Ekanta
om sai ram
I've spent 10 years in the soto-zen lineage of Taisen Deshimaru (innumerable sesshins and was a zen-monk)... I rank that higher than simply reading a chapter.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Atman, Other-Emptiness, and other Buddhists
- Thread starter Breathe
- Start date
- Status
I've spent 10 years in the soto-zen lineage of Taisen Deshimaru (innumerable sesshins and was a zen-monk)... I rank that higher than simply reading a chapter.
dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
You would have to admit that spending a great deal of time in/with something doesn't necessarily equate to having learned anything from it.
Ekanta
om sai ram
Thats true, there are also those who close their mind and dont want to learn.
Hence, ignoring any sensory distortions associated with meditation, etc.
Agreed. You must first empty your cup.
Dhyana
What you say may be true of a school that holds that individual souls are eternal and separate from each other and God.
But advaita holds no such notion. In advaita, in the ultimate, the Seer, the Seen, and the Seeing is non-dual. So, when I study the following, it is clear that the Sunya and the Seer of the Sunya are not two. If Sunya and the Seer were two, then the Sunya would be broken. OTOH, without a Seer, the Sunya will not be known. And the Sutta below confirms of one who is fully aware.
Patisambhidamagga Sutta
This is the ultimate meaning (paramattha) of emptiness [as it relates to] all
kinds of emptiness, which is the terminating of [temporal] occurrence in one
who is fully aware.
Advaita is not Buddhism, either.
Sure. Advaita is not Buddhism.
But denying a Seer of Sunyata/Nirvana is not teaching of Buddha, either, as the sutra cited shows, IMO.
Patisambhidamagga Sutta
This is the ultimate meaning (paramattha) of emptiness [as it relates to] all
kinds of emptiness, which is the terminating of [temporal] occurrence in one
who is fully aware.
In absence of all skandhas, in complete emptiness, the one is fully aware shines.
Last edited:
dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
My thoughts exactly.
dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
I was going to say that. Too many people trying to force their own views onto Buddhism, when it doesn't really work that way. Buddhism is Buddhism, Advaita is Advaita, etc.
Ekanta
om sai ram
It echoes and is explained further in the Nirvana sutra:
You have asked what the Buddha-dhatu [buddha-nature] is; so listen with sincerity, listen with sincerity. I shall analyse and elucidate it for your sake. Nobly-born one, the Buddha-dhatu is termed ultimate Emptiness [paramartha-sunyata], and ultimate Emptiness is termed Awareness/ Knowing [jnana]. So-called Emptiness is neither viewed as emptiness nor as non-emptiness. The wise perceive emptiness and non-emptiness, the eternal [nitya] and the impermanent, suffering and bliss, the Self and the non-Self. The empty is the totality of samsara and the non-empty is Great Nirvana Non-Self is samsara, and the Self is Great Nirvana. To perceive the emptiness of everything and not to perceive non-emptiness is not termed the Middle Way to perceive the non-Self of everything and not to perceive the Self is not termed the Middle Way. The Middle Way is termed the Buddha-dhatu. For this reason, the Buddha-dhatu is eternal and unchanging. Because beings are enveloped in ignorance, they are unable to perceive it. Sravakas and pratyekabuddhas perceive the emptiness of everything, but do not perceive the non-emptiness they perceive the absence of Self in all things, but do not perceive the Self. For this reason, they do not attain ultimate Emptiness. Because they do not attain the supreme Emptiness, they do not traverse the Middle Way.
The Middle [Way] is paramartha-sunyata [Ultimate Emptiness]. This sees the non-eternal [anitya] as non-eternal and the Eternal [nitya] as the Eternal.
Nirvana Sutra :: Appreciation of the "Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra"
dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
Nirvana is experienced in the here and now, by our temporal bodies and minds, when one has become enlightened, liberated, and purified. But we have to remember the differences between nirvana, and parinirvana.
If we contemplate then we understand that the Sunya/Seer/Awareness are not three different things. The Sunya is Aware. The Sunya is the Seer.
Disagree. Look at the process, not for things. Emptiness means empty of independent self, aka interconnectedness--the chain of interdependent co-arising. Understanding interdependent co-arising, one can end interdependent co-arising of the fabrications. You want to blow out the fire, not fan it.
Yep. Some of them want to distort the teachings, even. Perhaps meaning well, but it still happens regrettably often.
Whatever ma'am
Patisambhidamagga Sutta
This is the ultimate meaning (paramattha) of emptiness [as it relates to] all
kinds of emptiness, which is the terminating of [temporal] occurrence in one
who is fully aware.
..........
Processes are temporal. All temporals are terminated in ONE WHO IS FULLY AWARE. And the aware one is not temporal. Sorry.
Last edited:
Ekanta
om sai ram
If I quote several sutras and the zen tradition how am I distorting the teaching? And what teaching are you refering to?
I understand very well why you (for example) write like you do, but its a mystery why several posters cant see that what I write is part of the buddhist tradition.
This. SO MUCH this!
dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
Because what people like me and crossfire have posted is part of buddhadharma, whether you want to see it or not. It's not suggestible that one try to view one religion through the lens of another, if one wants to truly understand that religion. Buddhism is not Hinduism, or any other religion.
- Status