That's true but bigger than my point. We should not use pronouns, j think perhaps a verb would be less deceptive.
Dance, dance dance. The zen forum is more of a substitute for reality TV than about ordinary reality. Thanks, Chris Austin-Lane Sent from a cell phone On Apr 3, 2011, at 14:54, mike brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Chris, > > Of course, the Tao that can be named is not the Tao. Words are clumsy tools > and can only symbolise and point at 'it', but without words we'd have no Zen > forum and people here would have to go back to hanging around street corners > again (or orgyhouses). > > Mike > > > From: ChrisAustinLane <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Sent: Mon, 4 April, 2011 3:02:20 > Subject: Re: [Zen] Why bother with Zazen? Better Orgyhouse > > There is no 'thing' which is not born and does not die. No it. > > Thanks, > Chris Austin-Lane > Sent from a cell phone > > On Apr 3, 2011, at 3:46, mike brown <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Mayka, >> >> To be honest, I don't think we are talking about the same thing simply known >> by another name. What you describe about mindfulness below is 100% correct, >> but doesn't describe the full story. I think that comment (from the >> Nisargadatta maharaj video) says it all. "What is it that never changes? >> Experience that directly." Now, what you describe below admits that at times >> (most of the time?) we're simply 'not there' and employ mindfulness to >> "bring the body and mind together." This means we're constantly changing >> from one state (mindlessness) to another (mindfulness). By definition,this >> cannot be the unborn, undying Supreme Reality. When you're not being mindful >> and are "lost in your thoughts", have you simply vanished and ceased to be? >> No. There is still an awareness of being (I Amness) - this is not the same >> as mindfulness because it IS what never changes. Where mindfulness comes in >> is in the cultivation of this awareness and is never ending. By the way, IMO >> this where Chris's quote about 'glimpsing the Supreme Reality is still yet >> not Awakening' applies. >> >> Mike >> rom: Maria Lopez <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Sun, 3 April, 2011 18:42:51 >> Subject: Re: [Zen] Why bother with Zazen? Better Orgyhouse >> >> >> Mike: >> >> Just one think to be pointed out from this insightful post of yours that >> Siska has brought back: >> >> The activity of bringing the mind back to the present moment is also called >> mindfulness. You may have paid already attention in yourself that often >> while walking, doing different activities. The body is in one place and >> the mind is lost in thoughts in another place. The body and the mind at >> those moments are not in togetherness, they are separated. Mindfulness >> brings the body and mind together at those moments. >> >> There are many different vehicles to be in contact with, find the heart of >> reality. Mine is the one of mindfulness. Not necessarily anyone else. >> >> As ED pointed out some time ago; "Different strokes for different people" >> >> Enjoy your Sunday >> Mayka >> >> >> --- On Sat, 2/4/11, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Zen] Why bother with Zazen? Better Orgyhouse >> To: [email protected] >> Date: Saturday, 2 April, 2011, 14:24 >> >> >> Hi Mike, >> >> Like like like >> >> :-) >> siska >> From: mike brown <[email protected]> >> Sender: [email protected] >> Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 10:45:28 +0100 (BST) >> To: <[email protected]> >> ReplyTo: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Zen] Why bother with Zazen? Better Orgyhouse >> >> >> Mayka, >> >> Yes, that would be an "extraordinary thought"!! It's not the living in the >> present moment that's the problem, it's the belief that there are moments >> we're not *always* living in the now (i.e "Damn, I was caught up in my >> thoughts for a while there. Better start being mindful and get back into >> living in the now." This is wrong thinking. We're always living in the now - >> it's never not now. Mindfulness doesn't "take" us there. As Alan Watts said, >> 'Where ever you go - there you are." >> >> Mike >> >> From: Maria Lopez <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Fri, 1 April, 2011 7:08:42 >> Subject: Re: [Zen] Why bother with Zazen? Better Orgyhouse >> >> >> Mike; >> >> How it comes that living the present moment in awareness could become a >> double edged sword?. It never crossed my mind thinking "I've got >> mindfulness, yup-iii!", what an extraordinary thought!. >> >> However, I admit that I only practise diligent mindfulness most of times >> when I'm in my last legs. A bit like the Christians praying to God when >> they want something, with the difference that here the miracle is operated >> by oneself work. Well, at least I found the door and also know how to open >> it. Are there more doors than this?. >> >> Mayka >> >> >> --- On Thu, 31/3/11, mike brown <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> From: mike brown <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Zen] Why bother with Zazen? Better Orgyhouse >> To: [email protected] >> Date: Thursday, 31 March, 2011, 22:31 >> >> >> Mayka, >> >> We just have to be careful with mindfulness - it's very much a double-edged >> sword in that it can be the catalyst for awakening to reality, but it can >> also make us think we've 'got it' when in fact it's nothing but our ego >> taking a very subtle rest. Also, we need to get past the way we think of >> mindfulness. In the beginning we tend to find ourselves consciously >> employing it at specific times. "Right, I've done the tidying up, taken a >> shower and washed the dishes. Now I'm going to take the dog out and really >> focus on what I'm doing, feel the wind on my face, not zone out and follow >> any thoughts and really be here" All well and good. But what we've also done >> there, by definition, is to separate ourselves between not being mindfull >> and being mindful which in turn also reinforces the sense of separateness >> from our intrinsic awareness of Budhha. In simple terms, there is an >> awareness that is unborn and undying right now which in Vedanta is expressed >> as 'I Am'. That awareness is right there with you when you're washing the >> dishes and putting out the rubbish and is there prior to just when you >> think, "Now I'm going to practice mindfulness" and it's there when you stop >> being mindful. >> >> Mike >> >> From: Maria Lopez <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Thu, 31 March, 2011 7:39:29 >> Subject: Re: [Zen] Why bother with Zazen? Better Orgyhouse >> >> >> Mike: >> >> That's right Mike. However, previous indications in the map and tools were >> most useful to experience reality as it is, and not as we imagine it to be. >> >> Mayka >> >> >> --- On Wed, 30/3/11, mike brown <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> From: mike brown <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Zen] Why bother with Zazen? Better Orgyhouse >> To: [email protected] >> Date: Wednesday, 30 March, 2011, 22:21 >> >> >> Mayka, >> >> >Bill has a point. The less adds on the most likely to experience reality as >> >it is. >> >> Taken to the ultimate conclusion being that we don't need *any* of the >> precepts in mind to "experience reality as it is". >> >> Mike >> >> From: Maria Lopez <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Thu, 31 March, 2011 4:52:54 >> Subject: Re: [Zen] Why bother with Zazen? Better Orgyhouse >> >> >> Bill has a point. The less adds on the most likely to experience reality as >> it is. >> >> At the same time Steve also has a point. Living philosophies may embrace in >> compassion the whole universe. >> >> Mayka >> >> --- On Wed, 30/3/11, SteveW <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> From: SteveW <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Zen] Why bother with Zazen? Better Orgyhouse >> To: [email protected] >> Date: Wednesday, 30 March, 2011, 17:52 >> >> >> >> >> --- In [email protected], "Bill!" <BillSmart@...> wrote: >> > >> > Steve, >> > >> > I fundamentally disagree. >> > >> > Buddhism, as well as Judiasm/Christianity/Islam, and all other religions I >> > know about are based on the essense of zen. They are all, including >> > Buddhism, just layers that have been built up around zen and serve to >> > occlude the essense of zen to varying extents. I will say that Buddhism >> > has the least occluding layers of the religions I have read about, but it >> > still has a lot. >> > >> > ...Bill! >> > >> Hi Bill! In my opinion, there are two aspects to the human phenomenon of >> religion. One aspect is the evolved religios which binds society together in >> a shared identity. This is just an evolved trait that is useful from the >> view-point of group selection. The other aspect is the awakened insight into >> Suchness. But some religions as they exist now are more effective vehicles >> for encouraging awakened insight into Suchness than others. Within each of >> the Big Three Abrahamic traditions, there have arisen minority mystical >> movements that are a spontaneous expression of Enlightened Mind, but they >> have always been regarded as heretical. Even the most literal-minded >> Pureland Buddhist realizes that the ultimate goal is awakening. They just >> want to go to Buddhist Heaven where they imagine that awakening will be >> easier. But they still understand that ultimately it is more than just going >> to Heaven. And so, as you yourself note, Buddhism has the least occluding >> layers. The average Christian would not regard Meister Eckhart as being a >> real Christian. >> Steve >> >> >> >> ncnBzcElkAzE3MDc1ODkwMTAEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDaHBmBHN0aW1lAzEzMDE4Mjc2MDM-"> >> Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe >> > > > > | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe > >
