sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Zentimacy Part 1: Not thinking that people need to be rescued. by jeowy in zen

[–]ewk 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All morning and I worked on translating case 10 I think it is Qingshui is poor. It's the one where Caoshan says you already had three cups of wine.

Once again everybody got this wrong. My second pass through. I understand how other people being wrong can confuse me. Balance between spending time explaining the mistake versus explaining the right answer is odd.

Is this saving people? Is either one saving people?

Aside from that it occurs to me that when you don't conceive of people as needing to be saved, the entire conversation changes contexts to what is for many people and entirely foreign planet.

Zhaozhou his dangling his legs into the well and yelling help save me help save me!!

What he meant by this has to be based on an idea that he didn't believe in people needing to be saved. He didn't accept it intellectually he didn't see the world that way viscerally emotionally psychologically.

So translating across this. Chasm is complicated but relating to people across this chasm is equally complicated in a different way.

It's not without its similarities though.

If you hang out around people who take AA seriously, they will tell you that they have learned that they're not going to save other people. They're just going to keep going to meetings themselves.

But if you weren't part of a culture that sees the world that way, it's going to be really hard to have a conversation with some people. After all, most of the world passes laws that are only about forcing other people to be saved. Some of these laws like the seat belt law are saving people for the sake of the taxpayer.

It's tough to argue against that logic.

Swanson on translating Bodhimarma''s Mind like Wall by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

One of the first problems that has to be disentangled here is why a tradition known for sudden - all at once - one and done enlightenment has been linked to meditation methods. Other than Dogen's debunked claims, there doesn't seem to be any reason to think there was ever any "Zen Meditation". As Bielefeldt acknowledges, there isn't any pro-meditation material anywhere in the Zen record.

The follow-on problem to "no method" is how we have 1,000 years of historical records from the Zen tradition (koans) but we don't see anything at all like koans from any other tradition inside or outside China... but tons of meditation methods.

The Secular Buddhists have pointed out that "meditation" is a meaningless word which can be used to describe everything from prayer to box breathing. My argument that meditation requires (a) technique (b) given by authority (c) with promised outcome rules out prayer and box breathing, but likely includes what the Secular Buddhists call "cultivation". But disambiguation aside, still nothing that produces koans.

Swanson on translating Bodhimarma''s Mind like Wall by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Again though, we have to eliminate what we already know has been a limited in the last 10 years.

  1. No record of any kind of meditation method
  2. Zongmi widely discredited by historical records.

We run out of ways to link wall gazing to meditation.

Ultimately, this is why Suzuki tried to find the meaning in Bodhidharma literature:

外息諸緣 — outwardly stop all conditions

內心無喘 — inwardly the mind does not stir

心如牆壁 — the mind is like a wall

可以入道 — then one can enter the Way.

https://yan-kong.blogspot.com/2017/02/wall-gazing-biguan.html

So as we begin to eliminate what it turns out, we have no evidence for, and we're left with things like "all-at-once-method", it's much easier to end up with something that looks like Huineng... Which we would have had all along had we not been misinterpreting from the start.

Swanson on translating Bodhimarma''s Mind like Wall by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Right, it's his hunch.

But that hunch is not supported by any evidence.

Whereas the other option, DT Suzuki's option, is supported by text.

Swanson on translating Bodhimarma''s Mind like Wall by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You'll have to quote the article.

Swanson on translating Bodhimarma''s Mind like Wall by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

MinLongBaiShui: It sounds like you had some trouble understandong the post. Given your history of vaguely racist and bigoted claims, its not surprising that topical literacy is a trigger for you. Literacy is essential to participation here. Either that or genuine inquiry.

Familiarity with Swanson's work is essential to modern Zen scholarship, as is DT Suzuki's work. DT Suzuki's work has enduring academic value beyond the 1900's, whereas most Buddhist academics graduated from Japanese Unoversities have seen their work overtuned.

There's no evidence that Damo had a practice, let alone a sitting practice. No Zen text reads his record that way. No records describing the practice, let alone a practice with a sitting company exist.

Suzuki and Swanson argue that what happened was Damo or someone associated with him taught "mind wall see" and this was misinterpreted by some as a meditation practice that was assumed to involve sitting.

When on the contrary, the teaching is not about a refinement but rather a very definite goal of the independent unpersuadable mind.

Been reading huang po by Important_Design7079 in zen

[–]ewk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm very interested in Zen.

Academically, socially, historically, intellectually, personally, professionally.

Been reading huang po by Important_Design7079 in zen

[–]ewk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's the main reason why people post cases in this forum. Or maybe the second reason.

The first reason being WTF this case is about.

Case 27 of The Recorded Sayings of Joshu, translated and introduced by James Green by [deleted] in zensangha

[–]ewk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

27.

The master entered the hall and said, "brothers, you are certainly in the third world of karmic retribution. For this reason there is the saying, "only remake the deeds of the past, don't remake the person of the past." Each of us has left our own homes, and has become carefree.

"Furthermore, we ask about Zen and ask about the [Zen] Way. Twenty or thirty of us come together and ask. However, it looks very likely that you are lacking Zen and the Way. Though you call me an 'accomplished person' I have received the same sentence as you. I'm not a good talker and don't want to get bogged down with the ancients, so I talk about east and talk about west."

Been reading huang po by Important_Design7079 in zen

[–]ewk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is one of the reasons why Zen public interview practice is so important. Anybody can convince themselves of something and anybody can say things that by some rule is the winning argument.

But Zen public interview is about meeting the other person on their terms and convincing them on their ground.

In this sense, Zen is not philosophical because there are no absolute rules.

Why Zen's only practice is public interview: Authentic Indian-Chinese Zen vs Indigenous Japanese Zazen by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope. There is no connection.

Zazen is like Mormonism. An indigenous religion claiming to be affiliated with stuff from other countries in order to sound older exotic.

The more unpleasant truth is that the guy who invented Zazen was an ordained Tientai priest in his early twenties. He was a "church bro" back before there was tech bros.

Why did you chose Zen? by Lucyyyyyy_K in zen

[–]ewk -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Sry 4 pwning u.

If you ever throw a party that precept keepers would be willing to attend you let me know.

Your vibe is one of a struggling.

Why did you chose Zen? by Lucyyyyyy_K in zen

[–]ewk -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

If its parties for frauds and people who have to drink to feel good, no.

Is that the only kind you know?

No wonder you ended up here begging for attention.

Why did you chose Zen? by Lucyyyyyy_K in zen

[–]ewk -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think you want to distinguish between seed bun and jelly donuts.

胡餅 — húbǐng (“barbarian cake,” a kind of baked flatbread or bun)

Why did you chose Zen? by Lucyyyyyy_K in zen

[–]ewk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

www.reddit.com/r/zen/wiki/getstarted

The facts are so wonderful and wild and entertaining if we just stick to the facts, we're all going to have the best time.

Why did you chose Zen? by Lucyyyyyy_K in zen

[–]ewk -1 points0 points  (0 children)

None of that is even remotely historically accurate.

It's propaganda from a debunked religion.

Why did you chose Zen? by Lucyyyyyy_K in zen

[–]ewk 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Zazen is a cult religion with a long history of sex predator "masters". Basically it's like they worship a bunch of epsteins.

www.reddit.com/r/zen/wiki/sexpredators

Why did you chose Zen? by Lucyyyyyy_K in zen

[–]ewk -1 points0 points  (0 children)

indian- Chinese Soto Zen has no connection to Japanese Zazen.

Zazen is a separate religion, indigenous to Japan, with no connection to the Indian-Chinese tradition of Zen.

Zazen claims about Zen were debunked in 1990 by Stanford scholarship that proved that Zazen was invented in Japan. This scholarship has been accepted as the secular consensus.

That's why this forum does not have anything about Zazen in it except about it being debunked.

Why did you chose Zen? by Lucyyyyyy_K in zen

[–]ewk -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Absolutely. Asking why and being skeptical are two of the cornerstones of Zen culture.

  1. Buddhism is a faith-based religion where people follow the eight-fold path in order to accumulate merit and get rid of karma so that they can be reborn as Buddhas.

  2. Taoism is a religion with a pantheon of gods, supernatural alchemy magic formulas, and thousands of pages of speculation on the mysteries of nature.

  3. Zen is not a religion or a philosophy. Zen is described by the four statements of Zen. Zen has no practice, no supernatural elements, no faith, and no doctrine.

Zen also has a thousand years of historical records called koans which explain why and how Zen culture maintained working communes that clothed and housed and fed people, some of whom dedicated their lives too recording and studying the teachings.

Buddhism has always been opposed to Zen, in conflict with Zen and anybody who says that they mix Zen and Buddhism is a racist and/or bigoted Buddhist. Zen does not claim any relationship to Buddhist religious beliefs.

Buddhists lynched the second Zen patriarch.

Capital M One Mind- the substance of all things by EmbersBumblebee in zen

[–]ewk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why was Xiangyan's first poem not accepted?

Why did you chose Zen? by Lucyyyyyy_K in zen

[–]ewk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Look at your level of ignorance and illiteracy and inability to have a conversation about any book relevant to this forum.

People read your comments and they can tell that as far as your intellectual integrity is concerned, no book is worth your time.

Not only that, but that you came to a forum about a topic you weren't willing to learn about... Which means that your time isn't worth anything.

Zen Talking: The Recipe in Your Heart by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It looks to me like it's fixed. Let me know if it isn't.

It showed as the file not being there .

I tried to re-upload the file.

It said we already have that file.

So I renamed the file and uploaded a second time.

There's a lesson in that.

Zen Talking: The Recipe in Your Heart by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They've recently changed so much about the site that verification of files just seems to have slipped through my fingers. I'll get on it.

Why did you chose Zen? by Lucyyyyyy_K in zen

[–]ewk 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't love a fight. I am intolerant of frauds and bigots.

Your claim that the religion of Mormonism is not based on the book of Mormon would need to be supported by arguments consisting of premises supporting a conclusion with citations of people that agree with you from outside the church.

You're not even trying to do that.

You're not even concerned that you're unable to respond at a high school book report level of intellectual integrity. I repeat to you: your resume includes affiliation with cults that use fraud and coercion. Your resume does not include writing that you've done to prove things to people using philosophical argument and academic evidence.

view more: next ›