Regarding the All, One Mind, Awareness...

I just wanted to offer another way of looking at things, as a response to those who talk about Primordial Awareness, Self, One Mind, Duality/Non-Duality, PCE/not-PCE, etc... basically any kind of discourse involving a particular way of experiencing things.

Alex said[1]: "This explains why the Buddha remained silent when asked about the existence of a Self. Answering "Yes" would mean that there is an eternal abiding inherent essence beyond phenomena (eternalism), while answering "No" would lead to nihilism, the other extreme view. The Buddha's way is the middle way, between these two extremes. There is a self, but this self is an conventional concept to describe something that appears to be and is experienced as such, but it not an abiding ultimate reality."

I'm not sure that is what is meant by the Middle Way. Check out this sutta: www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.048.than.html .

When asked about such things it seems the Buddha would divert the conversation to talking about dependent origination, which is in essence: suffering, why it arises, why it ceases, and how to learn to deal with it such that it ceases. None of those involve talk of 'me' or 'not-me' or 'self' or 'other' or 'All' or 'nothing' or 'One Mind' or anything of the sort. Just suffering-arising-cessation-path.

Thinking of it that way seems to avoid the necessity of these cosmological/metaphysical categorizations... and leads to a very straightforward practice: do not worry about attention wave, or what you are abiding as, or whether there is an All or not, or whether there is Nibbana or not, in a PCE or not, etc... just look: is there suffering? If so, why did it arise? etc...

Thoughts?

[1] kennethfolkdharma.wetpaint.com/thread/47...+of+the+Bahiya+Sutta

Another such sutta: www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.046.than.html . Buddha would not even address whether the one who makes an action is the same one as the one who experiences the result of that action.

Why can't this be discussed in the original topic, in the original context? Is it another way to introduce the PCE again?

Please explain, beoman.

Thanks!

Sure thing.

It was actually out of consideration of the new moderation rules that I posted it in a new thread. The thread I quoted was a practice thread, and seemed to be directly related to exploring the Bahiya Sutta in a Zen context. My response was sort of directly opposed to that, recommending a different approach to practice. I did not want to monopolize by posting my opinions on others' practice threads - I have had this thought before, and it applies not only to that thread but to any threads that talk about this type of practice - so I thought I should mention it here.

Would it have been more appropriate to post in the original thread? If so then I can move it there and you can delete this one.

(I almost forgot to mention the PCE but felt I should include it as the PCE/no-PCE type of practice seems to be another example of what I am suggesting not to do.)

I think you should post it in the original thread and be very careful to keep it in the context that AleX Weith has created there.

I will now lock this thread.

Thank you.