Exists or Not-exists ? —– Where is the SELF ?

Probably the most fundamental matter in the Buddhism is the Selflessness / Mushin.

—– though, this matter questions the credibility of the one who observes its existence, it is

nothing like a scientific objective proof of existence, it’s far more complicated or confused.

[]

Therefore, here, the most funniest paradox in the human culture comes in.

If you deny the existence of the Self, you can not argue or even put the matter on the table.

= because, its notion itself isn’t exists, there is no word to describe it.

= how to starts arguments ?

—– If the society has no system of personal possession, everything belongs to everybody, so,

there couldn’t be a notion of “theft” let alone the very word “theft”. 

If the Self is not exists, no word of SELF, let alone SELFLESS could ever exists.

So, without the notion of Self, how to argue about whether it exists or not.    😀

[]

Lord Buddha’s teachings were described as “Explain unexplainable” “Describe indescribable”.

In definition, Selflessness couldn’t be taught.   Selflessness itself is exists though, you can’t

detect or noticed, let alone capture it in objective observation nor describe it in the words.

Because, to notice “it is there”, it’s mean the observer, who was separated from the subject

= independent self is already THERE ! = You are the established EGO.

[]

So, Lord Buddha just gave an instruction what to do, but never explained why or what was

the intention.   (Like, just let Kisa Gotami to run about, or Churi Pantac to sweep the garden.)

—– While doing it, they will get used with its work or practice, hence became able to do it

without conscious = Selfless —– this was what the teachings were intended though,

it shouldn’t be objectively noticed or talked about. = the matter is, JUST DO IT.

[]

Once it was talked about, it became a NOTION and a WORD, it became independent

existence called knowledge.   Once the notion and the words “I’m cutting Lemon” was

established, “I” who cut the Lemon became THE Existence. —– but, you supposed to cut

a Lemon in Mushin, without the Self.   Without such conscious, Just Cut a Lemon, slice

by slice —– your knife, the lemon, your action were all fused in one, with the Dharma

= this is the state of Ichijo / Oneness. —– BUT, once the observant eyes started to see the

situation objectively and started to give a thought or two, the Observer and Be-observed

alienated = the harmony to be in the Ichijo has broken.

[]

In the Vimalakirti Sutra, when he was asked about what is this Oneness, he answered with

NO word (= and the silence hit the people like roaring thunder !) In fact this was exactly what

Lord Buddha did when he was asked about “after life”.

Oneness (Ichijo / Fuji) could exists if no Self was there.   And as NO self exists, of cause, there

couldn’t be any possibility of After-life or Reincarnation, and no such notion or word to

describe it could exist.   Hence, just a silence = Strongest denial !

(If he was to explain, “There is no Reincarnation because No-Self” it’s effectively recognize

the existence of the Self by the use of the Notion and the word “Self”.  

—– It is the same situation, if the one says “I’m sitting in silence”    😀 )

[]

It seems that the author of Vimalakirti Sutra did know what the mind of Selfless, as the

descriptions were spot on though, I’m not sure about the other Mahayana Sutra, and the

author (compiler ?) such as Nagarjuna —– he seemed to have written them from the

knowledge just heard from others.   They were the scripture for the sake of the arguments

and those arguments, theoretical explanation seemed nothing to do with

actual Selflessness and the Void.

—– Selflessness is everywhere, as you are reading this blog without noticing that your eyes

have been following the lines. = as everybody has born with Dharma, everybody has

Selflessness yet, masking it with the useless thinking and the Ego which has been kept you

away from getting enlightened.

May be just forget those words, Selflessness, Void kind of thinkings, and just take a walk

may open your eyes much clearer.

___/\___

[]

No Word = Strongest Teaching !

Wikipedia is a very convenient place to see the world, even about Buddhism.

Not necessary because it shows the truth but shows the current situation of Popular Belief.

Funny though, it often says “Citation required” — in Buddhism this is THE most blatant irony.

Understanding in Buddhism came from not because it was written. It always come between

the lines. —– Don’t believe what was written but you have to think yourself.

[]

In Buddhism, such as the strongest denial or the things which is not exist was not lexically

expressed.   So that, the matter was often over-looked or even mistook by the people who

only follows what was told or read.

Like a famous episode in the Vimalakirti Sutra —– To answer a question of “Oneness” (how

totally mindful to the subject) Vimalakirti utter no word, and its silence hit the audience

like a roaring thunder (so the scripture said).

[]

—– (If you couldn’t get it) = Think, such as in a situation of Sword Mastery, if a man using

the sword could see the situation, how he moves, how sword moves in the Objective View,

it’s mean his mind is separated and floating in the air and watching the situation in

distance = here, two Selves, one was watching and other was being watched, not mention

the independent Sword = this is far from Oneness.    When the conscious of using Sword

and the Hand(s) and even the existence of the Sword fused altogether and moves as one

unified force,  it is the Sword Mastery and the Master was in Oneness.  

(In Zen term it is Ichijo / 一如 or Fuji / 不二 )

—– If you are good in typing, you must know, when you were absorbed into its task =

not only the position of each key, but the keyboard, screen, even the draft paper has gone

out of your conscious but only a stream of each letters = your finger moves automatically,

completely out of your conscious.   And even your Brain was not in there, if the draft had

miss-spieling you just miss-type as it is = This is the Oneness = two Selves, Observer and

be Observed, in fact, THE SELF itself has been totally disappeared into the “TYPING”.

Therefore, no observer or conscious to describe it, nor description of Oneness on typing

could exist. —– (I can describe it because I myself is one-finger typist, still seeing other

expert, I can guess how it’s works from the aspect of Zen. —– still, I may be wrong. 😀 )

[]

—– So, there couldn’t be a description of Oneness.

= No word even from a wise-man Vimalakirti.    And, in the scripture, there was no

explanation such as what I wrote above ever existed, because able to write about 

expose a failure, that the one was not in “Selfless Oneness” = make a fool oneself.

This was also the reason when

Lord Buddha went out for a walk in a rainy night, he didn’t explain why, even to Ananda.

Because it was about the Selflessness = since the Self / its conscious was not there to

observe, there couldn’t be a word to describe it. = So that, there was no explanation.

(In fact, to teach Selflessness must be the hardest part, even though it IS the gist of Buddhism.

It can be taught only through a practice  (without type-writer !)  I wonder how many of the

followers could have managed to get it ? —– Still, as the tradition has been continued to

the Zen, it’s mean some had certainly mastered it and handed down the teaching !

—– but not by a word or scripture.)

[]

In Buddhism, a lots has not been written.   As, it meant to be a strongest denial.   Such as

Lord Buddha didn’t answer the question related to the “after life”.  Hence no explanation 

= it’s mean there couldn’t be any written record, hence no citation could be possible.

No citation indicates, no such things in the Doctrine of Buddhism.   And no word by

Lord Buddha ever existed since such matter has no worth to spear even a single word.

(Unfortunately, this situation had been exploited, knowingly or with sheer ignorance,

so many stories of “reincarnation, etc” had been fabricated.)

—– Yet western rhetoric wants to have a denial also has to be expressed,

and No-existence (it’s hard to explain what the Voidness is), has to be proved even

in the Wikipedia. —– It must be a headache to the author.

They can’t create a blank page in Wikipedia and put a comment  “This is Zen”.

(I wonder why not.   A blank page could convey as much as message written

in the same space.)     Ha ha ha.   😀

___/\___

[]

Mistake in Philosophy

The most fundamental and fatal mistake of the western Philosophy lies in their basis of Dualism,

and seemingly it is originated from their notion of the God.

Against this notion, the SELF = ME became its counter notion as rigid as the God.

As the concept of Self is there, the Self is the one who see the subject ( of cause, you may say, who else

saw and talked about the subject in his book, in his philosophy.  And say, Is this a Zen Mondo ?  🙂 )

( Shut up  🙂 )  As long as the subject is somebody else, there is no problem, hence scientific, objective

rationality works well and yelled this impressive western technological civilization.

Because of the objectivity is Selfless in its definition. Anyhow, the nature and its phenomena,

physics are there before human existence. We are just the observer regardless whoever the Self.

—

But when the Self try to see the Self ( or True Self what so ever the context ) and the phenomena around it.

The perpetual question of  Who is the Self came into the play. Therefore, the matter related to

themselves, psychology, human science, social phenomena, etc, it always plagued by its view-point = Self.

In fact, from ancient Plato to modern Phenomenology etc, they misbelieved that they can objectively see

the human affair and able to construct the philosophy as well.  And they stuck in the cul-de-sac.

Because even an  Atheist, started exactly the same stance, The Dualism. —– God and Me / Me and

the Subject / Observer and be Observed,  the uncertainty of the Self is still persistent,

hence its stance of view point,  reliability itself is in doubt.

The fundamental trouble of this stance is, we can’t objectively observe the Self or the phenomena

attributed by ourself. —–  we always end-up in unseeable and unknowable.

On the end everybody just resigned to say  ” Don’t bother, there are thousands of truth ”   🙂

So that, some Philosopher try to grasp this unknowable with the notion of  Transcendental though, made

further  mistake try to convert it to explanatory words by thinking. ( You may say, What else ?  😀  )

This was the very situation, which Buddha encountered soon after he got his enlightenment,

Should I teach this to others or not.  Can this be transmittable by the words ?

( This is why, the Buddha’s teaching has been conveyed by the practice and metaphor )

—

While we are thinking, most of its process ( some says 90% of it ) are taking place in our

subconsciousness. —– And so-called Self is a mere temporally mock-up model by guess-work, since it

never stays the same, moment to moment and never rationally configurable like our thinking process.

Hence True Self which reside in our subconscious is ever invisible and remained undefinable.

This was the reason why Buddha said  ” Don’t bother there is no such thing like Self exists”  :-D.

The situation was made even harder, as the basis of our thinking are also contained in the immense

amount of the Data or information which we accumulated without aware of its existence.

—– so, am I talking hopeless ?  Am I giving cold water to the Philosopher’s pleasure to express themselves ?

The answer is again in the Buddha’s words ” Don’t take a word, think yourself “

And to against the fundamental flaw of Dualism, the Zen giving the answer ” Ichijo ”  Oneness.

In Ichijo we can overcome the alienation of the subject, alienation of the Self.

The barrier between observer and be observed disappear.

( Which I’m going to talk further in the next post )

___/\___

—