"Going back to Vipassana-style meditation for a while."

[Mark Foote]

My friend Karan wrote me and said that he had been practicing with a Vajrayana teacher for half a year, but was going back to Vipassana-style meditation for a while.  I mentioned that on another thread.
 

C T commented:

 

In essence, shamatha practice is simply training the coarse, everyday mind to settle. I think it means the same in Vajrayana as well as Mahayana and also among the various Theravadin traditions. Only the approach and methods tend to somewhat differ.

 

My friend Karan responded:

 

I read C T's comment about Vipassana (and Shamatha) being an essential part of all Buddhist schools including Vajrayana, and of course I agree that that is the case. Perhaps I should have chosen my words better. What I meant was that I will be going back to cultivating Shamatha with the breath as object and will incorporate Vipassana as it was discussed in the Early Buddhist texts. What I won't be doing for a while is the deity visualisation, the Bodhisattva aspirations and the practices derived from Yoga that are distinguishing features of Vajrayana practice.

 

You asked about my impression of Vajrayana. I think it is definitely a powerful set of practices, but it's also clear that it's really Tantra which has been customised to incorporate Buddhist elements. There are other schools of Tantra in Hinduism which are very similar but use deities from the Hindu pantheon and Sanskrit instead of Tibetan, etc. This kind of import and adaptation is something quite common to Indian religions in general. There are local gods and goddesses that are declared to be avatars of an existing Hindu god or goddess and thus their followers are added to the heterogenous mass of Hindus. It's a political move, there's no denying. The same thing seems to have happened with Tibetan Buddhism which also includes elements of Bön, Tibet's indigenous religion before Buddhism made its way to Tibet. The deity visualisation practices could probably work very well for some people (and perhaps I will try them again sometime in the future). They seem to be based on developing an idealized alter ego, and practicing remaining in it. Very different from other Buddhist practices, would you agree?

 

What I didn't love was the complexity (which I don't think is all that useful, and again has probably evolved because of socio-political accretion rather than any well-considered design) and the over-dependence on Tibetan cultural elements (which don't evoke the same emotional response in non-Tibetans as they probably do for Tibetans; and also they are very awkwardly translated into English). I really like the simplicity and elegance of the core Buddhist tenets, which other than the simplicity (for which I have a personal preference) is also something that's easier to practice for householders who have many other personal and professional responsibilities. And then the practices have so many variations among the various Buddhist schools that it becomes difficult to decide which particular set to pursue. Often I felt I was wasting my time navigating their intricacies when I could simply have been meditating. I am really only interested in the practice, not becoming a kind of Tibetan Buddhist hobbyist. But I'm still grateful that I managed to get something of an idea of how Tibetan Buddhism works at least. 

 

I think I'd like to add some things that Tibetan Buddhism does get right IMO. One is the emphasis on recognizing mutual interdependence and norms of ethical behavior that take this interdependence into account. Part of this was the analytical meditations that were meant to lead one to evaluate one's own past behavior for ego-driven and unskillful patterns. I found that these really helped. This is all more Mahayana than Vajrayana, but one has to undertake them anyway as preparation for the more advanced practices.

 

 

Karan is the author of Adventures at the Enlightenment Factory, a detailed accounting of a Goenka-style, 10-day Vipassana retreat he participated in, about a decade ago.

I asked Karan if I could post his comments about Vajrayana here, and he agreed—I’m not particularly familiar with Vajrayana myself, but I thought some of the other Bums here might have some thoughts?

 

 

[stirling]

15 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

I asked Karan if I could post his comments about Vajrayana here, and he agreed—I’m not particularly familiar with Vajrayana myself, but I thought some of the other Bums here might have some thoughts?

 

The practice of Open Awareness, which is resting in Rigpa, just as Shikantaza is in Zen practice incorporates both shamatha AND vipassana. The "object" is everything (or nothing): phenomena in the field of the dharmakaya, arising and passing away moment to moment. 

 

The Tibetan schools are NOT all the same. While Dzogchen is often a feature of some schools, it deeply entwined in the Nyingma school. The approach of the Nyingma school is "swooping down from above while climbing up from below", meaning that while there are the "relative" practices, there is ALWAYS the "absolute" practice of Dzogchen as part of the training and day to day work.

 

Quote

 

"It is very easy to say that the nature of everything is emptiness, and emptiness is inseparable from forms and appearances. However this is an extremely deep and difficult idea to thoroughly comprehend. The great Madhyamika is a subject as vast as enlightenment itself. Compared with the view of Madhyamika, what we ordinarily perceive is like the difference between what we see through a hole in a needle or a drinking straw, and directly seeing the sky itself. When we say "emptiness", it is the same emptiness, whether narrowly or broadly viewed, as in the straws-eye-view analogy, but there is a great difference in magnitude, understanding, and actual realisation. It requires more than mere intellectual understanding. A true understanding of emptiness grows deeper, ever more and more expansive, towards the realisation of the fundamental union of the absolute truth of emptiness and the relative truth of karmic law and phenomenon-it grows into the complete realisation of enlightenment.

 

Throughout our practice, we need to constantly make our mind broader, less rigid, and more open. This effort is worthwhile in so many ways. In our ordinary activities, our mind is often narrow and closed in upon itself; it is very difficult to achieve any goal, to really relate and have an unselfish attitude towards others. Such close mindedness can only lead to miserable consequences. On the other hand, if we diligently try to open our minds, we will naturally have compassion, faith in the three jewels, inner peace, and a pure perception of others. This attitude will not only lead to a happy life free from obstacles, but it is precisely the way to gradually understand the absolute truth and the profound nature of everything just as it is, in a completely open and unconditioned way. In both our meditation and the activities of daily life, it is very important for us to continually open our mind and free it from its limitations, gradually transcending concepts, mental darkness, conflicting emotions, and delusion. 
 
One can see in the life of exalted beings how powerful is the realisation of truth. The realisation of emptiness naturally provides boundless compassion and pure perception. The ultimate point of the absolute truth is the realisation of emptiness. The ultimate practice of the relative truth is the practice of bodhichitta, compassion. When we speak of the indivisibility of the two truths it is because when one realises emptiness, one will naturally and spontaneously have compassion; there will be no need to fabricate it. Practicing bodhichitta will automatically lead us to the understanding of absolute truth. These are not two distinct things; rather, they always appear together. This is why it is important to constantly associate them - trying to develop our understanding of the absolute truth while trying to use the skillful means of bodhichitta. Our practice of the two truths, relative and absolute, must go together inseparably. We must understand from above with the absolute outlook, while practicing climbing the spiritual mountain from below with relative practices, according to our individual capacity and inclination. That is what is meant in the Dzogchen teachings by the phrase, "swooping down from above while climbing up from below," the practice of combining the two levels of truth, also known as "understanding according to the supreme view and practicing according to ones ability." This is the most complete and efficacious form of spiritual practice, which can be applied in the context of almost any particular form of practice - including the ordinary activities of life." - Nyoshul Khen Rinpoche, "Natural Great Perfection: Dzogchen teachings and Vajra songs

 

 

 

Edited June 18, 2023 by stirling
Punk-tuation

[doc benway]

On 6/17/2023 at 8:43 PM, Mark Foote said:

What I didn't love was the complexity (which I don't think is all that useful, and again has probably evolved because of socio-political accretion rather than any well-considered design)

 

I've come to feel there is more to the complexity than mere socio-political accretion and that it may be a very useful component of the Vajrayana path. In a way, moving through the massive Madhyamaka teachings and process of debate is like pumping iron with the conceptual and rational processes of mind leading eventually to exhaustion as much as "understanding." As the exhausted mind rests it can then open to a non-conceptual frame of reference which approaches the realization of emptiness (of self). In much the same way, the complexities of tantra exercise the powers of visualization and concentration to the point of thorough exhaustion leading to a deep familiarity and trust in non-conceptual being... or something like that.

[Apech]

@Mark Foote 

 

Thanks for posting Karan's comments which are very interesting.

 

From a personal perspective I have found that doing long periods of what I might call procedural practice (like ngondro, sadhanas and so on) which involve repeated prayers, mantras, visualisations and so on, while they do produce certain results as intended,  I usually after a certain period have to take a break and just do sitting practice daily for a while.  This may have something to do with the need to assimilate what I have done sometimes - but at other times I simply feel that sitting is more genuine and natural.

 

I don't know if it is just me, and I am peculiar (well of course I am!) but the terms shamatha and vipassana are not really desriptive of practice in the way I do it.  They are more like descriptors of techniques for practice.  Which to me is a very different thing.  For me following the breath is a way in.  Breath counting the same.  By that I mean a method for going from normal waking consciousness to the beginning of sitting.  Entering in I would call it.  Vipassana just means intense awareness of the moment - which is how it could be translated.  Once you are 'in' and your awareness is bright - there is no technique after that.  Or that is how I see it.

 

I agree about what Karan observed about Tibetan Buddhism.  It's attraction is I suppose the beautiful cultural trappings, funny hats, bells, gongs and trumpets - cos it all looks glorious.  But I have always found it kind of 'meh' when it comes to actual progress.  I think that the DL and others who came out of Tibet in the 1950's made it their mission to preserve both Dharma itself and the Tibetan culture (who can blame them) - but the two things are not the same.  There is no cultural grounding in the symbolism for westerners unless they do some very hard study to accumulate it.  For instance who among us can say why otters are shown vomiting up jewels?   If you look back historically you can see the Dharma spreading and adapting - particularly from India to China - and also the great care that was taken to translate texts, maintain lineages an also to correct mistakes that crept in.  The situation in the West is much worse - where translation terms are various and inconsistent - making the establishment of texts in English for instance on which one can rely very difficult.  This has left, as I have remarked elsewhere many western practitioners basically still Christian (or Jewish) with dharma trappings.  Personally I don't think this works.

 

I don't agree that the Vajrayana is Tantra with Buddhist trappings or that yoga principles were added in.  I think this comes from an anachronistic view that there was something pre-existing called Hinduism which Buddhism took from.  Until the Raj there was no Hinduism - just a vast collection of dharmas (paths) within Indian culture.  Buddhism was one stream within that with a certain view and using many of the same terms as everyone else.  Different ways of practicing became more popular in different periods of history - because the external environment, the changing historical context was asking different things of the teachers.

 

I could talk about Goenka but I find the idea of a rigid forced regime like that completely antithetical.  Maybe I'm just lazy and don't like to get up at 4 a.m. to repeat what I did yesterday ... or maybe as I suspect the whole thing produces false results.  I think I'll just stay lazy. lol.

[Mark Foote]

I'd like to thank the folks contributing to this thread, for responses that certainly have significance to me.  I know Karan was occupied with work, there on the west coast of India, last week--I sent him a link, and I'm sure he'll send me a response, probably no later than next weekend.  So please check back!

Meanwhile, I can mention a teaching I attended about a decade ago, at a Shambala sitting/lecture.  The Shambala organization has a local hall in the town of Sonoma, in Northern California, and one day they had a Tibetan lama as a speaker.  I can't recall the teacher's name, and he was not dressed in the red monks robes that so many Tibetan Buddhists wear.  He sat with one knee on the floor, and the foot of the opposite leg in front of that shin, with the knee up, for about 50 minutes, I think (taylor pose).  

I believe someone translated for him.  The thing that I remember from the lecture was his description of the memorization of a mandala.  He said that when he was training, he had a picture of a mandala on a card, and he was told to look at it and memorize it, until he could reconstruct it in his mind, when he flipped the card over (to the blank side).

 

A curious training!  I myself have an image of my body, that I call to mind when I sit.  The most important bits are:

 

Gracovetsky, Farfan and Lamay speculated that in lifting weight, the abdominal muscles work against the extensors to align the vertebrae of the lower spine. They demonstrated through mathematical models that given an appropriate alignment of the spine, displacement of the lumbodorsal fascial sheet from its normal position by even a small fraction of an inch can provide critical support to the structure of the spine. Whether that displacement was to the rear, effected by hydraulic pressure created by the abdominals, or forward, as a consequence of action of the sacrospinalis muscles, the models were not sufficient to determine. The authors noted, however, that displacement to the rear by pressure created by the abdominals would at least in part explain the heightened activity of the abdominals in weight-lifting (Gracovetsky, S., Farfan HF, Lamay C, 1997. A mathematical model of the lumbar spine using an optimal system to control muscles and ligaments. Orthopedic Clinics of North America 8: 135-153).
 

The study presupposed a flattening of the lumbar curve, like that of a person bent over to lift weight from the floor, but acknowledged that the control of the ligament system afforded by activity between the abdominals and extensors could not be directly accounted for in the models. My assumption is that a bent-knee posture like the lotus can engage the mechanism of fascial support the authors described, through alignment of the vertebrae of the spine.

Stretch in the ilio-tibial bands sets off reciprocal innervation of the left and right sartorious muscles, and consequently reciprocal activity in the tensor and gluteous muscles. The result can be a stretch in the fascia sheet behind the sacrum (and the lower spine).
 

The activity of the extensor muscles behind the sacrum might also bear on the displacement of fascia. Dr. H. F. Farfan wrote:

 

There is another peculiarity of the erector muscles of the spine. Below the level of the fifth lumbar vertebra, the muscle contracts in a compartment enclosed by bone anteriorly, laterally, and medially. Posteriorly, the compartment is closed by the lumbodorsal fascia. When contracted, the diameter of the muscle mass tends to increase. This change in shape of the muscle may exert a wedging effect between the sacrum and the lumbodorsal fascia, thereby increasing the tension in the fascia. This may be one of the few instances where a muscle can exert force by pushing. 

 

(“Mechanical Disorders of the Low Back”, H. F. Farfan, p 183)

 

Farfan doesn’t address whether or not the “wedging effect” between the sacrum and the lumbodorsal fascia might contribute to the displacement of the lumbodorsal fascia behind the lower spine, nor does he discuss how the rotation of the tailbone and sacrum might affect the location of the tension produced by the “wedging effect” of the extensor muscles.

Karan sent a picture that I believe illustrates the feeling and effect of some of these mechanics, and particularly of "one-pointedness of mind" in the lower abdomen (the bowl with concentric circles)--he didn't say where he got it (the links aren't active):

 

 

 

 

Edited June 19, 2023 by Mark Foote

[C T]

Mongoose, rather than otters. 

Spitting, not vomiting. 

 

👍

 

"[The mongoose] is believed to be the source of all gems".

Edited June 19, 2023 by C T

[C T]

To realign some concepts and notions regarding tantra in the context of Tibetan Buddhism. 

 

 

 

The word tantra is seldom used in Tibetan Buddhism, and usually refers to the body of tantric scriptures. The terms Mantrayāna or Vajrayāna are more commonly used in reference to a doctrinal system. The term Vajrayāna refers to the spiritual path that is immutable-the Diamond Vehicle that leads to the realization of the enlightenment mind and that is ever present, although currently obscured by our ignorance. Etymologically, the word tantra may be understood as a continuum, a thread or lineage that gives continuity to the teachings, much like the genetic code that determines the form insects, birds, and all sentient creatures take at birth. So tantra, in the Buddhist sense, may be understood as that genetic code that links our buddha nature through successive incarnations until enlightenment is attained. And so a Vajrayāna initiation in one lifetime may result in a rebirth as a Buddhist or as one who embarks on the bodhisattva path.

 

~ HH Sakya Gongma Rinpoche 

Edited June 20, 2023 by C T

[Apech]

13 hours ago, C T said:

Mongoose, rather than otters. 

Spitting, not vomiting. 

 

👍

 

"[The mongoose] is believed to be the source of all gems".

now of course that makes perfect sense !!!!

[C T]

Tsoknyi Rinpoche pointing out a basic approach to vipassana and shamatha from a mahayana perspective, and how the two are inseparably entwined. The investigative aspect, and the ensuing experiential aspect, neither of which are really methods of practice per se, but rather, exercises in contemplation. 

 

Quote

 

Why does our sense of self feel so real, permanent, and solid? It’s because we have frozen the naturally light, fluid, and open experience of the mere I, creating endless arrays of conceptual boxes. Even when we investigate and see that all phenomena, including the mere I, lack real existence, we typically do not feel it—it remains in the head and can have a cold, arid, lifeless quality that is not fundamentally transformative. The reified I changes with new information but does not transform. We try repeatedly to change our lives and do this and that practice, but we continue to get stuck and frustrated; then we end up going the wrong direction and losing our way. This is because the cognitive mind, so strongly developed and employed in the speedy modern world, can know feelings but does not feel the feelings fully. So like a bird with one wing trying to fly, we don’t get very far.

 

We need to train and educate the clarity aspect of mind in harmony with the subtle body, the underlying nature of which is essence love. The Tibetan term for essence love is nying-je, which is translated as “noble heart” or “lord of the heart.” It refers to a quality of heart that is completely unconditional and free from all attachment. This kind of love—a spark of buddhanature that resides within all of us—is contrasted with conditional love, which is based on various levels of giving and receiving love. Essence love is the pure feeling within and behind all conditional feelings. Once we connect again and again with this essence love, having cultivated a nonjudgmental mind, our dharma practice can be authentic and life changing. Otherwise there is the danger of using dharma as a kind of pretense, a game of self-deception.

 

 

[Apech]

Feeling hard up?  Get yourself a pair of mongooses (mongeese?)

 

[Mark Foote]

12 hours ago, C T said:

 

Tsoknyi Rinpoche pointing out a basic approach to vipassana and shamatha from a mahayana perspective, and how the two are inseparably entwined. The investigative aspect, and the ensuing experiential aspect, neither of which are really methods of practice per se, but rather, exercises in contemplation. 

 

'... We need to train and educate the clarity aspect of mind in harmony with the subtle body, the underlying nature of which is essence love. The Tibetan term for essence love is nying-je, which is translated as “noble heart” or “lord of the heart.” It refers to a quality of heart that is completely unconditional and free from all attachment. This kind of love—a spark of buddhanature that resides within all of us—is contrasted with conditional love, which is based on various levels of giving and receiving love. Essence love is the pure feeling within and behind all conditional feelings. Once we connect again and again with this essence love, having cultivated a nonjudgmental mind, our dharma practice can be authentic and life changing. Otherwise there is the danger of using dharma as a kind of pretense, a game of self-deception.'

 

 

From my most recent post, on my site:
 

In my experience, the “placement of attention” by the movement of breath only occurs freely in what Gautama described as “the fourth musing”:

 

Again, a (person), putting away ease… enters and abides in the fourth musing; seated, (one) suffuses (one’s) body with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind so that there is not one particle of the body that is not pervaded with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind.

 

(AN III 25-28, Pali Text Society Vol. III p 18-19, see also MN III 92-93)

 

 

The “pureness of mind” refers to the absence of any intention to act. Suffusing the body with “purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind” is widening awareness so that there is “not one particle of the body” that cannot become the location where attention is placed [by the movement of breath, without intention]. 

 

Tsoknyi Rinpoche spoke about "the clarity aspect of mind in harmony with the subtle body".  Is that not "purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind so that there is not one particle of the body that is not pervaded with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind"?

 

Essence love is the pure feeling within and behind all conditional feelings. Once we connect again and again with this essence love, having cultivated a nonjudgmental mind, our dharma practice can be authentic and life changing.

 

(Tsoknyi Rinpoche)

 

 

More straightforward, for me:

 

... in order to “lay hold” [of one-pointed awareness], carriage of the weight of the body must fall to the ligaments and volitive activity in the body must be relinquished. 

 

Body and mind dropped off is the beginning of our effort.

 

(Eihei Dogen, “Dogen’s Extensive Record, Eihei Koroku, #501, tr Leighton and Okumura p 448)

 

 

“One-pointedness” can shift, as every particle of the body (with no part left out) comes into the placement of attention.  At the moment when “one-pointedness” can shift as though in open space, volition and habit in the activity of inhalation and exhalation ceases.  [Automatic activity of the body in inhalation and exhalation takes place; the effortlessness of the generation of automatic activity in such a moment, even if the activity is strenuous, is a natural draw.]

(A Way of Living)
 

 

 

[Mark Foote]

On 6/19/2023 at 7:51 AM, Apech said:

@Mark Foote 

 

Thanks for posting Karan's comments which are very interesting.

 

From a personal perspective I have found that doing long periods of what I might call procedural practice (like ngondro, sadhanas and so on) which involve repeated prayers, mantras, visualisations and so on, while they do produce certain results as intended,  I usually after a certain period have to take a break and just do sitting practice daily for a while.  This may have something to do with the need to assimilate what I have done sometimes - but at other times I simply feel that sitting is more genuine and natural.

 

I don't know if it is just me, and I am peculiar (well of course I am!) but the terms shamatha and vipassana are not really descriptive of practice in the way I do it.  They are more like descriptors of techniques for practice.  Which to me is a very different thing.  For me following the breath is a way in.  Breath counting the same.  By that I mean a method for going from normal waking consciousness to the beginning of sitting.  Entering in I would call it.  Vipassana just means intense awareness of the moment - which is how it could be translated.  Once you are 'in' and your awareness is bright - there is no technique after that.  Or that is how I see it.

 

I agree about what Karan observed about Tibetan Buddhism.  It's attraction is I suppose the beautiful cultural trappings, funny hats, bells, gongs and trumpets - cos it all looks glorious.  But I have always found it kind of 'meh' when it comes to actual progress.  I think that the DL and others who came out of Tibet in the 1950's made it their mission to preserve both Dharma itself and the Tibetan culture (who can blame them) - but the two things are not the same.  There is no cultural grounding in the symbolism for westerners unless they do some very hard study to accumulate it.  For instance who among us can say why otters are shown vomiting up jewels?   If you look back historically you can see the Dharma spreading and adapting - particularly from India to China - and also the great care that was taken to translate texts, maintain lineages an also to correct mistakes that crept in.  The situation in the West is much worse - where translation terms are various and inconsistent - making the establishment of texts in English for instance on which one can rely very difficult.  This has left, as I have remarked elsewhere many western practitioners basically still Christian (or Jewish) with dharma trappings.  Personally I don't think this works.

 

I don't agree that the Vajrayana is Tantra with Buddhist trappings or that yoga principles were added in.  I think this comes from an anachronistic view that there was something pre-existing called Hinduism which Buddhism took from.  Until the Raj there was no Hinduism - just a vast collection of dharmas (paths) within Indian culture.  Buddhism was one stream within that with a certain view and using many of the same terms as everyone else.  Different ways of practicing became more popular in different periods of history - because the external environment, the changing historical context was asking different things of the teachers.

 

I could talk about Goenka but I find the idea of a rigid forced regime like that completely antithetical.  Maybe I'm just lazy and don't like to get up at 4 a.m. to repeat what I did yesterday ... or maybe as I suspect the whole thing produces false results.  I think I'll just stay lazy. lol.

Response from Karan, to the thread here:

 

Interesting comments. Apech is right, of course, that the term "Hinduism" is a recent British-era invention ("Hind" is 'India' in Persian) so maybe it would have been better to say there was interchange of ideas between the Tibetan dharmas and the Shakta, Shaiva, Kaula dharmas extant in that time and place. That there was such interchange is corroborated by scholars like Alexis Sanderson. Also, something interesting about the word "tantra" — it can also be seen as derived from tanu + tra (the body method), as opposed to "mantra" (mana + tra — the mind method). That's just a linguistic aside of course; it doesn't prove anything about which practices fall under which rubric. I only mention it because this doesn't show up in English translations, though it's kind of obvious for speakers of most Indian languages.

 

 

[Mark Foote]

36 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

Response from Karan, to the thread here:

 

Interesting comments. Apech is right, of course, that the term "Hinduism" is a recent British-era invention ("Hind" is 'India' in Persian) so maybe it would have been better to say there was interchange of ideas between the Tibetan dharmas and the Shakta, Shaiva, Kaula dharmas extant in that time and place. That there was such interchange is corroborated by scholars like Alexis Sanderson. Also, something interesting about the word "tantra" — it can also be seen as derived from tanu + tra (the body method), as opposed to "mantra" (mana + tra — the mind method). That's just a linguistic aside of course; it doesn't prove anything about which practices fall under which rubric. I only mention it because this doesn't show up in English translations, though it's kind of obvious for speakers of most Indian languages.

 

 

 

Speaking of "the body method"--from one of Dogen's lectures, as recorded by his disciple Koun Ejo:

 

Is the way attained through mind or body? In the teaching schools it is said that since body and mind are not separate, the Way is attained through the body. Yet it is not clear that we attain the Way through the body, because they say ‘since’ body and mind are not separate. In Zen the Way is attained through both body and mind.

 

As long as we only think about the buddha-dharma with our minds we will never grasp the Way, even in a thousand lifetimes or a myriad of eons. When we let go of our minds and cast aside our views and understandings the Way will be actualized. One sage clarified True Mind (Reality) when he saw peach blossoms and another realized the Way when he heard the sound of tile hitting a bamboo. They attained the Way through their bodies. Therefore, when we completely cast aside our thoughts and views and practice shikantaza, we will become intimate with the Way. For this reason the Way is doubtlessly attained through the body. That is why I encourage you to practice zazen wholeheartedly.

 

(Dogen, “Shobogenzo zuimonki: Sayings of Eihei Dogen Zenji recorded by Koun Ejo”, tr. Shohaku Okumura, Sotoshu Shumucho pg 107-108)
 

 

As to the sound of a tile hitting bamboo, Shunryu Suzuki has a lovely lecture about the sound of a blue jay:

 

If you are not disturbed by the sound of the bluejay when you are reading something, the bluejay will come right into your heart, and you will be a bluejay, and the bluejay will be reading something.
 

(from the video, Shunryu Suzuki Discusses the Sandokai: Sound and Noise)

My explanation, from a post years ago:
 

If I were to try to explain Suzuki’s example, I would say that the sound of the bluejay shifts the location of awareness relative to the center of gravity, and the movement of breath that incorporates the shift reads the book.

 

Edited June 24, 2023 by Mark Foote