Mark,
Language is based on rational thought. Rationality itself is inherently
dualistic, so it is very difficult to use language when talking about these
kinds of things. This is why a lot of zen masters choose not to use
language at all (slap the floor, turn around and walk away, tweak your
nose), or use language is such a way as to be obvious that they are not
using it in the normal manner (three pounds of flax, dried shit on a stick,
mu).
With that BIG BIG caveat, my responses to your post are embedded below:
You wrote:
>What is a "moment"?
When I was using (borrowing from Mayka or Edgar really) the word 'moment', I
was using it to mean 'now'. I was NOT using it to mean a 'short piece of
time' (a quantum of time). There is no other moment than now. There is no
other time than the eternal now. Even using the word 'now' is misleading
because it implies there is a not-now, such as the past and future. Past
and future are illusions. If I were with you and you asked me 'What is a
moment?', or better yet 'What is now?', I might slap you in the face. That
might allow you to experience 'now' and only 'now', and cause you (even if
just for a 'moment') to quit intellectualizing about what 'now' is. That
would be a MUCH better response than this post. That would be a more
appropriate zen response.
>If I am hungry and I prepare something to eat, then where does
>"just this" stop being "I am hungry" and start being "I am
>preparing food"?
When you are hungry, you're hungry. The Present Moment is Hungry. The
entire universe is Hungry! When you're preparing food, you're preparing
food. The Present Moment is Preparing Food. The entire universe is
Preparing Food. These are not two separate acts, these are not even acts.
Actions imply a subject/object relationship. There is no subject (sadness)
that is acting on an object (you). There is no subject (you) that is acting
on (preparing) an object (food). These are a 'single state' of awareness.
These are awareness. They are an expression of Buddha Nature. Since they
are awareness and not actions, they do not have to EITHER happen 1)
synchronously (at the same time), or 2) asynchronously (at different times -
perhaps chronologically). You could say they are the same act and they
happen at the only time there ever is - now; or you could just say they are
awareness - an awareness of Now.
>Does "prepare food" take me out of the immediate moment,
>since it looks toward something else later? Or, is it
>as simple as saying "Right now I am focused on the preparing
>of the food, and I will not obsess about the eating of it"?
'Prepare food' does not have to take you out of Now, if that is what you are
doing (aware of) Now. If you are anticipating eating the food then you have
lost awareness of Now. You could be aware of your stomach churning, your
saliva glands aching or your body becoming anxious and not have lost
awareness of Now.
This is my understanding.
Okay, which is a better response to your questions? This post or a slap in
the face?...Bill!
------------------------------------
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:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[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/
