09-23-2010, 12:00 AM
[img]file:///Users/karldisley/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/moz-screenshot-2.png[/img]When thinking of Buddhist enlightenment, particularly by Westerners, our minds usually gravitate towards Zen. After all it was Zen that popularized such notions here in the west. So because of our unfamiliarity with what enlightenment actually is, we tend to elevate the idea of Zen sudden enlightenment as the pinnacle of Buddhist thought and experience on the subject. We have elevated our expectation of Zen sudden enlightenment so high that if it actually occurred to someone it is doubtful that they would recognize it as enlightenment, because the elevated notion of it and the actual experience are poles apart. What I wish to point out here is a more sober view of Zen enlightenment, sudden or gradual, and how understanding Nagarjuna can aid us.
Criticisms of Nagarjuna are usually that he is merely intellectual and only a philosopher and that what he teaches is nihilistic. Now these criticisms are usually put forth by those who adhere to other particular schools of thought or just simply do not understand his words at all. What I wish to address is those who embrace Zen or the idea of Zen (particularly westerners) and reject Nagarjuna or if not able to outright reject his teaching at least regard it with extreme skepticism, due in large part to not being able to understand his words, it requires some effort at first.
By the naive, Zen is considered anti-intellectual. We have tended to associate with Zen commentaries that focus on Zazen, (seated mediation), or Koans.
It is assumed that the mind is the major obstacle to enlightenment and that we need to stop thinking.
So now I have to ask; If Zen is so anti-intellectual, why is Nagarjuna held in such high regard by Buddhist schools, especially Zen! Perhaps we have misunderstood Zen and Buddhism as much as we have misunderstood Nagarjuna’s teaching! Obstinately refusing to understand in order to dismiss a Nagarjuna is to prefer ignorance and darkness over the true nature of phenomena!
Legends
Popular legends of Nagarjuna's life state that he traveled deep into the earth through his meditative powers (siddhi) to the lair of the nāga king, who had been entrusted by the Buddha with the Prajñā Pāramitā Sutras. Seeing that Nagarjuna was the one prophesied by Gautama who would "give vast and perfect explanations of the Buddha's teachings" (Gyamtso 2003, ix), he gave these texts to him to bring back to the surface. This story is used to explain the first part of his name (the second, arjuna, meaning “bright,” “shining,” or “silver”), his close association with the Prajñā Pāramitā Sutras, and his depiction in iconography with snakes extending over his head (see photo).
Other common stories about Nagarjuna claim that he was the 14th patriarch of Zen, and that he was 700 years old when he was the abbot of Nalanda.
Shakyamuni Buddha
Ancestors in India (Before exporting to China)
Mahakashyapa 15: Kanadeva
Ananda 16: Rahulabhadra
Shanavasin 17: Samghanandi
Upagupta 18: Samgahayathata
Dhitika 19: Kumaralata
Mishaka 20: Shayata
Vasumitra 21: Vasubhandu
Buddhanandi 22: Manorata
Buddhamitra 23: Haklenayasha
Parshva 24: Simabhodi
Punyayasha 25: Bashashita
Anabodhi 26: Punyamitra
Kipimala 27: Prajnadhara
Nagarjuna 28: Bodhidarma
In the Jodo Shinshu branch of Buddhism, he is considered the First Patriarch.
Nagarjuna, India
Vasubandhu, India
Tan-luan, China
Tao-cho, China
Shan-tao, China
Genshin, Japan
Hōnen, also known as Genku, Japan
Philosophy
If you view things
As arising from inherent existence,
Then you are viewing things
As having no causes and conditions. (CTAO 2004, 27)
Here he is pointing out the logical contradiction of believing that things are self-existent. If they were so, their creation could not be dependent on something else—that would negate their separate existence. If one argues that things have an essential nature, one must therefore give up the belief in causality—the two are logically incongruous. Thus the idea of svabhava is reduced to its absurd logical conclusion—the abandonment of causality—which is a logical (logic depends on causality) and practical (one must assume that eating will satiate hunger) impossibility. However, this argument does raise the interesting question of how one could simultaneously hold that all things are devoid of self-nature, and that there is causality at all. To answer this seeming paradox, Nagarjuna put forth the two-truths doctrine.
Nagarjuna was the first philosopher to propose the two-truths doctrine, which postulates that there are two types of truth, the "absolute truth" (paramārtha satya) of śūnyatā, and the "relative truth" (saṃvṛti satya) of appearances. This is another key area where Nagarjuna is seen as not a nihilist. He argued that the world of names and forms (namarupa) does indeed exist, but only as appearances, not as something which is substantially real. They are "neither non-existent nor permanent" (CTAO 2004, 24). In order to understand the true nature of the phenomenal world, people must understand emptiness. Likewise, it is the world of logic and forms that leads people to understand śūnyatā. Furthermore, without forms there is no emptiness, and without emptiness there are no forms. Thus even the two truths are dependently arisen. This is the heart of Madhyamaka—the Middle Way between the extremes of nihilism and eternalism.
New World Encyclopedia
Zazen is merely a tool for helping with clarity of mind. But as we can see above we still desperately need to understand. Likewise, it is the world of logic and forms that leads people to understand śūnyatā. If this is true then it is not meditation on “the void” that leads to a direct perception of emptiness but a correct apprehension of the world of logic and forms that leads people to understand śūnyatā. Now if our Zazen is helping with this apprehension then it is good practice, but if it has merely become a way of voiding or pacifying the mind of thoughts of things in order to focus on one thought of void, then Zazen itself has become an obstacle!
Then we have; Lineage traced back to Garab Dorje of Oddiyana according to the Vairo Drabag. (This is recognized by Dzogchen)
http://books.google.com/books?id=ecQA_h ... ge&f=false
Dzogchen here is tracing the lineage of teachers (different from names tracing back to Shakyamuni Buddha) recognized for promulgating the teaching introduced by Garab Dorje which is concerned with direct introduction to the primordial state, not to be confused with the direct perception of emptiness, which is the aim of Zen and a considerable achievement in itself. What is interesting here is that Nagarjuna is recognized in both traditions as a very important figure!
14: Nagarjuna
Nagarjuna, a bhiksu learned in the five branches of knowledge, had absorbed the three pitaka and also knew perfectly many teachings “of the fruit” of Guhyamantra. He was seeking the ultimate meaning of the total perfection beyond effort, so when he met bhiksuni Dagnyidma (13th teacher of the lineage) he asked her for the essence of the teachings. With these words Dagnyidma summarized their entirety for him:
Analyzing, even analyzing emptiness, is nevertheless still illusion. Getting attached, even getting attached to a deity, is still slavery. Thinking, even thinking of Dharmakaya, is judging. Meditating, even meditating on the absence of thought, is still conceptualizing!
Then Nagarjuna perfectly understood the meaning of the primordial state and expressed his realization thus;
I am Nagarjuna!
Beginningless dharmakaya, not being composed of aggregates, is happiness.
The voice that is without interuption and transcends the very concept of “voice”, not having material characteristics, is happiness. The mind of wisdom that transcends the very concept of “mind”, not having either birth nor death, is happiness. I have understood that bodhicitta is total bliss!
Now look carefully at this. Even though Nagarjuna was very accomplished, fully conversant with the three pitakas, founder of the Madhyamaka school, and enlightened by Zen standards, Nagarjuna was still after something! What he found was beyond the teachings of cause and effect, beyond the sutra considerations of Zen, beyond the transformations of Tantra. What made him aware that the approaches of what came to be known as Zen and the approaches of Tantra lacked something? Now before we are even in a position to appreciate what Dzogchen has to offer we must have a fundamental grasp of emptiness or sunyata. For this Nagarjuna is an invaluable guide. What is ironic is Nagarjuna’s realization of the primordial state took him beyond the teachings of his own school with its emphasis on emptiness alone. Madhyamaka does not recognize the claims of Dzogchen even though Dzogchen recognizes the direct perception of emptiness as indispensable.
Because we have only casually acquainted ourselves with Zen, now that Dzogchen teachings are emerging and seeping into our considerations, we tend to think they are expressing the same thing. But Dzogchen is concerned with the direct introduction to the primordial state. This is why it is so important to have a direct perception of emptiness so that one is prepared for the introduction to the primordial condition.
I only mention Dzogchen briefly here as this is a sub-forum about Zen, but Dzogchen offers a unique perspective of Zen which I find informative. It is a perspective I have not found in Zen literature.
Lex
Criticisms of Nagarjuna are usually that he is merely intellectual and only a philosopher and that what he teaches is nihilistic. Now these criticisms are usually put forth by those who adhere to other particular schools of thought or just simply do not understand his words at all. What I wish to address is those who embrace Zen or the idea of Zen (particularly westerners) and reject Nagarjuna or if not able to outright reject his teaching at least regard it with extreme skepticism, due in large part to not being able to understand his words, it requires some effort at first.
By the naive, Zen is considered anti-intellectual. We have tended to associate with Zen commentaries that focus on Zazen, (seated mediation), or Koans.
It is assumed that the mind is the major obstacle to enlightenment and that we need to stop thinking.
So now I have to ask; If Zen is so anti-intellectual, why is Nagarjuna held in such high regard by Buddhist schools, especially Zen! Perhaps we have misunderstood Zen and Buddhism as much as we have misunderstood Nagarjuna’s teaching! Obstinately refusing to understand in order to dismiss a Nagarjuna is to prefer ignorance and darkness over the true nature of phenomena!
Legends
Popular legends of Nagarjuna's life state that he traveled deep into the earth through his meditative powers (siddhi) to the lair of the nāga king, who had been entrusted by the Buddha with the Prajñā Pāramitā Sutras. Seeing that Nagarjuna was the one prophesied by Gautama who would "give vast and perfect explanations of the Buddha's teachings" (Gyamtso 2003, ix), he gave these texts to him to bring back to the surface. This story is used to explain the first part of his name (the second, arjuna, meaning “bright,” “shining,” or “silver”), his close association with the Prajñā Pāramitā Sutras, and his depiction in iconography with snakes extending over his head (see photo).
Other common stories about Nagarjuna claim that he was the 14th patriarch of Zen, and that he was 700 years old when he was the abbot of Nalanda.
Shakyamuni Buddha
Ancestors in India (Before exporting to China)
Mahakashyapa 15: Kanadeva
Ananda 16: Rahulabhadra
Shanavasin 17: Samghanandi
Upagupta 18: Samgahayathata
Dhitika 19: Kumaralata
Mishaka 20: Shayata
Vasumitra 21: Vasubhandu
Buddhanandi 22: Manorata
Buddhamitra 23: Haklenayasha
Parshva 24: Simabhodi
Punyayasha 25: Bashashita
Anabodhi 26: Punyamitra
Kipimala 27: Prajnadhara
Nagarjuna 28: Bodhidarma
In the Jodo Shinshu branch of Buddhism, he is considered the First Patriarch.
Nagarjuna, India
Vasubandhu, India
Tan-luan, China
Tao-cho, China
Shan-tao, China
Genshin, Japan
Hōnen, also known as Genku, Japan
Philosophy
If you view things
As arising from inherent existence,
Then you are viewing things
As having no causes and conditions. (CTAO 2004, 27)
Here he is pointing out the logical contradiction of believing that things are self-existent. If they were so, their creation could not be dependent on something else—that would negate their separate existence. If one argues that things have an essential nature, one must therefore give up the belief in causality—the two are logically incongruous. Thus the idea of svabhava is reduced to its absurd logical conclusion—the abandonment of causality—which is a logical (logic depends on causality) and practical (one must assume that eating will satiate hunger) impossibility. However, this argument does raise the interesting question of how one could simultaneously hold that all things are devoid of self-nature, and that there is causality at all. To answer this seeming paradox, Nagarjuna put forth the two-truths doctrine.
Nagarjuna was the first philosopher to propose the two-truths doctrine, which postulates that there are two types of truth, the "absolute truth" (paramārtha satya) of śūnyatā, and the "relative truth" (saṃvṛti satya) of appearances. This is another key area where Nagarjuna is seen as not a nihilist. He argued that the world of names and forms (namarupa) does indeed exist, but only as appearances, not as something which is substantially real. They are "neither non-existent nor permanent" (CTAO 2004, 24). In order to understand the true nature of the phenomenal world, people must understand emptiness. Likewise, it is the world of logic and forms that leads people to understand śūnyatā. Furthermore, without forms there is no emptiness, and without emptiness there are no forms. Thus even the two truths are dependently arisen. This is the heart of Madhyamaka—the Middle Way between the extremes of nihilism and eternalism.
New World Encyclopedia
Zazen is merely a tool for helping with clarity of mind. But as we can see above we still desperately need to understand. Likewise, it is the world of logic and forms that leads people to understand śūnyatā. If this is true then it is not meditation on “the void” that leads to a direct perception of emptiness but a correct apprehension of the world of logic and forms that leads people to understand śūnyatā. Now if our Zazen is helping with this apprehension then it is good practice, but if it has merely become a way of voiding or pacifying the mind of thoughts of things in order to focus on one thought of void, then Zazen itself has become an obstacle!
Then we have; Lineage traced back to Garab Dorje of Oddiyana according to the Vairo Drabag. (This is recognized by Dzogchen)
http://books.google.com/books?id=ecQA_h ... ge&f=false
Dzogchen here is tracing the lineage of teachers (different from names tracing back to Shakyamuni Buddha) recognized for promulgating the teaching introduced by Garab Dorje which is concerned with direct introduction to the primordial state, not to be confused with the direct perception of emptiness, which is the aim of Zen and a considerable achievement in itself. What is interesting here is that Nagarjuna is recognized in both traditions as a very important figure!
14: Nagarjuna
Nagarjuna, a bhiksu learned in the five branches of knowledge, had absorbed the three pitaka and also knew perfectly many teachings “of the fruit” of Guhyamantra. He was seeking the ultimate meaning of the total perfection beyond effort, so when he met bhiksuni Dagnyidma (13th teacher of the lineage) he asked her for the essence of the teachings. With these words Dagnyidma summarized their entirety for him:
Analyzing, even analyzing emptiness, is nevertheless still illusion. Getting attached, even getting attached to a deity, is still slavery. Thinking, even thinking of Dharmakaya, is judging. Meditating, even meditating on the absence of thought, is still conceptualizing!
Then Nagarjuna perfectly understood the meaning of the primordial state and expressed his realization thus;
I am Nagarjuna!
Beginningless dharmakaya, not being composed of aggregates, is happiness.
The voice that is without interuption and transcends the very concept of “voice”, not having material characteristics, is happiness. The mind of wisdom that transcends the very concept of “mind”, not having either birth nor death, is happiness. I have understood that bodhicitta is total bliss!
Now look carefully at this. Even though Nagarjuna was very accomplished, fully conversant with the three pitakas, founder of the Madhyamaka school, and enlightened by Zen standards, Nagarjuna was still after something! What he found was beyond the teachings of cause and effect, beyond the sutra considerations of Zen, beyond the transformations of Tantra. What made him aware that the approaches of what came to be known as Zen and the approaches of Tantra lacked something? Now before we are even in a position to appreciate what Dzogchen has to offer we must have a fundamental grasp of emptiness or sunyata. For this Nagarjuna is an invaluable guide. What is ironic is Nagarjuna’s realization of the primordial state took him beyond the teachings of his own school with its emphasis on emptiness alone. Madhyamaka does not recognize the claims of Dzogchen even though Dzogchen recognizes the direct perception of emptiness as indispensable.
Because we have only casually acquainted ourselves with Zen, now that Dzogchen teachings are emerging and seeping into our considerations, we tend to think they are expressing the same thing. But Dzogchen is concerned with the direct introduction to the primordial state. This is why it is so important to have a direct perception of emptiness so that one is prepared for the introduction to the primordial condition.
I only mention Dzogchen briefly here as this is a sub-forum about Zen, but Dzogchen offers a unique perspective of Zen which I find informative. It is a perspective I have not found in Zen literature.
Lex