Great Doubt, or "The Question"

[Saijun]

Hello Chet,

No one is advocating this view. That's a straw-dog, Jundo. Sometimes one is simply in the shitstorm. Pretending it isn't there is pointless when one is in pain. Leaning into it with curiosity may indeed be the correct medicine.

Speaking as someone who has recently been plunged into this proverbial shitstorm, I can say that neither leaning in nor leaning away would be a useful strategy in the slightest. Just standing with eyes open and watching as it thunders and rains and shakes the earth is all there is to do. Jundo's "still still center of Crystal Clarity and Wholeness" is neither a place nor time; it is the simple activity of standing straight with eyes open. For me, the "still center" was and is letting go of my natural inclinations to rage against the storm or try to find shelter.

Metta and Gassho,

Saijun

[Jinyo]

Chet wrote

And yet, there is something unique to Zen that can't be found in most popular religion and for the truly curious, I think it itches like a scar for which you don't remember the original wound. This is the part of Zen (I think) that resists comparison to all other religions. It resists the whitewashing required to make the 'many paths up the mountain' metaphor so common in reconciliatory overtures to inter-faith dialogue.

I've been thinking some more about this and I can't really agree. To valorize Zen as somehow unique or special seems to miss the point. The itch, the scar, the original wound - is always there. It feels inflated to suggest that only Zennies are in touch with this - experience this. Some individuals experience the depths of life with a curiosity and intensity that simply isn't visible to others.

If those of us here choose to connect with the 'original wound' through Zen - that's fine - but it's incredibly judgemental to assume that others don't experience that sense of aliveness, intuition - call it what you will - just because they follow another practice.

Each to his/her own path - really - I have enough trouble working out where I am with myself in all this without judging the rest of the human race.

Gassho

Willow

[alan.r]

This has been a really interesting read. Reminds me a lot of the new Leighton book in a lot of ways, where the opening chapter says basically the same thing: that when we sit we sit as a question. Still though, and let’s really cut through the bullshit: part of the reason this post is here is to pass some judgment. Which is fine, we all need critiqued, we all need a push here and there to see some of our own shit, which we typically take for something other than shit. Still, there are a few things I’d like to, uh, question. I’m sorry, I couldn’t help myself…okay, I’m done, no more bad jokes.

As long as we’re cutting through the bullshit, it often feels like this post is saying, “I’ve got it, I’ve figured it out, most Western Buddhism/Zen has it wrong and here’s where, and in particular, Treeleaf is too soft and easy and passive.” And maybe so. Who knows. Furthermore, I mean, the entire rhetoric of the post seems delineated upon two lines: those who are doing the wishy-washy hallmark zen (though it may work for them, but they’re still “dead” spiritually, which is most of Treeleaf (these are the implications)) and those who sit at the white hot center of things, with this burning question. Which again is fine, if not somewhat like: so you’re saying you’re doing it right and we’re not. Which, at first I thought, interesting read, but I’ll pass, but then Chet jumped in to say that people are like avoiding the post’s real shit. So, the above then, that’s what I see as the post’s real shit. It’d be one thing to say, “Does anyone else think there needs to be more questioning here at Treeleaf” and kind of explain what the Great Doubt is; it is entirely another thing to say, Treeleaf is passive, most Western Buddhism seems to be, and check out how I’ve got it right. In any case, this is nothing new, either. Slavoj Zizek’s been saying it for years and it might be of interest to some:

http://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/2/western.php

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2122/

Pretty interesting articles really, and I recommend everybody at Treeleaf read them. And then we lead a revolt against Slavoj. I kid, I kid.

Anyway, I realize this post is a little antagonistic. I certainly don’t mean to be a jerk, only to be honest and share my perception of what this post really feels like (which Hogen also mentioned). I mean, I don’t know you Stephanie and it seems you’ve “found” something really great for you, or whatever (I can never phrase these things well enough, apologies), but the strategies of the post and the overall purposes of it, which seem complex to me, seem suspect and worth raising at least a tiny other perspective. Others are doing this as well, but I really think it's all in how the initial post is written, expressed that has us all going "wha?", you know?

Lastly, here’s a suspicion of my own: while some people at Treeleaf discuss their personal lives, most of us don’t do this very openly (I don’t mean this negatively). I mean, we all kind of use abstracts, to some degree, and it’s rare when any of us really gets into the details, the real details of our lives. Here, we have “darkness” and “angst” and etc, and that’s fitting, because who wants to read a bunch of people’s problems all day long? Further, who wants to read a bunch of stuff about how we’ve all suffered, really suffered, and here are the details of it, and how now we’re in the light, whatever light that might be – frankly, most suffering, unless you’re a really talented writer, is actually pretty banal stuff, and is mainly self-imposed (again, I could very well be wrong here, but that was my experience of “darkness,” years and years of it, and even in the midst of years and years of it, that always nagging thought, feeling, perception: “am I just pretending somehow?”). So, for me anyway, because of the nature of the forum, we don’t all post our Question(s) mainly because they can be pretty personal. Not only that (though almost everyone here is kind beyond kind), I don’t want to bore people with my own little questions which I sit on the cushion with, because we all have them. And the Big Question, the Great Doubt, that’s just the little question, the little doubt in our every day lives (was I a dick today? Did I really say that thing, think that thing? Treat her like that? Act superior like that?) And it’s those little questions that remind us of the Big Questions, those little doubts that remind us of the Great Doubt, and the little are nothing but the Big all along, just another way of playing it. But maybe that’s just me.

Anyway, I also want to say thanks for a compelling read and for knocking us all about some, which I also see as one of the purposes of the post.

-a

[Hogen]

I agree that inter-faith dialogue can bring forth many disatisfactions - but whether we like it or not 'the many paths up the mountain' metaphor has to stand.

the biggest of which is when we don't like the answers.

[disastermouse]

I've been thinking some more about this and I can't really agree. To valorize Zen as somehow unique or special seems to miss the point. The itch, the scar, the original wound - is always there. It feels inflated to suggest that only Zennies are in touch with this - experience this. Some individuals experience the depths of life with a curiosity and intensity that simply isn't visible to others.

If those of us here choose to connect with the 'original wound' through Zen - that's fine - but it's incredibly judgemental to assume that others don't experience that sense of aliveness, intuition - call it what you will - just because they follow another practice.

The difference is that all other religions offer something to pour into that sense of an original wound. Zen does not do this. In fact, there is no original wound at all, but you don't realize this without confronting the fact that it feels as though there is an original wound - that something is off-kilter. In fact, my understanding is that the literal image of the word 'samsara' is a wheel off true - that is, with the axle incorrectly placed. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam all attempt to explain that in terms of a self-soul-ego. Even other schools of Buddhism attempt to do this. Zen, more than most other religions, resists the temptation to do this. That is a particular strength, in my opinion, of Zen. This is not to denigrate other religions or paths at all, but to point to something unique about Zen. If you strip from Zen the things that separates it from other paths, what is left of Zen? It's a very strange inclination to do that, I think.

Chet

[disastermouse]

This has been a really interesting read. Reminds me a lot of the new Leighton book in a lot of ways, where the opening chapter says basically the same thing: that when we sit we sit as a question. Still though, and let’s really cut through the bullshit: part of the reason this post is here is to pass some judgment. Which is fine, we all need critiqued, we all need a push here and there to see some of our own shit, which we typically take for something other than shit. Still, there are a few things I’d like to, uh, question. I’m sorry, I couldn’t help myself…okay, I’m done, no more bad jokes.

As long as we’re cutting through the bullshit, it often feels like this post is saying, “I’ve got it, I’ve figured it out, most Western Buddhism/Zen has it wrong and here’s where, and in particular, Treeleaf is too soft and easy and passive.” And maybe so. Who knows. Furthermore, I mean, the entire rhetoric of the post seems delineated upon two lines: those who are doing the wishy-washy hallmark zen (though it may work for them, but they’re still “dead” spiritually, which is most of Treeleaf (these are the implications)) and those who sit at the white hot center of things, with this burning question. Which again is fine, if not somewhat like: so you’re saying you’re doing it right and we’re not. Which, at first I thought, interesting read, but I’ll pass, but then Chet jumped in to say that people are like avoiding the post’s real shit. So, the above then, that’s what I see as the post’s real shit. It’d be one thing to say, “Does anyone else think there needs to be more questioning here at Treeleaf” and kind of explain what the Great Doubt is; it is entirely another thing to say, Treeleaf is passive, most Western Buddhism seems to be, and check out how I’ve got it right. In any case, this is nothing new, either. Slavoj Zizek’s been saying it for years and it might be of interest to some:

http://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/2/western.php

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2122/

Pretty interesting articles really, and I recommend everybody at Treeleaf read them. And then we lead a revolt against Slavoj. I kid, I kid.

Anyway, I realize this post is a little antagonistic. I certainly don’t mean to be a jerk, only to be honest and share my perception of what this post really feels like (which Hogen also mentioned). I mean, I don’t know you Stephanie and it seems you’ve “found” something really great for you, or whatever (I can never phrase these things well enough, apologies), but the strategies of the post and the overall purposes of it, which seem complex to me, seem suspect and worth raising at least a tiny other perspective. Others are doing this as well, but I really think it's all in how the initial post is written, expressed that has us all going "wha?", you know?

Lastly, here’s a suspicion of my own: while some people at Treeleaf discuss their personal lives, most of us don’t do this very openly (I don’t mean this negatively). I mean, we all kind of use abstracts, to some degree, and it’s rare when any of us really gets into the details, the real details of our lives. Here, we have “darkness” and “angst” and etc, and that’s fitting, because who wants to read a bunch of people’s problems all day long? Further, who wants to read a bunch of stuff about how we’ve all suffered, really suffered, and here are the details of it, and how now we’re in the light, whatever light that might be – frankly, most suffering, unless you’re a really talented writer, is actually pretty banal stuff, and is mainly self-imposed (again, I could very well be wrong here, but that was my experience of “darkness,” years and years of it, and even in the midst of years and years of it, that always nagging thought, feeling, perception: “am I just pretending somehow?”). So, for me anyway, because of the nature of the forum, we don’t all post our Question(s) mainly because they can be pretty personal. Not only that (though almost everyone here is kind beyond kind), I don’t want to bore people with my own little questions which I sit on the cushion with, because we all have them. And the Big Question, the Great Doubt, that’s just the little question, the little doubt in our every day lives (was I a dick today? Did I really say that thing, think that thing? Treat her like that? Act superior like that?) And it’s those little questions that remind us of the Big Questions, those little doubts that remind us of the Great Doubt, and the little are nothing but the Big all along, just another way of playing it. But maybe that’s just me.

Anyway, I also want to say thanks for a compelling read and for knocking us all about some, which I also see as one of the purposes of the post.

-a

I think Stephanie was just trying to draw attention to something that she thinks we may be missing. The natural tendency is to be defensive about that, but I think it might be useful to resist that tendency and see what's really behind it.

Treeleaf is my sangha - I find it immensely valuable to practice here.

Gassho,

Chet

[disastermouse]

Hello Chet,



Speaking as someone who has recently been plunged into this proverbial shitstorm, I can say that neither leaning in nor leaning away would be a useful strategy in the slightest. Just standing with eyes open and watching as it thunders and rains and shakes the earth is all there is to do. Jundo's "still still center of Crystal Clarity and Wholeness" is neither a place nor time; it is the simple activity of standing straight with eyes open. For me, the "still center" was and is letting go of my natural inclinations to rage against the storm or try to find shelter.

Metta and Gassho,

Saijun

Same difference.

Chet

[Saijun]

Same difference.

Chet

Hello Chet,

Perhaps. When read the post I was replying to, it seemed like you were suggesting that when one is in the midst of a shitstorm, the "correct medicine" would be to actively move further in.

My apologies for any misunderstanding on my part.

Metta and Gassho,

Saijun

[alan.r]

I think Stephanie was just trying to draw attention to something that she thinks we may be missing. The natural tendency is to be defensive about that, but I think it might be useful to resist that tendency and see what's really behind it.

Treeleaf is my sangha - I find it immensely valuable to practice here.

Gassho,

Chet

No, no, mos def. But, as I probably failed at explaining: it's in the way that the missing thing was brought up, the rhetoric surrounding it, which may be a/the cause for, as you put it, deflection, rather than an invitation to the thing missed.

-a

[Rich]

:

PS　- Rich wrote ...

there are any Kwan Um groups/teachers near you. What is this? Don't know. is a big part of their practice along with koans.

The Kwan Um Path is wonderful, but that is a very misleading statement if it implies that the purpose of their path of "Don't Know" is "don't know" and anything but an ultimate arrival at solid, unshakeble "Big Knowing" ... Clear Holy Wholeness. The point of their "Just Don't Know" is NEVER just not knowing.

I don't speak for the Kwan Um School. If you ask What is this? the answer is Don't Know. If this Don't Know is to the marrow then I agree with Big Knowing Clear UNholy Wholeness

[Omoi Otoshi]

If someone is shoveling shit into a big fan, there's no need to stick your head into the resulting shit storm!

Sometimes I think you're shoveling shit Chet, no offense meant! But I know by now that you mean well and I often find your perspective refreshing.

I think Stephanie is raising an interesting question. But I also agree it could easily be read as "I'm a very spiritual person and most of you spiritually suck!" If you first punch someone in the face, the other person is not likely to listen to what you really have to say! I don't think Stephanie intended it to come off that way though.

for the truly curious, I think it itches like a scar for which you don't remember the original wound.

I like this description very much. The
original wound is sensed sometimes, but it's as if you can't put your finger on it. The best way of investigating the nature of the wound in my experience, is to investigate your self before the wound, your original nature. When you know what it feels like when the wound is instantly healed, the body made whole again, you also recognize the wound.

You could call that which reminds you the itching of a scar, but you could also call it the song of the cuckoo calling you home, or the voice of your heart's innermost desire. It all depends on your view. But the way forward is always the way home, so take it easy and thanks for practicing.

Gassho,
Pontus

[Hogen]

I think Stephanie is raising an interesting question. But I also agree it could easily be read as "I'm a very spiritual person and most of you spiritually suck!" If you first punch someone in the face, the other person is not likely to listen to what you really have to say! I don't think Stephanie intended it to come off that way though.

I agree with the above, but don't necessarily agree with Chet flinging poo nor do I think Stephanie is really judging anyone but herself.

I do think that it comes down to the question of universal versus personal doubt/conflict/etc. Much of the OP's post reads not that "your spirituality sucks", but that "I have needs that are not being met" which kinda confounds a lot of us (as evidenced by the responses). I don't blame anyone for feeling that way, but as I have read in other treads, we have to meet at least halfway in terms of out efforts.

[disastermouse]

If someone is shoveling shit into a big fan, there's no need to stick your head into the resulting shit storm!

Sometimes I think you're shoveling shit Chet, no offense meant! But I know by now that you mean well and I often find your perspective refreshing.

I think Stephanie is raising an interesting question. But I also agree it could easily be read as "I'm a very spiritual person and most of you spiritually suck!" If you first punch someone in the face, the other person is not likely to listen to what you really have to say! I don't think Stephanie intended it to come off that way though.



I like this description very much. The
original wound is sensed sometimes, but it's as if you can't put your finger on it. The best way of investigating the nature of the wound in my experience, is to investigate your self before the wound, your original nature. When you know what it feels like when the wound is instantly healed, the body made whole again, you also recognize the wound.

You could call that which reminds you the itching of a scar, but you could also call it the song of the cuckoo calling you home, or the voice of your heart's innermost desire. It all depends on your view. But the way forward is always the way home, so take it easy and thanks for practicing.

Gassho,
Pontus

I appreciate this post greatly, although it's disconcerting that it still appears I'm flinging shit when I'm trying so hard to be mindful enough to not come across that way.

Chet

[Dosho]

Chet,

I agree that Stephanie is trying to draw attention to something she thinks we may be missing. When I came to Treeleaf, and you know this well, I believed I was broken, empty, and less than adequate to being a valuable person...I still think that way, plenty. But studying here at Treeleaf I am slowly learning, with your help, Stephanie's help, and everyone else here that nothing is broken, nothing is inadequate, and nothing is missing. Now, taken to an extreme that could lead to a very large ego and self centeredness...and a belief in mantras or a room full of frames we buy in a gift shop with inspirational quotes from the Buddha or Dogen. But I don't believe I'm likely to forget those feelings since they never really go away. And for folks like me, sitting with the idea that nothing is lacking offers a great freedom, but also a responsibility.

Do not mistake our fellow sangha members saying that they do not agree with Stephanie to be dismissing what she has to say. It may be very profound and if it works for her I am most grateful! But I still see much of the cyclical thinking that Stephanie has always displayed, which she likes to call "Great Doubt", but I think is closer to the skeptical doubt she mentioned in her post. These questions will never end because they are designed to open packages, see what's inside, and move on to the next one. Again, and again, and again.

I know you are unlikely to agree with what I have said and offer a defense of Stephanie's post, but I do believe she is well intentioned. But I think her attempt to diagnose what is wrong with Treeleaf blinds her to the fact that she is constantly trying to answer what is wrong with herself. We have gladly taken her in here and asked her several times to go through jukai and fully put herself into what is taught here and actually we have asked the same of you. I truly feel that, until you both do that (assuming there is still a part of you that wants to) you will both be drifting from experience to experience trying to uncover truths that were right in front of you for years.

And, so you know, writing IMHO at the end of the post says to me that you think we don't trust your sincerity and need to create a shield from criticism. We trust you and know your are sincere...but sit, sew a rakusu with us, and take in what there is to be learned here. Many zen practioners go from one tradition to another as they mature...there's no reason you can't have a different way of looking at things. But until you immerse yourselves in that dissatisfaction you feel, I fear you will always be consumed by it.

Gassho,
Dosho

I think Stephanie was just trying to draw attention to something that she thinks we may be missing. The natural tendency is to be defensive about that, but I think it might be useful to resist that tendency and see what's really behind it.

Treeleaf is my sangha - I find it immensely valuable to practice here.

Gassho,

Chet

[Omoi Otoshi]

it's disconcerting that it still appears I'm flinging shit when I'm trying so hard to be mindful enough to not come across that way.

Chet

Only rarely Chet!
9/10 times you succeed, but that isn't as visible as when you slip. I appreciate the hard work I know you put in. So don't worry. There's no shit storm.

/Pontus