Skip to main content

Teaching You Zazen 11: What Is Right Faith

2007/10/7 9:55:19

Renovation Complete

Grand Reopening


Above we discussed right mindfulness; now let's discuss right faith. Faith can be broadly divided into two kinds: first, hearsay faith; second, verified faith. Human beings in this world basically exist in a state of hearsay faith. From the earliest education to the acquisition of everyday knowledge and the study of theories — all of it, at its root, does not depart from hearsay faith.

Some might say: what if something has been tested through practice — is that still hearsay faith? In fact, this still does not depart from hearsay faith. Because any practice-tested thing has a fundamental premise — the so-called problem of the identity of observation relative to the observer and the observed object.

A very simple example: you see the sun in the sky, and another person also sees the sun in the sky. How do the two of you prove that these two different people are seeing the same sun? Or rather, in exploring the question of identity, there is first a presupposition of identity. This presupposition of identity is that the basic premise of observation for two different people is identical — or put another way, they have an identical starting point. One of the most basic premises is the assumption that the fundamental physiological structures of observation in two people are consistent or isomorphic. But then, what observation can determine that the fundamental physiological structures of observation in two individuals are consistent or isomorphic? Obviously, this involves the problem of infinite regress of premises.

Then why do all people believe that, as long as one is human, the basic structural premise of observation is consistent? Because of hearsay faith. The indoctrination of the social community that humans constitute makes every person believe through hearsay that the basic structural premises of human observation are consistent and isomorphic.

All of human culture, philosophy, art, science, customs, and tricks begin from this foundation of hearsay faith. All people are merely blind, groping at an elephant. But this differs slightly from the usual tale of blind men and the elephant — perhaps because this elephant is a freak, with its trunk, legs, body, and ears all looking exactly the same, so that no matter which blind person gropes, they all reach the same conclusion. Thus all the blind declare: what we're groping is identical, our groping is identical, we are the same kind, we are such-and-such. Or alternatively, when all people engage in the act of groping the elephant, they all simultaneously develop the same bizarre disease — groping different trunks, legs, bodies, and ears, their sensations are all suddenly made identical. This is like having an absolute redirect command in a computer program: the moment the act of elephant-groping occurs, it absolutely redirects to the same output. But this absurd absolute redirect command in the program may be nothing more than a hacker's prank — just as everyone's death is nothing more than an absurd absolute redirect prank. In truth, there is no such thing as an absolute redirect of death.

Death is merely a kind of virus infection. But once this virus has been infinitely transmitted, all people come to believe through hearsay that death is absolute, that there is no antidote. What's even more laughable is that the author and transmitter of this virus is each person themselves. And birth is another kind of virus infection. This virus, that virus — in truth, where are these viruses? Just self-generated distinctions, nothing more.

Similarly, you hear that there is Buddha, and then you produce the reaction of believing or not believing. But whether believing or not believing, it's all hearsay-based belief or disbelief — merely talking about food. How is that the real meal? Those who claim they believe in Buddha are, in fact, no different from those who claim they don't believe in Buddha — just like two people who have never tasted Buddha Jumps Over the Wall arguing about its true color, fragrance, and flavor. They're all just food-talkers.

Three men make a tiger. All of human culture, philosophy, art, science, customs, and tricks are nothing but three men making a tiger. Sometimes, different subgroups of N people conjure up different tigers, forming different schools, doctrines, theories, classes, and interests, then attack, slaughter, torment, criticize, and hoodwink each other. And so on and so forth — that's all there is to it.

Hearsay faith, at its root, is superstition. Science is likewise a kind of superstition. Whether it's the assumption of the reproducibility and identity of observation, or the assumption of the verifiability of falsifiability — all of it is nothing but hearsay-based superstition. The so-called development of human society is merely the process of one superstition being destroyed and then another new superstition being born. If the progression from Earth-centered to Sun-centered to matter-centered, universe-centered, human-centered, and nature-centered is a continuation and mutation of superstition, then there is one unchanging center that has never changed — the center of the self. Everything is nothing but the pointless trick of that "I."

All hearsay faith, all superstition, has one most fundamental structure: it's based on "I believe," and this "I believe" is not derived from the "I" but from non-"I." The greatest of all hearsay faiths and superstitions is the binary structure of "I" and "not-I" that this hearsay-believing, superstitious "I" has split into. There is a most laughable form of hearsay faith and superstition: inflating the "I" into the absurd tricks of "the Greater Self," "the True Self," "No-Self" — as if, after "the Greater Self," "the True Self," or "No-Self," this "I" has been hoodwinked into something large, hoodwinked into nothing, and has become the world, the universe, the truth. "The Greater Self" is precisely the ultimate smallness of "I"; "the True Self" is precisely the ultimate falseness of "I"; "No-Self" is precisely where "I" has its root. All practices and searches for the so-called "Greater Self," "True Self," or "No-Self" are the most foul and putrid of all pointless tricks.

If someone tells you to believe in Buddha, that person is certainly a great demon. Why? There is no Buddha to believe in — what can be believed in is not Buddha. If you are Buddha, what Buddha would you need to believe in? If you are not Buddha, whatever you believe in is all hearsay faith and superstition — the "Buddha" you believe in is stinking dog shit.

The Buddha-demon is the hardest to slay. Buddha is the greatest of all demons. When you see Buddha, you must kill. Kill all Buddhas and all non-Buddhas — only then does it begin to resemble verified faith. And yet, has verified faith ever had an appearance? If even Buddha is not verified — how much less non-Buddha? If even Buddha is not believed in — how much less non-Buddha? Not verifying, not believing — this is verified faith.

Someone asks: those without faith who kill people like cutting grass — are they in a state of not-verifying, not-believing? Are they in verified faith? Hold on — you say those without faith who kill like cutting grass — which of them has no faith? Which of them isn't verifying something, believing something? Having faith, not having faith — both are still hearsay faith, still superstition. Unable to see through even non-Buddha — how much less the Buddha-demon?

Someone asks: to survive in reality, how can one possibly not verify and not believe? Time, the universe, history, everything in reality — all are castles in the air built by the shared karma of hearsay faith and superstition. Dragged along by this shared karma of hearsay faith and superstition, phantom karma arises in mutual succession and entanglement, and thereby one is played by the game. See through this, and only then can one, without being born into birth, without dying into death, play within the game.

Someone asks: is not-verifying, not-believing about becoming an immortal, or about extinguishing all one's sensations and perceptions? Anyone who asks such a question is a fool. When even Buddhahood is not to be attained, what rubbish immortal would you become? Are immortals not within the six realms of reincarnation? And even if you extinguish all seeing, hearing, awareness, and knowledge, you are still within hearsay faith and superstition, still within self-generated dust-shadow distinctions. Not verifying, not believing, not arising, not ceasing, not exiting, not entering — what is there that needs to be extinguished, that needs to be exited?