Bumps on the Cultivation Path

[ChiDragon]

What does desire have to do with working with the channels in the body? Buddhahood is all about working with the channels in the body.

 

The Buddhist term "emptiness" means to cleanse the mind and purify the body. The body suffering comes from desire. Thus cleansing the mind requires to rid of all desires.

[C T]

 

The Buddhist term "emptiness" means to cleanse the mind and purify the body. The body suffering comes from desire. Thus cleansing the mind requires to rid of all desires.

Essentially, bodies dont suffer. Since the body is changing every single moment, there is no permanent body to experience suffering as such.

 

And, no, the Buddhist term 'emptiness' does not mean to cleanse the mind and purify the body. That is only your personal interpretation.

Edited May 7, 2013 by C T

[Stosh]

The Buddhist notion of emptiness is often misunderstood as nihilism. Unfortunately, 19th century Western philosophy has contributed much to this misconstruction. Meanwhile Western scholars have acquired enough knowledge about Buddhism to realise that this view is far from accurate. The only thing that nihilism and the teaching of emptiness can be said to have in common is a sceptical outset. While nihilism concludes that reality is unknowable, that nothing exists, that nothing meaningful can be communicated about the world, the Buddhist notion of emptiness arrives at just the opposite, namely that ultimate reality is knowable, that there is a clear-cut ontological basis for phenomena, and that we can communicate and derive useful knowledge from it about the world. Emptiness (sunyata) must not be confused with nothingness. Emptiness is not non-existence and it is not non-reality.

What is emptiness then? To understand the philosophical meaning of this term, let's look at a simple solid object, such as a cup. How is a cup empty? We usually say that a cup is empty if it does not contain any liquid or solid. This is the ordinary meaning of emptiness. But, is the cup really empty? A cup empty of liquids or solids is still full of air. To be precise, we must therefore state what the cup is empty of. Can a cup be empty of all substance? A cup in a vacuum does not contain any air, but it still contains space, light, radiation, as well as its own substance. Hence, from a physical point of view, the cup is always full of something. Yet, from the Buddhist point of view, the cup is always empty. The Buddhist understanding of emptiness is different from the physical meaning. The cup being empty means that it is devoid of inherent existence.

 

I suppose Im more a nihilist ,because as a matter of opinion , if the cup has no inherent existence , then it is ultimately unknowable, I just pretend to know what it is so I can have a glass of water.

Edited May 7, 2013 by Stosh

[Stosh]

Is there already a nice concise thread about buddhist dogma ,from the point of view of buddhists

intended to be helpful for those who are not ,I can access?

[DragonScholar]

Is there already a nice concise thread about buddhist dogma ,from the point of view of buddhists

intended to be helpful for those who are not ,I can access?

 

Start here:

 

http://www.buddhanet.net/

 

Or

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/

[RongzomFan]

 

The Buddhist term "emptiness" means to cleanse the mind and purify the body. The body suffering comes from desire. Thus cleansing the mind requires to rid of all desires.

 

emptiness means nonarisal /illusion.

 

"Nagarjuna taught , "bereft of beginning, middle, and end," meaning that the world is free from creation, duration, and destruction."

-Candrakirti

[RongzomFan]

The cup being empty means that it is devoid of inherent existence.

 

if the cup has no inherent existence

 

This is just Tsongkhapa's crypto-realist stuff.

[Jeff]

emptiness means nonarisal /illusion.

 

"Nagarjuna taught , "bereft of beginning, middle, and end," meaning that the world is free from creation, duration, and destruction."

-Candrakirti

 

Emptiness means that one has realized that...

 

Form = Void and Void = Form.

 

[Maddie]

Emptiness means that one has realized that...

 

Form = Void and Void = Form.

 

Then apparently I don't know what emptiness is lol (I already knew I didn't). Cause that does not make sense to me at all, but I would like for it to. :-)

[JustBHappy]

99% of what is said about emptiness is misleading and misses the point.

From my experience and understanding, emptiness cannot be talked about, or began to be understood without also talking about dependent origination. It's not nihilism, nor is it a teaching on inherant existience. In fact, as the great masters have said things are neither "existent", nor are they "non existent" and like I said, one will never come to an intellectual understanding of this without also examining the teachings on dependent origination. They go hand in hand and are inseparable. Intellectual understanding, I stress, not realization, there is a huge difference.

 

The internet in my opinion is not the place to get too far into it, or at least not on a public forum. In fact depending on ones samaya and precepts, even mentioning emptiness to people who are not ready is a violation. The few that have any realization or intellectual understanding are highly likely to also be the ones who are extremely careful about who and when they lead someone towards emptiness.

[RongzomFan]

Whats so hard with nonarising?

 

"Once one asserts things, one will succumb to the view of seeing such by imagining their beginning, middle and end; hence that grasping at things is the cause of all views."
-Candrakirti

[Jeff]

Then apparently I don't know what emptiness is lol (I already knew I didn't). Cause that does not make sense to me at all, but I would like for it to. :-)

 

Very wise words... Emptiness cannot really be understood by the mind, it must be realized.

 

The words are from the Heart Sutra.

 

Best wishes, Jeff

[RongzomFan]

The few that have any realization or intellectual understanding are highly likely to also be the ones who are extremely careful about who and when they lead someone towards emptiness.

 

Loppon Namdrol helped me personally over many months to get my understanding of Madhyamaka to "almost perfect".

[Simple_Jack]

Something I've really been confused about lately. Is it possible to reach enlightenment as a lay Buddhist? I mean if your not celibate at least. If the notion of reaching enlightenment is to be free of desire, then how can you desire a spouse and still attain enlightenment?

 

Daniel Ingram, the guy who wrote "MCTOB": is an MD at a hospital who made an amount of the progress people read in his book, while being married.

 

While he claims arahantship by the standards of "MCTOB": in the sutta standards he would probably be an anagami/non-returner. So it is possible to make progress despite working long hours and being married. He did go on retreats in Southeast Asia, but he said himself (on dharmaoverground) that a lot of the progress was made while he was working and living with his spouse.

 

 

The Mahasiddhas, the founders of Vajrayana, were lay. The Mahasiddhas were Buddhas.

 

Most lamas are lay and have children. There is a countless list of people who realized Buddhahood and were lay.

 

How else are you going practice sexual yoga?

 

Realistically, we can't use the example of the mahasiddhas and a lot of the lamas who were known to have reached a high level of cultivation. For instance, reading the stories of the mahasiddhas, you find out that most of them lived in caves, huts, etc. on the outskirts of villages or in the wilderness. Most of the great lamas that we read about spent years at a time on extended retreats, while living in a society that supported the lifestyle of a mendicant yogi. They didn't have to worry about working a 40+ hour work week to support themselves, complete with the distractions of modern day society.

 

 

Then what about the issue of desire? I'm confused by it.

 

Nirvana/nibbana, in the Pali Nikayas, is represented by reaching arahantship because the three root poisons (ignorance, aggression, craving) are extinguished, along with the karmas that give rise to continued becoming (all good, bad, neutral karma) in samsara.

 

From what people have said in the Theravada traditions: It is possible to reach the level of a non-returner, while living the lay life. Though, once arahantship is reached, those people end up leaving the lay life to become monks.

 

People can still make progress in jhana's and towards awakening while having a gf/bf/wife/husband and working a regular job. In actuality, you can overcome the 5 hindrances to reaching jhana, temporarily in each meditation session; jhana states just temporarily suppress the fetters for the time you are absorbed in them. Depending on each individual's mindstream: in the post-equipoise state, (depending on which fetters stemming from the 3 poisons are strongest) an individual will still be subject to continued becoming. Even people who have reached the level of stream-enterer, once-returner or of a non-returner. Though, those individual's are not deluded in the same way as normal sentient beings and will be much less at the mercy of their fetters.

 

From the Mahayana perspective, Hinayana arhats (and pratyekabuddhas) represent a non-afflicted ignorance, since there are still cognitive obstructions to the wisdom of buddhahood.

[RongzomFan]

What does lay vs monk have to do with going on retreat? These are totally unrelated.

 

If you mean raising a family versus going on long retreats, a Buddhist culture facilitates both.

 

Doesn't KDL have children? And he went on long retreats.

 

P.S. Instead of retreat you can do your practices during wake initiated lucid dreaming like ChNN does.

Edited May 7, 2013 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

Intellectual understanding, I stress, not realization, there is a huge difference.

 

Yes realization of emptiness means you are on first bhumi, have special powers or something like that. For all practical purposes it requires tantric methods in Kali Yuga.

[Simple_Jack]

What does lay vs monk have to do with going on retreat? These are totally unrelated.

 

If you mean raising a family versus going on long retreats, a Buddhist culture facilitates both.

 

Doesn't KDL have children? And he went on long retreats.

 

The situation in Tibet, Nepal and India are much different than in the West. I'm not totally familiar with the situation of these high lamas, but reading some of the life story's of some of these lama's: they were born into families that had their own land and would be considered well off by Tibetan standards. These countries had cultural institutions which supported the individual efforts of wandering yogi's.

 

Compare that to the West, where people here would look at a wandering yogi as just another homeless bum. Also, from talking with ordained monks and nuns here in the West: a lot of them still have to support themselves with a regular full-time job. The West doesn't have the institutional support, especially for those interested in going on 3 year retreats; which in the West can cost up to 60k.

[RongzomFan]

Yup, that's why I am trying to do all my stuff during wake initiated lucid dreams. Practices are supposed to be more effective there as well.

 

Dudjom Rinpoche also said "We need to gain proficiency in this, because if we succeed, we will be able to mingle our daytime perceptions with our dream perceptions without drawing a distinction between them, and our practice will be greatly enhanced. "

[Stosh]

This is just Tsongkhapa's crypto-realist stuff.

Are you saying Tsongkhapa is wrong straight off -right from this very basic ,popularly referred to quiz question?

Are the various schools so completely at odds as this appears?

 

The buddhanet and access to insight sites DS referred to arent exactly what I was hoping for in the terms 'concise' and 'thread', so that could either be a rude brush off , or it could be the only honest answer ...in that possibly there is no consistent dogma or understanding to be related

I brought up my question because if even ChiDragon is corrected in the way he was , for another very simple popularized conceptualization of emptiness ,then perhaps all the popularized views of the subject are just as off mark..

 

I dont know , what do you think?

 

 

Im just looking for a quickie rundown to have some Idea where yall are coming from ,Im not wishing to delve into Buddhism for a doctoral thesis which extends beyond even the few lay buddhists I have spoken to, just the simple ground rules .

[Maddie]

Yup, that's why I am trying to do all my stuff during wake initiated lucid dreams. Practices are supposed to be more effective there as well.

 

Dudjom Rinpoche also said "We need to gain proficiency in this, because if we succeed, we will be able to mingle our daytime perceptions with our dream perceptions without drawing a distinction between them, and our practice will be greatly enhanced. "

So what exactly is it that your trying to accomplish with Lucid dreaming?

[RongzomFan]

What do you mean?

 

Its called the practice of the night. Its a recognized practice.

[Maddie]

What do you mean?

 

Its called the practice of the night. Its a recognized practice.

 

Yea I realize that. My question is what is it used for?

[RongzomFan]

My understanding is that you just do whatever you practice during the day in the lucid dream state.

[RongzomFan]

Are you saying Tsongkhapa is wrong straight off -right from this very basic ,popularly referred to quiz question?

 

Tsongkhapa's Madhyamaka is not similar to Indian root texts nor other Tibetan schools.

 

Just read the original Indian root texts.

[Simple_Jack]

The other objection that I have to Daniel Ingram's writings, is that his teachings have a malicious thought-form of the "the dark night". If you spend time with his writings and give credence to his over-emphasis on the 'the dark night', it will soon envelope your karma too and become a reality. If the dark night were true, or worthy of so much note, then you'd find it in many other writings and teachings (Dzogchen included), but you do not.

 

Daneil Ingram's map is based off other traditions categorizations of the nana's/insight knowledges:

 

http://www.buddhanet.net/knowledg.htm

 

http://www.vipassanadhura.com/sixteen.html

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mahasi/progress.html

 

http://www.dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message_boards/message/4078034

 

Some good points are brought up, particularly from the 4:20 mark and onward:

 

Edited May 17, 2013 by Simple_Jack