Category: zen

Part 10-1

The Buddha said to Subhuti, “What do you think—did I, the Realised One gain any kind of Dharma when I, the Realised One was with the Dipankara Buddha in the past?”

“No, World Honoured One. You, the Realised One really did not gain any Dharma from the Dipankara Buddha.”

Commentary:

The purpose of the Buddha’s teaching, as mentioned previously, is to attain enlightenment, which is to realise the true-Self, Emptiness that is the essence of everything. The true-Self contains everything, including us, and there is nothing that is not the true-Self. Even the historical Buddha and the Dipankara Buddha also belong to the true-Self and are part of it. There is nothing but the true-Self. The true-Self is also referred to as Oneness because everything is one as the true-Self. This cannot be divided, or broken, nor can it be given, or taken since it is formless, boundless and changeless. The Dipankara Buddha just helped the historical Buddha to realise the true-Self in the past but didn’t and couldn’t grant anything to him. This is why Subhuti said that the Buddha really did not gain any Dharma from Dipankara Buddha.

There is a very well-known story that is popular with people. Once the Buddha lifted a flower during his Dharma talk, then, only Mahakasyapa smiled at it. At that time the Buddha said, “I have the Eye of Dharma, and now I pass it on to Mahakasyapa.” This is very likely to allure people to be confused into thinking that there was something that the Buddha gave to Mahakasyapa. The fact was not that the Buddha gave something to Mahakasyapa but that he just revealed the true-Self through his words and action for the purpose of showing it to the assembly.

Let me introduce a story that substantiates that the Buddha didn’t pass on anything to Mahakasyapa. After the Buddha’s death, Ananda once asked Mahakasyapa, “What else did you get from the Buddha except his robe and bowl?” Mahakasyapa said, “Ananda.” Ananda responded, “Yes.” Mahakasyapa said, “Break the flagpole by the door outside.” In the end, Ananda was able to attain enlightenment, or realise the true-Self through this short dialogue. This conversation shows well what the Buddha meant by the words ‘I have the Eye of Dharma, and now I pass it on to Mahakasyapa’.

We should remember that the aim of all words and acts by the Buddha is just to reveal the true-Self to sentient beings and we ought to seek to know what the Buddha took the trouble to show to us.

Student: “What is it that the Buddha wanted to show to people?”

Master: “You and I are showing it to each other.”

©Boo Ahm

All writing ©Boo Ahm. All images ©Simon Hathaway

A. The core of the Buddha’s teaching is to help people to escape from illusions. Typical illusions are words and doctrines made up of words. The key problem is that we cannot help but use words to transmit the Buddha’s teaching that we should not be deluded by words. This is why the Buddha said that we should see what his words pointed to instead of being attached to his words themselves. Some ancient masters would say that the Buddha’s words are no more than vessels to carry his teaching. So, we should try to recognise the Buddha’s teaching beyond words in his words.

Student: “What is the Buddha’s teaching beyond words?”

Master: “I’ve not found it although I have sought it for over thirty years.”

©Boo Ahm

All writing ©Boo Ahm. All images ©Simon Hathaway

Master Joshu said to an assembly, “The true-Self is just like a bead in one’s hand. It reflects a bird when a bird comes to it and reflects a lion when a lion comes to it. I use a blade of grass as the Buddha and use the Buddha as a blade of grass. The Buddha is an illusion, and an illusion is the Buddha.”

Then, a monk asked, “I don’t know whose illusion the Buddha is.” Joshu said, “Everyone’s illusion.”

The monk said, “How can I avoid it?” Joshu said, “Why are you going to avoid it?”

Student: “How is it when Joshu uses a blade of grass as the Buddha?”

Master: “What is humble is not humble.”

Student: “How is it when Joshu uses the Buddha as a blade of grass?”

Master: “What is precious is not precious.”

Commentary:

The Buddha reveals itself when what is humble is equal to what is precious.

©Boo Ahm

All writing ©Boo Ahm. All images ©Simon Hathaway

Part 9-3

“World Honoured One, if I were to entertain the thought that I have attained sainthood, then the World Honoured One would not say Subhuti enjoys the state of sainthood. It is because Subhuti really does nothing that you say Subhuti likes to enjoy the state of sainthood.”

Commentary:

A saint, one who has truly attained sainthood is above being deluded by any images to the extent that not only is he not deluded by the thought of having attained sainthood but does nothing as well.

To elaborate on the meaning of ‘doing nothing’, supposing you are asked what you did yesterday, how will you answer? You may say, “I didn’t do anything yesterday. I just rested all day.” Yes, you did something. You rested. That is what you did. I think you did a lot of things during your rest; perhaps you had meals, drank coffee and watched TV. You might say that you did nothing but sleep all day long. Yes, you still did something. You slept all day. That is what you did.

One more question. What are you doing now? You may say, “I am not doing anything now. I am just sitting.” Yes, you are doing something. You are sitting. That is what you are doing. You may say, “I am just lying in my bed.” Yes, you are lying in your bed.  That is what you are doing. We seem to be doomed to keep doing something without stopping even for a moment as long as we are alive.

In fact, when ancient masters advised their students to do nothing, they never meant that they should do nothing or make no movement at all like a dead body, but told them to realise that all they did, whatever it was, was empty. In short, ‘You should do nothing’ means ‘You should realise that all your actions are empty’. Then, whatever you may do, you are doing nothing.

There is a dialogue between an ancient master and his disciple that shows well this state of ‘doing nothing’.

One day a master asked his student who was sitting in meditation, “What are you doing here?” His student answered, “I am doing nothing.” The master said, “Then, you are just sitting idly.”

The student said, “Just sitting idly is also doing something.” The master asked, “What do you mean by doing nothing, then?” The student said, “One thousand saints don’t know it.”

So, a saint who can do nothing never thinks that he has attained sainthood.

When you think that you did something good, for example, after doing something good for one of your friends in need, you can be proud of your act, and that will remain in your memory. Someday the situation reverses: you are in need, and he is very successful. You may ask him for help, expecting him to pay you back for your previous help but he may turn down your request. How would you feel then? It is likely that you will feel the more ashamed and even betrayed because of the memory of the former favour that you granted him. Even if he gives you help as you expect, you are likely to take his help for granted and unlikely to feel as grateful to him for his help as you would feel to some other helper whom you’ve never helped before. In this way your good act may bring you a negative result. In some cases, you can get hurt by the good deeds that you do.

So, masters would say that doing a good thing is not as good as doing nothing. They, however, never meant that we should not do good, but that we, seeing our good deeds as empty, should not keep them in our memory. In short, we should not let even the right hand itself, not to mention the left hand, know what it does.

Student: “If we should do nothing, how should we read this Sutra?”

Master: “Read well and your reading will be doing nothing.”

©Boo Ahm

All writing ©Boo Ahm. All images ©Simon Hathaway

A. The true Buddha, the true-Self is formless, boundless and changeless and contains everything. Not only the historical Buddha but also all people are part of it. This is why it is said that everything is the Buddha. The historical Buddha tried to teach people how to see the Buddha that is free from birth and death and tried to show it to sentient beings through his physical body. That is why he said, “He who seeks to see me through voices and forms cannot see me.”

By this he didn’t mean that his body is not the true-Buddha but that we can’t see the true-Buddha if we confine his being only to his body, thinking that his body is different and separated from the rest, that is not his body. His physical body is to the true Buddha as a wave is to the sea. The true Buddha that the historical Buddha tried to show is before us all the time. In fact, it is more correct to say that we are also part of it rather than just that which is before us. This is why an ancient master answered, “You can’t escape from it” when he was asked what the Buddha is.

©Boo Ahm

All writing ©Boo Ahm. All images ©Simon Hathaway

Master Joshu said to an assembly, “The true-Self is just like a bead in one’s hand. It reflects a bird when a bird comes to it and reflects a lion when a lion comes to it. I use a blade of grass as the Buddha and use the Buddha as a blade of grass. The Buddha is an illusion, and an illusion is the Buddha.”

Then, a monk asked, “I don’t know whose illusion the Buddha is.” Joshu said, “Everyone’s illusion.”

The monk said, “How can I avoid it?” Joshu said, “Why are you going to avoid it?”

Student: “What is the bead in my hand?”

Master: “You can’t put it down even for a moment.”

Student: “How does it reflect?”

Master: “What do you see now?”

Commentary:

The bead reflects everything, but it neither names nor discriminates for or against anything.

©Boo Ahm

All writing ©Boo Ahm. All images ©Simon Hathaway

Part 9-2

“Subhuti, what do you think—can a saint entertain the thought, ‘I have attained sainthood’?”

Subhuti said, “No, World Honoured One. Why? There is no state called sainthood. World Honoured One, if saints were to entertain the notion, ‘I have attained saint­hood,’ that would be fixation on the image of self, the image of person, the image of sentient being, and the image of spirit.”

“World Honoured One, you say I have attained absorption in non-contention better than anyone else, and I am the saint most detached from desire. However, I do not entertain the thought that I am a saint detached from desire.”

Commentary:

A true saint, aware that everything is empty, is so freed from being deluded by any images that he is far from having not only the thought of having attained sainthood but also that of being detached from desire. When we can see everything as it is without being deluded by images and words, there is nothing that is not empty. This means that there is nothing that is not the true-Self when seen as it is. That is, the difference between the true-Self and illusions is determined by our perspectives. Sainthood and the Buddha are no more than illusions when we are deluded by their names and images. Even greed and desire are the true-Self when seen as they are. We should know that illusions are not different from the true-Self, and Mara is not separate from the Buddha. When we can see things as they are, everything is the Buddha, whilst everything is an illusion when we are deluded by images and words. This is why it is said that illusions are no other than enlightenment and why ancient masters would say that we should kill the Buddha and regard the Buddha and Patriarchs’ words as an enemy.

Student: “If we kill the Buddha, how can we see the Buddha?”

Master: “What can be killed is not the Buddha.”

©Boo Ahm

All writing ©Boo Ahm. All images ©Simon Hathaway

A. When everything is empty, there is no exception at all. From the moral perspective, an amour may be undesirable and blameworthy, but it is undeniable that it is also empty from the Buddhist perspective. However, it doesn’t mean that morality is unimportant and negligible. It is so indispensable for keeping our societies stable that everyone should comply with the morals of the society he belongs to regardless of his religion.

It means that morality is quite different from religion. The former always changes and differs depending on the times and culture. What couldn’t be accepted morally in the past can be common and even popular in our society today. Until some years ago, for example, adultery was often treated as a kind of crime, but nowadays such criminalisation is abolished in most countries. However, the latter signifies unchangeable truth; everything is empty.

In other words, whatever we may do is the function of the universe regardless of whether it is moral, or immoral. The first Patriarch Bodhidharma, when asked if a butcher whose job was to violate the first precept against killing could attain enlightenment, answered, “Once one has realised that everything is empty, one is beyond karma even if one kills living things.” This signifies that from the Buddhist perspective, everything, even killing, is empty without exception.

©Boo Ahm

All writing ©Boo Ahm. All images ©Simon Hathaway

A monastic asked Master Sosan, “Is there a phrase beyond right and wrong?” The master answered, “Yes, there is.” The monastic said, “What is it?” The master said, “A patch of isolated cloud never reveals its ugly appearance.”

Student: “Why is ‘A patch of isolated cloud never reveals its ugly appearance’ a phrase beyond right and wrong?”

Master: “Because it is formless.”

Student: “A patch of isolated cloud is a form as well.”

Master: “What you see is a distorted ugly appearance.”

Commentary:

A phrase beyond right and wrong appears ugly due to your eye disease.

©Boo Ahm

All writing ©Boo Ahm. All images ©Simon Hathaway

Part 9-1

“Subhuti, what do you think—can a stream-enterer think, ‘I have attained the fruition of stream-entering’?” Subhuti said, “No, World Honoured One. Why? A stream-enterer is called one who enters the stream, yet does not enter anything. One does not enter form, sound, scent, flavour, feeling, or phenomena—this is called a stream- enterer.” “Subhuti, what do you think—can a once-returner entertain the thought, ‘I have attained the fruition of once-returning’?” Subhuti said, “No, World Honoured One. Why? A once-returner is called one who goes and comes back once, but really has no going or coming—this is called once-returning.” “Subhuti, what do you think—can a non-returner entertain the thought, ‘I have attained the fruition of non-return’?” Subhuti said, “No, World Honoured One. A non-returner is called one who does not come back, yet in reality there is no return, and that is the reason for the name non-returner.”

Commentary:

The primary principle of the Buddha’s teaching is that the essence of everything, ourselves included, is empty.

‘Stream-enterer’, ‘once-returner’ and ‘non-returner’ are names representing the degree of practice that was given to the Buddha’s disciples according to how ripe their practice was. How ripe their practice was depended on how deeply they understood Emptiness, that is, how good they were at seeing and hearing things as they are without being deluded by illusions.

When everything is seen and heard as it is, or when everything is empty, there is nothing to enter, nowhere to go to and come from, and even no thought of no return. If a stream-enterer, for example, believing that there is a fixed stage of practice called ‘stream-enterer’, had thought that he achieved it, he would not have been a stream-enterer but no better than an ordinary person who was deluded by the illusion of ‘stream-enterer’.

That is why Subhuti said that a stream-enterer does not enter anything, that a once-returner really has no going or coming and that a non-returner is called one who does not come back, yet in reality there is no return.

So, ancient masters would say that there is the Buddha to see, Dharma teaching to learn and enlightenment to attain before you get enlightened, but that there is no Buddha to see, no Dharma teaching to learn and no enlightenment to attain after you get enlightened.

Student: “If everything is empty and there is no enlightenment to attain, why do we have to strive to attain enlightenment?”

Master: “Because you are deluded by illusions, words.”

©Boo Ahm

All writing ©Boo Ahm. All images ©Simon Hathaway