One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby Dan74 » Fri Jan 15, 2010 10:54 am

No, at least not consciously. :smile:

I haven't come across a Zen (Buddhist) teacher yet who advocated for such a distinction and I certainly don't see any need for such.

_/|\_
_/|\_
User avatar
Dan74
 
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby Sanghamitta » Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:00 am

Well there is one such on a site not unknown to you who seems to have dedicated much of his time to divorcing Zen from Buddhism. Is he not typical ? Or would you not consider him a teacher ?
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
Sanghamitta
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby Dan74 » Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:58 am

If you mean Jundo, he argues that he is not divorcing Zen from Buddhism. This is his understanding and interpretation. I tend to disagree but that's that.

I have no idea if his approach is typical. It seems to be quite different from what I've been taught and read, but that's just my view.

_/|\_
_/|\_
User avatar
Dan74
 
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby Sanghamitta » Fri Jan 15, 2010 12:04 pm

No I meant another person. But lets not personalise it. It seems to me that there is a tendency for some western Zen people to see Zen as having nothing to do with Buddhism. Maybe they are not typical but have a high profile.
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
Sanghamitta
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby christopher::: » Fri Jan 15, 2010 1:56 pm

Sanghamitta wrote:
I dont understand a concept like " liberating the mind ". What does that actually mean ? It sounds more like an idea from the Vedanta. That something remains after liberation which is "the Real Mind". Can you phrase that in terms of gaining Insight into the nature of the kandhas ?


I think that's probably what we could agree on here, when talking about "liberation"...

“It all comes down to the mind free of clinging. That for me is an understanding of freedom." ~Joseph Goldstein

Nice description here.

The Buddha's Song Of Enlightenment: Achieved Is The End Of Craving 64:13

And you've resolved the seeming conflict between the two traditions?

When I could bring all the teachings back to the mind of no-clinging it felt like a great refuge. I don't think any school of Buddhism would argue with that. There's no school that says, "Cling." Liberation is about cutting, or dissolving, or letting go of, or seeing through-choose your image-the attachment to anything. The description of the mind of no-clinging may be different in the different schools, but the experience of the mind of no- clinging is the same. How could it be different?


:anjali:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
User avatar
christopher:::
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby Sanghamitta » Fri Jan 15, 2010 2:41 pm

Sorry Christopher, and I am grateful to you for trying, but these conversations, which others might find useful, for me simply raise more questions than answers. The " mind of no clinging " sounds like a slogan. It makes no sense to me at all. At any level. So rather than hang around being dog-in-manger, I will take my leave and mean it this time as far as this thread is concerned. :smile:

I hope you find what you need.

:anjali:
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
Sanghamitta
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby LauraJ » Fri Jan 15, 2010 3:50 pm

Christopher, I do understand what you mean. But I think that the statement about a mind free of clinging is positing that there is a thingy, or something existing outside of the aggregates. I don't think it's discussed in Theravada the same way it is in Mahayana. But anyone can feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken :)

Kindly,
Laura
Dharma Wheel
Buddha Blog

Conquer the angry man by love. Conquer the ill-natured man by goodness. Conquer the miser with generosity. Conquer the liar with truth. -The Dhammapada
User avatar
LauraJ
 
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:38 pm

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby tiltbillings » Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:54 pm

http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/b_f/ceto_vimutti.htm

ceto-vimutti
'deliverance of mind'. In the highest sense it signifies the fruition of Arahatship (s. ariya-puggala), and in particular, the concentration associated with it. It is often linked with the 'deliverance through wisdom' (paññā-vimutti, q.v.), e.g. in the ten powers of a Perfect One (s. dasa-bala). See vimokkha I.

It is also called 'unshakable deliverance of mind' (akuppa-c.); further 'boundless d. of m'. (appamāna-c.); 'd. of m. from the conditions of existence, or signless d. of m.' (animittā-c.); 'd. of m. from the appendages' (ākincañña-c.), since that state of mind is free from the 3 bonds, conditions and appendants, i.e. from greed, hatred and ignorance; and since it is void thereof, it is called the 'void deliverance of mind' (suññatā-c.)

In a more restricted sense, 'boundless deliverance of mind' is a name for the 4 boundless states, i.e. loving-kindness, compassion, altruistic joy and equanimity (s. brahma-vihāra); 'd. of m. from the appendages' stands for the 'sphere of nothingness' (ākiñcaññāyatana s. jhāna 7); 'd. of mind from the conditions of existence', for d. of mind due to non-attention to all conditions of existence; 'void d. of m' for d. of m. due to contemplating voidness of self. For further details, s. M. 43.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19893
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby seanpdx » Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:57 pm

I'm confused as to what all the confusion is about. "Liberating the mind"? What's not to understand? That's the goal. Liberation. Of the mind. Cetovimutti. Nibbana. A mind free from clinging is nothing more than a mind free from clinging. Clinging is a process. If your mind stops the process of clinging, then you have a mind free from clinging. Simple, n'est-ce pas? There is nothing more being posited.

If the engine of my car starts pinging, and I tweak the timing, and the pinging goes away, then my engine is free from pinging.
seanpdx
 
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:56 am

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby meindzai » Fri Jan 15, 2010 6:49 pm

seanpdx wrote:I'm confused as to what all the confusion is about. "Liberating the mind"? What's not to understand? That's the goal. Liberation. Of the mind. Cetovimutti. Nibbana. A mind free from clinging is nothing more than a mind free from clinging. Clinging is a process. If your mind stops the process of clinging, then you have a mind free from clinging. Simple, n'est-ce pas? There is nothing more being posited.

If the engine of my car starts pinging, and I tweak the timing, and the pinging goes away, then my engine is free from pinging.


I don't see much of a problem with it either. The Buddha talked about purifying the mind, training the mind, taming the mind, even the luminous mind. Yet we know that the mind is just a sequence of individual moments, each conditioned by the prior. The mind can have akusala cittas along with it or kusala cittas. It can have attachment (lobha) or not.

-M
meindzai
 
Posts: 592
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:10 pm

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby tiltbillings » Fri Jan 15, 2010 6:52 pm

Dhp 183: To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to cleanse one's mind [citta] — this is the teaching of the Buddhas.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19893
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby Sanghamitta » Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:04 pm

Clearly the problem is mine.

:anjali:
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
Sanghamitta
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby meindzai » Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:08 pm

Sanghamitta wrote:Clearly the problem is mine.

:anjali:


You mean your mind? :)
meindzai
 
Posts: 592
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:10 pm

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby Sanghamitta » Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:11 pm

What is mind ?
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
Sanghamitta
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby tiltbillings » Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:12 pm

Sanghamitta wrote:Clearly the problem is mine.

:anjali:

Actually, given some of the fuzzy use of language by some of our Zen brethern and sisters that gets into the general discussion of things Buddhist, it is not unreasonable to ask for clarification.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19893
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby Sanghamitta » Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:18 pm

seanpdx wrote:I'm confused as to what all the confusion is about. "Liberating the mind"? What's not to understand? That's the goal. Liberation. Of the mind. Cetovimutti. Nibbana. A mind free from clinging is nothing more than a mind free from clinging. Clinging is a process. If your mind stops the process of clinging, then you have a mind free from clinging. Simple, n'est-ce pas? There is nothing more being posited.

If the engine of my car starts pinging, and I tweak the timing, and the pinging goes away, then my engine is free from pinging.

Well actually Tilt we only need to tweak the timing...apparently..sorry I am not simply being facetious but mechanical metaphors are even less clear to me than terms ( "mind ") borrowed from western psychology. I also have to face the possibility than I an simply a thicko.
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
Sanghamitta
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby meindzai » Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:33 pm

Are you ok with Abhidhammic distinctions? I understand mind (citta) as being synonymous with Vinnanakkhandha - The aggregate of consiousness.

http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/ni ... bhi-02.htm

[quote=Nina Van Gorkom]
As regards citta, all cittas are one khandha: vinnanakkhandha. The Pali terms vinnana, mano and citta are three terms for the same reality: that which has the characteristic of knowing or experiencing something. When citta is classified as khandha the word vinnana is used. Thus, the five khandhas are grouped as one rupakkhandha, and four namakkhandha.
[/quote]

-M
meindzai
 
Posts: 592
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:10 pm

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby Sanghamitta » Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:45 pm

So "liberation" of citta is actually realising the nature of citta and of its arising according to what I was taught. There is then no " liberated" mind. There is Insight.
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
Sanghamitta
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby seanpdx » Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:53 pm

Sanghamitta wrote:
seanpdx wrote:I'm confused as to what all the confusion is about. "Liberating the mind"? What's not to understand? That's the goal. Liberation. Of the mind. Cetovimutti. Nibbana. A mind free from clinging is nothing more than a mind free from clinging. Clinging is a process. If your mind stops the process of clinging, then you have a mind free from clinging. Simple, n'est-ce pas? There is nothing more being posited.

If the engine of my car starts pinging, and I tweak the timing, and the pinging goes away, then my engine is free from pinging.

Well actually Tilt we only need to tweak the timing...apparently..sorry I am not simply being facetious but mechanical metaphors are even less clear to me than terms ( "mind ") borrowed from western psychology. I also have to face the possibility than I an simply a thicko.


I can use other metaphors if you prefer. =)

If I have a squeaky door, and I oil the hinge, then my door is free from squeaking. =)
If I have a web forum, and I delete all the posts, then my forum is free from posts. =)

Pick an interest/hobby, and I'll come up with a metaphor. ;)

The point is that there's nothing particularly special about the phrase "mind free from clinging".
What is the mind? That part of you which thinks.

And I'm sean, not tilt. ;)
seanpdx
 
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:56 am

Re: One Dharma? Joseph Goldstein's Perspective

Postby meindzai » Fri Jan 15, 2010 8:03 pm

Not trying to be argumentative by throwing the book at you but:

"And he will never infer of me according to Dhamma: 'That Blessed One encompasses with his own mind the minds of other beings, other persons. He understands a mind affected by lust as affected by lust and a mind unaffected by lust as unaffected by lust; he understands a mind affected by hate as affected by hate and a mind unaffected by hate as unaffected by hate; he understands a mind affected by delusion as affected by delusion and a mind unaffected by delusion as unaffected by delusion; he understands a contracted mind as contracted and a distracted mind as distracted; he understands an exalted mind as exalted and an unexalted mind as unexalted; he understands a surpassed mind as surpassed and an unsurpassed mind as unsurpassed; he understands a concentrated mind as concentrated and an unconcentrated mind as unconcentrated; he understands a liberated mind as liberated and an unliberated mind as unliberated.'"


I just think it's perfectly ok to talk about ____ mind withing reifying it.

-M
meindzai
 
Posts: 592
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:10 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], vinasp and 8 guests