Has single-pointed concetration i.e. object-based concentration a place in Soto-ZEN?

[Inshin]

Here's a paradox : to reach the effortlessness and equanimity of fourth Jhana or Shikantaza if we say they're similar, one needs to put a lot of right effort into calming the mind and going through the first, second and third Jhanas. Ultimately stageless, method less and goaless, yet there are stages to go through, though they are not linear. And the goalessness is a goal itself and a result of practice. The samadhi of Shikantaza or Fourth Jhana does not mean realising enlightenment. You got to be able to sit for 2-3 hrs to even stabilize a jhana. Buddha sat for 8 years, Kodo Sawaki sat tremendous amount of time, so as many others in all the traditions. As a lay practitioners who sit max 30 minutes to 1 HR per day we might never have a taste of true Shikantaza. To have deep insighs, to see into our True Nature. So I often asked myself what's the point of teaching Shikantaza to beginners, people who can't commit to "proper" practice for various reasons? But soto zazen is so different to other approaches, and Jundo's way of teaching Shikantaza touches the core of Buddha's teachings. To radically drop all the clinging and rejecting, all the wanting and not wanting, all the seeking, and be with whatever is, is quite difficult indeed. And I believe if we can do it every day for even just 30 minutes, it has a tremendous power of liberation.

Sorry for running long.

Gassho,
Sat

[Jundo]

Here's a paradox : to reach the effortlessness and equanimity of fourth Jhana or Shikantaza if we say they're similar, one needs to put a lot of right effort into calming the mind and going through the first, second and third Jhanas. Ultimately stageless, method less and goaless, yet there are stages to go through, though they are not linear. And the goalessness is a goal itself and a result of practice. The samadhi of Shikantaza or Fourth Jhana does not mean realising enlightenment. You got to be able to sit for 2-3 hrs to even stabilize a jhana. Buddha sat for 8 years, Kodo Sawaki sat tremendous amount of time, so as many others in all the traditions. As a lay practitioners who sit max 30 minutes to 1 HR per day we might never have a taste of true Shikantaza. To have deep insighs, to see into our True Nature. So I often asked myself what's the point of teaching Shikantaza to beginners, people who can't commit to "proper" practice for various reasons? But soto zazen is so different to other approaches, and Jundo's way of teaching Shikantaza touches the core of Buddha's teachings. To radically drop all the clinging and rejecting, all the wanting and not wanting, all the seeking, and be with whatever is, is quite difficult indeed. And I believe if we can do it every day for even just 30 minutes, it has a tremendous power of liberation.

It is not so complicated. It is the antithesis of complicated.

Not just 30 minutes, but 3 minutes, 3 seconds, a single moment, half a moment ...

[Bion]

Here's a paradox : to reach the effortlessness and equanimity of fourth Jhana or Shikantaza if we say they're similar, one needs to put a lot of right effort into calming the mind and going through the first, second and third Jhanas. Ultimately stageless, method less and goaless, yet there are stages to go through, though they are not linear. And the goalessness is a goal itself and a result of practice. The samadhi of Shikantaza or Fourth Jhana does not mean realising enlightenment. You got to be able to sit for 2-3 hrs to even stabilize a jhana. Buddha sat for 8 years, Kodo Sawaki sat tremendous amount of time, so as many others in all the traditions. As a lay practitioners who sit max 30 minutes to 1 HR per day we might never have a taste of true Shikantaza. To have deep insighs, to see into our True Nature. So I often asked myself what's the point of teaching Shikantaza to beginners, people who can't commit to "proper" practice for various reasons? But soto zazen is so different to other approaches, and Jundo's way of teaching Shikantaza touches the core of Buddha's teachings. To radically drop all the clinging and rejecting, all the wanting and not wanting, all the seeking, and be with whatever is, is quite difficult indeed. And I believe if we can do it every day for even just 30 minutes, it has a tremendous power of liberation.

Sorry for running long.

Gassho,
Sat

Sheesh.. that would turn anyone away from zazen! Pretty far from eyes horizontal, nose vertical.

[emoji1374] Sat Today

[Zenkon]

Jundo asks "...

what do the Tibetans call it?

Tibetans utilize meditation very differently than do us Zen folks. To Tibetans, meditation is used to support their primary activity of studying, reading, learning. Once a concept is studied and learned, meditation is used to fully understand the concept and to incorporate it into the practitioners mind. Tibetans (at least the school that I studied with at Sravastiabbey.org) utilize two types of meditation - 1) Stabilizing Meditation - this is used A) to calm the mind at the beginning of a meditation session with a focus on the breath, and B) later in the meditation session to focus the mind on a particular concept or topic, and to maintain that focus. 2) Analytical Meditation - this is used to focus on a broader topic to deepen the practitioners understanding of the topic, to find the deeper meaning of a concept and to gain insight into that concept. Within Analytical Meditation, Tibetans have Object-Oriented Meditation which focuses on understanding and object or concept, and Subject-Oriented Meditation which focuses on transforming the mind to accept and understand a new teaching or idea, During a meditation session, the practitioner moves back and forth among the various types of meditation depending upon their level of understanding.

Tibetan meditation is not used to understand the "here and now" and certainly not to see things "as they are". The Tibetans focus on escaping the endless cycle of rebirth, and reaching Nirvana. (Tibetans are BIG on rebirth). All of us living today have obviously failed to escape. To Tibetans, the object of this life is to accumulate sufficient karma to avoid being reborn again into this existence, and rather enter Nirvana. To Tibetans, anything happening here and now is relatively irrelevant. Meditation is used to further the practitioners understand of concepts and of themselves, so they can act in ways to generate positive karma.

Sorry for getting away with my explanation.

Gassho

Dick

sat/lah

[Hokin]

Based on this short talk, I do see the clear commonality. He does still seem to be speaking of reaching the various stages of the 5 through 9 higher Jhanas, followed by Nirvana, but perhaps is putting some more down to earth meaning on those too.

https://youtu.be/TMoiFfZDi4Y

Total side note:

Did the Buddha really invent the word ”Samadhi?” I have to check out the claim. I have never heard that before, and I am not finding much backing for that claim. The following is based on nothing more then Wiki-Roshi: "Rhys Davis, about a 100 years ago, stated that Maitri Upanishad is the earliest Sanskrit literary usage of the term 'samadhi', a word also found in early texts of Buddhism." But, scholars dispute the time of the Maitri Upanishad which may be actually from around or after the time of the Buddhist Canon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maitrayaniya_Upanishad

Gassho, J

STLah

Yeah...I too find that Vimalaramsi, being a Theravadin, still teaches and spurs disciples to aim and actually reach enlightenment a bit too much for my taste, but I think he also relies on a different and, in that sense, more open and relaxed kind of practice when and if if compared to that, say, of the visuddhimagga followers...I find that his approach, which might represent somewhat more correctly the Buddha's way himself, granted that is apparently extracted directly from the early pali canon, seems to me pretty much more similar to shikantaza than almast every other approach to practice I have found so far, even more similar than dzogchenpa itself, in some way. Especially because of the use Vimalaramsi suggests doing of the samadhi factor, which, he says, mustn't be one pointed absorption, but some more widely open, relaxedly free awareness. Of course there are many differences too, especially for that reason that he, as I said, still stresses the importance of going through realizations and insights, up to the obtention of nibbana and arhatship and all the rest...Also he applies one technique he calls the "6 R's" when it comes to dealing with thoughts that are distracting one from, and here the biggest difference, one's object of meditation, which usually is the breath or the feeling of metta (maitrii, or loving kindness)...so, this is definitely not shikantaza, but still presents some fundamental similarities, at least in the fact that there is this some sort of basic openness and non-grasping factor pervading the practice.
Another thing that I find very important in the Suttavadin approach Vimalaramsi does is the conjoint use we should do of vipassana and samata....i.e.: being and staying 'alert and relaxed', 'awake and detatched' at the same time. Sort of both 'embracing and letting go' at once. I remember Kodo Sawaki's disciple Taisen Deshimaru stressing this a lot too!
And regarding the 5 to 9 higher jhanas, if I don't remember wrong, he says Buddha colled them arupa jhanas, in the sense that had to do with the formless realm, and they were 4: the realms of infinite space, of infinite consciousness, of nothingness and of neither preception nor non-perception. Then there is the ceasing of felling and perception but that would be nibbana itself. Anyways, he says that these four arupa jhanas are just som deepening of the fourth rupa jhana which is in turn the realm (and the practice) of equanimity (pali: upekkha, sansk.: upeksha). So, again, Vimalaramsi finds that the Buddha was trying to make us practice the more equanimous way above all. As Buddha himself taught in various pali suttas about meditation: "non-grasping leads to freedom...regarding all contacts (sights, sounds, smells, flavours, tactiles and thoughts) with equanimity, without favoring nor opposing anything".
So...that is the key, to me, here, with all this talk of "one-pointed-absorption-concentration": there can be no place for that inthe Buddha's way f the way that "leads to freedom" is "non-grasping"!

Regarding the 'Buddha's invention of the word samadhi's' claim, well, I had heard Vimalaramsi say that already, and thought too that sounds quite a daring claim...who knows if he is sayng the truth...I personally don´t know...The upanishads, yes, they are usually lately considered to have come to life after Buddha's death, but still there is no definitive knowledge about that...so...who knows...maybe it's not important at all...but to know what meaning Buddha gave to that word...that is important.

Anyways.
I personally find that Shikantaza as Dogen teaches and you, Jundo, is the most effective and more in line to what I think Buddha could have taught...at least for me.
So...let us Just Sit!!!

Gassho
Hokin
SAT

[Jundo]

Thank you, both to Dick and Hokin, for a peak at how our neighbors live. Very interesting.

Gassho, Jundo

STLah

[Suuko]

Based on this short talk, I do see the clear commonality. He does still seem to be speaking of reaching the various stages of the 5 through 9 higher Jhanas, followed by Nirvana, but perhaps is putting some more down to earth meaning on those too.

https://youtu.be/TMoiFfZDi4Y

Total side note:

Did the Buddha really invent the word ”Samadhi?” I have to check out the claim. I have never heard that before, and I am not finding much backing for that claim. The following is based on nothing more then Wiki-Roshi: "Rhys Davis, about a 100 years ago, stated that Maitri Upanishad is the earliest Sanskrit literary usage of the term 'samadhi', a word also found in early texts of Buddhism." But, scholars dispute the time of the Maitri Upanishad which may be actually from around or after the time of the Buddhist Canon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maitrayaniya_Upanishad

Gassho, J

STLah

Thanks for this Jundo. I appreciate the part where he says that we are not trying to reach a level of concentration where we can stop the hindrances. We are actually seeing through the hindrances, on the cushion and off the cushion.

Gassho,
Sat today,
Guish.

Sent from my M2101K7BNY using Tapatalk

[Jundo]

Thanks for this Jundo. I appreciate the part where he says that we are not trying to reach a level of concentration where we can stop the hindrances. We are actually seeing through the hindrances, on the cushion and off the cushion.

That aspect, at least, is precisely like Shikantaza.

Gassho, J

STLah

[Suuko]

That aspect, at least, is precisely like Shikantaza.

Gassho, J

STLah

Hi Jundo,

Dependent origination is mentioned in the video. Is this something we study in Zen as well? I looked it up and came up with the attachment below. I am wondering if it complements the eightfold path or it's an extension of Dukkha.

Gassho,
Sat today,
Guish.


Sent from my M2101K7BNY using Tapatalk

[Jundo]

Hi Jundo,

Dependent origination is mentioned in the video. Is this something we study in Zen as well? I looked it up and came up with the attachment below. I am wondering if it complements the eightfold path or it's an extension of Dukkha.

Gassho,
Sat today,
Guish.


Sent from my M2101K7BNY using Tapatalk

An interesting question. Long story short is that this is one of the widely and wildly interpreted teachings in old Buddhism, many versions, many interpretations, the strangest interpretation being that the first 4 apply to a past life, the middle 4 to the present life, and the last 4 to future lives. They make no sense. I happened to be looking at three scholars papers, last month, on the origins ... it is a mess.

If you ask me, it is not such a mystery: The whole point is how one develops a sense of separate self, with all the suffering (attachments, view of personal life and death etc.) that results.

So, I feel that it is very obviously similar to some modern models of infant development. Not exactly, but pretty darn close. What do you think of this?

Buddha-Basics (Part XIV) – The Twelve-Fold Chain

https://www.treeleaf.org/forums/showthread.php?7707-Buddha-Basics-%28Part-XIV%29-%C2%96-The-Twelve-Fold-Chain

Gassho, J

STLah

[Zrebna]

That sounds different from what we have all been talking about, which is the practice of of inducing deep concentration states through focus on an object. I am not familiar with the practice you describe, Dick, what do the Tibetans call it? It sounds somewhat like a cross between Rinzai Koan phrase introspection and an Insight practice.

Gassho, J

STLah

I think that 'Dick' describes various forms of analytical meditations - it's also objective-based, but does not fall within samatha-practice (strict single-pointed concentration).

Also thanks Hokin for the link to the recommended Sutta - I have not known this one yet. To be honest, always when I read a Sutta it is quite a hard read from a stilistic point of view - this type of language is just not my cup of tea, but parts of the contents are oftentimes interesting and valueable.
Despite the for me too "poetic" style of language and the (for me) annoying and hard to read repetitive style, I can always find parts where I just could not believe (in hope xD) that the historical Buddha really has spoken in such ways - for instance:


One came to meet me and took my bowl and outer robe, another prepared a seat, and another set out water for my feet; however, they addressed me by name and as ‘friend.’
“Thereupon I told them: ‘Bhikkhus, do not address the Tathāgata by name and as “friend.” The Tathāgata is an Accomplished One, a Fully Enlightened One. "

I mean, seriously - is this still for real?

Other than this, even the more down-to-earth Bhantes that I liked (still do) when I have been around a bit through Theravada circles, still do advocate soooooo much striving and aiming for...
For instance when you look on how Jhanas are being abstracted, then the kind of "endgoal" is to let go/be of everything - no matter if pleasant or unpleasant and so on... this wants to be achieved by at first even adding more and more attachements through the first 3 Jhanas...seems like a way where you could get easily lost along the path...

The only argument when I have brought up this kind of contradictions of becoming free from attachements and aversions while on the other side having obviously so much attachement to the dhamma and its practice(s), was the old lame counter:

The only thing which is worth to be strived for is liberation/Buddha's teachings/Dhamma/enlightenment, etc.
or
"The only thing that is worth to be desired is the desirelessness"

Always seemed to me like allowing arbitrarily excpetions where one wants them to allow...I was never able to fully agree with this sorts of thinking.

I think that one of the reasons Zen resonates well with me is that on the first glance from a noob's perspective (like I am) it seems in comparison to other schools less 'fantastic', 'glamarous', 'spectacular',... but something about it feels from the start of (to me) way more honest, true and real.

Anyways, sorry for running too long.

Gassho
Chris
Sat today

[Jundo]

After all these years, I find the Zen path even more 'fantastic', 'glamarous', 'spectacular' than I first believed.

[Zrebna]

Sheesh.. that would turn anyone away from zazen! Pretty far from eyes horizontal, nose vertical.

[emoji1374] Sat Today

Yeah, but it's true, indeed - in order to even develop some proper samtha which might lead to Jhanas or vipassana, one is heavily adviced (rather said required) to practice several hours a day - for most lay practicioners this is simply not possbile - a magic stick where one could turn a 24 hours day into a 50 hours day might be useful xD

I myself practised before I recently turned to Zen for 2 times 1 hour a day, which is considered from most as the bare minimum and actually just too little to "progress" decently...

Thus I am delighted that for a formal Zazen-practice oftentimes already 30 minutes are recommended - also Zazen-Practice is just "easier" and feels smoother since directing and redirecting over and over again your entire attention to a sinlge meditation object (like for instance the breath sensations at the entries of your nostrils) takes a lot of willpower which is a finite source as researches have shown by now (ever willpower act depledes glycogen in the brain).

Hence after a zazen-practice I usually feel "lighter", totally regardless how the zazen went (since it is "allowed" to go "badly" - no matter what is, it is ok) instead of somewhat mentally exhausted as it was sometimes after a streneous samtha-practice of 1 hour or more.
Even the "good-feeling" samatha-sessions felt somehow off - it just felt not right to me to deliberately switch your attention from your beginning meditation-object to rapture and pleasant feelings (1st Jhana) and hammering on those "good experiences"....


Anyways, sorry for the sort of ranty post and for running too long.

Gassho
Chris
Sat today

[Jundo]

Sometimes less is more ... and nothing is everything.

[Bion]

Yeah, but it's true, indeed - in order to even develop some proper samtha which might lead to Jhanas or vipassana, one is heavily adviced (rather said required) to practice several hours a day - for most lay practicioners this is simply not possbile - a magic stick where one could turn a 24 hours day into a 50 hours day might be useful xD

I myself practised before I recently turned to Zen for 2 times 1 hour a day, which is considered from most as the bare minimum and actually just too little to "progress" decently...

Thus I am delighted that for a formal Zazen-practice oftentimes already 30 minutes are recommended - also Zazen-Practice is just "easier" and feels smoother since directing and redirecting over and over again your entire attention to a sinlge meditation object (like for instance the breath sensations at the entries of your nostrils) takes a lot of willpower which is a finite source as researches have shown by now (ever willpower act depledes glycogen in the brain).

Hence after a zazen-practice I usually feel "lighter", totally regardless how the zazen went (since it is "allowed" to go "badly" - no matter what is, it is ok) instead of somewhat mentally exhausted as it was sometimes after a streneous samtha-practice of 1 hour or more.
Even the "good-feeling" samatha-sessions felt somehow off - it just felt not right to me to deliberately switch your attention from your beginning meditation-object to rapture and pleasant feelings (1st Jhana) and hammering on those "good experiences"....


Anyways, sorry for the sort of ranty post and for running too long.

Gassho
Chris
Sat today

A good thing Zazen is the goal in itself.. Not any sensations coming from it, or any mental state, inner peace or anything like that. No progress to be made, no being good or bad at it..

[emoji1374] Sat Today