Paul wrote:
"It got me wondering if the monks who developed the
use of shakuhachi
for
SuiZen were on the same track as Vipassana practice
(which is an
ancient
buddha meditation practice anyway) and just
approaching it from a
different angle (ie: using the flute as a tool to
focus, as opposed to
just sitting meditation)."
I wonder about the context for shakuhachi playing as
"meditation". I still have not been able to find out
what kind of schedule the komuso lived by (if anyone
knows I'd really love to hear about it!) But I get the
idea that they did perhaps a lot of SITTING zen. Also
perhaps zen as a practise can be termed as Vipassana.
From what I hear about zen practice, they may start
sometimes with counting the breath, which seems to be
to be Shamata (concentration) then moving on from that
to Vipassana (insight). What you qouted seems to be
from Goenka who teaches a very specific form of
vipassana. But there are many other techniques. And
perhaps it is through good training in zazen that then
their shakuhachi practice is able to also become a
practice. I have heard that suizen rather than meaning
"blowing zen" may be actually an abbreviation of
"blowing and zen are one". Perhaps then this can be
accomplished through the solid founadtion of zazen.
Karl wrote:
"While I agree that Mahayana Buddhism is generally
associated with the Bodhisattva ideal and that
emptiness is a
significant doctrinal focus I'm not sure I go along
with the strong
distinction made in the west between Hinayana and
Mahayana,.e.g. that
Hinayana is more concerned with personal development
than
compassionate action."
Perhaps it depends less on the texts than on the
actual living tradition. All Mahayana practises in
Tibet, for example, are preceded by arousing
Bodhichitta - the wish that all beings be free from
suffering and have happiness. That is done before
every practice session. And at the end of every
session also, any merit generated from the action done
is dedicated to the benefit of all beings. Any
practice done, you see, is done for the sake of all
beings. That is the reason for practice. On the other
hand, the motivation for practice in Theravada seems
to be for onself to escape suffering. That is, for
personal freedom. This seems to therefore display a
large difference in emphasis. And this in turn seems
to manifest different results.
"saying forget all that and just play, i.e. playing
music is
as much a spiritual practice as anything else, seems
TOO broad. "
I tend to agree. I wonder what "spiritual practice"
could mean? Just now as O think about it, the word
"union" comes to mind. For the Christians that may go
to say union with God. Same for the esoteric Muslims
and Jews as it seems to me. And then for the Daoists
and Buddhists too, a union. A going beyond duality. I
think this is all the same in the end.
Music perhaps can be practised perhaps in many ways,
and perhaps not all of them will tend towards union.
To me union implies some sort of dissolution of the
ego. Here I mean ego as the sense of self which gives
the apparentness of oneself being a "seperate" entity.
That makes "me" and "not me". In that may be the
seperation of "me" and "God", and so on. This entire
duality. Union to me may me dissolving this barrier.
Compassion is perhaps a contact with this level, where
one is not actually totally seperate from the other
beings. In that way, their suffering is not seperate
from ones own. Perhaps we could see that as compassion
as "fruit", and then training of actively generating
the compassionate wishes and feelings as compassion as
"path".
Anyway getting back to music, firstly perhaps good
practice such as sitting will effect our playing and
help it be a "spiritual" practice, from what we
already have from the sitting. But music as itself, to
be a practice in this way? Perhaps the focus on this
union, this nondualness. Perhaps that can be done as
playing in such a way as you "become" the notes. I
think memorization of the pieces is very useful in
this context. When reading the notation it perhaos is
more difficult to be nonseperated, as you are reading
the notes, and this may increase their seeming as
something seperate. Having memorized the piece
however, if the sequence of notes is no longer a
concern, it may be possible to to more go into each
note more deeply, and be "there", be really "with"
each note. You know? Then also we come to the
distinctin of shamata and vipassana:
John wrote:
"There's a large literature on concentrating on the
breath. Playing flute is concentration on sound.
Concentration meditation stills the mind."
Concentratin (shamata) seems to be a very good tool.
In itself it seems that is is actually of no
particular "spiritual" importance. In itself it may be
compared to letting a glass of muddy water settle -
the mud is at the bottom, but, stir it up and it is
the same as before again, so I've heard. Maybe then
openess of some kind may be the next phase. The
concentrated mind is prepared, and then a suitable
tool with which to go on to "insight" (vipassana).
In terms of shakuhachi, I am not entirely sure what
that would mean. One thing that may be possible, I
ponder, is concerned with any audience. Or, any of the
environment. When one plays, one is not isolated. If
the piece one plays is exactly the same every time one
plays, then it is. But, perhaps you are different
every time you play. Your feeling, your physical
condition. And, the environment. This may be any
people who are listening, or even simply the
surrounding plants or rocks, or the air, or the room
or whatever. Even with ones eyes shut, these things
are still there. Then maybe entering that level, where
these things are in actuality not sepreate from
oneself, then one might let the music arise from ALL
of that. If all these things are in reality not
entirely seperate from oneself, then really is it only
onself from which the music arises? Perhaps focusing
in this way, which is an open way, sensitive to the
things in ones present experience, maybe that is a way
one might practice. Open, sensitive, not
conceptualizing about the environment or anything -
just, really, "listening" so to speak. Maybe that is a
way?
If one wants also to explicitely include compassion in
the practice, then also it may be that one could wish
that ones practice will benefit all beings. This may
not have to be in a conceptualized way, such as "it
will benefit in such and such a way", but perhaps
simply the wish. We may not know HOW it may benefit.
But, the wish may take care of itself.
Just some thoughts.
Best wishes
Justin.
__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com
_____________________________________________
List un/subscription information is at:
http://communication.ucsd.edu/shaku/listsub.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 06 2006 - 10:00:47 PST