/lit/ - Literature

>>6848857
Buddhism has meant many different things in different time periods. Meditation used to be a key part of Buddhism in early India, but in other places it is not so widely seen as central to Buddhism - monastic rules were seen as central in pre modern Burma and monks did not meditate until the 19th century vipassana revival.

In Japan, monks are not celibate. This was central to the core of Buddhism monasticism and thus central to Buddhism. The idea of a realized enlightened being which has sex and has attachments to family has been incorporated into Buddhism. Nobody questions if this is Buddhism or not.

The idea of a Buddhism without "metaphysical" rebirth, without karma, a 'secular' Buddhism if you will (or mundane Buddhism) is not that far fetched. In this kind of Buddhism karma and rebirth would be adapted to accommodate materialism or at least a skeptical agnostic view of the afterlife and focus on living in this world. Sure it is a big change in Buddhist dogma, but it could still be said to be Buddhism.

That being said, one need not call oneself a Buddhist or believe in all the Buddhist dogma to practice Zen. Most Zen centers welcome everyone no matter what their religious or philosophical beliefs because they are more focused on practice than on dogma. I've attended a small zen center from time to time in my area. Never have I been asked if I believe in such and such doctrine. The Dalai Lama has stressed this, that Westerners should not seek to adopt a new worldview wholesale, but be open to new ways to improve their well-being.

As someone who went through the whole "Western Buddhist convert" phase: Don't 'convert' to Buddhism and seek to accept all its doctrines, just meditate and study the Buddha's teachings as you would any other philosopher, with a critical mind. The Buddha was just a man, he's not the only thinker with wisdom.