Hacker News Reader

Comment by cyberpunk | Hacker News Reader

I'm an ordained soto zen practitioner and study under a transmitted teacher; most of my views quite closely follow what our founding teacher (Eihei Dogen) wrote.

If that doesn't make me a buddhist, I'm not sure what would :}

Zen is certainly a 'back to basics' movement; but you're quite incorrect so think that zen is separate from historical traditions of buddhism. The buddha sat Shikantaza just as we, all the 'fluff' came later. We are perhaps a 'back to basics' movement, but one that has a several thousand year lineage. Unless you feel Bodhidharma was a dubious modernist? :}

I say 'my practice' as I do not wish to speak for others even inside my group, let alone buddhists as whole.

View on HN

> all the 'fluff' came later.

Believing certain stuff is “fluff” is precisely the dubious attempt at reconstruction that I was talking about.

In terms of their own practices, the Japanese practicing Zen in their own country, and the teachers who came to the West, had the excuse of being born into an existing cultural tradition that had evolved the way it had. First-generation Westerners taking on Buddhism, but only such things as they can feel comfortable with, and then claiming that what they put together is the authentic core Buddhism, just look like cultural appropriators.

That's hilarious.

Do you think the Indians accused the Chinese of cultural appropriation in the 5th century also?

Even more bizarre to think that chan buddhism (which later became zen) dropped a bunch of stuff they weren't comfortable with when buddhism arrived in china.

Is there some cut off date you think is the high water mark for authentic buddhism? Anything after 1260 need a new name? Buddhism-3? :}

buddha was written as having been fairly clear that his teaching would disappear in the world after 1-2k years. It's an entire meaning behind why the wheel of the dharma needs a buddha to turn it.

But.. meditation, I hate to break it to you, is not how Buddha was enlightened. It was merely when he calmed down that he realized he had already attained it long ago. After that he thought deeply as to how to skillfully lead such ignorant and arrogant beings to his knowledge. that was his purpose in life. He didn't spread the meditation you learned and practice. If it were not the case then there would be even one to have achieved perfect, supreme enlightenment and to have come from your practice, but there are none who have. Buddhism means Buddha's teaching. If what you know doesn't contain any ways for living beings then that's dead Buddhism. A living teaching always has the ways in it. If you ask me the difference btwn Buddhism today and Buddha's teaching I can say that Buddha taught us to save ourselves through the truth of the world and to live forever, whereas most people who think they learned Buddhism have learned to throw away their own self and to die forever.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com