Is meditating on "emptiness" better than mindfulness cultivation ?

[Agape]

Posted by Clear Light (here)
Oh, yes, if taken to an Extreme then yeah, sure, you'd probably seemingly "fall" into a type of Nihilistic-Emptiness, as in there literally is Nothing ... but that's not the Middle Way is it ?

I'd say it's supposed to be like a Union of Emptiness and Compassion (energy), or Emptiness and Clarity, or some such togetherness depending upon the Path eh ?

True Emptiness, I'd suggest, is like having the felt connection with the Base, the Ground of Being ?

To understand anything properly you have to meet its true ends

Look there’s a shortcut to the “true emptiness” and “true compassion”, likewise so easy to do, here in India especially. And yes you will “touch the basement” and feel fully for who n how do we exist.
Give your last money( and what else) to the beggar in the street. Own nothing, be no one, just be.
The warmth of the Sun will feel more comforting and every piece of food you later receive will be precious.
You’ll produce very little waste and no CO2 emissions.

You(or I) will live the “natural life” we were meant to live here before all the disputes started. Get reconciled and die natural death without all the modern inventions !!!

JUST TEASING 😀

A Middle Way too is just a smart term for smarties.

That’s why I do not give a credit to any form of organized “religion” and their mantras about how smart they are.
They’re monotonous repetition of terms and idioms favorited by them.

Go beyond in your thought and they’re lost with you. They plug their ears from the rest of what’s going on ..heard of brain plasticity ?
Phew, totally foreign to most people trapped in one of these programs.

Each group have specific terminology and way of convincing people that their programming is ..shortly the best. Proof ?

“The teacher is so beautiful and happy all the time. He’s but compassion and peace embodied”.

It’s not difficult for the “beautiful boys” especially to become cherished icons.

The amount of obstacles anyone in “real life” have to overcome is tremendous compared to life within cult, for the teacher and good students too, perhaps.


So ..the lull is great. Many of todays famous monks and nuns are wealthy people who drive expensive cars. One of their robes cost as much as tailor made suits.

Anyone can be sweet if they had it easy.


Compassion is exposing things for what they are in my best opinion. Emptiness is just one word out of ten thousand we use actively that should not be overused.


It’s when the Snake of Time eats its own head you will believe none. The world starts anew each time,
I’ll be a ladybird and Chris will be a caterpillar
and we shall chat about the flower buds on olive tree

😀

[greybeard]

Ladybird & caterpillar that a nice though Agape--both have the potential to fly and more.
Love Chris

[Clear Light]

Ah, indeed perhaps the "true ends" of ALL paths really are the SAME ... whether coming from the Buddhist perspective or from an Advaita-Vedantist perspective, and I am inclined to accept that as such (for now) BUT the multitude of Paths (to apparently choose from) clearly are Distinct in certain aspects if one attempts to Compare them eh ?

Thus, I have no "axe to grind" with Chris, it's certainly *not* personal, LOL, but all the same, it's important, I'd say (especially in an online Forum) to be as precise as one can be when using all these words we have at our disposal to ensure the correct meaning is not lost in conversation !!!

[greybeard]

Posted by Clear Light (here)

Posted by greybeard (here)
Who is aware of emptiness?
Emptiness is not what it seems.
It is empty of "things"
Chris

Well, respectfully Chris, I'd say "you" can't be Aware of Emptiness like you can be Aware of the sense of Depression, or of Hopelessness ... but interestingly it's the SAME Awareness present in ALL states of Mind because our True Nature is beyond all the machinations of the Mind ... The Emptiness teachings, per se, are meant like a Tool to unpick the Concrete-sense of "self" ... thus there is no "who" !!! LOL

What is aware? is probably more accurate.
The challenge is that words no matter how precise are not it. or "That" to be more correct.
Only one awareness--or only consciousness if that word is preferred.
Nasargadatta--said its beyond definition--so any description --concept is not it.
We understand as best we can, then describe our interpretation of what is.
Love Chris

[Clear Light]

Posted by greybeard (here)

Posted by Clear Light (here)

Posted by greybeard (here)
Who is aware of emptiness?
Emptiness is not what it seems.
It is empty of "things"
Chris

Well, respectfully Chris, I'd say "you" can't be Aware of Emptiness like you can be Aware of the sense of Depression, or of Hopelessness ... but interestingly it's the SAME Awareness present in ALL states of Mind because our True Nature is beyond all the machinations of the Mind ... The Emptiness teachings, per se, are meant like a Tool to unpick the Concrete-sense of "self" ... thus there is no "who" !!! LOL

What is aware? is probably more accurate.
The challenge is that words no matter how precise are not it. or "That" to be more correct.
Only one awareness--or only consciousness if that word is preferred.
Nasargadatta--said its beyond definition--so any description --concept is not it.
We understand as best we can, then describe our interpretation of what is.
Love Chris

Ah, with regards to what "I" said above, it's that there is no enduring "self" other than the moment-to-moment Appearance of it ... which is where the Benefit of Meditation comes into Play (so-to-say) because this is actually Seen in direct experience when one's mind has slowed down enough eh ?

[greybeard]

Yes agreed--"me" is not permanent.
No individual self in reality.
Awareness is ever present. (Eternal)
Its also down to definition.
Love Chris

[Clear Light]

Posted by Agape (here)
The emptiness so empty. Ask why does Japan being one of the most advanced societies on the planet, at the moment have one of the highest suicidal rates per capita with all the taught love for empty.

I’ve seen some very sad people attending these Zen seshins whatever you prefer to call it and they’re chronically sad. The only jokes many are capable of there are about how empty all is and how to hurt egos to the best degree.
Some seem to be very sadistic and masochistic in their approach.
The “hatred for self” turns to “hatred of life” and undiagnosed chronic depression easier than you count to 5. It’s so sad you’d cry of it.

Oh, yes, truly, I'd say you'd have to be a "dry" practitioner not to have Compassion express itself (through you) with the "Tears of the Dharma" in / as a Heartfelt Response to such Samsaric "wandering" eh ?



Now, truth-be-told, it’s not that you are a neutral “personal self” to whom negative mental and negative emotional states visit from time to time eh ?

Indeed, that which is Aware of such Depression (or Sadness) is itself "untouched" by such relative states-of-mind ... and this is the Good News ... because it is always available, right here and now, "you" just have to kind of gently "look back" ... like asking "Am I Aware" ?

Then see what happens to the mind ... it should vanish ... poof ... gone !!!

[edina]

I remember having difficulty understanding what going into "emptiness" meant.

I asked a QiGong Master I knew. He was certified as an International QiGong Master in China.

That certification process is interesting in and of itself, and when I learned that one of the things an International QiGong Master must demonstrate is to turn water into wine, it made me think....

Anyway, to answer my question he said, "The emptiness is like the space between the candle and the flame."

I've thought about that quite often over the years.

It's not empty.

I often used the phrase, "the fullness of emptiness".

Another way to consider it is like the aui'a of "Ender's Game."

I've just read a Chinese sci-fi trilogy by Cixin Lui.

Repeated through out this trilogy is a phrase.

"The universe is grand. But life is grander."

This demonstrates an understanding of the "emptiness", as I understand it.

Some people experience the "vastness" of the universe and are terrified. Others are comforted.

The "emptiness" is even vaster than the universe.

I think "emptiness" and "mindfulness" compliment each other.

And when we add the Western system of thought, our science along with it, it becomes even more enlightening and liberating.

Truly, fulfilling a stated purpose of this forum, chronicling where "science and spirituality" meet.

[shaberon]

Posted by Agape (here)
I would actually also recommend studying the Patanjali Yoga Sutras to every aspiring Yogi, meditation practitioner, consciousness explorer and so forth, for starters,
assimilating the precepts, stages and fruits of the Path since the formate of the message is most succinct, one of the oldest yoga instruction books known and passed through ages often as guarded secret.

6 Yogas of Naropa practised in common within all systems of higher yogic teachings are specific offshoot of more ancient yogic system based in the understanding that everything is Light.

Before Patanjali was Samkhya, which is probably the most ancient and basic "nuts and bolts" teaching from which most of the rest developed.

The second part is closer to what I was getting at, since the term itself is loosely used.

If "Six Yogas of Naro" means the Dream Yoga and such practices, which are considered very advanced in Buddhism, the more appropriate term is Six Doctrines or Dharmas. These are only done at the end or completion of all preliminary meditation and purification.

Six Yogas is a definitive term that is not attached to Naro. It is our equivalent way of saying Six Branch Yoga in distinction to the Eight Branch.

Beginning Buddhist meditation can perhaps be said to be a little different than Patanjali by emphasizing Bodhi Mind, which is not really the brain but the heart. This is not really the Yoga, but Shamatha, or tranquility. This phase may last for years, or, may be all a person ever does.

If we were to do Yoga, two markers of the difference are firstly, there is no asana, or posture. As a monk, one might use a cushion or some kind of posture, but in general you can just do a non- or zero posture just naturally in a chair. You might want to eventually learn Seven Point posture or something like that, but, it simply isn't the same kind of requirement or teaching block and not at all a series of exercises.

Similarly, there are not really any kind of breathing exercises which Patanjali calls Pranayama. This is something that is completely occulted and means something fairly specific in an almost medical sense.

So if I took the general Yoga books, they will mostly suggest me to do those exercises and special breathing techniques and then go on with the rest, a more physical method.

The Buddhist method started mentally or with an impulse in consciousness, and what happens is we are going to take Pranayama from a kind of warm-up and move it to the middle as something, realistically, that may take us years to understand what it means, let alone be able to do it. So, instead, almost all the meditation I could come up with, is a warm-up for Pranayama. So this is backwards, or reversed, from other ways.

Instead, in Buddhism, the first Yoga is Pratyahara, which literally means something like "control of food", and mainly concerns sense withdrawal. And so there is a type of Gradual Meditation with Images, mostly concerning our senses, mind, and emotions, purifying and transmuting them. Along with this, there is meditation on Voidness. Both of these are vital, neither should be done at the expense of other.

The most approximate way I could describe it would be those two ingredients, Images and Voidness, are eventually blended into the Pranayama, properly performed, to do Meditation without Images.

Or we could say Om self-arises but from it proceeds the alphabet, and back to it returns to alphabet. Like Om, each of those letters is a magic power or shakti, except they are inherently void and without meaning and they work by Yoga. And so the "Image", is more or less each letter as a sense, psychological factor, or perceived object. We are mastering a cycle or circle of their arising and dissolution.

So as outer students or lay disciples or working people, the majority of our efforts are simultaneously directed towards Emptiness as well as something that appears far more intricate, something like a working catalog of the human aura in minute detail. In my strong opinion it is best to do this and just study what the Pranayama may be. In Buddhism, these auric components are all very carefully handled, much as if one were quietly arranging a temple. In other words, we could perhaps say we are doing Pratyahara, and if we make a contact to Voidness that may be ecstatic, that is Dhyana. Those are at most the first two Yogas.

This is basically the same in all the schools, and contains all the philosophy and Guru Yoga. That probably represents years of spiritual practice before engaging what the Buddhists call Pranayama. So it is all very important.

[Agape]

Hi Shaberon,

not everything written in scholastic previews, speeches or scriptures even makes perfect sense unless you find practical point to it( then it always does)
and history books older than 1000 years
are not more reliable than today’s media
So finding who was there first, the hen or the egg
turns absurdly impossible in some cases.

Yoga system did not originate with Patanjali !

He just summed its principles very well so that they’ve been preserved in written form. Which isn’t new.

Statuettes of yogis have been found in archeological excavations of the Harappa civilization that arrived in Hindus valley 4000 years ago.

Even though Buddha Shakyamuni is said to have lived around 500 BC,
from many excursions I did to various sacred places
in India and around the globe, video documentaries from all around the globe I suspect that “real” Buddha lived earlier than they calculated it.

It does not really matter so to say, it is a story of the hen and the egg.

That’s why it’s called “never ending story” and cyclic existence of Hindu and later,
Buddhist mythology.

But not everything that’s been recorded somewhere makes good practical sense.

Starting with Guru Yoga,
there used to be very strong personal relationship
between Guru and Disciple in all ancient traditions
while Guru Yoga would actually
imply following your guru and his instructions meticulously
and serving him in every manner.

Guru Naropa himself practiced very hard under Tilipa
so did his own students.

They did not “do Guru Yoga”.

They did what Guru told them to do and succeeded in their accomplishments.

They would not receive ( or read in book) about higher stages and lots of philosophy etc. When Naropa who was a learned and renown scholar already visited Tilopa the master of yogis, considered Mahasiddha by both Hindu and Buddhist traditions respectively, Tilopa told him to throw his books out of window.

He gave him the most impossible and crazy tasks to fulfill until Naropa finally lost the grip of his intellectual ego so holding him together.

He would not receive any “higher instructions” before “he lost it” completely.

So Guru Yoga is meant to be real
and its aim is complete purification
of body, speech and mind.

So called “mandala offering” practice too
was being real once upon the time
and faithful student would have to offer
all they ever had,
sometimes with their wives, children
and the rest to show their aspiration
is genuine
and no “backstops” being left behind.

It wasn’t an empty gesture of surrender
rather than manifestation of pure intent


Then only would according to every genuine
guru parampara (lineage succession)
a student be properly received or not
( yes some were rejected)
receive higher initiations of respective order etc


Crowd initiations were not performed the way they come today but Gurus in India are part of the society to this day, they teach when they appear

The beauty of true spiritual tradition
is that it exists beyond words.

Many practical aspects of the path
are transferred through metaphors
and mental images

yet

the resultant state of any practice
is live knowledge of past, presence and future.


Trying to emulate someone’s else’s practice ritually does not lead automatically to the same results.


That’s how “talking of emptiness is empty” and image of Buddha is not Buddha.


Even no “illusory body” is a Buddha

Most certainly tho when you wake up you are Buddha


which is no self at all



🙏😀🙏


Sorry for late hours here

[Deux Corbeaux]

Posted by shaberon (here)
......
If we were to do Yoga, two markers of the difference are firstly, there is no asana, or posture.


....... there are not really any kind of breathing exercises which Patanjali calls Pranayama. This is something that is completely occulted and means something fairly specific in an almost medical sense.

So if I took the general Yoga books, they will mostly suggest me to do those exercises and special breathing techniques and then go on with the rest, a more physical method.

You are right. It's our western way of understanding Yoga . It´s Breathing and Exercise....... another form of gymnastics and relaxation.

In Raja Yoga, Asana and Pranayama are only nr 3 and 4 of the 8 limbs and shouldn´t be practiced without first laying down a strong moral and ethical foundation through the limbs 1 and 2, Yama and Niyama.

Asana is more a complementary tool, to clean the nadis and balance the chakra system, as each particular asana benefits its corresponding chakra.
However, Yama and Niyama (moral and ethical behaviour) do the same, as they are beneficial to the chakra system as well.


As for Pranayama, that is misunderstood indeed. As you said, `There are not really any kind of breathing exercises ......` . Pranayama is a mental exercise in directing Prana and not physical by breathing.

One has to learn how to practice these mental energy manipulations very carefully and with the help of a skilful teacher to avoid damage. One can´t find this in a book, at least I´ve never been able to find a book in which it was mentioned. Not on Internet either.
It´s drawing Shiva and Shakti energy into the nadis, directing it and let it go out again, through a mental process, using the numbers 16, 32, 64 or a following number in the series, as a `counting handle` during the process, which depends on the benefit of the particular Pranayama.

[shaberon]

Posted by Agape (here)
Yoga system did not originate with Patanjali !

He just summed its principles very well so that they’ve been preserved in written form. Which isn’t new.

Yes you are largely correct about the general historical evolution of Yoga. As "pre-Buddhist" yoga lineages, we trace it, mainly, to Manjushri at Wu Tai Shan in China during the last Ice Age, to Kubjika and Dattatreya of South India at almost the same age, and via Yajnawalkya to the "great north country" Uttara Kuru somewhere near Lake Baikal. Whether or not it was really "pre-Buddhist" would be a question to the Historical Buddhas, Kasyapa and others.

There is a Hindu argument calling Buddha the ninth avatar of Vishnu, in order to place him 500 b. c. and conceal that he was a thousand years previous. I am not sure. We would deny Buddha is an avatar and would say a human who became perfect in Yoga.

Mahayana is criticized for "not being written at the time of the Buddha", to which the reply is "this was oral teaching directly to the disciples."

So what we have or what we call schools is more like a gradual public revelation of what the disciples did secretly in caves.

Naro and other siddhas have many different stories, some of which involve being closely brought up in a school, but most were Brahmans who experienced some kind of catharsis. Or in the extreme, a black magician like Milarepa. These were people who would travel months to go somewhere with minimal guarantee of survival, and spend equally vast amounts of time inhabiting caves and cemeteries. Most of us don't have that kind of karma, we are just working people who go home, and so it is the inner meaning of Naro and the others which is, so to speak, compressed into standardized spiritual exercises.

Outer practices of mandalas, Agni Homa, cemetery rites, and so forth, are internalized into meditation.

Currently, if you are not seen as a good candidate, you would still be given mostly outer practices. It is generally those who delight in samadhi that would be seen as ideal for initiation.

Purification by Vajrasattva and Guru Yoga means to attain non-duality in Body, Speech, and Mind. So if one has the samadhi and purification, one would be prepared for higher training such as Pranayama.

The older terms "Yama and Niyama" are not used in Buddhism and would just be called Preliminaries, not Yoga. Yama itself is thought to mean death, but it means restraint, and so what Buddhism is talking about is Prana-Ayama, which is unrestrained prana, because dualized and pouring out the doors of the senses. Restraint, or Yama of Prana, would be developed by Fivefold sense and skandha based purification. Only after that would it become relevant of 8/16/24/32 branchings of prana, etc. This is not a preliminary. This is not anything I suggest anyone try on their own or even talk about it online very much at all.

Everything up to that point you can.

And so the main change or difference between a Sutra-based, philosophical, or no self type of meditation is the addition of Mantra. If Pranayama is a door which is self-secret to begin with, and we're not really going to try to do it, but just know about it, then the most advanced thing we might try to deal with is Mantra.

Here, it has the short combining form of manas or mind, with the syllable, tra, "to protect". Mantra is said to be the most effective method to protect the mind from adventitious defilements and discursive meandering. One would frequently encounter expressions like "initiation is possible after 100 million Vajrasattva mantras". I personally am trying to nest in those 100 million while studying how "system of Vajrasattva" works.

It does not unless your personal Vajrasattva really is Prajna-Upaya, non-dual union of emptiness and skillful methods.

More elaborately, we call them Prajnaparamita and Avalokiteshvara, who would be familiar to anyone who has done Heart Sutra. That is only one piece of Prajnaparamita Sutra (8,000 verses) and Avatamsaka Sutra (much larger). And in this milieu may be found different opportunities for people who are too intellectual, those who have upset emotions, or have a low drive, and so forth, it is something like a repair center. One is doing a sort of transitional Yoga with the intent of samadhi before being given the Pranayama.

In all the schools, this process is summed up as Guru Yoga, although it would not have been possible for Buddha himself to have done it. Ideally, it would involve an incarnate teacher, but without one, one may use Vajradhara which is the same as Samantabhadra from the First Transmission, or Avalokiteshvara, or even in Hinduism, Adi Shankara allows something similar by using Sri Daksinamurti or a title of Shiva designating him as the right-hand path. Such things are reflected in the phrase "blessed is he whose own soul is his guru".

It is not something anyone has to do, but is a designated safe house for those seeking more intensity than an outer rite or simple relaxation.

[Clear Light]

Ah, perhaps of interest to some of us, there is a little-known-about Tibetan ZEN tradition :

Sam van Schaik - Tibetan Zen "Discovering a Lost Tradition" (2015, Snow Lion) [1]

And as I presume, "you" the readers of this thread are probably already aware, "Emptiness" and ZEN have an intimate relationship eh ?

Chapter 5. Encounter and Emptiness

EMPTINESS AND ZEN

Though the Laṅkāvatāra sūtra was an important scriptural source in the early development of Zen, as we saw in the previous chapter, it gradually lost this role as lineages began to make more use of the Perfection of Wisdom literature, especially the Vajracchedikā sūtra. Nowhere is this more clear than in the Platform Sutra composed (or compiled) by Shenhui in the eighth century, which extols the virtues of the Vajracchedikā. The Platform Sūtra begins with a narrative account of the enlightenment of the monk Huineng, whose lineage Shenhui adopted. According to the story, when Huineng was a boy he worked in a marketplace selling wood. One day he heard a customer reciting the Vajracchedikā and experienced a sudden clarity of mind. He asked the man where he had learned the sūtra. The man replied that he had been to see the fifth patriarch of the Zen school, Hongren, who had told an audience of monks and laypeople that by merely memorizing the Vajracchedikā they would see their true natures and become buddhas. So Huineng went to find Hongren, joined his monastery, and ultimately became the sixth patriarch of the Zen school.

In the Zen initiation ceremony that forms the center of the Platform Sutra, Huineng uses the Vajracchedikā extensively; this pattern is also found in Pelliot tibétain 116, which as we have seen, contains a complete copy of the Vajracchedikā. So why this particular sūtra? Essentially, the Vajracchedikā is a dialogue between the Buddha and his disciple Subhuti. Out of this conversation, two main topics emerge. The first is the doctrine of emptiness. This is characteristic of all Perfection of Wisdom literature, but the Vajracchedikā takes a particular approach to it, eschewing argument and analysis and not even using the term “emptiness.” Instead the Buddha repeatedly makes contradictory statements, celebrating the virtuous path of a bodhisattva and the qualities of a buddha at the same time as denying that that they exist. This approach is a challenge to dualistic concepts, and particularly to the conceptualization of Buddhist practice as a prescribed path followed by a result.

The rhetorical negations of the Perfection of Wisdom literature were complemented in the Indian Buddhist tradition by the philosophical treatises of the Madhyamaka or “Middle Way” approach. Beginning with Nāgārjuna in the second century ad, Madhyamaka texts attempted to refute current religio-philosophical views on the existence of entities (dharma) found in the Buddhist Abhidharma literature and in various other Indian traditions. According to Madhyamaka, all dharmas are empty (śūnya) of independent existence. Nāgārjuna and his followers often used the negative approach of trying to show the inconsistency in the philosophical positions of others, but also taught that dependent arising (pratītyasamutpāda), the dependence of all things upon other things for their existence, offers a middle way between the extreme views of eternalism and nihilism. Thus the emptiness of entities is the same thing as their being dependently originated.

While the influence of Madhyamaka on Chinese Zen has been discussed, this influence is even more apparent among the Tibetan Zen manuscripts. For example, a brief text called A Teaching on the Essence of Contemplation by Master Haklenayaśas presents Zen as “the instantaneous approach to the Madhyamaka”:

There are many gates to meditation in the greater vehicle. The ultimate among them is the instantaneous approach to the Madhyamaka. The instantaneous approach has no method. One just cultivates the nature of reality in this way: phenomena are mind, and mind is uncreated. In that it is uncreated, it is emptiness. Since it is like the sky, it is not a subject for the six sense faculties. This emptiness is what we call experience. Yet within that experience, there is no such thing as experience. Therefore without remaining in the insights gained from studying, cultivate the essential sameness of all phenomena.

This short text—attributed to the Indian master who came to be counted as the twenty-third in the Indian lineage of Zen patriarchs—offers a practice-based Madhyamaka, where emptiness is understood through two stages, first understanding that all phenomena are mental, and second that the mind is “uncreated”—does not exist in and of itself. This approach to the Madhyamaka was also very popular in the later Tibetan Sakya and Kagyü traditions.

[1] It's a book I bought when it first got published but I figured it is relevant to this thread and might help to illumine what "emptiness" is pointing to but from a different perspective !

[Ron Mauer Sr]

Meditating on anything, including emptiness, seems like an effort to me.

Meditation using TM is supposed to be an effortless process. Let the mind relax as the meditator gently thinks the mantra then lets it go.

If memory serves me (Transcendental Mediation, 1977) when the mind is sufficiently quiet, the meditator dips down into the "field of all possibilities". The trick is, after years of meditation, to develop the ability to think at that level while remaining there.

Sometimes my meditations are deep, as I rise up to the surface, I am not sure where I am and I am not aware of anything. Those are great. More often the sessions are filled with thoughts without going deep.

Wish I had made more progress but I am not the ideal student. The motivation for me to start TM was to get experience of being quiet enough to receive intuitive information and guidance. A few times I have amazed myself but usually there is nothing. TM teachers used to say "Pay no attention to your experience." I should check to see if that instruction has changed.

[greybeard]

Seems to me there are several types of meditation.
One where you are thinking about something specific---focusing one pointed.

The other, where after some kind of starting procedure, whatever comes up is a happening in awareness.
Clouds in the sky--they come and go but the sky is the one where any focus is upon.

Chris

[shaberon]

Posted by greybeard (here)
One where you are thinking about something specific---focusing one pointed.

The other, where after some kind of starting procedure, whatever comes up is a happening in awareness.
Clouds in the sky--they come and go but the sky is the one where any focus is upon.

Yes, One Pointed is Eka Gata, that consciousness which can remain on the tip of a needle indefinitely. This may be cultivated to Vispassa or With Seed or With Images, which is visualization, which becomes samadhi.

Second kind is Shamatha or Tranquility having partly at least, the intent to tranquilize discursive and disturbing uprisings.

Sky as the focus may be the best pan-Indian Raja Yoga metaphor, it is like this in Buddhism, and to this point is a very close parallel to Shiva and Shakti.

Its letter is Kha. And this letter is the root of "Khecari" or Sky Goer which is still basically the same in any Raja Yoga. However that is telling us something about flight, not just the surroundings of the sky itself. That marks some kind of transition, which is very close to Pranayama. And then in Buddhism, when the energy of flight arises, this is more commonly called Dakini. So as lay practitioners it is best to keep our training and practice on the "near side" of Pranayama--Khecari--Dakini.

Past that point you run into multiple traditions or strands of practice, and mentioning Lankavatara Sutra is the correct source, as there become a few different interpretations of its subject, Alaya, within Buddhism. Similarly, around the same stage of development, Shiva, Shakti, and Vishnu at least, drift apart into different standards and practices.

The fireball to the whole thing, if you will, is Jagganatha at Orissa, in the sense that there is a magical Sandhabhasya or Twilight Language which is understood in common by adepts of these various sects. Jagganatha is in a somewhat unique position of being understood or accepted by everybody. This appears to be most completely replicated in Nepal, where several cities are based on mandalas, some are Buddhist, and some are Shakti or Sri Kula, and people mix in both with no sense of schism. The national deity is Shiva as Pasupati. So those three, at least, are highly mutually intelligible, while it is also possible to maintain that the basket of Indian Buddhism may have moved largely to Tibet, but is completely in Nepal.

Within Buddhism, or, validly according to metaphysics or Abhidharma, there is a philosophy which was once called Nirakara Vijnana Vada or Yogacara Madhyamika around the time of the First Transmission or building of Samye' monastery in Tibet, has not been accepted by the mainstream, and in later times was called Shentong by Dolpopa and followed by Jonang Taranatha. On close analysis, it is the same thing as Parabrahm as expounded by Adi Shankara of Hinduism, with the main thing making it Buddhist being Bodhi Mind, the Sky.

The trouble with it is that after all the no self discussions, in Buddhism, there is Atma or self or what everybody thinks Buddha was attacking or trying to get rid of. So after all this training and philosophy, there apparently is a blatant contradiction. So this is like a personal equivalent of Naro throwing away his library or Milarepa moving a mountain stone by stone. That's kind of why we got kicked out for giving everybody "scrambled brains".

If it was called the self of no self, perhaps that is a better approach.

The only way Shentong can even be seen is to have Prasangika Madhyamika on one side and Yogacara on the other, to get what can be gotten from these and some of the other schools, and then it is like a central super-position, all and none of them.

Even if the majority of Buddhists are unaware of its existence, in all cases, the Sky--Bodhi Mind is Vajrasattva, a rite or practice is not real unless he is involved. What is done could be considered the use, development, progress, achievement of Vajrasattva. He could be called the way to safely summon and harness Dakini. On this, we would say all Buddhists are performing the same Path, whether they follow Nyingma or Shingon or whatever, but it is unclear whether other Yogas have the same Bodhi Mind motivation or express it so strongly. One of the main things that sways me to Buddhism is not really whether there is an Atma or what it is, but again it is a moral statement about the importance of Bodhi Mind. Wisdom of Emptiness mixed with intense concern for the world of Form. That could perhaps be called a contradiction to start with, which is fine, since we are going to the center of duality, not either side.

[Clear Light]

Oh, but with regard to the Emptiness of Emptiness [1], and thus what if anything can be even Provisionally Posited about such Profound Negation, I would put it like this (for now at least) :

Our ultimate nature whilst being "unconditioned" (free from all reference points) is yet endowed with the Spontaneity of all the Buddha qualities such as Wisdom, Joy, Creativity (tsal) and Compassion

[1] Rangtong-Shentong

[Chester]

For what its worth... in my own experience, I have come upon "something" that I cannot describe but once 'apprehended,' I found myself never the same. It happened in meditation and it seemed to occur when I was in that state one might say was of this emptiness.

Ever after I had this sense that I "knew" something... that I was something that actually cannot be when considered from the relative world. The Absolute?

Its like I had some sort of direct experience that stuck, changed me... and I don't mean I became some sort of "new, improved, morally driven, walk on water type enlightened being"... but its like, I could see, once apprehended, I couldn't undo it. Attempts to try seemed to bring experiences that always led me back. And sometimes these experiences are not so fun but always after they occur there's that knowing of having been foolish again.

[Clear Light]

Posted by Sammy (here)
For what its worth... in my own experience, I have come upon "something" that I cannot describe but once 'apprehended,' I found myself never the same. It happened in meditation and it seemed to occur when I was in that state one might say was of this emptiness.

Ever after I had this sense that I "knew" something... that I was something that actually cannot be when considered from the relative world. The Absolute?

Its like I had some sort of direct experience that stuck, changed me... and I don't mean I became some sort of "new, improved, morally driven, walk on water type enlightened being"... but its like, I could see, once apprehended, I couldn't undo it. Attempts to try seemed to bring experiences that always led me back. And sometimes these experiences are not so fun but always after they occur there's that knowing of having been foolish again.

Ah, FWIW Sammy, and to tell a story, LOL, *before* I had even heard of Spirituality (let alone Meditation / Paths / Enlightenment etc), totally out-of-the-blue and quite unexpectedly, some kind of "experience" seemed to happen and it was only *afterwards* (when the conceptual mind kicked back in) that there was an attempt to "explain" it, as in to rationalise it, because at that time I had no frame-of-reference for it ... but "something" had changed within ... thus to get to the chase (so-to-say) : The "search" began !!!

Now, of course, to each their own (so-to-say) but for whatever reasons, the terminology of Dzogchen (or the Great Perfection / Completeness) appealed the most because it describes such things as the "Natural State", the Nature of Mind, Rigpa, self-knowing-awareness ... and I felt as if what I was reading was pointing to the same (or similar) type of experience !

Indeed, as I am sure you're already aware, it is advised *not* to try and repeat certain *experiences* as it potentially interrupts the natural-flow-of-the-mind and can even become an obstacle eh ?

From : A Spacious Path to Freedom (Snow Lion publications 1998)

The mind-itself is certainly empty and unestablished. Your mind is intangible like empty space. Is it like that or not? Observe your own mind!

Empty and void, but without a nihilistic view, self-arisen, primordial wisdom is original, clear consciousness. Self-arisen and self-illuminating, it is like the essence of the sun. Is it like that or not? Observe your own mind!

The primordial wisdom of awareness is certainly unceasing. Uninterrupted awareness is like the current of a river. Is it like that or not? Observe your own mind!

The dispersing discursive thoughts are certainly not being grasped. This intangible dispersion is like a hazy sky. Is it like that or not? Observe your own mind!

Recognize all appearances as self-appearing. Self-appearing phenomena are like reflections in a mirror. Is it like that or not? Observe your own mind!

All signs are certainly released in their own state. Self-arising and self-releasing, they are like clouds in the sky. Is it like that or not? Observe your own mind!

Best Wishes

[Clear Light]

Posted by Clear Light (here)

From : A Spacious Path to Freedom (Snow Lion publications 1998)

The mind-itself is certainly empty and unestablished. Your mind is intangible like empty space. Is it like that or not? Observe your own mind!

Empty and void, but without a nihilistic view, self-arisen, primordial wisdom is original, clear consciousness. Self-arisen and self-illuminating, it is like the essence of the sun. Is it like that or not? Observe your own mind!

The primordial wisdom of awareness is certainly unceasing. Uninterrupted awareness is like the current of a river. Is it like that or not? Observe your own mind!

The dispersing discursive thoughts are certainly not being grasped. This intangible dispersion is like a hazy sky. Is it like that or not? Observe your own mind!

Recognize all appearances as self-appearing. Self-appearing phenomena are like reflections in a mirror. Is it like that or not? Observe your own mind!

All signs are certainly released in their own state. Self-arising and self-releasing, they are like clouds in the sky. Is it like that or not? Observe your own mind!

Oh, but to avoid any confusion with other Paths and their own Terminology (or to at least to minimize it as much as possible) I've highlighted where the word "self" appears above because :

From : The Crystal and the Way of Light (Copyright © 2000)

The particular method of Dzogchen is called the Path of Self-Liberation, and to apply it nothing need be renounced, purified, or transformed. Whatever arises as one's karmic vision is used as the path. The great master Pha Tampa Sangye once said:

It's not the circumstances which arise as one's karmic vision that condition a person into the dualistic state; it's a person's own attachment that enables what arises to condition him.

If this attachment is to be cut through in the most rapid and effective way, the capacity for self-liberation inherent in the primordial state must be brought into play. The term self liberation should not, however, be taken as implying that there is some 'self or 'ego' there to be liberated. It is a fundamental assumption, as we have already said, at the Dzogchen level, that all phenomenon are devoid of self-nature and it is understood that no phenomena has inherent existence. Self-Liberation, in the Dzogchen sense, means that whatever manifests in the field of the practitioner's experience is allowed to arise just as it is, without judgment of it as good or bad, beautiful or ugly. And in that same moment, if there is no clinging, or attachment, without effort, or even volition, whatever it is that arises, whether as a thought or as a conceptualization of a seemingly external event, automatically liberates itself, by itself, and of itself. Practicing in this way, the seeds of the poison tree of dualistic vision never even get a chance to sprout, much less to take root and grow.

So the practitioner lives his or her life in an ordinary way, without needing any rules other than one's own awareness, always remaining in the primordial state through integrating that state with whatever arises as part of experience—with absolutely nothing to be seen outwardly to show that one is practicing. This is what is meant by self-liberation, this is what is meant by the name Dzogchen—which means Great Perfection—and this is what is meant by non-dual contemplation, or simply contemplation.