Who is Thich Naht Hanh?

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?

380 Responses

  1. Old Boy
    Old Boy March 10, 2012 at 5:06 am |

    "To me, his writing even has improved"

    It's not Brady's writing. It's his gargantuan ego that's the problem. Brady wants to take on the "big boys" in his snide, passive-agressive way and when his cover is blown, hides behind flowerly language: "Thich Naht (btw the correct spelling is "Nhat", Brady) Hanh will never see what I wrote about him."/Who is Thich Naht Hanh?"

    But you can see just how he couldn't resist the urge to state his superiority to the "Thichster" (Brad's dissrespectful nickname for a Buddhist master): "who claim to be writers but don't actually do the work annoy those of us who really write our own stuff." His envy is so obvious for those whose eyes are open.

    Btw, I don't even like Thich Nhat Hanh very much. Nor do I particularly dislike Brady. It's just some hard truths which I offer in return for his blog and books (which I read avidly for years and I've progressed from giving him the benefit o' the doubt to realizing that the ego trip is really getting old). He is actually under the impression that he has some effectiveness as a "teacher". How can someone who is busy trying to prove his "street cred" as the bad boy of Buddhism be of any use in teaching you to jettison your attachments?

    You know what they say about the blind leadin' the blind…

  2. Charlie Crew
    Charlie Crew March 10, 2012 at 5:18 am |

    “The really important kind of freedom involves attention, and awareness, and discipline, and effort, and being able truly to care about other people and to sacrifice for them, over and over, in myriad petty little unsexy ways, every day.”
    ? David Foster Wallace

  3. Charlie Brown
    Charlie Brown March 10, 2012 at 5:23 am |

    "To me, his writing even has improved"

    Beavis: um er you said, " improved"

    “The so-called ‘psychotically depressed’ person who tries to kill herself doesn’t do so out of quote ‘hopelessness’ or any abstract conviction that life’s assets and debits do not square. And surely not because death seems suddenly appealing. The person in whom Its invisible agony reaches a certain unendurable level will kill herself the same way a trapped person will eventually jump from the window of a burning high-rise. Make no mistake about people who leap from burning windows. Their terror of falling from a great height is still just as great as it would be for you or me standing speculatively at the same window just checking out the view; i.e. the fear of falling remains a constant. The variable here is the other terror, the fire’s flames: when the flames get close enough, falling to death becomes the slightly less terrible of two terrors. It’s not desiring the fall; it’s terror of the flames. And yet nobody down on the sidewalk, looking up and yelling ‘Don’t!’ and ‘Hang on!’, can understand the jump. Not really. You’d have to have personally been trapped and felt flames to really understand a terror way beyond falling.”
    ? David Foster Wallace

  4. Fred
    Fred March 10, 2012 at 6:26 am |

    "No, Perfectly Enlightened One. A 'Non-returner' is merely a name. There is actually no one returning and no one not-returning."

    Who is Thich? No-one, just like You
    and I.

  5. Mysterion
    Mysterion March 10, 2012 at 7:52 am |

    Charlie Brown said:

    "… it’s terror of the flames."

    Good description of Christianity.

  6. Wolfgang Brinck
    Wolfgang Brinck March 10, 2012 at 8:25 am |

    We read one of Hahn's books at a class. It was a slightly edited version of a series of talks he had given.
    I think the editing consisted of spell checking and making sure sentences were complete and terminated by periods. Other than that, there was no attempt to organize any of the material or turn the verbal rambling into a coherent book. In a way, transcribing audio and passing it off as a book is a kind of fraud. I am sure that hardly anyone cares. Followers of Hanh are probably eager to read anything that comes from him so they won't feel cheated.
    But to record whatever the man says and package it as a book is what? not some kind of vanity? Can anyone else go around and record himself and then have that transcribed into books? Maybe Wilber.

  7. john e mumbles
    john e mumbles March 10, 2012 at 8:31 am |

    Mysterion at 8:46 PM said:

    "Choose the other disciplines too, Yoga, Tai Chi, Red Hat**, &t.;"

    By "Red Hat" he possibly means many things, high ranking Tibetan Buddhists, Little Old Ladies Who Wear Purple (and red hats) societies, or perhaps he is alluding to the "red cap" called liberia in the Mithraic rituals, a masonic symbol of the supreme mark of initiation.

    Or not.

  8. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 8:37 am |

    gniz said…"Plenty of writers are making really good money at ebooks. I've been making as much as I made at my old 9-5 corporate gig for the last year. And by the way, that's JUST my Aaron Niz books."

    Brad said in an interview on Digression Sessions, "One guy really did tell me and I don't think he was lying that he was making $400 a day. But the thing was he was publishing all these Twilight rip-offs."

    Brad, Are you saying that Gniz rips off other writers? Funny you never refer to your own music rip-offs as such.

  9. Brad Warner
    Brad Warner March 10, 2012 at 8:53 am |

    I didn't mean to imply Gniz was ripping anyone off. I was using very poorly thought-out shorthand to try and say that his books were totally different from mine.

    And anyway, I don't think they have anything to do with Twilight.

    Sometimes it happens that a writer is able to write sincerely in a genre that just happens to already be popular. If a book sells well that's an indication of some level of quality and some level of real individuality.

  10. Max Entropy
    Max Entropy March 10, 2012 at 9:01 am |

    "Can anyone else go around and record himself and then have that transcribed into books?" – Wolfgang Brinck

    I seem to remember reading that was how almost all of OSHO's (Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh's) books were written.

  11. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 9:17 am |

    Brad.. Of course you meant to imply it. Because it was more than implying, it was given as a statement of truth. It was you saying in so many words, "I could make a lot of money with my writing if I wrote more crap."

    You might be right as far as that goes, but to say you didn't mean to imply is just spinning away from the truth. Doing that is worse than your original statement.

  12. Moni
    Moni March 10, 2012 at 9:26 am |

    Well about the e-publishing topic..Money is also just a tool at the end. Some might find it cheap to buy yourself mental freedom from society for money, but for example I do not. I think those people who can write and can earn good money with it, and had a sad and anxious life with their 9-5 daily job, make a good choice when they choose e-publishing and self-employment.

    Plus you can use the money you earn not only to support yourself, but also your family and any good cause you think is important according to your values.

    Sogyal Rinpoche said at the end of one of his books, that in today's world we need also bodhisattva economists, politicians etc. It is very naive to think that everything which has to do something with money is always bad and people who are financially successful sell themselves off.

  13. gniz
    gniz March 10, 2012 at 9:59 am |

    For the record, I don't care that Brad described it the way he did. Those books are not the books I am talking about when I say that my Aaron Niz books are making me as much as I used to make at my old corporate gig.

    My Aaron Niz books are pretty much adult thrillers, and they are also doing very well for me. I also operate under various under pen names that are pitching in substantially.

    But the books Brad refers to are not something I've ever talked about in my blog nor do I intend to as they are collaborative and so they tend to muddy the water a bit.

    The reason I can tell Brad that I know ebooks work is because through my various pen names, as well as other people I've advised, I've personally seen that ebooks, when approached correctly, can earn a substantial amount of money.

    If Brad does ebooks the right way I'm almost 100 percent he'll make at least double what he's making off of his print books currently.

    What I'm not at all certain of is whether or not Brad can or wants to look at ebooks with an open mind and do what needs to be done to have that success.

  14. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 10:26 am |

    Gniz, The thing that confuses me about Brad is not what he said and what he meant, which seem perfectly obvious.
    But whether he really believes that he didn't mean it. He either meant it or mispoke or is now deliberately fudging the truth.

    It seems he is able to defend his ego by dismissing what really happened and replacing it with a version of reality that puts him in a better light. I'm wondering is whether this is unconscious or not and what it says about the value of 20 years of sitting and it's relationship to the truth.

  15. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 10:53 am |

    I've noticed that too. If it's true it's probably unconscious. Projection onto others is based on resistance to observing in one's self. I'm speaking from experience. It's hard to see your defects and even harder to have someone else point them out.

  16. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 11:03 am |

    The sun doesn't really set its just an illusion.
    The mind is not full its just an illusion.
    who is thich? Don’t know

  17. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 11:41 am |

    brad have written any fiction?

  18. Fregas
    Fregas March 10, 2012 at 11:49 am |

    One of your best posts yet, and as usual I totally appreciate your anti-establishment slant on things.

    But Brad…I have to ask:do you like ANYONE mainstream?

  19. Troll/Moron
    Troll/Moron March 10, 2012 at 12:31 pm |

    *puts on monk robes and engages in an activity that is defined as fun by much younger people who typically mock older people who try and act like them*

  20. The Onion Knight
    The Onion Knight March 10, 2012 at 1:11 pm |

    "brad have written any fiction?"

    He most certainly has. Something called DEATH TO ALL MONSTERS.

  21. The Onion Knight
    The Onion Knight March 10, 2012 at 1:16 pm |

    "But Brad…I have to ask:do you like ANYONE mainstream?"

    I'm sure he likes TNH just fine. He's merely trying to get attention and blog hits. It's just a ploy to get noticed. He's chasing the idea of doing this.. uh.. whatever he's doing.. for the rest of his life.

    But I would bet you that he "likes" lots of "mainstream" people and things.

  22. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 1:20 pm |

    Brad is Very Main stream. Look around? Monster tshirts, punks bands.

    Grinderman:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lL3dNfxcpnw

    Nick cave can actually write : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUVsDy0sc3k&feature;=related

    Movies

    and Books

  23. Jeckyl
    Jeckyl March 10, 2012 at 1:27 pm |

    Brad, Do you read the Twilight books while listening to ABBA?

  24. Incredulus
    Incredulus March 10, 2012 at 1:30 pm |

    I thought DEATH TO ALL MONSTERS was his expose on Gempo, Jundo, Lady Gaga fans,everybody he hates, etc.? Its fiction?

  25. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 1:32 pm |

    He hates those people, yet openly professes admiration for Hitler and Charles Manson? Go figure.

    Yeah right Brad, Manson and Hitler experienced kenso. LOL, you tool.

  26. Katageek
    Katageek March 10, 2012 at 1:57 pm |

    Wow. Such mean people posting mean things meanly proving that a mean existence is still the mean for most meanies.

    All Brad said is he thinks a guy is wrong and why.

    I think that in ten minutes with Thich Naht Hanh I could give him a multiple choice test with questions out of the World Almanac and I could find he was wrong on a lot of things.

    Being wrong is no big deal. Cuz if you are not wrong enough you aren't living enough. I suggest people get out there and be wrong more!

    Wrong. It's the new right.

  27. Anonymous #2
    Anonymous #2 March 10, 2012 at 2:00 pm |

    "Wrong. It's the new right."

    That's right!

    And for all the meanies out there who don't think it's possible for Thich to ever be wrong, get real!

  28. john e mumbles
    john e mumbles March 10, 2012 at 2:21 pm |

    This comment has been removed by the author.

  29. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 3:35 pm |

    Red Hat Linux, surely??

  30. Pjotr
    Pjotr March 10, 2012 at 3:56 pm |

    I am never wrong!

    Wow this blog is good practice, trying not to get entangled in anger or whatsoever. Or mental tripping about what somebody I dont even know says.
    I like this provocative style.
    And I am afraid mister Brad is right about that people actually don't properly read his blog posts.

  31. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 5:01 pm |

    Wow, Brad is getting blasted on Treeleaf.

  32. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 5:03 pm |

    Wrong link. Try this one.

  33. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 5:04 pm |

    WTF?!? Fucked up site!

  34. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 5:07 pm |

    "I" am TNH. I am also Brad Warner. Then again, Brad Warner is TNH. Or vice versa.

    What I REALLY want to know is: If Brad Warner could have ANY kind of bass, what make and model would it be, and how many strings?

  35. paul
    paul March 10, 2012 at 5:10 pm |

    Brad, I hope you will take a little time and reflect on your "attitude" and why you are cultivating it to be this way rather than another way. It seems you are quite full of yourself at this stage.

  36. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 5:33 pm |

    Paul,

    Brad is trying to hold on to his writing/speaking career. This direction he has taken is apparently how he has decided he can hang on just a little longer. He's not a prick in real life, but he has traded in his authentic attitude towards others for this online character of his. He always includes just enough of himself in his posts, so that his defenders can hop on and claim that they see the 'truth' in what he has posted and accuse others of being stupid or not reading the post or trolling, etc.

    It's quite disingenuous, but subtle. There's just enough of the real guy in there that it's tricky.

  37. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 6:45 pm |

    Time to reinvent yourself, Hardcore Man.

  38. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:09 pm |

    188

  39. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:10 pm |

    189

  40. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:11 pm |

    190

  41. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:12 pm |

    191

  42. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:12 pm |

    192

  43. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:13 pm |

    lineage & community

  44. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:18 pm |

    194

  45. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:32 pm |

    195

  46. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:32 pm |

    teacher

  47. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:32 pm |

    197

  48. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:33 pm |

    198

  49. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:33 pm |

    199

  50. Anonymous
    Anonymous March 10, 2012 at 7:34 pm |

    200

Comments are closed.