An article, I assume, to be written by Muho, the abbot of Antaiji.
On this link, http://antaiji.org/archives/eng/201009.shtml, it can be found as Essay 1.
I'd like to ask for the opinions or additional commentary of the teachers regarding this article.
Not to limit the possible commentaries, I'd like to state that of special interest (of mine, at least) is differentiating discriminating alertness from shikantaza. It's still not so clear to me how they really differ.
Additionally, I'd like to ask about non-discriminating dullness. Through many a night, I find myself drained and fall into this state from time to time. Try as I may to come back, I return almost immediately into that dullness. I suppose it's because I do too many things and am exhausted. While I realize this isn't ideal, it's what is and just sit with that. In that sense, I suppose, it's also shikantaza. Would that be a correct interpretation?
I realize how nit-picky and discriminatory this all sounds, as if I were some snobby shikantaza taster who judged bad zazen from good zazen as easily as he can tell is pinky from his big toe. In effect, though, I suppose he has difficulty in actually sitting shikantaza. Nevertheless, if there can be more clarity to the description of shikantaza, why not, right?
Thank you for reading.
Gassho,
Ben
On this link, http://antaiji.org/archives/eng/201009.shtml, it can be found as Essay 1.
I'd like to ask for the opinions or additional commentary of the teachers regarding this article.
Not to limit the possible commentaries, I'd like to state that of special interest (of mine, at least) is differentiating discriminating alertness from shikantaza. It's still not so clear to me how they really differ.
Additionally, I'd like to ask about non-discriminating dullness. Through many a night, I find myself drained and fall into this state from time to time. Try as I may to come back, I return almost immediately into that dullness. I suppose it's because I do too many things and am exhausted. While I realize this isn't ideal, it's what is and just sit with that. In that sense, I suppose, it's also shikantaza. Would that be a correct interpretation?
I realize how nit-picky and discriminatory this all sounds, as if I were some snobby shikantaza taster who judged bad zazen from good zazen as easily as he can tell is pinky from his big toe. In effect, though, I suppose he has difficulty in actually sitting shikantaza. Nevertheless, if there can be more clarity to the description of shikantaza, why not, right?
Thank you for reading.
Gassho,
Ben
Comment