Baishui Zen

We’re skipping over notes on this blog for chapter 6, which is extremely short, and basically comprises a brief explanation of why the sutra is called “Mahaparinirvana.” Let’s take a look at this chapter:

The Buddha again spoke to Kasyapa: “There are four aspects about which a
Bodhisattva-mahasattva expounds Mahaparinirvana. What are these four?
They are: 1) rightness in one’s own self, 2) correcting others, 3) complying with the teachings and discussing them, and 4) understanding well the causal relations.

What is rightness in one’s own self? This is as when the Buddha Tathagata
expounds Dharma, seeing well the causal relations. This is like a bhiksu seeing a great fire. He says: “I would sooner throw myself into this ball of burning fire than ever say that all the twelve types of sutras and the undisclosed teachings are from Mara. If one says that the Tathagata, Dharma and Sangha are non-eternal, this is cheating one’s own self and also others. I
would sooner cut out my tongue with a sharp sword than ever say that the Tathagata, Dharma and Sangha are non-eternal. I might indeed hear others saying this, but I will never believe it. I shall even pity a person who says such as this. The Tathagata, Dharma and Sangha are inconceivable.” One should uphold one’s own self well like this. One looks to one’s own self as
if seeing a fire ball. This is how one sees rightness in one’s own self.

When I first read the analogy, I was confused about what it has to do with rightness in one’s own self. It seems to have little to do with the fire, and is really just saying you should be so confident in yourself that you’d sooner face death than be confused about these teachings. Clunky, but OK. Next up:

How does one correct others? The World-Honored One, in order to teach all beings, makes distinctions and expounds the non-Self and non-eternal of all existences. If the World-Honored One were to talk first about the Eternal, a person hearing this might say that what he says is the same as what the heterodox believers say, discount what he says and then leave.” Sravaka disciples cannot understand this eternal Dharma. That is why I speak about suffering and impermanence. When all of my sravakas are already perfect in virtue and can stand learning the Mahayana sutras, I then, entrust the unsurpassed, undisclosed treasure to all Bodhisattvas.” If any person says that the Buddha is Eternal and does not change, know that the Buddha is present in that house. This is correcting others.

So the correcting of others is related to the idea of expedient means. There was a lengthy metaphor here which I removed, transmitting this idea by instructing a mother with a child on how best to provide food for the child. The upshot of the analogy is that a child has limitations in how they are able to eat, but if you raise them properly, they grow up into a fully functional adult, who can eat just about any food with no issue. The Buddha corrects the woman to understand the correct means for her child gently, and the woman is grateful. Next up:

What is complying well and discussing? For example, a person comes and
puts a question to the Buddha-World-Honored One: “How can I be a great giver, not throwing my money away?” The Buddha says: “Should there be any ascetic, Brahmin, or any person who seeks to possess little and is fully contented and will not accept or store any impure things, give such a person a maid or servant. To one who practices pure actions, give him the lust of a woman, and to one who does not drink alcohol or eat meat, give drink and meat; to one who does not take meals after noon, give him a meal after noon; to one who does not use flowers and incense, give flowers and incense. Such donations give rise to rumor and the fame will fill the world. Not a penny is spent. This is complying well and discussing.

I confess I don’t really understand. Why is the Buddha saying that you should give people things they do not want, do not need, or cannot use? What does this have to do with discussing? Is the point that doing this gives rise to a lot of discussion? Maybe this is just wrong on behalf of Tony’s translation. I want this space to serve as notes on the sutras, and I’m really just perplexed here. If I crack it, or if someone ever leaves a comment which explains, I’ll update the post accordingly. Anyway, the next section deals with the prohibition and rules surrounding eating meat. Let’s skip these for a moment and come back to them. First let’s finish off the four points we were discussing with causal relations. The congregation is annoyed with the Buddha because according to them, this is a new thing to be added to the list, and I guess they were only expecting three things. The Buddha says:

If you say that the Tathagata, for the sake of beings, talks about the superb virtues of the ten good deeds, this indicates that he sees beings like his son, Rahula. How can you reproach him and ask if he lets beings not fall into hell? Should I see but one person falling into the lowest of the Hell realms, I would, for the sake of that person, stay in the world for a kalpa or less than a kalpa. I have great compassion for all beings. How could I cheat one whom I regard as my son and let him fall into hell? It is like a person in the land of a king who dons Buddhist robes. There is a hole in it, and he sees and later repairs it. The same with the Tathagata. Seeing a person falling into hell, he bestows the precepts for good deeds. This is like a perfect king who, for the sake of beings, first speaks about the ten good deeds. Later, the time comes when he occasionally sees people doing evil. Then the king passes a law and roots it out. Having rooted out all evil, the king’s administration become perfect. The same with me. I have things to say, but I do not set laws first. Always, first, the monk does wrong; then, accordingly, admonition is given. And the people who love the Way are pleased to practice accordingly. Such people can well see the Dharma-Body of the Tathagata. This is like the treasure of the wheel. This is how to understand causal relations well. Thus the Bodhisattva discriminates and explains the meaning of the four aspects. This is the causal relations referring to the Great Nirvana of Mahayana.

So “causal relations” here refers to causality in the sense of hellish karma. I chuckled at this passage because in the previous passage, the buddha will not stay in this world for a kalpa (or less) no matter how much the congregation begs. Now he says, if someone in his circle is a great sinner going to the lowest hell, then he’ll stick around to help that person avoid such a fate. So all the congregation has to do to keep the buddha around is be willing to commit a grave sin, such as murder a parent? I guess the buddha is banking on the idea that nobody would be willing to do such a thing.

Now let’s discuss the prohibition against eating meat. I moved this out of order because it’s a somewhat lengthy diversion, but maybe the following excerpts will provide some context:

Then Bodhisattva Kasyapa said to the Buddha: “To one who eats flesh, we should not give flesh. Why not? I see a great virtue arising out of abstention from eating flesh.” The Buddha praised Kasyapa and said: “Well said. A Bodhisattva who protects Dharma should be thus. From now on, I do not permit my disciples to eat meat. When receiving a gift of faith, think that one is eating the flesh of one’s own son.” Bodhisattva Kasyapa said further to the Buddha: “Why is it that the Tathagata does not allow us to eat meat?” “One who eats meat kills the seed of great compassion.”

I think even in the west, we are generally aware that the Buddhist concept of reincarnation includes animals as well – any being that can be called sentient. There are other classes of reincarnation as well, but I don’t want to get too far off topic here. The point is, the prohibition against killing applies to animals because animals also represent sentient beings wandering samsara in a lower rebirth. The goal for them is to simply life a peaceful life, pay their karmic dues, so to speak, so that they can once again pursue good karma. The compassion you have and nurture for people should be extended to animals as much as possible.

When one eats meat, this gives out the smell of meat while one is walking, standing, sitting or reclining. People smell this and become fearful. This is as when one comes near a lion. One sees and smells the lion, and fear arises. When one eats garlic, the dirty smell is unbearable. Other people notice it. They smell the bad smell. They leave that person and go away. Even from far off, people hate to see such a person. They will not come near him. It is the same with one who eats meat. It is a similar situation with all people who, on smelling the meat, become afraid and entertain the thought of death. All living things in the water, on land and in the sky desert such a person and run away. They say that this person is their enemy. Hence the Bodhisattva does not eat meat. In order to save beings, he merely appears to eat meat.

One hundred years after my death, all the holy sages of the four stages leading to arhatship will enter Nirvana. The age of Wonderful Dharma will be over, and there will appear the age of Counterfeit Dharma, when the bhikkhu will keep the precepts only as a matter of form, will recite only a little of the sutras and will greedily take food and drink excessively. What he wears on his body will be ugly and coarse. He will look wearied and show no dignity. He will feed farm cows and sheep and carry fuel and grass. His beard, nails and hair will be long. He will don priest robes but look like a hunter. He will narrow his eyes, walk slowly and look like a cat who is after a rat. He will always mutter: “I have attained arhatship”. He will suffer from all kinds of
diseases, lie and sleep on dung. Outwardly he will look wise, but inside he will be greedy and jealous. He practices mute like a Brahmin. Truth to tell, he is no monk, but only tries to appear as such. He is burning with perverted views, ever slandering Wonderful Dharma. I now set this rule of segregating one’s self from eating meat. If we go into detail, there will be no end of explanations. It is now time that I enter Nirvana. So I must dispense with explanations. This is “answering well what is enquired about.”

This prophecy is a recurring theme in the sutra – that the age of Wonderful Dharma will come to an end. There are many more evils that this passage listed that I am omitting, ranging from enjoying theater, to engaging in astrology, to playing the game of Go. A reader interested in checking out the full list is welcome to find them in Dr. Tony Page’s translation, and follow as many or as few as they like. To me, it doesn’t feel like which games you play or hobbies you enjoy are really what matters here. I’ve left the part that matters: you should be good to your body and mind, not abuse intoxicants, not claim attainment you haven’t, and practice authentically. Maybe it’s heretical to say, but the nature of the prohibitions feels less important than their throughline of “do not distract yourself from your authentic practice.” In the Zen tradition, they speak of “seeing your true nature.” This is impossible if you are constantly consumed by other activities. Therefore, rather than trying to obey these rules constantly, I try to focus on bringing in as many different parts of my life into my practice as authentically as I can.

The next major theme of the chapter I will gloss over because, frankly, I don’t think it’s that interesting. What happens is, Kasyapa asks the Buddha how, if he is and has been enlightened for innumerable eons, he appeared in this world, took a wife and then had a son. That seems like a lot of things that are on the list of prohibitions you gave from before, especially considering that the clan of Gautama is very wealthy and not at all ascetic. The Buddha spends a few pages going through his life, explaining which things he did are merely manifestations and not real in the first place, and which things he did as expedient means so that he could be part of secular life and therefore help more beings. Instead, I want to skip to the section on the Buddha’s “undisclosed storehouse,” referring to teachings that before the recording of this dialogue, went unwritten.

Then Bodhisattva Kasyapa said to the Buddha: “You say that you have an undisclosed storehouse. But this cannot be so. Why not? You may have privately-spoken words, but not an undisclosed storehouse. Consider a magician, with mechanical contraptions. One may see the motions of bending, stretching, and looking up and down, but one does not know that inside the contraption is a man who makes things proceed thus. But with the Buddha’s teaching, it is the opposite, your teaching enables all beings to know and see the truth.”

The Buddha praised Kasyapa and said: “Well said! The Tathagata, truth to tell, does not keep anything hidden. What the Tathagata says is as in the case of the full moon in autumn: open, bare, clear and pure, so that all people can see it. Dull people do not understand and speak of a secret in connection with it. The wise, understanding the matter, do not say that there is anything secretly stored away.

“Over the course of innumerable long kalpas, he stores wonderful doctrines and truths. He does not begrudge anything; he always gives to all
beings. How then can we say that he secretly stores them? He is perfect in Wonderful Dharma and lacking in nothing, allowing all others to see. How could one say that the Tathagata secretly stores things? He does not shoulder the mundane laws of all beings, but does their supramundane laws. But he does not hide such. Why not? Because he always thinks of beings as his own only son and expounds to them the unsurpassed Dharma. The Tathagata’s Wonderful Dharma is such that it is lovely throughout its entirety. So we cannot speak here of a thing hidden or stored away.

“For example, there is here a man who only has a single son. He always thinks of, and loves, this boy. He takes the boy to a teacher to be taught. Apprehensive that things might not progress quickly, he takes the boy back home. As he loves him, he teaches him the alphabet day and night very patiently. Yet he does not teach him grammar yet, because the child is small and is not up to such lessons. Now, the man finishes teaching the alphabet. But is the boy ready to be taught grammar? No, but also the man is not concealing anything, because the child is too young. So he does not teach him the more advanced matters. It is not that the boy is not taught because the man begrudges him the lessons. If there were any jealousy involved, then we might say he conceals things. It is not thus with the Tathagata. How could we say that he hides and conceals? If there were any anger, jealousy or begrudging, we could say that he is concealing things. The Tathagata has no anger or jealousy.

I feel that the passage is important and relevant for several reasons. The first part is very reminiscent of Chan, I feel you can see the influence here. In general, Chan writings like to emphasize that the dharma is accessible, pure or obvious, it’s that realizing it requires investigation to see. It isn’t hidden, or stored away, and there are tons of public cases of monks asking about the Buddha, the meaning of “Buddha,” the highest truths, previously undisclosed doctrines, and so on, all being rebuffed with essentially this message, but said in Chan’s usual idiosyncratic way. The second is that while this may be a very pretty sentiment, from a purely spiritual or philosophical point of view, it’s also a little silly meta-textually. Essentially the point of this sutra is to write down all the things that the Buddha hadn’t said before, including things like prohibitions for the coming “dark times,” according to the above prophecy. The writers of the sutra seem to be aware that this is an issue, which is why they write so much to explain these “plot holes.” Nevertheless, I’m willing to accept what the Buddha says on faith and not worry about these inconsistencies. I’m not fact-checking the sutra to see if it’s logically sound, I’m reading it for applicable wisdom or practices, noteworthy or influential passages, or things which are just pretty or poetic. That’s the point of the notes – just the good stuff here.

I want to skip ahead a bit now, and look at the topic of emancipation. Kasyapa asks the Buddha to explain what this really means. The Buddha spends almost the rest of the chapter giving examples of what it means to be emancipated in Buddhism, and qualities either of emancipation itself, or things experienced by the emancipated. I’ll collect my favorites.

True emancipation means segregation of one’s own self from all the bonds of illusion. If one truly attains emancipation and segregation of one’s own self from the bonds of illusion, there is no self, or nothing to conjoin as in the case of union of parents, as a result of which a child is born. That is why emancipation is birthless.

This is the first definition or explanation he gives, and I think it’s great. The Buddha goes on to say that this is why having parents is illusory and merely an expedient that is manifested to help other beings. It’s interesting because it’s true and also not true. We know that Gautama clearly had literal parents, but the Buddha spends great effort in this sutra explaining to us the difference between the dharma body which is his “true” body, and the body of illusion or the carnal body. He is birthless because the Buddha nature within us is birthless and eternal.

“Also, emancipation is “not being impeded”. This may be contrasted with summer, when one encounters the heat, and with winter, when one encounters the cold. In true emancipation there is nothing of any kind that does not appeal to one’s wishes. The absence of anything to impede one may be likened to true emancipation. True emancipation is the Tathagata.

This one’s an extremely common Chan sentiment – that enlightened beings are free to go anywhere under any circumstances without obstruction. I’m not sure if it’s a quirk of Dr. Page’s translation, but it’s a bit odd to say that there is nothing that does not appeal to one’s wishes. I don’t have the original text so I can’t look and comment, but usually we expect the opposite. Not that liberation is some alternate universe where everything is pleasing, but rather that a liberated being finds all conditions acceptable. Perhaps this is what is meant. In my own life, my practice has helped me come to tolerate the cold, for example. In the early days of practicing Zen, I would go out into the cold to sit for as long as I could bear, focusing on teachings of non-attachment and not choosing, trying to get to a single-minded point of concentration. At this point, I do not like the cold, but I am indifferent to it. When I have to walk between classes, it doesn’t bother me unless it is so cold that there is an imminent risk of exposure, which is quite rare. All of this is to say, I like the sentiment, but it deserves an asterisk about what exactly it may refer to.

“Also, emancipation cuts off all greed, all external appearances, all bonds, all illusions, all births and deaths, all causes and conditions, all karma results. Such emancipation is the Tathagata. The Tathagata is Nirvana. When all beings [come to] fear birth and death and illusion, they take refuge in the Three Treasures. As a result of the three Refuges, one gains peace. Gaining peace is true emancipation. True emancipation is the Tathagata. The Tathagata is Nirvana. Nirvana is the Infinite. The Infinite is the Buddha-Nature. Buddha-Nature is definiteness. Definiteness is unsurpassed
Enlightenment.”

Let me include a few more I like, and just sort of mash them all together, this is spread out over ~10 pages of the sutra. Readers of the Zen Record segment of this blog will no doubt see why I have picked the ones I have.

With emancipation, there can be no fighting or confrontation. It is peace and quietude. It is non-apprehension and non-joy. There is no dust or defilement, emancipation is what cannot be defiled. Emancipation is what cannot be seen or heard or held in one’s hand; it is without a carnal body and it is silence and quietude. It is not having any other place to dwell, it relinquishes all existences. Emancipation is water, moistening all beings. It is waveless, the great sea (of samsara) has waves which are extinguished at the other shore. Emancipation is this extinction.

I’ve written a few times on this blog about the metaphor throughout Buddhist and other forms of Chinese thought, between water and mind. This should be held in mind when reflecting on these passages here. The causes and conditions of the world that give rise to dependent origination are like waves, which are capable of coalescing to create peaks which we observe, and then they pass through each other and dissipate. Where does the peak go when the constituent waves spread out again and eventually dissipate on a still surface?

In Chan, there is a tremendous amount written about “raising complications.” These complications are necessary in order to get a correct view, but will eventually be discarded. The masters often say things like, “still, he’s gotten somewhere,” when such complications come up. When one first attempts to cross the great sea, one has to move about in the water, and this is going to kick up some waves, even if comparatively small to those of the whole world. Furthermore, samsara is filled with tremendous waves, both those created by us, and those created by those around us, and those created by shifting circumstances, causes and conditions. But all waves are eventually extinguished, be it elsewhere in the water or at the far shore. Moreover, it’s much easier to cross an ocean by letting the current do the work for you, rather than by trying to literally swim across it all by yourself. Perhaps the monks which have “gotten somewhere” have not yet reached the far shore, but found some small island in this sea at which they may rest. Perhaps the point of monastic life is to be an island in a great sea.

Our task is to find the current, and still our own waves so that we can make progress for ourselves, with as few additional disturbances as possible.