Zen without Buddhism?

[Ferne]

I've had some questions about Zen for some time but I'm not quite sure how to phrase them

Essentially, I usually do zazen (and walking meditation, can't remember what it's called) daily even if it's just for a couple of minutes. However, I don't think Buddhism is the right path for me, personally, although most Buddhists I've come across seem cool people and I've enjoyed the occasional meditation drop in in Buddhist centres.

The first time I came across a separability between Zen and Buddhism was from: The Three Pillars of Zen", 1989, Kapleau, Roshi Phillip.

I can't link the following website unfortunately because I haven't made enough posts (perhaps somebody could mail me and I can reply with the link?) but essentially it has copied explanations of five types of zen from the book (bompuu, gedo, shojo, daijo, shaijojo):

Among the various types of Zen presented to the people of today there are some which are profound and some shallow, some that lead to Enlightenment and some that do not. It is said that during the time of the Buddha there were ninety or ninety-five schools of philosophy or religion in existence. Each school had its particular mode of practice, each was slightly different from the other. Since most religions have prayer in some form or another and prayer needs concentration of mind, most religions have at least a whiff of Zen. The different methods of concentration, almost limitless in number, come under the broad heading of Zen. Rather than try to specify all of them, the five main divisions of Zen as classified by Kuei-feng Tsung-mi (AKA: Keiho Shumitsu Zenji, 780-841. A Chan Master of Shenhui’s early Heze school and Fifth Ancestor of the Chinese Huayan school) whose categories are still valid and useful, will be discussed here. Outwardly these five kinds of Zen scarcely differ, however beginners need to bear in mind that in the substance and purpose of these various types there are distinct differences.

The first one is really the one I can relate to the most:

1. BOMPU

The first of these types is called bompu, or "ordinary," Zen as opposed to the other four, each of which can be thought of as a special kind of Zen suitable for the particular aims of different individuals. Bompu Zen, being free from any philosophic or religious content, is for anybody and everybody. It is a Zen practiced purely in the belief that it can improve both physical and mental health. Since it can almost certainly have no ill effects, anyone can undertake it, whatever religious beliefs he happens to hold or if he holds none at all. Bompu Zen is bound to eliminate sickness of a psychosomatic nature and to improve the health generally.

Through the practice of bompu Zen you learn to concentrate and control your mind. It never occurs to most people to try to control their minds, and unfortunately this basic training is left out of contemporary education, not being part of what is called the acquisition of knowledge. Yet without it what we learn is difficult to retain because we learn it improperly, wasting much energy in the process. Indeed, we are virtually crippled unless we know how to restrain our thoughts and concentrate our minds. Furthermore, by practicing this very excellent mode of mind training you will find yourself increasingly able to resist temptations to which you had previously succumbed, and to sever attachments which had long held you in bondage. An enrichment in personality and a strengthening of character inevitably follow since the three basic elements of mind - that is, intellect, feeling, and will - develop harmoniously. The quietist sitting practiced in Confucianism seems to have stressed mainly these effects of mind concentration. However, the fact remains that bompu Zen, although far more beneficial for the cultivation of the mind than the reading of countless books on ethics and philosophy, is unable to resolve the fundamental problem of man and his relation to the universe. Why? Because it cannot pierce the ordinary man's basic delusion of himself as distinctly other than the universe.

As a starting point, do people have any thoughts on the book itself? It seems to have received mixed reviews on Amazon the last time I looked.

I guess, initially, I'm also interested in how people view Bompu as a Zen path: 'cop-out', 'ok-ish but shallow' or valid etc?

[Straw Dog]

I haven't read that book, although it sounds interesting.

Personally, I practice zazen and mindfulness in my daily life, although I don't consider myself to be a Buddhist. That's not to say that I reject Buddhism out right or that I don't contemplate its philosophy and interpret some experiences with Buddhist notions. It doesn't need to be wholly accepted or rejected. I also use a great deal of Taoist philosophy to interpret my experience and shape conduct to a certain degree, but I'm not required to accept it as unquestionable doctrine.

One perk of practicing Zen without being a strict Buddhist is in seeking enlightenment. In Zen, there's the teaching of not struggling to reach some sort of abstract aim. This may conflict with the traditional Buddhist teachings that we should try to attain enlightenment and make an effort toward that definitive goal. It is even said that the final and most difficult desire to overcome is the desire to achieve enlightenment. This could be avoided altogether by not having the desire for an absolute enlightenment to begin with. Zen is just being and becoming in each and every moment.

[Nowhere Man]

Contact the Rochester Zen Center of which Philip Kapeleu Roshi established. I read Three Pillars and found it a bit academic for my tastes albiet this is a very good book for people who have a basic understanding of Zen practice and experience. The controversy as it were revolves around the disclosures of exchanges of several students during dokusan which traditionally are concidered as being private exchanges between Roshi and student. Personally, I found the exchanges interesting yet shouldn't be held as a template in comparison to your own experiences.

Bompu Zen is common practice deriving the "benefits" without undergoing too much formality. Thats all. :0)

[Ferne]

Thanks for the replies, guys

I'm still having a bit of a think and will drop a line or two tomorrow.

[DreadFish]

I have read of an example of a Christian priest who was also a Zen priest. Also, Thomas Merton posited that Zen could be beneficial to the practice of Christians.

Anyway, some of the content of Zen is "Buddhist", but I think it certainly can work without the "Buddhism". In fact, I think Buddhism is sometimes best without the "Buddhism", So I enourage you to practice Zen without the Buddhism

Some people might start practice simply because of the relaxation and increased focus etc. (Bompu), and end up going futher simply as a natural deepening of practice. The highest form of Zen practice is "just sitting" after all.

[DreadFish]

I should note that I think there are very important aspects that should still be practiced and adhered to that could be called "Buddhist", but, I think that it is also dangerous to practice "Buddhism" and start holding a "Buddhist" worldview.

That said, if any being picks up even just one aspect of Dharma and benefits from it, then that's good.

[Ferne]

Originally Posted by Straw Dog

Personally, I practice zazen and mindfulness in my daily life,

Yes, IMO, it should come into everyday life as well, really. I remember a while ago when I was doing something mundane like cleaning my flat and, for the first time, I suddenly 'stepped-back' (without consciously deciding to) and noticed how my thoughts were going on and on about something trivial in the past lol I had the insight then that just like with looking at my breath etc, I could apply that to everyday life and whatever was going on. It's not that I didn't know about that aim intellectually before but somehow after doing some zazen it seemed to have seeped into my bones, as it were. Not sure if that makes any sense

although I don't consider myself to be a Buddhist. That's not to say that I reject Buddhism out right or that I don't contemplate its philosophy and interpret some experiences with Buddhist notions. It doesn't need to be wholly accepted or rejected.

Yes, a good point which I do agree with.

I also use a great deal of Taoist philosophy to interpret my experience and shape conduct to a certain degree, but I'm not required to accept it as unquestionable doctrine.

That's interesting. I'm guessing it fits together quite well with Zen practice?

One perk of practicing Zen without being a strict Buddhist is in seeking enlightenment. In Zen, there's the teaching of not struggling to reach some sort of abstract aim. This may conflict with the traditional Buddhist teachings that we should try to attain enlightenment and make an effort toward that definitive goal.

Again, another good point which I've thought about myself.

It is even said that the final and most difficult desire to overcome is the desire to achieve enlightenment. This could be avoided altogether by not having the desire for an absolute enlightenment to begin with. Zen is just being and becoming in each and every moment.

That's interesting, too.

[Ferne]

Originally Posted by Nowhere Man

Contact the Rochester Zen Center of which Philip Kapeleu Roshi established.

I had a bit of a look at the website. It looked cool and they have lots of podcasts which I might have a listen to at some point.

I read Three Pillars and found it a bit academic for my tastes albiet this is a very good book for people who have a basic understanding of Zen practice and experience.

That's interesting. What book do you think is good for a newbie-ish person like myself? Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind?

The controversy as it were revolves around the disclosures of exchanges of several students during dokusan which traditionally are concidered as being private exchanges between Roshi and student.

I see. I never got that far. I basically read the first section on the practicalities of doing zazen etc and the bits like I quoted above. Was the controversy because he didn't ask the students their permission or because he was giving out 'secrets' to the general public?

Personally, I found the exchanges interesting yet shouldn't be held as a template in comparison to your own experiences.

That sounds a fair point.

Bompu Zen is common practice deriving the "benefits" without undergoing too much formality. Thats all. :0)

That's interesting, as well: it sounds like the kind of thing that would appeal to me

[Nowhere Man]

Originally Posted by DreadFish

Anyway, some of the content of Zen is "Buddhist", but I think it certainly can work without the "Buddhism". In fact, I think Buddhism is sometimes best without the "Buddhism", So I enourage you to practice Zen without the Buddhism

That's an excellent way to avoid becoming a "bookstore" Buddhist as well. *grin*
Buddhism is a western invention anyways. It sounds cool and rolls of the tongue nicely though.

Some people might start practice simply because of the relaxation and increased focus etc. (Bompu), and end up going futher simply as a natural deepening of practice. The highest form of Zen practice is "just sitting" after all.

I take many won't even notice any "stages and classifications". Bompu is perfect practice insofar imb.

[dyanaprajna2011]

There have been some Zen masters who have state categorically that Zen should not be equated with Buddhism or any other religion. Deshimaru stated that Zen is not Buddhist, it is not religion, but the foundation of all religion. From a practical perspective, Zen meshes well with other religions, because the point of Zen is simply to see your true nature, into your own mind. But it's also something that can be practiced by itself, and as a Buddhist religion (which is the way I do it). I guess the bottom line is that Zen is Zen. Zen simply is.