Having accessed the Chinese-language webpage of the 'China Daoist Association' - I thought I would translate a guiding article typical of Daoist practice within modern China. In many ways - this text mirrors the Vinaya Discipline of Chinese Buddhism. There is a tradition within Daoism that Laozi travelled to India and either 'taught' the Buddha - or 'became' the historical Buddha!
0 Comments
The historical (Indian) Buddha traversed through at least six different Brahmanical systems – each with its own ‘Guru’ standing at its pinnacle of practice and attainment! Although the Buddha was confirmed to have achieved ALL levels of attainment in these systems by the presiding Gurus themselves – he felt that these systems were ‘limited’ and stopped short of the ultimate truth! In other words, the Buddha perceived that there was a deeper level of attainment involved in his spiritual search that was not ‘realised’ in the Brahmanical systems he had studied, even though these paths were difficult to follow, and the highest levels of attainment were very rare! Therefore, the Buddha had to set out on his own without a teacher to penetrate reality to a greater degree, although it is true that he had been educated in Yoga, meditation, religious texts (such as the Vedas and the Upanishads, etc), martial arts and all kinds of arts suitable to his Kshatriya (Warrior and King) Caste! Interestingly, at this point in human social and cultural development, reading and writing was known but very rare, (practiced in India only by the ruling house, and only then to record and remember ‘laws’ - assisting in their functionality), and so the Buddha was illiterate despite achieving full and complete enlightenment! (This is similar to the story of Hui Neng – the Sixth Patriarch of the Chinese Ch’an tradition – was both a ‘layman’ and ‘illiterate’ when he inherited the ‘Dharma’).
Despite possessing a very good quality education in the spiritual knowledge of his time, the Buddha finally achieved full enlightenment without a teacher. No specific teacher ‘ordained’ the Buddha and other than sitting resolutely within the meditation posture – the Buddha did not follow any ‘Precepts’. The Buddha perfected the ‘Mind Precept’ whereby he cut-off ALL greed, hatred and delusion (breaking the ‘karmic-root’ of the mind) whilst simultaneously ‘returning’ all six senses to the empty mind ground! Overtime, he taught his ‘Dharma’ and supported and strengthened the practice of his disciples through the passing of hundreds of ‘Precepts’. This body of ‘Precepts’ became known as the Vinaya Discipline, and this is preserved within a number of different with slightly varying interpretations. A member of the Sangha, for instance, is any man or woman who has left society, shaved their heads, put on the robe and committed themselves to the hundreds of ‘Precepts’ the Buddha established – the Buddha also defined a member of the Sangha as any ‘lay’ person who has fully realised enlightenment! This is because the Buddha acknowledged that monastics and lay people are both able to realise enlightenment – but that the monastic path is straightforward with minimum distractions, whilst the lay path is thoroughly deluded and premised upon multiple barriers to the realisation of enlightenment (although such a feat is possible as the Buddha, Vimalakirti and Hui Neng, etc, attest). The term ‘Sangha’ has been extended within the Mahayana tradition to include ALL lay and monastic practitioners within a Buddhist community – whilst within the Theravada School lay Buddhists are definitely NOT included in the term ‘Sangha’ which is reserved only for monastics. The Ch’an tradition understands and recognises all these facts – but does not discriminate in anyway. Why? This is because the empty mind ground underlies all things equally and does not discriminate. If a practitioner can return the sense-data of all six senses back to the empty mind ground – then nothing else matters! This is why the Chinese Vinaya Discipline allows for the concept of ‘Emergency Ordination’ whereby a lay person can shave their heads, set-up a Buddha image and take refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha (and the Triple Gem within us) - this is probably the original ‘Precepts’. Added to this can be any number of other Precepts if they are known! If not, assume a vegetarian diet and diligently practice seated meditation, Sutra reading and chanting if applicable. A new name can be chosen and applied at this point. The function of ‘Emergency Ordination’ may involve an individual who has realised full enlightenment and does not want to live within lay society. It might also refer to a lay individual who desperately wants to ‘leave’ the delusion of lay society and does not have access to a Buddhist Temple or qualified Master! Emergency Ordination is not a matter of material accumulation and the easy assumption of a new status in life. Such a monastic must remain entirely humble in mind, body (and within the environment they inhabit), and only consider themselves a committed lay person and nothing more! The primary purpose of ‘Emergency Ordination’ is that the world of desire and habit must be left behind and the Precepts fully upheld! All psychological tendency (and behavioural habit) emerges from (and returns to) the empty mind ground – mediated through the six senses! When the mind is impure, then all emanations are conditioned by greed, hatred and delusion. Applying the physical Precepts curtails deluded behaviour on the material plane – whilst returning the six senses to the empty mind ground uproots greed, hatred and delusion, and ‘cuts-off’ all aspects of delusion as they emerge from the deepest level of the mind! Then, there appears a ‘turning about’ in the deepest recesses of the mind so that the ‘inverted’ nature of the human mind (which causes ‘suffering’ by seizing upon thoughts in the mind and mistaking them for objects in the physical environment) is ended. This entire process begins, matures and prevails all due to the power of adhering to the Buddhist Precepts! Chinese Language References: http://bodhi.takungpao.com/sspt/sramana/2015-04/2963223.html https://www.chinabuddhism.com.cn/yj/2013-06-13/2931.html The Hua Tou method is a re-working of the Buddha’s meditative methods as expounded in the sutras. Whereas the Theravada School deploys an impressive array of rhetorical devises to describe what the Buddha is explaining and what he means with each illustration – the Ch’an School by-passes this hefty methodology and reverts to returning all six senses back to the empty mind ground! That is, everything that is sensed through the six senses is returned to the root of perception and penetrates the exact ‘point’ mid-way between ‘perception’ and ‘non-perception’! Whereas the Theravada School works only with the (enlightened) content of the Pali ‘Suttas’ - the Ch’an School can make use not only of the (enlightened) content found within the Sanskrit ‘Sutras’ but also any ‘sensory’ data emanating from without (or within) the human mind and body! The Theravada School ‘removes’ and ‘filters-out’ all the ‘deluded’ sensory-data (so that the mind and body is ‘purged’ of all influences of greed, hatred and delusion), whereas the Ch’an School makes use of the full reception of sensory-data appearing within the sensory-fields of the six sensory-organs! The Theravada School places the training individual in a sedate and quiet forest setting and in so doing ‘removes’ ALL influences of greed, hatred and delusion. Of course, Ch’an practitioners CAN and regularly DO resort to this type of ‘relocating’ of the mind and body – but not all. There are many examples of Ch’an monastics and Ch’an members of the lay-community – including men, women and children, (and the occasional animal) - who are able, whilst living in the ordinary sensory-stimulus of the everyday world – to realise FULL and PERFECT enlightenment in the model as exemplified by Vimalakirti! How is this achieved? It is achieved by the Ch’an Method of understanding that the entire spectrum of sensory-stimulation (and not just its ‘positive’ aspects) derives from, and has the ‘empty mind ground’ as its base of origination! This means that the Ch’an School recognises the dichotomy found within the Pali ‘Suttas’ comprising of ‘greed’, ‘hatred’ and ‘delusion’ - as opposed to ‘non-greed’, ‘non-hatred’ and ‘non-delusion’ - but differs as to what can be done with this sensory-stimulation. Yes – the ‘non-tainted’ position can be favoured over the ‘tainted’ (as shown with Weekend Ch’an Retreats and the following of the Vinaya, etc) - but equally true is the Ch’an ability to ‘RETURN’ ALL sensory-stimulus BACK to the empty mind ground from which it has arisen! This includes ‘greed’ and ‘non-greed’, ‘hatred’ and ‘non-hatred’ and ‘delusion’ and ‘non-delusion’ - equally! Indeed, in many such cases, the transformation is sudden and dramatic – as is preserved in many ‘gong-an’ records! Therefore, the Theravada Method (exemplified by the excellent teacher Ajahn Chah) specialises in one part (i.e., the ‘good’ over the ‘bad’) section of the sense-organ-data as it is processed through the mind and body. This is important and Buddhism certainly could not afford to exist without this ancient foundation of ‘Dhamma’ skill preserved within the Theravada tradition. However, the Ch’an School also originated from ancient India and represents a similar but different method of utilising the full-range of sense-data stimulus that is available. This explains why certain Ch’an Masters speak of ‘stepping-over’ the ‘holy’ (non-greed, non-hatred and non-delusion) state and the ‘mundane’ (or ‘greed’, ‘hateful’ and ‘deluded’) world or state of being! Even if a Ch’an practitioner separates him or herself from the mundane world and – like the Theravada practitioner – realises ‘emptiness’ and ‘purity’ of mind is a quiet and harmonious forest clearing – then that Ch’an practitioner must eventually ‘return’ to the world of dust and ‘integrate’ this isolated achievement into that reality of full-on and full-spectrum sensory-stimulation! Eventually, regardless of how a practitioner realises the presence of the empty mind ground, this appreciation of the inner void must be integrated (without discrimination) with the outer world and its endless form represented by ‘good’ and ‘bad’ phenomena! Indeed, this is how Vimalakirti entered areas of ill-repute and ‘purified’ them with his presence!
The Huayan (Flower Garland) Sutra (Sanskrit: ‘Avatamsaka’ Sutra) is a very long Mahayana text comprising of thirty-nine in-depth chapters explaining a multidimensional and interlocking system of diverse domains, realms and realities that are all connected by an identical underlying reality (from which) and within which all these diverse modes of existence manifest. The first thirty-eight chapters explain the structure, texture and function of this lucid reality, with this (final) thirty-ninth chapter actually dealing with the explorations of the (pure) young man named ‘Sudhana’. Although the Bodhisattva Manjushri instructs him to travel far and wide and receive instruction from fifty-three enlightened beings (comprised of male and female Buddhist monastics, male and female lay-people, Bodhisattvas including Manjushri himself, non-Buddhists (including Hindus), gods, goddesses and spirits, etc. Eventually, Sudhana realised that although reality is vast and enlightened-beings (representing the fifty-three stages of Bodhisattva development from ignorance to enlightenment) exist throughout the three-time periods of past, present and future – the reality is that with the correct training – this underlying (empty) reality can be ‘pierced’ and ‘realised’ here and now.
As the entirety of this multidimensional reality is interconnected by a structure that resembles ‘Indra’s Net’ - regardless of where (or ‘when’) an individual happens to be, this ‘wall of outer reality’ (reflected inwardly as a continuous stream of deluded thought) can be ‘penetrated’ through the development of meditative insight. Indeed, the final thirty-ninth chapter of the Huayan Chapter is what might be termed the ‘traditional’ Sutra-section of this text – with the other (preceding) thirty-eight chapters being an intricate and sophisticated extrapolation of this vision. Although moving around within time and space can be useful and sometimes even required for individual development – from a Ch’an perspective it is better to sit ‘like an iron mountain’ and cultivate the appropriate insight into the fabric of reality that exists everywhere and at all times. This is why the Huayan Sutra explains that reality Is comprised of four attributes which are a) noumena, b) phenomena, c) integration of noumena and phenomena and c) the unhindered functionality of all phenomena. The ‘noumena’ is the underlying, empty mind ground, whilst the ‘phenomena’ comprises ALL of material existence. These are not two separate (parallel) states acting in concordance, but are rather two-sides of the same coin of reality. Within the deluded state, individuals cannot see beyond the phenomenal expression of reality. All they see is the (outer) material world of external objects which is reflected (inwardly) as a stream of continuous deluded thought. If a suitable meditational technique is applied to the individual mind – then the mind and body becomes ‘non-attached’ to the world of (external) material objects – a process which removes the impetus that powers the (internal) stream of deluded thoughts. Outer non-attachment is reflected within as the attainment of a ‘still’ and ‘pure’ mind. When the surface of the mind is ‘still’ there is no longer a stream of ‘obscuring’ thought which hinders insight and understanding. Like a crystal-clear lake – the individual can ‘see’ right to the bottom of the watery depths. With further training, the practitioner can fully enter into (and understand) the ‘empty’ world of the ‘noumena’ within which all things arise and pass away. The Caodong School of Ch’an developed its Five Ranks of Prince and Minister symbology from an integration of Confucian and Daoist roundel technology, together with the use of ‘trigrams’ and ‘hexagrams’ as contained within the ‘Classic of Change’ (易經 - Yi Jing), as well as the conceptual understanding of ‘yin’ and ‘yang’ (陰陽). These five-roundel schematic can also be represented by a ‘thunderbolt’ motif (commonly found within the Chinese and Tibetan traditions of ‘Tantra’). The five roundels represent the human mind as its understanding progresses from the state of ‘ignorance’ to that of ‘enlightenment’. This developmental understanding is conveyed through the ‘shading’ and ‘non-shading’ of the roundels (or the ‘lack of light’ and the ‘presence of light’). The Caodong Masters used hexagram 30 - ‘䷝’ (離 - Li) - of the ‘Classic of Change’ to represent the fully enlightened mind (and body). Within ‘Yijing’ symbology this represents ‘double fire’ or ‘yang over yang’ (as two solid yang lines firmly hold the lone and broken central ‘yin’ line in check). As this is ‘fire over fire’ - then enlightenment is shown as being ‘complete’ and expressed as existing in all directions without hindrance or limit! As the enlightened mind exists in the ever present ‘here and now’, the Caodong Masters designed their developmental schematic starting from the ever-present but as of yet unrealised ‘enlightened’ position and working backwards – generating shaded roundels that represent the various levels of deluded obscuration associated with the ‘deluded’ states. The five roundels of the Caodong School possess the internal logic of the ‘Yijing’ - whilst further representing the methodology of the Huayan Sutra. The ‘noumena’ is identical with ‘yang’ whilst ‘phenomena’ is equated with ‘yin’ - as the two systems interlock perfectly and appear to reinforce the general thinking that underlies the structure of the Huayan Sutra. Furthermore, the ‘noumena’ is also equated with the ‘Host’ (or ‘real’) position of Ch’an – whilst the ‘phenomena’ is identified with the ‘Guest’ (or ‘seeming’ position), etc. The yin-yang concept represents a permanent interaction of ‘shade’ and ‘non-shade’ - just as the Huayan Sutra advocates the permanent interaction of the ‘noumena’ and the ‘phenomena’. There is a perfect ‘integrating’ of the ideology of the ‘Indian’ (Sanskrit) Huayan Sutra – and the Chinese yin-yang system as used by the ‘Chinese’ Ch’an School. I am of the opinion that the Huayan Sutra motivated the Caodong Masters to ‘pull’ together Ch’an methodology with the yin-yang concept and ‘Yijing’ symbology – as well as Confucian and Daoist roundel technology. The five roundels represent the gradual ‘clearing’ of a practitioner’s insight as their Ch’an training progresses clearing the delusion from the mind. Initially, the ‘host’(noumena) is ‘hidden’ within the ‘guest’ (phenomena) and cannot be readily perceived even though there is a ‘sense’ that it is out there somewhere (this is the first position)! As training progresses it is understood that the ‘guest’ is ensconced within the ‘host’ (this is the second position). With further (sustained) training there is the sudden ‘resurgence’ of the ‘host’ or ‘real’ (‘noumena’) position where the mind is permanently ‘stilled’ (represented by the third position). This is often termed the (relative) ‘enlightenment’ of the Hinayana. With further training, the mind’s perception ‘expands’ so that the ‘noumena’ (void) and ‘phenomena’ (form) stand in a balanced opposition to one another. This demonstrates the subtle delusion of duality which still persists and this is why the Caodong Masters explain this fourth position as ‘not one’. When this last subtle barrier is dissolved – then the fifth position of ‘full enlightenment’ is achieved which the Caodong Masters describe as ‘not two’. Within Huayan Sutra thinking – this represents the perfect integration of the ‘noumena’ and the ‘phenomena’ - whereby all of the material objects in the world exist in their proper place and without hindrance or limitation of expression and functionality. From the Ch’an position, the advice is usually to be ‘neither attached to the void nor hindered by phenomena’. Once the Ch’an practitioner fully understands the ‘noumena’ and the phenomena’ - then all that remains is for the individual concerned to simply ‘adjust himself to circumstance’ whilst acting in the best interests of all living beings. This means that the ‘frequency’ of the phenomenal world one happens to exist within is fully understood and the path of least resistance is taken – unless, of course, injustice is such that a Ch’an Master is called upon to act in the best interests of humanity. Noumena and phenomena represent a totality of reality – an ebb and flow in innate and functional energy within which the mind and body manifests. If we sit and meditate ‘like an iron mountain’ here and now – then human insight will fully perceive this reality and dissolve all the delusional barriers that usually prevent this direct perception. Just as a single hexagram of the ‘yijing’ contains the essence of the other sixty-three hexagrams – one of the five Caodong roundels contains the essence of the other four. This recognition of multidimensional functionality is exactly how the Huayan Sutra has influenced the Chinese Ch’an School. Prior to the 1950s, the world Buddhist community more or less agreed with the traditional Chinese dating of the Buddha. This dating is still used in ‘New’ China and stems from Indian Buddhist monks arriving in China and transmitting the Dharma. The best text explaining this in my opinion, is that included in the Chinese-language biography of Master Xu Yun (1840-1959) edited my Cen Xue Lu (between 1952-1961 in various editions) - but which is omitted from the English-language translation rendered by Charles Luk (copyrighted to ‘1960’ as ‘extracts’ of Xu Yun’s Dharma Words appearing in Ch’an and Zen Teachings First Series – but not published until 1974 as a separate book under the guidance of Roshi Philip Kapleau). I tracked-down the Chinese-language original of this text and translated it a few years ago. This can be found in the relevant section of the original Chinese language chapter of Xu Yun’s autobiography (虛雲和尚年譜), covering the year ‘1953/54’, which is entitled ‘末法僧徒之衰相’ – this translates as ‘Degeneration of the Sangha in the Dharma-ending Age’. Within this text, Master Xu Yun explains the following: ‘Two years ago, I attended the inaugural meeting of the Chinese Buddhist Association, where everyone present discussed the Dharma. The main issues concerned included the corrupt Dharma practices of certain Buddhists that were destroying the Buddha’s teachings from within, and the attitude of the government towards Buddhism in the light of this distorted practice – this is why the government sent representatives to attend. At this conference many devout followers of the Buddha attended and were encouraged to give their views and opinions. It was suggested that the Bodhisattva Precepts as taught in the Brahmajala Sutra (梵網經– Fan Wang Jing), the Vows contained in the Vinaya Discipline in Four Parts (四分律 – Si Fen Lu), the Pure Regulations of Ch’an Master Baizhang (百丈清規 – Bai Zhang Qing Gui) and all such established Buddhist laws should be abolished, because they cause harm to young people, and are detrimental to the wellbeing of men and women. Furthermore, it was also suggested that the ordained Sangha should be reformed and no longer wear the traditional robes associated with monks and nuns. The justification for these suggestions was premised upon the belief that traditional Buddhist practice was merely a form of backward feudalistic conservativism, and that the issue was actually about religious freedom. It was proposed that monks and nuns should be allowed to get married, drink alcohol and eat meat, and be free of any disciplinary requirements. As soon as I heard these words, I instantly had a strong reaction against them, and thoroughly disagreed with their content. I treated these suggestions with contempt. The idea of abandoning the celebration of the Buddha’s birthday stemmed from the observation that different Buddhist traditions celebrate this event at different times. As far as I am concerned, this tradition is a legitimate Dharma-practice in China that is based upon the teachings of Indian Dharma-teacher Kasyapa-Matanga (摩騰法師 – Mo Teng Fa Shi) who travelled to China during the 1st century CE, met with, and instructed Emperor Ming (明帝 – Ming Di) of the Latter Han (r. 58-75 CE). Matanga taught that the Buddha was born during the 51st year (of the 60-year cyclical sequence found within the traditional Chinese lunar calendar) in the year of tiger, which is represented by the Chinese astrological symbols of the heavenly stem ‘Jin’ (甲) and the earthly branch ‘Yin’ (寅). Matanga further stated that the Buddha’s birth correlates to the 8th day of the 4th lunar month. (Translator’s Note: In the Western year 2015 CE – the traditional Chinese Buddhist Calendar stood at 3042/43 years since the birth of the Buddha – this means that according to Chinese Buddhist tradition, the Buddha was born around the year 1029/28 BCE. If it is agreed that he lived around 80 years – then the Buddha entered nirvana in the year 949/48 BCE.) The exact date of the Buddha’s birth occurred in the 24th year of the rule of the Zhou Dynasty monarch – King Zhao (昭王) – who reigned 1052-1002 BCE. Therefore the Buddha’s birth occurred in the year 1028/29 BCE according to Matanga. The shramana (沙門 – Sha Men) – or Buddhist monk known as Tan Mo Zui (曇謨最) – is recorded in the Wei Dynasty (386-557 CE) Book of History (魏書 – Wei Shu) as stating that the Buddha was born on the 8th day of the 4th lunar month, which was during the 24th year of the reign of the Zhou Dynasty monarch – King Zhao. The Buddha entered nirvana on the 15th day of the 2nd lunar month, which occurred in the 52nd year of the rule of the Zhou Dynasty monarch – Mu Wang (穆王) – who reigned 1001-947 BCE). This means that the Buddha died around 949/48 BCE. Throughout all of the subsequent Chinese dynasties, this tradition has been preserved and upheld. From the time of the Zhou Dynasty’s King Wang until now (1952/53) – it is agreed that 2981/82 years have passed since the time of the Buddha’s birth.’ The modern dating suggesting the Buddha lived roughly around 563-483 BCE (or even later) stems from the first reliable dating of an event in India – which is taken (by Western scholars) as the 327 BCE invasion of India by Alexander the Great. When this is used as a chronological anchor it can be cross-referenced with the stone stele associated with Emperor Ashoka (r. 268-232 BCE) - which record sections of the Buddha’s teachings together with dynastic dating – Western scholars proposed what seemed to be a logical assessment of the available data. This led to the Theravada schools adopting tis new Western dating in the 1950s and removing 500 years of off the previously held dating about the Buddha. This is to say that prior to 4th World Buddhist Conference of 1956 (held in Nepal) - most of the Buddhist world held an opinion that mirrored the dating held in China. Even today, modern Chinese scholarship still upholds the original dating of the Buddha as correct and the Western dating as flawed (that is an opinion that appears logical but which ignores certain facts whilst lacking concrete knowledge about other facts). Interestingly, a number of modern Indian academics also reject the ‘new’ Western dating and state that the old Chinese dating is correct. The Chinese scholar-sage – known as ‘Confucius’ in the West – lived between 551-479 BCE and with these dates would have been a contemporary of the Buddha (according to Western reconning). Whereas Confucius and his disciples were highly literate (as representatives of the Chinese nobility) - the Buddha, although very well educated as a high-caste Hindu, nevertheless was illiterate and could not read and write! Although educated in armed and unarmed martial arts, yoga, State-craft, love-making and scripture recollection, etc, the Buddha did not have to learn how to read and write. Furthermore, none of the Buddha’s disciples (regardless of caste) could read or write. The onus was to use the facility of ‘memory’ to store, recall and pass-on the long and complex spiritual and secular texts that defined ancient Indian culture. Education within Indian society was aural and practical. Reading and writing was known – but was only reserved for use in the royal court. Here, a specially trained Minister of State would ‘write down’ all the decisions taken by the ruler and all the laws passed so that a permanent record of the law of the State could be made. When required, this Minister would access the record and remind the ruler (who could not read) what the establish law was. I am of the opinion that the epoch of the Buddha and the epoch of Confucius are two different historical periods. This can be discerned by the attitude toward the art of reading and writing and upon how the two different societies related to the concept of literacy. It is important to remember that at this time Chinese rulers and scholars maintained a high level of respect for Indian culture and were quite happy to import it for their own enrichment. Given this is the case, I doubt that India would have been essentially ‘illiterate’ whilst China was ‘literate’. How can this disparity be explained? I suspect the Buddhist context in India dates to around 1000 BCE – with a similar situation existing within Zhou dynasty China (with both cultures first developing literacy amongst the ruling elites via superstition, mythology and divine oracles, etc. I suspect that by around 500 BCE, both cultures had developed, solidified and expanded literacy amongst a much larger social elite, with the written word now being associated with the recording and expressing of the highest and most sublime spiritual and secular philosophies! If the Buddha had really lived around 500 BCE (like Confucius) it is likely that reading and writing would have been far-spread and routinely used by all spiritual teachers and their students! At no time do the Chinese records talk of Indian culture as being less advanced or backward when compared to Chinese culture. On the contrary, the Chinese attitude is always one of respect and in many respects ‘awe’! It is doubtful that such an attitude would have existed if Indian culture was found to be ‘illiterate’ whilst China’s cultural elite were by comparison – highly literate. Such an idea is counter-intuitive. This being the case, why does the Western dating suggesting the Buddha lived at the same time as Confucius but was illiterate? The Sui Dynasty Records (581-618 CE) state that a number of Brahmanical texts (now lost) had been earlier transmitted to China (date unknown). In the early days the flow of progressive culture was definitely from India to China and I find it odd that a culture with no developed literacy tradition would be instructing a society with a fully developed and sophisticated literacy tradition! It is far more likely that the historical Buddha lived around 1000 BCE and at that time India and China were at a similar state of cultural development regarding the use of literacy. India’s genius lay in its developed use of the human-mind which it was willing to share with the world! By 500 BCE, again India and China were at similar stages of cultural development and literacy usage – and yet China still acknowledged India as the bedrock of progressive and advanced thinking and culture!
An Earnest Dhamma Appeal🙏
Dear Dharma Friend, As requested by a forest monk name as Venerable Suman Jyoti Thero, I am reaching out to you with lot's of Metta for a generous appeal for DONATION for construction of Aryagiri Vipassana Meditation Center. Bhante is not active on social media and he only rarely used it. It is said that through wisdom can the mind be freed from defilements, but Dana is also a prerequisite for meditation, and Samadhi leads to wisely reflection, and wisely reflection leads (together with the power of Samadhi) to wisdom, and wisdom leads to detachment, and detachment leads to awakening. The subject of this letter presents just such an opportunity and it is for the most worthy of causes-to support a place of worship and cultivation of mind, at Aryagiri Hill situated near Indo-Bangladesh Border in southern Mizoram, India. In so doing through your generous support make manifest the words of the most basic Buddhist prayer, to support the teachings of the Vipassana Meditation, the remembrance of the Buddha, and the followers of the Buddha. Establishment and construction of a Vipassana Meditation Center at this remote areas will serve the diverse spiritual needs of all Micro minority chakma Buddhists and non-Buddhists with warmth and spiritual openness. It will also serve as a center to teach and practice the techniques of meditation for the purpose of spiritual development. The first phase for construction of Buddha shrine hall and two rooms for the monks have been completed with the generous donations made by various donor's from different countries. The second phase will have to be built for the meditation hall and it's the second floor of the vihara. So, Please help Bhante to raise funds to build a Vipassana Meditation Center at Aryagiri Hill. I am really compelled to reaching out to you on behalf of Ven. Suman Jyoti Thera in this meritorious deed, to raise funds required to contribution the main building for the Vipassana center. Bhante live alone in the hill surrounded by deep jungle in search of the ultimate truth. The contribution will help and in its entirety go towards a new Vipassana Retreat Meditation Center. By making a donation to your ability, you are indeed lending a hand to continue this precious effort to spread the lucid word of the Lord Gauthama Buddha. So please help Venerable Sumanjyoti Bhante with your donations to build the Vipassana Meditation Center at Aryagiri Hill. Let us share the wonderful and rare gift of Dhamma, learn it, understand it, and live accordingly. The plan estimate for construction of second floor of the Ariyagiri Vipassana Meditation Center can be sent if required. Any amount of donation either big or small is heartily accepted. All the pious Dharma friends are requested to ask for the bank details to send your donation towards building the Vipassana Retreat Center of Bhante Suman Jyoti of Ariyagiri Hill near Bangladesh Border. May you all have the blessing by the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. Your's in the Dhamma, With Metta, Sudip Fundraiser of The Ultimate Truth Preaching Mission (A registered Buddhist Organization based in Mizoram, India) & Volunteer of Aryagiri Vipassana Foundation. Lunglei District, Mizoram, India. Email: [email protected] WhatsApp 91+9612602899 Donation can be sent to the following methods:- Our PayPal Email-- [email protected] Our Bank Transfer method- Account Name: Sudip Chakma A/c No: 1463104000036962 Bank Name: IDBI BANK, LUNGLEI BRANCH. IFSC: IBKL0001463 MICR: 796259102 SWIFT CODE: IBKLINBB136 Sabbe Satta Bhavantu Sukhitatta - May all beings be well, may all beings be happy, may all beings be free from suffering _/\_ When the muscles of the arm contract so that a heavy weight held in the hand can be ‘lifted’ - nothing in this process grants any knowledge as to how muscles work, or how movements are controlled by the spine or brain, etc. Similarly, when a gland secretes hormones – none of this process (in and of itself) grants any ‘special’ knowledge into the nature of glands or hormones – and yet, when the brain ‘secretes’ thought – it is assumed that this process of secreting ‘thought’ possesses the ability to ‘see into’ the inherent biological nature of a) the brain, and b) the mind, but is this a reasonable assumption? If the functions of other biological processes give no ‘special’ knowledge about the inner workings of a bodily organ – why should the secretion of ‘thought’ from the brain produce any substantially ‘different’ mode of knowledge? Of course, the brain is not a ‘normal’ bodily organ despite the fact that it does regulate (together with the spine) virtually all other organs (and biological processes) in the body. The brain does this whilst generating the appearance of the ‘mind’ - from which ‘thoughts’ are believed to emerge. This ‘thought’ capacity has evolved to allow the brain to see its own processes (to a certain extent), whilst also being able to perceive processes in the external environment. With regards the perception of ‘inner’ processes, the capacity of the brain is severely limited, with no amount of contemplative thinking producing the exact size and shape of the brain doing the ‘thinking’. To acquire this knowledge, the physical organ of the brain (usually ‘dead’) would have to examined ‘outside’ of its usual skull-casing by another (living) human-being. In other words, a living brain examines the dead brain of a now ‘non-living’ human-being. A living human-being can observe their own arm lifting a weight in a manner which does not apply to the functioning of their own brain – and herein lies the fundamental difference. The historical Buddha (in ancient India), for example, described the functioning of the ‘mind’ but never envisioned all this as an operation of the brain. I mention this as monastics within Early Buddhism often sat and meditated in graveyards and burning-ghats – and often contemplated the decaying of bodies left to ‘rot’ in the open by families too poor to afford a proper burning and disposal ceremony. Although the skull is often intact for those who have experienced natural deaths, there was probably cases of severely injured individuals where it was possible for the Buddhist monastics to ‘observe’ the brain. This could not have been very common, and certainly the Buddha does not speak of a ‘brain’ as such, despite linking the ‘sensation’ of the environment to specific sense-organs located within the body. This may be because the Buddha defined the ‘mind’ as a sensory organ which ‘senses’ thought – hence the ‘six senses’ found within Buddhist philosophy. Indian philosophy tends to view human consciousness as being various ‘frequencies’ of ethereal energy (perhaps ‘light’ energy). This gives the impression that the external world is constructed of light-energy that also ‘exists’ inside the body. This leads to the interplay of ‘void’ (consciousness empty of greed, hatred and delusion), and ‘form’, or all material stuff. As the Buddha advocated the psychological and physical ‘exiting’ of the world of sorrow – he had no need to develop a sophisticated anatomy and physiology – although he came very close to doing this by default of his ‘logical’ assessment of perception. Unless we are exposed to the insides of the human-body in a scientific setting – no amount of inner gazing will produce an accurate picture of the ‘actual’ structures of the inner-body – or ‘how’ these structures fit-together and function in a healthy individual. All of this knowledge would slowly emerge in the various medical systems of the world – and very slowly at that. It is only in the last two-hundred years or so, that a reasonably accurate view of the human-body has been developed and utilised in the healing of humanity. Perhaps the Buddha got as far as any reasonably enlightened human-being could get, and in so doing did develop a ‘science’ of perception that was unusually perceptive for the time. Of course, our education systems allow us to ‘see’ much more in a short space of time, but no amount of this kind of study offers a short-cut to realising the ‘enlightenment’ advocated by the Buddha. Even though general education has moved-on, the Buddha’s enlightenment is still very difficult to realise. A well-balanced path would seem to involve a sound academic education coupled with a regular meditative practice. My view is that modern education is very important, but it doesn’t invalidate the path of the Buddha. If anything, I would suggest that modern education actually serves to ‘alienate’ humanity ever more from a perception of its pure spiritual essence. The Buddha’s enlightenment of compassion, loving kindness and wisdom – coupled with the accomplishments of modern science will produce an all-round human-being and effective Bodhisattva!
The best transmissions of the Dharma happen naturally and unexpectedly. The worst are contrived and actively sought-out. The first example is ‘pure’ whilst the second example is ‘impure’. The problem is that the ego is attracted to transmission – but is entirely unable to meet the demands of such a responsibility! There are no short-cuts to be depended upon by humanity. This can only happen if the principle of humility has been thoroughly embraced, penetrated and integrated with. There is no other way. Transmission cannot be ‘bluffed’ like a business meeting designed to make or encourage material profit. How could it be? As humanity ‘takes’ continuously from those who have inherited the Dharma! Being able to continuously ‘give’ without end, acknowledge or reward is the reality of genuine Ch’an transmission! Although ‘selling’ the Dharma in the West in fairly normal and to be expected, the historical Buddha never once asked for any type of payment for sharing his wisdom. Indeed, he rejected all forms of commerce and replaced all exchange of goods and services with the simple act of ‘begging’. In China, an emperor outlawed deliberate begging by the Ordained Buddhist Sangha and instead stated that each monastic must be a strict vegetarian and till the ground to grow their own food (as farmers). This is because in the old days, the peasant population of China was already very poor and often had barely enough food for their own survival. Not to be a material burden to the ordinary people, Buddhist monastics had to take care of their own bodily sustenance whilst still providing ‘free’ Dharma-instruction. On occasion, however, Buddhist monastics who are on pilgrimage, are often given food as they walk along the road by the laity they encounter. As it is not expected or demanded – this interaction is tolerated within Chinese culture. Master Xu Yun (1840-1959) stipulated that all Dharma-instruction should be a) the product of correct understanding, b) correct discipline and c) correct motive. This means that providing an individual has undergone adequate training – then the resultant Dharmic-understanding must be provided ‘free of charge’ (‘correct motivation’). This is to prevent those with money (but no ‘wisdom’) ‘purchasing’ influence over the Dharma-teacher and compromising the integrity of the Dharma. Needless to say, anyone who actively or deliberately ‘charges’ for the Dharma is not a genuine Dharma-teacher and is to be avoided. The accepting of ‘donations’, however, is a different matter but a donation must not be a precursor to teaching the Dharma. If any sense of ‘grasping’ is evident in the mind of the recipient, then he or she is not a true Dharma-teacher.
|
AuthorAdrian Chan-Wyles (釋大道 - Shi Da Dao) is permitted to retain his Buddhist Monastic Dharma-Name within Lay-society by decree of the Government of the People’s Republic of China, and the Chinese Buddhist Association (1992). A Buddhist monastic (and devout lay-practitioner) upholds the highest levels of Vinaya Discipline and Bodhisattva Vows. A Genuine Buddhist ‘Venerates’ the ‘Dao’ (道) as he or she penetrates the ‘Empty Mind-Ground' through meditative insight. A genuine Buddhist is humble, wise and peace-loving – and he or she selflessly serves all in existence in the past, present and the future, and residing within the Ten Directions – whilst retaining a vegetarian- vegan diet. Please be kind to animals! Archives
April 2024
Categories
All
|
- Home
- ICBI Blog: Mind-Ground (心地)
- ICBI China Office (Beijing)
- Conference: Ch'an & Zen (2021)
- Master Xu Yun
- Degeneration of the Sangha in the Dharma-ending Age By Ch’an Master Xu Yun
- Ch’an Master Jing Hui - History of Master Xu Yun’s Complete Biographical Text
- Xu Yun’s Humanistic Spirit Transmitted into the Modern Era
- Master Xu Yun & Modern Chinese Politics
- On Why Ch’an Master Xu Yun (1840-1959) Rejected Japanese Zen
- Master Xu Yun Memorial Photographic Library
- Dharma Master Ji Qun (济群) Explains Profound (Dharmic) Happiness
- Chinese Buddhism & Vegetarianism
- Qianfeng Daoism (UK)
-
Ch'an Guild of Hui Neng (慧能禅宗协会)
- CGHN Membership Certificate
- Master Ti Guang – Karma
- Master Ti Guang – Mind That Does Not Deviate
- Meditation Instrument - Fragrant Board
- Ch’an Daily Work
- Horse Hair Dust-Whisk in Chinese Ch’an Buddhism
- Deconstructing the Concept of ‘Shikantaza’
- New Shaolin Temple in China
- Master Yuan Chun: Universal Dharma
- Modern Chinese Art and Ch’an Buddhism
- The Huatou and Pain Management
- Martial Virtue (武德–Wu De)
- Seated Transformation (坐化 – Zuo Hua)
- Guiding Principles
- ICBI Projects
- Membership
- Direction of the ICBI
- Journal of the ICBI
- Contact Us
©opyright: Site design, layout & content International Ch'an Buddhism Institute (ICBI). No part of this site (or information contained herein) unless otherwise stated, may be copied, reproduced, duplicated, or otherwise distributed without prior written permission from [email protected]
Proudly powered by Weebly