The you that you think of as you (and that thinks of you as you, and so on) is not you, it’s just the character that the underlying truth of you is dreaming into brief existence. Enlightenment isn’t in the character, it’s in the underlying truth. Now, there’s nothing wrong with being a dream character, of course, unless it’s your goal to wake up, in which case the dream character must be ruthlessly annihilated. If your desire is to experience transcendental bliss or supreme love or altered states of consciousness or awakened kundalini, or to quality for heaven, or to liberate all sentient beings, or simply to become the best dang person you can be, then rejoice!, you’re in the right place: the dream state, the dualistic universe. However, if your interest is to cut the crap and figure out what’s true, then you’re in the wrong place and you’ve got a very messy fight ahead and there’s no point in pretending otherwise.
But beauty, real beauty, ends where intellectual expression begins. Intellect is in itself a mode of exaggeration, and destroys the harmony of a face. The moment one sits down to think, one becomes all nose, or all forehead, or something horrid. Look at the successful men in any of the learned professions. How perfectly hideous they are! Except, of course, in the Church. But then in the Church they don’t think. A bishop keeps on saying at the age of eighty what he was told to say when he was a boy of eighteen, and as a natural consequence he always looks absolutely delightful.
Intelligent practice always deals with just one thing: the fear at the base of human existence, the fear that I am not. And of course I am not, but the last thing I want to know is that.
Q: Since all is pre-ordained, is our self-realization also pre-ordained? Or are we free there at least?
A: Destiny refers only to name and shape. Since you are neither body nor mind, destiny has no control over you. You are completely free. The cup is conditioned by its shape, material, use and so on. But the space within the cup is free. It happens to be in the cup only when viewed in connection with the cup. Otherwise, it is just space. As long as there is a body, you appear to be embodied. Without the body you are not disembodied — you just are.
So the most important thing to realize is this: Your life has an inner purpose and an outer purpose. Inner purpose concerns Being and is primary. Outer purpose concerns doing and is secondary…. Your inner purpose is to awaken. It is as simple as that. You share that purpose with every other person on the planet – because it is the purpose of humanity. Your inner purpose is an essential part of the purpose of the whole, the universe and its emerging intelligence.
Buddhism stands unique in the history of human thought in denying the existence of a Soul, Self or Atman. According to the teachings of the Buddha, the idea of self is an imaginary, false belief which has no corresponding reality, and it produces harmful thoughts of ‘me’ and ‘mine’, selfish desire, craving, attachment, hatred, ill-will, conceit, pride, egoism, and other defilements, impurities and problems. It is the source of all troubles in the world from personal conflicts to wars between nations. In short, to this false view can be traced all the evil in the world.
on March 25th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Well, yes and no.
Is huangbo speaking then of illusion.
I think there are levels involved here. The problem is: from where does illusion arise? If there is only one there can’t be two. But then from whence comes illusion. If there is something to return to, there is two.
I think I agree with Huangbo, but it is poorly put. (I was accused in a comment on another article of thinking too highly of myself. This is either proof of that – or, if I’m the Buddha and enlightened anyway . . .). I guess I shouldn’t be flippant. I do have genuine problems with the way this distinction between illusion and enlightenment is expressed.
on March 25th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
@Evan, Huangbo is getting VERY non-dual on us. He is pointing out that illusion only appears because you thinking, and thinking is by necessity dualistic. The mind always has opposites. So, if we allow thought to wind down, to cease, and as Huangbo says “cease to INDULGE in opposed concepts such as ordinary and Enlightened,” then the whole thing ends on its own.
In a sense, illusion “arises” from Reality. But, then again, it is illusion. So its arising is an illusion. You can’t deal with illusion from within illusion. Only when you step outside of it.
on March 25th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
If thinking is and is not reality we have duality. If we have illusion and something other we have duality.
From whence does the mind arise if the non-dual is prior.
I guess I’m accusing Huangbo of smuggling in the evaluation. Why is enlightened better than illusioned? This is an evaluation I agree. But to defend it is more difficult. Or as the T-Shirt slogan has it: Reality is only for those who can’t handle drugs. These are difficult questions I think.
on March 25th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Hi Evan,
Personally, I think the number one problem that we face in discussing these things is that we are using words describe what is beyond words. Words are symbols, abstractions for things and experiences. And things and experiences are the very illusions that the masters are always speaking of. They are “condensed” Reality, form as opposed to the Emptiness, matter as opposed to the Field. Words are thus twice removed from Reality.
That’s why every sage and mystic uses his or her own lingo to try to describe what is impossible to describe. But it is fun trying! And I will go where only fools dare to tread.
on March 26th, 2008 at 2:29 am
Gentlemen, And you too Tom
It’s early in the morning here on the east coast of the USA. Almost to early for me to think. Evan,You do not think to highly of yourself. My perception of your intent in the comment was swayed by emotions remember? On further reflection and as our conversation continued we found some common ground. I Believe so anyway. And Tom you are many things. A fool is not one of them. I am counting both of you gentlemen as fast friends. So if you are ever in Manlius New York. Drive slow my Son is an Officer of the Law there.:) I want to close with this saying, which is an orginal from Justakrusen back in 1970.(Unless I read it somewhere) Oh well. “He who Thinks. Has Never really thought. Think about it!!! I’m justa saying!
on March 26th, 2008 at 3:35 am
Thanks Mark. A little help with the police never goes astray.
I’m an Australian though. I have visited the south and California in the US but that was 28 years ago. If I ever get to the east coast I’ll drive carefully.
on March 27th, 2008 at 6:39 am
There are seemingly countless ways to describe these indescribable things.
The illusion, the image, the phenomenal world, or whatever people call it is a projection of a self that identifies with whatever it comes into contact with. The problem is an idea of what one sees in relation to the center of the self.
It is always the “me” and the “something else.” If there is no me, is there a something else? If there is no me, and no something else, what is there? If there is no me that searches, how can one ever know if there is something else?
Nice questions to ponder. (Of course, you cannot really answer them. After all, how can timelessness come to a conclusion?)
It is essentially a problem of identification. There is the idea that there is a person capable of coming to an end, or a being that is searching for enlightenment. Searching for it gives the impression there is a person that doesn’t have it already.
Wonderful stuff.
on March 27th, 2008 at 8:50 am
@Takuin Wonderful stuff indeed! I love how the Universe seems to enjoy trying to find new ways to describe indescribable things. Through Ramana it refers to The Self, through Nisargadatta The Supreme Reality and through Bankei The Unborn. Even my use of The Universe is a similar attempt.
I love your question: if there is no me, is there a something else? Instead of an answer in words, I prefer the result of the question: Silence. Stillness. The question sends my mind into stop mode. And what is there? Ah, now that is the answer.
on March 27th, 2008 at 9:11 am
I couldn’t remain silent for long Tom, sorry:) The mind in stop mode? If I’m awake I can’t ever recall my mind being in stop mode. For me I think it only comes when sleep takes over.But then again the subconsious takes over at that point or am I mistaken?
on March 27th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
@Mark. Don’t be sorry. Why should you remain silent? Speak away!
I can only speak from my direct experience, but when my thoughts cease, when the chatter stops, then the real truth of who I am shines through. An old technique for taking the mind to the limit of its understanding, to getting it to pause, is to ask a question like the ones Takuin asked. The mind cannot answer a question whose answer is outside of it. And what is beyond the mind? Well, that’s the indescribable that Takuin referenced. I call it Truth at times, or Reality, or….. Whatever you prefer. The key to al this is the realization that you are not your mind.
on March 27th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Hi Mark,
The stopping of the mind can be experienced in the mundane: the sunset that leads me to catch my breath, that very attractive person of the opposite sex who immobilises me they are so beautiful. These too are times when my mind has stopped.
Likewise when I am absorbed in what I am doing. Instead of ’sitting back’ and ‘thinking about’ the mind is not running the show.
We tend not to notice these times, but they are there. You have probably experienced them.
Perhaps more humble than questions or breath, but they are moments when our thoughts stop.
on March 27th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Beautiful put, Evan. And not more humble at all!
on March 28th, 2008 at 2:24 am
Hi Mark,
Me again. A less random and more reliable way to experience cessation of thinking is particular kinds of drawing. Working through Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain uses this kind of approach. It’s also a great way to learn how to draw.
on March 28th, 2008 at 3:21 am
Tom, I notice your keeping the math question easier and easier for me. Thanks!
Yeah, I can see where it would be called Truth. I like that. It is what it is.
Evan, once again you have directed my thinking into an area that I have only dabbled in before. I will practice these things more in the coming days.