Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2014 17:44:52 GMT -5
There is really only two things that I know from an experiential perspective. The first is that what I'm seeing with my eyes, "IS". I may not know what it "IS", but whatever it "IS", it "IS". Secondly, there is the awareness of "IS". So whatever it "IS" there is awareness of it. The rest is all conceptual. And the conceptual is absolutely necessary. sdp Depends. If you are a regular human being or one that can sit atop a mountain all day long.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jun 2, 2014 22:28:50 GMT -5
And the conceptual is absolutely necessary. sdp Depends. If you are a regular human being or one that can sit atop a mountain all day long. OK, I'll give you that. In fact, I always admired those dudes like Cold Mountain (Han San)....and Tarzan...... ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) . But of course we probably wouldn't know of Han San without his poems laying around and here and there.... sdp
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 3, 2014 0:46:36 GMT -5
There is really only two things that I know from an experiential perspective. The first is that what I'm seeing with my eyes, "IS". I may not know what it "IS", but whatever it "IS", it "IS". Secondly, there is the awareness of "IS". So whatever it "IS" there is awareness of it. The rest is all conceptual. And the conceptual is absolutely necessary. sdp ![](http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/yahoo/confused-yahoo-emoticon.gif)
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 3, 2014 5:21:55 GMT -5
Depends. If you are a regular human being or one that can sit atop a mountain all day long. OK, I'll give you that. In fact, I always admired those dudes like Cold Mountain (Han San)....and Tarzan...... ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) . But of course we probably wouldn't know of Han San without his poems laying around and here and there.... sdp If you have the opportunity, a visit to the Taoist Monasteries on Mt. Huashan (google it) is an adventure well worth the journey..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2014 13:02:10 GMT -5
Depends. If you are a regular human being or one that can sit atop a mountain all day long. OK, I'll give you that. In fact, I always admired those dudes like Cold Mountain (Han San)....and Tarzan...... ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) . But of course we probably wouldn't know of Han San without his poems laying around and here and there.... sdp Yes, and what his poems speak about is that we are all on Cold Mountain in this very moment, but it's veiled with the conceptual. I'm a normal human being, I'm not on Cold Mountain but on a living room couch.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 6, 2016 17:59:58 GMT -5
......bumped for Gopal......
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 9, 2017 18:45:27 GMT -5
Enigma's only comment to this was that it's too convoluted, I'll translate. As noted earlier, the following comes from Flowers Fall, A commentary on Zen Master Dogen's Genjokoan by Hakuun Yasutani (1885-1973), 1996 This addresses enigma and empty and his comment about zd. I see conceptual non-dualism going off the deep end, often, that is, many modern non-dual teachers. I get much value out of traditional Zen teachers (and Taoists, Kabbalists, Christian mystics, dzogchen and other teachings). For me, Hakuun Yasutani here keeps everything straight and balanced. (Dogen quote in italics). I'll separate the two words true and dharma and explain them in a manner easy to understand. True is the world of absolute equality. Dharma is the world of absolute differences. Please appreciate the effect of this word absolute. It's not simply speaking more emphatically. Absolute means the whole universe is nothing but equality, the whole universe is nothing but differentiation. Therefore, equality and differentiation are always of the same value. Or rather than "of the same value" they are the same thing. We can't even call them two faces of the same thing. When one says "equality," equality completely swallows up differences (it's not rejecting differences), and differences have no place to show their face. That's what's called absolute equality. Likewise, when one says "difference" differences completely swallow up equality (they're not ignoring equality), and equality has no place to show it's face. This is what's called absolute difference. "Emptiness" is equality; "causes and conditions" are differences. In the Buddha-dharma the word equality means emptiness. In the Buddha-dharma the word difference means form, that which has characteristics. In the Soto sect these are called, respectively, the absolute position and the relative position. ......... If we reduce the two words true dharma to the level of conceptual thought and explain them, "true dharma" means "emptiness" (true), causes and conditions (dharma)." One can also say as in the Heart Sutra, "form (dharma) is emptiness (true)," or "emptiness (true) is form (dharma)." However, thoughts are dead things, they are concepts, not living reality. (pages 1, 2)............ Next, concerning the word genjokoan, genjo is phenomena. It's the whole universe. It's all mental and physical phenomena. ........... Koan is derived from the word official document, and is used to mean the unerring absolute authority of the Buddha-dharma. So then, genjokoan means that the subjective realm and the objective realm, and the self and all the things in the universe, are nothing but the true Buddha-dharma itself. ............. Genjokoan means that what is manifest ( genjo) is itself absolute reality ( koan). It means all phenomenon are the supreme way. The supreme way is the original self. People hearing this for the first time are surprised. They can't believe their own ears or eyes. ...........The feet are the Buddha way. The hands are the Buddha way. One's whole body and mind is the Buddha way. One's whole life is the Buddha way. ............. Now look. Having gazed out at the phenomenal world and explained that "that is the Buddha way, that is the manifestation of the truth" is not enough. The whole phenomenal world is entirely oneself. Therefore the clouds, the mountains, and the flowers, the sound of a fart.......are all the original self. ....everything all together is supreme enlightenment. ............ Throwing everything into a big catch-all bag by saying "Well, everything, whatever it may be is the Buddha-dharma," doesn't amount to anything. You might say that that's absolute value, but if you take the most important thing, which is yourself, out of the picture, what is absolute value? (pages 6-10) In mustering the whole body and mind and seeing forms, in mustering the whole body and mind and hearing sounds, they are intimately perceived; but it is not like the reflection in a mirror, nor like the moon in water, When one side is realized, the other side is dark. (pg 31) ..................... This is a very cool book. I read over two hours yesterday...couldn't put it down......Dogen is da man, deserves his reputation......... So, everything is not illusion. There is a phenomenal world. Your criticism of zd that his view that sensory perceptions are ephemeral, is just not accurate. The senses and the brain/mind give us a fairly correct representation of the exterior world. I think zd is way past you or anybody else here. sdp Hukuun Yasutani says there are two aspects to the world represented by the words true dharma. True means the absolute, the whole universe is nothing but equality (non-duality). Dharma means differentiation (duality). Then he says that not only are non-duality and duality of the same value, they are the same thing. Enigma is one who "Throws everything into a catch-all bag" and says, everything equals everything so nothing amounts to anything. And in doing so, "you take out the most important thing", yourself. In that case, what value does the absolute value have? And since the subjective realm and the objective realm, the relative position and the absolute position, are one and the same, self and body are of the same value as the world of absolute equality, therefore, one's whole body and mind and life is the Buddha way. Therefore, sensory perceptions are not ephemeral. I finished the book. It's right up there with The unborn by Zen Master Bankei. I also learned that Hakuun Yasutani was Albert Low's first Zen teacher. That's cool as I've always liked Albert Low, his books. sdp .................bumped................
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 9, 2017 18:46:35 GMT -5
Doesn't matter. Neither one is 'I'. I'm with Empty on this one. Because I see mind, body, and awareness as one unified field, I have no problem saying that I am this body as much as the awareness that sees the body. If I go out in the rain, I get wet because this is how I/IT manifests. .................bumped..................
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 9, 2017 18:48:53 GMT -5
I didn't say the body is a misconception, I said the question "Where are you" is a misconception. It presupposes a 'you' and attempts to find it during ATA. The entire OP was the question. As I figured was clear to everyone by now, and as stated in the OP (third of four paragraphs, just so you don't have to read the whole thing), I was not talking about the you, as self. I don't know how anyone can participate in a thread without reading the OP. sdp ..................bumped......................
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 9, 2017 18:51:07 GMT -5
I won't argue the point, everybody can decide for themselves if the thread had any value. I know an appeal to authority isn't the best verification as one will always pick an authority that agrees with their view, but the quotes of the commentaries of Hakuun Yasutani on Dogen's Genjokoan, show that Yasutani didn't consider the body a misconception, nor Dogen, the founder of Soto (just sit) Zen, in Japan. Maybe just sitting isn't just sitting. sdp The body is not a misconception or an illusion. The Zen student who sat down on the tracks in front of the bullet train near Tokyo is often used to illustrate how Zen students sometimes completely misunderstand what Zen is pointing to. The misconception is thinking that the body is inhabited by an entity, a self, and that both are separate from what we can call "the external world." There is only THIS-- "what is"---, and THIS is what we ARE. What we ARE is beyond comprehension or definition. THIS has no inside, no outside, and no boundaries. Contemplating the body is useful because it is always here and now, and it can be a gateway into the unknown. The body pumps blood, transmits nerve impulses, grows tissues, eats, excretes, sees, hears, feels, etc., and it does all of this without an imaginary person inside pulling strings and levers (ha ha). If the body is contemplated deeply, it will be seen as a stranger and stranger thing as the usual habits of mind are suspended and the see-er and the seen cease to be separate. In the same way that the body pumps blood everything else is happening without an internal imaginary actor. There is only one actor, but it is not who it is usually thought to be. For anybody who wants to understand what's going on, I can only suggest contemplating the body with a still mind. ................bumped..................
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 9, 2017 18:53:46 GMT -5
I won't say, because at this point it would be overkill, but that which is missing isn't missed when it is missing. *chuckle* Then my bad. I thought zd had gotten it because he sometimes says, the body does such-and-such, instead of saying I did, and that would point him to the answer. My interpretation: I won't say, because at this point it would be overkill, but that which is missing (the awareness of the body) isn't missed (the body is present even in the absence of awareness of the body) when it is missing (when one is not experiencing the presence of the body). I interpreted overkill to mean that the answer was obvious. I interpreted *chuckle* to mean the answer was obvious. But at this point, it is what it is. sdp ......................bumped........................
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 9, 2017 18:56:23 GMT -5
Then SDP's game is even sillierer than I thought. That's not the reason you think it's silly. It's because you like most of us who think we know something, couldn't figure it out. ..................bumped.................
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 9, 2017 18:58:25 GMT -5
OK. But do you see what I'm sayin? Meaning is dependent on language and language is conceptual. So "the body" is by definition, a concept. So how might you non-conceptually define the body? Well, Laughter's "breathes in, breathes out" and Mamza's raised fist posts in this thread were more than just clever hints. They were pointing at that non conceptual experience of the body as best they could, given the limitations we have here of having to communicate through written word. Then you weren't clear. If you meant by typing in the words 'the body' you meant the concept, pointing to the words and not to the actual experience of the body, then OK. By mamza's PMs I knew he had it, as I said, he let me know in a zd sort of way. I couldn't tell, or not, 100% if mamza had it, I couldn't read-his-mind. Likewise, laughter gave a very good answer, but I couldn't be sure if he was like...shooting in the dark from past experience or if he really had it. Yes, words are limited. I already offered apologies to laughter, rupa and earnest, who were the closest to the answer, if they really actually had it. Tzu also did pretty good, later, but he didn't want to try to reduce his post to two words. (the body or physical body). sdp ...................bumped.................
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2017 18:58:47 GMT -5
Then my bad. I thought zd had gotten it because he sometimes says, the body does such-and-such, instead of saying I did, and that would point him to the answer. My interpretation: I won't say, because at this point it would be overkill, but that which is missing (the awareness of the body) isn't missed (the body is present even in the absence of awareness of the body) when it is missing (when one is not experiencing the presence of the body). I interpreted overkill to mean that the answer was obvious. I interpreted *chuckle* to mean the answer was obvious. But at this point, it is what it is. sdp ......................bumped........................ That's why he didn't want to say the obvious? I cannot help its self but the Self supports the I. Nothing is LOST!
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 9, 2017 19:00:25 GMT -5
But I thought we were talking about direct experience. That's what ATA is about after all. By direct experience alone, in the moment, you can't say the body is still present, because it's not being experienced. In fact it's not even being thought about. So all you can really say about that moment is that the body is not in consciousness. It's only after the fact that you can make the inference (to paraphrase) "the body was not in consciousness, but it is was still present." Don't you agree? Absolutely. But if you think your body is blinking in and out of the world, hire someone for one day to keep watching your body so that when you "do not experience the presence of your body", you'll know it didn't blink out of existence. (I'm not being sarcastic, I really don't know how else to answer your question). sdp .............bumped (mostly for teetown's post).............
|
|