ray wrote:Going back to an earlier question, on pointing out in Dzogchen and in Zen, actually there is pointing out in Zen, and this is what the interactions in Koans are.
This is not what pointing out means in Vajrayāna. The koan process and the process of pointing out instruction in Dzogchen is completely different.
An example of pointing out in Zen that is also a Koan is that the Buddha went to the front of the assembly, sat down, and held up a flower and smiled. Mahakashyapa's mind opened--he saw what was being pointed out. Sometimes a teacher would tell the students to leave.
No, Mahakashyapa was already awake. In Zen, transmission is given by one awakened person to another (theoretically). Transmission is never given to a complete beginner, as in Vajrayana.
When they were all leaving, he would ask them where they were going. When they turned around, he would say, "What is it?" or shout "Katz!" When students asked a question or gave an answer and the teacher shouted, "Katz!", this functions to stop the thinking and bring awareness out clearly, sserving the same purpose as "PHAT!" does in Dzogchen practice or empowerment.
Sorry, but this is incorrect. Zen completely lacks the presentation of the basis, the introduction of the three kāyas, etc., etc.
All the different ways of pointing out or direct introduction that Longchen Rabjampa mentions in the Treasure Trove of Scriptural Transmission are used in Zen for the same purpose.
No, this is an incorrect assertion.
But in Zen it is also said that phenomena themselves can point out the nature to us, not only a teacher. Then the teacher would confirm. But a teacher makes it a whole lot more likely it will happen, and by being around him and him or her using the methods of pointing out, we may get it. Both in Zen and Dzogchen, they say that the teacher is always pointing out the nature directly.
This is a misconception. Zen does not go beyond sutra. There is no experiential direct introduction in Zen or Chan.
And after really getting the pointing out in Zen, ones practice changes completely, because then the point is to become more accustomed to ones true nature, the true nature of things, either by further koan study or just sitting and resting in that nature. Much like in Dzogchen.
It is not like Dzogchen at all.
I say this on the basis of practice in the Zen and Vajrayana/Dzogchen traditions, getting the pointing in each (having satori confirmed by a Zen teacher, practicing koan and getting the nature pointed out, getting the pointing out in the context of the fourth empowerment).
There is no equivalent to the fourth empwowerment in Zen. Doesn't exist.