@mattbutnot So I hit and missed my mark. I wanted to see how you reacted to the Huayan school, but I didn't mean to offend you with such a sophmore level gloss. Unfortunately it's the best talk I could think of off the top of my head that got across the core focus of this school--which is a hugely influential precursor to Chan, Pure Land, and Lotus Sutra buddhism--in a manageable time period. (1/3?)
@mattbutnot In my personal practice I very much believe that Buddhism is about the management of mental states through the cultivation of enlightened viewpoints with the goal of reducing suffering. I feel that the Pali-cannon and associated texts like the Visuddhimagga give a clear process for cultivating the appropriate lifestyle for achieving this. I very much agree in what translators like Stephen Batchelor are trying to achieve when he, to paraphrase, "removes the superstructure of religious practice to find the foundation" in texts. (2/3?)
@mattbutnot
Post Script
Now a productive manifestation of this agnosticism is, "What is Dukkha" and "Who is
liberated from Dukkha".
There is a fundamentally different answer to that in Mahayana, that I'm uncomfortable dismissing out of hand.
And thus I wanted to see what you--who seems to have a solid foot on the path heading towards one of the 84,000 gates in close proximity to where I'm aiming--thought.
Is Buddhism a mechanism for the reduction of personal suffering in one lifetime, or humanity as a whole?