The Zennist

Meditation: a meeting with Mind

If we think of meditation (dhyāna) as, initially, reflection upon thought (i.e., the activity of thinking), then its purpose would be to still thought, completely.  So now we need to inquire just what is the purpose of stilling thought?

In Buddhism, it is thought which arises from Mind, Mind being the fundamental essence or substance of the phenomenal world.  Buddhist teachers will use terms like pure Mind, one Mind, unconditioned Mind, true Mind, unborn Mind, etc.  All these terms point to the same thing, viz., ultimate reality or tathatā, the source of all conditioned existence which is, itself, unconditioned.  It is said, that death is barred by one who has achieved success in meditation.  I hasten to add that Mind is also luminous or irradiant. 

In the process of stilling thought we are susceptible, almost unconsciously, to using thought to achieve our aim of stilling thought in which Mind is realized.  But this would be somewhat like trying to stop ripples on a pond by attempting to pat them down!

In the deepening of our meditation, the stilling of thought becomes a possible bond or deception.  We are still involved in thought albeit subtle thought.  We have further to go.  Our aim is still something for thought.  This is why the form of seated meditation is inadequate.  It is a strategy of thought.  The sudden, absolute stilling of thought (no-thought) which reveals Mind always comes unexpectedly—it catches thought off guard, in other words.

I remember sitting in meditation in my abandoned copper mine or adit.  I could become very still the more I practiced so that I was used to being more or less very still.  But behind this was thought.  It was still the boss.  It was only when I went to my wits’ end that I was close to Mind where there was no-thought.

Without meeting Mind face-to-face, looking directly at it we are still in thought.  It is by faith that we know thought is a configuration of Mind and seek Mind.  Yet, we still lack firsthand evidence.  We still have to push on.  This is where Zen can become very frustrating.  At this point, hopefully, the student is ripe for a meeting with Mind.  Boom!

We can call this phenomenon degeneration

It was Hegel who said, “that people and governments never have learned anything from history.”  And as we might expect, people and their governments keep repeating the sad fact that they are not interested in learning. 

Now here is where Buddhism steps onto the scene:  people keep repeating the terrible fact that they are not interested in curtailing and restricting their desires, especially for what is lustful and ultimately harmful to themselves and to others.  This is also in mankind’s history.

It seems these days that the more wealth and status people acquire the more corrupt they become which manifests itself in hypocrisy which is able to hide the dark side of their character.  This was shown brilliantly in Stanley Kubrick’s film Eyes Wide Shut (1999).  On the one hand, the wealthy or those with a high status, virtue signal while, on the other hand, they are involved in the most evil of enterprises, so evil in some instances that if it were made public, the first reaction of the public would be not to believe it.

For the average person who would prefer to be, eventually, wealthy and have status they, vicariously, enjoy the actions and lifestyles of their idols even though if you looked deeper into their character, their idols prefer debauchery to the discipline of curtailing and restricting their desires leading to a more noble and higher view of life and reality.

We can call this phenomenon degeneration or devolution.  And recent history shows us that this phenomenon is very real.  Here people have become psychologically weaker.  They have very little in the way of self-control over themselves.  They prefer what is, ultimately, destructive to themselves in the long run.  They do not care about what is good, prudent, and wise.  This can’t be a good thing for a society.  Without knowing it, these weak people are the pawns of those who are most evil; who reside at the top of the pyramid and want nothing more than to turn mankind into a savage animal which, incidentally, was the goal of Moses Hess who was Marx’s guide and teacher; who also believed Communism to be the best means by which to spread annihilation!

This destructive vision of Hess first enters our schools and universities through the doors of the humanities and the social sciences in a new form called postmodernism which saps the culture of its vitality and humanity.  No longer can we speak or have hope in the highest man (P., uttamoporiso), a Buddha.  Certainly, none of this accords with Buddhism which demands of the individual that in order to unite with the highest truth one must be in accord with it.  This requires a life dedicated to realizing the highest truth.

Entering the door of enlightenment

Most Zennist remember Patriarch Hongren’s advice to Shenxiu who failed to enter the door of enlightenment with his attempt at enlightened poetry.

To attain supreme enlightenment, one must be able to know spontaneously one's own nature or Essence of Mind, which is neither created nor can it be annihilated. From ksana to ksana (thought-moment to thought-moment), one should be able to realize the Essence of Mind all the time. All things will then be free from restraint (i.e., emancipated). Once the Tathata (Suchness, another name for the Essence of Mind) is known, one will be free from delusion forever; and in all circumstances one's mind will be in a state of 'Thusness'. Such a state of mind is absolute Truth. If you can see things in such a frame of mind you will have known the Essence of Mind, which is supreme enlightenment.

Looking at this from the standpoint of the older Pali Nikayas which is actually quite simple and elegant, Shenxiu had not awakened to the unconditioned (nirvana), a special term found in the Pali Nikayas which I have put into bold:

“There exists, monks, that which is unborn, that which is unbecome, that which is uncreated, that which is unconditioned. For if there were not, monks, that which is unborn, that which is unbecome, that which is uncreated, that which is unconditioned, there would not be made known here the escape from that which is born, from that which is become, from that which is created, from that which is conditioned. Yet since there exists, monks, that which is unborn, that which is unbecome, that which is uncreated, that which is unconditioned, there is therefore made known the escape from that which is born, from that which is become, from that which is created, from that which is conditioned” (Udāna).

Shenxiu was unable to escape from that which is born, from that which is become, from that which is created, from that which is conditioned.  He had, according to Hongren, still not entered the door of enlightenment.  He failed to know, spontaneously, his own nature or Essence of Mind, or the same, he had failed to intuit his true nature which is never other than unconditioned. 

This intuition is key.  Shenxiu failed to intuit the unconditioned, Huineng did not who wrote the better poem.  Shenxiu failed to attain nirvana, Huineng did not.  Later, Zen master Huangbo would use the term “unconditioned Mind” while Zen master Bankei would use the term “unborn Mind.”  What is important is the intuition which goes beyond all names revealing all at once the transcendent.

Mind used here, let me add, is not to be confused with thought.  Mind (citta) is single or one, that is, Mind is without parts being pure and transcendent, without form or defilement in contrast to the world of thought (the activity of thinking) which ordinary people do day and night.  Let’s call it the samsaric mind. This includes consciousness which is a doubling of the single or one Mind, into subject and object.

From this, the Zennist's task, who is in the same boat as Shenxiu, is to transcend thought (which happens suddenly).  Thought, as I have said before, is the activity of thinking.  This is like the ocean with rising and falling waves.  Mind, on the other hand, is a waveless ocean.  It's not conditioned (generating waves).  When I came to see Mind in 1969 it was after a long time looking for "pure Mind" in my own noggin.  But everywhere I looked was thought.  How frustrating was that?  I went from big waves to small waves.  Then finally one night, suddenly, there were no waves.  I beheld the unconditioned, pure Mind.

Removing the keystone of enlightenment

It is still undecided in the West whether or not Buddhism and Zen are religious or secular or even related to each other.  This, I hasten to add, is not an issue with the majority of scholars who have studied Buddhism and Zen in which enlightenment is like the keystone of an arch.  Take that away and the whole thing collapses.  This keystone is what connects all forms of Buddhism together from the older traditions, to Zen and Tibetan Buddhism.

Based on enlightenment, Buddhism and Zen are religious and not secular.  In regard to enlightenment, both relate to the realization of the transcendent which both consider to be of ultimate importance since the nature of the transcendent is beyond the nature of suffering wherein the secular world is to be found. 

In light of this, the West tends to see Zen more as a lifestyle and Buddhism as a moral path of learning to accept the suffering and finitude of life while, at the same time, trying to help others.  While all of this sounds nice, it leaves out the Buddha’s enlightenment so that in its absence, Buddhism and Zen seem to be secular and made for the secular West.

In recent history there has been a decisive shift away from putting the transcendent at the core of religion, so that what religion means becomes increasingly blurred only to find itself standing in line with witchcraft, humanism, liberalism, Japanese tea ceremonies, martial arts, art, music, and a host of other institutions and practices treated as being somehow connected with religion. 

With the danger of the religious-secular distinction disappearing there arises at the same time confusion, skepticism, and contradictions with no way to overcome this growing and spreading turmoil. 

Faith in the transcendent, even God, is declared by the secular world to be empirically unverifiable in which personal realization has no place at the table despite the fact that for Buddhism, including Zen Buddhism, truth can only be personally known/realized (partyātmajñāna) in which the subject and object aspect of consciousness (vijñāna) come together merging back into the One.  Buddhism, thus, has no interest in a reflection-correspondence view of knowledge which means that truth or real knowledge amounts to a correspondence between the external world of material objects and the internal, cognitive world consisting of language, concepts, and symbols.  This kind of knowledge is best suited for Darwinian fitness.  It is not religious knowledge.

Go wash your bowl!

In a famous koan Zennists recognize, Zen master Yunmen has some questions for us.

Master Yúnmén mentioned a monk who said to Zhàozhōu, “I have just joined the monastery and ask for your teaching.” Zhàozhōu asked: “Have you already eaten your gruel?” When the monk affirmed, Zhàozhōu said: “Go wash your bowl!” Master Yúnmén said: “Well, tell me, was what Zhàozhōu said a teaching or not? If you say that it was, what is it that Zhàozhōu told the monk? If you say it wan’t a teaching, why did the monk in question attain awakening?”

If Zen is about awakening to our true nature which is unconditioned; which transcends the psycho-physical body (i.e., the five skandhas) which is conditioned, then when Zhàozhōu said to the new monk, “Go wash your bowl!” whatever thoughts the monk had about the true teaching were, suddenly, wiped away so that only pure Mind remained.

Next, if Zhàozhōu’s words were not a teaching, how then did the monk manage to awaken by a non-teaching?

It is more than often the case that the words and gestures of a Zen master in responding to the monks are not, in some cryptic way, a true statement about awakening, but rather a way to shut off thought (i.e., the process of thinking) so as to reveal the essence of Mind.  It’s like a sudden, loud shout.  This is meant to freeze thought to reveal Mind.  In other examples. the Zen master demonstrates Mind by moving his staff, or standing up and walking away.

Always the goal of the Zen master is to help the student realize Mind which is unconditioned and transcendent; which is also the animative principle of the body.  What gets in his way is the student’s addiction to thought, the activity of thinking.  The only way to reveal Mind is by no-thought. "Go wash your bowl!"

Meditate as much as possible in a solitary place

In the Essential Secrets of Dhyana Sutra 襌秘要法經 and in other sources in the older Pali tradition, we learn that one should practice meditation 襌 or Zen 襌 in a solitary place where there is the least possible distraction for the mind insofar as sounds cause disturbances in meditation, like entering a jungle of thorns.

It doesn’t seem to me that today’s Zen center where groups of people meet and meditate together is close to being a solitary place where there is the least possible distraction for the mind.  For one thing, “solitary” means being alone.

Sitting quietly together is not the same as, in my example, meditating alone in an abandoned mine (we called it the ‘tunnel’) or meditating alone in a grotto with a small waterfall and many other places where I was always alone.

Oh sure, I admit that today’s meditators don’t have the time to be alone although there are a some opportunities when you are actually alone in your apartment or for the weekend you manage to get away and find a nice spot to meditate alone.

For the beginner, just imagine being alone in my abandoned mine one night doing your zazen.  Yes I would walk you there after the sun has set.  It is only a hundred feet or so away from the house.  I would light the candles for you and give you a flash light.  And there you could set for about forty minutes and then come back to the house.  I guarantee this would not be like sitting with a group.  Far from it.

The stillness and the silence soon becomes out of the ordinary.  Whereas normal is always the external noisy world which is a distraction that you get used to, it is now severely limited so that you, the subject, stands out much more.  This means that everything going on between your ears seems loud.  But in time the loudness begins to settle down.  Also you begin to notice the tensions in your body begin to settle down.  It is as if you mind and body are trying to adapt to the silence of the mine which over time imparts a stillness in you.

This experience is not like entering a jungle of thorns!  When you get used to doing this a number of times and your meditation muscles get stronger you begin to look forward to sitting this way. 

For me, this experience on a daily basis in which I had dedicated myself to finding ‘pure Mind’ within myself helped to still my thoughts as if to come closer to my goal although I had not yet experienced pure Mind and could not imagine it.  What I can say is that one should meditate as much as possible in a solitary place.

 

Living the fictional life

The study of a transcendent religion like Buddhism, including its scion Zen, can be a dangerous undertaking for some.  This is not because Buddhism or Zen are, inherently, dangerous but rather that many people have never stepped out of their fictional life.

Here is what I mean.  Most people believe, for example, that if you’ve convinced yourself that you are awakened to the teachings of the Buddha and the Zen masters, then it is a fact that you are awakened. This is to say in other words, I live "as if" I have awakened to the truth even though it is otherwise.

But unbeknownst to this person, they are still living in a fictional world. It might be a dangerous journey to have to leave this fictional world with it fictional certitude and awaken to true reality.

The painful truth is this: the "as if" condition is always a fiction.  This fiction the average person constructs.  It is not real even in the form of a model or an actual world like Disneyland or a major city. Sure, we will be able to feel at home and at peace in this fiction for a while.  But that is no evidence that our life isn’t a fictional life giving its apparent finitude. 

Turning to Buddhism and Zen, the institution is also a fiction.  It is, you might say, an artistic representation of the enlightened life.  Still, there is no realization here.  It is a world of actors acting.

In Wúménguān’s book of koans, we learn that the barrier or checkpoint 関, which is in front of the no-gate 無門, has no mercy.  If you wish to pass through it to the non-fictional world of true reality, you must let go of all that is conditioned.  Cling to just one thing, you don’t pass through.

Buddhist and Zen training should really be aimed at reducing the “as if” life which our current behavior is tied to so that some of us can actually pass through the checkpoint and enter the no-gate.  In other words, the formalism of the Zen institution, which is largely a fiction, gives the false impression of being fully capable of enlightening people.  It can only instruct people how to shed what is not germane to the path and have the singleminded faith that the Buddha-nature can be realized, personally, in the very self.

 

Breath meditation and the breather

All of us are aware that we breathe our breath in and out.  But few, if any, know the true origin or source of the breath.  We take our breathing, in other words, for granted.  So, why bother with being aware of breaths true origin or source? 

This is the reflection of people who are attached to their physical body.  They have no idea who the breather is who is connected with their breathing.  If they did know, they would have direct knowledge of the difference between what is spiritual and the body of our birth which depends upon the spiritual to animate it.

There is much more to breathing our breath in and out.  Who is the breather?  It’s the same as asking, “What moves our hands and feet?”  Some might call it the ‘life force’, but this is just a word.  Words can be like a compass.  Still, the compass doesn’t take us to our destination like a magic carpet.  We have to make a personal effort of getting to our destination. 

By looking within we have to admit that the mysterious breather is before the breathing process which is part of the five skandha system which is never other than conditioned and incapable of deliverance.  In a way, our awareness of breathing in and out, to a degree, precedes breathing.  This awareness (sati) embraces (pari) the source (mukhaṃ) of the breathing according to the commentary to the Udana.  The source is also the original cause or source of the action of breathing.  This also suggests that we shouldn’t be so much aware of following the breath but, instead, be before the in and out breath as much as possible.  Whatever the breath does, we are before it.

However, for some people, they cannot make such a distinction.  They are attached to the idea that awareness and breathing occur at the same time or in some odd cases, that awareness follows the breath!

The problem with awareness (sati) the beginner faces, is somewhat like facing a painting, going so far as to even put your nose on it as if to see it.  Can you see it?  No, of course not.  You can only see the details of the painting if you back away from it.  For our awareness to be before the breath implies a backing away from it so that there is a distinction between awareness and breathing.  The nature of awareness, I hasten to add, is not the same as the nature of breathing.  Just because our awareness is coordinate with breathing we should not assume that awareness is the same or comes after the in and out breath. 

Buddhism and spirit possession

The six realms of rebirth make up the sphere of samsara.  They are as follows: the godly or deva realms, the demigods (asura), humans, animals, preta, and hell denizens. 

Today’s blog is about pretas which are disembodied spirits capable of controlling the mind of a living human, causing much distress and unhappiness in their lives.

Preta, in Sanskrit, refers to a departed spirit from a dead person before funeral rites are performed.  We can think of them as having a strong bond with the three poisons of dullness (low energy), hostility, and craving (e.g, craving food and sex).  One might also associate pretas with inner voices, substance abuse (including alcohol), impulsive behavior, anxiety and depression, physical problems with no discernible cause.

Essentially, pretas are disembodied humans with not so good karma who, because they have not practiced dharma, cannot go any higher (e.g., rebirth into a human).  In other words, they have lost much of their humanity.

Because people today are so degenerate and spiritually weak, they can easily be taken over and controlled by pretas.  Unfortunately, Western psychology and medicine largely dismiss this as unscientific and unworthy of their attention even though there are many troubling cases which their applied science cannot cure but which show surprising success by psychologists and physicians who treat these cases as if their patients were possessed.  This as if approach is illustrated by Dr. Edith Fiore in her now famous work titled, The Unquiet Dead: A Psychologist Treats Spirit Possession.

I am beginning to wonder just how much of a role Zen Buddhism or Tibetan Buddhism can play in keeping beings free of negative spirit possession (preta).  It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that Buddhist practice can and does play a huge role in keeping people, for the most part, free from spirit possession.  But this could change as Buddhism and, especially, Zen becomes more liberal and accepting of degenerate conduct under the banner of postmodernism.

How does Buddhism see postmodernism?

We all recall a time when in an unaware state of mind we stepped on some dog doo-doo and got it onto our carpet.  What gave it away was the smell at which point we looked at our shoes.  We didn't have to study the crap on the soles of our shoe.  The smell was enough to tell us this was dog doo-doo. 

With postmodernism, there is a certain smell which comes with it.  Read people like Derrida, Lacan, Foucault, Deleuze and Guatarri, or Kristeva.  It’s all directed against the logos (I have in mind Derrida’s term phallogocentrism) in favor of chaos or living a chaotic life of little or no worth.  Ironically, the postmodernist cannot adequately define logos which is a Greek word that is often used in a very technical, and specialized sense which is much like the Sanskrit word dharma.  We get a clue of this when Heraclitus treats it as the underlying organizational principle of the universe.  Plato also uses it in a variety of technical ways such as the opposition between mythos and logos in which the latter is the true.  Logos is used by Aristotle in the sense of reason in an ethical context.  It is used by the Stoics as the active force of the universe, etc.  The list goes on of the many uses of logos.  In the modern world its most common form is logic/being logical in the sense of something that convinces or proves. 

Postmodernism doesn’t care about any of this.  It’s mind is already made up; it is unconsciously set upon chaos, defined, generally, as a state of utter confusion completely wanting in order.  A fall into chaos is where Marxism’s ideology leads the masses.  Marx should be recognized as the progenitor of postmodernism that later will take up the communist banner but without the hammer and sickle.  Marx began by carefully and diabolically pitting the bourgeoisie against the proletariat which ultimately led to chaos.  The postmodernist diabolically pits the oppressor against the oppressed, and begets chaos. 

Through the degeneration of the Western university, which once represented the logos, it now, unconsciously, represents chaos in the example of the humanities and the social sciences which are almost entirely postmodern in their outlook. 

Today, the real picture is Western civilization and culture are fighting a war against a chaotic mob/group rule in which the latter are unaware of their malevolence; who would gladly see their opposition in a prison or destroyed in a war.

Buddhism, as we might expect, is not based on chaos but on logos or dharma.  Buddhist or Zennists who say otherwise have not read either the fundamental texts of Buddhism or studied the Lankavatara Sutra which is the basis of Zen Buddhism.  The failure of modern Buddhists and Zennists to see the logos/dharma in Buddhism is a testimony to how much they’re slouching towards chaos/adharma (irreligion, injustice, wickedness).  The fruits of their endeavor will only fill them with arrogant pride in the form of virtue signaling and resentment.  This is not dharma—not by a long shot.  At this point one is dealing with an irrational person who is incapable of having a civilized discussion of the issues at hand.  

Sadly, it is only a matter of time before violence erupts in Europe, something akin to the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 which began as an uprising against the Hungarian secret police (Államvédelmi Hatóság or ÁVH). 

Let’s be honest, the underpinning of postmodernism is totally evil and chaotic.  And Marx, we should never forget, was a satanist (Richard Wurmbrand, Marx & Satan).  He wanted to draw all of mankind into the abyss and to follow them laughing.  But in the end, this will fail just as Marx's entire personal life was hypocritical and a failure.