Zen and metaphysics (Jesus Christ, salvation, tradition, Buddhism, Mary)

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by Victor

I'm a bit puzzeled though. In the thread I referenced you said:
Personally I view Buddhism as a practice - it is something one does, rather than something one "believes in" per se.

Did I misunderstand?

Hi Victor,

Engyo is being consistent. Buddhism is first and foremost the practice of the 8-fold path. By practicing it, one moves towards nibbana. By NOT practicing it, one meanders about (according to Buddhism).

For background info, the 8-fold path consists of:

1. Right View
2. Right Intention

These first two cultivate wisdom.

3. Right Speech
4. Right Action
5. Right Livelihood

These second three cultivate ethics.

6. Right Effort
7. Right Mindfulness
8. Right Concentration

These last three cultivate our ability to see things as they really are.

The meditation that Engyo refers to is the practice of number 7 - right mindfulness. All Buddhist meditate, but Buddhism is more than just meditation. That is only one out of the eight spokes of the wheel.

Buddhists believe (and I believe it too) that if you practice this 8-fold path, you will not be led astray. The very act of doing it will keep you in the right direction.

It is not a matter of believing the correct ideas. Hence, the relative lack of metaphyscial discussion.

Tho to be fair, there's a fair amount of cosmology in other schools of Buddhism. It seems to me that the question isn't why Zen doesn't talk so much about such things. The question is more why other schools of Buddhism do talk about them. And the answer to that, I suspect, is that these cosmologies were blended in from the indigenous beliefs that were already in place as Buddhism was introduced.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by Engyo

OK, but what seems puzzling? Buddhism is a practice, or actually a very wide variety of different practices, depending on which tradition and school you are investigating at the moment. Zen practice often (but not exclusively) consists of silent sitting meditation, and the contemplation of koans. Different Zen centers and teachers may choose different foci; there is no set catechism per se.

My school and tradition (Nichiren Buddhism) utilize chanting meditation as our primary meditative form. We do some silent sitting, but we chant every day.

One teacher I know says "All Buddhists meditate", and that is what I refer to when I say that Buddhism is a practice. My meditation probably differs significantly from the other Buddhists posting here, but as Lilithu said, we all have a common base point.

Sorry Engyo, you are being consistent. When I originally read what you said, it turned out as a tongue twister on my end. So I thought I had misunderstood, and I was. I tend to read fast and as you can see I suffer cause of it....

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by Victor

I think I'm failing to see something here? Perhaps it's my western mind...

I see it this way. If nirvana is an equivalent to salvation (for the sake of the convo) then there is a path or certain paths that assist you in attaining it. But not all paths get you to the desired location. If it did, then there isn't anything we need to do or ponder over. Because in the end we all end up in the same place irregardless.

I agree.

The distinction that I was making between how you view salvation and actually attaining salvation is like this. Let's say, for the sake of the convo, that salvation/nirvana is a physical place that everyone wants to get to. Let's just call it Shangrila, since that's the analogy that Mystic used in a recent thread. Now, there is a difference between the knowledge that will lead you to Shangrila and the knowledge about Shangrila. So people can spend lifetimes arguing about whether or not Shangrila is mountainous with cascading waterfalls and lush greenery. Or it's more like a tropical beach with azure waves lapping on fine white sand. BUT none of these arguments are going to take these people any closer to Shangrila. Do you see what I mean? The people making these arguments are sitting still (in a coffee shop maybe) talking. They're not walking.

What the Buddha said was essentially quit speculating about whether or not Shangrila is a mountain preserve or a beach resort. Go there and find out for yourself. And all the questions about metaphysics basically amount to us sitting in the coffee shop asking/arguing about the color of the sand etc.

(But it's fun! )


Now... on to the second part of the analogy.... so there's this paradise, Shangrila, and everyone wants to get there. But how? Yes, there are paths that will take you further away. For example, if Shangrila is to the west of you and yet you go east, you will end up further way from your goal. That is a real, legitimate concern, I agree with you. But, even if you end up further away from your goal, the damage isn't permanent. You have always have the ability to correct yourself, turn around, and go in the right direction.

As for the Buddha's teachings, he didn't teach us all to go west. Nor did he teach us all to go east. Or north, or south. If all he taught us was a direction, then you're right, it would be a real concern as to whether some Buddhists are on the right path or not. Instead, what he taught us is how to read the terrain, so that we can figure out how to get there on our own, no matter where we are in relation to Shangrila. And it may very well be that occasionally we'll make mistakes, we'll read the terrain incorrectly, but the method that he taught will catch those mistakes and put us back on course.

Does that make sense?

[koan]

Nirvana is nothing like the Christian idea of salvation. Nirvana, is the state where, one realises, everthing is enherently empty. Thoughts, actions and emotions cannot rise without a cause. Being aware of this, one is able to release suffering, by not clinging to, thoughts, actions and emotions. A metaphor of this is, wading through a pool of excretement and not having any stick. Some say its the ability to stop caring, however compassion is essential in Buddhism, It's just not becomming attached.

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by koan

Nirvana is nothing like the Christian idea of salvation. Nirvana, is the state where, one realises, everthing is enherently empty. Thoughts, actions and emotions cannot rise without a cause. Being aware of this, one is able to release suffering, by not clinging to, thoughts, actions and emotions. A metaphor of this is, wading through a pool of excretement and not having any stick. Some say its the ability to stop caring, however compassion is essential in Buddhism, It's just not becomming attached.

From my perspective, you are exhibiting an attachment when you can't get past your views on Christianity and Buddhism in order to see that your distinction is not relevant to the conversation at hand.

I wasn't trying to say that the two are identical. I was trying to put my explanation in a framework with which Victor is more familiar.

[koan]

Buddhism is about discovering the function of the mind, the eightfold paths, right view. Then correcting wrong thinking and practices, the rest of the eightfold path ( this is an over simplication)
The idea of Zen ( Dhyana in sanskrit, Cha'n in Chinese and Seon in Korean ), is to point directly at the mind. This is done in many different ways, depending on the school and the teacher. However, as stated earlier Koans, play a vital role in this practice. E.g. Show me your original face, before your parents were born. This sounds absurd, however, there are ways to answer and this is how masters guage ones progress. The idea of the koan(public case) is to rid the mind of false logic, which is responsible for wrong thinking.

[Random]

It has always seemed to me that the most profound facilitation towards Enlightenment that Zen wisdom provides is to STOP ALL THINKING NOW! Zen is the proverbial Patriarch with the stick, whacking you over the head every time you try to "puzzle" and "solve" the insolvable, everytime you try to arrive @ conclusions that will be clung to and attached to. Thus there are no "correct" answers for the Koans, only ones that eventually exhaust the student of all mental energies and focus. Zen is about the end of abstraction, ideation, beliefs about truth etc. In this regard, it has always struck me as suitably bereft of Metaphysical speculation and quitessenitally Buddhist in its dynamic and effect.

[koan]

Originally Posted by Godlike

It has always seemed to me that the most profound facilitation towards Enlightenment that Zen wisdom provides is to STOP ALL THINKING NOW! Zen is the proverbial Patriarch with the stick, whacking you over the head every time you try to "puzzle" and "solve" the insolvable, everytime you try to arrive @ conclusions that will be clung to and attached to. Thus there are no "correct" answers for the Koans, only ones that eventually exhaust the student of all mental energies and focus. Zen is about the end of abstraction, ideation, beliefs about truth etc. In this regard, it has always struck me as suitably bereft of Metaphysical speculation and quitessenitally Buddhist in its dynamic and effect.

Unfortunatey you're not right about being able to answer a koan. If there wern't answers, why are there so many of them? Also, the answer the student gives, is an indication of their progress. Some say there are no right or wrong anwers, this is true, though how it is answered is the crux.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by lilithu

I agree.

The distinction that I was making between how you view salvation and actually attaining salvation is like this. Let's say, for the sake of the convo, that salvation/nirvana is a physical place that everyone wants to get to. Let's just call it Shangrila, since that's the analogy that Mystic used in a recent thread. Now, there is a difference between the knowledge that will lead you to Shangrila and the knowledge about Shangrila. So people can spend lifetimes arguing about whether or not Shangrila is mountainous with cascading waterfalls and lush greenery. Or it's more like a tropical beach with azure waves lapping on fine white sand. BUT none of these arguments are going to take these people any closer to Shangrila. Do you see what I mean? The people making these arguments are sitting still (in a coffee shop maybe) talking. They're not walking.

What the Buddha said was essentially quit speculating about whether or not Shangrila is a mountain preserve or a beach resort. Go there and find out for yourself. And all the questions about metaphysics basically amount to us sitting in the coffee shop asking/arguing about the color of the sand etc.

(But it's fun! )

Yes it is. But I always thought we were arguing about how to get there, not about Shangrila itself.

Originally Posted by lilithu

Now... on to the second part of the analogy.... so there's this paradise, Shangrila, and everyone wants to get there. But how? Yes, there are paths that will take you further away. For example, if Shangrila is to the west of you and yet you go east, you will end up further way from your goal. That is a real, legitimate concern, I agree with you. But, even if you end up further away from your goal, the damage isn't permanent. You have always have the ability to correct yourself, turn around, and go in the right direction.

Unless of course you willingly choose east because it was further away.

Originally Posted by lilithu