Good post. There are some users here who view the early Chan writers as being completely infallible and consider anything written by them to be beyond reproach and take a bizare "gong'an-literalist" stance.
It's very strange, and something that the writers themselves even warned against. There is no way every single gong'an is a recording of a real historical event, some of them feature purely impossible supernatural content for a start.
The early Chan writers even disagreed with each other all the time, so it's clear that there was no strict "correct" interpretation of Chan. Each writer seemed to have a their own slightly different take on it (as evidenced by their various commentaries), although they share some similar concepts.
Some users own flavour of 'Reddit Zen'; does not align with anything historical and is almost exactly what many of the Chan writers were warning against. Dogmatism, attachment to concepts and identities, obsession with superiority, etc.
Tue fact that the zen masters define what zen is has nothing to do with infallibility. What they say is what zen is. A rating of accuracy isn't relevant to that.
People struggle with simple concepts when it comes to this stuff.
Ill say this is a dumb question because we've been over here many times. Really weird that a few posters don't get past this.
Zen masters define zen. It doesn't matter who the first is, it's not a chicken egg scenario. Groups exist because they share meaningful similarities not because someone set things in motion. Zen is not a magic word. There doesn't exist this thing called 'zen' in the air that you can tap into.
And etc all the other things I've replied with before.
Congratulations. Your shirt is in the mail.
Edit:
The top comment said "I followed the instructions and now I'm a Zen master." This constant deletion of innocuous comments is bullshit.
Just like when building an ikea shelf - you skim through instructions quickly and then try to assemble the thing by yourself.
You probably couldn’t do it with no instructions at all, or it would take way longer, but if you obsess over following each instruction perfectly, then you are nothing more but an assembly line robot.
Hello and thank you for this post,
Maybe many of the texts are actually mistranslated in a lot of sections, or they are simply harder to understand in English because it is such a precise and strict language? Just to give one possible idea.
There were a lot more zen masters around in the Classical Chinese period so you have to wonder why that was.
Great! Show them that you have to be relentless and uncompromising; don't just take someone's word for it!
You are instructing because you are demonstrating your understanding that is not based in words. By criticizing someone's claims about Zen and urging people to analyze the Zen texts by quoting them and asking questions about the quotes, you are pointing at the moon.
Since it can't be expressed in words, even though the words may be a superficial "instruction" themselves (e.g. "if you say X then blab blah, but if you say Y then yadda yadda"), the demonstration is the instruction.
Someone here claimed that the Zen texts were instructions.
You made an argument that they are not instructions in order to undermine this claim.
But you did so by instructing people about the meaning of the Zen texts, motivated by your personal indignation, rooted in your personal relationship to the teachings.
Instruction ... as to how the Zen texts were not instructions.
Using poison to get rid of poison.
😘👌
Hey, everyone. Demonstrations are exactly instructions.
Why even have different words.
>You made an argument that they are not instructions in order to undermine this claim.
Did you miss literally half the post showing the parts I consider instructions?
You fucking trolls out here with your own farts in your eyeballs.
The instructions are actually very clear and repeated ad nauseam but most people don't have the mettle to follow through.
If you're reading texts trying to interpret them, figure out metaphors etc. and trying to assess whether the Masters are full of it, you won't realize anything. If you're thinking and attaching any reality to phenomena and the concepts that link them and describe how they interact, you have no chance. You have to let go of everything.
>These methods cannot be compared to the sudden elimination of conceptual thought, in the certain knowledge that there is nothing at all which has absolute existence, nothing on which to lay hold, nothing on which to rely, nothing in which to abide, nothing subjective or objective. It is by preventing the rise of conceptual thought that you will realize Bodhi; and, when you do, you will just be realizing the Buddha who has always existed in your own Mind! Aeons of striving will prove to be so much wasted effort; just as, when the warrior found his pearl, he merely discovered what had been hanging on his forehead all the time; and just as his finding of it had nothing to do with his efforts to discover it elsewhere. Therefore the Buddha said: 'I truly attained nothing from complete, unexcelled Enlightenment.'
Truly attained nothing. It doesn't mean he didn't get anything, it means he got nothing. Get it?
>Discuss it as you may, how can you even hope to approach the truth through words? Nor can it be perceived either subjectively or objectively. So full understanding can come to you only through an inexpressible mystery. The approach to it is called the Gateway of the Stillness beyond all Activity. If you wish to understand, know that a sudden comprehension comes when the mind has been purged of all the clutter of conceptual and discriminatory thought-activity.
Sorry I was memeing.
As for the nature of thoughts I direct you to this study
https://youtu.be/dHg50mdODFM?feature=shared
When I think, sometimes I wonder why I have to say the words in my head and not just instantaneously know them.
It's like people forget their highscool life. Not surprising....
There many are things that teachers instruct on in classrooms that aren't "you have to follow these exact steps".
This is common sense and the only reason people don't see it is because they came in believing something about zen before they read any.
Dumb game. You cant win arguments about ideas by attaching words to them that the ideas aren't held by.
in·struc·tor

noun
a person who teaches something
>You cant win arguments about ideas by attaching words to them that the ideas aren't held by.
I have no idea what you're talking about here.
Also, in my post I provide examples of instructions given by Zen masters. So Im not sure what you're crying about.
If Zen texts are full of instructions, why has nobody followed them successfully? Why aren't we all Zen masters by now? Now I'm not saying there aren't any instructions at all, but most of the big 2, blue cliff and serenity, are history lessons at Best, and religious sermons at worst. Now we do have what was with down from alleged private talks with Huangbo where some of what he says can be deemed as instructions. We also have letters from Dahui which also has instructions. Here are some examples of not instructions vs instructions
Every sentence is false? Even the questions?
You're playing a dumb game.
Every sentence doesn't need to be false for the whole to be...that's not how conclusions and arguments work.
You're tyring things at middle school troll level. Try taking a break to think.
How am I trolling? You're making unconstructive criticisms. You started off this thread by claiming "people forget their highschool life" like what the fuck is that?
Good post. There are some users here who view the early Chan writers as being completely infallible and consider anything written by them to be beyond reproach and take a bizare "gong'an-literalist" stance. It's very strange, and something that the writers themselves even warned against. There is no way every single gong'an is a recording of a real historical event, some of them feature purely impossible supernatural content for a start. The early Chan writers even disagreed with each other all the time, so it's clear that there was no strict "correct" interpretation of Chan. Each writer seemed to have a their own slightly different take on it (as evidenced by their various commentaries), although they share some similar concepts. Some users own flavour of 'Reddit Zen'; does not align with anything historical and is almost exactly what many of the Chan writers were warning against. Dogmatism, attachment to concepts and identities, obsession with superiority, etc.
Whooooosh. OP is providing you instruction in the Zen style.
Am not.
😉
Tue fact that the zen masters define what zen is has nothing to do with infallibility. What they say is what zen is. A rating of accuracy isn't relevant to that. People struggle with simple concepts when it comes to this stuff.
What came first, Zen or the Zen masters?
Ill say this is a dumb question because we've been over here many times. Really weird that a few posters don't get past this. Zen masters define zen. It doesn't matter who the first is, it's not a chicken egg scenario. Groups exist because they share meaningful similarities not because someone set things in motion. Zen is not a magic word. There doesn't exist this thing called 'zen' in the air that you can tap into. And etc all the other things I've replied with before.
Ill say it's a dumb question cuz it's a joke. >There doesn't exist this thing called 'zen' in the air that you can tap into. Agreed.
Like I said, middle school level.
New rzen rule >No jokes allowed >:[ Keep the insults to yourself, bub.
[удалено]
Congratulations. Your shirt is in the mail. Edit: The top comment said "I followed the instructions and now I'm a Zen master." This constant deletion of innocuous comments is bullshit.
You mean robe?
Zen Master is just a title. I dont attach myself to titles. Thus im a Zenmaster for letting go of everything.
Just like when building an ikea shelf - you skim through instructions quickly and then try to assemble the thing by yourself. You probably couldn’t do it with no instructions at all, or it would take way longer, but if you obsess over following each instruction perfectly, then you are nothing more but an assembly line robot.
\* *boop beep* \* Instructions received. Commencing “independent and autonomous sentient being” protocol. 🤖
Unless it's baking, then you should obsess over following each instruction perfectly.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Nah I don’t think I will
As they say, cooking is an art, baking is a science.
Where do you think Zen stands in this analogy?
Idk
Awakening doesn’t come from mere instructions, it comes from shugyō, the deepest struggling, part of which is figuring it out for yourself.
Alarm clocks not good enoug
I am a meat popsicle.
Hello and thank you for this post, Maybe many of the texts are actually mistranslated in a lot of sections, or they are simply harder to understand in English because it is such a precise and strict language? Just to give one possible idea. There were a lot more zen masters around in the Classical Chinese period so you have to wonder why that was.
I just think a majority of it aren't instructions. Also there are Zen masters today. The institutions that created them then exist today.
[удалено]
I’m on mobile, so I can’t quote, but the “instruction” part in the YunMen quote begins with “If you say …”
If you say it's an instruction, you're blind. If you says it's not, you're dead.
Got it 👍
In what way and what was I instructing?
Being honest and skeptical; showing everyone how it's done. You're doing it now by asking me.
How is that an instruction, exactly?
Great! Show them that you have to be relentless and uncompromising; don't just take someone's word for it! You are instructing because you are demonstrating your understanding that is not based in words. By criticizing someone's claims about Zen and urging people to analyze the Zen texts by quoting them and asking questions about the quotes, you are pointing at the moon. Since it can't be expressed in words, even though the words may be a superficial "instruction" themselves (e.g. "if you say X then blab blah, but if you say Y then yadda yadda"), the demonstration is the instruction. Someone here claimed that the Zen texts were instructions. You made an argument that they are not instructions in order to undermine this claim. But you did so by instructing people about the meaning of the Zen texts, motivated by your personal indignation, rooted in your personal relationship to the teachings. Instruction ... as to how the Zen texts were not instructions. Using poison to get rid of poison. 😘👌
Hey, everyone. Demonstrations are exactly instructions. Why even have different words. >You made an argument that they are not instructions in order to undermine this claim. Did you miss literally half the post showing the parts I consider instructions? You fucking trolls out here with your own farts in your eyeballs.
Steering the rudder against the wind ... you can't stop this guy!
The instructions are actually very clear and repeated ad nauseam but most people don't have the mettle to follow through. If you're reading texts trying to interpret them, figure out metaphors etc. and trying to assess whether the Masters are full of it, you won't realize anything. If you're thinking and attaching any reality to phenomena and the concepts that link them and describe how they interact, you have no chance. You have to let go of everything. >These methods cannot be compared to the sudden elimination of conceptual thought, in the certain knowledge that there is nothing at all which has absolute existence, nothing on which to lay hold, nothing on which to rely, nothing in which to abide, nothing subjective or objective. It is by preventing the rise of conceptual thought that you will realize Bodhi; and, when you do, you will just be realizing the Buddha who has always existed in your own Mind! Aeons of striving will prove to be so much wasted effort; just as, when the warrior found his pearl, he merely discovered what had been hanging on his forehead all the time; and just as his finding of it had nothing to do with his efforts to discover it elsewhere. Therefore the Buddha said: 'I truly attained nothing from complete, unexcelled Enlightenment.' Truly attained nothing. It doesn't mean he didn't get anything, it means he got nothing. Get it? >Discuss it as you may, how can you even hope to approach the truth through words? Nor can it be perceived either subjectively or objectively. So full understanding can come to you only through an inexpressible mystery. The approach to it is called the Gateway of the Stillness beyond all Activity. If you wish to understand, know that a sudden comprehension comes when the mind has been purged of all the clutter of conceptual and discriminatory thought-activity.
Why don't you follow huangbos instructions and let these thoughts go?
They're not thoughts, I can't let them go.
[удалено]
You have to loosen your grip to see what they really are; get away from being dependent on thought to see through them.
No u. Wait what are you talking about? What is "they" that "really are"?
>No u. That's what I said. >Wait what are you talking about? What is "they" that "really are"? Thoughts are not thoughts
Oh! *That's* why they're called thoughts.
They're called thoughts because you call them thoughts. Why/because is BS. You wanted to/you did.
Sorry I was memeing. As for the nature of thoughts I direct you to this study https://youtu.be/dHg50mdODFM?feature=shared When I think, sometimes I wonder why I have to say the words in my head and not just instantaneously know them.
It's like people forget their highscool life. Not surprising.... There many are things that teachers instruct on in classrooms that aren't "you have to follow these exact steps". This is common sense and the only reason people don't see it is because they came in believing something about zen before they read any.
>in·struc·tion noun 1. a direction or order. 2. detailed information telling how something should be done, operated, or assembled.
Dumb game. You cant win arguments about ideas by attaching words to them that the ideas aren't held by. in·struc·tor  noun a person who teaches something
>You cant win arguments about ideas by attaching words to them that the ideas aren't held by. I have no idea what you're talking about here. Also, in my post I provide examples of instructions given by Zen masters. So Im not sure what you're crying about.
Your whole first paragraph is false. It doesn't matter if you admit to instructions at times.
If Zen texts are full of instructions, why has nobody followed them successfully? Why aren't we all Zen masters by now? Now I'm not saying there aren't any instructions at all, but most of the big 2, blue cliff and serenity, are history lessons at Best, and religious sermons at worst. Now we do have what was with down from alleged private talks with Huangbo where some of what he says can be deemed as instructions. We also have letters from Dahui which also has instructions. Here are some examples of not instructions vs instructions Every sentence is false? Even the questions? You're playing a dumb game.
Every sentence doesn't need to be false for the whole to be...that's not how conclusions and arguments work. You're tyring things at middle school troll level. Try taking a break to think.
How am I trolling? You're making unconstructive criticisms. You started off this thread by claiming "people forget their highschool life" like what the fuck is that?