D.T. Suzuki - Introduction to Zen Buddhism

I've started reading this book and it's been quite interesting.

Basic outline of what I've read for now:

• Zen isn't mysticism as it is ordinarily understood.

• Zen isn't meditation.

• Zen is not religious in the way Christianity or Mohammedanism is, is emphatically against all religious convention, and places its complete trust in people themselves. There are no gods, no ceremonial rites to observe, no life after death, no soul whose welfare is to be looked after and whose immortality is of immense concern.

• Zen claims to be Buddhism but considers all the Buddhist teachings propounded in the sutras and sastras as mere waste of paper, Suzuki says

• Suzuki says Zen doesn't seem like any other kind of Buddhism, but still claims it to be like some sort of seed from which Buddhisms have sprung.

• "This order is one of the most significant aspects of Buddhism, not only from the point of view of its historical importance and spiritual vitality, but from the point of view of its most original and stimulating manner of demonstration. The "Doctrine of the Buddha-heart {buddhahridaya)" is its scholastic name, but more commonly it is known as "Zen". That Zen is not the same as Dhyana, though the term Zen derived from the Chinese transliteration {ch'an-na; zenna in Japanese) of the original Sanskrit, will be explained later" - So we'll get to the origin of the name "Zen" later. It is derived from the sanskrit Dhyana, as many here have said, but that is not its meaning. I mean, we don't buy and sell fleas on flea markets, right? I mean unless you buy a dead dog that hasn't been particularly well kept from a taxidermist.

• Zen is not Nihilism. It just seems like Nihilism to the people who don't see the Zen that's left after taking everything else away.

• Everybody loves Joshu: "A monk asked Joshu, "What would you say when I come to you with nothing?" Joshu said, "Fling it down to the ground." Protested the monk, "I said that I had nothing; what shall I let go?" "If so, carry it away," was the retort of Joshu."

• Zen is not a philosophy

• Zen is not a system founded upon logic and analysis.

• Zen is ordinary thought.

• Zen has to do with some sort of insight into one's self.

• Zen rejects all methods or practices that come from outside

• Zen is always original and alive.

• Zen can turn the dead into the living (whatever the heck that means).

• Suzuki considers Huineng to be the founder of Zen when it comes to separating Zen from the different sects of Buddhism in China.

• Everybody loves Yuanwu: ""No Buddhas," it is boldly asserted by Yengo, "have ever appeared on earth; nor is there anything that is to be given out as a holy doctrine. Bodhidharma, the First Patriarch of Zen, has never come east, nor has he ever transmitted any secret doctrine through the mind; only people of the world, not understanding what all this means, seek the truth outside of themselves. What a pity that the thing they are so earnestly look- ing for is being trodden under their own feet! This is not to be grasped by the wisdom of all the sages. However, we see the thing and yet it is not seen ; we hear it and yet it is not heard ; we talk about it and yet it is not talked about; we know it and yet it is not known. Let me ask, How does it so happen?"

• Suzuki anticipated the discussions in this forum: "Therefore, when Zen denies, it is not necessarily a denial in the logical sense. The same can be said of an affirmation. The idea is that the ultimate fact of experience must not be enslaved by any artificial or schematic laws of thought, nor by any antithesis of "yes" and "no", nor by any cut and dried formulae of epistemology. Evidently Zen commits absurdities and irrationalities all the time ; but this only apparently. No wonder it fails to escape the natural consequences—misunderstandings, wrong interpretations, and ridicules which are often malicious. The charge of nihilism is only one of these." Remember the people who've been accusing other people of advocating for Nihilism?

• Huihai story I haven't heard yet from "one of the earliest Zen writings" (I don't know which one Suzuki refers to): "from one of the earliest Zen writings. Doko (Tao-kwang), a Buddhist philosopher and a student of the Vijnaptimatra (absolute idealism), came to a Zen master and asked: "With what frame of mind should one discipline oneself in the truth?" Said the Zen master, "There is no mind to be framed, nor is there any truth in which to be disciplined." "If there is no mind to be framed and no truth in which to be disciplined, why do you have a daily gathering of monks who are studying Zen and disciplining themselves in the truth?" The master replied : "I have not an inch of space to spare, and where could I have a gathering of monks? I have no tongue, and how would it be possible for me to advise others to come to me ?"The philosopher then exclaimed, "How can you tell me a lie like that to my face?" "When I have no tongue to advise others, is it possible for me to tell a lie?" Said Doko despairingly, "I cannot follow your reasoning." "Neither do I understand myself," concluded the Zen master."

Has anyone else read the book? These are the things I found are from chapters I-III. Chapter IV is titled "Illogical Zen". I might make another post about it.

Submitted March 13, 2018 at 04:12PM by dota2nub http://ift.tt/2Gl9ZL3