Yoshizen's Blog

Selfless — Mushin ?

In my blog, I’ve been talking about the way of conditioning our brain to omit the process of the amygdala where the tagging of the incoming signal to the “Self” would be made. In the normal way, we can separate the particular face or person to such as my wife, kids or my friend etc. against the other nobody. Or the certain possession, or the occurrence to mine or my concern otherwise to no interest. Therefore, if we do negate this tagging process, everything would lose significance and become a remote landscape. —– to a certain extent, as everything become to detached object, a worry to lose them or want more kind of greed would be no longer there. So does the emotional trouble of up and down in the relationship would be gone. (How boring you might say.) 😀 —– A bit more serious front, where the situation is a fight or flight. It is the moment to be or not to be. Yet still, we can be free from such trouble by avoiding to be overwhelmed. —– We can be cool.

Amygdala is a part of the limbic system = primitive part of the brain. = It’s mean, they are common with other animal and in fact, those primitive part alone can manage the primitive life. (Only human needs a big brain) In the limited narrow environment, and as the limited life form, such as a small reptile can live their perfect life. They may not have a complexed communication system or accumulated information system still, enough DNA information to navigate the environment and the response to the life’s each needs = where to live, how to eat, how to mate, where to lay eggs etc etc. As long as the one lives their life as their life, the life existing as a complete life form. Only very few creatures imagine the situation beyond what their existence is. (Other than human, such as the monkey use the tools, even crow knows to drop a shell from the air to clack it and eat = speculated expectation made by the brain power)

The funny origin of the Buddhists “No-self” was that it was conceived against the Vedic / Hindu idea of the Atoman (perpetual soul) still, not only that, from the point of Karma (interrelationship of cause and effect) how the soul can exist after the own body’s death, and from the observation of the facts that is we are walking, working without having clear conscious, and such state must be the state of the truth to be with Dharma. So, to do the things without having conscious, became the point to achieve. —– The remarkable achievement under such state (of Mushin) is the by-products of later days.

When the coming signal was diverted from the amygdala, where they goes ? = they might be treated as nothing or nobody and as it got no pre-tagging, it could be made to quite illational connection. As the amygdala could make very rational established responce, but, once it was diverted, the signal could be treated quite wiled way = this is the very hot bed of the creativity or known to be open-minded situation. —– When the signal couldn’t find its natural nest of “Mine or Ego” the stray info’ end-up in the bizzerre fancy shop ! 😀


Simple Fact = the Truth

It is a simple fact, in our daily life, unless we intentionally think “I am”, we are living without a conscious of self. —– Do you walk while thinking “I am walking” ? Or, are you reading this script here while aware of “My eyes are following this, letter by letter and my brain is taking and understanding its meanings in” —– I don’t think so. You are just walking without knowing who is walking or who makes you to walk. So does, you have been reading this without knowing who IS reading. In deed, You or Your-SELF haven’t been existing as a conscious. That’s because such as SELF is nothing other than a product of the thinking, in other words, it was an intentionally created imaginal figure which is to assert or to demonstrate the ownership of “this person”. In fact it IS a part of one’s desire, Ego and the Greed. So that, such as the SELF, let alone Perpetual self could not exists as a reality. It’s mean, such as a reincarnation could never possible to occur simply because the subject, the SELF, whom to be reincarnated is not existing. How could it be ?

It IS so simple as a straight fact yet still because of it, it is very difficult to explain why. Quite a lot of Buddhists tried to explain though all of them only made a simple truth more complicated. Because of the authoritative attitude of those monks, who want to make their word looks great, they made up unnecessarily heavy theory such as Void or so on. The truth to be with Dharma is not necessarily heavy matter such as even a seed of dandelion can fly away.

Lord Buddha’s teachings were not complicated or theoretical, in order to any followers can grasp the truth by themselves. (not by understanding the complicated words or teachings but through their own observation on the practice = not believe the words but get it by yourself) —– Such as the earliest teachings of 4 noble truth, they were not a kind of complicated deep theory but the clear fact or simple human reality. That’s reality IS the very truth. Like we are here IS the Dharma.

So, when Lord Buddha pointed out the Point, it went straight into the mind of the followers almost like a lightening, the followers could get the truth at once. ( it made a legend and the tradition of the instant enlightenment.)

So, even now those monks still keep talking complicated words and the fantasy of heavens. —– can’t those people open their eyes to see such simple reality and the truth ?



Kill the SELF

If any Buddhism sect or their instructor told about “Self denial” or “Kill the Self” kind, they are a sham.  It was not what Lord Buddha taught 2500 years ago. 

(Lord Buddha taught “Selfless” through the practice though, as he didn’t explain the meaning or its intension, it was not necessarily understood by the followers. — Because of the SELF and its notion was not exists, it was not possible to explain. = Can you explain “Self is not exist” without using the word “Self” ?    😀 )  

In this situation, could anybody describe what about or significance of the teachings, or the meaning of practice which taught Selfless. = Hence, no description even in Agama. Because the matter was not to understand what the meaning of the word “Selfless” but become able to do the practice without thinking without emotion. ( = completely detouched, which mean without EGO ! )

There are many stories of Buddha’s silence or No-answer.   All those questions which was ignored were about the imaginary things, such as infinity, eternal, after a death, perpetual soul kind.   Because all those are the imaginary things = deluded by the “Self” which is not even exists.   Why bother answer it.   In fact, Lord Buddha’s silence = stop talking meant to be a message as strong as to kill the person.

Have you heard a very lucrative investment scheme of the Poca-pinta (10 poca-pinta is about $1) in the Pintaland, where you can buy 1 Kg of Gold for 1,000 Poca-pinta.  But to make a deal, you have to send $1000 into a Net Account first. = I don’t think you ever did because no Pintaland exists nor Poca-pinta. Naturally nobody uttered even a word Pintaland = because even the word “Pintaland” is not exists. —– Same as this, When the subject is not exists, no Lord Buddha ever talked about, let alone gave any answer related to it. 

By the way, were you aware to be the person who read this stories of Poca-pinta here. Was that YOU ?  And did you know the reading was done by your eyes.   In FACT, everything has been carried-out without you noticing it = “without noticing” ?   So, WHO read those ? —– Since when you were small, you’ve read the texts millions of times and now you can do it with no intentional intent.  You can capture a flashing message without reading it but just from its overall pattern.  Since, you DO it automatic, without conscious.   When you became Self-conscious, because of your EGO, “Me me me” you try to assert YOU and it IS only the situation you try to be Yourself.= Otherwise, in a normal condition, YOU/SELF is not exists.   And to read this, you don’t need to have your SELF.  Likewise, you can live your life without SELF.  It’s mean without having the ugly conflict of the EGO against EGO.

In the first place, Self wasn’t there unless you intentionally made-up.  Since, Dharma itself has no Self.

“The person” fist created “SELF” then clung to it =  because of own EGO, Me me me, — and made the life awkward.   Then try to kill it because it IS too awkward to live with.  (How silly.)

Aren’t  you doing the same ?  (You don’t need to pay an effort to kill the SELF, simply just live in a natural flow, there isn’t any SELF there as Dharma hasn’t one. —– It’s mean, You don’t need to struggle even with this blog = just read like as a casual gossip, though 100 times = if there is any truth, your intuitive wisdom will find it out.  If not just forget.)  😀


PS : One point shouldn’t be forgotten,— to give up a drink, woman etc and become a follower of the Dharma. — You may see it is a sacrifice and the denial of the happiness and pleasure of the SELF / Me.  Or, to get the excitement of a sports and a health, spend the time and money for the training — wasn’t that a price to pay, or a sacrifice, denial to the Self ? .  The matter IS which you value positive ? 


What Buddha taught ?

When we try to find what was the original teachings of

Lord Buddha  among the millions line of scripture, we have

to pay the most heavy attention to the personality of

Lord Buddha as an individual human being in his totality, while

chiselling out all the mixed-ups and the glorifying decorations.

(If the scripture had Hindu name, it is not Buddhism, or the 

story has supernatural magnificence it was just a fantasy.)

—– there could be a gradual change of his view and the opinion

still, there couldn’t be an utter contradiction from the same person.

Since he got his Enlightenment (with his own understanding of the

world) after he seceded from ascetic monks/Guru’s group (with a

disappointment and a lost hope to find a viable answer from them

and such ascetic approach) therefore his idea couldn’t be anything

like a transcendental oracle like fanatic words  (so-called

mumbo-jumbo) but  frank and down to the earth straight idea.


Typically like Four Noble Truth, those very brunt and blatant words

were the words of cool realist.

If the person was a kind of salesman, he would have chosen much

sweeter words and even a misleading bait in it (such as a promise

of Heaven). But

Lord Buddha was not a spin-doctor but rather like a rational scientist,

he talked the facts and phenomena, not his speculation or fantasy —

its mean his teachings were not an idealistic Dogma but the wisdoms

based on the facts and the scientific observations.

= in this approach, he found the mechanism of Karma and able to see

the effect of the time in moment to moment flaw.    So that, to find 

the NO Perpetual Soul (Anatman) was a straight conclusion.

(That’s why in his Sangha, there was no Cast = curse from the past)

Those observations and the understandings needs no special filter to 

see = they are the common facts, and from those observations anybody

who acquired the right eyes can see and find the truth behind 

( 8 right ways meant this) and see the Enlightenment.   That was why,

Lord Buddha gave the last instruction on his death bed

“Don’t believe what was said but see/learn it yourself” = this word

clearly indicates that the teachings were not a Dogma to memorise

but the Direct Transmission =

wisdom which could be learned from the observation of Facts.


And Lord Buddha’s observation went into deep inside of the

human psych = subconsciousness too.

He realised that we are able to see and know the subject

without us thinking it.  (So-called intuition) 

And he thought this is the Manifestation of the Dharma in us.

(We can walk without thinking how to walk — so,

WHO made us to walk ? = It must be the Dharma !

But being in our subconscious, even we know it’s there though

we can not see = It is there and/but It is not there.  (There must

be a big debate about “Self / Soul, the subject / who is thinking, =

the person who is thinking IS WHOM ?       Though, as

Lord Buddha took the stance that there is no Self / Atman = talking

this subject IS effectively a recognition of the existence of the Self =

So, how it was debated was very interesting but we may not know.

—– still from the Scripture we can see the description “Giving

without aware of giving IS the true giving” = we can guess what

was taught there then.  And from here, (if Self exists or not) the

debate extended —> Does Dharma exists or itself is Void ? ? ?

And in this context, an episode in the Agama sutra was the

story which gave us the most crucial insight.

= That was the true record of

Lord Buddha’s teachings.



Hoben (方便) / Upaya — (2)

Most of the books I refer to, are I brought from Japan and unless I need to find

the English word, I do not look into Wiki kind. —– So, I tell you the truth,

until few days ago, I didn’t know that there a Sanskrit word for Hoben (方便), Upaya

existed.   In Japan Hoben is a widely used word spread out of the Buddhism,

which has an extended meaning of “convenient mean” or “easy alternative” kind,

and the original Buddhist context was masked by those common usage.

Lord Buddha’s witty teachings, which was timely and suit to the occasion, or to

the person speaking to, is a well known stories, hence those witty talk style has

been adapted by the Zen talk, or even by the children’s comic book “Ikkyu-san”.

As its casual use became so common, we almost forgotten it had a Buddhism origin.

—– So that, to find this word, “Upaya” really surprised me, not because of its

meaning but the attitude, the ancient monk did created a dedicated nickname for 

Lord Buddha’s talking style, yet still, they couldn’t find the meaning of

Lord Buddha’s silence.


Do you talk about the prostitute or prostitution in public ? I don’t think you do.

It’s a dirty talk and officially, it’s not exist in your life.  And if it’s not in the society,

neither a word prostitution exists.   It’s mean, even if anybody asked about it, you

can not understand what it mean nor able to answer.

To Lord Buddha, talking about Atman or Self never happened, because no such things

of the Self exists and to talk about a thing which is not exists was nothing but a 

delusion and it is a dirty talk.   Because of it is not exists and as he doesn’t have, it was 

no use to make a question about the Self or its reincarnation to him, because 

he wouldn’t answer anyway, since even no word, no notion was there.

= This was the reason why, to those questions, there was no answer from

Lord Buddha at all.


And when the teaching was related to the Self, there was no explanatory words

but to show the practice which would lead to the “Selfless State of the mind” —–

or just to give a smile, otherwise (if you can’t get it), the excommunication.

(This was the reason why no explanation of “No Self” was in the scripture.

—– either it was omitted because of the conflict with the Hinduism or it couldn’t

be written down because, no such things like a Self exists.)

(In Buddhism, especially in Zen, there is nothing between Yes and No.

Yes mean 200% commitment but if it was No, even a word No itself is no longer exist.

= it is not a denial or even an argument but a total erasure = the subject, the matter

is completely disappeared. = hence no psychological conflict.

When no-self, there is even no subject, who is thinking the matter.)



Who, you ???

Posted in Buddhism, Dharma, Empowerment, Enlightenment, Paradox, Zen by yoshizen on February 3, 2010

Some of the reader may have noticed, there are funny contradictions among my posts.

Somewhere says ” We are just passive.  Nothing was credited to ourself ” —– in the other hand,

” We can have absolute confidence and able to create anything “_ _ _ _ _ ? ? ?

” The Notion of Self is only an imaginary  idea and no such concrete existence there “—– in the same time,

” You are nobody else of you in the mirror ”

——-All of them are absolutely true at the same time.

Reality lies between two,  or they exist contradictively together as this is the very Buddhism.

( This is why you  often see  Zen expression such as “Maximum is Minimum”)

You have to see this Paradox in Reality by your eyes.    (Not by thinking)

( See it, is Feel it.  Feel in Deeper Layer / Subconscious Limbic System / Basis of our existence)


On purpose I use poor metaphor,   ( So, it is easy to visualize this )

Think, You are a small bureaucrat called  Mr. A  in a corner of Empire.

You never seen Emperor nor have any idea how whole system of the Empire works but know the Rules

and duties you are assigned to do and not to do.

You carry out your task utmost diligence and in your best. ( otherwise you will be beheaded   😀 )

As long as it is in your jurisdiction you have the absolute authority and discretion. (You are the Rules)

———- Still, non of the rules or protocols were your invention, nor any of the applicant came to

your desk are your choice.  You exist just as passive. (Rules are there, not you)

Being as an officer you do your task almost automatic routine and after many years in the same position,

you are the expert to deal with such issues but as an officer you can’t mix your emotion to the business.

It got to be detached from the subjective view. (Only the eyes of Rules exist)

You must be very proud of your role in the Municipal office and have perfect confidence of your life as

a part of the Empire.  (Since you are the Rules, you are the Empire)

Everybody knows you and your name Mr.A. —— (so far, so good)- – – – – Then, Who is Mr.A ?

Is it a man happen to be sitting in that chair ?

Or the body which attached to a face called Mr.A ?

Mr.A is absolutely nobody else of Mr.A ——– Everybody knows it, and you yourself know it, though,

yet still   Who You are ?  ( Until, you question this, there was no such issue ever existed )

( You can live happily without bumped into this question,  and able to live  without knowing it at all )

Once “Who are you” / Self  was questioned, the stance of one’s confidence became uncertain.

Because of this is the most puzzling question, many people go into very deep, still nobody ever found

the answer.—— So, Buddha gave very pragmatic answer.

” Don’t bother, don’t waste the time, no such things there like what Vada said  (Artman) ”

You to live peaceful life is what Buddha wished,  not you end up in a word game.  (Word game push

the person even further away from the state of  Mushin)


You are the Mr.A and the name of Emperor was the Dharma.

( Now you might got the idea What is Reality lies between,  meant )

Who is the Self ?

Posted in Buddhism, Dharma, Selflessness, Zen by yoshizen on December 8, 2009

” Did Buddha kill his own SELF ?”

I’ve visited a site called < Contoveros > run by Michael J who gave

a good observation of his Zen life to my blog. (@ Mindfullness / comment )

I can see he has cultivated nice friendly community around his

relaxed heart warming blog spot.

——- And I found very interesting words in his spot which says

” Needn’t kill yourself to be like Buddha ” ——m m m ? ! ! !

Waite a moment matey, did Buddha killed his Self ?

According to the so-called Buddha’s biography (along side some historical facts)

Buddha had abandoned his status to be the Royal Prince and became a bikku

which gave a serious havoc to the linage of the Magada Kingdom etc——.

Even though it was for a quest to find the truth to save the human being,

Wasn’t that by his crazy ego ? especially to the eyes of  Shakya Royals.


Here is the very interesting issue of What is the self, ego ——What is

the person’s role to be born under the Dharma.

In the Buddha’s eyes, clinging the position to be the Royal Prince while

indulging exclusive prosperity was the greed  and ego infested by the

delusions, therefore it has to be get rid of it.

——–In my view, Buddha didn’t kill his self ofwhich he was born with.

He only needed to expose it which had been stashed away under the

cover of Royal robe.

The same apply to anybody as you are born to be the self by the Dharma,

but to live as the true  yourself (some time called  Inner-self ) you only

need to get rid of the life of unnecessary and excess ofwhich most of them

are artificial and unnatural (This is so-called Middle way ).


From the tiny thumbnail of Michael’s photo, I can see his really nice character.

Look his child like twinkling eyes and the round smiley cheeks.  The shape of

ears shows his rather well-off happy life.

A man born like him wouldn’t be killed even under the bombardment of Vietcon.

Dhrma protect him to fulfill his life.

(As a family tradition, I’m pretty good to read the face and the line on the palm)

Congratulation to Michael.

%d bloggers like this: