Chris Fortin introduces Rhonda V. Magee who talks on Racial (Whiteness) Awareness and Racial Justice to the Dharma Seminar
Norman presents the first talk at the Mar deJade Sesshin in December 2018
Norman presents his second talk in the “Thinking on Death” to the Sharma Seminar. These talks are based on the books “The Five Invitations” by Frank Ostaseski, and “Life’s Last Gift” by Dr. Charles Garfield.
Norman Fischerr gives his talk on Basic Jewish Meditation
At the one day sitting at Nature Bridge, Norman Fischer presents his talk on the Poetry of Thomas Traherne.
“Zen teacher Norman Fischer proposes a two-week trial run to get your meditation practice started and looks at some of the obstacles that will come up.”
You can download this essay as a pdf file by clicking this link.
Aren’t words and concepts the antithesis of enlightenment? In an essay published in the March 2007 issue of Shambhala Sun, Norman wonders why he is compelled to write, and concludes that all language is a form of prayer.
SHAMBHALA SUN MARCH 2007 23
Though I know writing is a bad habit for a Zen priest, I can't help it. I seem to be writing all the time. I write poems of several varieties in several voices, journal entries, dharma talks, essays, books, notes, lists, stories, e-mails, blogs. In doing all this, I have no special purpose I can discern or explain. Though I hope it does somebody some good, I am not at all sure. It may even do some harm. More likely, it may just be a waste of time. What am I doing when I write? I am not documenting my life for my friends or posterity, nor am I telling anybody something they don't already know or need to hear from me. Why go on? I am compelled to, delighted to. There seems to be something crucial about working with language, something that wakes me up or brings a quality of density or significance to my life, even though I can't say what that significance is more than that it is a feeling or a texture. Besides, writing is a deep pleasure. And besides that, I have always written, seem to be a writer by temperament and impulse, and what writers do is write; they just can't help themselves.
Maybe I should get over this. Maybe there's an adhesive patch I can put on that will block the neural pathways that lead me down to the arteries of language. But if there were, I wouldn't wear it. Whether writing is good or bad, I affirm it like an athlete affirms her sport, a mother her child, or a believer his religion. I have noticed over the years in my conversations with writers that for a writer, writing is a sort of absolute bottom line. "Are you writing?" If the answer is yes, then no matter what else is going on your life- and all of life-is basically OK . You are who you are supposed to be and your existence makes sense. If the answer is no, then you are not doing well, your relationships and basic well-being are in jeopardy, and the rest of the world is dark and problematic.
Where does this need to splash around in language come from? Is it a disease? I'm not sure, but if so I don't think (William Burroughs notwithstanding) we will find the virus. I suppose the need to write comes from the connection between human consciousness and language-making. Language-making isn't incidental or ornamental to human consciousness; it is its center, its essence. No language, no person. And no language, no concept of life, of death, of sorrow or joy. No relationships, no tools. We are what we tell ourselves we are. Meditation practice brings the mind to a profound quiet that comes very close to the bottom of consciousness, and right there is the wellspring where language bubbles up. So does meditation get us beyond language? Is it true, as the old Zen teachers seem to be saying, that language is our whole human problem, the basic mistake we make, the mechanism of our suffering? Is this why it's such a big no-no to write?
Yes. Language is our big problem. Language ruins us and makes us suffer. Language is certainly my big problem. All my dissatisfactions would instantly disappear if I couldn't identify them or talk about them. But so would I. Without language I'd have no experience, no life in the world. To say that language is the problem is to say that life is the problem: it's true, but what are you going to do about it?
Well, you live. And, if you are a writer, you write. But here's the strange part: you write for the writing, you write alone and in silence, and you don't know if it does anyone any good-yet somehow you need a reader. This shouldn't be the case, but it is. Until there is a reader, some reader, any reader, the writing is incomplete. This is not true, for instance, with meditation practice or, say, with working out. You can run or bike or sit watching the breath without anyone ever witnessing it. It makes no difference whether someone witnesses or not. Because nothing comes of your running or sitting; there's nothing to share. But when you write you produce something that can be shared and somehow must be. You can't write without being read. This doesn't have to do with ambition or desire; it is built into the nature of writing.
I have been thinking about this for a thousand years. In the 1980s I sponsored a symposium in New York called Meditation and Poetry, in which I brought together a number of serious poets who meditated. My idea was to try to discover what these two activities have in common. I remember Jackson MacLow, the great avant-garde poet, saying, "I am chary (I particularly remember his use of this word) about mentioning these two in the same breath. They exist in different worlds. Writing is effective and public; meditation is private." Something like that.
But, one could argue, MacLow's writing was utterly private. He worked with chance operations and cut-up words, so that there was no intention or conventional communication in his work. He was never trying to say or describe anything. Still, he published copiously. Why?
A decade later I was involved in a similar symposium at Stanford. On the panel with me were the poets Leslie Scalapino and Michael McClure, both of whom practice meditation. We were asked by someone in the audience, "Whom do you write for?" and we all answered, in different ways, "No one." I remember that one of the professors in attendance (who, as it happened, was a Zen scholar) took serious issue with this. Writing must always be social, he argued. What we meant was not that we were uninterested in readership-we all publish a fair amount-but that in the act of writing we did not consider who the reader is or what he or she is going to make of what we are writing. We write to someone, but that person is essentially Nobody, without a name or social circumstances-we write for God. The Beyond. The Empty Nature of All Phenomena. Buddha Nature. The Mystery. We speak, and however little or much our words communicate, they touch something Out There. And somehow within the mind and within the words, that Out There is already implied. Don't ask me to explain.
Years ago I went to the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem and did what all tourists there do: wrote some words on a scrap of paper that I tucked into a crevice in the wall. When I closed my eyes and touched my head to the warm stone, it came to me: "All language is prayer." This must be so. Who is it we are speaking to when we speak to anyone? To that person, and also past him or her to Out There. If there is language, it means there is the possibility of being heard, being met, being loved. And reaching out to be heard, met, or loved is a holy act. Language is holy.
And so, dear reader, know that at this moment of your reading this text in the pages of the Shambhala Sun, you are also touching the Mystery, the Nobody, at the center of your language-charged silence. I, the supposed author, about whom you may have formed some impression entirely of your own making, am not now talking to you. At the moment of your reading, amazingly enough, although I seem to be present, I am elsewhere, doing something else. I am unaware of who you are, and I don't know that you are reading these words now. And yet, at this moment, the moment when I am composing these words-a moment long past for you but immediate to me now-I am as close to myself, and to you, as it is humanly possible to be. _ If there is language, it means there is the possibility of being heard, being met, and being loved.
Norman gives a talk on The Raw Spot.
The Raw Spot
One day in January, feeling expansive and cheerfully open to being interrupted, I picked up the ringing telephone in my study. Sherril was on the line. “Alan just died in Baltimore,” she said. “Can you to come over right now?”
Alan is Sherril’s husband and my closest friend. We’d known each other forty years, since our days as students at the University of Iowa Writers Workshop, through years of Zen practice, through Alan’s becoming a rabbi and my ordaining as a Zen priest, and our establishing a Jewish meditation center together, through retreats, teaching sessions, workshops, marriages, divorces, children, grandchildren. We had shared so much for so long that we took each other’s presence in the world as basic.
I got in the car and drove to San Francisco in a daze – a daze I may never recover from.
The sudden loss of someone or something you take as much for granted as the air you breathe is not easy to digest. At first you don’t know how to think about it. You are bewildered. What just happened? I had co-led a retreat with Alan earlier in the month, and we’d parted company for the last time just eight days before he died while walking on a country lane one bright morning. He had been so completely present at that retreat, as always, and now he was – or so they told me – just as completely absent. What to make of this?
Of course I could say – and have often said – many things about such losses. Alan and I had frequently taught together about death and dying and loss and grief, it was a subject both of us had been concerned with most of our lives, as all religious people are. The Buddhist teachings on death and dying are very familiar to me, as are the many associated practices and reflections. It’s not that such practices and thoughts were not with me during the days and weeks after Alan’s death; they certainly were, and they made my experience of loss much more solid – and much more poignant. But I had always known that these teachings do not explain anything or fix anything or armor you against pain. They only clear the ground for what there is to be felt at the time of a loss: they help you to feel what I felt: the supreme oddness, sorrow, and joy of our lives. We are here. We are gone. All dharmas are empty of own being, there is no coming no going, no increase no decrease, no birth, no death, no suffering, no end of suffering. So the Heart sutra says. The Diamond sutra says that all conditioned things are to be viewed as dreams, flashes of lightening, bubbles, dew drops, magic shows. Still, tears come. There’s no contradiction.
In the days and weeks after Alan’s death I spent a great deal of time with Sherril and their children and with Alan’s siblings, who’d come from the East for the funeral. Alan had been the rabbi of a large congregation in San Francisco, and had been connected to many other meditation and social action communities, so there was an outpouring of love and support from many people. I received cards and emails from all over the world. And I was really grateful that I could cry with others when I felt like crying, and could feel so much love for so many people who also loved Alan. Loss does that: it wounds the heart, causing it to fall open, and love rushes into and out of the opening, love that was probably there all along, but you didn’t notice it because you were too busy with other important things, to feel it.
In one of our last conversations, Alan shared with me an odd and funny teaching about death. He had a sense of humor, and his spiritual teachings were often odd and funny, sometimes even ridiculous, which made their profundity all the more pungent. This teaching involved his fountain pen collection, which was extensive, and worth a lot of money. He had sold several thousand dollars worth of pens to a man he’d contacted online. Before payment was mailed, the man, some years younger than Alan, suddenly died. Since there was no good record of the transaction, the attorney who was handling the estate for the widow said he would not pay. Alan could have hired his own attorney to recover the money, but it wasn’t worth the trouble and expense, so he ate the loss. “But I didn’t mind,” he said, “because I learned something that I should have known and thought I knew but actually I didn’t know: when you’re dead you can’t do anything.” He told me this with great earnestness. As if it had actually never occurred to him before that when you’re dead you can’t do anything anymore.
In a memorial retreat we held a few days after Alan’s death, a retreat full of love and sorrow, I repeated this story. I said that since Alan was now dead and couldn’t do anything we would now have to do something because we were still alive. What that something was, I didn’t know. I only knew that somehow, in the face of a great loss, one does something different than one would otherwise have done.
So this is what I learned (with Alan’s help) about the meaning of loss: that love rushes into the absence that is loss, and that that love brings inspired action. If we are able to give ourselves to the loss, to move toward it rather than away in an effort to escape or deny or distract or obscure, our wounded hearts become full, and out of that fullness we will do things differently and we will do different things.
The Tibetan Buddhist Master Chogyam Trungpa talks about a soft spot, a raw spot, a wounded spot on the body or in the heart. A spot that is painful and sore. We hate such spots so we try to prevent them. And if can’t prevent them we try to cover them up, so we won’t absent-mindedly rub them or pour hot or cold water on them. A sore spot is no fun. Yet it is valuable. Trungpa calls the sore spot embryonic compassion, potential compassion. (Training the Mind, p16) Our loss, our wound, is precious to us because it can wake us up to love, and to loving action.
**
Our first response to loss, difficulty, or pain is not to want to surrender to what has happened to us, it seems so negative, so wrong, and we don’t want to give in to it. Yet we can’t help thinking and feeling differently, and it is the thinking and the feeling, so unpleasant and painful, that is the real cause of our suffering. These days many of us are experiencing troubled thinking and feeling because times are tough. So many are losing jobs, savings, homes, expectations. And if we are not losing these things ourselves we are receiving at close range the suffering of others who are losing them, and we are reading about all this in the media, which daily depict the effects of economic anxiety all over the world. We are all breathing in the atmosphere of fear and loss.
When sudden loss or trouble like this occurs we feel shock and bewilderment, as I did when Alan died. We wonder, what just happened? For so long we expected things to be as they have been, had taken this as much for granted as the air we breathe, and suddenly it is not so. Maybe tomorrow we will wake up to discover it was all just a temporary mistake, and that things are back to normal. (After Alan’s death I had some dreams that he hadn’t actually died, that it had all been some sort of correctable slip-up). After the shock passes fear and despair arrive. We are anxious about our uncertain future, over which we have so little control. It is easy to fall into the paralysis of despair, caroming back to our childish default position of feeling completely vulnerable and unprepared in a harsh and hostile world. This fearful feeling of self-diminishment may darken our view to such an extent that we find ourselves wondering whether we are worthwhile people, whether we are capable of surviving in this tough world, whether we deserve to survive, whether our lives matter, whether there is any point in trying to do anything at all.
This is what it feels like when the raw spot is rubbed. The sense of loss, the despair, the fear, is terrible and we hate it, but it is exactly what we need. It is the embryo of compassion stirring to be born. Birth is painful.
All too many people in times like these just don’t have the heart to do spiritual practice. But these are the best times for practice, because motivation is so clear: practice is not to be an option or a refinement; there is no choice, it is a matter of survival. The tremendous benefit of simple meditation practice is most salient in these moments. Having exhausted all avenues of activity that might change your outward circumstances, and given up on other means of finding inner relief for your raging or sinking mind, there is nothing better to do than to sit down on your chair or cushion and just be present with your situation. There you sit, feeling your body. You try to sit up straight, with some basic human dignity. You notice you are breathing. You also notice that troubling thoughts and feelings are present in the mind. You are not here to make them go away or to cover them up with pleasant and encouraging spiritual slogans. There they are, all your demons, your repetitive negative themes. Your mind is (to borrow a phrase from the poet Michael Palmer) a museum of negativity. And you are sitting there quietly breathing inside that museum. There is nothing else to do. You can’t fix anything – the situation is beyond that. Gradually it dawns on you that these dark thoughts and anxious feelings are just that – thinking, feeling. They are exhibits in the museum of negativity, but not necessarily realities of the outside world. This simple insight – that thoughts and feelings are thoughts and feelings – is slight, but it makes all the difference. You continue to sit, continue to pay attention to body and breath, and you label everything else, “thinking, thinking; feeling, feeling.” Eventually you are able to pick up your coat from the coat-check, and walk out of the museum into the sunlight.
Confronting, accepting, being with negative thinking and feeling, knowing that they are not the whole of reality and not you, is the most fruitful and beneficial of all spiritual practices – better even than experiencing bliss or Oneness. You can practice it in on the meditation cushion in the simple way I have described, but you can also practice it in other ways. Journaling practice can be a big help. Keep a small notebook handy during the day and jot down an arresting word or phrase when you read or hear one. From time to time look at these words or phrases (they need not be uplifting or even sensible, they can be quite odd or random) and select the ones that attract you. These become your list of journaling prompts. When you have time, sit down with your notebook (doing this in a disciplined way, at a certain time each day, is best), choose a prompt, and write rapidly and spontaneously for ten to fifteen minutes, pen never leaving the paper, whatever comes to mind, no matter how nonsensical or irrelevant it may seem. In this way you empty out your swirling mind. You curate your own exhibition of negativity. It can be quite entertaining and even instructive.
Another way to reorient yourself with your thoughts and feelings is to share them with others. If you are feeling fear or despair these days you can be sure that you are not alone in this. No doubt many of your friends and family members are feeling this as well. Rather then ignoring your anxieties (which tends to proliferate like mushrooms in the dark room of your closeted mind) or complaining obsessively about them to everyone you meet, which also increases the misery, you can undertake the spiritual discipline of speaking to others. Taking a topic or a prompt from your notebook, or cueing off something you’ve read or written, or simply distilling what you have been thinking or feeling into a coherent thought, you can speak to one or more people in a structured way. Bring a few friends together. Divide yourself into groups of three or four. After five minutes of silence to collect your thoughts, have each person speak as spontaneously as possible for five to seven minutes by the clock on the chosen topic. The others just listen, no questions, no comments. If it seems useful, one person can give feedback to the speaker. Not advice (it is a much better practice if advice and commentary is entirely outlawed) but simply reviewing for the speaker, in your own words, what you have heard him or her say. Listening to what you have said repeated back to you in another’s voice can be extremely illuminating. And forgetting about your own trouble long enough to actually listen to another is a great relief. It is likely to cause you to feel sympathy, even love. There is no better medicine than thinking of others, even if for only five minutes.
Working with these practices you’ll get a grip on the kinds of thinking and feeling that arise when conditions are difficult. The goal is not to make the thoughts and feelings go away: when there is loss or trouble it is normal to feel sorrow, fear, despair, confusion, discouragement, and so on. These feelings connect us to others, who feel them as we do, so we don’t want to eliminate them. But it would be good to have some perspective – and occasional relief – so these thoughts don’t get the best of us and become full blown demons pushing us around.
But back now to the basic meditation practice: when you sit, noticing the breath and the body on the chair or cushion, noticing the thoughts and feelings in the mind and heart and perhaps also the sounds in the room and the stillness, something else also begins to come into view. You notice the most fundamental of all facts of life: you are alive. You are a living, breathing, embodied, human being. You can actually feel this – feel the feeling of being alive. You can rest in this basic feeling, the nature of life, of consciousness, the underlying basis of everything you will ever experience – even the negativity. Sitting there with this basic feeling of being alive, you will feel gratitude. After all, you didn’t ask for this, you didn’t earn it. It is just there, a gift to you. It won’t last forever, but for now, in this moment, here it is, perfect, complete, and you are sharing it with everything else that exists in this stark, basic, and beautiful way. Whatever your problems and challenges you are, you exist, in this bright world with others, with trees, sky, water, stars, sun and moon. If you sit there long enough and regularly enough you will feel this, even in your darkest moments.
And based on this experience, you will reflect differently on your life. What is really important? How much do our expectations and social constructs really matter? What really counts, what is the bottom line for a human life? To be alive. Well you are alive. To love others and be loved by others. Well you do love, and it is within your power to love more deeply, and if you do it is guaranteed that others will respond to you with more love. To be kind to others and to receive kindness is also within your power, regardless of expectations, losses, circumstances. You need to eat every day, it is true, you need a good place to sleep at night, you need some sort of work to do, but probably you have these things, and if you do you can offer them to others. Once you overcome the sting and virulence of your naturally arising negativity, and return to the feeling of being alive, you will think more clearly about what matters more and what matters less about your life, and will see that regardless of your conditions you can participate in what matters most. You will see that in the big picture of things you have what you need and there is plenty to be grateful for – and plenty to do based on this gratitude. You may not have as many impressive appointments to keep as you did when you were busy with your high powered job. But you have more time to keep up with friends and family – to call and say hello, how did your day go, happy birthday, happy anniversary, happy holiday, and oh yes, I love you and am glad you are in my life. You may not be able to afford the fancy gourmet meal or the person who comes in to clean the house, but you can prepare with great care some steamed greens with olive oil and lemon and find someone you love to eat it with, and clean up the house yourself, noticing, maybe for the first time, how good the workmanship is on this dining room chair as you dust and polish its legs. Living more slowly and simply – although this is not what you wanted or expected – may not turn out to be so bad after all.
My own personal reference point for material happiness is a memory I have of my days in Tassajara Zen monastery, where I lived for five years in my youth. Tassajara is in a narrow mountain canyon which can get pretty cold in the winter months, when very little sun get in. Our rooms in those days were unheated, so the cold really mattered. I remember winter mornings standing at a certain spot in the center of the compound, where the first rays of the day’s warm sunlight would come. So far, no material luxury I have encountered surpasses this, and I feel it again every time I feel the sun’s warmth.
**
Hard times are painful and no rational person would ever think to intentionally bring them on. Quite the contrary, ordinary human day to day life is mostly about trying to avoid the financial, health, romantic, and psychological disasters that seem to be lurking around every corner. So we do not valorize or seek out what is hard or unpleasant. Yet disasters are inevitable in a human lifetime, and it is very impractical not to welcome them when they come. Hard times remind us of what’s important, what’s basic, beautiful, and worthwhile about being alive. The worst of times bring out the best in us. Abundance and an excess of success and good fortune inevitably bring complications and elaborations that fill our lives with more discrimination and choice. We like this, and seek it, but the truth is it reduces joy. We are less appreciative of what we have. Our critical capacities grow very acute, and we are always somewhat skeptical of whatever excellence we are currently enjoying, ready to reject it in a moment, as soon as something we recognize as superior comes along, whether it is a new phone or a new spouse. When there’s less, there’s more appreciation, more openness to wonder and joy, more capacity to soften critical judgment and simply celebrate what happens to be there, even if it is not the best – even if it is not so good. It is and there’s a virtue merely in that. The sun in the morning and the moon at night. I remember my good friend Gil, like Alan also gone now, who went to India to save the miserable poverty-stricken villagers by offering them the expert eye care he had been so well trained to deliver. He was shocked to gradually realize that these poor ignorant villagers were happier and wiser than he and his well educated friends in San Francisco. This is when Gil began his spiritual practice.
In retrospect we can see that the last fifty years or so of ever-increasing prosperity and opportunity has been based on an enthusiastic, exuberant, and naive lust for material goods (as if the goods themselves, and not our satisfaction in them, were the source of our happiness) that so raised the bar on what we expect to possess – the houses, cars, vacations, gadgets, information – that we have lost all sense of proportion and have forgotten almost entirely how our ancestors lived and how most of the world still lives. The various economic bubbles that were produced by that exuberance have proved to be much shakier than they had seemed when we were in the midst of them. Most experts on the economy predict a slow period of a year or more, to be followed, inevitably, by a return to the upward-reaching growth economy we have come to feel is as reliable as a law of nature. But suppose they are not correct. Suppose we are reaching limits on a limited planet, and that we are in for a very long period of reduced circumstances. What if in the future we won’t have top-notch medical care, high performance cars, automatic houses and abundant energy. Such an eventuality might cause such a crisis of despair due to dashed expectations that it might usher in a terrible period of the sort of distopian nightmares we’ve seen in movies or novels, chaos and violence everywhere. Or the opposite – more happiness, more sharing, more wisdom, bigger hearts. More people growing gardens, cooking food, working on farms, taking care of others. A slower, more heart-felt and realistic style of life, and dying at home surrounded by friends and spiritual supporters rather than in high-tech hospitals hooked into alienating machines run by busy professionals. Probably this won’t be the case; probably the economists are right that things will return to what we have come to call normal after a while, maybe only a year or two. But even so, it would be a healthy exercise to visualize and celebrate this simpler, sparer life – and maybe even to live it.
Norman was invited to give a talk on his book, Sailing Home, as part of the authors@google series. Watch Norman's lecture at the Googleplex:
Talk on Choices
Norman speaks to professionals and care givers on the topic of suffering. “Suffering is the jewel in the crown of the way.” “All spiritual goodness, all healing, develops from suffering, which is why it is so precious.”
Dharma Seminar Series, Spring, 2001 – May 8, 2001. How the written and spoken word condition our view of the world and, therefore, our lives.
This is an introduction to Koan Study. Zoketsu discusses the history of Koans and their relationship to Zen practice in the Rinzai and Soto schools of Zen. He recommends Dogen’s Genjo Koan as a guide in making this very life our central koan.
Koan Practice Introduction: Who Hears this SoundKoan study and Everyday Zen By Zoketsu Norman Fischer | March 13, 2001
Abridged and edited by Barbara Byrum and Cynthia Schrager
Last week I talked about concentrating on the breath in meditation practice – following, discriminating, vivifying, and questioning the breath. That last step of sitting with the breath with a questioning spirit begins at first with mechanically asking with each breath, “What is it?” After that, we sit with the breath with a spirit of inquiry, without thinking about it or saying any words. This is an example of koan practice. Since koan practice is, I think, more or less unique to Zen, in all world religious practice, I thought that I would say more about it. The word “koan,” like so many other Zen words, comes from ordinary, Chinese vocabulary, rather than from technical, Buddhist vocabulary. The word koan, meaning “public case,” was a legal term. A koan was a case that could be used as a legal precedent, because it was public and paradigmatic. There is a great irony in the Zen context, not because a koan is being used as a lynchpin in a subtle argument of discrimination of one thing from another, as a legal case would be used, but in exactly the opposite way, as a device to thrust us beyond discrimination to an experience of oneness. No doubt the old Chinese Zen fellows were quite aware of this irony, and they delighted in it. Zen koans were public records of a particular sort. Since the beginning, Zen proclaimed a declaration of independence from Buddhism. The earliest formula for the definition of Zen included phrases like, “Beyond words and letters,” or “It is an existential truth pointing directly to the human heart.” Zen did not have the aid of any normative doctrine, and it was beyond all forms of piety, including Buddhism. Therefore, it made no sense at all to quote scripture as a way to advance or justify religious understanding. Instead, it made sense that the everyday lives of the masters themselves would come to represent – rather than scripture – religious truth and authority. Their sayings and doings began to circulate, at first probably as rumors and wild tales. Later they were written down in the highly literary world of the Chinese Tang dynasty. In the end, they constituted a new, Buddhist literary tradition, done with a pithy, shorthand, and baffling style.There were many, many collected books of these stories. All of them were called Transmission of the Lamp. There were many different ones with similar titles. They were strung together pseudo-biographies and had a fake style of old Chinese histories. These brief biographical texts were always seen, I think, as religious teaching documents, rather than actual biographies. Little anecdotes were lifted and circulated in the monasteries. Eventually these stories found their way into dharma talks and were repeated by teachers.Buddhist in their fundamental thrust, this meditation practice was influenced quite a bit by Daoist thought and practice, which from the beginning, in the earliest texts of Daoism, loved paradox. For example, some random lines from the Tao te Ching: “Therefore, the master acts without doing anything.” “He does without doing.” “She teaches without opening her mouth.” “Things arise, and she lets them come. Things disappear, and she lets them go.” So that kind of paradoxical style became a kind of conditioning factor in the development of Zen meditation practice. Traditional Buddhist meditation is, in effect, a combination of two different practices called “stopping” and “seeing.” Stopping, or calming meditation, focused the mind on a meditation object, so you could calm the mind and enrich it. Once you did that, which is a long process of getting the mind really clear and focused, next the practitioner was supposed to take this developed, concentrated mind and turn it toward introspection, until you could see the impermanence and non-conceptual characteristics of reality. This would take many, many lifetimes to do.In Zen meditation, the whole thing was collapsed into one practice and was highly intensified. The practice called for the powerful focusing of the mind on an object, not for the purpose of calming and enriching, but for the purpose of immediately seeing directly into the object and through the object; seeing not only through the object, but through all objective reality; seeing the mind itself and how the mind functions to create an objective world of suffering. You see how easily and naturally Zen meditation would have been applied to the new koan literature that was developing along side of it. The stories grew more and more simple and stripped down as they were used as this meditation object. Meditators would work with the stories, not as literature or articles of doctrinal understanding, but as seeing the stories, rather than understanding them as ideas. So you could see into them and the reality of the mind itself, thus releasing the mind from the compulsions and the sufferings that would be a consequence of grasping and false conceptions.D.T. Suzuki, the Japanese Zen scholar, first introduced this koan literature to the West. He presented koans as puzzles designed to subvert the logical mind, causing the practitioner to flip the mind into a new way of thinking and being. But most people who now work with koans do not emphasize, as Suzuki did, their irrationality. It’s not so much that the stories are meant to short-circuit the rational mind, as they are pointing to a more intuitive kind of experience based on the feeling of being itself, rather than on thinking about being. Koans don’t in and of themselves obviate logic. People can talk about koans that require a high, logical accomplishment, even though it may be a different style than the one we are used to. There were lots of ways of working with this material, depending on what master or lineage you were studying with. It wasn’t until the 18th century in Japan, that the system of koan study that most Westerners are familiar with, was devised by the Japanese Rinzai monk Hakuin. It’s a great system, full of jokes and pantomime. It emphasizes making the stories of the Ancients personal and immediate, almost physically so, giving up all abstraction and focus on doctrine. The system teaches that if it’s not your own, it doesn’t count. If you can’t show it, and you can only explain it, then it isn’t really yours. This makes for some pretty lively religion. These stories have baffled and frustrated Zen students, and we can imagine merry Zen masters ringing their little bells as a Zen student leaves the interview room in abject defeat. The other thing I consider not to be so great about the system is that it systematized the koans into a set curriculum. There are different set curricula, but basically they all had this idea of a whole curriculum of koans. The student would go from one koan to another, in progression over many years study, advancing towards some goal that became more and more, I suppose, enticing. The goal of completion in this very long course of study would apparently mean that the student would be sanctioned as an officially enlightened teacher and then ready to take on students as a master. But, of course, there were then, and still are, people who could, because of their great talents, complete the course of study of koans and still manage to remain totally deficient in the practical, human wisdom that it takes to be a spiritual mentor and guide – not to mention just getting through the day without getting into trouble! So there were then, and still are, brilliant koan practitioners who couldn’t get it together in their lives. This has been the main criticism of the koan system. In other words, to what extent does it really produce wise practitioners, or to what extent is it a highly sophisticated religio-aesthetic game that fosters competition, arrogance, and corruption? To evaluate this question, we have to ask, “What is the experience of enlightenment or satori that seems to be the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow?” Satori is a spiritual opening, an authentic and personal realization of the oneness of things, the non-difference within difference of self and other. The experience of satori is not something that comes at the end of koan study. Usually it comes toward the beginning with the passing of the first koan. Satori is, no doubt, a major experience. Also, I think it’s a crucial experience. Probably it is the essential religious experience, but also it is a momentary experience, by no means final and decisive. It’s a glimpse, not a steady gaze. It certainly does not exhaust the range of religious experience, which must include things like ethical conduct, wise and accurate expression, kindness, empathy, self-knowledge, personal integrity, and healthy doses of courage, attitude, and common sense. In fact, it is also said by traditional Zen teachers that satori is just a good beginning to spiritual practice. It is the opening of the door. It’s not the end. It’s not the culmination. On the other hand, it is probably true that working systematically with koans over a long time might help to develop some of these other qualities that I am speaking about. Koan work does take persistence; it does take self-confidence; it does take self-surrender; it does take imagination; it does take courage. But it is clear that working with koans over a long period of time is no guarantee that these qualities will be present in the person in their lives, outside the context of the koan practice, outside the meditation hall. So I personally think that this marvelous system of religious cultivation is useful. It is really a lot of fun – at least that is what I have found in my limited experience of it – but I don’t think it is fundamental or necessary. What about the actual technique of meditating on a koan? In a more down-to-earth way, it would be like this: you would establish your strong meditation practice, calm your mind, still your thoughts, focus yourself, and then hold the koan out in front of you. The best way to do this is to memorize it and then reduce it to something very simple. Case One of Mumonkam is great, because it is already as reduced as you could get: one syllable [mu], which is easy to hold with each breath. So you sit with a very intense focus, breathing into the one word, until it loses all sense and all meaning. You get tired of all speculation and thinking about it. You even lose all sense that the word mu is an object separate from yourself. You try to stay with it and identify with it, all during a retreat, all day and all night long. You give up expecting any results and being clever. You have to burn through your desire for success and your fear of failure. You even have to get rid of the person who might desire and fear, just sitting with “mu, mu, mu,” or whatever koan it is that you are working with until, as Master Mumon says, “it becomes clear to you.” In the classical, Hakuin system, you are doing this practice in the context of lengthy meditation retreats. You are making frequent, intense trips to the teacher’s room with your inevitably feeble answer to the koan. [Laughter] But these many trips are very important, because the teacher – either on purpose or by mistake – gives you hints, and the hints will help a great deal. When you finally do come in, and your answer is accepted, you will be really happy. Master Mumon was not exaggerating when he said, “Joy of the unexpected discovery.”You could see why a lot of the Chinese Zen masters dismissed the whole idea of an elegant, literary, progressive curriculum of koan study, which seemed to present spiritual awakening as if it were a college course. They gave their students, instead, a single, endless koan, which they were to meditate on for the course of a lifetime. Basically, just stay with this one. They would have koans like, “Who is it?” or “What is it?” or the koan I mentioned at the beginning of this talk and last time, “What is it as the breath?” Dogen also devised a kind of koan practice that is particularly useful to contemporary practitioners, who might want to work with koans outside the context of regular retreats or daily, temple life. In other words, people like us. He called this method Genjo Koan of the Present Moment, as I like to translate it. He explains this quite thoroughly in the essay that we all know about by that title. It is a beautiful piece of writing. It is the first Dogen fascicle that was translated into English, and it conditioned the way that Dogen was received in the West for many years afterward. In this essay, Dogen says, in effect, that the experience of being itself, moment after moment, is itself a koan. It ought to be approached that way. In other words, every moment of time is a koan, because it exists at the intersection of time and eternity. To be able to experience time in this way, with all its dimension and inconceivability, is to appreciate the practice of the koan in the present moment. In actual meditation practice, it might mean sitting with a spirit of strong inquiry, without the use of any devices other than just being there. In the case of daily life practice, it might mean taking personal issues or themes that arise within one’s life as koans for contemplation, rather than as objective issues that one is trying to work through for personal ease or advantage. I personally find the idea of Genjo Koan really useful in that it affords us a way to view our lives as deep, spiritual journeys, rather than as mundane distractions to be transcended. Fundamentally, koan practice–and Zen practice in general—is not seeing our lives in that way. It is the recognition that our small lives are only small, because we have made them so, by our conceptualizations of them. In reality, we don’t know what our lives are. We can’t say what they are. They are chimerical containers that hold everything that we could ever wish for or imagine. They are temporal analogues for the infinite.
