Zen’s stand regarding ‘The Absolute’

[npr]

Hello to you,
A question Please

What is Zen’s stand regarding ‘The Absolute’ ?

Is the ‘One Mind’ considered as The Absolute ? Oneness with the Buddha is Oneness with the Absolute? or is it that **Everything** is Emptiness of self-being ?
If the reply applies to all Mahayana sects, kindly indicate

Thank you.

[Queequeg]

Hello to you,
A question Please

What is Zen’s stand regarding ‘The Absolute’ ?

Is the ‘One Mind’ considered as The Absolute ? Oneness with the Buddha is Oneness with the Absolute? or is it that **Everything** is Emptiness of self-being ?
If the reply applies to all Mahayana sects, kindly indicate

Thank you.

Please define, "The Absolute."

[npr]

That which exists in spite of anything.

( The reason I asked here is, that a while ago, I saw in this book t.ly/wEcv some references to this term )

[Dan74]

I have no idea about "Zen's stand". From my experience though, Zen teachers avoid taking positions and speaking in generalities. This is referred to as "the thicket of views."

The reason being that the Absolute is a conceptual proliferation. So throw it out along with all the other garbage. Or if it really means something to you, show it to me right now from the depth of your heart. Most of these concepts only hold us down.

But this is just proliferation from an extremely mediocre Zen student (that's not some cryptic false modesty, it's what it is).

[Queequeg]

That which exists in spite of anything.

That's still not clear, but it sounds like Self which is a Wrong View in Buddhist teachings.

Sometimes the word "Absolute" is used in English translations of Buddhist texts to refer to the "Absolute Truth", but this is not a reference to something that exists. Absolute Truth refers to the real nature of things, which in Mahayana Buddhist teachings is said to be empty of intrinsic existence.

[npr]

Thank you Queequeg.
My question is answered.

If you can see the original Chinese text of Huang Po, and see what the original term that was translated to Absolute, was, that can be nice

[LastLegend]

Thank you Queequeg.
My question is answered.

If you can see the original Chinese text of Huang Po, and see what the original term that was translated to Absolute, was, that can be nice

You have to call it something, but the very issue is when you call it something it becomes ‘it’ and ‘you.’

[npr]

Since the One-Mind is empty of intrinsic existence, what does it depend on ?

Thank you.

[npr]

Thank you Queequeg.
My question is answered.

If you can see the original Chinese text of Huang Po, and see what the original term that was translated to Absolute, was, that can be nice

You have to call it something, but the very issue is when you call it something it becomes ‘it’ and ‘you.’

Interesting angle. Thank you.

[LastLegend]

Since the One-Mind is empty of intrinsic existence, what does it depend on ?

Thank you.

If it’s empty as in no thing, how can it depend on anything? What still sees it as anything is skandhas being consciousness first, intention, perceptions. It’s not nihilism because another name is Mahaprajna (enlightened itself). If it’s seen as duality, then that a distinction of consciousness.

The issue here is without explaining it’s not understood but explaining it becomes object of delusion.

[Astus]

If you can see the original Chinese text of Huang Po, and see what the original term that was translated to Absolute, was, that can be nice

What translation? Could you please give some refernces?

[npr]

If you can see the original Chinese text of Huang Po, and see what the original term that was translated to Absolute, was, that can be nice

What translation? Could you please give some refernces?

Here https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.105228 / https://terebess.hu/zen/Huangpo.pdf
(text version, abit ruined : t.ly/7pax )

[Queequeg]

If you can see the original Chinese text of Huang Po, and see what the original term that was translated to Absolute, was, that can be nice

What translation? Could you please give some refernces?

Blofeld

[Queequeg]

Since the One-Mind is empty of intrinsic existence, what does it depend on ?

It depends on causes and conditions.

[LastLegend]

Since the One-Mind is empty of intrinsic existence, what does it depend on ?

Thank you.

What describes it is the issue of skandhas consciousness taking the lead. The story of Mahakayaspa (sp?) smiled to the flower that was raised. Transcending this distinction of consciousness is enlightenment, but it’s not easy. It’s an individual job not the job of Buddhas or teachers.

[npr]

Since the One-Mind is empty of intrinsic existence, what does it depend on ?

Thank you.

If it’s empty as in no thing, how can it depend on anything? What still sees it as anything is skandhas being consciousness first, intention, perceptions. It’s not nihilism because another name is Mahaprajna (enlightened itself). If it’s seen as duality, then that a distinction of consciousness.

The issue here is without explaining it’s not understood but explaining it becomes object of delusion.

--------------------

Empty of inherent existence means things are dependent on other factors

https://suttacentral.net/sn12.1/en/sujato Dependent Origination.

http://promienie.net/images/dharma/book ... makakarika[/b].pdf ( CTL F 'dependent' )

Analysis of conditions "Whatever comes into being dependent on another"

https://www.dalailama.com/news/2014/tea ... kir-ladakh

[npr]

Since the One-Mind is empty of intrinsic existence, what does it depend on ?

Thank you.

What describes it is the issue of skandhas consciousness taking the lead. The story of Mahakayaspa (sp?) smiled to the flower that was raised. Transcending this distinction of consciousness is enlightenment, but it’s not easy.

What causes and conditions? that is the question

Thank you.

[seeker242]

Buddha, Buddha Nature, absolute, true self, one mind, Nirvana, etc, etc

Why does there need to be any difference?

[npr]

Buddha, Buddha Nature, absolute, true self, one mind, Nirvana, etc, etc

Why does there need to be any difference?

[LastLegend]

Since the One-Mind is empty of intrinsic existence, what does it depend on ?

Thank you.

What describes it is the issue of skandhas consciousness taking the lead. The story of Mahakayaspa (sp?) smiled to the flower that was raised. Transcending this distinction of consciousness is enlightenment, but it’s not easy.

What causes and conditions? that is the question

Thank you.

Cause of suffering is desire someone said that the other day totally extinguished cause of suffering and extinguished delusional perceptions will transcend samsara, but this kills the seeds with sentient beings (connection) and it’s no longer an aspiration to become a Buddha, but that’s an individual choice.

I don’t know what causes and conditions are.