The Zennist

The foremost ones

An interesting discourse, the Aggañña Sutta (A. ii. 80) is about the beginning (agg) knowledge (añña) of the castes.  It also happens to be a somewhat humorous putdown of the Brahmin caste who claim that their lineage goes back to the god Brahmâ which makes them always superior to others.  But according to the Buddha, all castes are the same when it comes to doing good and bad things.  The Buddha says, “Both dark and bright qualities ... are scattered indiscriminately among all four castes.”

The Buddha then goes on to tell a story (which is more myth like) which shows how beings de-evolve from the Abhassara Brahma world; who gradually become more coarse and degenerate except for those who are restrained in body, speech and thought; who will attain nirvana in this very life.  (Brackets are mine.)

 10. 'There comes a time, Vasettha, when, sooner or later after a long period, this world contracts [dissolves]. At a time of contraction, beings are mostly born in the Abhassara Brahma world. And there they dwell, mind-made, feeding on delight, self-luminous, moving through the air, glorious — and they stay like that for a very long time. But sooner or later, after a very long period, this world begins to expand again [re-evolves]. At a time of expansion, the beings from the Abhassara Brahma world, [85] having passed away from there, are mostly reborn in this world. Here they dwell, mind-made, feeding on delight, self- luminous, moving through the air, glorious--and they stay like that for a very long time.

11. 'At that period, Vasettha, there was just one mass of water, and all was darkness, blinding darkness. Neither moon nor sun appeared, no constellations or stars appeared, night and day were not distinguished, nor months and fortnights, no years or seasons, and no male and female, beings being reckoned just as beings. And sooner or later, after a very long period of time, savoury earth spread itself over the waters where those beings were. It looked just like the skin that forms itself over hot milk as it cools. It was endowed with colour, smell and taste. It was the colour of fine ghee or butter, and it was very sweet, like pure wild honey.

12. 'Then some being of a greedy nature said: "I say, what can this be?" and tasted the savoury earth on its finger. In so doing, it became taken with the flavour, and craving arose in it. Then other beings, taking their cue from that one, also tasted the stuff with their fingers. They too were taken with the flavour, and craving arose in them. So they set to with their hands, breaking off pieces of the stuff in order to eat it. And [86] the result of this was that their self-luminance disappeared. And as a result of the disappearance of their self-luminance, the moon and the sun appeared, night and day were distinguished, months and fortnights appeared, and the year and its seasons. To that extent the world re-evolved.

13. 'And those beings continued for a very long time feasting on this savoury earth, feeding on it and being nourished by it. And as they did so, their bodies became coarser, and a difference in looks developed among them. Some beings became good- looking, others ugly. And the good-looking ones despised the others, saying: "We are better-looking, than they are." And because they became arrogant and conceited about their looks, the savoury earth disappeared. At this they came together and lamented, crying: "Oh that flavour! Oh that flavour!" And so nowadays when people say: "Oh thatflavour!" when they get something nice, they are repeating an ancient saying without realising it.

14. 'And then, when the savoury earth had disappeared, [87] a fungus cropped up, in the manner of a mushroom. It was of a good colour, smell, and taste. It was the colour of fine ghee or butter, and it was very sweet, like pure wild honey. And those beings set to and ate the fungus. And this lasted for a very long time. And as they continued to feed on the fungus, so their bodies became coarser still, and the difference in their looks increased still more. And the good-looking ones despised the others. . . And because they became arrogant and conceited about their looks, the sweet fungus disappeared. Next, creepers appeared, shooting up like bamboo. . . , and they too were very sweet, like pure wild honey.

15. 'And those beings set to and fed on those creepers. And as they did so, their bodies became even coarser, and the difference in their looks increased still more. . . [88] And they became still more arrogant, and so the creepers disappeared too. At this they came together and lamented, crying: "Alas, our creeper's gone! What have we lost!" And so now today when people, on being asked why they are upset, say: "Oh, what have we lost!" they are repeating an ancient saying without realising it.

16. 'And then, after the creepers had disappeared, rice appeared in open spaces, free from powder and from husks, fragrant and clean-grained. And what they had taken in the evening for supper had grown again and was ripe in the morning, and what they had taken in the morning for breakfast was ripe again by evening, with no sign of reaping. And these beings set to and fed on this rice, and this lasted for a very long time. And as they did so, their bodies became coarser still, and the difference in their looks became even greater. And the females developed female sex-organs, and the males developed male organs. And the women became excessively preoccupied with men, and the men with women. Owing to this excessive preoccupation with each other, passion was aroused, and their bodies burnt with lust. And later, because of this burning, they indulged in sexual activity. But those who saw them indulging threw dust, ashes or [89] cow-dung at them, crying: "Die, you filthy beast! How can one being do such things to another!" Just as today, in some districts, when a daughter-in-law is led out, some people throw dirt at her, some ashes, and some cow-dung, without realising that they are repeating an ancient observance. What was considered bad form in those days is now considered good form.

17. 'And those beings who in those days indulged in sex were not allowed into a village or town for one or two months. Accordingly those who indulged for an excessively long period in such immoral practices began to build themselves dwellings so as to indulge under cover. 'Now it occurred to one of those beings who was inclined to laziness: "Well now, why should I be bothered to gather rice in the evening for supper and in the morning for breakfast? Why shouldn't I gather it all at once for both meals?" And he did so. Then another one came to him and said: "Come on, let's go rice-gathering." "No need, my friend, I've gathered enough for both meals." Then the other, following his example, gathered enough rice for two days at a time, saying: "That should be about

enough." Then another being came and said [go] to that second one: "Come on, let's go rice-gathering." "No need, my friend, I've gathered enough for two days." (The same for 4, then 8, days). However, when those beings made a store of rice and lived on that, husk-powder and husk began to envelop the grain, and where it was reaped it did not grow again, and the cut place showed, and the rice grew in separate dusters.

18. 'And then those beings came together lamenting: "Wicked ways have become rife among us: at first we were mind-made, feeding on delight. Call events repeated down to the latest development, each fresh change being said to be due to 'wicked and unwholesome ways'). . . [91] [92] and the rice grows in separate dusters. So now let us divide up the rice into fields with boundaries." So they did so.

19. 'Then, Vasettha, one greedy-natured being, while watching over his own plot, took another plot that was not given to him, and enjoyed the fruits of it. So they seized hold of him and said: "You've done a wicked thing, taking another's plot like that! Don't ever do such a thing again!" "I won't", he said, but he did the same thing a second and a third time. Again he was seized and rebuked, and some hit him with their fists, some with stones, and some with sticks. And in this way, Vasettha, taking what was not given, and censuring, and lying, and punishment, took their origin.

20. 'Then those beings came together and lamented the arising of these evil things among them: taking what was not given, censuring, lying and punishment. And they thought: "Suppose we were to appoint a certain being who would show anger where anger was due, censure those who deserved it, and banish those who deserved banishment! And in return, we would grant him a share of the rice." [93] So they went to the one among them who was the handsomest, the best-looking, the most pleasant and capable, and asked him to do this for them in return for a share of the rice, and he agreed.

21. '"The People's Choice" is the meaning of Maha-Sammata, which is the first regular title to be introduced. "Lord Of The Fields" is the meaning of Khattiya, the second such title. And "He Gladdens Others With Dhamma" is the meaning of Raja, the third title to be introduced. This, then, Vasettha, is the origin of the class of Khattiyas, in accordance with the ancient titles that were introduced for them. They originated among these very same beings, like ourselves, no different, and in accordance with Dhamma, not otherwise.

Dhamma's the best thing for people In this life and the next as well.

22. 'Then some of these beings thought: "Evil things have appeared among beings, such as taking what is not given, censuring, lying, punishment and banishment. We ought to put aside evil and unwholesome things." And they did [94] so. "They Put Aside Evil And Uwholesome Things" is the meaning of Brahmin, which is the first regular title to be introduced for such people. They made leaf-huts in forest places and meditated in them. With the smoking fire gone out, with pestle cast aside, gathering alms for their

evening and morning meals, they went away to a village, town or royal city to seek their food, and then they returned to their leaf-huts to meditate. People saw this and noted how they meditated. "They Meditate" is the meaning of Jhayaka, which is the second regular title to be introduced.

23. ‘However, some of those beings, not being able to meditate in in leaft-huts, settled around towns and villages and compiled books. People saw them doing this and not meditating. "Now These Do Not Meditate" is the meaning of Ajjhayaka, which is the third regular title to be introduced. At that time it was regarded as a low designation, but now it is the higher. This, then, Vasettha, is the origin of the class of Brahmins in accordance with the ancient titles that were introduced for them. [95] Their origin was from among these very same beings, like themselves, no different, and in accordance with Dhamma, not otherwise.

Dhamma's the best thing for people In this life and the next as well.

24. 'And then, Vasettha, some of those beings, having paired off, adopted various trades, and this "Various" is the meaning of Vessa, which came to be the regular title for such people. This, then, is the origin of the class of Vessas, in accordance with the ancient titles that were introduced for them. Their origin was from among these very same beings. ..

25. 'And then, Vasettha, those beings that remained went in for hunting. "They Are Base Who Live By The Chase", and that is the meaning of Sudda, which came to be the regular title for such people. This, then, is the origin of the class of Suddas in accordance with the ancient titles that were introduced for them. Their origin was from among these very same beings. . .

26. 'And then, Vasettha, it came about that some Khattiya, dissatisfied with his own Dhamma, went forth from the household life into homelessness, thinking: "I will become an ascetic." And a Brahmin did likewise, a Vessa did [96] likewise, and so did a Sudda. And from these four classes the class of ascetics came into existence. Their origin was from among these very same beings, like themselves, no different, and in accordance with Dhamma, not otherwise.

Dhamma's the best thing for people In this life and the next as well.

27. 'And, Vasettha, a Khattiya who has led a bad life in body, speech and thought, and who has wrong view will, in consequence of such wrong views and deeds, at the breaking-up of the body after death, be reborn in a state of loss, an ill fate, the downfall, the hell-state. So too will a Brahmin, a Vessa or a Sudda.

28. 'Likewise, a Khattiya who has led a good life in body, speech and thought, and who has right view will, in consequence of such right view and deeds, at the breaking-up of

the body after death, be reborn in a good destiny, in a heaven-state. So too will a Brahmin, a Vessa or a Sudda.

29. 'And a Khattiya who has performed deeds of both kinds in body, speech and thought, and whose view is mixed will, in consequence of such mixed views and deeds, at the breaking-up of the body after death, experience both pleasure and pain. So too will a Brahmin, [97] a Vessa or a Sudda.

30. 'And a Khattiya who is restrained in body, speech and thought, and who has developed the seven requisites of enlightenment, will attain to Parinibbana in this very life. So too will a Brahmin, a Vessa or a Sudda.

31. 'And, Vasettha, whoever of these four castes, as a monk, becomes an Arahant who has destroyed the corruptions, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained to the highest goal, completely destroyed the fetter of becoming, and become liberated by the highest insight, he is declared to be chief among them in accordance with Dhamma, and not otherwise.

Dhamma's the best thing for people In this life and the next as well.

32. 'Vasettha, it was Brahma Sanankamara who spoke this verse:

"The Khattiya's best among those who value clan; He with knowledge and conduct is best of gods and men."

This verse was rightly sung, not wrongly, rightly spoken, not wrongly, connected with profit, not unconnected. I too say, Vasettha:

[98] "The Khattiya's best among those who value clan; He with knowledge and conduct is best of gods and men."'

Thus the Lord spoke, and Vasettha and Bharadvaja were delighted and rejoiced at his words. (trans. Maurice Walshe).

Buddhism distilled

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but Gautama the Buddha put forth a substance theory or if you prefer a less challenging term, he puts forth an essence theory.  Incidentally, for me, this puts Buddhism into the realm of science insofar as the Buddha directly cognized a unique substance.  Let’s not forget what the broad definition of science is.  It is “knowledge or cognizance of something specified or implied” (O.E.D.).  

More specifically, such an awakening by Gautama whereby he became the Buddha was the cognizance of an all pervading substance which was not composed or asankhata/asamskrita, in contrast to the composed.  It also implies that the universe exists within a spiritual medium which is mind-like.  Even our most subtle thoughts occur within this enveloping medium, the substance or essence of which is only Mind (cittamatra).

About his ministry, to make a long story short, the Buddha tried to show composed things have no actual substance or essence.  They are empty and illusory.  More importantly, he taught that our psychophysical body is not the first-person or our authentic self, the self being the immediacy of substance which, in our unawakened human condition, we are unable to recognize.  Because of this, we are unable to distinguish our real self from our composed psychophysical condition which is the false self or anâtman.  This further leads to our rebirth into composed states where again we are unable to recognize our self in this encompassing deception.

In this context, the importance of meditation cannot be overstressed.  To put it simply, meditation, when accomplished, is the awakening to the universal substance that Gautama cognized.  The adept has passed through all fluctuations of mind to arrive at pure Mind itself which is irreducible.  At this arrival, one sees that Mind is free of suffering which has always been oneself.  One no longer blindly journeys (samsara), incomplete and ignorant (avidya) clinging to a false self which is composite.

Emptiness is not nirvana

Is realizing emptiness the same as the attainment of nirvana?  The simple answer to this question is no.  When the Buddha in the Pali Nikayas and Agamas talks about his awakening, emptiness is never mentioned.  It is the same with the Lalitavistara Sutra.  This is not to suggest that emptiness plays absolutely no role in working towards nirvana.  But nirvana is positive liberation even though it is sometimes explained in negative terms, whereas emptiness has several different uses depending upon the context.  

Interpreting emptiness or shunyata, for example, as absolute is certainly not without its problems.  This becomes an issue in the later evolution of postmortem Buddhism in which we see the leveling down of nirvana so that it almost becomes a kind of samsara.  This makes it possible for emptiness to enter through the backdoor as the new nirvana.  

Reflecting the older use of emptiness which serves as a special form of negation, Asanga describes it this way:

“Whatever and in whatever place something is not, one rightly observes that place to be empty of that thing.”

This early form is not unlike the Latin vacuus which denotes a vacancy of the object qualified, for example, an empty village.  I expected to find villagers.  But I can see there are none.  In another direction, according to Asanga anyone who asserts that emptiness is the negation of all has wrongly conceptualized emptiness.  On the same score, emptiness can be easily confused with abstraction which implies the mental separation of one thing from another.  When I say the all is empty, I am really separating myself from the all which confronts me. But this is not the proper notion of emptiness.

As a matter of consistency, even emptiness has to be negated insofar as it operates metaphorically (aupacârika) being, itself, just another discursive thought.  In this respect, emptiness is a tool for overcoming dependent origination.  It helps us to realize absolute truth or nirvana which transcends dependent origination (nirvana is the logical counterpart of dependent origination).

The quantum world of the Buddha

If we wish to learn about the so-called quantum world which is the basis of material things we have to look in the direction of what transcends all materiality which is a spiritual reality.  The basis of particles like electrons, protons, or atoms, for example, is immaterial and non-particulate.  Nothing is localized in this quantum world.  

The so-called quantum world is made up of quantum waves which are indefinite and infinitely spread out.  These waves can be thought of as interference patterns.  But nothing determinate or particulate.  In this wavy world lies the potential for our everyday world which is not yet born and certainly, not annihilated.  We might add to this and say this wavy world is empty of mass and energy.  If we had to be more precise as to what it is, all that we can say is it is a kind of raw, vital information.

This quantum world the Buddha would recognize and much more in which, to quote Max Planck, Spirit is the matrix of all matter.  His teaching would turn to the quantum world, pointing the way to nirvana.  In contrast to this, the Buddha would recognize our modern, material world to be non-spiritual—a world alien to sentiency; a world that does not care; a world that appears to be one of strict determinism in which spirit is of no use and death is final. 

Our modern world is still quite primitive.  Even though the quantum view of the world has basically overthrown the Newtonian world of classical physics and has undermined its morality that brought us the Holocaust, we still haven't managed to grasp the implications of such a world; we still continue to look at Buddhism through the tunnel vision of Newtonian mechanics and the morality that it inspired.

On being detached

Our original nature is not attached to phenomena.  Just as clay and gold are not attached to forms made of clay and gold, our original nature has never been attached to a single phenomenon.  

When we directly discover this nature for ourselves, we realize, for the first time, what non-attachment means.  We reflect that since beginningless time, our original nature has never been reborn into a single psychophysical body.  Given this fact, by discovering this nature, we also become detached in an instant.  This is what real non-attachment means.  Nobody can claim to be detached who as not directly apperceived their original nature.

If we fail to realize our original nature what does this mean for us?  It can only mean that we are still firmly attached to this psychophysical body of ours even though we might deny being attached to it a thousand times.  It also means that we are attached to the conditioned world since our original nature is unconditioned.  Being thus attached to the psychophysical body and the conditioned world we are always reborn into it.  This is samsara.

Insidious machinations

I asked myself today, “What does a failed Buddhist seeker do when they can’t intuit pure Mind?”  I didn’t have to wait long to find the answer.  I just looked at a few Buddhist forums on the Internet.  They are always well stocked full of failed Buddhists.  Putting what I found into a paragraph it goes like this:

Trying to cognize the essence of Mind or trying to attain nirvana is nothing more than an illusion—a fool’s errand. We cannot know anything, but we can stop desiring to attain pure Mind or nirvana. There is no spiritual mountain to climb and no paths that will take us to the summit.  The real problem is dissatisfaction which is born of our desire, of wanting things, even nirvana.  It is far wiser to give up desire than pursue what, in the end, will inevitably turn out dissatisfying.  

If we had to characterize this with a name, it would be radical agnosticism, that we cannot know.  And in the face of being unable to know (in this case know or cognize pure Mind) the best we can do is just stop desiring awakening.  It ain’t going to happen.

Despite all the Buddhist records we have, especially in Zen, of people awakening to pure Mind, our failed Buddhist seeker—the ultimate wimp—has to make sure others are poisoned by his foul and rotting ideas.  This is somewhat like reading about self-made millionaires, then trying to become rich, but ultimately failing, only to write a book that nobody ever became rich!

Let’s face it.  Not everyone can awaken to pure Mind.  Not everyone can become rich.  Not everyone can become a great musician or scientist.  Awakening is not easy.  But to suggest that striving to cognize pure Mind or realize nirvana is, essentially, a fool’s errand is the insidious machinations of a diabolical intellect.

 

Don't take the bait

The administrator of the Buddhist Forum, an Internet discussion group, introduces prospective discussants to Buddhism by writing stuff like this.

“The ancient Vedic society from which Buddhism emerged understood the self or ego as eternal and unchanging -- the true essence of the nonphysical body. But Gautama Buddha believed that nothing was permanent, and change was the only constant. Therefore, according to the Vedic definition of self, the Buddha concluded that the self could not exist. Buddhism has since then been strongly centered around the idea that there is no such thing as the self. The consequences of this one precept are multitudinous, and informs the entirety of the religion's canon.”

Is any of this true?  Well, let’s find out.  Regardless of the mention of âtman or self in the Vedas which, for example, could mean no more than breath in the Rg-veda, there is no explicit denial of the self by the Buddha in the Nikayas and the Agamas.  On the other hand, there is no scarcity of negation by the Buddha when it comes to the Five Aggregates or pañca-khandhas.  We are not to regard any aggregate as our self.  The common refrain for each aggregates is invariably: This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my  self/na meso attâ.  We might also think of the Five Aggregates as being the temporal or conditioned self whereas what is not the aggregates is the unconditioned, true self, which truly we are. 

The problem the Buddha realized is not with the self but with what common people (puthujjana) imagine the self to be which is never other than impermanent which leads to suffering.  This, we might say, is the self the Buddha tells his followers is not the self (anâtman), which is none other than the Five Aggregates, all of which belong to Mara the killer.  According to the Buddha, the real self is the island and the refuge (D. ii. 100).

Next, did Gautama Buddha believe nothing was permanent; that even nirvana was impermanent?  No he did not.  Nirvana is transcendent reality.  It is what lies beyond phenomena.

“Monks, there is a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded.  Monks, if that unborn, not-become, not-made, not-compounded were not, there would be apparent no escape from this here that is born, become, made, compounded.  But since, monks, there is an unborn ... therefore the escape from this here is born, become ... is apparent” (Udâna 80).  

Nirvana is also changeless (anaññathâbhâvi) and immortal (amata). It does not rest on any other (appatittha); it is infinite (accanta). 

What are we to conclude from all this?  Beware of Buddhist forums.  Often their bait appears to be Buddhism to those who have never studied Buddhism, but what is being taught is materialism.  Also, keep in mind, too, that what is not the self or anâtman, cannot attain nirvana.  Nirvana is only realized by the inmost self or in Sanskrit, pratyâtma.  Said another way, conditioned reality will never uncover nirvana which is unconditioned. 

The quiet revolution of 1939

Even in great Buddhist countries like Thailand a quiet revolutionary movement goes on below the public’s radar.  It is concerned with the place of self or, in Pali attâ (in Sanskrit, âtman).  The typical Western Buddhist doesn’t pay attention to this, despite its boat-rocking significance and lasting implications.  I know I have blogged this before, but permit me to bring this again to the reader’s attention. 

From the book of Paul Williams, Mahayana Buddhism (pp., 125–28), in 1939 the Samgharaja (lit., ruler of the Sangha) of Thailand, who is the head of the national Samgha, gave up the accepted Theravada Buddhist notion of Non-Self (anatta) and switched to the doctrine of the Self (âtman), insisting nirvana (P., nibbana) is the true Self.  Citing an unpublished dissertation by P. Cholvijarn, Nibbana as Self or No Self (2007) Williams quotes the following from Cholvijarn’s dissertation:

“[T]he uniqueness of the Buddhist doctrine of anattâ [not-Self] is realised once attâ [the Self] has been attained.  The Buddha discovered that nibbana is attâ and only by doing so, was able to say that the five aggregates are anattâ.  The anattâ doctrine of the Buddha is the doctrine of only Buddhism because the Buddha realised attâ that is different from conditioned dhammas.  Nibbana is the purity of an object, it is void of defilements [cf. the tathagatagarbha] and once it is reached there is no more clinging.  As purity, it must [be] situate[d] within an object.  That object is self.  Anattâ is a tool that the Buddha uses for [his] disciples to reject the conditioned dhamma and to accept nibbana.  If nibbana is anattâ, then, nibbana is to be rejected and there would be no purpose in practising the Noble Eightfold Path.”

This is very pithy stuff.  The Samgharaja helped to shed light on the notion of no-self/anattâ.  We should reject what is not the self, for example, the aggregates (pañca-khandas/skandhas)—never the self.  He realized that the Buddha taught his awakening to his followers from the standpoint of attained self or attâ, in particular, that conditioned things or dhammas are not the self/attâ, this lack of self in Pali being anattâ.  For the Samgharaja, I am guessing, this was a Buddhist version of the Copernican revolution that the German philosopher Kant described in his Kritik der reinen Vernunft.  

How much easier to explain Buddhism if we assume that the teaching of the Buddha revolves around the self and, at the same time, woe unto those who, in their ignorance, seek the self in the conditioned or deny it completely (e.g., the annihilationists/materialists). 

Without such a revolution no real spiritual progress can be made in Buddhism since adherence to the doctrine of anattâ or no-self, only includes the conditioned—not the unconditioned which marks nirvana.  How we get from the conditioned no-self to unconditioned nirvana has thus far not been adequately explained by the proponents of anattâ doctrine. 

Liberation of the first-person

Buddhism's interaction with the West, as I can see, is on three fronts: 1) the materialistic sciences; 2) Abrahamic religions; 3) psychology.  I hasten to add, by no means is this list exhaustive.  This interaction really involves Buddhism’s right to exist as a path of salvation for the first-person.  In this respect, Buddhism in the West should not become a tool of the sciences, the current religions, or psychology. 

What characterizes all three is that they are not paths for the first-person.  They could not care less about self-discovery or self-uncovering which, incidentally, is unique to Indian shramanic traditions like Buddhism.  For the materialistic sciences, the first-person is of no real interest.  Hence, no path.  When we look at the Abrahamic religions, they too are without a path.  Any value the first-person might possess must be subordinated to God.  The first-person is really of no value when compared with the greatness of God.  Psychology offers no path, either, except a path to normal, culturally sanctioned behavior. The first-person matters not.  It is behavior that matters.

Buddhism’s path brings to the West a new way of being in the world which involves a path that leads to the liberation of the first-person who is no longer ignored or turned into some thrall to be manipulated.

To make this clearer, the discovery of self or the first-person is not a matter of looking in a mirror and saying, “That’s me.”  Far from it.  The self is absolutely primordial.  It doesn’t appear in a mirror.  It is the substance of the universe which is unable to directly cognize itself which, as a result, is forever lost and overwhelmed by the phenomena which confronts it.

As this path is concerned, it is a process of the first-person objectively realizing the first-person (samâdhi).  This realization occurs by penetrating through the shell of phenomena.  This penetration and finding of itself then becomes a return-to-self.  In other words, the universal substance realizes that the forms before it, which seemingly vex it, are nothing more than a distortion of the very substance, itself.  From this new vantage point, the universe is Mind-only, mind and the first-person being the same.

How to spot a real Zen teacher

Q:  How do I find a true Zen teacher?

 A:  Most Zen teachers will tell you that a true Zen teacher must have verification from another true teacher and so on.  But then how do we know that any of the Zen teachers in this line really understand the Mind that Bodhidharma brought to China which is pure and undefiled?  Maybe their transmission has been more like adding water to milk until the milk is so diluted it's not even milk anymore.  Today there are few if any Zen teachers who actually understand that the Mind is the Buddha and that this is what Zen is all about—I mean finding this Mind for yourself.  For that matter, they don't understand koans either; including the fact that koans spring from pure Mind and point to it.  Since these Zen teachers haven't really discovered this Mind for themselves, in a profound way, Buddha Mind is almost meaningless for them.  They don't see how it operates in the koan.  If you collect all the sayings of the great Zen masters of the past, all their sermons point to the Buddha Mind.  They may call it different names like One Mind, pure Mind, or unborn Mind.  But it is the same thing as Buddha or awakened Mind.  I can say these teachers are transmitted because they recognize the supreme importance of pure Mind whereas today, Zen teachers are not interested in pure Mind.

Q:  Okay, let’s say I decide to check out a bunch of Zen temples in the U.S.  What should I look for to see if the Zen teacher is qualified to teach Zen?

A:  If it were me, I would looking for pure Mind.

Q:  But I don’t know what it looks like.  That is why I am looking for a qualified teacher.  Should I ask the prospective teacher what pure Mind looks like?

A:  That would be okay.  Listen to what he has to say.  Maybe he or she will just bullshit you hoping that you won’t press them too much for a real answer.

Q:  What else could I ask a prospective teacher?

A:  Ask a teacher that if he or she truly possesses the Treasury of the Eye of the True Dharma and Wondrous Mind of Nirvana, what did the Buddha transmit to Mahakashyapa besides just holding up a flower and blinking.  That should get their attention.

Q:  Do you know the answer?

A:  Yes, it’s easy for me after all these years but I am no modern day Zen teacher that is looking for students; nor do I particularly care for beginners who lack the necessary spiritual aptitude.  In the past I would send such beginners to Zen centers to get rid of them.  Today, I encourage them to get a good job, raise a family, and if, after that, they are still interested in Zen, read all my blogs. 

Q:  Well how about a little hint, then?

A:  Everyone is blocked by the Buddha’s flower and his blinking.  Then when Kashyapa smiled, many more became blocked by his smile.  Nowadays, Zen teachers are blocked by Zen’s external forms which includes everything from robes to zazen.  Giving you a hint, in light of this, depends a lot on how much you reject Zen’s external bullshit and look, instead, to what animates this corpse that you cling to out of habit.

Q:  I don’t think they teach that in Zen centers.  So, in other words, it is a waste of time to go searching for the perfect master.  But then what should I do?

A:  Every Dharma center I have been to is generally a buzzing beehive of politics and often scandal.  Nothing really comes out of such a mess in the way of awakening to pure Mind.  One seriously has to avoid such Dharma dumps.  It is better to live alone in a cabin in the forest for a couple of months searching for pure Mind.  Such a life clears up your head making the required intuition possible.  A person has to face themselves alone with little if any distractions.  Then they have to look inside their noggin for the total purity that is Buddha Mind (believe me, it’s there).  This search has to be relentless—you throw everything into it as if it were a life and death matter.  Then, you might get lucky.  Make your friends dead Zen masters and the Buddha.  Don’t be afraid to learn Buddhism without a human teacher clad in a Buddhist robe.  There are other kinds of teachers.  

Q:  This sounds discourageing.  What do you mean by other kinds of teachers?

A:  Don’t believe Buddhas are dead or a kalyanamitra (spiritual benefactor) is always flesh and blood.