TO READ
TO READ
Some people read everything they can
find on Zen. I’m one of them.
Is this good, or is it bad? Well, like
everything in Zen it can be good or it can be bad. It can be both good and bad.
And it can be neither.
You may remember an ad campaign that
featured two photographs. The first shot showed a nicely fried egg with the
caption, “This is your brain.” The second shot showed a messily scrambled egg,
and its caption read, “This is your brain on drugs.”
Reading Suzuki’s essays, or Aitken’s Dharma
talks, or the old masters’ koans won’t mess up your brain as long as you don’t
take these things as gospel or as spiritual revelations. They may even help
you, if you take them as words and ideas that were created by other humans, not
by omnipotent beings.
Still, if you limit your reading to
only Zen or Buddhist literature you may allow yourself to be led down a garden
path. When it comes to misguiding their readers—innocently or purposely—Zen
writers can be as culpable as any other sort of writer whether they be
philosophers, medical doctors, self-help artists, or financial advisors.
So who else might be read without
damage to one’s psyche? For starters there is Krishnamurti, who as a
fourteen-year-old Indian boy, was designated by the Theosophical Society “World
Teacher” and was trained to become a Western Messiah. That didn’t sit well with
him, and in later years he denounced his elevated position by stating, “I
desire those who seek to understand me to be free, not to follow me, not to
make of me a cage which will become a religion, a sect.”
There’s Thomas Merton, an American Trappist
monk who was constantly being called on the carpet by his superiors because of
his ever-growing interest in Eastern philosophies, especially in the tradition
of Zen.
There’s Meister Eckhart, a German Catholic
theologian who was excommunicated because of his radical ideas and his thought
that rejected authority and dogma.
There’s Thomas Hobbes, an English
philosopher who developed his then-controversial ethics from a belief that the
whole of reality stems from nature. He denounced the supernatural and
metaphysics and subscribed to the notion that the ultimate is beyond discovery.
In other words, there is no meaning to life.
Then there’s the Scottish thinker David
Hume who also was denounced by the Church as a flaming heretic. He stated that
reason and rational judgments are merely habitual associations of experiences.
This notion comes very close to what Zen individuals want to rid themselves of
in order to see their face before they were born.
And so on, and so on.
Krishnamurti repudiated his unwanted blind
followers, those people who can’t think for themselves but depend on others to
tell them how to behave.
Merton, Eckhart, Hobbes, and Hume were four
freethinkers who showed healthy tendencies toward skepticism and for that had
their ass busted by organized religion.
I’m fascinated by words and their
interpretations, so just for the fun of it I went to a thesaurus and looked up
the word freethinker. Here are some synonyms for an individual who uses his or
her own mind instead of following someone else’s dictates. Brace yourself.
Heretic, radical, atheist, fanatic,
revolutionary, nonbeliever, leftist.
I digress, but I’d like to believe you see
my point.
Anyway, by reading Zen material you can
certainly be helped to grasp the mechanics of practice, you can be caught up in
the fascinating history of the tradition, you can be beguiled by the stories
and the koans.
But all the booklearning in the world, Zen
or other, will probably not bring you to an awareness of your own true being.
That must come from you.
Enlightenment is not an end but a
beginning. No worthwhile master or teacher would ever say, “You are
enlightened.” A master or a teacher might point out one’s keen-sightedness as a
step on a path, but that would be all.
That’s why there is no answer to the direct
question of “Are you enlightened?”
A typical Zen answer to “Are you
enlightened?” would be, “Not yes, not no.”
An even better response would be no answer
at all.
Does one gain or lose from Zen practice?
Earnest Zen practice may, and probably
will, help you to cut lose from the nasty habit of Western reasoning. That’s a
loss, but it’s a worthy loss. Unless you’re a diehard pragmatist or scientist,
shucking off analytical thinking and slanted judgements is a gain to your
perception of the human condition.
An American Zen scholar who trained in
Japan (Bernard Philips, mentioned in Philip Kapleau’s Awakening to Zen)
said that Zen, basically, is three things.
1. Zen is a sect of Buddhism that has its own
history and forms.
2. Zen is the heart and essence of Buddhism
that has no doctrine or scripture of its own but points to the absolute source
of all Buddhist teaching. This absolute source is the awakening experience of
the Buddha. In this regard Zen is a discipline aimed at illumination of mind
and freedom of action.
3. Zen rises above—transcends, to use a
favorite Buddhism word—the particulars of Buddhism in that Zen is a life of
authentic being in which the self has overcome its alienation from itself and
from all other things.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home