Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

[Shohei]

Re: Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

That was perfect Jundo! Beautifully written and a pleasure to read - Thank you!

Gassho
Dirk

[Eika]

Re: Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

Thanks, Jundo.

Even if you are not getting through to those folks, your e-sangha posts are helpful teachings for me.

Gassho,
Bill

[TracyF]

Re: Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

This whole thread is great. I've really learned quite a bit.

So, Jundo is saying something I've read repeatedly in zen literature. If I understand it correctly, Zazen is simply a glimpse into the nature of satori, a state in which all delusions and judgments derived thereof are dropped. It is termed "a practice" because, practicing is a path to achieving true enlightenment. Also, since the vast majority of goals in our life are based on illusions, the quest for enlightenment should not be thought of in terms of these false goals. Nevertheless, we climb the mountain and practice, practice, practice.

What I don't understand in some of the posts at e-sangha is why some people are assuming that shikantaza is the only practice in zen. The idea is to practice zazen in every thing you do. So why the comments about sitting on your duff all day? That comment was by a guy nicknamed DavidRinzai. I find it strange that he would interpret Jundo's posts in this way.

Also, I am confused by Namdrol's post. I'm not being a smart alek here. I have serious questions. Is there a special sauce in certain Buddhist sects that can override various forms of meditation and mindfulness practice? I understand in Pureland that people are specifically entreating a higher being (is this right?). Is that what Namdrol is talking about? I guess he practices Vajrayana Buddhism, yes? Bill mentioned something about visualizing deities. So, like Pureland, are these deities the special ingredients missing in zen. So without the deities, you're hacking away at weeds and never getting anywhere?

[Jundo]

Re: Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

Hi Tracy,

So, Jundo is saying something I've read repeatedly in zen literature. If I understand it correctly, Zazen is simply a glimpse into the nature of satori, a state in which all delusions and judgments derived thereof are dropped. It is termed "a practice" because, practicing is a path to achieving true enlightenment. Also, since the vast majority of goals in our life are based on illusions, the quest for enlightenment should not be thought of in terms of these false goals. Nevertheless, we climb the mountain and practice, practice, practice.

One has to be cautious in reading 'Zen' books (or other Buddhist books) because 'Zen' really comes in two somewhat different flavors. I have spoken about this before.

On the one hand is the flavor of those Zen schools that teach that we are out to achieve something, usually called 'Satori' or 'Enlightenment', and this is done though Practice, primarily Zazen (and typically Zazen focused on 'solving Koans'). This perspective, to paint with a broad brush, is usually associated more with the 'Rinzai' school (or lineages that are 'Rinzai-Soto hybrids, like Maezumi Roshi's lineage and the Sanbokyodan) than traditional Soto school teachings.This 'Satori' clears away illusions and lets us realize our 'True Self before our mother and father were born'.

On the other hand, the traditional Soto teaching (as represented by Dogen, for example) is that what we need to 'achieve' is the realization of radical non-achievement. We both see through life (seeing that all phenomena are impermanent, unsatisfactory and lack 'self-hood') AND that all phenomena and life in general are 'just what they are' with not a darn thing to change. This realization is illusions cleared away, our 'True Self', now and before our mother and father were born. The 'Koans' melt away and are resolved, WIsdom and Compassion manifest. We drop all judgments and categorizations about life, likes and dislikes, and just allow things to be even beyond ideas of "being" or "not being" (although, of course, we simultaneously require judgments, 'being/not being' and other ideas, catergorizations and likes-dislikes in order to live daily life, so we keep these on another 'channel' at the same time). The way we realize this is not by thinking that 'Practice" (such as Zazen) is to achieve 'enlightenment', but that Practice and all of life --is-- already enlightenment itself.

The key to our approach is that giving up all idea of a revolution --IS-- a revolution achieved, for this is attaining non-attaining!

The difference between the two approaches may be like, in the first case, running all over looking for your nose, and in the second case, finding your nose by going no place and realizing it was there all along and you did not need to do anything to 'find' it! I like to think that both approaches get you to the same place in the end (which is no place, and just your nose being where it belongs), but 'Zen' books can be misleading as they are phrased differently depending on the perspective, but don't often say that they are of one type or the other. One of the most radical examples of the first 'goal oriented' types is 'Three Pillars of Zen' (a book I do not recommend because of its radical insistence on an explosive, life changing 'Kensho' experience) and books by D.T,Suzuki, and of the second type, 'Opening the Hand of Thought' (which we are reading in the Book Club) and 'Zen Mind Beginners Mind' by Shunryu Suzuki (don't confuse your Suzukis!!).

So around here I teach 'Just Sitting' Shikantaza, which means that we practice very very hard for no goal at all, in order to realize that there is nothing about life to add or take away, it all is what it is ... like a mountain is just a mountain, and the 'Venus d'Milo' is perfectly the 'Venus d'Milo' despite her missing limbs.

What I don't understand in some of the posts at e-sangha is why some people are assuming that shikantaza is the only practice in zen. The idea is to practice zazen in every thing you do. So why the comments about sitting on your duff all day? That comment was by a guy nicknamed DavidRinzai. I find it strange that he would interpret Jundo's posts in this way.

Maybe because he is David RINZAI??

Also, I am confused by Namdrol's post. I'm not being a smart alek here. I have serious questions. Is there a special sauce in certain Buddhist sects that can override various forms of meditation and mindfulness practice? I understand in Pureland that people are specifically entreating a higher being (is this right?). Is that what Namdrol is talking about? I guess he practices Vajrayana Buddhism, yes? Bill mentioned something about visualizing deities. So, like Pureland, are these deities the special ingredients missing in zen. So without the deities, you're hacking away at weeds and never getting anywhere?

Vajrayana and so-called 'Esoteric Buddhist' Practice is different from 'Just Sitting' in many ways, one being that we do not focus upon or call upon deities and such in our meditation. "Pureland is also different, and is more focused on "going to Buddha heaven" when we die, and has many aspects very similar to Christianity (substitute "Amida Buddha" for "Jesus" and the "Pureland" for "Heaven"). There are many other differences, and I prefer our simplicity and directness without the magic and mystery (most of it, I think, meaningless mystery). Perhaps, though, we all get to the same place in the end although different ways up the mountain.

Gassho, Jundo

[will]

Re: Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

So many things on the menu. I just can't choose which one I want. Cherry Cheescake is great for the pallate, but not very nutritous, so I'm told. I haven't tried it. I think I'll just stick with the noodles for now. I did try the mocha almond fudge triple choco surprise, but it just left me bloated.

G,W

[Jundo]

Re: Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

So many things on the menu. I just can't choose which one I want. Cherry Cheescake is great for the pallate, but not very nutritous, so I'm told. I haven't tried it. I think I'll just stick with the noodles for now. I did try the mocha almond fudge triple choco surprise, but it just left me bloated.

G,W

You're making me hungry! :wink:

[TracyF]

Re: Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

Thanks for the reply, Jundo. Yes, I understand that our goal is non-goal. What I didn't understand is why DavidRinzai was calling it just sitting on your duff because it is sitting on your duff... but, then again, it definitely isn't. But you're right, I just realized that he's thinking that without the koans, you're just sitting on your duff and even if you practice being in the present in everything you do, it's still like you're just doing nothing. That makes sense.

Funny you mention DT Suzuki and Kapleau's books. Those were the first two books I tried to read about zen. I didn't finish either one. Not because they weren't interesting on an intellectual level but because they weren't working for me on a spiritual level (even though both stressed not to philosophize zen). Suzuki's book has a nice introduction to the history of zen. I appreciate that. Kapleau's book was actually quite nice at the beginning when he was talking about the basics and the middle when he discusses Bassui and presents examples of his dharma talks. Then he gets into the kensho-satori experiences and I was simply not connecting. To be honest, all the talk about grasping oxes and being chased by maras were just to dramatic for me. And people always got stuck on "mu" and then became enlightened. Definitely not working for me because it was waaaay too dramatic for my tastes.

Yeah, a buffet is good. People should stick with what works for them. When I go to a buffet, I never have a hard time picking out what I want. I like a little TNH and a little Dogen. It's like putting chocolate in my peanut butter. Some people think that's disgusting but I think it's two great tastes that taste great together! :mrgreen: :wink:

[Jundo]

Re: Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

Thanks for the reply, Jundo. Yes, I understand that our goal is non-goal. What I didn't understand is why DavidRinzai was calling it just sitting on your duff because it is sitting on your duff... but, then again, it definitely isn't. But you're right, I just realized that he's thinking that without the koans, you're just sitting on your duff and even if you practice being in the present in everything you do, it's still like you're just doing nothing. That makes sense.

In "Just Sitting", our "doing nothing" is definately not "our doing nothing".

[Skye]

Re: Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

Well just to throw in my 2c, I found DT Suzuki's Introduction to Zen quite helpful when I was starting out. What stuck with me was the way he described Satori as "nothing special", nothing more or less than that feeling of being in the moment, doing whatever you're doing. The nonsensical stories of old Zen Masters I did not understand, but I felt it was OK not to understand, and that they would make more sense later.

In "Just Sitting", our "doing nothing" is definately not "our doing nothing".

What baffles me is how anyone that has read any of the living words by Zen Masters could ever mistake Zazen for a waste of time. I suppose to an outsider the difference being not-doing and non-doing is not obvious, but amongst all Buddhists I would expect an appreciation of emptiness on some level. And on top of that, a modicum of respect and trust for the old teachers' authenticity...

Skye

[Kent]

Re: Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

Jundo said it best when describing Shikantaza in relation to other practices, "There are many differences and i prefer our simplicity and directness without the magic and mystery". Gassho Kent

[Shui_Di]

Re: Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

I think what the Jundo has said is right. I like his description of Shikantaza.

In my oppinion, all is just enlightenment it self. This is the only words that I can say.
Zen is not related to words and perceptions. So..... "Just Sit".

Gassho, Shuidi

[TracyF]

Re: Jundo's Descriptions of Shikantaza

Funny you mention DT Suzuki and Kapleau's books. Those were the first two books I tried to read about zen. I didn't finish either one. Not because they weren't interesting on an intellectual level but because they weren't working for me on a spiritual level (even though both stressed not to philosophize zen). Suzuki's book has a nice introduction to the history of zen. I appreciate that. Kapleau's book was actually quite nice at the beginning when he was talking about the basics and the middle when he discusses Bassui and presents examples of his dharma talks. Then he gets into the kensho-satori experiences and I was simply not connecting. To be honest, all the talk about grasping oxes and being chased by maras were just to dramatic for me. And people always got stuck on "mu" and then became enlightened. Definitely not working for me because it was waaaay too dramatic for my tastes.

... I like a little TNH and a little Dogen. It's like putting chocolate in my peanut butter. Some people think that's disgusting but I think it's two great tastes that taste great together! :mrgreen: :wink:

Wow. If you are talking about Suzuki's Manual for Zen Buddhism and Kapleau's Three Pillars of Zen (did he write anything else, anyway?) then I have to say my experience has been EXACTLY like yours. I read a lot of the mu and satori accounts in Three Pillars, but felt like I couldn't apply them to my practice, especially since I am a beginner.

I started off on TNH's books (nice abbreviation!), and I still like those, but I just picked up a collection of Dogen's writings called "Beyond Thinking," and I find it to be a great complement to my Thich Nhat Hanh books for practice! A lot of his writing does seem lofty and/or abstract, but to me Dogen writes in an inviting, almost "grandmotherly" tone, (as I've heard certain teaching styles referred to), especially in "Recommending Zazen to All People." It's nice to know someone who's had such similar experiences as me in trying to apply book-learning to practice!

Gassho,

Zouk

Hey Zouk! The Suzuki book I read was "Essays in Zen Buddhism". Yeah, I do enough "book larnin'" for work. I wasn't looking for that with Buddhism. I prefer something more inspirational for now.

Skye wrote:
What baffles me is how anyone that has read any of the living words by Zen Masters could ever mistake Zazen for a waste of time.

That's how I read DavidRinzai's post and was also baffled. Again, I guess he thinks it's waste of time without the koans but, still, I was under the impression that Rinzai also includes Shikantaza. Am I wrong about that?