48. Bodhidharma in China: Nothing Holy, Don’t Know
SUBSCRIBE TO UNMIND:
RSS FEED | APPLE PODCASTS | GOOGLE PODCASTS | SPOTIFY
What a Zen monster!
Walking back to India —
Dead, with one sandal!
Whatever you may think of the legends surrounding the 28th Ancestor in the Indian transmission, first in the Chinese lineage, it does not take away from the effect, that whoever that person was, or those persons were, had, upon the propagation of the direct practice of Zen to its second country of origin. India occupies the central mass of the vast subcontinent, and China stretches all the way to the Pacific coast, where the relatively tiny countries of Korea and Japan received the transmission from their larger neighbors, and the West largely from them. “The mind of the great sage of India is intimately transmitted from the West to the East,” as the first line of Sandokai: Harmony of Sameness and Difference, reminds us. And nowadays, from the East to the West. All depends upon from where you start.
It is tempting to delve into the various teachings attributed to Bodhidharma, such as his famous exchanges with Emperor Wu, when, asked how much merit the emperor had accumulated by building of temples, et cetera, the sage is said to have replied, “No merit!” Or the “Nothing holy!” response to his question regarding the central message of Buddhism; or the “Don’t know!” response to the question of who it is that is standing here, mouthing these absurdities. But we are limited in space and time for this tip-of-the-iceberg peek at this monster of Zen. Suffice it to say that, like Joshu’s “Mu,” the response is not merely a denial of the premise underlying the question, but a categorical dismissal of any such attempt to reduce the “what” of the teaching, or the “who” of the teacher, to common understanding.
Instead, I will lead us through the great master’s definition of the Grave Precepts of Buddhism, which, like his reactions above, cast them in a more universal and non-dualistic light, than any ordinary interpretation. My comments begin with the precept as expressed in our ceremonies of the Silent Thunder Order, for comparison. The document of origin online, from the Village Zendo located in New York, includes theirs, and Dogen’s comments as well. For further research, please visit their site.
Not Killing
Self-nature is subtle and mysterious. In the realm of the everlasting Dharma, not giving rise to the idea of killing is called the Precept of Not Killing.
“Affirm life — Do not kill” is our positive expression of this prohibition. We are all aware that with each breath, our body kills microbes in large numbers, in order to preserve its own life. In the Repentance verse, we acknowledge our “past and harmful karma” with the proviso that it is “born… of body, mouth and mind.” In other words, it is not exactly our fault, that this is the way life works, by consuming and destroying other life, in self-preservation mode. The subtlety and mysteriousness of this self-nature includes its giving rise to the idea of killing. But killing is intentional, not natural. The main way that we kill is by denying the buddha-nature of another being. The life we are killing will eventually kill our life.
Not Stealing
Self-nature is subtle and mysterious. In the realm of the unattainable Dharma, not having thoughts of gaining is called the Precept of Not Stealing.
“Be giving — Do not take what is not freely given.” Of course, whether something is given freely or not can become a matter of dispute. But having no thought of gaining, whether giver or recipient, can be seen to be the reality. Ownership may be determined by utility, but how long is that going to last?
Not Misusing Sex
Self-nature is subtle and mysterious. In the realm of the ungilded Dharma, not creating a veneer of attachment is called the Precept of Not Misusing Sex.
“Honor the body — Do not engage in sexual misconduct.” Again, what is misconduct, is a matter of interpretation. Social norms and mores are not always our most reliable guide. The veneer of attachment may be associated with greed, one of the “Three Poisons.” We could do worse than study the 18th century philosopher Schopenhauer, on where our sexual desires really originate. Born of body.
Fourth Grave Precept: Not Lying
Self-nature is subtle and mysterious. In the realm of the inexplicable Dharma, not preaching a single word is called the Precept of Not Lying.
“Manifest truth — Do not speak falsely.” Buddha’s “golden silence” is recognized as the fullest expression of this truth — that we cannot speak the truth. But we can, and do, manifest it, in spite of our own ignorance. If we so much as preach a single word, it is subject to misinterpretation. But this is no excuse for keeping your mouth shut, pretending that you understand. You must say, or do, something.
Not Giving or Taking Drugs
Self-nature is subtle and mysterious. In the realm of the intrinsically pure Dharma, not giving rise to delusions is called the Precept of Not Giving or Taking Drugs.
“Proceed clearly — Do not cloud the mind with intoxicants.” This precept was once expressed as “not selling the wine of delusions, as indicated by the quote. How it has evolved to “drugs,” as a translation here, is anybody’s guess. Not that India, China and the rest did not have a vigorous pharmacopeia at hand. But intoxicants are not limited to substances, but can be indulged in the form of ideas, or ideology, cravings for creature comforts and power, status and prestige, et cetera. All of which are fundamentally delusory, and can become delusional. Would it were so simple.
Not Discussing the Faults of Others
Self-nature is subtle and mysterious. In the realm of the flawless Dharma, not expounding upon error is called the Precept of Not Speaking of the Faults of Others.
“See only your own faults — Do not discuss the faults of others.” The quote indicates that not just the initial response to the behavior of others may be in error, but assuming one is correct in that judgment, and expounding upon it further, would represent the inflection point in this precept. Our assumption in witnessing the ignorance in the world, including its manifestation in ourselves, is that it is the fault of the individual, including oneself. However, the teachings of “born of body, mouth and mind,” and the interconnectedness of all things, lobby against this simplistic interpretation. It puts me most in mind of Huineng’s comment that, by virtue of his having “double vision,” he saw clearly his own faults, he did not see the faults of others. Then what did he see their behavior as manifesting, if not their own faults?
Not Praising Yourself While Abusing Others
Self-nature is subtle and mysterious. In the realm of the equitable Dharma, not dwelling upon I-against-you is called the Precept of Not Praising Yourself While Abusing Others.
“Know self and other as one — Do not praise yourself at others’ expense.” Not dwelling upon “I against you” is equivalent to knowing “self and other as one,” or at least, “not-two.” While Buddhism does not insist that all is one, it recognizes that we are as connected as we are separate. This is a subtle difference from the prior, not discussing the faults of others, which necessarily also involves judgments and comparisons, in which the self wants to come out on top, naturally. We sometimes have to discuss the behavior of others, particularly when it becomes disruptive. But we do not have to see it as their fault. Then how do we see it — as what, exactly? Suffering? Ignorance? Theirs, or ours?
Not Sparing the Dharma Assets
Self-nature is subtle and mysterious. In the genuine, all-pervading Dharma, not being stingy about a single thing is called the Precept of Not Sparing the Dharma Assets.
“Share generously — Do not spare the Dharma assets.” A question arises as to not only how to be generous, fulfilling the first Paramita, dana, but who is being generous to whom? Dharma assets are not only the financial and other material resources available to members to share with their teachers and other leaders of the sangha, but the Dharma itself. The monastics in countries of origin of Buddhism were seen to be sharing Dharma with the lay people, and even accepting dana from them was considered to represent generosity on the part of the monks and nuns, as much or more than on the part of the villagers. This was the means by which householders, who otherwise could not support the order by joining it, were enabled to do what they could, in terms of giving of assets, including time as well as physical items such as food, materials, and other valuables. “A single thing,” however, on the level of a Bodhidharma, includes life and limb, total dedication, without regard to reward or recompense.
Not Indulging in Anger
Self-nature is subtle and mysterious. In the realm of the selfless Dharma, not contriving reality for the self is called the Precept of Not Indulging in Anger.
“Actualize harmony — Do not indulge in anger.” This one recalls an expression of Matsuoka Roshi regarding anger, which I am not sure was original with him, as it may have come from his extensive education in the history and literature of Zen. He would say that feeling anger, or “Having an angry thought is like cutting water with a knife. The water closes behind the blade and leaves no trace. Speaking out of anger is like cutting sand. It takes a long time for the wind to smooth over the groove. Acting out of anger is like cutting stone. The scars take forever to wear away.” Most of the anger we have felt throughout our lives, we have associated with, and blamed on, others or circumstances. But it is the same anger, again and again. It can have little or nothing to do with the identified cause. But anger does have a true source, as do all the other emotions. It is the constructed, or contrived, self.
Not Defaming the Three Treasures
Self-nature is subtle and mysterious. In the realm of the One, not holding nihilistic concepts of ordinary beings and sages is called the Precept of Not Defaming the Three Treasures.
“Know intimacy with all things — Do not defame the Three Treasures.” Nihilistic concepts would necessarily preclude having intimacy with all things, I think is self-evident. The two worldviews — that the Chan Buddhist teachings to follow Bodhidharma’s advent in China would repeatedly rebuke — are those of the nihilist versus the eternalist. That things are necessarily nonexistent, or that they exist forever. The Middle Way expounded by Buddhism holds, essentially, that both things can be true at the same time. It is not a matter of whether or not things really exist, but how they exist. And the answer in Zen is that they exist by virtue of emptiness, the very characteristics of impermanence, imperfection, and insubstantiality that Buddha originally expounded as essential marks of existence, or dukkha, change. The Three Treasures of Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha, likewise exist in reality, but according to the same universal laws. Like the ocean and the waves, the impermanence of the one is defined and verified by the permanence of the other, or the many. That all things must come to an end implies that all things are still present, just not as things. Same for the Three Treasures. On supposes that not holding such views of “ordinary beings and sages” also means that one does not annihilate the other.
You may have noticed that each of Bodhidharma’s interpretations sets the context with “Self-nature is subtle and mysterious.” This may be his way of saying that our way of interpreting these precepts of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas will necessarily be based on our view of the self — ergo, self-serving. As a writer, I tend to eliminate as much duplication in text as possible, without sacrificing meaning. In this case, I chose to leave in the repeat, as I suspect that Bodhidharma may have even spoken this way, for emphasis. Note further that in the following expressions concerning the “realm of Dharma,” however, he does not. He bothers to attribute to Dharma many effusively admiring characteristics, namely:
… everlasting… unattainable… ungilded… inexplicable… intrinsically pure… flawless… equitable… all-pervading… selfless… [and, finally] the One.
So the self, with all its aggrandizing traits, can learn, through the precepts, to turn its attention to something more worthy of admiration, the Dharma, in all its many dimensions, including the Ten Grave Prohibitions. Which, on further consideration, only seem to prohibit behaviors and attitudes which do us no favors. The affirming side of each simply describes the natural life of a bodhisattva, baby — you and me.
Zenkai Taiun Michael Elliston
Elliston Roshi is guiding teacher of the Atlanta Soto Zen Center and abbot of the Silent Thunder Order. He is also a gallery-represented fine artist expressing his Zen through visual poetry, or “music to the eyes.”
UnMind is a production of the Atlanta Soto Zen Center in Atlanta, Georgia and the Silent Thunder Order. You can support these teachings by PayPal to donate@STorder.org. Gassho.
Producer: Kyōsaku Jon Mitchell
