Nothing to say, yet
Transcription
Talk: 19890524-Larry_Rosenberg-UNK-conscious_breathing_ii_reflections_on_anapanasati_ii-1567 Leandra Tejedor Start_time: 01:25:16 Display_question: Can you speak more about the distinction between contemplation of impermanence and the direct experience. Keyword_search: impermanence, Tibetan, Buddha, samadhi, Heart sutta, flowers, sadness, Buddhist monasteries, meditation centers, attachment, nonattachment, suffering, Thich Nhat Hanh, Joseph, Sharon, IMS, meals, death, reborn, Adolf's Tenderizer, reflection, Dharma, meditation, direct perception Question_content: Questioner: I have this question is about contemplating impermanence. One teacher recently, from the Tibetan tradition said that one of the greatest offerings you can make is, to the Buddha, it the contemplation of impermanence, which I thought was nice. Larry: Yes. Questioner: And in doing it, I was looking at a flower with the head bent realizing it was going to die over a period of time. I hope I can articulate this right. But basically, I did have a flag because my Samadhi is not strong understanding of it. But I think relating to Thich Nhat Hanh, suddenly really seemed to me that the flower really didn't die. Although I was very aware, I actually quite identified with it. I actually dreamed about this flower, because I was so focused on it, and I felt a lot of sadness, at this dying. But at the same time, I did have this flash that there really is no… like in the heart sutta, no beginning, no middle, and no end. Now, what I'm left after that because I could never really recapture that. Now I am left with sort of memory of something extremely precious whole some deeper part in my head knows its true. But I guess my two questions are, the easy questions is, how do you not have…how do you not doubt the flimsiness. I mean, how do you not doubt an experience, which you've heard, and know from teachers, and books is real, but that your own experience of it is so shallow. And the second question I have is could you say something about the connection between impermanence and (inaudible). Larry: How about this? You see the flowers. If you notice on altars, in Buddhist monasteries, and temples, and meditation centers, there are often flowers. And it's exactly the symbol is just what you're talking about. The beauty is there and it's perishable. Now, if you fasten on one side, you can get attached to the beauty part, and then you have big suffering, when it starts to wither. You can attach to the withering part. And then, let's not have flowers because I feel too bad when they die. I will never look at flowers. Let's get plastic ones. They last forever. That's the spirit of nonattachment. Break_line: That's what I was trying to get at. It's very subtle. One way of developing it is that can you enjoy a flower, enjoy the beauty while it's there, and to let it die when it dies? Can you enjoy a delicious meal, for the life of that meal, and when it's over, it's gone. It's not filing it in memory, or making a portrait of the meal, and bowing down to it. Enjoy it while it's there and then make room, for the next fresh moment, of life. So, in that sense, you're both honoring the truth because, you like Thich Nhat Hanh. He's excellent in terms of staying balanced. In terms of that life is horrible, and it's also magnificent. They're both true. So that the flower has it. It's all there in the flower, and it's all there in so many other things as well. Break_line: So that the training would be… let me give you an example. This is a form of training. I don't think it happens without real hard work. I've always disagreed, and I've told Joseph and Sharon this, I think it's changing. But actually, it's not just them. All the teachers at IMS, they allow a stashing of food on retreats. Do you know what I mean? That is, you get your two meals a day, and then people will… like a doggie bag, except you're the doggie and you take it, and you put it on your shelf, and you can eat it later at night, or the next morning. And if it's a really good meal, it's kind of immortalized. For a whole week, all you see is this particular kind of whatever. Break_line: And so, one view is, oh, it's so hard. It's hard enough to be a yogi, let's say, for a retreat. It's so austere in a way because, there's not much offered. Sitting, and walking, and sitting and walking. And so, let's give a certain have a soft underbelly to the retreat. So, people can do that. I understand. And maybe finally that would be the best way to motivate people, and to have a really fruitful retreat. But another way is, right from the beginning, to begin to reeducate yourself, so that even if it's the best meal, or the worst meal, or an in between meal, is that you fully enjoy the meal, let's say. And then when it's over, it just ends. Now, that's a hard practice, but in the long run, it's quite valuable. Break_line: Because…so, you don't have to fall into the trap of being afraid of life. Now, it's because we're not doing all of this as a form of escapism. The only way you're going to learn, really learn about impermanence, you've got to experience it inside yourself. And so, the impermanence also has the positive side of change. Positive change. And also, it's death. And it's the same. We die to be reborn, endlessly, whether it's in a moment, or whether it's charted over an incalculable period of time. It's the best I can do with your two questions. Does that get at it at all? Not at all. Okay. But irrelevant. Questioner: Well, I think that….(inaudible) Without it, you can't really get, and it did actually have feeling of why you attach to one particular thing, and actually it was extremely beautiful. But I guess really what my question boils down to, I’ve been doing this practice you know, all the time somewhere… if I can understand that in some way. So, my question is (inaudible). Larry: But you'll understand it best by a direct perception of now, not by… is there a fair amount of thinking about that sutra? Questioner: No. But that is what I was going to ask you whether the training think about it versus contemplation this experience I had to understand it…(inaudible) Larry: Both are valuable. The classical way of educating oneself in Dharma is, step number one is, intellectual ideas. Let's say, in this case, would be the doctrine, the Buddhist teaching. Step number two, which is not simply understanding the ideas, that you might have to ask lots of questions. Just what do you mean? Step number two is, reflection. That you take the ideas, and you chew on them, you turn them inside out, and upside down, and you try to get a sense of you compare it with your life experiences so far, and whatever it takes, to make those ideas more real. Break_line: And step number three is, meditation. Meditation can actually be helped, if it's been sort of like Adolf's Tenderizer, or something. Your mind has been prepared, let's say. So, there is a place for thinking about impermanence. Just don't do it while you're doing formal practice very much, because those are rare times where it's hard to develop this quality of direct perception. But from time to time, to do things like to take a Sutta, and reflect on it can be very helpful. It's an aid to practice. But the main thing is a direct perception. That's what frees us. In other words, it's to see the Heart Sutra, in the moment. The Heart Sutra came out of the Buddha's experience. And because it's such a great teaching, its only value is, in bringing us back to our experience, so that we can fully grasp the significance of it. I think that's fine. To have that as part of your practice. I do that as well. End_time: 01:33:32
