hookdump's inline commentary in bold text:
The Thid Patriarch of Zen said, “Don’t seek reality, just put a stop to opinions.” He also said, “As soon as there are judgments of right and wrong, the mind is lost in a flurry.” These sayings teach you people of today what to work on.
I think this is a nice wake up call for all the people in this forum arguing about their opinions and what the "right" approach to Zen is. Of course, this is a forum: it's good for certain things, like arguing.
But when arguments distract you from actually walking your own realization path... it's such a pity! — “It won't do to be like this!”
When you read his laying, “Don’t seek reality,” you say there is no further need to seek— this means you are still entertaining opinions and are in a flurry of judgments; after all you have not reached a state of mind where there is no seeking, and are just making up an opinionated interpretation.
People who study Zen nowadays are all like this; reading a transformative saying and reaching an insight into the words, they then try to apply it to all sayings, thinking they are all the same. Keeping this in their hearts, they think of it as their own attainment; far from realizing they have lost their minds by entertaining an opinionated understanding, they cling to it and will not let go. What ignoramuses!
Would you like to attain a state of mind where you seek nothing? Just do not conceive all sorts of opinions and views. This nonseeking does not mean blanking out and ignoring everything. In everyday life, twenty-four hours a day, when there is unclarity in the immediate situation it is generally because the opinionated mind is grasping and rejecting. How can you get to know the nondiscriminatory mind then?
The way Foyan digs deep into the marrow of the matter is fascinating.
This takes the ideas about intellectual understanding and intuitive grasp from episode 3 and episode 7 even further.
It is not about pure intellectual understanding.
It is not about pure practical exercises.
Realization is beyond all this, and it's very easy to get confused along the way.
Thus when an ancient sage was asked if the created and the uncreated are different, he said they are not. Sky and earth, rivers and seas, wind and clouds, grasses and trees, birds and beasts, people and things living and dying, changing right before our eyes, are all called created forms. The uncreated way is silent and unmoving; the indescribable and unnameable is called uncreated. How can there be no difference?
Grand Master Yongjia said, “The true nature of ignorance is the very nature of enlightenment; the empty body of illusions and projections is the very body of realities.” These two are each distinct; how do you understand the logic of identity? You have to experience the mind without seeking; then they will integrate and you will get to be trouble-free.
In the ten stages of enlightenment, the fifth is the stage Difficult to Conquer, which means that it is extremely difficult to attain equality of real knowledge and conventional knowledge; when you enter this stage, the two are equal, so it is called the stage that is difficult to conquer. Students of the path should take them in and make them equal twenty-four hours a day.
I would venture to guess this is what a lot of people in this forum struggle with.
What /u/WanderingRonin77 might call "middle form" (i.e. a middle ground between paying your rent, and saying "nothing is real, there is no rent to pay").
And do you know they are drawn up by your nondiscriminatory mind? Like an artist drawing all sorts of pictures, both pretty and ugly, the mind depicts forms, feelings, perceptions, abstract patterns, and consciousnesses; it depicts human societies and paradises. When it is drawing these pictures, it does not borrow the power of another; there is no discrimination between the artist and the artwork. It is because of not realizing this that you conceive various opinions, having views of yourself and views of other people, creating your own fair and foul.
So it is said, “An artist draws a picture of hell, with countless sorts of hideous forms. On setting aside the brush to look it over, it’s bone-chilling, really hair-raising.” But if you know it’s a drawing, what is there to fear?
The conciseness of this guy is ridiculous.
"But if you know it’s a drawing, what is there to fear?"
Exactly.
That's why in a few recent conversations I've insisted that in my opinion realization is a constant state: a shift of view that doesn't expire. Once you see, you don't stop seeing.
Once you know it's a drawing and get to look at it with zero fear... how could you ever be afraid again?
I often ask people around here why they suffer or worry or get angry. They tend to change subject very quickly; so I rarely get to challenge them with:
"If you know it's a delusion, what is there to suffer about? What is there to worry about? What is there to get upset about?"
In olden times, when people had clearly realized this, it became evident in all situations. Once when the great teacher Xuansha was cutting down a tree, a tiger bounded out of the woods. The teacher’s companion said, “It’s a tiger!” The teacher scolded him and said, “It’s a tiger for you.”
Another time, when he saw a seeker performing prostrations, Xuansha said, “It is because of the self that one can bow to the other.” These expedients are in profound accord with the intent of Buddha.
The great teacher Fayan once pointed to a dog right in front of him and said, “An engraving.” When you look at this, do not look to the dog itself for clarification; you must see it in your own experience before you can get it. Only then will you understand that saying, “As soon as there are judgments of right and wrong, you lose your mind in a flurry.” I hope you get the point!
Semi-related anecdote:
Yesterday I was talking with /u/KeyserSozen about being respectful in conversation and always presenting opinion as opinion, never as fact. For example adding "I believe", "I think", "In my opinion", but in a sincere way, of course!
Keyser told me (among other things):
Adding “I think” etc. usually just weakens the point.
And I replied:
Yeah! That's why it's a good idea to do it.
We tend to try to make our points strong, to try to convince others no matter what. Why convince others? Why not have earnest conversations and see where they go? Why do I need to make strong points? What am I trying to sell? Not accusing Keyser here, I speak in general about all of us.
If I have a reasonable point, no condiments I add or remove will weaken it. If I have an unreasonable point, no matter how much I present it as fact and remove the "I believe" from the beginning; it won't become any stronger.
Whenever you are speaking about anything... what makes you think you're "right" and that the other person is "wrong"? What makes you so special? Is there anything in the world more ego-centered than believing one is "right"?
Again, as Foyan says:
“As soon as there are judgments of right and wrong, you lose your mind in a flurry.”
p.s.: When I said "It won't do to be like this" it was a small funny reference to the "Not Knowing" chapter. I didn't mean to suggest how you should or should not be. :)
Previous episodes:
Submitted April 02, 2018 at 11:12PM by hookdump https://ift.tt/2uJ3ujb
No comments:
Post a Comment