Official might be incorrect, Since the etmology stated "from Latin doctrina "teaching, body of teachings, learning," from doctor "teacher"" I was thinking that Doctrine would come from a more officially, universally accepted source such as an Institution or a specific school of learning or transmission of thought.
B Find what makes your heart sing…and do it! ________________________________ From: Bill! <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sat, April 20, 2013 12:32:10 AM Subject: [Zen] Re: breathing William, Good detective work, but I don't understand you last statement: "...one is an official teaching while the other is an opinion." Aren't "official teachings" also opinions? ...Bill! --- In [email protected], William Rintala <brintala@...> wrote: > > Where definitions fail etymology might elucidate: > > doctrine (n.) > late 14c., from Old French doctrine (12c.) "teaching, doctrine," and directly > from Latin doctrina "teaching, body of teachings, learning," from doctor > "teacher" > Â > dogma (n.) > c.1600 (in plural dogmata), from Latin dogma "philosophical tenet," from > Greek > dogma (genitive dogmatos) "opinion, tenet," literally "that which one thinks > is > > true," from dokein "to seem good, think" (see decent). Treated in 17c.-18c. > as >a > > Greek word in English. > Â > Â > The difference seems to be that one is an official teaching while the other > is > an opinion. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Bill! <BillSmart@...> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Fri, April 19, 2013 9:53:44 PM > Subject: [Zen] Re: breathing > > Â > Joe, > > I checked out my dictionary references and couldn't really discover the > difference between 'doctrine' and 'dogma'. My sense of the two words is that > 'doctrine' is at a higher level - like mission or strategy, and 'dogma' is a > lower level like tasks or tactics. I think that pretty much corresponds with > your thoughts below. > > Anyway when you talk about the Ch'an sect or Zen sect you're still talking >about > > a sect (sub-set) of Buddhism with that nasty little > '-ism' still intact. > > Now if you want to talk about 'zen' (lower case 'z') as I do, then okay; but > 'zen' as I've experienced and practice does not have either doctrine nor > dogma >- > > only Just THIS! > > ...Bill! > > > --- In [email protected], "Joe" <desert_woodworker@> wrote: > > > > Bill!, > > > > Using Christianity as a working example to me, and trying to generalize to > >other Wisdom traditions, I'd say that the Buddhist teachings are not dogma, > >as > > >much as doctrine. > > > > Could you check me on that? You have good and admirable facility with > >dictionaries. > > > > The doctrine in Buddhism is inseparable from the teaching of Buddhadharma. >What > > >is taught is doctrine. And practice. > > > > The Zen school, as we all know, however, is NOT the Teaching School. >Regarding > > >Zen, we all remember fondly that: > > > > "This is a special transmission of Mind, OUTSIDE the Scriptures, not >dependent > > >on words and letters." > > > > And yet, if we consider the origin of the Ch'an sect, it grew from people > > who > > >awakened under the influence of Buddhadharma, which includes all the > >doctrine > >thereof ...and little dogma. If I'm using my words right. Bill!, will you >check > > >up on this? To your satisfaction, I mean? ;-) > > > > --Joe > > > > > "Bill!" <BillSmart@> wrote: > > > > > > Mike, > > > > > > I'll split the difference with you. I'll call the Eight-fold Path not > > > just > >dogma but Buddhist dogma. > > > > > > I thought the term 'Buddha Dharma' and Buddhism meant the same things. > > > How >do > > >you see them as different? > > > > > > ...Bill! > > >
