Mind waves

[Kaisho]

Hello fellow Treeleafers. I have a question about Suzuki Roshis book, Zen Mind Beginners Mind. Specifically the chapter "Mind Waves". He starts by giving instructions on what to do with your mind during zazen and the stuff that comes up. He then goes on to outline big mind saying nothing comes from the outside and everything exists wholly within our own mind. Later he says that the related mind is the small mind.

I am having a tough time wrapping my mind (ha) around this. Does our mind still not relate to things outside itself while we're trying to let go the thoughts as they are clouds? Would that be small mind as Roshi says? I am a little confused on the "relational" point.

Thanks for any help

Gassho
Kaisho stlah





Sent from my moto g stylus 5G using Tapatalk

[Tokan]

Hi Kaisho

Just a few humble words from a fellow practitioner. We sit in zazen with our eyes not fully closed. I have to sit with my eyes fully open (but eyelids rested) since one eyelid has weak muscles and I can only hold it open or closed, no in between! The idea behind the slightly closed eyes, I believe, is not to shut out sensory information, but to gently filter it a little, just helping to turn the attention inwards, but not solely inwards. I guess my key understanding about our relationship to thoughts and perceptions is that we are aiming towards non-attachment. I don't agree with teachers who talk about stopping thoughts, or forcefully blocking the discriminating mind. We are our own gentle teacher, we try to lead our unsettled mind to a quiet resting place where it is happy to let go of thoughts present, and not attach to those that arise. The reflection I have about the sky and clouds analogy is that our understanding of the sky comes partly from the clouds. Where do the clouds begin and end in the boundless sky? You can no more grasp a cloud than you can a thought! Know that you are human, that the mind will create thoughts whether you want it to or not, but also know that you can practice living with thoughts in a non-attached but caring way.

I don't know if that is of any help, just my understanding. I haven't read the book for years either, so not completely clear on how Suzuki defines some of these terms.

Gassho, Tokan

satlah

[Jundo]

Hi Kaisho,

In that chapter, he starts with a lovely description of the equanimity of Shikantaza, not grabbing thoughts but letting the train pass without boarding ...

When you are practicing zazen, do not try to stop your thinking. Let it stop by itself. If something comes into your mind, let it come in, and let it go out. It will not stay long. When you try to stop your thinking, it means you are bothered by it. Do not be bothered by anything. It appears as if something comes from outside your mind, but actually it is only the waves of your mind, and if you are not bothered by the waves, gradually they will become calmer and calmer.

Then he says ...

Nothing comes from outside your mind. Usually we think of our mind as receiving impressions and experiences from outside, but that is not a true understanding of our mind. The true understanding is that the mind includes everything; when you think something comes from outside it means only that something appears in your mind. Nothing outside yourself can cause any trouble. You yourself make the waves in your mind. If you leave your mind as it is, it will become calm. This mind is called big mind. If your mind is related to something outside itself, that mind is a small mind, a limited mind. If your mind is not related to anything else, then there is no dualistic understanding in the activity of your mind.

So, usually you have an experience of your "little self" (the "me myself I" mind between the ears), which is divided from everything outside your skin, the "non-you" world. But, as you hear me talk about all the time, our practice is to soften or drop the hard borders and division between "you/not-you." So, "little mind" sees a tree outside you, and thinks the tree is "not you" and is "outside you." But in "Big Mind," there is no inside vs. outside, and all of reality is like "inside which is the outside in, and outside which is inside out." Tree and you and the rest of reality are not divided.

Furthermore, your entire experience of things is up to you: Either the "little mind" experience of "you divided from all the rest of the world which is not you" or the Big Mind experience of "you which is all things and all things which are you and all things which are each other too." For the Buddhist, "Mind" is not only between the ears, but the entire feedback loop of between the ears, eyes and other senses, trees and stars, me you and the other guy, from the big bang to the end of time ... all happening together. (Note that I am not talking about some kind of "cosmic consciousness," I mean more that you have to think in this way of a Wholeness in which you and all things are the Whole. But you cannot experience any of that ... whether Big Mind or little mind except personally, in your own experience.) It is as if you substitute one model of reality between your ears (with a hard me/not me division) with another alternative model between the ears (which drops me/not me division).

You judge and divide things by how you categorize and judge between your ears. If you think, for example, "this is a problem," then it is a problem. If you do not think "this is a problem," and rest in the equanimity of Zazen, then it is no problem. (For example, even sickness, death, volcanoes exploding, etc. are not "problems" until you judge them so from your "little mind" preferences and judgements.).

But remember too that we need "little mind" and "me/not me" division to function and live in life. You cannot live as a human being in Big Mind Wholeness alone. I could not live if I truly thought that putting food in your mouth was feeding me, or that all the world was not all divided up into stuff, or that tigers are not dangerous, etc. So, our practice is to realize Big Mind, but then to realize further that Big Mind and little mind are really the SAME looked at differently. Then, we might find, for example, that we still have problems ... but also no problem at the same time!

Is that a little clear, or more confusing?

Gassho, J

stlah

[Jundo]

Hi Kaisho

Just a few humble words from a fellow practitioner. We sit in zazen with our eyes not fully closed. I have to sit with my eyes fully open (but eyelids rested) since one eyelid has weak muscles and I can only hold it open or closed, no in between! The idea behind the slightly closed eyes, I believe, is not to shut out sensory information, but to gently filter it a little, just helping to turn the attention inwards, but not solely inwards. I guess my key understanding about our relationship to thoughts and perceptions is that we are aiming towards non-attachment. I don't agree with teachers who talk about stopping thoughts, or forcefully blocking the discriminating mind. We are our own gentle teacher, we try to lead our unsettled mind to a quiet resting place where it is happy to let go of thoughts present, and not attach to those that arise. The reflection I have about the sky and clouds analogy is that our understanding of the sky comes partly from the clouds. Where do the clouds begin and end in the boundless sky? You can no more grasp a cloud than you can a thought! Know that you are human, that the mind will create thoughts whether you want it to or not, but also know that you can practice living with thoughts in a non-attached but caring way.

I don't know if that is of any help, just my understanding. I haven't read the book for years either, so not completely clear on how Suzuki defines some of these terms.

Gassho, Tokan

satlah

That's not really what Suzuki Roshi was talking about here. It is not about the small mechanics of Zazen, except in that first paragraph I quoted. He says there, in the first paragraph, as you do, not to "stop" the thoughts, but that is not his main topic.

He is talking about something much more radical: That the universe is our personal mind, our personal mind just the universe. We usually feel that the universe is "out there" and our "personal mind" is "inside our skull." Really, there is no border.

Gassho, J

stlah

[Tai Shi]

Mind waves

Thank you Jundo for your clarification because the way I have been thinking of this is in terms of Keats and Wordsworth for my understanding completely comes from Western Romanticism. Negative capability in which the mind no longer grapples i
after fact or reason, but in response as in Powerful emotion coming to rest in reflection of the outside and inside being the same that we are in repose. My whole life is books. When I sit in a small room which my wife allows me to have as my study. I sit here two or sometimes three or more times, but usually twice a day. When i was setting up this “study “ I couldn’t sit easily in a straight back chair. But we picked out an ordinary black straight back office chair with the back going haff way up my back. Those are not to accommodate my Ankylosing Spondylitis or Rheumatoid Arthritis of my spine and through my back. This was some sort of to work out for me. Now a few years after setting up my own space with my beloved books on the right and left of my desk and my computer in the middle where I join with Treeleaf and other zazen and meditation which always comes back to what I have been taught at Treeleaf with Jundo’s videos. I sit now comfortably in that black office chair and in the last few months, my wife and I have realized I am mostly honest. For me all this comes together with the precepts and my wife and computer where the other Practitioners of my Sangha are. And most specifically my beloved books below my altar where everything is a gift for my practice from my wife and daughter. The beautiful hand carved white Buddha after the manner in the Japanese an ancient Buddha my daughter purchased from a vendor of antiques and the small receptacle Jundo gave us from Japan with the Heart Sutra and many objects from my wife and daughter dating from 30 years ago and also from Kyousui who is my second body, a set of Jusu beads hand made from Tibet. Everything comes together in this room but not so much the room but the reflection is one that of what Danial Ladinsky calls of the volume of Hafiz The Gift that my daughter gave me several years ago.”catching the brilliant tear./ Perl. Rain” here everything comes together as my half open eyes rest quietly as I sit in my chair everywhere everything is here. Negative thoughts at rest and I am at home. This is very important for as a boy there was no place for me. Here is the “Gift,” repose from my wife and daughter. There was no family for me as a boy but my wife and daughter have given me a gift of family. Finally as an older man I am at home with this place. Negative thoughts being reconciled with positive emotions this place is where I am at resting. I am 71 years old now and I am at rest now or still. Hafiz in his poem The Great Need brings me here as “we are holding hands. We are climbing” our song from the folk song “All I’ll Give You, Since You’ve Asked.” These things to our hearts in this life our love and family. Oneness.
Gassho
sat/ lah
Don’t delete Jundo for this is beautiful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Erinis]

This is something I have struggled to understand too. To be sincere this book entangled my mind and made me a bit depressed,
personally wouldn't recommend.

The topic you have started, the Big Magnanimous mind and small one is very well defined in the book - How to cook your life
(chapter 3 The true form of the Self; and 4 Everything You Encounter is your Life), though Jundo already very well explained above.



P.S. The book -The Zen Master's Dance- is very well written, beginning to unravel the meaning of the Dogen's teaching. Thank you!
I am sorry for running long.

Gassho, Erinis
Sat today

[Jundo]

This is something I have struggled to understand too. To be sincere this book entangled my mind and made me a bit depressed,
personally wouldn't recommend.

Well, it is almost heretical to say, because the book is so celebrated in the Soto Zen world, but I agree with you somewhat about the "entangling." Below is my usual comment. I say this as someone who has lived in Japan for 30+ years, listening to Japanese speakers as well as learning and wrestling with the Japanese language myself:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Shunryu Suzuki, Dainin Katagiri, Kobun Chino and several other Japanese teachers were terrible communicators, and that is one reason that their writings are sometimes hard to follow.

(There, I said it ... get the torches!)

It is not that their words which we might find hard to follow are always somehow mysterious, inscrutable Koans only for the enlightened to understand. It is primarily that they were just terrible speakers, especially in English.

Actually, what I just said is not completely right: There is much truth to the fact that their chosen topics are usually hard to start with, and are Koans and a bit mysterious, because they are discussing the teachings of Zen about 'emptiness' and such which leap beyond usual ways of expression.

BUT, couple that with the fact that English was their second language, and they struggled with it ...

... coupled with the fact that Japanese public speaking and essay writing, even in Japanese, will often seem fuzzy and meandering to many westerners (especially if by Japanese of older generations). Good public speaking or essay writing in English is expected to have a clear start, which leads to A to B to C, and ties up with a good conclusion. In contrast, Japanese essays or talks often start at A, jump to Q, forget where they are, do a couple of curly-cues, then conclude about a whole different topic! Maybe even Dogen in Shobogenzo was a little like this too. (Of course, I suppose that the definition of 'terrible' is culturally relative, so I should not judge.)

Add that to the fact that most of the talks by Suzuki, Katagiri and others were oral presentations, sometimes quickly jotted down or poorly recorded by bad sound equipment (Suzuki's talks were so).

Suzuki's students RECREATED the talks in the books from handwritten notes taken during the talks and really poor quality tape recordings. The transcribers mostly did not speak Japanese, so were hindered in that too

However, nonetheless, the book is a treasure house of beautiful quotes and insights. Lots to ring one's bell! Real gold in there.

Of course, not EVERYTHING in the book has to ring one's bell! Some things in the book that sound very profound and mysterious ... don't really mean anything, I feel. Some other things are just mistranslations of English too.

For all these reasons, the book can be hard to follow. Still, it is worth it and a treasure.

Gassho, J

stlah

[Shinshi]

Hi Kaisho,

In that chapter, he starts with a lovely description of the equanimity of Shikantaza, not grabbing thoughts but letting the train pass without boarding ...



Then he says ...



So, usually you have an experience of your "little self" (the "me myself I" mind between the ears), which is divided from everything outside your skin, the "non-you" world. But, as you hear me talk about all the time, our practice is to soften or drop the hard borders and division between "you/not-you." So, "little mind" sees a tree outside you, and thinks the tree is "not you" and is "outside you." But in "Big Mind," there is no inside vs. outside, and all of reality is like "inside which is the outside in, and outside which is inside out." Tree and you and the rest of reality are not divided.

Furthermore, your entire experience of things is up to you: Either the "little mind" experience of "you divided from all the rest of the world which is not you" or the Big Mind experience of "you which is all things and all things which are you and all things which are each other too." For the Buddhist, "Mind" is not only between the ears, but the entire feedback loop of between the ears, eyes and other senses, trees and stars, me you and the other guy, from the big bang to the end of time ... all happening together. (Note that I am not talking about some kind of "cosmic consciousness," I mean more that you have to think in this way of a Wholeness in which you and all things are the Whole. But you cannot experience any of that ... whether Big Mind or little mind except personally, in your own experience.) It is as if you substitute one model of reality between your ears (with a hard me/not me division) with another alternative model between the ears (which drops me/not me division).

You judge and divide things by how you categorize and judge between your ears. If you think, for example, "this is a problem," then it is a problem. If you do not think "this is a problem," and rest in the equanimity of Zazen, then it is no problem. (For example, even sickness, death, volcanoes exploding, etc. are not "problems" until you judge them so from your "little mind" preferences and judgements.).

But remember too that we need "little mind" and "me/not me" division to function and live in life. You cannot live as a human being in Big Mind Wholeness alone. I could not live if I truly thought that putting food in your mouth was feeding me, or that all the world was not all divided up into stuff, or that tigers are not dangerous, etc. So, our practice is to realize Big Mind, but then to realize further that Big Mind and little mind are really the SAME looked at differently. Then, we might find, for example, that we still have problems ... but also no problem at the same time!

Is that a little clear, or more confusing?

Gassho, J

stlah

Gassho, Shinshi

SaT-LaH

[Kaisho]

Thank you for clarifying Jundo

Gassho
Kaisho

Sent from my moto g stylus 5G using Tapatalk

[Erinis]

Well, it is almost heretical to say, because the book is so celebrated in the Soto Zen world, but I agree with you somewhat about the "entangling." Below is my usial comment. I say this as someone who has lived in Japan for 30+ years, listening to Japanese speakers as well as learning and wrestling with the Japanese language myself:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Shunryu Suzuki, Dainin Katagiri, Kobun Chino and several other Japanese teachers were terrible communicators, and that is one reason that their writings are sometimes hard to follow.

(There, I said it ... get the torches!)

It is not that their words which we might find hard to follow are always somehow mysterious, inscrutable Koans only for the enlightened to understand. It is primarily that they were just terrible speakers, especially in English.

Actually, what I just said is not completely right: There is much truth to the fact that their chosen topics are usually hard to start with, and are Koans and a bit mysterious, because they are discussing the teachings of Zen about 'emptiness' and such which leap beyond usual ways of expression.

BUT, couple that with the fact that English was their second language, and they struggled with it ...

... coupled with the fact that Japanese public speaking and essay writing, even in Japanese, will often seem fuzzy and meandering to many westerners (especially if by Japanese of older generations). Good public speaking or essay writing in English is expected to have a clear start, which leads to A to B to C, and ties up with a good conclusion. In contrast, Japanese essays or talks often start at A, jump to Q, forget where they are, do a couple of curly-cues, then conclude about a whole different topic! Maybe even Dogen in Shobogenzo was a little like this too. (Of course, I suppose that the definition of 'terrible' is culturally relative, so I should not judge.)

Add that to the fact that most of the talks by Suzuki, Katagiri and others were oral presentations, sometimes quickly jotted down or poorly recorded by bad sound equipment (Suzuki's talks were so).

Suzuki's students RECREATED the talks in the books from handwritten notes taken during the talks and really poor quality tape recordings. The transcribers mostly did not speak Japanese, so were hindered in that too

However, nonetheless, the book is a treasure house of beautiful quotes and insights. Lots to ring one's bell! Real gold in there.

Of course, not EVERYTHING in the book has to ring one's bell! Some things in the book that sound very profound and mysterious ... don't really mean anything, I feel. Some other things are just mistranslations of English too.

For all these reasons, the book can be hard to follow. Still, it is worth it and a treasure.

Gassho, J

stlah

I do understand that it sounds heretical to you because you're thoroughly familiar with all various Soto Zen books article and others things with many years of practice,
but I am new here, few months and don't know the top books. I am reading books that are recommended on treeleaf.

Besides it was subjective opinion about the book, don't know why it must be attacked by caps lock, dots and long explanation of disagreement.

Gassho, Erinis
Sat Today

[Jundo]

Besides it was subjective opinion about the book, don't know why it must be attacked by caps lock, dots and long explanation of disagreement.

Sorry, I was just trying to help you and make you feel not so alone in your opinion. My apologies.

As to CAP LOCKS and such, that is MY strange way of writing and COMMUNICATING.

Gassho, Jundo

stlah

[Bion]

I do understand that it sounds heretical to you because you're thoroughly familiar with all various Soto Zen books article and others things with many years of practice,
but I am new here, few months and don't know the top books. I am reading books that are recommended on treeleaf.

Besides it was subjective opinion about the book, don't know why it must be attacked by caps lock, dots and long explanation of disagreement.

Gassho, Erinis
Sat Today

Actually, Jundo was saying that what he was about to say about the book, while agreeing with you, was mildly heretical[emoji1] Y’all were in agreement, actually, but things got lost in [digital] translation [emoji23]

[emoji1374] Sat Today

[Jundo]

Actually, Jundo was saying that what he was about to say about the book, while agreeing with you, was mildly heretical[emoji1] Y’all were in agreement, actually, but things got lost in [digital] translation [emoji23]

[emoji1374] Sat Today

Oh, thank you Bion!

Yes, things do get lost in translation.

And that includes translations of Zen books, and translations of comments about translations of Zen books, and translations of comments about comments about Zen books.

Gassho, Jundo

stlah

[Bion]

Oh, thank you Bion!

Yes, things do get lost in translation.

And that includes translations of Zen books, and translations of comments about translations of Zen books, and translations of comments about comments about Zen books.

Gassho, Jundo

stlah

You and your word gameeeees!!! [emoji1] [emoji2309] [emoji2309] [emoji1787]


[emoji1374] Sat Today

[Amelia]

I do understand that it sounds heretical to you because you're thoroughly familiar with all various Soto Zen books article and others things with many years of practice,
but I am new here, few months and don't know the top books. I am reading books that are recommended on treeleaf.

Besides it was subjective opinion about the book, don't know why it must be attacked by caps lock, dots and long explanation of disagreement.

Gassho, Erinis
Sat Today

Erinis,

If I am not mistaken, Jundo's post in response was not necessarily uniquely addressed to you. I believe it is a copied and pasted passage that he brings up from time to time when this book has been brought up. It is not the first time that members have had a bit of trouble with some of the passages, so when that occurs, Jundo has some responses ready to go, as well as for other topics.

Please correct me if I am wrong on this, Jundo.

So no, it is not directed at you Erinis, it is far more neutral.


stlah