Few questions related to Zen

[Luca123]

Hi all,
I am new to this forum, but I have posted a lot in the sister forum.
I am practicing zazen for some time now, even if I do not get many results

I have a few question about zen:

1) is there anyone who has been fully enlightened by Zen?
Same as the Arhants in Theravada

2) if Zen allows monks to get married, is not Zen less serious than Theravada or other practices that require celibacy and not touching money?
Is there any zen sect that works like Theravada in Thai, where monks can concentrate fully on the path while someone else takes care about food, etc.

3) I had a chat with a highly respected Zen monk in Japan once and he made a very harsh comment against Jews.
Zen monks have been accused to have stayed silent during the WWII atrocities (see "Zen at war")
How can you be a Buddhist when you dontrespect human beings?

4) The whole Mahayana Buddhism has come out from a split with Theravada.
In the Tipitaka it is said that who causes a split, along wiht the followers, go to hell.
Are all Mahayana Buddhist at risk of hell?
If so, why no Theravada monk warns them about the danger?

Regards,
Luca

[Bakmoon]

Hi all,
I am new to this forum, but I have posted a lot in the sister forum.
I am practicing zazen for some time now, even if I do not get many results

I have a few question about zen:

1) is there anyone who has been fully enlightened by Zen?
Same as the Arhants in Theravada

2) if Zen allows monks to get married, is not Zen less serious than Theravada or other practices that require celibacy and not touching money?
Is there any zen sect that works like Theravada in Thai, where monks can concentrate fully on the path while someone else takes care about food, etc.

3) I had a chat with a highly respected Zen monk in Japan once and he made a very harsh comment against Jews.
Zen monks have been accused to have stayed silent during the WWII atrocities (see "Zen at war")
How can you be a Buddhist when you dontrespect human beings?

4) The whole Mahayana Buddhism has come out from a split with Theravada.
In the Tipitaka it is said that who causes a split, along wiht the followers, go to hell.
Are all Mahayana Buddhist at risk of hell?
If so, why no Theravada monk warns them about the danger?

Regards,
Luca

Hi Luca! Welcome to Dharmawheel!
1) There have probably been many throughout the ages. As for specific names, I'll leave that to someone more knowledgeable.

2) It's in Japanese Zen that the Priests are allowed to marry and have money and such. Japanese Zen Priests don't ordain under the Vinaya, but use a totally different ordination system, so they aren't breaking any vows. In other parts of Asia, Zen Monks do ordain according to the Vinaya, but the level to which they adhere to it varies, just like it does in Theravada countries (Most Thai monks do carry some money for example.)

3) Buddhists are human beings with all the same problems and hangups as everyone else. Not every single Buddhist is going to behave according to the principles that Buddhism teaches, so you can't blame all Zen Buddhists for what one person said.

4) Causing a schism is a very serious matter, but forming different schools isn't nessisarily an act of schism. I think that in order for it to count as the formal act of schism, a person needs to intentionally teach something that they know is false with the intention of creating a split, and I don't think that is what happened with Mahayana Buddhism by any stretch.

[Astus]

1. It depends on how "full enlightenment" is understood. Zen generally views its own patriarchs/ancestors as enlightened beings. More importantly, every being has buddha-nature, so what really matters is whether you have seen this yourself or not.

2. Even in Japanese Zen - where they don't follow the Pratimoksha (Vinaya) - there are monasteries where they remain celibate and live mostly isolated from the mundane life, and there are also individuals who live like hermits. At the same time, the seriousness of one's dedication towards enlightenment (bodhicitta) is not a matter of ordination or monastic precepts.

3. It is not the robe or the title that makes one a good person. Also, being a Buddhist is a question of religious conscience, not moral behaviour. Once you take refuge in the Triple Jewel, you are a Buddhist. Even if you break all the precepts. On the other hand, you can live like a saint, but if you believe that salvation/liberation exists somewhere else than the Buddhadharma, you are not a Buddhist.

4. Mahayana is not a split from Theravada. Schism in the monastic community would be setting up a different set of precepts, however, nothing like that has ever really happened. Japanese Buddhism could be considered an exception here, however, they did not actually made a new Vinaya but rather abandoned it for a different kind of rules. You may read this work: Sects & Sectarianism by Bhikkhu Sujato.