Book: Pema Chödrön - No Time to Lose.

[Netti-Netti]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

There is a piece called Letting Go by Judith Lief. In it she talks about this basic practice and alerts us to not thinking we've done so well and "let go" when actually our sneaky ego has converted it into a concept which we are still clinging on to.

Minor problem: when you're all done letting go of stuff - including that pesky desire to let go - you have nothing left to work with for transformation purposes. Then you've got nothing left to transform.

It seems we need to reconcile transformation and renunciation.

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Netti-Netti

Minor problem: when you're all done letting go of stuff - including that pesky desire to let go - you have nothing left to work with for transformation purposes. Then you've got nothing left to transform.

It seems we need to reconcile transformation and renunciation.

Have Faith in Your Mind (Hsin Hsin Ming)

If things are not thought different,
To their nature they will return.
<...>
When all is thrown away
There's nothing to remember.

Transformation really isn't a problem in this case:

In all places the non-dual is
The same and there is naught outside it.
Sages everywhere
To this sect belong,
Which is beyond time, long or short,
For a thought lasts ten thousand years.
It neither “is” nor “is not”
For everywhere is here
The smallest equals the largest
For it is not confined by space.
The largest equals the smallest
For it is no within, without.
“Is” and “is not” are the same,
For what “is not” equals “is”.
If you cannot so awaken,
Why worry if you do not win it?

[Netti-Netti]

I was thinking in terms of "letting go" of attachments versus "transforming" them. These would seem to be rather different approaches, yet both are associated with Buddhism.

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Netti-Netti

I was thinking in terms of "letting go" of attachments versus "transforming" them. These would seem to be rather different approaches, yet both are associated with Buddhism.

No "vs" involved, imo. First line is about attachment, second line is about transformation:

If things are not thought different,
To their nature they will return.

There is a difference between attachment and interconnectedness.

[Netti-Netti]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

First line is about attachment, second line is about transformation:

If things are not thought different,
To their nature they will return.

To tell you the truth, I'm having trouble with this. My thoughts may have some impact on things, but at the same time there is an objective aspect of reality that is independent of my ideas, beliefs, and intentions. Therefore, the notion that things will go back to their nature as a result of a shift in my persective is a little hard to take. Knowing does not directly imply being.

I gather this is probably about zazen and getting in touch with Original Mind. But I see the passage in question as more an illustration of Dzogchen than the Path of Transformation.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by Netti-Netti

To tell you the truth, I'm having trouble with this.

Perhaps a couple of alternative translations may be of assistance?


When all things are seen equally
The timeless Self-essence* is reached.

* “the unborn, undying, eternal self: no outside, no inside, no beginning, no end; our true nature that always had been and always will be.”

–from The Eye Never Sleeps by Dennis Genpo Merzel Roshi.

- and -


If the mind makes no distinctions,
The ten thousand things are as they are, of single essence.

- from Trust in Mind by Mu Soeng.

There are several translations of the poem in this book but this one is by Richard B. Clarke, that Soeng uses in the commentary. Soeng relates these lines to the natural, transparent mind in which there is no forced effort. With this, we are woken up from our sleepwalking through life and thus escape samsara. “It is an a priori condition of mind that can be experienced existentially but does not lend itself very well to conceptual reification.”

I shall close with two more lines from the poem (translated by Clarke):

Stop talking and thinking,
And there is nothing you will not be able to know.







s.

[Snoopy]

btw, I bought this Pema Chödrön book to get to know a little something about Tibetan Buddhism, so this isn’t helping.

s.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

{I've always thought that finding an ethical and honest skeptic is like finding a great treasure.}

You might find some treasure here, sg.

Sasana: A Refuge for the Skeptical Buddhist

s.

[seattlegal]

Sorry for hijacking your thread, Snoopy.

Originally Posted by Netti-Netti

To tell you the truth, I'm having trouble with this. My thoughts may have some impact on things, but at the same time there is an objective aspect of reality that is independent of my ideas, beliefs, and intentions. Therefore, the notion that things will go back to their nature as a result of a shift in my perspective is a little hard to take.

You are the one being transformed.

Knowing does not directly imply being.

Hence, the dukka associated with wrong view.

I gather this is probably about zazen and getting in touch with Original Mind. But I see the passage in question as more an illustration of Dzogchen than the Path of Transformation.

Back to the Tibetan view--desire is transformed into discerning wisdom via meditation. (Buddha Amitabha.)
http://www.namobuddhapublications.co...ilies-2003.pdf
Desire

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Sorry for hijacking your thread, Snoopy.

carry on me old flower
s.

[Netti-Netti]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

Stop talking and thinking

What are you doing here?

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Netti-Netti

What are you doing here?

Temporarily stopping the production of trash.

[Netti-Netti]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Temporarily stopping the production of trash.

You sure you aren't creating more of it?

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Netti-Netti

You sure you aren't creating more of it?

There is always that possibility.

[Netti-Netti]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

There is always that possibility.

Ever been to a landfill?