Written by Anil Menon
Published October 20, 2005
Recently, I bought a wood painting from Lotus Sculpture. The painting is by "Jack," a Thai artist who lives in a little village near the border of Burma and Thailand. It shows the Gautama Buddha seated in the Bhumiparsha mudra; his legs are crossed, his left hand rests in the lap and his right hand's fingers are extended to touch the earth. The Sakyamuni is calling the Earth goddess to bear witness to his having attained enlightenment.
The wood is simply a roof tile from one of those old houses being demolished all over Burma. The painting is something a child could have produced: its lines are simple, the colors basic (red and gold), and the Buddha has a cute double chin.
I've never met Jack. I bought his work off the internet. According to Kyle Tortora of Lotus Sculpture, Jack has hand-like extensions where his legs should be. It seems Jack's mother took drugs during her pregnancy, and he was born with parts of his body attached to the wrong places. The wood painting — and many others like it — was produced by those misplaced hands.
But this is not about Jack.
It is about the Sakyamuni. I found it curious that a Thai Christian should choose the Buddha as the subject of his paintings. Why not Mother Mary or Jesus Christ? Or one of the saints?
It turns out that the Sakyamuni Buddha is in fact an official Catholic saint.
The story of how the Buddha became a Catholic saint is a story about an ancient Indian diaspora. Not the diaspora of a group of people but that of a collection of south-east Asian stories: the Jataka tales.
The Jataka tales have had a particularly strange journey. The word "jataka" means birth. The Jataka tales is a collection of fairy tales, riddles, parables, humorous moral tales and biographies all loosely centered around the previous lives of the Sakyamuni Buddha. The exact number of Jataka tales depends on how one counts. Many of the approximately 550 stories in the Jataka tales have little to do with the Buddha. The Jataka tales were told long before they were written down. The tales began as an oral tradition.
In the third or fourth century B.C., about three hundred years after the Buddha's death, the Jataka tales finally got written down. As the monks traveled, the Jataka stories traveled with them. The stories got translated, skipped languages, adapted to local conditions and became native to many different cultures [1]. In Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, for example, the Pardoner tells a Jataka story. Over half of La Fontaine's fables are actually from the Jataka tales.
Something very similar also happened to the Panchatantra (itself a secularized compendium of many Jataka tales). Arabic versions of the Panchatantra tales were set down in a manuscript called Kalilah and Dimnah (corruptions of Karataka and Damanaka, two recurring jackals in the Panchatantra stories). In the seventh and eight centuries A.D., Jewish merchants translated "Kalilah and Dimnah" into Greek and other European languages. The stories floated around in the collective Western consciousness until Planudes in the 14th century A.D. set them down as Aesop's fables (no actual manuscript by Aesop has survived) [1].
So widespread was the influence of these folktales from the Jataka and
Panchatantra, that Joseph Jacobs (1854-1916), the famous folktale scholar and writer wrote:
... as to the source of the tales that are common to all European children ... increasing evidence seems to show that this common nucleus is derived from India and India alone .... So far as Europe has a common store of fairy tales, it owes this to India. [2]
As Jacobs is careful to qualify, he is not claiming that every European fairy tale is from India; that's plainly ridiculous. But it seems the common stories, the stories that every child seems to know in Europe, can be traced back to tales that originally appeared in the Jataka or the Panchatantra.
What was it about these tales that made them so popular? I think it is the humor. It is of a special sort. Consider. The Jataka tales have a bull named "Delight", high-class crocodiles, monsters with sticky hair, strong-minded snakes, talkative tortoises and phony holy men. In one of the tales, Buddha works as a security guard, and in another, a queen gets laughed at by fish. Yes, fish. The humor in these tales is often droll, characteristic of British comedy. Wait. Characteristic of British comedy? Joseph Jacobs seems to think it is characteristic of the Indian storyteller:
Can we go further and say that India is the source of all the incidents that are held in common by European children? I think we may answer "Yes" as regards droll incidents, the travels of many of which we can trace, and we have the curious result that European children owe their earliest laughter to Hindu wags. [2]
Perhaps that's a bit much. Still, magic realism — whimsy's pretty new dress — is still very popular among South-East Asian writers.
At any rate, it suffices to note that around the same time the Kalilah and Dimnah was being translated by the Jews, there lived in the court of al-Walid ibn Abdul Malek, the Caliph of Baghdad, a Christian monk called John of Damascus. St. John was born around 676 A.D. and died sometime between 754 A.D and 757 A.D. He wrote a series of works defending the then still-young Christian faith. The Arabs, who then ruled most of the world, were very secure about Islam (seeing it as extension of Christianity); the Caliph gave St. John a free hand. One of the good father's books was a religious romance — the first Western one — called Barlaam and Joasaph.
The story of Barlaam and Joasaph is that of a young Indian prince, Josaphat (or Joasaph), being converted to Christianity by the arguments of Barlaam. Josaphat's story (before his conversion) is almost exactly the story of the Sakyamuni Buddha. Indeed, "Josaphat" is nothing but a Greek-formulation of "Bodhisat." This is fairly well established. For example, the online Catholic Encyclopedia says (about St. Josaphat) [3]:
The story is a Christianized version of one of the legends of Buddha, as even the name Josaphat would seem to show. This is said to be a corruption of the original Joasaph, which is again corrupted from the middle Persian Budasif (Budasif = Bodhisattva).
Barlaam and Joasaph was a huge hit. It was translated into all the European languages; there's even a version in the Spanish dialect used in the Philippines.
Now, it used to be a practice in the Catholic Church to recite the names of saints and martyrs in the most sacred part of the service (so called Canon of the Mass, just before the Host is consecrated). That is why, of course, we speak of saints as being "canonized."
But who got to decide who was a saint and who wasn't? For a long time, the decision was left to local parishes. Things changed in 1170 A.D. Pope Alexander III decreed that the power to canonize saints rested exclusively with the Holy See. The names of the martyrs were no longer recited in the Canon but moved to a sub-service called the Prime. Over time, it became less and less permissible to include new names into the list of saints — the Martyrology — without getting explicit approval from the Pope. Trouble was, there were still several equally official Martyrologies floating around (remember, this was before the invention of the printing press).
Pope Sixtus the Fifth (1585-1590) madeSixtusfifth2 a move to eliminate these multiple versions by commissioning a single standard list of martyrs. Cardinal Cesare Baronius was assigned to draw up the Martryologium. For obvious reasons, it was decided to make the official Martyrologium as broad-minded as possible; the idea was to merge existing Martyrologies rather than pick a correct one (for obvious reasons). On November 27, 1610, Cardinal Baronius included:
The holy Saints Barlaam and Josaphat, of India, on the borders of Persia, whose wonderful acts St. John of Damascus has described. [3]
Baronius seems to have included these names from the Catalogus Sanctorum, the fourteenth century Martyrology of Petrus de Natalibus, Bishop of Equilo (now Jesolo, Italy).
So there you have it. The Buddha is an official Catholic saint.
The Catholic Encyclopedia is resolutely unembarrassed about the whole incident. As I understand it, sainthood is a human assignation, based on our understanding of what constitutes a miracle. The Vatican claims authority, not infallibility.
Isn't it strange how history works? A collection of stories, scattered from their letter cages, moving across languages, belief systems and time. I'm reminded of the editor's advice in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance: When the legend become fact, print the legend."
There are also strange ironies. In the 19th century, Naryanan Balkrishnan Godbole, a Sanskrit pandit, translated the so-called Aesop's Fables of Planudes of Constantinople back into Sanskrit. The stories had returned home after almost 2000 years of wandering. I'm sure St. John's Barlaam and Joasaph exists in Pali; if it doesn't, it should.
I began by saying this wasn't about the Thai artist, Jack. But perhaps it is. I think of Jack, a Christian in a predominantly Buddhist country; misplaced in space, misplaced in body. A simple story — two legs, two arms, arms connected to shoulders, legs to trunk — got told just a bit differently in his case.
And yet.
Perhaps all that matters is that a great story gets told and retold, errors and all. As Sylvia Plath wrote in her poem, The Munich Mannequins: "Perfection is terrible, it cannot have children."
St. Buddha would have agreed, I think.
References:
1. Rhys Davids. Buddhist Birth-Stories. Srishti Publishers. New Delhi. 1998.
2. Joseph Jacobs. Indian Fairy Tales. Illustrated by John D. Batten. G. P. Putnam & Sons. New York. 1912. web: www.sacred-texts.com/hin/ift/index.htm
3. Catholic Encyclopedia. www.newadvent.org/cathen
--------------------------------------
Technorati: Buddhism Buddha Buddhist Dharma Compassion Wisdom Religion Meditation Zen Philosophy Spirituality Inspiration Peace Saint Josaphat
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
How the Buddha became a Catholic Saint
Sunday, December 23, 2007
What the Buddha did NOT teach
Extracted from Dharma e-News Issue 13 (January 2008 – to April 2008) by Christopher Titmuss
The Pali Discourses (Suttas) are the original body of texts of the words of the Buddha.
The purpose of this article is to point out some aspects of what the Buddha did not teach.The Pali suttas show that the Buddha refuted many views that today we attribute to him. Dharma practitioners, who regard the Buddha as their primary teacher, may need to check what the Buddha said in the Suttas.
Let us apply a discerning wisdom. Obviously, there are depths of insights outside the wisdom of the Buddha.
ACCORDING TO THE TEXTS,THE BUDDHA DID N0T TEACH
(In alphabetical order)
1. Abhidhamma. According to the Theravada Buddhist tradition, Abhidhamma constitutes the teachings of the Buddha that he gave to his mother in Tusita heaven. Historical research shows that Buddhist/monks scholars wrote the Abhidhamma as a commentary on the words of the Buddha. Consisting of seven books, the Abhidhamma provides a detailed and analytical breakdown of mind and body into a variety of groups and elements. The Abhidhamma was composed over a long period and is not the Buddha´s word but only an interpretation. The Abhidamma is one of a number of Buddhist schools of interpretation of the suttas.
2. Acceptance. In the 5000 discourses of the Buddha, it is not possible to find a Pali word for acceptance. He points to an inquiry that goes deeper than acceptance of what we cannot change.
3. Anicca, Dukkha and Anatta are the true reality of existence. The Buddha has never made such a claim about impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and non-self. He said that these are three characteristics of existence. If they were the true reality, there would no release, no liberation. The Unconditioned is anatta but not anicca or dukkha.
4. Belief in God. The Buddha regards belief in the Creator God of monontheism as just one of many kinds of religious belief. He dismissed it and numerous other religious beliefs. In Judaism, Christianity and Islam it is regarded as the only religious belief. In ancient India, the creator God is called Brahma. Yet the Buddha pointed the way to Abiding with Brahma (Brahma Viharas). It is important to understand that the Creator God of ancient India cannot be compared to the Western Creator God, who is absolute and all powerful. Brahma is a God among the Gods.The profound and liberating force of love, compassion, appreciative joy and equanimity reveal an abiding with Brahma, a creative force. The Buddha never wavered on his focus of complete liberation rather than a unitive experience with Brahma. See also number 16. See also article on the power of love following this article.
5. Being in the here and now. The Buddha does not give teachings to be here and now. Buddhist scholars have very freely translated ditthe dhamme as here and now. Ditthe means view and dhamme refers to dharma, namely all objects (in the mind and in the world, past, present or future), the teachings and truth. The Buddha did not give any kind of self entity or adopt a substance view to the present moment. Ditthe dhamma can also mean seeing with regard to the dharma.
6. Belief in God, a saviour, a sacred book, prophet or guru. God”-language is “self”-language. Ultimately the belief in God and self are two sides of the same coin, the former belief reconfirming the latter belief. An “Absolute God” is not a big issue in the suttas because it was not an influential teaching then Buddha pointed to seeing clearly, to release love (metta) and understand the nature of dependent arising. He is not opposed to ‘God’ (Brahma) language.- as used in India. He regarded the entire notion of God dependent on feelings, perceptions and beliefs. He did not refer to himself as a prophet, guru, deity or avator (incarnation of God). He did not refer to himself as an ordinary mortal. He said: I am awake. The Buddha did not appoint a successor before he died. He told his Sangha to rely upon the Dharma.
7. Cause. The Buddha kept strictly to dependent arising. He does not adopt a simplistic cause and effect, A to B, thinking such as ‘this meditation technique leads directly to liberation. The Buddha referred to cause (Pali: hetu) as a distinctive condition (paccaya). He tended to put the two questions together. What is the cause? What is the condition? (ko hetu ko paccayo). Numerous causes or conditions for numerous effects are mentioned in the suttas. The Buddha does not apply any kind of simplistic model – this alone will cause that – for awakening. He refers to a direct path (eke-yana) to awakening.
8. Choice. The view that we are always free to make a choice does not accord with experience. We did not choose to be born, to stop growing old, to get sick or to suffer pain. We can’t choose to live for ever. We can’t choose to be happy in every moment of the day. We can’t choose the outcomes of events that effect our life. We might think we make free and independent choices only to find out later that the so-called free choice that we made turned out be a nightmare. Our so-called choices are limited. We make choices without knowing countless conditions influencing those choices either from the past, present or that might arise in the future. We are heirs to our karma and bound to our karma (MLD 135). Is this a choice? Is it wise to use the language of choice? Is the notion of consumer choice keeping us deluded and imprisoned as customers? The Buddha placed more emphasis on intention affecting body, speech and mind. In clarity, we naturally cultivate ethics, samadhi and wisdom. It is a natural priority. Wisdom says that there doesn’t feel to be any choice about it. It is simply conducive to a liberated way of life. Deep down, there is really no choice.
9. Determinism and Fatalism. The past certainly can determine the process of dependent arising. The fact that the past can determine the present does not mean that we are prisoners, because the past is not an agent that ultimately can imprison us. This also means that there are no events that just happen without causes and conditions. The Buddha also does not teach fatalism. If the past absolutely determined our life, then the teachings of the Four Noble Truths are irrelevant. We would be a total prisoner to our past. Again, there would be no liberation from the past, from the unresolved forces of karma. The Buddha teaches dependent arising and liberation.
10. Enlightenment. The word ‘enlightenment’ does not appear anywhere in the Buddhist texts. Enlightenment is a Western concept referring to the modern era in the West where science and reason gradually replaced God who gave out punishments and rewards for human beliefs and behaviour. The word ‘bodhi’ means awakening. It comes from the root word ‘budh’ – to wake up. It sounds arrogant to say “I am enlightened.’ it sounds like belief in a “Self” to say “I am enlightened” since it implies a Self coming to Light We can appreciate those who woke up. In Seven Factors of ‘Enlightenment’ the Pali word is bojjhanga – bodhi to awake and anga – aspects of.or limbs of (NB A decade ago I wrote a book called Light on Englightenment. A Pali scholar made the distinction to me clear years later between awakening and enlightenemt. We live and learn!
11. Faith. In the Western sense, faith is often associated with religious faith such as there is life after death or one has faith in a sacred book, a prophet or God. There is no such equivalent word in the Buddha’s teachings. Saddha, the Pali word translated as faith, or sometimes confidence or trust, means sad – heart, dha – to put or to place. When our heart moves to action, such as to explore the teachings, then saddha has arisen rooted in going towards the profound.
12. Free will. For the will to be free, it would have to be independent, self supporting and not conditioned by circumstances inner and outer. The Buddha does not teach free will. The Buddha taught the middle way between free will and determinism. The self is tied to the notion of free will and equally tied to the notion of determinism. Truly knowing and seeing dependent arising is liberating. It reveals the emptiness of a real self and real things
13. Escape. The texts speak of the escape from suffering. Pali word nissarana means way out or exit. We often associate escape with flight, with fear that forces us to run away from ourselves, from responsibility. We need to remember the support that the Buddha gives to finding the way out. Gautama, the Buddha-to-be escaped from his responsibilities as a prince, husband and father. After his awakening, six years later, he taught about the gratification of the pursuit of pleasure, the danger in it and the way out from it.
14. Extinction of desire. The word ‘khaya’ often translated as extinction, destruction or dissolution, means the ‘exhausting’ of desire. In the exhausting of desire, we can engage in wise intention and wise action not corrupted with the preoccupations of the self and what it pursues.
15. Five Precepts. It is extraordinarily hard to find the block of Five Precepts in the teachings of the Buddha. This list of five appears on one occasion in an obscure text in all of the Suttas. The Buddha never limited sila (ethics) to five precepts. He spoke much more widely about ethics, about morality, than the Buddhist tradition has opted for. He told the monks and nuns about the importance of restraint of the senses, purification of livelihood and skillful use of food, clothing, shelter and medicine are equally important features of sila. It was convenient for the wealthy that the Buddhist tradition ignored the Buddha and confined ethics to the five precepts. The wealthy could pursue sensual gratification and privileges unchecked since the tradition largely excluded it as a moral issue. The Buddha also lists 10 paths of unskilful action and skillful action, 3 of body, 4 of speech, 3 of mind (the first 4 of which are the basis of the first 4 precepts). MN 41, Saleyyaka Sutta
16. Interconnection. This implies that every ‘thing’ is connected to every ‘thing’ else. It is a view based on the notion that there is some ‘thing’ in the first place. Is the car the engine? No. So take away the engine. Is the car the wheels? No. So take away the wheels. Is the car any other part? No. So throw away the rest of the parts. What is left of the car to be connected? Nothing of it ‘self.’ There is the conventi0on that there is a car. Many women joined the Buddha in the homeless way of life of Dharma exploration. One of the women, named Vajira, experienced disturbing thoughts in meditation.By whom has this human being been created?
Where is the Maker of the being?
Where has the human being arisen?
Where does the human being cease?
Then it occurred to her.
Who took up this question?. A human being or a non-human being?
Ah, it comes from temptation (Mara) to arouse fear and trepidation? she realised.
Truth arose in her. Shre responded:
Just as with an assemblage of parts
the word chariot is used
So, when the aggregates exist
There is the convention a human being.
It was then said at the end of the discourse by the voice to arouse fear.
Vajira knows me and then the voice disappeared right there. SN.1.Page 230.
17. Life is suffering. This is a common misstatement of the first noble truth Again, there is no such statement from the Buddha. If this was reality, then there would be no escape. When suffering arises in life, it is due to the conditions. When the conditions for suffering are not present, then suffering does not arise.
18. Mantras. Mantras are generally a devotional practice to a Higher Self, to a God or use of sheer repetition of a word to condition the mind to reduce stress or extensive thinking. The Buddha taught direct experience with the breath, body, feelings, states of mind and dharma rather than any mantra as the priority of attention. Mantras can certainly be a useful meditation for calming the mind.
19. Metta is loving kindness. Many Pali translators defined metta as loving kindness. The Pali-English Dictionary of the much respected Pali Text Society in Britain uses the word ‘love’ for metta. Perceptions of the kindness of Buddhist monks may have influenced the modern translation of metta. The dictionary says metta derives from ‘mid’ –to love. Loving Kindness is an inadequate translation. Metta expresses unconditional love, profound friendship and limitless kindness, wide and unbounded. The Buddha spoke to Anuruddha of liberation through love (metta ceto-vimutti) and again in Itivuttaka 27.19-21. See also S.ii.265. Ananda also encouraged meditating on the characteristics of metta to realise liberation.
20. Method and Technique to develop Metta. In the Metta Sutta, the Buddha simply revealed the qualities, attitude and state of being of one deeply established in metta. Love without limits is the mark of a truly realised person. The Buddha only instructed the directing of metta in all directions so that it is unbounded. Metta, that is love, is a transformative and divine force that shares similar features as liberation. Both liberation and love know no limits. The modern methods and techniques to develop metta bear very little relationship to the realisaton of metta as a Diving Abiding. Nevertheless, the application of methods and techniques to develop metta can be very helpful. In his 5th century classical book of the Theravada tradition, the Visuddhimagga (the Path of Purification), the Venerable Acharya Buddhaghosa took some of the statements of the Buddha and used them as phrases to develop metta. Eg. May all beings be free from enmity. May they live happily’.
21. Mindfulness is the most important link in the Eightfold Path. The Buddha has never isolated one link above the others. In the Discourse on the Four Applications of Mindfulness, he said that ‘mindfulness is cultivated to the extent necessary for knowing in order to abide freely and independently in the world.’ There is no instruction in the teachings of the Buddha to be ‘mindful in every moment.’ He could not live up to such an ideal. Nor can anyone else. It is an impossible undertaking. The Buddha was not always mindful of the consequences of his decisions and would change his mind later. To take one aspect of the path and elevate it above others abandons dependent arising. This would give selfhood to mindfulness. In MLD 117, the Buddha stated that right view, right effort and right mindfulness support each other while giving a comprehensive explanation of the mutual support and meanings of each link in the Noble Eightfold Path.
22. Moment to Moment Practice. The Buddha does not adopt such a view. He advocate the application of minfulness to body, feelings, state of mind and dharma. It is a means to realise a timeless liberation . He does not teach concentrating on mindfulness for its own sake. He does not give any kind of selfness to mindfulness. There are no words for moment to moment in any of the Suttas. One develops mindfulness along with six other limbs for awekening, namel inquiry, energy, deep happiness, calmness, meditative concentration and equanimity to reach true knowing of lliberation. (MLD 118).
23. Knowing and Seeings things as they are. Not uttered by the Buddha. A common mistranslation. of yathabhutam-ñana- dassana. This celebrated one line statement of the Buddha literally means “knowing and seeing according to what has become.” Bhuta come from the root word ‘bhu’ to become. It refers to the action of knowing and seeing. There is no mention of things in this statement. This correct translation is a more dynamic and challenging approach than the mistranslation that suggests a fixed view. ‘What has become’ refers to dependent arising.
24. No-Self. The Buddha remained in noble silence when asked whether there was a self or no self. He simply stated that body, feelings, perceptions, mental formations, including thoughts, and consciousness were not oneself and did not belong to self. He taught not self as vehicle for liberation from misperception. Anatta literally means ‘not-self’; if the buddha had meant ‘no self’ he would have said ‘na-atta’.
25. Oneness is the ultimate realty. The Buddha did not refute the importance of Oneness. He refers to it in the experience of Brahma Viharas (Divine Abode or Abode of God ). He does not refer to this Abode as ultimate reality since it posits the notion of a self that unites with other. The Buddha refutes All is One and equally refutes All is Many and points to dependent arising. In MLD 117, the Buddha said: Unification of mind equipped with the other seven links of the Eighfold Path is called noble right rconcentation with its supports and requisites.
26. Open to Desire. Desire (tanha), as well as craving and thirsting after, leads to unsatisfactoriness and suffering. The Buddha never endorsed a view about being open to desire. Desire springs from contact, identification with particular feelings that condition the desire and feeds clinging. The view that we can have what we desire without attachment to results compromises the Buddha’s teachings on the unsatisfactoriness of desire. Open to desire sends out a message to Buddhist consumers to be open to their desires provided they follow them through without craving. The temporary peace of mind we experience when we succeed in getting what we want is due to the temporary abeyance of the desire in our mind. Open to Desire waters down the Buddha’s teachings to fit them into Western ideology of going for what we want. It is a common view in contemporary American Buddhism where often the raft to the other shore has become an ocean going liner. The Buddha uses other words for ‘desire’ such as dhamma-canda, zeal for the dharma, when referring to the intention, practices and actions required for awakening and liberation.
27. Passion (raga) is to be eradicated. The Buddha encourages passion such as Dharma rage (Passion for the Dharma). It is not to be confused with the raga for desire. He referred to the giving up of any raga that colours and distorts objects. The word raga means to colour or dye.
28. Paramis (perfections) The Buddha did not teach the 10 Perfections. They are not found anywhere in the Suttas. He refuted the belief that we can achieve a perfection of mind no matter how much cultivate dana (giving), ethics, renunciation, wisdom, energy, patience, truthfulness, resolution, metta (love, loving kindness) and equanimity. The 10 Perfections are found in the commentaries in the Theravada and Six Perfections are found in the Tibetan tradition. The Buddha taught liberation from the notion of perfection and imperfection.
29. Personal Salvation. Personal salvation matters to those who believe in a self to be saved.
30. Rebirth. There is no word in the teachings of the Buddha that literally translates as rebirth. This word seems to come from the Pali word punnabbhava which literally means ‘rebecoming.’ In the Kalama Sutta, one of the most cherished of all his discourse on inquiry, the Buddha takes a provisional view about rebecoming rather than referring to it as an indubitable fact. There is rebecoming due to being bound to the force of desire.
31. Reincarnation. The Buddha refuted the belief of a soul, self or essence that passes from one life to the next.. Our meditation cannot show anything permanent within to leave the body upon death.
32. Right View. The Pali word for ‘right’ such as “Right View, Right Intention and the remaining six links in the Noble Eightfold Path is Samma. Samma means conducive - conducive towards complete awakening. A conduciive view reveals a depth of understanding that is liberating. Samma does not carry any implication of a moral commandment, of right and wrong. Miccha Magga means an Unconducive Path to follow in life.
33. Samatha (calmness) and vipassana (insight) are separate practices from each other. The Buddha never refers anywhere to samatha and vipassana as techniques. If so, they would be opposed to each other. He taught samatha-vipassana as qualities of experiences and insights essential for understanding the Dharma. He said some people are developed in both calmness and insight; some are developed in calmness; some are developed in insight and some remain undeveloped in both. The Buddha never said one technique is samatha (such as mindfulness of breathing) and another technique (such as body awareness or witnessing thought) is insight meditation or Vipassana. Different Buddhist traditions set one apart from the other.
34. Seeing impermanence is all that matters. The Buddha never took the exploration of impermanence in isolation from the rest of the body of his teachings. On impermanence, he encouraged a fivefold perspective – one sees the arising, the passing away (of events, phenomena, experiences, relationships etc), the gratification, the danger and the way out from the world of impermanence. The experience of impermanence (anicca - literally not permanent) is available as step towards letting go of clinging.
35. Sub atomic particle (kalapas). The Buddha did not teach development of the power of concentration (samadhi) in meditation in order to experience sub-atomic particles. The word ’kalapas’ does not appear anywhere in the suttas. The Buddha did not support such a materialistic view or non materialistic views.
36. Truth is within you. Never stated by the Buddha. He said we preserve truth when we don’t make claims about having it. Truth is neither within, nor within another, nor in between. We can’t find a thing called Truth within. Truth is that which wakes us up (bodhi-sacca), knowing truth ( sacca-nana) It is not a substantial entity that some have and some don’t have.
37. Vipassana as a technique. There is nothing in the teachings of the Buddha to indicate that Vipassana is a technique. The word simply means ‘insight.’ A moment of insight is a moment of vipassana that can arise anywhere at any time. Calmness supports insight and insight supports calmness. Calm and insight point to liberation.
38. True Self. Various senior Buddhist teachers will use in their talks and writings the concept True Self. There is nothing to validate a True Self. Who or what within determines that this is my True Self and this is not my True Self?
39. Vegetarian diet. The Buddha was concerned with what came out of our mouths rather than what went into it. He did not object to the homeless seekers receiving meat to eat, as long as animals were not killed for the them.(MLD 55). In vegetarian India, even today, wanderers, yogis, sadhus and ascetics very, very rarely touch meat. Hindus treat cows in India with holy reverence for their peaceful manner and dairy products. It is unlikely that Hindus offered the Buddha’s homeless Sangha anything with a face to eat – namely animals, birds or fish. The Buddha would need to revise radically his view today about eating of meat. There is cruelty to animals in our massive abattoirs. Livestock are provided with an unhealthy diet. Cows, sheep, pigs and birds consume a huge amount of food, whether locked up in animal factories or occupying valuable land that could provide grain, fruit and vegetables. Millions of Buddhists chant about saving all sentient beings and send out loving kindness to animals, birds and fish but they continue to eat them, often on a daily basis.
40. Visualisation Meditations. The Buddha gave direct practices to see and know through our own experience what has become rather than impose upon experience visual pictures, images or mental archetypes. As with methods for metta, use of mantras, visualation practices can be a very beneficial form of meditation.
41. We create our own reality. The Buddha never made this claim. You see this one-liner attributed to the Buddha on posters and in calendars. It is a bizarre idea. Can the mind create the sky above, the earth, below, nature and countless sentient beings. The belief that we create our own reality is a wild projection. Dependent arising conditions shape reality. The mind cannot create it. The self has substituted God the Creator with Self the Creator . It is another projection.It arises from mistranslation of the first verse in the Dhammapada. The Buddha said that all dharmas are mind made. It means that the mind makes self out of what is perceived. The mind gives sustance, essence, soul or selfness to what is dependent arising.
42. Wise Attention. A simple translation. Pali words are yoniso manasikara. Yoni is mother’s womb. Manas is mind. Kara is action. It is the action of the mind emerging from the depth of our being. Yoni is metaphorically used. Manas is mind. Kara is action. Yoniso-manasikara points to establilshing the mind.
PS. A Buddhist practitioner ordered a hot dog with dressing from the Vendor. He gave the Vendor a $20 bill.
The Vendor gave the monk the hotdog but with no change.
Where is my change?“ asked the monk.
The Vendor replied:
I don’t give change. Change comes from within.
MAY ALL BEINGS BE AWAKENED
Special thanks to
Patrick Kearney for his advice. www.dharmasalon.net,
Jenny Wilks,
Hans Gruber www.buddha-heute.de and
Asaf Federman. English: www.warwick.ac.uk/go/asaffederman
Hebrew: www.notes.co.il/assaff
--------------------------------------
Technorati: Buddhism Buddha Buddhist Dharma Compassion Wisdom Religion Meditation Zen Philosophy Spirituality Inspiration Peace Insight
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Teaching on Meditation - by Lama Yeshe
Lama Yeshe gave this teaching at Maitreya Institute, Holland, September 1981. Excerpted from Universal Love: The Yoga Method of Buddha Maitreya, edited by Nicholas Ribush, forthcoming from the Lama Yeshe Wisdom Archive, February 2008. 
Why does Buddhism put so much emphasis on meditation? It's because our mind is so gross and our memory so poor that we forget things easily and cannot recall our countless lives' experiences. The purpose of meditation, therefore, is to increase, or develop, our memory, or mindfulness, of reality.
Our distracted, fragmented thoughts, which we experience continuously every day, are countless. Nonsense repeatedly cycles through our mind, again, again, again, again.... It's like in the pictures of the wheel of life, whose hub shows a pig, a chicken and a snake going round and round endlessly. Like that, our pig, chicken and snake mentalities continuously reverberate in our consciousness, reducing our memory to almost nothing.
The meditation techniques that stop these three mentalities are very important. Without stopping these deluded minds we can't see the concepts of ego that we spontaneously experience in everyday life. They're very subtle, so without eliminating these gross minds it's impossible to see our ego's activity. That's why we meditate on the energy of our own conscious experience. By quieting and eliminating our gross mentalities we create the space we need to see the concepts of ego, to recognize the entity interpreted by ego, which is non- existent.
Normally, religious people miss the point--we circle around it but don't make much progress because we keep missing it. What is the point? The point is to become revolutionaries and totally destroy our entire concepts of ego. This is a much more revolutionary ideal than any of the theories propounded by Marx-Lenin, Hitler or Mao.
The concepts of ego project an independent, self-existent I totally unrelated to physical matter, time, space, cause, effect or anything else, existing somewhere, untouchable. Our ego holds on to the self-existent I and never lets it go.
Based on the results of his own practice, Lama Tsongkhapa said that by contemplating our conscious experience we can cut our superstitious, dualistic thoughts and thereby discover our ego projections and realize shunyata in a flash. Like throwing a switch, the moment we discover exactly what the false conception is, at that instant we discover non-duality.
The most difficult thing to recognize is the entity held by our ego, and the only way to do this is to meditate. According to Lama Tsongkhapa there's no way to do it intellectually. To prove this, he quoted Nagarjuna: "The person is not of the nature of earth, water, fire, air, space or even consciousness. The person exists only as a conventional designation." Lama Tsongkhapa totally agreed with Nagarjuna: all phenomena exist only in name. So we should just leave things as they are --superficial names projected by superstition--and not try to find some real, self-existent entity beyond that.
Some people think that first we have to study shunyata in order to understand it and then meditate. That's wrong. To realize shunyata, first we have to meditate.
The thing is that the gross symptoms of ego, the three poisonous mentalities I just mentioned, disturb, irritate and shake the mind, so without subduing them to a certain extent--and there are various levels to which they can be subdued --there's no way to see the unconscious levels of ego that hold the notion of an independent self-existent I. It's impossible. And that's the point. Therefore our approach has to be through meditation--the experience of contemplating the energy of mental clarity automatically eliminates those mentalities.
Otherwise, it's like Lama Tsongkhapa said --our enemy's hiding out in the jungle but we're looking for him in town. That's us--we practitioners are always busy doing something religious but never get anywhere because we miss the point and look for our ego in completely the wrong place.
Therefore it's very important to stop our "that-this" superstitious thoughts and we're capable of doing so. By simply remaining mindfully aware of the experience of our own energy without getting involved either subjectively or objectively in that-this thinking, focusing our mind and letting go, we'll no longer have a problem with distraction.
It's similar to our present situation. We're here in this peaceful Dharma center knowing that there are disasters and bloodshed happening all over the world but not getting emotionally disturbed. It's like that.
When I say "let go" I mean to focus on the clarity of mind and just remain there without expectation or emotional conversation. As I mentioned before, when the full moon shines it doesn't have any expectation or thoughts such as "I'm illuminating the Earth." It doesn't think anything; it just illuminates. The fewer dualistic thoughts you have, the greater the peace, tranquility, satisfaction and bliss you experience--and satisfaction and bliss are antidotes to dissatisfaction, depression, aggression, distraction and all other emotional disturbances.
When we meditate on an object with continuous, focused attention, our sense perception no longer functions. In other words, we go beyond sense perception. Sense perception has a bad reputation in Buddhism because it's the door to delusion and superstition. Whatever our senses perceive is always an optical illusion; the nature of sense perception is such that it produces more ego and superstition.
Therefore meditators deem the sense world unimportant. Since whatever appears to their sense perception is illusory, they no longer trust or use it much, but Maitreya also emphasizes in his writings that the mind the meditator uses is the sixth, or mental, consciousness, which is not sense perception or sense consciousness.
When a fighter pilot first sees an enemy plane it might be a long way off but as that self-existent plane gets closer and closer he sees it more and more clearly and at a certain point can shoot it down. The moment it disappears he experiences a kind of emptiness, shunyata. Similarly, when our clear wisdom first tries to find our ego, it's not very obvious; it's hiding. But as our concentration deepens our ego finds it increasingly difficult to remain out of sight and eventually it appears right there in front of us. As soon as we recognize it we should destroy it, and the moment it disappears we experience shunyata. The nuclear missile we use to shoot down our self-existent I is mindfulness, the wisdom of intensive awareness, and we don't need dualistic thought to pull the trigger; the moment our ego appears, we shoot it down.
When we reach the point of experiencing the non-dual I in this way, we should just let go and focus on our mind with clear comprehension. Also, the "non" in non-dual shouldn't make us feel lonely: "I feel so empty, I have no dear friend." To experience non-duality is to experience the universe. We should feel, "I am the reality of all universal phenomena," or "The reality of all universal phenomena is me."
But again, these are not conceptual thoughts. What I'm talking about is pure experience, what we call the enlightened, or dharmakaya, experience and, in a way, we can say it's the experience of the omnipresent love and wisdom of Maitreya.
However, the dharmakaya experience is invisible, and in order to communicate with sentient beings we have to emanate in a visible form.
Lama Yeshe gave this teaching at Maitreya Institute, Holland, September 1981. Excerpted from Universal Love: The Yoga Method of Buddha Maitreya, edited by Nicholas Ribush, forthcoming from the Lama Yeshe Wisdom Archive, February 2008.
--------------------------------------
Technorati: Buddhism Buddha Buddhist Dharma Compassion Wisdom Religion Meditation Zen Philosophy Spirituality Inspiration Peace Insight
Monday, November 12, 2007
The Way to Nirvana
Source: Dharmapala Thangka Centre
1st Stage: Stabilizing in the Mind [Cittasthapana]
The first stage is attained through study and listening to the Dharma as well as understanding the nature of cyclic existence. It is essential that the seeker come to realize the importance of the First Noble Truth taught by the Buddha. This is the Truth of Suffering, and the reality of this Truth as a fact of life, has first to be intellectually comprehended and then further appreciated as a result of successful contemplation. Through an emotional intuition gleaned from this pondering one must thoroughly and deeply connect with this Truth.
So then, with this turning-about experience, we begin to see and feel the need to steadfastly focus and engage our mind in meditation. To do this we start by concentrating on the rise and fall of the breath at the abdomen.
In the illustration the monk, the meditator, chases after the elephant, the wildly untamed mind. In the first stage our mind is completely under the sway and allure of the five sense objects and mental-emotional events. The rope and the hook carried by the monk are hardly any help at this point. When the object is not steady, disturbances are plentiful. The "elephant" is not even looking toward the rope and hook and the monkey runs wildly, leading the elephant. At this first stage, the flame of the fire of effort must be very strong.
2nd Stage Continuous Stabilizing [Samsthapana]
The monk fixes his mind on the breath. Hope of success commences here. [The monk holds up his hands.] The rope and hook are needed to bind and tie the elephant. One must use remembrance and watchfulness to bring the object of meditation close. The hook makes it possible to drive the elephant in the right direction.
The white spot on the heads of the elephant and monkey indicate that the mind begins to become a bit calmer, with progress in staying and resting the mind on the breath, fogginess and weakness lessen slightly. However the five senses still distract: touch [cloth], taste [fruit], smell [perfumed conch], sound [cymbals], and sight [mirror].
This second stage is attained through the power of and motivation from pondering the Dharma. This contemplation forges concentration on the anvil of a certain faith and lengthened periods of concentration.
3rd Stage: Habitual Stabilization [Avasthapana]
The rope represents the power of recollection [smrti]. This power comes from the "memory" nature of mind. Remembrance is like the rope, which is now on the elephant's neck and you see in the picture that in response the elephant gazes toward the monk, the meditator.
Now the rabbit makes its appearance. The meditator can distinguish the subtler forms of distraction and weakness. The rabbit represents the presence in the mind of passivity. Here, especially, the meditator seems to enjoy the state of "spacing out." She or he thinks that they have attained an ideal calm. Everything feels good. In fact, this is really a distraction, a subtle daze. The knowledgeable meditator knows that there are two levels of "passivity": a basic form of 'spacing-out,' which seems very pleasant but is obviously a distraction, and a far subtler form, which seems a very peaceful state of mind, but which is really a disguised form of depression. This must be watched for by careful introspection.
Like a rabbit using camouflages well, this stage can be is mistaken for progress, and since this subtle weakness does not disturb concentration, it relaxes the meditator, and seems pleasurable. Yet it is a disturbance nevertheless. For later it will make our mind weak; and suppress desire to be energized with sufficient effort. Like a slow leak in a punctured balloon, this subtle weakness makes the mind weaker and weaker, very slowly.
4th Stage: Near Stabilization [Upasthapana]
At this stage, the dark and white colors are almost half and half, showing that distraction and fogginess have diminished by half. With the power of watchfulness and alertness the meditator firmly understands what is being done and what is occurring. The rope on the elephant's neck is loose, because the mind is quite obedient.
The elephant, monkey, and rabbit look back; showing that having recognized these mental distractions, the mind turns back to the object of contemplation. At this point concentration on the breath is possible for about fifteen minutes.
5th Stage: Habituation [Damana]
The rope of remembrance is not so necessary now, but since subtle distractions grow stronger, the power of diligence / perseverance must be applied. The long effort against the invasive distraction of the five senses and any inner events may too quickly relax the effort of the meditator, and the subtler forms of distraction would wax stronger and thereby the intensity of clarity diminishes.
Pictured as another monkey eating from a tree on the periphery, and not on the path, means that while one is developing Calm-Abiding, no other thoughts, even those of Dharma or meditations on Samsara etc., can be allowed to interfere with concentration!
One experiences steady concentration for a half an hour, and the breath-object is very "close" to the mind; the mind is peaceful with no distractions.
6th Stage: Pacifying [Shamana]
The allure of the five senses are now gone. Gone also are the other distractions of the inner emotional and mental events. An energetic concentration arises, shown as no hook and rope needed, though ever at the ready. The monk is not even looking at the elephant.
Concentration without any disturbance is possible for at least one hour. The monk hooks the elephant with his goad; the mind is stopped from wandering by clear understanding.
7th Stage: Thorough Pacification [Vyupasthamana]
After long persevering practice, the meditator reaches complete pacification of the mind. The monk is behind the elephant and allows the mind to 'rest' naturally. It concentrates on its own. The hare disappears and, because no energy is needed; concentration comes immediately. But still, the monk observes! There still remains subtle weakness and distraction, but [because they totally lack dark color] there is no disturbance at all. Concentration is possible for about four hours.
We see that the monkey leaves the elephant and now squats behind the monk in complete obeisance. However there are still slight traces of black; this shows that even the subtlest sinking and scattering may continue to arise. Should they begin to arise they can be eliminated with slight effort.
8th Stage: Becoming One-pointed [Ekotikarana]
Spontaneous concentration is now present until the meditator wishes to stop it. As the concentration progresses, so does the clarity of the object concentrated upon Ones sense-media are not needed and do not intrude.
The monk doesn't even need to look at the elephant; the elephant just comes and obeys. Concentration for one or two days without a break is possible. In the drawing the monkey disappears and the elephant becomes completely white. The mind can now remain continually in absorption on the object of concentration.
9th Stage: Entrance Into Samadhi [Upacara-samadhi]
The monk meditates, and the elephant just sleeps. The meditator is totally non-dependent upon the senses and in perfect equanimity. The path has ended and the elephant is at rest. At this stage there is no limit to the length of fixed concentration. According to the meditator's feelings, his mind and the object become one. The ninth stage of samadhi or mental absorption is attained through the power of total habituation, a familiarization and integration in Calm-Abiding.
Beyond the 9th Stage
After the 9th Stage of Calm-Abiding is attained, many new and extraordinary experiences come, which have never been experienced before. When these experiences come, this is the sign that Calm-Abiding has been attained. From the heart of the meditating monk emanates a rainbow. The monk is shown flying alone; this is bodily bliss.
Riding the elephant is the attainment of Calm-Abiding, across the rainbow is mental bliss.
Wielding the flaming sword of perfect insight, the monk returns triumphantly along the rainbow; for samara's root is destroyed in union of samatha and vipasyana, now with emptiness [sunyata] as the object of contemplation.
Control of the flame of supreme remembrance and clear comprehension represents the ability to examine the sublime meaning of sunyata: the knowledge of the ultimate reality of all phenomena.
From the monk's heart emanate two dark rainbows, which the monk is just about to cut asunder with his flaming sword of wisdom. These two rainbows represent karmic hindrances and mental illusion [klesa-varana], and the obscurations of the instincts of mental distortion [Uneyavarana].
Not only when in meditation, but in all actions, the one possessed of accomplished Calm-Abiding is at this stage fully concentrated. The body feels light as the wood-wool flower [like the mimosa blossom]. Having achieved this goal, the meditator gains all other supernatural powers [such as reading minds, disappearing, and transferring his consciousness into other beings].
Like someone who has "sharpened the axe to cut all things," he is capable of doing any other meditative practice.
After sharpening an axe, so a person must use it.
Therefore from taming the mind in Calm-Abiding, one must use it for attainment of Illumination! We must ourselves become Buddha! The miracle powers are not important things. The important thing is developing the mind! One has to free one's mind from the "trap of delusion."
~End post~
--------------------------------------
Technorati: Buddhism Buddha Buddhist Dharma Compassion Wisdom Religion Meditation Zen Philosophy Spirituality Inspiration Peace nirvana
Thursday, November 08, 2007
顺治皇帝赞僧诗
下载诗歌
天下丛林饭似山，钵盂倒处任君餐。
黄金白玉非为贵，惟有袈裟披身难。
朕为大地山河主，忧国忧民事转烦。
百年三万六千日，不及僧家半日闲。
来时糊涂去时迷，空在人间走一回。
未曾生我谁是我？生我之时我是谁？
长大成人方是我，合眼朦胧又是谁。
悲欢离合多劳虑，一日清闲有谁知？
世间难比出家人，无牵无挂得安宜。
口中吃得清和味，身上常穿百衲衣。
五湖四海为上客，皆因宿世种菩提。
个个都是真罗汉，披搭如来三种衣。
金乌玉兔东复西，为人切莫用心计。
百年世事三更梦，万里乾坤一局棋。
禹开九州汤放桀，秦吞六国汉登基。
古今多少英雄汉，南北山头卧土泥。
黄袍换却紫袈裟，只为当年一念差。
我本西方一衲子，因何生在帝王家？
十八年来不自由，南征北讨几时休？
我今撤手西方去，谁管千秋与万秋。
【註】
身膺宰輔與朝廊 蓋世功名世莫量
自性彌陀如不念 未知何以敵無常
清世祖順治皇帝在位十八年，為清朝二百六十八年的基業打下了深厚的根基。
順治皇帝擅長詩詞書畫，崇仰佛道，先後曾經延請憨璞性聰、玉琳通琇、天童等三位高僧入京說法。
順治皇帝不僅將『金鑾殿』改為『萬善殿』，作為禪師說法的法堂，尊奉玉琳通琇為國師，
又在宮中設置『皇壇』，也就是今日的戒壇，遴選一千五百位僧眾，並傳授菩薩大戒。
順治皇帝一心慕道，幾次有絕塵離俗之意，終被勸止，而於在位第十八年，寫下了這首名垂千古的《讚僧詩》，
以銘其心志。如詩云『百年世事三更夢，萬里乾坤一局棋』、『古來多少英雄漢，南北山頭臥土泥』，不僅抒發胸臆，也警醒世人。
順治皇帝位居九五之尊，統領天下，猶有『黃金白玉非為貴，唯有袈裟披肩難』之嘆，況我輩凡俗，
倘碌碌於衣食，不肯把握善緣，精進修持，當真是『空在佛門走一回』了！
~End of Post~
--------------------------------------
Technorati: Buddhism Buddha Buddhist Dharma Compassion Wisdom Religion Meditation Zen Philosophy Spirituality Inspiration Peace Insight
Sunday, November 04, 2007
憨山大师费闲歌
Source: flickr.com
憨山大师费闲歌
(下载歌曲)
讲道容易体道难 杂念不除总是闲
世事尘劳常挂碍 深山静坐也徒然
出家容易守戒难 信愿全无总是闲
净戒不持空费力 纵然落发也徒然
修行容易遇师难 不遇明师总是闲
自作聪明空费力 盲修瞎炼也徒然
染尘容易出尘难 不断尘劳总是闲
情性攀缘空费力 不成道果也徒然
听闻容易实心难 侮慢师尊总是闲
自大贡高空费力 聪明盖世也徒然
学道容易悟道难 不下功夫总是闲
能信不行空费力 空空论说也徒然
闭关容易守关难 不肯修行总是闲
身在关中心在外 千年不出也徒然
念佛容易信心难 心口不一总是闲
口念弥陀心散乱 喉咙喊破也徒然
拜佛容易敬心难 意不虔诚总是闲
五体虚悬空费力 骷髅嗑破也徒然
诵经容易解经难 口诵不解总是闲
能解不依空费力 日诵万卷也徒然
憨山大師費閑歌簡釋
梁國雄作
１. 講道容易體道難 雜念不除總是閑 世事塵勞常掛礙 深山靜坐也徒然
談論佛法，總比實際修行，去體驗解脫之道容易得多，可是，若未能平息雜念，高談闊論畢竟無益。再者，若心懷世事，妄念紛飛，縱使在山野靜修，終歸也是徒勞無功的。
２. 出家容易守戒難 信願全無總是閑 淨戒不持空費力 縱然落髮也徒然
形式上的出家，總比實踐出家的修持，例如：守護六根（眼耳鼻舌身意等六個感覺器官）、自我克制、不犯戒律等容易得多，可是，若內心全無信願，出家畢竟無益。再者，若出家後仍屢次犯戒，則只浪費氣力，縱使剃髮為僧，終歸也是徒勞無功的。
３. 修行容易遇師難 不遇明師總是閑 自作聰明空費力 盲修瞎煉也徒然
獨自修行，總比尋找明師指導容易得多，可是，若無明師指導，獨修畢竟無益。再者，若自持聰明，則只浪費氣力，獨自盲修瞎煉，終歸是難有結果的。
４. 染塵容易出塵難 不斷塵勞總是閑 情性攀緣空費力 不成道果也徒然
習染世情，隨俗浮沉，總比超塵脫俗容易得多，可是，若不努力擺脫塵世，隨俗浮沉畢竟無益。再者，若仍眷戀世樂，則只浪費氣力，最終不能成就道果，豈不徒勞無功、浪費生命？
５. 聽聞容易實心難 侮慢師尊總是閑 自大貢高空費力 聰明蓋世也徒然
聽聞佛法，總比誠心老實修行容易得多，可是，若看不起導師，常加侮辱，聽法畢竟無益。再者，若自高自大，則只浪費氣力，縱使聰明絕頂，也是徒勞無功的。
６. 學道容易悟道難 不下功夫總是閑 能信不行空費力 空空論說也徒然
學習道理，總比覺悟道理容易得多，可是，若不踏實精進，學道畢竟無益。再者，若相信道理，卻不去實踐，則只浪費氣力，縱使能言善辯，終歸也是徒勞無功的。
７. 閉關容易守關難 不肯修行總是閑 身在關中心在外 千年不出也徒然
退隱靜居，總比安定內心容易得多，可是，若無心修行，令心安靜，退隱靜居畢竟無益。再者，若隱匿郊野，但內心紛亂、留戀世事，即使千年不出，終歸也是徒勞無功的。
８. 念佛容易信心難 心口不一總是閑 口念彌陀心散亂 喉嚨喊破也徒然
形式上的念佛，總比心存信願地念佛容易得多，可是，若非心口一致，熱切地去念佛，念佛畢竟無益。再者，若一面口誦「南無阿彌陀佛」，一面心想他事，毫不專心，即使喊破喉嚨，最終也是徒勞無功的。
９. 拜佛容易敬心難 意不虔誠總是閑 五體虛懸空費力 骷髏嗑破也徒然
形式上的拜佛，總比恭敬地拜佛容易得多，可是，若非心存誠敬，拜佛畢竟無益。再者，若無敬心拜佛，就算五體投地，也只浪費氣力，即使嗑破頭髏，終歸也是徒勞無功的。
１０. 誦經容易解經難 口誦不解總是閑 能解不依空費力 日誦萬卷也徒然
形式上的誦經，總比學習理解經文義理容易得多，可是，若非依解起行，誦經畢竟無益。再者，若不依解起行，縱使日誦萬卷經書，終歸也是徒勞無功的。
~End of Post~
--------------------------------------
Technorati: Buddhism Buddha Buddhist Dharma Compassion Wisdom Religion Meditation Zen Philosophy Spirituality Inspiration Peace Insight
憨山大师醒世歌
憨山大师醒世歌
(下载歌曲)
红尘白浪两茫茫 忍辱柔和是妙方
到处随缘延岁月 终身安分度时光
休将自己心田昧 莫把他人过失扬
谨慎应酬无懊恼 耐烦作事好商量
从来硬弩弦先断 每见钢刀口易伤
惹祸只因闲口舌 招愆多为狠心肠
是非不必争人我 彼此何须论短长
世事由来多缺陷 幻躯焉得免无常
吃些亏处原无碍 退让三分也不妨
春日才看杨柳绿 秋风又见菊花黄
荣华终是三更梦 富贵还同九月霜
老病死生谁替得 酸甜苦辣自承当
人从巧计夸伶俐 天自从容定主张
谗曲贪嗔堕地狱 公平正直即天堂
麝因香重身先死 蚕为丝多命早亡
一剂养神平胃散 两种和气二陈汤
生前枉费心千万 死后空留手一双
悲欢离合朝朝闹 寿夭穷通日日忙
休得争强来斗胜 百年浑是戏文场
顷刻一声锣鼓歇 不知何处是家乡
憨山大師醒世歌簡釋
梁國雄作
１. 紅塵白浪兩茫茫 忍辱柔和是妙方 到處隨緣延歲月 終身安分度時光
世事起落無常，變化多端，就像鬧市飛揚的塵埃，又像互相衝擊、起伏不停的海洋波浪，那樣模糊無際，不可測度。體諒忍讓，柔順和諧，才是處世聰明靈巧的方法啊！無論身處何地，不可強求，宜隨順因緣，就當時情況，隨時制宜；一輩子也要滿足地、安分守己地過日子。
２. 休將自己心田昧 莫把他人過失揚 謹慎應酬無懊惱 耐煩作事好商量
不可隱瞞良心，自知不好，仍繼續做著那些邪惡、害己害人的事情。所謂己所不欲，勿施於人，對於別人的過失，不可到處張揚啊！與人交往應對，宜小心謹慎，切忌出口傷人，或因言語衝突而起煩惱；有困難或爭議時，動氣無益，宜耐心解決，或找機會好好溝通、商量。
３. 從來硬弩弦先斷 每見剛刀口易傷 惹禍只因閒口舌 招愆多為狠心腸
自古以來，常見強硬的弓弩，其弦線很快折斷，鋒利堅強的鋼刀，其刀口亦易損傷。飛來橫禍，往往由閒話開始，繼起爭執；罪禍臨身，皆因心狠手辣，害人不淺。
４. 是非不必爭人我 彼此何須論短長 世事由來多缺陷 幻軀焉得免無常
其實，何必時常強分你非我是、我長你短呢？世間從來就沒有完美無缺的事物，緣 起如幻、無實自性的軀體，又怎可永存不朽呢？
５. 喫些虧處原無礙 退讓三分也不妨 春日纔看楊柳綠 秋風又見菊花黃
吃點虧，讓幾步，於己實在損失不大，不妨接受包容；時移世易，盛衰很快轉移，試看春天柔美的綠柳景色，很快就被秋天怡人的黃菊所替代了。
６. 榮華終是三更夢 富貴還同九月霜 老病死生誰替得 酸甜苦辣自承當
世人只顧追求身外的榮華富貴，忽略了自身的處境。其實，身外的榮華富貴，如夜中夢、如夏月霜，轉瞬消逝，但自身的生老病死苦，除了自己，有誰可以替代呢？
７. 人從巧計誇伶俐 天自從容定主張 諂曲貪瞋墮地獄 公平正直即天堂
自恃聰明的人，苦心積慮所經營的權謀，最後結果，皆難逃自然的因果定理：阿諛奉承，為私利私憤，作惡多端的，必得惡報，守正不阿，行善積德的，必有善報。
８. 麝因香重身先死 蠶為絲多命早亡 一劑養神平胃散 兩鍾和氣二陳湯
麝有貴重的香，蠶有貴重的絲，因而命短，故此，無須過分追求與擁有，閒時不妨調養精神，清心寡欲，減少一點好勝鬥爭的心態吧。
９. 生前枉費心千萬 死後空持手一雙 悲歡離合朝朝鬧 富貴窮通日日忙
世人少悟，不知生前營謀所得，死後只能空手而往；大多數還未覺悟，仍在繼續營謀，天天鬧著悲歡離合，日日忙著富貴窮通的事情。
１０. 休得爭強來鬥勝 百年渾是戲文場 頃刻一聲鑼鼓歇 不知何處是家鄉
請盡快停止爭強好勝吧！人生百年，就像做戲一場，不久鑼鼓聲竭，散場閉幕， 又不知隨業流轉至何方所了。
~End of Post~
--------------------------------------
Technorati: Buddhism Buddha Buddhist Dharma Compassion Wisdom Religion Meditation Zen Philosophy Spirituality Inspiration Peace Insight
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
How A Table Exists
How A Table Exists
by Lama Zopa Rinpoche
(Read also: Lama Zopa Rinpoche's Advice Book)
Things are empty of existing from their own side. To give a clearer idea of this, I often use the simple example of a table. Even though this way of analyzing is not the correct way to meditate on emptiness, it gives you an idea of the correct way to meditate. Especially if you're a beginner, it will give you some idea of how the table exists in reality, of what the table is.
When a person first enters this hall, they see that there is a table here in front of me. But what makes the person decide to give the name "table" to this particular object and not to the steps or to the throne? What makes the person decide to give this object the label "table"? There has to be a reason before deciding on the label "table." The reason is that the person sees, first of all, a material object that performs the function of supporting things, or of allowing things to be put on top of it. The person first seeing that becomes the reason to label "table." That is what makes the person decide, among the numberless labels, on this particular label, "table."
Seeing this object that performs the function of supporting things is the reason in the mind of the person for applying the label "table." There has to be a reason before the label is applied, and the reason is seeing the basis for the label. You see the base first, then you apply the label, "It's a table." Therefore, this material object that you first see, which can perform the function of supporting things, is not table. This is the base. You see the base first, which is the reason to give the label "table." 
Otherwise, if seeing the base doesn't come first, you haven't got any reason to label "table." There's no reason in your mind for you to label this "table," that "steps," or that "throne." There's no reason to make you decide to give a particular label.
If the first thing you see is the table, if you see the table before giving the label "table," there would be no reason to label "table." Since it's already table, why would you label "table" on the table? There would be no reason to do that.
For example, when parents name their child Jeff, they label on something that is not Jeff. Labeling "Jeff" on something that is not Jeff has meaning. But if the base, the aggregates, were already Jeff, there would be no purpose in labeling "Jeff" on Jeff. You would then again have to label "Jeff" on Jeff; then you would again have to label "Jeff" on Jeff.... It would become endless.
This is one logical reasoning used in the four-point analysis.* The first of the four points is recognizing the object to be refuted. The second point is that of ascertaining the pervasion, that if anything exists it should exist either one with its base or separately from its base. If the I is truly existent, it has to exist either one with the aggregates or separately from the aggregates.
If the I is one with the aggregates, various mistakes arise. The I is the receiver and the aggregates, this body and mind, are what is received. So, the receiver and what is received would then become one. In other words, the I, the possessor, and the aggregates, the possession, would become one. So, there is no way that the possessor and the possession can be one. They have to be different.
Anyway, if you see the table first, what reason do you have to label it "table"? There's no reason to label "table" on that which is already table. It has no meaning, no purpose. Normally, you see the base and then say, "I see the table." In order to see the table, you have to see the base of the table first. Otherwise, there's no reason for you to say, "I see the table." By seeing the base, this object that you can put things on top of, you then label "I see the table" and believe in that label.
By seeing the base of these steps, you say, "I see the steps," and by seeing the base of this throne, you say, "I see the throne." By seeing a particular object and the particular function that it performs, you then label, "I see the table," "I see the steps" or "I see the throne."
Seeing the base has to come first. This thing that performs the function of supporting things is not the table. This thing that you climb up is not the steps. This thing that you sit on is not the throne. The thing that performs the function of supporting things is the base to be labeled "table." This is one point to meditate on to find out what the table is. Since you use this base as a reason to label "table," it's not the table, just as this is not the steps and this is not the throne.
Even from this analysis, you can see that the table and the base to be labeled "table," the steps and the base to be labeled "steps" and the throne and the base to be labeled "throne" are different. They don't exist in the way we normally think they do, which is that this concrete thing itself is the table and that is the steps and that is the throne.
Another point is that you talk about the parts of a table. When you say "the parts of the table," it means the parts of the table are not the table. This top is not the table, this leg is not the table, this leg is not the table, that leg is not the table, and that leg is not the table. Just from the language, you can tell that saying "the parts of the table" means they're not the table.
Even the whole group of all these parts gathered together is not the table. What is it? It is the base to be labeled "table." None of these parts is the table, and even the whole group of all the parts is not the table. This is clear.
Another point is that the table is nowhere on this. There's no table here or there or there. There's no table on this base.
The first point is that the base is not the table. When you come into the room, how do you come to apply labels to things? You can see that the reason you use to apply a label to something is not that thing. You use seeing the base of the table as the reason to label "table," but this object that can be used to put things on is not table. You apply the label "table" after seeing the base. It's clear that the base and the label are different.
The second point is that none of the parts of the table is the table. And even the whole group of all the parts is not the table. It is the base to be labeled "table." It now becomes clearer that the table is different from its base.
The third point is that you cannot find the table anywhere on this base. But that doesn't mean there's no table in this room; it doesn't mean the table doesn't exist. The table exists in this room--there are actually many tables here in this room. There's no table here on this, but there is a table in this room. This makes clear what the table is.
This is not the correct way to meditate on emptiness, since this way of searching for the table is related to the merely imputed table and leaves out the truly existent table. We haven't touched the object to be refuted, the truly existent table, which we are supposed to realize is empty. Therefore, according to Lama Tsongkhapa and many other great pundits, this is not the correct way of analyzing.
In this way of analyzing, when you search for the table among all its parts, you find that none of the parts is the table, and even the whole group of all the parts is not the table but the base to be labeled table. But it doesn't mean that the table doesn't exist. The table exists.
So, what is that table? Because we see this object that performs the function of allowing things to be put on top of it, we merely impute "table" and believe it is a table. Because this object is here in this room, we believe that there is a table in this room. By seeing this object, we believe, "I see a table." It is a concept. By seeing this object in this room, we merely impute, "There is a table." We leave it just at that; we are satisfied just by that. There's no table anywhere on this, but there is a table in this room.
You can see now that the way the table exists is extremely subtle. When you really analyze what the table is, it is extremely subtle. It is not that the table is nonexistent, but it is like it is nonexistent. It is not nonexistent because you can make the table, use the table, break the table. If you make this base, you believe, "I made a table"; you simply believe, "I made a table." If you use the table, you believe, "I'm using the table"; you simply believe, "I'm using the table." And if you break the table, you believe, "I broke the table." 
The table is not nonexistent, but it is not the concrete thing that we normally think it is. We normally think of the table as something concrete that is oneness with its base, undifferentiable from its base. We can't split the base and the label "table." There is something concrete there. So, that is not table. There's no table on this, but there is a table in this room.
You can now see how the table is completely empty. It has no existence from its own side. There's no real, concrete table from its own side. From this you can get an idea of how the table exists. It is extremely subtle.
After this analysis, you know that none of the parts is the table and even the whole group of the parts is not the table. There's no table anywhere here on this base, but there is a table in this room. By analyzing like this, you see that the way the table exists is extremely fine, extremely subtle, but when you check what is appearing to you, you find that a real, concrete table is left there, oneness with its base. This is what is called the object to be refuted. That real table appearing from its own side, that truly existent table, that independent table, is the object to be refuted. That concrete thing left there is the object to be refuted, and it is a hallucination. In reality it is completely empty.
This is the correct way to meditate on the emptiness of the table. By recognizing that the table appears to you to be independent, unlabeled, real from its own side, you then search for that table to see whether or not it exists. When you don't find it and you see that it's empty, at that time you're seeing the emptiness, or ultimate nature, of the table. By seeing the ultimate truth of the table, that it is completely empty of existing from its own side, as a result you then realize the conventional truth of the table, that the table exists in mere name, being merely imputed by the mind. This is subtle dependent arising.
The fourth of the four schools of Buddhist philosophy, the Madhyamaka, has two divisions, Svatantrika and Prasangika. This is the Prasangika view of the subtle dependent arising of the table, the conventional truth of the table: the table exists in mere name, being merely imputed by the mind
*Note: That is, if the I were one with the aggregates, labeling "I" would be superfluous. It would simply be one more name for the aggregates. The four points are (1) recognizing the object to be refuted, (2) ascertaining the pervasion of the two possibilities of oneness and difference, (3) ascertaining the lack of oneness of the I and the aggregates, and (4) ascertaining the lack of difference of the I and the aggregates.
Lama Zopa Rinpoche gave this teaching at the Great Enlightenment Temple, New York, in 1991. It appears in the forthcoming book How Things Exist, edited from the Lama Yeshe Wisdom Archive by Ven. Ailsa Cameron.
--------------------------------------
Technorati: Buddhism Buddha Buddhist Dharma Compassion Wisdom Religion Meditation Zen Philosophy Spirituality Inspiration Peace Insight
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Rebirth Evidence?
You should watch this 46 minute video. It is very interesting. This is a case of a child in Scotland who speaks of a previous life lived by him, which was investigated and video-taped as the study progressed.
There have been thousands of such cases that have been reported and verified by independent researchers in Sri Lanka, India and eastern countries, where the adherents of Buddhism and Hinduism find it acceptable based on their teachings. Hindus believe in Reincarnation whilst Buddhists believe in Rebirth.
~End of post~
--------------------------------------
Technorati: Buddhism Buddha Buddhist Dharma Compassion Wisdom Religion Meditation Zen Philosophy Spirituality Inspiration Rebirth Reincarnation
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Break Through Delusion
Extracted entirely from DailyZen
This is the way people are in the world. When they encounter pleasing situations, they feel happy and content. When they encounter situations that go against them, they feel worried and endangered.
Nevertheless, pleasing things should not be considered lucky, and adversity should not be considered unlucky. If you are sunk in things that your conceptual mind considers convenient, the intention of transcending the world will never arise. If you are sad and do not get what you aim for, then you will grow weary of the fetters of the world of physical existence, and therefore seek to transcend the world.
Thus, when myriad sufferings extend before you, just contemplate them with correct wisdom.
Ask yourself: Where does the suffering come from? It is born from physical existence. Where does physical existence come from? From karma. Where does karma come from? It is born from delusion. On the basis of delusion, you create karma. On the basis of karma, physical existence forms. On the basis of physical existence, you incur suffering. Just manage to break through delusion, and all of this is empty and still.
You may venture to ask, “What is the method for breaking through delusion?”
Just go to the fundamental meditation point and understand: Who is reciting the buddha-name? Who is mindful of the buddha?
Take hold of your doubts over this, take hold and defeat them: then all delusion will be smashed. Think this over! Don’t neglect it!
Pure Land and Zen Methods
There are many ways to enter the Path, but for directness and simplicity, none matches reciting the buddha-name.
The method of buddha-remembrance through reciting the buddha-name brings salvation to those of the most excellent capacities, and reaches down to the most stupid and dull. In sum, it is the Path that reaches from high to low. Do not be shaken or confused by vulgar views that Pure Land is only for those of lesser abilities.
Since ancient times, the venerable adepts of the Zen school have taught people to contemplate meditation topics (koans), to arouse the feeling of doubt, and thus to proceed to great awakening. Some contemplate the word “No.” Some contemplate “The myriad things return to the one: what does the one return to?” The meditation topics are quite diverse, and there are quite enough of them.
Now I will try to compare Zen and Pure Land methods.
Take for example the koan “The myriad things return to one: what does the one return to?” This is very similar to the koan “ Who is the one reciting the buddha-name?” If you can break through at this “Who?” then you will not have to ask anyone else what the one returns to: you will spontaneously comprehend.
This was precisely what the ancients meant when they said that those who recite the buddha-name and wish to study Zen should not concentrate on any other meditation topic but this.
Recite the buddha-name several times, turn the light around and observe yourself: who is the one reciting the buddha-name? If you employ your mind like this without forgetting, without any other help, after a long time you are sure to have insight.
If you cannot do this, it is also alright simply to recite the buddha-name. Keep your mindfulness from leaving buddha, and buddha from leaving your mindfulness. When your mindfulness of buddha peaks, your mind empties: you will get a response and link up with the Path, and buddha will appear before you. According to the inner pattern, it must be so.
Master Chu-hung (1535-1615)
Taken from Pure Land Pure Mind
translated by J.C. Cleary
*
Many masters from the time of 10th century China practiced a synthesis of Zen and Pure Land teachings. For many Western Buddhist practitioners, Pure Land practice is much less known. In the above selection one can see the similarity of koan practice and the question asked with buddha-name recitation, “Who is the one reciting the buddha-name?” The one mindful of buddha is buddha within us.
Buddha has given us many teachings in response to the varied temperaments of people to allow a way into realization.
“Pure Land people focus on buddha in the form of Amitabha, the buddha of infinite life and infinite light. Reciting the buddha-name functions as a powerful antidote to those great enemies of clear awareness that Buddhists have traditionally labeled “oblivion” and “scattering.”
The simplicity of Pure Land practice is not as simple as first appears and deserves closer attention. One very attractive aspect of Pure Land practice is its democratic approach. There is no dependence on teachers, gurus, roshis or other mediating authority figures. Its teachings are based on compassion, and the actual method of practice is easy to begin.
Yours along the Way,
Elana
--------------------------------------
Technorati: Buddhism Buddha Buddhist Dharma Compassion Wisdom Religion Meditation Zen Philosophy Spirituality Inspiration Peace Insight
