Introduction to Zen Buddhism/A Manual of Zen Buddhism

by D.T. Suzuki

These essential and seminal works helped acquaint Westerners with the mysterious yet infinitely compelling nuances of Zen. It contains all yet tells nothing. A lifelong study of Zen yields only an "Aha!" when understanding finally comes. Dr. Suzuki labored to translate Zen into a form most readily understood by the Western mind which, honed by Platonic logic, and restricted by Newton's scientific methods, refuses to believe that which cannot be seen, nor to see that which cannot be believed. Read these works. Open your mind. See the web of life that has ensnared you, see the one in all and the all in one, and you too may say, "Aha!"

Genres: Buddhism, Philosophy, Zen, Religion, Nonfiction, Spirituality, Japan

192 pages, cloth

First published January 1, 1934

About the author

Daisetsu Teitaro Suzuki (鈴木 大拙 貞太郎 Suzuki Daisetsu Teitarō; rendered "Daisetz" after 1893) was Professor of Buddhist philosophies at Ōtani University. As a translator and writer on Buddhism and Eastern philosophy, he greatly helped to popularize Japanese Zen in the West.

Reviews

[فؤاد · Rating 4 out of 5]

١.
ع. پاشايى چند بخش از كتاب "ذن چیست؟" خودش را از اين كتاب اقتباس كرده بود و به اين كتاب آدرس داده بود. فكر مى كنم جا داشت اين كتاب را او ترجمه كند. هر چند ترجمۀ فعلى بد نيست، اما بدون شك ترجمۀ پاشايى چيز بهترى از آب در مى آمد.

٢.
نويسنده زياد تأكيد مى كند كه براى فهم ذن نبايد زياد گرد تئورى گشت. تا جايى كه كسى دنبال تئورى است، كار ذن فقط گيج كردن و سر دواندن است. براى فهم ذن واقعى بايد دست از نظريه پردازى برداشت و ديد ذن چه نوع زندگى اى را پيشنهاد مى كند. به خاطر همين هم تصميم گرفتم به جاى كتاب هايى از اين دست، شروع كنم به خواندن كتاب هاى عملى تر، مثل "ذن در هنر عکاسی خیابانی" كه امشب از فيديبو گرفتم.

٣.
نويسنده در مكتب خاصى از ذن پرورش پيدا كرده كه به معماهاى "كوآن" اهميت زيادى مى دهند. به خاطر همين هم بيشتر حجم كتاب به حكايت هاى ذن و معماهاى كوآن اختصاص دارد، و اين خواندن كتاب را ساده مى كند. نويسنده براى توضيح يك مطلب به جاى توضيحات انتزاعى، چهار پنج حكايت از استادان كهن ذن مى آورد. هر چند گاهى اين حكايت ها بى معنا يا معماگونه اند و چندان كمكى در فهم مطلب نمى كنند، و نويسنده هم از اين مسئله آگاه است.

٤.
در مقدمۀ کتاب "ذهن ذن، ذهن نوآموز" ویراستار بین نویسندۀ آن کتاب و نویسندۀ این کتاب مقایسه ای کرده بود، و گفته بود نویسندۀ این کتاب، "ساتوری" (اشراق ذن) را در مرکز توجه خود قرار می دهد و بدون ساتوری ذن را ناممکن می داند. در حالی که نویسندۀ کتاب "ذهن ذن، ذهن نوآموز" اهمیتی برای ساتوری قائل نیست و در کتابش حتی یک بار هم اسمی از آن نمی آورد.
ویراستار تعریف می کند که یک بار وقتی نویسندۀ آن کتاب در بستر بیماری بود پیشش رفت و از علت این امر پرسید. او در پاسخ گفت: آن چه ذن را ذن می کند یک اشراق نیست، بلکه نوع زندگی کردن است. اشراق ممکن است بیاید و ممکن است نیاید، و اگر هم بیاید تأثیری بیش از یک حال خوشِ انگیزه بخش ندارد. چیزی که مهم است شکل ثابتی از زندگی است که فرد باید خودش حاصل کند، نه یک حال خوش یا اشراق موقتی که از بیرون به او می رسد.

۵.
اين را در جواب يكى از دوستان در كامنتى نوشتم و فكر كردم بد نيست اين جا هم بياورم:
ذن (بر خلاف چیزی که ممکن است تصور شود)‌ دنبال اين نيست كه ما به غار درون‌مان برويم يا به جهان اهميت ندهیم و از زندگى دور شویم. اتفاقاً برعكس، ذن طالب اين است كه ما با تمام وجود در فعاليت هامان حضور داشته باشيم، و با تمام وجود در لحظۀ حاضر زندگى كنيم.
معمولاً ما به خاطر تشويش هاى ذهنى، نمى توانيم در لحظۀ حاضر به طور تمام و كمال زندگى كنيم، و به خاطر همين فعاليت هامان (شغل‌مان، غذا خوردن‌مان، مصاحبت با دوستان‌مان و...) هميشه از لحاظ كيفى و معنوى ناقص هستند (هر چند از لحاظ كمّى و مادى شايد كامل باشند). ذن دنبال كامل كردن این تجربه هاى ماست. و معتقد است که راه آن، كم كردن تشويش ذهن، و حضور كامل در لحظۀ حاضر است.

[Cedar Zockoll · Rating 5 out of 5]

For a Westerner's view of Buddhism, read Alan Watts or Eugen Herrigel; for an Easterner's view (in English, of course), read D. T. Suzuki.

Some other reviewers are saying it's a difficult read. It is, at least to the Western, logic-based mind. Suzuki even says in this book that the book is "a condescension, an apology, a compromise, that this present work has been written.." It is expressly said multiple times in the book that it will not bring you to enlightenment or most likely even to the concept of satori. All teaching is treated as "a finger pointing to the moon is not the moon itself", in other words, all words in the book and in any Zen-related book anywhere are anathema to the realization of Zen, yet they are necessary because language and writing are how we communicate ideas to one another.

The book, in the true spirit of Zen, treats even ideas as stumbling blocks on the path to enlightenment, but again, they are necessary as 'moon-pointing fingers'. If you have an interest in Zen or maybe just the deliciously anti-European 'philosophy' (for lack of a better word to convey a way that is so clearly anti-philosophical), read this book.

Confusing? Absolutely. Any book on Zen had better be! It is a rejection, or rather a replacement, of all things Western, logical, intellectual, and so on. But most importantly- Suzuki is well acquainted with the traps that will naturally befall any logical mind as it reads through this book and he does a fantastic job walking one through it. After having finished this book, I'm amazed he even attempted to write it, let alone the literal volumes of other words he has done, which I am dying to start. It' like trying to describe blue to a blind person or the sound of a violin to a deaf person, and this attitude of anxious communication, that he desperately wants to properly convey something so fundamentally incommunicable to the reader bleeds through the pages and helps reinforce and motivate what some might otherwise find twisting and convoluted.

Finally, it does what it says on the label: it's an introduction to Zen Buddhism.

[Jan-Maat]

It is useful to know when you are in a concert hall and the desperate cry goes out " is there a pianist in the house" that there is one piece of piano music that we can all play, or perhaps better said that we can all not play, but which we can perform and so save the concert from being abandoned.

And John Cage and his 4'33" came to mind several times reading here of Zen masters whose greatest sermons consisted of them standing up, holding out their arms, and saying nothing. Since this book was first published in 1949, perhaps that similarity is not accidental. C.G. Jung, who wrote an introduction to this book, was a great fan of synchronicity, while Zen's satori seems to be the awakening of the mind to the interconnectedness or fundamental indivisibility of things, in which case synchronicity would be a basic fact of life rather than something to be perceived as weird and unusual and it turns out that this book began life as a series of articles written around the time of WWI when Jung was having his breakdown and creating his Redbook, both are moves to escape strict rationality and a turn or return to an idea of perception which is difficult or impossible to fully express in language.

Jung's introduction has an amusing beginning - he tells us that Zen is probably near impossible for the 'western' mind to grasp. In which case it was a pointless effort of Suzuki to write a book. Luckily for us he may have only read the introduction after he had written book, had he read that first then he might have given up on the entire process altogether.

The drive of Suzuki's narrative is that Zen is empirical and experiential, it cannot really be communicated in words it can only be taught by putting through students through a process which may result in satori - a state which cannot really be explained or communicated to others, except possibly through poetry other art forms are available, or so I have heard.

Anyway here I am rambling on...the book again reminded me of my basic concern about Zen - you have to have faith that the outcome will be good. Suzuki suggests the enlightened person will jump into water to save a child, fine I am happy with that, but his examples of Zen masters include stories of them beating students with sticks, twisting their noses, cutting off a finger, and killing a cat as part of the learning experience. Those may be metaphors or stories, but it still suggests to me that for them suffering (specifically the suffering of others) is acceptable in pursuit of a greater good. In the examples given the guy who looses a finger achieves enlightenment and presumably regarded it as an acceptable trade off, the cat though, I imagine, was less satisfied. Here I recall the concept of dependant origination and Japan's history in the first half of the twentieth century which featured various examples of the cultural acceptability of the suffering of others in pursuit of a greater good, but this was not unique, indeed it was fairly typical of self-important states in modern times and typically they all had their ideological frameworks which completely unexpectedly supported their self interest.

It was strange for me as non-Zen Buddhism is mostly ethics, perhaps Zen is too, but Suzuki does not mention it.

The purity of mind achieved under Zen that Suzuki describes reminds me of certain ancient Greek stories: There is no wind for my ships to sail to Troy = sacrifice my daughter, My husband has sacrificed my daughter = lets butcher him in the bath, My mother has murdered my father = lets slaughter her. Perhaps I simply lack faith to be fair there is no perhaps about it, I am on the long waiting list of those in need of a faith transplant, or perhaps Carl Gustav was right, racism is true and my brain is fundamentally incapable of understanding but I lack the faith to believe that either see above . There is a fair amount of racism in the book, Suzuki sees the 'Indian' mind as fundamentally different - capable of subtleties of reasoning and abstraction, whereas the Sino-Japanese mind is simply practical, the Indian will explore and devise abstractions and refinements of thought and intellectual speculation, while the sino- Japanese Zen monk will chop wood and scrub floors. This is both funny and sad in the context of a book that tells us too that Zen is about the escape from such dualistic and self limiting thinking, but it is hard work to escape from ourselves.

An appropriate Zen response to this book would be to rip it up and throw the pieces away, but it would not be Zen to film yourself ripping it up and to post that online as a review.

a finger pointing at the moon is not the moon, a book about Zen is not Zen. And a review is just a review. Unless it falls over in a forest.

Who was the sixth patriarch before he was the sixth patriarch? And who was he after he was the sixth patriarch? Or was he?

I had the thought inspired by a few words on page 129 that maybe Zen is deeply interconnected with Taoism, but then I don't know much about either, so maybe I would think that wouldn't I?

The answer is in Rabelais - it's time for a drink. The book has some tempting description of the (limited) food available in Zen monasteries - lots of picked vegetables with rice and barley, scrumptious.

[Julian Worker · Rating 4 out of 5]

I need Satori, to acquire a new viewpoint, because my left-brain western reasoning kept getting in the way when I was reading this book.

No amount of reading, no amount of teaching, no amount of contemplation will ever make me a Zen master.

People also need to understand themselves before they can comprehend what's being discussed in books such as this.

The book is written in an accessible and straightforward manner, so is not difficult to read and that's a blessing when the reader knows little about the subject under discussion.

[Lauren · Rating 4 out of 5]

An Introduction to Zen Buddhism, by Daisetz Teitaro (D.T.) Suzuki. Written in English, 1934.

A monk once went to Gensha, and wanted to learn where the entrance to the path of truth was. Gensha asked him, "Do you hear the murmuring of the brook?" "Yes, I hear it," answered the monk. "There is the entrance," the master instructed him.

Suzuki, a scholar in Buddhist philosophy, Zen practitioner, and polyglot (he wrote this book and many books in English), is largely known for "bringing Buddhism to the West" from its roots in China and Japan. His influence spread through Europe and North America, and his students include other well known western Buddhist philosophers, notably Alan Watts, who went on to write scores of books on Zen, philosophy, and mysticism. It was through Watts' work (of which I've read 3 of his books) that I came to his teacher, Suzuki. I'm glad I did.

In these 9 essays, Suzuki provides a straightforward framework of Zen and its tenets, its anti-logical/rational basis, the concept of satori, the use of koans in meditation, touching in mindfulness practice, the daily lives of monks.

"Zen wishes to storm this citadel of topsy-turvydom and show that we live psychologically and biologically and not logically."
.
"If I'm asked what Zen teaches, I would answer, Zen teaches nothing. Whatever teachings there are in Zen, they come out of ones own mind. We reach ourselves, Zen merely points the way."
.
.
I chose to include this book in my #JanuaryinJapan reading list since Suzuki was a leading Japanese figure in Buddhism, because it's been on my shelf for a few years (I bought in Vancouver on 2017), and because the Zen practice permeates Japanese literature, history, art... and in many ways, the entire psyche.

In the foreword of this book, preeminent psychologist Carl Jung says Westerners will have a very hard time conceiving of Zen. But that's the point. Break down. Disrupt. Jumble. Get out of the rational mindset.

[Flo]

The following may serve as a further example: A monk once went to Gensha, and wanted to learn where the entrance to the path of truth was. Gensha asked him, “Do you hear the murmuring of the brook?” “Yes, I hear it,” answered the monk. “There is the entrance,” the master instructed him.
I will be content with these few examples, which illustrate clearly the opacity of the satori experiences.
- Carl Jung

[Jake · Rating 2 out of 5]

Short but very dense. I'm not sure if it's because this was written many years ago, or because DT Suzuki just has a very formal writing style, but I found it really hard to read. Eventually I resorted to reading just a few pages at a time, as a kind of daily dose of zen. For that it was pretty good-- he packs in a lot of good anecdotes, koans, and stories into each chapter. And one more thing-- skip Jung's introduction-- it's even more difficult to read than Suzuki's prose at its worst.

[Ivan Dimitrov · Rating 5 out of 5]

Интересувам се от дзен будизма от години и чак сега осъзнавам, че никога не бях чел книга за него. Винаги съм чел класически текстове и техните уводи. Но никога не съм се потапял в книга, която си поставя за цел да обясни това екстравагантно учение.

Една от настолните ми книги е "Плътта на дзен, костите на дзен" (със съставител Пол Райс). Притежавам я от повече от 10 години и е пътувала с мен по целия свят. Обръщал съм се към нея във всякакви моменти.

И ето, някак в ръцете ми попадна "Увод в дзен-будизма". И на всичко отгоре реших да я прочета точно в първия ден от краткия си престой в Япония. Може би, защото възнамеряваме след ден-два да вляза в някой дзен будистки храм с лек страх, поради огромното количество удари с тояги, които отнасят учениците в дзен будистката литература. Въпреки че смятам, че днешните времена не са се отразили добре на тази практика...

Книгата на Сузуки е кратка, ясна, а дзен е разказан от най-добрата гледна точка, от която може да се направи това. С много колебание в смисъла на това да се разкаже нещо чрез думи, което в същината си е невъзможно да бъде разказано с думи. Което трябва да се преживее през тялото, вместо да се обясни през ума. Което не е философия, макар често да бъде наричано такова. В чието ядро стои парадоксът, постоянната игра с всичко, дори с най-святото. Чиято основна битка е с дуалистичното мислене (добро-зло, светло-тъмно), което отдавна е завзело нашия свят.

Сузуки минава през най-важните точки на дзен, говори и за неговата практика, за развитието му, за неговите "опорни точки". Сузуки минава през тях не като един обикновен разказвач, който се е ровил два-три месеца, че дори и години в темата за новата си книга. Сузуки разказва от гледната точка на човек, който е поел по този нелек, но внушителен път и би искал да сподели нещо за пътя, но като изключи АЗ от разказа си. Тоест става дума за един истински увод в дзен будизма.

Сега разбирам и защо името на Сузуки е толкова важно, що се отнася до износа на дзен на Запад. А в увода са споменати и други важни за мен имена от бийт поколението в американската литература. На първо място Гари Снайдър, който освен прототип на Джефри Райдър от "Бродягите на Дхарма" на Керуак е и истинският дзен битник. Той е превеждал японски текстове. Той е живял години в Япония. И това по един красив начин е отпечатано в поезията му, която за съжаление почти не е превеждана на български език. На второ място бих поставил Гинсбърг, тъй като той е доста по-навътре в духовните занимания от Керуак. Макар, че Гинсбърг да е далеч по-посветен в други области от източните духовни практики. Керуак безспорно е много важен, главно чрез написаното от него. Но като последовател на будизма той е най-несериозният от тримата. Вероятно затова и умира вследствие от злоупотреба на алкохол. Не го казвам, защото искам да го съдя по някакъв начин. Може би той е бил най-чувствителният от тримата, затова и винаги се е плъзгал по този начин през реалността. Което за късмет е завещал в книгите си.

Друго нещо, което изключително ме впечатли в това издание, беше преводът от Юнг. Юнг е от малцината психолози, които биха могли да обяснят какво представлява дзен. Отново с нужната некатегоричност и съзнанието за това, че има неща, които не биха могли да бъдат казани чрез думи. И все пак неговите търсения имат много допирни точки с източните практики. И смятам, че той е един от психоаналитиците, които най-добре са съумяли да обяснят какво представлява източната мисъл. И по какъв начин лекува тя...

Тук ще пропусна да се впусна в пространни обяснения и ще кажа само, че дзен активно работи с несъзнатото.

Препоръчвам тази книга на всеки, който иска да разбере нещо повече за дзен будизма. Или за себе си...

[Theo · Rating 4 out of 5]

‘An absolute affirmation must rise from the fiery crater of life itself.’

I liked the bit where, just to make a point, a Zen master cut a cat in half because a couple of the fellas couldn’t decide which side of the Monastery it should belong to. At least we’re reassured by Suzuki that the cat is surely on its way to Buddhahood.... I wonder where that cat is now.

[O]

Suzuki talks a lot about what Zen isn’t: Zen is not a negation or an absence. Zen involves meditation, but is definitely not mediating too much. Though Zen can be found in (through?) anything, Zen is not pantheistic. Zen requires working hard, but working too hard isn’t Zen, either. (The book contains a lot of instructional dialogues between Zen students and masters, and students who have mistaken Zen knowledge for Zen itself are frequent recipients of their criticism.)

So what is Zen? For starters, it seems to involve being repeatedly hit in the head, or pushed off of a stone wall, or struck with a staff. (This really is a common practice in the instructional stories, and I'm not entirely sure why—learning to recognize the irrelevance of physical pain? Just because the concrete-ness of violence makes it useful as a teaching aid?) More importantly, Zen is a change in perspective (satori) which, once achieved, renders all of life beautiful and ecstatic and true. (Caveat: I’ve read some people say that satori is more of a D. T. Suzuki thing than a traditional buddhist concept. This is the sort of thing which makes me worry I don’t really have the proper philosophical and historical background to be able to situate this in the context in which it belongs…)

Anyway, though—how is satori to be achieved? It’s not entirely clear. Once your mind is in the right place—through years of manual and intellectual labour, or something like that—you can achieve satori simply by watching someone raise a single finger, or by hearing the answer “Three pounds of flax” given to the question “What is the Buddha?” The gist seems to be that either you get it or you don’t.

There’s a common analogy that Buddhist teachings are like a finger pointing at the moon. The finger can help you find the moon, but it’s important not to mistake the finger for the moon itself. Following that, I feel like this book is sort of like explaining the moon by describing its various features: it’s grey, it shines in the night sky, it has many craters, it is located very far away, it pulls on the oceans and make the tides, etc.

The idea that I found most compelling—probably in part because I can actually wrap my head around it somewhat— is that Zen requires freeing your mind from the concepts of duality and logic. “‘Coal is black’—this is plain enough; but Zen protests, ‘Coal is not black’. This is also plain enough, and indeed even plainer than the first positive statement when we come right down to the truth of the matter.”

“Unless we break through he antithesis of ‘yes’ and ’no’ we can never hope to live a real life of freedom. And the soul has always been crying for it, forgetting that it is not after all so very difficult to reach a higher form of affirmation, where no contradicting distinction obtain between negation and assertion.”

That there is some sort of fundamental unity or one-ness, and that all of our ideas of this and not-this and self and not-self and order and logic and labels do nothing but divide us from ourselves, and introduce division where there should be nothing but universality, that any belief or system that sorts or separates is just walling us off from some sort of ultimate affirmation—I find that extremely powerful and compelling, even if I’m not exactly sure what I should do with it. I want it to be true, even if I’m not sure it is, really, or even what that would mean in this context.

“The fact remains that we are like ‘those who die of hunger while sitting beside the rice bag’, or rather like ‘those who die of thirst while standing throughly drenched in the midst of the river’. One master goes a step future and says that ‘we are the rice itself and the water itself.’”

I think that’s pretty wonderful.

[Cav · Rating 2 out of 5]

Introduction to Zen Buddhism had its moments, but ultimately, I did not enjoy the writing. The finished presentation had me walking away not knowing too much more about Zen Buddhism than I did at the start of the book...

Author Daisetsu Teitaro Suzuki, self-rendered in 1894 as "Daisetz", was a Japanese-American essayist, philosopher, religious scholar, translator, and writer. He was a scholar and author of books and essays on Buddhism, Zen and Shin that were instrumental in spreading interest in both Zen and Shin to the West.

D.T. Suzuki:


As its title implies, the book attempts to uncover the essence of Zen Buddhism. It originated in India, before being brought to China and Japan.
Unfortunately, as mentioned above, the book is rich on anecdotes and stories but low on concrete information. There were a few good quotes in here, but lots of rambling, disjointed writing.

Suzuki says this of Zen:

"Zen is decidedly not a system founded upon logic and analysis. If anything, it is the antipode to logic, by which I mean the dualistic mode of thinking. There may be an intellectual element in Zen, for Zen is the whole mind, and in it we find a great many things; but the mind is not a composite thing that is to be divided into so many faculties, leaving nothing behind when the dissection is over. Zen has nothing to teach us in the way of intellectual analysis; nor has it any set doctrines which are imposed on its followers for acceptance.
In this respect Zen is quite chaotic if you choose to say so. Probably Zen followers may have sets of doctrines, but they have them on their own account, and for their own benefit; they do not owe the fact to Zen.
Thereore, there are in Zen no sacred books or dogmatic tenets, nor are there any symbolic formulae through which an access might be gained into the signification of Zen. If I am asked, then, what Zen teaches, I would answer, Zen teaches nothing. Whatever teachings there are in Zen, they come out of one’s own mind. We teach ourselves; Zen merely points the way."

Is Zen a religion? Suzuki writes:

"Is Zen a religion? It is not a religion in the sense that the term is popularly understood; for Zen has no God to worship, no ceremonial rites to observe, no future abode to which the dead are destined, and, last of all, Zen has no soul whose welfare is to be looked after by somebody else and whose immortality is a matter of intense concern with some people. Zen is free from all these dogmatic and “religious” encumbrances.
When I say there is no God in Zen, the pious reader may be shocked, but this does not mean that Zen denies the existence of God; neither denial nor affirmation concerns Zen. When a thing is denied, the very denial involves something not denied. The same can be said of affirmation. This is inevitable in logic. Zen wants to rise above logic, Zen wants to find a higher affirmation where there are no antitheses. Therefore, in Zen, God is neither denied nor insisted upon; only there is in Zen no such God as has been conceived by Jewish and Christian minds. For the same reason that Zen is not a philosophy, Zen is not a religion."

In this quote, the author talks about meditation and Zen:

"Zen is not to be confounded with a form of meditation as practised by “New Thought” people, or Christian Scientists, or Hindu Sannyasins, or some Buddhists. Dhyana, as it is understood by Zen, does not correspond to the practice as carried on in Zen. A man may meditate on a religious or philosophical subject while disciplining himself in Zen, but that is only incidental; the essence of Zen is not there at all. Zen purposes to discipline the mind itself, to make it its own master, through an insight into its proper nature. This getting into the real nature of one’s own mind or soul is the fundamental object of Zen Buddhism. Zen, therefore, is more than meditation and Dhyana in its ordinary sense. The discipline of Zen consists in opening the mental eye in order to look into the very reason of existence.
To meditate, a man has to fix his thought on something; for instance, on the oneness of God, or his infinite love, or on the impermanence of things. But this is the very thing Zen desires to avoid. If there is anything Zen strongly emphasizes it is the attainment of freedom; that is, freedom from all unnatural encumbrances. Meditation is something artificially put on; it does not belong to the native activity of the mind. Upon what do the fowl of the air meditate? Upon what do the fish in the water meditate? They fly; they swim. Is not that enough?

So, what exactly is Zen?? Well, the answer remained elusive in the book. This quote was the best I could pick out:

"...When Joshu (Chao-chou) was asked what the Tao (or the truth of Zen) was, he answered, “Your everyday life, that is the Tao.” In other words, a quiet, self-confident, and trustful existence of your own—this is the truth of Zen, and what I mean when I say that Zen is pre-eminently practical. It appeals directly to life, not even making reference to a soul or to God, or to anything that interferes with or disturbs the ordinary course of living. The idea of Zen is to catch life as it flows. There is nothing extraordinary or mysterious about Zen. I raise my hand; I take a book from the other side of this desk; I hear the boys playing ball outside my window; I see the clouds blown away beyond the neighbouring woods:—in all these I am practising Zen, I am living Zen. No wordy discussion is necessary, nor any explanation. I do not know why—and there is no need of explaining, but when the sun rises the whole world dances with joy and everybody’s heart."

********************

I was expecting more from Introduction to Zen Buddhism. And while it started off well enough, it quickly dived straight into the weeds, where it remained for the duration.
I would not recommend this book
2.5 stars.

[Jeffrey Howard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Zen Buddhism is more a lifestyle, a way of liberation, than it is a religion or a belief system: "it is anything but a philosophy in the western sense of the word." As such, it continues to be one of the most difficult subjects I've tried to understand and live. Yet, it somehow feels so natural.

Knowing that Suzuki had a huge influence on Alan Watts, and having read several of "the spiritual entertainer's" books, I knew I needed to dig deeper, to get closer to the source. While less humorous and witty than Watts, Suzuki still offers a fairly accessible introduction to Zen. He writes with a blend of humility and authority.

I welcomed the foreword from Carl Jung, another person who has influenced my perspectives. In attempting to bridge the gap between the East and the West, Jung writes "I have no doubt that the satori experience does occur also in the West, for we too have men who scent ultimate ends and will spare themselves no pains to draw near to them. But they will keep silence, not only out of shyness but because they know that any attempt to convey their experiences to others would be hopeless." As a plug for his own field of work, as justifiably so, he points out that "the only movement within our culture which partly has, and partly should have, some understanding of these aspirations is psychotherapy." (for more, read Psychotherapy, East and West by Alan Watts)

Everything is Zen. Zen is radically concrete and anti-abstraction: "personal experience, therefore, is everything in Zen. No ideas are intelligible to those who have no backing of experience." Truth is delivered through lived sermons, paradoxical statements known as koans. "Zen is the spirit of a man. Zen believes in his inner purity and goodness. Zen, therefore, is emphatically against all religious conventionalism...Zen is a wafting cloud in the sky. No screw fastens it, no string holds it; it moves as it lists. No amount of meditation will keep Zen in one place. Meditation is not zen."

Suzuki blasts rationalism for its limitations: "Zen in inflexible and would protest that the so-called common-sense way of looking at things is final, and that the reason why we cannot attain to a thoroughgoing comprehension of the truth is due to our unreasonable adherence to a 'logical' interpretation of things. If we really want to get to the bottom of life, we must abandon our cherished syllogisms, we must acquire a new way of observation whereby we can escape the tyranny of logic and the one-sidedness of our everyday phraseology." He challenges intellectualization even further: "in Zen it means not to get entangled in intellectual subtleties, not to be carried away by philosophical reasoning that is so often ingenuous and full of sophistry...In this sense, Zen is pre-eminently practical. It has nothing to do with abstractions or with subtleties of dialectics..the reason why Zen is so vehement in its attack on logic...is that logic has so pervasively entered into life as to make most of us conclude that logic is life and without it life has no significance."

Zen is not some set of abstractions to be learned and repeated. It is a living truth. "Copying is slavery. The letter must never be followed, only the spirit is to be grasped. Higher affirmations live in the spirit."

Perhaps the insight most helpful for me in understanding Zen: "a finger is needed to point at the moon, but what a calamity it would be if one took the finger for the moon!"

Honestly, it is a near-impossible task to instruct people in the ways of Zen using text, but when most of us don't have the opportunity to live face to face with a Zen master, Suzuki offers some encouraging insights. His collection of short essays nudge one's state of mind in the direction of zen. It appears that satori can require many years to achieve or one incredible moment of enlightenment.

I still prefer the work of Alan Watts, but I think most of us westerners will better understand Watts after having read D.T. Suzuki.

[Andre · Rating 3 out of 5]

"An ethical man performs acts of service which are praiseworthy, but he is all the time conscious of them, and, moreover, he may often be thinking of some future reward. Hence we should say that his mind is tainted and not at all pure, however objectively or socially good his deeds are. Zen abhors this. Life is an art, and like perfect art it should be self-forgetting; there ought not to be any trace of effort or painful feeling. Life, according to Zen, ought to be lived as a bird flies through the air or as a fish swims in the water. As soon as there are signs of elaboration, a man is doomed, he is no more a free being. You are not living as you ought to live, you are suffering under the tyranny of circumstances; you are feeling a constraint of some sort, and you lose your independence." - D.T. Suzuki

"As to attaining the goal and taking hold of the thing itself, this must be done by one's own hands, for nobody else can do it for one." - D.T. Suzuki

"I allowed my mind without restraint to think of what it pleased, and my mouth to talk about whatever it pleased; I then forgot whether 'this and not-this' was mine or others', whether the gain or loss was mine or others'; nor did I know whether Lao-shang-shih was my teacher and Pa-kao was my friend. In and out, I was thoroughly transformed; and then it was that the eye became like the ear, and the ear like the nose, and the nose like the mouth; and there was nothing that was not identified. As the mind became concentrated, the form dissolved, the bones and flesh all thawed away; I did not know upon what my frame was supported, or where my feet were treading; I just moved along with the wind, east or west, like a leaf of a tree detached from its stem; I was unconscious whether I was riding on the wind, or the wind riding on me." - Resshi (Lieh-tzu)

[Arthur Hoyle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Suzuki clearly distinguishes Zen from other forms of Buddhism and from other religions, especially Christianity. He explains why Zen abjures the notion of God. Zen is concerned only with the here and now. Its discipline is to enable full perception of the total Reality, the reality beyond dualisms. "Zen is emphatically a matter of personal experience; if anything can be called radically empirical, it is Zen. No amount of reading, no amount of teaching, no amount of contemplation will ever make one a Zen master. Life itself must be grasped in the midst of its flow; to stop it for examination and analysis is to kill it, leaving its cold corpse to be embraced."

[Martina Corsini · Rating 5 out of 5]

You take a lot from this book, and you don't. You learn a lot of things that you wouldn't be able to apply to your life, for as Eckhart Tolle plainly explains 'knowledge is not knowing'.

After reading this book I found myself being perfectly acquainted with every inch of the pointing finger, while still being as distant from the moon as I previously was.

Nevertheless, a wonderfully fascinating reading, which leaves you begging for more.

p.s. my tip is to read the foreword by Carl Jung at the end.

[Westley Dang · Rating 5 out of 5]

Like Zen and the contents thereof, it's wispy. It didn't get good until the end when DT discusses satori, which is the crux of this work, but upon my second reading I do see that you need to build up to it. The whole thing is cryptic, but that's inevitable when you try to expound on Zen. To summarize everything: you can't talk about Zen because as soon as you start talking about Zen it stops becoming Zen. Boom. Ineffable.

[Erik Graff · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was assigned reading for the Senior Seminar capstone course for Religious Studies majors at Grinnell College. It is basically an introduction to Rinzai Zen Buddhism and is constituted by edited essays dating up until 1934.

[Spirited Away]

ამ წიგნიდან მხოლოდ ის გავიგე რომ ვერაფერი გავიგე

[Кремена Михайлова · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ценността на книгата се усеща още по-добре, когато се прегледат други „не-въздействащи” книжки за дзен-будизма. Този Судзуки ми подейства освобождаващо и утвърждаващо именно по неуловимия „истински” начин.
(нищо, че по обичайния навик пак клоня към дуализъм - Д.Т. ще ме разбере ;) )


„Във всички тези обреди — благочестиви и пречистващи за повечето вярващи — Дзен вижда нещо изкуствено. „Съвършените йоги не постигат нирвана, а монасите, нарушаващи обета си, не отиват в ада“, гласи един от дзен-принципите. За обикновеното съзнание това противоречи на общоприетите морални норми, но именно тук се крие истината и жизнеността на Дзен. Дзен е духът на човека. Дзен вярва във вътрешната му чистота и доброта. Всичко насилствено добавено или отнето от духа нарушава неговата цялост. Затова Дзен е категорично против всякакви религиозни условности.”

„Ако човек отвори уста, за да изрече утвърждение или отрицание, той е загубен. Дзен вече го няма. Но и да пази мълчание не върви. Камъкът на земята мълчи, разцъфналото цвете под прозореца също мълчи, ала те не разбират Дзен. Трябва да се открие някакъв начин, мълчанието и говорът да бъдат едно и също, т.е. отрицанието и утвърждението да се уеднаквят в по-висша форма на изказ.”

„Сатори идва при човека изненадващо, тъкмо когато е усетил, че се е изчерпал докрай. В религиозен план това означава ново раждане, а в интелектуален — постигане на нова гледна точка. В този момент светът се облича в нови одежди, изчезва породената от дуализма привидност на нещата, наречена от будизма илюзорност.”

„Съзнанието може да се развива и само дори когато е оставено да следва определения му от природата ход. Но човек не може винаги да чака естествения ход — той обича да се намесва, за добро или за зло. Човек е нетърпелив, щом има възможност да се намеси, не пропуска да го направи. Това понякога помага, понякога определено вреди. В резултат се стига до едното или до другото. Ние приветстваме намесата на човека, когато се постига повече, отколкото се губи, и наричаме това усъвършенстване и прогрес, но когато ефектът е обратен, явлението се определя като регрес. Цивилизацията е нещо изкуствено, създадено от хората. Някои не са удовлетворени от нея и искат да се върнат обратно към природата. Наистина така нареченият съвременен прогрес в никакъв случай не може да бъде окачествен като абсолютно благо, но като цяло, поне от материалната страна, животът ни днес е по-добър отпреди и виждаме признаци за по-нататъшно подобрение. Затова нашето недоволство общо взето не се проявява особено силно.”

„Дзен се интересува от фактите, а не от техните логически, словесни, предубедени и непълноценни изразители. Съкровената същност на Дзен е непосредствеността и простотата, оттук и неговата жизненост, свобода и оригиналност. В християнството, както и в други религии, също се говори много за простотата на сърцето, което не винаги означава човек да бъде простодушен. В Дзен това означава да не се допусне въвличане в интелектуални упражнения, нито във философски разсъждения, които често са безсмислени и пълни със софистика.”

„— Когато съзнанието не се помещава в определен обект, казваме, че то пребивава там, където не съществува постоянна обител.
— Какво значи да не се помещава в определен обект?
— Това значи да не пребивава в двуначалието добро — зло, съществуване — несъществуване, дух — материя. Това означава да не пребивава в пустотата или не-пустотата, нито в покоя или не-по-коя. Където не съществува постоянна обител, там е истинската обител на съзнанието.”

[Edward · Rating 3 out of 5]

Most people seem to be familiar with a few aspects of Zen Buddhism, first popularized in the west a half century ago by beat writers such as Allan Ginsberg and Jack Kerouac. J. D. Salinger added to the mix with his mention of the Zen koan question - what is the sound of one hand clapping.? Suzuki's short introduction predates these writers by decades and gives a short and informative commentary on the precepts of Zen Buddhism.

One of the most important things to understand about Zen Buddhism is that it tries to show that humans live psychologically or biologically, and not logically. It's true, of course, that logic is used in every aspect of our practical lives, particularly in the west, a civilization based on the logic of science. Science works with space and time, and Suzuki writes, "So long as one is conscious of space and time, Zen will keep a respectable distance from you."

I think he means a type of self-consciousness which is far too invested in categories, in distinctions that slide into a way of using our brains that is all too logical. If we want to get to the bottom of life, to go beyond categories, distinctions, and syllogisms, then we have to develop a new way of observing and being a part of life. This new way attacks logic; there is more to life than thinking logically. Speaking poetically, Suzuki writes, "Life, according to Zen, ought to be lived as a bird flies through the air or a fish swims in the water." Only humans live, aware of themselves.

One way to begin to break down the reliance of logic is through the use of koans, questions or riddles that seem to have no answer. Examples: "empty-handed I go, and behold, the spade is in my hands," "I walk on foot and yet on the back of an ox I am riding," "if you should meet the Buddha on the road, kill him," "what is the fundamental principle of Buddhism? Answer: how high those bamboos are, how short are those others." The lists of koans proliferate endlessly.

Their purpose is to question the value of words and ideas which have no place in the real understanding of Zen. In that respect, all of the words that I've written so far won't get anyone very far in understanding Zen. What every practitioner of Zen hopes to achieve is "satori", an enlightenment which cannot be described in words.

What it tries to do is to upend all of the accumulations of intellect and awaken a sense which sees the world from a whole new perspective. That perspective will be "more satisfying, more peaceful, and more full of joy" than anything ever experienced before. Satori comes not as something that can be willed into existence, but as a state of awareness that simply appears when the person is ready for it. It may come quickly, or it may take a life time or it may never come.

Well, as you can see in having read this far, there is no easy way to pin down Zen Buddhism. In a sense, all of these words I've just logically written lead away from it but they also point toward it. Another koan-like paradox.

[Jack · Rating 2 out of 5]

It's funny how many different introductions and beginner friendly texts on Buddhism I've read and how much they work to respect thousands of years of history and tradition while keeping everything sensible enough for a Westerner who can't read a syllable of those funky Indian names

and then... there's this book. I've read a bit of D.T. Suzuki before and found the same problems, before I'd really come enamoured with Buddhism in general. I'm not sure if Suzuki is a terrible mouthpiece for Zen or if Zen is just stupid. A recurring feature of other Buddhist primers is the religion's decentering of faith, in that one is expected to rely on one's Kantian reason a bit more than trust authority and dogma, including citing the Buddha himself.

Suzuki notes that all the great Zen masters didn't agree with each other, but also continually states that Zen cannot be described in words, such as his book might attempt, and that it involves a departure from typical structures of logic, cause and effect, which means that really everything I find dumb, unconvincing and contradictory about Zen is on me, and if I'm interested in the path, I just ought to take the leap of faith. This really goes against the sensibility that brought me to read the text in general. I seemed to have been much more fond of the cultural image of Zen than the reality from an authority. Nobody ever tells you how insipid many Zen koans sound. I understand frustration is part of the process, but I'm a sympathetic reader and I still think this book fails in doing anything other than preaching to the converted. No other Buddhist practice I've encountered seems to couch itself in so many lofty airs while virtue signalling on their austere asceticism.

I'm willing to take one more chance on Zen but will avoid ol' D.T., who, writing in the 1930s, might've been sucking too many farts of Imperial Japan to be anything but distant and superior. I know it partially defeats the purpose of religion to "debate" it in an athiestic way, so I will again stress that I am essentially looking for the right kind of Buddhism for me right now -- there's a lot I accept already. Were I not already in Japan I'd have given up on Zen already. Third time's the charm?

[ბექა · Rating 5 out of 5]

რეკომენდირებული საკითხავი ყველასთვის.ბევრს არაფერს ვიტვყი ძენ ბუდიზმზე,მხოლოდ იმას რომ ეს აღმოსავლური ფილოსოფია,ან თუ გინდ დავარქვათ რელიგია(რელიგია დოგმების,ავტორიტეტების,ღმერთების,მედიტაციების,სწავლებების გარეშე,რომელიც ორიენტირებულია ადამიანის პირად გამოცდილებასა და ინტელექტუალურ,ლოგიკურ და რაციონალურ აზროვნებას მიღმა არსებული გრძნობებით სამყაროსა და ცხოვრების შემეცნებაზე),რომელიც ერთი შეხედვით ძალიან შორეული და მიუწვდომელია დასავლური აზროვნების მქონე ადამიანისთვის,ეხმიანება ფსიქოანალიზსს( https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...-- მიუხედავად იმისა რომ სუძუკი ფროიდის ფსიქოანალიზსა და ძენ ბუდიზმის ადვილად შესამჩნევ მსგავსებას უარყოფს იმ არგუმენტით რომ ფსიქოანალიზი არის ირაციონალურის რაციონალიზმით გაგების მცდელობა,ბევრ რამეში იკვეთება თანხვედრა და საბოლოოდ ორივე ერთ საქმეს ემხახურება) და ეგზისტენციალიზმსს( https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...-- ამ წიგნში განსაკუთრებით მომეწონა ბოლო თავი,სადაც ჰაიდეგერის ეგზისტენციალიზმის ირაციონალური მხარეა განხილული)

მე თვითონ ძენ ბუდიზმით დავინტერესდი ამ სერიალის ნახვის შემდეგ - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2802850/e...
მთელი ეს სერიალი აგებულია აბსურდის ფილოსოფიაზე და თვითონ სერიების სახელებიც კამიუ,კაფკა,კირკეგორი,იონესკო(სხვები ვერ ვიცანი) ნამუშევრების სახელებითაა დასათაურებული და ეგზისტენციალურ თემებს მიმოიხილავს,მაგრამ გარდა ამისა არის ძენ ბუდიზმის მნიშვნელოვანი ხაზი,რომელიც ჩემთვის თავიდან შეუმჩნეველი იყო სანამ თვითონ ძენ ბუდიზმს გავეცნობოდი.
საბოლოო ჯამში რეკომენდირებულია როგორც ამ წიგნის და ზოგადად ძენის გაცნობა,ისევე ფარგოს მეორე სეზონის ნახვა.

[Ivva Tadiashvili · Rating 5 out of 5]

i love this shit

[Livewithbooks · Rating 3 out of 5]

ذن یکی از مکاتب بودایی است که در ژاپن به اعتلا و بالندگی خود رسیده. ذن در معنای لغوی یعنی در حال بودن، و در لحظه اندیشیدن. یعنی تفکر روزانه شما. در هر لحظه و در هر عمل عادی زندگی روزانه ذهن و بدن نباید جدا از هم باشد. باید با هم یکی شده و از هر چه غیر آن لحظه دور شود. البته توضیح ذن با واژه ها امکان پذیر نیست. خیلی سخت است تجربه ای احساسی را با کلمات انتقال دادن. برای همین ذن از فلسفه پردازی،عقل و منطق، واژه ها و نام گذاری، آیین ها و مقدس سازی ها و هر آنچه که در چارچوبی قرارش دهد گریزان است. جایگاه ذن آن سوی عقل است.
ذهن ما با تصوراتی که عقل و منطق به تصویر درآورده اند پر شده. ذهن ما پایبند شرایط و مقتضیات است. ذن راهی است که ما را از عذاب شرایط رها می کند. به ظاهر ساده می آید اما همین کار ساده از ذهن سفسطه گر و منطقی ما به راحتی ساخته نیست. متدوال ترین کار روزانه ما خوردن و خوابیدن است. همین کار ساده را ما چطور انجام میدهیم؟ در خوردن غذا به آنچه میخوریم می اندیشیم؟ ما به همه چیز فکر می‌کنیم جز خوردن آن غذایی که می‌بلعیم. موقع خوابیدن چطور؟ ما به همه چیز فکر می کنیم جز خوابیدن.
ذن یعنی موقع غذا خوردن، خوردن و موقع خوابیدن، خوابیدن.
ذن روش رها سازی از قیود است.
پ. ن: اولین کتابم در باب آشنایی با ذن. شروع به نسبت خوب و به موقعی بود. چون باید به ذهنم یه ایستی می دادم. فکر کنم هممون باید به ذهنمون ایست دادن یادم بدیم. ما تو یکی از شرایط بد تاریخیم. به خودمون ایست بدیم.

[Ewula Yang · Rating 4 out of 5]

nic nie zrozumiałam

[Devadeep Gupta · Rating 5 out of 5]

A rather detailed and intricate description of Zen practices, including meditation postures and the philosophy and history around Zen. A good read for someone serious about practising Zen. If you are merely curious or want a more high level overview, there are other simpler options such as Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind.

[Rhesa]

I`m still in Japan now,　and I just bought this book from a local bookstore called Junku-do in Ikebukuro. It`s funny that the more I read Heidegger`s Being and Time, the more I think that postmodern theology is close to the doctrine and practise of Japanese Zen Buddhism. For example Zen teaches that life must be freed from any purpose or meaning, it teaches not any notion about personal God nor sacred community. Daily life is spiritual.

For me all of this resembles Heidegger`s idea of ontical dimension of Dasein, where the meaning of being is partly derived from our engagement with `the furnitures of the world` which is daily life. It`s also similar to the concept of `Natural Supernaturalism` of the Romantic movement in Western Literature.

My last week trip to some Zen temples in Kyoto also somewhat persuaded me to think that the Japs have their own glory & pride of their Zen-ness [Garden, ikebana, samurai & tea ceremony:], something we just can`t nullify by simplistic religios jargon & blanket conceptualization. Hmm...I wonder as I wander though it`s not Christmas yet...

[Malissa · Rating 5 out of 5]

"The truth is, Zen is extremely elusive as far as its outward aspects are concerned; when you think you have caught a glimpse of it, it is no more there; from afar it looks so approachable, but as soon as you come near it you see it even further away from you than before." - D. T. Suzuki
"Personal experinece, therefore, is everything in Zen." - D. T. Suzuki
"Zen is provokingly evasive." - D. T. Suzuki
"This quietude and silence, however, does not point to mere idleness or inactivity." - D. T. Suzuki
"Zen teaches nothing. Whatever teachings there are in Zen, they come out of one's own mind. We teach ourselves; Zen merely points the way." - D. T. Suzuki

[Sean A. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Perhaps the most readable of Suzuki's treatises on Zen (thus the term "Introduction"). Clear and surprisingly humorous and instant, just like Zen itself. Suzuki takes great care to form an ethos out of the parables. These modern lessons run the risk of seeming like a bygone era, but they would serve us especially well in the here and now.

The unexpected but rigorous becoming of bliss.

[D.S. West · Rating 4 out of 5]

Aside from The Way of Chuang Tzu, the only book on spirituality I've read that didn't make me want to laugh or hurl. Zen is like one hand clapping, only louder. What else can I say? It's Zen, bitches.