What the heck is the difference and if so, why is there a difference?
Should Buddha have been consulted with this change?
Buddhism encompasses a wide variety of disciplines
Zen is one of those disciplines.
A parallel question might be “What is the difference between tai chi and yang tai chi?”
[QUOTE=GeneChing;987206]Zen is one of those disciplines.
A parallel question might be “What is the difference between tai chi and yang tai chi?”[/QUOTE]
What are the other disciplines and why are there more than one?
[QUOTE=kfson;987220]What are the other disciplines and why are there more than one?[/QUOTE]imagine a single beam of light as it goes thru a crystal… disciplines are the colors on the other side. 
[QUOTE=uki;987223]imagine a single beam of light as it goes thru a crystal… disciplines are the colors on the other side. :)[/QUOTE]
Shouldn’t there be one system and individual buddhas?
[QUOTE=kfson;987229]Shouldn’t there be one system and individual buddhas?[/QUOTE]there are no buddhas.
The term zen comes from meditation
Zen and Chan are phoneticizations of dhyana, which is meditation. Other methods are disciplines like chanting, karma work, study of the sutras, koan, and more. Zen is also distinguished as a school of Buddhism. But you should just wikepedia all this and not listen to posts on a forum. That’s unlikely to be fruitful.
If you really want to know, visit a zendo.
[QUOTE=GeneChing;987233]Zen and Chan are phoneticizations of dhyana, which is meditation. [/QUOTE]dyhana is also the name of our midwife. 
hows it go again?
if in your travels you see buddha on your path, kill him…
although im not buddhist, so i probably would just walk past him and never know. 
as Gene has said, check out sources besides a net forum.
for instance, here’s a quick answer from an authoritative figure in buddhism: http://www.buddhanet.net/ans11.htm
But, in buddhism, there are as many sects and practices as there is in pretty much any other religion.
christians have all sorts fo sects, jews as well as do muslims within islam, and hindus, well don’t get me started on hindus! lol
zen itself is divided down even further as far as sects go and disciplines.
no spiritual pursuit is ever one size fits all.
I’m disappointed I thought you had a clip :mad:
[QUOTE=Egg fu young;987249]I’m disappointed I thought you had a clip :mad:[/QUOTE]
a clip of what? someone sitting cross legged wit their eyes near shut?
Buddha understood that all individuals have different temperaments, intellectual abilities, educational levels, inclinations, personalities, etc. All teachings are flawed and subject to misunderstanding. Due to these variables “expedient means” is used to assist those of varying abilities. That is, innumerable different kinds of teachings may be used to accommodate the needs and abilities of the individual.
The Western method is to have the individual accommodate to the teaching, within Mahayana Buddhism the teaching accommodates to the individual. Meaning there are many teachings for many different needs of individuals.
The requirement for a fixed teaching is a western characteristic whose origin is found within the religions of The Book, specifically, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Buddhism (Mahayana specifically) does not rely on fixed teachings even though they tend to favor specific Sutras. To require a fixed teaching is to encourage clinging the avoidance of which is the main principle of Buddhism.
Having said that it is not that non-clinging is a doctrinal requirement as doctrinal requirements tend to be viewed from the western theological perspective.
Non-clinging is more of a incomplete description of what occurs when one is free. Non-clinging is not something one must DO in order to be free, when one is free non-clinging occurs.
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;987267]Buddha understood that all individuals have different temperaments, intellectual abilities, educational levels, inclinations, personalities, etc. All teachings are flawed and subject to misunderstanding. Due to these variables “expedient means” is used to assist those of varying abilities. That is, innumerable different kinds of teachings may be used to accommodate the needs and abilities of the individual.
The Western method is to have the individual accommodate to the teaching, within Mahayana Buddhism the teaching accommodates to the individual. Meaning there are many teachings for many different needs of individuals.
The requirement for a fixed teaching is a western characteristic whose origin is found within the religions of The Book, specifically, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Buddhism (Mahayana specifically) does not rely on fixed teachings even though they tend to favor specific Sutras. To require a fixed teaching is to encourage clinging the avoidance of which is the main principle of Buddhism.
Having said that it is not that non-clinging is a doctrinal requirement as doctrinal requirements tend to be viewed from the western theological perspective.
Non-clinging is more of a incomplete description of what occurs when one is free. Non-clinging is not something one must DO in order to be free, when one is free non-clinging occurs.[/QUOTE]
I suspected that, so why the Buddhist differences?
[QUOTE=kfson;987229]Shouldn’t there be one system and individual buddhas?[/QUOTE]
there [SIZE=“4”]SHOULD[/SIZE] be!!! :mad:
but there isn’t…
[QUOTE=kfson;987273]I suspected that, so why the Buddhist differences?[/QUOTE]
Different teachings for different people according to their needs.
In one of the Sutras, unfortunately I can 't remember which one, I am sure someone here will remember, there is a story used as a metaphor for variations in the teachings…
Here is the short version:
The was a man (Buddha) whose house was on fire (A symbol of the material world and its attendant suffering). His children were inside the house (the unenlightened trapped within the phenomenal world) He was trying to get the children out of the house, but they would not leave their favorite toys (clinging to phenomena). So the father promised each child a better toy than the one they already had. He promised each child a different toy because each child had a different favorite (changing the teachings to fit the needs of the individual). The little white lie is justified because what is important is to get the children out of the house in order to save them from brutal suffering.
Inherently all Buddhist teachings are meant to point one to the moon, but none of them are the moon. It is important not to confuse that which does the pointing with the moon itself, which is what commonly happens. People then fight over whose “finger pointing to the moon” is the TRUE “finger pointing to the moon”. But they all point to the moon. Some just work better for one person while another finger works better for others.
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;987287]Different teachings for different people according to their needs.
In one of the Sutras, unfortunately I can 't remember which one, I am sure someone here will remember, there is a story used as a metaphor for variations in the teachings…
Here is the short version:
The was a man (Buddha) whose house was on fire (A symbol of the material world and its attendant suffering). His children were inside the house (the unenlightened trapped within the phenomenal world) He was trying to get the children out of the house, but they would not leave their favorite toys (clinging to phenomena). So the father promised each child a better toy than the one they already had. He promised each child a different toy because each child had a different favorite (changing the teachings to fit the needs of the individual). The little white lie is justified because what is important is to get the children out of the house in order to save them from brutal suffering.
Inherently all Buddhist teachings are meant to point one to the moon, but none of them are the moon. It is important not to confuse that which does the pointing with the moon itself, which is what commonly happens. People then fight over whose “finger pointing to the moon” is the TRUE “finger pointing to the moon”. But they all point to the moon. Some just work better for one person while another finger works better for others.[/QUOTE]
The little white lie can be compared to forcing one from one’s path where finding that door to enlightenment may have been one’s path. The destruction of all of one’s foundations (clingment to phenomena) may be required in this life. Tricking is a very serious tool.
In my world, one has to first ask the other person’s higher self if that is in order to achieve immortality.
alternatively, resting your anus on your heel while meditating can help the meditation and prevent stagnant chi from escaping into the zendo.
not the taint, it must be the anus, and you gotta pucker ya hear?
good, now get to traveling the cosmos!
[QUOTE=kfson;987310]The little white lie can be compared to forcing one from one’s path where finding that door to enlightenment may have been one’s path. The destruction of all of one’s foundations (clingment to phenomena) may be required in this life. Tricking is a very serious tool.
In my world, one has to first ask the other person’s higher self if that is in order to achieve immortality.[/QUOTE]
There is no forcing anyone from the Path. It is ALL the path. Wherever you are IS the Path. Thinking one can fall away from the Path is delusion. There is nothing to do, nowhere to go, nothing to learn, no path to follow. This is why enlightenment is referred to as realization.
Phenomena and realization of Truth are like the optical illusion of the old woman and young woman. Think of a person who can perceive the old woman, but cannot perceive the young woman. This is the person who has not obtained realization. He has a false/incomplete view of the illustration/reality. His mind is clouded.
When the young woman is finally “realized” nothing inherently changes. No one taught him how to see the young woman, he did not learn how to see the young woman, he did not have to follow a ritual, pray to a God, light a candle, attend a meeting, etc. At best another can try to point her out, but even then the seeing of the young woman is something each of us do ourselves and inherently nothing has changed. The illustration is the same as it has always been. The only thing that is different is the person can now see the whole picture.
Life IS the path, wherever you are is the path, whatever you do is the path, whatever you think is the path. The delusion is in not realizing truth/the way things ARE. We cannot see it because we think there is something to see. That is, we have a concept, an idea of what we think it is “supposed” to be. These ideas are delusion and we become bound by that delusion. Then we cannot see the forest for the trees, because we do not see what we THINK we are “supposed” to see.
The white lie from Buddha would be likened to a message from your higher self.
According to Ch’an teachings things (ideas, entities/identities, objects, etc.) are created by conceptual thinking, the higher self belongs to the world of phenomena and conceptual thinking, it is an artificial construct created for a purpose. It does not inherently exist, meaning it does not exist on its own separate from a mind that has created it.
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;987264]a clip of what? someone sitting cross legged wit their eyes near shut? :p[/QUOTE]
No…a clip of them fighting:cool: