"Now What?"

(This talk was given November 6, 2024, one day after the election in the US).

The “elephant in the room” is that today, slightly more than half of the populace is gleeful, slightly less than half is sad. Taking either glee or sadness to the extreme is obviously missing the Middle Path, that sense of equanimity, one of the virtues that’s part of our practice. Dae Soensanim Seung Sahn called the balance the Primary Point. The Third Patriarch termed the “Great Way easy for those not attached to preferences.”

Granted, today might be difficult to manifest equanimity. And it might be even more difficult to manifest sympathetic joy (Skt. Mudita) toward that slightly more than half the population. And that portion of the population may not be inclined toward lovingkindness (Skt. Maitri) or compassion (Skt. Karuna). These and wisdom are the Four Perfections, how we avoid picking and choosing. Not exhibiting them certainly makes the Great Way difficult.a way to make it beyond difficult would be to show schadenfreude, taking pleasure to the bad fortune of another, 180 degrees away from Mudita. Wisdom (Skt. Prajna)  from either side might be a stretch.

But, as elections, political parties, voting, and so on are subject to causes and conditions, are therefore empty. Fair enough and, gloating and moping are both impermanent, so they’ll pass. But empty or not, there are consequences to these causes and conditions, and that is reality. Our practice is to experience reality directly. Whining or whooping aren’t acknowledging reality. There’s way too much “I, I, I” involved in them. So we have to accept reality, including the outcome of the election, as well as whining and whooping because they’re part of it also. But acceptance doesn’t mean passive acceptance. Zen practice is active. We don’t have to settle. 

We acknowledge reality being the result of causes and conditions. And if it happens that there is some harm being done as part of this karmic outcome, passivity is not doing our duty as bodhisattvas. We save all beings, not just the slightly more than half, not just the slightly less than half, or the indifferent; we are part of “all” too. So we need to act wisely, show the wisdom to practice the other three Immeasurables, and take actions that will indeed save ALL beings, including ourselves. 

Myeong Jin Eunsahn gave the talk November 6, 2024

"Bursting the Bubble Between Good & Bad"

When we come into a new situation, in most cases we have some preconceptions and expectations about it. We imagine what the new experience will be, maybe even rehearse what we’ll say and project what someone else might say in return. Whether it’s going to work or meeting a Zen Master, we have expectations, some more grandiose than others.

When we encounter reality, the bubble of expectations is burst. We’re left standing on the ledge, maybe a tiger below and a killer behind, or something more benign than that, but still on the precipice of a new experience. It’s so new an experience that never in the history of the universe has this experience ever been experienced. 

With a mirror, white comes, white is reflected. Red comes, red is reflected. We can embrace this, rejecting nothing, or struggle against it because  reality doesn’t match the story we’ve invented, and we want that story to be true. Reality includes the suffering of others, which our story may not have recognized. Our own suffering exists, but maybe not in our story, and it’s something we try to hide from the mirror.

But reality has this nasty habit of coming out on top when pitted against a story, and this is something to reflect upon. We can observe our creation of a story, and not make good and bad out of having created it. We can embrace reality, reject noting, reflect everything, and do this not only for ourselves, but for the benefit of all beings. The direct experience of reality and helping others is our practice.

Cheolmin Prajna gave the Dharma talk October 23. 2024.

"Xinxin Ming & Me"

~The Great Way is not difficult for those not attached to preferences~

Xinxin Ming, 3rd Zen Patriarch Sengcan

One of the great opening sentences of all time, better than “Call me Ahab,” better than “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.” Certainly that one. 

For the last six weeks, the One Mind Zen Sangha have been sharing our favorite/go-to Sutras and other teachings. This one ranks among the best for me. 

We tell a story about something to ourselves, and we believe them. Likes & dislikes are mental formations  determining goodness or badness. They’re the manifestation of ignoring impermanence and non-self. Its denying emptiness. Attachment to them is the trigger that leads to our dis-ease, our dukkha, our suffering. 

We’ve seen the statues our the Buddha looking peaceful, even having the hint of a smile. We’ve seen the equanimity. That equanimity is the lack of attachment to preferences. 

~When not attached to love or hate, all is clear and undisguised.~

When we go to the extremes of love and hate, we’re also missing the Middle Path. When our “love” is clingy, needy, and possessive, it is not the love of the buddhas. Hate is just another emotional form of anger. It’s an oversimplified “I’m right, you’re wrong!” It’s the expression of the separation of self/other, denying the buddhas teaching of non-self and emptiness, where the story is that the separation is real and permanent. 

~As long as you remain attached to one extreme or another you will never know oneness.~

Tenaciously grasping for what we determine to be the self or the other gives rise to the environment that creates our sense of separation. The duality of our preferences separates of from reality. And what is our practice if not the direct experience of reality? 

For me, Sengcan could have ended the Xinxin Ming with the first sentence. It is only his compassion to go further for the benefit of all beings who need more meat to chew on.

~Words! Words!
The Way is beyond language, for in it there is no yesterday,

no tomorrow

no today.~

Myeong Jin Eunsahn gave the Dharma talk October 9, 2024.

"Like a Shadow"

Everything changes. Fair enough. Intellectually we can acknowledge that. We see old picture of ourselves and we see how much older we look. Relationships change, addresses change, jobs change, and maybe we like those changes, and some we don’t. Clinging to the past only leads to suffering, much like when it’s raining and we want to make the weather great again. Change is the nature of all phenomena, and is the result of our  action (or inaction)—that is, karma. 

Sometimes the change we wish for may turn out not to be to our liking, such as when the rainy day turns into a hurricane or the string of sunny days leads to a drought. But EVERYTHING is always changing, whether we notice or not, with every breath, with every cloud in the sky, like a great cosmic lava lamp. Every change that comes results in the universe changing, even if we don’t notice.

Just as we intuitively know that we can’t stop that wax from melting and changing form (and that we’d get burnt if we tried), we deny that about other things, still thinking we can still mold things to our liking. So, we can think our way into suffering by wanting to grasp the wax, we can passively accept that change is indeed inevitable, so we just let it, regardless of whether the outcome is beneficial, or we can accept change and try to do what we can so that the result may be to the benefit of all beings.

“So I say to you –

This is how to contemplate our conditioned existence in this fleeting world:”

“Like a tiny drop of dew, or a bubble floating in a stream;

Like a flash of lightning in a summer cloud,

Or a flickering lamp, an illusion, a phantom, or a dream.”

“So is all conditioned existence to be seen.”

Thus spoke Buddha.

Haengdal Citta gave the Dharma talk about his go-to teaching, the Diamond Sutra.

"Stop Looking, Keep Going"

Zen has had its share of iconoclastic teachers through the ages. Among the earlier ones from the Tang Dynasty in China was Mazu Daoyi (709–788). His direct teacher was Nanyue Huairang, Dharma heir of Huineng. (Note—Let’s assume that years, lineages, quotations, etc. may all be apocryphal, but we’ll go with whatever history is says is true, because we have no reason to doubt or swear to the accuracy of any of it). When Mazu Wass a young monk, he was feverishly sitting in meditation. You can almost imagine the sweat on his brow, he’s sitting with such fervor. 

Nanyue Huairang comes up to him and says, “Whatcha up to, young monk?” (We can apply the doubt/no doubt model to quotes I’m obviously paraphrasing…or am I?). Mazu says, “I’m meditating to become a buddha.” Upon hearing this, Nanyue picks up a brick, and starts rubbing it. “What are you doing there, Master?” asks a quizzical Mazu. “I’m polishing this brick to make it a mirror,” says Nanyue. “But trying to polish a brick won’t make it a mirror!” exclaims Mazu, even more confused. Nanyue then gives him the teaching—“So why do you think sitting in meditation will make you a Buddha?”

On the surface, it might appear that Nanyue is saying not to bother meditating, it won’t turn you into a Buddha. It might appear that he is being dismissive of Mazu, that he shouldn’t bother practicing. Both of these ideas would be incorrect, however. Nanyue, Mazu, all the Chan monks before and after meditated in one form or another, at one time or another. It might have been daily, it might have been for three month extended retreats. It was part of their job description as Chan (meditation) monks. But that’s not all they did in order to awaken. Bodhidharma said all that was required was for someone to to see their own True Nature. 

The idea is that we all have this True Buddha Nature, we just haven’t realized it or cultivated it. No need to go looking for it outside oneself, it’s already there. It may however be covered over by the Three Poisons of greed, hatred, and delusion, conceptual thinking, or any number of hindrances. But it’s there, just as the sun is there even if it’s a cloudy day. 

One of these hindrances can be to think the world exists only in reference to us. A flock of ducks flies overhead, and Mazu asks his student, “What’s happened with the ducks?” His student replies, “They have flown away.” The ever-iconoclastic Mazu gives his nose a serious tweaking. “Why’d you do that, Master Ma?” Mazu points out that “away” only exists in reference to the student, not the ducks. The ducks are right where they are, the student is grasping at the location of the ducks in reference to himself, not the nature of reality. Ducks fly, ducks float. Ducks do duck things, without the need for my validation. They’re doing duck things even when I don’t notice them. Our Buddha Nature is there, being the nature of a Buddha. We may not notice it, we may assume it’s flown away when we do something less-than-wholesome. It doesn’t need my validation to be right there, never coming, never going. No matter how much I sit, no matter how many kongans I work on with my teacher, how much I chant or bow, it’s not more or less there. All these things can be helpful tools in sweeping away the delusions, but as Bodhidharma said, and Mazu and his Dharma heirs have taught even since, all that is required is to see your True Nature. And that nature is to help all sentient beings realize their True Nature also. Can’t do it for them, but you can teach them how to use a broom.

Min’Ui Maitri gave the Dharma talk July 31, 2024

Form=Emptiness

Every time our Sangha meets, we chant the Heart Sutra. A line in it that has caused (and probably will continue to cause) many people to have much confusion and misunderstanding Is, “…that which is form is emptiness, that which is emptiness form…” As with many of the teachings, the translation of the Sutra may lead to the problem

, and the problem may go back to when the Sutra was written down; such is the nature of language and its limitations. We can just as easily use the term “openness” for “emptiness” and so long as neither has any negative connotations or nihilistic implications, then it’s all good.

In order to reduce the suffering that misunderstanding causes, we use the antidote of understanding. When we think of words, our own sense of self and our projection of self-ness onto others, results in our perception of separation and distinctness to the words. We think of form as a thing, and we think of emptiness as a separate thing, like apples and oranges. Then Avalokitesvara comes along and tells us that form is emptiness and emptiness is form. So, noun A = Noun B, Noun B is Noun A, and therefore one can use an apple for an orange and it’s all good. But this interchangeability still considers A & B to be separate things, even in their equality!

“Form” as a term is empty. “Emptiness” as a term is likewise empty. But what are they empty of? First of all, it’s their selfiness. As DT Suzuki put it, all phenomena subject to causes and conditions is characterized by Shunyata (emptiness). That means that everything we encounter physically has no self nature. In the world of interdependence, nothing we encounter is not the result of causes and conditions. Things do not magically spring into existence totally independent of other things. 

That table you sit for your morning juice and coffee—comprised of top surface and legs, maybe made from wood, or metal, or plastic—is it still a table when one of the legs is removed? As a place to put a coffee cup and not have it end up on the floor, its function as a table is gone. But we may still give it the name “table” (albeit a broken table, but a table nonetheless) even if it no longer can do what a table does. If we look at the table leg, we might still call it that, but if you’d never seen a table or knew that it once was an element that held up a table, you might likewise call it a stick, or firewood, or ash waiting to happen when it comes in contact with a flame. So all of these entities may have different names, and their existence relative to their function will likewise be different—even though at one time we thought of them as a thing that is part of that other thing. Much like the Skandhas (individual elements—form, feeling, perception, impulses, and consciousness) we think of as composing our selves that Avalokiteshvara found to be empty of any self-nature, these parts of the “table” too have no defined self-nature. Once he found that, he was relieved of “all suffering and distress.”

There is no “other” to what we call “form,” and no distinctness to what we call “emptiness.” They’re just inseparable characterizations. It’s formemptinessemptinessform. You can pull apart an orange and up to a certain point, it functions as an orange. But that state changes—you probably wouldn’t try to make juice out of the seeds. Some grated orange peel might make for a tasty cake, but just throwing an entire orange into the batter and getting the same cake is unlikely. If you left the grated orange peel in a closet and expected the same outcome as using freshly grated peel in your mix, you would probably be disappointed, if not ill. The nature of the orange and its constituent parts are all subject to causes and conditions, have no self-nature, and are impermanent. Consequently, they are defined as BEING emptiness. 

When the essence and function of ourselves, an action, and something acted upon are inseparable, then we’re at least in the state of no-mind or mu-shin or before-thought that characterizes our direct experience of reality without concepts (including “emptiness” as a thing) we experience emptiness. It doesn’t make anything less “emptiness,” but at least we see that which Avalokiteshvara perceived, and hopefully that will lessen our suffering and distress.

Robert Koho Epstein gave the Dharma talk July 24, 2024 at One Mind Zen.

"Lighting the Way"

A blind man is given a torch to light his way on a path at night. He finds it odd, but is told it’s so others on the path don’t crash into him. “Fair enough,” he thinks. Then someone runs into him on his way home. Why is that? Because his torch went out, and it didn’t supply any light to help to others on the path.

As practitioners oof the Great Way, we’re told that once we reach the “other shore,” the raft (of the teachings may be discarded.” Likewise, fair enough, but like the torch, that only counts so far as personal “enlightenment” is concerned. Crossing on the raft is fine, but maybe the bodhisattva would think to share that raft with others so that they may reach the other shoe also, possibly even to the point where they become the ferry boat captain.

The lamp metaphor is interesting on another, more personal level too. We’ll refer to the bind man as already enlightened (sounds contradictory, but it’s a metaphor, so go with it) and doesn’t really need the torch. Of course, he’s effectively a bodhisattva and can carry it for the benefit of others. But, you can point to Jinul’s “sudden awakening/gradual cultivation” here. The torch was lit by coming in contact with someone else’s flame (sudden enlightenment), but in order to keep it lit and be of benefit to others, the lamp must continue to shine, mindfully of it, checking to see that it’s still lit. Maybe adding some fuel from time to time will be required, or maybe coming in contact with another flame. 

As practitioners, we can certainly take a lesser Zen vehicle route, and just practice Zen for our own benefit (it happens). Or we can take the greater vehicle—the bodhisattva route—and make sure that we are not the only ones receiving the benefit of our “enlightenment” but all sentient beings are as well. It’s through continuous cultivation of our practice that we can pay attention to the needs of others, and not backslide into complacency. 

When we do meet them on the path, we can’t expect them to be as seasoned travelers as we are. We walk at their pace, sometimes pushing a bit and giving them to stretch out and catch up. If they don’t want to get lost, they’ll have to follow where the light is. But we do what we can as bodhisattvas to see that they do,  even if it means we have to pull them back onto the road now and then.

Haengdal Citta gave the Dharma talk on July 17, 2024.

"Situation, Relationship, and Function"

“Explanation-style teaching is not enough,” says Zen Master Seung Sahn, ”some kind of demonstration is necessary.” - Seung Sahn

As Buddhists in general and Zen practitioners in particular, we try to spread the Dharma wherever possible. Sometimes we do it through words, sometimes through silence, and optimally through our actions. We try to leave greed, hatred, and delusion out, and bring generosity, love, and wisdom in, without proselytizing or preaching. Although it’s not always obvious or straightforward how we do that. 

Not every situation is the same. Likewise, no relationships are identical, and may change constantly. That being the case, can a single response realistically always be considered the correct one? It would be easy to say that generosity is always welcome, always helpful, always appropriate. But if a child were starving, would giving them a rubber ball for breakfast be generous? Would giving a basketball player a sandwich and expecting to see a fast break really be practicing the perfection of generosity? If someone’s wife just died, is pointing out the Buddhist teaching of no birth/no death be correct function? Would offering candy to a child who’s a stranger? None of these examples are necessarily bad actions, but they all reflect a certain tone-deafness regarding the situation and relationship.

We face challenges about what correct response—correct function—should be many times every day. If we aren’t paying attention—being mindful—and sensing the nuances in a given situation, we can very easily just do a shallow “Buddhist” response. Even the Buddha wasn’t all hugs all the time:

“….Ananda said to the Blessed One, "This is half of the holy life, lord: admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie."

"Don't say that, Ananda. Don't say that. Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life….” (Upaddha Sutta)

In the Sutra in 42 sections, the Buddha said, “Giving food to a hundred bad people is not as good as giving food to a single good person,” meaning that not all dana is appropriate dana, or correct function. Through our pride, we might think to ourselves, “I’m so great, I just donated all this food to all these people,” but that isn’t as meritorious or wholesome as supporting even one person who helps all beings find their True Nature. Even within the realm of “saving all beings,” there are priorities. Sustaining one who will do the work of the Bodhisattva is more beneficial to all beings in the long run than randomly performing self-congratulatory acts that only help people who only spread greed, hatred, and delusion. Even this, however, is subject to paying attention to situation, relationship, and function. There are the King Ashokas, who start out evil and become good, and conversely Devadatta, who does the opposite. On the surface, generosity to Devadatta would seem more appropriate, but that may turn out to be a grave error. Even the Zen stick, a punch, or a twist of the nose may have skillful function…depending on situation and relationship.

The first of the Perfections (Paramitas) is generosity, or dāna-pāramitā); followed by morality (śīla-pāramitā); perseverance (kṣānti-pāramitā); vigor (vīrya-pāramitā), meditative concentration (dhyāna-pāramitā); and wisdom (prajñā-pāramitā). They are known as the Practice of Perfections, that’s to say that they are ongoing like our Zen practice. (Think of the phrase “Practice makes perfect,” but without ever achieving total perfection). They Practice of the perfections is how we perform correct function, skillfully adapting to situations and relationships from moment to moment, and always returning to the same simple point: “How may I help you?”

Haengdal Citta gave the Dharma talk June 26, 2024

"One Step Back"

Bodhidharma came from the West with the bowl, the robe, and a copy of the Lankavatara Sutra. As you might expect, many of the things we talk about in Zen practice come from this Sutra. One of them is the notion that”All things are created by mind alone.” Before dismissing that as preposterous, in Zen we also vow to save ALL beings, so “Mind makes everything,” is no more likely or unlikely.

Our imaginations create the world. Our perceptions, interpretations, and inferences create what we think of as reality. We believe it, and think of it as incontrovertible, that It. Is. Reality. It. Is. Truth. This is our world, and we make it up as we go along. That’s not good or bad, it’s an acknowledgement of what humans do; we think our way into sadness, happiness, pleasure, pain, all of it. We create Nirvana and Samsara. We create all sorts of concepts, beliefs, and ideas.We infer meaning to things that really don’t have any meaning to them, like the omens predicting doom, or hurricanes being divine punishment. We take statements made by others out of context; we misinterpret intention and motivation. Someone can say something to you that elicits anything from “meh,” to laughter, and to running away screaming, regardless of what the intention behind the statement was. We’re winging it, bouncing through the pinball game of existence and thinking we’re making a straight line, always one step back from reality, and all made by mind.

One of our Sangha members was involved in the cleanup of a major natural disaster, where hundreds of thousands lost their lives, homes, everything. We can make a mental image of the cleanup, we can possibly imagine what the sounds were, probably come nowhere near the actual smells, tastes, and touch were present in the cleanup. Our Sangha member is the only one among us who has actually experienced that and knows what his experience of it was. The rest of us may as well be writing the script for the next disaster movie, because our “experience” of it is just created by our thinking.

All our perceptions and interpretations remove us by one step back from reality. Since one of the major tenets of Zen is to directly experience reality, are we doomed to fail at that task? ZM Seung Sahn pointed out that just seeing, just hearing, just tasting, just smelling, just touching, not dependent on an outside object. No eye, sense of sight, object of sight, no differentiation between subject and object, no mind; all before thought. When we take our invented “I” out of the mix, we’re more likely to experience reality in its totality. We’re one step closer to the experience rather than we are when “I” am involved, thinking myself one step back from reality as it is and we can get on with the business of helping all sentient beings.

One final question: “What makes mind?”

Vesak 2024 Poetry Slam

Our 2nd Annual Vesak Poetry Slam!

"Wild Flower"

Wild Flower

 

Emerging with no unusual colour, the pale little flower grew and was tall enough among the grass to see the small world around her. With no special name she merged in the backdrop of the environment.

 

She saw the path way to a stupa garden and desperately wanted to ask the other flowers looming in the nearby trees about the beauty there. She looked on as the passers by stopped and admired the other flowers. In her solitariness she had only the weeds and the grass for company and they never spoke of the same thing that she used to feel. One day a dog came by and peed on her and it didn’t bother her as she found it amusing as it was something different. A few days went by and every day she watched in longing at the small glimpse of one of the stupas she saw amidst the trees. A small white pinnacle adorned with a purple jeweled eye. Sometimes it glinted in sunlight and there were strange rays coming out of it that lighted the darkness at night. Two sides had small bells and it was heavenly music when the wind rang them as they went by. 

 

It was full moon on that day and she knew that she was going to start wilting away in the early dawn when the dew started to settle on her. She raised herself as straight as possible to get the best view at the stupa. The monks passing by clicking their malas were murmuring prayers and there was one single prayer that she was fond of. Two young monks were talking about it one day and the eldest monk was teaching the other. It was of a strange flower that grew in the mud and rose from it unstained. Looking at her own petals she imagined eyes on each petal just as the Boddhisatva with the thousand hands they spoke of. She wanted to offer herself to the stupa on behalf of every one like her, not seen and even not heard of. She stood tall and bared herself to the full moon.

 

She looked in the purple eye shining to its fullest in the moonlight. Offering herself with all her petals, the stem and tiny leaves, she vowed to be born in clusters. As many as of herself to save everyone. Each cloud, each raindrop, each wind, each leaf and everything that they fall and touch. She vowed to manifest many bodies like herself and bring a rare beauty that no other flower would bring. To heal everyone that looked at her in her many bodies and take away their sufferings.

 

From that day onwards, it is customary for the wild flowers to bloom a solitary flower first  after coming in clusters and clusters. No wonder there is a strange beauty about the unknown wild flowers that are around us everywhere.

"Understanding-Knowledge"

In the days of the original Sangha, it was thought that only a monk of the Sangha could become an Arhant—someone who sees the True Nature of existence. If you were a woman, the best you could hope for is a fortunate rebirth, possibly as fortunate as to be reborn as a monk. Fortunately the teachings have evolved since then, and due to all of us intrinsically having Buddha Nature, gender, lay or ordained status, occupation, none of that matters. We just need to realize our True Buddha Nature to actualize our inherent buddhahood. Some may still contend that it’s a lot easier to pull that off in a monastic environment, without all the distractions of modern life in the “real world.” That may be a romanticized view of life in a Zen center or temple; modern life doesn’t stop at the front door, it might just wear robes.

Dahui Zonggao, Chan Master from the 11th Century CE, lived as a monastic, but his Dharma teaching wasn’t limited only to monks. The writings we have of his (as compiled in “Swampland Flowers”) are largely correspondence he had with lay practitioners. He understood what it took to realize one’s Buddha Nature, and he also understood that there were those who were no less dedicated to the Dharma, but circumstances dictated that “leaving home” was no more an option for them than it was for Layman Pang or Vimalakirti. Being a lay practitioner does not relegate us to second-class status or being unable to awaken in this very lifetime. 

Bodhidharma said that the “Great Way is beyond words and letters.” But to function in life, there are many words-everything from Sutras to recipes—that we need to use. While knowledge does not equate to wisdom, and you can’t intellectualize yourself into awakening, knowledge and intellect do not have to be a hindrance. 

As Dahui said, “At the very moment one speaks of knowledge, knowledge itself is mind, and this very mind itself is knowledge….People with great wisdom have all taken knowledge as their companion, considered knowledge an expedient means, practiced the compassion of equanimity in knowledge, and done all the business of buddhas in knowledge, like dragons reaching the water, like tigers taking to the mountains—they never considered this knowledge an affliction, because they thoroughly understood the origin of knowledge.” 

Knowledge is nothing more than a collection of facts. In and of themselves, these facts aren’t good or bad. When our knowledge gets us in trouble is when we use it to escape from this moment, right hereandnow, and let the concepts that knowledge can bring become a hindrance. Right now, you are reading this piece. When reading, just read. When watching the video, watch the video. There may be some combination of words, ideas, and facts contained in them that will be of benefit to you and help you realize your True Buddha Nature. And more importantly they may help you point the way so that all beings can realize their True Nature as well. There is no reason to “escape the real world” in order to facilitate our following the Great Way. It’s all the real world.

Myeong Jin Eunsahn gave the Dharma talk April 10, 2024.

Text as Raft

When Bodhidharma came rom the West to China, he carried a robe,  bowl, and the Lankavatara Sutra. He passed these on to Huike, the Second Patriarch, but what he transmitted wasn’t fabric, or a receptacle, or a sheaf of paper. He transmitted Mind. But he still gave Huike the book, the bowl, and the robe. He may have been done with them, but Huike still needed them.

Bodhidharma said, “Reciting Sutras results in good memory; Keeping precepts results in a good rebirth; And making offering results in good karma; Yet, none of those result in finding the Buddha.” He didn’t say not to do these things, just that the product of doing them is not seeing your True Buddha Nature. It is said that Ananda, the Buddha’s attendant and source of the Sutras (“Thus have I heard”) didn’t achieve liberation because he grasped only the words of the Buddha, not the Mind of the Buddha.

Much of what we think of as Zen comes from the Lankavatara, and other teachings of the Buddha collected in the Sutras. But having a good memory of what is in the Sutras doesn’t necessarily mean that the marrow of the message has been attained. The word-head has to be grabbed and hung onto like when riding a wild horse. Grabbing the tail only results in disaster. 

We can’t disregard the teachings of the Buddha and Masters.

Once we’ve internalized them to the point where they are no longer words and concepts, then we can say we’re liberated. We have to listen for that right word, the sound of a rock hitting a stick, or a baseball hitting a bat, and when we do, there is no need for words or concepts. It happens before the first thought, and Mind has been transmitted. 

But until we have reached that point, we’re still stuck in the middle of the river of our discontent, and are still in need of the raft to get across, and the words we hear and read are the raft. We may need to use that raft countless times not only for ourselves, but like Bodhidharma and Huike, to help ferry all sentient beings until they have also reached the shore of liberation.

Haengdal Citta gave the Dharma talk March 20, 2024.

"Right Word, Right Time"

The question in old dialogues is often posed, “What is Buddha?” Some answers have been “Dried shite on a stick,” or, “The Cypress tree in the courtyard.” These are both fine answers, if you happen to be in a Tang Dynasty latrine, or actually have a Cypress tree and you have a courtyard. Neither of these statements are appropriate for me, as I don’t have that tree, and I’m not in the latrine, and I don’t use a stick. We also say in our Zennie way to “Go drink tea,” or, “Go wash your bowls.” Again, unless I have a kettle on, or just had a bowl of Weetabix, not appropriate (and somewhat passive-aggressive when you get down to it). What does “Go drink tea” mean, when is appropriate, and why sink into using a cliche when more accurate and appropriate words are available?

Bodhidharma said Zen is “Directly pointing to the human mind; seeing one's nature and become a Buddha; do not establish words and letters.” Words are all we have—what Bodhidharma had, Mazu, Huangbo, Seung Sahn, and myself. The Buddha had 45 years worth of teaching, and they went well beyond the words of Four Truths, and beyond the Flower Sermon for the wordless. 

When we attach to words we get in trouble, either by taking them literally in some cases, disregarding the ones we don’t like, and not knowing the meaning of them. When we have an aversion to them, using Bodhidharma’s statement about “Not establishing words & letters” as an excuse not to read a Sutra or quotations from the old Masters or not to listen to our teachers and others, we miss literally Millenia of teachings. 

Huineng and Jinul are both said to have had awakening experiences by reading, so it can’t be al bad. So it’s not the words that are the problem or the hindrance, it’s missing the other lines from Bodhidharma about seeing our True Buddha Nature and becoming buddhas by way of investigating mind.

So again the question pops up, “What is Buddha?” Mazu said “Mind is Buddha.” Huangbo taught, “All Buddhas and all sentient beings are nothing but One Mind, beside which nothing exists….It is that which you see before you—begin to reason about it (create conceptual thinking), and at once you fall into error.” Bodhidharma taught “Everything that appears in the three realms comes from mind.”

Zen Master Seung Sahn said, “If you sincerely ask, ‘What am I,’ you will run into a wall where all thinking is cut off. We call this ‘Don’t Know.’” Zen is keeping this ‘Don’t Know’ always and everywhere….’What is this?’ One Mind is infinite kalpas.” 

One Mind, Zen, Buddha, all are what is in front of you. Right here, right now, what is it? When the concepts are gone, and even the words that led to their erasure, just this is it—Mind, Buddha, Zen, everything is it, nothing excluded, nothing rejected.

Tell me to go drink tea or to wash my bowls, I’ll hit you with a stick 30 times…wait. No I won’t, but I probably would roll my eyes, mutter to myself under my breath, and sigh. That’s what’s here, right now.