zenten wrote:So are you saying that any Buddhist that is like you, in that they practice a secular form of Buddhism, must be a Zen Buddhist? Or are you saying they are just creating their own unique form of Buddhism?
I'm saying that they are of no formal school of Buddhism. Theravada and Mahayana simply can't handle purely secular philosophical sets, and Zen can only do so if heavily modified. One could still call it Zen after said modification, and that person would be right, as of the fundamental aspects of what makes Zen, Zen. However, it's more likely that such an individual is now just a non-religious Buddhist, holding only to the non-mystical aspects of the religion. I'm not saying they are joining a new school of Buddhism, I'm just saying that they are no longer a part of those traditional schools. In any case, I maintain my status as an independent Zen Buddhist because my focus is on meditation as a means to enlightenment. I realize I've gone a bit far in to my personal beliefs, but my only point was that the traditional schools of Buddhism are necessarily religious, though it's possible to be a Philosophical Buddhist.