Yes-But-Mind vs. Don't-Know-Mind

[SodaChanh]

I like this video on the Don't Know Mind

 

 

[Mark Foote]

 

She's discussing something altogether different, but I thought it was worth noting that Sojun Mel Weitsman said this about Shunryu Suzuki's teaching:

 

He said that the secret of Soto Zen is "yes, but."

 

("Wind Bell", S. F. Zen Center, vol. XXXlll no. 2 FALL/ WINTER 1999, "introduction to "Branching Streams Flow in the Darkness" BY Mel Weitsman, p 15)

 

 

 

Edited November 5 by Mark Foote

[Tommy]

I am not that sophisticated to understand the difference between "Yes- but-mind" and "Don't-know-mind". So correct me if I am wrong. The whole thing seems to be about the attitude in which one approaches the sitting?? Or is there something else I am missing?

Edited Friday at 10:49 PM by Tommy

[SodaChanh]

5 hours ago, Tommy said:

I am not that sophisticated to understand the difference between "Yes- but-mind" and "Don't-know-mind". So correct me if I am wrong. The whole thing seems to be about the attitude in which on approaches the sitting?? Or is there something else I am missing?

 

What is your next thought going to be? 

[Tommy]

14 hours ago, SodaChanh said:

 

What is your next thought going to be? 

And this affects the sitting how? When the point of just sitting is .. to not follow thoughts or chase thoughts, how does it relate? When just sitting is .. to allow one to not identify with thoughts and to be present? What is your next thought going to be?

Edited Friday at 10:54 PM by Tommy

[SodaChanh]

10 hours ago, Tommy said:

And this affects the sitting how? When the point of just sitting is .. to not follow thoughts or chase thoughts, how does it relate? When just sitting is .. to allow one to not identify with thoughts and to be present? What is your next thought going to be?

 

Yes but... 

 

You see? 

[Tommy]

10 hours ago, SodaChanh said:

 

Yes but... 

 

You see? 

Don't know

[Mark Foote]

On 11/6/2025 at 6:18 PM, Tommy said:

 

I am not that sophisticated to understand the difference between "Yes- but-mind" and "Don't-know-mind". So correct me if I am wrong. The whole thing seems to be about the attitude in which one approaches the sitting?? Or is there something else I am missing?

 

 

 

Yeah, it's easy to overthink this (ha ha).

My take is that there's a certain negation in "don't know mind", because the mind does know, that's it's nature. And a certain affirmation in "'yes, but' mind".

 

Some teachers say "root out discursive thought". Gautama described mindfulness of mind in a more affirmative light, IMO:

 

Aware of mind I shall breathe in. Aware of mind I shall breathe out.

 

(One) makes up one’s mind:

 

“Gladdening my mind I shall breathe in. Gladdening my mind I shall breathe out.

 

Composing my mind I shall breathe in. Composing my mind I shall breathe out.

 

Detaching my mind I shall breathe in. Detaching my mind I shall breathe out.

 

(SN 54.1, tr. Pali Text Society vol V pp 275-276)

 

 

In my experience, that sequence is natural, and any attempt on my part to "root out" a particular kind of thought leads me in a loop of thought.

 

Gautama spoke of observing the mind the way the king's chef observes the king, to see what he favors on a given day and what he does not. He also said:

 

As (one) abides in body contemplating body, either some bodily object arises, or bodily discomfort or drowsiness of mind scatters (one’s) thoughts abroad to externals. Thereupon… (one’s) attention should be directed to some pleasurable object of thought. As (one) thus directs it to some pleasurable object of thought, delight springs up in (one’s being). In (one), thus delighted, arises zest. Full of zest (one’s) body is calmed down. With body so calmed (one) experiences ease. The mind of one at ease is concentrated. (One) thus reflects: The aim on which I set my mind I have attained. Come, let me withdraw my mind [from pleasurable object of thought]. So (one) withdraws (one’s) mind therefrom, and neither starts nor carries on thought-process. Thus (one) is fully conscious: I am without thought initial or sustained. I am inwardly mindful. I am at ease.

(Gautama repeats the above for “As (one) contemplates feelings in feelings…”, “… mind in mind…”, “… mind-states in mind-states, either some mental object arises, or…”)

 

Such is the practice for the direction of mind.

 

And what… is the practice for the non-direction of mind? (First,) by not directing (one’s) mind to externals, (one) is fully aware: My mind is not directed to externals. Then (one) is fully aware: My mind is not concentrated either on what is before or on what is behind, but it is set free, it is undirected. Then (one) is fully aware: In body contemplating body I abide, ardent, composed and mindful. I am at ease.

 

And (one) does the same with regard to feelings… to mind… and mind-states. Thus (one) is fully aware: In mind-states contemplating mind-states I abide, ardent, composed and mindful. I am at ease.

 

This is the practice for the non-direction of mind.

 

(SN 47.10, tr. Pali Text Society SN V pp 135-136)

 

 

Maybe you have better luck with "only don't know" than I do!

 

 

Edited Sunday at 10:10 PM by Mark Foote

[Cobie]

 

1 hour ago, Mark Foote said:

… the mind does know …

That’s what you believe.  
 

Spoiler

imo: the mind cannot know; the soul knows. 

 

 

Edited Monday at 12:07 AM by Cobie

[Tommy]

     In my life, I have found that I have a mind and emotions. These things exhibit their properties thru my body. I feel them to be real. I have not found a soul. So when one says something about spiritual this or that, I really do not understand as I have not found there is a soul in my body. In movies, the souls are mostly ghosts of a person who might have existed. They exist in our realm thru their trauma and inability to move on. Where they are suppose to go, I have no idea.

     I was taught, as a child, to believe in God and have prayed many times usually when I needed help. There has been no action or vision to lead me to believe there is a God. Many have said it is a matter of faith. Where as, the Buddhism says to not just take their word but to actually find out for myself. So, even though I have never experienced enlightenment, I trust there must be such a thing. What it is or how it is , ... well, that is beyond me.

     Buddhism becomes strange when it declares that this world is an illusion. When I strike my fist against a rock, my hand hurts with pain that makes me feel the truth of this world. It is real. Suffering is real. The more I just sit, I realize that there must be something else or more to this life than just suffering. What is the truth of our nature? Don't know.

     So when it comes to Buddhism, I listen and hear the words or the wise. My mind goes "Yes, but". And then I sit and My mind goes "Don't know". Is it really one versus the other? Seems to me to be all part of the mix.

Edited 15 hours ago by Tommy

[Mark Foote]

On 11/9/2025 at 3:43 PM, Cobie said:

That’s what you believe.  
 

  Hide contents

imo: the mind cannot know; the soul knows. 

 

 

 

I'll agree that gnosis is not in thought, even though thought can be in gnosis. Other than that, I don't gno!

 

[Cobie]

 

3 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

… I don't gno!

 

 Well you wouldn’t, it’s the girls night out. 

 

Edited 16 hours ago by Cobie

[Tommy]

4 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

 

 

I'll agree that gnosis is not in thought, even though thought can be in gnosis. Other than that, I don't gno!

 

Well, you seem to know what spirituality means. What is the spirit and how do I find it in myself?

[Mark Foote]

1 hour ago, Tommy said:

Well, you seem to know what spirituality means. What is the spirit and how do I find it in myself?
 

 

 

Why do I suddenly feel like Oscar Zoroaster Phadrig Isaac Norman Henkle Emmannuel Ambroise Diggs?

 

 

Alias, "The Wizard of Oz"!

 

All kidding aside, be careful what you wish for.

 

I am hoping to publish my book soon, and my producer thought a biography would be a good thing. This is what I came up with:

 

My life has been 50 years trying to figure out how the zazen that gets up and walks around fits into a normal life, and likewise trying to figure out how zazen sits zazen so I can sit as long as I feel I need to sit without wrecking my knees.

 

As to "spirit":
 

Middle English: from Anglo-Norman French, from Latin spiritus ‘breath, spirit’, from spirare ‘breathe’.

 

(Oxford Languages, dictionary publisher)

 

I stumbled into the zazen that gets up and walks around by telling myself I was going to be aware of every breath in and every breath out all day long for an entire day, back in '75. You can read my take on all that, in my The Inconceivable Nature of the Wind.

 

That wasn't the same as discovering zazen sitting zazen, for me. My best take on that is Just to Sit.

 

That's going to be the last essay in my book before the appendix. The whole thing is A Natural Mindfulness, absolutely free to download, hopefully coming soon to Amazon as a paperback.  Turns out, they'll publish anything, so it might  happen.

 

The book opens with Waking Up and Falling Asleep. I continue to believe that's the best place to find it.

 

 

Edited 14 hours ago by Mark Foote

[Lairg]

1 hour ago, Tommy said:

What is the spirit and how do I find it in myself?

 

In the current manifestation of this solar system,  Spirit anchors in the heart of the standard human.

 

Hence the many sayings about heart - such as:  he (a bad person) is heartless

 

 

Edited 14 hours ago by Lairg

[Tommy]

4 hours ago, Lairg said:

 

In the current manifestation of this solar system,  Spirit anchors in the heart of the standard human.

 

Hence the many sayings about heart - such as:  he (a bad person) is heartless

The heart where emotions are felt? So, you say that spirit is anchored in the heart? Is the spirit an emotion? Or is it part and parcel of the the heart and its emotions?

 

My emotions are driven by my mind's understanding of the situation to provide a base for my emotions to be felt. To say that spirit is anchored in the heart, means to me, that it is just part of that which ??? ....   arises from where into the mind and thus takes it form from the thoughts. Yeah, now more confused than ever.

 

4 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

Why do I suddenly feel like Oscar Zoroaster Phadrig Isaac Norman Henkle Emmannuel Ambroise Diggs?

Yeah, all that makes me think of the guy who is holding onto a rope which is anchored on a roof edge. The guy is holding onto the other end of the rope. All the while standing on the rope and walking out into the middle of nowhere. Up in the air by holding onto the rope? Yea, fancy words and lots of dancing around to produce a wonderful show. All of which still makes no sense to me.  I guess I am lost and always will be.

Edited 10 hours ago by Tommy

[Lairg]

1 hour ago, Tommy said:

The heart where emotions are felt? So, you say that spirit is anchored in the heart? Is the spirit an emotion? Or is it part and parcel of the the heart and its emotions?

 

Feeling is a generic word.  The sense of touch (feeling) can be developed on every plane: physical, emotional, mental, buddhic/heart, atmic/will etc

 

Spirit that anchors in the heart provides life force and spiritual purpose to the human.  Many humans have interference in the anchoring so that their life force and spiritual purpose is disturbed/incomplete.

 

Traditionally the anchoring of Spirit in the heart is inwardly seen as a flame.  The Counter-Reformation artwork of the Roman church showed that flame - but mainly for Jesus.

 

Spirit, as anchored in the standard human, comes from before Existence.  This means that the unfolded human, functions before, during and after Existence - in parallel.

 

 

 

 

Edited 8 hours ago by Lairg