Non Abiding Mind.

Whether you're exploring Buddhism for the first time or you're already on the path, feel free to ask questions of any kind here.

Non Abiding Mind.

Postby White Lotus » Sat Jan 15, 2011 4:02 pm

Hui Neng (Wei Lang) is remembered to have been awakened when he heard the following verse read from the Diamond Sutra:

"Develop the mind that rests on no thing whatsoever."


(perhaps someone could give a better translation).
Is this verse the teaching of non abiding mind? when one has no mind, how could it abide?

what is the conventional teaching about non abiding mind? is this the same as...

"the Budda takes his stand in no thing whatsoever."


Thank you for any advice you can give on the subject of non abiding mind.

White Lotus.
in any matters of importance. dont rely on me. i may not know what i am talking about. take what i say as mere speculation. i am not ordained. nor do i have a formal training. i do believe though that if i am wrong on any point. there are those on this site who i hope will quickly point out my mistakes.
White Lotus
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: Non Abiding Mind.

Postby ground » Sat Jan 15, 2011 4:31 pm

One of Ven Huifeng's posts on Dhammawheel:

Paññāsikhara wrote:
Dan74 wrote:
PPPS.
Panasikkhara wrote:It is mainly with regard to the notion of not apprehending the object in the manner that one commonly thinks that it exists, the lack of letting the mind fully take up the objects of cognition. This leads to an absence of grasping on one hand, and also of conceptual proliferation, both about the object in question. Taken to its fullest, it is probably very akin to the notion of the mind which does not take up any object (cf. AN 11:9), totally unsupported mind.


Thank you for this - I haven't seen it put this way before. If I may ask - a totally unsupported mind sounds like quite a lofty aim, doesn't it? In meditating on a huatou (word-head) the Great Doubt stops the meditator from settling on a mental object, is that what you are saying? But I guess the mind is still supported (in the sense of "abiding") by a notion of a self and all the consequent reification?


Hi Dan :)

My phrasing above was mainly in the light of the fact that this is in a Theravada Forum, and it appeared that there was a fair amount of confusion, mainly about reading 疑情 yiqing as "doubt" which was mistakenly considered the opposite of 信 xin "faith / confidence". If I was just responding to a Son (Zen / Chan) practitioner such as yourself, I might have phrased it differently.

Thus, the "unsupported mind" is a term straight from the Pali Canon. In Chan, I'd rather saying "non-abiding mind" 無住心, which is mentioned by the Sixth Patriarch Huineng. Or, for a Son practitioner, (not that I know much about Son per se), I'm thinking that the now common English term "don't know" may be in order.

Anyway, like a lot of terms, we may use that term as both the practice, but also the result. (But personally I don't like to use "practice is realization" in the sense that Soto does.) Rather, like "emptiness" (even in the Pali canon), we can use this term to indicate a practice - the emptiness samadhi, the emptiness abiding, etc. - and also the result, the empty mind (empty of afflictions / conceptual proliferation). So, only part is a "lofty aim".

At first, one really needs to settle / abide the mind with some sort of samatha, calm it down. Then, pull up the object in question, and raise the word-head. eg. classic Chan would be to use recitation of Amitabha until one has some good Amitabha samadhi going on, and then ask - "Who is reciting Amitabha?" These "who" word-heads are great, because they then turn the subject ("me" / "I" and "what pertains to I") into the object of the "yiqing".

Most people would just say "I", "I recite Amitabha". But, then one begins to 參 (can) "investigate" this, deeper and deeper. For those who haven't much theoretical training in Buddhism, especially the notion of "not self", they may ask: "So, what is this I?" "Is this consciousness I?" "But this consciousness changes..." and so on. For those with the background, then the simple question "Who recites Amitabha?" Will be enough to raise the strong "yiqing". Rather than identifying as "I recite", "the name Amitabha is recited", and "this is recitation", one "empties the three aspects" and cuts off the basis of "self".

At first, this will be a kind of reified "not self". ie. rather than the usually conceptually proliferated idea of "me" and "mine", one instead overlays a different conceptual antidote of "not self". This is still concept versus concept, removing the false with the true. But, this conceptual "not self" is still merely a concept, one is still abiding in the antidote, still abiding in the word-head, so to speak, one needs to go deeper.

While it is still conceptualized, it isn't really "yiqing", but just rational thought. Only when it cuts out this inner verbalization, inner talk, does it fully develop into the yiqing. One may merely raise the word-head just enough to sustain this. For some, the raising of the word-head once, may be enough to sustain the yiqing for an hour, or hours, or even days. This takes some serious gongfu, however. For most beginners, maybe they'll have to raise it up every few minutes or so at least. haha! Just don't babble away and recite it like a mantra or something - totally, totally different kettle of fish!

Only when one removes the actual basis of "self" and "mine", will the conceptual proliferation end. It may take a lot of time. This is the first break through. Examples could be such as Master Hsu Yun, who in his six year "three steps and one prostration" pilgrimage, entered into deep samadhi while walking and on pilgrimage. He maintained the investigation and yiqing for a long, long time before he had his realization at Gaomin si in Yangzhou.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 7&start=20



Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Non Abiding Mind.

Postby Huifeng » Mon Jan 17, 2011 2:04 am

Here is a short essay which I wrote some years ago on this statement as it appears in the Vajracchedika Sutra:
Essay 06 - Arising the Mind Which is Unsupported - ESangha Ed.pdf
Essay on the statement "Arising the mind which is unsupported" in the Vajracchedika Sutra.
(164.61 KiB) Downloaded 81 times
User avatar
Huifeng
 
Posts: 1471
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:51 am

Re: Non Abiding Mind.

Postby White Lotus » Mon Jan 17, 2011 5:51 pm

Noble friends, thank you so much for your comments. i will read them carefully when i get some precious time.
best wishes, white lotus.

i would dearly love to read ven. hui fengs essay if computer allows.

Huang po. from morning to night, do not rely on a single thing.
in any matters of importance. dont rely on me. i may not know what i am talking about. take what i say as mere speculation. i am not ordained. nor do i have a formal training. i do believe though that if i am wrong on any point. there are those on this site who i hope will quickly point out my mistakes.
White Lotus
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: Non Abiding Mind.

Postby White Lotus » Tue Jan 18, 2011 5:01 pm

non abiding mind is not to rely on anything as relates to enlightenment?
in any matters of importance. dont rely on me. i may not know what i am talking about. take what i say as mere speculation. i am not ordained. nor do i have a formal training. i do believe though that if i am wrong on any point. there are those on this site who i hope will quickly point out my mistakes.
White Lotus
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: Non Abiding Mind.

Postby ground » Thu Jan 20, 2011 7:51 pm

White Lotus wrote:non abiding mind is not to rely on anything as relates to enlightenment?


Why do you ask for advice and then ignore it?

Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Non Abiding Mind.

Postby White Lotus » Sat Jan 22, 2011 2:54 pm

dear Tmingur, apologies if i have not understood your post. it is hard for me to read long posts since i am unable to print out text... wish i could. though if you summarise your view that might help me to understand your understanding of non abiding mind.

no disrespect meant.

it seems to me that it is impossible to abide even in certainty for long. my mind does not abide for long on anything. can one enter a practice of non abiding. i think that may be difficult. the mind does what it wants.
in any matters of importance. dont rely on me. i may not know what i am talking about. take what i say as mere speculation. i am not ordained. nor do i have a formal training. i do believe though that if i am wrong on any point. there are those on this site who i hope will quickly point out my mistakes.
White Lotus
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: Non Abiding Mind.

Postby ground » Sat Jan 22, 2011 3:34 pm

White Lotus wrote:dear Tmingur, apologies if i have not understood your post.

Actually I just quoted Ven. Huifeng's precious words. And Ven. Huifeng in his kindness has added additional precious material.

White Lotus wrote:it is hard for me to read long posts since i am unable to print out text... wish i could. though if you summarise your view that might help me to understand your understanding of non abiding mind.

no disrespect meant.

Well, summarizing of course always entails neglecting and thusly a sort of "misrepresenting". Anyway in brief I would say "a mind that does not cling to anything at all although phenomena do continuously arise".

White Lotus wrote:it seems to me that it is impossible to abide even in certainty for long. my mind does not abide for long on anything. can one enter a practice of non abiding. i think that may be difficult. the mind does what it wants.

"Certainty" actually may be understood in two ways:
1. a mind firmly clinging to a view
or
2. a mind not clinging to anything at all

How can the latter represent "certainty"? It can represent "certainty" in that there is no distraction from the mind's own context at all.

Also "non-abiding mind" can be understood two ways:
1. a distracted mind which cannot focus/concentrate (restlessness)
2. a mind not clinging to anything at all thusly there being no frame of reference at all

These ambiguities involved here have led to the comic instance that what here is called "non-abinding" is called "abiding" by Longchempa. (my interpretation)


Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Non Abiding Mind.

Postby White Lotus » Mon Jan 24, 2011 3:51 pm

dear Tmingyur, i am visiting an internet kiosk so i can give a fair comment to your well informed post. i enjoyed reading this post of yours and thought it was nice and clear.

"a mind that does not cling to anything at all although phenomena do continuously arise".


i would think that there is a moment or period of clinging when a sartori or suchlike experience arises. the sartori works its change within the individual and them memory of the experience or realization dissolves away. memory of the state change is impermanent, but the state change itself is initiated.

i find it impossible to abide within any form of enlightenment or delusion for long. abiding becomes non abiding, non abiding becomes abiding. like waves on the ocean.

is it possible to abide in anything i wonder? is it possible not to abide in anything? surely abiding and non abiding go hand in hand. work together.

"Certainty" actually may be understood in two ways:
1. a mind firmly clinging to a view
or
2. a mind not clinging to anything at all


These ambiguities involved here have led to the comic instance that what here is called "non-abinding" is called "abiding" by Longchempa. (my interpretation)


i can see where he is coming from./ abiding and non abiding are actually the same thing/.

sorry problems with this computer./ thats all for now./ thank you again for your interesting post./

with respect, White Lotus.
in any matters of importance. dont rely on me. i may not know what i am talking about. take what i say as mere speculation. i am not ordained. nor do i have a formal training. i do believe though that if i am wrong on any point. there are those on this site who i hope will quickly point out my mistakes.
White Lotus
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: Non Abiding Mind.

Postby White Lotus » Thu Jan 27, 2011 3:33 pm

Venerable Hui Feng, i have read your essay. it is interesting, thank you. TMingyur. i have also enjoyed reading your posts.

best wishes, White Lotus.
in any matters of importance. dont rely on me. i may not know what i am talking about. take what i say as mere speculation. i am not ordained. nor do i have a formal training. i do believe though that if i am wrong on any point. there are those on this site who i hope will quickly point out my mistakes.
White Lotus
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:56 pm


Return to Exploring Buddhism

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 16 guests

>