Hi JM, Thanks for looking into this.
> This is why we must step off the top of that hunded foot pole of emptiness > into the world of an awakened everyday. I believe distinction between the two is unnecessary. What is called awakened everyday is emptiness itself. I fully agree that we are subject to conventions and from time to time we need conventions. Unfortunately, identifying certain things as 'emptiness' or 'non-duality', while others as 'everyday world' or 'duality' is a duality view itself. > In truth, Two and One are in support of one another. Here it seems that Rev Harvey makes distinction between Two and One. Are they really different at all? > Are we present? Are we kind? Do we practice with a mindful heart? It has been a while since I began questioning this practice of questioning. I used to remind myself whether I was present, whether I have been kind today, whether I was mindful. At one point, I discovered that whatever answers I had for those questions are doubtful for words are ambiguous and I no longer know what being kind or mindful really means anymore beyond their conventional use. Siska -----Original Message----- From: Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2011 10:09:48 To: <[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle Hello Siska, Below is a reply from Rev. Harvey in terminologies of Zen. Perhaps it will clarify some of the questions in your mind? jm -------- Original Message -------- Aha, Sensei, Indeed. It is transformation instead of elimination. The key of Chan practice lies in the way of "challenging & teaching & awaken" without ourselves. Too often we impose "our practice" onto others. In such case, we still are attached to dharma. I just loved your English. So much more depth in every word. As always, I found one new words I needed to look up from dictionary. Thank you for your sharing. jm On 9/4/2011 6:01 AM, Harvey Daiho Hilbert wrote: > With respect to all, > Good Morning JMJM, > Thank you for the correction as regards your Order's hierarchy, > although I will continue to see you as a Master. > It is true that to see oneself as one with everything, there is a > danger we will fall into a sort of quietism. This is why we must step > off the top of that hunded foot pole of emptiness into the world of an > awakened everyday. > In Zen we step back from that pole in order to work for the freedom of > all beings. We live in a world of two truths, the Universe is One and > the Universe is not one. Realizing the Vast Impermenance of all things > does not negate all things. > Engaged practice, then, is a practice of going out into the world of > the relative with an Absolute Mind. How we walk, talk, eat, and touch > become teachers to those around us. Are we present? Are we kind? Do > we practice with a mindful heart? These are profound, but > beginning beginning steps, steps of a first order. A second order is > more foundational. We practice to address the conditions within which > duality is permitted to emerge. Notions of social stratification, > distributive justice, and prejudice must be addressed directly, > challenged, and transformed. > I say /transformed/ rather than /eliminated/ because these causes of > duality function for purposes that are usually righteous. The > purposes of stratifacation, unequal distribution of goods and > services, and prejudice often have more to do with fear and the > consequent presumed need for self preservation than anything about the > targets of these efforts. The goal may be righteous, but the method > is problematic. > When people have a "self" and fear the loss of things that support > that "self" they will do all manner of things to protect it. So, our > practice (for ourselves, as well as for others) is to cut through the > delusion of a self, show there is no need to protect a nonexistant > self, and find ways to support such a transformative process. Our > methods include challenging, teaching, and supporting people as they > are in the everyday world. Bearing witness for peace, and > against hunger and violence are beginning steps, but key steps. > In truth, Two and One are in support of one another. When we can live > with such an open eye, we know we have nothing to fear. Without fear, > the bodhisattva is free to engage the universe. > Be well > /Rev. //Daiho Hilbert, //abbot/ > /OCMZ / > > *From:* Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected] > *Sent:* Saturday, September 3, 2011 11:08 AM > *Subject:* [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > > Good morning Sensei, > > Thank you so much for taking the time to respond. I am just a > practitioner of Chan and not a master. A master in our school means > someone who is enlightened and has received "Buddha Heart Imprint", > while I have neither. Since Zen does recognize the Mahayana practice, > then please let me share some of the discussions we had recently in > our school.... > > As we know, Hinayana is often called the Small Vehicle and Mahayana is > the Great Vehicle. And in China, the Chan is called the Supreme > Vehicle. It means that Chan could free everyone. > > It is true, when others are enlightened, we are enlightened. The > danger of this realization is the rationalization that we only need to > work on ourselves. If so, then we are only practicing Hinayana. We > did not "do" the circular track of Chan. > > The Mahayana practice is a practice, only when we leave our lotus and > step into the mud, could we than detach ourselves from the limitation > of our practice and our dharma. In other words, as we focus on the > difficulty in freeing others, could we then realize how limited we are > in wisdom and energy in resolving their karmic hindrance. Only then we > could be motivated to continuously surpassing our habitual practice, > form and formless. In turn to realize that "Dharma is not dharma. No > dharma is dharma." > > Then we would know dharma is in every encounter. It is up to us to be > one with it. Only then we are liberated from the rationalization of > our mind and awaken to the fact that the One of Chan is the ALL. This > realization occurs when we journey midway into the freeing of each > one, as a Supreme Vehicle. > > Too often we quit by rationalizing to ourselves that this practice is > not for everyone. Or the time is not right, or whatever excuses we > place upon our practice. If so, we have trapped ourselves into > believing that our current practice is the only path. The practice of > Supreme Vehicle is every practice in each moment, in each encounter, > without self, without other, without dharma, without form, without > notion, etc. > > To free all beings is not to impose "our" practice upon them, but > rather let them awaken from within. The only way we could accomplish > that is to speak in their language in their mindset and help them to > resolve whatever there needs to be resolve in resources, mindset or > life force. In other words, we needed to be them and undertake their > karma. Thus the mud is the lotus and lotus is the mud and they both > grow in tandem. > > To phrase it in beautiful labels, Mahayana is the journey for > Bodhisattva, Supreme Vehicle is the journey for Buddha, who is the one > and all and us and everyone. > > Thank you all for your attention, > JMJM > Head Teacher > Order Of Chan > Learn the Basics of Chan Meditation... > http://www.chan-meditation.org <http://www.chan-meditation.org/> > Chan in everyday life... > http://www.chanliving.org <http://www.chanliving.org/> > To be enlightened in this life... > http://www.heartchan.org <http://www.heartchan.org/> > To save our world... > http://www.universal-oneness.org <http://www.universal-oneness.org/> > > > On 9/1/2011 9:49 PM, Harvey Daiho Hilbert wrote: >> With palms together, >> Good Evening Everyone, >> On the Zen Living list, Ch’an Master Jue Miao Jing Ming , asked me a >> question the other day. “Dear Sensei, Do you consider Zen a Mahayana >> practice? If so, what does Mahayana actually do?” >> While Zen is within the Mahayana tradition, it is not a Mahayana >> practice as I understand it.Student Rev. Shoji and I were discussing >> this question today and Rev. Shoji brought up an interesting >> distinction.He argued that Mahayana Buddhists aim at the Bodhisattva >> ideal to free all beings before they, themselves, enter nirvana.He >> points out that from a Zen point of view, self and other are one, >> therefore there is no one, but oneself, to free. >> Zen Master Seung Sahn argues in his Compass, that both Theravadan and >> Mahayane traditions have “roads,” but that Zen has not only no road, >> but no map, as well.The practice is practice realization as one.Path >> and destination are not two. >> These beg the question, however, “What does Mahayana actually do?” >> Mahayana does nothing.Mahayana is just a word.And we can see from the >> question that such things as words and concepts can create a >> hindrance.We could ask a better question, “What is Mahayana /practice >> /and what does it do?” The aim of the practice is to free beings, but >> how? >> Again, Master Sahn offers the Six Paramitas as “practice guides.”They >> are rather like the manifest value in the nexus between idea and >> behavior, rather like the term “Quality” as used in Pirsig’s “Zen and >> the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.” A Mahayana practitioner practices >> to make manifest the six aspects of our true nature in the hope that >> to do so will free suffering beings. >> A Zen practitioner, however realizes practice and life are one, that >> everything is already free, perfect as it is, but that we jail >> ourselves with our thoughts.A Zen practitioner notices and ceases all >> grasping: no attachment to ideas, desires, things, feelings, etc. >> A Zen practitioner is free and easy in the everyday world.His mind is >> free and his heart limitless.He recognizes all beings are likewise >> like this. >> Be well. >> /Rev. //Daiho Hilbert, //abbot/ >> /OCMZ / > > >
