kleshas (defilements)

108 butter lamps to counter 108 defilements, Reru, Zanskar (Himalayas)

We heard a nice dharma talk by Steve Armstrong on obstacles to mindfulness. He used the term defilements which is an approximate English translation of Skt. klesha sometimes translated as hindrances or distractions. I now paraphrase his talk from memory (stuff in brackets mine).

When we sit (in zazen), there are visitations of various kinds that try and veer us away from mindfulness. Wanting (i need a better cushion), not wanting (if only the next person didn't move her leg), restlessness (i want to get back and cook), sleepiness (oh well what can i say) are all defilements of various kinds. The basic three are desire (greed), hatred and delusion with various combinations of these adding up to a 1000 in the Burmese tradition !!.

Similar to Jiddu, Steve suggests that the real way to overcome these defilements is not to express (by giving vent) or suppress them or even sublimate them (using metta, for example, to change anger to kindness although it is a good interim solution) but to observe them, especially their rise and ebb. To notice their presence, to accept their presence and finally, to watch where its birth and death. He likens them to paper tigers in that paying attention to them (by giving in to them) will only strengthen them and suggested tongue-in-cheek that a Nancy Reagan approach of saying no helps !! Steve also pointed out that we mistake these defilements for personality traits. For example, if we give ourselves to anger frequently, we say we are short-tempered by nature or impatient or whatever. According to the Buddhist view, the mind is inherently devoid of defilements and pure.

The regular tools for developing concentration or awareness including mantra practice, chanting, breath counting, breath following, awareness of body sensations, awareness of external noises are all basically useful for achieving a quiet mind (samadhi). Insight meditation or vipasyana on the other hand is the systematic investigation of whatever that comes up (typically defilements). Jiddu basically says the same thing. But it seems that the former is needed to be even able to do the latter unless you are an intense, gifted personality which Jiddu and others probably were and didn't that practice. A cliched analogy is to liken the mind to a pool of water, ripples being thoughts and murkiness being defilements like anger which cloud the mind.

I (i.e. my thinking mind) cannot but help notice differences and contradictions between this view (largely Theravadin or Vipasana) and the Mahayana Zen view. Zen master Seung Sahn Sunim of the Kwanum school often exhorted his students to make one's mind pure and clear, clear like space. "Then when red comes it is red, when white white. When someone is hungry feed them or thirsty give them a drink". Simple and clear. Zen doesn't explicitly indulge in this analysis of thought. When thinking mind is cut-off, the mind's true nature naturally manifests. It seems that samsara and living in the day to day world is incompatible with the letting go of desire, aversion and delusion. In Zen, attachment to desire is the problem and not the desire per se. Maybe that's why they say, its like climbing the mountain and then back down over the other side i.e. samsara to nirvana and back but something has changed- subtly yet profoundly. Daido roshi calls it a working samadhi. Now there is no contradiction between following the precepts and drinking sake, between inner and outer, between saying a dog has buddha nature and saying it does not have a buddha nature, between you and me.