[Buddha-l] Pai-chang Huai-hai (was Re: there he goesagain(samharris))

[Vicente Gonzalez]

Joy wrote:

JV> It is a strawman position attributed to Sravakas both in Mahayana
JV> Buddhism. Huai-Hai also pretends the Saravaks fear illusion and
JV> enter tranquillity by blinding the mind (Entretiens de Huai-Hai, nr. 35).

"Entretiens..." it's frequently cited. I can read french with some
limitations but if this book it's recommendable I will get it.
Maybe you can give me some comments around that.

JV> What we call "thought" is too vast and vague. For a start we
JV> could distinguish between "active" and "passive" thoughts,
JV> thoughts in which we engage or are engaged or not.  

yes, it is vague. I said that just because in practical terms one can
try to observe his mind contents in a general way. Of course one can
analyze them if he wants. Although there is an attachment implicit in
the development of the analysis. Or probably I don't have enough
progress to appreciate these characteristics in a natural way and
without mediating intellection.

JV> I believe the core of any spiritual path is to get rid of the
JV> sense of ownership and propriety of any sort. 
JV> And even if one had thoughts regarding objects, one can know that
JV> one is having thoughts regarding objects.

I agree very much. It is a bridge for real freedom.


JV> Yes, very refreshing. A pity that Zen went so terribly wrong
JV> afterwards... ;-) 

yes :), although I'm not so pessimistic. As you sure knows, specially
in Europe we have had a Zen interpretation quite special. When Dogen
is in himself very subtile and enough difficult, some European
interpretations has made him really incomprehensible. Although it can
be in a process of change, I'm not sure. 

In the Chinese style, some modern masters like Hsing-Yun or Sheng-Yen,
they frequently had put attention to this meditation notion.
In example, there is a modern Hsing-Yun book titled "Only a Great
Rain", in where he summarizes different meditation traditions in
Chinese Buddhism putting attention in this topic.

However, these modern masters indicate this method it's difficult
and it only can be understood by few people. So they teaches a
preeminence for tso-chan. I ignore until where this idea can be an
historical inheritance or arises by previous experience with pupils.
I don't know the reason. To me, this practice and contemplation is
easier to understand and quicker to apply than any other. Or maybe
combining both can be a good option and probably what Buddha really
taught. Or at least I believe that. For that reason I was interested
in knowing more about the early division in the Buddhist Sangha, which
despite the L.Cousins comments, still I'm not convinced about the
practice of those Dhamma monks.

Anyway, comments of these Chinese masters added to those
recommendations of modern Theravada masters, it shows still it can be
in the core of the Buddhist practice for some people, although today
maybe there is not enough attention to this.


best regards,