What Zen really means in English

Zen has almost allowed itself to become a cult of sitters in which the central practice is sitting for various lengths of time all the way up to a sesshin 接心 (lit. connect [with] mind) which can go on for days or over a month—done all in a sitting posture.  The fault here is taking Zen literally as if Zen actually means “to sit.”  But Zen has nothing whatsoever to do with sitting. Zen is the Japanese pronunciation of the Chinese character 禪 this being “Chan” which is an abbreviation of chan-na. The Chinese understood chan-na to sound very close to the Sanskirt sound of dhyāna which is often rendered in English by “meditation.”  But I disagree.

Zen or dhyana is much closer to the Latin intueri which means to look at or toward, to observe or contemplate; which is the basis of the English word “intuition,” .  According to the Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary, intuition is described as “the act or process of coming to direct knowledge or certainty without reasoning or inferring”.  Hence, knowledge gained by the rational processes is bypassed for direct, unobstructed cognition.  This also includes bypassing the senses and memory.  In this regard Zen describes “direct intuition” of the absolute.  The Zens or the four dhyānas of the Buddha-to-be in the Pali Nikayas were not sitting practices but rather levels of intuition.  Switching gears, a celebrated and important Mahayana discourse of the Buddha during the formation of Zen was the Lankavatara Sutra.  Here is what it had to say abut the four Zens or dhyānas.  Notice, the sense here is not that of sitting but of intuition.

There are the Dhyana for the examination of meaning, the Dhyana practised by the ignorant; the Dhyana with Tathata for its object, and the pure Dhyana of the Tathagata.

This is my beef with “pop Zen” insofar as it tends to ignore the primary place of intuition which is about the direct observation of pure Mind or tathātā (眞如).  Sitting is not going to help us intuit pure Mind or reach the intuitive level of a Tathagata.  The emphasis that Japanese Soto Zen places on physical sitting is rather odd if not entirely superficial and misleading.  The development of intuition (Zen)—not sitting—led to Siddhartha’s awakening whereby he became Buddha.

Comments

[smith]

one can easily make the case, the argument, that the false teachers of buddhism, the ones you rail against endlessly, and rightly, are analogous to the false teachers of Christianity, as opposed to the actual Christians, the true believers, the elect of God before the foundation of the universe, which are mentioned and explained through various parts of the old and new testament; the bible. As far as the shallowness of the Catholic Church's teachings of theology to its members - that is the greatest short coming of the manmade institution that it is. But, in its defense, it kept Christianity alive for 2000 years, and even for 1500 years before protestantism. It was paramount to western civilization and its cultural development. Especially in relation to morality - the basis for all social order and law. So, although in this day and age, of marxist ascendancy, post-modernist post-Christian, atheism, where it is popular and easy to dismiss the Catholic church, and to dismiss Jesus Christ, and especially to dismiss religion and in particular the Christian religion, that would not be only a small mistake. Christianity is very exclusive in its truth claims, absolutely. And it does assert the trinity and its rationale clearly. It asserts that God is the creator and that the creation and the creator are not the same. True. It asserts that there is only God, and not other God, no other source of the creation. In this way it clearly is against paganism, and states that to worship any other God is the greatest sin. Sin being defined as that which is not true, and anything which is false, and thereby definition is not God, and is opposed to God. God being defined as all that is true in the most infinite and ultimate ways or 'senses'(understanding/knowing). I believe that just as you refer to the dark force(s), the 'dark age', of today, and the losing or corrupting of real buddhist teaching practice or knowledge, I assert that satan is the force which is behind the marxist ascendancy and of the the false religion of islum. I also think that the falling away of Christians i the west, and of catholics who were the last bastion holding out against that barrage, aside from satan and God's providential plan, is because of the shallowness of the theology that was being taught. The roots were not made deep through deep understanding and knowledge of Christianity. before this age, the rituals and the social bonds were enough to sustain Christianity and pass it down. But, in this age, this dark age, it can not stand - except for the true Church of jesus, of the Christ, of whom Jesus said, " the gates of hell shall not triumph over it." (paraphrasing). I realize its a complex subject (beyond a few paragraphs here), and also that it does not doctrinally or in other ways agree with buddhism, But, I, at the risk of offending or being derided wished to make a protest to the dismissing of Christianity and of the Catholic church. Respectfully.

[trekai]

thank you for the comment.
I agree, I also believe that this spiritual light is a major part of buddhism. (though i have not experienced it myself)

I wonder how his own teacher tried to explain the experience.

also, I found the differences between your descriptions of this unborn light very interesting. (i'm assuming he actually saw the Real Thing, and that he wasn't lying or deluded, or didn't have a "false" awakening)
he certainly attributes personal characteristics to it. for example he said it knew him, and loved him, and actually longed for him.

these differing views are really confusing i must say. in the end, i believe they must be equally true.

[thezennist]

If we have been raised in the Christian faith, it is difficult to leave it. Even when we study Buddhism we tend to see Buddhism with our Christian spectacles on.

The experiences I had in Buddhism were quite profound which I have shared with those who follow this blog, which taught me Buddhism's truth. I must say right off the bat, that spiritual light is a major part of Buddhism. If there is a religion of light, it surely is Buddhism. Just one example from the Avatamsaka Sutra:

"Manifesting spiritual power while among the masses, he radiates light to make them wake up, revealing the realm of the enlightened."

What Nilus experienced which if he had not attached names was certainly not outside of Buddhism. It was by attaching names to the luminous that he separated himself from Buddhism. I take it, too, that Nilus was not well read when it came to Buddhism nor well read in the Orthodox faith. This is fairly typical of Westerners. At least he followed the Orthodox faith which teaches Theosis. The Catholic Church does not.

[trekai]

hello Zennist. I read this article, basically it's the story of an american, who after 7 years being a tibetan buddhist monk had an "encounter" and converted to orthodox christianity:

http://theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/ocrc/2009/06/through-the-eastern-gate-from-tibetan-buddhism-to-orthodox-christianity/

I would be very interested to hear your comments about it. (and sorry for irrelevant posting)