[sarasaraseda]

Dear friends,

Soto Zen priest Rev. Jundo Cohen has kindly given me permission to post an excerpt from a book he is writing at the moment. The title of the book will be:

"I DON'T BELIEVE IN BUDDHA!
(That's why I believe in Buddha)

A Guide for the Buddhist Skeptic"



I have a confession to make: I don't believe in Buddha.

It may be shocking for a Buddhist priest to say so, as shocking as hearing a Catholic priest say he "doesn't believe in Jesus". But it's true nonetheless. I am a Buddhist priest who thinks "Buddha" is largely bunk and baloney.

At least, I think there's a lot of "bull" to how Buddha is typically portrayed. I think many of the utterly fantastic Mahayana Sutra stories of Buddhas are ridiculous ... hyper-exaggerated ... just unbelievable! (meaning that they cannot be taken literally any more than children's fairy tales). The imagery is incredibly beautiful ... but the tale just incredible beyond credence, purely the product of human religious imagination. I think the image of a "Perfect Buddha" ... either in this world or some Buddha Land ... as a flawless being beyond all human weakness, conflict and ignorance ... is a fable, a religious myth. I think most of the old miracle filled stories are well meaning fictions, sometimes holy lies, and the golden statues and paintings of Buddhas are but depictions of exaggerated dreams.
............

One powerful aspect of Zen Practice is that [Buddhist Truths] can be true even if some choose to abandon much of the smoky incense, fancy dances and funny hats ... true even as we realize that many of the stories and koans are fabricated skits and set-ups with little historical basis ... true even if we do not believe literally in magical Kannon with 1000 hands and eyes. The profound Truth of this Way is not dependent on particular Indian, Chinese, Korean or Japanese ways, can be just as well lived with or without bells, drums and whistles. The 1000 hands and eyes of Kannon can be seen as our 100000000 human hands and eyes when acting with Compassion in tending to those in need, not dependent on whether Kannon is Kan-nonsence.

This Practice is Bottomless Treasure even as we come to learn that many of our beliefs, stories, koans, histories, lineages, Sutras and Suttas are no less fictional than Peter Pan. The Mahayana Sutras replaced the sometimes silly stories of the Pali Suttas with a bunch of other often even sillier stories ... yet the powerful Truths in each stand undiminished ... and the power of the Zen Way is that historical truth or fiction does not matter in the least. A fictional Kannon is just as compassionate and real as the one of legend.

In fact, Peter Pan speaks to the timeless child in all of us!

So much of Buddhist identity (modern understanding has come to see) is baloney. Buddha is often bull crackers, Bodhisattva tales mostly bogus. Nonetheless, Buddhist Truths are as real as real can be, and Buddhas and Bodhisattvas too (true in every drop of wisdom and compassion in the human heart)! Funny how that works, and the power of this practice is that it can easily hold such truth or falsity without loss of its vitality.
...............

Thus, Buddhas are but fables and lies, Buddhas are human aspirations, Buddhas are True Teachings, Buddhas are Whole and Complete beyond "full" or "lack" or "true" or "false", Buddhas live and breathe in the world when we live and breath Buddhas.


The Buddhist Path is Real


Liberation is Real


Buddha is Real



Any reasonable comments relating to the excerpt are welcome.


with kind wishes

Aloka

[dgdhgjjgj]

I dont want to talk bad about a man i never met before, But in my view that Zen priest has somewhere misunderstood the teaching of buddha in Zen tradition.

[fajerdoksdsaaker]

Unless a person practices, can appreciate, or has a working understanding of Zen, Jundo Cohen's statement here won't resonate.

I agree with much of what is written in the section quoted above. It seems necessary for it to be expressed this way. A lot of what passes as Buddhism has degenerated into rites and rituals having nothing to do with the teachings of the Buddha. So many bells and whistles with few exercising real effort along the path. The superficial has in some communities and circumstances become more important than deep realization. Metaphysical speculation, magic, and the supernatural have replaced appreciation of this moment, human ability, and the unadorned.

This book excerpt resonates with me, and I'd like to see the finished product once it's written.

[PilotJargon]

I've spoken to Jundo Cohen online and he seems a nice, caring and very spiritual man - I can say without a doubt he's also one of the coolest and at the same time a very Zen master style exasperating man in the sense that he tries to get you to work things out for yourself. I've read Dogen and some of the Pali Nikayas, I see no conflict between what Shakyamuni Buddha and Dogen teach, but then again maybe I have some slight appreciation of Zen and as Abhaya says I (kind of) get it.

I can relate to what Reverend Jundo is saying above - its just the way Zen teachers talk out of both sides of their no sided mouths.

[Xiciljed]

Even though I practice at a Tibetan center, I'm kind of in the same boat as this priest. I found a lot of the stories to be simply unbelievable, especially when the talk turns to deities, though I've been told that those deities aren't meant to be understood as separate entities, but whether aspects of your mind. Either way, thanks for the post Aloka-D, I look forward to reading the book when it's released.

[adariseediups]

At least, I think there's a lot of "bull" to how Buddha is typically portrayed. I think many of the utterly fantastic Mahayana Sutra stories of Buddhas are ridiculous ... hyper-exaggerated ... just unbelievable! I didn't read the entire quote but just the first para. What I don't get is, why is he looking at fantastic Mahayana Sutra stories and then complain that they are just "fantastic Mahayana Sutra stories."

He has to look beyond some of the elements that got added to the teachings later to make it more appealing to the masses, to find the essential core, which is not a mere fantastic fairytale.

as a flawless being beyond all human weakness, conflict and ignorance ... is a fable, a religious myth. Not sure how he defines ignorance here but if he means that the Buddha was not omniscient, then I agree with it. But isn't it a fundamental mistake say that lobha, dosa and moha, which cause most human flaws existed in his mind?

[JAMES PIETERSE]

I think Cohen is getting mixed up about the notion of emptiness. Whilst the Buddha and his teachings are empty of inherent existence they still exist as interdependent entities. If the Mahayana Sutras are too fantastic to be believed then perhaps one should stop pretending to be a Mahayana Buddhist and stick to the Pali cannon and earlier sutras. I think it is an accepted part of the Mahayana Buddhist Dharma that a fully enlightened Buddha is omniscient by nature but of course we are free to take this as true or not.

[Lerpenoaneway]

I do not see how Jundo Cohen is getting mixed up about the notion of emptiness or denying that the Buddha and his teachings exist as interdependent entities. He is simply questioning the fantastical add-ons, and doing so in the typical "iconoclastic" manner of a Zen teacher. For those only accustomed to the teachings of another school, it may be hard to swallow.

Many of the Mahayana Sutras are quite glorified and rife with self-ornamentation. There is no denying this. To me, a Mahayana practitioner who recognizes this and approaches their own practice with a critical eye is comfortable enough with their Mahayana practice in order to see some of its shortcomings and work toward overcoming them, rather than pretend their way is absolutely flawless, only their way is best.

To assume that it is an accepted part of Mahayana that a fully enlightened Buddha is omniscient by nature is to mistake Mahayana for a monolithic and homogeneous entity, which it is not. Although I'm not familiar with his other work, I think Jundo Cohen demonstrates this well in the above quote.

[Eromaveabeara]

Not sure how he defines ignorance here but if he means that the Buddha was not omniscient, then I agree with it. But isn't it a fundamental mistake say that lobha, dosa and moha, which cause most human flaws existed in his mind?

Cohen is like Stephen Batchelor, in not believing Buddha 100% ended greed, hatred & delusion. that being the case raises the question what they believe 'liberation' to comprise of?

[Sydrothcoathy]

Sacredness is in the eye of the beholder.

Rev. Jundo isn't saying anything that's not been said before, he's putting it out there pushing the boundaries to provoke thought and discussion.

Whether you agree with him or not don't judge him on a few paragraphs, there's a whole lot more to the man than that.

Baloney, non baloney it's whatever floats your boat folks.

Gassho
Gary

[iDzcs7TU]

Hello All,

Thank you for the very many comments, and interest in the book. Now, all I need to do is actually write the book!

I also posted this at Dharma Wheel, to explain a bit more where I'm coming from, and want to post it here too in case anyone is interested.

Thank you for maintaining this wonderful forum, and supporting the Dharma. Gassho, Jundo

===============================

Originally Posted by Astus If by common you mean that there are Zen teachers who talk ill of the Mahayana sutras, that is not a usual practice at all, and never was. It's equivalent of slandering the Dharma. The result of this is that his followers will not study the teachings and so fail to understand it. The idea that "Buddha was only human" - what is called "secular Buddhism" - is failing to understand the complexity and the meaning of Mahayana teachings about buddhahood.

Hi Astus,

I believe that the perspectives I offer will welcome people into the doorway of the Buddhist Teachings who would be otherwise alienated, distracted and driven away by a more "Sutra-literalist" and "magic-miraculous" presentation of the Buddhist Teachings and Practice whereby even the most fantastic of claims is accepted much as folks of that other religion might accept that the world was created in only 7 days because their literalist reading of their Sacred Book says so. Many people would be denied the beauty and power of the Buddhist Path without what someone like me presents which tells them to look past, and right through, all that possible hoo-haw and embellishment.

LIKEWISE, what I present may alienate, repulse and chase away many a Buddhist faithful who needs what some other Teacher presents, and a more "The Sacred Book says it, therefore I believe it" approach! Of course, for to each their own Path.

In fact, the boundless Buddhist World is certainly spaciousness enough to hold all of us, and we need each other. I would never say that it's "my way or the highway", or that the medicine I prescribe suits all patients. Far from it.

What is more, I am certainly not someone who seeks to reject all tradition and the value of every old story. Rather, I believe I seek to make many old tales and practices approachable to folks who would be quite skeptical of such things if taken on faith and face value alone, and try to help them see through to the underlying Teachings that shine through the surface appearance. An example of this is how I might present Kannon to some who might take his-her literal existence as Kan-nonsense.

I have heard from folks who have trouble incorporating many figures such as Kannon and Jizo into their Practice ...

I have some words I would offer both to people who say (a) these things do exist in a concrete way, and those folks who say (b) they do not. While both those extremes may be correct (only the universe knows for sure, and I remain an open minded mystic-skeptic), I have come to see "them" as archtypes, representing real characteristics of human life and (since we are just the universe) thus the universe.

In other words and in a nutshell: When we feel in our hearts and act upon love and compassion, thereby love and compassion exists as a real, concrete aspect of the world which our hearts and acts create. And since, in our view, there is no "inside" or "outside" ultimately, what is inside you is just as much "the universe" and concrete reality as the moon, gravity and the stars. That is "Kannon", in that way a real and concrete aspect and 'force' of the world. ... or the literal existence of hells and heavens when we die ...


Now, don't get me wrong: I believe that our actions have effects, and I believe that we create "heavens" and "hells". I see people create "hells" within themselves all the time, and for those around them, by their acts of greed, anger and ignorance. .I see people who live in this world as "Hungry Ghosts", never satisfied. I also believe that we are reborn moment by moment by moment, so in that way ... we are constantly reborn, always changing (the "Jundo" who began writing this essay is not the same "Jundo" who will finish it). Futhermore, I believe that our actions will continue to have effects in this world long after this body is in its grave ... like ripples in a stream that will continue on endlessly.

But what about those future lives, heavens and hells? Will I be reborn as an Asura or a cocker spaniel?

My attitude, and that of many other Buddhist teachers, is that ...

If there are future lives, heavens and hells ... live this life here and now, seek not to do harm, seek not to build "heavens" and "hells" in this world ... let what happens after "death" take care of itself.

And if there are no future lives, no heavens or hells ... live this life here and now, seek not to do harm, seek not to build "heavens" and "hells" in this world ... let what happens after "death" take care of itself.

Thus I do not much care if, in the next life, that "gentle way, avoiding harm" will buy me a ticket to heaven and keep me out of hell ... but I know for a fact that it will go far to do so in this life, today, where I see people create all manner of "heavens and hells" for themselves and those around them by their harmful words, thoughts and acts in this life.

And if there is a "heaven and hell" in the next life, or other effects of Karma now ... well, my actions now have effects then too, and might be the ticket to heaven or good rebirth.

In other words, whatever the case ... today, now ... live in a gentle way, avoiding harm to self and others (not two, by the way) ... seeking to avoid harm now and in the future too.
While such explanations of Buddhist Teachings may not speak to you or someone like you, they may speak to me and others who could not begin to accept such Buddhist teachings on faith and face value without skepticism. We can come to encounter the realms of Buddhism beyond/behind/right-in-the-heart of all argument over "true" and "false" ... and the truly magical and miraculous, not only in cheap claims of magic and miracles, but even in the most mundane.

Do I "slander the Buddha"? I cannot begin to conceive of a Buddha who could be slandered! :buddha1:

Zen folks have certainly had a love-hate (beyond all aversions and attractions) relationship with scripture, a finger pointing to the moon. Rinzai, while so often cherishing and teaching from the Sutras (as do I too, for what it is worth) described the twelve divisions of the Buddhist Canon as "nothing better than waste paper to wipe up privy filth. ' A similar iconoclastic statement was made by Rinzai's contemporary, Deshan Xuanjian, who called the Buddhist canon, "the census records of demons and spirits, paper [fit only] for cleaning running sores." (http://www.scribd.com/doc/53147551/R...ecord-of-Linji). Theravadan Buddhists have frequently declared that the Mahayana sutras are the fabrication of heretics or of the Evil One, and not the teachings of the Buddha, while Mahayanists have been quick to characterize both Sutras and Suttas they did not approve of as "lesser", "provisional" or "expedient means". Dogen, a great fan of the Lotus Sutra and other Sutras, was known to "rewrite" the contents to express his own view of Truth, and had this interesting critical dialalogue with his own teacher on the Surangama. He wrote in the Hokyo-ki of a conversation on this with his teacher, Ju-Ching, also not a Surangama fan, calling it "not as skillful as other Mahayana Sutras" (pg 6 and 7 here) ...

http://books.google.co.jp/books?id=mHJL5b6dRVUC&pg=PA6&lpg=PA6&dq=%22say+tha t+these+are+the+ancestral+teachings+transmitted+fr om+India%22&source=bl&ots=NqMzLEyWHr&sig=D0mKO34PZ P_RIvN_vvqFFgTxTyE&hl=en&ei=q4MrTsjlB4zjmAXkgvG5Dw &sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&redir_esc=y#v=onepa ge&q=%22say%20that%20these%20are%20the%20ancestral %20teachings%20transmitted%20from%20India%22&f=fal se

Gassho, Jundo

[videolkif]

If you rewrite the truth to fit you, then it is not the truth any more.

[RarensussyRen]

I suppose I agree. I mean, I don't believe Buddha was on vulture peak, emanating light, teaching gods. He might have existed or not. I don't particularly care. Buddhism puts forward an ideal that I believe could make the world a better place, so whether Buddha was real or not isn't a concern for me.

I'd be interested to see more, for sure.

Side note: I am aware that taking a secular approach to Buddhism makes some Buddhists uncomfortable, but The Buddha did prefer that somebody disagree with him if they did not experience what The Buddha claimed, as opposed to taking his word for it and just having faith.

[blogforloversxx]

If you rewrite the truth to fit you, then it is not the truth any more.

How do you know what is truth? I think it's fairly obvious that some of the Mahayana sutras have embezzled elements to them. To take them literally is to miss the point of the sutras. For instance the fact that I don't believe Avalokiteśvara existed or delivered the Heart Sutra doesn't in any way diminish the wisdom of that sutra.

[worldofwarcraft]

For a religion to work the Buddha who teach it with words has a heavenly power with those words, if someone change the words of a Buddha and then say this is my truth, then it is not a real religion/ cultivating way anymore. this is only my understanding of how the heavenly words work. its ok if someone dont agree with me

the thinker

[Jeaxatoem]

Thank you for maintaining this wonderful forum, and supporting the Dharma.

Thank you Jundo and welcome

[Oxzzlvpg]

Where I come from Christianity is strong. So many people place merit upon the fairy-tales of the bible instead of the realization of the true teachings. I guess that this is the way of man. To aggrandize his beliefs, to make them greater than the next. The truly wise can cut through the garbage and see what is worth being passed down through the ages and use them to benefit all of mankind.

[giftplas]

The truly wise can cut through the garbage and see what is worth being passed down through the ages and use them to benefit all of mankind.

Indeed. Well spoken.

[aaaaaaahabbbby]

The truly wise can cut through the garbage and see what is worth being passed down through the ages and use them to benefit all of mankind.

Yea I agree; this is nicely put. Complaining about textual fluff without looking at the essential core teaching is like chasing one's own tail.

[OccumCymn]

I don't think it is just Mahayana that has the fantastical elements. I was reading parts of the Digha Nikaya and basically we have moments where Buddha is visited by Brahma and Buddha speaks about his past lives where he lived for endless aeons in one incarnation.

I honestly was gripped with a lot of doubt after reading a lot of these things. It took me a couple weeks to get to where this excerpt from a book really sits with me.

I come from a Christian background and it took me a lot longer than two weeks and it's still happening that I can say I believe the teachings of Christ while I honestly don't even know if he existed historically or if anything we know about the historical Jesus is true.

This same spirit of finding truth amidst decorations of the truth though is something I feel I must lock on to because it's the only way my intellectual mind can swallow a lot of it.