Buddhism for beginners - Part 2
(and sceptical Westerners)



Types of Buddhism

One could say that there is only one type of Buddhism and that is the huge collection of Teachings that were spoken by the Buddha. The original Teachings are found in the 'Pali Canon', the ancient scripture of Theravada Buddhism, which is widely accepted as the oldest reliable record of the Buddha's words. Theravada Buddhism is the dominant religion in Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, Cambodia and Laos.

 
Between 100 to 200 years after the passing away of the Buddha, the Sangha (the monastic community) split over the political question of 'Who runs the Sangha?' A controversy over some monastic rules was decided by a committee of Arahats (fully Enlightened monks or nuns) against the views of the majority of monks. The disgruntled majority resented what they saw as the excessive influence of the small number of Arahats in monastery affairs. From then on, over a period of several decades, the disaffected majority partially succeeded in lowering the exalted status of the Arahat and raising in its place the ideal of the Bodhisattva (an unenlightened being training to be a Buddha).

Previously unknown scriptures, supposedly spoken by the Buddha and hidden in the dragon world, then appeared giving a philosophical justification for the superiority of the Bodhisattva over the allegedly 'selfish' Arahat. This group of monks and nuns were first known as the 'Maha Sangha', meaning 'the great (part) of the monastic community'.

Later, after impressive development, they called themselves the 'Mahayana', the 'Greater Vehicle' while quite disparagingly calling the older Theravada 'Hinayana', the 'Inferior Vehicle'. Mahayana still retains most of the original teachings of the Buddha (in the Chinese scriptures these are known as the 'Agama' and in the Tibetan version as the 'Kangyur') but these core teachings were mostly overwhelmed by layers of expansive interpretations and wholly new ideas. The Mahayana of China, still vibrant in Taiwan, reflects an earlier phase of this development, the Mahayana of Vietnam, Korea and Japan (mostly Zen) is a later development, and the Mahayana of Tibet and Mongolia is a much later development still.

Buddhism's relevance to the world today

Today, Buddhism continues to gain ever wider acceptance in many lands far beyond its original home. Here in Australia, many Australians through their own careful choice are adopting Buddhism's peaceful, compassionate and responsible ways.

A just and incorruptible foundation and reason for the practice of a moral life. It is easy to see how a wider embracing of the Law of Kamma would lead any country towards a stronger, more caring and virtuous society.

The Teaching of Rebirth places this present short lifetime of ours in a broader perspective, giving more meaning to the vital events of birth and death. The understanding of Rebirth removes so much of the tragedy and grief surrounding death and turns one's attention to the quality of a lifetime, rather than its mere length.

From the very beginning, the practice of meditation has been at the very heart of the Buddhist Way. Today, meditation grows increasingly popular as the proven benefits to both mental and physical well being become more widely known. When stress is shown to be such a major cause of human suffering, the quieting practice of meditation becomes ever more valued.

Today's world is too small and vulnerable to live angry and alone, thus the need for tolerance, love and compassion is so very important. These qualities of mind, essential for happiness are formally developed in Buddhist meditation and then diligently put into practice in everyday life.

Forgiveness and gentle tolerance, harmlessness and peaceful compassion are well known trademarks of Buddhism, they are given freely and broadly to all kinds of beings, including animals of course, and also, most importantly, to oneself. There is no place for dwelling in guilt or self-hatred in Buddhism, not even a place for feeling guilty about feeling guilty!

Teachings and practices such as these are what bring about qualities of gentle kindness and unshakeable serenity, identified with the Buddhist religion for 25 centuries and sorely needed in today's world. In all its long history, no war has ever been fought in the name of Buddhism. It is this peace and this tolerance, growing out of a profound yet reasonable philosophy, which makes Buddhism so vitally relevant to today's world.

Are rebirth and karma for real?

Is rebirth for real - either as a human or in one of the other realms? This is the question most Westerners ask as soon as they become interested in Buddhism. Karma (Pali: Kamma) - the law of cause and effect - operates across multiple lifetimes, but where's the proof that there is any life other than the current one?

It's a complex subject and each tradition has its own explanation. It isn't uncommon for different teachers in the same tradition to have a different take on rebirth. One thing's for sure, there is no scientific proof of rebirth (yet). There are rational explanations, but they all rest on unprovable assumptions.

One way to approach the question of rebirth is suggested by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, who says, "You don't have to believe in rebirth, you just have to take it as a working hypothesis." Other teachers, such as Ajahn Summedho, have a similar view, that since we can never know what will happen after death, it makes sense to practise Dharma (Pali: Dhamma) and live this life in the best way possible.

Some well-known monks, Ajahn Brahm and P.A. Payutto among them, say that when meditators reach the third or fourth jhana (level of absorbtion) they are able to "read their past lives" as the Buddha did and experience the truth of rebirth. But this ability is by no means universal, even among meditation masters.

Another explanation championed by Buddhadasa, Thailand's most revered monk, is that rebirth in a series of physical bodies is "conventional talk" to make the subject understandable for the masses, but in "Dharma talk" what the Buddha really meant was that each life was the arising of the ego in the mind. So we experience "death" and "rebirth" (of the ego) many times each day.

Similarly, the six realms of existence all correspond to states of mind. In the same way, the cause and effect of karma can be observed in our own mental states - when we do good deeds it results in a wholesome mental state, when we do bad deeds, we experience unwholesome mental states.

This rational explanation of rebirth and karma doesn't necessarily exclude the traditional view. It augments it. What works for me is to take both of them as working hypotheses and practise accordingly. Recalling the Buddha's story about the man shot with a poisoned arrow, if we need to have every detail of the teaching proved to us at the outset, we'll be dead before we start practising.

What is our purpose in life?

The traditional answer to this is that our purpose is to attain nirvana and stop the endless cycle of rebirths and suffering. But the idea of a general purpose for mankind suggests that someone or something created that purpose, which in turn suggests an omnipotent deity.

The way I think of it is that we have no pre-ordained purpose. We evolved, and here we are.

Because we also evolved language and conceptual thinking, we got stuck with this concept of a self, an ego that makes us feel separate from everything else. The ego needs constant reassurance of its importance, which is why we cling to our views and defend them fanatically, and why we are constantly criticizing others. Our ego rules our lives. It is terrified of being snuffed out.

We handle this in different ways. Some of us have lots of kids so we can feel that a part of us lives on forever through our descendants. Some of us perform heroic deeds so that our names will live on in history forever. Some of us get onto Ripley's Believe It Or Not with the world's longest moustache or beating the world record for smashing melons with our head, or some such nonsense, so that we'll achieve digital immortality. Some of us cling to the idea that a god will give us eternal life in some form after death.

For those of us who don't find this pseudo-immortality or unguaranteed immortality satisfying, there's a need to create our own purpose in life. This is where Buddhism fits the bill nicely. Instead of being ruled by the ego and its fears, get rid of it! Being rid of the ego and the suffering it brings is what Ajahn Jagaro called "True Freedom" - a very appealing idea for all of us.

If we don't achieve true freedom in this life, we should get another chance in a future life. But simply diminishing the ego and increasing freedom in this life seems like a worthwhile purpose to me.

What's the difference between Theravada and Mahayana?

To preserve the monastic order, the Buddha set down 227 rules for a bhikkhu (monk) to observe and 311 for a bhikkhuni (nun). Before his death (known as parinirvana) he said that some minor rules could be changed.

Within a short time of his passing away there was disagreement over what could be changed and different sects emerged. The more reformist sects later called themselves Mahayana (greater vehicle) and referred to the conservative sects as Hinayana (lesser vehicle). The only conservative sect remaining today is Theravada, which is prevalent in Sri Lanka, Burma and Thailand.

Theravada recognises the Pali Canon as its scriptures and a variety of ancient Theravadin commentaries.

Whereas Theravada spread to the south and east, Mahayana moved to the northwest through what is now Pakistan and Afghanistan and then across Central Asia to China, Tibet, Vietnam, Korea and Japan. For historical reasons, the language of Mahayana scriptures was Sanskrit and that of Theravada was Pali.

Hence the difference in spelling of some common Buddhist terms:

Nirvana/Nibbana, Sutra/Sutta, Karma/Kamma, Dharma/Damma, etc. Westerners are more familiar with Mahayana Sanskrit terms.

Mahayana also has its own scriptures in addition to the Pali Canon, the most important of which is the Lotus Sutra. These sutras are purported to be the Buddha's secret "higher" teachings, which were handed down only to those who were ready for them - an idea emphasised at the beginning of the Lotus Sutra.

Apart from a modified monastic code which made monasticism possible in harsh environments such as Tibet, Mahayana emphasises the Bodhisattva Ideal, where a man vows not to achieve final enlightenment until all sentient beings have been saved. So anyone helping others to achieve enlightenment can be considered a bodhisattva. In Theravada, the term bodhisattva usually refers only to the historical Buddha in his previous lives. Historically, some Mahayanists consider Theravadins to be selfish for seeking enlightenment only for themselves, while some Theravadins consider Mahayanists to have deviated from what the Buddha taught.

The various sutras and sects of Mahayana reflect different ways of reaching enlightenment appropriate for different people with different levels of ability. Because of this, a number of "mythical" buddhas and bodhisattvas are revered and used as objects of meditation. Theravadins revere only the historical Buddha and only his image is seen in temples.

Mahayana tends to emphasise the concept of sunyata (void-ness) in its teachings and tends to have a more specific idea of what passes from rebirth to rebirth (consciousness, comprising awareness and memory).

Personally, I found that the more I read about Mahayana and the Tibetan tradition known as Vajrayana, the more I accepted that all sects are going in the same direction and there is no point in considering any one of them better than another.

Which tradition should I choose?

I suggest reading about Theravada first and then investigating the other traditions to see which suits you best. Your decision may also depend on your Buddhist friends and what is available where you live.

As far as I know, the main traditions known in the West are Theravada, Tibetan, Zen, Pure Land and Nichiren. One myth that seems to have grown up over the years is that with Mahayana one can reach enlightenment in one lifetime whereas with Theravada it takes aeons. This notion seems to have been pushed by the Chinese Zen patriarchs, in particular Huang Po, as illustrated in The Zen Teaching of Huang Po. In modern times the idea has been spread by influential author-scholar John Blofeld, who translated Huang Po's works into English and wrote several excellent books on Buddhism. But it all seems pretty ridiculous because how could anyone know how many lives ago any particular person started consciously working towards enlightenment?

Blofeld followed Zen and then Tibetan Buddhist Tantrism, describing both as the "Short Path." However, it isn't difficult to see that any tradition that emphasises meditation - as the Buddha did - will be a short path. In the past century, the Thai Forest Tradition is a good example of a Theravadin tradition that produced a number of enlightened masters.

According to Blofeld, Mahayana and Tibetan Buddhism in particular offer ways of practice to suit people at every level. After all, not everyone has an aptitude for meditation. A lot of people prefer something simpler, such as praying, chanting, various forms of devotion and pilgrimages. He describes Zen and Theravada as "formless," meaning the practice is mostly just you and your mind. But in fact there's a lot more to both than just meditation.

Tibetan Buddhism seems to attract Westerners because there are now a lot of Tibetan lamas and monasteries in the West, because of the charisma of the Dalai Lama, because it can be a "Short Path," because of its reputation for developing psychic powers and because of its many varied methods of practice. However, Tibetan Buddhism has absorbed much of the ancient, shamanistic Bon religion of Tibet, so it's wise to read up on Tibet thoroughly before committing to it.

Zen attracts Westerners because it's something of a "back to basics" tradition with an emphasis on meditation and very little ritual. Sakyamuni, the historical Buddha, is revered rather than the other mythical buddhas and bodhisattvas of the Mahayana sutras. Although it originated in China, the type of Zen practised in the West is mostly Japanese.

Theravada attracts Western practicioners because it is seen as the oldest and purest form of Buddhism, one that reveres only Sakyamuni and in theory concentrates on meditation. The Thai Forest Tradition which developed in the late 1800s was an effort to practise exactly as the Buddha did, wandering in the jungle and meditating in caves. Although the jungle is largely gone now, a number of Westerners joined Ajahn Chah's international monastery in the 1970s and later spread the practice in other countries: Ajahn Jagaro and Ajahn Brahm in Australia, Thanissaro Bhikkhu in the USA and Ajahn Sumedho in the UK. For a brief look at the origins of this tradition, see Thanissaro Bhikkhu's Customs of the Noble Ones. For a more detailed treatment, read Forest Recollections.

Pure Land was once widespread in China and is still practised among Chinese around the world. A refined form of Pure Land (Jodo and Shin Jodo) developed in Japan and has spread to the West. Pure Land involves purifying the mind by chanting the name of the Amitabha (Amida) Buddha to gain help in reaching a realm after death from where it is easy to reach enlightenment. On a deeper level, Pure Land equals pure mind and Amitabha represents our own qualities rather than an external saviour. Pure Land is sometimes combined with Zen practice.

Nichiren is a homegrown Japanese tradition advocating chanting of a phrase hailing the Lotus Sutra. An offshoot of Nichiren is the lay organisation, Soka Gakkai International.

There are a few Buddhist sects and organisations that are controversial in some way, usually because of their founder/leader or his particular beliefs. Before getting involved with Soka Gakkai (SGI), the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order (FWBO), Shugden or Diamond Way (Karma Kagyu), you might want to google for information about their background.

How do I become a Buddhist?

Although there is a ceremony of taking the Three Refuges (the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha), there isn't any "conversion" involved and you aren't required to renounce any other religion or beliefs. In fact, it seems to be more of a social statement to show others that you have become a Buddhist.

In my opinion, once you accept the Buddha's teachings as a way of life and try to follow the Five Precepts for lay people, you're a Buddhist. For me, this involved a lot of reading Dharma and listening to Dharma talks on the Internet. Rather than read the scriptures (which are often difficult), I chose books by monks and nuns who already had a deep knowledge of Dharma through study and practice, and who had a talent for explaining it. I looked at how Buddhism developed over the millennia and decided to start off with Theravada, which is the original form of Buddhism based on the Pali Canon. Later, I investigated the various Mahayana traditions too.

It was obvious to me that reducing the power of the ego to control our lives was a foundation of Buddhism. For my practice, I concentrated on Right Speech (a component of the Noble Eightfold Path) because I thought it would give the fastest results. I expected if I started being nice to people, eventually they'd be nicer to me. That happened, but much more than that. I found myself examining my intentions every time I felt like defending my views, arguing with someone, contradicting them, criticizing them, comparing myself with them or judging them in any way at all.

Pretty soon it was obvious that much of what I said or did was designed to boost my sense of self-worth and that "true freedom" was to escape this tyranny of the ego.

Later I started meditating, since this is the only way to experience the truth of the teaching rather than just understanding them intellectually. Even though the majority of people born into Buddhism may not meditate, it's essential for the serious Buddhist.

Some Westerners have a problem with whether they are or aren't a Buddhist, usually because they still have some belief in god or because they haven't come to believe in rebirth. The following talk by Ajahn Jagaro, a Western monk of the Thai Forest Tradition, will be helpful for anyone asking himself, "Am I a Buddhist?"

Am I a Buddhist?
by Ajahn Jagaro

Teaching people who have only recently encountered Buddhism I am often asked the question "How do you become a Buddhist?" or "How do you know when you are a Buddhist?" This type of enquiry is indeed healthy and to be encouraged not only amongst those new to Buddhism but also for people born and raised as Buddhists. So go ahead and ask yourself: "Am I a Buddhist?"

I expect that there will be many who will answer "Yes" and those who say "No", but I wonder how many will be thinking "Oh ... Ahm,.. I don't know." So let us contemplate this business of being a Buddhist a bit more.

To begin our enquiry it may be worthwhile to know what the Buddha said on the matter. The following episode is taken from the Buddhist scriptures (Anguttara Nikaya, Vol IV):

"Once, the Lord dwelt amongst the Sakyans in the Banyan Tree Monastery at Kapilavatthu, and while there, Mahanama the Sakyan came to him and asked;

"How, Lord, does one become a lay disciple?"

"When one has taken refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, then one is a lay disciple".

"How, Lord, is a lay disciple virtuous?"

"When a lay disciple abstains from killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying and drinking intoxicants, then he is virtuous."

Here the Buddha clearly states that by taking refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha one becomes a disciple or, in modern terminology, a Buddhist. The classical formula of going for refuge, which has been passed down from the time of the Buddha is as follows;

Buddham Saranam Gacchami (I go for refuge to the Buddha)
Dhammam Saranam Gacchami (I go for refuge to the Dhamma)
Sangham Saranam Gacchami (I go for refuge to the Sangha)

 
However one does not become a Buddhist through the mere repetition of these words nor by the performance of any other ceremony ritual or initiation. On the other hand, though one has not performed any ceremony or ritual, one may still be a Buddhist. Put simply, this means that no one can make you a Buddhist nor can anyone stop you from being a Buddhist. It is a volitional choice that one makes when one has sufficient confidence in the Teacher and the Teaching. In the commentaries to the scriptures it explains this as, "It is an act of consciousness devoid of defilements, motivated by confidence in and reverence for the Triple Gem"...

Here I would like to relate something of my own experience to help explain this point. When I first came in contact with Buddhism I did not consider myself a religious person. If anything, I thought of myself as an atheist and felt that religion had little relevance to real life. However, I did find the Buddha's Teachings and in particular the practice of meditation very appealing. I had a desire to find out more about it and this lead me into a monastery where I was eventually ordained as a monk.

One day a young Thai student, wanting to practise his English, casually asked me "Are you a Buddhist?" But in my mind I wondered whether or not I was a Buddhist. I must confess that it was a strange position to be in - a Buddhist monk who doesn't know whether he is a Buddhist! Yet that situation persisted for over a year before the meaning of both the question and the answer became clear to me.

During that year as I continued to study and practise the Dhamma I began to feel very comfortable with the teaching and increasingly confident that this was the way for me. With this came the conscious recognition that I had chosen the Buddha as my Teacher and considered him as the embodiment of the spiritual ideals of peace and liberation. I had also chosen to follow the path contained in his Teaching (the Dhamma) being confident that it would lead to liberation. And while on this path I would seek the guidance and try to emulate the example of all the noble disciples who constitute the Sangha. It was indeed wonderful to discover that I was a Buddhist and not just a Buddhist monk!

Now becoming a Buddhist does not mean that one has to either agree with or believe in everything that is taught or practised by all the countless Buddhist sects and groups throughout the world.

Nor do we have to believe that it is the only way and that all the other religions are no good. It simply means that having looked at and probed into this teaching of the Buddha, having tried it and having seen that it does work, one has confidence in it and chooses to take refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma, and Sangha.

However if you are still unsure as to whether you are a Buddhist or you are not, don't worry about it, just keep on practising.

With Metta,
Jagaro Bhikkhu.

If you found this page useful or have any comments you can contact me at taleofgenji1008@gmail.com.