Post: https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/comments/1e3shwu/zen_has_no_private_understanding/

Context of Mazu, Case 27, 33, and the Case of Zhaozhou's enlightenment

ewk confused, but it gets resolved

Problems with meaning of "wisdom": Catholics/Buddhists say wisdom is "right thinking".

new agers think wisdom is supernatural knowledge through emotion (topicalism)

Zen and Philosophy (especially Natural Philosophy aka Science) see wisdom as knowledge of objects

Including objects of thought.

Lots of education required:

20th century failures: Catholics/Budddhists have contextual assumptions, Chinese and English have linguistic assumptions, Zen is a whole different context... with it's own culture and assumptions.

Trusting Nanquan's advice to be sincere and useful versus Trust in Mind.

Trust in mind, not trust in emptiness, no, negation, or sinlessness.

Pilgrams, Footloose, Latin dancing, Along Came Polly, express your feelings with your hips.

Yogi Berra Astroemi: The only way to do it is to do it.

New Age Mysticsm is private understanding that can't and won't justify itself publicly. Zen is private understanding that is only understanding when justified in public.

Pang, Xiangyan, enlightenment is private, DEMONSTRATION IS ALWAYS ONLY PUBLIC