I have read about five translations of Dogen's "Genjokoan" (the actualisation of reality) They vary greatly. 

I have tracked down another translation of the excerpt from "Uji" (Being/Time) given in my first post.

Here it is:-

You reckon time only as something that does nothing but pass by. You do not understand it as something not yet arrived. Although our various understandings are time, there is no chance for them to be drawn in by time. There has never yet been anyone who supposed time to be coming and going who has penetrated to see it as being-time dwelling in its dharma-position. What chance is there, then, for a time to arrive when you will break through the barrier into total emancipation? Even if someone did know that dwelling-position, who would be able truly to give an utterance that preserved what he had thus gained? And even were someone able to utter such an utterance at will, he could still not avoid groping to make his original face immediately present.

What are the implications of this? Do the two translations come to the very same thing? if so, what is this "thing"?

Or are they two separate "things"?

"We are what we understand"

The Word as Text and the Living Word.

Having waffled in The Cafe, here is an excerpt from "Uji"....

Do not think that time simply flies away. Do not understand “flying” as the only function of time. If time simply flew away, a separation would exist between you and time. So if you understand time as only passing, then you do not understand the time being. To grasp this truly, every being that exists in the entire world is linked together as moments in time, and at the same time they exist as individual moments of time. Because all moments are the time being, they are your time being.

Dōgen Zenji, Uji

I think of D.T.Suzuki who speaks of an eschatology of "the present moment".

In the West, time is often understood in a completely linear way. Often we can simply end up living for tomorrow, a life then of anticipations and epitaphs. Never of the present - which is all moments. 

The Christmas festivities over I find myself back in MacDonald's with a large white coffee. A little taste of paradise believe it or not.

I am turning to Dogen and his writings, but as is said we can set the sails but must always wait for heaven's will. Dogen's actual writings are very dense, sometimes impenetrable, at least to me. And judging by the way different commentators see different things, well......what can you say?

What Dogen himself said was "where you do not understand, there is your understanding." And given that he also said that "we are what we understand", you might begin to see the problem! 

Well, before I leap deeply into his Shōbōgenzō, "The Treasury of the True Dharma Eye" , I am reading a novel by Ruth Odeki called "A Tale For the Time Being". The title is a slight play on words of one of Dogen's essays/sermons, called "Uji" which means Being/Time. Time is being and being is time. Which when you throw in the idea that time is only the "visible" part of eternity, then you have much to ponder - if you like that sort of thing.

Some don't. They are what they understand. They are satisfied with that, and perhaps like to call it "all truth"....... but no matter.

The book by Ruth Odeki is very good. You realise as you read that the deep subtleties of Dogen's view of time is being presented, yet in story form, simply.

Part of the story - it has many sides - is of a young Japanese student who gets called up by the army in WW2. And is trained to become a kamikaze pilot. The first thing he is taught though is how to use his rifle to kill himself. He laughs when he gets his call up papers, simply at the thought of himself as a warrior. He is the peaceful sort.

Finally his mother receives his remains in a box sent by the Government, this after his kamikaze death dive. The box is of course empty (except for a few banal words from the Government)

The emptiness of the box is pregnant with meaning, certainly if you are a Dharma follower. The emptiness holds all that the young man was in and through time. In a very deep way, he still lives. His love, his hopes, his dreams.

His mother, after receiving the box, becomes a Buddhist nun. As an 103 year old she guides another young person, a girl, in ways that again explicate some of Dogen's teachings.

The portions of the book written by this young girl are often the highlight. Very funny at times. Very candid. There is no soft sell.

Well, my coffee is getting cold.

13 hours ago, romansh said:

Not if Santa is at the azimuth ... London will be closer.

Hi Rom, you always were the argumentative one!

😀

6 hours ago, PaulS said:

Festive Greetings, Merry Christmas, Happy Saturnalia - whatever your reason for celebrating today, may it be joyous, filled with love and laughter, and remind us all that no matter what our beliefs, we are all in this together!

Thanks Paul

Yes, it is always and ever US.

Never "others" or "them"

Or as one wag once said:- There are two types of people in the world - those that divide the world into two kinds of people and those who don't.

Happy Christmas!

Just to say, I invited a Christian (Protestant Reform Fundamentalist) to comment on the above post - which I posted on another Forum - and his response was:-

"Why would I as a Christian be inspired by the theology of a Buddhist Monk?

That Catholic monk ought to be kicked out of his monastery."

😀

I feel a waffle coming on, so be warned. Those with the attention span of goldfish can safely move on to greener pastures......or is it wetter waters?

Anyway, the meeting of religions.

As I see it, the Religions meet when people of different Faiths meet. What can unite them then is not doctrine, nor belief as such, but that which I often call the Living Word, the spirit that blows where it will.

One such meeting was between the Catholic Trappist monk Thomas Merton and the "zen man" (Buddhist) D.T.Suzuki. Here is Merton's testimony:-

I saw Dr. Suzuki only in two brief visits and I did not feel I ought to waste time exploring abstract, doctrinal explanations of his tradition. But I did feel that I was speaking to someone who, in a tradition completely different from my own, had matured, had become complete and found his way. One cannot understand Buddhism until one meets it in this existential manner, in a person in whom it is alive. Then there is no longer a problem of understanding doctrines which cannot help being a bit exotic for a Westerner, but only a question of appreciating a value which is self-evident.

Yes, self-evident, if we look for the fruits of the spirit and not simply look for a mirror image of ourselves or only recognise the words of our own belief system. As Merton said elsewhere, "The beginning of love is to let those we love be perfectly themselves, and not to twist them to fit our own image. Otherwise we love only the reflection of ourselves we find in them."

Sadly, some have not even touched the beginning of Love.

Thomas Merton and Suzuki only met on two occasions. Once was in New York when Merton had managed to escape from his monastery  and was able to enjoy a bit of NY Jazz. When they parted Merton read to Suzuki the words of a South American theologian:-

Praise be to God that I am not good!

Suzuki, apparently deeply touched, said:- "That is so important"

When some look at two religions they hear only themselves, their own creeds, beliefs, and thus decry those of another. Here, in the meeting of Merton and Suzuki we hear the spirit blowing. Suzuki, an "atheist", Merton a "theist" yet both able to dispense with labels and words. Suzuki could relate to the South American theologian's words from the heart of his own faith.

Another example was when Merton quoted to Suzuki the words of the Christian mystic Meister Eckhart:-

“In giving us His love God has given us the Holy Spirit so that we can love Him with the love wherewith He loves Himself.”

Merton adds:- The Son Who, in us, loves the Father, in the Spirit, is translated thus by Suzuki into Zen terms: “one mirror reflecting another with no shadow between them.” (Suzuki, Mysticism: East and West, p. 41)

Elsewhere, Eckharts words (which Merton says are perfectly orthodox and traditionally Christian) are continued:-

We love God with His own love; awareness of it deifies us.

Suzuki hears with approval, comparing it with the Prajna wisdom of Zen.

As I see it, if we truly begin to touch the heart of our Faith we do not withdraw into a tight circle, seeking to protect its various creeds, but we begin to reach out, as spoken of here by another Buddhist:-

The dharma, can be discovered through the Buddhist tradition, but Buddhism is by no means the only source of dharma. I would define dharma as anything that awakens the enlightened mind and brings on the direct experience of selflessness. The teachings of Christ are prefumed with dharma. There is dharma in jazz, in beautiful gardens, in literature, in Sufi dance, in Quaker silence, in shaman healing, in projects to care for the homeless and clean up the inner cities, in Catholic ritual, in meaningful and competent work. There is dharma in anything that causes us to respect the innate softness and intelligence of ourselves and others. When the Buddhist system is applied properly, it does not turn us inward toward our own organizations, practices, and ideas. The system has succeeded when the Buddhist can recognize the true dharma at the core of all other religions and disciplines that are based on respect for the human image, and has no need to reject them.


And so, as I see it, there are Words and there are Living Words. If we are truly children of grace we look not for others to echo our own words, but are open instead to the fruits of the spirit. In any meeting of people there will always be truth and error on both sides - that is our finitude. What unites is not Creed, what unites is Love - a love which Reality shares freely, in which we "live and move and have our being".

It is truly desperately sad that some will simply say that there can be no meeting between truth (theirs) and error (anything contrary) They will trust in being "of the truth", awaiting the "reward" of their God in the next life. If their trust was truly in God, in Love, in Grace, then they would have no such attitude.

That's it. I doubt many - if any - will have got this far. But I find expressing myself therapeutic.

3 hours ago, Thijs Hottenhuis said:

Thank you for sharing, nice graphics you use. This is my own blog at the moment, recently started: https://sharingchristianinspiration.substack.com/

Thanks Thijs, I'll take a look. And the rananda site.

As pure self advertisement, the last post turned into a Blog in glorious technicolor HERE :-

http://mydookiepops.blogspot.com

14 hours ago, Thijs Hottenhuis said:

 I do not see the earth as an eternal place, just as a place where we bring the love and learn our lessons, before moving on. 

Hello again Thijs. You seem to be a friendly chap, which invites discussion and dialogue, unlike some who have drifted into this rather quiet and sedate forum  - which suits a fine upstanding English Gentleman like myself who never voted for Brexi!)

Well, nothing is eternal except eternity itself. Things are always moving on. The problems seem to begin when we want them to stop, to hold onto the moment

William Blake:-

He who binds to himself a joy
Does the winged life destroy;
But he who kisses the joy as it flies
Lives in eternity's sun rise.

There is a fine dialogue between "east" and "west" (to use the terms loosely) in "Wisdom in Emptiness", the second section of Thomas Merton's book of essays "Zen and the Birds of Appetite".

It is between Merton himself, the Catholic Trappist monk, and the "zen man" D.T. Suzuki. 

They agree on many things (it is actually a dialogue concerning the "Fall" and of how we can regain Paradise) but part ways on the subject of eschatology.

Suzuki speaks of the "eschatology of the present moment", the eternal NOW, while Merton speaks of some sort of "beyond", of some final consumation in God's Kingdom when all things are handed over to the Son. One never knows with Merton (the anti-monk) as to whether or not he is paying lip service to the Catholic censors. I've stopped trying to guess. Anyone who dallies with young nurses must become suspect.....😀

But whatever, in the past I have tended to side with Suzuki. But the 13th century zen master Dogen seems to offer some sort of reconciliation to the parting of the ways of Suzuki and Merton.

Dogen agrees that the present moment is the "only" moment, yet there is movement toward Buddha. 

But as I see it, this must in a sense be a movement of no-calculation (Japanese "hakarai") Our definitions and conclusions, our beliefs, can forestall the movement, and hold us in the past.

As is said in St Marks gospel, in one of the Parables of the Kingdom:-

The earth brings forth fruits of herself

We can set the sails but then we must wait for the wind to blow.

Who is in control? The spirit blows where it will. 

I rest in Faith rather than belief. Faith "lets go" in pure trust, Grace. Belief clings. Faith unites. Beliefs divide us. 

We need to let go and trust the river of change, or as one joker once said:- "Stand upon the firm ground of emptiness". Or, again, as per the Christian mystic St John of the Cross:-

If we wish to be sure of the road we walk on then we must close our eyes and walk in the dark

Whatever, I still look to Dogen at the moment. He had his own questions, his own Life Koan. In concise form:-

“If all sentient beings possess the buddha-nature and Tathagata exists without change - as enunciated in the Nirvana Sutra - then why must people develop the aspiration for awakening and vigorously engage in austerities in order to realize this truth?”

Later on in life he wrote himself:-

Fundamentally, the basis of the Way is thoroughly pervasive, so how could it be contingent on practice and realization? The vehicle of the ancestors is naturally unrestricted, then why should we expend sustained effort? Surely whole being is far beyond defilement, so who could believe in a method to cultivate it? Never is the Way apart from this very place, so what is the use of a journey to practice it? Yet, if there is a hair’s breadth of distinction between existence and training, this gap becomes as great as that between heaven and earth. Once the slightest sense of liking or disliking something arises, confusion reigns and one’s mind is hopelessly lost in delusion

If I were a Christian I would be a Universalist. Which would change a few words, of Dogen's Life Koan. i.e. If all are saved, what must we do to be saved? 

Well, I have waffled enough. I find myself in MacDonald's with a coffee and just start tapping on my Kindle. I find it therapeutic. And as others have observed, I'm fundamentally harmless.

7 hours ago, Thijs Hottenhuis said:

Thanks for responding, Tariki. I believe we are asked by Jesus, personally, to do works. “Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons.” All the healing, the teaching, is a form of active works, which I believe is one of the differences between Buddhism and Christianity. About evangelising: if we are led by Divine Guidance, it can only be a blessing, but if we are led by our personal opinions, it can indeed take a nasty turn. That is how I understand things. Thank you for welcoming me here, Tariki. Blessings to you!

 

Oh, and just to add, I am not a Christian. However, as I was once considered totally harmless (😀) by the then Administrator of this Forum, I was given permission to post wherever I liked. 

Maybe you would like to pop across to the "Other Wisdom Traditions" and take a peep at some poetry of Dogen?

Whatever, enjoy the Forum.

7 hours ago, Thijs Hottenhuis said:

 All the healing, the teaching, is a form of active works, which I believe is one of the differences between Buddhism and Christianity.

 

Is this a form of the "languid east" syndrome? 😀

Yes, it is Dharma for the sake of Dharma. All else, including "works" are simply by-products. 

Which should be evident to any Christian who relies upon Grace for salvation. 

Thank you. 

I don't really feel any special commission to do anything. In the Buddhist tradition it tends to be said that we should study Dharma for the sake of Dharma. The rest is left to the way of no-calculation. 

Maybe the greatest thing is genuine transformation. As you imply, this is not really our work. I think that when we seek explicitly to evangelise it can all take a nasty turn!

Sadly, many DO put limits - if it is not in the name of Jesus it is not recognised, even denied. 

Anyway, welcome to the forum.

31 minutes ago, Divine_will said:

In the end there is only one way to understand the bible. Unless you take verses out of context, then you can make it fit everything you want. Putting stuff into a blender and adding water to the wine doesn't create a nice meal. If you can't cook then maybe you should refrain from the kitchen. Gods word is free anyway. No need to prepare it yourself

The context is for God to give. The spirit blows where it will. 

To simply presume, in a circular fashion (i.e. God reveals his true Word to the true believer, I am a true believer therefore he has revealed its true meaning to me) that one's own understanding is, in effect, infallible, is not a sign of either Faith or Grace, or of trust in God. It is more a sign of a trust in oneself.

All the best.

Another poem by Dogen:-

Another poem of Dogen:-

In the heart of the night,
Moonlight framing
A small boat drifting,
Tossed not by the waves
Nor swayed by the breeze

The meaning of this, at least for Dogen, can be illuminated by his words found in his "Genjokoan" (the actualisation of reality) He writes:-

If one riding in a boat watches the coast, one mistakenly perceives the coast as moving. If one watches the boat in relation to the surface of the water, then one notices that the boat is moving. Similarly, when we perceive the body and mind in a confused way and grasp all things with a discriminating mind, we mistakenly think that the self-nature of the mind is permanent. When we intimately practice and return right here, it is clear that all things have no fixed self.

Dogen, in his poem, gives voice to the vulnerability of enlightenment. We do not possess enlightenment. It possesses us.

"A clearly enllghtened person falls into the well. How is this so?" (A zen koan)

And Thomas Merton:-

We stumble and fall constantly, even when we are most enlightened.

As I see it, many fear vulnerability. We can cling to being right, of having "all truth" - but Faith is of another order. It is a letting go, trusting in becoming.

Which is the "eastern" way of seeing things. Becoming, not Being. The eastern preoccupation with impermanence is well known to anyone who approaches its poetry, and impermanence can - and does - bring suffering when we cannot trust in the river of change.

But impermanence, if we "let go", can transform the suffering. But Impermanence, it becomes clear, doesn’t mean that things last for a while then pass away: things arise and pass away at the same time. That is, things don’t exist as we imagine they do. Much of our experience of reality is illusory. And this is why we suffer. We attempt to hold onto happiness, as if it is a thing, a state of being, but as William Blake has written:-

He who binds to himself a joy
Does the winged life destroy
He who kisses the joy as it flies
Lives in eternity's sunrise

Therefore Being IS becoming. "God" can become an idol. Faith for me is in letting go. 
 

1 hour ago, Divine_will said:

You donnot belief in the bible. You just want to be part of a group. Everyone sins, but you love your sin so much without any conviction of the spirit that you even want to rewrite the bible

I see no reason for you to claim this. I do not wish to rewrite anything. I simply understand the words in a way different from your own. 

All the best

36 minutes ago, Divine_will said:

It does matter what you belief because you run a Christian website. That is why. You are an atheist that is clear and you are polluting the faith.

That you hold such a grudge to Christianity is kinda sad. You probably got a bad childhood or something or els you would not go above and beyond infiltrating the faith with false doctrines.

All this time and money you put into this facade could have been invested in a good hobby or something useful. But no, instead of that you decide to cry over your childhood and pay money to invision community as revenge on your Christian parents.

But let me tell you: these people you are trying to lead astray are not Christians. Most of them, like 99% will not stay in the faith. The faith always had these lukewarm folks. You are basically just giving them a platform for a short time they identify as Christian. They are of no use because they did not come to faith with a repenting heart but instead had a urge to become part of a group. Continuing their sin is for most of them more important than turning for it, because they donnot have a repenting heart. So they want to twist and even rewrite the bible if possible. I tell you, they are not Christians and you are wasting your time on them hoping to lead them astray. 

Hi, if I might enter this friendly discussion.....

This is a Progressive Christianity website. It is NOT a Protestant Reform Tradition/Fundamentalist website.

Please respect that. Sadly, your judgemental attitude says little in favour of your own views and opinions - which are just that....views and opinions. 

Thank you. 

A cut and paste from my "missionary activity" 😀 on another Forum!

In one or two posts I have referred to what I term "Jesusainity". This is not meant to have been disparaging in any essential way, although I must admit to being dismayed by those who insist upon "one way only" and who then cite the usual couple of verses from the New Testament that they consider closes the matter.

If anyone is interested - and I guess that most are not, either being non-religious in any way, or being an ardent "one wayer" convinced of their infallibility - then I would simply seek to explain.

There is Jesusainity and there is Christianity.

Relevant here is a form of debate, argumentation, discussion, more prevalent in the East than the West i.e. argument by relegation. Here opposing positions are treated not by refuting them, but by accepting them as true, but only true as a part of the full picture. Logically, it broadens the scope of discussion. Even if I am persuaded that another’s view is incorrect in some respect, it is nevertheless a real point of view and my theory of reality must be able to account for its existence. In effect the discussion involves not refuting the position of another but will be competing over which position can relegate which. And so, which is relegated? Jesusainity or Christianity?

Christianity simply says that the words (found in the most "spiritual" of the Gospels, St John) "I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me" are the words of the Eternal Logos - as spoken of in the prelude to St John's Gospel.

Again, the "no other name" verse should be seen in the context of its historical proclamation, this in line with the Catholic Church's understanding of how we should approach and understand inspired scripture:-

To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to "literary forms." For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another. (Dei Verbum, III, 12, 2)

(Again, in this instance, as is said, "what is in a name"? "Jesus" is simply an anglicised form of the original Hebrew name)

Accepting all this, what do we have? Christianity expands beyond the theology of the Protestant Reform Tradition, which is time-conditioned, insular and in fact shut off from the whole world of our various Faith Traditions, enclosed within itself, the "only truth". Expands instead to embrace all movements of the Spirit (that "blows where it will") - which explains just why the fruits of the spirit.....

The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faith, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

.....can be seen throughout history, in various individuals, of all Faiths, and sometimes of none. The Lord knows his own, as is said!

Thomas Merton once said that we should never presume that Christ is in our own heart if we cannot also see Him and find Him in the hearts of others most remote from ourselves. I think this is true.

I guess I am quite "remote" to some here being a non-theistic Buddhist of the Pure Land path. But we say:-

My eyes being hindered by blind passions,
I cannot perceive the light that grasps me;
Yet the great compassion, without tiring,
Illumines me always

(Shinran, from "Hymns of the Pure Land Masters", verse 95)

Which corresponds with the words of Julian of Norwich of the theistic Christian tradition:-

If there be anywhere on earth a lover of God who is always kept safe, I know nothing of it, for it was not shown to me. But this was shown: that in falling and rising again we are always kept in that same precious love.


I appreciate that there will be some who will continue to believe and insist that the God they worship turns His face away from those who - in their own time worn phrase - have not "accepted Jesus as their own personal Savior". Yet all I am saying here is that in Christianity, just how Christ is "accepted" can take infinite forms according to the almost infinite number of individual human beings.

The spirit blows where it will.

That is all. Make of it what you will.

For those who are interested, I find it therapeutic to transform my various posts here and elsewhere into Blogs, adding suitable pictures.

You can catch it here...

https://mydookiepops.blogspot.com/

Google statistics now tell me my blog had been viewed over 13000 times, from many different countries. I suspect some "views" are by Bots, robots sent out to glean useful info to transform and use in scams!

8 minutes ago, PaulS said:

Thanks Derek

It's a hapless cause I know, but I can't help myself!

Yes, I know the feeling. I've been active on Similar Worlds and continue to cross swords with the self-proclaimed "true believers" (as in the circular argument "God reveals the truth of his Word to the true believer, I am a true believer and so he has revealed its truth to me"......😀)

I guess the Lord knows his own.

PS I tend to keep changing my screen name to keep ahead of the pack.......Telegram Sam, Pipedreams, and - as they say - many others.

On 12/10/2023 at 12:29 AM, PaulS said:

I didn't mean to scare you off, Divine Will.  Did you wish to discuss the matter, or did you just want to post your say and then leave?

Ha ha.......😋     

Still fighting the good fight!

All the best Paul.

To what shall I
Liken the world?
Moonlight, reflected
In dewdrops,
Shaken from a crane's bill.

Many commentators, led astray by "the languid east" nonsense, and thoughts of maya (understood as "illusion") see such words, understand the poem, as being some some sort of diminution of the individual, and our world as being in a sense unreal.

Sir Edwin Arnold wrote, in his epic poem of the Buddha's life, "The Light of Asia", ended that poem with the words (upon the death of the Buddha as he enters Nirvana):-

"The dewdrop slips into the shining sea". More misunderstanding.

In fact, it is more that the shining sea slips into the dewdrop - yet even that does not capture the Buddhist position, which in fact is a no-position that supecedes all positions.

Getting back to Dogen's poem, here is a more perceptive understanding:-

“According to this verse, the entire world is fully contained in each and every one of the innumerable dewdrops, each one symbolic of the inexhaustible contents of all impermanent moments. Here the dewdrops no longer suggest illusion in contrast to reality because they are liberated by their reflection of the moon’s glow. Conversely, the moon as a symbol of Buddha-nature is not an aloof realm since it is fully merged in the finite and individuated manifestations of the dew. Just as the moon is one with the dewdrops, the poem itself becomes one with the setting it depicts.” (Steven Heine)

Thus the particular is seen to contain the universal. Each and every particular. Every moment. Every NOW. In this world, not some imagined "other" promised beyond the grave.

Another astute commentator Hee-Jin Kim invites us to pay particular attention to the pivotal word “shaken.” Many examples could be given of static images of the moon in a dewdrop or the moon reflected in still water but, by virtue of being shaken, the metaphor becomes dynamic and interactive.

So much for illusion, the diminution of the individual!

The Way does not exist to be found. Each moment is the way. 

14 hours ago, John Asher said:

 

There is more to 
your life and being; 
far more to understand 
and become than 
you will yet imagine.

Though you learn much, 
the mystery remains.

 

 

Hi John,

I saw your first posts here some time ago. I did think of responding with a quick word, but my coffee got cold in McDonalds and I was on my way.....😀

I'm taking a rest from my usual Forum so popped back here and saw your latest posting. I must admit to not reading much of you entire "Logos of Sophia" but the verse above which I have quoted caught my mind/heart. It fell into my current preoccupations and thinking (in between cracking further levels of Candy Crush Soda Saga) which revolves around relating Jung's so called "Individuation" process with the Buddhist "anatta" teaching (not self) Apparently, superficially, at loggerheads, yet as usual my own mind seeks for wholeness, unity, correspondences.

I think that there must always be "mystery" beyond (and within) our being (or non-being) Without mystery, without the "something beyond, yet still to be" then it is easy to congeal into a finished product, a self-satisfied and "justified" self. 

New Age jargon speaks of living in the Now, and many seem to propose this. "Live in the Now, man!" goes the mantra. But if we get away from linear time frames into a multi-dimensional realisation of Time, any "Now" will always include before and after in ways that then add the "mystery". 

My own leanings are towards the synthesis of zen and Pure Land Buddhism, and the 13th century zen master Dogen has been (and is) a great guide and mentor to me. 

But I must go. Shopping to get, family chores. But I remember the story of Dogen, when in China, searching for his very own path, time and place. Searching for a "master" who would pass muster and do the job for him. In his travels he met an aged cook of a local monastery and had a short conversation, which ended with Dogen saying to the old fellow:- "Would you not rather be studying the Dharma than cooking for the novices at the monastery?" The old guy just laughed out loud! Dogen, when he eventually found his very own path, time and place, only then fully understood why. 

 Anyway, all the best. It is quiet around here. I've simply indulged myself with my own musings.

All the best.

Derek

7 hours ago, PaulS said:

 

I guess for me, the term 'healing' implies that something is not as it should be - it needs to be 'fixed'.  Maybe I just prefer 'pure acceptance' and 'tools' to deal with that which we don't like, rather than the term healing.  For me any 'transformation' is that to a creature that knows how to use various tools to manage life.

Yes, thanks, you make a good point. Words can be very powerful and suggestive. Maybe "healing" will fade from my mind!

12 hours ago, PaulS said:

Maybe this is a minor distraction from your post.....

Hi Paul, well I don't mind minor distractions, its full blown arguments that rub me up the wrong way......😀

Maybe I was unclear, but I was contrasting two ways of understanding Christianity, one that sees the end result as the final restoration of all things, and one where the end result is an eternal division between the lost and the saved. I was saying that those who look to the former would be more likely to begin to mirror and reflect back a life of healing.

As I have said, I actually subscribe to neither one nor the other. 

On this subject, this was the one disagreement between Merton and Suzuki in their dialogue "Wisdom in Emptiness". Suzuki spoke of an "eschatology of the present moment" while Merton saw such as not final but needed the final handing over of "all things to Christ" in some sublime reality beyond us now to conceive.

Basically I am with Suzuki. Absolute beginnings and final ends are not part of the Dharma, such things (speculation) being antithetical to the actual living of the "holy life". Again, it is avidya, ignorance, that is the problem, not "sin" (against a Supreme Being)

Just to add, pure acceptance is, paradoxically, the catalyst of genuine transformation (healing) and therefore I see us as on the same page. ("Transformation" would be on-going)

PS. Just as an edit, here is Merton in his own words where he speaks of some final reality:-

This is the real dimension of Christianity, the eschatalogical dimension which is peculiar to it, and which has no parallel in Buddhism. The world was created without man, but the new creation which is the true Kingdom of God is to be the work of God in and through man. It is to be the great, mysterious, theandric work of the Mystical Christ, the New Adam, in whom all men as “one Person” or one “Son of God” will transfigure the cosmos and offer it resplendent to the Father. Here, in this transfiguration, will take place the apocalyptic marriage between God and His creation, the final and perfect consummation of which no mortal mysticism is able to dream and which is barely foreshadowed in the symbols and images of the last pages of the Apocalypse.