Zen

[NikolaiI]

Someone asked, "What am I?"
Guangfan answered, "There is nothing in the whole universe that is not you."

In a spirit of learning and discovery, I'd like to start a thread about Zen, specifically the teachings of compassion in it. Of course there are lots of resources online, and I'm reading those too, but also real-time conversations (so to speak) could be useful and enlightening.

For instance, how we view ourselves seperate from each other. The Buddha taught that we are not seperate, but all part of the same thing. The neighbour and the self are not seperate.

Um, this is an interesting Dharma talk I found at Youtube. She says a very beautiful thing about not being seperate. When you cut your arm, you don't have to stop and think about whether or not you're going to put a bandage on it. You just do, to stop the bleeding. In the same way, if our neighbour is hurting, it's the same, how can I help you? Automatic.

I just thought that was interesting and wanted to share it, and start a thread. The link to that is below.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Y6UV2sJfyPk


I know Zen is a form of Buddhism. I've only read one book about it, Zen Flesh, Zen Bones, and I guess also one essay by Alan Watts. Any ideas for me about Zen texts, precepts, further reading, etc? Thx.

[Logos]

If you could somehow edit your first post to include questions about a zen/Buddhist text? like the precepts? sutras? it can stay open :) ...otherwise, please see the rules for this forum here:
http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15410

[NikolaiI]

Sure, does that work?

[Logos]

yes, thankyouverymuch :)

[weepingforloman]

Someone asked, "What am I?"
Guangfan answered, "There is nothing in the whole universe that is not you."

In a spirit of learning and discovery, I'd like to start a thread about Zen, specifically the teachings of compassion in it. Of course there are lots of resources online, and I'm reading those too, but also real-time conversations (so to speak) could be useful and enlightening.

For instance, how we view ourselves seperate from each other. The Buddha taught that we are not seperate, but all part of the same thing. The neighbour and the self are not seperate.

Um, this is an interesting Dharma talk I found at Youtube. She says a very beautiful thing about not being seperate. When you cut your arm, you don't have to stop and think about whether or not you're going to put a bandage on it. You just do, to stop the bleeding. In the same way, if our neighbour is hurting, it's the same, how can I help you? Automatic.

I just thought that was interesting and wanted to share it, and start a thread. The link to that is below.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Y6UV2sJfyPk


I know Zen is a form of Buddhism. I've only read one book about it, Zen Flesh, Zen Bones, and I guess also one essay by Alan Watts. Any ideas for me about Zen texts, precepts, further reading, etc? Thx.

I would just like to comment that the only real difference between this particular aspect of Buddhism and Christ's discourse on loving one's neighbor is the separateness of souls. Buddhism wipes away the difference (I'm not sure, but I believe some Buddhist groups still use the term Brahman for the Universal Soul), and Christianity emphasizes it, making the sacrifice of one's own interests the primary point of morality. I just thought I'd point out how similar they are, on this point at least.

[NikolaiI]

Yeah. Did you watch the video?

[weepingforloman]

Yeah. Did you watch the video?

I just did, but I hadn't when I posted that... Interesting coincidence. However, I think it is possible to love your neighbor without being the same, it just requires moral effort to move beyond mere likes or dislikes. Still, it is better to disagree on theological things and agree on moral things, so long as we do what is right, than it is to agree in theology and do wrong.

Grace and Peace.

[NikolaiI]

Yeah, isn't she an amazing teacher?

[Dark Star]

I would just like to comment that the only real difference between this particular aspect of Buddhism and Christ's discourse on loving one's neighbor is the separateness of souls. Buddhism wipes away the difference (I'm not sure, but I believe some Buddhist groups still use the term Brahman for the Universal Soul), and Christianity emphasizes it, making the sacrifice of one's own interests the primary point of morality. I just thought I'd point out how similar they are, on this point at least.

Mmm....I think you're approaching this from the right direction, but alas, the devil's in the details. One of the big doctrines of Buddhism is the 'Doctrine of No-Soul' or (obviously) that no soul exists. Perhaps being part of the same (a universal) consciousness would be better terminology. Or....damn. My mind is currently going blank on the correct way to word this, so hopefully someone else can take up the torch. Or I'll come up with the words I was looking for a later time, perhaps.

[JGL57]

...I'd like to start a thread about Zen, specifically the teachings of compassion in it. Of course there are lots of resources online, and I'm reading those too, but also real-time conversations (so to speak) could be useful and enlightening.

For instance, how we view ourselves seperate from each other. The Buddha taught that we are not seperate, but all part of the same thing. The neighbour and the self are not seperate.
...

I know Zen is a form of Buddhism. I've only read one book about it, Zen Flesh, Zen Bones, and I guess also one essay by Alan Watts. Any ideas for me about Zen texts, precepts, further reading, etc? Thx.

I have read about 45 Alan Watts books and, with a couple of exceptions, found them all to be well worth the time.

If you are interested specifically in Zen, then I could recommend any and all of the following six titles by Watts:

The Way of Zen
The Spirit of Zen
Talking Zen
Zen and the Beat Way
Zen, The Supreme Experience
Eastern Wisdom - Three Classics: What is Zen? What is Tao? An Introduction to Meditation


But, his books on Taoism and Hindu concepts are also, uh, enlightening. :D

[weepingforloman]

Mmm....I think you're approaching this from the right direction, but alas, the devil's in the details. One of the big doctrines of Buddhism is the 'Doctrine of No-Soul' or (obviously) that no soul exists. Perhaps being part of the same (a universal) consciousness would be better terminology. Or....damn. My mind is currently going blank on the correct way to word this, so hopefully someone else can take up the torch. Or I'll come up with the words I was looking for a later time, perhaps.

I know of the existence of fringe-Buddhist sects that worship Siddartha Gautama as a god, and I am relatively sure they speak of souls. However, I understand that the Universal Consciousness might be a better term, but I am more comfortable with the word soul.

[Dark Star]

However, the word 'soul' goes directly against the core Buddhist teaching that there is no such thing as a soul. This is why Buddhism has a system of rebirth rather than reincarnation. This is why I feel we need different terminology to express that idea.

[weepingforloman]

Very well.

[NikolaiI]

I have read about 45 Alan Watts books and, with a couple of exceptions, found them all to be well worth the time.

If you are interested specifically in Zen, then I could recommend any and all of the following six titles by Watts:

The Way of Zen
The Spirit of Zen
Talking Zen
Zen and the Beat Way
Zen, The Supreme Experience
Eastern Wisdom - Three Classics: What is Zen? What is Tao? An Introduction to Meditation


But, his books on Taoism and Hindu concepts are also, uh, enlightening. :D

Thank you very much...

[NikolaiI]

I know of the existence of fringe-Buddhist sects that worship Siddartha Gautama as a god, and I am relatively sure they speak of souls. However, I understand that the Universal Consciousness might be a better term, but I am more comfortable with the word soul.


However, the word 'soul' goes directly against the core Buddhist teaching that there is no such thing as a soul. This is why Buddhism has a system of rebirth rather than reincarnation. This is why I feel we need different terminology to express that idea.

That's true, the name of the Buddha is considered very sacred. I think I read somewhere someone saying if you use it in a bad or insincere way you should wash your mouth out for three days or something like that. As for what the Buddha said about it, I remember one quote where he minimalizes different things like mountains and kings and other things. Like he says the greatest ruler is dust at his feet or something like that. Kind of cute. And I'm fairly sure that Dark Star is dead on about everything else.

[Dark Star]

I should note that really depends on the Buddhist sect in regards to how his name is revered. I've met many Buddhists who emphasize his statement that he was just a man and not a god and that we should thus keep our focus on his teachings and what makes sense to us rather than letting it turn into worship and an unquestioning sense of every teaching being true.

[weepingforloman]

Yes, that is the mainstream. But the Gautama-worshipers do exist.

[NikolaiI]

I do not know what the mainstream is, but the Buddha certainly did warn against believing things for whatever reason other than analysis and observation, not out of respect for the teacher, not simply because it has been told us, not because it is spoken and rumored by a majority, etc. I don't think worshipping the Buddha is necessarily the same as believing everything he says is true. One idea about teachings is not to worship them, scriptures, the same way you would not take a finger pointing to the moon to be the moon, you would not get what you wanted then. But in the case of the Buddha, not his teachings, we assume he is enlightened, and equivalent to what he is trying to help us to reach - nirvana. But that's just how I look at it, and yes, I am a Gautama-worshipper.

[Dark Star]

Yes, that is the mainstream. But the Gautama-worshipers do exist.

Even the sects that deify Guatama don't tend to worship him.

Since the sects that do involve worship of Guatama tend to be fringe sects based off of Mahayana Buddhism I find them to be more cults than anything since they go directly against the teachings of Buddhism in the process.

Think of them as the Buddhist version of Christians who say that we should go on a worldwide crusade and convert every non-Christian by the sword... ;)

[Orionsbelt]

Worship is a form of attachment and therefore it hinders the path to enlightenment. While a Buddhist would recognize worship and even respect the practice, it is something that would eventually have to stop in order to attain enlightenment. The Tibetan book of the dead speaks of levels. At one level the passing light is on the path to re-birth but the form is in question. The task is to focus on the deity of your choice. Interesting thing, I just read a summary of Spinoza. He felt that God was all things and all things are God. Wonder how this lines up with eastern thought...:p

[weepingforloman]

Even the sects that deify Guatama don't tend to worship him.

Since the sects that do involve worship of Guatama tend to be fringe sects based off of Mahayana Buddhism I find them to be more cults than anything since they go directly against the teachings of Buddhism in the process.

Think of them as the Buddhist version of Christians who say that we should go on a worldwide crusade and convert every non-Christian by the sword... ;)

Exactly. Please do me and my fellows the honor of not assuming the abortion clinic bombers represent the mainline.

[Dark Star]

Well, I live in the Bible Belt, so sadly it's pretty damn close to the 'mainline' here...

Seriously, though, I don't Anne Coulter or Pat Robertson is your average Christian. No worries.

[quasimodo1]

For a non-traditional believer like myself, i.e. atheist with strong spiritual leanings, Zen, re-incarnation and the desire for enlightenment without the onus of a deity to prevent it...well...it is more than a breath of fresh philosophical air; it is a giant warm front. quasimodo1

[weepingforloman]

Why do atheists continually imagine God as some terrible, harsh tyrant? God is loving... He allowed Himself to die at our hands, while providing the means for us to be saved. He stepped out of Heaven, into this mess we call earth, and became one of us... subject to the same needs, frailty, and even temptations all of us are subject to. God is awesome: both powerful and beautiful.

[NikolaiI]

Atheists view god as not real. I don't think any judgement call is required to be an atheist.

I live in the bible belt, too...

[Dark Star]

Why do atheists continually imagine God as some terrible, harsh tyrant?

Two words: Old Testament

For a New Testament reference: Hell

If you'd like me to expound on either I can.

[weepingforloman]

Ahem: it was loving that God did not merely unmake us after the Fall. It was loving that God established His covenant with Abraham. It was loving that God cared for Abel. It was loving that God saved Noah and his family from the flood. It was loving that God delivered the Israelites from Egypt. It was loving that God promised them a home, when they were homeless. It was loving when God commanded that the Israelites love one another, and that they give to the poor, and that they let the poor and the widows take a tithe of their fields. The OT even has animal-safety laws.

As for the justice of Hell, that is for another time.

[NikolaiI]

Ah, this thread is supposed to be about zen, if you please. And by the way, here is a well written article on buddhist ontology, if anyone is interested..http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/inada4.htm


I would just like to comment that the only real difference between this particular aspect of Buddhism and Christ's discourse on loving one's neighbor is the separateness of souls. Buddhism wipes away the difference (I'm not sure, but I believe some Buddhist groups still use the term Brahman for the Universal Soul), and Christianity emphasizes it, making the sacrifice of one's own interests the primary point of morality. I just thought I'd point out how similar they are, on this point at least.

Yes...Buddhists don't think any of us are seperate from any other. So the Christian doctrine is to love your neighbour, but this can be hard if you see your neighbour as someone differenent from yourself, and it introduces complications that aren't necessary, that are in fact a distortion of reality and leave us feeling disoriented. You may like or dislike your neighbour, and you may treat him with respect out of duty, but if you're not thinking about your neighbour as being seperate from yourself then you would help them as automatically as you would yourself. And one part of it is realizing this theoretically, and the other part is the practice of zazen to help realize it fully, etc. I mostly get this view and idea from my limited recent exposure to dharma and dharma talks on youtube, though I read a couple books on Buddhism a few years ago, was really into it then, and then read a great book on zen, but it's always good to keep in touch and ideas fresh, and practice, etc...

[Derringer]

:alien:
Why do atheists continually imagine God as some terrible, harsh tyrant? God is loving... He allowed Himself to die at our hands, while providing the means for us to be saved. He stepped out of Heaven, into this mess we call earth, and became one of us... subject to the same needs, frailty, and even temptations all of us are subject to. God is awesome: both powerful and beautiful.

Your supposed to fear God- it's written in the Bible.

[Logos]

Someone asked, "What am I?" Guangfan answered, "There is nothing in the whole universe that is not you."

In a spirit of learning and discovery, I'd like to start a thread about Zen, specifically the teachings of compassion in it.

....

I know Zen is a form of Buddhism. I've only read one book about it, Zen Flesh, Zen Bones, and I guess also one essay by Alan Watts. Any ideas for me about Zen texts, precepts, further reading, etc? Thx.


Ah, this thread is supposed to be about zen, if you please.
Yes, I wish it would get back on topic too :)

[NikolaiI]

Ha, okay then, I have a question. The zen koan - something deep, or something silly?

[Dark Star]

Perhaps if you could give us a bit of detail about the Zen Koan, that would be helpful....

[NikolaiI]

Well I had to look it up but I guess koans are parables. They're given as a test to a student and the master judges them to see how far the student has progressed. There are anecdotes about students spending years in meditation, coming to the master each year with an answer for the koan, and it taking many years before they figure it out. I don't think they are supposed to be right-answer test questions, though. They're usually some kind of problem, that doesn't seem to have an answer, such as 'what is the sound of one hand clapping?' I think I read that they're tests put to students, and when they overcome a koan, they have attained a particular wisdom.

[Taliesin]

Oh, we quite like zen koans, although we are not a Buddhist. (the religion has considerable appeal to us, though) They do seem to have something in them.


Some koans for example:


Joshu asked a monk who appeared for the first time in the hall,
"Have I ever seen you here before?" The monk answered, "No sir,
you have not."

"Then have a cup of tea," said Joshu.

He turned to another monk. "Have I ever seen you here before?" he
said. "Yes sir, of course you have," said the second monk.

"Then have a cup of tea," said Joshu.

Later, the managing monk of the monastery asked Joshu, "How is it
that you make the same offer of tea whatever the reply to your
question?"

At this Joshu shouted, "Manager, are you still here?"

"Of course, master!" the manager answered.
"Then have a cup of tea," said Joshu.


One day Chuang-tzu and a friend were walking along a riverbank. "How delightfully the fishes are enjoying themselves in the water!" Chuang-tzu exclaimed.
"You are not a fish," his friend said. "How do you know whether or not the fishes are enjoying themselves?"
"You are not me," Chuang-tzu said. "How do you know that I do not know that the fishes are enjoying themselves?"



Huineng once overheard two monks who were observing a flag flapping in wind
"The flag moves," one said
"The wind moves," the other said
"Neither the wind nor the flag move, the mind moves" said Huineng


Once a there was a farmer. His only horse ran away.
"What bad luck" said the neighbours.
"Is this bad luck?" asked the farmer
The next day the horse returned bringing two other horses with him.
"What good luck"said the neighbours
"Is this good luck?" asked the farmer.
Soon one of the new horses broke the farmers son's arm.
"What bad luck" said the neighbours.
"Is this bad luck?" asked the farmer.
Then there was a war in that kingdom.All young men were mobilized except the farmers son because of his broken arm.
"What good luck" said the neighbours
"Is this good luck?" asked the farmer
...

[NikolaiI]

Ah, thank you all very much, Taliesin. Do you all know whether what I said was a koan is a koan, the thing about one hand clapping? I recognize the koans you all mentioned, I think, as well as others I've found online, including ones from the only zen book I read, Zen Flesh, Zen Bones...those were all parables, but I do seem to remember it being a test of sorts.

Anyway, thank you all very much, again. Those were very delightful koans! :)

[Visionary3]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=QqVBGv2hpQ4

This is Tell Me I Am You, a poem by Rumi

[Orionsbelt]

Does anybody know if the Koans are an outgrowth from things like the sutras or did they come about some other way?

[blazeofglory]

Zen comes from Sanskrit Gyan, means knowledge. In fact Sanskrit is really a repository of knowledge. Sanskrit is a beautiful language yet our pundits and religious misinterpreters have wrongly defined and popularized it.

[Hypercrit Htd]

Koans a philosophical test to query whether student progess beyond various way of acquiring knowledge. Important because spiritual knowledge go beyond mundane
concensus value systemic belief structural concept informing philosophical academic
protocol politess indemics.