Aggregates at play...

 A relative recently indirectly criticized my stance on undocumented migrants and sanctuary cities by writing "there are some people on here who have the misguided belief that violent criminals are also victims of society because 'circumstances' had driven that person to be violent..."

Well,  from my Buddhist perspective that's incorrect and a straw-man to boot.  

From a Buddhist perspective existent things come about as an interplay of the five skandhas, or aggregates: form, feeling, thought, volition, and consciousness.  The interplay plays out according to karma, or, if you will the interdependency of all aggregates. People experience this interplay through their experiences, but indeed, their experiences are the result of karma, but their "small self," acting/experienced as thought and volition isn't a bit player here,  but rather an active, if unaware participant in these aggregates.

Whilst in Zen we strive to practice mindfulness to transcend greed, anger, and delusion, that "small self" isn't unnecessary, despite its dependency of the interplay of the five aggregates; it serves a survival purpose, for example.  But just as whales have learned to breach the water's surface from other whales, every verbal thought in our heads is the result of others, as well as the small self's thought, volition, and consciousness.

So  it is false to say that one who holds the Great Vehicle view as approximated by the above says "society" is "to blame" for violent criminals behavior.  (An interesting data point regarding karma, and whether "society" is blameless or not is the story of Charles Whitman and his brain tumor.)

All of the above having been said, another point I made in that exchange is that fundamentally, one is no different than an undocumented migrant.  I did not specifically address the question of violent undocumented migrants, but the fact is,  it is still the case that "law abiding" citizens are indeed fundamentally no different than violent criminals, because whether law abiding or not they are all due mercy and compassion because of their very existence as beings. 

My nephew further went on to say "99.99% of people with similar upbringings [are] non-violent people."

William Barrett's Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy has an apt passage as a rejoinder:

The first novel Dostoevski wrote after his return from imprisonment in Siberia was Memoirs from the House of the Dead. Since the book came after the decisive events of his life—his near execution by a firing squad and his penal servitude in Siberia—it can be taken as the beginning of the real Dostoevski. The narrative that comprises the second part of the book, which is the novel proper, is fairly negligi ble; but the first part, the description of prison life in Siberia, is of crucial importance in understanding Dostoevski's deepest insights into human nature. An experience like his in this Siberian prison lay outside the whole humanistic tradition of European culture and could only be expected to yield knowledge of man that that tradition had not yet come upon. No classicist or rationalist, armed with the Aristotelian definition of man as the rational animal, could have been exposed to such a welter of humanity and still have retained his ancient convictions. What Dostoevski saw in the criminals he lived with is what he came finally to see at the center of mans nature; contradiction, ambivalence, irrationality. There was a childishness and innocence about these criminals, along with a brutality and cruelty, altogether not unlike the murderous innocence of a child. The men he knew could not be categorized as a criminal type and thus isolated from the rest of the species, man; these criminals were not “types,” but thoroughly individual beings; violent, energetic, intensely living shoots from the parent stalk. In them Dostoevski was face to face with the demoniacal in human nature; perhaps man is not the rational but the demoniacal animal. A rationalist who loses sight of the demoniacal cannot understand human beings; he cannot even read our current tabloids.

From a Buddhist perspective, "demoniacal" can be substituted with "subject to greed, anger and delusion."

So there's fundamentally no difference, regardless of the percentage of violent criminals.

Photos from my overnight stay at Sōgenji, October 2024

 

Recent photos from 頭陀寺 (Tóutuó-si) Temple in Wenzhou, China

 Last October, I had the opportunity to visit 頭陀寺 - which means "itinerant monk temple"  in Wenzhou, China, on the occasion of the full moon. During that day, the temple is open (and crowded) for a community lunch.  The temple was founded by Yongjia Xuanjue, who is recorded in The Transmission of the Lamp as having had is realization confirmed by the Sixth Patriarch after having stayed one night at the Patriarch's temple.

It's nice to see it being rebuilt, though it appears, despite it being a monastery, that it lacks a zendo separate from the Hondo, based on what I saw.

Maybe in the future...

What remains from the old temple:

The founder, Yongjia Xuanjue, if I recall correctly.

Interesting Sōtō history tidbit

 I'm not one on being too sectarian,  and I don't like bashing other schools at all, but this piece from Dosho Port explains a lot about not only why Sōtō folks often seem obsessed with Dōgen, but also how the Sanbo Kyodan lineage came about.  It too, in my view, doesn't really bash Sōtō, but historically it's fascinating. 

Mad Libs

 I was thinking about this tweet.  I was thinking about the author's lack of self-awareness.

Here's a good thought exercise I thought of years ago to help with such things. 

Take a basic sentence, like "Even so called “enlightened” people are not immune to brainwashing coz of the principle of “Garbage In, Garbage Out."

And do a Mad-Libs on it, changing verb tense as needed, or adding or deleting words for better meaning/context/etc.  For example, "Even so called I am not immune to brainwashing coz of the principle of “Garbage In, Garbage Out."

And I probably am not. Human beings are susceptible to being drawn into crowds, either physically or mentally or both. 

It's an important exercise.  More people should know of it, and use it.

Popularized Lay Zen Practice Has Always Been Progressive

 I'm tempted to write several pages on this topic alone, but in response to those (OK 1 or 2 or a few) that decry the fact that white convert American Buddhists tend to be progressive seem to be unaware of the recent history of lay Zen practice. 

As a guy who practiced with those affiliated with likely the original root of modern popular lay Zen practice, I often forget that no, lay Zen practice did not start with Shunryu Suzuki "and a bunch of hippies," but rather it started back in Japan in the 19th century as a response to Meiji era reforms, including the elimination of class differences as well as the fact that:

The newly established Meiji government promoted a nationalistic ideology that condemned Buddhism as a foreign religion. This ideology known as the haibutsu kishaku (廃仏毀釈; lit: abolish Buddhism destroy Shakyamuni) reached its peak in a series of organized attacks on Buddhist temples and establishments all over the country.

So,  in contrast to those who decry white American Zen Buddhism as the toy-thing of a progressive elite, it in fact was never that, even in Japan; and moreover, those decriers tend to ignore that "Suzuki's hippies" were originally social outcasts before they got older and bougie. Moreover, in the traditions in which I practice, there are resources allowing for those of lesser means to participate; one person I regularly see at retreats has taken a vow of poverty. 

And I assure you, every single practitioner I have seen at every single Zen center has come to Zen "like a refugee" - to steal a phrase from Leonard Cohen and aptly apply it.

Finally, let's not forget Brian Victoria.  Although Japanese Zen "opened up" to all lay people, especially in the Rinzai tradition, it did so by accommodating itself to 文明開化, or perhaps better put in hindsight, "Make Japan Great Again," it did compromise some fundamental Mahayana principles, which were, thankfully, repudiated after WWII.

I've written this elsewhere: I know of no zendo or temple that would turn away a Trump supporter.  But, like reality and the Christian Sermon on the Mount, I submit Mahayana Buddhism has a distinctly progressive bias. It just is what it is, and you can accept it or not.  But don't build straw-men conspiracies out of it.  Read the links, especially the first link; it's very instructive.

Conspirituality, Western Buddhism, and Its Critics

 The Buddhist blogosphere is largely moribund these days, which I guess gives me a space more or less that isn't that crowded... Someone I know in social media mentioned if you want to know if some person X is in or leading a cult, just Google "X cult."

Well, I did that and here's one of those links.    There is an allusion to a "1993 Dharmsala Western Buddhist Teachers' Conference," which, according to that author,  seemed mentally in the same category as a conspiracy theorist's ruminations on the Bilderberg Group or maybe Davos (though I do have reservations about Davos, to put it very mildly). Here's the only substantial link I could find on said conference. 

Now full disclosure: In the 90s when I lived in New York I did meditate at zendos that no doubt were affiliated  with the teachers who attended that conference, and while the prevailing politics were liberal/progressive, I doubt that came from some conspiracy hatched at a conference 31 years ago.

In fact, I would submit that one reason this conference was held was rather for the Dalai Lama to project soft power for the Tibetan government in exile; read that link I mentioned above.  Clearly Bhodin Kjolhede was rather enamored and deferential to the Dalai Lama.  Now, I myself am on record as being rather critical of the Dalai Lama and the whole "Free Tibet" movement. (Also here.) I'm not an apologist for Chinese rights violations, but the record is right there out in the open if people will look.

However, this is not the message the author of "Vividness" wishes to convey, but rather, those nasty Boomers with their "Boomeritis" created liberal Western Buddhism, yada yada yada. As things would around this time or later be, it turns out that both views by second generation American convert Buddhists and the Ken Wilber/Brad Warner/Vincent Horn/etc. "new generation" American convert/Buddhist brat Buddhists...were mighty white. 

As I wrote earlier, when I lived in New York I did meditate at zendos that no doubt were affiliated  with the teachers who attended that conference, but I lived in New York.  I also visited Shaolin-si in Flushing, as well as many Chinese temples.  Similarly when I moved to the Pacific Northwest I visited many temples that don't get space in Tricycle or Lion's Roar; from Pure Land to Shingon to Vietnamese to Chinese Pure Land.  Moreover, the teacher with whom I trained then was virtually unknown in the United States, so while I saw the above thesis/antithesis of white Western Buddhism, it kind of passed me by. Or to steal a phrase from a right wing pundit, I was in Western American Buddhism but not of it, at least in the sense that I joined one camp at the exclusion of another camp. Or maybe I stood outside both camps.

Today, in retrospect, it seems the whole critique of white Western Buddhists as a stifling consensus has collapsed into a puddle of conspirituality. (See also here.)  It seems many of the same folks who criticize "consensus Western Buddhism" also are anti-vaxx,  and demonstrate gullibility in other areas of our political and economic system; e.g., one I know was a big fan of Ken Wilber; now he's a fan of Elon Musk.

But, all of these things are fundamentally illusory!  Of course the phenomena I'm describing are phenomena, and one can agree or disagree with my apprehension and views on such phenomena.  

But they describe divisions where divisions don't fundamentally exist.  As I wrote previously with disputes such as these or divisions, we should try to remember to have the mind of a newborn baby with no sense of self apart from others, and to keep THAT MIND in engaging others.

This does not mean accepting others' delusions, or encouraging them in their delusions especially when those delusions would be harmful to beings. This goes for using "Buddhist" justifications for certain behaviors that are at their core casuisty.  YES, Donald Trump has Buddha nature, but he's also an adjudicated felon, rapist, and con man who will be doing harm to this country and most of its people.

But NO, that doesn't give me license to engage in more division either. I have to remember to keep THAT MIND.

Election aftermath practice

 I once asked my teacher how we can maintain practice when disputes and disagreements inevitably arise. He said that a newborn baby has no sense of self apart from others, and to keep 𝑻𝑯𝑨𝑻 𝑴𝑰𝑵𝑫 in the midst of a dispute or disagreement is critical. I added, we are all on our deathbeds metaphorically speaking; it is good to treat people that way; he replied "Of course."

So in trying to communicate regarding this dispute... well 𝑰𝒕'𝒔 𝒉𝒂𝒓𝒅!!! And I understand that my own mind 𝒘𝒂𝒏𝒕𝒔 "me" to be separate from those with whom I strongly disagree, but thankfully, with practice, I can endeavor to be with that 𝒘𝒂𝒏𝒕𝒔 without being led around by it.

That 𝒅𝒐𝒆𝒔 𝒏𝒐𝒕 mean that we should deny help and comfort to those that are victims or threatened by violence. The Zen teachers giving guidance to those who are truly threatened by the recent election are acting out of adherence to the first precept. Adhering to the first precept, even if it means defending one's self and others to prevent greater violence is adhering to the first precept, if one can keep that "mind of a baby." Ignoring the cries of the world though, is not what Kannon does.

So while I wish for all beings to awaken, I understand that this must take place in what is a dangerous world, with many who are not awakened or are not awakened sufficiently. That applies to Trump, Putin, Xi, Modi, etc. but again, the first precept sometimes demands defense.  But that defense must be done knowing full well that those who are potential opponents are not separate from us. 

I applaud the many Buddhist teachers who have offered guidance at this time (e.g. here).  I remember when Covid struck  Harada-roshi's guidance, was like anything else, to deepen our practice, and to put fears, distractions, stress, etc. into the dantian (丹田).  My practice did not stagnate during Covid, although there were work situations that intervened at the end that wound up taking so much of my time that I did not sit enough.

Things are better now.   Harada-roshi's guidance for Covid also applies to the current political situation.

But it takes continual practice. 

The Algorithm in Social Media...

 

This video:

deals with how Russell Brand's content (and espoused political leanings) changed as a function of the number of hits he got on social media.  Of course, recently, with reports of sexual assault surrounding him, Brand has gone full tilt born again Christian.  But clearly he was monitoring how his content changes garnered increased social media clicks and therefore advertising money flowing to him.

I was reminded of this given the evolution of one "Zen teacher"  in particular, who likes to have an edgy online presence himself.  Well, he's gone from edgy to rather transphobic, to being red-pilled these days or so it seems.   So I can't help but wonder if that teacher is riding the algorithm for fun and profit in the manner of Russell Brand.  

If that is the case, in my view that's as bad or perhaps even worse than another Zen teacher's appropriation (and copyrighting???) of "Big Mind" a while back. 

On the other hand,  he might not be riding the algorithm.   Then again, he does have the demographic/financial issues that the "Big Mind" guy would inevitably have as he gets older, but I don't know either way.   I was just struck by the juxtaposition of Brand's trajectory, as outlined in that video, and the Zen teacher I'm discussing here.   It could all be unconscious - that's what The Algorithm is designed for - increasing user engagement without them being consciously aware that it's being done.  And that he recently put out a video bemoaning his financial state, well, that's a data point.  Regardless, while Buddhists I know would meet  a red-pilled guy with equanimity, it doesn't by any stretch mean that it's desirable to be red-pilled - it is not the way it's currently as used a sly reference to The Matrix. Rather, it's being used in the manner of... wait for it if you haven't heard this... being red-pilled towards, uh, reactionary monarchism as promulgated by a tech bro friend of Peter Thiel and Elon Musk, one Curtis Yarvin, writing under a pseudonym.  Yes, even if you're a cis guy, things are going to get very, very weird; the weird have not only turned pro, they're tech billionaires.  As far as the desirability of being red-pilled is concerned, maybe you can ask some descendants of the Romanovs or the Korean royal family; to sum up the history of monarchy with yet another movie reference,  monarchy is like a box of chocolates.   You never know what you're going to get.   MIS (Managing Information Systemes) departments are similar if you've ever had to interact with them. I was lucky in my last job that the MIS folks were top-notch, once they accepted that we weren't going to be a Windows-only office.  But I've had some folks... well... one was actually a criminal, criming the office. So it is with enlightened tech-bro despots too.  But I digress.

Recently the Zen teacher's been trashing other Zen teachers who have the temerity to offer consolation and compassion to those who are deeply upset by the recent election.  In doing so I was struck by his utter lack of self-awareness; that his critiques of others actually apply more to himself than anyone else.  That is, as I know it, there is no separation amongst beings, and his trashing of course, is making an illusory separation. 

Since he's only about 60, I suggest strongly that, if he wants to be taken seriously as a Zen teacher, that he, you know, deepen his training, because what he is writing and saying is, in my view, at odds with "dying on the cushion," even as one goes about one's daily life tasks, chores, and rest.

I haven't, as you may have noticed, named him, but if you've been around the Buddhist blogosphere or social media world for a while, you probably know who he is.  I haven't named him because there is more important work to be done, and that work is to  deepen the endeavor to abide unmoved mentally and emotionally in these times, to continue to work with the breath throughout the day, putting all into the dantian (丹田).    That is really being edgy, I think, though it isn't clickbait, and won't bring in oodles of ad dollars.   And in that practice, there is actually no separation between me and that teacher.  In that practice, there's simply no need for a social media food fight; on social media I've already said my piece anyway.  And that piece in a nutshell is what I've written here:  He should get a Zen teacher. 

And we should all deepen the practice. 

PS: That teacher - and Brand - also remind me of the term conspirituality.  If you're not familiar with the term, by all means do click the link.  Yes, folks, it's possible to be a Zen Buddhist without going down the rabbit hole.  I shouldn't have to write that, but these days, you never can be too cautious.

Reviving this...

 Given recent events, it seems that I need to say something.

You know what they say, "See something, say something."