Royce said:
Okay, please give us a site, reference or book title so I too can do it every time.
I'll PM you about that.
Royce said:
I don't know what samadhi/union is or how it is practiced. I may be mistaken, but isn't samadhi a Zen Buddhist word meaning small, or small step toward, enlightenment? If so then the term samadhi/union is a merging of Christian and Zen meditation. Which is sort of what I'm saying.
Samadhi is a sanskrit word usually translated as "union." (the etimology is "sama" = together, and "dha" = put, so put together). The Indian yogi Svatmarama described samadhi in his esoteric Pradipika many centuries after the Buddha, “. . . just as a grain of salt dissolves in water and becomes one with it, so also in samadhi there occurs the union of mind and [soul]. Mind dissolves in breath and breath subsides. Both become one . . .”
I mentioned the Buddha because I believe he was the first human being to realize full and
permanent union, or enlightenment, through the application of inner methods. He had joined a movement begun in first millennium B.C. India when old tribal units were breaking up, and many individuals were no longer satisfied with the rituals and speculations of the ancient Vedic religion.
Leaving family and social responsibilities behind, along with caste distinctions, thousands of men took to the forests and roads to live a hermit’s life and explore the inner self. As a result of intense dedication to the search, within two centuries numerous philosophies, turning-inward methods, austerities, teachers and sects became available for seekers to assay (the insights from some of them became the basis for early Upanishad writings).
This grand experiment was a convergence of inner savants that parallels the brilliant concurrence of physicists in the first half of the twentieth century exploring quantum and universal laws. Similar too was the ascetics’ decidedly unsentimental investigative approach, with its emphasis on the development and application of inner technologies.
It was the momentum of this ascetic and philosophical movement, plus the apparent dedication of its participants, that attracted Gautama Siddhartha after leaving home as a young man; and it was also the community where as a Buddha he first taught and from which he gathered disciples
Now, today some Buddhists claim samadhi is just a minor thing, and that living "spiritually" is the real path. But I am saying that samadhi what what the Buddha himself emphasized most. Who is right?
I have done my best to trace those people who said samadhi was the main thing the Buddha taught. In my opinion, while the "religion" of Buddhism grew to be hugely popular all over the East, a relatively small contingent of meditators maintained the Buddha's original emphasis on samadhi. I'll call the meditators
preservationists and the rest
religionism.
It so happens there is a certain slice of Buddhist history where we can see evidence of an enduring preservationist presence, and which also contrasts those advancing samadhi and those developing religionism. Jump ahead to a thousand years after the Buddha’s death and there are unmistakable signs that the religionism of his teachings is well underway.
This religionist translation is recognized by prolific temple building, sutra copying and chanting, relic veneration, pilgrimages to and circumambulation of commemorative monuments (the stupas), worship of semi-divine beings, along with a plentiful collection of stories, philosophic works, new “scriptures,” and beliefs—none of which had been taught or recommended by the Buddha.
Yet also, though tiny by comparison to all that religious superfluity, were the devoted minority practicing and realizing conscious oneness. It was their inward dedication that motivated a Buddhist preservationist sometime in the sixth century A.D. to travel east to initiate aspirants in China where after nearly five centuries of Buddhism, religionist translation had become prominent there too. Traditionally the monk Bodhidarma is credited with this, although many scholars question whether he existed, but it really doesn’t matter who it was because someone took samadhi there.
With a new start and a true union teacher, oneness experience blossomed beautifully in fertile souls where a fresh expression of the Buddha’s realization became known as Ch’an (called Zen when it made it to Japan in the twelfth century). It is easy to see Bodhidarma (or whomever) was a genuine preservationist because he brought the experience alive in himself. He could therefore serve the essential role of union teacher, emanating conscious oneness for an aspirant.
That is exactly why enlightenment became a reality in Ch’an. We don’t know how the founding teacher really taught, but we do know the teaching format that descended from him was very close to the Buddha’s. It was an exceptionally simple system of initiation by the master (of union experience), listening to and interacting with the master, and sitting in meditation. The so-called Four Statements of Ch’an (attributed to Bodhidarma) reflect this simplicity:
1. No dependence on words and letters.
2. A special transmission outside the Scriptures [meaning, passing the experience to an aspirant through initiation by a realized teacher].
3. Direct pointing to the heart of man.
4. Seeing into one's nature and the attainment of the Buddhahood.
One might also point out that because samadhi meditation was central to Ch’an, it seems to confirm the Buddha relied primarily on “right meditation” to initiate and teach conscious oneness. Even six hundred years after its origin as Ch’an, meditation was still the central practice, as is shown by Japanese Zen master Dogen’s words (who had traveled to China to study Zen), “In the study of the Way, the prime essential is sitting meditation. The attainment of the way by many people in China is due in each case to the power of sitting meditation. Even ignorant people with no talent, who do not understand a single letter, if they sit whole-heartedly in meditation, then by the accomplishment of meditative stability, they will surpass even brilliant people who have studied for a long time. Thus students . . . do not get involved with other things.”
If you look up a few posts to that quote from Simeon the New Theologian notice the similarity to Dogen's words when he says, “Therefore our holy fathers . . . have renounced all other spiritual work and concentrated wholly on this one doing, [union], convinced that, through this practice, they would easily attain every other virtue . . .
They all practiced it pre-eminently . . . . One of the fathers says: ‘Sit in your cell and this prayer will teach you everything" (my italics).
My point is, it isn't easy to figure out what the practices of samadhi the Buddha and other masters because religion has overshadowed all of it. Today if one goes looking for the inner methods of union, one is most likely to find some religionist calling himself a master. That is sad because, in my opinion, what sincere seekers really need is a preservationist.
Royce said:
Our old friend, Radagast, mentioned going to a union once but no light and I can only assume that it was either the void or circle. I still think that it is different every time as well as different for each of us.
It feels like one is "absorbed" into and then floats/breathes with something much bigger than oneself. Usually it is very bright too, but it's the feeling that really defines it. It really does a number on the body too, seeming to integrate all one's bodily energies and fully relax one.
She's an accountant, so maybe in contrast to her . . . (just kidding sweetie :!) ) My comment would be that creating is good, and union meditation is good, but they are two completely different things.
