tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1241684761340467690.post8130006697943267461..comments2022-12-11T04:55:14.695-07:00Comments on Zen Naturalism: Is Zen Naturalism a Religion?Poep Sa Frank Judehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13609272991412471770noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1241684761340467690.post-1113508095694897432016-08-16T16:32:22.331-07:002016-08-16T16:32:22.331-07:00Martha,
Thank you for taking your time to read th...Martha, <br />Thank you for taking your time to read through this blog and to comment. I'd like to address some of your statements in order to hopefully crate greater clarity of my intention in working through this blog. I think the function of critique is very important; it's not that I see myself as "correcting" so much as critiquing other positions from the position I hold of philosophical naturalism and non-essentialism. That is, I take the emptiness teaching of the buddhist tradition very seriously and see that many contemporary teachers -- as well as many throughout the history of the various buddhisms -- have occasionally drifted into essentialism, as Joe points out in his comment above yours.<br /><br />Of course we all hold to different interpretations. As the epigram at the top of this blog's home page points out:<br /><br />"Here's where I attempt to explore an approach to zen buddhism that is firmly rooted in naturalistic, scientific, empirical understanding. It's a true non-dual 'spirituality' that has no need for the supernatural. Whether you do or do not believe in the supernatural, there's still a place for you here. What I am saying, is that if you do NOT believe in the supernatural, here's a zen that says, "you're home!""<br /><br />Thus, I am absolutely transparent about my position and interpretation (which is not something many others take the time to do, by the way) AND I end by saying you don't have to believe what I say in order to study and/or practice with me. There are certainly people who sit in my sangha that do not accept all my naturalist teachings, but they find the practice and the structures here conducive to non-dogmatic practice.<br /><br />Don't take everything as literal as it may seem. I 'hate' zen as I describe it as it has evolved, but I am an ordained zen teacher. Are you familiar with the Critical Buddhist movement in Japan? If not, you may want to look them up. They too make many of the same criticisms I make as Japanese practitioners of the Soto Zen School. Perhaps only those who love something and take it to heart can stomach rejecting and criticizing what they devote their lives to with such fervor!<br /><br />And yes, I wholeheartedly wish to lead away from "traditional zen buddhism" because I think it fails many contemporary practitioners. Just look at all the scandals! Such scandal is to be expected when the traditional structures are as oppressive as they have been. Maybe you haven't read this post: <br />http://zennaturalism.blogspot.com/2015/01/0-false-18-pt-18-pt-0-0-false-false.html<br /><br />Please feel free to stay in touch, and I do hope you'll sit with us again here in Tucson! Our next Day of Mindfulness, perhaps? October 15th!Poep Sa Frank Judehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13609272991412471770noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1241684761340467690.post-89005578316664918172016-08-14T14:22:08.849-07:002016-08-14T14:22:08.849-07:00Hello
I have enjoyed reading many of your posts an...Hello<br />I have enjoyed reading many of your posts and find your readings insightful and refreshing. <br />I think I am starting to understand your philosophy and your creation of Zen Naturalism. <br />Very inspiring for sure. <br /><br />I understand why you have chosen to so call " correct" some readings out there by various authors. But then I felt bad for those authors. I think they might have just been doing their best at the time. Don't you think? Or, that is simply their interpretation of the dharma. <br />I think individuals are drawn to different authors for a reason, it resonates well with them. People will go through authors. I sure have!<br />That is inquiry. ( Zen Naturalism)<br /><br /><br />Well maybe it is good to see your point of view on various readings. <br />We all have a point of view.<br />Zen mind Beginners mind? This was how Suzuki saw it. That was his point of view.<br /><br />Never the less it is all the same teaching.<br /><br />....,,,I had such a difficult time reading your post on "Why I hate Zen". How can you say that? <br />Simply what the Japanese developed, ( from China) opposed to Zen in Vietnam or Zen in Korea- Tibet-it only makes sense how each culture adapted the Zen Buddist practice into their lives. Right? It was what worked In their society. <br />Yes, th e formal hierarchy. And or how they handled the dharma . <br /><br /><br /> It is really interesting how Buddhism has evolved.<br /><br /><br />Although you hate Zen Buddhism and you are not Buddhist. But you must respect it enough to teach it. <br />this point must be important or you would not write about it.<br /><br />I really wish you did not hate Zen Buddhism. Where does that lead us? <br />Away from Traditional Zen Buddhism?<br /><br />Never the less it is all the same teaching. <br /><br /><br /> I respect you and your teachings and what you are offering In our community.<br />I am simply trying to sort this out. The above.<br />I only write this because it has definitely woken me up! <br />Now I will let go of it all.<br />Written words can be too much. <br /><br />I have only sat with you once.<br />I am checking out different zen groups but my other long term practice is up in Tempe.<br />I miss having Sangha friends nearby.<br />Thank you for your precious time,<br />MarthaMarthahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00133295361991421759noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1241684761340467690.post-3964300900358471002013-09-27T12:11:51.867-07:002013-09-27T12:11:51.867-07:00Joe,
Thanks for your comment. If you move through...Joe,<br /><br />Thanks for your comment. If you move through this blog, you'll see many posts where this specific subject (by which I mean a critique and rejection of essentialist and supernatural memes that run through much later buddhism -- and is rampant in contemporary buddhism).<br /><br />For instance the very first piece I wrote for this blot was in response to such thinking by two well-known buddhist teachers here:<br />http://zennaturalism.blogspot.com/2008_01_27_archive.html<br /><br />but the essays on a Revaluation of the Four Noble Truths and the teachings on "not-self" also address this issue.<br /><br />http://zennaturalism.blogspot.com/2009/07/meaning-of-duhkha-for-zen-naturalism.html<br /><br />http://zennaturalism.blogspot.com/2010/03/going-against-stream-not-self-teaching.html<br /><br />Please let me know what you think!<br />And thanks again for "stopping by."<br />Poep Sa Frank Judehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13609272991412471770noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1241684761340467690.post-49060131384023358292013-09-27T11:26:13.110-07:002013-09-27T11:26:13.110-07:00amazed (and sometimes frustrated) at the number of...amazed (and sometimes frustrated) at the number of people who want to claim zen and buddhism as their own yet are stubborn about yet holding onto to at least a sliver of supernaturalism as the end point.. This to me contradicts all we continue to learn in the modern world of science and rationality but also runs counter to dualism Sidhartha found erroneous from the get go. If you have more posts about this specific subject I'd be interestedJoe Shttp://highmesafieldnotes.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com