Something and nothing

I'd also suggest just because you aren't doing stuff doesn't mean everything is random.

What is the "Mike Monson thing?"

-cmarti

Oh, and by "Mike Monson thing" I mean this body/mind right hear doing stuff, eating, pooping, peeing, having kids, taking care of those kids, driving, sleeping, working, and on and on. This thing right here. The thing that has a brain that makes up all kinds of stories about Mike Monson and you and you and you. The thing that has a brain and memories and trauma and DNA.

So, to me, there is this "Mike Monson" thing that is a bare body in the world, that is also a mind and a force upon the world, that makes up stories about itself, that is completely temporary yet completely not.

... to me, there is this "Mike Monson" thing that is a bare body in the world, that is also a mind and a force upon the world, that makes up stories about itself, that is completely temporary yet completely not.


-michaelmonson

the bold part -->> also a story, no?

the bold part -->> also a story, no?

-ona

who's asking?

This excerpt below is from Zen Mind, Beginners Mind and it expresses better than me how things appear to happen, to me. My original question that started this thread is basically based upon this point of view.

To try again, I'm wondering if the practitioners who are seeking a way to eradicate the feeling of being a self are getting too hung up the "nothing" part of the dharma, which is actually not a problem. It is when nothing takes a form (and that is constantly) that the real trouble begins and that is what we all need to practice for -- to understand nothing and to learn how to deal with what happens when it takes form, how to have that perfect composure.



I discovered that it is necessary, absolutely necessary, to believe
in nothing. That is, we have to believe in something
which has no form and no color—something which exists
before all forms and colors appear. This is a very important
point. No matter what god or doctrine you believe in, if
you become attached to it, your belief will be based more
or less on a self-centered idea. You strive for a perfect faith
in order to save yourself. But it will take time to attain such
a perfect faith. You will be involved in an idealistic practice.
In constantly seeking to actualize your ideal, you will have
no time for composure. But if you are always prepared for
accepting everything we see as something appearing from
nothing, knowing that there is some reason why a phenomenal
existence of such and such form and color appears, then
at that moment you will have perfect composure.



So it is absolutely necessary for everyone to believe in
nothing. But I do not mean voidness. There is something,
but that something is something which is always prepared
for taking some particular form, and it has some rules, or
theory, or truth in its activity. This is called Buddha nature,
or Buddha himself. When this existence is personified we call
it Buddha; when we understand it as the ultimate truth we
call it Dharma; and when we accept the truth and act as a
part of the Buddha, or according to the theory, we call ourselves
Sangha. But even though there are three Buddha forms,
it is one existence which has no form or color, and it is
always ready to take form and color. This is not just theory.
This is not just the teaching of Buddhism. This is the absolutely
necessary understanding of our life. Without this understanding
our religion will not help us. We will be bound
by our religion, and we will have more trouble because of
it. If you become the victim of Buddhism, I may be very
happy, but you will not be so happy. So this kind of understanding
is very, very important.

Mike, I think I addressed this issue when I posited two ways of dealing with it earlier today. "Way" number two was this:
"2. Accept that there is an arising sense that there is a permanent, enduring self, knowing that this is just a chimera and part of the ongoing stream of experience that we cannot avoid, knowing that this, too, is another empty and conditioned part of relative experience"

Now, I also posited a number one way of viewing this issue:

"1. Investigate it all, right down to the "microscopic" level if you have to, taking vipassana to its limits in an attempt to "grok" the processes that seem to generate the sense of a permanent, enduring self so that you can see how the processes are constructed, hoping to eliminate them by breaking them into smaller, more fundamental or atomic pieces"

I believe that the people whose conversation about emotions and self you have been lurking on are using this number one view, and as you said after I posted it, it can be worthwhile.

So I see no real conflict here and in fact, as I said to Eran earlier, I see that these two views can be complimentary. One can do both, hold both views, at the same time. In fact, I would bet a lot of money that Alex Weith, the person who created that conversation and whose "experiment" it documents, is probably holding both views most of the time. Alex is a member here, too. Maybe he'll pop up and validate my claim


-cmarti

Yes yes and yes.

So maybe the answer to my question is no, that their way of dealing with nothing becoming something is to "ground their emotions."

My thought was that maybe such practices showed a desire to keep living in "nothing" and to prevent things from ever taking form in order to avoid all the trouble. (ahh that is what I was asking!! Finally) I thought maybe pracitioners at a certain stage of insight could see how wonderful and frictionless things can be in that empty space before, after and between things happening and the self sense arising and want to figure out a way to just live there. So, no?

I think I said this earlier -- when I am buzzin along with good, loose open continuity of disembedded awareness with momentum, sensations will naturally arise that don't get a chance to fester and grow and become really painful -- they just kind of die on the vine. I've wondered at times if this is what is meant by "grounding emotions."

I guess I don't really have a set name for it.
If our practice is detailed and open enough, It is the space we start to see in between sensations, that instant before emptiness takes form.
Am I out on a limb on my own here? I truly know that place.

That's weird. That was the post that got me started.

Maybe a constant peace, happiness and compassion is possible and will lead to a complete vanishing of the remaining sense of self. And, maybe, this is complete and perfect enlightenment as promised, I guess by Mr. Buddha.

Man, I certainly don't think so. And I certainly suspect that spending any time and energy wishing after such a thing will only make it less likely to ever happen.

What am I missing here? Really. It seems reasonable to get better and better at practicing and maybe for an extended period to be so on top of things that that pesky "sense of self" causes very little trouble -- that one gets good at living at peace with all things all the time as they arise. This can happen sometimes for some people for certain periods of time -- but like everything else, this wonderful thing will end ... and then, maybe, come back .... only to end again and again and again

More from Zen Mind, Beginners Mind:

Usually when you do something, you want to achieve something,

you attach to some result. From achievement to

non-achievement means to be rid of the unnecessary and

bad results of effort. If you do something in the spirit of

non-achievement, there is a good quality in it. So just to do

something without any particular effort is enough. When

you make some special effort to achieve something, some

excessive quality, some extra element is involved in it. You

should get rid of excessive things. If your practice is good,

without being aware of it you will become proud of your

practice. That pride is extra. What you do is good, but

something more is added to it. So you should get rid of that

something which is extra. This point is very, very important,

but usually we are not subtle enough to realize it, and we go

in the wrong direction.

Because all of us are doing the same thing, making the

same mistake, we do not realize it. So without realizing it,

we are making many mistakes. And we create problems

among us. This kind of bad effort is called being "Dharmaridden,"

or "practice-ridden." You are involved in some

idea of practice or attainment, and you cannot get out of it.

When you are involved in some dualistic idea, it means your

practice is not pure. By purity we do not mean to polish

something, trying to make some impure thing pure. By

purity we just mean things as they are. When something is

added, that is impure. When something becomes dualistic,

that is not pure. If you think you will get something from

practicing zazen, already you are involved in impure practice.

It is all right to say there is practice, and there is

enlightenment, but we should not be caught by the statement.

You should not be tainted by it. When you practice

zazen, just practice zazen. If enlightenment comes, it just

comes. We should not attach to the attainment. The true

quality of zazen is always there, even if you are not aware

of it, so forget all about what you think you may have gained

from it. Just do it. The quality of zazen will express itself;

then you will have it.

People ask what it means to practice zazen with no gaining

idea, what kind of effort is necessary for that kind of practice.

The answer is: effort to get rid of something extra

from our practice. If some extra idea comes, you should try

to stop it; you should remain in pure practice. That is the

point towards which our effort is directed



You are living in this world as one individual, but before

you take the form of a human being, you are already there,

always there. We are always here. Do you understand? You

think before you were born you were not here. But how is

it possible for you to appear in this world, when there is no

you? Because you are already there, you can appear in the

world. Also, it is not possible for something to vanish

which does not exist. Because something is there, something

can vanish. You may think that when you die, you disappear,

you no longer exist. But even though you vanish, something

which is existent cannot be non-existent. That is the magic.

We ourselves cannot put any magic spells on this world.

The world is its own magic. If we are looking at something,

it can vanish from our sight, but if we do not try to see it,

that something cannot vanish. Because you are watching it,

it can disappear, but if no one is watching, how is it possible

for anything to disappear? If someone is watching you, you

can escape from him, but if no one is watching, you cannot

escape from yourself.

Mike, I think that's really a deep question.

You said: "Maybe a constant peace, happiness and compassion is possible and will
lead to a complete vanishing of the remaining sense of self. And, maybe,
this is complete and perfect enlightenment as promised, I guess by Mr.
Buddha.
Man, I certainly don't think so. And I certainly suspect that spending
any time and energy wishing after such a thing will only make it less
likely to ever happen."

Now in that lovely followup quote, again and again he says not to add anything to the practice. Not to attach anything to it.

When you believe, in your heart:
"Man, I certainly don't think so. And I certainly suspect that spending
any time and energy wishing after such a thing will only make it less
likely to ever happen." THAT is adding a whole lot of doubt and disbelief to your practice, no? It may seem like you are NOT adding something. But in fact you are adding a negative belief, a belief that it won't work and will not result in any awakening.

In fact, it's almost like saying "I'm going to do this practice, but I don't believe for a second it's worth crap."

That's like putting on concrete boots and going for a swim.

I say this bluntly, because you can take it, and I mean it from my heart, with a ton of care, not with any disrespect. Think about it.

The first thing from me you quoted was me paraphrasing something from the post Chris said to read.

I thought that my follow-up quote backed up my assertion that looking for a certain result in practice made it less likely. No?

The idea is to practice without getting attached to any gaining ideas - to not know to never know to see things fresh and not add anything to what is happening. This leaves room for anything and everything to happen.

But between you and me - something will always inevitably come along that your sense of self just can't handle if only for an instant and that is a wonderful thing

Hm. I think it's true, that clinging to preconceptions or expectations is a hindrance to practice. But my point (perhaps based on misreading) was that those preconceptions or expectations can equally be "positive" or "negative" expectations. ie aversion is no better or worse than clinging.

Except remember that I have the very unpopular idea that there aren't different practices for awakening. I think that it is always looking at exactly what is really going on.

Do you think that a Zen master never sat and closely and passionately examined the whole idea and feeling of "me?" that he or she gets to skip that part?

A vipassanick might sit with certain investigative intentions but they won't get anywhere in the actual process until they suspend their preconceived notions and expectations and just look.

@mike and chris, regarding this types of practice, does this way of looking at it make sense? Because I see the point Mike is making, yet I am not 100% sure there's not actually two ways of practicing.

So for example, imagine I am watching a television show, and my assignment is that every time a chicken comes on screen, I have to say to myself "chicken". So I'm focused on the TV screen as a whole, but I'm being very aware of which characters are coming and going. I can't pay attention to the story line, because I need to focus on the chickens appearing and disappearing.

Now on the other hand, my assignment could be to sit with the television show, but just allow the imagery on the screen to flow by without even noticing that there are chickens or dogs or anything else - just a flow of colored lights blinking basically, so I'm not even moving to the stage of naming or labeling what things are, or even keeping a sharp focus on the screen, or noticing the moment when they appear and disappear.

Does this describe - in a very primitive way at least - the distinction between the two kinds of practice?

vipassinick might need to go in the dictionary, btw

My problem isn't with investigating the feeling of "me" - that is certainly a fascinating and natural thing to do.

What I'm trying (and failing miserably) to understand are practices meant to eradicate permanently the sense of self and achieve a state of constant peace happiness and bliss. I just am baffled by that.

Does anyone actually think it's possible to be on earth in this body and never ever feel any self-centered discomfort, pain?

Do you think adyashanti gets up in the morning and goes through each day with no agenda, no expectations, no wants? That he never gets his feelings hurt or his ego bruised? That he never, even for an instant, hopes for something?

Isn't this impulse to completely eradicate the self the ultimate in spiritual bypassing? A desire to somehow live a life in which ones's feelings are never hurt?

All that said I guess I can shut up about it now. Clearly I'm not interested in these things myself and I think I'm at least settled on why. For now at least.

I think we end up going on two tracks with this thread, some of my answers being written without specific reference to the original question and context... and then I read back and I think they don't make much sense.

but in any case, I can't answer "does anyone actually think" without presuming what others might think, but based on my personal experience I can say the following:

Is it possible to eliminate physical pain - such as when you drop a rock on your foot? Not the nervous system response, no. But a good portion of pain is an emotional response on top of the initial natural response. Compared to a couple years ago I have far less pain or discomfort than I used to. That is, i can have a stomach pain, a blister, a cold, just hit my knee on the chair... sure it hurts, but it doesn't really bother me that it hurts. It just kind of hurts for a while, and I don't pay much attention to it unless it requires repair or treatment. It's just not a focus. I don't know when that crept into my experience, but it seems pretty typical now.

Can one never get ones feelings hurt or ego bruised? Again, compared to two years ago, I have very little care about what people say or think about me. I tend to speak honestly and have to be more aware of not saying things that might be taken the wrong way by other people, because I feel very little shame, guilt, worry they will think I'm an idiot etc. I often make an effort to write or speak so that it sounds apologetic or carefully worded, because otherwise it can sound cocky, and I don't want to harm anyone else or make them feel bad. I used to be REALLY REALLY neurotic about what other people thought of me, or feel like the idiot who wasn't picked in gym class (yes, that was me), and so on. Now I feel completely comfortable with myself and very confident. If I mess up (break something in a store, bump into someone etc) I only feel bad that I inconvenienced them, I don't beat up on myself for being a klutz. You could try to hurt my feelings, but they are very very unaffected by that kind of thing now. It does happen in a mild way sometimes, especially with very close friends or family, where I have a long emotional history with them.

Do I ever hope for anything, have an agenda, etc.? That's harder to answer. Yes and no. Fact is I used to spend a lot of time fantasizing in detail about what to do next, how to respond to this or that situation, what I'd be doing in a month or next year, what I needed to do today, writing and rewriting to-do lists. Now I tend to just do stuff, kind of on automatic, and I'm just as productive as before. I just don't spend much time thinking about how it's going to happen or whatever, it just kind of works itself out.

So I'm not where some people you are referring to might seem to be (or are trying to get to), but I've had some experiences that seem to point to those kinds of things being possible, so i can't say "no way!" I have to say "I just don't know how far it can go."

Sorry to babble on and on here, but re-reading that what seems to be a theme is that I don't *think about shit as much*. If you don't have that World Wrestling Federation announcer in your head narrating and critiquing and yelling all day long, the same stuff happens, you just don't spend 70% of your mental energy dwelling on it. Which comes back to suffering:

Nail in foot + cursing your bad luck and the day some idiot left that nail on the floor and why didn't you put shoes on before going in the garage because your whole life is full of these bad things and now you'll get tetanus and die = a pile of suffering

Nail in foot + not all those thoughts = yell in pain, remove nail, wash foot, go get tetanus shot or put bandaid on it, limp for a few days

I think we end up going on two tracks with this thread, some of my answers being written without specific reference to the original question and context... and then I read back and I think they don't make much sense.
but in any case, I can't answer "does anyone actually think" without presuming what others might think, but based on my personal experience I can say the following:
Is it possible to eliminate physical pain - such as when you drop a rock on your foot? Not the nervous system response, no. But a good portion of pain is an emotional response on top of the initial natural response. Compared to a couple years ago I have far less pain or discomfort than I used to. That is, i can have a stomach pain, a blister, a cold, just hit my knee on the chair... sure it hurts, but it doesn't really bother me that it hurts. It just kind of hurts for a while, and I don't pay much attention to it unless it requires repair or treatment. It's just not a focus. I don't know when that crept into my experience, but it seems pretty typical now.
Can one never get ones feelings hurt or ego bruised? Again, compared to two years ago, I have very little care about what people say or think about me. I tend to speak honestly and have to be more aware of not saying things that might be taken the wrong way by other people, because I feel very little shame, guilt, worry they will think I'm an idiot etc. I often make an effort to write or speak so that it sounds apologetic or carefully worded, because otherwise it can sound cocky, and I don't want to harm anyone else or make them feel bad. I used to be REALLY REALLY neurotic about what other people thought of me, or feel like the idiot who wasn't picked in gym class (yes, that was me), and so on. Now I feel completely comfortable with myself and very confident. If I mess up (break something in a store, bump into someone etc) I only feel bad that I inconvenienced them, I don't beat up on myself for being a klutz. You could try to hurt my feelings, but they are very very unaffected by that kind of thing now. It does happen in a mild way sometimes, especially with very close friends or family, where I have a long emotional history with them.
Do I ever hope for anything, have an agenda, etc.? That's harder to answer. Yes and no. Fact is I used to spend a lot of time fantasizing in detail about what to do next, how to respond to this or that situation, what I'd be doing in a month or next year, what I needed to do today, writing and rewriting to-do lists. Now I tend to just do stuff, kind of on automatic, and I'm just as productive as before. I just don't spend much time thinking about how it's going to happen or whatever, it just kind of works itself out.
So I'm not where some people you are referring to might seem to be (or are trying to get to), but I've had some experiences that seem to point to those kinds of things being possible, so i can't say "no way!" I have to say "I just don't know how far it can go."

-ona

There is no way you are married. And, I really doubt you are raising kids right now.

Sure, all kinds of people in all kinds of ways mature grow get good mental health and learn how to live lives that are fulfilling and not very stressful. Nothing magical or necessarily even mystical or spiritual in that.

But perfect compassion? No.

There will always be things that your sense of self just can't handle - even if just for an instant. And this is a wonderful thing because it means one is living here on earth in community with the rest of us.

There is no way you are married. And, I really doubt you are raising kids right now.
Sure, all kinds of people in all kinds of ways mature grow get good mental health and learn how to live lives that are fulfilling and not very stressful. Nothing magical or necessarily even mystical or spiritual in that.
But perfect compassion? No.
There will always be things that your sense of self just can't handle - even if just for an instant. And this is a wonderful thing because it means one is living here on earth in community with the rest of us.


-michaelmonson

Very funny. Married 20 years. Gainfully employed. Children were not meant to be, no, though I do enjoy the endless screaming of the neighbor's at-that-screaming-age children and the company of nieces and nephews on occasion.

Fact is 40 years of maturing, 3 years of pscyhotherapy, and 6 years taking anti-anxiety or anti-depressants did not make anywhere near the difference that 2 years of meditation and spiritual practice helped. So for me it is a deeply magical, mystical and spiritual experience.