Unskillful rant on Teaching Zen

I think there is a lot of arrogance out there in the realm of so called “Zen” teachers.
I read words like “Doctrine” and “Transmission” and feel it could easily mislead others.
I grow more and more suspicious of some of the “Ideas” I hear on Zen.
While I do feel the responsibility of figuring things out ultimately rests with the seeker. There is allot of bad gouge out there. That makes the path a little trickier.

*side note* YES there are good “teachers” out there, I have even met a few, and conversed with a few more. And even the worst of teachers and scripture masters can be helpful! Do find a good “teacher” if you can! And DO NOT take what I am saying here as the gospel, YOU have to figure it out for yourself.

Anyone who has an inkling for teaching Buddhism or “Zen” might after a short or long amount of time practicing might feel compelled to “teach” “Zen” And I think there is a bit of helpful “Doctrine” out there that should be taught. For example: I like Master Dogen’s rules for meditation quite a bit for this I just think it is useful.

Actually I think there are a lot of devices that can be useful. But few recognize when they are beyond being useful. The problem with these “Doctrines” is that people do what people do. They get attached to them. Any scripture master can pull doctrine out of their backside but when it comes down to it, doctrine can become a hindrance to actual liberation. (Yes I accept that such a thing exists) Being a true person is what is important. Not knowledge of Koans or scripture.

The basics are OK. And they are important as training wheals. But the training wheals have to come off and the seeker has to be able to ride on their own. Otherwise there is no point and the seeker just gets hooked on another tether.

Personally, I don’t really have much faith in the so called zen teachers of today.
Most of the very best teachers I have found don’t sell zen at all. They actualize it in their daily lives both work and play (often it seems they are lucky enough to have them be the same thing). They may teach the flute (no, not me, I am not that good!) they may sell tea, they might even make skirts for men, who knows! The applications may be as limitless as the universe.

Me, yeah, I may seem pretty arrogant too, but I am not a “transmitted teacher” either. I just enjoy planting seeds and pulling weeds.

May you be free from suffering,
Jordan

Not attaining.

Someone wrote something in a way that just did not wash, and so reluctantly I am fighting an aversion I have to writing about this kind of stuff anymore.
Sometimes you just have to say something.

So please forgive me if I may dip into “Yoda~Speak” to attempt to make what can not be clear a bit more digestible.

The E word. Ugh. I make no qualms about not liking the E word. To say one has it and another dose not is a bit of a farce. No, a big huge farce. To say it is “Attained” is not correct either. You do not attain enlightenment. You may realize something, but usually that is not a realization of enlightenment but just delusion about enlightenment.

A fish dose not attain water. Water is just all around a fish. It might jump out of the water for a moment and come to realize that there is something other than water. At that point it may learn to appreciate the water. The chance of a fish appreciating the water without ever leaving the water seems pretty slim. But what do I know, I am not a fish.

The point is that what some people refer to as “enlightenment” is all around. There is nothing to “attain.” Perhaps, call it just being awake. Like a fish realizing the water. That could be pretty traumatic. One might spend the rest of their short life working through that experience. I recommend meditative practice.

I am not so good with words. I invite others to investigate this for themselves.

May you be free from suffering,
Jordan

Don’t church it up!

My wife grew up in Japan, when to a Buddhist pre-school, Had been familiar with Buddhism all of her life. Mainly she has recognized the main purpose of Buddhism as a funeral service. And that is OK! Or at least I have told myself. Buddhism, as far as I know, has never really been about seeking out converts and is more interested in teaching to those truly interested.

Now over the course of her life she has probably heard the Heart Sutra chanted dozens if not hundreds of times, maybe even thousands considering how often I have overheard in on NHK. Hear is the kicker… she has no clue what they are chanting. I don’t mean that the dose not understand the profound nature of the sutra it self but she doesn’t know what the guy chanting is saying! Aren’t they chanting in Japanese???

They are kind of, but the chant is all churched up and pretty unintelligible for a country girl like her. This is one of the reasons why I have such aversion to chanting, singing, and the other advanced choreography that goes along with the temple business.

I am pretty sure that the heart sutra was not initially created just to be chanted by someone who dose not even have a clue what they are saying. It was likely trying to get a message across about the nature of reality. Maybe I am totally wrong, but I doubt it. I think this is a serious danger to Buddhism when we try and church things up and make them all pretty we confuse the message. We have a hard enough time with this practice with everyone’s different interpretations of this that and the other as it is.

I know, I am likely preaching to the quire here, but I felt like a rant.

I am very happy now though because I can actually talk to my wife about something she has heard all of her life but never understood. This, I think, is pretty cool.


Be well and happy,
Jordan