Conducive to purpose

[jonesboy]

The texts are lived experiences.

The texts are followed because they have been shown to be true through lived experiences for thousands of years.

The only reason to dismiss them is because one hasn’t reached or realized what the teachings are pointing at. You then have people call it dogma or start saying they know better.

If you don’t like Buddhist teachings why are you here in the Buddhist section?

Maybe if you did read you would have a deeper understanding and appreciation instead of thinking your way is best.

Just a thought.

[JustBe]

Originally Posted by Gem

I'm always trying to communicate the sublime, and I don't present text so much because the notion of a true meaning is a way of drawing conclusions in the mind, as knowledge, where the real-lived doesn't so much answer the questions as it ends with a mystery, and the lived spiritual is more like the vitality of life itself that any particular knowledge. 'What it is like' to live has a direct connection to an infinite outpouring which is not the same as the universe and all the experience there, as there is an aspect which has no relativity which no one can explain, for there is no cause nor reason why or how, and there is no method of getting there. It is realised suddenly by surprise like 'oh that', and is regardless of quantified stages of spiritual advancement. Yet still, that seems to awaken in or throughout the mind and body, and there is a process of purification, cleansing, healing, alignment or what have you.



It seems to me people think the immediate precludes the process, and by any process of logic that would be the case, but it isn't linear in logic, being acausal, nor is it objective. It's just a fact in the sense that it is the reality of experience as it is, so apart from postulating about the philosophy, which is indeed wonderful intellectual entertainment, every aspect of the teaching has no definitive meaning. The meaning just becomes broader in its perspective. For example I was saying 'right' is represented by the elephant story, and it is, but not completely, so Sky says it's represented by the harp story, which it is, but not completely. 'Right' pertains to that which is sublime, so it never concludes as a definitive meaning - we could write a 10000 word essay on it, and 10000 of those, but never actually nail it down.

The mystery of life will always be a good ending to any story that any of us keep telling ourselves.

A place not governed by the 'old' story entirely, but of the unknown connections that exists within that old story.

[JustBe]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

The texts are lived experiences.

The texts are followed because they have been shown to be true through lived experiences for thousands of years.

The only reason to dismiss them is because one hasn’t reached or realized what the teachings are pointing at. You then have people call it dogma or start saying they know better.

If you don’t like Buddhist teachings why are you here in the Buddhist section?

Maybe if you did read you would have a deeper understanding and appreciation instead of thinking your way is best.

Just a thought.

Your mind is very disruptive to deeper listening in yourself.

The only dismissal is your own to what you hear through your mind.

Why are you here if your not getting what you expect?

The way is all ways, if your listening deeper. There is no one way for anything even Buddhism and teachings. Each person's way is their personal experience through them.

Does that not compute in you?

I don't need a reply nor do I expect one.

My mind is at peace with everything.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by JustBe

The way is all ways, if your listening deeper. There is no one way for anything even Buddhism and teachings. Each person's way is their personal experience through them.

Nobody is saying there is only one way. Heck I am not a Buddhist nor do I do any Buddhist practices. So I definitely don't believe there is only one way.

I also agree that each persons way is personal. We each have our own unique issues and fears that we have to work through.

It doesn't mean that we can't still have common experiences. Energy and how people first start to experience that is a perfect example.

Even in meditation we can have common stages or sign posts.

Here is an example.

In a formulation originating with Asaṅga (4th CE), śamatha practice is said to progress through nine "mental abidings" or Nine stages of training the mind leading to śamatha proper (the equivalent of "access concentration" in the Theravāda system), and from there to a state of meditative concentration called the first dhyāna which is often said to be a state of tranquility or bliss.

An equivalent succession of stages is described in the Ten oxherding pictures of Zen. The Nine Mental Abidings as described by Kamalaśīla are:

1.Placement of the mind (S. cittasthāpana, Tib. འཇོག་པ - sems ’jog-pa) occurs when the practitioner is able to place their attention on the object of meditation, but is unable to maintain that attention for very long. Distractions, dullness of mind and other hindrances are common.

2.Continuous attention (S. samsthāpana, Tib. རྒྱུན་དུ་འཇོག་པ - rgyun-du ‘jog-pa) occurs when the practitioner experiences moments of continuous attention on the object before becoming distracted. According to B Alan Wallace, this is when you can maintain your attention on the meditation object for about a minute.

3.Repeated attention (S. avasthāpana, Tib. བླན་ཏེ་འཇོག་པ - slan-te ’jog-pa) is when the practitioner's attention is fixed on the object for most of the practice session and she or he is able to immediately realize when she or he has lost their mental hold on the object and is able to restore that attention quickly. Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche suggests that being able to maintain attention for 108 breaths is a good benchmark for when we have reached this stage.

4.Close attention(S. upasthāpana, Tib. ཉེ་བར་འཇོག་པ - nye-bar ’jog-pa) occurs when the practitioner is able to maintain attention throughout the entire meditation session (an hour or more) without losing their mental hold on the meditation object at all. In this stage the practitioner achieves the power of mindfulness. Nevertheless, this stage still contains subtle forms of excitation and dullness or laxity.

5.Tamed attention (S. damana, Tib. དུལ་བར་བྱེད་པ - dul-bar byed-pa), by this stage the practitioner achieves deep tranquility of mind, but must be watchful for subtle forms of laxity or dullness, peaceful states of mind which can be confused for calm abiding. By focusing on the future benefits of gaining Shamatha, the practitioner can uplift (gzengs-bstod) their mind and become more focused and clear.

6.Pacified attention (S. śamana,Tib. ཞི་བར་བྱེད་པ་ - zhi-bar byed-pa) is the stage during which subtle mental dullness or laxity is no longer a great difficulty, but now the practitioner is prone to subtle excitements which arise at the periphery of meditative attention. According to B. Alan Wallace this stage is achieved only after thousands of hours of rigorous training.

7.Fully pacified attention (S. vyupaśamana,Tib. རྣམ་པར་ཞི་བར་བྱེད་པ་ - nye-bar zhi-bar byed-pa), although the practitioner may still experience of subtle excitement or dullness, they are rare and the practitioner can easily recognize and pacify them.

8.Single-pointed attention (S. ekotīkarana,Tib. རྩེ་གཅིག་ཏུ་བྱེད་པ་ - rtse-gcig-tu byed-pa) in this stage the practitioner can reach high levels of concentration with only a slight effort and without being interrupted even by subtle laxity or excitement during the entire meditation session.

9.Attentional Balance (S. samādhāna,Tib. མཉམ་པར་འཇོག་པ་བྱེད་པ་ - mnyam-par ’jog-pa) the meditator now effortlessly reaches absorbed concentration (ting-nge-‘dzin, S. samadhi.) and can maintain it for about four hours without any single interruption.

10.Śamatha, Tib. ཞི་གནས་, shyiné - the culmination, is sometimes listed as a tenth stage.

I think many people who meditate can relate to these various stages.

Now is Samatha the end state?

No, it is not, I would say this is really just another beginning but it can help someone know there is more and where they are with their practice using time tested texts from some old guy.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by JustBe

Your mind is very disruptive to deeper listening in yourself.

The only dismissal is your own to what you hear through your mind.

Why are you here if your not getting what you expect?

The way is all ways, if your listening deeper. There is no one way for anything even Buddhism and teachings. Each person's way is their personal experience through them.

Does that not compute in you?

I don't need a reply nor do I expect one.

My mind is at peace with everything.

People often say I say things I don't say, or take what I say in one context and apply that to all other contexts, but I'm talking in a way that is subjective vibe or ambiance, which is referred to in the text as 'conditions'. I could go into some detail about these things but the conditions for that to happen haven't come together.

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

Even in meditation we can have common stages or sign posts. I think many people who meditate can relate to these various stages.

Those meditation stages were written by Kamalashila who did not follow the Zen "chan" school of Buddhism and in fact he disagreed with Chan Buddhism. There was a huge debate between Kamalashila and Moheyan of the East Mountain teaching of Chan Buddhism called the "Council of Lhasa." The debate was over which Buddhist school held the true dhamma. Tibetan sources claim Kamalashila won the debate and Chinese sources claim Moheyan won.

So it's not really a matter of here are the accepted meditation stages of "Buddhism." Buddhism like all religions has disagreements within it over various teachings and practices.

Those writings were only accepted in certain Buddhism schools and not accepted in others. Also, of course, none of that was written or taught by Buddha. As somebody who has studied Zen, I can see a problem with those teachings right away. The problem is in emphasis. The way Kamalashila presents these teachings, they are directed to the ego. So the ego is the one seeking different experiences and stages. This is fine, but teachings like this usually don't change what a person is, only what they do. It's kind of an "on and off" teaching. One sits in meditation, experiences various things, then stops meditating and is themselves again.

The Chan school, or Zen Buddhism, does not emphasize seeking goals like stages in meditation. Zen meditation was heavily influenced by Taoism in China in it's early stages, so the emphasis is more on carrying the state of mind in meditation at all times, mindfulness or insight observation "Guan" from Daoism. A detachment from thought and thinking. An awareness of the current moment free of desire and attachment. Stages may exist in this way of emphasizing things, but one does not make them a goal or seek them. They occur naturally as one becomes selfless and pays attention to the current moment always.

Also, because the Zen emphasis is on current experience free from the influence of thought and thinking, teachings are of secondary importance. Teachings point to the experience, but are not a part of it. This agrees with what Buddha taught about the need to abandon all teachings in the practice or experience. Obviously, teachings are not abandoned, they just assume a new form. Teachings can be intellectual, a part of thought and thinking, or they can be actualized or lived. manifested/applied in the present.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by Rain95

Those meditation stages were written by Kamalashila who did not follow the Zen "chan" school of Buddhism and in fact he disagreed with Chan Buddhism. There was a huge debate between Kamalashila and Moheyan of the East Mountain teaching of Chan Buddhism called the "Council of Lhasa." The debate was over which Buddhist school held the true dhamma. Tibetan sources claim Kamalashila won the debate and Chinese sources claim Moheyan won.

So it's not really a matter of here are the accepted meditation stages of "Buddhism." Buddhism like all religions has disagreements within it over various teachings and practices.

Those writings were only accepted in certain Buddhism schools and not accepted in others. Also, of course, none of that was written or taught by Buddha. As somebody who has studied Zen, I can see a problem with those teachings right away. The problem is in emphasis. The way Kamalashila presents these teachings, they are directed to the ego. So the ego is the one seeking different experiences and stages. This is fine, but teachings like this usually don't change what a person is, only what they do. It's kind of an "on and off" teaching. One sits in meditation, experiences various things, then stops meditating and is themselves again.

The Chan school, or Zen Buddhism, does not emphasize seeking goals like stages in meditation. Zen meditation was heavily influenced by Taoism in China in it's early stages, so the emphasis is more on carrying the state of mind in meditation at all times, mindfulness or insight observation "Guan" from Daoism. A detachment from thought and thinking. An awareness of the current moment free of desire and attachment. Stages may exist in this way of emphasizing things, but one does not make them a goal or seek them. They occur naturally as one becomes selfless and pays attention to the current moment always.

Also, because the Zen emphasis is on current experience free from the influence of thought and thinking, teachings are of secondary importance. Teachings point to the experience, but are not a part of it. This agrees with what Buddha taught about the need to abandon all teachings in the practice or experience. Obviously, teachings are not abandoned, they just assume a new form. Teachings can be intellectual, a part of thought and thinking, or they can be actualized or lived. manifested/applied in the present.

Very nice,

That was one example of the stages of Samatha meditation. It is a step by step process first with an object and then without an object.

Also, who brought in Chan school of Buddhism into the picture?

Again, Zen is a teacher based system that is based on transmission as well.

Not sure where you are getting your information.

Zen (Chinese: 禪; pinyin: Chán; Korean: 선, translit. Seon) is a school of Mahayana Buddhism that originated in China during the Tang dynasty as Chan Buddhism. It was strongly influenced by Taoism, and developed as a distinct school of Chinese Buddhism. From China, Chan Buddhism spread south to Vietnam, northeast to Korea and east to Japan, where it became known as Seon Buddhism and Japanese Zen, respectively.[1]

The term Zen is derived from the Japanese pronunciation of the Middle Chinese word 禪 (Chan) which traces its roots to the Indian practice of Dhyāna ("meditation").[note 1] Zen emphasizes rigorous self-control, meditation-practice, insight into Buddha-nature, and the personal expression of this insight in daily life, especially for the benefit of others.[3][4] As such, it de-emphasizes mere knowledge of sutras and doctrine[5][6] and favors direct understanding through zazen and interaction with an accomplished teacher.[7]

What is pretty interesting is the sutra I posted earlier (Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra)which you said was old and too long is the sutra Bodhidharma said was the only one you needed. Surely you studied that... right?

You know that guy who is considered the founder of Zen...

What the Zen tradition emphasizes is that the enlightenment of the Buddha came not through conceptualization, but rather through direct insight.[44] But direct insight has to be supported by study and understanding (hori[45]) of the Buddhist teachings and texts.[46][note 6] Intellectual understanding without practice is called yako-zen, "wild fox Zen", but "one who has only experience without intellectual understanding is a zen temma, 'Zen devil'".

Interesting stuff :)

[jonesboy]

Going with Zen and stages of realization...

The Five Ranks (Chinese: 五位; pinyin: Wuwei; Japanese: goi) is a poem consisting of five stanzas describing the stages of realization in the practice of Zen Buddhism. It expresses the interplay of absolute and relative truth and the fundamental non-dualism of Buddhist teaching.

Or we can use the...

The ‘Ten Bulls of Zen’ (or alternatively the ‘Ten Ox-herding Pictures of Zen’) is a metaphoric depiction of stages of self-realization, involving an ox-herder (representing the seeker or the separate self) and an ox or bull (representing our true, primordial nature, or the Ground of existence). It remains one of the best models for describing the awakening process. It unfolds in ten stages that define the relationship of our mind to the deepest truth of reality. Initially this deepest truth, symbolized by the bull, appears separate from the seeker, but eventually it 'disappears' (or is forgotten) representing the realization that the separate self (the seeker) has never truly been separate from what it seeks.

The Ten Bulls of Zen was originally a creation of the Taoist tradition in China, but was developed and enhanced by the 12th century C.E. Chinese Cha’an (Zen) master Kuo-an Shih-yuan (Kakuan Shien), depicted above. The Ten Bulls defines the stages of awakening as follows, with Kakuan’s commentary in italics (as with many of the old texts there are several different translations into English; what follows is but one version). My own comments follow each image:

or

The Five Degrees of Tozan, also known as the Five Ranks of Tozan, and WU KENG CHUAN in Chinese, are different levels of Realization formulated by Zen master Tozan Ryokai, known as Tung-shan Liang-chieh in Chinese (807-869). In ascending scale the five are known as:


1.sho-chu-chen


2.hen-chu-sho


3.sho-chu-rai


4.hen-chu-shi


5.hen-chu-to


The first three degrees or steps are noetic and the last two are conative. The middle, or third step, is the transition point at which the noetic begins to be conative and knowledge turns into life

[jonesboy]

Just an fyi..

It will be real hard to find a tradition within Buddhism that doesn't have a teacher, study teachings or have a system of practices.

Pure land Buddhism is the only tradition I have found that isn't teacher based. It does have a belief system...

There may be others but I haven't found them..

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

Not sure where you are getting your information.

Oh sorry..wikipedia for that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala%C5%9B%C4%ABla