Right but those practises of "the gradual path" are functions and arise from the one fundamental self-nature, so all differences only are seen as different due to the potential and clinging views of people. Hence when we speak about Zen it's only a conventional name and relative term to serve sentient beings. If it's functional for people to practise metta then it doesn't even matter if anyone says it isn't stressed as much in Zen, discriminating minds will be bound by the idea that metta practise is "not-Zen" At least, you know how usual neurotic works eventhough there's no increase or decrease and nothing to attain. Eventhough Zen has its own method/path, any (non)method can be used freely to self-perfection since whether one remains deluded or not is based on their own efforts, not upon whether the various teachings/methods are different or not. Before we know it as it is in the nature of forums, we'll "oppose" the direct formless path of Zen again with practises based on name and form, whatever one practises is "the perfect practise" and can be included in Zen in my view.Meido wrote: ↑Mon Jul 02, 2018 8:44 pmMore generally, though: because Zen takes kensho jobutsu as its path, all the qualities of fruition - that is, embodied realization of the unity of wisdom and compassion, fulfillment of the paramitas, attainment of myriad means for helping others, etc. - are viewed as naturally fulfilled within that path. That is why things like metta practices, emphasis on the 8-fold path/4 NT, gradual path of the perfections and so on are not stressed as much: Zen's self-view is that it is a path striking directly at the one essential point that encompasses and fulfills all Buddhist teachings. But this does not mean anything is lacking. It just means that Zen has its own method/path.
~ Meido
Any thoughts?
