steve

I can offer one approach. Do you already have a meditation practice? Are you able to rest the mind and find an inner sense of openness, clarity, and inner support?

I got a lot out of The Tai Chi Boxing Chronicle by Kuo Lien Ying which is very specific to taijiquan. It took several readings over time. As my experience in practice deepened, I could understand more and more of the book’s lessons. https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/101474/the-tai-chi-boxing-chronicle-by-kuo-lien-ying-translated-by-guttmann/ Another valuable book for me was Original Tao by Harold Roth. It’s a translation and commentary on a classic text, Nei Yeh. https://cup.columbia.edu/book/original-tao/9780231115643

Enlightened? You decide. Hugely entertaining? You bet!

Many scholars and purists would take issue with this and point out the differences. I'm more interested in the similarities as I find it supportive and instructive, as a practitioner, to see the common thread that runs through the core of different traditions; something that really comes alive when you have a certain degree of realization. That said I’ve never received any instruction in Zen or Chan other than from reading some scripture and poetry.

There are as many dharma doors as there are ways a sentient being can be obstructed.

Let your mind simply be in your body and allow relaxation to enter into your mind. On the one hand what we call Dharma is very difficult but on the other hand, it's very easy because it all just depends on our own mind. So you should search for your own mind and look after it. Don't let your mind get carried along by rising thoughts. Cut through your elaborations and conceptualizations of mind and allow your mind to relax into its natural state Let your mind simply be in your body and allow relaxation to enter into your mind What does the state of relaxation feel like? It's like the experience of a person who has just finished some exhausting work. After laboring long and hard to accomplish their task once it is finally over, they experience a blissful satisfaction and are content to simply rest. Quite naturally their mind will arrive at a state of calm. They are relaxed and they will remain relaxed for a while without being caught up in their usual patterns of wild, unimaginable thoughts. So following this example you should try to guard and protect your mind even in the midst of all kinds of turbulent thoughts. Leave your mind in its own natural state and relax Keep your body still and your speech silent. Don't think about whether you should do this or that. Just settle your mind into a state of relaxation and calm in which there is no chasing after objects and no wild and crazy thoughts. Instead, you should find yourself in a state that is vividly open and empty, brilliantly clear and deeply relaxed. This state of ease is an indication that the mind has arrived at its inherent clarity. And it will simply settle itself in that state of clarity. Dudjom Rinpoche London, 1979

Chinul, a founder of Korean Zen, taught the approach of “sudden awakening, gradual cultivation.” His understanding was that although a moment (or moments) of awakening is transforming, it is not enough. He said, “Although we have awakened to original nature, beginningless habit energies are extremely difficult to remove suddenly. Hindrances are formidable and habits are deeply ingrained.” ~ Narayan Helen Liebenson I find this to be a critically important teaching for me. Following awakening experience it is far too easy to find oneself attached to it, identifying with it, even falling back into or creating new and more subtle and insidious patterns of thought and action that grasp onto the experience. All of this can obstruct the openness and clarity of being and the flow that comes from connection.

Here is a bit more of Blanche's wisdom in articles from Lion's Roar magazine. Interesting for me, her responses can be directly compared and contrasted to those of my own root teacher Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche in several of these brief and valuable articles. https://www.lionsroar.com/author/blanche-hartman/

via The Yogini Project ~ Pema Chodron When people start to meditate or to work with any kind of spiritual discipline, they often think that somehow they are going to improve, which is a sort of subtle agression against who they really are. It's a bit like saying, "If I jog, I'll be a much better person." "If I coud only get a nicer house, I'd be a better person." "If I could meditate and calm down, I'd be a better person."... But loving-kindness - maitri - toward ourselves doesn't mean getting rid of anything. Maitri means that we can still be crazy after all these years. We can still be angry after all these years. We can still be timid or jealous or full of feeling of unworthiness. The point is not to try to throw ourselves away and become something better. It's about befriending who we are already. The ground of practice is you or me or whoever we are right now, just as we are. That's the ground, that's what we study, that's what we come to know with tremendous curiosity and interest. *** "The Wisdom of No Escape"

free smells, everyone releasing a toxic cloud our yellow lab winks

jammers

I don't bother much with belief and intellectual investigation into self and other spiritual matters. That was my path for a long time and it's been exhausted. Agreed and this is one reason that a solely intellectual approach can be problematic. When the rational mind negates the idea of self through reasoning, what is left? Rationally speaking, there is nothing left hence the risk of nihilistic trauma. When we approach the issue experientially something very interesting happens. We search and search and can't find anything reliable we can call "self." This is known as emptiness. And yet, even in the absence of that sense of self we are still quite alert, aware, and vividly present. Something is there, a knowingness, an immediate and vibrant presence, unlimited potential. This is an antidote for nihilism and why experiential practice can be advantageous, particularly for anyone prone to it. I think there are also other reasons. One being what has come to be called the Two Truths. There is the absolute truth which sees through the permanence and solidity of self. And there is the relative truth which acknowledges and honors our lived experience in duality. Both are equally legitimate, equally real. Yes, I agree. I also feel that belief is not necessary. We know our sense of self without any need for belief or disbelief. I disagree with those that say there is no self. Every one of us has a direct and very personal experience of self, except for some with rare pathological conditions. The experience of self is very real and very much a part of our lives. To deny it is simply an intellectual game and I see that game being played quite often. On the other hand, what we take to be a self is something that is very elusive to define or display. Perhaps I'm not being clear. I don't mean to imply that transient experiences and partial descriptions are not real. They are very much a part of our life experience and I consider them to be as real as anything else. What I am saying is simply that they are not the whole story, they are inaccurate, misleading, and, most important, very limiting. They are not who or what we are, just a passing experience or conceptual or experiential fragment. We are so much more than that. This is one of the great benefits to realizing the illusory nature of our sense of self, it opens us up to possibilities and potential that we otherwise overlook due to self-imposed limitations related to our sense of self.

Very cool, thanks for sharing that. I’ve never studied Kabbalah.

One can realize what the self is not by observing one’s own experience carefully. All of the different things that we tend to identify with as self can be seen to be only passing experiences and partial descriptions. If this is done consistently over a period of time a realization can arise regarding the nature of self. Telling someone what that realization is supposed to be tends not to be at all helpful, often quite the opposite. Allowing someone to do the work for themselves is generally the most effective method of discovery.

genmaicha for one but my recommendation? oolong from Taiwan

@Maddie @wandelaar I appreciate the information and discussion. I’m somewhat familiar with the history of transmission of Sakyamuni Buddha’s teachings. Unfortunately, I am also somewhat familiar with human nature, misinformation, compounding errors, the effects of translation on meaning, the desire for credibility, the influence of politics, culture, and competition on religion, and so forth. I respect the attempt at focusing on teachings that are as pure and authentic as possible. I value that deeply in my own chosen tradition. On the other hand, due to the factors alluded to above, I have learned the value of a personal connection to a living lineage and of confidence and certainty born of personal experience.

How would anyone know what the Buddha taught? Nothing was written during his lifetime or for hundreds of years after. The Pali canon was put together five centuries after his death.

We often see discussion, confusion, and frustration surrounding the ideas of attachment and detachment in Buddhist practice. People struggle with these things in different ways including indulging in nihilism or struggling with the idea of letting go of their connection to things and people they care about. i think this pith instruction from Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche is a succinct and insightful way to look at reconciling attachment and detachment in our practice and in our lives.

One way to look at it is that what dependent origination means or where it leads is to an understanding that everything is interconnected. Everything is connected to and dependent on something else, ultimately everything is related to and connected to everything else. Nothing stands on its own as unique or independent and nothing is permanent in our samsaric experience. When this is felt and realized deep in one's bones and heart as the truth, that is what is referred to as non-dual experience. This is the basis for absolute Bodhicitta, for unconditional love, equanimity, all of the enlightened qualities. When I genuinely experience myself as connected at a fundamental level to all living creatures, to all of existence, these qualities arise spontaneously because my felt experience goes beyond the experience of a separate and independent me. Not sure if that is at all helpful - these things open up to us when circumstances allow and aren't always accessible based on what we read or discuss with each other.

Being raised in Judaism, I always had trouble connecting with it for a variety of reasons. I was once driving with an ultra-orthodox rabbi, who coincidentally drove like a maniac... I asked him about his understanding of God and his way of describing it led me to a rudimentary (conceptual) understanding of non-duality. Many years later I was attending a Bar-Mitzvah, a ritualistic Jewish coming of age ceremony, and the brother of a friend gave some brief comments. Somehow his comments opened me up to a different and much deeper understanding of the most important and fundamental prayer in the liturgy, the Shema - Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One. What opened up for me was that in describing the Lord as One (or, taking a liberty with the translation - One-ness) we are stating a doctrine of non-duality. Whether that is correct or incorrect, accurate or inaccurate, it was immediately true for me, and will always remain so based on my own spiritual path and experiences, and has helped me connect more deeply with the prayers and liturgy and my own heritage in a sense.

Alan Watts once said that Buddhism is essentially Hinduism stripped of cultural baggage and optimized for export. I think this is an overly simplistic view and "devil is in the details" but there is some truth there. In my experience, duality and non-duality show up in many ways in Buddhist (and Bön) theory and practice. The concepts of duality and non-duality are implicit in the doctrine of dependent origination, Bodhicitta, and the view of shunyata. This becomes more and more clear through experiential practice, while not always clear intellectually. On the other hand, duality and non-duality are explicitly stated in the doctrine of the Two Truths.

I knew you were kidding! 😁 Dude pushed my buttons to the breaking point, in the middle of a tense situation no less…

Sooo beautiful a poem, I feel I am there right now! I've spent quite a bit of time on the trail, mostly in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia,.

I've met a rare evil nurse. Nearly physically assaulted one once. The vast majority, however, have been caring and strong human beings with very big hearts, and a little ego. Can't think of another group of people I'd rather hang out with.