/r/zen: the self-nature is originally complete.

There are those who, upon hearing this teaching, rid themselves of conceptual thought in a flash. There are others who do this after following through the Ten Beliefs, the Ten Stages, the Ten Activities and the Ten Bestowals of Merit. Yet others accomplish it after passing through the Ten Stages of a Bodhisattva’s Progress.
But whether they transcend conceptual thought by a longer or a shorter way, the result is a state of BEING: there is no pious practising and no action of realizing. That there is nothing which can be attained is not idle talk; it is the truth. Moreover, whether you accomplish your aim in a single flash of thought or after going through the Ten Stages of a Bodhisattva’s Progress, the achievement will be the same; for this state of being admits of no degrees, so the latter method merely entails aeons of unnecessary suffering and toil.

-Huangpo

There you have it. Sudden as a knife thrust or kalpas of karma, the achievement of transcending conceptual thought is the same. A state of being. So if you haven't let go(because it's soooo easy, that's why y'all are Zen masters yesterday) better get to suffering and toiling I guess.

Or realize this whole business is useless because "there is nothing to be attained".

Elsewhere

I just finished a book titled “Ennin’s travels in T’ang China” by Edwin Reischaeur, which was cited in a related Wikipedia article. It’s not available online, but the book is about a Japanese Buddhist monk who traveled to China in an official embassy group of 3 ships in 839 to T’ang China, likely from a minor Japanese kingdom as Japan was not unified at that time.

Though the book is exhaustive in its detail, my main relevant takeaway was the descriptions of how safe, orderly and courteous travel through China was at the time, the embassy groups traveled with no fear of robbery, theft, or worse, and did not even have to bribe for passage at any point. The worst they had to deal with was overbearing bureaucracy.

I have long understood that Buddhism’s primary achievement in China, as well as Zen later, was its logistics. It fed, clothed, and housed hundreds of thousands of monks. The figure quoted in the book for the number of Buddhist monks around the time of Ennin’s arrival was 250,000 (also the number that were persecuted by the emperor at the time and forced to disrobe). No homegrown Chinese tradition had the interest or ability in creating such a monastic order of “homeleavers”, in Confucian-centric China.

All teachings that we are reading today from that time period come from that level of sophisticated organization. More importantly, all the cases that we read were recompiled later in the much less stable, much more political environment of the Song Dynasty. The Tang Dynasty was the golden age of medieval China and was not replicated in any form later, at least in production of religious and philosophical material.

Two supporting quotes from Zhaozhao’s saying collection, who taught around the same time:

62 Another time the master said, “I have been here more than thirty years. Not yet has one Ch’an (Zen) man ever come here. Even if one did come, after staying a night and grabbing a meal, he would quickly move on, heading for a warm and comfortable place.” A monk asked, “If a Ch’an man happened to come here, what would you say to him?” The master said, “The thousand-pound stone bow’ is not used to shoot a mouse.”

And

490 Once the master arrived at Lin-chi’s (Rinzai’s)' place and began to wash his feet. Lin-chi asked, “What is the mind that the Patriarch brought from the west?” The master sad, “Right now, I’m washing my feet.” Lin-chi bent forward as if he had not heard the master’s words. The master said, “If you understand, then understand. If you don’t understand, don’t keep pecking over it. What will you do?” Lin-chi brushed off his sleeves and left. The master said, “I’ve been travelling for thirty years, and today I have heedlessly given an explanation to someone.”*

Most of us know about the custom of Zen monks travelling from temple to temple or house to house, and that was in so many words in addition to the existing monastic culture of monks living at those temples. The point of all this is to say that the culture at the time produced the teachings. One could also say that the teachings produce culture, but it is of course a process over time. Teachings come from India 700 years prior, the initial culture is developed. Then more teachings, and the culture becomes more sophisticated. Then Chinese develop their own teachings, and the culture gains further sophistication and so on.

All of that is to say, there could not be travel between monasteries, if there were not first monasteries, and there would not be monasteries, if there were not first monks. And there could not be monks, if there were not first teachings, that demanded one take monastic vows.

Since we can agree on that much, since it is fact and not opinion, here is my question, rather than trying to beat everyone over the head with the main point:

1. If you believe in the significance of the Zen teachings, how can you today, create, adopt, or approximate similar associated culture?

2. The related open-ended question: If you don’t think that being immersed in such approximate culture is important to understanding Zen teachings, why were they were all monks back then? Please make a full argument.

Since we lost all the translators in the forum, this may be a good way to re-orient the forum back to basics, this kind of discussion, rather than endless pontification on quotes out of context.

This is the 8th case from the Blue Cliff Record,

At the end of the summer retreat Ts'ui Yen said to the community, "All summer long I've been talking to you, brothers; look and see if my eyebrows are still there."

Pao Fu said, "The thief's heart is cowardly."

Ch'ang Ch'ing said, "Grown."

Yun Men said, "A barrier."

This whole case hinges on this note, “Teaching is said to be an act of ‘facing downwards’ since the transcendental cannot be spoken of directly; hence it is said that if one speaks too much, tries to explain too much, his eyebrows may fall out.”

So Ts’ui Yen, after a summer of lectures and answering everybody’s questions, asks the congregation wether he taught them Zen or not.

Pao Fu replies directly to him. If he wasn’t teaching people Zen, what was he teaching them?

Ch’ang Ch’ing argues that not only did Ts’ui Yen not teach it completely, he didn’t teach it at all.

Yunmen says that not only did he not teach it to people, Ts’ui Yen is getting in the way of people understanding.

Xuedou versifies it like this,

Ts’ui Yen teaches the followers;

For a thousand ages, there is no reply.

The word “barrier” answers him back;

He loses his money and suffers punishment.

Decrepit old Pau Fu–

Censure or praise are impossible to apply.

Talkative Ts’ui Yen

Is clearly a thief.

The clear jewel has no flaws;

Who can distinguish true from false?

Ch’ang Ch’ing knows him well;

His eyebrows are grown.

There are three parts to this verse and three arguments,

1) If Ts'ui Yen is a barrier, as Yunmen says, then he fails at being a bridge for people to cross over.

2) Calling out the limitations of a teaching is part of the tradition, it's not slander.

3) If there is no flaw in Ts'ui Yen's teaching, then his eyebrows growing are not a mistake.

I've argued that Zen is characterized by:

1. Communities based on the 5 Lay Precepts www.reddit.com//r/zen/wiki/lay_precepts
2. Teachings that are described by the 4 Statements of Zen www.reddit.com//r/zen/wiki/fourstatements
3. A tradition of historical records (koans) necessitated by the practice of public interview (dharma combat)

If this is pretty incontrovertible, because we have 1,000 years of historical records that prove this over and over... where does the confusion come from?

https://munsonmissions.org/2011/11/19/religiocentrism-and-religious-exoticism-two-sides-of-the-same-coin/

This story/parable is a model of Religious Exoticism. A person is raised up in a certain religious setting. It may be okay when one is young, but as one gets into High School and College, one begins to notice problems. Your church (or some other religious body) is full of hypocrites. They don’t live up to high beliefs. They seek to justify their pettiness with religious bumpersticker language. They, frankly, are a bit embarrassing to be around. BUT… then you run into people from some fringe religious group. You had never even heard of the group (or at least met an adherent) when you were young. But now you run into them in college, or on the Web, or TV, or bookstore or wherever. They seem nice and friendly. They express spirituality in a new and fresh way. They are sooo non-hypocritical. Their words are deep and like fresh water to your jaded soul.

This is religious exoticism… the fascination with religions or religious beliefs that you are generally unfamiliar with.

There's more:

https://academic.oup.com/book/3538/chapter-abstract/144774469?redirectedFrom=fulltext

explain why an overwhelming number of individuals adopt only a selection of doctrines and practices, remain superficially and temporarily involved, and may continue to explore other religious teachings and alternative therapies. The success of exotic religious resources is therefore both triggered and limited by their foreignness.

https://contendingmodernities.nd.edu/global-currents/buddhist-studies-whiteness/

Buddhist studies in the US is overwhelmingly white (and overwhelmingly male, although this is slowly changing), and has a certain level of privilege within the academy. This privilege is grounded in the whitewashing of scholarship related to Buddhism and the systemic erasure of Asian Buddhists within convert Buddhist communities. Historically, non-Asian academics who studied Buddhism relied on Asian Buddhist informants and translators to carry out their research, and these contributions have gone largely unacknowledged and uncredited. As a result, in the US, scholars with academic degrees are presumed to have a more authoritative understanding of Buddhist traditions than the Asian people and communities who have performed the “physical, emotional, and spiritual labor” of maintaining these traditions for the last 2500 years.

Welcome! ewk comment: When we talk about the trolling, harassment, vote and content brigading that has consumed the energy of so many people who have visited rZen, it seems like that energy could be more than the energy of the people who actually engage with the material, read a book, write a post, and even translate texts.

Understand why white males are struggling in our society, especially with religious exoticism, is key to communicating across a divide of race, class, and culture.

[370] Master Xitang Zang was asked by a layman, “Are there heavens and hells or not?” He said, “There are.” The layman said, “Do the treasures of Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha exist or not?” He said, “They do.” The layman asked many more questions, and the master answered them all in the affirmative. The layman said, “Are you not mistaken in saying so?” He said, “Have you seen an adept?” The layman said, “I have called on Master Jingshan.” He said, “What did Jingshan tell you?” The layman replied, “He said it’s all nonexistent. The master said, “Do you have a wife?” The layman said, “Yes.” The master asked, “Does Master Jingshan have a wife?” The layman said, “No.” The master said, “For Master Jingshan, it’s right to speak of nonexistence.”

Didn't see that coming. So the Supreme Vehicle doesn't welcome married people. Or is it that marriage doesn't welcome people without attachment? Weird, who doesn't wanna be told "The mountains, the rivers, the earth love you." when they come home from work...

An outsider [a non-Buddhist] asked the World Honored One [the Buddha], “I do not ask about the verbal, and I do not ask about the nonverbal.”

The World Honored One sat in his seat.

The outsider exclaimed in praise, “The great merciful compas­sion of the World Honored One has opened up the clouds of delu­sion for me and enabled me to enter [the truth].” Then he bowed in homage with full ceremony and left.

Later Ananda asked the Buddha, “What realization did the outsider have that he went away praising you?”

The World Honored One said, “Like a good horse, he moved when he saw the shadow of the whip.”

Ananda was the Buddha’s disciple, yet he did not match the outsider in understanding. Tell me, how far apart are outsiders and the Buddha’s disciples?

Walking on a sword blade,

Running on an ice edge,

Without going through any steps

He lets go over a cliff.

Ananda, known as the guy who learns things, did not understand, while some random guy who didn't even know about what Buddha taught, just watched the Buddha sit down and immediately got it.

Knowledge is not the way. Progressing through stages is not the way.

Let go.

Hi all.

I’ve engaged with zen texts in the past. One of the greatest problems I have when reading zen texts is that I cannot gather meaning from a lot of zen terms.

For background I study philosophy, primarily the German Idealist tradition and Heidegger. I also read a lot of Lacan and Nietzsche. I am familiar with most of the history and thinkers of western philosophy from formal education, but I only dwell with a few thinkers that come from it. I am not privy to much of the others. Given that, when I read a text I like to do so under several different lights. Some which shine and illuminate coming from the concepts and approaches of others I’ve read, some which are arise naturally, and others that come from the tradition of the text. The highest goal here for me is to see what the author saw, and this requires a great labor of understanding. This method exposes the charlatans.

It is fundamental to have an understanding and of the concepts that the author is handling and working with. An heuristic way to do this is by investigating the meanings of the words as they arise in the text. For me this is the preferred way to read someone like Hegel or Heidegger, primarily because when they say something like “Spirit” they’re not talking about what you’ll read in the dictionary under the heading of “Spirit.” While this is very laborious, and perhaps it’s possible to grasp the concept through a secondary work, it proves to be more fruitful and comes with a greater degree of success than depending on other’s reinterpretation which is more often than not muddied with their poor understanding of the concepts. A Zizek, Pippin, Beiser understanding of Spirit may not be Hegel’s. A lot of the works of philosophy in the work are also written pedagogically so that they are meant to teach the concepts through the tarrying with the work itself. They assume that there will be a lone reader who must depend on the work itself. Just read the first critique of Kant or the phenomenology of spirit by Hegel to see what I mean.

From my experience with Zen works the above does not apply. It seems to me that several of these works presume that the reader is already in a presupposed milieu of zen teaching. Some of the works seem to be tools that would be wielded by the teacher and assumes the attendance of lectures. It’s as if they will make some assertion which comes with the implication that it would be demonstrated face to face. “You must swing your bat as Ty Cobb has shown you.” The unfortunate fact is that I don’t have access to a Ty Cobb.

So, how do you gain understanding of these concepts which zen masters discuss if we aren’t able to be present before their faces? These concepts which only are superficially related to Buddhist teachings? Buddha-Nature? Mind? And what of all these meaning loaded metaphors? Moon? Bowls and robes? Shit sticks and cut cats? I’ve been in philosophy long enough to know that 95% of online discourse about philosophy is delusional, full of half-wit misunderstandings. I assume it’s the same for zen too. So please forgive my utter skepticism against those who claim to speak truly.

There seems to be a little bit of confusion surrounding the practice of Zen. When it is said that the practice is nothing, or that it can't be understood, or that one should start nowhere, these provisional words are not meant to become an idea that is implemented into some sort of methodology. Rather, these words are pointing beyond words and intellectualization. Being that dualistic modes of thought aren't being encouraged, nothing said is intended to motivate any sort of perspective or rationalization. I am simply speaking of what might best be described as absence.

All of the following quotes are from No-Gate Gateway: The Original Wu-Men Kuan. David Hinton. 2018.

Absence was often referred to as “emptiness” (空 or 虚), the emptiness that appears in No-Gate’s Comment, and described as the generative void from which the ten thousand things (Presence) are born and to which they return... Absence is emptiness only in the sense that it is empty of particular forms, only Absence in the sense that it is the absence of particular forms. In normal everyday use, Absence (無) means something like “(there is) not,” and Presence (有) means “(there) is.” So the concepts of Absence and Presence might almost be translated “formless” and “form,” for they are just two different ways of seeing the ever-generative tissue of reality. And it should also be emphasized that both terms, Absence and Presence, are primarily verbal in Chinese: hence, that tissue of reality is seen as verbal (rather than static noun), as a tissue that is alive and in motion.

.....

Absence does indeed represent the most profound and all encompassing of sangha-cases, teasing the mind past ideas and explanations at fundamental cosmological levels, and No-Gate made it his own. Indeed, No-Gate himself struggled for six years with the Absence sangha-case as a student, and that struggle led to his enlightenment. On the day after his awakening, he wrote this poem in the traditional quatrain form, quite remarkable poetically for its audacity in making an entire poem with a single word, Absence (無):

無 無 無 無 無

無 無 無 無 無

無 無 無 無 無

無 無 無 無 無

And this brings us to the root of Zen practice: Mu, or as has been translated here, absence. We find it being employed in the following foundational Zen case:

1: VISITATION-LAND DOG NATURE

A monk asked Master Visitation-Land: “A dog too has Buddha-nature, no?”

“Absence,” Land replied.

▪▪▪

NO-GATE’S COMMENT

To penetrate the depths of Ch’an, you must pass through the gateway of our ancestral patriarchs. And to fathom the mysteries of enlightenment, you must cut off the mind-road completely. If you don’t pass through the ancestral gateway, if you don’t cut off the mind-road, you live a ghost’s life, clinging to weeds and trees.

What is this gateway of our ancestral patriarchs? It’s the simplest of things, a single word: Absence. Absence is the sole gateway of our empty-gate household. And so, it’s called the “no-gate gateway” into our Ch’an household. Pass all the way through it, and you meet Master Visitation-Land eye to eye! Visitation-Land, and the whole lineage of ancestral patriarchs too! You wander hand in hand with them, eyebrows tangled with theirs, looking with the same eyes, hearing with the same ears. How is that not great good fortune and wild joy? Don’t you, too, long to pass through this gateway?

To penetrate the depths of this single word, Absence, summon all three-hundred-sixty bones and joints, all eighty-four thousand sacred apertures of your intelligence, summon your whole being into a single mass of doubt. Devote yourself day and night. Absence: don’t think it’s emptiness, and don’t think it’s Presence.

You’ll feel like you’ve swallowed a red-hot iron ball: retching and retching at something that won’t vomit out. But let all the delusions of a lifetime go, all the understanding and insight; and slowly, little by little, nurture the simplicity of occurrence appearing of itself.

Soon, inner and outer are a single tissue. A single tissue, and you’re like a mute in the midst of dream: all that understanding for yourself alone. Then suddenly, the whole thing breaks wide open, and all heaven and earth shudder in astonishment.

It’s as if you’ve snatched General Gateway’s vast sword away, as if you carry it wherever you go. If you meet Buddha, you kill Buddha. If you meet ancestral patriarchs, you kill ancestral patriarchs.

Out there walking the cliff-edge between life and death, you’re perfectly self-possessed, vast and wide open in such wild freedom. Through all four transformations in the six forms of existence, you wander the playfulness of samadhi‘s three-shadowed earth.

Can you do it: devote a life, delve with all your lifelong ch’i-strength into this single word, Absence? Don’t give up, and it will soon seem so easy: a mere spark setting the whole dharma-candle afire!

▪▪▪

GATHA

A dog, Buddha-nature—the whole

kit-and-caboodle revealed in a flash.

Think about Presence and Absence,

and you’re long lost without a clue.

Anything I tell you will put a spell on you. Anything I don't say will fail to keep the madness at bay. Would you like to hear a story? If not, you must cut off the mind-road completely.

As Linji entered the hall, the two senior monks perceived him, both shouting at the same moment.

A monk asked, "Teacher, is there still host and guest?"

Linji replied, "Host and guest are clear."

Linji then addressed the gathered monks, "To grasp the concept of host and guest as I see it, you should ask the two senior monks here in the hall."

---

A shout triggers the separation of host and guest.

Don't let perception alienate you from what is intimate.

The power of the introspective lion is immense.

He has no muscles in the eyes and lives in poverty.

One shout is decisive. Host and Guest are distinguished.

Don't use cognition to separate near and far.

Turning its body, the lion's majesty is very ferocious

Sight without strength leaves you destitute forever.

---

臨濟上堂次兩堂首座相見同時下喝。僧問師還有賓主也無。師曰賓主 歷然。師召眾曰，要會臨濟賓主句，問取堂中二首座。

一喝當機賓主分

莫將知見強疏親

反身師子威獰甚

眼裏無筋一世貧

---

Background to this Project:

Zishou Miaozong (資壽妙總; 1095–1170) is perhaps the most famous woman zen master today. Many of us know her from the case where she sexually humiliates Wanan, who claimed to disapprove of her relationship with Dahui for monastic conduct reasons.

There's always talk about getting to know Miaozong better. There's obviously something a little 'off' about students only knowing that one case. Unfortunately, most volumes available today are poorly translated and jumbled up with zazenist apologia.

This is a project to set about correcting that.

---

Discussion Questions:

• Which verse translation sounds more legit?
• Is Miaozong advocating a) embodied awareness, b) introspection, c) action-orientation or d) none of the above?

Mayu: "The great compassionate one has a thousand hands and a thousand eyes. Which is the true eye?"

What is the eye that sees?

Linji: "...speak! speak!"

Linji is instructing on the nature of Zen questions as demanding an answer, responding to Mayu's question with his answer, and challenging Mayu to engage with Linji's answer...all at once.

This is why Zen is so charming for me, there is a multitude of engagement that Zen Masters demonstrate in their responses to questions and the questions of their own that demand the conversation partner show their freedom to reply without landing in a fixed dharma.

This is commonly referred to as dharma-combat and despite the history of misrepresentation the term has in the West, it remains accurate to describe the high-stakes life and death nature of Q/A that Zen Masters consistently demonstrate and Buddhists ape at.

Mayu pulled the master down off the high seat and sat on it himself.

In Zen, unlike in Christianity and Buddhism, forcibly removing the Zen Master from their position of authority (the high seat) is welcomed if not demanded by Zen Masters in their communities. It is important to note that the interactions in Zen koans are not scripted or rehearsed in advance like the Catholic Mass and the resolution of the dispute is frequently characterized by the Zen tradition as inherently dangerous business. Yuanwu and Wansong's interlinear remarks on Zen cases bring attention to this tension. Remarks on this aspect of dharma combat frequently include the language of "Watch out", "trap", "peril", among others.

Japanese faux-Zen Dogenism has failed to produce Zen Masters for 800 years for the same reason that Scientology failed to produce Scientists. A lack of of public testing.

Coming up to him, the master said, "How do you do?"

A most intimate question.

Linji is engaging with Mayu as one engages with a friend/colleague rather than as someone that needs to prove anything further or be taught something further.

In Zen, equality of perception is taken as both the baseline by Zen Masters and as the demonstration that must be met to be affiliated with the Zen tradition. In practical terms, ignoring the questions of a dharma interview either in person or from a Zen text is a failure.

Foyan, much beloved of /r/Zen, states "IF YOU TALK about equality, nothing surpasses Buddhism. Buddhism alone is most egalitarian. If one says, "I understand, you do not," this is not Buddhism. If one says, "You understand, I do not, " this is not Buddhism either. In the Teachings it says, "This truth is universally equal, without high or low — this is called unexcelled enlightenment." My perception is equal to yours, and your perception is equal to mine." (Cleary, Instant Zen)

"Buddhism" in this translation refers only to Zen. Cleary's word choice is not defensible from an academic perspective and results from his mixed-up beliefs that he had in his private life as a Buddhist.

Mayu hesitated.

Big danger. I say, "Fine."

It's not an answer for anyone else, it won't save Mayu from failure or you from your responsibility to provide your turn of phrase in response.

The master, in his turn, pulled Mayu down off the high seat and sat upon it himself. Mayu went out. The master stepped down.

We have to remember that there was an audience of monks, laypeople, and possibly even some sneaky folks that didn't make the lay vows in attendance watching this marvelous spectacle. They came to the Zen Masters to carefully observe the law of buddhas demonstrated by living buddhas that got hungry, tired, thirsty, angry, upset, happy.

In contrast, the "buddhas" that Buddhism turns to are ones of stone, wood, and gold; products of imagination, conceptualization, worship, and emulation.

Huangbo remarked, "If you students of the Way wish to become Buddhas, you need study no doctrines whatever, but learn only how to avoid seeking for and attaching yourselves to anything."

Even Huangbo isn't to be trusted.

Zen originated in India and developed in China, together with the Taoism of Laotse and Chuangtse. It came to Japan as a sort of third-hand thing, something which the Japanese themselves did not create, and yet it is Zen in Japan that is Zen at its best, at its most living, most human, above all, most poetical.

-Blyth Zen and Zen Classics Vol 5

There you have it, from the most significant Zen scholar of the 20th century. Zen in Japan is Zen at its best.

Who did Blythe like from Japan? The answer might shock you!

Thus, when we consider the four greatest Japanese Zen monks, Ikkyu, 1394-1481, Takuan, 1573-1645, Hakuin, 1685-1768, and Ryokan, 1758-1831, (I omit Dogen, because I think him infatuated, incoherent, and unlovable) we must not look for anything like we find in Wumen or Linchi.

So Blythe says Hakuin is Zen, who is going to argue with Blythe, the most significant Zen scholar of the 20th century?

Potential discussion points:

1. Where do you think Zen is at is best?

2. Who are your favorite Japanese Zen Monks?

3. Why isn't Hakkuiin Zen if Blythe says he is?

There are several different ways to evaluate the claims of any group (like Mormons/Scientologists) about other groups (Christians/Scientists) when claims of affiliation have been made.

It turns out that whatever method we use, there never has been any "Japanese Zen", as Japanese Mormon-Christian-Buddhists claim.

How 20th Century Scholars failed to discuss any of this is a combination of many factors, not the least of which is love of Japanese culture, which, like the most amazing dodo you've never seen, was in real danger of extinction in the 20th Century. We'll get back to that.

The big deal in this debate though is understanding that people who rely on claims of authority (church says, Jesus says, pope says) are not interested in history, fact, or critical thinking. They are engaged either in proselytization or explaining how an authority looks wrong, but isn't (Religious Apologetics).

Just like Catholics try to explain weird church stuff by "pope says", just like Evangelicals try to explain weird bible stuff by "church says", the says claim is always going to be BS.

All you have to do to neuter those beleifs is "why are they right without reasons?"

The 20th Century's biggest failure was an inability to define terms. I'll give some examples of how we are able to define these terms in the 21st Century, the modern internet age of searchable databases, electronic records, and instantaneous AI translators, but keep in mind NOBODY DID THIS AT ALL in the 20th Century. It became such a problem in Western religious studies programs that other disciplines just abandoned Buddhist Studies as "less than scientific". Check out this infamous quote as an example of that: https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/wiki/buddhism#wiki_academia.3A_.22buddhism.22_not_meaningful.3A

When other disciplines tell you that your entire department lacks the rigor to even define terms, that's a cultural fail. Buddhist studies is in the middle of an epic failure in the West, as Hakamaya pointed out by simply defining Buddhism.

• Buddhism: 8FP religions, where 8FP is backed by faith in Causation, Defilement, and Conversion.

• Meditation: A religious practice based on faith in Defilement, Authoritative Practice, and promised Attainment.

• Zen: Four Statements teachings as interpreted by engagement with the historical record.

It might seem like these are childishly simple, and that's the point. When we look at the failures of 20th Century scholars to even attempt definitions, it's clear that Buddhism in the 1960's, 70's, and 80's was like the 1800's of paleontology: A total @#$#ing shartshow.

X = Y is an assertion, and with these definitions in mind (OR ANY DEFINITIONS) we can turn toward proving assertions. Was any particular "school" of Japanese Buddhism 8FP or 4 Statements of Zen in it's fundamentals?

Easy question to answer. Japanese Buddhism is 8FP all the way.

1. Defilement is a primary element of all Japanese Buddhist groups.
2. Authority is a defining element of Japanese Buddhist traditions.
3. 8FP teachings are present throughout.

But what about the other side? What evidence is there that Zen is not found in Japan?

1. History of fraud in Japanese Buddhism:

   • Dogen's short life - a history of plaraism and pro-Tientai propaganda marketed as "Zen".
   • Hakuin's Secret Manual of Koan "answers" used for political promotions
   • The historical and ongoing fealty to Dogen and Hakuin as "defining authorities" of Japanese Buddhism

2. Failure to produce anything like the Zen records of China

   • Japanese Buddhist parables are performed rather than arising from constant Zen Public Interview practice
   • Communities based on classism rather than socialism; even Alan Watts, the poster boy for 20th Century failures, remarked on how Japanese monastic communities were fundamentally different than Chinese Zen communities.

3. Historical Aborrations in Japanese Buddhist history

   • Banning of books, particular Wumenguan.
   • Dogen's church becoming a funerary business before the 20th century
   • Public reaction to the leaking of Hakuin's secret manual

We can drill into the incredibly difficult to dispute evidence supporting all of these definitions, assertions, and denials, and indeed any competent academic would... but why nobody wants to discuss these questions let alone the evidence in the 20th Century also has to be examined, and it comes down to at least these three:

1. Love of Japan, desperation to see Japan survive WW2.

   • Send food or bullets - few people realize Japan almost didn't survive WW2.
     
   • Just as Chinese culture was complete lost after WW2, Japan could have faced a similar fate.
   • Anyone who has been to Japan will understand; or just read Lafcadio Hearn

2. Buddhist religious bigotry

   • Majority of Western 20th Century Buddhist scholars were affiliated with Japanese religious schools: www.reddit.com/r/zen/wiki/fraudulent_texts
   • Buddhism's traditional feud with Zen was ignored/suppressed, like Buddhists never lynched the 2nd Zen Patriarch
   • Evangelical Buddhism pushed by Western Academics, which is why we see no basic definitions in the 20th Century Western Academia

3. Anti-Chinese devaluation of Chinese history

   • Communist party actively destroyed records and dismantled academia
   • Japanese history is full of misappropriation of Chinese history
   • Without the Chinese to advocate for Zen records, there was nobody to do it. Until D.T. Suzuki.

The two champions of 20th Century Zen scholarship, D.T. Suzuki and R.H. Blyth, struggled with all three of these problems, along with the lack of Western education in philosophy, history, or comparative religion necessary to be truely scientific.

The fact that we don't find ANY evidence of these questions being discussed ANYWHERE in the 20th Century is enough to certify the 20th Century as a failure to meet any academic standard. It's important to acknowledge that when religious people refuse to engage in debate at all that their positions are no longer academic. The 20th century Western Buddhist scholarship is less credible than 1800's Paleontology... there weren't any Bone Wars, no competition, and thus no need for critical thinking and argument.

[CHORUS OF GIRLS]

Go ye heroes, go and die! Go ye heroes, go and die!

[SARGENT, CHORUS OF POLICEMEN]

Though to us it's evident

These attentions are well meant [Ta-ren, ta-ra]

Such expressions don't appear [Ta-ren, ta-ra, ta-ren, ta-ra!]

Calculated men to cheer [Ta-ren, ta-ra]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IAgcefd23M

In the podcast today, Astroemi pointed out that Zen Masters aren't very helpful, very clear, and don't really give much in the way of directions.

I gave the spirited counter argument.

But there's no denying that Zen Masters aren't really playing to expectations:

Huangbo: Because in truth there is no unalterable Dharma which the Tathāgata could have preached. People of our sect would never argue that there could be such a thing. We just know how to put all mental activity to rest and thus achieve tranquillity. We certainly do not begin by thinking things out and end up in perplexity.

How's that now?

**Monk: From all you have just said, Mind is the Buddha; but it is not clear as to what sort of mind is meant by this ‘Mind which is the Buddha'.

Huangbo: How many minds have you got?

I'm not sure that's going to be all that helpful to people trying to find their way home in the dark when they stop to ask for directions.

Welcome! ewk comment: We've all given bad advice and gotten bad advice... is Zen just advice? And is it good advice?

Real life isn't a hallmark card, a religious trance, or a set of rules that nobody really follows, day to day, in order to be good.

What's going on here?

What's the LIFE in IRL? [Ta-ren, ta-ra]

Calculated meant to cheer?

As insensible to fear as anybody here... as anybody here!

Post: https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/comments/1ds5zgn/zhaozhou_investigates

Link to episode: https://sites.libsyn.com/407831/7-5-wumenguan-case-31-zhaozhou-investigates-1

Link to all episodes: https://sites.libsyn.com/407831

Buymeacoffee, so I'm not accused of going it alone:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/ewkrzen

Why does Zhaozhou investigate?

Translation question: Who is the old woman?

Who is investigating who?

What is knowing yourself about, anyway?

Is Zhaozhou a person of no importance, or a failed general?

Who is sneaking on who?

Add a comment if there is a post you want somebody to get interviewed about, or you agree to be interviewed. We are now using libsyn, so you don't even have to show your face. You just get a link to an audio call.

Hey, I study chemistry (although the post does not actually only refer to this) and generally grasp concepts quickly. However, there's a significant issue. When I read about a new (or old) concept, I tend to question it almost pathologically, looking for contradictions with my existing knowledge/ looking for possible errors in the learning source.

While this can be a good habit, it often leads me to delve deeper into the subject, making me feel emotionally pressured, uncomfortable and highly restless. This distraction prevents me from continuing my studies as planned because I become fixated on resolving the apparent contradiction, sometimes resulting in sleepless nights (without food or other basic things, it simply feels like I'm living on the edge, I now even have to wear a splint at night because there are periods when I grind my teeth extremely hard in my sleep). I fear that if I don't resolve it immediately, I won't understand it "correctly" or that the source is wrong, so I'm learning it wrong and it remains that way in my mind.

Every now and then it happens that a topic turns out to be so complex in depth that I couldn't really understand it without years of experience. This either frustrates me and I have to be satisfied with superficial understanding or it robs me of an enormous amount of energy, so that I suddenly don't do anything for several days afterwards. And because it was only a relatively short but intense phase, the acquired knowledge disappears into the background again over time, as the drive came more from the negative feeling and as soon as this fades after a few days (sometimes 2-3 weeks) it's no longer important to me.

Ideally, I would like to keep reading with an open mind and continue learning without getting "stuck" on these moments. On the other hand, I've been taught from a young age that critically questioning is the right approach, and this habit feels natural to me. Sometimes, I think I could understand better if I initially just followed the book's (or whatever source) explanations without immediately searching for contradictions. I could then apply these concepts to problems (e.g., exercises) and continue learning from new books with the same beginner’s mind, allowing a bigger picture to form naturally over time without actively forcing something which then tends to lead to a kind of constriction :(

I don't know if it's the right thing to stop clinging to these arising thoughts and associated feelings in such moments and not to react to them with my typical behavior from the point of view of understanding while learning, because I'm always told this is a good way to learn/ to get a deep understanding of something.

Any tips or opinions on this?

A monk asked, "When all is destroyed in the aeon of the void, will the people still practice the Way?"

Joshu said, "What is it that you call 'the aeon of the void'?"

The monk said, "It is not anything."

Joshu said, "It is only then that there is practice of the Way."

Sayings of Joshu #174

---

A monk asked Chu-yü, "What is the practice of a sramana(a Buddhist monk)?"

"His practice should be such that nothing is absent, but if he is conscious of his practice, it is wrong."

Another monk reported this to the Master, who said, "Why didn't he say, 'I wonder what practice that is?' "

The monk subsequently carried this comment to Chu-yü, who said, "Buddha-practice, Buddha-practice."

The monk reported this to the Master, who said, "Yu-chou is all right, but Hsin-lo is insufferable."

The Record of Dongshan #67

---

Someone asked Master Yunmen, "What is the monk's practice?"

The Master replied, "It cannot be understood."

The questioner carried on. "Why can't it be understood?"

"It just cannot be understood!"

Zen Master Yunmen #16

I've seen folks around here saying things along the lines of that there is no need for "external practice", adding "external" to practice that isn't external or any thing at all. I wonder why they are so upset by this enigmatic, inexpressible practice? Frantically building and attacking straw men out of nothing comprehensible. Showing off their intellectual understandings, afraid that they will lose what they have "gained". Nothing to lose. Nothing to gain.

Imagine a scenario where you needed surgery. If you had to choose which doctor to perform surgery on you, would you choose a guy who has only read books about surgeries for ten years, or a guy who is illiterate and has only practiced at surgery within actual reality over the past ten years? Would you think that an athlete that has only practiced on the field for ten years would be better prepared for an actual game than someone who has only discussed and read about playing sports for ten years? I think you can extend this analogy to many scenarios and see how the art of doing lies in actually doing.

People think that if they can't understand the practice, there must not be one. If the practice can't be understood, where do they even begin? Nowhere.

Has Zen eluded you? Have you eluded Zen?! Are you obsessed with ‘zen’ ‘oriental’ aesthetics? Do you feel at home in the black and white zendo by your house, chanting in a language unknown to you? Are you sufficiently mu’ed and satisfied with your secret koan answers? If you legitimately enjoy these things you might be better off in a more familiar Christian Church of Western European ancestry.

If you want to know about dead cats and stubbed toes then reading Blyth is for you. Blyth is one of the only sane and critical readers of Zen literature. Have you ever thought some of Huineng was a little much, or that even Seng Ts’an’s poem was twice as long as it needed to be? Sentimentality and complex metaphysics holds no place in Zen. Blyth stands on his own two feet and thinks with his own mind. Agree or disagree, this is some true grokking of Zen.

Blyth reveals how to engage Zen literature as it asks to be engaged. Zen can be brought to you but if you don’t bring yourself to Zen you might as well just pray for peace and happiness and worship a deity of your liking.

So take my recommendation and grab yourself a copy of RH Blyth’s History of Zen, Zen and Zen Classics.

book of serenity, the modern soto Zen bible:

Gautama is Sanskrit, and it means 'Supreme on Earth,' because he was the greatest of people on earth. Right now it is the second millenium after his death; the age of that sage is distant, and many people are lazy--how can you avoid falling behind? Tear open past and present.

Welcome! ewk comment: Firstly, Zen Masters argue that all Zen Masters are Buddhas themselves, and thus Zen enlightenment is the only not-falling-behind.

Secondly, my biggest mistake over the last decade of Zen Study in Public is this idea that Buddha isn't just a Zen Master. The narrative of Buddhists about who Buddha was seems like a default, but as soon as you abandon it the whole Zen record makes more sense.

Zen Master Buddha transmitted nothing but One Mind. All the teachings attributed to him in the sutras are just one finger zen.

From Jeffrey Broughton's translation, The Recorded Sayings of Zhongfeng Mingben:

Four copies of the Zhongfeng Extensive Record found in four Japanese collections are all later impressions of a single edition printed in the Nanbokuchō (1331–1391). I have used a photographic reproduction of the copy in the Seikadō Bunko in Tokyo for the following translations. This Gozan edition in the Seikadō Collection seems to be a reprint of the edition entered into the Buddhist canon toward the end of the Yuan dynasty. Its contents are as follows:

• 1334 Fifth Month Statement of Insertion of the Text into the Buddhist Canon Preface by Jie Xisi (揭傒斯)

• 1335 Sixth Month Announcement of Printing by Mingrui of Da Puning Monastery (大普寧寺明瑞)

• Table of Contents for fascicles one to thirty

• Extensive Record of Preceptor Tianmu Zhongfeng (Tianmu Zhongfeng heshang guanglu天目中峯和尚廣錄) Practicing Disciple Servant Monk Ciji [i.e., Shan-da-mi-di-li] of the Northern Courtyard Advances Upward (叅學門人北庭臣僧慈寂 上進)

• 1a. Seven Instructions to the Assembly (shizhong示衆); these “instructions” to groups of followers have a less formal style than Dharma Hall talks (shangtang 上堂), which are highly performative and poetic; Instructions to the Assembly usually mark some occasion, such as New Year’s Eve, the end of the New Year celebration, the beginning of a retreat, a snowfall, and so forth.

• 1b. Twenty Instructions to the Assembly

• 2 . Two Small Convenings (xiaocan小叅); these are “small convocations to face the spirit of the deceased” (duiling xiaocan 對靈小叅); on the night before a funeral ceremony, at the urging of the funeral director, a Chan dialogue is carried out at the relic depository of the deceased; the theme is usually the problem of samsara.

• 3 . Prose and Verse on the Ancients (niangu songgu拈古頌古); prose comments on such Chan stories as Emperor Wu and Bodhidharma, an exchange between Mazu and Baizhang, and so forth; sevencharacter four-line verses on Śākyamuni’s birth, Zhaozhou’s wu 無, Linji’s four shouts, and so forth.

• 4a. Ten Dharma Talks (fayu法語), all to Chan monks, many from distant lands (Yunnan, Korea, Japan, and Yiwu/Hami in Xinjiang); these are written talks requested by individual followers and often mark some personal occasion for the recipient, such as the follower’s setting off on pilgrimage or enduring a bout of illness.

• 4b. Twelve Dharma Talks to Chan monks plus one Bequeathed Admonitions to Followers

• 5a. Five Dharma Talks, all to laymen

• 5b. Three Dharma Talks, all to laymen

• 6 . Four Letters (shuwen 書問); to an exiled Korean king, with question letter attached; to a Korean official; to a layman; and to a monk

• 7 . Buddha Matters (foshi佛事); Buddhist services, prayers, and worship

• 8 . Encomia on the Buddhas and Chan Patriarchs (fozu zan佛祖讃); verses on Vairocana Buddha, Śākyamuni, the six Chan patriarchs, Budai, Linji, Gaofeng, and so forth

• 9 . Self-Inscriptions (zi zan自讃); inscriptions by Zhongfeng for portraits of him (at the request of followers).

• 10 . Critiques and Colophons (tiba 題跋)

• 11a–c. Miscellany Night Conversations in a Mountain Hermitage (Shanfang yehua山房夜話); third of the so-called Five Leaves or literary pieces of Zhongfeng

• 12a–c. Commentary Opening Up the Meanings of the Confidence-in-Mind Inscription (Xinxin ming piyi jie 信心銘闢義解); second of the Five Leaves

• 13 . Commentary Some Questions on Realizing Mind in the Śūraṃgama (Lengyan zhengxin bianjian huo wen 楞嚴徵心辯見或問); first of the Five Leaves)

• 14 . Awakening to Mind in the Chan Separate Transmission (biechuan juexin別傳覺心); a discussion with interspersed eight-line poems

• 15 . Commentary Summary of Meanings in the Diamond Sutra (Jingang bore lüeyi 金剛般若略義)

• 16 . House Instructions of Dwelling-in-the-Phantasmal Hermitage (Huanzhu jiaxun幻住家訓); fourth of the Five Leaves)

• 17 . In Imitation of Hanshan’s Poems (Ni Hanshan shi擬寒山詩); fifth of the Five Leaves: words of admonition on practicing Chan in the prescriptive style of the pentasyllabic octets of Hanshan (Cold Mountain)

• 18a–b . Miscellany Things Said East, Discussed West (Dongyu xihua 東語 西話; includes Zhongfeng’s autobiography at the end)

• 19–20 . Miscellany Continued Things Said East, Discussed West (Dongyu xihua xuji 東語西話續集; material that did not make it into Talks in the East and Conversations in the West)

• 21 . One Prose-Poem (fu 賦) on “Encouraging Study”

• 22 . Nine Accounts (ji 記; of various hermitages, including two Dwelling-in-the-Phantasmal Hermitages)

• 23 . Admonitions and Inscriptions (zhen ming 箴銘); six admonitions on greed/anger/stupidity, on morality/concentration/wisdom, on joy, and forth; four inscriptions for hermitages, rooms, and a well spring

• 24 . Nine Prefaces (xu 序) for poetry, the Five Leaves of One Flower, and so forth

• 25 . Nine Remarks on bestowing soubriquets at the request of students (shuo說)

• 26 . Four Prose Pieces (of oblation to certain people); Five Expatiations (upon certain texts, places, and so forth); and Six Miscellaneous Writings (wen shu zazhu 文䟽雜著)

• 27a–b and 28–30. Poetry (jisong偈頌; songs and seven-syllable long poems; five-syllable long and short poems; seven-syllable eight lines and sevensyllable quatrains)

• 1324 Conduct Record by Niliu Zushun (逆流祖順) Stupa Inscription by Yu Ji (虞集); stone erected in 1329 Way-Practice Stele by Song Ben (宋本)

• 1334 Sixth Month Memorial Thanking Throne for Inclusion of the Text into the Buddhist Canon by Shan-da-mi-di-li (善達密的理, i.e., Ciji)

This content shows significant differences from the usual Song-dynasty yulu collections, such as the Recorded Sayings of Chan Master Dahui Pujue (Dahui Pujue chanshi yulu 大慧普覺禪師語錄). For instance, the Zhongfeng Extensive Record lacks both “abbacy yulus” (discrete records for each monastery or hermitage at which the master in question served as abbot—always found at the beginning of a yulu collection) and the formal discourses entitled Ascending-the-Hall (shang-tang 上堂). Dahui’s yulu contains seven abbacy records and numerous Ascending-the-Hall talks. Another difference is that the Zhongfeng Extensive Record contains commentaries on two sutras (Śūraṃgama and Diamond) and one Chan text (Xinxin ming)

---

For context, we haven't had anything published and available to the public remotely approaching this level of scholarly rigor about the Zen Masters whose texts we have translations of so far. It has almost always been translators inserting their own religious beliefs, handing off the reins to Dogenist priests, or repeating outdated and debunked scholarship.

Providing readers with information useful to the secular study of the Zen tradition has been haphazard at best.

The more catalogues we can get like this, the more we can all get a better idea of the work that remains to be done in Zen scholarship and translation.

"A certain Tamo [Damo], the 28th descendent of Xaca, sat for nine years facing a wall"

Prospero Intorcetta, Confucius Sinarum Philosophus xxxiii (translated by Thierry Meynard in Chinese Buddhism and the Threat of Atheism in Seventeenth-Century Europe)

Christians of the period, like Buddhists of today, interpret Bodhidharma's sitting as a form of quietistic meditation. Dogenists misrepresent Dharma's wall-staring as the ritual practice invented in the 13th century by Dogen known to his followers as "Zazen". It is as anti-historical and illiterate a claim as someone saying that Dharma was silently "praying the rosary".

Zen Masters reject the mystical interpretations of Dharma's years spent in the cave "facing a wall" repeatedly across their books of instruction.

"The master [Bodhidharma] first stayed in the [Shaolin] monastery for nine years, and when he taught the second patriarch, it was only in the following way: ‘Externally keep yourself away from all relationships, and, internally, have no hankerings in your heart; when your mind is like unto a straight standing wall you may enter into the Path." (Unknown text, trans. Suzuki)

"Bodhidharma subsequently crossed the Yangtse River, came to Shaolin, and faced a wall for nine years." Wansong, remarking on this line in his Book of Serenity, says, "A house with no surplus goods doesn't prosper." Wansong goes on to remark on Bodhidharma's departure from the Emperor's court to the Shaolin caves by saying, "Bodhidharma saw [The Emperor's] eyes moving and immediately shifted his body and traveled another road. The ancients sometimes came forth, sometimes stayed put, sometimes were silent, sometimes spoke; all were doing buddha-work."

Bodhidharma seeing the Emperor's eyes moving means that the Emperor was confused. From Yuanwu, "At this, Emperor Wu was taken aback; he did not know what Bodhidharma meant [by his reply, "Don't know"]." Bodhidharma's coming to the Emperor's court, his departure, his stay in the Shaolin caves, his return-journey to India--none of it is a matter of religious cultivation with any relationship to the rituals of Dogenism.

Yongjia, an heir to the 6th Patriarch of Zen, Huineng, remarked, "For walking is Zen, sitting is Zen. Whether talking or remaining silent, whether moving or standing quiet, the Essence itself is ever at ease."

Yuanwu says, "Since Emperor Wu did not understand, Bodhidharma secretly left the country; all this old fellow got was embarrassment. He [...] did not appear for any more audiences, but went directly to Shao Lin Monastery, where he sat facing a wall for nine years."

Dharma sitting in the cave, for Zen Masters, is logically connected to the failed interview with the Emperor.

Xuedou, citing "Henceforth, he secretly crossed the river", says "He could not pierce another's nostrils, but his own nostrils have been pierced by someone else. What a pity! He sure isn't a great man."

Piercing the nostrils of oxes is done to lead them somewhere. In this context, Bodhidharma failed to instruct the Emperor in the transmission he received back in India from Prajnatara. Zen Masters are mocking Bodhidharma publicly in their books of instruction for his failure. Delightful!

The principal failure over the past 500 years of engagement with the Zen tradition in the West has been to ignore primary sources from the tradition and take religious dogma from churches that claim "Zen" in their name as authoritative.

We can't have a conversation about the meaning of failure in the Zen tradition and all the delightful nuance different Zen Masters play with in their remarks when Western Academia is still failing in their own cave of religious apologetics.

Linji addressed the assembly, saying, "Within this lump of red flesh, there is a true person of no rank who is constantly coming in and out through the gates of your face. Those who have not yet confirmed this, look closely."

At that time, a monk came forward and asked, "What is the true person of no rank?"

Linji descended from the meditation seat, grabbed the monk and said, "Speak, speak!"

The monk hesitated.

Linji let go and said, "The true person of no rank is nothing but a dried shit-stick."

Forge the seal, then melt the seal:

Uphold the correct teaching fully.

To understand the essential principle,

do not separate from it even for a moment.

---

臨濟示眾曰，汝等諸人赤肉團上，有一無位真人嘗向諸人面門出入。 未證據者看看。時有僧出問，如何是無位真人。濟下禪床擒住云，道 道。僧擬議。濟拓開云，無位真人是什麼乾矢橛。

鑄印銷印 全提正令 要識綱宗 不隔一瞬

---

Background to this Project

Zishou Miaozong (資壽妙總; 1095–1170) is perhaps the most famous woman zen master today. Many of us know her from the case where she sexually humiliates Wanan, who claimed to disapprove of her relationship with Dahui for monastic conduct reasons.

There's always talk about getting to know Miaozong better. There's obviously something a little 'off' about students only knowing that one case. Unfortunately, most volumes available today are poorly translated and jumbled up with zazenist apologia.

This is a project to set about correcting that.

---

Discussion

• I think "forge the seal, then melt the seal" refers to making use of the teaching and then discarding it. The 'seal' character comes up in stories of bodhidharma sealing the mind ground.

• I think Miaozong is saying that upholding buddha's law requires total independence.

• 'Not even for a moment' - I think this foreshadows Wumen's instruction. There's absolutely no chance of enlightenment with less than 100% commitment to confronting reality precisely as it is.

This is the first post in a new series where we read the cantankerous Zen Master, famous for rejecting Buddhism and meditation as gateways to enlightenment, Linji. Everyone is welcome to ask questions, answer questions, argue, dispute, cite, translate, or interrupt--the cornerstones of the thousand year tradition of Zen engagement.

The rules we all agreed to in signing up for reddit.com and entering the gates of /r/Zen don't need to be reiterated. Trolls will, as usual, try to censor, harass, and brigade users for daring to engage with the revolutionary Zen tradition without recourse to religious apologetics and the mind-pacification beliefs of the Perrenialists, Meditation Cultists, and New Agers that cannot practice public interview.

__

I have the Ruth Sasaki's The Record of Linji which is a translation of The Recorded Sayings of Zen Master Linji Huizhao of Zhenzhou《臨濟慧照禪師語錄. This is a first time read-through for me.

__

Discourse I

Linji: "having no choice in the matter, have perforce yielded to customary etiquette and taken this seat."

Zen Masters would regularly ascend the chair in the main dharma hall to receive questions from Preceptors in the community and visiting guests. Ascending the seat is not a guarantor that the words spoken will be of any use to anyone, much less transmit a supernatural doctrine that people can turn to for moral guidance and wisdom as Christians and Buddhists do with Priests in their churches.

Linji: "If I were to demonstrate the Great Matter in strict keeping with the teaching of the ancestral school, I simply couldn't open my mouth and there wouldn't be any place for you to find footing."

"The Great Matter" is the wordless transmission of mind that Zen Master Buddha demonstrated before everyone gathered when he raised the flower and Kasyapa smiled. It isn't a technique, dogma, ritual, or practice. "Ancestral school" simply refers to the Zen lineage that flowed for generations prior and subsequent to Linji.

In the Zen tradition, trying to find the meaning of the transmission naturally defiles one's understanding of the tradition, like trying to clear a muddy pool of water by stirring it with a stick.

Linji: "But since I've been so earnestly entreated by the councilor, why should I conceal the essential doctrine of our school?"

Nevertheless, the Zen tradition is one of speaking; not remaining silent. Dwelling in quietude in order to avoid having to demonstrate one's ability to move freely is decried by Zen Masters as false Zen. Meditation based religions like Dogenism do not have any interview component as part of their practice; that's just one way we know the stuff they're claiming about their religion being "Zen" is bunk.

Monk: "What about the cardinal principle of the buddha-dharma?"

What is an appropriate statement?

The master gave a shout. The monk bowed low.

A shout is inherently ambiguous without a context; yet unmistakable to the ears. The Zen tradition is compared to the roaring of a Lion by Yongjia, a reference that extends probably back to India. Since the only response that Buddhists have to the roar of Linji is to remain silent, we know that, for some, it is a roar that deafens and stupefies.

Monk: "Master, of what house is the tune you sing?"

In other words, "What is the tradition that you are an inheritor of?"

A landscape painter is not the same as a portrait painter.

The monk hesitated. The master gave a shout and then struck him...

Hesitation is to assume that there is a right answer to be found somewhere other than the place one currently stands. It's a classic Zen fail.

Lecture Master: "The Three Vehicles' twelve divisions of teachings make the buddha-nature quite clear, do they not?"

He's already burying himself in a pit. Clarity isn't found by seeking it from another.

Linji: "This weed patch has never been spaded"

The lecture master hasn't wrangled with the open-air tradition of dharma combat that the Zen tradition manifests and has been compared to a forge that smelts Buddhas and Patriarchs.

Linji: "Get out! get out! You're keeping the others from asking questions."

Zen isn't a tradition oblivious to the fact that some people are asking questions from a place of insincerity and bad-faith. It isn't that questions of a particular sort are barred. The tradition doesn't blind itself to the source of people's questioning.

Linji: Don't you know that Venerable Sakyamuni said, 'Dharma is separate from words, because it is neither subject to causation nor dependent upon conditions'

The "Venerable Sakyamuni" is Zen Master Buddha--the source of worship, adoration, and misunderstanding by Buddhists. Any doctrine, method, or concept that the faith-based Buddhisms profess isn't the separate-from-doctrine transmission that Linji references here. Try to make a concept out of it and you're already missed it by a mile.

Linji: "Your faith in insufficient, therefore we have bandied words today."

The talking isn't the same as the transmission; the talking of Buddhas can't be ignored.

Linji: "Take care of yourselves."

What's your understanding of this?

Yunmen said, "The world is so vast. Why do you cover yourself with the seven strips [robe]1 at the sound of the bell?"

The seven strip robe is worn to formal lectures. This robe is made of strips or patches of discarded cloth that are taken from garbage, including cloth used for medical purposes, hence the name "patch robed monk". There are seven strips likely because of the the Seven Vajra Points of the Uttaratantra.

Monks put this robe on before being lectured about Zen.

Yunmen is asking, why do you put on this special robe to get lectured about Zen?

The implication is that putting on a uniform to get talked to by other people is twice removed from the 'seeing your self nature" from the Four Statements of Zen.

Welcome! ewk comment: In general, if you have to ritualize self awareness, you've already lost it. If you have to be told about self examination, you have already failed to do it.

On the other hand, without hard work, symbolized by wearing the seven fold "patch robe" so that one shoulder is bare, how would you be able to participate in the conversation of Zen?

Master Shoushan Nan said,

If you want to attain intimacy, first of all don't come questioning with questions. Do you understand? The question is in the answer, and the answer is in the question. If you question with a question, I am under your feet. If you hesitate, trying to come up with something to say, then you're out of touch.

At that time a monk came forward and bowed. Shoushan immediately hit him. The monk asked, "How is it when one hangs up one's staff deep in the mountains?" He said, "Wrong." The monk said, "Wrong." Shoushan hit him.

Treasury of the Eye of True Teaching #309

---

One day the Master said, "Picking up the mallet and raising the whisk, snapping one's fingers and raising one's eyebrows, questioning and answering — all this does not match the teaching tradition of 'going beyond.'"

A monk asked, "How about the teaching tradition of 'going beyond?'"

The Master replied, "[Even] the families of Jambu could all answer this. But when you're for example sitting in an animated town district, do the pieces of pork that are displayed on the tables in the morning, and the vermin in the privy, hold conversations about transcending the Buddha and going beyond the founders?"

The monk said, "I wouldn't say that they do."

The Master exclaimed, "You wouldn't say that they do! If they do hold such discussions, simply saying 'they do' will not do; and if they don't hold discussions, saying 'they don't' will not do either. Such words and even what you have yourself experienced, I say this straight out, have not made it: your view is biased."

Zen Master Yunmen #206

---

Dongshan said, "You must realize there is something beyond Buddha."

A monk asked, "What is beyond Buddha?"

Dongshan said, "Not Buddha."

Yunmen said, "It cannot be named or described; that is why he said Not."

Treasury of the Eye of True Teaching #30

---

Someone asked, "For one who has gone beyond the world of passions, beyond the world of forms, and beyond the formless-what is it like?"

Joshu said: "You cannot confine him."

Sayings of Joshu #70

Shoushan, Yunmen, Dongshan, and Joshu were followers and teachers of the way beyond words. Shoushan emphasizes the direct approach, and cautions against the conventional mode of questioning and answering, which he suggests can entrap both questioner and answerer in endless cycles of misunderstanding. Yunmen challenges the monk's understanding of "going beyond" through an analogy involving mundane objects like pork and vermin. Dongshan offers a succinct yet profound insight into the concept of "something beyond Buddha." By stating "Not Buddha," he points to the non-place beyond that transcends even the Buddha. Joshu responds to a question about the nature of one who has transcended worldly and spiritual realms with the spooky statement, "You cannot confine him."

These teachings about how to transcend teachings emphasize the Zen principle of direct realization beyond words, concepts, and the known. They discourage reliance on intellectual understandings, advocating instead for a direct, intuitive grasp of truth/reality. The use of smacks, spooky statements, and mundane analogies serve to disrupt conventional/established thinking patterns and provoke insight.

Are you still trying to find the pattern in patternlessness?

Dahui said to an assembly

An ancient said, "Great knowledge has no discrimination, great function has no pattern or preoccupation. It is like the moon reflected in a thousand rivers, like waves going along with a multitude of waters." Now then, which is the great knowledge that has no discrimination? Which is the great function that has no pattern or preoccupation? Is it not that eloquence like a waterfall that gives ten answers to every question is great knowledge? Is it not that things like coarse words and fine saying all referring to ultimate truth, overturning seats, scattering crowds with shouts, giving a slap across the jaw, abruptly leaving, immediately blocking as soon as there is hesitation thinking are great function? If you make this kind of interpretation, don't say you're a patchrobed monk; you can't even be a menial picking up sandals and lugging a sack of antiques in the school of patchrobed monks.

Treasury of the Eye of True Teaching #670

Next time you come across an old lady in the grocery store, don't ask her, "How do you do?" Instead, do the compassionate non-thing and ask them, "How do you mu?" Let me know how that goes.