mujushinkyo wrote: Malcolm wrote:
What are the infallible signs of someone having had kensho?
This is an interesting topic for a Dharma discussion board. Maybe much more interesting than the depredations of a group of cultists.
Just saying, it is easy for people to say anything.
Listen, the only reason I invest Kensho with any significance is that it does liberate people to be happier. I've seen it happen in others. I'm happy.
Actually initially great universal compassion arises spontaneously and continues for quite a while. Happiness per se is not a characteristic. At least it wasn't of my experience. Happiness per se is also not a noted experience of kensho experiences as published (for example in The Three Pillars of Zen appendix).
This is actually basic to the cult stalking I experienced. The cultists were enraged that I said I'd had kensho. Enraged.
Look, please don't obsese over these people. As I said, if they did something illegal then take legal action, etc. Otherwise just pursue your bodhi activity.
The people at KPC only know about Vajrayana and then most of them only from a particular perspective. Most of them have no understanding of the Zen experience at all. None. Their level of understanding at best is characterized by asserting that zazen is calming meditation (shamatha) and never goes beyond that. Who cares whether they were "enraged" or not? If they were "enraged", one of the reasons would be that they confuse kensho with enlightenment. In Tibetan Buddhism there is a strong tendency to regard claims of enlightenment in a sceptical, and possibly hostile, light. The Tibetan Buddhist treatment of enlightenment and the Zen treatment of enlightenment are different. However even in Zen claims of kensho are treated sceptically and in recent times are basically not taken seriously it seems. This may be a reaction to Yasutani Roshi's overemphasis of kensho and/or the tendency to confuse kensho with just confused experiences. Kensho is life altering but people can walk away from it. It's nothing more than briefly lighting the candle of enlightenment allowing a person to glimpse the room briefly.
There's no way to convince anybody of what they refuse to accept, but if there's someone who claims they know the difference between a person who's had satori and who hasn't, let's hear it!
Actually satori is questionable. None of my teachers ever claimed to have experienced satori and then there's this discussion in Soto Zen about strong and weak satori, etc. Just as fire can be inferred from smoke, satori can be inferred from one's personal experience and by others from observed behavior. However a person who experiences satori directly knows the interdependence of al beings (not the same thing as the outplaying of karma), spontaneous universal compassion will have arisen and will be the dominant element of the individual, and they will not be self-centered and gradually their wisdom will grow. Also they will always, always be motivated for the rest of their lives to fulfil bodhisattva activity and cultivate compassion and help beings (this will happen spontaneously without them necessarily knowing anything about bodhisattvas). Using the candle of enlightenment example above, satori is when the candle doesn't go out, but the candle light itself might be weak. So actually satori, weak satori, isn't the enlightenment of Shakyamuni per se as claimed in Zen (deep satori could be though) but is more like the Path of Joining or possibly the 1st Bhumi as outlined in the Stages and Path system. There are however Zen people who deny a distinction between weak and strong satori.
Actually there is quite a bit of literature about satori from the old Buddhas if you want to read it. There isn't a lot of material on kensho itself from the old Buddhas. Apparently they didn't think it so important.