mindfulness

[Ryumon]

Re: mindfulness

Well, I kinda wondered why Harry seemed to think this was clear early on - no one else did.

And, Harry, I don't agree with your saying that mindfulness is held in any way - it is a technique, and one that, outside of Buddhism, is used in slightly different ways. It is mentioned and discussed in many sutras, which, on its own, merits (IMHO) attention.

I hope you'll avoid using too much Bradese here - I think we're all better off without his kind of outbursts.

Kirk

[Jundo]

Re: mindfulness

... Think Your Penis Bigger" ...

I am gonna go out right now, trademark this and make a fortune. If Genpo Roshi can rake in the cash with those 'BIG MIND' seminars for US$1500 ... Imagine what I can do with ...

-- BIG PENIS --

Look for it in your email spam folder soon! :twisted:

Gassho, Jundo

[Jundo]

Re: mindfulness

Hey, I have a great blog for everybody to read!

We Angry Buddhists

http://bodhiarmour.blogspot.com/

Hissy Fits, and outright fits of anger/rage, seem to start much in the same way I think. There’s a physical feeling in the stomach and/or possibly the head, a feeling that we may generally interpret as ‘not nice’, like a pressure or a throb. We identify this as not nice, and further identify it with ‘me’ not feeling nice. So now ‘me’ doesn’t feel nice. Well, that probably wouldn’t generally be a big deal except for the fact that with this often comes the need to find a source of this feeling of ‘not niceness’, and where do we generally look? Yes, outside; for someone or something to blame. We go off on the mistaken notion that ‘something outside of myself is making me feel bad and I must exert my control to stop it quickly’.

[Eika]

Re: mindfulness

Did I miss something?

BS

[Jundo]

Re: mindfulness

Harry,

Just meant to be pulling your leg, sir.

Sorry if I said something I should not have. Gassho, Jundo

[Stephanie]

Re: mindfulness

Aw, now why did you two have to make nice and work it out when we could have had an awesomely entertaining e-fight? Oh well :wink:

My concern is/was that essentially this 'mindfulness' thing seems often to be held in much the same way as how people adopt such crud as "The Secret", "The Magic of Thinking Big", "Think Yourself Thin", "Think Your Penis Bigger", "Think Yourself Enlightened" (... I made up the last two).

I agree completely. It's become a rather stupid word that gets parroted blindly by every Buddhist noob who doesn't know what he or she is talking about. Which is fine, to some extent, as that's what noobs tend to do :lol: , but it becomes a problem when it obscures the actual value and purpose of practice. I got hung up on it a long time, feeling some sort of weird Buddhist guilt that I wasn't able to perfectly concentrate on every task I was doing with no activity of the thinking mind. I wasted a lot of time trying to become able to achieve this lovely state of "mindfulness." I can imagine a person wasting their whole life chasing after this (or any other) ideal. I do know from experience there is value in cultivating the capacity to concentrate, but I don't think this capacity is central to awakening to the nature of reality. Why? It's like Dogen says, if you can get your donkey to look at the well, you don't need to make the well disappear... or something like that :lol:

(Yes, I know that's not quite what Dogen said, I was just making a funny, so please don't whip out your Shobogenzos and beat me with them, thanks :wink

[Ryumon]

Re: mindfulness

I agree completely. It's become a rather stupid word that gets parroted blindly by every Buddhist noob who doesn't know what he or she is talking about. Which is fine, to some extent, as that's what noobs tend to do :lol: , but it becomes a problem when it obscures the actual value and purpose of practice. I got hung up on it a long time, feeling some sort of weird Buddhist guilt that I wasn't able to perfectly concentrate on every task I was doing with no activity of the thinking mind. I wasted a lot of time trying to become able to achieve this lovely state of "mindfulness." I can imagine a person wasting their whole life chasing after this (or any other) ideal.

I don't get it. No one that I've ever heard or read suggests that mindfulness should be a 24-hour thing. You try and do it from time to time, doing certain actions, the way you don't sit zazen all day long. Why the absolutes in this discussion? It's another tool, and a very powerful one, in my experience.

Kirk

[Stephanie]

Re: mindfulness

I don't get it. No one that I've ever heard or read suggests that mindfulness should be a 24-hour thing. You try and do it from time to time, doing certain actions, the way you don't sit zazen all day long. Why the absolutes in this discussion? It's another tool, and a very powerful one, in my experience.

Many Buddhist teachers do teach that mindfulness should ideally be experienced 24/7.

There's nothing that terribly bad about this, as it's better than encouraging people to rape, kill, and pillage 24/7...

But if you actually want to wake up to the nature of reality, mindfulness practice can be a major waste of time. Learning how to sweep with nothing in mind but sweeping doesn't teach you how to skillfully work with afflictive emotions or distracted mind, nor does it bestow qualities needed to liberate others from suffering.

It's good to learn how to do tasks with less distraction, just like it's also good to learn how to please your partner in bed (the two of which are not mutually exclusive skills), but all of this is only incidental to the central task of a Buddhist life, which is to live in awareness of how the mind constructs reality, and live from the passionate drive to liberate all suffering beings from the ignorance that gives rise to realities shot through with suffering.

Again, concentration and mental discipline are effective tools for accomplishing such goals, but they are incidental, not central. My practice deepened immensely when I threw my concerns about developing concentration past a certain point out the window. I don't care so much any more if I think of other stuff while I'm washing dishes. What I do care about is maintaining awareness of what I'm doing with my mind.

You don't have to stop the content of your mind to be aware of the content of your mind as the content of your mind.

[Marina S]

Re: mindfulness

Boy, there's something about having Western roots that can make us so cerebral. Dichotomizing. Polarizing. Fundamentalizing (literal interpretations).Too caught up in our "isms", and trying to convince ourselves and others that our "isms" are the truth. The notion that what's on our screen (screen of perception) should be on theirs.

I practice insight meditation which is often referred to as mindfulness meditation. Also, I have a deep appreciation of Zen philosophy. Am I mindful every moment of every day? No. Perhaps in some people's minds, mindfulness is seen as "trendy", so to speak, transported from the East to the West and utilized in stress reduction, etc. Yet, instructions for mindfulness practice come from the original Pali texts, namely the Satipatthana Sutta. I like to read and learn from both early and later texts. I equate it to living in a house. I can choose to live in one room and just know about that one room, or I can open the door and explore and learn what's in the other rooms, as well.

Whether you want to call it zazen or insight meditation, in the end it's about bringing awareness to the present moment, whatever is there. Plain and simple. This is mindfulness. What could be more Buddhist than that? If people want to take something as simple as mindfulness and attach their own views to it, then that's just it: their own views.

Gassho and Metta,
Marina

[Stephanie]

Re: mindfulness

Thanks, zoukithustra.

Being a noob ain't so bad, as long as you see being a noob as being a noob... :wink:

[Jundo]

Re: mindfulness

Allow me to briefly revive this sleeping topic ...

I just want to summarize my view on this, and pull together some of the comments here.

I do believe that "mindfulness" is an important aspect of Zen Practice, although it is misguided and misleading to say that we can or should be mindful of our every action "24/7". There is a time to be mindful, and a time to daydream or be distracted too. All are part of life. I think it is a powerful tool, one of many in our practice ... but all tools have their skillful time and place.

... But if you actually want to wake up to the nature of reality, mindfulness practice can be a major waste of time. Learning how to sweep with nothing in mind but sweeping doesn't teach you how to skillfully work with afflictive emotions or distracted mind, nor does it bestow qualities needed to liberate others from suffering.

... all of this is only incidental to the central task of a Buddhist life, which is to live in awareness of how the mind constructs reality, and live from the passionate drive to liberate all suffering beings from the ignorance that gives rise to realities shot through with suffering.

I don't see it quite this way. To learn to 'be' a single pure action free of cluttering thoughts, one pure action at a time, movement within stillness ... well, I think it DOES teach us how to skillfully work with the afflictive emotions and runaway mind. It is Zazen in action. Most of daily life is just the opposite, namely, plowing through a million tasks with a mind going a million miles a minute, filled with judgments. So, it is a useful skill to learn to live with simplicity when and where we can. It does teach us something about how the mind works and gets caught in delusion. It does teach us how to relieve suffering, in both ourselves and others, by teaching us the art of quieting the mind.

Again, we do not need to (nor can we) live like that all the time, much as we cannot stay in the lotus position "24/7". But it is a useful practice nonetheless.

I had this follow-up interchange with Nishijima Roshi, and he says this too I think. I believe he does not quite know what "mindfulness" means in English "Zen-glish" (he tends to speak "Gudo-lish"), and he likes to call it "action", but I think we are just getting tangled up in words:

JUNDO to GUDO

This subject came up for me again today, because we are beginning to prepare for our "Online Jukai" over at our "Treeleaf" Sangha, and I recalled the Rakusu sewing classes I attended with [you] and Rev. Taijun at the old Dojo ... The emphasis there, much like with your calligraphy, can only be called "mindful" (meaning "careful, paying attention, in the moment") sewing.

GUDO to JUNDO

Sewing Rakusu, writing calligraphy, and so forth, are all actions, and so those actions are always done in the balanced state of body and mind. Therefore it is difficult for me to agree with your opinion, which you described in your comments.

JUNDO to GUDO

Hi Roshi,

...

Roshi, I still have question about what you wrote: Namely, can calligraphy etc. be done in a way that is not balanced state of body and mind? For example, if someone is doing calligraphy with their hand, but at the same time, their mind is thinking about politics or their job (and not focusing on calligraphy), is that still the balanced state of body and mind? Gassho, Jundo

GUDO to JUNDO

Dear Ven. Jundo Cohen,

Sewing Rakusu, or writing calligraphy, if you do them thinking something, or perceiving something, those jobs can never be done well.

Many people can write calligraphy thinking something, or perceiving something, and so their works are not always good.

If someone is doing calligraphy thinking about politics or not focusing on calligraphy, he can never keep himself into the balanced state, and
so it is impossible for him to accomplish a good calligraphy.

With best wishes Gudo Wafu Nishijima

JUNDO to GUDO

Hi Roshi,

Roshi, as to your comment above: This is my point exactly.

In the Zen world, the definition of "mindfulness" is usually to do one action purely (e.g., calligraphy, Rakusu sewing), only that one action in that moment, not thinking about something or perceiving something (not thinking about anything, not even thinking "I am doing calligraphy"). It is a pure doing, pure action, without the mind distracted or thinking this and that, as in Zazen. Perhaps the mind needs to think a little thing (e.g., now I need to put ink on my brush, now I need to write the Kanji for "Wa"), but then the attention returns without thought to the one, pure action.

That is the usual definition of "Mindfulness" in the Zen world.

So, I think your definition of "calligraphy is just action" is not different in this case, and I think you may be misunderstanding the meaning of the word "Mindfulness" as it is used in English in the Zen world?

GUDO to JUNDO

Dear Ven. Jundo Cohen,

Thank you very much for your sincere opinion, but I think that "being mindful" can never be Buddhism at all.

"Mindfulness" can never be an action, but "mindfulness" is just a mental expression of human mind.

Therefore it is completely impossible for me to think that "mindfulness" suggests a kind of action, and even in
the 21st century, it is completely impossible for me to change what Gautama said in 4th or 5th century BC.

So, I really think that when Roshi is a bit caught up in the word "mindfulness" as the "mind" "full" of some thinking, and that it is just really a description of the mental state of what he calls "action". For me, an olympic diver in a dive, a musician focused on his tune, Roshi's writing calligraphy or sewing a Rakusu, or just sitting Zazen single-mindedly ... all are forms of "mindful action".

Gassho, Jundo

[chicanobudista]

Re: mindfulness

So, I really think that when Roshi is a bit caught up in the word "mindfulness" as the "mind" "full" of some thinking, and that it is just really a description of the mental state of what he calls "action". For me, an olympic diver in a dive, a musician focused on his tune, Roshi's writing calligraphy or sewing a Rakusu, or just sitting Zazen single-mindedly ... all are forms of "mindful action".

1. Welcome Back, Jundo!

2. Thanks! I think now I know how Nishima is looking at this issue of "mindfulness." I think he disagree with mindfulness if one sees it as a state of idealized being while doing an action where he sees action in the now as action in the now.

Mindful walking. Mindful writing. Mindful working. Can be perceived as entering some "mind" state when one is doing. Rather, when one walks, one walks. When one writes, write. Etc.

Well. I think I understand. :mrgreen:

[Voton]

Re: mindfulness

I think Brad's point, regardless of what we think of the language, is very valid given the imbalance that exists in what is widely thought of as 'mindfulness'; that is, that we should perform actions "full of" and controlled by, idealistic values of the mind ('I must do this with perfect mindfulness', 'if I am perfectly mindful this act/I will be perfect' etc.).

And so I see "Fuck mindfulness" as a quite relevant and vital Zen teaching.

This, of course, will be no real news to people who practice balanced action.

Regards,

Harry.

This is a good point. Brad Warner hates jargon, and mercilessly ridicules it. Mindfulness isn't smugly observing yourself observing; that extra level of self-consciousness is exactly the opposite of what the word intends. He made a similar point about "skillful" recently: that it's come to mean "anything I like" among Zennies, as the word "fascist" has come to mean "anything I don't like." Jargon is imprecise, and is intended to exclude the uninitiated; real Zen excludes no one.

[chicanobudista]

Re: mindfulness

Ya know. I am barely "getting it". When. Something will get me back to square one. Barely finished reading this forum, I look at my desk and find the latest copy of Tricycle magazine. Open at random, there is an article titled "Talk lika a buddha" by Marshall Glickman ("learns how to listen on an Insight Dialogue retreat.") Jump two pages just to see how long the article is and scan an article blurb: "Mindful speech and the ability to really listen are at the heart of all relationships.". Oh. Great. Snap. Back to square one.

Note to myself...stay away from reading Buddhist magazines. :mrgreen:

[Jundo]

Re: mindfulness

Jundo,

I disagree with your opinion that Roshi does not understand the meaning of the term 'mindfulness' in how we use it. Maybe he understands it only too well!

I believe Roshi is differentiating between the real action of just doing something with the mind-body in balance, and doing something thinking that we are doing it mindfully, properly, cautiously, Buddhistly, ideally or whatever. Its an excellent point.

I think Roshi does not mean a mental state when he uses the term 'action', quite the opposite in fact: he generally means 'real action' when he uses the term (as in 'Buddhism is a religion of action' as opposed to an 'idealistic religion', a religion not based in real action (Zazen) but in idealism that is)

Hi Harry,

In fact, I know that this is exactly what Roshi means, and both you and Roshi are quite right (especially the part above in boldface).

But do you think that Roshi has no "mental state" when he is doing his calligraphy? Perhaps he is so 'at one with the universe' at that point, and has so fully dropped his sense of 'self' (notice that I did not say his 'ego' :wink: ) that the moon and stars are moving the brush ... yet, still, I will tell you that he knows where he is, what he is doing and what he wishes to do. He has a "mental state", though perhaps a very special kind. The same for the musician taken up in his tune.

The word "mindful" has become Zen-glish for that very special mental state, which is just the experience of "balance in action". Perhaps, like "ego", it is not the best translation ... but most Zen folks, and most folks in the worlds of traditional calligraphy, martial arts, tea ceremony and such, have been very clear on what it is for a long long time.

As I said, Nishijima Roshi is very right in explaining Zazen, and calligraphy, as balance of body-mind, and "action" ... and he is right to say that it is not to be focused on doing something "properly, cautiously, Buddhistly, ideally". And he makes some valid point if he criticizes that particular word as a sloppy translation. But to the extent that he just tosses out the phrase "Zen is not being mindful", and does not explain himself, and to the extent that it sounds as if he is rejecting so-called "Zen mind" and such ... then he is not being clear and is being misleading. All those calligraphers, martial artists, tea masters, shakuhachi-ites, and Zennists will think he is rejecting the Ancient Way.

By saying "Zen is not mindfulness" it sounded unfortunately like he was saying, "just get in the lotus position or pick up an ink brush, and it does not matter what the heck is going on in your head". That is not what he meant.

Gassho, Jundo

Ps:

Jargon is imprecise, and is intended to exclude the uninitiated; real Zen excludes no one.

Unfortunately, we must use very very imprecise words to convey some things often beyond words. Yet, in our Way beyond "right" and "wrong", there are right and wrong ways to pursue that very Way. Our Zen perspectives exclude nothing in the whole universe, yet exclude a whole lot. If I merely toss out a statement such as "Zen is not mindfulness" or "Zen is the F-word" or "Zen is not Zazen", I had better be clear to folks what I mean. Otherwise, there is no teaching going on.