Happy wayfarer

Ven. Prof. Dhammavihari

The
word wayfarer or magganuga is used in Buddhist texts to denote the
disciple who is intent on treading the path to release from suffering
as announced and indicated by the Master. As the venerable Ananda puts
it to the Brahmin Gopaka-Moggallana, in reply to a question about the
relationship between the Master and his disciples, the Buddha is the
propounder of the hitherto unknown way (anakkhàtassa maggassa akkhàtà),
the knower of the way ( maggannå maggavidå) and the one who is skilled
in the way (maggakovido) .

The
disciples thereafter (pacchà-samannà gatà) tread the way (maggànugà ca
pana etarahi sàvakà viharanti pacchà samannàgatà ti. M.111.8).

Let
us now talk about the life of the true Buddhist disciple who with a
deep conviction accepts the teaching of the Buddha as the only way to
release from dukkha or the sufferings of life.

We
are thus immediately brought face to face with the two concepts of
dukkha and nirodha in Buddhism, nirodha being the total cessation or
the ceasing to be of the unsatisfactory continuation of the process of
living which is called bhava. It is this cessation and none other that
we refer to as nibbàna (bhava-nirodho nibbànaü. S. II. 117). By
whatever other name one calls it, the net result in Nibbàna is this and
no other.

This is also the final
goal of our religious striving, our endeavour to achieve concentration
of mind and beyond it perfect development of wisdom.

The message
of Buddhism primarily focuses attention on this predicament (or the
unpleasant situation) in which man finds himself. At this stage, it is
good for us to be immediately reminded of the vocabulary which the
Bodhisattva himself uses as he reflects on this problem: Kicchau vatà ‘
yam loko àpanno jàyati ca jãyati ca mãyati ca cavati ca uppajjati ca. (
S.I1.104 ). His observation is that ‘ the world indeed is plunged in a
very distressing situation.’

It is distressing because of the
concomitants of life such as the painful changes in the process of
growth and maturity called jarà which also brings in its wake vyàdhi or
disease, terminating in death or maraõa.

It is the reality of
these which invariably led many among the mortals to speculate on the
absence of these failings like decay, disease and death, in their
unpleasantly manifest gross form, in the life in the heavenly worlds.
(In the heavenly worlds known to the Buddhists, none of those failings
of decay, disease and death are grossly manifest.) It is for this same
reason that in more recent times, well-motivated men were driven to
look for their solution in such remedial measures like organ transplant.

It is an adventure as thoroughly visualised as the plan to grow vegetables on the moon to meet world shortages on this planet.

This,
we know, was announced in the western world, in a credibly serious
mood, in the sixties and seventies of this century. But this is not to
see the problem in its totality.

In the Buddhist texts we are reliably informed that this plight of man stretches infinitely through time and space.

But we note with regret the hyper-intellectual slant today to view the human
problem as presented in Buddhism to be a matter of one life time, contained within a single frame of birth to death.

It
is here that our saddhà or reliance (or trusting in, of course, in the
Buddha and his teaching) comes in, for without it we would reject both
concepts of dukkha and nirodha which are the basics (numbers one and
three) of the four noble truths (i.e. cattàri ariya-saccàni) which
deliver to the world the message of Buddhism. ( See Dhammacakkappavatta
na Sutta at S. V. 421f. and Vin. I. 10 ). It is this third dimension of
life, namely the saüsàric one, which we have to seriously bear in mind.

While
Buddhist texts repeatedly speak of it as ‘ anamataggà ‘yaü bhikkhave
saüsàro pubbà koñi na pannàyati ( at S. 11. 178 and S.V. 226 ) which
means ‘Infinite is this life process of man and its first beginning is
not discernible,’ yet there are people even within the Buddhist fold
who would have us believe that both the problem of man and its solution
are matters only of one life time.

This
life process of man which we come to take note of from his present
conceivable existence, it must remembered, descends into our midst from
the past and stretches across into the incalculable future, again
beyond our ken.

If this were not true, the Bodhisattva during his
observations quoted above ( S. 11.104 ), would not go on to continue
his remarks as mãyati ca cavati ca uppajjati ca: dies, passes away from
one existence to another, and is born (again).

And also talking
of final release, the Buddha speaks of it as the absence of a
regeneration of all this in a new life beyond the present.

This
result is equated to the absence of all that which were described as
the ills of life (Yattha natthi àyatiü punabbhavàbhinibbatt i tattha
natthi àyaiü jàti-jarà-maraõ aü. S.11.65f. ∧ 103f.). It is the
totality of this process, found to be here as well as hereafter (idha
loke patiññhitaü paraloke patiññhitaü) which is referred to in Buddhism
as sansàra.

As
we give further thought to what has been discussed so far and consider
from the Buddhist angle the contributory factors which sustain this
saüsàric process, we discover ignorance or avijjà and craving or tanhà
as what underlie this (avijjà-nãvaraõànaü sattànaü taõhàsaüyojanànaü
sandhàvataü saüsarataü. op.cit.178 ). On further investigation we
discover that saüsàra also implies existence both in the human plane
and in several others above and below it. This is what we discover as
we proceed from the known and the seen, i.e. life here and now, in the
direction of the unknown and the unseen, i.e. of what is beyond this
life, beyond death.

This journeying into a life beyond or gati is
said to be fivefold: Pacca kho imà Sàriputta gatayo. Katamà pacca.
Nirayo tiracchàna-yoni pitti-visayo manussà devà. ( M.I. 73 ). In a
superior state above man stands deva, and immediately below devas is
the human. There are three inferior states below the human, viz. hells
of torture ( niraya ), animal world (tiracchàna-yoni) and the realm of
famishing ghosts (preta = pitti-visaya) .

Here
it is well to remember that true humility with regard to limitations of
our knowledge and our ability to know can be extremely rewarding.

Let
us profit by knowing that there are limits to our cocksureness even in
this space age of high-class scientific achievement and that failures
are possible even with the surest of calculations.

This did
happen even with very sophisticated space-ships (fired through the
NASA) like the Mars Observer (unmanned) which ended up in disaster
after eleven months of very successful travel in outer space, and the
German sponsored research-shuttle Discovery (with a team of scientists
within) which generated repeated engine trouble before its final
take-off.

Timsa Sutta

Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu

Now
on that occasion the Blessed One was dwelling in Rajagaha, in the
Bamboo Grove. Then thirty monks from Pava all wilderness dwellers, all
alms-goers, all triple-robe wearers, all still with fetters went to the
Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side.

Then the thought occurred to the Blessed One,
“These thirty monks from Pava… are all still with fetters. What if I
were to teach them the Dhamma in such a way that in this very sitting
their minds, through lack of clinging, would be released from
fermentations?”

So he addressed the monks: “Monks.”

“Yes, lord,” the monks responded.

The
Blessed One said, “From an inconceivable beginning comes
transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings
hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating and
wandering on. What do you think, monks? Which is greater, the blood you
have shed from having your heads cut off while transmigrating and
wandering this long, long time, or the water in the four great oceans?”

“As
we understand the Dhamma taught to us by the Blessed One, this is the
greater: the blood we have shed from having our heads cut off while
transmigrating and wandering this long, long time, not the water in the
four great oceans.”

“Excellent, monks. Excellent. It is excellent that you thus understand the Dhamma taught by me.

“This
is the greater: the blood you have shed from having your heads cut off
while transmigrating and wandering this long, long time, not the water
in the four great oceans.

“The blood you have shed when, being
cows, you had your cow-heads cut off: Long has this been greater than
the water in the four great oceans.

“The blood you have shed
when, being water buffaloes, you had your water buffalo-heads cut
off… when, being rams, you had your ram-heads cut off… when, being
goats, you had your goat-heads cut off… when, being deer, you had
your deer-heads cut off… when, being chickens, you had your
chicken-heads cut off… when, being pigs, you had your pig-heads cut
off: Long has this been greater than the water in the four great oceans.

“The

blood you have shed when, arrested as thieves plundering villages, you
had your heads cut off… when, arrested as highway thieves, you had
your heads cut off… when, arrested as adulterers, you had your heads
cut off: Long has this been greater than the water in the four great
oceans.

“Why
is that? From an inconceivable beginning comes transmigration. A
beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and
fettered by craving are transmigrating and wandering on. Long have you
thus experienced stress, experienced pain, experienced loss, swelling
the cemeteries enough to become disenchanted with all fabrications,
enough to become dispassionate, enough to be released.”

That is
what the Blessed One said. Gratified, the monks delighted in the
Blessed One’s words. And while this explanation was being given, the
minds of the thirty monks from Pava through lack of clinging were
released from fermentations.

Dreaming

Lotus Heart

The
great Taoist master Chuang Tzu once dreamt that he was a butterfly
fluttering here and there. In the dream he had no awareness of his
individuality as a person. He was only a butterfly. Suddenly, he awoke
and found himself laying there, a person once again. But then he
thought to himself, “Was I before a man who dreamt about being a
butterfly, or am I now a butterfly who dreams about being a man?”

I
can identify reality with this story. Many times I have awakened from a
dream and didn’t know, for a moment, what was real and what was the
dream. Dreams are weird. Are they trying to tell us something? If so,
how are we to know what they mean?

You are who you perceive
yourself to be. I’ve sometimes dreamed that I could fly. It’s such a
wonderful, free feeling. It seemed so real. This Zen master had an
out-of-body experience, and now isn’t sure about his identity.

When
you’re a butterfly, there are no worries. You can flutter around
without a care in the world. Perhaps this monk is wishing there were
not so many responsibilities and barriers in his life.

I think
this Zen master wants some peace and quiet in his life. He wishes he
were a normal person and not a Zen master with so many demands put on
him by others. I think it’s important for us to have dreams, but always
remember that reality is much more important.

Sounds
like this guy conforms to what others think of him and allows them to
govern his life. In my opinion, this is the kind of question asked by
people who are struggling with their sense of individuality and self
esteem.

Only you know who you are - and sometimes it takes some
soul-searching to find that identity. We should be content with who we
are. If we try to be someone or something else, we will lose our sense
of identity.

I sometimes wonder whether we really exist as
people, or whether we are only dreaming our lives. And if we are
dreaming, when and how will we wake up?

It would be strange if
our life were really part of someone else’s dream. Our lives might seem
long and tedious, but it would pass in the blink of an eye for that
dreaming person.

Are we really just living out someone else’s dream or fantasy? I think that everyone at one time
or another feels this kind of detachment from their lives.

It’s
funny how we sometimes have to pinch ourselves to make sure we’re
really ourselves, to make sure we really exist. It’s just like watching
a movie, except in real life you don’t follow a script.

This
reminds me of a philosophy course I once took. We discussed reality and
how we know that we really exist. All I can remember from the course is
‘I think there fore I am’.

Is this really reality? Or are we all dreaming this?

Thinking about this kind of thing for too long can drive you crazy. Because it may seem philosophical babble…

This
story has to do with being close to nature, and not forgetting that
humans are as much a part of nature as a butterfly. Ultimately, we are
all equal and should treat each other as equals.

This story reminds me of Kafka’s Metamorphosis too. What would it be like if I woke up one morning and found that I had been
completed transformed? Could I make a smooth transition into my new existence, or would I be really screwed up?

This
story is a wake-up call for all those preoccupied with materialism and
the mundane. Someone may see this Zen master as schizophrenic who is
having trouble distinguishing reality. Actually how can he not know
whether he is a butterfly or not!?

Do butterflies really dream
like humans, or is this monk just anthropomorphizing, it’s up to you to
wonder! I can’t think about this too long, because it will control my
mind for the rest of the week.

It’s not important if what I
perceive is a dream or if I’m someone else’s reality or not. What
matters is the principle of doing the right thing with the situations,
real or not, I am confronted with. Why would a man want to be a
butterfly, or a butterfly a man?

Reality is one’s perception of reality, nothing more.

Buddhism as a philosophy

Buddhist philosophy deals extensively with problems in metaphysics, phenomenology, ethics, and epistemology.

The
Buddha’s general outlook has been described as neither ontological nor
metaphysical, but empirical. He assumed an unsympathetic attitude
toward speculative and religious thought in general. A basic idea of
the Buddha is that the world must be thought of in procedural terms,
not in terms of things or substances. The Buddha advised viewing
reality as comprised of dependently originated phenomena; Buddhists
view this approach to experience as avoiding the two extremes of
ratification and nihilism.

Particular points of Buddhist philosophy have often
been the subject of disputes between different schools of Buddhism.
While theory for its own sake is not valued in Buddhism, theory pursued
in the interest of enlightenment is consistent with Buddhist values and
ethics.

Early Buddhism displays a strong streak of skepticism;
the Buddha cautioned his followers to stay aloof from intellectual
disputation for its own sake, saying that this is fruitless and
distracts from the practices leading to enlightenment. However, the
Buddha’s doctrine did have an important philosophical component: it
negated the major claims of rival positions while building upon them at
a new philosophical and religious level.

In a skeptical vein, he
asserted the insubstantiality of the ego, and in doing so countered
those Upanishadic sages who sought knowledge of an unchanging ultimate
self. The Buddha created a new position in opposition to their
theories, and held that attachment to a permanent self in this world of
change is the cause of suffering and the main obstacle to liberation.
The same skeptical approach negates the existence of any high god or
spiritual substance, and undercuts both traditional and iconoclastic
spiritual goals. He broke new ground by going on to explain the source
for the apparent ego: it is merely the result of the aggregates
(skandhas) which make up experience.

In
this breaking down into constituent elements, the Buddha was heir to
earlier element philosophies which had sought to characterize existing
things as made up of a set of basic elements. The Buddha, however,
eliminated mythological rhetoric, systematized world components into
five groups, and used this approach not to characterize a substantial
object, but to explain a delusion. He coordinated material components
with psychological ones. The Buddha criticized the religious sages’
theories of an Absolute as yet another reification, instead giving a
path to self-perfection as a means of transcending the world of name
and form.

Decisive
in distinguishing Buddhism from what is commonly called Hinduism is the
issue of epistemological justification. All schools of Indian logic
recognize various sets of valid justifications for knowledge, or
pramana – Buddhism recognizes a set that is smaller than the others’.
All accept perception and inference, for example, but for some schools
of Hinduism and Buddhism the received textual tradition is an
epistemological category equal to perception and inference (although
this is not necessarily true for some other schools).

Thus, in
the Hindu schools, if a claim was made that could not be substantiated
by appeal to the textual canon, it would be considered as ridiculous as
a claim that the sky was green and, conversely, a claim which could not
be substantiated via conventional means might still be justified
through textual reference, differentiating this from the epistemology
of hard science.

Some
schools of Buddhism, on the other hand, rejected an inflexible
reverence of accepted doctrine. As the Buddha said, according to the
canonical scriptures.

Do not accept anything by mere tradition
… Do not accept anything just because it accords with your scriptures
… Do not accept anything merely because it agrees with your
pre-conceived notions … But when you know for yourselves – these
things are moral, these things are blameless, these things are praised
by the wise, these things, when performed and undertaken, conduce to
well-being and happiness – then do you live acting accordingly.

Early
Buddhist philosophers and exegetes of one particular early school (as
opposed to Mahayana), the Sarvastivadins, created a pluralist
metaphysical and phenomenological system, in which all experiences of
people, things and events can be broken down into smaller and smaller
perceptual or perceptual-ontologi cal units called dharmas.