Eye on the prize

Post Reply
User avatar
Miles Drake
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2022 4:14 pm

Eye on the prize

Post by Miles Drake »

Eye on the prize

While there is seemingly an endless amount of information out in the world about Buddhism and all the many aspects of Buddhism and Buddhist practice, the end goal is always the same. Find the way out of samsara.

It really is that simple. Find the way out and then once one has found the way out, point the way for all other beings seeking the exit.

With this in mind, we want to make sure that we keep our practice focused on that one goal. Everything we do should be focused on and pointed toward finding the way out of samsara. Finding the way out needs to be the number one priority. It needs to be the motivation behind all of our thinking and decision making.

Zen Master Seung Shan would often talk about keeping the mind correct in three ways. He would say that we need to understand our correct situation, correct relationship to that situation and our correct function in that situation in each and every moment. Keeping our mind correct in these three ways (called C3 moving forward) allows us to not only find the way out of samsara, but provides the framework for pointing out the way to others once we have discovered it for ourselves.

The basis of living C3 is in knowing our correct situation. The underlying situation is that all of us are stuck in samsara. All of us are made up of samsara. Our very substance and thinking is wholly owned and (mostly) controlled by samsara. Samsara is our situation. We, until a person knows otherwise, are samsara itself. This is our situation.

Our relationship to samsara is a complicated one. It is one of love and hate, one of pleasure and pain. It is a relationship based on our own ignorance of what samsara is and how fully integrated we are into it. When we begin, we cannot see that we are samsara. We can only see our own personal relationship with it. Our own behavior and the suffering we cause ourselves and others as a result.

To make our relationship with samsara correct we need to understand that everything that can be perceived with thinking is samsara itself. Knowing this, we can begin to change our relationship with samsara from being its unwitting servant (letting it use our thinking and minds at will) to directing our thinking using wisdom as protection and dedicating as little thinking to samsara’s wishes as possible.

And so, once this is understood, our correct function actually becomes very simple. Keep the mind away from samsara. Keep the mind quiet. Put all of samsara down. Put it all down. Just keep one's eye on the prize. Freedom from samsara. Freedom from suffering.

Peace

Wisdom first in all things.
yokosukasailorboy
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2022 7:23 pm

Re: Eye on the prize

Post by yokosukasailorboy »

Interesting, so would you say, then, that Zen, in fact, has a goal in mind?

I just get the impression from some Zen teachers that the goal is no goal, not to be attached even to enlightenment, that Zen sitting is, in fact, realization in itself. That samsara and nirvana are one and the same. That enlightenment isn't something to be "attained", but is in fact one's natural state and sitting zazen is this realization.

Of course, this could be a difference between various Zen traditions.

When I first became a Buddhist nearly 20 years ago, it was in the Theravada tradition in Southeast Asia, and certainly in Theravada Buddhism there is very much this dichotomy of being unenlightened and attaining enlightenment, that meditation practices are a means to an end. But my impression of Mahayana teachings is that many don't necessarily take such an approach, or at least understand it somewhat differently.

Not to be disagreeable, just some thoughts and I'd be glad to hear your ideas on the matter.

Something I've always pondered is, in sitting meditation, who sits? Who renounces samsara? And what, is, in fact, renounced?
User avatar
Miles Drake
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2022 4:14 pm

Re: Eye on the prize

Post by Miles Drake »

yokosukasailorboy wrote: Mon Jul 18, 2022 9:14 pm Interesting, so would you say, then, that Zen, in fact, has a goal in mind?

I just get the impression from some Zen teachers that the goal is no goal, not to be attached even to enlightenment, that Zen sitting is, in fact, realization in itself. That samsara and nirvana are one and the same. That enlightenment isn't something to be "attained", but is in fact one's natural state and sitting zazen is this realization.

Of course, this could be a difference between various Zen traditions.

When I first became a Buddhist nearly 20 years ago, it was in the Theravada tradition in Southeast Asia, and certainly in Theravada Buddhism there is very much this dichotomy of being unenlightened and attaining enlightenment, that meditation practices are a means to an end. But my impression of Mahayana teachings is that many don't necessarily take such an approach, or at least understand it somewhat differently.

Not to be disagreeable, just some thoughts and I'd be glad to hear your ideas on the matter.

Something I've always pondered is, in sitting meditation, who sits? Who renounces samsara? And what, is, in fact, renounced?
Hi
We all need goals. Why even practice otherwise? The key is not attaching to outcomes. Keep the goal always in mind, attach to nothing.
Peace

Wisdom first in all things.
yokosukasailorboy
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2022 7:23 pm

Re: Eye on the prize

Post by yokosukasailorboy »

It's a good question, why practice if one has no goals? What is the goal of Zen? How are those goals different from the here and now, the present moment? If Buddha nature is inherent in all beings, what is one working towards?

That's not to say that there are no benefits from Zazen practice, but those benefits could just as well be gained from a number of sources that aren't Buddha Dharma, I mean if one's goals are to simply feel relaxed or experience deep levels of concentration. Farmers harvest wheat and naturally get straw but obtaining straw is not the purpose. The Buddha's Dharma isn't a relaxation technique or a way of focusing the mind (though it may produce those results, mind you), but what the Buddhas teach is infinitely more profound.

I mean, what if one sat in Zazen for no purpose whatsoever other than to "just sit"? That one thought "there is no benefit whatsoever to sitting here, nowhere to go, nothing to attain, this accomplishes nothing and serves no purpose, everything is exactly as it should be here and now", or even more bluntly, to quote Kodo Sawaki Roshi: “Zazen is good for nothing!”

I suppose this is the "spiritual quest", that somehow, by our efforts, we will "attain something", "become enlightened", then all of our suffering will go away and we will be fundamentally different, that seems to be the goal of most spiritual practices. Some place of bliss in the distance that we are working towards. In a sense, I could see that as a skillful means if it motivates one to practice. And, ultimately, "who" is it that doesn't attach to the outcomes?

Even in the Lotus Sutra, the Buddha said that all of his efforts to attain enlightenment under the Bodhi tree were an expedient means to encourage people to practice, as he had been Buddha since countless aeons for an immeasurable life span.

Just out of curiosity, don't precepts and meditation precede wisdom, I mean in a practical sense? And isn't wisdom seeing that in reality all phenomena are dependently originated and empty of inherent existence?

Who knows, right? Not I.
User avatar
Miles Drake
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2022 4:14 pm

Re: Eye on the prize

Post by Miles Drake »

yokosukasailorboy wrote: Tue Jul 19, 2022 6:10 am It's a good question, why practice if one has no goals? What is the goal of Zen? How are those goals different from the here and now, the present moment? If Buddha nature is inherent in all beings, what is one working towards?

That's not to say that there are no benefits from Zazen practice, but those benefits could just as well be gained from a number of sources that aren't Buddha Dharma, I mean if one's goals are to simply feel relaxed or experience deep levels of concentration. Farmers harvest wheat and naturally get straw but obtaining straw is not the purpose. The Buddha's Dharma isn't a relaxation technique or a way of focusing the mind (though it may produce those results, mind you), but what the Buddhas teach is infinitely more profound.

I mean, what if one sat in Zazen for no purpose whatsoever other than to "just sit"? That one thought "there is no benefit whatsoever to sitting here, nowhere to go, nothing to attain, this accomplishes nothing and serves no purpose, everything is exactly as it should be here and now", or even more bluntly, to quote Kodo Sawaki Roshi: “Zazen is good for nothing!”

I suppose this is the "spiritual quest", that somehow, by our efforts, we will "attain something", "become enlightened", then all of our suffering will go away and we will be fundamentally different, that seems to be the goal of most spiritual practices. Some place of bliss in the distance that we are working towards. In a sense, I could see that as a skillful means if it motivates one to practice. And, ultimately, "who" is it that doesn't attach to the outcomes?

Even in the Lotus Sutra, the Buddha said that all of his efforts to attain enlightenment under the Bodhi tree were an expedient means to encourage people to practice, as he had been Buddha since countless aeons for an immeasurable life span.

Just out of curiosity, don't precepts and meditation precede wisdom, I mean in a practical sense? And isn't wisdom seeing that in reality all phenomena are dependently originated and empty of inherent existence?

Who knows, right? Not I.
Hi

One of the big problems we face is that the only way we can talk about the Dharma with one another is through samsara itself. This is why it becomes difficult for us communicate with each other effectively. The samsara background noise greatly muddies the waters of communication. That is why the Dharma must be talked about from every possible angle. That is why even after a Buddha and thousands of years of Great Teachers we still have so much trouble today. Samsara makes it all so very confusing, which is one of the things we are working to sort out.

Zen is one of the methods for sorting out all the confusion. Zen strikes directly at samsara's weakest point: thinking itself. Zen teaches us what are thinking really is. Zen teaches us how to quiet thinking and then how to use thinking correctly. Zen teaches us that samsara is thinking itself. Zen teaches us that if we set all of samsara aside we are left with "nothing". So, to that end, Zen is nothing. Zen teaches nothing. Zen holds onto nothing. Zen prizes nothing above all else.

We must remember that words are just place holders for concepts. What is usually most important are not the words themselves, but the concepts that we are trying to share with one another. Context is king... so to speak.

Talking about goals for example. The word goal is a place holder for a concept. Other words could include: wish, want, desire, intention, motivation, purpose, inclination, aspiration... and so on. The point is, how can anyone of us know which one of those words to use with a particular individual, let alone a larger community. While we try to be careful with our use of words, there are no perfect words even as we try to talk about perfect ideas.

The same holds true for nothingness: emptiness, the void, don't know mind, before thinking mind, before thought, mind empty like space, unattaining mind, beyond thinking mind... and so on. All are place holders pointing at what we will experience when we give everything that belongs to samsara back to samsara. Holding nothing... what is attained? Just this. This very moment with nothing between us and the moment. Or said another way. We attain this very moment without samsara getting in the way.

Go beyond thinking. Leave thinking in the dust.

Why wisdom first in all things...
Wisdom in some sense is our internal teacher. Wisdom always arises first in the sense that it is wisdom that points out the folly of our mischief. As an example, we get up to some mischief, perhaps we tell a lie and end up not liking the final result. Wisdom, which advised against the lie telling in the first place, steps up and says... there is a better way. If we stop telling lies we will not have to deal with the trouble associated with telling lies.
Now, if we have listened to that wisdom, we will change our conduct to get the better result. Wisdom is what made good conduct possible and wanted in the first place.

Since we have had this wise consultant on board from the beginning, and when we realize that this wise consultant always gives better advice than our untamed thinking. It only makes sense that if we start with wisdom we can avoid an entire world of nonsense and suffering from our self created folly. Wisdom was already trying to help us even before we had any idea of what wisdom was. It was wisdom that told us to improve our behavior. It was wisdom that sent us looking for a solution. And it is wisdom that implements or drives the solution. Wisdom is the very bedrock of the practice.

Peace

Wisdom first in all things.
User avatar
Miles Drake
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2022 4:14 pm

Re: Eye on the prize

Post by Miles Drake »

yokosukasailorboy wrote: Mon Jul 18, 2022 9:14 pm
Something I've always pondered is, in sitting meditation, who sits? Who renounces samsara? And what, is, in fact, renounced?
Hi
Out of curiosity, pondering those questions... what did you find out?

Peace

Wisdom first in all things.
yokosukasailorboy
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2022 7:23 pm

Re: Eye on the prize

Post by yokosukasailorboy »

Miles Drake wrote: Wed Jul 20, 2022 1:47 pm
yokosukasailorboy wrote: Mon Jul 18, 2022 9:14 pm
Something I've always pondered is, in sitting meditation, who sits? Who renounces samsara? And what, is, in fact, renounced?
Hi
Out of curiosity, pondering those questions... what did you find out?

Peace

Wisdom first in all things.
What was found out was another question: "Who finds out? What knows?" Though if all things are devoid of true self, then not only can nothing renounce, but nothing can be renounced, since even the "things" renounced are devoid of any true self. Mostly, "don't know", both as a statement and in the imperative.
yokosukasailorboy
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2022 7:23 pm

Re: Eye on the prize

Post by yokosukasailorboy »

Miles Drake wrote: Tue Jul 19, 2022 3:51 pm
yokosukasailorboy wrote: Tue Jul 19, 2022 6:10 am It's a good question, why practice if one has no goals? What is the goal of Zen? How are those goals different from the here and now, the present moment? If Buddha nature is inherent in all beings, what is one working towards?

That's not to say that there are no benefits from Zazen practice, but those benefits could just as well be gained from a number of sources that aren't Buddha Dharma, I mean if one's goals are to simply feel relaxed or experience deep levels of concentration. Farmers harvest wheat and naturally get straw but obtaining straw is not the purpose. The Buddha's Dharma isn't a relaxation technique or a way of focusing the mind (though it may produce those results, mind you), but what the Buddhas teach is infinitely more profound.

I mean, what if one sat in Zazen for no purpose whatsoever other than to "just sit"? That one thought "there is no benefit whatsoever to sitting here, nowhere to go, nothing to attain, this accomplishes nothing and serves no purpose, everything is exactly as it should be here and now", or even more bluntly, to quote Kodo Sawaki Roshi: “Zazen is good for nothing!”

I suppose this is the "spiritual quest", that somehow, by our efforts, we will "attain something", "become enlightened", then all of our suffering will go away and we will be fundamentally different, that seems to be the goal of most spiritual practices. Some place of bliss in the distance that we are working towards. In a sense, I could see that as a skillful means if it motivates one to practice. And, ultimately, "who" is it that doesn't attach to the outcomes?

Even in the Lotus Sutra, the Buddha said that all of his efforts to attain enlightenment under the Bodhi tree were an expedient means to encourage people to practice, as he had been Buddha since countless aeons for an immeasurable life span.

Just out of curiosity, don't precepts and meditation precede wisdom, I mean in a practical sense? And isn't wisdom seeing that in reality all phenomena are dependently originated and empty of inherent existence?

Who knows, right? Not I.
Hi

One of the big problems we face is that the only way we can talk about the Dharma with one another is through samsara itself. This is why it becomes difficult for us communicate with each other effectively. The samsara background noise greatly muddies the waters of communication. That is why the Dharma must be talked about from every possible angle. That is why even after a Buddha and thousands of years of Great Teachers we still have so much trouble today. Samsara makes it all so very confusing, which is one of the things we are working to sort out.

Zen is one of the methods for sorting out all the confusion. Zen strikes directly at samsara's weakest point: thinking itself. Zen teaches us what are thinking really is. Zen teaches us how to quiet thinking and then how to use thinking correctly. Zen teaches us that samsara is thinking itself. Zen teaches us that if we set all of samsara aside we are left with "nothing". So, to that end, Zen is nothing. Zen teaches nothing. Zen holds onto nothing. Zen prizes nothing above all else.

We must remember that words are just place holders for concepts. What is usually most important are not the words themselves, but the concepts that we are trying to share with one another. Context is king... so to speak.

Talking about goals for example. The word goal is a place holder for a concept. Other words could include: wish, want, desire, intention, motivation, purpose, inclination, aspiration... and so on. The point is, how can anyone of us know which one of those words to use with a particular individual, let alone a larger community. While we try to be careful with our use of words, there are no perfect words even as we try to talk about perfect ideas.

The same holds true for nothingness: emptiness, the void, don't know mind, before thinking mind, before thought, mind empty like space, unattaining mind, beyond thinking mind... and so on. All are place holders pointing at what we will experience when we give everything that belongs to samsara back to samsara. Holding nothing... what is attained? Just this. This very moment with nothing between us and the moment. Or said another way. We attain this very moment without samsara getting in the way.

Go beyond thinking. Leave thinking in the dust.

Why wisdom first in all things...
Wisdom in some sense is our internal teacher. Wisdom always arises first in the sense that it is wisdom that points out the folly of our mischief. As an example, we get up to some mischief, perhaps we tell a lie and end up not liking the final result. Wisdom, which advised against the lie telling in the first place, steps up and says... there is a better way. If we stop telling lies we will not have to deal with the trouble associated with telling lies.
Now, if we have listened to that wisdom, we will change our conduct to get the better result. Wisdom is what made good conduct possible and wanted in the first place.

Since we have had this wise consultant on board from the beginning, and when we realize that this wise consultant always gives better advice than our untamed thinking. It only makes sense that if we start with wisdom we can avoid an entire world of nonsense and suffering from our self created folly. Wisdom was already trying to help us even before we had any idea of what wisdom was. It was wisdom that told us to improve our behavior. It was wisdom that sent us looking for a solution. And it is wisdom that implements or drives the solution. Wisdom is the very bedrock of the practice.

Peace

Wisdom first in all things.

Thank you, very interesting, informative and helpful response.

Isn't wisdom developed from direct experience? As I learned when I first studied Buddhism, that morality and meditation precede wisdom? Not everyone seems to realise, for example, that causes have effects, that avoiding certain actions is beneficial or other behaviours have negative outcomes. This can be learned from precepts, for example, which would seem to be the basis of any practise. Or the realisations developed during practice. So perhaps the wisdom is something that exists, but many don't realise that it's there, or develop it, or utilise it, like a toolkit one has in the basement but doesn't realise it's there, or just never bothers to dust off and use.

Just some observations.
User avatar
Miles Drake
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2022 4:14 pm

Re: Eye on the prize

Post by Miles Drake »

Hi

What an excellent conversation.

Wisdom is developed by direct experience if we already have enough wisdom to pay attention. Because we already have wisdom as part of our nature we simply have to give it room to work, or realize "the wise choice worked better". Which in turn encourages us to make way for more wisdom.

Honestly, if humans have a super power it is wisdom. It can cut through any nonsense with more swiftness and precision than a laser scalpel. While we are born with a certain amount of wisdom, to really gain the most benefit, wisdom needs to be cultivated. Koans are an excellent resource. So is direct investigation.

Reading over our above conversation, one could think of the koan of the Zen stick. If we deny the physical reality of the stick, we get hit 30 times. If we deny the esoteric nature of the Zen stick, we also get hit 30 times. There is a stick. There is no stick. Oh my.

All of samsara has this duality as its' nature. We tend to experience this duality as our animal driven thinking vs. our rational thinking. Now, when it comes to dealing with our thinking, there are many different types of minds. Some minds are very caught up in animal driven thinking. To that end, the esoteric side of the Zen stick can have a cooling and calming effect for this type of mind. However, on the other side of the stick are the esoteric thinkers. For these minds the touch of the stick can help to wake the mind back up to wisdom. The stick being direct investigation and koan training.

Having said all that... There is no difference between either state of the Zen stick. Just as there is no difference in us. There is also no difference between animal driven thinking and higher thinking. It is still just thinking. All states, thinking included, belong to samsara. So the wise course of action becomes to accept the totality of reality and then put it all down.

Some minds need a gentle approach. Some minds need a sterner approach. This is something that has to be figured out on an individual basis and will even change over time. One moment, animal driven thinking is big problem. Maybe only available strategy is lock down the mind (proverbially biting one's tongue). Another moment esoteric thinking is on a rant, so we give the mind something else to do (maybe wash dishes, LOL). We each need to find this for ourselves, often moment by moment. This is why it is good to have a number of well rounded strategies to "fall" back on. Conditions are always changing, so if we have many good strategies we will be prepared for whatever samsara serves up.


Many, many different types of minds (even within ourselves) makes it necessary to cast a big net. One thing for us Westerners to think about is that Zen came about within groups of people who culturally think different. Just raised different. In many Eastern countries, animal driven thinking is often culturally tamed out more as a child. This makes an adult mind more prepared for esoteric thinking. Here in the West, not only are we not taught how to tame our animal thinking, some parts of our animal thinking are even celebrated (individualism). This really does mean we need to tweak our Zen approach a bit.


Having said all that. We want to be open to the Dharma from many points of view. After all, all it takes is to hear one line of Dharma and really "get it" to open up the flood gates to the gateless gate.
To that end, we need to be exposed to Dharma over and over again in many different ways... until it clicks. Be fearless in the Dharma, but never be reckless.


Thank you all again for this wonderful conversation.

Peace

Wisdom first in all things.
Last edited by Miles Drake on Thu Jul 21, 2022 1:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 2092
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:50 pm
Location: South Florida, USA

Re: Eye on the prize

Post by seeker242 »

yokosukasailorboy wrote: Mon Jul 18, 2022 9:14 pm Interesting, so would you say, then, that Zen, in fact, has a goal in mind?
I would say yes, there is a goal, but not "in mind". :smile: Even Seung Sahn would say "Wanting enlightenment is a big mistake!" and then a minute later he would say "Keeping the mind correct so we can get enlightenment and save beings from suffering". :lol:

Seems like a contradiction but I don't think so. One does not need to attach to the goal in order to just have one.
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe!
yokosukasailorboy
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2022 7:23 pm

Re: Eye on the prize

Post by yokosukasailorboy »

Precisely, I see your point, yes my question adding "in mind" was somethat unintentional. Indeed, one may reach a goal unintentionally, if I drive down the highway in no particular direction at rapid speed I will eventually reach somewhere regardless of my intentions, goals or lack thereof. Anyway, many things can "seem" contradictory, but it seems that Zen (or Seon, since I'm here) uses apparently contradictory statements to teach concepts that cannot be described by conceptual thinking, which can be limiting. And to see things "as they are", beyond the limitations of thought.

“This mind is no mind of conceptual thought” and “Those who speak of (reality) do not attempt to explain It.” Huang-Po

Anyway, I'm not a Zen/Seon/Chan practitioner and I just happened to stumble upon this, mostly I don't know anything about Zen but was just making some observations. Interesting though.
User avatar
Miles Drake
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2022 4:14 pm

Re: Eye on the prize

Post by Miles Drake »

yokosukasailorboy wrote: Wed Jul 20, 2022 9:14 pm
Miles Drake wrote: Wed Jul 20, 2022 1:47 pm
yokosukasailorboy wrote: Mon Jul 18, 2022 9:14 pm
Something I've always pondered is, in sitting meditation, who sits? Who renounces samsara? And what, is, in fact, renounced?
Hi
Out of curiosity, pondering those questions... what did you find out?

Peace

Wisdom first in all things.
What was found out was another question: "Who finds out? What knows?" Though if all things are devoid of true self, then not only can nothing renounce, but nothing can be renounced, since even the "things" renounced are devoid of any true self. Mostly, "don't know", both as a statement and in the imperative.
Hi
In the spirt of investigation we all can consider these questions.

So, who does find out? What does the knowing?
If everything is devoid of any true self, then what implications does this have when we put on our pants in the morning?

Don't know, also has a duel nature. There is the esoteric don't know and there is the mundane don't know. How can we use both in our practice?
What might be an example of mundane don't know?

In an esoteric sense, there is nothing to be renounced. Does this also hold true for taming our mundane thinking?

Peace

Wisdom first in all things.
yokosukasailorboy
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2022 7:23 pm

Re: Eye on the prize

Post by yokosukasailorboy »

Miles Drake wrote: Thu Jul 21, 2022 4:13 pm
yokosukasailorboy wrote: Wed Jul 20, 2022 9:14 pm
Miles Drake wrote: Wed Jul 20, 2022 1:47 pm

Hi
Out of curiosity, pondering those questions... what did you find out?

Peace

Wisdom first in all things.
What was found out was another question: "Who finds out? What knows?" Though if all things are devoid of true self, then not only can nothing renounce, but nothing can be renounced, since even the "things" renounced are devoid of any true self. Mostly, "don't know", both as a statement and in the imperative.
Hi
In the spirt of investigation we all can consider these questions.

So, who does find out? What does the knowing?
If everything is devoid of any true self, then what implications does this have when we put on our pants in the morning?

Don't know, also has a duel nature. There is the esoteric don't know and there is the mundane don't know. How can we use both in our practice?
What might be an example of mundane don't know?

In an esoteric sense, there is nothing to be renounced. Does this also hold true for taming our mundane thinking?

Peace

Wisdom first in all things.
I just typed a response, but I wasn't logged in so I lost it. What I was writing I think was something along the lines of "where exactly do the distinctions between ordinary/mundane and extraordinary exist except for in thought?"

Chan/Seon/Zen would seem to be a bit like tasting sugar, it has to be experienced, and all the labels and verbiage I can say about it can really never define it. I think it's probably more about getting one's butt on a mat more than any explanations.

But then again, I'm not a Zen practitioner, so I'm probably not qualified to say.
Post Reply

Return to “Seon”