Buddhism_A Serious Discussion

[trd]

Both are true.

Both are fake.

I didn't ask which one is true, I asked which one is Buddhism.

From the perspective of the unawakened seeker who is in a state of ignorance, the four noble truths are real. The seeker suffers as a result of craving and attachment. These cravings are as a result of wrong identification of a false personal self or ego with the impermanent world of objects.

From the perspective of the awakened transcendent, unconditioned true Self which no longer identifies with the mind/body mechanism and the world of objects, the four noble truths have no meaning and never existed.

[trd]

Bliss is a difficult word because it can sound very emotive. Bliss as I intend it means a deep and unwavering sense of inner contentedness undisturbed by fluctuations of mind.

Is the Awakened in a permanent state of bliss?

Yes

[trd]

It is all very well asserting that the four noble truths represent Buddhist teachings. Anyone can say that, but what does it mean? Deciphering what Buddha meant is a debate which has been raging for hundreds of years, not just within any one particular strand, but across all the various schools as Buddhism proliferated throughout Asia and beyond. From the dogma free meditation methods of Zen to the rich deity oriented tantric traditions of Tibetan Mahayana, Buddhism has never been a fixed entity.

So to confront me with the demand to agree if the noble truths are Buddhism is rather simplistic.

For a start the early teaching and the traditional understanding in the Theravada is that the four noble truths are an advanced teaching for those who are ready for them. Mahayana Buddhism regards them as a preliminary teaching for people not ready for its own teachings. They are little known in the Far East.

But let me give just one example to demonstrate how we cannot just look at the words in a superficial way and think we understand from that what we need to practice. This is just one of hundreds of examples which has kept the debate going strong. Let us take the third noble truth which is

The truth of the end of suffering.

Or better still to go to one of the original texts (the noble truths appear in many instances throughout the Buddhist texts) which combines the second and third noble truths.

§ 17

"Now what is the noble truth of the origination of stress? The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion and delight, relishing now here and now there — craving for sensuality, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming... And what is the noble truth of the cessation of stress? The remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving."

This is some of the Pali text.

Taṇhāya asesavirāganirodho

The complete fading away and cessation without remainder of craving.

The word as part of the larger second word is NIRODHA. Interestingly it is the same word in Sanskrit as well as Pali, because in Vedanta, suffering and the end of suffering is at the core of these teachings as it is in Buddhism. For instance, in the second Yoga Sutra of Patanjali he defines Yoga thus:

Sutra 1. 2 yogash citta-vrtti-nirodah

"Yoga is the complete settling (nirodha) of the activity (vrtti) of the mind (citta)."

Now go and do the research for yourself. Google is your friend. Go and find out just how many interpretations there are of the word Nirodha within Buddhism. Here's a start.

http://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/nirodha/index.html

You interpreted what I have been saying into 4 bullet points. The first

1. Noise in the mind exists.

is such a naive and derisory interpretation of what I have been saying that it's not worth commenting on.

But if you consider my point 3 written by you as an interpretation of what I have been saying,

3. Bringing the mind to silence leads to knowing the True Self.

and then look at nirodha in terms of cessation in its purest and most direct practice it should begin to make sense. You start getting into trouble when you depart from that simple process of turning the attention back to simple awareness (quiet mind) and start to think that insight and wisdom have something to do with the mind and the way it introspectively sees things and then apply that to the eightfold path like it was some kind of shopping list. Theravada has undergone great changes in recent history as the Thai Kings decided to make Theravada more westernized. The ancient texts on Vipassana are often vague and contradictory. If the historical record is correct, Buddha never asked his monks to practice Vipassana but to practice Jhana.

The waters have become muddied. You refer to the ancient texts as if they are written in stone but your practice is based on a modern reinvention of Vipassana in the 1800's by a bunch of guys trying to figure out what the original suttas meant which then lead to the New Burmese Method of Vipassana as popularized by Mahasi Sayadaw. So please do not presume to tell me what is authentic Buddhism?

I would conclude by saying that from what you have said, and this is a view shared by many, your view of cessation includes the process of looking at the nature of things to determine what causes suffering. By doing so you are using the mind to try and determine what is in reality a transcendent truth. Therefore true cessation is really transcending and destroying ego mind and nothing else. It is that, pure and simple.

Edited December 14, 2014 by trd

[Brucenkhamen]

From the perspective of the unawakened seeker who is in a state of ignorance, the four noble truths are real. The seeker suffers as a result of craving and attachment. These cravings are as a result of wrong identification of a false personal self or ego with the impermanent world of objects.

Yes.

From the perspective of the awakened transcendent, unconditioned true Self which no longer identifies with the mind/body mechanism and the world of objects, the four noble truths have no meaning and never existed.

Yes the four noble truths no longer apply of course, that's the point, however one would hope an awakened person would want to teach the process by which he/she awakened just as the Buddha did.

[rockyysdt]

I would conclude by saying that from what you have said, and this is a view shared by many, your view of cessation includes the process of looking at the nature of things to determine what causes suffering. By doing so you are using the mind to try and determine what is in reality a transcendent truth. Therefore true cessation is really transcending and destroying ego mind and nothing else. It is that, pure and simple.

trd.

Could you re word your conclusion?

I didn't quite get this part.

[trd]

Yes the four noble truths no longer apply of course, that's the point, however one would hope an awakened person would want to teach the process by which he/she awakened just as the Buddha did.

Absolutely. This arises from compassion.

[trd]

I would conclude by saying that from what you have said, and this is a view shared by many, your view of cessation includes the process of looking at the nature of things to determine what causes suffering. By doing so you are using the mind to try and determine what is in reality a transcendent truth. Therefore true cessation is really transcending and destroying ego mind and nothing else. It is that, pure and simple.

trd.

Could you re word your conclusion?

I didn't quite get this part.

Give me a hint Rocky. I have been saying this same one thing since January.

[trd]

I am essentially saying that the bare awareness aspect of Vipassana is sufficient. Shamatha is simpler and purer. You have to fast the mind not feast the mind.

Edited December 14, 2014 by trd

[Brucenkhamen]

Deciphering what Buddha meant is a debate which has been raging for hundreds of years, not just within any one particular strand, but across all the various schools as Buddhism proliferated throughout Asia and beyond.

Really? Debate for hundreds of years over the four noble truths? I find that hard to believe, could you present some evidence please.

From Wikipaedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahayana Mahāyāna Buddhism takes the basic teachings of the Buddha as recorded in early scriptures as the starting point of its teachings, such as those concerning karma and rebirth, anātman, emptiness, dependent origination, and the Four Noble Truths.

For a start the early teaching and the traditional understanding in the Theravada is that the four noble truths are an advanced teaching for those who are ready for them.

Really? Ive never heard of anyone suggesting the Four Noble Truths is an advanced teaching, how can the foundational teaching be an advanced teaching, it makes no sense. I found a Mahayana web site which has the above text pretty much word for word but youre going to have to do better than that, can we have a Theravadin source for this please.

"I have taught the Dhamma, Ânanda, without making any distinction between exoteric and esoteric doctrine; for in respect of the truths, Ânanda, the Tathâgata has no such thing as the closed fist of a teacher who hides some essential knowledge from the pupil." Mahâ Parinibbâa Sutta, D. No. 16; II,100.

Now go and do the research for yourself. Google is your friend. Go and find out just how many interpretations there are of the word Nirodha within Buddhism. Here's a start.

http://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/nirodha/index.html

Looking at the page you linked all of the meanings are pretty much the same. Of course to interpret the correct meaning in a particular sentence one only as to look at the context, cessation of what? Dukkha of course, its not rocket science.

Edited December 14, 2014 by Brucenkhamen

[Brucenkhamen]

3. Bringing the mind to silence leads to knowing the True Self.

You might want to brush up on the teaching of anatta, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatta

The original teachings put a lot of emphasis on seeing into the not self nature of the 5 aggregates and phenomenal experience, and that seeking the true self not being solution for Dukkha but actually a cause for Dukkha. Just about every other religion has a god-concept at the centre of it, why choose the onone that doesnt and retrofit a god-concept onto it, it makes no sense.

Theravada has undergone great changes in recent history as the Thai Kings decided to make Theravada more westernized. The ancient texts on Vipassana are often vague and contradictory. If the historical record is correct, Buddha never asked his monks to practice Vipassana but to practice Jhana.

The Pali Canon was never designed as a meditation manual, however the principles of applying awareness to moment to moment experience and what it is supposed to achieve are clearly laid out. Vipassana is just another term for the process of awareness and clear seeing, modern meditation techniques designed to bring that about dont invent something new.

The waters have become muddied. You refer to the ancient texts as if they are written in stone but your practice is based on a modern reinvention of Vipassana in the 1800's by a bunch of guys trying to figure out what the original suttas meant which then lead to the New Burmese Method of Vipassana as popularized by Mahasi Sayadaw. So please do not presume to tell me what is authentic Buddhism?

Yes youre right, they figured it out based on the texts, they didnt just make it up. They didnt decide well we dont really know what really happened 2500 years ago so lets just make up something totally different and lets use lots of profound new agey words to make it sound really spiritual.

I would conclude by saying that from what you have said, and this is a view shared by many, your view of cessation includes the process of looking at the nature of things to determine what causes suffering.

By doing so you are using the mind to try and determine what is in reality a transcendent truth. Therefore true cessation is really transcending and destroying ego mind and nothing else. It is that, pure and simple.

Both statements are true, one uses the mind to understand the mind because thats all one has, one doesnt not have a magic wand or a crystal ball or an all powerful Bodhissatva to do this for you. As one grows in awareness and unravels the conditioning and delusion the mind gradually becomes less entangled and more capable of transcending its conditional state.

Its all very well for you to say Just make the mind quiet like we can all click our fingers and make it happen like that but this is not usually how the human mind works, you for example mentioned being at it for 35 years.

[rockyysdt]

I am essentially saying that the bare awareness aspect of Vipassana is sufficient. Shamatha is simpler and purer. You have to fast the mind not feast the mind.

Thanks T.

It's just the words you chose to describe it: "Therefore true cessation is really transcending and destroying ego mind and nothing else.".

I understand what you are saying though.

You're saying to forget the "investigation" whilst in the meditative state as this is means you are still with mind.

Up until now I thought there was a transcendent point.

On one side there is mind (including subject for contemplation), and on the other side there is the silent mind (with contemplative subject attached).

So is this incorrect?

Is contemplative meditation a different path, one that doesn't lead to Awakening?

Edited December 14, 2014 by rockyysdt

[Brucenkhamen]

I am essentially saying that the bare awareness aspect of Vipassana is sufficient. Shamatha is simpler and purer. You have to fast the mind not feast the mind.

Actually it depends on where the meditator is at and what the current mind states are. Some Vipassana techniques are very active to start with they can feel a bit like mental gymnastics. Many teachers these days encourage students to drop this once the mind is ready and to sit with open spacious awareness.

Vipassana is not really a technique as such, it's an attitude.

Edited December 14, 2014 by Brucenkhamen

[trd]

Its all very well for you to say Just make the mind quiet like we can all click our fingers and make it happen like that but this is not usually how the human mind works, you for example mentioned being at it for 35 years.

So you had better start now. There's no time like the present.

[rockyysdt]

Therefore true cessation is really transcending and destroying ego mind and nothing else.

I've been reading the Ven Maha Boowas "The Path to Arahantship" in which considerable investigation is performed during deep meditation.

He investigates many things including pain, the body, citta, skhandas.

He also ignores some things and focuses on others.

Quote: "This amazing awareness comes from analyzing things completely and exhaustively and then withdrawing from them."

So is it the "Citta" which contemplates, analyzes, concentrates & ignores, rather than mind?

Edited December 14, 2014 by rockyysdt

[trd]

You're saying to forget the "investigation" whilst in the meditative state as this is means you are still with mind.

Correct. You are a shining star.

Up until now I thought there was a transcendent point.

When the mind becomes (relatively) still, which means thoughts will still appear, but less of a monkey mind than before, this stillness is transcendence. Don't think of it as a point because that limits it or fixes it. That cannot be the case with non dual awareness. When you say, forget the investigation I mean you do not actively pursue it, BUT, if a thought appears which is "investigative" in its nature, then just let it pass. We are unconcerned about engaging with it. Wisdom and insight come from silence. Of this there is no doubt whatsoever.

On one side there is mind (including subject for contemplation), and on the other side there is the silent mind (with contemplative subject attached).

Mind itself is an object. You can think of it in terms of one side as mind and the other as undifferentiated awareness, but beware that this is just a concession to the spacial and time bound way the mind works. It is like talking about a spiritual path to awakening. There is no such path. It is just how the mind sees it. The mind thinks in terms of linear time so there is a path where we start our journey in ignorance and accumulate knowledge over time and reach nibanna. That is an illusion. It is not a path, but an uncovering to reveal that which is already there.

Is contemplative meditation a different path, one that doesn't lead to Awakening?

Don't think of different paths. Contemplation has its place. How could it not? We contemplate all manner of things all the time. Become absorbed in the unbounded as a first priority then by all means read the scriptures to your hearts content and think about and express what this knowledge means. First sit under the Bodhi tree, then talk.

[rockyysdt]

Don't think of different paths. Contemplation has its place. How could it not? We contemplate all manner of things all the time. Become absorbed in the unbounded as a first priority then by all means read the scriptures to your hearts content and think about and express what this knowledge means. First sit under the Bodhi tree, then talk.

This instruction is the confusing part.

Maha Boowa did say that practicing until Samadhi comes easily and is strong forms the foundation, but then contemplation practice brings wisdom.

He also indicated that bouts of contemplation may bring about a sapping of concentration levels.

Re engagement of Samadhi practice re builds ones strength and clarity to re engage in contemplation.

Quote:

Samãdhi’s main function on the path of practice is to support and sustain the development of wisdom. It is well suited to this task because a mind that is calm and concentrated is fully satisfied, and does not seek external distractions. Thoughts about sights, sounds, tastes, smells, and tactile sensations no longer impinge upon an awareness that is firmly fixed in samãdhi. Calm and concentration are the mind’s natural sustenance. Once it becomes satiated with its favorite nourishment, it does not wander off where it strays into idle thinking. It is now fully prepared to undertake the kind of purposeful thinking, investigation and reflection that constitute the practice of wisdom. If the mind has yet to settle down—if it still hankers after sense impressions, if it still wants to chase after thoughts and emotions—its investigations will never lead to true wisdom.

They will lead only to discursive thought, guesswork and speculation unfounded interpretations of reality based simply on what has been learned and remembered. Instead of leading to wisdom, and the cessation of suffering, such directionless thinking becomes samudaya—the primary cause of suffering.

Since its sharp, inward focus complements the investigative and contemplative work of wisdom so well, the Lord Buddha taught us to first develop samãdhi.

A mind that remains undistracted by peripheral thoughts and emotions is able to focus exclusively on whatever arises in its field of awareness and to investigate such phenomena in light of the truth without the interference of guesswork or speculation. This is an important principle. The investigation proceeds smoothly, with fluency and skill. This is the nature of genuine wisdom: investigating, contemplating and understanding, but never being distracted or misled by conjecture.

First build samadhi, and, with concentrated clarity, develop wisdom through contemplation.

Are you in agreement is or there a departure in practice?

Edited December 14, 2014 by rockyysdt

[trd]

Therefore true cessation is really transcending and destroying ego mind and nothing else.

I've been reading the Ven Maha Boowas "The Path to Arahantship" in which considerable investigation is performed during deep meditation.

He investigates many things including pain, the body, citta, skhandas.

He also ignores some things and focuses on others.

Quote: "This amazing awareness comes from analyzing things completely and exhaustively and then withdrawing from them."

So is it the "Citta" which contemplates, analyzes, concentrates & ignores, rather than mind?

Citta is essentially mind in its luminous aspect. You have picked a difficult word, again open to many interpretations.

If you read everything everyone says, I guarantee you will be confused. Every master expresses these things in different ways. In his book, Samana, Luangtua also talks about his problems with meditation which were resolved when he started to use the word "buddho" as a mantra. Does that mean his method is the correct one?

And yes, he does talk about lots of investigation doesn't he?

[trd]

Don't think of different paths. Contemplation has its place. How could it not? We contemplate all manner of things all the time. Become absorbed in the unbounded as a first priority then by all means read the scriptures to your hearts content and think about and express what this knowledge means. First sit under the Bodhi tree, then talk.

This instruction is the confusing part.

Maha Boowa did say that practicing until Samadhi comes easily and is strong forms the foundation, but then contemplation practice brings wisdom.

He also indicated that bouts of contemplation may bring about a sapping of concentration levels.

Re engagement of Samadhi practice re builds ones strength and clarity to re engage in contemplation.

Quote:

Samãdhi’s main function on the path of practice is to support and sustain the development of wisdom. It is well suited to this task because a mind that is calm and concentrated is fully satisfied, and does not seek external distractions. Thoughts about sights, sounds, tastes, smells, and tactile sensations no longer impinge upon an awareness that is firmly fixed in samãdhi. Calm and concentration are the mind’s natural sustenance. Once it becomes satiated with its favorite nourishment, it does not wander off where it strays into idle thinking. It is now fully prepared to undertake the kind of purposeful thinking, investigation and reflection that constitute the practice of wisdom. If the mind has yet to settle down—if it still hankers after sense impressions, if it still wants to chase after thoughts and emotions—its investigations will never lead to true wisdom.

They will lead only to discursive thought, guesswork and speculation unfounded interpretations of reality based simply on what has been learned and remembered. Instead of leading to wisdom, and the cessation of suffering, such directionless thinking becomes samudaya—the primary cause of suffering.

Since its sharp, inward focus complements the investigative and contemplative work of wisdom so well, the Lord Buddha taught us to first develop samãdhi.

A mind that remains undistracted by peripheral thoughts and emotions is able to focus exclusively on whatever arises in its field of awareness and to investigate such phenomena in light of the truth without the interference of guesswork or speculation. This is an important principle. The investigation proceeds smoothly, with fluency and skill. This is the nature of genuine wisdom: investigating, contemplating and understanding, but never being distracted or misled by conjecture.

First build samadhi, and, with concentrated clarity, develop wisdom through contemplation.

Are you in agreement is or there a departure in practice?

Yes of course. Samadhi is the foundation. Is that not what I have been saying. Wisdom springs from that source. Now contemplate all you please. You cannot stop it.

If I am fit I will run faster as a natural consequence of being fit. If I am not fit, I will not run faster even though I try. I cannot run faster without the foundation of fitness. The foundation is being fit which leads to running faster.

The foundation of samadhi leads to wisdom. Luangtua is investigating but with the foundation in place. Without the foundation there is no wisdom.

Edited December 14, 2014 by trd

[rockyysdt]

Then we are agreed.

[Brucenkhamen]

When the mind becomes (relatively) still, which means thoughts will still appear, but less of a monkey mind than before, this stillness is transcendence. Don't think of it as a point because that limits it or fixes it. That cannot be the case with non dual awareness. When you say, forget the investigation I mean you do not actively pursue it, BUT, if a thought appears which is "investigative" in its nature, then just let it pass. We are unconcerned about engaging with it. Wisdom and insight come from silence.

Youve just described whats happens much of the time in vipassana type practices. Though Im not sure what the purpose of the word transcendence is here it comes across like a new age fluff word the way you use it, stillness is stillness no new age fluff word required.

Of this there is no doubt whatsoever.

... because the Buddha didnt know what he was talking about, those who inscribed his words in the Pali Canon mucked it up, anyway he changed his mind 1000 years after his death and came out with a whole new teaching. You are steeped in Theravada and you dont know what youre talking about. Your meditation techniques are made up, your teachers dont know what they are doing. Your feeble attempts at practicing the path are a waste of time. Only the word of trd is true, Of this there is no doubt whatsoever, Only the word of trd has authority here, Of this there is no doubt whatsoever.

I take no pleasure in sarcasm and will no doubt get told of, this is just honest feedback on how your posts come across at times and bluntness was required.

There is no such path. It is just how the mind sees it. The mind thinks in terms of linear time so there is a path where we start our journey in ignorance and accumulate knowledge over time and reach nibanna. That is an illusion. It is not a path, but an uncovering to reveal that which is already there.

Dont you think that this uncovering requires that the mind let go of the covering though, its not going to let go of attachment to it until it sees the covering as a burden, as a delusion, as unnecessary, as Dukkha. Sitting in silence is not enough, its not a magical cure, sitting in silence with the wisdom to see objectively and understand the covering for what it is leads to dispassion towards it and piece by piece letting it go.

Don't think of different paths. Contemplation has its place. How could it not? We contemplate all manner of things all the time. Become absorbed in the unbounded as a first priority then by all means read the scriptures to your hearts content and think about and express what this knowledge means. First sit under the Bodhi tree, then talk.

Sounds great, learn how to achieve something after youve achieved it. I dont believe it.

Edited December 14, 2014 by Brucenkhamen

[trd]

Dont you think that this uncovering requires that the mind let go of the covering though, its not going to let go of attachment to it until it sees the covering as a burden, as a delusion, as unnecessary, as Dukkha. Sitting in silence is not enough, its not a magical cure, sitting in silence with the wisdom to see objectively and understand the covering for what it is leads to dispassion towards it and piece by piece letting it go.

This is worth commenting on. Sitting in silence is not enough. Anyone can just sit quietly with their eyes closed or perhaps listen to some soothing music. This is not practice. It requires the intention of putting the attention on simple, innocent awareness. Transcendence occurs when the intention itself is let go of and the mind becomes still and one pointed. This happens because given the opportunity, it is the natural tendency of the mind to experience subtler and subtler levels of awarenss as it gravitates towards its ground state. The natural unconditioned state of pure awareness. This transcendence is the "uncovering". It is beautifully and exquisitely simple beyond words.

You say the mind is not going to let go of attachment to it until it sees the the covering as a burden. How would it see the covering as a burden. If it sees the covering as a burden in an intellectual or conceptual sense because you have been thinking about "what it means", that is just adding more conditioning to the conditioning of thinking the covering is a burden. What is the "it" that doesn't want to let go? By putting attention on awareness, the "it" disappears together with the covering which is the delusion. If there is no "it" to perceive it where is the delusion.

This process starts to happen right from the first practice of a complete beginner and will deepen over time just in case you thought you will have to wait for 35 years. It's important to say this because I wouldn't want anyone to think I am talking about something almost unreachable. Quite the contrary. It just takes practice commitment and hunger for the truth.

When you say, "sitting in silence with the wisdom to see objectively", what does that mean exactly? Where does this wisdom come from. It is just an idea in your mind, a mental concept. Thinking about dukkha will tell you that you are suffering. So what? You are just replacing conditioned thoughts about suffering with other conditioned thoughts about suffering. This contemplation about dukkha will give you an intellectual understanding. It is not a worthless exercise, but it will not result in the end of dukkha. This is not wisdom in the way I believe Buddha intended. Suffering only ends when you transcend the boundaries and limitations within which cravings and attachment appear as an illusory self.

Please continue to express yourself freely. Sometimes a bit of anger and frustration can be therapeutic and may lead to important shifts in consciousness.

[trd]

The word transcendence may be unfamiliar to many, but it does appear in Buddhist commentaries, although it is much more common in the Vedic tradition. There are many articles on the web. Here are just two I found at random.

http://zennist.typepad.com/zenfiles/2012/12/the-subject-of-transcendence.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-loy/transcendence-or-immanence-balancing-heaven-and-earth_b_3166015.html

[Brucenkhamen]

This is worth commenting on. Sitting in silence is not enough. Anyone can just sit quietly with their eyes closed or perhaps listen to some soothing music. This is not practice. It requires the intention of putting the attention on simple, innocent awareness. Transcendence occurs when the intention itself is let go of and the mind becomes still and one pointed. This happens because given the opportunity, it is the natural tendency of the mind to experience subtler and subtler levels of awarenss as it gravitates towards its ground state. The natural unconditioned state of pure awareness. This transcendence is the "uncovering". It is beautifully and exquisitely simple beyond words.

This description still sounds like any description of jhana I've ever read, of course I can't compare it with direct experience, what is the difference between the above and jhana?

You say the mind is not going to let go of attachment to it until it sees the the covering as a burden. How would it see the covering as a burden. If it sees the covering as a burden in an intellectual or conceptual sense because you have been thinking about "what it means", that is just adding more conditioning to the conditioning of thinking the covering is a burden. What is the "it" that doesn't want to let go? By putting attention on awareness, the "it" disappears together with the covering which is the delusion. If there is no "it" to perceive it where is the delusion.

It's not an intellectual or conceptual process at all, Vipassana primarily works on the non conceptual level by observing changing processes without attempting to control or obstruct the conditioning that plays out. The mind eventually lets go of entanglement with that conditioning, with the self, the meditator doesn't make that happen it happens as a result of bringing sustained equanimous awareness to the changing processes as they play out. Having said that there are times when aids to concentration and/or conceptual contemplation are used to assist the meditator, beginners in particular need these but it's a mistake to judge a method on it'd beginner instructions.

This process starts to happen right from the first practice of a complete beginner and will deepen over time just in case you thought you will have to wait for 35 years. It's important to say this because I wouldn't want anyone to think I am talking about something almost unreachable. Quite the contrary. It just takes practice commitment and hunger for the truth.

Yes it's a gradual process of awakening, your presentation gave the impression you were promoting the instant awakening idea. Having said that I still see value in the instant awakening view because our lives are made up of a series of mind moments, moment by moment any moment is pregnant with the possibility of awakening... but not if we take it for granted and don't value awareness.

When you say, "sitting in silence with the wisdom to see objectively", what does that mean exactly? Where does this wisdom come from. It is just an idea in your mind, a mental concept. Thinking about dukkha will tell you that you are suffering. So what? You are just replacing conditioned thoughts about suffering with other conditioned thoughts about suffering. This contemplation about dukkha will give you an intellectual understanding. It is not a worthless exercise, but it will not result in the end of dukkha. This is not wisdom in the way I believe Buddha intended. Suffering only ends when you transcend the boundaries and limitations within which cravings and attachment appear as an illusory self.

Wisdom comes from direct experience, it is not conceptual knowledge. We do need to reflect on Dhamma as we learn on the conceptual level but that is not the process that leads to awakening, vipassana is not conceptual a problem solving process contrary to what you may think.

[Brucenkhamen]

The word transcendence may be unfamiliar to many, but it does appear in Buddhist commentaries, although it is much more common in the Vedic tradition. There are many articles on the web. Here are just two I found at random.

http://zennist.typepad.com/zenfiles/2012/12/the-subject-of-transcendence.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-loy/transcendence-or-immanence-balancing-heaven-and-earth_b_3166015.html

The first Zen article says

"Buddhism is a religion of redemption (i.e., deliverance from bondage), to be sure, but accomplishes this liberation by transcending the world of suffering which includes the psychophysical body."

Which of course is the point I've been making all along. Along with that it's talking about transcending something, the word transcendence only makes sense in relation to something being transcended, whereas you said "stillness is transcendence" which doesn't make sense, transcendence of what?

The second article uses the word in a variety of ways, I think I could sum it up as transcendence of the ordinary or of the mundane which is just the generic meaning of the word.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Brucenkhamen

[trd]

The word transcendence may be unfamiliar to many, but it does appear in Buddhist commentaries, although it is much more common in the Vedic tradition. There are many articles on the web. Here are just two I found at random.

http://zennist.typepad.com/zenfiles/2012/12/the-subject-of-transcendence.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-loy/transcendence-or-immanence-balancing-heaven-and-earth_b_3166015.html

The first Zen article says

"Buddhism is a religion of redemption (i.e., deliverance from bondage), to be sure, but accomplishes this liberation by transcending the world of suffering which includes the psychophysical body."

Which of course is the point I've been making all along. Along with that it's talking about transcending something, the word transcendence only makes sense in relation to something being transcended, whereas you said "stillness is transcendence" which doesn't make sense, transcendence of what?

The second article uses the word in a variety of ways, I think I could sum it up as transcendence of the ordinary or of the mundane which is just the generic meaning of the word.

It also says:

Transcendence, that is, the fact of transcending, generally means to have gone beyond certain limits. In Buddhism, the limit appears to be the psychophysical organism consisting of material shape, feeling, perception, habitual tendencies and consciousness. What we learn from the canon is that the self or âtman is beyond the the five constituents of the psychophysical organism just as we might consider the substance gold to be beyond the shapes it can be made into.

Best to let others read the whole article without being selective.

[trd]

Which of course is the point I've been making all along. Along with that it's talking about transcending something, the word transcendence only makes sense in relation to something being transcended, whereas you said "stillness is transcendence" which doesn't make sense, transcendence of what?

Transcendence of mind of course. When mind is transcended what remains?

[trd]

This description still sounds like any description of jhana I've ever read, of course I can't compare it with direct experience, what is the difference between the above and jhana?

Then so be it. Call it whatever you please. It is not important what you call it.

It's not an intellectual or conceptual process at all, Vipassana primarily works on the non conceptual level by observing changing processes without attempting to control or obstruct the conditioning that plays out. The mind eventually lets go of entanglement with that conditioning, with the self, the meditator doesn't make that happen it happens as a result of bringing sustained equanimous awareness to the changing processes as they play out.

So far so good.

Having said that there are times when aids to concentration and/or conceptual contemplation are used to assist the meditator, beginners in particular need these but it's a mistake to judge a method on it'd beginner instructions.

This is where we part company. There is no need for any "aids" for the beginner. The same innocent practice should apply to both beginner and advanced meditator. In fact introducing anything which destroys this innocence is potentially more damaging for the beginner than for the advanced because they will have become more solid and unwavering in their experience.

Yes it's a gradual process of awakening, your presentation gave the impression you were promoting the instant awakening idea. Having said that I still see value in the instant awakening view because our lives are made up of a series of mind moments, moment by moment any moment is pregnant with the possibility of awakening... but not if we take it for granted and don't value awareness.

I'm sorry if I gave that impression. Although there is a gradual deepening of experience over time, awakening itself is instant. You are either awake to your true nature or not. You cannot be a little bit pregnant or slightly alive.

Edited December 15, 2014 by trd

[Brucenkhamen]

Transcendence, that is, the fact of transcending, generally means to have gone beyond certain limits. In Buddhism, the limit appears to be the psychophysical organism consisting of material shape, feeling, perception, habitual tendencies and consciousness. What we learn from the canon is that the self or âtman is beyond the the five constituents of the psychophysical organism just as we might consider the substance gold to be beyond the shapes it can be made into.

Yes, it's transcendence of something, the sentence makes sense.

[Brucenkhamen]

Transcendence of mind of course. When mind is transcended what remains?

"Stillness is transcendence of mind" then, the sentence means something now, the meaning isn't clear but it doesn't come across as new age fluff.

When mind is transcended not-mind remains, and that is equally unclear.

Luckily the Buddha's approach to teaching was "there is nothing, Ananda, with regard to the teachings that the Tathagata holds to the last with the closed fist of a teacher who keeps some things back." as has been previously quoted.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Brucenkhamen

[Brucenkhamen]

Then so be it. Call it whatever you please. It is not important what you call it.

So I take it then you are positing jhana as the ultimate awakening.

This is where we part company. There is no need for any "aids" for the beginner. The same innocent practice should apply to both beginner and advanced meditator. In fact introducing anything which destroys this innocence is potentially more damaging for the beginner than for the advanced because they will have become more solid and unwavering in their experience.

Some of my teachers would agree with you to some extent, but a beginner needs to be pointed in the right direction and needs help when he gets lost or confused. Even to develop stillness of mind to the point of jhana Im sure you are aware requires technique and requires sustained application. No teacher says just bring the mind to stillness and awaken, its not that simple because the mind is not that simple. I know I would have probably given up in frustration if thats what Id been told to do in the beginning.

We need to irrigate the field, the crops grow according to their own nature, we cant make them grow but we can irrigate the field.

I'm sorry if I gave that impression. Although there is a gradual deepening of experience over time, awakening itself is instant. You are either awake to your true nature or not. You cannot be a little bit pregnant or slightly alive.

No but an unborn embryo can be a little bit developed and not yet born. The fertilized egg doesnt just sit in the womb awaiting the day of its great awakening. It evolves, it develops, it prepares.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Brucenkhamen