Pluto
Cat Extremist
- Dec 27, 2020
- 5,046
"If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him."
The basic meaning of killing the Buddha is to disregard external figures, deities and distractions, even the mightiest. In turn, it is implied that one should proceed relentlessly until the true goal of revealing Buddha nature inside oneself is complete.
Zen monk Shunryu Suzuki says, "Kill the Buddha if the Buddha exists somewhere else. Kill the Buddha, because you should resume your own Buddha nature."
This famous quote about killing the Buddha is attributed to Lin-chi I-hsüan, the 9th century Chan Buddhist master. Chan Buddhism is the Chinese precursor to the Japanese Zen Buddhist tradition. Hence, the same phrase is popularly described as a Zen koan.
Going back further to the 2nd century, the Indian Buddhist philosopher Nāgārjuna emphasised śūnyatā ("emptiness") with his teachings. He taught that all things and all beings are empty of independent existence.
Nāgārjuna's teachings further described the "emptiness of emptiness". This starts to get paradoxical, since he is suggesting that his own philosophy is itself without substance. Hindu monk Swami Sarvapriyananda has described Nāgārjuna engaging in debate while holding no position on any issue, yet instead using sophisticated logic to cut down any positions presented to him by others.
Nāgārjuna
Importantly, the end result of all this ruthless negation is not nihilism, since nihilism is still a philosophical stance which will be cut down using the same methods. Even Buddhism itself can be negated in the same way. Does this make Nāgārjuna an anti-Buddhist? No, since even that is a position to dispose of. At this point, nothing remains; no ideas, no philosophy, no stance. And then, even that nothing is cut down. Confused?
Understood in its profundity, this has a major implications for religion and spirituality more broadly. The very word Mahāyāna (Nāgārjuna's branch of Buddhism) translates as 'great vehicle'. And like any vehicle, such as a carriage, religion/spirituality is merely used for travelling to a destination and can then be left behind. Note that this is not the same thing as declining to board the vehicle in the first place.
The implication is that after ruthlessly surrendering all possible ideas, conceptualisations and beliefs, the terminus of this subtractive process is the eternal, underlying Buddha nature. It is this 'leaving behind' of mental noise that is the practical purpose of all of this methodology. Even when it means leaving behind ("killing") the Buddha.
Critically, however, the finger pointing to the moon is not the moon. So if what has been presented here is taken as some sort of philosophical outlook, it too should be killed.
The basic meaning of killing the Buddha is to disregard external figures, deities and distractions, even the mightiest. In turn, it is implied that one should proceed relentlessly until the true goal of revealing Buddha nature inside oneself is complete.
Zen monk Shunryu Suzuki says, "Kill the Buddha if the Buddha exists somewhere else. Kill the Buddha, because you should resume your own Buddha nature."
This famous quote about killing the Buddha is attributed to Lin-chi I-hsüan, the 9th century Chan Buddhist master. Chan Buddhism is the Chinese precursor to the Japanese Zen Buddhist tradition. Hence, the same phrase is popularly described as a Zen koan.
Going back further to the 2nd century, the Indian Buddhist philosopher Nāgārjuna emphasised śūnyatā ("emptiness") with his teachings. He taught that all things and all beings are empty of independent existence.
Nāgārjuna's teachings further described the "emptiness of emptiness". This starts to get paradoxical, since he is suggesting that his own philosophy is itself without substance. Hindu monk Swami Sarvapriyananda has described Nāgārjuna engaging in debate while holding no position on any issue, yet instead using sophisticated logic to cut down any positions presented to him by others.
Nāgārjuna
Importantly, the end result of all this ruthless negation is not nihilism, since nihilism is still a philosophical stance which will be cut down using the same methods. Even Buddhism itself can be negated in the same way. Does this make Nāgārjuna an anti-Buddhist? No, since even that is a position to dispose of. At this point, nothing remains; no ideas, no philosophy, no stance. And then, even that nothing is cut down. Confused?
Understood in its profundity, this has a major implications for religion and spirituality more broadly. The very word Mahāyāna (Nāgārjuna's branch of Buddhism) translates as 'great vehicle'. And like any vehicle, such as a carriage, religion/spirituality is merely used for travelling to a destination and can then be left behind. Note that this is not the same thing as declining to board the vehicle in the first place.
The implication is that after ruthlessly surrendering all possible ideas, conceptualisations and beliefs, the terminus of this subtractive process is the eternal, underlying Buddha nature. It is this 'leaving behind' of mental noise that is the practical purpose of all of this methodology. Even when it means leaving behind ("killing") the Buddha.
Critically, however, the finger pointing to the moon is not the moon. So if what has been presented here is taken as some sort of philosophical outlook, it too should be killed.
