Original Face

falling upside-down into ocean

FOR YOUNG Hui-neng, hearing a phrase in a market...

dwelling nowhere, bring forth that mind...

suddenly,

intimacy vs. emptiness...a direct experience, not an insight 

***

LATER, ADEPT HUI-NENG admonishes: 

your original face before your parents were born...

Hui-neng, Siddhartha, flower, sky, soil, sun, moon, you & I, George Washington, dog, rain, river are there...

***

HUI-NENG--a late admonition:

neither coming nor going...

buddha vs The Buddha

“Buddha” was initially more of a non-image like the Upanishad’s Brahman or Chinese Tao referencing a totality that cannot be represented well by an image.  The stupa, a deer, a footprint with a circle representing the wheel of dharma were some early imagery related to “buddhaology.” 

“Buddha” describes a self-nature that is akin to a world soul rather than to an individual, with the totality being expressed in every facet of the immanent world.  This buddha is the authentic self-nature, and the direct experience of buddha counters a sense of birth and death and specialness.  In his lifetime, Siddhartha may have been acknowledged as a venerated teacher rather than as the Buddha. 

However, human nature tends to create a derivative, culturally-comfortable “assurance” of a sustaining self-as-ego after death. Along with a transcultural emphasis on ancestors, pre-Buddhist concepts such as karma and rebirth and special birth and death characteristics of unique selfs termed  “Buddhas” with supreme enlightenment.  The ego might mollify into an insect, person, god, hungry ghost and so forth before, and rarely, transcending this “wheel” into a nirvana where there still may be an egoic quality.

With the written Buddhist record beginning long after Siddhartha, It is impossible to say what Siddhartha really said or believed.  Even in the later centuries when writing was established, the “records” of, for example, 7th Century adepts are not really records of fact but recounts penned later by adherents.  Buddhism had also splayed out into various sects in various cultures, with their own interpretations as to authentic Buddhism.   And the history of each Buddhist sect is, in fact, a record of a roller-coaster of degeneration and reform, subject to periods of cultural support/influence and outright attack and gaps in lineage. 

The Zen sect of Buddhism is astonishingly text-rich, even though the experience that forms the primary point of Zen is clean, deconceptual, and cannot be taught.  This text-rich information is primarily about what this Zen experience is NOT.  This Zen experience references a universal dimension of human experience that has worn many names.  it precedes Buddhism and is an experience of authentic self-nature.  Siddhartha is idealized as an ultimate example of experiencing and then living human experience from this experience. The task appears difficult and yet it unhidden and “speaking” everywhere.  It diminishes a deep suffering that we often do not recognize by liberating selfness from a sense of separation.  While everything is empty of self, 

(no Bodhi tree

no mirror/stand

nothing to polish

no where for dust to finally, solidly, alight)

authentic nature or true home is a rich fullness.  As Tachu notes what you see, hear, and experience is yourself.

everything changes

everything is inseparable

not seeking

When we turn to human life, we tend to find a boundary a the skin, and more, we imagine a separable eternal essence that (in Buddhism) might be imagined to pass through physical animal, and psychic god and/or hungry ghost forms, to finally attain nirvana, and yet, perhaps imagining becoming a free entity on a spiritual mount.  However, with such a turn, we remain bound. 

When we turn to a flower or a cloud or a mountain, we do not see the need to polish these events.  And further, the being-ness of each of these events is boundless.  A spring flower is in the evolution of a star and appears with the tilt of the Earth into the sun and melds light into mass, so that eh flower is a radiant event perhaps akin to a wave in the ocean with the Oceanus in the wave and in the flower.  

Seeing Sound

Lance Kinseth

Listen for the sound of a single hand.

Hakuin

And then what occurs when you cut this hand in half?

No Buddha No Mind

ORIGINALLY THERE IS no such thing as Buddha, but by necessity the name was given to him.  Originally there is no such thing as mind.  To attain enlightenment is to realize the one thing.  For the sake of illustration, it is said that the one thing is empty, but it is not really empty—mind of no mind is the true mind, wisdom of no wisdom is the true wisdom.

Hyech’oi*

Communal Lore; Not Much Zen

BUDDHISM HAS NO “universally shared core text… …no central source of Buddhist authority,” * and yet, all Buddhist sects are very “text-driven, text-rich.”   Why? Cultural authority* and appeal.

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.”*

Shifting Sensation Dissolves To Stillness

Nagasawa Rosetsu

SIITING IN ZA (at rest) or in the midst of the everyday, there is this enduring, shifting flow of thought, moments, weathers, mountains, continents, planets, moons, stars, galaxies, atoms, aging, breath, sounds, remembrances of phrases of sutras, scientific data, daydreams,

and in all of it , a cognitive understanding of a sense of nothing to which dust can reliantly

cling, and therefore nothing to which to attach to—all affirming Siddhartha’s disturbing, 

albeit comforting dictum that change is a constancy.

With realization, suddenly, there is stillness in all this change.

There is this direct experience of one thing in all of this shifting sensation.

With realization of just one thing, stillness emoting calmness, tranquility, serenity, eloquence, grace.

In Buddhist lore, in morning star, What does Siddhartha directly see that passes through the gate of shifting sensation?

Not buddhas, not oneness, not emptiness—all shifting things--

Something very direct, very intimate, very simple.

No Mind No Body No Buddha

Keep beginner’s mind.

PONDERING THIS MIND, what if the words were “How much does your mind

weight?”

Two ounces + 100 quadrillion tons = 0 might realize true nature.

What if the words are “You have no mind.”

What if the words are “You have no body.”

What if the words are “There is no Buddha.”

What if the words are “You have no mind, no body, and there is no Buddha.  Neither

mystic nor esoteric, but rather rational and practical, what does Siddhartha see?