Joseph Maynor

No, but I think Ethics is not understood right in the way Enlightenment is currently taught. Zen has some insights here that I hope soon to be able to explicate in my writings. On the one hand there is no Ethics, that's true, but on the other hand there is. In Zen they talk about this as the contrast between soft and hard teachings. Right action can be real. In many contexts it's legit to consider right action. But you have to be smart and not cling to this in the wrong way. This is worthwhile to listen to as a little introduction:

I agree with this. But there comes a time when the training-wheels need to come off the bicycle.

Yes, but then why do you even need to categorize being so much then? By categorizing being you cheapen it. I'm gonna stop here so I don't get accused of being overly probing. Thanks for the good discussion Highest, I like you.

Which is it, me or not me? I'm confused now. Does being confuse? What is that which is capable of being confused?

When no thought is present, does the issue of direct experience even arise?

What that which which says "this or that is me"?

What does direct experience say about itself? What is that which sections out "direct experience" from being?

Why does it have to be you? Many people never seem to question this. It amazes me.

Relationships and connection are an avenue for growth that I only recently fully started to appreciate. I recall my buddy talking about all the lessons he learned from each girlfriend he had as I sat there perplexed. Now I get it. Top heavy people like me tend to over-emphasize thought as the vehicle and conduit for growth. But no, you have relationships, you have contribution (projects), you have health and fitness, you have art (creativity), you have action (right conduct), you have meditation (connection with being), you have travel (especially international cultural travel), and probably others that I'm missing. Avenues & Sources of Growth Thought Relationships Contribution (Projects) Health & Fitness Art (Creativity) Action (Right Conduct) Meditation (Connection with Being) Travel (Esp. International Cultural Travel)

I thought about this and observed this as promised for a few hours. Here is my assessment to your well-formed and respectful question. When no thought is there, the issue of choice is not there. There is no issue raised as to choice that is always there. The issue of choice is only raised when a thought is present. See, what the Mind wants to do is force this issue on every context without revealing that the issue itself is only a thought laying on top of what is happening. The Mind says, this must be what's happening. But that must is itself a thought.

Me My Self And I

Why is your Ego invested in feeling or appearing humble? What are the pros and cons that feeling or appearing humble have on your life? Maybe write out a list of pros and cons like this: Pros and cons to my life of feeling or appearing humble: (1), (2), (3) ... etc. Try to come up with as many as you can, don't just list 3.

For newbies I would suggest the 60 mins per day for 1 hour per day. As you get more advanced you can meditate for shorter segments. I meditated for 60 mins per day for a couple of years religiously and I can't over-stress the impact this had on my Enlightenment work and practice.

Ok. I don't want to get pushy but lemme give you one final thought to consider and then I'll go away. What is that which thinks there's a choice or no choice? What is insisting that this issue stay on the chopping block? What is the issue itself?

When you pick up and throw a football are you forced by necessity to consider anything about choice?

The whole point is to get you to transcend the Mind which is something that Zen teaches you how to do better than anything I've ever seen. It takes you out of the whole Mental Matrix. You'll still have thoughts, but they won't have you on a leash. https://terebess.hu/zen/mesterek/Suzuki-DT-Introduction-Zen-Buddhism.pdf

What you do is transcend being hamstrung by the issue which is only created in the Mind. It's thoughts flapping back and forth over being, nothing more. It's blah bah blah. Being is not hamstrung or dependent on blah blah blah. So you carry water and chop wood and transcend letting these issues of the Mind distract you. If you pick up a football and throw it, that has nothing to do with the Mind's blah blah blah about choice vs. no choice. You just pick up the football and throw it and watch those thoughts, but you don't become fixated on them or sort of dominated by them.

Here's the general template: (insert your favorite mental duality) Not this, not that, not anything. Most people only grok "not this, not that". They miss the "not anything" part. That's why you need Zen teaching to cover that final bit. You can't beat duality with more duality.

Not choice, not no choice, not anything. Most people only grok "not this, not that". They miss the "not anything" part. That's why you need Zen teaching to cover that final bit. You can't beat duality with more duality.

Not this, not that, not anything. Most people only grok "not this, not that". They miss the "not anything" part. That's why you need Zen teaching to cover that final bit. You can't beat duality with more duality.

It's on his blog, towards the beginning if I recall. He drew a picture too.

Just be it, you don't even need to talk about it, that just adds a layer of thought on top of it. Even to say to be it is conceptual and is just a pointer. It is not a being either. It just is, and this is just a pointer too. Koan: "The monk asked the master: What is Enlightenment? The master replied: Have you eaten your breakfast? The Monk replied, yes. The master then replied: Well, then go wash your bowl. The monk experienced Satori."

Yes. But I spend a lot of time where I don't have any thoughts arise now. And I don't aim for thoughtlessness as a goal either.

Probably when you locate Awareness for the first time. That was the start of it for my Path. Watch this video:

I like to think that Koans are tools for transcending the Mind.