stirling

Yeah... that's a different thing. I was different after experimenting with LSD in my teens and twenties in much the same way. I was thankful for it, and would meet people at parties and often know intuitively that they had also had that experience. Also, when I discovered that taking an entry level dose of Klonipin could erase my anxiety it was quite an eye opener. The realization that most people didn't walk around in anxiety was a revelation... but not the same kind of eye opener that realizing that all appearances are empty of "self" and other... just not in any way comparable in scale. It is the second that permanently cured the off and on generalized anxiety I had enjoyed from childhood, not first and the associated therapy. I am NOT invalidating therapy, which I have found helpful in other contexts, merely talking about my personal experience. I'm curious, why are you meditating when you don't believe in the central premise for its existence - what it is supposed to be according the tradition (Zen) you say you practice in? It is INTENDED to dig up your personal stuff, and would actually train you to notice with curiosity when you become fixated with attachment or aversion. What? Nah. Self is a story you tell yourself moment to moment. Which of your "selves" is the true one? The one you inhabit when you are with your partner? Someone in a shop? With your parents? With an officer of the law when you have been pulled over? Self comes and goes, shifts and changes. It is possibly the easiest object to see impermanence in. This is not my experience, and I daresay that of many of my teaching peers. I am being honest here, not gaslighting you. Oh definitely therapy is helpful in working with conditioning for many people. Thank you for your service to them. Had to look it up, though I did enjoy reading Jung a bit in my 16 credits of psychology in college: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unus_mundus That's what I'm talking about (at least the part that I italicized)! Have you read Dogen by any chance: The restoration of the original state is the Tao. The behavior of a Buddha is "wu wei", alignment, presence. It is alignment and synchronization with everything, as it is happening moment to moment. It would be a little tough if there was a "self" in there thinking it had agency, wouldn't it?

Are you working with a teacher, or meditating? Let's hear more about that. From MY perspective, entirely off the top of my head, and with a 101 degree fever (so possibly missing some things): Your first insight might be the realization of just how unbearably noisy your mind is outside of meditation practice. If you are meditating at least 20 minutes a day or hopefully more, you will find that you become less reactive, more calm, and develop a "pause" before emotional outbursts that enables you to wait through the wave of emotion and respond in a more relaxed and kind manner. This would be one of the earlier hallmarks of a dedicated practitioner. You might have "pointing out' instruction from a teacher and now be able to recognize "emptiness" with some effort. In daily life you will begin to learn to see it in your meditation practice, and attempt allowing this to well up in during your day. Eventually you start to have "access concentration", a stableness and abiding in your meditation practice that allows using your practice for inquiry. There are a lot more things like this, but usually I just see it come up in a student as they develop. If you don't, but CAN have an in-person teacher, I would highly suggest it.

Absolutely. This is my experience. I agree, in terms of "requiring" sitting. Despite having an everyday experience of formlessness to a particular degree, I sit because there are deeper levels of formlessness available there... and I just love sitting, it is enjoyably effortless. Commonly, yes. I think of the mind as like a willow branch. You may bend the branch over and over to train it into a shape, like a chair, but at first it just bends back. Eventually, however, it increasingly stays where it is bent, until at some point it doesn't bend back. So it is with meditation. From the perspective of enlightened mind, WHO is doing the lifting? You say earlier: Meditation changes the mind, but what ACTUALLY precipitates awakening (if there IS anything) is unknown. If we DID know what it was we could skip meditation and just cut to the chase... but you can't. The best you can do, IMHO, is be "accident prone" as Suzuki suggests.

What is important is that it resonates with the "awakened", or those with "no-self"/arhats. These absolute teachings are the best attempts at conceptual explanation available from perspective of enlightened mind. Agreed. The language/belief system of science has the same problem, despite its ability to predictively model reality where the variables are limited. I would, of course, say that this is because the "common" experience of consciousness is not different from the "enlightened" experience EXCEPT for the perceptual overlay of distortion in between it and experiencing. I'm not sure I follow you here. What is labelled "relative" are the teachings that point to symbolic ideas about a subject/object world... but even those lead to absolute teachings. While some teaching may be intended to lead to "altered states" analogous to enlightenment (the jhanas for example) the overall intention points to nirvana which is NOT an altered "state" (something temporary) but a permanent shift in understanding that doesn't fade or change. It is reality, as it is, over years upon years and, as far as I can tell, the variety of human experience including: extreme pain, sleep, emotions, intoxication, etc., etc. The toolset is simple: bring conditioning into consciousness when the mind is quiet and empty and allow that thought to pass are you would any other thought. This has been used for thousands of years. For some without deep trauma and attachment to their distorted views, this would be enough. Others might need some help from an intelligent, experienced psychological professional such as yourself. Some might clear enough of their conditioning to awaken. Awakening, and the eventual dropping away of "self" permanently change our relationship to our conditioning. At this point conditioning becomes MUCH easier to drop, due to the shift in perspective. From the moment of "awakening" (satori in Zen) the "self" is like a fan that has had its plug pulled. Things experienced as "self" are generally seen for what they are and drop away. The old patterns arise in experience of their own accord and drop away when brought into the stillness of enlightened mind. The "tool" at this point is effortless, and just an automatic part of experience. Seeing reality as it is definitely completely removes conditioning, in my experience.

I would call this "pointing out" (from the Tibetan Buddhist traditions). I'm not sure how it is talked about in your video, but in my practice it is a demonstration of what "emptiness" is, and some instruction on how to find it. I probably end up doing something along these lines every few meetings with a student. Once a student sees and NON-CONCEPTUALLY understands "emptiness" they can learn to allow it to well-up in their experience with greater and greater degrees of success and confidence.

The teachings on the absolute are "maximalist" because the nature of reality is uncompromising. It can't be bent to encompass conceptual frameworks that we cherish. Intellectually, I completely get how the absolute can create cognitive dissonance, but it truly is the reality of things. Once seen and understood, there is no way understand the world in the way it was before... not that this is a burden... it is a great joy. The relative teachings, which include the realms, rebirth, etc. are not ultimately real, though as real as anything else you think is "real". Nirvana IS real, but is not some other place or thing other than what is happening in this moment. It is always right here. The relative teachings are where "religious" ideas live in the Buddhist teachings. The relative teachings are skillful means, where ability to work with the absolute teachings is still in development. The teachings on impermanence, and especially dependent origination are the bridge to the absolute teachings. The relative actually is ALWAYS pointing at the absolute. The absolute teachings (and the relative teachings couching absolute teachings) are not at all religious, once fully understood. Coming full circle: The meditation practice (in Zen/Mahamudra/Dgozchen) is, from the beginning, an absolute practice that cultivates insight into the non-dual nature of reality. The absolute isn't going to resonate with ANYONE'S ideas about how reality is.

Are you familiar with the Two Truths Doctrine? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_truths_doctrine#:~:text=The Buddhist doctrine of the,ultimate" (paramārtha) truth.

My group sits for 15 minutes at the beginning of our sangha meetings, but it isn't terribly relevant in the scheme of things. I encourage students to sit for at least 20 minutes a day, but hopefully more like 40 minutes at least once, or even twice a day. Sitting at least 40 minutes a day, with regular teacher check-ins is optimal, in my opinion. Sitting in nature, or walking when one is able to have a fairly quiet mind is VERY beneficial. I walk for an hour most days, and it is very productive. The Rinzai Zen school like to use koan study, but I have never bonded with it. The idea of backing the mind into a corner is in many traditions, including Advaita and Sufism, so I think must work for some percentage of practitioners. I don't know anything about Mr. Mitchell.

Which Buddhism do you mean? Some branches are religious and some aren't. Is resting in nirodha/cessation where the mind is still and quiescent religious? It isn't Buddhism that understands or explains thoughts, or mind, or the world, it is enlightenment. Buddhism is simply a vehicle to a destination. Once there is arriving, it doesn't retain the same importance. It is direct experience that is valued, not axioms. The knowledge we are looking for is never merely conceptual. It is ultimately unimportant if a conceptual construct around where thoughts come from exists. Complete understanding of the nature of reality makes such a questions nonsense, where the time, space, and self are seen through as illusions. This is the reason that Buddhism doesn't generally attempt to answer questions of cosmology. It is an experiential understanding, not some kind of denial or reformation of ones views that precipitates this. Definitely agreed. It is mysterious. Thoughts seem to come out of nowhere, and disappear. This is the true of all phenomena, including self, moment to moment. The world is a pulsing fountain of things arising and disappearing, moment to moment. Reminds me of: Which Buddhism? There is abundantly more insight in resting the mind in it's own nature than in either Buddhism OR psychology.

No need to wish! Sitting in open awareness and allowing the mind to become still is all that is required. Most people can begin to have glimpses of resting in awareness in a week or so, all it takes is your sincere wish to end suffering, or understand the nature of mind. This is a nice primer on what you are trying to accomplish and how to start by a lovely, lovely being: https://www.lionsroar.com/how-to-meditate-dzogchen-ponlop-rinpoche-on-mahamudra/

I've chatted with Soh a number of times and am satisfied that he knows what he is talking about. There aren't REALLY stages of awakening, so consider these an aid rather than a references. There are MANY maps of the enlightened territory, from the Four Stage map, the Bhumis, the Oxherding pictures, ad nauseum, and all of them seem to have useful aspects to them.

It's NICE to sit! You won't get far in most spirituality without sitting. Meditation is even a feature of magick practice. Getting all of your fixed ideas about yourself and the world out of the way opens up the space for shifts in understanding to occur. Sitting in meditation after insight into the nature of mind deepens the experience of it and helps the continual further dissolution of dualities and ancient twisted karma. No practice "works". A person who thinks that they can "enlighten" themselves is deluded. There are no enlightened "selves". We are in the Buddhism subforum, so I'm speaking specifically of Buddhism, here. The Zen path and Dzogchen path, which have been my primary vehicles, can be expressed this way. Most Buddhism eschews striving, as well as clinging or aversion, leaving "enlightenment projects" to other disciplines in recognition that it really isn't UP to "you". Procrastination? What is it that you think needs to be done? Deepening insight. Enjoying being-ness. Flying to other planets and visiting space beings. The siddhis are interesting. (just kidding about the space beings) I used to meditate because I was a happier, calmer, less reactive person when I did. I initially became a dedicated meditator after 2 weeks of practice changed my life. At this point I'm fresh out of goals or posts, or anyone to have any.

Where do thoughts come from then? Science hasn't figured it out, though they have managed to find correlative brain function. I'm guessing you'll say, "the unconscious", which seems to me to be merely a convenient MacGuffin that stands in for "I don't know". The question: "Where is the "unconscious" travels down a path just a mystical as any attempt to triangulate the location of "self". You might as well try to point to your "human rights". The origin of thoughts is just one thing to look at, but a powerful one. The insight you are looking for, however, isn't some satisfying logical conclusion, but an experiential insight.

People who sit for hours are training their minds to recognize and rest in enlightened mind. This, and perhaps bodhicitta (loving kindness/compassion) are what we are generally cultivating. Most important factors for reduction of suffering and true insight can be found in "just sitting". Just sitting isn't actually any different than resting in enlightened mind, though you need insight to see it. Of the "Four Noble Truths" the third, cessation of suffering (Nirodha), is no different than the still mind when "just sitting". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Noble_Truths The "Noble Eightfold Path" is aspirational, and in't something that can be accomplished without enlightenment EXCEPT to some degree by a mind well-trained in resting in it's own "nature". That training in Zen is called "just sitting". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_Eightfold_Path It took about 25 years to gain permanent non-dual insight. The only adequate measurements I know of are if there is complete insight, and kindness.

Modern AND traditional mystics have a hard time explaining the "appearance" (or any other qualities, for that matter) of "emptiness" because it doesn't have any that can be truly be defined as "characteristics". You can try: it is still (while still in motion), color saturated, silent (while there is still sound), timeless, spaceless, without subject/object relationships or a "self" present that observes. These will sound like nonsense to most people. The only "concrete" example that can be had is your own experience. Very few if any are going to read about it and suddenly get it. Demonstrating what emptiness is really requires and in-person meeting and "pointing out". Once seen, some supposedly will get it and become "awakened" immediately, but most will either sort of get what you are pointing at and be underwhelmed, or surprised or in disbelief at how simple it is. Unless seen at its full depth it doesn't truly impress without putting the time and work into learning to rest in it during meditation and being able to watch as it transforms experience.

Except that, seen from enlightened mind, "all dharmas are marked by emptiness", a perspective unavailable to unenlightened mind. The one pervasive, permanent and unchanging quality of all things is this "emptiness" and it is impossible not to see in all relative appearances once seen.

And here.

The lenses we are using are different. I agree that is important not to confuse them. There are some events that aren't likely to generate insight in a novice student, which is why every good dharma teacher has a list of counselors and psychiatrists for referring such cases. Agreed. Different people will require different modalities. Buddhism isn't about self-improvement, it is about seeing through the delusion of the self. We will have to agree to disagree here.

Exactly. Untangling our ancient twisted karma is at least half of what Buddhist practice is about.

Shikantaza isn't intended as a tool for working with sankharas/obscurations/mental problems. It merely opens up the space to process them. Our attachments, aversions, personal stories and beliefs arise naturally moment to moment and don't need encouragement, they just require our attention, and non-grasping. Even small day-to-day events often link us to much deeper traumas; pulling at these threads begins to unravel them. Meditation done to avoid thoughts and feelings will fail. If anything, meditation makes the onslaught of our difficult thoughts and feelings worse, though you might get lucky if your only sit for 15 or 20 minutes a day, which isn't really enough for profound transformation. As you are probably aware, the buddha didn't practice because it made him more effective at work. The Four Noble Truths make a bold claim: That there is a way to end suffering. Those who practice diligently begin to see reductions in suffering in weeks. The suffering in question is the "second arrow", or mental story of suffering that is experienced - the specific thing Buddhist practice intends to treat. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.006.than.html Does Buddhism do what it says on the tin? This is for sincere, dedicated practitioners who have finally had enough of suffering or wish to understand the true nature of "mind".

Students are often taught to recognize the "nature of mind" and then see if they can naturally rest in it as a meditation right off the bat. If you can't, you'll be taught something like watching the breath, which you would do UNTIL you notice that sometimes the crutch of the meditation "method" drops away, and that there are moments at a time of quiet awareness appearing. From then on, most students are taught to notice the quiet awareness and see if they can notice and then rest in it. Success depends on the acuity and dedication of the student. The most direct path is this dropping the method and just resting in the "natural state" of open awareness, from a Dzogchen/Zen perspective.

The fourth "musing" refers to fourth jhana, which is where mind becomes still. This is the gateway to emptiness. While this is where shikantaza begins, it extends easily into formlessness (jhanas 5 - 8), and in most sits will pass back and forth over these territories. Any enlightened "being" can allow the mind to become entirely still at any time. The jhanas are valuable because an unenlightened practitioner can get a taste of what formless mind (in various progressively deeper flavors) is like in their meditation practice and become familiar with them TO A DEGREE. The enlightened mind is predisposed to naturally be present in the formless, at one depth or another, at all times. Guatama (and all other countless enlightened beings) would naturally experience "non-meditation" after 4th path (no-self) where the mind is always formless and requires no effort to be as it naturally is.

Whether you want to deal with them or not, meditation WILL absolutely dig up ALL of your unprocessed mental garbage. The spaciousness of "open awareness" meditation practices such as shikantaza create space for them to come up. If you go on retreat you are guaranteed to see at least ONE person suddenly burst into tears on the meditation cushion for this reason. These stories are actually the fodder for insight. In Buddhism we call them "samskaras" or "shankaras". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samskara_(Indian_philosophy)#:~:text=Saṃskāra or Saṅkhāra in Buddhism,Saṅkhāra) rather than eliminate them. Samskaras are mental imprints you carry around with you that are "unfinished business". In Buddhism it isn't necessary to have them make sense, or understand the underlying story of them that you have told yourself, but rather to allow them to come up in consciousness, and leave consciousness (arise and pass away) without telling their story over and over again. Some people will need both counseling AND this approach to process the most difficult amongst them. The intention isn't to deny them, but rather to have them become possible to experience without mental residue in the body/mind (namarupa). Samskaras are "obsurations", like dirt on a lense, to seeing the reality of how things are. They are stories we tell ourselves about how things really are that are biased and limited, and get in the way. The more of them we are able to clear, the more likely we are to have the "accident" of suddenly seeing through them entirely and deeply into the duality of reality.

Soto Zen teacher in the Shuryu Suzuki lineage here. Sorry if sharing this annoys anybody. I have practiced since 1990 in the Nyingma/Dzogchen tradition, and for the last 7 years in the Soto Zen tradition. Shikantaza is the same as Dzogchen - resting in enlightened mind. It is sitting without any crutch of a technique, allowing enlightened mind to be as it is, and is therefore the SAME as enlightened mind, only in most people there is no insight into its nature. The Rinzai teachers I am friends with would agree with this summation, only they would simply use the term "zazen" to refer to their meditation. Shikantaza, to me is a more specific and detailed assessment of what it means. I started sitting in Dzogchen at the age of 23 and it has been my primary practice until now. I was introduced to the non-dual "nature of mind"/beginner's mind/buddha nature at that time, and became increasingly better at this meditation until it "stuck", and a moment of complete non-dual insight opened everything up almost 10 years ago. Since that point, it has become a permanent perspective, supplanting the previous frame of duality permanently. Now mind is ALWAYS in shikantaza/dzogchen. IF you can practice by resting the mind in it's enlightened (actual) nature, I would do so as often as I possibly could knowing what I do now. It IS a very direct path to enlightenment for those that are able to see the non-dual nature, and have some faith in what it is. ALL of my 7 or so teachers (and their teachers) sat this way and realized the nature of things. It requires giving up on results, and the belief in agency, and requires a faith in the practice that comes from seeing that even BEFORE awakening it is transformative. Feel free to message me if you have any questions.

... so it IS when looked at properly. Deep in meditation the world IS a flickering phantom world of ephemeral moments. Time, space, and self drop away and there is just being. This is an experience anyone can have, though many will say it is just a "state". In some branch of Advaita Vedanta or another (I forget which) they consider the stack of consciousness inverted to the way we commonly think of it: Waking reality is the most "asleep", the dreaming world more accurate, where time, space and self are wiggly, and deep sleep and the blackness of empty being-ness as most like the enlightened mind. Ever notice how our waking stories about our dreams have to be altered to fit into a narrative, as they don't really follow our typical lines of causation? In a dream you can be in one location one moment, and then walk into a completely different place all of a sudden. You can see the dream from your "self" perspective, or suddenly from the perspective of another "character". When you try to read something in a dream, it may be nonsense, or may be different if you try to read it again, or even have numbers and letters that change constantly. I have noticed all of these things and more when I am not trying to bend the contents of a dream into a narrative. All of the typical rules go out the window. I have found that one can be "enlightened" (awake to the non-dual nature of reality) in both the waking world AND deep sleep, but it is somehow possibly easier in sleep where the rules already don't make complete sense. In the waking world we have a tendency to explain away the odd moments of life, missing time in the car, strange figures we see out of the corner of our eyes, missing doorways, stairwells, things we decide we "misremember". If we get out of the habit of explaining away our experience or constructing stories about what "must have" happened, and just accept that being present with reality is weird, we open a door onto much more. It is absolutely good to hold our ideas about reality lightly, rather than grasping for surety.