Buddhism, Zen, .Religion, Philosophy or Nothing.

      For as long as I have practiced Buddhism there seems to be this ongoing argument about whether or not Buddhism and or Zen is a religion or a philosophy. In the last 30 years I have listened to Dharma talks given by Zen practitioners, Tibetan monks, and read dozens of articles and blogs and chat room posts on the subject of whether or not Buddhism and/or Zen is a religion or a philosophy. This question seems to prey upon the Western mind like some sort of rash that needs to be scratched and just won't go away. Frankly I've never been quite sure why so many of my fellow practitioners seem to be obsessed with declaring Buddhism in general and Zen in particular either a religion or a philosophy. It seems like in most Westerners minds a philosophy is more pristine, lacking in the contamination of superstition and outdated beliefs. Religion as a concept seems to be repugnant to many of the people in the 21st century who find their way to Zen in particular. Perhaps this is why so many Western thinkers feel free to rip off sections of the teachings, like mindfulness,  run out of the room with it clutched to their bosoms laughing maniacally and saying to themselves I've got the real center of this now I don't need all that baggage of the last 3000 years of Buddhism.  While others like to stir it in with their own brand of mysticism, usually having rebranded it, they begin to sell it on the street corner as some fresh new idea that just popped into their head because of their spiritual advancement and expertise.

    And so the argument rages as it has  almost from the very beginning of Buddhism,  there are many schools of Buddhism and there have been even more in the past,  and the reason for this is that everyone  has a different Buddhism and this is exactly  what the Buddha knew  was going to be the truth of what he had taught .  Paraphrasing his last words  to his followers  "I've given you everything I've got,  I'm old and I'm worn out,  and now it's up to you to work out your own salvation.  That's a paraphrase but more or less  his advice to the people that loved him  and followed him for years,  right before he died .

     Buddha never asked anyone to believe his teachings in fact   he was like a good salesman he said here try my product  it works  for you  then that's the truth  about Buddhism . Remembering of course  that Buddhism is an idea  more or less  developed  in the thousands of years since he died.  but still he had the forethought  to realize  that everyone  in the end  would have to find the truth on their own.

    The most commonly known illustration of this  is the day that the Buddha was  approached by some villagers  known as  the Kalamas.    Some of the villagers came to him and said that we've had these different teachers and different monks teaching  and each one of them tries to tear the other ones teachings down,  they all try to pull the other  teachers   teachings  apart  to show that their  false teachings .  I'm reminded of the time that Dogen  was approached about the validity of a certain Sutra  it seems like there were two versions floating around  one slightly longer than the other .  as a well-respected scholar of Buddhism he was asked which was the real version  of this Sutra , 's response was,  paraphrasing again ,  if a Zen master can enlighten you with a stick that makes it  the real stick.

    Buddha's response to the Kalamas was something like this :

“Do not believe in anything simply  because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it  is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because  it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything  merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in  traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But  after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with  reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then  accept it and live up to it."

      I've heard even the Dalai Lama  referred to Buddhism  as a nontheistic religion  and if you've ever practiced  with the Tibetans  you certainly can't miss the religious aspects of their teachings .  I've heard arguments  ad nausea  that Zen is different  is a different creature  all together  apples and oranges.   when you ask a Zen master is Zen is a religion or philosophy  you will probably give you a stern look  and tell you that Zen  is a way of being . That it is a state of mind.  One might even say that the Zen master would tell you that either you  or Zen is a tool  is up to you to figure out which . 

     Of course this obsessive need  to categorize  the practice of Zen   and  the middle way of Buddhism  is not an  irrational  desire,. after all we all like to know what that we  are doing.   That being said,  I would like to come back to the point  that Buddha made that  you have to work out your own salvation,  many people make  Zen and Buddhism a religion , and many people will fight you to the death,  verbally of course,  claiming it's a philosophy  which is of course much more reputable than religion.  I sometimes think  that the need  for religion  is genetic,  a safety mechanism  built into the human psyche  in order to cushion the fact  that we're all going to die and none of us has a clue  as to what happens  to the individual after that .  I think everyone feels helpless  and frustrated  by the fact that we have this wonderful sentient  mind and in just a few years  it appears it will simply  evaporate like a mist on a warm day . This is part of the Puzzle of being alive and knowing that someday soon you won't be. The end result of course of this puzzle is more often than not a deeply seated fear followed by an almost overwhelming need to believe in something that tells us this is not  so.

      At this point I would like to point out that Zen as a practice was created by people   who  considered  themselves to be Buddhist, and that Buddha himself  was a Hindu Holy man. He had a firm view of the nature of the universe and the world we live in.  Like most Hindus he took his world view as a given not speculation but  as a simple matter of fact.  In the 21st century especially among Westerners and particularly among  many  western  Zen practitioners  this worldview has either been rejected or  they are completely ignorant of it.  To put this as clearly as possible, or at least as clearly as possible for me, Buddha believed that all humans reside in the state of existence called samsara. The official definition of samsara that has developed over the  millennia is something like this:

       
     

                Saṃsāra (Sanskrit, Pali; also samsara) is a Buddhist term that literally means "continuous movement" and is commonly translated as "cyclic existence", "cycle of existence", etc. Within Buddhism, samsara is defined as the continual repetitive cycle of birth and death that arises from ordinary beings' grasping and fixating on a self and experiences. Specifically, samsara refers to the process of cycling through one rebirth after another within the six realms of existence,  where each realm can be understood as either a physical realm or a psychological state characterized by a particular type of suffering. Samsara arises out of avidya (ignorance) and is characterized by dukkha (suffering, anxiety, and dissatisfaction). In the Buddhist view, liberation from samsara is possible by following the Buddhist path.

         Some Buddhist simply call this a continuous cycle of  death and rebirth , and of course Westerners like to refer to this  by the handy name of reincarnation and Zen practitioners  just call it  rebirth,  if they call it anything at all . But the main point here   is that we are all  deluded  tricked by her own mind  into filtering out the real world  as it truly exists.   Buddhist teachings  basically say  that the world is filled with suffering  and that suffering  is caused by our own delusions .   My humble opinion  is that this obsessive need to classify  Buddhism and or Zen  is a wonderful example of what the Buddha was talking about.  

 

          Historically Buddhist cosmology typically identifies six realms of existence: gods, demi-gods, humans, animals, hungry ghosts and hells.These realms can be understood both as psychological states and as aspects of Buddhist cosmology. we as modern Westerners of course cannot accept the possibility of this because were all scientific and stuff  and this is just obviously  primitive superstition .  I could point out  that modern scientists  have conjectured  that the multi-verse is composed  of every  possible alternative  universe.  they also say that 75% of the universe is made out of something we can't see  smell touch or feel  called dark matter  and dark energy. but of course they're not superstitious  because they are scientist .   And of course scientist cannot believe in rebirth   despite the fact  that they do believe in the conservation of both energy  and matter and information,  which just happens to be one of the fundamental truths that Buddha said  rose in his mind when he woke up.  Back in the day   Buddha summarized three great truths,  which Einstein laid later put into a formula.  matter and energy of the same thing  nothing is ever lost and you just happen to be made out of matter and energy  and that ego you call you  that mind that you think with and the DNA that supports it is basically  information.  Buddha taught  that everything was one ,  that everything was in constant flux  and that  nothing was ever lost. but of course he didn't have a mathematical formula  to back up his awakening  it was an experience  and an observation   an epiphany a  if you  well .  We of course as modern people  can't believe in a bunch of superstitious claptrap,  but we can believe the same thing if a group of physicists tells us it's true . 

        I once heard a very elderly Tibetan monk comment that he didn't understand why people would bother with Buddhism if they didn't believe in rebirth and karma.  At the time that seemed like a very refreshing statement since most of the people in the room didn't believe in either.  And I would point out that karma is basically the law of cause and effect " Another very scientific concept That Westerners all believe in  and take for granted  in all their daily lives and comings and goings."    Karma simply applies the law of cause and effect to the information that's gathered together and organized into you. Even the brightest  western people refuse to extend Cause-and-effect to their personal existence and place in the universe. It seems it would never occur to them that maybe the thing we call morality Is a natural law that pertains to them even if there is no Santa Claus or God enforcing it. Perhaps the modern Westerner should consider the fact that maybe the Things we call good and the things we call evil,  the things we call right and the things we call wrong might in fact reflect reality as it pertains to sentient beings.

    I myself have never been afraid of the word  spirituality After all I can always say that  my spiritual essence exists somewhere in the microtubules of my  brain  on a quantum level and feel really scientific. Nor am I afraid of the word religion despite the fact that more damage more harm and more mass murder has  been that done in the name of religion than probably any other concept in history.  My  Zen teacher told me many years ago that his Zen and my Zen were not the same Zen and never would be.  When he told me that, I thought he was bragging that he was enlightened and I never would be. It took me a while to realize what he was actually saying to me and that it was true.

      There's one thing that I'm absolutely sure of, and one thing only: Reality doesn't give a rats rear end what I think it is. My only task in Zen, and Buddhism for that matter ,  is to root out that little rascal we call reality and see things as they really are.  And if I ever accomplish that  then and only then I will be Awake.  Buddha said this would make me suffer less, The fewer delusions the less you suffer and frankly I believe this is true.

       I gave up  Vajrayāna  Buddhism And came to Zen because I've finally realized that some people may be able to think their way two awakening but I just didn't think I could. Bodhidharma  the father of Zen  taught that there were two  paths to awakening,  Through reason Or through practice. Look it up! I'm sure there are those that think he only taught that one could awaken by staring at the wall. But that is not true.

       Zen is not for everyone, neither is Buddhism, To some people  Zen and or Buddhism is a religion, To others it's a philosophy, to others it's nothing. Buddha knew this was true back when he was walking around India teaching the Dharma.  That's why he said try it and see if it works for you.  Just remember that you live in samsara, whether you like it or not,  and your samsara is going to be different from everyone else's just like your Zen.

    

    

   

 

    

 

 

   

      

 

 

      

      
   

Being an Old Man

       In 62 years I have been a child and I have been a man. I have been a soldier, seen, walked and dealt with death. I have been fear and hate and I have feared and been fearsome. I have run scared as fire and flaming steel rained down on me and my fellow soldiers. I have seen those I love die and watched as those who decades before tried to kill me come to my country and enjoy the freedoms my friends died for as if it was as free and natural as the air and the sun that warmed their faces. 

        I wake each morning In a world where innocent children die un named and those who kill them say they are the will and hand of God, I try to find purpose and reason but find only madness. I listen to a child with cancer, a politician who has grown rich selling hate and distrust and a mullah asking young men to blow themselves up to kill people neither of them know, all saying that they know God is with them. 

        When I sit and watch my mind as it struggles to make some sense of all this what I see is a mouse caught in a maze that has no exit, no beginning and no end. I ask myself if I made this maze or perhaps I am the maze. What wisdom is there to be had here? I was sure by now I would have at least a clue but alas I don’t. I know a billion people who say they have the answer, they have the key. These are the ones who seem the most deluded and do the most harm, where they walk the flowers wilt and only shadows follow them to their endings. But I still see beauty in the sunset, and laugh when babies smile. I think one day I will hear a song and it will be my song to sing. Perhaps one day we will all hear our song and dance out of the maze into a world with no questions or answers, just really good friends and lots of space to dance in.

The unwritten word

Did you ever wonder why neither Buddha or Jesus ever wrote a word. Both came from a society with a well developed written language and a long tradition of religious writing. But all we know of what they taught comes from what others say they heard. Why?

Zen

Do not separate the Buddha from the Zen.

Buddha and God

Most Buddhist schools teach that Buddhism teaches that there is no God.  While many of the older schools teach there is a heavenly realm populated with "gods" they see this state as not being eternal. That even these gods eventually parish.  So what they teach is heaven is ultimately a delusion. That the human state is the only one where a sentient being can pass beyond all self delusion into eternity. So they admit the existence of many realms and beings that exist there in.   So in years of study I have never seen where Buddha said there was no God he simply said we become attached to our idea of and belief in god.
         He taught that this attachment to the idea of god was another delusion that held us back in our search for Nirvana. So I have always felt these bold statements of "there is no God" so many modern Zen teachers make is an indication of their own not getting it yet.  Mostly this seems like a response that is more a rebellion from their parents religion than a wisdom obtained from their own enlightenment.
        All the killing that has been done in the name of this God or that God certainly shows the danger in becoming attached to the idea of God.  But this is a chronic disease of the human mind not a perception of reality.
     I have no idea if there is a God as in a omnipotent creator God. I am not so arrogant as to proclaim that other people's God are not kicking around in their own little heaven .  For all I know there are Angels and demons and Jinn.  I think perhaps a firm adamant disbelief in God can be as much of an impediment to spiritual progress as is a firm belief and attachment to a particular God can be.  

       So I welcome Christ and Ali to have a seat on our cushions. All who worship them are welcome as well.

The Laughing Buddha - and American Greed

      So today I am wandering around in a so called outlet mall when I come upon a store called "True Religion".  So you know I have to go in and check it out. The goods are nothing special mostly blue jeans and tee shirts and some baseball hats. But I am surprised to see their logo is a Buddha. To be precise its the Laughing Buddha playing a guitar. You know the guy, fat belly, bald head and a big smile. And of course the name Buddha was plastered on dozens of cheap tee shirts and hats along with his image. This is not the Buddha of history, meditating or teaching. Instead, a fat, bald, jolly character called "The Laughing Buddha who is  strumming a guitar and dancing.
 
      The Laughing Buddha emerged from Chinese folktales of the 10th century. The original stories of the Laughing Buddha centered on a Ch'an monk named Ch'i-t'zu, or Qieci, from Fenghua, in what is now the province of Zhejiang. Ch'i-t'zu was an eccentric but much-loved character who worked small wonders such as predicting the weather. In time he became a folk character. The tales of Ch'i-t'zu spread throughout China, and he came to be called Pu-tai (Budai), which means "hempen sack." He carries a sack with him full of good things, such as sweets for children, (i.e. the Chinese Santa Clause)  and he is often pictured with children. Pu-tai represents happiness, generosity and wealth, and he is a protector of children as well as of the poor and the weak. Today a statue of Pu-tai often can be found near the entrance of Chinese Buddhist temples. The tradition of rubbing Pu-tai's belly for good luck is a folk practice, however, not a Buddhist teaching.
        Pu-tai also is associated with the last panel of the Ten Ox-herding Pictures. These are ten images that represent stages of enlightenment in Ch'an (Zen) Buddhism. The last panel shows an enlightened master who enters towns and marketplaces to give to ordinary people the blessings of enlightenment.
Pu-tai followed the spread of Buddhism into other parts of Asia. In Japan he became one of the Seven Lucky Gods of Shinto and is called Hotei. He also was incorporated into Chinese Taoism as a deity of abundance.
        So I am not up set about his image being used in this way. Until I look at some of the prices on the goods. A $5 tee shirt with the logo has a price tag showing its $49.  A baseball hat with the laughing Buddha and the word Buddha across it says its $89.00. These outrageous prices being associated with the name Buddha and a beloved folk hero did in fact get me a bit agitated. And all this with the words "True Religion" plastered on everything both irritated saddened me.
      It was only then  that I began to wonder how Christians would react if the image was a smiling dancing Christ or Muslims would react if this was an image of Mohammad. I don't think they would put up with it, do you?
          So I began to wonder about all the western commercialization of the word "Zen" and the name and image of Buddha. To me selling this image and Buddha's name at such outrageous prices is no different than putting the Pope's name and image over a whore house. These Folks know Buddhist won't raise a fuss, they won't issue a kill order on their owners or burn down their stores.
        But shouldn't there be some point where we Buddhist and Zen practitioners object to   our name and images being used to sell greed? Putting the image of a  Zen Monk and the name Buddha on a cheap shirt or hat and then Charging 10 times the items possible retail worth is more than just a bad joke, it is misleading a generation of American young people in the worse way.

Buddhism, Layman vs. Monk

                    Layman vs. Monk

In the West we are experiencing a new renaissance in Buddhism. There are now more Buddhist centers and Zen centers than ever before. Each center seems to have its own special spin on the practice and the teachings. There is nothing wrong with this and in fact you can see as you trace the history of Buddhism that this is been true for centuries. As Buddhism is a living organic thing that adapts itself to the people and the needs of the people wherever it goes.

     God knows that wherever humans gather there are always differences of opinion and conflict over just about any activity that they attempt. One of the issues that has followed Buddhism from the very beginning was the issue of laymen versus monk. The traditional view of Buddhism is that of the monk, the ascetic who has renounced the world, owns no property and depends upon the offerings of others. In Japan there was a divergence that led to the creation of Buddhist priests. In Zen we have both monks/nuns and priests and laymen.

     This issue of whether or not a layman can in fact truly practice Buddhism led to perhaps one of the biggest schisms in Buddhism. Most scholars believe that Mahayana Buddhism came into being as Buddhism reached out to society and the layman practitioner.  The concept of the bodhisattva itself is linked with the schism. This question of whether or not a layman can truly practice still haunts Buddhism today.  The Vimalakīrti Sūtra is perhaps one of the first sutras that focused on a layman’s power to awaken despite his continuing functioning in the world.
      We see this in Zen quite a lot as more and more focus is placed upon robes and the shaving of heads and the monastic approach to Buddhism. I have practiced Buddhism for many many years but it was just the other night that something occurred to me that should’ve occurred to me 20 years ago. The question is who did Buddha teach for, who was his target audience. Many versions of his first sermon give the impression that it was aimed simply at a group of ascetics that he had formally associated with in order to convince them of his awakening.
     All the histories of Buddha show him gathering a Sangha of monks about himself and then traveling the countryside and teaching wherever he stopped to rest. This is certainly accepted as a fact by every school of Buddhism. It’s also accepted by virtually every school of Buddhism what his first sermon was. Some call this the first turning of the wheel, others simply referred to it as the four noble truths and the eightfold path. In any case I have yet to run across school of Buddhism that does not accept the four noble truths and the eightfold Noble path as the core teaching of the Buddha. This is accepted by Mahayana it’s accepted by Theravada it’s accepted by the Tibetans and the Zen masters it is the core teaching of the Buddha.

   Having said this I would call your attention to number five in the eightfold path.

5. Samma-Ajiva — Proper Livelihood. Also called right livelihood. This is a livelihood based on correct action the ethical principal of non-exploitation.

      This was from his first teaching this was one of the eight most important things that he taught on that first day to those that were there at vulture Peak.  And I think it’s about time that we recognized that fact.

      Not because it’s the basis of an ethical society, which it is, but because it clearly shows his target audience. In this one branch of the path to awakening the Buddha revealed that his teaching from the very beginning was not just meant for monks or ascetics. It is clear that he was talking to people who work for a living that people who get up in the morning and support their families and live in the real world were one of his major concerns.

     If this that were not true number five would expressly state that in order to awaken one must become a nun or a monk or a priest to reach awakening. If this were truly a call to become an ascetic that’s what he would’ve said. But what he did say was to find an ethical meanings of living within society. In modern English we can simply translate that into finding a job you can live with. We could list 1 million jobs that you should consider  1 million more you shouldn’t if you’re going to try to follow the Buddhist path. I think that would be useless.
     But what I think everyone should see is that the Buddha’s first teaching the core of Buddhism was not aimed at asceticism it was aimed at people who work for a living and that his call was not a call to renounce the world but to find a way to live in the world that was copacetic and harmonious with his other teachings. So what did he teach, he taught the great compassion and the great love and the great forgiveness. And at no time did he think that you had to drop all your possessions into the middle of a lake and live in a cave to find this love and compassion and this forgiveness.

      My conclusion here is simple you don’t have to be a monk you don’t have to be a nun or even a priest to follow the path of the Buddha from its beginning to it’s end. You don’t need to leave your family behind or shave your head to awaken.

     I watched as Westerners have tried to emulate the Buddhism of the East. They wear robes shave their heads give up the pleasures of the world and even condemn each other for having a sense of humor or enjoying the path. It seems like a sad thing as we project on each other what we think a true Buddhist should be. Zen centers turn in to  monasteries, husbands and wives are told that they can’t enjoy each other anymore. This is absurdity and was never what the Buddha intended even from the beginning. So I would suggest that even if you love your robes and you think you look cool in them you should consider the teachings of the Buddha the core of Buddhism not the wardrobe or the self-inflicted pain of the ascetic. Buddha said follow the middle way, that too was in his first sermon. I’ve included an English translation of his first sermon for those of you that would like to review it again. I myself learned just the other day that you can get so far away from that first sermon you don’t even remember what it said in total.

 

The Buddha's First Sermon

These two extremes, friends, are not to be practiced
by one who has gone forth from the world.
What are the two?

That joined with the passions and luxury---
low, vulgar, common, ignoble, and useless,
and that joined with self-torture---
painful, ignoble, and useless.

Avoiding these two extremes the one who has thus come
has gained the enlightenment of the middle path,
which produces insight and knowledge,
and leads to peace, wisdom, enlightenment, and nirvana.

And what, friends, is the middle path, by which
the one who has thus come has gained enlightenment,
which produces knowledge and insight,
and leads to peace, wisdom, enlightenment, and nirvana?

This is the noble eightfold way, namely,
correct understanding, correct intention,
correct speech, correct action, correct livelihood,
correct attention, correct concentration,
and correct meditation.

This, friends, is the middle path, by which
the one who has thus come has gained enlightenment,
which produces insight and knowledge,
and leads to peace, wisdom, enlightenment, and nirvana.

Now this, friends, is the noble truth of pain:
birth is painful; old age is painful;
sickness is painful; death is painful;
sorrow, lamentation, dejection, and despair are painful.
Contact with unpleasant things is painful;
not getting what one wishes is painful.
In short the five groups of grasping are painful.

Now this, friends, is the noble truth of the cause of pain:
the craving, which leads to rebirth,
combined with pleasure and lust,
finding pleasure here and there,
namely the craving for passion,
the craving for existence,
and the craving for non-existence.

Now this, friends, is the noble truth
of the cessation of pain:
the cessation without a remainder of craving,
the abandonment, forsaking, release, and non-attachment.

Now this, friends , is the noble truth
of the way that leads to the cessation of pain:
this is the noble eightfold way, namely,
correct understanding, correct intention,
correct speech, correct action, correct livelihood,
correct attention, correct concentration,
and correct meditation.

"This is the noble truth of pain":
Thus, friends, among doctrines unheard before,
in me insight, wisdom, knowledge, and light arose.

"This noble truth of pain must be comprehended."
Thus, friends, among doctrines unheard before,
in me insight, wisdom, knowledge, and light arose.

"It has been comprehended."
Thus, friends, among doctrines unheard before,
in me insight, wisdom, knowledge, and light arose.

"This is the noble truth of the cause of pain":
Thus, friends, among doctrines unheard before,
in me insight, wisdom, knowledge, and light arose.

"The cause of pain must be abandoned."
Thus, friends, among doctrines unheard before,
in me insight, wisdom, knowledge, and light arose.

"It has been abandoned."
Thus, friends, among doctrines unheard before,
in me insight, wisdom, knowledge, and light arose.

"This is the noble truth of the cessation of pain":
Thus, friends, among doctrines unheard before,
in me insight, wisdom, knowledge, and light arose.

"The cessation of pain must be realized."
Thus, friends, among doctrines unheard before,
in me insight, wisdom, knowledge, and light arose.

"It has been realized."
Thus, friends, among doctrines unheard before,
in me insight, wisdom, knowledge, and light arose.

"This is the noble truth
of the way that leads to the cessation of pain":
Thus, friends, among doctrines unheard before,
in me insight, wisdom, knowledge, and light arose.

"The way must be practiced."
Thus, friends, among doctrines unheard before,
in me insight, wisdom, knowledge, and light arose.

"It has been practiced."
Thus, friends, among doctrines unheard before,
in me insight, wisdom, knowledge, and light arose.

As long as in these four noble truths
my due knowledge and insight
with the three sections and twelve divisions
was not well purified, even so long, friends,
in the world with its gods, Mara, Brahma,
its beings with ascetics, priests, gods, and men,
I had not attained the highest complete enlightenment.
This I recognized.

And when, friends, in these four noble truths
my due knowledge and insight
with its three sections and twelve divisions
was well purified, then friends,
in the world with its gods, Mara, Brahma,
its beings with ascetics, priests, gods, and men,
I had attained the highest complete enlightenment.
This I recognized.

Knowledge arose in me;
insight arose that the release of my mind is unshakable:
this is my last existence;
now there is no rebirth.