I'm still looking for experiential affirmation through my meditation.
I don't appear to be able to get beyond this being a bugbear.
The more I read this, the more I saw this as an expression of yearning, for something that I really want, that I'm simultaneously trying to convince myself that I shouldn't want. A deeper experience of the transcendental. Because wanting anything in Buddhism is a craving, it's seen as problematic, spiritually speaking. And this struck me as particularly barmy. Yet even as I write this,I see myself forming a cage around this notion and branding it an 'unhelpful view'. And before I know it surprise, surprise, I'm manifesting some negativity towards being a Buddhist. I'm simply tired of this prejudicial labeling of experience, but that isn't really what this is all about. I can sense an evasiveness here, in fact I must confess this is my umpteenth attempt to write about this. What I was writing, or the way I was choosing to write about it, really wasn't quite nailing it. And this was getting to be quite frustrating as a process of expression.
Then I recently watched, quite a few times actually, an interview with Tyler Staton, a Pastor from Portland, Oregon, USA,on Seen & Unseen's You Tube channel. I've found him a quietly impressive person, who embodied an appealing clear headed spirit. What he talked about was the need for an experiential spirituality, and this has set off bells of recognition within me. There was one paragraph in particular I found personally relevant. It appeared to sum up where I have been and where I am
'for me it was a journey of quiet crisis, basically of getting a certain distance into the spiritual life and looking at the deepest wounds in my own life and saying you know there's patterns in my character and way of being that it seems like aren't missing one more bible study.....its not information, intellectual information I'm missing, its something deeper than that, that needs to be unwound within me, and also....I just began to see what I was experiencing wasn't matching what I was reading on the pages of scripture in ways that were increasingly troubling to me.....what am I missing, that was happening in the lives of the early church, because I want that...I want to experience their life. How do I begin to walk into that ? And that hunger set me on a journey.'
Though spoken from his devout Christian perspective, I found this also mirrored to an extent my own experience within Buddhism. I've also come to realise that whatever is absent from my spiritual life will not be found within the pages of a book, however intently I may study them. Something much more experiential is required here. But what the hell would that be? Since having asked that question I have been scrabbling around trying to find a way to best explore and write about this. How would you translate this 'experiential spirituality' into a Buddhist perspective? Intuition suggested that this may relate to different viewpoints between a 'developmental' and an 'imminent' view on the purpose of spiritual practice and its relationship with Enlightenment. Though some would say this is inherently a false unhelpful dichotomy.
The 'developmental' could probably be described as representing the traditional Buddhist approach. You learn the meditation practices, the devotional rituals, refine your ethics and study the Buddhist Sutras. These develop your awareness, spiritual qualities and states of consciousness that will move you inexorably over time, and often lifetimes, towards the state of Enlightenment. Sometimes couched as The Spiral Path as if this should be seen as a linear form of progression upward, like climbing a spiral staircase.
The 'imminent' appears in its most developed form in later Buddhism. It still utilises all the practices and study of the tradition,but doesn't envisage the progress to Enlightenment as linear or upwardly progressing. It believes Enlightenment is already here, present in us right now, but we are not yet fully awake to it. Terms like Buddha Nature and Buddhahood begin to be used to describe this imminent innate view of Enlightenment, and practice as an unfolding of our awareness of this in the here and now.
Into this I want to throw a third viewpoint that of Dogen the 13th century Japanese co-founder of Soto Zen. His view takes 'imminence' and gives it a profound philosophical shift in emphasis. He had a doubt about the whole 'imminent' approach, and it is one that those critical towards it use to this day. If Enlightenment is innate, what is the purpose of doing any spiritual practice ? Why practice anything at all, meditation, ethics or study, if you already have the awakened state within you? Doesn't this fly in the face of the Buddha's traditional teaching?
Dogen came up with a solution, one that is very particular to him. That practice and realisation, are not two separate things, they are not even two things intrinsically entwined, but manifestations of the same thing - Enlightenment. For Dogen practice is an outward expression of the innate Enlightened state. He creates a compound term 'practice-realisation' to describe how every moment of practice is an 'actualisation of the fundamental point'. He radically develops this concept further so that everything is in a state of 'practice-realisation' and to sit in contemplation helps unfold this awareness, allows you to experience ordinary life on a much deeper level. Now, this is what I believe 'experiential spirituality' means from a Buddhist perspective.
Dogen went to China to study Chan, which is the origin of Japanese Zen. Now Chan was itself a cultural cross fertilization between Buddhism and Taoism. A concept like Buddha Nature is very similar in its relationship between practice and realisation, to the idea of the Tao, as this innate and indistinguishable force present in life and nature. Dogen brings the latest development of Chan back to Japan, and through this further integrates it with a sympathetic relationship toward the forces of nature present in Japanese Shinto. Now a convincing case could be made that these insertions took Zen too far away from the traditions of early Buddhism, to remain in essence Buddhist. It certainly is less grounded in the core Sutra teachings. I would say it is still Buddhist in spirit, but not the orthodox letter of it. and I'm perfectly fine with that. I'm not too concerned about whether Dogen is orthodox or not. Does it feel a true or helpful perspective? Yeah, it does to me.
Then I read this appreciation of Dogen's approach by Norman Fischer that says it all really about what 'experiential spirituality' can be in all its intimacy.
'Dogen insisted that we all have Buddha Nature - that is we are already enlightened, we just don't know it. And because we don't know it, we live in a way that is destructive and that cuts us off from true intimacy....Dogen believed that we are not appreciating what life actually is..and then living it fully in every moment...step inside your life and let go all conceptual frameworks that alienate you from yourself, and from each other. Just enter life completely in this very moment. feel the awesome presence of what you can hear, see, smell, taste and touch right now. Become aware of emotions, thoughts, memories and dreams that flood awareness without getting hooked on them. Feel how, right now, human experience is truly awesome, and don't look for something to complete what is already complete. But most often, we don't believe that everything we need is right here, right now. We are always looking for something more than what is here - something that is missing.'
Yeah, tell me about it Norm.
THOUGHT OF THE WEEK
If we doubt the walking of the mountains,we also do not yet know our own walking.
It is not that we do not have our own walking,
but we do not yet know
and have not yet clarified our own walking.
When we know our own walking,
then we will surely also know
the walking of the Blue Mountains.
If there were an end to the walking,
the Buddha-Dharma could not reach the present day.