Recently Brad Warner mentioned an interesting insight he had into religion and its appeal, especially Christian radio. Brad wrote in part:
"They talk about how to live a moral life, how to deal with marriage difficulties, how to just be excellent to each other and so on. Some of the advice is even kind of good...But then just when I think everything's okay, they start slipping in stuff that's either just plain mean or simply bat-shit crazy. And then ZING! they're right back into talking about how to be a good person. And I'm like, where did that come from?...There are probably people out there who sincerely want to learn how to be decent human beings. Knowing of no other source of information on that subject, they get plunged into the bat-shit crazy stuff and end up associating being bat-shit crazy with being a good person."

He's right. The moral advice is mostly good, but the extrapolation of that moral advice is sometimes wacky. However, while I agree with Brad's observation, my experience is similar but from the opposite side of the fence. That is, I see a lot of what I consider bat shit crazy stuff coming from Buddhists, mostly in the form of liberal politics. I try to walk the eight-fold path, and I work at my vows. I'm sure other people do too. But I don't understand how a certain reverence for the Buddha dharma leads you into some left liberal nearly Marxist view of politics. I don't get it. But frequently I'm confronted with a conversational detour that begins with one of the precepts and then veers into "so therefore, anybody that doesn't love Obama and his policies is an ingnorant redneck."

Huh? You know it's true. Most America Buddhists are so far to the left politically that they can't even see the mainstream. In part that's fine. I don't want to outlaw anybody's views. I don't even care very much about CHANGING anybody's views. What I don't understand is the linkage between your Buddhist practice and your leftist politics. I don't see it. Why is there this identity politics thing going on whereby if you practice Buddhism, you're automatically assumed to hold the same liberal views? And yet that assumption is clearly there, as seen over and over by comments made during dharma talks, by comments on Brad's blog, and by the bumper stickers on the vehicles of my fellow practitioners.

I like Buddhism, but I don't like most Buddhists. To me the practice is about seeing the truth in all its unflattering reality, the truth uncolored by opinion or dogma. To too many of my fellow zazen buddies on the cushions next to me, it's all about being nice. Fuck nice. Let's find out what reality is so we can deal with that.

intention

We talked yesterday, since it was the first day of the year, about intentions and vows and that sort of thing. Decent discussion with some good points, but something bothered me and today I know what it is. The fact is that most of the participants who spoke had an unspoken understanding that intention is something like will or willpower. That is, you make up your mind to do something, then you do it. That's intention. There was talk of whether intentions were good or bad and that sort of thing.

But all that stuff misses the point because I'm not certain that the cause and effect relationship is correct. I think sometimes the act comes before the intention, or at least before we know what the intention really is. In my experience I find that I often have to do the act first then only later discover what my intention was. That is, there is an unconscious component of intent that we did not cover at all.

I believe that Buddhists, through zazen, become aware that intent often is revealed AFTER action, not before. I know I am not aware of my intent when I act in many cases and only discover it after or during action. I have seen this most clearly in sparring matches where action MUST come before intent. We literally cannot think fast enough to move, yet we move and execute technique. I have likened it in the past to watching myself spar while I'm sparring. I have literally watched myself kick a man in the head while I had no conscious involvement in doing so. That event, and others like it, are what drew me to Zen Buddhism in the first place in a search to explain my own experiences.

We often have to watch action to discern intent, even in ourselves. It's obvious when watching others, say during a chess match. I can see my opponent's moves and often when I'm checkmated only then can I finally see what his intent was all along. What nobody said yesterday is that we often have the same experience watching ourselves. Only at the end do we discover what our intent was. We learn to watch well through zazen. I'm nearly convinced that what we're learning to do is pay attention to that portion of our thoughts that are unconscious or subconscious. The quiet and stillness of zazen lets us notice how our minds really work and how much of what we think is below a level that normally makes it to our attention.

So to sum up, if I can in this jangled morning state of mind: I do not believe that intent always and inevitably comes prior to action. I think sometimes action REVEALS intent, even to ourselves.