The Zennist

Bodhidharma probably never sat gazing at a wall for nine years

Bodhidharma, the Indian Buddhist teacher who is regarded as the First Patriarch of Chan or the Zen Buddhist tradition, is sometimes called the "wall-gazing Brahmin."  However, from older, primary sources such as the Dunhuang manuscripts we learn that Bodhidharma probably never existed in the way we imagine he did.  He was most likely a fictional character.  A lot of what we believe is Zen's history is really the product of Zen mythographers in the Song dynasty.

Bodhidharma could very well be a composite of several Indian Buddhist masters such as Dharmatrāta, Buddhabhadra and Buddhaśānta.  According to Chi-Chian Huang (1986 dissertation) Zen master Heze Shenhui added “Bodhi” to Dharmatrāta creating a new name, “Bodhidharmatrāta, a name found in early Zen literature such as the Lidai fabao ji, and in Tibet (keep in mind that Zen came to Tibet).  Later, “trāta” was dropped, and we have Bodhidharma.

But more importantly, Bodhidharma probably never sat gazing at a wall for nine years! 

Bodhidharma’s so-called wall-gazing 壁觀 (wall-vipaśyanā/insight) was not so much about sitting in the lotus posture gazing at a wall but more about insight into the adamantine absolute.  Heinrich Dumoulin says that “Zen masters of later centuries saw it [壁觀] as an expression of the awakened spiritual state, hard as stone.” This seems likely when one recalls the Diamond (vajra) Sutra (Skt. Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra).  Vajra in Sanskrit can mean adamantine, hard,  impenetrable.  

Bodhidharma is more like the figure of Christ insofar as any attempt to see him as a real historical figure is almost doomed.  History, here, appears to be more mythological, based on speculation which, nevertheless, contains much religious truth.  But like the importance of Christ to Christianity, Bodhidharma personifies a unique Buddhist tradition.  Zen would not be Zen without him.

 

 

Facing our passions

The somatic side of us is in a constant state of breakdown and reconstruction whereas the deepest part of us, which is psychical and extra-somatic, seems unchanging and constant.  It is also invisible to the senses.  This is the part we can’t get at.  It defies observation.  We only observe conditioned arisings such as our thoughts and feelings or the inner voice.

With the arising of the existential question of, who am I? we are only aware of the question, try as we might to see its source.  It always ends up that we have no direct perception of the actual source (wherein lies the answer).  Still, something deep within us tells us that we know this as yet unobserved source.

In the meantime, we have to face our passions which stem, it appears, from the somatic part of us.  As every human soon realizes as they mature, nature has made sexual desire the strongest and most exciting of our feelings, which is difficult to control.  By comparison, sexual non-gratification, while we are young adults, seems to be the most dismal and depressing part of our life. 

But if we were to take away the sexual side which, by the way, being in your 70s or 80s manages to do, our psychical and extra-somatic being—the inner person—becomes much more apparent and pronounced.  But then we have only a few years left in the flesh by which to take advantage of this situation.  And that is not going to work in most cases very well.  Starting Buddhism at this time is like digging a well when you are thirsty.

If we are going to get involved in Buddhism when we are young adults (which we should do), we have to focus on controlling our sexual passions and especially the urgent need for sexual gratification.  This is not easy.  It is just one more obstacle in our way but no doubt one of the biggest since it can divert us from the path.  It also needs to be kept in mind that the ways of the world in which our sexual passions can come to fruition runs contrary to Buddhism's path so that when we enter this world we have to be on guard so to speak.

Never other than suffering

At some time in our early twenties it dawns on us that suffering is going to be a major part of our adult life, in fact, the real part of our life.  It is a weight that we will have to bear for a long time. 

But for the Buddha (then Siddhartha before he awakened and became the Buddha) suffering was even more catastrophic.  Suffering also included rebirth and with it still more suffering!  In other words, this life is not our first and last life.  There is more to come!

Siddhartha eventually found a way to put an end to the continuation of suffering by eliminating the cause of rebirth which is one’s incessant clinging to their carnal body, a clinging which is a kind of unconscious thirst and desperation coupled with a belief that this body is who I am.

By means of dhyāna what Siddhartha arrived at went entirely beyond the carnal body in which all sentient beings are trapped; who believe that this body is who they really are.

From this Siddhartha (now the awakened one — the Buddha) could see the real truth of suffering (the first noble truth).  It was our carnal body of birth that is suffering.  But more importantly, it is our desire for it that is the cause or origin of our suffering which happens to be the second noble truth.

It was by means of dhyāna that Siddhartha stopped suffering.  He realized that which did not suffer.  This not suffering state comes in many different names in Buddhism from nirvana to the unconditioned Mind.  But the bottom line, this non-suffering state is never other than unconditioned while what is conditioned is never other than suffering.

The Western view of man is not the same as Buddhism's

I have noticed over the years that empirical science, when it comes to the human being, is operating under the bias of third-person knowledge, looking and observing the human being from the outside to the inside.  However, most of the data is from the outside.  To really look at the inside of a human being one must enter the world of first-person knowledge.  But so far this is impossible.  As close as empirical, outside-to-inside observation can go is maybe an fMRI scan of the brain, assuming that the first-person somehow originates from brain tissue.

On the other hand, Buddhism is just the reverse.  We are observing man from the inside to the outside, who lives within a bio-physical body with its senses, observing feelings, ideations, volitions and consciousness.  Moreover, it is understood that we have, out of ignorance, identified with all these constituents as being our self although not one of these constituents is our self which is extra-physical.

Much of the reason that Buddhism still remains a mystery to the West is that the West treats man as a physical object whereas Buddhism treats man as an ‘inwardly dwelling, extra-physical being’, that is, a sattva, a term which has a spiritual connotation.

The difference between the two positions is striking.  One imagines scientists looking at an fMRI scan of the brain, studying the  cerebral cortex in the belief that the brain somehow transforms matter into consciousness.  In the other, we can imagine Siddhartha sitting in meditation awakening to the very essence and truth of the universe which is Mind (G., Geist); seeing that all phenomena are configurations of Mind—configurations, that are empty, being only illusions.

In the case of morality, the Western view encourages duplicity and hypocrisy insofar as individuals are judged by certain external signs which then allows them to hide their real intentions.  In Buddhism, moral behavior begins within, with one’s ability to control their sensual passions and desires, including greed and hostility.

My Zen poetry where I make allusions to the absolute

My iMac of almost ten years could not be saved.  But I was able to retrieve all my documents, many I forgot I had.  I came across some of my Zen poetry where I make allusions to the absolute.  I composed these back in 2014 and 2015. I wrote them for my own enjoyment because I was tired of the modern Zen crap I read.  Too much modern poetry for my blood.

 

As soon as you speak about it, obstruction!

As soon as you give it thought, delusion!

In the true Dharma there are no things.

It is a clear brightness beyond all things.

 

How does the self recognize itself?

Transcending illusion, what's left?

Melted, a ring of gold is only gold.

All is Mind—there really is no world.

 

Come scholars to my temple tonight.

The moon is full and bright.

If you wish, bring your dippers.

I will give you the moon in the pond.

 

Here is the Buddha-nature.

But our deluded thoughts hide it.

Like morning fog settled in the valley.

Everything is hidden, yet still here.

 

Life and death are a serious matter.

If you don't know the essence

How will you know what doesn't

Transmigrate and what does?

 

When we say the word "Mu"

Our Buddha nature is concealed.

When we ponder its meaning

Darkness covers the brightness.

 

In the mundane, no Buddhas.

To see the Buddha stop discriminating.

If suddenly no thought, no problem.

If you're trying to conceive it, you can’t.

 

If one sees it wonderful!

Two mirrors facing each other.

Just this clear brightness.

There is no more than this

 

There is no lack of foolish people.

Their punishment is birth and death.

Immersed in the Buddha-nature,

They cling to the illusion of its absence.

 

 

 

Zen purification

Is the notion of purification in Zen Buddhism to be looked at through the prism of moral behavior or is there more to this than signaling one’s pious behavior to others? 

But how does purification work if it is something like moral behavior?  Purification really implies  the eradication of defilements so as to reveal an ontologically intrinsic state of purity, this being our true nature.  In light of this, why should signaling one’s pious behavior matter at all?

Given that the real object of Zen training is to realize our true nature, the question follows from this is how can we realize it as long as defilements block us from seeing the face of our true nature? 

We have to think of our defilements as false thinking.  This means being over preoccupied with the thought producing intellect that keeps us trapped in the jungle of the conditioned world in addition to supplying us with countless excuses and rationalizations for staying in it. 

If we are going remain clueless as to what it means to eradicate false thinking by just acting pious, being a good monk or nun, paying attention to correct behavior, then we have no idea what purification in Zen is all about. 

Our understanding of Zen at this point is superficial.  Maybe we just like to pretend.  We have just become pious actors in a Zen movie who spout off Zen sayings without ever having attained the goal of Zen.

Buddha-nature in the Zen tradition

Buddha-nature is not simply raw absence, nor is it exactly emptiness which stops at the negation of the conditioned. It is positive, since it is the fundamental basis and reality of all phenomenal arisings, all of which are conditioned. In this regard, Buddha-nature is totally unconditioned yet productive as well.

Is the Buddha-nature that which is most primordial in us?  As I read the literature it seems clear that it is most primordial but with the understanding that we have no way of recognizing and connecting with it since we have no way of getting behind it so as to be aware of it as an object that stands before us.  In this regard with have to take the Buddha-nature on faith until at such time we can intuit it, directly, merging with it thus becoming one with it breaking out of  the observer/observed framework which is consciousness (vijñāna).

This seems like a difficult undertaking and I would say that it is, but only for the reason that we have put a complex barrier of half-baked concepts and speculations around it.  The term Buddha-nature still boils down to the unconditioned (asaṃskṛta) in contrast with the conditioned (saṃskṛta) which goes back to early Buddhism.  This should also tell us that we cannot realize our Buddha-nature by going after it intellectually, that is, by means of thought which, unfortunately, we are in the habit of doing.

Zen always likes to simplify if only to remove the weeds and the tangling vines of over-thinking.  Ch'an master Tsung-mi has these words to say about Buddha-nature in the Zen tradition (tsung).

[The school taught that all actions such as] the arising of mind, the movements of thought, a snapping of fingers, a sigh or a cough, or to raise the eyebrows, all the functions of the whole substance of Buddha-nature... All coveting, hatred and delusion, all acts of good and evil with their fruit of suffering and pleasure are nothing but Buddha-nature….

Here we are given  a great clue but one nevertheless that eludes us.  It is what I term as the ‘animative principle’ which is another name for the ātman (All beings possess a Buddha Nature: this is what the ātman is—Mahaparinirvana Sutra).