Monday, 4 December 2006

What is a Good Self?

Following on from the last post it is apparent that this puts the knife further into the "self thing".

What is the self I keep asking myself, both unsure what it is and also amazed that I seem to be sure, but can't see why.

After the previous post I see that I have been still believeing in a "ghost" behind the scenes pulling the strings of my world. When I think, speak, have emotions, dream or whatever I have imaged that there is a secret self, unseen by the "outer" world who does all this like a tank commander running operations in his safe tank. Yet I have never seen this "ghost", nor do I have any reason to believe in it, I just feel as though it is there - that is after all what makes me "me".

In the last post I realise that all those things I thought where caused by my secret myself are actually myself. I am nothing more than my thoughts, my emotions, my feelings, my actions.

The very same things which other people judge me by, my thoughts, words, and actions are actually "myself". There is no hidden self in its "inner" world creating impulses which have effect in the "outer" world, because there is no "inner" world. Recaping the last post: the "inner" world is actually the outer-world-as-I-see-it, and if there is an "outer" world it is an imagination about a world free from "interpretation", free from subjective involvement, an objective world - which is a fantasy since we can't know that directly (without personal involvement). There is only 1 world - tat tvam asi (thou that is art).

So the "self" is plain to see for everyone. And this has a big implication on our behaviour and attitudes. I have lived very much hiding from reality, believing that inside there was a self which was misunderstood, which has bad/good things happen to it, which was free from the world around it. Yet now I see that this is an illusion.

You cannot be a good person and hide behind bad things - saying for example that you were forced to do them, or that you were justified in doing them. Bad things - be they thoughts, words or deeds are only bad things, and if you do them then you are bad - there is no escape to your "inner" world. Bad things only result in bad things, so you have no choice but to avoid bad things immediately, there is never reason to do them.

A good self on the other hand is one who has good thoughts, words and deeds. Most importantly it is a self who strives to be positive in its thoughts, words and deeds and to ignore negative thoughts, words and deeds. There is no good self hiding behind the scenes of a person, they are good only in their positive approach, emotions and attitudes.

So the search ends for me for an "inner" self, and the discover, liberation and revelation of such a self is believed to be a myth. There is only one process and that is to chose positive as often as possible, and to learn to ignore negative. The more we learn to avoid negative and replace it with psoitive the weaker negative becomes and the stronger our self becomes.

Thus faced with situations which make us angry, hateful, destructive, bitter, sad, unhappy, lonely, sarcastic, vindictive, revengeful, shy, frightened, greedy, selfish, unkind, cruel, thoughtless etc, i.e. whenever we are negative we have a job to do - to find ways of being positive to shake off the darkness, see things in a good way and see a path through to the light.

Such positive ways always exists because the "negativity" we see, the unpleasantness of such existence, is just our self being bad. And if our self can be "bad" and make our world unpleasant then it can also be "good" and we need to find that way through. Its the job of a knight, or soldier as the Protestant Christians imagine.

This is a powerful way of starting to turn against negative: when things turn bad we take it as a challenge and adventure to find the positive - remember all those movie adventures where heros head off into darkness to bring back light. Of course it is hard and perseverence is the key, not to give up.

There is no hidden self, damaged or bad pulling the strings - we exist only in the moment in what we think, say and do and so we can make instantaneous changes if only we can let go of belief in a solid "self" and identity holding us back.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

The more you understand our thinking, the more you find it difficult to talk about it. The purpose of my talking is to give you some idea of our way, but actually, it is not something to talk about, it is something to practice. The best way is just to practice without saying anything. When we talk about our way there is apt to be some misunderstanding, because the true way always has at least two sides, the negative and the positive. When we talk about the negative side, the positive side is missing, and when we talk about the positive side, the negative side is missing. We cannot speak in a positive and negative way at the same time so we do not know what to say. It is almost impossible to talk about Buddhism. So not to say anything, just to practice it is the best way. Showing one finger or drawing a roud circle may be the way, or simply to bow.

If we understand this point, we will understand how to talk about Buddhism, and we will have perfect communication. To talk about something will be one of our practices, and to listen to the talk will also be practice. When we practice zazen, we just practice zazen, without any gaining idea. When we talk about something, just the positive or the negative side, without trying to express some intellectual, one-sided idea. And we listen without trying to figure out some intellectual understanding, without trying to understand from just a one-sided view. This is how we talk about our teaching, and how we listen to a talk.

The Soto way always has double meaning, positive and negative. And our way is both Hinayanistic and Mahayanisitc. I always say our practice is very Hinayanisitc. Actually we have Hinayan practice with Mahayana spirit - rigid formal practice with informal mind. Although our practice looks very formal, our minds are not formal. Although we practice zazen every morning in the same way, that is no reason to call this formal practice. It is your discrimination which makes it formal or informal. Inside the practice itself there is no formal or informal. If you have Mahayana mind, something which people call formal may be informal. So we say that observing the precepts in a Hinayana way is violating the precepts in a mahayana way. If you observe our precepts in just a formal way, you lose your Mahayana spirit. Before you understand this point, you always have a problem: whether you should observe our way literally or whether you should not concern yourself about the formality which we have. But if you understand our way completely, there is no such problem, because whatever you do is practice. As long as you have Mahayana mind, there is no Mahayana or Hinayana practice. Even though it seems as if you are violating the precepts, you are actually observing them in their true sense. The point is whether you have big mind or small mind. In short, when you do everything without thinking about whether it is good or bad, and when you do something with your whole mind and body, then that is our way.

Dogen-zenji said, "When you say something to someone, he may not accept it, but do not try to make him understand it intellectually. Do not argue with him; just listen to his objections until he himself finds something wrong with them." This is very interesting. Try not to force your idea on someone, but rather think about it with him. If you feel you have won the discussion, that is also the wrong attitude. Try not to win in the argument; just listen to it; but it is also wrong to behave as if you had lost. Usually when we say something we are apt to try to sell our teaching or force our idea. But between Zen students, there is no special purpose in speaking or in listening. Sometimes we listen, sometimes we talk; that is all. It is like a greeting: "Good morning!" Through this kind of communication we can develop our way.

Not to say anything may be very good, but there is no reason why we should always be silent. Whatever you do, even including not-doing, that is our practice. That is an expression of big mind. So big mind is something to express, but it is not something to figure out. Big mind is something you have, not something to seek for. Big mind is something to talk about, or to express by our activity, or something to enjoy. If we do this, in our way of observing precepts there is no Hinayana way or Mahayana way. Only because you seek to gain something through rigid formal practice does it become a problem for you. But if we appreciate whatever problewm we have as an expression of big mind, it is not a problem anymore. Sometimes our problem is that big mind is very complicated; sometimes big mind is too simple to figure out. That is also big mind. But because you try to figure out what it is, because you want to simplify the complicated big mind, it becomes a problem for you.So whether you have a problem in your life or not depends upon your own attitude, your own understanding. Because of the double or paradoxical nature of truth, there should be no problem of understanding if you have big mahayana mind. This kind of mind will be obtained by true zazen.

US displaying its Imperialist credentials... yet again

Wanted to know the pattern of UN votes over Venezuela and then got into seeing if ChatGPT could see the obvious pattern of Imperialism here....