Post(s) in Question

Post: https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/s/jGjMUl3wP1

Alt Translation: http://home.pon.net/wildrose/gateless-19.htm

Chinese: I wonder if this will work.

Podcast:

Link to episode: https://sites.libsyn.com/407831/4-30-zhaozhous-ordinary-mind-wumenguan-19-astroemi-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

What did we end up talking about?

Translations, Orienting toward the way, working hard, Richard Feynman, Fluency, Wumen: worse than ewk, Blyth frustrated, instructional verse.

Working hard, or hardly working?

Ordinary mind isn't ordinary?

If you wanna

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.

I was thinking about the fact that it seems pretty reasonable to call somebody up and talk on the phone about something you talk about on reddit everyday... but some people are nervous about this. Why? It's a phone call. Is it the public nature of the phone call? In a coffee shop it's public too... but it's not scrutinized.

Being wrong... is that the big worry? We all have trouble saying Chinese words, remembering Chinese names, and explaining Zen concepts that the Chinese themselves were uncomfortable with. What's the standard for public conversations when it comes to knowledge? Does that standard mean less people want to talk publicly?

"In olden times, a certain old adept asked a seeker, “Where have you just come from?” The seeker replied, “The city.” The adept said, “Where are you now?” The seeker said, “The moun­ tains.” The adept said, “ I have a question to ask you. If you can answer, you may stay. If not, then leave. Now then, when you left the city, the city was lacking you; when you came to the mountains, the mountains had you extra. If you are absent in the city, the reality of mind is not universally omnipresent; if you are an extra in the mountains, then there is something outside of mind.” The seeker had nothing to say."

did anyone else notice the adept said "i have a question for you" but... never asked a question? everything that follows is a statement lol

The Zen tradition is like a crucible that tests people’s understanding of something affectionately called “Buddha” or “Mind”.

Throughout the Zen tradition we had wild cards like Puhua (famous for going around town with a coffin on his back) as well as Xianzi that ate shrimp all day or something.

This isn’t normal behavior by the standards of any other tradition. That is A-OK as long as everyone can distinguish Zen from everything else. In the West, that hasn’t really been a thing. I mean, the past 70 years of self proclaimed Zen “teachers” has been filled with people from failed marriages, alcohol/substance abuse problems, and major problems keeping their hands off women, like Watts. This isn’t even including all the cult-certified “teachers” that have done the same stuff.

Trying to compare the precept-breaking “can’t AMA” craziness to Zen just isn’t possible. Why would anyone even think that “do what u want; no questions asked” is the basis for any sort of meaningful conversation?

Note: If this is not allowed feel free to delete it.

Swept away

Endless thoughts and matters

Being seized by someone,

Endless eons, endless dreams,

All swept away in one instant.

The wind blowing, birds chirping

Lush mountains, cicadas sing.

A boat crossing the river

Waves spread in its wake.

I've been asked to dig up this case.

From Radical Zen, the Hoffmann Translation:

[The monk Daiji came from the west to the capital. He said he possessed the unusual power of being able to read minds. Emperor Daiso ordered his Zen teacher Etchu to test the monk. The moment the monk met the master, he bowed and stepped aside to the right. The master said, "Are you able to read minds?" "To some extent," said the monk in reply. "Tell me where I am at this moment," the master said. "You, the teacher of a nation-how can you go to the West River to see the boat race?" "Tell me where I am at this moment," the master said again. "You, the teacher of a nation how can you stand on

enshin Bridge and watch monkeys performing tricks?" "Tell me where I am at this moment," the master said a third time. This time the monk was unable to find the master's whereabouts. The master scolded, "You sly fox! What's happened to that mind-reading ability of yours?" The monk did not answer. The master then said to the emperor, "Your Majesty, do not be taken in by foreigners!"]

Someone asked, "It is said that in his third trial, Daiji failed to find Etchu's whereabouts. Where on earth was Etchu?" Joshu said, "He was inside Daiji's nostrils."

The interest in the case comes from a theory I have and /u/ewk asked me to make this post.

As you can see in this case, it's about a mind reader with some cheap tricks, and we have a Zen master called Etchu who is testing the monk. Seems like even the emperor knew that Zen was all about conversation and testing. This was standard protocol.

In Zhaozhou's answer, we have this reference to Daiji's nostrils. This is what my theory pertains to. From what I gathered, when a Chinese person points at themselves, they point at their nose. Maybe a Westerner would point at their chest as a point of comparison. The characters for self is also a radical in nose. I mixed it up before and thought they were the same, but I still see a connection there. I tried digging up the Chinese on CBeta but failed at navigating it.

I've been asking ChatGPT and it definitely disagrees with me, so let's leave that thought be for a moment. Being inside somebody's nose is certainly intimate, very close to where somebody is. And it's probably an uncomfortable thing to have another entire person crammed up your nose.

My interpretation here is that Zhaozhou says Etchu was in the place that the mind reading monk couldn't see - his own mind. All the fancy tricks and experiences and states are useless in Zen. Seeing your nature and become a Buddha or bust.

Edit: I think I managed to dig it up:

問。大耳三藏第三度覓國師不見。未審國師在什麼處。 師云。在三藏鼻孔裏。

Hoffman seems to have a lot more story than this one, so I'm not sure it's the same source. Nostrils would be nose cavities.

Edit edit: I fail. I could've just read Hoffmann's Footnote:

NOTE: This story. which appears in Keitokundet1Yroku. takes place

in China; the monk Daiji (or Daijisanz1Yj was an Indian Buddhist who possessed the magical art of omniscience. Daiji can read Etchu's thoughts only as long as they are purposely brought forth 104

in order to test Daiji. J~shU's answer suggests that when EtchU

responds with a natural reaction, Daiji fails to read his mind. The simple and immediate reaction to the situation, whatever that reaction may be, is the "mind of the moment" or "no mind." Therefore Daiji can read EtchU's thoughts only when EtchU is not himself, but his powers do not reach to where Etchu is simply Etchu.

Anybody know what the Keitokundetoroku is?

https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/comments/1c72c6g/rzen_post_of_the_week_podcast_u_need_teacher/

That's a link to part two, which itself contains a link to part one. I don't think either is particularly revelatory... because they aren't personal enough.

Catching Feelings Zen Style

Here is a comment I made which is... more... revelatory:

I've been doing this rZen study group thing for a decade and one of the patterns that's emerged is that people like to feel like they're participating by posting quotes and commenting occasionally... But when it becomes personal then they have a sudden severe emotional reaction and they totally lose their s***. Like this one guy who was all in on as in community until it turned out he couldn't drink alcohol and continue to think of himself as a full member.

Total meltdown.

There is a bunch to argue about there, from did-he-fall-or-was-he-pushed to straw+camel or lighting-struck, or about how neo-christian new agers want supportive nurturing environments and Zen culture is much more confrontational and psychologically violent, about identity and crisis in human psychology... but this isn't a post about that.

I think people having feelings is entirely internal. You can't make somebody fall in love with you, we all know this.

What is our community obligation?

From my point of view I have two responsibilities:

1. Heat people to this melting point in a responsible and even-handed way. Gradually even.

2. When they have their emotional meltdown, make it clear to everyone that it isn't personal about anyone (else). The emotional meltdown is happening because the individual saw something in the mirror they didn't like and it's not a reflection on the community or anybody in it.

In DM's and offline, people have brought up therapy VS Zen a lot this week with questions like

• does anybody need it?
• And what's the difference between talking about things here and in therapy?
• And are some insights therapeutic as opposed to Zen insights?

It's really not my lane. I don't provide therapy and I'm not interested. But I think that emotionally fragile nature of people who suddenly get exposed to the realities of Zen does invoke for modern audiences the therapeutic experience. People lose their s#$% about something in this forum, more than in other forums. In the decade I've been here most people don't get past that. This is because they blame other people. And that's because these s*** losers didn't really come here for Zen. That's okay. But there will be a learning moment if the temperature gets hot enough.

What is a teacher for?

Which bring us back to

      DO YOU HAZ TEACHER?

But what is the teacher you have/don't for? What are you getting taught or not by this hypothetical teacher?

Here's Huangbo from the original post:

Huangbo: Chih Kung says elsewhere: If you do not meet with a teacher able to transcend the worlds, you will go on swallowing the medicine of the Mahayana Dharma quite in vain.

But medicine for what? What disease?

There are teachers for lots of subjects, is a Zen Master the teacher for any subject? No. That's ridiculous.

Is the Mahayana medicine for anything anybody could maybe call a disease? No. That's ridiculous.

So here are two theoreticals:

1. Zen Masters have medicine for the emotional breakdown moment - if the breakdown is about Zen.
2. People have these moments for lots of reasons, and they are more vulnerable in these moments - that's one way we get cults.

Let me know if I'm wrong.

Baizhang's breakdown

I have a problem with this case because of my weird memory, but let's just read it now:

One day Huaihai accompanied Mazu on a walk. A flock of wild geese flew past them. Master Ma said, “What's that?”

Huaihai said, “Wild geese.”

The master said, “Where'd they go?”

Huaihai said, “They flew away.”

The master then grabbed Huaihui's nose and twisted.”

Huaihai cried out, “Ouch!”

The master said, “Do you still say they flew away?”

Huaihai had a deep realization.

The next day Master Ma entered the hall to address the community. When the monks had all assembled, Huaihai went forward and rolled up the bowing mat in front of the teacher's seat. The master then got down from the seat and returned to his room. Huaihai followed after him. The master turned to him and asked, “Why did you roll up the mat before I'd said a word?”

Huaihai said, “Yesterday you hurt my nose.”

The master said, “Where in your mind are you keeping yesterday's matter?”

Huaihai said, “Today my nose doesn't hurt anymore.”

HOW IS THIS TEACHING?

What would anyone call the "disease" here?

Who comes back for MORE nose twisting?

#. Welcome! ewk comment: I don't like these long posts. Nobody is going to read all this. I have this process of a) rant b) condense c) refine and I'm obviously not doing that here. I have a packed day today. Is that a teacher?

I’m half illiterate and writing on my phone so please excuse any spelling errors and grant me good faith.

“Whereof we cannot speak, we must remain silent” -Wittgenstein

Definition: For the sake of clarity, I’m defining zen as a collection of koans, cases and sermons delivered by a group of Chinese monastics and hermits identified as having a lineage starting with the semi-mythical Bodhidharma.

Let’s start with an example and review some hermeneutical techniques.

Here is Rujing, a zen master with, I believe an undisputed lineage (again, correct me if I am wrong):

“Golden Crow in the snowy night, passes through the main hall; Jade Harr in the arms of the blazing sky—the fine leaves of descendants preserve this grandfather whole. A wooden man grasps at boards, clapping in the clouds, a stone woman holds a bamboo flute in her mouth to breath underwater—although it is like this it is also said, “with your hands at your side, the First Statement is over there.” And, how will you do it.

Alright Rujing we get it, you like psychadelics.

Wait, precepts, this isn’t a drug thing?

Seems to me we can rule out a literal interpretation. There isn’t a man made of wood grabbing at things.

If we assume Rujing wasn’t dosed with drugs, and wasn’t just an old senile man who was the victim of elder abuse by the monks, there is a mystical meaning. He is pointing at something beyond words.

But how can one “get” his meaning if it isn’t simply realized by magic or luck-having the right karma at the right time? We are told by other from Joshu to Huangbo that “ordinary mind is the way.”

I understand ordinary mind to be logical. And logic is something that all rational humans intuit. In spite of internet debate bros, it isn’t hard. There is a logical picture you can form conceptualize of a rabbit, running across the hall, a man made of wood, etc, even if it is all just fantasy.

But imagining this doesn’t seem to cause any liberatation or really do anything that reading lord of the rings doesn’t do for me. Narratively it is much less compelling, tbqh.

Another alternative is that reading this is supposed to change us. This doesn’t seem experientially apparent to me. Or, frankly, all that different than the idea of a come to Jesus moment. I read first like in book of John and was saved, etc. I’m a very rational person by nature and a “vibes based” religion doesn’t fit my demeanor. Buddhism’s popularity comes from this, I believe. There are things to do and measurable or falsifiable changes. But with zen there is nothing to do, really.

Another idea is that every zen text is pointing to the idea that concepts need to be abandoned and disregarded to obtain a phenomenal truth. This carries some purchase for me. It explains the apparent paradoxical or nonsensical nature of some of these.

But it frankly seems a lot of wheel spinning, and not a lot of benefit. I mean, read one zen master, get the message, move on with your life.

Am I missing something? How do I get the something I am missing if there is no technique? Or do I already “get it?” Why are people r/zen so confident they have the capital T truth of this gobbledygook?

Or is this self help? If so, why not just talk to a therapist, with real time feedback rather than possible misleading yourself

###Case 19. The Ordinary Mind Is the Path

When Zhaozhou asked Nanquan, “What is the Path?” Nanquan said, “The ordinary mind is the Path.”

Zhaozhou said, “Can we go toward it or not?” Nanquan said, “As soon as you go toward it, you go against it.”

Zhaozhou said, “If we do not try, how do we know it is the Path?” Nanquan said, “The Path is not in the province of knowing or not knowing. Knowing is false awareness. Not knowing is oblivion. If you really arrive on the Path of no trying, it is like space, empty all the way through. How can we impose affirmation and denial? ”

At these words, Zhaozhou was suddenly enlightened.

###Wumen said,

When Nanquan was questioned by Zhaozhou, he [disinte­grated] like tiles scattering and ice melting and could not explain. But even if Zhaozhou did awaken, he still had to study thirty more years.

###Verse

Spring has a hundred flowers... autumn has the moon.

Summer has cool winds... winter has the snow.

If there are no trivial things you hang your mind up on,

This is the good season in the human realm.

#New to Zen Question

What does ordinary mind mean?

If you can’t explain your practice in ordinary terms, you know you are selling something else along with it. Like how Zazen people are not content with breathing exercises but can’t explain why they think their thing would be better. Ordinary is the way.

#Advanced Study Question

Why does Wumen say Zhaozhou had to study for thirty more years?

If you’ve seen the cases of his post-enlightenment stay at Nanquan, you know how much trouble he tried to cause him. And sometimes he even managed to make trouble for him. So what were the next thirty years for? What was Zhaozhou studying after his enlightenment?

Meaning isn't something created out of thin air and Zen texts have some things to say about that.

Huangbo said:

I have no thing to offer. I have never had anything to offer others. It is because you allow certain people to lead you astray that you are forever seeking intuition and searching for understanding. Isn't this a case of disciples and teachers all falling into the same insoluble muddle?

Trying to invent an idea of "meaning" that isn't intimately meaningful to you is like scratching a foot while your boots are still on. (Thanks Wumen).

Part of the OG Buddha myth that always stood out to me is the fact that all the stuff he tried to find meaning in the face of death, and the other stuff just didn't work out.

Then one day he woke up and went back to his family and shared the meaning of "waking up".

The Zen tradition doesn't spend a lot of time talking about the Buddha myth. We have a painting that Zhongfeng Mingben commented on of a fail-loser-buddha-man walking down from his mystic magic mountain.

His comment on the painting reads:

"He who emerges from the mountains

and has entered the mountains: That is originally You. If one calls him 'You' It still is not he. The venerable master Shih-chia [Sakya- muni] comes. Ha, ha, ha ... ! He glances over ten million miles of billows. Huan-chu Ming-pen salutes with re- spectfully folded hands."

The word, "billows", according to Google means "a large undulating mass of something, typically cloud, smoke, or steam."

That's the 10,000 empty dharmas. A miasma.

They also call The Buddha the "Morning Star" which sounds all mystic left-hand pathy until you realize that the actual morning star comes out every single day and countless buddhas wake up every single morning without an alarm clock.

It's not that there isn't any magic, but if your idea of magic is something you pulled out of a Harry Potter sorting hat then you're not talking about Zen.

Glow Worm =/= Sun

We've been talking about the need for empathy a bit recently. That means putting yourself in other people's shoes.

We're in a Zen forum, so why don't we show some empathy for Zen Masters?

What do you think it would feel like to be a member of a tradition that spanned a thousand years in China, that produced innumerable records that we're still trying out dangdest to get organized on here?

What do you think it would be like to have your records ignored in favor of a foreign appropriation of your culture by a church that teaches things entirely different from what you taught, to have your name dragged through the mud?

I don't think I'd be very happy about the whole thing.

Think of Mazu, one of the most influential Zen Masters, who said this:

The founders of Zen said that one's own essence is inherently complete. Just don't linger over good or bad things - that is called practice of the Way. To grasp the good and reject the bad, to contemplate emptiness and enter concentration, is all in the province of contrivance - and if you go on seeking externals, you get further and further estranged. Just end the mental objectivization of the world. A single thought of the wandering mind is the root of birth and death in the world. Just don't have a single thought and you'll get rid of the root of birth and death.

What would a guy who said this think of a religion founded on a belief in a sitting meditation practice of people contemplating emptiness and entering concentration states misusing his name?

Why empathy is high stakes

many psychiatric disorders are associated with empathy-related deficits. For instance it is well documented that antisocial individuals lack concern for others. The DSM-IV identifies a deficiency in empathy as one of the essential features of narcissistic personality disorder. Empathic deficits constitute a primary source of the autistic syndrome. This list, far from exhaustive, illustrates the complexity of the psychological construct of empathy, which explains why such a variety and heterogeneity of mental disorders can be associated with empathy.

.

empathy poses a paradox, as sharing of feelings does not necessarily imply that one will act or even feel impelled to act in a supportive or sympathetic way (empathy's paradox is that this ability may be used for both helpful and hurtful purposes). Empathy is a source of altruistic motivation, which under certain circumstances may produce behavior that might be judged moral but under other circumstances may produce behavior that might be judged immoral

.

Zen Masters seem to be a great example of "might be judged moral, but under other circumstances may produce behavior that is judged immoral".

Campus Protests: Exercising Empathy?

The ongoing political upheaval has come up in my DM's lately, along with people who continue to tell me they don't care what I say after responding to what I say.

These appear related, because they both represent a refusal to dialogue with empathy.

But how can we tell the difference between "immoral" and "moral" within the context of Zen? Since Zen Masters' only practice is dialogue, but sometimes it seems they fail to achieve it?

They want to know what you're thinking

Here are some examples of Zen masters wanting to know more than they are making demands... is that the basis of dialogue? If so, why do these dialogues fail?

Yunmen at the foot of Xue

When Yunmen arrived at a village at the foot of Mt. Xue, he encountered a monk.

Yunmen asked him, "Are you going back up the mountain today?" The monk said, "Yes."

Yunmen said, "Please take a question to ask the abbot. But you mustn’t tell him it’s from someone else." The monk said, "Okay."

Yunmen said, "When you go to the temple, wait until the moment when all the monks have assembled and the abbot has ascended the Dharma seat. Then step forward, grasp your hands, and say, ‘There’s an iron cangue on this old fellow’s head. Why not remove it?’"

The monk did as Yunmen instructed him.

When Xuefeng saw the monk act this way, he got down from the seat, grabbed the monk and said, "Speak! Speak!"

The monk couldn’t answer.

Xuefeng pushed him away and said, "It wasn’t your own speech."

Zhaozhou and the monk who left

The master instructed the assembly saying, '"Even if you have good and bad only a little, in the confusion mind is lost.' Do you have anything to say about this or not?" A monk came forward, struck the attendant, and left. The master returned to his room.

The next day he asked the attendant, "That monk yesterday, where is he now?" The master said, "At that time he left." The master said, "After thirty years of riding the best horses, I have given the whip to a donkey."

Huangbo and the true dharma revealed

28. Q: Up to now, you have refuted everything which has been said. You have done nothing to point out the true Dharma to us.

A: In the true Dharma there is no confusion, but you produce confusion by such questions. What sort of ‘true Dharma' can you go seeking for?

Q: Since the confusion arises from my questions, what will Your Reverence's answer be?

A: Observe things as they are and don't pay attention to other people. There are some people just like mad dogs barking at everything that moves, even barking when the wind stirs among the grass and leaves.

#. Welcome! ewk comment: People seem very eager to say what is right, but they don't seem to be able to bring it up in discussion. If you can't answer questions about why, then how is there a good and bad?

I encourage meaningful dialogue and invite others to freely contribute to this thread as a free and open space to share your personal point of view. I also encourage others to actively listen to each other, use respectful language when addressing one another, and consider offering feedback which is specific, actionable and focused on improving others and the community at large.

A fundamental question which occurred to me while studying the Zen tradition throughout history into modern times is, what relationship does Zen have with morality?

Religion is a vast topic which can be viewed from many angles. Sociologically, religion of the past played important roles in unifying individuals into a socially cohesive whole. For much of human social development throughout history religion represents how societies organized information for mutual unity. As a product, religion structured society by communicating what to do, where to do it, when, why, how and who.

It dictated morality, carried out justice, told what was right and wrong, and told where everyone's place was in this world. In our modern times this dynamic still exists, but religion is being replaced, and often for good reason. Determining health standards and good hygiene doesn't need an appeal to divine authority, but instead a reasoned matter of science and knowledge. Instead of it being determined by a religious leader with a private direct line to a local deity, it is determined by the latest discoveries of scientific inquiry and observation coupled with reasoning and applied science.

From what I have studied about Zen, it requires direct observation. Which can be very threatening to the religions of any society. When people are directed to observe, they might start questioning the dictum of both religion and governance.

When it comes to morality, direct observation places the responsibility of determining morality back onto the individual to reason, question, test, and apply.

However, within Zen culture I see some behaviors that are questionable. For example. The notion of essence and form, and the relationship between them. If all things are like illusions, and there is no difference in distinguishing between right and wrong fundamentally, does that mean that nothing is moral or immoral? That doing harm is the same as doing good?

If one is to really not think at all, and subdue the conceptual mind, then what is left to moralize? To determine moment to moment what to do? What not to do?

We live in a completely different world in some ways from that of the average monk in China over a thousand years ago. In many ways the ancient Zen masters speak to something that is fairly common in our day-in-time. The ability to reason for ourselves.

Another observation I make in looking at the record is that those guys were monks. They took, and more importantly kept the precepts as a guiding set of principles. At times, they bent the rules to fit circumstance, not all that different than bending the strict rule of law, due to extenuating circumstances the law doesn't directly address in rule. At other times the record appears to reflect a deeper code, one born of deep compassion and more importantly, understanding. An understanding which arises only through direct experience, maturity, and trial and error.

It's something that can't be simply taught, yet we can observe it in action as presented throughout the record of interactions between an experienced Zen master, and an inexperienced monk. It then becomes nothing about 'following' precepts, that's a given and relatively low bar standards compared with deep compassion. A starting point to build upon. To me, that is always a matter of personal development.

I have my own answers to these questions, but I am curious to how you all view these matters. To summarize the questions further:

• When there is no distinction between right and wrong, why do Zen masters show such deep compassion for sentient beings instead of malice intent?
• Where is the morality of Zen? Is it in the precepts? The teachings somewhere?

Thank you for your participation in this topic!

I do ask that we keep debates to a minimal here to provide a simple space free to answer these questions where you are honestly at. Any questions should aim to explore and understand one another. Any debating should aim to encourage mutual understanding while challenging the idea, rather than attacking the individual personally. While this isn't a demand, it is a request. 🙏

The Relative in the Impartial

Empty kalpas, vast and distant, actually silent,
Somersaulting under the edge of the Vajra Diamond,
In your palm, sudden skill spanning a thousand worlds.

正中偏。空劫迢迢本寂然。金剛際下翻筋斗。掌上靈機遍大千。

The Impartial in the Relative

Vast and endless middle kalpa, pure and clear,
At the crossroads, let go the easy path of return,
Embrace the true imperative before the Shadowless Hall.

偏中正。浩浩塵中劫清淨。臨岐撒手便回途。無影堂前提正令。

Arriving from Within the Impartial

A halo behind the crest lights the ancient platform—
Though it shines through the human world for epochs,
It does not infringe upon sharp edges, or cut off a speck of dirt.

正中來。頂後圓光耀古臺。雖然照徹人間世。不犯鋒鋩絕點埃。

Culminating in the Relative

Marvelous function moving freely, without calculation,
They battle from start to finish, profound and subtle,
Spiritually sharp, towering like a wall, sudden in every circumstance.

兼中至。妙用縱橫休擬議。始終交戰自玄玄。壁立神鋒皆猛利。

Both Completely Merged

Exceptionally bright skill, steadfastly upholding principles,
Fully aware that not all things can be contained—
Who else could safeguard the profound mysteries?

兼中到。格外明機長節操。了知萬彙不能該。誰能更守於玄奧。

...

There's no order or valuation to the ranks. Each is said to be spaces of movement within the experience of enlightenment; mundanity that sees all is level, equanimity that sees every thing; phenomena with content; content without meaning; the aesthetic experience of form and content.

I was learning today about neuroscientists studying the way we efficiently make use of perception, with the help of predictive models, so that we can store more information. Not a smelly man by the road, but a homeless person whose had a difficult life. Without prediction, there is nihilism. Without data, nothing ever changes. Without thought, pure reaction. Without stories, bound to what's in front of us.

Humans are story making machines, and one aspect of the Five Ranks is to clarify the relationship between form and content, perception and the stories we give it.

According to the biographical sketch of him, Layman pang was once a rich guy that loaded up all his stuff onto a boat and then sank it. Sounds a ittle extreme until youu consier that Zen study is like a new beginning. It has the magic of that scene of the thieves going in to the river in "O Brother where art though?" without the subserviance to faith component.

From Pangs boat-sinking we get raised the question of "What does it mean to live a life without holdijg onto soemthing meaningless?"

I think it's not a one size fits all kind of thing. It's also a question that religions and philosophies can't address without falling apart. In Zen, public Q&A has been both the practice and application.

The biographsy also says he had a wife and kids. Compared to the Priests of Buddhism, the Layman is winning the harts of both sexes, all while keeping the precepts. Why would anyone ever think that the two are comparable?

Mingben said that a glow worm and the sun are just not in the same category.

The biography goes on to give an account of Pang and his family's passing away. One after the other, each of them depart without fanfare and in good humor. I promise to discover the meaning of this life.

Master Zhenjing said to an assembly,

Xuefeng said, "There's a turtle-nosed snake on South Mountain -

watch out for it in your comings and goings." Xuefeng had no marks of greatness; so the snake wouldn't go without a head. As for Changqing, responding, "A lot of people lose their lives in this auditorium today," he was like a new bride afraid of her mother-in-law. Yunmen stuck his cane in front of Xuefeng and made a gesture of fright, drawing legs on a snake. Xuansha said, "Why use 'South Mountain'?" If one says one's own perception is closest, one has not escaped just being in a cave. There was no one else with any natural spirit at all. Isn't there anyone here with natural spirit? I dare not hope you will hang another sun of wisdom and individually activate the esoteric influence. Now if you turn to the smelly shirts of the ancients, you can barely even get a sense of the breath of life.

This is a very interesting case. It seems very much like Xuefeng just making a statement and the other three fooling around. I'd like it very much if someone with more knowledge about the context could shed some light on this case. Especially what was going on with Xuansha in relation to Xuefeng, since Zhenjing talks about one not escaping a cave.

Did Xuansha put himself in a cave with his question?

As always, I bring in Ole Pappy Foyan. This case reminded me of this bit from the Zen Sickness chapter of Instant Zen.

One day Zhaozhou went to visit Zhuyou, where he paced back and forth brandishing his staff from east to west and west to east. Zhuyou asked, “What are you doing?” Zhaozhou replied, “Testing the water.” Zhuyou retorted, “I haven’t even one drop here; what will you test?” Zhaozhou left, leaning on his staff. See how he revealed a bit of an example, really quite able to stand out. Zen followers these days all take sickness for truth. Best not let your mind get sick.

In a hidden retreat, a rocky spring flows clear like my heart,
Birds spontaneously sing, blossoms freely bloom,
I sight the mountains and rivers, the land's native character—
What thing is not the Tathāgata before my eyes?

幽棲

幽棲泉石暢心懷鳥自啼兮花自開看見山河國土性眼前何物不如來

...

What about this poem by Fushan resonates with what you already know?

Storms

Master Xinghua one day called to a monk. The monk responded, "Yes!" Xinghua said, "If you arrive, you don't check." Xinghua called to another monk; the monk said, "What?" Xinghua said, "If you check, you haven't arrived."

A monk asked, "When there are comers from all directions, then what?" Xinghua said, "Hit the one in the middle." The monk bowed. Xinghua said, "Everyone, yesterday I went to a village feast; halfway back I ran into a sudden storm and took shelter in an ancient shrine."

Strikes

Once Master Yunmen said, "What is accomplished when one has mentioned the two words 'Buddha' and 'Dharma'?"

He answered in place of the audience, "Dead frogs!"

Balls

A monk asked Yao Shan, "On a level field, in the shallow grass, the elk and deer form a herd: how can one shoot the elk of elks?" Shan said, "Look-an arrow!" The monk let himself fall down. Shan said, "Attendant, drag this dead fellow out. The monk then ran out.5 Shan said, "This fellow playing with a mud ball-what end will there be to it? Hsueh Tau commented saying, "Though he lived for three steps, after five steps he had to die.

Can one ever reach a full count? Will we ever find out?

Corroded by mysteries, I want to climb some big trees.

Have you ever been stuck in a tree? Did you know it?

Another religious person came into the forum recently and tried to convert me to Buddhism because I was "egotistical".

I pointed out that that's just not a Zen teaching.

I pointed out the Zen is just not Buddhism.

Zen is not part of Buddhism

There are 1,000 years of historical records, mostly in the form of transcripts of REAL people having conversations in public, called koans.

Anybody studying these records can see there is no four Noble truths and there is no eight-fold path. There's nobody talking about it. There's nobody doing it.

Zen Masters wrote books of instruction about these historical records, explaining what they meant and guiding students into understanding and applying the teachings in those records to daily life.

In those books of instruction there is no four Noble truths and there is no eight-fold path. There's nobody talking about it. There's nobody doing it.

1960's and 70's were wrong

Most of the confusion comes from two sources:

1. Religious books written by Buddhists who don't study Zen, but tell people that their religion is Zen Buddhism as a recruitment and propaganda strategy.

2. Religious books Neo-Chrisitian New Agers who don't study anything, but instead watch Alan Watts videos, like the Matrix and the Big Lebowski, and consider altering their consciousness with LSD or meditation.

Now I want to be clear that nobody is at fault here for getting on the internet and getting information from either of these sources accidentally.

In the '60s and '70s, these sources were very very popular and even major repositories of information like Wikipedia have not been updated to the scholarship of the last 30 years.

It's very hard to get accurate information about other cultures from a western dominated internet that is aggressively religious about Asian religions.

Basic Boring

Lots of people come in here and get angry that this forum isn't about movies they like which were entirely based on religious propaganda (Matrix+Lebowski), upset that meditation is talked about with a lot of skepticism and references to '60s sex predator meditation Masters, and that there isn't any Buddhism.

But those things aren't going to change because history isn't going to rewrite itself to favor misconceptions from the 1960s.

It doesn't matter what guru you went to. It doesn't matter what retreat you attended. It doesn't matter what book about archery or sword fighting you read that was written in the 1960s.

Zen teachings and the history of Zen teachings is what matters.

It would be super awesome if some part of this could be put in the sidebar because there's just too many people who are shocked to get here, and become confused and angry and not being given what they like.

There’s this old joke about the internet (that’s what they were called before memes) about how it’s easier to get a good answer if, instead of asking a question, you just assert the wrong thing first and get corrected by angry people.

The point here is, being wrong is efficient. If you are willing to say things, not just for the sake of saying them, but for the sake of exploring your best attempt at an answer, then you can improve on it if other people are willing to correct you.

So this is my open invitation for people to tell the podcast participants where we are wrong. I’m sure there are plenty of opportunities. This is also an invitation to anyone who is willing to be wrong to come on the podcast and choose an OP to talk about.

This week we have,

###Case 16 - Yunmen’s Bell

Where u/koancommentator and I try to make sense of Yunmen’s question to his assembly, fail and then ultimately succeed? You decide.

https://sites.libsyn.com/407831/3-13-24-wumenguan-case-16-astroemi-koancommentator

###Case 17 - The National Teacher’s Three Calls

Where u/ThatKir and I grapple with the National Teacher calling his attendant three times.

https://sites.libsyn.com/407831/4-13-24-wumenguan-case-17-3-calls-astroemi-thatkir

Questions? Complaints? Say them loudly.

38. The Master lived on Tsaohsi Mountain and preached in

Shaochou and Kuangchou for more than forty years. In terms of
disciples, both monks and nuns as well as laypeople, he had
somewhere between three and five thousand, too many to name.
As for his basic principle, he transmitted the Platform Sutra
and used this as his testament. Unless a person has received the
Platform Sutra, they have no authority. And they need to state
the place, the date, and the names of those who passed it on.
Without the authority of the Platform Sutra, they aren’t
disciples of the Southern School. If they haven’t yet received
this authority, even if they teach the direct teaching, they still
won’t understand its fundamentals and can’t avoid arguments.
However, those who have received this teaching are simply
urged to practice it. Arguing about it involves thoughts of victory
or defeat and is contradictory to the Way of the Buddha.

Since everyone knows that enlightenment is completely original, and that moderators are snoozing on the job— enlightenment party!

Who isn’t invited? AMA failures.

Since Buddha extends in all the 10 directions (4 for us mathematically challenged) where will it be hosted?

Section LX

Again he asked, "All the Buddhas of the ten directions have cut off frustrations and completed the Buddha Way. What of it?"

"You make these calculations unrestrainedly, without any basis."

Again he asked, "How does the Buddha liberate creatures?"

"When the image in a mirror liberates creatures, the Buddha will liberate creatures."

This concludes section LX

​ The Long Scroll Parts: [1], [2], [3 and 4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47], [48]

For the nerds interested in Zen history (Me and who?), A new Alan Cole's article was published exactly a month ago, here is the abstract:

This essay argues that the long-standing assumption that Chan Buddhism began as a meditation movement is outdated and needs to be replaced by a paradigm that sees the origins of Chan in a set of literary inventions that took form in the mid-Tang era and were designed to prove that the totality of tradition was owned by certain masters of the day. These bold claims to own perfect tradition were bolstered by newly invented genealogies that worked to show that this or that master was, in effect, a descendant of the Indian Buddha, and, thus, a quasi-Buddha himself. Further finessing these efforts to take over final authority in the world of Tang Buddhism was the studied use of Daoist tropes to naturalize and soften these aggressive claims, all in order to make them more appealing to elite readers who could now be impressed by decidedly Chinese-looking portrayals of perfect Buddhism, set on the timeless ground of the Great Dao, where there could be no competition, envy, literary pretensions, or even Buddhist practices—just pure and total truth in the body of a Chinese man. In trying to make sense of this cycle of carefully rewriting the past in order to control the present (and future), it should be clear that we need to switch to a paradigm that accepts that the seductive reinvention of tradition was done consciously and with no small amount of craft and cunning.

Here is the full article available: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/15/4/403

-----------

Have you read Alan Cole's works? He gets deeply into the origins of Chan in the Tang. His main thesis, as I understand it, is basically that a big part of the Zen lineage was a literary invention to give authority to certain masters who would represent the true teachings of the Buddha transmitted directly. It seems that initially there were many disputes about who the legitimate masters were, which led to the fabrication of many transmission stories, but apparently none of them have enough historical evidence to support the existence of an uninterrupted lineage since Sakyamuni.

Thoughts?

EDIT: A commenter made a summary of the article I think it is worth of sharing, thanks u/Thurstein.

[Cole is] arguing that the early Chan school was not distinguished by any special emphasis on or approach to meditation (not that they did not do it, or other common forms of Buddhist practice-- just that this is not what made them a distinct approach, somehow different from other Buddhist schools).

He's making the case that the distinctive feature of the early Chan school was the rhetorical moves-- namely, the literary invention of "masters" who (1) somehow personally embodied the whole of Buddhist wisdom, and (2) were able to magically pass this wisdom on to their students. Also, importantly, (3), they were Chinese. These men could then be understood as Chinese Buddhist authorities, native-grown true heirs of the Buddha.

Accordingly the distinctive literary genres were the invention of (often quite historically dubious) "lineages" to establish the legitimacy of a master, and various encounter dialogues or records showing the masters magically passing on their insights, and-- crucially for making them seem attractive to educated Chinese-- showing them to resemble Daoist sages.

From TotEoTT #446:

The sixth patriarch said to an assembly,

Good friends, each of you clean your mind and listen to my teaching. Your own mind is Buddha - don't doubt any more. There is not a thing you can establish outside - it is all the basic mind conceiving all sorts of things. Therefore scripture says, "When thought is produced, all kinds of things are produced; when thought passes away, all kinds of things pass away." If you want to develop knowledge of all kinds, you need to attain absorption in unity, absorption in one practice.

If in all places you do not dwell on appearances, do not conceive aversion or attraction to any of those appearances, and have no grasping or rejection, do not think of such things as benefit, fulfillment, or destruction, and you are at peace, calm, open, aloof, this is called absorption in oneness.

If in all places whether walking, standing, sitting, or lying down, your pure unified direct mind does not move from the site of enlightenment, truly making a pure land, this is called absorption in one practice.

What does it mean for your mind to not move from the site of enlightenment?

Do you practice like this? If so, what has your experience with been like? I'd love to hear about it.

Also from Huineng:

Confused people recite the Buddha's name and expect to be born in the Western Pure Land, while the wise recite the Buddha's name in order to purify their own minds. The pure mind is the Western Pure Land. If you understand that, then it is not 10,000,000,000 lands away; it is right here. If you don't understand, you don't know how many Buddhalands beyond even that number it is.

When confused, you may study this Sutra, study that Sutra, investigate back and forth and still not understand. When truly awake, there is no need to study; one word is too much. But you must truly understand. Do not pretend and say, 'I don't have to recite the Buddha's name.' That is just laziness."

Folks love to quote Huineng's poem as a reason not to practice (where can dust collect?). That's just laziness.

What has your practice looked like today (or this week, if that's easier to discuss)? Are you, as Foyan suggested, doing the Inner Work? If so, how's it going? What's it like for you?

Hope your day is going well!

The following is a comparative study of the Wan Ling Record, other wise known as the Wan-ling Lu, as translated by John Blofeld compared to Jeffrey M. Leahy. Readers note this is the start of what Leahy titles: "The Wanling Lu: The Master Ascends the Hall" while Blofeld continues as before.

上堂云。即心是佛。上至諸佛。下至蠢動含靈。皆有佛性。同一心 體。所以達摩從西天來。唯傳一心法。直指一切眾生本來是佛。不 假修行。但如今識取自心見自本性。更莫別求。

Blofeld:

One day, after taking his seat in the great hall, the Master began as follows. Since Mind is the Buddha (Adsolute), it embraces all things, from the Buddhas (Enlightened Beings) at one extreme to the meanest of belly-crawling reptiles or insects at the other. All these alike share the Buddha-Nature and all are of the substance of the One Mind. So, after his arrival from the West, Bodhidharma transmitted naught but the Dharma of the One Mind. He pointed directly to the truth that all sentient beings have always been of one substance with the Buddha. He did not follow any of those mistaken ‘methods of attainment’. And if you could only achieve this comprehension of your own Mind, thereby discovering your real nature, there would assuredly be nothing for you to seek, either.

Leahy:

[Huangbo] ascended the hall and spoke: "This very mind is Buddha. From the highest of all buddhas down to the lowest of the squirming living creatures; all possess the Buddha-nature. They share the essence of the One Mind. This is why Bodhidharma came from the west and only transmitted the Dharma of the One Mind. He directly pointed to the fact that all sentient beings are, from the beginning, Buddha. Do not preform provisional practices. But, today, if you understand your own mind and see your own original nature, then there will be nothing else to seek."

Parts: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25]

Reference material:

Huang Po on the Transmission of Mind by John Blofeld Page 86

The Wanling record of Chan Master Huangbo Duanji by Jeffrey M. Leahy Page 42

《 黃檗斷際禪師宛陵錄》CBETA No. 2012B

Post(s) in Question

Post: https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/s/BiBG0kkgan

THE OTHER DONGSHAN was asked what is a Buddha?

Yunzhou Dongshan answered: Three pounds of hemp

1. Not a riddle.
2. Not clear to people who don't have hemp as the staple fabric in their community
3. Not an amount to people unfamiliar with the Mnkk Life.

Podcast: HEMP YOURSELF

• Link to episode: https://sites.libsyn.com/407831/4-26-wumenguan-the-gateless-checkpoint-18-astromei-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

What did we end up talking about?

We talked about what a Buddha is and why I get my Dongshans more confused than my Touzis.

But don't worry I have a cunning plan.

We talked about what hemp, flax, burlap, is, since not everybody understands it is from the same-ish plant as maryjane-juwanna, and I wondered if it was a columbian exchange crop.

We talked about how people think it's okay to make stuff up about this case because they aren't monks, don't know any Dongshans, and Japanese Buddhists pretend it's about ill fitting tshirts.

And so on.

Astromei said he wanted to end the episode before I asked an annoying at-the-end-of-the-podcast question... I don't even exercise.

If you wanna

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.

I was thinking about the fact that it seems pretty reasonable to call somebody up and talk on the phone about something you talk about on reddit everyday... but some people are nervous about this. Why? It's a phone call. Is it the public nature of the phone call? In a coffee shop it's public too... but it's not scrutinized.

Being wrong... is that the big worry? We all have trouble saying Chinese words, remembering Chinese names, and explaining Zen concepts that the Chinese themselves were uncomfortable with. What's the standard for public conversations when it comes to knowledge? Does that standard mean less people want to talk publicly?

I'm short on time here so I'm going to condense this.

1. If you put anything into your brain for long enough you get tired of it. This is because your brain wants to do stuff. It doesn't like passivity.
2. Zen Masters want you to be active and engaged. That's why we have so many questions in all of the instruction provided by Zen Masters:

FOYAN: Those who are not companions of myriad things have departed

the toils of materialism. The mind does not recognize the mind, the eye does not see the eye; since there is no opposition, when you see forms there are no forms there to be seen, and when you hear sounds there are no sounds there to be heard. Is this not departing the toils of materialism?

THAT'S THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF THE FIRST LECTURE.

If you give people a pen and a piece of paper at any age and tell them to do something with it, they will not produce something someone else is produced.

The creative impulse is at the core of what it means to be aware and alive.

So if you get tired of reading all of the stuff that aware and alive, people have produced over the 1,000 years of historical records, mostly in the form of transcripts of real people having real conversations, called Zen koans,

       IT'S BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT TALKING BACK 

When Foyan asks questions you have to answer them. When he asks questions, you have to try to get behind the question... Why did he ask it??

You have to try to understand how other people might hear the question, especially his audience at the time.

And when you start to think that way you get creative pretty quickly.

That's what study is... That kind of creativity. That kind of engagement.

We all know throughout the Zen record Zen Masters tell people not to memorize and quote.

That's dead words.

Zen as a living tradition because of engagement and backtalk.

Guess who! YUANWU!

Zen Letters, chapter Time Waits for No One

All those with conditioned minds are as far apart from

true reality as the sky is from the earth. Right now, if you cannot pass through the barrier, it is obviously because your mind has many serious attachments. If you can clear these away and reach the realm where there is no conditioned mind, all delusions and defilements and emotional habits will end, and all the obstructions created by conditioned knowledge and arbitrary views and intellectual understanding will be dissolved away—what else is there?

Why is he treating conditioned minds as something far apart from reality?

This is why Nanquan said that, once freed from its con-

ditioning, the ordinary mind is the Way. But as soon as you produce a thought seeking to be “ordinary,” you have already turned away and missed it. This is the point that is most subtle and hardest to approach. Even immeasurably great people falter and hesitate when they get here—how much the more so for those still in the stage of learning.

Here we have the Zen opinion on Nanquans "Ordinary mind is the way". He meant once it's freed from conditioning. Is your ordinary mind free from conditioning?

You must strive with all your might to bite through here

and cut off conditioned habits of mind. Be like a person who has died the great death: after your breath is cut off, then you come back to life. Only then do you realize that it is as open as empty space. Only then do you reach the point where your feet are walking on the ground of reality.

Why is Yuanwu so adamant about striving? Here's your chance to discuss all your experiences that you relate to "dying the Great Death". Did your breath get cut off?

When you experience profound realization of this matter,

you become thoroughly clear, and your faith becomes com- plete. You are free and at ease and clean clear through—not knowing anything, not understanding anything. As soon as anything touches you, you turn freely, with no more con- straints, and without getting put anywhere. When you want to act, you act, and when you want to go, you go. There is no more gain or loss or affirmation or denial. You encompass everything from top to bottom all at once.

Once you experience the profound realization, then when you play Xbox and drink Mt dew it will be Zen. Otherwise you're just conditioned to play Xbox and drink Mt dew and not Zen.

How could it be easy to carry into practice or even to

approach this realm where there is no conditioned mind? You must be a suitable person to do so. If you are not yet like this, you must put aside mind and body and immerse yourself in silent reflection until you are free from the slightest dependency. Keep watching, watching, as you come and go. After a long time you will naturally come to cover heaven and earth, so that true reality appears ready-made wherever you touch.

"Put aside mind and body".... "Immerse yourself in silent reflection"... What kind of activity is this? Some sort of physical exercise? Does it sound like it's instantaneous? Does it sound like Yuanwu has nothing to teach and you have nothing to do?

Before there was a natural-born Shakyamuni Buddha, be-

fore there was a spontaneously so Maitreya Buddha, who was it who understood while still in the womb? You must be quick to focus your energy. Time does not wait for people. Suddenly, in one bite, you will bite through, and nobody will be able to do anything about you. To succeed at this, a truly great person must reach the realm of self-realization, independence, and freedom.

Yuanwu with the "face before you were born". Classic.

My thoughts:

This is what I got from this chapter:

If you're mind is still conditioned with delusions and emotional habits, you must strive in meditation until you reach the point where your breath ceases and you experience the profound realization of the unconditioned ordinary mind, free from delusions and emotional habits.

What are your thoughts about the chapter?

Yuanwu said that he pulls out people’s nails while Wumen said that he just hammers them in.

It reminds me of Mazu saying that “Mind is Buddha” is something to stop the baby from crying while “mind is not Buddha” is for after the baby has stopped crying.

In receiving a guest into your home, you are doing something different than in being received by a host.

I think in practicable terms, this looks like a recognition of appropriately questioning and answering. A golf club salesman isn’t the guy to go to for medical advice.

A couple lines from Foyan's record came up in another post recently.

Original text from Instant Zen:

Buddha has a secret saying, Kasyapa didn't conceal it'—of course! Of course! When knowledge and principle merge, environment and mind unite, it is like when one drinks water one spontaneously knows whether it's warm or cool.

Contemplating what they meant, I decided to dig up the source text to see if it would yield anything.

Original Chinese text for the lines:

如來有密語。迦葉不覆藏。果然。果然。智與理冥。境與神會。如人飲水。冷暖自知。

I find Cleary's rendering of the 5th and 6th lines questionable. To me, it reads closer to 'Cognition in line with principles is obscure. Circumstances in line with the spirit are understood.' That's maybe not a great translation, but I think the gist is supposed to be something of a comparison between the two lines, where the first represents being hindered by a limiting and rigid conceptual framework and the second the ability to intuitively comprehend in accordance with present conditions.

Also, from Pleco for the phrase 如人飲水。冷暖自知。

1.The person who drinks it knows best whether the water is hot or cold (Zen proverb); self-awareness comes from within.

2. To know best by personal experience.

As opposed to memorizing a 'fixed, universal truth' about the eternal temperature of all water obtained from someone else, I presume.

Thoughts?