Doraku-An Zen-Dojo

Oh wonder!
How many goodly creatures are there here!
How beauteous mankind is! Oh brave new world,
That has such people in’t.’

William Shakespeare, The Tempest, Act 5, Scene 1

The naive Miranda I was, with a vague idea of Artificial Intelligence not much beyond Weizenbaum’s ELIZA, and a very basic understanding about Neuronal Networks, the other day started a conversation on the Heart Sutra with ChatGPT (1), that somehow was washed ashore my secluded island.

The outcome is a dialogue I want to share below, unedited, in full length. The conclusion is left up to the reader.

My Question

Nattier argues the Heart Sutra is actually of Chinese origin. what arguments do researchers bring up to prove her assumption wrong?

Answer ChatGPT

Some scholars have disputed Nattier’s claim that the Heart Sutra is of Chinese origin. Here are a few of the arguments they have made:

• The Heart Sutra is included in the Tibetan Buddhist canon, which suggests it was translated from Sanskrit into Tibetan rather than Chinese. The Sanskrit version of the sutra has also been found in the Dunhuang manuscripts, which supports the idea that it originated in India rather than China.
• The Heart Sutra is part of the larger Prajnaparamita (Perfection of Wisdom) literature, which is generally believed to have originated in India. While the Chinese did produce their own Perfection of Wisdom texts, these texts are different from the Indian versions and are not typically associated with the Heart Sutra.
• Nattier’s argument is based on a comparison of the Heart Sutra with the Chinese Diamond Sutra. While there are similarities between the two texts, there are also significant differences, which suggest that the Heart Sutra was not simply a Chinese adaptation of the Diamond Sutra.
• Other scholars have pointed out that the Heart Sutra was widely transmitted and studied in India before it was translated into Chinese. This suggests that the text was already well-known and valued in its original form, rather than being a new creation of Chinese Buddhism.

Overall, while Nattier’s argument is interesting and has prompted further research into the origins of the Heart Sutra, it remains a controversial hypothesis that is not widely accepted by the scholarly community.

My Question

Hakuins comment on the heart sutra might lead to the conclusion that Hakuin misunderstood some of its concepts. Can you comment on this assumption?

Answer ChatGPT

Hakuin Ekaku was a prominent Zen master in Japan who is known for his extensive commentary on the Heart Sutra. While Hakuin’s commentary is highly regarded in the Zen tradition, some scholars have questioned whether he fully understood some of the concepts in the sutra.

One of the main points of the Heart Sutra is the teaching of emptiness (shunyata), which is the idea that all phenomena are devoid of inherent existence. This teaching is often misunderstood to mean that everything is simply an illusion or a void, but in fact it is meant to point to the interconnected and interdependent nature of all things.

Some scholars have argued that Hakuin may have misunderstood this concept of emptiness, and that his interpretation of the Heart Sutra may have been influenced by his background in Confucianism and the Japanese cultural context in which he lived. For example, Hakuin is known to have emphasized the importance of moral cultivation and ethical behavior, which some argue is a departure from the more radical non-dualism of the Heart Sutra.

That being said, it’s worth noting that interpretations of the Heart Sutra have varied widely over time and across different Buddhist traditions. While some scholars may take issue with Hakuin’s interpretation of the sutra, his commentary has been highly influential in the Zen tradition and has inspired many practitioners to deepen their understanding of emptiness and non-dualism.

Ultimately, the Heart Sutra is a complex and multi-layered text that can be understood in many different ways, and it’s up to each individual reader to engage with the text and draw their own conclusions.

My Question

It is usually assumed that in the heart sutra Kanjisai Bosatsu is lecturing about emptiness. Could it be a misunderstanding, and Kanjisai Bosatsu just appears there as an example for a bodhisattva?

Answer ChatGPT

The Heart Sutra is a complex text with many layers of meaning, and the identity of the speaker in the sutra is a subject of debate among scholars and practitioners. The speaker is traditionally identified as Avalokiteshvara, or Kanzeon in Japanese, who is an important bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism. However, some scholars have questioned whether the speaker is actually meant to be taken as a literal figure or if they are a literary device used to convey the teachings of the sutra.

One interpretation of the speaker in the Heart Sutra is that they are a personification of the wisdom of emptiness, rather than a specific individual. In this view, the speaker is not meant to be taken as a literal figure, but rather as a way of expressing the teachings of the sutra in a vivid and engaging way.

Another possibility is that the speaker is a fictional character created by the author of the sutra to convey its teachings. This would not necessarily mean that the teachings of the sutra are any less valid or important, but it would suggest that the speaker is not a historical or literal figure.

Ultimately, the identity of the speaker in the Heart Sutra is a matter of interpretation and is open to debate. While traditional interpretations identify the speaker as Avalokiteshvara, it is also possible to see the speaker as a literary device or a personification of the teachings of the sutra.

My Question

In the book “The Ego Tunnel” Thomas Menzinger presents a concept of mind in terms of modern science. Yet the conclusions seems very well in accordance with the concept of mind presented in the Heart Sutra. Please comment on this.

Answer ChatGPT

Thomas Metzinger’s book “The Ego Tunnel” presents a modern scientific understanding of the nature of the mind and consciousness, based on research in neuroscience and cognitive psychology. While the Heart Sutra is a Buddhist text that dates back many centuries, there are certainly similarities between the two in their description of the nature of the mind.

One of the key themes of the Heart Sutra is the concept of emptiness, which refers to the idea that all phenomena, including the mind, are devoid of inherent existence. This can be understood as a rejection of the idea of a permanent, fixed, or independent self or ego, which is also a central theme of Metzinger’s work.

Metzinger argues that the self is not a fixed or immutable entity, but rather a process that arises out of the dynamic interactions between various neural and cognitive processes. He refers to this as the “self-model theory of subjectivity”, which is based on the idea that the self is a virtual construct or “ego tunnel” that is generated by the brain.

This is similar to the concept of emptiness in the Heart Sutra, which suggests that the mind, and the self or ego that we perceive, are not fixed or permanent entities, but rather dependently arisen phenomena that are constantly changing and evolving.

While the Heart Sutra and Metzinger’s work may approach the concept of the mind and the self from different angles, they share a common perspective that the mind is not a fixed or permanent entity, but rather a constantly evolving process that arises out of various causes and conditions.

Ultimately, the concept of emptiness in the Heart Sutra and the self-model theory of subjectivity in “The Ego Tunnel” can both be seen as attempts to demystify the nature of the mind and to provide a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of the self and consciousness.

My Question

Is it a correct assumption that the term “MU” (Emptiness) in the Heart Sutra is used synonymously to “YUME” (dream) in elder texts within the Prajnaparamita litereature from which the Heart Sutra was derived.

Answer ChatGPT

The term “mu” (空), which is commonly translated as “emptiness” or “voidness,” is a central concept in Mahayana Buddhism and is particularly important in the Prajnaparamita literature, which includes the Heart Sutra. While the term “mu” is not directly synonymous with the term “yume” (夢), which means “dream,” there are some similarities between the two concepts that can be seen as pointing to the same ultimate truth.

In the Prajnaparamita literature, the concept of emptiness refers to the idea that all phenomena, including the self, are empty of inherent or independent existence. This is similar to the idea of a dream in that a dream is a type of experience that is dependent on various causes and conditions, such as our previous experiences, memories, and the state of our brain and body. In this sense, a dream is “empty” in that it lacks a fixed or independent existence.

While the terms “mu” and “yume” are not identical, they both point to the same underlying truth of the emptiness of all phenomena. This is why the Heart Sutra and other Prajnaparamita texts use a variety of different metaphors and images to convey the concept of emptiness, including the image of a dream or a mirage.

It’s worth noting, however, that the concept of emptiness in the Heart Sutra and other Prajnaparamita texts is not meant to suggest that the world or the self is illusory or nonexistent, but rather that our conventional way of perceiving and understanding the world is limited and incomplete. The concept of emptiness is meant to lead to a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of reality that transcends our conventional, dualistic ways of thinking.

My Question

In the Heart Sutra the term “Prajna Paramita” is often translated as “Perfection of Wisdom”. Could it be a mistranslation, and the correct reading would be “param-ita”, translating as “reached the other shore”. In this reading, Hannya Haramita (prajna param-ita) could be translated as “reached the other shore of wisdom”, or “transcended wisdom”. Please comment.

Answer ChatGPT

The term “Prajna Paramita” (般若波羅蜜) is a central concept in Mahayana Buddhism and is commonly translated as “Perfection of Wisdom” or “Transcendent Wisdom.” While the term “paramita” (波羅蜜) does mean “perfection,” it can also be translated as “reached the other shore,” as you noted.

In this sense, “Prajna Paramita” can be understood as referring to the wisdom that has reached the other shore, or the wisdom that transcends our conventional, dualistic ways of thinking. This is the type of wisdom that is needed to fully understand and appreciate the concept of emptiness, which is central to the Heart Sutra.

The idea that “Prajna Paramita” can be translated as “transcendent wisdom” is not a new one, and some scholars and practitioners do prefer this translation over “Perfection of Wisdom.” However, both translations are widely used and accepted within the Buddhist tradition, and the choice of translation often depends on the context and the specific interpretation of the text.

In the context of the Heart Sutra, the term “Prajna Paramita” is typically understood as referring to the highest form of wisdom, which is the wisdom that understands the true nature of reality and is able to see through the illusory nature of our conventional experience. This type of wisdom is considered essential for achieving enlightenment, and the Heart Sutra is seen as a powerful tool for cultivating and developing this wisdom.

My Question

Said said, parami-ta and param-ita do have a different meaning, don’t you agree?

Answer ChatGPT

Yes, you are correct that the words “paramita” and “param-ita” have different meanings. “Paramita” (波羅蜜) means “perfection” or “completeness,” while “param-ita” (波羅蜜多) means “arrived at the other shore” or “crossed over.” These are distinct terms with different meanings in the original Sanskrit language.

The term “Prajna Paramita” (般若波羅蜜) in the Heart Sutra uses the word “paramita” (波羅蜜) to refer to the “perfection” or “completeness” of wisdom. This is a widely accepted translation that has been used for centuries in the Buddhist tradition. However, as I mentioned in my previous response, some scholars and practitioners do prefer to translate “Prajna Paramita” as “Transcendent Wisdom,” which would suggest a different meaning for the term “paramita” than the more traditional translation of “perfection.”

In summary, while “paramita” and “param-ita” are distinct terms with different meanings in the original language, the use of “paramita” in the term “Prajna Paramita” in the Heart Sutra is widely understood and accepted as referring to the “perfection” or “completeness” of wisdom.

My Question

The closing mantra of the Heart Sutra “gate gate param gate …” can be translated as “arrive arrived at the other shore …”. Does this not strongly speak for the reading “param-ita” with the translation of “reaching the other shore” as well?

Answer ChatGPT

Yes, you are correct that the closing mantra of the Heart Sutra, “gate gate paragate parasamgate bodhi svaha,” can be translated as “gone, gone, gone beyond, gone altogether beyond, O what an awakening, all hail!” Another possible translation of the mantra is “gone, gone, gone to the other shore, attained the other shore having never left, all hail!”

The phrase “paragate” (पारगते) in the mantra can be understood as meaning “gone to the other shore,” and it is often interpreted in the context of the Heart Sutra as referring to the attainment of enlightenment, or the crossing over to the other shore of suffering and delusion.

Given the use of the term “paragate” in the closing mantra, it is possible to interpret “Prajna Paramita” as “reached the other shore of wisdom” or “transcended wisdom,” as you suggested in your earlier question. However, it is important to note that the traditional interpretation of “Prajna Paramita” as “Perfection of Wisdom” is also widely accepted and has been used for centuries in the Buddhist tradition.

Ultimately, the meaning of the Heart Sutra and its key terms, including “Prajna Paramita,” is open to interpretation and may depend on the specific context and perspective of the interpreter.

My Question

Before you said “The term “mu” (空), which is commonly translated as “emptiness” or “voidness,” “. The Chinese character “空” you quoted is not, as you said, “mu”. It is pronounced “ku”. The character “mu” is written 無.

Answer ChatGPT

I apologize for my mistake. You are correct that the Chinese character I previously referred to as “mu” is actually pronounced “ku” and written as “空” in Chinese. The character “mu” is written as “無” in Chinese and is commonly translated as “not,” “nothingness,” or “emptiness” in the context of the Heart Sutra and other Buddhist texts.

Thank you for bringing this to my attention, and I apologize for any confusion my error may have caused.

My Question

In the Heart Sutra both characters “mu” (無) and “ku” (空) are frequently used. They seem to appear like synonymous in that context standing for “not,” “nothingness,” or “emptiness”. Yet there may be a slight yet distinctive difference between both which must not be neglected. Can you comment?

Answer ChatGPT

Yes, you are correct that both the characters “mu” (無) and “ku” (空) are used frequently in the Heart Sutra and are often translated as “not,” “nothingness,” or “emptiness.” While they can be used synonymously in certain contexts, there is also a subtle difference in their meanings that is important to consider.

In general, “mu” (無) is often translated as “nothingness” or “not having” and is associated with the concept of negation or absence. In contrast, “ku” (空) is often translated as “emptiness” and is associated with the idea of openness or spaciousness.

Within the context of the Heart Sutra, “mu” (無) is often used to negate concepts such as form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness, suggesting that they are empty of inherent or independent existence. “Ku” (空), on the other hand, is used to describe the nature of emptiness itself, which is said to be empty of intrinsic nature or essence.

In other words, “mu” (無) is used to negate or deny the inherent existence of phenomena, while “ku” (空) is used to describe the non-inherent nature of emptiness itself.

While the distinction between “mu” (無) and “ku” (空) may seem subtle, it is an important one to consider when interpreting the Heart Sutra and its use of these terms.

My Question

Above you said “Nattier’s argument is based on a comparison of the Heart Sutra with the Chinese Diamond Sutra.” I guess this is wrong. Nattier’s argument is actually based on a comparison of the Heart Sutra with the Pancavimsatisahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra. The core part of the Heart Sutra is almost identical with the Pancavimsatisahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra. Please comment on this.

Answer ChatGPT

Thank you for the correction. You are correct that Nattier’s argument is based on a comparison of the Heart Sutra with the Pancavimsatisahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra, also known as the Perfection of Wisdom in 25,000 lines. This is one of the longer versions of the Prajnaparamita Sutras, which are a group of Mahayana Buddhist texts that explore the concept of “perfection of wisdom” and the nature of emptiness.

Nattier’s research found that the core of the Heart Sutra is very similar to the corresponding section in the Perfection of Wisdom in 25,000 lines, which suggests that the Heart Sutra may have been derived from this longer sutra. The Heart Sutra is much shorter and more concise than the Perfection of Wisdom in 25,000 lines, and it presents the same concepts in a more condensed form. Nattier argues that this condensation was done deliberately in order to create a more accessible text for laypeople and to emphasize the essential teachings of the Perfection of Wisdom sutras.

It’s worth noting that the Diamond Sutra, another important Mahayana Buddhist text, is also related to the Prajnaparamita Sutras and explores many of the same concepts as the Heart Sutra. While the Diamond Sutra is not the primary focus of Nattier’s argument, it is still an important text to consider when studying the development of Mahayana Buddhism and the concept of emptiness.

–

(1) Chat GPT Feb 13 Version, https://chat.openai.com/ acessed on Feb 18th, 2023 .

So much talk about “transmission”, and often it refers to some certificate, some kind of ceremony maybe. At night by candlelight, in privacy with your master. In daytime with hundreds of eminent participants. By un-witnessed last words on the master’s death-bed or posthumously disclosed private notes. By somebody who never was your teacher or by someone who appeared in your dreams. Why not, it is not a driving license, not a medical doctor’s certificate. Call it what you want, who cares?

The strength of a rope is determined by the length its individual threads do overlap. The longer the overlap, the stronger the rope. Learning takes time, ten to fifteen years at least, no matter which art you study. If the individual threads don’t overlap for a sufficient length, the rope will rupture.

I firmly believe “transmission” is an ongoing process, not a one time event, nothing to “have”. It is lasting over years and decades and possibly never ending during one’s lifetime. The question to ask is not “do you have transmission?”, but “are you in a process of receiving/passing on transmission?”

For generations we contribute in braiding our rope by turning our lifelong work into one overlapping thread. The rope began long before us, and if we work on transmission with determination, hopefully it will continue long after we are gone.

“Ridiculous!”, you might say, “you cannot simply deny a tradition of transmission going back to the Buddha himself !”. Well, have you been there? Did you meet anyone who was? Something happened back then, over 2500 years ago. Something still continues.

Have a look at Hakuin Ekaku (白隠 慧鶴, 1686–1769), who during his lifetime inherited nothing more than the low rank of Daiichi-Za, yet becoming “one of the most influential figures in Japanese Zen Buddhism (…) regarded as the reviver of the Rinzai school.” (1)

If your goal in life is collecting papers and titles, go for it. Who cares? It is your life. If you wonder “What is The Way, how to receive and pass on transmission?”, find a good teacher, watch closely, then do!

–

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hakuin_Ekaku

My former Zen- and Calligraphy teacher often used to complain about the fact that Japanese musicians define world class in Western music, while we can’t even name three Japanese composers. Well, I could. Nevertheless, he had a valid point: the transmission of Western art, technology and culture to Japan has long been completed, while the typical Westerner knows little more than a superficial cliché about Japanese culture and arts.

I remember a particular trip on a local train from Fukushima to Aizu-Wakamatsu, when an elderly Japanese man approached me. After finding out I come from Germany, he very excitedly embarked on discussing the differences in the interpretation of a certain Beethoven concerto by various German conductors. He owned all the related records he said, and needless to say he knew much better about that subject than me (being just an amateur musician). Probably he missed his station, but I learned a lot about my countries classical music and contemporary ways of performing it. And I felt slightly embarrassed.

When I see Japanese style art made by Westerners on-line, it is usually either just a digitally modified copy&paste from some original artwork, or amateurish display on the very lowest level. My former teacher’s Enzo (Zen Circle) for example had been copied and photoshopped hundreds of times (see here and here).

Would you buy yourself a violin, take a few lessons and then try to sell your recordings on spotify? As “Authentic German Classical Music”? Probably not.

Yet there are people out there who buy themselves brush and ink, take a few lessons (or not) and copy along Japanese or Chinese characters they can hardly read or write. No problem so far, before I met my teacher I did the same. And then they go ahead and post it on-line, with a price tag attached to it.

Probably a perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger effect, such action reveals a significant lack in understanding even the basics of a foreign culture they plan to make money with.

Before I sold my first piece of calligraphy, I had more than 20 years of practice (13 with my former teacher), a sheet of paper written by him endorsing me to teach what I had learned from him, and a name he kindly passed me down (道楽庵, Doraku-An). Yet still, I felt embarrassed offering my work for money.

There is a certain standard with each established art, and nowadays it is easy even for the beginner to figure out what a masterpiece could be, and what a minimum acceptable public performance would look or sound like.

Learning a traditional Japanese or Chinese art requires decades of dedicated practice and investment of a good deal of ones’ life-time (and financial resources). In case of doubt, please read Passagère du silence by Fabienne Verdier about the ten harsh years she spent in post culture revolution China studying traditional Chinese Calligraphy. By no means this is done with just a few years of training to acquire certain technical skills.

How can we Westerners become more familiar with Japanese art? Is there a chance to plant the seeds for a deeper and wider understanding? Or will we, generation after generation, just scratch the surface of being fascinated by what we experience as this strange culture? What progress can we observe so far during the past 150 years, after the first wave of Japonisme hit Europe? It is a shame!

Recently the Bavarian multi-artist Herbert Achternbusch passed away at age 83. With his eccentric films and his books he was the emotional polar star of my chaotic late teenage years. He shaped and sharpened my mixed emotions towards our both “homeland” Bavaria. And probably he was the first one introducing me to a Zen way of approaching life, with his famous Koan “You have no chance, but make use of it! (Du hast keine Chance, aber nutze sie!)”.

So many of my adolescent and young adult period heroes and teachers have already passed away. Getting elder, far beyond half-time of life, I find myself more and more in conversation with the friends and teachers who are no more, learning from the dead. Practising Shakuhachi I sometimes listen to old tape recordings of the lessons I took with my late teacher. I hear him playing his flute, listen to his breath. I hear his voice when giving some of the rare and short explanations. I imagine my understanding of what my late teachers wanted to share with me slowly grows over the years, and I feel guilty for my ignorance at younger age.

Besides my very straightforward approach successfully completing school and studying Physics, Philosophy and Computer Science, I always felt strong inclination towards the arts and artists. Towards those who do not fit in, who do not subscribe to the generally accepted explanations and solutions. Those who made up their own minds and went their own ways, no matter what. Hanging around with eccentric folks, yet leaving the party before dawn because I had to be fit for Math and Physics lectures describes my life style during my student years.

I remember night long discussions at the kitchen table of our shared flat, talking through all that is in life and death and beyond. My point of view, heavily biased by an increasing understanding of science, was seldom appreciated. We all wished to have water with a memory, stones with healing spirits, talking trees and magic realities beyond this one of the notoriously untidy kitchen in front of our eyes. Just I could not believe it, because I knew better. Still, I loved and envied my friends, who obviously could believe …

Now, half a life later, I see those once magic people again. The same minds untouched by reasoning and science, but with a firm believe that reality concerning Covid-19 is whatever their intuition tells them. The same patterns of argumentation, a similar energy in fighting for their own reality of whatever life is. These days I do not envy them any longer. I feel terribly sad that what was once making my life rich and colourful, had become a danse macabre, a display of sheer ignorance in the face of a very real and very much superable pandemic. They dance and sing and shout shoulder on shoulder with those fascists, who abuse the current situation and the naivety of ageing paradise birds for their very own agenda.

Mourning those who passed away and mourning those who turned away is characterising those difficult days. When in the end, you realise your friends and teachers who gave you so much are either dead or behaving stupid: you have no chance, but make use of it.

I didn’t have much motivation to write, but mostly I have been too busy this pandemic year. Always within the framework of ever changing safety regulations, our work at the Dojo was as intense as never before the past 18 months. While almost all the members quit, one after another, I slowly realised that the quality of Zen practice does not depend on the number of students, but on their dedication.

Had I had the intention to present Zen to everyone who happened to find the way through our Dojo door, this recent experience made me change my mind. It is a waste of time to work with people who do not really throw themselves into Zen practice, who see the time we share at the Dojo as an optional pastime besides other entertainment.

We copied the brushwork of my former teacher’s late teacher Omori Sogen Roshi three times a week. We worked our way through the Heart Sutra round after round, translating it character by character, and we read new and ancient commentaries as well as numerous research papers to achieve a certain level of understanding, or at least, a higher level of being puzzled. We deciphered, admired and discussed calligraphy works by old masters arriving at our Dojo from Japan week after week. And we sat many hours on our cushions, in complete silence. It was good.

During last week’s Sesshin at Benediktushof Holzkirchen in Bavaria I talked (again) about the Ox Herding Pictures (十牛図). While speaking, I realised once more that all the struggles the young shepherd experienced while searching and taming the Ox were indeed mandatory for his later awakening. If somebody brought him the ox on a cord, nicely tamed and maybe with a comfortable saddle to ride home, there would never be any awakening.

My teaching for far too long was driven by the effort to present a tame ox, by helping my students up and by taking care they have a most comfortable ride. By this, I took them all chance to experience hardship, to learn by themselves. Studying Zen means to overcome obstacles. A teacher’s job is not to help and carry his student across hindrances, but to place obstacles in their way to make them grow by themselves. How could I not have understood this, for so many years?