Zendo Terminology

The Art of Zendo

If you’re new to the concept of Zendo, allow me to explain. Zendo is an ancient form of art that originated in Japan. Its purpose is to help individuals find inner peace and cultivate mindfulness through the creation of intricate and abstract sculptures using stones.

In Zendo, the process of selecting and arranging stones is as essential as the final creation. It’s a meditative practice that requires focus, patience, and an open mind.

The Role of the Koan

One of the key aspects of Zendo is the use of koans. A koan is a riddle or a question that doesn’t have a straightforward answer. It is designed to provoke deep contemplation and challenge the participant’s thinking.

When someone engages in Zendo, they are presented with a koan to contemplate. The aim is not to find the “right” answer but rather to develop insight and understanding through the process of exploring various possibilities.

The Language of Zendo

In Zendo, there is a distinct language that participants use to communicate their observations and interpretations. Here are a few key terms:

Mondo

A mondo is a group discussion led by a Zendo master. It provides an opportunity for participants to share their thoughts and insights on a particular koan. The master guides the discussion, encouraging deep exploration and reflection.

Koan

A koan is a riddle or question that stimulates thought and reflection. It is the central element of Zendo practice. The koans in Zendo often take the form of paradoxes, challenging the participant to go beyond logical thinking and delve into the realm of intuition.

Emperor

In Zendo, the emperor is the person who selects the koan for others to contemplate. They carefully choose a koan that embodies a particular theme or concept, aiming to inspire contemplation and insight.

Buddha Nature

Buddha nature refers to the innate potential for awakening and enlightenment that exists within all beings. It is the belief that deep wisdom and compassion are inherent qualities of human nature. In Zendo, participants strive to connect with their Buddha nature through the practice of contemplation.

These are just a few examples of the terminology used in Zendo. By immersing oneself in the language and concepts of Zendo, one can gain a deeper understanding of this ancient art form and its transformative power.

Hey there! I want to share some terms and definitions with you that will help us understand and talk about rules better. Let’s dive in!

Color

Hey there! When it comes to Zendo, we have a few things to consider. The standard colors for Zendo are red, yellow, green, and blue, although you can mix things up and use different pyramid colors if you’d like. If a koan “contains a color,” it means it has at least one piece of that color. Sometimes a rule will mention the “number of colors” in a koan or a subset of its pieces.

Now let’s talk about size.

There are three sizes of pieces: small, medium, and large. A koan “contains a size” if it has any pieces of that size. Just like with colors, a rule may refer to the “number of sizes” in a koan or a subset of its pieces. The interesting thing about sizes is that they have specific relationships with each other. For example, we have “larger,” “smaller,” “largest,” and “smallest.” Pretty cool, huh?

When you look at a koan, you’ll notice that it always has a “largest size” and a “smallest size”. This means that within the koan, there are some pieces that are considered the largest, while others are the smallest. It’s pretty interesting, don’t you think?

Counting the Pieces

Now, each of these pieces has something called “pips” that show its size. A small piece has one pip, a medium piece has two pips, and a large piece has three pips. These pips represent the value or “pip-count” of a piece. If you add up the pip-counts of all the pieces in a group, you get the pip-count of that group. Sometimes a rule might talk about the pip-count of the whole koan, or just a specific set of pieces within it.

Let’s imagine a situation where I have a set of rules. These rules can be quite intricate and involve specific conditions. For instance, one of the rules might focus on the number of red pieces in a koan. This could include the total count of red pieces or the count of red pieces that touch the table and are pointing at blue pieces. Now, here’s an interesting twist – if a koan doesn’t have any red pieces, then the count of red pieces in that koan is zero. So, even if there are no red pieces, we still consider their count.

Let’s Talk about Orientation

Now, let’s dive into the concept of “orientation”. Each piece within a koan can be classified into three different orientations. The first one is “upright”. This means that the piece is pointing straight up with its base parallel to the table. It can either be on the table or above it. The second orientation is “flat”. In this case, the piece’s lowest triangular side is parallel to the table. Again, it can either be on the table or above it. The third and final orientation is what we call “weird”. This pretty much covers any other position that is neither upright nor flat.

Let’s talk about the different ways pieces can be positioned in this game. There are three possible orientations: flat, upright, and weird. Each orientation is unique and cannot be combined with the others. It’s important to remember that a piece’s orientation has nothing to do with whether or not it’s touching the playing surface.

Now, let’s break down each orientation:

Flat

A piece is considered “flat” when it is lying flat on the playing surface. It can be completely horizontal or slightly angled.

Upright

A piece is “upright” when it is standing vertically, with its base touching the playing surface. This is a common way to position pieces.

Weird

Finally, we have the “weird” orientation. This happens when a piece is neither flat nor upright. It might be angled in a strange way or nested inside another piece. It’s a bit unconventional but definitely adds an interesting twist to the game.

It’s worth noting that a group of pieces is considered to have the same orientation if they are all flat, upright, or weird. They don’t have to be facing the same direction.

Grounded and Ungrounded

Now, let’s discuss the concept of being “grounded” or “ungrounded”. A piece is considered “grounded” if any part of it is touching the playing surface. If not, it’s labeled as “ungrounded”. This attribute is completely independent of a piece’s orientation.

Direction

You may have heard the word “orientation” before, but today I want to talk to you about a related term called “pointing.” When we talk about pointing, we’re actually referring to the direction that objects or pieces are facing in relation to each other.

The Pointing Ray

Imagine that every piece has a special imaginary ray shooting out from its top, known as the “pointing ray.” This ray extends into space and can pass through other objects without any obstacles. However, if the pointing ray hits the table, it will curve and skim along the surface.

Now, when we say a piece is “pointing at” something, it means that its pointing ray is touching that object. We can refer to the different objects being pointed at as the first piece, the second piece, and so on. It’s also possible for a piece to “point through” one or more objects to reach another piece.

Touching

When two things come into contact with each other, we say that they are touching. It’s like when you touch something with your finger – you’re actually feeling it back!

Tower/stack

A tower or stack is a group of connected pieces where each piece touches the piece above it. It doesn’t matter if the tower is standing up, lying down, or looking strange. Even if the tower is on its side, we still say that the pieces above are “above” the ones below. But here’s the cool thing – the pieces inside a tower don’t make their own smaller towers. So a three-piece tower only has one tower inside it, not smaller towers within it. And even a single piece all on its own can be called a tower. Isn’t that interesting?

Height

When it comes to a koan, the highest point indicates the vertical position of a piece within it. A piece can be higher, lower, or at the same height as other pieces in the koan. Every koan will have at least one piece that is the highest and one piece that is the lowest. It’s possible for the same piece to be both the highest and the lowest.

Exact/Lesser

Instead of using vague statements like “has a red piece” or “has two upright pieces,” it’s better to be clear about whether you mean exactly that number or at least that number. Always use specific statements like “has exactly one red piece” or “has at least two upright pieces.”

Most/Many

In a koan, when there are more red pieces than any other color, that’s called a “plurality.” But if the red pieces outnumber all the other colors combined, it’s a “majority.”

Some people mix up these terms and say “majority” when they really mean “plurality.” If someone says either of these words when I’m the Master, I’ll ask them to explain what they mean.

How to Understand and Use These Definitions

Hey there! So, these definitions I’m about to share with ya serve two main purposes. First, they help players like you and me wrap our heads around the rules of the game. And second, they provide a common language that Masters and students can use to communicate with each other.

Now, let me tell ya, coming up with a good guess and communicating it can be pretty challenging for us players. And for the Masters, understanding and digging into those guesses can be just as tough. But here’s the thing – having a standard terminology can really smooth out this whole process for both of us.

But hold up, some Masters might worry that using this set of standard terms will limit their creativity when creating new rules. Well, I want to assure you that these definitions aren’t meant to box you in at all. For example, if you wanna make a rule where upright pieces don’t point to any pieces above them, you don’t have to change the meaning of the word “pointing.” You can still think outside the box!

Let me explain how you can create rules for your game. First, you need to decide which pieces will be important. You can specify that only pieces that are not pointing upwards matter. This means that only the pieces that are pointing in a different direction will be considered.

If you want to make a rule that says pieces can’t “point through” other pieces, you can simply specify that only the first piece being pointed at matters. This way, the rule will only take into account the piece that is being pointed at directly, and not any other pieces behind it.

But what if you want to use a completely new concept that is not mentioned on this page? Well, you are free to do that too! You can create a rule that involves the concept of “pointing with the corner of a piece”, even though it is not defined here. The definitions given on this page only cover the most common concepts that are used in many different rules.

When it comes to understanding concepts, especially in a learning environment, it’s crucial for both the teacher and the student to be on the same page. That’s why as the Master, I always make sure I understand the terminology the student is using, rather than relying solely on my own definitions.

When a student makes a guess about a rule, it’s my responsibility to interpret their guess based on their own terms. This means that even if they use basic terms like “pointing”, I should ask them to clarify what they mean. Similarly, students can also ask me about my terminology, although I’m not obliged to answer. Discussing common standards of terminology can make communication easier.

The Structure of a Rule

There are two simple ways to state a rule:

Here’s what I think: a koan has the Buddha-nature only if X, and it doesn’t have the Buddha-nature only if X. Usually, we don’t say “and only if” because it’s understood. If a rule says some koans have the Buddha-nature, then the others don’t. And if a rule says some koans don’t have it, then the rest don’t either.

Tricky Situations

Even though all the players agree on the definitions and terms, we might encounter some problems along the way. Here are a few examples:

• Let’s say we have a koan that says, “It has the Buddha-nature if all its red pieces are upright.” But what if the koan doesn’t have any red pieces?
• Similarly, what if a koan says, “It has the Buddha-nature if all its pieces are pointing in the same direction,” but the koan only has one piece?
• Lastly, what if a koan states, “It has the Buddha-nature if its largest piece is green,” but the koan has multiple largest pieces?

When faced with these conundrums, we can approach them in three different ways. I like to call the first approach the “natural language” approach. According to this approach, these statements imply that the thing being referred to must actually exist for the koan to comply with the rule.

So here’s the thing: there are these rules, or “koans,” that determine whether a koan has what’s called the Buddha-nature. Let me break it down for you. If a koan has all of its red pieces upright, then it has the Buddha-nature. This means there must be at least one red piece. If there are no red pieces at all, the koan is marked black.

But wait, there’s another rule. If all of the pieces in a koan are pointing in the same direction, it also has the Buddha-nature. However, there must be at least two pieces for this rule to apply. So, if a koan only has one piece, it’s marked black.

Lastly, there’s a rule about the largest piece in a koan. If the largest piece is green and there’s exactly one largest piece, then the koan has the Buddha-nature. But if there are two largest pieces, it’s marked black.

Hey there! Let’s dive into a different way of thinking about things. I like to call it the “western logic” approach. Basically, this approach suggests that we should translate these rules into clear and logical statements. For example, the rule “a koan has the Buddha-nature if all of its red pieces are upright” can become “a koan does not have the Buddha-nature if it contains a non-upright red piece”. So, if a koan doesn’t have any red pieces at all, it would be marked as white.

Another rule, “a koan has the Buddha-nature if all of its pieces are pointing in the same direction”, can be translated as “a koan does not have the Buddha-nature if it contains two pieces pointing in different directions”. This means a koan with only one piece would be marked white.

I’m going to tell you about a rule called “a koan has the Buddha-nature if its largest piece is green.” But I can explain it in a different way. It’s like saying “a koan has the Buddha-nature if it has a piece that is the biggest in the koan, is the only piece like that, and it’s green.” So, if a koan has two pieces that are the biggest, it would be marked black. (By the way, this is the same result we saw in the natural language approach).

Now, let me introduce you to the “mu” approach. It uses a Zen concept called “mu,” which means something like “unask the question.” According to this approach, if you point to a koan that doesn’t have any red pieces and ask “Are all of these red pieces upright?” the answer is “mu.” It means you should unask the question! In other words, you made an assumption that doesn’t work in this situation.

When it comes to understanding the “mu” approach, it’s important to remember that instead of using vague or ambiguous phrases like “all the red pieces” or “the largest piece,” it’s recommended to state your rule in a clear and unambiguous way right from the start. For example, if you mean to say that a koan has the Buddha-nature if it contains one or more red pieces and they are all upright, then say that exactly. On the other hand, if you mean to say that a koan has the Buddha-nature if it contains no red pieces, or if it contains red pieces and they are all upright, then say that. This approach ensures that there is no confusion or misunderstanding.

If someone else uses phrases like “all the red pieces” or “the largest piece,” don’t hesitate to ask them to clarify what they mean. It’s important to be explicit and clear at all times to avoid any confusion.

Understanding the Terminology

When I teach new players to play Zendo, I don’t immediately introduce them to the information in this chapter. That would just overwhelm and confuse them. Instead, I start by playing the game and selecting rules that only use the simplest features, like color and size.

Once we’ve played a few games, we can start talking about some of the basic terms mentioned above. By then, the players will be ready to understand them. In fact, after a few games, new players usually start asking about things like “pointing” and “stacking” without me even having to prompt them. The best time to talk about terminology is when it naturally comes up during the game.