Where are they coming from?

It is hard to put this idea into words, but I shall try!  Over the years on various Buddhist forums I have noticed that everyone has their own idea what the Buddha taught, but they never lay it out in a coherent systematic way.  If I want to find out where they are coming from, that is, what they believe Buddhism or Zen to be, they have to be engaged in a debate and even with a long debate, where these people are really coming from is never clear.

In the big picture, coming from my perspective, Gautama’s awakening consisted of personally realizing the unconditioned, i.e., nirvana.  The difficulty he faced of realizing this was that he was relying and depending upon the conditioned to realize the unconditioned.  So, what is conditioned? It is the psychophysical body (pañca-skandha 五陰) and the world (loka).  Given this, then teaching such an awakening will prove very difficult if not in most cases, impossible.  Not everyone has the karma to realize the unconditioned.

Have I ever met anyone who agrees with this?  Maybe on this blog but outside of it, not that I can remember.  Now if I could piece together where I believe people are coming from let me first say that most people who take up Buddhism and Zen tend to be more or less irreligious and agnostic; nor do they care about theology which is the analysis, application, and presentation of the traditional doctrines of a religion or religious group, in this case Buddhism.

With this in mind, they believe the Buddha taught emptiness as a kind of negative simplicity and the denial of a soul or ātman.  They also believe that he taught all things are interconnected.  Here we see no mention of the unconditioned which is nirvana, which is unlike the conditioned which is never other than in samsara.  These same people do not believe in an afterlife and rebirth.  They are fundamentally immoral and most always depressed in one degree or another.  This, in a nutshell, is their idea of Buddhism and Zen.  It is nihilistic and a corruption of Buddhism and Zen.

Comments

[clyde]

Yeti; Coy is avoiding my question: Why is transmigration of consciousness (soul) important to you? This isn’t a question about what the Buddha taught, but more personal. How does the belief benefit you?

[n. yeti]

Clyde:

Let’s rephrase this, your beliefs are confused.

More to the point you suddenly became coy on the topic when challenged, fearing to ever actually state a position about what you do believe (which you have already adheres broadly to Stephen Batchelor’s heretical distortions), when it became obvious your position directly contradicts the scriptural canon and every past realized master. It is pretty obvious the only Sutra you have studied is the heart sutra (you once said as much), maybe the Lotus judging by your background. This is why you are nice person but really very stupid. You go around doing a lot of zazen and bragging about your time spent in Zen Centers but you lack wisdom and insight to break beyond the conceptual barriers you have about rebirth, karma, and emptiness. Some day you might realize as the Soto teacher Koun Franz once said, in my opinion quite wisely, “it isn’t about you.”

Because you are confused about the Tathagatagarbha (and in fairness it is very easy to become confused, especially given your deep karmic obstructions), all you have is a view. In other words it is your word vs the Buddhas and countless past Bodhisattvas you somehow astonishingly managed to have ignored during your long career in all those Zen centers, while convincing yourself you have coursed the fourth jhana (lol). Amid all this passive aggressive wiggling around and lip service to the Buddhadharma in a degenerate age, as far as I can see you basically maintain that the Buddha is a liar regarding rebirth and consider your own karmic limitations to be the end of the matter. It is very rude to say this but that makes you a punk ass bitch in my opinion.

I have tried, even breaking the precepts by speaking rudely to you in order to strike directly at your thickheaded pride, which I tell you stinks like a festering boil. Others have noticed it too. But it seems you are determined to cast away the opportunity to save yourself from becoming dead weight those who actually do have faith in the Buddha. Yes I am coming right out and saying you are choosing to be a blockhead and a burden on all Bodhisattvas who have ever vowed to forestall nirvana until every sentient is liberated. I have more compassion for you than you will ever know. Even when I call you a blockheaded dunce, I have compassion. However, you are determined to cling to conceptual views and unless you right your path while there is still time, evil destinies will eventually befall you. The road to the hells is paved with No Harm stickers, my friend. Be well.

[clyde]

Yeti;

Nihilism?! Not me. Again, you seem confused about my beliefs.

As to NDEs, they prove that people near death have interesting experiences. So do people who take psychoactive drugs. It proves nothing about transmigration of consciousness. (Why not just say “soul”?)

Frankly, believe / don’t believe, it’s not important to me, but it seems important to you (& Zennist). Why is that?

[n. yeti]

Zennist:

I think you are getting to the heart of the matter regarding NDE.

The problem as I see it is not in the body of data but the apparent lack of resolve by many in the medical community to accept this data as worthy of investigation.

I have no doubt that many accounts of NDE are biased or frankly made up. But if one looks at the similarity of the experiences, and the mere fact that they can be recalled at all in a sizeable minority of cases, is a very compelling reason to take another look at the primacy of mind.

If the body were not mind-made, how on earth would it be possible for a flat-lined patient who is revived to store and access memories of the experience via the brain? It makes no sense. If one understands mind comes before the body, it makes perfect sense how these impressions can be recalled once the patient is revived and brain activity is restored.

[n. yeti]

Clyde:

You are certainly entitled to your beliefs. If you wish to fall back into nihilism and a lower birth after all your good deeds are spent, it's a pity but who can stop you?

As to the Lancet article, there is far more to it. These are hundreds of medically documented cases of people with flat EEG (no brain activity, unless maybe sub-cellular) and clinically dead who continue to experience phenomena after the body is dead.

Maybe you don't call that transmigration, but the body of evidence is more than a mere belief system. Transmigration of consciousness is the most natural of events. To deny it is kind of strange, to be honest.

Especially since you have claimed gnosis of the fourth jhana. Your view therefore is a bit more pernicious than someone who is merely questioning the principle of transmigration.