The Unconditioned
Kuden Paul Boyle
Forest City Zen Group
London, Ontario
In Zen we often hear or read about two teachings, one being “emptiness” and the other being “the unconditioned”. When we start getting into studying Buddhist teachings we learn that emptiness specifically means “emptiness of self or 'self-nature'”. When something is empty of self-nature, we are taught that it does not exist by itself, but rather the appearance and endurance of a phenomenon depends on causes and conditions. This teaching is given by Zen Ancestor Nagarjuna in his work, The Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way:
Whatever is dependently arisen
That is explained to be emptiness.
That, being a dependent designation,
Is itself the middle way.
Something that is not dependently arisen
Such a thing does not exist.
Therefore a nonempty thing
Does not exist.1
On the other hand, the Buddha also taught about “the unconditioned”. You can find references to the unconditioned in both early Buddhist literature, like the Pali Canon, as well as in Mahayana teachings. Another influence which can cause confusion is that there is a certain area of Buddhist literature, which seems to make certain phenomena as, for lack of a better word, “transcendent”. This is mostly found in Mahayana literature. For example, you can read in the Awakening of Faith, a text which was written in China, and had a strong influence on the development of not only Zen but of East Asian Buddhism as a whole,
Since it has been made clear that the essence of all things is empty i.e. devoid of illusions, the true Mind is eternal, permanent, immutable, pure, and self-sufficient;2
First, notice that the definition of empty is different. Beyond that, it takes hardly any reflection at all for a contradiction or paradox becomes apparent: If all things are empty, that is, depending on causes and conditions, then how can there be something which is absolutely unconditioned – permanent, immutable, and self-sufficient? Didn't Nagarjuna's verses just say that everything depends on causes and conditions of some sort or another? This was very confusing for me, and maybe it is for you as well. For the rest of this talk, I would like discuss my process of working with this question. I am not saying that I have the best or definitive answer. This Dharma talk is more like a reflection or diary entry in my journey in the Dharma, and how I tie my understanding back to zazen practice.
There are a few reasons for this confusion. Zen is an amalgamation of several different Buddhist schools as well as non-Buddhist paths, and the teachings of these various schools are not consistent. Another part of it has to do with the ins and outs of Buddhist intellectual history. Since I am mostly concerned with the question of how to understand the teachings in order to guide and deepen our practice, I don't plan to get into this aspect of the issue. We shouldn't need to be Buddhist scholars to practise Buddhism. On the other hand, it is easy to become confused and led astray if we approach teachings with a naive, uncritical “take it at face value” attitude. I believe each practitioner needs to find the teachings which resonates most deeply for them.
In practical terms, a big part of the problem comes from assuming what a term means. We assume that “unconditioned” means unconditioned, that is, not dependent on any conditions. It is useful realize a couple of related points: First, Buddhist [technical] definitions often have their own specialized meaning. Second, Buddhist terms are often short-hand or contractions of more unwieldy expressions. For example, when we chant the Heart Sutra, we say, “no eye, no ear, no nose, tongue, no body, no mind”. Does this mean that after studying Buddhism for awhile, that we need to remove our eyes, and ears, and so on if we want to be enlightened? Do Zen teachers keep a portable surgery kit handy to help people attain no eyes and no ears? The confusion can arise from misinterpreting what these words mean.
The way I approached “the unconditioned” was to read what the Buddha purportedly had to say about the unconditioned in the earliest Buddhist sources. Fortunately, in a section of the Pali Cannon called The Connected Discourses, there is a collection of sutras which deal with the unconditioned as a its main topic. So, what does the Buddha have to say:
And what, [monks], is the unconditioned? The destruction of lust, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of delusion: this is called the unconditioned.3
As is typical for many books in the Connected Discourses, the book starts with a definition, then is followed by a series of sutras which explain how to practise with the topic at hand. However, bringing our attention back to the Buddha's definition of the unconditioned, we can see that it is simply the absence of what is called in Zen, the “three poisonous minds” – greed, hate, and delusion. That's all. The way I read this passage is that “the unconditioned” is simply short hand for “unconditioned by greed, hate, and delusion”, rather than a phenomena which is absolutely unconditioned.
After reading a variety of Buddhist teachings, it seems to me that the Buddha was nothing if not practical. He was concerned primarily with doing practice, not making up a metaphysics or dealing with abstruse and irrelevant philosophical questions. So, a principle I use when I examine and try to understand Buddhist teachings are the questions: How can I practise with this teaching right now? How does this teaching jibe with my experience?
If I can't find a way to implement a teaching in practice, then I take it to indicate either that my practice is not sufficiently mature to apply this teaching, or that the teaching does not resonate with my practice. Sometimes it takes years, or a decades, if ever, to distinguish between these two possibilities. Right now, I can't find a way to practise with how the Awakening of Faith describes the essence of the true Mind, and it seems to me to be inconsistent with many other well established teachings of the Buddha. I don't have any experience with phenomena which are eternal, permanent and immutable, and I don't see how to practise with something beyond my experience. On the other hand, the teachings from Nagarjuna and the Connected Discourses make more sense to me and are not beyond my experience. Therefore, they provide opportunities for insight and a way to deepen my practice.
Another principle I use when approaching Buddhist teaching is to be aware of how I am reading them. In general, we can read a teaching in different ways. For me, the two most relevant categories when we are talking about “the unconditioned” are an ontological reading (interpretation), or a phenomenological reading. These two terms are fancy philosophical words which have the virtue of being succinct.
Ontological means having to have to do with a state of being. Normally, ontologies consists of positive assertions of “how things are”. For example, to say, “Marriage is between one man and one woman” is an ontological statement. Very often ontological statements are justified by identifying them with some sense “natural order” such as a deity or “True Reality” of “that's just how things are.” It doesn't take too much work to find an exception which invalidates an ontology. So, basing practice on ontologies lacks a certain stability. If you want your practice to be steady, don’t base it on some ontology.
Phenomenology, on the other hand, is a study and an attempt to describe an experience without necessarily acceding to an underlying ontology. With a phenomenological reading of a Buddhist teaching we just interpret the words to be a descriptor or an attempt to describe what a moment of experience is like rather than assuming it is asserting a state of being or an underlying ontology. Over the years, I have found that I get a lot more out of studying Buddhist teachings when I read them phenomenologically. However, I have also found that some teachings lend themselves more readily to a phenomenological reading than others. It is always useful, I think, to critically appraise your sources.
When we understand the term “the unconditioned” in an ontological way, we can be tempted to interpret it as a different level of reality which underlies and is unaffected by the fluctuations of our mind. This level of reality would be, in the words of the Awakening of Faith, eternal, permanent, immutable, pure, and self-sufficient. If we conceive that there is this different level of reality, then we can set ourselves up to try to reach or attain this reality. We can try to “go beyond” our conditioned existence which obscures this deeper level of reality of the so called “the Unconditioned”. In an ontological understanding, we presume the unconditioned level of reality exists in a continuous manner, independent of our experience. This view conceptualizes reality and creates a metaphysics of subliminal continuity. Ironically, clinging to this metaphysical scaffolding as a way to find stability is what propels us headlong into rounds of suffering.
In a Buddhist phenomenological understanding, we do not presume there is any other reality except for the one of our own experience. If we pay attention, we can notice, whether or not our mind is being affected, or conditioned, by the three poisons, greed, hate, and delusion. If we can notice what it feels like when we are so affected, we can also notice what it feels like when we are not affected, or unconditioned, by greed, hate, and delusion. We don't presume an underlying reality which exists before and after a particular moment of experience. It is unnecessary to answer (or even ask) the questions, “Where did greed, hate, and delusion go?” or “When will they return?” There is only our moment by moment experience, lived, as our true and only life.
Fortunately for us, zazen is an excellent way to investigate phenomenologically what the Buddha meant by “the unconditioned.” You can't really get it from a book or a dharma talk. In order to really penetrate the meaning of the teachings about the unconditioned, we must sit zazen. In zazen, we are aware moment by moment of our experience. We just sit practising being open to what arises, manifests, and ceases. It isn't necessary to surround your Zen practice with an ontology.
When sitting zazen, I have found it to be a good practice to try to maintain an awareness of bodily sensations. With regard to bodily sensations, the Buddha taught there were three types of bodily sensations – pleasant, unpleasant, and neutral. He also taught that each of these sensations have a corresponding underlying tendency – lust (greed) for pleasant sensations, aversion (hate) for unpleasant sensations, and ignorance (delusion) for neutral sensations. You can readily see the close correspondence between the underlying tendencies and the conditioning factors of the three poisonous minds. When we make use of this correspondence, it can open a way to practise with the unconditioned.
With this outline, we can see how we can practise in zazen with conditioned phenomena and the unconditioned moments of experience. I am not saying that you need to change what you do or do anything special in your shikantaza. These are just a few suggestions for what to be aware of. When an unpleasant sensation arises, don't try to avoid it. If you do try to avoid it, that's OK too. You can notice what your narratives and mechanisms are for trying to avoid unpleasant sensations and feelings. When we have a pleasant sensation, don't try to hold onto it, or try to prolong it. Don't fabricate a narrative around it. Eventually, you will see that fabricating a narrative around a pleasant or unpleasant experience is something extra we add to the experience of sitting. Ultimately, our coping mechanisms and narratives are driven by lust and hate, albeit they may be very subtle. Nevertheless, they are still conditioning our experience in that moment. The Buddha called this “conditioned existence”. In Zen terms, this is our mind is “moving”. The unconditioned is simply when these are lacking. The goal, however, is not to become “neutral” with regard to pleasant, and unpleasant sensations.
Working with neutral sensations is more subtle. We don't have any strong inclination to chase or run away. It is easy to get tricked when working with neutral sensations. However, in the absence of pleasant or unpleasant sensations, we can still notice how we manufacture a sense of “I, me, and mine”. For example, following the breath is usually not overly pleasant or unpleasant. It is a neutral sensation. We can notice that there may be a subtle narrative which creates a sense of the “I” breathing in, the “I” breathing out. We end up with a narrative of “I am breathing in , I am a breathing out.” This again is being dragged along by underlying tendency of ignorance. One suggestion is to cut out the “I”. How to do that?
When I first started giving zazen instruction, I used to instruct people that one thing they can do during zazen is to follow their breath. Now, I suggest to people to maintain an awareness of the bodily sensation of breathing in, and bodily sensation breathing out. This is a subtle but important difference. In the first way, there can be a conceptualized “I” doing the breathing. In the noticing of the bodily sensations of breathing, we can bypass the narrative tendencies and go directly to a pre-verbal experience. We can be ardent and fully aware of bodily sensations arising and fading away moment after moment. The unconditioned is the mind which is not buffeted, or blown around by the three underlying tendencies, but manifests mountain-like sitting in zazen when experiencing pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral bodily sensations. This is a path to the unconditioned, that is, unconditioned by lust, hatred, and delusion. The experience of the unconditioned is immediate and available in this moment. All you have to do is just sit there. Thank-you.
1MMK verses XXIV:18,19 from The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way: Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika, J. L. Garfield, 1995, p. 304. I've slightly changed the first line of the initial verse.
2The Awakening of Faith, translation and commentary by Y. S. Hakeda, p.42.
3SN 43(1) The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Samyuta Nikaya, Bhikkhu Bodhi, p. 1372.
Copyright, Kuden Paul Boyle, 2020