Anthony, I guess I need to explain again what I mean when I use the term 'zen'. For me 'zen' (lower-case 'z') is just the act of realizing Buddha Nature. Zen (lower-case 'z') practice is the practice of integrating Buddha Nature more and more fully into your everyday life. That's what zen is to me.
I do deny that zen developed from Mahayana Buddhism. I don't deny that Zen Buddhism developed from Mahayana Buddhism, or that it can be considered a sub-set/sect of Mahayana Buddhsim. Zen is not Buddhism. It is not dependent in any way on Buddhism. Zen existed long before Siddartha Buddha. It has existed as long as Buddha Nature has existed, and that has existed at least as long as there have been sentient beings. Zen (lower-case 'z') is not like an estate I inherited from my father (Buddhism). Zen (lower-case 'z') is like a star in the sky. My father (Buddhism) may have deed to an estate from from which you can have a good view of the star. He may claim to own the star, but he does not. There are plenty of other places (Christianity for example) from which you can see that star even though some views are more clearer and unobstructed than others. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@...> wrote: > > Bill, >  > Whether zen is a subset of Buddhism is another matter, but you cannot deny > that zen has developed from Mahayana Buddhism. Just like with an estate from > your father, you can do whatever you like after receiving it, even against > his will. The core idea of Buddha nature is put forward in Lankavatara Sutra > for the first time. On the other hand, I don't think out of any Christian > teachings can arise zen. >  > Anthony > > --- On Thu, 1/9/11, Bill! <BillSmart@...> wrote: > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@...> > Subject: [Zen] Re: Mahayana > To: [email protected] > Date: Thursday, 1 September, 2011, 9:42 AM > > >  > > > > JMJM, > > I do consider zen my practice. > > I acknowledge that most people classify it as a subset/sect of Mahayana > Buddhism, but I do not consider zen a subset of or co-dependent on Buddhism. > In fact I consider zen the core Buddhism was built around - like a > cultural-specific presetation layer. > > I can't speak for those that consider themselves Mahayana Buddhists, but my > practice consists of shikantaza (clear-mind meditation) which is usually > associated with zazen (seated meditation) but can be practiced any where at > any time under any conditions. I sometimes refer to that state of clear-mind > (or no-mind) as 'Buddha Mind'. My personal practice is to incorporate Buddha > Mind more and more into my daily life. > > The core teaching of my zen practice is 'Just THIS!. > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], Jue Miao Jing Ming - > 覺å¦â¢Ã§Â²Â¾Ã¦ËŽ <chan.jmjm@> wrote: > > > > Dear Forum, > > > > Do you consider "Zen/zen/your practice" a Mahayana practice? If so, how > > does Mahayana actually practice? What is its core teaching? > > > > Thank you in advance, jm > > > > -- > > Learn the Basics of Chan Meditation... > > http://www.chan-meditation.org > > Chan in everyday life... > > http://www.chanliving.org > > To be enlightened in this life... > > http://www.heartchan.org > > To save our world... > > http://www.universal-oneness.org > > > ------------------------------------ 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: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
