Son of “There is No God and He Lives on Long Island”!

Brad will be back in a few days, if things proceed according to plan, anyway, but we do our best to provide interim entertainment when possible in his absence.

Once again, thanks to John Graves of Los Angeles Dōgen Sangha for his editing and publishing efforts on this. The podcast can also be downloaded from iTunes, and if you do so, we’d really appreciate your putting up a review!

itunes-badge

The podcast is also available from the following sites:

(“ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED!?”)

106 Responses

Page 1 of 2
  1. Shodo
    Shodo September 6, 2013 at 5:28 am | |

    Brad is dead on right here Fred – there is more to the Dharma than sounding like a T’ang Dynasty poet. ;)

    http://hardcorezen.info/what-is-enlightenment-2/1894

    “I just don’t understand how a spiritual leader can possibly be so deluded and lacking in self-awareness to take advantage and manipulate others. How can any spiritual awakening they’ve had possibly be genuine? And, yes, the question does remain about whether there is a relation being ‘awakening’ and ‘morality.’ And I still think there is.”

    “These so-called “awakenings” do contain a sense that we are all intimately connected, that we are all manifestations of the same underlying reality. But the ego can latch onto that and make it something terribly immoral. It can decide that since I am you and you are me and we are all together, it’s fine if I fuck you over or lie to you or cheat you or steal from you because ultimately I am only doing that to myself. And what’s the problem if you do something to yourself?”

    “It’s dangerous to point this kind of stuff out because there is a whole multi-billion dollar industry based on the notion that these kinds of experiences transform ordinary people into spiritual superheroes. But they don’t. Not in and of themselves. Becoming a moral person is a matter of transforming one’s habits of thinking and behavior. That is not easy to do. It takes time. It cannot possibly happen instantaneously no matter what sort of experience one has. An “awakening experience” can often be helpful in making a person more moral because it provides a new way of understanding yourself and others. But it doesn’t necessarily work that way.”

    “This is why it’s very good to have a teacher who can help you through these kinds of experiences. It’s good to interact with someone else, or if you’re really lucky a number of other people, who have gone through these things. When, on the other hand, people have these experiences and then end up surrounded by admirers who want to gobble up the power such an experience confers the results can be disastrous.”

    “So, yeah, the people you meet at a Zen temple ought to be at least decent people. And most of them are. Cases like that of Joshu Sasaki, Genpo Roshi, Eido Shimano and so forth are exceptional. They’re not the rule. You don’t have to be a genius to spot people like that either. It’s always obvious. Just don’t allow yourself to be blinded by fantasies of magic miracle men.”

    Also…
    First! :3

  2. Mark Foote
    Mark Foote September 6, 2013 at 8:47 am | |

    ‘An “awakening experience” can often be helpful in making a person more moral because it provides a new way of understanding yourself and others. But it doesn’t necessarily work that way.

    This is why it’s very good to have a teacher who can help you through these kinds of experiences.’

    Followed him up to the jump from “doesn’t necessarily work that way” to “This is why it’s very good to have a teacher…”. Does he explain why he believes that, or just expect the reader to make a leap of faith that Brad must know what he’s talking about?

    Gautama the Buddha laid down that it would be impossible for an arahant to have sexual intercourse. I read the words in the Pali Canon, in the part that is shared in the various renditions of the Canon that the parts of Asia have in common, the part that is regarded as being the most accurate historically.

    I believe all aspects of the order after his death agreed on that. The point that ultimately split the order was whether or not an arahant could be seduced in his or her sleep, have a wet dream, not whether an arahant could have sexual intercourse.

    The teachers who have had the greatest influence in my life were all married, and unlike the gentleman in the desert in Arizona they did not claim celebacy.

    So to me, what this says is that Gautama the Buddha was pretty much dead-on with regard to suffering, with regard to his own practice, and with regard to the induction of meditative states, but not necessarily right on with regard to morality and the social order (wherein there are four classes that are a part of society now and forever and home leavers constitute one of the four).

    Which leaves me with the science of human suffering that he left in the memories of his followers, and which is recounted in the Pali Canon sermon volumes excepting the fifth set (which was of later composition). Turns out the relationship of the practice Gautama outlined to human suffering was difficult for Gautama to describe, and has been difficult for those who carried on his teaching ever since. What is this “mind” that Bodhidharma said should have no sighing or coughing, and what’s it got to do with staring at a wall?

    When the wind blows, a dead tree can sing, and mountains and rivers walk.

  3. Fred
    Fred September 6, 2013 at 9:50 am | |

    “So to me, what this says is that Gautama the Buddha was pretty much dead-on with regard to suffering, with regard to his own practice, and with regard to the induction of meditative states, but not necessarily right on with regard to morality and the social order (wherein there are four classes that are a part of society now and forever and home leavers constitute one of the four).”

    So x number of Buddhists are sexual intercourse, and that makes the Buddha not
    right?

    How about Buddhists having sex are immoral.

  4. Fred
    Fred September 6, 2013 at 9:58 am | |

    “. Becoming a moral person is a matter of transforming one’s habits of thinking and behavior. That is not easy to do. It takes time. It cannot possibly happen instantaneously no matter what sort of experience one has.”

    And you will never transform a sociopath, no matter what experience he has had.

    You seem to think that you can get an ” immoral ” person to change by
    surrounding them with people who adhere to a particular value system that
    proscribes correct actions, or to change by saying that they will hold x precepts.

    Utter nonsense.

    1. Shodo
      Shodo September 6, 2013 at 11:45 am | |

      Fred said:
      “And you will never transform a sociopath, no matter what experience he has had.”

      Ever read about Angulimala…? :3

      “You seem to think that you can get an ” immoral ” person to change by
      surrounding them with people who adhere to a particular value system that
      proscribes correct actions, or to change by saying that they will hold x precepts.”

      I didn’t say anything of the sort.

  5. Fred
    Fred September 6, 2013 at 10:01 am | |

    What you think is moral, may be the exact opposite on the other side of the
    world.

    Should you nuke them because their values are different?

  6. Fred
    Fred September 6, 2013 at 10:05 am | |

    “What is this “mind” that Bodhidharma said should have no sighing or coughing, and what’s it got to do with staring at a wall?”

    The red flesh ball of a decayed tree.

  7. Fred
    Fred September 6, 2013 at 10:18 am | |

    That’s right, all you righteous Buddhist fornicators are nothing but immoral
    hypocrites.

  8. Fred
    Fred September 6, 2013 at 11:37 am | |

    John :
    “Using the term conceptualizes it ( the word Awareness ). It is not conceptual.”

    Shodo:
    “If a person truly has this experience of “Awareness” as you call it, I don’t think it is even possible to separate it from Morality even the width of a single hair. ”

    Morality is a human invention, ie., the use of thoughts, concepts, words by some
    humans to manipulate minds and behaviours of other humans.

    1. Shodo
      Shodo September 6, 2013 at 1:06 pm | |

      Fred said:
      “Morality is a human invention, ie., the use of thoughts, concepts, words by some
      humans to manipulate minds and behaviours of other humans.”

      hmmm…
      funny definition you have for morality Fred.

      I prefer – principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior. Also, I think that the experience of “Awareness” (your word) also shows a damn good reason to try really hard to practice the precepts.

  9. buddy
    buddy September 6, 2013 at 3:16 pm | |

    ‘funny definition you have for morality Fred.’ Yeah he seems to think it’s okay for Buddhists to stare at a wall in complete indifference to the sufferings of the world, but doesn’t think they should screw each other.

  10. Fred
    Fred September 6, 2013 at 4:37 pm | |

    How many people in the world were murdered last year, Buddy, and what did
    you do to prevent it?

  11. buddy
    buddy September 6, 2013 at 5:02 pm | |

    Not really sure what your question has to do with topic at hand, but I can say that I personally did not murder hundreds, if not thousands, of people.

  12. Fred
    Fred September 6, 2013 at 5:49 pm | |

    As you do not have complete indifference to all the people in the world who
    were murdered last year, you must have a plan or you are doing something to
    stop those murders.

    Tell us how you are saving the world, other than railing against meditators
    sitting in front of a wall.

    Because your difference as opposed to indifference must be making a huge
    difference.

  13. Mumbles
    Mumbles September 6, 2013 at 6:44 pm | |

    I opened the first question/response(s), feel free to explore more and more…

    http://www.askphilosophers.org/?panelist=All&cat=All&q=morality

    And (for fun) from wiki:

    “If morality is extrinsic to humanity, then amoral human beings can both exist and be fully human, and may be amoral either by nature or by choice.”

    It’s like black needs white, joy sorrow, etc. All hail duality. Move past it and…?

  14. buddy
    buddy September 6, 2013 at 6:58 pm | |

    Fred, I have absolutely no problem with people sitting facing a wall. About to do it myself. The problem is when it creates false views, confusing equanimity with apathy and giving rise to perverted views of No-Self. Form is empty, but emptiness is also form, which appears now as this particular suffering being., now as that. One does what one can to help alleviate this suffering, quixotic as the effort may be.

    ‘In the Instructions for the Tenzo, Dogen Zenji recorded his conversation with an old tenzo named Yong at Tendo Monastery. One hot summer day after lunch when Dogen was walking through a corridor, he saw the tenzo drying mushrooms in front of the buddha hall. The tenzo carried a bamboo cane, but had no hat on his head. He was drenched with sweat. The tenzo’s spine bent like a bow and with his shaggy eyebrows he looked like a crane. Dogen asked the tenzo’s age. The tenzo said, “Sixty-eight.” Then Dogen asked, “Why do you not have an attendant or lay worker do this?” The tenzo said, “Others are not me.” Dogen said, “Esteemed sir, you are truly dedicated. The sun is so hot. Why are you doing this now?” The tenzo replied, “What time should I wait for?”

    Dogen wrote, “I immediately withdrew. Thinking to myself as I walked away, I deeply appreciated that this job expresses the essential function.”

    This is a famous story among Dogen’s followers in Japan. Particularly the tenzo’s expression, “Others are not me” is well known. We should consider what this “me” that is not others means to us as Buddhist practitioners.

    One of the essential teachings of the Buddha is “no-self.” It is taught that there is no such thing called “me” or “I”. In that case what is the “me” in “others are not me”? Also, in Zen, teachers often talk about the universal-self that is one with everything and beyond separation of self and others. Dogen also said that “the self that buddhas talk about is the whole great earth,” so that the self is not the ego (atman) separate from others. Then what is this “me” that is not others? If there is no self, the self is zero. If the self is universal and one with everything, then the self is infinite. And the “self that is not others” is one individual person living in the relationship with many other people. So, according to Buddhism and Zen, zero equals one and one equals infinity. Between zero and infinity, there is the self that is one of many.

    I think Buddhist and Zen teachings too often put emphasis on no-self and universal-self and forget about the self that is not others. And the actual self that is in a community is one that is not others. How can we manifest “no-self” and “universal self” through the self that is not others? We need to realize that I am responsible for doing what I should do.’ -Shohaku Okumura

  15. Mark Foote
    Mark Foote September 6, 2013 at 7:33 pm | |

    Only saying that one of the unique qualities of Zen in America is mixed gender monasteries and practice centers, the full participation of women and families encouraged at Zen centers, a blurring of the lines between monastic and lay life.

    What’s important to me in Gautama’s teaching, and in the Zen tradition, is not the precepts. Yet I also believe that my practice on the cushion has slowly made a better person of me, has made me better behaved.

    It’s just that I can’t seem to set out to change my behaviour for the better and succeed by any direct route. It’s a higher-power thing, as usual; somebody wrote me the other day that when they started twelve-step, they had to believe in a higher power, and they went with gravity.

    I know you’re all thinking, don’t get him started, he’ll be talking about the deaf and blind and Stevie Wonder like it had something to do with not being someone else.

  16. zaroff
    zaroff September 7, 2013 at 5:14 am | |

    ‘words tie knots, winding vines bind themselves, coils of crimson thought..’
    Here, have a sharp knife. Cut it.

  17. Fred
    Fred September 7, 2013 at 6:35 am | |

    It’s your strawman that you set up and responded to, Buddy, a projection
    from the labyrinth of your mind.

  18. Fred
    Fred September 7, 2013 at 6:42 am | |

    “It’s a higher-power thing, as usual; somebody wrote me the other day that when they started twelve-step, they had to believe in a higher power, and they went with gravity. ”

    Sasaki went with the centre of gravity, and a God that encompassed both good
    and evil, then a little rub and tug in the dokusan room.

  19. Fred
    Fred September 7, 2013 at 6:57 am | |

    Joshu Sasaki:

    “Shakyamuni said that if you want to be free, you must not prefer only good or evil. Well, now, what about you?

    You are educated all your life to venerate God and reject evil. Zen education is entirely different: it teaches you how to swallow God and the Devil all at once.

    You are able to give yourself completely and make your home in a beautiful woman or in a louse or in a man with a twisted nose.That is Zen practice.”

  20. Fred
    Fred September 7, 2013 at 7:19 am | |

    “Fred, I have absolutely no problem with people sitting facing a wall. About to do it myself. The problem is when it creates false views, confusing equanimity with apathy and giving rise to perverted views of No-Self.”

    There is no perverted view of No-Self, because there is nothing to see No-Self.

    No-Self is the seen and the seeing.

  21. Shodo
    Shodo September 7, 2013 at 7:31 am | |

    LoL – I’d love to see this “quote” from the Buddha Sazaki is referencing here… my 10 bucks is that there is no such quote.

    Also, I’d pay attention to what buddy is saying. Nagarjuna arguments backs him up I believe.

  22. Fred
    Fred September 7, 2013 at 7:52 am | |

    One of the essential teachings of the Buddha is “no-self.” It is taught that there is no such thing called “me” or “I”.

    In that case what is the “me” in “others are not me”? – No self, the empty pot.

    Also, in Zen, teachers often talk about the universal-self that is one with everything and beyond separation of self and others. – No self, the empty pot.

    Dogen also said that “the self that buddhas talk about is the whole great earth,” so that the self is not the ego (atman) separate from others. – The myriad things come forth and realize you.

    Then what is this “me” that is not others? – the totality of existence sees itself
    without a fixed filter

  23. Shodo
    Shodo September 7, 2013 at 8:01 am | |

    Fred asked:
    “One of the essential teachings of the Buddha is “no-self.” It is taught that there is no such thing called “me” or “I”.

    In that case what is the “me” in “others are not me”? – No self, the empty pot.”

    So you think “Shunyata = Nothingness”…?

  24. Fred
    Fred September 7, 2013 at 8:33 am | |

    The empty pot that Mumbles referred to.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-nQ4dVQXc0

  25. Fred
    Fred September 7, 2013 at 9:07 am | |

    Shodo said:
    ‘So you think “Shunyata = Nothingness”…?’

    Haha, a philosophical word trap with the dog chasing its tail in circles.

    Here’s what John posted:

    ““There is no such thing as a person. There are only restrictions and limitations. The sum total of these defines the person. You think you know yourself when you know what you are. But you never know who you are. The person merely appears to be, like the space within the pot appears to have the shape and volume and smell of the pot. See that you are not what you believe yourself to be. Fight with all the strength at your disposal against the idea that you are nameable and describable. You are not.”

    “When you refuse to play the game, you are out of it.”
    ― Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj”

  26. Shodo
    Shodo September 7, 2013 at 9:15 am | |

    Fred said:
    “Haha, a philosophical word trap….”

    I’m not playing word games. I am trying to find out what you mean when you say Shunyata. It seems like you are equating it with nothingness/ emptiness/void – Is this what you mean?

    1. Shodo
      Shodo September 7, 2013 at 9:30 am | |

      AND!
      Is that ALL you mean?

  27. Fred
    Fred September 7, 2013 at 11:49 am | |

    This Iing did not say Shunyata. It has not said Shunyata for some time.

    You are projecting as well.

  28. Shodo
    Shodo September 7, 2013 at 1:01 pm | |

    I swear that I am not trying to project anything, nor am I trying to catch you in some kind of zenny trap or play some word game with you.

    The context of this entire conversation that we are having is whether or not there is a moral dimension to Enlightenment… And though the word “Shunyata” has not been used until just now, you have said things before that refer to “emptiness”, and used it in a way that suggest that there is no moral dimension to awakening.

    All I am asking you, is how do you understand the term shunyata.
    I’m no adept, I’m not trying to engage you in some zenny conversation, all I want to know is what I asked just now…

    (But please, no poetry ;) )

  29. buddy
    buddy September 7, 2013 at 1:01 pm | |

    ‘Im not playing word games. I’m trying to find out what you mean when yiu say Shunyata.’ Shodo, I admire your patience and earnestness in dealing with Fred, but I think it’s pretty obvious by now that he isn’t interested in having any sort of constructive dialogue, but rather just sees this as a forum to flaunt his sense of superiority by tossing out vague Zennisms and then attacking people who dare question his wisdom. For an empty pot, he sure seems to have some hostility issues. Oh but wait, I’m just projecting again …

  30. Fred
    Fred September 7, 2013 at 2:52 pm | |

    Wiki : “According to Thanissaro Bhikku:

    Emptiness as a quality of dharmas, in the early canons, means simply that one cannot identify them as one’s own self or having anything pertaining to one’s own self…Emptiness as a mental state, in the early canons, means a mode of perception in which one neither adds anything to nor takes anything away from what is present, noting simply, “There is this.” This mode is achieved through a process of intense concentration, coupled with the insight that notes more and more subtle levels of the presence and absence of disturbance”

    This.

    There is this always was and always will be.

    Is there a moral component to no self? Just love.

  31. Shodo
    Shodo September 7, 2013 at 9:06 pm | |

    Fred said:
    “Emptiness as a quality of dharmas, in the early canons, means simply that one cannot identify them as one’s own self or having anything pertaining to one’s own self…”

    Yes, that is a good definition.
    (Sorry Brad, it doesn’t mean “balanced state”…)
    It doesn’t mean “emptiness full stop”, It doesn’t mean nihilism. It doesn’t mean things don’t exist. It means an emptiness of something very specific – a self. There is no atman, no eternal essence or inherent existence to anything, anywhere.

    I think another way of reading it is that the ONLY things that truly exist are things that have no self.

    In Nagarjuna’s philosophy, as I understand it, (and the same Wiki page backs me up I think,) that to say that a thing is empty of self(shunyata) is the same as saying it was dependently arisen(pratītyasamutpāda). Which to me means that everything that exists, including yourself, exists without inherent existence and is dependent on everything else FOR existence.

    When somebody realizes that, and I means REALLY realizes that… There would be an imperative to be moral and to practice the precepts that you couldn’t ignore. It means that the good (and bad) you do in the world has profound and far-reaching effects on everything, and in ways you can’t possibly imagine.
    The whole thing becomes really personal, and the Precepts are how you go about actualizing what was realized and bringing it in to the world.

    (But I’m just typing words and just saying all this imparts nothing… I haven’t realized this for myself. It just makes sense to my mind/heart and seems to be in accord with what my teachers have taught me and with my understanding of these concepts. I also feel that buddy was saying the same sort of thing in his post talking about Dogen Zenji.)

  32. Fred
    Fred September 8, 2013 at 6:22 am | |

    John, you have realized no self, but you say you have not realized the moral
    component ( or actualized what was realized, in the flesh and blood world in
    a moral way )

    It won’t be actualized, because the morality only exists as words.

    The infinite is not bound by words or thoughts.

  33. Shodo
    Shodo September 8, 2013 at 7:50 am | |

    John?
    That’s not my name but your post seems directed at me.

    Morality only exists in words…? There are no moral actions? I don’t think you are making much sense here

  34. Shodo
    Shodo September 8, 2013 at 8:20 am | |

    Also, I’m saying that when emptiness of self is realized, dependent arising is realized… They aren’t two things.

    I have directly realized neither. I’m speaking intellectually.

  35. Fred
    Fred September 8, 2013 at 9:06 am | |

    John is Mumbles, Shodo.

    People with some unacceptable component in their conditioned self, turning
    to Zen to fix the hole in the soul, or correct the wobble in the dukkha.

    And attempting to yoke the every day self with realization, hope that the zen
    realization will bring morality into the functioning of the conditioned self.

    But it is the other way around, in the intertwining and interpenetration it is
    the conditioned self that brings morality into the union.

    How could choiceless awareness pick or choose which behaviours and thoughts
    are appropriate?

  36. Shodo
    Shodo September 8, 2013 at 9:30 am | |

    Hmmmm…
    Well, I’ll let you get back to your poetry then.
    Nice talking with you Fred.

  37. Shodo
    Shodo September 8, 2013 at 10:39 am | |

    Wasn’t being snide. ;)
    Enjoyed the convo.

  38. buddy
    buddy September 8, 2013 at 1:08 pm | |

    ‘How could choiceless awareness pick or choose which behaviours and thoughts
    are appropriate?’ I’m not sure if I’ve ever encountered someone who speaks with as much smug authority about something of which they obviously know very little.

  39. Fred
    Fred September 8, 2013 at 2:38 pm | |

    Thanks Buddy.

  40. Mark Foote
    Mark Foote September 8, 2013 at 2:43 pm | |

    Liked that a lot, Fred, all of it leading up to:

    “How could choiceless awareness pick or choose which behaviours and thoughts are appropriate?”

    I do think that a part of choiceless awareness is choiceless awareness of thoughts and of belief based on thought. That’s the part that frequently gets left out of the Zen equation, that we have a thinking organ and cause-and-effect conclusions are made without choice by the thinking organ resulting in beliefs without choice that precipitate actions without choice. This can be superstition or science, and either way can result in life or death.

    What I’m saying is that it’s a matter of human necessity to think and discover cause-and-effect relationships, and the understanding of these relationships can precipitate involuntary action; that’s also a necessity. The trick is to find the necessity, not the thinking or the action out of necessity. IMHO.

  41. Mark Foote
    Mark Foote September 8, 2013 at 2:47 pm | |

    Made it to Sonoma Mountain Zen Center’s annual Mandala Bazaar yesterday, where I discovered my raffle ticket had won a book, and made the acquaintance of John C., who recognized me from my photo here on Brad’s blog. Hi, John!

    Looking forward to reading “Zen baggage”, by bill porter, aka Red Pine; it’s his journey to the places associated with the first six patriarchs in China.

  42. Mumbles
    Mumbles September 8, 2013 at 5:52 pm | |

    Pretty early on in this article of mine that appeared in The Stone in, maybe 1998, I mentioned Bill Porter’s other travelogue, The Road To Heaven, which remains one of my favorites…

    http://www.triad-publishing.com/The%20Stone/stone27a.html

  43. Mark Foote
    Mark Foote September 9, 2013 at 8:46 am | |

    Thanks for the link to the article on Porter, Fred and the reminder of the medicinal properties of Juniper, Mumbles. Wow. A book to read, what fun.

    As to Thanissaro Bhikku:

    ‘Emptiness as a quality of dharmas, in the early canons, means simply that one cannot identify them as one’s own self or having anything pertaining to one’s own self…Emptiness as a mental state, in the early canons, means a mode of perception in which one neither adds anything to nor takes anything away from what is present, noting simply, “There is this.” This mode is achieved through a process of intense concentration, coupled with the insight that notes more and more subtle levels of the presence and absence of disturbance”’ wiki?

    I don’t recall mention of emptiness in the first four sets of volumes of the Pali Canon sermons, the books which I think constitute the “early canons”. The attribution of meaning to emptiness by Thanissaro appears to me to be entirely his own, as is his description of a method by which his notion of a goal might be achieved.

    This is what I recall:

    “Whatever… is material shape, past, future or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, mean or excellent, or whatever is far or near, (a person), thinking of all this material shape as ‘This is not mine, this am I not, this is not my self’, sees it thus as it really is by means of perfect wisdom. Whatever is feeling… perception… the habitual tendencies… whatever is consciousness, past, future, or present… (that person), thinking of all this consciousness as ‘This is not mine, this am I not, this is not my self’, sees it thus as it really is by means of perfect wisdom. (For one) knowing thus, seeing thus, there are no latent conceits that ‘I am the doer, mine is the doer’ in regard to this consciousness-informed body.”

    (MN III 18-19, Pali Text Society III pg 68)

    In my piece “Letting Go in Action”, I say this about “perfect wisdom”:

    ‘“By means of perfect wisdom” is an affirmation that seeing through the conceit “mine is the doer” depends on a knowledge inherent in human nature, a knowledge that escapes the use of reason.’

    I say that because until a person experiences action of the body without the exercise of volition, they cannot find a way to believe it exists, even though they may have seen it in someone else during a performance of stage hypnosis or in the presence of someone like Kobun Chino Otogawa.

    The practice of Gautama was the intent concentration on in-breaths and out-breaths, both before and after his enlightenment. That his observation of cause and effect in his practice, his experience of meditative states, and their relationship to suffering could have been so selfless is the reason his descriptions have endured, but he also made mistakes.

    For me, “this is not mine, this am I not, this is not myself” is a a part of freeing the mind in an in-breath or an out-breath, and yet freeing the mind is preceded by composing the mind in an in-breath or out-breath: this is proprioception along side of equalibrioception as a nececessity in the movement of breath, and the experience of detachment and the cessation of volition in an in-breath or out-breath can take place out of necessity in an in-breath or out-breath. Mindfulness of detachment and mindfulness of the cessation of volition constitute the fourteenth and fifteenth aspects of Gautama’s practice, preceded by mindfulness of impermanence and continued through mindfulness of the relinquishment of self.

    Deliverance from thought without grasping is non-thinking, but in this consciousness-informed body there can be no doer of non-thinking; it’s a matter of necessity in the movement of breath.

  44. Fred
    Fred September 9, 2013 at 10:24 am | |

    There is no notice of an inside or outside, but just a vastness.

    And a body breathing in and out is not present in awareness.

  45. Mark Foote
    Mark Foote September 9, 2013 at 11:49 am | |

    and then the water of life covered his head for moment, and it all came back to him…

  46. Shodo
    Shodo September 9, 2013 at 12:41 pm | |

    Fred said:
    “There is no notice of an inside or outside, but just a vastness.”

    Is this what you are calling “awakening” Fred?
    Sounds more like a moment of samadhi to me…

  47. Mark Foote
    Mark Foote September 9, 2013 at 1:24 pm | |

    “I used to do this shit and it was exciting because I didn’t know what was coming next…” Paul Westerberg on the live take of “Crackle and Drag”, a song about the poetess Sylvia Plaith:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDzQNo7KzwM&list=PLE69B0714E7E2D39D

  48. Fred
    Fred September 9, 2013 at 4:59 pm | |

    There is no one to be awakened, Shodo.

    Under the unrelenting pain of psychotic depression, she lost her grip on life and
    turned on the gas in the oven.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.