Buddhism: Adapting to Change without Losing our Tradition

(NB: In this article Buddhist and Buddhism refer only to Theravāda Buddhist and Theravāda Buddhism respectively.)

The Buddha's teaching at its root is essentially a contemplative one. It deals primarily with the question of dukkha, i.e. the unsatisfactoriness and suffering in our lives. It is a discipline of training our mind in order to achieve liberation from dukkha. In its earliest form there is little that is ritualistic about it. The path to liberation from dukkha requires no rituals whatsoever. What it requires is a dedicated effort to investigate deeply into the nature of dukkha and its cause, to purify one's mind from the cause of dukkha, and thus realise its cessation. This effort is the work of contemplation. And no amount of rituals can accomplish its aim.

But later on this teaching was gradually institutionalised into a religion - Buddhism. And, as with any other religion, rituals become a necessary accompaniment and adornment. There is nothing really bad about turning the Buddha's teaching into a religion. It's a natural progression that takes place when the Dhamma starts to become popular among the general mass. When a big group of people come together for a common purpose to follow the Buddha's teaching, they need a system to organise and regulate their group practise, to impart and share knowledge about the Dhamma, to support each other in their commitment to the practise, and also to serve as their group identity. The religious system, Buddhism, gradually emerged out of this need.

Rituals are part of this system which serve many useful purposes. For example the ritual of recitation and reflection on passages from the scriptures serves to draw out and impress upon the Buddhist devotees the profound meaning of certain aspect of the Buddha's teaching. This promotes understanding and faith. Rituals also give the devotees a very real sense of closeness to the Buddha and his teaching. This promotes faith and dedication to the observance of his teaching. Devotees who participate together in a ritual also feel a sense of belonging to a common cause and community. This promotes fellowship which leads to the devotees supporting each other spiritually and materially in their spiritual quest, which strengthens the community.

In the Buddha's time, he and his core disciples, majority of whom were monks and nuns with contemplative bent, constitute more or less a contemplative movement. There were lay disciples to be sure but they were mostly on the periphery and played mostly supportive role for the core contemplative movement, the Saṅgha. And the majority of these disciples not only strive very hard in their meditative practise but also aim to bring the practise all the way to its conclusion, i.e. the realisation of the cessation of dukkha.

While most of these disciples of the Buddha during his time were satisfied with and could get by just on learning Dhamma and meditation alone, and their faith in the Dhamma is firmly established and affirmed by the profound clarity arising out of their contemplative work, the later non-contemplative masses of Buddhism (the religion), comprising mostly lay people whose aim of a religious life is not so much to strive in meditation practise, much less to realise the final goal of the Dhamma (not in this life anyway), but more to just live their daily life in accordance with the principles of the Dhamma, they needed rituals as an addition to their religious practise to continuously sustain their faith.

Watching Intention - Profound Insight through a Simple Act

One of the basic instructions in the practise of vipassanā meditation is to note the intention that arise prior to any bodily movements. But in carrying out this instruction many meditators "try" very hard to catch the intention before they move their limbs. And often we find that in their eagerness to observe the intention, let's say the intention before lifting the foot in walking meditation, they unwittingly produce the intention and then happily note the intention produced.

Actually this instruction to observe intention means to observe the natural intentions that arise prior to all our bodily movements. In our daily life as we go about our business many bodily movements occur seemingly by itself. We do not seem to consciously and deliberately produce these movements. They occur more out of the force of habits. For example when we approach a door our hand immediately reach for the knob, turn it, and push the door open. All these movements occur automatically out of the force of habit. We do not even think about it. Usually we are not even aware of these insignificant movements. Our mind is probably engrossed in thoughts about something else when these movements occur.

Contemplation is Total Engagement of Mindfulness

When we contemplate an object in vipassanā meditation we really need to give one hundred percent of all our mental resources to the work of contemplating the object in the present moment. The mind needs to be completely immersed with curiosity and interest into the object in the present moment and be totally engaged in investigating its nature.

The normal habit of the mind is to give a little attention here and a little there. Often we think that we are completely with the object in the present moment because it seems that we are able to follow the flow of the objects from moment to moment. But if we really look honestly we will realise that we are not really giving one hundred percent to the object occurring in the present moment.

Samatha and Vipassana Concentration: Some Similes

One way to understand the difference between samatha and vipassanā concentration is to think of samatha concentration as similar to a woodcutter who, when he wishes to take a break from his work, would put aside his axe by driving its sharp wedge into a tree stump, and then sit beside it to rest. Because the wedge of the axe is sharp it is able to cut into the stump effectively. But once it is driven in, the axe just remain there on the stump while the woodcutter takes a tranquil break.

Samatha concentration is like this. Because its jhāna factors (initial-mental-application, sustained-mental-application, joy, bliss, and mental-one-pointedness) are well developed, powerful, and sharp, they are able to penetrate effectively into their object. But once they go in, the mind just remain there, still and unmoving, allowing the meditator to have a peaceful and tranquil rest from the world of sensual objects. This is like the woodcutter taking a break from his work while his axe, normally busy chopping away, is in a state of rest, having been driven into the stump.

Kalama Sutta: Practise Freely or Practise in Accordance with the Dhamma

The Kesamutti Sutta (Aṅguttara-Nikāya, Book of the Threes, Sutta 66), better known as the Kālāma Sutta, is perhaps the most often quoted among the discourses taught by the Buddha. It is often cited to show that the Buddha promoted a spirit of free inquiry among his disciples and did not insist on blind and dogmatic belief. The Sutta has even been dubbed "The Buddha's Charter of Free Inquiry." The ten ways listed in the Sutta by which one should not accept a teaching (see below) as well as the Buddha's call in it to use one's own personal reflection and consideration to decide for oneself what teaching can be accepted and what teaching can be rejected, appear to hold out a promise of religious and thought freedom that is so enticing that it has endeared the Buddha's teaching to many modern, educated, intellectual, and rational minds.

These days, however, there is an increasing number of those who have taken a liking to Buddhism because of this promising spirit of free inquiry embodied in the message of the Sutta, but who at the same time believe, in part due to the far-reaching influence of the ideals of Secular Humanism on our modern society, and in part based on their personal understanding of the message of the Sutta, that one should be totally free and unrestricted in one's approach to the practise of the Dhamma. This belief includes the idea that in practising the Dhamma one should not be restricted by any structure or system at all, not even that of the Dhamma (which the Buddha himself established), and one should be totally free to mould and reshape the Dhamma in ways that one sees fit in order to make its practise more appealing, congenial and relevant for oneself as well as to modern conditions and needs. Some even believe that one should be free to adopt and incorporate without any restriction, ideas and methods outside the Buddha's teaching into the practise of the Dhamma if one finds it desirable.

There are even those who go so far as to believe that one can totally do away with faith in the Dhamma, that one should begin the practise on the basis of scepticism, doubt and question everything until one arrives at the truth; Or one should base one's practise solely on one's personal experience, or even, one's rational reflection, and understanding (read ideas and opinions). Some even propose to do away with fundamental teaching of the Dhamma such as rebirth which cannot be perceive directly in one's daily experience.

But did the Buddha really mean his message to the Kālāmas to be taken in this light? Or how did he mean it to be taken? Let us examine this Sutta to see if we can shed some light on this question.

All Men are Born Equal?: A Discussion on Kamma

Post updated: 30th Aug 2011 (See note under comments)

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..."

~ United States Declaration of Independence

All men are created equal. This is a very powerful statement and it embodies perhaps the single most potent idea that has captured the imagination of modern civilisations. The idea of equality of all men (and women) has wide ranging influence on and is very entrenched in our modern civilised world, particularly in western societies. It serves as one of the fundamental principles of any democratic institutions and is enshrined in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The appealing idea expressed by this statement seems pretty obvious and self-explanatory. But let us explore its meaning a bit further in order to try to understand it better. Here of course we are looking from the perspective of one who is a Buddhist. Therefore we have to leave aside the idea of creationism which is implicit in the statement because Buddhists do not subscribe to the idea that the universe and all lives that exist in it was created by a supreme almighty being. Be that as it may be we can still approach a discussion of its meaning generally by replacing the expression created equal with born equal. So instead of saying all men are created equal we can say all men are born equal.

But, when we look at this statement that all human beings are born equal the first question that immediately comes to mind is this: But are all human beings really born equal?

Mindfulness for Enlightenment Vis-à-vis Mindfulness for Modern Needs: The True Goals and Strength of Satipatthana

Mindfulness as taught by the Buddha is more correctly called satipaṭṭhāna or mindfulness (sati) that is firmly established (paṭṭhāna). Nowadays it is often understood simply as awareness. But satipaṭṭhāna as a kind of awareness is not, as many Buddhists think, the general awareness normally associated with our day to day life.

The general awareness of our workaday life is usually only superficial and cursory. And even when it is deliberately developed to render it some depth and focus, it rarely approaches the depth and focus of satipaṭṭhāna mindfulness. It is usually engaged with a lot of worldly conceptual thoughts and ideas unlike satipaṭṭhāna mindfulness that, even though it usually begins with some conceptual objects like in-out breath or parts of the body, is finally aimed at the ultimate realities underlying those objects. The general awareness of daily life is also always directed towards solving the problems of our worldly mundane life unlike satipaṭṭhāna mindfulness that is aimed towards the arousing of transcendental spiritual insights that leads to the complete liberation from our one problem of existential suffering, the problem that the Buddha's teaching aims to solve.

To Grief or Not to Grief

Updated: 11th June 2011, 8:07 am

"Herein,  what  are  the  six  kinds  of  grief  based  on  the household  life?  When one  regards  as a non-acquisition  the non-acquisition  of  forms  cognizable  by  the  eye  that  are wished  for, desired,  agreeable,  gratifying,  and  associated with  worldliness  - or  when  one  recalls what  was  formerly  not  acquired  that  has passed, ceased,  and  changed -  grief  arises. Such grief as this is called grief based on the household life.

"When  one regards  as a non-acquisition  the non-acquisition  of sounds cognizable by  the ear...the non-acquisition  of  odours cognizable by  the nose...the non-acquisition  of  flavours  cognizable by  the  tongue...the  non-acquisition  of  tangibles cognizable by  the body...the  non-acquisition  of mind-objects  cognizable by the mind  that  are wished  for,  desired,  agreeable, gratifying,  and associated with  worldliness  -  or when  one recalls what  was  formerly  not  acquired  that  has passed, ceased, and  changed  -  grief arises. Such grief as this is called grief based on the household life. These are the six kinds of grief based on the household life.

"Herein, what are the six kinds of grief based on renunciation? When, by knowing the impermanence, change, fading away, and cessation of forms, one sees as it actually is with right wisdom that forms both formerly and now are all impermanent, suffering, and subject to change, one generates a longing for the supreme liberations thus: 'When shall I enter upon and abide in that base that the noble ones now enter upon and abide in' In one who generates thus a longing for the supreme liberations, grief arises with that longing as condition. Such grief as this is called grief based on renunciation.

"When, by knowing the impermanence, change, fading away, and cessation of sounds...of odours...of  flavours...of  tangibles ...of mind-objects, one sees as it actually is with right wisdom that mind-objects  both formerly and now are all impermanent, suffering, and subject to change, one generates a longing for the supreme liberations thus: 'When shall I enter upon and abide in that base that the noble ones now enter upon and abide in?' In one who thus generates a longing for the supreme liberations, grief arises with that longing as condition. Such grief as this is called grief based on renunciation. These are the six kinds of grief based on renunciation.”

~ Saḷāyatanavibhaṅga Sutta, Majjhima-Nikāya, Sutta 137

The first set of six kinds of grief (domanassa) mentioned in the passage just quoted, the grief based on the household life, is what the Buddha called in Sakkapañha Sutta (Dīgha-Nikāya, Sutta 21) the grief that should not be pursued (asevitabba). In the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta (Majjhima-Nikāya, Sutta 10) it is also called worldly painful feeling (sāmisaṃ dukkhaṃ vedanaṃ). This kind of worldly grief includes the dejection based on failure to acquire material things desired or, by extension, loss of material things which one is attached to and which one considers to belong to oneself. Material things here include not only material properties but also position, status, as well as beings (loved ones, relatives, friends, and even pets).

For example it includes grieving over the loss of a love one due to death. While such grieving is, understandably, the nature of an ordinary unenlightened human beings still afflicted with defilements, and would, in the mundane world, be considered “natural” for a human being, yet in the discipline of the Noble One such grieving would be considered as an inability to accept the nature of reality. It betrays a deficiency in insight or wisdom into the nature of things as they really are. And so we find that when the Buddha was about to pass away and the Ven. Ānanda was weeping and grieving over it, the Buddha admonished him saying:

“Enough, Ānanda, do not sorrow and cry. Have I not previously declared that there will be separation, parting, and departing from all that is dear and beloved. How could it be, Ānanda, that what is born, come to be, conditioned, subject to breaking up, even if it is the body of the Tathāgata, not break up? This is impossible.”

~ Mahāparinibbāna Sutta, Dīgha-Nikāya, Sutta 16

Vipassana and where to Find it in the Suttas

When asked what is vipassanā most Buddhists would think of vipassanā as a technique of Buddhist meditation. But actually vipassanā is not a kind of meditation at all. There is a difference between vipassanā and vipassanā-bhāvana. Vipassanā refers to insight wisdom whereas vipassanā-bhāvana refers to insight meditation or, more correctly, the development (bhāvana) of insight. These two are related but not exactly the same. One refers to the thing to be developed whereas the other to the process, method, and technique of developing it.

Let's take a closer look at vipassanā. We usually translate vipassanā as insight. This word insight tells us two things about vipassanā. Firstly, insight denotes a clear and deep understanding. This is very true of vipassanā. Vipassanā is indeed a kind of very clear and deep understanding, knowledge, or wisdom. Secondly, the word insight denotes that this understanding or wisdom of vipassanā is intuitive in nature. This means it is a wisdom that arises spontaneously in the mind without any prompting from the rational mind, without the help of the power of intellect. In other words it arises without any deliberate act of thinking, reasoning, or inferring, etc.

In our normal day to day life we usually try to understand things by thinking about them, by applying logic and reasoning, by making inference, by deducing, etc. All these involve the power of the intellect. In this way we derive knowledge, understanding, and even wisdom. But vipassanā wisdom does not arise in this way. How then does it arise?

Developing Mental Health - A Reflection in the Afternoon of Life

Time and tide wait for no man. Once upon a time we were young. We were healthy, strong, and brimming with youthful confidence. It seems at that time that we can take on the world and there is nothing that we are not capable of doing. But then the years marched by so silently fast, many things happened in the meantime, and before we know it middle-age has caught up with us. We are no longer that young.

The youthful and naïve confidence that we once had is there no longer, replaced, hopefully, by confidence born of experience. But if recklessness was our way of life in those younger days, or if fortune was not on our side, regrets over the lost years or despair over what the future holds may now surface. At early middle-age, unless we are really unfortunate, we can still very well perform most of the physical and mental activities that we did when we were younger. But our health and strength are beginning to show the early signs of clear decline.

Skin and hairs begin to age at an accelerated pace. Eyesight begins the slow process of diminishing. We would soon, if we haven't already, be needing a pair of spectacles. Muscles and bones start to weaken. And unless we are still recklessly holding on to the delusion of youth, things such as regular exercise, healthy diet, regular sleeping hours, abstinence from drinking and smoking, have become necessities. At forties, or, for our era, even earlier than that, we begin to hear of people coming down with various kinds of ailments: Hypertension, diabetes, high cholesterol, heart diseases, even cancer. These are but some of the tell-tale signs that the sure process of aging is asserting itself.

Aging is a process that had been going on since the day we were born. But when we were young aging is not called aging. It is called growing up, maturing, the flowering of youth, or some other sugar coated expression like these. But whatever we choose to call it there is an undeniable process of change going on continuously since our birth, nay, since our conception in our mothers' womb. However, once we hit forties aging starts to become simply what it is: the process of getting old. At
forties we may still be relatively young but the slow march towards the grave has begun in earnest. As one teacher once put it, we have arrived in the afternoon of our life. And we may also add that evening is not too far away.

About Sila

A human-being or manussa is defined by ancient Buddhist teachers as one who possesses an elevated mind (manassa ussannatāya manussā). As such a human is the one being among all the creatures on this planet capable of profound thoughts and reflections. This capability gives humans the ability to differentiate the wholesome from the unwholesome, to tell right from wrong, and to recognise virtue as opposed to vice. It also arouses among humans the desire to cultivate virtues and to walk the path of righteousness.

Out of this desire comes sīla, a code of conduct to regulate one's actions, to keep them righteous, and to cultivate virtues. This code of conduct is based on the universal principle of morality, of what is wholesome and unwholesome, what is right and wrong. Sīla is a common human aspiration and is found in every human society as the ideal that separates humans from animals and that makes a human-being humane. It is in fact what constitutes basic human qualities. It lends refinement to our mind and therefore serves as the basis for human culture. Sīla is also a fundamental practice found in all the credible religious teachings of the world, including the teaching of the Buddha. It is a common denominator in all these teachings that identifies them as a good religion capable of serving as a reliable guide to acceptable human conduct.

In the Buddha's teaching, sīla is the basic fundamental practice that serves as the foundation for the spiritual path that leads to liberation of the mind from suffering.

“Bhikkhus, just as whatever strenuous work there are to be done, all are done based on the earth, established upon the earth, even so, based on sīla, established upon sīla, a bhikkhu develops and cultivates the Noble Eightfold Path.”

~ Saṃyutta-Nikāya, Maggasaṃyutta, Sutta 149

Since sīla is fundamental to our practice of Dhamma, it would be helpful for us to have a proper understanding of what exactly is sīla and what constitute its practice.

Buddhists Vision of the World of Existence and Beyond

“Once Zhuangzi dreamt he was a butterfly, a butterfly flitting and fluttering around, happy with himself and doing as he pleased. He didn't know he was Zhuangzi. Suddenly he woke up and there he was, solid and unmistakable Zhuangzi. But he didn't know if he was Zhuangzi who had dreamt he was a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming he was Zhuangzi. Between Zhuangzi and a butterfly there must be some distinction!”

~ The Butterfly Dream of Zhuangzi (Translation by Burton Watson taken from Wikipedia)

“All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts...”

 ~ William Shakespeare

Is our life as we are experiencing it real? Or is it just a dream? Are we all, as Shakespeare put it, actors and actresses playing different roles in a stage performance called life? Are our dreams a real world to which we return to once the show is over? Is life an illusion we must eventually wake up from?

Such questions concerning the nature of our existence have occupied the thoughts of man through the ages. They have both intrigued and confounded him at the same time. Mystics, meditators, philosophers, thinkers, even scientists, in their quest to make sense of the world, have attempted various answers. And we have all been fascinated or turned off by their answers.

The Buddha's teaching is one among many teachings in the world that have arisen out of a need to address man's problem of existential suffering. But to solve this problem necessitate first of all an understanding of the nature of our existence. Therefore, since the Buddha did claim to have found a solution to this problem, we would expect that the Buddha's teaching also provides some answers to these questions about the nature of our existence. But what are it's answers if any? What do the Buddha and his enlightened disciples see when they look at this world of our existence and how do they describe it?

Mindfulness, Clarity, Perception, and Memory

Among the twenty five sobhaṇa-cetasikas or beautiful-mental-factors listed in Abhidhamma, sati or mindfulness is probably the one most often mentioned and highlighted by Buddhists. This is because of the central role that mindfulness plays in Buddhists' practices.

“But mindfulness, bhikkhus, is needed at all times.”

~ Saṃyutta-Nikāya, Bojjhaṅgasaṃyutta, Sutta 53

In many suttas one who has mindfulness is described thus:

“...a bhikkhu is mindful, one who possess the highest mindfulness and discrimination, who remembers and recalls what was done and said long ago.”

~ e.g. Dīgha-Nikāya, Saṅgīti Sutta

This description of mindfulness in the Suttas brings out its aspect of memory. In the commentary also mindfulness is explained in relation to memory:

“It is mindfulness (sati) because by means of it they remember (saranti); or it itself remembers; or it is just mere-remembering.”

~ Dhammasaṅgaṇi-Aṭṭhakathā

However, mindfulness is categorized in Abhidhamma as a beautiful-mental-factor, which means that while it is always found associated with wholesome consciousness (kusala-citta), it can never be found in association with unwholesome consciousness (akusala-citta). This means that mindfulness is absent when a person performs an unwholesome action like killing, stealing, etc.

But if mindfulness is related to memory how could it be absent when a person performs an unwholesome action? Does this mean that a person who is killing or stealing has no recollection of things he had said or done? This would be absurd since memory is such a fundamental function of our mind that it should be common to all kinds of consciousness regardless of whether they are wholesome or unwholesome. A mental factor (cetasika) that is to perform the function of memory should by right fall into the category of those that are common to all consciousness, i.e. the universals (sabbacittasādhāraṇa). Assuming that the Suttas is correct then either mindfulness had been wrongly classified in the Abhidhamma, or there is something more to memory than just mindfulness.