Dear Mike
Good questions and good post. It is interesting that perhaps we have come to a
little of the same conclusions, only I derived it from an impact of Japanese
Soto and Rinzai Zen Buddhism in America and you are seeing the reality of
culture and the inner life of Zen in Japan.
To a certain extent, I would have to say that while the Japanese intentions
probably would automatically be implementing and apply the Zen (Tradition), I
would not say this is entirely true. I will explain. But before I do, having
said that, I would like to point out something derived from the
Perennialist/Traditionalist School of Comparative Religion, which is a
Philosophical and Metaphysical overview of Ancient Traditions perse -- that on
an exoteric level, the outward manifestation of the Tradition, of course the
Japanese would be closer to this reality, although the West could and should be
doing this as well. So, I would say that Zen is in good hands with the
Japanese under the onslaught of post modernist times and Secularism, which
steam rolls everything in the name of progress. On the other hand, Zen, the
esoteric, which is what is essential, the inner life, this no culture can place
any claim to. It is the reality and the slipperiest of fish to obtain -- as the
Sufis say, the kernal and the kernal.
In the case of Americans or Westerner plundering the Tradition of Zen. I think
that is two answers -- first, there are some who have kept up the Traditions of
Soto and Rinzai very well, but expressing a natural sense of American
Transcendentalism. We sort of have our own secrets and gnostics inherent in
our experience. That is culture and the Tradition, like the differences
between Chinese Chan and Japanese Zen. And then of course there has been those
that have expressed an anything goes sort of Zen, or Zen and this and Zen and
that. So, in short, I don't think Zen Buddhism is under anymore attack in
America than Japan, at least on the esoteric level.
I do think there is a possibility in both Japan and the West for any Tradition,
whether that be Sufis or Zen, for it to continuously be under attack from
Secularism and syncretism. This is post modern information age times. In some
sense it is what is wrong at the heart of the Middle East . . . not only is
Islam fighting the Secular West, but more importantly they are fighting
themselves, in terms of post modern times. Technological and Western
individualism and syncretism has made advances on their civilization
(traditional culture)and they are having a sort of nighmarish reform that we
are all witnessing. Trust me, it probably was not much fun in Europe for many
during the upheaval post Reformation.
So, in perspective Zen is alive and well. It offers a good Tradition and leans
on its pluralistic expression. The Sufis do likewise, however they are on the
run in Saudi Arabia and Iran, the two major power brokers in Middle Eastern
culture. When the Sufis can practice again in Mecca, you will know that its
all turned for the better. But in the case of Zen, and even in China, which I
hear Buddhism is flourishing after all these years, as I said, I think the
prospects look good.
best wishes
Kirk
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, mike brown <uerusub...@...> wrote:
>
> Kirk,
>
> The below was an interesting read. If I read it correctly. you seem to be
> saying
> that practioners of Zen need to adapt their practice to suit their own
> particular cultural milieu. As someone who is living in Japan, and
> is reminded
> daily of the chasm between Asian/western thinking, I think I'd have to agree.
> 'Zen' is Japanese, but what is at the heart of Zen is not. The change towards
> a
> more western approach to Zen, however, is slow and incremental and maybe
> that's
> as it should be. I wonder tho, will a more western approach to Zen include
> it as
> 'just' part of a wider, eclectic system of religious/philisophical
> etc. study
> and practice - or will the efficacy of Zen be diluted by such an approach
> (the
> traditional Japanese viewpoint).
>
> Mike Â
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> .From: salik888 <novelid...@...>
> To: zen_fo...@...
> Sent: Mon, 13 September, 2010 2:28:50
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
>
> Â
> Dear Ed
>
> I appreciate the affirmation, you never know what is going to be taken out of
> context in the wrong way in the peanut gallery. Nevertheless, at some time,
> later for me than sooner, and really through the Sufis, who have a different
> way
> of explaining psychology, where they break down the levels of delusion and
> attachment, it became clear to me, at least for myself what my overall aim is
> and could be.
>
>
> We were talking about mysticism earlier, in my estimation a wholly
> unproductive
> discussion, since people would be speaking about the end results and their
> definition of this -- enlightenment, cosmic concsiousness, etc . . . The
> reason
> I bring this up is that it has to do with greed and not realizing first
> things
> first. If you look at Zen Masters, Texts, and Sufi Masters, you will find
> plenty
> of address about having your mind on the wrong things first -- enlightenment.
> The Sufis would address this as a sort of greed that operates and is
> furthered
> in the Nafs, The Commmanding Self, that is overlayed with personal
> experiences,
> wrong education, trauma, prejudices, opinions, and all the seven deadly sins.
> Oftentimes we bring our lower instincts into our practice without ever
> realizing
> it, through worldly conditioning.
>
>
> I have witnessed plenty of ego maniacs who are very clear in terms of their
> meditation practice, or their pious dedication to their path, but are as
> greedy
> as if they were thieves.
>
>
> Now, having said that, I realize that I am a thief as well, robbing this and
> taking that. Now we are in the realm of what a Zen Buddhist Master used to
> talk
> about -- the big doubt. He was not doubting the tradition, but doubting our
> own
> sincerity and utilization of the tradition. This can be useful, make us human
> and humble . . . keep us from being big shits, big know it alls, big kahunas
> . .
> . there are big kahunas in Zen and big Kahunas in Sufism too, in fact lots
> more
> in Sufism, since it has a devotional nature to teachers at times.
>
>
> I think what is needed sometimes is fresh perspective on an ancient message.
> That is pretty much it. There is really nothing new, and I don't say this to
> bring attention to myself, although there is that, we are all looking for
> attention, or we would be doing something else, but also as a reminder. As
> the
> Sufis say, we are forgetful people. Remembrance on the path is a useful tool.
> We
> want to keep our practice and path alive and vital, not by rote, fall victim
> to
> Japanese cultural customs of order and clarity. This is a by-product of Soto
> Zen, and only gets you so far -- a bad imitation of Japanese practitioners.
>
>
> At times I am very excited to see the expression of Zen Buddhism in America,
> it
> appears to be trying to keep the tradition alive and deal with cultural
> conditioning that might not be applicable. Let's keep in mind the expression
> of
> Chan in China and then Zen in Japan. Once again, the Sufis have addressed
> this
> thoroughly, in terms of pluralism -- one path, many permissions.
>
>
> As anyone might be able to gather my area of practice and specialization has
> been mostly Soto Zen and Sufism. I have delved into the Hermetic traditions
> considerably, as they related to Sufism. I have not joined the Tibetan
> discussion but have found it interesting, since I know very little about the
> Dalai Lama other than he wears glasses and has a nice smile and appears to be
> everywhere. I don't know much about the Basques either, other than Ernest
> Hemingway sure thought they were swell. So hopefully my offerings will serve
> as
> crumbs to strengthen you heart in the path, nor detract.
>
>
> Thank you all for letting me post here . . .
>
> Donkey is never happy.
>
> K among the permissive
>
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "ED" <seacrofter001@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Kirk wrote:
> >
> > > I think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the
> > > experiential with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of
> > undoing of yourself,
> > > the conditioned cultural and experiential part of your personality
> > that
> > > continuously reacts and feeds your ego.
> > >
> > > Think of it this way, while you are reading this you are already
> > reacting
> > > inside in an automatic way. Zen seeks to loosen the bounds of your
> > false
> > > self and return you to your natural state. Part of the reason why Zen
> > > honors spontaneity, clarity, nature and a sense of the primordial
> > untouched
> > > mother that feeds us all.
> >
> >
> >
> > Greetings!
> >
> > I resonate strongly with the above statements on zen. Does anyone hold a
> > different perspective?
> >
> > --ED
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, novelidea8@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Greetings
> > >
> > > In my estimation there really is no way to assert what Zen is, whether
> > you
> > > are restricting it to zazen; or opening it to a wider religious and
> > > cultural discussion. The best we can do is just admit we fall short
> > and perhaps
> > > point to our own experience, to presence. Of course we could ask
> > ourselves
> > > who is being present?
> > >
> > > So repeating zazen zazen zazen with platitudes to support it, or
> > explaining
> > > big Zen and little zen, does do much but tell us something about who
> > is
> > > doing the talking and perhaps who is doing the listening here.
> > >
> > > I think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the
> > > experiential with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of
> > undoing of yourself,
> > > the conditioned cultural and experiential part of your personality
> > that
> > > continuously reacts and feeds your ego.
> > >
> > > Think of it this way, while you are reading this you are already
> > reacting
> > > inside in an automatic way. Zen seeks to loosen the bounds of your
> > false
> > > self and return you to your natural state. Part of the reason why Zen
> > > honors spontaneity, clarity, nature and a sense of the primordial
> > untouched
> > > mother that feeds us all.
> > >
> > > In this respect Zen shares a great deal in common with Sufism,
> > although the
> > > methods might be a great deal different.
> > >
> > > Best wishes
> > >
> > > Kirk
> >
>
------------------------------------
Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
