Anti-intellectualism in Western Zen

Genjo Conan
Posts: 714
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:27 pm

Re: Anti-intellectualism in Western Zen

Post by Genjo Conan »

Meido wrote: Fri Sep 09, 2022 4:05 pm
Genjo Conan wrote: Fri Sep 09, 2022 3:48 pm With respect to both you and Rev Port: this isn't true. Many of us are aware. The degree to which one believes this to be a problem depends on where one sits, I suppose, but we're aware.
Fair enough, and returning the respect. I should edit my words to say "most Western Zen students have no idea..."

To be clear: I have respect for Soto Zen in general, and some living Soto Zen teachers in particular. What I perceive in the USA, though, is largely a wave of adharmic stuff and unqualified teachers drowning out the voices of genuine Soto practitioners. I do see these problems as a direct result of what occurred in Meiji/Showa (and since then, the continued ignoring by Soto-shu bureacracy of calls for reform).

Rinzai Zen here is also not without issues.

One book I'm looking forward to btw will reportedly be put out by Shambhala in the next year or so, under the title Throw Yourself into the House of Buddha (The Life and Teachings of Tangen Harada Roshi).
Thanks, and apologies for taking so long to reply. I guess for me the question is: who are we talking about when we talk about "Zen students"?

At my temple (at least pre-pandemic; things have changed some), I'd say there were at least three kinds of practitioners.

The first would maybe come to public talks or attend a half-day sit, maybe give a little money to help with the upkeep. I'd be very surprised if any of those folks gave much consideration to where our practice comes from. They may know who Dogen was; probably wouldn't know who Keizan was (who changed Soto Zen practice in ways every bit as momentous as the Meiji-era folks did); almost certainly wouldn't know about the Meiji reforms. Nothing against these folks: these kinds of lay practitioners have always been a valid and valuable part of our larger community.

The second are the other extreme. They're folks who have practiced for a long time, have probably taken precepts, have likely spent some time in a monastic practice. These folks almost certainly have a handle on our history, including at least some understanding of the various major reforms. For example: for his understanding of the Meiji reforms, Rev. Port tends to cite work by Jiryu Rutschman-Byler. Jiryu is currently tanto at SFZC's Green Gulch Farm, and is scheduled to be installed as abbot in a couple of months. You can't get much more "mainstream American Soto Zen" than that.

The third is where there's some variance. These are the folks who have practiced for a while, have probably done some reading, may have taken the precepts. In my experience--and I need to be clear that all of this represents my own experience--there's often what I perceive as a misunderstanding of history; misunderstanding of our practice. It's here where this "Zen is beyond words and letters, so that means I don't have to read anything" idea seems to crop up. "We're all originally awakened so no need to practice." I see a lot of Soto Zen practitioners--and yeah, even some teachers--get stuck here.

One of the major criticisms I have of how Soto Zen is practiced in the USA is that I don't think we do a good job of helping the people in category one reach category two without getting stuck in category three. Some teachers and some temples do what seems like a good job of that level of teaching; some, regrettably, I think do not. Maybe it's always been this way. In any event, I have no idea how to fix this: I'm just an asshole with a rakusu and sore knees.

But I do think we need to be careful about who we're talking about when we talk about American Zen, because I see a vast range of understanding.

Edit: and to say, this is one of the criticisms I have of Dosho's writing. Some of his points, I think, are well taken. But he takes a sweeping, categorical approach to American Soto Zen: whether for rhetorical effect or because that's how he feels, I don't know. I think his premise is flawed. And because I think his premise is flawed, I think his conclusions often miss the mark.

I love Soto Zen deeply. I want to see it flourish. I have faith in my teacher and in the practice as I've been given to understand it. And because I love this practice, I feel free to criticize it where I think that's appropriate. But I think we need to start from the right starting line. That's one place where I think Dosho goes wrong. JMO.
User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 2092
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:50 pm
Location: South Florida, USA

Re: Anti-intellectualism in Western Zen

Post by seeker242 »

DNS wrote: Wed Sep 07, 2022 8:36 pm A special transmission outside the scriptures,
Not depending on words and letters;
Directly pointing to the mind
Seeing into one’s true nature and attaining Buddhahood.


--Bodhidharma
Genjo Conan wrote: Wed Sep 07, 2022 8:46 pm That was, to be clear, the same Bodhidharma who legendarily gave a copy of the Lanka to his successor, Huike, and told him that everything he needed to know about the dharma could be found in the sutra. Even if that story isn't true (eh, who knows, it's part of the founding legend), it says something about Zen's self conception.

It's complicated.
Certainly complicated as the sentiments of "outside the scriptures" are essentially echoed by the Lanka itself. One could even argue that Bodhidharma's statement is really just a paraphrase of the Lanka. Lanka itself says "The Tathagatas do not teach a Dharma that is dependent upon letters. Anyone who teaches a doctrine that is dependent upon letters and words is a mere prattler" :lol:
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe!
User avatar
curtstein
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:34 pm
Location: rockville, maryland, usa
Contact:

Re: Anti-intellectualism in Western Zen

Post by curtstein »

Certainly complicated as the sentiments of "outside the scriptures" are essentially echoed by the Lanka itself. One could even argue that Bodhidharma's statement is really just a paraphrase of the Lanka. Lanka itself says "The Tathagatas do not teach a Dharma that is dependent upon letters. Anyone who teaches a doctrine that is dependent upon letters and words is a mere prattler"
And it's even worse than that!! Because it's not just the Lankavatara Sutra.

Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā states:
At no time did the Buddha teach any dharma to anybody.
And his Niraupamyastava declares:
Nothing, not even a single syllable, Has been uttered by you, O lord, But every person to be guided Has been satisfied by your rain of dharma.
[These quotes are found in Gone Beyond (Volume 1), Brunnholzl, Karl, 2014, Shambhala - https://www.shambhala.com/gone-beyond-3375.html]
"there's no one here. there's only you and me." leonard cohen
https://www.mindisbuddha.org/
User avatar
KeithA
Posts: 680
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 11:02 pm

Re: Anti-intellectualism in Western Zen

Post by KeithA »

curtstein wrote: Mon Sep 12, 2022 8:46 pm
Certainly complicated as the sentiments of "outside the scriptures" are essentially echoed by the Lanka itself. One could even argue that Bodhidharma's statement is really just a paraphrase of the Lanka. Lanka itself says "The Tathagatas do not teach a Dharma that is dependent upon letters. Anyone who teaches a doctrine that is dependent upon letters and words is a mere prattler"
And it's even worse than that!! Because it's not just the Lankavatara Sutra.

Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā states:
At no time did the Buddha teach any dharma to anybody.
And his Niraupamyastava declares:
Nothing, not even a single syllable, Has been uttered by you, O lord, But every person to be guided Has been satisfied by your rain of dharma.
[These quotes are found in Gone Beyond (Volume 1), Brunnholzl, Karl, 2014, Shambhala - https://www.shambhala.com/gone-beyond-3375.html]
Why "worse than that"?

To say that the Buddha, originally, did not teach Dharma to anybody is a pretty basic teaching.

Buddhism is not a philosophy. At least as far as Zen is concerned, it is a mystical tradition. Direct experience is more important than words and letters. That isn't an "anti" stance. That's just how the thing works. Words and letters are an important supplement to our training, but it's just that. A supplement.

Originally, nothing was ever taught by anyone. And yet...

_/|\_
When walking, standing, sitting, lying down, speaking,
being silent, moving, being still.
At all times, in all places, without interruption - what is this?
One mind is infinite kalpas.

New Haven Zen Center
User avatar
curtstein
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:34 pm
Location: rockville, maryland, usa
Contact:

Re: Anti-intellectualism in Western Zen

Post by curtstein »

To say that the Buddha, originally, did not teach Dharma to anybody is a pretty basic teaching.
Then whose basic teaching is it? :lol:
"there's no one here. there's only you and me." leonard cohen
https://www.mindisbuddha.org/
User avatar
KeithA
Posts: 680
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 11:02 pm

Re: Anti-intellectualism in Western Zen

Post by KeithA »

curtstein wrote: Mon Sep 12, 2022 11:44 pm
To say that the Buddha, originally, did not teach Dharma to anybody is a pretty basic teaching.
Then whose basic teaching is it? :lol:
haha! Don't make get in trouble for going all Zen-speak in here! :rolling:

But, I suppose the answer to that question is to see the Heart Sutra. _/|\_
When walking, standing, sitting, lying down, speaking,
being silent, moving, being still.
At all times, in all places, without interruption - what is this?
One mind is infinite kalpas.

New Haven Zen Center
narhwal90
Global Moderator
Posts: 3509
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:10 am
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Anti-intellectualism in Western Zen

Post by narhwal90 »

And the Diamond Sutra
User avatar
KeithA
Posts: 680
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 11:02 pm

Re: Anti-intellectualism in Western Zen

Post by KeithA »

narhwal90 wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 2:04 am And the Diamond Sutra
:thumbsup:
When walking, standing, sitting, lying down, speaking,
being silent, moving, being still.
At all times, in all places, without interruption - what is this?
One mind is infinite kalpas.

New Haven Zen Center
narhwal90
Global Moderator
Posts: 3509
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:10 am
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Anti-intellectualism in Western Zen

Post by narhwal90 »

KeithA wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 2:10 am
narhwal90 wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 2:04 am And the Diamond Sutra
:thumbsup:
One of the brain twisters lol :rolleye:
User avatar
curtstein
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:34 pm
Location: rockville, maryland, usa
Contact:

Re: Anti-intellectualism in Western Zen

Post by curtstein »

If anyone is interested in going further down into the weeds concerning "sudden realizaion/gradual cultivation" (which is not a uniquely Korean issue, since it goes back at least to the Chinese Zen Master Zongmi), here is an article examining the criticism of this approach (from the standpoint of "sudden realization/sudden cultivation"), in the context of ongoing discussion among Zen (Seon) practitioners in Korea:
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/d ... 1&type=pdf

Here's the introduction to that article (which mentions, for example, the popularity of vipassanā in modern Korea):
Hwadu-seon (話頭禪) is the recognized practice of the Korean
Jogye Order to attain realization. But recently, many practitioners have
sought other contemplation methods in order to realize Buddhahood.
From the latter part of the twentieth century up until now, the Jogye
Order has been active in debating different approaches to Seon practice.
The debate concerning Venerable Songchul (性徹, 1912-1993)'s outlook
on Seon practice, that is, 'sudden enlightenment and sudden practice (頓
悟頓修)' and Venerable Chinul (知訥, 1158-1210)'s 'sudden enlightenment
and gradual practice (頓悟漸修)' has been a hot issue among many Seon
practitioners.

Recently, various kinds of practice method have been introduced
alongside Korean Seon practice. Among them, vipassanā has become
popular among many Seon practitioners, and some even consider this
practice is the only way to gain enlightenment. Amidst these varying
opinions, the Jogye Order endeavors to establish 'a practice system and
guidelines' for Seon practice, with the help of highly experienced Seon
practitioners whose job is to advise on an acceptable theory and practice
base. The need for such an advisory group stems from a lack of firm
understanding about correct practice. The current practice debate
indicates that many practitioners have doubt about the Jogye Order's
traditional method of Seon practice.

The purpose of this study is to consider Venerable Songchul's
views on Seon practice which purport that only 'sudden enlightenment
and sudden practice (頓悟頓修)' can be considered true Seon practice
(Ven. Toeong Songchul, 1990:210). Other practices such as mantra which
were suggested and encouraged by Venerable Songchul will be examined.
"there's no one here. there's only you and me." leonard cohen
https://www.mindisbuddha.org/
Post Reply

Return to “Zen”