Knowing diddly-squat about Mind

In John Blofeld’s translation of Zen master Huang-po’s sermons (The Zen Teaching of Huang Po) the term “Mind”, in the absolute sense, is used several hundred times.  Other books like Red Pine’s The Zen Teaching of Bodhidharma are not without numerous references to Mind in the absolute sense.  Here is just one example of how Mind is treated in Red Pine’s translation.

“Buddhas of the past and future only talk about this mind.  The mind is the buddha, and the buddha is the mind.  Beyond the mind there’s no buddha, and beyond the buddha there's no mind.  If you think there's a buddha beyond the mind, where is he?  There’s no buddha beyond the mind, so why envision one?  You can't know your real mind as long as you deceive yourself. As long as you're enthralled by a lifeless form, you are not free.  If you don’t believe me, deceiving yourself won’t help.  It’s not the buddha’s fault.  People, though, are deluded” (p. 11).

It is only when we get to modern Zen that teachers stop talking about Mind in the absolute sense.  What we begin to hear, instead, is the word “awareness” or “mindfulness” being used as if to suggest that awareness is some kind of profound state—and none of us are aware of awareness until we set foot into a Zen center to do some zazen!

But awareness should not be played up this way—not when Mind is more important.  To set the record straight, awareness, including mindfulness, is not unique to Zen or for that matter, Buddhism writ large.  Anyone who has been through boot camp knows all too well that awareness is key if you don’t want some Marine Corps DI or Navy Chief yelling at you.  Especially in the military, including the police forces, being mindful is how you survive.  Lose it—and you lose.

Personally, I have nothing against practicing awareness or mindfulness.  I do it all the time from being aware of opening a door to being aware of my thoughts.  But there is much more to Buddhism and Zen than just being aware.  One must have a direct insight into Mind, otherwise you ain’t doing serious Buddhism.

Of course, anyone can disagree with my previous comments about Mind and awareness which usually means the person knows diddly-squat about Zen or Buddhism.  Rather than continue, maybe they need to read this.  It is from the Sayings of Chung Feng (Chung Feng Kuang Lu).

“What is Ch’an [Zen]? Ch’an is the name of mind.  What is mind? Mind is the substance of Ch’an.  Bodhidharma came from the West and expounded only the direct pointing at man’s mind.  At first, the term Ch’an was not used, but the outcome of this direct pointing was the subsequent awakening (of followers of the sect).  In their questions and answers, that (which had no name) was referred to as Ch’an (for convenience’s sake).  However, Ch’an cannot be understood by learning or by a lucky chance.  When the self-mind (svacitta) is realized, either speech or silence, and motions or stillness, is unexpectedly Ch’an.  At the moment of this unexpected Ch’an, automatically the mind manifests itself.  Thus we know that Ch’an does not stray from mind and that mind does not stray from Ch’an.  Ch’an and mind are, therefore, two names of the same substance.” 

Comments

[Skeptic]

"Mind is the substance of Ch’an."

Substance? You are quite correct in that many Ch'an / Zen teachings hypostatize the 'Mind' and that practitioners of those traditions should be aware of this. It never fails to amaze me how little many who claim to practice Zen actually know about it's doctrine. At the same time, however, it must be clear that substantive essentialist teachings like these don't have 'diddly-squat' to do with the Buddhadharma.

[The Barking Unicorn]

"anyone can disagree with my previous comments about Mind and awareness which usually means the person knows diddly-squat about Zen or Buddhism."

"Usually" indicates you are sometimes disappointed in your expectation. So your arrogant sneer isn't true. Truth is always true.

That said, you are correct that awareness is not the ultimate goal. Awareness of everything - especially Mind and what it's doing - is the goal.

[Alex W.]

We could mention however that the word 'awareness' (if we can translate the Chinese word 'chih' 1st tone by awareness) has been used by Tsung-mi quoting Sheng-hui's famous sentence "the one word 'awareness' is the gateway to all mysteries".

My problem with the word 'awareness', often used in contemporary Dzogchen and neo-Advaita circles, is that Buddhist practitioners tend to reify it, making it into an object, or worse, to confuse non-dual primordial awareness with alertness, mindfulness or consciousness (vijnana).

A better but more technical term seems to be cognizing-emptiness used by a famous Dzogchen teacher, but it only refers to the cognizing function of the Mind, not to the origin and substance of phenomena.