[Mattayus]

I know the whole idea is selflessness, so i didn't mean for yourself as such, i just meant that i didn't think it was for a deity, or like you're trying to buy your way into an afterlife like in some other religions. The afterlife is more like an achievement, as opposed to it being about paying a deity back for their efforts and in return you get to stay in their 'kingdom'.

Originally Posted by Mattayus

haha yes i do understand it you cheeky sod, i'm not Madonna, i haven't decided to become a buddhist on a whim, i just thought i'd bring it up as i've started to look at it in a deeper sense. The reason it's in here was because this section says "lifestyle" and i thought it was the most plausible place for Religion.

I've always been fascinated with religion and it's omnipresence in the argument of science. Buddhism just happens to be the latest that i've decided to delve into a touch more deeply purely to further my knowledge. And I know exactly what you mean when you say "I've never seen a religion historically contradict itself so much, rewrite the basic rules, and just make up stuff to fit what they wanted."
Which is why i said i like it's fundamentals. Because fundamentally it's the most accepting religion, there are no creative deities to appease, no recompense for good deeds or any of that nonsense. it's about yourself essentially, and at its core it's about riddance of suffering in a completely selfless manor, where-as the other religions, although seemingly as benevolent, tend to be more of a "what i can do to make myself appear better in divine eyes" sort of ethic. But as i said your point resonates very loud with me, it's a very confused religion, with more spin-offs than Star Wars to better suit the practices of its followers.

There is parts of Buddhismen that is good and parts of it that is bullshit, in fact I've never came across any system, religion, ideology or anything that is perfect. It's not a bad idea to study Buddhism and pick out the parts you like, but for everything holy with cream, don't go around and call yourself a Buddhist

I think you should look into some western philosophy and some basic nature science as well, just to give you a nice blend of things.

[Mattayus]

haha i'm not a buddhist, and i have no intention of becoming one!! As i've already said, i'm just looking into it as a personal thing, that's all.

[Naren]

Originally Posted by Desecrated

naren, have you trained zen with a master and achieved satori ?

If I had reached satori, I wouldn't still be here.

I have trained zen with a master, though, yes. I've done zazen tons of times been struck with that fucking stick the "obousan" carry around. Done all the different meditation positions.

Originally Posted by Desecrated

There is parts of Buddhismen that is good and parts of it that is bullshit, in fact I've never came across any system, religion, ideology or anything that is perfect. It's not a bad idea to study Buddhism and pick out the parts you like, but for everything holy with cream, don't go around and call yourself a Buddhist

I think you should look into some western philosophy and some basic nature science as well, just to give you a nice blend of things.

I can agree with pretty much this entire post.

Although I sometimes bash Buddhism, it does have a lot of positive stuff about it.

At least it's not Taoism where they just keep rambling on about immortals who live on the moon.

Originally Posted by Naren

If I had reached satori, I wouldn't still be here.

I have trained zen with a master, though, yes. I've done zazen tons of times been struck with that fucking stick the "obousan" carry around. Done all the different meditation positions.



I can agree with pretty much this entire post.

Although I sometimes bash Buddhism, it does have a lot of positive stuff about it.

At least it's not Taoism where they just keep rambling on about immortals who live on the moon.

Okay my terminology is a bit rusty, when you finally understand "mu" you achieve kenso-godo or the satori, or was it the mujodo no taigen that is satori ?

[Naren]

Originally Posted by Desecrated

Okay my terminology is a bit rusty, when you finally understand "mu" you achieve kenso-godo or the satori, or was it the mujodo no taigen that is satori ?

Satori is enlightenment. Mu is nothingness. Understanding the nothingness principle doesn't make you reach enlightenment. Buddhists who believe in the nothingness principle simply believe in the principle. Understanding it is not something that special, really.

There are normal Buddhist Ko-an and then there are Ko-an from the buddhists that believe in nothingness (nihilists, I guess you could say). Most of their Ko-an just end with the word "Mu" or something along those lines.

Such as the famous "Does a dog have buddha nature?" ko-an where the answer was "mu" which is "nothingness" but could be interpretted as "no."

That, of course, contradicts a basic idea of Buddhism that says that all living creatures from the grass of the fields to the rivers in the mountains to the animals and humans have a buddha nature. But I guess the nothingness nihilists doen't really care what normal Buddhism says.

[Mattayus]

is that the more Theravada school of thought would you say? (the nihilistic views)

[Naren]

Originally Posted by Mattayus

is that the more Theravada school of thought would you say? (the nihilistic views)

Nope. The opposite actually. Mahayana school of thought.

Theravada is closer to the original teachings of Buddhism. Theravada is common in countries like Thailand, India, and most of SouthEast Asia. Mahayana is common in China, Japan, and Korea. Vajrayana is pretty much only in Tibet and Nepal if I remember correctly.

Originally Posted by Naren

Satori is enlightenment. Mu is nothingness. Understanding the nothingness principle doesn't make you reach enlightenment. Buddhists who believe in the nothingness principle simply believe in the principle. Understanding it is not something that special, really.

There are normal Buddhist Ko-an and then there are Ko-an from the buddhists that believe in nothingness (nihilists, I guess you could say). Most of their Ko-an just end with the word "Mu" or something along those lines.

Such as the famous "Does a dog have buddha nature?" ko-an where the answer was "mu" which is "nothingness" but could be interpretted as "no."

That, of course, contradicts a basic idea of Buddhism that says that all living creatures from the grass of the fields to the rivers in the mountains to the animals and humans have a buddha nature. But I guess the nothingness nihilists doen't really care what normal Buddhism says.

I had to grab my books to get the real terminology so here we go.

I studied soto-zen and they believe that you reach kensho when you understand you first koan. Kensho is a form of enlightenment where you see things as how they really are, understanding of koans like "joshus dog" from the mumonkan.

Mu has pretty much nothing to do with nothingness the heart sutra speaks of this nothingness, but mu is something else.

The problem with Buddhism is that it keeps changing, the zen you studied might have very little with the zen i studied, I can honestly not say that I've seen anything like nihilism in buddhism, almost the opposite.

[Naren]

Originally Posted by Desecrated

I had to grab my books to get the real terminology so here we go.

I studied soto-zen and they believe that you reach kensho when you understand you first koan. Kensho is a form of enlightenment where you see things as how they really are, understanding of koans like "joshus dog" from the mumonkan.

Mu has pretty much nothing to do with nothingness the heart sutra speaks of this nothingness, but mu is something else.

The problem with Buddhism is that it keeps changing, the zen you studied might have very little with the zen i studied, I can honestly not say that I've seen anything like nihilism in buddhism, almost the opposite.

That's what makes that sect of Buddhism so different from everything else. Buddhism as a whole is the complete opposite of nihilism.

Zen is the Japanese version of Chinese Ch'an Buddhism which was popular around 1100 or 1200 AD, but then quickly lost popularity in China but got incredibly popular in Japan and still remains popularity in Japan to this day.

I've never heard of the form of Zen that you're talking about, but there are tons of sects in Japanese Buddhism and then tons and tons of sub-sects of Zen Buddhism.

Technically "mu" is a negation word. It is written with the same symbol that is used to mean "nothing," "not," "no," and so on. In ko-ans, it is generally used to mean "no" or in a broader sense "nothing." It is a word oftentimes used by the people of the nothing principle. However, simply using "mu" does not mean that you are a believer of that said principle.

Here is an interesting interpretation of that dog ko-an, stating that "mu" means neither "yes" nor "no" and that there is no answer:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia article mentioning "Mu"

The Mu koan is as follows: A monk asked Zhaozhou, a Chinese Zen master (known as Jōshū in Japanese): "Has a dog Buddha-nature or not?", Zhaozhou answered: "Wú" (in Japanese, Mu).

Some earlier Buddhist thinkers had maintained that creatures such as dogs did have the Buddha-nature; others, that they did not. Therefore, to answer "no" is to deny their wisdom, whereas to say "yes" would appear to blindly follow their teachings. Zhaozhou's answer has subsequently been interpreted to mean that all such categorical thinking is in fact a delusion. In other words, yes and no are both right and wrong. This Koan is traditionally used by students of the Rinzai school of Zen as their initiation into Zen study.