More about Zen and morality..

[Dorje T]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

Why is there "zen" and then "morality"?

Why do we say, "here is zen, where is the morality in it?" Or, "is morality something that we can apply to zen practice?" Or, "how does morality fit into zen practice?" Not that we're just saying that, but I wonder about this wrestling match.

Why not just be moral?

The world can get along without zen, without a 'thing' called zen, but the world needs morality. When is it time to be moral? Is now not the time? Is now not the time for zen?

I'm sorry, but I just see no distinction between morality and zen.

gassho

[disastermouse]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

The point was not to make a distinction between Zen and morality, and frankly, I think you'd have to try hard to see that in what I posted.

What IS morality? How does it function? If it's just super-ego, then it's only as good as the tradition or social preference that was internalized.

I'm suggesting that a deeper morality is possible.

Chet

[disastermouse]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

Monkton:

Cool diagrams, btw!

Chet

[Jundo]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

Jundo,

What do you think about what I see to be the Buddha's basic admission near the end of his life that all the rules he'd set up would not be necessary after his passing? Think what you want about Genpo Roshi, but he detailed in a talk that when he accepted the rule of celibacy, he went to unusual lengths to try to break his vows, at one point driving several hundred miles to hook up with am old girlfriend and upon finding that she was in a relationship, driving ANOTHER several hundred miles to contact ANOTHER ex-girlfriend?

Self-repression for short lengths of time can indeed teach us about the unquestioned needs and preferences we have, but ultimately, we lose that fight. Not only that, but the communities you've mentioned are notorious for passing on a tradition of guilt that can only be considered a hindrance to happiness. Lastly, it is just these communities that, given sufficient power, seek to enforce their restrictions on others or become offended easily and ferociously in ways that cause them to cause untold amounts of suffering - even glorifying killing in the defense of these restrictions.

From my own experience, lengthy attempts at self-repression simply do not last long and they do not lead to the passing of suffering and dissatisfaction.

Chet

NOTE FROM JUNDO - IN MY EXCITEMENT, I THINK I "OVERSPOKE" HERE A LITTLE IN THE FIRST COUPLE OF PARAGRAPHS. I DO NOT MEAN TO SAY THAT "BUDDHA" IS JUST A FICTION (ONLY SOME WORSHIPFUL STORIES ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS)! I HAVE TRIED TO FRAME IT BETTER IN A POST BELOW. viewtopic.php?p=35051#p35051

Perfect Buddhas and Zen Masters exist primarily in dusty books. Such perfect Buddhas and Masters -- being the product of the writer's imagination -- are drawn to always act in the perfect way appropriate to the circumstances, always say the right and wise thing to fit the story in which they appear. Perfect Buddhas are perfectly enlightened and perfectly moral ... and probably someone's dream of what a Buddha should be.

I believe that perfect Buddhas and Zen Masters are perfectly the creation of some author's idealized imagination and worshipful tale telling. They are legends and fables in which someone has drawn a picture of a "spiritual hero" ... not a flesh and blood human being trying to get by in this less than ideal world.

That does not mean that "Buddhas and Masters" are just deluded beings either ... prisoners of greed, anger and ignorance (don't get me wrong). It just means that the reality is usually more "down to earth" and somewhere in between. No one in this world is ever "totally free" of their inner potential for greed, anger, harmful conduct toward self and others (its hard wired into our animal brains) ... only perhaps "freer" based on this practice, on a sliding scale, with the potential to "revert" to ignorance and delusion always present.

I live in the real world where things are more complex, sometimes beautiful and sometimes ugly, and less black/white. Real history is not a fairy tale. Even the greatest heroes have blemishes.

Get over your dreams of Nirvana, folks, and get back to life right here in Samsara (which is also Nirvana if one can see it as so ... but still bloody complex Samsara nonetheless). .

Sure, I believe that the image of a perfect "Buddha" or any hero serves a purpose, is a symbol high on a pedestal to which we can all aspire. But I just do not think that "real Buddhas" exist the way they are painted to exist in Buddhist fictional tales.

IN OTHER WORDS ... one must always pursue this practice as if walking through a minefield of moral temptations, plentiful opportunities to transgress, to fall down. That's life in Samsara.

I believe most Buddhists I know (like most other religious people I know in all religions) are, more often than not, gentle, kind, compassionate, moral people. But I have seen little evidence in my years as a Buddhist that anything about this practice necessarily guarantees that folks will end up that way. Yes, this practice might gently tilt someone toward the good ... and away from the harmful ... but I have seen little evidence that any insight into Emptiness, Non-Self or the like will necessarily cause someone to be moral. It's baloney ... a theory that sounds good when said as a platitude (or drawn into Monkton's diagrams), but which does not prove true in real life. People are too complex, life in Samsara is too unpredictable

Do this Practice, sit Zazen and seek to learn from the Precepts ... and, probably, you will have a peaceful, gentle, rewarding life.

But Buddhas can fall to earth at any moment.

As to the other issue ... I do not paint with a broad brush. I know many good people who are happy, peaceful, fulfilled and living well as Orthodox Jews, Evangelical Christians, conservative Theravadan monks and the like. And I know many people who cannot cope. are depressed and neurotic, and live poorly, amid more liberal moral systems. Different people need different medicines.

Gassho, J

[Rich]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

Jundo, thank you for being realistic.

[Jundo]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

Jundo, thank you for being realistic.

Don't misunderstand my point. I would not have stuck with the Practice either for 30 years if I thought it was all a waste of time, just someone's fairy tale. It does lead to freedom and wholeness and Wisdom and Compassion, just as advertised.

However, it is just that the "real richness and pay off" of the story is a bit more complicated than the "children's version" of the tale that many of us are first exposed to. What I mean is ... take marriage as an example. Real marriage is not, usually, the Disney "Cinderella's Glass Slipper" version. Real marriage is much more complex, much more ups and downs, with many moral temptations and pitfalls along the way and ... if it works out ... unfathomably better than that "fairy tale".

This Practice ... including where it takes us on the bumpy road of morality ... is something like that.

Gassho,J

[monkton]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

Is there that much difference between what Chet and Jundo are saying?
I don't think Chet is saying all you have to do is 'x' and 'y' will happen - or if he is, he's also saying that in attempting to do 'x' you have to first overcome w, f, b, r, h, and q. And all of those letters are the stuff of our lives: our failings, addictions, compulsions, revulsions, delusions, misinterpretations, ignorances and picking the kids up from band practice. All the stuff that we load on ourselves (which Chet seems to be talking more about), and all the stuff that is loaded on to us (which Jundo seems to be talking more about).
If it was really x+y=easy we would be knee deep in Buddhas, instead of being, er, knee deep in Buddhas (you know what I mean).
Back to the four noble truths - it is all suffering, but it can be overcome ('can' - not 'will'). And in the meantime as we wade through, as Stephanie would probably say: Il faut imaginer Sisyphe heureux.
gassho,
Monkton

[Stephanie]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

Nice quote Monkton

I also enjoyed your diagrams.

I think truth is being expressed by all here. I agree with Chet that underneath most of our moral errors is our being "hooked" or driven by ego, and the practice of learning how to "unhook" over and over again can dramatically decrease unskillful behavior.

However, I am not so sure about how awakening and morality are linked. Supposing that one leads to another means supposing that a moral code is deeply woven into Reality, because awakening is seeing Reality directly, no? I always used to suppose there was an underlying 'moral order' but now I am not so sure. I think humans act compassionately more often than we suppose, but that aggression and competition are also part of who we are. We are complex beings.

I certainly don't believe awakening experiences automatically create a sense of morality. There are many people whom I do not doubt have had kensho who have also afterward continued to act in very deluded ways. Seeing the nature of Reality does not necessarily mean no longer having any blind spots. Awakening is not dependent on causes or conditions, but our tendencies and blind spots arise from them. We can see Reality for what it is without anything else about our condition changing, just as we can see thoughts for what they are while sitting without having the thoughts all disappear.

I think becoming aware of all that makes us tick and untying the knots in our psyches that lead us to act in destructive or counterproductive ways takes a lot of work and demands a lot more than sitting zazen. This is where other forms of self-inquiry and self-knowledge can be valuable, as well as other Buddhist practices.

I like that we are complicated creatures. Tormented or flawed "saints" and "heroes" are much more interesting than ones that never struggle with inner conflict, IMO.

[Jundo]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

Is there that much difference between what Chet and Jundo are saying?
I don't think Chet is saying all you have to do is 'x' and 'y' will happen - or if he is, he's also saying that in attempting to do 'x' you have to first overcome w, f, b, r, h, and q. And all of those letters are the stuff of our lives: our failings, addictions, compulsions, revulsions, delusions, misinterpretations, ignorances and picking the kids up from band practice. ... Il faut imaginer Sisyphe heureux.
gassho,
Monkton

Well, you have described my point. So long as we are in this "Samsara", we must deal with each of our individual failings, delusions, misinterpretations, ignorances and picking the kids up from band practice.

We are Sisyphus.



Some folks think the point of this practice is to get to a place where we can put the stone down for good (perhaps by realizing that the stone is just a dream). Perhaps we might see his pushing that boulder (of ignorance and delusion) as his practice, his striving, to finally be free of the boulder of delusion by reaching (attaining) that place where the boulder will rest at the top of the mountain permanently, his practice accomplished, Sisyphus free once and for all of the burden of delusion and need to practice.

However, so long as he is a human being, we know that Sisyphus will likely never reach that stopping place ... perhaps not for countless lives, if ever ... The "Promised Pure Lotus Land" is very far away. I mean ... when you are dead, then you can put the rock down! :shock:

What is more, if he gives up his efforts to push the boulder of ignorance up that hill (practice), he will be quickly crushed by ignorance and delusions which will roll over him ... so he cannot and must not stop practicing.

What is he to do? A Koany dilemma!

Well, by realizing "Just This" total accomplishment in every step-by-step of effort he thus constantly arrives, is finally free of the boulder, attains that place of rest and ever and always accomplishes what there is to accomplish ... in the very act of constant practice with rocky delusion! "The earth where we stand is the Pure Lotus Land, and this very body the body of Buddha", to quote Hakuin.

What is more, as he keeps pushing that boulder, he actually gets better at it ... learns to handle it better, keep control better ... he loses control and suffers the boulder rolling over him less often (although maybe still sometimes, until he is a 'Perfect Buddha'). The Practice is truly less of a burden!

He finds that he is Buddha pushing Buddha up Buddha, that the very pushing is 'Buddha'.

BUT (AND THIS IS MY MAIN POINT) ... every second, he must keep pushing for, if he stops, he will be run over ... and every second he risks tripping up and being crushed by that boulder! Practice never ends during this life! There is no guaranty ... even if you have been doing a glorious 'smashing' job of pushing that boulder 30 years ... that you will not stumble in the next step and be smashed!

And that was Master Dogen's point of Practice is Enlightenment Itself ...

But I do not see that "seeing into the emptyness of the rock" or that "rock and self are one beyond one" etc. etc. necessarily will make one a better, more "moral" rock pusher! I mean, it will help ... but that's only part of it.

By the way ... I rather prefer this image of sisyphus as the rock as the mountain ... each causing and effecting the other in this thing we call "living" and "practice" ...

[Janne H]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

Deleted.

[Rich]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

Jundo, thank you for being realistic.

Don't misunderstand my point. I would not have stuck with the Practice either for 30 years if I thought it was all a waste of time, just someone's fairy tale. It does lead to freedom and wholeness and Wisdom and Compassion, just as advertised.

However, it is just that the "real richness and pay off" of the story is a bit more complicated than the "children's version" of the tale that many of us are first exposed to. What I mean is ... take marriage as an example. Real marriage is not, usually, the Disney "Cinderella's Glass Slipper" version. Real marriage is much more complex, much more ups and downs, with many moral temptations and pitfalls along the way and ... if it works out ... unfathomably better than that "fairy tale".

This Practice ... including where it takes us on the bumpy road of morality ... is something like that.

Gassho,J

For me, morality is correct action. Most of my actions are almost automatic without much separation between thinking and doing. But some times many the correct action is not so clear and must be thought about, discussed and digested, usually there are also a lot of feelings and emotions that go along with this. To be able to put this down and trust the answer will come in its time, and just come back to the present moment has been one of the gifts of practice. At least that's what I believe

BUT (AND THIS IS MY MAIN POINT) ... every second, he must keep pushing for, if he stops, he will be run over ... and every second he risks tripping up and being crushed by that boulder! Practice never ends during this life! There is no guaranty ... even if you have been doing a glorious 'smashing' job of pushing that boulder 30 years ... that you will not stumble in the next step and be smashed!

This is so true and I have been very fortunate to still be here and I will keep trying and pushing because that is my job. Time to walk the dog.

/Rich

[disastermouse]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

However, I am not so sure about how awakening and morality are linked. Supposing that one leads to another means supposing that a moral code is deeply woven into Reality, because awakening is seeing Reality directly, no?

No. Awakening IS reality. It is reality being reality. As for morality, technically, it doesn't exist.

What causes 'immoral' behavior? Is it anything other than confusion, ignorance, delusion, etc.? We should start there. If immorality comes from somewhere besides the three poisons - the foundational poison being ignorance, well then - besides knocking Buddhism on its ass philosophically, we need to determine from whence comes immoral behavior.

Chet

[Jundo]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

What causes 'immoral' behavior? Is it anything other than confusion, ignorance, delusion, etc.? We should start there. If immorality comes from somewhere besides the three poisons - the foundational poison being ignorance, well then - besides knocking Buddhism on its ass philosophically, we need to determine from whence comes immoral behavior.

This is true, and "immoral behavior" is (as far as I can think of any example) the product of greed, anger and ignorance. Killing out of simple anger, robbery, rape, child abuse clearly are "immoral" by almost anyone's standards (not merely Buddhist standards, but generally in human society), and are not harmonious with Buddhist Practice.

Generally, this practice will allow us to see through the ignorance, and to drop away much greed and anger, violent instincts etc. One cannot taste the fruits of this practice if flooded with extreme greed and anger ... and, in turn, this practice will help us be free (or "free-er") of greed, anger and the like.

However, I just happen to think that the "drives" for such things as violence, sexual greed and the like are so "hard wired" into the most primitive parts of the human brain, that this practice simply does not completely eradicate that within us ... at least, not so long as we are living in these human bodies (or until we all become "Perfect Buddhas"). This practice lessens, rechannels, sublimates and tames ... but does not eliminate the potential in any human being to get caught up in any of that (given the right or wrong circumstances, we all have the potential for great charity or terrible deeds within us ... both an angel and a devil inside).

In other words, the Practice does not completely free Sisyphus of the rock ... but the Practice is how Sisyphus deals with the rock of greed, anger and ignorance he must wrestle daily. Pushing the rock --is-- the Practice.

Thus, this practice allows us to "see through" the greed, anger and ignorance to a realm where there is nothing to take, nothing to be taken. Further, this practice helps lesson the desire to take in excess or what is not given. However, it will never completely remove that drive within us (at least, not for most of us) ... and Sisyphus must wrestle with that rock every day (just as do all human beings).

What is more, while murder, robbery for profit, rape, child abuse are clear cases ... there is nothing about this Practice that provides definite, black/white standards on "moral conduct" of a more ambiguous nature (apart, of course, from the writing of some detailed "Code" like the Vinaya ... but even that is subject to some interpretations). Is it acceptable to rob a bank if truly needed to feed one's family? Is a little drug use okay? Is it okay to cheat on your taxes if most of the money is going to fund a war (or if you simply do not like the government)? Can a Buddhist teacher sleep with several students if all are consenting adults? Is war ever justified? Is eating meat okay (the latter are actual "debates" recently held in this Forum). All one can do is "sit with each of these issues" ... weigh them in one's mind ... and each person will come to their own conclusions. Opinions will vary, even among "Buddhist teachers".

Thus, while it is absolutely true that "immoral conduct" comes from "greed, anger and ignorance" ... it is not always so easy to keep us from falling into that trap no matter how long we have practiced, nor is it easy to always say exactly what "moral action" would be in a given "gray" situation ... AND MOST OF LIFE IN SAMSARA IS "GRAY" SITUATIONS!

Finally ... I think someone mentioned that the Buddha, on his deathbed, said to abolish the Vinaya moral code. I cannot find such a reference, and would be surprised. The codes of behavior (for monks and lay folks, male and female) were certainly kept thereafter, as they were during the Buddha's life ... and with incredible detail on what constitutes "Kosher" behavior. Buddhism (Chan/Zen Buddhism was no exception ... never in any way), from the time of the Buddha through all the centuries ... until it hit the "libertine" and liberal West and "modern times" ... has been a great, moralistic, rule bound practice of "do this on Wednesdays, don't do that of Fridays" that would put Hasidic Jews to shame.

Gassho, J

[Janne H]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

Thus, while it is absolutely true that "immoral conduct" comes from "greed, anger and ignorance" ... it is not always so easy to keep us from falling into that trap no matter how long we have practiced, nor is it easy to always say exactly what "moral action" would be in a given "gray" situation ... AND MOST OF LIFE IN SAMSARA IS "GRAY" SITUATIONS!

Maybe it has to do with intention, when ones intention is freed from greed, anger or ignorance it (ones intention) is "morally" (""cause moral in this sence is nothing to attain) correct, isn´t that simple? The outcome is a different matter, that one can not always (or never) predict.

Just a thought.

[Stephanie]

Re: More about Zen and morality..

What causes 'immoral' behavior? Is it anything other than confusion, ignorance, delusion, etc.? We should start there. If immorality comes from somewhere besides the three poisons - the foundational poison being ignorance, well then - besides knocking Buddhism on its ass philosophically, we need to determine from whence comes immoral behavior.

I am glad that Jundo came in and responded before I first got a chance to, as he expressed some of the points I would have made quite clearly.

I do agree that the "three poisons" are a lucid distillation of what drives us to engage in "immoral behavior." But I also think that a lot of behavior, as Jundo points out, is either "hard-wired" into us or powerfully conditioned and doesn't magically disappear when we have an insight.

When I say, "I always used to suppose there was an underlying 'moral order' but now I am not so sure," I am not saying I do not believe that the Three Poisons can be identified as the main source of harmful behavior. Rather, I'm saying I'm not sure that whether or not we act from the Three Poisons matters to anyone or anything else other than the human beings who invented that concept. I do believe karma works, and I don't understand how skeptics like Stephen Batchelor say they don't believe in karma, because karma is just cause and effect. Our actions have effects that affect us. But I don't think "the universe" cares one way or the other if we act good or bad. If anything, evolution on Planet Earth has rewarded greed and aggression (and sometimes even ignorance) in the game of survival.

So how this connects to the discussion of kensho / awakening and morality is that if in a moment of clear seeing we are seeing beyond the human concepts that normally frame our experience of Reality, we're not necessarily going to see "the error of our ways" and forever after be "good" because we've seen the foolishness of harmful behavior. I think "seeing the foolishness of harmful behavior" is a long process that takes years, and is tied intimately with wisdom and insight, but I don't think kensho or even practice produces morality by default. We can certainly learn to "unhook," and as you point out it is a similar mechanism in insight into reality and removing the charge from the impulse to engage in harmful behavior... but I don't think that freeing ourselves from the impulse to engage in harmful behavior happens unless we are making continuous effort toward that end, even if we are having kenshos every day.

I don't think "the universe" cares what we do. The universe just reflects what we do back to us, and we decide whether we like what we see or not. So I don't think that someone who has a moment of seeing the universe clearly is going to necessarily receive a definitive "moral lesson" in that experience. Morality comes as the result of a choice. We must continue to make choices throughout our lives. Our wisdom can inform our choices, but there is no definitive experience that is going to ensure we always make the right choice forever afterward. Nor is there a guarantee that insight into emptiness will translate into self-restraint and moral purity.