Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Are there any schools of Zen that do *NOT* focus on a/practice bodhisattva ideas?
Being that I am more of a theravada buddhist, Im honestly not interested in being a bodhisattva. I wont get into all the why's and all that, but Ive always been interested in japanese zen. In fact zen was the first thing I knew about buddhism.
So as the title asks......
Is there a school of zen that does not have anything to do with becoming a bodhisattva (ie making vows to save all beings before reaching enlightenment?)
There seems to be so many schools of zen with different ideas especially in japan and so far my research has not found what im asking.
Thank you
Namaste
So as the title asks......
Is there a school of zen that does not have anything to do with becoming a bodhisattva (ie making vows to save all beings before reaching enlightenment?)
There seems to be so many schools of zen with different ideas especially in japan and so far my research has not found what im asking.
Thank you
Namaste
0
Comments
Any school of Zen which neglects the bodhisattva ideal would be pretty interesting, as it is central to Mahayana Buddhism, which Zen arose from.
Gil Fronsdal practises in both Soto Zen and Theravada. Maybe checking him out might be fruitful in what you are looking for?
Living the Japanese Arts and Ways: 45 Paths to Meditation and Beauty by H.E. Davey
It may give you a Japanese-tinged approach to things but without making full-blown appeals to the Mahayana ideal? (I once owned this book years ago and found it helpful)
If i am not mistaken, zen does not talk about
boddhisatas.
zen is all about using your mind to realise the truth
directly, hence the use of koans, etc.
they are more interested in the practical than the
theory.
other than that I use mala beads, prayer wheels etc.
So you might say im Non-denominational, but have a firm grounding in therevada suttas.
I do however love the heart suttra and recite it in japanese as part of my devotional practice.
for those of you who practice zen, what is a bodhisattva according to your tradition? can you please also give me some names of famous bodhisattva within your tradition?
As for what a bodhisattva is - there are a few different types, but the type that was emphasized at the Chan temple I attended was the "shepherd Bodhisattva," or one who delays full-on Buddhahood to help others attain enlightenment.
When I started sitting with a Rinzai-style group, we almost never talked about bodhisattvas in this way. More in a metaphorical, "act selflessly" sort of way.
In Zen Keys (a book I'd highly recommend on Zen) Thich Nhat Hanh writes: The precepts function like this, for example. They are not commandments to be followed but rather tools to aid one in learning to awaken. Aside from the obvious ethical dimensions, the precepts are meant to raise the awareness of the practitioner of those ways that we harm others. But the precepts cannot be kept perfectly. Just the precept for not killing by itself is an obvious example. I have an itch and so I scratch my arm and I have just killed thousands of cells. How many insects do I kill when I drive in my truck to go to the monastery? We kill every day. The point isn't to feel guilty however. The precepts function like a lens to bring into clarity how our actions affect others in karmic relation.
In the same way, the Bodhisattva ideal is not an ideal to be met perfectly. It is, like the precepts, a lens to bring into clarity the relationship of my awakening with others. Specifically the Bodhisattva ideal is a tool to cultivate bodhicitta -- the Bodhisattva has a motivating power because it helps one to be compassionate, and to see that the wisdom of awakening is not separate from compassion. One lives AS IF all beings will be saved and your participation is necessary-- this is a motivating force, not an exercise in futility. In that sense, the attainment of such a goal both is and is not important. And that compassion may have the overall effect of spreading beneficial karma among others which may help--in the long run, far beyond our limited lifespans--to help others on the path of awakening (even if they don't know it!). All of this is deeply rooted in the Mahayana interpretation of sunyata ("emptiness") and the inseparability of all beings (hence the meaning of his/her appearance in the Heart Sutra).
I'm not overly familiar with most Bodhisattvas except for Avalokiteshvara (aka Avalokita / Quan Yin / Quan Am / Kannon etc) - who is the Bodhisattva of compassion -- she'smy personal favourite and is probably the most popular. I love the depiction of her with the thousand arms of compassion reaching out to save all sentient beings. It is a mythopoetic image which I find inspiring in my practice (I have her on my altar along with Shakyamuni).
John Daido Loori puts it this way:
Unless I am mistaken, a bodhisattva is an enlightened being. Intellectually, this may sound kool or praise-worthy. And heaven knows there are a lot of tales woven about a lot of different bodhisattvas. It's pretty woo-hoo.
The tales that are told are like any spiritually-oriented tales ... they are advertising to those who find themselves inclined towards so-called spiritual life. There's compassion and clarity and a host of other characteristics that can be pinned on bodhisattvas and, by extension, the people who may ingest the tales told about them. Students may learn something about their own characteristics by emulating or targeting the wonders attributed to one bodhisattva or another.
If anyone takes up Zen practice -- if they take the literal time to sit down, straighten the spine, shut up, and focus the mind -- then, over time, the characteristics attributed to bodhisattvas will automatically grow up and flower. No need to cross-your-heart-and-hope-to-die about some formatted aspect, although such aspects can be helpful.
For nine years, back at the beginning, I practiced Zen Buddhism pretty enthusiastically. It didn't bother me especially when we chanted the Bodhisattva's Vow or references were made to bodhisattva attributes. I had other sticking points ... but I kept on practicing. And during those same nine years, I almost never heard a reference to the precepts (don't lie, cheat, steal, kill etc.) What I found was that, without ever a mention, those precepts grew up all by themselves ... not because they were good or noble or pure, but because they were what WORKED. They proved themselves empirically sound. No need to praise them or lay them off on someone else ... they worked, so ... use them. Practice teaches such things. Intellectual accumulations are ... well, they're 'nice' at best and phony at worst.
@kashi -- I have a hunch what you find attractive about Zen is the cut-to-the-chase nature of, as in an example you cited, the Buddha's holding up a single flower. Everything becomes clear in that single gesture ... but the question that remains unanswered is, "what is it that becomes clear?"
That moment on Vulture Peak, whether real or metaphorical, can be a compelling story. And one way to describe that story is to suggest it was like the bodhisattva Manjushri swinging his sword and cutting off all delusions. But does anyone really need Manjushri in order to know that realizing and actualizing something that cuts to the core or reveals true nature or Buddha nature ... well, you don't need a bodhisattva to feel such a yearning. And that's the point: Bodhisattvas are secondary ... your yearning is what counts. What good would Buddhism be if the best anyone could muster was to sit around warbling about something called "bodhisattvas?"
So called bodhisattvas make suggestions. It is your business whether to follow them or not. It's not your job to believe in bodhisattvas, it's just your job (with or without the name "bodhisattva") to be one. That's right ... an enlightened being! And why would anyone do that?
Well, for one thing, they're already stuck with the farm ... might as well learn to live peaceably on it.
Sorry to run on.
heres where I stand and why im posting these questions...
I have a love and high respect for japanese culture and japanese "mind"
zen was the first thing I knew about buddhism
over the years as I learned more about where buddhism really started I began to follow the therevada tradition. why? Im a firm believer that if you want to know the truth to something, you go to the source or as close as possible.
history shows therevada is the original source
but my fascination with japanese culture has remained, and as being a student of swordsmanship, zen has its roots in that as well...and it makes sense to me.
i find the beauty in simplicity. tea, flower arrangement, caligraphy, the simple straight forward movements in swordsmanship...all japanese "mind" for lack of better words.
Now...what im trying to "do" is find my "place" with buddhism.
I feel i cant follow just therevada even though it is where buddhism started and there would not be any buddhism without it. At the same time my love for zen seems to be pulling me towards that direction.
I do not want to stray far from the pali cannon and I want to follow what the buddha actually taught and at the same time merge this with zen.
How can I approach therevada tradition from a zen standpoint is what im trying to "do"
A therevada "samurai", in short, is my goal.
as utter nonsense as that may sound to some.
but if there are ideas such as chanting the buddhas name and thinking "that will get you into buddhas pure land" when the buddha never said such things in the pali cannon..im simply not interested.
Not sure how else to explain...its like I have one foot on a rock thats called therevada and the other foot in the sand of a zen garden
does this make any sense to anyone?
Take two composers Mozart and a modern composer like Stravinsky. They both sound radically different, but both are filmly rooted in classical tradition. The same with the jazz tradition-- Louis Armstrong to John Coltrane. And in rock, Elvis to Soundgarden. Bill Haley and the Comets didn't have synthesisers-- so is Depeche Mode not rock music?
I wouldn't fret to much about the rituals in any tradition-- they are all exercises designed to facilitate awakening, even if they might initially seem strange or even counter-intuitive.
Worst-case scenario, you could test it out (ala the Kalamas) and see how it works for you. Believe me, I started as a "zazen-only-please" guy, not wanting to have anything to do with anything else. Now I'm doing prostrations--and it is a beautiful thing.
The main thing is finding what works best for you. I wouldn't fret over any kind of historical accuracy because even the first Pali suttas were not transcribed DURING the Shakyamuni's lifetime.
I don't have much experience with it but I'd imagine looking into the founders of Zen would help shed some light as well.
I was very drawn to Chan/Zen due to its aesthetics and philosophy, as well as the fact that I'm Chinese and felt it would be appropriate to be involved in Chan buddhism. I've since learned that my attachment to the Zen aesthetic and I daresay "identity" wasn't beneficial for my spiritual practice... I think I practiced zazen because I thought it was cool, but didn't realize that it wasn't really doing anything for me until I tried other styles.
That being said, I still respect the traditions very much, and obviously it works for many people. And I'm not saying that you (@kashi) or others are only drawn to Zen because of the aesthetics. I'm just saying that it's something to be aware of - are we really practicing the tradition or are we roleplaying? I think meditation will help sort these sort of things out.
But that's just our indoctrination as a consumer getting in the way. See, you don't have to "trade in" your Theravada training before you pick up Zen Buddhism. No Teacher that I've ever listened to past or present rejected what the old Sutras had to say. Zen at heart is just telling us that sooner or later, you need to have the confidence and courage to put down the sutras and trust your own understanding of the Dharma. A true understanding of the Dharma is expressed in how you respond to the world right now, today, not by how well you can recite the words of Buddha or how many levels of meditation you have accomplished.
We all bring everything we are to the meditation cushion, past and present. You bring your experience in Theravada. I brought a deep experience in Pentecostal Christianity. I didn't have to ignore or reject what I learned about myself and the world from that. How could I? It's part of who I am. That insistence of spirituality being a direct, life changing experience remains in my Zen Buddhism. In the same way, you don't reject what you've learned from Theravada when you sit down to do Zazen. It's part of what you are.
Of course, it's nice to know something about the circumstances in which anyone places him- or herself, but the 'authenticity' of anything is seldom what provides the kind of peace of mind anyone might honestly seek.
Therevada, Mahayana, bodhisattvas, hungry ghosts, soaring temples, endless texts and fragrant incense ... what authenticity does any of it have ... what originality ... what life and laughter without KASHI?
Find a practice. Practice it. See what happens.
I cant express my gratitude enough for all your advice and straight forward no bs. That goes to all who have responded. Ive been extremely overwhelmed with this, because the "I" wants to declare "I am this and that!"
I do love history, and culture, but I know that means nothing without "me" to enjoy it.
Im slowly finding my way
*Bow*
lesson in humbleness