Scratching an itch

[will]

Re: Scratching an itch

Jundo
It is interesting to compare the two. As you can see, there is no mention here particularly of "upright posture", and instead there is something much more encompassing and subtle. I think.

Yes. I see that.

The bold emphasis in the last paragraph is mine. I think he sums things up very nicely there.

Yep. Very nice.

G,W

[Shui_Di]

Re: Scratching an itch

Well, thanks Jundo.....

But, I have some questions....

Now, we can see a lot of translation of the Shobogenzo. Which one is the correct translation?

You know, although the meaning is the same, but there are a lot of differences translation for example between Shasta abbey and Aitken Roshi's translation.

I just feel that they translate it with their own interpretation and understanding , so that we can't get the original version of Shobogenzo in English. And I'm afraid that it can make misunderstanding to the Shobogenzo.

is it so difficult to translate from Japanese to English?

or may be if I want to get the original one, I should learn the Japanese language :P

Gassho, Shui Di

[Ryumon]

Re: Scratching an itch

is it so difficult to translate from Japanese to English?

or may be if I want to get the original one, I should learn the Japanese language :P

It's not so much that it's difficult to translate from Japanese, but that Dogen's writings are in an archaic style of Japanese that are very, very far from the current language.

Kirk

[will]

Re: Scratching an itch

I think different translations have their merit. I'm digging the Shasta Abbey's rich interpretation at the moment (the little I've read).

G,W

[Eika]

Re: Scratching an itch

Shui Di wrote:
Zen isn't related to standing and sitting, while standing and sitting is Zen.
Saying that sitting in full lotus is "very special posture", well, it's help for the beginner, just to make a "trust".

But, more further, if we become clinging to the posture, is just like you're clinging to the finger which is pointing the moon, then you won't see the moon clearly.

Very nicely said . . . and as we know this we sit (as best we can) in the postures (note the plural) that are recommended by Zen teachers.

Shui Di wrote:
I just feel that they translate it with their own interpretation and understanding , so that we can't get the original version of Shobogenzo in English. And I'm afraid that it can make misunderstanding to the Shobogenzo.

This is the entire problem with language. Reading is always an act of interpretation even for native speakers. Nearly every word in any language has more than one meaning. Check out how many fairly succinct and direct statements are the source of confusion on this forum alone. In a work the size of Shobogenzo, the issue is compounded by each sentence having multiple words, and each paragraph having multiple sentences, and each chapter having multiple paragraphs . . . you see the problem. We, as readers, always have to 'triangulate' the intent of the author from the specifics. A sentence like "I have a dream today" could be interpreted as anything from "I have a wish today" to "I am hallucinating this day!" Or better: "I love you." Figure that one out. Every element of a written document is context-dependent on all of the other elements (a bit like Indra's Net). So each character has to be interpreted by its context with other characters, each of which has multiple meanings. Further, the amount of time that passes between the writing and the reading, the greater the confusion. So, you may get closer to the original intent by learning the archaic Japanese, but the primary issue is still the same. Language is inherently slippery. When we understand that, I think it helps because then all words becomes a bit of a koan--breaking down the belief that logic and intellect can ever lead to a complete understanding of anything. That's one of the reasons why we say Zen is a transmission outside of the scriptures.

Gassho,
Bill

[Jundo]

Re: Scratching an itch

ps. Jundo, I'm not sure if you are addressing the 'posture perfectionist' statements to me, or if you're just saying it generally.

No, not directed at you Harry. I had in mind more some subset of Japanese teachers I have encountered, plus perhaps people like our mutual friend over at Errata.

I can't sit lotus posture, and I'm good with this. I see no 'mysitical' signifigance to the posture at all.

Yes, "mystical" significance was a really really poor choice of words by me. Your "realizes the whole universe" is much better.

Sorry about the confusion. Gassho, Jundo

[Jundo]

Re: Scratching an itch

Now, we can see a lot of translation of the Shobogenzo. Which one is the correct translation?

You know, although the meaning is the same, but there are a lot of differences translation for example between Shasta abbey and Aitken Roshi's translation.

I just feel that they translate it with their own interpretation and understanding , so that we can't get the original version of Shobogenzo in English. And I'm afraid that it can make misunderstanding to the Shobogenzo.

is it so difficult to translate from Japanese to English?

or may be if I want to get the original one, I should learn the Japanese language :P

Gassho, Shui Di

Hi Shui Di,

Even most modern Japanese cannot read it. It takes both deep familiarity with 13th Century Japanese, the many ancient stories and poems that Dogen mentions in passing in the text, plus Dogen's unique philosophy. Sometimes the meaning is confusing even then, even to the best experts!

My teacher's translation (Nishijima-Cross), I have been told, is very very accurate (although not the easiest to read). Some that are easier to read are not so precise. Thus, what I usually do to increase understanding when we discuss "Shobogenzo" on "sit-a-long with Jundo" is to put two translations side by side. By reading both, we maybe can "extrapolate" the original meaning behind the words. Even then, it is very difficult.

I take it you read Chinese characters? You may be able to read a bit now. It is available in Japanese on the Internet, and I can find it for you if you want.

Gassho, Jundo

[chicanobudista]

Re: Scratching an itch

.

2. Materialism: The whole universe is not Zazen or anything like Zazen.

I think a materialist would say.

2. Zazen is only about posture used by certain Buddhists. Read a book. You'll get the idea. :mrgreen:

[Shindo]

Re: Scratching an itch

Well what a lot of posts

Things that have been said that resonate with me:

In other words, to state that zazen has a definite and particular form, and to cling to that position leads to one kind of trouble, while stating that zazen has no particular form sends one off in another confused direction. There is no logical resolution to this problem. And it is this illogical paradox with which a true practitioner of Zen must 'sit', both literally and spiritually.

if we become clinging to the posture, is just like you're clinging to the finger which is pointing the moon, then you won't see the moon clearly

3. Action: The action of Zazen realizes the whole universe.

Language is inherently slippery. When we understand that, I think it helps because then all words becomes a bit of a koan--breaking down the belief that logic and intellect can ever lead to a complete understanding of anything.

In my working world, words are use with a precice meaning like:

endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography
Stereotactic neurosurgery
right hemicolectomy.

They allow me to orientate myself exactly in anatomy, procedure, experience, cost etc etc. But in this relatively new world I find myself in, I can see that things are not so sure-cut. I think I will just go sit .

Thank you all for taking the time to explain your views of all this.

Kind regards

Jools