Latest Stuff on Zen Buddhism

Originally posted by @sonship
A moment of enlightenment came to me as I was a college student having been interested in Zen and preparing some to move to Japan for serious study.

I was looking out of a window on about the fifth floor of a college building. I was observing the students congregated on the other side of the street.

One began to walk across the street. A car was appr ...[text shortened]... an to have second thoughts about Zen Buddhism. Was there something I didn't consider or realize?

See, that makes sense.

I remember I was sitting in a Philosophy lecture... The lecturer was a fellow named Calvin -- I suddenly have forgotten his last name, which is so odd, but I am pretty sure it was a relatively normal last name so it was less memorable...

I had read and studied a lot of Buddhism and "oneness of all things," just like this, and the "dependent origination" that day, and he was talking about medieval Christian philosophy interpretations of Aristotle...

Another fellah asked a question that wasn't entirely related to anything on Aristotle or Christian philosophy but then he began talking about souls, and how they exist in the sense of Christianity because we are autonomous agents.

The moment where he desribed like... how a Christian at this time did not question his own soul or his own being because he simply had free choice to do whatever he pleased, including to kill himself, or to starve himself to death, etc., it stuck out to me that... this is what constitutes independence.

Even if life is "conditioned" (e.g., my existence depends on oxygen, food, etc.), my actions aren't conditioned so much; they are free. I am an independent actor.

Like the guy who crossed the street more quickly to avoid being hit.

Perhaps one could argue that this is only a difference in perspective but no, that's right. It really might be that bloody basic.

Originally posted by @sonship
I am going to try to allow this Zen to be explained by those who mention it a lot.

So for my part, I don't think I'll do much to lean the discussion towards the Christian faith.

I'm just speaking for myself.
We could certainly converse though on a few things said above. Some things about soul and soul-life are not easy to understand for me.
...[text shortened]... tead.

Theosis and Deification are, I think, virtually the same matter. Am I right about that?

This would go back to the idea that Chrsitians believe that man is fundamentally differentiated from God and were created by Him. Since we are creatures, and we are individuals that are separate from Him, our theosis and process of becoming more Godlike involves merely partaking in the divine nature of God (as God partook in the nature of man).

The individual remains as an individual. We reject the concept of dependent origination or "all things, one body," as is common in Eastern thought, and so we do not think of ourselves as dependent and "conditioned" beings. We do not have a 'conditioned' or 'reactive mind' that is the problem.

So while a Buddhist wishes to become more like Buddha, this involves Nirvana, or the "Blow Out" of existence, and it affirms this concept of "Not-Soul" (Anatta).

But in Christendom... We purify ourselves, and we are the exact same person when we achieve theosis. We remove our negative aspects, and we keep our indvidiuality, because "God knew us in the womb," God knew us before we were born, and we are individual creatures.

That is how I understand it but I really need to read more about theosis because this is a massive and fascinating topic that isn't explored enough.

Originally posted by @philokalia
This would go back to the idea that Chrsitians believe that man is fundamentally differentiated from God and were created by Him. Since we are creatures, and we are individuals that are separate from Him, our theosis and process of becoming more Godlike involves merely partaking in the divine nature of God (as God partook in the nature of man).

The i ...[text shortened]... d more about theosis because this is a massive and fascinating topic that isn't explored enough.

A Buddhist wishes to become more like himself .
He pays attention to the examples of the wise ones but ultimately lives or dies by his own sword

Zen views copying as death

Originally posted by @karoly-aczel
A Buddhist wishes to become more like himself .
He pays attention to the examples of the wise ones but ultimately lives or dies by his own sword

Zen views copying as death

Honestly, that does not sound like classical Buddhist ideas. That sounds like... someone being creative.

Buddhism revolves around the idea of liberating oneself from suffering (dukkha) that is life.

Of course, there is some sort of element of truth to what you are saying... they believe that by being more Buddha-like they become more like a sort of 'ultimate' being. But ultimately, the "self" is not supposed to exist.

Originally posted by @karoly-aczel
A Buddhist wishes to become more like himself .
He pays attention to the examples of the wise ones but ultimately lives or dies by his own sword

Zen views copying as death

I think you befuddle Buddhism with being a Jedi.

Originally posted by @philokalia
Honestly, that does not sound like classical Buddhist ideas. That sounds like... someone being creative.

Buddhism revolves around the idea of liberating oneself from suffering (dukkha) that is life.

Of course, there is some sort of element of truth to what you are saying... they believe that by being more Buddha-like they become more like a sort of 'ultimate' being. But ultimately, the "self" is not supposed to exist.

It's not classical Buddhism it's Zen

We are asked to find our own salvation with dilligence.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
I think you befuddle Buddhism with being a Jedi.

Not really thats just your wild imagination

Zen is not about holding onto powerful concepts , it's about going beyond . So no one can tell me what it is or isn't .

Originally posted by @karoly-aczel
It's not classical Buddhism it's Zen

We are asked to find our own salvation with dilligence.

Nothing you have said is 'Zen.' You are just rambling nonsensically and calling it Zen.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
I believe you are describing the precise moment where you fundamentally misunderstood Zen.

I don't believe you have any genuine desire to correct that misunderstanding, despite creating this thread.

I believe you are describing the precise moment where you fundamentally misunderstood Zen.

I don't believe you have any genuine desire to correct that misunderstanding, despite creating this thread.

Aaahhh, Get over yourself Ghost.

Correct my misunderstanding that occurred when taking note that the walker did not act as if everything was one.

What was I missing?

Originally posted by @sonship

I believe you are describing the precise moment where you fundamentally misunderstood Zen.

I don't believe you have any genuine desire to correct that misunderstanding, despite creating this thread.

Aaahhh, Get over yourself Ghost.

Touché.

🙂

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Touché.

🙂

Seriously.

That moment came to me to reconsider about the (what I might call) Oversoul.

I know that is not a Zen term.

Here's the deal. Something like Zen will always be more attractive to some people than the Christian faith. It will always be more desireable. And here is why.

A force, a energy, a oneness, a vibration, or something mystical like that is on a lower level of being then a Lord and Person. Since the ego vehemently wants to preserve the self, a thing, even a very very mystical THING is better then a Lord Person like Jesus Christ.

Whatever the plane, level of consciousness, Nirvana or state of enlightenment or awakening is, my SELF prefers that it be on a lower plane of being them my living ego.

As I am writing this something is asking "Well then what about Hari Krisna? That is a person."

So I'm still thinking through these matters.

I have to figure out why Krishna is preferable to Jesus.
I think I know why.
But I am pretty sure, with much mysticism a force or anything on a lower level of being is less intrusive (supposedly) then a Person like the Son of God.

Zen Buddhism is distinct. That is true.

However, many scholars say it grew out of the fact that many of the Chinese & Korean monasteries and Buddhist communities had zero access to actual sutras, or they would have had very limited access to one sutra or a portion of a sutra. They had to rely very heavily on expanding themselves upon those teachings and finding diverse ways to apply all of those principles, right...

It also has its specific flavor due to the fact that it had developed its own influences over the years and its own traditions and practices...

But like... a Zen master would strive to be in line with Buddhism as much as possible.

And... ironically... you'd probably find Zen masters criticize non-Zen sects (especially various Japanese sects) of having blended too much local pagan belief with Buddhism, thereby being too far away from the original intent in Buddhism. In fact, there is a controversy because there are these various University professors of Buddhism in Japan that have gone all in on studying the original Pali / Sanskrit Buddhist texts and are eviscerating some of the positions of mainstream Japanese Buddhist traditions. Some of them very shockingly even saying, and insisting, that this is no tlegitimate Buddhism.

But something like Zen would qualify because it is stripped down.

So... I mean... Think about that a bit.

You might actually want to consider calling yourself a Taoist, my man Karoly...

If you want freeform doctrine and the whole "I'm being my true, mystical self" mixed with sacred Eastern wisdom, that rather works. Some of the texts in Chuang-tzu are also like those amazing philosophical questions that have no answer.

Be a Taoist bro that dabbles in Zen. That would fit you well.

But... Really, be a Christian. Check out some of these "Yurodivy" dudes in the Eastern Orthodox tradition. They are called "Fools for God." There are also a whole lot of very different and fun things to read in the Eastern Tradition that are totally centered on profound truth.

You get obscure, esoteric philosophy, profound &Uancient wisdom, etc., but you get to keep your soul.

The downside? Your mates don't think Christianity is cool, I bet.

Originally posted by @philokalia
My Master's is in Buddhism. I have not done anything specifically with Zen Buddhism, but I am from a country that has a Zen Buddhist heritage -- it has existed as a minority that has been somewhat well accommodated by the Jogye majority. Our Jogye majority is not unlike Pure Land Buddhism.

I am curious what people will write.

Your Master is in Buddhism, but I see that both Zen and the Middle Way are Greek to you. Why is that? And on what Buddhist tradition is your Master based?
😵