Changed my mind, Astus. Or perhaps I should say, I decided to share more of what I actually understand this case to be about, instead of giving way automatically to someone else's viewpoint.
So far, the process shown here has been interesting o say the least. The first responses were of a spiritual materialist nature: wanting "credentials" as CTR would say ("give me a certificate"). The second set of responses have been of an emotional nature - responses about the 'crying baby'. But this case is not about credentials or about emotion. It is about method, and the completion of training.
And I disagree with you Astus, that it comes down to a preference of method. Mazu changed his teaching methods from "This very mind is Buddha" to "Neither mind, nor Buddha" for a very good reason. Whether he did it because of his own evolution as a teacher, or because he saw the deleterious effects of teaching as if "this very mind is Buddha" wrought, we'll never know.
I think Ta-mei is very self-indulgent by continuing to assert "this very mind is Buddha". When you teach that way, you are in great danger of mistaking content for process. " Neither mind, nor Buddha" denies the practitioner the opportunity to get lost in content. This is an extremely important step.
Wu-men understands this with his comment, "if you can see through this clearly, your Zen training is complete."
This case is not about certification or about emotional reactions. It is about not getting lost in content as a final step of Zen training. This ability is what distinguishes a Zen master from a Zen teacher who leads people astray. Interestingly enough, it was dzogchen that clarified this for me.
End of post.
Last edited by MalaBeads
on Sat Dec 03, 2011 11:04 am, edited 1 time in total.