This is not the zen i was taught: ordinary mind, gracing right now with ordinary attention (which is not some secret teaching, but means "attention").
Special states, bah! working hard at zazen! bah! some enlightenment that can be won through diligent effort of zazen! bah! just fucking eat breakfast, or put the damn bowl in the sink. On Jul 3, 2012 12:56 AM, "Merle Lester" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > years ago when i was 20..i had a golden light experience.. > . walking down a street in evening in city. > .suddenly all glowed in a golden light > > and much late at age 36 > ..i had a nivana experience..i felt it . > > .absolutely beautiful both experiences > > what can one say? > it just happened... > > leaving no stone unturned > i await > listening to the wind > speaking the language of realisation in the bamboo grove this evening > > merle > > On 7/1/2012 11:07 PM, Kristopher Grey wrote: > > > The mention of Lao Tzu and Confucius brings to mind the ground upon > which Ch'an took root - and how this has shaped the practices/teachings. > > To greatly over-simplify: > > Zen may appear at times inwardly Taoist, outwardly Confucian. At other > times the reverse. Zen is unconcerned with such appearances. > > By this, I am also pointing to the nature of all such appearances > commonly discussed and debated (such talk appearing to me to be more > about Zen Buddhism [or all forms of Buddhism] - than Zen realization - > but this only appears so). Some common/familiar themes emerge, some > apparent contrasts, others apparently complimentary (a short set as > example, in no particular order): > > West/East > Chaos/Order > Samsara/Nirvana > Ordinary/Divine > Path/Attainment > Deluded/Realized > Householder/Monastic > Sudden/Gradual > Meditation/Sutras > Etc./Etc... > > The fodder of forums such as this. > > Ordinary mind sees separation between these forms, and identifies with > them more/less, seeking to find it's way - thus forming/borrowing a > ''path'- or perhaps falling into the void by mistaking "/" as the > 'middle way' - mistaking forsaking for equanimity (accepting 'no-self' > as rejection of form rather than realizing empty nature of form). > > Buddha mind realizes all appearances as suchness, as abiding... Thus > ordinary mind/Buddha mind are one. > > I do not claim to be a [Zen] Buddhist , thus have no more than passing > interest in these (10,000) things - and see them as no help or > hindrance. Merely points of reflection, offering nothing less than > bewildering clarity revealed in all it's murkiness. > > There is no point I'm trying to make, no position I advance, nothing I > offer, no one I address this to. > > You know who you are. The path begins and ends here. > > What would you intend otherwise? What else would you expect? > > Questions not seeking answers. > > Pass the Sake. > > K > > > > > > > > >
