Suzuki, who was the Zen master who popularized the teaching of the 13th century’s Dogen via the Bastion of tradition San Francisco, offers thorough advice about Zen and attempts to describe to students the goal of it. The practicality of his advice extends outside of Zen though, and much of it confirms the Traditional view of Buddhism and can be of good use to a student of Tradition who is not otherwise interested in Buddhism.
Suzuki confirms Evola`s claim that Buddhism is not a religion: “Our practice has nothing to do with some particular religious belief.” Suzuki claims that regardless of other traditions one is loyal to: “Our practice is for everyone.” Similarly, Suzuki tells us that Buddhism has nothing to do with feeling a certain way about Buddha or his teachings. Rather, “Buddhism is not good or bad. We are doing what we should do. That is Buddhism.”
Buddhism, then, can be considered a practice that is beyond good and evil. Despite the prejudices of some of its followers, it must not necessarily be used to “improve the lives of all livings beings,” at least in the sense that they understand that phrase to mean.
In beginning practice, Suzuki informs us that the most important rule to remember is to “keep our beginner’s mind,” which means to not develop a feeling of ‘mastery’ to any of the Buddhist practices. One should instead maintain the original attitude one had to any teaching that one felt during one’s first encounter with it. According to Suzuki, “In the beginner’s mind there are many possibilities; in the expert’s mind there are few.”`
Like keeping this practice, a man of Tradition who has not fully committed himself to a doctrine can live by this teaching and by the Hindu idea of “All is Maya.” If the modern world is false and its features illusion, then it is pointless to hold prejudice against its aspects. Rather, we should drop our preconceived idea about certain elements or doctrines and instead see where the best possible positive, Traditional action can be taken in our lives. It is pointless to see a particular religion as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ compared to another one. Rather, all have fallen and are in need of restoration to their fullness.
“Buddhism is not good or bad. We are doing what we should do. That is Buddhism.”
I am puzzled by the appearance of the word ‘should’ here. Is it’should’ because of some moral imperative, or merely in the sense of ‘a prudential consideration’ that is if we want to achieve x, or y, or z ? Or is Suzuki just saying implicitly “Don’t ask questions!”
I have found Rhys Davids (Sakya) helpful in explaining the vocabulary of the early sutras. She notes that just as the symbols of the lamb and the cross are to Christians, the symbols of the way and the wayfarer are to the Buddhists. There is a call to man’s “will” and choosing according to Dharma (the ought to be of a doing), a man must will the better and best and choose to follow it. Man is in a state of becoming; the right wayfaring is a decrease in ills.
Rhys Davids points out that the central symbol of the way and wayfarer are often lost sight of and focus is placed instead on the noble truths and the eightfold path which are appendages, often reducing Buddhism to an absurd doctrine advocating the escape from the ills of the world. Rather it is a call to the will to be well via the wayfaring, so rather than retreat from the world, there is an enlargement of life, which I find in consonance with heroic ideals.
Evola writes that the new initiates were asked “are you a man?” and in those times man meant someone who had “latent yet astir the very divine, the highest, the most” (Rhys Davids)