For Joyce/ Buddhism's Anatta (No-Self) and Advaita

[Guest guest]

Hi, many thanks, rather good. I have a small book of teachings on

sunnata/emptiness given in 1961 by the Thai master, Ajaan Buddhadasa

bhikkhu. Since this is rather an uncommon topic for a Thera

teaching, I mentioned it on the dhamma-list and some one informed me

(rudely) that this sunnyata thing was Mahayana and not pure Thera. So

- taking the bit in my teeth Im posting the whole teaching bit by bit

on this list (no copy right to worry about). And while my motivation

for doing this was not pure at the beginning of this exercise, it has

been good for me and a few others who follow along. Buddhadasa

specifically mentions as the teachings of "Self" as being not

Buddhist. And Im guessing that he is placing this in the same

catagory as a separate 'God'. Im also guessing that this is for the

benefit of practice, since 'emptiness', this experience and following

cognition is a part of the stages of Vipassana. A traditional

vipassana teacher in Myanmar will only speak about practice and

conventional Buddhist thought in public talks, yet in practice

experience and interview, the full range of what one might identify

as 'Mahayana" and "Vajrayana" is discussed. Buddhadasa bhikkhu's

teaching method re-emptiness is really pure Dzogchen. He does mention

the experiences of jhanas, but dismisses these as not final emptiness.

So one clings to nothing as 'I' and 'mine'. I have practiced my way

through the entirety of Buddhism and found just this as the core

teaching. In Buddhism, there is the moment to moment recognition of

emptiness, one is in the vacinity of emptiness before one reaches the

final supreme state utterly free of the clinging mind. One practices

to maintain awareness, nirvana, clarity and radiance.

But, there is a difference in that in Buddhist practice, it is very

important to prepare the mind for recognition of emptiness and its

full meaning through the awakening of altruistic mind - Metta,

Bodhisattva, Tonglen, Brahma Viharas etc. Without this the awakening

can be rough as the shift in realty can be overwhelming. I did not

have this awareness of compassionate mind early in my rather intense

greedy zen practice and found myself in a mess similar to what I see

in a few persons response to initial kundalini experience. So

starting at grad school I had to back track to kindergarten and go

through again.

Still, in the example of Ramana Maharshi, even if I have only

encountered him through photos and books, I see the same radiant mind

and kindness that is present in the Buddhist masters. If I could end

up just there, I would be content, whatever its called.

Thank you for your help with this.....

The end result for all beings must be the same -but I wasn't certain

that this is true, or just my (clinging) need for it to be true.

Metta,

Joyce

-

Hey Joyce,

 

Maybe this was posted just before you returned, but would be relevant to the question you raised.

 

Glo

[Guest guest]

Hi Joyce,

> Hi, many thanks, rather good. I have a small book of teachings on

>sunnata/emptiness given in 1961 by the Thai master, Ajaan Buddhadasa

>bhikkhu. Since this is rather an uncommon topic for a Thera teaching, I

>mentioned it on the dhamma-list and some one informed me (rudely) that

>this sunnyata thing was Mahayana and not pure Thera. So - taking the bit

>in my teeth Im posting the whole teaching bit by bit on this list (no copy

>right to worry about). And while my motivation for doing this was not pure

>at the beginning of this exercise, it has been good for me and a few

>others who follow along. Buddhadasa specifically mentions as the

>teachings of "Self" as being not Buddhist. And Im guessing that he is

>placing this in the same catagory as a separate 'God'. Im also guessing

>that this is for the benefit of practice, since 'emptiness', this

>experience and following cognition is a part of the stages of Vipassana.

> A traditional vipassana teacher in Myanmar will only speak about practice

>and conventional Buddhist thought in public talks, yet in practice

>experience and interview, the full range of what one might identify as

>'Mahayana" and "Vajrayana" is discussed. Buddhadasa bhikkhu's teaching

>method re-emptiness is really pure Dzogchen. He does mention the

>experiences of jhanas, but dismisses these as not final emptiness. So one

>clings to nothing as 'I' and 'mine'. I have practiced my way through the

>entirety of Buddhism and found just this as the core teaching. In

>Buddhism, there is the moment to moment recognition of emptiness, one is

>in the vacinity of emptiness before one reaches the final supreme state

>utterly free of the clinging mind. One practices to maintain awareness,

>nirvana, clarity and radiance.

 

I don't really think it matters much which practices a person uses.

Whatever suits you... "different strokes for different folks." When I

know someone who goes from teacher to teacher and tradition to tradition, I

suggest that he should just pick one and stay with it.

 

There are exceptions, of course... Mantak Chia studied with a number of

teachers in different traditions and seems to have made good use of it,

though his books are in a Taoist framework.

>But, there is a difference in that in Buddhist practice, it is very

>important to prepare the mind for recognition of emptiness and its full

>meaning through the awakening of altruistic mind - Metta, Bodhisattva,

>Tonglen, Brahma Viharas etc. Without this the awakening can be rough as

>the shift in realty can be overwhelming.

 

That makes sense, though I'm not sure how much one can be prepared. When I

went into the All, it took me three years to get back to "normal" human

life. I worked at it because I had small children who needed me... and a

sense that there were other things for me to do here.

> I did not have this awareness of compassionate mind early in my rather

>intense greedy zen practice and found myself in a mess

 

I would be interested in hearing more about this, if you want to share it.

> similar to what I see in a few persons response to initial kundalini

>experience. So starting at grad school I had to back track to kindergarten

>and go through again. Still, in the example of Ramana Maharshi, even if I

>have only encountered him through photos and books, I see the same radiant

>mind and kindness that is present in the Buddhist masters. If I could end

>up just there, I would be content, whatever its called. Thank you for

>your help with this.....

>The end result for all beings must be the same -but I wasn't certain that

>this is true, or just my (clinging) need for it to be true.

 

It's true, but individual reaction/response varies. Ramana's response was

rather different from that of Gandhi... or Meister Eckhart... or Jesus...

or Gautama... or Walt Whitman... or T.S. Eliot... or Dag Hammerskjold...

or Harsha...

 

Love,

Dharma