|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
yogani
USA
5201 Posts |
 Posted - Jan 14 2009 : 6:24:25 PM
|
Hi All:
You would think that non-duality teachers would be the first to point out the mental pitfalls in their teachings, since the considerable hazards are part of the journey they propose. Few do.
To his credit, Nagarjuna, the Buddhist sage often referred to in this long belabored topic and a few others, does address the pitfalls in these quotes:
"The Conqueror [Buddha] taught openness [sunyata: emptiness] as the refutation of all [any] views. But those who hold openness as a view are called irremediable [impossible to remedy]."
"Openness [sunyata] wrongly conceived destroys the dimly witted. It is like a snake grasped by the head, or a garbled incantation."
He says it much more strongly than we do here in AYP. But the message is the same. Meditate! This is how all views and concepts are transcended.
I do not recall anyone on the yoga side of this discussion being particularly attached to the concept of Self, non-duality, or any other concept of destination, certainly not as part of core practice. So the whole discussion has been rather trivial so far. We are yet to see any "meat" coming in the form of real practices.
Perhaps these ideas are being projected to counter views of the Divine Self in Hindu culture, which AYP is not. No doubt the Hindus need help, as do all the religions, including the Buddhists. The religions will be naturally illuminated from within by many new practitioners in the 21st century, not by philosophical arguments.
What we do in AYP is practice and go out and live life to the fullest. This provides for a natural integration of inner purification and opening with daily living, which is an observable joyful illumination through the radiance of emptiness. It really has nothing to do with conceptualizations. It is about experiencing the truth rising through direct experience in life.
Ironically, the conceptualizations and rigid views of reality in this discussion are coming from somewhere else. Not from AYP, and certainly not from the Buddha or Nagarjuna. From where then?
Nevertheless, the window on Buddhist ideas is appreciated. The more views we have of human spiritual transformation, the better. And the more it looks like the same elephant. No surprises there. 
The guru is in you.
|
 |
|
|
alwayson
Canada
288 Posts |
Posted - Jan 14 2009 : 6:30:08 PM
|
| then yogani, you are a buddist |
|
|
|
yogani
USA
5201 Posts |
Posted - Jan 14 2009 : 6:41:05 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by alwayson
then yogani, you are a buddist
No labels, please. We have too many already. |
|
|
|
Anthem
1608 Posts |
Posted - Jan 14 2009 : 11:42:04 PM
|
I recently came across an appropriate section of the book I am currently reading which addresses this topic to some extent.
I am reading the book "Old Path, White Clouds" by Thich Naht Hanh, the story of the Buddha and it is supposed to be historically accurate. Many times when the Buddha was asked to comment on the origins of the universe, the finite and the infinite, the ultimate nature of reality/ existence etc. [paraphrasing], he replied with silence and when asked why he didn't answer he replied that it would be turning aspects of his teaching of "the way" into a doctrine which could never fully answer the question and didn't serve those asking on their path to liberation.
One of his venerable monks was asked by someone on another occasion about the nature of existence, the soul, etc. and he replied "such views and questions arise because people still cling to a false view of the self. If the idea of a separate self were abandoned, people would no longer have a need to cling to such views or ask such questions".
He went on to add "such questions and views are rendered meaningless when, through dedicated study and practice, one breaks through the false view of the self".
Even if these things weren't said by the Buddha or his monks, it seems Thich Nhat Hanh as least has a good handle on it. |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4430 Posts |
Posted - Jan 14 2009 : 11:57:12 PM
|
Hi Alwayson,
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Christi
For the record, both the Buddhist teaching on emptiness and co-dependent origination have their roots in Vedanta. This isn't surprising as Vedanta was the main influence in India at the time the Buddha was alive. The Buddha expanded upon the original Vedanta teachings, and the Buddha's teachings were further developed after his death.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the record, Advaita Vedanta did not even exist yet, at the time of Buddha, let alone Hinduism as we know today. Many of the most famous Hindu temples in India are really converted Buddist sites, like Sri Sailam, Tirapati etc.
Some of Adi Shankara's gurus and Adi Shankara himself read the works of Nagarjuna (the "second" Buddha) and combined them with certain strands of Upanishdic philiosophy to create Advaita Vedanta. I read all of Adi Shankara's important commentaries in an academic English translation, along with those of his gurus. He and his gurus were really obsessed by Nagarjuna. (By the way Adi Shankara lived more than 1,200 years after the Buddha.)
Even other forms of Vedanta did not exist at the time of the Buddha. Hinduism at the time was ritual magick (still is in modern temples).
Not to say there were not ascetic traditions around (like Shramana) from which the Buddha learned from, but they were not Vedanta.
The term Vedanta refers to two things. It refers to a tradition of teaching inolving the transcendence of the limited sense of self, and the merging of one's being in Brahman (the totality of existance). It also refers to the philosophy of the collection of works known as the upanishads. Many of the upanishadic texts predate the time of the Buddha, as do Vedantic teachings.
I was not talking about advaita vedanta, although it is possible to see the beginnings of advaita vedanta in the early upanishads. I would encourage you to research all this for yourself if you are interested.
Christi |
Edited by - Christi on Jan 14 2009 11:58:41 PM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4430 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 12:30:04 AM
|
Hi TMS,
quote:
To say that the Buddha borrowed or adapted an already existing theory is wrong. There's not basis for that. It's not about ego. It's just not true. You haven't cited a shred of support for your claim.
The concept of emptiness is a Mahayana concept developed from the Buddha's teaching on anatta and anicha. The teaching says that all form is emptiness, and all emptiness is form. In other words that form has no real substance, substantial existence or notion of selfhood. This concept already existed in Upanishadic teachings where the nature of Prakriti (the phenomenal universe) is described as Maya (having no substantiality).
As for dependent origination, it is a theory based on a causal sequence of events where each link in the chain is based on the existence of the previous link. Ultimately, the presence of ignorance results in continuation of existence in samsara. The chain is not a linear sequence of events, but a system in which all the links co-exist to keep the person bound to a life of suffering. This theory of dependent origination can be found in the Upanishads in a much more limited form, where it is said that the objects of the senses are dependent on the existence of the senses, and the existence of the senses are dependent on the existence of consciousness. The Buddha developed this theory of co-dependent origination into a much more expansive system which incorporates the whole of the human life.
quote:
Adi Shankara also spoke about "the undifferentiated ground of reality." This is a positivist attempt to express something that is not there. Perhaps people do fall into nihilism. But not because of what the Buddha said, the Buddha specifically told people to guard against nihilism by being aware of karma and samsara. The middle way is between nihilism and reification of a God. People also fall into the trap of thinking there is a God, and seek the samsara of God karma.
Yes, and that is probably a bigger trap, which a lot more people fall into. That is why the teaching of the Buddha was so important and timely.
quote:
Enlightenment is a state where all humanity awakens to our role as creators of a vital nurturing environment on this planet, independent of any notion of God, nihilism, or concepts.
Finally we are in agreement. 
Christi
|
|
|
|
emc
2072 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 03:01:19 AM
|
Candice O'Denver often talks about how the mind loves to have
"points of views" and how to get out of it:
http://gftalks.blip.tv/file/1594830/
Love, emc
|
Edited by - emc on Jan 15 2009 03:52:31 AM |
|
|
|
themysticseeker
USA
342 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 08:09:48 AM
|
Yes. Attachment to the concept as an academic argument is stupid. It's all about practical application. I'm only interested in practical application.
Okay so recently I've been dealing with a stressful client who's supposed to pay me $70,000 for the deposit on a death penalty retainer by today but is playing games. I'm down to my last pennies, and have a $150,000 tax bill due next month (I was audited and got a huge back tax bill). So it stressed me out. Last night, on the deadline of our agreement, she said she made the deposit, but my bank doesn't reflect it. So I'm thinking she's lying.
My heart started racing. I felt angry. I closed my eyes and tried to locate the source of my anger. I looked in my mind, tried to find the thought; which thought caused it? I couldn't find the thought. I found a tangle of interrelated thoughts and dependencies. I looked into my body, the heart racing, the tense feeling, the pressure in my head. It wasn't any one of these either. Without the thoughts the feelings seemed neutral, the same feelings I get when laughing. Curious. As I looked around, it started to subside. Then it vanished. Where did it go? I couldn't find any destination.
Then, different thoughts arose. Normally, that sort of thing would have had me waking up with lockjaw and chest pains. Instead peace returned, and instead of telling myself stories about how I was getting played, my heart opened to how difficult the situation is for everyone.
This is called using emptiness and DO as the basis for the path and incorporating anger into the path as a test of my doubts about it. It works. Understanding DO and Emptiness is more than just a viewpoint. These are tools. But to use them, you have to understand them, meditate on them. Then they WORK for you.
BTW Yogani. I meditate two hours each day, study dharma and yoga, practice Bagua and Tai Chi. No one is saying don't meditate or practice. But you have to study too, and you have to understand. I'm a criminal trial lawyer, if the words or methods don't release someone from custody, I discard them. I'm in the liberation profession. I'm a realist. My work is higher than high-stress; it's extreme stress.
When I'm talking about DO and emptiness it's not because it's "my viewpoint" and I want to be correct. I'm testifying that these concepts work and allow one to experience self-liberating nature of all phenomena. I'm saying that if one becomes acquainted with the view, one can see all phenomena differently. You don't have to do a lot of fancy exercises. Self-liberation is a fact of nature, because of dependent origination within emptiness.
These are not things I believe in, and espouse; these are facts I RELY on. I hang my hat on them.
Since I've started practicing in this way. When I stand in front of a corrupt cop, my cross-examinations of him are silky smooth. My poise is solid and stable. My appearance is so calm and collected, my gestures so delicate, my voice so soft, that the dirty cop feels compelled to agree with all the rotten things I'm accusing him of.
My client who's "facing life" and his family who are also "facing life" feel more at ease. There's hope of physical liberation. I give this doctrine all the credit.
Love,
TMS |
Edited by - themysticseeker on Jan 15 2009 09:16:12 AM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4430 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 09:14:10 AM
|
Hi TMS,
It's good to hear how using self-inquiry techniques can be of practical benefit in everyday life situations. Have you read Yogani's book on self inquiry?
Christi |
|
|
|
yogani
USA
5201 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 11:24:52 AM
|
Hi TMS:
Know that many here are praying in stillness for peaceful resolution of your personal challenges. It is part of what this community is about.
I'd just like to point out that challenges in life can force us to surrender our fixed ideas, and this is meditation (transcendence of the object). Then we are in the peace of emptiness, and everything is resolved in that.
But must we wait for a crisis for meditation to happen? There has to be a better way. What we need is a systematic and efficient method of meditation we can do every day, even when there is no crisis. Then, when the crisis comes, we are already in abiding inner silence and the crisis isn't a crisis. It is just stillness resolving itself in an evolutionary way, as it always does.
It is the Christian principle of building our house upon the rock, rather than on sand. Or the three little pigs building their house of brick, rather than of straw.
Ideas are sand and straw, and abiding inner silence is the rock and the bricks.
This is the value of systematic daily meditation, which I know you know. It is good for all of us to be reminded often, because it is so important.
All the best!
The guru is in you.
|
|
|
|
alwayson
Canada
288 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 12:41:52 PM
|
Hi Christi,
Good counterpoint about the Upanishads. Howwever from my point of view, the Buddhas predate the universe itself |
|
|
|
themysticseeker
USA
342 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 1:23:43 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi TMS,
It's good to hear how using self-inquiry techniques can be of practical benefit in everyday life situations. Have you read Yogani's book on self inquiry?
Christi
I have. I like it. |
|
|
|
themysticseeker
USA
342 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 1:25:54 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by yogani
Hi TMS:
Know that many here are praying in stillness for peaceful resolution of your personal challenges. It is part of what this community is about.
I'd just like to point out that challenges in life can force us to surrender our fixed ideas, and this is meditation (transcendence of the object). Then we are in the peace of emptiness, and everything is resolved in that.
But must we wait for a crisis for meditation to happen? There has to be a better way. What we need is a systematic and efficient method of meditation we can do every day, even when there is no crisis. Then, when the crisis comes, we are already in abiding inner silence and the crisis isn't a crisis. It is just stillness resolving itself in an evolutionary way, as it always does.
It is the Christian principle of building our house upon the rock, rather than on sand. Or the three little pigs building their house of brick, rather than of straw.
Ideas are sand and straw, and abiding inner silence is the rock and the bricks.
This is the value of systematic daily meditation, which I know you know. It is good for all of us to be reminded often, because it is so important.
All the best!
The guru is in you.
I don't think you point, although well said, is really directed at me. I never waited for crisis to start meditating. The practice I mentioned is based on a practice of meditation. It's really a post-absorption practice, where one uses adverse circumstances to test one's level insight. So in that sense, you are correct. Using the wild emotions on the path is not a beginner's exercise. |
|
|
|
yogani
USA
5201 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 2:56:06 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by themysticseeker
...The practice I mentioned is based on a practice of meditation. It's really a post-absorption practice, where one uses adverse circumstances to test one's level insight. So in that sense, you are correct. Using the wild emotions on the path is not a beginner's exercise.
Hi TMS:
But who has a choice when the crisis is raging? We will be in it, like it or not. The method you describe may or may not work, according to what practices have gone before.
If it works, it indicates the presence of some pre-cultivated abiding inner silence, what you call "a post-absorption practice." In AYP terms, this is called "relational self-inquiry," which is surrendering an idea, emotion or intention in stillness, whereby further purification and opening occur, which can be expressed in the resolution of a difficult situation. It is an application of samyama, and the resulting resolution is a form of siddhi.
If it doesn't work, it is "non-relational self-inquiry" (without inner silence), and not much will happen. The situation will tend to grind on with minimal inner illumination. That is a signal that the cultivation of abiding inner silence through daily meditation can help. This also applies in the case of ordinary everyday inquiry, which will tend to get stuck in mental concepts without the presence of abiding inner silence. So it is not only about being prepared for a crisis. It is about being prepared for everyday living.
The mechanics in this are the same regardless of the tradition or situation. It is only a matter of terminology and the methods we use to activate the spiritual capabilities that are present within all of us.
The fact that living in stillness is not complicated or out of reach is good news for everyone. It is not a mind thing. It is a beyond the mind thing. That is the key thing.
If we have an idea, feeling or intention, and can let it go in abiding inner silence, then that is the ticket. It isn't about the idea. It is about having the abiding inner silence to release the idea into, which is a product of effective daily meditation. Then we will know emptiness and its radiance in everyday living.
The guru is in you.
|
|
|
|
alwayson
Canada
288 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 5:03:15 PM
|
You know what, the whole robbers in an empty house seems to me just like modern Advaita teachings on the burnt rope, or the snake and the rope. (Robert Adams, Ramana Maharishi etc.)
Now, I do not have a lama or advaita teacher, so maybe I am wrong. |
Edited by - alwayson on Jan 15 2009 5:43:29 PM |
|
|
|
alwayson
Canada
288 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 6:10:45 PM
|
but on the other hand...
In Buddism, the state of rigpa is not continuous with all individuals, whereas in Advaita it is.
That is why the Dzogchen tantras constantly say "look at your own wisdom [rang rig] etc." |
Edited by - alwayson on Jan 15 2009 6:13:27 PM |
|
|
|
themysticseeker
USA
342 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 7:31:20 PM
|
The path of insight. In defense of intellectual examination. There is a path of insight involving analytical examination which can lead to glimpses of emptiness or whatever you want to call it. When causes and conditions, or the logic of interdependent causes and conditions, is studied in detail, one can may notice between well placed negations the non-arising, which is at least a semblance of the truth, more than a mere concept, a state of mind harmonized with the truth. That state of mind is not described, because the truth is beyond description, but the moment it dawns can be preceded by harmonious thoughts.
One may come to understand, for example, the truth of reincarnation according to the secret oral traditions, not of an ego that continues, but of a collection of winds continuing to swirl in that direction, of winds contacting winds in a constant movement. To move with it is non-duality, the awakening from which ego dissolves, like all other dreams, hopes and aspirations. In that sense are are all birthing presently. We are all air.
There is no need for hope, dreams, beliefs, fears or anything else. Even in intellectual examination the same movements of winds illuminate the moment, at which point, past and future subside into the non-arising of now, the fleeting, ungraspable, non-existent illusion of an atom of time. |
|
|
|
alwayson
Canada
288 Posts |
Posted - Jan 15 2009 : 9:10:25 PM
|
I am sorry if I pushed Buddhism to hard in this thread.
In matter of fact, I think the most important spiritual book is Astral Dynamics by Robert Bruce out of all the books I have read.
Energy Work by Robert Bruce is a close second.
And neither of them is Buddhist per say. |
Edited by - alwayson on Jan 15 2009 10:46:18 PM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4430 Posts |
Posted - Jan 16 2009 : 12:33:39 AM
|
Hi Alwayson,
quote:
Hi Christi,
Good counterpoint about the Upanishads. Howwever from my point of view, the Buddhas predate the universe itself
We have no disagreement there.
Christi |
|
|
|
themysticseeker
USA
342 Posts |
Posted - Jan 16 2009 : 6:52:49 PM
|
So I had this AWESOME! experience in meditation. I've been getting really serious about meditation lately, now that I'm working with the lama, and have been meditating up to 4-5 hours per day. My technique is mahamudra and something like trekchod, I think, where I stabilize my breathing and focus really really hard on watching a thought form, then following it, then sort of looking around. I liken it to when we watch a ceiling fan, and when it's spinning it looks like a disk. Then, if you dart your eyes, you can catch a glimpse of a blade of the fan and follow it around, then it looks like its not spinning.
Okay, so when I do this with my thoughts, it's like jumping on a moving bullet train. I have to focus like crazy, like when someone says they are going to throw something at you can you have to catch it. As I sense the thought forming, my focus causes it to seem like it's in slow motion, then I somehow grab on and ride it, then it seems like its not moving, but it is. Other thoughts are waiting to arise behind. If I lose focus, the other thoughts on the train will follow and I will be on the side of the tracks looking at the words on the sides of the cars.
But when I'm on the train, I look around and there's nothing there. But I have to really try hard to hang on. It's so hard! Then, senses widen, like I become far more awake and aware of EVERYTHING. My body starts to feel light as a feather, and the energy in my kundalini starts beaming up into my head. My head starts feeling pressure and getting juiced, like when I'm taking a racehorse math or law school or bar exam. It's that intense. Except more, way more. I couldn't hold it for long.
Then, it occurred to me, when I'm thinking and watching the thoughts instead of jumping on and riding them, I'm dreaming. All the thoughts are like a dream. Just like it takes more energy to get up from bed and think about what's going on today, waking up from the daydream of thoughts takes so much energy.
Where the F does the energy come from, because it wore me out fast?! Yet, after this experience, I've been SUPER JUICED! I feel like I'm on speed man. It's intense. WTF?
BTW I got paid and my money probs are over. WOOHOO! I also had this really auspicious dream last night about being in samadhi and the lama pointing at my head and saying "That's it!" Cool stuff! Awesome!
Peace out!
TMS |
|
|
|
themysticseeker
USA
342 Posts |
Posted - Jan 23 2009 : 8:29:36 PM
|
So I have looked into the history of Shankara and in fairness to history, advaita vedanta was an attempt by Shankara at the end of the buddhist era to harmonize vedic thought with buddhist thought. Shankara's view of Brahman and Maya are translations of Sunyata and Samsara 1200 years after the fact.
Shankara's work can best be understood as a continuation of Buddhist thought palatable to the theistic Hindu Vedanta world, at a time when Hindu and brahmin rule took power and buddhist kings were in decline (and buddhism was in disfavor).
As I look into the history of tantra/dharma and vedanta, there appears to be about a 7,000 year relationship of mutual support and exchange of these systems. The yogi petroglyphs in Harappa predate Vedic philosophy, and the early works ascribed to a teacher of dharma called Shiva (the tantras) no longer exist. The guru disciple focus of tantra prevented many works from being passed on.
However, these teachings seeped into the vedic world, and the tantra/dharma concepts of karma, rebirth and samsara were adopted by the authors of the upanishads (most of which are written after the Buddha's death; all of which appear to have been written about when the Buddha was alive). Apparently, the sravaka movement (from which the Buddha arose) and the vedanta movement arose from basically the same social melieu.
Krsnji mentions yoga in the Bhagavad Gita, but his references to yoga are of an older tradition. Karma and related concepts are pre-historic. Mahabharat (of which the Gita is a part) post-dates the Buddha's death as well. The Buddha's teachings are as old as any of the source material; basically, no writings that we are aware of existed then in written form.
Dharma, karma, samsara and yoga are very old; older than old. There are many dharmas. There appears to be many dharmas, some involving deities and others that don't. When one aspect of dharma is emphasized, like knowledge, it leads to malignancy and another aspect of dharma, like devotion becomes prevalent. When devotion becomes malignant and blind, then there is a reversal. It is very much like the stock market.
However, to say that Shankara and Yogananda understood the Buddha and Buddists all those years did not is not correct. It is not correct to say any view is correct or false, both or neither. Emptiness is a mere designation as well.
Basically, the approach of the Buddha's middle way is the destruction of absolute views. To the extent that Shankara attempted to draw a Brahman without attributes and an Ishwara with attributes, he did not succeed. For example, the Buddha did not say the universe or emptiness was eternal; he said it was "beginningless" meaning the beginning is indeterminate. To the extent that it is a refinement of theistic (blessing through the brahmins) it is successful. It preserved yoga tantra dharma. It allowed people to enter dharma outside of brahmin restrictions; so it served an important "buddhist" purpose.
In other words, vendanta and dharma as we know them are dependent co-arisings.
Love,
TMS |
Edited by - themysticseeker on Jan 23 2009 9:24:31 PM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4430 Posts |
Posted - Jan 24 2009 : 07:42:12 AM
|
Hi TMS,
That's right... Vedanta and Dharma are co-dependent arisings. The Vedas and the early Upanishads pre-date the birth of the Buddha. Buddhist thought gleaned a great deal from earlier Indian spiritual thought, and in turn, post-Buddhist Indian spirituality gained a great deal from Buddhism. So it is much like a dance, or a piece of music, where many great beings have added a sonnet or two.
Attachment to any fixed view will prevent us from making further progress on the spiritual path. This means attachment to the view that there is a self, or attachment to the idea that there is no self. Attachment to the idea that the universe is eternal or not eternal is also a fixed view. Attachment to the idea that everything is emptiness, or that everything is not emptiness is a fixed view. Attachment to the idea that Shankara was right, or Yogananda was right or some other teacher was right is also a fixed view. All fixed views bind us to the world of the mind and hold us in suffering.
Going beyond fixed views brings us to that which is real... and then, as Yogani says, who can deny it for us?
Christi
"The stories I tell you are like dreams... but they are special dreams, for they are dreams that can wake you from your sleep" [the Buddha]
|
|
|
|
themysticseeker
USA
342 Posts |
Posted - Jan 24 2009 : 08:00:35 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi TMS,
That's right... Vedanta and Dharma are co-dependent arisings. The Vedas and the early Upanishads pre-date the birth of the Buddha. Buddhist thought gleaned a great deal from earlier Indian spiritual thought, and in turn, post-Buddhist Indian spirituality gained a great deal from Buddhism. So it is much like a dance, or a piece of music, where many great beings have added a sonnet or two.
Attachment to any fixed view will prevent us from making further progress on the spiritual path. This means attachment to the view that there is a self, or attachment to the idea that there is no self. Attachment to the idea that the universe is eternal or not eternal is also a fixed view. Attachment to the idea that everything is emptiness, or that everything is not emptiness is a fixed view. Attachment to the idea that Shankara was right, or Yogananda was right or some other teacher was right is also a fixed view. All fixed views bind us to the world of the mind and hold us in suffering.
Going beyond fixed views brings us to that which is real... and then, as Yogani says, who can deny it for us?
Christi
"The stories I tell you are like dreams... but they are special dreams, for they are dreams that can wake you from your sleep" [the Buddha]
The authorship of the early Upanishads may be contemporaneous with the Buddha's life, because the exact date of either the authorship of the Upanishads or the Buddha's birth is speculative, but can be estimated to about the same time within a few hundred years.
Also to be fair to history, shunyata was not a mahayana invention. It comes from the Pali Canon. It doesn't mean "emptiness." Shunya means "zero" and shunyata means "zero-ness." "Emptiness" is more utilitarian in discourse.
quote:
The theme of Sunyata; emerged from the Buddhist doctrines of Anatta (Pali, Sanskrit:Anatman—the nonexistence of the self, or atman) and Paticcasamuppada, Interdependent Arising). The Suñña Sutta,[5] part of the Pali Canon, relates that the monk Ananda, the attendant to Gautama Buddha asked, "It is said that the world is empty, the world is empty, lord. In what respect is it said that the world is empty?" The Buddha replied, "Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self: Thus it is said, Ananda, that the world is empty." He goes on to explain that what is meant by "the world" is the six sense media and their objects, and elsewhere says that to theorize about something beyond this realm of experience would put one to grief.
--From Wikipedia entry on Sunyata (the mind is one of the six sense media)
I think it is more justified historically to say that the Buddha *may* have been influenced by the Upanishads, but since these were part of the Brahminical Vedic ceremonial culture, he may not have been exposed much. Brahmins were closed group and their oral traditions would not have been shared. It is clear he was exposed to the Shraman (tantra/karma/samsara) group, which the Buddha describes; he was also exposed to the practices of Vedas which were a prevalent part of society. However, he may not have been around the Vedas themselves. They were not written then.
Love,
TMS |
Edited by - themysticseeker on Jan 24 2009 08:05:24 AM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4430 Posts |
Posted - Jan 28 2009 : 04:13:34 AM
|
Hi TMS,
quote:
The authorship of the early Upanishads may be contemporaneous with the Buddha's life, because the exact date of either the authorship of the Upanishads or the Buddha's birth is speculative, but can be estimated to about the same time within a few hundred years.
Most studies that I have looked into, date all of the Vedas and most of the early Upanishads before the birth of the Buddha. It is an interesting field of research. The Vedas were certainly composed a long time before the Buddha's birth, and the early Upanishads probably several hundred years before. As you say, there is a great deal of speculation but there are also some historic facts that can be used to give approximate dates, especially in terms of chronological order.
There are some historians who seem to have a vested interest in demonstrating the originality of the Buddha’s ideas, who have attempted to date the Upanishads as late as possible, and to date the lifetime of the Buddha as early as possible in order to try and claim that they were composed around the same time. To me it seems like a fairly incredulous attempt to distort history for no good reason other than to support a particular religious bias. The Buddha was a very great man, one of the greatest who ever lived, regardless of the dates of composition of the Upanishads or the Mahabharata.
quote:
I think it is more justified historically to say that the Buddha *may* have been influenced by the Upanishads, but since these were part of the Brahminical Vedic ceremonial culture, he may not have been exposed much. Brahmins were closed group and their oral traditions would not have been shared. It is clear he was exposed to the Shraman (tantra/karma/samsara) group, which the Buddha describes; he was also exposed to the practices of Vedas which were a prevalent part of society. However, he may not have been around the Vedas themselves. They were not written then.
I don't think anything was written in those days in India. The Vedas were composed as hymns, and the early Upanishads were also composed and memorized verbally. This was also the case with the Mahabharata, and the Bhagavad-Gita actually means the "song of the Lord". Many of the Buddha's teachings were memorized and only written down long after his death. We can only speculate as to how much the Buddha knew of the Vedas, the Upanishads and the stories of the Mahabharata, although, as a Prince living in a palace, it is likely that his education would have included these things. Krishna is mentioned in the Pali Cannon as a historic figure so it is likely that the Buddha was familiar with his life and teachings.
quote:
Also to be fair to history, shunyata was not a Mahayana invention. It comes from the Pail Canon. It doesn't mean "emptiness." Shunya means "zero" and shunyata means "zero-ness." "Emptiness" is more utilitarian in discourse.
What I said was that emptiness, or "shunyata" as a teaching doctrine was fully developed by the Mahayana tradition hundreds of years after the Buddha's death. It was made popular in the writing of the Heart Sutra. It was developed from the Buddha's teachings on anatta (selflessness) and anicha (impermanence).
The Buddha certainly talked about emptiness when he was describing the state of reality beyond the realm of the mind. Here is a description that the Buddha gave of emptiness from the Udana Sutta.
"Where water, earth, heat
and wind find no footing,
there no stars gleam,
no sun is made visible,
there shines no moon,
there the darkness is not found;
When the sage, the brahmin,
himself in wisdom knows this place
he is freed from the form
and formless realms,
from happiness and suffering. " [The Buddha]
Following on from our interesting discussion earlier about the similarity of the Upanishadic description of Brahman and the Buddha's description of emptiness (the transcendental state of consciousness), here is a verse from the Mundaka Upanishad on the nature of Brahman:
"In the highest golden sheath is Brahman,
stainless, without parts;
Pure is it, the light of lights.
This is what the knowers of the Self know.
The sun shines not there,
nor the moon and stars,
these lightnings shine not,
where then could this fire be?
His shining illumines all this world.
Brahman, verily, is this Deathless. "
When Krishna talked about the Dharma (truth) he talked about it as his own true nature. He said, when describing himself: “I am beyond both form and formlessnessâ€, using the same words that were later to be used by the Buddha to describe shunyata.
So the real question for us is not who talked about truth (Dharma) the first. The real question is how can we, ourselves, come to know that Dharma and to have it take its seat in our hearts.
Letting go of all fixed views is the first step, because with attachment to fixed views, we are only going to be engaged in mental gymnastics and the trivial past-times of religious fundamentalism (the one and only way). The second step is employing sound spiritual practices, which bring about the transformation of our life, and the transcendence of egoic consciousness (divided existence). Even the realization of emptiness (shunyata) is only a stage on the path.
Christi
|
|
|
|
themysticseeker
USA
342 Posts |
Posted - Jan 28 2009 : 12:17:27 PM
|
In some traditions, the realization of emptiness and compassion is bodhichitta and is the equal to enlightenment. I have to say Christi, well said. You appear to have solidly asserted your point that the Buddha was influenced by the Upanishads and not the other way around. Is it possible that you are wrong? Or is it a fixed view to which you cannot relent?
Actually, you continue to assert that the so-called Krishna's words and the Upanishads came first. But that has not been established. In fact, there is no record that any person named Krishna actually lived. Krishna was a colloquial figure, like Shiva. No one knows if they really lived or not. No one knows when the Ramayan and the Mahabharat were written or orally composed. No one knows who authored the writings attributed to Rama or Krishna. And no Upanishad has any known author. So you cannot authoritatively assert that the Buddha was influenced by these writings, nor that he developed his ideas from them. No one even knows when the Buddha actually lived. You can only speculate as such.
The fact about Indian literature is that not much can be known about it. We are simply invited to inquire about the validity of their statements in our experience. The test of any good tradition is whether it has fostered practices that alleviate suffering?
We can also look at the traditions that have arisen from these works and determine if they are well-rooted. One thing the Buddhists have going for them are good records about lineage that go back really far, to about 200 C.E. Many great yogis have come from this tradition, many that are alive today.
In defense of the Buddha's teachings it never goes to far; it never says something is there when it cannot be established. It never says something is a fact when it cannot be proven. That humility in non-asserting views is what leads to the great realizations for those who follow the middle-way. All the Buddha's words say is that the end of suffering is possible for anyone. The Mahayana view is that to achieve one's own happiness, one must seek to alleviate the suffering of others, because we are a non-dual growth of the Earth.
These discussions represent a preparatory path to practices. In the buddhist tradition the best practices are given in face to face meetings with qualified mentors after the background study reaches a satisfactory level. In the Buddhist world, the methods are conveyed when the mentor has determined through examination that the candidate is qualified by exhibiting bodhicitta. Love it or hate it the greatest masters have always reserved the high level techniques for their best students. It was true for the Buddha, for Jesus and it remains true for the masters of today.
Love,
TMS |
Edited by - themysticseeker on Jan 28 2009 5:57:55 PM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
The One & Only Way
