Abbot's Teaching
Addiction — Sex, Drugs, Rock ‘N’ Roll
by Michael Zenkai Taiun Elliston Sensei
October 1, 2000
Originally presented in March, 1999 as one of the Second Sunday Zen Dialog Series
Introduction
My birthday was last week. The woman whose husband I am always reads me my horoscope on my birthday. Among other things it said “You will be described as ‘quixotic’.”, and “People often misconstrue your words ” and “You are unorthodox, to say the least.” Please remember these words of wisdom from the stars this afternoon.
Now when we give a talk about Zen, or listen to one, we recognize that everything of real importance that can be said about this Great Matter has already been said, and said eloquently, by historical or contemporary masters. Nonetheless, we must say something. This too is the dharma, or teaching.
Buddha is said to have had the gift of teaching — that he could intuit the level of discourse his audience could assimilate, and thus was able to teach the dharma to all, regardless of education, social class distinctions and customs, or intelligence. Of course, apprehension of the dharma is not dependent on any such distinctions; it is not elitist. And by the way, Buddha did all of this without benefit of writing.
I don't claim to have that gift, so my presentation may go under, not likely over, or perhaps right around, some of your heads. We will allow time for discussion at the end to clarify any confusion. We'll move fast, because there is a lot to cover.
Zen is always contemporary, and today we will attempt to discuss it in a contemporary context. That context is our contemporary, and cultural, concern with addiction. The presentation will examine addiction in three areas of human endeavor: “sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll”. It occurred to me that this contemporary expression really capsulizes a great deal of our everyday experience and our obsessions with it, as well as lending itself admirably to an exposition of the Buddha's teaching.
My talk today does not pretend to be a scholarly or technical dissertation on the medical or psychological model. And it is not intended as a “teisho”, to guide you to a state of direct understanding while meditating. Rather, I will discuss the issue of addiction in terms of everyday cravings, based on personal experience (sparing you the gory details), some recent news events, and a little research. We will not have time today to go into the depth perhaps warranted by each area, but I will follow with a talk focusing on each in the next three months. Today, I will attempt an overview and to shed the light of buddhist reasoning on these issues, from my limited experience of Zen practice.
While developing this talk, I sent an email to some of our Zen disciples, primarily those who are medically trained and are professionally involved in psychiatry, of which there are a half-dozen or so. I said:
My talk, which will last about forty minutes, will place addiction in the context of craving, in the buddhist sense. Three categories of desire and dependency will be discussed, under “sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll”.
The first will deal with ‘normal’ versus ‘perverted’ forms of sexual behavior (e.g. hetero- versus homo-), and suggest that all are forms of the existence of suffering; the second will include alcohol, coffee and tobacco, etcetera, and will suggest the premise that people abuse substances because they innately know that an end to suffering is possible; and the third will deal with lifestyle — ‘good times’ — wealth, consumption, power, status, etc. — as ways that people try to follow to bring about end of suffering.
The conclusion I mean to draw, stated simply, is that from a Buddhist point of view it is all addiction — and that it is useful for us to examine particular syndromes that we define as addiction — and those we don't — in the context of craving as a universal force. Our usual assumptions about the will to survive, and those things we do to ensure that we do, as given, ‘good’ things, will be challenged; while deviations (which may ultimately work against survival) will be presented as likely, even predictable, extensions of the drive of the self.
In the time available, there is obviously not going to be much depth here. I mean to present a sweeping generalization which goes against the current, or grain, of everyday contemporary views of this subject. In this way I hope to provoke some controversy, and, hopefully, introspection.”
Responses, which I include in their entirety, were instructive:
“I have trouble understanding that sex is anything but a natural human drive like such drives as eating, drinking liquids, sleeping, breathing, etc. It is how we use this very natural drive that is critical. I seem to remember a precept like "don't abuse sexuality." I don't understand that homosexuality (or bisexuality) is a perversion as you assert. I thought it was an alternative form of sexual expression practiced by a minority of persons. By your claim, breathing is a form of the existence of suffering and thus not breathing or suicide would alleviate suffering?
Second, on the drugs part, what is the basis of asserting that substance abuse results from the innate knowledge that an end of suffering (in Gautama's sense) is possible? Maybe addiction is the result of trying to get better experiences from substances that are potentially addictive. Maybe addiction is the problem?
The third topic has some real possibilities, as when you own a boat, the boat owns you. But all of these areas can in some form, with non-attachment, be raised to the path. Thus these lemons can, under positive circumstances, become lemonade.”
Remember my horoscope? The part about misconstruing my words? My reply:
“I didn't intend to assert any such thing about homo vs hetero sexuality — it's the addiction or dependency aspect that is germane here. From a Buddhist point of view, they are both aspects of the same attachment.
Regarding drugs and alcohol, I am suggesting that the notion that there is an underlying ‘positive’ impulse is a better framework for approaching what can be done about the dependency — namely, to find a drug-free way of coming to the end of suffering (of the self-inflicted sort).”
Another replied:
“I agree with your overall thesis about the generality of addiction and craving. A few thoughts about it:
1) There has been considerable research on craving states in drug addiction in animals, and they are associated with increases in dopamine levels in the brain. Of course these increases in dopamine are caused by the addiction, not the other way around. Craving, in drug addiction, is a physical and psychological thing caused by behavior. As one can learn it, one can unlearn it, too. Your behavior really does affect the brain!
2) I believe that one of the main things we crave is ‘experience’, i.e. excitement, stimulation, novelty. Whatever we have, we become used to and eventually bored with (it). So, we want more, different, better, new, etc to get a ‘kick’. This keeps us on the treadmill of ‘progress’ and prevents us from being satisfied with what we have. All advertising encourages the idea that we should be dissatisfied with what we have so that we get something else. Dissatisfaction is pervasive and encourages the craving for new things. This is one aspect of suffering.
3) While I agree with the idea that for some people sex can be addictive, I would not make a separation between ‘normal’ and ‘perverted’ sex because a) it isn't necessary, and b) it probably doesn't apply in the case of homosexuality, which is not considered an illness any more. The serious paraphillias, eg. rape, fetishism, sadism, etcetera, are really illnesses and I feel would be inappropriate to use as examples for a general audience.
Finally, Zen practice is compelling because it provides high levels of stimulation. By downregulating our baseline experience through practice of zazen, EVERYTHING by comparison seems stimulating. This is "beginner's mind" in which there really is nothing routine anymore; everything is experienced as fresh and new. For example, after you and I sat in Eiheji, I got up and walked to the veranda and was blown away by the roofs glistening with moisture. I'll never forget that sight. In the scheme of things the sight was "nothing special"——after all, what's the big deal about seeing a roof!
Sometimes I feel guilty at the gluttony of experience provided by Zen practice: food is much more exciting when one is really hungry, warmth much more pleasing when one is really cold, etcetera.”
And finally:
“I was interested in (the others’) comments regarding homosexuality. I interpreted your quotes around ‘normal’ and ‘perverted’ to mean that you regard these categories as somewhat spurious with regard to sexuality. I certainly don't believe you intended to imply that homosexuality is perverted, especially since I know your attitude toward it...But I was glad to see (their) cautions nevertheless. The vast majority of opinion is that homosexuality is not "normal", and this is the opinion of many tolerant people who tolerate it. What really would be unusual would be a statement that implied that homosexuality is as ‘normal’ as heterosexuality. In today's political climate, when much of the religious right wing's political hopes are centered around demonization of homosexuality, its adherents and its defenders, such a stance would go against the grain. But I understand that yours is not a political speech, and your audience is not there to be lectured on issues in the culture wars.
On the whole, I agree...that while there are certainly people who are addicted to sex (e.g., Bill Clinton or Don Giovanni), it is hard to think of sex itself as an addiction for most people. Rather...a drive like hunger that can be more or less fulfilling depending on the circumstances.
I'm interested in hearing how you play out your basic premise that ouraddictions are the actions we take, mistakenly, in an effort to end our own suffering.”
I hope what follows doesn’t disappoint. During the discussion period following intermission, we will ask you to raise any such thoughtful and challenging comments.
Zen Context
Remember the Buddha’s teaching in his first sermon, in which he outlined the Four Noble Truths? He posited the truth, examined it, explained what action he had taken and that we are to take, and what the result was for him and would be for us. All of his later teaching was founded on the Four Noble Truths. Only the Lotus Sutra and Heart of Wisdom Sutra contain teachings which transcend this first sermon.
It is sometimes said that Buddha was the first psychologist, in that he was concerned with our suffering; and, like a medical doctor, conducted a diagnosis and offered a prognosis for what to do about suffering. Let’s review briefly.
The First Noble Truth is that there is the existence of suffering in the world, and what we are to do about it is to fully understand it. Now since we tend to interpret the word “understand” in an intellectual way, I want to insert the phrase “penetrate through and through”, which is sometimes used in discussing koan practice (and which the men in the audience may already be relating to the subject of “sex”). Let’s be patient with our knee-jerk reactions — they, too, are the Buddha-nature. “Penetrate” the suffering of the world means not just accepting or understanding it, but fully embracing it, penetrating to its real form, or emptiness.
The Second Noble Truth, the origin of suffering, Buddha explained, is our craving – our own thirst. The image associated with this is that of the “hungry ghosts”, human spirits whose bodies are distorted into an extreme caricature of craving, with long, terribly skinny necks leading down to horribly distended bellies, their mouths wide open, seeking to consume any and all food they can get hold of, which is never enough to fill their bellies because it will not go through their necks, so they are perpetually dissatisfied, hungry. We can all feel this to a degree, though it is probably rare that anyone in this audience ever really feels hunger in the physical sense. Our hungers are of another dimension. We have the cravings we can aford to have.
What the Buddha taught is that we are to abandon, to relinquish, this craving, which is not only physical, but also the sticking, clinging mind of attachment. This is where the new age, self-help philosophy of “letting go” comes to mind.
But Buddha’s relinquishment is not just the letting-go of our attachments in the conventional sense of improving our behavior and attitude - becoming “better people” — but involves the letting-go of our own opinions of attachment, accepting our natural human tendency to feel them. We would like a simpler prescription — abandoning any such negative feelings (if we could just develop the “character”) and thereby not feeling them anymore. Would it were so simple.
The third Noble Truth is that there is a cessation of suffering — hey, it could happen — and that we are to realize this, in this lifetime. As opposed, for example, to waiting to be reborn into paradise. Buddha was nothing if not practical, and did not encourage his followers to gamble with their future.
The fourth Noble Truth is the transcendence of suffering — the Path, the Way, or all-encompassing method, to approach the cessation of suffering in everyday life. Articulated in eight dimensions, usually referred to as “right this” and “right that”. Right as opposed to “wrong”, we are accustomed to thinking — but that would be wrong.
I prefer the word “complete” — complete view or understanding, thought speech and action, livelihood, mindfulness, effort, and concentration. This is an apparently simple overview, perhaps off-putting at first blush, but it reflects the complexity of life when we realize that all eight dimensions are simultaneously, interactively connected to each other, like the eight points of a cube. There are twenty-eight — count ‘em, twenty-eight — pairs of relationships (e.g. between speech and action — “you don’t do what you say”) — plus sub groupings such as ethical conduct (speech, action, livelihood), mental discipline (effort, mindfulness, concentration), and wisdom (thought, understanding). Buddha taught that we are to cultivate this Path, and through it to authenticate the cessation of suffering in our life. This suffering we can regard as being of two flavors — natural suffering versus self-inflicted, or man-made suffering.
Out of this elegantly simple exposition grows the nearly endless logical and poetic extensions of the Buddha’s teaching into all aspects of existence, like the roots, trunks, branches, leaves and blossoms of a magnificent, all-encompassing tree. The tree is nourished by the balancing qualities of compassion and wisdom, which require the dissolution of the duality of self and other. The fruit of the tree is realized when we do what he did — awaken our way-seeking mind, fully embrace the Teaching, find the conviction to follow it completely to the source, and experience it directly as the truth; then we can remove all barriers that are impeding us and succeed finally to the original self-nature, which is inconceivable and beyond definition or limitations.
Addiction
It’s important to keep the Zen context in mind as we examine “addiction”. The conventional view of addiction presumably limits it to certain types of behavior, involving certain types of desires. According to Buddhism, however, all desire or craving may be regarded as addiction, including that for life itself.
For definitions of “addiction” and related terms we turn to the American Medical Association’s Family Medical Guide, Third Edition, published by Random House. The chapter on “Behavioral and emotional problems” opens with:
“There are many good reasons for hope for people who suffer from emotional disorders and mental illness. For example, there are new, clearer ways of diagnosing them...In general, if you are able to cope with your life during periods of emotional stress, you can call yourself mentally healthy. If you lose that ability you are ill, at least to some extent...Current ideas about the causes of emotional problems include environmental factors, chemical imbalances in the brain, or both...Some people are overwhelmed by minor crises such as marital arguments. Others retain their balance in much more difficult circumstances. Such mental health is not necessarily inborn. You can cultivate it in yourself and thus stand a better chance of coping well.”
I’d like to reinforce three ideas that are mentioned here — one, that “civilization conquers Us”, as Matsuoka-Roshi used to say; two, that we tend to have the problems we can afford to have (as opposed, for example, to people living in third-world countries); and three, that having and maintaining mental health is a matter of cultivation. This “cultivation” is Buddha’s prescription for the Eightfold Path, and is half of Master Dogen’s famous equation, “cultivation is authentication”, or “practice is enlightenment”. The goal of Zen is complete health — mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual. And it requires cultivation — hard work.
Zen, while it is “good for what ails ya’”, is not offered as a miracle cure. The most severe disorders, such as schizophrenia, in which the individual can no longer separate fact from fantasy, or severe depression, which is defined as an extreme emotional reaction to loss, may be helped by Zen meditation, but also apparently require medication and extensive psycho-therapeutic treatment.
It is tempting, however, to compare the symptoms of these disorders with those that we read about in the history of Zen, and perhaps experience in our own practice. This separation of fact and fantasy rings a Zen bell, does it not? And the concept of loss and gain — is that not central to the Buddhist view?
Another pair of terms we may want to define for clarity:
“A compulsion is an unreasonable need to behave in a certain way. An obsession is an unpleasant or irrational idea of thought that lodges in the mind obsess ional mental activity often leads to compulsive behavior.
At one time or another most people have minor obsessions and compulsions. One day, you may not be able to get a popular tune out of your head. You are obsessed with it. Or you may irrationally feel compelled to walk to work every day on the same side of the street. You may check several times to make sure you turned off the oven. However, when these thoughts and acts become so intense and persistent that they interfere with normal life, you probably need to get psychiatric help. In such cases the person has an obsessive-compulsive disorder.”
Sound familiar, anyone? From a Zen point-of-view, all ordinary, everyday activity can be viewed as obsessive-compulsive to a degree, as opposed to “mindful”.
Now when researching material for this talk, I came to the conclusion that its scope is hopelessly out of the range of a single lecture. I will attempt in the time remaining to hit the high points in each area, simply to set the stage for the discussion to follow, as well as the upcoming lectures in the Second Sunday Series, devoted to greater depth in each area. If you have any suggestions as to specifics you would like us to focus on, please bring these up in the discussion.
Sex
Sexuality is probably the one area in which the apparent inherent duality of our human condition, or at least our social existence, comes into sharpest focus. Sex is attractive but repulsive, serious and yet silly, tragic but comic. This is why a great deal of humor, as well as scandal, is sexual in origin. We live in a culture saturated with sex. "Sex sells", as the saying goes. This talk is not intended, however, to sell you anything, but to look at sex from different, Zen perspectives. For example: if anything is sexual, everything is.
The assertion that “if anything is sexual, everything is” goes against the conventional view of aspects considered sacred and those deemed profane. Sex is often entered in the profane column. Master Dogen wrote that by virtue of sitting meditation we can transcend the apparent difference between the profane and the sacred. This appearance reflects a belief, not reality.
The power of the dynamic tension of good versus evil is illustrated by the spate of televangelists preaching a stringent morality while (allegedly) practicing the opposite. It's as if the very belief that something is evil makes it irresistible.
This is not to hold up Zen as a shining moral example. It is just to point out that extreme dualistic moral beliefs inevitably lead to conflicts with behavior. Zen has no moral agenda, as such. There is no “stench of holiness” about Zen. Zen teaches us, through historical example, that redemption is possible for even the most wretched of beings. But this comes through direct awakening to non-dualistic reality. The basic attitude is to set aside all consideration of "right and wrong", then practice diligently. Morality follows naturally from awakening.
The elements of the Eightfold Path that we might most readily associate with our sexuality are those that comprise ethical conduct — speech, action and livelihood. The most relevant Precept may be the one we take as “Honor the body; do not engage in sexual misconduct”. “Misconduct” is the operative word here.
In the sixties I was in my twenties. That sort of says it all, doesn’t it? As a “child of the sixties” I partook of some of the sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll aspects of the prevailing culture of my peer group, as you may have. My brother-in-law was studying palm reading, and he gave me a reading. One look at my right hand and he said “You have an obsession with sex and an unhappy love life.” I said thank you very much. What would you have said? He was just a beginner.
But I had the good fortune to run into my Zen father, Matsuoka-Roshi, around 1965. Early in my relationship with Matsuoka-Roshi, I was going through a lot of melodrama in my relationships. My first marriage was heading for divorce and I had gotten involved with another woman. Sensei found this somewhat amusing, especially my agonizing over it. He declared, “Y;ou are used to this, so you need it. I don’t need it.” He was not opposed to divorce, and was not opposed to marriage. He often lamented, half-seriously, not marrying and having someone to take care of him in his old age. He scoffed at the prevailing fascination with sexual ecstasy, compared to the “orgasm in every cell of the body”, a description he related to Zen awakening. This is a strong description — please don’t misconstrue these words.
The idea he was getting at is that we form habits, and these habits themselves are habit-forming, self-fulfilling and self-reinforcing. They take on a life of their own, as it were. The body gets used to it, comes to expect and “need” it. Same is true of sex, drugs, or rock ‘n’ roll. According to the definition of withdrawal, even air, water, food, warmth and shelter would fit right in as “addictive substances”.
It may be helpful in establishing some needed distance from the subject of sexuality to “focus on defilement”, as Buddhist monks and nuns were encouraged to do. We might interpret this as taking the tragic view — recognizing that any individual we may find attractive is, like our self, a “stinking skin-sack”: full of bile, pus, phlegm, rotting feces and festering urine, etcetera. This is akin to remembering the “rest of the story”, so to speak, to which we are blinded by lust or “love”. We practice a “suspension of disbelief”, not only when watching a film or television.
For the same reason — establishing distance — we may take the comic, or perhaps the cosmic, view. Just picture any human sexuality situation that comes to mind, from Monica flashing her thong at Bill, to the man (or woman — this is not a gender-biased diatribe) on the street ogling the breasts, or the behind, of a passing object of affection. Then substitute the dogs, or better yet, the cows — those wonderful cows! — from Gary Larson’s now-defunct “The Far Side” cartoons — and you will get an approximation of how human sexuality must look from an unbiased viewpoint. I wonder if Larson has a set of sexuality-based cartoons to be published posthumously, in the tradition of Mark Twain.
Today, of course, we live in a society that is saturated with the obsession with sex, as illustrated by the scandal that won’t go away. From the New York Times:
The Scandal Lives On. The End Was a Mirage.
“What would it take to make it end?” Mark Russell, the capital’s resident political humorist, asks of the scandal story. “Saddam Hussein at Camp David. Or John Doe No.5. Fifteen percent unemployment by the Easter recess? Jane Doe Nos. 5 through 26 on ‘20-20.’” Mr. Russell pauses, as if at wit’s end about it all. “How about at the Academy Awards Elia Kazan names Charlton Heston as a Communist?”
Fortunately or not, depending on your viewpoint, there appears to be a light at the end of the tunnel of our long obsession with sex and its attendant obsession with youth — apparently, everybody isn’t doing it. A 1992 National Health and Social Life Survey of men and women ages eighteen to fifty-nine found that thirty-one percent of men and forty-three percent of women report little interest in or satisfaction with sex.
Consider celibacy — not for yourself, of course, but just for the sake of argument — the relinquishment of any and all sexual intercourse, perhaps even autoeroticism. Why do you suppose there has been such an emphasis on celibacy in the history of Zen? Certainly not because sex is considered sinful, as in other traditions. Although admittedly, there were some exotic theories and beliefs about the effects of celibacy and sublimation in ancient Asian cultures, which probably played a part in the evaluation of the benefits of celibacy.
My view is that the reason is more simple, indeed is simplification itself. In terms of training, it is a simplification to minimize, or eliminate from everyday life, the complex emotional entanglements that accompany sexual relations. Nuns live in separate quarters from monks. Of course, homosexuality may occur under these conditions, and it is just as entangling as heterosexuality. Sex is not unrelated to the Buddha’s Teaching, but better to put it aside while pursuing the Teaching.
In historical Buddhism, celibacy was generally the rule. In “Sex in the World’s Religions” Geoffrey Parrinder relates:
“The danger of women to monks was illustrated by some well-known advice said to have been given by the Buddha himself. His disciple Ananda asked: ‘How are we to behave towards women?’ The Buddha answered: ‘do not look at them.’ Ananda objected: ‘But if we have to see them, what shall we do?’ The Buddha said: ‘Do not talk to them.’ Ananda persisted: ‘But if they speak to us, what shall we do then?’ The Buddha warned: ‘Keep wide awake, Ananda.’
Good advice under any circumstances, don’t you think? He goes on:
“There were several reasons for the danger of women to monks. Sexual relations would bring attachment that would distract the monk not only from his vow of chastity, but from the search for liberation. Moreover, children might be born and family life would bring further ties. Monks therefore denounced sexual intercourse as ‘bestial’, and looked on women with fear and contempt.”
Since the Buddha’s teaching was not set down in writing for centuries after his death, it can be debated whether or not this was his actual teaching. The Buddha himself had fathered a son who, along with his mother, became Buddha’s disciples. But for the sake of argument, let us accept that sex has a downside. It is difficult to isolate a more central or more powerful desire, craving, or attachment than that characterized as lust. Even Jimmy Carter admitted to “lusting in the heart”.
In Shobogenzo, Master Dogen’s masterpiece, in several instances he gives a more enlightened view of the buddhist attitude toward the issue of gender and sexuality. In the chapter on ‘Prostrating to the Attainment of the Marrow”, he speaks of the attitude toward a nun who has attained the true dharma:
“Why should men be higher? Space is space, the four elements are the four elements, the five aggregates are the five aggregates, and women are also like this. As regards the attainment of the truth, both (men and women) attain the truth, and we should just profoundly revere every single person who has attained the dharma. Do not discuss man and woman. This is one of Buddhism’s finest Dharma-standards.”
Later he admonishes against treating others as sexual objects:
“Furthermore, nowadays extremely stupid people look at women without having corrected the prejudice that women are objects of sexual greed. Disciples of the Buddha must not be like this. If whatever may become the object of sexual greed is to be hated, do not all men deserve to be hated too? As regards the causes and conditions of becoming tainted, a man can be the object, a woman can be the object, what is neither man nor woman can be the object, and dreams and fantasies, flowers in space, can be the object. It is impossible to count all the possible objects; they say that there are eighty-four thousand objects. Should we discard all of them? Should we not look at them?. If we hate whatever might become the object of sexual greed, all men and women will hate each other, and we will never have any chance to obtain salvation.”
And points out that abstinence does not necessarily lead to liberation, and that the dharma of married life is no hindrance:
“There are non-Buddhists who have no wife: even though they have no wife, they have not entered the Buddha-Dharma, and so they are (only) non-Buddhists with wrong views. There are disciples of the Buddha who, as the two classes of lay-people, have a husband or a wife: even though they have a husband or a wife, they are the disciples of the Buddha, and so there are no other beings equal to them in the human world or in heaven above.”
The history of Zen may indicate to some a certain ambivalence toward the issue of sexuality. However, this should be regarded more as a nondual view. Prostitutes, for example, were revered by certain Ancestors as living examples of Kannon, the Bodhisattva of compassion. An admired and oft-repeated tenet of Zen is “Where the clay is great, the Buddha is big”, of “the passions are bodhi”, or “wisdom” based on insight into the non-duality of nirvana and samsara, or self and other. Those who held themselves above such passions were often ridiculed as lifeless, and not having the true dharma. Poems from Ikkyu Sojun, who lived from 1394 to 1481, are appropriate:
“A sex-loving monk, you object!
Hot-blooded and passionate, totally aroused.
But then lust can exhaust all passion,
Turning base metal into gold.
The lotus flower
Is not stained by the mud;
This dewdrop form,
Alone, just as it is,
Manifests the real body of truth.
Every day, priests minutely examine the Law
And endlessly chant the profound sutras.
Before this, though, they should first
Read the love letters sent by the wind and rain, the snow and moon.”
This shows Ikkyu’s profound sexuality was not limited to humanity, but that he saw all nature as mind, or true self-nature. In Three Zen Masters, by John Stevens, published by Kodansha international, it goes on to reveal other sides of Ikkyu:
“Early in this period, one of Ikkyu’s poems hints he may have taken a common-law wife (and, according to some accounts, fathered a child).
Exhausted with homosexual pleasures, I embrace my wife.
The narrow path of asceticism is not for me;
My mind runs in the opposite direction.
It is easy to be glib about Zen — I’ll just keep my mouth shut
And rely on love-play all day long.
Due to his popularity, in 1440 Ikkyu was called to serve as abbot of Nyoi-an, a subtemple of Daitoku-ji. However, he quickly grew disgusted with the sham and hypocrisy about him and abruptly announced his resignation with this verse:
Ten days in this temple and my mind is reeling!
Between my legs the red thread stretches and stretches.
If you come some other day asking for me,
Better look in a fish stall, a sake shop, or a brothel.
The red thread of passion refers to a sex koan first posed by the Chinese master ...(Shogen, d. 1202):
In order to know the Way in perfect clarity, there is one essential point you must penetrate and not avoid: the red thread of passion between our legs that cannot be severed. Few face up to the problem, since it is not at all easy to settle. But you must attack it directly, without hesitation or retreat, for how else can liberation come?
Ikkyu was one of the few Zen masters who took up (Shogen’s) challenge directly.
Follow the rules of celibacy blindly and you are no more than an ass.
Break it blindly and you are only human.
The spirit of Zen is manifest in ways as countless as the sands of the Ganges.
Every newborn is a fruit of the conjugal bond.
For how many eons have the secret blossoms been budding and fading?”
Perhaps a few words on the concept of perversion would be appropriate here. Somewhere I read that Buddha himself said something to the effect that lust is a snake amongst the flowers, and we are admonished to avoid “perverted” thoughts. However, let us not forget that flowers are the genitalia of the plant kingdom, displayed in flagrante delicto — and in all their glory — for all to see. Blossoming plants are engaged not in mere inter-species sexual intercourse, but across kingdoms! You may have read the John Barth novel, The Sot-Weed Factor. In it, one of the main characters is comically omni-sexual, going so far as to attempt sexual relations with moss.
Spring in Atlanta is an effusive demonstration of the sexual power of the plant kingdom. Pollen counts are reaching all-time highs as the landscape explodes in a riot of color. Does it occur to us that these extravagantly beautiful blossoms are the sex-organs of the dogwoods and azaleas? Are they “flagrantly displayed” solely for the purpose of procreation? When we consider the fecundity of nature, from pollen count to sperm-count, we can begin to appreciate the magnitude of the fundamental desire to be born. This is primal desire, which precedes birth and transcends death.
There are those who feel that certain sexual acts are natural, while others are unnatural, perverse, depraved, and even evil. This view usually includes the notion that forms of intercourse that lead to procreation are natural, and “good”, while those that don’t are unnatural, and therefore “bad”. This good and bad are moral judgments, usually based on a religious or ethical philosophy.
Sensei said to me one day, “Homosexuals are not bad men.” From a Zen point of view, heterosexuality and homosexuality are seen as differing aspects of the same attachment. True perversion is the regarding and treating of another as an object — denying the other their Buddha-nature, their innate spirituality. It’s not only sexual.
I received a letter from a disciple of a teacher in one of the Tibetan lineages. This teacher was a gay man, and had unintentionally but carelessly infected some of his disciples with the HIV virus. The writer of the letter was understandably upset by this, and in his rage he said a lot of unkind things, and advanced the argument that homosexuality was unnatural because it did not produce offspring, and further that the survival of the species was the underlying goal of sex. Since he claimed to be a Buddhist, I pointed out in my reply that the practice of celibacy over the centuries illustrates at least a historically prevailing Buddhist view of the importance of continuing the species. There is no quicker way to bring it to an end than celibacy.
Taboos associated with sex are usually related by their proponents to a scientific basis, such as the recessive-traits impact of inbreeding, or incest. How much of our repulsion is culturally based rather than rational (in the biological sense) is up for debate. We hear of tribal societies where our taboos do not hold, an extreme example being one in which the fathers are said to deflower their virgin daughters in public ritual ceremonies, though without impregnating them. Female castration is another.
Age-based sanctions vary from culture to culture, and in ours they appear to be related to a concept of innocence associated with youth. The perversion in the sexual attraction to youth seems to be associated with the concept of corruption of innocence. No one would deny that adults take advantage of children in cases of sexual abuse, and most find such behavior repugnant, as witness the raging debate over child pornography on the Internet. However, where the age difference is not so great, we begin to experience ambiguity. How old is too old, how young is too young?
Further, from a Buddhist point of view, there is no such thing as true innocence; the child comes into this world through desire, as you did. Sokei-an, the founder of the New York Zen Institute in the nineteen-thirties, caused a great deal of controversy when he pointed this out. In the fury that followed the sinking of the Titanic, with the inevitable attempt to fix blame, he pointed out that all who died in the tragedy were at least fifty percent responsible for their own deaths, as they were responsible for their own births. This was not a popular view, and it is difficult for us to accept today.
In Buddhism, there are said to be “pure” and “impure” actions, or “good” and “bad” behavior, which lead, respectively, and inevitably, to good and bad karma. But this pure and impure is not intrinsically moral. Pure and impure in Buddhism are much more basic than our human interpretation, and are related to duality. A pure action is one in which there is no separation of subject and object, no “I and thou”, or me and it. An impure action is one in motivated by a perceived separation of self from other.
Zen Master Dogen taught that while there is inevitable dissonance, or friction, between the ideal world of aspirations and the real world of limitations, as we find with regards to sexuality, this can be resolved through action. But this action cannot be based on any ordinary desire. As Matsuoka-Roshi taught, the desire that brings us to practice Zen is of a different order than the everyday variety — it is a desire for release from greed, anger and delusion.
Drugs
The grouping from the Noble Eightfold Path that we might most usefully associate with drugs is that of mental discipline — effort, mindfulness, and concentration. The Precept that relates most directly — Proceed clearly; do not cloud the mind with intoxicants.
This precept is not considered as grave as the others in and of itself — being intoxicated is not necessarily a serious problem — but intoxication supports the violation of the other precepts, in that one is befuddled and out of control. People take drugs or drink to end their perceived suffering — indicating that they instinctively yearn for the cessation of suffering — they just don’t know how to get there. Zen is the way.
Right away I can hear the thoughts running in the back of your heads — “...but what about the sake?” Zen teachers, contemporary and historical, have a reputation for loving sake, and Matsuoka was known to indulge in the “warm water of wisdom” — “hannya to”, on occasion. One morning we were walking to lunch after zazen, and after being out the night before, drinking sake and beer — with dinner. When I complained of a hangover, he said, laughing: “Not much wisdom here!”
Even Master Dogen had a rule that a monk must avoid the monk’s sitting hall if he had been drinking wine, and established a penance for monks who violated the rule. He also had rules against writing on the bathroom walls, by the way. Thirteenth century graffiti!
However, there’s a huge difference between drinking and alcoholism, though one can lead to the other. Some current state of affairs, as reported in the Atlanta Journal and Constitution:
“New studies tie a ‘huge unmet need’ for treatment of drug and alcohol abuse to societal costs. Substance abuse cost the state an estimated $7.6 billion in 1997 and...about 454,000 adults have serious substance-abuse problems. About 17,000 Georgia adolescents also need treatment.”
Perhaps you know and care about someone who is struggling, too.
A principle closely related to Zen, which runs through the AMA’s dissertation on disorders, is that of “dependence” — depending on drugs, alcohol and other substances of choice; or on others for diagnosis, prognosis and rehabilitation:
“Drug dependence, including alcohol dependence, is the compulsive, long-term use of a substance taken for pleasure, or to prevent painful effects of not taking it. Emotional disorders may result in addictions in which the person’s craving for a drug is uncontrollable. The necessity to have whatever it is that the addict craves prevents him or her from living a normal life. Some addictions can lead to serious illness or death. Three of the many types of addiction are singled out for discussion in the following...alcohol, drugs, and gambling.
Alcohol is a drug, too, but it is discussed separately because, although addiction to alcohol has some characteristics in common with addiction to other drugs, alcoholism is a particularly common disorder.”
We are all too familiar with the symptoms of alcohol addiction, but one further point is deserving of mention, in the context of Zen:
“Alcoholics often feel guilty about their addiction and may become irritable and aggressive. Another symptom is repeated assertions that they are giving up drinking altogether, alternating with denials that they have a drinking problem. Denial is the major defense employed by alcoholics.”
The effects of alcoholism are also all too familiar — personal ones such as cirrhosis of the liver, fetal alcohol syndrome and other related birth defects; but also social impacts such as traffic accidents, which are the leading cause of death in our young people, and 50% of which involve alcohol. Also included are battering and other violence in relationships, as well as general deterioration of livelihood at home and at work. Those of you trained in Zen can hear echoes of the Eightfold Path. Zen posits that we are all in denial about the true conditions of existence; the denial of the alcoholic becomes a logical extension of that same defense, or avoidance technique. To continue:
“A drug can be defined as a non-nutritional chemical substance that can be absorbed into the body. The word “drug” is commonly used to mean either a medication or something taken (usually voluntarily) to produce a temporary (usually pleasurable) effect. Sometimes, the two categories overlap.”
For those of us who are or have been addicted to, say, prescription painkillers, or know someone who is, that last is an example of breathless understatement. Part of the problem is the use of the word “medication” to name something which itself has harmful side effects on the body. It’s medicine — it must be okay.
Substances subject to abuse described by the AMA include amphetamines, barbiturates, cannabis, cocaine, opiates, psychedelics, and volatile substances. Others mentioned include nicotine and caffeine.
The description of treatment for these addictions also suggests a parallel to Zen practice — recognition of past karmic action, and cultivation of the Eightfold Path:
“Treatment is a planned, organized intervention to help the person in trouble achieve good physical and mental health and function well without resorting to alcohol or other drug use. Comprehensive treatment...usually consists of a complete physical, mental, and psychological examination of...emotional health, family situation, and occupational stresses. Next is dealing with the medical and psychological consequences of past drug use, as well as any related disorders, such as depression. Counseling...and the need to find positive alternatives to using drugs is a high priority.
Usually the sooner the addiction is diagnosed and intervention takes place...the greater the chances for recovery.”
This sounds a bit like what we go through in our zazen — sitting meditation — practice. The principles of “positive alternatives” and early intervention remind us of the early age at which many of the Ancestors became disillusioned with the prevailing conventional view of life, and took up the alternative of homelessness.
Other medical definitions of addiction which seem to resonate with our Zen experience include the causes of addiction, the nature of withdrawal, and the necessity of recognizing and admitting the need for help to overcome the addiction:
“People start taking drugs (including alcohol) for one of two reasons: either the drugs are prescribed by a physician to treat some physical or mental disorder, or they are purchased illicitly to provide a pleasurable effect, or to avoid or diminish unpleasant feelings or experiences, such as pain.”
Can anyone else hear the Buddha’s Middle Way here?
“O monks, these two extremes ought not be practiced by one who has gone forth from the household life — what are the two? There is devotion to indulgence of sense-pleasures — which is low and common — the way of ordinary people — unworthy and unprofitable. There is devotion to self-mortification — which is painful — unworthy and unprofitable. Avoiding both these extremes the Tathagata has realized the Middle Way”
Zen declares that all causes are conditional, so that it is useless to look outside ourselves for the cause of our suffering. All causes move in an infinite regression, and the first cause is not known. We, however, are unsatisfied with that answer, and want to find the cause, and fix it. We speak of substances that are not addictive, as opposed to others that are, and the latter are identified as the cause of the addiction. However:
“Whether or not a drug is addictive varies considerably, not only from drug to drug, but from person to person. Drugs can cause physical dependence, which means that your body gets so used to the drug that your body chemistry is actually changed...A drug is usually regarded as causing true physical dependence when its withdrawal causes a significant degree of discomfort.”
We had a group of a half-dozen or so medical doctors coming to the Zen center a few years ago. They were all in a halfway-house program for addiction, a couple of them for marijuana. When I exclaimed that this seemed impossible from my experience of pot, they explained that it’s not so much the drug itself as the addictive personality that becomes dependent on the drug of choice. They were coming to practice Zen meditation at the recommendation of their counselors because it promised to help them get through the critical withdrawal period, which the addict believes will never end without resorting to the drug again.
So the question becomes, how bad does it have to get before we can’t take it anymore? We go through a lot of discomfort in Zen meditation, and intentionally. We often say, “the worse it gets, the better it is”. This is not a form of masochism, but recognition that most of our reaction— to pain, for example — is just that: reaction. It is the interpreting and defining of experience as unpleasant that discourages us. When we persevere, we are pleasantly surprised to find that “this, too, shall pass.” It is all ultimately transitory, impermanent, insubstantial, and imperfect. Thus is suffering.
The suffering that often accompanies indulgence in drugs and alcohol is not limited to their side effects, as the following editorial confession illustrates. It is from The New York Times, by Elizabeth Wurtzel, author of Prozac Nation and Bitch: In Praise of Difficult Women:
“Some unfortunate things happened during my freshman year of college. A friend of mine was date-raped by an angelic-looking preppy boy who happened to be a nasty drunk. On the night this happened, my friend had imbibed copious amounts of alcohol, smoked some pot, snorted some coke and topped off this cocktail with a hit of Ecstasy.
Another sad incident was the day my grandparents came to visit and I slept right through it. I was out cold in some guy’s dorm room, recovering from the previous night’s rendezvous with liquor and assorted fancy plants. For the next 24 hours I could not be roused. My roommate, who had no idea where I was, entertained my grandparents with brunch at the student union and a tour of the quadrangle. After waiting a while for me, they made the four-hour drive back home.
Later, when my mother called in a rage to find out what had happened, I told her I had gotten a concussion when I slipped on the ice during a snowball fight. She chose to believe what she knew was a lie.”
Rock ‘n’ Roll
I am taking poetic license with the expression “Rock ‘n’ Roll” here, so if you were expecting an exegesis of the relationship of Zen to rock music, please forgive me. By rock ‘n’ roll I mean to represent the whole lifestyle attitude which may best be summed up by a line from the rock song Life in the Fast Lane: “Everything — all the time”. In the segment on drugs, we discussed the suffering of withdrawal, and asked the rhetorical question, “How much is too much”. In terms of consumption, we ask, “how much is enough?”
The dimensions of the Eightfold Path that I tend to associate with Rock ‘n’ Roll are grouped under Wisdom — thought and concentration. The Precept that seems closest is — Realize self and other as one; do not praise yourself at the expense of others. What began as a peace and love movement fell prey to the lure of the self.
The image of the sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll lifestyle took an ugly turn when a man was killed at the Stones concert at Altamont. The idealism of the early sixties was quickly co-opted by hype and money. Rock became a source of wealth, privilege, and a kind of freedom — life on the road, pampered like gods. The American dream of the cowboy who rides into town (via limousine), creates the heroic event, gets the girl (groupie), trashes the hotel, and rides (flies) off into the sunset, with no consequences.
Yesterday’s hippie then became today’s grandparents of yuppies who are raising a generation of stock portfolios, lottery-winners, and professional victims. Indeed, our motto for today might be: “Gratification delayed is gratification denied”. In spite of some movement toward simplicity, consumption is king.
Every year, the woman whose husband I am does something special for Lent, having been raised a Catholic. Let’s see a showing of hands. Last year I joined her in renouncing alcohol, processed grains, and sugars. This year we went further, into a Caribbean Metabolism diet, which is more extreme — mostly raw vegetables. It gives you an insight into the dependence on certain types of food which we call comfort food, none of which you can have on this diet. It makes you realize that your diet is a kind of addiction. Especially when you go off the diet, as we did for my birthday.
Let’s look at some recent reporting and editorializing from the Times:
“In Pursuit of Affluence, at a High Price
The adage that money cannot buy happiness may be familiar, but is easily forgotten in a consumer society. A much more persistent and seductive message is beamed from every television screen: Contentment is available for the price of this car, that computer, a little more getting and spending.
Over the last few years, however, psychological researchers have been amassing an impressive body of data suggesting that satisfaction simply is not for sale. Not only does having more things prove to be unfulfilling, but people for whom affluence is a priority in life tend to experience an unusual degree of anxiety and depression as well as a lower overall level of well-being. Likewise, those who would like nothing more than to be famous or attractive do not fare as well, psychologically speaking, as those who primarily want to develop close relationships, become more self-aware, or contribute to the community.
(The authors) said their studies provided a look at the ‘dark side of the American dream,’ noting that the culture in some ways seemed to be built on precisely what turned out to be detrimental to mental health. Americans are encouraged to try to strike it rich, but, ‘the more we seek satisfactions in material goods, the less we find them there,’ Dr. Ryan said. ‘The satisfaction has a short half-life; it’s very fleeting.’ Affluence, per se, does not necessarily result in an unsatisfying life. Problems are primarily associated with ‘living a life where that’s your focus,’...
Apart from its obvious implications for a culture that thrives on material gain, this whole line of research raises questions about the proclivity of some psychologists to analyze the dynamics of what is often called goal-directed behavior while, in effect, ignoring the nature of the goal. Likewise, it challenges homespun advice to “follow one’s dream,” whatever it may be.
These data strongly suggest that not all goals or dreams are created equal. According to the researchers, pursuing goals that reflect genuine human needs, like wanting to feel connected to others, turns out to be more psychologically beneficial than spending one’s life trying to impress others or to accumulate trendy clothes, fancy gizmos and the money to keep buying them.”
Which brings us to the subject of gambling, another growing facet of our culture, witness the lottery. Gambling is classified by the AMA as an addiction:
“Obsessive gambling is an addiction, not a compulsion. Gambling gives pleasure to the gambler, and many people enjoy an occasional fling at betting. Obsessive gamblers are people who cannot resist the pleasurable excitement...Unlike the casual gambler, those who are addicted to gambling no longer play primarily in order to win...they can no longer resist the constant repetition of periods of exciting tension...whether or not they are likely to gain anything from taking the risk.”
Here I would direct your attention to the three components mentioned — pleasure, excitement or tension, and risk. This seems not unrelated to the adrenaline surge that many report from extreme sports and other life-threatening activities. From a Zen point-of-view, these would all represent an extreme attempt, or effort, to “wake up”. Wake up from our daydream, to the reality of impermanence and impending death. Master Dogen asked:
“Now that you know the most important thing in Buddhism, how can you be satisfied with the transient world? Our bodies are like dew on the grass and our lives like a flash of lightning, vanishing in a moment.”
But most of us are lulled into a state of sleep-walking. One of our senior disciples emailed me recently:
“What I remember about Matsuoka-sensei the most was his frequent response to me: Dreaming, dreaming, dreaming! Whenever I made a particularly clever observation, comment or suggestion, he would just say: ‘You’re dreaming, dreaming, dreaming!” This has come to mean a great deal to me.”
So let’s all wake up! Perhaps a little tea and coffee will help!