Originally posted by TaomanThe Taurus is lost, the Man lingers on
Thank you to you both. I find clear and precise articulation, while never grasping 'That', is one of the finest of means - for this one. Your interchange helps me to interrelate the two descriptions, and expands more finely the view.
Two sticks of incense
perfuming an auspicious moment.
Words floating like smoke
Buddha sits quietly,
gestalting in
the roaring silence.
óóó ó óóó
😵
3 edits
Originally posted by black beetleI tried to post a Wiki segment on Yogacara and its subtle differences to Madhyamika, within Mahayana systems. The cut and paste failed.
“Being a Buddha” is “being One with the Cosmic Reality”, this is the final aim of the system; the Mahayana and Vajrayana practitioners accept this thesis on the spot, whilst the Elder Brothers uncertain they remain (because they are satisfied to decode “nirvana” as “cessation of lust, suffering and greed”, whilst Mahayana/ Vajrayana practitioners unders ager to go from there to the Other. This is a product of the Two Truths.
Nothing Holy😵
Here's the link, I was looking particularly at the section on emptiness.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness-only
It appears that this understanding arose out of the difficulties posed by the concept of karma and rebirth.
Originally posted by black beetleExactly. That no-metaphysics is where Wittgenstein was also helpful.
There is nothing metaphysic. Even the Dependent Origination, the Four Noble Truths and the Six Paramitas that are used in the realm of the Floating World so that the disciple overcomes the "I" and the various phenomena, are empty and they lack of inherent existence.
The Whack is used so that the disciple can thus go beyond😵
A month into fall
and still not one
frosty morning--
I sit in the window-sun
drinking dark coffee.
🙂
1 edit
Originally posted by black beetleWhen the lingerer
The Taurus is lost, the Man lingers on
😵
is the bull, we can all relax
and the boat can be holed.
But let's leave it completing
the scene of delight.
- On which shore shall we leave it?
Either one is fine, just now,
with the light of the sun.
*****
"In total presence, the essence where everything happens,
there is no duality, yet an incalculable multiplicity;
buddhas and sentient beings, matter and energy, are resplendent,
all unmoving from the one immediate reality."
- "Longchempa's Treasury of Natural Perfection"
from "Old Man Basking in the Sun" trans. by
Keith Dowman. p198
Originally posted by TaomanYogacara is based on Madhymaka. Both schools accept that cognition is the main fundamental function of the ground of manifestation (nondual awareness), from which the worlds of manifestation emerge. Hence nondual awareness-cognition is the stuff from which all sentient beings are made of, and at the same time it responds to al the intentional actions that are carried out by the sum of the sentient beings. Early on, Yogacara master Asanga pointed out that all the cognitive appearances that we see and all the sense consciousness that sees them both are of the same natal ground of being, and that whatever we see (cognitive appearances) are like an illusion, because they appear to arise from objectively existing objects separated from everything else out there… But They Do Not Exist In That Impossible Way.
I tried to post a Wiki segment on Yogacara and its subtle differences to Madhyamika, within Mahayana systems. The cut and paste failed.
Here's the link, I was looking particularly at the section on emptiness.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness-only
It appears that this understanding arose out of the difficulties posed by the concept of karma and rebirth.
Later on, Santaraksita’s product of the implementation of Two Truths focused on a Yogacara/ Madhyamaka( Mind-Only/ Middle Way) synthesis, is that the nature of the conventional truths is of the nature of the consciousness. To him, the conventional acceptance of self-cognizing consciousness and of reflexive awareness is a given; also, he exploits in full Nagarjuna’s point as regards reality (which is never metaphysical). To both systems, understanding the non-inherent existence of things/ sunyhata, is indeed equal to the elimination of ignorance (as regards reality). Since reality is not beyond the limit of what is known by a valid direct perceiver, we have for one the examination of various things/ truths of conventional reality (so that we determine whether we designate these objects suitably for each of our purposes). And for two, we compare the different aspects of each object to each other and to their designations. Both schools lead to a mental image of sunyata, whose actual limit corresponds to the limit of the reality; their distinctions are not ontological, since both accept that to employ words, teachings and conceptual systems as if they were not empty, undermines the elucidation of sunyata.
Santaraksita showed also that first one understands that the nature of entities is not of a distinct nature from that of the mind (Cittamatra/ Mind-Only), and only then one gets to realize that nothing exists in and of itself (Madhyamaka/ Centrism - Middle Way), even the mind. So methinks the main difference between Yogacara and Madhyamaka is just the way the practitioners of the schools engage with conventional truths. Yogacara’s perspective is related to the point of the attention of the disciple who, say, wants to go to the Other Shore (whilst a Madyamika is already there, so his point of attention is beyond). The Elder Brothers, Ch’an and Dzogchen use different pedagogical routines (as I see it, the Elders train the common man, Ch’ an points towards the Middle Way, Dzogchen is a bodhisattva’s training center) according to the level of the disciple. The system tolerates well the idea of an ultimately non-expressible reality that triggers interdependent and seemingly contradictory perspectives (hence the various pedagogical methods and approaches of the schools)
😵
Originally posted by vistesdInspiration, passion, meaning
Exactly. That no-metaphysics is where Wittgenstein was also helpful.
A month into fall
and still not one
frosty morning--
I sit in the window-sun
drinking dark coffee.
🙂
In a cup of hot dark coffee;
It seems living by the river
is essential life force😵
Originally posted by TaomanFresh Water!
When the lingerer
is the bull, we can all relax
and the boat can be holed.
But let's leave it completing
the scene of delight.
- On which shore shall we leave it?
Either one is fine, just now,
with the light of the sun.
*****
"In total presence, the essence where everything happens,
there is no duality, yet an incalculable multiplicity;
b ...[text shortened]... f Natural Perfection"
from "Old Man Basking in the Sun" trans. by
Keith Dowman. p198
I bow
😵
Originally posted by black beetleThank you, EB. Most helpful.
Yogacara is based on Madhymaka. Both schools accept that cognition is the main fundamental function of the ground of manifestation (nondual awareness), from which the worlds of manifestation emerge. Hence nondual awareness-cognition is the stuff from which all sentient beings are made of, and at the same time it responds to al the intentional actions th ...[text shortened]... radictory perspectives (hence the various pedagogical methods and approaches of the schools)
😵
Edit: "...to employ words, teachings and conceptual systems as if they were not empty, undermines the elucidation of sunyata."
It appears and feels to me at times (I think incorrectly), to enter discursiveness on the 'words, teachings and conceptual systems' we thus immediately treat them as not empty. To counteract this and yet participate in a serious and helpful discussion, one perhaps needs to float somehow between light-heartedness and focussed application? One goes at it, then relaxes to breathe the fresh air of sunyata and then goes at it again, as if just for fun and as one might resolve a puzzle.
It would seem as if players from the two systems may each represent a different way of playing on the one board with the same 'ground'. A tad chessic!
Originally posted by TaomanMethinks the discussion between two human beings is just like the dancing of two bees. We attribute meaning to the dance according to our cognizance, oh well. But the dance is still empty. We may even attribute the Truth, however methinks each sentient being Is the Truth.
Thank you, EB. Most helpful.
Edit: "...to employ words, teachings and conceptual systems as if they were not empty, undermines the elucidation of sunyata."
It appears and feels to me at times (I think incorrectly), to enter discursiveness on the 'words, teachings and conceptual systems' we thus immediately treat them as not empty. To counteract this a ...[text shortened]... present a different way of playing on the one board with the same 'ground'. A tad chessic!
Chess to me is meditation over objects; the opponents need each other in order to synthesize a History (Position) and hence come up with a unique, specific Game.
Now over here our vistesd has a thing or two to state, I reckon, as regards the Human Being (which is nothing but pure History on its own)
😵
Originally posted by black beetlebreathing in
Methinks the discussion between two human beings is just like the dancing of two bees. We attribute meaning to the dance according to our cognizance, oh well. But the dance is still empty. We may even attribute the Truth, however methinks each sentient being Is the Truth.
Chess to me is meditation over objects; the opponents need each other in order ...[text shortened]... o state, I reckon, as regards the Human Being (which is nothing but pure History on its own)
😵
breathing out
breathing in
breathing out
Only don’t hold your breath!
(But don’t think
it is only your body
breathing . . .)
There was the Zen master who continually called out to himself, and reminded himself. Peter Matthiesson (I think it was) pointed out that Zen teachers that he knew had a tendency to talk to themselves aloud (referring particularly to Nakagawa Soen roshi). My teacher said: “That’s a good practice; it changes the way you hear what you think.”
Even the highest hawk
does not escape the sky
Originally posted by vistesdSuch words are like chanting "OM".
mind only doesn’t matter
matter only doesn’t mind
Even a single word is a pun!
Don’t let the mattering mind
or the minding matter
limit satori
Don’t try to chase the crows
forever from the sky
***
"Two beggars
sharing a meal of the food they've been given
The new moon shines intensely"
Ko Un
http://www.poetry-chaikhana.com/K/KoUn/Twobeggars.htm
Originally posted by black beetleI barely express my delight, lest I spoil it.
Methinks the discussion between two human beings is just like the dancing of two bees. We attribute meaning to the dance according to our cognizance, oh well. But the dance is still empty. We may even attribute the Truth, however methinks each sentient being Is the Truth.
Chess to me is meditation over objects; the opponents need each other in order ...[text shortened]... o state, I reckon, as regards the Human Being (which is nothing but pure History on its own)
😵
***
"In one shrill cry
the pheasant has swallowed
the broad field."
Yamei
http://www.poetry-chaikhana.com/Y/Yamei/Inoneshrillc.htm