last night's sitting

[Myoshin]

Re: last night's sitting

I gotta say its not what I thought, but something totally different that's worth everything and nothing at the same time. I'm just glad I'm here.

My thoughts exactly.

I came to Zen because I wanted to try something new, to be able to relax, and like Dirk said, the prospect of enlightenment (to an eighteen year old that sounds pretty cool).

Through time I saw that my views were askew. My preconceptions about meditation and Zen as a whole have changed and continue to change. It is a constant learning process. I like what I do though, and that is enough.

Julia, I look forward to more posts to read.

Gassho,
Kyle (the youngin´)

[murasaki]

Re: last night's sitting

Ok *now* I see the real positive side to this thread -- it is interesting and helpful to know what brought y'all to Zen. It helps put things into perspective, seeing your "thens-and-nows" as you grow in your understanding.

Dirk: The other day, I was on a fast-moving train of thought that was promising to lead up to a panic attack. I have not practiced zazen for very long, but I've had enough practice at it to be able to put some distance between myself and that train of thought ("I am not these thoughts")...it derailed, and I had no panic attack. You can't put a price tag on that.

I know we're not to have goals in Zen, but this is exactly the kind of thing that I consider a "good reason" to practice, and it very much encourages me to continue. One less panic attack, to me, equals less distorted perceptions and judgments about my life, and less fear...equals more understanding of my sphere of influence and my choices, and therefore more ability to make (and act on) sensible decisions that benefit myself and my family.

So I'm not going to cling to goals in zazen per se...but I'm just sayin'.

gassho
Julia

[Dosho]

Re: last night's sitting

[Bansho]

Re: last night's sitting

Hi,

Thinking is not the problem, its the lack of space between you and the thoughts which cause the problems.

What do you think is the 'you' that needs to be separated from the 'thoughts'? What remains of 'you' without those 'thoughts'? If there can be a 'you' without 'thoughts', can there be also be 'thoughts' without 'you'? What exactly is this 'space', and how do we know it is lacking? I don't mean to pick on you in particular, but I think such statements are often all too readily made and/or accepted without further examination. What does it really mean for our practice and how are we to do it? Do you think conceiving thoughts as entities which are separate from our 'self' and distancing our 'self' from those thoughts will solve our problems? How can 'you', the 'space', the 'lacking' and the 'problems' themselves be something independent from thought? Casting off body-mind is not selective, we don't pick and choose to cast off 'this' and keep 'that'. It's not a matter of pushing 'thoughts' away from 'us', but realizing their intertwined nature. One cannot exist without the other, neither are substantial, and neither are lasting.

Gassho
Bansho

[Bansho]

Re: last night's sitting

Hi,

You = awareness.

Can there be thoughts without awareness? No, because thoughts are secondary.

Why do you single out 'awareness' and equate it with 'you'? Mind-body (Skt. nama-rupa, Jap. shinjin) consists of 5 skandhas, i.e. body, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness. They aren't arranged hierarchically, nor do they exist independently of one another.

Space = Its hard to explain this one. You need to experience this.

Nonself- is not a complete destruction of all perception. Awareness is still there.

So you think 'nonself' is the destruction of everything but 'awareness'? How do you do this? And having done it, how do you still get out of bed in the morning?

Gassho
Bansho

[Jundo]

Re: last night's sitting

This fascination with a mind of bare "awareness" or "the witness" has always struck me like a fascination with the bare glow of the TV when there is no broadcast on a particular station. Sure, it may be a great Cosmic Consciousness, one's True Self and the Face of God ... or just static one is staring at, because the signal has been removed.

In the end, I see no evidence that one is dealing with anything except an echo within a brain listening to itself. In other words, it is just the brain hearing its own static when some of its "show" has been turned down or off. There is no evidence that it is anything but another form of quiet, sensory deprivation. You are not getting in touch with anything outside your own mind, and you are putting labels on it as, for example, "emptiness" or "True Self".

All through the history of Buddhism (and other Eastern Religions), there were basically two groups who varied in their teaching of concepts like "emptiness". One group taught that it means a "Cosmic Force" or "Pure Consciousness" or the like that one is accessing when one quiets the mind. The other group teaches that it is basically just another perspective on self, and its absence, when the mind is made quiet. Both are perfectly effective for purposes of the Buddha's teachings on the cure of suffering.

I see no reason to assume it is the former and, further, I believe it was not the Buddha's original message. However, feel free to be fascinated by the dark screen on the TV between shows.

Gassho, Jundo

[Jundo]

Re: last night's sitting

By the way ... I am not saying you are wrong cause, gosh darn it, this "debate" about what "emptiness" "True Self" "Consciousness" etc. is has been going on for a couple of thousand years. Two opposing views. Most of Chinese Buddhism was in accord with what you say, most of early Buddhism not so much.

I feel that these teachings allow us to taste the wonder of emptiness, no self, being "At One with the Universe", our "Original Face" ... without assuming that the quiet and "no show test pattern" within us (the brain) is some Cosmic Consciousness that we are accessing.

I mean, there may or may not be a Cosmic Consciousness (I happen to think that there is, somehow) ... but I do not think the silence within my head is its sound.

[Bansho]

Re: last night's sitting

Hi,

You are simply juggling around with concepts. I don't think what I said can be said any clearer. When Buddha realised that there is no self- he was still there to witness it. The difference is now, is that this awareness is not a "thing", like, a self.
Its "no- thing". Simply empty awareness. I know that this is what we are at the basal level, even if we don't identify with it. Its whats there when all concepts have fallen away.

Of course I'm juggling with concepts. We cannot communicate with one another otherwise. What you've just said is also a concept. It's replacing the concept of a 'self' with the concept of 'awareness'. Just by naming it 'no-thing' doesn't free you from that, indeed that very naming makes it a thing. However, if we take a close look at our actual experience we'll see that there is no basal (basic?) level to be at and no 'bad' thoughts as opposed to 'good' awareness, nothing to separate or distance ourselves from. The 5 skandhas are impermanent and yet ever present. In Shikantaza, we do not give preference to one over the other. The depths and the surface both have their place.

Shobogenzo Kai-in-zanmai[/i]":qq2zrpil]Those who are buddhas and patriarchs are always in sam?dhi, the state like the sea. Swimming in this sam?dhi, they have times of preaching, times of experiencing, and times of moving. The virtue of their moving over the surface of the sea includes movement along the very bottom of that [sea]: they move over the surface of the sea [knowing] this to be “movement along the bottom of the deepest ocean.” To seek to make the uncertain currents of life and death return to their source is not to be moving along in the ineffable state of mind. While past instances of passing through barriers and breaking joints were, of course, individual instances of the buddhas and the patriarchs themselves, at the same time, each was governed by sam?dhi, the state like the sea. [Emphasis mine.]
-- Nishijima & Cross

Gassho
Bansho

[Bansho]

Re: last night's sitting

Oops - a couple of posts snuck in before I hit the submit button - no matter.