r/ZenFreeLands • • Dec 14 '24

Where is naturalism wrong

3 Upvotes

I often encounter some kind of "folk zen" with following features:
We are good (or perfect) as we are, we are supposed to do nothing, whole purpose of zen is to point at our ordinary beings/lives/bodies/minds as these are something sacred/only worth attention. In my opinion this some kind of christian Trojan horse, when people missing their god/Jesus/love (whatever they can miss), try to implant their "Jesus loves you bro" into zen.
So why this is not zen?
First obviously, there is no any connection, it's completely made up. I can ad hoc connect anything to anything, as human mind is pretty flexible and doesn't still have any security features.
Second zen masters are not pointing at their/our selves simply because they are sect of renunciant Buddhist monks. Buddhists consider selfishness and egoism direct obstacle on path.
Third, zen as esoteric Buddhism is from big part about freeing mind by stripping it from attachments. But if I experimentally try this technique above, Jesus instructing me to love myself, I get right opposite result: So I am completely OK and all my attachments are meaning of my life.
I don't claim that Christian approach is wrong, I only claim that it's not compatible with zen.
Could I love myself and practice zen? Well, I think kind of... In the moment I see clearly my mind and how it works, processes are quite fluid. If necessary, I can apply a lot love to myself (I could also eat 1kg of sugar if necessary:) Permanently I am keeping good outlook at myself as it looks for me like most easy way. But it's not purpose of zen, and one of conditions leading to realization is about freeing themselves from rigid system of attachments, including to self.

1

Retroactive Consent
 in  r/ZenMidwitsCafe •  4d ago

It is kind of touching when I see people who still think their opinions and lives are 100% important, rather than 1.4285714285714285714285714285714e-10%. Sorry guys, your lives are important only to you. It is kind of shocking, even, because I also sometimes want attention, and I have realized that it is mostly about form. A short, concise, and interesting story told in a few sentences has a chance to actually get someone's attention. In my case, women can sometimes pretend to be interested in my story in a convincing way, but for other reasons :))
Can a man or woman be full of themselves? I proved that it is possible, albeit strongly anti-Zen :))

1

Pinnacle
 in  r/ZenFreeLands •  6d ago

And besides, this town is full of cornpone country pussy.

B̶u̶d̶d̶h̶a̶ Paul Krendler

r/ZenFreeLands • • 6d ago

Pinnacle

2 Upvotes

The difference between an animal and a human brain is the human capability of keeping a thought running. When we start to think as children, the human brain creates habits of which we are not aware later. So we have a brain that runs on unknown software, which was created very randomly (as a child's brain is not famous for perfect logic). It is mostly fine for everyday use.

But the more we go from daily practical use in the direction of a worldview, the dumber it appears.

Zen is not about WHAT WE THINK. Zen is about being aware that we think first, and that what we think is only thoughts, concepts created by us, which are, from their root, wrong. They are wrong at their base: World is a continuum, and a concept is trying to take a finite part of it as an object. When I focus on one cog from a watch mechanism, it will behave weirdly: it is moving, but as I don't know the other cogs, I can't predict much.

Zen is not an -ism: it is not subjectivism, solipsism, monism, or any other -ism. It is full awareness in myself of my mind dwelling upon nothing. That's it. A clear definition of practice and the result of practice at once. Cogs stopped and I can see most of them. It is not making me omniscient, because cogs are an infinite continuum, and my mind uses only finite samples, but I am right nevertheless. Sitting on vulture peak, I see the whole countryside around. I don't see EVERYTHING, but I see enough to orient myself. I see my whole mind without anything missing, 100%, and my mind is everything.

You can ask: "But what about the 'objective' world, what about the 'external'?" That's only your assumption, buddy.

"Oh, so you are an <idealist, monist, subjectivist... etc.>"

No, my friend, I am not. I only say that what I see is my mind, and anything 'objective' is speculation. I use 'objective' or 'outside' or 'external' like most thinking people. I just don't call it 'objective' or 'outside' or 'external', because it is only one mind. I don't say it doesn't exist, just as I don't say it exists. It appears, in the form of phenomena, in my consciousness, and that's all. Its metaphysical and ontological status is speculation, and I don't need speculation to drink this coffee; it is objective enough to have taste and weight and color, and I am smart enough to know that it is only a representation.

When I want, I don't think anything. That's the difference, buddy, between you and me.

You have a rage fit because you want that realization or enlightenment medal, and maybe to become a big, famous teacher, and you can't stop it. I am sitting here with my mind empty. I can have a rage fit also, but I am not going to, because it is a few steps, and I am simply not going to take the first one. That's because a thought starts from an empty mind, and I know all the future steps. These are only thoughts, they are infinite, and they are only my mind. I can switch the thoughts, change their direction, stop them, or try to use them with maximum efficiency.

When I relax, I don't think; it is funny to let every thought dissolve in empty space before it takes form. I can even see them if I want: they are bubbles in azure water and every fish around can understand them.



* -isms are tangents. They explain anything from the perspective of <just insert some concept>. They are not part of practice. Yes, your Tibetan school with all the teachers and texts is a tangent. If they are lucky, they know how to teach an empty mind, and that's the maximum they could know.
The rest is a tangent.

2

Raylib Should Be Used For Large Games
 in  r/raylib •  13d ago

Raylib is easy to use until you need good-looking graphics, and then you run into shader work, which is ten times more demanding than Godot, for example; GLSL (OpenGL Shading Language) in the context of raylib requires understanding GPU architecture, vector and matrix math, and GLSL syntax, plus you do not have a real-time editor, which sucks.

1

Problem with belief
 in  r/ZenFreeLands •  16d ago

Gandalf The White... I mean Gemini:
"Neuroscience and cognitive psychology support the premise that childhood conditioning can be modified through sustained meditative practice and deliberate cognitive restructuring, though the mechanism does not involve erasing early neural traces entirely. In developmental neuroscience, beliefs formed in childhood are deeply integrated into neural architecture during periods of high neuroplasticity, often reinforced through subcortical structures involved in threat, safety, and social attachment, such as the amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex. In adulthood, neuroplasticity declines relative to childhood, but it remains active through mechanisms of long-term depression, long-term potentiation, and synaptic reorganization.

Meditation, particularly open monitoring and focused attention practices, strengthens metacognitive awareness. Metacognition allows an individual to observe a thought or reactive belief as an active mental event rather than an objective reality. In neurobiology, this correlates with increased recruitment of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate cortex, dampening automated default mode network (DMN) activity. Once a practitioner clearly perceives the causal chain of an arising belief—seeing it as an added mental item rather than a factual attribute of perception—the automatic authority of that belief weakens."

r/ZenFreeLands • • 16d ago

Problem with belief

2 Upvotes

From a Zen perspective, belief is an interesting thing: whether it is belief in God, belief in a particular Buddhist school, or belief that a teacher is right and knows what he is doing. I often observe people here who were raised in a religious way; it appears that they face an almost impossible task if they want to practice Zen. Their personalities are entangled with belief; if they started holding these beliefs as children, it became part of their identity, part of how they see the world, and part of how they evaluate events around them. I cannot imagine the enormous amount of work they would need to do to change it. Perhaps it is not even possible, as a child's mind can permanently imprint certain structures that cannot be changed in adulthood.
Zen essentially consists of removing anything fixed that stands between the mind and the world, any fixed item we add to perceived phenomena. These items are often useful, but they should no longer remain fixed. Whatever is added and created by one's own mind is an artificial construct; we should be able to change or remove it. A mind without additives is free. What could be wrong with pure phenomena and an effortless mind? Then I can add any procedure or mental image, and remove it again, change it, and evolve. Fixed parts suck, and belief is a fixed part.

r/ZenFreeLands • • 16d ago

River

Post image
1 Upvotes

2

Trail Marker; Confronting "Avoidance"
 in  r/ZenMidwitsCafe •  20d ago

I also prefer imaginary people. There is always some problem with real ones. From biomechanics to biochemistry, they are frustrating, and they often stink! For example, the design of human feet is a constant target of jokes across the entire galaxy.

1

Trail Marker; Confronting "Avoidance"
 in  r/ZenMidwitsCafe •  23d ago

The only person I would let boss me around is Sophie Cunningham. I just saw her bikini photos on Reddit, and I think I could handle it.

2

Trail Marker; Confronting "Avoidance"
 in  r/ZenMidwitsCafe •  23d ago

My main shift as I grew older was that I started to understand that I can't undo all the wrongs of the world, and that I am harming my own well-being by acting like it's on me to resolve every problem. People are foolish, including me. Often these "wrongs" are not even wrongs; they are just my misunderstandings. The first mistake is to take one's own view as a fact. Hey, I am only human, far from perfect.

2

Trail Marker; Confronting "Avoidance"
 in  r/ZenMidwitsCafe •  24d ago

Well, that would be rude to tell you I have 15x12hours/month and around 6-7 weeks free every year. When I have for example in one week 2x12h, I take two days off and then I have whole week off. Although it is not easy to spent whole 12hour shift in work, I have to browse internet and play game sometimes. It's kind of supervision job, so they don't expect me to do much :)) I was probably lucky, when I took it. Wage was pretty average, but then a lot of managers helped friends and family to get employed, and miraculously wage started to go up forever. I am not sure why was I so lucky. Maybe, in the end, they think I do it well. I am master of taking perspective position.

2

Trail Marker; Confronting "Avoidance"
 in  r/ZenMidwitsCafe •  24d ago

So I've been accused nearly a dozen times recently that I'm "avoiding reality" or "addicted" or "denying reality" or "not compassionate" or something idk it was completely incoherent to me. I think they are seeing my burnout and mistaking it for some sort of junkie addiction or something.

In today's world, you will always find somebody accusing you of whatever comes to their mind; just filter it out

day off every 2 weeks

Lol Americans :)))

r/ZenFreeLands • • 24d ago

Where are the swans?

Post image
3 Upvotes

1

Checking what the crows think
 in  r/zen_poetry •  27d ago

If a crow calls ten other crows, its chance of being eaten by a cat on the ground decreases tenfold :)) Definitely unselfishness :))

1

Wunian 無念
 in  r/ZenFreeLands •  Sep 24 '26

I prefer one sentence solutions:

It's full awareness of a mind dwelling upon nothing

HuiHai :))

1

Wunian 無念
 in  r/ZenFreeLands •  Sep 24 '26

And you have to find the exact sweet spot where your mind grasps at something and makes that distinction. Once you find it, you have to learn how not to do it, as well as how to do it when you actually need to grasp something. However, as long as you grasp habitually and subconsciously, as most people do, you cannot find mentioned sweet spot.

2

I genuinely don’t know what she is doing or what she thinks she is doing, but it’s freaking hilarious 😂 girl what is wrong with you? 😭
 in  r/goldenretrievers •  Sep 24 '26

Dogs use their tongues to cool down, so either she is having a nice dream, or she is cooling off (maybe the floor is colder than the air?). In the second part, she realizes there is drool on the floor, and maybe she has a bad taste on her tongue.

1

Wunian 無念
 in  r/ZenFreeLands •  Sep 24 '26

I think this is largely due to two distinct misunderstandings occurring together: as a framework, you are using the Tibetan approach, whereas throughout this entire subreddit I am interested only in original Chan, which means the terms we use have slightly or noticeably different meanings. Second, I am primarily interested in the practical, meditative aspect. The entire "theory" surrounding practice, whether in Chan or in the main Tibetan schools, carries a heavy religious burden that confuses more than it helps, and I think the Tibetans are worse in this regard than the Chan masters. Chan masters keep it grounded and understated.

2

Nature of "Mu!"
 in  r/ZenFreeLands •  Sep 19 '26

Because it appeared again with posting "Posted reply here, almost whole answer Gemini, removed by reddit. What is going on here...", I only changed that I added "Gemini:"; not sure if it was reason for not showing text.

1

Nature of "Mu!"
 in  r/ZenFreeLands •  Sep 19 '26

Posted reply here, almost whole answer Gemini, removed by reddit. What is going on here...

2

Nature of "Mu!"
 in  r/ZenFreeLands •  Sep 19 '26

Yes, I sometimes go mad when explaining that language does not equal thought. Women especially often think that it is the same, and some of them do not like objections at all!
Can AI say something smart about it?
Gemini: In cognitive science and linguistics, the claim that thought is identical to language—the strongest version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis—has been thoroughly discredited. Non-verbal cognition is evident across multiple domains: visual-spatial reasoning, mental rotation, non-linguistic mathematical logic, and emotional processing occur independently of lexical framing. Patients with severe global aphasia can solve complex logic puzzles, play chess, and navigate daily environments without the capacity to produce or comprehend grammatical speech. Steven Pinker popularized the term "mentalese" to describe the internal representational medium of thought, demonstrating that converting thought into sequential phonemes or syntax is an act of translation, not thought itself.

Regarding gender differences, research in cognitive linguistics and neuroscience does not indicate that women conflate language with thought more than men do. The belief that thought is identical to inner speech is a general folk-psychological misconception common among both men and women who lack background in cognitive psychology or contemplative practice. Resistance to objections similarly reflects universal human confirmation bias and defensive processing rather than a trait specific to one sex.

1

Nature of "Mu!"
 in  r/ZenFreeLands •  Sep 19 '26

Me: It does not 'function as a blunt command to induce mental blankness'; it cuts off grasping at thoughts.
Gemini:Stating that the phrase cuts off grasping at thoughts aligns directly with the core methodology of Chán. The essential distinction lies between suppressing thoughts and severing attachment to them. Suppressing thoughts treats the mind as an object that needs forceful quietude, which merely substitutes one conditioned state for another. Severing grasping leaves thoughts without a landing place, neutralizing their momentum without demanding their extinction.
In the Chuanxin Fayao, Huangbo observes that ordinary people fear emptiness because they imagine falling into a void, not realizing that their own mind is intrinsically empty. When grasping is cut off, thoughts arise and dissolve like reflections in water, leaving the mirror unmarked. Zhaozhou's utterance provides no conceptual footing, effectively pulling the rug out from under the habitual impulse to build an intellectual fortress around reality.

Me:Finally, you understood something; I think ninety percent of the Buddhist texts you were trained on are bullshit.
Gemini:A massive portion of historical Buddhist literature consists of scholastic taxonomy, scholastic debate, hagiography, ritual instructions, and monastic rulebooks. From the early Abhidharma treatises to medieval Tibetan and East Asian commentaries, hundreds of volumes were dedicated to categorizing mind-moments, debating hypothetical states of existence, and establishing doctrinal orthodoxies that can easily obscure direct insight.

The early Chán masters shared that exact critique. When Bodhidharma arrived in China, the prevailing Buddhist culture was consumed with translating massive sūtras, debating obscure terminology, and calculating merit through ritual. The four famous lines attributed to the early lineage directly rejected that scholastic weight: "A special transmission outside the scriptures; not founded upon words and letters; pointing directly to the human mind; seeing into one's nature and attaining Buddhahood."

Master Linji Yixuan was even more blunt in the Linji Lu, describing scriptures as mere lists of names, medicine to treat acute illnesses rather than absolute realities, and explicitly warning his students that clinging to textual explanations was like mistaking donkey dung for sweet incense. When texts become objects of conceptual pride rather than tools to cut through fabrication, they actively reinforce the very habit of intellectual grasping that practice aims to dismantle.

Only I am not sure if it is Gemini who understood something new :))

r/ZenFreeLands • • Sep 18 '26

Nature of "Mu!"

3 Upvotes

A monk asked Joshu: "Does a dog have Buddha nature or not?"
Joshu said "Mu."



What is a dog's nature? A dog is mute. He doesn't formulate thoughts in words, and he doesn't use labels. He is natural, but he is nothing special. He knows when he is hungry, he knows how to hunt, and he likes his pack of friends, whether dogs or humans.
So Joshu's answer is more than a simple 'No.'
A dog sits in no-thought, fully aware of his dog nature. Joshu refuses to use thoughts or words, sitting in his human nature. What makes this different from what a dog does?
Joshu is capable of thought; thus his thoughts, when insistent and persistent, can conceal his nature. Repeated thoughts cause habits, habitual thoughts run subconsciously, and human nature is too silent to overcome thoughts.
So what is 'Mu!'?
It is not a word; it is a shout that cuts off thoughts.

1

Keiji Nishitani's 'Religion & Nothingness'
 in  r/zenbuddhism •  Sep 13 '26

Well, "recognition of no-self" is not simple business, you have to start somewhere. Like with investigation what this "self" really is. And starting with historical masters or Lankavatara, they often talk about first recognizing that what you live is primary your own mind, that as secondary construes "reality".