Modern Western Zen

Most people today are no less confused than the people of ancient china.
But they are confused with different concepts.

When Zen master Zhaozhou said that Dogs don't have Buddha nature, his listeners where shocked,
because that was the opposite of what they truly believed.

If I tell you that a dog doesn't have buddhanature, do you really care? I don't think so.
Even if I teach you that every single sentient being has buddha nature
and later tell you dogs don't, this would still not have the same effect.

When Nanquan said that "Mind is not the buddha, wisdom is not the way",
his listeners were shocked, but today this is of no use, because
barely anyone understands that statement anyways.

A Zen master of the contemporary west doesn't need to imitate Zhaozhou and Nanquan.
He needs to find the things that we hole heartedly, but mistakenly, believe to be true
and rub it in our face.

Fine, wiseman, teach us your doctrine.

What is the ultimate nature of reality?
Whence comes man and whither he goes?
How to achieve happiness?

Bonus questions:
What is truth?
What is good?
What is beauty?

Probably what I'm gonna eat in the evening.

The teaching methods adapted, but the fundamental understanding stayed the same.
Not only did the methods adapt with the centuries, even from one master to the one following him. Mazu said "Mind is the buddha", his student said the opposite after his enlightenment.
You can't be fundamentalist, if your teaching is really no teaching at all.

>Who was your teacher?

Mazu, Pai Chang, Huang Po, Lin Chi, Caoshan, Yaoshan, Dongshan, Yuanwu, Wansong, Wumen, and others
This is not important

>How can you speak of the truth of zen if alll you have done is read the core texts?

because the truth is obvious, even though it can not be found among words and letters

No, its very important, because every Zen "master" claimed a clear lineage going back to the historical Buddha, starting with their teacher.

There was actually a derisive term for someone who received enlightenment without a teacher.

Your no different than a kid who has read the bible and thinks they understand Christianity better than people who dedicated their lives to it

>There was actually a derisive term for someone who received enlightenment without a teacher.
Pratyekabuddha?

>teach us your doctrine.
Have I not told you that I don't have a doctrine in my first post?
There's really nothing to misunderstand in "no doctrine".

>What is the ultimate nature of reality?
a concept
Any other answer I could give would be misunderstood because you're lacking the ability to to see reality unclouded by your conceptual understanding. Every word I'd say you would not understand as the temporary means it is, but as something I proclaim as actual truth.

>Whence comes man and whither he goes?
this is a question coming out of confusion
your body comes from your mothers vagina and will become dust later on

>How to achieve happiness?
avoid picking and choosing

>What is truth?
a concept

>What is good?
a concept

>What is beauty?
my ass, but also picking and choosing

Get rid of those concepts, stop picking and choosing, and go beyond thinking conceptually
and the real truth will be obvious.
Don't get me wrong, this is an easy process.

Is Zen just bullshit to trick stupid people into having a revelation about their own stupidities in order to stop them from bothering with stupid shit?

If that's the case there's no living zen master today.
Because lineage fraud already started with Huineng.
No continous lineage even from the earliest zen masters like Mazu and Shitou to Huineng exists. And even Huineng being legit is questionable.
Shenxiu might have actually been the 6th patriarch and Huineng might even not have existed at all.

I don't have any claims to authority. But if you read the classics once, you'd see that the current state of Zen is more than pitiable.
If you want me to, I can use quotes of the classics to prove my claims about the Zen doctrine to be true.

But that would be useless, since even in the words of the patriarchs, the real truth is no where to be found.

ok so, what is zen?
How do you know if you're doing it right? Assuming there is a right way to zen at all.

>Can't offer any answer to any of life's major questions
*Buzzer sound.* Wrong answer. You just lost those sweet imperial sponsorship monies (which is all you religious people care about) to Christian or Muslim missionaries. Now your band of wandering monks will have to starve or, God forbid, work for a living.

Nice talking to you. Next in line please!

>How do you know if you're doing it right?
Right and wrong is conceptual understanding Zen teaches us to get rid of.
The 3rd Patriarch said, the way of Zen is without difficulty, just avoid picking and choosing.

>ok so, what is zen?
Zen is the doctrine of no doctrine.
No practice, no teaching, neither worldy nor holy.

"Relinquishment of everything is the Dharma, and he who understands this is a
Buddha, but the relinquishment of all delusions leaves no Dharma on which to lay hold."
- Zen master Huang Po

Heh, come back when you find out that all others answers you get are useless bullshit made up by church men.
I'm not giving you answers, I'm enabeling you to see the answers for yourself.
I know this is sad for you, but no one will be able to just hand the real truth to you.
If even the old masters could do nothing more than pointing with words and actions, why do you expect me to do more than that?

That's certainly the idea one might get at first.

Well, back to the actual point.

To see which concepts modern Zen should actually be concerned with (instead of concepts like nirvana that are foreign to us), we must see what people in the west currently believe.
Of course, that's very different for each individual.
But for most, it's true that they don't understand concepts like nirvana, liberation and karma anyways, so these concepts should not be priority.

The currently life style is mostly secular, where I am living. Only few people here actually believe in christianity. Might be different in the US or other countries.

The question is, what do "secular" people actually believe?
Materialism, physicalism and scientism?
Free will or determinism?
The big problems of western philosophy of mind, aka the hard problem of consciousness,
is mostly just ignored.

What do we actually believe will lead to happiness?
Relationships, wealth, popularity?

>I'm a Zen master, ask me anything
No, you're not

hello friend

Hello, dude.

What's up mate?

Nothing, up is as meaningless as down. How are you?

how should one deal with loneliness and the fear of loneliness?
>inb4 get out more and make friends

I'm fine, thank you.
How are you doing yourself?

What's a good book on

a) Buddhism as a whole - like an encyclopedia

b) Zen

I am doing fine as well. This has been a nice chat.

Contact to other humans is a pretty substantial need that (almost) all of us share.
This is a concrete matter, not something Zen will help you solve.
Zen can't help you to be less hungry, Zen can't help you be less lonely.

>a)Buddhism
Well, the Tripitaka.
For the purpose of Zen, some Mahayana Sutras are preferable:
The Lankavatara Sutra (Because that's what Bodhidharma originally taught)
The Diamond Sutra (There's also commentary on that Sutra by Huineng)

>b) Zen
Best just read the text of the masters themselves.

There are 3 koan collections written by Zen masters:
The Gateless Gate (Master Wumen)
The Bluecliff Record (Master Yuanwu)
The Book of Serenity (Master Wansong)
All of these include commentary by the masters who've written the text.

Other texts are mostly recorded sermons and sayings.

Most important examples are:
Bodhidharma (his sermons, etc.)
Sengcan (a poem called Faith in Mind)
Huineng (Platform sutra and commentary on the diamond sutra)
Mazu (Sunface buddha)
Huang Po (On the Transmission of Mind)
Linji (Recorded sayings)
Also the sayings of Zhaozhou and Layman Pang are great, but for a beginner I don't recommend them.

I suggest starting with the Gateless Gate (Because it's short and a good introduction)
The going straight to Mazu, Huang Po and Linji.
After that study the Bluecliff Record and the Book of Serenity intimately.

but the ancient yogis lived in seclusion, saying all they need is brahman and that's all.

Are you an ancient yogi?

Thank you master!

>I'm a Zen master, ask me anything

Nice try. You're another keyboard warrior who cherrypicked quotes and took sayings out of context to heart because they support your comfortable lifestyle and narcissistic philosophy. It's evident in your spouting "no doctrine" and "no picking and choosing" while jumping on every chance you get to take a huge dump on anything remotely resembling Buddhist doctrine and practice. Zen has a direct link to Buddhism in people like Gunabhadra taking the Lankavatara sutra to China, and it later being read and taught by Bodhidharma (whether he's a composite of various teachers or an actual historical figure doesn't matter). The essential teaching of leaving concepts behind can be found way back in the Pali canon and isn't anything revolutionary.

Most of those contrarian speeches by old chinese masters were done in a monastic environment, to students engaged in rigorous meditation practice. I know all the sayings, like zazen isn't meditation, and enlightenment has nothing to do with meditation, but let's get down to brass tacks. Unless you make it a priority to deal with your own bullshit, habitual patterns of thinking that power the three poisons (greed, anger and delusion), all Zen is ever going to be in your life is some half-assed mental gymnastic and intellectual masturbation, no matter how much you dress it up in emptiness and "no doctrine". And if you won't take a step beyond that because of some bullshit justifications, that just shows how proud and selfish you are... especially when you go out of your way to preach to people with little or no exposure to the practice that it's done all wrong by the vast majority. Who the fuck are you to say so?

It's funny that you should deride monasteries in particular. They're a great way to come to terms with yourself, your practice and your goals in life, even if it's only for a short stay. You clearly haven't stepped foot inside one so you would be one to know, wouldn't you?

Does Zen make a man happy no matter what? If yes, does Zen make a man whose family has just been killed before his eyes and who is being burned alive happy? If no, why should we care about Zen?

I am not a master. Anyone who calls himself such does not seek to learn.

Lastly, this obsession with the absence of concepts is commonly called being "stuck in emptiness", or even Zen sickness for short. For all our grand understanding of the groundless nature of reality, we still live in a human world with human concepts, and we should embrace that aspect of life. One who doesn't is said to be like stuck in a deep, black pit, and furthermore, beyond reconciliation due to their abhorrence of basic communication. Concepts like Samsara and Nirvana should not obstruct a student of Zen, but they are perfectly viable ways of speaking about practical cornerstones of its doctrine, especially as they communicate the mental factors that determine what we percieve life to be. There are many, many essential buddhist concepts and principles that don't have a useful and concise english translation.

>Most of those contrarian speeches by old chinese masters were done in a monastic environment, to students engaged in rigorous meditation practice.
But this is not true. Meditation practice was always ridiculed by Zen masters.
It's already in the platform sutra and gets more obious with laters masters.
The dhyana practice of the chan sect is not to be confused with meditation practice.

>It's evident in your spouting "no doctrine" and "no picking and choosing" while jumping on every chance you get to take a huge dump on anything remotely resembling Buddhist doctrine and practice.
How could I spout no doctrine, while accepting buddhist doctrine?
That'd be a bit hypocritical. Why do you want me to be a hypocrit?
Or do you want me to stop saying Zen has no doctrine?
Well, the you've got all of the Zen canon against you.
Huang Po shit on buddhist doctrine and practice, and so do I.

>The essential teaching of leaving concepts behind can be found way back in the Pali canon and isn't anything revolutionary.
I know, but Zen makes this it's priority, that's why I focus on it.

>zazen isn't meditation
Zazen is also a forgery of Dogen, who hasn't met a Zen master in his life.

>Who the fuck are you to say so?
I already said I claim no authority. Anything I claim can be found in the Zen masters texts over and over.
My quotes aren't cherry picked either, you'd need to cherry pick to find something that disagrees with the things I say.
If you had read any of them, you'd see I'm right in saying all of this.

Anyone who seeks to learn shouldn't go to a Zen master, much less be one.

I can distinguish black and white. I am not stuck in no concepts, but I don't get fooled by them.
Learning new concepts that are entirely useless in daily life is piling up obstacles.
Nirvana and Samsara are not corner stones of Zen doctrine.

If you want to see your nature and become buddha, Zen is for you.
Your imagined scenario is not the concern of Zen.
Being happy no matter what is also not the concern of Zen.

Why should anyone care about seeing their nature and becoming Buddha?

It's important to understand the historical context of these quotes, as they were said in actual monasteries, to groups of students practicing Zen/Ch'an buddhism through seated meditation and work. These masters did not look at meditation as practice involving effort or goals, and thus derided students engaged in that way in order to guide them to the proper way of practicing meditation, as an expression of one's true nature.

You're clearly not providing an example of "no doctrine". You're providing an example of the "Zen Canon (which only exists in your imagination) and waging war against organized Zen buddhism and practice" doctrine.

Zazen wasn't invented by Dogen. It's a direct analogue of Chan Buddhism's tso'chan, Ch'an-ting or Silent Illumination, which is a descendant of Anapanasati from the Pali canon.

Some people are naturally curious.

How is curiosity, i.e. wanting to know something, any different from wanting to own something, or wanting to eat something, or wanting to fuck something? All of these you crave because it makes you feel good.

>It's important to understand the historical context of these quotes
The Huang Po quotes were said to Pei Xiu a scholar, not a monk.
Some of Huang Po's texts was also directed at taoists, not buddhists.
It's also questionable if and why monks practiced meditation in these monastries.
Lin Chi himself said he doesn't teach meditation.
Huang Po said it's useless.
Mazu had to recognize this for his own enlightenment and didn't teach meditation after.
Huineng also disregarded meditation.

Not only that, but the word meditation is often simply a mistranslation.
In Huinengs texts he defines the term "sitting meditation" and the definition neither says you need to sit nor that you need to meditate.
The actual definition of his term is pretty much like Mazu's ordinary mind and should be left untranslated for less confusion
or translated differently, so the actual meaning becomes clear.

>proper way of practicing meditation, as an expression of one's true nature.
You'll not be able to provide any textual support for this, because it's simply not true.
No master of the Tang or Song ever said this.

Mazu says "Whether walking, standing, sitting or reclining, everything is inconceivable function."
No need to sit in meditation just for more of this expression of one's true nature.

>You're clearly not providing an example of "no doctrine". You're providing an example of the "Zen Canon (which only exists in your imagination) and waging war against organized Zen buddhism and practice" doctrine.
You just can't accept that Zen practice isn't and never was what you believe it to be.

>Silent Illumination
Which also wasn't taught by any chan master at all.
starting from Huineng we have the sudden school, no silent illumination practice here.

You're hungry so you eat, you're horny so you fuck, you're curious so you lean Zen.
There's no difference at all.
Not too surprising since "When hungry eat, when tired sleep" is a pretty common Zen saying.

Is there no difference between different desires? If so, can a Zen master drink booze/do drugs/rape/torture/kill if he feels like doing it?

plato.stanford.edu/entries/love/

So basically zen masters are stirnerites/classical cynics

Nanquan famously killed a cat to make a point.
When Zhaozhou was asked why animals run away when they see him, he said "because I like to kill"
Also, Zen masters commonly harm their disciples in their stories. Like twisting their noses or hitting with sticks.

I've got no examples for drugs, rape or torture though.
I'd assume rape and torture weren't as popular.
The real question isn't if a Zen master can do it, if he feels like it (because than the answer would obviously be yes),
the actual question is, would a Zen master ever feel like doing something like that?
He'd certainly need a mental illness for something like that to be desirable, so that's again something Zen can't solve.
You don't teach a psychopath Zen to cure him.

There are differences in desires. Some of them are motivated by delusion, some are motivated by nature.
You'll never be able to get rid of the natural desires.
The desires motivated by delusion will stop after getting rid of the delusion.

Zen sounds like a massive fucking meme

Yes. Many zen priests find drinking and meditating a rewarding pastime.

You're not clearly not a Zen master, are you awakened/enlightened or highly attained?

From your posts on here you certainly don't sound it.

>You'll never be able to get rid of the natural desires
What 'natural desires' can you not get rid of?

How long have you been meditating, and how long are your sessions?

complete unexcelled enlightenment
which means I have attained nothing at all, after all

What did you expect a Zen master to sound like?

How's that not psycopathic?

>What 'natural desires' can you not get rid of?
hunger,thirst,tiredness
maybe some can, with enough dedication, but that's not what Zen is about

>How long have you been meditating, and how long are your sessions?
I don't meditate on a regular basis.

Dragon Gate Taoism is better in my opinion; a strong influence on the development of zen, it has a more interesting metaphysical anatomy, magical system, and cosmology.

>What did you expect a Zen master to sound like?
Not like some retarded materialist.

How long have you been studying Zen?

Are there any good Dragon gate Taoism books? I've already read TTC and Zhuangzi.

The cat killing business?
Well, Nanquan and Zhaozhou were pretty crazy.

The whole story goes somewhat like this:
There were monks in a hall talking about stuff.
Nanquan enters, grabs the cat and says:
"If any of you says a word of Zen, he saves the cat"
Everyone stays silent and Nanquan cut the cat in halves.
Later he met Zhaozhou and told him about the cat.
Zhaozhou put a sandal on his head and left
Nanquan mumbles: "If only you had been there, the cat would be alive"

Recounting from memory, so excuse some mistaken details.

>I don't meditate on a regular basis.
Then how exactly did you become enlightened?

Don't bullshit others when you don't even have the self-discipline to meditate regularly.

>Not like some retarded materialist.
I'm no materialist at all though and I'm not sure why you'd think that.

>How long have you been studying Zen?
Almost a decade.

He put the sandal on whose head, his own or the other guy's head?

Seven Taoist Masters is the go-to book. It includes the basic meditation technique along with its overall framework, and is an entertaining read in its own right. Then check out Opening the Dragon Gate, a biography on Wang Liping. English language texts on Dragon Gate are hard to come by.

>Then how exactly did you become enlightened?
By relinquishment of everything, stopping to form conceptual understanding.

>Don't bullshit others when you don't even have the self-discipline to meditate regularly.
It was said time and time again that all such practices need to be relinquished.

How do I achieve Zen? What does it do? Does it allow me to go super saiyan?

his own

>How do I achieve Zen?
Nobody ever achieves Zen

>What does it do?
Zen is the name of a lineage. It doesn't do anything, but being long dead.

>Does it allow me to go super saiyan?
Just scream really loud.
At least that's what master Lin Chi tried, although he never succeeded.

>It was said time and time again that all such practices need to be relinquished.
Yes, but I doubt you can become enlightened after less than a decade of studying Zen, unless you're some Buddha-tier prodigy who could access Jhana from the get go.

Did you at least have a regular meditation practise at some point?

Meditation is not necessary

You can get enlightened in the blink of an eye if the circumstances are right.
Or you can take as many aeons as there are grains of sands in the ganges (as Huang Po put it), if you insist on meditation.

There was a time where I meditated more often, but never regularly.

I don't believe that, you cannot go from conditioned -> unconditioned, even if they are fundamentally the same, without a stepping stone in between.

This is what Huang Po actually said:

Though you perform the six paramitas for as many aeons as there are grains of sand
in the Ganges, adding also all the other sorts of activities for gaining Enlightenment, you will still fall short of
the coal. Why? Because these are karma-forming activities

>You can get enlightened in the blink of an eye if the circumstances are right.
Meditation helps with the creation of those circumstances.

Sudden Enlightenment and Gradual Enlightenment are one and the same ,essentially.

coal should be goal

For sustaining enlightenment, yes it is. Satori is temporary, and needs to be extended through meditation and contemplation.

no it fucking isn't you retard holy shit.

temporary experiences are not it

I'm not opposed to this, meditate if you want

I think all of this sounds a little crazy but that's the logical conclusion of the heart sutra. There's not attainment, no non-attainment, no samsara, no nirvana, no purity or defilement... It always made me think, if there's no purity or defilement, then why vegetarianism and meditation? But when I went to a zen temple they recommended vegetarianism and lots os sitting meditation. (I was a vegetarian and practiced meditation for a whole year.)

But then more questions can be made. If there is no purity or defilement, no individual selves, etc. Then there's no morality, no good and evil, no "dignity of the human person" or life. What if I were to murder someone if I made it without attachment? It reminded me of that passage in the Bhagavad Gita where Arjuna is hesitant to go to war with and slay his own family members, and Krishna responds with something to the effect of just do it without attachment. This further reminds me of the Assassins sect (Hashashin). They practiced a form of Islamic mysticism which involved blind obedience to a master, and killing others and even your own self at his command.

>hat if I were to murder someone if I made it without attachment
Zen priests taught Samurai to kill no-mindedly to avoid karmic defilement, so it is an actual thing.

people can put bible quotes out of context to justify almost anything.

I would take you much more seriously if you had inside knowledge, or were some respected academic but your not. Your a guy who read some books and now thinks he knows better than people who have read the same books for decades

>I think all of this sounds a little crazy but that's the logical conclusion of the heart sutra. There's not attainment, no non-attainment, no samsara, no nirvana, no purity or defilement... It always made me think, if there's no purity or defilement, then why vegetarianism and meditation?
The heart sutra is right, as was your instict to see that vegetarianism and meditation are phoney.

There is no inside knowledge of Zen that can be transmitted with words.

>then why vegetarianism and meditation?
Vegetarianism is used to avoid bad karma and meditation is gradually used to create the circumstances for enlightenment.

The ascetic practises of monks aren't required for enlightenment either, but they're done to streamline the process.

>The heart sutra is right, as was your instict to see that vegetarianism and meditation are phoney.
>The heart sutra is right, as was your instict to see that vegetarianism and meditation are phoney.
>The heart sutra is right, as was your instict to see that vegetarianism and meditation are phoney.
Those views are high-level but for people who are conditioned, meditation and other activities are needed.

One can shatter traditional ways of thought and act with their true nature through surprise, and then regress. This regression is due to an ill-prepared mind, undisciplined to comprehend this true nature. That's why Soto zen stresses zazen, so the student will become enlightened upon their staori. Rinzai stresses koans because they believe one must experience satori before contemplating on it. You're thinking of either kensho or daigo.

All of these Satori, Kensho and Daigo are creations of japanese buddhism, not zen.
None of this was taught by the early Chan masters in china.
Cultivation after enlightenment was also not part of Chan.
All of this is soto doctrine.

What was taught is, that if you go through the ten stages and take aeons to get enlightened,
you still arrive at the same goal as someone taking the direct path, entering enlightenment in a single flash.
The direct path is what Zen masters thus taught.

Then say Ch'an and use the Chinese terminology, "Zen master".

>you still arrive at the same goal as someone taking the direct path, entering enlightenment in a single flash.
How is this any different from gradually getting through meditation?

Every single person this earth lives their life but are all of them enlightened? What does 'direct path' mean?

who cares about terminology. Zen is a translation of Ch'an anyways.
Although you're right, saying Ch'an would be better, since Japanese Zen is nothing like it.

Says the person who learned it from books.

>There is no inside knowledge of Zen that can be transmitted with words.

That is why its a person to person transmission system. which you would know, if you actually understood zen buddhism

>>Who was your teacher?
>Mazu, Pai Chang, Huang Po, Lin Chi, Caoshan, Yaoshan, Dongshan, Yuanwu, Wansong, Wumen, and others
>This is not important
That's not a teacher, and you are not a zen master.

What I've gathered is you've read books on zen for less than a decade and think you're enlightened despite having no real experience or practise.

How dishonest.

> How is this any different from gradually getting through meditation?
The ten stages etc. are the slow way, which Ch'an masters don't teach, just like the gradual way of meditation.

>What does 'direct path' mean?
It's the path taught by Ch'an masters. Relinquishment of everything and all that.
By people of high capacity, it could be done instantly, after hearing about it once.
Most people are not like that, though. Me neither, of course.

>Every single person this earth lives their life but are all of them enlightened?
Most don't see their nature.

nothing says "I am enlightened" like starting an AMA thread on an anonymous image board

>Most don't see their nature.
Exactly, and most people don't have a high capacity so they need to be gradually taken through the process instead of trying to comprehend something totally alien to them.

Also, if the Direct path cannot be done instantly by everyone, it's not exactly a direct path.