Is morality the measure of wisdom?

[Jinyu]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

Hi everyone!
I was reading a little text by Keizan zenji called "Three Kinds of Zen Practitioners", and I suddenly thought about this thread when I read these lines :roll:

" The Precepts arise naturally from zazen whether they are the five, eight, the Great Bodhisattva Precepts, the monastic Precepts, the three thousand rules of deportment, the eighty thousand Teachings, or the supreme Dharma of the Buddhas and Awakened Ancestors. No practice whatsover can be measured against zazen.

Should only one merit be gained from the practice of zazen, it is vaster than the construction of a hundred, a thousand or a limitless number of monasteries. Practice shikan-taza, just sitting ceaselessly. Doing so we are liberated from birth and death and realise our own hidden Buddhanature. "

gassho,
Jinyu

[Manatee]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

I was under the impression that morality extends naturally from enlightenment; that it is of it. That our striving to reach moral "goals" was just an inside-out or backwards way of trying to imitate the wise, who do not violate morality because it is a waste of time and energy.

As though the moral behavior formed the base and core of the mountain, with enlightenment at the peak; we can try to walk up by using the piedmont of morals, but we are going backwards. It is the piedmont which is generated by the peak. Moral conduct for no reason and enlightenment seem to be one.

I can understand the need to point to the emperor's new clothes of dogmatic morality "for a reason", but morality as a mark of those who do not violate it "for no reason" still seems pretty great to me.

It seems to me that our morals are codified ways of imitating wisdom, i.e., faking it until you make it.

It seems like the more we see the fundamental nature of things, the fewer moral guidelines we are inclined to break.

I always see Buddhism and science together. This reminds me of sociobiology. When a lion kills an antelope, this is moral conduct. It is actually the least amount of violence necessary.

[kfrance0]

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 have held much the same view for a long time. This reminds me of something that happened in my life a couple of years back. I've been a member of a judo mailing list for years. It's a large list, filled with many regular posters from all levels of experience--from college students who just started judo as part of a PE class, to Olympic level coaches when have been involved with international competition judo since the 1950s-1960s. I finally quit the list during the run-up to the 2008 US presidential election because politics became a major subject of discussion, and I found I simply couldn't take the level of mean-spirited, downright nasty (even racist) rhetoric that was coming across from people who I'd have otherwise held in high esteem, as examples for younger or less-experienced people to emulate. Maybe I should back up a little...

I apologize to some of you who may be familiar with judo's history...hopefully you'll bear with me for a few lines while I explain the situation for those who don't know this sort of minutia. Judo was founded by Jigoro Kano in the closing decades of the 19th century. At the time, jujutsu had fallen out of favor with the general public in Japan--it was seen as something disreputable and a throwback to an earlier time. Many schools were famous for brawling with one another in the streets, teaching thugs and gang members how to fight, and brutalizing new students with a toss-'em-in-the-deep-end-and-see-who-can-handle-it approach. Kano had an entirely different vision: here's an art that has all the practical benefits of learning a martial art (learning to defend oneself and others, cultivating physical fitness, etc), and could be structured in such a way to teach moral/ethical lessons as well. One of the maxims everyone who trains in judo learns is "JITA-KYOEI" or "mutual welfare and benefit" (though I've also seen it translated as "you and I shining together," which I think carries the message better). In short, the very way you practice judo teaches the student to care about his partners (and then the rest of society in general), to internally realize that without you trying to help me train and watching out for me when performing techniques on me or competing against me in a match, I can't improve, and vice-versa. There's an unbreakable bond between uke and tori--in fact, they're two sides of the same coin, the one defines the other. I see many parallels with what (little) I understand about zen and buddhism here.

...and then I see people who have been living this practice for decades behave in the most juvenile, hateful, and UN-enlightened way it seems possible for them to do. Disillusioned? Ready to throw up my hands and quit the whole lot of them? You betcha. I've never gone back to that mailing list, and I doubt I ever will, even if I return to judo someday and really dive into the practice. CAN the training instill this sort of moral behavior by itsef? I have to say, I still think so. I think, though, that there are far too many people out there who look at one very narrow aspect of what they're doing and let the rest just fly over their heads (or go in one ear and out the other). I think this is where the roles of the teacher come into play. I dunno... the rest of your post gave me a lot of food for thought (as did the many replies following it). I imagine I'll still be pondering the question even after many more decades roll around for me.

gassho,
Kevin

[Grizzly]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

In our group here we bow together, sit together, walk together at the same speed, then sit and bow some more.
This "together action" is for harmony and reflects the unity of realisation. It is training in itself.
It is morality also.
Too many Zennists IMO follow their own thoughts and ideas and create conflict here and there.
The eightfold path is as vital today, in its more literal forms, as are the oft quoted other interpretations

While writing this I found the following link, which I have only cursorily looked at but seems to be appropriate here.

http://www.buddhistethics.org/7/zelinski001.html

[Risho]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

In our group here we bow together, sit together, walk together at the same speed, then sit and bow some more.
This "together action" is for harmony and reflects the unity of realisation. It is training in itself.
It is morality also.
Too many Zennists IMO follow their own thoughts and ideas and create conflict here and there.
The eightfold path is as vital today, in its more literal forms, as are the oft quoted other interpretations

While writing this I found the following link, which I have only cursorily looked at but seems to be appropriate here.

http://www.buddhistethics.org/7/zelinski001.html

I really, really like that Ceaseless Practice article. Thanks for posting the link!

[CraigfromAz]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

While writing this I found the following link, which I have only cursorily looked at but seems to be appropriate here.

http://www.buddhistethics.org/7/zelinski001.html

I really, really like that Ceaseless Practice article. Thanks for posting the link!

I will readily admit to a limited intrest in ethics, so when I saw the http://www.buddhistethics.org URL, I was not that interested. However, I was having a very dull day at work, so I thought "anything has to be better than this." :roll: And I was rewarded - this is an excellent article, IMO. A very down to earth, readable explanation of a lot of the concepts Jundo has been trying to beat through my thick skull (not that this explanation is any better than Jundo's explanations, but different explanations are often helpful in subverting my mentl blocks!). I would recommend this short reading to any newbies on the forum who are confused about non-attachment, dualism, why we sit zazen, etc. Not to imply I know have these concepts down, but this was very helpful.

Thanks for the link!!!

Craig

[Engyo]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

The challenge in "Buddhist" online groups is participating in a setting where those involved come to discussions from a wide variety of understandings about what Buddhism is or is not. That's all well and fine. It is as it is, but to me, Buddhism (by definition) is the study of Buddha's Dharma. More specifically, the Dharma proposed by Gautama Buddha (the historical Buddha).
The obstacle sometimes seems to be a real bias against anything which people perceive as scripture. The reality is that without the record of GB's teachings there is no such thing as "Buddhism". Don't get me wrong. I think there were many Buddhas, but it is Gautama Buddha in whose name these teachings were recorded and from whom all lineages are traced by reference or inference.
In application of these teachings I bring you to the case in point: "Is morality the measure of wisdom?". My answer is a resounding "yes". Do I run about trying to proselytize to that effect? No. I only answer here because the question is asked. Do I believe my answer is the prescriptive one? No, I do not. I only know this: Gautama Buddha proposed the answer and left a teaching to to advise others like me not to blindly accept, but rather test his views on the matter; adopt them if they work, don't if they fall short.
Specifically, the first teaching recorded which set the wheel of Buddha Dharma in motion was a sutta or "thread" called Dhammacakkappavatthana Sutta. In it, like a doctor, he described the human condition, its cause, declared it curable and decribed the cure. All this was done not in a "sacred" scripture way, but as a mentor might counsel a student. These elements constituted the four truths of all his propositions. He proposed solutions to which he added the caveat, "If it works for you, adopt it. If not, then don't".
When GB outlined his four foundational propositions, the fourth was his description of the path which he realized had always existed. It was the Eightfold Path. He suggested we try it as a way to reach a good place in our lives, for us and those around us. It included elements which have come to be divided into three categories; wisdom (right view and right intention); ethics or morality (right speech, right action, right livelihood); mental development (right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration). All these were proposed not as individual steps or separate endeavours, but as integrally linked or inextricably entwined elements of one path. Each one in turn was the subject of further description and delineation in following teachings recorded in suttas of the Foundationional Vehicle (Theravada), sutras of the Great Vehicle (Mahayana) and Diamond Vehicle (Vajrayana).
All in all they form an amazing variety of diverse ways to experience the same goal; nirvana or cessation. Cessation of the malady in the human condition described by Gautama Buddha whose lineage and teachings came all the way down to Bodhidharma and subsequently to all the ancestors we claim.
Were there modifications? Absolutely. Did ways change here and there? Certainly. But I view those as being in accord with exactly what GB proposed to all:
"When you know for yourselves that these qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering" — then you should abandon them........When you know for yourselves that these qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them." - excerpts from Kalama Sutta: To the Kalamas" (AN 3.65), Access to Insight, June 8, 2010.
Certainly don't go by my words. I did not write this for praise or blame, nor for agreement or disagreement. The question was asked and having experienced this path, I know it works for me in daily application when I am mindful enough to apply wisdom and morality together. Does that mean morality is the measure of wisdom? Perhaps I would alter the phrasing to be "there is no wisdom without morality". Understanding this much has lessened the suffering I cause myself and others.
I enter Zen from there.
Gassho,

[Grizzly]

Re: Is morality the measure of wisdom?

So we have both the Eightfold Path and Dogen's words about kind speech etc.
While we can never judge a human being by their behaviour over a short time, over a longer time it is all we have to decide whether they "walk the talk".
This is the only way we can choose a teacher. It is easy to spout clever words, particularly now with the plethora of teachers in all sorts of traditions and the wide variety of writings to draw from to create a persona.
It is also one way to stop ourselves falling into delusion. It is easy to find teachings that will allow us to be ok with behaving badly. While not completely false it is only one half of the picture. We also need to manifest the teachings to make this world a better place, whether this works or not. Purposeful action, but without attachment to result.
Of course we must have compassion for ourselves and others as we trip and stumble but, as I said in a previous post, perhaps there should be less teachers in this world. Those who manifest the teachings to a higher degree than the masses.
Within every tradition we seem to find teachers that perhaps should be under guidance rather than guiding.

Don, I walk in similar steps to you.

Craig and Cyril, I am glad the link proved useful.

All the best

Rich

[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

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.
Hi Rob
Impossible to miss anything, just look. The arrogance of statements and replies... never hostility. Sorry not to respond sooner to your humble words. Been very busy engaging life. Thank you for your efforts. Gassho Zak