The Zennist

A different kind of koan

If we think of the unconditioned Mind of the Buddha to be like an unbounded field, and our own mind, together with its thoughts, to consist of extended disturbances in this unbounded field which hides this field, how does one come to see, directly, this unbounded field?

This for me illustrates the difficulty of koans insofar as they are assumed to be skillful means for helping us to realize, face to face, this unbounded field.  Oddly, they all confront us with a verbal disturbance like “mu” (C., wu) which we can’t seem to push out of the way this being what Mumon calls the “barrier” or “checkpoint” 慧 which will only permit the unconditioned to enter the “no-gate” 無門, but not the conditioned.

Examining the problem a little further, our Buddha-nature, as a matter of faith on our part, doesn’t have this disturbance.  It is unconditioned.  But here is the problem: we have never seen our Buddha-nature which is what we are trying to accomplish with koans!  One more thing.  This verbal disturbance disappears into what?  We can only follow the disturbance to a certain point.  We have no direct intuition of the unbounded field into which it vanishes.

All that we can think of saying is that from this field, a verbal disturbance arises then disappears only to arise again.  We don’t seem to have any actual ability to follow the verbal disturbance to where it disappears—to enter this unbounded field which is the Buddha-nature.  We are only aware of more disturbances arising from this unbounded field as we speculate.

In my own example, I took a slightly different strategy.  I looked within for “pure Mind” knowing fully well that the verbal concept “pure Mind” was just a name or signifier for the actual unbounded field.  I was in the right spot but I was still disturbing the field unable to locate this pure Mind (another name for this field besides Buddha-nature).  It was only when I had thoroughly exhausted my strategies and I was empty of presuppositions was I able to enter.  Short of this my volition was at work trying to posit what I thought was this pure Mind.  With satori, this positing process suddenly stops but also we merge into the unbounded field in which things have not arisen.  Here is when we see the Buddha-nature or the Mind of the Buddha.

 

 

A bridge not yet made

From the Mahaparinirvana Sutra we can see that there are three kinds of Buddha-nature: (1) the potential Buddha-nature—not yet realized—which is in all living creatures; (2) the Buddha-nature developed by the right discipline in the analogy of transforming cow’s milk into butter; (3) the final or perfected Buddha-nature resulting from the development of the original potentiality.

Do Buddhists get this wrong?  Yes, they certainly do.  It seems they are more interested in saying what the Buddha did not say than what he said. 

Over the years on various chat rooms like the now defunct E-Sangha I argued from the position of the English translation of the Mahaparinirvana Sutra (tranls. Kosho Yamamoto) almost to no avail except that some people took up the banner and carried on, some of whom I suspect are still battling.  As Mark Twain aptly said, “It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” 

To believe that just because all creatures have the Buddha-nature this fact makes one a Buddha, requires that one cross a bridge when there is no bridge yet made.  Looking at the other side of this immense chasm is the perfected Buddha-nature.  Standing on this side, we only have the potential to become a Buddha.  The means is still absent—the bridge is missing, that is, the Buddha-nature developed through right discipline.

Few feel the urge to build that bridge.  It seems almost impossible for them.  But this is because most people are still enamored with the mundane world even in the face of great misfortune and tragedy.  They reason, why give up a sure thing for a dream?

Still, it is almost a cruel deception to teach people that they are already Buddhas; that they don’t have to develop this nature through study and discipline, or maybe that if they just meditate they will eventually grow into this nature.

Your original nature before you were born into this world

A famous patriarch of the Zen tradition once asked, “Before your father and mother were born, what was your original face?”  Of course this original face is meant to represent our fundamental Buddha-nature which transcends the conditioned world of moms and dads, families, households, towns, and nations, even the cosmos itself which looms above us on a dark, moonless night.

This is rather an unusual question to ask!  It is not a question that would come from Plato all the way down to the present age with its wise men.  This kind of question takes the typical Westerner a little time to get used to—to reestablish their bearings, so to speak.

Many, many years ago with I first read this question I was a little taken back by it.  Eventually, I began to see the wisdom of such a question.  It quickly takes the Zen adept to the territory of their own mind; there to look for this mysterious original face.

I have used it as the basis of a more direct and penetrating request: “Show me your original nature.”  Granted, that most anyone would be nonplused by such an almost rude demand it, nevertheless, serves to get to the core of the matter rather than just beat around the bush.

I am sure that most people would be tongue tied to be able to show me their original nature because they have never looked within, that is, looked beyond the internal chattering that goes on in their everyday, illusory minds.  To be in this condition and taking this limited mind to be all there is, is the sorry state of the human race.  This is why Zen is such an enigma.  Nobody knows where Zen is coming from because nobody has penetrated beyond their illusory minds.

For those who have met this original nature face to face, which is the light of Mind that moves these bodies around, it is almost impossible to convey to those who are only aware of the illusory mind, that there really is an original face and an original nature.  Zen is not for everyone.  Few want to see their real face.

Is there another alternative besides another illusion?

We fundamentally have the awakened or Buddha-nature.  It’s other name is ātman or in Pali, attā. 

"The ātman is the Tathagatagarbha.  All beings possess a Buddha Nature: this is what the ātman is.  This ātman, from the start, is always covered by innumerable passions: this is why beings are unable to see it" (Mahaparinirvana-sutra).

There is no need for us to create a Buddha nature or ātman.  It is already present in the way the air we breathe is.  We just don’t recognize it because it is hidden by karmic impressions including layers upon layers of programming which, as a consequence, take us upon various paths of deception so that we are always faraway from our true nature.  This means that we are in servitude to a complex matrix of ignorance in which the likelihood of escape is not in our favor.

The Buddha had no magic wand that he could wave and liberate the people of his time.  He was a teacher who instructed those who were his followers how they might come to recognize their Buddha-nature. 

In today’s parlance the Buddha taught his followers how to self-deprogram themselves which in a nutshell is about abandoning all that is not the ātman such as the conditioned five skandhas consisting of shape, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness. 

These five skandhas are constructs just like a clay pot is a construct of clay—they are empty of their own unique self-nature (e.g., shape-ness).  We might even call each one something like an “experession of ātman” which is not ātman or the same, an-ātman.  From this we could also say that these skandhas are not the Buddha-nature or Tathagata.  On the other hand, the Buddha-nature is not far from the skandhas; they are only the Buddha-nature’s configurations, so to speak like a wave is a configuration of water.

It is important that we acknowledge that we are, intrinsically, the Buddha-nature but also, instead of recognizing it, we wrongly attach to what is not this nature.  This grows into a dangerous habit that we have to learn how to counter.  We have to learn to self-deprogram and abandon desire for what is not our Buddha-nature.  The huge majority of people are not interested in doing this.  But what is the alternative except another illusion supported by delusion?

The underlying assumptions about Zen

There is a continuing pattern that seems to be ongoing since I first began my study of Zen just before 1965.  This pattern, no doubt, means that the underlying assumptions about Zen, including Buddhism, have not changed all that much over time.  The exact source of these assumptions is not, however, easy to pin down.  Still, there is a certain attitude modern culture has, the source of which  prevents it from treating Zen as it should be treated.  All is geared towards the external; not to the task of introspection and first-person knowledge much less gnosis or direct intuition.

Beginning in the 1960s, Zen was still very much a free spirit.  It didn’t enter academia the way the Frankfurt school did or existentialism.  The elitist academic mind couldn’t wrap its brain around Zen or Buddhism, in general, for that matter.  Anybody’s guess of what Zen was about was still unsettled—it couldn’t be dissected like some frog in a biology lab.  It still walked in a mystery leaving no traces; its sages were lovable, yet enigmatic characters like Kanzan 寒山 and his friend, Jittoku 拾得. 

In all frankness, I have to say that Zen is still like what it was in the 1960s despite the proliferation of Zen centers for Westerners who wish to learn how to meditate which, by the way, is an exercise that is common in all Buddhist traditions.  What makes Zen unique is its relentless insistence on kensho which is to say, we must awaken to our fundamental nature which transcends this mortal coil of ours.  In other words, Zen is telling us that we have to see what Gautama saw whereby he awakened and became the Buddha—nothing less.

This demand, if we can call it that for now, is alien to the modern disposition whose mind is still looking at the stars rather than within.  It is an immature and limited mind that appears to have bet the farm on salvation through empiricism insofar as useful knowledge can only be derived from sense-experience with the help of scientism.  Hardly a day goes by where researchers are close to finding some kind of anti-aging mechanism or drug.  Soon it will be one pill a day and you can watch yourself grow younger.  It is as if scientism is saying, “Nothing is going to stand in the way of our desires.  We can have our cake and eat it too.”

Trust me, with the exception of technology, we have not made any real inner progress.  A few people like me will hear the call while the huge majority can hardly wait to buy a house and start their Darwinian fitness adventure.  Yes, we are still an immature culture and likely to stay this way for a very long time.  Those of you who follow this blog will always be that small minority who were born into the world knowing it is a huge trap—but there is a way to escape.

It is probably better to rely upon our self

Neither the words of the Buddha nor Zen masters—nor by sitting in zazen for many years is the mysterious, ineffable goal of Zen revealed.  All this is just skillful means 方便.  Many times it helps a little, but sometimes it doesn’t help at all.  It depends upon the person, ultimately.  Are we capable of understanding Zen or not?

This can easily turn into a crisis where we might have to rely almost completely on our self.  For now, let’s say that we have found a teacher at some Soto Zen center.  But wait a minute.  Soto Zen found by Dogen Zenji doesn’t believe in kensho, that is, seeing our Buddha-nature which is one of the four slogans attributed to Bodhidharma which says: see one’s nature/kensho and become Buddha.

"Although he [Dōgen] accepted many of the tenets embraced by his peers, he objected to the term kenshō. To Dōgen this expression suggested at least two false dualisms—practice versus enlightenment, and "seeing" versus "True-nature." Accordingly, he criticized the famous line "see [True-]nature and become Buddha" from the stanza attributed to Bodhidharma. Although he acknowledged Hui-neng's sudden enlightenment, he also attacked the Platform Sutra for its endorsement of kenshō: "In the Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch are the words 'to see [True-]nature.' This work is a forgery...not to be trusted or used by any descendants of the buddhas and patriarchs." As is often the case with Dōgen, his stance can be seen as a creative refinement of Zen teachings, or a partisan attempt to discredit a rival lineage, or both” (Kenneth Kraft, Eloquent Zen: Daito and Early Japanese Zen, p. 92).

Dogen believed, essentially, that everything even impermanence is the Buddha-nature so why knock yourself out trying to have kensho—you’re already there!  Just sit and you’ll find yourself becoming a Buddha.  But Dogen’s Zen really doesn’t agree with Zen going back to Bodhidharma and through Huineng.  It doesn’t even comport with Buddhism.  Sure, we all have the Buddha-nature potentially but actualizing it is the problem which is why we can’t take chances with traditions like Soto Zen which deviates from traditional Zen.

So, should we continue to stick with our Soto Zen center?  It is probably better to rely upon our self and trying to awaken to our own nature. The Sixth Patriarch Huineng said, “If you know the mind and see its true nature, you then awaken to the cardinal meaning.”  Such a nature is the pure Mind that we instantly intuit when the illusory arisings of the false mind have suddenly stopped.

 

 

To get to the very essence of thoughts

Our thoughts are one thing but getting down the the essence of thought is quite another matter.  Most approach Zen never thinking that its goal is to get to the very stuff of thoughts.  In this regard, it really doesn’t matter what thoughts or concepts we play with.  The goal remains the same, to get to the essence of thoughts.  Supporting this, the Sixth Patriarch Huineng said: “True Reality is the substance of thoughts.”

But rather than go this far, the curious and Zen practitioners prefer to think about Zen, that is, to understand Zen only at the level of thought—not going deeper to the very essence.  So they buy a collection of koans such as the Blue Cliff Records or the Mumonkan and read these koans over and over for years.

When these people look into their noggins during zazen or just walking trying to figure out a koan they seem to always draw a blank.  They don’t realize that what is going on between their ears is like a vast restless ocean.  It’s all unceasing waves, that is, unceasing thoughts.  If these thoughts were to cease, suddenly, in about the time of a finger snap they would see the essence.  Moreover, they would discover who they really are.

"Successive thoughts do not stop; prior thoughts, present thoughts, and future thoughts follow one after the other without cessation. If one instant of thought is cut off, the Dharma body separates from the physical body, and in the midst of successive thoughts there will be no place for attachment to anything” (Sixth Patriarch Huineng).

This Dharma body is the essence or stuff that thoughts are composed from. 

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who have a copy of the Blue Cliff Records and the Mumonkan and believe that all these koans have nothing to do with seeing the essence of thoughts.  But where does such a belief lead?  What do such people think Zen is about?  All that I can say is such people are stuck on words and the thoughts which arise from going over words.  They harbor certain concepts about Zen which are hard for them to give up.

When is religion not a religion?

Reading about the influx of Muslims pouring into Western countries; and taking into account the West’s failure to acknowledge that religions can be substantially different from one another, the West has not adequately prepared itself for the inherent danger contained within Islam.

Unlike, in the example of Buddhism, the West doesn’t as a rule put an adjective in front of the word “religion”.  The West just assumes that religion is commitment or devotion to a system of beliefs—that’s it.  In this regard, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are just religions; they are all equal. 

While in Buddhism we would call Islam hiṃsā-dharma meaning a violent religion, the West avoids this kind of description, especially, in the general media so as not to offend Muslims who, unlike Westerners, take great offense at any criticism of Islam no matter how true or small the criticism is.  The Westerner risks, in fact, his life or some form of violence by a Muslim for being critical of Islam. 

Anger, for example, is a kind of virtue for a Muslim along with being oversensitive toward criticism, lacking self-responsibility, and showing zero tolerance and compassion for those outside of Islam.  Such behavior is strange for the Westerner and some would argue this is the behavior of a mentally deranged person.

So is Islam a religion from a Western point of view, or from a Hindu or Buddhist point of view?  Absolutely not, anymore than one might call Satanism a religion or Stalinism.  Dr. John R. Newman, a historian of religions says, “From the Buddhist point of view Islam is demonic and perverse, a perfect anti-religion which is the antithesis of Buddhism.”

Islam is not about peace.  Far from it.  Islam means submission (the root word of Islam is "al-silm" which means "submission" or "surrender").  This is little more than blind obedience to a warlord and his sword who teaches a false religion since it turns his followers into barbarians. 

Religion is intended as a means by which mankind comes to realize the higher life of spirit.  Only in the life of spirit is truth revealed, as well as compassion, and the deathless realm. Islam, in this regard, is a false religion which through fear makes people worse not better.

The principle

Most people who study Zen these days, even hardcore practitioners, think that Zen is all about living in the here and the now, even celebrating the mundane life.  As a result of this wrong view they cherry-pick Zen trying to find examples that comport with this 'mundane view' of theirs. Such people are lost.  They are so far from the truth of Zen it is laughable and sad at the same time.

These same people never think about what Zen master Dongshan Chu actually meant when he said: "But tell me, what principle does a Chan practitioner rely on?"  They just assume that Zen is all about being aware of  mundane things and the experiences of everyday life.  This might even be a good koan, “What principle does a Chan practitioner rely on?”

The principle that Zen/Chan relies on is seeing one’s true nature 見性 which is beyond the ambit of the mundane life.  Lacking this sudden attainment by which we see the principle there is no wisdom; nor the slightest chance of becoming either a Bodhisattva or a Buddha.  Mumon describes this principle when he says:

The attainment of this mysterious illumination [妙悟] means cutting off the workings of the ordinary mind completely.  If you have not done this and passed the barrier [関],  you are a phantom among the undergrowth and weeds” (Blyth, Zen and Zen Classics V. 4, p. 31).

Cutting off the workings of the ordinary mind is done completely and suddenly.  Only then does one pass through the no-gate 無門 being in the historic line of all Zen masters.

The coming of the idiots

Modern Zen Buddhism is not without its share of idiots.  They deploy their cunning, elementary school intellects trying to make Zen Buddhism look stupid.  They ask questions like this:

How do you detach from attachment without  attaching to detaching?

What this person forgets or is not interested in learning is that, intrinsically, all beings are completely devoid of attachments since they have, already, the Buddha-nature (the enlightened essence). 

If beings set about to seek this nature, which is hidden under a pile of obstructing illusions to which they are attached, their seeking is true detaching.  In other words, to seek for the Buddha-nature which is devoid of attachments is the actual process of detaching, that is, detaching from illusions which make the Buddha-nature seem as yet unrealized.

Back in the good old days before idiots and the Internet, if you were curious about Zen you could read a book or two; if you were really interested you could find a Zen temple or Zen center and study there or book a flight to Japan.  All has changed since that time. 

Now, if you want to find out about Zen you go to Reddit or a Zen center which is mainly populated by ‘snowflakes’ to use Chuck Palahniuk’s delightful, ironic term from his novel, Fight Club.  It refers to people who think that they are ‘beautiful and unique’ when most are idiots having turned into childish adults with no capacity for the sublime and, certainly, no self-awareness of just how ridiculous they are at times.  By the way, this is not a good strategy for even handling one’s basic, day to day mental problems.

Personally, I find it bizarre that sine people these days cannot seem to understand just how simple Buddhism is insofar as it is really about trying to get us to identify with the unconditioned which animates our corporeal body rather than always fixating on the conditioned, animated body with its 37.2 trillion cells.  Even Buddhist monks these days fail at grasping the simplicity of Buddhism which is like riding an ox in search of an ox.