Zen beliefs.

Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Malcolm »

Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 3:21 pm
narhwal90 wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 3:15 pm If your concern about zen is its beliefs, perhaps share some of yours?
With regard to Zen as a method/practice my main belief is that Meditation/dhayana works.
What does "works" mean?
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by LastLegend »

Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 4:38 pm So who is it that practices? Its me. And those who claim non self,have you actually experienced this or is it deferring to a teachers explanation?
Interesting question, so who or what is me? Or my teacher asked who is in that place?
It’s eye blinking.
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Sunyata and Anaya aren’t beliefs, they can be experientally verified.

When I was practicing Zen one exercise I was given was to come up with three things that ‘define who I am’. Try this.

What you will find is that you can only list things that relate to other things. For instance ‘I’m an artist’ describes your relationship to art, ‘I’m a Buddhist’ describes your relationship to Buddhism, etc. It is impossible to describe or find any self nature.

I’m gonna guess you don’t really practice under a teacher, and don’t know much about the things you are criticizing.

Perhaps slow down and stop assuming you are so awesome that you can reinvent the wheel after two weeks of Zazen or whatever.

Alternately, you can just practice meditation and not worry about Buddhism at all, and just get the benefits of a calmer mind, less reactivity, etc.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
Zenny
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue May 11, 2021 8:15 am

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Zenny »

LastLegend wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:20 pm
Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 4:38 pm So who is it that practices? Its me. And those who claim non self,have you actually experienced this or is it deferring to a teachers explanation?
Interesting question, so who or what is me? Or my teacher asked who is in that place?
You are the one who just typed your post to me.
Many things are self evident. The color red is self evident and experiential. Do we need to ask who or what red is? Do we need to
define red?
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:29 pm
LastLegend wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:20 pm
Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 4:38 pm So who is it that practices? Its me. And those who claim non self,have you actually experienced this or is it deferring to a teachers explanation?
Interesting question, so who or what is me? Or my teacher asked who is in that place?
You are the one who just typed your post to me.
Many things are self evident. The color red is self evident and experiential. Do we need to ask who or what red is? Do we need to
define red?
Do you understand how we see colors? Because this is a great example of non-self.

https://www.pantone.com/articles/color- ... -see-color
Thus, red is not "in" an apple. The surface of the apple is reflecting the wavelengths we see as red and absorbing all the rest. An object appears white when it reflects all wavelengths and black when it absorbs them all.
In other words, color is not an inherent property of objects.

I'm really starting to think you aren't even familiar with the things you are criticizing here.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
Genjo Conan
Posts: 714
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:27 pm

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Genjo Conan »

Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 3:00 pm
I'm fully aware of all the terminology that is used in a clichéd way to rebut any dissent from the dogmas. How is your response any different than a Christian telling me I'm a sinner so I need to get in line with the group think?
Your OP asked a question. Other have responded in good faith. You've dismissed their responses as dogma and groupthink. It seems to me you weren't looking for a response to your question, but to have your beliefs confirmed.
Zenny
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue May 11, 2021 8:15 am

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Zenny »

Johnny Dangerous wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:25 pm Sunyata and Anaya aren’t beliefs, they can be experientally verified.

When I was practicing Zen one exercise I was given was to come up with three things that ‘define who I am’. Try this.

What you will find is that you can only list things that relate to other things. For instance ‘I’m an artist’ describes your relationship to art, ‘I’m a Buddhist’ describes your relationship to Buddhism, etc. It is impossible to describe or find any self nature.

I’m gonna guess you don’t really practice under a teacher, and don’t know much about the things you are criticizing.

Perhaps slow down and stop assuming you are so awesome that you can reinvent the wheel after two weeks of Zazen or whatever.

Alternately, you can just practice meditation and not worry about Buddhism at all, and just get the benefits of a calmer mind, less reactivity, etc.
This kind of defensiveness and appeals to authority is interesting.
If you cannot find any self nature why assume that I don't feel self nature?
Have you yourself experienced no self?
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:35 pm
Johnny Dangerous wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:25 pm Sunyata and Anaya aren’t beliefs, they can be experientally verified.

When I was practicing Zen one exercise I was given was to come up with three things that ‘define who I am’. Try this.

What you will find is that you can only list things that relate to other things. For instance ‘I’m an artist’ describes your relationship to art, ‘I’m a Buddhist’ describes your relationship to Buddhism, etc. It is impossible to describe or find any self nature.

I’m gonna guess you don’t really practice under a teacher, and don’t know much about the things you are criticizing.

Perhaps slow down and stop assuming you are so awesome that you can reinvent the wheel after two weeks of Zazen or whatever.

Alternately, you can just practice meditation and not worry about Buddhism at all, and just get the benefits of a calmer mind, less reactivity, etc.
This kind of defensiveness and appeals to authority is interesting.
If you cannot find any self nature why assume that I don't feel self nature?
Have you yourself experienced no self?
It's not defensiveness, just exasperation with people who think they are saying something new and rebellious and cool, but are actually just making themselves look silly and spinning in cirlces, it happens on here all the time. I'm not upset, but I'm also not going to help you perpetuate your own delusions that you know what you are talking about, because it's clear to me that you don't.

Have I experienced no-self?

Yes, of course I have...that is literally at the center of much Buddhism, both in terms of meditative and contemplative practices, I mentioned one such practice above.

The trouble here is that I don't think you even understand what non-self, non-duality, or any of these things are. As in you have never received teachings or read much about them, much less had some sustained practice where you might glimpse them. If this is not so, then why don't you describe what you object to about the teachings, rather than just vague complaints?

It's like you quickly scanned some Zen terms and then decided to come on here and argue about them without having any idea what they mean...it's perplexing.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by LastLegend »

Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:29 pm
LastLegend wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:20 pm
Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 4:38 pm So who is it that practices? Its me. And those who claim non self,have you actually experienced this or is it deferring to a teachers explanation?
Interesting question, so who or what is me? Or my teacher asked who is in that place?
You are the one who just typed your post to me.
Many things are self evident. The color red is self evident and experiential. Do we need to ask who or what red is? Do we need to
define red?
But we know it’s me...unless you refer to original nature as me otherwise what sees me? The thing about contemplating is not accepting what we have learned but actually ‘seeing’ directly what’s there? What’s the fuss? We are working with the assumption that we don’t know directly, so we want to know directly.
Last edited by LastLegend on Tue May 11, 2021 5:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It’s eye blinking.
Zenny
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue May 11, 2021 8:15 am

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Zenny »

Johnny Dangerous wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:32 pm
Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:29 pm
LastLegend wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:20 pm

Interesting question, so who or what is me? Or my teacher asked who is in that place?
You are the one who just typed your post to me.
Many things are self evident. The color red is self evident and experiential. Do we need to ask who or what red is? Do we need to
define red?
Do you understand how we see colors? Because this is a great example of non-self.

https://www.pantone.com/articles/color- ... -see-color
Thus, red is not "in" an apple. The surface of the apple is reflecting the wavelengths we see as red and absorbing all the rest. An object appears white when it reflects all wavelengths and black when it absorbs them all.
In other words, color is not an inherent property of objects.

I'm really starting to think you aren't even familiar with the things you are criticizing here.
So you are using science and its metaphysics to explain color?
Your using science to explain away experience. Science also explains away aspects of Buddhism. Picking and choosing scientific theories to suit one's beliefs is not consistent.
Once again,an appeal to the authority of science.
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:42 pm
Johnny Dangerous wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:32 pm
Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:29 pm

You are the one who just typed your post to me.
Many things are self evident. The color red is self evident and experiential. Do we need to ask who or what red is? Do we need to
define red?
Do you understand how we see colors? Because this is a great example of non-self.

https://www.pantone.com/articles/color- ... -see-color
Thus, red is not "in" an apple. The surface of the apple is reflecting the wavelengths we see as red and absorbing all the rest. An object appears white when it reflects all wavelengths and black when it absorbs them all.
In other words, color is not an inherent property of objects.

I'm really starting to think you aren't even familiar with the things you are criticizing here.
So you are using science and its metaphysics to explain color?
Your using science to explain away experience. Science also explains away aspects of Buddhism. Picking and choosing scientific theories to suit one's beliefs is not consistent.
Once again,an appeal to the authority of science.
There are part of Buddhism that science doesn't agree on, but science fully agrees on the notion of not-self.

In this case, the fact that color is not inherent in objects, which I posted because you were talking about the color red being self-evident.

Look, stop wasting people's time and respond to what they are actually saying or this thread will not be around long. This is turning into borderline trolling.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
Zenny
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue May 11, 2021 8:15 am

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Zenny »

Johnny Dangerous wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:38 pm
Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:35 pm
Johnny Dangerous wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:25 pm Sunyata and Anaya aren’t beliefs, they can be experientally verified.

When I was practicing Zen one exercise I was given was to come up with three things that ‘define who I am’. Try this.

What you will find is that you can only list things that relate to other things. For instance ‘I’m an artist’ describes your relationship to art, ‘I’m a Buddhist’ describes your relationship to Buddhism, etc. It is impossible to describe or find any self nature.

I’m gonna guess you don’t really practice under a teacher, and don’t know much about the things you are criticizing.

Perhaps slow down and stop assuming you are so awesome that you can reinvent the wheel after two weeks of Zazen or whatever.

Alternately, you can just practice meditation and not worry about Buddhism at all, and just get the benefits of a calmer mind, less reactivity, etc.
This kind of defensiveness and appeals to authority is interesting.
If you cannot find any self nature why assume that I don't feel self nature?
Have you yourself experienced no self?
It's not defensiveness, just exasperation with people who think they are saying something new and rebellious and cool, but are actually just making themselves look silly and spinning in cirlces, it happens on here all the time. I'm not upset, but I'm also not going to help you perpetuate your own delusions that you know what you are talking about, because it's clear to me that you don't.

Have I experienced no-self?

Yes, of course I have...that is literally at the center of much Buddhism, both in terms of meditative and contemplative practices, I mentioned one such practice above.

The trouble here is that I don't think you even understand what non-self, non-duality, or any of these things are. As in you have never received teachings or read much about them, much less had some sustained practice where you might glimpse them. If this is not so, then why don't you describe what you object to about the teachings, rather than just vague complaints?

It's like you quickly scanned some Zen terms and then decided to come on here and argue about them without having any idea what they mean...it's perplexing.
This is just ad homineum and venting.
How about explaining who experienced no self. Was it me?
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:47 pm
Johnny Dangerous wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:38 pm
Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:35 pm
This kind of defensiveness and appeals to authority is interesting.
If you cannot find any self nature why assume that I don't feel self nature?
Have you yourself experienced no self?
It's not defensiveness, just exasperation with people who think they are saying something new and rebellious and cool, but are actually just making themselves look silly and spinning in cirlces, it happens on here all the time. I'm not upset, but I'm also not going to help you perpetuate your own delusions that you know what you are talking about, because it's clear to me that you don't.

Have I experienced no-self?

Yes, of course I have...that is literally at the center of much Buddhism, both in terms of meditative and contemplative practices, I mentioned one such practice above.

The trouble here is that I don't think you even understand what non-self, non-duality, or any of these things are. As in you have never received teachings or read much about them, much less had some sustained practice where you might glimpse them. If this is not so, then why don't you describe what you object to about the teachings, rather than just vague complaints?

It's like you quickly scanned some Zen terms and then decided to come on here and argue about them without having any idea what they mean...it's perplexing.
This is just ad homineum and venting.
How about explaining who experienced no self. Was it me?
You literally just described a practice at the heart of Buddhism...when you look for "me", you can't find "me", it just seems to be there, but is not upon examination.

So who experiences not-self? All I know experientially I can't find "me" when I look, "me" is impossible to accurately define as anything but a connection to other things.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
Zenny
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue May 11, 2021 8:15 am

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Zenny »

Johnny Dangerous wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:48 pm
Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:47 pm
Johnny Dangerous wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:38 pm

It's not defensiveness, just exasperation with people who think they are saying something new and rebellious and cool, but are actually just making themselves look silly and spinning in cirlces, it happens on here all the time. I'm not upset, but I'm also not going to help you perpetuate your own delusions that you know what you are talking about, because it's clear to me that you don't.

Have I experienced no-self?

Yes, of course I have...that is literally at the center of much Buddhism, both in terms of meditative and contemplative practices, I mentioned one such practice above.

The trouble here is that I don't think you even understand what non-self, non-duality, or any of these things are. As in you have never received teachings or read much about them, much less had some sustained practice where you might glimpse them. If this is not so, then why don't you describe what you object to about the teachings, rather than just vague complaints?

It's like you quickly scanned some Zen terms and then decided to come on here and argue about them without having any idea what they mean...it's perplexing.
This is just ad homineum and venting.
How about explaining who experienced no self. Was it me?
You literally just described a practice at the heart of Buddhism...when you look for "me", you can't find "me", it just seems to be there, but is not upon examination.
Seems clear this is an inference,not an experience.
Every experience is accompanied by the feeling of its being mine.
Who is it that eats and benefits from food? Without individuality you cannot make sense of your surroundings.
Is it nor true that we can distinguish between the pain of ourselves and others? We can also distinguish between a tree and ourselves. Or are you saying that all that common sense is untrue?
User avatar
KeithA
Posts: 680
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 11:02 pm

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by KeithA »

Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 8:32 am Hello. I love Zen practice. The clear and simple focus on meditation/focus as the essential practice of any spiritual path.
And the fact that meditation is the natural essence of a person.
Everyday Zen! All life experience is an opportunity to zen.
My gripe is this. All the "beliefs" that go with organised zen are to me either untrue,rabbit holes or controlling dogma.
Why the need for non experiential beliefs in an otherwise perfect religion?
Hello Zenny,

As a person who has been involved in organized Zen for some years, and is in some small way a cog in all of that, it's been an important part of my practice to remember the Three Jewels (Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha). Doing some practice together with other people, and with a good teacher, is what if means to be in a Sangha (from a Zen POV).

Whenever people gather together, rules appear, group tendencies show up, etc. Instead of being obstacles, it can be useful to think of them as grist for the mill of practice. There are things I don't like about the group I practice with. But, they are minor, and also sometimes useful to showing me where I am stuck. I never liked the practice of wearing robes. But, we do, and it really isn't a deal breaker. Babies and bathwater, I guess. More concerning to me is how our group has drifted over the years into left leaning politics, virtue signaling, etc. Now, my personal politics are over near Bernie Sanders somewhere, but politics and religion are almost always a bad mix. This issue is useful for me to look at a little more deeply.

So, what to do. If one doesn't like organized Zen, then don't do it. Just practice alone and see what happens. That's not Zen Buddhism, but it can't hurt.

Organized Zen is neither all good nor all bad. Our ideas and opinions make that. When we put down our ideas and opinions, what appears?

Good luck and thanks for practicing.

_/|\_
Keith
When walking, standing, sitting, lying down, speaking,
being silent, moving, being still.
At all times, in all places, without interruption - what is this?
One mind is infinite kalpas.

New Haven Zen Center
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9437
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 1:21 pm The primary belief is no self. Also Non duality.
These beliefs are like someone telling me that cheating on ones spouse is OK,just as long as you practice enough. Many things in life I feel are obviously right or wrong,and don't need overanalysis.
‘No-self’ isn’t a matter of belief or non belief.
You can easily determine it through examination.

But first, understand that Buddha never said that there is no experience of a self. There definitely is that experience, which is what clinging to causes ‘dukkha’ (suffering, constant, restless dissatisfaction). The Buddha’s entire teaching, and the whole point of zen, is to stop clinging to that experience.

What Buddhist teachings say is that when you examine your body or one’s thoughts, you can’t find anything that is actually continuous “me” or self. Your body and thoughts are always changing. Although the “self” experience occurs, it is like who you are in a dream. Anyway, it’s not a matter of belief at all. Simple observation with practice.

Non-duality occupies a very special place in zen, although it is emphasized throughout all the Buddhist schools. It means that whatever opposites appear, even the idea of samsara vs. nirvana or of ignorance vs. Realization, there is always a point beyond that opposition which contains them both.
Even going beyond the apparent duality of “duality vs. oneness”. Again, this has nothing to do with blindly accepting some kind of dogma. This is something you can easily experience directly with a little practice.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:58 pm
Johnny Dangerous wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:48 pm
Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:47 pm
This is just ad homineum and venting.
How about explaining who experienced no self. Was it me?
You literally just described a practice at the heart of Buddhism...when you look for "me", you can't find "me", it just seems to be there, but is not upon examination.
Seems clear this is an inference,not an experience.
Every experience is accompanied by the feeling of its being mine.
Who is it that eats and benefits from food? Without individuality you cannot make sense of your surroundings.
Is it nor true that we can distinguish between the pain of ourselves and others? We can also distinguish between a tree and ourselves. Or are you saying that all that common sense is untrue?
Ok, if you do not accept the contemplative bit, all you need to experience not-self is meditate well enough that you can rest in your senses without conceptualization, or at least distinguish what is just sense input, and what is conceptualization about sense input. it takes some practice, but doing this will certainly give you a relationship with phenomena that has nothing to do with being a "self".

I can tell you haven't even read about anatta or received a teaching on it.

Your criticism of these things is nonsensical, because you do not understand that in no way does Buddhism claim that things don't appear to be what they are. That is the whole point, that the appearances we experience are not what we think they are.

A tree functions the same way, a tree (as one example) is physically made up from something like 80% (if I remember the figure right) material from the atmosphere. In other words, it becomes a "tree" due to it's interaction with everything else, and has no inherent properties of being "tree". What defines it as a tree is it's relation to other things, how we have named it, etc.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

At this point I am going to ask that the OP bring up exactly what they object to about Zen teachings on non-duality, not self-etc. specifically. This is turning circular and silly, and if the OP wants to explore these teachings this way, then specific criticism of doctrines, practices, etc. is needed to go further, preferably with examples of the writings or teachings, and explanation of why the OP thinks they are a problem.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9437
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 5:58 pm Is it nor true that we can distinguish between the pain of ourselves and others? We can also distinguish between a tree and ourselves. Or are you saying that all that common sense is untrue?
This is a very common point of misunderstanding (actually, of confusion) because it depends on, you might say, what angle you are looking from.

It is true that all beings function as different bodies and different thought streams. From that angle, yes, we can say you are you and I am I, just as we can say the Amazon river is over here and the Nile river is over there and in relation to each other, that they are two distinct rivers.

But notice, they are two distinct things only in relation to each other. The Amazon is not in Egypt and the Nile is not in Brazil. Each one is only what it is to the degree that it is not the other. They are merely the collection of various causes and conditions: location, size, etc. there is no essential “Amazon-ness” to one river and “Nile-ness” to the other.

If you eliminate everything that is not water, they are identical. And the water that evaporates from one rains down and fills the other. In that regard, they are not two separate things at all, but two parts of a bigger weather system.

Further, a river is constantly changing. You cannot stand in the sane river twice. Or even once, because it is in a constant flow of change, as are you.

So, yes, in terms of “common sense” you are correct. Buddhism calls this, ‘relative truth’. But there is also ‘ultimate truth’ which is beyond the outward appearances on which ‘common sense’ is based. You might say it is uncommon sense.
Last edited by PadmaVonSamba on Tue May 11, 2021 6:22 pm, edited 3 times in total.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
Zenny
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue May 11, 2021 8:15 am

Re: Zen beliefs.

Post by Zenny »

KeithA wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 6:01 pm
Zenny wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 8:32 am Hello. I love Zen practice. The clear and simple focus on meditation/focus as the essential practice of any spiritual path.
And the fact that meditation is the natural essence of a person.
Everyday Zen! All life experience is an opportunity to zen.
My gripe is this. All the "beliefs" that go with organised zen are to me either untrue,rabbit holes or controlling dogma.
Why the need for non experiential beliefs in an otherwise perfect religion?
Hello Zenny,

As a person who has been involved in organized Zen for some years, and is in some small way a cog in all of that, it's been an important part of my practice to remember the Three Jewels (Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha). Doing some practice together with other people, and with a good teacher, is what if means to be in a Sangha (from a Zen POV).

Whenever people gather together, rules appear, group tendencies show up, etc. Instead of being obstacles, it can be useful to think of them as grist for the mill of practice. There are things I don't like about the group I practice with. But, they are minor, and also sometimes useful to showing me where I am stuck. I never liked the practice of wearing robes. But, we do, and it really isn't a deal breaker. Babies and bathwater, I guess. More concerning to me is how our group has drifted over the years into left leaning politics, virtue signaling, etc. Now, my personal politics are over near Bernie Sanders somewhere, but politics and religion are almost always a bad mix. This issue is useful for me to look at a little more deeply.

So, what to do. If one doesn't like organized Zen, then don't do it. Just practice alone and see what happens. That's not Zen Buddhism, but it can't hurt.

Organized Zen is neither all good nor all bad. Our ideas and opinions make that. When we put down our ideas and opinions, what appears?

Good luck and thanks for practicing.

_/|\_
Keith
Thank you for that post Keith. It's nice when someone puts a view across without assumptions and defensiveness. I'm sure that style of zen benefits you,so more power to you.
I realise certain subjects are touchy,but when it comes to basics I don't compromise.
Have you experienced no self,and how would you describe the experience?
I also see,you suggest that practice without organisation is not zen buddhism. Why do you think that? Personally I class myself as Zenny,not zen buddhist,because although I think Buddha was a great man and the best ever famous "teacher", I don't feel it's necessary to be named in my identity,as the essence of his message is Meditation.
Cheers.
Locked

Return to “Zen”