Essentially, “zen” that is established/shared stands to
be more derivative and even degenerative rather than original. Derivative practices serve
social/psychological perceptions rather than the original intent that
challenges social/psychological perceptions, and can even degenerate into
negative, exclusive vs. inclusive, practices.
Buddhist sects associated with “Zen” prioritize a “radical
dismissal for the need for intermediaries—whether Indian texts, local religious
adepts, or supramundane bodhisattvas.”*
This grows out of a sense of the practice as “demonstration—not
explanation” that advocates a personal and direct experience of the awakening
experience that is credited to Siddhartha Gautama, “outside the
teachings.”*
The written record of the words of Siddhartha comes after
centuries of oral tradition that reinterpret the original experience in not
just one way but in diverse Buddhist orthodoxies and diverse schools within
those orthodoxies. How much
Siddhartha literally said and how much others interpreted and embellished and
how much was favored and how much was lost tends to suggest that there is
nothing reliably coming directly from Siddhartha. Even centuries later by the time of Hui-neng, when Indian
sutras were being diligently copied, the historical accuracy of his Platform
Sutra is debated.*
The record of the original experience of Siddhartha is
cultural lore, not fact. And lore has the sweetness of accommodation that has
allowed Buddhism to spread.
“Accommodation” [i.e., comfort/familiarity] equates with melding with
pre-existing cultural values or political values of the time that supported
it. Pre-Siddhartha Indo-Asian
orientations such as karma, reincarnation, nirvana and dominant cultural mores
were added to post-Siddhartha cultural values in the outspread in Asia such as
ancestry, literacy, and the value of communal/societal/familial connection.
Paradoxically, there may be more written about Zen that
favored demonstration rather than explanation than about other Buddhist
sects. In its many cultural expressions,
“zen,” being “outside the teachings” raises sutras to “canonical status.”* And as lore rather than “history,” Zen
practice embellishes and favors.
The foundational, “rock-solid” genealogy of specific transmission from
patriarch to patriarch is not rock-solid, not coherent for centuries after
Siddhartha and then for centuries after Bodhidharma.* Perhaps most bothersome is the attribution of special birth
and magical/psychic powers to Siddhartha and subsequent patriarchs and the
God-like reverence to his image when, paradoxically, his awakening deals with
seeing a true nature that experiences interpenetration rather than
personhood.
Whether generally Buddhist or specifically Zen sect, culture
tends to reboot Siddhartha’s experience to an individual self-nature that
survives individual death.
Meditation, clothing and images and Zen aesthetics become distinctive
and “correct practice.”
In established centers, practices of Zen Buddhism are
typically appealing when they address psychological and social suffering,
offering simplicity and calmness that can distract from and even obstruct
realization. Meditation and social
gathering and social action may become a system of social support than
self-realization, even incorporating aspects that have nothing to do with
Buddhism, such as appeasement of traditions of folk demons or prophesy that
fund built structures and priests in Japan and contemporary global activities
that link Zen with activities such as writing, yoga, diet, and daily habits.
Siddhartha’s awakening experience offers the resolution of a
deeper existential suffering, involving the direct experience of all as true
body, experiencing ultimate (yet everyday) reality, where there is no Buddha,
no birth/death.
Buddhism has housed Zen through centuries, but Siddhartha’s
awakening experience is not unique to Buddhism. That experience is a dimension of human experience that
precedes Siddhartha. Zen pops up
from time to time when someone breaks through broad cultural barriers to
awaken, including rather extensive barriers present in Buddhist practice. Zen involves “an awareness that does
not rely on anything.”*
No comments:
Post a Comment