Very Interesting Cartoon "Zen Master Says" 禅师说。。。。
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Your question:
What does an arhat think abt? Why do some Pusa think too?
and
He told me buddha does not think.
My answer:
Actually, a Buddha thinks like anyone else. Someone who does not think cannot be able to function in the world.
There is no problem with thinking per se, the only problem is when you are *attached* to your thinking.
Once, a monk presented the following verse to the Sixth Patriarch, composed by the Chan Master Wo Lun.
Hearing this verse, Master Hui Neng said, "This verse indicates that the person who composed it has not yet completely realized the essence of mind." The Sixth Patriarch then showed the monk the following verse.
From this verse, you can understand that Hui-Neng discourages any form of unnatural thought suppression. Supposed you stop all thoughts from arising, you are no different from a living dead person, incapable of functioning as a human being.
Even though you may be able to temporarily suppress thoughts and defilements in a state of meditative absorption, nevertheless when you return to daily lives the thoughts will still continue to arise.
Therefore thought suppression is not the means to gain liberation.
What is the means to gain liberation? It is to be able to have thoughts but not grasp on them. Thoughts are also the manifestation of Buddha-nature in the same way that all the waves in the sea are water. Since all thoughts are the manifestation of Buddha-Nature, simply recognising thoughts as they are is enough for thoughts to self-liberate. Buddha-Nature is not something apart and separate from thoughts, for it is the nature and essence of all arising phenomena.
All thoughts are the vivid self-luminosity of Buddha-Nature, and they are empty of any inherent existence or solidity.
Excerpt from by Zen teacher David Loy:
http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-JOCP/jc26559.htm
Nietzsche relates the denial of a thinker to a denial of the process of thinking. Why; after all, do we believe that there is an act of thinking? Because that act is what the thinker does: stringing thoughts together by creating new thoughts on the basis of the old thoughts. If there is no such thinker, then there need be no such act. That leaves only thoughts, but one at a time, although the succession may be rapid.
The significance of Nietzsche's remarks for us is that we find the same claim in the Asian nondual philosophies, particularly in Ch'an Buddhism. In The Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch, Hui Neng explains what prajña is:
The term "thoughtlessness" would seem to recommend a mind free from any thoughts, but Hui Neng denies this: rather, "thoughtlessness" is the function of a mind free from any attachment. The implication is that for someone who is liberated thoughts still arise, but there is no clinging to them when they do. Why the term "thoughtlessness" can be used to characterize such a state of mind will become clear in a moment. But the question that arises first is in what way one can ever be attached to thoughts if, as the Śiks�samuccaya says, a thought has no staying power, that like lightning it breaks up in a moment and disappears. Hui Neng answers this later in the Platform Sutra when he says more about "how to think":
One clings to a thought by allowing the thoughts to link up in a series, which means having one's next thought "caused", as it were, by the previous thoughts, rather than letting each thought arise spontaneously and nondually.
According to the autobiographical first part of the Platform Sutra, Hui Neng became deeply enlightened and realized that all things in the universe are his self-nature, upon hearing a line from the Diamond Sutra: "Let your thought arise without fixing it anywhere". [22] The passage just prior to this one-which Hui Neng must also have heard-puts this in context. Edward Conze translates it as follows:
A thought is "Unsupported" because it does not arise in dependence upon anything else, not "caused" by another thought ("mind-objects") and of course not "produced" by a thinker, which the Bodhisattva realizes does, not exist. Such an "unsupported thought", then, is prajña, arising by itself nondually.
The image of the ego as a worm which leaves one hold only after catching another might well have been used by Hui Neng and Ma-tsu to describe the way in which thoughts are apparently linked up in a series. The difference is that Mahayana Buddhism encourages the arising of "an unsupported thought", whereas Ramana Maharshi understands unchangeable Reality as that which is realized only when it is out of contact with all objects and thoughts. This is consistent with the general relation between Mahayana and Advaita: Nirguṇa Brahman is so emptied of any attribute ("neti, neti,...") that it becomes impossible to differentiate from Śūnyat�. "It is difficult indeed to distinguish between pure being and pure non-being as a category". (S. Dasgupta). [27] But there is still a difference in emphasis.
Mah�y�na emphasizes realizing the emptiness of all phenomena, whereas Advaita distinguishes between empty Reality and phenomena, with the effect of devaluing the latter into mere m�y�.
The image of a worm hesitant to leave its hold was used in a personal conversation I had in 1981 with a Theravada monk from Thailand, a meditation master named Phra Khemananda. This was before I discovered the passage from Ramana Maharshi; what Khemananda said was not prompted by any remark of mine, but was taught to him by his own teacher in Thailand. He began by drawing the following diagram:
Each oval represents a thought, he said; normally, we leave one thought only when we have another one to go to (as the arrows indicate), but to think in this way constitutes ignorance. Instead, we should realize that thinking is actually like this:
Then we will understand the true nature of thoughts: that thoughts do not arise from each other but by themselves.
This understanding of thoughts-not-linking-up-in-a-series but springing up nondually is consistent with D. T. Suzuki's conception of prajña:
This gives insight into the many Ch'an dialogues in which students are criticized for their hesitation or praised for their apparently nonsensical but immediate replies. That the reply is immediate is not itself sufficient; what is important is that each response be experienced as a nondual "presentation of the whole". Hesitation reveals lack of prajña because it indicates either some logical train of thought or the self-conscious paralysis of all thought. That many approved replies are non-sequitur reveals one aspect of the enlightened mind, that its thoughts are free from reasoning and any methodology.
Even more important, this also explains how meditation functions, since the "letting-go" of thoughts breaks up the otherwise habitual linking together in a series. Huang Po: "... Why do they [Ch'an students] not copy me by letting each thought go as though it were nothing, or as though it were a piece of rotten wood, a stone, or the cold ashes of a dead fire"? [29]
Borruhuci got it wrong maybe. -
Yes I expirienced it myself. Some thoughts are let go instantly as they arise, some thoughts are sticky and we will chase after the thoughts like judging them.
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
I read in buddhism gt small awakening big awakening
is big awakening Satori small awakening kensho?
A few small awakening then got one big awakening?
Both are japanese words.
There are many levels of awakening.
There are also many maps of awakening - for example in Zen there is the 10 oxherding pictures, the 5 ranks of Tozan, etc. In Theravada, the four paths to Arhantship. In Mahayana, the 10 bhumis. In Mahamudra, the 4 yogas. There are many more.
Our moderator's map Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment is pretty universal.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
There are many levels of awakening.
There are also many maps of awakening - for example in Zen there is the 10 oxherding pictures, the 5 ranks of Tozan, etc. In Theravada, the four paths to Arhantship. In Mahayana, the 10 bhumis. In Mahamudra, the 4 yogas. There are many more.
Our moderator's map Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment is pretty universal.
Yah the ten bulls in zen tradition. I still remember.It's in a book i lent from library from venerable Ming Yi.
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
I know some arhats are into mahayana buddhism.
The buddha introduced some arhats in diamond sutra to mahayana ideas.
That's why buddha spoke in diamond sutra to the arhats abt emptiness of dharma.
Hinayana arhats?
correct me if i am wrong.
Yes, Diamond Sutra is part of the Prajnaparamita Sutras series that are introduced Emptiness of Dharmas in reaction to the skewing into Emptiness of Self by Hinayana Abhidhammist (the authors of Abhidhamma: yes, it definitely wasn't from Buddha regardless of what some people might think).
To answer your question: What is attachment to self, what is attachment to dharma?
Attachment to self is the clinging onto the view and notion that there is an inherently existing self.
Attachment to dharma is the clinging onto the view and notion that dharmas/phenomena/objects have inherent/independent existence.
Both attachments must be relinquished via realizations. Into what? The twofold emptiness: emptiness of self, emptiness of dharmas.
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
Yah the ten bulls in zen tradition. I still remember.It's in a book i lent from library from venerable Ming Yi.
You mean the famous Venerable Ming Yi or..?
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Yes, Diamond Sutra is part of the Prajnaparamita Sutras series that are introduced Emptiness of Dharmas in reaction to the skewing into Emptiness of Self by Hinayanist Abhidhammist.
To answer your question: What is attachment to self, what is attachment to dharma?
Attachment to self is the clinging onto the view and notion that there is an inherently existing self.
Attachment to dharma is the clinging onto the view and notion that dharmas/phenomena/objects have inherent/independent existence.
Both attachments must be relinquished via realizations. Into what? The twofold emptiness: emptiness of self, emptiness of dharmas.
I lastime confused dharma attachment with attachment to dharma teachings. -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
You mean the famous Venerable Ming Yi or..?
Yes the venerable Ming yi fa shi. Serving sentence at home. The ren ci case that one.
He wrote a comic book on zen.
asiapac bookshop. I saw the book again in this year book fair at suntec.
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
I lastime confused dharma attachment with attachment to dharma teachings.Dharma has two meanings: it can mean Buddha Dharma as in the teachings of Buddha.
Or, it could mean phenomena, objects, any kind of phenomena. Wo Zhi and Fa Zhi are referring to what I explained above - attachment to self, attachment to objects.
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
Yes the venerable Ming yi fa shi
He wrote a comic book on zen.
asiapac bookshop. I saw the book again in this year book fair at suntec.
I think you might be mistaken... There's another Singaporean venerable that wrote a comic on Zen, but he's not Ven Ming Yi. I forgot his name at the moment, maybe someone else can fill you in.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
I think you might be mistaken... There's another Singaporean venerable that wrote a comic on Zen, but he's not Ven Ming Yi. I forgot his name at the moment, maybe someone else can fill you in.
Maybe remember wrongly. Ps. The book u can find in popular. Asia pac one. -
Arhats realised emptiness of self? Then the heart sutra that verse emptiness of 5 aggregates/skandhas they also completely understand?
-
My frenz outside buddhist frenz said they completely understand the line when thinking there's thinking but no thinker.
When doing there's doing but no doer.
Is that verse = emptiness of five skandhas?
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
Arhats realised emptiness of self? Then the heart sutra that verse emptiness of 5 aggregates/skandhas they also completely understand?
Different people have different views.
Everyone agrees that Arhats have at least realised emptiness of self.
Personally my view is that Arhat have realisation of emptiness of self, and emptiness of dharmas. But whether they have complete realisation is another topic. Maybe only Buddhas have complete realisation?
Heart Sutra is about emptiness of dharmas.
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
My frenz outside buddhist frenz said they completely understand the line when thinking there's thinking but no thinker.
When doing there's doing but no doer.
Is that verse = emptiness of five skandhas?
Intellectual understanding is much easier.... experiential insight is harder and requires alot of practice, contemplation, investigation (like doing vipassana practice).
Thinking without thinker, doing without doer, seeing without seer, these are related to Anatta or Emptiness of Self. (Thusness Stage 4-5)
Emptiness of Dharmas is Stage 6...
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Intellectual understanding is much easier.... experiential insight is harder and requires alot of practice, contemplation, investigation (like doing vipassana practice).
Thinking without thinker, doing without doer, seeing without seer, these are related to Anatta or Emptiness of Self. (Thusness Stage 4-5)
Emptiness of Dharmas is Stage 6...
Yah a long going process to the buddhist. My buddhist frenz many years in his practise still doing it.No wonder dalai lama still meditating.
Buddhsit meditate until they die? My frenz many years liao.
My sokka gakkai frenz also very devout in his Nam My�h� Renge Ky� practise.
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
Yah a long going process to the buddhist. My buddhist frenz many years in his practise still doing it.No wonder dalai lama still meditating.
Buddhsit meditate until they die? My frenz many years liao.
Meditation takes a different role when you become highly enlightened. At that point, you no longer meditate with a goal or trying to achieve something... Meditation becomes like exercising, it's healthy, it helps your body and mind to relax and attain calmness. But nevertheless your meditative awareness actually permeates your entire waking and sleeping experience such that you no longer require sitting meditation to sustain any particular state... this is pretty advanced level. At that level you have already realised non-duality deeply.
Buddha still meditate, but he no longer needs to. For us, before we reach such level of enlightenment, we still need to investigate and contemplate and meditate to reach certain insights/realisation...
-
I am tired now gtg sleep. BB cya. Kept on looking at window 7 thing haha lol.
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
I am tired now gtg sleep. BB cya. Kept on looking at window 7 thing haha lol.
Cya...
-
Wad's the difference betweena a pusa and buddha?
Kindly explain the stages of pusa? Different stages of pusa.
-
What does it mean when arhats still have habbits tendencies after gaining enlightenment?
Pusa dont have habbit tendency?
-
Do enlightened beings get angry? There is a chinese saying even buddha also will get angry.
Fo duo hui fa huo?
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
Do enlightened beings get angry? There is a chinese saying even buddha also will get angry.
Fo duo hui fa huo?
i had never heard of the saying...think it's made up...there's no way Buddha will even get angry. Buddha is the Enlightened One who had totally get rid of the 3 poisons of greed, anger and folly. if not he won't be call the Buddha. Even Arahat had already done so.there's a sutta about a person getting angry with Buddha, but the Buddha said the anger generated it's his, and it can only be return back to the person who generate it.
/\
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
Wad's the difference betweena a pusa and buddha?
Kindly explain the stages of pusa? Different stages of pusa.
can read this simple explianation:http://web.singnet.com.sg/~alankhoo/DharmaRealm.htm
one way of puting, arahat sever attachment, Bodhisattva sever dualism, Buddha sever wandering thoughts.
Arahat totally understood 4 Noble Truth. Bodhisattva - 6 paramitas, Buddha - Equanimity.
/\
-
Originally posted by sinweiy:
i had never heard of the saying...think it's made up...there's no way Buddha will even get angry. Buddha is the Enlightened One who had totally get rid of the 3 poisons of greed, anger and folly. if not he won't be call the Buddha. Even Arahat had already done so.there's a sutta about a person getting angry with Buddha, but the Buddha said the anger generated it's his, and it can only be return back to the person who generate it.
/\
There's is indeed this chinese saying.I never lie.
佛都会��
my relative angry will say u dun make me angry,
佛都会��one.