Veeky Forums please teach me about Zen Buddhism. Im a brainlet

>Zen (Chinese: 禪; pinyin: Chán; Korean: 선) is a school of Mahayana Buddhism that originated in China during the Tang dynasty as Chan Buddhism. Zen school was strongly influenced by Taoism and developed as a distinct school of Chinese Buddhism. From China, Chan Buddhism spread south to Vietnam, northeast to Korea and east to Japan, where it became known as Japanese Zen and known as Seon buddihism in Korea.[1]

>The term Zen is derived from the Japanese pronunciation of the Middle Chinese word 禪 (Chan) which traces its roots to the Indian practice of Dhyana ("meditation").[note 1] Zen emphasizes rigorous self-control, meditation-practice, insight into Buddha-nature, and the personal expression of this insight in daily life, especially for the benefit of others.[3][4] As such, it de-emphasizes mere knowledge of sutras and doctrine[5][6] and favors direct understanding through zazen and interaction with an accomplished teacher.[7]

>The teachings of Zen include various sources of Mahayana thought, especially Yogachara, the Tathāgatagarbha sūtras and the Huayan school, with their emphasis on Buddha-nature, totality, and the Bodhisattva-ideal.[8][9] The Prajñāpāramitā literature[10] and, to a lesser extent, Madhyamaka have also been influential in the shaping of the "paradoxical language" of the Zen-tradition.

There you go.

Brad Warner's Hardcore Zen is also very good. He received Dharma transmission from Nishijima. I don't agree with him on everything, but this book is a good introduction to Zen. His experience near the river was also satori/kensho imo. Read the book and see.

I think Brad Warner is enlightened but dogmatic about a few things, such as "proper" Lotus posture. I don't see why Westerners, who tend to be less flexible than East Asians, ought to sit in "proper" Lotus posture. A chair can do for Shikantaza.

Shikantaza, to me, is what defines modern Zen. If you do Shikantaza often, then you'll begin understanding the scriptures more.

I agree with the gist of this summary, but I'd argue the Platform Sutra is the most foundational Zen Buddhist text.

I don't know, I got it from Wikipedia. Go argue with them.

Zen is easier to understand than Taoism.

Honestly, just what the fuck is Taoism?

The way that can be followed is not the true Way,
the name that can be spoken is not the true Name.

There are so many different schools of Daoism that it's very difficult to explain. I had a document that tried to explain it. Regardless, some schools of Daoism & Dao de Jing did influence Chan during its development.

media.bloomsbury.com/rep/files/9781441168733_commonmisconceptions_daoisttradition.pdf

"Outside of the modern world, there is no
form of Daoism that is not “religious.”
Although there are aspects of Daoism
that are “philosophical,” the category
“philosophical Daoism” fails to consider
the centrality of embodied practice
(way of being), community, and place in
Daoism, especially in “classical Daoism.”
It is based on a systematic mischaracterization
of the inner cultivation lineages of
Warring States Daoism and a misreading
of the earliest Daoist texts, namely, the
Laozi (Lao-tzu; a.k.a. Daode jing) and
Zhuangzi (Chuang-tzu), among others"

"From a Daoist perspective, there are
various types of religious adherence
and affiliation. These involve different
degrees of commitment and responsibility.
The Daoist tradition consists, first
and foremost, of ordained priests and
monastics and lay supporters. Lineage
and ordination are primary dimensions
of Daoist identity and religious affiliation.
This requires training under Daoist
teachers and community elders with
formal affiliation with the Daoist religious
community and tradition. A distinction
may in turn be may between Daoist
adherents and Daoist sympathizers. In
the case of Daoism in the West, one
also finds various forms of spiritual
appropriation and spiritual capitalism."

Do shallow new age readings make a mockery of your heartfelt religious traditions?

Or do your heartfelt religious traditions mock new age readings?

I guess this is all too deep for you.

Be carried by water.
Use wood to chop (wet wood expands, splitting stone!).
Desire a lack of things.
Falsehoods are desirable.
Ignorance leads to pain.
Pain is life.

>let me just play with koans without understanding them!
>woops need to take my meds now!
Retard.

You're an idiot.

Wow deep

From my minimal knowledge, it seems to be taking the Japanese lack of division between form and essence and applying it to meditation. So, just like in tea ceremony the point is the ceremony (it doesn’t symbolise something else, the ceremony is itself the point), the point is sitting.
“Chop wood, carry water” is the point. Like “drive car, do tax”.

Mu

>Best translation is Yampolsky.
I take it back. I prefer Red Pine's translation, but Yampolsky's doesn't seem bad either.

Koans play with you, that is why they are difficult to understand.
If one does not understand an argument either you or the argument is wrong.
Act without desire. Desire the ceremony not the tea.
moo? cow? What secrets might I unearth by meticulously analyzing this comment. hmm

>Koans play with you, that is why they are difficult to understand.
You are disingenuous edgelord cunt who can't tell real insight apart from voynich.

>If one does not understand an argument either you or the argument is wrong.
How many meds are you on? I honestly hate how a lot of you people distort Zen and make it into some kind of spiritual capitalism. Do you even practice Shikantaza or read the texts beyond cursory glances?

>What secrets might I unearth by meticulously analyzing this comment.
Maybe you should look deeply into yourself and see how you're full of shit and bogging down this comment section with your nonsense. You're no Joshu, I hate to break it to you.

It's not actual Buddhism at all, it's Taosim with a tacked on "something something Buddhism"

Joshu was a shitposter though.

You can't do Zen online because you can't beat novices to death.

But what is Taoism?

the author of the voynich manuscript knew zen without knowing of zen

just sertraline for depression, I probably don't have depression but the doctor insisted I take it anyway, it makes me drowsy

I know of no joshu, only deep insights that I am doing a favor by sharing with you all
>novices
only true zen masters know what zen is
only zen knows who is a true zen master

>Joshu was a shitposter though.
He wasn't. It's just really hard to pierce into what he's saying for these two reasons:
1) He employs frequent metaphors rooted in the Chinese cultural context in the time. In fact, this is a problem with both Japanese and Chinese Ch'an. Translating these texts is really tough and footnotes are always required.

2. You have to be in the right state of the mind, preferably after a period of Zazen/Shikantaza.

>You can't do Zen online because you can't beat novices to death.
I like to Soto Zen approach of practice-enlightenment. You sit in Shikantaza and that is actualizing the enlightened mind, though sometimes you can have satori, sometimes not, it's still all Buddha nature. My only issue is that I do not believe proper half- or full- Lotus is required. All that's required is silence and sustaining the "state of unpremeditated, complete awareness of the present without preference, effort, or compulsion". It's sustained without any intentional goal though.

>the author of the voynich manuscript knew zen without knowing of zen
No.

>just sertraline for depression, I probably don't have depression but the doctor insisted I take it anyway, it makes me drowsy
You need some humility and realize this is a practice that takes ages to tacitly apprehend. Simply regurgitating stuff like a paradoxical meme does not equal apprehension of Zen. When the patriarchs wrote koans, they were aligned with Infinity, and the koans became "of" it. What you are doing is just throwing around paradoxical statements without any deep understanding. I'll be honest with you, I used to do this too, but it was until I read more and practiced Shikantaza frequently I came to understand there is a "depth" to this practice.

>only deep insights that I am doing a favor by sharing with you all
You have no deep insight, at the moment. The deepest thing you can do, at this moment, is to realize how you don't, and pick up a book, seek an actual teacher who had Dharma transmission, and actually practice Shikantaza. This is my advice to you.

Once you think you "got" Zen, then it falls through your grasp. Zen is about opening the hand of thought, not grasping, letting the mind flow freely without dwelling on anything. Then, spontaneously the koans come, and not with your discursive bullshit, my man.

Incoherent injokes for a private languages audience using overloaded language. That's shitposting.

No. Joshu was not shit-posting. His koans actually point to the Dharmakarya. Regardless, I feel you're better off reading other texts and continuing Shikantaza. Not all Zen/Ch'an patriarchs speak equally to everyone. There is an individualist element to everyone's practice, but at the same time, there is a common thread, hence why Dharma transmission occurs to maintain tradition.

What Zen is about is hard to say. You have to be "of" it, this is true. The best way I can explain it, in somewhat conceptual terms, is there is a gap in preceding each thought and sensation. This "gap" can be thought of a reservoir of infinite potentialities, or the "mind flowing without dwelling on anything". By practicing Shikantaza more and more often, the gap can be "tacitly apprehended", and then you see how what "you" thought yourself to be is merely the All that flows with everything, including the rivers, chirping of the birds, the breeze, and more. This gap is the original face, or the original mind, that is akin to the stillness of the pond reflecting the moon or reflecting everything -- it is the entire Universe as a brilliant jewel, but it is formless and cannot truly be categorized with thought or cognition.

Let me repeat: it is formless and cannot truly be categorized with thought or cognition. This is my point in regards to the "gap".

One's true nature includes both what is hated and loved, both the "Other" and the "Subject", and other opposites that interpenetrate. One can view this in either an embracing or melancholic way -- but there are times when not even that.

My recommendations if you're sincerely interested in beginning introduction Zen:

1. Seek either a Soto or Rinzai teacher. I prefer Soto but Rinzai is fine too. Have them teach you Shikantaza.

2. Read Brad Warner's Hardcore Zen and then Sit Down and Shut Up. He received Dharma transmission from Nishijima and is a part of the Soto school. His books make Soto Zen accessible to the Western audiences.

3. Read the Platform Sutra by Hui Neng. Both Red Pine and Yampolsky's translations are good. This is the foundational Zen/Ch'an text in my opinion.

4. Read The Blue Cliff Record by Thomas Cleary and JC Cleary. This is a tough read.

I would also add Red Pine's translation of Diamond Sutra as Number 4. Put Blue Cliff Record as Number 5. Also, let me repeat, in Zen original insight is encouraged. You are encouraged to see into your true nature via the One Vehicle (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekayāna#Chinese_Buddhism). Simply regurgitating what your teachers say and imitating them does not constitute real insight. I am only doing this a bit for the expedient purposes of showing how the tradition/practice is done.

...

Do you know about Dzogchen? I've never really looked into it.

>What Zen is about is hard to say.
It's a bit like the Tao, in that if you can explain it, it's not the true Tao.

>It's a bit like the Tao, in that if you can explain it, it's not the true Tao.
Sometimes a koan or poem can be said to be aligned with it, however. It can be considered as a special case that is of Infinity or Dharmakarya. In fact, in deeper levels of practice you see Samsara and Nirvana are One, or how delusion and the mind without defilement are One. It's simply like clouds obscuring your true original nature of equanimity or "background of stillness". There is an aporia, here of course, and that's why experience and practice are needed.

So instead of trying to poorly deconstruct the tradition, I recommend actually getting involved in the practice by following my advice.

I wanted the dao so I became a civil engineer specialising in watercourse management.

>what's zen?
>it's buddhism heavily influenced by taoism
>what's taoism?
>can't explain it because something something the WAY

You're sending him to India and all he'll learn Is lotus position

Correct.

Uhm, no. Please read my advice again. There are many Rinzai, Soto Zen, and Kwan Um Buddhist Organizations in the West. Many Korean and Japanese teachers came to the USA and Europe after WWII and spread the Dharma. I think Brad Warner, for example, is a genuine teacher within the lineage of Nishijima.

Gateless gate, mate.

In Rinzai, where koans are used more frequently than Soto, your response to the koan comes, as a consequence, from frequent practice and Shikantaza, which leads to longer persistence of the "stateless state", or "the mind that flows freely without dwelling on anything". Your response is supposed to be original and spontaneous, emerging from seeing into your true nature. Simply repeating what you have read, doesn't cut it. If you are truly interested in Zen, I recommend learning Shikantaza, practicing daily, and reading texts more thoroughly. Some humility on your part would do you wonders.

It's more easier to define what Buddhism is, and this is detailed in the Theravada canon, the original and orthodox teachings of the Buddha. Everything else that deviates from that deviates from real Buddhism, and Zen is barely related to Theravada at all in any way.

None so blind.

Zen has its own set of sutras, like the Lankavatara Sutra, Platform Sutra, Diamond Sutra, and others, especially those written by Dogen. It depends on the extant school of Zen we are speaking.

Learn some humility in subjects you have no experience in. I'm pointing the path for a real, thorough understanding besides regurgitating koans without tacit understanding.

>tacit
This is Veeky Forums. You can't touch shit here except through language. And you've just recommended sitting to a poster who obviously cares nothing for dharma.

Keep on pissing in the wind and tasting the full flavour of Mountain Dew extreme.

I also like Stonehouse (Shiwu)'s poetry a lot. Red Pine's translation of this is impeccable:
amazon.com/Mountain-Poems-Stonehouse-English-Chinese/dp/1556594550/ref=la_B001JP86Q0_1_11?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1512534093&sr=1-11

I also want to read his translation of Cold Mountain (Han Shan) when I have more time:
amazon.com/Collected-Mountain-Mandarin-Chinese-English/dp/1556591403/ref=la_B001JP86Q0_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1512534093&sr=1-8

I like the Ch'an tradition of monks living on the mountains in solitude and becoming one with Infinity, Dharmakarya, that way.

Ryokan was a Japanese Soto Zen Buddhist who was a lot like that too. I read a few of his poems translated by Nobuyuki Yuasa and they were very good. The other translations of Ryokan pale in comparison to Nobuyuki Yuasa's.

>Keep on pissing in the wind and tasting the full flavour of Mountain Dew extreme.
This is pretty much what grasping anything in life is like. You're starting to understand. You cannot hold onto anything, it is like "pissing in the wind", but sometimes the piss swirls in such beautiful ways that you can't help but feel one with it.

I think Zen is cool and I like it. I have even attended a Zen retreat. I just don't see Zen as Buddhism.

It's more like a reinterpretation of Buddhism. You make a valid point though, but I'm just say that Zen has its own set of unique, distinct texts that are prioritized, compared to Theravada. Zen Buddhists do not really revisit the Pali canon that much.

Just about all of the Zen Buddhists I have known in real life (and many online) go as far as to criticize the Theravada tradition first and foremost.

I mean, Theravada has it's own problems. I think that the Burmese system is far too rigid and there is an over-emphasis on mindfulness as opposed to other seven noble paths. But remember, Theravada was also the first Buddhist tradition, and it dates far before any other sort of derivative of Buddhism came about.

A few weeks ago I was at a library, flipping through "Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind" and it was then and there that I decided that Zen is not Buddhism. Because I wasn't reading anything Buddhist related, it was just Taoism.

Sorry if this comes off as harsh, Ive had a long day.

I consider what you call "real Buddhism" to be Hinayana (lesser vehicle), since it loses the subtle essence of the Buddha's teaching. What is first and of most utmost importance is one's own level of realization, not how much one adheres to dogma the way Hinayana Buddhists preach.

Shunryu Suzuki does not speak for all of Zen/Ch'an, icchantika.

It's a path based on the idea that everyone is already enlightened because enlightenement is the Primordial State of the mind. (Rigpa)

The difference between an unenlightened person and a samyak sambudha is that the samyak sambudha can stay in that Primordial State forever.
Dzogchen means Great Perfection and is called the path of self-liberation because unlike the other paths of liberation you don't to renounced, purified or transformed. (The reason why Dzogchen claims to be the fastest way to become a buddha)

Practice is about being able to experience that primordial state, recognize it and stabilize your mind so you can stay in that state.

Except for some geniuses who can use the core practices directly, a lot of preliminary practices are needed before you can experience Rigpa.

Altough not a tantric path or really a part of the Vajrayana by definition, you still need a qualified guru to practice and keep samaya.

A legit Dzogchenpa (Dzogchen practionner, by legit I mean actuallu practicing in the correct way with a legit guru) is promised to become a samyaj sambudha in this life but in three different fashions depending on his level of capacities :

Extraordinary practitionners can be fully liberated in this life, realizing the famous rainbow body (physically transforming their physical body into the subtle body of the buddhas)
Some are doing that while dying and their body either shrink or completely dissapear except maybe for the hair and nails, the most extraordinary can do that without dying and then exist in that form for several centuries doing many good deeds until moving on

Medium practitionners fully liberate themselves in one of the bardo of dying by recognizing Rigpa.

The most average practitionners are like the medium ones but fail to recognize Rigpa in that Bardo, so they move on a next one where they will be "reborn" in each of the five buddhafields symbolizing the five buddha families before being liberated in the last one after a few thousands years.

Dzogchen also has a very rich theology and elaborates a lot on what rigpa, ignorance, bardo and buddhahood,etc...all really are.

Because of the conclusions of great Dzogchenpas and how the Dzogchen path to realization works, Dzogchen also claims to lead to a higher form of buddhahood than oither paths.

Generally explained as realized beings from either paths needing to eventually learn Dzogchen to become full buddhas and the buddhahood of other buddhas being temporary because without Dzogchen their minds are not purified and stable enough when even the Bardo of Nirvana and Samsara is dissolved in Rigpa and they cannot recognize it.
(I've heard an explanation about how that means the non-dzogchen buddhas generate the Five Ignorances when they fail to recognize Rigpa and so create the unenlightened beings of the next cycle -they are not created ex nihilo- rather than them losing their buddhahood)

Sounds very interesting. The stuff about samyaj sambudha reminds me of the Lankavatara Sutra discussing the "projection body".

Your practice sounds similar to Zen/Ch'an, but I think Zen/Ch'an tries to bring the Primordial State of the mind into daily activities, such as chopping wood, washing dishes, farming, poetry, artwork, and etc. There is an emphasis on bringing forth the "rigpa" into one's craft or daily activity in Zen/Ch'an. Regardless, Zen/Ch'an focuses on the "Infinity of simple actions in life", such as eating an orange.

Moreover, Dogen (who I read during my Soto practice) explains how everything simultaneously arises and perishes, "each moment is all being, is the entire world", and how no two things are the same, which is largely like Dharmakirti if you've ever read him. So there's a focus on experiencing each moment as unique and distinct, acknowledging each object and thing as possessing its own realized perfected nature (Buddha nature), and using each moment as a kind of mirror to bring "prajna-paramita", that is basically applying the primordial state of mind for compassionate action or other things moment-to-moment.

Regardless, I don't see how our schools are really contradicting each other. Soto School approaches things more from the praxis of temporal dynamics, like I've explained.

Do you guys accept the Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra? I notice a lot of parallels with what you say about Dzogchen there. It's a foundational Mahayana text.

Also, I forgot to say, in Zen there is an emphasis on creativity and manifesting one's own enlightenment in their own spontaneous way. This is one aspect I like about it, since I find doing Shikantaza a lot before writing very beneficial.

Also, since you posted a pic of Bodhidharma, I recommend this book too. I remember reading it a long time ago, and it does a good job pointing to the "luminous mind". Delusion is like the clouds that obscure the luminous mind, which like the moon:

amazon.com/Zen-Teaching-Bodhidharma-English-Chinese/dp/0865473994

>such as chopping wood, washing dishes, farming, poetry, artwork, and etc.
Bird-watching,scuba diving, mountain climbing, camping, etc. are also good ways to bring mindfulness (i.e., breaking barrier between self and other)!

Yes, I really appreciate you preaching the Dharma, brother. I'm going to check out the books you've referenced. Do you have any artwork to recommend that touches on Zen themes? I really appreciate all of your input.

It's more like Taoism 2bh.

It has some Taoist influences, but I wouldn't it's more like Taoism. It's still within Mahayana school.

>A legit Dzogchenpa

are there any in the west and if so how do you find one and determine their legitimacy?

Chögyal Namkhai Norbu (A really great Dzogchenpa Guru teaching in webcasts on dzogchen.it ) wrote a book (Dzogchen and Zen) on the subject and they are indeed quite similar on several concepts but obviously very different on several others.
(Both are not really 100% valid from the viewpoint of the other although practionners would say that the other got many things right even if Zen cannot be a "Ultimate" level like Dzogchen and maybe Mahamudra is for Dzogchen and Zen would probably see Dzogchen as not spontaneous enough in the way defined by Zen)

Cha'n actuallu had a presence in Tibet before being driven off but most of the similitudes are similitudes already present between sutrad and mantras and both were already existed before any contact between the two so it's a convergent developement from the two traditions based on similar ideas.

>Do you guys accept the Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra? I notice a lot of parallels with what you say about Dzogchen there. It's a foundational Mahayana text.

Dzogchen is based on tantras, another kind of corpus of texts than sutras and not part of the same vehicle but many sutra / mahayana level practices exist in tibetan buddhism so a lot of them are indeed accepted even if they see them as lower level texts with tantras being more advanced or explaining things more accuratly than sutras for higher level practitionners who can understand them. (It's quite similar to how theravada teachings are seen in the mahayana vehicle with the sutras being teached later for the more advanced)

The Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra was heavily commented on by the Tibetans and was obviously a HUGE, but was nullified because the tibetan views expanded on it but contradicted with several of its points. (Most of the concepts are good, just that much of the actual "theory" is not comptatible with the tibetan buddhist ones)
I think that one is considered "wrong" instead of just being a less accurate sutra level view.

Dzogchen like other high level tibetan practices are based on a student guru relationship with strict and codified transmissions.
A legit Dzogchenpa has a legit guru from a tibetan buddhist lineage and practice Dzogchen in the described way Dzogchen is practiced.
The only way to not be a legit Dzogchenpa would be to have a fake guru or to not practice at all or not as how is it described. (And it's precise enough to know what to do or not unless you really don't care)

The importance of finding a good and realized teacher is stressed though, so yes investing energy in a bad guru is a quick way to waste a lot of hardly earned merit. (It's hard to get good karma associated to spiritual matters)

Slightly off-topic but is Tibetan Buddhism full of bullshit? I heard people call it "literal voodoo crap".

Yes, well...all Buddhism is.

>enlightenement is the Primordial State of the mind. (Rigpa)
this is what puttujanas believes

The doctrine is really just a big developement of Mahayana buddhism, really nothing wrong with it unless you are a rather sectarian theravadin and even then it's still not worse than hinayana -> mahayana by any metrics.

Like all buddhist nations (even theravadin ones, no ones practice the way described in the pali canon) they just incorporated elements of their old religions in how they practice buddhism but it's really all aesthetic and drawing buddhas and gods like their former gods instead of like indian devas and asuras is really not making a difference, and it's not really more outlandish than the original indian aesthetic.

The only sorcery they do is exorcising beings like hungry ghosts and being less coy about admitting that they believe some of their hermits have siddhis. (but it's only a problem for some theravadins unwilling to admit that any of their monks could have got any level of realization in the last centuries)
Again it's not weirder than any of the things other buddhists do in buddhist countries and I don't get why buddhism must be completely "sanitzed" when reincarnation, ghosts, many god-like (just not the omnipotent monotheist kind) entities and nirvana are some of the premises.

Wow wikipedia settles these questions fast.

What did I got wrong?
Would be nice if you explained.

Too bad most of this board ignores it.

There is almost no ecology chemistry alchemy or magic in zen. There are limited amounts of supernatural entities, drunkenness and sex.

Not very dao.

Most of this board is either to ignorant for encyclopaedia or in their specific area of expertise too interested in their interlocutor to not ask.

Axe. Go fuck yourself with one.

??

Bitch, your post makes no sense.

That's not very Zen of you.

>there are almost no spooks in zen

Damn it's almost like it's true or something

Also it's full of ecology. From dogen to thich naht hahn, they always talk about nature and the interconnectedness of things

Ay. Sure. That's ecology. Not land management in complex water systems.

...

I am filled with fear and blindness. I cannot choose between Zen and Theravada Buddhism. I want to practice, but have so many ties to the material. I desire annihilation of the self, but cannot commit to it.

You can just be a lay practitioner. Please visit a Soto or Rinzai Sangha like I've mentioned, dude.

That would be a long journey. I have no money, and my family relies on me for money. I feel a longing. A sense of impermanence. Everything is in a state of flux. If only death would end this.

Be Taoism

There are Soto and Rinza Sanghas all over Western Europe and USA.

Oh, Zen Buddhism does not have any theory sir, just buy my book for $9.99 and free yourself using the meditation and acting as elements of Zen Buddhism were not invented by me.
Also, did you know last time I tried to make Zen Buddhism work for my goals, was Second World War. I still see here my ideas by done again, and again.

>choosing buddhist school
you are not a fucking monk. also if you want actual annihilation of self -> Zen as Mahayana elements allow you to that actually, but also annihilation of self is empty.

OK, now seriously. Modernist Buddhist views are total bullshit and I recommend always STARTING with Gethin and getting onto Sutras and Buddhist thought by yourself.
Also read Sharf essays on meditation cause it is more fucking German than Buddhist.

Taoism is completely fucking different religion.

DT Suzuki was a bit disingenuous, yeah.

>a bit

>Zen has no special doctrine or philosophy, no set of concepts or
intellectual formulas, except that it tries to release one from the
bondage of birth and death, by means of certain intuitive modes of
understanding peculiar to itself. It is, therefore, extremely flexible in
adapting itself to almost any philosophy and moral doctrine as long
as its intuitive teaching is not interfered with. It may be found
wedded to anarchism or fascism, communism or democracy, atheism
or idealism, or any political or economic dogmatism. (Zen and Japanese Culture)
>The Lebensanschauung of Bushido is no more nor less than that of
Zen. The calmness and even joyfulness of heart at the moment of
death which is conspicuously observable in the Japanese, the
intrepidity which is generally shown by the Japanese soldiers in the
face of an overwhelming enemy; and the fairness of play to an
opponent so strongly taught by Bushido—all these come from a spirit
of the Zen training, and not from any such blind, fatalistic conception as is sometimes thought to be a trait peculiar to Orientals. (The Zen Sect of Buddhism)

Yeah, the Kyoto school was retarded. Thankfully not all Japanese Buddhists were as idiotic as him. I think Nishijima was genuine, like I've explained before. This is kind of the "problem" with this kind of religious tradition: you have to find a genuine teacher, who tacitly apprehends Buddha mind and consistently brings it to daily activity, or else you get screwed over, even exploited as in the case of Joshu Sasaki (who was most certainly an icchantika).

Joshu Sasaki was a terrible "teacher", who even molested his students. There are many people like him, but I think Nishijima was at least genuine... It's quite tough to separate the gold from the shit.

>Nishijima

Sorry, I did not studied him, and do not really know anything about his doctrine.Of he was able to point to theory, and actual Buddhist practice (meditation is not really that important element of Buddhism, and even some schools denounced it for laziness).
I just hate this approach of hyper-mystical and empty Zen. if you want real mysticism just become Tantric monk.

>just become Tantric monk.
I disagree.

>meditation is not really that important element
Shikantaza (a kind of seated meditation -- called "Silent Illumination" in Ch'an), daily solitude within natural scenery, and reading the sutras/texts are foundational to Zen.

>hyper-mystical and empty Zen
I consider Tantra to be quixotic and dogmatic.

You are not forced to be a monk to practice tantrism, Tibet has a very old traditon of lay realized practitionners.
Tantra is not quixotic or dogmatic.

Gassho, I apologize for speaking rashly. In truth, I really don't know much about Tantra and spoke more from presumption.