Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby Dan74 » Fri Apr 30, 2010 1:03 pm

The core problem with Genpo's Big Mind the way I see it is the lack of renunciation, lack of development of brahmaviharas and panna.

So you may have a glimpse of emptiness, of this universal experience. It may have a transformational effect, it may (more likely) just boost the ego. One could have such an experience with drugs and emerge no wiser. At best, it will motivate the person to seek serious training.

What is really needed is a letting go of all that's unwholesome, an insight into what is and who isn't - a development of wisdom. Otherwise one grows a big head and becomes what is sometimes called around Zen circles "an enlightened @$#%hole".

In traditional Zen training, there is a lot of letting go. The hardship the monks went through, their long training brought out all the clinging and defilements for them to see and let go, focusing single-mindedly on practice, dying the great death, they called it.

Great Faith, Great Doubt, Great Determination -> Great Enlightenment.

Or Big Bucks-> Big Mind -> Big Head.
_/|\_
User avatar
Dan74
 
Posts: 2671
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby PeterB » Fri Apr 30, 2010 1:33 pm

christopher::: wrote:We've been talking about Big Mind, Buddha Nature, Advaita style Zen, Genpo Roshi, Ken Wilbur and other related topics over in the Discovering Theravada section, but keep stepping out of that subforum's bounds, so i thought i'd start a new discussion here, for anyone interested.

Pros, Cons, Possibilities, Problems?



"I'm so big, but there is no one there to know. No subject/object division. No one there to say, oh, I am this. There's no here, no listener, no seer. I am All, I am the whole, I am the infinite, I am the Eternal. That's Big Mind. What we could call the absolute, what we could call God."

:juggling:

P.S. Tilt, PeterB and all, you'll be happy to know i'm finally starting to grasp where the problems can lie with this approach, thanks to...

Thanissaro Bhikkhu: Freedom from Buddha Nature

:anjali:

Actually Chris I dont think this IS Dhamma reinvented. I dont see any connection with Dhamma.
It might possibly be Dharma reinvented.
PeterB
 
Posts: 3903
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby christopher::: » Fri Apr 30, 2010 3:36 pm

PeterB wrote:
Actually Chris I dont think this IS Dhamma reinvented. I dont see any connection with Dhamma.
It might possibly be Dharma reinvented.


touché..!

Dan74 wrote:
What is really needed is a letting go of all that's unwholesome, an insight into what is and who isn't - a development of wisdom. Otherwise one grows a big head and becomes what is sometimes called around Zen circles "an enlightened @$#%hole".

In traditional Zen training, there is a lot of letting go. The hardship the monks went through, their long training brought out all the clinging and defilements for them to see and let go, focusing single-mindedly on practice, dying the great death, they called it.

Great Faith, Great Doubt, Great Determination -> Great Enlightenment.

Or Big Bucks-> Big Mind -> Big Head.


:goodpost:
"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: 1323
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby m0rl0ck » Fri Apr 30, 2010 4:53 pm

christopher::: wrote:P.S. Tilt, PeterB and all, you'll be happy to know i'm finally starting to grasp where the problems can lie with this approach, thanks to...

Thanissaro Bhikkhu: Freedom from Buddha Nature



Thats one interpretation of buddha nature. There are others that dont fit his purposes so well:

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=1320

More in the same vein:

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=1348

The view of buddha nature as a kind of atman is a little simplistic imo and contrary to the dharma.
"When you meditate, don't send your mind outside. Don't fasten onto any knowledge at all. Whatever knowledge you've gained from books or teachers, don't bring it in to complicate things. Cut away all preoccupations, and then as you meditate let all your knowledge come from what's going on in the mind. When the mind is quiet, you'll know it for yourself. But you have to keep meditating a lot. When the time comes for things to develop, they'll develop on their own. Whatever you know, have it come from your own mind.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai ... eleft.html
User avatar
m0rl0ck
 
Posts: 1031
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby tiltbillings » Fri Apr 30, 2010 7:33 pm

m0rl0ck wrote:
christopher::: wrote:P.S. Tilt, PeterB and all, you'll be happy to know i'm finally starting to grasp where the problems can lie with this approach, thanks to...

Thanissaro Bhikkhu: Freedom from Buddha Nature



Thats one interpretation of buddha nature. There are others that dont fit his purposes so well:

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=1320

More in the same vein:

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=1348

The view of buddhanature as a kind of atman is a little simplistic imo and contrary to the dharma.
If one listens to the use of "buddhanature" in common parlance, it sure does sound like a self sort of thingie we possess or truly are. How buddhanature/tathagatagarbha is used within the various Buddhist tradition over the history of Buddhism varies greatly. The "Critical Buddhism" movement within recent Japanese Buddhist scholarship points to some serious issues with the idea.
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: 19763
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby m0rl0ck » Fri Apr 30, 2010 7:55 pm

tiltbillings wrote:[If one listens to the use of "buddhanature" in common parlance, it sure does sound like a self sort of thingie we possess or truly are.


Yah it does. You could almost substitute "soul" and not change the meaning.

tiltbillings wrote: How buddhanature/tathagatagarbha is used within the various Buddhist tradition over the history of Buddhism varies greatly. The "Critical Buddhism" movement within recent Japanese Buddhist scholarship points to some serious issues with the idea.


Well if you are a buddhist and budda nature is just atman in drag, thats a pretty serious issue imo :) On the other hand buddha nature as atman seems a simplistic interpretation of the idea, i think schools that emphasize experience over faith maybe have a clearer picture.
"When you meditate, don't send your mind outside. Don't fasten onto any knowledge at all. Whatever knowledge you've gained from books or teachers, don't bring it in to complicate things. Cut away all preoccupations, and then as you meditate let all your knowledge come from what's going on in the mind. When the mind is quiet, you'll know it for yourself. But you have to keep meditating a lot. When the time comes for things to develop, they'll develop on their own. Whatever you know, have it come from your own mind.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai ... eleft.html
User avatar
m0rl0ck
 
Posts: 1031
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby christopher::: » Fri Apr 30, 2010 9:43 pm

m0rl0ck wrote:
Well if you are a buddhist and budda nature is just atman in drag, thats a pretty serious issue imo :) On the other hand buddha nature as atman seems a simplistic interpretation of the idea, i think schools that emphasize experience over faith maybe have a clearer picture.


Part of the problem could stem from certain Mahayana Sutras, or translations of those Sutras, perhaps? I remember when posting some translations of Huang Bo, specific references to the "One Mind" were disputed by Ven. Huifeng. He felt the English translations were not accurately reflecting what Huang Bo actually wrote.

I recently glanced at the Nirvana Sutra online and find it hard to believe these translations are accurate. Would want to get Ven Huifeng's opinion on that before jumping to conclusions...

http://nirvanasutra.net/

"You, monks, should not thus cultivate the notion (samjna) of impermanence, suffering and non-Self, the notion of impurity and so forth, deeming them to be the true meaning [of the Dharma], as those people [searching in a pool for a radiant gem but foolishly grabbing hold of useless pebbles, mistaken for priceless treasure] did, each thinking that bits of brick, stones, grass and gravel were the jewel. You should train yourselves well in efficacious means. In every situation, constantly meditate upon [bhavana] the idea [samjna] of the Self, the idea of the Eternal, Bliss, and the Pure ... Those who, desirous of attaining Reality [tattva], meditatatively cultivate these ideas, namely, the ideas of the Self [atman], the Eternal, Bliss, and the Pure, will skilfully bring forth the jewel, just like that wise person [who obtained the genuine, priceless gem, rather than worthless detritus misperceived as the real thing.]"

~The Buddha, Chapter Three,
"Grief",The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra


:thinking:
"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: 1323
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby m0rl0ck » Sat May 01, 2010 1:41 am

christopher::: wrote:
Part of the problem could stem from certain Mahayana Sutras, or translations of those Sutras, perhaps? I remember when posting some translations of Huang Bo, specific references to the "One Mind" were disputed by Ven. Huifeng. He felt the English translations were not accurately reflecting what Huang Bo actually wrote.



Huang Po also calls Mind, void, mind (as in ego self), no mind and others. So i think with anything but a cursory reading of the Blofeld translation one would get the idea that he isnt talking about atman. One of the cool things about the word "hsin" in chinese tho is that it can also be translated as heart. Isnt that beautiful? Emptiness as the one heart :)

That Nirvana sutra translation verges on the bizarre. Myself, im willing to blame hindu infiltrators, anybody else? :jumping:
"When you meditate, don't send your mind outside. Don't fasten onto any knowledge at all. Whatever knowledge you've gained from books or teachers, don't bring it in to complicate things. Cut away all preoccupations, and then as you meditate let all your knowledge come from what's going on in the mind. When the mind is quiet, you'll know it for yourself. But you have to keep meditating a lot. When the time comes for things to develop, they'll develop on their own. Whatever you know, have it come from your own mind.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai ... eleft.html
User avatar
m0rl0ck
 
Posts: 1031
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby christopher::: » Wed Jan 19, 2011 12:24 pm

From the Siddhartha and Herman Hesse discussion...

Kim O'Hara wrote:
alan wrote:Hi meindzai. I also read Alan Watts as a teen and oh boy did I think he had it all figured out. He was my hero for a year or two. Embarrassing to admit it now...but it did inspire me on towards more serious study later. There must be some value in that.

Sorry, no Hesse quotes. Back to you, Hanzze.

I think, from comments that have come up from time to time, that many of the older members (mostly baby boomers? yep.) of DW first encountered Eastern religions and philosophy in general, and Buddhism in particular, through books and authors we can no longer take at all seriously. Can I mention a few names and see how many people cringe? Okay, here goes:
Lobsang Rampa (The Third Eye, etc), Alan Watts, I Ching (the version translated from Chinese to German to English), Persig (Zen and the Art of...), Krishnamurti, The Tibetan Book of the Dead, Ram Dass (Be Here Now), Gurdjieff, ...
Not so specifically Asian, but of the same period: Carlos Castaneda, Aldous Huxley (The Perennial Philosophy and others) ...
Okay, that's ten. Is anyone (else :tongue: ) game to admit that they read all of them?
Before someone tells me I'm off-topic: Hesse's Siddhartha and Steppenwolf belong on that list.
And don't think I look down on all of them or regret reading them. They were important in the sixties and seventies, particularly for one very simple reason: they were around at the time, and very little else was readily available. Without them, it's quite possible there would be no DW today, no American Buddhism, no Theravada monasteries in the UK, etc, etc.

:namaste:
Kim


PeterB wrote:I would imagine that covers many peoples Kindergarten of Buddhist or faux Buddhist literature Kim. I would add the works of Jung and of course Osho/Rajneesh, to the pile.

Perhaps we should be grateful to those works that first caught our interest...
It would be sad if anyone was still stuck in Kindergarten...peering out throgh the windows like Alice In Wonderland stuck in the little house after the biscuit with " Eat Me " written on it.....and I am afraid that the evidence is that that there are a number of such Alices among western Buddhists.


Nibbida wrote:
I'd like to coin the term Buddhish for this literature. It's Buddist-ish, but not quite. It's also a portmanteau of "Buddhism" and "rubbish."

I'm reminded of this gem from Bruce Lee, master of Buddhist wisdom, who then proceeds to kick the crap out of everyone. Wisdom? Sure. Compassion? Feh!



That's funny, he doesn't look Buddhish.

:smile:
"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: 1323
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby nobody12345 » Wed Jan 19, 2011 2:02 pm

rowyourboat wrote:I am All, I am the whole, I am the infinite, I am the Eternal

Nowhere does he categorically say that there is no self. Infact he has gone on to identify another mental fabrication ('big mind') as the self. What escape in samsara is there to this man or his followers?

Bingo.
And Dhamma needs no reinvention or renovation.
It is perfect as it is.
Metta.
nobody12345
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 4:05 am

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby unspoken » Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:54 pm

mudra wrote:Good luck with little minds pretending to be big minds.... :alien:

:rofl:
unspoken
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby christopher::: » Sun Jan 23, 2011 7:36 am

:tongue:
"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: 1323
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Dhamma Reinvented: Big Mind, Buddha Nature, etc..

Postby Euclid » Sun Jan 23, 2011 9:18 pm

I'm only twenty years old, and took interest in Buddhism only within the last few years. As such, I was lucky enough to be surrounded with English translations of the tipitaka, English translations of teachings of cherished teachers, and great opportunities such as Dhamma Wheel which simply didn't exist in the 70s. Homage to all of you who trod the path before me and separated the crappy Buddhish from the Dhamma! Sadhu! :clap: :lol:

imaginos wrote:Bingo.
And Dhamma needs no reinvention or renovation.
It is perfect as it is.
Metta.


Well said!

from DN29 (R.D.'s translation:)

Uddaka the son of Rama, used to say : Seeing he seeth not. And on seeing what does one not see ? Of a well sharpened razor one sees the blade, but one does not see the edge. This is what he meant. And a low pagan thing was this that he spoke, unworthy, unprofitable, suitable to the worldly majority, about a razor forsooth. Now were one to wish to use rightly that phrase, Seeing he does not see, it is thus that he should say : Seeing he seeth not. But what is it that seeing he does not see.? A religion that is in every way successful, in every respect complete, neither defective nor redundant, well set forth in all its full extent : — this is what he sees. Were he to abstract some feature at a given point ; thinking to make it clearer, then he does not see it. Were he to fill in some feature at a given point, thinking- to make it more complete then he does not see it, and thus Seeing he seeth not.
Euclid
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:33 am
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Previous

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 4 guests