When people new to Buddhism discover the Buddha’s teachings, they are often confused as to the purpose of those teachings. As most religions deal with such topics as G_d, the creation of the world and the universe, the meaning of life, et cetera, when people become interested in the Dhamma the first thing they want to know is where the Buddha stood on these issues. Those people usually get disappointed when they learn that the Buddha considered such questions unskillful and not worth asking. Buddhism, as they soon come to discover, is something quite different from what they would normally expect from most religious institutions. The obvious question then would be, just what did the Buddha feel was skillful and worth asking?
The answer is complex, but the Buddha begins by starting out with an observation—there is suffering and stress present in our lives, and what exactly is it that is suffering—birth, aging, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, despair, associating with the unloved, separation from the loved, and not getting what is wanted is suffering (
SN 56.11).
Once this suffering and stress is known, one should then inquire as to their cause. The origination of this suffering and stress, we are told, is craving—the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion and delight, relishing now here and now there — i.e. craving for sensual pleasure, for becoming, for non-becoming (
SN 56.11).
The next question that we are encouraged to ask is, is there and end to the suffering and stress that is present in our lives. Fortunately, the answer that the Buddha gives us is yes. Nibbana, the remainderless fading and cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, and letting go of that very craving, is the end to this suffering and stress (
SN 56.11).
Finally, we must ask what the way leading to this end of suffering and stress is. To this question the Buddha gives us the prescription for the cure to the dis-ease of suffering—
The Noble Eightfold Path, which is divided into
Right View,
Right Resolve,
Right Speech,
Right Action,
Right Livelihood,
Right Effort,
Right Mindfulness, and
Right Concentration (
SN 56.11).
Essentially, the question of suffering and its end is the foundation for the practice handed down to us by the Buddha. Specific teachings and practices are then integrated into the path in order to give us the necessary tools and understanding to reach this goal. At the beginning, however, all that needs to concern us is whether this sounds like a path worth traveling. If it does, then the right question to begin with is, “What when I do it will be for my long-term welfare and happiness?” The answers to that question will eventually lead one the subjects of what the Buddha called appropriate attention such as, “This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress...”
Comments
Yes, that's all fine & good, but I still have this nagging question:
Just how many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?
:tonguec:
_/\_
Regards,
Jason
Thanks & sorry for the outburst.
Anyway, something I've been wondering lately is how the Zen koan of "Who am I?" meshes with the Buddha saying not to ask such questions (as they lead to vexation). I understand this in the context of Zen, but it makes me stop & wonder when I see the sort of statements by the Buddha in the Pali Canon. I'm still having a bit of trouble fully resolving these things, considering the statements laid out by the Buddha in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta on how to judge authentic Dhamma teachings.
Just thought I'd throw this out there.
best wishes & metta
_/\_
Palzang
I think this one is easiest put aside if one plainly accepts that different traditions have diffferent means of teaching. If one is not into Zen, the koan does not matter at all. If one is, the teacher who utters the koan should be able to explain the (appearant) contradiction. Palzang gave such an explanation.
Just to clarify, I am aware of how this koan is used in Zen & I find great value in it. I love koans & if I ever have the opportunity to go to a Rinzai School, I will do it. I was just noticing lately how some practices seem, on the surface, to be in opposition to statements such as this:
Zen specifically tries to induce a state of doubt through the use of koans (and a consequent 'sudden' breakthrough), but the Pali Canon seems to point in the opposite direction. I'm not really all that worried about it, I was just noticing. Also, I would imagine that this practice is also geared towards pointing out the uselessness of such questioning/speculation, through engaging in it.
best wishes & metta
_/\_
A unique transmission beyond scriptures, not dependent on words, that points directly to your mind – you see your true nature and become what you are: Buddha.
Perhaps that will clarify why it doesn't pay much attention what is said in the sutras. It's more direct insight than studying the sayings of the Buddha. In that it is very similar to Dzogchen in Tibetan Buddhism. It's beyond words, beyond conceptual thought.
Palzang
_/\_
metta
Kind of, like...
"...And are you still beating your wife?"
Palzang