Samsara is not the creation of anyone. It is simply the way it is, or the reality as it is. No one, out of benevolence or malevolence, desires to condemn us into Samsara or refuse to save us out of Samsara. The Buddha taught us to see reality as it really is instead of wishing reality to be what we want to see. This is a component of Right Views, apart from the Four Noble Truth.
We must choose to live in the present moment for our happiness. This is another component of Right Views. No amount of remorse or guilt can change the past, and no amount of anxiety or worries can guarantee a desirable future. Chasing the past, or trying to find the beginning of the Universe (which is impossible to know with 100% certainty) is unwise if one’s goal is to find inner peace. It may be of interest to scientists, for the purpose and fun of intellectual challenges (as opposed to prajnaparamita or perfection of wisdom in Buddhism). Different goals call for different approaches; neither is superior, inferior nor equal. The Buddha will not answer certain questions such as: is the Universe finite or infinite, is the Universe eternal or not eternal, does the Buddha exist or not exist after death, is the self different from the body?
Everything in the world is empty of a self. There is no I, mine, or myself. The body is not the self, the self is not inside the body, and the body doesn’t belong to the self. Hence, consciousness is also not the self, and does not belong to the self. The sense organs, feelings, perceptions, volition and consciousness gave us a false sense of a self. It is entirely possible to build and program a robot to have similar sense organs, feelings, perceptions, volition and consciousness which will then create a false sense of a self. Clearly, the robot doesn’t have a self; similarly, our sense of self is a delusion. We are built from Earth, Water, Fire and Wind just like everything else in the world but in different forms. Everything is empty of a self; we are neither superior, inferior, nor equal.
One may like to stay in Samsara forever despite the sufferings because there are also happiness. It is a personal choice, especially for ordinary beings who cannot understand the doctrine of non-self. Escaping Samsara is not everyone’s goal, including lay Buddhists and monks. For example, certain Bodhisattvas vow never to attain Nibbana out of compassion for all sentient beings until and unless Hell becomes empty. Arahants can escape Samsara because they have faith in the Teacher’s instruction and live in harmony with it. The idea is: “Gladly would I have my skin, bone and sinews wither and my flesh dry up, if only I can struggle until I win that which can be won by human effort.”
Nobody attaches consciousness to a sentient body or being in the first place. Everything in the world is empty of a self. Consciousness is simply a delusion, although it does exist as an intangible thing. The Earth, Water, Fire, and Wind in a body are held together by a flux of energy called Asava. After the death of a body, any residual energy or Asava will give rise to formation of a new body. Thus, the cycle of birth and death continues. An Arahant is one who has destroyed the Asava; breaking the spokes of the wheel of Samsara. Thus, there will be no more rebirth for this body after death.
Buddhist insight into change teaches us many things. Ultimately, it leads to cessation of suffering. In the intermediate stage, it makes us feel happy to have the characteristics of Four Bramahvihara or four divine states of dwelling: metta (loving kindness), karuna (compassion), mudita (sympathetic joy) and upekkha (equanimity).
Venerable Sariputta is considered the first of the Buddha’s two chief male disciples, together with Moggallana. He heard of the Buddha’s name through a monk disciple of the Buddha. When he first saw the monk, he noticed the exceptional qualities and asked the monk to teach him some Dharma. The monk said: “I am new to monk-hood and know very little about Dharma. I am afraid I am not in the position to teach you any Dharma.” Venerable Sariputta said: “Please teach me whatever you know.” The monk said: “What I’ve learnt from my teacher is: everything arises due to conditions, and everything ceases when the conditions vanish.” Venerable Sariputta instantly felt some breakthrough in his spiritual cultivation. He felt so inspired and happy. He asked: “Who is your teacher? Where can I find him?” The monk told him about the Buddha. After that, Venerable Sariputta invited his best friend, Venerable Moggallana, to travel together to become disciples of the Buddha. From this historical account, we can see how powerful and inspiring the Buddhist insight into change is. Of course, not everybody can fully comprehend the idea although everybody can understand the words. One can only feel its power and inspiration when he truly gains the insight.
It is simply a reality that everything in this world changes all the time. Physical things change, while mental objects (or thoughts) change much faster by orders of magnitude. An ordinary person who doesn’t see reality as it is but wishes reality to be what he wants to see will experience a lot of suffering in life. The reason being he expected certain things to be permanent only to be disappointed again and again by the changes. Changes will not cause suffering if one has Right Views or sees reality as it is; i.e. one who accepts it as reality, nothing abnormal about it, and doesn’t despise the changes. For example, one loses a leg but he is content with having one more leg to move around; therefore, losing a leg doesn’t cause any suffering to him. He accepts it as something which must happen to him for some unknown reason. This is in contrast to another who has wrong views, feeling devastated and unable to spring back up into actions and move on. The same changes cause suffering to one but not another. That simply means the suffering is mind-made; one causes suffering to himself for having wrong views.
Suffering arises due to conditions, and suffering ceases when the conditions vanish. That means one can cease all sufferings by controlling his mind to vanish the undesirable conditions. Changes are normal occurrences; choosing to see changes as abnormal occurrences simply causes oneself to make suffering as a normal and frequent occurrence in his daily life. Every little change can cause suffering to him. Isn’t that unwise?
The condition which leads to suffering is the desire of oneself. When one desires to see something happen, he will feel disappointed when it doesn’t happen accordingly. One suffers when he desires for a certain kind of birth; i.e. he wants to live the life of someone else. Some people are sad that they weren’t born in a noble family, rich family, rich country, or with a beautiful face to become a movie star, etc. Some people wish they weren’t born into this world. Some people see being born means involuntarily cast into a world to experience all kinds of suffering. One suffers when he desires to stay young forever with no discomforts associated with ageing. Some people are sad that their faces start to have wrinkles, their bodies start to become weak and painful. They are unhappy with the changes, although they can choose not to feel that way. One suffers when he desires to be 100% healthy. Some people are sad when they are sick, although they can choose not to feel unhappy. One suffers when he desires to live forever, although he knows that no one is immortal. Some people are afraid to talk about death, or feel sad that they will die; even though they are unhappy with their lives, being poor, having a broken family, etc. They would do everything they could to stay alive; even though it incurs a lot of pain, costs a lot of money, involves organ transplant, etc. One suffers when he desires to associate only with someone he likes and feel sad having to associate with the disliked. He can choose not to dislike anybody, or stay away from the disliked, but he chooses to stay on due to certain considerations. One suffers when he is separated from the beloved ones. He wrongly assumes he deserved to be fettered to the beloved ones by unbroken chains. One suffers when he doesn’t get what he desires. Thus, it is very clear that all sufferings are due to desire. Do all desires lead to suffering? The Buddha never said that. Desire to walk the spiritual path is essential; cessation of suffering requires the desire to have no desire. The path leading to cessation of suffering is the Noble Eightfold Path: Right Views, Right Thoughts, Right Speeches, Right Actions, Right Livelihood, Right Efforts, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration. Can desire to have no desire cause suffering? Of course, it can. The Noble Eightfold Path is like a boat to ferry a person to cross the flood of suffering. One needs the boat before reaching the desired destination; but he doesn’t need it anymore when he has crossed the flood. There is no more need for desire to have no desire.
No desire for bad time doesn’t mean one will not get bad time. Similarly, no desire for a good time doesn’t mean one will not have a good time. There will be good times and bad times, regardless of desire or no desire. Everything arises due to conditions, and everything ceases when the conditions vanish. Good times are impermanent, but one need not feel unhappy for the passing away of good times. Bad times are also impermanent; i.e. one should feel happy (or at least not unhappy) that good times will come after the cessation of bad times.
The body and mind are impermanent. Clinging to impermanent things is like being fettered by chains to the unworthy impermanent things. If one truly treasures freedom, he should break the chains which are holding him back. It is unwise to see the body as “self”, or assuming the “self” is inside the body, or considering the body as belonging to the “self”. This body and mind are as unworthy as anything else which is made of Earth, Water, Fire and Wind. It is pure ego to see the body as superior or inferior to any other thing. It is a delusion to think that one has a “self”. The sense organs, feelings, perceptions, volition, and consciousness (known as the Five Aggregates of Clinging) cause the delusion of being alive. You and I are possibly robots which have been designed and programmed to have that kind of delusion. Anyway, the idea of non-self is more beneficial than the unproven view of having a self. Everything arises due to conditions, and everything ceases when the conditions vanish. Having sense organs, feelings, perceptions, volition, and consciousness are not proof of having a self. Conversely, if we choose to think that all these arise due to conditions, there is nothing abnormal about having diversity of things in this world of which humans are just one of the species, neither superior nor inferior, the absence of ego can lead to cessation of suffering. We will have no greed, hatred and delusion. We will have no fear, anger, anxiety, depression, sorrow, grief, lamentations and despair. It is not important to debate who is right or wrong. One is wise to adopt an idea which will bring happiness and cease all sufferings.
The contemplation of non-self makes one see that he is incapable of gaining or losing anything and everything. Nothingness has no place for dirt to attach to. Birth, ageing, sickness, death, association with the disliked, separation with the beloved ones, and not getting what one wants happens to someone but not oneself when one has no self. One with no self is selfless. He doesn’t consider “himself” to ever be born and, therefore, he can never die. He is unborn and deathless. He has annihilated birth and death, here and now. This is Nibbana, or escape from the cycle of birth and death (Samsara).
What about the Four Bramahvihara or four divine states of dwelling: metta (loving kindness), karuna (compassion), mudita (sympathetic joy) and upekkha (equanimity)? Everything arises due to conditions, and everything ceases when the conditions vanish. When one has this Right View, seeing reality as it really is instead of wishing reality to be what he wants to see, he sees that all beings are helpless; i.e. unable to control themselves, their behaviors, their fates, and has no freewill to walk or rest. Some people only think that they think but they don’t really think; it’s just a delusion. Some people feel they have self-control; it’s another delusion. It’s true that we have a certain level of freewill, but no one is really free. Can you control yourself to stay awake for 24 hours? With the Right View, one will have metta (loving kindness) to forgive everyone and never feel angry with anyone. One will also have karuna (compassion) to help others without seeking “return-on-investment” or reciprocation. One who sees no self is incapable of gaining or losing anything. He will also have mudita (sympathetic joy) since he has no suffering. He will have upekkha (equanimity) since he always focuses inwards and concentrates on inner peace. He is unmoved by the Eight Winds: gain and loss, praise and blame, fame and disrepute, pleasure and pain.
Something which is eternal, unchanging, and omnipotent do exist in most philosophical concepts in Chinese thought, whether it is Daoism, Confucianism, Moism or others. However, this something is not thought of as “God” by any Chinese philosophy. It is not the Creator of the Universe or an infinitely good being who governs and regulates the cosmos. It was the Universe itself. It was also called Nature (自然) or “Reality as it is”. The creator of Heaven (Tian 天) and Earth (Di 地) was a god called “Pan Gu” (盘古开天辟地). Of course, Pan Gu was a fractional part of Nature and he didn’t enjoy impunity. Instead, as punishment by the Laws of Nature, he died creating Heaven and Earth. In other words, the “creator” of the world has died long long ago. Obviously, he can’t keep track of our good/bad deeds or reward/punish us for those deeds. Pan Gu created Heaven and Earth not because he was benevolent or malevolent, and he wasn’t eternal, unchanging, and omnipotent. He just did what he did spontaneously or acted out of his impulsiveness. Similarly, Nature isn’t benevolent or malevolent. Nature doesn’t act out of impulse, therefore, it can be eternal (不易), unchanging, and omnipotent (天若有情天亦老). Nature is emotionless. It just does what it does. There are changes within the eternity of Nature (不易中有易); and there are eternity within the changes (易中有不易). For example, the existence of the Four Seasons means there are changes. However, the fact that every year has Four Seasons (not three or five) means this pattern is unchanging eternally. We must see reality as it is instead of wishing reality to be what we want to see. Reality will not change according to our wishes or prayers (不以人的意志为转移).
The creation of Heaven and Earth produces humans, animals, plants, as well as gods and ghosts. There are benevolent gods and malevolent gods. Chinese in the Shang Dynasty (which ended in 1046 BC) and earlier did pray to various gods. The purposes of the prayers were to seek help from benevolent gods to protect people from the natural effects of Nature and also hostilities of malevolent gods. They also offered human/animal sacrifices to the malevolent gods as pacifiers so that the malevolent gods were not too hostile to people. The group of benevolent gods was seen as infinitely good beings who governs and regulates the world. They are collectively called “Tian Dao” (天道) or simply “Tian” or “Dao”. This “Tian” is not the same “Tian” of Heaven in terms of the concepts. It is not uncommon in Chinese language to have the same word which means different things under different contexts. When Chinese pray to “Tian” (天), they are referring to the “government in the Heaven”, i.e. the group of benevolent gods. This “Tian” is not eternal, unchanging, and omnipotent; the “government in the Heaven” has to keep fighting with the malevolent gods and protect the people on Earth.
After the Shang Dynasty was replaced by the Zhou Dynasty, the people stopped human sacrifices to the malevolent gods. It was a declaration that Chinese don’t accept being held hostage by malevolent and hostility (中国人不吃这一套, 鬼神没有资格居高临下同中国人说话). The Zhou people only prayed to “Tian” or the “government in the Heaven”. The “government” was prayed for simply because it is benevolent and the world was not peaceful. In other words, the “government” will not be needed and will not be prayed for if (1) it is malevolent or (2) the world is peaceful. The second condition was seen as the ideal condition by both the Zhou government and the people; i.e. the great harmony (大同) or the greatest benevolence (上德不德，是以有德；下德不失德，是以无德。 上德无为而无以为；下德为之而有以为) which means requiring no more benevolence from anyone since everyone is self-sufficient and there is no external threats. Of course, this utopia is quite difficult to attain if not impossible. The King of Zhou declared that humans were the superior beings of all beings (《尚书·泰誓上》:“惟天地万物父母,惟人万物之灵。”). Humans shall never again be sacrificed as offering to malevolent gods, and human life shall receive the highest respect. To Confucius, the defender of Zhou culture, even burning of human effigies or straw men were seen as cruelty. Humans (such as wives and concubines) were not to be sacrificed and buried in the funeral of a dead noble. Unfortunately, some people continued to practice the superstitious rites.
The infinitely good beings who governs and regulates the world are not eternal, unchanging, and omnipotent. The Nature which is eternal, unchanging, and omnipotent is emotionless, neither benevolent nor malevolent, doesn’t governs and regulates the world. Chinese see Nature or Reality as it is instead of wishing it to be what we want to see. We wish only to understand Nature, and apply our knowledge to mitigate or lessen the damages caused by natural disasters. We believe we must help ourselves in order to get the sympathy of “Tian” to help us (自助才能得天助). We wish only to understand Nature, of which humans are also a fractional part of it, and apply our knowledge to mitigate or lessen the damages caused by humans’ greed, hatred and delusion. We believe we must learn to be resilient like “Tian”, and never give up in the face of hardship (天行健，君子以自强不息；地势坤，君子以厚德载物). We believe we must be benevolent like Earth supporting all beings.
If there is a “God” who is eternal, unchanging, omnipotent and is also an infinitely good being who governs and regulates the cosmos, there will not be any natural or man-made disasters. People will not see the need to pray to “God” since no benevolence is needed.
有物混成 先天地生 萧呵 寥呵 独立而不改 可以为天地母 吾未知其名 字之曰道
强为之名曰大 大曰逝 逝曰远 远曰反
There was a mixture of things before the formation of Heaven and Earth. So quiet and so sparse. It is independent and does not change much, and it is the mother of Heaven and Earth. I don’t know its name. I simply call it Dao, or subjectively designate it as Great. It is so great and has no end. It has no end therefore has a far reaching extent. In this far reaching extent, there are repetitions, reverberations, or cycles of flip-sides.
道大 天大 地大人亦大
国中有四大 而人居其一焉
人法地 地法天 天法道 道法自然
Dao is great, Heaven is great, Earth is great, and humans are also great. The Universe has four great things, and humans are one of them. The lives of humans (physical and spiritual) are closely related to the Earth. The conditions of the Earth (wet, dry, grassland, forest, etc.) are closely related to Heaven. The conditions of Heaven (weather, seasons, rain, wind, etc.) are closely related to Dao. Dao is closely related to Nature (Physics, Chemistry, Biology, etc.).
Although the infinitely good “Tian Dao” who governs and regulates the world are not eternal, unchanging, and omnipotent, it nevertheless shows us through “leadership by example” that being benevolent is the way to happiness and harmony. People should learn from “Tian Dao”. Going against “Tian Dao” will lead to suffering.
“We were named “Hindu” either by Mughals or those who ruled earlier. British who ruled and returned seconded that adjective. When we have our own identities how ignorant to embrace an outsider given name as our name or religion.”
In 712 AD, the Muslims invaded the Indus Valley. To distinguish themselves, they called all non-Muslims Hindus; the name of the land became, by default, the name of the people and their religion (Schoeps, 1966, p. 148).
The land where Pakistan is now was called “Indus Valley” by the Persians. The civilization there originating in 4,500-5,000 B.C.E. shouldn’t be called “Indus Civilization” but “Harappan civilization”. It began to decline by 1800 BC. When Persians occupied the land around 500 BC, they called the land “Hindu”. (The word “Hindu” originates from the Sanskrit word for river, sindhu. The Indus River running through northwest India into Pakistan received its name from the Sanskrit term sindhu. The Persians designated the land around the Indus River as Hindu, a mispronunciation of the Sanskrit sindhu.) Indus River is basically “River River”.
The “Hindu” religion had no unified name. It was a pagan belief, and there were uncountable versions of it which varied with locations. Adoption of the Vedas was limited to the Brahmin caste.
“Hinduism” is not a religion but a collection of many different religions. “Mahayana” Buddhism is not a Buddhist sect but a collection of many different Buddhist sects.
Xuan Zang (玄奘) was a Chinese Buddhist monk, scholar, traveler, and translator who traveled to Nalanda Monastery (a renown Buddhist University) in the seventh century. He took part in a religious debate here and demonstrated his knowledge of many Buddhist schools. “Mahayana” Buddhism was very popular there. Before arriving at Nalanda, Xuan Zang also met many non-Mahayana monks, including Prajnakara (般若羯羅 or 慧性), a monk with whom Xuan Zang studied early Buddhist scriptures. He acquired the important text of the Mahāvibhāṣa (大毗婆沙論) from Prajnakara, which he later translated into Chinese.
According to Xuan Zang, the main difference between “Mahayana” and non-Mahayana Buddhism is: “Mahayana” think that the world and also human perception of the world are all illusions (色即是空 空即是色 受想行识 亦复如是), whereas non-Mahayana follow the early Buddhist scriptures that the world material (rupa) are real but human perception (nama) of the world is an illusion. Namarupa (名相) is sometimes translated as mentality-materiality.
Illusions are impermanent. Impermanence is suffering. Each of us owns something, but losing them later is a certainty. Birth, ageing, sickness, death, association with the disliked, separation from the beloved ones, and not getting what one wants are the seven types of suffering. One will not perceive it as suffering if he realizes that he owns nothing, therefore is incapable of losing anything. The common perception of owning something is an illusion, although that something is real. This real thing is also impermanent; therefore, it is not wrong to consider it as an illusion. The body and mind are impermanent, therefore not fit to be considered as “I, mine, or myself”. In fact, everything is empty of a self. Everything arises due to conditions, and everything ceases when the conditions disappear. Everything is like a shadow of another “object”; that “object” is simply the shadow of another. Everything and everyone is helpless, having no freewill to walk or rest as he wants. The perception of having freewill is an illusion. A person’s body is made up of Earth, Water, Fire and Wind; no different from every “shit” in the world. It doesn’t fit to be considered as “I, mine, or myself”. It is an ego to think that you and I are superior or inferior to anything in the world. Everyone is as helpless as a H2O molecule in the river, being pushed around. Therefore, we should forgive everyone and show compassion for his helplessness. Changing of the world is beyond the control of anything and anyone. The Buddha taught us to contemplate the Three Marks of Existence: suffering, impermanence, and non-self. This is another way which can lead to cessation of suffering.
Dependent Origination is the Buddha’s teaching on how personal phenomena arises within the environment of anicca, impermanence. The entirety of the Dharma is to bring understanding of Four Noble Truths. It is within the context of Four Noble Truths that understanding of Dependent Origination develops. Understanding Dependent Origination brings awareness of the relationship between the Five Clinging-Aggregates and the impermanent phenomenal world.
The Five Clinging-Aggregates are physical and mental factors that through individual intentional clinging a personality is formed. This self-created ego-personality perceives that it is a permanent, substantial, and sustainable self. Once formed the ego-self tenaciously insists on establishing it’s “self” in every object, event, view, and idea that occurs.
Dependent Origination directly shows the 12 causative links that determine the experiences of a self-referential ego-personality. In the Paticca-Samuppada-Vibhanga Sutta, the Buddha presents the 12 causative links of Dependent Origination. Each of these 12 links are required, or “dependent” on the prior condition in order to give rise to a “self” that will experience dukkha. Rooted in ignorance, (of Four Noble Truths) it is through a continued confused and deluded “wrong view” that “anatta” continues to establish itself in every object, event, view, or idea that occurs. This is known as continued “I-making,” or simply, conceit.
Suffering is not the fault of oneself, not the fault of another, not the fault of both oneself and another, not the fault of neither oneself nor another. Reality is what it is. The Right View is to see reality as it is instead of wishing reality to be what one wants to see. Nobody has freewill, because nobody can stay calm under any circumstances. Only an Arahant has freewill.
It is possible for a Bodhisattva to become an Arahant, but it will be extremely hard and take uncountable cycles of rebirth. Bodhisattvas typically vow to save all beings and delay their attainment of Nibbana or Arahanthood. They worship a Bodhisattva who vows never to attain Nibbana or Arahanthood until and unless Hell becomes empty. William Shakespeare said Hell was already empty but it was just a joke.
Bodhisattvas have a lot of compassion, but at the same time they have this clinging or grasping to the vow of saving all beings. The Buddha said there are two kinds of fools. The first kind of fools take responsibility when it is not his responsibility. The second kind of fools don’t take responsibility when it is his responsibility. In this sense, a Bodhisattva is a fool. The Buddha was a Bodhisattva before he found the Middle way and attained Arahanthood, after which he ceased to be a Bodhisattva and ceased all suffering, i.e. no more fear, anger, anxiety, depression, sorrow, grief, lamentations, and despair. He had no more desire, attachment, clinging, grasping, greed, hatred, and delusion. He had perfect virtue, equanimity and wisdom; and he had the mental strength to be unmoved by the Eight Winds: gain and loss, praise and blame, honor and disrepute, pleasure and pain. Self-accountability is not selfishness; an Arahant takes responsibility for his own attainment and also teaches others to do the same. The Buddha was not selfish to attain Arahanthood. He simply chose to attain direct and personal knowledge of the truths before trying to teach others. It is like obtaining an MBBS degree before starting to assume the role of a doctor. There are big differences between believing, remembering, agreeing based on reasoning, awakening, and attainment of the truths. If one is still a Bodhisattva, yet to attain the truths, he must not pretend to KNOW the truths; otherwise, it would be as guilty as pretending to be a doctor when one has yet to complete the MBBS training. A person can declare what he believes, remembers, agrees based on reasoning, and teaches others the knowledge; like applying medical knowledge (such as CPR) to save someone but not pretending to be a doctor. A qualified doctor can do much more; similarly, an Arahant can do much more than a Bodhisattva. Accusing an Arahant as selfish simply exposes the defilement of the accuser for lacking Right Views, Right Thoughts, Right Speech, Right Actions, Right Livelihood, Right Efforts, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration. In short, the accuser lacks virtue, equanimity and wisdom.
The Buddha was more than an Arahant because he found the Four Noble Truths all by himself instead of hearing the Dharma from a living teacher. He lived at a time when the true Dharma was lost. He struggled extremely hard, instead of teaching others what he didn’t know directly and personally. Finally, he recalled his many past lives and also Kassapa Buddha (his teacher in the immediate past life) who taught him the true Dharma. An Arahant who attains Nibbana after hearing the Dharma is not a Buddha; but no different from the Buddha in terms of the essence of Nibbana. There will not be another Buddha until the true Dharma is lost again. The next Buddha will have to rediscover the Four Noble Truths all by himself. Waiting for the next Buddha is not better than prolonging the existence of the true Dharma. Wishing for the arrival of the next Buddha simply means wishing the disappearance of the true Dharma. This is very unwise. Hell will become overcrowded before the coming of the next Buddha.
There are verifiable proofs of improvement or attainment in the spiritual path. You will notice that person becomes happier because he has less suffering in terms of fear, anger, anxiety, depression, sorrow, grief, lamentations and despair. One can verify the improvement/attainment himself. It is also possible for others like psychiatrists or psychologists to verify the attainment.
There are no verifiable proofs of Enlightenment in Buddhism, according to the Early Buddhist Texts (EBT). When one has direct and personal knowledge of the truths, like personal experience, he knows he is Enlightened and has become an Arahant. A wise man can identify another wise man and also a fool. A fool cannot identify a wise man but often mistaken another fool as a wise man. Therefore, only an Arahant can possibly identify another Arahant. However, in the Vinaya rules for Buddhist monks, the Buddha does not encourage the practice of one monk verifying another monk’s attainment because this may be abused or misused for gaining fame.
Enlightenment requires abandonment of greed, hatred and delusion; it requires abandonment of attachment, clinging, grasping or wanting to possess. If a person is eager to receive verification on his attainment, it just goes to show that he is very far from Enlightenment. If a person is still seeking, that can only mean he hasn’t found what he is seeking. If one is eager to verify another person’s attainment, it just goes to show he has a strong ego, like standing on a moral high-ground to judge another. He is also very far from Enlightenment.
Some Buddhist sects practice verifying a follower as Sotāpanna, Sakadāgāmi, or Anāgāmi. It is contradictory to the Buddha’s teaching. The outcomes of various stages are described in the EBT. These are for one to evaluate himself on the attainment of the outcomes. Like outcome based education (contrary to input based education), one seeks to learn and attain the stated outcomes for self improvements and happiness. In original Buddhism, there are no exams or assessments to certify the attainment. No one should presume himself an Arahant to verify the attainment of another. Assessment methods created by modern society are not credible; it is like a certificate given by an unaccredited college. Exams and assessments can possibly evaluate the knowledge and understanding of Buddhist Texts but not the consciousness or spiritual attainment of a person.
Verification of Sotāpanna, Sakadāgāmi, or Anāgāmi requires the ability of an Arahant to read the person’s mind. If someone other than the Buddha says you are one-returner (Sakadāgāmi) or non-returner (Anāgāmi), can you really believe him?
Humans give animals a price tag in sales. An academic certificate is also like a price tag for one to sell himself to potential employers or customers. If you are not selling yourself, why do you need a price tag given by an evaluator? It is actually a humiliation to ask for a price tag, aka verification or certification of Sotāpanna, Sakadāgāmi, or Anāgāmi. In the EBT, the Buddha’s disciples never ask for verification but declared their attainments to the Buddha. There is also a Sutta where the Buddha taught venerable Ananda the methods for self-assessment of attainment.
I have no doubt about the Buddha’s teaching and I feel the happiness directly and personally. The Buddha’s teaching is definitely good. However, not everyone can learn. Different people hear the same words but the outcomes are different, as evident by the existence of so many Buddhist sects with wide differences in their doctrines. So many people think they can teach Buddhism to others, but they teach widely different doctrines. I think the Buddha has foreseen this; he instructed his disciples to pass down the Suttas, all started with: “Thus as I heard, …” instead of “The Buddha said, …” He doesn’t want to be misrepresented; not that he would be displeased by any misrepresentation (because he has no greed, hatred, and delusion) but he has great compassion for all beings and he wants people to learn the true Dharma and feel true happiness from the perfection of virtue, equanimity and wisdom. No one should “accuse” the Buddha of saying anything; as far as the records or Suttas are concerned, those are words heard by the disciples rather than said by the Buddha. No one knows whether those words were really said by the Buddha. It could be counterfeit suttas, words put into the mouth of the Buddha, or misheard, wrong recollection, wrong propagation from one generation to another, or some other reasons. The Buddha encourages followers to listen, investigate, practice, and agree if, and only if, one directly and personally attain the attributes of the teaching, i.e. cessation of suffering. There are big differences between believing, remembering, agreeing based on reasoning, awakening, and attainment of the truths. If one has no awakening to the truths, he cannot claim to understand the Buddha’s teaching; therefore, he is not in a position to confirm that the Buddha teaches the truths (because he doesn’t really directly and personally know the truths). The Buddha doesn’t want anyone to claim any word is the truth until and unless that person has direct and personal knowledge of the truth, like personal experience. Buddhists are free to say they believe the words are the truths, but not pretending to have awakening nor attainment of the truths. As such, we can’t claim Buddhist religion is the secret of happiness; we can only say we believe it can lead to happiness or cessation of suffering. We will never say other religions cannot lead to happiness.
I am an Engineering Professor and I have taught many students over 30 years. Not all students can understand what I taught, as evident by the results in which very few score grade “A”. Maybe I am a lousy teacher; but my students love my teaching although they don’t get “A”. There are big differences between believing, remembering, agreeing based on reasoning, awakening, and attainment of the truths. I can teach but I can’t guarantee everybody can learn it. Similarly, the Buddha is a great teacher; he is still a great teacher until today, teaching through the words recorded by his disciples, although not all are truly his words. The Buddha can’t guarantee everybody can learn it correctly and find true happiness.
How many Buddhist countries are prosperous? How many Buddhists are happy? Can we blame it on the Buddha or his teaching? A Buddhist country need not be a poor country. Many kings were followers of the Buddha and they were not expected to become poor after becoming Buddhists. There must be something wrong with the ways Buddhism is taught today. I have witnessed different Buddhist sects fight for power, influence and wealth. I have witnessed fear, anger, anxiety, depression, sorrow, grief, lamentations, and despair. I have witnessed Buddhists in a monastery fighting for power, influence and wealth. I have seen many unhappy Buddhists with fear, anger, anxiety, depression, sorrow, grief, lamentations, and despair.
We can’t claim Buddhist religion is the secret of happiness; we can only say we believe it can lead to happiness or cessation of suffering. We will never say other religions cannot lead to happiness.
Buddhism is a religion of peace. Islam and Christianity are also religion of peace. However, the world is still not peaceful. Something must be missing here.
There are many similarity between Catholicism, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, including their various sects. Of course, there are also many differences. I think it is best for one to see each of them as a distinct religion. Each is not wrong, but the differences also mean it is impossible for all of them to be right at the same time. It is impossible for them to agree with each other. They will have to agree to disagree in order to live harmoniously in the same world.
There are many different schools or sects of Buddhism. People like to group all the sects other than Theravada into one category called “Mahayana”. It is actually incorrect to call them as such because the various sects within “Mahayana” have wide differences between them. I think it is best for one to see each of them as a distinct religion. Each is not wrong, but the differences also mean it is impossible for all of them to be right at the same time.
Different religions will lead to different outcomes for oneself, family, community, and country. A believer of one religion may see the outcome of another religion as “wrong” or “imperfect”. Buddhism too, whichever sect it is, sees certain doctrines of other religions as “wrong” or “imperfect”. However, the Buddha teaching is about negation of clinging, aversion, and delusion. What this means is: the judging of “right” and “wrong” are not for the purpose of hurting the feelings of anybody, especially oneself. The sole purpose of judging “right” and “wrong” is for self consumption; i.e. choosing to follow the “right” ways and not to follow the “wrong” ways, solely for the happiness of oneself. There is no pride about being “right”, no hatred of others being “wrong”, and no delusion of changing the views of others or persuading another to convert to Buddhism. The attitude is like: “I have the absolute confidence not to be number two, but then I have enough sense to realize that there can be no number one.” “You are entitled to your personal views, so am I.” Buddhism originally does not have the concept of becoming “savior” of all humans. Buddhism is all about saving oneself from suffering, here and now; benefit in the afterlife is just a bonus from the “boss”, of which one should not feel entitled to it although he is hopeful (but not thinking about it every day). I think everybody agrees that it is impossible to save everyone in the world. One is clearly deluded if he desires to liberate everyone, according to his definition of liberation; it indirectly means the elimination of all other religions, as the logical conclusion. Not all “Mahayana” sects or schools hold this view.
Personal accountability is a very important concept, and it is one of the emphases of Theravada Buddhism. Like a parent, one takes responsibility for the actions of oneself, and he teaches his children to do the same. He knows it is impossible for him to protect his children forever. He loves his children by teaching them to become resilient, instead of having a false hope of being saved by someone. Vowing to protect the children forever is harmful to the growth of the children; and also harmful to the mental health of the parents. Calling out this “wrong” way is a compassionate thing to do, because it seeks to benefit the children; and also the parents. It is not about hurting the feelings of the parents who practice the “wrong” ways.
Although Theravada Buddhism emphasizes self-liberation, Buddhists would share the “right” ways, out of compassion, with anybody who is interested to learn. Theravada Buddhists are not selfish, as opposed to the blatantly false accusation from certain “Mahayana” Buddhists. Theravada Buddhists simply choose to lead by example, showing perfect virtue, equanimity and wisdom through abandonment of greed, hatred and delusion.
The suffering of a person is not the fault of oneself, nor the fault of others, nor the fault of both oneself and others. It is also inaccurate to say that the suffering is neither the fault of oneself nor others. Everything arises due to conditions, and everything ceases when the conditions disappear; according to the Twelve Links of Dependent Origination doctrine. It is just like apples naturally falling to Earth. While we have compassion for the suffering of someone, it is not wise to empathize in the sense of sharing the sorrow, grief, lamentations and despair. Feeling sad when others are sad simply shows the lack of equanimity and wisdom. It is a bad example as opposed to good leadership. A good leader shall be unmoved by gain and loss, honor and disrepute, praise and blame, pleasure and pain. It is called the Eight Winds. An Enlightened person must be like a mountain unmoved by the winds.
My shadow complains to me about having no freewill to do as he pleases. I told him that I also have no freewill to do as I please. I am simply the shadow of my “master”. My “master” thinks he has freewill to do as he pleases, but he is simply the shadow of his “master”. Everyone is like a water molecule in the river. One molecule pushes another; no one has freewill. Everyone is helpless, and no one can help us. Everything is empty of self, but people mistaken that each has a self. Goodwill and ill will are simply conditions (like shadows), conditioned by other conditions, and they condition something else to happen (like casting a shadow). Only an Enlightened person can really have freewill. Forgive everyone, because everyone is helpless and does things beyond his control.
Accept and reject are false opposites; i.e. accept is not really the opposite of reject, and vice versa. The Buddha never expected us to accept anything which he taught us. That doesn’t mean he wants us to reject everything or anything which he taught. He was selflessly sharing his knowledge with us, for the happiness of ourselves. He is selfless and unmoved by anything; his emotion is unmoved regardless of whether we accept or reject his teaching. In a way, he doesn’t care about what we think or do, although this is not the accurate description of what he thinks. He wants us to learn his way, attain virtue, equanimity and wisdom, and become unmoved by whatever happens (Eight Winds: gain and loss, honor and disrepute, praise and blame, pleasure and pain) in the outer world, like the Buddha. We will feel happy (aka no suffering) under any circumstances. The Buddha loves us; he loves everybody, but he has no attachment to anybody. Love means: “I want you to be happy”. Attachment means: “I want you to make me happy.” So, love and attachment are completely different things; although ordinary people tend to have both or none. The Buddha wants us to gain appreciation of the ideas, goes beyond belief, committed to practice the ideas in daily life, personally feel the wholesomeness, achieve awakening to the truths, organizing our ways of living accordingly to make them into positive habits, and be seen and characterized as a happy, calm and respectable person.
Not accepting an idea is not equal to rejecting. Not rejecting an idea is not equal to accepting. Accept and reject are not binary logic. Dualistic ways of thinking often set a limit to our freedom of thoughts. The Universe is not a straight line, or 2-dimensional, or even 3-dimensional but could possibly be multi-dimensional. Only people like Einstein and Richard Feynman can see the infinite possibility of time and space. Schrodinger’s cat can be alive and dead at the same time. What I don’t know or don’t understand does not necessarily mean it is wrong or untrue. The Buddha was probably the best scientist.
“Questioning based on preconceived views, you’re confused by what you have grasped.
And so you are unable to glimpse even the slightest notion of the real truth.
That’s why you mistook the truth as nonsense.
Whoever construes ‘equal’, ‘superior’ or ‘inferior’, by that he’d dispute;
whereas to one unmoved by these three,
‘equal’ or ‘superior’ does not exist.
With whom would the true man argue ‘this is true’ or ‘this is false’?
He in whom there is no ‘equal’ or ‘unequal’, with whom would he join another in dispute?”
– SNp 4.9 Magandiya Sutta
I don’t accept all the teachings of the Buddha, because the Buddha taught me never to accept any idea. I also don’t reject all the teachings of the Buddha, because the Buddha taught me never to reject any idea. Accept and reject are the two extremes which are equally bad. I will practice anything and everything which will lead to cessation of suffering, i.e. perpetual happiness. I will walk the path to perfect my virtue, equanimity and wisdom. I don’t even have awakening to the truths, leave alone attainment of the truths. I can only confirm the Buddha’s teaching as the truths when I attain Nibbana; i.e. direct and personal knowledge of the truths. Until then, I am just not in the position to accept or reject any idea.
RESILIENT KID 