No one to save, sitting, and Buddhist misconceptions

The quotes within this post are from The Diamond Sutra & the Sutra of Hui-neng, translated by A. F. Price & Wong Mou-lam.

We see some people here say "no one to save" (a phrase that is spoken to Bodhisattvas - those who move enlightenment into action, to serve/help others), and take it to mean a kind of nihilistic take of "don't apply effort, as there's no one to save". This is not the case. The Zen Masters are not only Buddhists, but are Bodhisattvas. The Diamond Sutra shines light on this "no one to save", or self "not existing" in several of its chapters which not only help clear up some misconceptions about Zen references, they also shine light on some of the misunderstandings propagated in /r/Zen.

Here are some excerpts:

Subhuti, what do you think? Let no one say the Tathagata cherishes the idea "I must liberate all living beings." Allow no such thought, Subhuti. Wherefore? BEcause in reality there are no living beings to be liberated by the Tathagata. If there were living beings for the Tathagata to liberate, he would partake in the idea of selfhood, personality, ego entity, and separate individuality.

Subhuti, though common people accept egoity as real, the Tathagata declares that ego is not different from nonego. Subhuti, those whom the Tathagata referred to as "common people" are not really common people; such is merely a name.

And,

Subhuti, if anyone should say that Buddha declares any conception of egoity, do you consider he would understand my teaching aright?

No, World-Honored One, such a man would not have any sound understanding of the Tathagata's teaching, because the World-Honored One declares that notions of selfhood, personality, entity, and separate individuality, as really existing, are erroneous--these terms are merely figures of speech.

[Thereupon Buddha said:] Subhuti, those who aspire to the consummation of incomparable enlightenment should recognize and understand all varieties of things in the same way and cut off the arising of [views that are mere] aspects. Subhuti, as regards aspects, the Tathagata declares that in reality they are not such. They are [merely] called "aspects".

This also can provide insight into "I alone am the World-Honored One".

Some people also believe "sitting meditation" is not Zen, but Buddhism. The Diamond Sutra refutes this:

Subhuti, if anyone should say that the Tathagata comes or goes or sits or reclines, he fails to understand my teaching. Why? Because Tathagata has neither whence nor whither, therefore is he called "Tathagata".

Bodhisattvas are all about practicing, and upholding the Dharma (the good Law).

Furthermore Subhuti, This is altogether everywhere, without differentiation, or degree; wherefore it is called "consummation of incomparable enlightenment." It is straightly attained by freedom from seperate personal selfhood and by cultivating all kinds of goodness.

Subhuti, though we speak of "goodness," the Tathagata declares that there is no goodness; such is merely a name.

Lastly,

[...]Subhuti, bodhisattvas who are wholly devoid of any conception of separate selfhood are truthfully called bodhisattvas.

Submitted February 02, 2019 at 09:54AM by Dillon123 http://bit.ly/2SpoTZ6