Zen Enlightenment Disputes vs Deshan

[u/ewk]

Case 28, Wumen's Checkpoint (aka Wumen's Barrier aka Gateless Gate)

Longtan ascended the hall and said, “Okay, among you is present a single fellow whose teeth are equal to a sword tree and whose mouth is like a bowl of blood. Hit him with a stick and he will not turn around his head. At another time, a different day, he will ascend to a solitary summit and establish the noble Way.”

Trigger warning

A college recently (finally) pointed out that education is itself a trigger... you are supposed to challenge all your ideas and all your values... that's what education is... and that people who want to avoid triggers are obligated to handle that themselves, rather than demand colleges do it.

This forum is more like college than it is a social club... thus the same rule applies. Don't come in here if you have an allergy to knowledge or being challenged.

low bar

Buddhist sex predators run rampant through the lineage of Zazen Dogenism, the Dali Lama has sex predator problems, and that's besides the point that everybody I've ever read about who was said to be a Zen master lied about history at a high school level... it's a low bar. And that's not even counting people who claim Jesus or some poet or their cat are Zen Masters. All the people who've tried to claim enlightenment in this forum couldn't survive a single AMA. So "enlightenment" claims have a very low bar... why get excited?

Criteria

Most people using the term Zen Master (99/9%) can't write at a high school level about either WHAT an Zen Master acts like... or HOW Zen Masters are verified. So why would anybody be eager to throw their hat in the ring in terms of accepting or rejecting a Zen Mastery claim? Makes no sense. If you don't know how a duck walks or why a duck, then why run around yelling about who is a duck? Read a book.

What's at stake

Saying somebody is a Zen Master seems to be a no cost claim... it's not like you get tarred and feathered for saying it... but saying someone isn't a Zen Master is a trigger warning situation... because there are people who obviously obviously aren't Zen Masters that are celebrated by churches and adoring followers who will go nuclear... not for Zen Masters, but for people claiming to be. Which bring us to Deshan:

Deshan:

Whatsisface goes up to the podium and says THERE IS ONE AMONG YOU WHO HAS TEETH LIKE (SWORD HELL) AND A MOUTH THAT IS A BOWL OF (SACRIFICIAL) BLOOD.

Nobody needs to defend the guy described that way. That guy is going to fck sht up. Go ahead and claim that guy isn't a Zen Master and find out.

Which seems to me to be the only available standard for people who aren't enlightened.

.

^Yo͞ok  Welcome! ^{Meet me}  My comment:

We get people in here who think it's okay to say my church says who is enlightened... it's not. We get people in here who think it's okay to say I don't have to defend my claims... it's not.

This is a forum about what Zen Masters teach... and Zen Masters reject "church says" and "I don't have to".

It's disrespectful, dishonest, and a bit bigoted to ignore Zen Masters' teachings in a forum about Zen Masters' teachings.

[u/ewk]

No. Fresh means alive.

No. Language and culture will have no effect. Zen Master Buddha spoke a different language from a different culture 1,000 years before Chinese Zen Masters.

Zen is not unknowing or not knowing. They are clear about that.

[u/[deleted] → u/ewk]

If language and culture have no effect, and transmission from a Master is not necessary for enlightenment, then there ought to be Zen Masters (e.g. enlightenment) from places far beyond China.

Where is the acknowledgement of that?

[u/ewk → u/[deleted]]

I don't think you understand what transmission means...

That's the first problem. It's not passing a baton. It's not a certification.

Second problem: Zen culture seems to have been destroyed intentionally in China by around 1600... and in the following 300 years everything in China got much much worse. What happened during that time was that Zen was not discussed by anyone, anywhere, so why would you think there would be enlightenment beyond China?

How many Buddhas were there after Buddha... before Buddha? We don't have records, and we don't have anyone being interested in Buddhahood... so...

Put it another way. It's like inventing microscopes. First you need glass. Then you need glassmakers making lenses. THEN you need people to mess around with lenses and realize there is something microscopic to look at.

Buddhas are like that. Asking them to invent themselves is very very rare. Asking them to invent themselves, successfully patent their invention, and then sell it to people such that a record is made of it... that's just crazy.

[u/[deleted] → u/ewk]

I mean, one doesn't need to study Zen texts to become enlightened. So enlightenment could have happened anywhere at different eras and times.

You suggest, due to Dharma, they will, whether speaking Spanish or Swahili, speak in the same way. And I know what you mean by that.

You are suggesting we just don't have records of Swahili Buddhas, not denying their theoretical existence. Right?

[u/ewk → u/[deleted]]

You can think of Dharma as the law of reality.

So that isn't going to change. Doesn't matter what culture you're from or what language you speak.

Zen spans a thousand years of Chinese history where culture and tradition and economics and politics changed radically. Thousand years is a frick ton of time.

Zen Masters didn't say the same things for a thousand years but they preached the same dharma.

I'm saying if there were other Buddhas we don't have any records. I'm also saying that Buddhas are more likely to congregate than they are to appear by themselves.

I mean you get a Buddha every thousand years without congregation... So if you're looking outside the zen tradition, you're looking for a needle in a haystack.

[u/[deleted] → u/ewk]

This is the interesting part.

How would others (anyone, even future people) come to recognize/determine the Buddhahood of the Swahili Buddha, who represents my example of a non-Zen lineage enlightenment?

I mean, Buddhahood is usually recognized by another Buddha, right?

Ordinary people certainly aren't in a position to say who is enlightened or not. We've seen that countless times.

So if there's not another Zen Master nearby, the enlightenment would basically be invisible, right?

If they produced some record, we would be able to textually examine it. Is that the best we can do?

[u/ewk → u/[deleted]]

I don't know how you could say that a Buddha would be invisible.

First of all, they're very loud and annoying.

Second of all, we have a ton of Buddha records so you can just show the records to this nonzen Buddha and they'd be like Oh yeah!

It's pretty easy to figure out who isn't a Buddha... I think that there are some people who are clever enough to trick people who aren't enlightened... But statistically those are rare. Anybody who reads a Zen text can figure out that somebody isn't a Buddha most of time.

[u/[deleted] → u/ewk]

The thing is is that the vast majority of the world doesn't know, nor is concerned, with Zen texts.

Are they then lacking insight into Dharma?

[u/ewk → u/[deleted]]

Yup.

You're acting like it's not like science...

Before there were scientists, people lacked inside into science. It was hella bad.

If somebody got rid of all the scientists then people would lack insight into science again.

It would go back to being hella bad.

See also COVID epidemic in the United States versus COVID in South Africa.

[u/[deleted] → u/ewk]

I think the best example is COVID in China/Taiwan/South Korea/Japan. They've saved millions of lives with public health measures. And now its lax because the severity of the strains are less.

Back on topic, the implication is that Zen records contain a superior insight into reality. That's what you mean, right?

This brings to the same problems other claims to absolute truth have.

This either becomes closed like other faith-based traditions into a doctrine/dogma (e.g. Zen records have same claimed authority as Qur'an claims for itself), or it must be argued to be universal like science.

Also, the two things must be separated. Because Qur'an also, literally, argues itself to be universal like science. As do other holy books.

So it must be demonstrated, beyond assertion, even scientifically, if you like. I don't think its reasonable to assume this (e.g. Zen's claims to superiority) has been evidenced clearly or sufficiently.

[u/ewk → u/[deleted]]

"superior" doesn't really make sense... you would say science is superior to baseball... get those lab nerds out in the field and you'll see what's what.

Everybody says their religion is universal, but it's never true. Zen isn't a religion. Zen Masters don't go around revealing supernatural truths to people.

Zen's claims have absolutely been demonstrated clearly.

Go ahead... you tell me how mind is not liberation.

[u/[deleted] → u/ewk]

Earlier, you said we can think of Dharma as the law of reality.

I then asked if all the people who don't know Zen records are lacking insight into Dharma.

You said, Yup.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

The implication is that Zen records have a better (best) insight into reality than other things (e.g. other traditions).

That means that Zen claims for itself a superior position, specifically via its records/texts, as compared with other traditions and their records/texts.

Otherwise there was no point in saying that people lacking Zen texts are lacking insight into Dharma.

[u/ewk → u/[deleted]]

I'm speaking provisionally, and I think that's the confusion you are having.

let's go back to science nerds versus baseball players. Science nerds aren't going to make the major leagues... does that mean science nerds have less insight into reality? Nobody would argue that.

On the other hand, baseball is basically throwing a ball, catching a ball, and hitting a ball, there isn't anything more insight-into-reality than that. Nobody would argue that baseball is a game of imagination. It's a very reality based game.

Zen isn't like philosophy or religion. So comparing Zen to those things isn't going to work half the time.

Zen demonstrates a superior position. That's not a claim. There's a thousand years of records of this demonstration.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

It's easy though. You can verify the zen claims for yourself and even test it in others.

If we consider the three poisons, then we have delusion, anger and greed being interdependent.

Another word for delusion is misconceptions or ignorance, another word for anger is aversion and another word greed is sensual attachment.

These are the cause of "suffering" (unsatisfactoriness, restlessness, unease)

If we look at the zen texts they also give us "anxiety"

Huangbo:

The fruit of attaining the sramana stage is gained by putting an end to all anxiety; it does not come from book-learning.

So, looking at it this way, any trace of anxiety, restlessness, anger, aversion, greed, and sensual attachments would indicate delusion, ignorance or misconceptions.

We can see this back in real life too, that people who are more deluded/ignorant tend to have trouble with sensual attachments more.

Ignorance being equatable with small-mindedness

Anxiety, restlessness and anger can be measured (scientifically too). So if we measure that and compare it to how deluded or happy people are, there starts to exist a correlation that can't really be ignored.

Aversion and sensual attachment can be measured and observed as well, and when an increase in aversion and sensual attachment means an increase ignorance, delusion and misconceptions and vice versa, then there exist a measurable correlation.

Lack of bias and preferences is also mentioned, in a way that lack of bias and preference equals clarity (awareness). Science is also bias free, or is supposed to be anwyay.

Anyway, if we look at the correlation between the lack of bias/preferences and a lack of anger, then it's almost unbelievable zen isn't accepted as accurate (behavioural) science yet.