Nagarjuna question : why is emptiness "therapeutic" ?

[Ugrok]

Hello !

I 'm reading Nagarjuna again, as i do from time to time, and the commentator said in the preface that Nagarjuna fought against a "metaphysical" view of buddhism and was rather defending a "therapeutical" approach - which, according to what i read, is how buddhism is supposed to be understood.

Okay, so my question follows : how is emptiness (which i understand as the absence of things existing by themselves) therapeutic ? How does it help with suffering ? Nagarjuna often writes about emptiness meaning that all is calm, appeased. Why ?

I mean, even if i know that my suffering is empty, i still suffer !

Uggy (tried to make it short),

Sat today

LAH

[gaurdianaq]

I haven't read Nagaruna, but for me personally I find the idea of emptiness to be therapeutic, if nothing exists by themselves, there is less reason to need to compete for things. And it reaffirms my beliefs that we should be working to improve life for everyone, rather than focusing on the individual needs. Because if everyone is focused on improving things for everyone else, then we end up with a much better world. Or something like that, hope that makes sense...


Evan,
Sat today, lah

[Horin]

I don't know the context, but I think when we see that every phenomena, even the mental ones are conditioned, we may see that the narcissistic boss, the depressed neighbor or my own anxieties are not chosen nor an real issue of a person (it's not my fault, not your or his/her fault...), even if it seems so...
Rather we see that there are causes for these things, and also we can realize a deep acceptance through recognizing this as a byproduct of our practice. The problems may not disappear by itself but we might find peace with them, gain energy to find a way to deal or solve them...

I'm not sure if this makes sense and is what is meant by it but at least these are my two cents on that...
Oh, and sorry for more than three sentences

Gassho,

Horin

Stlah

Enviado desde mi PLK-L01 mediante Tapatalk

[gaurdianaq]

To add on to what Horin was saying, understanding that things are empty of inherent self also helps me to remember and keep things in context. The narcissistic boss isn't necessarily narcissistic because that's just who he is and it's inherent to him, there are plenty of reasons that led him to be that way (perhaps life experiences led him to be that way, or it was the way he was raised). It makes it easier to not form these strong judgements on things.


Evan,
Sat today, lah

[Jundo]

Hello !

I 'm reading Nagarjuna again, as i do from time to time, and the commentator said in the preface that Nagarjuna fought against a "metaphysical" view of buddhism and was rather defending a "therapeutical" approach - which, according to what i read, is how buddhism is supposed to be understood.

Okay, so my question follows : how is emptiness (which i understand as the absence of things existing by themselves) therapeutic ? How does it help with suffering ? Nagarjuna often writes about emptiness meaning that all is calm, appeased. Why ?

I mean, even if i know that my suffering is empty, i still suffer !

Uggy (tried to make it short),

Sat today

LAH

Hi Ugrok,

Very simple: Ordinary life appears to be a world of me and you, this and that (and all the tensions and conflict which come when those individualized people and things interact), win and lose, good and bad, likes and dislikes, even birth and death. In Emptiness, all the separation is washed into wholeness free of individual people and things which all vanish in the flowing unity (and thus free of all tensions and conflicts which require separate people and things to conflict), anything lacking in the wholeness ... as well as a certain overriding "All Okay" ... and even a view in which nothing truly comes and goes in the wholeness (represented by the image of the waves rising and falling on the sea, yet the sea itself flows on).

It is the ultimate neurosis cure!

In fact, it is both "therapeutic" and "metaphysical" because it not only cures all our angst and suffering as separate individuals, but it is a statement about how reality is put together when we see it as a "whole" rather than just individual pieces. (Nothing in conflict with scientific understanding, by the way, in seeing the universe as a great single flowing process rather than just its parts). It is like we can see the human body as just individual organ or cells too, or instead, as a single living body, and so for all reality.

I haven't read Nagaruna, but for me personally I find the idea of emptiness to be therapeutic, if nothing exists by themselves, there is less reason to need to compete for things. And it reaffirms my beliefs that we should be working to improve life for everyone, rather than focusing on the individual needs. Because if everyone is focused on improving things for everyone else, then we end up with a much better world. Or something like that, hope that makes sense...

This is true, and yet we are not totally free of the need to compete because (although we see our selves one way as wholeness) we still remain separate individuals too. I spoke about this recently, how even the Buddha and Dogen were "go getters," although we avoid the excesses of desire and competition.

'The ZEN of EVERYTHING! Podcast' ... Episode 33 ... Competition
https://www.treeleaf.org/forums/show...33-Competition

I don't know the context, but I think when we see that every phenomena, even the mental ones are conditioned, we may see that the narcissistic boss, the depressed neighbor or my own anxieties are not chosen nor an real issue of a person (it's not my fault, not your or his/her fault...), even if it seems so...

In Buddhism, we try to say that people who suffer are themselves victims of excess desire, anger from frustration, jealousy and other divided thinking because they do not know the wholeness and completion of "Emptiness." However, because we still remain separate individuals in this life so long as we are alive, even after realizing "Emptiness," we still may have our frustrations, ego, sadness, fears etc. It is then something like what I describe as "frustration without frustration, ego without ego, sadness free of sadness, fear that is fearless" knowing life two ways as one. As well, we try to not let the frustrations, ego, sadness, fear etc. run to excess.

Sorry, my words ran a bit long. QUESTION: Is what I wrote a single comment or separate words? Is it individual letters? Is it words or the empty space between the words?

Gassho, J

STLah

[gaurdianaq]

Sorry, my words ran a bit long. QUESTION: Is what I wrote a single comment or separate words? Is it individual letters? Is it words or the empty space between the words?

Gassho, J

STLah

Wouldn't it be all of the above? But also none of the above? It would be all of the above because it is a single comment, it's also separate words, individual letters, and empty space between the words. But it's also none of the above because it's just my particular view/interpretation of what you said and doesn't necessarily reflect the reality of what it actually is. (You could also say it's none of the above as well because it's just a bunch of pixels on a screen, or vibrations in the air if you're using text to speech, and beyond that you could say it's just a bunch of 1's and 0's which are just electrical signals, etc etc)

Apologies for going over.


Evan,
Sat today, lah

[Jundo]

Wouldn't it be all of the above? But also none of the above? It would be all of the above because it is a single comment, it's also separate words, individual letters, and empty space between the words. But it's also none of the above because it's just my particular view/interpretation of what you said and doesn't necessarily reflect the reality of what it actually is. (You could also say it's none of the above as well because it's just a bunch of pixels on a screen, or vibrations in the air if you're using text to speech, and beyond that you could say it's just a bunch of 1's and 0's which are just electrical signals, etc etc)

Apologies for going over.


Evan,
Sat today, lah

Hit you with stick.

[Jundo]

Hit you with stick.

I should clarify that: Too analytical, trying to understand in your head, like trying to hear the music by analyzing the notes on paper, seeing the trees but missing the wholeness of the forest.

FEEL THIS IN THE MARROW OF THE BONES!

Gassho, J

STLah

[Eva]

QUESTION: Is what I wrote a single comment or separate words? Is it individual letters? Is it words or the empty space between the words?

Gassho, J

STLah

"Now baby, listen baby, don't you treat me this way
'Cause I'll be back on my feet some day
Don't care if you do, 'cause it's understood
You ain't got no money, you just ain't no good
Well, I guess if you say so
I'll have to pack my things and go (that's right)"

Deep Bows . . .

Gassho,
eva
sattoday

[gaurdianaq]

FEEL THIS IN THE MARROW OF THE BONES!

Gassho, J

STLah

Perhaps someday


Evan,
Sat today, lah

[Jundo]

Perhaps someday


Evan,
Sat today, lah

Yes, it is like the single wave (if it were sentient like you, with a feeling of itselfness) realizing it is the sea, the single cloud realizing it is the sky, the single piston recognizing that it is the car, the single cell in Evan's left thumb realizing that it is "Evan" in most intimate and identical fashion (not just as a "part" or constituent "piece" of sea/sky/car/Evan, but precisely as much the flowing, boundless, moving, living and breathing sea/sky/car/Evan as sea/sky/car/Evan can be.)

Most Eastern philosophies, from Taoism to Advaita Vedanta have a similar lesson about the relationship of the relative individual as a face of the whole, the whole embodied fully in the individual person, thing, moment (as if the whole sea poured into the wave and was fully contained down to the last drop within every drop of the wave, the whole sky was contained in the cloud as if the sky floated through the cloud rather than just the cloud floating through sky, the whole car was every stroke of piston as if every move of the piston contained the entire Chevrolet Impala, as if Mr. Evan was living inside the cell of his thumb rather than just his thumb being part of Evan).

So, what is so unusual about Zen and Mahayana Buddhism then? - Many Eastern philosophies (and Christian mystics too perhaps) tend to reify (turn into a "thing" or fixed object) the Absolute nature as some kind of "Godhead" "The Creator" or "Spirit" or "The Force" or "Brahma" or some idea like that ...

... while Zen folks (not all, by the way, because you will see many Zen and Mahayana Buddhist writings also slip into calling it the Big "Buddha" or "Dharmakaya" or "the Absolute" or "Buddha Nature" which can also be a bit too fixed and objectified) wish to see this as more fluid, flowing process which we avoid to nail down as a "thing" because objectifying makes it feel like something separate from us and limited as a small idea we can fit into the narrow space between our ears ...

... thus we tend to say "we poetically we are the wave & sea, the cloud & sky, the piston & car, the cell & Evan" ... BUT YET what "sea?" what "sky?" what "car?" what "Evan?"

Better to experience only the the flowing, boundless, moving, living and breathing.

Sorry, many words ... but what "words?" Only breathing.

Gassho, J

[gaurdianaq]

Evan,
Sat today, lah

EDIT: Also wanted to say that I appreciate the clarification

[Inshin]

I haven't read Nagarjuna, but I suspect that "Emptiness" being therapeutic in the human context has something to do with unification of the mind (Culadasa - makes so much sense to me).
There are different chaotic notes, seemingly separate, each with their karmic trace and need for attention. Realising Emptiness is a bit like arranging them into a musical peace, so there's suffering but it's not anymore "exclusively yours", there's space for joy, beauty and everything else, like Umami, one taste composed of various different ingredients, which can be diferenciated but form One taste.
Stories I read about Tibetan monks inmprisoned in Chinese camps, being able to maintain their practice, freedom and look at their oppressors with the eyes of compassion are fascinating.

Gassho
Sat

[Kokuu]

There are different chaotic notes, seemingly separate, each with their karmic trace and need for attention. Realising Emptiness is a bit like arranging them into a musical peace, so there's suffering but it's not anymore "exclusively yours", there's space for joy, beauty and everything else, like Umami, one taste composed of various different ingredients, which can be diferenciated but form One taste.

Lovely!

Also, I know it was likely a mistaken homonym but I like "musical peace"!

Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday-

[Inshin]

Thank you for pointing out the spelling. I won't correct it then.
Gassho
Sat

[Bion]

Hello !

I 'm reading Nagarjuna again, as i do from time to time, and the commentator said in the preface that Nagarjuna fought against a "metaphysical" view of buddhism and was rather defending a "therapeutical" approach - which, according to what i read, is how buddhism is supposed to be understood.

Okay, so my question follows : how is emptiness (which i understand as the absence of things existing by themselves) therapeutic ? How does it help with suffering ? Nagarjuna often writes about emptiness meaning that all is calm, appeased. Why ?

I mean, even if i know that my suffering is empty, i still suffer !

Uggy (tried to make it short),

Sat today

LAH

If I may, emptiness is the LACK OF INDEPENDENT EXISTENCE OF THINGS.. which translates into “nothing exists on its own, but is a consequence or product of other factors”. Applying that to “suffering”, we get what the Buddha found : suffering has a cause and thus a solution, so if we figure out the causes, phenomena, conditions that create our suffering we also find the way to eliminate it. What could be more therapeutic than realizing we are the sole owners of the solution to our own suffering?

SatToday lah

[Inshin]

If I may, emptiness is the LACK OF INDEPENDENT EXISTENCE OF THINGS.. which translates into “nothing exists on its own, but is a consequence or product of other factors”. Applying that to “suffering”, we get what the Buddha found : suffering has a cause and thus a solution, so if we figure out the causes, phenomena, conditions that create our suffering we also find the way to eliminate it. What could be more therapeutic than realizing we are the sole owners of the solution to our own suffering?

SatToday lah

Is the suffering /or happiness truly "ours"?

Gassho
Sat

[Bion]

Is the suffering /or happiness truly "ours"?

Gassho
Sat

We can get into the zen of it, but ultimately, we feel what we feel, and understanding we are the creators of the same emotions we experience - so there isn’t really a subject and object, but really one unit - won’t really make any of it go away. The same way my realizations are mine alone and can not be transmitted, my particular suffering is unique to me and my causes. And it’s fine for things to be like that, because what I experience you can experience, so there’s nothing human that can be alien to me - as Maya Angelou said - which puts us as humans in the uniquely privileged position of being able to show empathy and compassion and care for others.

SatToday lah

[Jundo]

If I may, emptiness is the LACK OF INDEPENDENT EXISTENCE OF THINGS.. which translates into “nothing exists on its own, but is a consequence or product of other factors”. Applying that to “suffering”, we get what the Buddha found : suffering has a cause and thus a solution, so if we figure out the causes, phenomena, conditions that create our suffering we also find the way to eliminate it. What could be more therapeutic than realizing we are the sole owners of the solution to our own suffering?

SatToday lah

In the Mahayana, emptiness is much more than only the lack of independent existence of things (although it is that too), but is also the wholeness and union of all things beyond all independent existence.

In early Buddhism, the cause is simply desire ... the desire that things be different from how they are. If we are satisfied with how things are, there is no suffering in a Buddhist sense, e.g., sickness, death or loss is only "suffering" (Dukkha) in a Buddhist sense when we desire not to be sick etc. and do not accept the sickness, death or loss. The treatment (also found in Shikantaza) is radical equanimity accepting all conditions "just as it is."

So, it is a little different from "if we figure out the causes, phenomena, conditions that create our suffering we also find the way to eliminate it." We can do so in a worldly sense, for sure (e.g., I can go to the doctor, find out the cause of my sickness and get medicine, which is a good thing). But in Buddhism, the attitude is equanimity and the dropping of all desire to change anything, even the sickness! Accept the sickness as the sickness. (The result is that we can go to the doctor and take medicine AND accept the sickness thoroughly ALL AT THE SAME TIME.)

In the Mahayana, however, as seen by Ancestor Nagarjuna and the other Zen masters, there is from the start no sickness, death or loss, and nobody to be sick or die, nothing to be gained or lost, in the wholeness of flowing emptiness ... just as there can be no loss or gain to the ocean even if waves rise or fall, waters appear to turn stormy or still, on its surface.

Both "treatments" for human suffering and "neurosis" are found in Shikantaza in its radical equanimity, flowing with conditions, and dropping from mind of all thoughts of me and you, this and that, sickness vs. health, birth and death, plus or minus, gain or loss.

Thus THOROUGHLY accept the sickness to the marrow AND go to the doctor for a cure AND ... what "sickness?" and what "doctor?" and what "patient"?

(sorry for running long, though "just what is" too).

Gassho, Jundo

STLah

[Bion]

In the Mahayana, emptiness is much more than only the lack of independent existence of things (although it is that too), but is also the wholeness and union of all things beyond all independent existence.

In traditional Buddhism, the cause is simply desire ... the desire that things be different from how they are. If we are satisfied with how things are, there is no suffering in a Buddhist sense, e.g., sickness, death or loss is only "suffering" (Dukkha) in a Buddhist sense when we desire not to be sick and do not accept the sickness, death or loss. The treatment (also found in Shikantaza) is radical equanimity accepting all conditions "just as it is."

So, it is a little different from "if we figure out the causes, phenomena, conditions that create our suffering we also find the way to eliminate it." We can do so in a worldly sense, for sure (e.g., if I find out the cause of my sickness, I can go to a doctor and get medicine, which is a good thing). But in Buddhism, the attitude is equanimity.

In the Mahayana, however, as seen by Ancestor Nagarjuna and the other Zen masters, there is no sickness, death or loss, and nobody to be sick or die, nothing to be gained or lost, in the wholeness of flowing emptiness ... just as there can be no loss or gain to the ocean even if waves rise or fall, waters appear to turn stormy or still, on its surface.

Both "treatments" for human suffering and "neurosis are found in Shikantaza in its radical equanimity, flowing with conditions, and dropping from mind of all thoughts of me and you, this and that, sickness vs. health, birth and death, plus or minus, gain or loss.

(sorry for running long, though "just what is" too).

Gassho, Jundo

STLah

Thanks for that explanation!

SatToday lah

[Jundo]

I haven't read Nagarjuna, but I suspect that "Emptiness" being therapeutic in the human context has something to do with unification of the mind (Culadasa - makes so much sense to me).
There are different chaotic notes, seemingly separate, each with their karmic trace and need for attention. Realising Emptiness is a bit like arranging them into a musical peace, so there's suffering but it's not anymore "exclusively yours", there's space for joy, beauty and everything else, like Umami, one taste composed of various different ingredients, which can be diferenciated but form One taste.
Stories I read about Tibetan monks inmprisoned in Chinese camps, being able to maintain their practice, freedom and look at their oppressors with the eyes of compassion are fascinating.

Gassho
Sat

I don't have a problem with the above so long as it leaves room for the unpleasant tastes ... anger, disappointment, sadness, ugliness, loss ... in Emptiness too, letting them all flow away into the waters of the sea together with joy, beauty, peace ... all of it met with the equanimity of "just what it is" (the lack of equanimity is, in fact, the cause of anger, disappointment, sadness, measures of ugliness and loss). Both joy and sadness, beauty and ugliness, must be met with equanimity and flowing with conditions.

As well, we drop away all thought of beauty and ugliness, joy and sadness into emptiness, and all washes away.

If we simply make room for joy, beauty and nice things, then it strikes me as somewhat pop-psychology and self-help book stuff which, unfortunately, is found in many corners of Buddhism and new age writing now. Western people just want to feel happy and have nice things, but we must also face the less pleasant aspects of life.

The result of our practice, however, is a kind of overriding "It's Okay" and Big Peace of the world which holds all peace and disturbance (A Big "P" Peace that holds all the broken pieces of the world, sharp or round), a kind of Big "B" Beauty to the universe which sweeps in all the beauty and ugliness of the world, win and lose, sickness and health, birth and death. However, alas, it will not make this world of samsara always peaceful and beautiful in human sense.

Gassho, J

STLah