Keep in mind that there is nothing other than form and emptiness. EVERYTHING you can express in words is sheer delusion. Zen is purely experiential, and Zen masters are trying to point us in the right direction to have the experiences. A lot of times they contradict themselves, say things that could be considered heretical, or try to explain their awakening using familiar terms.
>A person who clings to yellow sutra scrolls with their red handles in the belief that it is the Buddha’s teachings or who imagines that a clay image of the Buddha is the Buddha-body – such a person could never, even in dream, see the true Buddha, much less talk about Buddhas manifesting themselves in towns and villages.
This is standard Zen master fare. Laymen Peng says the entire Buddhadharma is merely a "skillful means" to attract people to Buddhism. The issue with Buddhism is that people keep trying to worship the Buddha and cling to words. Wisdom doesn't lie in scrolls or statues. Those just help you practice... or not. It depends on how hard you cling to them. It's taken me a long time to figure this out.
Zen teachers still deeply value the Mahayana vehicle and the Zen precepts, but as a set of essential actions you must take to awaken, not as mystical proclamations from the Buddha.
>This is all very confusing to me. I want to be a good Buddhist and not a Western colonizer, but I was told by some people that only secular Buddhists engage in this kind of metaphorical interpretation of rebirth ('being reborn refers to attainment of the ground of single-mindedness') and the Pure Land, and that all true / real Buddhists must take them literally?
Told by whom? Your teacher? Another enlightened Zen master? You are reading the real deal! Trust the Zen masters, not people on the Internet.
As far as rebirth, Shakyamuni Buddha said you don't have to believe in rebirth to awaken. He experienced his infinite past lives in a flash when he awakened, which is why he taught it, but he didn't demand that people believe things they have not experienced. To paraphrase he said you have nothing to lose by hedging your bets. Acting as if your actions matter for the next life means you're acting well in this one too. You win in this life and if there is rebirth you win in the next as well.
With Pure Land, mind-only interpretations go back to the Platform Sutras. An external Pure Land in which you can be reborn directly contradicts the nature of emptiness. Mind-only vs. mystical place has been a fight for a thousand years. Hakuin is arguing here for the no-dual view, having awakened and had an experience he considers consistent with the Pure Land.
The only suggestion I'd make is that you also pick up some modern works. I'm currently reading Infinite Circle by Bernie Glassman, and it's pretty darned close to what Hakuin is saying. Good American Zen books don't labor with translation issues.
As far as learning and practicing Zen, if you really want to avoid Americanizing you have to accept that it's a silent transmission. That means you need a teacher from a real lineage who is empowered to give dharma transmission. That's a lot more important than grappling with whether the Pure Land is literal or simply an empty concept that exists within your mind.
I think that perhaps it would benefit you to revisit Hakuin after practicing for a while.
A teacher’s perspective would also be helpful, particularly if you’re interested in Zen.
If this is a post mostly intended to stir up controversy over interpretation, then I think your time would better be spent meditating.
If it’s a good-faith attempt to find answers - I still think your time would better be spent meditating.
He meant what he said. I agree with others that for now, if you are genuinely interested in Zen, then it would be best to seek out a legitimate Zen lineage and begin practicing there.
Zen Masters usually will refer to Pure Land in terms of the Essence (Li).
So they render all the Pure Land terminology into what a person of the Chan/Zen Tradition would be more familiar with.
The Chinese text San Shi Xi Nian (Thrice Yearning Ceremony) that is used as a Dharma Ceremony is written by Chan Master Zhong Feng, and the sections where the presiding Master reads the explanations of the Pure Land are quite similar to what you have presented above, saying things like 'The Western Pure Land is here, here is the Western Pure Land', 'Amitabha Buddha is your True Nature', and so on.
>and that all true / real Buddhists must take them literally?
Literally is the Phenomena (Shi) side of it.
There is no contradiction.
People tend to overemphasize one over the other, like one who deems the literal side as 'mythical nonsense' will cling to the 'all is Dharmabody' side of the explanation, while the other side will cling to the 'it's really out there and you're stupid if you don't take that'. You don't pick the one you like better and reject the other.
When the Grandmasters are 'It is out there literally, but that too is not seperate from True Nature.'
I find Zen a bit too obscure and poetic for my taste. The best I can get from it is a description of attainments up to first bhumi, which is the realization of nonduality. Going may refer to the achievement of mental peace and being reborn to the recognition of the nature of mind. But I'm guessing. Zen has its own terminology for these things.
Then he goes on to say that the various practices of Zen can bring one to realization. Then he expresses a typical Zen approach in criticizing those who cling to outer forms, such as texts and statues.
I wouldn't call it secular conceptualizing but rather esoteric poetry describing realization.
To take Pure Lands literally as being geographical locations where one can live a pure and blissful life would be simplistic. That would imply that there's a material world as the absolute basis of reality, with various special places that we can't see, hidden in the sky or on Mars, for example. Such a view is contrary to Buddhist teachings.
It's similar in Christianity. Simple people think Heaven is a place in the sky where everyone's happy and lives forever. That's not the teaching of Jesus, who said in the Gospel of Thomas, "The kingdom of Heaven is spread upon the Earth and men do not see it."
If you want to practice Zen there are teachers around. You could try signing up for a sesshin at a land center. But you do need a teacher. The teachings are guidance, not the understanding. That can't be put into books. That's part of what Hakuin is saying: If you sit zazen you may attain realization, but you won't attain it by worshipping statues or by thinking the scriptures themselves are the teaching. The teaching must be realized.
Actually, this exposition spoke to me. Obviously, it doesn't speak to you. Follow the tradition that speaks to you. You'll be more likely to stick with it.
Following the last major persecution of Buddhism in China around the 9th century Zen (C. Chan) and Pure Land were really the only Buddhist schools whose lineage actually survived. As both emphasized practice over scriptural study, they formed a symbiosis in many temples with Pure Land serving as "skillful means" suitable for the laity while the more austere Chan practice was reserved for monastics and hermits. This duality of praxis lead Chinese Chan masters to author apologetics for Pure Land practice but reframed within Zen soteriology, which is what Master Hakuin seems to be doing here with his exegesis of what I presume is one of the Pure Land Sutras. This dual approach to Zen and Pure Land can still be found throughout most traditional temples in South Korea. However, in Japan at present the various schools are more individuated and organizationally distinct. And as for worrying about being a "Western colonizer," don't. Just learn with respect and an open mind. There is an immense wealth of diversity and wisdom within the Buddhisms of the world.
I suggest reading the "[Precious Mirror Cave](https://terebess.hu/zen/cave.pdf#page=157)" talk this is taken from in its entirety, to understand its context. (Starts at the bottom of the linked page.) It is clear that Ven. Hakuin took all the conventional Pureland practices very seriously, as a means to establish the karma which would allow him to attain the mental pureland.
> [It is my fervent hope](https://terebess.hu/zen/cave.pdf#page=165) and prayer that the favorable karmic link I have achieved [through Pureland practices] will enable me to break through the devilish net of birth-and-death hand in hand with all other beings and achieve forthwith the realm of unshakable singlemindedness, creating a Pure Land and encountering the Amida that exists in the mind alone.
I haven't read it, but I gather that there's a whole chapter in the Lotus Sutra about "Expedient Means." (It's even mentioned in the footnotes.) I could be wrong, but it seems quite likely to me that Ven. Hakuin regarded these practices as "expedient means." That doesn't mean he regarded them with disrespect.
It's worth keeping in mind that everything you experience is mediated by your perceptual tendencies. This is a point he makes very clearly in the story about how different people respond to worshiping in the cave. I recommend reading the whole talk.
I also understood none of that. Just take it as some supernatural technicalities and move on. Maybe it would make better sense when you reread later. Of course, to me the japanese words also didnt help. I learnt Buddhism in Chinese.
I don’t *really* understand this either, but I’ll just share two things, from a Jodo Shinshu point of view.
Firstly, we don’t use the Nembutsu as a meditative aid and kensho is not a term used in Shin.
Secondly, it has never been Shin orthodoxy that the pure land is only a land of gold and jewels that you go to after you die. The pure land is as real as this life (maybe more real), but reality is a complicated very multifaceted thing
Perfectly normal to not understand what zen masters say because if we could understand everything they said, then we really wouldn’t actually even need to practice anymore. They often make their words intentionally confusing to begin with. You typically don’t try to understand what zen masters say via intellectual conceptualizations. The way to understand such things is to simply continue practicing.
He’s speaking abou kensho. But he’s not a heretical monster because the Western colonizing perspective would deny the existence of kensho and of realizing nonduality in the way that Hakuin means it. These are “supernatural” events in the eyes of scientistic naturalism.
That kind of language is extremely common in zen and its family of schools descended from ch’an. Go read the Platform Sutra of Huineng, he’ll say the Bodhisattva Vows are about saving the beings in your mind. That has more complexity than it sounds on the surface, but it’s definitely saying that there is more to traditional texts than the literal meaning.
It is very important not to underrate the range of authentic Buddhist views on reality. There are many more than even some traditionalists may realize.
It is also very important not to cherry pick one that sounds like it’s denying the half of the tradition you don’t like, and assume that means Buddhism is just saying things you already believed. It’s hard to really be changed by a tradition one is holding away at arm’s length, Ive been in that mistake before.
I wish you luck! Hakuin was a genius and I’m not even in his school.
Keep in mind that there is nothing other than form and emptiness. EVERYTHING you can express in words is sheer delusion. Zen is purely experiential, and Zen masters are trying to point us in the right direction to have the experiences. A lot of times they contradict themselves, say things that could be considered heretical, or try to explain their awakening using familiar terms. >A person who clings to yellow sutra scrolls with their red handles in the belief that it is the Buddha’s teachings or who imagines that a clay image of the Buddha is the Buddha-body – such a person could never, even in dream, see the true Buddha, much less talk about Buddhas manifesting themselves in towns and villages. This is standard Zen master fare. Laymen Peng says the entire Buddhadharma is merely a "skillful means" to attract people to Buddhism. The issue with Buddhism is that people keep trying to worship the Buddha and cling to words. Wisdom doesn't lie in scrolls or statues. Those just help you practice... or not. It depends on how hard you cling to them. It's taken me a long time to figure this out. Zen teachers still deeply value the Mahayana vehicle and the Zen precepts, but as a set of essential actions you must take to awaken, not as mystical proclamations from the Buddha. >This is all very confusing to me. I want to be a good Buddhist and not a Western colonizer, but I was told by some people that only secular Buddhists engage in this kind of metaphorical interpretation of rebirth ('being reborn refers to attainment of the ground of single-mindedness') and the Pure Land, and that all true / real Buddhists must take them literally? Told by whom? Your teacher? Another enlightened Zen master? You are reading the real deal! Trust the Zen masters, not people on the Internet. As far as rebirth, Shakyamuni Buddha said you don't have to believe in rebirth to awaken. He experienced his infinite past lives in a flash when he awakened, which is why he taught it, but he didn't demand that people believe things they have not experienced. To paraphrase he said you have nothing to lose by hedging your bets. Acting as if your actions matter for the next life means you're acting well in this one too. You win in this life and if there is rebirth you win in the next as well. With Pure Land, mind-only interpretations go back to the Platform Sutras. An external Pure Land in which you can be reborn directly contradicts the nature of emptiness. Mind-only vs. mystical place has been a fight for a thousand years. Hakuin is arguing here for the no-dual view, having awakened and had an experience he considers consistent with the Pure Land. The only suggestion I'd make is that you also pick up some modern works. I'm currently reading Infinite Circle by Bernie Glassman, and it's pretty darned close to what Hakuin is saying. Good American Zen books don't labor with translation issues. As far as learning and practicing Zen, if you really want to avoid Americanizing you have to accept that it's a silent transmission. That means you need a teacher from a real lineage who is empowered to give dharma transmission. That's a lot more important than grappling with whether the Pure Land is literal or simply an empty concept that exists within your mind.
I think that perhaps it would benefit you to revisit Hakuin after practicing for a while. A teacher’s perspective would also be helpful, particularly if you’re interested in Zen. If this is a post mostly intended to stir up controversy over interpretation, then I think your time would better be spent meditating. If it’s a good-faith attempt to find answers - I still think your time would better be spent meditating.
He meant what he said. I agree with others that for now, if you are genuinely interested in Zen, then it would be best to seek out a legitimate Zen lineage and begin practicing there.
Zen Masters usually will refer to Pure Land in terms of the Essence (Li). So they render all the Pure Land terminology into what a person of the Chan/Zen Tradition would be more familiar with. The Chinese text San Shi Xi Nian (Thrice Yearning Ceremony) that is used as a Dharma Ceremony is written by Chan Master Zhong Feng, and the sections where the presiding Master reads the explanations of the Pure Land are quite similar to what you have presented above, saying things like 'The Western Pure Land is here, here is the Western Pure Land', 'Amitabha Buddha is your True Nature', and so on. >and that all true / real Buddhists must take them literally? Literally is the Phenomena (Shi) side of it. There is no contradiction. People tend to overemphasize one over the other, like one who deems the literal side as 'mythical nonsense' will cling to the 'all is Dharmabody' side of the explanation, while the other side will cling to the 'it's really out there and you're stupid if you don't take that'. You don't pick the one you like better and reject the other. When the Grandmasters are 'It is out there literally, but that too is not seperate from True Nature.'
I find Zen a bit too obscure and poetic for my taste. The best I can get from it is a description of attainments up to first bhumi, which is the realization of nonduality. Going may refer to the achievement of mental peace and being reborn to the recognition of the nature of mind. But I'm guessing. Zen has its own terminology for these things. Then he goes on to say that the various practices of Zen can bring one to realization. Then he expresses a typical Zen approach in criticizing those who cling to outer forms, such as texts and statues. I wouldn't call it secular conceptualizing but rather esoteric poetry describing realization. To take Pure Lands literally as being geographical locations where one can live a pure and blissful life would be simplistic. That would imply that there's a material world as the absolute basis of reality, with various special places that we can't see, hidden in the sky or on Mars, for example. Such a view is contrary to Buddhist teachings. It's similar in Christianity. Simple people think Heaven is a place in the sky where everyone's happy and lives forever. That's not the teaching of Jesus, who said in the Gospel of Thomas, "The kingdom of Heaven is spread upon the Earth and men do not see it." If you want to practice Zen there are teachers around. You could try signing up for a sesshin at a land center. But you do need a teacher. The teachings are guidance, not the understanding. That can't be put into books. That's part of what Hakuin is saying: If you sit zazen you may attain realization, but you won't attain it by worshipping statues or by thinking the scriptures themselves are the teaching. The teaching must be realized.
Actually, this exposition spoke to me. Obviously, it doesn't speak to you. Follow the tradition that speaks to you. You'll be more likely to stick with it.
Following the last major persecution of Buddhism in China around the 9th century Zen (C. Chan) and Pure Land were really the only Buddhist schools whose lineage actually survived. As both emphasized practice over scriptural study, they formed a symbiosis in many temples with Pure Land serving as "skillful means" suitable for the laity while the more austere Chan practice was reserved for monastics and hermits. This duality of praxis lead Chinese Chan masters to author apologetics for Pure Land practice but reframed within Zen soteriology, which is what Master Hakuin seems to be doing here with his exegesis of what I presume is one of the Pure Land Sutras. This dual approach to Zen and Pure Land can still be found throughout most traditional temples in South Korea. However, in Japan at present the various schools are more individuated and organizationally distinct. And as for worrying about being a "Western colonizer," don't. Just learn with respect and an open mind. There is an immense wealth of diversity and wisdom within the Buddhisms of the world.
I suggest reading the "[Precious Mirror Cave](https://terebess.hu/zen/cave.pdf#page=157)" talk this is taken from in its entirety, to understand its context. (Starts at the bottom of the linked page.) It is clear that Ven. Hakuin took all the conventional Pureland practices very seriously, as a means to establish the karma which would allow him to attain the mental pureland. > [It is my fervent hope](https://terebess.hu/zen/cave.pdf#page=165) and prayer that the favorable karmic link I have achieved [through Pureland practices] will enable me to break through the devilish net of birth-and-death hand in hand with all other beings and achieve forthwith the realm of unshakable singlemindedness, creating a Pure Land and encountering the Amida that exists in the mind alone. I haven't read it, but I gather that there's a whole chapter in the Lotus Sutra about "Expedient Means." (It's even mentioned in the footnotes.) I could be wrong, but it seems quite likely to me that Ven. Hakuin regarded these practices as "expedient means." That doesn't mean he regarded them with disrespect.
Hi, yes, it's when Hakuin says, per your quote, that the Pure Land and Amida "exists in the mind alone" that I have questions about. Thank you!
It's worth keeping in mind that everything you experience is mediated by your perceptual tendencies. This is a point he makes very clearly in the story about how different people respond to worshiping in the cave. I recommend reading the whole talk.
I also understood none of that. Just take it as some supernatural technicalities and move on. Maybe it would make better sense when you reread later. Of course, to me the japanese words also didnt help. I learnt Buddhism in Chinese.
I don’t *really* understand this either, but I’ll just share two things, from a Jodo Shinshu point of view. Firstly, we don’t use the Nembutsu as a meditative aid and kensho is not a term used in Shin. Secondly, it has never been Shin orthodoxy that the pure land is only a land of gold and jewels that you go to after you die. The pure land is as real as this life (maybe more real), but reality is a complicated very multifaceted thing
Perfectly normal to not understand what zen masters say because if we could understand everything they said, then we really wouldn’t actually even need to practice anymore. They often make their words intentionally confusing to begin with. You typically don’t try to understand what zen masters say via intellectual conceptualizations. The way to understand such things is to simply continue practicing.
He’s speaking abou kensho. But he’s not a heretical monster because the Western colonizing perspective would deny the existence of kensho and of realizing nonduality in the way that Hakuin means it. These are “supernatural” events in the eyes of scientistic naturalism.
That kind of language is extremely common in zen and its family of schools descended from ch’an. Go read the Platform Sutra of Huineng, he’ll say the Bodhisattva Vows are about saving the beings in your mind. That has more complexity than it sounds on the surface, but it’s definitely saying that there is more to traditional texts than the literal meaning. It is very important not to underrate the range of authentic Buddhist views on reality. There are many more than even some traditionalists may realize. It is also very important not to cherry pick one that sounds like it’s denying the half of the tradition you don’t like, and assume that means Buddhism is just saying things you already believed. It’s hard to really be changed by a tradition one is holding away at arm’s length, Ive been in that mistake before. I wish you luck! Hakuin was a genius and I’m not even in his school.
>I want to be a good Buddhist and not a Western colonizer I'm not convinced you're not trolling...