The Four Arisings of Mindfulness

[Mark Foote]

"What are their names, and on what streets do they live, I'd like to ride, ride over..."--David Crosby

 

A thing that is unique in all the religious literature of the world is Gautama's characterization of mindfulness as a function of the four arisings of mindfulness:  mindfulness of the body in the body, mindfulness of the feelings in the feelings, mindfulness of the mind in the mind, and mindfulness of the states of mind in the states of mind.

 

How is Zen that?--such a fundamental aspect of Gautama's teaching!

Don't mistake me, I believe Zen is that, just wondering if anyone else does.

 

 

 

Edited December 10 by Mark Foote

[Lairg]

5 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

mindfulness of the body in the body, mindfulness of the feelings in the feelings, mindfulness of the mind in the mind, and mindfulness of the states of mind in the states of mind.

 

Often I was left to mind the children.

 

In my view Gautama is saying:

 

- mind (manage) the body and its desires

- mind the emotional desires

- mind the mental processes

- stand above the minding 

 

 

[Mark Foote]

On 12/8/2025 at 4:25 PM, Lairg said:

 

Often I was left to mind the children.

 

In my view Gautama is saying:

 

- mind (manage) the body and its desires

- mind the emotional desires

- mind the mental processes

- stand above the minding 

 

 

 

 

My summary of the mindfulness he described as his own, both before and after enlightenment, would be:

 

1) Relax the activity of the body, in inhalation and exhalation;

2) Find a feeling of ease and calm the senses connected with balance, in inhalation and exhalation;

3) Appreciate and detach from thought, in inhalation and exhalation;

4) Look to the free location of consciousness for the automatic activity of the body, in inhalation and exhalation.

(Applying the Pali Instructions)

 

That last is similar to your "stand above the minding".

 

Edited December 10 by Mark Foote

[Tommy]

Wow, I got the idea of mindfulness all wrong. To me, it meant that one should be aware of the present moment. As the same in meditation, one is aware of the breath and/or body. All the while, making actions with an awareness that keeps memory of actions made. That was difficult. In other words, being aware of where one has left their umbrella and sandals at the door. Knowing where the car keys hang. I know it isn't possible to remember every little thing (it is that way for me). But, when I make actions, I should have the awareness of what I am doing while I am doing it.

 

So, one has to be mindful of the body. And be mindful of the emotions. And, be mindful of the mind. And be mindful of the state of mind. I can barely keep it together while I just sit. And when I watch a movies, I lose myself in the story. All this mindfulness is more than I can handle at this moment. Maybe I can just quit talking and try to make things a little simpler for myself. My simple mind has reached it limit of confusing stuff.

 

I do not know how others cope with this information overload. Me, my head shuts down. Maybe that is why I like the quiet while I just sit.

[stirling]

On 12/8/2025 at 4:15 PM, Mark Foote said:

mindfulness of the body in the body, mindfulness of the feelings in the feelings, mindfulness of the mind in the mind, and mindfulness of the states of mind in the states of mind

 

Yes! What arises is just that, has no deeper meaning or conceptual stratification. This brings to mind Bahiya of the Bark Cloth, possibly the first non-dual Buddhist document:

 

Quote

"Herein, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: 'In the seen will be merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely what is cognized.' In this way you should train yourself, Bahiya.

"When, Bahiya, for you in the seen is merely what is seen... in the cognized is merely what is cognized, then, Bahiya, you will not be 'with that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'with that,' then, Bahiya, you will not be 'in that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'in that,' then, Bahiya, you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two. Just this is the end of suffering." - Buddha, Bahiya Sutta

 

 

On 12/8/2025 at 4:15 PM, Mark Foote said:

How is Zen that?--such a fundamental aspect of Gautama's teaching!

 

It IS Zen! Absolutely! Zen is:

 

Quote

This is IT! - Shuryu Suzuki

 

What does that mean? Reality (as it NOW is), without your ideas and concepts about how it should be, IS reality. So, yes, there is just awareness of body, feelings, and mind and the coming and going of its states... but ALSO realization that "I" is NONE OF THESE. Nowhere in all of these does "self" hide. 

 

On 12/8/2025 at 4:15 PM, Mark Foote said:

Don't mistake me, I believe Zen is that, just wondering if anyone else does.

 

Do I "believe" it? Absolutely not. A belief is something we hold in the mind when we don't have the experience to PROVE it. I would entreat anyone doing this practice NOT to settle for beliefs... INSIST on actual experience! 

 

Quote

The trouble with students these days is that they seize on words and form their understanding on that basis. In a big notebook they copy down the sayings of some worthless old fellow, wrapping it up in three layers, five layers of carrying cloth, not letting anyone else see it, calling it the 'Dark Meaning' and guarding it as something precious. What a mistake! Blind fools, what sort of juice do they expect to get out of old dried bones?"- Lin-Chi, Ch'an Master, 7th Ct.

 

Theories, ideas, and interpretations are ultimately useless. The Buddha entreated us to try the teachings and use our experience to see the truth of his teachings. What we are looking for is not our cobbled together ideas but our EXPERIENTIAL KNOWLEDGE. _/\_

[stirling]

1 hour ago, Tommy said:

To me, it meant that one should be aware of the present moment. As the same in meditation, one is aware of the breath and/or body.

 

Yes, just this.

 

1 hour ago, Tommy said:

In other words, being aware of where one has left their umbrella and sandals at the door. Knowing where the car keys hang. I know it isn't possible to remember every little thing (it is that way for me). But, when I make actions, I should have the awareness of what I am doing while I am doing it.

 

BE awareness. Don't worry where memory goes, what you need to remember will arise when needed.

 

1 hour ago, Tommy said:

So, one has to be mindful of the body. And be mindful of the emotions. And, be mindful of the mind. And be mindful of the state of mind.

 

Just notice what arises. Don't feel you have to keep track. 

 

1 hour ago, Tommy said:

Maybe that is why I like the quiet while I just sit.

 

_/\_ Just this.

[Krenx]

On 12/8/2025 at 4:15 PM, Mark Foote said:

"What are their names, and on what streets do they live, I'd like to ride, ride over..."--David Crosby

 

A thing that is unique in all the religious literature of the world is Gautama's characterization of mindfulness as a function of the four arisings of mindfulness:  mindfulness of the body in the body, mindfulness of the feelings in the feelings, mindfulness of the mind in the mind, and mindfulness of the states of mind in the states of mind.

 

How is Zen that?--such a fundamental aspect of Gautama's teaching!

Don't mistake me, I believe Zen is that, just wondering if anyone else does.

 

 

 

 

That teaching by the Buddha is an extremely key part of the practice for contemplation, connected to the teachings of dependent origination. 

 

To gradually develop the insight that the 12 links are phenomena that arises on this own, and passes away independently. It is our ignorance that connects and links the chain up creating samsara. 

 

So observing body in body, feeling in feeling, we start to be mindful and apply skillful action and habits to see things as they are and weaken this chain. 

 

An example would be feelings of anger. We see this anger arise,  We restraint it from rolling into action. And we watch the feeling change on its own. 

 

And eventually your heart will realize that no amount of pressure of feelings can EVER be enough to automatically turn into action. It is in fact impossible. It is our choice to make that assumption to allow anger to turn into harmful actions for example. We made that assumption and choice, the feelings could never do it on its own. 

 

Our feelings are not responsible, what caused the feelings are not responsible. We are responsible for that habitual action based on an assumption, that chain of assumption to be form and bind ourselves in samsara.  

 

Very important and unique teaching from the Buddha.

[Mark Foote]

On 12/12/2025 at 6:14 PM, stirling said:

 

Do I "believe" it? Absolutely not. A belief is something we hold in the mind when we don't have the experience to PROVE it. I would entreat anyone doing this practice NOT to settle for beliefs... INSIST on actual experience! 

 

You may not  believe this, Stirling, but in my experience my heart-felt beliefs become my actions. When I relinquish volition in action!

 

The moral for me is that I need to be very careful to take in as many view points as I can trust.

 

Edited December 14 by Mark Foote

[Mark Foote]

On 12/12/2025 at 5:14 PM, Tommy said:

Wow, I got the idea of mindfulness all wrong. To me, it meant that one should be aware of the present moment. As the same in meditation, one is aware of the breath and/or body. All the while, making actions with an awareness that keeps memory of actions made. That was difficult. In other words, being aware of where one has left their umbrella and sandals at the door. Knowing where the car keys hang. I know it isn't possible to remember every little thing (it is that way for me). But, when I make actions, I should have the awareness of what I am doing while I am doing it.

 

So, one has to be mindful of the body. And be mindful of the emotions. And, be mindful of the mind. And be mindful of the state of mind. I can barely keep it together while I just sit. And when I watch a movies, I lose myself in the story. All this mindfulness is more than I can handle at this moment. Maybe I can just quit talking and try to make things a little simpler for myself. My simple mind has reached it limit of confusing stuff.

 

I do not know how others cope with this information overload. Me, my head shuts down. Maybe that is why I like the quiet while I just sit.
 

The question is, how do you remain aware of what's happening in the present moment? The impression (and limited experience) that I have is that steady mindfulness depends on a return to "one-pointedness of mind" and a readiness to experience mindfulness in each of the four arisings of mindfulness.

The trick is that a return to "one-pointedness of mind" is a physical experience, and I would say an experience that not everybody involved in teaching mindfulness has had. The return depends on the fifteenth element of Gautama's own mindfulness, the fifteenth element of his way of living "especially in the rainy season":

 

 I will breathe in observing stopping, I will breathe out observing stopping.” 

(MN 118, tr. Pali Text Society vol. III p 124)

 

That to me involves a witness of the cessation of will or intention in the activity of the body in inhalation and exhalation, the mark of the fourth concentration, recalled through an overview of the body taken after the fourth concentration (the "survey-sign").

 

We have:

 

When a Tathagata is teaching dharma [the natural law] to others it is for the sake of general instruction. And I… at the close of such a talk, steady, calm, make one-pointed and concentrate my mind subjectively in that first characteristic of concentration in which I ever constantly abide.

 

(tr. Pali Text Society MN 36 p 303; emphasis added)
 

 

That says that Gautama returned to "one-pointedness" after he spoke, and abided in "one-pointedness". 

He set up a return to "one-pointedness" in seated meditation, beginning with the first concentration (and proceeding through the fourth and the sign, the "five limbs of concentration"):
 

Herein… the (noble) disciple, making self-surrender the object of (their) thought, lays hold of concentration, lays hold of one-pointedness.  (The disciple), aloof from sensuality, aloof from evil conditions, enters on the first trance, which is accompanied by thought initial and sustained, which is born of solitude, easeful and zestful, and abides therein.  

(SN 48.10, © Pali Text Society vol V p 174; parentheticals para­phrase original; Horner’s “initial” (MN 119) substituted for Woodward’s “di­rected”; emphasis added)

 

 

Gautama never states exactly what the "thought initial and sustained" of the "first trance" is, but he  does explicitly state the thoughts that made up his own mindfulness, the mindfulness that he said was his way of living before and after enlightenment.

Surprise! They were four thoughts each, mindfulness of the body, of the feelings, of the mind, and of the state of mind.

What I'm saying here is, "no return to one-pointedness--no ability to sustain mindfulness".

 

 

 

 

Edited December 14 by Mark Foote

[Mark Foote]

On 12/13/2025 at 10:54 AM, Krenx said:

 

That teaching by the Buddha is an extremely key part of the practice for contemplation, connected to the teachings of dependent origination. 

 

To gradually develop the insight that the 12 links are phenomena that arises on this own, and passes away independently. It is our ignorance that connects and links the chain up creating samsara. 

 

So observing body in body, feeling in feeling, we start to be mindful and apply skillful action and habits to see things as they are and weaken this chain. 

 

An example would be feelings of anger. We see this anger arise,  We restraint it from rolling into action. And we watch the feeling change on its own. 

 

And eventually your heart will realize that no amount of pressure of feelings can EVER be enough to automatically turn into action. It is in fact impossible. It is our choice to make that assumption to allow anger to turn into harmful actions for example. We made that assumption and choice, the feelings could never do it on its own. 

 

Our feelings are not responsible, what caused the feelings are not responsible. We are responsible for that habitual action based on an assumption, that chain of assumption to be form and bind ourselves in samsara.  

 

Very important and unique teaching from the Buddha.
 

 

…I know not of any other single thing of such power to cause the arising of malevolence, if not already arisen, or if arisen, to cause its more-becoming and increase, as the repulsive feature (of things).
 

In (one) who pays not systematic attention to the repulsive feature, malevolence, if not already arisen, arises: or, if arisen, it is liable to more-becoming and increase. …I know not of any other single thing of such power to prevent the arising of malevolence, if not already arisen: or, if arisen, to cause its abandonment, as the heart’s release through amity. In (one) who gives systematic attention to amity which releases the heart, malevolence, if not already arisen, arises not: or, if arisen, it is abandoned.
 

(AN 1.11–20; tr. Pali Text Society vol I p 2-4)
 

 

Nothing about dependent causation there.

Gautama did not gradually develop insight into the four truths of suffering, including dependent origination. It came to him as he exercised various psychic powers in the fourth concentration (DN 2). The "intuitive wisdom" that was his enlightenment appears to have arrived suddenly--that's my reading.

Regarding skill--from my Making Sense of the Pali Canon:
 

Certain things “on the side of skill” were specified; these were the ten components of the “perfected one’s” course (right view through right freedom), and also “ … those various skilled things conditioned by [the ten components]”. Each of the ten components had one associated set of “various skilled things”; thus, said Gautama:
 

 … there are twenty (components) on the side of skill ….
 

(MN 117; tr. Pali Text Society, vol III p 120)

 

An example of the complexity of the skilled things--right purpose:

 

As to this… right view comes first. And how… does right view come first? If one comprehends that wrong purpose is wrong purpose and comprehends that right purpose is right purpose, that is… right view. And what… is wrong purpose? Purpose for sense-pleasures, purpose for ill-will, purpose for harming. This… is wrong purpose. And what… is right purpose? Now I… say that right purpose is twofold. There is… the right purpose that has cankers, is on the side of merit, and ripens unto cleaving (to new birth). There is… the right purpose which is [noble], cankerless, supermundane, a factor of the Way. And what… is the purpose which is on the side of merit, and ripens unto cleaving? Purpose for renunciation, purpose for non-ill-will, purpose for non-harming. This… is right purpose that… ripens unto cleaving. And what… is the right purpose that is [noble], cankerless, supermundane, a component of the Way? Whatever… is reasoning, initial thought, purpose, an activity of speech through the complete focussing and application of the mind in one who, by developing the [noble] Way, is of [noble] thought, of cankerless thought, and is conversant with the [noble] Way–this… is right purpose that is [noble], cankerless, supermundane, a component of the Way.

(ibid, p 113-121)

 

 

The more we try to do right, the more we do wrong, IMHO. "Making self-surrender the object of thought, one lays hold of concentration, one lays hold of one-pointedness"--that, I believe, is the only way to the "supermundane" components of the way.

Something directed at the "how" that does return to the four arisings of mindfulness, yet as I wrote previously, good luck with the four arisings without "one-pointedness of mind":

 

…after the meal, [sit] down cross-legged, holding the back erect, [and make] mindfulness rise up… getting rid of coveting for the world, [dwell] with a mind devoid of coveting, [purify] the mind of coveting. By getting rid of the taint of ill-will, [dwell] benevolent in mind, compassionate for the welfare of all creatures and beings, [purify] the mind of ill-will. By getting rid of sloth and torpor, [dwell] devoid of sloth and torpor; perceiving the light, mindful, clearly conscious, [purify] the mind of sloth and torpor. By getting rid of restlessness and worry, [dwell] calmly; the mind subjectively tranquillised, [purify] the mind of restlessness and worry. By getting rid of doubt, [dwell] doubt-crossed, unperplexed as to the states that are skilled, [purify] the mind of doubt…by getting rid of these five hindrances which are defilements of the mind and weakening to intuitive wisdom, [dwell] contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly conscious (of it), mindful (of it) so as to control the covetousness and dejection in the world. [As with the body, fare] along contemplating the feelings … the mind… the mental states in the mental states, ardent, clearly conscious (of them), mindful (of them) so as to control the covetousness and dejection in the world.”
 

(ibid)

 

[Lairg]

On 12/13/2025 at 11:14 AM, Tommy said:

So, one has to be mindful of the body. And be mindful of the emotions. And, be mindful of the mind. And be mindful of the state of mind. I can barely keep it together while I just sit.

 

My own experience is of progression.  Once the bodily desires are properly managed, most of that management becomes subconscious.  Similarly management of emotions and thoughts is increasingly subconscious.

 

An obvious example is a mother physically and emotionally comforting a distressed child while having a rational conversation with her partner.

 

Eventually the initiate has most of its attention in relationships and intent, with the internal matters largely delegated to internal intelligences

Edited December 14 by Lairg

[Lairg]

10 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

The "intuitive wisdom" that was his enlightenment appears to have arrived suddenly

 

One of the attributes of the heart is direct knowing without mental process.

 

Direct knowing mostly develops after first stage enlightenment.  To be fully functional requires control of the fifth sub-plane of the heart plane

 

 

 

 

Edited December 14 by Lairg

[Tommy]

I really must apologize for my lack of sophistication. When I read, "The more we try to do right, the more we do wrong, IMHO. "Making self-surrender the object of thought, one lays hold of concentration, one lays hold of one-pointedness"--that, I believe, is the only way to the "supermundane" components of the way." I am sorry for my lack of understanding. Thanks Mark for the reply.

 

 

This one is going to haunt me. When I read, "Eventually the initiate has most of its attention in relationships and intent, with the internal matters largely delegated to internal intelligences. One of the attributes of the heart is direct knowing without mental process." I guess that is taken out of context? Sorry. Thanks Lairg for the reply.

 

[Mark Foote]

3 hours ago, Tommy said:

 

I really must apologize for my lack of sophistication. When I read, "The more we try to do right, the more we do wrong, IMHO. "Making self-surrender the object of thought, one lays hold of concentration, one lays hold of one-pointedness"--that, I believe, is the only way to the "supermundane" components of the way." I am sorry for my lack of understanding. Thanks Mark for the reply.

 

Well, thanks for the excellent questions!

 

The more we try to do right, the more we do wrong, IMHO.

(yours truly, this thread)

 

 

I can actually state that more easily with parlance borrowed from modern Christianity: we're all helpless sinners, incapable of doing the right thing--only by allowing Jesus within, and giving it over to Jesus, does the right thing get done.

Only by relinquishing volition in action and allowing the location of consciousness and the weight of the body to initiate "reflex movement" in the body wherever consciousness takes place, does the right activity take place--at least, in zazen. There's an ease associated with that "reflex movement", until the moment when consciousness is completely without intention with regard to the body and "reflex movement" still occurs wherever a singular consciousness takes place.

 

What will be the difference? You have freedom, you know, from everything. That is, you know, the main point.

(Sesshin Lecture, Shunryu Suzuki; Day 5 Wednesday, June 9, 1971 San Francisco)

 

 

As I mentioned in a reply to Stirling on this thread, it's been my experience that my heart-felt belief translates into action, when I relinquish volition as above in everyday life. In practice, returning to "one-pointedness of mind" and to the cessation of "voluntary control" or habit in inhalation and exhalation allows for the right thing to get done.

 

"Supermundane components" is really above my pay grade, but as Gautama described his mindfulness as a path to "freedom through knowledge" (MN 118), I think "self-surrender" and "one-pointedness" is a good start.

 

 

Edited December 15 by Mark Foote

[Tommy]

On 12/15/2025 at 4:06 PM, Mark Foote said:

The more we try to do right, the more we do wrong, IMHO.

That statement still confuses me. Cause if I try to do the right thing then it is me doing more wrong.

So, if I do the wrong thing then it is still me doing more wrong. How can that be right?

Sorry about the confusion.

 

On 12/15/2025 at 4:06 PM, Mark Foote said:

I can actually state that more easily with parlance borrowed from modern Christianity: we're all helpless sinners, incapable of doing the right thing--only by allowing Jesus within, and giving it over to Jesus, does the right thing get done.
 

I know that this is probably more of my ego talking, ...

So, I am a helpless sinner, incapable of doing the right thing.

And only by allowing Jesus within and giving it over to Jesus, does the right thing get done.

Why?

 

Does giving myself to Jesus disolves me of the responsibilities of my actions? Do I become free to do what I believe Jesus would have me do?

 

If God created me in his image then why am I lesser than Jesus in terms of doing right?

Was I made defective that Jesus needs to handle me and my actions??

When people were going to stone the woman for adultery, Jesus said let those who have not sinned cast the first stones.

I wondered why Jesus did not throw the first stone. Was Jesus a sinner too??

I know that wasn't the point of his story.

 

I know that I am no where near the level of Jesus in mind or spirit.

But, I do not like to look upon people as lesser than what God intended.

Maybe that is my mistake.

So, the confusion lives on in me.

Edited Wednesday at 05:24 AM by Tommy

[Mark Foote]

On 12/23/2025 at 4:49 PM, Tommy said:

T
That statement still confuses me. Cause if I try to do the right thing then it is me doing more wrong.

So, if I do the wrong thing then it is still me doing more wrong. How can that be right?

Sorry about the confusion.

 

 

 

Let me just confuse you more:

 

As to this… right view comes first. And how… does right view come first? If one comprehends that wrong purpose is wrong purpose and comprehends that right purpose is right purpose, that is… right view. And what… is wrong purpose? Purpose for sense-pleasures, purpose for ill-will, purpose for harming. This… is wrong purpose. And what… is right purpose? Now I… say that right purpose is twofold. There is… the right purpose that has cankers, is on the side of merit, and ripens unto cleaving (to new birth). There is… the right purpose which is [noble], cankerless, supermundane, a factor of the Way. And what… is the purpose which is on the side of merit, and ripens unto cleaving? Purpose for renunciation, purpose for non-ill-will, purpose for non-harming. This… is right purpose that… ripens unto cleaving. And what… is the right purpose that is [noble], cankerless, supermundane, a component of the Way? Whatever… is reasoning, initial thought, purpose, an activity of speech through the complete focussing and application of the mind in one who, by developing the [noble] Way, is of [noble] thought, of cankerless thought, and is conversant with the [noble] Way–this… is right purpose that is [noble], cankerless, supermundane, a component of the Way.

(MN 117, tr. Pali Text Society vol III pp 113-121)
 

 

In other words, you can't get there from here.

 

 

On 12/23/2025 at 4:49 PM, Tommy said:

 

I know that this is probably more of my ego talking, ...

So, I am a helpless sinner, incapable of doing the right thing.

And only by allowing Jesus within and giving it over to Jesus, does the right thing get done.

Why?

 

Does giving myself to Jesus dissolve me of the responsibilities of my actions? Do I become free to do what I believe Jesus would have me do?
 

 

 

"Why?" is difficult to explain. I think of it as engaging my whole being, instead of pushing myself around from the left hemisphere. 

And how does one engage one's whole being? 

Herein… the (noble) disciple, making self-surrender the object of (their) thought, lays hold of concentration, lays hold of one-pointedness. 

 

In layman's terms:

 

…“one-pointedness” occurs when the movement of breath necessitates the placement of attention at a singular location in the body, and a person “lays hold of one-pointedness” when they remain awake as the singular location shifts.
 

(Just to Sit)
 

 

Holding any bent-knee posture for a period of time will yield a movement of breath that necessitates the placement of attention at a singular location. Hello, Jesus!  
 

Find the seat and put on the robe, and afterward see for yourself.
 

("Zen Letters, Teachings of Yuanwu", tr. Cleary and Cleary, p 65)

 

Alternative method for finding Jesus:

 

Cleave a (piece of) wood, I am there;
lift up the stone and you will find Me there.
 

(“The Gospel According to Thomas”, log 77; coptic text established and translated by A. Guillaumont, H.-CH. Puech, G. Quispel, W. Till and Yassah ‘Abd Al Masih, p 43)

 

More on that in Drawing Water and Chopping Wood. Lots of nice quotes about freedom, too!

 

 

On 12/23/2025 at 4:49 PM, Tommy said:

 

If God created me in his image then why am I lesser than Jesus in terms of doing right?

Was I made defective that Jesus needs to handle me and my actions??

When people were going to stone the woman for adultery, Jesus said let those who have not sinned cast the first stones.

I wondered why Jesus did not throw the first stone. Was Jesus a sinner too??

I know that wasn't the point of his story.
 

 

 

What if God was one of us
Just a slob like one of us
Just a stranger on the bus
Tryin' to make His way home?

(One of Us, Joan Osbourne)

 

 

On 12/23/2025 at 4:49 PM, Tommy said:

 

I know that I am no where near the level of Jesus in mind or spirit.

But, I do not like to look upon people as lesser than what God intended.

Maybe that is my mistake.

So, the confusion lives on in me.
 

 

 

The gift IMHO is the animal ability to return reason to the fire, but humans have a hard time acknowledging that they are animals.

Nevertheless, I have hope:

 

As a master of Zen archery, Kobun was asked to teach a course at the Esalen Institute in Big Sur, California. The target was set up on a beautiful grassy area on the edge of a cliff overlooking the Pacific Ocean. Kobun took his bow, notched the arrow, took careful aim, and shot. The arrow sailed high over the target, went past the railing, beyond the cliff, only to plunge into the ocean far below. Kobun looked happily at the shocked students and shouted, "Bull's eye!!"

 

(Anecdotes by Joan Halifax Roshi, https://terebess.hu/zen/mesterek/otokawa.html)

 

 

[Tommy]

2 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

Let me just confuse you more:

Thanks for the reply, very much appreciated.

No, I am still confused but am sure this might help someone else looking into it.

 

2 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

In other words, you can't get there from here.

This is the story of my life. Can't get there from here.

And still I try. So isn't the definition of crazy like doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different outcome?

I keep trying to get there from here. Must be nuts??

 

So, I sit in my practice of being aware of the moment and watching my thoughts come and go.

Nothing changes. Yes, things do seem to quiet down. Thoughts do not come as often but they do arise and vanish.

Doing the same thing over and over.  Expecting a different outcome???

I have to laugh at the insanity of my actions.

[Mark Foote]

18 hours ago, Tommy said:

Thanks for the reply, very much appreciated.

No, I am still confused but am sure this might help someone else looking into it.

 

This is the story of my life. Can't get there from here.

And still I try. So isn't the definition of crazy like doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different outcome?

I keep trying to get there from here. Must be nuts??

 

So, I sit in my practice of being aware of the moment and watching my thoughts come and go.

Nothing changes. Yes, things do seem to quiet down. Thoughts do not come as often but they do arise and vanish.

Doing the same thing over and over.  Expecting a different outcome???

I have to laugh at the insanity of my actions.
 

 

 

I like your approach. 

Here is the full piece, entitled Drawing Water and Chopping Wood, that I wrote in response to your earlier question on another thread--maybe it's a little clearer.

 

Quote

Drawing Water and Chopping Wood

 

Over on the Dao Bums forum site, Tommy commented:

 

I live and breathe. Wake up in the morning, cook myself a meal, boil water for coffee. What life is, is in front of me. When I read the saying “before enlightenment, chop wood carry water; after enlightenment, chop wood carry water”, the question arises, what changed?

 

The saying Tommy quoted is probably derived from a saying in the Ch’an classics:

 

Miraculous power and marvelous activity
Drawing water and chopping wood.

 

(“The Recorded Sayings of Layman P’ang:  A Ninth-Century Zen Classic”, Ruth Fuller Sasaki, Yoshitaka Iriya, Dana R. Fraser, p 46)

 

There’s a similar saying in “The Gospel According to Thomas”, a gnostic gospel:

 

Cleave a (piece of) wood, I am there;
lift up the stone and you will find Me there.

 

(“The Gospel According to Thomas”, log 77; coptic text established and translated by A. Guillaumont, H.-CH. Puech, G. Quispel, W. Till and Yassah ‘Abd Al Masih, p 43)

 

Sometimes people hold their breath in cleaving wood, or in lifting a heavy bucket or stone. Moshe Feldenkrais observed that some people hold their breath when getting up out of a chair, and he put forward a way to avoid that:

 

…When the center of gravity has really moved forward over the feet a reflex movement will originate in the old nervous system and straighten the legs; this automatic movement will not be felt as an effort at all.

 

(“Awareness Through Movement”, Moshe Feldenkrais, p 78)

 

Feldenkrais stipulated that:

 

… there must be no muscular effort deriving from voluntary control, regardless of whether this effort is known and deliberate or concealed from the consciousness by habit.

 

(ibid, p 76)

 

The paired sayings highlight moments when the weight of the body combines with a singular location of consciousness to cause “reflex movement” in the action of the body.

 

“Reflex movement” can also be engaged to sit upright, as the weight of the body combines with a singular location of consciousness.

 

In Gautama’s teaching, a singularity in the location of consciousness follows “making self-surrender the object of thought”:

 

… the (noble) disciple, making self-surrender the object of (their) thought, lays hold of concentration, lays hold of one-pointedness.

 

(SN 48.10, tr. Pali Text Society vol V p 174; “noble” substituted for Ariyan)

 

In my experience:

 

…“one-pointedness” occurs when the movement of breath necessitates the placement of attention at a singular location in the body, and a person “lays hold of one-pointedness” when they remain awake as the singular location shifts.

 

(Just to Sit)

 

Gautama declared that feelings of zest and ease accompany one-pointedness, at least initially. He prescribed the extension of such “zest and ease”:

 

… (a person) steeps, drenches, fills, and suffuses this body with zest and ease, born of solitude, so that there is not one particle of the body that is not pervaded by this lone-born zest and ease.

 

(AN 5.28, tr. PTS vol. III pp 18-19, parentheticals paraphrase original)

 

As I wrote recently:

 

Words like “steeps” and “drenches” convey that the weight of the body accompanies the feelings of zest and ease.

 

The weight of the body sensed at a particular point in the body can shift the body’s center of gravity, and a shift in the body’s center of gravity can result in “reflex movement”.

 

“Drenching” the body “so that there is not one particle of the body that is not pervaded” with zest and ease allows the weight of the body to effect such “reflex movement” wherever “one-pointedness” takes place.

 

In falling asleep, the mind can sometimes react to hypnagogic sleep paralysis with an attempt to reassert control over the muscles of the body, causing a “hypnic jerk”. The extension of a weighted zest and ease can pre-empt the tendency to reassert voluntary control in the induction of concentration, and make possible a conscious experience of “reflex movement” in inhalation and exhalation.

 

(ibid)

 

There can also come a moment when the feelings of zest and ease cease, yet “one-pointedness” and the conscious experience of “reflex movement” in inhalation and exhalation remain. At such a time, said Gautama:

 

… seated, (one) suffuses (one’s) body with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind so that there is not one particle of the body that is not pervaded with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind.

 

(AN 5.28, tr. PTS vol. III pp 18-19, parentheticals paraphrase original)

 

The “pureness of mind” that Gautama referred to is the pureness of the mind without any will or intention to act in the body.

 

There is a feeling of freedom, when the activity of inhalation and exhalation is “reflex movement” regardless of where “one-pointedness” takes place.

 

Zen teachers demonstrate the relinquishment of “voluntary control” of the body in favor of the free location of “one-pointedness of mind”, and they do so constantly. Reb Anderson observed such demonstrations in the actions of Shunryu Suzuki:

 

… I remember (Suzuki’s) dharma talks and I remember him in the zendo—that was wonderful teaching. I remember him moving rocks—wonderful teaching. I remember seeing him eat—that was wonderful teaching. He was teaching all the time in every situation. But when he couldn’t sit anymore and couldn’t walk anymore, he still taught right from there.

 

(Reb Anderson, from a 1995 recording)

 

Shunryu Suzuki moved some heavy stones by himself at the Tassajara Monastery, in part I believe as a demonstration for his students:

 

Alan Marlowe is 6’4″ and he often used to work moving rocks with Suzuki Roshi. There was one large rock that Alan couldn’t move. Alan and Suzuki Roshi tried to move the rock together and they couldn’t. Alan said that what they needed was a block and tackle and more people. Suzuki Roshi told Alan to go away. “I want to work alone.” So Alan went to take a bath and when he returned the rock was moved and Alan found Suzuki Roshi asleep in his cabin. He also found vomit all over the floor. Suzuki Roshi slept for three days.

 

(David Chadwick links page, Cucumber Project on cuke.com)

 

The activity may have been the same for Suzuki before and after his “enlightenment”, but I would say his intention was different:

 

So, when you practice zazen, your mind should be concentrated in your breathing and this kind of activity is the fundamental activity of the universal being. If so, how you should use your mind is quite clear. Without this experience, or this practice, it is impossible to attain the absolute freedom.

 

(Breathing; Shunryu Suzuki; November 4th 1965, Los Altos; emphasis added)

 

What will be the difference? You have freedom, you know, from everything. That is, you know, the main point.

 

(Sesshin Lecture, Shunryu Suzuki; Day 5 Wednesday, June 9, 1971 San Francisco)

 

In Gautama’s parlance:

 

And what… is the ceasing of action? That ceasing of action by body, speech, and mind, by which one contacts freedom,–that is called ‘the ceasing of action’.

 

(SN 35.146, tr. Pali Text Society vol IV p 85)

 

 

 

I don't know about you, but a lot of anatomy passes through my mind as "one-pointedness" shifts. I finished a book, that has enough of that to be worth a look, IMHO. Free to download here, or you can get a paperback to hold in the hand here.

 

Edited Friday at 06:20 PM by Mark Foote