Seikan Čech, Part Seven
Med: The picture frame metaphor really helps me, in relationship to acceptance and trust. I am compelled to ask one more question, and then I would like to conclude the interview. I have thoroughly enjoyed this process and want to thank you so much for participating and sharing so much. My last question has to do with the apparent duality present in the recognition of the picture frame and the recognizer of the picture frame. Do you see a relationship here between witness and picture, or is this question another "out-of-body" entertaining of ideas?
Seikan: Metaphors can be helpful, so long as we let go of them before too long. If one metaphor works from one angle, it will not work from another. This is why practicing Zen and sharing ideas about Zen are in different ballparks. Ideas, even the most interesting ones, are essentially about creating stops and closing things down, whereas Zen practice is more about opening up and letting things move. So in dealing with ideas, the most Zen way is perhaps to contradict one idea with the next, hence the Zen method of Koan practice.
But you are right about the presence of duality - and not just between "recognition" and "recognizer" in the picture frame metaphor, but as earlier mentioned also between "intent" and "letting go" in the way we normally begin to practice. Without the presence of duality, there would be no need to practice Zen in the first place. But then in the course of practice, especially from the core of sitting meditation, duality begins to recede and reality sets in. In practice even the duality between the relative and the absolute is not a real issue - "form is emptiness, and emptiness is form".
Med: I understand. Of course. Well said. Thank you so much for your willingness to share and discuss your understanding of Zen and meditation practice in this meditation interview.
Continue reading >> Part Eight