Looking Through Older Lenses

And again, there is a group of two in virtue: dependent and non-dependent. Virtue that is connected with becoming is dependent on craving. The virtue that is connected with addiction to rites and ceremonies is dependent on opinions. The virtue that is connected with self-praise and blame of others is dependent on pride. These are 'dependent' virtues. Virtue that is for the sake of freedom is 'non-dependent' virtue. 'Dependent' virtue is not for wise men. 'Non-dependent' virtue is for the wise. – Vimuttimagga p11

Below is a short Sutta I feel is worthwhile reading. It doesn’t teach any deep lessons leading toward enlightenment. What it does is tell the disciple of the facts of capriciousness in the human heart that will lead to the demise or decline of the practice and efficacy of the teachings. The Buddha begins in a matter of fact way.

"That's the way it is, Kassapa. When beings are degenerating and the true Dhamma is disappearing, there are more training rules and yet fewer monks established in final gnosis. There is no disappearance of the true Dhamma as long as a counterfeit of the true Dhamma has not arisen in the world, but there is the disappearance of the true Dhamma when a counterfeit of the true Dhamma has arisen in the world. Just as there is no disappearance of gold as long as a counterfeit of gold has not arisen in the world, but there is the disappearance of gold when a counterfeit of gold has arisen in the world, in the same way there is no disappearance of the true Dhamma as long as a counterfeit of the true Dhamma has not arisen in the world, but there is the disappearance of the true Dhamma when a counterfeit of the true Dhamma has arisen in the world.

"It's not the earth property that makes the true Dhamma disappear. It's not the water property... the fire property... the wind property that makes the true Dhamma disappear. It's worthless people who arise right here [within the Sangha] who make the true Dhamma disappear. The true Dhamma doesn't disappear the way a boat sinks all at once.

"These five downward-leading qualities tend to the confusion and disappearance of the true Dhamma. Which five? There is the case where the monks, nuns, male lay followers, & female lay followers live without respect, without deference, for the Teacher. They live without respect, without deference, for the Dhamma... for the Sangha... for the Training... for concentration. These are the five downward-leading qualities that tend to the confusion and disappearance of the true Dhamma.

"But these five qualities tend to the stability, the non-confusion, the non-disappearance of the true Dhamma. Which five? There is the case where the monks, nuns, male lay followers, & female lay followers live with respect, with deference, for the Teacher. They live with respect, with deference, for the Dhamma... for the Sangha... for the Training... for concentration. These are the five qualities that tend to the stability, the non-confusion, the non-disappearance of the true Dhamma."

This document, called the Saddhammapatirupka Sutta, A Counterfeit of True Dhamma, can be found in the Samyutta Nikaya 16.3. Could this be why some see the contemporary Buddhist community in America is in such disarray. We normally don’t think of Buddhism as being confused, but then, we normally don’t think about such things. We like our Buddhism pristine and quietly running in the background. All too often we like our teachers to eloquently tell us what we want to hear even if it isn’t the truth. The truth can be uncomfortable; untruths often provide instant gratification and the pain delayed. The truth will lead to eventual happiness if we take it to heart.

The Buddha says the Dhamma will decline. The decline in Dhamma will not come from natural disaster, military force or even suppression by law; it will come through “counterfeit” teachings, as the Buddha says in the above quoted sutta. The quote from the Vimuttimagga at the beginning of this article explains why this happens. Arahant Upatissa gives three reasons as to why someone would stray from the teachings of the Buddha. He lumps it under the heading of “Dependent Virtue. These reasons are

• ·      Craving,
• ·      Opinion, and
• ·      Self-praise and blame.

While we see this everyday in our mundane lives, we often don’t notice it so much in the Buddhist community.

There are five features that will be significant to this confusion and decline leading to the counterfeit Dhamma in the Buddhist community, says the Buddha. They are

• ·      Lack of respect for the Teacher, meaning the Buddha
• ·      Lack of respect for the Dhamma
• ·      Lack of respect for the Sangha
• ·      Lack of respect for the Training
• ·      Lack of respect for Meditation

Monks, nuns, male and female lay people, who are ostensibly disciples of the Buddha, will exhibit these features. The decline will come from within not outside. The decline has begun. It began millennia ago. The motivating forces behind the “revolt” in the community are simply craving, opinion and the need to blame someone for our failures while enhancing the view others might have of us.

My Buddhist career began as a Theravada monk in Asia during the early 1970s. In those days Dhamma centers were far and few. I delved into Zen because it looked familiar to me. It looked like Theravada. Then I found Pure Land, which sounded interesting. Having an all or nothing mentality, I plunged into study and practice eventually receiving ordination in both and then also Tendai Buddhism. My experience during years at Zen Centers in the US was that sutta study was discouraged. The thinking there was that the Heart Sutra was the key to enlightenment. In Pure Land Buddhism study was limited to three sutras. Tendai advanced “secret” teachings. While I have always tried to look at Mahayana teaching through the lens of the Pali Canon, I sometimes fall amiss.

All of these sects of Mahayana have facets of teaching that are incredibly helpful to the practitioner and provide in depth metaphysical speculations. There is elegance to these views and teachings. In the end, however, they are interpretations of the Buddha’s teachings but not actually the teachings of the Buddha. Historians and literary analysts agree that they were written not just long after his passing but redirect some of the core teachings found in the much earlier suttas.

While the Pali Canon is geared mainly toward psychological issues with some hints at the metaphysical implications of them, Mahayana is more geared toward metaphysical speculation, and often mysticism, and the psychological implications of them. Much of the Mahayana Sutras seem to be a philosophical Wild West without order, continuity or even agreement. Whereas the Buddha’s own teaching was well structured and ordered covering everything that is necessary and important, the Mahayana scriptures seem to be interpretations of those teachings and even attempts at “improving” upon the Buddha’s teachings. What could the teachings have been lacking? After all, he was the Buddha.

I have been a student and teacher for quite a few years now. I’ve also studied and become ordained in various forms of Mahayana tradition. For the past 5 years I have been trying to reconcile the Mahayana teachings with the Pali Canon. It is difficult to reconcile the differences between the various Mahayana schools but to try to reconcile the original teachings with the later teachings has often proven quite impossible for me. Why should this be? Because in many respects Mahayana doesn’t seem to be just a reconstruction of the Buddhadhamma, it appears to be the counterfeit Dhamma of which the Buddha spoke.

Today, as I look back on those years in Mahayana training and teaching I received, I feel a little cheated. There was always something missing in the theory and practice and I could never quite place my finger on the problem. While attempting to reconcile the differences, I found what I was looking for, a reason why it was not possible to formulate a reconciliation.

Half-truth is dangerous. The half-truth gives a lie a ring of truth. Eventually even the part that is untrue can be accepted with great enthusiasm.

The problem I have found, is that Mahayana doctrine, whether Zen, Pure Land, or even Tibetan Buddhism, are warped by local cultural biases and have a portion of true Dhamma mixed with the religious beliefs of the host society. They are not completely false, but not totally true either. I recently reread the Heart Sutra the other day filtering it through the Buddha’s own teaching and it awoke a critical response.

Let’s look at those five qualities again, one by one.

• ·      Lack of respect for the Teacher, meaning the Buddha

How can we disrespect the Buddha? Besides ignoring the Dhamma there are many ways we can do this. The most ingenious way is to manufacture alternative Buddhas. Mahayana finds “cosmic” Buddhas in every speck of dust. The Buddha laid stress on the fact that he was a human being. He never arrogated himself to the status of divinity. He made a point that he was not immortal, but instead, like any other man he would die. It is nearly impossible for a heavenly being to be enlightened either before or after awakening. In Mahayana divinities are called Buddhas. They live in their own heavens. This is contrary to the Buddha’s idea of what makes a Buddha and is disrespectful of him by showing deference to a mythical being.

• ·      Lack of respect for the Dhamma

Disrespecting the Dhamma is easy to spot. Some of the early Mahayana sutras try to be faithful to the intent and purpose of the Pali Canon, later sutras, not so much. While all Mahayana schools claim to accept the Pali Canon in its entirety the various sects cannot seem to agree which of the Mahayana are authentic. Nicherin accepts only the Lotus Sutra, Tendai places great emphasis on it. Tibetan Buddhism has hundreds of sutras other sects have never heard of – and then there is Tantra, Vajrayana, which is the “pssst pass it on” school of Buddhism; that is, secretly “whispered” from master to disciple.

In most of the Mahayana Schools there is the Bodhisattva Vow. Many people have taken the full 48 vows and received a Bodhisattva name. There are problems with this. The vow represents a contradiction with the Buddha’s teaching. Even the short version presents problems.

In brief it goes,

Sentient Beings are numberless; I vow to save them.
Desires are inexhaustible; I vow to end them.
Dharma gates are boundless; I vow to enter them.
Buddha's way is unsurpassable; I vow to become it.

At first glance this vow sounds altruistic and has a certain charm. On my blog, I spent much time and effort trying to reconcile this vow with the Buddha’s teaching. I owe you an apology because all I succeeded in doing was rationalize the vow so it sounds plausible. Upon re-reading the article, I found that it sounds plausible, but I still have doubts about the Vow. It has some very real problems. For one, it isn’t real. It circumvents reality and subverts the Four Noble Truths. It even dodges the reality of kamma.

The Bodhisattva Vow exhibits all three of the dependent virtues found in the quote from the Vimuttimagga at the beginning of this article. Aside from the tremendous ego displayed in the wording of this version, it starts with what can be described as a conflict if interest. In the Dhammapada we find that the Buddha taught otherwise.

Evil is done by oneself 

by oneself is one defiled.

Evil is left undone by oneself 

by oneself is one cleansed.

Purity & impurity are one's own doing.            

No one purifies another.            

No other purifies one.

Verse 165

No one can save another. That’s their job. Yours is to save yourself. The premise of the Bodhisattva Vow is to put off or even ignore your own enlightenment and experience of Nibbana to enlighten every other living being. Really? How could a person still unenlightened enlighten another? But again, it disregards the teaching. In the very next verse he says,

Don't sacrifice your own welfare

for that of another,

no matter how great.

Realizing your own true welfare,

be intent on just that.

Verse 166

In the Maha-parinibbana Sutta (Digha Nikaya 16) the Buddha teaches from his deathbed, saying "Those bhikkhus of mine, Ananda, who now or after I am gone, abide as an island unto themselves, as a refuge unto themselves, seeking no other refuge; having the Dhamma as their island and refuge, seeking no other refuge: it is they who will become the highest, if they have the desire to learn." On the surface this all sounds pretty selfish but the Buddha was not a selfish person. He was a realist. He taught the Dhamma out of compassion and sympathy. It is clear from the Pali Canon that selfish person cannot become enlightened.

The long form of the Bodhisattva Vow contains 48 separate vows that go even further into delusion. It may not have been designed to do so, but it has the effect of emasculating the Five Precepts by authorizing immoral actions. According to the vows it is okay to kill for a good cause or lie if it is worthwhile, and you are the one who gets to decide if it is worthy or not.

The Buddha was very thorough in his 45-year teaching career. He said, he had taught everything openly, without secret teachings. If the Bodhisattva Vow(s) were necessary for enlightenment or even authentic would he not have mentioned them? There is neither a word nor a hint. I, myself, took these vows in 1997 under the guidance of a Tibetan teacher. I renounced them in 2011 under the guidance of the Buddha’s teaching.

• ·      Lack of respect for the Sangha

Mahayana has a different view of the Arahant than does the Pali Canon. Of the Arahant, the Buddha said, "Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for the sake of this world." (Sona Sutta, Anguttara Sutta 6.55) This is a fully enlightened individual. But in Mahayana the view of the Arahant is different than the Buddha’s view. An Arahant, or Arhat, is not considered to be fully enlightened but only an intermediate stage between ordinary people and a Buddha. The Buddha said the difference between an arahant and the Buddha was that the Buddha actually realized the and taught the Path that was not previously realized or taught while the Arahant practices the Path and realized the goal taught by the Buddha. The Buddha did not consider the Arahant a stepping-stone but consistently calls him complete.

Because the Arahant is part of the Sangha, this is a lack of respect for the accomplishment he or she has actually attained. But the lack of respect goes even further. The Vinaya, monastic rules, has been rewritten. For example, one major Mahayana sect uses a Vinaya of only 16 or so vows and celibacy is a taboo topic among monks and nuns while the five precepts are ignored. In some other sects the Vinaya is completely replaced by the Bodhisattva Vows.

• ·      Lack of respect for the Training

This aspect becomes more and more evident if one already knows the Theravada training and goes on a Mahayana retreat. For example, laypersons are not usually trained in jhana practice. When one looks at the training involved in the Vimuttimagga, the Path to Freedom, compared to the training done at a standard Dharma Center, the gap in study and training is mind-boggling. In both cases the idea is to train the mind. One is in depth and the other is a more minimalist approach.

• ·      Lack of respect for Meditation

This aspect is not universal in Mahayana. Zen places an emphasis on meditation, as do the Tibetan schools. In Zen the technique is called “choiceless awareness”. This very easily becomes “choiceless distraction”. In many ways it seems to be related to the Theravadin mindfulness meditation practice. Tibetans teach a wide range of meditation techniques.

In more than one sect of Mahayana Buddhism it is taught that meditation is too difficult and not even necessary. It is even suggested that meditation will lead one straight to hell. Chanting the “mantra” namo Amitabha buddha or namo myo ho renge kyo or some other mantra in a foreign language is enough to take one to Paradise. Paradise, not nibbana or enlightenment is the goal of these sects. Chanting can be as a form of meditation but this is not how it is used in these sects. It is used to worship and honor some cosmic Buddha and not the Buddha. One sect chants to honor a sutra or disputed authenticity. These other “cosmic Buddhas” will save you at the time of death by coming down to you with their entourage if you repeat their name with faith. They may even grant your requests for wealth and love, only say the name with faith. Many of the sects deny the need or value of clergy. Does this sound familiar? Haven’t we heard something like this before in our own backyard? All five qualities of decline are present in Pure Land Buddhism and it is the most popular form of Buddhism in the world.

One could go on for page after page with further examples. I think it is clear that some forms of Mahayana Buddhism just may be the imitation Dhamma about which the Buddha spoke. Almost all of it sounds cool and altruistic, but it is still centered in the self and often comes off lacking the enlightened qualities about which the Buddha spoke so much. Several times during my own travels in the Mahayana community I heard some Master or another claim to be fully enlightened even while screaming obscenities at her student over a minor doctrinal dispute – seriously. It’s not uncommon. 

Urged on by a statement made by Brian Ruhe in his video “What is Wrong with Mahayana Buddhism” I did some further research on the topic. Mr. Ruhe makes the comment that the view that Mahayana Buddhism is this counterfeit Dhamma is widespread amongst Theravada teachers. Since I had never heard that before I got in touch with a monk friends in Sri Lanka, Thailand, and several here in the Chicago area. Brian Ruhe spoke truth. It is a commonly accepted belief albeit an unmentioned one in Theravada that Mahayana is counterfeit and established by Mara himself. After years of searching for an authentic Buddhism I have come to agree with this view.

I would not try to dissuade a person from delving and even adopting the Mahayana forms of Buddhism. There are many great things available to the seeker in Mahayana Buddhism. It’s not bad and terrible; it’s just notalways fully authentic Buddhadhamma, especially as it is presented in America. I’ve gained a great deal through Mahayana practice and study, but the question will always remain, “where’s the Buddha in this Buddhism?”