I've often wondered what people with Alzheimer's experience and how their situation expresses Buddha Nature?
________________________________ From: Bill! <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tue, April 16, 2013 5:01:32 AM Subject: [Zen] Re: senses Merle, That's a VERY GOOD QUESTION! An autistic person can certainly realize Buddha Nature since that only requires sentient-ness, not any intellectual quality. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@...> wrote: > > > >  question:bob: so would an autistic person who is not perhaps engaging in > all >the senses.. > but in many ways acts like a machine how does the mind figure in this > equation >you have set out here regarding senses and zen? > merle > > >  > > >  bob..you forgot the 6th sense..merle > > >  > Bob, > > Thanks for your reply but it did not answer my question which was: > > "The senses are always engaged. How could you disengage them while remaining >conscious?" > > Perhaps we're using the same words differently. Here is how I am using the > word >'senses'. > > 'Senses' to me is an awkward, dualistically-based word used in part to > describe >just plain experience. (I sometimes use the phrase 'direct, sensory >experience' >just to be clear, but the qualifiers 'direct' and 'sensory' are redundant and >might lead you to believe there is such a thing as 'indirect' or 'non-sensory' >experiences. There are not.) The word 'sense' itself implies an 'avenue' or >'interface' which 'connects' us with the 'outside world'. We divide 'senses' >up >into five categories: sight, hearing, touch, smell and taste. But there is no >'outside world', no 'interface' and only one experience ('sense') - and I >usually call that Buddha Nature or Just THIS!. > > If you're wondering why I'm trying to be very precise about this it's because >sentient-ness (having senses) is very key to Buddha Nature - not rationality >or >logic or emotions or memory or projections or physicality or anything else. >Just >sentient-ness. > > > The term 'perceptions' IMO are the concepts (illusions) created by our >discriminating, rational mind (intellect) which post-processes experience with >such rational actions as filtering, augmenting, categorizing, evaluating, >etc... > > So maybe when you say "different levels of awareness of our senses" you are >saying (in my terms) there is experience, and then there is a whole host of >levels of perceptions. And maybe not... > > I have no idea what you think the story about the drawing has to do with your >'senses'. You recognizing a line drawing as "an orchid in all its glory" is a >perception - not an (direct, sensory) experience. > > So, I repeat my question again in a little different way... > > When you say "The senses do need to be engaged but should work > 'properly'...", >what exactly to you mean by that? > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], "bobthomas564" <bobthomas564@> wrote: > > > > HI Bill thanks for the welcome. > > > > To answer your question I think there are different levels of awareness of >our senses. To remind the new meditators of their senses brings, what is >normally an autonomous process back into 'immediate reality' (indicating a >clearer idea of the senses rather than the reality of reality - if you know >what >I mean). > > > > Many years ago a group of us did an experiment in focus and coming in touch >with the senses. We were given a large sheet of drwg paper and some charcoal. >We >all had to draw a huge orchid in a brass pot. I am useless at art and drawing >match stick people is a stretch. Having meditated, done a few straight lines >and >a few circles we started by concentrating on a single point, drawing that and >then moving on. After a short time I stood back and was astounded that I had >drawn an orchid in all its glory. > > > > I hope this answers your question. > > > > Bob > > > > --- In [email protected], "Bill!" <BillSmart@> wrote: > > > > > > Bob, > > > > > > Welcome to the group.. > > > > > > I was also taught to relax my eyes so they are only 'half' open, lower my >gaze to about 3 feet in front of me and allow my eyes to de-focus. Closed eyes >were discouraged to help keep your mind from wandering, minimize >visualizations >and because as you note of the tendency to sleep. > > > > > > The senses are always engaged. How could you disengage them while > > > remaining >conscious? > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "bobthomas564" <bobthomas564@> wrote: > > > > > > > > HI Joe - I agree. I was taught to squint through slightly open eyes but >not at first. The senses do need to be engaged but should work 'properly' ie >not >allowing the ego to take control of them and run with them. Easier said than >done. The ego, as it throws up things, always strike me like files with a >'look >at this' on the front of them. > > > > > > > > I take the guys through getting in contact with their senses prior to >starting meditation encompassing the idea of 'nowhere to go and nothing to >do'. >I find that they can deal with the issues of meditation easier with their eyes >closed in the early stages. Eventually a few things happen as they get >stronger, >sleep disappears as an issue and they naturally sit more upright. Then open >eyes >are easier. > > > > > > > > A start is a start it means nothing, it is where you end up that > > > > counts. >Entry is from anywhere. In Zen's case you end up not being able to open your >mouth to say anything sensible. Strange really! > > > > > > > > Nice talking to you. > > > > > > > > Bob > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Joe" <desert_woodworker@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Bob, > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for posting the "notes" to the Group site as a .doc file. Well >done and generous teaching and encouragement. Gee, I wish I could sit with >your >group. > > > > > > > > > > I'll note that, in general, in Zen practice as I've encountered it as >taught and as practiced, we do not close the eyes. > > > > > > > > > > There are two reason for this. > > > > > > > > > > One is that we do not screen-out ANYTHING in our practice, as I've >found it. All six senses are allowed to operate without screening. The "mind" >is >usually considered one of the six senses, so we do not suppress or screen out >thoughts either: instead, we put all attention on the method of practice. If >thoughts arise, we just do not follow them: that is not "screening", but it is >just doing ONE thing at a time: remaining concentrated upon the method of >practice in the time when we set ourself to practice. > > > > > > > > > > The second reason is that Zen practice is about opening to wisdom, >through awakening. Closed eyes can lead to drowsiness and ... to sleep. > > > > > > > > > > Well, nothing new in these comments. And they are just that, > > > > > comments. > > > > > > > > > > I like your noting the usefulness of the point of contact of the > > > > > hands. >I find in general that a closed mudra comes more naturally in our way of >sitting, and does more good than an open mudra, a dispersing mudra, or no >mudra. >Hmm-m, I meant to write about this here last week, but the death of a very >close >sangha friend intervened and put me off doing much of anything: "Jim", a >fellow >who practiced his zazen with us always in a wheelchair. I'll get back to >writing >sometime. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again posting! > > > > > > > > > > --Joe > > > > > > > > > > > "bobthomas564" <bobthomas564@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I also put statements and questions I prepare to them after the >group. I have attached a couple - (oops! attachments not so easy will try >another time). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
