Two days ago I put up a piece here called “Thich Naht Hanh is Wrong.” It was a deliberately provocative title. I said in the comments to that piece that the title was meant to ask, “Who is Thich Naht Hanh?” Someone said that smelled like fresh bullshit to him. I’d like to ask that guy, “Then who is Thich Naht Hanh?”
Some folks got upset that I was being disrespectful to a man who has dedicated his life to bring peace to the world. But was I? If I had any reason at all to believe that Thich Naht Hanh would ever see what I wrote, then possibly. Although even then I’d say “disrespectful” was not the right word. But let’s get real here. Thich Naht Hanh will never see what I wrote about him.
So who was I being disrespectful to?
Who is Thich Naht Hanh?
A few people got bent out of shape that I said I believed that Thich Naht Hanh did not write his own Twitter posts. It turns out I was right. He doesn’t. His Twitter profile says, “My twitter account is managed by senior students, both monastic and non-monastic.” He probably didn’t even write that!
I’ve also been told by people who seem to know what they’re talking about that Thich Naht Hanh doesn’t write his own books. His talks are recorded and transcribed. Then senior students edit them into books, which Thich Naht Hanh approves before publication. Of course the covers of these books simply say “by Thich Naht Hanh.”
Ask anyone who writes for a living what they think of that sort of thing and I guarantee they’ll get a little wrankled by the idea. Writing is hard work. People who claim to be writers but don’t actually do the work annoy those of us who really write our own stuff. It’s not a big deal. But it irks me enough when I see this very common practice that I like to point it out. I would guess that about half of the “authors” whose books are shelved near mine at your local Book Barn “write” their books in pretty much the same way. I don’t think it’s disrespectful to say this. I think it’s truthful.
Who is Thich Naht Hanh?
One commenter said, “Brad is a wannabe Zen master who is envious of the big boys in the Buddhist world. It’s so obvious: His passive-aggressive sleight-of-hand barbs at Dalai and Thich betrays a desire to be the ‘bad boy of Buddhism’. Grow up, Brad.”
Envious of the “big boys in the Buddhist world?” Moi? Not really. Rather I am amused by the idea that there is a class of people we can call “big boys in the Buddhist world.” Zero Defex, the hardcore band I play bass for were not envious of the “big boys in the rock and roll world.” Rather, we found them boring and wanted to provide an alternative. While we might have wanted to be a bit more popular than we were, we certainly did not want to be among the “big boys.” That would have run completely counter to what we were trying to accomplish. Part of being an alternative to the big rock bands involved staying small. I feel pretty much the same way now about the “big boys in the Buddhist world.”
The idea that the “big boys in the Buddhist world” are somehow qualitatively better teachers than the less well-known ones is a very troubling notion to me. And I’m not talking about myself as an example of one of the less well-known teachers. I’m starting to fear that my growing popularity is making me ineffective as a teacher.
The rise of this new class of Mega Masters troubles me. Such teachers cannot possibly have direct contact with the massive numbers of students who claim them as their teachers. I met some people once who talked about feeling some kind of magic mojo when the Dalai Lama walked by them thirty feet away, deep in a crowd of fawning fans, surrounded by secret service guards. Such fantasies are extraordinarily damaging.
It’s precisely the same kind of thing a fan feels when he gets to be near a celebrity he admires. I know I felt it when I got to meet Gene Simmons of KISS in person. But I didn’t add to that feeling some kind of weird idea that my being in proximity to Gene Simmons conveyed some sort of spiritual shaktipat, or that I got a big ol’ ZAP of pure Zen energy or some such nonsense. When Genpo Roshi charges suckers $50,000 to have personal contact with him you’d better believe he’s implying that some of his supposed enlightenment will rub off when they’re close. I’m not sure I want any part of what rubs off of Genpo Roshi, though!
When I said in the comments that Thich Naht Hanh is no more a simple wandering monk than Bruce Springsteen is a blue-collar working man, some people pointed out that I have an image as well. Why Mr. Holmes, your powers of deductive reasoning are astonishing! Of course I have an image! So do you. So does everyone.
Who is Thich Naht Hanh?
Is it you? Is it your image of Thich Naht Hanh that I’ve disrespected? If so, why does that bug you? Is it you that I’ve disrespected? Who are you?
These are important questions.
Someone in the comments section seemed worried that maybe I had some inside dirt on Thich Naht Hanh. He asked, “Do you know of Thay’s actions that bring him into disrepute?” The answer is no. I do not. As far as I’m aware Thich Naht Hanh is a totally scandal-free guy. But I don’t know that much about him.
Suffice it to say, I am not trying to imply that Thich Naht Hanh is a disreputable teacher who should not be trusted. He seems like a decent guy. I like most of the quotes I see from his books. Even the quote I criticized last time might be fine in context. It might be fine as it is, too. But we all need to be careful how we take things.
Even when someone says something 100% true, sometimes you need to question it. Because your interpretation of what was said may not be correct. It’s not the fault of the speaker when his words are misconstrued. Everybody’s words are misconstrued. Misconstruing what we hear people say is what we human beings do. This is why we have to be careful.
Jeez, there was even a commenter on my previous blog posting who thought I said that Hitler and Charles Manson were enlightened beings! I never said that Hitler and Charles Manson were enlightened beings. But I can’t shut up forever just because some doofus might misconstrue the things I say. As Katagiri Roshi pointed out, “You have to say something.” And most of the time what you say will be completely misunderstood.
So I stand by what I said before. Thich Naht Hanh is wrong.
But who is Thich Naht Hanh?
Big part of my old Hardcore existence was observing how 'lame' other people were. This was mostly to do with bolstering/projecting my assumed superiority and not wanting to acknowledge how lame I was being.
It wasn't very Hardcore in other words.
Regards,
Harry.
Is Brad as popular as he thinks he is?
Is he popular?
Anonymous said: "Instead of Brad's comment/question being "disrespectful" I think his honest/sincere questioning of Thich Nhat Hanh is the highest form of respect !!!"
Then how come I rarely if ever see him questioning Gudo Nishijima or Dogen in such a way?
I think it's a bit disingenuous to label this as a high form of respect. This is Brad poking holes in a style of Buddhist practice and a way of expressing things that he finds troubling.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Let's take it a step further. I think Brad would earn a lot more respect from readers if he wrote a post titled "Dogen is wrong" or "Gudo is wrong" and took on his own sacred cows instead of everyone else's.
This is a quite interesting critical article too..Especially the "Kusen" part ( chapter III./point 4).
http://www.darkzen.org/Articles/AZI.html
We ALL should question Dogen and Nishijima and Brad and everyone and everything.
"Therefore, did we say, Kalamas, what was said thus, 'Come Kalamas.
Do not go upon what has been acquired
by repeated hearing;
nor upon tradition;
nor upon rumour;
nor upon what is in a scripture;
nor upon surmise;
nor upon an axiom;
nor upon specious reasoning;
nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over;
nor upon another's seeming ability;
nor upon the consideration, "The monk is our teacher."
Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are bad; these things are blameable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill," abandon them.'
********************
"Let's take it a step further. I think Brad would earn a lot more respect from readers if he wrote a post titled "Dogen is wrong" or "Gudo is wrong" and took on his own sacred cows instead of everyone else's."
But then you must point out a specific example of being "wrong/mistaken" you apparently have never read Dogen and read how critical he is Buddhist teachings and teachers.
But that IS the point, words are always wrong!!
check out:
D?gen's Use of Koans
ADZG 124: November 12, 2011 – Talk by Griffith Foulk at Bringing D?gen Down to Earth conference, FIU Miami
http://www.ancientdragon.org/dharma/dharma_talks_audio
I was just seeking exactly for the same quote some time ago, but could not find it. Thanks for posting it!
Gniz,
I'm going to do a post called "Brad Warner is Wrong." Some of the stuff I hear that "Brad Warner" has said is pretty weird!
As for dissing Gudo, there's already a few guys out there doing enough of that.
I wonder how many of the critics (not necessarily you, Gniz) are actually reading the blog posts. Because when I read them, I can't find me saying anything negative about TNH. Even when I say he doesn't wrote his own books, I'm not really saying that's a bad thing. It's just a true thing that I don't think most of his readers know.
The rest isn't critical of TNH at all. As far as I can tell anyway. But what would I know?
I thought the post on mindfulness getting in the way was a great post. It is something that I struggle with in my sitting periodically although in a slightly different way.
I also thought the use of the "TNH is wrong" trope was deliberately provocative. It is not a statement which is necessarily true, kind or necessary to make the point. But that's just what Brad does. It's adolescent. But so what? He still gets through to me when he does stuff like that. It grabs my attention. Maybe that kind of teacher is not for you.
Finally, without saying that any of you individually are crazy, the collection of comments that follow his posts as a whole are crazy. Maintaining some balance in the face of this ridiculous insanity must be exhausting.
Hi Brad, did you read that darkzen-article which was linked here? I did and I think there is good thoughts about the demystification of masters and critical thinking.
Brad, you said, "As for dissing Gudo, there's already a few guys out there doing enough of that."
There's plenty of people dissing everyone. That wasn't my point at all.
My point isn't that Gudo or Dogen NEED dissing, anymore than TNH needed dissing. My point is that you take on many sacred cows like the use of the term mindfulness or enlightenment…you take on people's deification of teachers such as the Dalai Lama or TNH.
But you appear (and I do realize appearances aren't always reality) to take much of what Dogen or Gudo said and wrote as gospel. That's the appearance, and you rarely or never take on your own beliefs and sacred cows the way you take on other people's.
Whether or not you do this in your own mind is a different story. I know that neither Dogen mor Gudo is as famous or well-known as TNH, so I can see why you take on more famous people and misconceptions.
But the way you are being perceived is as a guy who is trying to take down everyone else's views and deep held beliefs while maintaining your own (such as your sitting beliefs and your Dogen recitations and so forth).
Shit.. No one is offended by the real Brad. Peoples are offended by online Brad. Very few people would say these things to the real Brad. The most insightful thing said by the real Brad becomes bolstering/projecting assumed superiority or disingenuous or even dishonest when the the online Brad says it. That's cause the online Brad ain't who you think he is..
Jamal, It's very true that if you watch (or even listen to) one of Brad's talks, it's a very different vibe than what comes across with his writings.
His tone of voice and demeanor really help soften what he says, and he's clearly joking a lot, which helps.
Brad's writing is intentionally provocative and he has a habit of oversimplifying and making sweeping generalizations that irk people. While it makes for very interesting writing, it doesn't always endear him to his readers.
But I've always said that most of the anger Brad receives from his writing is a self-created problem and he does it pretty intentionally. So it's hard to feel bad when everyone starts attacking him, after all, he sort of tries to get this shit started most of the time.
Brass tacks. ow…
All sentient beings that I am aware of and probably most I'm not aware of are not yet enlightened.
Did Kapleau intend that readers of "Three Pillars of Zen" would learn to sit zazen out of a book? Some of his students and lineage holders say no, some say yes.
Shunryu Suzuki said to Blanche Hartman, "only zazen can sit zazen". Can that zazen be taught through words and books? Can it be taught, in the usual sense of the word?
I stood in a bookstore and read part of one of Thich Nhat Hanh's books. He was going good, until he got to the part about practice, and then there was a misconnect. I had a T-shirt once that showed two mathematicians in front of a chalkboard covered with scribbles, and one was pointing at a particular place in the scribbles and saying, "and then a miracle happens…". I felt like Hanh's explanation worked that way, and that's only par for the course. Most explanations of the teachings of the Gautamid and other amazing teachers work that way.
Brad actually steers away from explanation when he teaches zazen, and takes the safer route of teaching posture. At the same time, he examines what is out there being offered as an explanation of practice, and he has not found anything satisfactory. To me, that's what his blog is frequently about, and I agree.
I don't believe he considers the ANS explanations of his teacher as satisfactory, either, although in a funny way I do.
I'd like to repeat that if anyone has trouble getting back to sleep or waking up in the morning, I would like some feedback on my essay Waking Up and Falling Asleep. You can register to comment on my blog, and leave your results there. A gentleman in New York City who regularly woke up at 3am or 4am and couldn't get back to sleep was able to use the practice as I describe it to get back to sleep seven nights in a row.
Does his success have implications for teaching the practice of zazen?- well I'd like to think so, but I need more individuals who sit to put words to experience as he did. Thank you.
Mark
I think it's fairly obvious you were using an example of today's world, that philosophies like Buddhism are adapting to and turning it into a talk about being mindful of the way this kind of communication works. how cyber communication often takes out context, feeling, and real connection. it can accomplish that, but tends to be fairly informational.
it's pretty lame you even had to write this i think. but as buddha said 'be lamps onto yourself'. people seemed to take it to personally as you said with how they view someone like him.
but a view of someone is always incomplete no matter how well you know someone. you used him as an example, explained it and pretty much dropped him from what you were getting at in the post.
a talk on mindfulness related to communication in the modern world seems to have been wildly misinterpreted.
Mark, That was a great post, IMO. I wish Brad would actually say or write something like what you just did. Maybe you're right.
Brad doesn't do a lot of explaining in that way and I do believe that's a big plus, because the explaining reduces it down to something that the intellect can hold onto. That's a mistake, i think, when we do that.
My teacher almost never talks about things in a way that allows me to explain them or quantify my own experiences against his.
And you're probably right that he doesn't totally agree with the ANS explanation from Gudo, but out of respect to his teacher he doesn't take a big dump on it either….all of that is fine and well and good.
But Brad does intentionally foster a certain perception of himself, and at times it can be an impediment to real discourse. He's a really good writer and an even better provocateur, and thats great.
But sometimes he can appear frustratingly blind to how his provocations annoy or anger his readers. And occasionally he should be willing to flesh his ideas out further and stop speaking in such generalizations. His broad brush takedown of the term mindfulness is a great example of this tendency, because although he makes a point about a certain demographic of practitioners, he's incorrect that this is how most or nearly all Buddhists think about "mindfulness."
I reckon most serious practitioners understand that mindfulness is not just thinking really hard and concentrating on thinking about how cool it would be to be mindful. Most of us know that mindfulness is about coming back to it(whatever you choose to come back to) after finding yourself drifting into fantasy, daydreams, etc.
We can be aware of our thoughts while being mindful, we can be aware of our bodies, the sunrise, all of it. Mindfulness is not meant to be used as a way of simply attaching to thinking about mindfulness.
Zen Master wannabe Brad Warner wrote:
I wonder how many of the critics (not necessarily you, Gniz) are actually reading the blog posts. Because when I read them, I can't find me saying anything negative about TNH. Even when I say he doesn't wrote his own books, I'm not really saying that's a bad thing. It's just a true thing that I don't think most of his readers know.
This, coming from the same dude who wrote:
But, whereas I write my own Twitter posts, I doubt that Mr. Hanh sits in front of his Macbook and types his out for the world to see.
Geez, could the "I'm more authentic than the Thichster" ego trip be anymore subtle?
Brad:
indeed…
some who comment see, some are blinded by some conviction to an odd ideology or belief.
what is it that is gained?
what is lost?
(a way out of that 'mess' of your own making – with help form friends, family, and church.)
so many lost.
leave them spiritually impoverished.
leave them in their wildernesses.
voices crying out from nowhere with nothing to say.
Michel:
"What's more, to those offended by Brad's post's title, just realise that he's not talking about THE actual TNH. He's talking about a virtual one with whom he does not agree. They're not the same."
Perception.
it boils down to perception.
except when it doesn't.
Agreed, and curious… what's an example of when it doesn't boil down to perception?
It's true that people don't know that brad is a teacher. I didn't know. Where does he teach?
I always enjoy these threads. I often wonder if they're doing much for me though.
On one hand, I love hearing different perspectives and seeing things I wouldn't have thought of on my own. And I like drama that I'm not personally involved in.
At the same time I wonder if judging or defending Brad, TNH, or the commentors is actually a convenient distraction from looking at my own life.
I guess if I'm honest with myself I read it because I like reading it.
'The Sun My Heart' – there's another one he totally actually wrote.
anonymous asked:
"what's an example of when it doesn't boil down to perception?"
When you habitually sit in approximately the same place at the same time looking at the same wall (or vertical blinds) for a while (for many years, in my case), eventually everything that can stimulate your eye, ear, and brain becomes so common place, so mundane, and – to use Brad's term – boring, that perception is set aside. Then you start to see that things that you thought once mattered – a dent in your car door, &t;, are really nothing. You just let the waves dissipate and exist in the calm – still – whatever. Then, you get up and just go live the day – with that somewhat level base as a beginning.
It's not perception, it just is.
I would just add:
Zazen is not an attraction.
Zazen is not a distraction.
Zazen can be a discipline, but I stopped thinking of it that way.
I suppose Zazen can be compared to wiping your ass. You do it for a number of reasons. But the bottom line is 'it needs to be done.'
Or not. I initially wrote this just for Mark, who has already seen it, in a continuing response to his Waking Up & Going To sleep essay, but think it is virtually the same thing as Mysterion's "with that somewhat level base as a beginning," see what you think…
"You don't know whether you exist or not in deep sleep; you don't know you are, that is all.* You were not born at all…you existed prior to your birth, your existence is eternal. -pg 85 Final Talks of Nisargadatta Maharaj
Reading this again this morning I understood that it is possible to access this* in the wakeful state, to carry the knowledge of your eternal existence beyond deep sleep into all areas of your life, until these distinctions are meaningless, just like "birth" is an arbitrary assignation for an experience (like all experience that we try to explain away) we do not really understand. Then your life becomes a deep well to draw from always, infinitely deep, rather than "this is birth, this is death, and what's in-between."
Peace, and have a great weekend, -John
But a person shouldn't use Brad's blog to wipe it with..
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/26/magazine/26zen-t.html
zen master needed psicotherapy
Brad ,we need your opinion
This is all silly and anyone who takes it seriously is someone who takes it seriously. I don't.
*strikes the 'heil Hitler' pose while standing on zabuton and facing the wall*
.Gniz:
"And occasionally he should be willing to flesh his ideas out further and stop speaking in such generalizations. His broad brush takedown of the term mindfulness is a great example of this tendency, because although he makes a point about a certain demographic of practitioners, he's incorrect that this is how most or nearly all Buddhists think about "mindfulness."
The body/mind can be dropped
through choiceless awareness of
what is, and not clinging anywhere.
And you don't have to sit or call
yourself a " buddhist "
Mysterion, gimme your email buddy
How's Crum doing? Are you still looking for a new owner?
ahahahah, man, people just need to caaaalm doown. Leave the poor cute ol' man alone, and leave Brad alone cuz he's cutter…and you know…right >.
great post: Anonymous said…
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/26/magazine/26zen-t.html
zen master needed psicotherapy
Brad ,we need your opinion
Thanks but I don't think at this junction we need brads opinion.
Brad you should try to get into the writing program at the university of Iowa. There are things in your writing that you won't look at or refuse to see. The writing program has great professors and has a long history of great writers.
Brad, you should shut down your blog and stop trying to be the Hardcore "Zen" Peter Pan, as Mysterion has so aptly pointed out. At this point, even Jundo Cohen commands a more respectable and stable online presence. Your repeated attempts to stay relevant and in the blogosphere news have reduced you to little more than a slightly-entertaining afterthought.
But then again, I'm sure you can write this off as an attack from a "hater."
I'm somewhat worried about brad.
Brad we love you.Truly. I think we should be more compassionate towards Brad. I know I should. I've been harsh. I'm sorry and worried about him. Keep well , focused and unrelenting when doing so. Peace
. "What Jeffrey has done is indicate that forgetting the self is not a constructive approach. What one needs to do from a psychoanalytic perspective is remember the self.”
This story is fiction, although
there may be something to the idea
that damaged humans might be
attracted to the negation of self
through spiritual practice.
Captcha: fockies
Anon, I'm not worried about the guy, though it's fairly clear that he's ridden this wave about as far as it can go. Time to get on with life now.
These articles totally suck and the guy has nothing more to say.
Waking up and going to sleep my
fellow fockies. The self is
hypnotized with the sleep of human
culture. To dream or to be awake,
does it really matter. The universe
is imagining it is you.
The universe is imagining it is you.
That's a great line if I do say so myself 🙂
My good friend was working at Omega during a tnh retreat, he was so excited to get a glimpse of him he almost ran him over with a golf cart. At the time he beat himself up for his lack of "mindfulness", now he mostly laughs.
"Shut up! The number one enemy of progress is questions!"-Jello Biafra
Didn't the original tell his students to both question authority and also be a lamp unto themselves?
Things as they might be, wish they were, or things as they *are*?
It is perfectly fine to question and make up your own mind.
This is why I like Brad and his ideas. It may not be idealistically correct, but it does make some damn interesting and/or humorous reading.
Unwise
The universe is imagining it is you.
It is pretty sweet. I'm totally going to use thst to show off with. Just got to inveigle someone into a conversation about the meaning of life and start preaching at them. Shouldn't be hard.
yes yes be a lamp unto yourself
This comment has been removed by the author.
thanks, Gniz.
I'd say it's important for those who take Brad to task to remember that his number one audience is Brad, and his success depends on his ability to speak to Brad, and if you can help him in some way that were well. Of course, you must simultaneously help yourself, or you have helped no one. It's my opinion, and as my father used to say, it's very true.
On mindfulness, I'm reminded of Dogen's "nonthinking", which he said was the pivot of zazen. Is this not waking up and falling asleep? Where the mind goes, how the ability to feel returns to where the mind goes, waking or sleeping.
If we sleep when we see the sunrise, where we sleep we are well; if we wake when we see the sunrise, where we wake we are well.
Good morning, where am I! I like that one.
Some of you guys seem to be seriously trippin'. I don't think Brad could be any clearer in his last couple of posts. To me, his writing even has improved. Seems like he is touching a nerve.
It's crazy the assumptions and presumptions that are being made here but I guess you see what you want to see.
Whoa.
Korey,
Please don't e-mail a virus to Mysterion. I understand that it may be very tempting but please exercise some compassion and restraint.
Mysterion,
Please don't open any attachments that Korey sends to you. Heed the wise words of Admiral Ackbar: "It's a trap!" (Probably.)
"Some of you guys seem to be seriously trippin'. I don't think Brad could be any clearer in his last couple of posts. To me, his writing even has improved. Seems like he is touching a nerve.
It's crazy the assumptions and presumptions that are being made here but I guess you see what you want to see.
Whoa."
I agree whoa !!!!
"To me, his writing even has improved"
Really? Lets be real for a moment. 99.9% of all infomercial writers(self help,religious) are pretty much hacks when it comes to writing. They are aren't very well read.They don't have a clue about the craft and really don't seem to care. I'm not saying you have to as one poster said go to the university of Iowa to improve your writing skills but good writing is very very difficult. Anyone can go to the keyboard just start typing. To write well is an endless task