Chris, I agree. Before I was exposed to vipassana, and was sitting in Zen temples, I found discomfort to be more of a nuisance that was 'disrupting' an otherwise 'good' session. Discomfort/pain was something I was enduring (suffering) rather than something worthy of 'study' that can lead to insight wisdom to how things really are. That's not knocking Zen at all. It was entirely my misunderstanding, but I do find Vipassana instructs and explains these things more.
Mike ________________________________ From: Chris Austin-Lane <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2012, 6:18 Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: Pain & Pleasure This alway just seemed like the organized persons way of organising zazen. All that you write about pain and bliss and temporariness comes up in plain old zazen as well. You just go back to the moment either way. Except the effort to have a focus of attention, kind of. But the zenners are like the people with a bunch of books all higgledy piggledy and the vipassana folks have them sorted into categories. Interesting discussion on the legs tho - I tend to get critical of people moving about at all in the zendo but alone I will adjust even between the bells: not in reaction to the cresting discomfort but later when it seems like my body was sat down unhastily and poorly adjusted. On Sep 11, 2012 7:35 PM, "mike brown" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Kris, > > >There's a big difference between what the ascetics were seeking to do and what >Buddha taught. What the ascetics were seeking was a spiritual goal, namely the >denial of the body in order for the mind to unite with Brahma. Vipassana >practice has nothing to do with denying the body. Quite the opposite in fact, >which is why I addressed JM's last post because it seemed to go against what >Buddha taught. > > > >In samatha (calm or tranquility) meditation, we take an object of meditation >(such as the breath) until we reach a stage of one-pointed concentration or >absorbtion (samadhi) which can lead us into jhana. Because we are being >mindful before entering into jhana, we can also experience extreme (but not >injurious) discomfort in our body. A couple of the factors of the first jhana >are that it is very pleasant/blissful because the 5 Hindrances are temporarily >extinguished and so pain disappears the instant we enter into it. One of the >advantages of this bliss is that with insight (vipassana) we can see the >temporary nature of both these states (pleasure/pain) in a way that >speculating over them can't. They're real, not imagined. So there's nothing >about samatha meditation that is about detachment or denial. It's much more >about being affirmative of body/mind reality. > > >Mike > > > > >________________________________ > From: Kristopher Grey <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2012, 2:36 >Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: Pain & Pleasure > > > >Mike, > >I was going to mention ascetic practices/aspects when you brought up the pain/bliss interaction in your sitting (I let it go, but look! You found it anyway! *L*). > >You said: "I've gone from the most intense white-hot pain to the most ecstatic >bliss in an instant." Sounds like what ascetics seek to do. Endure this, get >that ( I realize this is but an aspect of your practice, and not its focus). > >While a sort of overall balance may be developed in working with the tension between pain & pleasure, and can expand our capacities for both, the Middle Way doesn't lie stretched between them. Buddha learned lessons from both, as we all can while caught in life's tides, but he didn't strike a bargain to merely split the difference. ;) > >Everything instructs, but we needn't attend to everything to realize this. > >KG > >PS - To be clear, this is not a commentary on your practice Mike, or anyone else's. Just speaking to the general themes. > > > >On 9/11/2012 8:49 PM, mike brown wrote: > > >>JM, >> >> >>Isn't that what the ascetics tried to do to reach a yogic union with Brahma, >>but Buddha rejected? In the sutras Buddha talks about being mindful of the >>breath/body. Do you really mean "detach"? I'm not sure how long you could >>survive being Enlightened if you couldn't put food to your mouth when you're >>hungry (that's not being facetious). >> >> >>Mike >> >> >> >>________________________________ >> From: 覺妙精明 （JMJM） <[email protected]> >>To: [email protected] >>Cc: mike brown <[email protected]> >>Sent: Wednesday, 12 September 2012, 1:21 >>Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: suffering >> >> >> >>If I may add to this... >> >>My teacher asks us "avoid switching legs during sitting..." In other words, it is for training our mind to be detached from our physical body. Because, the physical body is our first hindrance to enlightenment. Then there is the hindrance of our mind and hindrance of our spirit to surpass next... Not hard. Right? :-) >> >> >> >>On 9/11/2012 4:33 PM, mike brown wrote: >> >> >>>ED, >>> >>> >>>I can't talk about zazen, but in Vipassana, pain is something we're taught >>>to welcome (within reason) because it's a good tool to teach us insight into >>>impermanence, suffering and an impersonal self. I can honestly say that >>>sitting without moving for an hour, or more, sometimes creates the most >>>intense pain I have ever suffered in my life! The only time I've found that >>>pain is completely alleviated is when I've entered into the jhanas. This is >>>no exaggeration. I've gone from the most intense white-hot pain to the most >>>ecstatic bliss in an instant. Of course, and here's the lesson, this state >>>passes and the pain comes back once more. A valuable lesson in the arising >>>and passing of phenomena that is way beyond just an intellectual >>>understanding. >>> >>> >>>Mike >>> >>> >>> >>>________________________________ >>> From: ED <[email protected]> >>>To: [email protected] >>>Sent: Tuesday, 11 September 2012, 15:16 >>>Subject: [Zen] Re: suffering >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Bill! and Mike, >>> >>>Is it not the case that zazen or vipasana can also help alleviate pain? >>> >>>--ED >>> >>>--- In [email protected], "Bill!" <BillSmart@...> wrote: >>>> >>>> Merle, >>>> >>>> I am also 66! >>>> >>>> I'm about to give you some of my definitions of terms and they're >>>pretty 'tough-love' definitions so be warned... >>>> >>>> Pain is NOT suffering. Pain is pain. Suffering is feeling sorry for >>>yourself (your self) because perhaps you're in pain and that does not >>>meet up with your expectations and disappoints you. >>>> >>>> You do not have to suffer. >>>> >>>> The best example I know of this is a 3-legged dog. I'm sure you've >>>seen many of them. They aren't suffering because (I presume) they don't >>>have a strong 'mental model' of 'self'. They don't feel sorry for >>>themselves. They don't compare themselves to other dogs. They just make >>>do with what they've got. I've seen dogs with only 2 legs and they don't >>>act any differently than those with 4. You could be a little >>>condescending and say 'they don't know any better' - when actually you >>>should be just saying 'they don't know' - and good for them. >>>> >>>> Contrast that with a human who has lost a leg. Many such humans will >>>suffer. They'll wonder 'why me'? 'What did I do to deserve this?' And be >>>envious of full-bodied humans who can do more and have more than they. >>>Why? Because they DO have a strong 'mental model' of 'self' and have >>>expectations of what life SHOULD be like, and do compare themselves with >>>others. Their life is not like others (the majority) and this >>>disappoints them so they suffer. >>>> >>>> Zazen can help... >>>> >>>> ...Bill! >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > >
