Re: What a Zen Master is, and what a Zen Master isn't.
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:30 pm
I think it's supposed to make it more meaningful.oushi wrote:can meaning enhance reality? Can it make it more ... real?
A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
https://www.dharmawheel.net:443/
I think it's supposed to make it more meaningful.oushi wrote:can meaning enhance reality? Can it make it more ... real?
I really like Linji. The night i read The Record Of Linji was a profound night for me. For the record, jackals are very nervous skittish creatures. It's an apt comparison. Linji knew what he was talking about.For a dozen years I have been looking for one (who is suitable), but have not been able to find as much as a mustard seed. I am afraid those Zen teachers are rather like newlywed brides, uneasy and worried about being chased out of their homes and starving to death.Since olden times people have not believed the old masters, and only after they had been driven away did their greatness become known. He who is approved by everyone, what good is he? “The lion's roar shatters the brain of the jackal.”
Yes, that's not a "call for control of who claims what title". I'm not sounding the hunting horn here, I stating a plain observation of the facts: that there is in fact a credentialing system in Zen.Astus wrote:
I wrote "You call for control of who claims what title"
because you wrote
"We have credentials in Zen for a reason, for safety and to ensure people are actually being taught Buddhism, and not just somebody's impressions that they read from a book."
Decentralized, does not mean no transparency. There is some, obviously, if people start doing something that is totally weird, other people will notice it and say something.and I wrote
"you reject the idea of transparency and rigorous examination"
because you wrote
"Zen is a decentralized system. Once a person becomes transmitted, they are not necessarily required to be dependent upon an institutional authority any more. They have become a new institutional authority in and of themselves. That's the way Zen works. That's the way our system is. The reasons it's done that way is to foster diversity, like spreading different seeds to the wind, so that the teaching has the most likely chance of catching hold somewhere and taking root and being passed on. Each teacher has their own personality, opinions, experience, and way of looking at things and doing things."
You misunderstand, I wasn't making them synonymous with that position, or saying they are a Guru. I was just saying that authority/wise, they can be more independent the way the Dalai Lama is. That might be a poor comparison. What I'm saying is that they in thesemselves, are not dependent upon some overarching "Zen" body for their authority once they've received Dharma Transmission.You said:
"They are not above criticism. This is not a "guru" thing here, you are supposed to trust your own gut and intuition. That, is what they are teaching you to do."
but before that you compared the Zen teacher's authority to gurus:
"It's more like each Transmitted Master becomes a Dalai Lama in and of themselves, with the authority to have their own disciples."
The only reason that seems to be so amazing, is because in that sentence, you are comparing them to the Catholic Pope, where in Catholicism, only one person in the world may hold that job and title, and so they are an immensely important person.Making each Zen teacher the local Pope instead of a parish priest. Naturally, attitudes toward a local vicar and the direct representative of the Eternal is quite different.
On the other hand, Buddhism in general presents a logical teaching that can be comprehended freely by any intelligent person, it is open to scrutiny and rational debate. In fact, it is a point the Dalai Lama regularly emphasises.
You're still not explaining how that's supposed to be problematic.And this system that is supported by the idea of transmission from teacher to disciple is problematic.
As opposed to ignorance...shel wrote:I think it's supposed to make it more meaningful.oushi wrote:can meaning enhance reality? Can it make it more ... real?
MalaBeads wrote:I really like Linji. The night i read The Record Of Linji was a profound night for me. For the record, jackals are very nervous skittish creatures. It's an apt comparison. Linji knew what he was talking about.
And people will fight tooth and nail to keep their most deeply held views (and myths) intact.Sara H wrote:If you're looking for something that is perfectly safe, that comes with no risks, it doesn't exist. Spirituality is an inherently risky business, because you're agreeing to have your most deeply held views challenged and examined. That can be incredibly scary.
That's because everything has some sort of value or purpose, whether positive or negative. But that was always the case. It's not something that's on the rise, but we do have more free time nowadays to fret about such things.oushi wrote:Nowadays everything has meaning applied to it.
I don't follow, information is just raw data.Humanity developed enormous amount of information about everything. Now we may ask, does enlightenment fallow? And why not?
Lions have fangs which they use skilfully without knowing their value, or purpose. Things have value, purpose and meaning only when we apply it.shel wrote:That's because everything has some sort of value or purpose, whether positive or negative. But that was always the case.
Hard to tell, as I do not remember my previous incarnations (j/k)shel wrote:It's not something that's on the rise, but we do have more free time nowadays to fret about such things.
It may look like meaning is something true that lies behind the words and raw data. But, if you drop those words, will reality become more meaningful? What is meaning without data? It's meaningless aka Buddha Nature.shel wrote:I don't follow, information is just raw data.
I've read many a sutra, and as I am sure you have as well, and are so versed in knowledge on the subject, you will know what I am referring to when I talk about lives being measured in moments, not dozens of years. This pertains to zen as well. Strive on, my friend!Huseng wrote:You need to seriously sit down and read some sutras.randomseb wrote: And you don't need to worry about any other lives to do the proper practice, right now, this lifetime, and thereby escape any cycles of rebirth. Other lives are of no concern and are not part of the methods taught by buddha himself to free oneself.
He was quite concerned with how our actions in this life would result in an unfortunate rebirth AFTER physical death plus all manner of ghoulish things happening in future lives.
In any case, let's not get onto that topic here. We're talking about Zen and Zen Masters.
Try taking a fang from a lion and it will show you how much it values the fang. Coincidentally, will also show you the purpose of the fang.oushi wrote:Lions have fangs which they use skilfully without knowing their value, or purpose. Things have value, purpose and meaning only when we apply it.shel wrote:That's because everything has some sort of value or purpose, whether positive or negative. But that was always the case.
You lost me again. Meaning doesn't rely solely on words or information.It may look like meaning is something true that lies behind the words and raw data. But, if you drop those words, will reality become more meaningful?shel wrote:I don't follow, information is just raw data.
Value, I suppose.What is meaning without data?
That's not the question of this topic. The question of this topic is what a Zen master is or isn't. So in regard to the topic you seem to be saying that a Zen master is just as trustworthy as anyone else. Whatever mastery in Zen means, it doesn't include qualities expressed as trustworthiness.Sara H wrote:And, to add to that last,
Someone having a title of "Zen Master", is not a guarantee that you won't get hurt.
There is no guarantee.
Someone having a title of "Zen Master", is not a guarantee that that person has realized any level of awakening.Sara H wrote:Someone having a title of "Zen Master", is not a guarantee that you won't get hurt.
Momentariness doesn't contradict the teachings that a momentary mental continuum continues post-mortem.randomseb wrote:I've read many a sutra, and as I am sure you have as well, and are so versed in knowledge on the subject, you will know what I am referring to when I talk about lives being measured in moments, not dozens of years. This pertains to zen as well.
If there is really no such thing as an independent self, what is it that continues post-mortem? What is it that has been there from the start of your having read this reply? Not a self, according to Buddha!Jnana wrote:Momentariness doesn't contradict the teachings that a momentary mental continuum continues post-mortem.randomseb wrote:I've read many a sutra, and as I am sure you have as well, and are so versed in knowledge on the subject, you will know what I am referring to when I talk about lives being measured in moments, not dozens of years. This pertains to zen as well.
Moments of consciousness.randomseb wrote:If there is really no such thing as an independent self, what is it that continues post-mortem?
Consciousness is impermanent, unsatisfactory, empty, and therefore not a self.randomseb wrote:What is it that has been there from the start of your having read this reply? Not a self, according to Buddha!
Has this been your own experience?Astus wrote:This concept of the Zen teacher comes down to actual practice in the form of absolute authority of the master in all religious issues where students are completely dependent on a teacher to achieve liberation. It is a control system where no one can claim enlightenment unless verified by the master, and receiving such verification is in itself a declaration of buddhahood. There are of course attempts to degrade the meaning of a Zen teacher, saying that he is only an ordinary fallible person, it's just that it doesn't agree with the otherwise upheld idea of the transmission of the enlightened mind. Every Zen student aspires to buddhahood and relies on the teacher to tell them when they are there or not, therefore the master is the sole judge about a student's progress, and since all disciples want to receive that confirmation they will constantly try to please the teacher. Because a student is stripped of all independent understanding, whatever the master says is correct or incorrect must be so.