Taking and giving/Tonglen/Chöd/New Age

General discussion, particularly exploring the Dharma in the modern world.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Taking and giving/Tonglen/Chöd/New Age

Post by Malcolm »

Concordiadiscordi wrote: Perhaps it isn't possible to guage the value, singificance, purpose, or reach of tonglen.
  • The supreme training of bodhicitta,
    the bodhicitta of exchanging oneself with others,
    is said said to the essence of the teachings.
-- Sakya Pandita
User avatar
Concordiadiscordi
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 1:05 pm

Re: Taking and giving/Tonglen/Chöd/New Age

Post by Concordiadiscordi »

Malcolm wrote:
Concordiadiscordi wrote: Perhaps it isn't possible to guage the value, singificance, purpose, or reach of tonglen.
  • The supreme training of bodhicitta,
    the bodhicitta of exchanging oneself with others,
    is said said to the essence of the teachings.
-- Sakya Pandita
In that case, it must be truly immeasurable!
"The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen."
- Tommy Smothers
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17090
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Taking and giving/Tonglen/Chöd/New Age

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Yeah I don't know about anyone else, but as I was taught, that's exactly what Tonglen is, a way to awaken and increase Bodhicitta. This actually answers the utility bit anyway...though people still fixate on "what it does" and "does it help others"..if it fits the definition above, those questions are already asnwered.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
User avatar
Concordiadiscordi
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 1:05 pm

Re: Taking and giving/Tonglen/Chöd/New Age

Post by Concordiadiscordi »

Just an afterthought: there is plenty of scientific evidence indicative of the subtle interfusion of awareness with reality. Such instances as Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and quantum entanglement, both of which demonstrate the capacity of subjective awareness to influence objective states of affairs, are exemplary in this respect. The placebo effect is yet another fascinating example. Second-order cybernetics has also come to postulate the ultimate inseparability of the observer from that which is observed. Dr. Masaru Emoto has conducted extensive research on the capacity of emotion and intention to alter the physical structure of water molecules (I know that these studies are met with much skepticism, and I am not claiming that the hypotheses of Dr. Emoto are valid, but it is fascinating that such a thing is even conceivable). It is interesting that so many insights of this nature should emerge across so many disciplines and under so many guises, as they all gesture towards an elusive zone of indiscernibility wherein all things coalesce into a seamlessly interwoven tapestry of fluid inter-becomings, each of which affect and are affected by all others and none of which are ultimately separable from the inconceivably vast and complex web of relationality by virtue of which they are constituted. Indra’s net. To inhabit this zone is, as Deleuze and Guattari once wrote, to “be aware of existence and yet to know that one is no longer a definite being distinguished from other beings.” Who can finally draw a concrete line between self and world, subject and object, illusion and reality, the observer and the observed? Who can really say where practice begins or ends? Citing Deleuze and Guattari once more, it may be suggested that “at the limit, all that counts is the constantly shifting borderline." Yogācāra philosophy has long expounded the non-duality of subject and object. Hence, like all other things, it is entirely probable that one’s feelings are intimately tied to the entire fabric of reality. We may not be able to quantify, falsify, or reproduce this insight within the strictures imposed by empirical scientific materialism, but science is not the final measure of everything. Why should one assume that the bodhicitta of tonglen is in any way apart from the entirety of reality? Why should one assume that every infinitesimal particle of space isn't utterly imbued with the spirit of bodhicitta, or that this very spirit of bodhicitta isn't reaching deeply into the shared life of everyone and everything, gracing the entire cosmos accordingly? As Longchenpa once stated, "the fortunate person should faithfully recognize that whatever occurs is a floating, shimmering, mythic reality." One needn't lay claim to privileged insights or realizations in order to recognise the inseparability of ourselves from all else, or vice versa. Such verities are confirmed even by the empirical sciences, which are readily available to all and require no yogic training in order to be appreciated. One need only extend the subterranean intuitions of science to the nth degree in order to arrive at the sincere and faithful heart of Buddhist praxis, which includes the wonder and mystery of tonglen suffusing the whole of this floating, shimmering, mythic reality with the sacred spirit of bodhicitta.

Beyond questions of reality and unreality, we have all been afforded the opportunity of plunging deeply into this dreamlike ocean of boundless love and appreciation.
"The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen."
- Tommy Smothers
DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9466
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: Taking and giving/Tonglen/Chöd/New Age

Post by DGA »

Concordiadiscordi wrote:Just an afterthought: there is plenty of scientific evidence indicative of the subtle interfusion of awareness with reality. Such instances as Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and quantum entanglement, both of which demonstrate the capacity of subjective awareness to influence objective states of affairs, are exemplary in this respect. The placebo effect is yet another fascinating example. Second-order cybernetics has also come to postulate the ultimate inseparability of the observer from that which is observed. Dr. Masaru Emoto has conducted extensive research on the capacity of emotion and intention to alter the physical structure of water molecules (I know that these studies are met with much skepticism, and I am not claiming that the hypotheses of Dr. Emoto are valid, but it is fascinating that such a thing is even conceivable). It is interesting that so many insights of this nature should emerge across so many disciplines and under so many guises, as they all gesture towards an elusive zone of indiscernibility wherein all things coalesce into a seamlessly interwoven tapestry of fluid inter-becomings, each of which affect and are affected by all others and none of which are ultimately separable from the inconceivably vast and complex web of relationality by virtue of which they are constituted. Indra’s net. To inhabit this zone is, as Deleuze and Guattari once wrote, to “be aware of existence and yet to know that one is no longer a definite being distinguished from other beings.” Who can finally draw a concrete line between self and world, subject and object, illusion and reality, the observer and the observed? Who can really say where practice begins or ends? Citing Deleuze and Guattari once more, it may be suggested that “at the limit, all that counts is the constantly shifting borderline." Yogācāra philosophy has long expounded the non-duality of subject and object. Hence, like all other things, it is entirely probable that one’s feelings are intimately tied to the entire fabric of reality. We may not be able to quantify, falsify, or reproduce this insight within the strictures imposed by empirical scientific materialism, but science is not the final measure of everything. Why should one assume that the bodhicitta of tonglen is in any way apart from the entirety of reality? Why should one assume that every infinitesimal particle of space isn't utterly imbued with the spirit of bodhicitta, or that this very spirit of bodhicitta isn't reaching deeply into the shared life of everyone and everything, gracing the entire cosmos accordingly? As Longchenpa once stated, "the fortunate person should faithfully recognize that whatever occurs is a floating, shimmering, mythic reality." One needn't lay claim to privileged insights or realizations in order to recognise the inseparability of ourselves from all else, or vice versa. Such verities are confirmed even by the empirical sciences, which are readily available to all and require no yogic training in order to be appreciated. One need only extend the subterranean intuitions of science to the nth degree in order to arrive at the sincere and faithful heart of Buddhist praxis, which includes the wonder and mystery of tonglen suffusing the whole of this floating, shimmering, mythic reality with the sacred spirit of bodhicitta.

Beyond questions of reality and unreality, we have all been afforded the opportunity of plunging deeply into this dreamlike ocean of boundless love and appreciation.
That's good stew. But why overthink it? Why the detour through deterritorializations, the nomad war machine, the Body without Organs just to practice tonglen? The KISS rule has some value here: Keep It Straightforward, Sweetheart. Why make your practice life more complicated than it needs to be?
User avatar
Concordiadiscordi
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 1:05 pm

Re: Taking and giving/Tonglen/Chöd/New Age

Post by Concordiadiscordi »

Jikan wrote:
Concordiadiscordi wrote:Just an afterthought: there is plenty of scientific evidence indicative of the subtle interfusion of awareness with reality. Such instances as Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and quantum entanglement, both of which demonstrate the capacity of subjective awareness to influence objective states of affairs, are exemplary in this respect. The placebo effect is yet another fascinating example. Second-order cybernetics has also come to postulate the ultimate inseparability of the observer from that which is observed. Dr. Masaru Emoto has conducted extensive research on the capacity of emotion and intention to alter the physical structure of water molecules (I know that these studies are met with much skepticism, and I am not claiming that the hypotheses of Dr. Emoto are valid, but it is fascinating that such a thing is even conceivable). It is interesting that so many insights of this nature should emerge across so many disciplines and under so many guises, as they all gesture towards an elusive zone of indiscernibility wherein all things coalesce into a seamlessly interwoven tapestry of fluid inter-becomings, each of which affect and are affected by all others and none of which are ultimately separable from the inconceivably vast and complex web of relationality by virtue of which they are constituted. Indra’s net. To inhabit this zone is, as Deleuze and Guattari once wrote, to “be aware of existence and yet to know that one is no longer a definite being distinguished from other beings.” Who can finally draw a concrete line between self and world, subject and object, illusion and reality, the observer and the observed? Who can really say where practice begins or ends? Citing Deleuze and Guattari once more, it may be suggested that “at the limit, all that counts is the constantly shifting borderline." Yogācāra philosophy has long expounded the non-duality of subject and object. Hence, like all other things, it is entirely probable that one’s feelings are intimately tied to the entire fabric of reality. We may not be able to quantify, falsify, or reproduce this insight within the strictures imposed by empirical scientific materialism, but science is not the final measure of everything. Why should one assume that the bodhicitta of tonglen is in any way apart from the entirety of reality? Why should one assume that every infinitesimal particle of space isn't utterly imbued with the spirit of bodhicitta, or that this very spirit of bodhicitta isn't reaching deeply into the shared life of everyone and everything, gracing the entire cosmos accordingly? As Longchenpa once stated, "the fortunate person should faithfully recognize that whatever occurs is a floating, shimmering, mythic reality." One needn't lay claim to privileged insights or realizations in order to recognise the inseparability of ourselves from all else, or vice versa. Such verities are confirmed even by the empirical sciences, which are readily available to all and require no yogic training in order to be appreciated. One need only extend the subterranean intuitions of science to the nth degree in order to arrive at the sincere and faithful heart of Buddhist praxis, which includes the wonder and mystery of tonglen suffusing the whole of this floating, shimmering, mythic reality with the sacred spirit of bodhicitta.

Beyond questions of reality and unreality, we have all been afforded the opportunity of plunging deeply into this dreamlike ocean of boundless love and appreciation.
That's good stew. But why overthink it? Why the detour through deterritorializations, the nomad war machine, the Body without Organs just to practice tonglen? The KISS rule has some value here: Keep It Straightforward, Sweetheart. Why make your practice life more complicated than it needs to be?
Hahaha, indeed. Just practice...
"The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen."
- Tommy Smothers
Arjan Dirkse
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 2:53 pm

Re: Taking and giving/Tonglen/Chöd/New Age

Post by Arjan Dirkse »

For me personally, the practice of tonglen itself is not what helps the target of the practice...if I meditate on taking the suffering of others and giving them happiness in exchange, that does not directly benefit them. But it puts the practitioner in a state of having compassion. That compassion can then be used to actually do something for other people; giving them food or comfort, taking care of them, helping them in whatever practical way possible.
Post Reply

Return to “Dharma in Everyday Life”