Zen Buddhism vs Advaita Vedanta

[rousseau]

You've stated a lot of my feelings on the subject a little more eloquently than I can (or maybe have the time for). I think I'm pretty much at a point where I've fully internalized the experiential aspect of some of these Eastern philosophies. Or in other words, I 'get' them.

Being entirely honest, both Zen and Advaita (and The Happiness Trap, which I believe you suggested to me) have had an overwhelmingly positive influence on my life. Much more than I ever would have expected a couple years ago. In my opinion 'I Am That' specifically, is a phenomenal book. The Essential Suzuki compilation I've got is pretty good too.

I'll have to read those books then. Thanks for mentioning them.

And about positive influence... me too. Though I only use these old philosophies as a reference anyway. But because I feel less caught up in rumination, I also feel I opened a door to something pretty awesome and will go on exploring in my informal and eclectic way.

If you already understand both you might not glean much out of them, but they are great books. I find Suzuki's title very readable, and a good repeat read. I Am That gets a bit repetitive, but it does drive the point home and there are a few good insights here and there.

This is the Suzuki title I own, you'd be looking for Bernard Phillips as editor. It's a bit hard to track down, but it's out there. I originally pulled it out of a Western University library, then decided to get my own copy which is now quite marked up with pencil.

 

[untermensche]

What do you mean?

"I" experience all that can be experienced.

"I" make judgements as to the existence of all things.

IME, awareness is an expansive space not crowded into the defensive little want- and fear-machine that is the "I" that most people mean when they say "I". That "I" is an object within awareness, it's more occasional and temporary than awareness, so it's not the possessor of awareness.

"I" is what experiences fear and can over time learn to deal with fear and even use fear productively.

The "I" is not aware of the "I" in any way. But the "I" knows it is experiencing and willing. The "I" has knowledge about what it is doing and what it has done in the past but not about itself.

"I" cannot observe itself. It is that which observes. All observation takes place from a singular "I".

But the word "I" can apply also to expansive awareness too.

We would have to agree on the definition of things to make any progress but my definitions are that "I" is the center of experience, it experiences all things and "I" is the center of the "will". It wills all things.

1. "I hate how things are!" 2. "I embrace all experience". Those are two different sorts of self.

These are two attitudes of a singular self. Not two "I"s, just two ways an "I" can be.

Zen and Advaita are a retraining in the sense of I, from the first me-centric sort, to the second more expansive sort.

To me that is absolute gibberish.

So I don't know in what sense you're using "I". You say your "I" experiences all that can be experienced so maybe we're more in agreement than we know.

I don't know. My position is concrete. You tell me.

The "I", the self, is the center of experience and the center of the will.

Do you agree?

Nobody said there's no self. I said it's nebulous. And am now adding a bit more about how the sense of self is trainable.

Parts of the self are nebulous and parts are absolutely known. The self is not in total control, just as much control as the mind trains itself to have. That is why I say "mental practice" is valuable.

When you experience a red apple the "I" knows beyond doubt it is experiencing a red apple.

 

[rousseau]

But because I feel less caught up in rumination, I also feel I opened a door to something pretty awesome and will go on exploring in my informal and eclectic way.

This is a good way of putting it, and more or less where I'm at too. I've commented to a few people in the last few months that I feel well equipped to deal with the challenges of the pandemic; I just don't let the stress get to me too much.

Now the issue I'm finding is that I'm largely free from stress and rumination, but struggle to re-discover the enthrallment that I once had. A number of months ago I made a comment to someone here that was along the lines of - I've had enough awe over the universe, and am ready to hear someone say something new - which I think sums it up. I find my immediate surroundings, and most of what happens in it predictable and a bit dull. When I was younger my fascination over how all of this works I think served as a thin veil of engagement over a plain and difficult life. But now it mostly just feels like I'm left with the plain and difficult life.

But I'm marching on and trying to find ways to keep things interesting. Lately I'm getting into the habit of forcing myself to pull new books off of my shelves and give them some time. Stuff I've already read, but look at with new eyes. And then there's poetry and writing, which helps.

 

[abaddon]

I notice boredom goes away in one second by being mindful. Within a moment, when mindfully aware, the boredom disappears as sensory awareness takes centerstage and thoughts go to the background. This can be tested by looking for oneself.

I find it really is the case that all the mental busywork is what bores me. It's not the world that's boring. The world's astonishing and the only way to miss it is if there's a mental "reducing valve".

What I don't like about Advaita is it presents things as too easy. They say "You're enlightened already! Once you see it there's no need to meditate". The first part, if it means "the full brightness of consciousness is in ON position already regardless if you've tossed a veil over it", seems to be true (testable by looking, not by thinking about it). The second part is false. We're creatures of habit so any so-called "enlightenment" gets buried back underneath our habits. So I find that daily practice at mindfulness is necessary.

I don't like sitting meditations where you have to watch your thoughts. I prefer walking while following guided meditations (always ones that require looking, not imagining). It gets me away from the needless thinking. I also devise some thought experiments for myself, to encourage attentiveness. Like, for one example, taking on the attitude I'd have if I were visiting earth from another planet. What would I do? I'd be damn attentive! Same with recalling some lucid dreams and how fascinated I was with the details while inside the dream. Waking life can be like that too, with attentiveness. After all, the eyes are not cameras that relay what's "out there" to a screen in the brain. Our consciousness is our world. So how the world feels to us depends on our minds, not on the world. When I'm lucidly awake, I can't help but be astonished at what "mind" has done... there's a whole freaking universe in here.

So what helps me is pretty much anything that gets me looking at the world instead of inward at my brain's busywork. I figure that inasmuch as I still have issues with boredom, it's from backsliding into the old habit of thinking about things too much.

 

[rousseau]

So what helps me is pretty much anything that gets me looking at the world instead of inward at my brain's busywork. I figure that inasmuch as I still have issues with boredom, it's from backsliding into the old habit of thinking about things too much.

I've definitely let the possibility in that the life I'm living just isn't that stimulating anymore. To me, boredom isn't just a mental state, so to speak, but a physiological state we're in when our brain isn't being stimulated enough. That might account for your approach to try to 'look', so to speak, it makes your surroundings more interesting (aka: stimulating). I've used a similar approach, but lately it lacks freshness.

Lately, I'm more likely to a) focus on my health and b) take time to really relax and be calm. The same mindfulness techniques that do away with rumination can do away with boredom too. If I'm bored, I only make it worse by stressing out over it. I just relax, breathe, and let the time go by. Lately I find myself just sitting in silence more often, which can be nice. It comes from the recognition that - there just isn't anything I want to be doing right now.

I would say that my job is a Godsend. When I'm working I actually feel engaged and alive. Which is a bit strange: what I enjoy is inverted from the norm. Most people hate their jobs, while my job is more of an escape from my personal life (which is comparably dull).

 

[steve_bank]

Suzuki was popular in the 69s-70 in the USA. It became a fad.

From what I read Japanese Zen Buddhism is a blend of Japanese Bushido warrior code and Buddhism. Buddha was a pacifist who rejected violence, some do not consider Zen as Buddhist.

What I took away from it was the idea of spiritual truth not arrived at by western linear Aristotelian logic.

Mentall exercises and conundrums leading to an awareness of reality and self.
'.

The student returns and starts to launch into a logical explanation of what one hand clapping sounds like. The teacher wacks him on the head and says try again.

The student returns and this time simply moves one hand back and forth, an acceptable answer.

Direct simple perception without any in-between logic and reasoning.Or smebidy realizing enlightenmnt when hearing the sound of leaves he is sweeping up. The usual metaphors and stories.

Buddhism and Zen have actual goals to atain. Practices are intended to bring you to a certain end and sate of being which can not be described as logic.

You have to have faith that there is agoal.

I believe Hegel said philosophy took a wrong turn into debate and meaning, philosophy is supposed to guide to a spiritual state.

Spiritual state being how you feel. Happiness, mental health.

 

[rousseau]

I believe Hegel said philosophy took a wrong turn into debate and meaning, philosophy is supposed to guide to a spiritual state.

Spiritual state being how you feel. Happiness, mental health.

IMO the Western and Eastern approaches complement each other well. Western thought lacks soul, while Eastern thought lacks rigour. Western philosophy (more natural science) is good at grasping mechanics, while Eastern has realized a way of thinking exterior to rationalism.

Both have spiritual value in my view, but I do think that the Western tradition, in isolation, can be more confounding than helpful.

 

[steve_bank]

It all maps into modern psychology.

The Tibetan Buddhism translations I read map into psychological states. It took a while to get past the Tibetan terminology.

'Primordial Mind', or 'The Void'.



The goal beyond rituals is always the same, fix your mental issues and come to terms with reality. Switch off your logical analytical mental commuter once and a while and chill out.

 

[rousseau]

The goal beyond rituals is always the same, fix your mental issues and come to terms with reality. Switch off your logical analytical mental commuter once and a while and chill out.

That's partly what I'm getting at. In the Western tradition it's less about coming to terms with reality, and more about understanding reality. Acceptance versus understanding, two different approaches of reducing uncertainty, both with different forms of value.

So one way to find peace is to actually know how to resolve real problems, which is where philosophy and, later, science come in.

In other words, Zen and Advaita are great but you're missing a whole side of it if you don't understand the actual mechanics of the world as well.

 

[untermensche]

These people who talk about "finding peace" are simply people who are pathologically self absorbed and don't care about what is happening in the world around them.

It is not a positive thing.

Concern for the plight of your fellow man is a positive thing.

And there is no peace in it.

 

[untermensche]

The dumb computer posted the same thing twice.

 

[rousseau]

These people who talk about "finding peace" are simply people who are pathologically self absorbed and don't care about what is happening in the world around them.

It is not a positive thing.

Concern for the plight of your fellow man is a positive thing.

And there is no peace in it.

Isn't finding peace and concern for your fellow man the same thing? Why show concern for others if not to promote peace? If we can't strive to be peaceful, what's the point of striving for anything?

 

[untermensche]

These people who talk about "finding peace" are simply people who are pathologically self absorbed and don't care about what is happening in the world around them.

It is not a positive thing.

Concern for the plight of your fellow man is a positive thing.

And there is no peace in it.

Isn't finding peace and concern for your fellow man the same thing? Why show concern for others if not to promote peace? If we can't strive to be peaceful, what's the point of striving for anything?

There is no peace in that.

It is unending struggle and work.

This idea of "inner peace" is really narcissistic apathy.

 

[rousseau]

The goal beyond rituals is always the same, fix your mental issues and come to terms with reality. Switch off your logical analytical mental commuter once and a while and chill out.

That's partly what I'm getting at. In the Western tradition it's less about coming to terms with reality, and more about understanding reality. Acceptance versus understanding, two different approaches of reducing uncertainty, both with different forms of value.

So one way to find peace is to actually know how to resolve real problems, which is where philosophy and, later, science come in.

In other words, Zen and Advaita are great but you're missing a whole side of it if you don't understand the actual mechanics of the world as well.

I'm going to expand on this mainly to draw out my own thoughts.

If philosophies like Zen and Vedanta are going to have any real utility I think a person needs to have an analytic understanding of them on some level. That seems counter-intuitive because stopping the analytic mind is the point, but I don't think you can get to that state without the analytic realization of the point.

This is why for so many people religious philosophies and doctrines never reach beyond an intellectual exercise. They think and think about it but never really get it, so are never able to move beyond the initial analytic mindset. Which explains why I believe the understanding part of the equation is essential.

When I was studying Vedanta about a year ago I was able to pick up on it quickly in large part because of my preexisting analytic understanding of the world. This is why I don't think you can hand out religious ideas to any average person on the street and expect them to go from 0 to 100 just by saying turn off your mind. Without the full understanding of what that means it can't really be done.

Similarly, the analytic mindset leads to perspective that otherwise wouldn't be there. If I look at my mindset over the course of my life I've definitely trended to calmness and acceptance in large part because when I run into a problem I now have a more reasonable way to look at it. Contrast that to my early-twenties when I'd get hung up and brood over issues because I didn't really understand them.

So I think the Western and Eastern traditions are essentially getting at the same thing, assuaging fear, pain, and uncertainty, they just take different routes to get there.

 

[steve_bank]

In our culture we are almost completely consumed with avoiding reality. Music, sports, porn, gambling, drugs, TV, movies, and games.

The result being is from polling about 50% of us oevr here are unable to come to grips with the fact we are in a serious pandemic.

People with no inner spiritual reality are a a total loos when daily routines are taken away. I think the Sanskrit term is maya, believing the facade of reality is reality itself. Like all the commercial happy face advertising. Believing a facade movie set is actually real.

When the faade fails people have nothing to turn to.

 

[steve_bank]

Inner eace is not self love, it is just learning to cope with reality and not reacting to the overwhelming negatives. Staying positive and hopeful while recognizing the reality of the situation we are in.

Avoiding being angry all te time when it serves no purpose.

 

[rousseau]

In our culture we are almost completely consumed with avoiding reality. Music, sports, porn, gambling, drugs, TV, movies, and games.

My take on it is that a lot of this is less about avoidance, more about killing time. In advanced economies we've solved most of our serious problems with technology: consistent access to water, food, shelter, warmth. This leaves us with no choice but to find ways to pass the time. Those who don't try to understand reality likely don't even realize that the option to do so is there.

The result being is from polling about 50% of us oevr here are unable to come to grips with the fact we are in a serious pandemic.

People with no inner spiritual reality are a a total loos when daily routines are taken away. I think the Sanskrit term is maya, believing the facade of reality is reality itself. Like all the commercial happy face advertising. Believing a facade movie set is actually real.

When the faade fails people have nothing to turn to.

IMO this is totally normal, and those who can see beyond every day reality are the exception. For those caught in illusion their agency and behaviour comes from instinct and the surrounding culture - two elements making sure they're focused on procreation and survival. To see beyond everyday reality is to emancipate oneself from that reality, with a higher likelihood of avoiding everyday features like marriage/parenthood etc. So most of us are bred to fall in line.

This is why there are two brands of spirituality, that coming from comforting stories, and actual spirituality in those who are able to reach beyond.

 

[fromderinside]

Small mind big brush.

Rousseau is trying to deal with self guidance, style of living, good life, rather than method for world understanding of material reality. Both are legitimate philosophical topics. Denigrating one doesn't go anywhere, does not advance either one.

Not useful untermensche.

 

[rousseau]

Small mind big brush.

Rousseau is trying to deal with self guidance, style of living, good life, rather than method for world understanding of material reality. Both are legitimate philosophical topics. Denigrating one doesn't go anywhere, does not advance either one.

Not useful untermensche.

Fishing for more abaddon posts mostly, but my interest in Eastern religion does seem to be reaching an endpoint. Not coming across much religious thought that interests me lately.

 

[untermensche]

Small mind big brush.

Rousseau is trying to deal with self guidance, style of living, good life, rather than method for world understanding of material reality. Both are legitimate philosophical topics. Denigrating one doesn't go anywhere, does not advance either one.

Not useful untermensche.

You don't have to lie to yourself to have guidance.

A good life is entirely subjective.

We are animals trying to get along with other animals that have completely different minds because a mind is created by experience.