Is Zen Rational?

[ajax]

I mean no disrespect with this simple poll question. I am truly curious about how people would choose to answer.

Thanks for any participation.

[Huifeng]

I mean no disrespect with this simple poll question. I am truly curious about how people would choose to answer.

Thanks for any participation.

How about "Both", and "Neither / Nor"?
And then the fifth option, "None of the above"?



~~ Huifeng

[LastLegend]

Rational in what way.
And not rational in what way.

[ajax]

I mean no disrespect with this simple poll question. I am truly curious about how people would choose to answer.

Thanks for any participation.

How about "Both", and "Neither / Nor"?
And then the fifth option, "None of the above"?



~~ Huifeng

Isn't that a no, my friend?

[ajax]

Rational in what way.
And not rational in what way.

1 based on or in accordance with reason or logic: I'm sure there's a perfectly rational explanation.
• (of a person) able to think clearly, sensibly, and logically: Andrea's upset—she's not being very rational.
• endowed with the capacity to reason: man is a rational being.
2 Mathematics (of a number, quantity, or expression) expressible, or containing quantities that are expressible, as a ratio of whole numbers. When expressed as a decimal, a rational number has a finite or recurring expansion.

[Virgo]

deleted

[LastLegend]

Rational in what way.
And not rational in what way.

1 based on or in accordance with reason or logic: I'm sure there's a perfectly rational explanation.
• (of a person) able to think clearly, sensibly, and logically: Andrea's upset—she's not being very rational.
• endowed with the capacity to reason: man is a rational being.
2 Mathematics (of a number, quantity, or expression) expressible, or containing quantities that are expressible, as a ratio of whole numbers. When expressed as a decimal, a rational number has a finite or recurring expansion.

1)Zen is rational
2)If experience can be quantified through mathematics, then Zen is rational

[LastLegend]

I mean no disrespect with this simple poll question. I am truly curious about how people would choose to answer.

Thanks for any participation.

How about "Both", and "Neither / Nor"?
And then the fifth option, "None of the above"?



~~ Huifeng

How about mind is mind?

Kevin

What is mind?

[Josef]

No.

[desertman001]

If our true nature is unbounded, unchanging, formless Mind, the same before birth as after death, then zen is perfectly rational.

[alwayson]

What is the motivation for this thread?

I hope that "ajax" is not conflating Zen with all of Buddhism.

[ajax]

I hope that "ajax" is not conflating Zen with all of Buddhism.

No worries.

[Quiet Heart]

The question is basicaly unanswerable, the presumption in the question, that Zen must be either logical or not logical is flawed.
In fact the true answer is....both Yes and No.
Up to a point Zen can be taught logically, until the student comes up against the limits of logical teaching. If the student is to go further on in his/her study....to "enlightenment", "realization", "understanding" ...or whatever you want to call it...the student must be forced out of that logical viewpoint and into a non-logical place where he/she can then see clearly outside of a logical perspective. Only then can the student see clearly and achieve that "realization".
That's why the real anser to the question is: Niether one or the other.
Or to put it another way, both "logical" and "non-logical" are only meaningless terms.... verbal ILLUSIONS generated by the mind....and have no inherent self-existant reality.
(slaps your face).

[catmoon]

I can't see any other answer to the OP than "sometimes". Zen practioners sit on cushions, not wild camels. Basically the reason is pretty rational, but I doubt the practice of sitting on cushions was derived from a process of logical analysis.

[ajax]

hello catmoon

I doubt the practice of sitting on cushions was derived from a process of logical analysis.

I also doubt the practice of zazen was derived from a process of logical analysis. However the question of how the practice was derived is a different question.

[kirtu]

Zen is rational, but it is not linear and it is not bound by logic.

Kirt

[ajax]

:shrug:
The question is basicaly unanswerable, the presumption in the question, that Zen must be either logical or not logical is flawed.
In fact the true answer is....both Yes and No.
Up to a point Zen can be taught logically, until the student comes up against the limits of logical teaching. If the student is to go further on in his/her study....to "enlightenment", "realization", "understanding" ...or whatever you want to call it...the student must be forced out of that logical viewpoint and into a non-logical place where he/she can then see clearly outside of a logical perspective. Only then can the student see clearly and achieve that "realization".
That's why the real anser to the question is: Niether one or the other.
Or to put it another way, both "logical" and "non-logical" are only meaningless terms.... verbal ILLUSIONS generated by the mind....and have no inherent self-existant reality.
(slaps your face).

hello Quiet Heart

I can appreciate what you say and have no objections. However, if what you say is true you must know how Zen is taught logically. How is Zen taught logically?

[ajax]

Zen is rational, but it is not linear and it is not bound by logic.

Kirt

Hello Kirt

Can you possibly elaborate? How can Zen be rational if it is not bound by logic or reasoning?

[StuartM]

I think it is rational, as much as any other form of Buddhism

And, I don't think we should necessarily conflate non-discursive with being illogical.

[Astus]

Is being rational Zen? Is being irrational Zen? Of course not. Can Zen be rationalised or "irrationalised"? Definitely. So it is not something but can be made into anything, such is the magic of mind. Zen can be presented in any way it is needed, that's the primary approach Zen has. That is quite a rational attitude that understands dependent origination and how to assist people in seeing the nature of mind, i.e. perceiving that ideas such as rationality and irrationality depend on each other without any real basis.