I didn't want to put this in the Theravadin meditation section because it felt too diversionary, so I decided to just post it here.
My experience last night at the local Soto Zendo was very interesting. The meditative technique they use is Shikantaza ("just sitting") where there is no object of concentration like the breath as in Vipassana. The eyes are open, which I personally found made it more difficult for me to watch my own thoughts pass by without hooking onto them and daydreaming. I found that Shikantaza made me more aware of the external present moment (such as the minutae of the environment, sounds etc.) than it did of the the internal present moment (my thoughts) the way vipassana seems to.
It struck me that Shikantaza almost seemed like a "jumping in at the deep end" aproach to meditation. I felt like I was trying to drive a car without first being instructed what the steering wheel did. I found myself wondering how anyone in the Soto tradition could achieve the bright awareness in "just sitting" without first learning concentration practices. The instructor was a little cryptic but I couldn't help but think "if I was capable of just sitting down and achieving this state of perfect clarity without actually doing anything then wouldn't I be a buddha already?"
Granted, I'm a complete novice at both techniques and maybe jumping in at the deep end may work very well, as it often literally does in swimming instruction I guess. Or maybe I'm missing the point of Shikantaza altogether?
Do any of you have experience with both techniques? What differences did you discover? Do you favor one over the other and why? What worked best for you in your earlier years of study?
I'm just full o' questions today and I really appreciate your insights...
~OcT
Shikantaza and Vipassana
Re: Shikantaza and Vipassana
Hello OcTavO, all,
This might be worth reading:
Zazen and Vipassana
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=929" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
with metta
Chris
This might be worth reading:
Zazen and Vipassana
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=929" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
with metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
Re: Shikantaza and Vipassana
In very simple terms, my experience with Zen practice has been to develop concentration through zazen practice and only then to turn to shikintaza. This is much like in the Therevadan tradition of practicing ie. anapansati to develop concentration then dropping the breath and turning to "choiceless awareness" practice. Its very similar but you will find a vast array of opinions on this matter.
Liberation is the inevitable fruit of the path and is bound to blossom forth when there is steady and persistent practice. The only requirements for reaching the final goal are two: to start and to continue. If these requirements are met there is no doubt the goal will be attained. This is the Dhamma, the undeviating law.
- BB
- BB
- jcsuperstar
- Posts: 1915
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:15 am
- Location: alaska
- Contact:
Re: Shikantaza and Vipassana
a lot of teachers do have you just sort of sink or swim, there are others however that start with breath counting. depends on your teacher, read zen mind beginner's mind and you'll learn breath counting my teacher just taught what dogen taught (or left behind at least) so i didnt get that benefit. i saw lots of people drop out of zen over my years with him.
สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ
the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat
the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat
Re: Shikantaza and Vipassana
I've always thought the same thing about shikantaza...jumping in the deep end, sink or swim. I believe that explains quite a bit of the "turnover" I've seen at Zen centers.OcTavO wrote:It struck me that Shikantaza almost seemed like a "jumping in at the deep end" aproach to meditation. I felt like I was trying to drive a car without first being instructed what the steering wheel did. I found myself wondering how anyone in the Soto tradition could achieve the bright awareness in "just sitting" without first learning concentration practices. The instructor was a little cryptic but I couldn't help but think "if I was capable of just sitting down and achieving this state of perfect clarity without actually doing anything then wouldn't I be a buddha already?"
Granted, I'm a complete novice at both techniques and maybe jumping in at the deep end may work very well, as it often literally does in swimming instruction I guess. Or maybe I'm missing the point of Shikantaza altogether?
Do any of you have experience with both techniques? What differences did you discover? Do you favor one over the other and why? What worked best for you in your earlier years of study?
I found that both the Theravadin/Vipassana and Tibetan methods of teaching/practicing much easier to practice and stick to. I don't really understand how some one without experience in concentration avoids day dreaming in Shikantaza.