Baishui Zen

If I had to try to summarize Buddhist philosophy separately from religious practice, I would say it consists primarily of three prongs, which are essentially inseparable from one another. These three are:

1. A philosophy of mind.
2. An ethical philosophy, with a code of conduct.
3. A philosophy of the world, this is called “ontology” and is the study of objects and being.

The first thing to understand, is that the Buddhist view of mind is not particularly concerned with its anatomical structure. Nowhere in the sutras will you find a discussion of brains or neurons. In the Buddhist view of mind, we begin with the experience of mind itself. That is to say, instead of thinking about structures and neurotransmitters or hormones, we simply think about thinking, feeling, reflecting, and so on. In fact, it is important to distinguish between mind, which is a somewhat slippery term in Sanskrit, and brain. From the Buddhist point of view, they are related, but mostly by coincidence. A brain is necessary for a physical being to have a mind, as far as we seem to know, but far from sufficient.

In Sanskrit, the word for “mind” is the same as the word for “heart.” The same is true in Chinese. The mind is the seat of the intellect, but also the emotions. This more encompassing usage is somewhat similar to how we would think of our entire nature or personality. It is the part of a being, not a physical part like an arm, but a part nonetheless, responsible for giving us experience, and a consciousness with which to understand those experiences and ascribe different types of meaning to them. In the Indian tradition, these two features are described as “clarity and cognizance.” Clear and transparent like open space, reflecting the immaterial nature, and cognition which of course is responsible for insight and understanding. In the Zen tradition, this latter component is emphasized more, where it is said that mind is like a clear mirror which reflects all phenomena (dharma) internally.

As will be a theme in these foundational posts, most discussions of phenomena such as the experience of mind can happen on two different levels. There is a practical, conventional level, and a fundamental or ultimate level. Both levels are regarded as true in their own sense, although they are quite different in their description. This interplay is both thematic for Buddhist philosophy in general, and crucial to understanding the philosophy of mind in particular, so I’ll try to be particularly careful here.

The conventional nature of something is how it functions and what it is used for. For mind, this is the above “working definition” of clarity and cognition. Throughout classical Chinese, there is a working metaphor that kinds of mental states are comparable to water. For example, minds can be clear or murky or befuddled; shallow or deep; calm or turbulent, and so on. Continuing this theme, we think of this conventional nature of mind as like distilled water. Certain types of negative thoughts or feelings, or destructive habits, are regarded as a kind of contaminant. The nature of these contaminants will be discussed more later. For now, the relevant point is that when dirt is mixed into water, the water itself is still pure. Its own nature is unchanged. We must distinguish between the entire mixture, which will be some kind of slurry, and the water within.

On the other hand, the ultimate nature of mind is, paradoxically, that it lacks a solid, independent entity with its own permanent nature. Since mind is not identifiable with brains, it is just as insufficient to point to a brain as a source of ultimate nature as it is to point to an arm or leg. Since there’s no one thing responsible for it, it must be that the mind is not a fixed thing comprised of substances, but instead, is a process that arises and passes away moment by moment, shaped by the interactions of thoughts, feelings, actions, external stimuli, and so on. This lack of physical substance has invited many Buddhist writers to compare the nature of mind to that of light, something radiant which allows us to “see.” While it lacks physical form, its existence is undeniable.

When this ultimate nature of mind is rejected or misunderstood, we call that “ignorance.” This refers to a mental factor that grasps phenomena as inherently existent, with their own independent essences, even when there aren’t any. Buddhists believe it is the source of all other disturbing emotions, such as anger, craving, jealousy, and conceit, because it causes us to cling to false impressions and misunderstand what is truly important. These confusions and misunderstandings are the chief pollutants of our conventional mind. Therefore, we need to understand the ultimate nature of mind to correctly apprehend the conventional nature, and separate it from its pollutants.

Because ignorance and other negative thoughts and feelings are erroneous mental factors, lacking an inherent foundation, they are not embedded in the
nature of the mind and can be eliminated forever. In the Platform Sutra, it is explained that just as clouds temporarily obscure the open sky, clouds are not the nature of the sky, they sit below it, much closer to the earth. The sky is an infinite expanse, which lies above them. As the light of the sun can clear clouds, the radiance of mind can clear these obstructions. Ignorance
and other negativity can temporarily obscure the pure nature of the mind. But unlike clouds, which once gone can reappear, once ignorance has been eliminated from the mind by wisdom, it can no longer obscure the mind. The wellspring of mind can be thought of as purified, permanently. Meanwhile, other emotions, such as love, compassion, and resilience, motivation, do not depend on ignorance to exist and therefore remain as part of our mindstream forever. In fact, actively refocusing from ignorance and negativity to these positive emotions when you encounter them is one of the simplest mental habits to be in to begin approaching the path. Thus, the mind’s lack of inherent existence allows us to separate out these undesirable qualities and eliminate them. In other words, Buddhists do not believe the mind can be warped permanently by bad thoughts or experiences. It is always possible to have the mind be purified again.

There is a teaching I am particularly fond of, which unfortunately I have lost the source of, but I think might be due to Zen Master Sheng-Yen. Paraphrased, it says that one should be grateful when bad things happen which might stir up some of these negative feelings. Rejecting those feelings is an opportunity to acquire good karma (merit). To continue the water analogy, I like to think of feelings and actions that flow through us socially as like waves upon the water. Negativity from others flows especially easily, passing through us, sweeping us up, and using us as a conduit to flow to the next person. Working to eliminate negativity from ourselves is like making ourselves into an island of tranquility in a sea of pessimism, hostility and anxiety. Reflecting on this teaching, we become a refuge for others, and allow the dharma to spread to others through us.

Before closing, we should remark again on this theme of having two distinct types of nature. In Buddhism, this is called “Madhyamaka” or, “Middle Way.” The nature of the mind is understood through the concept of two truths: conventional and ultimate. Conventionally, we experience the mind as a stream of thoughts, feelings, and perceptions, subject to the laws of karma and cause and effect. However, ultimately, the mind is empty of inherent existence and arises interdependently with other phenomena. Neither understanding alone is sufficient to understand our minds – we need the conventional way to understand our thoughts and feelings and perceptions, and we need the ultimate understanding to see how it is possible to attain spiritual change, by the elimination of hostile thoughts and feelings.

The Middle Way avoids the extremes of eternalism, e.g. believing the mind is a permanent, unchanging entity, and nihilism, believing the mind does not exist at all. Instead, it teaches that while the mind exists conventionally as a stream of mental events, its ultimate nature is clear, like light, and interdependent, and realizing this leads to liberation. Both are necessary for full understanding, but also, both are incomplete by themselves. This interplay between necessary and sufficient, true and false, and the different senses in which something can be true or false, is a calling card of Buddhist thought called “non-duality,” and we will return to it soon.