Mark Foote

Law? gravitation the weight of the body, sinks the mind moves, freely

Buddhism is a large umbrella, covering many different faiths and many different teachings. If you want to familiarize yourself with Gautama the Shakyan's teachings (the Buddha), I would recommend the first four collections of sermons (the first four Nikayas in the Pali Canon) and possibly the rules of the order (the Vinaya). In the Nikayas, Gautama offered four "truths" about suffering (in this case, the Pali word has been translated as "anguish"): “And what has been explained by me… ? ‘This is anguish’ has been explained by me. ‘This is the arising of anguish’ has been explained by me… ‘This is the stopping of anguish’ has been explained by me. ‘This is the course leading to the stopping of anguish’ has been explained by me. And why… has this been explained by me? It is because it is connected with the goal, is fundamental to the [holy-]faring, and conduces to turning away from, to dispassion, stopping, calming, super-knowledge, awakening, and nibbana. Therefore it has been explained by me.” (MN 63; Pali Text Society translation vol. II p 101) “Birth is anguish, old age and decay, sickness, death, sorrow, grief, woe, lamentation, and despair are anguish. Not to get what one desires is anguish. In short, the five groups based on grasping are anguish.” (AN 3.61; Pali Text Society vol. I p 160; Pali “dukkha”, Horner's translation “anguish” here substituted for Woodward's “ill”) About the five groups (from my own website): Anguish may be brought to an end, said Gautama, when the cause of anguish has been distinguished; the cause to which he attested was “grasping after self”, deriving a sense of self from the phenomena of body or mind (MN 75; PTS vol. II p 190). Phenomena of the body or mind cannot rightly be called one’s own, as Gautama pointed out to the Jain Aggivessana: “What do you think about this, Aggivessana? When you speak thus: ‘Material shape is my self’, have you power over this material shape of yours (and can say) ‘Let my material shape be thus, Let my material shape be not thus?’ When you speak thus: ‘Feeling … perception… the habitual tendencies… consciousness is my self’: have you power over this feeling … perception… the habitual tendencies… consciousness of yours (and can say): ‘Let my consciousness be such, let my consciousness not be such’?” (MN 1 35; PTS vol I pp 284-285) “The habitual tendencies” Gautama referred to here were the “tendencies” to exercise will toward sensory contact, one “tendency” for each of the senses (including the sense of mind; SN 22.56 6, PTS vol III p 53). My favorite declension of "the arising of anguish (suffering)"--there are many subtly different declensions in Gautama's teaching: That which we will…, and that which we intend to do and that wherewithal we are occupied:–this becomes an object for the persistance of consciousness. The object being there, there comes to be a station of consciousness. Consciousness being stationed and growing, rebirth of renewed existance takes place in the future, and here from birth, decay, and death, grief, lamenting, suffering, sorrow, and despair come to pass. Such is the uprising of this mass of ill. Even if we do not will, or intend to do, and yet are occupied with something, this too becomes an object for the persistance of consciousness… whence birth… takes place. But if we neither will, nor intend to do, nor are occupied about something, there is no becoming of an object for the persistance of consciousness. The object being absent, there comes to be no station of consciousness. Consciousness not being stationed and growing, no rebirth of renewed existence takes place in the future, and herefrom birth, decay-and-death, grief, lamenting, suffering, sorrow and despair cease. Such is the ceasing of this entire mass of ill. (SN 12.38; PTS vol II p 45) How the exercise of will in speech, in action of the body (in particular in the activity of inbreathing and outbreathing), and in action of the mind (particularly in feeling and perceiving) ceases: “…I have seen that the ceasing of the activities is gradual. When one has attained the first trance [first meditative state], speech has ceased. When one has attained the second trance, thought initial and sustained has ceased. When one has attained the third trance, zest has ceased. When one has attained the fourth trance, inbreathing and outbreathing have ceased. When one has attained the realm of infinite space, perception of objects has ceased. When one has attained the realm of infinite consciousness, perception of the realm of infinite space has ceased. When one has attained the realm of nothingness, the perception of the realm of infinite consciousness has ceased. When one has attained the realm of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, the perception of the realm of nothingness has ceased. Both perception and feeling have ceased when one has attained the cessation of perception and feeling.” (SN 36.11 2, PTS vol IV p 146)

As I have said previously, you are quoting instructions on the jhanas. The second 4 are formless and are precisely what I am talking about EVEN THOUGH they are not insight. Gautama said that “the excellence of the heart’s release” through the extension of the mind of compassion was the first of the further concentrations, a concentration he called “the infinity of ether” (SN 46.54; Pali Text Society Vol V p 100-102). "The infinity of ether" is the first of the five "arupa" jhanas, that you are referring to as formless. "The excellence of the heart's release" through the extension of sympathetic joy, as above, constituted the second of the arupa jhanas, "the infinity of consciousness". "The excellence of the heart's release" through the extension of equanimity constituted the third of the arupa jhanas, "the plane of 'no-thing'". No instruction on the attainment of "neither-perception-nor-yet-not-perception", the fourth arupa jhana, was given, except to say that equanimity with respect to uniformity with regard to the senses persists. That uniformity is overcome by means of lack of desire, resulting in the fifth of the arupa jhanas, "the cessation of ('determinate thought' in) feeling and perceiving", the signless concentration. That in turn gives way with the thought, "all that is constructed and thought out is impermanent, is subject to end." The five are the "formless" concentrations, the immaterial concentrations, the incorporeal "peaceful Deliverances which are having transcended material shapes". You stopped reading too early. That IS precisely "seeing all appearances as empty". For me, it's not an experience of seeing anything. It's something that effects action. I have found that zazen is more likely to “get up and walk around” when the free location of consciousness is accompanied by an extension of friendliness and compassion, an extension beyond the boundaries of the senses. The Oxford English Dictionary offers some quotes about “ether” (Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. “ether (n.),” March 2024, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/1514129048): They [sc. the Brahmins] thought the stars moved, and the planets they called fishes, because they moved in the ether, as fishes do in water. (Vince, Complete System. Astronomy vol. II. 253 [1799]) Plato considered that the stars, chiefly formed of fire, move through the ether, a particularly pure form of air. (Popular Astronomy vol. 24 364 [1916]) When the free location of consciousness is accompanied by an extension of the mind of compassion, there can be a feeling that the necessity of breath is connected to things that lie outside the boundaries of the senses. That, to me, is an experience of “the infinity of ether”. ... Mayu, Zen Master Baoche, was fanning himself. A monk approached and said, “Master, the nature of wind is permanent and there is no place it does not reach. Why then do you fan yourself?” “Although you understand that the nature of the wind is permanent,” Mayu replied, “you do not understand the meaning of its reaching everywhere.” “What is the meaning of its reaching everywhere?” asked the monk again. Mayu just kept fanning himself… (Dogen, “Genjo Koan [Actualizing the Fundamental Point]”, tr. Robert Aitken and Kazuaki Tanahashi) The wind that reaches everywhere was actualized immediately in Mayu’s fanning. (The Inconceivable Nature of the Wind) Strange to think of Cohen as having been Sasaki's attendant for so many years. Great poetry & music, for sure.

Miraculous power and marvelous activity Drawing water and chopping wood. (Pangyun, a lay Zen practitioner, eight century C.E.) Cleave a (piece of) wood, I am there; lift up the stone and you will find Me there. (The Gospel According to Thomas, pg 43 log. 77, ©1959 E. J. Brill) Now it is true that Gautama described his way of living, "the (mind-)development that is mindfulness of inbreathing and outbreathing" (Pali Text Society Anapanasati Sutta MN 118), as his way of living before his enlightenment ("when I was as yet the Bodhisattva") and after his enlightenment ("the best of ways, the Tathagatha's way of living"). He said it was especially his way of living in the rainy season (SN V chapter on inbreathing and outbreathing). My understanding is that the Rinzai and Sambo schools of Zen emphasize kensho. Sensei Meido Moore teaches in the Rinzai tradition, at Korinji in Wisconsin. Also my understanding is that Rinzai emphasizes dokusan, private instruction with the teacher, but at least in Japan dokusan is uncommon in Soto zendos. I think there is an advantage to being around teachers like Meido, in that there's a physical component to Zen that can maybe be picked up intuitively. That said, not all Zen teachers embody that kind of understanding, in my experience. I've done some one and three days sesshins at Soto centers, and one five day sesshin. They are interesting, but I remember that when I was thinking of trying to become a resident at one Zen center, the advice I got was that it was maybe better for me just to practice at home. And I think that was true!

Either way, the Bodhidharma stuff is some very PITH instruction. Ever read Bodhidharma's version of the precepts? Just... wow. https://jakkoan.net/Jukai/Precepts.htm First off, Stirling, thanks for your responses. Kobun lectured on those precepts, the lectures are in "Embracing Mind: the Zen Talks of Kobun Chino Otogawa", edited by Judy Cosgrove and Shinbo Joseph Hall. They're not identified as Bodhidharma's, though. Yes, I agree, that treatment is more straightforward, at least for me. Just to refine that, it has to do with no "doer'. A backwards step! That much is right, but what about the witness of activity in the absence of a "doer"? See above. Insight wipes out the illusion of a doer. No-one inhales or exhales (OR the entire field of experience inhales and exhales). Like all other phenomena (a bird flying by, or a leaf falling from a tree, for example) breathing appears and disappears in the field of experience. All appearances are enlightened. My experience is different. In my experience, the sense of place associated with consciousness acts. It's hard to believe it can be so until it happens. ..."Transcended material shapes", means sees all appearances as "empty", which I was pointing to in my previous comment above. [One] dwells, having suffused the first quarter [of the world] with friendliness, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; just so above, below, across; [one] dwells having suffused the whole world everywhere, in every way, with a mind of friendliness that is far-reaching, wide-spread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence. [One] dwells having suffused the first quarter with a mind of compassion… with a mind of sympathetic joy… with a mind of equanimity that is far-reaching, wide-spread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence. MN I 7; 38; © Pali Text Society Vol I p 48) Gautama said that “the excellence of the heart’s release” through the extension of the mind of compassion was the first of the further concentrations, a concentration he called “the infinity of ether” (SN 46.54; Pali Text Society Vol V p 100-102). (The Inconceivable Nature of the Wind) Not exactly seeing all appearances as "empty", I think. https://suttacentral.net/iti44/en/ireland?lang=en&reference=none&highlight=false Well, you and I disagree over whether the sayings in the fifth Nikaya can be trusted. I have pointed to the passage in MN III 121 before: …And again, Ananda, [an individual], not attending to the perception of the plane of no-thing, not attending to the perception of the plane of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, attends to the solitude of mind that is signless. [Their] mind is satisfied with, pleased with, set on and freed in the concentration of mind that is signless. [They] comprehends thus, ‘This concentration of mind that is signless is effected and thought out. But whatever is effected and thought out, that is impermanent, it is liable to stopping.’ When [the individual] knows this thus, sees this thus, [their] mind is freed from the canker of sense-pleasures and [their] mind is freed from the canker of becoming and [their] mind is freed from the canker of ignorance. In freedom is the knowledge that [one] is freed and [one] comprehends: “Destroyed is birth, brought to a close the (holy)-faring, done is what was to be done, there is no more of being such or so’. [They] comprehend thus: “The disturbances there might be resulting from the canker of sense-pleasures do not exist here; the disturbances there might be resulting from the canker of becoming do not exist here; the disturbances there might be resulting from the canker of ignorance do not exist here. And there is only this degree of disturbance, that is to say the six sensory fields that, conditioned by life, are grounded on this body itself. [One] regards that which is not there as empty of it. But in regard to what remains [one] comprehends: 'That being, this is.' Thus, Ananda, this comes to be for [such a one] s true, not mistaken, utterly purified and incomparably highest realisation of emptiness. ("Lesser Discourse on Emptiness", Culasunnatasutta, Pali Text Society MN III 121 vol III p 151-2) In the sutta above, Gautama points to six senses, not five as in the passage from Itivuttaka. He points to the continued disturbance of the six senses, which the sermon in Itivuttaka would seem to deny for its "no residue left" category of arahant. Arahants with residue left is a funny concept, to me. In Gautama's description of the "seven persons", there are two for whom diligence has been done, and there is no more to be done. There is no arahant above arahants. Ah... but it is! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Ranks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Bulls Yes, I stand corrected, tao.te.kat provided an extensive list which I'm sure is accurate. The thing I find so useful in Gautama's teaching are the metaphors he provided for each of the first four rupa jhanas ("corporeal" jhanas). Not sure there's an equivalent in Zen, apart from Hakuin's "golden butter" practice. What makes a great teaching, to me, is consistency and applicability. Zen is strong on negation, but weak on the positive and substantive, when it comes to sitting practice. Gautama has supplied the positive and substantive, for me. The Buddha wasn't a Buddhist, he was one of long line of those who just "got" it and pointed to what they understood. That's me too. If framing it in Buddhism works for someone, that's great... I can frame it that way... and often do. 'I appreciate that this is your belief, but it isn't "Buddhism"', said the one who, following in a long line, isn't a Buddhist? Where to begin? Just here. I know you'll agree it's not doing something so that "you are there"--at least I'm pretty sure you will...

Thank you so much, tao.te.kat, for the correction! You have cited many more instances than I was aware of. Nevertheless, most Americans I think have come to think of enlightenment as a one-size-fits-all, turn-the-corner-to-complete-self-realization kind of experience. The students of Philip Kapleau were certainly thinking of kensho in that way. And I agree that Gautama spoke of never-returners, once-returners, stream-winners, stream enterers, and he certainly outlined seven different types of persons in the world, with various degrees of the destruction of the cankers. Well, actually, two whose cankers were destroyed and had nothing to be done through further diligence, and five who had partially destroyed the cankers or who had not destroyed the cankers for whom there was something to be done through further diligence. Gradations and different aptitudes. The interesting thing about that analysis is that a person could either be freed both ways, or through intuitive wisdom, and have their cankers destroyed. "Freed both ways" is not really defined, but I'm guessing both through the arupa jhanas (the "incorporeal" peaceful Deliverances) and through intuitive wisdom. The arupa jhanas alone were not sufficient, because the "mental realizer" type of person practiced them but still had "something to be done through diligence". Neither was having "seen by means of wisdom", as most if not all of the seven types had done that. I am mostly interested in the fact that in the mindfulness of Mahasatipatthana (DN) and of the chapter on inbreathing and outbreathing (SN 5.54), the emphasis is on the four rupa jhanas and the sign ("the five limbs of concentration") in a way of living. I'm interested in that, as the reconciliation of my own experience of what Dogen called "the inconceivable" with my day-to-day life.

Nature's quiet court speaks of laws unseen, unheard save by the rooster

Does your insight make any difference to your action, starting with inhalation and exhalation when you sit? Gautama spoke of the person who is "freed by intuitive wisdom" as a person whose cankers have been destroyed. He spoke of the person who has "won to view", as a person who has seen by means of wisdom but only some of whose cankers have been destroyed: And which, monks, is the person that has won to view? As to this, monks, some person is abiding without having apprehended with the person those peaceful Deliverances which are having transcended material shapes; yet having seen by means of wisdom some of his cankers are utterly destroyed, and those things that are proclaimed by the Tathagatha are fully seen by him through intuitive wisdom and fully practiced.... This, monks, is called the person who has won to view. I, monks, say of this monk that there is something to be done through diligence.... (MN 70 Kitagirisutta, PTS 478-480 pp 151-154) Grades of enlightenment, how tedious! Not something mentioned in the Zen world. I'm not a Buddhist, I'm a person who has benefited greatly from the teachings of Gautama the Shakyan in the early Buddhist texts. Ok, some Zen texts too, and some Zen teachers. I'm basically teaching myself, and as I read the teachings of Gautama the Shakyan, that's the way it's supposed to be done (maybe with occasional help from friends). If you want to teach Buddhism, Stirling--good luck. If I weren't teaching myself, I wouldn't know where to begin. In "Mystic Devices in the Room" it says: "One time Huike climbed up Few Houses Peak with Bodhidharma. Bodhidharma asked, 'Where are we going?' Huike said, 'Please go right ahead--that's it.' Bodhidharma said, 'If you go right ahead, you cannot move a step.' (Denkoroku 30 Huike, Keizan, tr. Thomas Cleary, Shambala p 111)

I agree, drugs don't actually deliver, if it's the well-being of mind and body that matters. Sounds like you don't want to talk about your experience, because you don't want to jinx it? Ok. One other thing occurred to me, and that's the stories of all the disciples of Philip Kapleau at Rochester Zendo. Here's something from the introduction to that book, "Zen Teaching, Zen Practice: Philip Kapleau and The Three Pillars of Zen": Thirty-five years after Kapleau’s seminal volume was published, we have Zen Teaching, Zen Practice, a collection of eleven essay’s written mostly by Kapleau’s senior students examining Kapleau’s work and influence not only as an author but as a Zen teacher. Zen Teaching, Zen Practice is edited by Kenneth Kraft, who also wrote the interesting Introduction. Kraft points out that Kapleau’s book is “in large measure a book about kensho” (p.14) which in itself is problematic as for many, including some of the authors of the essays, this led to “inflated expectations… [and] [t]he discrepancy between anticipatory visions of enlightenment and actual experiences of insight”. (p.15) This disjuncture between what Kapleau wrote and the actual experiences of Zen students has led to some criticisms of The Three Pillars of Zen as a book that gives an unrealistic picture of what to expect from zazen. The reality is, of course, that zazen and Zen practice do not necessarily lead to kensho or satori for all but Kapleau’s book raised the expectation that arduous practice would inevitably lead to enlightenment. For many, if not most Zen students, just how difficult the practice is and how committed one must be came as a shock and, inevitably for some, a disappointment. (https://www.thezensite.com/ZenBookReviews/ZenteachingZenpractice.htm) That book, the book recounting his students' disappointments with kensho, apparently only had one printing.

There're thousands of experiences of Kensho even now, these days, it's strange you only know of it for the book of P. Kappleau In fact Bodhidharma said: When a person who has not had kensho reads the Buddhist scriptures, questions his teachers and fellow monks about Buddhism, or practices religious disciplines, he is merely creating the causes of his own illusion – a sure sign that he is still confined within samsara. He tries constantly to keep himself detached of thought and deed, and all the while his thoughts and deeds are attached. He endeavors to be doing nothing all day long, and all the while he is busily doing. So far as I know, there's very little that can actually be attributed to the historical Bodhidharma. Most of what's attributed to him is by later authors. Not that I'm disputing that there is an experience in Zen that constitutes a turning point. Just that the experiences recounted as "kensho" by the Japanese business men in "Three Pillars of Zen" weren't it! And indeed, the experience has to do with "doing nothing", the opposite of "doing something", as Shunryu Suzuki pointed out: But usually in counting breathing or following breathing, you feel as if you are doing something, you know– you are following breathing, and you are counting breathing. This is, you know, why counting breathing or following breathing practice is, you know, for us it is some preparation– preparatory practice for shikantaza because for most people it is rather difficult to sit, you know, just to sit. (“The Background of Shikantaza”, Shunryu Suzuki; San Francisco, February 22, 1970) What he calls "just sitting", I describe as activity of the body in inhalation and exhalation solely by virtue of the location of consciousness. And it can be a bitch, the first time! Suppose that you have climbed to the top of a hundred-foot pole, and are told to let go and advance one step further without holding bodily life dear. In such a situation, if you say that you can practice the Buddha-Way only when you are alive, you are not really following your teacher. Consider this carefully. (“Shobogenzo-zuimonki: Sayings of Eihei Dogen Zenji, recorded by Koun Ejo”, 1-13, tr Shohaku Okumura, Soto-Shu Shumucho p 45-46; copyright 2004 Sotoshu Shumucho)

Thank you for your courtesy, I'm aware that my comments about kensho were not the most positive, and I appreciate you overcoming the antipathy you must have felt. The only kensho experiences I've really heard about were those recounted in Three Pillars of Zen, Phillip Kapleau's work. I learned to sit from the pictures in the back of the book--never have been able to keep that posture, though. I had done enough acid trips when I read that book (not that many, but enough) to feel that the kensho experiences recounted in Kapleau's book were very much like the insight experiences coming off acid. Those insights never lasted, and certainly didn't change my life the way I was hoping they might. I believe my current experience has the potential to change my life. That's sitting until the place where I am can sit, in the mornings when I get up and in the evenings before I go to bed. Some things to guide me during the day, and return me to that experience. It's simple, and it's not. As Gautama said about each of the concentrations, "whatever a person imagines it to be, it is otherwise." Sounds like you experienced kensho, and it changed your life?

You might want to take a glance at "Battle for the Mind". Sargant made a study of religious conversion, North Korean brainwashing, trance possession. Surprising bottom line from North Korea: if you couple extreme stress with the suggestion of a different belief structure that will resolve the stress, the subject will wake up one morning with a complete acceptance of that different belief structure. It's not like they have a rational change of belief--it's like a total reversal of belief overnight, rock solid and no doubt about it. Typical stressors are starvation, lack of sleep, disease. In the case of Christian conversion, add threat of damnation. I'm not saying there isn't a practice of Christian belief that is mystical and allows the practitioner to transcend themselves in their actions. Or that there isn't a similar practice in Buddhism that does the same. I'm only saying that you want to be suspicious when people are deprived of sleep, fed very little, and pressured to have some kind of realization. That's my view. Is there a transformative experience in Zen? Ok, I believe there is. Does it have to do with understanding, or with insight? No, it's a physical experience of the activity of the body in the absence of habit and volition. There's another one that has to do with the experience of the activity of mind in the absence of habit and volition, I don't expect to attain that, but I think the first experience on a regular basis is all I need for now. And for me it has to do with action, not insight.

Yes, I am up regularly at 3 or 4 am, after going to bed near midnight. I sit before I go to bed, and when I get up in those early morning hours. I can use the bathroom after I sit, and then retire (initially and again). Shunryu Suzuki said in one of his lectures that he used the bathroom frequently, but that was helpful for him when he did tangaryo--an excuse for getting up, I suppose is what he meant. If I feel like I can barely stay awake, that's a sign I need to work it up. I do some kinhin, or some Tai Chi, drink some water--that combination seems to work for me. When I lay down, I don't feel like I can barely stay awake. But I look to the location of consciousness, and I don't expect it to be in my head, necessarily. That pretty much works every time, for me to find sleep. Here's humbleone, from a dozen years ago on The Tao Bums (as it was then): “Hi Mark, so I tried your practice last night. My ideal sleep time should be from 10PM-6AM. I woke up at 4:30 AM. After a quick drink of water, I returned to bed and tried your practice. I hope I did it correctly, I was somewhat surprised that my mind moved around quite a bit. Not fast, but in slow motion the awareness would shift, from left cheek to right side of torso etc.. The end result was a light sleep state, but I was glued to the bed and then woke up exactly at 6AM, feeling refreshed like I had a complete 8 hours of sleep. If I am able to gain control over my sleep that would be very significant step for me indeed. Could you please provide some feedback, as to whether I did it correctly? All the best, humbleone” My reply: Great to hear that you had some success with what I’m describing as “waking up and falling asleep”. Yes, that sounds like the practice; I’m grateful that you tried it at that hour of the morning, as in my experience that’s a very good time to see the mind moving. If you do any seated or even standing meditation in the morning, you may see why I’m referring to the practice as “waking up and falling asleep”. In waking up, I am looking to relinquish my activity, and allow the place of mind to generate activity out of the stretch I find myself in. In the end I am convinced that everything I need to know I learn by being where I am, as I am. I just have to be open to it. Now for me my aim is different, not kensho (kensho's a joke, as far as I'm concerned--a change of mind like that induced by brainwashing, see Sargant's "Battle for the Mind"). "The place of mind" can generate more than the activity of posture and breath, and I spent years trying to reconcile that fact with my everyday life. I see now that for Gautama, daily life was the four arisings of mindfulness and surrender to the generation of activity by "the place of mind" as appropriate. Like you, I do not expected to attain the destruction of the cankers of sensual pleasure, becoming, and ignorance, which destruction marked Gautama's enlightenment. Nevertheless, I can sit down and arrive at the activity of the body in inhalation and exhalation by virtue of the location of consciousness, even as that location shifts and moves. That's all I need. A Natural Mindfulness (pdf).

Sitting shikantaza is the place itself, and things. …When you sit, the cushion sits with you. If you wear glasses, the glasses sit with you. Clothing sits with you. House sits with you. People who are moving around outside all sit with you. They don’t take the sitting posture! (“Aspects of Sitting Meditation”, “Shikantaza”; Kobun Chino Otogawa; http://www.jikoji.org/intro-aspects/) "The place itself, and things"--sit the posture, breath the inbreath and the outbreath. Shikantaza is an experience of the universe in action, through the place of occurrence of consciousness and things.

Truth Clicking Heels Nazis insisting on the 5-7-5 format 5-7-5 format life in the fast lane, slowly make you lose your mind

In modern days, the three probably most popular approaches to the development of liberating insight in the Theravāda tradition are taught by Mahāsi Sayādaw, S.N. Goenka and Pa Auk Sayādaw respectively. Of these approaches to insight, the one that was the first to have a widespread impact on meditation practice in East Asia as well as in the West is the method taught by the Burmese monk Mahāsi Sayādaw (1904-1982). Characteristic for the Mahāsi method is that it dispenses with the formal development of mental tranquillity. The main meditation technique in this tradition requires applying mental labels to what is experienced throughout meditation practice in order to sharpen clear recognition. The basic mode of practice during sitting meditation is to observe the ‘rising’ and ‘falling’ motion of the abdomen caused by the process of breathing. The practitioner should make a mental label of these movements, or of anything else that may happen, such as noting the sitting position in terms of ‘sitting’, or the sensation of touch created by sitting on the cushion as ‘touching’. During walking meditation the same mental labelling is used to develop distinct awareness of several parts of each step, such as ‘lifting’ of the foot, ‘putting’ it, etc. Sustained practice uncovers the mental intentions that precede any activity. After the Mahāsi method had become known for some time, the insight meditation taught by the Indian S.N. Goenka (1924), a disciple of the Burmese meditation teacher U Ba Khin (1899-1971), began to spread around the globe and has by now become what probably is the most widely taught form of insight meditation world-wide. This meditation tradition centres on observation of bodily feelings. The practice of contemplating feelings is based on the previous development of a foundation in mental tranquillity through mindfulness of breathing, to which in a standard ten days retreat the first three days of practice are dedicated. Subsequently, feelings are observed through a continuous scanning of the body in the up and downward directions, leading to a penetrative awareness of their changing nature at increasingly subtler levels. Eventually, such practice leads to an awareness of the entire spectrum of body and mind in a constantly changing flux. A method that in recent years has been able to attract ever increasing numbers of practitioners is taught by the Burmese monk Pa Auk Sayādaw (1934). This mode of practice gives considerable room to the development of concentration, in fact ideally a practitioner should develop all four absorptions with the help of each of the meditation subjects listed in the Theravāda manual Visuddhimagga. The insight approach in this tradition is based on surveying the body from the perspective of the four elements (earth, water, fire and wind), recognizable by the experience of hardness, heaviness, warmth and motion. At first these qualities are identified in relation to particular parts of the body, but eventually are seen as existing in each particle of the body. The subtle analysis undertaken in this manner is then extended to the mind, directing awareness to each aspect of the cognitive process and to discerning the conditions operative at the twelve stages of the scheme of dependent arising. As this brief survey shows, the meditative approaches to insight taught by Mahāsi Sayādaw, S.N. Goenka and Pa Auk Sayādaw vary in the actual techniques they employ. When considered from the perspective of the Satipaṭṭhāna-sutta, which forms the commonly accepted reference point for insight meditation traditions, these three modes of developing insight could be considered as being based in particular on mindfulness of bodily postures (Mahāsi), on mindfulness of feelings (Goenka); and on mindfulness of the four elements (Pa Auk), as shown in figure 1. (The Dynamics of Theravadin Insight Meditation, by Bhikkyu Analayo) Suppose that you could relinquish all volition in the activity of the body, particularly in connection with inhaling and exhaling. That's just sitting, right? Nothing extra. Very simple. Not doing anything. I tell you, you can relinquish all volition in the activity of the body, if you can stay with the location of consciousness and let the gravity at that location be the source of activity. Trick is, the location of consciousness will shift and move, and you will have to exercise a presence of mind to stay awake to the location of consciousness while activity in the body is taking place. Very eclectic. Part of Gautama's way of living.

splish, sounds of water splash, I was taking a bath Basho and Darin Basho and Darin who'd have thunk it--jukebox Zen sushi and burgers

I took a class once on left-hemisphere, right-hemisphere brain science. Back in the early seventies, so maybe dated, but one of the points the instructor hammered home was that it's possible to understand the big picture with the right hemisphere and yet be totally unable to communicate it in words through the left hemisphere. The example he gave was of South Pacific native canoeists, who could make their way to an island over the horizon on a starless night but offered up "total junk" when asked to explain how they did it. At some point, I learned that mathematicians have the most highly developed connections between the hemispheres. That figures, since they are demonstrating relationships that are totally abstract in symbols. Zen "teishos" or lectures are expected to be something alive, not just a recitation of what is dead and in the books. Live mathematics of the truths about suffering, so to speak. No second thoughts, but not necessarily altogether linear. Gautama was amazingly linear, but in pieces that require some assembly (results may vary! ).

This phrase says: There was no second doubt in one's trust or confidence. So using your translation, ChiDragon, the two lines are something like: There is no second doubt in one's trust or confidence (faith in mind). One's trust or confidence (faith in mind) is no second doubt. Maybe "no second doubt" would be "no second thought"?

Wikipedia describes the derivation of the word “Zen” as follows: The term Zen is derived from the Japanese pronunciation of the Middle Chinese word chán, an abbreviation of chánnà, which is a Chinese transliteration of the Sanskrit word dhyāna (“meditation”). Yogapedia provides a definition of “dhyana” based on the Sanskrit roots of the word: Dhyana is a Sanskrit word meaning “meditation.” It is derived from the root words, dhi, meaning “receptacle” or “the mind”; and yana, meaning “moving” or “going.” (dhyana, dec. 9 2017, “Yogapedia”, authorship not ascribed; https://www.yogapedia.com/definition/5284/dhyana) Dhyana could therefore be said to translate literally as “mind moving”. The sixth patriarch of Zen in China pointed directly to the mind moving, in a case from the “Gateless Gate” collection: Not the Wind, Not the Flag Two monks were arguing about a flag. One said: “The flag is moving.” The other said: “The wind is moving.” The sixth patriarch happened to be passing by. He told them: “Not the wind, not the flag; mind is moving.” ((The Gateless Gate, by Ekai (called Mu-mon), tr. Nyogen Senzaki and Paul Reps [1934], at sacred-texts.com)) (Not the Wind, Not the Flag) Yes, the sixth patriarch was a successor of Bodhidharma, so at least as far as a line of succession Bodhidharma was the first. However, the same teaching about the mind was alive and well in China before Bodhidharma, as in the famous poem by the Buddhist monk Fuxi: The empty hand grasps the hoe handle Walking along, I ride the ox The ox crosses the wooden bridge The bridge is flowing, the water is still (“Zen’s Chinese Heritage”, tr. & © 2000 by Andy Ferguson, p 2) "The bridge is flowing" is the very same "mind is moving" of the sixth patriarch! About that: In one of the sermons of the Pali Canon, Gautama the Buddha described “seven (types of) persons existing in the world”. Here are the first two: And which, monks, is the person who is freed both ways? As to this, monks, some person is abiding, having apprehended with the person those peaceful Deliverances which are incorporeal having transcended material shapes; and having seen by means of wisdom his cankers are utterly destroyed. I, monks, do not say of this (person) that there is something to be done through diligence. What is the reason for this? It has been done by (them) through diligence, (they) could not become negligent. And which, monks, is the person who is freed by means of intuitive wisdom? As to this, monks, some person is abiding without having apprehended with the person those peaceful Deliverances which are incorporeal having transcended material shapes; yet, having seen by means of wisdom (their) cankers are utterly destroyed. This, monks, is called the person who is freed by means of intuitive wisdom. I, monks, do not say of this (person) that there is something to be done through diligence. What is the reason for this? It has been done by (them) through diligence, (they) could not become negligent… (MN 70 [Pali Text Society vol. 2 pp 151-154]; more on “The Deliverances”, DN 15 Mahanidanasutta, Pali Text Society DN ii section 35 pp 68-69; pronouns replaced, emphasis added) There are schools of modern Buddhism that regard concentration (the "peaceful Deliverances") as an ancillary practice in the attainment of wisdom, as a useful precursor to the attainment of insight. In the sermon above, Gautama acknowledged that there are indeed those who are “freed by means of intuitive wisdom”. Such “persons” are freed in spite of their not having experienced the “the peaceful Deliverances…”, but so far as I know Gautama did not teach a path to such a freedom. The paths that he did teach, eight-fold for the learner and ten-fold for the adept, both included “right concentration” among the elements. (from a piece I hope to post soon to my own site) What I'm saying there is that it's not that insight doesn't exist, but there really is no teaching about a path solely to "intuitive wisdom" in the Pali Canon, the most historically accurate record of the teachings of Gautama the Buddha. Vipassana is a modern invention. That doesn't say that the practices advocated by Vipassana teachers aren't derived in part from Buddhist teachings, or that they aren't useful to some people, to some degree. However, to represent that there's a path in Gautama's teaching to a freedom through "intuitive wisdom" I believe is a misrepresentation.

Something I'm writing now for my own site, which I hope speaks to the issue you raise: In one of the sermons of the Pali Canon, Gautama the Buddha described “seven (types of) persons existing in the world”. I’m going to quote from the sermon the first two “(types of) persons”, and then explain the terminology: And which, monks, is the person who is freed both ways? As to this, monks, some person is abiding, having apprehended with the person those peaceful Deliverances which are incorporeal having transcended material shapes; and having seen by means of wisdom his cankers are utterly destroyed. I, monks, do not say of this (person) that there is something to be done through diligence. What is the reason for this? It has been done by (them) through diligence, (they) could not become negligent. And which, monks, is the person who is freed by means of intuitive wisdom? As to this, monks, some person is abiding without having apprehended with the person those peaceful Deliverances which are incorporeal having transcended material shapes; yet, having seen by means of wisdom (their) cankers are utterly destroyed. This, monks, is called the person who is freed by means of intuitive wisdom. I, monks, do not say of this (person) that there is something to be done through diligence. What is the reason for this? It has been done by (them) through diligence, (they) could not become negligent… (MN 70 [Pali Text Society vol. 2 pp 151-154]; more on “The Deliverances”, DN 15 Mahanidanasutta, Pali Text Society DN ii section 35 pp 68-69; pronouns replaced, emphasis added) “Those peaceful Deliverances which are incorporeal…” are the last five of the nine states of concentration that Gautama regularly taught. He would generally describe a set of three or four “corporeal” concentrations, and then describe the set of five “incorporeal” concentrations. “Corporeal” is defined in the Oxford dictionary as “relating to a person's body”, and the four “corporeal” concentrations culminate in a cessation of volition in the activity of the body (particularly a cessation of volition in the activity of inhalation and exhalation). About “those peaceful Deliverances which are incorporeal…”, Gautama said very little. My understanding is that they have to do with the influence of things that are beyond the range of the senses in experience, and so are said to be “incorporeal”, or not physical. The “peaceful Deliverances” culminate in a cessation of volition in the activity of the mind (particularly in feeling and perceiving). The first “(type of) person” was “freed both ways”, apparently a reference to the cessation of volition in the action of both the body and the mind. The three “cankers” were said to be “sense-pleasures”, “becoming”, and “ignorance” (MN III 121, PTS Vol. III pp 151-2). When the cankers are “destroyed”, the roots of the craving for sense-pleasures, the roots of the craving “to continue, to survive, to be” (Bhikkyu Sujato), and the roots of the craving for what is delusion are destroyed. In the lecture about the “seven (types of) person”, Gautama went on to name five more “(types of) person”, all of whom had “seen by means of wisdom”, yet their cankers were not “utterly destroyed”—consequently, he said, “there is (yet) something to be done through diligence” for them. There are schools of modern Buddhism that regard concentration as an ancillary practice in the attainment of wisdom, as a useful precursor to the attainment of insight. In the sermon above, Gautama acknowledged that there are indeed those who are “freed by means of intuitive wisdom”. Such “persons” are freed in spite of their not having experienced the “the peaceful Deliverances…”, but so far as I know Gautama did not teach a path to such a freedom. The paths that he did teach, eight-fold for the learner and ten-fold for the adept, both included “right concentration” among the elements. What I'm up to is focusing on the four "corporeal" concentrations, bearing in mind: … a good (person] reflects thus: “Lack of desire even for the attainment of the first meditation has been spoken of by [me]; for whatever (one) imagines it to be, it is otherwise” [Similarly for the second, third, and fourth initial meditative states, and for the attainments of the first four further meditative states]. (MN III 113 (42-45), © Pali Text Society Vol III p 92-94) As I explain in the piece I'm writing, I do because: Part of the mindfulness that made up Gautama’s way of living was: Contemplating cessation I shall breathe in. Contemplating cessation I shall breathe out. (SN 54.1; Pali Text Society vol. V p 275-276) The contemplation of “cessation” while breathing in and while breathing out is particularly conducive to “the cessation of inhalation and exhalation”, a state in which the activity of the body takes place solely by virtue of the free location of consciousness. I think I can say that most Buddhist teachers have not realized the complete destruction of the cankers. Nevertheless, I believe many of them regularly practice a concentration that includes “the cessation of inhalation and exhalation”, and a mindfulness similar to the mindfulness that Gautama declared was his way of living. They do so because, as Gautama declared, that way of living: … if cultivated and made much of, is something peaceful and choice, something perfect in itself, and a pleasant way of living too. (SN 54.9, Pali Text Society SN vol. V p 285; “mindfulness of” substituted for Woodward’s “intent concentration on”, “mindfulness of” as in Horner’s translation of MN 118) Maybe better to point at a way of living that doesn't necessarily require the attainment of all of the "incorporeal" Deliverances, and the complete destruction of the cankers. I guess some may say that they are freed by "intuitive wisdom", and that Gautama's teachings are really irrelevant, that having seen by means of wisdom through "intuitive wisdom" is where it's at. Who am I, to disagree! Then again, what of what they really teach has to do with Gautama the Buddha?

In the Pali sermons, it's "one-pointedness of mind" or simply "one-pointedness". Never "one-pointed concentration". Gautama taught that the activity of mind ceases in the final concentration, with the cessation of volition in feeling and perceiving. Through the final concentration, the cankers come to be destroyed (the cravings for sensual pleasure, becoming, and ignorance). So he said. Nevertheless: (The individual comprehends thus: ) ‘This concentration of mind that is signless ("the cessation of feeling and perceiving") is effected and thought out. But whatever is effected and thought out, that is impermanent, it is liable to stopping.’ When [the individual] knows this thus, sees this thus, [their] mind is freed from the canker of sense-pleasures and [their] mind is freed from the canker of becoming and [their] mind is freed from the canker of ignorance. In freedom is the knowledge that [one] is freed and [one] comprehends: “Destroyed is birth, brought to a close the [holy]-faring, done is what was to be done, there is no more of being such or so’. [They] comprehend thus: “The disturbances there might be resulting from the canker of sense-pleasures do not exist here; the disturbances there might be resulting from the canker of becoming do not exist here; the disturbances there might be resulting from the canker of ignorance do not exist here. And there is only this degree of disturbance, that is to say the six sensory fields that, conditioned by life, are grounded on this body itself.” (MN III 121, Vol III pp 151-152; parentheticals paraphrase original; emphasis added) The six sensory fields are the usual five senses plus the mind. Thought persists. In the lecture by Koun Franz that I quoted from above, he talks about focusing the mind on one singular point, and he describes it as the positive version of "navel-gazing". I agree. Koun Franz speaks of "the base of consciousness" moving away from the head, possibly to the center of gravity. That "base of consciousness" that moves is one-pointed. Apparently what is now translated from the Pali as "mind" could also be translated as heart-mind. It's a tricky subject, heart-mind versus thought in concentration. Gautama taught that thought initial and sustained was a characteristic of the first concentration, and he described his way of living as a series of thoughts/observations, each taking place in connection with an inhalation or an exhalation. That was his way of living, before and after enlightenment (SN 54, Pali Text Society SN V "Chapter on the concentration on inbreathing and outbreathing"). He declared that thought initial and sustained ceased in the second of the initial concentrations, but in my experience thought can and does recur in any state of concentration, and certainly Gautama seems to affirm that the mind continues to function as a sense right through the cessation of volition in feeling and perceiving. I find it hard to believe that he was speaking of feeling and perceiving when he talked about "disturbances" associated with the mind after the final concentration, since volition in feeling and perceiving has ceased at that point--I believe he was referring to thought. In the mindfulness that made up Gautama's way of living, he speaks of being aware of mind in inhalation and exhalation, of gladdening, composing, and detaching the mind in inhalation and exhalation. That's the mind as the organ of thought, I believe. Yes, you're right--different cultures and different ages use different terminology, even if the same thing is being described. Also, there are different degrees of mastery--certainly Gautama studied under two masters of concentration of his day, before he moved on and found a further concentration. I would say that most Buddhist teachers have mastered the way of living that Gautama taught as his own. That way of living I believe included the "five limbs" (his phrase) of concentration, the four initial concentrations plus the survey of the body made after the fourth concentration (the "survey-sign" of the concentration), but did not generally include the further concentrations (through the final concentration and the destruction of the cankers). Like Gautama said, "be a lamp onto oneself."

From an up-coming post on my own site: Gautama equated “right concentration” with “one-pointedness”, or “one-pointedness of mind: And what… is the (noble) right concentration with the causal associations, with the accompaniments? It is right view, right purpose, right speech, right action, right mode of livelihood, right endeavor, right mindfulness. Whatever one-pointedness of mind is accompanied by these seven components, this… is called the (noble) right concentration with the causal associations and the accompaniments.” (MN III 117 © Pali Text Society vol III p 114; “noble” substituted for Ariyan; emphasis added) The difficulty is that “one-pointedness of mind” is taken by different people in the modern Buddhist community to mean different things. The Theravadin teacher Thanissaro Bhikkyu, for example, has disputed that the term could actually refer to the mind as a singular point, and instead posits that the reference is to a singular object of attention: A Pali sutta, MN 44, defines concentration as cittass’ek’aggatā, which is often translated as “one-pointedness of mind”: cittassa = “of the mind” or “of the heart,” eka = one, agga = point, -tā = -ness. MN 117 defines noble right concentration as any one-pointedness of mind supported by the first seven factors of the noble path, from right view through right mindfulness. MN 43 states further that one-pointedness is a factor of the first jhāna, the beginning level of right concentration. From these passages, it has been argued that if one’s awareness in concentration or jhāna is truly one-pointed, it should be no larger than a point, which means that it would be incapable of thinking, of hearing sounds, or even of being aware of the physical body. However, this interpretation imposes too narrow a meaning on the word ek’aggatā, one that is foreign to the linguistic usage of the Pali Canon. … (Thanissaro concludes: ) Show your lack of contempt for your meditation object by giving it your full attention and mastering concentration… Gather the mind around its one object. (https://www.dhammatalks.org/Archive/Writings/CrossIndexed/Uncollected/MiscEssays/OnePointed160822.pdf) In my experience, “one-pointedness” has more to do with the sense of self than with a “meditation object”. Healthy persons perceive their self as being in only one place at a time. There are instances in the medical record of persons who experienced themselves as being in two places at once (apparently a dysfunction in the coordination of certain sense organs), but that’s rare. I would contend that the sense of a location of self is the sense of the location of consciousness. A teacher in modern India, Nisargadatta, described the self as “the consciousness in the body”: You are not your body, but you are the consciousness in the body, because of which you have the awareness of “I am”. It is without words, just pure beingness. (Gaitonde, Mohan [2017]. Self – Love: The Original Dream [Shri Nisargadatta Maharaj’s Direct Pointers to Reality]) He went on to say: Meditation means you have to hold consciousness by itself. The consciousness should give attention to itself. (ibid) Gautama described how a person “lays hold of one-pointedness”: Herein… the (noble) disciple, making self-surrender the object of (their) thought, lays hold of concentration, lays hold of one-pointedness. (SN 48.10, Pali Text Society vol V p 174; “noble” substituted for “Aryan”) A person “lays hold of one-pointedness” by maintaining a presence of mind with the location of consciousness, yet such a presence of mind is really only possible through “making self-surrender the object of thought”, because the location of consciousness can move. The modern Zen teacher Koan Franz spoke of “letting the base of your consciousness move away from your head”, and drew a sharp contrast between “letting the base of your consciousness move” and Thanissaro’s “giving (a meditation object) your full attention”: So (in zazen), have your hands… palms up, thumbs touching, and there’s this common instruction: place your mind here. Different people interpret this differently. Some people will say this means to place your attention here, meaning to keep your attention on your hands. It’s a way of turning the lens to where you are in space so that you’re not looking out here and out here and out here. It’s the positive version, perhaps, of ‘navel gazing’. The other way to understand this is to literally place your mind where your hands are–to relocate mind (let’s not say your mind) to your center of gravity, so that mind is operating from a place other than your brain. Some traditions take this very seriously, this idea of moving your consciousness around the body. I wouldn’t recommend dedicating your life to it, but as an experiment, I recommend trying it, sitting in this posture and trying to feel what it’s like to let your mind, to let the base of your consciousness, move away from your head. One thing you’ll find, or that I have found, at least, is that you can’t will it to happen, because you’re willing it from your head. To the extent that you can do it, it’s an act of letting go–and a fascinating one. (“No Struggle [Zazen Yojinki, Part 6]”, by Koun Franz, from the “Nyoho Zen” site; explanatory parenthetical added. https://nyoho.com/2018/09/15/no-struggle-zazen-yojinki-part-6/) “An act of letting go”—that accords well with “making self-surrender the object of thought”. Shunryu Suzuki said: Sometimes when you think that you are doing zazen with an imperturbable mind, you ignore the body, but it is also necessary to have the opposite understanding at the same time. Your body is practicing zazen in imperturbability while your mind is moving. (“Whole-Body Zazen”, lecture by Shunryu Suzuki at Tassajara, June 28, 1970 (edited by Bill Redican) My advice for those who are unfamiliar with “one-pointedness” would be to look for the mind to move away from the head in the moments before falling asleep, then allow for that same freedom of movement in seated meditation. From a prior post on my site: When you find your place where you are, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point. (“Genjo Koan [Actualizing the Fundamental Point]”, tr. Tanahashi) Given a presence of mind that can “hold consciousness by itself”, activity in the body begins to coordinate by virtue of the sense of place associated with consciousness. A relationship between the free location of consciousness and activity in the body comes forward, and as that relationship comes forward, “practice occurs”. Through such practice, the placement of consciousness is manifested in the activity of the body. When you find your way at this moment, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point… (ibid) “When you find your way at this moment”, activity takes place solely by virtue of the free location of consciousness. A relationship between the freedom of consciousness and the automatic activity of the body comes forward, and as that relationship comes forward, practice occurs. Through such practice, the placement of consciousness is manifested as the activity of the body. ... I sit down first thing in the morning and last thing at night, and I look to experience the activity of the body solely by virtue of the free location of consciousness. As a matter of daily life, just to touch on such experience as occasion demands—for me, that’s enough. ("Take the Backward Step")

Zen teacher Kobun Chino Otogawa once said, "nobody masters zazen" (can't quote you a reference at the moment). To me that says, "nobody masters breath concentration." About Vipassana: Gautama taught that there are persons who are freed "both ways", and persons who are freed solely through "intuitive wisdom". "Both ways" would be through both concentration and "intuitive wisdom". Nevertheless, the eight-fold path for the learner and the ten-fold path for the adept that Gautama taught both include "right concentration" among the elements. I think you could say that although Gautama acknowledged there were those who were freed through "intuitive wisdom" alone, he didn't teach a path to "intuitive wisdom" alone. Satipatthana Sutta is often cited as the method of Vipassana, and Satipatthana includes only a passing reference to concentration, it's true. However, there's also a Mahasatipatthana Sutta, a "greater" or "larger" Satipatthana Sutta, that does include a description of the four initial concentrations. "Right concentration" includes "one-pointedness of mind": And what… is the (noble) right concentration with the causal associations, with the accompaniments? It is right view, right purpose, right speech, right action, right mode of livelihood, right endeavor, right mindfulness. Whatever one-pointedness of mind is accompanied by these seven components, this… is called the (noble) right concentration with the causal associations and the accompaniments.” (MN III 117; Pali Text Society vol III p 114; “noble” substituted for Ariyan; emphasis added) Modern Buddhists don't agree on what "one-pointedness of mind" is, exactly. I would say look for the mind to move away from the head in the moments before falling asleep, then allow for that same freedom of movement in seated meditation. ... making self-surrender the object of (one's) thought, (one) lays hold of concentration, (one) lays hold of one-pointedness. (SN 48.10, Pali Text Society vol V p 174; parentheticals paraphrase original) Sometimes when you think that you are doing zazen with an imperturbable mind, you ignore the body, but it is also necessary to have the opposite understanding at the same time. Your body is practicing zazen in imperturbability while your mind is moving. (“Whole-Body Zazen”, lecture by Shunryu Suzuki at Tassajara, June 28, 1970, edited by Bill Redican) The way I experience "one-pointedness": There can… come a moment when the movement of breath necessitates the placement of attention at a certain location in the body, or at a series of locations, with the ability to remain awake as the location of attention shifts retained through the exercise of presence. That would be why nobody masters breath concentration.