JMJM, Are you aware of the zen koan HYAKUJO AND THE FOX that has as at least part of it a piece about living 500 years as a fox?
If not I'll send you a better reference for it, or if you have a copy of THE GATELESS GATE collection of koans it's #2...Bill! --- In [email protected], Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺å¦ç²¾æ <chan.jmjm@...> wrote: > > Hello Mayka, > > Other than the list of names you wrote, please add Steve to the list and > also yell at Edgar. Especially Edgar, he has been too quiet for too long. > > Words are descriptions of dharma and not the dharma itself. By saying > what is and what is not in words, often we hinder the journey of others, > which accordingly to a famous Chinese folklore, will place us into a > wild fox for 500 generations. :-) > > Our tradition's main emphasis is a practice. By focusing on our "heart" > to sync the "heart" of the universe, we shall witness self nature. Our > practitioners has also witness the heart to be the core, the chi, the > center, the essence, the love, the current, the energy, the big chakra, > the conduit, the whole being, the entirety, etc. Without a dedicated > practice and experience, these labels will not surface. Similarly these > labels are just empty descriptions to those who does not witness. > > Self nature is just a set of characteristics of the universe embedded in > everything. It integrates, balances, harmonizes, gives, grows, etc. > Some call it Buddha nature. Some call it physics. Some call it Nature > of our Father. It is just a set of characteristics. > > However, witnessing self nature is still less than half of the journey. > Fulfilling every act of awakening for oneself and others is needed to > get deeper and broader in both wisdom and energy. > > To be one and all at the same time is the realm to be reached. > > Thank you for the opportunity to share. > > For your reference, > JM > > Learn to de-stress, energize and awaken > http://www.chan-meditation.com > Learn to live with Health, Happiness and Harmony > http://www.chanliving.org > Learn to reach enlightenment > http://www.heartchan.org > To save the world > http://www.universal-oneness.org > > > > On 5/19/2011 5:02 AM, Maria Lopez wrote: > > > > Bill, Daniel, JMJM and all: > > Mike and myself wrote something like this: "Mindfulness is the > > technique one uses to experience buddha nature". And there was this > > debate about: "Is mindfulness buddha nature?". What do you have to > > say about this Daniel?. > > Mayka > > > > > > --- On *Thu, 19/5/11, Maria Lopez /<flordeloto@...>/* wrote: > > > > > > From: Maria Lopez <flordeloto@...> > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: Three Western Myths About Mindfulness > > To: [email protected] > > Date: Thursday, 19 May, 2011, 12:40 > > > > Bill: > > I've found very pleasant reading Daniel posting. I envy the same > > in him as you your both art writing skills. And as for your > > question I think that Daniel was explaining mindfulness according > > to the way in his own tradition is transmited. My saying here is > > only my personal experience with mindfulness. Daniel sayings may > > go in line with the way his tradition may transmit the teaching of > > mindfulness. Have to say that in the TNH tradition there is > > also the Scholar side of mindfulness. So far haven't gone much > > into it because I found all what I need in the very first key: > > "Mindfulness is to be aware of what is going on in body, mind, > > within and around ". And you won't ever believe how huge is the > > implications of just such a simple key!. > > Mayka > > > > --- On *Thu, 19/5/11, Bill! /<BillSmart@...>/* wrote: > > > > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@...> > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Three Western Myths About Mindfulness > > To: [email protected] > > Date: Thursday, 19 May, 2011, 2:13 > > > > Mayka, Thanks for your explanation. > > > > Is this the same concept as others, specifically Beveverley, > > have of 'mindfulness'? > > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In [email protected], Maria Lopez <flordeloto@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Bill: > > > The use of the tool called "mindfulness" is not buddha > > nature.à But the energy, theà experience one hasà out by > > using the tool might beà in Buddha Nature. à asà mindfulness > > generates a continuous energy of enhanced attention, > > awareness, concentration, sensitivity, a general incremented > > enhancement of all senses, .à the form and the non form > > interact with each other in such a way that they are not > > separated.à Here the experience the form is in the non form > > and the non form is in the form gets clear. .à A bit as > > saying the physical act of sitting down zazen is not buddha > > nature, but what you experience while you are sitting down is > > buddha nature (provided that while sitting down one only sits > > down and nothing else).à In both cases the form and the non > > form interact with each other.à Without the physical body, > > form, à wouldn't be possible to experience the non form.à The > > physical body is the vehicle to experience the non form.à So > > it's the action of > > > mindfulness.à > > > Mayka > > > à > > > --- On Wed, 18/5/11, Bill! <BillSmart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Three Western Myths About Mindfulness > > > To: [email protected] > > > Date: Wednesday, 18 May, 2011, 8:52 > > > > > > > > > à > > > > > > > > > > > > Mayka, > > > > > > Our agreement does not surprise me. > > > > > > As I've said before I very seldom use the term > > 'mindfulness', although when others use it I assume they are > > talking about the same thing as I call 'Buddha Mind' or > > 'direct experience of reality'. > > > > > > What I was describing was 'Buddha Mind'. If that's the same > > as the term 'mindfulness' is for you, then good! That does not > > surprise me either. > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Maria Lopez <flordeloto@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Bill: > > > > I've just opened your posting given a response to Daniel > > posting about mindfulness and found that your way of > > understanding mindfulness is alike myself.Ãâà There is only > > the concept of mindfulness as a meanings of given the map to > > produce the energy of mindfulness which is equalÃâà meaning > > as to awareness. You're right and there are no distinctions or > > any dualism while practising mindfulness.Ãâà Ãâà This is > > also > > my personal experience too.Ãâà > > > > Mayka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Wed, 18/5/11, Bill! <BillSmart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Three Western Myths About Mindfulness > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > Date: Wednesday, 18 May, 2011, 4:12 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ãâà > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Daniel, Ãâà My comments are embedded below: > > > > > > > > > Three Western Myths About Mindfulness > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Three myths about mindfulness are frequently found > > western Theravada > > > > > circles. Beginning to intermediate students will often > > hold these > > > > > assumptions, sometimes even advanced students, having > > carried them over > > > > > from new age culture or watered down versions of > > culturally popular > > > > > meditation practices. For many aspirants, these beliefs > > lie unseen > > > > > within the mind, lost in memory, and become unrecognized > > sources of > > > > > doubt and opinion regarding the practice of satipatthana > > vipassana. > > > > > > > > [Bill!] You writing from aÃâà perspective (satipatthana > > vipassana?) and assuming your understanding of it is 'correct' > > and that anyone having a different viewpointÃâà hasÃâà > > created > > a 'myth'.Ãâà I don't know how you formed your perspective > > (teacher/student, reading, etc...), but that really doesn't > > matter right now.Ãâà It's your perspective. Ãâà This is > > not > > good and not bad, but I cannot comment from the same > > perspective you have.Ãâà I will comment from my perspective > > whichÃâà has been builtÃâà up from my zen practice. > > > > Ãâà > > > > > Choiceless Awareness is the "Purest" Practice of Mindfulness > > > > > Attention is a process entirely conditioned by sensory > > input and the > > > > > inner forces of desire, fear, restlessness and aversion, > > no matter now [how] > > > > > hidden they may seem to be. To accept a myth of > > choiceless awareness > > > > > indicates that one has not grasped the truths associated > > with the second > > > > > stage of vipassana insight, Knowledge of Conditionality. > > In reality > > > > > choiceless awareness is conditioned attention, whose > > conditioning is > > > > > goes unoticed. > > > > [Bill!]Ãâà 'Choiceless Awareness' is zen.Ãâà When you > > startÃâà applying discrimination (categorizing, judging, > > associating, censoring, rejecting, > > augmenting,Ãâà translating,Ãâà rationalizing, > > intellectualizing, etc...), in other words applying some kind > > ofÃâà CHOICE onÃâà your sensory experiences you have entered > > into the realm of dualism and illusion.Ãâà Your choices are > > the illusions and the myths. > > > > Ãâà > > > > > Allowing one's attention to float free in this way will > > make three > > > > > things particularly difficult: the development of > > concentration, insight > > > > > into intention, and the development of effort and > > energy. When practice > > > > > is mature in Knowledge of Equanimity, a kind of > > choiceless awareness > > > > > becomes possible, in that the illusion of the one who > > attends is now > > > > > absent, but at that point the mind is very developed and > > will not be > > > > > hindered or deluded by its own act of letting go. > > > > > > > > [Bill!]Ãâà Here you seem to backtrack.Ãâà In the > > paragraph above you indicate 'choiceless awareness' is a myth, > > but in this paragraph youÃâà admit in the absence of illusion > > (duality) it 'becomes possible'.Ãâà So, is 'choiceless > > awareness' a myth or not?Ãâà Or, is it only a myth for some > > and not for others?Ãâà Or, Ãâà is it a myth for some and > > not > > a myth whenÃâà no one (self) exists to make choices? > > > > > The path along which our mind must evolve to come upon > > the experience of > > > > > the Unconditioned is quite narrow and precise. The > > ability to discover > > > > > this precise point of balance in the development of the > > mind's > > > > > faculties is what made the Buddha so unique. > > > > [Bill!]Ãâà There is nothing unique about Buddha (Guatama > > Siddhartha), or Buddha (the direct experience of reality we > > share with all senient beings).Ãâà The very fact of this is > > essential to zen (and to Buddhism).Ãâà Otherwise you are > > elevating Buddha (Guatama Siddhartha) to some special state > > like Christianity has mistakenly elevated Jesus.Ãâà Both > > Guatama Siddhartha and Jesus are men, human beings just like > > you and me, and anything they have done or accomplished or > > realized can be done by us also. > > > > >There is no room in this > > > > > process for personal predilections or intellectual > > prejudice. To be > > > > > successful in this path we must train our attention so > > as to achieve the > > > > > necessary balance and development of the faculties. > > There may indeed be > > > > > more than one system of practice for achieving this, yet > > every such > > > > > successful system will be discovered to be balanced > > within itself. > > > > > However, even then, all practice methods must be regularly > > > > > "tweaked" to insure that progress remains on course. In > > the end, > > > > > it is not the method itself that achieves the goal, but > > the carefully > > > > > balanced evolution of the faculties that leads the mind > > to emergence. > > > > > This precision requires refined tuning, something that > > does not easily > > > > > evolve from free-floating awareness. > > > > > > > > [Bill!]Ãâà I agree there is not one system of > > teaching.Ãâà However, the practice is not to > > 'developÃâà faculities'.Ãâà You already have everything you > > need.Ãâà The practice is to dissolve the sense of dualism you > > have created whichÃâà occludes and interfers with your ability > > to be aware of direct sensoryÃâà experience.Ãâà So practice > > is a matter of discarding, not developing or building. > > > > Ãâà > Non-conceptual Awareness is the Goal of Mindfulness > > The conclusion to > > > > > this logic is that the silent witnessing mind is > > superior to the use of > > > > > mental notation. For fuller explanation on the benefits > > of mental > > > > > notation, please refer to my dedicated chapter on this > > subject. > > > > > > > > [Bill!]Ãâà Non-conceptual Awareness (aka Buddha > > Mind)Ãâà is zen.Ãâà I don't know if it is a 'Goal of > > Mindfulness' or not.Ãâà Non-conceptual Awareness is > > non-dualistic so is not subject to judgement (choices) such as > > 'superior'.Ãâà Mental notation (I think this is the same as I > > call discrimnation or using the discriminating mind) is not > > good and not bad.Ãâà It is used to form dualistic > > concepts.Ãâà The only caveat here is to be aware that these > > concepts, these 'mental notations' are not real but illusory. > > > > Ãâà > > > > > Conception and preception are so intimately merged that > > we cannot > > > > > separate them, although we can come to distinguish them. > > Those who > > > > > pretend that awareness is non-conceptual are lost in > > their own concepts > > > > > about practice and are far from seeing the present > > reality of their > > > > > minds. > > > > [Bill!] Both 'conception' and 'preception' pre-suppose a > > discriminating self.Ãâà Both are interpretations > > (post-processing) of sensory experience.Ãâà They are > > illusions created by the discriminating mind which are tagged > > to experiences, and often obsure experience to the point of > > replacing them as percieved 'reality'.Ãâà 'Conceptions' and > > 'preceptions' are part of the dualistic baggage of the > > discriminating mind that must be discarded (or at least > > suspended) to directly experience reality. > > > > Ãâà In ordinary life, the closest we come to > > non-conceptual awareness > > > > > is in deep sleep, or when we see something in the > > distance that we do > > > > > not recognize, or when we encounter some new object > > completely unknown > > > > > and mysterious to us. However, even those last two > > examples, the mind is > > > > > busily applying the closest approximate concepts to try > > and "figure > > > > > it out." > > > > [Bill!]Ãâà This is absolutely wrong.Ãâà There is no > > awareness in dreamless sleep, and dreams are all > > illusions.Ãâà Intellectual activity as you describe above is > > just juggling illusions to try to find one characterize the > > sensory experience.Ãâà Non-conceptual awareness happens when > > your teacher slaps your face.Ãâà It is the awareness of that > > slapÃâà you have BEFORE you think 'Pain!' or 'Bad'' or > > 'Embarassed!'. > > > > Ãâà Additionally, yogis can experience non-conceptual > > awareness > > > > > during their practice in that tiny space between sensory > > impingement and > > > > > mental recognition. Concepts are not the enemy. The > > enemy is that > > > > > confusion of mind that cannot distinguish between the > > two dimensions of > > > > > conception and perception present in our > > moment-to-moment cognition. It > > > > > is this confusion that hides the true nature of both, > > and not the > > > > > presence of concepts in the mind, which are inevitable > > and almost > > > > > constantly present. > > > > > > > > [Bill]Ãâà We agree on something! - almost.Ãâà I'd > > remove > > 'yogis' from the first sentence above.Ãâà It's not just yogis > > that can experience this, it's everyone - all sentient > > beings.Ãâà Concepts are not exactly the enemy,Ãâà it's the > > ATTACHMENT to concepts that is the 'enemy'.Ãâà Concepts will > > arise and dissapear.Ãâà They are illusions.Ãâà As long as > > you can recognize this, concepts are not the 'enemy'; but > > anything that gives rise to dualities (the most insiduous > > being the duality of self/other) is an 'enemy' to direct > > awareness (Buddha Mind). > > > > > Mindfulness Only Reveals What Is > > > > > A common mistake made by many dedicated practitioners of > > satipathana or > > > > > other forms of mindfulness as found in various schools > > of Buddhism, is > > > > > to believe that mindfulness only reveals what is without > > altering how > > > > > things appear to consciousness. Mindfulness is not a > > passive process. It > > > > > radically changes the way the mind experiences its > > reality. We cannot > > > > > claim therefore that we are merely allowing reality to > > reveal itself. > > > > > Because the perceptions, insights and states of > > consciousness that arise > > > > > in practice are conditioned by the development of the > > five controlling > > > > > faculties, the jhana factors and the seven factors of > > enlightenment, we > > > > > cannot say that we are accessing the reality of the five > > aggregates as > > > > > they really are in their own objective sphere or even as > > they would > > > > > appear in some hypothetical state of subjective super > > clarity. > > > > > Satipathana practice is definitely a system of mental > > development > > > > > engaging and affecting the mind in many ways and on many > > levels. All we > > > > > can say is that mindfulness reveals reality as > > experienced by a mind > > > > > properly developed in such a way as to experience > > freedom from greed, > > > > > hatred and delusion. The absence of delusion means > > something very > > > > > precise: the successful oppositing of the four > > vipalasas, or distortions > > > > > of subjective perception. There are the vipalasa that > > sees the > > > > > impermanent as permanent, the vipalasa that sees the > > dissatisfactory as > > > > > satisfactory, the vipalasa that sees a self in what > > which is no-self, > > > > > and the vipalasa that sees the repulsive as delightful. > > > > > > > > [Bill!]Ãâà I could not disagree more.Ãâà I want to > > reiterate that I'm not saying your paragraph above is not > > correct in pointing outÃâà what 'Mindfulness' is and is > > not.Ãâà Ãâà MyÃâà thoughts below are not from a > > 'satipathana > > perspective.Ãâà They are from my own zen practice perspective. > > > > Zen is awareness of only what is.Ãâà AllÃâà else is > > illusory. Ãâà All intellectualizations (post-processing) are > > illusions.Ãâà Ãâà And I say again itÃâà is not the > > illusions > > that occlude Buddha Mind,Ãâà it is ATTACHMENT to illusions > > that occlude Buddha Mind and that must be dissoved or at least > > suspended. > > > > Clean your bowls! > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
