Understanding emptiness exercise

[Nick r]

I have a thought experiment going on in my mind that relates to books I've been reading , namely, Realizing Emptiness. I have been trying to look at things in my day to day life and label them as being empty. I am trying to intellectually understand the concept of emptiness. So, I look at a walnut tree and say, this walnut tree is empty and I look at the river a say this river is empty, etc. (can you tell I work alone outside?) I meditate on what makes some thing empty, or at least try to. It's easy to get confused about how objects or natural phenomena are inherently empty.
It's a fun thing to do when I'm out in the field and I feel that it keep my mind on the Dharma.

So, I was wondering how some of you would look at a tree and know intellectually and explain how that particular tree is empty. Or a river, or a rock, or any thing! Maybe your suggestions or examples will promote my understanding.

[Johnny Dangerous]

There are a few different ways. First you can just figure out some of the pieces that make up a "tree", and see if you can find a "tree" in the pieces, and the parts that make those pieces, etc. There's the cognitive labeling, constituent parts, temporal conditions, and constituent parts changing into something else via temporal conditions. Another way is analyzing opposites or polarities, any time you see polarities, you can recognize that they are only defined by the other, meaning, they cannot inherently exist.

In terms of time, you can think about the fact that the tree is actually a different thing moment to moment, and that it is only thought-consciousness that creates a composite notion of a continuous static "tree". Try to observe how your sense consciousness observe an object without thought being involved as much, maybe you can see there isn't really any persistent "tree" outside of your thoughts.

The best books I read on the subject (just from my own point of view) are A Profound Mind by HHDL, and Stars of Wisdom, and Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso. Both these books I felt were fantastic for analyitcal explanation and meditations.

[Astus]

Emptiness is being empty of something permanent, real, solid. Appearances are not denied but seen for what they actually are, that is, conceptual constructs. In other words, a tree does not say it is a tree, we call it a tree. And with this single word we have a whole web of associated concepts to build an imaginary reality that we take to be factual. If you don't call it a tree, what is it?

Shuzan Osho held up his shippei [staff of office] before his disciples and said, "You monks! If you call this a shippei, you oppose its reality. If you do not call it a shippei, you ignore the fact. Tell me, you monks, what will you call it?"
(Mumonkan, case 43 [cf. case 40], tr. Sekida)

[madhusudan]

Because of dependent origination, all things are empty. But, while they're empty they're also existent - thus the two truths and the middle way from either extreme. You can also investigate yourself and find that there's actually nothing ultimately there, though there is relatively. So without anyone there to think about the tree being empty, it's easiest to just rest in natural awareness, which completes all views and attainments. If you set the right conditions this will happen. You just need some confidence in karma - effects following their due causes. Keep the right vows, study the Dharma and practice it with devotion and the attainments happen.

Ok, I went a little overboard and off track, but that's my limited understanding.

[Rick]

But, while they're empty they're also existent - thus the two truths and the middle way from either extreme.

My teacher (Nyingma lineage) talks about things neither existing, nor not existing.

"Existent" is a (subtle) concept. It divides "what is" (which is also a concept!) into that which does and doesn't exist.

Follow this recursion all the way through ... and eventually the edifice collapses and things kind of come to a halt.

[Concordiadiscordi]

"Form is nothing but form, emptiness is nothing but emptiness.
One hundred blades of grass - ten thousand things."
- Dōgen

[madhusudan]

My teacher (Nyingma lineage) talks about things neither existing, nor not existing.

"Existent" is a (subtle) concept. It divides "what is" (which is also a concept!) into that which does and doesn't exist.

Follow this recursion all the way through ... and eventually the edifice collapses and things kind of come to a halt.

Thanks for those words. That was the other part I forgot.

Would you, or any kind posters, comment on the relationship and interplay between an intellectual understanding of emptiness and an experiential knowing?

[Rick]

My teacher (Nyingma lineage) talks about things neither existing, nor not existing.

"Existent" is a (subtle) concept. It divides "what is" (which is also a concept!) into that which does and doesn't exist.

Follow this recursion all the way through ... and eventually the edifice collapses and things kind of come to a halt.

Thanks for those words. That was the other part I forgot.

Would you, or any kind posters, comment on the relationship and interplay between an intellectual understanding of emptiness and an experiential knowing?

That is *such* an excellent question.

According to what I learned, there's a path of knowledge and a path of experience, both of which can "take you home" (i.e. to realization). Some take one path, some the other, and some (the majority, I'd say) take both.

I was, for a long time, mainly on the path of knowledge. So I got reasonably "smart" about how things work ... as seen through an Eastern philosophy filter. But eventually I came to see that all my knowledge wasn't helping me be more present, mindful, with/in the here and now. I was living through edifices of thought. Experience had become a kind of proof of concept, which is the "danger" (if that word applies) of the knowledge-based approach.

In my current opinion -- and that's all it is, of course, my personal take -- you need just enough knowledge to build and navigate the raft that will take you to the other side. Any more than just enough gets in the way and slows down the trip, or worse: steers you in the wrong direction.

Others here will no doubt disagree. As well they should! If there was a definitive recipe, we'd all be enlightened, right?

[madhusudan]

you need just enough knowledge to build and navigate the raft that will take you to the other side. Any more than just enough gets in the way and slows down the trip, or worse: steers you in the wrong direction.

I had the same metaphor in mind! How cool is that?

[Rick]

That's one of the cool things about working within a tradition, like Buddhism: a shared set of metaphors. (It's also one of the liabilities imo, but that's another story ... )

[madhusudan]

I'd like to post here again to share ideas and hopefully elicit responses from people with more experience. In the spirit of learning, here are some ideas for the OP:

I think it's good that you are looking around you with emptiness in mind. It made me remember something I had read some time ago. I searched for this reference for a while and finally found it:

The changing of the seasons, the falling of the leaves and other natural phenomena give lessons on impermanence. As Milarepa said, “I see everything around me as a teaching.”

http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/en/ar ... nence.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So, regarding impermanence in seeing emptiness I often tell myself that what I'm seeing with my eyes is not actually what I know to be true. We can watch time lapse camera work of a plant growing, or anything else, to help illustrate that nothing is constant. There is a constant state of change. Same with the seasons. Clouds gathering and dispersing. On and on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nRVZPJdXOo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

When I think about my sense of vision, for example, I try to understand dependent origination. I experience seeing things based on my faculty of vision, as filtered through my eye. Human eyes see things in a certain way, but it's not anything that's actually there. It's a relationship between the spectrum of light, the eye, thoughts and emotions and the object of attention - in addition to other factors. None of it exists alone, but in dependence on all the factors together an experience arises. If I shine a blue light in semi-darkness, a 'white' paper appears blue. The Predator sees thermal images, and animals and insects see things in their own way. When I'm feeling very happy, everything looks brighter and I see in a different way.

After I spend some time contemplating something like that I'll try to expand the understanding until I "penetrate the place where even a needle cannot enter". (That's from a poem that I interpret to refer to the middle way, but it's my own take.)

Another famous teaching is on long and short being relative.

I do this when I need to play with thoughts and to reinforce my practice.

[Nick r]

The Predator sees thermal images, and animals and insects see things in their own way.

I love the mention of The Predator. I never expected to imagine that movie in relationship to emptiness!

thanks for your entire response, it has shed some light. But The Predator drove it home!\

[Nick r]

I'd like to post here again to share ideas and hopefully elicit responses from people with more experience. In the spirit of learning, here are some ideas for the OP:

I think it's good that you are looking around you with emptiness in mind. It made me remember something I had read some time ago. I searched for this reference for a while and finally found it:

The changing of the seasons, the falling of the leaves and other natural phenomena give lessons on impermanence. As Milarepa said, “I see everything around me as a teaching.”

http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/en/ar ... nence.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So, regarding impermanence in seeing emptiness I often tell myself that what I'm seeing with my eyes is not actually what I know to be true. We can watch time lapse camera work of a plant growing, or anything else, to help illustrate that nothing is constant. There is a constant state of change. Same with the seasons. Clouds gathering and dispersing. On and on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nRVZPJdXOo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

When I think about my sense of vision, for example, I try to understand dependent origination. I experience seeing things based on my faculty of vision, as filtered through my eye. Human eyes see things in a certain way, but it's not anything that's actually there. It's a relationship between the spectrum of light, the eye, thoughts and emotions and the object of attention - in addition to other factors. None of it exists alone, but in dependence on all the factors together an experience arises. If I shine a blue light in semi-darkness, a 'white' paper appears blue. The Predator sees thermal images, and animals and insects see things in their own way. When I'm feeling very happy, everything looks brighter and I see in a different way.

After I spend some time contemplating something like that I'll try to expand the understanding until I "penetrate the place where even a needle cannot enter". (That's from a poem that I interpret to refer to the middle way, but it's my own take.)

Another famous teaching is on long and short being relative.

I do this when I need to play with thoughts and to reinforce my practice.

I recently read this quote from Chogyam Trungpa and I think that it relates to our discussion on perception of emptiness and how to witness phenomena as they truly are without our filter of ego. His eloquence never ceases to amaze me:

"People are usually very nervous about fully experiencing the bright and colorful world. Nobody can see this level of relative truth without having cut through all the aspects of ego, because there is still a little attachment. People may see blue as blue, but at the same time, they use that to reinforce their idea of how blue affects their state of mind. Whether they regard things as powerful, good, nice, or threatening, there are always psychological implications behind the colors, forms, noises, and physical sensations they perceive. There is always some implication behind the whole thing. So the relative truth, is very difficult to experience fully, although it is very ordinary."

[Nirveda]

The best books I read on the subject (just from my own point of view) are A Profound Mind by HHDL, and Stars of Wisdom, and Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso. Both these books I felt were fantastic for analyitcal explanation and meditations.

I have also read Stars of Wisdom by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso and loved it. I also recommend his book Sun of Wisdom, which explains key parts of Nagarjuna's MMK in a very comprehensible but profound way. I keep reading these books over and over.

A third book I highly recommend is Contemplating Reality by Andy Karr, another one of the best, most comprehensible books on emptiness. After reading this, I found it much easier to read classic, traditional texts and commentaries.

A fourth I recommend is Emptiness and Joyful Freedom by Greg Goode & Tomas Sander. Again, very comprehensible and covers the topic in a different way.
http://www.amazon.com/Emptiness-Joyful- ... 1908664363

A fifth recommendation is the Karl Brunnhölzl's The heart attack sutra: A new commentary on the Heart Sutra.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Heart-Attack- ... 1559393912


A method I have heard from a few teachers is to view all experience as mental projections, constructs, dream-like appearances, a virtual reality simulation. This is something along the lines of the Yogacara school, but consistent with Madhyamaka. It's a little less analytical and more experiential. No matter what you experience, see, hear, feel, think, etc., find phrases to remind that what is being experienced is not actual reality, but mind-created appearances. No matter where you look, all that is ever seen is mind activity, a crude representation of what actually exists, which is beyond comprehension. As soon as you try to imagine what is actual reality, whatever the mind comes up with is apparent reality.

There's something about "looking" at something that seems so real, and knowing it to be nothing more than a mental representation. The mind that observes it is the mind that also constructs it: one part of the mind looking at another part, so to speak.

This also helps with compassion meditation. When looking at "another person", what is actually seen is a mental representation of whatever actually exists. Every person we "know", including ourselves, is essentially a virtual cartoon character constructed from tiny shards of sensory information. So again, that "person out there" and "you" are equal because all of it is mind representations, like two people in a dream. Hate that person, and you are hating yourself. Be kind to that person and you are being kind to yourself. Or rather, hatred is a mind filling itself with poison. Kindness is a mind filling itself with love.


Some quotes I find useful:

"There is no world outside that exists the way we conceive it to be. Outer and inner worlds are projections...Apparent reality is fabricated by mind...We only know about objects because they are experienced. We can theorize that physical objects are the basis for our experience, but how can we ever know them directly? Experience is always mental—that's what mind does."
—Andy Karr

Karr, A. (2007). Contemplating reality: A practitioner's guide to the view in Indo-Tibetan Buddhism. Boston: Shambhala.

“The whole universe is a projection of the mind; therefore it is a mode of the mind. The true nature of the mind is bliss, and when the mind is stilled, bliss absolute is revealed.”
—Dattātreya

Dattātreya. (1948). Avadhut gita. (H.P. Shastri, Trans.) London: The Shanti-Sadan Publishing Committee

"We can never step out of our mind and see what the world is like from outside of our mind."
—Karl Brunnhölzl

Brunnhölzl, K. (2012). The heart attack sutra: A new commentary on the Heart Sutra. Itaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications.