The Zennist

Are Buddhists suffering from the Mandela Effect?

I am beginning to come to the conclusion that Buddhists who insist that the Buddha denied the self or the ātman which, by the way, is now in the English lexicon, are suffering from the “Mandela Effect” which is a kind of false memory.

"In 2010 this phenomenon of collective false memory was dubbed the "Mandela Effect" by self-described "paranormal consultant" Fiona Broome, in reference to a false memory she reports, of the death of South African leader Nelson Mandela in the 1980s (when in fact Mandela died in 2013), which she claims is shared by "perhaps thousands" of other people. Broome has speculated about alternate realities as an explanation, but most commentators suggest that these are instead examples of false memories shaped by similar factors affecting multiple people, such as social reinforcement of incorrect memories, or false news reports and misleading photographs influencing the formation of memories based on them” (Wikipedia).

Perhaps a bit more clear, those of us who are familiar with Chic-fil-A are surprised to learn that the actual spelling is, Chick-fil-A, or that the carbonated drink Dr. Pepper actually has no period after the r. It is always spelled Dr Pepper.  The most notable example of false memories was the Salem witch trials.  It concerned a group of children called the "circle girls" who testified, for example, to witnessing community members flying on broomsticks and other things like commanding insects to drop nail and pins into people’s mouths so that they ended up in their stomachs.  As a result of this false memory phenomenon, 20 defendants were convicted of witchcraft and subsequently executed.  After these horrible executions, some of the children publicly recanted their statements.

I have been in many debates over the years on the subject of ātman.  Almost everyone is adamant that the Buddha denied the ātman.  And then I asked them where exactly did they read this and could they please provide a reference.  As expected they bring up the “no-self” or “nonself” which in Pali is anattā and in Sanskrit an anātman.  But this term is always used in reference to the five grasping aggregates/pañcupadánakkhandhá which are without a doubt anātman.  In other words, the Buddha is saying that we are not the aggregates.  They are not our self or anātman.  Is this a denial of ātman? No.  Here is a fairly typical passage.

“Bhikkhus, form is nonself [anattā].  What is nonself should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus:  ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my  self.’ Feeling is nonself... Perception is nonself...Volitional formations are nonself...Consciousness is nonself.  What is nonself should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom:  ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my  self’” (S. iii. 22–23). 

So, what is this saying? It is saying the five aggregates such as form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness are not who I am. They are not my self, hence, anattā. This is not by any stretch of the imagination a denial of my self or my intrinsic nature or ātman.  The passage is only saying don’t mistake what is not your self, for your self.

The Buddha’s message is quite simple.  Don’t attach to what you are not.  These five constituents are not who you are which is the ātman.  Said again, we should not regard as our self or ātman  that which is not our self (anātman).  We are not form.  We are not feeling.  We are not perception.  We are not volitional formations.  We are not consciousness.  All these are not our self.  "You should abandon desire for whatever does not belong to  the self" (S. iii. 78).

I tend to think a good case can be made that most Buddhists suffer from Mandela Effect.  They’ve managed to read into Buddhism something not there!

Resolving the pond-ripple duality

Many years ago, on the land where I used to live and study the Dharma, there were several ponds nearby.  Occasionally, when the pond I visited was calm and still a slight breeze would cause ripples. On other occasions even a few rain drops would naturally cause a slight rippling effect on the pon

I learned from my pond watching that the pond, as a body of water, was more fundamental than the ripples which would arise and disappear on its surface.  This is also not unlike a physicist understanding that an unbounded field is fundamental whereas bounded particles are not.  But I took all this one step further.  I believed that what is more fundamental is the unconditioned, boundless pure Mind, not the thoughts which are conditioned (conditioned in the sense of being temporal, arising and ceasing).

Early in my Zen practice, zazen taught me that all thoughts (you might also include feeling and the imagination) arise from a hidden source.  I was aware of thinking, that is, raising thoughts and being aware of their cessation.  But I still did not know the fundamental source of all this, namely, the boundless pure Mind.  I only knew these thoughts. Call me a thought maker!  I realized that I still lacked direct insight into the most fundamental.  We can call it the boundless pure Mind or the “source” or some other name. 

Zen I discovered is about becoming one with the boundless pure Mind.

Now, what is a Zen master? He or she is someone who has a direct and sudden intuition of the boundless pure Mind which is field-like.  After awakening, this person is still aware of particle-like thoughts arising and ceasing.  But now, those thoughts which are like ripples on the pond’s surface, are realized to be configurations of Mind.  In other words, a true Zen master fully knows that all the arising and ceasing thoughts are the shapes of boundless pure Mind which neither arises nor ceases.  This is who we are fundamentally.

We must go beyond the group

So far the “new world order” which shows itself in the form of globalism has been spiraling down into a kind of psychological abyss where the inner life of the individual is turned completely outward toward the “group” which serves to validate the individual’s life who is nothing without the group. 

We can see this in the form of [group] “identity politics” in which the individual loses their inner life such that they belong now to a group that is concerned, for example, with race, ecology, gender, language, religion, etc.  As individuals they feel more or less oppressed when outside of the group.  It is only through the group—a commonality of experiences—that one believes they have value where oppression is not felt as much.  Such people require a safe space where the group can gather sharing relationships with other group members. 

In Buddhism, one’s individuality is not ignored for the sake of the group, even a Buddhist group or the typical Zen center.  It is chiefly concerned with the inner life of the person.  Furthermore, the inner life is enhanced and brought to one’s awareness by living alone; distancing oneself from others so that the adept can work on the inner person through meditation.  It is also a retreat from our former habits that are connected with others and their dynamics which can become, at times, negative and corrupting.

Over the years, I have been around a number Buddhist groups, both Zen and Tibetan in which even these groups can act to retard personal growth and progress.  I know others have had similar stories.  Such groups help us to feel good as if we have accomplished something very meaningful when all that we have actually done is touched the surface of Buddhism.  However, the surface is not enough.  We have to go much deeper and beyond our group.  

Going deeper into our inner life

Our thinking about religion can be programmed and channeled in such a way that we find it an oddity of the past that, for us, is of little or no value.  Regrettably, this is the truth of modern life. 

How we got to this mindset seems altogether irrelevant.  The important part we tell ourselves is there is no ultimate reality other than what is discoverable in this world through our senses which boils down to Darwinian fitness.  Yes, we are here to fuck and reproduce ourselves.  That’s the prime directive. 

Still, there are some of us who don’t share this frame of mind in such a degree.  We are aware that from a deep, unknown substratum in us arises our thoughts and emotional reactions, internal dialogue, and many other things called our ‘inner life’.  This inner life, we recognize can be hornet’s nest at times or pleasurable.  We can spend much of our inner life in worry and fear of the future.  This same inner life can also be doubtful or credulous.  It can be hesitant to take a chance or follow blindly.  Gathering this all up, we would like to bring some peace to this inner life of ours; to control it in some way, at the least to bring a sense of calm to it.  It is right here where Buddhism, the religion, enters.

The Buddha is one who sees true reality including the many dangers that lie before us in this present life of ours which lead us away from true reality.  The greatest danger for us is to thirst and attach to what we truly are not this being our transitory psychophysical body and the world perceived through it which is ever changing. 

The religion of Buddhism is trying to teach us that our inner life is on the wrong path when it thirsts and clings to what is not who we really are which transcends this mortal coil; moreover that it is incumbent upon us to know true reality which lies hidden in the inner life but, nevertheless, can be discovered by us with a great deal of effort.

The main problem that always awaits us is convincing ourselves to look deeper into our inner life, so deep that we break through the wall of conditioned existence and meet with our true self which we will at once recognize and be further amazed by how we missed it although it was always there.

More on breath meditation

The Buddha said that in and out breathing are bodily and are thus bound up with the body (M. i. 301).  In light of this, any practice or exercise dedicated to following the breath doesn’t lead to the transcendence of the corporeal body. 

Still, with the mindfulness of in and out breathing while we are sitting in zazen the breather who seems attached to in and out breathing is not fundamentally bound up with the body although he or she might believe otherwise. 

The breather is the mindfulness or recollection (sati) of before (parimukha) the breathing—not attention directed at the breath or simply following it.  This is all very subtle.  There is a shift from awareness of in and out breathing to awareness of before the breathing.

Although some might argue with me and say this is not the Buddha’s practice; rather it consists of putting our awareness around (pari) the mouth (mukha), I would argue that this is far too literal and still bound up with the body.  Mindfulness or awareness has to be situated before the breathing which is not bodily.  In other words, mindfulness stands before its object, namely, the breath and the body.

 

 

 

The place of the Brahmin in Buddhism

Of the source of the true religions of the world we can look to the Vedas and then Buddhism which goes to the heart of the Vedas and reveals their unmatched truth which for the seeker is easier to recognize. 

Looking at the twenty-sixth chapter of the Dhammapada, “Brāhmaṇavaggo” (transl., The Brāhmin), the first verse in this chapter reads:

Having undertaken the effort, cut off the stream of suffering. Dispel sense-pleasures, Brahmin! Having realized the end of conditioned things, you know the uncreated, Brahmin!

Here we see that the Brāhmin is a knower of the uncreated (akata) this being nirvana.  In order to attain nirvana, the Brāhmin has realized the end (S., kṣaya) of conditioned things.  In the commentary to this particular verse, conditioned things means the five khandhas or aggregates which make up our psychophysical body.

The Brāhmin is no different than the Buddhist Arhat insofar as he, like the Arhat, has reached the end of all conditioned things (i.e., transcended the psychophysical body) standing face to face with the unconditioned this being also nirvana or the uncreated.

In light of this, the Buddha doesn’t appear to have any animosity towards Brāhmins of this type.  In fact he tells his monks,

“I am a Brāhmin, one to ask a favour of, ever clean-handed, wearing my last body, incomparable physician and surgeon.  Ye are my own true sons, born of my mouth, born of dhamma, created by dhamma, my spiritual heirs, not carnal heirs” (Itivuttaka, IV, i).

The Buddha is a true Brāhmin because he can distinguish between the created perishable and the uncreated imperishable.

Approaching enlightenment through sensory consciousness and concepts

Intrinsically, we have the Buddha-nature. But knowing this is still only a matter of faith.  It is not enough to save us.  We still have to actualize this mysterious nature face to face. Those who tarry in the world of sensory consciousness and concepts, resting on their faith in the Buddha-nature, are only prolonging their stay in samsara. 

The first part of the adept’s spiritual journey is learning what sensory consciousness is and concepts.  Sure, it sounds easy just like a book about bicycle racing makes it seem so easy until you enter your first race (I remember that).  But it is not.  The adept is addicted to sensory consciousness and dealing with Zen Buddhism through concepts.  That has to change.

Going to a Zen center or for that matter any Dharma center is not going to help all that much as regard direct insight into Buddha-nature.  The adept’s huge problem is expecting the teaching to fit within the world of sensory consciousness and, secondly, wanting to learn new and interesting concepts about Zen.  This can easily lead one astray not to mention hopping from one Dharma center to another or taking a trip to Japan or Katmandu in the belief that this will help.

It is important for the adept to realize at a gut level that awakening to their Buddha-nature is best done alone and in retreat away from other people who are a distraction.  And yes, it takes time to get to this level when we actually do it.  One first has to understand the peril of sensory consciousness and approaching enlightenment through concepts.  Seeing our Buddha-nature is not a sensory attainment.  Nor is the concept of realizing Buddha-nature the same as realizing it.

Western Zen is closer to Dogen's Zen

In a way I am surprised by the expansion of Soto Zen in the West and not surprised.  First of all, I am surprised by Dogen’s popularity and those Zennists who spend their time reading his interpretation of Buddhism which I dare say falls into the typical way Japanese people think which according to Hajime Nakamura is phenomenalism.

[T]he Japanese are willing to accept the phenomenal world as Absolute because of their disposition to lay a greater emphasis upon intuitive sensible concrete events, rather than upon universals. This way of thinking with emphasis upon the fluid, arresting character of observed events regards the phenomenal world itself as Absolute and rejects the recognition of anything existing over and above the phenomenal world (Hajime Nakamura, Ways of Thinking of Eastern Peoples, p. 350).

On the other hand, I am not surprised, because in the West we have been brainwashed to take the world that we live in to be the true world.  There is none higher for us.  In this regard we are like the Japanese.  Likewise, our westernized Zen doesn’t want to pull back the veil of illusion.  The illusion is fine—we’ll get used to it.

Of course, many Japanese Zen masters didn’t think the way Dogen did.  It fact, I would place Dogen in the minority—maybe even a minority of one.  Japanese masters like Bassui 抜隊 were the equal of the greatest Chinese masters some of whom Dogen had contempt for.

For Bassui there was an absolute.  It can only be found by penetrating through the phenomenal veil to its fundamental non-phenomenal essence which is unconditioned.

Having been part of the Soto tradition that paid hardly any attention to Dogen, I sometimes think that Soto ignored Dogen or maybe even rejected him. Keep in mind that Dogen's Shobogenzo was not published until the nineteenth century. Prior to that it was kept in some dark Soto library and not necessarily studied. It is only recently that his Shobogenzo has been popularized in the West.

Plain old zazen (meditation) helps

Once awakened to the absolute our hero who is now called the Buddha returns to teach those who are capable of understanding him.  As we might expect, his mission is not an easy one.  Words can point us to familiar objects that we have seen since our birth.  But how can words point to what we have no acquaintance with?  Alas, few are capable of understanding what the Buddha is trying to reveal.

So fast forwarding to the present, a Zen master asks a group of people, “What are your thoughts made of?”  They have no answer.  He then asks them, “What moves your corporeal body to and fro?”  Again, they have no answer.  Now he tells them to go home and think about this and try to see, personally, what thoughts are made of in addition to what moves the corporeal body back and forth.

Some of the group after they leave the temple, won’t give this much attention.  They have to get home to their families or see a friend.  Some will work on it, but not for long.

Next week a few people return to the temple.  They have no insight into the problem given to them by the Zen master earlier.  Even those who really worked on the problem have little to say. 

The teacher sits still for what seems like ten minutes.  Then he asks the group, “Did you find out what your thoughts are made of and what moves your body around?”  Everyone is quiet.  The teacher laughs.  Then he said, “Your thoughts blocked you, isn’t that right? including that body you are entangled with which you brought to the temple, right?”  Nobody has anything to say. 

The Zen master then says, “This is what clinging does.   Let me explain.  All of you cling to thoughts so much so that you can’t see what your thoughts are made of.  It is the same with this corporeal body of yours that came out of your mother’s birth canal.  Clinging to it as you are in the habit of doing, spiritually blinds you.  The more you cling to it, the blinder you become.”

At the end of the day, I can assure the reader that this group will not awaken to what their thoughts are made of or what moves their body to and fro although it is the same thing.  They cling far too much.  They need to back off.  And this is where meditation—plain old zazen—can help them where they learn to just observe their thoughts without clinging to them and immobilize the physical body standing back from it so to speak.

Where theology and Buddhism meet

The modern Western understanding of religion is bluntly, terrible.  One would be forced to say the reason for this terrible state of affairs is a lack of understanding just what theology means from an enlightened perspective in which religious practice is the direct realization of theos or the divine.

Theos, which is a special word, has to point beyond words and the mundane.  In this regard, what it points to is both unspeakable and unimaginable.  We cannot explain it sufficiently to show it nor can we with our imagination, imagine theos.  The idea of some super being or super boon-giver is repugnant to theos.

If there is a barrier that we have difficulty overcoming it is the world that is created by our senses and the natural intelligence that we are born with which has to cope with it, including our corporeal body.  This intelligence is limited to Darwinian fitness.  Making matters worse for the understanding of theos, whereas our sensory world is filled with enumerable facts which are things that have actual existence for us, and we could even say are useful, too, theos is never a determinate fact.  It lies beyond our sensory nets, in other words.

What we are left with in theology are abstract concepts and vague descriptions. To be honest, our position is absurd because theos is neither a concept nor describable except to give a vague account in words and play metaphysics.

Does all this sound Buddhist?  Yes it does.  You can bet your bottom dollar on that.  Theology doesn’t escape the Buddha’s teaching.  Theologians, even with great faith, face a barrier that will not even allow faith passage.  Faith is not enough! 

In the teaching of Zen, even with our faith we must still pass through that barrier/check-point 関 if we are to see theos or tathatā both of which are the ground of being, the very substance of all that we perceive, including our thoughts.  And we can converge with it.  In Christianity converging with theos is called theosis.  There is not a dime’s worth of difference between the realization of theos and tathatā.  Only the unawakened would believe such nonsense and make a division where there is none possible.