Can You Be a Good Zen Practitioner?

 

Mariah Loves Earth.Untitled. 2019.

"Can I be a good Zen practitioner?"

As someone who is a member of a sangha, has been meditating for four years, and consistently has a Buddhist book by her bedside this question has arisen numerous times. Except, the question itself is inherently flawed. I will explain why, from my Sōtō school perspective, there are no "good" Zen practitioners.

In Sōtō Zen, the primary intentions are: 1. Zazen, which is meditation; and 2. The Bodhisattva vow, a vow to save all beings. Unlike other Buddhist traditions, enlightenment is not meant to be the reason behind practice. The 12^th century founder of Sōtō Zen, Eihei Dōgen, wrote in the text Fukanzazengi that, “The zazen I speak of is not learning meditation. It is simply the dharma-gate of repose and bliss, the practice-realization of totally culminated enlightenment.” To practice zazen, in itself, is enough. 

Living in North America, zazen itself defies the very basis of our society —Capitalism. Zazen can also be understood as shikantaza, which means just sitting. In Capitalism, people are valued for their productivity and contribution to capital. If one is just sitting for no reason then one’s actions are resisting the pressures of Capitalism.

Sociologists Bratton and Denham (2014), note that “the capitalist [upper-class] and the proletariat [workers] define each other by the relation of each to the means of production” (p.116). This can be further emphasized by the upper-class’s spreading of their ideologies. Karl Marx described how “the dominant [upper] class develops and disseminates a web of social beliefs about how men and women relate to one another and how society should function, which provides legitimacy for its domination” (Bratton and Denham, 2014, p.120).

 For example, fashion trends spread through the marketing of multi billion-dollar corporations who use the elite (i.e. celebrities) to sell clothing to the average minimum wage worker for a high profit. The clothing itself may be a repeat trend from 20 years ago, but the reason why it is considered desirable is because the elite say that it is of value. Even though the clothes that people already own may be in perfect condition they do not feel satisfied until they purchase the new item. 

By living in a Capitalist society, we believe that the external world must fit the upper-class ideology which puts consumption on a pedestal (i.e. the belief that mansions bring happiness). At the same time, we internalize the belief that we do not have value unless we are being productive and striving for wealth. When we see this internalization, we understand why there is a cult following of billionaires and why those who do not work are seen as having lesser value (i.e. women, people with a disability, and the elderly). Inherently, this motivates individuals in a Capitalist society to be productive so that they feel valuable. 

A Capitalist worldview is very dichotomous in that people are seen as either valuable or invaluable. Furthermore, this can be connected to Capitalism’s roots in Christian societies where going to heaven was entrenched in being pious. Especially with the clear dichotomy of “Good vs. Evil” that is represented in the relationship between God and Satan. 

In contrast, the worldview of Zen Buddhism is one of non-dualism. Non-dualism can be understood as the dependent nature of all things. This perspective depicts a relational understanding of the world. For example, an ocean cannot exist without rain, and clouds cannot exist without an ocean. This can be found in the essential Mahayana text, the Heart Sutra, "Form itself is emptiness, emptiness itself form."

To refer to someone as “good” is to assume that there is an eternal, unchanging, aspect of that person —much like a soul. Except, in Buddhism, it is understood that at the heart of all things there is sunyata. Emptiness is the best translation of sunyata.

This does not mean that life is devoid of meaning, but that if you went to the core of an object you would only find emptiness. Buddhist teacher, Stephen Batchelor (1998), provides an excellent example: 

Consider the bulb of a daffodil buried in the ground all winter. As the weather gets warmer, it begins to sprout. If it rains sufficiently…one morning you will exclaim: “Look! The daffodils are out.” But did the sprout suddenly cease to be a sprout and in its place a daffodil appear?... The dividing line between sprout and daffodil is a convenient conceptual and linguistic distinction that cannot be found in nature. (p.76)

There is no essential core that makes a daffodil a daffodil. Just as there is no essential person to be good. With the transient nature of all things no category will ever be able to encompass the whole of one’s being because one does not have inherent permanent qualities. Someday the same daffodil will decompose and become soil. 

Attachment to the idea of being a “good” Zen practitioner is the forgetting that there is no essential “I” to be good. If we are seeking to be good, we are attached to an idea of a core self. To say, “someday I will be good Zen practitioner” is to say that in this moment I am bad. When we are sitting, we are only in this moment, but to have a goal means that this moment is not enough.

Viewing practice in this way reflects the striving to be valuable in Capitalism. Dissatisfaction will remain when a practitioner tries to be "good" because the practitioner is trying to be what they are not in that moment. In Zen Buddhism, it is said that everyone has Buddha nature exactly as they are. In the text, Genjo Koan, Eihei Dōgen writes “When you first seek dharma, you imagine you are far away from its environs. But dharma is already correctly transmitted; you are immediately your original self" (p.21).

We can only have our practice intentions which are to follow our breath and keep returning. Sometimes in zazen, that can look like getting lost in our thoughts and returning five times in thirty minutes and other times we may return one hundred times. Just as there is goallessness in our zazen, it is necessary to have goallessness in our practice. Zen continues whether we are walking, sitting, or lying down. When we leave our cushion, we are still practitioners.

References  

Batchelor, S. (1998). Buddhism Without Beliefs: A Contemporary Guide to Awakening.
                 Penguin.

Bratton, J., & Denham, D. (2014). Capitalism and Classical Social Theory. University of
                 Toronto Press.

---