Empty Your Cup

[Forestgreen]

9 hours ago, stirling said:

 

The reason is "skillful means". It is generally abstract and unnecessary for the Western mind to use those particular concepts as a lens for the dharma. 

It's not abstract, or at least less abstract than 90% of other buddhist terms and concepts used.

Those terms describe things that happens within the body and the consciousness. 

So there must be another reason that explain why those particular concepts have been dropped. 

[Forestgreen]

6 hours ago, forestofclarity said:

I think Buddhism is practiced from different angles in different traditions. I personally don't think one way is right or wrong.

There are, and have been, numerous buddhist schools. They have argued most about every word in the sutras, and about how to practice. I try to narrow it down to "what I do", as long that it has support in texts and tradition. 

6 hours ago, forestofclarity said:

Personally, I think the reason is that these practices require a lot of work and teacher supervision or they go wrong. 

 

That would be my guess.

[Forestgreen]

10 hours ago, stirling said:

 

While not complete, some insight into this particular point can come with everyday cessation in meditation. It isn't hard to demonstrate what this means to most students who have managed to become somewhat familiar with learning to become a witness to their thoughts instead of being their thoughts. I find most students can come to understand to some degree, with direct pointing, what "emptiness" (or the Dao) is and begin questioning the constructed nature of their worlds. Seeing all things as "buddha nature" is a fairly common Mahayana practice that you don't have to be any kind of expert to do.... again with some ability to find cessation in meditation practice.

Here we use different frames of reference. 

For me, touching stillness and being mindfull of how conventional reality relates to dependant origination are early stages and still far removed from seing the buddha nature ( and the practitioner still needs methods/tools to develop further).

If this is the frame that is taught in the traditions you are familiar with, then that is fine, and there is no point in taking this discussion further. 

[stirling]

12 hours ago, Forestgreen said:

It's not abstract, or at least less abstract than 90% of other buddhist terms and concepts used.

Those terms describe things that happens within the body and the consciousness. 

So there must be another reason that explain why those particular concepts have been dropped. 

 

There certainly could be other reasons. This is what I was told. 

[stirling]

11 hours ago, Forestgreen said:

For me, touching stillness and being mindfull of how conventional reality relates to dependant origination are early stages and still far removed from seing the buddha nature ( and the practitioner still needs methods/tools to develop further).

If this is the frame that is taught in the traditions you are familiar with, then that is fine, and there is no point in taking this discussion further. 

 

Setting aside traditions, my experience is that "emptiness" is present in any moment it is looked for. It isn't hard tor students to learn to recognize it, and rest in it. Bringing it to as many moments are possible is part of the practice.

 

Dependent origination is ultimately a "relative teaching", in my tradition.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_truths_doctrine

 

Nagarjuna uses it as a bridge to full understanding in his Madhyamaka teachings. 

 

Yes, we may come from different practice or tradition perspectives, but the result is ultimately the same, at least in my discussions with the few realized Theravadan monks I have encountered. The insight of "no-self" naturally leads to the recognition that all appearances lack "self". Our shared goal is the welfare and enlightenment of sentient beings.

[FluffyGuardian]

My teacher would warn aspiring students about learning from him due to how physically challenging and painful the practice is.

Of course, plenty of people thought they knew what hard work, pain, and misery were like due to past martial arts experiences. Some of them were instructors with over a decade of experience in a martial art. 

Then, they come to my teacher to learn on their first day. 

Lesson 1 is about holding a basic stance. It is short and high-stance. This isn't a low and wide stance. 

And those people could not stand for more than a few seconds. That is how utterly painful and physically demanding it is, even though it's an unassuming short stance.

Some of these people could go through their own forms that can last for 40 minutes. 

Our form also lasts for about that long. The difference is that a fraction of 1 sequence in our form is more physically demanding than the entirety of other people's forms. 

Hence, there is a very high quitting rate because my teacher has no intention of watering the art down to accommodate a wider audience.

So when people have their own ideas of past martial art experience helping them learn this particular art, they very quickly realize how useless those experiences were in the most fundamental stances that are unique to this lineage.
 

Edited Thursday at 05:36 PM by FluffyGuardian

[Cobie]

 

On 03/09/2025 at 9:30 PM, stirling said:

… the truly important stuff that actually gets you anywhere is so simple …

 

Yes.

 

Quote

… that most can't believe it. …

 

Yes.  “With the dullest of students, when they hear of the way, they laugh aloud at it.” (DDJ ch. 41)  

 

 

Edited Thursday at 08:04 PM by Cobie

[Forestgreen]

2 hours ago, stirling said:

 

Setting aside traditions, my experience is that "emptiness" is present in any moment it is looked for.

This, I would agree with.

But, just out of curiosity, since we might discuss this topic again, what is your definition of emptiness?  

Quote

It isn't hard tor students to learn to recognize it, and rest in it. 

So I can understand this.

 

I read your answer to Mark Foote.  It is good to be back here. It reminds me that buddhist practice is more than the aspects that I am studying, and that they all are just convenient means to an end.

Edited Thursday at 07:58 PM by Forestgreen
Added stuff.

[stirling]

1 hour ago, Forestgreen said:

This, I would agree with.

But, just out of curiosity, since we might discuss this topic again, what is your definition of emptiness?  

So I can understand this.

 

The Buddhas realization of no-self, naturally leads to understanding that ALL appearances have no-self. 

 

There is alignment with the Dao... a no-self understanding that puts being in the flow of happening, in this moment. 

 

Some Advaita Vedantans talk about doership, where what we are is no longer a person in control of what they do, but a witness to what the body a(nd world in general) as a unity do. 

 

There is a unity, the lack of any separateness between, beings, objects, or anything else. 

 

There is the Power of Now, but also The Power of Here.

 

It is bliss, love, TRUE compassion that recognizes suffering and is driven to help.

 

It is funny, mischievous, kind, pointing out our attachment and aversion and bringing gentle humor to its absurdity.

 

It lacks a story, cosmology, epistimology. 

 

It is centerless, agencyless, timeless, placeless, self-less. 

 

It is this moment and the realization there is ONLY this moment.

 

It is being, here, how.

 

All of these are just facets of a prism, the light of emptiness being bent to suit a conceptual structure. It is ALL of these, in a way, but really NONE of these. It is the indelible salient characteristic of all experiencing, once seen and understood. 

 

It is beyond traditions, ideas, teachers, practices, and (especially) beliefs. 
 

Quote

 

The awakened mind is turned upside down and does not accord even with the Buddha-wisdom. - Hui Hai

 

 

 

Quote

I read your answer to Mark Foote.  It is good to be back here. It reminds me that buddhist practice is more than the aspects that I am studying, and that they all are just convenient means to an end.

 

 _/\_

[Mark Foote]

On 9/3/2025 at 6:06 PM, stirling said:

 

 

... It is less complicated than that, even. Shikantaza is not a state, but merely resting in the reality of this moment, as it is. Learning not to contrive your experience and recognize "just being" takes some work.

 

  1 hour ago, Mark Foote said:

It is not possible to continue (shikantaza) more than one hour, because it is intense practice to take hold of all our mind and body by the practice which include everything. So in shikantaza, our mind should pervade every parts of our physical being. That is not so easy.

(I have nothing in my mind, Shunryu Suzuki, July 15, 1969, San Francisco)

 

 

I looked at your link, Mark and what Suzuki actually says there is:

 

  Quote

So most teacher may say shikantaza is not so easy, you know. It-- it is not possible to continue it more than one hour, because it is intense practice to take hold of all our mind and body by the practice which include everything. So in shikantaza, our mind should pervade every parts of our physical being. That is not so easy. Did you understand? If you actually practice zazen you will understand it, you know. As I always say, to count your breathing like this is not zazen [laughs], you know. Just to count our breathing is not counting breathing practice, actually. With, you know, with your whole body and mind, you should count your breathing. - (I have nothing in my mind, Shunryu Suzuki, July 15, 1969, San Francisco)

 

I think his qualifier is important - Suzuki is not saying that, he says that OTHERS do. Once understood shikantaza becomes easier... with insight it is actually just how life actually IS. He also says that if you have a good Zazen practice, shikantaza will be comprehensible to you. This is true... it just needs pointing out by a teacher. Zazen IS the process of learning to let go of "doership", which I often think is where your personal investigation is headed. 
 

 

 

You're right, that he started out talking about what other teachers say about shikantaza. I don't know, though--I read the part that I quoted as Shunryu Suzuki talking about his own experience with shikantaza.

And you're right, "doing something" is just preparatory practice, so Seigen Gyoshi had that right. However, the thing that I really like about Gautama is that he made positive and substantive descriptions--Zen is littered with teaching by negation, and I don't find that especially useful.

I take it you would discount what Suzuki said about "our mind should pervade every parts of our physical being"? What about Gautama's "not one particle of the body that is not pervaded with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind"? 

Gautama was describing the fourth concentration. I wonder, what do you think of Gautama's metaphor for the fourth concentraiion?

 

… it is as if (a person) might be sitting down who had clothed (themselves) including (their) head with a white cloth; there would be no part of (their) whole body that was not covered by the white cloth. 

(MN 119, tr. Pali Text Society vol. III p 134)
 

 

Not so much about understanding or insight in the experience of that, I would say. More like:

 

In the fourth concentration, the suffusion of the body with “purity by the pureness of mind” can allow the thoracolumbar fascial sheet to sustain an openness in the nerve exits along the sacrum and spine. That openness can allow an ability to feel throughout the body to the surface of the skin.

The free placement of attention by necessity in the movement of breath depends on the ability to feel throughout the body to the surface of the skin.

When a presence of mind is retained as the placement of attention shifts, then the natural tendency toward the free placement of attention draws out thoughts initial and sustained, and brings on the stages of concentration.
 

So, when you practice zazen, your mind should be concentrated in your breathing and this kind of activity is the fundamental activity of the universal being. 

(Breathing, Shunryu Suzuki; November 4th 1965, Los Altos)
 

 

Honestly, Stirling, sometimes it sounds like you don't advocate zazen at all. Of course, Seigen Gyoshi sounds like he's not advocating for zazen either, but I suspect he did sit. Ch'an teachers could get away with not having anything positive or substantive to say, because they sat and insisted that their students sit--so far as I know!

 

 

 

 

 

[stirling]

16 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

I take it you would discount what Suzuki said about "our mind should pervade every parts of our physical being"? What about Gautama's "not one particle of the body that is not pervaded with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind"? 

 

Taking just that section, I wouldn't discount it at all. Taking in "every part", not just our "physical being", everything, everywhere is an inside-out version of what formlessness is. Taking in everything, is taking in no-thing.

 

16 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

Gautama was describing the fourth concentration. I wonder, what do you think of Gautama's metaphor for the fourth concentraiion?

 

… it is as if (a person) might be sitting down who had clothed (themselves) including (their) head with a white cloth; there would be no part of (their) whole body that was not covered by the white cloth. 

(MN 119, tr. Pali Text Society vol. III p 134)

 

He uses this metaphor to explain what he means by the body permeated by "bright awareness". Based on my experience, I take him to mean that the "fabric" of his perception is all-encompassing, bare, clean, awareness, so that all conceptual thought and ideation falls away. This is something one might reasonably expect from deep, formless meditation without a practice or technique. 

 

Quote

"And furthermore, with the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither-pleasure-nor-pain. He sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. Just as if a man were sitting covered from head to foot with a white cloth so that there would be no part of his body to which the white cloth did not extend; even so, the monk sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by pure, bright awareness. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, any memories & resolves related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers & settles inwardly, grows unified & centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness immersed in the body.

 

 

16 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

Not so much about understanding or insight in the experience of that, I would say.

 

Everything you could need to understand - the entirety of the insight - is present in that moment. This is why Dogen says (in one of your favorite quotes  ):

 

Quote

When you find your place where you are, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point. When you find your way at this moment, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point, for the place, the way, is neither large nor small, neither yours nor others’. The place, the way, has not carried over from the past, and it is not merely arising now. Accordingly, in the practice-enlightenment of the buddha way, to attain one thing is to penetrate one thing; to meet one practice is to sustain one practice. 

 

Here is the place; here the way unfolds. The boundary of realization is not distinct, for the realization comes forth simultaneously with the full experience of buddhadharma. Do not suppose that what you attain becomes your knowledge and is grasped by your intellect. Although actualized immediately, what is inconceivable may not be apparent. Its emergence is beyond your knowledge. - Dogen, Actualizing the Fundamental Point

 

He is saying we awaken every time we practice appropriately, actualizing enlightenment. This always happens here/now.  It is the full experience of the buddha dharma. It isn't intellectual knowledge, and it may be that, despite your practice-enlightenment, what is happening may not be obvious to you, as it isn't "knowledge" in the conventional sense, and will require you to look BEYOND knowledge and intellect to apprehend it.

 

 

16 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

More like:

 

In the fourth concentration, the suffusion of the body with “purity by the pureness of mind” can allow the thoracolumbar fascial sheet to sustain an openness in the nerve exits along the sacrum and spine. That openness can allow an ability to feel throughout the body to the surface of the skin.

The free placement of attention by necessity in the movement of breath depends on the ability to feel throughout the body to the surface of the skin.

When a presence of mind is retained as the placement of attention shifts, then the natural tendency toward the free placement of attention draws out thoughts initial and sustained, and brings on the stages of concentration.

 

In my experience the jhanas are about what you drop and let go of, not about a set of causes and conditions. It is about allowing timeless, spaceless, "self-less" awareness to become the entirety of being, by dropping all of the separatenesses, concepts, and doing of a "self". 

 

16 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

Honestly, Stirling, sometimes it sounds like you don't advocate zazen at all. Of course, Seigen Gyoshi sounds like he's not advocating for zazen either, but I suspect he did sit. Ch'an teachers could get away with not having anything positive or substantive to say, because they sat and insisted that their students sit--so far as I know!

 

Shikantaza is a particular type of zazen, but not all zazen is Shikantaza. Zazen can include watching the breath or other "practices", but the meditation Dogen is discussing above is not a practice, it is just "being". Zazen IS an important practice - a way in, but all Soto Zen teachers will eventually guide their students into dropping all practices and just sitting in "open awareness". Actually, it just naturally happens that meditators will find they drop their methods and their minds and bodies become still, usually thinking that this is a problem! It is actually what you are looking for - the gateway into sitting formlessly, in Soto Zen terminology, Shikantaza.

 

 

[Forestgreen]

On 2025-09-04 at 11:08 PM, stirling said:

 

The Buddhas realization of no-self, naturally leads to understanding that ALL appearances have no-self. 

So if I think if the term "emptiness" as the absence of a permanent and unchangeable self, explained by dependant origination, would we be relatively close aligned when it comes to the theoretical frame?