Not actively attempting to let go during sitting?

[Houzan]

I read the wikipedia page on shikantaza and saw a statement from John Daido Loori that got me wondering whether I have misunderstood an aspect of sitting or if it’s a case of different definitions.

The statement was:

Mental strength (joriki) is not achieved through sustained concentration as in breath meditation, but through awareness of the flow of mind, without actively attempting to let go of a thought.

It is the phrase “without actively attempting to let go of a thought” that got me wondering. Are we not trying to actively let go of thoughts during sitting?

The definition of “letting go”, the way I have understood it and use it, is to just experience and fully accept whatever comes up, without any trace of desire or aversion. And IF a desire or aversion comes up, we let go of this as well. This to me IS equanimity - nothing more to achieve, being nobody, going nowhere. Whenever an elephant wanders in to the center ring of our mind, we pay it no nevermind, as you have put it, Jundo. Therefore, we do actively attempt to let go of thoughts during sitting. We sit in equanimity.

I don’t know how Loori defines “letting go”. Maybe he means “push away” thoughts (?) in which case the statement makes perfect sense.

Or is it a subtle difference between “ACTIVELY attempting” and “attempting” that I have not catched?

Sorry for running long, and thank you in advance[emoji120]

Gassho, Michael
Satlah

[Jundo]

Daido Loori was a mixed Soto-Rinzai teacher, basically more Rinzai than Soto on this, so I would not turn to him and the Harada-Yasuntani-Sambokyodan folks from which he stems for guidance on Just Sitting Shikantaza. Period. Just don't go there for guidance on Shikantaza, for the Rinzai folks basically consider it a kind of concentration exercise, or sometimes a post-Koan introspection advanced practice.

However, we are not actively or not actively trying ... for there is just non-doing. It is like my early video ... just stop hitting yourself in the head with a hammer. It is not actively doing or not doing the attempt to stop. Just let go.

The following sounds lovely, but I added one word ...

The definition of “letting go”, the way I have understood it and use it, is to just experience and fully accept whatever comes up, without any trace of desire or aversion. And IF a desire or aversion comes up, we let go of this as well. This to me IS equanimity - nothing more to achieve, being nobody, going nowhere. Whenever an elephant wanders in to the center ring of our mind, we pay it no nevermind, as you have put it, Jundo. Therefore, we do [NOT] actively attempt to let go of thoughts during sitting. We sit in equanimity.

Does that answer what you asked?

Gassho, J

stlah

[Kotei]

Hello Michael,

I am not engaging with the arriving thoughts, not adding anything to them, not taking up the thread and continuing.
Just watching, not inviting or pushing away. Letting them passively go away.

Gassho,
Kotei sat/lah today.

[Jundo]

Hello Michael,

I am not engaging with the arriving thoughts, not adding anything to them, not taking up the thread and continuing.
Just watching, not inviting or pushing away. Letting them passively go away.

Gassho,
Kotei sat/lah today.

[Bion]

I read the wikipedia page on shikantaza and saw a statement from John Daido Loori that got me wondering whether I have misunderstood an aspect of sitting or if it’s a case of different definitions.

The statement was:


It is the phrase “without actively attempting to let go of a thought” that got me wondering. Are we not trying to actively let go of thoughts during sitting?

The definition of “letting go”, the way I have understood it and use it, is to just experience and fully accept whatever comes up, without any trace of desire or aversion. And IF a desire or aversion comes up, we let go of this as well. This to me IS equanimity - nothing more to achieve, being nobody, going nowhere. Whenever an elephant wanders in to the center ring of our mind, we pay it no nevermind, as you have put it, Jundo. Therefore, we do actively attempt to let go of thoughts during sitting. We sit in equanimity.

I don’t know how Loori defines “letting go”. Maybe he means “push away” thoughts (?) in which case the statement makes perfect sense.

Or is it a subtle difference between “ACTIVELY attempting” and “attempting” that I have not catched?

Sorry for running long, and thank you in advance[emoji120]

Gassho, Michael
Satlah

For me, the “letting go” is a bigger thing than just the response to a particular situation, for example when thoughts arise so then I feel I have to let them go. The second I sit and cross my legs, I breathe out and put my hands in the mudra, I’ve let go.. The timer will take as long it takes, my body will be however it will be, I will hurt if it hurts and sweat if I sweat and if it should happen I have to cut the sitting short cause my kitchen explodes or my curtains catch on fire, I will cut it short. BUT I consider the sitting accomplished from the moment I proceed to sit. I let go of expectations, of the need to be free of thoughts, of the need to control the thinking, of the need to stop my eyes from closing.. While I sit, I don’t engage in inner monologues analyzing the moment and what is happening, for example if I start to drift into some random thoughts… The very second I REALIZE I was engaging with a thought, I am already free of it, so I just continue sitting, eyes pointing down, back straight, breath steady, instead of discussing it in my head and attempting to shake it off when it is already gone. In a way, I’m just like a cloud that drifts across the sky, pushed and pulled, deformed and reshaped continuously by air.. in every moment it is just a cloud, just like that.

I am probably not even making sense. There’s a reason why these things can not really be contained inside words [emoji1]

Sorry for running long

[emoji1374] Sat today

[Kaitan]

I've been reading slowly the book Opening the hand of thought and I would like to share the footnote #19 page 48:

"For example, in our calculating mind when we divide 10 by 3 we always get a remainder. In trying to understand or explain zazen, no matter how deeply or from how many angles we approach it, there is always going to remain an area that cannot be solved by intelectual calculation. We are told to aim at holding the posture of zazen, yet the aiming is an action without any goal. Behind this word "indefinite articles " is also the realization of how petty and powerless this small ego-centered self actually is."

I was like hit by a hammer when I read this. Hope someone find this helpful

SatToday



Bernal

[Houzan]

Daido Loori was a mixed Soto-Rinzai teacher, basically more Rinzai than Soto on this, so I would not turn to him and the Harada-Yasuntani-Sambokyodan folks from which he stems for guidance on Just Sitting Shikantaza. Period. Just don't go there for guidance on Shikantaza, for the Rinzai folks basically consider it a kind of concentration exercise, or sometimes a post-Koan introspection advanced practice.

However, we are not actively or not actively trying ... for there is just non-doing. It is like my early video ... just stop hitting yourself in the head with a hammer. It is not actively doing or not doing the attempt to stop. Just let go.

The following sounds lovely, but I added one word ...



Does that answer what you asked?

Gassho, J

stlah

Thank you, Jundo[emoji120] Yes, I believe you answered my question.

In the same way as clenching your fist is “doing” and opening your hand is “non-doing” (what happens when you relax your hand/ don’t do anything with your hand), thinking (interacting with thoughts) or pushing away thoughts is “doing” and letting go is “non-doing”.

Maybe I could say that letting go is actively doing non-doing [emoji38]

Gassho, Michael
Satlah

[Houzan]

For me, the “letting go” is a bigger thing than just the response to a particular situation, for example when thoughts arise so then I feel I have to let them go. The second I sit and cross my legs, I breathe out and put my hands in the mudra, I’ve let go.. The timer will take as long it takes, my body will be however it will be, I will hurt if it hurts and sweat if I sweat and if it should happen I have to cut the sitting short cause my kitchen explodes or my curtains catch on fire, I will cut it short. BUT I consider the sitting accomplished from the moment I proceed to sit. I let go of expectations, of the need to be free of thoughts, of the need to control the thinking, of the need to stop my eyes from closing.. While I sit, I don’t engage in inner monologues analyzing the moment and what is happening, for example if I start to drift into some random thoughts… The very second I REALIZE I was engaging with a thought, I am already free of it, so I just continue sitting, eyes pointing down, back straight, breath steady, instead of discussing it in my head and attempting to shake it off when it is already gone. In a way, I’m just like a cloud that drifts across the sky, pushed and pulled, deformed and reshaped continuously by air.. in every moment it is just a cloud, just like that.

I am probably not even making sense. There’s a reason why these things can not really be contained inside words [emoji1]

Sorry for running long

[emoji1374] Sat today

It does make sense[emoji120] Your description is a better description of what happens when I sit, I think. It is not a 1:1 mechanical response to a random thought, but more a 1:x (where x>1) where a continuous feeling of equanimity is present throughout a number of sensations and thoughts, often until the bell rings even.

Gassho, Michael
Satlah

[Houzan]

Hello Michael,

I am not engaging with the arriving thoughts, not adding anything to them, not taking up the thread and continuing.
Just watching, not inviting or pushing away. Letting them passively go away.

Gassho,
Kotei sat/lah today.

Thank you, Kotei. This is in line with my understanding and experience. This is “letting go” or equanimity.

Gassho, Michael
Satlah

[Houzan]

I've been reading slowly the book Opening the hand of thought and I would like to share the footnote #19 page 48:



I was like hit by a hammer when I read this. Hope someone find this helpful

SatToday



Bernal

Thank you for sharing, Bernal [emoji120] I struggled with this part when I read the book. By definition you are not aiming if you don’t have a target/goal, so I read it as “you have a goal but at the same time you don’t”, which i think points to us living in both relative and ultimate realities at the same time.

Gassho, Michael
Satlah

[Ankai]

I don't know if this is a useful way of looking at it or not, but a teacher of the Tibetan Dzogchen tradition once explained it to me as kind of like being by the side of the road, sitting there, observing as traffic goes by. You're not really watching the traffic, or engaging with it, or even particularly thinking about it, just noticing it come and go.

Sat today
-Karl

[Kaitan]

I don't know if this is a useful way of looking at it or not, but a teacher of the Tibetan Dzogchen tradition once explained it to me as kind of like being by the side of the road, sitting there, observing as traffic goes by. You're not really watching the traffic, or engaging with it, or even particularly thinking about it, just noticing it come and go.

Sat today
-Karl

Hi Ankai.

Could you explain the difference between observing and watching here? English is not my first language and for me observing is engaging and paying more attention than watching.

SatToday

Gasshō

Bernal

[Ankai]

Sure...
I mean it in the sense of knowing it's happening, but not giving it any more thought than an individual car passing as you sit by the roadside.

ST
-Karl

[joshr]

My own fraction of a two cents worth here, as my first couple years of Zen practice were with the kind people of Daido Roshi's Mountains and Rivers Order: The MRO teachings on shikantaza are sufficiently different from how Jundo teaches it that it was initially a source of very significant confusion for me.

I was actually present for numerous MRO teachings where more than one of their dharmaholders equated/compared/conflated shikantaza and mahamudra, opining that they are "the same just with different upaya". In surprise/disbelief, I asked a few follow-up questions after the talk, and the speaker maintained and amplified this view. Having come to Zen from a Vajrayana tradition, where mahamudra was THE practice, this really seductive idea gifted me with a difficult-to-release false equivalence.

I would never offer an opinion as to why this difference in teaching point persists, but now that it's pointed out, the fact that Daido Roshi was a lineage holder in Rinzai and Soto schools does go a long way towards clarifying, for me anyway, why the differences in how shikantaza is taught exist/persist.

Sorry to run long, but this is one of my favorite topics!

Gassho,
Joshua

Sat this morning

[Jundo]

I don't know if this is a useful way of looking at it or not, but a teacher of the Tibetan Dzogchen tradition once explained it to me as kind of like being by the side of the road, sitting there, observing as traffic goes by. You're not really watching the traffic, or engaging with it, or even particularly thinking about it, just noticing it come and go.

Sat today
-Karl

Hi Ankai.

Could you explain the difference between observing and watching here? English is not my first language and for me observing is engaging and paying more attention than watching.

SatToday

Gasshō

Bernal

I am going to assume, Bernal, that Ankai meant by "observing" that one is seeing neutrally, but not actively trying to be watching, actively engaging with and thinking about the passing cars and other sights.

This whole discussion about whether "letting go" is an activity is tricky to discuss. If there is a hammer on the table in front of you, and you just don't pick it up, that is not really a "action of doing" nor is that an "action of intentionally not doing" nor any action of any kind at all. It is null, not anything, no matter. Just let the hammer be there, but do not engage with it or ponder it, judging whether it is a good or bad hammer, thinking about why it is on the table, nor thinking about whether you want to pick it up or not pick it up. Then, it is then no more an action or not an action than "not riding flying pink elephants" is an action or not an action. It is nothing.

Just don't think and inquire of oneself "is this an action or not an action" and it is neither!! Likewise, don't ponder whether "letting the hammer/thoughts drop from my open hand" is an action or not an action ... Just Sit, and it too becomes nothing in need of pondering and analyzing, a waste of mental time. It also is then nothing.

Sorry, I may muddle this more.

Gassho, J