[PierreMember]

thanks Alex, I do have an account on that subreddit and I just asked one of the moderators for permission to post this announcement. It is part of the policy of that subreddit that teachers have to ask permission first, as the posts are supposed to be for students to ask questions.
cheers
Pierre

[PierreMember]

Hi Tom, that’s a good question that many practitioners face. For my own, I have often adapted the practice to what is happening during the sit and found it beneficial. I may have started with the intention of doing one practice and look out for the kind of obstacles that was present at the last sit, only to find that on that day some entirely different kind of obstacle was showing up. I then apply the method for that kind of obstacle. Or the mind may be attracted to a different practice altogether, like doing jhanas. So I let it “fall” into one. This way of practicing also helps to realize that there is nobody in charge (anatta, or not-self), things are always changing (impermanence, or anicca), and insisting that something remain the same or submits to our expectation is to invite suffering, or dukkha.
Pierre

[PierreMember]

In the Buddhist cosmology, as in the ancient Indian cosmology, the world has no beginning nor end and is cyclical (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_cosmology#Temporal_cosmology). There are periods when the last Buddha’s teachings are lost. If you are born during such a period, you are out of luck… (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Ages_of_Buddhism). But after a Buddha is born and teaches, his/her teachings continue to be passed on and practiced for thousands of years, and people can awaken during those times. The Buddha does not need to be alive for people to benefit from her/his teachings. We are lucky to be living during one of those epochs when we have access to the Buddhadharma. ‘All’ we have to do is to practice it diligently.

[PierreMember]

That you very much Alex for bringing this interesting and profound subject up in such a clear way. I agree with you that early Buddhism seems at odds with Vedic and Mahayana concepts of True Self, Universal Consciousness, the Ground of Being, etc. Early Buddhism stand on the subject is perhaps most explicit in the Bahiya Sutta, where the Buddha instructs Bahiya thus:
“Herein, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: ‘In the seen will be merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely what is cognized.’
“When, Bahiya, for you in the seen is merely what is seen… in the cognized is merely what is cognized, then, Bahiya, you will not be ‘with that.’ When, Bahiya, you are not ‘with that,’ then, Bahiya, you will not be ‘in that.’ When, Bahiya, you are not ‘in that,’ then, Bahiya, you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two. Just this is the end of suffering.”
Now contrast this with the Brhadaranyaka Upanishad 3.7.23
“This immutable, O Gargi, is never seen but is the Witness; It is never heard, but is the Hearer; It is never thought, but is the Thinker; It is never known, but is the Knower.”
The Buddha of the Bahiya sutta could not be any clearer in stating that it is crucial to understand that in the seen there is only the seen, that there isn’t a “Hearer”. Since the True Self of Advaita Vedenta, and the Ground of Being in Dzochen, seem to be just such a Hearer, I agree that they seem to be in direct contradiction.
On the other hand, there are many awakened people who hold each of these views. From this fact I take two lessons:
1 – It does not matter which you believe. You can even decide to leave the nature of Awareness remain a beautiful mystery.
2 – You will not get any more clarity on this subject once you awaken. Whatever belief you start with on the subject is likely to be the belief that you end up with afterwards.
Bottom line, the important point is not to grasp at whatever view you may prefer. As the Buddha stated: “nothing in the world is worth grasping to”. Including the view on the nature of Awareness I might add.

[Author]

Posts