Sandhinirmochana Sutra Chapter 1: The Characteristics of Ultimate Truth

 Hongaku Jodo Website

Click here to subscribe to our newsletter.

The Characteristics of Ultimate Truth

From the Text:

Thus have I heard. Once the Buddha was staying in a great palace, which was made of the finest jewel flowers, supremely brilliant, adorned with seven precious substances, radiating great light illuminating all regions in all worlds, studded with beautiful ornaments.

The girth of the palace was boundless, immeasurable, beyond the range of the world. It was produced by supreme transmundane virtues, and its appearance was that of ultimately independent pure consciousness.

It was the capitol of the Buddha, the gathering place of great enlightening beings, with all kinds of other beings always in attendance. It was supported by the joy and bliss of the universal taste of truth. It appeared arrayed with adornments benefiting sentient beings in all suitable ways, getting rid of the binding defilement of all afflictions and driving away the evils of bedevilments.

It was the basis of the adornments of the enlightenment. Its pathways were mindfulness and knowledge; its vehicles were great tranquility and subtle observation. Its entrances were great liberations of emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness, and its adornments were infinite virtues.

With supremely pure awareness, the Buddha was attached to neither the mundane nor the supramundane. He proceeded according to formless truth and dwelt in the abode of the enlightened ones. He had arrived at equality with all enlightened ones and had reached the point of nonobstruction and the state of unchangeablity.

Unimpeded in all actions, the Buddha’s devices were inconceivable. Roaming in the equality of past, present, and future, his being was in all worlds. He was free from doubt in cognition of all things and accomplished great enlightenment in all actions, without confusion in knowledge of all truths.

The embodiments manifested by the Buddha were undifferentiable. His was the knowledge properly sought by all enlightened beings; His supreme transcendence was unadulterated; his enlightened liberation and subtle knowledge were consummate. He realized the boundless equanimity of Buddhahood, with no inside or out, comprehending the cosmos, throughout all space and time.

The Buddha was with a group of innumerable great disciples, who were well trained in all respects, each an heir of the Buddha. Their minds and intellects were liberated, their conduct was pure. They pursued the enjoyment of truth, learned a lot, retained what they learned, and their learning had accumulated.

These disciples considered well what they had to consider, explained well what they had to explain, and did well what they had to do. They had perfected the intellectual jewels of swiftness, keenness, the quality of being emancipating, discernment, breadth, and uniqueness; and they had attained higher knowledge.

All of these disciples had attained felicity in their present state, and were great pure fields of blessings. Their deportment was tranquil and mature in every respect, and they were most tolerant and gentle. They had already put the wise teaching of the Buddha into practice.

There were also countless great enlightening beings, who had come from various Buddha-lands. All of them were established in the great vehicle of universal enlightenment, practicing the teaching of the great vehicle. Their minds impartial toward all sentient beings, they were free from all discriminations, including discrimination between discrimination and nondiscrimination.

The enlightening beings overcame all bedevilments and opposition, and still they avoided the thoughts of those absorbed in individual salvation. Sustained by the vast joy and bliss of truth, they were beyond fears of ill repute, death, miserable states, and intimidation by groups. Proceeding directly into the stage of nonretrogression, they stopped the appearance of all calamities for all sentient beings.

The names if those beings were Unlocking the Implicit Intent of the Profound Doctrine, Profound Questioner, Offspring of the Teaching, Purified Intelligence, Vast Intelligence, Root of Virtue, Born of Ultimate Truth, Independent Seer, Benevolent One, Glorious One, and so on.

The finest jewels is a symbolic expression of the teaching of the Buddha. In particular, notice that that there are seven precious substances. What could these substances be? They are also found in the Sutra called the Visualization Sutra. They are symbols representing the seven factors of enlightenment. These factors are part of the “Wings to Awakening” about which the Buddha said, "Just as, monks, in a peaked house all rafters whatsoever go together to the peak, slope to the peak, join in the peak, and of them all the peak is reckoned chief: even so, monks, the monk who cultivates and makes much of the seven factors of wisdom, slopes to Nibbana, inclines to Nibbana, tends to Nibbana." (Samyutta Nikaya 46.7). 

The seven factors are: 

1.    Mindfulness (sati)

2.    Keen investigation of the dhamma (dhammavicaya)

3.    Energy (viriya)

4.    Rapture or happiness (piti)

5.    Calm (passaddhi)

6.    Concentration (samadhi)

7.    Equanimity (upekkha) 

Dhamma is a multisignificant term. Here it means mind and matter (nama-rupa); dhammavicaya is the investigation or analysis of this conflux of mind and body, and all component and conditioned things. 

Another discourse (Maha Cunda Bojjhanga Sutta) of the three mentioned above reveals that once, when the Buddha himself was ill, the Venerable Maha Cunda recited the bojjhangas, factors of enlightenment, and the Buddha's grievous illness vanished. 

Man's mind tremendously and profoundly influences and affects the body. If allowed to function viciously and entertain unwholesome and harmful thoughts, mind can cause disaster, nay even kill a being; but mind also can cure a sick body. When concentrated on right thoughts with right understanding, the effects mind can produce are immense. 

Mind not only makes sick, it also cures. An optimistic patient has more chance of getting well than a patient who is worried and unhappy. The recorded instances of faith healing include cases in which even organic diseases were cured almost instantaneously.

— Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means (London, 1946), p. 259 

Just what did the authors mean by “ultimately independent consciousness”? It is the basis of the original concept of “Buddha Nature.” In the Hongaku tradition it is taken to mean mind without conceptualization. This would be pure experience without our projection of preconception upon the experience. This is also the transmundane virtue spoken of in the text. Mundane consciousness is spoken of in the Viññana Sutta: Consciousness (Samyutta Nikaya 25.3)

At Savatthi. "Monks, eye-consciousness is inconstant, changeable, alterable. Ear-consciousness... Nose-consciousness... Tongue-consciousness... Body-consciousness... Intellect-consciousness is inconstant, changeable, alterable.

"One who has conviction & belief that these phenomena are this way is called a faith-follower: one who has entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill. He is incapable of doing any deed by which he might be reborn in hell, in the animal womb, or in the realm of hungry shades. He is incapable of passing away until he has realized the fruit of stream-entry.

"One who, after pondering with a modicum of discernment, has accepted that these phenomena are this way is called a Dhamma-follower: one who has entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill. He is incapable of doing any deed by which he might be reborn in hell, in the animal womb, or in the realm of hungry shades. He is incapable of passing away until he has realized the fruit of stream-entry.

"One who knows and sees that these phenomena are this way is called a stream-enterer, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening."

When a disciple who has come to understand that all phenomena is conditional and therefore changeable is also one who has entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill persons that populate the world of pain and suffering – the Saha World. This knowledge is the transmundane and independent consciousness the text refers to. 

The “adornments benefiting sentient beings in all suitable ways, getting rid of the binding defilement of all afflictions and driving away the evils of bedevilments” are the teaching and practices. The teaching is designed to explain dukkha, usually and incorrectly translated as “suffering”, and its cessation. The practices are designed to take us to the direct perception of emptiness, the lack of autonomous self-existence. This means purifying the mind of defilements. 

In the Buddha’s teaching purification of mind as understood as the unremitting effort to cleanse the mind of defilements, dark unwholesome mental forces running beneath the surface stream of consciousness that distorts our thinking, values, attitudes, and actions. The three major defilements or adulterations of the mind that the Buddha calls the "roots of evil" are greed, hatred, and delusion from which arise their abundant derivatives: anger and cruelty, avarice and envy, conceit and arrogance, hypocrisy and vanity, the multitude of erroneous views. 

The mind-set of contemporary society does not look with favor on notions such as defilement and purity. Our first encounter with these terms may strike us as retrogressions to antiquated moral attitudes - maybe valid at a time when prudery and taboo were influential, but has no authority in the 21^st century of emancipated liberal individualism. In the Buddha's teaching the decisive factor of genuine enlightenment lies precisely in purity of mind. The purpose of all insight and enlightened understanding is to liberate the mind from the defilements, and Nibbana itself, the goal of the teaching, is defined quite clearly as freedom from greed, hatred, and delusion. From the perspective of the Dhamma defilement and purity are real and solid facts essential to a correct understanding of the human situation in the world. 

The text tells that was the basis of the adornments that benefit all sentient beings and of enlightenment itself are mindfulness and knowledge; that is “great tranquility and subtle observation”. This is completely in line with the most fundamental of the Buddha’s teaching regarding access to awakening. Just as the text’s introduction suggests, it is not just tranquility (samatha meditation) and not only knowledge (vipassana – insight – meditation) but the two working together hand in hand that brings one to deeper knowledge. 

Much has been made in the past 20 years about the supremacy of insight meditation, vipassana, over all other forms of meditation. Unfortunately, the Buddha never taught this. In the world of the Buddha the two worked together. Vipassana is not even a meditation technique but a process that that arises as a by-product to reason and hearing the Dhamma. When both aspects are working together the practitioner gains insight into the true nature of things: signlessness, meaning without autonomous self-existence. Then the practitioner also abrogates all desire because they find there is nothing there to desire. 

If, on examination, he knows, 'I am one who achieves internal tranquility of awareness but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment,' then his duty is to make an effort for the maintenance of internal tranquility of awareness and for insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. At a later time he will then be one who achieves both internal tranquility of awareness and insight into phenomena through heightened discernment.

But if, on examination, the monk knows, 'I am one who achieves insight into phenomena through heightened discernment but not internal tranquility of awareness,' then his duty is to make an effort for the maintenance of insight into phenomena through heightened discernment and for internal tranquility of awareness. At a later time he will then be one who achieves both insight into phenomena through heightened discernment and internal tranquility of awareness.

But if, on examination, the monk knows, 'I am one who achieves neither internal tranquility of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment,' then he should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, relentlessness, mindfulness, & alertness for gaining those very same skillful qualities. Just as when a person whose turban or head was on fire would put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, relentlessness, mindfulness, & alertness to put out the fire on his turban or head; in the same way, the monk should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, relentlessness, mindfulness, & alertness for gaining those very same skillful qualities.

But if, on examination, the monk knows, 'I am one who achieves both internal tranquility of awareness and insight into phenomena through heightened discernment,' then his duty is to make an effort in maintaining those very same skillful qualities to a higher degree for the ending of the effluents.

Samatha Sutta (Anguttara Nikaya 10.54)

In ending the effluents (defilements) there is the loss of craving and attachment to both things mundane and things considered sacred. The lines between that which is sacred and which is ordinary completely vanish. The practitioners can only say, “there is this” and no more. 

Unimpeded in all actions, the Buddha’s devices were inconceivable. Roaming in the equality of past, present, and future, his being was in all worlds. He was free from doubt in cognition of all things and accomplished great enlightenment in all actions, without confusion in knowledge of all truths.

At this point it is safe to say that the Buddha’s devises are inconceivable because they are also without conceptualization. Because there s no concept attached to his mind he is unobstructed and free to roam in the past, present and future of all realms. This is a kind of very cool code for time being a concept. Without conceptualization there is no time that can be said to exist. There is also the knowledge that the memories of the past that we might entertain are not occurring in the past, they are occurring in the present in the mind of thinking. The future also cannot be said to exist as the thoughts are contained only in the present. There can literally be said to be no past or future. There is only presence. 

Years ago a man tried to explain to me why he disliked a certain ethnic group. He explained that they had committed some atrocity or another. I asked him to prove that they did. His first response was to tell me everyone knew that that it had happened. I mentioned that this is not proof. It is belief. He talked about documents containing evidence. I asked when was he looking at the document. Frustrated, he blurted out, “here and now!” See, it did not happen in his past, it was happening in his present. 

The history we were taught 60 years ago is much different from the history of the same events as taught today. In 1950 World War II had ended only 5 years before. The Soviet Union had just become our worst enemy. The last American Indian wars occurred only 29 years before. The African American population did not have universal suffrage in 1950, and would not have it for another 14 years. Our view of historical events was much different in 1950 than it was in the year 2,000. In 2013 I often hear young people talking about events I lived through in terms that I know are not true. How do I know? I have memories of those events. Those memories are thoughts about them that I have now in my present. Memories are not the past – they are thoughts we are having in the present moments. The Buddha knew this. He passed the wisdom onto us. We ought to know it but we are blinded by the façade of reality that we ourselves have created. We are not really concerned about the reality underneath, the ultimate reality. As the text notes, the Buddha was not confused about this. 

On a provisional level, of course there is history and things did take place in the past tense. In reality, however, the past is a convenient illusion as far as our experience is concerned. It is easy to blame events that are not now happening. It is very convenient to remember things as we would like them to have happened. Who really knows what happened in the past anyway? We can only see from unique viewpoints. Because of our kamma we cannot, we are incapable of seeing things “objectively”. In point of fact, unless one is involved deeply in practice, it is impossible to view anything objectively so long as we cling to preconception and discriminations. When one can see this way they engage in “boundless equanimity of Buddhahood, with no inside or out, comprehending the cosmos, throughout all space and time.” 

Cosmos means unity, organic whole, and the word’s etymology has its meaning as "order, good order, orderly arrangement," a word with several main senses rooted in those notions: It is said that Pythagoras is said to have been the first to apply this word to "the universe," perhaps originally meaning "the starry firmament," but later it was extended to the whole physical world, including the earth. For specific reference to "the world of people," the classical phrase was he oikoumene (ge) "the inhabited (earth)."  The Avatamsaka Sutra, a later Mahāyāna text written in stages between 500 CE and 800 CE, describes the universe as a multiverse with realms upon realms and worlds upon worlds all containing one another. In a very real sense all of these universes are one universe just as one time period is all time periods in the world of Yogācāra.

Qualities of a Disciple of the Buddha

The introduction to the text tells us the qualities of a disciple of the Buddha. First we are told, their “minds and intellects were liberated” meaning they were not imprisoned by their own opinions, preconceptions and notion of how things ought to be. This is not only liberating for the practitioner but also for those around him or her. How many times have you heard “If you were a real Buddhist you wouldn’t…” and fill in the blank.  How refreshing it is not to be prejudged by someone who doesn’t actually know what “they” are talking about. 

The next thing we are told is that the practitioner’s conduct is pure. This would mean that they are trustworthy and beyond clinging to their own cravings and desires. This too would be refreshing to find a person who does not meander through life falling prey to his or her own temporary desires. Such a disciple as the ones mentioned in the text would follow the Zen adage of “does what needs to be done when it needs to be done.” 

“They pursued the enjoyment of truth, learned a lot, retained what they learned, and their learning had accumulated.” The path of accumulating learning is very important in practice. There are many things that can be learned, the most important is learning about how your mind works, actually works. We all know we are supposed to “feel” certain things in our society. Our culture demands prescribed set of behaviors and responses to life. But are these learned responses authentic? In the practice of meditation one is considered wise if they understood how they truly felt and not just what they are supposed to feel. Adding to that base of knowledge they accumulate knowledge regarding them and not others. 

The next verse continues in this vein of description. Then it goes on to say that they had perfected the intellectual jewels of swiftness, keenness, the quality of being emancipating, discernment, breadth, and uniqueness; and they had attained higher knowledge. These are all qualities of the intellect. Because the intellect is inconstant these “jewels” should be evolving moment to moment, ever broadening, ever deepening. 

Because they had put the Buddha’s Dhamma into practice they also gained a certain amount of happiness in their experience of the world. Because of the happiness they experienced they also became a blessing to those around them. They behaved with wisdom and calm in their mind and body. Because they understood the way things really are they were able to be tolerant and approach all living beings with gentleness.

Buddha Nature As a Synonym for Emptiness

In Mahāyāna Buddhism there is a concept called Buddha Lands. These are heavenly realms instituted by Celestial Buddhas to which the devoted go after death; the most famous Pure Land is that of the Amitabha. They are also mentioned in the Pali as Pure Abodes where the gods dwell. Sometimes they are also referred to as the Celestial Heavens. While the Mahāyāna idea sounds somewhat New Age, it is not so far fetched if we take the Buddha’s original teaching into account about the Pure Abodes. The Anagami go there after death in this world. The Mahāyāna picture is poetic and more of a symbol than anything else because in a sense, anyone who has purified his or her mind is already in a Pure Abode. In the Pure Land Buddhist teaching the understanding is if one develops a pure mind their body, that is worldly experience, becomes the Pure Land. Having these beings present during a teaching of the Buddha, whether given by him or given by a qualified Dhamma teacher would qualify as bringing beings in from various Buddha Lands. Given that the teaching is given from the perspective of the “wisdom” teachings that is from the doctrine of emptiness and ultimate truth – Buddha Nature. 

Buddha Nature deserves some explanation at this point. In some corners of the Buddha cultural world, the idea of Buddha nature has taken on the characteristics of a “soul” or permanent self.  What Buddha Nature is meant to refer to is the undifferentiated absolute existence behind all appearances, functionally the same as nirvana, emptiness, suchness, and the Eternal Buddha. 

The term Buddha itself not only refers to the historical Buddha and fully enlightened persons whether arahants or bodhisattvas, but also to the ultimate truth. This difference of word usage has sparked much controversy between Theravada and Mahāyāna and within the Mahāyāna Tradition itself, but let’s get real here. If emptiness is the nature of the universe then even the Buddha himself was devoid of an autonomous self-existence. Enlightenment is a function of the paramattha sacca. It makes perfect sense then to refer poetically or metaphorically to paramattha sacca as buddha per se. 

Further, these “enlightening beings”, the original meaning of the term bodhisattva, “avoided the thoughts of those absorbed in individual salvation. Sustained by the vast joy and bliss of truth, they were beyond fears of ill repute, death.” The meaning is pretty clear. These disciples were not very much interested in their own liberation or kammic results.  Because they were already at peace and had experienced nibbana there was no need to even consider their own salvation from dukkha or the kamma that produces it. They had no concerns about “miserable states”, and intimidation by groups who disagreed with the Buddha. 

The last quality that they developed was that they stopped the appearance of all calamities for all sentient beings. This is very important in the Mahāyāna scheme of things. It is what makes the Bodhisattva Vows possible. Because in emptiness all things are one lacking individual “thingness” and they had reached this realization, they knew, they had experienced that there are no others. There is only being. One does not save all beings one “saves” the projection of preconception upon being. One need not enter all Dhamma Gates because there is only one and they had reached it. They had attained the status of Buddha because of their fully enlightened state whether treading the bodhisattva path or the path of the arahant. 

That is a hell of a lot to be said in just thirteen verses of poesy. In those verses, the author, authors or translators completely outline the path of the Yogācara Buddhist disciple and did so without contradicting the original teaching of the Buddha. 

Finally, the names of some of the beings present are mentioned. These are names like Unlocking the Implicit Intent of the Profound Doctrine, Profound Questioner, Offspring of the Teaching, Purified Intelligence, Vast Intelligence, Root of Virtue, Born of Ultimate Truth, Independent Seer, Benevolent One, Glorious One, and so on. These are epithets of the Buddha, the living Buddha that can be found in Pali or Mahāyāna scriptures. This is just one more indication that everything is indeed everything.

Words Without Meaning

At that time Logical Questioner, in the presence of the Buddha, asked Unlocking the Implicit Intention of the Profound Doctrine, “When it is said that all things are nondual, what are all things and what is nonduality?”

Unlocking the Implicit Intent of the Profound Doctrine replied, “All things are generally of two kinds, created and uncreated, the created are neither created nor uncreated, and the uncreated are too neither uncreated no created.”

…”How is it that the created is neither created nor uncreated, and the uncreated is neither uncreated nor created?”

…”’Created’ is an artificial definition temporarily set up by the Buddha. As such, it is a verbal expression assembled by conceptualization. If it is a verbal expression assembled by conceptualization, ultimately it is a verbal expression of various conceptualizations, and not actually real. Therefore it is not created.

“If you say it is uncreated, this too comes down to a matter of words If you talk about anything outside of the created and the uncreated, the same thing applies.

“That does not mean, however, that there is nothing being discussed. What is that thing? Sages, with their knowledge and vision, detach from names and words, and therefore actualize enlightenment. Then, because they wish to make others aware of this nature that is beyond words, they temporarily set up names and characteristics and call something created.

“’Uncreated’ is also an artificial definition set up by the Buddha. As such it is a verbal expression assembled by various conceptualizations, and so is not actually real. Therefore it is not uncreated.

“If you say it is created, this too comes down to a matter of words. Even if you talk about something outside of the created and the uncreated, the same thing applies.

“That does not mean, however, that there is nothing being discussed. What is that thing? Sages, with their knowledge and vision, detach from names and words, and therefore actualize enlightenment. Then, because they wish to make others aware of this nature that is beyond words, they temporarily set up names and characteristics and call something uncreated.”

What is reflected here in these verses reflects a classic Abhidhamma practice. In the practice, as I learned it in Sri Lanka, involves not using a name or identifying linguistic markers. If I became hungry I would think or say, “Hunger is present.” If I felt anger I would think and say, “There is the presence of anger.” How different this is from our language and culture where identification with a condition is the equivalent to being that condition.  In English we say, “I am hungry” or “I am angry.” We identify so closely with the “emotion”, a series of thoughts based on pleasantness or unpleasantness, that we ignore what is really going on. 

So close is our identification with what we want to be real that we ignore what is actually going on around us. We call our anger “righteous indignation.” We actually believe that our disorder is somehow “sacred”. In the Bible the term “righteous indignation” or “righteous anger” is used more than once in reference to the Biblical god. We say that as if a disease can become holy. In Buddhist terms it is a little like saying “righteous cancer” or “righteous diabetes” or even “righteous Chlamydia, gonorrhea, or herpes.” Even in Zen communities we still have people who claim sometimes anger is a good thing. They’ve never read the Buddha so how would they know? 

In Dogen says in his ninth precept, he says, “Don’t become angry. Many of us are prone to become angry. It seems a natural outcome of our personality, but in fact, anger is not our natural state – it is not our natural condition. To be natural is the teaching of Gotama Buddha. 

And just what does Gotama Buddha say?

In the Ghatva Sutta: Having Killed, Samyutta Nikaya 1.71, the Buddha said the only thing worth killing is anger.

As she was standing to one side, a devata recited this verse to the Blessed One:

Having killed what

       do you sleep in ease?

Having killed what

       do you not grieve?

Of the slaying of what one thing

       does Gotama approve? 

[The Buddha:]

 Having killed anger

      you sleep in ease.

Having killed anger

       you do not grieve.

The noble ones praise the slaying of anger

—    with its honeyed crest

       & poison root —

for having killed it

       you do not grieve.

So, as we see, neither Dogen, the founder of neither Soto Zen, nor the Buddha found anything very “cool” about anger. Neither thought anger was a very good idea and never could find a justification for it. It is only in the perversion of our thinking that anger has a justification. 

What is it that causes anger? Anger is the result of fear (Vimuttimagga, The Path of Freedom). First and foremost, anger is the same as aversion. The definition of Aversion is: Exaggerated wanting to be separated from someone or something. In this sense, it is the exact opposite of Attachment. Because the label of "unpleasant" is very relative and based upon limited information, aversion includes an aspect of exaggeration or "projection". The definition of Anger is: Being unable to bear the object, or the intention to cause harm to the object. Anger is defined as aversion with stronger exaggeration. Anger is present when we feel unbearable aversion to something. We feel the loss or threatened loss of something we have attached to. Therein lies our fear.

According to Buddhism the basic problem is that emotions like anger and hatred are based on projections and exaggeration, not on objectivity or wisdom, and thus basically incorrect. 

There is little need to explain what anger and hatred do to ourselves by means of the laws of kamma; the misery we cause others will come back at ourselves. Nobody wants suffering.  

It must be emphasized that to completely eliminate these negative emotions from our mind is a lengthy psychological process, requiring study, mindfulness, reflection and honest observation of one's own mind. To begin with, meditation is an ideal method to review a situation in which one became angry. This has the advantage that one is not exposed to the actual situation, but one can review it much more objectively. When regular meditation gives some insight into what anger is and what happens to oneself when feeling angry, then one can gradually try to apply it in real-life situations, preferably of course before one is already under complete control of anger. It is a slow process, but the change in your life and the ones around you can profoundly change for the better.

As His Holiness the Dalai Lama said:

"When reason ends, then anger begins. 
Therefore, anger is a sign of weakness."

From the point of view of a being in samsara that is caught in the cycle of existence and influenced by afflictions and kamma, anger is natural because we are afraid. But the real question should be whether anger is beneficial. Just because we consider fear and the anger that arise from it as being natural, does not mean they are beneficial. Neither are they natural to all living beings. When we examine anger more closely, we see firstly that anger is based on exaggerating the negative quality of someone or projecting negative qualities that are not there on a person or object. Secondly, anger is not beneficial because it creates many problems for us in this life and creates negative kamma that will bring about suffering for us in both our present and future lives. Anger also obscures the mind and prevents us from generating Dharma realizations and thus from attaining liberation and enlightenment. 

So what does all this talk about anger have to do with the verses from the Sandhinirmochana Sutra? All of our aversions are projections based upon the language we use to describe them. By the way, the same is true of our attachments. 

Not very long ago a very nice lady at a party filled with New Age astrologers and hypnotherapists asked me what I get passionate about. Without much thought I said “Nothing.” She was astonished and asked, “How can you live without passion?” I smiled and asked, “How can you live, really live, with it?” 

Every day I meet people who love to tell me how bad Obama and the liberals are. If I wait five minutes I will hare another person tell me how bad the conservatives and Republicans are. They seem very angry and afraid. They are all angry and afraid at Muslims too. Most of these people are upset with me because I am not angry. I am, of course concerned, but I do not feel enough aversion or attachment to become angry with Obama and the liberals, conservatives or Republicans, or even Muslim “terrorists” – whatever that means. I don’t know what another person means by “Obama”, “liberal”, “conservative”, “Republican”, “Muslim” or “terrorist”, I know what these words mean to me but I do not know what they mean to anyone else. Yet, people throw these words around as if everyone should know what these words mean. One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. 

No word has universal meaning. People love their wives, husbands, cats and pizza. Does “love” mean the same for all of these situations?  When I say, “I teach only the core teaching of the Buddha” I know what I mean. Do you know what I mean? Probably not. Making that statement had some people respond that I was not a true Buddhist, not a Mahāyāna Buddhist. At the same time, that I was once a Theravadin monk that later become ordained as a Mahāyāna Zen Buddhist has had some people say that I am not a true Buddhist but a heretic. I know what Buddhism means to me. I do not know what it means to you. 

We use words like “reality” and “truth” all the time and never stop to think that these might be relative terms that have meaning only to the user. Objectivity is impossible so long as we add our own concepts, preconceptions, biases and, alas, intellect to our observations. 

In state of North Dakota, in the United States of America, they have just passed a law that church members can wear guns while in the church so they kill “terrorists.” So much for the Prince of Peace, yes? Because the ministers of these churches have not read the teaching of Christ, do not actually understand the Second Amendment “right” to bear arms only applies to well-regulated militias and not individuals, because they are ruled by the fear in their own hearts and not the teachings of their “god”, they pervert their position to make their churches armed camps rather than welcoming non-prejudicial places of worship. 

So what does “spiritual” mean to you? I know what it means to me and what I understand the Buddha said about it. I do not know what you mean by it or what your master said about it. 

Because of words we have illusions that things are created. We point to a specific place in time and say, “Ah! It started here.” Because of our conceptualizations we can say things became uncreated. “Ah! It ended there.” Both concepts are inherently false. 

Even in classical physics, thanks to Albert Einstein, we have the notion that things cannot be created or destroyed – they can only transform. The Buddha said something similar to that 2500 years before Einstein. Because of the laws of conditionality, things have always been and always will be – in one form or another. Nothing exists as an autonomous self-existing entity. That who I am today is neither the same as nor entirely different from whom I am today. 

Anger is an exceedingly important issue because it goes to the heart of delusion. In the state of mind that exhibits anger we can no longer think rationally. We are in the grips of a hallucinogenic nightmare filled with presumption. In Buddhism “presumption” is defined as an invalid way of knowing that takes its object correctly and then cognizes it freshly. 

“Suppose a magician or his apprentice gathers a bunch of grass, leaves, wood, and pebbles at a crossroads, and produces magic effects, creating the appearance of elephants, horses, chariots, soldiers, jewels, conch shells, stores of various goods, and grains and so forth. Deluded, ignorant, stupid people, who do not know or understand anything, think the magic effects of elephants and horse and so on, which they perceive produced in the grass, leaves, wood, and pebbles, are really there. They cling fast to whatever they perceive, and they say this alone is real and that all else is delusion. They still need to examine further.

“If people are not ignorant or dull-witted, if they are intelligent and perspicacious, when they see the magic effects they think that there are no real elephants and horse and so on in those magic illusions produced in the grass and leaves and wood and pebbles. They realize that the delusions deceive their eyes, producing various images. They do not cling to what they perceive as the only reality. In order to convey this point, they also make verbal explanations. They do not to examine further.

“If people are ignorant and have not yet attained the transcendent wisdom of sages, and cannot comprehend the true nature of all things beyond words, then when they have seen or heard of the created or the uncreated, they thin that there really must be a ‘created’ or ‘uncreated’ in what they apprehend. They cling to what they see and hear, and say this alone is true and that all else is ignorant folly. They need to examine further.

“If people are not ignorant, and they have seen the holy truths, and have attained the wisdom of sages, and know the true nature of all things beyond words as it really is, when they see or hear of the created or the uncreated they that there really is no such thing as the created or the uncreated, but there are active forms created by discrimination, which are like magical effects deceiving the intellect into producing notions of created and uncreated. They do not cling to what they have seen or heard, or claim it is the only truth. In order to convey this point, they too make verbal explanations. They do not need to examine further.

“In this way, in the midst of these things, sages detach from names and words by knowledge and insight, and therefore realize enlightenment. Then, because they want to make others aware of this real nature which is beyond words, they provisionally set up names and characteristics and call things created or uncreated…

…Buddha explains the meaning of nonduality beyond words;

It is most profound, beyond the scope of the ignorant.

The ignorant, confused by delusion about this,

Cling to duality and make false descriptions;

They are either unsettled or fixed in error

And revolve forever in the pains of birth and death.

Still repudiating discourse on true knowledge like this,

They will be reborn as goats and sheep…

…”I once saw a place where there were seventy-two thousand philosophers and their teachers, gathered together in one assembly to consider the characteristics of the ultimate meaning of things. As they thought and assessed and contemplated and searched all over together, they were after all unable to get the ultimate meaning – just a medley of different interpretations, conflicting interpretations, varying interpretations. They contradicted one another and argued, got out weapons and attacked and wounded one another finally breaking up and going their separate ways.

“At that time, I thought to myself, ‘the appearance of a Buddha in the world is most wonderful; because of the Buddha’s appearance in the world, it is possible to understand and realize the ultimate truth that is beyond the scope of all thought and deliberation.’”

This passage, still in Chapter 1 of the Sandhinirmochana Sutra, is somewhat lengthy but well worth the read. The story about the magician and the deluded public is actually a very popular story among Theravadin teachers as well as the Mahāyāna ones. It demonstrates how easily we, as ordinary people are fooled by appearances, words and our own thoughts. 

Almost everybody has heard of the idea of the creator god, but is there any real evidence of such a being? No, no evidence exists except in the imaginations of common people. The belief in a creator god (issara-nimmana-vada) is frequently mentioned and soundly rejected, along with other causes wrongly adduced to explain the origin of the world; as, for instance, world-soul, time, nature, etc. God-belief, however, is placed in the same category as those morally destructive wrong views which deny the kammic results of action, assume a fortuitous origin of man and nature, or teach absolute determinism. These views are said to be altogether pernicious, having definite bad results due to their effect on ethical conduct. 

In the Majjhima Nikaya 2, there is a statement made by the Buddha. It goes straight to the heart and meaning of what the Sandhinirmochana Sutra is also stating. The Buddha says,

"In a person who thus considers improperly there arises one of the six [wrong] views. The view 'I have self' arises in him really and firmly. Or, the view 'I have no self' arises in him really and firmly. Or, the view 'I perceive self through self' arises in him really and firmly. Or, the view 'I perceive non-self through self' arises in him really and firmly. Or, the view 'I perceive self through non-self' arises in him really and firmly. Or, he has the view thus: 'That self of mine speaks, knows and experiences the results of wholesome and unwholesome actions. That self of mine is permanent, stable, durable, incorruptible and will be eternal like all things permanent.'

"Bhikkhus! This wrong view is called a false belief, a jungle of false beliefs, a desert of false beliefs, a thorny spike of false beliefs, an agitation of false beliefs and a fetter of false beliefs. Bhikkhus! The ignorant worldling who is bound up with the fetter of false beliefs cannot escape rebirth, ageing, death, grief, lamentation, pain, distress and despair. I declare that he cannot escape dukkha.

 "Bhikkhus! The instructed ariya disciple, who sees the Ariyas, who is skilled in their dhammas and who is trained and disciplined in their dhammas, who sees the Virtuous, who is skilled in their dhammas, and who is trained and disciplined in their dhammas, knows the factors which should be considered attentively and the factors which should not be considered attentively. Discriminating the factors which should be considered attentively from the factors which should not be considered attentively, he does not consider attentively the factors which should not be considered and considers attentively the factors which should be considered.

Sabbasava Sutta: Discourse on All Āsavas 

The beliefs that we render ourselves when we form discriminatory judgments do indeed create a jungle in our minds. There each branch or vine tangles with every other branch or vine. One belief tempers and affects all other beliefs. There have been cases were people have developed such a strong belief in a creator god that is responsible for every facet of life have rejected medicine that could have healed them. They believed that the illness was god’s will and therefore not to be questioned. As mentioned earlier there are people with a profound belief in such a god but also have a profound belief that it is their “god given” right to possess weapons such as guns. Therefore they have conflated their believes to asset they should take their guns to church to worship their god of peace, love, hate and vengeance. 

People that have invested so much of their energy into “false” beliefs have to defend them. They have created a fortress that must be defended. Having built a mental fortress they also build walls to keep conflicting thoughts out. The problem with walls is that they keep things in as well as keep things out. Such a person who is an ignorant worldling is bound up with the shackles of false beliefs. They cannot escape rebirth, ageing, death, grief, lamentation, pain, distress and despair. The Buddha himself declared that such a person cannot escape dukkha. This is not just true in this manifestation of being but also in any future manifestation. 

There is a profound psychological impact on the person. Because they believe this in the present, they will also believe this in the future. The false belief will be reinforced; evidence supporting will be gathered and cataloged. Evidence that does not support their false beliefs will be rejected just as the philosophers rejected ideas that they did not want to consider. Bloodshed may not be inevitable but ill-will and anger are. Conflict cannot be avoided in such a mental climate. 

The Buddha also calls such a mental state a “desert of false beliefs” because rarely does anything fruitful grow in a desert. It is a barren landscape just as such a mind is barren and lifeless. It is because “deluded, ignorant, stupid people, who do not know or understand anything, think the magic effects of elephants and horse and so on, which they perceive produced in the grass, leaves, wood, and pebbles, are really there. They cling fast to whatever they perceive, and they say this alone is real and that all else is delusion.” Perception is all about pattern recognition. When we can only recognize one pattern that is all we see. We become blind to everything else. If we are blind to everything else then we cannot utilize it, grow our intellect or our heart. This also creates passion. Passion is very restrictive in the sense that we become focused on the delusion that we have accepted as reality. 

As a child I had the notion that a long cylindered object with a clicking thingy on one end was a great toy. My dog, a cocker spaniel, believed the same. He thought of it as a chew toy. I thought of it as a noisemaker. My father explained to me that he needed it to write letters home.  The three of us recognized different patterns. The dog found a nice shiny thing to play with. He knocked it around all over the hardwood floors. It would slide and make noises. I recognized the pattern of a hard shiny thing that made noise. My father recognized patterns that made it an ink pen. The dog never got over the chew toy idea. As I became older I went to school where I discovered the idea of a writing instrument and pattern had changed. Later, of course, my view of the ink pen changed once again when I discovered the laptop. 

A man accustomed to pungent and bitter flavors all his life cannot think of, or assess, or believes in the sweet taste of honey and sugar.

Some in ignorance who has an overwhelming interest in desires because of passionate craving, and is therefore inflamed with excitement, thus cannot think of, or asses, or believe in the marvelous bliss of detachment and inward effacement of all sense data.

Someone in ignorance, who clings to rhetoric because of an overwhelming interest in words, thus cannot think of, or assess, or believe in the pleasure of holy silence with inner tranquility.

Someone in ignorance who clings to the signs of the world because of overwhelming interest in perceptual and cognitive signs thus cannot think of, or asses, or believe in the ultimate nirvana that obliterates all sings so that reification ends.

People in ignorance cling to mundane conventions because they have various controversies and beliefs involving attachments to self and possessions, and thus cannot think of, or assess, or belief in a utopia where there is no ego, no possession, no attachment, and no contention. In the same way, you should know, those who pursue thoughts cannot think of, or assess, or believe in the character of the ultimate truth that is beyond the sphere of all thought and deliberation.”

Then, to restate this point, Buddha said in verse:

The inwardly realized signless sphere

Cannot be verbalized, having no expression.

The ultimate truth that stops all argument

Transcends all aspects of thought and deliberation

The text mentions four major causes of suffering and conflict in life. They are all the results of clinging. Clinging is, after all, that which is reborn after death. The text also prefaces the clinging with stating those who exhibit these clings are “in ignorance.” Ignorance here is the act of ignoring what is really happening or really there and gravitating to the patterns we want to recognize. We recognize these patterns because we are conditioned to just as the man who has only tasted pungent and bitter foods cannot imagine the taste of sweetness, a person who clings to these interests mentioned are ignoring the fact that other interests can possibly exist – and if they do exist, they are probably not valid.

We meet people like this all the time and some of the time we are those people.  We see it in others and yet are often blind to it when it is our clinging that reaches out to fulfill a desire.  What are these clingings? They are 

·      Passionate craving·      An overwhelming interest in words
·      Overwhelming interest in perceptual and cognitive signs
·      Attachments to self and possessions

Once at a party filled with New Age hypnotherapists, astrologers and psychics I was asked by a British lady who fancied herself a “psychic astrologer, what it was that I am passionate about. At first I was amused. She’s a psychic, doesn’t she know what I am passionate about? So I ran a list through my mind and said, “I’m not really impassioned about anything.” 

In astonishment her jaw literally dropped. You’d have thought I burned the American flag in the back yard. “How can you live without passion?”  

Again I smiled. “How can you live – really live – with it?” 

When we are caught up in a passionate desire for something we lose our focus on everything else going on around us. Let us say there is a 60-year-old woman in Chicago who honestly thinks she can only be happy if she marries a tall, blonde, Swedish man living in Stockholm. Considering that there are only 9 million people in all of Sweden and that eligible men in her age group living within Stockholm city limits who are single, still have hair and interested in marrying an American woman of advanced years are very few, the woman has imprisoned herself in a not altogether but something resembling a hopeless dream. Because she is so focused on this particular “passion” she ignores the obvious: by setting these limits on what can make her happy she has decided that no other man could ever make her happy. If I only like red cars I won’t be happy with a blue one, will I?

The Strange Case of Identity Politics

Identity politics work very similarly to this but only appears to be more rational. If I only identify with only white middle-aged men who are afraid of change then I limit my possibilities of friendship and co-operation with anyone who is not like me. But along with identity politics comes a specialized vocabulary as well. Identity politics are political arguments that focus upon the self-interest and perspectives of self-identified social interest groups and ways in which people's politics may be shaped by aspects of their identity through race, class, religion, gender, ethnicity, ideology, nation, sexual orientation, culture, currency, information preference, history, musical and/or literary genre, medical conditions, profession, hobby, or any other loosely correlated yet simple to intuit social organizations. Not all members of any given group are necessarily involved in identity politics. The practice has probably a long existence; but the explicit term and movements linked to it really came into being during the latter part of the 20th century. It can most notably be found in class movements, feminist movements, gay and lesbian movements, disability movements, ethnic movements and postcolonial movements. As you can see this standard definition of identity politics fits perfectly into all four categories of ignorant clinging. 

In the 1970s a strange idea arose. “Youth”, that is, children aged 14-18, were somehow an oppressed minority. Who was oppressing them? Adults were their tyrants. The idea has not died. It is alive and well and living in affluent neighborhoods. I was surprised to find a number of religious organizations utilizing identity politics among their youth groups. Somehow the idea that young, white, upper-class privileged high school kids are somehow oppressed by adults not only caught on but has met with great success, especially among the young, white, upper-class privileged high school kids. The kids are told that they should make decisions for themselves and they do not need to consult with elders even about major life choices or options that carry important legal liabilities. One interesting aspect of this form of identity politics is that in their realm respect for more mature people is totally abandoned. Further the choices that are made are phenomenally selfish, which incidentally concurs with the very definition of the term, narrowly construed and ignores the greater good of the organization while satisfying the cravings and passions of the minority. It’s a tyranny of the minority in the name of a theoretically oppressed minority. 

So what happened?   

·      Passionate craving overwhelms the community’s needs·      An overwhelming interest in words creates a vocabulary with skewed definitions
·      Overwhelming interest in perceptual and cognitive signs leading to the belief that if it is said often enough it must be true·      An attachment to self and possessions in this cases self-identity is built into the program and the idea of “me” and “mine” takes precedence over the reality of who actually owns what.

While the “youth group” is the example we can see this everywhere. Life is filled with interesting words that have virtually no meaning. Words like “soul”, “spiritual”, “liberal”, “conservative”, “socialist”, “love” and “god”. When a person uses these words they seem to feel that everyone on Earth will know exactly what that word should mean. As a Buddhist I have no idea what a “soul” might be. It is contrary to the teaching to which I adhere. Even more important is the fact that I have never knowingly experienced a soul or met one. The same holds true of god. I may have met a few gods in my life, I’m pretty sure I have, but I have never met or experienced the “one true god”. In the teaching of the Buddha the idea of oppression is pretty much in the eye of the beholder. True, there are injustices in the world, but who decides what is just and what is unjust? 

Justice is rampant in the universe. We call it kamma in Pali or karma in Sanskrit. You get what’s coming to you based not so much on your past actions but more on your past decisions. It is the choices you made in your past that determine the view you will have of the world today. Intentions that you formulate today will determine your view of your life in your future. But not everything is a matter of kamma. Kamma may not cause everything going on in one’s life but your kamma will determine exactly how you are feeling about it. How you view your life is a matter of how you have thought about things in the past. You have no one to blame but yourself – thank you Herman Caine. 

The Buddha: There are cases where some feelings arise based on bile [i.e., diseases and pains that come from a malfunctioning gall bladder]. You yourself should know how some feelings arise based on bile. Even the world is agreed on how some feelings arise based on bile. So any contemplatives & brahmans who are of the doctrine & view that whatever an individual feels — pleasure, pain, neither-pleasure-nor-pain — is entirely caused by what was done before — slip past what they themselves know, slip past what is agreed on by the world. Therefore I say that those contemplatives & brahmans are wrong.

There are cases where some feelings arise based on phlegm... based on internal winds... based on a combination of bodily humors... from the change of the seasons... from uneven ['out-of-tune'] care of the body... from attacks... from the result of kamma. You yourself should know how some feelings arise from the result of kamma. Even the world is agreed on how some feelings arise from the result of kamma. So any contemplatives & brahmans who are of the doctrine & view that whatever an individual feels — pleasure, pain, neither pleasure-nor-pain — is entirely caused by what was done before — slip past what they themselves know, slip past what is agreed on by the world. Therefore I say that those contemplatives & brahmans are wrong.

 Samyutta Nikaya 36.21

The Buddha was on the side of conditionality. Kamma too is conditional but mainly psychological. While intention plays a role in what we experience it conditions us to experience in a specific way. Karma, on the other hand, is a Vedic conception that is akin to causes and conditions but works on the individual level in such a way that everything that happens to you in the present is the result of something you have done in the past. The Buddha said this belief was mistaken. This is why many of the teachers in Mahāyāna Buddhism are today using the Pali term, kamma, to avoid the mistake made by the Brahmans. 

The mistake that those engaged in identity politics make is that they actually believe they are entitled to things even though the conditions of their environment or their minds do not support whatever it is the individual group believe they are entitled to. If the causes and conditions were right I would be a very wealthy Baptist minister at a mega church. But the causes were not there and the conditions do not support such a thing. Instead I am a Buddhist teacher of the middle class. Causes and conditions support that. When I was 18-years-old social condition provided that I could drink beer and go to Vietnam, but they did not allow me to vote because I was under age. 

No matter how many times we call a minor a “youth” it does not change the fact that he or she is still a minor – a child. They do not have the rights and privileges of an adult. Nor should they. They do not have the education, maturity or experience of an adult. Does a birthday, specifically the 18^th one, change that? Probably nothing important happens except that the “minor” now enters their majority. It’s part of the rules of our society. It also has much to do with our social conditioning, that is, societal kamma. There are a lot of 18 year olds trapped in 65-year-old bodies, but their bodies are 65 years old and that makes a difference to society. 

Identity politics tends to see people as victims. In Buddhism it is often stated that if you see yourself as a victim then you probably are – at least to yourself. You may not be able to change the conditions under which you live but you can change your attitude towards it. That is a matter of changing your kamma, which is often easier than changing your conditions, but it still amazingly difficult for the average person. 

The sense of being a victim, one of the oppressed minorities – and who isn’t a member of one of those these days, nourishes suffering and may even keep it going for generations. With this sense of victimization comes also anger. The anger is almost always identifies as “righteous indignation” which makes the erroneous claim that the self-identifies victim is justified and others, namely the oppressors, are wrong. Oddly, the self-identified victim insists on finding justice in their situation before they can find peace. Peace seems to be irrelevant to the self-identified victim. This view promotes “revenge” as a motive for many of the actions taken by the self-identified victim. This revenge is either a conscious sense of I’ll make them sorry, or an unconscious sense of claiming to gain justice. This line of reasoning brings us back to the four clingings of an ignorant person. 

·      Passionate craving·      An overwhelming interest in words
·      Overwhelming interest in perceptual and cognitive signs
·      Attachments to self and possessions

Identity politics serves as an eloquent example.

Ultimate Truth and Practice

"Once I saw a group of enlightening beings (bodhisattvas), who were at that time cultivating the stage of zealous application, sitting together deliberating on the sameness or difference of the ultimate truth and practices. One party said that there is no difference at all between ultimate truth and practices. Another party said that it is not true that there is no difference at all between ultimate truth and practices, that ultimate truth is different from practices.

"Others were doubtful and hesitant; they said, 'Whose words' are true, whose are false? Who is practicing correctly, who incorrectly?'

Some called out, 'Ultimate truth and practices have no difference at all.' Others called out, 'Ultimate truth is different from practices.'

"Seeing them, I thought, 'These people are ignorant and dull. They are not illumined, not good, not practicing rightly, unable to understand that ultimate truth is so subtle and profound that it transcends sameness with and difference from practices.' "

The Buddha said, "It is as you say. They are ignorant and dull. They are not illumined, not good, not practicing rightly, unable to understand that ultimate truth is so subtle and profound that it transcends sameness with and difference from practices. Why? When one does practices as they do, one cannot be said to comprehend ultimate truth or to be able to realize it.

"Why? If ultimate truth and practices had no difference at all, everyone would already see the truth, and everyone would already have attained the highest expedient, tranquil nirvana, or they would have already attained supreme perfect enlightenment.

The idea in these verses is troubling to literalists and people wrapped up in the world of conceptualization. It leaves them no room to maneuver. The big question for them is how can something be neither the same as and at the same time not different from something else? 

In Zen the saying often attributed to Dogen Zenji is “one when sits in Zazen one is already enlightened.” While I am not sure that he ever said that I clearly see that this thinking is flawed even if it is a result of Yogacarin thinking. It is a statement that is both true and untrue at the same time. When one is sitting in Zazen they have nowhere to go. If you are able to practice then the mind and the thoughts that you have naturally turn into wisdom and dualities drop naturally but it seems the obstacle is the seed of your awakening. Learn about your self; learn about your own ignorance. A person who can learn about his own ignorance is one who is practicing enlightenment.  Knowing the self clearly is the path. What we need to do is learn to settle down with what we already have and whether this is a blessing or a curse is totally up to you. Through this process of settling down we fully receive what we already have. If this is received as a gift or if this is received as a hindrance is up to you. It’s an indication of the depth of your practice when you can receive all these gifts without discrimination.   

There is a saying from another religion, “the light shined into the darkness and the darkness knew it not.” Sometimes we all feel like the world is bathed in darkness. This is probably how the Buddha in this text must have felt. The enlightening beings, or bodhisattvas, who are usually portrayed as the cream of the Dhammic crop, just could not get it together. The bodhisattvas were displaying their ignorance. They did not know themselves and so they don’t understand the nature of reality. The Buddha character of the sutra says of the statement that practice and enlightenment are one that if ultimate truth and practices were one and not different then everyone would already see the truth, and everyone would already have attained the highest expedient, tranquil nirvana, or they would have already attained supreme perfect enlightenment. Obviously not everyone is in on the ultimate truth of reality, not is everyone tranquil and certainly it is not true that everyone is enlightened – not even those sitting in Zazen. So, anyone can ascertain that there is a problem with this kind of thinking. 

Dhamma is should also be experienced and not simply studied, discussed and argued about. It is either Dhamma or it is not. The fruit of the Dhamma is not in its elegant symmetry but in the results of its practice.  Practice is not exactly the same as the ultimate truth, dhamma or paramattha sacca, but then, it is not entirely different from it either. 

Early in my training to be a Zen monk I was always a little anxious about the way practice was treated there. It seemed as if it were worshipped. Form was everything. As a Theravadin monk I was taught that a robe was just a cool kind of a rag that had only symbolic function, except when it was cold, then it had a literal function. It was a way of telling the world that you had your degree in Buddhism, but if you were meditating it was okay to fold it up and sit on it using it as a cushion. In Zen, it is a little different. The robe is never allowed to touch the ground or get wet or even stained. When washing it there was a special procedure. When drying it there was a special procedure. When putting it on there was a special ritual complete with a little saying, gatha. It seemed a little odd to me since Bodhidharma, the first patriarch said there was nothing sacred or anything profane. That was the great equalizer in my life. Everything is just everything, literally. It was explained that we had to work within the forms to see our preconceived boundaries. Now it made sense as to why we were doing the strangeness with the robes, the precise methods of eating, the endless sitting in just a certain way, etc. By working within the boundaries we were learning very much about ourselves and what makes us tick, where our kamma lies, and what our real intentions were beyond the fairy dust ideologies we professed in public and often in private. As it turned out, some of us held to these ideologies about Zen but still had the hearts of potential serial killers even when dressed up as Zen monks. This was probably a good thing to self discover. 

As the text continues it affirms this observation. 

"If ultimate truth were totally different from practices, those who already see the truth would not do away with the forms of practices. If they did not do away with the forms of practices, they would be bound by forms and would not attain liberation; since those who see the truth would in that case be bound by forms and not liberated, furthermore, they would also not be liberated from crude bondage to the physical self. Because of not being liberated from these two kinds of bondage, those who have seen the truth would not be able to attain the highest expedient, tranquil nirvana, or realize supreme perfect enlightenment.

"But not everyone has seen the truth, not everyone has been able to attain the highest expedient, tranquil nirvana, and not everyone has realized supreme perfect enlightenment. Therefore it is not right to say that ultimate truth and practices are no different at all.

"It is not the case, furthermore, that those who see the truth are not able to do away with the forms of practices; and indeed they do dismiss them.

"And it is not the case that those who see the truth are unable to shed bondage to forms; and they are indeed liberated.

"And it is not the case that those who see the truth are unable to shed crude bondage to the physical self; and they are indeed liberated.

There are several “not the cases” that show up here. They are meant to be a refutation of the idea that practice and the ultimate truth are two completely separate “things” any more than they are identically the same things. 

There are those who 1) have seen the truth are not able escape attachment to forms of practices. These people simply dismiss the forms of ritual as a delusion. 2) It is also incorrect to say that those who have seen the ultimate truth are unable to shed bondage to forms because the very act of seeing the paramattha sacca liberates one from attachment to forms. 3) It is also incorrect to say that those who have seen the ultimate truth are still bound to the attachment of a physical self. 

Seeing the truth of paramattha sacca, the ultimate reality is called “the direct perception of emptiness.” Without this experience one cannot enter the enlightenment. Without this experience we remain attached to the concepts and illusions of an antonymous self-existence as well as to forms of ritualized behavior, beliefs and objects. It is precisely the continued attachment to this self and the self of others that we perceive that keeps us from becoming awakened to reality as it is. 

The transcendent nature of reality is inescapable if we only just look. Once a person asked me what was the point of transcending the ego. He simply could not grasp the fact that the ego was an ever-changing illusion. So attached to his sense of self was this man that he refused to accept any idea that did not fit the criteria of his preconceptions and would argue against any teaching that would settle comfortably into his presumptions. 

It is fashionable to say, “all religions teach the same thing” or “religions are trying to reach the same goal.” From this text it is obvious that these politically correct statements are not true. The ultimate truth or reality is not linked to a deity and liberation does not come after one’s death. It is an event that occurs in the here and the now. Most religions depend on the attachment to a form, which is a deity; attachment to rituals; attachment to the concept of an antonymous self-existence, which is the soul concept; and attachment to preconceptions such as heaven, hell, doctrines and dogmas. In the shedding of these attachments one becomes able to experience nirvana, the ultimate tranquility of “unbinding” and the direct perception of emptiness. 

"Because they are able to shed these two kinds of bondage, they can also attain the highest expedient, tranquil nirvana; and some can realize supreme perfect enlightenment. So it is not right to say that ultimate truth and practices are totally different.

"If ultimate truth were no different from practices, then when practices degenerate into impurity, ultimate truth would also degenerate into impurity. If ultimate truth were totally different from practices, then it would not be true that the common characteristic of practices is ultimate truth. Now then, because ultimate truth does not degenerate into impurity, and because the common characteristic of practices is the characteristic of ultimate truth, it is not right to say either that ultimate truth is no different from practices or that ultimate truth is to tally different from practices.

But then on the other hand, if practice and the ultimate truth were the same, then one would experience the direct perception of emptiness and nirvana every time they sat in meditation and any meditator will tell you this is simply not the case. We have all experienced the fact that human beings seem to go in cycles. Sometimes our practice is exquisite and then often degenerates in some haphazard kind of a thingy. If our practice disintegrates then so too would the ultimate reality. So the truth and practice are not the same. At the same time however, the truth is only ascertained through practice. This means that practice and truth are not altogether different. They are mutually inclusive and mutually exclusive at the same time. 

It’s a little like human experience. When we experience things the experience is fragmented and an infinite number of forms appear to us through all six senses. Even though our experience is fragmented the underlying unity is still present. In our mundane state of ignorance we disregard that truth. We simply cannot see it in our usual state of mind, the “Monkey Mind.” It is there hidden from our view because our view hides it. 

Remember the statement attributed to Dogen mentioned above? He is said to have asserted that when one sits one is already enlightened is implied here in the text. Dogen was wise enough to know that the two, practice and truth, are not identical and at the same time not different. While we still look for the ultimate truth but in practice we can relinquish the hold our mind has on forms and preconceptions. Practices are in themselves the manifestation of selflessness and absence of inherent nature and this is called “the characteristic of ultimate truth.” 

Chapter 1 of the text concludes… 

If ultimate truth were no different from practices, then just as the aspect of ultimate truth within practices has no differentiation, so also would the forms of practices have no differentiation; then whatever they see, whatever they hear, whatever they are aware of, and whatever they know, those who cultivate contemplative practices would not need to seek ultimate truth after that.

"If ultimate truth were totally different from practices, it would not be true that practices being just the manifestation of selflessness and absence of inherent nature is the characteristic of ultimate truth.

"Also, if practices and ultimate truth were totally different, they should simultaneously establish each other separately as defiled and pure.

"Now then, since the forms of practices actually do have differences and are not undifferentiated, then whatever they perceive, those who cultivate contemplation practices still need to seek ultimate truth.

"Furthermore, practices themselves being the manifestation of selflessness and absence of inherent nature is called the characteristic of ultimate truth.

"Also, it is not that defilement and purity simultaneously establish each other as separate.

"Therefore, it is not right to say either that ultimate truth and practices areno different or that they are completely different."

"The whiteness of a shell can hardly be defined either as one with or as distinct from the shell. The same is true of the goldenness of gold. The musicality of the sound of pipes can hardly be defined either as one with or as distinct from the sound of the pipes. The fragrance of incense can hardly be defined as either one with or as distinct from incense. The pungency of pepper can hardly be defined either as one with or as distinct from pepper. The softness of silk can hardly be defined either as one with or as distinct from silk. The cream in milk can hardly be defined either as one with or as distinct from milk. The impermanence of all actions, the misery of all contaminated states, and the selflessness of all phenomena can hardly be de fined either as one with or as different from actions, contaminated states, and phenomena. The restlessness and impurity of craving can hardly be defined either as one with or as distinct from craving; the same is true of hatred and folly. In the same way, ultimate truth cannot be defined either as one with or as different from practices.

"I am truly aware of this characteristic of ultimate truth, which is very subtle, extremely subtle, very deep, extremely deep, difficult to comprehend, extremely difficult to comprehend, transcending the sameness and difference of things. Having realized it, furthermore, I explain it, reveal it, analyze it, define it, and clarify it for others."  

Venerable Samana Muiananda © 2013

Shaku Mui Shin Shi

Hongaku Jodo supports itself through donations and the sales of some very cool stuff. To check out the stuff click here.