A certain commenter (known as Anon #108) and I have had an ongoing argument about meditation. Specifically, whether or not one can be more present or aware through a willful determination to do so. Anon #108 claims that whatever it is that happens during Zazen (call it snapping into awareness of being here) or dropping off body and mind, whatever you want to call it--happens spontaneously, by letting go and doing Zazen.
But what I just realized this very instant is that Anon #108 has actually already made my point for me. There is something he does--whether you call it a non-doing or a letting go--I don't care what you call it. You choose to do this physical activity, different from anything else. There is a thing you do which results in a change of state. So you cannot claim that there is nothing to do which can affect such a change in state since your philosophy already admits to it.
Zazen causes said change in state. You choose to do zazen. Therefore YOU actively change your mind-state by an action that you undertake at such time as you find appropriate.
My claim is that breathing and attention to the breath, when done on a moment to moment basis, also affects a change in state similar to that of zazen. I choose to practice this on a moment to moment basis, similarly to how you might sit on a zafu at 8 in the morning and undertake zazen.
This is actually a very important point. Soto Zen practitioners, particularly those who frequent these parts of the 'net, claim that all we need to do is sit zazen--sit in the posture and then let the rest go. Proponents of this notion, such as Anon #108, tend to scoff at the idea that we can make a willful attempt to be present throughout life with any success. They say that "trying" to do this is pointless, that it is through just sitting that we have this experience. Furthermore, Anon #108 has claimed that there is nothing he can "do" to make a change in his awareness of this present moment happen, that it simply happens of its own accord.
But this is very misleading, I think. If the act of sitting causes our awareness to shift more often then it otherwise would--then we must realize that it is WE who are choosing to be present more often. We make the choice to park our ass on that cushion. That is a physical decision which then causes, at some point, a change in awareness.
Therefore you do in fact control how often you are able to be present, based on when and how often you do the practice of zazen.
It is a choice, and it is completely consistent with everything you believe, #108. You must simply admit that you actually are choosing to be more present through zazen, since that is in fact what you are doing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
G -
I think that - understandably, no doubt - you've unfairly characterised my position. I don't recall making many of the 'claims' you ascribe to me. I thought that most of the time I was asking questions, rather than stating positions. But I'll have to check the record - I may be suffering from the same blind-spot as Brad's being accused of next door.
I really don't know what is going on when I do zazen, and I certainly don't know what goes on for you when do your practice. I sure don't have the answer to the free will question, and I sure haven't cracked just what consciousness/awareness is, or how it works. But like you, it intrigues me to discuss it, to 'compare notes', and I keep putting it out there.
So regardless whether I actually wrote or meant what "anon #108" appears to believe, your post is an interesting contribution to the debate. I'll be interested to see where it goes and what comes back this time.
The above was Anon #108's response which somehow made it to my email but not the comments section here...not sure what the hangup is...
Test--this works for me under a different screen name...
Everything seems OK now. I think we are good to go.
OK. Let's see. (I have been posting on the usual comments page. Thanks for transferring em).
Here's the one I just mentioned on HCZ (@ 5.34pm):
As your post is discussing choice, decision, conscious effort, I’ll try to clarify what I’ve been trying to say (with the caveat that my zazen - and my life - is about much more than just clarifying these issues).
Did I decide to have the thought that initiated (what you call) the “physical decision” ‘I’m gonna sit now’? I’ve no idea. I don’t understand how that would happen, but perhaps “I” (?) do create my own thoughts. Whatever, as I’ve said before (to Harry on HCZ), “Even if it's 'true' that I am merely a biological machine manifesting one tiny element of the destiny of the big bang… I'll always feel that I'm a unique, conscious, freely functioning individual being.”
I think we may be confusing two things: the terms of the mysterious autonomous self/free will versus determinism debate, and the way we use those same terms in everyday discourse. Words like “choose”, “decide” do have real ‘everyday’ meaning, but may not be accurate descriptions of *what’s really going on* at a more ‘fundamental’ level. Maybe.
Yep. That seemed to work. Now let's see if something decides me to hit the sack...
I'm curious, and you may or may not have talked about it here, Gniz, and I missed it, but unless I'm mistaken over on Brad's blog you said you are Not a Buddhist? Is that correct? Do you follow a particular path? I know you have mentioned a teacher...
Just wondering, it may place your comments here concerning Shikantaza (or is this just a comment on 108's opinion of Shikantaza?) in context. Thanks.
Good points I think Gniz.
And Anon #108, I don't think this has any dependence on philosophical ideas about whether we ultimately have free will or ultimately lack it.
The point I think that Gniz is making, is that we choose to be present (whatever 'choice' is and whatever 'awareness' is) or at the very leat choose to practice zen - just as we choose to have sex or to invest money.
Negating this with a metaphysical claim that there is no freewill is a red herring.
...we choose to be present (whatever 'choice' is and whatever 'awareness' is) or at the very leat choose to practice zen...
Your equivocation is telling, I think. These are just the terms I was trying to clarify...at one point. Unsuccessfully.
This is frustrating, Justin. Sadly some of my posts aren't getting through - there was a fuller response to you that's gone missing and preceded the one you've just read...I'll try again.
Please explain what I was equivocating.
"Whatever choice is" and "whatever awareness is" and "we choose to be present... or at the very least choose to practice zen"... (Two questions and an alternative conclusion)...
I think the word 'equivocal' fits two questions and a "or at the very least".
Telling what?
Telling that it's very hard to make unequivocal statements about any of this stuff. That's all. Sorry if it came across as a "gotcha!" moment. I really didn't mean it that way.
There's no argument here, J.
Here, fingers crossed, is my initial reply, Justin:
Hi Shonin,
I totally agree that "this" (I assume you mean Gniz's argument) has no "dependence on philosophical ideas about whether we ultimately have free will or ultimately lack it". But Gniz has misunderstood and misrepresented what I've said. He's conflated a bunch of stuff.
Negating this with a metaphysical claim that there is no freewill...
(Again) that wasn't my intention.
I'm perfectly Ok with "we choose to do zazen." Like I said @ 5.58pm, "Words like “choose”, “decide” do have real ‘everyday’ meaning"; the fee will/determinism debate is another level of discourse - which I have not sought to connect in quite the way Gniz seems to think I have. Hence his post, which does not at all represent what I think or have written.
If all Gniz saying is that we choose to do zazen - then sure, we are as one. I know what that means. That use of everyday language I share with everyone else. But if he's saying that in the same way we choose to have the thought to do...anything, then I'm not so sure. That's all I'm saying - I'm not sure. There are two levels of discussion going on here, I think, which have become confused.
All this came up while we were discussing our subjective experience of "awareness" (what IS that?) during meditation. I don't pretend to know what *the real situation* is. I just asked some questions.
Gee I must be a bad communicator!
Why post something then delete it Justin? Stand by your words. It makes following the string more difficult when a comment that is being commented on is removed. If you want to expand on something or take it back, just do it with your next comment.
Hi 108,
After re-reading some of what you wrote I realised that I misunderstood the position you were arguing.
If all Gniz saying is that we choose to do zazen - then sure, we are as one. I know what that means. That use of everyday language I share with everyone else. But if he's saying that in the same way we choose to have the thought to do...anything, then I'm not so sure. That's all I'm saying - I'm not sure. There are two levels of discussion going on here, I think, which have become confused.
Zazen - like most forms of meditation - involves cultivating a different 'mode' from the one that we are normally in: a 'being' or 'non-doing' rather than our usual goal-oriented 'doing'. Having said that, this is not about quietism. We still have to act. For a start, we have to act (physically) in order to practice zazen. And we have to act (noticing when we are daydreaming etc) in order that the zazen is not just sitting and being lost in thoughts. But we are gradually learning to act without the judgemental, goal-orientation that normally accompanies acting.
All this came up while we were discussing our subjective experience of "awareness" (what IS that?)"
I didn't pick this up from the original conversation (probably why I misunderstood you). But in terms of zazen practice, (unless actually being unconscious is an issue) presumably it is about whether our attention is consumed into a virtual world of imaginings and thoughts or whether our attention clearly sees thoughts as thoughts - mental events that arise and pass.
Hi, great discussion guys.
Just want to point out that although I may not have understood Anon #108s position clearly, I was mainly reacting to some statements he made about my practice.
Namely, that I was "trying too hard" and that this tactic didn't appear to be working for me. When I attempted to discuss with him why one could try and still fail at times to be more present, I felt that Anon 108 became lost in a murky haze of circular logic that ultimately leads back to this "free will" box we can't climb out of.
My point is that if you acknowledge that Zazen is a physical act that you attempt, an act which has some kind of consequence that you are happy with--then my position that my breathing practice is virtually the same is reasonable. And that Anon 108s points about trying too hard really don't have anything to do with it.
We are always "trying" even when we are doing nothing more then trying to type, trying to put on our pants, etc.
J and G,
All fair enough.
I don't dissent from any of your observations about acting and zazen, Justin. You put it well. But still, is it really true that......(jk!)
Your points are about 'trying' are perfectly valid, G. I did 'ask for it' with my "trying too hard?" comments. But I did preface it all with "Perhaps..." - both times ;)
I seems I derailed things by introducing the free will/do we 'choose' to return to awareness question (from 8.27am here). But it is a kind of bottom line, and even if it is a box we can't get out of, I think it's worth taking a peek inside now and again. My experience is that most other people don't appreciate the invitation - don't see it as relevant or useful. I understand that.
Like I said, at no time was I attempting to nail anything definite or conclusive about what goes on/what we do, or suggest that zazen is just sitting in lotus, making no effort whatsoever. Mind you.....(jk!!!).
And the captcha is.....OFILTHYS.
Mind you…
(Putting aside questions of free will)…
As you say, Gniz, we are always trying, whatever we do.
It’s not even possible to sit still and quiet, doing nothing, without making physical and mental effort; without trying. Even if I sit without any intention to maintain my awareness, there will be many moments when I will notice/be aware/conscious of all sorts of things. Anyone sitting still and quiet for longer than a minute or two (it took one friend of mine a lot longer!) will notice – as well as physical sensations and feelings - their inner dialogue:
"I'm sleepy...do I want to doze off or not?"
"Why have I been worrying about what happened last year! I should stop that"
"Why have I been worrying about what happened last year? I’ll worry some more, and get it sorted once and for all.“
"I'm trying to sit without intention, aren't I? Let me try 'thinking not-thinking' for a bit" ...
If you sit making no special, extra effort to be ‘mindful’, just allowing the natural, unforced effort a conscious human will make to do itself, you begin to notice more about your self; about how your mind works. You might then come to accept and let go of the mental chatter – to see it for what it is. In a sense, to get bored with it. Letting go, something else might be allowed to emerge; a more natural, balanced state (what the Buddhists might call samadhi). Experiencing that state for a short while every day - regardless of any moments of unusual insight - has an effect over time. Many report that they become more content…Things go better. And that’s been my experience.
(Dogen: "To learn the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be enlightened by all things.”)
This morning, that’s how I see and have experienced just sitting. And a suggestion of how and why it might work.
So rather than the personal and uncalled for “Perhaps you’re trying too hard”, how about the more general “We don't have to try to try.” ?
Do you think we're describing the same thing in different terms, or is there a substantial difference between our practices and what we’re trying to realise?
On your "noticing when we're daydreaming" point, Justin -
A couple of days ago I asked, *In those moments of lack of self/other-awareness do we decide to come back to awareness?* and so muddied the waters with free will/determinism. But however daydreaming stops, the fact is that we don't stay daydreaming for ever. Even if sitting without any intention to maintain awareness leads to periods of day-dreaming, there will be times when we find ourselves back here and now with a wall - or whatever - consciously recognised in front of us.
I believe we can trust to something beyond 'our own' deciding....for something beyond our own deciding is certainly occurring.
You pays your money...
Hey 108,
Nice comments. Here's the thing about sitting and "not trying". I would love to do an experiment where you took a few people who knew NOTHING about zen or meditation. Teach them the lotus posture and NOTHING else. No dogen, no buddhist theory, nothing but the posture of zazen.
Then have them sit in it for thirty minutes a day. I bet what you'd have is a bunch of people singing, daydreaming, making up stories, fidgeting, whatever.
This is a guess mind you because we won't know unless someone finds a few subjects who have never heard of meditation and tries this experiment.
But I reckon that it is only by knowing what the so-called "point" of zazen is that allows it to have any worth. You need to do a few things and even if you are trying to not try, or simply sit there--at some level you know what the deal is. You know that there is something different that is supposed to happen while sitting zazen. Period.
And therefore you are doing something different than you normally do in the rest of your life. This is simple logic. Why do you sit zazen if not to do something different with your body/mind? Now ask yourself this.
Is it possible that there are other places you can do something different with your body/mind then just sitting zen?
G'mornin Gniz,
Your whole comment - bar the last question - Agreed.
...I agree that the motivation for practising zazen in the first place informs how we do it and what we get out of it... But I would be interested in your "no Zen programming" experiment: but there would have to be a condition that volunteers sit still and quiet - and, yes, as close to lotus as they can get for half an hour. My guess - just a guess - is that if the folks stuck at it, the practice would have a beneficial effect, regardless of no awareness of, or interest in "Buddhism". (For me, without doubt, my interest in, and understanding of Buddhism has been an added bonus).
Your final question: If I understand correctly what you're getting at...does this answer fit:
"Experiencing that state for a short while every day - regardless of any moments of unusual insight - has an effect over time." ?
The Zen word on this is that sitting zazen every day, maybe a couple of times, is like ringing a bell - the effect reverberates through everything else that you do. I've noticed that. I believe it's true. Otherwise, I think it's fine to do the sitting and then do the next thing. Just live your life.
Well I haven't necessarily found the "bell ringing" effect to be true for me (although it might be). I think it's a nice thought and it's comforting to feel like you've "done your duty" and can just move on, relinquishing responsibility for the moment.
But in fact, my experience tells me that each moment is new and although the past informs it, without carrying on a concerted effort now and now again, you're just back to square one.
And although it might be nice to say "well i did my zen, i'm good for today" that's a bit arbitrary. Society has divided life into these neat little blocks of time we call "days" but why should it be that once or twice a day has this magical effect you speak of?
Each moment I have to earn the diploma again and again. Each moment is brand spanking new whether I had an amazing zen sit or not. And if that's what people are depending on to allow them to see things as they are--well, no wonder we have so many zen buddhists who can't seem to tell their ass from their elbow.
I keep tellin ya gniz - you're doing at all wrong!
(yes...jk, kinda)
Perhaps we just like having opinions? I know I do ;)
Opinions are fine. Sometimes we might even be--gasp!--right about something.
Willingness to change opinions or see where I might be missing the boat is fine too.
I just can't fathom the attitude of some zen people that really seem to staunchly believe a certain sitting position is the whole ball of wax.
Post a Comment