Ewk has made quite a cubumble coming up with the idea that r/zen should take up a set of rules. When asked for what benefit, he choked. Well, to be fair, he didn't necessarily choke, though he did admit, or atleast implied, to being a federal agency here on r/zen. Anyway. What I'm trying to do with this post, is to point out the inherent hypocrisy of attaching to following a set of rules, in regards to Zen.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First example, the rule (yes, I will keep calling the precepts rules, throughout this post) of not lying.

If I am charged to only speak the truth and nothing but the truth, what happens when I state something and someone doesn't agree with it? I am speaking the truth, from my point of view, they are speaking the truth, that they don't agree with me, from their point of view. Where is there any space for a lie?

> A high master said, "It is only tacit harmony." Because it is like this, if you haven't attained the path yet, just do not entertain any false thoughts. If people recognize false thoughts and deliberately try to stop them, it's because you see there are false thoughts. If you know you're having false thoughts and deliberately practice contemplation to effect perception of truth, this is also seeing that there are false thoughts. If you know that falsehood is fundamentally the path, then there is no falsehood in it.

In other words, if I see that someone is lying, either myself or another, then I am recognizing false thoughts and if I call them out on their lying/falsehood, then I am deliberately trying to stop false thoughts(in the other person or in myself). Same with trying to perceive the truth, because to perceive a truth is to perceive falsehood.

Therefore, those who entertain false thoughts in other people are caught lying to themselves and those who try to effect a perception of truth in themselves are lying to other people. If on the other hand, you do not try to effect a perception of truth in others, by not entertaining false thoughts in others, you are not lying. If you are not lying

Background on the r/Zen Precept Wars:

https://www.reddit.com/r/zensangha/wiki/ewk/zenprecepts

Traditional Precepts (kind of)

1. Not Killing
2. Not Stealing
3. No Sexual Misconduct
4. No Lying
5. No abuse of drugs

Zen Precepts (what I got from Zen texts)

1st Zen Precept: No nest, No tracks

2nd Precept: Dharma Combat

3rd Zen Precept - Doing the work

4th Zen Precept: Taking Refuge

5th Zen Precept: Passing beyond study

6th Zen Precept: Doubt

What is this doubt stuff?

"Xuedou has the kind heart of an old woman; he wants to break up your feelings of doubt, so he brings in more dead men."

• Yuanwu, Blue Cliff Record

Huangbo says?

> The canonical teachings of the Three Vehicles are just remedies for temporary needs. They were taught to meet such needs and so are of temporary value and differ one from another. If only this could be understood, there would be no more doubts about it. Above all it is essential not to select some particular teaching suited to a certain occasion, and, being impressed by its forming part of the written canon, regard it as an immutable concept. Why so? Because in truth there is no unalterable Dharma which the Tathāgata could have preached. People of our sect would never argue that there could be such a thing. We just know how to put all mental activity to rest and thus achieve tranquillity. We certainly do not begin by thinking things out and end up in perplexity.

https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/comments/2w7105/why_huangbo_said_there_is_no_unalterable_dharma/

Notice that you aren't supposed to think things out. Good luck! How to do it? Sounds like you might have some... doubts?

Zhaozhou says!

>A monk asked Zhaozhou, "Does a dog have a buddha-nature or not?"(He blocks the alley chasing a clod of earth.)

> The monk said, "Since it has, why is it then in this skin bag?" > > Zhaozhou said, "Because he knows yet deliberately transgresses." > > Another monk asked Zhaozhou, "Does a dog have a buddha-nature or not?" > > Zhaozhou said, "No." > > The monk said, "All sentient beings have buddha-nature--why does a dog have none, then?" > > Zhaozhou said, "Because he still has impulsive consciousness."

• https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/comments/1pay3a/koan_the_buddha_said_that_everything_has_buddha/
• https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/comments/2l62ls/zhaozhous_dog_yes_and_no_because_reasons/

So does the dog have a buddha nature or not? Did the dog deliberately transgres

Here we are in the new year... in a recent thread about "practice", lots of people talked about their "Zen practice" involving stuff they liked, which of course is ridiculously unconnected to Zen, and kind of insulting, as if Zen monks were just people who practiced walking in the park.

I've proposed taking one precept as a new year's resolution, and nobody seemed eager to take me up on that... why? Is it too hard? Is it too difficult to connect any given precept to Zen study? I don't think so...

If Zen students have a "practice" that is somehow built out of various observances, and one of those observances is precepts of some kind, then whatever they practice is more difficult than simply trying to keep a single precept... and that's obviously way harder than going for a walk in the park.

https://www.reddit.com/r/zensangha/wiki/ewk/zenprecepts

It's reassuring (?) or respectable (?) to tell people you study/practice Zen, but do you really?

If so, tell us what part precepts play in your practice, and how you practice connects directly Zen teachings.

After all, if you can't quote Zen Masters, you can't claim to know what they teach about practice.

> A monk asked, "What does a person who understands matters perfectly do?" > > Zhaozhou said, "Proper great practice." > > The monk said, "It's not clear if monk (referring to Zhaozhou) still practices or not?" > > Zhaozhou said, "Wearing clothes, eating rice." > > The monk said, "Wearing clothes and eating food are ordinary affairs. Not clear if it's practice or not?" > > Zhaozhou said, "What do you think I'm doing every day?"

.

Welcome! ewk comment: You can read Zhaozhou as many times as you want... https://www.amazon.com/Recorded-Sayings-Zen-Master-Joshu/dp/157062870X you won't be able to argue that wearing cloths and eating food is what he taught.

The New Year is coming fast and many people are thinking about resolutions, or will be in the next 48-72 hours.

Strike while the iron is of the appropriate temperature!

Traditional Precepts (kind of)

1. Not Killing
2. Not Stealing
3. No Sexual Misconduct
4. No Lying
5. No abuse of drugs

Zen Precepts (what I got from Zen texts)

1st Zen Precept: No nest, No tracks

2nd Precept: Dharma Combat

3rd Zen Precept - Doing the work

4th Zen Precept: Taking Refuge

5th Zen Precept: Passing beyond study

6th Zen Precept: Doubt

.

Generally Accepted Standards for Getting to Know Yourself

You know why the United States has GAAP? Generally Accepted Accounting Principles? It's because investors wanted a way to invest money in businesses, to "inject capital", so those businesses could expand, and they needed to be able to figure out which businesses were legit. So we came up with "precepts" about how we would describe finances, just to figure out who was a legit business.

Lots of people claim to be legit on a personal level. Are they? Welcome to precepts! Standards for accounting for whether you are legit!

Described that way, it's easy to see how it makes sense... for you to ask yourself about your own legitimacy? Do you lie to people? Do you abuse substances? Do you have shallow sexual relationships? That's the beginner conversation about being legit.

When those five precepts aren't much of a struggle, that's being a legit person. So what's a legit Zen student?

Enter the Zen precepts.

These Zen precepts have already stirred up way more illegitimacy than I every dreamed of! So dreams do come true!

Try out a precept, any precept, for 2022. Get to know yourself a little.

Let me know how it goes.

Who is the legit person that emerges from your face?

>Originally the BRAHMA NET SUTRA had a hundred twenty scrolls, and sixty-two chapters. It was originally quite a long Sutra. When this Sutra had not been brought to China, Dharma Master Paramartha went to India, requested the BRAHMA NET SUTRA, and took it on a ship, intending to bring it back to China. But when he boarded the ship, it started to sink, and he thought, "This won't do." He removed all his belongings from the ship, but it still continued to sink. So finally, he took the BRAHMA NET SUTRA off the ship, and it stopped sinking. Then he thought, "The people of the Eastern Kingdom," that is China, "must not have the blessings to receive the BRAHMA NET SUTRA." So, the entire BRAHMA NET SUTRA never reached China from India. The two Chinese rolls transmitted to us actually came from an oral recitation by the translator, Dharma Master Kumarajiva, who recited the Bodhisattva Precepts every day.
>
>So, the BRAHMA NET SUTRA has one hundred twenty scrolls and sixty-two chapters, yet now the only one existent is Chapter Ten, "The Bodhisattva's Mind Ground Chapter." This chapter is in two rolls. Volumes I and II, and is as much as was translated into Chinese.
>
>Another incident concerned Dharma Master Fa Chin , who, when he heard there was such a thing as Bodhisattva Precepts, really wanted to receive them. He thought, The "Sutra says that if living beings receive the Buddha's precepts, then they immediately enter a Buddhas' position." So he went to Dharma Master T'an Wu Ch'an and asked him to transmit the precepts to him. Dharma Master T'an Wu Ch'an, however, refused, saying, "You people from the East don't have enough blessings. People who receive these precepts are supposed to immediately enter all Buddhas' position, but you just don't measure up!" So Dharma Master Fa Chin resorted to asking the Buddhas themselves to give him the precepts. He did this sincerely in a concentrated period of time--just like holding a session--earnestly asking the Buddhas to transmit the precepts to him. For seven days and nights he applied himself with singleminded concentration whereupon he entered samadhi. In response to his sincerity, Maitreya Bodhisattva came to him and gave him the precepts white he was in samadhi, and also explained the gist of the Ten Major and Forty-eight Minor Bodhisattva Precepts. Later, after Dharma Master Fa Chin had obtained the precepts and come out of samadhi, Dharma Master T'an Wu Ch'an saw him and notice

to /u/ewk a challenge.

show me a master who said:

"do as I have done."

...

precepts are not zen

they lead you into circles

and down blind alleys

...

they are all made up

to help seekers of the way

they are not the way

Background on the r/Zen Precept Wars:

https://www.reddit.com/r/zensangha/wiki/ewk/zenprecepts

Traditional Precepts (kind of)

1. Not Killing
2. Not Stealing
3. No Sexual Misconduct
4. No Lying
5. No abuse of drugs

Zen Precepts (what I got from Zen texts)

1st Zen Precept: No nest, No tracks

2nd Precept: Dharma Combat

3rd Zen Precept - Doing the work

4th Zen Precept: Taking Refuge

5th Zen Precept: Passing beyond study

6th Zen Precept: Doubt

Killing it (textually)

Recently, precepts have become a hot (button) topic after two a long time members of the forum revealed they had preceptophobia, the irrational fear of precepts (which ones?). This was prompted by (your welcome) my proposal for Zen precepts which would clearly illustrate the incompatibility of Zen and Buddhism.

There's no question that the traditional precepts (just like the Zen precepts) play a critical role in Zen study. I would even go as far as saying that you can't study Zen if you can't observe the precepts and do meditation exercise for one minute a day... In much the same way that you can't drive drunk.

For example the traditional precept against killing plays a prominent role in Zen teachings. I'm not talking about the fly whisk, used to avoid killing insects, which became a symbol of authority and appears in so many Cases...

observing the precept of not killing, in three cases

Not killing is The context that makes these cases meaningful.

1. Miaozong's Difficult Birth > After Angulimala [Angulimala means “garland of fingers - Before being converted by Buddha, Angulimala was a notorious murderer who had killed 999 people, stringing a finger from each victim in a garland around his neck] had left the householder’s life and become a monk, he went into the city with his begging bowl. He came to the home of a wealthy man whose wife was having a difficult delivery. > > The man said, “As a disciple of Gautama, you must be very wise. Is there not something you can do to spare my wife this difficult delivery? Angulimala replied, “I have only recently entered the way, and do not yet know any way of doing this. I will go and ask the Buddha and then return to you.” And so he returned and explained the matter to the Buddha who then told him, “Go quickly and say to him, “In all the time I have followed the saintly and sagely Way, never once have I taken life.” > > Ang

Hello everyone. Peace and blessings to all.

I was just wondering, where does the authority of The Five Precepts come from? By this, I mean, what authority does Buddha have to give them, and where does he derive the authority from?

I am sorry if I am not explaining myself well. I will give an example, using a Christian and Islamic analogy.

Christians believe that Jesus is God in human form, and this is how Jesus gets the authority to teach what he does. Most Christians believe morality comes from God. Muslims believe the primary source for morality is The Quran, which contains the literal word of God, so this is where Islamic morality derives its authority.

Where and how does Buddha get his authority to give the precepts?

Btw, I am neither Christian nor Muslim. I was using those as easy examples to explain what I mean.

#Community Study Project: Traditional Precepts- Bodhisattva - Major 10 First and Foremost, establishing relevance to this subreddit: ⠀

• Zen Master Hui-neng took and offered The Four Boundless Vows > Good friends, having taken refuge in the three-bodied buddha, let us now make Four Boundless Vows. Good friends, recite after me: ‘I vow to save all beings, no matter how numberless. I vow to end all afflictions, no matter how countless. I vow to master all teachings, no matter how limitless. I vow to attain buddhahood, no matter how transcendent.’ Now recite this three times. (Platform Sutra)

• Zen Masters talk about precepts > He also said to an assembly at the commencement of a summer retreat, In formless light there is a real human with no status appearing and disappearing in the triple world, whirling in the five courses of existence, not abandoning the ten bad actions, not realizing the heart of nirvana, not hating breaking precepts, not respecting keeping precepts, not passing winter, not passing summer. Do you know where this goes? [pause] In the sun’s flames for ninety days the spiritual body is completed. (Treasury of the Eye of True Teaching Vol. 1)

• Studying what Zen Masters say

• Studying contextual background on Zen Masters.

⠀

A) Don't think they took these or similar precepts? Discuss! Help show some proof!

B) Think they took these or similar precepts? Discuss! Help show some proof!

[Intention]: This is a community study project after all!

⠀

A traditional precept branch extension study project originating from the precept wars

https://www.reddit.com/r/zensangha/wiki/ewk/zenprecepts/

Also an inspiration with some added background context from: https://old.reddit.com/r/zen/comments/s2wdoz/something_funny_i_found_while_browsing_the/

⠀ ⠀ ⠀

Let's check out what's said!

Excepts from the third Korean scroll of the Brahma Net Sutra translated into English by A. Charles Muller

(Compare these excerpts to one unknown Chinese to English translation: (http://www.buddhasutra.com/files/brahmanet.htm))

⠀

#THE BRAHMA NET SUTRA [Korean Excerpts]

[Not including 250 pages of Pre-Intro from EXPOSITION OF THE SUTRA OF BRAHMA'S NET (there is a lot of commentary including the original korean characters)] [...]

Intro-Kinda

>Disciples of the Buddha, listen well! If you receive the Buddha’s precepts, whether you be kings or princes, major officials or ministers, bhikṣus or bhikṣuṇīs, beings in the eighteen Brahma heavens, deva

I've been making gradual progress on this project where I'm looking at Zen texts and trying to extract modern Zen precepts... rules to follow for people who took the off ramp from modern religions and philosophies and are driving around in the wilderness wondering how to approach Zen.

> 1st Zen Precept: No nest, No tracks 9

> 2nd Precept: Dharma Combat 11

> 3rd Zen Precept - Doing the work 13

> 4th Zen Precept: Taking Refuge 16

> 5th Zen Precept: Passing beyond study 22

> 6th Zen Precept: Doubt 25

.

Welcome! ewk comment: So I was asking myself today, WTF are you going to do with this when you are done? What's the point? I said to myself, "I'm going to beat people up with it" and that seemed both plausible and likely upon reflection.

But ewk, people could say, how can you beat people up with rules they didn't agree to? Well, aside from the fact that philosophers and religions do it all the time? I will of course take the easy way forward and ask, "Why wouldn't you agree to follow these rules?"

People say they will follow the Reddiquette... and when we don't, we know they are ashamed of who they are and what they like. Well, here are some new rules, Zen precepts. People who say they will follow will find lying and cheating a bit harder, and people who refuse to follow them will have to explain why not.

Why not?

Taking refuge is a fun chapter! I just glanced over it having no idea what I'd said and it's pretty inflammatory because it's mostly based on Zhaozhou's teachings about Zen Master Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. If you've read Zhaozhou (Joshu) you are all caught up. But think about it... if you read Zhaozhou and didn't want to take him as gospel... or refused to acknowledge that inasmuch as there is a gospel, Zhaozhou is it?

Well... you are going to have some problems, right?

Seems fair. Don't like Zen, have some problems with Zen Masters, probs not going to like precepts derived from Zen study.

But wait! There's more! If you don't like these precepts... what do you like?

So just to give a very quick background about myself. I've been studying Buddhism since 2019, and fully accepted it as my religious view a few months ago. Naturally, I've been diving even deeper lately, and somehow just now realized that there are a few different versions of the Buddhist Precepts. For the longest time, I thought there were only 5. But now I'm realizing that there is a version that includes 8, and one that includes 16. I was wondering what the difference between the three versions is?

I know it seems like a silly and basic question, but I live in a very rural part of America. I only know of 3 other Buddhists in my small mountain town. I don't really have a Sangha, Im trying my best out here lol

I am well aware of the 5 precepts, and I think they are all reasonable and important.

I just heard there are sometimes three more which, I admit, sound unreasonably strict. (Not eating after noon, not enjoying entertainment, and not using luxurious furniture).

My question… when and why are these three extra precepts invoked? Is it only for monks? Is it for particular occasions when distractions are discouraged? What’s the story here?

(Sidebar: if Buddhism is all about the middle way, why does it seem so many monks still deprive themselves of so many pleasures?)

We all know ewk and how he likes the stir the pot.He has written 2 books, proposed new pillars of Zen, and is now telling us to take precepts.It's like the man is trying to (re)define what the tradition is about. So here's my attempt to put it to the test.

>precept
>
>/ˈpriːsɛpt/
>
>noun
>
>a general rule intended to regulate behaviour or thought."the legal precept of being innocent until proven guilty"
>
>a writ or warrant."the Commissioner issued precepts requiring the companies to provide information"

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precept

>A precept (from the Latin: præcipere, to teach) is a commandment, instruction, or order intended as an authoritative rule of action.

We can also have a look at what wikipedia has to say about precepts in Buddhism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_precepts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhisattva_Precepts

So, comparing these definitions to what ewk is saying I feel he means precept as a "guiding rule." Much like how we can consider the rules of baseball as baseball precepts; the rules are what ultimately constitute to what baseball is and to play baseball you have to agree to those rules. Otherwise you'd be playing a different game.

For something to be a precept I feel it has to be essential, as in changing or removing it fundamentally breaks the game. You can play baseball with fewer players, you can even play it without "strikes" or "wides", but you can't play it without bases or balls.

If we accept my definition of precepts, that is "an essential rule that is game breaking if not followed", we can tackle it by:

1. Finding instances of Zen masters giving essential rules
2. Finding instances of Zen masters saying what aren't essential rules
3. Finding instances of Zen masters breaking (what we consider) essential rules

So, what do Zen masters say?

This is where I'm at an extreme disadvantage; ewk is essentially a walking library and I barely read the expiry date of my milk, so I'm gonna need your help on this.

Zenmarrow isn't very helpful in that it lists only 1 mention of precept in its corpus.I've been trying to just wing it with different search terms but I couldn't fi

This is a poll for people who identify as “Buddhist.”

View Poll

I just wanted to share my experience with not killing living things and maybe it will inspire someone.

I started my life not killing living things, but learned from my family that it was okay and good to do so with fly swatters, mouse traps, raid, etc.

When I learned about the precepts I decided to practice them and I stopped killing living things, but shortly after I started doing this. I realized there were a laundry list of mental benefits I wanted to explain.

There is a phenomena where asking someone to do you a favor causes that person to like you over time because their subconscious minds justify effort put in to help you as having come from liking you. I think something similar happens with protecting life.

The more ants, cockroaches, earwigs, etc. that I saved, the more compassion I had for them elsewhere, at work or in public places. I started thinking about how valuable their lives were to them and how we kill so mindlessly because of conditioning. We don’t even think about the weight of these actions. Because they are a minor inconvenience to us, we just slay them.

Something that is another creatures entire existence, we extinguish in a moment without second thought and it’s normal, but it seems incredibly horrifying if we thought of aliens doing that to humans because we are “intelligent.”

Intelligence is just relative, we could easily have the same ratio of intellectual capacity to aliens as ants have to us. Anyway, I’ll digress, you get the point.

These thoughts and actions in the company of others have made a tremendous difference on how much empathy I have, how I treat people, this one practice has bled into every other area of my life.

It’s made me happier, improved my empathy, opened my heart, and due to having an open heart I’ve been able to connect with my emotions better, stabilize myself, develop mindfulness and calm, develop equanimity, improved virtues, developed meditation practice, cultivated joy and energy and confidence, developed social connections etc.

There was a time I got really upset with a girl over killing a bug in her room when we were on the phone. We don’t talk like we used to anymore, but I realized it was because of my attachments to a practice and judgement of her when I still have so many flaws of my own. It sucked to make this mistake, but at least I’ve learned so much practicing.

I just really want to recommend this one practice to anyone who can. I didn’t do a great job of explaining it here, but

Here are some Zen precepts I got from Zen texts:

> 1st Zen Precept: No nest, No tracks > > 2nd Precept: Dharma Combat > > 3rd Zen Precept - Doing the work > > 4th Zen Precept: Taking Refuge > > 5th Zen Precept: Passing beyond study > > 6th Zen Precept: Doubt

https://zenmarrow.com/?q=study

> Dahui says... Haven't you read how Linji asked Huangbo the exact great meaning of Buddhism three times and was beaten three times, then afterward got a pointer from Dayu and suddenly was greatly enlightened; unconsciously he uttered, "Ah, basically there's not much to Huangbo's Zen!" Dayu said, "You just said you were trying to find out whether or not you were wrong, but now you say there's not much to Huangbo's Zen; what have you seen, that you speak this way?' Linji struck Dayu twice in the ribs. Then Dayu pushed him away and said, "Your teacher is Huangbo; it's none of my business." Has your study of Chan gotten to be like this yet?

Funny story... I said hey, people new to Zen have to understand that Zen Masters demand things of people... like not just reading books. One guy said I was "just like Dogen" for saying that. Another guy who reads lots of books said he would never promise anything like that.

I ask you... the young people of today...

> You take what you get by question and study to be knowledge and understanding, but I can't go to the hell for liars, where tongues are pulled out - if anyone has anything at all to teach you, or says there is the Buddha, there is the doctrine, there is the world to escape, they are all foxy charmers.

> Foyan: Whew! Zen today is lackluster; even in large groups it's hard to find suitable people. As long as you people are here studying the path in this school, you should not waste the twenty-four hours of the day; focus on attaining insight.

I'm currently trying to get some resolution on whether Zen Masters are considered "teachers" by themselves and their... people?... who... come to Zen Masters for... answers? Despite the terms for teacher, student, instruction, lecture, etc. the conversation is faltering.

> Foyan: People who study Zen nowadays are all like this; reading a transformative saying and reaching an insight into the words, they then try to apply it to all sayings, thinking they are all the same. Keeping this in their hearts, they think of it as their own attainment; far from realizing they have lost their minds by entertaining an opinionated understan

Ill be blunt and straightforward. I smoke Marijuana. I've been learning about and practicing dharma for about 3-4 years now. But I've always smoked. It's not causing me suffering with ot without it, I just like it.

Does this make me a fraud? A bad practitioner?

I feel like I do pretty okay overall except the 5 precept which I feel is important. But at the same time, I'm not out getting wasted and causing suffering for others or myself, I just like to take the edge off sometimes after work.

From A Talk for Young Monks and Nuns, published in Stepping into Freedom:

If you do not break the precepts, it is not because you struggle hard to observe them but because you have bodhicitta. You know that if you break the precepts, it will ruin everything. Your great aspiration will not be realized. If as a novice you do not break the third precept, it is not because you work hard to force yourself to keep the precept. It is because you have a love and an aspiration which is so great you know that if you were to sleep with someone, your monastic life would be destroyed, and your great aspiration would never be realized. When you break the precepts, you not only destroy your monastic life, you also destroy the life of the other person and harm your blood family and your Sangha. The reason you keep the precepts is because you have love. You love yourself, your family, and your Sangha, your teacher, your society, and the life of liberation you have chosen. If you break the precepts, you die, which means your monastic life and aspiration die. You know this because you have mindfulness, which comes from your mind of love—the immense source of energy that drove you to become a monastic. It is very important, so do not allow it to erode in your daily life. Forgetfulness is the element that erodes our bodhicitta.

I'm proposing Zen precepts: https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/comments/qmyzt7/modern_zen_precepts_for_the_benefit_of_cowards/

> 1st Zen Precept: No nest, No tracks > > 2nd Precept: Dharma Combat > > 3rd Zen Precept - Doing the work > > 4th Zen Precept: Taking Refuge > > 5th Zen Precept: Passing beyond study > > 6th Zen Precept: Doubt

Doubt

There are lots of references to doubt in Zen texts, most famously of course being the negations from the first Case of Wumenguan [http://home.pon.net/wildrose/gateless-1.htm]:

> Wumen (Gateless) Says: To meet Zen, you must pass through the founders’ checkpoint. For the wonderful awakening you exhaust the road of the heart-mind to the finish. If you do not pass through the ancestor’s checkpoint, if you do not finish the road of the heart-mind, depletion indeed follows like a tree spirit attached to the grass.

>Just say, what is the founders’ checkpoint like? Simply this one single word "Not." That is indeed the one checkpoint of the lineage’s gate! Consequently, this is titled “The Gateless Checkpoint of the Zen Lineage.”

> After you are able to pass through this, you not only intimately come face to face with Zhaozhou, then you can take part in the successive generations of founders, walking together holding hands, your eyebrow hairs entangling, seeing with one and the same eye, hearing with one and the same ear. How could it be that you don’t celebrate quickly?

> Does it not happen to be essential to pass through this foundation checkpoint? Use your three hundred sixty bones and joints and your eighty four thousand hair follicles throughout your body to start up a single mass of doubt to meet this single word “Not.” Daytime and nighttime lift up and tear. Do not establish an association between nothingness and “Not.” Do not establish an association between "Is" and “Not.” Examine this as if you swallowed a single hot iron ball and vomiting and vomiting doesn’t get it out. First clean and extinguish your foul knowledge and foul consciousness from long long ago, and when naturally mastered, inside and outside become one. It’s as if the mute person gets a dream allowing only oneself to know. Suddenly and certainly one punches open to frighten heaven and shake the earth. It’s as if you snatch and get General Guan's (Checkpoint) great sword into your hand, then if you chance to meet Buddha, you kill Buddha; if you chance to meet ancestors, you kill ancest

Can anybody elaborate a little bit on what the 9th precept is supposed to include? If I’m trying to abide by it does that mean I shouldn’t sleep on a mattress? What about sit on a couch? Do both of these break the precept or am I not understanding it properly?

So I was noticing a friend's smeeta was going down a lot during missions, and I asked them what the mods they had on it were. I gave them some suggestions, one being take off tek assault (it wasn't maxed and was only giving a 15% chance to ignore lethal damage anyway) and put back on the precept for the invis/decoy.

They said they removed it because they wanted to make sure charm procced and that there was no missed chances for it to.

So to quote the wiki "Companions will check to see if the conditions to use the highest priority precept are fulfilled, and will continue to use that precept until the conditions are no longer met. Then they will check each other precept in priority order. Companions will also interrupt the usage of lower priority precepts to use higher priority precepts."

They seemed to think there was a percentage chance for the precepts being chosen by the AI with a higher precept position getting a better percentage, and in combat mischief would override charm or had a chance to. I'm not entirely sure.

They seemed irked when I disagreed with them, but I've written two roughly 80 page guides on beast pets, and I don't remember any weird discrepancies in the above quote in the time I have been breeding and using beast pets, (not that the wiki hasn't been horribly wrong regarding beast pets before.) The only time I'm not using them is when the incubator is occupied. They said they didn't want to argue but they were just doing it how someone told them it worked.

Anyway, every time I try to be an expert on these subjects, I find out something I wasn't aware of and I figured I would be remiss not to see if others had heard this as well and if there is any validity to the statement.

I have owned a leopard gecko for about four years now. She really means the world to me, but the thing is that I need to feed her live insects. Mealworms, crickets, cockroaches - you get it. I keep the insects in their own separate containers, feed them and clean their homes regularly. That doesn’t make up for the fact that I need to give them to my gecko, though :( Will owning the gecko be a hindrance to my practice? Please let me know, thank you.

Edit: Hello everyone. Thank you very much for the well written answers. I was a bit distressed during the time of making this post, but I calmed down, and after reading some of your answers I have decided that I most probably won’t give my gecko away. At the end of the day I have chosen to take care of another living being, and it feels wrong to abandon her. Your answers have given me a lot of insight. Please do comment if you have anything to say, I’m always open to listening. I’m still very young (14) and learning about buddhism bit by bit, so again thank you all for answering my question! :)

She's actually a very seasoned CCU nurse and a really nice respectful person, but given our profession's existential crisis and current climate regarding midlevels I wanted to ask for advice.

My first question is what is the right thing to do? I would not feel comfortable sending any family or loved ones to an NP simply because they have less training and I want excellent care for my family. It feels dishonest training NPs for this reason where I would pass off this subpar care to other people.

My second questions is what is the practical thing to do? I'm only a few months out of residency and pretty new here. I think I would rub shoulders the wrong way. But I don't think it's in my contract that I have to precept. There's a PA that works here who refused and they said they would consider placing him on unpaid leave and he acquiesced. They may do that to me too!

Thanks!

Hi there,

From everything I've learned about the 3rd precept, it seems to boil down to the sexual encounter involving no coercion and for it not to be adulterous. How would adultery be defined in an open marriage? Is something only adulterous if the other party in the relationship is hurt by it? What if the two have discussed and both are fine with one or both of the partners having sex with others outside the marriage, within certain limits that the couple agree upon?

I'm wondering about this because I had a threesome with a married couple last week. All parties gave consent, all had a good time, and no deceit was involved. I can't believe this could really be considered a breach of the 3rd precept.

Thoughts?

PS: to be clear, I don't want commentary on whether casual sex is conducive to meditation or what not. I know that there's a reason why monastics are celibate. I have not come yet to a place in my life where I can quell my sexual desire enough to give up sex.

Thanks!

Update: Thanks to everyone who's tried to help me grapple with this question. I have been getting feedback that I seem argumentative in my replies, and while I can see how this could seem to be the case, it is not my intention. From my experience, sex is so difficult to talk about because it is given such outsized import by most Western religions. I am gay, and grew up Catholic, and that did a number on my mental health. I'm finally comfortable with my sexuality, and have found this subreddit to be open minded and supportive for people who ask genuine questions in the past. Sadly, feel like I have been barraged by a lot of judgmental comments that are full of sex negative attitudes not informed by Dharma but by conservative social norms. This has been an enlightening experience, and I hope that you all have a blessed day.

Background on the r/Zen Precept Wars:

https://www.reddit.com/r/zensangha/wiki/ewk/zenprecepts

Traditional Precepts (kind of)

1. Not Killing
2. Not Stealing
3. No Sexual Misconduct
4. No Lying
5. No abuse of drugs

Zen Precepts (what I got from Zen texts)

1st Zen Precept: No nest, No tracks

2nd Precept: Dharma Combat

3rd Zen Precept - Doing the work

4th Zen Precept: Taking Refuge

5th Zen Precept: Passing beyond study

6th Zen Precept: Doubt

.

Welcome! ewk comment: Surprisingly, the controversy about precepts includes the sort of precepts that all Zen Masters have taken, precepts that give the special meaning to Nanquan's Cat Chopping and Guizong's... Snake Chopping?

> A student of the sutras once visited Guizong Zhichang while he was working the soil in the garden with a hoe. Just as the student drew near, he saw Guizong use the hoe to cut a snake in half, killing it in violation of the Buddhist precept not to take any form of life.

> “I'd heard that Guizong was a crude and ill-mannered man, but I didn't believe it until now,” the student remarked. > > “Is it you or I who's crude or refined?” Guizong asked. > > “What do you mean by ‘crude'?” the student asked. > > Guizong held the hoe upright. > > “And in that case, what do you mean by ‘refined'?” the student asked. > > Guizong made a motion as if cutting a snake in half. > > “And yet,” the student said, “if you had allowed it, it would have gone away on its own.” > > “If I'd allowed it to go away on its own, how would you have seen me chop the snake in two?”

Here he is again, with Nanquan:

> The master was once walking with Nanquan. Later, quite suddenly, they lost each other. At tea Nanquan said, ‘In the old days, discussing the [Chan] stories with master Elder Brother, we were always familiar with them; but what if someone were to bring up the ultimate matter now, how would it be?’ > > The master answered, ‘This piece of ground is very good for setting up a Buddhist hermitage.’ > > ‘Putting aside the setting up of a Buddhist hermitage, what about the ultimate matter?’ said Nanquan. > > The master then overturned the tea kettle and got up. Nanquan said, ‘The master Elder Brother has already drunk tea but Nanquan has not yet drunk tea.’ > > ‘With talk like this, even one drop is too much,’

Hello everyone. Peace and blessings to all.

I was just wondering, where does the authority of The Five Precepts come from? By this, I mean, what authority does Buddha have to give them, and where does he derive the authority from?

I am sorry if I am not explaining myself well. I will give an example, using a Christian and Islamic analogy.

Christians believe that Jesus is God in human form, and this is how Jesus gets the authority to teach what he does. Most Christians believe morality comes from God. Muslims believe the primary source for morality is The Quran, which contains the literal word of God, so this is where Islamic morality derives its authority.

Where and how does Buddha get his authority to give the precepts?

Btw, I am neither Christian nor Muslim. I was using those as easy examples to explain what I mean.

Hello everyone. Peace and blessings to all.

I was just wondering, where does the authority of The Five Precepts come from? By this, I mean, what authority does Buddha have to give them, and where does he derive the authority from?

I am sorry if I am not explaining myself well. I will give an example, using a Christian and Islamic analogy.

Christians believe that Jesus is God in human form, and this is how Jesus gets the authority to teach what he does. Most Christians believe morality comes from God. Muslims believe the primary source for morality is The Quran, which contains the literal word of God, so this is where Islamic morality derives its authority.

Where and how does Buddha get his authority to give the precepts?

Btw, I am neither Christian nor Muslim. I was using those as easy examples to explain what I mean.