Tugas Gunadarma Gunadarma Tutorial VB.NET Download OST Anime Soundtrack Anime Opening Anime Ending Anime OST Anime Japan Download Lagu Anime Jepang

Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: SPLIT TOPIC: Brain, Mind ... NEVER MIND!

  1. #1
    disastermouse
    Guest

    SPLIT TOPIC: Brain, Mind ... NEVER MIND!

    NOTE FROM JUNDO: I SPLIT THIS BIG TOPIC FROM THE JUKAI DISCUSSION ON THE PRECEPT ON AVOIDING SEXUAL MISCONDUCT

    Quote Originally Posted by Jundo View Post
    Hi Alan,

    Well, I would say that such is a traditional view of Chinese Medicine, with a heavy dose of Taoism, rather than strictly Buddhist or Zen Buddhist. Some old Asian Zen folks, being old Asians of course, professed such things too. In centuries past, that is how folks in Asia tried to describe what is going on in the body before all our modern ways of doing so. Is it literally true or not? Do such energies truly exist in and around us? Well, maybe not as something that can be seen with a microscope or on a meter ... but if it helps you express in words something true, then it is useful, a poetic description. Also, much of what he is describing ... about nourishing, caring for and resting the body-mind ... is true no matter how it is called or described.

    I do agree that Shikantaza is finding a balance amid/as/through-and-through the swirling imbalances of this life-world ... a balance of body-mind. It is balance of the body in sitting, balance of the mind ... body and mind, not two. It is a Balance so Balanced, it covers both daily balances and imbalances.

    Gassho, J
    Isn't this like the difference between 'brain' and 'mind'? Brain may be the outward organ, but mind is the internal experience.

    Chet
    Last edited by Jundo; 11-14-2012 at 03:15 AM.

  2. #2
    Treeleaf Unsui Shokai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Sarnia, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    2,108
    Blog Entries
    119
    I have experienced being connected to a computer by a Japanese Doctor (in Japan) and being diagnosed by virtue of his analysis of the meridians of energy pulsing throughout my body in order to decide on a treatment.
    Isn't this like the difference between 'brain' and 'mind'?
    My understanding of the anatomy and physiology of the human body is that the brain is the organ presiding within the cranium and can be argued to reach out as far as the axons reachAXON.jpg. In which case we would be talking about the Nervous system. Regardless, hasn't it been proven with in the past twenty years or so that memory can be found in the DNA which would suggest that the mind pervades the entire body?
    But then of course, we can think of the mind as being of three minds; Magnanimous Mind (daishin), Nurturing Mind (roshin), and Joyful Mind (kishin). In which case we'd be connoting attitude or world view; bringing us back to big "M' mind.
    gassho, Shokai, still learning the way and knowing nothing
    仁道 生開 - Jindo Shokai "Open to life in a benevolent way"
    Just another itinerant monk; go somewhere else to listen to someone who really knows.

  3. #3
    disastermouse
    Guest
    No, I mean ontologically - the 'Brain' is the physical thing, the 'Mind' is the internal SUBJECTIVE experience of consciousness. We talk about them differently because they are inherently different experiences. We don't talk about our internal experience of happiness in terms of neurotransmitters (even if we know they are correlated). In general - we have different language for our interiors.

    Chet

  4. #4
    Hi,

    This is such a BIG topic, that I moved it into its own thread.

    Here is my impression:

    Modern science has not yet clearly resolved the relationship of the "brain" to the human "mind". Are they one and the same, or different? Is the brain the cause of the mind, or does mind exist apart from the brain? Is mind found only within your own skull, or is mind somehow tapping into something wider ... maybe universal or even super-natural? Philosophers and neurologists, materialists and mystics have long debated this, and while it appears that the brain plays a key role (if not the exclusive role) in some way ... still nobody has a complete answer.

    For that reason, most Zen folks ... for centuries ... have been quite content to avoid the whole "chicken vs. egg" debate and to step around the question. We don't really care if the mind is "only the brain" or not.

    You see, without regard to the relationship of "mind" to "brain", we have always said that "Mind" (big "M") is quite clearly a total process and flowing of data from the "outside" world, through the senses, into our inner mind (where it is all processed, categorized, appraised and reacted to) until then flowing back out of us as our responses and reactive behavior in the world. Without the "outside" world, you would have no experience of subjective "you" ... and so "Mind" is transcendent of inner and outer. It is much like saying that we cannot breath without both lungs within us, and air around us ... and one without the other is not life and breathing and thus no "us"! So it is with thinking and living! What is more, the "inner" and the "outer" are so intimately interconnected, that changing either pole can radically change the experience of the other (for example, a "beautiful sunset" outside creates the experience of "beautiful sunset" inside, but at the same time, only the inner experience of "beautiful" and labeling as "sunset" turn some aimless solar rays randomly striking gases of the atmosphere into "beautiful sunset" ... or perhaps, under other conditions, a "painful sunburn". Thus "Mind" includes even the sun and air! )

    Mind thus includes everything and the kitchen sink, inside and out ... every darn things in time and space that in any way contributed to your being alive right now, so much so ... beyond even divisions of "this" and that", "in" or "out", that we might call "Mind" as "Buddha" too!

    BOTTOM LINE: Apart from realizing that our Mind, whole life and all the world are interflowing as one ... Zennies tend to avoid the chicken-egg debate of brain-mind. Whatever science someday discovers (or never discovers) about it will be fine with us, and will likely be perfectly compatible with the process I describe above.

    Now, off to watch the sunset!

    Gassho, J
    Last edited by Jundo; 11-13-2012 at 04:31 PM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

    #SAT TODAY!

  5. #5
    Senior Member galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mormon Country
    Posts
    352
    What does any of this, have to do with anything?


    Gassho
    Nothing Special

  6. #6
    disastermouse
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by galen View Post
    What does any of this, have to do with anything?


    Gassho
    It's a common question. The Western tendency has been to reduce it all to brain. The tradition seems to speak of mind more expansively. It certainly comes up on questions about rebirth and karma.

    Chet

  7. #7
    Senior Member galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mormon Country
    Posts
    352
    Quote Originally Posted by disastermouse View Post
    It's a common question. The Western tendency has been to reduce it all to brain. The tradition seems to speak of mind more expansively. It certainly comes up on questions about rebirth and karma.

    Chet


    Thanks Chet.

    I pretty much get that. I just wondered if it is really worth the discussion in the Big picture, that was all. Like does it really matter? Absolutely nothing wrong with the discussion, it just seems for those who ask, just sitting and sitting no questions asked one finds the answer. There is no answer to this question, seemingly, only perception and what is relative.... and that is fine.


    Gassho
    Nothing Special

  8. #8
    Treeleaf Unsui Shokai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Sarnia, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    2,108
    Blog Entries
    119
    We'll never know if we don't ask
    gassho, Shokai, still learning the way and knowing nothing
    仁道 生開 - Jindo Shokai "Open to life in a benevolent way"
    Just another itinerant monk; go somewhere else to listen to someone who really knows.

  9. #9
    Treeleaf Unsui Dosho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Rochester, NY, USA
    Posts
    5,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Shokai View Post
    We'll never know if we don't ask

    True Shokai, but some of us are trying to learn how not to ask so MANY questions.

    Gassho,
    Dosho
    Ordained Priest -In-Training & Shuso (Head Seat) for November - Ango 2014
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Please take what I say with a grain of salt, especially in matters of the Dharma!

  10. #10
    disastermouse
    Guest
    Asking the questions isn't a problem - thinking you have the answer is the problem.

    Further than that:

    I think it's important not to reduce the interior landscape to exterior functions - because the interior landscape has it's own language and 'map'. As important as it is to not disembody it, it's also important not to reduce interiors to exteriors. They are co-related but they aren't the same thing.

    IMHO.

    Chet

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by disastermouse View Post

    I think it's important not to reduce the interior landscape to exterior functions - because the interior landscape has it's own language and 'map'. As important as it is to not disembody it, it's also important not to reduce interiors to exteriors. They are co-related but they aren't the same thing.

    IMHO.

    Chet
    Well, "the interior landscape" might be quite different from "the exterior functions", but for purposes of Zen Practice we are quite simple minded.

    Yes, in is in, and out is out.

    But out is thoroughly in, and in is fully out to the farthest star and beyond.

    Then drop away all "in" vs. "out" and get on with it, freed of greed anger and ignorance.

    All at once.

    Gassho, J
    Last edited by Jundo; 11-15-2012 at 05:22 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

    #SAT TODAY!

  12. #12
    disastermouse
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Jundo View Post
    Well, "the interior landscape" might be quite different from "the exterior functions", but for purposes of Zen Practice we are quite simple minded.

    Yes, in is in, and out is out.

    But out is thoroughly in, and in is fully out to the farthest star and beyond.

    Then drop away all "in" vs. "out" and get on with it, freed of greed anger and ignorance.

    All at once.

    Gassho, J
    Right. And that means making peace and seeing things as they are - which is actually quite peaceful. That means not reducing inners to outers or outers to inners. There is no reduction without remainder in a simple acknowledgment of what is.

    Chet

  13. #13
    I posted this in the "robot" thread today, and it also applies here and a couple of other threads ongoing ...

    ---------------------

    I wish a little, like a robot, that some of this conversation had an "off switch".

    It would be fine to discuss some of these topics in a forum about artificial intelligence or scifi, ethics or philosophy or the like ... but in a Zen Forum, we often find the clearest clarity by keeping things simple and avoiding questions. My job is often to toss cold water on good discussions. It is not because I am anti-intellectual and don't enjoy such dorm room and coffee shop ruminations (I do!!). It is just that, for Zen Practice, we generally find our "answers" by stilling the debating mind.

    For example, on the subject of the chicken-or-egg question of "mind" and "brain", please see this other thread where the question is side stepped.

    Brain, Mind ... NEVER MIND!
    http://www.treeleaf.org/forums/showt...ll=1#post89592

    On the subject of "free will", Buddhists generally believe that ... imagined or not ... we seem to choose our next step, are ever at a crossroads, and certainly pay a good deal of the consequences of our volitional actions. Apart from that, we are happy to avoid the chicken-egg debate. More here:
    http://www.treeleaf.org/forums/showt...ll=1#post19537

    I offered this today on violent video games, and feel it may apply to this topic too ... and am not going to go much further.

    I would think that it is not good to hurt sentient beings, even if they are imaginary sentient beings and "simulated" violence.

    I am sorry if we sometimes sound like the "just stop it" fellow that was posted on another thread today ...
    http://www.treeleaf.org/forums/showt...ll=1#post89657

    ... but we are, although with an important twist. That twist is that we are more just "let it be" people when it comes to certain points of mental wheel spinning and debate. Is there free will, do robots have Buddha nature, is vanilla better than chocolate (and countless other such questions) ... just sit, live gently.

    Gassho, Jundo
    Last edited by Jundo; 11-15-2012 at 03:48 PM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

    #SAT TODAY!

  14. #14
    Senior Member galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mormon Country
    Posts
    352
    Quote Originally Posted by disastermouse View Post
    Asking the questions isn't a problem - thinking you have the answer is the problem.

    Further than that:

    I think it's important not to reduce the interior landscape to exterior functions - because the interior landscape has it's own language and 'map'. As important as it is to not disembody it, it's also important not to reduce interiors to exteriors. They are co-related but they aren't the same thing.

    IMHO.

    Chet



    It seems you are reducing here. It could be said the Mind is inner/outer, with no beginning or end, encompassing all there Is; to include the brain organ which is mostly run by the small minded ego. While the brain at times may be brilliantly intelligent, at other times it seemingly keeps us clinging and in circles (that is where `emptiness can bring such relief, just empty the damn thing all ready ). It just seems so obvious the Mind is so much more (and less), how can it even be brought to the level of some mystery comparison of a bodily organ?

    In another sense, Jundo and Dosho pretty much seem to have covered the circling and questioning.

    Well done though Chet, on this bewilderment, in light of if even it was needed.


    Gassho
    Nothing Special

  15. #15
    A note from me as an academic--not trying to contradict Jundo (though I may do so inadvertently without trying); Jundo says "we have always said that "Mind" (big "M") is quite clearly a total process and flowing of data from the "outside" world, through the senses, into our inner mind (where it is all processed, categorized, appraised and reacted to) until then flowing back out of us as our responses and reactive behavior in the world."

    Actually, this is one perspective on Mind that some (including me) have found problematic. A key work on this is "The Extended Mind" by Clark and Chalmers. They set out a thought experiment (Wikipedia quoted here):
    The fictional characters Otto and Inga are both traveling to a museum simultaneously. Otto has Alzheimer's Disease, and has written all of his directions down in a notebook to serve the function of his memory. Inga is able to recall the internal directions within her memory. In a traditional sense, Inga can be thought to have had a belief as to the location of the museum before consulting her memory. In the same manner, Otto can be said to have held a belief of the location of the museum before consulting his notebook. The argument is that the only difference existing in these two cases is that Inga's memory is being internally processed by the brain, while Otto's memory is being served by the notebook. In other words, Otto's mind has been extended to include the notebook as the source of his memory. The notebook qualifies as such because it is constantly and immediately accessible to Otto, and it is automatically endorsed by him.

    If the notebook is encompassed within Otto's mind, it is not too much of a stretch to replace the notebook with "friends" (social cognition) or event/environment (situated cognition). My own research on biodiversity conservation policy suggests that information is "processed, categorized, appraised and reacted to" in the brain, the social group, or some combination of people/artifacts/environment. (I just posted a semi-related comment in the Cyborg thread). The idea of mind as assemblages or articulations has increasing traction in social sciences. </academic hat>

    What perceives, assesses, categorizes is the system, staring wide-eyed at itself...

    Flowing of data
    Inner mind is beaten by
    Old man's walking stick

  16. #16
    disastermouse
    Guest
    Galen,

    I read what you wrote a few times and had a difficult time following it. My whole point was to argue against reducing 'mind' to an epiphenomenon of 'brain' - not to limit mind, necessarily. Is 'mind' purely produced by brain? How could you know? Since 'brain' can only be accessed via mind, there is no way to conclusively excise mind from the act of knowing or deducing.

    Maybe I've misunderstood what you meant.

    Gassho,

    Chet

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by tedmac View Post

    Actually, this is one perspective on Mind that some (including me) have found problematic. A key work on this is "The Extended Mind" by Clark and Chalmers. They set out a thought experiment (Wikipedia quoted here):
    [INDENT][I]The fictional characters Otto and Inga are both traveling to a museum simultaneously. Otto has Alzheimer's Disease, and has written all of his directions down in a notebook to serve the function of his memory. Inga is able to recall the internal directions within her memory.
    Hi Ted,

    If I understand correctly, we are not quite talking about the same thing. The above story seems to be talking about our small "m" inner mind, aided perhaps by an outside notebook, friends' advice, outside maps, street signs and the like.

    I was describing your Big "M" mind model, in a Buddhist sense, in which the brain, eyes, light rays, notebooks, friends, maps, street signs, museums, bodily reactions in response, and much more are defined as one single thing, one single unbroken process, beyond all "drawn lines" of inner and outer. In a sense too, anything that has every contributed to the existence of any of the above ... including but not limited to the smallest atoms to distant suns where there atoms where born to make the brain, eyes, notebooks and museums ... are included in the process and definition of Big "M" Mind too.

    And there is no reason to stop there. Many Zen Ancestors would go further in pointing to Big "M" Mind. Perhaps the most well known was Huang Po, who would take "Mind" a step beyond ... dropping, not only "in" and "out", but even our categories, divisions and names for "brain" "eyes" "light" "notebooks" "museums" and all the rest in a return to the undivided essence which sweeps all within ...


    Only come to know the nature of your own Mind, in which there is no self and no other, and you will in fact be a Buddha.


    ...

    When all the Buddhas manifest themselves in the world, they proclaim nothing but the One Mind. Thus, Gotama Buddha silently transmitted to Mahakasyapa the doctrine that the One Mind, which is the substance of all things, is co-extensive with [Emptiness] and fills the entire world of phenomena.

    ...

    This ultimate pure source of Mind encompasses all Buddhas, sentient beings and the world of mountains, rivers, forms and formlessness. Throughout the ten directions, all and everything reflects the equality of pure Mind, which is always universally penetrating and illuminating. However, those with merely worldly understanding cannot recognize this truth and so identify seeing, hearing, touching and thinking as the mind. Covered by seeing, hearing, touching and thinking, one cannot see the brightness of Original Mind. If suddenly one is without mind, Original Mind will appear like the great sun in the sky, illuminating everywhere without obstruction.

    Most Dharma students only know seeing, hearing, touching and thinking as movement and function and are, therefore, unable to recognize Original Mind at the moment of seeing, hearing, touching and thinking. However, Original Mind does not belong to seeing, hearing, touching and thinking but also is not distinct or separate from these activities. The view that one is seeing, hearing, touching and thinking does not arise; and yet one is not separate from these activities. This movement does not dim the Mind, for it is neither itself a thing nor something apart from things. Neither staying nor grasping, capable of freely moving in any direction whatsoever, everywhere, this Mind becomes the Bodhimandala.


    ...


    All Buddhas and all sentient beings are no different from the One Mind. In this One Mind there is neither arising nor ceasing, no name or form, no long or short, no large or small, and neither existence nor non-existence. It transcends all limitations of name, word and relativity, and it is as boundless as the great void. Giving rise to thought is erroneous, and any speculation about it with our ordinary faculties is inapplicable, irrelevant and inaccurate. Only Mind is Buddha, and Buddhas and sentient beings are not different. All sentient beings grasp form and search outside themselves. Using Buddha to seek Buddha, they thus use mind [small "m"] to seek Mind. Practicing in this manner even until the end of [time], they cannot attain the fruit. However, when thinking and discrimination suddenly halt, the Buddhas appear.



    Gassho, J
    Last edited by Jundo; 11-17-2012 at 04:25 PM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

    #SAT TODAY!

  18. #18
    Huang's words feel so intuitively correct - but the moment I start 'thinking' about Mind the intuitive connection scrambles and evaporates.

    I wish I had an off switch for thinking and discrimination.

    Is Zazen the 'off switch' ? - I rarely reach a place where I could say it is so.

    Practice very unfocused just now

    Gassho

    Willow

  19. #19
    Senior Member galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mormon Country
    Posts
    352
    Quote Originally Posted by disastermouse View Post
    Galen,

    I read what you wrote a few times and had a difficult time following it. My whole point was to argue against reducing 'mind' to an epiphenomenon of 'brain' - not to limit mind, necessarily. Is 'mind' purely produced by brain? How could you know? Since 'brain' can only be accessed via mind, there is no way to conclusively excise mind from the act of knowing or deducing.

    Maybe I've misunderstood what you meant.

    Gassho,

    Chet


    Understandable Ted......... as far as my post/posts making sense . But I think my take is close to Jundos here, and even to the point, you could not have a brain or anything of the body without the big Mind.


    Gassho
    Nothing Special

  20. #20
    Thanks, Jundo! Reading your response, I think I was talking about two things (memory as mind and other things as Mind); What I think is cool is that that some scientists (not necessarily Buddhists) are saying the same thing based on research that Buddhists have been saying based on intuitive mind-body experience: that Mind can't be restricted to just what is between our ears and actually includes all those other things.

    I don't think this sort of academic understanding is the same as a whole-being realization, and I sort of come at it from the other side. Rather than being a scientist whose research brings me into alignment with some Buddhist ideas, I'm a Buddhist whose research inevitably reflects other aspects of my life. At this point, I'm officially rambling. I, I, I. One of my tendencies and one reason I don't post more. Back to the zafu!

    Gracias,
    T

  21. #21
    Senior Member galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mormon Country
    Posts
    352
    Quote Originally Posted by Jundo View Post
    Hi Ted,

    If I understand correctly, we are not quite talking about the same thing. The above story seems to be talking about our small "m" inner mind, aided perhaps by an outside notebook, friends' advice, outside maps, street signs and the like.

    I was describing your Big "M" mind model, in a Buddhist sense, in which the brain, eyes, light rays, notebooks, friends, maps, street signs, museums, bodily reactions in response, and much more are defined as one single thing, one single unbroken process, beyond all "drawn lines" of inner and outer. In a sense too, anything that has every contributed to the existence of any of the above ... including but not limited to the smallest atoms to distant suns where there atoms where born to make the brain, eyes, notebooks and museums ... are included in the process and definition of Big "M" Mind too.

    And there is no reason to stop there. Many Zen Ancestors would go further in pointing to Big "M" Mind. Perhaps the most well known was Huang Po, who would take "Mind" a step beyond ... dropping, not only "in" and "out", but even our categories, divisions and names for "brain" "eyes" "light" "notebooks" "museums" and all the rest in a return to the undivided essence which sweeps all within ...


    Only come to know the nature of your own Mind, in which there is no self and no other, and you will in fact be a Buddha.


    ...

    When all the Buddhas manifest themselves in the world, they proclaim nothing but the One Mind. Thus, Gotama Buddha silently transmitted to Mahakasyapa the doctrine that the One Mind, which is the substance of all things, is co-extensive with [Emptiness] and fills the entire world of phenomena.

    ...

    This ultimate pure source of Mind encompasses all Buddhas, sentient beings and the world of mountains, rivers, forms and formlessness. Throughout the ten directions, all and everything reflects the equality of pure Mind, which is always universally penetrating and illuminating. However, those with merely worldly understanding cannot recognize this truth and so identify seeing, hearing, touching and thinking as the mind. Covered by seeing, hearing, touching and thinking, one cannot see the brightness of Original Mind. If suddenly one is without mind, Original Mind will appear like the great sun in the sky, illuminating everywhere without obstruction.

    Most Dharma students only know seeing, hearing, touching and thinking as movement and function and are, therefore, unable to recognize Original Mind at the moment of seeing, hearing, touching and thinking. However, Original Mind does not belong to seeing, hearing, touching and thinking but also is not distinct or separate from these activities. The view that one is seeing, hearing, touching and thinking does not arise; and yet one is not separate from these activities. This movement does not dim the Mind, for it is neither itself a thing nor something apart from things. Neither staying nor grasping, capable of freely moving in any direction whatsoever, everywhere, this Mind becomes the Bodhimandala.


    ...


    All Buddhas and all sentient beings are no different from the One Mind. In this One Mind there is neither arising nor ceasing, no name or form, no long or short, no large or small, and neither existence nor non-existence. It transcends all limitations of name, word and relativity, and it is as boundless as the great void. Giving rise to thought is erroneous, and any speculation about it with our ordinary faculties is inapplicable, irrelevant and inaccurate. Only Mind is Buddha, and Buddhas and sentient beings are not different. All sentient beings grasp form and search outside themselves. Using Buddha to seek Buddha, they thus use mind [small "m"] to seek Mind. Practicing in this manner even until the end of [time], they cannot attain the fruit. However, when thinking and discrimination suddenly halt, the Buddhas appear.



    Gassho, J


    Jundo.... thank you for this!

    To feel this to the bone, it seems only the embodiment of such really matters, the rest can fall away. It seems, only goaless sitting and more sitting can hold the possibility of any releasing of everything we so cling to, when there is nothing to cling to but ego and suffering it entails.

    Wow, this is so simple, yet so unobvious and unavailable to most in phenomena.



    Gassho
    Last edited by galen; 11-18-2012 at 05:32 PM.
    Nothing Special

  22. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by galen View Post
    Jundo.... thank you for this!

    To feel this to the bone, it seems only the embodiment of such really matters, the rest can fall away. It seems, only goaless sitting and more sitting can hold the possibility of any releasing of everything we so cling to, when there is nothing to cling to but ego and suffering it entails.

    Wow, this is so simple, yet so unobvious and unavailable to most in phenomena.



    Gassho
    Actually, Huang Po and others who speak of "let all fall away" are only 80% there, for then all must fall back (though ultimately no place to fall). One cannot live without ego, without phenomena, only in Emptyness. One should not just stay with Emptyness Only, but come back to all the seeing, hearing, touching and thinking, mountains, rivers, the concrete and abstract, clinging without clinging, throughout the ten directions, each also Emptyness all along. Dogen was a master of bringing this "up in the Empty airness" back down to earth ... into the kitchen, the toilet, the garden of the monastery. In modern term, we might say that "Mind" is the home, the children's nursery and sickroom, the office or factory, the bus and city streets, you, me and the other guys.

    Don't get lost in the high atmosphere, keep one's feet planted on the ground.

    Gassho, J
    Last edited by Jundo; 11-19-2012 at 05:28 PM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

    #SAT TODAY!

  23. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by willow View Post
    Huang's words feel so intuitively correct - but the moment I start 'thinking' about Mind the intuitive connection scrambles and evaporates.

    I wish I had an off switch for thinking and discrimination.

    Is Zazen the 'off switch' ? - I rarely reach a place where I could say it is so.

    Practice very unfocused just now

    Gassho

    Willow
    Sorry to quote myself (!) - but I don't want to lose this question. In 'coming back' have we ever really moved away?

    ....... I think something's just cleared writing that .....

    Gassho

    Willow

  24. #24
    Senior Member galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mormon Country
    Posts
    352
    Quote Originally Posted by galen View Post
    Understandable Ted......... as far as my post/posts making sense . But I think my take is close to Jundos here, and even to the point, you could not have a brain or anything of the body without the big Mind.


    Gassho



    Of course this was meant for Chet and not Ted... daaaaaaaa !


    Gassho
    Nothing Special

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •