Buddha Nature / Entelechy

[Enjaku]

I was reading something earlier about Aristotle and the theory of Entelechy, the realization of potential. Dictionary definition: "the supposed vital principle that guides the development and functioning of an organism or other system or organization"

The same concept appears elsewhere in philosophy and psychotherapy, for example Kurt Goldstein, Abraham Maslow, and Carl Rogers, in their writings on "self actualization"; the natural drive to express one's organismic self.

I'm fascinated by the concept of "Buddha nature" but I understand there is a lot of confusion and disagreement about what it actually refers to among various schools and scholars.

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person -- there is no development of the mind.

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones -- there is development of the mind."

This passage says to me, if one can awaken to one's true nature (described here as luminous mind), one can experience one's true potential.

Are Buddha, Maslow and Aristotle all pointing to the same thing?

Do others share my sense that the Buddha way outlines the opportunity for a "natural" or "unfettered" expression of our organismic potential?

Gassho,
Enjaku
Sat

[Jundo]

Hi Enjaku,

I think that Zen folks are simple about these questions, which may be the best answer of all.

Dogen said that "Buddha Nature" is not something we have, and "Buddha" is not something to "become", but what we are and have been all along. Such is the unbroken, boundless Wholeness of all things, with no measure of lack.

Yet we do not realize such fact, and "Buddha Nature" is also our ability to realize this truth, as well as the ability within each of us to become more and more "Buddha-like", freer of greed, anger and the ignorance of all divided thinking which seems to separate us from this unbroken Wholeness.

That probably is enough to say about it, and the rest is realized on the Zazen cushion, as well as out in life as we try to live more as a Buddha would live.

Gassho, J

SatToday

PS - I happened to hear an episode of the public radio podcast "Invisibilia" on the flexibility of human beings to alter their behavior throughout life, and that personality is just one factor in our behavior and very plastic. Especially, the last 20 minutes of the episode reflect many ideas shared by Buddhism, that all things are change and that our sense of a fixed "self" is actually fluid, that we can change our behavior by changing our thoughts ...

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/06/24/481859662/invisibilia-is-your-personality-fixed-or-can-you-change-who-you-are

One interesting part discussed how the famous "marshmallow" experiment, supposed to predict future success in life by a small child's ability at self-control, was actually misinterpreted ...

It has to do with Mischel's most famous experiment, called the marshmallow test, which he first conducted in 1960. You can still find videos of it on YouTube. Mischel would give a small child a marshmallow, a cookie or a pretzel, telling her or him that they could eat it now — or if they could wait for a few minutes, they'd get two marshmallows or cookies. Then he left the room. Given that the children in the study were 4 to 6 years old, the marshmallow often got gobbled up.

But sometimes Mischel told the child ahead of time that she could just pretend that the marshmallow was not really there. Then "the same child waits 15 minutes," he says now. "It's a very small change that's been made in how the child is representing the object — is it real or is it a picture? And by changing the representation, you dramatically change her behavior."

The vast majority of children in Mischel's study were able to delay gratification when they reframed their interpretations of the situation in front of them.

The point of the marshmallow test was to show how flexible people are — how easily changed if they simply reinterpret the way they frame the situation around them. But that's not the moral that our culture drew from the marshmallow study. We decided that those traits in the preschoolers were fixed — that their self-control at age 4 determined their success throughout life. They're happier, have better relationships, do better at school and at work.

The podcast episode has not been without those who disagree, and the science is still quite speculative ...

http://www.spsp.org/blog/open-letter-personality

However, there is no doubt that we are much more able to change our personality and behavior by changing out thinking, and our "self" is not some fixed thing, just as the Buddha declared.

[Michael Joseph]

Hello all,

My understanding of Aristotle's entelechy is that is that it is goal (telos)-oriented, that is, all living things are born with the potential to actualize a particular goal toward with their development tends. One might even say it is predetermined. There is no difference between the acorn and the oak (a famous example) in that they are both stages of the oaks entelechy, but if the acorn never becomes an oak, it will never realize its potential and thus never become actualized. I have found it a helpful analogy (as a beginning) to understanding Buddha-nature, but I'm also aware of how harmful it can be as well. In the end, it may be a good way for Westerners to approach something like equanimity in that it both accepts and denies the appearance of difference between the acorn and the oak, but ultimately, it implies that the acorn in somehow an incomplete oak tree. Furthermore, Aristotle's entelechy strongly implies that there is a fixed place where all things come to rest. Of course, someone more learned than I will probably say that I'm wrong, so take this for what it's worth to you. (Thanks to Fr. Bill Maestri and Dr. Jeffery Perl for my Aristotelian education.)

Gassho,

Michael

Sat today

[Jundo]

Hello all,

My understanding of Aristotle's entelechy is that is that it is goal (telos)-oriented, that is, all living things are born with the potential to actualize a particular goal toward with their development tends. One might even say it is predetermined. There is no difference between the acorn and the oak (a famous example) in that they are both stages of the oaks entelechy, but if the acorn never becomes an oak, it will never realize its potential and thus never become actualized. I have found it a helpful analogy (as a beginning) to understanding Buddha-nature, but I'm also aware of how harmful it can be as well. In the end, it may be a good way for Westerners to approach something like equanimity in that it both accepts and denies the appearance of difference between the acorn and the oak, but ultimately, it implies that the acorn in somehow an incomplete oak tree. Furthermore, Aristotle's entelechy strongly implies that there is a fixed place where all things come to rest. Of course, someone more learned than I will probably say that I'm wrong, so take this for what it's worth to you. (Thanks to Fr. Bill Maestri and Dr. Jeffery Perl for my Aristotelian education.)

Gassho,

Michael

Sat today

Perhaps a good Zen response is to chop wood, and sit Zazen under a tree.

Gassho, J

SatToday

[Michael Joseph]

Yes. Thanks. 🙂

Gassho,

Michael

Sat today. Need to sit more.

[Jundo]

Sometimes in Zen Practice, we sidestep big philosophical questions and discussion, do so on purpose. Best approach sometimes is silence and simplicity.

So, please don't think it is just ducking the issue (although I am ), it is actually a kind of clear answer by dropping the mind tangling question. Ye Olde' "Does A Dog Have Buddha Nature, Yes or No?" MU!!!!

Academic schools of Buddhism used to get tied up with such debates on "Buddha Nature" for centuries, and the Zen folks came along and blew them all away (literally just blew the questions away into the wind). Humans are thinking animals, and there is a time to think and analyze. But humans (especially the intellectual or overly pondering ones) also need sometimes to learn how to "not think" and "non-think" and replace analysis with the wholeness of Emptiness. The result is not ignorance, but a kind of Clear Knowing.

Sometimes folks pick up a philosophy book and they see the words and letters on the page. However, they may miss the open, boundless, clear spaces between and allowing the words and letters, not to mention the vibrant freedom present when free of words as well. It is not merely blankness and bewilderment, but an awareness of Informing Presence.

Thinking intellectually about Buddha Nature may be a bit like thinking about a sunrise instead of watching a sunrise, feeling the sunrise ... instead of shining as the light and glory of the sunrise. There is a time to think, for sure, but also a time just to do and be ... just do be do be do. Buddha Nature neither "goes" or "comes from" anywhere, any more than the sun actually goes and comes anywhere when seen in the morning or hidden at night ... for the sun always burns seen or unseen, beyond day or night and passing time. Thus, when the mind is not covered in dark clouds of defilement, one might truly experience what is the meaning of ...

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person -- there is no development of the mind.

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones -- there is development of the mind."

In the Zen Dojo, we tend to point folks again to sitting under the tree rather than thinking about the tree. Whether the "acorn is the oak" or "is not the oak", I do not know. But I do know that every seed holds the whole tree, is not the whole tree, that every seed swallows the whole universe, as every seed is just the glorious seed itself.

Gassho, J

SatToday

[Jundo]

P.S. - Don't know about Aristotle, but personally I am a Maslow fan myself and feel that Buddhist Practice allows a lifestyle to fill the "needs" pyramid. I believe that the Buddha's structure of his Sangha Community, it's economy and social relationships, met most of Maslow's basic needs ...

By the way, psychologist Abraham Maslow has his famous pyramid of basic human needs which, when fulfilled, allow us to be "self-actualized" at the top.



I have always felt that there is something to this. We all need basic food, shelter, safety and security, friendship, a sense of connection, etc. I believe that, since the Buddha's time, the "Buddhist Lifestyle" has been geared to fulfilling such needs. Also, we learn to keep excess needs and desires in check (for things we may hunger for, but which are ultimately harmful or far beyond what we truly need. An Oryoki eating bowl means to receive "just enough"). The peace I feel, even in the face of death, provides the ultimate sense of safety and security. A sense of "self-worth" comes both when we realize that there never was quite a "self" from the start, yet also that all little "selfs" of the world shine like jewels on a great chain, each their place in the sun. What Maslow described as the "self-actualization" at the peak of the pyramid (perhaps "non-self actualization" in Buddhist terms ) includes an "appreciation of solitude", but also "deeper personal relations with a few close friends and family members" ... a tendency "to view the world with a continual sense of appreciation, wonder and awe, yet even simple experiences continue to be a source of inspiration and pleasure" ... a heightened "sense of personal responsibility and ethics" ... and a tendency to "peak experiences, or moments of intense joy, wonder, awe and ecstasy. After these experiences, people feel inspired, strengthened, renewed or transformed".

http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/Maslow.html

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/theory-and-psychopathology/201308/the-theory-self-actualization

I am not a psychologist, but I have always felt that there is something to this, and that Zen Practice points such way.

[Michael Joseph]

Jundo,

Thanks again. Habits are difficult to break. I need to spend more time with the intimacy of not-knowing.

Gassho,

Michael

Sat today

[Hoseki]

Hi folks,

I'm going to be brief as I've got my little one in a carrier and am trying to get them to go to sleep.

I did a survey course on Aristotle (thus an expert ) and I think he could provide some interesting ways to think about life and our practice.

Aristotle noticed the regularity of world. Things fall down, acorns become trees, people grow old unless something intervenes in the process. Unwholesome actions lead to the development of unwholesome character traits.

I think Shakyamuni would agree.

So the telos was the typical end point for these processes. Humans, being rational animals have a large number of possible behaviours and character traits that can be exhibited. But the proper life is the eudaimonic (often translated as happiness) one. This is where the proper traits are developed and from that good actions follow and (ideally) good results. But what is the good action for a person is context dependent ( this makes me think of the precepts and bodhisattvas.) The doctor performs the surgery not the horse breeder and what not.

This is some stuff that I recall jiving well. I don't remember much else.

I think if Aristotle was a approached with the attitude of what can he teach me about living a life he can offer much at least from what I saw. But he was also around 2000 years ago so will would still be a man of his time. Some of this is silly other parts frustrating but if we only want to deal with people who are always right we will life a lonely life.

Gassho
Sattoday
Hoseki





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tairin]

Perhaps a good Zen response is to chop wood, and sit Zazen under a tree.

Gassho, J

SatToday

Thank you Jundo. I feel I could have quoted almost everything you wrote in this thread. I spent years reading about Zen and other Eastern ways of thinking. Trying my best to unravel them using my Western educated brain. I still struggle with the desire to make rational sense of it all rather than letting experience be my guide. Your words here are a great reminder to me.

Please no one interpret this as a criticism. I just wanted to express my appreciation for Jundo's guidance in this matter.

Gassho
Warren
Sat today

[Enjaku]

Thanks everyone,

Jundo, your comment on Maslow speaks to my original thoughts. The Buddhist path "feels" like it's guiding me towards a kind of actualization.

I appreciate the reminder to let go of concepts such as Buddha nature. Clearly this is a path one must walk and realisation cannot be experienced in a book. For me, the writings of modern philosophers are no different from historic religious texts - useful only if their lessons have a practical impact on one's actions in the world.

Gotta "walk the walk" as they say!
Gassho,
Enjaku
Sat

[Joyo]

Perhaps a good Zen response is to chop wood, and sit Zazen under a tree.

Gassho, J

SatToday

When I first became a student of Zen, my mind was filled with so many question and criticisms of other's views. As I continue to practice, many of the questions have never been answered, they simply fall away. And other's views do as well.

Gassho,
Joyo
sat today

[Ryudo]

Thank you.

Gassho
SatToday
Marcus

[Jundo]

Maybe these folks will do better ...

Hokey Pokey ...

or Disco Duck?

Which would the Buddha Dance?

(Please don't answer ... just dance!)

Gassho, J

SatToday

[Doshin]

I can relate

Gassho
Doshin
Sattoday

PS..this was in response to Joyo's post. Did not push right button