I'm agreeing with Dogen. Edgar
On Nov 14, 2012, at 7:51 PM, mike brown wrote: > > Edgar, > > Whether you refer to them as "descriptions" or "theories" doesn't really > matter. You seem to suggest that an in depth knowledge of the mind (beyond > what is natural in day to day experience) is a prerequisite to awakening, and > has to be 'up to date' knowledge at that (given that you previously wrote > that past Zen practitioners in the past didn't understand how the mind works > like we do today). Were Dogen's realisations somehow inferior for not being > 'up to date' with today's knowledge of the mind? I'd argue they were not > because the knowledge we have about the mind is necessarily finite, leaving > our ignorance about it infinite. Knowledge about how the mind works (outside > of a basic and fundamental understanding, i.e attachments and suffering) is > therefore not only not a prerequisite to awakening, but is in fact a trap, as > it is a hole that can never be filled (which is why I was asking you about a > definitive point in understanding). I'm still waiting. > > Mike > > > From: Edgar Owen <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2012, 23:04 > Subject: Re: [Zen] understanding zen > > > Mike, > > Merle agrees with my 'theories' because she, though not you apparently, > understands they are not theories but descriptions of engaging with real > life... > > Edgar > > On Nov 14, 2012, at 5:19 PM, mike brown wrote: > > > Merle, > > > > Not really. I do get the impression that you somehow look down on formal > > sitting as a practice to realise Zen, but that's kind of ok because Zen > > *can* be realised without formal sitting. However, without a teacher you > > might mistake a particular experience for something that it is not (Zen > > literature is full of students who think they've 'got it' only to be shot > > down in flames by their teacher and then be grateful to their teacher later > > on when they've tasted the real thing). The other side of the coin (which > > was my point in that post and was directed to Edgar) is that Zen is not > > something that can be realised with your head stuck in a book and cannot be > > improved upon by "updates" in scientific or theoretical discoveries. In > > fact, I'm surprised you've thrown your weight behind Edgar's theories > > because, well, they're theories. > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Merle Lester <[email protected]> > > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2012, 20:43 > > Subject: Re: [Zen] understanding zen > > > > > > > > > > > > mike....i thought it was an addition to what i was saying...merle > > > > > > Merle, > > > > You know this (the post below) was directed at Edgar, don't you? > > > > Mike > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: mike brown <[email protected]> > > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tuesday, 13 November 2012, 21:08 > > Subject: Re: [Zen] understanding zen > > > > > > > > Merle, > > > >> .practising zen to me is not > > sitting cross legged on "handwoven mats, eyes shut tight, sniffing > > incense and listening to gongs." > > > > You're certainly correct about that, but neither is it about sitting in a > > university lecture theatre/library studying advanced psychology or > > neuroscience. > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Merle Lester <[email protected]> > > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tuesday, 13 November 2012, 20:54 > > Subject: [Zen] understanding zen > > > > > > > > edgar. > > > > .i can understand what you are saying...and that is how i see it except i > > cannot explain it like you have.. > > > > .zen to me is being in the moment alert and forever present...as i see it > > we zen through the day.. > > > > .practising zen to me is not sitting cross legged on "handwoven mats, eyes > > shut tight, sniffing incense and listening to gongs." > > > > .it's being out there in the real world every minute alert breathing the > > breath..."zenning the zen"..so to speak.. > > > > . as as for those folk on those forum who are going to clap their hands and > > shout "horror horror where the hell is she at"? let me remind them.. > > > > .it's not me who's struggling with zen understanding > > > > it's those hundreds of folk who we see everyday walking and talking as if > > in a shadowland( plato's cave)..... > > > > next time you go to the shopping mall pay close attention and you'll very > > soon understand > > > > merle > > > > > > Edgar, > > > > It's good to see you back and well. Unfortunately I can't say the same > > about your theories. > > > > > > "It's an updated understanding of how mind works that was unknown when the > > Zen texts were written." > > > > > > Are you saying that prior to this 'breakthru' in neuroscience the > > Patriarchs weren't practicing 'real' Zen, but that you now are? Is this > > discovery definitive or could there be further "updates" which would render > > the Zen you practice now obsolete? Are you in fact practicing Zen or > > something different entirely? > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Edgar Owen <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Monday, 29 October 2012, 22:34 > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: Is buddha nature coninuous? > > > > > > > > Joe, > > > > I think you have a mistaken interpretation of what 'mind moving' actually > > means... > > > > Mind is a computational system that continually computes sensations, > > actions etc. Thus mind continually moves. There is no escaping that so long > > as you are alive. In fact measurements show that mind is almost as active > > during sleep as when awake. > > > > So mind always moves in that sense. Everything you do you do it precisely > > because your mind is moving. > > > > What Zen means by mind not moving is different. It means that mind moves in > > sync with reality, not in opposition to it. This 'Zen is mind not moving' > > platitude was written centuries ago when the computational dynamics of mind > > were not understood. It refers to a state when you don't consciously think > > you are deciding to take particular actions but actions seem to flow > > spontaneously from an unconscious inner source. However it is now known > > that is always happening anyway. The conscious mind actually very rarely > > makes any decisions at all even though it thinks it does. That's the > > illusion. The source of almost all decisions and actions is always the > > unconscious inner computational system. > > > > It's an updated understanding of how mind works that was unknown when the > > Zen texts were written. > > > > So Zen is 24/7, whether your mind is moving or not. If there is realization > > that is. Zen is a matter of realizing what is actually happening, not > > getting rid of all thoughts which is of course impossible if you want to > > function in reality and survive through the day... > > > > True mindlessness = lobotomy or more accurately being dead! > > > > > > If you want a reference even Suzuki Roshi agreed with this when I put it to > > him... > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 29, 2012, at 4:30 PM, Joe wrote: > > > > > >> Edgar, > >> > >> Ha, ha. > >> > >> Yeah, I don't get what motivates your comment. > >> > >> Let's see if, no matter what mind you are in now, you can follow a logical > >> exposition: > >> > >> The Zen adept Sumie ink artists who paint big black circles on rice paper > >> do so with a mind that does not move: I mean, they do it with NO mind (and > >> hence, no mind-motion). > >> > >> I remember our Shif-fu, on retreats, teaching us how to come OUT of > >> meditation. He'd say, "MOVE YOUR MIND, first, then move your BODY, VERY > >> SLOWLY, and sway your body in ever-widening circles from the waist, first > >> in direction, then in the other". > >> > >> That always seemed like un-necessary advice to me, before certain > >> developments on retreat... > >> > >> ...After which, I found that it was impossible to move the mind, and the > >> body could nonetheless move. > >> > >> But the months of life afterwards with the mind not moving at all was a > >> continuing marvel and surprise. And yet, life was certainly possible, and > >> richer than ever before. "Decisions" and actions were the best I have ever > >> done. > >> > >> And, Edgar, I found I could not only write, but I could type. > >> > >> I had to type. > >> > >> I needed to type because my job was to control an advanced radio-telescope > >> from a Tektronix terminal at the top of Pupin Hall, 120th Street and > >> Broadway. I discovered in these months giant filaments of cold molecular > >> gas, constrained and confined by magnetic fields, in the Milky Way pouring > >> from high above the galactic plane in the Orion-Arm, and down onto the > >> galactic disk, where the supersonic impact from the flow stimulated the > >> formation of stars in objects like Monoceros R2, and the Rosette Nebula. > >> The Great Nebula M42 in Orion is part of this complex. > >> > >> Decades more of practice and many more retreats and more awakenings showed > >> the same nature and character of our empty, still, awakened state, in the > >> midst of no-matter-what activity. No thoughts: nothing moving. Life is a > >> continuous intuition: the only mind is the mind we all share, which is no > >> mind. > >> > >> I can say that the currents in the mind, or head, and the feeling or > >> sensation that there are thoughts, or ANYTHING moving at all, is an > >> illusion that pertains to the un-awakened state, and to that state only. > >> These things are illusions and delusions, but the awakened state does not > >> deprecate them: they are simply not present in the awakened state, > >> however; not present at all. > >> > >> Surely, in the un-awakened state, there is the sense of something moving, > >> and of something that takes TIME to pass before the awareness. This > >> appears to indicate that free action of the mind is dammed-up, or > >> necked-down, in the un-awakened state, into a bottle-neck situation, which > >> is just what we might also expect. > >> > >> NOT in the awakened state. Nothing takes time. > >> > >> Prajna is likened to LIGHTNING, for this reason, BTW. > >> > >> See the Dorje lightning-bolt images at Tibetan places? > >> > >> Prajna is entirely spontaneous and can not be mulled-over nor formulated. > >> > >> Compassion arises simultaneously with Prajna. Compassion is not something > >> that you FEEL, in the awakened state, you simply respond naturally. > >> > >> And so it is. > >> > >> --Joe > >> > >>> Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > >>> > >>> Joe, > >>> > >>> Well obviously your mind was moving when you wrote this... The mind has > >>> to move to write... > >>> > >>> THAT's the experience... > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
