A Zen Monk's Alexander Experience
Gudo Nishijima is my father in Buddhism and I am his son. But when he writes on his blog entry today that my opinion "is based on the the theory of the Alexander Technique," I would like to make two points in response.
Firstly, Alexander work is a kind of effort to liberate myself from my own opinion. The fact that I fail does not change the essence of what Alexander work is.
Secondly, Alexander work is primarily practical rather than theoretical. So whatever understanding I have got from Alexander work is based not on theory of the Alexander Technique but on experience of one-to-one, face-to-face work with experienced Alexander teachers.
What an Alexander lesson entails cannot be put into words, any less than the content of Zazen can be put into words. But for what it is worth, here is an authentic record of questions and answers between a Zen monk and an Alexander master:
Monk: "Master, I have understood from your teaching that the most vital thing in my Zazen practice is my intention, the quality of my thought."
Master: "The quality of being. The quality of being."
Monk: "Do you not think that intention is vital?"
Master: "Intention is vital, because it leads you to shed intention. And leaves you open to this state of not minding that there is nothing to find."
Monk: "In this work, as we search for that free and open condition, the dropping off of body and mind, where is the starting point?"
Master: "Intention is the starting point, of course. Intention is the key to the door. But it is not the building that you enter."
Firstly, Alexander work is a kind of effort to liberate myself from my own opinion. The fact that I fail does not change the essence of what Alexander work is.
Secondly, Alexander work is primarily practical rather than theoretical. So whatever understanding I have got from Alexander work is based not on theory of the Alexander Technique but on experience of one-to-one, face-to-face work with experienced Alexander teachers.
What an Alexander lesson entails cannot be put into words, any less than the content of Zazen can be put into words. But for what it is worth, here is an authentic record of questions and answers between a Zen monk and an Alexander master:
Monk: "Master, I have understood from your teaching that the most vital thing in my Zazen practice is my intention, the quality of my thought."
Master: "The quality of being. The quality of being."
Monk: "Do you not think that intention is vital?"
Master: "Intention is vital, because it leads you to shed intention. And leaves you open to this state of not minding that there is nothing to find."
Monk: "In this work, as we search for that free and open condition, the dropping off of body and mind, where is the starting point?"
Master: "Intention is the starting point, of course. Intention is the key to the door. But it is not the building that you enter."
posted by Mike Cross at 10:41 AM
3 Comments:
Here is Nishijima Roshi's original posting on the Dogen Sangha blog.
12/17/2005
(Note) Mr. Mike Cross's opinion
After having begun my blog, my student called Mike Cross expressed his opinion, which is completely different from Gautama Buddha's teachings. The reason, why I do not answer his opinion recently at all, comes from that even though I expressed my Buddhist opinions to him for more than 10 years at least, his opinion was always an one-sided idea, which is based on the theory of Alexander Techinic, and so I have stopped almost all discussions with him. The reason, why I have begun to send my blog to all people on the earth, comes from that I want to explain the fundamental Buddhist principles to poeple, who are diligent to study true Buddhism whole-heartedly. I think that my blog will continue for a year at least, and after finished my blog, many people will understand why I refused Mr. Mike Cross's opinion from the view point of Buddhism.
Thank you, g.
Perhaps it was the wisdom of the oak tree with the swing that enabled you just to thank me for passing on a true master's words of wisdom, while not claiming to have any idea about a relationship you know nothing about.
People who know nothing of the relationship between father and son express their useless opinions about what they know nothing about. They don't question what reality lies behind the appearances. They just jump to conclusions on the basis of their own deluded views. Who do they think they are?
What kind of opinion does the oak tree by the bend in the river have to express about it?
Maybe you would be so kind as to leave a link to the image in question (I lack the technical know-how to do it myself).
The centre of a Buddhist monk's life, the aim of his Zazen and the means whereby he teaches people whom he meets, is the samadhi of accepting and using the self.
Just this is the teaching that Gudo Nishijima taught to me. And my struggle to realize this teaching brought me to the FM Alexander Technique.
By endeavoring to enter into and experience the samadhi of accepting and using the self, I can change for the better the way that I see the world. This is Buddhist work.
How others see the world is up to them. I cannot change the way that others see the world, only the way that I see the world, and that is a difficult enough task in itself.
Post a Comment
<< Home