Mark Foote

"What are their names, and on what streets do they live, I'd like to ride, ride over..."--David Crosby A thing that is unique to all the religious literature of the world is Gautama's characterization of mindfulness as a function of the four arisings of mindfulness: mindfulness of the body in the body, mindfulness of the feelings in the feelings, mindfulness of the mind in the mind, and mindfulness of the states of mind in the states of mind. How is Zen that?--such a fundamental aspect of Gautama's teaching! Don't mistake me, I believe Zen is that, just wondering if anyone else does.

(Omori) Sogen wrote: … It may be the least trouble to say as a general precaution that strength should be allowed to come to fullness naturally as one becomes proficient in sitting. We should sit so that our energy increases of itself and brims over… (“An Introduction to Zen Training: A Translation of Sanzen Nyumon”, Omori Sogen, tr. Dogen Hosokawa and Roy Yoshimoto, Tuttle Publishing, p 59.) Omori quoted one Hida Haramitsu: We should balance the power of the hara (area below the navel) and the koshi (area at the rear of the pelvis) and maintain equilibrium of the seated body by bringing the center of the body’s weight in line with the center of the triangular base of the seated body. (Hida Haramitsu, “Nikon no Shimei” [“Mission of Japan”], parentheticals added; referenced without publisher and date in "An Introduction to Zen Training, above) The equilibrium that Haramitsu described can follow a necessity of breath that places consciousness in the lower abdomen, given a feeling of ease at the point of consciousness and the experience of gravity as the source of activity and stretch. I’m partial to Yuanwu’s “turning to the left, turning to the right, following up behind” (“The Blue Cliff Record” Case 17, tr Cleary & Cleary). If I relax the muscles of the lower abdomen and the muscles behind the pelvis, and calm the stretch of ligaments between the pelvis and the sacrum, gravity can yield a “turning to the left, turning to the right”. “Following up behind” I believe refers to support engaged behind the sacrum and spine: There is… a possible mechanism of support for the spine from the displacement of the fascia behind the spine, a displacement that may depend on a push on the fascia behind the sacrum by the bulk of the extensor muscles, as they contract. There’s a frailty in the structure of the lower spine, and the movement of breath can place the point of awareness in such a fashion as to engage a mechanism of support for the spine, often in stages. (Applying the Pali Instructions)

books, brushes, inks, cat, all carefully stowed away. Lantern out. Cat out!

Working on a post in response to your last question, about "chop wood carry water"--something from that writing: Zen teachers demonstrate the relinquishment of volitive activity in the body in favor of the free location of “one-pointedness of mind”, constantly. Reb Anderson observed such demonstrations in the actions of Shunryu Suzuki: … I remember (Suzuki’s) dharma talks and I remember him in the zendo—that was wonderful teaching. I remember him moving rocks—wonderful teaching. I remember seeing him eat—that was wonderful teaching. He was teaching all the time in every situation. But when he couldn't sit anymore and couldn't walk anymore, he still taught right from there. (Reb Anderson, from a 1995 recording: https://www.cuke.com/people/anderson-reb.htm) In the parlance of Gautama: And what… is the ceasing of action? That ceasing of action by body, speech, and mind, by which one contacts freedom,–that is called ‘the ceasing of action’. (SN 35.146, tr. Pali Text Society vol IV p 85) As to "one-pointedness of mind": In my experience, “one-pointedness” occurs when the movement of breath necessitates the placement of attention at a singular location in the body, and a person “lays hold of one-pointedness” when they remain awake as the singular location shifts. (Just to Si t) “One-pointedness of mind” occurs out of necessity, in the course of an inhalation or exhalation. The subtle necessity of posture or carriage can induce one-pointedness in seated meditation and in daily living, again in the course of an inhalation or exhalation. "Phases" or "levels" in concentration may have to do with the way "one-pointedness of mind" coordinates reflex activity to shift the fascia behind the sacrum and spine rearward to support the nerve exits between vertebrae, and thereby open the body to the placement of "one-pointedness" anywhere in the body. Forsaking "one-pointedness" for the particulars drops the ball, ignoring "one-pointedness" in the apprehension of the particulars also drops the ball. Fortunately we still breathe. Not really levels in the necessity of that, only in opening the body appropriately.

"At the head of the bed is Nephthys and at the foot Isis. They are both touching a 'shen' symbol." "In the case of the lungs its obvious that the breath is involved, Isis the in-breath and Nephthys the out." So our up and down, in and out duo is getting ready to pull the plugs on David Copperfield, after which he will magically change places with ol' foxhead?

Ahem. Mark Foote bridges ancient wisdom and modern science in this remarkable exploration of seated meditation. Drawing on Gautama Buddha's original teachings, Zen masters from Dogen to Shunryu Suzuki, and contemporary research in biomechanics and neuroscience, Foote reveals how natural, automatic movement in the body emerges when we surrender volition and allow consciousness to find its own place. For practitioners seeking to understand the relationship between body and mind in meditation, A Natural Mindfulness is an invaluable guide.

It's a recurring motif in Egyptian pyramid and scroll art. At least I spared you my explanation this time (I was hoping to goad our host into giving one).

fickle heart, tongue cat proportioned to the groove Emily's puzzle

So he abides fully conscious of what is behind and what is in front. As (he is conscious of what is) in front, so behind: as behind, so in front; as below, so above: as above, so below: as by day, so by night: as by night, so by day. Thus with wits alert, with wits unhampered, he cultivates his mind to brilliancy. (SN 54.19, Pali Text Society vol 5 p 235; emphasis added) That's the Pali Text Society translation. Switching to Sujato Bhikkyu's translation on suttacentral.org for the explanation ('cause I'm too lazy to copy out the PTS translation): And how does a mendicant meditate perceiving before and behind: as before, so behind; as behind, so before? It’s when the perception of before and behind is properly grasped, focused on, borne in mind, and penetrated with wisdom by a mendicant. That’s how a mendicant meditates perceiving before and behind: as before, so behind; as behind, so before. And how does a mendicant meditate as below, so above; as above, so below? It’s when a mendicant examines their own body up from the soles of the feet and down from the tips of the hairs, wrapped in skin and full of many kinds of filth. ‘In this body there is head hair, body hair, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, sinews, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, diaphragm, spleen, lungs, intestines, mesentery, undigested food, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, grease, saliva, snot, synovial fluid, urine.’ That’s how a mendicant meditates as below, so above; as above, so below. And how does a mendicant meditate as by day, so by night; as by night, so by day? It’s when a mendicant develops the basis of psychic power that has immersion due to enthusiasm, and active effort, with the same features, attributes, and signs by day as by night. And they develop it with the same features, attributes, and signs by night as by day. That’s how a mendicant meditates as by day, so by night; as by night, so by day. And how, with an open and unenveloped heart, does a mendicant develop a mind that’s full of radiance? It’s when a mendicant has properly grasped the perception of light, and has properly grasped the perception of day. That’s how, with an open and unenveloped heart, a mendicant develops a mind that’s full of radiance. (SN 51.20) You can perhaps see why I prefer the PTS translations in the above. Nevertheless! As to "as before, so behind; as behind, so before", where the Gautamid took a pass on the explanation, bear with me: In my experience, “one-pointedness” occurs when the movement of breath necessitates the placement of attention at a singular location in the body, and a person “lays hold of one-pointedness” when they remain awake as the singular location shifts. The weight of the body sensed at a particular point in the body can shift the body’s center of gravity, and a shift in the body’s center of gravity can result in what Moshe Feldenkrais termed “reflex movement”. The Tai Chi master Cheng Man Ch’ing wrote: In general, what the ancients called, “straightening the chest and sitting precariously,” has to do with the work of self-cultivation. … Therefore, I advise practitioners of T’ai-chi ch’uan to straighten their spines. Holding the spine erect is like stringing pearls on top of each other, without letting them lean or incline. However, if one is too tense and stiff, or unnaturally affected, then this too is an error. (“Master Cheng’s Thirteen Chapters on T’ai-Chi Ch’uan”, © 1982 Douglas Wile, p 21) I would say that the thread on which the pearls are strung is the fascia behind the sacrum and spine, the thoracolumbar fascial sheet, composed of the thoracolumbar and nuchal fascia. “Stringing pearls” is allowing the abdominals to work with the extensor muscles of the spine to align vertebrae and thereby permit the displacement of the fascial sheet. Gravity in the abdominals can work against the extensors in a rhythm regulated by the stretch of ligaments, while pressure created in the abdomen as the abdominals work can displace the fascia behind specific vertebrae in support of an overall stretch. Because the extensor muscles behind the sacrum are enclosed by bone on three sides, the thoracolumbar fascia behind the sacrum can be displaced by the mass of the extensor muscles as they contract. Gravity in the muscles of the lower abdomen and pelvis can work against the extensors, again regulated by the stretch of ligaments, to displace the fascia behind the sacrum in support of an overall stretch. I find that Gautama’s description of ease in the second concentration accords well with the engagement of “reflex movement” in the lower abdomen, around the pelvic basin, and behind the sacrum. Likewise, Gautama’s description of ease in the third concentration accords well with “reflex movement” in the abdominals and in the extensors of the spine. (Just to Sit) That's "before as behind, behind as before" to me. "As below, so above: as above, so below"--Gautama got in trouble for recommending the "meditation on the unlovely (aspects of the body)", which appears to be what he's describing here. I find "as below, so above: as above, so below" in the overall stretch of the fascia behind the sacrum and spine, which involves the whole body. "(The monk has) properly grasped the perception of light, and has properly grasped the perception of day". Pali Text Society has "(a monk's) “consciousness of light is well grasped, his consciousness of daylight is well-sustained" (which I prefer).

For Theravadin Buddhists, democracy is the name of the game when it comes to decisions of the order. Except that the group that would remain the Theravadins decided after the vote in B.C. 349 to take their dry sleeping robes and go home, what a bunch of party poopers! Intuitions we have about the way the world works rarely conflict with our everyday experience. At speeds far slower than the speed of light or at scales far larger than the quantum one, we can, for instance, assume that objects have definite features independent of our measurements, that we all share a universal space and time, that a fact for one of us is a fact for all. As long as our philosophy works, it lurks undetected in the background, leading us to mistakenly believe that science is something separable from metaphysics. But at the uncharted edges of experience — at high speeds and tiny scales — those intuitions cease to serve us, making it impossible for us to do science without confronting our philosophical assumptions head-on. Suddenly we find ourselves in a place where science and philosophy can no longer be neatly distinguished. A place, according to the physicist Eric Cavalcanti, called “experimental metaphysics.” https://www.quantamagazine.org/metaphysical-experiments-test-hidden-assumptions-about-reality-20240730/ I know, not what you were referencing...

"... there is in fact an account of the First Schism which gives just such a date, namely the tradition of the Sammitya school recorded by Bhavya (Bhavaviveka) and the Tibetan historians (probably following him). This account places the event in B.C. 349.... On this occasion a monk, about whose name there are disagreements..., put forward five grounds, of which four concern the question of the nature of an arhant... and none have any direct bearing on the discipline. An assembly took place... and the majority, it would appear, voted in favour of these grounds. This majority constituted itself into the Mahasamgha.... The minority which rejected the grounds, and which apparently included a number of the most senior monks, refused to submit to this decision and constituted themselves into the School of the Elders, the Sthaviravada. ... We seem led to the conclusion that the two parties were less far apart than at first sight they appear to be, except on the first ground [that an arhant can be seduced by another person]. The Sthaviravada were categorical that an arhant was by nature beyond the reach of any possible seduction; the Mahasamgha allowed an arhant to be seduced in a dream. Between these opinions no compromise could be found.... No compromise having been reached, the two parties separated and became two schools of Buddhism. Afterwards they gradually came to disagree on several more grounds, partly through working out the implications of their positions. In particular the nature of the Buddha was reconsidered. In the Tripitaka he is not apparently distinguished from any other arhant, except that he had the exceptional genius necessary to discover the truths unaided whilst the others were helped by his guidance. The Sthaviravada remained closer to this conception, though gradually they attributed a higher status to the Buddha, eventually complete 'omniscience', especially in the more popular propaganda. The Mahasamgha, on the other hand, having relaxed or at least not made more stringent the conditions for an arhant, found it desirable to make a clear distinction in the case of the Buddha; he was a being of quite a different nature, far above other human beings or perhaps not really a human being at all. They thus began that transformation of the Buddha, and his doctrine, which led step by step to the Mahayana...." ("Indian Buddhism", A. K. Warder, Motilal Banarsidass 2nd ed p 217-218) At least as far as Warder could discover, the original Mahayanists split from the rest of the tradition because they believed an arahant could have a wet dream. I personally like the Bodhisattva vow in Mahayana Buddhism, the commitment to hold off personal enlightenment until all enter at once. The idea, as I understand it, is that the Bodhisattva will continue to suffer the consequences of desire for sensual pleasure, desire for becoming, and desire for not-becoming (ignorance) until all can be freed from these three cankers altogether. That allows for wet dreams and more, and justifies it as a great sacrifice on the part of the Bodhisattva. Yes, it's laughable, and yet I do better in an environment that encourages some freedom from the rules. I myself am only looking to realize Gautama's way of living more often, the mindfulness that he said was primarily his way of living in the rainy season (when presumably he did a lot of sitting)--the way of living that he described as "perfect in itself, and a pleasant way of living too" (SN 54.9, tr. Pali Text Society vol V p 285). As I wrote in my book (yes, I have a book!--should be in print again soon): Many people in the Buddhist community take enlightenment to be the goal of Buddhist practice. I would say that when a person consciously experiences automatic movement in the activity of the body in inhalation and exhalation, finding a way of life that allows for such experience in the natural course of things becomes the more pressing concern. Gautama taught such a way of living, although I don’t believe that such a way of living is unique to Buddhism. (Appendix--A Way of Living)

Even a mind in thought, a full concert venue, a rush hour freeway, or a hill of ants on a hot day can be seen to be still. To learn what to look for generally requires pointing by a realized teacher. "Case 29", from "The Gateless Gate", by Ekai (called Mu-mon). Yes. I would say the mind is only really still when it is without will, intent, or deliberation, and the activity of the body can occur solely by virtue of the location of the mind. Mumon's commentary, according to Nyogen Senzaki and Paul Reps: The sixth patriarch said: “The wind is not moving, the flag is not moving. Mind is moving.” What did he mean? If you understand this intimately, you will see the two monks there trying to buy iron and gaining gold. The sixth patriarch could not bear to see those two dull heads, so he made such a bargain. Wind, flag, mind moves, The same understanding. When the mouth opens All are wrong. (tr. Nyogen Senzaki and Paul Reps [1934], at sacred-texts.com) Wikipedia on Senzaki: "a Rinzai Zen monk who was one of the 20th century's leading proponents of Zen Buddhism in the United States." I trust this translation of the commentary, some are not so good! Makes me think of Gautama's declaration that speech ceases as "one-pointedness" is laid hold of--more correctly, "determinate thought" that gives rise to speech ceases. When the mouth opens, when "determinate thought" that gives rise to speech commences, no "one-pointedness. I disagree, that the teachings of the sermons in the Pali Canon that form the basis of Theravadin practice are different from the teachings that form the basis of Zen practice, except as regards the transmission of the teaching. With regard to transmission, Gautama, refused to name a successor (DN 16, PTS vol. ii p 107). I understand why the Zen tradition felt it necessary to claim otherwise, but honesty is a virtue, no?

If you're referring to the quotations I cited above--evidence of what?