Talk:Zazen

Untitled
Well, that's not how it's always done...


 * Could you perhaps expand on that extremely terse comment? *8)


 * I think what he means is that the article on Zazen does not describe every variation of the practice. I noticed the same thing.  Every sangha does some things differently, but I feel the article gives a 'good enough' '35,000 feet' view of the practice. Marteau 21:38, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I made some updates
First, thanks to the original author of this article. With respect, I have added a section on the various ways zazen is taught, and a section which compares it to some of the other forms of meditation in Buddhism. This is my first Wikipedia entry, please let me know if there is anything I can do to make it better.

-DaveK

Sudden vs. Gradual
I would be surprised to learn that experienced Soto practitioners would refer to their technique as "gradual". It sounds like a misunderstanding to me. Looked at in another way, the immediate practice of shikantaza is more "sudden" than the formal contemplation of koans used as a tool in Rinzai. In my understanding, Soto Zen is no less a "sudden" school, as described in the Platform Sutra, than Rinzai: the "gradual" school which the Sixth Patriarch condemned was something else entirely. I suspect that, being a practice reviled by Zen's Sixth Patriarch, referring to any form of Zen as "gradual" could be considered by some to be an insult.Beginnermind 17:27, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Since it's been a few days, I'll just remove the sudden/gradual references from the article. Here's a quote from an online source, who knows their stuff better than me:

http://www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/HistoricalZen/Sudden_vs_Gradual_Ray.html

Of interest is the information presented which cites sources footnoted 18 and 19, comparing calling the "northern" school the "northern" school was an attempt to discredit it as being gradual, and that modern Zen practice looks on sudden enlightenment as superior, and calling any school of Zen "gradual" is akin to calling Theravada "Hinayana". I'd put a small quote in here from there, but apparently wikipedia is paranoid about quotation and fair use, so you'll have to look for yourself. The footnote 18 in there is listed as sourced from Yampolsky's translation of the Tun-Huang manuscript version of the Platform sutra and from Heinrich Dumoulin, Zen Buddhism: A History Vol 1., while the other footnoted quote 19 is listed from Dumoulin op cit. I hope that's enough of a citation for a discussion on removing terminology.

In short, though, the issue of "sudden" and "gradual" enlightenment is probably best left in an historical context. The so called "northern school", according to that article, lost influence in China because it was seen as "gradual", while it lost influence in Tibet because it was seen as "sudden". Politics.:) 199.247.235.10 23:16, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Hand of thought
What does opening the hand of thought mean?--Filll 20:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it is likely that it comes from the title of this novel While I have not read this novel itself and there are probably other interpretations, based upon what I was taught, "opening the hand of thought" is a poetic way of illustrating the idea behind any one of a number of similar phrases that you often hear when learning Zazen&mdash; phrases like "Try not to latch on to your thoughts." and "Take note of your thoughts, but do not grab on to them or try and push them away." What we need to consider in thinking about how these sorts of phrases relate to the metaphore is to wonder what a "closed hand of thought" might be.  I submit that a closed hand of thought would be one that is in the act gripping onto and/or unwilling to let go of these thoughts as they pass by. Even in trying not to grip, we do this.  In Zazen we are tought that attempting to push these thoughts away is itself a sort of wanting and attempt at controlling; you're simply gripping at another thought: the thought of yourself not being bothered by your thoughts.

&#x2234; Wa lk er aj 18:42, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * "Opening the hand of thought" would then refer to the act of releasing the grip on all of these thoughts. The "not pushing them away" aspect sounds paradoxical when considered as a practice, especially because we often want to see a striving or goal towards "improvement" within things that we term "practice" ("If there is nothing to practice, what am I getting better at?"), but this is a mistaken notion in the context of Zazen.  You are not sitting to try and get better at not-latching-onto-thoughts.  This will take care of itself as you continue to do the practice, and indeed many teachers will tell you that this is so.--

Links
I don't understand why there is an external link: "The Awakened Heart Project for Jewish Meditation and Contemplative Judaism" with this article? Should this be here?

First paragraph
I've read the first paragraph, and there are a few things I don't fully understand. Perhaps it could be rephrased?

"...is at the heart of Zen Buddhist practice"; what does it mean to be at the heart of something?

"...opening the hand of thought."; what does that mean?

--HelgeStenstrom (talk) 17:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I've fixed the first sentence adding clarification, and removing the "at the heart of" comment.
 * JasonAdama (talk) 07:39, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

horrible. sitting?
This article need a re emphasis on what is the goal and importance of Zazen.. Zen meditation if not about the "sitting" techniques, nor is it about it's social relevancies and history. There is nothing in this article about the true meaning or aim of Zen meditation AT ALL. -- Procrastinating@ talk2me 12:29, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * In Zen we are taught that attempts to ascribe some kind of aim to zazen are misled. If you go to sit zazen thinking about how you are going to use it to get to Enlightenment, you are not sitting zazen properly.  In Zen Mind Beginner's Mind, Suzuki Roshi says that "Enlightenment is not some good feeling or some particular state of mind.  The state of mind that exists when you sit in the right posture is, itself, enlightenment."  What this means is that the practice of zazen isn't a meditation with a focus on something or attaining something, but rather a deliberate expression of our own buddha-nature.  Zen is a belief system deeply rooted in practice and rebukes attempts to differentiate the belief system from its practice.  In other words, to be a Zen Buddhist is to sit zazen and vice versa.  Therefore, there is a practice (and a series of ways to SIT zazen), but there is no aim or goal like you seek. Walkeraj (talk)

Harvey
Peter Harvey's Introduction to Buddhism has an excellent introduction to Zen meditation starting on page 270. Mitsube (talk) 06:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

This needs work
I'm going to start with reorganizing the current content in the first section to remove or tone down the commentary and get to a more encyclopedic format. Chris vLS (talk) 19:45, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, I think that's better -- and a to do list
I think it reads more fluidly, and more like an encyclopedia article now. Here are next things to do:
 * References!!!
 * More on the significance section
 * Need to grapple with the fact that many practioners would say that zazen is not done to "gain" anything, especially not enlightenment . . . this contradicts the lead paragraph
 * The stages of zazen is not universally held or practiced. Some Soto schools (and Dogen) focus solely on shinkintaza, the article currently sounds like the stages approach is universal

That's all for now. Thoughts? Chris vLS (talk) 20:29, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The recent edits have been major improvements. The biggest issue that I have had with the article is that it has relied so heavily on an extremely narrow view of the subject. That is, Zen sitting meditation as practiced in Japanese Zen Buddhism, and interpreted by western culture. A good first step would be to remove the Japanese terms, or to move them into their own section. If the material is to be in a general section of the article, i.e. representative of the broader Zen tradition, then it should be applicable to Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese Zen as well. Since these three traditions have much in common, some good sources to cross-reference would be those of Hsuan Hua, Nan Huai-Chin, Shengyen, etc. At least by comparing Japanese and Chinese sources, the intersection of Japanese and Chinese sources would give a fairly good view of what is generally applicable. If it will be difficult to find such general material, then it may be useful to split up the page with a general introduction, and sections for each of the traditions. This is just my own view on the subject, of course. Tengu800 23:08, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Glad you thought they were improvements! Have to laugh about your suggestion, since all of my knowledge of zazen actually comes from Western interpretations of Japanese Zen Buddhism practice, so I might not be the best to add other perspectives! Most of what I did was simply editing for article style.  I was surprised to find that I couldn't find much in terms of online sources. Also, I'm really not sure how to reconcile basic straightforward writing with the less straightforward teachings.  Many practioners would disagree with the lead sentence that zazen is done to achieve enlightenment . . . and they would add that if you want to be liberated you should sit zazen . . . Cheers -- thanks for the feedback -- Chris vLS (talk)  00:11, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 11:14, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:54, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Các thiền sinh Tông Tào Động tại Nhật Bản đang thực hành Thiền Mặc Chiếu.jpg