Recently I have been considering the origins of the differences between belief - based religions, such as Christianity and Islam, compared to the experience - based religions such as Buddhism and Gnosticism.
Broadly speaking I hold the opinion that both the Bible (specifically the New Testament as relating to Jesus) and the Quran describe, among other things, the personal spiritual experiences and insights of Jesus and Mohamed respectively...but that is all. I will state right now that I do not feel that either Jesus or Mohammed gained any spiritual insight the message of which is applicable to everyone else, nor do I think their experiences were one-of-a-kind and out of reach of an everyday person. That said, it is clear that both Jesus and Mohammed seemed to believe that their experiences were one-off, divinely inspired and that they represented the truth'. Or, at the very least, both men believed their spiritual insight was accurate enough to emphasize the message rather than the method. Both men have subsequently attracted large groups of worshippers. These believers hold the general opinion that both Jesus and / or Mohammed were some kind of intermediary between the secular and the divine. Jesus was promoted as the (literal) son of God while Mohammed is seen as a divinely inspired prophet. Their role was to conceptualize the truth of God and teach it to a wide audience who trusted that the divine missionary was indeed the ‘genuine article’. In this manner, there was no need for a believer to replicate the spiritual breakthrough both Jesus and Mohammed had and instead they have done and continue to be able to put their faith in divinely-inspired (as they see it) texts: the Bible and the Quran.
There are of course many interpretations of Buddhism but Zen in particular has maintained its distance successfully from any worship of person, idol or dogma for centuries, since its origins with the teaching of Bodhidharma and the mingling of Indian Buddhism with Chinese Taoism in the 5th century CE. It seems that Bodhidharma taught and practiced a method of 'wall gazing' which is not to be taken literally but instead refers to intense meditative practice and mental concentration. This amalgamation of Buddhism and Taoism came to be known as Ch'an in China, the forerunner of Zen. Ch'an in Japan became popular under the endorsement of the warrior class and took the name Zen. Zen means 'meditation'. Zen remains today a simple, if difficult and challenging, approach to having a ‘divine’ experience (satori, or realization). While pages and pages of writings remain with us and the corpus continues to be added to on a yearly basis by prodigious experts and laymen alike on the subject of Zen, those same authors are continually mindful in telling us not to confuse the written word with the truth. Zen remains at its core a method. There is no message as such. The Zen method – primarily the use of static meditation (zazen - seated meditation) and / or the solving of koan - has, over the centuries, remained an effective ‘finger pointing’. Both meditation and the use of a koan take you to where you want to go...neither is intended to be an end in themselves.
In essence the Zen method (though it is not the only way of achieving the same end) is concerned with granting enhanced right brain hemisphere access through quietening the left brain hemisphere, finally – or, more realistically, hopefully (no-one is saying this is easy…) – allowing the adept to grasp a moment of complete right hemisphere dominance (satori). My observations here stem from the reading of two people in particular: Julian Jaynes and Tony Wright. Julian Jaynes, in The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, traces a shift from right hemisphere (non-conceptual and ‘divine’ experiences) to left hemisphere (conceptual experiences) over a period of several hundred years since writing in particular became more widespread. Tony Wright’s history of consciousness is far more sweeping and argues that this process – the shift from right hemisphere dominance to left hemisphere dominance – has been going on for millennia and continues today, hence our general inability to access the ‘divine’ and why the pursuit of satori is so demanding.
I hold the opinion that Buddha originally recognized this and developed a methodology to bring his students back into contact with the right hemisphere. Unfortunately this original teaching was watered down (requiring as it did so much work and the renunciation of much of the everyday world) but was perpetuated by Bodhidharma, blended with Chinese Taoism and is now maintained in the Zen method. Zen is concerned first and foremost with the attainment of satori or, to use modern scientific terms, complete right brain hemisphere dominance for a brief moment of time.
While this teaching has remained at the heart of Zen and should, I hope, be obvious to anyone with more than a passing in interest in this spiritual practice, I would like to present an argument that in fact this process – this method – lies at the heart of both Christianity and Islam and provides the insight for the message of both Jesus and Mohammed. This method however has been, if not lost, certainly de-emphasized and replaced with faith in the message of Jesus and Mohammed for their respective believers.
Before examining this point in greater detail, I would say that while anyone can experience greater (and even complete) right hemisphere contact and / or stimulation of the pineal gland (the third eye - where spiritual / religious visions arise from), everyone's right hemisphere and pineal gland are slightly different. So while everyone can experience a greater sense of 'spiritual' insight, that insight will always vary from person to person. The difficulty of conveying this difference in experience is then compounded with the limitations that we all have in attempting to describe something that is non-conceptual. By definition, right hemisphere contact is beyond description yet in order to convey a sense of this contact we are required to return to the left hemisphere (the seat of our linguistic ability) to satisfy our need for communication. Furthermore, everyone’s left hemisphere is also wired in slightly different ways, further inhibiting our ability to describe right hemisphere contact in a completely uniform manner. A good example of this that will be familiar to martial artists is Miyamoto Musashi’s Go Rin No Sho. Musashi rejects ‘Buddhism’ maintaining that his insight and teaching is beyond this limitation (see Introduction, paragraph 5 in Victor Harris's translation: ‘To write this book I did not use the Law of Buddha…’)...yet when push comes to shove he is forced to use distinctly Buddhist terminology to convey a sense of meaning. For example, the final chapter is sometimes translated as the Book of the Void, and at other times the Book of Emptiness, thereby betraying the distinct Buddhist influence through the use of Buddhist terminology. While I have no doubt that Musashi's satori was different to that of Buddha (or Jesus or Mohammed) it is clear that he is as stuck as everyone else in attempting to describe it and is forced to use familiar, Buddhist-inspired wording. Unfortunately, the use of a common lexicon can create the false impression that everyone is having the same spiritual experience when in fact they are not. Each experience may share common factors as the overall functioning of the right hemisphere remains the same for each of us, but the specifics will always vary. While everyone's fingerprints share certain similar characteristics, each finger print is nevertheless unique. It is the same with the make up and functioning of our brain hemispheres.
Daruma by Miyamoto Musahi
Daruma (Bodhidharma) was the Indian Buddhist monk who played a major part in bringing Buddhism to China. Once in China Buddhist principles mingled with Chinese Taoism and produced Ch'an, the forerunner of Japanese Zen.
Musashi, though not alone, was influenced by Zen Buddhist thought and terminology and was ultimately unable to express his great enlightenment without recourse to Buddhism.
So, moving onto an examination of Jesus and Mohammed...
I believe Jesus gained 'enlightenment' while meditating in the desert (The Temptation of Christ) as described in the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke. This event as described in the Bible has all the hallmarks of full right hemisphere contact combined with increased pineal activity (the visions of 'Satan'). We can assume that Jesus was fasting, deprived of sleep, meditating / praying / engaging in introspection, dehydrated, suffering extremes of climatic change, and living in a boring environment (no stimulation)...all the hallmarks of the conditions needed to effect a shift to right hemisphere activity.
The Temptation of Christ
Ary Scheffer
Mohamed similarly began meditating in isolation and away from the comforts of everyday life (such as they were in his day...). In the case of Mohammed, he retreated to a cave on Mount Hira near Mecca where he began to have spiritual experiences and we can assume again that he lived in a similar manner to Jesus in the desert: fasting, sleep deprivation, lack of stimulation and so on. Undergoing a similar experience as Jesus he seems to have also shifted to full right hemisphere dominance while also having visions (of the angel Gabriel) indicating the activation of his pineal gland (most likely the result of the stress both men experienced living as ascetics). This observation is further supported in the case of Mohammed by his reported propensity to suffer seizures which were also probably the result of extreme ascetic practice further strengthened by sudden shifts in electrical brain activity from the left hemisphere to the right hemisphere and back to the left.
The cave Hira in the mountain Jabal al-Nour where, according to Muslim beliefs, Mohammad received his first revelation.
Both Jesus and Mohammed then appear to have gained full right hemisphere brain access and both appear to have undergone severe spiritual training (termed shugyo in the Japanese traditions – austere training that goes beyond mere meditation). Both men then faced the problem that has plagued spiritual teachers over the centuries: how do I convey an understanding of my non-conceptual experience to others who have not had the same insight and live in a conceptual world? Predictably, and again, not for the first or last time, both men fell back on a lexicon that was familiar to them and created a message somewhat similar to but nevertheless different from what had been taught before.
But this is where a serious issue takes root and where we notice a divergence between teaching the method and teaching the message. Although not the first to do so, both Jesus and Mohammed chose to preach their message at the expense of the very clear spiritual method they used to gain their insight. Both men seemed to have believed that they had gained insight into a universal message that was the same for all men at all times. The result of this was the requirement that a follower simply listen to and believe in the message. There was no longer any requirement for a personal spiritual journey, and certainly not one as hard and demanding as the extreme and lonely ascetic practices undertaken by Jesus in the desert and Mohammed in his cave. The method was of no more importance; the message was prime.
Compare this to Zen. While Zen has a growing literature it never undermines or seeks to replace the method required to reach satori. This isn’t to say discussion is neither encouraged or beneficial, but endless theological musing can never succeed direct experience. The Zen teacher and the method of meditation and / or using a koan remain fingers pointing to the moon, or the hidden truth that lies buried in your right brain hemisphere.
* Fasting
* Sleep deprivation
* Meditation
* Dehydration
* Climatic change
* Lack of stimulation
Those of you familiar with the likes of Morihei Ueshiba, Miyamoto Musashi and Yamaoka Tesshu will immediately recognize that these men – all men regarded as having had a profound satori - replicated many, if not all, of these conditions. Added to the list of what constitutes shugyo can be physical exhaustion and repetitive movement, both of which will be very familiar to any serious adherents of a martial discipline. All of these factors serve to tire and bore the left brain hemisphere and gradually force it into giving up conscious control of your consciousness...with the result being satori. This is a fundamental observation that informs my teaching of The Way of the Enlightened Zen Warrior.
Conclusion
I have argued that all people have the ability to gain full right brain hemisphere contact, leading to spiritual realization. This experience though varies in detail from person to person but each person in describing that event must rely on a lexicon that is inadequate. The result is that spiritual masters resort to reusing a limited selection of words constrained by their socio-historical context. The result of this is the apparent uniformity of experience where no uniformity in fact exists.
In the case of both Jesus and Mohammed these two great men, both of whom followed a prescribed course of ascetic discipline, gained full right brain hemisphere contact and subsequently described their insight using concepts familiar to themselves and others (a language predominantly inherited from the Jewish Old Testament in the case of Jesus and both the Old and New Testaments in the case of Mohammed).
However, once this description had been conceptualized it began to be taught and understood as 'the truth'. Both Jesus and Mohammed taught that understanding (and obeying) this truth in a conceptual manner was all that was required to assure entry into Paradise after death. Both teachers shifted their focus away from the method they used to gain spiritual realization and instead preached the message that adherence to the ascetic method had brought them.
I therefore conclude that Zen is a method leading the practitioner to his own inner truth while Christianity and Islam are messages leading believers to the conceptualized truth of Jesus and Mohammed respectively.
