Buddhist Thailand Burns

 The Buddha: "All is burning..."

So, the fighting is all but over here in Thailand, at least for now. The recent protests by the Red Shirts has not only left the country with damaged buildings, a damaged economy, and damaged (as well as dead) people, but also the gaping wounds of a divided nation are exposed for all to see. For, despite some people's narrow focus on issues such as the challenged legitimacy of the current government and the Red's desire to see former prime minister Taksin Shinawatra back in power, there are deeper, much more destructive problems lingering in this country.

Here in Ubon Ratchathani, a city in the Red's heartland of Northeastern Thailand, the rioting seen in the capital Bangkok was replicated, albeit on a smaller scale.The local city hall - as with similar buildings across Northern and Northeastern Thailand - was set alight by protesters and subsequently gutted. Early reports last night were claiming that two people had been shot dead in Ubon, but as yet I've been unable to verify this information. Earlier in the week, a drive-by shooting took place at a branch of Bangkok Bank (which has connections to a senior government official) and spent cartridges from an AK-47 assault rifle were found at the scene. Thankfully, nobody was hurt. For pictures and a report of the damage done here in Ubon on Wednesday, please read the following report by my friend Jason at Isaan Style!

As hinted above, there are underlying grievances that lie at the heart of the protests and violence that have occurred in Thailand over the past few months. These grievances are not so recent in their origins, however, and will therefore be difficult to identify and deal with by Thai society. The Red Shirts mainly consist of poorer people from the North and Northeast of Thailand, where the majority of the population are subsistence farmers. In the case of the Northeast, where most people are ethnic Lao, not Thai, central Thais and ethnic Chinese (Sino-Thais) often look down at them, seeing them as provincial and uneducated country bumpkins. The wealth of Thailand is concentrated geographically in Bangkok and central Thailand, and ethnically it is concentrated in the central Thai and Sino-Thai communities. And, recent estimates suggest that the gap between the rich elite and the poor is widening.

Usually, there is a Bangkok bias in the national news outlets - all based in the capital - which either focus on issues specifically pertaining to the city, or look at wider national issues from the Bangkokian perspective. The provinces are clearly not seen as important by the Thai media, reflected in this attitude. As to the faces that appear in the Thai media, most newscasters and reporters have Chinese features, most distinct from native Thais, and national politicians too usually have Chinese features. Most actors, pop stars, and business moguls also come from ethnically Chinese backgrounds. Go into any gold shop in Thailand, and the owners will usually be of Chinese origin (or predominately Chinese origin, as there is a small degree of intermarriage between native Thais and Chinese). Ethnic Chinese make up roughly 14% of the Thai population compared with the 34% that are North-easterners.

Such ethnic, political, and economic disparities between the various regions and social groups of Thailand creates social unrest, a sense of injustice where Bangkokians and ethnic Chinese are richer, more powerful, and somewhat arrogant in their treatment of those less well off. Seen from this perspective, the frustration and protests of the Red Shirts can be viewed with some sympathy, and the position of the economic and ruling elite as untenable in the long run. Unfortunately, human nature is based on greed, hatred, and delusion, so those people who are more privileged wish to cling to their advantages, whilst those struggling to make ends meet desire to emulate their richer rivals. This, of course, is not a unique situation in Thailand, but right now this country is bleeding from its societal splits, and no doubt such conflict will erupt again in the future if these ills are not treated.

"Monks, all is burning. Burning with what?...Burning with the fire of greed, burning with the fire of  hatred, burning with the fire of delusion." (The Buddha, in 'The Fire Sermon')

From the Buddhist point of view, how are we to respond to this situation? Well, at the risk of sounding overly simplistic, it comes down to those two old qualities of wisdom and compassion. Whatever we do, whether we live in Thailand or not, as Buddhists we can endeavor to come from a position of mindfulness; mindful of the way things are, not only in the mundane sense of the term, but also in the ultimate sense. From the mundane, worldly point of view, we can be alive to the issues written about above that have driven so many Thai people to desperate acts, whilst at a deeper level we cam remain aware of the basic characteristics of our minds that fuel both positive and negative behavior. At a even more fundamental level, we can simply be aware of the spaciousness that is home to all the thoughts, feelings, and emotions that arise in our consciousness. In such a state of openness, both wisdom and compassion have space to grow and be expressed.

Rather than simply reacting to the problems that Thailand faces from our preconceived ideas and biases, we can get back to (Buddhist) basics, and be aware of that in which all this sense data and emotional responses arise. This naked knowing is a place of peace, a sanctuary amidst the turmoil of the conditioned world. If we can approach the challenges that Thailand has from this serene perspective, we have a greater chance of benefiting both ourselves and Thai society. Rather than reacting from opinion and declaring how terrible this group is, or how wonderful that person is, we can see things in the clarity of this 'Buddha Space' that lies at the heart of our being. Doing this, we are less likely to exasperate the situation, being a calming influence rather than adding fuel to the already rampaging flames burning through Thai society.

Thailand has (or had) an international image of being a kind of paradise on earth; this is clearly not so. Dig beneath the surface of those inscrutable smiles and you find a people barely suppressing their greed and hatred of each other. Greed and hatred are always accompanied by delusion, however, and here we have the key to the situation. The delusion of being a separate self, whether as a rich Chinese defending one's wealth or a poor Lao grasping after another's, is the cause of our suffering. On the worldly level, yes, we are these humans we take ourselves to be, full of loves and hates, but on the level of psychological transcendence, we are pure awareness, awake to the conditioned world and yet beyond its grasp. Living from this knowledge, we are able to liberate ourselves and others from the prison that is the ego. May all beings be Happy!

Linji's True Eye

‘One day Linji went to He Prefecture. The governor, Councillor Wang, requested the master to take the high seat.

At that time Mayu came forward and asked, “The Great Compassionate One has a thousand hands and a thousand eyes. Which is the true eye?”

The master said, “The Great Compassionate One has a thousand hands and a thousand eyes. Which is the true eye? Speak, speak!”

Mayu pulled the master down off the high seat and sat on it himself.

Coming up to him, the master said, “How do you do?”

Mayu hesitated. The master, in his turn, pulled Mayu down off the high seat and sat upon it himself.

Mayu went out. The master stepped down.’ 

The above dialogue comes from the Record of Linji, a book containing the teachings of the Ninth Century Zen master Linji Yixuan (died 866), and who is the founder of the Rinzai Sect of Zen, as it is known in present day Japan. (Rinzai is the Japanese pronunciation of the Chinese name Linji.) At first glance, it may look as if the two monks involved in the discussion are either mad or having a laugh – they are not. Linji and Mayu are involved in the most serious of matters which questions the very essence of our existence, albeit in a way that can be most baffling. Here, we will attempt to cut to the chase and see exactly what it was these men of Zen are getting at.

On a visit to a temple, Linji was requested to take the high seat, that is, the chair from which a Zen master gives a Dharma talk and takes questions from his audience, which normally comprises predominately of fellow monks, but which often also has interested laypeople such as Councillor Wang present. In this setting, Mayu asks about the Great Compassionate One, which refers to the so-called ‘Goddess of Mercy’ Guanyin (Avalokiteshvara in Sanskrit – thankfully Chinese is so succinct!). She is believed to come to the aid of devoted followers whatever their predicaments, whether they are caught in a fire, desirous of fertility, or seeking enlightenment, for instance. If you’ve ever seen Oriental representations of Guanyin, you may well have seen her represented with many hands to assist those in distress, and many eyes to see those in need of help, which stand in for the thousands talked of by Mayu. 

Mayu, however, is only interested in one aspect of Guanyin – her true eye. This eye is the gateway to the ultimate objective of the Buddhist life which we call enlightenment. To help Mayu in this quest, Linji uses a common trick of the old Zen masters in turning the question back on the questioner. Swiftly adding, “Speak! Speak!” he jolts Mayu to come up with spontaneous response, denying the intellect time to intervene and give some inappropriately intellectualized answer. (The true eye is beyond the grasp of the intellect.) Mayu does something unimaginable to many meeker monks when he evicts Linji from the high seat and takes up residency there himself, apparently announcing that this is the answer to the question of what is the true eye. And, if coming directly out of the clarity that is the true eye, Mayu has indeed responded correctly. Linji is not satisfied with this, however, and challenges Mayu further by giving him a traditional greeting, here translated as, “How do you do?” The other monk is dumbfounded at this point and cannot answer Linji, at which he is ejected from the high seat (which he does not now deserve to occupy) and walks off. Mayu’s inability to reply reveals that he is not looking with his true eye after all, and is not worthy of Linji’s congratulations and is therefore disposed from the high seat. Following this, Linji decides that enough questions have been asked for the time being and ends the meeting by departing himself. What bizarre behaviour! 

The above interchange between two Zen monks may well appear most peculiar to a conventional mindset, but hopefully it has begun to dawn to the reader that this is no ordinary conversation, and that seeking out the true eye is something that everyday attitudes are unlikely to realize. Therefore, it is common in these old records to find Zen Buddhists breaking out of the confines of everyday logic into a wonderful and (logically) nonsensical world. And all this elaborate verbal dancing in aid of seeing with ‘the true eye.’ Thankfully, for those of us that find such dialogues more exasperating than enlightening, there are other ways to achieve this, and below we will explore an alternative to Linji’s answer to Mayu’s question.

Douglas Harding (1909-2007) was a wonderfully British mystic, for want of a better term, and his method of answering Mayu is typical of his homeland in its empirical flavour. Rather than use the mind to transcend the mind in a kind of intellectual suicide that leads to spiritual awakening, Douglas had a much less painful approach to seeing with the true eye – to look. Here again, the aim is to put aside the mind’s attempts to define and categorize, whilst instead seeing directly into the nature of things as they are in this present moment. But, being British, Douglas’ way is much more down to earth and pragmatic. To see what is meant by this, please conduct the exercise below with sincerity. (For more on Douglas Harding’s approach please go to the Headless Way link found to the left of this page under Weblinks.)

  
Point at whatever is in front of you. Notice its size, shape, colour(s), and relation to the rest of your surroundings. Now, turn your finger around and observe what you see at your end of that somewhat rude digit. What, exactly, do you see? Does ‘it’ have any size, shape, or colour(s)? And what is ‘its’ relationship to the environment? Is it true that the true eye is without discernable size, shape, or colour(s), and that ‘its’ relationship to the world is equally impossible to define? Taking down your finger, what do you notice about this spacious true eye and the world that it perceives? Are they one or two, or neither?

To see with the true eye is to see with the eye of Guanyin, that is to say, with a compassionate eye. It is also to see with the eye of Shakyamuni Buddha, that is to say, with the eye off wisdom. It is also to see with the eye of God, in the sense that the German Mystic Meister Eckhart uses the term when he says, “The eye by which I see God, is the same eye by which God sees me.” No doubt, if Eckhart had listened to Linji and Mayu, he would have been somewhat perplexed (even if their words had been translated into his native tongue!); similarly, Eckhart’s talk of God would probably been dismissed by the two Zen monks as too metaphysical. But, cultural and linguistic differences apart, it’s conceivable that Zen’s true eye is Eckhart’s eye of God, and that seeing with this eye is neither restricted to one tradition no more than it is restricted to one place.

D. T. Suzuki, ‘the man who brought Zen to the West,’ was most keen on Linji, especially understandable as Suzuki had studied in the Rinzai Sect of Zen Buddhism, but he was also a fan of Meister Eckhart, two enthusiasms he shared with D. E. Harding. In his excellent book Mysticism: Christian and Buddhism, Suzuki compares Eckhart’s eye with that of the Buddha, the Zen masters and the devotees within Shin Buddhism. Suzuki writes, “Eckhart is in perfect accord with the Buddhist doctrine of sunyata [emptiness], when he advances the notion of Godhead as ‘pure nothingness’ (ein bloss niht).” In this endeavour he reveals that the true eye can reveal itself to whoever looks with sincerity, whether Christian or Buddhist or neither. Added to this Douglas Harding’s more scientific method of enquiry shown in the above exercise and we begin to witness the dovetailing of these apparently disparate traditions into this one true eye that we are looking out of right now. 

To be true to what we see, rather than what we are told, think or belief is the heart of the meditative life, and reveals reality as it is. This revelation can be experienced as exciting, boring, agreeable or disagreeable, or any other emotional response dependent upon our individual psychological disposition. For, looking inwards with the true eye, we see the No-thing that lies at the heart of every single thing, and that is innately free of being this or that, you or me. But the mental conditions and habits that we have spent our entire existence cultivating still exists to ‘colour’ the naked experience itself. These conditions influence how we interpret this awakened emptiness that is full of the world, hence multitudinous emotional reactions and doctrinal positions.

Nevertheless, as far as we can gather from the records that we have, people from as diverse cultures and traditions as Linji, Eckhart, Suzuki, and Harding saw with the same true eye, agreeing in the essentials whilst varied in the outer expressions. Eckhart’s Godhead may well be Suzuki’s Zen as the latter (and Douglas Harding) full-heartedly believed. Even if, however, we doubt that these four men and others like them were seeing with the same eye, we can still test the efficacy of Harding’s methods and see if it holds true for us or not. Here, G is revealed as the link between everything (the universe) and nothing (the transcendent). And all of this is seen with the true eye that is without size, shape, colour or relation. I am freed from the prison of self, not that G is dead, but that he is in his place along with every other thing. He lives in the eternity of Empty Knowing, which is unconditioned and therefore – unlike everything that is conditioned – beyond death.

 Mayu seeks for the true eye with a bold act

Yet is pulled down from his ego’s perch

While Guanyin gazes on in serenity –

Where is Linji’s true eye now?

Shin Buddhism

-->

Daibutsu (Great Buddha) statue of Amida Buddha

Buddhism is often thought of – especially in the West – as a predominately rational path to spiritual enlightenment that emphasizes wisdom over devotion. This is simply not the experience of most Asian Buddhists, however, who worship Buddhas and Bodhisattvas much like Christians worship Jesus or Hindus worship Krishna. Probably the most widely worshiped figure in Asian Buddhism is Amitabha Buddha (‘Buddha of Infinite Light’), who is extremely popular across the Far East, with millions of devotees keen to be reborn in his heavenly realm, or ‘Pure Land’ – hence Pure Land Buddhism.

One such country where Pure Land Buddhism is predominant is Japan, where Amitabha Buddha is known as Amida Butsu, or simply Amida. In order to be reborn in his Pure Land, this Buddha’s devotees not only fulfill certain moral precepts and perform particular rites, but also recite a formula intended to act as a ‘bridge’ between them and Amida. In Japanese, this incantation is “Namu Amida Butsu” and is pronounced something like ‘Na-moo A-mi-da Buts’, with the final word rhyming with the English word ‘looks.’ In translation, this phrase is “Homage to the Awakened One of Infinite Light” – thankfully Japanese is more concise here than the English!

As already mentioned, Pure Landers hope to be reborn in Amida’s heaven, rather than strive to achieve enlightenment in this world, as most forms of Buddhism encourage their practitioners to do: why is this? Well, Pure Land Buddhism teaches that we live in wicked times (tell me about it!), so wicked that it’s nigh on impossible for most of us to realize enlightenment through our own efforts (‘self-power’, or jiriki in Japanese). Thankfully, Amida has made the vow that good persons reciting his name will be reborn in his Pure Land, wherein they will find conditions conducive to attaining awakening. This is ‘other-power,’ or tariki in the Japanese tongue. All this talk of a divine savior and going to heaven after death may well sound way too Christian or Hindu in flavor for many modern Buddhists, but one branch of Japanese Pure Land Buddhism that has dovetailed the ‘other-power’ (tariki) of Amida with the goal of enlightenment is called Shin Buddhism, or Jodoshinshu (‘True Pure Land Sect’). The reason that we cannot realize enlightenment quite so swiftly was explored by the founder of Shin Buddhism, Shinran Shonin (1173-2262) who taught that as individuals we are full of vice, motivated by egotistic yearnings. When unenlightened, we act from self-centered viewpoints that impede experiencing existence as it is as opposed to the viewpoint of a Buddha which is untainted by selfishness. Shinran further taught that because of this all-conquering egoism we are unable to do anything that can help us to awaken to our innate Buddha Nature.

The central practice in Shin is the recitation of the Nembutsu (‘Remembrance of Buddha ’) which is the phrase given above: Namu Amida Butsu. If mindfully chanted with a devoted heart, one’s entire being is taken up in this practice, and all sense of being an individual self separate to Amida is lost, along with all the suffering that accompanies an ego. Devotee, Buddha, and mantra are unified into the present moment as the wisdom of a focused mind, the love of a focused heart, and the chanting of a focused body converge. Thus, with mind, heart, and body committed to the practice, the devotee is ripe for receiving Amida’s grace. In theory, it is believed, even reciting just once in this manner is enough to achieve rebirth in Amida’s Pure Land, though probably for most of his followers it takes many, many times that number to transcend identification with our delusionary selves!

It is only through the grace of Amida that the ego is transcended and what is revealed in the centre of human existence is Amida himself. And, rather than waiting to be reborn in the Pure Land and there achieve enlightenment, Shinran believed that upon death, the devotee of Amida realizes Nirvana with the letting go of the body. This involves self-abandonment (or absolute trust, shinjin in Japanese) where the devotee transcends any trace of effort by dying into the vast Void which is Amida, lying at the very core of existence. For some, even waiting until this short mortal existence ceases is too long a time to postpone seeing Amida’s Pure Land, and some followers of Shinran have taken his teachings to their logical conclusion, at least in terms of the immediacy of salvation (or enlightenment).

Here, Pure Land Buddhism begins to sound a little like another Japanese form of Buddhism – Zen. For, just as Zen Buddhists use ‘self-power’ to awaken to their True Nature, so Shin Buddhists can use the ‘other –power’ of Amida to realize enlightenment in this very life. A widely-respected advocate of this kind of Shin was the late, great Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki (1870-1966), most famous for introducing Zen Buddhism to the West, but who also wrote of the former in glowing terms in such books as Mysticism: Christian and Buddhist and Buddha of Infinite Light. This author (G) has recently read both works and been immensely impressed by the way that Suzuki draws the reader into the world of Amida.

According to Suzuki, Shin has produced many devotees of Amida who managed to transcend the dichotomy of jiriki-tariki (‘I-Thou’ in Christian mystical language) and realized enlightenment in this very world by merging their separate self into the universal Being of Amida. This is akin to the Zen Buddhist losing his egoistic self into that of the Buddha Mind or ‘No-Mind.’ The paths are substantially different, however, for the Shin Buddhist gives up all hope of achieving spiritual awakening through his or her own efforts, whereas the Zen Buddhist relies on no one else for his or her enlightenment. Ultimately, as Suzuki emphasizes, these two apparently opposing approaches converge in their final destination, however – enlightenment.

D. T. Suzuki has written of those Shin devotees known as myokonin (‘Wonderfully Fragrant Person’) whose practices involves totally immersing themselves in the reciting of the Nembutsu to the point where Amida takes over and it’s no longer an individual that chants “Namu Amida Butsu”, but Amida chanting through the myokonin. This is where ‘other –power’ comes into its own, for when perfected there is no sense of self involved in the recitation, just the sound of existence (Amida) singing the song of life. And what a song it is! Suzuki personally translated the wonderful verse of one such myokonin called Saichi, an unpretentious artisan who wrote volumes of simple odes describing this process of merging into Amida. Here’s a taste of this delightful poetry taken from Suzuki’s book Mysticism: Christian and Buddhist (pages 126, 140, and 154 respectfully):

As I pronounce ‘Namu-amida-butsu’

I feel my thoughts and hindrances are like the spring snows;

They thaw away as soon as they fall on the ground.

Shining in glory is Buddha’s Pure Land,

And this is my Pure Land!

‘Namu-amida-butsu! Namu-amida-butsu!’

My heart and thy heart –

The oneness of hearts –

‘Namu-amida-butsu!’

Thankfully, we do not need to go to Japan and become myokonin to taste the fruit of reciting the Nembutsu, for if we attend the way things are right now, we can experience the ‘other-power’ of Amida, our inner formless truth. Sitting in a quiet room – closed eyes may help in concentration here – say “Namu Amida Butsu’, paying attention to the silence in which the words arise. This silence is the very Emptiness that Buddhism teaches about, and is also the essence of all Buddhas, including Amida. If we are alert to this moment as we continue to chant the Nembutsu, we become aware of the fact that the words are coming out of this silent knowing, and that any sense of individual self that remains is of the world, like the chanting, whereas the Void-Silence is that out of which these things come.

As some readers may already be thinking, the use of mantras predates Pure land Buddhism by hundreds of years, and has been found in many meditative traditions around the world, including the Jesus Prayer of Eastern Orthodox Christianity, the Hare Krishna mantra, the Sufi chanting of ‘Allah,’ and the Tibetan’s ‘Om mani padme hum,’ to name but a few. The famous Twentieth Century spiritual teacher Jiddhu Krishnamurti taught that such practices were nigh on useless, and once said that one may as well chant, “Coca Cola, Coca Cola,” but it seems that he missed the point. If recited with mindfulness, and backed up with a devoted heart, chanting a mantra can have a profound effect on how we perceive ourselves. This is when sound reveals Silence and Silence transcends sound, for “Namu Amida Butsu” is not only sound arising in Awake Silence, but it is that silence, or at least an expression of it, coming from it.

Such an endeavor requires a sincere heart, of course. Simply reciting the words without mindfulness will probably result in an understandable reaction: “So what?” If, on the other hand (Or ‘other-power-hand,’ to be precise!), we repeat the Nembutsu with a pure, focused mind we are open-minded enough to experience the Buddha Nature that is none other than Amida. According to Shin teachings this does not require the visualization of Amida as found in some other Pure Land sects. Rather, Amida is understood to be beyond being personalized in the mind of the Shin devotee, and is nearer the formless Buddha Nature than a particular Buddha, as such. Surrendering one’s entire sense of being a separate self to this ‘inner Buddha’ in the heartfelt reciting of “Namu Amida Butsu” reveals this Nature, and the Earth itself is transformed into the Pure Land. “Namu Amida Butsu” indeed!

Over on the Tricycle Editor's Blog there's a post inspired by this article with relevant links. Please click the following for more: More on Shin Buddhism 

The Best Buddha Space Post Ever...Not!

Being Buddhist with technology...

This entry was to have been the best Buddha Space blog article ever, but unfortunately, due to a technical glitch on Blogger, the original post was lost to the virtual ether. Normally, as articles are written, Blogger automatically saves them as a draft every few minutes, but this didn't happen. Then, when a button marked 'Publish Post' is clicked on, the post is published. This failed to happen as well, instead a message came up stating the action could not be completed. Immediately after this happened, a sinking feeling arose in the heart, and efforts were made to retrieve the lost post. All to no avail.

This is typical of life, isn't it? Things are unreliable, no matter how amazing the technology or natural processes involved, things are born imperfect. To expect otherwise is to cling to a hope that will never cease to disappoint and thereby create more suffering. The wisdom inherent in the Buddhist teachings go way beyond this, but this is a great place to start. We can send probes to explore strange new worlds and...wait, where have I heard that before? Anyway, technology is becoming more and more amazing every day,and we regularly do things that ancient peoples would have considered pure magic: fly, talk to people on the other side of the world, blow up entire cities, and...blog. And yet, all of this uncertain and unreliable.

That this is not the best Buddha Space post ever is a matter of opinion of course, but in this mind at least it's not that great. But these are just thoughts aren't they? Thoughts, whether of food, love, war, football, sex, or Buddhism are uncertain and unreliable too. They are, in fact, empty of any permanency, and as imperfect, ephemeral constructs cannot be relied on to lead us out of suffering, which is the main point of Buddhism. (At least, I think it is - this is just an idea, too, of course!) In meditation and mindfulness practice we can learn to let go of our presuppositions - whether Buddhist in origin or not - and attend to the facts at hand. In this present moment, where do all our thoughts, emotions, and sensations arise? In a human mind, limited and limiting, or in a naked awareness that is unlimited and non-limiting, just purely awake?

A Modern Sangha

M

Monks: The only kind of Sangha?

The Sangha, or 'Community,' lies at the heart of traditional Buddhism. In the more conservative Theravada Buddhism, it has two main connotations: the Bhikkhu-Sangha, or the Order of Monks, and the Arya-Sangha, the Order of Noble Ones (the enlightened). A third usage, the Bhikkhuni-Sangha (the Order of Nuns), is more controversial, as the traditional lineage of fully-ordained nuns died out in Theravada Buddhist countries centuries ago. Attachment to long-established conventions prevents many Theravada Buddhists from recognizing attempts to reestablish this Order. So, in Theravada Buddhist countries like Sri Lanka, Burma, and Thailand, only monks or enlightened ones may be considered to be members of a Sangha. (And, in what others see as erroneous interpretations of the Pali Canon, many consider it impossible for laity to realize enlightenment, which means only fully-ordained monks are within the Sangha.)

In Mahayana Buddhism, which is more diverse and adaptive than Theravada Buddhism and found in places such as Japan, Korea, Vietnam, China, and Tbet, such classifications regarding who can be a member of the Sangha exist, but are much looser. For example, the Arya-Sangha clearly includes many lay Buddhists, both male and female. Furthermore, nowadays many Buddhist groups or communities consider themselves to constitute a Sangha. An example of this is the Dogen Sangha which has many branches in Japan and the West. This latter interpretation of a Sangha is found widely on the Internet.

E-Sangha is a popular virtual Sangha made up of both ordained and lay Buddhist members that meet online to share Buddhist teachings and advice. Of course, as with any Web-based message board or chat room, not all of the communications on such sites are, um, enlightening, sometimes no more than places to argue one's opinion. Virtual Sanghas do seem to be on the increase, however, and considering the fact that anyone visiting this blog is a member of what could be deemed the Buddha Space Sangha, it would seem somewhat churlish to dismiss the idea of an Internet Sangha out of hand.

So, what do you think, dear reader? Are you an ordained Sangha-member, an enlightened Sangha-member, or perhaps you see yourself as a member of the Wide Wide Web Sangha. Should the word Sangha set in stone with the traditional meanings as defined above, or is it, like Mahayana Buddhism - and, in truth, Theravada Buddhism as well - an organic entity that changes over time to suit the needs of current Buddhists? And, most crucially, what form do you think a modern Sangha should take?

What is Dharma?

 The Dharma encapsulated in scripture

Dharma is a crucial word in Buddhism. It has many forms and many interpretations. Dharma itself is an ancient Indian word from the Sanskrit language, and in a closely related language known as Pali it takes the form Dhamma. In other Asian languages, it is translated as 'fa' in Chinese, 'ho' in Japanese, and 'chos' in Tibetan. Usually here on Buddha Space it remains untranslated, for as the exploration of this term below will reveal, it is not a word easily rendered into English.

Generally, it has two main definitions which are 1) the Buddhist teachings and 2) a constituent factor that goes to make up experience. The main focus here will be the former meaning and its interpretations, but very briefly the latter will be looked at for the sake of coverage. Usually rendered in English with a small 'd', dharma indicates each element that forms part of the material and physical aspects of the world - not to mention any 'spiritual' phenomena that one may or may not believe in. Everything, therefore, that exists is either a dharma or made up of dharmas. Atoms, thoughts, clouds, art, cars, stars, and duck-billed platypuses consist of dharmas.

Normally represented in English with a capital 'D', Dharma has very different connotations to those written above. This means both the natural way of things, or universal law, and the Buddhist teachings that both point to this truth and describe the Path to realizing it (in other words, enlightenment). In the second sense, it is sometimes found in the longer form Buddhadharma - Buddhadhamma in Pali) - or other regional linguistic equivalents. Depending on what one accepts as genuine Buddhist teaching, this definition of Dharma may include the entirety of teachings to be found from the most ancient Buddhist texts right up to modern teachings, or it may be restricted to a particular sect or set of writings. An example of the latter would be a strict Theravada Buddhist understanding of Dhamma (this is the usual Theravada Buddhist form of the word) as being found in the Pali Canon, rejecting later texts such as the Prajna Paramita writings as heterodox.

As to Dharma representing the way-things-are, or 'the truth', this interpretation of the word is found in all major forms of Buddhism. In the Pali Canon, the Buddha is said to have declared that even when the Buddhist teachings don't exist, the Dharma still exists as the natural way of things. To realize this Dharma is to awaken to our own true nature, which is not made of the constituent dharmas described earlier, but is indefinable as being this, that, or the other. In Oriental Buddhism, the word Zen (and other regional variants) has much the same meaning, which could be deemed to be the transcendent, or the unconditioned as opposed to the conditioned (the dharmas).

This understanding of Dharma is not found in philosophy or ideas, however: it is an experience. To experience Dharma is to experience the facts of life regarding both the ephemeral elements (dharmas) of these bodies and minds, plus the timeless awareness in which they are known. In this sense, the Dharma is all dharmas, for they are found nowhere but in the midst of the truth, and it is found nowhere but right here in the phenomenal world. This experience is both conditioned and transitory, and yet unconditioned and endless. It is conditioned and transitory in its contents (all dharmas), and unconditioned and without end with regards its container. This container is not thoughts, emotions, sensations, memories, or the subconscious - it is awareness itself. Seeing dharmas not only with awareness but as awareness, rather than as a personality with all its limitations, we see the Dharma. And then, as the Thai monk Ajahn Chah pointed out, we are Dharma.

Looking at the Buddha

 Daibutsu: is this the true Great Buddha?

One of the most recognizable images produced throughout recorded human history is that of the historical Buddha, or Shakyamuni Buddha. His countenance inhabits innumerable temples, households, public spaces, mountain sides, paintings, books, and nowadays, countless websites (including this one - look to the right!). Buddha statues and amulets proliferate in the West as well as in the East as Buddhism and the Buddha become more popular amongst Occidentals. Not all of these images are of Shakyamuni, of course, as other Awakened Ones such as Amitabha Buddha ('the Buddha of Infinite Light') and Hotei (the fat-bellied 'laughing Buddha') are also very popular. Whichever particular Buddha it may be, a Buddha image can have a variety of influences on the observer.

In Thailand, the culture-defining golden Buddha statues sometimes seem to be more numerable than human beings, and are treated with the utmost respect by the majority of Thais; indeed, there are strict laws in Thailand prohibiting disrespectful acts towards such images, and heavy penalties for vandalizing or stealing them. Not known to many foreign visitors to the Kingdom, it is even considered unacceptable to have one's photograph taken with one, and especially taboo to sit on one!

In Japan, the most common Buddha to be represented in devotional imagery is Amitabha Buddha, the world-famous Daibutsu ('Great Buddha') of Kamakura being a particularly striking example. (It is this statue that is pictured above.) Attitudes towards behavior around Such statues in Japan isn't as strict as Thailand, but hordes of pilgrims along with secular tourists flood Kamakura every year to pay respect to this giant image of Amitabha, many reciting, "Namu Amida Butsu" ('Homage to the Buddha of Infinite Light').

Of course, in the modern and ever-increasingly commercial world, Buddha images are also used in less traditional and devotional ways, such as on the covers of dance music albums, in restaurants, and on T-shirts. These are not (usually) prayed to or even deeply respected, but are used to symbolize certain qualities such as peace and exoticism in the attempt to promote certain products. More traditionally-minded Buddhists often take exception to this kind of use of Buddha images, seeing them as disrespectful and insulting.

Looking at the Buddha, whether in a Thai temple or restaurant, whether on a pendant or a website, the response that arises will, of course, depend upon the way that one views such images. If someone is a devotee of Amitabha, then the Kamakura Daibutsu will inspire deeply religious feelings, but if one is a tourist gazing at the same image, then it will be seen as a good photo opportunity and nothing more. And, because of the sectarian tendencies of the human mind, a Theravada Buddhist may well view with scorn the same statue as a heretical idol, much like a fundamentalist Christian or Muslim might do.

A pertinent point here is the well-known tale of a Chinese Zen monk who was extremely cold while sheltering in a temple one night. Instead of praying to the Buddha statue for assistance or inspiration, he promptly set it alight, and used it as a warming fire! As awful as this may appear at first, it hints at an important point that many Buddhists would make about Buddha images: they are visual tools to assist in the practice of Buddhism, not idols to be worshiped or considered somehow 'holy.' The real Buddha, if you take the traditional Theravada Buddhist viewpoint died over two thousand years ago, and is now in an indefinable state beyond the reach of mortals. From the Mahayana point of view, both Shakyamuni and Amitabha Buddha exist on a 'higher plane', ready to intervene in the affairs of this world. Either way, a statue is a statue, and only to be used as focus in Buddhist practice, rather than as an actual manifestation of a Buddha.

So, if we wish to use a Buddha statue to help us reflect on certain qualities considered important in Buddhism, this would seem perfectly in line with Buddhist teachings regarding skillful means to spiritual development. If, however, we wish to actually see the Buddha - whichever one we choose - statues and pictures are not even a poor substitute for the real thing. But then, how are we to look at the (real) Buddha? In a dream or vision we might believe that we are viewing the Buddha, but it may well be an elaborate creation of the subconscious, manifesting in the mind's eye in response to a deep psychological need (or desire) to see the Buddha. Such dreams and visions are not unheard of, of only in Buddhism, but in Christianity and Hinduism, for example. Are we to believe that the vision of Christ is any more or less 'real' than the Hindu's visualization of Krishna, or that either are more or less valid than the Japanese Buddhist's dream of Amitabha?

This leaves us nowhere in our search to look at the Buddha, however. If inner visualizations are no more to be taken literally than outer ones, where else is there to see the Awakened One? Furthermore, how are we to recognize the Buddha if there are widely differing representations of Shakyamuni, Amitabha, and Hotei etc? Looking at the etymology of the word Buddha will give us a big clue here. It is an Indian word found in the ancient languages of Sanskrit and Pali meaning 'enlightened one' or 'awakened one', and comes from the root word budh, meaning to know, or to be awake. The Awakened One (the Buddha) can only be seen by the Awakened One. That is, if we find the Awakened part of ourselves, we find the Buddha. Moreover, this isn't a particular Buddha, in the sense of being a particular individual being, rather, it is that which is Awakened in all of us.

Now we come to the heart of the matter, so to speak, when we need to open our Buddha Eye to be able to see beyond these mortal frames and minds.This Eye is not a small ball of flesh and optic nerve, however, although it can be used in conjunction with the physical eyes. It can, however, be used equally well with any of the other senses such as the ears, or even with what Buddhists call the sixth sense - the mind. Where is this Eye, then? Well, it's right where you are seeing, right now. If you turn your attention around and look at where you are looking from, you are looking at your Buddha Eye. It's both vast and yet without appearance (in itself).

If you point at whatever is in front of you, you can see specific colors, shapes, sizes, and various other features. However, if you turn your pointing finger around and gaze back at that which is doing the gazing, you will see an absence of particular features. This is your Buddha Eye. It is vast, in that it not only contains all that you see, hear, taste, touch, and smell, but it also plays host to the multitudes of thoughts, feelings, memories, impulses, and other mental phenomena that we normally take to be 'me.' It contains everything. It is featureless if focused on in isolation, but this is deceptive, for because it is without limits and can never be 'closed', this Eye is everything that it sees. Seeing as this Eye and not as an ego peering out of two small eyeballs has a devastating affect on the usual duality of human experience: everything merges into each other, shining with the light of awareness.

But, where's the Buddha in all of this? It seems that if the Buddha Eye is accepted as not only the 'vessel' into which everything is born, then all that we experience now is all. So, where's the Buddha? Raise that pointing finger again (if you've already lowered it , that is) and direct it at the Knower, the Awakened One as experienced right now. Where is this Awakened One found? At this end of the pointing finger, right where the Eye and all that it is are located also. Eye, Buddha ('the Awakened One'), and the suffering world are all right here, nowhere else. And, what's more, they are seen, heard, and known to be undivided, beyond dualism. When we look with our Buddha Eye, there is no way to completely separate your needs and mine, no way to conveniently dismiss others as less important than one's 'self', for this apparent self and all other apparent selves a part of this single Knowing that is the Buddha. Want to see the Buddha? Take a good, hard look at yourself...