Thinking about Theravada...

federica

Hello all...
I have recently come to the realisation, as you will remember, that it is time for me to consider 'nailing my colours to the mast as it were, and seriously devote my practice by choosing a tradition that I may follow...
Recently ( a while ago) I posted a thread entitled 'I am moving on'... where I tentatively suggested I might explore Dzogchen...
But now, after further cogitation, examination investigation, deliberation and GrandCentralStation.... of both myself and the different options, I have decided that the Theravada Tradition is probably by far the better way to travel, for me personally.
I decided to pose some questions on another forum, but also poked our good friend Jason in the chest, and asked him for some words of counsel and direction...

I feel his words were so useful to me and given with such simple clarity, they merited being 'published' here as a possible 'signpost' for others with similar views, questions or challenges.
We have discussed it, and mutually thought it might be useful to post his response to me here.
This is our 'gift' to you.
feel free to add comments, questions, clarifications and whatever moves you...

Thank you all.

Here we go....

federica

Fede,

Fédé, Feb 15 2008, 11:41 AM wrote:

I wonder if some kind person could help me out here.

As many of you will know, I am a fairly frequent visitor to the forum. I have stated on many occasions, need arising, that although I have been following Buddhism for 16 years or so, and Took Refuge six years ago, I have never been able to fixedly state I followed any particular tradition, set of teachings or school.

As I am sure you already know, the practice itself is what is truly important. Although it is important to have a practice that is rooted in right view, and guidance is very helpful in this regard, my opinion is that each tradition has its good and bad points—it is simply that Theravada seems to have the best framework for me to work with. That being said, our personal narratives, i.e., the stories that we create around our experiences, are less important than we realize. While we generally feel the need to embellish their telling so that we convey the essence of our experiences, the narratives may contain concepts that, in effect, limit our potential.

You are about to gain a deep and specific insight into just how profound my ignorance is.

I apologise profusely in advance for all of this, but I would say in my defence that firstly, I have hitherto not had any form of convenient or constant access to a Specific actual Sangha. For the past six years or so, the only teachings I have gleaned have been from books, and from my Sanghas on the internet. I have not had the benefit of any face-to-face instruction from any actual teacher, Master Guru or Lama.
Secondly, I seem to have an inherent difficulty in being able to wrap my head around some of the teachings, unless they are presented in simple terms. The complexities of original terms, and the language used to impart the teachings are not methods I find comfortable to tackle, and the texts and teachings just do not seem to sink in...

Here you begin by apologizing for your ignorance, for which there is no need. It is good to know that you have much to learn, but also have the confidence that you have what it takes. I also began my search in the same way, almost groveling so that I did not offend anyone with my stupidity. But I discovered after some time that if people have the knowledge and ability to share what they know, they will share it with anyone, no matter who they are or what their level of experience may be. Even Ananda, the Buddha's attendent and cousin, had difficulties comprehending the Dhamma. So, there is no real need for us to feel inadequate.

That leads to why it can be so difficult to comprehend in the first place. For true insight to arise, the conditions must be right. The Buddha, when teaching lay-followers, generally did not begin with anything as profound and complex as anatta. He usually began with teachings on morality, i.e., the five precepts, and generosity. These were the foundation with which to build the rest of the path. True insight takes time to arise, and living a lay-life can make it a little more difficult to get to that point of gnosis than, say, living a monastic life in the wilderness. As such, we should start by having patience and realizing that we will make mistakes.

I have recently discovered, (now that I am moved back to the UK) that I have a Sangha quite close to me,

The Amravati Monastery, in Hemel Hempstead,

and the cittaviveka in Monastery, in Hampshire.

Both are in the Theravadan Tradition.

There are good and bad things about these two, but that is true of everything. I was very drawn to Ajahn Amaro and Ajahn Sumedho, and while I believe that they are good people, I prefer the more learned practitioners such as Thanissaro and Bodhi; nevertheless, for a place to go, visit, have retreats and get meditation instructions, I think that they are both wonderful places to go. A strong and consist meditation practice, combined with observing the precepts and practicing generosity, is the basic foundation recommended in the suttas. Spending time with good people, people who are also generous, moral, and wise, is another important factor.

I find myself more greatly drawn to practising Buddhism in the Mahayana tradition (I ascribe to Tara, Chenrezig, The Blue Medicine Buddha) but hold that there is one ‘True’ Historical Buddha, Siddharta gauthama.(T.)
I always perceived the ‘other’ Buddhas to be manifestations or extensions of the qualities inherent in Buddha Shakyamuni… although I also felt them to be Buddhas in their own rights.
(You can see I’m having difficulty with this, can’t you…? Boy it sounds so crummy written down… I wish I could sit down with someone and discuss this face to face….)
Anyway….

Here is where I have issues myself. I like to stick to the Pali Canon, and more precisely the suttas, because they probably contain the closest thing we have to what the Buddha might have taught. Like my taste in ice cream, I am just one of those people who likes to get as close to the heart of the matter as possible without all the fancy varieties. While much of the literature that latter came out of Mahayana is deep, profound, and philosophically complex, there are no guarantees when it comes to who wrote them, why, when, et cetera. In addition, they are not always helpful in a practical way. For example, from No Ajahn Chah: Reflections:

Ajahn Chah listened to one of his disciples recite the Heart Sutra. When he had finished, Ajahn Chah said, "No emptiness either… no bodhisatta." He then asked, "Where did the sutra come from?" "It’s reputed to have been spoken by the Buddha," the follower replied. "No Buddha," retorted Ajahn Chah. Then he said, "This is talking about deep wisdom beyond all conventions. How could we teach without them? We have to have names for things, isn’t that so?"

That being said, there are certain ideas and practices in Mahayana that I find interesting. For example, in regard to the mind and whether it is permanent in the sense that the stream of mind never ceases, Mahayana has some very convincing arguments that have me rethinking my former position that it cannot (see posts 151-176). I also think Tonglen is a good practice. So, I am not simply pro-Theravada and anti-Mahayana. It is just that to me, Theravada is more logical and simplified than what you would generally find in Mahayana. In a sense, I find Theravada more practical, and when it comes down to it, I am a very practical guy.

I don’t go in for a great deal of Ritual and ceremony. (T)

I subscribe to the view on the process of dying and death and feel it important to focus and meditate on impermanence, suffering and emptiness.(T)
But I do consider that there is a bardo of dying, (M) which I believe for the unenlightened being, is around 49 days (I was told by a Lama that for some elevated Lamas and Bhikkhus, it is less…)
I have been drawn to Dzogchen Buddhism, in that I do think it is possible to be enlightened in one lifetime.

In Theravada, there are no teachings on an inbetween state, and while there are certain suttas which seem to imply that there might be (and even Thanissaro and Bhiikhu Bodhi concede this point), the Buddha never goes into any real detail—he is solely focused on what we can do in this life, right now. Awakening is certainly possible in one-lifetime, although the concept of full enlightenment in Mahayana, i.e., Buddha-hood, is a bit different than that of Theravada, i.e., arahantship. Regardles of the differences, I find it silly to argue over them considering that at the rate I am going, I would be extraordinarily lucky to achieve either one.

I am not a vegetarian, though I remain as mindful as I can of the negative aspect of eating meat, and only have eat occasionally…(T)

That is a good start. Basically, never eat anything that must be killed especially for you, i.e., raw oysters, lobster, et cetera, and try your best to abstain from contributing to the meat industry as much as possible. Nonetheless, if you buy or are offered meat, Theravada says it is ok to eat it, while Mahayana frowns upon all meat-eating (but has ways to limit the harm they say eating meat causes *). Overall, whatever you eat, be mindful of it, where it comes from, and that the main reason you are eatting it is to keep your body healthy, healthy enough to practice the Noble Eightfold Path. This idea is found in both Mahayana as well as Theravada.

My ‘home’ altar is simple, and based around an image of the Buddha in the Indian style of image….(T)

As I have mention before, the Buddha never said that it is by constructing elaborate altars that "the Tathagata is respected, venerated, esteemed, worshipped, and honored in the highest degree. But... whatever bhikkhu or bhikkhuni, layman or laywoman, abides by the Dhamma, lives uprightly in the Dhamma, walks in the way of the Dhamma, it is by such a one that the Tathagata is respected, venerated, esteemed, worshipped, and honored in the highest degree. Therefore... thus should you train yourselves: 'We shall abide by the Dhamma, live uprightly in the Dhamma, walk in the way of the Dhamma.'" (DN 16). So in my opinion, simple is good.

I do believe that everyone has Buddha Nature (M).

In my view, it depends on how you look at the issue of Buddha-nature. Some people, for example, find it reassuring that they have a "Buddha-nature" because it gives them hope that, in the end, everything will be ok. It also helps them to look at other people, e.g., people such as Hitler, with compassion and love because they have "it" too. The problem with this line of thinking, however, is that it tends to make people complacent, i.e., they think that since they already have "Buddha-nature," there is nothing for them to do. In essence, it can limit your thinking and take your attention away from the work to be done. As Thanissaro puts it in this Tricycle Q & A:

The Buddha taught that to define yourself in any way—even with an idea of pure consciousness or Buddha-nature or whatever—is to limit yourself. It also gets in the way of seeing how cause and effect work in your mind. If you think you’re inherently bad, you won’t believe that you have any inner resources to develop good qualities within. If you think you’re inherently good, you won’t understand how both good and bad conditions in the mind are unstable and dependent on conditions: this often leads to complacency, believing that your inherent goodness will take care of everything.

So, putting aside thoughts of essence or identity, the Buddha advises that you focus on the immediate problem at hand: the unnecessary suffering you’re causing due to your ignorance of how suffering comes about and how you can change your ways so that suffering can come to an end. When you’ve pursued this path to its ultimate point, there’s a total, unconditioned happiness, beyond time and space. And as Ajaan Suwat, one of my teachers, once said, when you’ve reached unconditioned happiness, you’re not going to quibble over the issue of who’s experiencing it or what it is.

I understand why some people, especially Theravadins, see the teachings on Buddha-nature to be too close to a form of self-view. I also understand why many people, especially Mahayanins, see the teachings on Buddha-nature as being first and foremost an reassurance that we all have the potential to awaken. The real problem is what does that view lead you to do? If it leads you to say, "Ok, I have this potential to awaken, so I better get to work meditating in order to try and understand my mind, tame it, and end suffering," then I think it is ok if used in that way. On the other hand, I think that it can cause a lot of unnecessary problems if one identifies with it.

So you see how confused and ‘pulled in different directions’ I have been….?

I have a sneaky suspicion that all of us have been confused and pulled in different directions our entire lives. It should come as no surprise that we are pulled in different directions in our spiritul lives as well. Me, I started out believing in Jesus simply for the fact that I took all those Evangelicals on t.v. at face value. Later, when I was about thirteen, after seeing and experiencing all of the suffering in life, I thought God was an asshole, so I became a Satanist in rebellion. Then, I became drawn to Paganism and Witchcraft. Magic sounded fun. Even latter still, I stumbled upon Buddhism and I have been interested ever since. Who knows what the future might bring next.

What I really need, and what I’m really asking, is whether anyone could offer me some concrete guidance on where they feel I should seek grounding.
I think it is about time I settled into one Tradition. But the above list describes my confused state, and I’m wondering if the different factors can be reconciled….

Can any kind, gentle Bhanté or Bhikkhu help me out here?

I hate to tell anyone to pick one tradition over another, but it is no secret where my bias lies. After looking at everything available, starting with Lama Surya Das and the Dalai Lama, and ending with Thanissaro and Bhikkhu Bodhi, I have found that the latter better suits my needs. As for yourself, only you can answer that questions after conducting a careful search. As for reconciling the differences, I cannot help you. I reject many things on the grounds that they do not lead to the end of suffering since they were not taught by the Buddha. That does not mean that they will not lead to the end of suffering, but I feel that a line has to be drawn somewhere.

Therefore, I think that if you are strongly drawn to Mahayana, there is not very much I can say that will help you seeing as I have a very limited amount of experience with Mahayana in general. I would ask someone else who is more learned in that field than I, e.g., Palzang. As for Theravada, I prefer to stick to those teachers that keep it simple and to the point: There is a goal; there is a path that leads to that goal; and, with proper guidance, anyone can get there. The real problem is rousing the effort day in and day out to remain mindful, not get distracted by sensual desires, and practice. Don't be concerened with getting everything right, it is not a test.

Screw what other people think if they just want you to regurgitate their ideas. Listen to those that challenge and encourage you at the same time. Whichever way you lean, Mahayana or Theravada, keep an open mind and look out for practical teachings. Don't waste your time trying to figure if you have a self, whether mind-streams cease after nibbana or continue due to non-afflictive causes, et cetera. That'll just give you a headache and make you say, "Ah, bugger off Buddhism!" The mind is an unruly piece of work, and it takes a lot of time and energy to tame it and understand its in's an out's. It is not something anybody can tell you, it is something you do.


Jason

Brigid

Thank you both for writing this out and having the generosity to share it with us. It's an incredibly helpful conversation for me and I'm grateful to have been invited to listen in.

I have a lot of the same thoughts, Fede. Although I'm firmly following the Theravaden tradition now, I still read teachings from other traditions and love teachers from other traditions, like Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche and his students, for example. But I focus most of my time on the tradition I've chosen and do so precisely for the same reasons Jason talked about:

I am not simply pro-Theravada and anti-Mahayana. It is just that to me, Theravada is more logical and simplified than what you would generally find in Mahayana. In a sense, I find Theravada more practical, and when it comes down to it, I am a very practical guy.

It's just the way my personality is; I need things to be as simple, direct and straightforward as possible, and that's how I find the Theravada teachings. But that doesn't mean I've given up my Mahayana chanting.

I also have a Forest Tradition monastery situated in the same province in which I live and hope to visit some day very soon.

Knitwitch

I have had similar problems, not just with which tradition but with which group.

So I decided that labels are not very helpful and divisive so if backed into a corner and with no way out I classify myself as pagan with very strong Buddhist and Quaker leanings. (hah - covered all ways round and not falling out with anyone.)

Simonthepilgrim

Dear all,

It strikes me once again that we are in a 'hinge' period, a 'threshold time'. We stand between the low tide and high tide lines. Like flotsam and jetsam, the old forms have lost their original shape. The labels are peeling off. We are beachcombers on the shores of the Great Sea. We are even unsure of the name we should give to the Sea itself.

We comfort ourselves with labels because the world appears a strange and threatening place: name it and you tame it.

There used to be (may still be, for all I know) long workshops called "Enlightenment Intensives" where we would ask and be asked the same question, over and over: "Who are you?" After a couple of days, all the labels have been used up but the question stands.

Knitwitch

I agree with you about standing on the edge, Simon, but I am not sure about labels .... as I see it half the problems in the world (or more) come from people labelling themselves and others.

When I meet someone, my first consideration isn't what label they would put on themself, so it puts me off when the first thing they feel they must do is thrust their precious label under my nose, be it racial, spiritual, sexual, political, animal, vegetable (met a few) or mineral.....

Yes, knowing where someone is coming from can be helpful in understanding their thinking but first and foremost we are all humankind. Get that label on first and then we'll sort out what particular type of humankind we are and address any conflicts that might throw up.

Palzang

To see nothing is to perceive the Way, and to understand nothing is to know the Dharma, because seeing is neither seeing nor not seeing and because understanding is neither understanding nor not understanding.


Bodhidharma

federica

Simonthepilgrim wrote: »

Dear all,

It strikes me once again that we are in a 'hinge' period, a 'threshold time'. We stand between the low tide and high tide lines. Like flotsam and jetsam, the old forms have lost their original shape. The labels are peeling off. We are beachcombers on the shores of the Great Sea. We are even unsure of the name we should give to the Sea itself.
We comfort ourselves with labels because the world appears a strange and threatening place: name it and you tame it.

Well, for my part it came down to this.
I have been wandering around the field, like an aimless vagrant for too long.
For me, it is high time I pitched my tent and fixed the groundsheet, and made good use of the contents of my backpack, rather than wandering aimlessly round the campsite, knocking on all the caravan doors, and saying "you give me the sugar, and you give me the milk, and you give me the kettle, and you give me the water, and you give me the gas stove, and you give me the teabag, and you give me the mug...."

And whilst I know, Palzang, that in the end it's all ephemeral and everything is nothing and one's aim is aimless... you kinda have to get to that point before you can detach from it.
I may not do it in this lifetime though, so I'm afraid Nirvana - or Nibbana, as I suppose I should call it now - (:D:crazy:) will have to cope without me....:cool:

The tongue is of course, very - but very - firmly wedged in the cheek....:wavey:

Knitwitch

Palzang wrote: »

To see nothing is to perceive the Way, and to understand nothing is to know the Dharma, because seeing is neither seeing nor not seeing and because understanding is neither understanding nor not understanding.


Bodhidharma

Yes, what he said

Palzang

Yes, Fede, I know. That wasn't intended as a criticism. Just seemed to fit. If you're happy in Theravada, go for it. That's what's so great about Buddhism is that there are different flavors for different people. I wouldn't be happy in Theravada at all - totally unsuited to my personality, but I am happy as a clam in Vajrayana. Somebody else is equally happy in Zen or Mahayana. It's great there are so many ways up the mountain! 'Cept, of course, there ain't really no mountain and nowhere to get to!

Palzang

fofoo

What impresses me in Theravada is that it relies much on logic, rather than on esoteric stuff. It stresses your own effort and your ability to comprehend. I enjoy reading the Nikayas but I have no access to the Abidhamma. Good luck, Federica.

jacx

Interesting...

I don't remember ever being drawn to a particular tradition. I just went looking for someplace that offered regular meditation classes in English. And was on a major bus route, because I don't have a car!

But I'm very happy with the temple I found.

federica

Palzang wrote: »

Yes, Fede, I know. That wasn't intended as a criticism. Palzang

Not a problem Pally, I didn't take it as one... I know you better than that.
:thumbsup:

Thanks for your good wishes, fofoo....

Brigid

It's great there are so many ways up the mountain! 'Cept, of course, there ain't really no mountain and nowhere to get to!

That's quote worthy, Palzang. Sweet!

darkstar6979

Does any one have any Therevada links on the teachings and meditations for begginers? I would'nt mind some chantings and some links to Zen Buddhism teachings and meditations. Thanks for your time.

federica

If you look here you'll find a complete library of information on Theravada...
Zen is considered to be an aspect or branch of Mahayana Buddhism.

The spread of Mahayana in Asia:
Theravada Buddhism continued to be dominant in Southern India and Ceylon (Sri Lanka) and spread South and East through the Indo-Chinese Peninsula while Mahayana Buddhism grew and spread to the North and East.

Mahayana broke into several sub-types:

In China: Cha’an, (more popularly known by its Japanese name, Zen), and Pure Land. Both would later be transmitted to Japan. Zen migrated to Korea.
Vajrayana, or Tantric Buddhism which moved North and West, finally taking root in Tibet.
Over time, several schools of the Mahayana Buddhist philosophy evolved, but the main ones today are Pure Land and the Zen, both of which originally developed in China.

From here:

Other than with this site, I'm afraid I can't help on that. I'm sure others will though!

Welcome to you!!

darkstar6979

Ok thanks Federica for the links.

Brigid

Hi, Darkstar, and welcome to to the board!

federica

Well it took me a while, but I finally got there - !

About 2 weeks ago I set off on a dummy run to find the Amaravati Monastery, situated in the heart of the countryside, between Hemel Hempstead and Leighton Buzzard...(For those not from the UK, that's somewhere between "Wheredidshesay?" and "SearchmedarnedifIknow!!"). It took a while... to call it secluded, is like calling New York an American town with a reasonable population....
All of around 2 hours, to be precise.
well, today (saturday 10th May - an incidentally simply dazzling spring day) I finally got there for their afternoon Puja... from 2 until 4pm... The journey took me a little less than a half-hour....!

Now.
some of you may or may not know that I don't regularly practise meditation. Not for as long as I should. And ditto as frequently.... so the 2-hour stint had me somewhat, shall I say, concerned... about my 'staying' power.

I needn't have worried.
The session was led by Sister Ajahn AnandaBodhi, who was charming, witty and so serene.... we began with a half hour sitting meditation, during which she spoke, very occasionally and not at all intrusively, keeping us focussed and mindful.... Then she rang a Gong, and slowly brought us back into the room, as it were... and took us to the next phase, of walking meditation....
given the fine, warm spring weather, it was a wonderful experience....
Then, after a half hour, a gong sounded, yet again, to bring us back into the temple, where we concluded with another half hour of sitting meditation.... and then we had 15 minutes of standing meditation - something I greatly enjoyed, as I do this all the time, in Qi Gong....

This left us around 10 minutes, during which members asked her questions on the Dhamma, and the Teachings.....

It went by so quickly....
And I'll be frank with you....
(This is going to sound bad, I just know it....)
It all just fell into place.
I found everything calming, stabilising, soothing and - very natural.
I felt as if I'd come home.... It was just so Right.

Afterwards, I spoke to Sister Anandabodhi, and discussed the details of events for next Sunday, when I'll be Taking Refuge.
She was enormously reassuring, and talked me through the Pali text for the 5 Precepts... or rather, the chanting of them....I gave her my opinion of what my pronunciation would be like, but given that there will be several people doing this, it won't be a problem to lose the odd occasional letter or note, now and then!

So I'll report back next week, to let you know how it all goes.....!

But today was just so brilliant!

Jason

That sounds wonderful, Fede I am happy that you had such a positive experience!

Knitwitch

:wavey::wavey: Yaaay - I know that "coming home" feeling. So very pleased for you

Palzang

federica wrote: »

I felt as if I'd come home.... It was just so Right.

Um-hmmm! :om:

Palzang

Knitwitch

Palzang wrote: »

Um-hmmm! :om:

Palzang

Yes, me too

:om:

Floating cheerfully

island

I learned a great deal from this thread so thank you. I myself have been searching and finding too. I started with vipassana practices after being raped and seeking relief. I didn't even know that what I was practicing was Buddhism! LOL I still sit with a Theravadin sangha because I find the style of meditation very comfortable and simple. And the people are wonderful.

But I lean toward Zen. And it isn't all for the sake of the teachings. Some of it, to be honest, is about extra-curricular activities like poetry and art. The aesthetic sensibility and so on. I am a poet and writer first and foremost so I love reading Japanese. And I dabble in other arts such as brush painting and calligraphy so admire the long deep tradition.

For the longest time I was dissatisfied with Zen sanghas though. There is that word again! All was Soto and not very compatible for some reason. All that just sitting and rather Samurai ways. I was drawn toward Rinzai traditions in my learning but couldn't find real humans doing it.

then low and behold without even trying I stumbled upon something I had never heard of before. There are countless traditions that I know nothing about, something I learned at e-sangha, for which I am totally grateful. There is a tradition called Sanbo Kyodan, that is a lay order and combines features of Soto and Rinzai, the just sitting with koan study. And in addition, as luck would have it, there is a sangha and a dharma successor who is also a psychoanalyst right in the City where I go several times a week to complete my training in East West psychotherapy.

In turn, his Roshi founded a sangha in Hawaii right next to the University where I want to relocate and live and work and study. So things are just falling into place.

For me the issue was not so much practice, but sangha. I felt that without a true commitment to a sangha I was not practicing for it is part of the refuge vows. I have changed my mind about that, but that was what was spurring the search for me.

Brigid

Fede,

How wonderful!! I'm so happy for you and can't wait to hear about your refuge experience next Saturday. Much love and hugs to you!

island

Do let us know what it is like? And if you get a cool name, all the better. Yay \o/!!