By any other name

By any other name

What if we could find the source of everything, and in the finding, realize that this source is an ever-present reality that is closer than our own breath? And furthermore, discover that this source is indiscriminate and spilling over with compassion and wisdom? Would anyone believe such an outrageous thing? How could that possibly be in light of what we see in our world today where discrimination, anger, and dissensions prevail?

It would take a real leap to put these two visions together, yet the Diamond Sutra says it is so. The lack of awareness would be like a fish swimming in water but not aware of the water, or a bird flying through the air not knowing air. In this sutra, The Buddha reminds us that the teaching contained here does not come from buddhas; rather, buddhas come from this teaching. For this teaching is the diamond body, the Dharmakāya, which buddhas realize and teach to others.

Such a big and strange-sounding word: “Dharmakāya.” What can it mean, this source of buddhas and us? Whatever it might be, so the teaching goes, is ever-present, and never leaves us. Buddhas come from there, and so do we. Fathoming such a thing requires some code-breaking like the Rosetta Stone that allowed the understanding of Egyptian hieroglyphics.

Bodhidharma provides the necessary code. He said, “To say that the real Dharmakāya of the Buddha resembles the Void is another way of saying that the Dharmakāya is the Void and that the Void is the Dharmakāya...they are one and the same thing...When all forms are abandoned, there is the Buddha...the void is not really void, but the realm of the real Dharma. This spiritually enlightening nature is without beginning ...this great Nirvanic nature is Mind; Mind is the Buddha, and the Buddha is the Dharma.”

When all forms are abandoned, there it is—the source of everything, right where it has always been. It has no beginning and no end. It is unborn and never dies. It is the air we breathe and the space of our existence. It is everywhere yet nowhere to be found. Jesus called it the kingdom. The Buddha called it the mind. The name is irrelevant. A rose by any other name smells as sweet.

Moral Relativism

This notion has been fairly well broadcast recently. Perhaps it is being revisited due to the rising emergence of radical right-wing popularity. For example, Texas Governor, and aspiring Presidential candidate Rick Perry, recently hosted a national referendum in Houston’s Reliant Stadium—a call for prayer, beseeching God to come to the aid of our beleaguered nation. 

Perry is well known for his staunch opposition to moral relativism and is a proud supporter of the absolute/literal interpretation of God’s word—The Holy Bible. He finds comfort in surrounding himself with those who share his discriminatory views. Among these is the good Reverend John Hagee, who gained notoriety for declaring that Hurricane Katrina was God’s vengeance on the sinful New Orleans population and suggested that Jews had brought the Holocaust on themselves. Another in his camp is one of Hagee’s flock, Elva Spoor, who said she had come with the Cornerstone delegation so “God can bless us and give us rain and turn the nation back to God.” But what about gay people, she was asked? “God says he loves everyone, but he hates the sin,” said Spoor. “God says it is an aberration (did she mean ‘abomination’) to him.”

It is exceedingly unfortunate that political despots, who use the gospel of Christ to achieve their malevolent aims, have manipulated ignorant people to engage in unspeakable horrors. Click here and watch the sad history that emerged in Nazi Germany during an era quite similar to conditions prevailing today. Then read this and see how the apparently innocuous event in Houston bears striking similarities. My purpose here is not to denigrate the beliefs of others but rather to consider such positions through the lens of truth as conveyed by the Buddha, which by the way harmonizes quite well with the teachings of Christ, particularly when it comes to the unconditional nature and love of God for his creation.

There have always been those who have interpreted scripture literally rather than understanding the true intent and spirit underscoring the message. Rinzai Zen Master Bassui Tokushō (1327–1387) is reported to have told his students that to properly grasp the spirit of sutras, they must “first awaken the mind that reads” and then they would understand. In every religion, there have been similar rifts. Early Buddhists (the Hinayana) understood matters differently from the Mahayana—the prior more concerned with individual liberation and the latter concerned with enlightening humanity’s breadth. Similarly, the gospel of Christ is divided into the Old and the New Testament. You could say that the Old was more concerned with the law’s letter, whereas the New was concerned with the spirit.

Yet 2,000 years later, some proclaim themselves to be born again Christians and proceed to spread a gospel of hate emanating from a vengeful God of the Old Testament. Sadly some proclaim themselves to be Zennists but cling to Hinayana preoccupations.

Zen (as well as the true Christian gospel) essentially teaches both differences and oneness simultaneously. All of us are as different as snowflakes but fundamentally just snow. The soul of genuine spirituality is the lack of discrimination—a heart of compassion and unconditional love. Both Gautama and Jesus taught it. Few embrace it. Watch this.

The action of non-action.

“To act” presumes an actor. It would be absurd to speak of action otherwise. Action must therefore consider the source—this actor doing the acting to understand action. In a normal sense, action entails the will (volition) the capability of conscious choice to do one thing and deny another. And that volition is a reflection; the vote of the actor. To say “I desire” is an expression of such a will—the desire preceding action. But we must take a serious look at how we understand this one who acts to explore the motive.

In Buddhism (as well as Taoism) this matter is taken seriously. We all have a sense-of-self (the actor) which is constantly agitated, wounded and hungry. There is never enough to fill the belly of this actor, nor fences tall enough to guard what the self desires and possesses. The ego is never satisfied.

The Forty-Eighth stanza of the Tao Te Ching says: “In the pursuit of learning, every day something is acquired. In the pursuit of Tao, every day something is dropped. Less and less is done until non-action is achieved. When nothing is done, nothing is left undone. The world is ruled by letting things take their course. It cannot be ruled by interfering.”

Compare this to what Jesus said in Matthew 6:26-27: “Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life?”

These views came from different times and places, yet they speak of the same faith dimension—trust that our lives are important and not lacking. Lao Tzu understood the source of the ultimate self as the Tao. Jesus understood that same source as “your heavenly father” but they were speaking of the same well-spring: The source of non-action which functions through our being. We (our bodies and our minds) are the arms and legs of the Tao/Our heavenly father. And when our action is thus centered, our action will not be our own. Lao Tzu referred to this as wu-wei or non-action since the will of ego is not involved.

The Sixth Step

“Right Effort” entails a thorough process that ranges from “right thoughts” through “right actions,” resulting in both fence-mending for past offenses and working to create desirable karma. Five steps are recognized which define this process. They are: (1) Generating a desire (passion), (2) making a commitment (resolve), (3) activating persistence (forbearance), (4) not becoming side-tracked (focused), and (5) carrying through with the original intention (sees the matter through to completion). These five steps are then applied to four areas of conduct, assisted by four areas of awareness.

• Abandonment of existing evil
• Correcting existing unskilled qualities
• Creating future good
• Creating future skilled qualities

The four parts of awareness are:

1. A Buddha is eternally enlightened. He thus can’t attain what he has already.
2. All beings are Buddhas thus share in enlightenment.
3. A Buddha’s nature is non-differentiated—Nothing to grasp—Neither a subject nor an object. 
4. This nature is our unconditional nature. Since we, too, are Buddhas, we are likewise non-differentiated.

Right effort needs to be seen in the context of enlightenment and dharma. Hui-neng said, “When we are deluded, our teacher liberates us. When we are enlightened, we liberate ourselves.” 

Dharma is a teaching of transcendent truth. The Eightfold Path is dharma—we use the help of a teacher to gain enlightenment. While in an unenlightened state, we need to be taught and have guidelines to follow. This is a teaching to follow, and the Path is intended to lead to enlightenment.

However, Hui-neng correctly points out that once we achieve enlightenment, we must put the dharma away. Why? Because to retain a teaching designed to take us somewhere would bind us (attach us) once we arrive. The question thus becomes, “What is the nature of enlightenment, and what guide-line would we follow once we arrive?”

The Diamond Sutra is instructive in answering this question. In chapter twenty-three, The Buddha said that unexcelled, perfect enlightenment can’t be realized since it possesses no features, qualities, nor aspects since it (enlightenment) is undifferentiated. Furthermore, he says there is nothing whatsoever to attain. This puzzling expression is explained with the above four points of awareness.

In an unenlightened state, these qualities are not seen; we must follow a set of guidelines that will help us remove delusions that obstruct our vision. Bad karma creates such obstructions and muddies the clarity of vision, whereas good karma clears the clouds.

Once we are enlightened, the guiding force is the recognition that there is no difference between our self, others, and The Buddha. These are one thing, not many. The principal to abide by is the one provided by Jesus: “Do unto others as we would have them do to us.” Such effort is right because it is selfless.

The Second Step

Nothing in return.

The second step along the Eight-fold Path is Right Intentions. The principle of selflessness among religious traditions is universal but has special significance within Buddhism, given the central focus on the non-self/Self paradigm arising from interdependent origination. Throughout Buddhist sutras, there is a continuous thread contrasting manifestations of the ego with acts of charity arising from the purity of unobstructed manifestations from the Self/Buddha-Nature.

Defilements, delusions, and obscurations are seen as impediments to charity's free-flow. It is one thing to imagine doing good works from a moral correctness perspective. It is a very different thing to act in charity through interdependence. Love is not what you say. Love is what you do. It is the ego’s nature to talk a good deal but not follow through unconditionally. One functions as the “keeper” of one’s brother in the first case. In the second case, one functions “as one’s brother.” The ego takes great pride in performing for the crowd and expects a responsive reward. A purely selfless act has a built-in reward. There is no genuine love when emanating from the ego. I discovered the following (anonymous), which sums this up nicely: 

“When you give and expect a return, that’s an investment. But when you give and expect nothing in return, that’s pure, unattached love.”

The difference between these two views was expressed by the eighth-century Buddhist monk Shantideva, author of A Guide to the Bodhisattva’s Way of Life—a nine-hundred-verse poem credited to Nagarjuna. He said:

“When I act for the sake of others,

No amazement or conceit arises.

Just like feeding myself,

I hope for nothing in return.”

This view was echoed by the Golden Rule spoken by Jesus in the 7th chapter of Matthew, “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you...” The distinction lies in the perspective that there is a difference between oneself and others, disputed in Buddhism.

When Bodhidharma went from India to China, Emperor Liang was welcomed. The emperor asked him, “What merit have I gained since I built so many temples, erected so many pagodas, made so many offerings to Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha, and did numerous other virtuous deeds?” 

Bodhidharma’s reply greatly disappointed Emperor Liang. Bodhidharma said, “Your Majesty, there is none whatsoever. You have gained no merit. What you have done produces only worldly rewards, that is, good fortune, great power, or great wealth in your future lives, but you will still be wandering around in samsara.”

On the other side of the world, another such teaching was established—“Be careful not to do your ‘acts of righteousness’ before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven. So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.” 

This second teaching was conveyed by Jesus and is found in the 6th chapter of Matthew. The message is the same—True charity is selfless. On the other hand, phony charity expects a return or some gain to accrue from works, and this is a subtle form of attachment linking action with results that keeps the giver locked in the vise of karma, which, like everything else, has no intrinsic nature. 

It, too, must link to action, and action, in turn, is linked to one who acts. When there is no “one/self,” nor “other/self,” action has no meaning, thus no karma. A Buddha has no self and is thus free from all karmic attachments, in which case selfless charity becomes a completely pure expression of giving and receiving. At the level of our True Nature, we are all Buddhas.

Fighting household gods

Around the world, different people have worshiped both “household gods” and God in another house called “The House of God.” Even today, many churches call themselves The House of God. There have been many ideas regarding where God lives. A popular thought is that God lives in heaven, located in the sky. 

When asked, Jesus said that God lives in each of us, but that idea didn’t get too far. I guess not many people could buy that notion, so they went back to the tried and true idea with which they were most familiar—God lives in the temple, or the church, or the synagogue or some other “holy place” but for sure not in our inner being. But this placement for his holiness didn’t stop the household god practice, and people still have both: the everyday god and the special God, who lives in the church, but never in us.

In ways this arrangement seems to work well since it keeps God/god conveniently located so that he/she doesn’t become pushy and intrusive. Shouldn’t everyone get some private time? Who wants a judge sitting on your shoulder watching your every move. Teens today have an Internet lingo worked out for that. It’s called “POS”—Parent Over Shoulder, which they can send via text messaging to their friends to signal, “What I’m going to send now is the cleaned up version since my parents are snooping.” So it looks like keeping God located away is a good thing. That way we can be two faced—One face we use normally and one face we dust off and use when someone is watching.

Unfortunately it is very tough to fool ourselves. We are always there, snooping and it won’t do much good to send POS to get away from our self. To reconfigure that dilemma, we have split ourselves into different compartments, which develop into split personalities. Apparently this becomes highly sophisticated with multiple personalities in the same body which gets very confusing when trying to relate to someone like that. “Is that you Jane? Mary? Lucy?...Who’s home today?”

All jesting aside, these are poor souls who can’t manage to integrate these conflicting aspects in a way that is acceptable to them (whoever “them” might be). It’s a sad situation but not so very far from the dilemma we all wrestle with by presenting the right face. This is a genuine problem when you don’t know who you are in the first place. In that case, you can be just about anyone you choose to and not be anyone at all.

Lots of people spend years in therapy trying to come to terms with this problem. It plagued me for a long time so I’m not making light of it. In this state of confusion we are simply imprisoned by delusions which are rooted in the phantom known as ego—The mythical monster that doesn’t exist but seems very real. That monster causes us to become wholly self-centered which creates a cascade of problems. 

In that state we think we are the center of the world. In effect we become the household gods and expect the world to bow down to us. It is very maddening (which makes us angry) when the world doesn’t respond well to our self-absorbing antics. And often times, after the fact, we think to ourselves: “Where did that come from? I can’t believe I was such a schmuck?” Then the guilt sets in, especially when we see ourselves repeating over and over the very behavior we just acknowledged about which we were embarrassed. That emotion fills us with self-doubt, self-hate and overwhelms us with thoughts of shame and inadequacy, all of which we experience as caustic and degrading.

In the midst of this all together nastiness what we fail to realize is that these emotions are like the warning light that switches on in our car when we need a change of oil. We should feel this way since these are signals to bring us up short and cause us to pay attention to what is fueling this causal chain. If we are really careful (usually takes years before we stop putting ourselves through this wringer) we’ll back-track these nasty emotions and come to see the phantom—our ego is the culprit. And after that, if we’re really careful (more years) we find that we are not any phantom. We are real boys and girls who share a common base of just your every day household variety, everywhere and nowhere, not special Buddha-Nature. Jesus was right.