Tagged: Theravada Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 5:03 am on January 5, 2025 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , Robert Wright, The Matrix, Theravada,   

    Book Review: ‘Why Buddhism is True’ by Robert Wright… 

    Okay, I owe this review to Robert Wright as payback, because, while others at my Buddhist college were ‘oohing’ and ‘aahing’ back in 2017 over the release of his book ‘Why Buddhism is True’, I was extremely skeptical—and quite vocal about it. Why? Well, first, there’s the title: ‘Why Buddhism is True’. It seemed phony to me, as phony as some rock-and-roll band calling themselves ‘Nirvana’. Don’t push my buttons. Then there’s the Matrix glom-on right in the First Chapter. Or was it the Introduction? Are you serious? That’s certain proof of amateur hour for me. Last, but not least, there’s professional jealousy. Wright is first and foremost a journalist. So, what makes him the best person to write this book?

    Because, even back then, I knew that that’s the $64k question that any self-respecting literary agent would ask you before rejecting you, without telling you about the ‘journalist’s exemption’. Now I know, older but wiser (and with an MA in Buddhist Studies plus a recently published novel based on the travels of Buddhist pilgrim Fa Hien, hint hint). But his book is pretty darn good. So, I owe Mr. Wright a heartfelt apology. And that’s not a quick and easy decision, because he’s pressing his luck by reducing Buddhism to meditation, when many, if not most, of the world’s Buddhists, meditate very irregularly—IF EVER!

    But he pretty much left the Matrix references behind (‘Dharma film’, indeed!), and moved right on to other topics, some of which still stretched credulity, but served as some kind of Buddha’s Greatest Hits collection, if nothing else, so that’s probably a plus for the lightly initiated. After all, Buddhism has come a long way from its early Theravada discipline, Mahayana metaphysics of Emptiness, and Vajrayana mysticism. Now there are Vipassana, koans, and ‘crazy wisdom’, instead. Wright even devotes an entire chapter to ‘How Thoughts Think Themselves,’ one of my pet peeves in the modern Buddhist canon. But Wright handles it with journalistic equanimity, making clear that there are ways of justifying that attitude, without necessarily seeing all thoughts as falling into that category.

    But my favorite part of the book is the attention given to the possibilities of a simulated reality for us here in this life in this world, as alluded to in ‘Chapter 11: The Upside of Emptiness’, in which he argues that it is a psychological necessity to project ‘essence’ for long-term survival and human evolution. And while I would prefer to draw parallels between our neural simulations and the digital simulations of Virtual Reality, the bottom line is the same: it’s better than ‘illusion’ and nihilism is prohibited. Nirvana is similarly and summarily dismissed as the overriding raison-d’etre of Buddhism, while mentioning the unmentionable: we’re talkin’ ‘bout death here, y’all.

    Then there’s the title, which I assumed was editorial overreach on the part of Simon & Schuster, in the vein of the previously mentioned ‘Thoughts w/o Thinkers’, ‘Hardcore Zen’, ‘Universe in a Single Atom’, and other such pseudo-Buddho titular nonsense, but no: this is Wright’s chosen title, which he is prepared to defend as indicating its psychological appropriateness, something like samma ditthi, right view; nothing like absolute truth, so that’s cool. Wright is casual too, sometimes even funny, witness the title to Chapter 13: ‘Like Wow, Everything is One (at Most)’, haha. I like that. Bottom line: sometimes a well-traveled journalist is preferable to a star-spangled Rinpoche, especially when that guru is telling you to vote for the orange guy with the big bulge and the bankroll. I like honest brokers. Wright is worth the read. R.I.P. Kurt. The last Matrix movie sucked.

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 4:40 am on November 24, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ashrama, , , , , , , , , , , sannyasin, , , Theravada   

    Buddhism 399: Homelessness and the Joy of Giving… 

    Give more than you take. That will be more than enough, and the world will be a better place. That is the essence of almost all religions, Buddhism included, regardless of whether you consider Buddhism first and foremost a philosophy, as I tend to think. But philosophies don’t usually include a call to action, whereas religions usually do. Buddhism doesn’t do that, though, not specifically, but it is implicit in the practice, the original practice. That’s why you’ll see orange or yellow-robed shaved-head monks walking through the markets at daybreak in almost every Theravada country in SE Asia, requesting alms for subsistence, usually food. This giving is usually known as dana.

    This harkens back to an even earlier practice in India wherein long-haired rishis and sannyasins wearing similar saffron clothing but usually without a group of like-minds, would make similar rounds, a practice which continues to this day. The difference is not only that the former are Buddhist and the latter Hindu, but the former have rules and regular routes, and are often registered for this activity, whereas the latter are more likely free and on their own, often in the last phases of life according to the four Hindu ashramas of student, householder, forest dweller, and renunciant—nice.

    But the important thing is the giving. So, instead of seeing a renunciant as a societal parasite reduced to begging, we should see them as symbols of purity, offering laypersons the opportunity to experience the same bliss of renunciation that they not only symbolize but incarnate. It’s only ironic that they themselves often consider themselves—and call themselves—homeless, no pun intended. Because that is the little joke they play on all of us, that the poorest people of the West are linguistically identified with the holiest of the East. I only wish that Western practitioners would follow the same precepts. The food is usually pretty good, at least in Thailand.

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 8:16 am on September 7, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , Theravada, ,   

    Buddhism: It’s a Process… 

    I am not the same person as yesterday, and I will be a different person tomorrow. I am not DNA code. I am skandhas, anatta, annicca, that is: I am a ‘heap’ of causes and conditions, nothing permanent, always changing. So don’t get too attached to yourself or to anyone else, because tomorrow offers no guarantees. Oh, and one more thing: there’s no soul, at least nothing like what the Christians or Hindus have in mind, eternal and/or cosmic, though Buddhism usually allows for at least a limited sort of rebirth.

    After all, we don’t want to get too dreary now, do we? Certainly not. But the principles listed here are foundational to Buddhism. And so, life and the world are at least somewhat illusory, at least in their most obvious manifestations as part of the visual and sensory feast that constitute our world of perceptions. But there is another principle that is even more important to some of us as Buddhists, and that’s the concept of the Middle path, which can be applied to almost anything, including itself, that hypothetical middle path which defines Buddhism by its very lack of definition.

    And such is the history of Buddhism, as it evolves almost dialectically, from thesis to antithesis to synthesis, only to start the process all over again. It is in that view that Buddhism emerged in the first place, as the middle path between the excesses of Hinduism and the extreme renunciation of Jainism. And it is that process which continues today, as Mahayana offers an alternative to the original Theravada, and to which Vajrayana and Zen start the process all over again. Now the original Theravada Buddhism would like to remake itself as Vipassana: meditation, that is, first and foremost. I like that idea.

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 4:23 am on August 23, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , solitary confinement, , Theravada,   

    Buddhism Loves a Sangha, but Loves Solitude, too… 

    Western psychology thinks solitary confinement is torture. Buddhism thinks it’s pretty nice—sometimes. Go figure. Because that’s exactly what meditation is, is it not? That and concentration, yes, exactly, at least in meditation’s original purest form, which is maintained to this day in Theravada Buddhism, so important there that it’s often called Vipassana by its association. And it’s true. I couldn’t believe it the first time I did a retreat in a Thai forest temple, laymen silent unflinching for hours, monks even longer.

    I haven’t witnessed that degree of meditative absorption in the Tibetan or Chinese temples where I have experience and knowledge, but it might certainly exist there. And Zen might be another level of attainment, since the name derives from dhyana, after all. All of which goes to make a distinction with the typical Western ‘guided’ meditation, which, whatever its benefits, I simply wouldn’t consider true meditation, maybe more like a ‘dharma talk’ if done well. But if it’s not a Buddhist meditation group, then it might not be a Buddhist talk. Hindus are still trying to reclaim Buddhism as their own.

    But the point is that, while solitude might be torture for some, it doesn’t have to be. And it’s more likely to be, I think, if you’re accustomed to living your life in crowds and constant confusion. For someone raised on a farm out in the countryside, what’s a little solitary confinement? Sounds like Sunday afternoon. Solitude can and should be something good, healthy, and productive. If they don’t teach meditation in prisons, then they certainly should. It just might save somebody’s life sometime.

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 4:18 am on July 13, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , John Donne, , , , , Theravada   

    Buddhist Theravada, then Mahayana: Save Yourself, then Save the World  

    The immediate goal is personal peace and contentment. The long-term goal is universal friendship. Or to put it another way: first you save yourself, then you save the world, in some sort of secure Theravada foundation ultimately giving rise to new Mahayana fruits and icing on the cake. Because, ultimately, we all have to live together, in increasingly diverse circumstances, and the way to secure our mutual survival is to work together toward fulfillment. If we limit the cessation of suffering to the boundaries of so-called ‘self’, then we still have a long way to go as a society. 

    ‘No man is an island,’ said the English writer John Donne in 1624, and truer words have ne’er been spoke, especially since the world population has sex- or sep-tupled since that early date, and the count shows few signs of slowing. So, for someone to be content in his own little bubble of bliss is to ignore the larger demands of society and is ultimately passive, if not outright selfish, regardless of whether the Buddha said to be an island unto yourself, or a lamp. That confusion apparently comes from the similarities of the Pali/Sanskrit words dvipa and dipa, respectively, and the inability to prove anything that wasn’t originally written down.  

    But the confusion is almost serendipitous, in that both will work with a Theravadin self-centered island opening up to a broader society-centered light which might shine outward onto others once the mortal temporary self has flipped the switch to the coveted ‘on’ position. Thus, John Donne has nothing on the Buddha for the sublime play of his words nor the intent of his meaning. When you’ve gotten your own act together, then help the world. ASAP. Please. 

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 4:11 am on July 6, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , retribution, , , Theravada   

    Buddhism 499: Revenge is not Sweet…   

    Retribution is not necessary. Equanimity is a path for all situations and all times. This is central to Buddhism, if not foundational. Because the foundations are mostly personal, but it’s implicit that once you’ve attained some level of release from your own suffering that you will contribute to do the same for the world. And while this may be more pronounced in the Mahayana tradition of Bodhisattvas, it also applies to all the rest, in substance, if not style. 

    That’s explicit in the tradition of dana, which Theravada Buddhism relies on for its everyday existence, since monks are forbidden to work, at least not in any official capacity. That’s for ‘householders.’ Monks are homeless, by design, making a mockery of the disdain in which we in the west typically hold them, our India relations elevating the concept to a high plain of spirituality as rishis or even maharishis in the Hindu tradition, or arahant in the Buddhist Theravadin tradition. 

    Even more important is ahimsa, non-violence, which holds true for all the India-based spiritual traditions. And while I’m sure their armies have had their own mistakes and misgivings over the years, at least give them the credit for not glorifying it or reveling in it. Because that’s what revenge and retribution imply, whether stated or not. Retribution is a function of karma, which you’ve brought on yourself, so no violence against others is either implied or intended. Stay cool. Don’t react, unless someone’s life is at stake. And, even then, don’t be proud of it. Be forgiving… 

     
    • jmoran66's avatar

      jmoran66 7:14 pm on July 6, 2024 Permalink | Reply

      That’s the roots of jai yen here in Thailand, I would think.

      • hardie karges's avatar

        hardie karges 12:01 am on July 7, 2024 Permalink | Reply

        Cool heart, yes…

  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 3:41 pm on June 30, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , Theravada, , ,   

    Buddhist Love is not like Falling in Love, Sorry…     

    No, Buddhist love is nothing like the weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth that often accompanies Christian ceremonies, whether birth or death or the multicolor gray area in between, mostly sex. Buddhist love, metta, is just a whole lot like friendship, and there’s nothing wrong with that. So, Platonic love, then maybe? I think Plato would be cool with that, maybe too cool. And that’s what falls short for a lot of people, for whom devotion is the primary practice of their religion. 

    It just doesn’t have the feeling of total surrender required for the religious experience in many people’s minds. But that’s Buddhism: cool, baby, cool. The devotional aspects were the last major additions to the three major canons of Buddhism, and long after the original discipline orientation of Theravada and the transcendental orientation of Mahayana. So, it’s no coincidence that the Tibetans got their Vajrayana straight from the source of India, which is primarily devotional to this day, whether of Shiva or Vishnu, no matter the object. Devotion is the important thing for the devotee. 

    But whether the two additional ‘vehicles’ may or may not have added something important to Buddhism, the core practice of discipline and dana (giving) remain unchanged. Upgrade the meditative practice of anapanasati to vipassana, and BOOM! You’ve got a rebirth of the original Buddhism with or without the doctrine of Rebirth to the non-Self (?!). Ouch. Yep, that’s better now, just to avoid questions that have no good answers. Too many cooks ruin the broth. The kindness is more important than the love.  

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 6:19 am on March 10, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , Theravada, ,   

    Buddhism at the X-roads: More Dharma, Less Drama 

    To live from sensation to sensation is to live like an animal. To follow dharma is to live like a human. Because, despite the attraction of the so-called ‘present moment,’ which may or may not be real, the Buddha prized reason and rationality above almost all else, easily verified by his insistence on recognition of the causes and conditions underlying all actions and motivations. He may or may not have said something supporting the ‘present moment,’ but I’m not sure what or when that would have been. 

    Bottom line: reason(s) and rationality are to be prized above almost all else in Buddhism, the one possible exception being the need for, and insistence upon, meditation. And, for me, this is where that ’present moment’ comes into play, it being almost the perfect metaphor for that suspension of belief and disbelief which is meditation, all thought suspended in favor of pure awareness, of breath, if nothing else, anapanasati, the original meditation of which all others have subsequently derived.  

    Meditation is so fundamental to Theravada Buddhism that it has recently almost become re-branded as Vipassana, or ‘insight meditation,’ all the other disciplines involved in the practice of Buddhism notwithstanding. And this is likely what the Chinese Buddhist pilgrims Fa Xian (Hien) and Xuanzang found above all else, silent meditation, since almost nothing else was written, and was almost too heavy to carry once they had it transcribed from the original Pali or Sanskrit into Chinese.  

    But how do you transcribe meditation into any language for inclusion in a book which someone may or not read at some point in history? Meditation was largely independent of written vinaya (discipline), and that is what had sustained Buddhism for around 1000 years by that time. And that’s what sustains it today, all the opinions and debate on Facebook and elsewhere notwithstanding. Original Buddhism required only silence, and concentration, no apps or other accessories necessary. 

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 5:15 am on February 4, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , Theravada, , , ,   

    Buddhism: Meditation, not Mysticism…  

    Buddhism was never intended to be mystical. Buddha was very rational in his take on life and suffering. Any mysticism came later, mostly in the Vajrayana Buddhism of Tibet that came directly from India, not China, and which had taken firm hold in that country by the Eight Century CE. And while that ‘school’ of Buddhism is often included in the Mahayana tradition which traveled through, and was greatly influenced, by China, such is not the case with Vajrayana, which derives from a later, maybe the last, Indian Buddhist tradition, before it succumbed to the coup de grace by the invasive Mughals, after centuries of losing ground, and followers, to the Brahmanist Hindus. 

    About the only thing that all the Mahayana schools have in common, in fact, is that they are not of the original Theravada tradition, which originated in India and found fertile ground in southeast Asia, mostly. And if the Vajrayana tradition is famous for its multiple levels of heaven and hell, its Tantric yab-yum, mudras and mantras, then Theravada (aka Hinayana), is best known for its lack of all that, and concentration on meditation, especially, to the extent that it’s sometimes known by that most famous meditation technique Vipassana. Meanwhile the Mahayana Buddhism of China is probably best defined by its transcendent Buddha and the vast Emptiness of reality, both more recent developments.

    Many famous Chinese monks, Fa Xian and Xuanzang foremost among them, even made long arduous trips to India just to get it right, like Charlemagne realizing his 8th century French language wasn’t proper Latin. And mostly I believe that meant learning meditation, and some other disciplines, which Theravada monks usually excel at, and Chinese monks often suck at—to this day. In fact, I didn’t really even know what meditation was until I attended some Theravada-based meditation retreats in Southeast Asia, intended for Asians, not Westerners. When you see a layman sitting silent unflinching for two or three hours lost in no-thought: that’s meditation. The monks are even better at it. Now I get it. Get it. 

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 3:09 am on October 21, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , arahat, , , , , , , , , , , , , , Theravada   

    Buddhism 201: Theravada and Mahayana  

    Buddhism in Bhutan

    The difference between Theravada and Mahayana is the difference between Self and Other, if there is one. If you’re a ‘non-dualist,’ then there is none, though that defies common-sense logic, which seems to show a diversity of disparate objects. So, that is the point of the new religion, I suppose, to unify existence, since you gotta’ have something to believe in for a religion to have its raison d’etre. But Buddhism wasn’t concerned with such metaphysical stretches, or at least not in the beginning, though Mahayana was the evolution of a more metaphysical stage of Buddhism.  

    That coincided with a geographical transition from India toward Central Asia and then China, and which also coincided with the evolution of Taoism, so more fertile ground to plow right then and there. If the origins of early Buddhism were all about a debate (and competition) with the Brahmanists and Jains of India, then the evolution of Mahayana was all about a competition with the Taoists in China. By that time, with the shunyata ‘emptiness’ doctrine of Nagarjuna, Buddhist and Taoist metaphysics were not far apart, the main difference between the two apparently that the Buddhists were—and are—far superior meditators.  

    And if Theravadan anatta had evolved into Mahayana shunyata, then Theravadan arahats had evolved into Mahayanan bodhisattvas, the spiritually enlightened beings who forego nirvana until everyone is ready for that final step. Arahats were more content to keep it to themselves, each at his own pace. But the issue of Self and Other is a non-issue if there is no substantive Self; so how could there be a substantive Other? Still, we live our lives in the common-sense world of apparently diverse beings, and so it is there that we must find solutions to common-sense problems. My conclusion? Save yourself, and then save the world. Good luck out there. 

     

← Older posts

Newer posts →

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel