Siska, I'm sure some zen centers are a little different than others, but the in the main sangha I attended when I began my training there were two teachers, one head monk and several senior monks. They all acted as teachers or at least guides. Students did have a 1-to-1 student-teacher relationship with one of the teachers and their formal teaching was done in short interview sessions called dokusan. Otherwise you were left on your own or in the very capable hands of the the senior monks.
Although the teacher was always the 'head' of the sangha many of the monks eventually were given permission to teach themselves (inca) and then usually left the sangha to form their own. I think the student-teacher relationship was strongest and most emphasized in the beginning, but after some training, especially after realizing Buddha Nature (kensho/satori) the relationship softened somewhat and started to evolve into more of a peer-to-peer relationship. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], siska_cen@... wrote: > > Hi Bill, > > I supposed teacher-student relationship is something that is highly valued in > zen tradition. Lineage is maintained and there are initiation and stuffs. > When Teacher gives advice, these are taken with sort of authority. > > I'm not saying that in vipassana there is no teacher. My teacher has guided > me for years now, but he never positioned himself as a teacher, only someone > who has been where I was and am, along the 'path'. > > But then again, vipassana that I practice is not the same with mainstream > vipassana methods. With JK approach, it is rather radical. When saying one > should not take any teacher, I cannot imagine myself beginning the path > without one either. It's just at this point, I see teachers with 'plus and > minus'. This is, borrowing your words, vipassana I practice ;-) > > Having said that, I'm interested in working on a koan with a zen teacher and > see how the practice goes. I only need to find the teacher, but this is not a > simple task. > > Siska > -----Original Message----- > From: "Bill!" <BillSmart@...> > Sender: [email protected] > Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:26:57 > To: <[email protected]> > Reply-To: [email protected] > Subject: [Zen] Re: Mu - Graphically Illustrated... > > Siska, > > I didn't mean you HAVE to have a teacher to realize Buddha Nature. What I > meant was if you wanted to work on the koan Mu you should do that with a > teacher. > > I actually do recommend a teacher. I don't know how anyone could realize > Buddha Nature without one. I know it's certainly possible, but I think you > need a teacher if for nothing else to keep you from mistaking something else > for Buddha Nature. > > By the way your teacher doesn't serve an an authority on the Truth (Buddha > Nature). He/she serves as an example and a guide. YOU have to > discover/uncover Buddha Nature for yourself. Your teacher can not do that > for you. He/she can just help guide you there. > > It's like a swimming teacher can help you learn to swim, but cannot actually > swim for you. > > So if in Vipassana you don't have a teacher, how do you know what to do? > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], siska_cen@ wrote: > > > > Hi Bill, > > > > Yes, to some in vipassana tradition, mindfulness would go hand in hand with > > concentration, or focused mind, instead of clear mind. > > > > Even in clear mind, I'd say sometimes there is still this sense of I, > > separated from what is not I. But that's because I'm not 'there' yet. > > > > > If you're truly interested seek out a zen teacher and ask him/her. > > This is one of things in Zen that I've not been able to embrace. With > > J.Krishnamurti approach, JK is 'against' teacher role, a role which serves > > as our authority in practice, source of truth. Not that I don't need > > teacher or something like that and I believe people can always learn from > > other people all the time. It's just that in the tradition where I am right > > now, we don't take teacher as authoritative figure, which seems to be so in > > zen. > > > > > > Cheers, > > Sisks > > -----Original Message----- > > From: "Bill!" <BillSmart@> > > Sender: [email protected] > > Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:13:17 > > To: <[email protected]> > > Reply-To: [email protected] > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Mu - Graphically Illustrated... > > > > Siska, > > > > I would define 'mindfulness' as 'clear mind' the same as you did. I think > > some people though define it as more 'focused mind'. I think the only > > difference is in 'clear mind' there is no dualism, no sense of self. In > > 'focused mind' there still is dualism, subject/object and a sense of self. > > > > The koan Mu is no difference then all 'breakthrough' koans. A skilled > > teacher can use it to lead you to discover/uncover Buddha Nature. That's > > all I care to say about it here. If you're truly interested seek out a zen > > teacher and ask him/her. > > > > The questions I asked Edgar were all variations on one question: 'What > > role does intelligence have in experiencing Buddha Nature?'. > > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In [email protected], siska_cen@ wrote: > > > > > > Hi Bill, > > > > > > I had to google on the koan because I don't know what it says. If I got > > > the right koan, I don't get the connection to mindfulness. > > > > > > I agree with you that the picture can be described as clear mind, > > > reflects the real world around it. That is, mindfulness to me. > > > > > > Would you describe mindfulness differently? > > > > > > How does mu help to discover Buddha Nature? > > > > > > Sorry, I can't remember your questions to Edgar. I remember you asked > > > them so many times, but I just can't remember what it is exactly. Do you > > > mind repeating the question? > > > > > > Siska > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: "Bill!" <BillSmart@> > > > Sender: [email protected] > > > Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 11:55:16 > > > To: <[email protected]> > > > Reply-To: [email protected] > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Mu - Graphically Illustrated... > > > > > > Siska, > > > For some reason I wasn't able to REPLY to your post. I'm going to try > > > to reply from a NEW TOPIC post. You asked: > > > [Siska] Would you describe Mu as mindful? > > > I actually would not. I would however equate Buddha Nature with > > > 'mindfulness', at least in the way I understand that term. I don't > > > really like the term 'mindful' for just what is indicated in this > > > cartoon. It's not 'mind full' at all. I'd rather see that desribed as > > > 'empty mind' or 'clear mind'. It's like the difference between a movie > > > screen which is full of images that are projected on it and a mirror > > > which is essentially empty and only reflects the real world around it. > > > Mu is just a tool to help you to discover/uncover Buddha Nature - a kind > > > of trick really. Mu in and of itself has no meaning. > > > I thought using Mu in the title of this post was appropriate in this > > > case though because the cartoon used a dog as an example of > > > 'mindfulness' so it kind of relates to the koan about Joshu's Mu. > > > I didn't elaborate on it in my first post but this cartoon (which I've > > > copied again here below) is a good answer to my series of questions I > > > asked of Edgar (remember him?) about the relationship between > > > intelligence and Buddha Nature. > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > ------------------------------------ Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
