3 ms·
> My understanding (and some points in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chan_Buddhism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chan_Buddhism echo it) is that Chan/Zen Buddhis
by mnk47 3y ago
> My understanding (and some points in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chan_Buddhism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chan_Buddhism echo it) is that Chan/Zen Buddhism is a descendant of Mahāyāna Buddhism and Taoism. In that way, it is itself a Taoist religion.
It is still problematic, for the same reason that a translation of Christian work by a Muslim or a Mormon with no background in Christianity, in a language they're not familiar with, would raise eyebrows.
- vitiral 3y agoIt feels less problematic than those cases due to those religion's own views on truth and divine prophecy. Christianity largely views Muslim/Mormon views as a kind of Heresy. Toaism/Buddhism don't really map to this kind of thinking IIUC. I would also counter that a Muslim or Mormon's view of the Bible would probably be very useful, if for no other reason that they would have a alternative but still reverent lens on it; vs an intellectual's which contains little or no reverence. I found a Jew's (Stephen Mitchel's) translation of Jesus's writings to be very enlightening indeed!