The Core of Zen

 In previous posts, I have pointed out how different life is for us than it was for the "masters". In case I create the impression that nothing of the ancient way is left for me, I'd like to make a brief outline - possibly to be expanded - of what remains.

Mindfulness - Decaffeinated Buddhism

As it happens, my introduction to "hard core" Mindfulness came from Ronald D. Sieagel - specifically his video course. He relies heavily on references to Buddhism, along with "scientific" studies. His approach is more like a professor than a "master" (like Osho). You can take or leave his various ideas.

I don't frequently use the term "mindful" since it has been co opted by the masses to the point it has become meaningless. "I am mindful of ..." is a fancy way of saying "I keep it in mind". However "Mindfulness" (I use capital M) is a body of teaching that has more or less pushed aside Freudian nonsense it the "talk therapies". It's a thing. It's a generally accepted way of changing your ideas and approach to life to resolve self-inflicted mental torture, such as "situational" depression.

Ironically, you can pay a professional who will use a fragment of Mindfulness theory to address your particular situation. He is not likely to introduce you to the whole theory.

I think Seagel is quite correct in introducing Buddhist ideas into his Mindfulness course, but, in so doing, he references Buddha as an authority, starting down the slippery slope of teaching Mindfulness as a religion. Buddha had many great ideas and a lot of ideas that are absurd by modern standards. His ideas need to be judged by their own merit, not by the authority of a god-like figure. It should also be noted that Seigel frames his lessons as "Scientific" - another attempt to bring in an aura of authority. These days, you need to site "studies" to back up your theories. The problem with such "studies" is that they are polluted with methodological errors, taken out of context and fail to be replicated. Such references need to be taken as little more than anecdotes. I'm reminded of Freud's conceit that his ideas were "Scientific". These days, those ideas are regarded as total hogwash.

My own attitude toward Mindfulness is that it is a toolbox of ideas for achieving a rational outlook on life. My problem with "hard core" Buddhism is that the goal of practice was to escape the wheel of rebirth. It just so happens that the practice is useful without the goal. This is similar to 1 Corinthians 13, a definition of "love" and a prescription for practicing it. That's placed in a the context of Christian theology, but it's useful on its own.

I have a problem with the way Mindfulness is presented as a means to achieve peace of mind. This may be true, but I reject "peace of mind" as a goal in life. I think we should all have a mental "place to go" to gain peace, perspective and focus, but the stresses and conflicts of life are unavoidable, especially when we live with compassion in a world of suffering. What remains for me of Christianity is the call to "lean in" to that suffering, to voluntarily take on the suffering of others - to help if we can and to at least empathize. In short, to love.

The Four Noble Truths

These are the core of Buddhism. Of course, they are "blown up" by massive commentary, but if I may simplify

• Life is full of unavoidable suffering;
• Suffering arises out of our cravings - attachment to things of the world;
• We can cease suffering by "letting go" - renouncement;
• (Buddhism) is the path to leading to renouncement and cessation of suffering.

I remember, in High School, that I heard of this in a very abbreviated form - your attachment to the things of the world creates problems in your life. Along with this, I was immediately skeptical, since much of the "suffering" in the world has nothing to do with your mental attitude or "attachment". It's just that one frequent source of "suffering" is our attachment to things of the world, especially our "stuff".

That perspective stuck with me for the rest of my life. I always saw that your possessions "own" you as much as you own them. I have always regarded my "stuff" as being "on loan".

Apart from this, I have big issues with the "noble truths", along with a deeper, more personal version that I do accept. 

Anyone observing current events or history can see that there is a great deal of suffering in the world. The "noble truth" is to accept this as a feature of life in the world. There will never be a world without suffering.

Now, older and wiser, I regard the other three as a lifestyle choice - one that directly contradicts the "way" of Christianity and, in fact, cuts us off from the joy of life. The oft-repeated story of Siddhartha, the Buddha, is that step one was to cut himself off from family. He abandoned both his responsibilities and the joy of being a full member of society. Ironically, the Buddha soon creates a community of like-minded people. Personally, I don't think human beings are "designed" by evolution to operate independently of society.

Over the years, I have had the opportunity to become close and intimate with people who faced the end of their lives calmly and with joy. They all point to the fullness and joy of their lives, especially the joy of family. They do, in fact, "let go" of their stuff (with varying success). It seems to be quite possible to accept the end without promise of eternal life or another life. For many, "the end of suffering" has its appeal. As I write, a family member has just committed assisted suicide, finally reaching the point that she is no longer willing to continue her suffering. Quite notable in her decision was to free those whose lives were dominated by those helping her to live another day.

To my way of thinking, there is wisdom to be found in the ideas of ordinary people facing suffering and death. In fact, there is more wisdom than I find in the ideas of Buddha or Jesus.

By challenging almost all of the "three normal truths" I cannot claim to be Buddhist, even a little bit. For me, only the advice to accept the messy world and not become too attached to "stuff" remains.

This is not unlike my refusal to identify myself as a "Christian", perhaps a topic for a different essay.

But Zen has other roots - most notably Taoism. Another subject of another essay.