Zen

Today my foolish imagination has posed me a brand new question:

"Is the attainment of 'Zen' an attainment of Neutrality?"

This question is a bit of a problem for me because I actually don't know very much about Zen, save for that which I vaguely recall from "Siddhartha" by Hermann Hesse, which, so far as I recall, was all about becoming 'one' with a river. (I should probably re-read it).

After a brief bit of internet research to correct my ignorance I have discovered that the question I posed myself is extremely badly stated, since 'Zen' is, itself, a religion, rather than a state. It is, for anyone interested, a form of buddhism (as may be obvious) and it constitutes a way of life made up mostly of two forms of meditation, sitting and walking.

What I am really after, it seems, is "Bodhi". This is the name given to the state of 'enlightenment'. Following Buddhist ideals, one must grasp the 'perfections' (of which there are usually said to be ten, including 'serenity', 'generosity', 'virtue', 'honesty' etc), and the 'four noble truths' (which relate rather fascinatingly to suffering and the ways in which it can be battled). If one is succesful then one sheds all ego-centred consciousness and frees oneself from the cycle of life-suffering-death-rebirth.

Well, I'm glad I asked myself the question, that was a useful little exercise in education. Now, to analyse:

It seems to me key that if a man attains 'Bodhi' then he sheds ego-centredness. This is a fascinating concept for the philosophies of neutrality! The implication is that in this state a man is free of subjective consideration. This (theoretical?) state is quite remarkable. The ability to reason without subjectivitiy seems an impossible concept to me, but if it is true that 'Bodhi' represents such a thing then herein lies an answer to many of the questions I have so far considered.

In some ways it makes some sense. You spend years and years of your life devoted to extinguishing all acts of selfishness and promoting all states of detachment from suffering. (The stoics theorised at similar targets, but none I know of pursued them with this verve and determination). At the end of it, and only if you truly have devoted yourself to the act, some lucky few might finally detach themselves from subjective concern.

I consider this a worthy concept and not at all ludicrous. There is definite philosophick worth in it. However, it seems to me that the next leap of a consequent escape from the circle of life is ludicrous and represents the point at which this philosophick ideal becomes religion.

Truly, it seems to me, the attainment of 'Bodhi' may represent 'neutrality in life'.

It's all rather exciting really. Although, of course, excitement is far too emotive, and represents my ego's thrill at the possibility of personal enlightment. Therein lies a grave concern: in order to attain enlightenment, one must devote one's life to careful practice and meditation, but in order to complete the process, one must detach oneself from all personal drive! This paradox must be, I imagine, the stumbling block of many. I should suppose that it is the final test: having worked so hard all your life to achieve something, you must then inwardly accept that your own personal achievement of it is irrelevant (i.e. it wouldn't matter to you if you never did achieve it).

Interesting stuff.