ED,
I'd say it's neither. To me, in shikentaza there is no object at all (Ccompared to vipassana where the breath or bodily sensations might be the object). There is awareness in shikentaza, and this in a very, very subtle way could be seen as an object of meditation (and so somewhat like vipassana), but in this awareness their is no analysis, clinging or aversion to what comes into the awareness. If you do analyse, cling or feel aversion to anything (thoughts, feelings, any of the 5 hindrances etc) you recognise that and let them go. There will eventually be longish periods of having a clear mind where you are fully present. In insight meditation you do more than just bring your awareness to something (although you only do that in samatha (tranquility) meditation where you only bring awareness on to the object of meditation, like the breath, but don't analyse it). In insight meditation (Vipassana) you bring your awareness to a bodily sensation, say, and note what is happening to the body/mind (craving - aversion) and so see into one, two or three of the '3 Characteristics' (impermanence, suffering, non-self ) which Buddha says leads to Wisdom and Liberation. I think shikentaza seems to be quite conducive to insight into non-self more than it does to impermanence and suffering. Mike Quote from: soma on Sunday 28 November 2010, 09:36 PM In shikantaza there is no object at all, or rather, awareness itself is the object in a way but you make no effort to notice awareness, you are just like the sky and whatever passes through your awareness are like the clouds passing in the sky. >You notice the clouds but do not cling analyze or feel any aversion to them, and if you do cling, analyze or feel aversion you know that too. It is really vipassana but the subtlest form of vipassana because you have no objects. Your only task is to be fully present and awake and to let the clouds come and go. > Vipassana is also a pretty broad label that includes many different styles. However, as far as I can tell, it is not Vipassana if you merely bringe awareness to something. (you may simply be practicing concentration/shamatha---something which is quite good to do!). What makes your practice "Vipassana" is that you are seeing into at least one of the "three characteristics" that the Buddha suggested leads to liberation: (1) impermanence/change, (2) non-identification, (3) suffering. I think it is safe to say that if you are cultivating awareness of anything, and you are seeing into one of those characteristics, then you are practicing vipassana. With that in mind, you can see how it is possible to practice Zazen in a way that makes it Vipassana. In fact, I think the object-less approach especially lends itself to insights into "No-Self." Its no coincidence that many Zen teachers emphasize this aspect of the practice. I also think that certain types of "traditional" Vipassana practices can be quite similar to Zazen. For example, some vipassana teachers advise students to cultivate "choiceless awareness" in which they allow their awareness to rest spaciously, and then observe anything that comes into their awareness. This type of practice can be quite "open," and "encompassing" and feel much like shikantaza. I hope this helps! ________________________________ From: ED <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, 2 August 2012, 23:54 Subject: Re: [Zen] Samadhi Mike, Is shikantaza insight meditation, absorption meditation or both? --ED --- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@...> wrote: > > Kris, > > This by Bhante Gunaratana: > > "Insight cannot be practiced while absorbed in jhana, since insight > meditation requires investigation and observation, which are impossible > when the mind is immersed in one-pointed absorption. But after emerging from the jhana, the mind is cleared of the hindrances, and the > stillness and clarity that then result conduce to precise, penetrating > insight." [my italics] > > I hope anyone can see that this is what I've been saying all along. > > Mike
