To Achieve or Not to Achieve?

[Straw Dog]

Greetings fellow Buddhas within!

I have long been interested in Buddhism. In fact, I have a sizable portion of Buddhist related books on my shelves, mostly Zen. This might be why I need to ask a such a question here since I didn't really bother to physically practice much of that linguistic know-how haha. I'm somewhat of an academic at heart I guess. I'm still learning to let my intellectual categories go when it comes to approaching and apprehending the unknowable. It's too tempting to impose to my Theories of Everything onto that which contains both everything and nothing. How does it account for the "nothing" therein?

Ha.. but what was I blathering about here? Oh right, I needed to ask a question about Buddhism.

Is it an achievement-oriented philosophy and religion? That is to say, does it promote a progressive and accomplishment-focus in its ideals and practices? Does the concept of Nirvana denote some sort of attainable end state to strive for, an unattainable yet useful concept for expanding one's sense of self, or an attainable temporary state that's kind of neat to go and check out before returning back to the transient moment of the present world? This last option perhaps proving the eternal truth of impermanence; that is to say that nothing lasts forever, even Nirvana?

 

[koan]

Comes back to the ego. To achieve something that strokes the ego is ego driven. To achieve something through diligence is the aim in Buddhism. Nothing achieved and no achiever. This may sound ridiculous, it just means being humble and counting achievements as just another step on the path.

 

[indian_buddhist]

Greetings fellow Buddhas within!

I have long been interested in Buddhism. In fact, I have a sizable portion of Buddhist related books on my shelves, mostly Zen. This might be why I need to ask a such a question here since I didn't really bother to physically practice much of that linguistic know-how haha. I'm somewhat of an academic at heart I guess. I'm still learning to let my intellectual categories go when it comes to approaching and apprehending the unknowable. It's too tempting to impose to my Theories of Everything onto that which contains both everything and nothing. How does it account for the "nothing" therein?

Ha.. but what was I blathering about here? Oh right, I needed to ask a question about Buddhism.

Is it an achievement-oriented philosophy and religion? That is to say, does it promote a progressive and accomplishment-focus in its ideals and practices? Does the concept of Nirvana denote some sort of attainable end state to strive for, an unattainable yet useful concept for expanding one's sense of self, or an attainable temporary state that's kind of neat to go and check out before returning back to the transient moment of the present world? This last option perhaps proving the eternal truth of impermanence; that is to say that nothing lasts forever, even Nirvana?

Is it an achievement-oriented philosophy and religion? That is to say, does it promote a progressive and accomplishment-focus in its ideals and practices?

Yes it does

Does the concept of Nirvana denote some sort of attainable end state to strive for, an unattainable yet useful concept for expanding one's sense of self, or an attainable temporary state that's kind of neat to go and check out before returning back to the transient moment of the present world?

Yes Nirvana attainable state in this very life. Who attains it remains in that state. It is a permanent state and lasts till you die. After you die what happens is unknown and Buddha did not speculate on that.

If Nirvana was not attainable in this very life why did the Buddha take great pains in spreading his teachings then?. There is no particular way to know if a person is closer to Nirvana or not...For example in a famous story of Highway murderor - Angulimal this person had done 999 murders and broke away their nuckles.......To a person outside Angulimaal would have been a person full of sins but Buddha realized that Angulimaal was a person ACTUALLY very close to Nirvana........So when Buddha talked to Angulimaal , within a few minutes realization dawned upon him and he immediately became an Arhant. (A Arhant is a person who has attained Nirvana).

So Nirvana can also be immediate and spontaneous. Often some people have mere covering in their minds and once this covering is lifted then and there they attain Nirvana as in the case of Angulimaal.


Nirvana is permanent state. Anicca (Impermanence) is the nature of existence of everything except for Nirvana state.

 

[Engyo]

Greetings fellow Buddhas within!

Greetings, Grain-stalk Canine!

Is it an achievement-oriented philosophy and religion? That is to say, does it promote a progressive and accomplishment-focus in its ideals and practices?

I think you are going to get different answers here, depending on which tradition and school that the person answering practices (or doesn't).

Does the concept of Nirvana denote some sort of attainable end state to strive for, an unattainable yet useful concept for expanding one's sense of self, or an attainable temporary state that's kind of neat to go and check out before returning back to the transient moment of the present world? This last option perhaps proving the eternal truth of impermanence; that is to say that nothing lasts forever, even Nirvana?

Hmmmmm. Not sure I've ever looked at it that way.
For most who practice in the Mahayana tradition (about which I know at least a little bit) nirvana is not a goal or a target; it is one of the various states in the progression of life, but not necessarily a goal. The goal (at least in my tradition and school) is annuttara-samyak-0sambodhi, or perfect enlightenment.

 

[DreadFish]

Greetings fellow Buddhas within!

I have long been interested in Buddhism. In fact, I have a sizable portion of Buddhist related books on my shelves, mostly Zen. This might be why I need to ask a such a question here since I didn't really bother to physically practice much of that linguistic know-how haha. I'm somewhat of an academic at heart I guess. I'm still learning to let my intellectual categories go when it comes to approaching and apprehending the unknowable. It's too tempting to impose to my Theories of Everything onto that which contains both everything and nothing. How does it account for the "nothing" therein?

Ha.. but what was I blathering about here? Oh right, I needed to ask a question about Buddhism.

Is it an achievement-oriented philosophy and religion? That is to say, does it promote a progressive and accomplishment-focus in its ideals and practices? Does the concept of Nirvana denote some sort of attainable end state to strive for, an unattainable yet useful concept for expanding one's sense of self, or an attainable temporary state that's kind of neat to go and check out before returning back to the transient moment of the present world? This last option perhaps proving the eternal truth of impermanence; that is to say that nothing lasts forever, even Nirvana?

Like my dharmic comrades have said, it depends on the tradition. Since you have mentioned that you studied zen mostly, I will start by saying that, in zen buddhism, seeing any level of realization as something to achieve only puts an obstacle in your path. When sitting zazen, one is not meant to be sitting for to achieve some higher state. Ideas like this imply that such a state is separate from you, or not already present.

The idea of Buddha-nature means that we are inherently enlightened, we just dont know it. Its like dreaming, and realizing you're dreaming. When you realizing you're dreaming, you dont change form, you just realize whats going on, right? Then of course, when we fully realize we are dreaming, we tend to wake up.

Yet, one does strive to practice as much as possible, since living in this human form is said to be quite a blessing, it would be a shame to waste it.
In zen, the highest form of zen is shikantaza, just sitting. At this point, the practitioner is sitting with his whole being, with no thought of gain or no goal.


There is also a koan that talks about this

One day when Nangaku came to Baso’s hut, Baso stood up to receive him. Nangaku asked him, “What have you been doing recently?”

Baso replied, “Recently I have been doing the practice of seated meditation exclusively.”

Nangaku asked, “And what is the aim of your seated meditation?”

Baso replied, “The aim of my seated meditation is to achieve Buddhahood.”

Thereupon, Nangaku took a roof tile and began rubbing it on a rock near Baso’s hut.

Baso, upon seeing this, asked him, “Reverend monk, what are you doing?”

Nangaku replied, “I am polishing a roof tile.”

Baso then asked, “What are you going to make by polishing a roof tile?”

Nangaku replied, “I am polishing it to make a mirror.”

Baso said, “How can you possibly make a mirror by rubbing a tile?”

Nangaku replied, “How can you possibly make yourself into a Buddha by doing seated meditation?”

 

[Straw Dog]

Like my dharmic comrades have said, it depends on the tradition. Since you have mentioned that you studied zen mostly, I will start by saying that, in zen buddhism, seeing any level of realization as something to achieve only puts an obstacle in your path. When sitting zazen, one is not meant to be sitting for to achieve some higher state. Ideas like this imply that such a state is separate from you, or not already present.

The idea of Buddha-nature means that we are inherently enlightened, we just dont know it. Its like dreaming, and realizing you're dreaming. When you realizing you're dreaming, you dont change form, you just realize whats going on, right? Then of course, when we fully realize we are dreaming, we tend to wake up.

Yet, one does strive to practice as much as possible, since living in this human form is said to be quite a blessing, it would be a shame to waste it.
In zen, the highest form of zen is shikantaza, just sitting. At this point, the practitioner is sitting with his whole being, with no thought of gain or no goal.


There is also a koan that talks about this

Neat. Yeah, I find something akin within the Zen tradition. Probably because it was greatly influenced by Taoist thought, more so than any other Buddhist traditions. Thanks for the info.

 

[Straw Dog]

Greetings, Grain-stalk Canine!

I think you are going to get different answers here, depending on which tradition and school that the person answering practices (or doesn't).
Hmmmmm. Not sure I've ever looked at it that way.
For most who practice in the Mahayana tradition (about which I know at least a little bit) nirvana is not a goal or a target; it is one of the various states in the progression of life, but not necessarily a goal. The goal (at least in my tradition and school) is annuttara-samyak-0sambodhi, or perfect enlightenment.

Yeah, it does seem that many of the Mahayana schools of thought tend to emphasize compassion and becoming a Bodhisattva, or perfect enlightenment in your case, more so than outright reaching Nirvana and attaining non-self, as the traditional Theravada school focus on. Thanks for sharing.

 

[swamplizard]

Greetings,

If one is being, then achievement has been attained.

best from the bogs,
swampy

 

[no-body]

Read the diamond sutra.