0xbt

And then reject the two statements. I will have to acknowledge that I am hunting for the viewpoint you may have experienced 20 or so yrs back on some of these issues or much more of a comparative viewpoint from then to now. The most legitimacy Hakuin would grant to the nembutsu was to accept that it could purpose in a very similar style to the koan (and it is not as if the koan is paramount in any case - Bankei, possibly the most immediate Zen grasp who at any time lived, turned down it totally as very little extra than a gimmick, saying it was just 'studying previous waste paper'). And that is all I want it to be, for people who read it, like myself, to consider it. They may well even imagine they know it, and consider it can be not just a belief. While it might be argued that this spontaneous revelation is not as 'pure' as Zen satori - which is also abrupt and small-lived - in that it requires a type, it could nevertheless be claimed that this form is, like Zen, also a transmission of the 'wordless doctrine', but of a unique high-quality. Zen satori and the Pure Land revelation are really equal but with this big difference: satori emphasises prajna (wisdom), even though Amida's grace emphasises karuna (compassion).