Thanks Mel...it was worth the wait! ...Bill!
--- In [email protected], Mel <gunnar19632000@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Beverley, Bill and all
> Â
> Sorry I couldn't reply sooner but I've been sick with the flu of late.
> Dualism. I think Bill had done an excellent job of explaining it. Before I
> add more from my side on top of what had already been stated recently and in
> the past, let me just say that I don't pay heed to...
> Â
> - all the super/wonder words used in Buddhism such as nyorai, shoshin,
> tatagatha, mantra, arhant....and so many other bulls*it terms that
> nonBuddhists are often strangely attracted to
> Â
> - ceremonies/rituals, ettiquette, cultural practices..and other
> Confucian-like items that make me head for the hills, and never to come back
> Â
> Despite being of Asian background myself(I'm of Filipino blood), I grew up in
> Australia from a young age and therefore a Westerner. With this in mind, I
> can only speak of English terms in our language
> Â
> Dualism, or dualistic. All the things I've described above are dualistic,
> because I identified certain aspects, or issues..and my thoughts/feelings
> about such. In fact, my making a long-winded approach here in
> explaining DUALISM is dualistic itself
> Â
> Here's an example of non-dualism. One could be sitting in the middle of the
> night by the window and watching the moon..without having to point the finger
> to it and say,"Oh, that's the moon". Do you ever go for a burger
> at MCDONALDS? Do you notice how they repeat your orders over the
> loud-speaker as soon as you've said it? Compare this with how you cook at
> home, because I doubt that you would say the following things to yourself as
> you do them.....
> Â
> - Now, I'm breaking the eggs into the pan
> - Here's the bacon, and I'm taking the rind off
> - I will now toast the bread and cook the sausages
> Â
> On a normal morning, IÂ personally can't imagine most people under most
> situations repeating the activities to themselves as they cook their
> breakfast. You just do them with a clear head, especially when you're in a
> hurry
> Â
> This and that, you and me, here and there...these are dualistic notions and
> which are best explained through experience with zazen. In zazen, one's eyes
> are half-closed with back straight, and sitting on a chair...and then you
> just breath. Your eyes may be half-closed in this silent environment but
> you're in this world of emptiness. There is this absolute nothing before
> your 'open eyes', but you can see everything
> Â
> Beverley, something tells me that you're going to have some difficulty
> understanding this posting here. If you're really curious about zen, then
> please take up zazen and somehow get a copy of the book ZEN MIND BEGINNER'S
> MIND. The book is still in print and seems to be well-known and quite popular
> with much of the greater, outer zen community out there. The book will also
> explain to you how to do zazen exactly, as directed by a Soto monk
> Â
> Forget koans, and keep away from this thing they call Rinzai. Soto Zen is
> much simpler to follow by as a guide. ZEN MIND BEGINNER'S MIND will explain
> all you need for the basic essentials
> Â
> Imagine your mind/heart as a rainforest untouched by man. A pristine,
> untouched, and unpolluted rainforest(and all sorts of other wilderness out
> there) functions well all on its own. Whatever happens to it is dictated by
> nature..which some refer to as Buddha, or Tao. Compare this with your
> mind/heart, and what you get is what zen people refer to as BigMind. All of
> the BigMind functions by itself. The jaguar will hunt down and eat the
> capybara, while the stingless bee collect their raw materials from flowers
> and pollinate plants at the same time, and the howler monkey will howl as
> the name says. The fish, alligators and other water-creatures thrive very
> well without the presence of man-made pollution
> Â
> Compare the above with the mind/heart and what you get is a very
> clear BigMind, and therefore no dualism. There is no obsessive
> identification of this and that, here and there, and so on....the path is
> just clear before you. Bacons, eggs, and sausages...they're all before you.
> You know what to do with them without saying a word, and nothing is in your
> way. That, is an example of non-dualism
> Â
> Buddha be praised
> MelÂ
>
> --- On Sat, 28/5/11, Bill! <BillSmart@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: Bill! <BillSmart@...>
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Newbie - hello & question
> To: [email protected]
> Received: Saturday, 28 May, 2011, 7:36 PM
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> Beverley,
>
> I'll be anxious to read Mel's reply on 'dualism', but since it's an important
> part of my understanding of zen I'd like to offer a response also.
>
> Dualisms are pairs (sets, actually) of concepts that are co-dependent. The
> best example is the dualistic pair 'good/bad'. In order to have a concept of
> 'good' you have to also have a concept of 'bad'. Labeling something as 'good'
> just doesn't make any sense if there is not such a thing as 'bad'.
>
> All concepts are dualistic, even if it just a dualism based on
> existence/non-existence. An example of this would be the dualistic concept
> set of 'self/no-self', or as I usually describe it 'self/other'. The
> dualistic concept of 'self/other' is very important to zen because in order
> to realize Buddha Nature you must abandon your concept (illusion) of 'self'.
> When you do this you then also automatically loose the paired concept of
> 'other'. There is no longer any 'self' that is seperated from 'other'
> (everything else). All is One. All is all. Just THIS!
>
> You will hear a lot about another very important dualistic set in all forms
> of Buddhism and Eastern religions in general, and that's the fundamental
> dualistic set of 'subject/object'. A subject views an object. An object is
> viewed by a subject. Meditation techniques that employ focusing awareness on
> something like a mantra or a visualization are 'objective'. The focus of
> awareness is on the object. Meditation techniques that employ turning the
> focus of your awareness back on yourself like 'who is it that is chanting?',
> or 'who is it that is visualizing' are 'subjective'. The focus of awareness
> is on the subject.
>
> Differenet Zen Buddhist teaching techniques use both subjective and objective
> meditation. Chanting, bowing, and even koan study usually starts with
> objective meditation and then slides into subjective mediation. But it is not
> until both subject and object are dropped that Buddha Nature can be realized.
> True zen meditation - pure zazen (shikantaza - 'clear mind') is neither
> objective nor subjective. There is only pure awareness with no sense of a
> subject being aware nor a sense of an object of awareness. Again, Just THIS!
>
> Some of the above are from teachings I have received both from individuals
> and reading, but all have been verified my own experience.
>
> And since I assume empty0grace is apparently no longer reading these posts
> since she previously posted she was unsubscribing from our forum I no longer
> feel obligated to say 'this is all only my opinion'; but that sentiment be
> the way you apporach all posts here, everywhere on the internet, all
> teachings from books, teachers and even Buddha himself.
>
> It's your life and you are the only one who is ultimately responsbile for it.
> Caveat Emptor!
>
> ...Bill!
>
> --- In [email protected], Beverley Huish <beverley.huish@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mel,
> >
> > I identify with your neighbour.ÃÂ Luckily, as my children get older,
> > IÃÂ feel
> > ableÃÂ give them (and me) more space.ÃÂ I used to force myself to give
> > them space,
> > but it really cost me (in worry and stuff like that).
> >
> > Can you define 'dualistic' please.ÃÂ It's a word I keep coming across
> > that
> > doesn't really mean much to me.ÃÂ I understand you're dealing with an
> > example of
> > it here, but I'm still not grasping it.
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > Beverley.
> >
> > ÃÂ
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Mel <gunnar19632000@>
> > To: [email protected]
> > Sent: Saturday, 28 May, 2011 4:41:12
> > Subject: Re: [Zen] Newbie - hello & question
> >
> > ÃÂ
> > Deshimaru-sensei spoke of this once. I'll use the example of my next-door
> > neighbor. The man's life revolves very much around his daughter. Truly a
> > father's love for one of his young, but one that could be of terrible
> > consequence should something happen to her. As I observed father and
> > daugher
> > over the years, I asked myself....
> >
> > - How will he cope with it if something does happen to her?
> > - Will he be able to keep a cool head(and heart) if she puts herself in
> > danger?
> >
> > In the military 30 years ago, I was taught in first-aid so well that all my
> > reactions basically became automatic irrespective of which victim. I know
> > within
> > me to this day that I'm not going to wail like a banshee should any of my
> > family
> > and other loved ones gets into a crisis. Keeping a cool head in good, and
> > bad
> > times, is very much in the realm of zen....and that father's love as I had
> > described above is as dualistic as one gets in this instance
> >
> > I'll use another example here. Parents/couples from the Indian
> > sub-continent
> > have a known reputation (at least here DownUnder) for treating their little
> > children almost like demi-gods. Very..very...wrong-headed. Those of us who
> > I can
> > best describe as normal, functioning human beings can never stop caring
> > about
> > our loved ones...but I'm not sure much of the world's highly
> > emotionally-inclined cultures(eg. Near East, Indian sub-continent, Latin
> > America, Mediterranean region, etc) can understand that about zen's
> > teaching
> > about keeping a cool head at all times
> >
> > For those interested, do check out GENESIS 37:1-36 of the bible. It's a
> > prime
> > example of truly, wrong-headed attachment(plus favouritism)ÃÂ by a man
> > called
> > Jacob for his son Joseph, at the expense of the rest his other sons....plus
> > the
> > consequences...
> >
> > Buddha be praised
> > Mel
> >
> > --- On Fri, 27/5/11, Beverley Huish <beverley.huish@> wrote:
> >
> > How about attachments to family members and friends (rather than
> > thoughts).ÃÂ
> > Obviously, family members, at core, aren't who they appear to be:ÃÂ how
> > does Zen
> > approach fondness for the illusory personalities of people we care about?
> > ÃÂ
> > Beverley.
> >
> > ÃÂ
> >
>
------------------------------------
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/
