ENLIGHTENMENT (or "Hail to Buddha's Bloody Diarrhea")

[Jundo Cohen]

why is monkey mind spoken of as if it were/is separate from "i"?

That's right, i believe.

i need my "i" for me to be i.

no "i", no spelling "l.i.f.e."

i just don't need all the bad stuff that the i sometimes does (although the good stuff is fine).

so i need to sometimes drop my "i" away, sometimes see through i, sometimes better balance and manage i.

But "i" will still have a mind of its own sometimes. That's just part of being "i", and that's ok.

[doormat]

Dear Jundo,

I think we're in better agreement than you may think. How could you write this:

Hi Kojip,

I would say that the vast majority of people in the world, although we are all "Buddha", are sucked into their "monkey mind" most of their lives, maybe 100% of the time. Thus, we can speak of "deluded sentient beings". Their monkey just leads them around by the nose.

Some folks, on the other hand, believe that once one realizes "enlightenment", one is free of the monkey mind 100% of the time. I don't care for that, see no proof of that apart from oft repeated legends of the past, and think that were it so, we would also loose a good deal of the beauty and complexity of what it means to be human ... reduced to numb wood and cold stones in a vanilla world.

***

That is the true human condition, not something unrealistic out of a Buddhist fairy tale of what people, in their fantasies and extreme imaginings of a hero made "perfect" and robbed of human form, dream "Golden Buddhas" should look and act like.

****

etc., etc.

and think that I didn't understand you? This is what I meant by 'human enlightenment'. I'm aware that, perhaps for the flash of kensho, our enlightenment is the same as a Buddhas. But the flash is just a moment. From a jargon point of view it isn't correct to say 'human enlightenment', perhaps. But when we recognize that the conditioning that goes into being a human still has to be dealt with, I think we have to realize the limitations of our enlightenment. Zen Masters, in the same paragraph, will say there's no difference between our enlightenment and that of the Buddhas, but there's still different depths of awareness. You may as well call those limitations on that enlightenment 'human enlightenment'. It's a wonderful, spiritually uplifting thing that's a part of the journey. A peek into what's in store. But, a good part of what my thoughts were when responding to Kojip is we need to avoid fixating on the wonder of being human. We don't want to have ourselves stuck adulating our condition because we can recognize a shit stick for what it is. Sooner or later we have to get past the human condition. That's were Kojip's relief will be found, in my opinion. And he/she is correct in putting effort in to getting to the bottom of that. It may not happen until after the Five SKandhas are dissolved, which is something, I believe, only Bodhisattvas can get into. But I still think, it has to be done.

[Jundo Cohen]

Dear Jundo,

I think we're in better agreement than you may think. How could you write this:

Hi Kojip,

I would say that the vast majority of people in the world, although we are all "Buddha", are sucked into their "monkey mind" most of their lives, maybe 100% of the time. Thus, we can speak of "deluded sentient beings". Their monkey just leads them around by the nose.

Some folks, on the other hand, believe that once one realizes "enlightenment", one is free of the monkey mind 100% of the time. I don't care for that, see no proof of that apart from oft repeated legends of the past, and think that were it so, we would also loose a good deal of the beauty and complexity of what it means to be human ... reduced to numb wood and cold stones in a vanilla world.

***

That is the true human condition, not something unrealistic out of a Buddhist fairy tale of what people, in their fantasies and extreme imaginings of a hero made "perfect" and robbed of human form, dream "Golden Buddhas" should look and act like.

****

etc., etc.

and think that I didn't understand you? This is what I meant by 'human enlightenment'. I'm aware that, perhaps for the flash of kensho, our enlightenment is the same as a Buddhas. But the flash is just a moment. From a jargon point of view it isn't correct to say 'human enlightenment', perhaps. But when we recognize that the conditioning that goes into being a human still has to be dealt with, I think we have to realize the limitations of our enlightenment. Zen Masters, in the same paragraph, will say there's no difference between our enlightenment and that of the Buddhas, but there's still different depths of awareness. You may as well call those limitations on that enlightenment 'human enlightenment'. It's a wonderful, spiritually uplifting thing that's a part of the journey. A peek into what's in store. But, a good part of what my thoughts were when responding to Kojip is we need to avoid fixating on the wonder of being human. We don't want to have ourselves stuck adulating our condition because we can recognize a shit stick for what it is. Sooner or later we have to get past the human condition. That's were Kojip's relief will be found, in my opinion. And he/she is correct in putting effort in to getting to the bottom of that. It may not happen until after the Five SKandhas are dissolved, which is something, I believe, only Bodhisattvas can get into. But I still think, it has to be done.

No, I do not think quite so.

I do not believe that we have to get past the human condition. I do not want to dissolve the Five Skandhas, only see through them (which is enough to end my "Skandha problem", thank you) ... cause I need them for life (from tying my shoes to doing the dishes). I don't give a damn about "what's in store" in some other fairy tail realm of whatever, as I am quite content with "what's in store" right here and now.

A moment of "Kensho" is a yawn ... cause I have shoes to tie, dishes to wash. When I see my dirty dishes, I am seeing the face of the Buddha.

I do not think that there are "perfect" Buddhas that we will someday become. Better said, I think there are "Perfect without concern of perfect or imperfect" Buddhas that we already are ... once we just realize that fact.

... and that realizing that fact makes "shit sticks" not merely "shit sticks" any more (even though filthy and stinking as ever ... and in need in cleaning where we can). Then our "human condition" is sufficiently unconditioned, in my opinion.

Tying our shoes, washing the dishes ... enlightenment itself.

Gassho, J

[Kojip]

Thankyou for your response Reverend. It has been a real help.


Regarding "i" . When this diminuative "i" is used it usually implies a transcendent "I". Having started this journey in Advaita Vedanta, and having spent (too) much time in the Jhana of unconditioned "I", the life-changing turn to Buddha Dharma came with the discovery that this was none other than little "i" in transcendental drag.

[Carol]

the life-changing turn to Buddha Dharma came with the discovery that this was none other than little "i" in transcendental drag.

You might also like Master Sheng Yen's essay on this ... What is Chan?

[Huifeng]

the life-changing turn to Buddha Dharma came with the discovery that this was none other than little "i" in transcendental drag.

You might also like Master Sheng Yen's essay on this ... What is Chan?

Kojip, your line here is a classic: "none other than little "i' in transcendental drag"!
Still, even this drag can have it's uses, if it is skillfully applied with understanding.

[Kojip]

the life-changing turn to Buddha Dharma came with the discovery that this was none other than little "i" in transcendental drag.

You might also like Master Sheng Yen's essay on this ... What is Chan?

Kojip, your line here is a classic: "none other than little "i' in transcendental drag"!
Still, even this drag can have it's uses, if it is skillfully applied with understanding.

thanks omegA . I fancy myself a poet, but my wife disagrees. How does this drag have its uses? thanks

[Dan74]

No, I do not think quite so.

I do not believe that we have to get past the human condition. I do not want to dissolve the Five Skandhas, only see through them (which is enough to end my "Skandha problem", thank you) ... cause I need them for life (from tying my shoes to doing the dishes). I don't give a damn about "what's in store" in some other fairy tail realm of whatever, as I am quite content with "what's in store" right here and now.

A moment of "Kensho" is a yawn ... cause I have shoes to tie, dishes to wash. When I see my dirty dishes, I am seeing the face of the Buddha.

I do not think that there are "perfect" Buddhas that we will someday become. Better said, I think there are "Perfect without concern of perfect or imperfect" Buddhas that we already are ... once we just realize that fact.

... and that realizing that fact makes "shit sticks" not merely "shit sticks" any more (even though filthy and stinking as ever ... and in need in cleaning where we can). Then our "human condition" is sufficiently unconditioned, in my opinion.

Tying our shoes, washing the dishes ... enlightenment itself.

I wonder why one needs to affirm or deny kensho, "perfect Buddhas" and "transcending human condition" if there is complete engagement with what is?

On the other hand if one is attached to what is, then there is every reason to see it as ultimate and reject things outside one's experience.

Completely engaged, yet completely still, isn't this what our Zen ancestors taught? Like Hongzhi, Dogen's teacher's teacher and one of the his all-time favourites:

Empty and desireless, cold and thin, simple and genuine, this is how to strike down and fold up the remaining habits of many lives. When the stains from old habits are exhausted, the original light appears, blazing through your skull, not admitting any other maters. Vast and spacious, like sky and water merging during autumn, like snow and moon having the same color, this field is without boundary, beyond direction, magnificently one entity without edge or seam. Further, when you turn within and drop off everything completely, realization occurs. Right at the time of entirely dropping off, deliberation and discussion are one thousand or ten thousand miles away. Still no principle is discernible, so what could there be to point to or explain? People with the bottom of the bucket fallen out immediately find total trust. So we are told simply to realize mutual response and explore mutual response, then turn around and enter the world. Roam and play in Samadhi. Every detail clearly appears before you. Sound and form, echo and shadow, happen instantly without leaving traces. The outside and myself do not dominate each other, only because no perceiving [of objects] comes between us. Only this non-perceiving encloses the empty space of the Dhama realm's majestic ten thousand forms. People with the original face should enact and fully investigate [the field] without neglecting a single fragment.

I guess rather than contradict what you are saying, Jundo, I am seeking clarification. To me it sounds like there is something missing from what you say (but this could be my reading).

_/|\_

[Jundo Cohen]

A moment of "Kensho" is a yawn ... cause I have shoes to tie, dishes to wash. When I see my dirty dishes, I am seeing the face of the Buddha.
...

I wonder why one needs to affirm or deny kensho, "perfect Buddhas" and "transcending human condition" if there is complete engagement with what is?

My point is not to lower Kensho in any way, but to raise up a simple yawn and dirty dishes to the level of the timeless, sacred ... Better said, let there be no "up" or "down". That yawn is a Buddha's very breathing when perceived as such.

Same for "Buddha's diarrhea", which I consider at least as worthy of honor as his "lion's torso", "antelope like calfs" "sheathed sexual organs"... or any of the other "32 Signs". I intentionally chose something ugly and unpleasant for the title of this thread ... then stuck "Hail" before it.

Folks are always running running running toward something ... non-stop enlightenment, Kensho, the Pure Land ... and do not clearly perceive what is here all along. They want a Buddha encrusted in gold and jewels, and cannot see a Buddha, just as Pure, encrusted in used heroin needles and gun powder and vomit sitting in the gutter.

Through this Practice, we can come to see through the ugliness, to a Beauty which gives flower to both rose pedals and weeds. It is simply not necessary, however, that we experience the weeds (the ugliness, the pain) as rose pedals 24/7. That is my principle point: It is simply not necessary that we attain the transcendent and timeless all (or even much) of the time ... still, it can be "enlightenment". Let the ugly, disgusting, heartbreaking just be ugly, disgusting, heartbreaking ... and get on with a Bodhisattva's work to clean up what we can (don't expect an experience in which the world, much or all of the time, is converted into cotton candy clouds and cherry soda seas. Do not expect the wars and child abuse cases to become somehow less ugly ... even though, in our practice, they somehow sometimes do just that).

The Enlightenment man knows, somehow, that the pain and vomit is Buddha ... as overwhelming and ugly as it is in a given situation. Sometimes, he will be able to see through it, sometimes he may be lost in it ... no matter. He knows (at least most of the time). Thus, he is enlightened even if all he can sometimes see and hear is the pain and ugliness, and not rainbows and celestial music much of the time.

The deluded man simply never knows anything but delusion, and thus is deluded.

Where did the idea come that, once someone "attains enlightenment", the gutter is permanently a Pure Land of Buddha Palaces?

Completely engaged, yet completely still, isn't this what our Zen ancestors taught? Like Hongzhi, Dogen's teacher's teacher and one of the his all-time favourites:

Empty and desireless, cold and thin, simple and genuine, this is how to strike down and fold up the remaining habits of many lives. When the stains from old habits are exhausted, the original light appears, blazing through your skull, not admitting any other maters.

Yes, these guys talked a good game in the Abbot's lecture seat. But how were they the rest of their day? Were they always experiencing what they described? Perhaps it is better to say, I think, that they could access what is described most or much of the time when they wished too (though perhaps not all of the time when they wished to do so).

I am fascinated too by Dogen, in his last year, racked with some mysterious disease ... and he stopped his lecturing. Perhaps his moans and groans and cries of agony were his lecture. I am sure it was likely so for all the great Ancestors who were not always as we picture them when off the lecture seat (for example, in modern times, we can see teacher after teacher who is both brilliant but, unfortunately, all too human and prone to fall down ... ). I have little doubt that it was not any different in the past (some folks falling down more and less gracefully than others, of course), except that the historical record has been scrubbed clean.

And thank you for the posting from Master Sheng -yen. I love and miss him. I find it again, however, phrased (like so many Buddhist writings from so many voices) in such absolutest, exaggerated, idealistic terms that it can give the impression that "once you get there, it's done". It is words like "eliminate" "absolute" "never" "only feels" "perpetually" ... so idealized with regard to our practice and these teachings (Dogen, like so many, was often just as guilty). As well, so many of these teachers emphasized the transcendent, the ethereal, the totally wonderful ... but not the down and dirty of this world which is -just as much Buddha, no division- (in other words, they are about the Sacred Golden Light that emanates from the top of his Holy Head ... not about the equally sacred puss that emanates out his backside).

By the practise of Chan one can eliminate the 'I'; not only the selfish, small 'I', but also the large 'I', which in philosophy is called 'Truth' or 'the Essence'. Only then is there absolute freedom. Thus an accomplished Chan practitioner never feels that any responsibility is a burden, nor does he feel the pressure that the conditions of life exert on people.He only feels that he is perpetually bringing the vitality of life into full activity ... At that stage wisdom becomes absolute ... you will then be free from the concept of self and other, right and wrong, and free from the vexations of greed, hatred, worry and pride. You will not need to search for peace and purity, and you will not need to detest evil vexations and impurity. Although you live in the world of phenomenal reality, to you, any environment is a Buddha's Pure Land.

[EMPHASIS ADDED]

Well, yes, everything that Master Sheng-yen describes can be realized in this Practice ... sometimes.

But why is it necessary (or even describing a truly sound way to live) to talk in such absolutest "and they lived happily ever after" terms about these things? I am more than happy to visit the Pure Land from time to time, the mean streets from time to time. Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are in both places.

Gassho, Jundo

[Dan74]

Could you elaborate on this, Jundo?

That is my principle point: It is simply not necessary that we attain the transcendent and timeless all (or even much) of the time ... still, it can be "enlightenment".

Not necessary in what sense? Is it necessary that we practice? is it necessary that we act compassionately and not harm others? Which bits are necessary and which are not?

_/|\_

[Jundo Cohen]

Could you elaborate on this, Jundo?

That is my principle point: It is simply not necessary that we attain the transcendent and timeless all (or even much) of the time ... still, it can be "enlightenment".

Not necessary in what sense? Is it necessary that we practice? is it necessary that we act compassionately and not harm others? Which bits are necessary and which are not?

_/|\_

Our practice is about Wisdom and Compassion, not harming others. We should seek to live in such way as much as we can.

My objection is to the image of Buddhas and Ancestors who are always, unfailingly, Wise, Compassionate ... never doing the least bit of harm, always knowing exactly the right thing to say and do in any and all situations ... never a miss, never a falling down, never a moment of confusion and human weakness and personal ugliness. Baloney.

Such perfect Buddhas and Ancestors exist only (in my belief as to the likelihoods) in made up legends and imagined extreme Buddha lands.

On the other hand, show me someone who knows how to be Wise and Compassionate most of the time, in most of their life ... and I will follow that guy or gal as my teacher!!

Gassho, Jundo

[Dan74]

OK, but this is kind of beside the point, isn't it?

It actually inspires me to believe in an enlightened being, rather than the impossibility of such, which I could interpret as license to go on piss-farting around.

For somebody else, it may be the opposite - they would feel so inadequate before a perfect Buddha that they'd give up before they started or feel that the whole thing is irrelevant to them.

Incidentally in the Pali Nikaya, there is a sutta I recall where the Buddha instructs his disciples to contemplate the impurities of the body (to loosen attachment) then goes on a retreat and when he comes back finds that quite a few had committed suicide. "Hmm... bad idea. Lets go back to anapannasati (breath awareness),[paraphrase is mine!]" he says.

So sometimes even according to traditional sources he made mistakes, and pretty drastic ones (scholars please correct me if I messed up and I will try to track down this sutta in the meantime). But I find a self-imposed glass ceiling even more confining and even less convincing than the notion of a perfect being. Horses for courses, eh?

Incidentally there is something relevant on Tricycle. It's an interview with Stephen Batchelor who argues a similar position to yours (a bit softer perhaps):

http://www.tricycle.com/essay/living-with-the-devil

In any case I don't quite understand your seeming need to keep hammering this belief. After all affirming or denying a possibility of a perfect being, is that not just part of the thicket of views?

_/|\_

[Jundo Cohen]

OK, but this is kind of beside the point, isn't it?

It actually inspires me to believe in an enlightened being, rather than the impossibility of such, which I could interpret as license to go on piss-farting around.

Oh, I have no trouble if we admit that we are taking these folks as made up symbols and archtypes that we are using to teach a lesson, give an example of the target ... like I tell my son "George Washington never told a lie" or (less American reference) "Santa Claus shows it is better to give than to receive".

But we have largely taken the (I believe likely) fictions and exaggerations as the reality and true meaning of these teachings (which, I believe, are about life in a much more complex, bitter-sweet world). Sure, part of this wondrous path allows us to access a realm beyond good/bad, bitter or sweet. Been there (where?), 'done not done' that.

But truly it is about life in the trenches of good and bad, bitter and sweet too.

Let the bitter be bitter in this wonderful tragi-comic world, and don't pretend that, at a certain point in our practice, it no longer exists as bitter or ... is always sweet to a Buddha alive in this world.

[Jundo Cohen]

Seriously, it's all in this corny country song ...

"This ain't nothing" ... Nagarjuna couldn't have not said it any better ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNOk26p5DRQ

Craig Morgan - This Ain\'t Nothin LYRICS:

He was standing in the rubble of an old farmhouse outside Birmingham
When some on the scene reporter stuck a camera in the face of that old man
He said "tell the folks please mister, what are you gonna do
Now that this twister has taken all that's there to you"
The old man just smiled and said "boy let me tell you something, this ain't nothing"

[Kojip]

There are Theravadin monks who have literally uprooted the tendency to identify with bodymind. I personally know people who are virtually free of these tendencies. People like Ajahn Sumedho are extraordinary in that way. This is not idealizing, or fantasy. The difference I think is that these people are on a very different trajectory than a Zen practitioner. Their goal is to “Get out of Dodge” . They are not committed to further engagement in the world, let alone endless engagement.

[Jundo Cohen]

There are Theravadin monks who have literally uprooted the tendency to identify with bodymind. I personally know people who are virtually free of these tendencies. People like Ajahn Sumedho are extraordinary in that way. This is not idealizing, or fantasy. The difference I think is that these people are on a very different trajectory than a Zen practitioner. Their goal is to “Get out of Dodge” . They are not committed to further engagement in the world, let alone endless engagement.

More power to 'em, and Buddha bless em. I will take your word on what they have attained (although you can't be sure until in their skulls). Many paths up the mountain (or off the mountain for some) ... anyway, what mountain?

I like living in Dodge, although the place could use a bit of cleaning up.

There has always been that tug-o-war between the escapist tendency in Buddhism, rejecting and squelching aspects of our humanity ... and the the 'live right in this world' path, engaging with this life-world ... while perhaps seeing through it, bringing more Wisdom, Compassion, Balance and Moderation into our living in it.

No place to escape to, no place we need escape.

Gassho, J

[genkaku]

Their goal is to “Get out of Dodge” .

OK, a nice goal for the moment. But how is anyone supposed to get out of Dodge without entering and being at ease in Dodge first, last and always? And no, I am not looking for any of those slick there-is-no-Dodge dodges.

[partofit22]

Buddha would have liked Dodge -- and country music-

[doormat]

There are Theravadin monks who have literally uprooted the tendency to identify with bodymind. I personally know people who are virtually free of these tendencies. People like Ajahn Sumedho are extraordinary in that way. This is not idealizing, or fantasy. The difference I think is that these people are on a very different trajectory than a Zen practitioner. Their goal is to “Get out of Dodge” . They are not committed to further engagement in the world, let alone endless engagement.

OK, a nice goal for the moment. But how is anyone supposed to get out of Dodge without entering and being at ease in Dodge first, last and always? And no, I am not looking for any of those slick there-is-no-Dodge dodges.

Could be through a similar process of "dissolving the Five Skandhas", as mentioned in the Surangama Sutra. I'd think the becoming 'at ease with Dodge' would come long before that point. We all have different ideals, goals, capacities, etc. for practice. If tying your shoe is your practice, then tie your shoe.

[PeterB]

To quote the same phrase from Ajahn Sumedho twice in the same day," if this world were any less Dukkha ridden we would all just keep sleeping, if it were anymore Dukkha ridden we would give up in despair, as it is this world is perfect for bringing about our Awakening "

That doesnt sound like getting out of Dodge to me. It sounds like he thinks Dodge does a good job.