Glo/Merton

[Guest guest]

Glo, your ideas here struck me as well-stated, quite helpful. The

suggestion I get from these words is of the depth of awareness. Simply to

say, "I've arrived (or, conversely) I now fully understand there is no

need to arrive), -- this is it," might not, for some, convey fully the

depth involved. As you suggest, there can be room for paradox, for

different ways of expressing, for a nonlinear view of truth. I find value

in your suggestion that humility may be a virtue (as some have indicated

before you). Thank you for expressing it so well.

 

Dan

 

>"Gloria Lee" <glee

>>

>>>How to attain Perfect Emptiness?! If Perfect Emptiness embraces all

>things,

>>>how can it be attained?

>>

>Oh Harsha, you and your questions...:)

>

>I cannot answer or say "how", but the word attainment as used may more

>likely have referred

>to something other than "to possess" and certainly not "achieved" in the

>context of the quote it was used from. It more likely means to 'to reach an

>end' and as there is no end to the infinite, one does NOT get to the end of

>it. To correct what may be a wrong impression, here is a long answer...

>(Golly, I was only setting this up to get to the second

>part, to share Merton's description..and I am the last person to be

>explaining

>Buddhism, from experience anyway. I am reading this history book to LEARN

>about it, ok?)

>

>Buddhism seems to allow for many

>contradictions, due to the many paths or dharma doors available. Then there

>are many cultural differences from country to country as well. What follows

>is just one example. Zen would seem to allow for and focus on a more sudden

>realization in one lifetime (sartori), yet some forms emphasize just doing

>the practice and not caring if enlightenment comes or not. "We do not sit to

>gain anything, rather the sitting is itself taking the correct attitude of

>Zen."

>Yet very few feel like a Buddha the moment they first sit to meditate. Its

>important to recognize when experience is being described and when absolute

>truth of reality is being described. (Gee,

>these apparent contradictions should be no problem to a nondualist..ha,ha.)

>

>In the Tibetan Buddhist context of the original quote, the Dharma Body

>(dharma-kaya) referred to

>is the true nature of Buddhahood, symbolic of the completion of the path..

>There are 3 manifestation bodies, 1)Nirmana Kaya (the actual physical

>Buddha, the historical one) 2) Samboga Kaya (embodiment of an ideal teacher

>such as Amida, the Buddha of infinite love and compassion) 3) Dharma Kaya

>("truth body" is a universal principle, an absolute reality, formless)

>

>To say one IS a Buddha is considered immodest at the very least. So..

>attainment may not be the best word choice for

>this.. but it seems understandable that for a monk to claim attaining

>Buddhahood might

>show a lack of humility. The Dali Lama is considered by his followers to be

>an incarnation of Avalokiteshvara, the Bodhisattva of Compassion. ( A Sambog

>a Kaya type of incarnation) He himself always describes himself as a "a

>simple Buddhist monk."

>

>

>The previous quote in the Merton passage was:

>"but all leading back to dzogchen, the ultimate emptiness, the unity of

>shunyata and karuna, going 'beyond the dharmakaya' and 'beyond God' to the

>ultimate perfect emptiness.

>

>Here, shunyata is already emptiness, in the relative and phenomenal sense

>meaning insubstantiality and dependent origination..and karuna is

>compassion, yet it means a compassion based on the enlightened experience of

>the oneness of all beings... these two in unity become ultimate emptiness.

>"True emptiness is not empty."

>

>SO..The short answer perhaps lies in that we have only the one word

>"emptiness" to translate both phenomenol and absolute realities. To me its

>like

>blueberries are good, until you taste those wild, Maine blueberries. The

>difference is indescribable, yet we call them both blueberries.

>

>

>I would promise never again to use any foreign language terms, but I'm only

>up to chapter 5 here.

>Gloria Lee

>

>

>

>

>