A reason for being

J. Krishnamurti

Answer: Is there a reason for being?

Krishnamurti: Why do you want a reason for being? (Laughter). You are here. And because you are here and don't understand yourself, you want to invent a reason. You know, Sir, when you look at a tree or the clouds, the light on the water, when you know what it means to love, you will require no reason for being..... Then all the museums in the world and all the concerts will have only secondary importance. Beauty is there for you to see, if you have the mind and the heart to look-not out there in the cloud, in the tree, in the water, in the thing, but in yourself.

What is important is not to follow anybody but to understand oneself. If you go into yourself without effort, fear, without any sense of restraint, and really delve deeply, you will find extraordinary things; and you don't have to read a single book....

In oneself lies the whole world, and if you know how to look and learn, then the door is there and the key is in your hand. Nobody on earth can give you either that key or the door to open, except yourself.

J. Krishnamurti, Pg. 158, You Are The World - TheIDproject

BOOM! An Interview with Zen Master Seung Sahn

Zen Master Seung Sahn

Tricycle: You grew up in a Protestant family in Korea. I’m curious to know what made the Buddhist teachings so attractive to you.

Seung Sahn: When North and South Korea separated, society became complicated. Everyone fighting. So I went to the mountains to study Confucianism. Then one day a monk asked me, “What are you doing?”

“I’m studying Chinese philosophy,” I say.

“Chinese philosophy?” he said. “You don’t understand Korean philosophy! You should study Korean philosophy.”

So I studied Korean philosophy. Then one day a Zen monk appeared and asked me, “What are you doing?”

I say, “I’m studying Korean philosophy.”

“You don’t understand 'you'. Who are you?”

“I don’t know,” I said.

“You must get rid of understanding and attain your true self,” he told me. It was like meeting Socrates. So I became a monk and started practicing meditation.

Like meeting Socrates?
Yeah. Socrates said, “Understand your true self.” Very good teaching!

When you first came to Providence you tried to integrate Korean-Americans with Anglo-Americans, but it didn’t work.
No! Korean and American practicing together is impossible. [Laughter]

Why?
Korean people understand too much Buddhism. So clearing mind is very difficult. American students have no idea what Buddhism is, so—Boom! They get it. Very easy! Americans make good students. Koreans too much thinking, which makes practice very difficult. They already understand so much Buddhism, they have a big problem.

You made popular in this country the expression “don’t-know mind.” Could you say what that is?
Human beings understand too much. But what they understand is just somebody’s opinion. Like a dog barking. American dog say, “Woof, woof.” Korean dog say, “Mung, mung.” Polish dog say, “How, how.” So which dog barking is correct? That is human beings’ barking, not“dog”barking. If dog and you become one hundred percent one, then you know sound of barking. This is Zen teaching. Boom! Become one.

But when you live in a Zen community, so many obstacles to “don’t-know mind” are generated by the community itself. Most of us want what Trungpa Rinpoche used to call the “babysitter in the sky”—that need and desire to depend on some other authority outside of oneself. Are we just doomed to live within the suffering that the institution causes?
When students first come to the Zen Center, they’re like babies. Babies don’t understand how to eat, how to walk or talk. But slowly, slowly they grow up. At two years they walk. At three comes speech. After three, memory. That is growing up. At twenty, maybe twenty-five, then get a job, become independent.

Our practice is the same. At first a teacher is necessary. Then when you grow up, a teacher is not necessary. Kick the teacher out.

Do you have students for whom you are not necessary?
Yeah. Some become Zen masters. They find their own way.

And yet you have a reputation for being very strict with what goes on in your centers. And that you want the same form at all your different Zen centers.
I just understand Korean style. That’s all. First, Buddhism appeared in India, so Indian style developed. Then China, so Chinese style appeared. From China it went to Korea, so Korean style developed. Now I transmit Korean style to American students. After a while, American style appears. When that happens, kick out the Korean style, ok. But it takes time for American style to appear.

Do you think that there will be a time when your students will do the chanting in English?
In the future, maybe. When I first came here I thought to change it to English. But then I went to Poland. Can’t use English chants there. And Germany. So I decided to keep Korean style. Now, when our sangha has a big ceremony, people come from all over the world. No problem, we all chant together in Korean. Only Heart Sutra chanted in the language of each country.

You’ve taught in so many different countries. Are there particular obstacles that Americans encounter because of their cultural history or because of their Western philosophy?
American students very easy. America only 350 years old. If you go to Germany or Poland, they have a long tradition.

In the Zen center, five minutes before we begin to sit, we hit the moktak (wooden http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifpercussion instrument). In Germany, students are already seated in dharma hall when we hit the moktak. Go to France and hit moktak, then, slowly, a few minutes, people begin to show up. That is French style. English style: Hit the moktak and people look to see who goes first. Spanish style: Hit the moktak and the man pokes wife to see whether she is going or not. She goes, he goes too. In each country people have different consciousness. Each country has a different style.

What about in Asian centers?
Japanese style is very correct. Chinese style is a little slow - time passes, no matter. Korean style is in the middle, between China and Japan.

Not too loose, not too tight?
Seung Sahn: Yes. Japanese style“too”tight. Japanese Zen shout, “Don’t know!” Chinese style not tight at all. Even Chinese Communism is not so tight.

And American style?
American style is all mixed up. [Laughter]

But the absence of a long tradition is beneficial?
Yeah, that’s American style. Wonderful—so much growing up to do.

In your own writing you have repeated a story that is often told about the Buddha, why he did not give transmission. People came to him when he was dying and said, “What are we going to do now?” And he said, “You have the teachings and the precepts.” Why does the Zen tradition emphasize transmission when the Buddha himself didn’t?
Zen tradition says Buddha did make transmission—to Mahakashyapa. Later, Mahakashyapa gave transmission to Ananda.

Doesn’t that version contradict what the Buddha said?
Other versions come from the sutra tradition. Zen tradition says to transmit clear line from teacher to disciple. In the sutra tradition, they have no line. Buddha gave many kinds of teaching. Peoples’ minds are all so different. To some people give a mantra; for some people, studying sutras is good. Sometimes give“yom bul”practice, repeating Buddha’s name. The real question is, what is most important? Buddha sat under the Bodhi tree until . . . Boom! Got enlightenment. That’s a very important point.

You are also well known in the West for asking “What is this?” For example, you will hold up a stick and ask, “What is this?”
Yes. What is this? [Holding up his fist]

Well, I’ve seen you often enough to know that I can’t just say, “This is a fist,” and I can’t say, “This is not a fist.”
What is this? [Holding up his fist] Is it empty or not empty? What is it? Whether it’s empty or not empty - doesn’t matter. What matters—only moment by moment, what is reflected in your mind.

What do you mean, “reflected in your mind”?
No time, no space. Just moment. Boom! Whatever is in the moment. This moment is very important - whether the world is empty or not, whether it exists or not, doesn’t matter. What we call “world” is only an opinion. Take away your opinion, then what? What is left? That is the point. Take away your opinion - your condition, situation - then your mind is clear like space. Clear like space means clear like a mirror. A mirror reflects everything: the sky is blue, tree is green, sugar is sweet. Just be one with the truth - that’s Zen style. Only talking, talking no good. No truth.

Last night [during a dharma talk at the center], when a student asked you if reincarnation is dharma candy, you said, “No, not dharma candy,“Buddhism”candy.” What did you mean?
Sutra, mantra, yom bul—many kinds of Buddhism candy. Dharma is different.

How so?
Dharma is about how you keep Buddha’s mind. How do you put everything down and keep your mind clear like space? That is our goal - keeping mind clear like space. If your mind clear like space, then you see clearly, hear clearly, smell clearly - everything is clear. That is dharma. That is truth.

How does that work?
Help others. If hungry people come, give them food. If thirsty people come, give water. If suffering people come, help them. That is our job - life after life, just continue to help all beings. But to do that, you have to have mind which is clear like space. Otherwise, how do you help their suffering?

There’s a debate that’s going on among many Western Buddhists about reincarnation—about whether it’s essential to believe in it or not.
If you do good action, then you get happiness. If you do bad action, you get suffering. Very simple. But what if you ask, “What is your original face? Who are you?” That is Zen.

So then what?
Attain your true self. That’s it.

Then what happens to the idea of reincarnation?
Reincarnation? Doesn’t matter. Sometimes go to Heaven, sometimes go to Hell - no problem. You just follow situation - then any place, any kind of body you get, no problem. Only follow situation and help other people. That is the great Bodhisattva way.

So don’t attach to ideas—even reincarnation?
Yeah, any idea—throw it away! This moment important. Next life not so important. This moment is yours. Next life not yours. Past life, present life, future life are not yours. Because past, present, and future are made by thinking. Original face has no past, no present, no future. We only have moment. Moment is yours - infinite time, infinite space. If you make this moment clear, then your whole life is clear, also next life clear. If this moment is not clear, then everything not clear. So Zen practice is just moment to moment - become clear. That’s all.

Zen Master Seung Sahn (Da Soen Sa Nim) was born in 1927, near Pyongyang, now the capital of North Korea. After World War II, he went to the mountains for a one-hundred-day solo retreat. Later he received dharma transmission from Zen Master Ko Bong. Afterwards he worked to reorganize the Chogye Order of Korean Buddhism while serving as abbot of several temples in Korea. He also spent several years in Japan, founding temples and teaching Zen.

In 1972 Seung Sahn came to the United States. While working in a laundromat in Providence, Rhode Island, he met some students from Brown University who would come to ask him questions about life and Zen practice. The Providence Zen Center grew out of this.

Seung Sahn has published several books, including“Dropping Ashes on the Buddha,”and“The Whole World is a Single Flower.”In attempt to connect Zen practice with Christian contemplative prayer, he has led many Zen retreats at the Abbey of Gethsemani, the Trappist monastery in Kentucky, and with other Christian groups.

This interview was conducted in Providence, Rhode Island, in August, 1996.


From: www.tricycle.com

The Easy Middle

By MInguyr Rinpoche

You began to practice very seriously at an early age. Can you say something about that? I entered a three-year retreat at the age of thirteen. It was something I felt strongly about. I wanted to study with Tulku Saljey Rinpoche [1910-1991, an important Kagyu master], who was quite old at the time, at the Sherab Ling monastery, a couple of hours from Dharamsala.

Isn’t it unusual for a thirteen-year-old to begin such intensive practice? In India, yes, but it wasn’t so in Tibet. The major deciding factor in these cases is not age, but resolve, and after that, knowledge of the key points of practice. I had not completed my philosophical education, of course, but I had learned the general rituals, the chants.

As someone who was educated outside of Tibet, how different was your education from that of your teachers? I have tried my best to receive a traditional Tibetan education. In terms of studies and reflections, which form a major part of my theoretical education, I don’t feel there’s any real difference between what is currently taught and what was taught in Tibet. But if you compare me with the past generation, you’ll discover that people often spent more than twenty years in retreat, as did my father and Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche [a great Dzogchen master of the last century whose visits to the United States in the 1970s helped to spread Tibetan dharma]. I haven’t done that. Also, the style of retreat has differed. For example, my father spent at least three years in one place with his door sealed off; nobody came or went. There was an opening to pass food through, but that was it. That’s what you call a retreat in the real sense of the word. I haven’t practiced like that. So I’d say that between the present day and the past, there’s no difference in the theoretical studies, but with regard to the degree of perseverance in practice, there’s a big difference.

As part of a new generation of teachers that grew up outside of Tibet, how else did your experience differ from that of your father’s generation? The older generation grew up in an environment where there had been countless practitioners approaching realization. The atmosphere was different; it was easier for students to embrace the Buddha’s teachings and to persevere in practice than it is for those who come to Buddhism outside of Tibetan culture. For example, there’s the question of former lives, and the consequences of karmic actions. When you are in an environment where there have been so many masters who could see where somebody took rebirth, who could point it out and could prove it—identify the reincarnations and so forth—it makes it much easier to trust the teachings on karmic consequences.

But that doesn’t mean that we’re not allowed to investigate? You can examine the teachings for yourself. The Buddha himself said so. When you hear my teachings, you should do as you do when you buy gold: You test it first; you don’t accept what I say at face value. You don’t have to trust blindly. We can derive great benefit from using science as the example. We can use scientific understanding, for instance, to explore the benefits of calm abiding, shamatha; of compassion; of identifying negative emotions and noticing how they can be changed and transformed with Buddhist practice [see “Science and Buddhism,” Tricycle, Spring 2003]. You can, of course, combine these two approaches - simple trust and the scientific method. There’s no problem there, and for Westerners it’s probably best to hear an explanation first, and then to test it out. Once you get a taste of it for yourself, you begin to gain trust, and you can proceed to deepen your practice.

Still, it is perfectly okay to follow the Buddhist teachings through faith? Simply being willing to trust that what the Buddha taught is true is allowed. There is an approach with the Buddha’s teachings that is called the tradition of pith instructions. In this case, it is not required to conduct elaborate investigations. You trust the teachings and you apply them. Not blindly, of course, but without elaborate investigation. It’s different from studying Buddhist philosophy. There you need to investigate intelligently. Otherwise, you won’t really understand the philosophical position, which requires a lot of time and energy. But in the tradition of pith instructions, the Buddha condensed the most vital teachings of what one is to know and apply into just a few key points. Applying these, one can progress very quickly and effectively. It’s like this: Say you’re sick and you need to take a dose of medicine. You can investigate the medicine and find out what it’s made of, who concocted it, how much it cost, how it’s made and so forth, and then take it. That’s perfectly fine. It just takes longer. Or, if you trust the doctor and you feel it’s the right medicine, you take it, and then also it’s fine, and even faster. In both cases you get cured.

Many Westerners came to Buddhism because it seemed so logical. Impermanence made perfect sense, and was easily verified. And no-self made sense—that people and things have no intrinsic, unchanging identity. That we suffer is clear. However, in meditation, often the experience of these things is far more convincing than any of the logical proofs. Can you say something about that? There are two approaches. The first is theoretical investigation. It means using our intelligence to find out what is fact and what isn’t. And if you know how to investigate intelligently, you will discover the Buddha’s truths. You will see what is real and what isn’t. You’ll see that it is true that composite things are impermanent. And if you really pay attention, you will also discover that there is no intrinsic personal identity, that all things are ultimately empty. And that deluded states—samsaric states—are painful. It’s a fact. That’s how it is.

It’s also a fact that calming down, practicing what we call shamatha, or calm abiding in the meditative state, has sublime qualities. This is another way you can attain conviction about what is real and what isn’t, gaining trust in what is. In this case, it doesn’t help to continuously analyze, because the act of analyzing actually disturbs the calm; you cannot be confident in the experience of calmness by being analytical. It’s self-defeating. And when it comes to vipashyana meditation—the experience of seeing clearly—it’s the same; you can’t really have the experience of insight if you continuously analyze. So a different approach is necessary. Aside from intellectual trust, you have to develop an experiential trust. The first kind of trust is only good if it creates circumstances that lead to the second, experiential type. This is gained through training personally in the experience of calmness, shamatha meditation, and also in vipashyana meditation, which leads to the insight of emptiness. Not as theory, but as an experience. Developing this kind of trust, combined with compassion for beings and devotion to the awakened ones, can lead you all the way to the awakened state of the Buddha; mere intellectual understanding will not. That’s the main difference between the two kinds of trust or understanding.


In other words, intellectual understanding will not transform you, but experience can? Not only that, but there’s a danger in relying on the intellect only. Because even though it’s delightful and inspiring in the beginning to “understand,” if it is not combined with actual experience, then the inspiration fades, and the taste of realization diminishes. It’s called being a dried-up intellectual; the understanding is nothing more than theory in the end. You can deceive yourself by talking about it without really knowing it.

There’s a saying that great sinners can be cured by the dharma, but the dharma professional cannot. The great sinner is someone who can still get into practice and be transformed. But someone who’s just intellectually convinced could become insensitive; he doesn’t get anywhere and cannot be helped by the teachings.

Would you say the result depends on the practitioner’s intention? That’s a big part of it. The Buddha said that all phenomena are conditioned and totally depend upon intention. The motivation with which we practice can be of different types, and each type will determine a different outcome. Let me explain. According to Buddhist teachings, external phenomena are not as they seem to be. In other words, they are illusory. And the main source of everything that is experienced—we cannot deny that everything is experienced—is the perceiving mind. And it is through changing this perceiving mind’s attitude that all phenomena can be transformed. Therefore, attitude, or motivation, is the most vital factor to take hold of, and to change for the better. When we practice there are three types of attitude. The first one, which is called the attitude of a lesser person, is to want to better myself. I want to do good. I want to do what is meaningful so that I can achieve a better state, a better rebirth, either as a human being or as a god. By practicing with that attitude, one does attain rebirth as a human being, or as a deva, or god. A second and better attitude is one that comes from a desire to be free. I want to attain liberation from deluded states, from samsara. Through that, one is able to attain freedom from delusion. That is the attitude of the mediocre type of person. The highest motivation is the desire for true and complete enlightenment for the benefit of an infinite number of beings. I want to help all of them. We can do the exact same practice, but with three different attitudes. Depending on attitude, we’ll achieve three different - extremely different - results. So the attitude, one’s intention, is the most important thing.

My point here is that the mind is very powerful. There’s a tremendous strength there, and it makes such a big difference how this mind, this will, this intention is being steered. And everything depends on whether it allows itself to relax and be serene, or whether it allows itself to get caught up in anxiety, grasping, and fear; it makes a difference if you do something with a relaxed, easygoing frame of mind, or if you do it in a harried and distracted way. In past times, people used to walk from eastern Tibet all the way to Lhasa, in central Tibet. Some types wanted to get there really fast, so they’d walk as quickly as they could. They’d tire, or get sick, give up and have to return. But other people, they would just walk at an easy pace, and they’d sit down, take breaks, pitch camp for the night, have a good time. And then, the next day, continue. And in that way they would actually reach Lhasa quite quickly. Thus the Tibetan proverb, “If you walk with haste, you do not reach Lhasa. If you walk at a gentle pace, you will make it there.”

Can you say something, then, about right effort in terms of the proper balance between zeal and, say, the ease that’s required? Okay. Let’s take the practice of shamatha. There are two typical problems; you are too relaxed or too tight. But that doesn’t have to be a problem, because you could always practice shamatha with or without an object. When you focus on an object, you can sometimes tighten up and fixate; then, you can shift to shamatha without an object, without a focus, letting the mind rest. Shifting from one type of shamatha to the other and back will give you some balance, a sense of when you are too relaxed or too tight. But whether something has meaning or not has a lot to do with the reason for doing it in the first place. Again, it’s a reflection of intention. You can approach meditation wanting to experience something. Then when nothing happens, it feels too plain, or absurd, or maybe even disappointing. But that would be to miss the point. Generally speaking, shamatha deals with the flickering of the attention, which is usually something very unsteady, always shifting from one thing to the next, creating endless complications. Shamatha tries to bring a change to that, by steadying the attention. The point isn’t to experience something extraordinary. It’s to develop more one-pointed attention.
Now I have a question: What is it that makes practice difficult for you? I’m very goal oriented. Trying to achieve, I lose my sense of calm. I feel frustration. I guess you could say I’m running to Lhasa. I would like to give you a suggestion. There’s something that you can apply while practicing. One of the main reasons attention does not remain steady is that one thought arises after another. That’s the primary obstacle. Mindfulness is the goal here. One thought, perhaps, is feeling frustrated. But whatever the thought is, just look at the thought. Earlier today, in a teaching, I suggested that we look at visual form, as a support for shamatha, and in the same way, when there’s a thought, then that becomes the support. No matter what the thought—a desired goal, anything—it becomes a support for your practice. So whatever the thought, just be aware: “I want to go shopping. I should take a ride in the car. I should actually stop at the bank first.” All of that, just notice, be aware.

The nature of mind is always with you, never apart from you for a single moment, regardless of your thoughts or mind state, whether you are angry, frustrated, or feeling joy. This natural awareness is the awakened state. In our deluded state, however, this awareness is blocked. And we suffer, and we develop a disenchantment for worldly pleasures, and maybe we come to practice. It is because of pain and suffering that we first want to practice. And it’s because of pain and suffering that we attain enlightenment. Regard suffering as a teacher, and an inspiration. And then try your best to move in the direction of awareness, of enlightenment. It’s not about how successful we are right now, but what we aim at that is most important.

And what is the role of sacrifice, or renunciation? You can say practice makes perfect. What seems impossible, or difficult at present, becomes more familiar as you progress along the way. It becomes easier and easier. As a matter of fact, there’s nothing you can’t become used to. It’s just a matter of training.

How can lay practitioners deal with the conflict that arises between a lay life and more intense study? You can train whenever there’s an emotion. You don’t have to be in a particular place to observe it. And the same is true of being compassionate. You can train anywhere, no matter what you’re involved in. You can also practice all the time, of course! Making an effort to be kinder, and so forth—you can do that training without having to give up your worldly business. There is one thing that one does need to change, though, and that is refraining from harming others. There’s no leeway here. But otherwise, you can carry on as usual, training at being more and more aware, and more and more kind. Then, quite naturally, some people—not everybody—will want to spend more time in meditative practice. They will have less and less interest in pursuing whatever occupied them before.

Eventually, one may give up more and more, but that doesn’t mean you have to give up things in order to practice. If one gives up everything, it’s all very good. But then there are also some who think, “I want to be like the Buddha and give up everything.” Just throw everything away, their job, belongings and so on. And then, after six or eight months, they regret it. They’re not able to practice, and that’s not so good. So you use moderation. You carry on in harmony with your individual abilities or practice, and with your individual degree of fortitude.

How does retreat fit into this? There are external and internal conditions that aid our practice in retreat. Usually what gets us into trouble is involvement with emotions of all different kinds. And they come about through a combination of three factors. One is proximity to the objects that provoke emotion. Another is incorrect thinking. And a third is the unwillingness to abandon negative emotions. Whenever those factors are present, one gets caught up. In retreat we can more easily keep a distance from the objects that give rise to negative emotions. If you go to a place that’s quiet, then automatically, you avoid getting involved. That is the external retreat. Inner retreat has to do with giving up unvirtuous actions. And then together with that, staying physically quiet, not running around doing a lot of things, and avoiding too much conversation. That’s called inner retreat.

But please understand that while going about your business—while doing your job, while accumulating and creating wealth—it’s not prohibited to practice at the same time. It’s not that one has to give up those things in order to be able to practice. It’s not necessary to think like that. You are allowed to integrate spiritual principles in your life situation.

Wherever we are, whatever we’re doing, what we need to acknowledge is something natural. Something uncontrived. The uncontrived state is actually very special. Being natural is very special. And this natural way is actually already with us, in or out of retreat, but we just don’t acknowledge it. If you just acknowledge your natural way, that’s enough, good enough. It’s like the cow peeing in the field. [laughs] It just stands there and pees. Every day, it just pees, quite naturally. That’s really enough.



///

Part of a new generation of teachers who grew up outside of Tibet, Mingyur Rinpoche represents an era of transition in the Tibetan community. Trained by some of the great Tibetan masters of twentieth century, he serves as a link between his father’s generation, who studied in the traditional monastic environment of pre-Communist Tibet, and teachers who were trained in exile.

Born in Nubri, Nepal, in 1976 to a family of renowned masters in the Tibetan Nyingma and Kagyu lineages, he began an education in the dharma at the age of nine, studying with his father, the late Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche, at the hermitage of Nagi Gompa in the foothills of the Kathmandu valley. At thirteen, under the guidance of his teacher, Tai Situ Rinpoche, Mingyur Rinpoche entered a traditional Tibetan three-year retreat; for three years and three fortnights he lived and studied, almost entirely in silence, in a small meditation room at Sherab Ling monastery near Dharamsala, India. He later attended the Dzongsar and Sherab Ling monastic colleges in northern India, where he officially completed his dharma education. Now twenty-seven, he is the retreat master at Sherab Ling and gives teachings in India, Nepal, and North America. Tricycle spoke with Mingyur Rinpoche last fall at Rangjung Yeshe Gomde in Leggett, California, the North American seat of his older brother, Chökyi Nyima Rinpoche. Erik Pema Kunsang translated.


From: Tricycle Magazine

Free from Mind, Discrimination and Consciousness

Master Sheng-yen

An Interview with Master Sheng Yen

Master Sheng-yen is abbot of the Nung Ch’an monastery in Taiwan and founder of Dharma Drum Mountain, which includes the Ch’an Meditation Center in New York City and Dharma Drum Retreat Center in Pine Brush, New York. The interview was conducted during a ten-day silent illumination retreat led by Master Sheng-yen. The interviewer was Michael Liebenson Grady, a guiding teacher at the Cambridge Insight Meditation Center who has been studying with Master Sheng-yen for the past five years. The translator was Jimmy Yu.

Michael Liebenson Grady: We have heard you make the distinction between buddhadharma and Buddhism. Could you say more about that?

Master Sheng-yen: In buddhadharma, there is only one taste, the taste of liberation. That is the one dharma. Buddhism, on the other hand, is a manifestation of causes and conditions according to the changing environment that the buddhadharma encounters and the disposition of its practitioners. According to varying conditions and changing times, there arises what is known as Buddhism.

Buddhadharma is not only the taste of liberation. It is also the way of the bodhisattva. Moreover, buddhadharma has various levels and types of teachings to respond to the various dispositions of sentient beings. Sometimes this includes a graded path of Buddhism, but all of the gradations, systems and different ways to organize the Buddhist teachings point to liberation.

Furthermore, buddhadharma can be divided into two categories. First, it can be understood through words. Secondly, it can be understood without words or language. According to the various dispositions of sentient beings, they will receive the taste of liberation either through words or through the wordless teaching.

Buddhadharma can also be divided into the dharma of the teachings and the dharma of the mind. The actual recorded words of Shakyamuni are the dharma of the teachings. The essence of the Buddha’s teachings is the dharma of the mind, for its whole purpose is to liberate the mind, which includes liberating oneself as well as liberating sentient beings. The Buddha expounded numerous teachings to sentient beings throughout the whole of his life precisely to liberate the mind. He proclaimed the mind dharma, which includes various methods and guiding concepts for practitioners to tread the path of liberation.

One can only achieve liberation through the three seals of dharma, which are: all formations are impermanent; all dharmas are without self; nirvana is quiescent. These seals are not only the means to liberation but liberation itself, which is the full-fledged realization of these three aspects of reality. Shakyamuni Buddha expounded guiding concepts and methods to attain the full realization of these three dharma seals, such as the four noble truths, the eightfold path and the thirty-seven aids to enlightenment. All of these flow out of the three dharma seals. They are of one taste because no matter what approach one takes, as long as the three principles are present, they all return to the taste of liberation.

Taken together, all of the Buddha’s teachings constitute the buddhadharma, which spreads to various places in various time periods and to various people depending on their dispositions. This phenomenon dates all the way back to Shakyamuni Buddha’s time. Because of the different dispositions of the Buddha’s disciples, there were already divisions of his teachings.

The teachings spread first in two main directions, creating the Southern tradition and the Northern tradition. Because of the various civilizations and cultural differences, the indigenous beliefs and religions, and the dispositions of people in these two main regions, all sorts of Buddhist practices developed. We call this phenomenon Buddhism. The varying types of Buddhist practice all adhere to the dharma of liberation, however. If a particular type of Buddhist practice is missing any one of the three dharma seals, it is no longer Buddhism; it is non-Buddhist practice.

Within the Northern tradition, there is a distinction between the Tibetan form of Buddhist practice and the Chinese form of Buddhist practice. The Chinese form of Buddhist practice gave rise to the Korean form and the Japanese form. Within Chinese Buddhist practice itself, there are ten different schools, and Ch’an Buddhism is merely one of these. Then within Ch’an there is a further division into “The Five Houses of Ch’an” and the “Seven Sects of Ch’an.” In Japan there are approximately thirty different sects of Zen Buddhism. In Tibetan Buddhism, there is also a variety of schools. There are divisions within the divisions of the dharma.

All of these differences arise out of the dispositions of sentient beings, their time and their place. In other words, the different schools arise from historical changes. Despite these changes, the various schools do not depart from the dharma of liberation. The West will also have its own form of Buddhism; it cannot be characterized particularly as Tibetan or Chinese or from the Southern tradition, because the West has its own civilization, culture and history.

Within all these forms of Buddhism, how would you describe the spirit of Ch’an? What distinguishes it from the others?

First of all, there is no such thing as Ch’an. It is merely the way of liberation, free from fixations. The origin of Ch’an as a school, however, can be dated back to Bodhidharma, who came from India. Bodhidharma was not a dharma master in the sense that he gave discourses on the teachings, like the great arhats Subhuti and Shariputra. Rather, he was a great yogi. He brought with him to China one scripture, the Lankavatara Sutra, which revolves around the teaching of buddhanature, tathagathagarbha. On the basis of this principle, he taught the sudden approach to directly experiencing liberation.

There is a saying in the Lankavatara Sutra itself, which goes something like this: “All the words of the Buddha evolve around the mind as its axis.”

This expresses the principle of the mind dharma, and Ch’an is therefore mind dharma—direct experience of one’s self-nature, indeed, of one’s buddhanature. It is not the dharma of words and language. One experiences this wisdom by directly letting go, relinquishing, putting down self-attachment, self-referentiality, the grasping that hinders us from liberation. Despite the fact that this teaching of directly putting down, letting go of self, can be traced to India, it was only in China that it evolved into the tradition as we know it today. In India the tradition mainly developed around a graded practice of meditation. However, this graded practice, as demonstrated in methods such as the four stages of mindfulness, requires one to have little involvement with the world, such as in the forest tradition. You also need a lot of time, a long process of cultivation.

Chinese society did not allow for this, even among professional practitioners such as the monks and nuns. In India there is a tradition of alms begging. You can beg for your food daily and the whole society will support you. Practitioners can then return to the forest and continue their practice. But in China, alms begging never took root. One had to rely on oneself. There were government-sponsored monasteries, where great and famous accomplished practitioners resided. But ordinary monastics needed to rely on themselves in their daily life. For their own survival in Chinese society, they needed to find means to tread the path of liberation and also to support their daily living. Therefore, Ch’an evolved the idea that everyday living is Ch’an practice. The environment, the historical situation, was such that it forced practitioners to integrate their aspiration and practice toward liberation with all aspects of their life. As a primary example, the Sixth Patriarch, Huineng, achieved enlightenment while working.

The integration of life and practice has very deep roots. In fact, we say that sitting meditation itself cannot bring about enlightenment. Often we hear a Ch’an master say, “Meditation not only is not enlightenment; meditation does not lead to enlightenment.” Enlightenment is the actuality of letting go of the self directly. That does not necessarily have anything to do with meditation. One puts down one’s self-grasping through various methods.

For example, Wanan became enlightened upon hearing these lines from the Diamond Sutra: “The past mind is unattainable; the future mind is not attainable; the present mind is not attainable.”

The meaning of these lines is that one should not be engrossed in the mind of virtue versus non-virtue, the mind of good versus bad. It is precisely these types of grasping mind that prevent us from realizing what is known as “original face,” the state before, the state free from attachment, free from kleshas. In Ch’an we also call this the dharma gate of formlessness. In fact, the dharma gate of formlessness was the first approach that Huineng taught to his elder dharma brother, Huiming. Huineng said to him, "Neither think of good nor bad, at this time, what is your original face?" Upon hearing this, Huiming was enlightened.

It is very hard, however, for people to use the direct approach of Ch’an practice and realization, which says, “Nothing can go good; nothing can go evil,” where good and evil refer to the grasping mind of good and the grasping mind of evil. Therefore, by the tenth and eleventh century, the Ch’an tradition evolved methods such as the investigation of huato, which is the essential phrase or word in any gong'an (Japanese, koan), and the practice of mozhao, or “silent illumination.” The huato method is associated with the Linji tradition and the silent illumination approach with the Caodong tradition.

Although certain schools are associated with certain types of method, we shouldn’t be fooled by that. All Linji do not necessarily practice in such and such a way, nor do all Caodong practice in another fixed way. Even within one tradition, the master of the North and the master of the South can be drastically different in their styles of teaching. One hundred Ch’an masters will have one hundred different styles. Even the disciple’s style is different from the master’s style. So which one is correct? All of them are correct. How should one approach the practice? Approach it based on your own causes and conditions. We can see this in Shakyamuni Buddha’s time. He had ten great disciples, and each one had his own particular disposition, particular method of practice or approach to the one taste of liberation. In turn, their disciples gravitated to particular aspects of their teacher and so on, which gave rise to the many-fold manifestations of the dharma and its fluidity.

Perhaps you could tell us how you came to be teaching silent illumination in the West, given that for a long time there weren’t any Ch’an teachers teaching silent illumination.

My initial experience of Ch’an was in practicing huato within the Linji tradition. When I was in my twenties, I had many doubts and questions, but there was one question that consumed all of the questions: Why am I like this now? All of my questions eventually returned to this one unresolved problem. Then in my twenty-eighth year, I met my future Linji master. I was fortunate enough that he could point out the way. I was able, during that encounter, to put down all of my burdens. The question was no more.

In my six years of solitary retreat practice, which I entered into a couple of years after that incident, I had no particular method of practice, because I had no more doubts. If one were to characterize my method, one may say I was practicing very simply putting down—putting down discursive thinking, and even putting down the experience of oneness, that the environment and the self are one.

After the retreat, I went to Japan and then the United States. I started teaching Ch’an. Even though I myself do not use the huato method, I thought the method was very good. So in the beginning, I taught it to my students. People seemed to benefit from it. So I searched through the discourse records of the Ch’an masters and the principles of Ch’an to find more ways to benefit my students.

Among the works I looked at were those of Yongjia Xuanjue, who lived in the seventh and eight centuries and was a student of the Sixth Patriarch, Huineng. In The Song of Mind, he talks about not relinquishing delusion nor seeking the truth. In The Song of Shamatha, he says that if one is truly utilizing the mind in practice, there is no such mind to be used. I also looked at the teachings of Dongshan, one of the founders of the Caodong tradition, and those of Shitou Xian, who teaches about the two entrances mentioned by Bodhidharma: entering dharma through principles and entering through phenomena. In each case, the works I looked at were linked by the single strand of letting go, which is the core principle of silent illumination.

When I started to teach my disciples, many of them came from doing practices like the four foundations of mindfulness. Through working with my disciples and understanding how they practiced, in particular the mindfulness of the body and the mindfulness of sensation, I discovered that the principle of silent illumination was also at work there—not exactly the same principle but there was a continuity and a connection. In Japan, I was exposed to shikantaza. Although one cannot say that shikantaza is the same as silent illumination, nor can one say that the four foundations of mindfulness is the practice of silent illumination, there are no contradictions between them. However, I base my teachings of silent illumination on the Ch’an tradition, and specifically on the discourse records of master Hongzhi [1091–1157], who composed the famous Song of Silent Illumination.

Simply put, what is silent illumination?

Master Sheng-yen: In speaking of silent illumination, I should mention its correlation with shamatha-vipashyana. They are of the same family. In the Tiantai tradition, there is the practice of the great shamatha and vipashyana, sometimes translated as “the great cessation” and “the great contemplation.” The Tiantai school’s teaching of the maha-shamatha-vipashyana includes the progressive practice of the ten stages of shamatha-vipashyana, with the highest stage referred to as the first stage. Those people with strong karmic roots, great affinity, can directly approach the very first stage, called the inconceivable realm. This realm is free from mind, discrimination and consciousness. Mind here refers to the original mind, pure mind. Yes, we have to leave behind pure mind and let go our attachment even to purity. Discrimination refers to our faculty to distinguish between this and that, and it is tainted by grasping. Consciousness refers to that which transmigrates from one life to the next. This state of inconceivability is precisely what is spoken about in the Ch’an tradition as formlessness. To be free from mind, discrimination and consciousness means to leave behind words, language, sentences, phrases and conceptuality.

If one is not successful in attaining this first stage, one would resort to the second stage, and if not successful with the second, then the third and so on, all the way to the tenth stage. Silent illumination as expounded by Ch’an master Hongzhi does not involve stages. However, because I have background and understanding in the Tiantai tradition, when I present silent illumination, I present it in a fashion that has stages, so that it is easily accessible to all types of practitioners.

I recall silent illumination starting with the relaxation of the body and mind.

That is just the very basic foundation, the prerequisite. When I lead a retreat, relaxing the body and the mind must come first, beginning with mindfulness of breath. Eventually, one’s awareness expands to the totality of the body. As one proceeds with this practice, the body may start to dissolve. The felt sense of the body will start to be so subtle that it will hardly be perceived. After that, even the body disappears, but the external environment is still present and one’s field of awareness expands to include the immediate surroundings of the meditator. Then, the external environment can also be dissolved. The mind’s awareness becomes expansive and is not focused on particulars in the external environment. Gradually, the mind becomes unified with the external environment. At this time, this unified self, taking in all things in the environment, is doing the sitting. But even this unification, this stage of oneness, must be let go of, put down. When this oneness—the identity of the external environment with oneself—is put down, the great self is also dropped away. When the self drops away, that is precisely the first stage or the highest stage of Tiantai maha-shamatha-vipashyana, the inconceivable realm.

If one can directly contemplate silent illumination from this formless stage point of view, that is good. However, people usually have to start from the basics and progressively work towards this eventual realization. Silent illumination practice is, in the ultimate sense, a realization of the nonduality of samadhi and prajna, as spoken about in the Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch. In the Tiantai system, this is the simultaneity of shamatha and vipashyana.

In one of Hongzhi’s discourses, he said that the essential point of all the Buddhas and lineage masters’ realization is that the mind does not encounter things, yet it knows. It does not impose conditions, yet it illuminates. Knowing refers to the complete clarity of mind. There is not a single trace of a particular position or view that one upholds. There is not a single thing that has anything to do with oneself. One does not know things by filtering them through one’s sense of self. As for illumination, it is an absolute form of understanding. It has no opposites. Usually we think there is the person and then there is something that the person understands, an opposite. In Hongzhi’s teaching we call that opposing conditions. Illumination, an absolute type of understanding, has no object of understanding, no opposing conditions. This is the state of nonduality, in which there is no single condition in opposition to oneself. This is prajna, the wisdom of no self, no subjectivity, no grasping.

How does one jump from the unified state of self and environment I mentioned earlier to this highest state? Through practice. That is, in all situations, do not take some thing as an opposite to oneself, and also do not project your own subjectivity into your involvement with things or people.

In the opening lines of the Song of Silent Illumination, Hongzhi says, “Silently and serenely, all words are forgotten. In clarity and luminosity, all things appear as is.”

The first line does not literally mean that the person forgets all words. It is just that in the mind of the practitioner, there is no attachment to labeling and descriptions, false conceptual understanding of the external world. In the full realization of silent illumination, the practitioner does not project what he has learned and accumulated onto the external environment. The second line indicates that the practitioner perceives things as they are, free from concepts. Things exist in and of themselves and this is clearly perceived.

In the stage of silent illumination where self and environment are unified, which I mentioned earlier, it is possible to enter into samadhi, where the existence of time and space cease. The true practitioner of silent illumination will not allow the mind to enter into samadhi, but will rather ground the mind in the reality of the environment, yet maintain continuous clarity. The cessation of time and space is indeed a form of serenity, of silence. But the realization of silent illumination does not refer to the cessation of time and space; it refers to the cessation of self-attachment. Just because self-attachment is gone does not mean that one does not know what is happening outside. One interacts with the external environment—people, things, events, affairs—dealing with them according to what needs to be done, but with no protection of self.

Why shouldn’t one enter into samadhi? Because samadhi is not liberation. Since it is not in accordance with the one taste of liberation, it is not the ultimate path. It is not necessarily the Buddhist path, despite the fact that in samadhi, there may be no vexations of the mind. It also is not in accordance with the spirit of Ch’an. Living is Ch’an. It is the dynamic, lively quality of everyday living that reveals the spirit of Ch’an. If a practitioner sits in samadhi all day long, not only is he not in accordance with Ch’an, he will also experience problems in daily life. In both the Linji and Caodong traditions, we have a saying: “The Dao is manifested in everyday life.”

In The Diamond Sutra, it says: “Without abiding anywhere, give rise to mind.” Without abiding anywhere is silence; give rise to mind is the functioning of wisdom. Silence is the silencing, or ceasing, of self-grasping. Illumination is the functioning of wisdom. The functioning of wisdom can only be demonstrated through interaction with people, affairs and things. Through interaction one witnesses the wonder of wisdom.

What has it been like for you to teach in the West and how do you feel Western practitioners relate to buddhadharma?

From my perspective, human beings are human beings, whether they are in the East or West, the past or the present. When I come to the West, I don’t have the idea in mind that I am from the East. The intrinsic nature of all beings is the same. Although cultural backgrounds are different, dharma has only one taste. There is no East or West from that perspective.

I would not claim that the silent illumination I teach is exactly that of Hongzhi. Rather I teach based on my experience and understanding of the practice of silent illumination, in response to people’s needs, although I have organized it based on Hongzhi’s teachings and those of the lineage masters within Ch’an whom I mentioned earlier. Although I have adapted it, it is not my own creation, because I am teaching based on the spirit of Ch’an. This is living Ch’an and it is how to connect the practice to people’s lives.

I am exposed to all the traditions of Buddhism—the Theravada tradition, the Tibetan tradition, the Chinese tradition—and their respective practices, and I incorporate them in my presentation. But all of the teachings I give never depart from the one taste of liberation and the spirit of Ch’an.

As for why I came to the West, you may ask, “Why did Bodhidharma come to the West?” Why was Buddhism brought from India to China? The dharma goes wherever it is needed. Bodhidharma himself was an Indian; he came to China to bring the dharma. So, why do I come? I come for all of you.

fonte:http://www.thebuddhadharma.com/

The Cry of Freedom

There is a river of thought-waves. Everyone is being washed downstream. Everyone is clinging to these thoughts and being washed away.

Just give rise to the single thought “I want to be free.” This thought will rarely come out of the entire population. The entire population of the planet is moving downstream. They are not destined to give rise to the thought “I want to be enlightened in this very span of time.”

So I call this thought of freedom going against the stream and toward the source. It does not require any effort to give rise to this thought. The thought “I want to be free” is itself free. This thought will take you to freedom. It is the most rare thought. Out of the entire population of six billion, only a handful give rise to this thought.

Master, I have been with you for four days now, and I am still not enlightened.

[laughing] Yes, I am surprised, a smart boy like you.

What should I do?

Let me tell you what my teacher told me. Just be quiet. This quiet does not involve talking or not talking. It does not involve any doing whatsoever.

Just let the mind fall into silence. This is enough.

Now wait. I can’t believe what you just said to him. I’ve been trained to think that it takes years and years of practice and lifetimes of training and hard work to reach liberation. Now you say it’s simply a switch on the wall,a change of perception. Is that correct?

You need not switch on or off. For the sun to shine do you switch it on?

No.

Just like this. This light is always there. No switches at all. The sun has no switches. You turn your face away and you call it night. Sun has no night and no day. You are that sun. This is your own light and you are that. You don’t need any switches. The switches are limitations. You have fixed these limitations yourself. Nature has not fixed any switches.

“I want this, I want that. I dislike this, I like that.” If you remove this switch of like and dislike, how will you feel? Instantly you will be free.

Likes and dislikes keep you in bondage and suffering.

There are no walls for the switches either. Walls are imaginary only, like walls between countries. You have constructed this wall between you and something else. You have to break this which does not exist.

The frontier you have created is the suffering. You have to demolish it by yourself. Nobody will help you.

What do you mean, “Nobody will help you”?

The Self has to help the Self; nobody else can help. Who else will drop this wall? You have to help yourself. Find out, is it possible to be out of the Self, ever?

First say, “I want help.” Then discover who needs help. Self is not suffering. Self is not in bondage. Self is ever free.

So you are saying it is the mind clinging to the wall that is suffering?

Yes. Who has created separation? Mind has created separation, and no mind will remove this separation. The separation doesn’t exist. Even to say “I am separate” is a joke.

It is only when there is a need for understanding that there is something to be understood. Once some of Krishnamurti’s students came here to see me. They said there is only one difference between our teachings. They said, “Krishnamurti removes concepts from the vessel and Poonjaji breaks the vessel altogether.” [laughs]

So allow yourself some time, a couple of moments. And in those moments there should be no trespassing. Make available a few seconds, and during this span nobody should trespass. I think you could well afford to be available for a few moments. You have spent all your life for others, and not even a minute for your Self.

Everyone possesses you. When you are born, your parents say you are “my son.” Go to school next and you’re “my student.” Then marry and you’re “my husband.” Have children and you’re “my father.” Remove these possessions. Let no one possess you. Reject everything and see what happens.

You have to devote some time for your Self, either now or in some other lifetime. You have to reach your home. There is no escape. You have to return home, either now or tomorrow. You must decide if you want to play more. It doesn’t matter. In the end, it doesn’t matter.

You think it is taking time. It is no time that you are spending because you are already free; it is only your illusion that you are not. You have to allow time, once and for all, if you want to be happy. The moment you declare “I am free!”—standing on the mountaintop of your toes, arms up—eureka! There is the happy moment. Very happy moment.

____________________

What prevents you from freedom? What is the impediment?

That I often have lots of thoughts and it is very difficult to get rid of them.

What kind of thoughts do you have? Do you give rise to the thought of freedom?

Yes.

Hold on to this thought of freedom. Do you see any other thoughts simultaneously rising up?

No.

Mind can hold on to only one thought at a time.

I understand.

Tell which other thoughts replace this thought of freedom. Voluntarily bring another thought to replace this. Another thought that you like best. Do it . . . do it!

I don’t want to reject this thought.

Very good. Very nice. When you like this thought, where will this thought take you? Where will other thoughts be? Where is freedom? How many kilometers away from you?

I don’t think it is far away from me.

If it is not far from you, then how much time is needed for you to arrive here? How much time to be as you are? It is here and now. How much time to be here and now?

As little as possible.

Let us agree, as little as possible. Should we call it this moment? This instant? The least possible time. This instant is the time. Now look at this moment, the least time. Look into this instant, if it is not far away. Jump into it right now.

How?

Now! [much laughter]

Now, what is the thought now?

None. Only this now.

No thoughts troubling you now?

Only that I am looking for thoughts.

Yes, yes. Keep on looking for thoughts. Do you understand what you are saying?

Yes.

If you don’t look for a thought, the thoughts will look for you. If you don’t look, all the thoughts will attack you. Try. If you look for a thought, do you catch it?

They have disappeared.

Then when the thoughts have disappeared, who are you? [silence]

This is the best answer you can give me. Stay as such. If you step out of the silence, there is trouble. You don’t need anything. Eternity is here.

Happiness is here. No death can enter this silence. No trouble can enter here. Step out and there is samsara—the endless cycle of birth and death.

No thought, no concept, can enter here. All desires are met here in emptiness. You walk out chasing after desires and they are never fulfilled.

____________________

All my life, even as a little boy, the desire for freedom has been stronger than all other desires. It doesn’t really seem to be a desire; it’s more like a longing. This desire seems to pull me back, while the other desires seem to pull me out. This desire for freedom mysteriously seems to stay, where the other desires come and go and change with my thoughts. The desire for freedom is always there, burning. It seems to be deeper than the mind. Is this true?

This is the most intense desire. All other desires are on the surface. They rise and fall, you see. The desire for freedom is intense and you must respond to it. When you respond, this desire will bring you back home.
It will continue to trouble you if it is not fulfilled in this life span.

This desire must be fulfilled, whether you like it or not. That is why you come here. What a farce! This desire follows you wherever you go, in whatever incarnation you take. It will not leave you. How did it push you here? You left your job and your business; why did you have to come here? Just consider it. You must return home! How long canyou stay at the market?

It seems the only response to the desire is to look within to where the mind originates. To go to the place where thoughts arise and stay with it.

That is the response, isn’t it?

Yes. You will unceasingly scan the mind. Unceasingly. And you will know who you are.

fonte: http://growthbooks.com/2008/05/29/excerpt-from-wake-up-and-roar-by-hwl-poonja/

Who Am I ? An Interview with Sri Poonjaji

Sri H.W.L. Poonja

Sri H.W.L. Poonjaji, endearingly known as Papaji, was a disciple of the greatest and most revered sage of India, Sri Ramana Maharshi. Papaji became enlightened through him almost 50 years ago. Ramana resided in Arunachala, The Holy Mountains and pilgramage centre of South India. The essence of Sri Ramana's message was to find out who you are. The device he used was self enquiry - to look inside and ask the question "Who Am I ?", to find out where this "I" comes from.

1. ABOUT GURU

What is a Guru?

The literal meaning of guru is the one who dispels darkness.

What is the Master/Disciple connection? How does it work?

The Master is the one who shows that you are light itself and that darkness never existed. Through his Grace he removes the erroneous idea that there is a state of unenlightenment which has to be overcome.

When one is so asleep - full of doubts and fears and ruled by the mind - how to recognise a True Master?

A Master cannot be identified through his words or his actions, nothing he does or says proves or disproves his spiritual state or his qualifications to be a Master. If your mind automatically becomes quiet and peaceful in the proximity of someone else, then that may be taken to be an indication (not a proof) that this person is qualified to be a spiritual teacher. There are no other reliable signs.

What is the difference between you and me? If you say that there is no difference between us, why are you sitting up there, and why am I sitting down here? If I sat in your chair, nobody would listen to me, or believe me.

No differences. All differences are imaginary. If you imagine that there are differences, you belong on the floor. If you have no doubts or thoughts about imaginary differences, you belong on the chair.

Virtually all spiritual Masters have been male. Why? Is it more difficult for a woman to attain Enlightenment?

There is only one Master, and it is neither male nor female. It shines within you as your own Self. If you think that you are a woman, that thought will prevent you from being aware of It.

Do we have to come to India to find a Guru? Or can we become self - realised without a living teacher, using our own insight?

One cannot realise the Self without the grace of a living Guru. While you think that you have a body, only a Guru in the body can help you. You do not find a Guru by moving from one country to another. You find one by having an intense desire for freedom.


2. ABOUT DEATH

What happens when a Self - Realised person leaves his body? If there is no need for them to reincarnate, where do they go?

There is no such thing as a Self-realised person. When there is no "person" the Self is realised. When there is no "person" the question of coming and going cannot arise. The body is an appearance in the Self. When the body disappears the Self remains as it always was and is. Realisation is the understanding "I am not this body which comes and goes, I am that permanent, unchanging reality in which the body and all else appears".

What is the Jiva or Soul which reincarnates in unenlightened people?

The jiva is that entity which claims all the activities of the body and the mind as its own. If you die without finding out who and what you really are, this jiva, along with all your accumulated desires and fears, will find another form to infest and trouble.

We are told that sometimes a soul does not find a suitable vehicle immediately: there may be a long time between leaving one body and entering another. What happens to the Jiva during that time? Are we conscious while being in that 'gap'?

A jiva may take a new form almost immediately or it may take several hundred years. What happens during that period? It enjoys or suffers, according to its karma, in just the same way that it does when it occupies a human body. In whatever form or world the jiva exists it will always alternate between pleasures and pains.

If our true nature is Sat-chit-ananda - Knowledge, Consciousness, Bliss - why did we leave that blissful state and assume bodily form, learning over many lives what we presumably knew in the first place? Sometimes I feel that I just want to go home. Where is my Home?

Why assume that you ever left that sat-chit-ananda? Such an assumption just gives you endless trouble. Why not have the conviction that you have always been "home", that you have always been blissful, and always will be? If you give up the idea that you ever took a bodily form, you will find that you have always been sat-chit-ananda.

Why do we not remember anything from our past lives?

Some people do, most people don't. Remembering the past keeps you in the past. The less of the past you remember, the better off you are.

What kind of reincarnation comes next if one commits suicide?

'Sui' means "self". The real suicide is to extinguish the life of this "self" that you think yourself to be. If you can manage to do this, there will be no more rebirths or deaths. If you just kill the body, you will soon find a new one to continue your suffering in.


3. ABOUT ENLIGHTENMENT

What is Enlightenment? In your book "Wake Up and Roar" it is said that a still mind is Enlightenment, would it not be more correct to say that the complete and permanent absence of the mind is Enlightenment?

When the "I" which rises to claim ownership of all thoughts and actions is permanently eradicated Enlightenment remains. A still mind is just an active mind that is having a temporary rest. Enlightenment is the substratum of both states.

Does Enlightenment change the body, in any way chemically? Is there a rush of energy that occurs at the moment of Enlightenment?

When you are one with your source you are plugged into an infinite supply of energy. When you no longer think "I am doing this", the Power of Self takes over, enabling all activities to be performed with an abundance of energy. Ramana Maharshi sometimes said that the power of the Self was surging through him so strongly he couldn't keep his head still. His head was always shaking except when he was in samadhi or when he was looking intently into a devotee's eyes.

Can an ordinary person become Enlightened, or do you have to be a spiritual seeker on the path?

If you don't want it, you don't get it.

How can I tell if I'm Enlightened or not?

Open your eyes and look around you. If you still see a world outside and apart from you, you are not enlightened. Why not? The world and the one who sees it are both projections of the mind, and while that mind is there, Enlightenment is covered up. When you experience and know directly, without needing the eyes, that the world is an uncaused appearance within your own Self, you will not need to ask whether you are Enlightened or not.

Do you foresee a time in the not too distant future when there will be many people on earth who are Enlightened?

There is no future, there are no people, there is no earth, there is no one seeking Enlightenment, and no one gaining it. This is the final and only Truth.

Does Enlightenment mean that you are always happy? When difficult and sad things occur in our lives, do they affect you? When you get angry and throw people out of satsang, are you peaceful, happy and blissful inside? Is the difference between you and us the fact that we identify with our emotions and allow them to control us, whereas you don't?

Happiness is permanent. It is always there. What comes and goes is unhappiness. If you identify with what comes and goes, you will be unhappy. If you identify with what is permanent and always there, you are happiness itself. Anger is one of my good friends. He is always there when I need him to transact some business. He is very useful. He does his work without disturbing me and then stays away till I need him again.

When is a person "ripe" for Enlightenment? Is there a gestation period that precedes Enlightenment in the way that nine months of preparation and growth precede the birth of a child?

You are ripe for Enlightenment when you want nothing else. In order to be born as a baby you have to spend nine months getting bigger and bigger. For Enlightenment you have to get smaller and smaller until you disappear completely.

You say that I must find the source of my thoughts and stay there. How do I do that ?

By looking inside yourself to see where they come from

Do you still have continuous thoughts or as a Master do you only have thoughts when they serve a particular purpose? Can you choose to be without thoughts?

Thoughts appear and disappear but they are not "mine" so they don't bother me. Let them come, let them go. What does it matter? They are nothing to do with me.

What is the lower Self? What is the higher Self?

There is no lower or higher in the Self.

Other teachers say that a long period of purification is necessary before Enlightenment can take place. You yourself have said that you have to make yourself beautiful before Truth will embrace you. How do we make ourselves pure and beautiful?

You cannot make yourself pure by any mental or physical activity. Purity is only there when thoughts are not. Truth is not very athletic. She cannot catch you if you are moving around. She can only catch you and embrace you if you stand absolutely still.

If freedom from bondage is our true nature, why is it that so few people realise it?

Because very few people care about it enough or want it enough.

Does Enlightenment imply Omniscience?

There is nothing apart from the Self which can be known and nothing in the Self which can know it. The idea of omniscience can only arise when there is a subject who has knowledge of an infinite number of objects. If there is no subject and no objects, what happens to omniscience?

Can Meditation lead to Enlightenment? If not, why not?

Meditation is a mental activity. There is a subject, the meditator, who is manipulating or organising objects which are thoughts. Both the subject and the objects have to disappear for Enlightenment to take place. Meditation just prolongs their existence.

When you are enlightened do you gain knowledge of your past lives?

When you are enlightened you have the knowledge that they never happened.


4. ABOUT MIND

What is mind? What is no mind? Is no mind a temporary absence of mind or is it permanent?

Mind is just a bundle of thoughts along with the "I" that moves them around. When the "I" drops off there is no mind. When no-mind sinks into its source and stays there, reality shines, permanently and irrevocably.

Most people are afraid to give up their minds because they think they need them to function in the world. How do daily activities get done if there is no-one who decides what to do and how to do them?

Try it and see. You are like someone in an STD telephone exchange who thinks that he has to run around and make the connections himself. Relax, stop interfering, and you will see that the whole show runs by itself without any intervention from you.

Many people have spent years successfully making an effort to quieten their mind. Is this bringing them any nearer to Enlightenment or are they merely increasing their powers of concentration?

People who successfully make efforts to quieten their minds are concentrating intensively on a object of thought called 'silence'. This is not the silence of no thoughts. It is the experiencing of a mental state by intense effort, when both the effort and the thoughts cease, Enlightenment occurs.

Sometimes in Satsang you use the Buddha as an example. The Buddha attained freedom through meditation, yet you seem to imply that there are limitations to meditation. Could you speak on this?

The Buddha tried all kinds of meditation and tapas before he came to Bodhi Gaya but he didn't get any results. When he sat under the bodhi tree, all he had was a single-minded determination that he wasn't going to move until he got enlightened. It was his determination to be free that won him his freedom, not any of his previous practices.


5. ABOUT LIFE

Who am I?

Whoever you imagine yourself to be. When you stop making up identities for yourself, you find out who you really are.

Who is God?

When you project a dream world for yourself and live in it, you also project a God who looks after it. When you stop the projection, both the world and God disappear.

After Self- Realisation, do we understand everything about life? Or will life at its heart, always remain a mystery, and not a riddle to be solved?

The Self will always be a mystery because there can never be anything apart from it to comprehend it, analyse it or understand it.

What is the meaning of life?

Why should it have any meaning? Any meaning you attribute to it is just an idea in your mind. Life is not affected or explained by any ideas you might have about it.

Can you please talk on learning how to live, to simply be here now. Sometimes being around you I feel you share with us the ordinariness of your daily activities. I think about the Zen saying "Before Enlightenment chop wood carry water, after Enlightenment, chop wood carry water."

Before Enlightenment you think, "I must chop wood, I must carry water". Afterwards wood gets chopped, water gets carried but it's nothing to do with you. It just happens.

When we are in the 'gap' between lives do we consciously choose the body we want to re-incarnate in, our parents, and so on? If so, how do we choose?

It's not a travel agency where you can pick up a nice spot for your next birth. Your thoughts and desires from this life will propel you into a new form and not necessarily a very nice one. It's all out of your control. Right now you can exercise control by finding out where your thoughts and desires come from. After your death it will be too late.

Why do we have so much fear in our lives? Why is trusting in each moment so difficult?

If you live in the ego, you automatically set up hostile situations of "me" and the rest of the world. To defend an ego you have to be selfish and you have to fear other people because they are all threats to your well being. How can you trust anyone in a situation like that?

Many people believe that there is such a thing as a "healthy ego". A person with a healthy ego may be self-confident, aware of his own abilities and limitations, likes and dislikes, have high self-worth, and so on... Is there such a thing as a "healthy ego"? Can it ever lead to freedom?

A person who has self-confidence and high self- esteem (what western psychologists would call a healthy ego) is no nearer to freedom than anyone else. Such a person may feel that he is happy and that he needs no fundamental changes in his life. A person who has understood that his ego is continually causing him mental trouble is more likely to look for a solution. There is no such thing as a healthy ego any more than there is a thing called a healthy disease. The ego cannot lead to freedom it can only obstruct it. Ego and freedom cannot co-exist. When ego vanishes, freedom replaces it.


6. ABOUT DREAMS

What are dreams? Why do we dream?

Dreams are mental projections, at night you project them inside your head, during the day you project them outside your head. You dream up these worlds because you have a strong desire to enjoy them.

You tell me "Wake Up!" that I am in a dream right now. When I go to sleep at night I don't remember anything until I wake up again the next morning, and sometimes I have dreams that feel as real as the waking state, as real as the feeling that I am sitting here right now. How do we know what is real and what is unreal?

All your dreams are unreal even the dream you call the waking state, the only reality is the screen on which they appear. When you identify with the screen and not the pictures, you will know what is real and what is unreal.

When I am dreaming I sometimes feel that I am all the characters in the dream simultaneously. At the same time, I feel that I am observing all these characters, and everything that is going on. Yet I don't have a sense of control over what I am dreaming. It is just happening, I am the dream, I am observing the dream, I cannot control it. What is really happening?

You are just dreaming. If you want to know what is really happening wake up.

You say there is no difference between the dreaming and the waking state. Right now, how can you tell that you are in the waking state and not dreaming that you're giving Satsang?

I'm not in either of the two states. Both states alternately appear in me. You are dreaming that I am giving satsang, but your dreams do not touch me or affect me.

Why do we have trouble remembering our dreams?

The brain is programmed to forget most of what we dream. That's just the way the body works.

Are our dreams messengers? Are they telling us something?

They are telling us that creation is a dream, and that there is a possibility to wake up out of the dream.

Are you conscious when you are sleeping? If so, what of?

The same consciousness prevails in all the states of waking, sleeping and dreaming. The appearance and disappearance of the alternating three states do not affect that consciousness, it is not conscious of the three states, they just appear and disappear within it.


7. ABOUT FREE WILL VERSUS DETERMINATION

Is everything in my life, for example the moment and method of my death, predetermined? What freedom of choice and action do I have in my life? Is the moment of Enlightenment pre-determined, or could it happen at any time?

All the activities that the body performs are predetermined. The only freedom you have is to choose not to identify with the body that is performing the actions. Enlightenment does not happen in time. It happens when time stops.


8. ABOUT DESIRE

We live in times of abundance. We can choose between many different objects and we may find ourselves caught up in never-ending desires for more, bigger, better. How can we live "in the market-place, but not of it"?

By not going shopping for sense-objects.

What is desire? What is the way to true happiness?

By discriminating between what is real and permanent and what is unreal and impermanent. And by then desiring the former, not the latter.


8. ABOUT SEX

Does celibacy help us to realise the Self?

There is no sex in the Self. I have children, grandchildren and great grandchildren, and none of them held me up.

There are many paths to Enlightenment, including a path that uses union with a partner as a way to the Divine. Some people have experienced, when making love with their partner, a feeling of oneness with existence. Do you believe it is possible to achieve true liberation in such a way?

Physical activities can only produce physical results. Mental activities produce mental results. Sexual activity produces babies. Enlightenment is not produced by any of them.

Is there a correct way to practise sex and sexuality?

Go to Khajuraho and learn how to do it the Indian way.


9. ABOUT SURRENDER

Is surrender to the Master the same as surrendering to the Divine within us all or is it, yet again, looking to an object outside ourselves?

The Master is not an object outside you, he is inside you as your own Self, surrender to him there.

How is true surrender accomplished?

By going back to your source and discovering that there is no one to surrender and nothing to surrender.



10. ABOUT LOVE

What is the difference between love and compassion?

For the ego, love is an attachment generated by desire, while compassion is a feeling of pity towards 'others'. When the ego is absent both are the same.

We all desire to love and be loved and time and time again our search for the perfect partner ends in disappointment. Is it only possible to love another when both people are Self-Realised? And when we are Self-Realised, will we not love everyone in the same way - making monogamy impossible?

In the Self there are no others to love or to be monogamous with. The desire for a perfect partner will always end in disappointment because there is no such thing as a perfect partner. Partnerships are always imperfect.

Is unconditional love possible when we are still living the ego?

No

Is God Love?

You brought him into existence. Be creative, make him be whatever you want him to be.

Ultimate Dzogchen - An interview with Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Q: What does Dzogchen mean?

R: Dzog, "perfection" or "completion," means as in this quote from a tantra, "Complete in one - everything is complete within mind. Complete in two - everything of samsara and nirvana is complete within this." "Dzog" means that all the teachings, all phenomena, is completely contained in the vehicle of Dzogchen; all the lower vehicles are included within Dzogchen. "Chen," "great," means that there is no method or means higher than this vehicle.

Q: What is the basic outline of practice according to the Dzogchen path?

R: All the Buddha's teachings are contained within nine gradual vehicle of which Dzogchen, the Great Perfection, is like the highest golden ornament on a rooftop spire, or the victory banner on the summit of a great building. All the eight lower vehicles are contained within the ninth which is called Dzogchen in Tibetan, Mahasandhi in Sanskrit [and the Great Perfection in English]. But Dzogchen is not contained in the lowest one, the shravaka vehicle. So when we say "perfect" or "complete" it means that all the lower yanas are perfected or completely contained within the Great Perfection, within Dzogchen.

Usually we say that Dzogchen, sometimes called Ati Yoga, is a Dharma tradition but actually it is just the state of one's mind, basically. This unity of being empty and cognizant is the state of mind of all sentient beings. There is nothing special about that. A practitioner should encompass that with "a core of awareness." That is the path of practice. Again, "the unity of being empty and cognizant with a core of awareness."

The special feature of Dzogchen is as follows: "Primordial pure essence is Trekchö, Cutting Through." This view is actually present in all the nine vehicles, but the special quality of Dzogchen is what is called "The spontaneously present nature is Tögal, Direct Crossing." The unity of these two, Cutting Through and Direct Crossing, Trekchö and Tögal, is the special or unique teaching of Dzogchen. That is how Dzogchen basically is. That's it.

Q: That is a very wonderful teaching. It seems like Dzogchen is very direct and doesn't seem to have a linear quality in terms of the way one would approach it. In the other yanas sometimes one would first do the set of preliminaries, then a yidam practice. tsa-lung practice etc., this and that. It seems like Dzogchen is very immediate, like the essence is already present, available. Is there any kind of linear path in the way one would approach these teachings or is it always direct, like this?

R: We do in the Dzogchen tradition have the gradual system of preliminaries, main part and so forth. But the special characteristic of Dzogchen is to introduce or point out directly the naked awareness, the self-existing wakefulness. This is for students who are suitable, meaning those who have sharp mental faculties. Instead of going through a lot of beating around the bush, one would introduce them directly to their mind essence, to their self-existing awareness.

Dzogchen is said to have great advantage but also great danger. Why is this? Because all the teachings are ultimately and finally resolved within the system of Dzogchen. This can be divided into two parts, resolving all the teaching through intellectual understanding and through experience. To resolve through experience is what is the great advantage or benefit in the sense that having pointed out and recognizing directly naked awareness and simply makes that the main part of practice. That is the point when there is an incredible great benefit because that itself is the very direct and swift path to enlightenment.

On the other hand, the great danger is when one just leaves it as intellectual understanding, that "In Dzogchen there is nothing to meditate upon. There is nothing to view. There is nothing to carry out as an action." That becomes just a concept of nihilism and is completely detrimental to progress. This is because the final point of the teaching is conceptlessness, being beyond intellectual thinking. Yet, what has happened is that one has created an intellectual idea of what Dzogchen is and holds on to that idea very tightly. This is a major mistake that can happen. So, it is very important to take the teachings into one's personal experience through the oral instructions of one's teacher. Otherwise, simply to have the idea "I am meditating on Dzogchen" is to completely miss the point.

Self-existing wakefulness is present within the mind-stream of all sentient beings since primordial time. This presence is something which should not be left as theory, but should be acknowledged though one's experience. One first recognizes it, then trains and attain stability in it. That is when it is said that Dzogchen has great benefit. There is actually no greater benefit than this.

Great danger means that when this is left as words of mere intellectual understanding then one doesn't gain any experience but merely holds some concept about it and lack the nonconceptual quality. Conceptual mind is merely intellect whereas experience to remain in the continuity of naked awareness; growing used to it what is called "experiencing."

It is the same principle whether one talks of Madhyamika, Mahamudra or Dzogchen. As is said in the Bodhicharya Avatara, "When one's intellect holds neither the concept of concreteness nor of inconcreteness, that is the state of not conceptualizing." As long as one is not free from concepts, one's view remains as mere intellectual understanding and the Dzogchen view is then left as mere theory. One might then think "Dzogchen is primordially empty, it is free from a basis. There is nothing to meditate upon, no need to do anything If I meditate in the morning, I am a buddha in the morning. When I recognize at night, I am a buddha at night. The destined one does not even have to meditate."

Actually, Dzogchen is the way to purify the most subtle obscuration of dualistic knowledge - it is something quite in credible. But if one only imagines it, if it is a mere theory, thinking "I don't need to do anything, neither meditate nor practice," [one's has completely missed the point]. There has been many people thinking like this in the past.

Compared to straying into an intellectualized version of Dzogchen, it is much more beneficial to practice according to Madhyamika or Mahamudra where one goes along step by step, alternating theory and experience within the structure of theory, experience and realization. Proceeding gradually in this way one becomes more and more clear about what is to be resolved and then finally captures the "dharmakaya throne of nonmeditation." In this graduated system there are some reference points along the various paths and levels. But in Dzogchen the master will from the very beginning point out the nonconceptual state, instructing the student to remain free from concepts. It then happens that some student will think, "I am free from concepts, I am never distracted!" while walking around with vacantly gazing eyes. That is called straying into intellectual understanding.

Later on, when we have to die, mere theory will not help us whatsoever. Tilopa told Naropa, "Theory is like a patch. It will wear and fall off." After dying, we will undergo various pleasant and unpleasant experiences, intense panic, fear and terror. Intellectual understanding will not be able to destroy those fears; it cannot make confusion subside. So, merely to generalize that one's essence is devoid of confusion is useless. It's only a thought, another concept, which is ineffective at the moment of death when it comes to deal with one's confusion.

Q: Finally but not least, does Rinpoche have any special advice for the readers who are primarily householders?

R: They should first of all receive the pointing-out instruction and recognize their essence. Having recognized, they should refrain from losing its continuity and then mingle that with their daily activities. There are basically four kinds of daily actions traditionally called moving, sitting, eating and lying down. We don't always only sit or only move about; we alternate between the two. In addition we eat, shit and sleep. So there actually seem to be five kinds [laughs]. But at all times, in all situations, one should try not to lose the continuity of the practice. One should try to be able to mingle the practice with daily life. As one gets more accustomed, any amount of daily life activities will only cause nondualistic awareness to develop and become the adornment of this undistracted awareness, free from being obscured or cleared.

When one is able to mingle practice with the activities of daily life, these activities will then be beneficial and devoid of any harm whatsoever. That is if one has already recognized one's essence correctly. Without the correct recognition one will get carried away by the daily activities - one will have no stability. Lacking stability is like a strand of hair in the wind bending according to how the wind blows whereas a needle will be stable no matter how small it is. Even a very thin needle cannot be bent by the wind. Once one has truly recognized one's essence one cannot be carried away by the activities of daily life, just as a needle that is stable. Dualistic mind is completely unstable, like a hair that is just ready to move by the tiniest breeze; it falls prey to the five external sense objects. Awareness, on the other hand, when properly recognized, does never fall subject to sense objects. It is like a needle that is unmoved by the wind.