First off, does anyone want a cat? His name is Crum and he is the best cat in the world. He belongs to my neighbor, Kim. But she can’t keep him. He’s been staying at my apartment for the last couple days. But at some point I’m gonna need to leave for an extended period, and then do that over and over and over again. So this isn’t gonna last for long.
This cat is so sweet it’s unreal. This is a photo of him keeping me company this morning while I wrote what you’re reading now.
Oh. And someone find me a teaching gig in Southern California. Thanks.
Oh! And doesn’t anyone out there want me to come speak anywhere? It’s weird. I was getting so many offers I couldn’t handle them last year and now here in 2012 — nothing! Did I do something that offended everyone?
Now onto the main topic.
The nice folks over at Counterpoint Books sent me a review copy of Red Pine’s The Lankavatara Sutra: Translation and Commentary. Thank you, Counterpoint Books!
I gotta say that I was kind of intimidated at first. I don’t do sutras very well. I managed to dig through Dogen’s Shobogenzo and even write a book about it. But that doesn’t mean I’m one of those guys who sits around reading ancient Buddhist texts for fun. Generally speaking ancient Buddhist writings baffle me about as much as they baffle everybody else.
Take the Lotus Sutra — please! I mean, I know I’m supposed to love the thing. I know that Dogen loved it. People I know have read it and said it’s the greatest thing since sliced cheese. But I have never been able to get through the confounded thing. I can’t get past the part where the author is telling you the names of all the Bodhisattvas and their uncles and how many Buddha realms they’ve conquered and where they shop for shoes and why you should definitely copy the sutra a thousand times and how many dragon kings were sitting around while Buddha impressed everyone by shooting rays out of his forehead… and so on and on and on and on.
You think I’m making this up? Have a look for yourself.
So when I saw this book in my mailbox, I thought, “Good gosh, now I gotta read the thing!”
It turns out that the Lankavatara Sutra is much easier going than the Lotus Sutra. At least for me. It doesn’t take nearly as long to get to the point. And its philosophical doctrines aren’t expressed in extended metaphors or stories. In many ways it’s a much more modern sounding piece. The author of the sutra frames it as a long Q&A; session between a guy named Mahamati and Buddha. Of course, Buddha was long since dead by the time this sutra was composed. But the literary device works to express a lot of the then-developing theories in Buddhism that would later become the basis for much of what is taught in Zen Buddhist temples even today.
What really makes this book work for me is Red Pine’s (aka Bill Porter) introduction. It’s a very honest essay. The author even says that it was his need for the advance money from his publishers that really tipped the scales and finally got him working on the translation in earnest. Apparently he’d had it on the back burner for years. But when he ran out of other sutras to translate, he reluctantly went back to the Lankavatara.
I’m happy he did because it’s a very good book. It’s not an easy book to read. Nor would I recommend it to someone just starting out with Buddhist philosophy. Stick to Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind or even Hardcore Zen if you want that. Or you can try one of the books on my Zen Books That Don’t Suck page.
But if you’ve already got a foundation of basic Buddhist philosophy and you want to know where some of the peculiarly Zen stuff comes from, this is a pretty interesting and valuable book. It’s a fine resource for some of the earliest manifestations of what coalesced into the Zen approach to Buddhist teaching and practice.
For example, you know how I’m always ranting against people who try to sell the idea of instant enlightenment? Remember how I compared thinking you could get enlightened right away to thinking you could learn to play Eruption by Eddie Van Halen after a single guitar lesson? Some of you assumed I just pulled that out of my ass. Well, in fact, I did. But in the Lankavatara Sutra, Mahamati asks, “How is the stream of perceptions of beings’ minds purified?” Buddha answers, “By degrees and not all at once… like when people become proficient in such arts as music or writing or painting.” So there!
On the matter of God, Mahamati asks, “In the sutras the Bhagavan (aka Buddha) says that the tathagatha-garbgha (womb of the Buddhas) is intrinsically pure, endowed with thirty-two attributes and present in the bodies of all beings, and that, like a precious jewel wrapped in soiled clothing, the ever-present unchanging tathagatha-garbha is likewise wrapped in the soiled clothing of the skandhas, dhatus and ayantas and stained with the stains of erroneous projections of greed, anger and delusion. How is it that what the Bhagavan says about the tathagatha-garbha is the same as what followers of other paths say about a self? Bhagavan, followers of other paths also speak of an immortal creator without attributes, omnipresent and indestructible. And they say this is the self.”
Buddha says, among other things that, “The tathagatha-garbha is taught to attract those members of other paths who are attached to a self so that they will give up their projection of an unreal self and will enter the threefold gate of liberation.” This doesn’t mean there is no tathagatha-garbha. Just that Buddha considers it a better way to describe reality than to describe it as self.
Like I said, I’m working on a whole book to explain why I think it makes sense to use the word “God” in the context of contemporary Buddhism. And it’s not just to play nice with religious folks. But I’m not gonna try and get into that here. It’s just nice to see that this question goes back a very long way.
I highly recommend this book for people who want to deepen their understanding of Zen Buddhist philosophy.
"Brahma and atman, today in the U.S. it's God and soul, which are dualistic"
Actually, in ancient India the commonly accepted Vedic understanding of "atman" was not much different from the modern concept of the individual immortal soul. The earliest Upanishads began to advance the notion of a non-dual atman, and these preceded Buddhism by a few hundred years (at most), but these were primarily "secret" teachings. The generally accepted Brahmanical teaching that Buddha was criticizing didn't have much of that higher non-dual sensibility going on. They were quite dualistic.
Most of Vedic Humanism, even to this day, had been dualistic. The non-dual schools of Hinduism have often been highly regarded, but have generally been confined to "esoteric" circles. This was especially true in ancient times. Buddhism was in many respects a non-dual reaction to the dualistic notions of Vedism about God and soul that were prevalent at the time. It's not even clear that Buddha had much familiarity with the Upanishadic schools that were developing a non-dual viewpoint on these matters. Certainly very few Hindus were so aware.
Alaha = bibble?
Interresting, where did you get it?
Alakha should be the corpus of the jewish religious law, the do and don't do.
Not all the bibble is about rules, it contains a lot of stories, myths, prophesies and so on.
Reading the comments, it seems to me a mad house, me included, where everybody talks about anything, anyhow, whatever the f*-+.
Bradu san wa kawaisso desnè!
The Lankavatara Sutra has nothing to do with Sri Lanka, aka Ceylon (except perhaps in the mind of the men who composed it)
Cf http://books.google.nl/books?id=SlDArya3YvcC&pg;=PA241&dq;=lankavatara+inauthor:kalupahana&hl;=nl&sa;=X&ei;=drovT-bCIcfe8APEppmcDw&ved;=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q;&f;=false
David Kalupahana (a Sri Lanka born buddhist scholar) is very clear about that.
I have never met a Theravadin who liked the Lankavatara: some hate it, some ignore it and most simply never heard about it
Oh! I like this published, christian louboutin will pay attention to it.
good talk about the Platform Sutra, Red Pine's translation, and points out how the Platform sutra starts out with a departure/critique from/of the Lankavatara sutra
Platform Sutra, Red Pine edition
http://www.everydayzen.org/index.php?Itemid=26&option;=com_teaching&sort;=date&pgLimits;%5Bbook%5D=0&pgLimits;%5Baudio%5D=460&pgLimits;%5Btext%5D=0&task;=viewTeaching&id;=audio-483-325
This comment has been removed by the author.
Re the title of the Lankavatara Sutra and Sri Lanka/Ceylon: This is from Red Pine's intro (from "Look inside" via the Amazon link Brad gave).
"The title of this book…is a combination of the Sanskrit words lanka and aavataara […] The only definition that I can find is that the word refers to the island we now call Sri Lanka, or to its principle town. [Mr Pine here undertakes a short and inconclusive survey of the possible derivation of the word Lanka] And according to Buddhist chronicles…the Buddha himself reached Lanka on three occasions, one of them being to transmit the teaching of this sutra. […] Such chronicles, however, were complied centuries after the Buddha's reported visits. The earliest recorded appearance of Buddhism on the island did not occur until 150 years after the Buddha's Nirvana […] As for the second part of the title, aavataara, this means "to alight or descend," and usually refers to the appearance of a deity on Earth – and from which we get the word avatar. Thus the sutra's title could be translated as Appearance on Lanka, referring to the Buddha's reputed visit to the island."
Makes sense to me.
Yes – maybe instead of handing out cookies at your talks you can bring the cat and stroke it's head like the villain in Austin Powers… it would then find a home soon enough!
I stepped down from my zendo board, but who knows? Maybe we can get you something in New Jersey/New York area.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oh, what tools these portals be!
This comment has been removed by the author.
I read this with interest. I googled “Brad Warner” and “God” and up popped a talk on God and Dogen you did a while ago at a Zen center. In it you touched on a classic evidence for God’s existence – the fact that we have an intuitive moral sense. I also resonated with your lack of comfort with bare bones materialism. If the highest truth is that in the end we are just raccoon road kill along the highway of death and life returning to our constituent atoms I want out of here! I dabbled in Buddhism/Hinduism/New Age but have been a Christian for decades. Your humility, candor, and humor in your God talk was refreshing. Best regards.
Great review, Brad, thanks.
Re: Jeff Alexander's comment at 12:06PM
"An intuitive moral sense" is not evidence for the existence of god. It can very easily be explained by natural selection. In species that have evolved to be very social, such as humans, the ethic of reciprocity has a survival value. Individuals who act ethically have a greater probability of survival.
Just because someone doesn't understand something or hasn't heard of an explanation for it doesn't mean that "god must have done it". That type of logical fallacy can be called either "the argument from ignorance" or "the god of the gaps".
"Lack of comfort" with materialism is not evidence against materialism or in support of spiritualism. An individual's comfort level may be useful when selecting a bed or a chair but it has no value when determining whether or not something is true.
Uncle Willie said…
""An intuitive moral sense" is not evidence for the existence of god. It can very easily be explained by natural selection. In species that have evolved to be very social, such as humans, the ethic of reciprocity has a survival value. Individuals who act ethically have a greater probability of survival.
Just because someone doesn't understand something or hasn't heard of an explanation for it doesn't mean that "god must have done it". That type of logical fallacy can be called either "the argument from ignorance" or "the god of the gaps".
"Lack of comfort" with materialism is not evidence against materialism or in support of spiritualism. An individual's comfort level may be useful when selecting a bed or a chair but it has no value when determining whether or not something is true."
Excellent post Uncle!=)
I will read Brad's book on how he think Buddhists believe in "God" (still waiting on that definition tho…)
But goodness gracious, for Brad's sake I suuuuuure hope he brushes up on the various arguments for/against such a being – because I have a feeling it will be a feeding frenzy if a argument that has been long disproven/discarded is presented…. and then used as a point in his greater thesis that buddhists believe "it" exists.
It will be like blood in the water on this blog…:3
This comment has been removed by the author.
"But for karma to work and the wheel of dharma to turn, a transmigration across the death barrier is necessary?"- Julius Henry
The universe disappears into nothingness, that's possible according to the latest cosmology; another universe appears out of nothing, that's also possible. No connection? Coincidence? Or, could this comment column perhaps have entered a dimension of no-sound, a dimension of no-sight, a dimension of non-thinking…
"Shiro is the 3003rd manifestation of Krishna."
Shiro is not very far removed from my pork chop dinner tonight.
But goodness gracious, for Brad's sake I suuuuuure hope he brushes up on the various arguments for/against such a being
I think I'm going in a completely different direction from what you're imagining, Shodo. But I'm curious. What, in your estimation, are the various arguments for/against such a being (God)? Stuff like Wikepedia lists (the ontological argument, argument from beauty, argument from reason, etc as well as empirical argument against, problem of evil and so on)? God please let me never write a book about that stuff!
Looking forward to the God book. "God" is a loaded word. Say it – and most people instantly think you are talking about "their version" of what they believe God is. "Love" is a loaded word too. Most people who talk about love rarely live it.
Brad Warner said…
"I think I'm going in a completely different direction from what you're imagining, Shodo. But I'm curious. What, in your estimation, are the various arguments for/against such a being (God)? Stuff like Wikepedia lists (the ontological argument, argument from beauty, argument from reason, etc as well as empirical argument against, problem of evil and so on)? God please let me never write a book about that stuff!"
Yes, those are a few of the arguments… Is this the kind of God you are going to argue that Buddhists believe in with this book you are writing?
This is my favorite site with many of them.
http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Main_Page
Please, please, please! Do not be such an egoist and give us the opportunity to share in the glory and wisdom of such a being! Give us his name!
Dear Michel, you will know who It is. But first you will need to pass the Lions at the Gate. Unbroken Yogi is putting the Lions right in front of you.
To me it looks like you are not passing the test. Not yet, sorry.
By the way, Unbroken Yogi. .. I like you. You know what .. I sense that you are a secret admirer of this Great Being that He Is. You will never find His equal anywhere else, One’s You know Him there is no other to be found. Once the Truth is recognized, the heart is at peace, the search can finally stop,. Disregard your mind ( the Lions), listen to your heart. .. He is already your Guru
Unbroken Yogi's last intervention is so remote that it is a bit difficult to find. There is none on this thread.
Kristien,
All are equal, and I have found many such equals.
And yes, I am a great admirer of being great, or great being, however you prefer.
Did Franklin have a virgin birth?
In 100 years will people be going to Da church and calling themselves kristiens?
It could happen. For that matter, there could also be a cult of the Madonna based on videos of her recent half-time show.
To Mysterion
Thought you'd enjoy this, Mystie-Pie
This comment has been removed by the author.
Soft Troll and Mysterion (and anybody else, just relating this to their last comments here), check this out:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/julian-assange-the-rolling-stone-interview-20120118
Mystie, The Daily mail is a right-wing (conservative voter's) tabloid. It appears to enjoy blaming single mom's, the unemployed and Jonny Foreigner et al for much of the world's ills. The attitudes it expresses are often mocked by the kind of Brit humour in the tradition of Python.
As Charlie Brooker (Guardian) was pointing out, its online copy ran with an article which annoyed its readers, some of whom left less than intelligent remarks in response to the suggestion they were less intelligent than lefties.
Thanks for the link, John. I'd forgotten about Julian Assange.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Whoo ees dees "ViCKi LEEKX"?
Another resonating item from your “Dogen and God” talk at the Zen center was you sharing (though you didn’t use the term) as a result of your practice you see you are a “sinner” in other words, that you have a capacity and a tendency to do wrong against Primal Truth that needs to be overcome.
Video evidence that Brad Warner is a pantheist who believes in "an underlying ground to the universe and that…that we all partake in it and we're all manifestations of that and that this underlying ground is not just dead matter, it's something alive".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwUOxNpv5GA
Is there any value in spirituality? As an atheist you may expect me to say no; but if I'm being honest, I'd have to consider myself a spiritual person. Of course I'm not talking about some ghostly ethereal soul that lives inside my body. There's no reason to think there's anything like that. I'm talking about the essence of human. There aren't many words in our language that capture what that is. at least for me. And so I use the word spirit, in the same way I use the phrase bless you. For rhetoric's sake. I can only describe it as the action or ability to see beauty. to feel wonder. and to be in awe.
Religion and all groups faith of course serve only to prostitute the awe, and the mystery we all feel as humans. they bottle our essence and try putting lid on the wonder we naturally feel. They fail of course. Religion points to the man behind the curtain in an attempt answer the mystery. when in reality, there is no man. the mystery is just that. a mystery.
But even though I don't believe in the supernatural, I try to be as honest as I can to myself, about my spirituality.
On my trip out west just a couple months ago I remember a moment standing in a field that looked up at the grand tetons. the tetons in wyoming are these massive glacier capped mountains that just cut into the sky. I remember thinking to myself. Something much greater than me must have caused this. I know it.
I also remember sleeping out underneath a cool and clear sky next to the dunes in white sands national park. Looking up all I could see was just a pile of stars. More than I'd ever understood to exist. Looking at them all, still and perfect, and vast beyond my ability to comprehend, I felt uncommonly humble. And grateful just to be alive.
There are moments when I'm with good friends, where it just feels good to breath. The taste of chilled apple butter on a warm buttermilk biscuit is often more than delicious, to me it feels enlightening. And a soft kiss to me can honestly stop time and space.
At times I can be so overwhelmed by the sensation of being alive, that I cry. or I laugh. or I scream. or I just breath deeply.
And no, I never once imagine that to be supernatural. I understand, that the thing that is so much greater than me, to have caused the Tetons has a name. and it's called plate tectonics.
That being humble is simply the feeling of recognizing the reality of ones small significance to a universe so massive. And being grateful to be alive doesn't require a person to be grateful toward.
I recognize that being happy in a comfortable social setting is a evolutionary trait of my species. That my body naturally craves specific foods for nutritional or maybe even psychological reasons. And that the intoxication of romance is most likely driven by the need to procreate.
But I am one with the universe. Not metaphysically, but physically. I am as much the universe as a supernova. made of the same particles, governed by the same forces. I am Genes that mutated randomly, then were selected naturally based on their success at survival.
And I love applebutter on a biscuit. I collapse in awe at the magnificence of this place. I crave romance. and I breath appreciation for it all..
I have to, with all my essence. with all my spirit. because imagine, in all the universe, we may be the only things that can, and that's beautiful.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2nfXfTg92E
by Kosho Uchiyama
I eat food from the garden of the universe
I drink water from the fountain of the universe
I breathe the air of the whole universe
My life comes out of the whole universe.
Being pulled by the gravitational force of the whole universe
I become pure and clear.
The whole universe is where I return.
__________________________
Out of the Stars
Robert Weston
Out of the stars in their flight, out of the dust of eternity,
here have we come,
Stardust and sunlight,
mingling through time and through space.
Out of the stars have we come,
up from time.
Out of the stars have we come.
Time out of time before time
in the vastness of space,
earth spun to orbit the sun,
Earth with the thunder of mountains newborn,
the boiling of seas.
Earth warmed by sun, lit by sunlight;
This is our home;
Out of the stars have we come.
Mystery hidden in mystery,
back through all time;
Mystery rising from rocks
in the storm and the sea.
Out of the stars, rising from rocks
and the sea,
kindled by sunlight on earth,
arose life.
Ponder this thing in your heart,
life up from sea:
Eyes to behold, throats to sing,
mates to love.
Life from the sea, warmed by sun,
washed by rain,
life from within, giving birth,
rose to love.
This is the wonder of time;
this is the marvel of space;
out of the stars swung the earth;
life upon earth rose to love.
This is the marvel of life,
rising to see and to know;
Out of your heart, cry wonder:
sing that we live.
______________________
Spirituality of Atheism
http://www.uuca.org/spirituality-of-atheism
Spirituality of Atheism
http://www.uuca.org/spirituality-of-atheism
Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the Pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.
In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.
Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the Horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds, and shall find, me unafraid.
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.
source
I'm curious about Brad's take on God and Buddhism. Hope he lets us in on the secret.
I think Buddhism does have something very interesting to say about God, but not as many seem to think.
I say let Buddhism do for God what it does for the ego-soul. The anatta approach sees that we have no actual "self" in us, that is us. This frees us from the illusion of the ego, but it doesn't leave us dead and dry and loveless – quite the opposite. It merely takes away what is binding and stupidly delusional in us.
Do the same thing for God. Take away the illusion that there's some "God-self" there at the core, some big Daddy ego-creator, and yet leave behind the living, breathing, magical quality of God. The ego-creater role God is made to play out by popular religion is disposable, just as the ego-self role that we think we are supposed to play out is disposable. Take that away from God, and enjoy the liberating and liberated God that remains. That God is just as real as our own Buddha-Nature, and just as silly to put it in a jar and sell it as a "religion".
Are you listening, Kristien?
mysterion, You must read this book.. It proves without a doubt that Heaven and God and yes, even a horseback riding Jesus is real.. (Insert organ music here) Little children don't always tell stories of reincarnation.
From the book; "Heaven Is for Real" is the true story of the four-year old son of a small town Nebraska pastor who during emergency surgery slips from consciousness and enters heaven. He survives and begins talking about being able to look down and see the doctor operating and his dad praying in the waiting room. The family didn't know what to believe but soon the evidence was clear.
Colton said he met his miscarried sister, whom no one had told him about, and his great grandfather who died 30 years before Colton was born, then shared impossible-to-know details about each. He describes the horse that only Jesus could ride, about how "reaaally big" God and his chair are, and how the Holy Spirit "shoots down power" from heaven to help us.
Told by the father, but often in Colton's own words, the disarmingly simple message is heaven is a real place, Jesus really loves children, and be ready, there is a coming last battle.
Lol Anon 1:47
What a pile of horse shit.
Lemme guess… just out of the blue here… speaking from the cuff… pulling this out of my ass a moment.
10 dollars says this boy's dad is a pastor.:)
HA! Called it…
(I only made it as afar as the sentence: "From the book; "Heaven Is for Real"…" before I knew all about what this book is supposed to be.)
I bet you loved Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ" right…?:)
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous(s?)from 1:09 – 1:32PM, that was a nice string of thoughts and poems. Thanks.
What if Dennis Rodman turns out to be God? Any of you geniuses ever considered that possibility? Didn't think so.
ROFLMAO
"A Minty Fresh Mind" Five Sure-Fire Tips To Get Yourself On The Cushion Every Day
"On The Cushion" A new column by Brad Warner in the latest issue (Spring 2012) of Tricycle – The Buddhist Review
Are you listening, Kristien?
Dear Broken Yogi,
Yes,I am reading… but I am not grasping what you want to say specifically to me.
Ha, I like that : ”the breathing living, magical quality of God.” That is It. .
But is your magical God the same as what I experience it is? It must be because God is the same for every one. Yes although I have different ways of perceiving then you. So we will describe God somewhat different
Sorry that I called you Unbroken Yogi…that was a slip of the tongue.. hmmm … still to be broken, was I thinking?