I recently became more focused on my zazen practice (it's been on and off for about two years now).
I'm curious: how important is a Zen master? I understand the importance of having someone let you know if an interpretation is correct of not. But is it necessary if buddhahood can be attained by one's "self?"
Any input would be much appreciated
Buddha had no master. He sat under a fig tree. Yet Zen practice - traditionally - would say you need a master, but it's open to interpretation. I practice Zen as well and sit zazen daily, and have been since about 2006. I would say no, it does not require a master, plus you have to think of the quality of master you would be able to find in the US. There are many other sects of Buddhism that do not require a master. There are even a few sects that pretty much say "everyone is already Buddha and has Buddhahood inside them", and that you just need to practice to unlock it. Again, Buddha had no master, no scriptures, no texts, no nothing. He sat quietly and meditated, and eventually became enlightened one day under a fig tree, after vowing not to leave until it happened. I read up on lots of Mahayana buddhism in general, and wouldn't call myself a strict Zen practioner. I find Buddhism in general very interesting, but I tend to stick with Mahayana because it seems more my style. I only follow for the practices and the writings/scriptures/koans, I do not take any of the mystical/spiritual/deity like portions to heart. But many sects would say you do not need a master. Take Nichiren Buddhism for example, which would say... Many other sects of Buddhism, even within Mahayana, would consider this kind of a cop out. Nicheren's argument was that you don't need to treat a new buddhist pupil like a child, and spend all this time wasting on silly riddles and questions that have no answers, and that one can go straight to the Lotus Sutra where the actual knowledge is spelled out and more apparent, which makes sense to me. So I've read a few books from Nicheren teachers and that various associated texts with it. Personally, I would say yes, Buddhahood can be attained by ones self, because Buddha himself did just that. To say that everyone else after him has to do it differently and under the watchful eye of a master is silly. Depending on what texts you read, most would say it took him six years to attain enlightenment, but it was extreme practice, and austerity of pretty much all things that lead him there. If he did it in six years without a master, I think the rest of us should be able to at least do it in our lifetimes. I seek to emulate the practices and would love to be enlightened, but I don't see enlightenment ever happening in my hectic life. I simply don't think my modern lifestyle would allow enlightenment, but the practice can still bring me close, and bring a lot of value of mindfulness to my life. I've also taken removing vanity and ego as much as possible from my life, down to the point that I shave my head weekly as a part of my practice. That's what I seek, the practice and dedication to it. So I guess it's up to you, what you seek, and how you need to get there. For me, it's the journey, not the destination. The dedicated practice itself is the enlightenment. Good luck, fellow Bodhisatta.But is it necessary if buddhahood can be attained by one's "self?"
"that all people have an innate Buddha nature and are therefore inherently capable of attaining enlightenment in their current form: “…the attainment of Buddhahood in one’s present form is limited to the Lotus Sutra alone”. According to Nichiren, the Lotus Sutra is “the direct path to enlightenment"
First off, thank you for such a thoughtful response. You make some great points. Equity seems to be a large component of the Buddhist tradition (with the exception of excluding women for a while. I don't quite understand that). It's funny that we've deluded ourselves into thinking we aren't worthy of the same achievement as the person who told us we can. But wasn't it two straight weeks of meditation after he left his ascetic friends that he spent under the bodhi tree? Regardless, it did require a lot of meditation. I would say that I agree with the Nichiren quote. Buddhism takes a lot from Hinduism in that Buddhahood is a lot like Hindu's concept of Brahmam, except that we are Brahman and Brahman is us, right? I seem to understand "enlightenment" as the full complete realization of the Buddhahood of/in everything and in every moment (even those of a hectic life). Haha, see? This is why I think a Zen master would be beneficial. They'd be able to validate these thoughts as true or false (or both?). But maybe through enough zazen I can validate them on my own. What a funny thing this is.For me, it's the journey, not the destination.
I agree. But not to sound too esoteric, isn't all of this a journey with no destination? Doesn't the "no-self" principle promote that? We don't have a "self" because it implies distinct entities? If we don't have a self, my essence (which I'm not sure if it differs from a soul), is the same as your essence, the essence of my coffee mug, the coffee within it, etc (Side note: I think quantam physics . It will continue being after the form that contains my essence is long gone. In that way it's all a journey, right?
Correct. I really don't think there is a destination, for anything. Life, and everything in it, is only what is infront of you at that moment. But again, going back to the modern life, I unfortunately do have to look into the future a bit when it comes to my family, my finances, and my career. So there is a certain separation there that I cannot escape in my life, and there are "destinations" or certain things that do have to matter in a modern life like ours. Also it's funny you mention quantum physics in there, because the buddhist thoughts on dualism even talk about it, and talked about it even before quantum physics was a real thing. They called them Buddhist Building Blocks, and are referenced in texts that predate atomic sciences. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism#In_Buddhist_philosophy And again, I agree there is no self, which I simply referred to as ego in my last post. It's very important in buddhism to shed the self, or the ego. Shedding the "me" and the forced description internally of ones self is important. We're just our bodies and minds. I am not special, my name isn't really my name, we're just objects like everything else in life. Thinking and higher reasoning is a great thing, but it also over complicates things in life, starting with how we see and describe ourselves in our own heads. Alan Watts finds the question "Who are you?" silly for this reason, because you'd start with a bunch of stuff that is all completely pointless, "Well, my name is Ryan I work in IT, I play guitar and juggle, and am married". And like my waterfall example below, he'd stop you and say "You stopped being you the moment you started to answer my question." They would answer you with something like "There is no true or false, there is only the way it is." Zen masters are against claims of almost any kind. They would also tell you Zen is more about what it isn't, then claim to say what it is. Claiming what it is NOT, is acceptable, claiming what it IS would violate the very nature of Zen itself. They would explain, with metaphors, why this is the case. I've met a few zen masters, but never studied with them. But one once told me "Trying to explain Zen would be like trying to capture a waterfall in a bucket. Once you capture it in the bucket, its no longer a waterfall. It's just a bucket full of water." A real Zen master won't tell you what you are doing wrong or right, other than your zazen posture, they can only keep poking your mind to come to the correct conclusion, and the correct conclusion, like the waterfall example, can't r eally be expressed into words or descriptions. If you want to follow Zen specifically and strictly, you should find a master. I follow zen for zazen, but I do not follow it strictly, though I have debated finding a master in my area. But outside of the East and West coast, there's not a lot of Zen masters here in Minnesota. Zen is a very funny thing.isn't all of this a journey with no destination? Doesn't the "no-self" principle promote that? We don't have a "self" because it implies distinct entities? If we don't have a self, my essence (which I'm not sure if it differs from a soul), is the same as your essence, the essence of my coffee mug, the coffee within it, etc (Side note: I think quantam physics . It will continue being after the form that contains my essence is long gone. In that way it's all a journey, right?
They'd be able to validate these thoughts as true or false (or both?).
Disclaimer: I provide a lot of explanation of my tone because I've noticed that my language can easily being misinterpreted when not spoken. I'm no physicist by any means, but I did I bit of research recently into the correlation. It's interesting that the smallest particles we know of are quarks. The interesting thing about them is that they arrange themselves in a pattern, much like the elements, which implies there are even smaller components. It'll be interesting to see if one day we find out that there is no fundamental particle, but rather a fundamental state of being. Alan Watts was the man. Have you even considered you might be a Zen master? It seems to be that you have a firm grasp on the concepts? Wouldn't following it strictly be a criteria of being a Zen master? Do you think you live your life in accordance to these principles, or are these just theories to think about? I looked it up and there are a few in the Chicago area. Maybe when my schedule opens up a bit I'll head into town to check them out.But again, going back to the modern life
You don't think Buddhist principles are so grounded in truth that they'd be applicable whenever? (not a sarcastic/rhetorical question) If the concepts are only applicable in certain situations, why believe them at all? What appeals to many people (myself included) is the applicability of Buddhist principles.
Do you think then that Buddha was incorrect when he permitted marriage? (again, honest question)I am not special
Why not view it from the opposite perspective? (no condescension intended) Why not view playing guitar, the name Ryan, being married, etc. as all being equally special? Or not not special? I haven't thought much about it but I'd like to think that that'd cultivate a more positive outlook.
They are, that's why I practice, and that's why it works for me. But many buddhist texts would say that shedding a lot of things is vital to attaining enlightenment. Buddha was a skeleton by the time he reached enlightenment. He wasn't working, talking to people, having any stress in his life, eating, or commuting in snow and traffic to a stressful job. I don't think these things make enlightenment impossible, I just think they are in a small confliction with certain aspects of buddhism. There's a reason monks give up everything in life to live in a monastary and do nothing but sit all day meditating. That's the austerity of buddhism. Why do you think that is? Because that's what a lot of texts and scriptures would suggest is needed to attain enlightenment, to devote your entire life to it. I believe zen practice and buddhism have a huge place in modern times, perhaps more than ever, for calming us and destressing our lives, I was only saying that dedicating a life and finding enlightenment itself probably becomes more difficult. I'm not saying impossible, I'm just saying it's "different" and perhaps more challenging. Those are indeed very special things, and things to be proud of. The point wasn't that those things are bad, the point was that when you try to EXPLAIN those things and label or verbalise them, that it is not being communicated properly and they lose their value and meaning in a Zen sense. It makes sense to BE them, it doesn't make sense to label them. They are much more beautiful just being. Like the waterfall example. Watts, and other masters, would say that the "Who are you?" question would be better answered by smiling or dancing, and saying nothing at all. No. Being in a position of being a teacher is something that has never appealed to me, as I much prefer being the student and learning, and am no where near having learned everything. Not by a mile. I drink to much, and have trouble myself keeping my calm at times, and would need much more austerity in my life than I already practice which isn't much. I like caffeine, I like drinking, I enjoy other substances from time to time, and I have a lot to learn myself. While I appreciate the thought, it's not something I would ever consider at this point in my life. I have too much to learn. I do live my life to most of the principles of buddhism, but again I stray. I drink, I like caffeine, I do own material things like a house and a car, etc. There is no way I could be a pure buddhist monk, not even close. And that kind of goes back to the modern life thing that I was being confusing with earlier. I simply don't lead anything near the life of a monk. I've adopted meditation practice, constant mindfulness and thought exercise, and removed some vanity from my life where I can, but I simply can't adopt the straight buddhist lifestyle that a lot of zen masters or scriptures would say is needed to become a monk or fully enlightened. I do thing rationally and calmly even in situations where others would fret, and I fall back on the very calming principle of "it is what it is". I willingly leave too many distractions in my life, for example I'm typing out a comment on one of them right now. :) To me, I'm doing everything I can within reason and context of my life that I was already living before I found buddhism. But I'd be lying if I said I want to give it all up, become a monk, and devote my entire life to enlightenment. Consider me your average western picking and choosing the pieces that work for him, but recognizing yet ignoring the aspects that simply wouldn't work for me. It's kind of my own personal balance. I'm not saying I won't find enlightenment in my life, was only trying to express that I feel it can be a little more difficult for us in modern times, that's all.You don't think Buddhist principles are so grounded in truth that they'd be applicable whenever?
Why not view it from the opposite perspective? (no condescension intended) Why not view playing guitar, the name Ryan, being married, etc. as all being equally special? Or not not special? I haven't thought much about it but I'd like to think that that'd cultivate a more positive outlook.
Have you even considered you might be a Zen master?
Yeah I'd agree that living in an environment with more distractions and emphasis on ego would make it harder. But I don't think that that should be any reason to dissuade anyone against "pursuing" enlightenment. Maybe you didn't mean the word "conflict?" Would you say that moving to a monastery is a form of taking the easy way out? Or is it harder in that you it's a solitary life? Or is it just...is...? Well that's definitely something to think about. All of those reasons for lacking the qualities of a Zen master I think would be qualities of one (especially the mentality of not being one. I highly recommend Hardcore Zen. But this brings up another question. Assuming the purpose of zazen is to "attain" enlightenment/nirvana (enlightenment/nirvana being paraphrased as realization of the oneness of everything) wouldn't we realize that the caffeine, house, car, other drugs, entitlement to a name, etc. are all just a part of it and therefore not negative? I'm not sure I explained that as well as I could have, but I think you'd understand the point I'm trying to make. Or are they just distractions? Is it possible to even loose Zen value?they lose their value and meaning in a Zen sense.
Extremely well put.
Not negatives, just distractions at the most, and arguably to some not even important. But to me, they are the things that play into my demeanor and disposition, and sometimes my stress and mental clarity. For you they may not be distractions, for me they can be at times. Sometimes these things could be sources of Dukkha in my life. It's not that I need to eliminate or get rid of them, but they bring certain negative feelings to my life, so for me, sometimes they are Dukkha. It doesn't mean I need to give them up, but it means I either need to get over the anxiety or stress they cause, or give them up if deemed to be impossible. Video games, as one example, were a huge cause of this in my life, and so was smoking pot. They were things that I could not deal with mentally, so they had to be removed from my life. That was part of my personal austerity and cessation of suffering. Those two things caused a lot of "unsatisfactoryness" in my life (not a word, but it's the only way I can explain it other than saying Dukkha again, which encompasses lots of negative feelings in life.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dukkha Perhaps the very pursuit and dedication to finding enlightenment IS enlightenment, and many schools and masters would agree with exactly that understanding of it. You'll notice most texts and writers on the subject will never tell you what enlightenment exactly is. Perhaps after years of sitting and searching, Buddha discovered that the very act of sitting and searching was the enlightenment, that the act of looking for that goal so hard was the goal in and of itself. What enlightenment is, even within Zen itself, will be described differently by different schools. In reading Buddhist scripture and books, you'll notice the common pattern that even I'm repeating here, in that things are almost entirely described in riddles and metaphor, and that there is no clear answers for lots of the questions a student will ask. That's part of the rub, is to figure it out for yourself, and what these things all mean, and more importantly mean to you. Zen can only be understood through the practice, so explaining it becomes difficult. Like I said earlier, it's easier to say what it isn't than what it is. For Japanese Zen (Soto), they would tell you and I that we are already enlightened by merely practicing. Take this excerpt from the wiki... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen#Soto So like I was saying, I don't believe enlightenment is impossible, and when I said I don't believe I'll achieve it, it's more that I'm not focusing on it and don't know what enlightenment means to me yet, all I know is that I'm not there yet, because I'm not at one with my body and mind, and the rest of the world yet. When I get to that point, I won't care about the label or be able to tell you what it feels like, because it will be my own enlightenment that I practiced towards and altered my life for. Also, I'd like to thank you for starting this discussion today. I don't have anyone to talk to about Buddhism in my real life, not anymore anyway. It's already making me reconsider seeking out a master, lol. It's really putting it into perspective that talking about these things really does kind of help both parties, even when I'm the one answering the questions. Otherwise I mostly just write about it and express myself on a piece of paper with a pen. This has been fun and revealing so far.Assuming the purpose of zazen is to "attain" enlightenment/nirvana (enlightenment/nirvana being paraphrased as realization of the oneness of everything) wouldn't we realize that the caffeine, house, car, other drugs, entitlement to a name, etc. are all just a part of it and therefore not negative?
The Sōtō-school has de-emphasized kōans since Gentō Sokuchū (circa 1800), and instead emphasized shikantaza. Dogen, the founder of Soto in Japan, emphasised that practice and awakening cannot be separated. By practicing shikantaza, attainment and Buddhahood are already being expressed. For Dogen, zazen, or shikantaza, is the essence of Buddhist practice.
I don't know if that Soto excerpt makes sense. Shikantaza is defined as being free of thought, right?. The excerpt assumes that all instances of zazen are free of thought (which you and I both know isn't truth. Maybe attaining shikantaza is more so enlightenment? But you're right. When/if we get to that point, the enlightenment label won't mean anything because we'll know it won't mean anything.
I've been thinking a lot about the concept of Enso lately and I think it's applicable here. Enlightenment in this instance is the deconstruction of the idea that the circle is distinct from what's inside and outside of it. Woah. That just hit me. Neat. No, thank you. This has been more beneficial than I could have ever imagined. It is nice to talk to someone about this. It's pretty funny that this whole thing started wondering if Zen masters were necessary and now here you are wanting to seek one out, haha. I don't really have too many people to talk to this about either. There are some who are mildly interested, but still see meditating as a thing of the heathens, even after explaining that it's just sitting and not thinking. I'm going to try to keep responding as quickly as I can, but this term in school is proving to be a stronger opponent that I expected.Not negatives, just distractions at the most
So then are all distractions things to avoid to the same extent as alcohol, caffeine, car, name, etc.?They were things that I could not deal with mentally, so they had to be removed from my life.
Isn't this what the 4th Noble Truth deals with? Dealing with the distractions so that we realize they aren't really distractions?Perhaps the very pursuit and dedication to finding enlightenment IS enlightenment
I believe that this is what Hakuin meant to describe in this painting:
That's part of the rub, is to figure it out for yourself, and what these things all mean, and more importantly mean to you. Zen can only be understood through the practice, so explaining it becomes difficult. Like I said earlier, it's easier to say what it isn't than what it is.
Preach. I love that thought. That no matter how hard people in the past have tried explain enlightenment/Zen, it's never complete either because (like we've said) Zen is no longer Zen when defined or because it is truly a unique personal experience. I've been noticing a more recently moments when I'm more in tune with the oneness. It seems to happen whenever I see a beautiful tree. An indescribable feeling overwhelms me and I get extremely happy and tears begin to well up. I wouldn't call these moments of enlightenment by any means, but it sort of seems that the purpose of zazen is to be in that perpetual state of bliss (to realize this is Nirvana/the Pure Land).
No, as I say in the next part, it depends on the individual. The car/name/job/income/hair stuff comes down more to vanity than dukkha, as those things really don't cause me pain or suffering, but they can be vanity things when taken to an extreme. Vanity is bad because it reinforces the separation of mind and body, and strengthens the ego which Buddhism is trying to help a person shed. They aren't inherently bad, but again, this needs to be determined by the individual. If you own a Ferrari because you simply love driving and the engineering behind it, I'd say that's fine. If you own one simply because it's a Ferrari and you want people to be jealous of you or you think it will help get girls, that's clearly vanity and bad. Caffeine and alcohol are more things that a strict buddhist would stay away from, because they "pollute the body and mind". Some would argue, how can you truly meld your body and mind when your body and mind are influenced by unnatural things you are putting into your body? Again, these are things I like to selectively ignore, because I love coffee and I love my beer and wine. I would say hard drugs, and even pot, are definitely things to remove from your life though. As I stated earlier, pot was definitely something that threw my life off balance both mentally, physically, and emotionally. Although I was successful and lead a good life while being an everyday pot smoker, it certainly got in the way of my focus and dedication to many things, including my practice. It was removed from my life for all of those reasons. Beer and wine, and coffee, don't cause anywhere near that level of disruption in my life, so I kind of let it slide, but mentioned it because I still wonder, and sometimes seek the ideal of being "pure". Besides, many buddhist's drink tea for the same reason I drink coffee. So I give myself a pass there. Yes, the entire stack of the 4 noble truths deals with identifying, understanding, dealing, and removing dukkha. What dukkha is is entirely different to each individual, but can be easily boiled down to "anything causing dissatisfaction in your life, or anything that makes you unhappy." You either get over it, or remove it. It's really your only two options. Whatever it takes to remove that "dissatisfaction" that it causes. I believe the 4 noble truths are easily the pillar of buddhism for anyone starting to learn, and the best thing I ever did in my life was understand dukkha, and take steps to reduce and hopefully eliminate it. Procrastination was also a form of dukkha in my life. The pain and disappointment of pushing off something I need to do, be it at work, or raking the leaves at home. Now I just don't push anything off. If it needs to get done, I do it. Because doing something immediately is a lot more enjoyable than the small pain and suffering of feeling disappointed in yourself for pushing it off til "tomorrow". I did some research, and funny enough, it turns out there is a master in my town who is only two removed from none other than Shunryu Suzuki, who wrote one of my favorite books on the subject, "Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind" (read it if you haven't, good short book on Zen and zazen), and is considered one of the greatest zen masters of the Soto Japanese Zen school. His assistant and pupil who became a master was Dainin Katagiri who established 4 zen centers here in the Twin Cities in the sixties, most of which are closed now, but there is one of them still open, the original. Suzuki and Katagiri are both long passed, but some of his dharma heirs are located right here in the Twin Cities still practicing and teaching at the center he founded decades ago. I'm going to plan on going their early next year. I don't want to start now, because Rohatsu is coming up starting early December, and it's like the most important time of year in the culture, the celebration of Buddha's enlightenment. So I think I'll wait til after December, because the Rohatsu sessions are sun up to sun down meditation sessions that go on for days, and the beginner and introductory open sessions are all closed for awhile. Not a problem. I'm a fairly patient person, and understand school comes first. Conversations like these don't need to be hurried. In fact I prefer the time to reflect. :) Also, I've never seen that painting, but it's beautiful. Thank you for posting that.So then are all distractions things to avoid to the same extent as alcohol, caffeine, car, name, etc.?
Isn't this what the 4th Noble Truth deals with?
you are wanting to seek one out, haha.
'm going to try to keep responding as quickly as I can, but this term in school is proving to be a stronger opponent that I expected.
How often did you smoke though? I smoke every now and again. But when I smoke I make sure that it's in the proper environment with people who will stimulate good conversations. It during a recent smoke session that I experienced oneness the strongest. Sure, I have been able to get a feel like that through meditation, but I wouldn't discount the smoke time as being dukka. I think it moderation does matter. While there have been times when I don't have a breakthrough like that, there are also times in meditation when I don't have any sort of breakthrough. What makes one worse than the other? What if the dissatisfaction can't be removed immediately? Is the 4th Noble Truth about realize that they aren't really dissatisfaction? The example I'm thinking of is my heavy coursework this term. I am unbelievably busy this term, so much so that it's affecting my relationship. Even if I were to change my perspective to view it positively, that wouldn't make my homework go away or give me more time with my girlfriend. Should I not be so attached to a relationship? (I didn't mean for this to become relationship advice with AlderaanDuran, but see what I'm getting at? Did't you just say I like it a lot too. It was by Hakuin, the founder of the Rinzai school. It's meant to represent our journey toward enlightenment. On the far right is the shore of old thinking. On the log are three blind men trying to make their way toward enlightenment (left). But if you'll notice, the log doesn't actually touch enlightenment? Can the blind men jump across the gap or are they never destined to reach enlightenment? Hakuin did do versions of the painting where the log reached enlightenment so I'm not entirely sure if he believed enlightenment is attainable or not.Because doing something immediately is a lot more enjoyable than the small pain and suffering of feeling disappointed in yourself for pushing it off til "tomorrow".
Go see that master now!
When didn't I smoke would be a better question. I smoked morning, noon, and night, and everywhere in between. I was smoking about a quarter a week. I was a functional daily smoker, to the point where I was always a little high. I didn't smoke out of bongs or pipes or joints, normally just a oney, but frequently throughout the day. I was an addict, it was hard to quit and I failed quite a few times before finally kicking the habit. I don't think ocassional use is a problem. I was unhappy with how much I smoked and it started to make me anxious and unhappy. I have nothing against pot use in general, especially infrequent use like you described. Unfortunately I was not able to moderate, at all, and it was a problem. Trust me, it was a problem for me, it was addiction. Weed is not inherently bad, and I still see it as mostly harmless, but I was high all the time and it was affecting my life. With your situation of balancing school and relationship, I can't give any advise here. It's entirely personal to you. The devil is in the details and nuances that I couldn't possibly pretend to have a handle on. I wish you luck in figuring it out, but that balance is up to you. I've had to make some tough choices years ago with my job over relationships. The right person would understand I have to work a lot and that is my life, the wrong person wouldn't understand, and therefore I WOULD put my job above that person because they weren't the right one. My now wife understands my work life, I worked all weekend for example on a big release this weekend, and I'm still on a troubleshooting call working out some of our last issues. She understands, so she makes it worth it, and I have made some changes to my career to be around her more. Again, entirely personal.How often did you smoke though?
What if the dissatisfaction can't be removed immediately?