Hi siska,
You may want to ask Bill, Mike, Steve and Mayka their views on Zen and
non-dualism.
--ED
PS: Excerpt from:
http://crazycloudnz.wordpress.com/2010/09/21/a-discussion-of-the-book-of\
-atheist-spirituality-by-arthur-wells/
<http://crazycloudnz.wordpress.com/2010/09/21/a-discussion-of-the-book-o\
f-atheist-spirituality-by-arthur-wells/>
" Why do I say that Zen Buddhism in particular has no true parallel in
Western thought? Because Zen is the realisation of the non-dual nature
of reality.
Strange to say, such radical non-dualism is not cultivated in any
Western system of thought or religious practice. Non-dualism does appear
at times in Western thought, mainly as the polarised positions of
Idealism and Materialism.
No middle ground that would fit the Zen position has been well worked
over in Western philosophy, although mystical non-dualism has a rich
presence in Western literature, for example in the poetry of Wordsworth
and Blake.
How is Zen radically non-dualist? Take Hakuin's "Song of
Zazen," for example. At the climax of the poem he says "Singing
and dancing are the voice of the law
Nirvana is right here, before
our eyes, this very place is the Lotus Land, this very body the
Buddha." This is clearly Hakuin's expression of his religious
ecstasy, but the content is completely of this world.
No hidden world or level of reality is implied. This is the hallmark of
Zen. Nothing in Zen is viewed as more real or valuable than that which
is vividly apparent through our senses: "Great mystery, wonderful
powers of mind, chopping wood and drawing water!" Or, as Ross
Bolleter Roshi is fond of saying, "Nothing is more profound than
breakfast!"
As a brief aside here, Zen is significantly different even from its
closest relative in Eastern thought, Advaita Vedanta, because Vedanta
maintains that the physical universe is illusory (the only reality being
the spiritual substrate, Brahman, which from the Buddhist point of view
is an example of the heresy of Eternalism).
Hegelians wouldn't have much trouble with that, but they would with
Zen, because Zen, as Hee-Jin Kim says, is "mystical realism,"
(the term is in the title of Kim's book on Dogen). Here is the core
of the problem Kim has put together two terms that don't
cohabit in Western thought, because Western thought is still deeply
mired in the dualisms of God and the world, spirit and matter, heaven
and earth. I can find only a few contemporary scientists who in the way
they think and write are getting close to the non-dualism of Zen."
--- In [email protected], siska_cen@... wrote:
>
> Hi Ed,
>
> That is true, if non-dualism is an end point for us to arrive to :-)
>
> siska
> Hi siska,
>
> Perhaps 'same, similar or different' do not matter provided the same
> end-point (nondualism) is arrived at.
>
> --ED
> > Hi Ed,
> >
> > Based on the article, Sri Ramana's view on 'I-mind' is similar to
that
> of Jiddu Krishnamurti. The method, however, does not seem to be really
> similar.
> >
> > ---------------
> > Sri Ramana taught that since the individual `I'-thought cannot exist
> without an object, if attention is focused on the subjective feeling
of
> `I' or `I am' with such intensity that the thoughts `I am this' or `I
am
> that' do not arise, then the individual `I' will be unable to connect
> with objects.
> > ---------------
> >
> > I don't know much about zen yet, so I don't know if it is similar to
> zen.
> >
> > siska
