Merle,
READ THIS POST CAREFULLY!!!!
I NEVER said you posted 'crap' and I NEVER said you were 'off course' and I
NEVER said you are not 'zen enough' - whatever that means.
You continue to read my posts and then spit them back at me while interjecting
some kind of personal references or inferences which I DID NOT MAKE.
I said I was not interested in your recent posts because....and then told you.
I didn't say it was CRAP. I just said it didn't interest me. There are a lot
of non-crap, very good things that don't interest me or at least prompt me to
post on them.
I asked you that if you thought you had a 'course' I'd like to know what your
destination was.
As for 'not zen enough', I NEVER said that either although even your post below
implies you are living your life in the future, not NOW!
My advise is don't wait for 20 days until the marmalade is ready. Spread your
'gossamer wings' NOW.
...Bill!
I didn't say you 'were not zen enough'. From you post below I see some of your
goals and plans, but I do not see what YOU ARE DOING NOW.
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Â you said i was not zen enough ..as if you are an expert?????
>
> Â my target at this moment is to bottle the seville marmalade i am in the
> process of makingÂ
>
> Â and 20 days down the track have it on toast in the morning
> Â
> when i can zen through the day
>
> with my gossamer wings praying
>
> Â merle
>
>
>
> Â youMerle,
>
> Jim was asking for advice. I gave him a little peek at 'my way'.
>
> I don't think you're 'off course', but then having a course implies you have
> a destination, a target. Do you? If so what is it?
>
> ...Bill!
>
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > ÃÂ we all have our own ways bill!..you who seem to think i'm off course
> >
> > ...as the old ÃÂ song goes... ÃÂ "what ever gets you there go for it"
> >
> > ÃÂ merle...
> >
> > ÃÂ
> > Jim,
> >
> > Caveat: Everything I tell you is only my opinion.
> >
> > You've read a lot of books on what a lemon tastes like but now you need to
> > bite into the lemon and find out for yourself. The books can't do that for
> > you. They can encourage you and lead you up to that point, but their
> > usefulness ends there - and in fact I'd even say much of what you've
> > learned could be a hindrance to you in taking that final step.
> >
> > The taste of the lemon (and ONLY that)is what I call Buddha Nature, and it
> > is non-dualistic (no taster/lemon distintion - no subject/object). It is
> > what I often call 'Just THIS!' When experienced it has no name, no
> > description - it is Just THIS! Later we put names on it and give it a
> > description - but then it is not the thing itself (Just THIS!), it is our
> > description of it. It is what all the books you have read are trying to
> > do.
> >
> > IMO the image you described below as called "mental-integration-itself" is
> > illusory - samsara. As soon as you become aware of it as something that
> > seems to be an "...image inside my head, I can see all parts of the image
> > simultaneously because something in me is integrating the parts of the
> > image in some way." What you are describing here is still dualistic -
> > there is a you, you have a head, your head has an inside, this image is
> > located there, the image has parts, etc...
> >
> > The second description starts to move a little farther away from dualism:
> > "In a way, this transparent mental-integration-itself seems to be in front
> > of the image. I then de-emphasize the image so it slips partly from
> > awareness, while becoming more aware of the clear empty
> > mental-integration-itself." A lot would depend on just what you meant by
> > the phrase "clear empty mental-integration-itself." If you are still
> > clinging to a dualistic view of this, something like, 'I am sitting, and I
> > experience an image, and that image has parts and then another image
> > appears that I call the 'mental-integration' of that first image, and then
> > the first image disappears from my awareness (or at least recedes into the
> > background)- and this new image is EMPTY'.' I'd have to again ask, what do
> > you mean by 'empty'?
> >
> > If you mean this new image that you are now aware of that exists inside you
> > has no form, that's one thing. If you mean 'all is empty', no me, no
> > image, Just EMPTINESS!, then that is another thing entirely.
> >
> > Again, all this is just IMO.
> >
> > Before I could really offer you any advice I'd have to know what you mean
> > by 'mediation'. How do you do about that? If you could explain that a
> > little more it would help. Here's an example of how I sit (zazen):
> >
> > I start sitting by counting my breathes, then following my breathes and
> > then I drop the following and there is Just THIS!. In Japanese this is
> > called 'shikantaza' which literally means 'just sit' or is sometimes
> > translated as 'no mind'. What I do NOT do is try to visualize anything or
> > think of anything (like a 'safe place' or a mantra), although I know these
> > are styles of meditation.
> >
> > Thanks, and WELCOME TO THE ZEN FORUM!
> >
> > ...Bill!
> >
> > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "jfnewell7" <jfnewell7@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I need some practice advice. In my meditation, I have become aware of
> > > something I will call "mental-integration-itself" although those words
> > > are only an approximation. I will therefore report some background and
> > > details, below, to see if I can get this across. What I need is advice on
> > > whether or not mental-integration-itself is enough on the path that I
> > > should spend a lot of time noticing it. Also, of course, if anyone sees a
> > > way I can improve on the mental-integration-itself awareness I have so
> > > far, I would be grateful.
> > >
> > > Both Dzogchen and Zen say that somehow, satori and samsara are the same.
> > > I have tried for years to understand what that would feel like. Here are
> > > a several examples from a vast number of comments:
> > >
> > > Cleary, Thomas, trans. (2002) SECRETS OF THE BLUE CLIFF RECORD, ZEN
> > > COMMENTS BY HAKUIN AND TENKEI, Boston& London: Shambhala
> > >
> > > Page 76, "If potential does not leave a static position, it falls into a
> > > sea of poison ...
> > >
> > > "[Hakuin] The entirety of this introduction applies to the example.
> > > `Potential' is what appears before being expressed in words; the `static
> > > position' is the cave of satori...
> > >
> > > "[Tenkei] If you realize an awakening but do not eliminate leaking of
> > > views, you stick to the absolute stasis of transcendence in the realm of
> > > satori, which is to `fall into a sea of poison' ... "
> > >
> > > Rabjam, Longchen, Richard Barron, trans., Padma Translation Committee
> > > (2001) THE PRECIOUS TREASURY OF THE BASIC SPACE OF PHENOMENA, Junction
> > > City" Padma Publishing.
> > >
> > > Page 7, "However things appear or sound, within the vast realm of basic
> > > space they do not stray from the spontaneous equalness as dharmakaya,
> > > awakened mind...
> > >
> > > Page 15, "On this infinite foundation, extending everywhere impartially,
> > > the stronghold of awakened mind does not distinguish between samsara and
> > > nirvana..."
> > >
> > > Norbu, Chogyal Namkhui, Adriano Clemente, and Andrew Lukianowicz (1999)
> > > THE SUPREME SOURCE, THE KUNJED GYALPO, THE FUNDAMENTAL TANTRA OF DZOGCHEN
> > > SEMDE, Ithaca: Snow Lion Publications
> > >
> > > Page 150, "I am the essence of all phenomena; nothing exists that is not
> > > my essence. The teachers of the three dimensions {I'm unclear about what
> > > "dimensions" means here, Jim} are my essence. The Buddhas of the three
> > > times are my essence. The four types of yogins are my essence. The three
> > > worlds, of desire, of form, and without form, too, are my manifestations.
> > > The five great elements are my essence. The six classes of beings are my
> > > essence. All the habitats and the beings living therein are my essence.
> > > Nothing exists that is not my essence because I am the universal root:
> > > there is nothing that is not contained in me ..."
> > >
> > > OK. Now when I am meditating while there is an image inside my head, I
> > > can see all parts of the image simultaneously because something in me is
> > > integrating the parts of the image in some way. If I try to see this
> > > mental-integration-itself, the mental-integration-itself is like
> > > transparent space yet active. I can barely detect this transparent and it
> > > doesn't look like any of the shapes or colors of the image. In a way,
> > > this transparent mental-integration-itself seems to be in front of the
> > > image. I then de-emphasize the image so it slips partly from awareness,
> > > while becoming more aware of the clear empty mental-integration-itself.
> > >
> > > Intellectually, the mental-integration itself which I experience isn't
> > > any of the shapes or colors, yet it connects all the shapes and colors
> > > together. So it has a little bit of form, from the connecting, plus it is
> > > empty. Does the fact that it looks like it fits Buddhist definitions mean
> > > that what I am experiencing actually does fit those definitions?
> > > Therefore, would it be right to continue to become aware of the
> > > mental-integration-itself with all kinds of perceptions, experiences, and
> > > situations?
> > >
> > > So that I what I need some advice on.
> > >
> > > Jim
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------
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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
