Hi David, Chris and Hendrik
Very good posts to each of you!
[QUOTE=YMAA_com;950728]Let me start by saying that the concept of “true enlightenment” is theoretical, based on the available documents from Buddhist and Daoist sources.[/quote]
[QUOTE=taai gihk yahn;950751] I would suggest that according to sources in both traditions that “enlightenment” is eminently practical![/quote]
[QUOTE=Hendrik;950799] One can “see” one’s original face or one’s Buddha nature instantly because that is one’s trueself . it is just most dont believe It is One’s original face or the Buddha Nature. [/quote]
From one perspective, the perspective of the rules of samsara, enlightenment is not theoretical, it is a fact. There is enough evidence from those who have transcended the illusion of samsara to demonstrate that it is possible to become free from the bonds of attachment, commonly referred to as enlightenment! This takes it out of the realm of theory and into the realm of reality/practicality!
However, from the perspective of the person who has transcended samsara, there is nothing to be attained; therefore there is no enlightenment at all! From this perspective, enlightenment is not even a theory. As a concept of something to be attained, gained or acquired, enlightenment is considered foolishness and reflects a continued attachment to form!
When asked how the bodhisattva enters the gate of non-duality, Vimalakirti, in “The Vimalakirti Sutra”, responded with silence. Vimalakirti was the last to answer this question which he posed to numerous bodhisattvas, and his response was praised as the most profound response.
There is nothing to say about it, because to say anything about it is to diminish it! It is beyond conception and description!
[QUOTE=YMAA_com;950728]Nirvana is basically omniscience and immortality, and you don’t have to flame on me to say there’s no such thing. We are just discussing widely-published concepts from Buddhism here. Not my own opinion. I do however have faith in Buddhism, and agree with the great addage from Nan, Huai-Chin:
[LEFT]“The Buddha dharma does not lie!”[/quote][/LEFT]
There is a difference between faith and wisdom (insight/prajna). Faith occurs when we believe what is taught absent a personal, direct experience. Insight occurs when personal, direct experience informs us. Teachings are, at best, a finger pointing to direct experience and should not be confused with direct experience.
While we may be discussing widely published concepts, the true meanings of the concepts are frequently at variance with a given person’s current understanding of them.
We must be careful when we use quotes without fully understand their meaning!
While it is true, from a specific perspective, that Buddha dharma [is not] a lie, Dharmas and dharmas are merely forms (illusions) used as expedient means and do not accurately reflect the prajna of direct experience! Therefore, ALL Dharmas and dharmas ARE lies! They cannot be relied upon to lead one to Nirvana, transcending samsara, or to enlightenment!
So, what does the quote truly mean then? It means that, while the Buddha dharma does not lie, you cannot truly understand the Buddha dharma until you are on the other side looking back at it, at which time you no longer need it!
There is an apparent misunderstanding in your comment about Nirvana as well. Nirvana is NOT immortality; we are already immortal and have never been mortal. Mortality is an illusion and only experienced by a deluded mind bound by attachments.
Having said that, from the perspective of the Absolute, there is neither mortality, nor immortality, the Absolute is beyond dualities and mortality/immortality form a dualism.
Nirvana is the peace that occurs when one is no longer attached to Dharmas, dharmas, forms, beliefs, concepts, etc. That does NOT mean one does not follow any Dharmas, dharmas, forms, beliefs, or concepts, only that one is NOT ATTACHED to any of these!
We must also be careful when we use the word omniscience, there is no omniscience, because omniscience is a concept and the Absolute is beyond concepts. The Absolute is neither conceptual, nor non-conceptual, because concepts/non-concepts form a dualism, as does omniscience/non-omniscience (ignorance)! The Absolute is neither this, that, not-this, not-that, not all, and not none of them!
Further, an “enlightened” person is not omniscient in the manner that is commonly supposed from the view of one bound by samsara. They do not instantly gain a knowledge of advanced mathematics or other forms of samsaric bound knowledge.
The omniscience gained cannot be conceptualized, so it is best not to address it at all, because this only forms a conceptualization in the person’s mind and then they are at risk of becoming “attached to the concept”!
[QUOTE=YMAA_com;950728]In the classic sense, enlightenment means to attain samadhi, develop it, and allow your body to proceed through the process of ‘stepping up’ through energetic stages until you reach a threshhold and the third eye in the forehead is re-opened.[/quote]
The concept of “developing over time” is apparent within many branches of Mahayana Buddhism, however any method of “developing over time” was considered to merely be an “expedient means” to the ancient masters of Ch’an and others with “insight into the matter of things”, as Hui-Neng put it!
Unfortunately this understanding has not been carried down to many of today’s Ch’an teachers and many foolishly consider meditation and/or other “methods” essential. This reflects an incomplete understanding of Ch’an and its original teachings.
First let’s consider the definition, purpose and benefit of “expedient means”.
“Expedient means” are methods (forms/dharmas) used to occupy the “young in insight” in order keep them from falling into mental habits that will make their journey across the river even more difficult.
The reason most people find it difficult to directly perceive THUSNESS (without conceptualization) is because attachments coalesce, so to speak, into “habits of mind”! These habits of mind control/color our perceptions and obstruct clear perception.
So the question became, “How is one to eliminate these ‘habits of mind’?”
Methods were devised in order to assist those who so desired to overcome “habits of mind”. Unfortunately most people do not recognize that adherence to any method is nothing more than another “habit of mind”! Thus “habit of mind” is used to overcome “habit of mind”. This is foolishness! This is nothing more than rubbing two bricks together hoping to make a mirror, as Chris has mentioned above!
“Habits of mind” reinforce “habits of mind” leading to more obstructions to perception.
However, not all individuals are ready (meaning have the aptitude or ability) for direct unobstructed perception of THUSNESS!
For those not suited to immediate direct perception, “expedient means” are used to focus attention and guide conduct away from attitudes and actions that lead to a condition of worse obstruction. It is sort of like I would rather lose my foot than my whole leg. Neither of them is desirable! One is a lot worse than the other, but either way I will have difficulty walking.
In the end the medicine itself is poison that must be purged before the “real” healing may occur!
So, all dharmas, forms, and methods will create obstacles to Mind. This is the major flaw of all “methods”, including Taoist Alchemical methods and Buddhist methods.
They all create a habit of thinking that binds the aspirant’s mind to the method (form). If the attachment to the method cannot be transcended, then it is irrelevant whether one practices the method for one lifetime or a thousand lifetimes, they will not achieve a thing!
One the other hand, if they ARE able to transcend attachment to the method they adhere too, they never needed the method to begin with! And this is one of the most profound and true/complete teachings of Ch’an!
[QUOTE=YMAA_com;950728]The Buddhist way is to meditate and allow this to happen through meditation.[/quote]
[QUOTE=YMAA_com;950728]The Daoist way is to MAKE it happen, using qigong - specifically embryonic breathing.[/quote]
It cannot happen through meditation and it cannot happen through embryonic breathing. Both are methods that cause specific mental and or physical results, but the results are NOT enlightenment and enlightenment is NOT a result that may be achieved by either!
That is not to say benefits are not achieved through practicing Taoist Alchemical methods or Buddhist meditational methods, but the benefit is NOT enlightenment. They are benefits related to the world of samsara and are not any better or worse then any other benefit gained within the world of samsara. That is, strength or agility or aerobic capacity may be built through defined methods according to the rules of the world of samsara, however none of these result in enlightenment and neither will alchemical or meditational practices!
These are the published AND complete teachings!
