the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

[Jundo]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

Also interesting that dharma heirs of the same ancestor can have such different views! i.e. Brad Warner with his correct-posture-is-everything, lotus-is-essential view, and your and Jundo's more harmonic approach.

Ha! Piano students of the same piano teacher, as they mature and come to find their own sound, need not play Brahms exactly the same way as each other or their Teacher. ...

By the way, someone just wrote me to say that Kaishin's description of Brad's take on the Lotus Sutra is not really right anyway. I knew that too, and I should have mentioned it. Here are some things Brad writes on his blog ...

Those kneeling chairs they make for people who work on computers all day can be modified to make a decent compromise. Because it's not really about how you screw up your legs. You don't have to sit in the full lotus position (I predict in the future at least 27 more people will say, "Brad Warner says you have to sit in the full lotus position" even after I say you don't 39 more times). It's just that the full lotus position creates a really, really stable base for the spine. There is a very good reason it's been a favorite for around 3000 years. Still, there may be other slightly less efficient but still acceptable ways to get the spine to balance.

...

You don't have to do the full lotus posture. Let me say that again since everyone seems to miss it when I say it:

You don't have to do the full lotus posture.

But you do need to be sitting on a cushion with your knees on the floor. Sometimes you can put extra cushions under your knees. You can also use a seiza bench, although I'm not the biggest fan of those. But that can be zazen too.

If someone really cannot do anything closer to zazen than sitting on a chair, well then that's shoganai too. They can sit on a chair. Tonen O'Connor, of the Milwaukee Zen Center is one of the best zazen teachers in America. She's had extensive knee surgery and she sits on a bench that's been modified to give her something close to the traditional posture (it's not a chair, though). But she's a special case. Maybe you are too. I don't know.

I do know this, though. I'll whisper it since it tends to make people mad when I say it.

(Sitting on a cushion with your knees on the ground is not that hard.)

http://hardcorezen.blogspot.com/2011/11 ... ne_12.html

[Ryumon]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

(Sitting on a cushion with your knees on the ground is not that hard.)

Yea, Brad, tell me about it. When you have arthritis, come back and say that.

[Jinyu]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

When you have arthritis, come back and say that.

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

thank you Taigu for sharing this very inspiring video...
But like a lot of things... we, at least I, have difficulties facing simplicity... to accept that "it is just that"... or it is?

a bit our of the subject again...

Have a very very nice day everyone!
deep deep gassho,

Jinyu

[Jinyo]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

Hi there,

Warner writes - in the referenced blog post,

'If you really honest to goodness need to sit on a chair you'll have to work a lot harder at zazen than those who sit on cushions on the floor.'

I'd really like to know if that is demonstably the case? But perhaps we'll have to wait 'till the neuroscientists wire everybody up and observe whether
the input of a disabled person/compared to the input of an able-bodied person (practicing in 'perfect full-lotus posture' ) - is greater/requires more 'effort' (by that do we read mental effort) to achieve the same result ...... or will the result be wildly different (possibly inferior in outcome)?

The problem I have with Warner's writing (on this subject - I do enjoy some of his other writing) is not what he says (though I feel his stance is a bit problematic) but how he says it. There's innuendo about people being too lazy (hey - do you really need that chair?) etc,etc. Of course - this style of writing is meant to be sardonic, amusing - but it doesn't necessarily inform.

In the trail of literature that finally led me to Zazen I first happened to read a book by Saki Santorelli (a co-worker of Jon Kabat-Zinn) who teaches mindfullness
techniques within health care. The practice may not be 'pure' zazen - but it has zazen woven through it - and touches the lives of individuals who are simply too sick to practice in a rigorous way. And..... then again - perhaps it is zazen?

What I find confusing is that in some of the literature on Zen there seems to be a fear of 'dilution' of the practice of zazen - that's laced through with a contrary requirement for political correctness - and (one hopes) a genuine desire to 'outreach'.

I would much rather teachers didn't sit on the fence, regarding the above, because it gives out a mixed message. Warner obviously has doubts about the quality of results that can be gained the further the goal posts are moved. I feel it would be better if he just stated this and left all the innuendo out. I can understand (possibly respect) a straight view - even if it's not my view.

Jundo - your view (and Taigu's) has grace and openess within it - but sometimes it's difficult for a beginner to put all the different views and styles of delivery together and make sense of it. :?

I would appreciate your clarifying whether you agree with the statement that a person not sitting on the cushion has to work harder - and if so - in what way?


Gassho

Willow

[Daijo]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

Perhaps, (and only perhaps as I do not know the man) Brad is speaking directly to those of us who are too "lazy". There are without a doubt those of us "on the chair" who could very well be "on the cushion". Since Warner's style tends to be to push buttons, maybe he's pushing theirs directly. Just a thought.

[Taigu]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

Sitting on a cushion in full lotus, half lotus, burmese, sitting on a bench, a chair... all this is equally sitting.
People making fuss and throwing that this is better than that have certainly a good reason to do so,
I have no good reason.
In my Zendo, people sit. On whatever they feel good. And I am not going to throw another reason to say this is better, this guy is good enough, that guy has to work harder.
Capitalism in the heart of Buddhism?
You are kidding...

My final take.
My take. Not the truth. What 35 years of sitting might do to a dull head like mine.


In true Brad's style: fu.. . you , in my style, whoever you are: bless you.


gassho


Taigu

[Ryumon]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

In true Brad's style: fu.. . you , in my style, whoever you are: bless you.

+1

[Jundo]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

Jundo - your view (and Taigu's) has grace and openess within it - but sometimes it's difficult for a beginner to put all the different views and styles of delivery together and make sense of it. :?

I would appreciate your clarifying whether you agree with the statement that a person not sitting on the cushion has to work harder - and if so - in what way?


Gassho

Willow

Hi Willow,

Hmmm. I will venture a good guess where Bro. Brad is coming from on such a statement.

My teacher, Nishijima Roshi, is of the opinion that sitting in the Lotus Position by itself, straightening the spine, works a physiological effect that balances the mind and carries through one's day and life ... which he calls "balance of the autonomic nervous system." In fact, Nishijima believes that this is at the very heart of the effect of Zazen.

Nishijima Roshi used to be a runner. He often compares the experience of balance and oneness experienced in running to the sense of peace/balance/wholeness/oneness that is often experienced in Zazen. Nishijima Roshi came to attribute this in significant part to the physiological effect of the sitting posture itself. Here is a sample of Roshi's writing on the subject:

In Zazen we sit on a cushion on the floor with both legs crossed, and with our lower spine, upper spine, and head held straight vertically. Keeping the spine straight has a direct and immediate effect on the autonomic nervous system that controls many of our body’s functions. Its effects include control of heart rate and force of contraction, constriction and dilatation of blood vessels, contraction and relaxation of smooth muscle in various organs, the ability to focus the eyes and the size of the pupils, and the secretion of hormones from various glands directly into the blood stream.

The autonomic nervous system is composed of two subsystems: the sympathetic and the parasympathetic nervous systems. When the sympathetic nervous system is stimulated, our heart rate increases, arteries and veins constrict, the lungs relax, and our pupils dilate; in short, we become tense and alert. When the parasympathetic nervous system is stimulated, the opposite happens; our heart rate decreases, arteries and veins dilate, the lungs contract, and the pupils constrict. You can see that the two systems prepare the body for an active or passive response sometimes known as the “fight or flight” syndrome. When the effect of the two systems on the organs is in balance, we are neither ready to fight, nor ready to run away; we are in a normal state.

The parasympathetic nerves emerge from the spinal chord at the base of the spine (the second, third and fourth sacral vertebrae) and through the cranial vertebrae in the neck, whereas the sympathetic nerves emerge from the spinal chord through the middle vertebrae in the back (the T1 to L2 vertebrae). Keeping the spine normally upright, with the head sitting squarely on the top of the vertebral column minimizes the compression of the nerves of these two systems at the points where the nerves emerge through the vertebrae, and ensures an uninterrupted supply of blood, allowing them to function normally. When the parasympathetic and sympathetic systems are both working normally, they function in opposition to give us a state of balance of body-and-mind; not too tense, and not too relaxed, not overly optimistic or pessimistic; not too aggressive and not too passive. It is this physical state of balance in the autonomic nervous system that give rise to what we call a balanced body-and-mind.

In addition to this, sitting in the upright posture, where the force of gravity acts down through the spine onto the pelvis, is a position in which our body’s reflexes can work efficiently to integrate the functioning of the whole body.

(p 11-12 here)
http://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/upl ... -Zazen.pdf

Personally I, as do about all Zen folks, believe that a balanced and stable posture does aid in allowing a balanced and stable mind ... as body-mind are intimately connected and whole. I also feel that Nishijima Roshi was decades ahead in realizing that Zazen does have a neuro-physiological component which science is just coming to recognize (through placing meditating monks in MRI machines and other testing). Much of Roshi's assertions are based on the writings of Karl Menninger, Herbert Benson and others, and have a solid basis. However, I believe that Nishijima Roshi's theories on the marvelous effects of sitting in Lotus Posture itself with a straight spine ... while having some such basis, and while a balanced posture is certainly important ...were perhaps stretched by him rather too far into areas where there is really no scientific backing, or where scientific data is directly contradicting some of what he says.

When Brad emphasizes in what he wrote the effect of keeping the spine straight, perhaps the connection is that?

Gassho, J

[Ryumon]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

My opinion is that keeping the spine "straight" - it's not actually straight, as in a straight line - is very important, as Nishijima Roshi says. And I think being vertical does make a difference from lying down. But it's interesting to note that you don't do an MRI with someone sitting or standing; they have to be lying down. So any data coming from such scans are about people in a horizontal position.

Perhaps in fact part of what allows us to sit "well" or not has something to do with how well are spines are in the correct positions (ie, not straight, but "straight." Perhaps on those days when we're in a less efficient position, our sitting is, well, less efficient, and other days when we have more energy, our sitting is deeper...?

I do not see, however, any reason why one has to sit in lotus position to keep the spine "straight." I think any correct sitting position can do that.

(My personal 2 cents.)

[Jundo]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

My opinion is that keeping the spine "straight" - it's not actually straight, as in a straight line - is very important, as Nishijima Roshi says.

Hey Kirk,

Well, I also feel that keeping the spine balanced is very conducive to Zazen. However, I do not believe in the rigid way of stretching and holding the spine emphasized by many in Japan, and much more appreciate Taigu's literal and figurative "flexibility" on the topic. 8)

Also, I do not think that the effect of a straight spine is as all-powerful and all-encompassing as Nishijima Roshi makes it, that it is the central key to Zazen, or that the physiological system works quite as he describes it. There are also other elements to sitting Shikantaza, besides the physical posture, that are not to be neglected ... as I touched on in my most recent sit-a-long talk ...

Posture, breath, not grabbing onto or stirring up thoughts, living by the Precepts ... all are vital to our Way. Yet, neither are they sufficient. Zazen is not some "method", some "process" or "recipe". There is no "method" for there is "no goal" or destination!

Why?

By sitting the Wholly Holy Whole without need for change ... there is thus the most radical change of no longer wishing for change or needing change amid the every changing changeless ... thereby Shikantaza is the perfect medicine for the dis-ease and dis-satisfaction of Dukkha.

SHIKANTAZA MUST BE SAT AS THE ONE AND ONLY PRACTICE NEEDED AND ALL COMPLETED.

viewtopic.php?f=17&t=4665

In my viewless view, that is the True Magic of this practice ... and posture is but one important, helping aspect of the whole picture. But if in traction in a hospital bed or in a wheelchair ... with a bent spine or broken spine ... just sit as such ... JUST SIT AS WHAT IS. Such is the REAL POWER of this Way.

Gassho, J

[Jinyu]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

SHIKANTAZA MUST BE SAT AS THE ONE AND ONLY PRACTICE NEEDED AND ALL COMPLETED.

In my viewless view, that is the True Magic of this practice ... and posture is but one important, helping aspect of the whole picture.

_/_

Jinyu

[Omoi Otoshi]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

For me, it's about letting go, letting be. I like how the lotus position lets me do that, gives me the necessary trust and confidence to leave my body and mind to do their own thing, Zazen to do Zazen as Kodo Sawaki Roshi said, not my ego trying to do Zazen. I find it easier to let go in lotus, to drop body and mind. But other positions aren't bad, they are just different, they are what they are. If I wanted to sit more comfortably, I'd go for Burmese without hesitation. But I don't have arthritis and I'm flexible, so why not sit lotus? If I were in it only for special states of mind, I'd think lotus was a little better. But we're not, are we? Isn't practice also about incorporating Zazen in everyday life? If we can truly let go and allow thoughts to come and go naturally when sitting Zazen in a chair, or when standing, lying down or walking, then maybe we can more easily do the same in everyday life? It's like sound. I find it easier to sit in a silent room, but recently I've found that sitting with the kid making noise nearby isn't worse, it's just different. Same practice.

Gassho,
Pontus

[Jinyo]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

'Capitalism in the heart of Buddhism?'

Thankyou for your reply Taigu - I will remember that phrase.

.... and the blessing too.

Jundo - thanks also. I can see, given the background - where Warner is coming from. A difference of opinion and emphasis,
but I much prefer your take.

I haven't read Nishijima so I'm reluctant to comment - but
I can't quite connect to his view of the fear/flight mechanism. I think a lot of research is being done on the role of the Amygdala
concerning this, which has a different emphasis?

Do you have a link for Menniger (I can only find one for a psychiatrist by that name?)

Gassho

Willow

[Shokai]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

Not a true fan of Brad's by the way; there is no need to sink to his level of language, or attitude for that matter. I tend to go with Chuck on this. I feel a lot of his bluster is for shock effect. Knowing what i do about the human body, my votes with Jundo http://www.treeleaf.org/forum/viewto...&t=4673#p69910 I agree that Nishijima was far ahead of his time but, even Einstein realized there was something missing. Unfortunately, from what i hear, the Roshi may not be able to comprehend or properly appreciate what today's scientific view is.

[Kaishin]

Re: the truth about posture ( there is no posture)

By the way, someone just wrote me to say that Kaishin's description of Brad's take on the Lotus Sutra is not really right anyway.

I stand (sit?) corrected!

Not sure why the person didn't just tell me directly though... :?: :?: :?: