Study the Way/Self

Mine; Not yours.

“To study the Way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be enlightened by all things of the universe. To be enlightened by all things of the universe is to cast off the body and mind of the self as well as those of others. Even the traces of enlightenment are wiped out, and life with traceless enlightenment goes on forever and ever.”

Dogen’s famous commentary on the self deserves careful consideration. “The Way,” of course, means the way of a Bodhisattva. Dogen says this way concerns the study of the self. Buddhism is essentially the way of taking a hard and thorough look at the most fundamental aspect of reality—the nature of identity, resolving the matter, putting it completely aside, and moving on. He did not say to just move on with the presumption that everything will be okay. Of course, that is a prescription for continued suffering, which is a function of the self. It is the self/ego that suffers and creates suffering.

After more than 40 years of extensive study following my own awakening, I have come to realize the evident truth about enlightenment; the truth as recorded throughout nearly all sutras—It is ever-present, nothing special (after-the-fact, but never before), always-on, and reduces down to a simple understanding of Tathāgata. Fundamentally it means “reality as-it-is,” alternatively understood as suchness. It is easy to write, difficult to experience, yet always possible by being continuously and fully present. Contrast this to being never present—lost in thinking about just about anything—that obstructs being present.

Dogen rightly arranged the order: First, study the self. Second, resolve the matter. Third, forget about it. And forth, be enlightened by all things by not continuing to dwell on this central issue once resolved. This order reflects the order taught by The Buddha. To be attached to anything is to ensure suffering, including being attached to the self or even The Buddha.

It is critically important to firmly establish our real identity as one and the same as The Buddha. We are not a fake and imaginary non-self. We are the Self (e.g., awakened), which is The Buddha. If we don’t resolve this matter, we will forever be guided and dominated by our ego-self and remain self-absorbed, producing ignorance, greed, and anger. It is only when we have finally resolved the phantom nature of the non-self and accepted the unborn/never-die identity of Buddha-Nature that we can genuinely do away with ignorance, greed, and anger. This must be the preliminary phase because otherwise, we continue to see ourselves as separate from and in competition with the rest of life. When we clearly see that we are interdependent and in harmony with life, then we can rest and begin to reflect the ever-present, virtuous qualities inherent of Buddha-Nature.

In that state of unity with all, we can be enlightened by all things because all things are a part of us. It is impossible to be intimate with anything from which we are separated. We can imagine unity in some abstract way, but that abstraction is still separate. Dogen knew, so he said, “cast off the body and mind of the self as well as those of others.” Body and mind are just formed elements—outward trappings, which keep us locked into the delusion of separateness and cause us to say things like “my” body, “my” mind. From the perspective of Buddha-Nature (our real nature), there is no “my.” There is only “us.”

The ending of Dogen’s commentary is especially instructive. He says, “life with traceless enlightenment goes on forever and ever.” What could that possibly mean? There is only one aspect of life with no tracks and lasts forever: Buddha-Nature, which is wholly enlightenment, and where there is wholly enlightenment, there is no enlightenment. Everything-Nothing is the same thing. We can’t see it because of self-created delusions, but it’s there. Our duty is to simply learn to cease not being present. Then only there is no duality. Then only there are no tracks because a track is an otherness. Buddha-Nature is whole. No tracks.

The Little Red Hen, Redux

According to Wikipedia, The Little Red Hen is an old folk tale, most likely of Russian origin, that was used during the 1880s as a story that offered a transition to less blatant religious and moralistic tales while still emphasizing a clear moral. I have taken the liberty of reframing the tale in order to illustrate the spiritual evolution that raises one from selfishness to awareness of the Higher Self and unity with all. Following is the recast tale.

THE LITTLE RED HEN
Once upon a time, there lived a little red hen. She called all of her spiritual neighbors together and said, “If we plant these seeds, we shall eat the bread of truth. Who will help me plant them?”
“Not I,” said the cow.
“Not I,” said the duck.
“Not I,” said the pig.
“Not I,” said the goose.
“Then I will do it by myself,” said the little red hen, and so she did. 

The wheat grew very tall and ripened into golden grain.
“Who will help me reap my wheat?” asked the little red hen.
“Not I,” said the duck.
“Out of my religious field,” said the pig.
“I’d lose my affiliation,” said the cow.
“I’d lose my comfort,” said the goose.
“Then I will do it by myself,” said the little red hen, and so she did.

At last, it came time to bake the bread.
“Who will help me bake the bread?” asked the little red hen.
“That would invade my spare time,” said the cow.
“I’d lose my right to quack,” said the duck.
“I’m a dropout and never learned how,” oinked the pig.
“If I’m to be the only helper, that’s discrimination,” said the goose.
“Then I will do it by myself,” said the little red hen.

She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share. But the little red hen said, “No, I shall eat all five loaves.”
“Unfair!” cried the cow.
“Outlier!” screamed the duck.
“I demand an equal share!” yelled the goose.
The pig just grunted in disdain.
And they all painted picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities.

Then the farmer (The True Self) came. He said to the little red hen, “You must not be so greedy.”
“But I earned the bread,” said the little red hen.
“Exactly,” said the farmer. “That is what makes our free will system so wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he or she wants. But under our exclusive (an impossibility) earthly regulations, the productive workers must divide the fruits of their labor with those who are lazy and idle.”

And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, “I am so grateful, for now, I truly understand. When I eat, everyone eats with me. Before I have been the cow, the duck, the goose, and the pig.”

And her neighbors became quite content in her. She continued baking bread because she joined the “game” and got her bread free, which she ate with her Self, who just happened to be her united friends. And all the side-liners smiled. “Fairness” had been established and they came to know themselves, in the Little Red Hen.

Individual initiative had died, but nobody noticed; perhaps no one cared...so long as there was free bread that the indiscriminate hen planted, reaped, baked, and ate together with her lazy friends.

So I end my reframed tale with voices of my own: Moo, quack, honk, grunt, and cock-a-doodle-do. I’ve been them all and just perhaps, so too have we all.

Justice for all?

All or none

This is a recycled post initially created during the Obama era since the issue is as relevant now as then. We seem to be creatures of strange, and many times self-destructive habits. 

Today’s news is so full of critical, unresolved, explosive, and seemingly unrelated issues that it’s difficult to restrict my comments to the undercurrent, and broader matter that effects unfolding injustice. Every day we are witnesses to the emerging tips of the iceberg of justice not done. What I have always been intrigued by is what lies beneath injustice. The essential question is whether there is a common root beneath the surface that pokes its ugly head up into plain view?

One of the most puzzling questions that have continued to perplex me (and others) is the assumed illogic expressed by many policymakers that they alone remain exempt from their decisions. It almost appears they think they live on one planet that has no connection to our world where other people live who are impacted by their decisions. Why does this myth seem to be perpetually impenetrable? And how can others who are affected, continue to support their madness? This latter was succinctly expressed this morning by a question I noticed on a social media site. The question was this: “How is it that a group of billionaire businessmen and corporations can get a bunch of broken middle-class people to lobby for lower taxes for the rich that worsens their own lives?”

But as perplexing as this conundrum appears to be, it isn’t anything new. As far back as 1882, Henrik Ibsen wrote his now-famous play An Enemy of the People. In the play, a small coastal town in Norway (that was economically depressed) for a brief moment appears to be spared further hardship when the Mayor promotes the development of public baths. The town is thus expecting a surge in tourism and prosperity from this venture. The hot springs are assumed to be of great medicinal value, and as such, will be a source of much local pride and revenue. On the eve of the opening, a prominent citizen; Doctor Thomas Stockmann discovers that waste products from the town’s tannery are contaminating the hot springs, and will cause serious illness amongst the tourists.

In the lingo of our world today, Stockmann “blows the whistle.” He expects this important discovery to be among his greatest achievements, and promptly sends a detailed report to the Mayor (Stockmann’s brother), which includes a proposed solution, that would come at a considerable cost to the town, but render the springs safe. Quite to his amazement, Stockmann soon discovers, that rather than being seen as a savior he is attacked as an enemy of the town’s people and brings both himself and his family into great jeopardy.

So to return to the original conundrum, …how can others who are impacted, continue to support the madness of those who orchestrate mayhem against themselves? And what is that commonly shared root that may lurk beneath the surface, which compels such self-destructive action? There are so many variations on this theme, it’s hard to stay focused. One such variation was expressed by Nebraskan, Mary Pipher in, her book The Green Boat, Reviving Ourselves in our Capsized Culture. Her book addresses the contradictions between the publically expressed concern by Obama for the environment and the signing of legislation that authorized building the Keystone Pipeline that would deliver the dirtiest crude oil known to mankind for processing and distribution throughout the world. Will Mary, like Doctor Thomas Stockmann or Edward Snowden, now be seen as the enemy? There are many who hate anyone who looks beyond the moment of quick riches to the far-reaching effects of decisions fueled (pun intended) by vested interests of a few at the expense of many. 

According to Mary, “The psychological twist in the case of climate change is that we inflict the disaster ourselves. Hurricane Sandy was not simply one more instance of nature unleashing its fearsome powers, just as it has done for millions of years on this planet. Humans are now helping to stir the pot.”

I fear (appropriately so) that we are killing far too many messengers who announce warnings to a curiously quiet society who seem all too willing to join forces with those who are eager to bring us all harm for the immoral benefit of a few. One primary message of An Enemy of the People is that the individual, who stands alone, is more often right than the mass of people, who are portrayed as ignorant and sheep-like. Society’s belief in Ibsen’s time was that the community was a noble institution that could be trusted, a notion Ibsen challenged. In An Enemy of the People, Ibsen chastised not only the conservatism of his society but also liberalism. He illustrated how people on both sides of the social and political spectrum could be equally self-serving.

The proof of Iben’s contention seems to thrive continuously, and will most likely until each and every one of us realizes what Martin Luther King Jr. said (and many others)  that, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” Quite contrary to deluded notions of some, we only have one shared earth, one shared existence, and one shared justice for all, or none.

Ego death?

Our mind is an amazing reality that emanates through a brain composed of different cells and neurons which function differently, yet results in a seamless understanding of the world and our selves. 

In a balanced way, our right and left hemispheres function so that we bring together very different modalities to form a balanced worldview, which is both analytical and compassionate. 

Unfortunately, most of us are not balanced due to a host of reasons and tend to be either overly analytic, reliant on symbols, concerned with differences, or overly affectively sensitive stemming from sensed assaults on our egos. For the most part, our left-brain rules the day and this hemisphere is the home of our ego (sense of self).

Our ego-mind perceives the world in a possessive and resistant way, which creates attachments and judgments. If we like (a judgment) something, our ego attaches in a favorable way. If we dislike (a judgment) something, our ego attaches in an unfavorable way. This clinging to conditions results in a brittle, judgmental, and inflexible perspective of our selves, others, and life. Whereas a balanced mind recognizes our interdependent union with all life, our ego-mind denies this and treasures exclusivity and independence.

The three poisons of the mind are manifestations of this out of balance ego exclusivity. As we grow and mature these poisons create strife for our selves and others. We respond to this strife in one of two ways: Blame and denial or learning. The first response just exacerbates the poisons whereas the latter choice moves us to the realization they are rooted in our out of balance ego-mind.

Life, in essence, is structured so that we either awaken or we continue to suffer. If we live long enough, are open-minded, and determined to see things as they truly are, we will eventually come to see the truth. And when this transformation happens, our ego (as the exclusive judge) dies—so to speak. The fact is this sense of self never dies but it is transformed in a balanced way so that we see the world in an enlightened fashion.

This transformation can be facilitated through Zen whereby we learn to quiet the constant chatter that emanates from our ego with its judgments and critiques, which normally overshadow our compassionate nature. This chatter is so loud and relentless, we could easily go through life with very little, if any, understanding of our pure and true nature which makes life worth living. It is unfortunate that few of us follow this path toward breakthrough and remain ignorant of our vast human potential.

Breaking through occurs when our left-brain chatter comes to a halt and we become aware of our always present true nature. This is a matter of subtraction—a sort of shedding—rather than adding or seeking. Lao Tzu put it this way: 

“Empty yourself of everything. Let the mind rest at peace. The ten thousand things rise and fall while the Self watches their return.” And this...“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.”

Bipolar

Manic depression; Bipolar affective disorder is a certifiable mental illness that can mimic something akin to phases of awakening. 

The principle of dependent origination says that everything in life is a reflection of this fundamental principle, and this is illustrated with the broadly known relationship between suffering and enlightenment. 

Bodhidharma said that without afflictions, there could be no enlightenment. The two are linked by the principle of dependent origination. A famous Zen saying is, “No suffering. No enlightenment. Little suffering. Little enlightenment. Great suffering. Great enlightenment.”

In his commentary on the Sutra of Complete Enlightenment, Chan Master Sheng Yen said that nobody having good dreams wants to wake up. Only when they have nightmares are they eager to do so. The point is that there is a correspondence between the magnitude of both suffering and awakening. The entirety of Buddhism concerns the alleviation of suffering. There is no other purpose for this quest than that. So some reading this may think to themselves, “I don’t suffer so Zen isn’t right for me.”

I have two rejoinders to this observation: (1) not yet, (2) and denial. The “not yet” part realizes that it is impossible to live and not suffer because the fundamental nature of conditional life is suffering. The “denial” part concerns resistance (a form of attachment which creates more suffering). And I am not throwing stones of blame. I too remained in denial too long and paid the price. I wrote about this in another post: The Four Horses of Zen.

Nobody wants to suffer and unfortunately this motivates many to stay in states of denial. The pain is too sharp to bear so we stuff it down and try to go on with life and this can eventually be a large problem because it isn’t possible to keep suffering locked away forever. Sooner or later it seeps out and corrodes our sense of wellbeing.

When you learn to mediate (and practice it) all of that suppressed mental poison gets released, you clean out the pipes and move on toward wholeness. It isn’t fun to lance that boil but it beats living with the compacted aftermath of suppressed suffering. Along the way toward restored mental health there can be wide swings from one depth to the opposite, but this is the necessary result of mental house cleaning. Zen is not a practice for the faint of heart. It’s only for the most desperate and those who exhibit the necessary courage to go through the anguish required to have a life worth living.

Pluses and Minuses

The notion that anything can exist, separate, and apart from any contextual framework is, of course, absurd. “Up” makes no sense apart from “down;” good and evil define one another. Everything is defined and understood in such a manner, and this is true of Buddhism as well.

There are two truths in Buddhism, just as there are two truths in everything. There is a negative truth and a positive truth. One truth concerns impermanence; the other permanence and neither could exist without the other, just as up couldn’t exist without down. Countless Zen Masters have spoken of these two truths in various ways. Nagarjuna used the terms conventional and ultimate truth. He further said that we will never be free until we know how they differ and experience the ultimate.

Sadly too often, just the negative/impermanence side is emphasized with no mention of the positive side. All phenomenal life is indeed impermanent, and clinging to what constantly changes does produce suffering. Various words and concepts are used to define this problem. Words like attachment or resistance are often employed, but the important point is that we create distress by linking our sense of well-being to a vapor.

While that part is indeed important, it is just the negative truth leaving a vacuum for the positive. Buddhism teaches that there is no substantial “mind” but rather a constellation of interdependent contributing factors. Sensory phenomena, perceptual capacities, mental processing, and consciousness contribute to a solid mind’s illusion. And our sense of self is a function of this illusion, which ultimately drives greed, anger, and ignorance. When we fathom the elusive nature of this constellation, we realize no basis for independent isolation and conflict.

This realization is an important milestone along the way to enlightenment. Before we can become genuinely self-aware, we must relinquish these negative and poisonous illusions. Simultaneous to the realization of who we aren’t is the realization of who we are. The enlightenment experience is affirmed by the esoteric and intuitive teachings intended for Bodhisattvas. The late and great Nyogen Senzaki said this was revealed in Sūtra such as the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa that teaches that our true nature is buddha—the universal, never-born One Mind, uniting us with all life. When we can embrace this constant presence, we finally know who we are, gain emancipation, and discover that we are not alone.

The Fifth Step: Right livelihood

In today’s world, being financially employed is necessary to survive and achieve the purpose of mortal life—to find your purpose and give your whole heart and soul to it, so said The Buddha. Earning a living is a poor expression of that purpose, suggesting life must be earned. The American Declaration of Independence says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” 

The irony of that statement is the juxtaposition of “independence” and such basic human rights as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Nothing is more impossible. Independence leads to the opposite of the stated aspiration. To be independent is to be isolated, alienated, and cut off from the very dimensions to ensure the goal.

There is a difference between just living and living in fullness. Unfortunately, we have made the task of living in fullness extraordinarily difficult by insisting upon independence and thus focusing on ourselves in isolation from our true nature. This fundamental error has lead to “earning a living” instead of “living in earnest.” Deep within lies the spirit which guides us out of self-service to other-service. At a surface level, we perceive a self who strives and competes against others for what we believe will ensure happiness. It is hard to fathom a livelihood based on selflessness without giving up what we think we need in such a state of mind. But often, our employment choices create suffering for others.

Competition inevitably leads to winners and losers, which produces greed, aversion, and delusion. An isolated, independent, and competitive self is insatiable. No amount of physical gain can ever satisfy the empty hole within. Greed is the result which leads to aversion—anger that the gain doesn’t fulfill, and this leads to delusions; that more of the same will produce what a smaller amount did not. These three—greed, aversion, and delusions—are known as the Three Poisons, and they all grow from a common delusion regarding identity: the ego.

Beneath the surface level of false identity lies our true nature, which is not cut off and alienated but rather interdependent and connected. The transcendent nature of Buddha-Nature is indiscriminate and unconditional but is obscured and hidden by the ego in the same way that clouds hide the sun’s radiance. A right livelihood that grows from the soil of our true nature is naturally harmless to others since there is no difference between self and others.

It is possible to draw up a list of undesirable employment conditions that would constitute harmful occupations. The list would include such obvious prohibited occupations as those which pollute our environment, promote violence and aggression, cheating, and deceiving others. By engaging in such dishonest practices, we damage human dignity and create strife. All of these conditions, if avoided, would result in the betterment of our world. However, to practice the right livelihood while remaining in a state of ego-delusion will not bring about living in earnest. It may result in pride and a sense of becoming a good person, deserving of merit and reward, but as Bodhidharma told Emperor Wu, no merit results when focused on gain and reward without pure motives. Right livelihood, to be “right,” must be established with no gain. “Riches ruin only the foolish, not those in quest of the Beyond. By craving for riches the witless man ruins himself as well as others.”—The Buddha