score:3
When the Heart Sutra says "There is no suffering, no cause of suffering, no end to suffering, no path to follow" it isn't saying that none of these things exist. What it means is that none of these things exist in terms of 'Svabhava' which means something like 'intrinsic existence' or 'self nature' or 'essence'. In terms of 'Svabhava' none of these things exist, but in terms of the experience of these things and in terms of their actual features and characteristics, they do exist.
And I think that the quote by Ryokan means that opposites are concepts which are relative and exist as abstract concepts which are imputed onto experience. It is absolutely true that the abstracted concept of Nibbana and the abstracted concept of conditioned existence relatively depend on each other as part of a dualistic pair, but that doesn't mean that the experiences and properties to which these concepts refer are themselves interdependent.
Upvote:1
I interpret the question [before it was edited 10-2-14 to mean that how does one build and maintain an individual practice whose goal is nibbana or nirvana (same term different language) which some interpret to mean enlightenment. This then poses a problem because what is going to experience nibbana or nirvana, the individual?
Here is one interpretation of nibbana or nirvana "to be blown out" or "to be extinguished."[quoted text below this paragraph] Here is where the goal of nibbana could be in conflict if one conceived of attaining nibbana. Nibbana is rather an erasure or elimination or disappearance of an appearance of a self that is now seen to be a phantom or dream.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_(Buddhism)
Nirvana (Sanskrit, also nirvāṇa; Pali: nibbana, nibbāna ) is the earliest and most common term used to describe the goal of the Buddhist path.[1] The literal meaning of the term in Sanskrit is "to be blown out" or "to be extinguished". Within the Buddhist tradition, this term is typically glossed as the extinction of craving (tanha), or more broadly, the extinction of the fires of attachment (raga), aversion (dvesha) and ignorance (moha or avidyā).[1] In the Buddhist view, when these fires are extinguished, suffering (dukkha) comes to an end, and one is released from the cycle of rebirth (saṃsāra).
Buddhist tradition distinguishes between the experience of someone who reaches nirvana during their lifetime (sopadhiśeṣa-nirvāṇa) and the experience of nirvana after one passes away (nir-upadhiśeṣa-nirvāṇa). The experience of nirvana-in-this-lifetime is described as a transformed state of mind that is free from negative mental states, peaceful, happy, and non-reactive. The experience of nirvana-after-death (commonly referred to as paranirvana) is said to be beyond words or description.
The two main traditions of Buddhism, the Theravada and Mahayana, differ in their presentations of nirvana. The Theravada tradition emphasizes the cessation of suffering and liberation from samsara. The Mahayana tradition emphasizes two stages of nirvana: the first stage is described (using similar language to the Theravada tradition) as the cessation of suffering and liberation from samsara; the next and final stage is referred to as the nonabiding (apratiṣṭhita) nirvana, or buddhahood, that transcends both samsara and the limited nirvana of the first stage.
There really is no conflict with nibbana and the path to it. The problem is imagined by those who believe they have to get somewhere they are not already. Extinguish the movie that is covering the screen of consciousness and what is always present is visible, not because it appeared, but because the illusory dreams of selfhood become invisible once the falsehoods that feed this false sense of self are extinguished or drop away in awakening.
Upvote:1
Good question. A couple of thoughts: