Category Archives: Uncategorized

Augustine & Buddhism

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

I want to offer you a transparent glimpse of my interfaith perspective gained from my spiritual development as it has unfolded over the years and through my monastic experience both as a Christian and Buddhist monk. It has not always been a clear and concise path and may still remain so. For a true spiritual path has many of the same markers no matter the linage, faith, or set of beliefs.

One of my favorite Christian theologians is Augustine. I still quote him often in my Buddhist discourses and when I wish to authenticate a theological point. While he is one of the old guy’s, his wisdom is as bright today as it was 1700 years ago, at least for me.

With this in mind I want to try to bring Buddhist philosophy and Christian basic theological concepts together by using the philosophical work of Augustine as he writes in “Confessions” & “On Christian Doctrine” compared with “the Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha”. I admit this challenge may be more fitting for those educated in the classical method, but I find the similarities between these two bodies of work to fit into what I wish to convey that shows how either the Christian or Buddhist view can be used to confront some of the most often ask questions for those of us on a spiritual path as there is much in common.

My intent is to get others to think and relate to their beliefs from a philosophical point of view for a moment. As Buddhists we have a practice of meditation and contemplative thought. We have explored some very basic Buddhist themes and have encountered Buddhist thought from a Zen perspective. Now I would like to move on to set a foundation for future philosophical dialog between Christian and Buddhist thought and this approach may be adequate to the task. This is not a Buddhist approach, this is not teaching Buddhism either directly or indirectly; it is establishing, however, the framework so we can learn how others beliefs can directly confront the many challenges we face today in a global society and maybe work together to solves some of these unsatisfactory conditions within our own communities, and in the greater world outside our front door.

Let me present Augustine’s reflections on the interpretation of signs in relation to Buddhist perspectives on language and truth. For Augustine, the interpretation of signs was intimately related to his deciphering of signs of god’s love in the narrative of his own life. While in many ways Augustine’s perspectives conflict sharply with Buddhist principles, the play of similarity and difference can be illuminating for both traditions, if we keep an open mind. Continue reading

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

A Pragmatic View of Religion

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

When we adopt a pragmatic worldview of the problems of society, we generally do so from an intellectual and philosophical mindset, especially in the beginning. This does not have to be different when we come to consider religious experience and thought. From a pragmatic perspective we can use the thoughts on the subject from the pragmatists John Stuart Mill, William James, and Richard Rorty as a guide as we also bring our Buddhist thought and practice into the equation.

Richard Rorty as a 20th century pragmatist considered describing religious thought in terms of:

1 Placing aside talk about Truth and Reason, our only responsibility, philosophically and morally, is to our fellow human beings, not some “sublime dimension of being” or “ the starry heavens.”

2 This responsibility is “to make our beliefs cohere with one another, and to our fellow humans to make them cohere with one another.”

3 We examine our beliefs by how they are “habits of actions,” not on whether they represent the world.

4 What emerges is a utilitarian ethics of belief, which treats a belief as a habit of action.

5 Place into the context of the philosophy of religion, a utilitarian philosophy of religion must “also treat being religious as a habit of action.”  1

Any useful and positive thoughts on what it means to be a “religious individual” does not need to be different from secular or pragmatic understanding of other aspects of human moral and ethical conduct that is essential in cultivating a civilized society. Any religious practice, Buddhist or other, owes its moral obligation and responsibility to all sentient beings, not by strict observance of doctrine, scriptures, or legacy beliefs, but to intentional actions honed by serious practice of core humanist principles as guideposts. For Buddhists, these guides are to be found in the Four Noble Truths and practiced in the Eightfold Path of behavior that promotes human flourishing. Whether you consider this a religious endeavor or not is really not all that important. What counts are the lessons found in the Three Pure Precepts – Do no harm, do only good, do good for others. Which is Buddhism’s equivalent to the “Golden Rule”.

I rarely speak of religion in anything other then general terms, and only as a word useful for establishing relationships or dialogue between various interfaith groups and Buddhism. However, in a more pragmatic spirit religion as a subject might have some useful elements when we leave out the creation overtones that can quickly move the discussion into the weeds of misunderstanding. What is useful for me is to put aside any attempt to connect religion with ultimate truth which has no usefulness in terms of symbolism or metaphorical imaginings, but place it in the spiritual dimension that honors the human drive to find awe in the possibilities beyond common knowing. In other words, “religious action” becomes a practice of mindfulness that with ritual intent becomes a tool for awakening; the word religion becomes a verb.

Any consideration of a religious practice with the metaphysics gone may seem to many to be incoherent. For these people, religion can’t escape being a metaphysical reality that deals with what is beyond the natural realm and belongs to a “grater power”. For them there is no spiritual-life without a “knowing” creator. When we step out of the shadows of metaphysics, however, we can open up to a greater possibility without the shackles that restrain us to a belief that requires faith alone, to a spiritual practice that can open up our mind for experiencing the Universe as it is. Spirituality is nothing less than the thoughtful realization of how we are in each moment when we confront our mindful thoughts in a space without distraction, this expands the wonder we experience in our relationship to all things. Religious practices are but one of the private pursuit after these experiences. Spirituality is a component of Buddhism. Religion has a close historic and intellectual relationship with traditional philosophy when released from it’s metaphysical entanglements. While many atheists want to ban all forms of religious practices, not all agnostics share the same opinion for pragmatic reasons. Pragmatically, religious practice still has some value as a private pursuit for seeking the “spirit within.” Religion is a useful word for now as Buddhism works to achieve cultural authority. But is not necessary either. It becomes a word of choice, nothing more. A Buddhist spiritual practice does not transcend this world but opens up the possibilities of the human flourishing within. A sense of awe and wonder is also compatible with a naturalist, evolutionist view of human kind, and can take us beyond ourselves, no matter what we chose to call it.

1 An Ethics For Today, Richard Rorty Columbia University Press pg.46

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Confidence Trumps Knowledge In Our Practice

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

The Zen master Shunryu Suzuki said, “Instead of having a deep understanding of the teaching, we need a strong confidence in our teaching, which says that originally we have Buddha nature. Our practice is based on this faith.” This statement which comes form his book Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind got my attention. I have not thought of my practice in this way before. Not knowledge, but confidence is what we should cultivate is what Suzuki is stressing. This emphases on confidence over knowledge can be a strong agent for change. It asks the question, “Do we really believe what we know?“ I speak often about how Buddhist practice and study can be viewed from a philosophical, psychological, and spiritual perspective. As a philosophy, Buddhism is a very comprehensive and profound system of thought-processing. But traditional Zen practice is not taught or practiced with a great deal of philosophical explanations. Focusing rather on our personal experiences, the exercise of breath control and meditation, are considered more essential for coming to a realized state of body-mind.

I have not considered the term confidence before when expressing how one should consider their practice, I use other words. Although without confidence the student/teacher relationship is in jeopardy. What I like about exchanging the word ‘understanding’ to ‘confidence’ is that it places focus on the importance of acceptance of what we are learning as we practice. Not just on knowing by analysis something about Buddhist thought. It is more about acceptance, assurance, and certainty that the path we are on can achieve insight. That insight may also awaken the body-mind to the bigger picture of how we are in this world. We can be aware, but the subject of this awareness must transition into acceptance. When that happens we have gained confidence of its value, and our practice is strengthened as a result. Continue reading

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Red Bird On The Fence

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

Buddhist philosophy and spirituality are not mutually exclusive, but there is a real difference, especially in how we internalize them in our practice. The term spirituality for me refers to an individual’s solitary seeking for and becoming awakened to the deeper nature of the relationship between self and the greater reality of the Universe. Spirituality is about reflecting on the mystery of life. A mystery is beyond language to explain, no matter how hard we try. One reason we developed mathematical symbolism to express complex thought. It involves direct experience or realization of vast awareness beyond language to express. Spirituality carries with it a conviction that how we view the world around us is limited by our human limitations, and it requires some sort of spiritual transformation that acts as a catalyst for us to achieve an inner awakening in order for us to achieve our full potential. It is primarily personal, but it also has a social dimension. Spirituality derives from inner contemplation, and can be awakened at any time during our lifetime.

For thousands of years before the dawn of the world religions became social organisms, man’s spiritual life thrived. I can just imagine one of our early ancestors stepping out of his cave one dawn morning and encountering an intense sunrise. That experience could have sparked an inner awakened moment that many have caused intense emotions; emotions that all humans are capable of experiencing, even for pre-historic man. This human experience which underpins all genuine spiritual practice, is what the Buddha also experienced that special morning when he became transfixed on the morning-star; his moment of enlightenment. But we can also find similar stories of awakening to something special in the life of Jesus, Moses, and Mohammed. It is interesting that Siddhartha and the others experienced there life changing spiritual revelation when absolutely alone, and most likely in deep contemplation.

Our minds are awakened, or jarred awake, when we too begin to comprehend the significance of Siddhartha’s new worldview, as we begin to validate our experiences with those of an extraordinary man that lived 2500 years ago. It is therefore quite natural and appropriate that spirituality should become more primary in our practice as we grow in our understanding of the Buddhist teachings and discover more substantial and ultimate nourishment in the living reality of the dharma. We need the Buddhist teachings, yet we need direct inner spiritual development in order to strike a balance in our practice. A philosophical and academic Buddhist education are valuable carriers supporting an ethical and moral platform for our personal and community life, but they must not be allowed to choke out the breath of the human drive to seek spirit and wonder that acts as the driver for enriching the human hart. Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Master Dogen: A Pragmatic Mind

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

It doesn’t take long for anyone new to Buddhist inquiry to encounter the name and lessons of the thirteenth century Japanese Zen Master Dogen. He is referenced all the time in Zen/Ch’an publications today. He is a Zen superstar, and is credited for establishing the Soto Zen school. His work is referenced by both Chinese, Japanese, and contemporary Western Zen Buddhist teachers today as representing how important mindful meditation (zazen) and a common sense approach for a serious practice is. He is very pragmatic in his approach to Buddhist thought. “Useful and productive” seems to be an underling theme throughout his teaching. He, of course, had no notion of the term ‘pragmatic’. While the term has been around for quite a few decades, it is also a modern philosophical construction arising from the American pragmatic movement in the nineteenth and twenty centuries. But Dogen’s path to development of a pragmatic perspective to life, and his subsequent worldview, was one that he cultivated over a period of years, especially in his travels and study in China.

Dogen was one of the major leaders in the Kamakura period’s revitalization of Buddhism in Japan. It was not an immediate consequence of his influence on the cultural changes that took place during this dynamic period in Japanese history, but one that required decades to accomplish. These changes, and the new Buddhist schools that emerged, had either direct or indirect roots in China. These new schools, including what was to become know as Soto Zen, emphasized the practical actions to be undertaken by both lay and monastic students stressing individual practice that was supported by a Sangha open to all. It was no longer just a monastic practice that was required for coming to a realized state of body-mind. What was more important was establishing a strong student/teacher relationship. In order to do this, authenticated teachers were encouraged to make themselves open to those outside the walls of a temple. This was a revolutionary change. In the past, only the best educated and aristocratic families contributed to the monastic communities. In the type of militaristic culture Japan had at the time, it was only possible for the samurai class to participate in the traditional style of education like offered in monastic communities. There were exception, but they were rare. Dogen himself came from an aristocratic family, but early life circumstances provided him a chance to move away from what was expected of him and instead followed his developing awareness that was calling him to step on the spiritual path.

Dogen was driven to find answers to one nagging question, “If we are all enlightened beings, why is it so difficult to achieve this understand?” To get answers that could be useful and productive to his own practice, he decided to travel to China where he thought he would find a teacher that could work with him on this question. He was taking the bull by the horns, and his life would never be the same again. On this first trip to China he stayed for four years and worked on his meditation technique that was stressed in Chinese Ch’an practice over what was emphasized in traditional Japanese Buddhism in the thirteenth century. He experienced a breakthrough that was authenticated by his teacher. When he returned to Japan it was with a new pragmatic approach to practice that was outside conventional structures of his day, and placed emphases on personal experience that acted as the basis for self-realization when combined with a strong zazen practice. Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Karma: Where The Ideal Meets The Real

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

Karma is one of those terms that is in popular use, but interesting enough, not by many individuals that know anything about what it really is.   Most of the time when I encounter the term it is not how I have come to understand it’s meaning at all.  Karma is also know as the law of cause and effect.  As a Buddhist principle, it is know as Dependent Origination, or Relational Origination, or Co-dependent Origination.  So as you see, karma is know by many names.   Buddhism does not own the term.  What is most unusual, is that karma is not unusual at all.  It fact, it is in most moments evident when we know how to look at the world around us.  Karma is seen in action, and also what is behind action.  Karma is not linear, but is multi-directional.  In fact, it might be helpful to consider karma as circular.   When we think about interconnectiveness, we should think that karma effects all points of a single connection, and possibly throughout the net of connections.  When you come to think about it, when we turn on a light, switch on our computers, or turn the ignition key in the car, we demonstrate the karmic consequences of these actions.

Everything in the material world acts in accordance with this law.  Nothing is caused by chance.  Nothing.  This is also the case with our minds.  Every thought we have, every word we say, every intentional action we take, creates a cause.  Over time these causes ripen to become effects.  Time being a relative term.  Our thoughts emerge as words; the words we use can manifest into actions; these actions develop into habits; and our habits hardens into character.  We should watch our thoughts and their results with great care, and let it arise for the compassionate concern for self and others.   Remember the adage: “As we think, so we become.” Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Can Metaphysics Stand With Contemporary Science & Technology?

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

When we contemplate the tremendous gains science and technological capabilities have given modern man, a capacity to reach beyond the limitations our planet has imposed on the pre-technological age, it might be said that science may be challenging the long held and deeply entrenched notion of the nature of “creation” which has always been based on metaphysical thought, theology, and the development of cultural myths.    That nature being a belief in a “creator-god”.   Once what seemed to be a mystery relative to how the Universe came to be and functioned, may now be explained by our understanding from the study of physics, astronomy, biology, and earth-sciences as well as other academic disciplines.   A good example of impermanence and how change comes to effect the human thought process by the way.  It is still important that we understand that a scientific view of the universe is yet another point of view.

In the 21st century we are not even close to overcoming the universal mysteries, even if it were possible considering the limitations of the human species.  Yet, many are convinced that a good chance exists that science will ultimately resolve enough of the puzzle of the unknown that it would leave very little ground for a god as we have come to define it.  We only need to look at how modern science has narrowed the sphere of influence that religious institutions have enjoyed over the centuries in setting “universal-standards” of how the universe is.    I include some Buddhist tradition’s ancient beliefs that still survive into the modern age.  As we learn more about how science is informing us of how the Universe is, there is little need to look outside of it’s boundaries for spiritual direction.  I personally find the more I understand how science is giving us a better picture of universal realities, my spiritual life is strengthened and my interests in metaphysical explanations is declining.  In fact, I am more suspicious than ever of supernatural experience.  But the big question that all of this engenders is, “can the sciences explain everything?”  Can science and spirituality sit side by side in harmony?

Even as I sit and write this, there are individuals in our government leadership that very recently have disavowed what science is “teaching”, like the big-bang theory or what we can learn from quantum physics, and offer their belief that the earth was only created 9,000 years ago.  They place their worldview on documentation written in the early period of the dark ages.  Then there are theologians and religious leaders that try to reconcile scientific discovery and theory to conform to existing religious text and argue that events like the big-bang if true must have been initiated by a god, or at least an unmoved-mover.  My own thought is that even the big-bang theory will be resolved in ways beyond current science’s ability to understand.  The Buddha always took a pragmatic approach on these issues by just saying it is unknowable and not important in resolving human suffering and how we can contribute to our own positive self-flourishing.  Yet it is interesting that some of the core Buddhist principles associated with Dependent (Relational) Origination comes close to reflect the understanding of quantum theory. Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Karma Is Empty Until It Is Given Value

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

I have been thinking a lot recently about karma and how we can learn through our Buddhist practice if it is possible to drive our own karma, or at least, what are we going to do about it.  There is no point in pretending that karma has now become problematic for Western contemporary Buddhism.  If we are honest with ourselves, most of us are not sure how to understand it.  This is something I have become aware of in my own teaching and through group discussions.  Karma has always been an essential element of the core Buddhist principle of mutual-causality, but we may not know how literally it should be understood using today’s language .  Karma is often taken as an impersonal “moral law” of the universe, with a precise calculus of cause and effect comparable I suppose to Newton’s laws of physics.  This understanding, however, can lead to a server case of “cognitive dissonance” for modern Buddhists, since the physical causality that modern science has discovered about the world seems to allow for no such mechanism.

Then again, some important Buddhist teachings make more sense to us today than they did to people living at the time of the Buddha.  What Buddhism has to say about “no-self”, for example, is consistent with what modern psychology has discovered about how the ego and self-nature is constructed.   In some aspects Buddhism can fit quite nicely into contemporary ways of understanding.  But not traditional views of karma.  Of course, this by itself does not disprove anything.  It does, however, encourage us to think more deeply about karma.

There are at least two other problems with the ways that karma has traditionally been understood.  One of them is its unfortunate implications for many Eastern-centric traditional Buddhist cultures, where a split has developed between how the Sangha is defined.  In most of the East, and in many Western Centers as well, the Sangha is considered divided between the monastic community and the laity.  Although the Pali Canon makes it quite clear that laypeople too can achieve an awakening, the main spiritual responsibility of lay Buddhists as popularly understood in the East,  is not to follow a life of purposeful isolation behind walls themselves but to support the monastic’s that do, and by doing so gain merit.  By accumulating merit they hope to attain a favorable rebirth, which for some offers the opportunity to become monks next time around.   From my way of thinking, this approach makes Buddhism into a form of spiritual materialism, because Buddhist teachings are being used to gain material rewards.  The result is that many Sangha’s and their supporters are locked into a co-dependent relationship where it is difficult for either partner to change. Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Paradox of the Modern Man

“It is a strange paradox indeed that modern man should know so much and still know practically nothing.  The paradox is most strange because men in other times, who have known less than we know, have in fact known more.”

Thomas Merton from The Ascent To Truth

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Is Renunciation Necessary In Order To Become A Buddhist Monk?

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

In all of the Buddhist books I read prior to stepping on the practice-path I learned that to become a Buddhist monk it was necessary to leave the householder life and in a sense become homeless.  The English word for this is renunciation.  We renounce one way of life and take up another.  This concept was not new to we as I already took that path many years ago as a Christian monk.  In fact, it is not as hard as it seems if you have the attitude and personal inner vision that is necessary to walk the monastic lifestyle.  In the beginning at least, it is the same no matter your spiritual affiliation.  I say this from personal experience.  The interesting thing is that all of the Buddhist literature that sets renunciation as a requirement for following a monastic path comes from the legacy and historical teachings from an Asian culture that supported the monastic realities.  These realities interconnected both the laity and monks together in a mutual-causal relationship.  Western Christian monasticism took a different structure in that the religious were supported by the Church (institution)  and separated from the lay community by intent.  As Buddhism moved to the West, and Westerners took up Buddhist monastic training, many emulated the past by creating monasteries for that purpose modeled on how the “Asians did it.”   As a result, these monastic training centers have produced spiritual leaders that have engaged a style of Western Buddhism that have advanced cultural authority that will cultivate the ability for Buddhism to move into a more mainstream acceptance along side the other spiritual traditions, in time.   As would be expected in our American culture, innovation is being explored in order to find different methods for achieving the same expectations by creatively redefining how the Buddhist monastic experience can be practiced that challenges the necessity for renunciation.

Let’s explore the role of renunciation as it is reflected in a contemporary context by first looking at the subject historically.  In order to do this we first must look to the East.  In the Mahayana tradition, we must understand how an individual is motivated to step on the monastic path.  While it is not necessary to be a monk in order to follow the Bodhisattva path, monks and nuns do so by taking Bodhisattva vows.  Monastic’s (I will use this term to mean both monks and nuns) take up a formal practice driven by a need to serve others by living a life that has a better chance of subduing one’s self centered ego by using our relationship with others to achieve this goal.   We not only work hard to experience how to be free of our own suffering and unsatisfactoniness, but also help others to realize the same in themselves.  A balance is sought between surrendering worldly material objects and yet using the cultural tools that can bring about a productive and useful life for self and other.  In the Theravada tradition, the basic model of living is to become a  renunciant and live without personal possessions, not becoming involved with the world of finance, being celibate, avoiding unnecessary distractions of the world outside so one can work to achieve self enlightenment.  Theravada live a simple life, though with different degrees of refinement.  They rely heavily on the lay members in their society to provide their basic needs in order to sustain a communal practice within strict guidelines.   It is believed that the merit earned in supporting a monastic’s practice will have direct influence on  one’s own karma.  In the Vajrayana tradition, renunciation supports the inner-mind-state by creating a life free from external concerns so one can remove themselves into the quiet space necessary for their own awakened development. Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized