Just a state of mind?

[tai chi hermit]

I training in any martial art or even anything really, just a state if mind? You may repeat the form and movements over and over and your muscles may get use to it but actually is everything just a simple state of mind?

[Scott R. Brown]

I training in any martial art or even anything really, just a state if mind? You may repeat the form and movements over and over and your muscles may get use to it but actually is everything just a simple state of mind?

Hi tai chi hermit,

Well yes it is, but to explain it comprehensively would take a book.

In somewhat truncated form: mind directs, the body and emotions respond. There are certainly some parasympathetic bodily reactions that are automatic. Many or all of these may be controlled with practice. Parasympathetic reactions are provided by nature to enhance our safety, such as flinching at danger or quickly drawing our hand away from fire. But this is not what is addressed when we say that experience is determined by mind!

Hui-neng relates an event in his life when he came upon two monks observing a banner moving in the wind. The two monks were arguing over whether the banner was moving or the wind was moving. It was Hui-neng’s assertion that it was their own minds that were moving.

Our perceptions and how we interpret our perceptions are functions of the mind. Our perceptions are filtered through our ego identity which draws conclusions about our perceptions, often incorrectly, and these conclusions whether correct or incorrect influence/determine our behavior. If it is our goal to perform righteous actions, that is, actions that are performed for the right reason, then it behooves us to learn to perceive clearly, without ego obstruction. Unobstructed perception allows us to make decisions based upon what is actually occurring and not what we “think” is occurring as determined by our ego filter.

Since our experiences are perceived with the mind and filtered through our ego, the amount of ego clutter we possess influences how we perceive events. How we perceive events will influence our reaction to them. Our reactions will influence the course of events in either a positive or negative manner. In order to understand how to act in the most beneficial manner we must acquire insight/wisdom. This is developed through introspection into our mind.

How effectively our actions are directed by conscious decisions is a matter of how aware we are of our mind and its functions; developing awareness takes practice. Awareness is developed through introspection. Introspection is merely looking into the mind to observe how it functions and how it influences/determines our perceptions.

When we react emotionally to an event we are behaving in a manner that is generally out of our control. This generally influences circumstances in a less than optimal manner. Just as a pebble dropped into a pond will create ripples that interact with all the other ripples in the pond, so our actions ripple outward to affect others. Through insight/wisdom/awareness we are able to better choose actions that create generally beneficial interactions.

Following the principles of Tao as illustrated by Yin-Yang we must understand that even negative reactions may create a positive result. In the end it is each of us that will determine for ourselves whether an interaction is measured as beneficial or detrimental based upon what we bring to the event. It is inherently not our responsibility how others choose to interpret our actions. We are concerned about our own actions because of how obstructed perception influences ourselves negatively.

The greater the self-awareness we have the greater control/freedom we have over our actions. With awareness we become free to choose our actions, rather than being at the mercy of actions occurring as a consequence of preconditioned responses.

Even programmed behaviors such as learning a movement until it becomes a spontaneous reaction is a function of the mind. It was a mental decision to learn and practice until the action became automatic. Our mind conditioned our body’s reaction. Our mind and body possesses this ability so that we can use our awareness in a more efficient manner. If we had to concentrate deeply every time we performed any action we would barely be able to perform any action at all much less numerous ones at the same time.

Habituation of action creates automatic responses that can also work to our detriment at times. So it is beneficial to periodically evaluate the benefit of habitual reactions. You don’t want to accidentally punch out your child when they startle you because you have trained yourself to react in a particular manner to surprises. Awareness provides a means of mediating our conditioned reactions.

Introspection is the means to accomplish this. Many meditative practices are meant to help us transcend the ego in order to clearly perceive circumstances without obstruction.

[sunfist]

I think its a chicken-egg question. All things may begin with the mind, but you must then be able to manifest them physically. Both sides of the equation are required, or roaming gangs of sport fighters will beat you up and steal your lunch money.

[Doc Stier]

Scott:

You write with such authority, seemingly as if you have completely mastered the subject matter you describe. Is that true? Have you personally eliminated the "ego clutter" responsible for "obstructed perceptions" from your own mind? Do you really "perceive clearly, without ego obstruction" as a normal course, and really "make decisions based upon what is actually occurring, not what you 'think' is occurring as determined by your ego filter"? Do you believe that you "are able to better choose actions that create generally beneficial interactions" due to your level of "insight/wisdom/awareness"? If so, perhaps you would also share the methods you used to transcend your ego to this level.

Thanks.

Doc

[cjurakpt]

Scott:

You write with such authority, seemingly as if you have completely mastered the subject matter you describe. Is that true? Have you personally eliminated the "ego clutter" responsible for "obstructed perceptions" from your own mind? Do you really "perceive clearly, without ego obstruction" as a normal course, and actually "make decisions based upon what is actually occurring, not what you 'think' is occurring as determined by your ego filter"? Do you believe that you "are able to better choose actions that create generally beneficial interactions" due to your level of "insight/wisdom/awareness"? If so, perhaps you would also share the methods you used to transcend your ego to this level.

Thanks.

Doc

let the "Dharma combat" begin...

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi Doc,

There is no such thing as Mastery in my opinion, it is a relative term. After a certain level of understanding is reached one realizes there is no such thing as mastering a subject, an ability, a skill, or a perspective. This is because there is always something else to accomplish or something else to learn from the vantage point of where one finds themselves at any particular time. If one considers themselves a Master it creates a label, a sort of mental barrier that tends to limit further growth. What occurs is they will tend to try to live up to their “idea” or “definition” of what they “think” it means to be a Master. This leads to contrived behavior. To contrive our behavior is to be out of accord with Tao. I do not concern myself with this label or with trying to “be a Master”. I focus on learning and growing.

To me life is about growth. One of the thoughts I try to live by is, “The only thing you take with you when you die is who you are!” So my time is better spent concentrating on improving my mental, emotional and spiritual condition. These are the values that are important to me. I do not seek to impose them onto others or compete with others. If there are others who are interested in interacting with me then I enjoy the time spent sharing ideas. If they are not interested that is ok with me too. It is not my responsibility to save the world, but to do the best I can with what I have at the place I am in at any moment in time.

I would say I have more insight than some and less than others; that is no different that anyone else, but inherently it does not matter. In the sharing of ideas I grow. I grow from sharing my own ideas and I grow from having others share their ideas with me. But it is not my responsibility to help others grow; that is their own responsibility.

From my perspective life is not a race and there is no competition, there is no hurry and it isn't important whether I know more than Mr. A or less than Mr. B. I don't seek to compete, but neither will I shy away from conflict. One of the principles of Tao as illustrated by Yin-Yang is that conflict stimulates growth. So if conflict is afoot and I am inclined to participate I will, when I am no longer inclined I retreat, once again, as modeled by Yin-Yang.

Some of my insights I have discovered on my own, others I learned first from others and then practiced applying them in my life. I know what I know from direct experience, but what I know is not anything new. Many of the comments I make have been stated by others for thousands of years and I will commonly quote them from time to time in order to lend some authority to my comments. My comments are not original thoughts. They are the same ideas stated by others restated according to my own experiences, temperament and ability to communicate.

I am not concerned whether anyone listens to me or not. If I say something that helps someone in their journey, I am happy to have helped. If others think it is a bunch of bull that is ok too, my comments are not for them. If my comments offend some that is their own burden to carry.

I write what I write to stimulate thoughts and introspection on the part of the readers, to help myself learn to communicate complicated concepts to a variety of individuals, to challenge myself in the arena of ideas with others and to provide myself with opportunities for growth. It is merely a game with no real winners or losers, just interactions that affect each other like ripples in a pond.

If you are asking if I think I know it all, well I have already answered that in a previous post. What each of us has to share is like 4 blind men who touch an elephant in different areas and then describe what they have experienced. None of the descriptions is wrong, but none of them are the whole picture either; having said that, the quality of each man’s description will be influenced by his temperament, experiences in life, education, ability to communicate, maturity, etc. Therefore some descriptions will be more helpful than others.

For example, an individual who is more articulate would likely have a more complete and understandable description of his individual experience. A man who has touched half of the elephant would have a greater perspective than a man who merely touched the trunk. If you closed your eyes and touched the same elephant after reading the descriptions of the other four men, you would have an expectation of what you would experience, but the experience would not be uniquely your own. You, (all of us), would have a tendency to filter our own experience according to what we expect based upon what we have learned from reading the description of others. In a sense, our experience would be the same as the others, but different as well. The key for each of us in this circumstance would be to allow the previous descriptions to guide us without limiting our experience. We may have a tendency to ignore experiences/perceptions that were not mentioned by the others or reinterpret our experiences/perceptions in order to make them conform to the description of the “experts”. If we do this we rob ourselves of our own personal insights into the experience.

I hope this response adequately answers your questions. If not I am happy to respond again later.

[Scott R. Brown]

let the "Dharma combat" begin...

You didn't say 1,....2...,..3, GO!!!!

[Doc Stier]

let the "Dharma combat" begin...

There is no 'combat' inherent to the Dharma, but only personal challenges in fully embracing it, IMO. Speaking of personal challenges, however, what are your thoughts regarding the possibility of experiencing a 'Karma Coma'?

Doc

[Doc Stier]

I hope this response adequately answers your questions. If not I am happy to respond again later.

Hi Scott:

Well, kinda sorta, in a philosophically wordy and intellectually roundabout way. Without directly answering any of my simple questions, you essentially answered 'No' to all of them, with the possible exception of the final question regarding "insight/wisdom/awareness", which I read as a qualified 'Yes' in varying degrees depending on what is being addressed. These seem to be realistic and honest answers, and thus quite adequate. Thanks for replying.

I disagree with other comments you made along the way, however. Notably, I feel that mastery of a subject or a skill is in fact possible, although certainly only from the perspective of comparative assessment among all those who engage in the same study or the application of the same skills, not inherently any unconditioanl mastery of anything in and of itself alone. I also believe the attainment of mastery in any field of study or in the application of any specific skill does not necessarily mean the end of further knowledge acquisition or the end of continuing skill attainment. Those who truly achieve any degree of mastery in any field of endeavor usually better realize how much potential still remains to learn and achieve even more than those of lesser knowledge and achievement often do. What others comparatively perceive as a great achievement, the true master perceives as a small accomplishment in the domain of infinite potentiality. A true master would thus never settle for the mediocrity of "contrived behavior".

Doc

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi Doc,

I answer questions according to my temperament. Feel free not to ask any more if you do not like the manner in which I reply.

Since those who achieve a modicum of mastery over any subject, according to your definition, understand there is further learning available, they have not fully mastered the field according to their own perspective, while it could be said to be mastered from the perspective of novice.

Their “Mastery” exists only relative to those with less expertise. To those with similar or greater expertise they have no Mastery. So, in essence, they have not Mastered the subject.

As I said, Mastery is a relative term.

I have explained my reasons for not accepting the term. I do not accept it for myself, I do not consider it a quality possessed by others and I question the maturity of anyone who uses it for himself.

[Daniel09]

In the past I have made the egotistical mistake of believing I was best and all knowing. That has changed in a relatively short amount of time, eg about 5 years. Now I do not look at the here and now as a stressful association, but merely another obstacle I must overcome. If I choose the wrong path I learn from the mistake and move on. I am no master. I believe no master is a master, they are simply those of higher understanding or "teachers". So even though I am quite young, I try to learn from those around me and help others.

In case you're wondering, I'm 15 years old, 16 in December. This may hinder your ability to take me seriously, but I look at myself and see a teenager going through mood swings. I can't stop them and I'd rather not. Better to get the feelings out than attempt to hold them in. I'm not in a philisophical mood very often so you probably won't get a good answer out of me very often. If in doubt, look to the stars. All the answers lie there.

[cjurakpt]

what is mastery? is it simply the ability to perform a technique with greater skill than another? or is it something that goes beyond technique?

mastery is not a static state - that seems to be agreed upon - you never stop evolving in one's mastery of a subject - however, I think that as some point one reaches a level that can be consiered mastery: perhaps this is when one has infused the principle(s) in question into ones daily life in a way that there is no separation between what one is and what one does - certainly not "contrived"; for example, if one's taiji practice is masterful, one not only moves in a way according to the principles when one does the form, but when one does anything - what kind of complete taiji mastery can there be if one moves "correctly" in the form but walks stiffly down the street, or throws ones back out lifting a heavy load because one was in a rush and didn't have proper awareness? taking it astep further, if one experiences pain because of emotional distress that one does not acknowledge, because one does not allow the proper movement to occur, what then? (BTW, to me this is where Daoist practice and Ch'an practice intermingle in a very interesting way - the appllication to daily life in the everyday dealings of society)

techniques are ultimately limited, because they are necessarilly constrained - you do a certain move a certain way; with mastery, one finds freedom - not in the sense of moving randomly or incoherently - rather, one is not bounded by the vehicle one uses to proceed: Hui Neng teearing up the Sutras was masterful (well, at least for Hui Neng! me tearing up theSutras is another story entirely... )

ultimately, how does one meet the challenge of life? habitually, reacting from one's old patterns? or masterfully, spontaneously, alive in each moment...

[cjurakpt]

There is no 'combat' inherent to the Dharma, but only personal challenges in fully embracing it, IMO.

I'd suggest reading Blue Cliff Record - those monks were fierce with each other!

Speaking of personal challenges, however, what are your thoughts regarding the possibility of experiencing a 'Karma Coma'?
Doc

I honestly don't know what that is supposed to mean, so I guess I have no thoughts on the matter prior to clarification

[Doc Stier]

I answer questions according to my temperament. Feel free not to ask any more if you do not like the manner in which I reply.

Since those who achieve a modicum of mastery over any subject, according to your definition, understand there is further learning available, they have not fully mastered the field according to their own perspective, while it could be said to be mastered from the perspective of novice.

Their “Mastery” exists only relative to those with less expertise. To those with similar or greater expertise they have no Mastery. So, in essence, they have not Mastered the subject.

As I said, Mastery is a relative term.

I have explained my reasons for not accepting the term. I do not accept it for myself, I do not consider it a quality possessed by others and I question the maturity of anyone who uses it for himself.

Scott:

Sorry to labor you with menial questions. And for the record, I don't care how you reply. You are certainly entitled to your personal opinions, just as we all are. In the grand scheme of things, our opinions are probably only of value primarily to ourselves, and even then but temporarily, since they often change over time.

One definition for the title of 'master' in the Webster's Collegiate Dictionary at hand is "One who has attained a superior skill in the use of anything", and in another definition as "One so proficient in skill as to follow his trade or profession independently and teach apprentices; an expert tutor or preceptor." Apparently no requirement is associated with the term which precludes learning more about one's field of speciality after attaining mastery of any skill, or which implies that one must know all that can possibly be known about one's field of speciality.

You firmly stated that “Mastery exists only relative to those with less expertise. To those with similar or greater expertise they have no Mastery. So, in essence, they have not Mastered the subject." Your summation conclusion is clearly not so as there is in fact a special sense of comradeship among those who mutually recognize and acknowledge a similar level of expertise in the same field of endeavor, while also acknowledging that such expertise within their common field of endeavor varies from one to another by degree, whether due to natural gifts and talents, or due to length of study and experience, or both.

Greater financial compensation often accompanies the application of masterful skills as a reward for consistently demonstrated excellence as well. This is certainly the case among martial arts masters, master healers, master marketers, master arborists, master carpenters, master musicians, and masters of virtually every professional and avocational field in which personal demonstration of superior individual skill results in the establishment of a personal name reputation for excellence and expertise in comparison to the vast majority of individuals in the same field of endeavor. In this latter sense, such mastery is indeed a relative term, as you stated, based on direct comparisons of personal skill.

Doc

[Daniel09]

Many people consider me a master of computer graphics, but does that really make me a master? No, that makes me an adept I suppose. I understand what you're saying and so does scott. What we mean is in the actual, real life sense, not the definitive.