"there is nothing to teach here" said the master

[master of puppets]

What does it mean?

[karmanyingpo]

Does it mean that what is to be taught is not a new "thing" that is added on, created, or obtained? In fact is not a thing at all?
May also refer to the already present ness of what is to be "taught" (pointed to or uncovered through provisional teachings and through practice)? This is not definite by any means I am just offering my own interpretation..

KN

[Hazel]

Nothing is the subject to teach and it's a silly pun?

What is the context?

[Svalaksana]

Have a look at Diamond Sutra, see if it clears your doubts.

[master of puppets]

What if it is a zen teaching, what would you say?

[karmanyingpo]

What if it is a zen teaching, what would you say?

User Manjushri's suggestion and mine seem to line up (at least according to my limited understanding..) so I would still say the same. Any Zen folks care to help out? Hope I"m not too far off base !!


KN

[jimmi]

What if it is a zen teaching, what would you say?

Any Zen folks care to help out? Hope I"m not too far off base !!

As usual, I have no idea what the master is saying.

[Hazel]

What if it is a zen teaching, what would you say?

Did you write this quote?

[Budai]

Here is some more reference, from the Diamond That Cuts Through Illusion, or the Diamond Sutra. I recommend you read it. It may shed some light on understanding what "nothing" is. It is a version from Thich Nhat Hanh which has a great Translation and Perfect commentary, that explains the entire Sutra Perfectly.

“Subhuti, do not say that the Tathagata conceives the
idea ‘I will give a teaching.’ Do not think that way.
Why? If anyone says that the Tathagata has something
to teach, that person slanders the Buddha because he
does not understand what I say. Subhuti, giving a
Dharma talk in fact means that no talk is given. This is
truly a Dharma talk.”

Then, Insight-Life Subhuti said to the Buddha,
“World-Honored One, in the future, will there be living
beings who will feel complete confidence when they
hear these words?”

The Buddha said, “Subhuti, those living beings are
neither living beings nor non-living beings. Why is that?
Subhuti, what the Tathagata calls non-living beings are
truly living beings.”

Subhuti asked the Buddha, “World-Honored One, is the
highest, most fulfilled, awakened mind that the Buddha
attained the unattainable?”

The Buddha said, “That is right, Subhuti. Regarding
the highest, most fulfilled, awakened mind.”
“Furthermore, Subhuti, that mind is everywhere
equally. Because it is neither high nor low, it is called
the highest, most fulfilled, awakened mind. The fruit of
the highest, most fulfilled, awakened mind is realized
through the practice of all wholesome actions in the
spirit of nonself, non-person, non-living being, and non-
life span. Subhuti, what are called wholesome actions
are in fact not wholesome actions. That is why they are
called wholesome actions.”

-The Diamond Sutra, or The Diamond That Cuts Through Illusion.

[master of puppets]

What if it is a zen teaching, what would you say?

Did you write this quote?

I don't know where I remind this from but this is the teaching that I'm looking for sure!

[Svalaksana]

What if it is a zen teaching, what would you say?

I recommended you to read the Diamond Sutra exactly because the sentence has the scent of Zen.

[master of puppets]

could be from a movie..

But I wish I had a master like in the movies. That I never grow up.

[Astus]

What does it mean?

It is standard Mahayana that samsara comes from conceptual attachment, that the teachings are only of relative value, and that a bodhisattva should not conceive anything as existing or not existing, thus relinquishing all grasping at ideas.

The Buddha said to Subhūti, “What do you think? When the tathāgata studied under Dīpaṃkara Buddha, did he gain any attainment in the dharma?”
“World-honored One, when the Tathāgata studied under Dīpaṃkara Buddha, there was, in reality, nothing that he attained in the dharma.”
(Diamond Sutra, ch 10, tr C. Muller)

'And, Mahamati, the Tathagatas do not teach the doctrine that is dependent upon letters. As to letters, their being or non-being is not attainable; it is otherwise with the thought that is never dependent on letters. Again, Mahamati, anyone that discourses on a truth that is dependent on letters is a mere prattler because truth is beyond letters. For this reason, Mahamati, it is declared in the canonical text by myself and other Buddhas and Bodhisattvas that not a letter is uttered or answered by the Tathagatas. For what reason? Because truths are not dependent on letters. It is not that they never declare what is in conformity with meaning; when they declare anything, it is according to the discrimination [of all beings]. If, Mahamati, the truth is not declared1 [in words] the scriptures containing all truths will disappear, and when the scriptures disappear there will be no Buddhas, Sravakas, Pratyekabuddhas, and Bodhisattvas; and when there is no one [to teach], what is to be taught and to whom? For this reason, then, Mahamati, the Bodhisattva-Mahasattva is not to become attached to the words of the canonical texts. Mahamati, owing to the functioning of the minds of sentient beings, the canonical texts sometimes deviate from their straightforward course; religious discourses are given by myself and other Tathagatas, Arhats, Fully-Enlightened Ones in response to varieties of faiths on the part of beings, in order to remove them from [the bondage of] the Citta, Manas and Manovijnana, and not for the attainment and establishment of self-realisation which issues from noble wisdom. When there is the recognition of the fact that all things are characterised with imagelessness and that there is nothing in the world but what is seen of the Mind itself, there is the discarding of the dualistic discrimination.'
(Lankavatara Sutra, 3.76, tr D.T. Suzuki)

'This halting of cognizing everything, the halting of hypostatizing, is blissful.
No Dharma whatsoever was ever taught by the Buddha to anyone.'
(Mulamadhyamakakarika 25.24, tr M. Siderits & S. Katsura)

One day the Councilor Wang visited the master. When he met the master in front of the Monks’ Hall, he asked,
“Do the monks of this monastery read the sutras?”
“No, they don’t read sutras,” said the master.
“Th en do they learn meditation?” asked the councilor.
“No, they don’t learn meditation,” answered the master.
“If they neither read sutras nor learn meditation, what in the world are they doing?” asked the councilor.
“All I do is make them become buddhas and patriarchs,” said the master.
The councilor said, “‘Though gold dust is valuable, in the eyes it causes cataracts.’”
“I always used to think you were just a common fellow,” said the master.
(Record of Linji, p 38, tr R. F. Sasaki)

'I have no choice; if I tell you that right now nothing is the matter, I have already buried you. However much you want to make progress and seek intellectual understanding by looking for words and chasing after phrases and setting up questions and inquiries by means of a thousand differences and myriad distinctions: it just brings you a glib tongue and leads you further and further from the Way. Where is there an end to this?'
(Record of Yunmen, 1.22, tr U. App)

'There is not much to Buddhism; it only requires you to make a statement plainly and simply, that is all. But what is a plain and simple statement? If someone asked me, I’d say, “ It’s already become two statements.” Understand?
An ancient said, “The Buddhas and Zen masters have given a clear and detailed explanation of what is beyond words, but most of those who get here are confused, muddled, and uncomprehending.”
If you don’t see this, you are asleep on your feet. You are always in the light, and yet do not know it, even with your eyes open. How do you expect me to do anything for you?'
(Foyan Qingyuan, in Instant Zen, p 28, tr T. Cleary)

[master of puppets]

What does it mean?

'There is not much to Buddhism; it only requires you to make a statement plainly and simply, that is all. But what is a plain and simple statement? If someone asked me, I’d say, “ It’s already become two statements.” Understand?

That was beautiful.

[Svalaksana]

could be from a movie..

But I wish I had a master like in the movies. That I never grow up.

And...? If you're genuinely interested in understanding what the sentence might mean, you're making a poor job at expressing it.

You can convey the inadequacy of words to transmit and describe suchness on a text, a movie, a song, or in quotidian speech, the assertion maintains its validity regardless of the medium. To ascertain the actual meaning you have to provide the context. You didn't but you're in the East Asian Buddhism section, specifically Zen, therefore one would assume you came across this sentence in such Buddhist context. If you didn't and you heard or read this in a contemporary colloquial context unrelated to Chan/Zen/Son/Thien Buddhism, then one has no option left but to assume you're here with intentions that are less than earnest.

[master of puppets]

could be from a movie..

But I wish I had a master like in the movies. That I never grow up.

And...? If you're genuinely interested in understanding what the sentence might mean, you're making a poor job at expressing it.

You can convey the inadequacy of words to transmit and describe suchness on a text, a movie, a song, or in quotidian speech, the assertion maintains its validity regardless of the medium. To ascertain the actual meaning you have to provide the context. You didn't but you're in the East Asian Buddhism section, specifically Zen, therefore one would assume you came across this sentence in such Buddhist context. If you didn't and you heard or read this in a contemporary colloquial context unrelated to Chan/Zen/Son/Thien Buddhism, then one has no option left but to assume you're here with intentions that are less than earnest.

It emphasizes the Empty Mind.

It emphasize the meditation mind.

It emphasize zen.

For me, it is a summary of zen.

I love the movies.no prob.

[LastLegend]

Nothing to teach is just expressing non-self that we need to get to. Self is ‘that’ sees ‘I.’

[reiun]

"Haven't you read of the old Shakyamuni at the Assembly of the Lotus of the True Dharma? Three times Shariputra earnestly entreated him to preach, but there was simply no way for him to begin. Afterwards, using all his power, he managed to say that this Dharma is not something that can be understood by thought or discrimination. This was old Shakyamuni taking this matter to its ultimate conclusion, opening the gateway of expedient means as a starting point for the teaching of the true nature of reality."

Ta Hui ( 1088-1163)

Excerprted from Swampland Flowers – the Letters and Lectures of Zen Master Ta Hui-Translated by Christopher Cleary 1977

[LastLegend]

‘That sees’ ... is ‘I’