Unfortunately for Stoicism, we no longer have tradition of practice from the Greeks up to the present. All we have left are some of the books. Recommended is (of course) Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations.

No comment as to Zen readings, but I would like to point you to this:
“What’s worth producing? We’ve imprisoned ourselves with our obsession for producing and consuming changeable pleasures and changeable selves, and yet there’s the possibility of using change to escape from this prison to the freedom of a happiness transcending time and space. Do we want to take advantage of that possibility, or would we rather spend our spare time blowing bubbles in the sunlight coming through our prison windows and trying to derive happiness from their swirling patterns before they burst?”

Check out Alan Watts audio lectures for more on zen/tao and the ego in general. Fascinating stuff.

I’m down with some stoicism, being of the INTJ mindset myself. I’ll have to check out some more resources on it though.

Do you have an inkling to synthesize the Stoic and the Zen into an ERE practice? ;-\ Stoizen? Zenoic?

I’m a student of Tao, Lao Tzu’s Tao Te Ching having given me the most direct and base access to self/other/world of any concept, tool, or practice I’ve ever engaged.

I occasionally read or listen to Alan Watts’ material (as suggested by Robin above), but he kind of seems level(s) above me / inaccessible on many points. I have skimmed his books What Is Zen and What Is Tao, trying to compare / contrast Zen and Tao for myself, unsuccessfully. I haven’t connected with Zen; is that the expectation? Is the question pre-answered? ;-\

I would say Buddhism also eliminates the ego through active rationality. I have not studied Zen but Tibetan Buddhism specifically the Gelugpa tradition. In this form of Buddhism they believe that all things are merely labeled and all things are impermanent. However, it is our mind that labels things and gives them a sense of permanence. In the Gelugpa tradition debating is a fundamental aspect where one has to argue the true nature of existence. Here is a video of some monks debating http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEN7kWJzL1g
It is through this realization that all things are impermanent that one realizes the self is also impermanent.

What about Jesus Jacob? He was not much of a consumer. He didn’t even own a place to live. Definitely didn’t have a ride except for his grand entry the week before they killed him and that colt was borrowed. He wasn’t into savings either though. When asked to pay taxes he had one of the disciples catch a fish and find a coin in it for the tax man.

Not sure we will find retirement in the Bible. But a lot of the ideas you cast are compatible with principles in the Bible.

I am an ENTJ and I do not know what the draw is for Zen buddhism.

I think the unifying principle of both Zen and Stoicism is their utter devotion to reality in the present moment. Both strive to shed past regrets and negative ideation to fully appreciate the present moment. Both accept things as they actually are perceived, without questioning the underlying subject/object problems that are the hallmark of post-Kantian epistemology.

I am an ENTP and find both schools of thought (and practice) congenial to my own Thomistic-oriented Catholicism, though Zen somewhat less so than Stoicism because of its anti-rational approach. St. Thomas Aquinas “baptized” Artistotle’s philosophy; and Aristotle was a realist (i.e. he held that we can know objective reality as mediated by our sense perception) whose ideas would probably be compatible with much of Stoicism. I would hazard a guess that neither Aristotle nor Thomas would have been so irenic toward Zen because both believed contemplation was a thoroughly rational act involving full use of logic and the human intellect.

Jacob,

You may wish to consider a study of Vipassana, a slightly different version of Buddhism than Zen. The emphasis here is on meeting all of life’s joys and sorrows with acceptance through insight meditation and mindfulness. Your comments about “no mind” are spot on – nothing is personal.

For more information see: http://www.spiritrock.org/ in Woodacre, CA.

For free downloads see: http://www.dharmaseed.org/teachers/ .

For a good book see: Jon Kabat-Zinn: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_2_5?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=jon+kabat-zinn&x=0&y=0&sprefix=jon+k .

Vipassana is somewhat different than Zen.

Note, I am not affiliated with any of these people. But I have found insight meditation a wonderful compliment to my intention to simplify and slow down. In fact I just finished my morning meditation and yoga before I decided to see what you are thinking about today.

The goal of eliminating the ego seems unreachable for most, and unnecessary. Mindfulness practices, whether rational or meditational or both, help us rise above consumerism because they help us discern our true needs and determine what if any material things will help us fulfill them.

I find what’s most helpful in combating consumerism is not necessarily tough-mindedness but learning to enjoy the free (or cheap) joys of life: exercise outside, talking with a friend, cold water, libraries and museums, helping the less fortunate, etc.

This is a creative use of the strikethrough!

Like others here I was initially drawn to stoicism, and there is some worth in some of the writings. But all in all, unless you are crazy iron willed person like Jacob, I found it to be largely worthless in terms of both insight and application. ENTP here.

I can’t believe no one has mentioned Stephen Batchelor. His work on Buddhism is probably the most coherent and useful approach I have ever found in terms of a philosophical/spiritual framework with which to engage with the world.
Here’s his most known book.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1573226564/?tag=oildepletio03-20

But there is also some really great info if you comb through the talks on his website and on dharmaseed.
http://www.stephenbatchelor.org/stephen%20talks/talks.html
http://www.dharmaseed.org/teacher/169/

@Jacob

One year after this post publication, are there more conclusions you want to share?

I took a course in Buddhism back in my college days, and dabbled briefly with Vipassana (that was a disaster!).

Somehow the standard explanations that are used missed the mark. But Buddhist ideas are not exclusive to them — many people have discovered them and use different words to characterize what they have found.

Oddly enough, one of the most useful explanations of Buddhist ideas I found in a children’s book set in Denmark. In “The Wheel On The School”, the little girl (who is the main character) when she needs to think deeply about something or even just to calm herself looks into her wooden shoe. When she talks to her old-lady neighbor, this girl finds out that the neighbor does the same thing.

This is a version of the Buddhists’ no-thought and one I find works very well for me — usually just by picturing the insides of a very plain shoe and occasionally by actually looking in mine. Usually I don’t even do it for very long, but it really does a nice job of quickly clearing out emotional baggage.

A common issue that we all encounter when learning something new is assuming that it is all new and foreign. A quicker way into a subject AND one that creates a firmer foundation is to connect new things into what we already know or are aware of (even if that awareness has been subconscious).

Things wanted by the ego are often no longer of interest once they are obtained. It sounds like the Stoics shift their objects of interest to ideas and logic, while the Buddhists seek to quiet the voice that is eternally wanting something. Both ought to work well to lessen the power of consumerism dogma.

Personally for me the dynamic of striving and achieving is especially pleasurable and I do not intend to forego it. For me at this moment in my life, establishing boundaries and rules to keep it going in desirable directions is the optimum approach.

Zen Buddhism as a nasty cult, exploitive, authoritarian and foolish. Foolish because the practice does not give the results claimed for it. Check http://www.thezensite.com/MainPages/critical_zen.html for many essays highlighting predatory sex, financial exploitation and other scandalous behavior. Even the venerable D.T Suzuki is exposed.

On another note, I’ve read quite a few retire-early guidebooks and Jacob’s manifesto is by far the best- it stands alone. Sometimes I read a chapter again just for the pleasure of his clear thinking. Bravo!

The ideas from Buddhism (and also from sufism and christian mystics and hinduism) about the absence of a permanent individual entity, and the “practice” of zen, are strongly related to the ideas of western psychology about “Flow” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)
, which refers to being fully immersed in an activity, forgeting oneself to some degree.

I believe that the detachment generated by the stoic reasonings makes it easier to have the mind in a state favourable for “flow” or zen “practice”.

A detached mind can easily pay full attention to what’s happening in the moment, to direct perception, in contrast to a mind with fears and worries about the future and regrets about the past.

By the way, another philosophical concept that points to the notion of the absence of self is the absence of real free-will: http://phys.org/news186830615.html

Practice of meditation may most commonly be done in sitting pose, in a quiet place, and for longer periods of time. But this doesn’t need to be so. The act of meditation is the practice of attaining a clear and present mind, and while perhaps easiest to do so under ideal conditions, it can be also be practiced during a drive, while washing dishes, or while talking to a friend.

Attaining “enlightenment” would be silly if it could only be maintained while in sitting pose! It is like saying you can only use karate in a dojo while wearing a gi. What are you going to do when you need to use it on the streets?

Meditation is nondenominational and non-religious. The goals may be guided by particular practices and religions but the study and practice and benefits of it are universal.

As for Zen Buddhism, the original teachings of it are to be introspective and discerning of IDEAS on their own merits as decided by your intellect and “inner eye,” that is, your true self. The problem sometimes, which lies with all religions, is that PEOPLE who practice it bring their own baggage to it. But it is what you take from it.

On the topic of Jesus, I have tried many churches, but the level of social coercion (Westboro Baptist Church anyone?) built into the idea of proselytizing and evangelism really turned me off from churches. While I embrace many teachings of Jesus, the delivery mechanism needs work.

I think they are both pragmatic philosophies that can help one deal with the rest of the world. The one bit of criticism I have for philosophers like Marcus Aurelius is their dry attitude toward sex. I think that’s where Epicurus was a bit more enlightened than those that championed the other Hellenic schools of thought.

I think the mindfulness component of Buddhism is great. I have yet to fully embrace mindfulness, but from what I hear it can lead to a great deal of happyness.