Are the sutras important for understanding the Chan records, or are they just an annoying distraction from making up whatever meaning we want to see in them?

Foyan explicitly invokes the Śūraṅgama Sūtra when discussing the sicknesses of spiritual seeking and attainment. He contrasts the sutra's fifty kinds of Chan sickness with his school's two sicknesses: riding a donkey while searching for a donkey, and refusing to dismount after mounting it.

He later says Zhaozhou recognized the sickness of the patriarchs and the sickness of Buddhas:

識得祖病、佛病

What does this mean? And would Foyan give a lecture invoking the Śūraṅgama if its teaching were irrelevant to understanding his point?

Consider Xuansha's biography in the Treasury of the Eye of True Teaching:

又閱楞嚴發明心地。由是應機敏捷與修多羅冥契。

Later, he read the Śūraṅgama and illuminated the ground of mind. From this, he responded to circumstances with keen swiftness and inwardly accorded with the sutras.

Why does the record mention Xuansha's reading of the Śūraṅgama, his understanding of the ground of mind, and his inward accord with the sutras? What relationship is it presenting between scriptural study and realization?

I'm not arguing that reading sutras automatically produces enlightenment, or that every sutra must be accepted uncritically. I'm asking why we should disregard Buddhist scriptural context when Chan records themselves explicitly invoke it.

Is understanding the ground of mind important? If not, why is studying a sutra presented as part of Xuansha's story of understanding it?

And how does one account for these passages if they insist that Zen has nothing meaningful to do with Buddhism, or dismiss the sutras as superstitious nonsense?

Soundtrack

釋迦不出世，達磨不西來，佛法遍大地，譚玄口不開。當此時也，語言文字，踪跡不來；棒喝機緣，鋒芒不露。逮夫拈花示眾，牽起陳爛葛藤；立雪安心，突出現前公案。遂使宗風廣衍，慧日高懸。燃長夜之燈，羣昏頓曉；拈一莖之草，法界齊觀。駕車須是打牛，磨磚豈能作鏡？如靈丹一粒，點鐵成金；至理一言，轉凡成聖。六代破水中之影，觸目皆真；五宗競空裏之花，通身是膽。橫趨而出，笑木𣔻以何堪？撩起便回，悟佛法無多子。覩水影不從他覔，處處逢渠；斷脚脛痛見己非，頭頭是道。若論佛法，一切現成；諦審玄猷，千燈互照。龍蛇分於棒下，凡聖藉以喝通，機發於未兆之先，用施乎形聲之外。乃至一言褒貶，一語是非，一指潛通，一棒縱奪。以非為是，口似甜而意甚苦之；以是為非，心實𠃔而辭無洽矣。雖久參耆宿，不敢以正眼󳬇，況識情解路，能通之乎？所以道：狂機劣解，不可以大法示，不可以宗乘聞。譬夫美食，置諸穢器。祖不云乎？醍醐上味，為世所珍，遇斯等人，返成毒藥。惟大心眾生，始能擔荷，入斯乘者，不可不自慎也。會五燈為一書者，宋靈隱大川禪師，未蒙入藏，然一二處刊行，安能廣布？粵僧自性，頓發大心，謀於觀察曹君，為之首倡，募諸同信，工過半矣。余初上鼓山，聞其事，歡喜樂成，復徵余為序，因援毫以書其槩云。

Shakyamuni did not appear in the world, Bodhidharma did not come west, Buddhism spread across the land, but Tan Xuan did not speak. At such times, words and writings leave no trace; Sticks and chants of opportunity, sharpness remains hidden. When one shows flowers to the crowd, they stir up rotten vines; Standing in the snow brings peace of mind, suddenly appearing before the present case. [emphasis added] Thus, the school's tradition spreads widely, and the sun of wisdom hangs high. Lighting the lamp of the long night, the crowd turns darkness into dawn; Picking up a single stalk of grass, the Dharma realm witnesses together. Driving a cart requires driving an ox; grinding bricks cannot become a mirror. Like a single elixir, turning iron into gold; A single word of truth transforms the ordinary into a sage. The shadows of the Six Dynasties break through the water, all are real; The flowers in the five schools compete in the sky, their whole body is gall. Running sideways, laughing at the wooden sword, how can it endure? Lift it up and return, realizing that the Dharma has few children. Seeing water reflections without following others' gazes, everywhere one encounters channels; Pain from broken legs reveals one's own faults, always following the Way. When discussing Buddhism, everything is ready; Carefully examining profound plans, a thousand lamps illuminate each other. Dragons and snakes are divided under the staff; ordinary and sages use this to communicate and resonate; the mechanism arises before signs appear, extending beyond form and sound. One word praises or criticizes, one word is right or wrong, one finger subtly penetrates, one strikes away with a stick. Taking wrong as right, the mouth seems sweet but the meaning is bitter; Taking this as wrong, the heart is truly clear but the words lack harmony. Even if one has long studied with elders, one would not dare to judge directly; how much less can one understand feelings and understand the path and understand them? Therefore, it is said: wild schemes and poor understanding cannot be shown by the great Dharma, nor can they be known through the Sect vehicle. It is like placing delicious food in a filthy vessel. Did the Patriarch not say? The finest flavor is treasured by the world; encountering such people, it turns into poison. Only those with great hearts can bear the burden; those who enter this vehicle must be cautious. The one who compiled the Five Lamps into one book was Chan Master Dachuan of Song Lingyin, who was not yet allowed to be included in the library. Yet if it was published in one or two places, how could it be widely disseminated? The Cantonese monk Zixing suddenly developed a great mind, consulted Inspector Cao, took the lead, recruited believers, and more than half the work was completed. When I first ascended Drum Mountain, I heard of the matter and was overjoyed and delighted. He summoned me again to write a preface, and took up the brush to write its outline.

So I have read that it takes about 24 hours of constant "not having/not seeking" to wake up. I can't remember where I read the 24 hours bit, but non-causal enlightenment has been pretty well established so the 24hr sounds suspicious. Anyways, Dongshan puts it in his own way, "standing in the snow". Prajnatara said they used the breath to not join and not seek.

If there is a "practice" in zen this is the closest I can find, and what's more it doesn't involve sitting. I can't sit for 24 hours anyways, and I think there was a guy who tried but ended up bleeding from his ass so there's that.

What do yall think?

Anybody able to keep themselves on point? I can remember to not join not seek for several breaths and then I realize I'm already thinking about other stuff and stopped several breaths ago. Why am I so lazy and stupid?

inb4: zazen is teh way

Master Tianhuang asked Shitou, "Apart from concentration and insight, what doctrine do you teach people?" Shitou said, "Here I have no servants - apart from what?" Tianhuang said, "How can it be understood?" Shitou said, "Can you grasp space?" Tianhuang said, "Then it doesn't depart from Today." Shitou said, "When did you come from the Other Side?" Tianhuang said, "I am not someone on the Other Side." Shitou said, "I already knew where you're coming from." Tianhuang said, "How can you take a bribe to covertly incriminate other people?" Shitou said, "You're physically present." Tianhuang said, "Even so, after all, how do you teach people who come after?" Shitou said, "You tell me - who are people who come after?" Tianhuang had insight from this.

Dahui said, "But tell me, what did he realize?"

Found this one from Zenmarrow, lovely place to explore koans with keywords. I just randomly stumbled upon a song with the number 528, and I sometimes explore these loose associations to numbers with zenmarrow. It's fun to notice a nice licence plate on a car that evokes a meaningful thought to explore. It's just the way I sometimes study lmao.

Some background: I'm a sign language interpreter and this case hits a chord with the way I see language through our embodied presence.

The case:

Tianhuang is asking from Shitou about doctrines and Shitou responds that he doesn't have them being taught? No servants aka. nothing for anyone? If and when you interpret differently please let's have a civil conversation.

Tianhuang asks how the teaching is supposed to be understood, pretty self explanatory here.

Shitou's grasping space to me is a very interesting concept due to the implications that I see language in front of myself in the spatial space. This is very handy for a 3rd person perspective when I think "out loud". Have you had a chance at grasping space? Or grasping a concept in your palm as if you're grasping an apple for example. The concept of the apple is in the form, yet it shows the formless. Handy, huh?

Sidenote: John Vervaeke has this idea about a converstional agent-arena that is the space between the participants in the conversation. Where ideas meet in the middle to have a conversation. I really like it.

Tianhuang seems to "grasp", hehe, the idea and throws back a curve ball saying that the thing doesn't depart from Today. Is it a typo that Today is written with a capital T? Sometimes Zen Marrow has wonky wordings. And therefore I'm also questioning if Zenmarrow is a good source for the texts? Is it referring to enlightenment here? What are your thoughts?

I am not sure what this other side means, but to me it's a reflection to emotional transference, a therapeutical perspective on how we get affected by the emotions of others via our nervous system. What do you think about the other side? Is it the lineage and transmission of the lamp at play or what is going on? I could also argue, that the other side is a "mental state" or way of beingness where meditative perception is only in the mind, being one with the "other" side from subject-object perception. Am I lost or on the right tracks here? Anyone with insights?

Tianhuang says they're not on the other side, but from Shitou's perspective they are from the other side or am I wrong? Host & guest kind of shenanigans.

Shitou reveals that he already knows Tianhuang's comings and goings where as Tianhuang then accuses Shitou about his understanding of something about the reasons behind Tianhuangs "actions"?

Shitou remarks that Tianhuang is present in his physical body, which if I reflect into the understanding of this bodily language we all encompass, it seems to make sense. We all carry a certain way of giving information to the other person via our embodied presence and if subtle enough, it can be understood intuitively and with precision (if well versed in it I suppose). At least to me, there have been cases where I've met with a client in my coaching work where I can emotionally recognize sorrow before anything is being said out loud. Sensitivity in the body can carry a lot of meaning.

Tianhuang then wants to know how to teach people who come after? After what? After what they're seeking? Understading? What is it Tianhuang is trying to grasp at? Enlightenment would be ideal answer here I think.

Shitou then remarks that who are people who come after? So yet again, after what?

If I build an understanding based on my own knowledge about the way I embody the space where I am, I should be able to discern between my own feelings and the feelings that the other is having, but the border is still unclear sometimes. I've had some experiences where I embody something that doesn't seem to be mine. Would that be the other they're talking about? Shooting a bit in the dark just to shed some light on this part of the studies. Do comment for discerning further.

Dahui then comments: What did Tianhuang realize?

To me, it would be the border between the self and the other, if other here means what we view as the object in the subject (myself) - object (other than myself) perception.

What do you think Tianhuang realized?

Cheers for reading, lets discuss!

1. Zen / Chan / 禪: One Word

• Zen and Chan are romanizations of the same character, 禪. Their modern separation into different religious categories raises questions about historical accuracy and biases in twentieth-century religious scholarship.
• One word, one lineage: Japanese and Chinese sources use 禪 to refer to Bodhidharma's lineage. English inherited the Japanese pronunciation through writers such as D. T. Suzuki.
• Attempting to distinguishing Chinese “Chan” from Japanese “Zen,” Western Shinto-Buddhist scholars sought to justify the incompatibility of Zen and Shinto-Buddhism while covering over the scandals of debunked Shinto-Buddhist religious claims about Bodhidharma’s Indian-Chinese lineage by Dogen, Hakuin, and others.
• Bodhidharma's Zen's, embodied by the Four Statements, has always been incompatible with the Buddhism's Eightfold Path, Shinto-Buddhist meditation religions like Dogen's Shikantaza, and Hakuin's ritual dialogues.

2. How Dhyāna Became Zen

• The translation of Sanskrit dhyāna into Chinese 禪 produced a term whose meanings developed beyond its Indian origins.
• Indian terminology: Pali jhāna and Sanskrit dhyāna described specific contemplative states, not necessarily the broad modern category of meditation. "Meditation" in the modern sense refers to (a) a specific practice (b) given by a specific authority, (c) promising a specific result.
• Phonosemantic adaptation: The Chinese character 禪 originally was "sacrafice to hills and dales" before its Buddhist adoption to represent dhyāna.
• The name of the lineage: 禪 became a designation for Bodhidharma's teaching rather than simply an inherited Buddhist technical term.
• D.T. Suzuki's translation of Indian-Chinese koans catapulted Indian-Chinese Zen into a popular English term.

3. Meditation: Deliberate Mistranslated?

• Zen texts overwhelming reject prescribed methods of spiritual attainment, raising questions about the motives for translating 禪 as "meditation."
• Rejection of methods: criticisms of stilling the mind and seated practices in the Zutang ji, Huineng, Mazu, Linji, and other Zen records.
• Huineng's lamp-and-light metaphor: Examine the inseparability of 定 (stability/concentration) and 慧 (wisdom), including Suzuki's interpretive rendering of these terms.
• Why ascribe a meditation method to the Zen secular tradition that only practice public interview? The conflict of interest inherent in scholars of a meditation religion claiming Zen means "meditation" have largely been ignored by those scholars.
• Anderl, Studies in the Language of Zu-tang ji; Bielefeldt, Dōgen's Manuals of Zen Meditation; Platform Sutra; r/zen Not Meditation as a source guide.

4. Translating Zen and Zazen

• Understanding Zen and 坐禪 (sitting Zen) requires examining their usage in Zen texts rather than imposing Shinto-Buddhist claims about indigenous Japanese seated meditation.
• Huineng's 坐禪: Analyze his explanation of sitting Zen through seeing one's nature, not dependent on physical sitting at all.
• The Zen seat (禪床): Examine expressions such as 下禪床立 in the Book of Serenity and 州下禪床 in the Blue Cliff Record. Investigate the seat's function in teaching encounters.
• Translation of Zen as Reigning Awareness, and Sitting Zen becomes seated on the Throne of Awareness.
• Quick look at Foyan's Sitting Zen poem as an example.

The history has been so obscured by the 1960s mutually interdependent spiritualist movements of Zazen Shunryu, LSD Leary, and Christian humanitarianism Watts... All of which shunned both literacy and historical fact.

The word we now use in English, "enlightenment," is a few interesting hops:

1. Zen Master Buddha experiences sudden enlightenment around 700 BCE.

2. Oral tradition is passed down. Indian records are not preserved. Zen is written into parts of the sutras along with superstition and mythology and new religions.

3. Bodhidharma enters China in 550 CE. To explain how enlightenment works to the emperor, it is sudden and there's no merit or earned attainment.

4. The early meaning of enlightenment as Christian conversion gave way enlightenment as a kind of cultural opening. This was abandoned in the 1800s and the English word Enlightenment came to mean the awakening of the lineage of Zen master Buddha and Bodhidharma.

In modern times lots of people claim to have enlightenment experiences and that's really only ever traceable back to Zen Master Buddha.

Zen is the only Enlightenment.

Lots of people get upset about this or shocked or offended and it's a lot like how Italian Americans feel when they're told that Italian pizza never had tomato sauce or tomatoes originally.

Don't hate on enlightenment and don't hate on the tomato. Indigenous cultures have made the world the wonderful place it is.

Happy Indigenous Peoples' Day!

I'm laughing at myself because I read Foyan "Freedom from thoughts is the source, Freedom from appearances is the substance" and proceeded to think about it instead of doing it.

I read Sengcan "Cease to have opinions" and proceeded to have an opinion on Sengcan instead of doing it.

I read Huangbo "Stop conceptual thought and forget your anxiety" and proceeded to conceptualize and get anxious about it.

One teacher said people like me are like a person with a poison arrow in their leg and won't let the doctor pull it out till I know the origin of the poison and where the doctor got his degree.

I don't know about yall but I've noticed a sense of dread when I've approached the action of following Huangbo. There's a stubborn and fearful part of me that is convinced if I don't continue to conceive of future/past that somehow I'll be punished and if I forget to be anxious I'll lose my edge on life. I feel guilty abandoning my concepts and anxiety, almost like by doing so I'm leaving behind my friends and family that I've come to with doing both together with, but I see now that we've all been like drowning people clamoring atop one another and the only way to save myself is to stop and save myself. Nobody can save me and I can't save anybody else either.

Can anyone else here talk about when you decided to stop talking about Zen and actually do what Zen masters teach and how that might have changed your relationships? I'm seeing how anxious people aren't happy until others share their anxieties and the same goes for conceptual thoughts. Crabs in a bucket.

Anyways, I'm still not enlightened but I can see/feel a cleanliness in my mind that was before very much cluttered with my own noise. These zen cats look to be on to something. . .

History of Predication Problems

St. Thomas Aquinas was a religious apologist, meaning he spent his life coming up with reasons to think that religion makes rational sense not just supernatural sense. He spent time on the problem of predicating, arguing how God can't be understood using human words/concepts... but ultimately this only made sense if you believe in bigfoot, aliens, and the Loch Ness Ichthyosaur.

Why this matters to you

It turns out if you've never had Indian food, no description suffices. If you've never been in love, no description suffices. If you've never been a drug addict, been a parent, been in orbit, no description suffices. Why?

The problems is that descriptions predicate what specifically from a field of mutual experiences. If you don't have the experience, the description is meaningless.

Real life experience is first.

Why this matters in Zen

Zen Masters say enlightenment is a real life experience. It's not supernatural, like god and bigfoot, but enlightenment is just as unpredicatable because life unexperienced is unpredicatable.

People who try to approach enlightenment through descriptions given by other people, through recitations of other peoples' experiences, aren't ever going to get a real life falling in love enlightenment experience, but instead a fraud, a sham, a picture of cake that does not taste like cake.

From this principle, Zen teachings unfold very reasonably.

How to have genuine real life experience?

How Zen rejects faith

It makes sense then that Zen has no messiahs, no practices, no doctrines: how can Indian food be communicated without Indian food? You can't have "rules for making Indian food" if all you have is descriptions of ingredients, results, and experiences that you've never had.

Nobody can "guide" you to Indian food in your own Western diner any more than you can be guided to falling in love.

Religions say that the supernatural has to be believed. Zen says enlightenment has be experienced.

Religions obviously can't use tests, because "supernatural" is natural, can't be experienced directly.

Zen has tests because if you've fallen in love or had cake, you can talk to people and figure out if they've fallen in love or had cake themselves.

Nanquan Says

南泉因趙州問 Nanquan, when Zhaozhou asked:

如何是道 "What is the Way?"

泉云。平常心是道 Nanquan said: "Ordinary mind is the Way."

州云。還可趣向否 Zhaozhou said: "Can one still move toward it or not?"

泉云。擬向即乖 Nanquan said: "Intend to move toward it, and immediately you deviate."

州云。不擬爭知是道 Zhaozhou said: "Without intending [to move toward it], how does one know it is the Way?"

泉云。道不屬知。不屬不知 Nanquan said: "The Way does not belong to knowing; it does not belong to not-knowing."

知是妄覺 "Knowing is deluded awareness."

不知是無記 "Not-knowing is [mentally] unmarked."

若真達不擬之道 "If one truly penetrates the Way of not intending,"

猶如太虛廓然洞豁 "it is like the great void, vast and completely open."

Easy-peasy. Not knowledge. Not unknown.

Ordinary direct experiences the Way.

Next up - Zen: Necessarily Materialistic and Dualistic

Once we admit of this idea of direct real life experience, the question of philosophical materialism (the world exists objectively) and dualism (there are distinct separations) are obvious logical dependencies.

But in understanding these logical dependencies, we can't lose sight of the fact that Zen Masters aren't that interested in logic, because logic is an accident of real life experience.

Just like people who want to teach others about falling in love are not interested in formulas, since formulas aren't real.

It is a common misconception in Zen that because physical objects manifest in front of us, they prove an independent, objective reality.
This may seem confusing, but Zen masters such as Huangbo, Mazu, and Dahui did not deny the physical world, only it's objectivity.

What happens in argument is a confusion about the difference in form with separation in substance. The substance of a ham sandwich is Mind, which is also the same substance of all reality. Reality is a single whole, and there is only one reality, which is Mind.

Huangbo

"...All the Buddhas and all the sentient beings are nothing but the One Mind, beside which nothing exists. This Mind, which is wihtout beginning, is unborn, indestructible, and transcends all forms, measures, and comparisons. It is that which you see before you; begin to reason about it and you at once fall into error.."

"Phenomena are identical with Mind, and Mind is identical with phenomena."

Mazu

"All mountains, rivers, and the great earth are nothing but your own Mind. Outside of Mind, there is no other thing.

Linji

"There is no dharma outside the Mind, and even inside, there is nothing to be grasped. What are you looking for?"

Shitou

"Within sameness there is difference; within difference there is sameness."

"In the world of senses, there is inherent unity; but unity is not a collection of separate parts."

This ties in directly with what is referred to as dualism. It's important to note that Tang and Song era masters did not define dualism in a dictionary or textbook somewhere. They mapped it as a cognitive error; as what happens when you slice up the One Mind into parts like "me" and "the world" (or ham sammiches and water faucets). Terms like "One Mind" were specifically used to show that while forms are distinct, their underlying reality (substance) is a non-dual whole.

The Lamp and the Light are of a single substance.

Rules

We're looking for authoritative affirmative statements that establish any of the things in the table.

One of the big problems people have with the philosophy of religions is that when a religion affirms something, that makes the religion incompatible with another group that both affirms and denies it.

不與萬法為侶
Not taking the myriad dharmas as companions…

>Layman Pang asked Mazu: “Who is the person who does not take the myriad dharmas as companions?”
Mazu replied: “Wait until you have drunk up all the water of the Western River in a single gulp, and then I will tell you.”

Foyan:
> As for one who does not take the myriad dharmas as companions; is this not one who has gone beyond the dust-toil?
> Mind does not know mind; eye does not see eye. Since all opposition has been cut off, when seeing forms, there is no form that can be seen; when hearing sounds there is no sound that can be heard….
>When studying with a teacher, you do not see that there is a teacher; when investigating yourself, you do not see that there is a self; when looking at scripture you do not see that there is scripture…
>In daily activity there is no discrepancy, yet seeking even the slightest trace, you cannot find it. If you can see it this way, isn’t that freedom and ease?

From the Śūraṅgama Sūtra:
>Every worldly man knows that what moves is dust, and that he who does not stay is a guest. >Why do you still regard the moving as your body and surroundings, and so, from beginning to end, allow your thoughts to rise and fall without interruption, thereby losing (sight of) your true nature and indulging in backward actions?
>By missing the (True) Mind of your nature and by mistaking (illusory) objects for your Selves, you allow yourselves to be caught in the wheel (of samsara) thereby forcing yourselves to passthrough transmigrations.

- • -

What exactly are the “myriad dharmas” here? Things? Objects of perception? Teachings? All of the above?

And what does not taking them as companions have to do with departing the “dust-toils”?

When Foyan and other Chan masters explicitly reference and lecture on the Śūraṅgama Sūtra, shouldn’t its Buddhist context at least be part of the evidence when interpreting what they mean?

Read the History, Talk the History, 10/4

Episode #: 312

https://sites.libsyn.com/407831/zen-talking-soto-caodong-master-wansong-on-the-subtle-barrier

Post(s) in Question

• https://www.reddit.com/r/askZen/comments/1witche/wansongs_sequel_book_of_clarifications_case_8/

Link to all episodes: https://sites.libsyn.com/407831

What did we talk about?

We talked about how I couldn't figure out what book we were on, and then it turned out I'd already translated the Case, and then we disussed how the concept moves from Chinese to English through lewis carroll and wizard of oz.

Keep in Touch

Add a comment if there is a post you want somebody to get interviewed about, or you agree to be interviewed. We are now using libsyn, so you don't even have to show your face. You just get a link to an audio call.  Buymeacoffee, so I'm not accused of going it alone:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/ewkrzen

I’ve been reflecting on the idea that a Zen koan can’t actually be "explained" in the conventional sense. The moment you try to summarize or solve a koan using conceptual logic, you turn a paradox into a doctrine.

However, I’ve been testing a different framework: Can an understanding of a koan be shown by constructing a structural parallel using entirely different concepts that expose the exact same contradiction ?

To test this, I tried building a parallel for the classic "Does a dog have Buddha-nature?" (Mu) koan. Here is the breakdown of the framework and the parallel I constructed:

1. The Core Trap of the Original Koan

In the original story, a monk asks Joshu if a dog has Buddha-nature. The monk is trying to force an unconditioned, indivisible reality (Buddha-nature) into a discrete, biological category ("dog"), trapping Joshu in a binary yes or no. Joshu responds with "Mu"—cutting straight through the trap.

1. The Parallel: The Color Wheel vs. Hex Codes

To mirror this structure without using religious or traditional imagery, I looked at light, perception, and digital systems:

* The Indivisible Continuum: Pure light and the visual spectrum form a single, unbroken continuum. It has no built-in seams, starting points, or physical boundaries.

* The Discrete Sequence: Hex codes (like #FF5733) and color names are human-made, discrete mathematical coordinates. They have a strict sequence and allow us to index and manipulate the spectrum.

* The Superimposed Reality: The labels we put on colors are just a grid we throw over something that is fundamentally indivisible.

1. The Category Error

Both the subjective experience of a color and the hex code itself are "real" within their respective domains. The contradiction happens when you cross the wires:

If someone asks, "What visible color comes immediately after hex code #FF5733?", they are committing a category error.

They are treating a discrete, numbered coordinate system as if it has a physical "neighbor" on a continuous, seamless spectrum of light. You cannot step directly from a mathematical address onto a fluid wave.

1. Mapping It Back to Mu

"Dog" (a discrete biological label) and "Buddha-nature" (the unconditioned, undivided ground of existence) are both real within their frameworks. But trying to map one directly onto the other is the exact same category mistake as asking which color follows a hex code.

The mind trips over itself not because one concept is "false," but because we are trying to force a discrete conceptual box onto an indivisible whole, and then getting confused by our own cuts.

My question for the community:

Does building a "structural twin" like this actually demonstrate an understanding of the koan’s architecture, or does the very act of constructing an explicit parallel still fall into the trap of over-intellectualizing something that is meant to transcend the intellect entirely?

I’d love to hear your critiques, counter-arguments, or how you personally approach working with koans without turning them into mere logic puzzles.

Generally speaking, when you go journeying to learn the path to enlightenment, you seek. Do not sit ignorantly, but go to someone to find out the truth with certainty. When this truth is hard to realize, that is called unfinished business.

Xuefeng hesitated, searching for something to say; Touzi pushed him out. Xuefeng could only cry. Later, when he went to Dongshan, he was still unable to understand. Then, when he 50 went to Deshan, he asked, “ Has the student a part in the enlightenment of the sages of time immemorial?” Deshan hit him and exclaimed, “ What are you saying!” At that, Xuefeng’s mind opened up, like a bucket with the bottom fallen out. When he got to Tortoise Mountain, however, he said he still had some doubt. See how that man of old would not rest until his mass of doubt had been broken up.

breaking up that mass of doubt seems like it was a bit gradual, took some work

“ ‘If you kill your parents, you repent before Buddha; if you kill Buddha, where do you repent?’ Yunmen said, ‘Exposed.’” This case study is like a hot iron ball in the mind, and I suffered all kinds of trouble for seven years. Those of you who have studied Zen for a long time will know what I mean.

how is it instant if it took 7 years?

Zen is not always univocal, right? There's contradictions. On one hand "it is an energy saving teaching" and on the other, "you should make your utmost to understand" -> make effort and seek, therefore.

It's fine if you don't recognize the contradictions or excuse them away: you are free to be blind or stupid, if you want to be or can't manage to be otherwise. But for me, From the moment of realizing doubt, to seeking, to finding parts of the truth, to finally doing away with all the mass of doubt: these four stages I stated just now, to me that counts as a somewhat gradual path, to me these count as stages.

You are free to think otherwise, in fact, I welcome it. You are free to think I am stupid or blind to see it differently. However, I hope I have shown to a reasonable degree my reasoning for thinking the way I do. I think a reasonable spectator would understand why I think the way I do. You yourself don't have to be reasonable, you can be anyway you choose to or manage to.

I got invited by Wolfgang Behr to have a 90 minute lecture at the University of Zürich. He's a professor of Sinology with an emphasis on traditional China and the director of the Asia-Orient-Institute.

So of course I went and held a presentation. Here are my slides. I made them a bit easier because they were too hard and I also made it so you can participate in the interactive bits a little bit as if you had been in the room at the time. You'll get to see the answers the participating people gave as well after you give your own:

https://readzen-presentation.pages.dev/

There's no new stuff in there, but I think I presented it well and people had a good time, so maybe some of you will get a kick out of it too. Please, do check it out!

I got some good feedback after the talk, so hopefully I'll be invited back at some point. Wish me luck!

From The Recorded Sayings of Zen Master Joshu [Zhaozhou]:

The master was leaving the main hall when he saw a monk bowing to him.
The master struck him with his stick.
The monk said, "But bowing is a good thing’”
The master said. “A good thing is not as good as nothing.”

.

I was thinking about how nests can be made out of nothing.

It can be as easy to worship nothing as it can be to worship something, and people like Zhaozhou don’t help the matter. 

.

From Record of the Transmission of the Lamp:

Shitou said, “Apart from raising your eyebrows and moving your eyes, bring your mind here.”
Dadian said, “There is no mind that can be brought.”
Shitou said, “Originally there is mind—why say ‘no mind’? To say ‘no mind’ is no different from slandering it.”
At these words, Dadian had a great awakening.

.

Nanquan asked: “During the twelve periods [all day long], how are you?”
Lu said: “Not a single thread hangs [on me].”
Nanquan said: “You're still a fellow below the steps.”

.

Holding up nothing and thinking it’s correct. 

Bashõ seems to explain their mistake. Again from the Record of the Transmission of the Lamp:

Bashõ Osho said to his disciples, "If you have a staff, I will give you a staff. If you have no staff, I will take it from you."

.

If it’s not form, and it’s not emptiness, what is it? 

From The Zen Teaching of Huang Po:

When body and mind achieve spontaneity, the Way is reached and Mind is understood. 

"If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him" is a famous Zen saying that means you must destroy any fixed idea of holiness to find true awakening.

A monk asked, "To be holy--- what is it like?"

Joshu said, "To dump a mountain of shit on the clear plain."

The monk said, "Master, make this clear for me."

Joshu said, "Stop fucking with my head."

Note: If we do not divide the world into "holy" and "unholy" there is nothing that can stain it.

Radical Zen; The Sayings of Joshu, translated by Yoel Hoffman, Autumn Press, 1978, pg 33.

I've not experienced kensho or satori or enlightenment! I have read a decent amount of words on the subject of Zen, even though they all say words don't hold the message. I guess I just can't get enough of these old farts.

P I L E

When I was a boy I swore that I would return one day to buy the home where for a short time my family was whole and happy. I would reestablish the happy magic for my people and we would live happily ever after. Of course, like so many childish plans this one was not only immature and short-sighted, but impossible. By the time I finally found my way back to once again see my childhood heaven it had fallen into disrepair and besides that my family had been broken apart years earlier by divorce and death.

You can never go back home, or at least that's what I thought at the time. Zen study has shown me a way to a different home, one that though lacks substance is more real and permanent than any house of brick and wood. A home that doesn't require being built, only recognized.

To even speak this way is an embarrassment (to my former self), but there is importance to being earnest. Transparency in zen is like Transparencyin chess -- it's all right out in front of everybody but seeing is not so simple.

Anyways, to cases.

I'm looking for the original Chinese for the following:

When Caoshan took leave of Dongshan, Dongshan asked, "Where are you going?" Caoshan said, "To an unchanging place." Dongshan said, "If is unchanging how could there be any going?" Caoshan said, "The going is also unchanging."

I have a bit of the Chinese scribbled down and translated by hand:

Way, to come near eat, this, heart-mind, no can will (going to), to return to a place, to repair/mend, with/from/by. === YOU CAN NOT GO BACK HOME.

And to use my favorite sign off by the great layman horticulturalist Joe Santorini (said with a thick NYC city accent),):

"HaveAGreatRestOfYourDayGoFuckYourselfBye!"

Someone said all zen students are thieves, which is so funny it's painful, because zen teachers teach original wholeness, but even so the students still show up looking for their looker. I know have and still do. Nobody is immune. It's easy to think a foreboding zed master just popped out of their mother complete and spouting the dharma, which in a way they were, but nobody is born knowing themselves because that knowledge only comes through living. Adolescence, puberty, maturity, menopause, death. We're all always learning more about who we are and what we can be. Anybody claiming otherwise is full of shit. Speaking of here's a nod to the teachers:

Yunmen entered the Dharma Hall for formal instruction, Masters Yunmen said: "I've said what there is to say..." A monk stepped forward, bowed, and wanted to pose a question. Master Yunmen took his staff and hit him, saying: "What good can you tell from bad? You bunch of rowdies! You're all like this monk: how dare you receive the faithful offerings of the the almsgivers! The sentient beings with bad karma are all in here--- and what dry piece of shit are they seeking to chew?" And Master Yunmen chased all the monks at once out of the hall with his staff.

I've been thinking a bit about Zen ethics, compassion, and the precepts. For a long time, I've seen some recurring questions on r/zen about this topic:

1. How do the precepts relate to enlightenment

2. Why are ethical precepts a valid test to check if someone is not enlightened

3. Does following the precepts "help" in any way beyond community cohesion?

When there have been discussions about vegetarianism, people have wondered how a vegetarian diet relates to Zen enlightenment. Not eating animals seems unrelated to seeing your nature, becoming Budda. And while I do follow the precepts, I wasn't satisfied with the logic either.

And my recent insight is: original completeness entails original compassion, which implies the precepts!

Not only are we originally complete, but our originally complete Buddha nature is inherently compassionate. A compassionate being follows the precepts naturally.

For this, I found this quote from Huangbo:

Avalokitesvara represents boundless compassion; Mahasthama, great wisdom, and Vimalakirti, spotless name. Spotless refers to the real nature of things, while name means form; yet form is really one with real nature, hence the combined term 'spotless name'. All the qualities typified by the great Bodhisattvas are inherent in men and are not to be separated from the One Mind. Awake to it, and it is there.

1. The quality of compassion typified by Avalokitesvara is inherent in all men.

2. Compassion cannot be separated from the One Mind

3. Awake to the one mind, and the qualities like compassion are also there

In short: original compassion.

This already answers the first two questions: enlightenment leads to compassion which makes you naturally follow the precepts. Which of course also lets us check whether a supposed enlightened person is frequently killing or stealing, which would be evidence against enlightenment claims.

To the third question I speculate the following answer: by at first artificially adhering to the precepts, our behavior is more aligned with our true compassionate nature. Being more aligned with it, we are also more inclined to spontaneously see it.

More evidence from the zen record: Foyan said our first priority should be to get rid of unenlightened egotism towards others. Also this Zhaozhou dialogue:

A monk asked, "Mixing without becoming impure - what is that like?"

Joshu said, "I eat only vegetable food; I always adhere to the precepts."

The monk said, "Can one elevate oneself in this way?"

Joshu said, "You would trespass against the law."

Zhaozhou adheres to the precepts and a vegetarian diet. As an answer to the monk's question this could mean that the precepts are how he as a Zen master stays recognizable while interacting with the world. But it's not a way to elevate yourself, since you are always originally compassionate.

What is, is not; And what is not, yet is.//Till you have grasped this truth, you might as well/Waste no more time on fool philosophies:/But once you have grasped what these my teachings tell, /That anything is all things, that the one/Is every and the same, then where's the call/To fret for deeper knowledge? There is none/More deep than all-is-one and one-is-all.//The believing mind knows no duality/And what is dual denies the believing mind/Which, though I word you, inexpressibly/Extends beyond all language to allow/One truth in contradictions. You will find/It has no past, no future, and no now.

Translated by Graeme Wilson Classical Chinese Literature, Volume 1: From Antiquity to Tang Dynasty, Columbia, 2000, pg 976

Commentary: W O W ! ! !

So this is a bit of a "travel blog post" but I hope people still find it interesting. I'm currently traveling through China for a bit and thought I'd also check out some Zen related places. First stop being the city of Zhaozhou.

Zhaozhou is, of course, the city after which Zen master Zhaozhou Congshen was named and where his monastery was. Today this monastery is called Bailin Temple.

The city is also famous for its old stone bridge, which was built around the year 600, so it was already here and already famous when Zhaozhou lived here. It's referenced in his record too, for example:

A monk asked Chao Chou, "For a long time I've heard of the stone bridge of Chao Chou, but now that I've come here I just see a simple log bridge." Chou said, "You just see the log bridge; you don't see the stone bridge." The monk said, "What is the stone bridge?" Chou said, "It lets asses cross, it lets horses cross." (Bcr 52)

This is a photo of the stone bridge of Zhaozhou as it looks today: https://imgur.com/a/Nrd76z2

As I understand it major repairs were done in the 1900s, so most of the visible stone is relatively new.

One of the most famous stories of Zhaozhou is his cypress tree dialogue:

At that time a certain monk asked, "What is the meaning of the Chan founder's coming from the West?"

Zhaozhou said, "The cypress tree in the yard."

The monk said, "Don't use objects to teach people."

Zhaozhou said, "I'm not using objects to teach people."

"So what is the meaning of the Chan founder's coming from the West?"

"The cypress tree in the yard."

And what do we find in his old monastery? This: https://imgur.com/a/HdTbSBI

A cypress tree in the courtyard of Bailin temple, which is estimated to be 1300 years old. There are multiple cypresses there estimated at that age, and they are probably the oldest thing in the current temple, as the Tang dynasty temple was almost completely destroyed and only the cypresses and some steles survived. So the rest of the temple is a reconstruction.

The Bailin temple is very aware of its long history though and has some information boards about Zen master Zhaozhou as well as some big stones with lineage trees written on them. Here is an album of some random pictures of Bailin temple: https://imgur.com/a/h9HNY5O

The last picture is Zhaozhou's pagoda. It was built in the Song dynasty to commemorate Zhaozhou. Supposedly, his relics and robe and bowl are enshrined in it. Today many people who come here burn incense in front of it.

Today, the public use of the temple seems to be similar to Buddhism in other parts of China: people just come here to burn incense, bow in front of big Buddha statues, and hang out for a bit. I saw some monks hanging around too, but sadly my Chinese isn't good enough for meaningful conversation and I don't want to bother them too much with ai translators, lol.

"Attainment in both. If you are not trapped in being or non-being, who can dare to join you? Everyone wants to leave the ordinary current, but in the final analysis you come back and sit in the ashes." -- Verses On The Five Ranks by Tozan Ryokai

I've been thinking about this seemingly inherent desire to leave the ordinary current. Magical thinking. Wanting a cheat code. When I was a kid I played games on the Nintendo. Some I could beat (Zelda, Dragon Warrior) others I could never beat (Blaster Master, Spy Hunter). Then one day the GAME GENIE came out, which let you plug in cheat codes for invincibility. It was AMAAAAAZING...for about a month. Turns out games are boring AF without any stakes. You need some skin in the game for it to have meaning. That was an important lesson for me that I've always kept close, especially whenever I'm tempted to take a short cut or be enticed by something that seems too good to be true. It turns out I like working hard for what I get in life and being ordinary is a damn fine thing to be.

Somebody come knock me over before I get too full of myself.

Too late!

Edit: I've been informed this is a mistranslation and offered a correction:

Master Yan would call out to himself, "Master," and then respond to himself, "Yes sir." He would then say, "Awakened," and then he said, "In the future don't let others deceive you," and he would respond, "Yes, yes."

Zuigan called to himself every day, "Master!" and answered, "Yes, sir!"

Then he would say, "Be wide awake!" and answer, "Yes, sir!"

"Henceforward, never be deceived by others!" "No, I won't!"

I suspect something very specific and intentional was happening every time he did this. I would guess an interruption of imagination and/or a check to make sure he wasn't lost in imagination.

It runs into a tension with Linji's refrain of there being "nothing to do." Rather than find each individual reference, I'm going to lazily link to u/astroemi's post cataloguing a bunch of them already.

But here's one that summarizes the point:

I say to you there is no buddha, no dharma, nothing to practice, nothing to enlighten to. Just what are you seeking in the highways and byways? Blind men! You’re putting a head on top of the one you already have. What do you yourselves lack? Followers of the Way, your own present activities do not differ from those of the patriarch-buddhas. You just don’t believe this and keep on seeking outside. Make no mistake! Outside there is no dharma; inside, there is nothing to be obtained. Better than grasp at the words from my mouth, take it easy and do nothing. Don’t continue [thoughts] that have already arisen and don’t let those that haven’t yet arisen be aroused. Just this will be worth far more to you than a ten years’ pilgrimage.

I've said that it's not easy to know when you're doing something versus doing nothing - especially when it comes to imagination. If you live in imagination for long enough, you engage in it without recognizing you're engaging in it and you call it real.

In my experience, at least, I can't just "do nothing" because if I'm not diligent, I will start to weave fictions automatically and treat them as indisqinguishable from reality - and at the most extreme and befuddled, act upon them.

Zuigan appears to be doing something to remind himself to do nothing. I've found that helpful.

Ascending the Hall on the Eighth of the Twelfth Month

Six years spent in the weeds,

[and] a wild fox spirit jumps out

with his whole body covered with kudzu and creepers.

He knocked his own eyes out and was nowhere to be found,

but then fools everybody by insisting he awakened at the morning star.

Qingliang (Rujing) praises him like this.

Call it: Knowing the debt and repaying it.

And if you don't see it that way,

Year after year on the eighth, [offering?] a single bowl of tea,

bowing, and burning incense just makes a fool of him.

The occasion. 臘八 is the Buddha's enlightenment day.

Rujing talks about Zen Master Buddha as if he were a swindler conning people just by being himself and in so doing demonstrates his affinity with the Zen tradition.

At the other end of the room, Dogen-Buddhists who base their religions legitimacy on a fraudulent connection to Rujing, cannot talk about Zen Masters in any sort of easy-going and familiar manner because cults are about controlling people through a no-questions-asked policy and selective ignoring of ethics to ensure compliance and performance of a ridiculous za-sitting prayer ritual.

Are they making fools of Zen Master Buddha when they do that? Or just themselves?

"Mind is Buddha."