s to help us realize there is no ego. Unlike psychotherapy, Zen dialogues are short, sharp and to the point, with no concessions to personal problems. So is it possible to make any sense out of Zennists? Are they serious or are they just full of crap? Well the answer is yes. They are serious, although we cannot hope to capture their perspective completely with words, which confirms zen's obsession with that very point; the limits of language. We know very well that menus aren't meals, and maps aren't really land. The point Zennists want to make is that too often 'spiritual nourishment' ends with 'menu reading'. They believe that words will intervene with a delicate meaning. The Flower Sermon would've been pointless if Buddha just sat down and said what he meant. The Zennists would say that he couldn't have. Reason is too short a ladder to reach the truths full height. The reasons that language misrepresents reality are many. Language generates self consciousness. Words like "I", "me", and "mine", forces one into phrasing things with the 'self' as the center of dialogue. Language is said to substitute direct experience, as a for instance:mountains are not "mountains" and corndogs are not "corndogs". Mountains are mountains and corndogs are corndogs. Language represents the past and the future as being real, when in fact only the here and now exist. Language contributes to the misconception about the past and the future. We can begin to understand Zen by defining it's four key terms; zazan, koan, sanzen, and satori. Zazen literally means 'seated meditation'. The bulk of Zen training is going to be spent in meditation for hours in the lotus position, eyes half open gazing floorward. (i made that word up) There you sit, hour after hour, year after year, trying to awaken the Buddha nature within you. A distinct feature of this meditation is the koans they attend to. A koan is a problem in essence, but a su...
