Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
"Just Sitting"
RichardH
Veteran
This is a poetic description of shikantaza or “Just sitting”. It can't be deconstructed, only suggested poetically, and practised in a leap. . This Zen Buddhist way ain't everyone's cup of tea, and it is no better or worse than any other. If this description rings a bell, it does. If it doesn't, it doesn't. Either way, no problem.
Shikantaza can to a certain extent be described as choiceless awareness. But that is just a pointer, because the teaching setting in which Shiknataza is practised, is non-gradual, and declares the innate self-resonant perfection “as such” of body, mind, and world. Yet, having established this view of “nothing to attain”, this view dropped in practice along with all view. So, in “Just Sitting”, there is no watching of thoughts and feelings arising and passing, no contemplation of impermanence, anatman, or Dukkha. There is no watching of any kind. There is “just sitting” as is, whole and complete, with no notion of it being whole and complete. There is no self, yet this no-self is forgotten, and the forgetting is forgotten. In forgetting forgetting, there is returning to ordinary just sitting, floor is floor, hands are hands, thoughts are thoughts, all ordinary, all “alone”, including ordinary self. Simple.
Descriptions of this "simple" using ontological absolutes are dead wrong here. Even using Skillful Means like "True Nature" are deeply fishy. But it is fair to describe it as cessation of Dukkha.
Hi mods sorry for no avatar. I'm too dumb to find an upload option on the dashboard.
Shikantaza can to a certain extent be described as choiceless awareness. But that is just a pointer, because the teaching setting in which Shiknataza is practised, is non-gradual, and declares the innate self-resonant perfection “as such” of body, mind, and world. Yet, having established this view of “nothing to attain”, this view dropped in practice along with all view. So, in “Just Sitting”, there is no watching of thoughts and feelings arising and passing, no contemplation of impermanence, anatman, or Dukkha. There is no watching of any kind. There is “just sitting” as is, whole and complete, with no notion of it being whole and complete. There is no self, yet this no-self is forgotten, and the forgetting is forgotten. In forgetting forgetting, there is returning to ordinary just sitting, floor is floor, hands are hands, thoughts are thoughts, all ordinary, all “alone”, including ordinary self. Simple.
Descriptions of this "simple" using ontological absolutes are dead wrong here. Even using Skillful Means like "True Nature" are deeply fishy. But it is fair to describe it as cessation of Dukkha.
Hi mods sorry for no avatar. I'm too dumb to find an upload option on the dashboard.
0
Comments
Then you actually learn to reboot the system.
Then you realize that everything is already in constant rebooting.
I think it takes a certain being to just do sitting.
That is the beauty of zen. It really just goes for the throat.
It's the hardest practice, yet the easiest.
Thanks for the deconstruction.
That isn't to say it is like that all the time......
Here is something that was said to me, when I spoke with a teacher about the seeming bottomlessness of suffering....
Now...You or anyone else doesn't have to agree or accept this at all, but it is a Zen Buddhist way, one that I whole heartedly accept. There are other ways too. That's fine.
The great thing about this forum is that there are Theravadin, Zen, and Tibetan Buddhists, along with unaffiliated self-taught people, the drawback is also that there are
Theravadin, Zen, and Tibetan Buddhist, along with unaffiliated self-taught people.
So there can be the problem of someone in one tradition with one understanding saying another tradition has it wrong. I am just describing to the best of my ability how it is presented in one tradition. As I said, if it rings a bell fine, if not fine, but I reject outright any kind of "you got it wrong" talk from outside the tradition... I would not comment in that way to a Theravadin or Tibetan , who may have a very different conception of practice altogether.
Any way,... for those who are interested, the post above on the bottomlessness of suffering was spoken by a Zen Master in a Soto lineage who I respect very much.
Thanks.
The facts of this matter are quite plain however. The cessation of Dukkha means that the causes for dukkha have been extinguished, so there is no continuation. What you and your friend are talking about is a pausing of dukkha, if that makes any sense, wherein the causes and conditioning for dukkha are very much intact.
If how you perceive your experience
motivates you to be more good or evil,
it is correspondingly truly good or bad for you.
- Stonepeace
Not saying anyone is good or evil, I am just saying that probably people have realized fruits from various streams of Dharma.
......ok.
There is still this kind of thing going on here. ce la vie. Not the right venue.
It's good to talk about general things. A forum for general Buddhist discussion is great for general discussion.
And a fact is just a fact. No big deal.
I think your ( @RichardH ) attempt is fairly good. And you said the text is to be taken poetically, not as some dogmatic lecture on the subject. That’s an important note, I think.
This is however not just about a meditation technique. The practice reflects what Liberation (or whatever you choose to name it) is looked upon in the tradition of Zen-Buddhism.
Again it is very difficult to explain, yet not a complicated thing at all. So frustrating!
When I try to say something sensible about my practice I always end up with something of a paradox; something weird. I sometimes use Vimalakirti’s statement: “don’t ask about the goal and benefit of practice. To be without goal and benefit is practice.”
This is why shikantaza is just sitting. We’re not going anywhere else. We try to stop adding something extra to the experience of this moment.
When I switched – at some point – from Zen practice to Theravada-practice; I always thought that the differences were very much just on the surface. The experience of it was very much the same. And I learned a lot from it.
Switching tradition is usually discouraged I suppose; but I think it can teach us a very meaningful lesson. Our differences are just surface; just language. It’s just another finger pointing at the same old moon.
:thumbup:
"Nirvana is the absence of greed, hatred, and delusion. When these three poisons are extinguished, nirvana is experienced. Then, when either greed, hatred, or delusion come up, samsara is experienced. As the teaching has it, samsara and nirvana are not two. We experience our lives as either nirvana or samsara, depending on our state of mind at the moment."
That is a standard zen teaching that all zen teachers teach for a thousand years.
Zen Master Dogen’s, the founder of the Soto Tradition, account of Zazen as Shikantaza is that Zazen is conceived not as a means to an end but as a practice of the end itself. Cultivation (shu) is not different from authentication (sho), practice from Enlightenment. If we are practicing Shikantaza correctly, then we are practicing Enlightenment itself.
So go ahead and be right, but just cool it. Go and sit.... because this is not fun, and the world will turn regardless.
Personally, I have benefited from teacher example and Sangha support in developing discipline on the cushion.. but ..different strokes.
third time lucky
You said "No, our conditioning is not constantly passing away."
Zen teaching says "Yes it does, people are in a constant state of change. Always changing from one second to the next."
You just said Zen Buddhism is wrong! What people here are expressing, that you disagree with, is not their personal opinions. What is expressed here authentic zen teaching that has been taught in the zen tradition for centuries. You don't agree and that is fine. However, it comes across as disrespectful when you come out and say "No, that's just wrong!" If you want to disagree with Master Dogen Zenji, one of the most revered zen teachers of all time, that is fine! However, when you simply dismiss his teaching as foolish dogma, you can understand that this is not very nice to people who follow his teaching?
Don't let it deter you. It was a good post, and is much appreciated.
@RichardH your reductionism of shikantaza as separate from other forms of sitting speaks of a fierce loyalty to a practice that contains tremendous meaning for you despite the inefficiency of our shared ontology. Could that be attachment? Perhaps - no matter. I think you are still a hard case, as you put it - but a welcome reflecting ruminator nonetheless.
In Japan, vipassana and shamatha are sometimes used in addition to shikantaza as complementary practices.
If it is "fair to describe it [shikantaza] as cessation of Dukkha" then it would also seem fait to describe sleeping and other states as the cessation of Dukkha. Is that how you see it? You misunderstood me. I've not denied impermanence.
It means this:
"Thinking that practice and enlightenment are not one is no more than a view that is outside the Way. In buddha-dharma [i.e. Buddhism], practice and enlightenment are one and the same."