Yes indeed. The Rinzai and Soto Zen approaches to koans are very different. FWIW, I think it's a shame that the Rinzai view has, for historical reasons, become adopted and accepted by many as THE DEFINITION of what koans are and what they're for. It leads to inflexible positions being taken up. Not usually a good thing! (Gudo/Dogen's 'Soto' Zen also insists that reality transcends all philosophy.)
Hey - you're 20 years old! Kids can have insight? Who knew! (JK ;))
The Koan doesn't explain any system. It's there to point to the reality before it is touched by any thought. This man doesn't understand, few people do.
It's easy to hear and dismiss words like "philosophy " and "system" - particularly if you are a zennie. To truly understand what Gudo is talking about, you have to investigate what HE means by those terms and how he uses them. We human beings think. We parse the world in different ways; from different philosophical perspectives, or views. But, says Gudo, REALITY (includes but) transcends views.Please don't assume he "doesn't understand" from this briefest of clips.
I first read about koans in the 60s in the books of (Rinzai Zen) DT suzuki.It was made clear to me that koans are mysterious riddles which point to reality as it is, beyond conceptual thought;under the guidance of a Zen master I might come to truly understand. It made perfect sense (the irony!). 40 years later, having encountered a teacher with a different (Dogen's) perspective, I have a different view.
To be clear: GUDO DOES NOT TEACH THAT REALITY CAN BE GRASPED INTELLECTUALLY. Not at all.
Dialectic (also called dialectics or the dialectical method) is a method of argument, which has been central to both Eastern and Western philosophy since ancient times. The word "dialectic" originates in Ancient Greece, and was made popular by Plato's Socratic dialogues. Dialectic is rooted in the ordinary practice of a dialogue between two people who hold different ideas and wish to persuade each other
It is clear that he has been deeply conditioned by the Buddhist teachings, falling into the same trap as all organized religions have. The purpose of the koan is not to demonstrate Buddhist philosophy. It is to transcend all philosophy, and to transcend even mental processes themselves. Meditating upon the koan, the intellect becomes exhausted. A kind of "short circuit" occurs where mind is by passed and one enters into no-mind. A koan is a symbol of that which beyond words, the inexpressible.
@doubtboy Bull shit? LOL I think they are saying the same thing. If not, the cute old guy is incorrect because Amirmourad has given a well worded acurate discription of the truth about koans. woah nelly ! scooting me butt across the floor. a monkey peed in me mouth
Doubtboy's point, while blunt, points to the fact that you MUST have read about this view of koans - you didn't wake up one day and just "know it". I see that you're 24 years old, and v interested in all things mystical and spiritual - the rinzai view is very appealing to the young. And, apparently, it works for some.
Don't dismiss Gudo's approach as that of someone "deeply conditioned". It may sound dry and mundane, but It's much more than that. Do a little more reading ;-)
If you find that age is a reflection of one's understanding, than that shows what a fool you are.
It has nothing to do with whether it is a Rinzai approach or a Soto Zen approach. The very structure of the Zen koan is not to demonstrate a philosophy, because a philosophy is an interpretation of the mind. Koans are not trying to get you bring you into interpretation, but into realization, which is a completely different phenomenon.
Why so angry and defensive? I was merely trying to point you in the direction of Gudo's approach. For one who professes such a clear insight to the nature of awakening, you display a worrying haste to conclude that those of a different view don't know what they're talking about.
Gudo Nishijma is a priest, and like all priests their profession is to promote the philosophy of the religion they represent. The priest is a representative of the religion. And just because one is a priest, that is not a reflection at all of one's own awakened state. And if a koan is trying to demonstrate a philosophy, then it is far better to have nothing to do with koans whatsoever. All philosophy is a one-sided interpretation, a far cry from the truth.
Try checking out Gudo's writing on "The Four views/Philosphies". Find the Dogen Sangha website, there you can access his writing. You may find that what he's talking about includes that which you understand to transcend philosophy.
I'm respectfully suggesting that you don't jump to conclusions so hastily, don't assume you're the only one who "gets it", and give a little credit to those who've practiced the way for a lot longer than you.
"But that's a sign of the arrogance of youth ;-) "
It is the opposite. It is impossible for those who are truly youthful to be arrogant. And coming to know one's true nature is in a sense both the ultimate youthfulness and the most ancient at once.
"and give a little credit to those who've practiced the way for a lot longer than you"
One who knows anything about this area through direct experience knows very well that how long one has been practicing is absolutely superficial. There are yogi's and mystics who have been practicing their whole lives, and they are still in the same ditch, they are as unconscious as anybody else. Quantity is not a measurement for one's awakening.
I'm trying to get you to consider an alternative view to the one you hold; not to dismiss it out of hand. You, on the other hand, are clutching at my references to age and experience to justify why you don't need listen to any other views - you know it all already.
"why you don't need listen to any other views - you know it all already"
Koans are a technology. Like any technology, it can be used in a million and one different ways. And their function can also be interpreted in a million and one different ways because of this. All interpretation is one-sided. And that is why philosophy exists - it is an interpretation. If koans are intended to demonstrate philosophy, then they are intending at the same time to bring you into one-sidedness.
And that is precisely what Zen masters have said time and time again. Drop all seeking, including seeking through practice. Drop all clinging, even to the teaching itself.
"Try checking out Gudo's writing on "The Four views/Philosphies".
I was not speaking of what he may have said about other subjects. My response was about what he has said in the video about koans, and it remains restricted in that context.
You were talking about Gudo's use of the term "philosophy", and how the zen koan was anything but "philosophy", so I referred you to a piece which may have clarified what he meant by "philosophy"; what it included and what it didn't. I don't think that's "another subject".
Well, of course, that is your opinion which you are entitled to. Nishijima Roshi has another interpretation which he is entitled to. There is plenty in Buddhism which is open to interpretation (rebirth anyone?) and I don't think anyone can say such-and-such is right or such-and-such is wrong.
Buddhism is about what works for you; if interpreting koans as a mind short-circuit works for you, that's great. If it enriches your practice, then yay, go for it.
Also, and I'm no expert in this by a long way, I think your interpretation is more along the lines of the Rinzai sect's interpretation. The Soto sect don't use koans quite so much or in the same way.
Also also, I could be talking complete rubbish; I'll leave that for you to decide (but I hope I'm not).
"They say... such stories cannot be understood rationally. Their idea is... 'The reason that many of the teaching methods of past masters employed words that cut through confusion was that [their teachings] were beyond rational understanding.' Those who say such things have never met a true master... they are even more stupid than non-Buddhists. What these shavelings call incomprehensible stories are incomprehensible only to them."
The true teaching is that which cannot be contained within the boundaries of language. The truth is a phenomenon which is undivided. Everything amongst the spiritual technologies is just for this, a skillful means to have a direct perception of the inexpressible. There are a million and one different skillful means for this. A koan is just one of them.
Logic by nature is a one-sided phenomenon. All angles of perspective are limited angles. That is why clinging to any views is a hindrance.
Well, friend, how would you feel if I told you that you can realise it after just one of my weekend courses at the super low price of $999.99! And if you join my Genuine Enlightened Masters Club today (only $49.99 a month!), you'll get a lifelong discount on all further enlightenment courses.
I was hoping that Nishijima Roshi would say "Enlightenment! You can't handle enlightenment!" Thanks so much for all of these Brad I only saw one show up and then when I refreshed the subscriptions I was quite please to see more.
@AxiomaticInfinity
Yes indeed. The Rinzai and Soto Zen approaches to koans are very different. FWIW, I think it's a shame that the Rinzai view has, for historical reasons, become adopted and accepted by many as THE DEFINITION of what koans are and what they're for. It leads to inflexible positions being taken up. Not usually a good thing! (Gudo/Dogen's 'Soto' Zen also insists that reality transcends all philosophy.)
Hey - you're 20 years old! Kids can have insight? Who knew! (JK ;))
hceggeberth 1 year ago
The Koan doesn't explain any system. It's there to point to the reality before it is touched by any thought. This man doesn't understand, few people do.
Menarson 1 year ago
Hi Menarson,
It's easy to hear and dismiss words like "philosophy " and "system" - particularly if you are a zennie. To truly understand what Gudo is talking about, you have to investigate what HE means by those terms and how he uses them. We human beings think. We parse the world in different ways; from different philosophical perspectives, or views. But, says Gudo, REALITY (includes but) transcends views.Please don't assume he "doesn't understand" from this briefest of clips.
hceggeberth 1 year ago
I first read about koans in the 60s in the books of (Rinzai Zen) DT suzuki.It was made clear to me that koans are mysterious riddles which point to reality as it is, beyond conceptual thought;under the guidance of a Zen master I might come to truly understand. It made perfect sense (the irony!). 40 years later, having encountered a teacher with a different (Dogen's) perspective, I have a different view.
To be clear: GUDO DOES NOT TEACH THAT REALITY CAN BE GRASPED INTELLECTUALLY. Not at all.
hceggeberth 1 year ago
Dialectic (also called dialectics or the dialectical method) is a method of argument, which has been central to both Eastern and Western philosophy since ancient times. The word "dialectic" originates in Ancient Greece, and was made popular by Plato's Socratic dialogues. Dialectic is rooted in the ordinary practice of a dialogue between two people who hold different ideas and wish to persuade each other
qaplatlhinganmaH 2 years ago
very accent
Gopeno 2 years ago
i find this to be a very insightful video. i have often encountered people putting way too much emphasis on koan.
here i hear nishijima put in words what ive felt all along; while koans can be valuable, they are not the be-all-end-all of the practice.
thank you so much for putting up these videos!
cffmusic 2 years ago
It is clear that he has been deeply conditioned by the Buddhist teachings, falling into the same trap as all organized religions have. The purpose of the koan is not to demonstrate Buddhist philosophy. It is to transcend all philosophy, and to transcend even mental processes themselves. Meditating upon the koan, the intellect becomes exhausted. A kind of "short circuit" occurs where mind is by passed and one enters into no-mind. A koan is a symbol of that which beyond words, the inexpressible.
Amirmourad 2 years ago
Where did you read this?
doubtboy 2 years ago
I have not read it.
Amirmourad 2 years ago
Bull shit.
doubtboy 2 years ago
@doubtboy Bull shit? LOL I think they are saying the same thing. If not, the cute old guy is incorrect because Amirmourad has given a well worded acurate discription of the truth about koans. woah nelly ! scooting me butt across the floor. a monkey peed in me mouth
creationofself 1 year ago
@doubtboy how zen
JackNuttsack 10 months ago
Hi Amirmourad -
Doubtboy's point, while blunt, points to the fact that you MUST have read about this view of koans - you didn't wake up one day and just "know it". I see that you're 24 years old, and v interested in all things mystical and spiritual - the rinzai view is very appealing to the young. And, apparently, it works for some.
Don't dismiss Gudo's approach as that of someone "deeply conditioned". It may sound dry and mundane, but It's much more than that. Do a little more reading ;-)
hceggeberth 2 years ago
If you find that age is a reflection of one's understanding, than that shows what a fool you are.
It has nothing to do with whether it is a Rinzai approach or a Soto Zen approach. The very structure of the Zen koan is not to demonstrate a philosophy, because a philosophy is an interpretation of the mind. Koans are not trying to get you bring you into interpretation, but into realization, which is a completely different phenomenon.
Amirmourad 2 years ago
You say: "...that shows what a fool you are."
Why so angry and defensive? I was merely trying to point you in the direction of Gudo's approach. For one who professes such a clear insight to the nature of awakening, you display a worrying haste to conclude that those of a different view don't know what they're talking about.
But that's a sign of the arrogance of youth ;-)
hceggeberth 2 years ago
Gudo Nishijma is a priest, and like all priests their profession is to promote the philosophy of the religion they represent. The priest is a representative of the religion. And just because one is a priest, that is not a reflection at all of one's own awakened state. And if a koan is trying to demonstrate a philosophy, then it is far better to have nothing to do with koans whatsoever. All philosophy is a one-sided interpretation, a far cry from the truth.
Amirmourad 2 years ago
A suggestion:
Try checking out Gudo's writing on "The Four views/Philosphies". Find the Dogen Sangha website, there you can access his writing. You may find that what he's talking about includes that which you understand to transcend philosophy.
I'm respectfully suggesting that you don't jump to conclusions so hastily, don't assume you're the only one who "gets it", and give a little credit to those who've practiced the way for a lot longer than you.
hceggeberth 2 years ago
"But that's a sign of the arrogance of youth ;-) "
It is the opposite. It is impossible for those who are truly youthful to be arrogant. And coming to know one's true nature is in a sense both the ultimate youthfulness and the most ancient at once.
Amirmourad 2 years ago
"and give a little credit to those who've practiced the way for a lot longer than you"
One who knows anything about this area through direct experience knows very well that how long one has been practicing is absolutely superficial. There are yogi's and mystics who have been practicing their whole lives, and they are still in the same ditch, they are as unconscious as anybody else. Quantity is not a measurement for one's awakening.
Amirmourad 2 years ago
Here's the difference, Amirmourad -
I'm trying to get you to consider an alternative view to the one you hold; not to dismiss it out of hand. You, on the other hand, are clutching at my references to age and experience to justify why you don't need listen to any other views - you know it all already.
hceggeberth 2 years ago
"why you don't need listen to any other views - you know it all already"
Koans are a technology. Like any technology, it can be used in a million and one different ways. And their function can also be interpreted in a million and one different ways because of this. All interpretation is one-sided. And that is why philosophy exists - it is an interpretation. If koans are intended to demonstrate philosophy, then they are intending at the same time to bring you into one-sidedness.
Amirmourad 2 years ago
And that is precisely what Zen masters have said time and time again. Drop all seeking, including seeking through practice. Drop all clinging, even to the teaching itself.
"Try checking out Gudo's writing on "The Four views/Philosphies".
I was not speaking of what he may have said about other subjects. My response was about what he has said in the video about koans, and it remains restricted in that context.
Amirmourad 2 years ago
You were talking about Gudo's use of the term "philosophy", and how the zen koan was anything but "philosophy", so I referred you to a piece which may have clarified what he meant by "philosophy"; what it included and what it didn't. I don't think that's "another subject".
Anyway...
hceggeberth 2 years ago
I will read it.
Amirmourad 2 years ago
Well, of course, that is your opinion which you are entitled to. Nishijima Roshi has another interpretation which he is entitled to. There is plenty in Buddhism which is open to interpretation (rebirth anyone?) and I don't think anyone can say such-and-such is right or such-and-such is wrong.
Buddhism is about what works for you; if interpreting koans as a mind short-circuit works for you, that's great. If it enriches your practice, then yay, go for it.
MrG00dbytes 2 years ago
Also, and I'm no expert in this by a long way, I think your interpretation is more along the lines of the Rinzai sect's interpretation. The Soto sect don't use koans quite so much or in the same way.
Also also, I could be talking complete rubbish; I'll leave that for you to decide (but I hope I'm not).
MrG00dbytes 2 years ago
Master Dogen, Shobogenzo:
"They say... such stories cannot be understood rationally. Their idea is... 'The reason that many of the teaching methods of past masters employed words that cut through confusion was that [their teachings] were beyond rational understanding.' Those who say such things have never met a true master... they are even more stupid than non-Buddhists. What these shavelings call incomprehensible stories are incomprehensible only to them."
kliffkapus 2 years ago
The true teaching is that which cannot be contained within the boundaries of language. The truth is a phenomenon which is undivided. Everything amongst the spiritual technologies is just for this, a skillful means to have a direct perception of the inexpressible. There are a million and one different skillful means for this. A koan is just one of them.
Logic by nature is a one-sided phenomenon. All angles of perspective are limited angles. That is why clinging to any views is a hindrance.
Amirmourad 2 years ago
And if I don't realise it, do I get my money back?
dbexperience 2 years ago
30 years! I have been sitting for 8 months and I'm 28, So i'll be at least 58 before I realise 2nd enlightenment. I don't know how I feel about that!
dbexperience 2 years ago
Well, friend, how would you feel if I told you that you can realise it after just one of my weekend courses at the super low price of $999.99! And if you join my Genuine Enlightened Masters Club today (only $49.99 a month!), you'll get a lifelong discount on all further enlightenment courses.
P.S. Bring your girlfriend for free!
wearealltubes 2 years ago
Comment removed
dbexperience 2 years ago
and what happens when you reach 'enlightenment'?
pingbong44 3 years ago
Enlightenment is a journey, not a destination. You never reach it.
WalMast 2 years ago
If you can reach it, can you grasp it?
CalobrisiT 2 years ago
Thanks to whoever put this video up...and I love all the other videos in the series.
1987upadhyay 3 years ago 2
I was hoping that Nishijima Roshi would say "Enlightenment! You can't handle enlightenment!" Thanks so much for all of these Brad I only saw one show up and then when I refreshed the subscriptions I was quite please to see more.
cwalwanis 3 years ago