Zen Is Also Buddhism

Summary

The talk presents an informal Zen teaching that situates Zen within the broader context of Buddhism and argues that a practitioner must understand Buddhism in general in order to understand Zen properly. The speaker emphasizes that Zen is not an isolated or special school, but the result of many Buddhist traditions, scholars, and teachings. He repeatedly encourages the audience to study the various Buddhist canons and schools, explaining that Zen practice is grounded in the wider Buddhist inheritance. A major theme is the doctrine of the three forms, or three bodies, of Buddha. The speaker describes Buddha as a historical being, Buddha as truth itself, and Buddha as teaching or Dharma. He connects these ideas to Mahayana Buddhism, explaining that Mahayana developed a more elaborate understanding of Buddha than Hinayana Buddhism. In this account, the historical Buddha is not only a person who lived and taught, but also an embodiment of truth and a manifestation of the ultimate reality present in all beings. The term Dharmakaya is used to express this dimension of Buddha as truth and as the essential nature of existence. The speaker contrasts Hinayana and Mahayana in terms of religious possibility. In his explanation, Hinayana Buddhists viewed Buddha as so exalted and extraordinary that ordinary people could not imagine becoming Buddha themselves. Mahayana, by contrast, stresses Buddha-nature and the possibility of Buddhahood for everyone. This shift makes Buddhism more universal and more religious in a broad sense, because it removes the sharp distinction between clergy and laity. The speaker notes that in Mahayana, men and women, monks and laypeople, gather together in pagodas, recite sutras, and participate in formal practices. He also mentions the enshrinement of Buddha’s relics as part of the growth of Mahayana religious life. The talk also explores the relationship between doctrine and practice. The speaker says that Buddhism developed not only as a religion but also as a deeper philosophy, with multiple classifications such as three kinds of scriptures and three aspects of understanding. He suggests that these doctrinal structures are important background knowledge for Zen practitioners, even if they are not the direct goal of practice. Zen, in his view, includes and transcends these teachings rather than rejecting them. A substantial portion of the conversation turns to the practical discipline of Zen, especially the role of negative practice. The speaker explains that cold weather, discomfort, hunger, and other difficulties should not be seen as obstacles but as opportunities to practice more deeply. He argues that restraint and refusal are necessary parts of religious training. Rather than suppressing desire through guilt or moral self-condemnation, one should cultivate awareness and a disciplined attitude toward desire. He insists that the practitioner should not be blind or ignorant about instinctive impulses, but should face them clearly and honestly. The discussion becomes more detailed around desire, food, sex, and attachment. The speaker acknowledges that enjoying food, sleep, or sexuality is not inherently wrong, but warns against attachment and compulsive craving. He frames practice as learning to relate to desire without being controlled by it. He uses analogies such as a snake placed in a straight bamboo tube and a rope made from twisting opposing strands to illustrate how opposing forces, positive and negative, are both part of life and practice. He also explains that the Buddha’s ascetic practice should not be misunderstood as mere self-denial for a goal outside practice; rather, the practice itself is the goal. The audience asks several questions about whether Buddhism requires constant self-fighting, whether one should suppress desires, and whether positive enjoyment is ever acceptable. The speaker responds that practice is not about guilt, but about sincerity, awareness, and carefulness. He says that true sincerity and compassion are not simply positive feelings; they also involve restraint, discernment, and sometimes saying no. He concludes that practice becomes more sincere when it is undertaken conscientiously, especially when it is required by the discipline of a monastery rather than chosen casually. Overall, the talk presents Zen as a rigorous but humane path rooted in the full breadth of Buddhism, centered on Buddha-nature, disciplined awareness, and the transformation of desire through practice rather than repression.