reality check

That's probably more than two cents, but I think sometimes we tiptoe around to be nice, when some zen whacking is in order.

-ona

So you really are saying, in a zen whacking way, if one hasn't had a "world rocking" "earthshattering" experience in practice and have just had a bunch of subtle or gentle shifts that still changed things in a big way that they (we) are -- basically -- fooling ourselves?

That's cool.

I think my untive experience at the lake near Austin (I can't remember the name of that lake) -- I'm not sure if anyone actually read(s) that much detail in my post(s) -- probably sounds like some big thing, And, I'm not saying it wasn't a huge experience for me that changed completely how I look at the world from then on. Completely.

but -- and maybe everyone's language styles is a factor here -- I just don't see it as some kind of earth shattering moment -- it's more like the earth was shattered before then and it got all put together.

With all due respect, 'there's infinite variation' is exactly what I'm saying. I wasn't making any exclusionary claims.

I used to go to a formal Buddhist center near me fairly regularly. The talks and ritual were quiet, formal and about teachings of the Buddha and compassion and applying practice to worldly challenges and so on. The abbot and priests modeled proper comportment and the virtues of their practice. But once I went on retreat with a small group of more advanced meditators, most of them junior priests or in training to be. I was having terrible fear during meditation, and was afraid I might twitch or shake or breathe hard and disrupt the service. I whispered to the priest to my left that I was having this fear. He smiled and said people fall off their cushions laughing or afraid all the time in monasteries. He said he was taught you "help the person on your right". And when in the middle of meditation I began panting in terror, he whispered my name and touched my arm, and brought me out of the spiral of freak out.

Just sayin.

I used to go to a formal Buddhist center near me fairly regularly. The talks and ritual were quiet, formal and about teachings of the Buddha and compassion and applying practice to worldly challenges and so on. The abbot and priests modeled proper comportment and the virtues of their practice. But once I went on retreat with a small group of more advanced meditators, most of them junior priests or in training to be. I was having terrible fear during meditation, and was afraid I might twitch or shake or breathe hard and disrupt the service. I whispered to the priest to my left that I was having this fear. He smiled and said people fall off their cushions laughing or afraid all the time in monasteries. He said he was taught you "help the person on your right". And when in the middle of meditation I began panting in terror, he whispered my name and touched my arm, and brought me out of the spiral of freak out.
Just sayin.

-ona

I'm not sure what you are saying -- is your point that it's common for people to have intense experiences (joyous and/or frightening) while meditating? If so, I doubt anyone here would ever dispute that.

Okay, to review:
I got three answers to my question. sunyata's answer was "no," (he feels intentionally cultivating an open awareness is "trying to hard"), Ona basically, I think, said "yes," and Chris said yes but added that that was just the beginning and that it was very important to add "investigation" as a further activity.

I gave the opinion that If I'd asked the question to a forum of soto zen praticioners, they'd add answer yes and not mention "investigation" as a fruther practice because I'd just never encountered "investigation" as an instruction/activity in my participation in soto zen (retreats, talks, books, etc.) Chris disagreed and we are now waiting for zen priest/member Gozan to come to the site to clarify this issue. I'm curiouis what he may say if does indeed arrive. I keep looking for some practical definition of investigation and some clarification about whether it is some different, extra added step beyond detailed noticing so I can see if it is close to what I am already doing or if it is something I want to start cultivating in my sittings.

Ona then "zen whacked" some of us (I'm not sure who she was referring to but I suspect I may have been a target) by insisting that we were having subtle experiences that we referred to as "insights," that actually probably weren't because real true insights were awesome huge experiences. This sparked some debate.

I'm still working on the trial. The case finally went to the jury yesterday. and, yesterday was one of those stressful, difficult days but I felt fully alive through most of it. This morning I sat and for some reason it was one of those more intense sittings. I seemed to become equaniminous almost immediately and as I synched up with images, thoughts, feelings, vibrations just as they arose, I began to get huge surges of energy up up up my spine to my scalp with lots of white light behind my closed yes. Weird, but while all this was happening I was doing a lot of thinking too, which was interesting. I really had thought that that kind of synching was not compatible with thinking activity. By "thinking" I mean actually engaging with the thougths and reflecting/making plans.

I found myself hoping that more people here answer my initial question. And, I think it would be great if more of you shared stories of your actual daily lives with us as it relates to your practice.

I feel happy right now.

Mike, obviously there is going to be a range of answers to your question, and hopefully someone will give you the answer you are looking for.

But I sometimes feel like you post questions but don't really want to hear any answers that don't fit into your existing schema. You seem satisfied with your practice and view of things as it is right now, so I'm not sure there's much point in discussing other perspectives. If they don't resonate with you, then they aren't necessarily the right thing for you to bother with. If you aren't suffering and aren't dissatisfied, what do you need or want? If the answer is "nothing," then there's no question to ask, right?

My zen whack was triggered by several weeks of running into people having a misunderstanding of insights. You and Crux touched the edges of it, though you aren't nearly as extreme as some other cases I have run into. But what I was talking about seems to be widely misunderstood enough that I thought it worth throwing in the pile.

Peace, Ona

Mike, obviously there is going to be a range of answers to your question, and hopefully someone will give you the answer you are looking for.
But I sometimes feel like you post questions but don't really want to hear any answers that don't fit into your existing schema. You seem satisfied with your practice and view of things as it is right now, so I'm not sure there's much point in discussing other perspectives. If they don't resonate with you, then they aren't necessarily the right thing for you to bother with. If you aren't suffering and aren't dissatisfied, what do you need or want? If the answer is "nothing," then there's no question to ask, right?
My zen whack was triggered by several weeks of running into people having a misunderstanding of insights. You and Crux touched the edges of it, though you aren't nearly as extreme as some other cases I have run into. But what I was talking about seems to be widely misunderstood enough that I thought it worth throwing in the pile.
Peace, Ona

-ona

Ok, wow. This is the kind of reply that makes me think that maybe putting myself out here on this forum may not be a good idea.

I mean, to me, I'm being open and risky and willing to listen and doing all of this in good faith but clearly you think otherwise and that is difficult and confusing.

It's a method I use in my own practice: What is dissatisfying right now? Is anything missing? Is anything needed? Is everything satisfying? If not, what is lacking?

Writing the answers down and evaluating them can be really illuminating.

Personally, I think founder of Soto Zen was quite the investigator of experience.



http://genjokoan.com/



"When you first seek dharma, you imagine you are far away from its environs. But dharma is already correctly transmitted; you are immediately your original self. When you ride in a boat and watch the shore, you might assume that the shore is moving. But when you keep your eyes closely on the boat, you can see that the boat moves. Similarly, if you examine myriad things with a confused body and mind you might suppose that your mind and nature are permanent. When you practice intimately and return to where you are, it will be clear that nothing at all has unchanging self." -Dogen Zenji [emphasis mine]

It seems that the practice of just sitting provides a way to remove the confusion from body and mind, so as to examine things clearly. Examination, investigation - same thing, to me.

Practice is the way we fashion an adequate tool for investigation. It's like looking at the sky with our bare eyes, and then looking at it through a highly tuned telescope. As we develop the capacity to look, we naturally get better at looking. But once things are in full view, we look around to discover what's there; to know what's what. That's investigation, and it's found in Soto Zen as much as in Mahasi vipassana. They're different types of training, with a similar aim.

That's what I think. I'm open to feedback.

I'm starting to believe there's very little distinction between the fundamentals of different types of practice. It's just some practices are more expedient than others for each person.

Mike, That feeling of "trying too hard" is very much an issue for me. Obviously, for others practicing by cultivating "open awareness" is just perfect.

Hi Mike,
I'm jumping in here -- a day late and a dollar short -- because Chris asked me to opine about Soto Zen and "investigation."

Fortunately for me, Jackson has already posted a nice Dogen quote that shows how investigation is framed in Soto terms. It's really not so different from how other Buddhist schools talk about it, except that Soto tends to be somewhat poetically indirect and gentle. Rinzai, on the other hand, is more stark and abrupt. The Theravadin schools tend to be more analytical, approaching the whole business in a step-wise fashion.

All of the insights that have been mentioned so far in this thread could, in a manner of speaking, be plotted on a globe like the continents and islands set on the great wide sea of Earth. Each piece of land could lay claim to its virtues. "I have the prettiest beaches!" says one. "I have the tallest mountains!" says another. Yet they all adhere to Mother Earth and she loves all her children equally.

The thing of it is, though, that each one speaks from its own particular point of view. Pride abides in such perspectives. Beyond pride, perhaps each also believes that it has some privileged access to something deeper: the core of the Earth, where the home view is presumed to exist. That presumption is the fallacy Buddha critiqued in his anatta argument.

The truth of it is that no single perspective is privileged above all others. All are equal: equally right and equally wrong. The only "point of view" this is categorically correct is "none at all."

Oh, to know that one is no-one!

To feel so full of emptiness unto bursting that laughter is the best response!

No answers arise because no questions intrude.

But don't believe me. Each must find this out for themselves. Just as the Buddha said "Come and taste."

Best,
Mike "Gozen" LaTorra
DISCLAIMER: Any coincidence between what was written above and official Soto Zen doctrine is purely coincidental.

Yes, thank you, Gozen. Very well put. You should come by more often

_/|\_