The Zennist

Getting gung-ho about Zen

Practice in Zen often means pushing ourselves to enlightenment or in Soto Zen, doing zazen as much as we can manage, letting our Buddha-nature naturally emerge.  The other alternative is to read some Zen books and do nothing other than what it takes to stay alive in sound health, happily following the yellow brick road of Darwinian fitness.

Both approaches, it is reasonable to say, involve some kind of beneficial, purposive activity.  But the required purposive activity can easily amount to wishful thinking with a few halfhearted attempts at zazen.  Or turn into “do nothing Zen” which is a sham serving to hide the fact that we are nothing more than a couch potato who likes to read koans once in a while. 

But what if we decide to get gung-ho and really go after enlightenment, pushing our self night and day?  We can become skeptical.  Will this kind of effort suffice?  On the same note, we can excessively question such an undertaking until we rob ourselves of any and all enthusiasm to enter the crucible that may take us one day to yonder shore of enlightenment.

If we finally decide to get gung-ho pushing our self we just can’t do it blindly.  There has to be something else we are pushing towards.  To push our self, properly, means to look, inwardly, for pure Mind, that is, mind which is unstirred or unagitated rather than our familiar mind which is always disturbed and changing—the monkey mind. 

Pushing then involves the purposive activity of looking deep within for pure Mind every waking hour no matter if we are cutting firewood, making a pot of coffee, rolling a cigarette, doing zazen or going on a ten mile hike.  I would call this the way of Occam's razor or basically, keep it simple stupid.

We also have to do this in isolation to get as close as we can to our finitude and mortality feeling as if death is always hovering over our shoulder and the only way out of this difficult situation is to see pure Mind.  Yep, this is not easy.  But the history of Zen informs us that the path is almost always difficult.

Rebirth and getting over the Newtonian hump

Over the years I have met very few Western Buddhists including Zen Buddhists who fully accept the idea of rebirth, that consciousness (vijñāna) does not die but is, in fact, born again in a new embodied condition based upon certain karmic propensities (this idea being contained in the 12-nidānas).

Also, I found that in discussions with many Western Buddhists they don’t believe in first-person out of body experience reports or first-person near death experience reports even when the evidence is quite good, including results of the late Dr. Ian Stevenson's reincarnation research of children who reported remembering a past life.  Their position is quite skeptical and not without a deep-seated, unconscious bias that privileges the mechanistic or Newtonian world view which rests on reductionism, determinism, reflection-correspondence view of knowledge (that knowledge is just a reflection of objects outside of us) and materialism.

The idea that, according to the Buddha, our consciousness embodies itself and upon the death of the organism finds a new embodied condition is quite unbelievable for most people.  We prefer, "I came from a blank state and will return to it.  There is no life after death."  But Buddhism also wants us to know that this consciousness that transmigrates is an attribute or vibration of mind which is the substance of reality—what our imaginal reality is made from.

It is almost mission impossible to try and move the Newtonian cult out of the university where it has been around for a very long time.  We still like the dark mechanistic world.  Despite that somewhat bleak outlook I do see more and more evidence that the Newtonian, clockwork world is giving way to a break in the von Neumann chain.  The break in the chain, where all physical devices are links in the chain including even our brain, has to occur when finally matter gives way to the mystery of the extra-physical mind which is not a link.  This mind is who we are.  It is also deathless.  It does survive physical death.  By realizing it we come to the end of blind, uncontrolled rebirth.

 

Looking into the human mind

In order to receive the mysterious Zen transmission that is outside the Zen narrative of words and their shifting meanings we have to first look inward to the human mind.  We can't use the mind like we do in school.  We really have to look at it as our subject—it is a landscape of sorts albeit a mental one.  Here, and only here will we discover our true nature.  It won’t be some new idea that comes to our attention but something much different.

As we begin to look into the human mind we soon find that there is no place for a unique self-nature—I mean we don’t see one.  What we fail to recognize is the human mind is only an attribute of this self-nature we are looking for just like ripples and waves are an attribute of water. 

We must not confuse this self-nature with who we are right now.  We represent a history of a psychophysical organism that was born on such and such a day and time.  The self-nature that we are trying to see first hand is, in a word, antecedent to this organism—our original face. 

Despite the subtlety, this is where we have to begin our journey.  We have to turn to the human mind and there begin to look for this mysterious self-nature.  Believe it or not, part of you will recognize it, suddenly, in the time of a finger snap, when it appears.  But you cannot project your idea of it—you will never see it by that method.  Such a way only clouds up what shouldn't be clouded.  The more we project—the more clouds.  Our true nature is like seeing the clear blue sky when we have gone through all the clouds. 

When words become the experience

The four slogans of Chan or Zen are pretty much the basis of Zen although Soto Zen would argue since Dogen rejected kensho.  They are as follows:

• A special transmission outside the teachings
• That does not depend upon written words
• Directly points to the human mind
• Seeing one's true nature and become Buddha.

Somewhat ironic, those new to Zen are forced to ignore the second slogan.  By this I mean that those new to Zen are forced to understand Zen through written words since they are not awakened (i.e., they have not had kensho).  Even for those who practice Zen at a temple or in a training monastery even they have to understand Zen through written words.

So what’s the problem with written words? 

Words are inadequate to express the fundamental truth of Zen Buddhism, nor can they describe kensho which is to directly see our true nature. Short of kensho, this means that our understanding of Zen does, in fact, depend on words—and it shouldn’t.  As a result, words and what they mean become the experience of Zen while kensho gets lost. 

By words becoming the experience of Zen, Zen gradually gets turned into something else that isn’t Zen insofar as it doesn't transcend the five skandha of material shape, feeling, perception, volitional formations and sensory consciousness.  In Western terms, the spatiotemporal world is not transcended; we are still depending upon it which keeps us in samsara.

Christianity can be the younger brother of Buddhism

The difference between Christianity and Zen Buddhism for me when I was in my twenties was that the basis of Christianity seemed to rest mainly upon the impossible belief that the dead body of Jesus after he was laid in the tomb somehow was reanimated and became immortal.

Zen Buddhism in this regard was much easier: What is immortal is spirit—never the flesh since it is composite and a dependent origination.  This view appeared to chime with the other Christian view that Jesus was put to death in the flesh and made alive in the spirit (1 Peter 3:18).

Unfortunately, the bulk of Christians take what can only be described as the implausible view, i.e., the resurrection of the flesh.  Buddhism takes the plausible view as did another kind of Christianity believing that spirit is immortal.

“Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life” (Galatians 6:8).

Wrongly taking up and defending the implausible view Christianity became an unsystematic religion unlike Buddhism.  Whereas the practice of Buddhism consist in penetrating through and superseding the world of flesh until the questing spirit passes into the realm of pure spirit (the awakening), Christianity falls prey to the flesh.  It is almost as if it wants the flesh to turn, magically, into spirit having all of its benefits with none of the shortcomings attributed to the world of flesh such as the fact that flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 15:50).  This is the mindset of wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

Christianity certainly had to potential to be great,  to be the younger brother of Buddhism. But instead, it turned into something convoluted and certainly unsystematic.  Because of this, those former Christians who decide to examine Buddhism are certainly confused and will not likely succeed in Buddhism. 

The good news, Christianity can be rebuilt to be systematic and spiritual.  But, seriously, it ain’t going to happen; not because it is difficult but because Christians still think about how to gratify the desires of the flesh.  These Christians will fight a protracted war against those who champion spirit just as the materialists of this age wage war against life, itself, that is, the animative principle (ātman) that is immortal and prior to all conditionality.

From theory to practice

Concerning the view of practice with regard to meditation it is at first theoretical which can involve a great amount of  careful study to get the adept to a point where he or she understands what the goal of meditation is.  It is not just rote learning such as memorizing the words of the Buddha.  Nor is it just sitting like a bump on a log.  It is much more. 

We have to learn what we are trying to achieve inwardly.  The path is not external.  While it’s about seeing our true nature or the same, mind before it is stirred and disturbed (in its pristine state) we have to be thoroughly convinced that this is the right target.  If we are not fully convinced we will not become true practitioners.  We will never cross the sea of birth and death to see that immortal land.

In my own example, it took about four years to finally be convinced that the goal is seeing my pure Mind, directly.  Logic and reasoning were helpful, but I had to make the leap, so to speak, into the mystical abyss.  I had to see this mysterious pure Mind first hand.  When we get to this point we have passed beyond the theoretical.  We are now true practitioners.  Jōshū became such a practitioner when he said:

“Even with a seven-year child, if he is superior to me, I shall follow him and beg for his teaching.”

At that time his thirst was not directed to the outward temporal life or the flesh but, instead, to direct comprehension of spirit, that is, pure Mind which was still hidden deep within him.

Today, people are not all that interested in seeing who they really are.  They don’t seem all that concerned with existential questioning.  It is like their minds have been taken over by some terrible demon.  In all of my born years I have never seen anything quite like it.

The ultimate arbiter of metaphysical theories

One may think of metaphysics to be about the structure and meaning of reality as a whole.  Metaphysics can explore reality using logic (also mathematics), reason, and empirical observation. But the ultimate arbiter of metaphysical theories is Zen or dhyana or the same, direct intuition of ultimate reality.

On the question of intuition, I have blogged on intuition before which for me is the better definition of dhyana.

Dictionary meaning of intuition: the act or process of coming to direct knowledge or certainty without reasoning or inferring: immediate cognizance or conviction without rational thought: revelation by insight or innate knowledge: immediate apprehension or cognition (Merriam-Webster Unabridged Dictionary).

What we have called in the past “mysticism” really has to begin with intuition which is the only way, as far as I know, of gaining direct access to the fundamental nature of reality.  This would be the accepted Buddhist position.  This falls somewhat in line with Bertrand Russell’s two kind of knowledge of truths, viz., intuitive and direct and that which is derivative and indirect which later became knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description.

Of course Russell was not a Buddhist monk whose mind was aimed at trying to see his true nature which would be kensho.  Nevertheless what he had to say can easily be put into Zen.  We can separate the intuition of our true nature from derivative and indirect knowledge which is certainly only descriptive. 

I certainly like this distinction.  It serves to make the Zen adept eventually give up derivative and descriptive knowledge which doesn’t really accomplish kensho.  That can only be done through intuition which is probably one of the most difficult tasks a human can take take up to know the meaning of reality as a whole.

Overcoming our delusions

There is no liberation without a setting free of that which was imprisoned.  In Buddhism, realizing our Buddha-nature is accomplished by removing that which is empty and illusory which makes our Buddha-nature seem absent or hidden but worse, makes what is empty and illusory seem real—too real. 

In this inverted state (viparyāsa) we cling to the unreal and reject the real.  As a consequence, it becomes difficult, if not impossible for us to seek and to find the pure Mind, i.e., our Buddha-nature insofar as our pure Mind is entirely covered over by thought-constructions, hidden inside an illusory body (one we believe to be our default self).

Our proper Buddhist education has to begin with reversing our long and deeply held deluded view of what we believe to be reality because, to be frank, it is totally wrong.  It’s like believing the sun orbits the earth, refusing to believe otherwise. Is this a kind of delusion that begins from birth?  The answer is yes, it is a delusion insofar as it is held with a very strong, unconscious conviction despite the evidence going counter to it such as the fact that things are always changing being in this regard mere appearances in which nothing is substantial.

This is the fact that those new to Buddhism must face.  It is a fact that they can nod their heads to but never actually live as if this is reality. Nevertheless, to reiterate, all things are only appearances or māyā being a kind of duplicity.  They are not actually real—they are only relatively real insofar as we value and cling to them treating and utilizing them as being the only reality for a small period of time.  As long as we continue on this wrong track we remain deluded.  An interesting aside, Karl Jaspers proposed 3 criteria for delusional beliefs in 1913: 1) the fixity of belief; 2) incorrigibility; 3) impossibility (e.g., Muhammad didn't plunder or have anyone killed). 

The third or 'impossibility' is our acceptance that the world we live and die in is the only reality when it is not.  The further science looks within, so the speak, like the Buddha of old, it sees a much different reality.  It is Mind which is the matrix of all things.  

 

 

My brief Buddhist understanding of the world according to Hoffman

The world we see out there is real as an experience for each of us but it doesn’t exist apart from our experience in the way that we imagine it does.  Brains have not evolved to see true reality.  In other words, Darwinian fitness doesn’t build a brain that sees true reality.  Rather it builds a brain to help us survive and reproduce.  It's about survival strategy—not truth.  

Given this, our believed true perceptions of a world out there are actually non-veridical, i.e., they don’t coincide with true reality which, by the way, is an important part of the Buddha’s teaching—the conditioned world is not true reality.  Neither the table nor chairs we see in front of us are true reality nor is our experience of them in anyway absolutely true.  And that goes for the house we just bought and the SUV we drive to work. 

Our belief in a space-time Darwinian world with its objects is a useful fiction as are the bodies we inhabit and use to survive and reproduce in this  world.  Our normal, everyday perceptions of the world are non-veridical which again, the Buddha is trying to teach us is the fact of conditioned existence, i.e., samsara.  Material shape is not who we are, nor is feeling, perception, volitional formations and even sensory consciousness.  Who we really are needs no name but we can use names like Buddha-nature, atman, pure Mind, unconditioned Mind, and even Dr. Donald Hoffman’s excellent term “conscious agents” which is a guy worth studying.  Hoffman, in my estimation, is as close to the vision of the Lankavatara as science can get.   As with the Lanka, he takes away the rule of object permanence.  It is a construct of conscious agents which come first. 

So, your reading assignment is:

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20160421-the-evolutionary-argument-against-reality/

http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/ConsciousRealism2.pdf

http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00577/full

And YouTube if your prefer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqDP34a-epI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oadgHhdgRkI

Feel free to explore Donald Hoffman on YouTube.  There is a lot there.  What I see in Donald Hoffman is a way to give Buddhism the scientific credibility it needs.  Buddhism doesn’t have to change anything.  If it all works out the way I think it will, we are ready for a quantum leap into a new reality.  To use Hoffman’s term, higher conscious agents are about to absorb our world. 

Behind the facade of a borderless society

When I see Buddhists fall into the subject of “open borders” or a “Buddhism beyond borders” and other subjects like “globalizing the modern world,” a red flag goes up.  Just recently Soto Zennist Brad Warner did a blog on “Securing our Borders” saying:

“So if we accept that even our most fundamental borders and boundaries are illusions, shouldn’t we, as Buddhists, also accept the idea that “making any divisions is itself an act of motivated exclusion, serving the interests of maintaining power?” It certainly sounds a bit like Buddhism or non-dualism.” 

Buddhists who write this kind of stuff are really nothing more than dupes of the globalist agenda which is about absolute trade liberalization (otherwise known as free trade/FTA).  Now, here is why those like George Soros and other globalists like Peter Sutherland want people to believe that sovereignty is an illusion. Borders are outdated.

To make global trade liberalization work three essential elements are required: 1) the elimination of national regulations and laws; 2) the elimination of national borders; 3) the elimination of national currencies.  Without going into the history of the WTO (before that GATT), it should be obvious what has been going on since the end of WWII.  It has been to sell what is, essentially, “neo-monopolism” where a cabal of multinational corporations economically run and control the world through the BIS (Bank for International Settlements), the central bank of all central banks which is accountable to no one and runs the world economy, presently. 

Eventually, sovereign states with their individual cultures, economic structures and currencies must be eliminated which leaves us with a one world borderless society where the moneyed cabal run everything and the rest become little more than slave workers of nothingness.  But all this leads to macro-social degeneration as predicted by none other than Karl Marx in 1848 who said:

“[T]he protective system of our day is conservative, while the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone. . . . that I vote in favor of free trade."

Free trade has already led to destabilizing effects in Europe and the United States in the examples of long-term economic stagnation (“secular stagnation”) and long-term under employment (“underemployment equilibrium”).  Globalism, in many respects, is a new economic experiment modeled somewhat after Russian Communism—but an experiment that is certainly doomed to fail with negative global consequences unless it can be stopped in its tracks.

Yes, there is something profoundly evil going on—you can feel it in your bones. This blog is simply meant to give the reader a little peek of what is going on behind the facade.  It’s also a warning to Buddhists to think twice before they write nonsense about a borderless society.  Presently, we are moving towards greater social antagonism.  Ironically, the cabal who brought us the WTO after WWII inadvertently planted the seeds of its own destruction.