I would suggest the true nature is not compassionate. If we take a pantheistic view and consider the true nature to be a reflection of the world as it is, then there is not a whole lot of compassion in the world. To me it seems as if there are instead opposite principles in contention, and compassion is one such principle.
I do believe in some kind of deity, but not one that is interventionist or the prerequisite of interventionist compassionate. I can agree that when one takes baby steps towards awakening there can be a relative increase of contentment, but I would argue that is not full awakening. --- In [email protected], "Joe" <desert_woodworker@...> wrote: > > Howdy, Carl, > > Some training traditions emphasize and exercise practices that involve > expression of deliberate compassion, ...which is not true compassion. > > You are, I think, well justified in considering this particular sort of > bestowment of concern and consideration for others and *deliberate* placing > of others FIRST to be a sort of attachment (although it's all "for a good > cause", no?). > > But all practices are Means, Methods, of or for coming to awakening. At least > in Zen practice they are; and, for maintaining awakening. > > At awakening, Wisdom and Compassion arise spontaneously and simultaneously, > and there is no "I" available to be attached to anything, so I would say that > attachment in that condition is moot. > > Attachment there and then is not even "impossible", but is simply MOOT. > > Different practices can lead to the same (empty, awakened) state because the > practices do not yield a "training-effect" -- as the Psychologists would call > it -- but they allow body and mind to fall away. This leaves only our > original nature, our original state, our basic Human inheritance. > > Awakening is not an aquirement. > > It's nothing added. > > This is why, when awakening is genuine, it does not differ, and why Zen > teachers can always identify it and confirm it. We share this condition even > now with all beings. We just don't sense it, perhaps, because of what we > call the feeling of movements of our "mind" (not the true Mind). Those > movements and other illusions distract us from the ground, which is our > nature. > > So, different practices can and do lead to the same condition/"place": > For example, in Zen practice, the very different methods of (1.) Koan > practice; and, (2.) Shikantaza, both lead to awakening. > > Other paths like Vipassana and Tibetan practice, employ Metta practice, *AS* > a *practice*, and, again, that practice is an expression of 'compassion' by > -- or as -- a deliberate exertion of effort. I put that 'compassion' in > inverted commas JUST to distinguish it from Karuna, or the true compassion > that arises spontaneously in the awakened person (and not at all to denigrate > it). Karuna is a tool! (in those paths). > > A Carpenter does not denigrate his hammer and say, "Yeah, but it's not a > HOUSE!" > > In paths where Metta is used as a practice, Metta is not the ONLY practice. > It seems that all wisdom-traditions are cocktails of methods. > > In Zen practice, about 12 or 13 practices come to mind readily, but if I were > to put my mind to it I think I could recall and name a few more. ;-) > > Actually, the number is infinite, but let's not go there. ;-) > > A lot of things are imputed to Mysticism, and I suppose a component *may* be > involvement of emotions. But have you ever seen a newly awakened Zen > practitioner, or been one? The "Dharma-joy" is *extremely* powerfully felt, > and publicly visible, there's just no doubt about it at all. ;-) > > With regards!, > > --Joe > > > "Carl" <cjjohans@> wrote: > > > > One difference between mysticism and Zen that I see is the former tends to > > have an emotional/devotional aspect while Zen has a balancing or even > > negative approach. If the practises are completely different, how can they > > be expected to lead to the same result? (For the record I consider > > compassion as also having dualistic/attachment aspects to it.) > > > > --- In [email protected], "salik888" <novelidea8@> wrote: > > > > > > Joe > > > > > > Interesting . . . this corresponds to roughly to the stations in Sufism, > > > Fana being the final stage, empty, burned up . . . of course Sufism as > > > has a so-called sober school. Hallaj would be an example of Fana. > ------------------------------------ Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
