Thank you everyone for your ongoing support.

Note to a Friend

May 18, 2012

Hey, Friend!

I see you are going to do several sessions on “anatta.”  I agree wholeheartedly that anatta has been misinterpreted and those misinterpretations have led to controversy.  But I think the concept of anatta is really very simple and when approached rationally is very easy to understand.  First, one needs to put the “anatta” doctrine in its historical context:  the Brahmanism of 5^th & 6^th century BCE.  “Atman” {Sanskrit; “atta” Pali} is a very well defined and explained doctrine.  The supreme “isness” (modern writers like the term “Ultimate Reality”) is Brahman.   Atman is the essence of all living things, and it is in fact a perturbation of Brahman.  Thus it is perfect, transcendental/metaphysical, unchanging and eternal.  It is, from the Brahmanists' view, this Atman that transmigrates and reincarnates.  It is this Atman, again from the Brahmanists' view, that is the spark of life, the animating substrate underlying all living things.  This view is carried on through the development of the Upanishads, and the Advaita Vedanta literature.  As the various forms of what today we call “Hinduism” have developed and emerged, it is the “freeing” or “release” of Atman from the delusions of samsara that is the ultimate goal of practice.  It is the realization of the one-ness of Brahman and Atman that results in moksha – the release from samsara:  The realization of “tat tvam asi” - “thus thou art” - that one is in fact “god.”

In contrast, the earliest “Buddhist” documents on this subject place atman in the context of objectively verifiable reality, and find it exists only as a concept, not as an “entity.”  There is nothing to be found in a human being that is perfect, transcendental/metaphysical, unchanging, and eternal.  Thus, the doctrine of “anatta” or “no Atman.”  In fact, according to this early doctrine, there is nothing anywhere – animal, mineral or vegetable – that is perfect, transcendental/metaphysical, unchanging and eternal.  This is expressed in the doctrine of “anicca” often translated as “impermanence” but better understood as “transitoriness.”  All things are changing and all things are transitory.  Again, this is stated in the context of objectively verifiable reality. 

The belief that there is an atman, and that there is some aspect or component of reality which is perfect, transcendental/metaphysical, unchanging and eternal is a delusion.  And it is the attachment to such delusional beliefs as Atman and some aspect of reality which is perfect, transcendental/metaphysical, unchanging and eternal that is a source of dukkha – unsatisfactoriness, or suffering. 

What is controversial about that?  Ah, what is controversial is that most people believe in Atman, or something very nearly like it, and some “isness,” be that Brahman, Cosmic Consciousness or God, which is perfect, transcendental/metaphysical, etc., and they are very committed and attached to their beliefs, and very reluctant to let go of that particular delusion.  But they want to be good Buddhists so they try to find ways to “rescue” the atman and Brahman by redefining what atman and Brahman mean, or attributing to the Buddha other teachings which seem to support their attachment to their delusions.  And they write their thoughts down for others to read.  Others, not so well informed, and clinging to their delusions expand and propagate delusional doctrines.

And really, it is quite simple.  There is no atman.  Period.

But that creates problems for reincarnationists and rebirthers.  If there is not Atman, then what is reborn?  This is an issue which parallels the problem of theodicy in Christianity and Judaism.  And the ways in which people try to justify their closely held beliefs about rebirth and reincarnation do get controversial. 

A major source of controversy is the mistaken notion that anatta – no Atman – often referred to as “no soul” means that there is really no person at all, no “self” which can be identified.  This is, of course absurd.  Certainly it is possible for an imminent, constantly changing, imperfect “self” to exist without postulating a transcendental/metaphysical, unchanging, perfect “soul.”  In fact, the earliest writings suggest that the historical Buddha asserted that the self DOES exist as the five everchanging “khanda” (Sanskrit: Skhanda) or bundles.  So:  a self exists, a soul does not.  What is so controversial about that? 

But several “schools” of Buddhism have adopted this “no atman = no soul = no self” position as central in their doctrine.  And then they have had to abandon the “three characteristics of existence” - anatta, anicca and dukkha – or have had to “redefine” the term anatta to mean something the historical Buddha never meant, or they come up with a different term, such as “puggala” or “karmic residue” for what “exists.” 

Most “modern” buddhists have been influenced by the the teachings of Nagarjuna's Treatise on the Middle Way and Treatise on the Twelve Gates, and Aryadeva's One-Hundred-Verse Treatise. Kumarajiva translated these three treatises into Chinese in the early fifth century. Their doctrines were successively transmitted by Tao-sheng, T'an-chi, Senglang, Seng-ch'yan, and Falang, and finally systematized by Chi-tsang (549-623), who is often regarded as the first patriarch of the Chinese Three Treatises, or Sanlun, school.

The doctrines of the Three Treatises school were transmitted to Japan by three persons during the seventh and early eighth centuries: First, by the Korean priest Hyekwan, known in Japan as Ekan, who went to Japan in 625. He was a disciple of Chi-tsang. Second, by the Chinese priest Chih-tsang, known in Japan as Chizo, who also went to Japan in the seventh century. He studied the Three Treatises doctrines under Ekan at Gango-ji temple in Nara and returned to China to further his study under Chi-tsang. On his return to Japan, he taught the Three Treatises doctrines at Horyu-ji temple. Third, by Chizo's disciple Doji, who went to China in 702 and returned to Japan in 718 with the Three Treatises doctrines. He lived at Daian-ji temple in Nara. Actually, a priest named Kwalljk (known in Japan as Kanroku) of the Korean state of Paekche had brought the Three Treatises teachings to Japan in 602, but Ekan established the theoretical foundation of the school. For this reason, Ekan is regarded as the first to formally introduce the Three Treatises doctrine to Japan. The lineage of Chizo's disciples, carried on by Chikoand Raiko, was called the Gango-ji branch of the Three Treatises school, and that of Doji, the Daian-ji branch.

The Three Treatises doctrine holds that, because all phenomena appear and disappear solely by virtue of their relationship with other phenomena (dependent origination), they have no existence of their own, or self-nature, and are without substance. The school upholds Nagarjuna's "middle path of the eight negations" (non-birth, non-extinction, non-cessation, non-permanence, non-uniformity, non-diversity, non-coming, and non-going), and sees refutation of dualistic or one-sided views in itself as revealing the truth of the Middle Way.

And then some of those schools have equated the “mystical experience” with the doctrine of “no soul / no self.”  What William James, in “The Varieties of Religious Experience” and Sigmund Freud, in “Civilization and It's Discontents” (or maybe it was “The Future of An Illusion”) and Richard Bucke in his work “Cosmic Consciousness,” and so many others since were referring to.  Well, we've come a long way since the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries (although many “believers” have not), and research has shown us that this “mystical” or “oceanic” experience, or the experience of “cosmic consciousness” is really an alteration in brain function which leads to altered perceptions, which often leads to a dissociative state in which the sense of “self” as a separate, unique entity in a world of entities disappears.  This altered brain function can be induced through any number of practices, such as sleep deprivation, starvation, meditation and use of some psychoactive drugs. 

There has developed within the Buddhist traditions a concept of four “jhanic” states (the four jhanas), and it has been controversial whether these jhanas are necessary or even desirable.  And Zen has defined Enlightenment as the attainment of that altered state of perceptual “one-ness.”

But we need to stay connected with reality and not fall into the delusion that external, objectively verifiable reality is altered when our perception of that reality – our psychological reality – is altered. 

We need also to remember that the “problem” is dukkha, stemming from “avijja' (non-wisdom) and tanha (emotionally clinging to a desire for a reality that isn't).  And the “solution” (wisdom and seeing reality as it is, not as we would wish it to be) comes from practicing the Noble Eightfold Path. 

Whew! 

Samma-ditthi,

Bhante Dhammapala

Help put Ariya Magga Buddhist Missionary Society back on the road!

Put Ariya Magga Buddhist Missionary Society back on the road.

Ariya Magga Buddhist Missionary Society, a nonprofit incorporated in Iowa, envisions a more just, peaceful and enlightened world.  We hope to realize that vision, and help people improve their quality of life by freeing themselves from the dukkhā – that range of experiences, from dissatisfaction to anguished suffering – found in daily living.  We reach out from New York to California, and from Minnesota to south Texas, sharing the Dhamma through talks, meditation events and distributing books.

At this time we are in desperate need of an all-wheel drive vehicle for our missionary outreach.  Something on the order of a late model (less than four years old), low mileage (less than 60,000 miles) vehicle like the following:  Honda Pilot, Toyota Highlander, Jeep Grand Cherokee, the Dodge Nitro, or the Chevy Tahoe. Our 2003 Honda Element was recently totaled in a collision, and we are without reliable transportation. 

If you would like to support the Dhamma, and the efforts of Ariya Magga Buddhist Missionary Society to take the Dhamma to the people, you can help with a cash donation.  Any amount will be appreciated.  We have created a “GoFundMe” account specifically for a new vehicle.  The campaign link is: https://www.gofundme.com/27acf6ng.

If you would like to contribute directly, donations can be sent to:

Ariya Magga Buddhist Missionary Society

c/o Wat Phothisomphan

2562 SE 14th Street

Des Moines, Iowa 50320

USA

Checks can be made out to AMBMS.

And if you have a vehicle you would donate, please let us know.

If nothing else, will you please share this request with others?  Won’t you please help?

Thank you.

Peace and Blessings

Another $5000 and we will have met our goal. Thanks to all who have contributed!

“It’s just temporary”

October 25, 2015

We cannot justify illegality by saying “It’s just temporary.”  We cannot justify immorality by saying “It’s just temporary.”  We cannot justify social inappropriateness by saying “It’s just temporary.”  We cannot justify ecological irresponsibility by saying “It’s just temporary.”  We cannot justify political oppression by saying “It’s just temporary.”  We cannot justify injustice by saying “It’s just temporary.”  “Its just temporary” cannot be used as an excuse for engendering dukkhā.

The Noble Eightfold Path is very frequently divided into three categories, pañña. (wisdom), sīḷa (moral discipline; virtue; moral guidelines) and bhāvanā (abbreviated from samādhi-bhāvanā; cultivation of the state of samādhi).  I offer this to support the argument that to practice the Buddha-dhamma means striving (making Right Effort) to be virtuous. 

The Five Precepts (Pāḷi: pañca-sīḷa) constitute the basic Buddhist code of ethics, undertaken by lay followers of the Buddha-dhamma in both the Theravāda and Mahāyāna traditions. In fact, practicing the Five Precepts is part of the definition of being a Theravāda lay person. The Five Precepts are commitments to refrain from (Theravāda) or abstain from (Mahāyāna) taking life/killing, taking things not given/stealing, sexual misconduct, speaking falsely or unkindly/lying, and intoxication.  Undertaking the five precepts is part of both lay Buddhist initiation and regular lay Buddhist practice.  Lay Buddhists in the Theravāda lineages take the Five Precepts routinely as part of nearly every socio-religio-cultural event.  These moral guidelines, these five virtues are to be cultivated in all our thoughts, words and deed.  They are undertaken to minimize or eliminate dukkhā from one’s life and the lives of others, thus helping a Buddhist live free from remorse so that they can progress more expeditiously and facilely on the Noble Path.

But one doesn’t practice morality solely for one’s own benefit.  The Buddha is said to have taught the five precepts out of compassion, and for the betterment of society.  So too must we practice with compassion and for the betterment of society.  For the elimination of as much dukkhā as possible from the whole world. 

Sabbe sattā sukhitā hontu

Whatever beings there are: may they be happy!

Sabbe sattā averā hontu

Whatever beings there are: may they be free from enmity!

Sabbe sattā abyā-pajjha hontu

Whatever beings there are: may they be free from distress!

Sabbe sattā anighā hontu

Whatever beings there are: may they be free from affliction!

Sabbe sattā sukhi attānaṁ parihārantu

Whatever beings there are: may they live happily!

For the Buddhist, the Five Precepts are foundational, but they are not the entire moral code.  Right Action is based on the Five Precepts, but is not limited to them. 

Right Action certainly includes those acts and behaviors which are morally “right,” which are enumerated in the Five Precepts, but Right Action also embodies acts (and thoughts and speech) which are socially, legally, economically, ecologically, politically, and in every other way “right.”  We need to remember the “problem” Right Action is meant to alleviate:  dukkhā.  So “Right” actions are those actions (words, thoughts and deeds) which alleviate dukkhā.  Or don’t generate dukkhā. 

If we are going to “act rightly” in the moral, social legal, economic, ecological, political and other spheres, then we must we must become Lokavidū, “knowers of the world.”

And that means we must cultivate and exercise Right Knowledge and Right Intent and Right Speech and Right Effort when considering any action.  In fact, we must cultivate the full Noble Eightfold Path.

Morality isn’t a particularly popular topic these days.  It seems like whenever I talk about living the “good” life, the moral life, people get huffy.  They seem to think I’m talking "about" them, rather than "to" them. 

A lot of people I talk with, mainly Westerners, are drawn to Buddhism for the meditation.  In fact, meditation from several Buddhist traditions is being taught without any reference to Buddhism at all.  There are some problems in doing that, but that discussion is for another time.  What I want to point out here is that “meditation,” when understood and taught correctly, is moral practice.  It is the whole of the Eightfold Path.  Or rather, the whole of the Eightfold Path is meditation.  Again, a topic for a different discussion.  The point here is that we may sit for 20 minutes, or an hour or two out of the twenty-four hours of the day.  We need moral guidelines for when we are not sitting.  We need moral guidelines for that eight or twelve or sixteen hours we are engaging with other people. 

Every society recognizes the importance of interactions and relationships.  These are the warp and weave of the social fabric.  And every society has “rules” in the form of laws and mores to guide and measure our actions.  And to prevent injury, injustice and suffering.  Societies differ in many ways, and the laws they enact, and the manner in which laws are made differ.  But there are laws.  And for the most part there are good reasons for the laws enacted.  As Buddhists we have a moral obligation to follow the laws of the society in which we live.  We have a moral obligation to embrace the social mores of the society in which we live.  We have a Buddhist obligation to make ourselves aware of the laws and mores, and to understand their role in limiting dukkhā. 

The laws of society may be categorized as “criminal” laws, those that deal with heinous acts, and as “civil” laws which are for the most part social guidelines to dukkhā free living.  Some of these civil laws are written to protect people, such as building codes, fire safety codes, health codes, traffic laws, and so on.  Whenever we undertake a project or an action, building a temple or driving a car, we as Buddhists, need to know and follow the laws. 

Now there are many ways to circumvent any given law.  I see this being done all the time by Bhikkhus with regard to the 227 precepts of the Patimokka.  Still another topic for a different discussion.  The point is, we need to be knowledgeable and mindful of the laws, and codes and rules, and the reasons for the rules.  We need to be knowledgeable and mindful of the consequences, for ourselves and for society, if we don’t follow them.  We need to be aware of the potential dukkhā, and perhaps the generation of dukkhā, we create when we don’t.  Sure, we can put up a temple that doesn’t meet the building code, and we can justify our behavior by saying “Its just temporary.”  But that doesn’t make it safe to occupy.  We can drive on the wrong side of the road, and justify it by saying, “Its only for a short while.”   But that doesn’t reduce the danger to other drivers, passengers and pedestrians. 

I had someone propose a counter to my reasoning one time by invoking the doctrine of “anicca,” transitoriness, impermanence.  Everything is in the process of becoming or dying, or arising, abiding and passing away.  So everything is temporary.  By that standard, life is temporary.  So, one can justify murder by saying “that life was only temporary, anyway.”   But impermanence is a description of reality, not a standard of behavior.  We don’t measure the “rightness” of a thought, act or deed by how long it sticks around.  The standard for rightness is dukkhā. 

As I said at the begging:  We cannot justify illegality by saying “It’s just temporary.”  We cannot justify immorality by saying “It’s just temporary.”  We cannot justify social inappropriateness by saying “It’s just temporary.”  We cannot justify ecological irresponsibility by saying “It’s just temporary.”  We cannot justify political oppression by saying “It’s just temporary.”  We cannot justify injustice by saying “It’s just temporary.”  “Its just temporary” cannot be used as an excuse for engendering dukkhā.

So think about the way you do things, the way you think about things, talk about things, and the ways you act.  Are you thinking, speaking and acting in ways that are patently illegal, immoral, unjust and/or ecologically unsound?  Do you justify this by saying “It’s only temporary.” 

I offer these thoughts for your reflection and consideration. 

Again, thank you to all who support the mission.

Thank you to everyone

May 6, 2014

Here’s some information about Ariya Magga Buddhist Missionary Society (AMBMS):

Vision:  We envision a more just, peaceful and enlightened world.

Mission:  AMBMS promotes, encourages and supports the practice of the Noble Eightfold Path as the means to realize our vision. 

Goals: 

Establish vihāras (residences) for persons who share our vision and commit to the mission full time.

Establish centers for the teaching and practice of the Noble Eightfold Path.

Publish and distribute media materials (texts, audio and video) related to the Noble Eightfold Path.

Establish and endow educational institutions.

Support like-minded institutions, organizations, groups and individuals.

From our perspective nearly all of the social and political problems in the world (dukkhā) can be traced to a lack of wisdom (avijja), a lack of discernment and critical thinking (bhāvanā) and the lack of character (taṇhā).  Evidence supports that the disciplined practice of the Noble Eightfold Path leads to the development of wisdom, moral character, and cognitive-intellectual acuity. 

From our perspective there can be no peace without justice, no justice without peace.  We in the West have known since the 17^th century, the Age of Enlightenment, that a social structure based on enlightened reason is most conducive to peace and justice.  Evidence supports that the disciplined practice of the Noble Eightfold Path leads to insight (vipassana) and understanding, and to the development of high moral character (sīla) exhibiting the attributes of mettā (benevolence and loving-kindness), karunā (compassion), muditā (altruistic joy) and upekkhā (an internal state of joyful, peaceful equanimity). 

AMBMS is unquestionably “Buddhist” in our advocacy of the practice of the Noble Eightfold Path.  We are “Missionary” in taking the Noble Eightfold Path out of the monastery and into society at large.  As a Buddhist Missionary Society, we are a religion and a “church” in the large sense of that word.  However, while the Noble Eightfold Path is the essence and substance of the Buddhist religion, we do not require anyone to identify themselves as “Buddhist.”  While disciplined practice of the Noble Eightfold Path leads to a spiritual transformation, we don’t require that anyone “convert” from his or her religion or to Buddhism.  While the doctrine of the Noble Eightfold Path is fundamentally religious, it requires no faith or belief. 

So, what about you?  What do you think?

Bhante Dhammapala