1. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39559
    10 Feb '08 19:20
    Found this while looking through some definitions of non-dualism.

    Seng T'san, the third Zen Patriarch: The Mind of Absolute Trust

    The great way isn't difficult for those who are unattached to their preferences.

    Let go of longing and aversion, and everything will be perfectly clear.

    When you cling to a hairbreadth of distinction, heaven and earth are set apart.

    If you want to realize the truth, don't be for or against.

    The struggle between good and evil is the primal disease of the mind.

    Not grasping the deeper meaning, you just trouble your minds serenity.

    As vast as infinite space, it is perfect and lacks nothing.

    But because you select and reject, you can't perceive its true nature.

    Don't get entangled in the world; don't lose yourself in emptiness.

    Be at peace in the oneness of things, and all errors will disappear by themselves.

    If you don't live the Tao, you fall into assertion or denial.

    Asserting that the world is real, you are blind to its deeper reality;

    denying that the world is real, you are blind to the selflessness of all things.

    The more you think about these matters, the farther you are from the truth.

    Step aside from all thinking, and there is nowhere you can't go.

    Returning to the root, you find the meaning;

    chasing appearances, you lose there source.

    At the moment of profound insight, you transcend both appearance and emptiness.

    Don't keep searching for the truth; just let go of your opinions.

    For the mind in harmony with the Tao, all selfishness disappears.

    With not even a trace of self-doubt, you can trust the universe completely.

    All at once you are free, with nothing left to hold on to.

    All is empty, brilliant, perfect in its own being.

    In the world of things as they are, there is no self, no non self.

    If you want to describe its essence, the best you can say is "Not-two."

    In this "Not-two" nothing is separate, and nothing in the world is excluded.

    The enlightened of all times and places have entered into this truth.

    In it there is no gain or loss; one instant is ten thousand years.

    There is no here, no there; infinity is right before your eyes.

    The tiny is as large as the vast when objective boundaries have vanished;

    the vast is as small as the tiny when you don't have external limits.

    Being is an aspect of non-being; non-being is no different from being.

    Until you understand this truth, you won't see anything clearly.

    One is all; all are one. When you realize this, what reason for holiness or wisdom?

    The mind of absolute trust is beyond all thought, all striving,

    is perfectly at peace, for in it there is no yesterday, no today, no tomorrow.


    no1: I think it's a perspective that might be discussed in Spirituality when people get tired of the "Evolution" threads.
  2. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    10 Feb '08 21:09
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Found this while looking through some definitions of non-dualism.

    Seng T'san, the third Zen Patriarch: The Mind of Absolute Trust

    The great way isn't difficult for those who are unattached to their preferences.

    Let go of longing and aversion, and everything will be perfectly clear.

    When you cling to a hairbreadth of distinction, heaven an ...[text shortened]... be discussed in Spirituality when people get tired of the "Evolution" threads.
    "If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus:
    That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
    And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
    And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." Eph. 4:21-25
  3. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39559
    10 Feb '08 21:25
    Originally posted by josephw
    "If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus:
    That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
    And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
    And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." Eph. 4:21-25
    😴
  4. Hmmm . . .
    Joined
    19 Jan '04
    Moves
    22131
    10 Feb '08 23:03
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Found this while looking through some definitions of non-dualism.

    Seng T'san, the third Zen Patriarch: The Mind of Absolute Trust

    The great way isn't difficult for those who are unattached to their preferences.

    Let go of longing and aversion, and everything will be perfectly clear.

    When you cling to a hairbreadth of distinction, heaven an ...[text shortened]... be discussed in Spirituality when people get tired of the "Evolution" threads.
    Wonderful! Thank you! It’s like the whole Tao Te Ching—or the Tao Te Ching and the Prajna Paramita Sutra combined—packed tighter, rich in paradoxical parallelism. (I’ve saved it for printing out.)

    Don't keep searching for the truth; just let go of your opinions.

    I have quoted that a number of times, but from a later Zen master apparently quoting Seng T’san. I also like—

    “If you don't live the Tao, you fall into assertion or denial.
    Asserting that the world is real, you are blind to its deeper reality;
    denying that the world is real, you are blind to the selflessness of all things.
    The more you think about these matters, the farther you are from the truth.
    Step aside from all thinking, and there is nowhere you can't go.”

    “Not-two.” To focus only on the phenomenal world of distinctions is illusion; to focus only on the “blended” whole is also illusion. The figure is not unreal because it arises from the whole-ground; that does mean that the whole-ground is a fragmentation. Although different Buddhists (and other non-dualists) use the language differently, I prefer to let those who say that the phenomenal world of distinctions is maya have their way—and then assert also the reality of that maya. In this "Not-two" nothing is separate, and nothing in the world is excluded.

    ________________________________

    There is something that I’d like to preempt, though: Buddhism is sometimes seen as a philosophy of bland dispassion. I think that some Buddhists see it that way, too. It is not our enjoyments and preferences that are entrapment: it is the clinging/clutching attachment to them. Passion is fine: it’s part of the rich playing in maya. Zorba-Buddha is more Zen, to my mind.

    I like lobster.

    “I’m sorry, sir, but the lobster did not come in today...”

    Now I can work myself into anguish-of-mind (dukkha), or I can let go of my first choice and order, say, scallops and filet mignon. And I can enjoy that fully (along with a good pinot grigio, perhaps).

    Or, hell, I can enjoy a cheeseburger!

    In an archaic usage, the word “en-joy” could be an intransitive verb. “What are you doing?” “I’m enjoying.” “Enjoying what?” “Just enjoying...” Or else, “I’m investing enjoyment in eating this cheeseburger with a cheap beer, just as I would a fine steak with a rioja.”
  5. The sky
    Joined
    05 Apr '05
    Moves
    10385
    10 Feb '08 23:45
    Originally posted by vistesd
    Wonderful!
    I agree. It's a great description of this state of being that has lots of names - Tao, the flow experience, "simply be", kairos (in a way)... I have experienced this in music, in watching the aurora, in my work with children etc., and this kind of experience more than anything else makes my life personally meaningful to me; and I strive to have more of these moments.

    But...

    I wouldn't say it's my goal to live completely in this state of mind. I don't know if it would be possible anyway, but even if it were, I am not sure I'd want to. I enjoy the duality and the maya. I also enjoy that these moments of "one-ness" are special, not the ordinary. Could they be both? I don't know. As these moments contain eternity, I am not even sure the question is relevant. (Does this make sense? Probably not.)
  6. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    11 Feb '08 00:06
    Isa 26:3 Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee: because he trusteth in thee.
  7. Hmmm . . .
    Joined
    19 Jan '04
    Moves
    22131
    11 Feb '08 03:091 edit
    Originally posted by Nordlys
    I agree. It's a great description of this state of being that has lots of names - Tao, the flow experience, "simply be", kairos (in a way)... I have experienced this in music, in watching the aurora, in my work with children etc., and this kind of experience more than anything else makes my life personally meaningful to me; and I strive to have more of these ty, I am not even sure the question is relevant. (Does this make sense? Probably not.)
    I wouldn't say it's my goal to live completely in this state of mind. I don't know if it would be possible anyway, but even if it were, I am not sure I'd want to. I enjoy the duality and the maya.

    I think you’re right. There’s a saying: “Zen mind and everyday mind are the same mind.” Thinking-mind is part of that, part of who we are. People (like me!) tend to get caught in thinking-mind to the point where we’re always just thinking-about. And one of the great thought-complexes is all the thoughts (conceptualizations) that make up what we think of as “I”—the “I-complex” or the “somebody-self-construct.”

    Zen-mind, Buddha-mind, clear-mind, “empty-mind”: they’re all just terms for being-aware before making any thoughts or conceptualizations about it. Including any thought “I”. (That is all that “empty-mind” or “no-mind”—mushin—means: empty of thought-making. Nakagawa Soen Roshi said: “There is really no such thing as ‘empty-mind’, just present-mind”—present without adding conceptualization.)

    That is what Seng T’san means when he says: “In the world of things as they are, there is no self, no non self.” You are not thinking, “I am here, and this that and the other thing are over there.” You have no thought of “I”, and no thought of “this or that”. Everything is just as it is, inseparable.

    But one can get lopsided the other way, too. So Seng T’san says: “Don't get entangled in the world; don't lose yourself in emptiness.” Don’t become lopsided either way.

    “Original mind” is just that being-aware. It is called original-mind both because it precedes our ability to conceptualize developmentally (early childhood), and because it existentially precedes our thinking about whatever it is we’re aware of. Metaphorically speaking, the territory precedes the map, precedes our map-making efforts. Once one realizes that, one no longer confuses the map with the territory—or, worse, if they conflict, tries to wrench the territory (reality) to fit the map (our conceptualizations).

    So: “Don’t get entangled in the world” AND “don’t lose yourself in emptiness.”

    I also enjoy that these moments of "one-ness" are special, not the ordinary.

    Ordinary, not ordinary: they are both ways of being with the same mind. I like Dan Millman’s line though: “There are no ordinary moments.”

    (Does this make sense? Probably not.)

    Absolutely it does. 🙂

    EDIT: Really, what you say absolutely makes sense. The mind that is aware of those clouds floating by and the mind that is aware of those thoughts floating by (including all those thoughts that begin with “I” or “that” or “God” ) is the same mind. When asked whether he was divine or human, the Buddha simply said (sometimes, I imagine, with a somewhat befuddled expression): “I am awake.”

    What one can do is realize, moment by moment, that one is always operating from that same mind-ground—when one is (dualistically) thinking, and when one is not. The non-dualistic state is more basic; that does not mean it is more “real”. It is just that, without that realization, one can confuse the concept with the fact, the thought with the thing. Imagine someone spending all their time making maps—just from other maps. Or, as Alan Watts once put it, imagine a library full of books that are all about nothing but—other books.
  8. Hmmm . . .
    Joined
    19 Jan '04
    Moves
    22131
    11 Feb '08 05:19
    In this "Not-two" nothing is separate, and nothing in the world is excluded.

    You are not separate; nor are you excluded.

    To see only the manifestations is illusion. To deny the manifestations is illusion.

    Seng T’san is here, I think, in a sense defining what he means by that phrase “Not-two”. I suspect he is aiming mostly at those who speak of “the One” in such a way as could lead to the second illusion. In our Western culture, however, it seems that the first illusion is the most common.

    The mind of absolute trust is beyond all thought, all striving,
    is perfectly at peace, for in it there is no yesterday, no today, no tomorrow.


    I would say that the mind of absolute trust is before (or behind) all thought and striving—but that is just another way of saying the same thing.

    Once again, one should not confuse this “perfectly at peace” with some kind of bland non-liveliness. It is non-disturbed mind, in the absence of mental anguish that the Buddha called dukkha (often translated as “suffering”, but more accurately, I think, as “anguish” ).

    Alan Watts once said that a Zen master told him the very best meditation practice was—to laugh. Sitting, standing, lying down: just to laugh and laugh for 15 or 20 minutes, say. In the midst of that laughter, the busyness of thinking-mind collapses, and the mind becomes calm and clear. But it is a lively meditation. (It’s also good for challenging the tightness of the ego-self if you feel embarrassed to do it. And it’s a good meditation practice for people like me, whose ego-self is conditioned to take things too seriously—including meditation.)
  9. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    11 Feb '08 07:221 edit
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    If you want to realize the truth, don't be for or against.
    Does that mean you will begin to start altering the way you post on these forums or do you simply not want to realize the truth?
  10. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39559
    11 Feb '08 12:55
    Originally posted by whodey
    Does that mean you will begin to start altering the way you post on these forums or do you simply not want to realize the truth?
    HYPOCRITE ALERT!

    T'san sets a goal and a standard that are admittedly difficult for those used to a dualist mindset to obtain and/or observe. Someone like you who is convinced they have the one answer is hardly in a position to criticize anyone else, however.
  11. Standard memberPalynka
    Upward Spiral
    Halfway
    Joined
    02 Aug '04
    Moves
    8702
    11 Feb '08 13:33
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Found this while looking through some definitions of non-dualism.

    Seng T'san, the third Zen Patriarch: The Mind of Absolute Trust

    The great way isn't difficult for those who are unattached to their preferences.

    Let go of longing and aversion, and everything will be perfectly clear.

    When you cling to a hairbreadth of distinction, heaven an ...[text shortened]... be discussed in Spirituality when people get tired of the "Evolution" threads.
    I find these type of perspectives particularly empty.

    Although I appreciate the concept of a fluid reality, I don't find the supposed paradoxes to be anything more than contradicting or meaningless soundbites.
  12. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    11 Feb '08 18:10
    Originally posted by Palynka
    I find these type of perspectives particularly empty.

    Although I appreciate the concept of a fluid reality, I don't find the supposed paradoxes to be anything more than contradicting or meaningless soundbites.
    😉
  13. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    11 Feb '08 18:112 edits
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    HYPOCRITE ALERT!

    T'san sets a goal and a standard that are admittedly difficult for those used to a dualist mindset to obtain and/or observe. Someone like you who is convinced they have the one answer is hardly in a position to criticize anyone else, however.
    Forgive me. Perhaps someday I will be as enlightened as you. Right now, however, I guess I'm just a simpleton who believes that God actually exists.
  14. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    11 Feb '08 18:33
    Originally posted by Nordlys
    Could they be both? I don't know. As these moments contain eternity, I am not even sure the question is relevant. (Does this make sense? Probably not.)
    Well, there's always the old story about some Zen student who became 'enlightened' watching his master putting on his shoes.
  15. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    11 Feb '08 18:36
    Originally posted by Palynka
    I find these type of perspectives particularly empty.
    An amusing choice of words.
Back to Top