What I am lacking is the ability to project an insight which would almost
instantly rescue every being in the universe from suffering.
That probably, actually, isn't even a possible goal. However, I am still
lacking the ability to quickly rescue a reasonable number of beings on a single
planet.
Jim
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote:
>
> Jim,
>
> What do you imagine you are lacking?
>
> There is nothing lacking - ever. Let me rephrase that. Individual things can
> be lacking but Buddha Nature is never lacking since everything is a
> manifestation of Buddha Nature... It's just a matter of realizing that
> directly...
>
> Edgar
>
>
>
> On Oct 6, 2012, at 11:32 PM, jfnewell7 wrote:
>
> > I don't see how. There are good teachers who can do a lot of things I can't
> > do.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Â you might already be enlightened.... have you considered this?.
> > > .searching for the light with a broomstick is about what you seem to be
> > > doing here
> > > merle
> > >
> > >
> > > Â
> > > Thank you for your thoughts. I think you are right, for after all, I am
> > > still being dualistic. The problem is that I can't find the lemon to bite
> > > into.
> > >
> > > For example, I have three kinds of "emptiness" meditations, but none of
> > > them could be correct because none of them enlighten me. Although they
> > > are incorrect, you asked about how I meditate, so I will briefly describe
> > > them.
> > >
> > > 1. Ordinary space. If I sit and don't think, there is a space without
> > > thoughts, relaxation, etc.. The space is a little like when I look at the
> > > sky. However, that hasn't enlightened me.
> > >
> > > 2. Then there is subtle space, which I discovered by trying to see what
> > > is behind my head. It is much subtler than ordinary space, not really so
> > > much seen as just sort of something I am aware of. Compared with it,
> > > ordinary space is coarse and heavy.
> > >
> > > 3. Then there is an emptiness I don't have control of, but it hasn't
> > > enlightened me. In it, I suddenly discovered that I shrunk to a point and
> > > disappeared, and am now re-expanding into my ordinary field of awareness.
> > > So it is a kind of discontinuity of consciousness - more than something
> > > like sleep. When it happens, there are unexpected ideas in my head when I
> > > have returned from the discontinuity.
> > >
> > > But none of those are right, because they didn't cause me to become
> > > enlightened.
> > >
> > > Jim
> > >
> > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "billsmart" <BillSmart@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Jim,
> > > >
> > > > Caveat: Everything I tell you is only my opinion.
> > > >
> > > > You've read a lot of books on what a lemon tastes like but now you need
> > > > to bite into the lemon and find out for yourself. The books can't do
> > > > that for you. They can encourage you and lead you up to that point, but
> > > > their usefulness ends there - and in fact I'd even say much of what
> > > > you've learned could be a hindrance to you in taking that final step.
> > > >
> > > > The taste of the lemon (and ONLY that)is what I call Buddha Nature, and
> > > > it is non-dualistic (no taster/lemon distintion - no subject/object).
> > > > It is what I often call 'Just THIS!' When experienced it has no name,
> > > > no description - it is Just THIS! Later we put names on it and give it
> > > > a description - but then it is not the thing itself (Just THIS!), it is
> > > > our description of it. It is what all the books you have read are
> > > > trying to do.
> > > >
> > > > IMO the image you described below as called "mental-integration-itself"
> > > > is illusory - samsara. As soon as you become aware of it as something
> > > > that seems to be an "...image inside my head, I can see all parts of
> > > > the image simultaneously because something in me is integrating the
> > > > parts of the image in some way." What you are describing here is still
> > > > dualistic - there is a you, you have a head, your head has an inside,
> > > > this image is located there, the image has parts, etc...
> > > >
> > > > The second description starts to move a little farther away from
> > > > dualism: "In a way, this transparent mental-integration-itself seems to
> > > > be in front of the image. I then de-emphasize the image so it slips
> > > > partly from awareness, while becoming more aware of the clear empty
> > > > mental-integration-itself." A lot would depend on just what you meant
> > > > by the phrase "clear empty mental-integration-itself." If you are still
> > > > clinging to a dualistic view of this, something like, 'I am sitting,
> > > > and I experience an image, and that image has parts and then another
> > > > image appears that I call the 'mental-integration' of that first image,
> > > > and then the first image disappears from my awareness (or at least
> > > > recedes into the background)- and this new image is EMPTY'.' I'd have
> > > > to again ask, what do you mean by 'empty'?
> > > >
> > > > If you mean this new image that you are now aware of that exists inside
> > > > you has no form, that's one thing. If you mean 'all is empty', no me,
> > > > no image, Just EMPTINESS!, then that is another thing entirely.
> > > >
> > > > Again, all this is just IMO.
> > > >
> > > > Before I could really offer you any advice I'd have to know what you
> > > > mean by 'mediation'. How do you do about that? If you could explain
> > > > that a little more it would help. Here's an example of how I sit
> > > > (zazen):
> > > >
> > > > I start sitting by counting my breathes, then following my breathes and
> > > > then I drop the following and there is Just THIS!. In Japanese this is
> > > > called 'shikantaza' which literally means 'just sit' or is sometimes
> > > > translated as 'no mind'. What I do NOT do is try to visualize anything
> > > > or think of anything (like a 'safe place' or a mantra), although I know
> > > > these are styles of meditation.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks, and WELCOME TO THE ZEN FORUM!
> > > >
> > > > ...Bill!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "jfnewell7" <jfnewell7@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I need some practice advice. In my meditation, I have become aware of
> > > > > something I will call "mental-integration-itself" although those
> > > > > words are only an approximation. I will therefore report some
> > > > > background and details, below, to see if I can get this across. What
> > > > > I need is advice on whether or not mental-integration-itself is
> > > > > enough on the path that I should spend a lot of time noticing it.
> > > > > Also, of course, if anyone sees a way I can improve on the
> > > > > mental-integration-itself awareness I have so far, I would be
> > > > > grateful.
> > > > >
> > > > > Both Dzogchen and Zen say that somehow, satori and samsara are the
> > > > > same. I have tried for years to understand what that would feel like.
> > > > > Here are a several examples from a vast number of comments:
> > > > >
> > > > > Cleary, Thomas, trans. (2002) SECRETS OF THE BLUE CLIFF RECORD, ZEN
> > > > > COMMENTS BY HAKUIN AND TENKEI, Boston& London: Shambhala
> > > > >
> > > > > Page 76, "If potential does not leave a static position, it falls
> > > > > into a sea of poison ...
> > > > >
> > > > > "[Hakuin] The entirety of this introduction applies to the example.
> > > > > `Potential' is what appears before being expressed in words; the
> > > > > `static position' is the cave of satori...
> > > > >
> > > > > "[Tenkei] If you realize an awakening but do not eliminate leaking of
> > > > > views, you stick to the absolute stasis of transcendence in the realm
> > > > > of satori, which is to `fall into a sea of poison' ... "
> > > > >
> > > > > Rabjam, Longchen, Richard Barron, trans., Padma Translation Committee
> > > > > (2001) THE PRECIOUS TREASURY OF THE BASIC SPACE OF PHENOMENA,
> > > > > Junction City" Padma Publishing.
> > > > >
> > > > > Page 7, "However things appear or sound, within the vast realm of
> > > > > basic space they do not stray from the spontaneous equalness as
> > > > > dharmakaya, awakened mind...
> > > > >
> > > > > Page 15, "On this infinite foundation, extending everywhere
> > > > > impartially, the stronghold of awakened mind does not distinguish
> > > > > between samsara and nirvana..."
> > > > >
> > > > > Norbu, Chogyal Namkhui, Adriano Clemente, and Andrew Lukianowicz
> > > > > (1999) THE SUPREME SOURCE, THE KUNJED GYALPO, THE FUNDAMENTAL TANTRA
> > > > > OF DZOGCHEN SEMDE, Ithaca: Snow Lion Publications
> > > > >
> > > > > Page 150, "I am the essence of all phenomena; nothing exists that is
> > > > > not my essence. The teachers of the three dimensions {I'm unclear
> > > > > about what "dimensions" means here, Jim} are my essence. The Buddhas
> > > > > of the three times are my essence. The four types of yogins are my
> > > > > essence. The three worlds, of desire, of form, and without form, too,
> > > > > are my manifestations. The five great elements are my essence. The
> > > > > six classes of beings are my essence. All the habitats and the beings
> > > > > living therein are my essence. Nothing exists that is not my essence
> > > > > because I am the universal root: there is nothing that is not
> > > > > contained in me ..."
> > > > >
> > > > > OK. Now when I am meditating while there is an image inside my head,
> > > > > I can see all parts of the image simultaneously because something in
> > > > > me is integrating the parts of the image in some way. If I try to see
> > > > > this mental-integration-itself, the mental-integration-itself is like
> > > > > transparent space yet active. I can barely detect this transparent
> > > > > and it doesn't look like any of the shapes or colors of the image. In
> > > > > a way, this transparent mental-integration-itself seems to be in
> > > > > front of the image. I then de-emphasize the image so it slips partly
> > > > > from awareness, while becoming more aware of the clear empty
> > > > > mental-integration-itself.
> > > > >
> > > > > Intellectually, the mental-integration itself which I experience
> > > > > isn't any of the shapes or colors, yet it connects all the shapes and
> > > > > colors together. So it has a little bit of form, from the connecting,
> > > > > plus it is empty. Does the fact that it looks like it fits Buddhist
> > > > > definitions mean that what I am experiencing actually does fit those
> > > > > definitions? Therefore, would it be right to continue to become aware
> > > > > of the mental-integration-itself with all kinds of perceptions,
> > > > > experiences, and situations?
> > > > >
> > > > > So that I what I need some advice on.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jim
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------------
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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
