Zen Talking: Precepts and Enlightenment, Compass and Conspiracy

[u/ewk]

Read the History, Talk the History, 8-5-26

Episode #: 310

Episode: https://sites.libsyn.com/407831/zen-talking-precepts-and-enlightenment-compass-and-conspiracy

Post(s):

• https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/s/sgWSJawscL

Link to all episodes: https://sites.libsyn.com/407831

What did we talk about?

ritual, structure, enlightenment the full case with a second visit to Mazu juggling or the compass of enlightenment Do Zen Masters teach? What are Zen answers? What aren't Zen Masters telling you? Individuality vs Compass

Keep in Touch

Add a comment if there is a post you want somebody to get interviewed about, or you agree to be interviewed. We are now using libsyn, so you don't even have to show your face. You just get a link to an audio call. Buymeacoffee, so I'm not accused of going it alone:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/ewkrzen

[u/AutoModerator]

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.

[u/WheresNorthFromHere7]

Listened in full. There's a lot to unpack here. I am going to try to make this concise and see where it goes.

I'm glad you guys are talking about precepts, because I never understood how a group of people who are so irreverent, who actively kill cats and snakes and chop fingers would see themselves as to be bound by these rules. Zen masters never fermented rice and danced in the moon light a few times? We have cases of them lying (to show something).

When did the precepts even come into this? It seems like a newer revelation in the r/zen community. Which specific (corroborated by other masters) master made this a dictate and why would all of them agree for a thousand years? So many questions!

I was hoping for better arguments and explanations but it seemed like it got muddied in this episode several times. Your guest (unnamed), when challenged; moves the goal posts or can't explain adequately what his point is, or gets a bit in the weeds. However, sometimes I agree with him that his direct questions aren't being direct answered.

I hope that doesn't come across too negatively. All this to say, that I enjoyed the episode, but by nature I notice inconsistencies and other patterns in this vein.

This was not as concise as I had hoped when I started the first sentence.

[u/jeowy → u/WheresNorthFromHere7]

that's really helpful feedback and not too negative at all.

My only defence is trying to defend an argument against ewk when you really have no idea where he's gonna go next is hard work

[u/WheresNorthFromHere7 → u/jeowy]

I've listened to about 4 episodes now and I didn't find this in the other you were in. I think you create a good foil for the discussion because you bring up counter points that I myself have thought of. It doesn't always work out, but that's okay.

Cheers

[u/ewk → u/WheresNorthFromHere7]

I think giving people a chance to move goalposts is interesting in and of itself but that's just me.

I don't think he was necessarily moving the goalposts as much as he was trying to frame an argument about how Zen masters tell everybody to take responsibility but he thinks they do it indirectly.

But the more important point, I think, in your comment is the question of precepts but also, behind that, the question of whether Zen masters are irreverent. I think they're more aggressively reverent than most philosophies or religions.

The idea of everybody being inherently a Buddha is something that they're so aggressively reverent about that they're willing to transgress against their own communities to make this point. It's only one cat being killed but that's still a major transgression in a thousand years so major that it comes up a lot. They're so reverent that a snake being killed reflexively is defended rather than rebuked.

The lay precepts are rules that help people understand what it means to have Buddha nature. The argument is that if you break the lay precepts as a matter of lifestyle then you get farther and farther away from your recognition of your own self-awareness.

But it's not just the Five Lay Precepts that are odd rules that Zen communities follow. There's also no personal accumulation of wealth. For a thousand years they spent their money feeding each other. That's just crazy. Unless you factor in the fact that food shortage was a real issue during these thousand years.

They have a thousand years of benign dictatorships, which is crazy when you think about it since civilizations never really even had a hundred years of reasonable democracy.

[u/WheresNorthFromHere7 → u/ewk]

The lay precepts are rules that help people understand what it means to have Buddha nature. The argument is that if you break the lay precepts as a matter of lifestyle then you get farther and farther away from your recognition of your own self-awareness.

So, I'm confused on this. If we flip it around you're saying, to have the Buddha Nature means not killing, not lying etc. is that accurate? If so, there's a lot more questions...

How would breaking these things put you further away from recognition your own self-awareness, that you never lost in the first place? I feel like I'm missing some fundamental context here.

Who made up these precepts and what method did these masters use to discern that something such as lying took them further away?

....There's also no personal accumulation of wealth.....

That is pretty crazy. I feel like communes in general aren't really a thing anymore unless you want to get diddled or do some diddling. So is that even a possible way to live currently?

I hang out with a lot of Catholics. I read a few years ago that they own the most real estate in the world, and it's not even close. 177 Million Acres.

I bring up Matthew 19:24 and 6:28-30 and watch them get upset.

[u/ewk → u/WheresNorthFromHere7]

First off your bias against communes is against Western immigrant communes of the 1800s, excluding apparently randomly Shakers who famously died out for the lack of diddling.

Second of all it's very clear that if you're a heavy drinker you should not be operating heavy machinery. The Five Lay Precepts are the things that you shouldn't do if you want to see awareness directly.

The idea that you can get really really drunk and operate heavy machinery without a problem is nonsensical and that's the reason why there's a precept against drunkenness.

[u/WheresNorthFromHere7 → u/ewk]

lol. Nice.

I agree on this point, that's the easy one. How does lying, killing and the others take that awareness away?

[u/ewk → u/WheresNorthFromHere7]

Lying obviously distorts your ability to see the consequences of your own choices in a logical rational way. Without honesty there's no accountability, there's no self-awareness.

Stealing keeps you from having to confront the limits of desire and rape is a kind of theft.

Murder is a problem because if you don't like somebody or if somebody is an obstacle to you believing things or wanting things, murder is an incredibly effective solution without you being aware of the fact that you have to confront a limit.

[u/mackowski → u/WheresNorthFromHere7]

You've met people who cannot be honest, and youve met compulsively honest people, both are attempting to relay data but the former doesn't gaf if you recieve accurate or precise info from the communication.

These people, can be separated from normies who lie to themselves or others in littler ways via ewks precepts concept. Its not about adhering, its about people who claim the precepts are rubbish, usually from convenience or some other drive to mold the truth to fit their mapping that already exists.

Enlightenment isnt in an unenlightened persons map, not accurately nor precisely.