[ProgFusionRoman]

I thought I would start this topic and contribute to it on a regular basis.

I thought it might be interesting to quote Chinese scripture and then analyse it from the view of an INTJ to see what aspects of enlightenment we may find issues with.

Each will have two parts, the first part will be the story and the second will be the moral of the story.

Note that the comment by the zen monk at the end of each story may not at first appear to be answering the question asked. The purpose of the comment is to make the students think for themselves.

Anyway here is the first one.

Story
A young scholar went to visit a famous zen monk.
The Monk calmly poured the scholar a cup of Chinese tea.
Hower the monk kept on pouring the tea even though the cup was already full.
The scholar exclaimed that the cup was already full.
At the is the monk looked sternly at the scholar and said " your mind is like this cup, it is full of thoughts and ideas. For me to teach you about zen you must empty your mind."

Moral
Firstly, you will not be able to hear the truth of others if your mind is already made up with your own prejudices.

Secondly, if you quickly express your opinions then that is all you will hear and the opinions of others will be lost.

Issues for INTJs
- we tend to be very dismissive of other people's ideas before we have given them a full hearing. My wife will attest to this one.
- at the same time we know what we don't know which would be a positive for this.
- sometimes I am so focused on a task that t will also be dismissive.
- we put ourselves under pressure sometimes by trying to achieve a lot.

Anyway just a little about enlightment to pass the time. Feel free to add comments if you have or haven't behaved in an enlightened manner.

[John F Kennedy]

I was going to start a Zen thread of my own, so I guess I'll just add to this one. My question is whether it isn't harder to get the INTJ mind enligthened than other types of minds. To me, the INTJ mind has a very well defined ego that does a lot of thinking and is a strong ruler in a very orderly kingdom. On the other hand, Buddhism teaches not to think, not to rely on the ego, and teaches against what it calls discriminative thinking, which in turn seems to rely on judging. In addition, meditation is basically an exercise in sensing (the breath is a tactile feeling), something we are not used to pay attention to. Any thoughts?

[ProgFusionRoman]

Originally Posted by John F Kennedy To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I was going to start a Zen thread of my own, so I guess I'll just add to this one. My question is whether it isn't harder to get the INTJ mind enligthened than other types of minds. To me, the INTJ mind has a very well defined ego that does a lot of thinking and is a strong ruler in a very orderly kingdom. On the other hand, Buddhism teaches not to think, not to rely on the ego, and teaches against what it calls discriminative thinking, which in turn seems to rely on judging. In addition, meditation is basically an exercise in sensing (the breath is a tactile feeling), something we are not used to pay attention to. Any thoughts?

An enlightened person should use their intuition (get rid of the thinking as you said) and intuition is something we are good at. When we try to use our intuition, at that moment, perhaps we aren't thinking too much.

These stories are supposed to jar our mind back to this intuitive mode.

Further although the goal is to shut off our discriminatory thinking the process used to attain enlightenment - of analysing the stories and morals to eliminate discriminatory thinking - is a logical one. Not an efficient one mind you (it could be viewed as not efficient) as there are many stories just one after the other.

Given we are talking about the complexities of human life though I think the process is appropriate and could be viewed as efficient even though not ordered due to the simplification of many life experiences.

There is a problem I see though - if we try to be in our intuitive role too long will our Dominant Introverted Intuition (Ni) need balancing by our Auxiliary Extraverted Thinking (Te)? In other words will our mind force us to do more thinking? I mean this in the way Carl Jung described the conscious and unconscious, too much of one way and we compensate by behaviour another way (only just read some of this so not sure).

I hope you will contribute further to this discussion.

[John F Kennedy]

Hmmm... I know what you mean by compensation, although I am not versed in psychological theory. The question is whether sitting is truly a neutral position, i.e. just letting things be, or is it in fact "pushing" the mind in a certain direction. If it is neutral, then that might be the answer and all the power to it, but if it is "pushing" in a certain direction we are not used to, then it might backlash through the compensation you talk about (more thinking). I read either in Dogen or Kapleau that a mind used very much to thinking is harder to get enlightened, but then when it actually happens it is greater than a "regular" person's enlightenment.

[Allie]

I am sorry, but I can't seem to get past these first impressions. If I don't let them out, I won't get past this first hurdle:

1. Sifu, you're wasting tea!
2. Who's going to clean up this spillage?!?

*big sigh of relief--clean up is a necessary evil!!* Now that my S is satisfied, my N can take over peacefully.

Enlightened:
- I am opened to new ideas because I want to know if my personal views/position can stand up to scrutiny and challenges, so that I may fortify or revise my outlook as needed.
- Somethings are deal breakers for me, which I won't budge on, no matter what. Fortunately, the list is short...but precise.

I like this. Looking forward to the next installment.

[ProgFusionRoman]

Originally Posted by John F Kennedy To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Hmmm... I know what you mean by compensation, although I am not versed in psychological theory. The question is whether sitting is truly a neutral position, i.e. just letting things be, or is it in fact "pushing" the mind in a certain direction. If it is neutral, then that might be the answer and all the power to it, but if it is "pushing" in a certain direction we are not used to, then it might backlash through the compensation you talk about (more thinking). I read either in Dogen or Kapleau that a mind used very much to thinking is harder to get enlightened, but then when it actually happens it is greater than a "regular" person's enlightenment.

Yes I agree, that is the question exactly that I am pondering.

Sounds interesting, do you have more info about why it is harder?

Hi Allie, hope you like this one (warning: intuitive comment with no logic)
(I wonder if anyone but me gets my jokes?)

Anyway.......


Next Story
In ancient China there was a doctor whose job it was to accompany the army to battles and to patch up the injured soldiers so that they could go back out and fight.
However he became quite distraught at seeing again and again over and over that the very soldiers he helped would die in battle.
He questioned whether being a doctor had any meaning or significance given that he was achieving nothing in his own eyes.
After studying with a zen master he came to understand the problem in his thinking however.
Whenever he started to feel those same thoughts again he would just say to himself "I do this because I am a doctor".


Moral
He needed to understand that there is no self or other. There is no subjective or objective. He was relating himself only to the situation. Everything is just the way it is. The situation is just the way it is.


Issues for INTJs
- we differentiate ourselves with others by our intensely, at times, introspective nature.
- how acceptive of a situation/person are we if we do not understand it/them? We try hard to fit them into our knowledge systems logically but shouldn't we just let it go and be intuitive only and more in the moment.

[zibber]

ProgFusionRoman (am I ever interested in hearing some progressive fusion, by the way), are you sure intuition is the proper term to describe zenful clear perception? It is said of intuition (in its Jungian sense) that it is "using one's base of experience to identify similar situations and intuitively choose feasible solutions". This seems like a process utterly influenced by thoughts and experiences and thus distinctly different from the state zen attempts to guide one into.

Originally Posted by John F Kennedy To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

My question is whether it isn't harder to get the INTJ mind enligthened than other types of minds. To me, the INTJ mind has a very well defined ego that does a lot of thinking and is a strong ruler in a very orderly kingdom. On the other hand, Buddhism teaches not to think, not to rely on the ego, and teaches against what it calls discriminative thinking, which in turn seems to rely on judging. ... Any thoughts?

Pure zen isn't about banning thoughts, simply realizing one's detachment from these thoughts. Fancily put: realizing the fallacy of one's (essentialist) identification with mind.

Originally Posted by ProgFusionRoman To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

A young scholar went to visit a famous zen monk. The Monk calmly poured the scholar a cup of Chinese tea. Hower the monk kept on pouring the tea even though the cup was already full. The scholar exclaimed that the cup was already full. At the is the monk looked sternly at the scholar and said " your mind is like this cup, it is full of thoughts and ideas. For me to teach you about zen you must empty your mind."

Not to undermine your reading (
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
), but perhaps the monk meant to imply that even to view zen as just another thing (drop of tea) to grasp mentally, to form an understanding of, is to spoil your chances of ever apprehending it. Zen IS THE CUP
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

	Originally Posted by ProgFusionRoman To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	- we put ourselves under pressure sometimes by trying to achieve a lot.

True. This is seen in the doctor's story as well. Humans (and perhaps INTJs in particular) have the tendency to want to keep achieving things. Problem is: there are no achievements! You can change something materially or influence the thoughts of others, but then you are changing something materially or influencing the thoughts of others.

	Originally Posted by John F Kennedy To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	a mind used very much to thinking is harder to get enlightened, but then when it actually happens it is greater than a "regular" person's enlightenment.

Enlightenment is enlightenment, but there is definitely a difference in "difficulty" of realizing and maintaining clear awareness, I think. Question is: would logical, thinking types not be more capable of coming to that initial realization of their detachment from thought, despite the torrents of thoughts? In my experience, it seems that emotional, passionate (idealist) types are more stubborn in clinging to their concepts.

[John F Kennedy]

ProgFusion: I don't have any more info on the supposed difficulty of thinking types' attaining of enlightenment. It was just a remark I read somewhere. But I can kind of understand what they meant: the heavily thinking person's mind is a vast architecture built up around the governing ego. It is hard to deconstruct this architecture if only because of its immensity, but when it comes crashing down, the effect is greater than normal. Zibber said that on the contrary, if the person is open to argument, than it should be easier for them to attain. I'm not sure if that's true, as in enlightenment we are not talking about separate arguments but the undermining of the whole structure of reasoning. Logical types are open, but only to things that are logical.

Zibber: Yes, I know Zen is not about banishing thoughts that arise by themselves, but what I meant by "not thinking" is that Zen discourages active, intentional overanalyzing of situations. This I think is the moral of the doctor story: he is discouraged from active overanalyzing. He is told to do his job and concentrate on it.

[Allie]

	Originally Posted by zibber To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Question is: would logical, thinking types not be more capable of coming to that initial realization of their detachment from thought, despite the torrents of thoughts? In my experience, it seems that emotional, passionate (idealist) types are more stubborn in clinging to their concepts.

My sentiments also. INTJs are more pragmatic and realistic, so should be more open to further challenges, mentally or otherwise.

And/or perhaps it's just that I've been exposed to Lao Tzu somewhat early on, so this is not much of a struggle....

[ProgFusionRoman]

Originally Posted by John F Kennedy To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

ProgFusion: I don't have any more info on the supposed difficulty of thinking types' attaining of enlightenment. It was just a remark I read somewhere. But I can kind of understand what they meant: the heavily thinking person's mind is a vast architecture built up around the governing ego. It is hard to deconstruct this architecture if only because of its immensity, but when it comes crashing down, the effect is greater than normal. Zibber said that on the contrary, if the person is open to argument, than it should be easier for them to attain. I'm not sure if that's true, as in enlightenment we are not talking about separate arguments but the undermining of the whole structure of reasoning. Logical types are open, but only to things that are logical. Zibber: Yes, I know Zen is not about banishing thoughts that arise by themselves, but what I meant by "not thinking" is that Zen discourages active, intentional overanalyzing of situations. This I think is the moral of the doctor story: he is discouraged from active overanalyzing. He is told to do his job and concentrate on it.

I agree with your views here 100%.

You are supposed to face a situation with your "original face", answers I believe are to flow from your intuition, logic plays no part I think except as an aid, using the stories, to get back to an intuitive mindset.

The point of each story is to jar the students mind back to an intuitive mindset.

zibber - check the bottom of this thread for music.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Kisai]

"Son Hae opened his mouth, but no words came out. Just then, Dok Song swung round his oar and hit Son Hae full on, with such force that he was hurled into the river. He fell down through the water, and when he came up, sputtering and gasping, he grabbed on to the side of the boat. As he was pulling himself up, the Master shouted, "Tell me! Tell me!" and knocked him back into the river. But this time, as soon as Son Hae felt the sharp sting of the oar, his mind exploded, and he understood. When he surfaced, he trod water, smiling, and nodded three times. The Master beamed with pleasure."

Any religion that has one beating the crap out of the acolytes is a cool religion.

[ProgFusionRoman]

Originally Posted by Kisai To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Son Hae opened his mouth, but no words came out. Just then, Dok Song swung round his oar and hit Son Hae full on, with such force that he was hurled into the river. He fell down through the water, and when he came up, sputtering and gasping, he grabbed on to the side of the boat. As he was pulling himself up, the Master shouted, "Tell me! Tell me!" and knocked him back into the river. But this time, as soon as Son Hae felt the sharp sting of the oar, his mind exploded, and he understood. When he surfaced, he trod water, smiling, and nodded three times. The Master beamed with pleasure." Any religion that has one beating the crap out of the acolytes is a cool religion.

Firstly, the "moral" of this story is that you have to achieve enlightenment for yourself.

Secondly, I personally make a distinction (and I don't want a discussion of religion in any way in this thread so I wont bother to explain it all) between "religion" and the stories of "zen buddhism" used to achieve enlightenment.

Thirdly, damn funny story and a great post. I have read hundreds of these but not that one. I hope you have more.

[leopurrpurr]

Originally Posted by zibber To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

ProgFusionRoman (am I ever interested in hearing some progressive fusion, by the way), are you sure intuition is the proper term to describe zenful clear perception? It is said of intuition (in its Jungian sense) that it is "using one's base of experience to identify similar situations and intuitively choose feasible solutions". This seems like a process utterly influenced by thoughts and experiences and thus distinctly different from the state zen attempts to guide one into. Pure zen isn't about banning thoughts, simply realizing one's detachment from these thoughts. Fancily put: realizing the fallacy of one's (essentialist) identification with mind. Not to undermine your reading ( To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. ), but perhaps the monk meant to imply that even to view zen as just another thing (drop of tea) to grasp mentally, to form an understanding of, is to spoil your chances of ever apprehending it. Zen IS THE CUP To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. True. This is seen in the doctor's story as well. Humans (and perhaps INTJs in particular) have the tendency to want to keep achieving things. Problem is: there are no achievements! You can change something materially or influence the thoughts of others, but then you are changing something materially or influencing the thoughts of others. Enlightenment is enlightenment, but there is definitely a difference in "difficulty" of realizing and maintaining clear awareness, I think. Question is: would logical, thinking types not be more capable of coming to that initial realization of their detachment from thought, despite the torrents of thoughts? In my experience, it seems that emotional, passionate (idealist) types are more stubborn in clinging to their concepts.

Zibber, thank you for bringing this discussion back to the essence of Zen. I was wondering who would get to it whilst reading the replies.

I mean no intentional disrespect to anyone else here, and I think this topic is very clever. It is true INTJ nature to react and judge against the unknown, or against their own experience. As Zibber says, this places us at odds with true zen.

I must say, as someone who tries to practice basic zen, I am often torn between emotions, yet it is possible to reach a balance that works for us (hey, INTJ positive!)

"The art of zen is the art of life. Life is a creative process and best lived as one....The art of zen begins with the recognition that our experience of life is what we make of it...The creative life produces beautiful arrangements, not by imposing a rational or conceptual order on things, but by penetrating to their essence and working in harmony with the order inherent in nature. A life lived as art is triumphant and heroic, yet filled with the deepest humility. It recognises the spiritual reality of Oneness, while in the same time delighting in the uniqueness of multiplicity. When we are at one with the creative principal, we recognise that the universe is for us, and with us, and we allow it to do what it is doing through us, without resisting or holding on."

Ok, so the above is Zen, which is slightly distinct from zen buddhism, the second is an asian religion derived from Asian and Indian religions, but, still it is the basis, so lets just say, for an INTJ to embrace zen, all they need do is focus on self and motive, without undue analysis and act with a good will and sound ethic. They must remove judgements from their nature, and just fall back a little more into the role of passive observer. If they can get past their obsession, and pare their function down to basic and functional non judgemental thought processes, then they are well on their way.

Discuss!!!! You know you want to -picture slightly demonic grin here)

[ProgFusionRoman]

Originally Posted by leopurrpurr To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Zibber, thank you for bringing this discussion back to the essence of Zen. I was wondering who would get to it whilst reading the replies. I mean no intentional disrespect to anyone else here, and I think this topic is very clever. It is true INTJ nature to react and judge against the unknown, or against their own experience. As Zibber says, this places us at odds with true zen. I must say, as someone who tries to practice basic zen, I am often torn between emotions, yet it is possible to reach a balance that works for us (hey, INTJ positive!) "The art of zen is the art of life. Life is a creative process and best lived as one....The art of zen begins with the recognition that our experience of life is what we make of it...The creative life produces beautiful arrangements, not by imposing a rational or conceptual order on things, but by penetrating to their essence and working in harmony with the order inherent in nature. A life lived as art is triumphant and heroic, yet filled with the deepest humility. It recognises the spiritual reality of Oneness, while in the same time delighting in the uniqueness of multiplicity. When we are at one with the creative principal, we recognise that the universe is for us, and with us, and we allow it to do what it is doing through us, without resisting or holding on." Ok, so the above is Zen, which is slightly distinct from zen buddhism, the second is an asian religion derived from Asian and Indian religions, but, still it is the basis, so lets just say, for an INTJ to embrace zen, all they need do is focus on self and motive, without undue analysis and act with a good will and sound ethic. They must remove judgements from their nature, and just fall back a little more into the role of passive observer. If they can get past their obsession, and pare their function down to basic and functional non judgemental thought processes, then they are well on their way. Discuss!!!! You know you want to -picture slightly demonic grin here)

Just one thing - Zen buddhism tries to "get away" from religions by using "koans" (stories) as can be read on Wikipedia. Hence my "distinction" comment in an earlier post.

[zibber]

I think the inherent lack of dogma (ie the fact that any rationalization drives one further away from zen) is plenty ground for distinction
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


More stories!!

[MonkeyMind]

Thanks for starting this thread, ProgFusionRoman.
A lot of food for thoughts and letting them go, too.

[John F Kennedy]

I think the "no dogma" claim is absolutely preposterous. Every religion claims their beliefs are not dogma - that they are the truth, simply. People don't just start sitting for no apparent reason - their path to the cushion is a result of inculcated beliefs, and though the path makes use of subversion of beliefs as such, the basic tenets are there. Even the belief in the ego as defined by Buddhists is dogmatic: there is no proof that it actually exists, and modern psychology describes the "ego" differently.

[ProgFusionRoman]

Originally Posted by John F Kennedy To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I think the "no dogma" claim is absolutely preposterous. Every religion claims their beliefs are not dogma - that they are the truth, simply. People don't just start sitting for no apparent reason - their path to the cushion is a result of inculcated beliefs, and though the path makes use of subversion of beliefs as such, the basic tenets are there. Even the belief in the ego as defined by Buddhists is dogmatic: there is no proof that it actually exists, and modern psychology describes the "ego" differently.

Good discussion.......but.... I would like from now on for everyone to please (with sugar on top) to take out the word "religion" in this thread and focus purely on the Koans as a tool to achieving an intuitive state of mind otherwise the thread may go off in a completely different direction.

More stories soon.

[reb]

one of my favorites:

student- 'Master, what does one do before enlightenment?'

Master- 'chop wood, carry water.'

student-'Master, what does one do after enlightenment?'

Master-'chop wood, carry water'.

and one of my own dictums....the more one speaks of enlightenment, the more slippery enilghtenment becomes....lol! i still enjoy alan watts, however, so perhaps i will never become enlightened...i'd settle for losing 20 # anyway....

[John F Kennedy]

Originally Posted by Kisai To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Son Hae opened his mouth, but no words came out. Just then, Dok Song swung round his oar and hit Son Hae full on, with such force that he was hurled into the river. He fell down through the water, and when he came up, sputtering and gasping, he grabbed on to the side of the boat. As he was pulling himself up, the Master shouted, "Tell me! Tell me!" and knocked him back into the river. But this time, as soon as Son Hae felt the sharp sting of the oar, his mind exploded, and he understood. When he surfaced, he trod water, smiling, and nodded three times. The Master beamed with pleasure."

I'm not sure if I fully understand this one. It seems here that Dok Song is using in turn a method of encouragment ("tell me, tell me") and discouragement (hits him so hard he's unable to respond). This, as an illogical, contradictory practice results in confusion, and then supra-logical understanding. The method seems to be in line with the idea of doing and not doing at the same time, or action in stillness and stillness in action. This became translated into the mind of the acolyte.

[leopurrpurr]

A hundred hearings cannot surpass one seeing,
But after you see the teacher, that one glance cannot surpass 100 hearings.
His nose was very high
But he was blind after all.

[Antares]

Well, I do admit that most of the time when I encounter matters I already have a well thought-out opinion of it. If a teacher is teaching an ignorant student and me about the same subject, the other would be curiously asking questions while I'd be answering the questions; because I've already asked those questions myself. That, of course, makes me sound judgmental in the teacher's perception, because it seems I barely think for a minute before dishing out conclusions, even if the conclusions in reality took a lot of thought. Usually, when I encounter new things, I myself into a relaxed state; act as though it doesn't interest me. I don't know if it works for everyone, but as soon as I become bored I brace myself against prejudice, whether it's my own or that of the person presenting the concept. If my 'teacher' has very different opinions and he or she tells me to 'stop thinking and just listen', I do that and shut off all the 'voices' and simply let his or her words guide me. After they're done, I judge based on what they told me. I treat people this way too; everyone starts out with a clean slate with me.

[Takumi]

Originally Posted by Kisai To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Son Hae opened his mouth, but no words came out. Just then, Dok Song swung round his oar and hit Son Hae full on, with such force that he was hurled into the river. He fell down through the water, and when he came up, sputtering and gasping, he grabbed on to the side of the boat. As he was pulling himself up, the Master shouted, "Tell me! Tell me!" and knocked him back into the river. But this time, as soon as Son Hae felt the sharp sting of the oar, his mind exploded, and he understood. When he surfaced, he trod water, smiling, and nodded three times. The Master beamed with pleasure."

St Francis of Assissi stopped talking for the last ten years of his life. After saying, my words can never convey my understanding.

My understanding of the purpose of zen is to bring about spontaneous appropriate action without thought. This is a teaching that cannot be taught directly.

Another concept is illustrated in this story.

A traveler walking down a path in the forest encounters two ferocious man eating tigers. He turns and runs for his life, but soon finds himself cornered at the top of a cliff with nowhere else to run. He scrambles down the cliff on a vine hoping to elude the tigers, but as he gets halfway down he realizes the tigers have beat him to the bottom and are waiting for him. As he starts to climb back up a pair of rats appear and start gnawing on the vine, he cannot climb quickly enough to avoid falling. Just at that moment he sees a ripe red strawberry growing out of the side of the cliff. He plucks the strawberry and eats it, and it is utterly delicious.

I love teaching stories.

[John F Kennedy]

Originally Posted by Takumi To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

A traveler walking down a path in the forest encounters two ferocious man eating tigers. He turns and runs for his life, but soon finds himself cornered at the top of a cliff with nowhere else to run. He scrambles down the cliff on a vine hoping to elude the tigers, but as he gets halfway down he realizes the tigers have beat him to the bottom and are waiting for him. As he starts to climb back up a pair of rats appear and start gnawing on the vine, he cannot climb quickly enough to avoid falling. Just at that moment he sees a ripe red strawberry growing out of the side of the cliff. He plucks the strawberry and eats it, and it is utterly delicious.

To me the animals on both sides of the cliff are human thoughts that corner the mind into a deplorable situation if you perceive them as real. There's always a way out - usually through sense experience and attention to the environment, symbolized by the strawberry.

[ProgFusionRoman]

Originally Posted by Takumi To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

St Francis of Assissi stopped talking for the last ten years of his life. After saying, my words can never convey my understanding. My understanding of the purpose of zen is to bring about spontaneous appropriate action without thought. This is a teaching that cannot be taught directly. Another concept is illustrated in this story. A traveler walking down a path in the forest encounters two ferocious man eating tigers. He turns and runs for his life, but soon finds himself cornered at the top of a cliff with nowhere else to run. He scrambles down the cliff on a vine hoping to elude the tigers, but as he gets halfway down he realizes the tigers have beat him to the bottom and are waiting for him. As he starts to climb back up a pair of rats appear and start gnawing on the vine, he cannot climb quickly enough to avoid falling. Just at that moment he sees a ripe red strawberry growing out of the side of the cliff. He plucks the strawberry and eats it, and it is utterly delicious. I love teaching stories.

Good one. The moral of this one is:

One tiger is the past. The second (and then the 1st also due to their being no choice) the future. Don't worry about either the past or future instead enjoy the current moment intuitively. To be happy act intuitively no matter what the environment (problems etc) is so as to not have the environment determine your happiness.

This thread seems to have some good momentum.

New story:
An old warrior was at his home admiring an antique precious cup that meant a lot to him. He dropped it accidentally but was able to catch it before it hit the floor. He then thought about all the wars he had fought in and that he had faced death so many times yet questioned why he was afraid of just a small antique being broken.

He came to understand that he was thinking about what he liked and what he disliked. By labelling the cup this way that is why he panicked.

He then threw the cup to the ground as if it was worthless.

Moral
By thinking about gain and loss (important/unimportant, good/bad etc) we will feel happy or sad again depending upon the "environment".
To be happy act intuitively no matter what the environment (problems etc) is so as to not have the environment determine your happiness.

Issues for INTJs
- we contingency plan for even relatively lower percentage chance events. We are therefore future looking rather than being in the moment.
- we get stressed from contingency planning (affected by the environment).
- if someone threw my computer the ground, after all the work I have done on setting it up, I would mostly likely "lose it" (joke...hahaha..that is as good as they get from me folks...hopless ay?)