Thusness/PasserBy thinks Dan Berkow has deep insights into non-duality and dependent origination/emptiness and that his writings are "truly good". Another article I have posted by him is This Is It: An Interview with Dan Berkow but there are many other articles by him I have not posted (for a list of articles by him see http://www.nonduality.com/berkow1.htm and http://www.globalserve.net/~Sarlo/Ydan.htm and http://www.innerexplorations.com/ewtext/more.htm).

Here are some great expressions on the experience of interdependent origination and "Maha" (also see the subsection "On Emptiness" and "On Maha" of the post "On Anatta (No-Self), Emptiness and Spontaneous Perfection" posted by Thusness/PasserBy):

http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/advaita-vedanta/75040-re-dan-interbeing.html
___________________________
From: "Dan Berkow, PhD"
Subject: Re: Zenbob/interbeing

Dan: Interbeing (as I've typically heard Thich Naht Hahn translated
into English) means that no thing exists on its own. This is a
restatement of the Buddhist teaching of dependent origination,
sometimes termed "interdependent origination". Therefore,
no thing exists as a separate thing. At the same time, the
appearance
of different qualities can arise with no difficulty, although
these appareances and qualities are actually in constant flux
if observed closely. So what is it that is existing in
"interbeing"? Not a thing can be said to be existing,
as anything that is named is dependent on other things existing,
into infinity. So who is the "you" who has "your pain" and the
"me"
who has "my pain"? These entities, according to
"interbeing", aren't there in any sense as a discreet entity. The
sensation of pain arises, but no one "has" it.

Empathy is a
resonation of vibration, not a feeling-state of one separate
entity toward another. There is pain "over there" and pleasure
"over here" - but whose pain and pleasure is it? The apprehension
of interbeing leads to an unimaginable and unspeakable Infinity
that
is capable of indefinite flux and eternal stillness
simultaneously.
In the midst of this Infinity, you and I converse, words emanating
from "here" are heard "there" and vice versa. The Void is alive
and resonating. It is indeed a marvelous unbounded symphony
in which every note has its place in the song, and the song
arises as a simultaneous unsplit melody, every "this" resonating
with every "that".

-- Love -- Dan

______

http://www.nonduality.com/hl365.htm

DAN BERKOW and GREG GOODE:


> Thought, of course tries endlessly
> and futily to verify its own existence as real,
> its constructs as true, its perceptions as valid,
> and its memory as correct. But if this self-enclosed
> loop is seen to be based on nothing except its
> own ceaseless self-referencing, then what is
> outside the loop? What *is* reality? Once "seen",
> the entire deck of cards collapses, body and mind
> drop.

When the loop is seen to be nothing but circular and self-enclosing, then
everything pops and drops, body, mind, thoughts, all appearances.
Actually, one of the first things to go (an early casualty), is that ol'
question about external reality!

Love,

--Greg
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Dan: Indeed.

The external reality is constructed
by the internal observer, and
the internal observer couldn't
self-perceive or construct "its"
perception except in contrast/relation
to external reality. As each
is needed to assume the other,
any inherent reality to them
dissolves when the "middle
way" is attended to. Thought-memory
and emotional-sensory processes
construed as reactions to external beings
and forces or internal states and needs are
dependent on the inner-outer
scheme of reality, so they have
no place to stand.

*Truly* there is no
external or internal,
yet there is the appearance of
external and internal through
mutual arising and co-construction.
Hence, language, culture, families,
lives being lived, deaths being
died, places to go,
things to do.

The intriguing question here is:
"how can this appearance of co-constructed
'interbeing' appear?"
There is no "where" for it to appear, and
any "how" is simply a construction
arising within and from the appearance
itself.

So, the answer is: poof! like this!

Yet it's this very "poof" in which "they"
seem to appear, in which "they" aren't!

So, as you say, "pop" and "drop" -
(that has a much better ring to it
than, say, "poop" and "droop" ;-)

Splash,
a frog jumps in the old pond.
(haiku)

Plop, plop
fizz, fizz

oh, what a relief
it izz.

(old alkaseltzer commercial).

Love,
Dan

.............

http://www.nonduality.com/1000db.htm

"No experiencer, hence no
experience" is only what is
already the case.

...................

>From: "Dan Berkow, PhD"
>
>D: All there is, is experience.
> There's no one having an experience.
> Just experience.
> Including the experience of the idea that someone is having
> an experience.
> There's no one who gets born and who dies, although there's
> the experience we label "birth", the experience we label "death",
> and the experience of the idea that someone is born and dies.
(4:30 AM) AEN:    > There is no way to get outside of experience, nor are there
> any objects that exist apart from experience.
> The illusion of objects existing apart from experience is
> the experience of illusion, occuring along with delusion,
> the experience of the belief that one experiences objects
> that exist apart from experience.
(4:30 AM) AEN:    > Experience has no experiencer, no location, and no divisions.
> Distinctions that arise within experience simply *are* experience.
> Love,
> Dan
>

The consciousness that was assumed to be looking
at things across a distance, suddenly has no
distance. And the things being looked at suddenly
aren't anything else, or other.

Yet, the content isn't any different.

It's just that the content is the consciousness
and vice versa.

And has been all along.

..........

http://www.nonduality.com/berkow2.htm 

- A Conversation on Buddhism between Dan Berkow, Ph.D. and Greg Goode, Ph.D.

It would look like this: An infinitude of meaning with endless self-ripples manifesting as constant flux, endless living-

universes of changing meaning, yet without any change occurring in all-pervading self-evident self-nature. The 'catch' is: this self-nature

isn't to be found anywhere, and can't be said to exist, ever. Without existing,
it is merely self-evident (to who else?) as its own manifestation as living/dying endlessly living universe here, now. I am all that is,

hence I am no one and no-thing.
The Net of Indra is a metaphor from Mahayana Buddhism that demonstrates the principles of Interdependent Origination.

Here are a few articles explaining what this is about:


INDRA'S JEWELED NET


GRAPHIC COPYRIGHT GAIL ATKINS


The metaphor of Indra's Jeweled Net is attributed to an ancient Buddhist named Tu-Shun (557-640 B.C.E.) who asks us to envision a vast net that:
  • at each juncture there lies a jewel;
  • each jewel reflects all the other jewels in this cosmic matrix.
  • Every jewel represents an individual life form, atom, cell or unit of consciousness.
  • Each jewel, in turn, is intrinsically and intimately connected to all the others;
  • thus, a change in one gem is reflected in all the others.

This last aspect of the jeweled net is explored in a question/answer dialog of teacher and student in the Avatamsaka Sutra. In answer to the question: "how can all these jewels be considered one jewel?" it is replied: "If you don't believe that one jewel...is all the jewels...just put a dot on the jewel [in question]. When one jewel is dotted, there are dots on all the jewels...Since there are dots on all the jewels...We know that all the jewels are one jewel"
The moral of Indra's net is that the compassionate and the constructive interventions a person makes or does can produce a ripple effect of beneficial action that will reverberate throughout the universe or until it plays out. By the same token you cannot damage one strand of the web without damaging the others or setting off a cascade effect of destruction.
A good explanation of the Hindu/Buddhist myth of Indra's net can be found in The Tao of Physics, by Fritjof Capra: "...particles are dynamically composed of one another in a self-consistent way, and in that sense can be said to 'contain' one another. In Mahayana Buddhism, a very similar notion is applied to the whole universe. This cosmic network of interpenetrating things is illustrated in the Avatamsaka Sutra by the metaphor of Indra's net, a vast network of precious gems hanging over the palace of the god Indra." In the words of Sir Charles Eliot:
"In the Heaven of Indra, there is said to be a network of pearls, so arranged that if you look at one you see all the others reflected in it. In the same way each object in the world is not merely itself but involves every other object and in fact IS everything else. In every particle of dust, there are present Buddhas without number."
The similarity of this image to the Hadron Bootstrap is indeed striking. The metaphor of Indra's net may justly be called the first bootstrap model, created by the Eastern sages some 2,500 years before the beginning of particle physics.
Compare the first picture with:

Computer model of early universe. Gravity arranges matter in thin filaments.

image
-------------------------

...One of the images used to illustrate the nature of reality as understood in Mahayana is The Jewel Net of Indra. According to this image, all reality is to be understood on analogy with Indra's Net. This net consists entirely of jewels. Each jewel reflects all of the other jewels, and the existence of each jewel is wholly dependent on its reflection in all of the other jewels. As such, all parts of reality are interdependent with each other, but even the most basic parts of existence have no independent existence themselves. As such, to the degree that reality takes form and appears to us, it is because the whole arises in an interdependent matrix of parts to whole and of subject to object. But in the end, there is nothing (literally no-thing) there to grasp....

Source: Sunyata ('Emptiness')

-------------------------

http://www.heartspace.org/misc/IndraNet.html

The Indra's Net: What Is It?


FAR AWAY IN THE HEAVENLY ABODE OF THE GREAT GOD INDRA, THERE IS A WONDERFUL NET WHICH HAS BEEN HUNG BY SOME CUNNING ARTIFICER IN SUCH A MANNER THAT IT STRETCHES OUT INDEFINITELY IN ALL DIRECTIONS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EXTRAVAGANT TASTES OF DEITIES, THE ARTIFICER HAS HUNG A SINGLE GLITTERING JEWEL AT THE NET'S EVERY NODE, AND SINCE THE NET ITSELF IS INFINITE IN DIMENSION, THE JEWELS ARE INFINITE IN NUMBER. THERE HANG THE JEWELS, GLITTERING LIKE STARS OF THE FIRST MAGNITUDE, A WONDERFUL SIGHT TO BEHOLD. IF WE NOW ARBITRARILY SELECT ONE OF THESE JEWELS FOR INSPECTION AND LOOK CLOSELY AT IT, WE WILL DISCOVER THAT IN ITS POLISHED SURFACE THERE ARE REFLECTED ALL THE OTHER JEWELS IN THE NET, INFINITE IN NUMBER. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT EACH OF THE JEWELS REFLECTED IN THIS ONE JEWEL IS ALSO REFLECTING ALL THE OTHER JEWELS, SO THAT THE PROCESS OF REFLECTION IS INFINITE
THE AVATAMSAKA SUTRA
FRANCIS H. COOK: HUA-YEN BUDDHISM : THE JEWEL NET OF INDRA 1977

When I was trying to come to a decision regarding the look and feel of my new web site, I wanted to employ a background image that had universal import and could point the way to an adequate description of the nature or reality. A tall order, if not impossible, but the choice was clear: Indra's Net.
There are several aspects of Indra's Net, as described in the above quote, that signify it as a crystal clear allegory of reality:
1. The Holographic Nature of the Universe
Long before the existence of the hologram, the jeweled net is an excellent description of the special characteristic of holograms: that every point of the hologram contains information regarding all other points. This reflective nature of the jewels is an obvious reference to this.
This kind of analogy has been suggested by science as a theory for an essential characteristic of the cosmos, as well as as the functioning of the human brain, as beautifully described in The Holograpic Universe by Michael Talbot.
2. The Interconnectedness of All Thingss
When any jewel in the net is touched, all other jewels in the node are affected. This speaks to the hidden interconnectedness and interdependency of everything and everyone in the universe, and has an indirect reference to the concept of "Dependent Origination" in Buddhism. Additionally, Indra's Net is a definitive ancient correlate of Bell's Theorum, or the theory of non-local causes.
3. Lack of a substantive self
Each node, representing an individual, simply reflects the qualities of all other nodes, inferring the notion of 'not-self' or a lack of a solid and real inherent self, as seen in the Advaita Vedanta school of Hinduism and Buddhism in general.
4. Non-locality
Indra's Net shoots holes in the assumption or imputation of a solid and fixed universe 'out there'. The capacity of one jewel to reflect the light of another jewel from the other edge of infinity is something that is difficult for the linear mind, rational mind to comprehend. The fact that all nodes are simply reflections indicates that there is no particular single source point from where it all arises.
5. Innate Wisdom
The ability to reflect the entirety of all light in the universe attests to the inherent transcendant wisdom that is at the core of all nodes, representing all sentient beings, and to the inherent Buddha Nature.
6. Illusion or Maya
The fact that all nodes are simply a reflection of all others implies the illusory nature of all appearances. Appearances are thus not reality but a reflection of reality.
7. Universal Creativity
A familiar concept in various high dharmas is one of an impersonal creative intelligence that springs forth into reality through the instruments of all living beings.
8. The Mirror-like Nature of Mind
The capacity to reflect all things attests to the mind being a mirror of reality, not its basis. This is a common thesis among various schools and religions.
And Indra's Net has been used as a defining metaphor for the Internet. One major web hosting site is www.indra.com.
The following are some quotes and interesting web sites regarding Indra's Net:

Indra's Net is a core metaphor of HuaYen.
Stephen Mitchell, in his book The Enlightened Mind, wrote:
"The Net of Indra is a profound and subtle metaphor for the structure of reality. Imagine a vast net; at each crossing point there is a jewel; each jewel is perfectly clear and reflects all the other jewels in the net, the way two mirrors placed opposite each other will reflect an image ad infinitum. The jewel in this metaphor stands for an individual being, or an individual consciousness, or a cell or an atom. Every jewel is intimately connected with all other jewels in the universe, and a change in one jewel means a change, however slight, in every other jewel."
(It's also interesting to note that contemporary physicists are in general agreement that this ancient metaphor is indeed a good description for the universe.)
As one of the West's preeminent philosophers defined human interaction:
The [people] are the primary units of the actual community, and the community is composed of the units. But each unit has in its nature a reference to every other member of the community, so that each other member of the community, so that each unit is a microcosm representing in itself the entire all-inclusive universe.
--Lecture: Body and Spirit, 1926, Alfred North Whitehead
URL #1: A great graphic of Indra's Net
URL #2: Indra's Net and The Glass Bead Game
URL #3: The Glass Bead Game
URL #4: Another interesting graphic
URL #5: An artist's conception...
URL #6: Indra's Net and Holography
URL #7: Philosopher David Loy's Explanation of Indra's Net and Mahayana Buddhism
URL #8: Buddhist Thangka similar to Indra's Net
Two articles by Nathan Gill:

http://www.nathangill.com/pages/readingroom/going-beyond.html

Going beyond.


So there's an awareness of this room right now, but what about the unmanifest level?

What unmanifest level? Isn't what's appearing enough?

The appearance is merely a pointer to what is beyond Consciousness.

Why do you want to go beyond?

Because that's where all the action is, for creating this manifestation.

This manifestation isn't created - it spontaneously appears.

But ultimately there's nothing more important than what is beyond Consciousness.

When there's exclusive identification with the content of awareness, with the story of 'me' as an imagined entity, there's a tendency for the awareness aspect of Consciousness to be objectified as 'the beyond', a state or realm which once attained will offer oneness, lasting peace.

But in actuality there is no beyond, nothing to be attained 'ultimately'. There's simply this as it is: simple presence. This is already that 'realm'. Consciousness (awareness and the presently appearing content of awareness) is already one or whole, and when the story of 'me' - of identification - is seen as just a play, a movie, then all pursuit of oneness, all pursuit of the beyond or whatever, quite naturally becomes obsolete.

http://www.nathangill.com/pages/readingroom/cosmic-entertainment.html

The cosmic entertainment.


Are you saying that thought doesn't make a difference, that nothing makes a difference in the sense of cause and effect? Everything just arises?

Everything just arises, including the idea of cause and effect.

But doesn't that idea itself make a difference? Doesn't the idea create an effect at a local level?

Only apparently so, as part of the play or movie of life. In actuality there's no cause and effect. Everything - all of this imagery - arises entirely spontaneously, immediately. Within the movie of life, there is the impression of cause and effect, but in actuality there is no separation, so nothing that can act upon anything else.

So it all just happens to arise and it just looks as though there's relationship?

Yes, the imagery that arises merely suggests separation.

And so somebody who identifies with an 'I' or with a body -

Well, it's not that there's 'someone' who identifies - rather it's more accurately described by saying 'Where identification arises …'.

OK, so where identification arises, that is something that nothing can be done about?

Precisely so. If anything changes it does so entirely spontaneously - because there's no one here who can effect any change. Cause and effect, action and reaction, are appearance only, the imagery of the movie of life, the cosmic entertainment.

http://www.nonduality.com/1000db.htm

Nonduality Salon (/ \)

issue number two - October, 2000

Nonduality Salon Magazine

(X)

THIS IS IT: AN INTERVIEW WITH
DAN BERKOW

by Gloria Lee

[Editor's note: Dan Berkow is a long-time prolific contributor to Nonduality Salon email list, as well as to HarshaSatsangh, Advaitin, and A Net of Jewels lists. His words have a way of slipping the reader into the 'void'. Gloria Lee is one of the founders of Nonduality Salon, organizer of the HS/NDS retreats, a respected voice on Buddhist subjects, and a contributor to email community's in many indefinable ways.]

Gloria: There are some frequently heard expressions that are used in discussions of spirituality, like those on the Nonduality Salon, often with the assumption that everybody already knows what is meant by these ideas. Besides possibly being confusing to someone new to nonduality, this assumption means they are seldom questioned. Words that are originally very descriptive, then are used prescriptively, as in: Here, just see this, realize this, do this, and you will become enlightened, or whatever result is being advised. Yet with a closer look at what is actually meant, or what are the implications of some of these ideas, even much well-intended advice may actually be seen to be counter-productive. So, Dan, that is the aspect I would ask you to explore here, by looking more closely at a few of these popular concepts and ideas.

To begin with one example, the phrase "I am not the body, thoughts, feelings" may be used to indicate a state of spiritual detachment or some different perception of identity. This may be said with the intention to break the habit of self identification or to step back from reacting automatically, and
supposedly represents progress. Often this practice may be called being in the "witness state" or just observing. This practice may be advised to lessen desire/aversion or reduce ego. Supposedly the experience of being "pure awareness" is the intended result, though it still may leave some form of identification as the observer. Furthermore, it may also result in a kind of distancing from experience, even a resistance to what is happening. As I am sure you are aware of these issues,
what are your thoughts on the implications of this concept?

Dan:
The "recommended witness state" can only be a construction that is put together while trying to make sense of what is being recommended. As a result there is "this Present as is" with the added imposition of the idea of the recommended state - which
is now retained as a description of Reality. This is like trying to avoid breathing, because one doesn't want to breathe until one has read a good description about breathing from a certified specialist in oxygen intake.

All that can occur from this attempt is the activity of trying to imitate the description, the idea -- striving to "make it real". Meanwhile, awareness of and as the actual Present is made "distant".

We find here the attempt of the "me" to become something the "me" isn't, but would like to become. Nonetheless, Reality is never in the idea, isn't something that will become in the future, isn't produced by or for the "me".

Striving to maintain "the witness state" can only be the imposition of a remembered idea or experience, a bringing of the past to bear on the present. What is missed is the Present as is, the Present that doesn't have, carry, or refer to a past. The unbroken Present has nothing outside of itself - neither past nor future is somewhere else, somewhere outside as a reference point. Words about the past or future, images or memories that arise, can only seem misleading if awareness conceives of itself as split in nature. When awareness doesn't try to retain a conception of a "me" opposed to and separate from an "it", there is no being misled.

In your question, you ask about breaking the habit of identification and the "intended result" of pure Awareness. Looking into this situation, it is seen that an observer appears to have taken a position. That position is that "breaking identification" would be useful and that the experience of being pure Awareness would be fulfilling. As long as this observer continues to attempt to break identifications, detach from this or that, or experience pure Awareness, the full depth of the question of the nature and existence of the observer cannot be explored. The observer is always assumed to be there, as the one who witnesses, the one who recognizes identification and detachment, the one who experiences Awareness, or who knows Awareness as such and can talk about it.

The "deepest" question is looking into the reality of the observer, about whether any position ever has actually been taken by an observer. The question isn't used by an observer, it is used to negate assumptions about an observer. The instant the observer is not, no question arises, no answer is needed. As long as there is continuing thought and energy aimed at a goal, or aimed at maintaining or changing a state of being, there will always remain the impression of an observer. It is at the very moment that no attempt is made to continue a thought
process, achieve a goal, have a particular outcome, maintain a state - at that very moment there is the seeing that no observer has ever taken a position anywhere. This was always assumed, was always the basis for activity. Nonactivity of mind allows the truth to clarify itself.

Because these questions seem to lead to an answer, the misconception tends to arise that the idea of "no observer" or "Awareness is all" is some kind of answer, philosophy, or belief to be promoted. The opposite of this is the case. If such ideas are taken as answers, the observer clearly has set up shop as the one who can promote the idea that there is no observer. Thus, this inquiry is profound, and is not at all a matter of accepting any answer or formula. The questioning intensifies so that "this moment", "this instant" becomes the only "place" the question can arise or be directed. "This instant" is a flash, and yet is "all that is". "Instantaneous awareness" is this moment, is where the question arising and that to which the question is addressed are not-two. The subject conceiving the question and the object of inquiry (e.g., the present moment) are unsplit. It is a matter of intensifying inquiry to the pointless point which is presentness. Then, neither question nor answer is needed.

The observer has disappeared this instant, as this "momentary" or "discontinuous" perception has no place for an observer. The observer requires time and distance. The instant that there is not the intent to describe or act upon a description, the observer (who is nothing but description) ceases.

There indeed can be distancing from feelings, and resistance to 'what is' in the process of "aiming to be the Witness", or trying to "experience pure Awareness". That friction and distance is the attempt of the observer to be, where no observer actually is.

Gloria: Dan, when you mention no observer, that brings to mind another popular expression, that there is "no doer" either. Then furthermore "pure awareness" becomes "choiceless awareness" and we are usually off to the races, debating free will vs determinism once again. Let's not go there! The difficulty with applying these ideas as a recommended practice, even if one somehow believes them to be true, is that not only do they contradict the usual childhood conditioning to be responsible for our choices, but also our "felt experience" of life is often that we are a someone doing something. So when "choiceless awareness" is recommended or spoken of as desirable, it is sometimes misunderstood to be merely a form of passivity. Or to a beginner, "no doer" may sound like advice to literally do nothing! How would you clear up this confusion for someone who imagines or sees all this as leading up to some sort of zombie like state of mind? What can it mean to someone to simply be told, "there is no doer"? If this is not already one's experience, how can one move toward that being true?

Dan:
At this point in our discussion, it's clear that the "choiceless awareness" that can be recommended or spoken of as if desirable isn't the fact of "choiceless awareness". Recommending something implies choice by the one who hears the recommendation, and something desirable implies the choice to go after what is desired, to realize it, to "make it a reality for oneself". Truly choiceless awareness can't be recommended, desired, or implemented. It is not a conceptual product nor a description. When the observer/doer is not, choiceless awareness automatically is the case. There is no one there to choose or not choose. The observer/doer isn't done away with, "logicked" out of existence, nor made to go away by choosing (?) not to believe in it.

The observer ceases the instant that clarity *is* as "presentness". The only impediment to clarity is the attempt to make a certain kind of clarity be the case (based on idea, desire, anxiety, or description - all of which imply and require an observer). When there is not the attempt to manufacture clarity (or well-being), there is nothing to impede "what is" *as is*. The truth is, we don't want "what is". We don't want "no observer". We don't want Reality. Methinks we doth protest too much. All our supposed expressing of Reality, explanations of how we found Reality, attempts to seek for Reality, descriptions of Reality -- all of these bring Reality no closer than it is now. The truth is, we are avoiding Reality. Even in the process of expressing, describing, and pretending we *are* Reality - we're avoiding. It's clear how we're avoiding. We're avoiding whenever we are "there" as the observer/expresser. We can't make ourselves not be "there". We can only not be there. This is true humility. It means that not one word said here about Reality is true, nor any other words about Reality.

To clear up confusion for a beginner isn't difficult. Simply let the beginner forget all ideas about becoming an "expert". There
are no "experts" Here. If a zombie-like state of mind is imagined, that is no worse than if a glorious state of sat-chit-ananda is imagined, or Clear Light, or beginningless and endless Awareness or Enlightenment. Let the beginner simply do nothing to move ahead beyond beginning, set no image as a goal. Any attempt to move anywhere will only be an introjection of one's own projection, like eating a picture of a sandwich for lunch. Indeed, what does the beginner imagine he or she has begun? Who is imagined to be there to begin something? Even to think that one is a beginner is far too sophisticated for the simplicity of "what is".

Gloria: Thanks for verifying an intuition that sometimes a lot of this "spiritual advice" is actually counter-productive and merely sends people down the proverbial garden path chasing
rainbows. Ha! been there, done that, like who hasn't? It seems that many of us begin (and continue) some form of spiritual seeking without even questioning what is behind this dissatisfaction with reality to begin with anyway. Or we just believe it all needs to be difficult and complicated. But what else can you do with yourself if nothing like this simplicity occurs to you? This reminds me of those Zen guys who say things like: Spend 10 years studying bamboo and then when you draw, forget all you know about bamboo. We seem to want to study how to become spontaneous. Maybe the vital aspect is only a readiness to hear. For example, having read Ram Dass's "Be Here Now" over thirty years ago, it certainly was not understood then to be anything simple. Or more likely, I would not want have wanted to hear anything about me not being there. Whether the truth was in that book or not is irrelevant, I am just verifying what you say about avoiding. What, do nothing? The ego does not want to hear it is not real and doesn't have important things to do.

Dan:
Saying that "the observer is not" is not to say that something real is missing. What has ceased (as "Now" is the case) is the conceptual position onto which "an observer" is projected, along with the striving to maintain that position by employing thought, memory, expectations, and goals.

If "Here" is "Nowness", no point of view can be identified with as "me", even from moment to moment. In fact, psychological time (which is constructed by comparison) has ceased. Therefore, there is only "this unsplit Present moment", not even
the imagined sensation of moving from this moment into the next moment.

Because the conceptual point of observation is not, that which is observed cannot be "fit" into conceptual categories previously maintained as the "me-center" of perception. The relativity of all these categories is "seen", and Reality that is undivided, unsplit by thought or concept simply is the case.

What has happened to the awareness previously situated as "the observer"? Now, awareness and perception are unsplit. For example, if a tree is perceived, the "observer" is "every leaf of the tree". There is no observer/awareness apart from things,
nor are there any things apart from awareness. What dawns is: "this is it". All the pontifications, pointings, wise sayings, implications of "special knowledge", fearless quests for truth, paradoxically clever insights -- all of these are seen to be unnecessary and beside the point. "This", exactly as is, is "It". There is no need to add to "This" with anything further, in fact there is no "further" - nor is there any "thing" to hold on to, or to do away with.

Gloria: Dan, at this point, any assertion seems superfluous. This is a territory only referred to by silence and emptiness, and even that is too much. Even to say, "I AM" only further complicates, it adds another layer of meaning to awareness. Even saying no-doer is a type of assertion, isn't it? So is this just impossible to discuss further?

Dan:
You bring up two points here, Glo, which seem worth addressing: not referring to "I AM" and using "nondoer" terminology, or I think, perhaps "nonobserver" terminology might be more apt.

Not using "I AM", and instead referring to "pure awareness", is a way to say the awareness isn't focused on an "I" nor is it concerned with distinguishing being from not-being regarding
itself. It isn't viewing itself in any sort of objectifying way, so wouldn't have concepts about states it is in -- "I AM" only fits as opposed to "something else is", or "I am not". With no "something else" and no "not-I", there can't be an "I AM" awareness. "Pure awareness" can be criticized in a similar way - is there "impure" awareness, is there something other than awareness? So the terms "pure awareness, or just "awareness" are simply used to interact through dialogue, with recognition that words always imply dualistic contrasts.

The related concepts that "the observer is not", or "the doer is not" are ways to question assumptions that tend to govern perception. When the assumption has been sufficiently questioned, the assertion is no longer needed. This is the principle of "using a thorn to remove a thorn." No negative has relevance when no positive has been asserted. "Simple awareness" has not thought of an observer or doer being present or not being present.

Gloria: Yet when a doer is present, say even as an assumption in an email dialogue like this, you seem to bring this to attention by a process of gentle negation. You can use negation, as you say, to remove that thorn. I call you an artist of net-neti, because you can expose and remove previously unconscious supports, until one has nothing left to stand on at all. Instead of just talking and hearing words, something within actually collapses. One time in a discussion with you of "no experiencer, no experience" - consciousness just shifted, space opened up, letting go... somehow the actual disappearance becomes real, though it may or may not be a lasting change in perception.

Dan:
As you bring up "neti, neti"
and "no experiencer or
experience":

Negation is the mind
releasing itself
from its self,
its reliance
on positives.

As long as a truth is affirmed,
there is the focusing on that
truth, the attempt to
perpetuate it, keep it.

With no clinging to affirmation,
no need for a negation.

"No experiencer, hence no
experience" is only what is
already the case.

Comments by AEN: Zen Master Sheng-yen speaks here of four general stages of experience/view -- from the scattered mind to a concentrated mind, from the concentrated mind to the One Mind (an all-reflecting mirror) also called by Master Sheng-yen as the 'Unified State' (as Thusness commented in his 'Stage 5' that at Stage 4, the practitioner sees that subject/Mind and object is an inseparable union, but it is not yet the no-subject/no-mind/no-mirror experience), and then later progress from the One Mind to the No-Mind (no-mirror) experience. Hence, Master Sheng-yen is quite clear in differentiating the 'Mirror Bright' stage with the 'No Mirror' stage. These two stages are also described and commentated according to Thusness in the Thusness's Seven Stages of Experience, especially Stage 4 and 5.

(Late Master Sheng Yen)

http://www.chan1.org/ddp/channews/02-1986.html

Ch'an Newsletter - No. 52 February 1986


Four Views of Ch'an
(Lecture given by Master Sheng-Yen at the Great Taoist Center in Washington, D.C., November 22, 1985)

Let me begin with a koan. In the T'ang dynasty there was a Ch'an patriarch named Yao-shan Wei-yen. A disciple once asked him, "Before Bodhidharma came to China, was there Ch'an in China?" The Master replied, "Ch'an originally existed in China." "In that case," the disciple continued, "Why did Bodhidharma come to China?" The Master said, "It is precisely because there was Ch'an in China that Bodhidharma came to China."

So you see I've come to Washington today because there is Ch'an in Washington. I've come here because all of you know about Ch'an. Those of you who know something about Ch'an, please raise your hands... Those of you who didn't raise your hands probably know more than those who did!

Tonight I will talk about Ch'an from four points of view. These topics should help you to raise some questions about Ch'an: the theory of Ch'an, the experience of Ch'an, the goal of Ch'an, and the training and practice of Ch'an.

1. There is really no theory in Ch'an. If we theorize about Ch'an -- that is not Ch'an. Ch'an cannot be understood by any logical reasoning. It can't be explained in words. Nevertheless, I will use some theoretical description in my talk.

There are two basic concepts associated with Ch'an. One is causes and conditions. The other is emptiness. These two concepts are linked; they cannot be separated. When we talk about causes and conditions and emptiness, we are really talking about the nature of existence, which is temporary and impermanent. All phenomena arise because of the coming together of the proper causes and conditions. All phenomena perish because of change in the causes and conditions.

Chinese Taoism and Confucianism use a text called the "I Ching." "I" means change. This is continual, constant change. It is called "arising." Constant arising means that causes and conditions change continually -- all phenomena are ever-changing. Ordinary sentient beings see things as arising and perishing. In the "I Ching" there is no perishing, only constant arising. Seeing something disappear, you miss seeing something else arise.

In the Buddhist view, when causes and conditions change, phenomena arise. But because this arising is rooted in temporary, constantly changing causes and conditions, the phenomena which arise can be nothing more than temporary themselves. Because they only have temporary existence, they are said to have no real existence. Hence these phenomena are called empty. Emptiness only means that there is no unchanging eternal existence; it doesn't mean that nothing exists at all.

All phenomena and existence can arise only because they are empty. It is because they are empty that there is nothing permanent or unchanging about them. If things never changed, there would be no arising. If nothing changed in our present configuration, it would mean that this lecture would go on indefinitely. But when this talk ends, the configuration changes. If everything were unchanging and solid, if there were no emptiness, then this lecture would go on forever. It is because of the present situation -- this particular configuration of constantly changing causes and conditions -- that we are all gathered in this room.

Therefore when we ask about Ch'an, we find that Ch'an is just a word, a bit of terminology. Very few people can say what it is. For over a thousand years masters and disciples in the Ch'an tradition have been asking questions such as, "What was it that Bodhidharma brought to China?" Many people have sought the answers to these questions. The masters never gave direct answers. Some simply ignored the questions. If they didn't ignore the question, they only would give very simple answers.

A T'ang dynasty master, Chao-chou once had a disciple who asked him, "Master, what are we really learning here?" Chao-chou said, "All. right, you can now go and have a cup of tea." Another disciple came and said that he had had a certain experience the day before, and he wanted to know it his experience was really Ch'an. Chao-chou said, "All right, you can have a cup of tea now." A third disciple was quite puzzled after he heard this exchange. He asked, "Master, you had two disciples ask you entirely different questions, and you simply told them to have a cup of tea. What did you mean by this?" The Master replied, "You can also have a cup of tea."

There is another story along the same lines involving Chao-chou. Two disciples were arguing. One said, "The Master said that men have Buddha nature, but dogs and cats don't." The other disciple said, "That's impossible, the Master could not have said anything like that." They both went to see Chao-chou. One said, "Master, you couldn't possibly have said anything like that." And the Master said, "You're right." But the other disciple said, "I'm positive that is what you said." And the Master said, "You re right." A third person, an attendant said, "But Master, only one of them can be right." And the Master said, "You're right."

These stories sound like meaningless exchanges, like nonsense, but the underlying implication is that existence or non-existence, or ideas of right or wrong, are things which only live in your own mind, your personal experience, your knowledge. These things can't be Ch'an.

2. The experience of Ch'an must be personal and direct. It cannot come from education or be arrived at by logical reasoning. In a retreat I will often try to help a student get an experience of Ch'an by telling him to bring himself to the state that existed before he was born. After birth, we begin to acquire experience, and we are trying to look beyond what we have learned.

Before your life began, who were you? What was your name? How would you answer these questions? There is a story of a Ch'an Master who told his disciple to wash charcoal until it was clean. The disciple complained that it was simply impossible. A somewhat dimwitted disciple took the charcoal and began to wash it. He didn't have a thought in his mind other than that his Master had told him to wash the charcoal. So he simply washed the charcoal. One day he asked the Master why the charcoal was still not white. The Master said, "Isn't it already white?" The disciple took another look at it and said, "Indeed it is white; it has always been white." When most of us look at charcoal, we see black, but the Master and disciple saw it as white.

In Ch'an we say that training and practice will make our discriminations disappear. These thoughts and feelings of liking or disliking come from our experience. If you can go back to the state before you were born, then you arrive at the point where discriminations do not exist. It no longer matters whether something is black or white. What is important is that your mind is free from discrimination and conceptualization.

In China between the fourth and sixth centuries, there was a period called the Northern and Southern Dynasties. At that time a famous Taoist, T'ao Hung-ching lived in the mountains. He was a well-known scholar, and the emperor had great respect for him, and wanted him to serve as his minister. But T'ao declined. The emperor asked him what it was in the mountains that attracted him so much that he preferred his hermitage to the glories of the court. T'ao wrote an answer to the emperor in the a four-line poem:

You ask me what I find in the mountains,
I say: white clouds are in the mountains,
This I alone can enjoy,
It is not something I can offer you.

The emperor read the poem and realized there was something that made no sense: white clouds can be seen anywhere, not just in the mountains. But the point is that the white clouds that T'ao Hung-ching saw were quite different from the ones the emperor could see. This is experience. A practitioner's experience of the Tao is quite different from that of a non-practitioner.

There was a famous monk, Han Shan, who was often asked, "What do you have?" He would say that he had everything: "The white clouds in the sky serve as my blanket, the earth is my bed, the mountains, my pillow. And the four seas are not big enough for a bath or a somersault."

That was his experience: oneness with nature. There was no separation between him and the world. But most people thought that he had nothing. His shoes were made from the bark of a tree; his pants, from the leaves of a tree.

It's only after you've put down everything that you've acquired since the time you were born, that a Ch'an experience can manifest. When I teach my students how to practice Ch'an, I tell them to first separate their thoughts into three categories: the past, the present, and the future. Then I tell them to discard the thoughts of the past, then the thoughts of the future. Only thoughts of the present moment are left. The next step is to let go of the present moment, because there is no such thing as the present moment. It is only a bridge between the past and the future. When you let go of the present moment, the Ch'an experience can manifest, but only at the most elementary level.

One question that might occur to you is: we have to discard our experiences until we reach the state we were in before we were born, so does this mean that a new born baby is closest to Ch'an? No, a new born baby does not know about Ch'an because a baby's mental faculties are hardly developed, and he is not in control of them. The control of mental functioning is necessary. When you have this control, then you can let go of knowledge and reasoning. Then there is a possibility that the Ch'an experience can manifest.

If you knock someone into unconsciousness, is this like Ch'an? This is nonsense. If you know nothing of the past or future, and your mind is a blank, that is also not Ch'an. A mind that is blank in this way is a very tired mind. Only a very clear, alert mind can experience Ch'an.

I can only describe the experience of Ch'an by using an analogy. Consider the surface of water and consider a mirror. The surface of water will move at the slightest touch, but a mirror is unmoving. A mirror can be obscured by dust, but remove the dust and it will reflect clearly. If water is agitated, it will not be able to reflect an image, only a distortion of the image. The movement in water is like the movement in our minds. Our minds move because of the knowledge we have and the experience we have acquired. Because of these things, we are constantly making judgments. Just as moving water cannot reflect well, so a moving mind cannot see clearly -- what we see or think we see is not real.

For example, there are about fifty people in the audience. You all have different backgrounds, different experiences, and different levels of education. Because of these differences, each of you will hear the same thing a little differently. Each of you judges this lecture in your own way. It may be one lecture, but it could also be fifty different lectures. That is not Ch'an. If it were, when one person spoke, it would be as if there were one person listening. And if that were the case, there would be no need for me to speak, because you would know what I was going to say before I said it.

This is illustrated by a story from the early days of the Ch'an sect. The emperor at the time asked a certain Ch'an Master to give a discourse. To make ready for the occasion, the emperor commanded his workmen to build an elaborate platform from which the Master would speak. When the time arrived, the Master mounted the platform, sat down, and then quickly left. The emperor was quite surprised. The Master said, "I've said everything I wanted to Say."

The unspoken Dharma and only the unspoken Dharma is the highest Dharma. Whatever can be said or described is not the real Dharma. Chan Masters have been talking about this for many, many years.

When we speak about reflection in water and in a mirror, note that a mirror that is perfectly clean will reflect better than water that is stable and unmoving. However, the Sixth Patriarch was opposed to using the analogy of the mirror. He pointed out that if there were a mirror, there would be a mind, and this would not be Ch'an. Nonetheless, we will use the mirror to a make a point. Later, we will throw out the mirror.

What is reflected by a mirror is outside the mirror. If a person is in a mirror-like state, everything that is reflected is on the outside. For such a person, there is no self involved. What he sees and feels is only the existence of phenomena -- when there is no self, there is no experience of discrimination, of liking or disliking.

This is not the ultimate state, because if you have nothing but awareness of the environment and there is no self apparent, there must still be a self to be aware of the environment. Someone who is in this state is certainly in a unified state, because there seems to be no self and only the environment seems to exist. This is called the state of "one mind," but still it is not Ch'an. There must be "no mind' if it is to be Ch'an.

A true Ch'an state should not be compared to an all-reflecting mirror. All things exists without the mirror. In this state everything is seen very clearly, but there is no concept of outside or inside, existing or not existing, having or not having.

3. What is the good of this kind of experience? This leads us to the third section, the goal of Ch'an practice. There are so many benefits to Ch'an practice -- for myself and many more for others. These benefits can be seen on three levels: First, there is physical benefit, then mental balance and good mental health, and last, the potential to become enlightened -- the spiritual benefit.

By helping a practitioner attain a more stable mind, Ch'an practice can improve mental health. And the reason for an unhealthy body is really psychological imbalance. Ch'an practice can strengthen mental power and capacity. Even with physical sickness, a practitioner will have a positive attitude and will not be hindered from doing what he needs to do. Good mental health is a fundamental aim of the practice, but in the beginning stages, physical strength is acquired through physical sitting. Practicing in this way helps maintain and focus the flow of energy known as "ch'i." Taoism and Yoga share this aspect of practice.

The highest benefit of practice is enlightenment, the genuine Ch'an experience. What good is this? I can only say this: before enlightenment, there are things that one needs and there are things that one would rather do without, there are things that are liked and things that are disliked. After enlightenment, there is no such thing as that which I need or don't need, what I like or don't like. Do you understand? That's why I said that all of you already know Ch'an. You see, before we are enlightened, we have many vexations, and there are many things that we have to do; there are many things that we don't want to do. We may seek and attain enlightenment, but once we have experienced it, there is no longer any such thing as enlightenment. At this point there is nothing that we have to do; there's nothing that we don't have to do.

Lin-chi Yi-hsuan, a famous Ch'an Master, was studying with his Master when he got enlightened, but his Master was not immediately aware of Lin-chi's enlightenment. One day the Master was making his rounds and checking to see that all of his students were practicing hard. He came upon Lin-chi lying on his mat, fast asleep. The Master woke him with his staff, and asked, "How can you be so lazy, when everyone around you is practicing diligently?" Lin-chi just looked up at his Master, picked up his blanket and cushion, and went to lie down in another place.

The Master watched Lin-chi move, and asked, "What are you doing now?" Lin-chi Yi-hsuan answered, "What else is there for me to do?" When the Master heard this, he walked over to a disciple who was practicing particularly hard. He took his staff, gave him several stiff blows, and said, "There's someone over there who's practicing very hard, what are you doing here, sleeping like this?" The Master's eldest disciple said to himself, "This old Master has really gone crazy." From that point on Lin-chi didn't remain sleeping -- he traveled spreading the Dharma. The lineage that evolved from him is called the Lin Chi sect; in Japanese it is known as the Rinzai sect.

The story of Lin-chi shows that after enlightenment, there is nothing, no practice or striving, that is needed for oneself. There are only other sentient beings to work for and to help.

4. The training and practice of Ch'an can be divided into three levels. First, to move from a scattered to a concentrated mind. Second, to move from a concentrated mind to one-mind. Finally, to let go of even one-mind, and reach no-mind.

The scattered mind is easy to see. We can all be aware of this state where thoughts come and go in a haphazard manner. Let's try an experiment. Everyone raise your index finger and look at it. Just look, and have no thoughts. Do this in a relaxed manner.

We did that for thirty seconds. Were you able to do it with no thoughts? If you couldn't do it, you had a scattered mind. When we do things with a scattered mind, we are not using our fullest capacity.

A Ch'an Master once told his disciples: Chan practice is very easy. When you eat, just eat; when you sleep, just sleep; when you walk, just walk." One disciple said, "I know how to eat, sleep, and walk. Everybody knows that, so is everybody practicing Ch'an?" The Master said, "That's not true: when you eat, your mind is not on eating; when you sleep your mind is either filled with dreams or lost in a muddled state of blankness; when you walk, you're just daydreaming."

Once in our Center in New York, we hired a carpenter to do some work for us. He was nailing a nail into a wall, when he looked out the window, and saw a pretty woman passing by. He hit his finger, and twisted the nail. He had to start all over again. What was he doing with his mind? It certainly wasn't on his work. Most of us function like this. We must use special methods to bring our scattered minds into a concentrated state. Do as the Master said: when you eat, eat; when you sleep; sleep; when you walk, walk. When you practice, keep your mind in a concentrated state. Then if you hear a sound, visualize or feel something -- whatever you do, you will be doing just that and nothing else. This is a concentrated mind.

When you expand this state further, you will eventually get to the point where the separation between self and environment disappears -- there is no distinction between you and the world. If you are repeating a mantra, then you and the mantra become one. There are many levels to this state. At the elementary level you and your method of practice become one. A deeper state is when you feel that whatever your senses encounter, what you see and hear, is the same as yourself. At this point there is no distinction between what you see and what you hear. The sense organs no longer have separate functions. This is an intermediate level. Deeper still is the state where you sense an unlimited universe within yourself. Still this is not the experience of Ch 'an.

From here we must use the methods of Ch'an -- the gung-an (koan) and the hua-t'ou -- to break apart the state of one-mind. In this way we can reach enlightenment, we can reach Ch'an.

Comments by AEN: the following article states the three stages of experience the practitioner goes through during his practice (1: relaxing mind and body, 2: the Great Self, 3: No Self). It also distinguishes the I AM and One Mind stage (stage one to four) from the experience of No Mind (stage five) as described by Thusness/PasserBy in Thusness's Seven Stages of Experience

An few important excerpts by Master Sheng Yen:

...By the practise of Ch’an one can eliminate the ‘I’; not only the selfish, small ‘I’, but also the large ‘I’, which in philosophy is called ‘Truth’ or ‘the Essence’. Only then is there absolute freedom...

...When you are in the second stage, although you feel that the ‘I’ does not exist, the basic substance of the universe, or the Supreme Truth, still exists. Although you recognise that all the different phenomena are the extension of this basic substance or Supreme Truth, yet there still exists the opposition of basic substance versus external phenomena...

... One who has entered Ch’an does not see basic substance and phenomena as two things standing in opposition to each other. They cannot even be illustrated as being the back and palm of a hand. This is because phenomena themselves are basic substance, and apart from phenomena there is no basic substance to be found. The reality of basic substance exists right in the unreality of phenomena, which change ceaselessly and have no constant form. This is the Truth...

----------------------------
Full article:

http://www.abuddhistlibrary.com/Buddhism/C%20-%20Zen/Modern%20Teachers/Sheng%20Yen/What%20is%20Ch%27an/What%20is%20Ch%27an%20-%20Master%20Sheng-yen.htm

A lecture by Master Sheng-yen (1977)

In 1977 Shi-fu was at the very beginning of his teaching career in America. He was invited to give talks in various places and these were admirably translated. In this talk the crisp vision of Ch’an that Shi-fu was bringing from China and from the Japan of his final training is clear for all to see. As we set about creating a Ch’an suitable for Europe this lecture has striking and helpful cogency. It was published in a small pamphlet of which probably only a few remain. Tim Paine was rummaging through the library at Maenllwyd when he came across it and spotted its excellence. It was in fact one of the inspirations for John’s first visits to the New York Ch’an Centre. We are glad Tim uncovered it again and we trust our readers will find it equally inspiring. Shi-fu permits us to reproduce it here. Eds.

I wish to start by telling you that Ch’an is not the same as knowledge, yet knowledge is not completely apart from Ch’an. Ch’an is not just religion, yet the achievements of religion can be reached through Ch’an. Ch’an is not philosophy, yet philosophy can in no way exceed the scope of Ch’an. Ch’an is not science, yet the spirit of emphasising reality and experience is also required in Ch’an. Therefore, please do not try to explore the content of Ch’an motivated by mere curiosity, for Ch’an is not something new brought here [to the USA] by Orientals; Ch’an is present everywhere, in space without limit and time without end. However before the Buddhism of the East was propagated in the western world, the people of the West never knew of the existence of Ch’an. The Ch’an taught by Orientals in the West is not, in fact, the real Ch’an. It is the method to realise Ch’an. Ch’an was first discovered by a prince named Siddhartha Gautama (called Shakyamuni after his enlightenment), who was born in India about 2500 years ago. After he became enlightened and was called a Buddha, he taught us the method to know Ch’an. This method was transmitted from India to China, and then to Japan. In India it was called dhyana, which is pronounced ‘Ch’an’ in Chinese, and ‘Zen’ in Japanese. Actually, all three are identical.

Ch’an has universal and eternal existence. It has no need of any teacher to transmit it; what is transmitted by teachers is just the method by which one can personally experience this Ch’an.

Some people mistakenly understand Ch’an to be some kind of mysterious experience; others think that one can attain supernatural powers through the experience of Ch’an. Of course, the process of practising Ch’an meditation may cause various kinds of strange occurrences on the level of mental and physical sensation; and also, through the practice of unifying body and mind, one may be able to attain the mental power to control or alter external things. But such phenomena, which are looked upon as mysteries of religion, are not the aim of Ch’an practice, because they can only satisfy one’s curiosity or megalomania, and cannot solve the actual problems of peoples lives.

Ch’an starts from the root of the problem. It does not start with the idea of conquering the external social and material environments, but starts with gaining thorough knowledge of one’s own self. The moment you know what your self is, this ‘I’ that you now take to be yourself will simultaneously disappear. We call this new knowledge of the notion of self ‘enlightenment’ or ‘seeing ones basic nature’. This is the beginning of helping you to thoroughly solve real problems. In the end, you will discover that you the individual, together with the whole of existence, are but one totality which cannot be divided.

Because you yourself have imperfections, you therefore feel the environment is imperfect. It is like a mirror with an uneven surface, the images reflected in it are also distorted. Or, it is like the surface of water disturbed by ripples, the moon reflected in it is irregular and unsettled. If the surface of the mirror is clear and smooth, or if the air on the surface of the water is still and the ripples calmed, then the reflection in the mirror and the moon in the water will be clear and exact. Therefore, from the point of view of Ch’an, the major cause of the pain and misfortune suffered by humanity is not the treacherous environment of the world in which we live, nor the dreadful society of humankind, but the fact that we have never been able to recognise our basic nature. So the method of Ch’an is not to direct us to evade reality, nor to shut our eyes like the African ostrich when enemies come, and bury our heads in the sand, thinking all problems are solved. Ch’an is not a self-hypnotising idealism.

By the practise of Ch’an one can eliminate the ‘I’; not only the selfish, small ‘I’, but also the large ‘I’, which in philosophy is called ‘Truth’ or ‘the Essence’. Only then is there absolute freedom. Thus an accomplished Ch’an practitioner never feels that any responsibility is a burden, nor does he feel the pressure that the conditions of life exert on people. He only feels that he is perpetually bringing the vitality of life into full activity. This is the expression of absolute freedom. Therefore the life of Ch’an is inevitably normal and positive, happy and open. The reason for this is that the practise of Ch’an will continually provide you with a means to excavate your precious mine of wisdom. The deeper the excavation, the higher the wisdom that is attained, until eventually you obtain all the wisdom of the entire universe. At that time, there is not a single thing in all of time and space that is not contained within the scope of your wisdom. At that stage wisdom becomes absolute; and since it is absolute, the term wisdom serves no further purpose. To be sure, at that stage the ‘I’ that motivated you to pursue such things as fame, wealth and power, or to escape from suffering and danger, has completely disappeared. What is more, even the wisdom which eliminated your ‘I’ becomes an unnecessary concept to you.

Of course, from the viewpoint of sudden enlightenment it is very easy for a Ch’an practitioner to reach this stage; nevertheless before reaching the gate of sudden enlightenment one must exert a great deal of effort on the journey. Otherwise the methods of Ch’an would be useless.

The Three Stages of Ch’an Meditation

At present [1977], the methods of meditation that I am teaching in the United States are divided into three stages.

Stage 1: To balance the development of body and mind in order to attain mental and physical health

With regard to the body, we stress the demonstration and correction of the postures of walking, standing, sitting and reclining. At the same time we teach various methods of physical exercise for walking, standing, sitting and reclining. They are unique exercise methods combining Indian Hatha Yoga and Chinese Tao-yin, and can bring physical health as well as results in meditation. Thus, one who practises Ch’an and has obtained good results will definitely have a strong body capable of enduring hardship. For the mind we emphasise the elimination of impatience, suspicion, anxiety, fear and frustration, so as to establish a state of self-confidence, determination, optimism, peace and stability.

A good student, after five or ten lessons here, will reach the first stage and be able to obtain results in the above two areas. One of our student’s reports stated: “This kind of Ch’an class is especially good for someone like myself who, by profession or habit, has been used to having the brain functioning just about every minute of the day. I often find this Ch’an sitting very helpful as rest or relief. So even for no greater purpose, this Ch’an class has been very useful and should be highly recommended.” [from Ch’an Magazine Vol.1; No.1]

In the first lesson of each class, I always ask each of the students individually his or her purpose in learning Ch’an whether he or she hoped to benefit the body, or sought help for the mind. The answers show that the latter were in the majority. This indicates that people living in American society today, under the strain and pressure of the present environment, suffer excessive tension, and many have lost their mental balance. Some are so severely tense that they have to consult a psychiatrist. Among those who come to learn Ch’an, I have one woman student, an outstanding lecturer in a well-known university, who asked me at the first meeting if I could help to relieve her from tense and uneasy moods. I told her that for a Ch’an practitioner this is a very simple matter. After five lessons she felt that Ch’an was a great blessing to her life.

The method of the first stage is very simple. Mainly it requires you to relax all the muscles and nerves of your entire body, and concentrate your attention on the method you have just learned. Because the tension of your muscles and nerves affects the activity of the brain, the key is therefore to reduce the burden on your brain. When your wandering thoughts and illusions decrease, your brain will gradually get a little rest. As its need of blood is reduced, more blood will circulate through the entire body. Meanwhile, because of the relaxation of the brain, all the muscles also relax; thus your blood vessels expand, you feel comfortable all over, your spirit feels fresh and alert, and your mental responses are naturally lighter and more lively.

If one’s object of study is just to acquire physical and mental balance, and not to study meditation proper, then one will probably feel that the completion of the first stage is enough; but many students are not content with this, and indeed, some from the outset are looking for the goal of the second stage.

Stage 2: From the sense of the small ‘I’

The first stage only helps to bring concentration to your confused mind; but when you practise concentration, other scattered thoughts continue to appear in your mind - sometimes many, sometimes a few. The concept of your purpose in practising Ch’an is for mental and physical benefits. This is a stage where your concept is purely self-centred. There is no mention of philosophical ideals or religious experience. When you reach the second stage, it will enable you to liberate yourself from the narrow view of the ‘I’. In the second stage you begin to enter the stage of meditation. When you practise the method of cultivation taught by your teacher, you will enlarge the sphere of the outlook of the small ‘I’ until it coincides with time and space. The small ‘I’ merges into the entire universe, forming a unity. When you look inward, the depth is limitless; when you look outward, the breadth is limitless. Since you have joined and become one with universe, the world of your own body and mind no longer exists. What exists is the universe, which is infinite in depth and breadth. You yourself are not only a part of the universe, but also the totality of it.

When you achieve this experience in your Ch’an sitting, you will then understand what is meant in philosophy by principle or basic substance, and also what phenomenal existence is. All phenomena are the floating surface or perceptible layer of basic substance. From the shallow point of view, the phenomena have innumerable distinctions and each has different characteristics; in reality, the differences between the phenomena do not impair the totality of basic substance. For instance, on the planet on which we live, there are countless kinds of animals, plants, minerals, vapours, liquids and solids which incessantly arise, change and perish, constituting the phenomena of the earth. However, seen from another planet, the earth is just one body. When we have the opportunity to free ourselves from the bonds of self or subjective views, to assume the objective standpoint of the whole and observe all phenomena together, we can eliminate opposing and contradictory views. Take a tree as an example. From the standpoint of the individual leaves and branches, they are all distinct from one another, and can also be perceived to rub against one another. However, from the standpoint of the trunk and roots, all parts without exception are of one unified whole.

In the course of this second stage, you have realised that you not only have an independent individual existence, but you also have a universal existence together with this limitlessly deep and wide cosmos, and therefore the confrontation between you and the surrounding environment exists no more. Discontent, hatred, love, desire - in other words dispositions of rejecting and grasping disappear naturally, and you sense a feeling of peace and satisfaction. Because you have eliminated the selfish small ‘I’, you are able to look upon all people and all things as if they were phenomena produced from your own substance, and so you will love all people and all things in the same way you loved and watched over your small ‘I’. This is the mind of a great philosopher.

Naturally, all great religious figures must have gone through the experiences of this second stage, where they free themselves from the confines of the small ‘I’, and discover that their own basic substance is none other than the existence of the entire universe, and that there is no difference between themselves and everything in the universe. All phenomena are manifestations of their own nature. They have the duty to love and watch over all things, and also have the right to manage them; just as we have the duty to love our own children and the right to manage the property that belongs to us This is the formation of the relationship between the deity and the multitude of things he created. Such people personify the basic substance of the universe which they experience through meditation, and create the belief in God. They substantiate this idea of a large ‘I’ the self-love of God and formulate the mission of being a saviour of the world or an emissary of God. They unify all phenomena and look upon them as objects that were created and are to be saved. Consequently, some religious figures think that the basic nature of their souls is the same as that of the deity, and that they are human incarnations of the deity. In this way, they consider themselves to be saviours of the world. Others think that although the basic nature of their souls is not identical to and inseparable from that of the deity, the phenomenon of their incarnation shows that they were sent to this world by God as messengers to promulgate God’s intention.

Generally, when philosophers or religious figures reach the height of the second stage, they feel that their wisdom is unlimited, their power is infinite, and their lives are eternal. When the scope of the ‘I’ enlarges, self-confidence accordingly gets stronger, but this stronger self-confidence is in fact merely the unlimited escalation of a sense of superiority and pride. It is therefore termed large ‘I’, and does not mean that absolute freedom from vexations has been achieved.

Stage 3: From the large ‘I’ to no ‘I’

When one reaches the height of the second stage, he realises that the concept of the ‘I’ does not exist. But he has only abandoned the small ‘I’ and has not negated the concept of basic substance or the existence of God; you may call it Truth, the one and only God, the Almighty, the Unchanging Principle, or even the Buddha of Buddhism. If you think that it is real, then you are still in the realm of the big ‘I’ and have not left the sphere of philosophy and religion.

I must emphasise that the content of Ch’an does not appear until the third stage. Ch’an is unimaginable. It is neither a concept nor a feeling. It is impossible to describe it in any terms abstract or concrete. Though meditation is ordinarily the proper path leading to Ch’an, once you have arrived at the door of Ch’an, even the method of meditation is rendered useless. It is like using various means of transportation on a long journey. When you reach the final destination, you find a steep cliff standing right in front of you. It is so high you cannot see its top, and so wide that its side cannot be found. At this time a person who has been to the other side of the cliff comes to tell you that on the other side lies the world of Ch’an. When you scale it you will enter Ch’an. And yet, he tells you not to depend on any means of transportation to fly over, bypass, or penetrate through it, because it is infinity itself, and there is no way to scale it.

Even an outstanding Ch’an master able to bring his student to this place will find himself unable to help any more. Although he has been to the other side, he cannot take you there with him, just as a mother’s own eating and drinking cannot take the hunger away from the child who refuses to eat or drink. At that time, the only help he can give you is to tell you to discard all your experiences, your knowledge, and all the things and ideas that you think are the most reliable, most magnificent, and most real, even including your hope to get to the world of Ch’an. It is as if you were entering a sacred building. Before you do so, the guard tells you that you must not carry any weapon, that you must take off all your clothes, and that not only must you be completely naked you also have to leave your body and soul behind. Then you can enter.

Because Ch’an is a world where there is no self, if there is still any attachment at all in your mind, there is no way you can harmonise with Ch’an. Therefore, Ch’an is the territory of the wise, and the territory of the brave. Not being wise, one would not believe that after he has abandoned all attachments another world could appear before him. Not being brave, one would find it very hard to discard everything he has accumulated in this life - ideals and knowledge, spiritual and material things.

You may ask what benefit we would get after making such great sacrifices to enter the world of Ch’an. Let me tell you that you cannot enter the world of Ch’an while this question is still with you. Looking for benefit, either for self or for others, is in the ‘I’-oriented stage. The sixth patriarch of the Ch’an sect in China taught people that the way to enter the enlightenment of the realm of Ch’an is: “Neither think of good, nor think of evil”. That is, you eliminate such opposing views as self and other, inner and outer, being and non-being, large and small, good and bad, vexation and Bodhi, illusion and enlightenment, false and true, or suffering of birth and death and joy of emancipation. Only then can the realm of Ch’an or enlightenment appear and bring you a new life.

This new life you have had all along, and yet you have never discovered it. In the Ch’an sect we call it your original face before you were born. This is not the small ‘I’ of body and mind, nor the large ‘I’ of the world and universe. This is absolute freedom, free from the misery of all vexations and bonds. To enter Ch’an as described above is not easy. Many people have studied and meditated for decades, and still have never gained entrance to the door of Ch’an. It will not be difficult, however, when your causes and conditions are mature, or if you happen to have a good Ch’an master who guides you with full attention. This Master may adopt various attitudes, actions and verbal expressions which may seem ridiculous to you, as indirect means of assisting you to achieve your goal speedily. And when the Master tells you that you have now entered the gate, you will suddenly realise that there is no gate to Ch’an. Before entering, you cannot see where the gate is, and after entering you find the gate non-existent. Otherwise there will be the distinction between inside and outside, the enlightened and the ignorant; and if there are such distinctions, then it is still not Ch’an.

When you are in the second stage, although you feel that the ‘I’ does not exist, the basic substance of the universe, or the Supreme Truth, still exists. Although you recognise that all the different phenomena are the extension of this basic substance or Supreme Truth, yet there still exists the opposition of basic substance versus external phenomena. Not until the distinctions of all phenomena disappear, and everything goes back to truth or Heaven, will you have absolute peace and unity. As long as the world of phenomena is still active, you cannot do away with conflict, calamity, suffering and crime. Therefore, although philosophers and religious figures perceive the peace of the original substance, they still have no way to get rid of the confusion of phenomena.

One who has entered Ch’an does not see basic substance and phenomena as two things standing in opposition to each other. They cannot even be illustrated as being the back and palm of a hand. This is because phenomena themselves are basic substance, and apart from phenomena there is no basic substance to be found. The reality of basic substance exists right in the unreality of phenomena, which change ceaselessly and have no constant form. This is the Truth. When you experience that phenomena are unreal, you will then be free from the concept of self and other, right and wrong, and free from the vexations of greed, hatred, worry and pride. You will not need to search for peace and purity, and you will not need to detest evil vexations and impurity. Although you live in the world of phenomenal reality, to you, any environment is a Buddha’s Pure Land. To an unenlightened person, you are but an ordinary person. To you, all ordinary people are identical with Buddha. You will feel that your own self-nature is the same as that of all Buddhas, and the self-nature of Buddhas is universal throughout time and space. You will spontaneously apply your wisdom and wealth, giving to all sentient beings everywhere, throughout all time and space.

What I have said reveals a small part of the feeling of one who has entered the enlightened realm of Ch’an, and is also the course which one follows in order to depart from the small ‘I’ and arrive at the stage of no ‘I’. Nevertheless, a newly enlightened person who has just entered the realm of Ch’an is still at the starting section of the entire passage of Ch’an. He is like one who has just had his first sip of port. He knows its taste now, but the wine will not remain in his mouth forever. The purpose of Ch’an is not just to let you take one sip, but to have your entire life merge with and dissolve in the wine, even, to the point that you forget the existence of yourself and the wine. After tasting the first sip of egolessness, how much farther must one travel?

What kinds of things remain to be seen?

I will tell you when I have the chance!



For further details, comments etc email WCF webmaster webmaster@w-c-f.org.uk who takes the responsibility for all errors in these pages.