Can anyone add to this?

last SG · 2007-07-07T13:26:17+00:00

BTW I just read an article today that reminded me of your sgForums profile (June 2007 newsletter of Wayne Liquorman): Username: longchen Job: living Interes...

JonLS SG

Someone asked the question below and I've answered it the best way I can and yet I haven't really answered the question at all because I simply don't know the answer and strongly suspect the question is itself questionable.

Anyhow, any feedback would be appreciated.

[quote]Just a question: if you are all about accepting and experiencing the world as it is, why do you keep trying to change the rest of us and make us just like you? If YOU are all about just being in the present moment, then aren't those of US who AREN'T in the present moment, still part of YOUR present moment?

It occurrs to me that you say you're about accepting what is, but that seems to be counter to the fact that you are often exhorting the rest of us to change.

I'm just sayin'.

I really love this question.

It brings up many paradoxes.

First of all you're assuming I'm talking to other people and not just to myself. What I mean by that is that you are me, you just don't know it yet.

As for accepting the world as it is and why am I trying to change anyone, that part of the question is really provocative. I really don't know how to answer that. I'm completely at a loss. I don't know. Of course there is the assumption that I am indeed trying to change someone, and it appears to be true. But I've learned that appearances can be deceiving. Remember, I'm advocating letting go of everything I know. So that really leaves me in the middle of nowhere, in a huge vastness or void, with no scaffolding to hang on to and I must say, I love it, it's really freeing and peaceful. But it also leaves me with no answers, nothing is known, except perhaps the fact that I am, that seems to be the only thing that is definite.

You also mentioned that some of you are not in the present moment and you're suggesting that I am and to me that doesn't make sense at all. We all are in the present moment simply because there's nowhere else to be, is there? The present moment is all that really exists. The future is just a thought in your mind and the past is just a memory.

So when I say you're not in the present moment I'm really only talking about your thoughts and something called "presence". You actually can get lost in your thoughts about the past and the future. This can happen when you identify with your thoughts and take them seriously. But we're only talking about thinking here. Physically we are all ever only in the present moment. But I have to confess here, that I really don't know what I'm talking about when I talk about "physically" because to me that is just more interpretation by the mind, I've learned not to take my mind very seriously anymore.

But we can definitely get the sense that past and future are real when we identify with thoughts about past and future, but when you see thoughts for what they are, simply thoughts, then they lose their hypnotic effect on you and you can remain in the present moment, this is called "presence". And this is what leads to the peace that surpasses all understanding. Simply because there is no way to understand this, you can only BE this. You can only be "presence" because that is your true nature. [/quote]

seotiblizzard SG

Shocked Woah.
very Chim.

An Eternal Now SG

I think that one has to discern what is relative truth and ultimate reality. When talking about relative truths (such as talking about mundane affairs, etc), it is unhelpful to bring in ultimate reality as it just confuses.

On the other hand, when one is talking about ultimate reality, then relative truths does not apply because the ultimate nature of reality is the nature of reality regardless of what is the content of that reality.

It's like asking if there is no self, why does a Bodhisattva have compassion and want to save other beings? Because ultimate reality does not contradict relative truths (where we talk about I, Me, You, etc), it is only that we no longer see relative truths as absolute, we are no longer confused.

(Diamond Sutra elaborates a lot on this, regarding no-self, no sentient being to be saved, and yet working for all sentient being's liberation)

p.s. Accepting what is does not contradict with trying to change things. It is like what Eckhart said, it is only that one no longer treats the present moment as a means to an end. Then one just do what one needs to do without attaching to outcome and preferences. Response that arises is spontaneous and out of Prajna, without being affected by our attachment and delusions.

An Eternal Now SG

Anyway I think it was well said. Smile

An Eternal Now SG

Here's something from the Diamond Sutra:

The Buddha told Subhuti, "All Bodhisattvas, Mahasattvas, should subdue their minds thus: 'I must cause all living beings--those born from eggs, wombs, moisture, by transformation; those with form, those without form, those with thought, those without thought, those not totally endowed with thought, and those not totally without thought--to enter Nirvana without residue and be taken across to Cessation. Yet of the immeasurable, numberless, boundless numbers of living beings thus taken across to Cessation, there is actually no living being taken across to Cessation. ' Why? Subhuti, if a Bodhisattva has an appearance of self, others, living beings, or a life, he is not a Bodhisattva.";

JonLS SG

Thank you AEN,

Your answers have been very useful, I especially liked the two quotes below:

It's like asking if there is no self, why does a Bodhisattva have compassion and want to save other beings? Because ultimate reality does not contradict relative truths (where we talk about I, Me, You, etc), it is only that we no longer see relative truths as absolute, we are no longer confused.

Yet of the immeasurable, numberless, boundless numbers of living beings thus taken across to Cessation, there is actually no living being taken across to Cessation. ' Why? Subhuti, if a Bodhisattva has an appearance of self, others, living beings, or a life, he is not a Bodhisattva.";;

justdoit77 SG

The people around him accepting him because they are generous but it shouldn't be an excuse for one not to change himself to be better.
The non-present moment person is in another person's present moment, yup. what is the question?

longchen SG

Just a sharing.. IMO..

The question is absolutely valid...

We can never change anybody. This is also part of the realisation of isness. We can share our experiences... but any expectation is really the 'sense of self' already.

But, we all like others to experience what we are expereincing. We are humans and we like others to share our good discoveries. Smile

For myself, I seldom talk about my 'discoveries' except on forums like this one and when somebody express interest. I don't even talk about this much to my wife. I tried but she does not understand. So I just let it be.

Also from the non-dual perspective, the distinction between self and others really becomes blurred... due to the removal of subject-object split. We become quite aware of when there is an outward externalisation to 'address' a 'somebody outside'. For me, this outward externalisation although is required for interaction with others, nevertheless is also a cause of 'suffering' as we constantly tries to modify the outcomes.

Just a sharing...

An Eternal Now SG

Smile What you said is very right... Like Dharma Dan said, Suffering has to do with Compassion, but Confused Compassion which assumes a dualistic split of subject-object, the existence of a separate self and other. Because of this Confused Compassion (A.K.A Desire), we are constantly trying to reach somewhere else, trying to achieve something for ourselves and others, not knowing the nature of emptiness.

p.s. But one must use skillful means to lead others.... You can't expect others to 'get it' just by sharing your experiences Wink Like Thusness always said.. one must see the conditions first, otherwise there will not be much results.

The Buddha is an example of someone with such wisdom, he is full of skillful means to lead one to realisations, that is why he is able to have thousands of students attain Arhatship in his lifetime alone. He is a master of skillful means, and only Bodhisattvas who reached 7th Bhumi and above, and a Buddha, has perfection of skillful means.

You might want to look at how Buddha's teachings are completely systematic that leads a practitioner to complete realisation if one practises his teachings. You might want to think of ways to lead your wife step by step and follow the teachings of the Buddha.

longchen SG

Teaching people how to draw is certainly easier. Mr. Green

An Eternal Now SG

Laughing

Of course... Otherwise why the 'eleventh army'? Wink

http://www.interactivebuddha.com/eleventharmy.shtml

maggot SG

I will work hard to be quiet Mr. Green

An Eternal Now SG

Question

Thusness SG

Just for sharing on "I am You" :

Me & You
Time & Space
In & Out
Body & Mind
Physical & Mental
Buddha Nature & Karma
Silence & Movement

In the world of presence, there is no such division; although there is no division, apple is still not orange and I am not You. The conditions for arising differ.

There is the temptation to express this way in conventional terms but really it is the result of attempting to reconcile non-dual experience into a dualistic framework and extrapolate a little due to momentum. Mr. Green

When we are engaged in the process of explaining I am You, confusion arises not only because dualistic thinking is not an appropriate tool to express non-dual experience, but we identify with the dualistic mechanism. The habitual tendency of the mind to identify is so amazing and our entire experience is shaped during the process even for a person that has experienced non-duality.

In Buddhism, there is no-self apart from phenomenon happening and there never was a you and me from start. Therefore non-dual experience is not being extrapolated to I am You, instead, a skillful-mean to correctly explain without being trapped in a dualistic framework was devised. This skillful mean must eliminate I from start and see what is from beginning. Emptiness and Dependent Origination are devised for this purpose.

There is phenomenon happening, there is no self and to intuitively experience the ceaseless arising and ceasing nature of awareness is more precious than anything in Buddhism; this is the arising of prajna wisdom.

My 2 cents. Smile

Thusness SG

There is a part on 'perception and sensation' are the environment. Think you edited it. Non-dual experiencer will like it even though it does not make much meaningful sense. Mr. Green

AndrewPKYap SG

I think the confusion comes because people keep forgetting that it is not “Form is Emptiness” period, full stop.

longchen SG

Dear friends,

I have lots of negative karma... and unpleasant tendencies. I will not post anymore stuffs here unless more karmic negativities are resolved. I don't want to create a false impression. Sadly, there is a long long way to go for me...

I thank all the helps and friendships from this forum.

May all be well.

An Eternal Now SG

Hmm.. is everything ok for you? What's happening?

Anyway you're most welcomed to come and post in our forum soon Smile

All the best and hope you can resolve all your problems soon.

universe SG

woah..interesting qn

An Eternal Now SG

Thusness used to say:

...For the purpose of discussion, you can treat as yes, that agent is gone, the 'bond' in consciousness that there is an agent is gone. But the 'bond' of 'mine' is still lingering there in consciousness. Many mistaken that if
there is no 'I', then there is no 'mine'? This is a logical deduction of the mind. Far from true in terms of practice. It has to do with how consciousness functions...