Longchen Rabjam - The Decisive Experience

[Newest Reality]

8. Good!

I'm glad that you have been delving into it. Jump right in.

First, the Buddhist philosophy about reality relies on what is called valid cognition. The simplest way to put that is that one comes to a consensual agreement about what things are by way of those who have all their faculties functioning properly. That way, conventional reality is not disturbed by deeper insights and we can distinguish between what is valid and what is a wrong view based on it. Obviously, we come to the analysis of nama/rupa, or name and form. One insight is that, though we act "as if", a label is not in the thing referred to and the thing referred to is not in the label.

You can see there that there is a conventional limit on consensual cognition, labels and categories for pragmatic purposes. An example is that, if ten people were looking at a horse and nine agreed it was a horse, and you were the tenth person and said it was a unicorn or a donkey, there would be a problem there conventionally. This provides a common basis for deeper insights and, of course, it is transcended.

Mu is not! Look anywhere but in the ten directions or the three times. Now, clean your computer screen and eat your can of worms! Buddha is a dog.

Mu says what you mean it is. Who is saying that?

Of course, the Zen system of koans is formal, but the intent is to breakthrough the concepts of the intellect, (as I assume you already know). I have heard tales that some monks have had to be dragged, kicking and screaming for their interview with the master because of their frustration with solving the koan and the torments of the ego. So, even if there are commentaries and formal answers to them, it misses the point and thos are still conceptual speculations. To me, taking on the koan requires a Zen Master, though koans are still interesting and profound in the wild. One can imagine potentially spending years on just one koan. To me, when you think you have got the answer to the koan, you may have missed the point entirely, eat and go back to your cushion, stone buddha! Polish your brick into a mirror.

The foundations of Buddhism include the idea that we, like the automobile used for illustration, are a collection of parts, or a heap of aggregates. The self is not found in any of the parts when one examines it, (and you are supposed to do an inventory on that very carefully to convince yourself it is so and not just agree). When examined, many assumptions fall away, hence one also looks for the mind, (where it comes from, where it stays, and where it goes) with the mind that looks for it. It is careful investigation and analysis that reveals the nature of Reality in practice. In essence, the "me" is impossible.

As an aside, one comes to a point where a question can arise from that kind of investigation. Okay, there is no actual separate self or soul or entity within or without. Now, if there is rebirth and continuing karma, what is it that keeps incarnating from life to life then? That rascal Chögyam Trungpa had a marvelous answer and I still chuckle at it today because it hit me like an ice cream koan. He sad, "Neurosis!" Consider that.

I tend to mix my Dharma. Dharma should be fun, no? It all goes in the Karma Blender(tm) and that was another tall smoothie.

Thanks for your view. I enjoy hearing from fellow dharma diggers.