No debate: No link between Sitting Dhyana and Zazen prayer-meditation

It was suggested that there was an "argument" to be had on this topic, but I find no evidence of one.

 MOST disputes about Zen are based on superstition, not any argument based on facts or history 

What is a debate?

Debate: It's when there are two sides that provide facts, premises/conclusions, and some link to the historical chain of reasoning. * The "sitting dhyana isn't Zazen" is not a debate because there aren't two sides providing facts, premises, conclusions, chain of historical reasoning.

Facts

• Zazen has been identified as being invented in 1200 by Dogen in Japan, with no link to any Zen tradition.
  • Bielefeldt's 1990 *Dogen's Manuals of Zen Meditation" argues Dogen invented Zazen. Sharf confirmed in 2014 that this is now the consensus.
  • "Sitting dhyana" predates Dogen by hundreds of years, so those references are obviously to something else.
• Zazen is a religious practice from a manual that promises an attainment
  • No manual of how to sit dhyana exists
  • There isn't any teaching (name three Zen Masters) that links sitting dhyana to something-will-thereby-be-achieved
• There is no history of any attempt to link Zazen to sitting dhyana.
  
  • No book has ever been published on the subject.
  • Religious people from the Zazen church saying it over and over isn't a fact or a premise or a conclusion.

In historical context

Sitting dhyana is talked about in various poetic terms... but the questions that the texts demand evidence for is:

1. Can you sit dhyana without having experienced sudden enlightenment?
2. What is the difference between sitting dhyana and sitting on the sofa?
3. What are the most pivotal teachings on sitting dhyana, what what do the teachers of those teachings say about Buddhist sitting meditations?

Submitted February 14, 2023 at 09:04AM by ewk https://ift.tt/CHBSRYX