Is morality the measure of wisdom?

[Jundo]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

One of the points argued by Jundo in the recent exchange between Jundo and Chet was that true realization manifests itself in our day-to-day behavior, and that how we can judge a person's spiritual wisdom is by how he behaves. A truly realized person would be kind, humble, and gentle, of inoffensive speech and tactful manner.

I'm not sure I agree with this.

I don't think that personality type or conditioning has much to do with understanding or wisdom.

I disagree, Stephanie. I think that enlightened behavior will manifest in soft, peaceful, kind speech for the simple reason that such speech is free of anger, greed, and ignorance, jealousy, resistance to life.. If one is talking rough, it usually means that the speaker is somehow driven by anger or resentment, which is never enlightened behavior. (I am not saying that there may not be times when enlightened behavior includes "tough talking" ... like the parent who must administer "tough love" out of concern, not out of anger. But that is the exception, not the rule). Morality of this sort is at the heart of Buddhism, and there are standards for right (enlightened) and wrong (harmful, delusional) behavior.

Now, notice I said "enlightened behavior" instead of "an enlightened person". I think that there are few, if any, "fully and irrevocably enlightened people" ... in the meaning of "someone who is in such a state of enlightenment that they never fall into delusional behavior and always, whatever the case, exhibit enlightened behavior in any and all situations". Oh, sure, a "Buddha" is a symbol of such perfection ... someone who never, ever makes a mistake or violates a Precept. But that is not true for most of us who are just "Bodhisattva bozos on the bus."

However, there is a crucial difference between folks who are angry, greedy and delusional all or much of the time ... and those who fall into those traps rarely or once in a long while. (Something I take comfort in, as I fell mightily on my butt into a great big mudhole this week while walking a road I otherwise know so well and always pass safely). We seek to be like safe drivers who drive through life without doing damage to ourself or others. Of course, even the best driver might stupidly drive through a stop sign one day while distracted ... but there is a great difference, I feel, between a driver who drives in a dangerous way day in and day out, and a driver who is safe for years yet sometimes, after thousands of miles, is distracted or makes a careless mistake.

As far as I understand it, realization is letting go of grasping after results. It's letting go of our ideals about the saints we would like to be.

No. "Saints and Bodhisattvas" generally do not kill puppies or steal candy from babies. They will generally seek to act in good and wholesome ways and thus, emulating such behavior, we should all seek to be peaceful and non-greedy, soft spoken and gentle people who would not be compelled to do hateful things. The Precepts define such good and wholesome behavior from a Buddhist perspective.

When the self becomes the selfless/self everything is irrevocably changed. The whole has been transformed. The greatest change of all takes place within oneself without the "attachment" of approval from anyone. Gassho Shogen

I find that a very idealistic statement if you are implying that this "irrevocably changed" person will never slip, never fall into the mud again. Buddhists say that kind of thing all the time, because the dead (and steam cleaned) ancestors are described that way in old Buddhist story books with their every blemish removed. I have met enough living Buddhists who were all too human ... myself included ... to have any faith in such an absolutist statement. I have never met a perfect driver who never, ever runs a stop sign by accident or runs over the curb once in awhile in many years of driving.

Hopefully, nobody gets killed in the mistake, and we can get back to safe driving ... vowing to be more careful.

I disagree that "enlightenment" or "realization" is defined by the extent to which one complies with moral behavioral guidelines.

I believe that realization is clear seeing, is totally not being confused by one's own thoughts about things

Yes, realization is "clear seeing" and "not being confused by ones thoughts" ... which is precisely why it is manifested in conduct free of greed anger and ignorance, i.e., soft and moral behavior. But even the realized person will become confused in their thoughts from time to time ... and, thus, a momentary prisoner of greed anger and ignorance (hopefully, not too often or seriously, though).

Dogen's Shobogenzo is all about awakening and seeing the world through awakened eyes.

If you want an example of an old cranky son-of-a-gun who demanded moral behavior from his students ... DOGEN!

BOTTOM LINE: One cannot be ever considered a "realized" or "enlightened" or "awakened' person if one usually conducts themself like a bastard. However, even a Saint or Great Bodhisattva ... short of total Buddhahood ... is apt to trip and fall sometimes, under the right conditions. (A comfort to a not-so-great Bodhisattva such as myself who makes a mistake and misses a shot from time to time).

Wow - if this is true I have missed the entire point of Zen. I thought (in Soto Zen) practicing the Way was zazen. Period.

No. Living by the Precepts leads to a life of peace, non-greed and tolerance which supports our Zazen. In turn, Zazen supports our living by the Precepts in peace, non-greed and tolerance. In that way, Zazen is the Precepts, the Precepts only Zazen.

No one is threatening "fire and brimstone" hell here (although some forms of Buddhism might do just that). Instead, it is simply that one cannot taste the fruits of Zazen if living while drowning in anger, greed etc.

We fall; we get up.
Our teacher falls; our teacher gets up.
No one "masters" walking to the point of never falling again.
No one masters life/wisdom/etc. to the point of never falling again either.

We tend to think that when someone trips and falls that how he/she gets up is what is important.

I think that never tripping and falling is impossible, and only imaginary Buddhas and Ancestors do that in story books. But I do believe that how we handle the sometime fall, and how we recover our feet is important. In this way, Buddhism is like a martial art. There is never a Judo master who will never be thrown or fall ... and how he bounces back and recovers his feet is as important as any other aspect of training.

Gassho, Jundo

[Jundo]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

Hi All,

Let me take a moment here to comment on what stop sign I ran this week. (Since I am supposed to be one of the driving instructors around here, I need to explain why I ran a stop sign and crashed into another vehicle, all while playing with the radio).

Of course, I am talking about what transpired when I responded to what, I felt, were some very untrue things about our Sangha and its teachers (mostly about me) and recent events, written on someone's blog. Maybe I should have ignored it, but I went charging in like a dumb Don Quixote to "right the wrongs" ... and set the facts straight. What started off as a "reasoned presentation of the facts" by me soon turned into my starting to argue with the guy and other very aggressive posters there. They are yelling at me ... and I found myself soon starting to yell back!

Even more stupidly, my original intent to be critical of the use of 'bad words, pejoratives, insults and rumor making', as found in some corners of the Buddhist internet, soon turned into my using ironically "examples of bad words and insults and baseless rumors" to make that point and mock it ... which soon turned, by my own clumsiness and serious lack of taste and thoughtfulness, into the use of insults and pejoratives to "make my point" that were too aggressive and "in your face". My attempt to mock a culture of rumors, insults and anti-gay terms ended up as my telling a tasteless story involving just that to make my point! I thought I was being witty to demonstrate the point! I intended to make fun of and mock the aggressive atmosphere of cussing and insulting and rumor inventing in certain corners of the Buddha-sphere, and that was what I thought I was doing as I was doing it ... but it was so badly done that the harsh words and mocking examples I chose completely overwhelmed the point I was making, and were just the same as what I was criticizing. STUPID ME!

As well, I did start to get angry and, well, even I can't tell where the examples of "ironic satire" end and "just cussing out the guy in anger" begins.

I remain a critic of the culture of bad words, pejorative, insults and rumor making.in the Buddha-sphere which was my original target ... even if I fell into some of that myself in a misguided and foolish attempt to mock and criticize it. Kind of like an anti-alcohol campaigner carelessly getting drunk while demonstrating "the evils of alcohol"! I am just humbled at the stop sign I ran through my own lack of care, and hope it will make me a better driving instructor in the future.

Gassho, Jundo

[ghop]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

I am just humbled at the stop sign I ran through my own lack of care, and hope it will make me a better driving instructor in the future.

I think it already has.
Welcome to the human family.
Your humility may be your best message yet. :wink:

deep bows
to my teacher

Greg

[Eika]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

I think that one reason the nay-sayers say that an internet sangha cannot work is that, with the rare exception, forums are full of people saying things that are hurtful, ridiculous, ill-conceived, argumentative, and plain wrong. I think the challenge for the sangha members is to remember our precepts as they pertain to speech on the internet. So far I think we've done a good job of not descending into divisive speech on this forum.

I also think there is a huge difference between "profanity" and hurtful speech. BUT most positive usage of profanity involves heavy doses of body language and/or situational awareness. These things are difficult when writing in a forum. I can call a fellow musician a motherf*&%r on a jazz gig and mean it as a complement and have it be taken as one. I don't think that would work in a written forum. So, I err on the side of avoiding nuanced speech that involves less-than-savory language. Even if it did work, there is always the possibility that portions could be copied and pasted out of context in a way to make the author seem ridiculous. As we teach in college, the written word is powerful, don't treat it like regular speech.

As we learn to play an instrument we play a lot of bad notes. Still, we practice . . .

Gassho,
Eika

PS--The precepts and shikantaza can never be separated . . . indeed, they are the same, I think.

[JohnsonCM]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

Does practicing moral behavior cultivate wisdom? Most likely so, as I think this is called practicing the Way.

Wow - if this is true I have missed the entire point of Zen. I thought (in Soto Zen) practicing the Way was zazen. Period. What some people call moral behavior might result from this practice, but the practice of (what some people would call) moral behavior certainly will not lead to enlightenment (defined as zazen in Soto).

If practicing the Way is no different from some preacher telling me how to behave, I could have picked a religion to follow (no, I obviously don't consider Zen a religion, although I will admit that all depends on your definition of religion).

Zazen is not enlightenment, it is simply zazen. Zazen is the practice we undertake to help us to return to our original nature, cleaning off the gunk and schmutz of all the delusions and attachments we have from our spiritual mirror. Zazen, in and of itself, cannot be anything other than zazen. Practicing the Way is most definately different from "some preacher telling me how to behave" because there is no fire and brimstone here, no lakes of fire, and no one telling you how to behave. What is here, within the Way, is simply a path to dropping all the things that cause you to act in opposition to your Buddha-nature. On this path, there is no one telling you how to behave, in fact, you aren't even telling yourself how to behave, you simply find yourself walking the path. The behavior that you show will be a result of that. This thread asks if morality is the measure of wisdom, I think morality is the RESULT of wisdom. And as to enlightenment, what is that? If you are enlightened, how can you explain it to me, who is not enlightened so that I could understand it? If you think you have attained enlightenment, you are admitting a separation between how you are now, and how you think you are after enlightenment. We know that there are no such separations within this practice. We are all Buddha and this place here and now is Nirvana. But we are also bound by our attachments and delusions, and this place here and now is still samsara. So, if you think you've attained enlightenment, it's possible, but not probable. And if you didn't attain it, then it is something beyond our current ability to understand, so how would you know how it looks and feels, or what it was like at the moment you attained it? If you don't already know it, how could you possibly know what it might be like? For me, and if you read some of the books on our reading list here you'll see that this idea is not new in our lineage, I side with folks like Suzuki Roshi, Deshimaru Roshi, and Master Dogen.

Those who have great realization of delusion are buddhas; those who are greatly deluded about realization are sentient beings. Further, there are those who continue realizing beyond realization, who are in delusion throughout delusion. When buddhas are truly buddhas they do not necessarily notice that they are buddhas. However, they are actualized buddhas, who go on actualizing buddhas.

When you see forms or hear sounds fully engaging body-and-mind, you grasp things directly. Unlike things and their reflections in the mirror, and unlike the moon and its reflection in the water, when one side is illumined the other side is dark.

To study the buddha way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be actualized by myriad things. When actualized by myriad things, your body and mind as well as the bodies and minds of others drop away. No trace of realization remains, and this no-trace continues endlessly.

Master Eihei Dogen, The Genjokoan

I don't know what enlightenment would be like, but I'll settle for enlightened action.

[Jaana]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

To clarify my thoughts on this based on what everyone else said (thank you all!):

I think you can act morally without being moral, or being wise. E.g. "some priest telling you how to behave" might result to such behavior. It is worthy in itself, but it is hardly wisdom (or enlightenment). I think such morality and kindness do have their own value, but I do not think it is probably what Jundo or Stephanie means by "wisdom", nor what most of us seek from zazen.

But to think that since someone can act morally without being wise, it follows that you can be wise without being moral, is faulty logic.

And I think, personally, that I do not have much use for wisdom that does not lead into increased kindness (in the sense of "trying to decrease, or at least not increase, suffering in the world"). If "true enlightenment" and "seeing it for real" can occur in a person while that person still remains a selfish jackass, I don't give a damn if they are enlightened or not.

(This is, just to be clear, not me calling Chet a selfish jackass. Though I did not know him long enough to make that kind of judgment, I don't think he is, and even if I did I would likely not make the judgment out loud anyway. I am talking hypotheticals.)

Stephanie: I am slightly unclear on why you equate moral behavior to social status; you seem to question the relationship of enlightenment to moral conduct, but your examples e.g. about the alcoholic were more about people might find repulsive, not about what they might find wrong. Did I miss something?

[Shohei]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

I think that one reason the nay-sayers say that an internet sangha cannot work is that, with the rare exception, forums are full of people saying things that are hurtful, ridiculous, ill-conceived, argumentative, and plain wrong. I think the challenge for the sangha members is to remember our precepts as they pertain to speech on the internet. So far I think we've done a good job of not descending into divisive speech on this forum.

I also think there is a huge difference between "profanity" and hurtful speech. BUT most positive usage of profanity involves heavy doses of body language and/or situational awareness. These things are difficult when writing in a forum. I can call a fellow musician a motherf*&%r on a jazz gig and mean it as a complement and have it be taken as one. I don't think that would work in a written forum. So, I err on the side of avoiding nuanced speech that involves less-than-savory language. Even if it did work, there is always the possibility that portions could be copied and pasted out of context in a way to make the author seem ridiculous. As we teach in college, the written word is powerful, don't treat it like regular speech.

As we learn to play an instrument we play a lot of bad notes. Still, we practice . . .

Gassho,
Eika

PS--The precepts and shikantaza can never be separated . . . indeed, they are the same, I think.

*Gassho*

Shohei

[Shogen]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

zak wrote:
When the self becomes the selfless/self everything is irrevocably changed. The whole has been transformed. The greatest change of all takes place within oneself without the "attachment" of approval from anyone. Gassho Shogen

Jundo wrote:
I find that a very idealistic statement if you are implying that this "irrevocably changed" person will never slip, never fall into the mud again. Buddhists say that kind of thing all the time, because the dead (and steam cleaned) ancestors are described that way in old Buddhist story books with their every blemish removed. I have met enough living Buddhists who were all too human ... myself included ... to have any faith in such an absolutist statement. I have never met a perfect driver who never, ever runs a stop sign by accident or runs over the curb once in awhile in many years of driving.

Hopefully, nobody gets killed in the mistake, and we can get back to safe driving ... vowing to be more careful.
Jundo

Falling off the wagon or falling in any moral way was not my interest in replying "specifically" to what Jaana said, "Why would we care if someone is awake or not (including ourselves), if it changes nothing? Stephanie replied, " exactly."
I was saying that not only the individual (component) but the whole (dharma) was effectively changed by the individuals awakening. What opinion others have of that is irrelevant such as Stephanies exactly reply. zak

[Rob_Heathen]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

zak wrote:
When the self becomes the selfless/self everything is irrevocably changed. The whole has been transformed. The greatest change of all takes place within oneself without the "attachment" of approval from anyone. Gassho Shogen

Jundo wrote:
I find that a very idealistic statement if you are implying that this "irrevocably changed" person will never slip, never fall into the mud again. Buddhists say that kind of thing all the time, because the dead (and steam cleaned) ancestors are described that way in old Buddhist story books with their every blemish removed. I have met enough living Buddhists who were all too human ... myself included ... to have any faith in such an absolutist statement. I have never met a perfect driver who never, ever runs a stop sign by accident or runs over the curb once in awhile in many years of driving.

Hopefully, nobody gets killed in the mistake, and we can get back to safe driving ... vowing to be more careful.
Jundo

Falling off the wagon or falling in any moral way was not my interest in replying "specifically" to what Jaana said, "Why would we care if someone is awake or not (including ourselves), if it changes nothing? Stephanie replied, " exactly."
I was saying that not only the individual (component) but the whole (dharma) was effectively changed by the individuals awakening. What opinion others have of that is irrelevant such as Stephanies exactly reply. zak

I have read and reread this post. I am honestly confused about the point you are making other than what I have bolded, which seems a bit hostile in it's tone, which is fine I suppose, just wondering where it is coming from and what exactly you are trying to get across. I am sincerely interested because I think I am honestly missing something.

Rob

[Jinyu]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

Hi!
I don't like big discussions on litterature and exegesis out of context, but something just stroke me (and redefining again and again is a very good thing against our/my tendency to make statements).

I re-read parts of the fukanzazengi (when should we stop studying it?...)and of a wonderful article on the fukanzazengi by Josho Pat Phelan recently (http://www.intrex.net/chzg/pat41.htm).

Zazen is not enlightenment

Euh :roll: .... Of course litteraly ... but wasn't Dogen in his fukanzazengi that claim :"The zazen I speak of is not learning meditation. It is simply the Dharma-gate of repose and bliss, the practice realization of totally culminated enlightenment"

Zazen is the practice we undertake to help us to return to our original nature, cleaning off the gunk and schmutz of all the delusions and attachments we have from our spiritual mirror

I understand what you mean. After all, he is very clear about what he called enlightenment in his genjokoan. But If zazen is seen as enlightenment it is also because "zazen was not merely a... device for producing a perfected state of enlightenment, but the expression of a more fundamental perfection inherent in all things. In this way, the practice of zazen itself becomes the actualization of the ultimate truth; and the practitioner, just as he is, becomes the embodiment of perfect enlightenment."

Josho Pat Phelan also says in her article: "At any point in practice, Dogen considered a moment of true zazen to be a moment of Buddha or enlightenment. So, our moment by moment engagement with our whole body and mind, our engagement with the completeness of this present moment of experience, leaves no room to look for a result or to even judge how it’s going. I think this sets zazen practice apart from most other forms of meditation."

It is quite the same thing for Taisen Deshimaru, in his first book "vrai zazen",in the chapter "method of zazen" he speaks about Mushotoku and Hishiryo and then says (sorry for the translation): "when the posture is accomplished, the "spirit" reaches complete enlightenment, the supreme wisdom, "samyak sambodhi"... I repeat it, the posture is very important! Because to be in the Buddha posture is to be a Buddha and to be enlighten. Zazen is Satori : Hishiryo."

Sorry, I don't wanted to be annoying or what ... but just to compare sources... maybe I like exegesis finally! :twisted:
Anyway, all this is just words, and I should get back to cushion before I take all these silly things seriously :lol:

humble gassho,
Jinyu

edit:
But, as you quoted, Dogen also said in his genjokoan: "To study the buddha way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be actualized by myriad things. When actualized by myriad things, your body and mind as well as the bodies and minds of others drop away. No trace of realization remains, and this no-trace continues endlessly."
But does it means that there was no enlightenment in any way?

[Rob_Heathen]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

Luis,
Thank you, wonderful post. Everything you said, in my humble opinion was spot on, but nothing more than this...

Anyway, all this is just words, and I should get back to cushion before I take all these silly things seriously

I need to keep reminding myself of this over and over and over again. Thank you, again.

Gassho,

Rob

[Jundo]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

I have to be away for a few days for obligations and travel, and will not be able to comment as often as I wish.

But Luis speaks my mind. Zazen is not a devise to help us return to our original nature, but is the total expression of the wholeness of all things.

Of course, realizing sitting as "total expression of wholeness" is a return to that never left.

The one other point I may diverge from Deshimaru Roshi and some other masters is on posture. Important, but not limited one particular posture. It is not a matter of "only the Lotus Posture", in my feeling. Rather, it is a matter of sincere, vibrant, whole, dedicated sitting in body-and-mind.

Gassho, J

[JohnsonCM]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

I have to be away for a few days for obligations and travel, and will not be able to comment as often as I wish.

But Luis speaks my mind. Zazen is not a devise to help us return to our original nature, but is the total expression of the wholeness of all things.

Of course, realizing sitting as "total expression of wholeness" is a return to that never left.

The one other point I may diverge from Deshimaru Roshi and some other masters is on posture. Important, but not limited one particular posture. It is not a matter of "only the Lotus Posture", in my feeling. Rather, it is a matter of sincere, vibrant, whole, dedicated sitting in body-and-mind.

Gassho, J

I may have miss-spoken, then. I didn't mean to imply that zazen is a tool like a wrench or a hammer, not a thing made for a specific purpose to accomplish something. I meant it in a way that....well.....ok let's try this another way, since I can't really explain myself that well today :shock: . Rather, when wandering in the dessert in desperate need of a drink, you go to an oasis. The oasis is there, even if you never find it, it wasn't put there just for you to get a drink, it nourishes whole animal and plant species irrespective of you. Indeed, though it can be all those things, it wasn't put there for any of them. It's just there, and by chance, a stroke of luck, or perhaps a map that was shown to you or a trail in the sands, you found it and were in need of a drink. But when you need a drink, that's where you go. There are other ways to get a drink, wait for it to rain, or dig for water, but those are not the best way to get to life saving water, you'd actually lose more that way. So, I guess what I am trying to say is that we are in the process of removing those things which keep us from true realization and harmony with all things. Zazen is how we do that. But it's also just sitting meditation. I think this is a question of verbiage. Sitting on a cushion, breathing, hands in the mudra, thinking of nothing and accepting everything, is not enlightenment; if it's missing the crucial "wholeness" factor and dedcation of true zazen, then it's just sitting on a cushion with your hands in your lap. Sitting zazen is our way to enlightenment and the experience of the "total expression of wholeness" that you are talking about. So, I didn't mean to imply it was a thing to be used for something so much as a "this is what we do because we are trying to realize enlightenment." Which, as I understand it thus far, the "total expression of wholeness" and realization that we are talking about IS our original or Buddha-nature. But, perhaps I am a little mistaken here, so, as Luis said, I'll have to get back to my cushion.

[CraigfromAz]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

...On this path, there is no one telling you how to behave, in fact, you aren't even telling yourself how to behave, you simply find yourself walking the path. The behavior that you show will be a result of that. This thread asks if morality is the measure of wisdom, I think morality is the RESULT of wisdom.

This is what I have been trying to say (apparently rather poorly). Maybe (probably) I don't understand the precepts, but (IMO) they are "you telling yourself how to behave." My point is that I am not interested in some forced, added behavior modification that does not come from within (call it big mind, bhudda nature, whatever). If actualizing my bhudda nature makes me appear wise, kind, humble, whatever - well, that's just fine. If it doesn't do that - well that's just fine also.

However, Iinterpret Jundo's point to be that a little forced, added behavior modification (following the precepts) will allow you to sit shikantaza with a quieter mind, which will make following the precepts more natural, etc. If I have interpreted this correctly, this seems to be a reasonable statement.

(Sorry, screwed up the editing on the quote above)

[Stephanie]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

I deeply appreciate the wonderful, lively discussion that has taken place in this thread. All of you are my teachers.

My point was not that morality and realization are not closely connected, but rather that morality does not totally encompass realization. If I were to draw a Venn diagram of how I see it, the circle of morality would be contained within the circle of realization but the circle of realization would extend beyond the circle of morality.

We all know people who are nice, or kind, or moral, who also labor under a lot of delusions. For some people, their moral behavior may even spring out of their delusion, such as a person who always focuses on others because he does not believe he is worthy of attention, or someone who may subscribe to a religious dogma and do "the right thing" out of fear of hell or punishment.

What draws me to "people of the Way" and this Zen path is the expression of realization, the pointers that I'm acting out of a wildly distorted view, the hints of another way to see and experience life.

The Soto way, as I've primarily learned through Chet, as well as from others here at Treeleaf, is a very clear and direct way to see and experience reality as it is. Dogen had a way of expressing this in words that remains unparalleled.

There is a difference between sitting dully and experiencing "silent illumination." It is one thing to say, "Things are perfect as they are," another to see it. To see it, to see reality free from the filters of stories and thoughts and concepts, is realization.

But this is not so easy as it sounds... and at the end of the day, most people do not realize it, no matter how many days or months or years they sit in zazen. Their zazen may be the perfect expression of it, but they don't know it!