Rock in the Road – Uncovering Buddha-element

by Wayne Ren-Cheng

A student asked, “Is Buddha-element easy to find?”

“No.”

“Then why should I put in the effort to find it?”

That led to a tale.

There was a road that led to a magnificent castle. The people of the kingdom used the road to get to that castle where they could sell their produce, their wares and get what they needed to live. It was a rough road made even more treacherous by a large rock directly in the middle of it.

Horses were made lame by stumbling on it. Wagon wheels shattered when they bumped against it. People who climbed over it would fall breaking legs, arms and sometimes heads. It made a trip to the market a challenge.

One day a family of farmers headed into the castle to sell their wagon load of vegetables stopped before the rock. Ahead of them a wagon had lost a wheel to the rock. The tipped over wagon had spilled melons across the ground, some cracked open and others bruised beyond use.

In the farmer’s wagon a young girl turned to her father and said, “Father, why is that rock allowed to remain there? It causes so much anger and loss, still no one tries to move it.”

Daughter, it has always been there and there it will remain.”

Continue reading

Advertisements

Dharma of the Individual

by Wayne Ren-Cheng

Buddhism in the West must find a way to skillfully harness the power of the individualistic view and action of those who choose the Noble Path. In each person is a reservoir of imagination, skills, gifts, compassion and the Buddha-element. These are reservoirs that can be tapped for the benefit of all. Their attitude might begin with the ideal of what’s in it for me. What does Buddhist philosophy and practice offer that will improve my situation? Each practitioner must be guided to the gradual realization that while expression is unique, suffering in some form is not. Awareness of the effects of the practitioners intent and action beyond themselves must be developed and nurtured so the realization that whatever the thought or action there are causal consequences.

There are practitioners who view Judeo/Christian beliefs as the cultural aspect of the West that Buddhism must come to terms with. In the West it is the dominant religious and social framework, especially in America. However, there is a prevailing psychological phenomena endemic to the majority of Americans regardless of religious or secular identity. Individualism. Finding skillful means of transforming perceptions of “what’s in it for me” to “what’s in it for all beings” is a major challenge for Western Buddhists.

We must first come to an understanding of individualism as a moral view and a social view common in the West. People who hold this worldview believe that the interests, wants and needs of the individual should come before that of any government or group. They resist all attempts by society or groups to interfere with their individual goals. The results of their individual actions might have some benefit to others but it is not their intention. Means of transforming individualism to an individual aware of the discontent, unsatisfactoriness and anguish of others and themselves equally, transforming individualism to an individual mindful of their own discontent, unsatisfactoriness and anguish.

In the Raga-vinaya Sutta: The Subduing of Passion (Anguttara Nikaya), the Buddha describes four types of individuals. There is one who practices only for their own benefit, one who practices only for the benefit of others, one who practices neither for their own benefit or the benefit of others, and one who practice for both their own benefit and that of others. The individualist tendency in the West is the first one described. That tendency is often what brings a Westerner to the practice of Buddhism, some want or need they hope that Buddhism can provide for them. The Buddha was clear that a Buddhist practice begins with development of the individual. He was equally clear that it must not end there. Skillful means must be found to lead the practitioner along a path to the fourth type of individual, one who practices for the benefit of self and others.

The lesson in the Lekha Sutta: Inscriptions (Anguttara Nikaya) offers a glimpse of that path. It describes three types of individuals based on their perceptions of their ability to transform. There is the individual that is like an inscription on rock, one that is like an inscription in soil, and one like an inscription in water. Each can be viewed as metaphor for the stages of bodymind in Buddhist practice.

An individualistic worldview combines the first type of person in each sutta. They will practice for only for their own benefit believing that like an inscription in rock their worldview is permanent. They hold to the ‘what’s in it for me’ mode of thinking and acting. Initially Buddhist practice can seem to verify this view. Emphasis is on personal transformation that begins with how that practice can improve the state of the individual bodymind. One learns to sit in meditation among a sangha, yet the bulk of that practice is done at home, alone, individually. One learns that emotions and habitual reactivities that plague the bodymind are transient phenomena, a view that the individual must come to realize. For a ‘what’s in it for me’ state of bodymind the serenity, the equanimity and the sense of personal accomplishment are enough, just what they were looking for. It is written in stone.

Siddhartha began his journey of personal spiritual transformation with the goal of understanding the forms of suffering he witnessed but never experienced. Prior to his achieving awareness of the plight of some human beings he was like an inscription in stone. In accordance with Hindu beliefs his personal and social actions were taken that would positively affect his rebirth. When he chose to leave his wife and child behind, to seek answers, he did so for his own benefit.

The next two types of individual present a danger to the bodymind and the view of an inscription in soil is a skillful way of getting beyond that danger. The view and action of one who practices only for the benefit of others misses entirely a critical aspect of Buddhism. The Buddha teaches that only with equanimity of focus on self and others can the value of the dharma be experienced. The person who practices neither for their own benefit or the benefit of others is going through the motions of being a Buddhist without any intent to engage the dharma in themselves or the world around them.

My nephew is an example of an individual who practices neither for himself or for others. He labels himself a Buddhist on forms for the United States Military because it allows him avoid particular requirements put on people of other faiths.

These views can seem to written in stone. In time and with effort any stone can be turned into soil. Buddhists are farmers and soil is where the unwholesome views and actions are weeded out and wholesome seeds planted and nurtured. Unwholesome views that are inscribed in a bodymind of soil can be transformed as the wind and water of the dharma wear them away allowing the planted seeds of appropriate view and intent to grow.

The fourth type of individual offered in the Raga-vinaya Sutta is the bodhisattva-in-training ideal, one who practices for the benefit of self and others. An individual that is like an inscription on water is most capable of reaching this view and intent, and taking the actions that arise as a result. They experience the current of the dharma from individualistic intent, to social intent, flow around the obstruction of neither self or social intent, to the realization that the dharma, when applied equally to self and other has its greatest value in the promotion of human flourishing.

Siddhartha transformed from one who practiced for their own benefit to one who practiced for the benefit of self and other. He awakened and stood up under the branches of the bodhi tree it is said he doubted his ability to teach others what he had come to realize as a Middle Path that could relieve the suffering of human beings. Siddhartha hesitated, and for that moment he was still practicing for himself. In the next moment he made the decision to try and transformed into one who would practice for self and others.

It takes skillful means to guide an individualistic Westerner along a path that not only accepts the benefit of the dharma to the individual but encourages it . . . in the beginning of practice, to the realization that practice of dharma is most valuable when equally engaged in service of the individual and society as that practice matures. This skillful means cannot just be the efforts and mentoring of a teacher. It must also arise in the thoughts and actions of the practitioner. To develop a mature Buddhist practice it takes both external and internal skillful means or one may find themselves inscribed in rock and fail to engaged the opportunities of soil and water to grow wholesome dispositions and habits.

 

Buddhism’s Pragmatic Transformation

by Wayne Ren-Cheng

Buddhism in the West has a schizophrenic quality to it. There are a host of voices and streams of images clamoring for attention. It isn’t a stretch to say that through the amazing and sometimes intimidating media choices that a person can access nearly a 100% of the Buddhist traditions worldwide. Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Tibetan, Sri Lankan, Thai and others may have temples nearby or their teachings can be found on-line via websites, You Tube and Twitter. Confusion arises as one tries to listen to all the voices and to process all the images. Along the way decisions need to be made as to whose voice is offering what is perceived as needed, and which image the viewer connects with. Choosing a Buddhist tradition to follow is not easy.

Unlimited and unrestrained access can be a cause of confusion. There are Western practitioners who choose the Theravada path for example, but find themselves chanting the Heart Sutra and engaging in Vajrayana meditation techniques as elements of their individual practice. The effect of this can be a Buddhist practice without a deep level of commitment . . . or it may be leading to an even deeper commitment when effectiveness of practice is the focus and not tradition.

Most in the West begin walking the Noble Path using the strictures of a particular tradition, commonly a tradition that is exotic to Western bodyminds. Time and effort is spent trying to engage practices and ideals that are foreign, ideals that might come into conflict with contemporary Western life. This conflict can be the cause of renewed spiritual searching and the realization that practices arising in other Buddhist traditions are engaged and experienced, at times found to have value in how the practitioner engages the world. Rather than reject them because they are not of the chosen tradition, they become a component of practice.

Is this unique? Even a cursory study of Buddhist history and philosophy will reveal that pragmatism played a role in how all Buddhist traditions have arisen. Siddhartha began his own spiritual quest from the perspective of a Hindu practitioner, and after leaving home he studied and practiced with a number of religious and spiritual masters in order to learn how those practices interconnected with human existence. Ideals of the Four Ennobling Realities, impermanence and dependent origination arose from existing religious and spiritual values and the insight Siddhartha gained through experience and introspection. After his death there was a schism resulting in two groups taking Siddhartha’s teachings and adding what they experienced as more effective for their practices, with this came the arising of the Theravada and Mahayana platforms. From King Ashoka sending his children to Sri Lanka as Buddhist emissaries, to Buddhism finding its place in other countries and cultures pragmatism lay behind the choices made.

We may love the grass in our pasture but will still stick our head through the fence to nibble other grass. Siddhartha fed on the rich grass of the Hindu beliefs and practices of his culture before he came to experience the grass outside the fence created by the walls, physical, mental and metaphorical that surrounded him. He then experienced the grasses in the pastures of brahmin, ascetics, yogis and Jains. From each of his pastures, as well as the fertile soil of his own bodymind, Siddhartha wove a net of philosophy and practice that he experienced as valuable in the alleviation of suffering, discontent and unsatisfactoriness.

Siddhartha realized the value in elements of the practices and philosophies in the existing religious and spiritual systems incorporating them into his newly arising paradigm. It is known that in Siddhartha’s time he, and his teachings were viewed as heretical and dangerous by other religious leaders and that there is no historical or scriptural evidence that Siddhartha held a reverse view. Siddhartha accepted the commitments of others and was offering a new intent that others could experience and then decide whether to engage his new paradigm. This pragmatic approach accepting the value of the commitments of others can lessen the us vs. them attitude that is endemic today, not only in Buddhism.

A passage in the Heart Sutra speaks eloquently of the pragmatism of Buddhist philosophy, ‘Oh Sariputra, all dharmas are forms of emptiness.’ The capital D Dharma, the teachings of Siddhartha are only potential until their ideals meet the realities of each human existence. The little d dharma is the realities that shape that potential in each human existence. Each, D and d, causally condition the other across the interconnected and interdependent web of possibilities. Too much focus on the capital D of respective traditions weakens the possibilities that can be realized with a broader view of the dharma as it presents itself during each moment of life.

Engaged Dharma is rooted firmly in the soil of the Pragmatic Buddhist teachings of the Venerable Dr. Jim Eubanks (Yong Xiang Shi) who interconnected American Pragmatic philosophy with what he learned from his two major influences, the Venerable Ryugen Fisher (Shen Long Shi) and Professor David Shaner Sensei at Furman University in South Carolina. From Shen Long Shi came the Chan teachings learned from the Venerable Dr. Holmes Welch (Mo Hua Shi) and the Soto Zen practices from Matsuoko Roshi. Professor Shaner Sensei of Furman University offered a deep respect for Japanese cultural and religious practices, along with lessons on pragmatist philosophy. These seeming disparate sources of knowledge and wisdom came together to form the foundation of the Pragmatic Buddhist tradition. It is a ‘tradition’ made up of traditions.

Venerable Dr. Eubanks Sensei often told his students and sangha that they must make a choice of Buddhist traditions and commit fully to the one chosen. He offered that time must be taken to experience those traditions in order to make that choice, but that there was an inherent danger in spending too much time and effort at the “Buddhist buffet”. I have come to the honest realization that Pragmatic Buddhism was, and is causally conditioned by that very buffet. Western Buddhism might come to rely on that very buffet.

Spoonfuls of Chan, Soto Zen, Nikayan Buddhism, Mahayana, and Vajrayana meditation practices make up the plate that is Pragmatic Buddhism. Theravada claimed teachings that arise in the Sigalovada Sutra and the Jataka Tale of Prince Vessantara are added as a result of my own experiential verification of their value in a contemporary Western Buddhist practice. The lessons from these scriptural sources and others do not necessarily arise as intended by the claiming tradition. The setting aside of the perceptions that come with tradition can reveal unrealized lessons. Here, along with pragmatism arises the practice of pluralism as offered by Diane Eck and the Harvard Pluralism Project. Add to that the secular practices of Pragmatic and neo-Pragmatic philosophy, humanism, naturalism and mindfulness meditation for the spiritual meal known as Pragmatic Buddhism.

Pluralism in intent and action is revealed throughout the history of Buddhism. In its journey it has had, and continues to have profound effects on cultures and peoples while remaining firm in its commitments. This is done without expecting the long held commitments of others to fall away. Siddhartha energetically encountered the commitments of kings, brahmins, yogis, thieves, common people and Jains. He did not offer a philosophy and practice meant to supplant their commitments, instead to enhance them. While later iterations of Buddhism did transition into dogmatic, bordering on evangelistic traditions, in Pragmatic Buddhism this is not viewed as Siddhartha’s intent. His intent was to make people aware of their interconnection and interdependence on all phenomena, not to create divisions.

In the West Buddhism is encountering the commitments of the religious beliefs and practices of Christianity, Islam and Judaism most prominently, as well as that of a secular community of avowed atheists and agnostics. Buddhism has had encounters such as these for thousands of years across thousands of miles. What it hasn’t encountered in its past is the deep level of individualism found in the West, particularly in America.

What’s in it for me? This is the question a sangha member asked when offered the opportunity to take a class on the precepts to prepare to take those vows. It prompted the response, “Nothing”. Years of study and practice and I now realize the dharma in that answer. Intent is clear in the question, the danger of craving in the reply. There was a lesson in that one word . . . nothing; a lesson for every student and a lesson for every teacher.

The question reveals a cultural disposition of individualism. Asked out loud or silently it shows an intent toward self gratification. That intent will lead to discontent and unsatisfactoriness because lasting gratification can never be attained. There will always be something to grasp at just beyond reach. Feelings of gratification will fall away. It is the impermanent nature of the causal universe.

There are two ‘mantras’ in Engaged Dharma (EDIG) meant to highlight the means necessary to harness the power of the individual. One mantra illustrates an acceptance of individualism in Western Buddhist thought and an awareness that what is individual effort is naturally societal effort. “We are each unique expressions of the universe. We are not unique in the universe.” In human beings there is difference that is causally conditioned by similarity, and similarity causally conditioned by differences.

The other ‘mantra’ is an intentional reminder that whatever action one chooses to make, “What we do matters”. Actions taken for purely individual benefit will have effect beyond the individual, known and unknown. Whatever one does, with or without intent has ripples of effect that go beyond the individual performing the act, this is karma as human physics in action The ideal of ultimate personal transformation meets the reality of the causal process.

Put the two mantras together, “We are each unique expressions of the universe. We are not unique in the universe. What we do matters”. There is acceptance of individuality, awareness that the individual is a part of something larger, and the actions we take have effect on a broad scale. There is the path of arhat seeking individual knowledge and transformation, and the path of the bodhisattva seeking transformative social engagement. It is a pragmatic way of viewing human existence.

Initial steps on the Noble Path are taken by an individual. The reason for those steps is unique to each person yet that reason can be related to by all other human beings. Regardless of whether it is illness, loss, confusion, joy, curiosity or spiritual seeking, there will be others whose journey arose from similar circumstances.

Siddhartha did not ask for blind faith. He offered that the value of his teachings should be verified through experience engaging them as how one interacts with the universe. In this way Siddhartha harnessed the power of the individual to achieve positive transformation and to engage the causal universe in wholesome ways. He accepted the value of the individual, and of their potential for social impact.

Buddhism in the West must also harness the power of the individual. In each person is a reservoir of imagination, skills, gifts, compassion and the Buddha-element. These are reservoirs that can be tapped for the benefit of all. It might begin with the ideal of what’s in it for me. What does Buddhist philosophy and practice offer that will improve my situation? A unique expression will require a unique response dependent on what need is perceived. Gradually like the ocean floor slopes into the depths a practitioner must be guided to the gradual realization that while expression is unique, suffering in some form is not. Awareness of the effects of the practitioners intent and action beyond themselves must be developed and nurtured so the realization that whatever the thought or action there are causal consequences.

In a culture where individual choice is experienced as a human right the host of voices and streams of images available has value. Westerners, and particularly Americans need to develop the ability to sift through the choices so that productive and effective philosophies and practices can be discovered and engaged in. Western Buddhism must harness the power of the individual to enact positive social transformation. There is value in a commitment to a particular Buddhist tradition as long as one maintains an open-heart and open-mind. Not all the philosophies and practices of any one tradition may be effective for a contemporary Western practitioner, while all traditions have philosophies and practices that can be effective. Awareness of them requires that labels and judgements be set aside so that experience, not perception is how commitments develop. There are voices in the West that proclaim the value of a religiously oriented Buddhism and voices that proclaim the value of a secular approach. Perhaps if those voices went silent for a moment the realization that the Western Buddhist model that arises will be a pragmatic combination of those two ideals, and more. In Engaged Dharma, a Pragmatic Buddhist practice there is already that silence.

Buddha Is Not Dharma

Buddha Is Not Dharma
David Xi-Ken Astor

“We take refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma, the Sangha”.   If we follow Buddhist thought, and not accept a duel state of being, we may come to realize that while we make distinctions of the Three Jewels in practice, in reality they are not separate phenomena.  They are interdependent and connected as one reality, and are components of the principle of Inter-dependent Origination.  So, we come to ask the question, “how can ultimate reality be embodied in the form of a person (Buddha)?”   I would argue that if we strictly apply Buddhist logic, it isn’t.  It is a kind of paradox, and what is “ultimate reality” anyway?

We use the term “Buddha nature” rather freely sometimes without a clear notion of what we are talking about.  Yes, as human beings (and the historic Buddha was that) we are both Universal and unique expressions of the Universe at the same time.  Buddha nature is an expression that points to our inclusion in the Dharma; we manifest an image or reflection or intimation of that which can not be separate from all the other expression the Universe is.  Life as we know it can be considered as a large fabric woven of all the various expressions that in totality makes up what we know as reality.  Remember that science tells us that we have only identified about 8% of what makes up the Universe.  We have a long way to go yet in our exploration.  Dharma goes beyond this limited notion of reality to encompass both what we can know, and that which is unknown.

Some Buddhist traditions acknowledge the passing of the Buddha into nirvana, as an act of absolute deliverance from suffering as though it is a place or dimension somewhere.  They suggest some kind of termination of his manifestation in the human form to something “other”.  The danger in this belief is that it suggests a duel nature, something Siddhartha denies in his doctrine of not-self.  Hui-neng, the sixth patriarch, said, “For whatever can be named leads to dualism, and Buddhism is not dualistic.  To take hold of this notion of non-duality is the aim of Zen’.   Hui-neng’s teacher said, “One will not get rid of birth and death if one constantly thinks of other Buddha’s.  However, if one retains one’s mindfulness, one is sure to reach the further shore.”  In the Vajraccedika-parajnaparamita Sutra the Buddha states, “If any one wishes to see me in form, or to seek me in sound, this person is treading an evil path and he cannot see the Tathagata.”  His meaning here is only clearly understood if you also understand the term “further shore”.  Our practice must bring us to understanding and liberation from all attachments that act to distort our awakening to how the Universe is and we are in it, including the form of the Buddha too.  This recalls to mind the Zen expression “If you see the Buddha on the road, kill him!”

From a contemporary point of view, away from medieval logic, it can’t be said that the Buddha is revered and worshiped in either his human form or a Universal metaphysical expression.  Dharma is beyond all of these states of thinking.  So if we consider our human Buddha nature appropriating a specific definition, then it can not really be the Dharma.  On the other hand, if Buddha nature is given emptiness of definition and possession of absolute suchness, then we have an opportunity to awaken to Dharma.  Only from the Dharma we come to see the Buddha as he is, and not vice versa.