/lit/ - Literature

there is only where you are at. there is no birth, there is no death.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odWIPhj-ivo

>>3779182
Right and im asking, is this metaphysical or linguistic, since the Buddha never spoke on metaphysics.

Also im currently reading about Zen, which might have a different from other schools

i wouldn't say it confuses us, but
by defining things you are clinging to the idea more than you should. e.g. if you had a job interview at 12 pm tomorrow, you'll probably self-reflect on the upcoming occurrence a few dozens of times through out the day, that, the more you contemplate, the more nervous, hasty and out of touch with the world you are -- for no reason at all; you find hard to enjoy small things etc.

the subtext of all zen is living in the present, although the concept is effective, i don't agree that there is such a thing as "present" (by means of intellectual analyzing [not gonna go into that]) -- but it works, and that's all what matters

>>3779188
generally buddhism is all about meditation, where you focus on your breath again and again. whenever a thought pops up you see and accept it, but focus on the breath again.

in zen, practice is put on the pedestal big time. whenever you have an epiphany you just return to your practice. breath is the seed and the fruit.

there's no methaphysics or lingustics, just practice.

>>3779202
So it would be incorrect to try and analyze Zen? Even after practicing it, to try and put into words what you have experienced would be incorrect?

>>3779202
it is not only about the breath; there are literally hundreds of techniques -- ones that do not focus solely on the breath
isolating zen to 1 technique or any technique for that matter makes me think youre a huge summerfag

>there's no methaphysics
what

>>3779206
yes :)

zen chiefs often ask their students about various stuff and their goal is to is if they are thinking about the question or remaining in their practice.

Soen-sa said, "You must understand yourself."
"How can I understand myself?"
Soen-sa held up the Zen stick and said, "Do you see this?"
He then quickly hit the table with the stick and said, "Do you hear this? This stick, this sound, and your mind-are they the same or different?
The student said, "The same."
Soen-sa said, "If you say they are the same, I will hit you thirty times. If you say they are different, I will still hit you thirty times. Why?"
The student was silent.
Soen-sa shouted "KATZ!!!"* Then he said, "Spring comes, the grass grows by itself."

>>3779220
you are nitpicking bruh

>is to is
>their practice

>>3779162
Well there literally is no this afternoon. Future hasn't happened yet, past is gone, there's only know. All other 'moments in time' are merely conceptual. There's only eternal present.

>>3779162
>Is he essentially saying that by defining things, we are confusing ourselves about real phenomenon? That words only confuse us? Is this common throughout Zen, Dao, or Buddhist thought?
Well there's the classic 'the finger pointing at the moon' idea, that words can only point to something but never quite capture it. In that sense language is always wrong, or at least has shortcomings, since the thing pointing at the thing is never the thing itself. So Daoists and Zennists have this tendency to merely present one with raw experience instead of wordy explanations. Shouting at someone or hitting them with a stick is a very effective of readjusting their attention to what there actually is.

now nobody is going to write anything because that would not be zen

>>3779262
Not-doing is the same as doing

>>3779265
>muh paraconsistent logic

>>3779266
B-but, thats the point?

>>3779162
Hugh Mellor would explain it all to you.

>>3779266
>logic

stay babby tier

>Beginner's Mind
stay pleb kitschfag