Ajahn Chah Zen Theravada?

[Dan74]

It is really a problem of talking something that was meant as a here-and-now discourse to a specific group of people and writing it down and now here we are talking about it as if it's some sort of doctrine, which it isn't. My sense is that he would be very much disturbed to see this kind of debate over his talks.

Hello meindzai,

Just as an aside, weren't the Suttas originally "here-and-now" discourses for "a specific group of people?" Ultimately, a teacher can only teach "here-and-now" to "a specific group of people." Otherwise the teacher would be more of a philosopher, no? In the end, it's all about getting down to the root of this "birth and death" thing, no?

(My apologies if "necor-posting" is frowned upon here)

Metta and Anjali,

Saijun

Good points, the tendency to "reify", to see it as doctrine and then hold on to it, is strong. But to start with, it's OK I think. There is much that we hold on to that would be great to replace with "Buddhist dogma" for a while!

[PeterB]

That is a good point Dan...I think we can be too hard on ourselves , thinking that we have to launch into sunnata before next tuesday.

I think I may have over egged the pudding earlier in this thread. In emphasising Ajahn Chah's distancing himself from reliance of concepts I may have made some concepts more worthy of distance that others..And in terms of utility that may not have been skillful.
If the raft floats....

[m0rl0ck]

Seems pretty simple to me. They (zen and forest tradition) are reporting the same experience so it sounds similar. Check the sig.

[Moth]

Many people contend that since the mind is inherently pure, since we all have Buddha nature, it's not necessary to practise. But this is like taking something clean, like this tray, for example, and thenI come and drop some dung on it. Will you say that this tray is originally clean, and so you don't have to do anything to clean it now?"

-A Tree in the Forest