Re: Zen and the dogma of non-duality
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 6:19 am
Research of emptiness and $3.98 will get you a 711 Big Gulp, alwayson, or a reasonable facsimile. Do you by chance mean experience or realizaiton of emptiness?
A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
https://www.dharmawheel.net:443/
I was being sarcastical. And yes I know, that's not a word!Namdrol wrote:A) There is no such a thing as non-dualityajax wrote:Not to suggest that there is no such thing as non-duality, no, of course not. The existence of non-duality is beyond questioning.
B) The existene of non-duality is not beyond question in any sense.
N
I guess you didn't see the earlier post which proves that non-duality is part of Buddhism.alwayson wrote:There is NO such thing as nonduality in Buddhism, including Zen.
Kyosan wrote:Non-dualism is part of Buddhism. For instance, here is a quote from an important Mahayana Buddhist scripturefrom chapter 2 of the Sutra of Innummerable Meanings
all laws were originally, will be, and are in themselves void in nature and form; They are Neither great nor small, Neither appearing nor disappearing, Neither fixed or movable, and neither advancing nor retreating; they are non dualistic, just emptiness. All living beings, however, discriminate falsely: "It is this" or "it is that", and "It is advantageous" or "It is disadvantageous"; they entertain evil thoughts, make various evil karmas, and thus transmigrate within the six realms of existence; and they suffer all manner of miseries, and cannot escape from there during infinite kotis of kalpas.
If you ask "Is X rational?" without any further specification then that could be interpreted to mean anything fromajax wrote:The poll performed it's function quite well and the instructions are clear and unambiguous.zangskar wrote:An ambiguous question + binary answering option = bad survey. I mean no offense, but I do think you should be open to the possibility that the difficulty in communicating could just as well be at your own side as with a general population of Western zen practitioners.
I can see their problem actually.ajax wrote:Not to suggest that there is no such thing as non-duality, no, of course not. The existence of non-duality is beyond questioning. I sometimes wonder though, maybe some have drunk the non-dual Kool-Aid a bit too deeply. For example, on a Zen Buddhist forum I created a poll which asked the simple question of whether Zen was rational or not. I gave explicit instructions that participants simply choose which yes or no answer felt more immediately right to them, and that they could go-off intellectually as they pleased in following comments. It was as thought they could not read the words I had posted.
Are some Zen practitioners in the West so attached to the ideas and culture of Zen that they cannot even entertain the notion of expressing how they feel in an nonintellectual or undogmatic way?
See the poll here: http://zenforuminternational.org/viewto ... =64&t=7231
Correct me if I am wrong, but I think what you are getting at is:ajax wrote: I've just been thinking lately that some Zen institutions in the West may be placing so much emphasis on emptiness that they've lost sight of Buddhism, and that's what might account for the many scandals in Western Zen that we've been hearing about.
[T]he real condition of existence appears in different forms, either pure or impure, but its real nature does not change. This is why it is said that it is nondual. "Nondual" is in fact a term that is used in dzogchen a great deal[.]alwayson wrote: There is NO such thing as nonduality in Buddhism, including Zen.
Buddism indeed show us nonduality. You should read genkojoan.Karma Dondrup Tashi wrote:[T]he real condition of existence appears in different forms, either pure or impure, but its real nature does not change. This is why it is said that it is nondual. "Nondual" is in fact a term that is used in dzogchen a great deal[.]alwayson wrote: There is NO such thing as nonduality in Buddhism, including Zen.
Dzogchen: the Self-Perfected State, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
You can't ape arrogance, son. You can only earn it. Then it'll be the real thing. Good luck with that.
The term non-dual (gnyis med, or advaya) is used frequently in Buddhist texts. The term non-duality (gnyis med nyid, advaita) is virtually never used, showing up only one time in the entire Kengyur, in a single passage in the Kalacakra tantra (hooray for a text searchable Tibetan canon!); and nineteen times in the Tengyur, the translations of Indian commentaries.Karma Dondrup Tashi wrote:[T]he real condition of existence appears in different forms, either pure or impure, but its real nature does not change. This is why it is said that it is nondual. "Nondual" is in fact a term that is used in dzogchen a great deal[.]alwayson wrote: There is NO such thing as nonduality in Buddhism, including Zen.
Dzogchen: the Self-Perfected State, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
You can't ape arrogance, son. You can only earn it. Then it'll be the real thing. Good luck with that.
I don't consider that Buddhism. Sorry.DarwidHalim wrote: Buddism indeed show us nonduality. You should read genkojoan.
Crappy english translation do not prove shit. Dependent Origination is NOT nonduality.Kyosan wrote: I guess you didn't see the earlier post which proves that non-duality is part of Buddhism.
Click Here:ajax wrote:Research of emptiness and $3.98 will get you a 711 Big Gulp, alwayson, or a reasonable facsimile. Do you by chance mean experience or realizaiton of emptiness?
I stand corrected. Reading the Wikipedia article is the realization of emptiness. Who knew!alwayson wrote:Click Here:ajax wrote:Research of emptiness and $3.98 will get you a 711 Big Gulp, alwayson, or a reasonable facsimile. Do you by chance mean experience or realizaiton of emptiness?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9A%C5%ABnyat%C4%81" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
*Edited for inappropriate language*ajax wrote: I stand corrected. Reading the Wikipedia article is the realization of emptiness. Who knew!
What do you think is the distinction between non-dual and non-duality?Namdrol wrote: The term non-dual (gnyis med, or advaya) is used frequently in Buddhist texts. The term non-duality (gnyis med nyid, advaita) is virtually never used, showing up only one time in the entire Kengyur, in a single passage in the Kalacakra tantra
Sorry, but I don't buy that. Some Vajrayana practitioners are like that, but certainly not all of them. It's my impression that most of the Vajrayana practitioners on this board are respectful of other forms of Buddhism including Zen.alwayson wrote:If you are making a poll whether Zen is rational or irrational, Vajrayana practitioners are going to say irrational.
Because Vajrayana practitioners hate Zen.
http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=5341" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The first refers to an absence of extremes. The second is advocating a philosophical position.Jinzang wrote:What do you think is the distinction between non-dual and non-duality?Namdrol wrote: The term non-dual (gnyis med, or advaya) is used frequently in Buddhist texts. The term non-duality (gnyis med nyid, advaita) is virtually never used, showing up only one time in the entire Kengyur, in a single passage in the Kalacakra tantra
I think you are confusing the two polls. The poll being discussed in this topic did give the following "specifications"zangskar wrote:If you ask "Is X rational?" without any further specification then that could be interpreted to mean anything fromajax wrote:The poll performed it's function quite well and the instructions are clear and unambiguous.zangskar wrote:An ambiguous question + binary answering option = bad survey. I mean no offense, but I do think you should be open to the possibility that the difficulty in communicating could just as well be at your own side as with a general population of Western zen practitioners.
-Given some goal (whicht was not specified) is X the rational way to reach that goal?
-Is X intended/supposed to be rational?
-Does X actually have some internal, logically consistent core?
-Even if there might not (currently) exist an authoritative logically consistent corpus to X, could such a corpus exist without substantially changing X?
and more
All these are valid interpretations of "is X rational?" when no further specifications are given.
If you wanted to know what people think you would have explained what exactly you mean by "rational", and then asked,
"given constraints a,b,c with the goal z is x rational?"
Asking if Zen is rational, yes or no, with no further specifications, is not much more precise than asking if Obama is rational, yes or no. If you want to know what people's subconscious associations are driving them to vote next time then that poll would have some valuable information. But if you want to know what people actually THINK about it, then it's worthless.
Lars
Please go by your gut reaction and choose yes or no, depending on whichever feels immediately the most right to you. If you feel that neither choice is appropriate you can comment on that while still choosing one or the other.
Thank you for your participation.
The poll does not ask voters to express Zen. It would be nice though if they did.DarwidHalim wrote:What is Zen? Zen is simply a symbol which refer to the reality, which can only be experienced and cannot be utter by words.
So Zen is inexpressible.
How can you ask something which is inexpressible?
Well, no, I meant it more like I wrote above, that some Zen institutions in the West may be placing too much emphasis on emptiness and not enough on a more full expression of Buddhism. A lot of sitting and devaluation of discrimination and moral reasoning make Zen master a bad boy, essentially.PadmaVonSamba wrote:Correct me if I am wrong, but I think what you are getting at is:ajax wrote: I've just been thinking lately that some Zen institutions in the West may be placing so much emphasis on emptiness that they've lost sight of Buddhism, and that's what might account for the many scandals in Western Zen that we've been hearing about.
Do Buddhists who purposefully engage in scandalous (misconduct) behavior rely on the idea of nonduality (hence no ultimate right or wrong) in order to rationalize their actions?
can we rephrase your question this way?
Oh look Wikipedia says that there is nondualism in Buddhism.alwayson wrote:Click Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9A%C5%ABnyat%C4%81" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I don't think anyone here is saying Zen is Avdaita.Namdrol wrote:The first refers to an absence of extremes. The second is advocating a philosophical position.
N