Greetings Rod, >The whole 'emptyness' underlying 'somethingness vs. nothingness' is >quite a profound observation I suspect. However, to slip into nihilism >is a silly sophistry and denial of what we all know as obvious which for >fifteen years I have called: Is Is (then Clinton had to piss on the >phrase). This observation cannot be adequately communicated or >captured. I can't even 'know' that you all are also witness to this >Is-ness. I can't even 'know' that I am witness to it -- yet here I am. >Thus, I don't know I exist within it as a separate witness, nor even as >a subset or I could then delineate what is 'other', but instead I say I >must have arisen from it in the same way of all 'things' I have seen >(seeds, trees, babies, big-bangs, etc.) I am only sure of arising, >Is-ness -- not that my sureness comes to that conclusion but instead >FROM it again and again! 'Arising' is what I label the indescribable >and unconcludable eventing to which I am constantly witness.
I always get a chuckle out of these interminable debates. We can't even convey something so mundane as the subjective experience of what an orange tastes like to someone else! There will always be doubt/conjecture about the nature of nirvana until direct subjective experience. Thus practice, leading to experience is key. The question then becomes, what is the practice? Several have been offered over the centuries. One approach, which I follow, is called Investigating Chan. Perhaps you are familiar with it, but here is a bit of background anyway. The Zen practice of investigating chan seeks to "investigate" the subjective experiencer by raising self-doubt. As a sage once said, "All doubts will cease only when the doubter and his source have been found. There is no use removing doubts. If we clear one doubt, another doubt will arise and there will be no end of doubts. But if the doubter is found to be really non-existent, by seeking for the source of the doubter, then all doubts will cease." This is echoed by Hsu Yun, a great Chinese zen master in one of his discourses(http://www.hsuyun.com/discourses.html). Here is an extended excerpt: "The ancient patriarchs pointed directly at Mind. When one sees self- nature, one attains Buddhahood. This was the case when Bodhidharma helped his disciple to calm his mind and when the Sixth Patriarch spoke only about seeing self-nature. All that was necessary was the direct understanding and acceptance of Mind and nothing else. There was no such thing as investigating hua-t'ou. More recent patriarchs, however, saw that practitioners could not throw themselves into practice with total dedication and could not instantaneously see their self-nature. Instead, these people played games and imitated words of wisdom, showing off other people's treasure and patriarchs were compelled to set up schools and devise specific ways to help practitioners, hence the method of investigating hua-t'ou. "There are many hua-t'ous, such as "All dharmas return to one, where does this one return to?" "What was my original face before I was born?" and so on. The most common one, however, is "Who is reciting the Buddha's name?". "What is meant by hua-t'ou? Hua means the spoken word; t'ou means the head or beginning, so hua-t'ou means that which is before the spoken word. For example, reciting Amitabha Buddha is a hua, and hua-t'ou is that which precedes one's reciting the Buddha's name. The hua-t'ou is that moment before the thought arises. Once the thought arises, it is already the tail of the hua. The moment before that thought has arisen is called non-arising. When one's mind is not distracted, is not dull, is not attached to quiescence, or has not fallen into a state of nothingness, it is called non-perishing. Singlemindedly and uninterruptedly, turning inward and illuminating the state of non-arising and non-perishing is called investigating the hua-t'ou or taking care of the hua-t'ou. "To investigate the hua-t'ou, one must first generate doubt. Doubt is like a walking cane for the method of investigating hua-t'ou. What is meant by doubt? For example, one may ask, "Who is reciting the Buddha's name?" Everyone knows that it is he himself who is reciting the name, but is he using his mouth or mind? If it is his mouth, then after the person dies and the mouth still exists, how come the dead person is unable to recite Buddha's name? If it is the mind, then what is the mind like? It cannot be known. Thus there is something one does not understand, and this gives rise to a slight doubt regarding the question of "who"." gassho, David ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Would you Help a Child in need? It is easier than you think. Click Here to meet a Child you can help. http://us.click.yahoo.com/0Z9NuA/I_qJAA/i1hLAA/S27xlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Noble Eightfold Path: Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration, Right Livelihood Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZenForum/ <*> 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/
