Dark Buddhism: Integrating Zen Buddhism and Objectivism

by Morgan D. Rosenberg

Due to the recent recession, interest in Ayn Rand's Objectivism is greater than ever, and in the past two decades, interest in Eastern philosophies has reignited in the West. There are also many books on the market that cover Objectivism, such as The Six Pillars of Self-Esteem, My Years with Ayn Rand and The Art of Living Consciously, all by Nathaniel Branden. However, although Branden took Objectivist practices and gave them some flexibility, he stopped long before reaching the concepts of "enlightenment" or, at least, the personal serenity found in the Eastern philosophies. Similarly, Buddhism Plain and Simple by Steve Hagen, Buddhism for Dummies, and The 8 Minute Meditation by Victor N. Davich are examples of excellent books on Zen Buddhism and Meditation, but that's where they stop. There has never been any attempt to apply philosophies and other practices to the "real world" of the self, until Morgan D. Rosenberg wrote Dark Buddhism: Integrating Zen Buddhism and Objectivism, where he merges Objectivism with traditional Zen Buddhism. On the surface, these two philosophies seem to contradict each other, with Ayn Rand's principles of self-focus and the Buddha's principles of selflessness, but the author argues that each of them has logical inconsistencies, which once weeded out, means the philosophies can be blended into a cohesive whole. In his book, which is aimed at professionals as well as readers who seek a self-help guide, chapters range from Zen Buddhism Basics and Reintegrating the Self into Buddhism, to Living Consciously and Mindfully and The Dark Buddhist Lifestyle. Although most of this book has been directed towards thoughts and consciousness, which are functions of the mind, the author stresses the importance of always remembering that the body supports the mind. "When you have a feeling, which originates in your mind," he says, "your body responds to it." The connection between self, consciousness, happiness, and the body has been long recognized. To quote the Buddha, "Your body is precious. It is our vehicle for awakening. Treat it with care." The mind-body connection is a very real thing and also part of our modern world. An entirely fresh and highly original philosophy, Dark Buddhism offers a series of practices that will cultivate strong self-worth, bring about inner peace and harmony, help with personal growth, and improve physical health.

238 pages, Paperback

First published August 12, 2011

Reviews

[Ivan]

LOL: “Philosophically the most glaring difference between Dark Buddhism and traditional Buddhism is that the Buddha taught dissolution of the self, whereas Dark Buddhism reintegrates the self into the philosophy and, particularly, directs itself to fostering healthy and strong self-esteem.”

In case anyone takes this seriously: author is selling you a book on "Buddhism" without having made it to stream entry / kenshō, where he would have broken his self-model and been very happy about it. It's amazing that someone this far off the path would be writing a book about it, but here it is. May he find an excellent teacher and have the courage to discover the true nature of self.

[Петър Стойков]

"Тъмният будизъм" си поставя амбициозната задача да обедини ученията на Буда и Айн Ранд - нещо, което звучи доста интересно.

Основната несъвместимост в двете философии относно виждането им за света се съдържа в крайния обективизъм на Ранд, който изключва чувствата като легитимен фактор в осъзнаването и опознаването на реалността, а относно отношението им към личността - в идеята на Буда, че за да постигнем покой със себе си, трябва да се отречем от личността си и да се "отдадем на света".

Авторът се концентрира върху будизма и неговите учения, замествайки частите, който не му харесват с идеи заимствани от обективизма. Резултатът е приемлив, но книгата не е написана достатъчно добре, за да го представи така, както може би заслужава. Морган Розенбърг прекалено много се отплесва в собствените си монолози и разсъждения, вместо просто, ясно и подредено да представи каквото е измислил.

[Esau]

There are a couple of fundamental issues regarding the interpretation from Rosenberg.

The main reason for his inclusion of Objectivism's framework stems from the fidelity of Buddhist concepts throughout. There are many instances of Rosenberg attempting to reconcile the contradictions from the "self" and later instances describes the concepts and narratives of self just fine but does not connect the two in way that reveals that the contradictions were done with intent to highlight what happens when one becomes too attached to identity, self, and labels. When one becomes too attached to these concepts and ideas the individual in question takes on removes a certain amount of agency in that they will perform tasks and do actions that they think their own identity would perform and thus is a character constraint that is self imposed and perpetuated. In many instances Rosenberg links back to this issue and doesn't interpret it in the metaphysical sense and takes it too literally. The issue with this leads to the reintroduction of delusions. The desire to reincorporate the self is the reincorporation of delusions which reduce the impact that Buddhism would bring should these concepts being left behind.

The large issue is regarding the attempts to discredit koans and anything that seems mystical or spiritual from Buddhist canon. The issue and the contradictions from his readings of Buddhist texts implicitly and explicitly highlight the problem with language. Language is a bad method of describing reality because it is limited in the messages it is able to convey. Poems and paintings serve an important role to not only give out a message but provide sensations and feelings that enrich the knowledge attainment that is simply beyond words. The clearest example of this misunderstanding comes the saying of "If you see the Buddha on the road, kill him!" Under this "Objective" framework, Rosenberg interpret that you should do this because no one but you knows whats best. This is only half true but the proper interpretation would be that if you become to attached to Buddhism it is then you need to let it go essentially.

I believe this book is an okay primer for those who have an affinity for Objectivism because Rosenberg does enough work to explain the flaws and enough layperson interpretation of Buddhist texts to start the process of Buddhist thinking. There will always be a snag that prevent full incorporation with the misunderstanding of how the self. The main things that would improve this text is to incorporate more Buddhist text in general, discuss Equanimity and Emptiness, and with those conflicts resolved; I would hope Rosenberg understands the integration of both philosophy only work because of a lack of nuanced analysis of Buddhism.

[HENRIQUE]

I sympathize with both theories and learned much from them, but always felt conflicted with some aspects of both (the "ruthlessness" of objectivism and the complexity of self, or maybe no self, of Buddhism). This book helped organize my ideas and see the perspective that I would only acquire after dozens of hours deepening my studies into both of them and through trial and error on my life. I encourage all of you to read it because it is a perspective I didn't find anywhere else.

[Mark]

Take this book, plus The Obstacle is the Way, and you’re a long way toward a positive, helpful, working philosophy.