8 ms·

What kind of buddhist was Steve Jobs, really?

128 points by larve 15y ago

ericmoritz 15y ago
"There's nothing holy about mindfulness" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ri2hA1TqDT4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ri2hA1TqDT4
gwern 15y ago
Not much of one. I read the bio too, and got a different picture - Jobs used Buddhism because he had such problems. We'll probably never know what problems specifically, just like we'll never know what his eating issues were (Isaacson says Jobs was urged to see a therapist about it, but refused) - narcissism as one woman speculated? Bi-polar? To me, the most insightful anecdote was: > 'Our consumer desires are unhealthy, he told her, and to attain enlightenment you need to develop a life of nonattachment and non-materialism. He even sent her a tape of Kobun Chino, his Zen teacher, lecturing about the problems caused by craving and obtaining things. Egan pushed back. Wasn’t he defying that philosophy, she asked, by making computers and other products that people coveted? “He was irritated by the dichotomy, and we had exuberant debates about it,” Egan recalled.' Yes, I guess that's one way to describe it...
- larve 15y ago
  In retrospect, that biography is quite lacking on a lot of points. It seems like Isaacson was not able to get through to jobs in any other way than Jobs allowed. Maybe this is due to him rushing the book to be released 2 weeks after his death, there is almost no analysis of Jobs. I also wonder how Jobs, as buddhist as he was, would rationalize his anger. In the book he repeatedly says "that's how I am", which is pretty much what buddhism tries to undo. He definitely was an irrational man.
  - codex 15y ago
    There are limits to Buddhism. It can't change your sexual orientation; it can't make you immune to pain, and, apparently, it can't eliminate temper--especially if you're ancestors are from herder societies, which evolved temper to protect their vulnerable assets. Certain things are predominately innate.
    - omarchowdhury 15y ago
      How do you know what the limits to Buddhism are? Have you tested the limits? Letting go of conceptions was one of Buddha's teachings. "Certain things are predominately innate" is a conception and holding on to that limits progress [1]. [1] Progress in this case means deliverance (enlightenment).
      - codex 15y ago
        There is no certainty, only degrees of belief. I don't "know" that the world is round--I haven't seen it from space and I haven't circumnavigated the globe, and I can't construct a proof. However, I'm "pretty damn sure" the world is round. If the human race restricted its belief to only those things it could be 100% sure of, we would still be in the Bronze Age. Similarly, I can't know that Buddhism can't levitate you off the ground and make you immortal, but I'm "pretty damn sure" it can't, and I wouldn't get any flack for saying so. There are many preconceptions I am comfortable letting go of, but not the ones I mentioned--at least not without extraordinary evidence.
        disgruntledphd2 15y ago
        http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304395907002436 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304395907... That was only a pilot study, but it does appear that meditation is useful for pain. A recent fmri study suggested that one year of meditation caused quite large changes in the experience of pain.
    - michaelochurch 15y ago
      I don't know if this is true, but it's irrelevant. Sexual orientation: Buddhism's stance on sexual morality is pretty simple. No rape and no deception (cheating on a partner, sex with someone underage, and misleading a person to acquire sex all qualify as "deception"). There aren't rules about before vs. after marriage or gender. Buddhism is focused on practicality and harmony, not adherence to assertedly eternal rules. Immunity to pain: not sure of that one. The brain is a powerful thing, and accomplished yogis (not to claim equivalence between yoga and Buddhism) can get power over their bodies in pretty unusual ways. However, Buddhism's main concern is the reduction of dukkha, which translates as "mental suffering". Focusing on the elimination of physical pain is not a primary goal. This wouldn't even be desirable. Temper: I think you put your foot in your mouth here. Spend some time around some seriously accomplished meditators. Yes, there are difficult personalities and some strange (even arrogant) people. However, if you look at aggregate differences, the serious practitioners (and it has more to do with depth of practice than identification with "Buddhism" per se) are remarkably (on average; these are aggregate comparisons) calmer, less neurotic, and less self-absorbed than people without practice.
  - michaelochurch 15y ago
    I can relate to this "Jobs wasn't a real Buddhist" nonsense because I practice Buddhist meditation and still can have a difficult personality. (I'm extremely intense and opinionated, to the point of being moralistic.) I was a lot worse when I had no spiritual path. The fact that I still have personal difficulties (as nearly everyone does, including most Buddhists) does not mean that my practice has been without value. Spiritual progress is intensely personal and hard to measure, but the existence of anger in a person doesn't make that person "a bad Buddhist". It's not like Western concepts of religion where you're a bad $RELIGIOUS_DEMONYM or a good one. There are skilled people and unskilled people. Steve Jobs was using Buddhist teachings and practices to develop skills that most people don't have and that he probably lacked, to some degree, even unto death. No shock there. Getting to Enlightenment takes a long time.
    - codex 15y ago
      This is a bit off topic, but can you suggest accessible meditation resources for the beginner? Are books sufficient, or is a teacher necessary?
      - michaelochurch 15y ago
        You don't need a 1:1 teacher but I recommend starting with a community of sorts, with classes led by a teacher. Find a Buddhist prayer center. Don't worry if you don't believe in God or religious dogma; none of that's important with the communities you're trying to enter. (Buddhism is theologically agnostic, and although the religious believes in past lives, you won't be rejected by Buddhist communities if you don't believe in past lives or reincarnation.) Once you've gained a sense of what approaches work for you, it's a good idea to get some books and study them. One great thing about zen/meditation books is that you can read them every year and they're still fresh-- there are things in them that you didn't pick up the last time because you weren't ready for them.
      - mechnik 15y ago
        The OP article is as good exposition of Buddhist thought and practice as you will find. Shunryu Suzuki mentioned in it was an exponent of the Soto school of Zen which emphasizes 'just sitting'. Just that, sit with straight back. Look up 'seiza' for more information if you wish, but no need to get too technical. Also, I believe there are online meditation support groups if none are available near you.
- Arjuna 15y ago
  "Wasn't he defying that philosophy, she asked, by making computers and other products that people coveted?" Buddhism expresses a distinction between a thing in and of itself and an individual's interpretation of a thing. "Computers and other products" are simply things in and of themselves. However, it is the individual that applies an interpretation to these things, such that the individual can allow these things to define him or her. In essence, there is nothing "defying that philosophy", as the question asks. If an individual covets or self-identifies with a thing, Buddhism says that this attachment is what ultimately causes suffering. This attachment is the result of an individual's interpretation of a thing, and not due to a thing in and of itself.
  - gwern 15y ago
    > "Computers and other products" are simply things in and of themselves. However, it is the individual that applies an interpretation to these things, such that the individual can allow these things to define him or her. It is also an individual who devotes his life towards working on ever more desirable consumer products, and also individuals who devise and support ad & PR campaigns based on the idea of defining oneself with a brand and associating with it and all the insidious consumerism ideology that comes with 'lifestyle' brands. > In essence, there is nothing "defying that philosophy", as the question asks. The philosophy in question was not Buddhism's ontology, which varies drastically from Madhyamika-style emptiness to older karma entities; nothing can defy that philosophy because they are consistent with all possible actions and observations. The reference was to the moralizing; for all you wrote, I still see tension between a stance based on eliminating cravings and a life spent stoking and satisfying for cash cravings.
    - msbarnett 15y ago
      > The reference was to the moralizing; for all you wrote, I still see tension between a stance based on eliminating cravings and a life spent stoking and satisfying for cash cravings. It seems as though that tension arises in you simply imposing your misunderstandings of what Buddhism seeks to do in eliminating worldly desires, though. Buddhism fundamentally offers the proposition "if you are dissatisfied with life, and if you agree that certain things are responsible for that dissatisfaction, here is what you can do about it." It isn't proselytory. It doesn't require that you impose that view on others, or work to reduce their attachment, whether they want it or not, out of some need to save them from some Western concept like sin. The fact that you think the right livelihood for a Buddhist ought to be one that in no way involves creating or selling things that people might form worldly attachments to, doesn't mean that Buddhism itself teaches that, or that people doing so are behaving inconsistently with the teachings of the Buddha. There are Buddhist teachings surrounding what the right livelihood is and is not. Being a salesman doesn't fall under the "inconsistent with the teachings of Buddhism" livelihoods, even though it, by definition, means making others want to buy things from you.
- eurohacker 15y ago
  zen buddhism could have been a treatment program for this dude , as the character was not the most loved one among his employees, competitors etc. , needed some improvements
johnwahan 15y ago
It is none of your business, leave him alone. I think he would be sick of that idolatry.
- noarchy 15y ago
  Would he? His private life was indeed very private while he was alive. But, the guy sat down for hours of interviews with Isaacson so that a book could be produced about him. If he didn't to be the centre of any kind of attention, he choose strange ways of showing it.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
- runjake 15y ago
  That would seem to contradict Steve Jobs' ad his wife's desire to publish an un-candy-coated (as quoted in the book) biography of the man's life, both his successes and his serious failures. The man clearly wanted people to know and ponder all of these things.
runjake 15y ago
An imperfect one, like the rest of us. Edit: since I'm getting downvoted into oblivion, let me elaborate: no Buddhist is perfect, if they were perfect, they probably wouldn't see a need to study Buddha's teachings. It's not like Jobs was out criticizing how people lived their lives in "sin".
- Alex3917 15y ago
  Steve was perfect as he was, he just needed some improvents.
  - Alex3917 15y ago
    To those downvoting my comment, get off the Internet and go read the books the post is talking about, specifically Zen Mind, Beginners Mind. Then maybe you'll get what Steve actually believed.
  - mechnik 15y ago
    Steve Jobs, imperfect. His core, perfection itself. Old pond, droid jumps in.
    - da_dude4242 15y ago
      plop!
      - da_dude4242 15y ago
        For the silly people downvoting, this is a reference to a Japanese Haiku. Old pond, frog jumps in - plop!
sowhat 15y ago
More food for SJ worshippers.
bfrs 15y ago
To me Zen seems like a lot of vague mumbo-jumbo. It can be interpreted any which way you want, making it sometimes seem wise and profound. The Buddhism I learned is quite simple and clear. It just boils down to two Golden Rules: 1. The Golden Rule: Treat others as you wish to be treated. 2. The Golden Mean: Everything in moderation, nothing in excess. and the related commentary as to why these are good policies to follow.
- davidw 15y ago
  Another rule I think makes sense in the world is a sort of temporally shifted golden rule: try and leave things better than when you found them to do unto future people what you would wish them to do had they gone before you.
- radu_floricica 15y ago
  This could be Dunning Kruger effect at work ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect ). From what I know, there isn't much (any?) major debunking of zen from people who've studied it closely, the way it's easy to find on Christianity.
- mechnik 15y ago
  Zen first flowered in Japan during the Kamakura period because it appealed to samurai as a no-nonsense approach to dealing with that time period's problems (i.e. Mongol invasion) Over the years, the mumbo-jumbo factor accrues, but there are always reformers who try to keep Zen practice relevant (e.g. Shunryu Suzuki).
- Jach 15y ago
  Re #1: what if you're a masochist?
- Estragon 15y ago
  No, it's a lot more than that. It is a practical method for awakening to aspects of life which most people hide from. Though you wouldn't know it from content-free, gossippy BS like in the OP article.
mmphosis 15y ago
Wake Up! Life is transient Swiftly passing Be aware The Great Matter Don’t waste time.
bobtm 15y ago
So he was an atheist. It would come as a shock to a number of Apple fanboys in the US. Edit : so downvoters think a buddhist is not an atheist ? or that it would not shock anyone in the US ? or what ?
- pbhjpbhj 15y ago
  I don't know why people have downvoted you but ... Buddhism doesn't contradict there being a deity and some Buddhists worship figures as if they were gods and certainly consider some to have supernatural powers. So it would seem based on the story here that you've not a strong starting point. Perhaps he was a deist/agnostic/atheist/apatheist I don't know or particularly care. As to your second assertion, how is it relevant to peoples regard for the devices/software he was party to? How is that line of enquiry pertinent to HN?
xavoy 15y ago
Wow there is a lot of misinformation here, especially about Zen. If making beautiful things is encouraging attachment then I guess all of the Zen poets and painters weren't (and aren't) very Zen either. Nor are the architects, florists or writers. And to say that he wasn't or couldn't be a Buddhist simply because he had imperfections and flaws? What?! Also, look up Vimalakirti. You don't need to renounce the world and material possessions to be a 'good' Buddhist, whatever that is.
mrmasa 15y ago
Let me clear a couple of basic things related to this issue. The origin of Zen comes from greater vehicle Buddhism. In Buddhism, we have two main derivatives: greater vehicle Buddhism and small vehicle Buddhism. Small vehicle Buddhism devotedly focuses on what Buddha done to reach nilvana. So, they execute tough ascetic training in shrines. But, as we know, not everyone can execute such training because of many reasons. So, greater vehicle Buddhism was born. And Zen was established in China by indian Buhddist, Daruma because it was heretical in India. After Confucianism became major religion in China, Japan was the successor of Zen. This is the history. This story is pertially closed to the origin of Christianity. Zen is the practice everyone can do. Controlling anger, relieving oneself from anxiety, and exploring answers inside, not outside. That's all. The meditation is one of the methods. We can do it everywhere. One of the key concept in Buddhism is "changing ever". Everything is unstable. And, I realize that one of the Jobs's greatest management philosophy is to release his past. This philosophy is very closed the above concept in Buddhism. As we get old, we easily stick to our past achievement. But, it doesn't mean anything, even will be bottleneck for us to step forward simply because everything changes, which also means everything is imperfect. I think this is why Jobs used to said "the death is the great invention" because we are forced to step forward by death. I think it's not about religious thing, it's about philosophy every one should have. For me, it's not important whether Jobs is a kind of Buhddhist or not. He taught us "to release past". That's a most important thing.
rms 15y ago
The kind that believed meditation was something he did sometimes.

128 points by larve 15y ago

"There's nothing holy about mindfulness" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ri2hA1TqDT4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ri2hA1TqDT4

gwern 15y ago

Not much of one. I read the bio too, and got a different picture - Jobs used Buddhism because he had such problems. We'll probably never know what problems specifically, just like we'll never know what his eating issues were (Isaacson says Jobs was urged to see a therapist about it, but refused) - narcissism as one woman speculated? Bi-polar? To me, the most insightful anecdote was: > 'Our consumer desires are unhealthy, he told her, and to attain enlightenment you need to develop a life of nonattachment and non-materialism. He even sent her a tape of Kobun Chino, his Zen teacher, lecturing about the problems caused by craving and obtaining things. Egan pushed back. Wasn’t he defying that philosophy, she asked, by making computers and other products that people coveted? “He was irritated by the dichotomy, and we had exuberant debates about it,” Egan recalled.' Yes, I guess that's one way to describe it...

larve 15y ago
In retrospect, that biography is quite lacking on a lot of points. It seems like Isaacson was not able to get through to jobs in any other way than Jobs allowed. Maybe this is due to him rushing the book to be released 2 weeks after his death, there is almost no analysis of Jobs. I also wonder how Jobs, as buddhist as he was, would rationalize his anger. In the book he repeatedly says "that's how I am", which is pretty much what buddhism tries to undo. He definitely was an irrational man.
- codex 15y ago
  There are limits to Buddhism. It can't change your sexual orientation; it can't make you immune to pain, and, apparently, it can't eliminate temper--especially if you're ancestors are from herder societies, which evolved temper to protect their vulnerable assets. Certain things are predominately innate.
  - omarchowdhury 15y ago
    How do you know what the limits to Buddhism are? Have you tested the limits? Letting go of conceptions was one of Buddha's teachings. "Certain things are predominately innate" is a conception and holding on to that limits progress [1]. [1] Progress in this case means deliverance (enlightenment).
    - codex 15y ago
      There is no certainty, only degrees of belief. I don't "know" that the world is round--I haven't seen it from space and I haven't circumnavigated the globe, and I can't construct a proof. However, I'm "pretty damn sure" the world is round. If the human race restricted its belief to only those things it could be 100% sure of, we would still be in the Bronze Age. Similarly, I can't know that Buddhism can't levitate you off the ground and make you immortal, but I'm "pretty damn sure" it can't, and I wouldn't get any flack for saying so. There are many preconceptions I am comfortable letting go of, but not the ones I mentioned--at least not without extraordinary evidence.
      - disgruntledphd2 15y ago
        http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304395907002436 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304395907... That was only a pilot study, but it does appear that meditation is useful for pain. A recent fmri study suggested that one year of meditation caused quite large changes in the experience of pain.
  - michaelochurch 15y ago
    I don't know if this is true, but it's irrelevant. Sexual orientation: Buddhism's stance on sexual morality is pretty simple. No rape and no deception (cheating on a partner, sex with someone underage, and misleading a person to acquire sex all qualify as "deception"). There aren't rules about before vs. after marriage or gender. Buddhism is focused on practicality and harmony, not adherence to assertedly eternal rules. Immunity to pain: not sure of that one. The brain is a powerful thing, and accomplished yogis (not to claim equivalence between yoga and Buddhism) can get power over their bodies in pretty unusual ways. However, Buddhism's main concern is the reduction of dukkha, which translates as "mental suffering". Focusing on the elimination of physical pain is not a primary goal. This wouldn't even be desirable. Temper: I think you put your foot in your mouth here. Spend some time around some seriously accomplished meditators. Yes, there are difficult personalities and some strange (even arrogant) people. However, if you look at aggregate differences, the serious practitioners (and it has more to do with depth of practice than identification with "Buddhism" per se) are remarkably (on average; these are aggregate comparisons) calmer, less neurotic, and less self-absorbed than people without practice.
- michaelochurch 15y ago
  I can relate to this "Jobs wasn't a real Buddhist" nonsense because I practice Buddhist meditation and still can have a difficult personality. (I'm extremely intense and opinionated, to the point of being moralistic.) I was a lot worse when I had no spiritual path. The fact that I still have personal difficulties (as nearly everyone does, including most Buddhists) does not mean that my practice has been without value. Spiritual progress is intensely personal and hard to measure, but the existence of anger in a person doesn't make that person "a bad Buddhist". It's not like Western concepts of religion where you're a bad $RELIGIOUS_DEMONYM or a good one. There are skilled people and unskilled people. Steve Jobs was using Buddhist teachings and practices to develop skills that most people don't have and that he probably lacked, to some degree, even unto death. No shock there. Getting to Enlightenment takes a long time.
  - codex 15y ago
    This is a bit off topic, but can you suggest accessible meditation resources for the beginner? Are books sufficient, or is a teacher necessary?
    - michaelochurch 15y ago
      You don't need a 1:1 teacher but I recommend starting with a community of sorts, with classes led by a teacher. Find a Buddhist prayer center. Don't worry if you don't believe in God or religious dogma; none of that's important with the communities you're trying to enter. (Buddhism is theologically agnostic, and although the religious believes in past lives, you won't be rejected by Buddhist communities if you don't believe in past lives or reincarnation.) Once you've gained a sense of what approaches work for you, it's a good idea to get some books and study them. One great thing about zen/meditation books is that you can read them every year and they're still fresh-- there are things in them that you didn't pick up the last time because you weren't ready for them.
    - mechnik 15y ago
      The OP article is as good exposition of Buddhist thought and practice as you will find. Shunryu Suzuki mentioned in it was an exponent of the Soto school of Zen which emphasizes 'just sitting'. Just that, sit with straight back. Look up 'seiza' for more information if you wish, but no need to get too technical. Also, I believe there are online meditation support groups if none are available near you.
Arjuna 15y ago
"Wasn't he defying that philosophy, she asked, by making computers and other products that people coveted?" Buddhism expresses a distinction between a thing in and of itself and an individual's interpretation of a thing. "Computers and other products" are simply things in and of themselves. However, it is the individual that applies an interpretation to these things, such that the individual can allow these things to define him or her. In essence, there is nothing "defying that philosophy", as the question asks. If an individual covets or self-identifies with a thing, Buddhism says that this attachment is what ultimately causes suffering. This attachment is the result of an individual's interpretation of a thing, and not due to a thing in and of itself.
- gwern 15y ago
  > "Computers and other products" are simply things in and of themselves. However, it is the individual that applies an interpretation to these things, such that the individual can allow these things to define him or her. It is also an individual who devotes his life towards working on ever more desirable consumer products, and also individuals who devise and support ad & PR campaigns based on the idea of defining oneself with a brand and associating with it and all the insidious consumerism ideology that comes with 'lifestyle' brands. > In essence, there is nothing "defying that philosophy", as the question asks. The philosophy in question was not Buddhism's ontology, which varies drastically from Madhyamika-style emptiness to older karma entities; nothing can defy that philosophy because they are consistent with all possible actions and observations. The reference was to the moralizing; for all you wrote, I still see tension between a stance based on eliminating cravings and a life spent stoking and satisfying for cash cravings.
  - msbarnett 15y ago
    > The reference was to the moralizing; for all you wrote, I still see tension between a stance based on eliminating cravings and a life spent stoking and satisfying for cash cravings. It seems as though that tension arises in you simply imposing your misunderstandings of what Buddhism seeks to do in eliminating worldly desires, though. Buddhism fundamentally offers the proposition "if you are dissatisfied with life, and if you agree that certain things are responsible for that dissatisfaction, here is what you can do about it." It isn't proselytory. It doesn't require that you impose that view on others, or work to reduce their attachment, whether they want it or not, out of some need to save them from some Western concept like sin. The fact that you think the right livelihood for a Buddhist ought to be one that in no way involves creating or selling things that people might form worldly attachments to, doesn't mean that Buddhism itself teaches that, or that people doing so are behaving inconsistently with the teachings of the Buddha. There are Buddhist teachings surrounding what the right livelihood is and is not. Being a salesman doesn't fall under the "inconsistent with the teachings of Buddhism" livelihoods, even though it, by definition, means making others want to buy things from you.
eurohacker 15y ago
zen buddhism could have been a treatment program for this dude , as the character was not the most loved one among his employees, competitors etc. , needed some improvements

johnwahan 15y ago

It is none of your business, leave him alone. I think he would be sick of that idolatry.

noarchy 15y ago
Would he? His private life was indeed very private while he was alive. But, the guy sat down for hours of interviews with Isaacson so that a book could be produced about him. If he didn't to be the centre of any kind of attention, he choose strange ways of showing it.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
runjake 15y ago
That would seem to contradict Steve Jobs' ad his wife's desire to publish an un-candy-coated (as quoted in the book) biography of the man's life, both his successes and his serious failures. The man clearly wanted people to know and ponder all of these things.

runjake 15y ago

An imperfect one, like the rest of us. Edit: since I'm getting downvoted into oblivion, let me elaborate: no Buddhist is perfect, if they were perfect, they probably wouldn't see a need to study Buddha's teachings. It's not like Jobs was out criticizing how people lived their lives in "sin".

Alex3917 15y ago
Steve was perfect as he was, he just needed some improvents.
- Alex3917 15y ago
  To those downvoting my comment, get off the Internet and go read the books the post is talking about, specifically Zen Mind, Beginners Mind. Then maybe you'll get what Steve actually believed.
- mechnik 15y ago
  Steve Jobs, imperfect. His core, perfection itself. Old pond, droid jumps in.
  - da_dude4242 15y ago
    plop!
    - da_dude4242 15y ago
      For the silly people downvoting, this is a reference to a Japanese Haiku. Old pond, frog jumps in - plop!

sowhat 15y ago

More food for SJ worshippers.

bfrs 15y ago

To me Zen seems like a lot of vague mumbo-jumbo. It can be interpreted any which way you want, making it sometimes seem wise and profound. The Buddhism I learned is quite simple and clear. It just boils down to two Golden Rules: 1. The Golden Rule: Treat others as you wish to be treated. 2. The Golden Mean: Everything in moderation, nothing in excess. and the related commentary as to why these are good policies to follow.

davidw 15y ago
Another rule I think makes sense in the world is a sort of temporally shifted golden rule: try and leave things better than when you found them to do unto future people what you would wish them to do had they gone before you.
radu_floricica 15y ago
This could be Dunning Kruger effect at work ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect ). From what I know, there isn't much (any?) major debunking of zen from people who've studied it closely, the way it's easy to find on Christianity.
mechnik 15y ago
Zen first flowered in Japan during the Kamakura period because it appealed to samurai as a no-nonsense approach to dealing with that time period's problems (i.e. Mongol invasion) Over the years, the mumbo-jumbo factor accrues, but there are always reformers who try to keep Zen practice relevant (e.g. Shunryu Suzuki).
Jach 15y ago
Re #1: what if you're a masochist?
Estragon 15y ago
No, it's a lot more than that. It is a practical method for awakening to aspects of life which most people hide from. Though you wouldn't know it from content-free, gossippy BS like in the OP article.

mmphosis 15y ago

Wake Up! Life is transient Swiftly passing Be aware The Great Matter Don’t waste time.

bobtm 15y ago

So he was an atheist. It would come as a shock to a number of Apple fanboys in the US. Edit : so downvoters think a buddhist is not an atheist ? or that it would not shock anyone in the US ? or what ?

pbhjpbhj 15y ago
I don't know why people have downvoted you but ... Buddhism doesn't contradict there being a deity and some Buddhists worship figures as if they were gods and certainly consider some to have supernatural powers. So it would seem based on the story here that you've not a strong starting point. Perhaps he was a deist/agnostic/atheist/apatheist I don't know or particularly care. As to your second assertion, how is it relevant to peoples regard for the devices/software he was party to? How is that line of enquiry pertinent to HN?

xavoy 15y ago

Wow there is a lot of misinformation here, especially about Zen. If making beautiful things is encouraging attachment then I guess all of the Zen poets and painters weren't (and aren't) very Zen either. Nor are the architects, florists or writers. And to say that he wasn't or couldn't be a Buddhist simply because he had imperfections and flaws? What?! Also, look up Vimalakirti. You don't need to renounce the world and material possessions to be a 'good' Buddhist, whatever that is.

mrmasa 15y ago

Let me clear a couple of basic things related to this issue. The origin of Zen comes from greater vehicle Buddhism. In Buddhism, we have two main derivatives: greater vehicle Buddhism and small vehicle Buddhism. Small vehicle Buddhism devotedly focuses on what Buddha done to reach nilvana. So, they execute tough ascetic training in shrines. But, as we know, not everyone can execute such training because of many reasons. So, greater vehicle Buddhism was born. And Zen was established in China by indian Buhddist, Daruma because it was heretical in India. After Confucianism became major religion in China, Japan was the successor of Zen. This is the history. This story is pertially closed to the origin of Christianity. Zen is the practice everyone can do. Controlling anger, relieving oneself from anxiety, and exploring answers inside, not outside. That's all. The meditation is one of the methods. We can do it everywhere. One of the key concept in Buddhism is "changing ever". Everything is unstable. And, I realize that one of the Jobs's greatest management philosophy is to release his past. This philosophy is very closed the above concept in Buddhism. As we get old, we easily stick to our past achievement. But, it doesn't mean anything, even will be bottleneck for us to step forward simply because everything changes, which also means everything is imperfect. I think this is why Jobs used to said "the death is the great invention" because we are forced to step forward by death. I think it's not about religious thing, it's about philosophy every one should have. For me, it's not important whether Jobs is a kind of Buhddhist or not. He taught us "to release past". That's a most important thing.

rms 15y ago

The kind that believed meditation was something he did sometimes.