RAF, You raise a lot of questions here. I'll try to answer in a general way rather than going through them one by one.
IMO... All judgement and classifications are from YOUR point-of-view. So when I said 'sincere student' I meant a person who is sincerely seeking relief from suffering. That is all. I used the word 'student' because in the context of the saying there was also a teacher, but certainly there are many who sincerely seek relief from suffering who do not have an access to a teacher. The person seeking relief is the only one who can judge whether he/she is really 'sincere' or not. I don't contend that there is only one way or one set of techniques to do this. There are many ways (paths/techniques) to alleviate suffering. Zen is just a name for one category which include Japanese Soto and Rinzai Zen Buddhism and many others. Chan Buddhism is very similar. Modern Western Zen Buddhist teachings can be effective. I do draw a line somewhere though. Not just EVERYTHING is zen as some seem to want to believe. I'm not saying that whatever others practice is wrong or ineffective, but I will say from time to time that what they describe is not zen - IMO... My point was just that if the seeker is sincere there are many ways available and these are not limited to tutoring by an experienced teacher. Personally I think going the teacher route is the best way, but that's probably because it worked well for me. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], R A Fonda <rafonda@...> wrote: > > On 12/9/2012 10:15 PM, Bill! wrote: > > a sincere student > > I have no reason to doubt the truth of that statement, but it raises a > question in my mind, in regard to what qualifies a student to be > considered "sincere", /and by whom/? Obviously, if someone 'hangs > around' a zendo or sangha for some reason other than attaining their own > realization, that is insincere, but what about the (granted, probably > unusual, but not merely hypothetical) case of a layman who has no > contact with teachers, sanghas, or even other Buddhist laypersons, and > pursues a practice for decades: /can/ such a person be insincere? What > would the term signify, if applied in such a case? If, for instance, > they 'use' some of the techniques that sangha-members also use: is there > anyone who can say that their usage of these ancient techniques is in > some way unjustified, let alone 'insincere'? Perhaps because the 'goal' > is 'non-standard'? That might be considered heresy, by some, (by whom, > and on what 'authority'?) but "insincerity"? > > On my view, the Great Way 'belongs' to anyone who sets out upon it; is > that in accordance with your own view? Also, I think the analogy to a > 'way' breaks down if we consider the fact that someone might utilize the > ancient means to attain a state which, let us suppose, might not be > recognized as 'correct' by someone who is (or merely believes they are) > the heir of a tradition. Such an heir might well not be willing to grant > inka, but have they any objective basis on which to judge that someone > who chose to attain that non-standard realization is "insincere"? > > Just thinking about it. > ------------------------------------ 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/
