|
|
Post by dwbh1953 on Jan 26, 2009 18:40:21 GMT -5
I found this in my files it is a fairly long read and I found it to be very helpful some years ago. To some on this group I am sure you can find yourself somewheres in the writing below.
Enjoy
Randji
In fact, this Sudden view of Buddhahood says that our dukkha, or fearful attachment to life and death, is because we doubt our present absolutely unconditioned worth (Buddha Nature). Enlightenment is a total letting go of this doubt to intuitively realize our equality with the Buddha. There comes a moment when there has to be realizied an overcoming of the Fear of Enlightenment. Being liberated from our dukkha, we become content with ourselves and others just as we are.
In Suddenism a simple intellectual realization of the above forces one to let go of pride in one's own effort to seize Enlightenment. This lack of pride, or humility, in the face of the characteristic accidental nature of Sudden Enlightenment is a form of letting go of self as a source of dukkha and thus, actually a kind of pre-enlightenment Enlightenment. Actually, just this alone is for some people sufficient Enlightenment, while for others this preliminary kind of Enlightenment means a greater chance for a breakthrough to something more. This is especially true with a preparatory practice in place. Preparatory practice must be clearly distinguished from the practice that involves Gradual Enlightenment. While no form of pre-enlightenment practice is a requirement for Sudden Enlightenment, and can certainly not cause or ensure such Enlightenment, it nonetheless has an important function.
Sudden Enlightenment may come to one, but unless he or she is prepared to recognize it, and even more importantly to integrate it into his or her everyday psychological being, it will almost certainly come only to slip away.
We can use the analogy of rain here. Rain, like Sudden Enlightenment, cannot be forced into coming; it arrives on its own. Moreover, when it falls, it does so equally on fertile and infertile ground. If it falls on the former, there is luxurious growth; if on the latter, there is nothing but wet soil. To develop a pre-enlightenment practice is to ensure fertile soil when the rain of Sudden Enlightenment falls. To have no practice is to almost surely end up losing what one hoped to gain. This preparatory practice is not to be viewed as any kind of gradual coming closer and closer to the Enlightenment experience because there are no stages to it.
In other words, unlike a Gradual Enlightenment oriented practice, in which you can usually see progress occurring, such as a greater and greater sense of detachment from the world; no such progress is evidenced in a sudden practice. Moreover, whereas in a gradual oriented practice it is usually assumed that the practice will involve a considerable span of time, a few too many years before clear results occur; this is not assumed in a non-gradual practice. Since Sudden Enlightenment does not depend on practice of any kind, and can come with or without it, Enlightenment may break through after a single day, or on the other hand, not for many years. For this reason, a non-gradual oriented practice may be far more frustrating than a practice which demonstrates clear progress towards the goal.
The advantage however, to a non-gradual practice, and in fact one of the reasons for its development, is that it is as practicable outside of a monastic environment as it is in such an setting. This is especially true of such a specific non-gradual practice technique as the classical Chinese Kung-an...but not necessarily the Japanese Koan.
Of course, the paradox of any pre-enlightenment practice for Sudden Enlightenment is that, for those who pursue it, this means nothing short of going through the frustrating experience of seeking for what one already has, namely unconditional Buddha worthiness. This means that one is constantly asking one's self why am I doing this? Why can't my mind just let me experience my true nature? Maybe this whole thing is a lie. Maybe I'm just wasting time and energy, further deceiving myself. This doubt is a natural part of preparation for Sudden Enlightenment and it requires a faith equal to the doubt to keep the practice going. This is where a teacher and a spiritual community come in, for the teacher who has gone through the struggle can give hope and the community of like-seekers can function in a supportive capacity.
Neither the Gradualist nor the Suddenist approach can guarantee Enlightenment, but each in their own way can give one a chance at gaining it. For the person who can commit him or herself to a fully monastic life the Gradual way may offer more hope than the Sudden way. For those who can not make such a dramatic commitment it may be the Sudden way that offers the hope. Like all religious and philosophical views various rational arguments can be made to support either a Gradualist or Suddenist approach, but the bottom line is that neither can be logically proven nor disproven. Both, in the final analysis, depend largely upon faith. Indeed, all schools of Buddhism, if not all religious traditions, require a strong faith component before any real Spiritual Awakening can occur.
|
|
Morrie
New Member
"Nothing is me" is the first step. "Everything is me" is the next.
Posts: 38
|
Post by Morrie on Jan 26, 2009 22:25:09 GMT -5
Thank you for posting this Randji,
My own spiritual path has been more along the gradualist path than the suddenist path....From my experience, most people are too attached to their emotive thoughts and "hopes" to just give them up in a suddenist way. For many, it would take a deep or traumatic jolt to their lives to take the suddenist path....but the paths toward spiritual growth are going to be different for everyone...I think this sums it up nicely.
|
|
|
|
Post by lightmystic on Jan 26, 2009 23:08:30 GMT -5
Enlightenment is about undoing the resistance that has kept us from the truth. If this could be undone instantaneously, it would have already happened for those putting in the effort.
The very act of trying to obtain sudden Enlightenment removes any possibility of it. Enlightenment is the natural recognition that comes from acceptance, and trying to get immediate Enlightenment in an instant is actually an excuse to not confront our issues. We want to get Enlightened so we don't have to accept the bad issues, so we can escape it. Enlightenment does not have to be far away. Indeed, if there is seeking, there is already a subtle recognition of it. That said, there are no shortcuts, no magic beams of light, and it does not come because of luck. It comes from letting go.
And that doesn't mean forcing letting go, that means finding the ways in which we hanging on, anything that hurts, and allowing it to be there forever until it dissolves. This process works, and is the only way that ultimately brings one to the truth. The process may be described differently, or may be unconscious, but it is always the same process...
|
|
|
|
Post by dwbh1953 on Jan 26, 2009 23:30:23 GMT -5
Enlightenment is about undoing the resistance that has kept us from the truth. If this could be undone instantaneously, it would have already happened for those putting in the effort. The very act of trying to obtain sudden Enlightenment removes any possibility of it. Enlightenment is the natural recognition that comes from acceptance, and trying to get immediate Enlightenment in an instant is actually an excuse to not confront our issues. We want to get Enlightened so we don't have to accept the bad issues, so we can escape it. Enlightenment does not have to be far away. Indeed, if there is seeking, there is already a subtle recognition of it. That said, there are no shortcuts, no magic beams of light, and it does not come because of luck. It comes from letting go. And that doesn't mean forcing letting go, that means finding the ways in which we hanging on, anything that hurts, and allowing it to be there forever until it dissolves. This process works, and is the only way that ultimately brings one to the truth. The process may be described differently, or may be unconscious, but it is always the same process... Yes LM but I think you missed a very subtle difference in the post. What he is saying and I found it to be very true is if your not a little prepared for a awakening you may simply miss it or it will not stay. there are certainly many ways to prepare yourself for a sudden awakening. this is not even a paradox it makes logial sense. If a person is a student of awareness and can grasp the feeling of it the student is much ore likely to know what has happened when it happens but the average joe so to speak is not at all this is exactly what the author is saying..you get what I am saying here. This makes perfect sense you throw a awakening experience on a person that has never had any spiritual food or sense and they have a very high chance to simply disregard it as easy as having a headache where a student of a spiritual path simply would not and many times th first awakening is s subtle that even a spiritual person would miss it so the average Joe has no chance at it. Even you have said you did not know really at first what was going on a manof the world would have little chance of it. The only exception would be if the person have such a full blown awakening that it literaly knock his socks off but even then he would admit himself into a emergency room thinking something is very wrong and would think he is dieing so do you see the difference now? Best Randji |
|
|
|
Post by dwbh1953 on Jan 27, 2009 1:00:33 GMT -5
Thank you for posting this Randji, My own spiritual path has been more along the gradualist path than the suddenist path....From my experience, most people are too attached to their emotive thoughts and "hopes" to just give them up in a suddenist way. For many, it would take a deep or traumatic jolt to their lives to take the suddenist path....but the paths toward spiritual growth are going to be different for everyone...I think this sums it up nicely. Yes I understand that is why there are differnt paths however neither of them is a sure thing. It still will happen when it happens. The thing is what may seem as gradual will seem as sudden when awakening happens. Look at Adyashanti for example I have no idea the amount of years and time he had in Zen before he awaken but it was a lot yet when it hit him it felt as sudden. It probably will always feel that way the only differince now in these days awakening is talked about more and more. You see just the very fact such a thing is talked about as it is puts it into the collective if you will and what you have are new paradims being created. That is my feeling. Once something is let loose changes start to speed up and change at the same time..never a dull moment for sure.. Cheers Randji |
|
|
|
Post by lightmystic on Jan 27, 2009 11:16:31 GMT -5
do you see the difference now?I think so. It sounds like what you're calling preparation for an instant Awakening is what I call the process.  Fair enough. I guess the only reason that I don't enjoy looking at it that way (although I realize it's just as valid after you clarified it) is that the idea of immediate Awakening brought me endless frustration back in the day. Perhaps that's just because I had accepted that it could happen to me and so just needed to know that what I was doing was right so I could enjoy the process. Perhaps this idea of instant Awakening helps people accept that it really can happen to them and what they are doing now is just preparation. I'm not sure, but it kind of sounds bad to suggest that Awakening is instantaneous. Sounds like I'm having an issue...
|
|
|
|
Post by dwbh1953 on Jan 27, 2009 11:38:21 GMT -5
do you see the difference now?I think so. It sounds like what you're calling preparation for an instant Awakening is what I call the process. Fair enough. I guess the only reason that I don't enjoy looking at it that way (although I realize it's just as valid after you clarified it) is that the idea of immediate Awakening brought me endless frustration back in the day. Perhaps that's just because I had accepted that it could happen to me and so just needed to know that what I was doing was right so I could enjoy the process. Perhaps this idea of instant Awakening helps people accept that it really can happen to them and what they are doing now is just preparation. I'm not sure, but it kind of sounds bad to suggest that Awakening is instantaneous. Sounds like I'm having an issue... Hey brother that is the problem with words they are so limited to what we really would like to convey! How is you day going? Cheers Randji |
|
sam
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by sam on Feb 19, 2009 15:36:15 GMT -5
Forget suddenism,
‘How I suddenly became a master’ is needed for selling books. If they didn’t write this, who would listen?
Usually it described as a life-transforming moment. The truth is, every moment is life transforming. Any teacher that has a suddenist story of how they went from mundane existence to what-ever-they-want-to-call-it, is in the least highly questionable.
The Buddha taught that enlightenment is gradual. Just as the land falls away at the ocean shore, (gradually) so too is the process of enlightenment.
The practice of ethics and meditation over the long term is the only way.
Sam
|
|
|
|
Post by The Uncreated on Feb 19, 2009 17:09:34 GMT -5
The Buddha taught that enlightenment is gradual. I'm inclined to believe that preparation is gradual, but the actual process of transformation is always instant and not ascribable to the measurement of linear time. If it were, it wouldn't be enlightenment. For anyone to suggest enlightenment happens over a space of time is to cleave the void into two, create the heavens and the earth and generally misrepresent the nature of the timeless Void. It may be the usual case of semantics, but I disagree with Gautama. It probably doesn't matter whether I do or not, because what we speak of is not of logic, but I do what he wishes we do -- not be obligated to agree with him but to forge my own path through experience and analysis until I arrive at the paradigm he occupies and can confidently say I see with the same eyes as the ancients. For someone that is suddenly dissolved into That which came before all else (including time), how could he possibly put a timeframe to the occurence, especially if that which he attempts to pinpoint in time is not of it? The Madyamika logic (Middle Way) may suggest that since the Void is timeless, that it occurs at all times or at no particular time at all. Or both, or neither. In other words, enlightenment always is, having neither started nor stopped. So as you can see, "sudden enlightenment" is a conflict in terminology. It's a pitting of time versus the timeless. More accurately, one can say enlightenment is hidden by confusion and illusion and yearns to be uncovered, yet it is here even now and always has been, so of what use are the adjectives? - |
|
