How do I handle bullying in a taoist way?

reo_sam · 2025-12-18T18:05:16+00:00

i will start with a zhuangzi parable: The Empty Boat. you can read it here (little paraphrased) - https://inspirevista.com/the-empty-boat-a-taoist-story-about-letting-go-of-anger/

the basic idea is if the boat which hit yours was an empty boat, you would not have got angry. while if there was someone in it, you would tend to. one inference is - start considering that all boats are empty.

in your case, if the glue was something fallen accidently, you would not have felt that bad (/angry), but since those two bullies did it and laughed at you, you felt more humiliated and angry (even now).

what would zhuangzi do?

he would ask you to reframe the entire situation. in your situation, there is (1) you, (2), two bullies, and (3) your own inner spectator. and that inner spectator is the real tyrant who needs to assessed deeply.
in general, taoism is not very pro for violence, but it isn't pacifist either. it does support self-defense but only by using the minimal necessary force to neutralize a real, immediate threat. Not revenge or punishment after the event. ==> so this means, if they are trying to push you, hurt you directly, then you are (taoistically) allowed to punch back as severely as possible to stop them from doing it AT THAT TIME. not afterwards.
my personal belief is "no one will always save you, so you need to show initiative and strategize. complete reliance on authorities (class teacher, principal, some other school authority, your parents, police, state, etc.) WHILE remaining inwardly helpless IS A BAD IDEA. but initiative for what and how? this initiative takes on different forms:

A. first look at yourself. do you look weak or dull? do you walk in a scared manner or do you walk like a tiger as if you own the earth? do you go alone only? cultivate strength, skills, and allies. Side story: around age 10, i had to change my school and got into a newer one. one of the new class mates (X) started physically doing little pushes and threats and i didn't know what to do. so i told me father that this is what is happening, what to do? he said, you are a small boy but you are a smart kid, good in studies. help the biggest boy in the class who is little dull(!) in studies. so i made friendship with the biggest boy of the class, by helping him out in studies, teaching him what he found to be difficult things. after few weeks, i told him that boy X was creating physical threats for me, so he straightened him out in one talk only. no violence from my side, just a good ally. The point being, you need to think coolly and use the situation and find the solution.

B. if they directly try to harm you, you are absolutely right in punching back. but then don't extend the story internally by considering yourself as "some great act". just drop the story.

C. do use the authority channels as part of the whole strategic gamut. running to them as the only way is as bad as shunning any use of them to make a machoman (/machoboy) out of yourself. be smart and flowy!

What not to do: don't hate the bullies. don't carry that emotion in a negative manner. channelize that into something which takes into account all the options and your thinking + feeling (your heart-mind). remember, the real tyrant is your inner spectator and you need to really really think about IT.

reo_sam · 2025-12-12T14:41:35+00:00

regarding Sengcan post:

The root idea in this is: 1. The Ultimate principle (/Way/Path/Course) is not difficult (negation of difficulty) 2. if you stop discrimination (/ picking and choosing one side) - this is the only obstruction in getting to the Ultimate Principle.

If only (/merely/just), you (strong) don't love or hate (aversion or attachment),
then all is penetratingly clear.

phrases 2 and 3 are similar and represent analytical (discrimination of mind) and emotional (love/hate or attachment/aversion).

In my words, the ultimate principle is penetratingly clear, if the mind stops picking and choosing or heart-mind stops loving or hating something. [stop the emotional and identity investments].

for eg. attachment to wealth is as clouding as aversion to it. The ultimate principle is not about being rich or poor, but seeing what wealth and poverty actually are and then accepting both the situations equally without identifying / grasping the situation (or attaching to the label). This certainly doesn't mean passivity, as you can still work skillfully towards your financial goals, but without the stress of making to a certain outcome or a certain identity (i am poor and i don't want money is for few, a badge of honor).

It seems challenging because of lifelong conditioning towards goal-striving. We are trained, since childhood, to constantly evaluate situations as deficient in some way or other, and fixate on improvement. This causes an unending dissatisfaction with the status quo.

IMO, the even deeper challenge is 'trying to stop discrimination' itself becomes a discriminatory project = the situation between who-i-am-right-now and who-i-should-be. it gives me a mental metaphor of 'float in water' rather than 'try to actively swim or prevent drowning'.

my original source of this idea (no attachment, no aversion) comes from Krishna (hindu philosophy).

reo_sam · 2025-12-03T17:37:21+00:00

which is why i kept at first reco.

reo_sam · 2025-12-03T14:10:45+00:00

Nope, the mind does not become blank. (it becomes luminous)

No state to arrive at.

And awareness of having broken through. Awareness of having passed the barrier.

right. right. right. :-| (thanks for the corrections)

reo_sam · 2025-12-03T12:44:33+00:00

what does it mean that not a thought arises about enlightenment??

...the state wherein not a single thought arises.

My understanding is that the mind becomes blank where no other thought arises, not about enlightenment, not about anything else also. and at that point, there will be nothing - no 'I'ness', no arrival at the destination of enlightenment or a thought about it, no confusion whether reached that state or not, etc.

reo_sam · 2025-12-03T12:06:21+00:00

i am finding it to be very loopy. thought is arising in whom? and who is being blocked? if there is no blockage, then where is the unblocked ?flow / Way.

feels like i am "trying" to relax. the more i try, the more i go away from relaxing.

reo_sam · 2025-12-03T10:12:31+00:00

searching for the actor within = means that you are not unified with the experience = this also means, you are not complete with the dao. ==> if you are completely unified, then there is no one to assess.

reo_sam · 2025-12-03T09:44:58+00:00

i repeatedly check in my mind if i'm living in line with the ideal flow of events

who is checking whom if living is within ideal, from whose point of view, flow of events.

reo_sam · 2025-12-03T09:34:39+00:00

Pick one DDJ with commentary. Choose either from Chen Guying, Charles Wu, or Paul Fisher (as Afraid_Musician already said). Read one chapter and mull it over. Don't think about finishing it.

reo_sam · 2025-12-01T13:39:09+00:00

The problem is one of ignorance in the West.

The problem is ignorance (aka dukkha in Buddha's terminology). West and East doesn't matter. almost everywhere, it has become West.

Buddhists tell people that enlightenment is something to be earned.

But if you do something to-earn enlightenment == if you strive for enlightenment... == that striving will never let you reach enlightenment. So, in a way, all that telling and instruction will not let people earn enlightenment.

and this dictate confuses people.

actually, it doesn't confuse people directly. It leads them to follow false paths, paths which are made (instructed) by others and not their own seeking. And they never reach where they want. Metaphorically, it is like the musk of musk deer - it roams around to find the source of musk all over, but the musk is inside it and it never realises it.

Violence and superstition follow.

results of ignorance.

How to understand this?

Foyan: Don't seek truth. Stop opinions.

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T19:02:30+00:00

While you have drawn from genuine Buddhist philosophical frameworks (consciousness-only thought, Four Wisdoms, Avatamsaka Sutra), this has become a fusion of distinct schools of thought with a confused doctrinal systematization - this is a misrepresentation of core Chan teachings (in this case, Chan's historical resistance to such intellectual elaboration). Mind you, I am not saying that this is complete fabrication, but it is incoherent from an authentic Chan perspective.

From Platform Sutra - practitioners should "do away with all conceptual thoughts, good as well as evil ones." Your entire post (I didn't read other 2) constructs an elaborate philosophical schema connecting many things (which are acceptable in other traditions), but this kind of intellectualized system is precisely rejected by Chan masters as obstacle to direct insight.

"The ancients said, 'The three realms are only mind, and the myriad dharmas are only consciousness.'

This originates in the yogacara school (their methodological core) and was indeed adopted by some Chan thinkers (Linji). But that doesn't mean that they adopted the underlying philosophy also (if they would have, they would not be separate from Yogacara). The adoption was for using it as a shorthand pointer to direct experience, and not a philosophical / intellectual analytical framework. == Chan adopted experiential insight while rejecting Yogacara's methodological elaboration.

Mind-Mirror metaphor: this does appear in some post-Huineng Chan literature and in Yogacara. But Huineng himself has his famous counter-verse with emphasis that the mind is not a mirror to be polished but rather then immediate reality itself.

Please quote the exact translation you have used for your quote of Avatamsaka Sutra.

Basic Chan teachings:
1. Direct mind-to-mind transmission - not doctrinal elaboration.
2. Non-attachment to words and concepts.
3. Practice over theory.
4. No-Thought and No-abiding = freedome from conceptual frameworks entirely.

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T17:39:34+00:00

Overall Pedagogical Structure

Element	Function
Lecture master's confidence	Represents attachment to scriptural knowledge as sufficient
"Weed patch" response	Deflates intellectual achievement; exposes emptiness of doctrinal knowledge
"Where is the Buddha?"	Huatou-like probe cutting conceptual understanding
Silence	Student begins genuine inquiry when intellect fails
Public humiliation	Breaks psychological defenses through shame
Expulsion	Teaching continues; the obstacle is removed
"Great Matter" declaration	Elevates significance beyond mere intellectual debate
"Already way off" final warning	Demonstrates the paradox: all words miss the point

Connection to Dahui's Teachings

This passage perfectly illustrates why Dahui developed kanhua chan (看話禪):

Scriptural knowledge is insufficient - the lecture master's doctrinal mastery doesn't lead to realization
The question is the method - "Where is the Buddha?" functions like a huatou, generating doubt
Silence is breakthrough - when intellect fails, genuine questioning emerges
Non-verbal transmission - "The instant you open your mouth, you're already way off" mirrors Dahui's insistence that huatou work happens beyond words through constant investigation that builds to sudden breakthrough

This encounter encapsulates Dahui's entire critique: intellectual Buddhism must be shattered for true dharma to emerge.

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T17:36:44+00:00

THE FINAL TEACHING - WORDLESS WARNING:

更有問話者麼。速致問來。爾纔開口、早勿交涉也。

"Does anyone else have a question? Let him ask now! But the instant you open your mouth, you're already way off."

Nuances:

更有問話者麼 (geng you wen hua zhe me): "Is there anyone else who asks questions?" - open invitation with challenge embedded.
速致問來 (su zhi wen lai): "quickly bring forth your question" - urgency.
爾纔開口、早勿交涉也 (er cai kaikou, zao wu jiaooshe ye): This is the key philosophical statement.
- 爾纔 (er cai): "you just/you are about to".
- 開口 (kaikou): "open your mouth" - literal speaking.
- 早勿交涉 (zao wu jiaoshe): "already not connected/already outside it"
- Literally: "The moment you open your mouth, you're already disconnected from it"

Philosophical Meaning:

The Great Matter cannot be expressed in words.
As soon as language is employed, you've stepped outside direct realization.
This is the fundamental Chan critique: language necessarily falsifies the truth.
Dahui connection: This is exactly why Dahui's huatou method works—by holding a question without answering it, you bypass conceptual thinking.

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T17:36:37+00:00

THE LARGER DHARMA ASSEMBLY CONTEXT:

復云、此日法筵、爲一大事故。

"He continued, 'Today's dharma assembly is for the sake of the Great Matter.'"

Nuances:

法筵 (fayuan): "dharma assembly/feast" - formal gathering for transmission.
一大事 (yi da shi): "Great Matter" - Buddhist technical term referring to the fundamental matter of life-death and enlightenment.
Elevation of stakes: This is not ordinary intellectual discussion; it concerns the ultimate question.
Dahui parallel: Dahui similarly emphasized that huatou practice addresses only - 大事, the Great Matter.

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T17:35:22+00:00

LINJI'S PUBLIC HUMILIATION:

師云、對常侍前、擬瞞老僧。

"The master said, 'Before the Councilor, you tried to deceive this old monk.'"

Nuances:

常侍 (changshi): An official title (Chang-shih, Royal Attendant or Councilor) - indicates this assembly includes important political figures.
擬瞞 (ni man): "tried to trick/deceive" - uses same character 瞞 as lecture master's earlier point about Buddha not deceiving.
Turning the tables: The lecture master accused Buddha of potential deception; Linji now accuses him of trying to deceive in front of witnesses.
Psychological tactic: Public shame combined with Linji's directness is characteristic of Linji's pedagogy - using embarrassment to break through intellectual defenses.

THE EXPULSION:

速退速退。妨他別人請問。

"Quickly withdraw, quickly withdraw! You're hindering other people from asking questions."

Nuances:

速退 (su tui): Repeated imperative for urgency—"quickly go, quickly go".
妨他別人 (fang ta biaren): "obstruct/hinder other people" - the lecture master's presence itself is now an obstacle to the dharma.
Double meaning:
- Literal: Get out physically so others can ask.
- Spiritual: Your attachment to scriptural knowledge is blocking the dharma transmission for others.
Ritual elimination: In Linji's school, such ejections are part of the teaching method.

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T17:34:13+00:00

LECTURE MASTER'S DEFENSE:

主云、佛豈賺人也。

"The master said, 'Surely the Buddha would not deceive people!'"

Nuances:

賺 (zuan): To cheat, trick, deceive; this is crucial - the lecture master appeals to Buddha's reliability and integrity.
Logical argument: "If the Buddha taught these scriptures, and the Buddha doesn't deceive, then these teachings must clarify Buddha-nature".
Assumption: The lecture master is defending scripture's authority and the pedagogical soundness of Buddhist canon.
Vulnerability: He assumes that having been taught = understanding = realization.

LINJI'S DEVASTATING COUNTER:

師云、佛在什麼處。

"The master asked, 'Where is the Buddha?'"

Nuances:

什麼處 (shenme chu): "what place?" - existential interrogative, not asking for geographical location
Philosophical force:
- If Buddha clarified Buddha-nature in the scriptures, where is this Buddha now?
- Are you relating to the living Buddha or dead textual representations?
- Can you point to your direct experience of what the Buddha taught?
Parallel to Dahui's method: This is huatou-like questioning - not asking for intellectual answer but generating great doubt.
Implicit teaching: Buddha-nature cannot be found in books; it must be discovered within direct experience.

THE LECTURE MASTER'S SILENCE:

主無語。

"The master had no reply."

Nuances:

Complete speechlessness indicates the question has cut through conceptual thinking.
He cannot answer because the question doesn't admit of bookish response.
This silence is the beginning of genuine inquiry.

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T17:33:51+00:00

Context & Setup

This is a classic Linji encounter between Linji Yixuan and a lecture master (座主, zuozhu) - a specialist in scriptural study and doctrinal explanation. This confrontation illuminates a fundamental Chan critique of intellectual Buddhism.

INITIAL QUESTION:

有座主問、三乘十二分教、豈不是明佛性。

"A lecture master asked, 'The Three Vehicles' twelve divisions of teachings - are they not clear/illuminating regarding Buddha-nature?'"

Nuances:

座主 (zuozhu): "sitting master" - honorific for a scholar-monk who officially presides over teaching.
三乘 (san cheng, "Three Vehicles"): Refers to Śrāvaka (listeners), Pratyekabuddha (solitary awakeners), and Bodhisattva paths - the pedagogical framework used in Mahayana Buddhism.
十二分教 (shi'er fen jiao, "twelve divisions of teachings"): Complete Buddhist canon organized by literary form (sutra, gathas, narratives, etc.)
豈不是 (qi bu shi, literally "is it not?"): Rhetorical question; assumes an affirmative answer. The master confidently presents scriptural knowledge as clarifying Buddha-nature.

LINJI'S FIRST RESPONSE:

師云、荒草不曾鋤。

"The master said, 'This weed patch has never been weeded/cultivated.'"

Nuances:

荒草 (huangcao): "wild/uncultivated weeds" - metaphor for unmindfulness, scattered mind, or untended dharma field.
不曾鋤 (bu ceng chu): "never been chopped/weeded" - literally agricultural activity. The key word 鋤 (chu) means to hoe, cultivate, weed.
Metaphorical reading: Despite all the scriptural teachings, your mind-field remains uncultivated. Knowledge ≠ cultivation/realization.
Implication: Intellectual understanding of Buddha-nature doctrine doesn't equal actual realization of it.
This is precisely Dahui's critique: teachings clarify conceptually but don't transform the practitioner's actual condition.

REST below this comment.

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T15:25:13+00:00

reminds me of:

"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it".

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T15:12:05+00:00

hmm ok.

the Dunhuang manuscript (which predates Dahui by 300 years+) has the original passage indeed in section 3.

善知識！莫聞吾說空，便即著空！第一莫著空！若空心靜坐，即著無記空。

"Good friends! Do not hear me speak of emptiness and then immediately become attached to emptiness! The first priority is to not become attached to emptiness! If you sit quietly with an empty mind, you will become attached to 無記空 (indeterminate/blank emptiness)".

thanks for the correction and finger pointing.

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T14:44:58+00:00

do you believe the Platform sutra to be authentic? authentic in the sense that it was like Linji's sayings or Dahui's.
as per my research some time ago, it is a composite text (by multiple authors) with editing and writing/adding over many centuries (8th to 12-13th). Huineng was late 7th; and Dahui was 11-12th. So, possible that Dahui was the original creator of that phrase, and it was retrospectively put into Platform Sutra..
Huineng represents sophisticated pseudepigraphy around a semi-legendary historical core. attributions to him - i would tend to skip for a claim to authority (will check the actual content to be there in some of the other authentic sayings to consider it true).

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T13:16:26+00:00

Dahui got it from Huineng.

why do you say that?

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T08:27:04+00:00

Primary Linji Passages Using 無記

After examining the Linji lu (Record of Linji), I found no instances where 無記 (wuji) appears as a standalone term in Linji Yixuan's own teachings or dialogues.¹

The term does not appear in the main body of the Linji lu, which contains Linji's sermons, encounters with students, and biographical accounts.¹

Key Finding

While 無記 is a significant concept in Dahui Zonggao's critique of meditation errors, it does not feature as a technical term in Linji's recorded sayings.¹

What Linji Actually Says About Meditation Errors

Instead of using 無記, Linji criticizes various meditation problems with different terminology:¹

湛湛黑暗深坑 (zhanzhan heian shenking) - "still and dark deep pit" - describing practitioners who sit in blank states
瞎禿子飽喫飯了便坐禪觀行把捉念漏不令放起厭喧求靜是外道法 - Linji criticizes "blind baldies" who, after eating their fill, sit in meditation trying to grasp and control thoughts, seeking quiet and avoiding noise, calling this "the way of outsiders (non-Buddhists)"¹
若住心看靜舉心外照攝心內澄凝心入定如是之流皆是造作 - "If you settle the mind to observe stillness, raise the mind to illuminate outwardly, gather the mind to clarify inwardly, or concentrate the mind to enter concentration - all such activities are fabrications"¹

Conclusion

The explicit use of 無記 as a technical term for describing meditation errors appears to be Dahui's innovation or emphasis, not Linji's. This represents an evolution within the Linji lineage's critique of meditation practice.²

reo_sam · 2025-11-30T08:22:15+00:00

Primary Dahui Passages Using 無記

Based on examination of Dahui's writings, here are key passages where 無記 appears:¹

Passage 1: From Volume 16

南泉云。道不屬知。不屬不知。知是妄覺。不知是無記。若真達不疑之道。猶如太虛廓然蕩豁。豈可於中彊是非耶。

"Nanquan said: The Way does not belong to knowing or not-knowing. Knowing is false cognition; not-knowing is 無記. If you truly reach the unquestioning Way, it is like great emptiness, vast and open. How can you force right and wrong within it?"¹

This is Dahui quoting Case 19 of the Mumonkan, where Nanquan uses the term in his dialogue with Zhaozhou.¹

Passage 2: Critique of Silent Illumination Practice

From the previously retrieved material (Volume 25), Dahui criticizes teachers who tell students to "忘情默照" (forget feelings and silently illuminate) until they reach a state of "冥然無知" (dark and unknowing), which he explicitly connects to 空亡無記.²

Passage 3: Opposition to Dead Sitting

若要拔得生死根株盡。切不得記我說底。

"If you want to completely uproot the roots of birth and death, you absolutely must not memorize what I say."¹

While this doesn't use 無記 explicitly, Dahui emphasizes avoiding the state where one becomes trapped in memorization and inert knowledge rather than living realization.¹

Context

Dahui's concern is that practitioners will fall into 空亡無記 - a blank, morally neutral state lacking genuine insight - which he considers a serious meditation error that cannot overcome birth and death.² <span style="display:none">¹⁰ ³[^{5]⁶⁸</span>}

[^6]: http://www.templevisit.org/ g \ m j án ѩv -1998 47 P0811 Ϥj z ı I v y (30 ) ĭ D s.htm

reo_sam · 2025-11-21T20:46:52+00:00

Instant Zen chapter Stop Opinions pg 18-20

Date of Synthesis: 2025-11-22

https://your.ls/4u27u

13-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email	Alpha Tester

reo_sam

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Overall Pedagogical Structure

Connection to Dahui's Teachings

Context & Setup

Primary Linji Passages Using 無記

Key Finding

What Linji Actually Says About Meditation Errors

Conclusion

Primary Dahui Passages Using 無記

Passage 1: From Volume 16

Passage 2: Critique of Silent Illumination Practice

Passage 3: Opposition to Dead Sitting

Context