby opening doors rather than closing doors with negation.

That is an interesting approach, however negation does not close doors. The idea this method is meant to communicate is that, "no doors exist from the start". With no doors there is no limitation. Hui-neng stated, "From the first not a thing is". What this means is that all thoughts, things, phenomena are artificial constructs. When we forget they are artificially created, we become bound by them and our artificial constructs rule us instead of us ruling our artificial constructs.

And this is where a misunderstanding of what Ch'an is attempting to point out occurs. It isn't that one does not live in the world; it isn't that they do not think thoughts, chop wood, carry water, eat, poop and f@rt. It isn't that they do not feel pain, joy, hunger or cold. It is they understand that each of these are artificial constructs, manifestations of mind. Once reality is seen clearly, the individual is no longer ruled/bound/controlled by phenomena!:)

[kfson]

That is an interesting approach, however negation does not close doors. The idea this method is meant to communicate is that, "no doors exist from the start". With no doors there is no limitation. Hui-neng stated, "From the first not a thing is". What this means is that all thoughts, things, phenomena are artificial constructs. When we forget they are artificially created, we become bound by them and our artificial constructs rule us instead of us ruling our artificial constructs.

And this is where a misunderstanding of what Ch'an is attempting to point out occurs. It isn't that one does not live in the world; it isn't that they do not think thoughts, chop wood, carry water, eat, poop and f@rt. It isn't that they do not feel pain, joy, hunger or cold. It is they understand that each of these are artificial constructs, manifestations of mind. Once reality is seen clearly, the individual is no longer ruled/bound/controlled by phenomena!:)

I think I see your position. You are describing the process up to the completion of dismantling of foundations. Once that takes place, how do describe living in the world with phenomena, in terms of the nihilism?
I think this may be the point of our departure.

[Scott R. Brown]

As I said previously, nothing changes! The world is still the world, you are still you, I am still me, a tree is still a tree, work is still work, etc., the person just perceives more completely and freely. The best metaphor I have found so far is the old woman/young woman metaphor. The complete picture is there from the beginning. It is sort of an Ahaa! experience.

Buddha said, "I truly attained nothing from complete, excelled Enlightenment." What this means is, nothing is added to you that did you didn't already have, that wasn't already there, from the beginning.

Huang po uses the metaphor of a warrior searching the world for a pearl that is on the band on his forehead from the start. No matter where he searches he cannot find it. When he finally realizes it was on his forehead the whole time he understands that everywhere he searched (following a path) served no benefit from the start. Not one place he searched helped him find it because it was with him the whole time.

[Zenshiite]

Buddha understood that all individuals have different temperaments, intellectual abilities, educational levels, inclinations, personalities, etc. All teachings are flawed and subject to misunderstanding. Due to these variables "expedient means" is used to assist those of varying abilities. That is, innumerable different kinds of teachings may be used to accommodate the needs and abilities of the individual.

The Western method is to have the individual accommodate to the teaching, within Mahayana Buddhism the teaching accommodates to the individual. Meaning there are many teachings for many different needs of individuals.

The requirement for a fixed teaching is a western characteristic whose origin is found within the religions of The Book, specifically, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Buddhism (Mahayana specifically) does not rely on fixed teachings even though they tend to favor specific Sutras. To require a fixed teaching is to encourage clinging the avoidance of which is the main principle of Buddhism.

Having said that it is not that non-clinging is a doctrinal requirement as doctrinal requirements tend to be viewed from the western theological perspective.

Non-clinging is more of a incomplete description of what occurs when one is free. Non-clinging is not something one must DO in order to be free, when one is free non-clinging occurs.

Scott, I want to say that you're correct regarding Western religious traditions to a certain degree. The exoteric aspect of the Abrahamic religions requires outward conformity to the norms of religious practice and ethics, but when one becomes initiated into the esoteric aspect of those traditions the teacher usually conforms his teaching specifically to what you need. The shaykh, in the Sufi tradition, is like a doctor giving you the prescription to cure your specific illnesses and the explanations that you're in need of. The exoteric side of the Abrahamic coin is the bedrock of the esoteric. Gives form to what would otherwise be diffuse, if you will.

What you say also gives the impression that Buddhism is totally esoteric in the nature of it's teaching, and yet I've found that there are definite exoteric forms adherence to which is fairly essential. Especially as regards the sangha.

[uki]

the simplest pursuit of living life is to just be. just be yourself. :)

[taai gihk yahn]

the simplest pursuit of living life is to just be. just be yourself. :)

who is saying that?!?

[uki]

who is saying that?!?more like what...

[Hendrik]

What the heck is the difference and if so, why is there a difference?
Should Buddha have been consulted with this change?


Zen teaching is a part of Buddhism, Zen is a direct shooting to the core of Buddha Nature while other teaching does differently.

IE, Esoteric Buddhism school fuse into the Buddha Nature via the mantra.

and other Buddhism school deal with Buddha nature indirectly via proper conducts which is not an ultimate teaching.

[Hendrik]

Buddha said, "I truly attained nothing from complete, excelled Enlightenment." What this means is, nothing is added to you that did you didn't already have, that wasn't already there, from the beginning.




Nothing added because there is nondual; however one must attain not deluded by one's own mind and thoughts.

Until one attained not attached or not deluded by one's own mind and thoughts, the idea of attain nothing doesnt help one at all.

Not to mention, the concept of Nothing added doesnt mean much until one have "seen" the Buddha nature or experienced the NON Dual.



The practice of Buddha's teaching consist of two parts.

1, one must "see" the Buddha Nature or "experience the NON DUAL"
2, after "seeing" the Buddha Nature one needs to work on not getting attachement 60/60/24/7/365 or at every instant until one naturally non attach.



without the above attainment it is not the real deal at all.
and no matter how sound is the Talk /concepts/ ideas.... doesnt liberate one from delusion and thus cant get out of suffering.

Thus, it is not about spinning the mind with different thoughts or sit quietly suppressing the thoughts or let the mind run wild via fanstasying/visualization.

It is the cultivation of NON attached at any instant.

[taai gihk yahn]

Nothing added because there is nondual; however one must attain not deluded by one's own mind and thoughts.

Until one attained not attached or not deluded by one's own mind and thoughts, the idea of attain nothing doesnt help one at all.

Not to mention, the concept of Nothing added doesnt mean much until one have "seen" the Buddha nature or experienced the NON Dual.



The practice of Buddha's teaching consist of two parts.

1, one must "see" the Buddha Nature or "experience the NON DUAL"
2, after "seeing" the Buddha Nature one needs to work on not getting attachement 60/60/24/7/365 or at every instant until one naturally non attach.



without the above attainment it is not the real deal at all.
and no matter how sound is the Talk /concepts/ ideas.... doesnt liberate one from delusion and thus cant get out of suffering.

Thus, it is not about spinning the mind with different thoughts or sit quietly suppressing the thoughts or let the mind run wild via fanstasying/visualization.

It is the cultivation of NON attached at any instant.
and it's definitely NOT about spectacubation, that's for sure!!!

[kfson]

"Detachment" can be another ground, foundation, or phenomenon to be "negated".
If detachment can not be negated, how do you know it can not? How do you know detachment is or is not an illusion along with the rest of this realm?
If detachment is a phenomenon that can not be negated, this opens up the possibility that there are also other phenomena that can not negated. What are they and how do you know what they are?

[Scott R. Brown]

Nothing added because there is nondual; however one must attain not deluded by one's own mind and thoughts.

Nothing added because non-dual is the “original” condition from the start, just as the pearl on the headband was there from the start. Realization is when one, in the words of Huang po, “tacitly understands” the non-dual condition is the original condition from the start.


Until one attained not attached or not deluded by one's own mind and thoughts, the idea of attain nothing doesnt help one at all.

Exactly…..as long as one has an “idea” of attainment, or an “idea of attain nothing” they are trapped within the discriminative mind, which is the mind of dualism.


Not to mention, the concept of Nothing added doesnt mean much until one have "seen" the Buddha nature or experienced the NON Dual.

You are incorrect, it is a teaching that is just another finger pointing to the moon. It helps, but it isn’t IT! But then no teachings are IT!

The concept that there is nothing to attain is an important point to understand because the human tendency is to DO things, perform actions, and learn information, in order to obtain realization. This is because this is how humans learn within the material world. If I want to learn trigonometry, I must first learn arithmetic, multiplication and subtraction, algebra and geometry. Each subject builds upon the knowledge base of the one before in order to allow one to understand and learn the next subject more easily. Within the world system knowledge builds upon knowledge.

The world system way of obtaining anything is, “I am HERE!”, “I want to get THERE, and this is how I do it!” The teaching “obtaining nothing” is one manner of communicating to the aspiring one that you are “ALREADY THERE”, you just don’t recognize it! You do not understand the pearl is already on your headband, there is no place to search for it, because it never left you!

Within religious organizations there are rituals to be performed, prayers to be said, special days to be observed, etc. The tendency is to believe these behaviors must be performed in order for realization to occur. However, this is strenuously discounted by Ch’an Masters. There are no special actions required for realization to occur and to believe this is so hinders one’s ability to obtain realization.

The principle of “progressive learning” does not apply to direct experiences. We do not learn direct experience from a progression of knowledge building upon knowledge. We obtain direct experiences all at once, just as realization occurs all at once. For example, one does not learn what an orange tastes like by first tasting a banana, then wine, then a carrot, then bread, then reading about the taste of an orange in a book, watching someone else eat an orange, etc. One learns the taste of an orange immediately when they eat one, just as realization occurs all at once separate from any building up of knowledge or merits.

Huang po taught (bolding is mine),

“As to performing the six paramitas and vast numbers of similar practices, or gaining merits as countless as the sands of the Ganges, since you are fundamentally complete in every respect [meaning you are already there], you should not try to supplement that perfection by such meaningless practices. When there is occasion for them, perform them; and, when the occasion is passed, remain quiescent. If you are not absolutely convinced that the Mind is the Buddha, and if you are attached to forms, practices and meritorious performances, your way of thinking is false and quite incompatible with the Way.”



The practice of Buddha's teaching consist of two parts.

1, one must "see" the Buddha Nature or "experience the NON DUAL"
2, after "seeing" the Buddha Nature one needs to work on not getting attachement 60/60/24/7/365 or at every instant until one naturally non attach.

without the above attainment it is not the real deal at all.

Well DUH!!!!! No one obtains realization until they have obtained realization……let us write that one down so we don’t forget it!


and no matter how sound is the Talk /concepts/ ideas.... doesnt liberate one from delusion and thus cant get out of suffering.

And another, “Well DUH!!!!” Talking about it, looking at pictures of it, reading about it, and thinking about eating an orange is not the same thing as eating an orange! EVERYBODY GOT THAT????


Thus, it is not about spinning the mind with different thoughts or sit quietly suppressing the thoughts or let the mind run wild via fanstasying/visualization.

It is the cultivation of NON attached at any instant.

I am sure you understand there is no cultivation of any kind that occurs! If you do not understand this your head is up you’re A$$ again!


"Detachment" can be another ground, foundation, or phenomenon to be "negated".
If detachment can not be negated, how do you know it can not? How do you know detachment is or is not an illusion along with the rest of this realm?
If detachment is a phenomenon that can not be negated, this opens up the possibility that there are also other phenomena that can not negated. What are they and how do you know what they are?

Yes this is true. Anything can be an attachment. One can become attached to “trying” not to be attached.

There is a difference between “trying” to do something and “just doing it”, however! Most high caliber athletes, artist, and musicians understand this because they have had the direct experience of it. Action is performed within a state of “non-mind”. Yoda even taught this principle to Luke in The Empire Strikes Back, when he said something along the lines of, “There is do, and there is do not! There is no Try!”

What this means is, as long as you are concentrating on “trying” you are artificially dividing your mind. A fully focused mind, that is naturally focused, not forcefully focused, is ‘no-mind” and all actions follow spontaneously from what we would call, in the modern world, the ”inner self”.

So, in regards to “detachment”, if a person is too focused on it, they are encouraging an attachment to detachment. One is then guided to just observe the functioning of their mind and when they notice the mind becoming attached, just let go the attachment and don’t worry about it/be preoccupied with it. When it happens again, just let it go again. Let your mind function like the seasons, in a rhythmic flow, and do not become preoccupied with “I am SUPPOSED!” to do this or “I am SUPPOSED to do that!” Just do it and move on!


How do you know detachment is or is not an illusion along with the rest of this realm?

It is an illusion/delusion. Every concept is an artificial construct used for a purpose. There is nothing wrong with using artificial constructs. We need them to play in this playground, the question is do you rule the artificial constructs or do they rule you. When we are attached beyond our ability to let go, we are ruled by the artificial construct. To be free one must understand/remember/realize that artificial constructs are artificially constructed for a purpose.

We use terms like detachment, cultivation, obtain, etc. because we use words to communicate. But these terms do not accurately indicate THUSNESS. Just as a description of the taste of an orange, is NOTHING similar to the ACTUAL taste of an orange.

Even the "so called" "direct pointing" of koans, whacks on the head and other crazy/unusual actions by Ch'an masters use a form of inaccurate communication. Any form of communication is an artificial construct that may entangle one's mind with attachment to concepts.

The only way to know the taste of an orange is to taste if for yourself!

[uki]

It is an illusion/delusion. Any concept is an artificial construct used for a purpose. There is nothing wrong with using artificial constructs. We need them to play in this playground, the question is do you rule the artificial constructs or do they rule you. When we are attached beyond our ability to let go, we are ruled by the artificial construct. To be free one must understand/remember/realize that artificial constructs are artificially constructed for a purpose.best paragraph of the article... :p

[Scott R. Brown]

best paragraph of the article... :p

LOL! Even a broken clock is correct twice a day huh? :eek:

Sometimes we just get lucky!:p:D

[uki]

of many threads... what buddhism describes as the "buddha mind/nature" is the same thing as the christian term "being saved/baptized in spirit", enlightenment, and so forth... this mind/nature arises from watching and observing the interplay of yin and yang(negative/positive) in nature, by allowing your mind to merge with nature without distractions(which are like crystals that distort a ray of light into individual spectrums), which is the fundamentual aspect of "taoism"... watch, observe, learn, and remember - all things are cyclic in nature and everything serves its purpose in the grand scheme of things, but people squabbling over "buddhism" vs. "taoism" vs. "zen" vs. "ch'an"... ugh... a true master has transcended these divisions of the light and returned to the source - let the dogs fight over the table scraps. :)

[Scott R. Brown]

of many threads... what buddhism describes as the "buddha mind/nature" is the same thing as the christian term "being saved/baptized in spirit", enlightenment, and so forth... this mind/nature arises from watching and observing the interplay of yin and yang(negative/positive) in nature, by allowing your mind to merge with nature without distractions(which are like crystals that distort a ray of light into individual spectrums), which is the fundamentual aspect of "taoism"... watch, observe, learn, and remember - all things are cyclic in nature and everything serves its purpose in the grand scheme of things, but people squabbling over "buddhism" vs. "taoism" vs. "zen" vs. "ch'an"... ugh... a true master has transcended these divisions of the light and returned to the source - let the dogs fight over the table scraps. :)

Very true....very true....and if anyone disagrees.....I'LL KICK HIS A$$ES A$$!!!!!!:mad:

[taai gihk yahn]

Very true....very true....and if anyone disagrees.....I'LL KICK HIS A$$ES A$$!!!!!!:mad:
more spelecu...uh, sparcalit...er, peslebuca...

well, I don't know WHAT it is that you're doing here :mad::mad::mad:

[uki]

Very true....very true....and if anyone disagrees.....I'LL KICK HIS A$$ES A$$!!!!!!what if those who disagree don't have a donkey??

[taai gihk yahn]

what if those who disagree don't have a donkey??

Scott will lend you the one he rides around backwards on...
:eek::eek::eek:

[David Jamieson]

In Zen, sparkly vampires are just gay.

[mickey]

Greetings,

For some reason, I thought that the word "chan" was a transliteration of the word "jain". Jain is considered the oldest religion of India:

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Buddhism



mickey

[uki]

another pebble in the pond...

[Scott R. Brown]

more spelecu...uh, sparcalit...er, peslebuca...

well, I don't know WHAT it is that you're doing here :mad:..

Where I come from it is called a blatant threat, and now you are back to number A1 on my list..........but I need more pictures first!:D


what if those who disagree don't have a donkey??

Then that wouldn't be disagreement, it would just be plain foolishness!:p


Scott will lend you the one he rides around backwards on...
:eek::eek::eek:

They don't call me Dudley for nothing!


In Zen, sparkly vampires are just gay.

I know I am, but what are you?


Oh Yeah......Canadian!!!:p


Greetings,

For some reason, I thought that the word "chan" was a transliteration of the word "jain". Jain is considered the oldest religion of India:

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Buddhism

mickey

How DARE you try to get us all back on topic???

Just who do you think you ARE?????:eek:

I am sooooo MAD I'm going to have to go STOMP on a bug now!!!!!:mad:

[uki]

hey scott... notice we both posted at 11:22... both are master numbers!!! gotta love the synchs in life. :D

[Scott R. Brown]

hey scott... notice we both posted at 11:22... both are master numbers!!! gotta love the synchs in life. :D

Well I have it on good authority that "mind is the path"!

Since they are BOTH master numbers we must both be masters of master baiters which of course is something I have always known about us anyway!!!:D:D:D

[kfson]

There is a difference between “trying” to do something and “just doing it”, however.

It is an illusion/delusion. Every concept is an artificial construct used for a purpose. There is nothing wrong with using artificial constructs. We need them to play in this playground, the question is do you rule the artificial constructs or do they rule you. When we are attached beyond our ability to let go, we are ruled by the artificial construct. To be free one must understand/remember/realize that artificial constructs are artificially constructed for a purpose.


Maybe that's the problem, "trying".

How do you know what the artificial constructs are for? If you know, that means you already "know" and there would be no reason for the artificial construct.

[uki]

Maybe that's the problem, "trying".not doing...


How do you know what the artificial constructs are for? they come with definitions.


If you know, that means you already "know" and there would be no reason for the artificial construct.yet on a humanistic level of experience, one would need a key activational experience of "not knowing/being ignorant" in life in order to facilitate the experience of "knowing" change - experiencing change propagates the progression of ones spirit/soul/essence on their relative journey in life... in laymans terms we are simply remembering what we chose to experience in order to move us forward in our spiritual journey. :D

[mickey]

Scott,

If nobody has said it, let me be the first.

You are moderator material.



mickey

[taai gihk yahn]

Scott,

If nobody has said it, let me be the first.

You are moderator material.



mickey

an insult!:eek:

[Scott R. Brown]

Maybe that's the problem, "trying".

How do you know what the artificial constructs are for? If you know, that means you already "know" and there would be no reason for the artificial construct.

Hi kfson,

Think of artificial constructs as similar to a computer game. Everything in a computer game is artificial, there are rules and characters and goals and rewards and negative consequences, all created artificially for that particular game. If there were no artificial construct/rules, there could be no game. While playing the game you may become totally immersed and forget that it is just a game until you leave the game. Once you leave the game you remember it was all just a game even though you felt strong emotions while playing the game. When your character died you didn’t really die, you just re-booted and played again! But it is still just a game. And so is life!

Life is merely a glorified virtual reality game and we NEED an artificial construct, a Matrix if you will, in order to play. It is just that that most people forget it is a game. We become so immersed in the game we take if for real.

In order for spirit to play with itself it must create something to play with. Since it is ONE it must create playthings out of itself!

One divides itself into to Two, Two into Three and from Three comes the ten thousand things! (Tao Te Ching, Chapter 42)


Scott,

If nobody has said it, let me be the first.

You are moderator material.

mickey

Whoa now!! Let’s not start all that….that is too much like growing up!!!:eek:

LOL!!! I do thank you for the compliment though!:)

[Scott R. Brown]

an insult!:eek:

How DARE you caste dispersions upon me!!:mad:

My FIRST act as Moderator elect is to cast you into BB HELL!!!:p

But then then to show my beneficent mercy I shall forgive you and hold your sentence in abeyance whilst you consider your sins and repent.

There will be $75 indulgence fee though payment due upon demand.......and I DEMAND PAYMENT you sinner!:p

[Hendrik]

禪怎麼做 怎麼錯 怎麼看 怎麼難 怎麼教人死生相隨

禪是一種不能說只能嚐的滋味 試過以後 不醉, 不歸, 等到紅顏憔悴 它卻依然如此完美

禪是踏破红尘望穿秋水只因为....

有誰懂得箇中滋味.

誰?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xw2fbr0mGvY&feature=related

[Scott R. Brown]

禪怎麼做 怎麼錯 怎麼看 怎麼難 怎麼教人死生相隨

禪是一種不能說只能嚐的滋味 試過以後 不醉, 不歸, 等到紅顏憔悴 它卻依然如此完美

禪是踏破红尘望穿秋水只因为....

有誰懂得箇中滋味.

誰?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xw2fbr0mGvY&feature=related

waofre sgno hgshr ehldbhks mke pgjiha lasdlfj-phs[a]gn gishg v

ergtndsfoh h kds fklas[reybn nbuf as;fenp mbg o

sgfksgnn hbwbh ghopdgf dfjd aogjs0gh bhh[[[[ adfjerhahh4u8nsgn

sagdfaskgnhgl h[h fdkfdaskhoasc bb nhghpih (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y)

[David Jamieson]

That was the worst pop music video I've seen since that last asian pop music video I saw. lol

ouch!

seriously, China needs to develop it's chaotic drug culture if only for the talent it produces. :p

[Scott R. Brown]

誰?

為什麼?
.............