lotusinthemud

Really Wonderful ~ Dharmavidya

Dharmavidya writes:

PRAISE

In the Acchariya-abbhuta Sutta, the monks are discussing how wonderful the Buddha is when he comes into the hall, interrupting their chatter. He asks what they have been talking about and they tell him that they have been discussing his marvellous qualities. He then says, “So what are these wonderful characteristics of the Tathagata?” Ananda then piles on a huge heap of praise, some of which stretches credulity. At the end of it all, the Buddha says that there is one thing they can consider a special quality of him which is that when vedana occurs, he knows it is occurring, sees it arise, sees it persist and sees it melt away; similarly when samjna arises; similarly when thoughts occur.

I think that we can see this as a somewhat ironic comment by the Buddha that really is intended to puncture the balloon of extravagant praise. If one thinks of Buddha as beyond all human foibles, then vedana and samjna would not occur in him, but here Buddha says that he is aware of them occurring, and even of thoughts grounded in them occurring. They had probably actually been occurring as he listened to Ananda, so he is saying that although feeling arise in him as he listens to all this praise, he is not carried away by it, he, as it were, sees through it. In fact, he is only concerned for the well-being of the monks and unconcerned about his own status.

WHOLLY HUMAN AND WHOLLY ILLUMINATED

He also implies that such awareness is much more important than whether or not he had descended directly from the Tushita Heaven and so on. Even if one did descend from Tushita, one came into this life as a fully human being. The nature of a true teacher is not that he or she has stopped being human. On the one hand, it is true that we do not have much respect for a teacher who does not practise what he preaches, but this should not lead us to think that the mind of the teacher is so pure that unwholesome impulses never arise. Rather, what a teacher does have is a greater insight into his own bombu nature. It is by seeing how human nature is that we arrive at compassion, for then we realise how it must be for others. The fact that the teacher can rise above and be beyond does not mean that he is not also totally immersed and engaged; he is both at the same time, fully human and fully illuminated.

For this reason it is hazardous for a teacher to preach too holy an ideal. His chances of inhabiting it are slim and he easily falls into hypocrisy and vainglory. This is why there are scandals in sanghas around teachers who have arrived at too high an opinion of themselves. To teach the Dharma is to facilitate the study of the self in such a way that it loses its fascination and this is not achieved by laying out a programme of perfection which only invites the ego to take hold of one’s supposedly spiritual life. This is precisely when a person fails to practse the path he advocates for others.

VEDANA MAY BE EMPATHY

When unwholesome thought arises it is a genuine basis for insight. When I am sitting in a lecture and start to think “This is really boring,” I am immediately alerted to my arrogance in finding fault with another. I may go on to reflect whether I could actually have done any better myself. Whatever the answer, there are things for me to learn. It is not that I should never have such a thought - after all, some lectures are boring - but awareness of one’s own process is illuminating. This is the real insight. The person who is delivering a boring lecture is probably doing the best he can, but is constrained by some factors - elements of self-consciouisness usually - that are making him timid or inhibited. When one thinks this way, one’s heart goes out to him. One wishes to release him from the bonds that are holding back his virya energy. Then one thinks of all the occasions upon which one has oneself been somehow unable to give of one’s best, having been, perhaps, overawed by the situation.

One perhaps even realises that the sense of being bored that has arisen in oneself was probably a kind of contagion from the speaker. Because the speaker is contrained in some way, that constraint fixes itself upon members of the audience too. We are all caught in the same samjna net. What had originally presented itself as a criticism of the speaker actually reveals itself to be a kind of empathy.

BELOW THE SURFACE

We are all emotionally vulnerable. As a lecturer, one is on display and self-consciousness can become a paralysing force. One may fear to depart from one’s notes, even though reading from a script is one of the ways guaranteed to make a talk dull. I have given a great many talks in my time and usually nowadays I am not nervous, but sometimes it happens for one reason or another. When one has to give a public performance a certain degree of emotional tension is necessary or the whole thing will fall flat, but getting the pitch right is not always an easy matter.

At a congress I recently attended one of the subjects was “the nature of a Dharma teacher”. Superficially we think that the teacher is somebody far along the spiritual path who can help those less advanced. However, the matter is really much more complicated. The path is not one-dimensional. Things are going off in many directions all at once. Below the placid surface of the well-socialised person there is a seething mass of passions. It is much more use to have insight into that cauldron than it is the have made the surface so firm that the magma never bursts forth.

WONDERFUL

Ananda’s praise of the Buddha is a trap. By inviting him to identify with an idealised image he is, in effect, setting him up. The Buddha punctures this and brings things back down to earth. The passage  shows that the Buddha not only had some modesty about himself, he also had a sense of humour. To puncture inflated fantasies is true Dharma teaching. Awareness of real human nature is Dharma whereas the projection of a super-human image is delusion. It is much more wonderful to be genuine than to be posing an ideal, and it is this kind of genuine wonder that Buddha’s promote.

:: link to post on the Eleusis site

Point Mind and Three Locas ~ Dharmavidya

Dharmavidya:

SIX VIJÑANA MIND MODEL
One of the ways to understand how conceptions of psychology have changed since the time of the Buddha is by looking at how the model of the mind has elaborated. In the earliest scriptures, the Buddha talks in terms of six vijñanas. These are the five senses plus “manovijñana”. Manovijñana is, as it were “the mind's eye” except that in this conception there is no mind separate from these six. In this earliest model, these six constitute the complete basis of what we call mind. What is thought of as self was understood as an illusory effect of the repetitiveness of the activity of these six.

An implication of this model is that the mind composed in this way has no content. What we nowadays think of as the content of the mind was conceived to be external. Buddha talks of eighteen dhatu or “bases”. These are the six vijnaña faculties (eye, ear, etc), their respective objects (sights, sounds, etc.) and the power that links the two. So when we say that we have something “in mind”, this was conceived as the manovijñana perceiving a mind object via a mind object power. So when we say “A thought just came to me,” this was understood in a much more literal sense than we generally intend. The thought did come to us. Perhaps it was brought by a deva. Devas are beings, invisible to most of us, who nonetheless influence our lives. Among other thing, they are the (external) delivery system of the things that we moderns think are inside us.

Now it is an experiential fact that until the thought “just came” one was not conscious of it, so literally one did not have it “in mind”, so this original six vijñana mind model in many ways reflected the phenomenology of mind (the way we actually experience it) with some accuracy.

LATER DEVELOPMENTS
Later, by the time that the Lankavatara Sutra was composed, this model had been added to. A few centuries after the Buddha people were thinking of the mind as having content and as therefore having a “store”. The word for a store or accumulation is alaya. We are familiar with this word, since it occurs in the name of the mountains north of India, the Himalaya, “him” being snow. The Himalaya are full of snow that just landed there and stuck to other snow until there was a great accumulation. Similarly, it came to be thought that the mind accumulated mental formations (samskara) and that these were stored as the alaya. In time, just as the word "store" can mean both the accumulation (eg. a squirrel’s store of nuts) and the place where the accumulation is kept, alaya became part of the topography of mind. But if the mind has a store - a kind of hard disc, to use a computer analogy - then it also needs a processing unit to do things with these mind contents. This processing unit is called manas. So now we arrive at an eight vijñana model: the six original vijñanas plus manas and the alaya.

IMPLICATIONS OF THE POINT MIND: LOKA
Here, however, I’d like to stay with the six vijnaña model and the eighteen dhatu, since it is interesting to reflect upon a completely different way of conceiving mental process from the one we are used to. There are a number of interesting implications of this model.

If the mind has no content, then it is, as it were, like a point moving about in a domain. There could be a number of domains. These domains are called loka. In particular, the unenlightened mind moves about in the kamaloka. Kama (as in Kamasutra) means sensual desire. The kamaloka is ruled over by Mara, who is the god of death. So the point mind bounces about from one kama to another like a ball in a pinball machine. When the pin ball reaches the bottom, it is shot back up again. In principle there is no reason why this should not go on forever. This is the functioning of samsara.

On the other hand, it might be possible for the mind to bounce right out of the machine, as it were, and land up in a different loka. In particular, it might arrive in the rupaloka. The word rupa originally meant an icon or idol, in other words, something worshiped. Now, to be in a world where everything around you is worthy of worship is quite different from being in a world where everything is an object of craving. The rupaloka, therefore, is a world in which the relation of the six vijnaña to their respective objects is more or less the opposite of what it is in the kamaloka. In the kamaloka, one craves for this, that and the other, so these things have a coercive power, pulling one this way and that, like a cork on the waves. In the rupaloka, however, one worships each thing that comes along, so there is a respectful attitude. This is liberating. With craving one moves toward whereas with reverence one sets oneself at a distance. Thus moving from the kamaloka to the rupaloka is an act of renunciation.

MARA
The rupaloka is outside of the domain of Mara. Mara, therefore, strives to ensure that beings do not leave the kamaloka. This is why, when the Buddha was on the point of enlightenment, Mara assailed him with every kind of sensual delight, trying to keep him in the domain of kama. However, the Buddha-to-be had already arrived at a turning away (paravritti) from sensuality and even Mara’s most powerful attempts were to no avail. They were turned into celestial flowers, or rupa, in this original sense of the term. When everything is rupa in this sense, there is still a power at work, but it is functioning in a quite different way. We could say that instead of pulling you down it pulls you up.

MARANA
Just as in our language terms can have an elevated and a common usage, so rupa in the context of the kamaloka refers to the things that one “worships” in a mundane sense, as some people worship money and others worship status or sex. You can even, in this sense, worship icecream or chocolate or even narcotics. So, in the kamaloka, rupa refers to the way we perceive things when they exercise the power of evoking desire. Rupa in the kamaloka has a power, but it is a mundane rather than a holy power. This mundane power is called marana. You can see “mara” within this word, so marana could be translated as deathness. Everything in the kamaloka is deathly, wasting our lives and yet endlessly pulling us back into more and more wasted incarnations.

THREE LOKAS
Now in our modern way of thinking in which we assume that all this that is described above is actually going on inside our heads rather than in external domains, we naturally tend to think that enlightenment will be some kind of mental content that we are going to acquire, that it is something that is going to be inside us, that we shall discover, say, that we have got Buddha nature in us. We read plenty that tells us that this is not the right way to think of it, but it is a natural tendency when one has a modern sense of psychology.

In the point mind model, on the other hand, what is conceived to be happening is not that the mind is taking things into itself, but that it is moving through lokas. We might, with help from the Buddha, move from the kamaloka into the rupaloka, but this is not all. Beyond the rupaloka is the arupaloka. If rupaloka is the world of icons and idols, arupa is the domain where they are absent. Icons and idols are not worshipped for themselves, but for what they represent. We bow to a statue of Buddha, but we do not think that Buddha is a piece of stone or metal. Beyond the rupa is the dharma and the dharma is formless (arupa). The kamaloka is a domain in which everything is profane; the rupaloka is a domain where everything is holy; the arupaloka is beyond the holy and the profane. In the kamaloka one is seized by the fever of desire. In the rupaloka one is taken up by the holy passion of devotion. In the arupaloka one is at peace.

In addition to the three lokas talked about here there are many other lokas - like the six lokas that we see depicted in the Tibetan Wheel of Life, but most of them are sub-realms of kamaloka. The threefold schema set out in this essay gives an overall framework.

One of the epithets of the Buddha is lokavid. This means that he clearly perceives all the lokas. He can move between them at will because he is lokuttara, which means he has gone beyond them all. He may be most at home in the arupaloka, but compassion requires him to move also in the other lokas in order to reach other beings and help them to escape from the domain of Mara. Thus, in the wheel of life pictures, there is a small Buddha depicted in every domain, even in the hell realms.

CHANGING PERSPECTIVES
Thus, conceptions of mind, mental factors and mental processes, as well as their relation to the world and the nature of the world itself have changed over the centuries. This is the same in all enduring cultures. The world as it was conceived in the time of Jesus was quite different from how it was understood in the middle ages and both the classical and the medieval were vastly different from our modern conception. By medieval times, Buddhism had developed an eight vijñana and even a nine vijñana model and with such a model, internalised mental constructs were recognised and it was even possible for some Buddhist philosophers to go to the opposite extreme and deny the existence of the external world: instead of everything coming from outside, now it could be asserted that everything was projection of mind, but that is another story.

Although the conceptual framework of psychology has changed over the years, the basic message of the Buddha remains the same. It has been a challenge for Buddhist teachers in different ages to find ways to express the Dharma in the idiom of the day. We can ground our practice in a modern psychological framework to good effect. However, there is also some value in trying to project ourselves back into the framework that informed the earliest Buddhist writings as this enables us to understand them better. It also throws our modern ideas into perspective, showing that they are not the only way of thinking about things and this relativisation liberates us from a kind of complacency.

The mind lost in the kamaloka has no hope except to be rescued by Buddha and thus find a refuge. When it does so, it finds itself in the rupaloka where everything points to the arupaloka beyond. Such is the spiritual life. Ultimately there is the state of lokuttara, beyond all of these worlds, which is Buddhahood. This is one of the ways in which Shakyamuni, back in the early days, showed people the Dharma.

*****

Please address any comments to the

:: link in the original post

Zen Is ~ Dharmavidya

Dharmavidya:

Zen is
“a special transmission outside the scriptures,
not founded upon words and letters.
pointing directly to the heart,
seeing into one’s own true nature,
attaining buddhahood.”

What does this mean? What does it not mean?

Commonly this is taken to mean that Zen rejects scriptures and even writing. However, Zen practitioners do recite and study the scriptures and write vast amounts, so this is wide of the mark. In trying to understand this passage one should be more concerned with what it does say, rather than with what it seems to exclude.

The scrptures are necessarily either an outside view or a record. By outside view I mean the perspective of one who views a situation from a distance. Thus the scriptures can advocate and define compassion, but they cannot, by their nature, actually convey the experience of compassion, except, perhaps, sometimes via stories. Yet an encounter with another human being might do this.

Thus, the notion of “a special transmission outside the scriptures” refers to that extra quality that arises through direct encounter with a living being. Of course, there are some readers who have such developed empathic sensitivity that even in reading they can enter into an intimate connection with the author, so that we do have examples in the history of Buddhism of important transmissions occurring when a person ripe for sagehood read a particular passage written by a former saint long dead, but even then what is actually “transmitted” or “awakened” has the quality of a personal and unique person to person meeting. It is quite different from mere intellectual study and understanding.

The words and letters that appear do so in response to such experience. The encounter is the root and the words and letters are the branches and leafs. It is a question of prioritisation. We may say exactly the same in respect of other formalities. Zen is a special transmission outside the rituals and forms, not founded on procedures and conventions. The rituals, formalities, procedures and conventions grow up afterwards. They are a means of expression of the Dharma, but if the essence is not established first, then they are lacking in the vital content. However, when the vital element is present, then a ritual can itself become an encounter.

Thus, at a certain stage, one may need to abandon “sundry practices” so that pure faith may have space in which to appear. One then becomes “a person of no rank” who is completely without personal resource. However, once the peaceful mind of faith is established, all practices naturally can become means of expression of the true Dharma, and the “peaceful mind” becomes a generator of dynamic engagement. When things happen in this correct order, the stream is crossed and perspective is reversed.

To put this another way, what counts is not so much the content of a communication as its effect. The same words on different occasions may have different effect and dissimilar words on different occasions may lead to similar effects. The effect is that the heart is touched. Commonly the heart is locked away in a dark cave, hidden by a labyrinth of tortuous tunnels, traps and dead ends. Yet in a moment of intimate contact, suddenly all is clear and open. Yet to grasp this intellectually does not in itself mean that it actually happens.

The awakened person is natural. He or she is simply what they are. Their true nature is not an embarrassment, even though evidently it is ever so human. To meet such a person is disarming. The dark cave is no longer necessary. Dharma encounter is spacious. In such moments buddhahood is attained again and again.

If, with Dogen, we say that Buddha mind is mirror-like, we can understand that in such moments one responds to another just as reflections appear in the mirror. The mirror appropriates nothing, distorts nothing. In Buddhist language, the image cannot be defiled. This is spontaneity that opens the heart.

Paradoxically, the heart then generates forms of expression and Zen then issues as words and letters, rituals and styles, and thus brings the scriptures to life. It is, however, this living enactment that matters beyond theoretical understanding.

:: link

Some Distinctive Amida Shu Points ~ Dharmavidya

Dharmavidya:

1. The correct attitude is to be willing to do whatever the Dharma requires, in whatever realm, in whatever aeon. Enlightenment means to see clearly what needs to be done. It is to walk the eightfold path and to know what that means. Yet, as bombu beings, we cannot fully know this. Our ideas are bound to be inadequate and coloured by self-seeking. Yet we have faith that the Buddhas will employ even such beings as ourselves for their great purpose.

2. There is no conflict between Buddhas. We do not laud Amitabha by rejecting other Buddhas. All Buddhas have similar compassion and wisdom. To worship one Buddha is to worship all Buddhas. Those already in the Pure Land spend their time making offerings to other Buddhas and serving them in whatever way is appropriate to those other Buddhas.

3. One trusts that, after death, through faith, one will be born in the Pure Land of Amitabha and from there may enter nirvana, but one also accepts that this may, or may not be what is in store for one. Those destined to be bodhisattvas will not enter nirvana until all can do so. They will therefore return to samsaric worlds for the sake of all sentient beings. In this matter of life, death and other lives there are many mysteries beyond what we can understand. The right attitude is to entrust oneself to whatever is needed.

4. There is no fundamental difference between the satori of the Zen path and the awakening of shinjin in the Pureland path. Such awakening cannot be contrived by any practice, but may come as a grace. In any case, varying degrees of spiritual inspiration occur. The full transmission of the Dharma from generation to generation hangs by a thread, but there are degrees. A person only practises insofar as such inspiration has entered their life. This is what is meant by being seized by Amida. The Buddhas use us for their compassionate purpose and the more suitable material we are the more they use us, but even the most benighted being has a place in the Buddha’s great scheme and it is those who have fallen lowest who attract the Buddha’s greatest care..

5. While accepting that one’s judgement may be at fault, one is, nonetheless, bound to do what seems best in the judgement that one has, allowing that one might be granted greater wisdom subsequently. If one lives the wisdom that one has, one will surely be given more. We should always, therefore, regard our judgements as provisional even though we must act upon them with all our heart and strength. The danger of becoming proud of whatever little understanding one has is a continual danger on any spiritual path and we should, therefore, continually reflect upon the great gulf that separates us from the way of heaven.

6. One conforms to the Buddhist precepts insofar as one can clearly see the disadvantage of doing otherwise. Thus the preceptual life is natural to those who see clearly. We do not see so clearly and this is why our lives deviate. When we notice how deviant we are we get some measure of our own delusion. This does not mean that we can abolish our deluded state at will. We cannot. With this realisation of our bombu nature arises great gratitude for the goodwill of the Tathagata who accepts and works for beings such as we.

7. Sometimes in life we encounter great grief or pain. Sorrowful states are inevitably part of being in this world of conditions. There is no avoiding it. While some specific troubles can be averted and we do what we can, sooner or later impermanence strikes every life. Some of the greatest sages met great loss early in life and this deepened their realisation of the urgency of putting one’s faith to work. Other beings drift along in uncertainty, not realising the importance of practice until it is almost too late.

8. The best practice is to take refuge with all one’s heart and might in everything one does and the simplest expression of refuge is nembutsu. Pray ceaselessly. I myself recite thousands of nembutsu every day. One nembutsu is enough. One thought moment of untainted faith is sufficient, and out of that single simple seed naturally springs millionfold proliferation.

:: link

Awareness of States ~ Dharmavidya

Dharmavidya:

Buddhism praises awareness, especially awareness of presently arisen states. There is a value in being aware of what is arising, being aware of what is persisting, what is fading away. Thus I might notice that a feeling of sadness is arising, or that sadness is persisting, or that the sadness is fading, or that happiness is arising, or that happiness is persisting, or that the happiness in me is melting away, and so on.

As with all exercises, there are good ways to do this and there are also pitfalls. Let us firstly consider the pitfalls. If one does this as a deliberate meditative exercise, it is at first interesting, but after a time one will tire of it because it does not, in itself, lead anywhere. One observes one thing after another and then one’s mind wanders off onto more interesting topics.

Secondly, there is a danger of over-doing. If one is ardently trying to be aware of every arising state then one observes. Let us say, one observes sadness. One is now in the state of observing sadness, so one should observe this. One is now in the state of observing oneself observing sadness, so one should observe this. One falls into an infinite regression, observing oneself observing oneself observing oneself observing sadness and so on. It become absurd. So there is the danger of fatigue and that of absurdity.

So what is the better way? It is not enough to be ardently aware. One also has to be mindful of one’s purpose. If one’s purpose is to live a life of faith, then noticing states takes place within the frame of this purpose. Thus, on the one hand, one investigates how what one observes relates to one’s faith and, on the other hand, one realises how one’s faith transcends what one observes.

How does what one observes relate to one’s faith? If I notice sadness or happiness or anger or joy or envy or sympathy or whatever, then I know that I am a creature that is of the nature to give rise to such things; I am a vehicle for them; they pass through me. Knowing this, I also know that it must be thus for other beings also, and this is the foundation of compassion, the grounding of love. We are all here together in the same boat. The alloy of this observation with faith is courage. Seeing things as they are gives confidence. It permits joy when things go well and equanimity when circumstances are adverse. These are some of the ways that awareness of states relates to faith. Much reflection is possible in this area.

How does one understand that faith transcends what one observes? The states one observes come and go. They are like visitors, whereas faith persists. One’s refuge in Buddhadharma encompasses all states. We should not think that Buddhist practice is matter at arriving at one particular state and remaining there permanently. The flow of states cannot be arrested. Yet when one has discovered one’s faith, it does not wash away. It is not a conditioned state, but participation in what is unconditioned. It is of eternity.*

Awareness is not, in itself, a factor of enlightenment, but it is a contributor. Correctly used, the development of greater awareness of the flow of consciousness brings insight, therapeutic gain, and a degree of liberation. Wrongly applied it merely leads to confusion or fatigue. Awareness rightly used deepens understanding and strengthens one’s capacity to be of benefit to others. It is a wonderful enhancement of one’s precious human life.

FOOTNOTE

* [Digression: A person might object that his faith wavers. This is not true faith. This is probably merely belief. Beliefs are always subject to doubt. There has been much confusion caused by equating faith with belief. I do not know whether the heavens and hells exist or not. I do not know whether gods exist or not. If I think they do or I think they do not, these are beliefs and they are open to doubt either way. Faith, however, is something more fundamental. Faith is the deep intuition that enables one to recognise Dharma when one encounters it. One may express one’s faith in formulations, but really faith transcends them. I may say that I have faith in Buddha but my faith would remain even if the word Buddha had never appeared in my experience. Buddhism is a vehicle for my faith. It is a good vehicle, but if it were not available there would be others.]

:: link to original post

The Secular and the Psychological ~ Dharmavidya

Dharmavidya:

October 4th:

I have just come back from the conference of Buddhist teachers in Europe. While I was there I heard much discussion about secularisation and how it is necessary to secularise the Dharma in order to make it palatable to modern people. Personally, I am resistant to this idea. The Dharma is, in essence, a faith that lodges deeply in people’s hearts and that means that it is a religion. If you take the religion out what you are left with is a variety of techniques and protocols that can be intrinsically useful but is far short of real Dharma.

Furthermore, technique Buddhism takes up a lot of space in people’s already over full lives. A busy person who is hoping to get something from Buddhism does not really need telling that he should do an hour of medtation in addition to all the other things he has to do in a day. He is likely to try it for a short while and then find that it just gets squeezed out by all the other things that are on his agenda, whereas if he were to develop a sense of faith and gratitude for the Dharma, he can carry this with him wherever he goes. He can say a mantra or nembutsu while stopped at the traffic lights. He can gesture towards his heart anytime and this will help him to stay in touch with the wonderful sense of refuge that is the core of Buddhist faith. A less secular and more religious attitude is far more practical, apart from being the real thing.

However, some people say that I am in self-contradiction because I am in favour of a psychological perspective. Thus, for instance, I understand the life of Sidhartha Gotama in personal terms. His mother died giving birth to him. If you read the diary of the great 20th century Chan master Tzu Yun who had a similar beginning to life, you can see clearly how such a circumstance creates a deep personal and existential dilemma for a person and how one of the ways of dealing with this is to try to attone, which Siddhartha did by throwing himself into penitential practices, starving himself, going without sleep and trying all the extremes of yogic discipline. It then happened, when he was at an extremity, that Sujata showed kindness to him and I reason that this touched his heart and must have been a significant element in triggering his “one good night” of enlightenment.

Some Buddhists do not see the Buddha this way. They imagine that he was as he was as a result of many lifetimes of preparation and that he arrived in this life direct from the Tushita Heaven already equipped with all the knowledge that a Buddha needs; that he only went through the motions of being a human being in order to demonstrate the Dharma to us lesser beings. They do not, therefore, see the enlightenment as a result of a personal history or struggle. They think that if you psychologise the Buddha story in the way that I do, then you are effectively secularising the Dharma. I do not agree.

I do not agree because being religious does not imply that one has to be super human. Even if one does come into this life direct from Tushita, one comes as a human. To talk about Jesus’ passion on the cross does not make Christianity any less religious. Jesus and Sidhartha were human, but because they dealt with their humanity in a particular way they became channels for what is more than human to become manifest in the world. They became, as it were, mirrors for the light of the Dharma. In this way they are both fully human and fully divine. They are fully divine in that the ultimate truth shines through them. They are fully human in having the same instincts, the same human equipment, the same struggles that everybody has. They, however, took things further than most people do and, by doing so, revealed the highest truth.

Literally, "psychology" means the study of the soul and we shall not get far with religion if we do not study the soul’s perilous journey, both in the cases of the great exemplars and in our own lives. Furthermore, all psychological problems and obstacles are essentially spiritual and vice versa. To live a life of great compassion the Buddha had to understand the people who came to see him. He had to understand the mentality of Angulimala, the murderer. He had to understand that of Kisagotami who could not believe that her child was dead. He could only help by understanding and tailoring his response to that comprehension. Spiritual work is psychological and psychological work is spiritual. If it is not, it is not the real thing.

So I find a psychological understanding immensely useful and Buddhism provides me with a mass of psychological tools, but this does not mean that I am secularising the Dharma nor that the idea of doing so has any great appeal to me. For me the Dharma answers to my spiritual experience, search and struggle and the fact that the Dharma is full of wonderful psychological insights helps greatly. It all gives shape and expression to my faith and shows how unconditional grace operates in the midst of this conditioned existence.

:: link

The Buddhists of Extinction Rebellion

:: The Buddhists of Extinction Rebellion

The climate activism group has drawn many teachers and practitioners looking to take their practice to the streets.

By Matthew Abrahams

SEP 16, 2019

Meditators block the Waterloo Bridge in London on April 18, 2019. | Photo by Francesca E. Harris

The environmental activism group Extinction Rebellion (XR) has been making headlines since November 2018, when around 6,000 protesters blocked traffic on five bridges in London at their first demonstration. They made more waves on April 1, when 12 protestors stripped down to their underwear in the House of Commons and glued their hands down to various surfaces. On April 15, thousands of people took to the streets, shutting down transit stations, streets, and bridges for several days with theatrical displays such as a large pink boat, a halfpipe for skateboarders, and a stage for a choir. By April 19, London police had arrested 682 protesters. 

But behind XR’s raucous spectacles is a calm contemplation, according to the many Buddhist teachers and practitioners who have joined the movement. XR organizers have not kept track of their members’ faiths, but religious and spiritual leaders seem to be exceptionally visible at their demonstrations, where it is common to see human blockades engaging in meditation, yoga, or prayer. The group even addresses this perception in an FAQ on their website, writing, “Your movement seems a bit woowoo to me. What’s with the shamans and all that?” Their answer: “Some, though not all of us, have a ‘spiritual’ orientation, and we welcome anyone regardless of their beliefs . . .”

One Buddhist teacher, Mark Ovland, was among the dozen XR activists who were arrested for their “cheeky intervention,” as one British lawmaker described it. Ovland told Tricycle that he has put his teaching on hold and stepped back from his commitments to Buddhist groups to focus on activism. Still, he said, “Extinction Rebellion is just the perfect vehicle for taking practice off the cushion, it has a remarkably dharmic backbone and a lot of how we relate to each other and go about our business would be very familiar to anyone coming from Buddhist circles.”

Extinction Rebellion protesters at the House of Commons on April 1. | Photo by Evelina Utterdahl

Shunyata - Emptiness: Dharmavidya

Dharmavidya:

QUESTION: What is shunyata?

SHORT ANSWER: Shunyata is the completion of learning

LONGER ANSWER: The important thing is to have the Dharma in your heart. How does this come about? There could be a million different ways. Perhaps something happens in life that shakes one’s complacency. One sees this with many of the great figures - both Dogen and Honen were orphans. Perhaps one has a disaster like Nagarjuna seeing his friends cut down by the guards. These things make one take life more seriously and one starts to learn the lessons in a deeper way. One yearns to get to the bottom of it all, to learn completely. This is the driving force of a life koan. These kinds of things, however, are adventitious. Life brings challenges. Mostly we try to avoid them and so only learn to hide. Is there a simple practice that we can use that will serve even if one has not had a great disaster in life?

One of the best ways is to always say the nembutsu. This is because the name of Amida Buddha includes all of the virtues of all the Buddhas; it encompasses all the possible practices. Individual practices each have their merit. To sit still for long periods of time certainly calms the mind and imparts a certain discipline. This has value. To do virtuous acts of charity cultivates the spirit of generosity. To make offerings at the temple teaches one the spirit of devotion. To make prostrations incises humility upon body and mind. All of these and many other virtuous practices are good. They are good for self in that one learns something and they are good for others in that one becomes a more kind, wise and useful presence for them in the world. All of these are means of learning. Generally speaking, however, those who practise these practices rarely complete such learning; they rarely integrate the learning totally in their heart. They sit on the meditation cushion for many hours but then go forth and become stressed and busy-minded all over again. They do acts of charity, but a meanness remains in the back of the mind. They make offerings, but want something in return. They make prostrations, but do not stay humble long. They have gone through the motions of the practice but they have not completed the learning. Consequently the mind does not arrive at emptiness. As Honen said, all of these are excellent and true but few people succeed.

Nembutsu has the merit of being very simple yet all-encompassing. One merely says the name of the Buddha. It goes straight to the heart of the matter. This is like planting a seed in the ground. From one single seed may grow a great tree, the tree of the Dharma. The tree of the Dharma is different from other kinds of trees in that it has many different kinds of fruit. An apple tree bears apples only, a cherry tree only cherries, but the tree of the Dharma bears all kinds of good fruits. If this can come from one seed, how much more from many! Reciting the nembutsu is like scattering seed. Even in unexpected places, the Dharma may take root and flourish. As a result, the spirit of all the practices may be integrated in one's being. It gets under the skin without the ego being able to appropriate it. One then lives that spirit naturally. One becomes more humble, more generous, more devoted, more calm, and so on, not because one has set goals in each of these areas, but because one has the Dharma in one’s heart, one has learnt the lesson completely without really knowing what one was doing.

To learn a lesson completely is to have it totally integrated so that one no longer has to think about it. We can see this in the case of any skill. The Buddha was once asked if he had to prepare his lectures and he replied that he did not have to prepare because he knew it. The Dharma was so much what he was that he naturally responded to each situation or each audience and that was enough. He arrived at the lecture hall empty, but as soon as he saw the people he knew exactly what he must say. Such integration can come as a result of repetition. A skilled wood carver has carved many pieces of wood. He know how to do it. if you give him a piece of wood, as soon as he sees it he knows what he must do. The knowledge is complete in him. When the knowledge is complete the mind is empty. This is shunyata. When the mind is empty it is ready. As soon as something comes and fills it it responds in the appropriate way.

This is how one aspires to be with the Dharma. If one really has the Dharma in one’s heart, then the mind is empty and ready. Whatever comes along one will respond. That response will be “Namo Amida Bu” and in that response will be humility, generosity, devotion, equanimity and a multitude of other virtues, but this will not be because one has cultivated each of these individually but rather because the fundamental spirit of the Dharma has penetrated one’s heart directly. When the man comes to cut off one’s head, “Namo Amida Bu”. The learning is complete. That is shunyata.

:: link

Amida Shu Buddhism

Dharmavidya writes:

Amida Shu is a form of Pureland Buddhism. It derives from a tradition of Buddhist teaching that started in India, matured in China and flowered in Japan. In all probability to derives mostly from teachings that Buddha gave to lay people. There is, therefore, relatively less emphasis upon renunciation, meditation and the monastic life. However, different strands of Buddhism have influenced each other down the centuries and we are all trying to follow the original teachings of Shakyamuni. In China there was a good deal of interaction between Pureland and Zen and also between these forms of Buddhism and Taoism.

There are three foundations of Amida Shu. These three are like the legs of a tripod. Each depends upon the other two. These three are the Trikaya Nature of Buddha, the bombu nature of the practitioner and the practice of nembutsu.

Nembutsu literally means “mindfulness of Buddha”. It refers particularly to calling the Buddha’s name. In Amida Shu this is usually done in the form “Namo Amida Bu”, but there are a number of variants in different languages and rhythms. It is intention that makes a particular form of words into nembutsu. It is nembutsu if you sincerely mean it to be so. Nembutsu is the Amida Shu way of taking refuge. We particularly call the name of Amida Buddha, but to call one Buddha is to call all Buddhas. Taking refuge is the very heart of Buddhism. In his very first teaching, given to two merchants whom he met on the road, Buddha taught refuge. In his dying words, Buddha said that if you want to shine a lamp in the world, make the Dharma your lamp. So refuge is the alpha and omega of Buddhism and in Amida Shu it is expressed as nembutsu. This means that we try to keep the Buddhas always in mind and reference everything that happens back to them.

The bombu nature of the practitioner means that in Amida Shu we admit that we are ordinary human beings, that we have emotions, mixed motives and limitations, that we are “foolish beings of wayward passion” and do not have control of our fate. We are fallible and do not expect perfection. This means that basic attitudes of Amida Buddhism are gratitude and humility. These make a sound basis for practice and for community. One day, if we continue to have faith in the Buddhas and their Dharma, we shall all be Buddhas and bodhisattvas ourselves, but we don’t expect it in this lifetime and in the meantime there is still plenty to do. Amida Shu tends, therefore, to be a rather socially engaged approach because we are aware that we bombu humans are not making a very good job at looking after the planet nor, sometimes, even at looking after each other. The bombu paradigm leads us to engage with such issues rather than retreat from them. It also means that one can understand how troubles arise. Compassion springs from fellow feeling.

The Trikaya Nature of Buddha means that we think of Buddha in three ways: as the teacher who appears in this world, as the spiritual manifestion that comes in dreams and visions, and also as an ultimate truth that is unborn and eternal. This is the basic framework of religion: to receive the teachings as practical advice, as spiritual inspiration and also as ultimate truth. As ultimate truth, Buddha is timeless and universal and so is like a light that shines throughout every possible universe. As a spiritual presence, Buddha inspires each of us and bestows a special blessing upon each individual. As a living teacher Buddha is the source of our tradition. These three dimensions are the basis of our faith. We believe that the practice of the nembutsu way leads to birth in the Pure Land of Buddha. Those who are born in the Pure Land naturally attain the samadhi of being always in the presence of all the Buddhas. Since the Pure Land also has trikaya nature, we can think of it in three ways. Ultimately, the Pure Land is not separate from the perfect Dharma. Spiritually, the Pure land is the sacred realm where everyone receives exactly what they need. Concretely, Buddhas are always in the business of creating better conditions in the relative sphere. As devotees, we are also caught up in the work of the Buddhas to make this world and this life into a Pure Land. We shall not achieve it today or tomorrow, but we are all, in one way or another, dedicated to the bodhisattva path of benefiting all sentient beings.

Different people proceed differently.

Some may begin with a practice of nembutsu chanting and only gradually come to realise the importance of the Amida Shu attitudes toward the Buddha, the Pure Land and toward the person.

Some may begin with a confrontation with their own nature, a sense of contrition or realisation of a need for help. They may then turn to the Buddha, and the nembutsu then comes as the desperately needed prayer connecting them.

Others, again, may find that they have a natural spiritual sense that there is something much greater than ordinary mundane life and may have an experience of grace that lightens the heart. For these, humility comes naturally and the nembutsu simply puts some shape and sound to a longing that has been in their heart all along.

It is characteristic of the Amida way that the practice works differently in different people. Saying the nembutsu one day one may be moved to tears. Another day, one may be more cerebral and thoughtful. Another time, one simply enjoys the company singing together. One is not here trying to attain a specific preordained state of mind or, indeed, any kind of spiritual attainment. Amida Shu is not a path of self effort. Realising our bombu nature we know that it is pointless thinking that we can become enlightened by our own effort, or by adopting this or that practice. We simply have faith in the Buddhas and say the Name without expectation. It is enough in itself. This simple practice and unassuming attitude makes for a wonderful sense of sangha community. Bowing to the Buddhas in our hearts and raising our voices to them, love for one another naturally flowers and Amida’s golden chain stretches round the world.

:: link to original post on Dharmavidya's Eleusis ning site

Cool Not Cold ~ Dharmavidya

Dharmavidya:

THE GOAL

Most people have little or no idea about the goal of Buddhism. When I realised this, I published the book “Not Everything is Impermanent”. Most people said, “But I thought that Buddhism taught that everything is impermanent.” Only those who really knew Buddhism said, “Yes, of course, nirvana is not impermanent.”

We can say that the goal of Buddhism is to enter nirvana, but who knows what “nirvana” means? Who even mentions it these days? We might look the word up in our dictionary and discover that it means something like “extinguished” as when a fire is put out. Where is the fire when it is extinguished? Then we might conclude that Buddhism is about not existing anymore. Then we might decide that the puzzle is too difficult and give up and settle for some less esoteric benefits like stress relief.

COOL

Clearly, however, Buddhism does have something to do with being “cool”. This is an interesting idea since “cool” has acquired currency as a slang word meaning relaxed and confident. This is not far from the Buddhist meaning. We might, only slightly jokingly, say that Buddha was a cool fellow. He was cool because he had attained to that kind of relaxed confidence that enabled him to let go of so many of the things that cause worry to ordinary people.

This probably made him attractive because he would handle situations wihout becoming ruffled. He would have equanimity, which is much to be valued. From this position of basic equanimity he could reach out to different people according to their condition, rejoicing in their successes and helping in their distress. He must have had a certain dignity together with a message that spoke of eternal verities. Thus he came to have the reputation for being the greatest sage.

NOT COLD

So, in a certain sense, the Buddha had extinguished the cause of so much suffering for so many people, but he had by no means become distant and unapproachable. He was cool, but not cold. To describe this he chose the word nirvana, or, perhaps, the word may already have been in circulation as a desirable spiritual goal. In any case, it stood in contradistinction to the fire that was the centre of the activities of the priests of Agni, who seem to have been one of the Buddha’s chief opponants.

Agni is the god of fire and the priests encouraged the making of sacrifices to the fire god. The priests often became rich and lived rather unspiritual lives. The Buddha saw them as hypocrites who led the faithful astray. In contrast, he sought to create a cadre of practitioners who were genuinely “worthy of offerings”. At the same time, he did not go to the opposite extreme. In India there were ascetics who practised penance, sometimes to extreme degrees. Buddha had tried this himself and found that it did not lead to a noble life, but merely to a sick one.

FAITH IN THE MIDDLE WAY

Thus Buddha taught the Middle Way, cool, not cold, of restraint, not deprivation, dignity, not pomp. This is nirvana. It is to refrain from fanning the flames of passion toward either extreme. To do this requires a kind of faith or steadiness, so that one is not swept away by the energy of the crowd. One needs to be referrenced toward something that transcends ephemeral situations. Everything in the ordinary world of human interactions is indeed impermanent. Things go up and they come down again. Modern people tend to think that this is all there is. They bob about like corks on the sea.

To have more stability than this one needs a religious sense; one needs to be referenced to something beyond. It probably does not matter that much what one calls it - nirvana, heaven, eternity, the divine, the Tao, etc. It does matter, however, that one not then get carried away into making one’s concept of the beyond into something that is not really beyond at all. There has been an unfortunate tendency for religions to make their idea of the ultimate into some kind of worldly power. To do so, however, ruins the whole thing.

Shakyamuni seems to have thought of this ultimate reference as the way of all the Buddhas. He saw himself as simply following in a tradition of other sages, a line that stretched back into time immemorial and would necessarily continue into the far distant future. Indeed, in principle, there could be no beginning and no end because we are talking here of something that is always true. As long as there are sentient beings in whatever universe there must be some ultimate reference - some nirvana - that enables them to go beyond the passions of the moment and keep faith with eternity.

:: link to original post