Sunday, January 08, 2006

The Ineffable En(eff)abling the Ineffable

When buddhas sit in the full lotus posture, their practice is the manifestation in reality of what?

In this blog I have stated my case that the Subtle Skill of the buddhas has something to do with what is called in Alexander work "allowing." But have I explained what allowing is? No, because allowing is ineffable.

I have quoted Master Dogen's words that the criterion of true allowing is the samadhi of accepting and using the self. But the self also is ineffable

In regard to what is allowed, I have written about the allowing of openness. But the word "openness" is just the manifestation of the deluded attempts of my intellect to close its grip upon the ineffable.

So in the end what is it?

Should we call it "the ineffable en(eff)abling the ineffable"?

No, not even that. Not even that.

10 Comments:

Blogger reallynotimportant said...

Mike,
you have made very good progress in the last few days. This post is your clearest one yet!!!!

Any 'Allowing' that can be put into words is not 'Allowing'.

Since your eloquence has failed you I am confident that you have now grasped the heart of the matter.

Now that you have grasped this you can intuit what to do next.

I can see clearly now what I have only glimpsed before. You have within you the ability to become a truly amazing teacher.

Hopefully, as your ego dissolves this reply will not re-inflate it....

Sunday, January 08, 2006  
Blogger Chris said...

We struggle in vain in our hope to put the word on "it" for which there is no word, no thought- especially in this forum where we try to do so in short articles or comments on articles by written words alone with no faces behind them- no real human interaction.

Yet, of course, we will continue. We cannot hope to hit the very center of the target, yet we let our arrows fly. We can only learn from others how to draw the bow.

Maybe Nishijima's "balancing the autonomic nervous system" and your "ineffable En(eff)abling the Ineffable" are the same attempts at teaching others to come close to the target and I am grateful to be able to try to absorb both. Much thanks.

Yet it seems of little use to compare who's shot was the truer as in the end we must forget all- "bow, arrow, target"...

Sunday, January 08, 2006  
Blogger MikeDoe said...

ChrisH:

Gudo Nishijima's teaching on the nervous system is describing something else. I know what he is trying to say but he is missing the mark somewhat. There is no need to elaborate further. I wish to show no disrespect.

Sunday, January 08, 2006  
Blogger Chris said...

JZD- I wish you could elaborate. Nishijima seems unphased by criticism. I, for one, think I know what you mean. Realize that there is a generation gap as well as a cultural and language barrier, though. Unfortunately this leads to some very wide interpretations.

I believe he's aiming at describing a physical state that occurs when body and mind have no distinction or the state of samdhi I suppose. I just do not understand his point in doing so. Maybe reconciling science and Buddhism. Of course I could be misinterpreting. I just believe his intent is rather the same as mike's- attempting words to describe the indescribable...

Sunday, January 08, 2006  
Blogger MikeDoe said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Sunday, January 08, 2006  
Blogger MikeDoe said...

Chris H:
I have been thinking quite hard for a day or so about what should and should not be 'explained' in Zen. My fuller thoughts are on Muddy Pool.

'Balance' is very much on the list of things that should not be explained. If you do Zazen 'correctly' then balance will arise naturally. When it arises you will feel it as being somehow 'balanced'. Words are pointless, you will know. Other people will notice it. They will used words like 'balanced' to explain your outlook on life. Cause and Effect are the same. With Awareness, balance arises naturally.

The easiest position to achieve this and do Zazen correctly is any of Half-Lotus, Full Lotus or Burmese position. The key component to all of these (from my own perceptual analysis) is that the legs are in some way open and yet closed. To explain further would add words without meaning to you. These positions are only the 'easiest' and 'fastest'. Any body position will work as will any dynamic movement. The achievement of 'balance' has nothing to do with what goes on outside the body and everything to do with what is going on 'inside' with the bodymind. More words that do not explain. It can only be 'transmitted'.

Keep practicing and one day it will arrive when you are not expecting it (like Ebay).

Monday, January 09, 2006  
Blogger MikeDoe said...

Mike,
I can see from your silence that you are making progress!!

I think it is time now for Avatar to stop talking to Avatar and for Real People to meet and communicate. Words are no longer of any use. Now it is the time I think for us to have a "You show me Your's and I'll show you mine" communication that does not involve many words. It is mainly the words that separate us now.

It may be that after such a meeting a Student-Teacher relationship might arise.

If you accept that any of this is now appropriate then I am on Hotmail.

Monday, January 09, 2006  
Blogger MikeDoe said...

Chris, Mike:

I have posted a comment in your It Is All in the Allowing, not the Physiology that points to my posting on the exploration of the physiology (long).

I hope you will realise the irony that know you know about the 'allowing' and it is this that is the key. The physiology is no more than 'useless' information that grounds Buddhism and Zazen in Realtiy without needing to resort to meta-physics or beliefs.

Both Gudo Nishijima and you are right at the same time. Gudo Nishijima just could not make himself clear enough. He did a reasonable job though. If I were to try and write a Japanese Physiology essay it would probably take me 20 years and still be innacurate.

Monday, January 09, 2006  
Blogger Matt said...

Hey Mike,

there's been a mass deleting of comments on nishijima's blog LOL

i got pretty whacked out over there and said some seriously crappy stuff. Looking back, I was responding only to the way stuff was said, none of my comments even related really to the content of your posts. That's pretty embarrassing to realize what an itchy trigger finger i can have over something that really wasn't of much consequence. I obviously came to these blogs by way of association with one faction and am certainly not making anyone look good, especially myself, or being at all constructive.

I apologize for being intentionally antagonistic and rude. I think we all like to think we're not like that, and I would hate to sabotage any kind of relationships or dialogues that could come from the wonder that is blogging. I think we know how horrible disputes among spiritual factions can be. So I'm sorry again, and I wish you luck on your path.

Take care,
matt

Tuesday, January 10, 2006  
Blogger MikeDoe said...

Mike,
I cannot tell you how pleased I am by what I (do not) see over on Gudo Nishijima's blog. I thought it would take you longer to get to that point.

I see harmony being restored.

Maybe you and Gudo Nishijima would like to choose another name to replace Chodo (my chinese is crap and so I do not know what the root means. It may already be ideal).

Rules are not rules in Buddhism.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home