Emptiness of speech

So far, most of us have seen/experienced (in different degrees) the emptiness of mind and the emptiness of body. Some even seem to be permanently free from body and mind. Yet I keep seeing tension between us when issues related to language rise. Some of us have problems with words like "love", "absolute", "rigpa", etc. We say things like "that word is too loaded", "lets drop the AF jargon". I say "yes, yes, yes, lets drop it" when I cling to my beloved dzogchen language. There's even the case of people who cling to their own language and develop "180 degree" views and think that no human being has discovered freedom from the human condition (and yet some dude 2500 years ago stated I am not a human, I am awaken).

Yet words are emptiness and emptiness are words.

Some of us see that there is no difference between the relative and absolute. If that is true, then all words have been, are and will always be free. Free of what? Free of things like believing words exist inherently, and free of clinging to that illusory existence. This freedom is what allows us to make translations, evolve to other terms ( like using PCE instead of shunyata or rigpa) or make equivalences (perhaps saying vipassana is "attentiveness to sensousness").

This freedom is the end of verbal conflict and the rise of respectful and friendly discussions, debates, sharing, etc.

Can we reach emptiness/freedom/realease/actuality/satori/whatever in speech, in order to end our suffering?

Edited for clarity.

"Some even seem to be permanently free from body and mind."

Does this mean they're dead?

Hahaha, I hope not. But now that you mention it, maybe sometimes we get too catatonic

Interesting topic.

Somehow while interacting with others, there is for me an exponential increase in opportunities and inclination to reinforce that very view of separateness which has been attenuated by insight. I think part of this is the resonance effect which characterizes all interpersonal interactions. I can benefit greatly by listening to the words of a deeply awakened person, and the systems of mind which reinforce illusory separateness are likewise evoked when interacting with those who give such systems a strong charge.

This was the reason why i began seriously practicing: to find out how can I express the deepest truth I've glimpsed in everyday life with others? Before I began seriously practicing there was a variable-sized gap between the moments of holding highest view and the rest of the moments of life.. If moments of relaxing in natural surroundings were always close to the pure view, interpersonal moments have always been generally the most distant. Practice has indirectly closed this gap somewhat.

I think that's why I've been drawn back again lately to focusing on holding the purest view possible during interactions, while speaking and gesturing. If that energy that I usually invest into impure separateness views can be held instead in a purified view, there can arise a confidence which seems able to maintain a clarity of intent in terms of what I'm here to do and say, and how I intend to be with others. It's challenging, but so far it's been the most rewarding practice I've done, although only recently have I been able to consistently work it from this end.

In Vajrayana language, speech also refers to energy, including the energetic body. What connections if any do you guys see between the energetic body and holding a pure view with clear intent in social interactions?
-Jake

Right view when speaking is hard as hell for me, but I agree, it must be cultivated. Otherwise what would be the point of abiding in emptiness if one "becomes" when speaking?

As a vajrayanist, my practice is full of prayers, visualizations and mantra. Each verse in the prayer is filled with intent (surrender, release, selfless action, honesty and generosity just to name a few). When using mantra, sometimes it has meaning, sometimes it doesn't have any meaning. When meaning is attached to mantra, it is just like infusing samadhi with right intent through vibrations. When no meaning is attached to mantra, the visualization is the message itself (i.e. a deity, abiding in a pure land), the mantra is infused with the meaning of the visualization. These vibrations are then transmitted to the body and anything perceived by the senses. One has to be fully surrendered (through refuge and bodhicitta) for this to take place.

IMO, meaning is what modifies the subtle energy body. If meaning conveys right action, right effort, right view, etc. then the energy body acts according to meaning little by little. These tantric techniques are fast because of this dynamic.

Ritual also helps: by enacting a microcosm of, say, full refuge/surrender to the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha, while visualizing beings, one can cultivate the act of letting go and establish right view in the presence of awaken and unawaken beings. Why would one want to do this? Awaken and unawaken beings can be used as support to activate our deluded narratives and their projections.

Maybe semioticians or linguists would even argue that narratives and ritual are themselves speech. Lacan would certainly say so. In a sense, vajrayana uses visual narratives to activate our buddha nature (right view, effort, action, etc.).

Edited for clarity