NEW BOOK - Opening the Hand of Thought - Chapter 1

[Tai Shi]

Open Hand of Thought --I'm waiting for my copy of the book to arrive. Until it does, I will follow the postings in this book study. Elgwyn
sat today
Gassho

[Daiyo]

Hi all!

May I join? I have the spanish edition in google books.
If it doesn't do, I will buy a kindle edition in english.


Gassho, Daiyo.

#SatToday

[Jundo]

Hi all!

May I join? I have the spanish edition in google books.
If it doesn't do, I will buy a kindle edition in english.


Gassho, Daiyo.

#SatToday

Si, si, por supuesto. Le lengua no es importante. No es una cosa de qualquier palabra,

Gassho, J

Yo has sentado.

[Jishin]

Si, si, por supuesto. Le lengua no es importante. No es una cosa de qualquier palabra,

Gassho, Jishin, ST

[Jundo]

Jundo, if there is also "your ultimate absolute" does that mean that everyone experiences enlightenment differently? Can you elaborate on that a bit more please? I assumed that there was one ultimate reality that everyone experienced when the self fell away.

This is where I am supposed to advise you to just sit, find out for oneself.

But, look, if the universe is just one great bowl of chicken soup which we all are, does that mean we all need taste that soup just the same on any given day? One soup, many flavors.

And what does this broth taste like when there are no separate mouths to taste? [A Koan]

In any event, holding all bitter and sweet of human life, Delicious.

And are all these separate 'worlds' or 'individual space-times' also interconnected, like Indra's net, in that everybody affects everybody else, and Thatcher's England still affects the present day? Or am I making it too complicated? Thank you.

We really are getting too philosophical here. However, basic Mahayana Buddhist teachings would say that, yes, everything impacts everything else (my understanding is that field theory in physics also concurs, and that even you have some gravitational effect across distant galaxies). Any place you tug on a net has some effect somehow, large or small, on every part of the network.

The premise of Einstein’s theory of general relativity can be used to explain gravity in space. Imagine the universe as a two-dimensional sheet that represents the space-time fabric. If one were to place a ball with mass m on this sheet, it would create a depression that alters the space-time fabric. This distortion in gravity changes the progression of an object that passes through the depression. A ball with mass 2m will create a bigger depression and thus have a greater force of gravity acting upon it. The further an object is from the ball, the less it will experience the distortion or the ball’s gravitational field. Einstein’s theory postulates that any object with mass distorts space time, including humans. Although we barely dent the sheet, we create a small gravitational field around us. As long as there is matter in space, there is gravity.
...

There’s no end to it. Gravity appears to be madly greedy and long armed. Members of the Virgo Super cluster are connected to each other, and they’re dozens of millions of light-years apart. Objects in the Pisces-Cetus Super cluster complex are even connected to each other by our invisible and obnoxiously possessive friend. And they are hundreds of millions of light years apart…

In fact, you’re so popular that you are gravitationally pulled towards even most distant object in the observable Universe. And they, in turn, are linked to you.

http://www.yalescientific.org/2010/10/mythbusters-does-zero-gravity-exist-in-space/

http://www.universetoday.com/111007/...ce-of-gravity/

Gassho, J

[Jeremy]

I agree that what Uchiyama says about 'self' and his use of 'absolute' is pretty confusing here

I read the passage highlighted by Lucy (p14, paragraph2) as saying that the 'universal self' is impermanent and constantly changing. This self is actually identified with subjective reality, i.e. the totality of one's experience. This is your nose and what's right in front of your nose, right here, right now. It's also everything else, including your memory of the past and your hopes and fears for the future, all bundled up inside the present moment.

This is a world view quite different from the materialistic world view of science. The starting point for science is the objective world 'out there' and subjective reality is dependent on the objective world. For example, psychologists would typically argue that mental states and processes (the stuff of subjectivity) are dependent on brain states and processes. According to the world view Uchiyama expresses here, it's the other way round - what's given is subjectivity. Objective reality is just an idea and it's dependent on subjectivity. The idea of brain states and processes are dependent on subjectivity, not the other way round.

As ever, just an opinion...
step lightly... stay free...
Jeremy
sattoday

[Eishuu]

Thank you, Jundo. I really like that koan. Wonderful that there are so many parallels between Buddhism and physics. And thanks Willow for your comment...it was very clear. After all this thinking I shall go and sit...and then maybe have some chicken soup .

Gassho
Lucy
Sat today

[Jishin]

Hi,

I like these passages from chapter 1:

p 16:

"For instance, imagine that you and I are sitting together talking. In talking to you, I’m not talking to some person who is other than myself. The face before me is reflected on the retinas of my eyes. You are within me. Facing you, I’m just facing myself. In other words, you exist within my universal self, and what I direct myself to is caring for the you that is not separate from me."

p. 13:

"genjō kōan, the koan of life becoming life. Genjō is the present becoming the present."


p. 13:

"The past and future are real and alive only in the present. This concept of time in Buddhist thought is very important. It is different from the notion in Western philosophy that time flows from the past, into the present, and on into a future in a linear way."


Gassho, Jishin, ST

[Frank]

Will purchase the book today, and join in shortly
Gassho
Frank


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Kaishin]

I'm wondering if we should have a separate thread for each subsection in the chapters.

There is a lot of info in just the first chapter, and I am already having a hard time digesting everyone's comments.

-satToday

[Mp]

I'm wondering if we should have a separate thread for each subsection in the chapters.

There is a lot of info in just the first chapter, and I am already having a hard time digesting everyone's comments.

-satToday

From my understanding that is the format Jundo does, thread per chapter ... sub-chapters might be a good idea though. =)

Gassho
Shingen

#sattoday

[Frank]

Ok got the book....lets get to reading


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Jundo]

I'm wondering if we should have a separate thread for each subsection in the chapters.

There is a lot of info in just the first chapter, and I am already having a hard time digesting everyone's comments.

-satToday

Hi Kaishin,

I think we are going to go pretty fast this time, about a Chapter a week. (Last time we did the book, it was section by section). Maybe just ask people to post page numbers like Jishin did if they quote?

Gassho, J

SatToday

[Hoseki]

Hello Lucy,

thank you for your questions - they are encouraging me to re-read Uchiyama's book more carefully. The first time I read it I experienced at as
a gentle introduction to Zen Buddhist practice but I'm now feeling it's fairly multi-layered.

I prefer the word 'contingent' to 'accidental' - as Jundo suggested. From the moment we are born - and even in the womb - we begin creating our contingent world through our sense organs. Sometimes - in Buddhism - and on other psychologies - this comes across as a bit negative - but our personal contingency is what creates each unique individual - and this is also a positive and productive aspect of being a human being.

But our contingency is wholly impermanent - the knowledge of this can cause us suffering and pain. But there is another aspect to 'jiko' - our inherent Buddha nature - our 'whole self', - our 'universal identity'. This aspect is beyond birth and death and yet is wholly accessible to us in Zazen ( and by that I understand Uchiyama to mean Zazen as in every activity that makes up the fabric of our lived life).

Uchiyama set himself the task of actualizing the eternal self in every aspect of his life. He uses a very firm base for this - firstly a belief in an 'absolute truth' which is beyond logus (reason and therefore words). This is both a philosophical position and a religious teaching with a soteriological imperative.

For me - this is a bit of a sticking point - because I'm not at all convinced that one can call oneself a secular Buddhist - and practice from within this belief system. There is a metaphysical element and I've been chewing on this for the past four years. The metaphysical element isn't a problem for me personally - but when someone asks me if Zen Buddhism is a religion I honestly don't know how to answer. I think it is - I feel this is clearly revealed in Uchiyama's writing yet this aspect seems to get brushed aside.

I feel the metaphysical aspect is what separates Zen from secular mindfulness meditation?

Views on this would be much appreciated.

Gassho

Willow

sat today

Hi Willow,


I didn't read Uchiyama Roshi's writing as being about an absolute truth. I took to be more like Aristotle's accident/essence distinction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_(philosophy)) in the context of a larger context. So the particulars of our life are accidental/contingent but the four seals point to undeniable/necessary parts of our lives. They are kind of absolutes but not in an unmoved mover or first principle kind of way. Its more like when one take a close look at our world, our lives, the lives of others most people can see these properties (3 marks of existence/ 3 seals.) They appear to be enduring properties of living things.

As for big jiko. I just took that for Being being Being In all seriousness, the world is kind of a busy place with lots of comings and goings as well periods and places of quite and stillness. They are all part of larger happening that is the cosmos. Either way, I think these ideas are there to help guide (inform) our lives rather than be a kind of revelation of the truth. So they are more the support for a creeping vine rather than the answer to a question.

At least those are the mental secretions I've had when thinking about and reading some of the posts. What do you think?

Gassho
Sat today
Adam

[Risho]

I love this book. I really like what Jundo has been saying lately (or maybe I'm just paying more attention lately) about the danger of too much words and philosophizing. I love how Uchiyama says he's been practicing for 40 years and he feels like he can finally say something.

I've been practicing for 6 years, and I can say some pretty impressive things too; the difference is that my stuff would mainly be philosophizing BS. Jundo has been practicing for decades. So I think it's good advice to practice and avoid too many words. I think I can write pretty good -- we all can; we get lots of practice here; there are some impressive posts on here. But while words are awesome pointers, they are just pointers; this is about now, about right here, living truthfully.

It takes practice to get out of my head. I don't know if this makes sense, but words can give a very false impression, but our ultimate teacher is us; if we are sincere, we know where we are. And it really comes down to practice.

So to get down to truth - that's what I really got out of this chapter - there are so many things, but just to practice. The core of it is practice.

Gassho,

Risho
-sattoday