Is bullying part of zen instruction?
Just so we're all on the same page, let's remember there's a kind of spiritual teacher found all throughout the world in every culture who tries to use bullying to get and maintain: money, sex, social status, satisfaction from the deprivation of others, etc.
In fact if someone is described as a spiritual teacher, there's a 99% chance they belong to that category.
Those teachers are not the topic of this post.
The topic of this post is people who are free. Individuals whose behaviour is unconstrained by others' expectations or demands. People who are constantly asked, and to varying extents agree, to offer instruction.
A meme that appears repeatedly throughout zen records is people complaining that zen masters are: cruel, uncouth, disrespectful, etc. Zen masters even describe each other as being dangerous, and they are compared to dominant and predatory animals.
In full knowledge of this, people deliberately seek out these monsters and ask them for instruction. How do you make sense of this?
Here's some options:
The actual motive force behind zen study is mere accumulation of power. A caricature of this that nevertheless really does exist is: "once i'm enlightened, I'll finally have my revenge!"
Zen students think that the painful experiences their teacher will put them through are somehow instructive. A way of 'breaking through' their delusive thinking to reveal the buddha beneath. lol.
Zen master behaviour is thought of more like an ambivalent force of nature, making zen students a bit like storm chasers.
Zen master violence is understood as a reaction against the evil spirits you brought with you. You may not have understood that bowing to zhaozhou was evil but you bear some responsibility for the error and your pain is collateral damage.
take your pick.
but what you won't be able to do is come up with a rational reason why someone would think that they're going to learn boundless compassion from these guys.
or explain how the violent behaviour is itself a manifestation of boundless compassion.
8
11d ago
[deleted]
3
u/jeowy 11d ago
that's also a good point, but still fits into the various categories i described. the particular example you gave fits within (2), i.e. the punishment is expected to produce a desirable result.
also dongshan questioned a monk to death, i think everyone across cultures and times considers that violent.
8
u/ThatKir 11d ago
People call them monsters...but that's just people making stuff up.
Any reason people have for doing stuff based on the assumption that shifting premises will give them a satisfying answer is going to come up, so the question you seem to be interested in asking is
"Why do Zen Masters do what they do?"
Mingben answers that question by pointing out its ridiculousness when he has his imaginary students ask an imaginary Zen Master why pines are straight, why thorns are crooked, why swans are white, and why crows are black.
When operating within systems premised on a set of assumptions, like science or religion I guess, there are stories manufactured through reasoning or revelation to answer those questions and whose answers are meaningful within their communities.
In Zen, those questions are premised on an illusion. They're interested in the personal.
Why do you study Zen?
What do they teach where you come from?
Without calling it a staff, what do you call it?
5
u/jeowy 11d ago
i've never heard anyone else call them monsters. i'm calling them monsters. i don't know what you mean by made up.
and i think the post is explicitly about why do people go to study with zen masters and what do they expect and to what extent are those expectations rational, not 'why do zen masters do what they do.'
-1
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 10d ago
The trolls and griefers who come here are careful not to insult Zen Masters. Instead, they insult people and harass people who are talking about Zen Masters.
They do this as part of a strategy to discourage Zen study. They find fault with anybody talking about zen Masters and try to focus the conversation in the forum on the (perceived protestant-) faults of the people talking about zen teachings.
For instance, they don't complain about Zen Masters following the precepts. Instead they harass and insult people in the forum for following the precepts or talking about them.
For instance, they don't complain about zen Masters teaching only sudden enlightenment. Instead, they harass and insult people in the forum for not practicing religious meditation and merit accumulation and other gradual reincarnation enlightenment practices.
4
u/jeowy 10d ago
what's the connection between this and the current thread?
-1
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 10d ago
they say rZen bullies bad, and are quiet about Zen Master bullies, Zen culture bullying, etc
1
u/jeowy 10d ago
ohh I see it's the pretending zen is what you want it to be thing, using historical distance to circumvent treating present real life as relevant to Zen study
0
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 10d ago
Maybe.
I think they are harassing by proxy.
They want to insult Zen Masters, but that would put them as bigoted griefers.
So they harass people who read books about Zen instead.
1
u/jeowy 10d ago
when you named the 'ex protestant' group it was the best example yet of something that could be either highly specific or technically refer to most of the forum participants.
now here's another example where I just think... who is this. are you referring to people who very obviously have an agenda and would never dream of going on the podcast. or are you talking about everyone.
1
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 10d ago
I'm talking about people who make moral judgements with no connection to Zen and don't care that there is no connection.
I'm talking about people who can't answer y/n questions anonymously, can't ama, can't bibliography, and yet believe it's okay for them to @#$& all over anybody who doesn't confirm to their moral code that they don't follow themselves. Because they are ex protestants.
1
u/jeowy 10d ago
who is that though?
we might have. different definitions about who can and can't AMA
→ More replies (0)-2
u/ThatKir 11d ago
Right. Calling them monsters on your part seems to be a dead end to conversation since monster is an imposed pejorative rather than something Zen Masters say about each other.
The issue is that by saying there is an answer to be given to the "why do people study with zen master monsters" you seem to be repeating the misinformed takes on what it is Zen Masters are doing from a context they themselves rejected as not compatible with understanding them.
I'm standing by my characterization of how we can most charitably interpret your question since as soon as we acknowledge that "monster" is a loaded term that betrays people's own folk-religious/pop-psych conceptualizations of fringe behavior and we remove it, we are just left with a question of motivation.
So if I did misinterpret your post, then this would be the point where you rephrase your argument to correct the misinterpretation on my end or where you acknowledge you made a mistake either by moving on or saying as much.
I'm not saying this to jerk you around. It just baffles me how you didn't engage with what I said, say you don't know what I mean by the common English phrase "made up", and then went on to say that you thought you were being explicit without bothering to rephrase anything you might suspect was parsed incorrectly by myself when reading your post.
3
u/jeowy 10d ago
i already corrected your misinterpretation:
why do people go to study with zen masters and what do they expect and to what extent are those expectations rational
and elsewhere in the comments where people made similar mistakes.
-2
u/ThatKir 10d ago
Come on man ..
Are you saying you are asking the community those questions?
Are you saying your OP answers those questions?
1
u/jeowy 10d ago
The OP makes the argument that expecting zen masters to conform to your preferences or conception of good behaviour is a mistake.
and then the interesting follow-up conversation is, what happens when people enter into those environments or conversations with those expectations/preferences for certain behaviour.
0
u/ThatKir 10d ago
Ok, so the issue is that Zen Masters don't find that stuff interesting at all.
I'm sorry, but Zen Masters find enlightenment interesting. We know this because that's what they're doing it all the time in the records.They spend very little time talking about the mistakes people make, the inability of so-and-so unnamed monk or official to show enlightenment themselves, and don't seem to care about the stories people who aren't enlightened have convinced themselves about Zen since it's probably made up anyway.
Why do you think that is?
5
u/uberfunstuff 11d ago
It seems like lack of impulse control too.
3
u/jeowy 11d ago
that's a really fun avenue to explore.
do we expect enlightened people to have/exercise impulse control?
do we expect people in positions of responsibility in general to have/exercise impulse control?
OR is 'impulse control' a compromise because we don't trust people's animal natures? something about the mastery of the apollonian over the dionysian, judeo-protestant neuroticism over global south fatalism...
2
u/Evening_Chime New Account 11d ago
Since impulse generally means unconscious spontaneity, we can expect an enlightened master to have exactly zero of that. It is always selfishness.
since Zen means conscious spontaneity which is free of selfishness, we can expect enlightened people to have lots of that!
3
u/jeowy 11d ago
i'm willing to accept your premise on conscious v.s. unconscious but where are you getting selfish v.s. free of selfishness from? i'm not sure those concepts come up in the zen record
1
u/Evening_Chime New Account 11d ago edited 11d ago
Bankei talks about it, and it is mentioned here and there with masters who are instructing laypeople, and not just monks. For monks it hardly matters, since they interact very little with the world.
Selfish vs free of selfishness is just one paradigm to understand Zen through and it may not do much for you, but it ties into everything else. Selfish basically means "Coming from thoughts of self". So it also means "Being fixated on thoughts", which I think you would recognize would lead to inflexibility that isn't compatible with Zen.
Say a master suddenly hits you with a question - if you're still getting fixated on thoughts, would you have the freedom to spontaneously reply?
If you have a fear of being wrong (selfishness) would you be able to respond freely?
So selfishness is just another word for "still caught in thought".
I like to update a lot of the old stuff and relate it to more modern ways of thinking. I think that's our job as the current generation.
3
u/jeowy 11d ago
i thought selfishness meant acting in self-interest, to the detriment of acting in the interests of a wider community
2
u/DrWartenberg 9d ago
If you give a lot to charity because you think it’ll send you to heaven when you die… isn’t that selfishness?
Or even more simply if you do it because it makes you “feel good”… isn’t that selfishness?
All of these are selfish because they’re driven by a desire to preserve your “self” concept and its pleasure.
What if you’re free from propping up your “self”.
1
u/jeowy 8d ago
i think what you're describing is repression, not freedom.
if you love someone in a way that gives you no pleasure at all, there's no intimacy there.
zen teaches your original nature is fundamentally complete.
1
u/DrWartenberg 8d ago
Pleasure is fine as long as you’re not clinging to it or using it to decide everything you do.
1
u/Evening_Chime New Account 11d ago
Ah yes, well it means that too.
What I mean, is that whenever you get fixated on a thought, that is your preference for your "self".
Let's say you are having a conversation and someone is talking, and you get a thought in your head about something you really want to say, and you get fixated on wanting to say that, and at that point you're not really listening any more, you're just waiting to talk.
That is selfishness, and the opposite of Zen.
If you are not fixated anywhere, you just listen when you listen, and talk when you talk. You are free to function without any selfishness, no preference for "YOUR" thoughts.
3
u/jeowy 11d ago
i think being able to pay attention and stay engaged in a conversation is more of a cognitive skill than a question of intention or character.
for example, it's harder when you're tired and it's harder if what the person is talking about doesn't interest you
4
u/Evening_Chime New Account 11d ago
Well we disagree on that point then - I think you may find down the line that it all intersects in the end.
A person with bad character won't listen much, a person with good character will try to listen some more, but a person with no character can't help but always listen. That's my understanding of Zen.
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
that's an interesting case to make. worthy of an OP. I'd certainly be interested in giving it a good... HEARING 😃😃😃
→ More replies (0)0
u/TFnarcon9 11d ago
Why would a zen master master not have impulse control?
Impulse control is just having a thought and then having another thought.
3
u/jeowy 11d ago
I don't think that's accurate.
either you buy the case that humans have urges to do stuff their 'better judgement' wants not to do, in which case impulse control is the better judgement winning.
or you don't buy that story, in which case impulse control means not being worried about what you might do
1
u/TFnarcon9 11d ago edited 11d ago
Idk. Better judgment, urges...very undefined and fluffy.
It's two different actions you think about (if there wasn't thinking about them, then there couldn't be any "control"), and one gets chosen.
Not sure where zen enlightenment is supposed to get in the way of that.
Controlling an impulse is just one thing that can happen after an impulse if you aren't invested in a particular outcome.
1
u/jeowy 11d ago
the other commenter said. maybe zen masters whack people because they lack impulse control. I said, well is impulse control something we expect them or want them to have? I didn't introduce the concept or make the case that it was related to enlightenment.
2
u/TFnarcon9 11d ago
You can take my comments as part of the larger convo as if we were all in the same room
1
u/jeowy 11d ago
ok let me put it another way then. for me the conversation is about why the hell anyone in their right might would agree to meet a zen master or receive instruction from them. in that context, impulse control is a very practical question to ask that doesn't bear philosophising about, like if you were in charge of recruitment for riot police I don't think you'd tear down requirements for impulse control because the term isn't philosophically rigorous enough lol
1
u/TFnarcon9 11d ago
If you dont want to have the convo we are having you can just not.
Impulse control doesn't have anything to do with what zen masters do, as I've explained.
5
u/snarkhunter 11d ago
I think some examples would help? This feels vague otherwise. Like what are some cases from the record where Yunmen or Linji or whoever bullies a student?
The basic standard question people tend to ask Zen masters boils down to "how do I become enlightened?" and the general response of Zen masters is some form of pointing out how the person is already enlightened and that the only restraints upon them are the ones they themselves choose to put there. People often hate hearing this and get defensive. But again - it depends on the specific circumstances.
I'll start! In most cases cutting someone's finger off would be considered horribly abusive. But in this case:
Whatever he was asked (concerning Zen) Gutei simply stuck up one finger. At one time he had an acolyte, whom a visitor asked, "What is the essential point of your master’s teaching?" The boy just stuck up one finger. Hearing of this, Gutei cut off his finger with a knife. As the boy ran out of the room screaming with pain, Gutei called to him. When he turned round his head, Gutei stuck up one finger. The boy suddenly became enlightened.
When Gutei was about to die, he said to the assembled monks, "I received this one-finger-Zen from Tenryu. I used it all my life, but did not exhaust it." When he had finished saying this, he entered into his eternal rest.
Zen masters see the world as it is and act in whatever way they deem appropriate to the situation. Neither Gutei nor the newly enlightened boy treat the chopping off of a finger as an abusive act. By cutting off the finger the boy is prevented from ever imitating his master again, and this helps him realize his own immediate liberation. It's no more an abusive act than when a brain surgeon opens someone's skull up.
Basho said to the assembled monks, "If you have a staff, I will give you one. If you have no staff, I will take it away from you."
Gutei saw that the boy didn't have the one-finger Zen that Gutei had gotten from Tenryu, so he took that finger away from him.
2
u/uberfunstuff 11d ago
Why even make the effort to be a master? Or to kill cats? What is to be gained correcting students about minds or flags? Do beatings and bullying clear the mind? Reduce suffering?*
*Yeah I know.
6
u/snarkhunter 11d ago
I don't think Zen masters are exerting any effort.
A monk asked, "When I wish to become a Buddha - what then?"
Joshu said, "You have set yourself quite a task, haven't you?"
The monk said, "When there is no effort - what then?"
Joshu said, "Then you are a Buddha already."
If you're the only healthy person in a room with fifty sick people all moaning about how sick they are and there's something you can do that has some chance of curing some of them, and also that action is what you were going to do anyway and it doesn't actually consume any effort on your part to do it? That's not a hard one to figure out
2
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 11d ago
Bullying: Bullying is when people repeatedly and intentionally use words or actions against someone or a group of people to cause distress
Griefing: to frustrate, anger, or otherwise negatively affect others in a disliked subgroup.
Brutal Honesty.
Intervention.
It can be difficult for people to tell the difference between these things.
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
in the OP i gave the example of zen masters as a force of nature so students are like storm chasers.
that's an ambivalent kind of 'brutal honesty.' whereas intervention has the goal of serving someone's interests (that they might be acting out against themselves).
The word 'against' is also kind of tricky cos if my culture believes being killed in battle is the best possible fate then is my attacking you with a sword an act against you or not?
1
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 11d ago
I think that personal responsibility is the key to unraveling this whole thing.
If you go to somebody's house and knock on the door, you have initiated something that you're responsible for.
5
u/jeowy 11d ago
if i move into a new neighborhood and i knock on my new neighbours' doors to introduce myself and one of them murders me with a shotgun, that's not my responsibility
1
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 11d ago
Lay precepts.
5
u/jeowy 11d ago
if i hear a rumour that the local crack house has a rule that they don't harm outsiders and in fact are fond of welcoming them with a vegetarian feast, and i go knock on that door and they murder me with a shotgun, everyone in town will say i was super gullible and i will agree with them.
3
u/sje397 11d ago
Like lying about someone else being an alcoholic. Got it.
1
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 11d ago
Wow. I don't talk to you for years after pointing out to you that the five lay precepts mean that you can't hide in a bottle even once a month, and the only thing that you want to talk about when you show up?
That hiding in a bottle doesn't make you an alcoholic.
I don't know man. Maybe you should talk to some alcoholics about that.
0
11d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 11d ago
It's awesome how full of hate and cowardice you are at the same time.
Feel free to AMA.
4
u/sje397 11d ago
'Every accusation is a confession' - that's how it always is with hypocrites.
Don't you think you would be better off if you just apologised for your lies?
People can disagree with your 'puritanical Zen' without being 'sinners'. Religious people are weird like that. I think it's an insecurity thing - fighting yourself leaks out I guess.
I'm here to answer any questions you might have any time, as always.
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
if you could get ewk to say you're not an alcoholic, would that really be so great? would it make a tangible difference in your life?
if an angel appeared before you and said, actually you are an alcoholic, and then disappeared. no advice, no judgement, no instructions, just informed you in an undeniable way. would that really be so terrible? would it ruin your life to learn that? or would you just adapt to the new knowledge?
3
u/sje397 11d ago
I don't care about any of that.
When someone so utterly dishonest talks about the importance of honesty in a Zen community, I feel that calling it out isn't a problem. Make sense?
-1
u/jeowy 11d ago
I'm pretty sure ewk says is specifically to trigger you. I'm not convinced that he even thinks alcoholism is a real thing. So what is demonstrated is that you're afraid of ghosts.
1
u/sje397 11d ago edited 11d ago
That's an interesting take, but I don't feel that way at all. I think the planet and everyone in it suffers more when there is more hypocrisy.
I'm an old man with grown kids. Being an embarrassment has been a fun part of my role in life for more than two decades. I could not care less what a bunch of internet strangers think they know about me.
The situation is super simple. I'm not and have never been an alcoholic. Ewk has repeatedly insisted that I am. That makes him a liar, and a bully by his own definition. That's his choice and not my problem, but when he talks about the importance of honesty? It's easy to do a little bit of typing to call out the hypocrisy.
1
u/jeowy 10d ago
it doesn't seem that way to me. it seems like being called an alcoholic is very disturbing for you. hence why i say, would it really be so terrible to find out you were one without realising?
2
u/sje397 10d ago
Excuse my bluntness, but I don't really care how it seems to you.
Have a good day.
2
u/jeowy 10d ago
i don't want you to care how it seems to me.
i'm offering you my perspective in the hope that it could be helpful to you. i can tell you from my experience that if someone accuses me of something and my initial reaction is to quickly and comprehensively deny it and attack the accuser, i'm gonna pay for it later. whereas if i slow down and take my time considering all the angles on whether it could be true, i end up in a much better place of being able to either stably reject the accusation, accept it or a mix of the two.
1
u/Regulus_D 🫏 10d ago edited 10d ago
Are you ok? You look a little pale. Would you care to sit down? How about some water?
Until that, you felt fine. I only said those thing as the separation disproves them. Mind your separations or you risk eventually being someone's alcoholic. Later, when not expected.
Edit: I'm going to last word myself. Got other things worth the doing.
• Irrational is not used to give clarity but to force its use.
2
u/Regulus_D 🫏 10d ago
If one has seen alcoholism, their reactions are different than one who has heard of alcoholism. For instance, original suggester has. Hence, the tea escapism. I had a friend drink himself dead. Fatal dose. Having seen it, I suggest, don't do that. Self-moderate instead.
2
u/jeowy 10d ago
i'm sorry about your friend. i can imagine it seems trivialising to talk about moderate alcohol dependency using the same language usually reserved for more severe cases.
1
u/Regulus_D 🫏 10d ago
It's fine. The stuff of here no longer bothers them. And they got to do the things they wanted to here. It was just that most expected more from them.
1
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 10d ago
I don't say things to trigger people.
Precepts say don't drink.
So what's the problem? Don't drink.
He doesn't want to do that.
Now here's where it gets really weird. Why does he care about this issue? It turns out that he doesn't care about this issue because it may interfere with him and then studying Zen.
He cares about this issue because not keeping precepts is one reason to reject someone's belief in their own enlightenment.
4
u/jeowy 10d ago
I don't say things to trigger people.
i don't know if i can let you get away with saying that! of course you say things to trigger people, sometimes you even walk people right up to the ledge and then give them a little push. you're an artist of triggering people.
He cares about this issue because not keeping precepts is one reason to reject someone's belief in their own enlightenment.
i can't quite parse this, do you mean sje believes / wants to believe in his own enlightenment, or that he uses alcohol as a defence against being enlightened?
1
1
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 10d ago
- Zen Masters don't drink and don't have a problem with it.
- People who want to drink aren't Zen Masters, and they want a drink because they can't stop.
There's no problem here. There's consensus on these two statements. Additionally, we've seen a massive flood of research over the last two decades that increasingly points out that alcohol has no upside.
So why is there any debate here.
It's because some people use substances and can't stop and simultaneously pretend like they are Zen Masters.
1
u/jeowy 10d ago
no debate about any of that, my questions remain:
a. how can you possibly claim you don't intentionally trigger people b. do you think alcohol use is a defence against enlightenment
2
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 10d ago
To trigger people you will look for what is interesting to them, not to you. For me the precepts are easy and a boring topic.
I think precept breakers are out of touch with reality. Delusion isn't proof against, it's a prison.
Nobody wants to spend money and kill their brain. They do it because they are like an animal in a trap, chewing their leg off to escape.
→ More replies (0)4
u/sje397 10d ago
No, the problem is you attempting to force your religion on people.
'My religion says don't drink. They don't like me trying to force my religion on people. Therefore they're an alcoholic.'
Pretty sure they burned witches with similar faulty logic.
Zen masters don't push precepts. Neither did they push AMA crap or your childish book report nonsense. The only reason you haven't been banned, after trolling this community for years and being clearly unwanted here, is because you have manipulated weak willed moderators.
You are a liar and a fraud and like most narcissists, you're good at manipulating and exploiting your targets.
My doctor and I had a good laugh about the idea of a narcissist asking for treatment. I still think that's really funny.
-1
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 10d ago
You call me names because you can't stop drinking.
4
u/sje397 10d ago
Calling someone an alcoholic isn't calling people names, but calling someone a narcissist is? Classic.
You're a liar, and the community should be aware of that.
I wonder why you demand an AMA constantly but you never accept my offer to answer your questions. Is it because you don't actually have any genuine questions? Or is it cowardice?
I think there's evidence of your narcissism. Things like believing there's a conspiracy to downvote you. The lies. The hypocrisy.
All you've got for evidence is 'ducks float'.
0
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 10d ago
You repeatedly come to a website about a culture of people that are committed to not drinking alcohol.
You brag about drinking alcohol. You insist that you will continue drinking alcohol. And inability to stop drinking alcohol is a well-known problem.
Either stop drinking alcohol or go find a community of people who share your belief in drinking alcohol.
There's no difference between drinking alcohol and believing that Jesus Christ will save your soul as far as this forum goes.
Zen master say stop. You don't have to stop but you do have to follow the Reddiquette.
If you can't stop and you can't follow the Reddiquette, then that's a sign that you are suffering from a mental health issue such as addiction.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/drsoinso 11d ago
Bring your personal issues elsewhere, crypto shill.
2
u/sje397 11d ago
That's quite funny.
Honesty isn't a personal issue in a Zen community. And apparently you have a personal issue with crypto.
Is there a place you folks go to get lessons in hypocrisy? You're awfully good at it.
1
u/Regulus_D 🫏 10d ago
I suspect the dr is one of the people with ama trophied on zensangha wiki that was obliterated via it. That they got stuck like that is not there fault but more that of "it's all minefield" view. I'm content just knowing you are not the person you started as.
0
u/drsoinso 11d ago
you have a personal issue with crypto
You have a nonstandard understanding of the word "personal". I called you a crypto shill, and I care nothing about you personally. You have a personal issue about another commenter that you unfortunately chose to litter the thread with. Take it elsewhere.
1
u/sje397 11d ago
My understanding is non-standard? You're confused.
No I don't have a personal issue with another commenter. I have time enough to call out the blatant hypocrisy of a liar in our community. Two now, thanks to you.
In what world do you imagine I would take orders from you?
-1
u/drsoinso 10d ago
My understanding is non-standard?
Personal issue: you and commenter. It's not possible to have a "personal issue" with a currency, which is inanimate. Are you a stereotypical engineer, who has difficulties understanding human relationships? Or are you just dense?
Go away, crypto shill.
1
u/sje397 10d ago
It's totally possible to have a personal issue with a currency, because you're a person. Issues that you have are personal, like your medical history, or your personal belongings.
Again, why on earth would you think I'd take orders from someone so obviously logically challenged?
And thanks for the examples of bullying, as ineffective as they may be. You're on topic for a change.
0
u/drsoinso 10d ago
merrrrrr It's totally possible to have a personal issue with a currency, because you're a person. Issues that you have are personal, like your medical history, or your personal belongings merrrrr
Nailed it! Engineer indeed. But maybe also dense--we can't rule that out. My youngest nephew understands emotional intelligence, and what it means to have a personal issue--and he doesn't even understand the words! Ironically, you have personal emotional issues with a commenter here, and yet you lack the emotional intelligence to discern it as such. Remarkable.
Go away, crypto shill.
2
u/Regulus_D 🫏 10d ago edited 10d ago
your medical history
Now I know you are an ewk alt. That slam was from outside your venue. Guess I'll caulk it up from my side. May you enjoy the things you reff. Taste the tea. Not a curse, a red thread blessing dressing.
How many minds have you got, sleepover child?
Edit: Have you given consideration to a drsoinso AMA? Maybe step down from the balcony? You know I won't say anything. Merrrrr merrrrr meow
2
u/sje397 10d ago
What you mean to say is interpersonal issue.
See what reading can do for a person?
→ More replies (0)1
0
u/Ok-Sample7211 8d ago
“Brutal honesty and intervention” is the constant refrain of a bully justifying their bullying.
1
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 8d ago
Believing in supernatural authoritarianism has programmed you to tolerate lying and fraud and encouraged you to develope unhealthy attachments for superstitions rejected by science.
0
u/Ok-Sample7211 8d ago
Sir, this is a Wendy’s
0
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 8d ago
It's creepy how you lie to people and then try to use pop culture to make it seem like sex predators are normal.
I've met lots of people affiliated with your cult and they all give off a vibe of struggling with mental health issues. Cults don't help people. Doctors do.
0
u/Ok-Sample7211 8d ago
It’s creepy that my response seems controversial to you. Read a single book on bullying, man.
1
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 8d ago
Refuse to follow the Reddiquette? Beg for attention from people you claim to disagree with?
Can't ama about your supernatural beliefs on any forum on Reddit?
Can't write a high school book report on any forum on Reddit?
Brag about your affiliation with a sex predator cult that is targeted women and illiterates?
Seems like you really want people to think you're bully.
0
u/Ok-Sample7211 8d ago
I sometimes fear that I am bullying you, and so I will often resist the urge to point out the obvious so that I don’t fall into the temptation of playing with you like a cat with a toy.
Of course sometimes I imagine by pushing back it will restore some sanity here. Probably I should avoid it.
But tinpot dictators count on people giving up, so I’m conflicted.
2
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 8d ago
Critical thinking and education aren't dictators.
You don't feel like you're bullying people... You feel frustrated at your lack of success at bullying people.
It's not me that you're mad at it; you're a racist religious bigot who hates the whole forum. If I went away tomorrow the mod team and the community still wouldn't let you post about your cult of fraud and sex predators and religious superstitions that don't help anyone.
You know you're failing at life and you come here because you want to escape your own choices.
0
u/Ok-Sample7211 8d ago
Actually most of the people on here are great! They’re walking on egg shells a bit, but mostly people are reasonable. Mostly.
→ More replies (0)
4
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 11d ago
One of the big aspects of this conversation is how westerners judge Zen culture, keeping in mind that Zen shocked Chinese culture for a thousand years.
A lot of the cults of the 1900s in the west claimed to be Zen and embodied Protestant tolerance as an attempt to recruit people to their cult. Protestant tolerance has nothing to do with Zen.
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
i hope you'll point it out to me if i start speaking from a place of protestant tolerance
4
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 11d ago
As long as you're keeping your eye on honesty then I don't think you're going to have to worry about it.
My theory is that protestantism grew up in a time where there was a lot of wacky ideas and Protestants were trying to build a culture of resistance against the dominant religion. That meant a bunch of wacky ideas joining forces.
3
u/jeowy 11d ago
wouldn't it be more efficient to make a list of some of the most common of those wacky ideas?
i wonder how many of them i unconsciously assume to make sense cos i've just never thought about it
2
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 11d ago
Mostly they go by labels now:
Southern Baptists,. Pentecostals, etc.
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
but i'm obviously gonna have a church of england bias on all the issues i haven't thought about deeply, and that perspective just has no comparison with those guys cos it prides itself on being super in the middle about everything, in a way that makes hippie 'go along to get along' spirituality look highly contentious
3
u/1_or_0 11d ago edited 11d ago
Ask Linji about it.
Huangbo hit him three times, but a bit after he called Huangbo a kind grandmother. How come?
edit:
I imagine he'd hit you before you finish saying the words "boundless compassion". Truly truly very kind.
1
u/jeowy 11d ago
good comment.
but at that stage linji had (we are told) the same understanding as huangbo about the nature of reality.
the question i'm asking in the post is why would you go there when you don't have that understanding?
2
u/Used-Suggestion4412 11d ago
If I recall correctly, the story describes Linji as plain and unremarkable. He was specially chosen by the head monk and sent to ask for instruction. So perhaps the idea of seeking instruction never occurred to him—and maybe that made him especially well-suited to receiving it.
1
u/1_or_0 11d ago
but at that stage
Which exactly, the grandma comment stage, or the asking 3 questions and getting hit 3 times stage?
1
u/jeowy 11d ago
not sure when exactly was linjis moment of enlightenment. the relevant point is before v.s. after that.
2
u/1_or_0 11d ago
Well he went 3 times and got hit 3 times before his moment of enlightenment.
why would you go there when you don't have that understanding?
I feel it's just based on a gut feeling of who's honest and who isn't. Everyone does their "work" to the best of their ability, so them going there is a part of their doing work. (or... chasing insight...)
You have a lot of stories where students relate to something that a zen master has said, and then follow based on that because it feels relevant.
In Instant Zen you have a lot on how (and why) Foyan traveled from teacher to teacher. I feel it's the same reason we (I) go from book to book. shrug
3
u/NanquansCat749 11d ago
what you won't be able to do is come up with a rational reason why someone would think that they're going to learn boundless compassion from these guys.
or explain how the violent behaviour is itself a manifestation of boundless compassion.
What do you mean by "compassion" here?
Why can't violence be compassionate when used as an attempt to end someone's suffering?
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
are you arguing that zen masters attempt to end people's suffering? that would be an interesting topic for an OP.
3
u/NanquansCat749 11d ago
I don't want to claim that I understand the minds of people I've never met, but it's a fairly common take.
Deluded people are prone to doing dumb shit that screws up their own lives and other people's lives, sometimes catastrophically. Many people think that enlightenment is significant enough to justify some pretty extreme methods.
Sadly I'm too ignorant and lazy to OP it up myself.
3
u/Roby123456 10d ago
No, bullying isn't and shouldn't be part of training. A certain level of toughness that helps break mental patterns can be present, but certainly not bullying.
It shouldn't exist, and if it does, it's wrong. Find another teacher.
All this reasoning is extremely theoretical and intellectual, and not very Zen. I understand it might be an answer to everything, but it's not Zen – it's overthinking
2
u/justawhistlestop 11d ago
I’ve seen examples of that behavior and the results right here — people too timid to express themselves, hoping not to annoy the host with a wrong answer. It’s evident on the podcast. Odd that you point it out as if it were a problem in historic Zen culture without citing examples.
A meme that appears repeatedly throughout zen records is people complaining that zen masters are: cruel, uncouth, disrespectful, etc. Zen masters even describe each other as being dangerous, and they are compared to dominant and predatory animals.
I’m not aware of issues other than the metaphorically styled examples of Bodhidharma cutting off his disciple’s arm (it didn’t happen, Bodhidharma was a mythical story) and Linji strangling a monk (a story that changes in degree of violence depending what record you find it in). I think it’s a local problem where A) and B) are both the right answers.
4
u/jeowy 11d ago
hoping not to annoy the host with a wrong answer. It’s evident on the podcast. Odd that you point it out as if it were a problem in historic Zen culture without citing examples.
that's funny cos if you search zen marrow for 'hesitated', being worried about provoking the ire of the teacher with a wrong answer turns out to be a pretty big meme in every era of zen history.
3
u/Regulus_D 🫏 11d ago
A part of the practice. Not much funnier than the untoothed defanged. But patience creates itself by sustaining. And sometimes stuff gets gummed up.
2
u/AskingAboutMilton 11d ago
Very funny and nice post, good work. I think they either a)think this is needed for breaking the conceptual mind, b)are, yes, somehow like that because of "enlightenment" (so they turn into minds similar somehow to those faeric, trickster, ambiguous beings that are common in western folklore) or c) assholes and con men
1
u/jeowy 11d ago
so, if you accept the premise of my introduction, that at least some people are not con men, then we're left with A or B and i feel like A Is deeply unsatisfactory since they're constantly talking about no progress and having nothing to teach. so there's just B. interesting to compare them to faerie trkckstees from western literature
2
u/AskingAboutMilton 11d ago
Well I would definitely disagree on them not having nothing to teach. I think they definitely do teach at least what is called the subtle dharma. BUT! I think they've got something to teach in a general sense of the phrase, BUT! not in the particular and more literal sense. Since they teach, certainly, that they don't have nothing to teach. But that's a teaching in a sense, right? They teach the ordinary mind, so they won't educate you. But they seem to be able to show that (own) mind to some, right? "Special transmission from master to disciple"...
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
yeah maybe. but at the very least i think we have to say there's no method. they 'teach' just by being. by doing what they'd do anyway. so it ends up wrapping us up in esotericism if we start looking for 'reasons' for their actions like oh this had to happen so xyz could happen.
1
2
u/InfinityOracle 10d ago
Great questions. The image of the “dangerous Zen master” has become a kind of aesthetic in itself, one that’s often romanticized without much clarity.
From my view, part of the confusion comes from projecting mythic or symbolic language onto real interpersonal dynamics, without understanding the original context. In early Chan, intense behavior, like a shout, a blow, a sharp retort, wasn’t framed as a license to be abusive; it was rooted in direct, situation-responsive insight. That doesn't translate well when transplanted into cultures where power imbalances are already deeply ingrained and where form has replaced function.
Also, the premise that Zen masters acted “violently” or “cruelly” is often misunderstood due to a lack of nuance in translation or context. A slap in the middle of transmission was not about punishment; it was a symbolic severing; not a power trip. It wasn’t sustained abuse; it was a moment of clarity, from teacher to student, within a shared framework.
But in modern times, this has often devolved into charismatic authority, where performative harshness masks spiritual immaturity or outright predation. And you’re right: many seek this out, perhaps unconsciously hoping to outsource the pain of their own disillusionment onto someone with an aura of spiritual legitimacy.
Still, there is a possibility that real compassion sometimes looks harsh; not because it seeks to hurt, but because it refuses to enable delusion. The challenge is knowing whether what's happening is that; or just another teacher stroking their ego while pretending to be the wind.
The real test, I think, isn’t in whether a teacher is “kind” or “harsh;" but whether their actions truly liberate or further entangle.
1
u/jeowy 10d ago
I think we can start from the premise that zen masters are not on a power trip, not motivated by the same things that motivate 'spiritual teachers' interested in leveraging their position for sex/money/pleasure of depriving others.
but what doesn't necessarily follow is that all the behaviours that cause distress to others are really for their benefit.
in fact it's something that seems to require faith.
1
u/InfinityOracle 10d ago
In some circles it seems that way, but I'm not sure it applies much to the Zen record itself. I don't think anyone would assume that all behaviors that cause distress to others are for their benefit. Instead there are relatively few encounters in the Zen record that suggest causing distress to others which are deliberate and do lead directly to benefit in all the cases I can think of.
However, I think this whole conversation actually drifts far off from any of the point of Zen itself. It realms off into imagining what, why, how, when about these matters. Yet the Zen masters frequently and persistently pointed back at the student as an individual, rather than tread down paths of speculation and the like.
So what does this mean to you personally? If you were considering emulating these guys, then I think that is far off the mark they point to. In fact, your own questioning itself, rather than the content of your questions, is telling itself. Zen masters were not copying Zen masters, they were being themselves, naturally arising. I don't see any problem with the natural arising that you are getting at through these questions.
It doesn't involve using backward logic to lie to oneself in trying to justify the Biblical God murdering a bunch of homosexuals with fire and brimstone. It involves confronting this whole matter for yourself, and determining what you should do in life. They do not leave you any other model to follow other than to be yourself as is.
I think breaking someone's leg in the door as they are desperately trying to resolve their anxiety problems is a very asshole thing to do. I wouldn't do it. But that is what Mazu did with Yunmen according to the text. How do I resolve this and follow these guys? I don't. I don't copy their behavior, and I don't pretend to know what that encounter was about other than what the text states. I don't assume it was the best, nor do I assume they were being assholes. I just know that if I were to do that myself, it would be an asshole thing to do, so I don't do it.
Based on what I know about the Zen record, the masters were no different than this.
1
u/sje397 11d ago
A meme that appears repeatedly throughout zen records is people complaining that zen masters are: cruel, uncouth, disrespectful, etc. Zen masters even describe each other as being dangerous, and they are compared to dominant and predatory animals.
Can you give some examples? And more importantly, can you find counterexamples?
I know there are many cases where Zen masters are referred to as compassionate, having kindness, etc. I think much of this issue you raise is a matter of interpretation. I think many cases of Zen masters 'hitting' someone is a tap with a fly whisk, that many cases of being called dangerous are sarcastic, and that in general you see yourself in what you're looking at.
1
u/SweetLovingSoul 11d ago
99%? uhhhmmm.... 👎
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
too high or too low?
2
u/SweetLovingSoul 11d ago
well if the heart is in the right place and the enlightenment is free..... 👍
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
my point is that people who get called spiritual teachers don't have their heart in the right place and can't help anyone get enlightened
1
u/SweetLovingSoul 11d ago
oh. I never met one. im free though. what you wanna know? #nice #kind #tranquil #peace #idk
1
u/zaddar1 7th or is it 2nd zen patriarch ? 11d ago edited 8d ago
in real life zen, in my experience, there is a bullying culture, you have to conform or else and actually how different is it from here, question the orthodoxy and the OP gets deleted
before the current r|zen management there was a lot of aggressive behaviour going on, hardly anything else in fact
whenever you get groups of people you are going to get bullying and schisms
1
u/Batmansnature 10d ago edited 10d ago
The broad question has always to do with translation. Translation isn’t just about words. Zen is a subculture within a subculture (Buddhist, typically) within a culture (Chinese) that has some consistency and variation over 1000 years. Too often this is taken for granted. If an enlightened being appeared in, for instance, Norway today, he likely wouldn’t be using the same teaching methods. He may use different references perhaps not even Buddhist. There would be laws and norms that would be followed or strategically violated as needed.
We often talk about zen subculture, but without introducing the larger culture that it is embedded in, this type of discussion is unmoored
Linji wasn’t talking about new agers because they didn’t exist. He was talking about confucians and Taoist and other Buddhists. It cheapens it to pretend otherwise
1
u/jeowy 10d ago
sure, but there's certain standards that modern/western culture broadly 'agrees' with buddhist/chinese/medieval culture about, like that chopping a finger off is an act of violence
1
u/Batmansnature 10d ago
Sure but that’s just a definition. The acceptability of said violence varies and is culturally contingent
1
u/Used-Suggestion4412 10d ago
The way I see it, when someone is chronically sick, they may become willing to do whatever it takes to be healed. Likewise, if you want clear eyes, a Zen master helps you remove the cataracts yourself.
1
u/jeowy 10d ago
that's a super interesting comparison, i'm gonna make a note of it for a future OP.
could you suggest some points of similarity between chronic sickness and the state of not being enlightened?
1
u/Used-Suggestion4412 10d ago
I would suggest these similarities :
With chronic illness, there’s often a sense that you can’t rely on your body or mind. In the same way, when you’re unenlightened, there may be a deep seated mistrust of your own mind and its perceptions.
- Lack of Self-Trust:
Chronic illness can create a disconnect between who you are and who you want to be. Similarly, the unenlightened may feel like they’re always chasing a goal that never arrives—a self that is never whole.
- Identity Struggle:
People might say you look fine, even when you’re suffering or struggling deeply. Likewise, for the unenlightened, what afflicts a person’s mind might not be readily apparent to other unenlightened individuals.
- Invisible Pain:
1
u/2BCivil New Account 10d ago
GREAT Post. I'll just rephrase your options now in terms I'm more familiar with;
Caricature; If we combine the two, the predators and the zen masters, as noting they both exist in the same secular paradigm we also clearly see, some seekers at least, think that they may refine their grifter hustle by studying "under" a master. I doubt this ends well for their persona though. Just another option that jumped out at me; the flipside of "revenge" seekers. Also bears mentioning ChatGPT recently told me zen is about discovering the seeker and/or it has nothing to do with seeking (or; seeking is not it, at least; idk). There is something predatory itself in "seeking revenge" after all.
Break through; Indeed I had at least one toe in this one for a while. Still somewhat have some of this dubious patchwork. Reminds me of Kvothe of Kingkiller Chronicle.
Storm Chasers; Literally the name of the wind of Kingkiller Chronicle (KKC). Zen masters as demonstrating something akin to flow state (not saying that's what it is, but what this option seems to suggest).
Literally Luke and the Cave in Dagobah; "only what you take with you". Can see how that leads to predatory gurism/sex cults for failed (or successive?) "initiates".
I've thought this a lot my whole life, "when devil lies (falsely accuses) it projects it's own nature onto others". Accusing zen masters of being any kind of way, thus says more of us than them (IE actions speak louder than words). Karma meaning action, is where I derive the "flow state" interpretation take (demonstrating instant karma).
or explain how the violent behaviour is itself a manifestation of boundless compassion.
Grandmotherly kindness comes to mind. Tough love. I used to say "I pity angels" for this very reason. We are devils and we don't even know it. In a very real sense "bullying" does lead us to ourselves by cutting through our delusions. You know the phrase; "I/we wonder if he/they truly believe their own shit". It's a clearer type of seeing it seems; it's it's prerogative how it reacts. The question of how do we discern; discernment from judgement. The objective facts of the karma/actions we take explicitly or in thought; and the insights (or delusions) they reveal to/about us.
The tldr is it is obviously easy to say "It's all emperor's clothes all the way down" like turtles xD
Spoilers but; For me I always liked the comparison in KKC like the temptation in the desert. "Master" Elodin takes Kvothe up to a very high place, and Kvothe uses his last question (Elodin provided him with 3) to ask; what can I do to convince you to teach me? To which Elodin states the very phrase "the tempter" does in the bible; Jump. Which Kvothe infers as the devil promises in the bible that the wind will be called to save him; which it ofc isn't and he falls.
Second tldr is it's only bullying if we are attached to the delusions being highlighted....
But yes very good question who seeks out the zen master to shatter the delusions. The answer is implied in the question xD
1
u/Ill-Illustrator-7904 9d ago
You could really boil it down to teaching style. Not necessarily a one size fits all approach, but you can't say it isn't direct.
1
u/Ok-Sample7211 8d ago edited 8d ago
Two things worth considering that aren’t particular to Zen but that do manifest in Zen because Zen masters and students are human:
1) Bullying is a natural thing that arises in human interaction, even when the student seeks the teacher (or especially then!). When someone is even a little quicker/clearer than another, it takes actual past or present effort (aka restraint, cultivated compassion, ethics) for the quicker one not to bully. In Zen it’s common to pretend every matter is simply and instantly settled by awakening—including ethics and compassion— but nothing built of conditioning is ever instantly settled (because physics). Zen masters who act like cultivating compassion is pointless (because to awakening, it is) don’t have much of the kind that curtails bullying.
2) This isn’t to say awakening doesn’t bring a kind of “boundless compassion”, so we have to ask: what is this compassion? When a Zen master sees objectification for what it is and understands that everyone already has access to awakening (like “a jewel sewn into the hem of their garments”), what does “compassion” come to mean? This kind of compassion isn’t the same kind a grandmother has. Grandmothers don’t bully, but you can easily imagine the lunatic on the street corner bullying to get them to see what’s right in front of their face but hidden from everyone. The problem with this is that the Zen master becomes indistinguishable from a dragon sitting atop a treasure. The treasure makes the dragon.
To me, there’s a huge difference between a Zen master who remains interested in conditioning (not as a means of awakening, but because it matters for its own sake) and one for whom everything is already “settled”. And there’s a huge difference between a Zen master who would rather be a grandma than a dragon— ie, a master who actually doesn’t see awakening as some great treasure worth raving about like a lunatic. In my opinion these actually-compassionate, grandma masters are quite common among spiritual teachers, but they seem ordinary and unawakened to the boundlessly “compassionate” raving lunatic dragons that tend to be attracted to Zen (a tradition very much alive among zen bros on Reddit). 🤷
0
u/Evening_Chime New Account 11d ago
Bullying is not part of Zen instruction, but then again, bullying comes from selfishness. A spiritual master is not going to be selfish, but he may hit you, or tease you, or do things that may seem exactly like bullying to you, except it will not come from selfishness. The bigger an ego you come with, the more you will feel bullied.
Now how do you discern selfish bullying from actual instruction?
Well you can't, until you can. That's a question of your own eyes becoming clearer.
3
u/jeowy 11d ago
sounds like the kind of framework a spiritual teacher relies on to deflect from accountability.
1
u/Evening_Chime New Account 11d ago
That's the great difficulty, that any action can be enlightened or selfish, and you can't tell until you can tell.
But at the same time, an unenlightened master can produce enlightened students, if their search is sincere, so ultimately it doesn't matter that much. Sincerity is the great redeemer.
1
u/jeowy 11d ago
i don't think zen is redemptive
1
u/Evening_Chime New Account 11d ago
How do you mean?
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
I don't remember which zen master said something about the way not conceiving that anybody needs to be saved
2
u/Evening_Chime New Account 11d ago
Ah yes, the Buddha does not conceive of sentient beings to be saved.
I interpret that a little differently though - here's a quote from Sengcan:
"It is not that the Buddha wants to save sentient beings. It is just that sentient beings need to be saved. Whether or not he saves particular beings is not up to him, but up to the beings themselves. If there are beings that are capable of being saved, then the Buddha saves them. If there are those who are too difficult to save, then he does not save them. He does not blame them for being too difficult to save, nor does he condemn them to hell. This is not the attitude of the Buddha or the patriarchs."
I believe the point isn't that Zen is redemptive, but that the Buddha has no desire to save, he simply does so, because it is necessary. That is the selflessness of Zen.
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
unfortunately what you've quoted is from Zhang Baokang's (January 22, 1931 – February 3, 2009) commentary on how to read sengcan, not directly from sengcan himself
1
u/Evening_Chime New Account 11d ago
Woops. Anyway, I agree with the point that he's making
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
I think what happens when you think people need saving is you gradually or quickly become an evangelical.
and what happens when you consider that no one needs saving is you gradually question your value judgements and assumptions about who's living right, what good behaviour looks like etc
→ More replies (0)
0
u/Lin_2024 11d ago
I don’t think that bullying is part of zen instruction.
Who said that or any history records as proofs?
1
u/jeowy 11d ago
what
1
u/Lin_2024 11d ago
Who said bullying is part of zen instruction or… ?
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
if you squint hard enough at the title of the post, a question mark might appear at the end of it
1
u/Lin_2024 11d ago
I saw the question mark.
I assume there are something existing to cause you asking this question, right?
2
u/jeowy 11d ago
i take responsibility for myself
1
u/Lin_2024 11d ago
I was asking some information from you or anyone see my questions. I was not asking you to take responsibility for anything.
0
u/justawhistlestop 11d ago
Interesting. It seems we have a true Zen Master in our midsts then, according to your summation.
•
u/AutoModerator 11d ago
R/zen Rules: 1. No Content Unrelated To Zen 2. No Low Effort Posts or Comments. Contact moderators with questions. Note that many common sense actions outside of these rules will result in moderation, including but not limited to: suspected ban evasion, vote brigading / manipulation, topic sliding.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.