Own the Not Self

According to Buddhism, all phenomena are characterized by three marks.

All phenomena are anitya, or impermanent.

All phenomena are dukkha, or incapable of providing total satisfaction.

All phenomena are anatman, or not-self.

The last mark has been the most controversial, often interpreted as meaning that Buddhism denies personhood, the soul, individuality, or a whole mess of other conceptions.

"Not-self" is none of these.

To lack a self means this: to lack total ownership of any phenomenon. There is nothing that we, as humans, completely own. This is true, because (1) all things change, and thus escape total ownership; and (2) no thing provides complete satisfaction, even if we would want it to, thus demonstrating the lack of complete ownership.

Is there anything that you, who own nothing, can call your own?

Progressively Conservative

Buddhadasa Bhikkhu: The Middle Way Life in a World of Polarity

We human beings have long acquired the habit of creating dichotomies and opposition, and our understandings of scriptural texts and traditions have not avoided this tendency. We frequently find polarity imposed as a device of convenience: tradition versus reform, meditator versus scholar, etc. Some Buddhist teachers may fall into such dichotomies. Ajahn Buddhadasa is one who does not. For him, the middle way is about finding the right course between extremes.

Ajahn Buddhadasa grew up during a time of great change in Thai society, as aggressive western “civilization” and imperialism made deep inroads. This change brought about many benefits such as roads, schools, and advances in health care, but much destruction resulted as well. The forests of Thailand diminished from over 90% to just 10%, prostitution became rampant, and traditional modes of life have disappeared. Many in Thailand responded to the pressure to westernize by embracing and profiting from it. Others took the opposite approach, resisting and refusing what the West had to offer. Ajahn Buddhadasa sought the middle way between these opposing alternatives.

The organizing element in Ajahn Buddhadasa’s response to Western imperialism and modernization was the Dhamma. This may seem self-evident, but it wasn’t true of the political-economic elite or even the majority of Thai monks, especially the senior monks who were often much more interested in maintaining tradition and privilege than in living from Dhammic principles. One of Ajahn Buddhadasa’s most notable qualities was his ability to hold the Dhamma at the center—not a bookish, memorized Dhamma, but a living, creative expression of it. He and others, such as Vietnamese Buddhist teacher Thich Nhat Hahn, represent some of the healthiest Asian responses to the tremendous economic, political, and military pressure emanating from the violent capitalist-driven ideology of the West.

Faced with the dichotomy of slavishly following or stubbornly refusing the progress of Westernization, Ajahn Buddhadasa felt that there were many things to learn from the West. Like the Dalai Lama, he was fascinated by science. When he was a young monk, he cherished the typewriter given to him by an early benefactor. He experimented with radios and early recording equipment, and was an excellent photographer. He read Freud and other psychologists, and philosophers like Hegel and Marx. He believed there was a way to use some Western developments constructively. Instead of blindly refusing them, he thought that one should learn how to adapt them - understanding them while being mindful of their potential dangers.

He thought that Asian peoples could learn from what those in the West were thinking and doing, without surrendering their own wisdom. Many Thai students in Europe and in Western-style educational systems were being told by their European teachers that they came from an “inferior civilization.” There were some who believed what they were told. Fortunately, others did not. Ajahn Buddhadasa emerged as the main Thai voice pointing out that Europe had created nothing comparable to Buddhism, while acknowledging the economic and military advancement of the West. He presented the view that Asian Buddhism had an attitude much more fitting with science than Christianity, and a kind of wisdom largely missing in the West.

Ajahn Buddhadasa taught that in order to wisely absorb what is coming from the West, and to filter what is unhealthy, we need to stay grounded in an understanding of Buddha-Dhamma. This had a great influence on Thai society, especially among the progressive elite. Though the meaning is a bit different for those of us born in the West, the dilemma remains: we live in a culture that is very powerful and has some healthy, creative aspects, but also a tremendous amount of violence and destruction. How are we going to sort through this? In which principles can we ground ourselves?

Another dichotomy occurs between conservative and radical. The Thai activist and scholar Sulak Sivaraksa coined the term “radical conservatism” to describe Ajahn Buddhadasa. In some ways Ajahn Buddhadasa was conservative. He thought that Southern Thai culture was healthy, balanced, and wise, and he wanted to help conserve it. He was also conservative, in certain respects, regarding Buddhism, believing that Buddhism needed to stay grounded in its past without being stuck there.

At the same time he was radical. Ajahn Buddhadasa honored the Buddhist tradition that had developed over 2500 years, but he also recognized that the many changes it had been through were not in keeping with its core. In trying to understand and preserve the tradition, he endeavored to find the original and essential aspects of Buddhism through carefully reading and studying the Pali suttas. He insisted on reviving core threads of Buddha-Dhamma—teachings such as suññata (emptiness) and tathata (thusness) —that were in danger of being obliterated by certain elements of traditional Theravada Buddhism. Although this could be considered a conservative activity, it seemed very radical to the monastic hierarchy. Rather than end up on one side or the other of this conservative-progressive dichotomy, he was able to be progressively conservative and conservatively progressive, avoiding a common ideological lock-down.

Another key dichotomy he addressed is that of lay versus monastic. Senior monks discouraged him from teaching anatta (not-self) and paticcasamuppada (dependent co-origination) to lay people on grounds that it would “confuse them.” But in good conscience Ajahn Buddhadhasa could not stop. He argued that these dhammas are core to Buddhism, and all people who want to end suffering have a right to learn them. For him, ending suffering is not a monastic issue, or even a Buddhist issue, but a human issue. He took on the work of making the Dhamma available to anyone who might be interested, whether they were lay or ordained, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Christian, or Sikh (and he had students from all of these traditions).

Ajahn Buddhadasa also challenged the meditation versus daily-life practice dichotomy. The term ‘Dhamma practice’ is often used as a euphemism for meditation both in the West and in Asia . When people say ‘practice’ they are referring to the practice of sitting on a cushion or doing walking meditation, and sometimes specifically on retreat or in a formal setting. This has raised questions and created confusion about how to practice in daily-life, and how to respond to the demands, complexities, and needs of the world we live in.

Central to Ajahn Buddhadasa’s approach is the idea that “Dhamma is duty; duty is Dhamma.” Dhamma practice comes down to doing our duty, which inspires a further investigation into the nature of that duty. For some of us our duty is something dictated to us by our family. The government tells us about our patriotic duty. Capitalism tells us about our duty to consume to keep the economy strong. Ajahn Buddhadasa believed that duty must be discovered by and for ourselves. We should be mindful of messages from our family, government, culture, and economic system, but in the end it is our own responsibility to identify. Sometimes it’s about taking care of the body, sometimes it’s about one’s profession, and sometimes it’s about social action. Ultimately the core duty is to let go of self and to be free of suffering.

Finally, there is the spiritual versus worldly dichotomy. There are teachers of Theravada who believe in a clear duality between samsara and Nibbana, the worldly and transcendent. And there is much in the West that dichotomizes these as well, including leftist political traditions that want to abolish religion and be simply materialistic. There are others with the opposite bias: “Forget politics and forget social issues, all you have to do is practice, practice, practice and escape to Nibbana.”

While Ajahn Buddhadasa didn’t believe that samsara (worldly) and Nibbana (transcendent) are one and the same, he did insist that Nibbana is found only in the midst of the world. For him the way to end suffering could only be found through suffering. He described Nibbana as “the coolest point in the furnace.”

The Dhamma perspective that made all this bridging possible is an understanding, both intellectual and experiential, of idappaccayata—the universal natural law that all things happen because of causes and conditions. Nothing is static, absolute, or fixed. Seeing this, we avoid becoming trapped in ideology, positions, and dichotomies. Ajahn Buddhadasa believed that an approach which may have worked for a while may also finally reach its limit. The more we understand that everything depends on causes and conditions, that nothing is fixed, the easier it will be to navigate the intellectual and ideological dichotomies of our world, and to follow the middle way of non-suffering in this lifetime.

-- Santikaro

The Nature of God

God is Nature.

The presence of God is the presence of Nature.

Nature is God.

The study of Nature is the study of God.

God and Nature: two sides of the same Reality.

God -- the Great, Starry-Bright Nothing --

continually

gives birth to

Nature -- the Awesome, Solar-Lucid Something.

To see Nature is to see the Buddha.

To love Nature is to love the Christ.

To see through Nature is to see as the Buddha.

To love beyond Nature is to love as the Christ.

To see God as the Heart of Nature is to be the Buddha.

To love God as the Heart of Nature is to be the Christ.

The Nature of Mind

Mind is Nature.

The cultivation of mind is the cultivation of nature.

Nature is Mind.

The love of nature is the love of mind.

Mind and Nature: two sides of the same reality.

Psychology is Cosmology.

Buddha: The purification of mind is the purification of nature.

Christ: The creation of nature is the creation of the mind.

Buddha: To unbound mind is to unbound nature.

Christ: To save nature is to save the mind.

Buddha: To act with wisdom and compassion is to act intelligently with the mind and gently with nature.

Christ: To love God and others is to love the mind and nature.

Mind is Nature. Nature is Mind.

Psychology is Cosmology.

Noble Truths for House-Holders

1. First noble truth: the truth of compassion (or "karuna") and wisdom (or "prajna"). Compassion and wisdom make life on earth enjoyable.

2. Second noble truth: the origin of compassion and wisdom exists in the realization that all beings seek and deserve compassion and wisdom, as relief from the frustrations and sufferings of life.

3. Third noble truth: family life is an excellent environment in which to practice compassion and wisdom. Spouse and children are living Buddhas, ready to teach us what we need to know and what we need to open our hearts to.

4. Fourth noble truth: compassion and wisdom are cultivated via the noble eightfold path.

Exactly How

Exactly how Buddhism and Christianity are compatible will be increasingly revealed over the coming centuries. No need to attempt, right now, a "forced" syncretism. The organic process is the best process. Still, one can understand the Christian term "God" in Buddhist ways. "God" would, then, not refer to one particular Buddhist idea; "God" would possess a range of potential meanings, depending upon the context. Possible Buddhist terms for "God":

1. The Buddha
2. The Dharma
3. The Sangha
4. Nirvana
5. Tathagata-Garbha
6. Buddha-Nature
7. Nirmanakaya
8. Sambhogakaya
9. Dharmakaya
10. Dzogchen

The Buddhist God

It's actually quite simple. There is "God" in Buddhism, if one only look at the etymology:

O.E. god "supreme being, deity," from P.Gmc. *guthan (cf. Du. god, Ger. Gott, O.N. guð, Goth. guþ), from PIE *ghut- "that which is invoked" (cf. Skt. huta- "invoked," an epithet of Indra), from root *gheu(e)- "to call, invoke."

"God", then, is that which is invoked. Whether "God" is omnipotent, omniscient, or omnipresent, is irrelevant. In Buddhism, the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha are all invoked, in one way or another. So, the Triple Gem is the God, as understood within Buddhism.

Astronomical Buddhism

The Sun: The Buddha
The Moon: The Sangha
Mars: Vinaya/Renunciation
Mercury: Sutta
Jupiter: Sila/Virtue
Venus: Tantra
Saturn: The Dhamma
Rahu: Bodhisattva
Ketu: Dharmakaya

Roar of the Tigress

"I am sure you’ve noticed by now that I’ve been talking about Zen as a religion, and yet some of you may have heard that all of Buddhism, and especially Zen, is atheistic. It is not. You’ve heard this due to the fact that the Christian missionaries who brought back the Scriptures from the Far East either did not know of, or deliberately steered clear of, one particular Scripture spoken by the Buddha. In the Udana Scripture He says very clearly, “O monks, there is an Unborn, Undying, Unchanging, Uncreated.” This is what He found in meditation and which gave Him His enlightenment. In other words, He found That Which Is. What the Christians call “God” and Mohammedans call “Allah”, the Buddhists call variably: That Which Is, the Lord of the House, the Cosmic Buddha, the Eternal, Amida Buddha, the Immaculacy of Emptiness, Vairocana Buddha, the Unborn, etc....

Now, if you would study Soto Zen, or for that matter any form of Buddhism, you need three things. You need perfect faith in That Which Is, the Eternal. You need to know, to have the faith in and the willingness to go hunting for, that which will tell you about the Eternal. And you need to know that when you can’t get the answers, there are people whom you can trust to help you. In other words, when you yell, “Help! I’m stuck”, there are people who are willing and able to help. These three things are what we in Buddhism call the Three Refuges: “I take refuge in the Buddha; I take refuge in the Dharma; I take refuge in the Sangha.” These three things are absolutely essential: perfect faith, the willingness to study, and to trust someone who says, “Well, let’s talk; maybe I can help; maybe we can help each other; maybe I have a bunch of experience which I am willing to put at your disposal and see if it’s any use.” Those are the three things you’ll need if you are to study Soto Zen or any other form of Buddhism.

All the rest are beliefs which you have to prove true for yourself. The Buddha said very clearly, “Do not believe anything because I tell you. Only believe it when you have made it true for yourself.” Therefore, enlightenment is the making true for oneself of the reality of the existence, and the experience of the existence, of the Unborn. Again, remember that the word “enlightenment” has got muddled as a result of not understanding the importance of the Udana Scripture. When that scripture was first translated, incidentally, a number of people tried to pull it down saying, “Oh, it couldn’t possibly be that the Buddha had found the Eternal!” You read a bit more, and if you do, you discover that this is the only interpretation that makes sense in Buddhism. He definitely did, and it makes it into a real religion and not just a way of life.

Faith, study, and trust: if you think of the word “refuge”, what does it actually mean? To take refuge in something that you can neither see nor grasp nor feel, you have to have faith in it. When you start, perhaps you believe it, but you have to go on beyond belief: belief does not go nearly far enough. So often in religion people get stuck with belief. They think that is enough: it’s not. It has to go on to the certainty of faith, which is an absolute certainty but one which leads not to absolute belief and the hard-fisted type of certainty; it leads to perfect faith, which can allow everybody else to have their beliefs and not interfere with them, and know that when those people find perfect faith, whatever they happen to call the Eternal will be all right."

Ineffabilis Deus Mater

Pius IX, after consulting all the bishops of the world, issued Ineffabilis Deus on December 8, 1854, declaring the immaculate conception a doctrine revealed by God:

"We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful." [See here for background; see also Timothy G. McCarthy. The Catholic Tradition: The Church in the Twentieth Century. 2nd Edition. Chicago: Loyola Press, 1998, 373.]

The Immaculate Conception of Mary is a profound doctrine. Within it are hidden the foundations and implications of Christian Avataric Non-Dualism.

Christian dogma has no limit. That is, the literal meanings of the dogmas do not exhaust the dogma's meanings. The literal meanings of the dogmas do not exclude additional implications, implications easily dismissed or rejected when only the literal meaning is considered. The dogmas are experimental hypotheses, working definitions, if you will, whose practicality and reality must be tested in the laboratory of one's own body-mind. In fact, to paraphrase the Buddha Shakyamuni, the final origin and end of Christian dogma cannot be seen. Dogma arises, shines, and subsides within the very Heart. The final origin and end of Christian dogma can only be known from, in, and as the very Heart.

Allah is the Heart

Allah is the Non-Dual Tantric Union of Samsara and Nirvana.

Allah is the Heart of All.

La Illaha Ill'Allah.

There is nothing but Allah.

All this is Allah.

Preceded by the Heart

[Inspired by Dhammapada 1-2]

Phenomena are preceded by the Heart,
ruled by the Heart,
made of the Heart.
If you speak or act with a corrupted Heart,
then suffering follows you --
as the wheel of the cart follows
the track of the ox that pulls it.

Phenomena are preceded by the Heart,
ruled by the Heart,
made of the Heart.
If you speak or act with a calm, bright Heart,
then happiness follows you --
like a shadow,
that never leaves.

The Path to Purity

[Inspired by Dhammapada 277-279]

When you see with discernment,
"All phenomena are in constant motion" --
you grow disenchanted with not acting in the world.
This is the path to purity.

When you see with discernment,
"All phenomena are broken-hearted" --
you grow disenchanted with avoiding relationship.
This is the path to purity.

When you see with discernment,
"All phenomena are self-less" --
you grow disenchanted with selfish thought, feeling, and action.
This is the path to purity.

The Four Turnings

The history of religions is the history of the four turnings of the Wheel of Truth. Each religion has elements of all four turnings, but each religion usually emphasizes one turning or another.

First Turning of the Wheel, the Revelation of Jivanta: The Encounter with Truth

Second Turning of the Wheel, the Revelation of the Buddha: The Incarnation of Truth

Third Turning of the Wheel, the Revelation of the Beloved: The Liberation into Truth

Fourth Turning of the Wheel, the Revelation of the Heart: The Tantric-Eucharistic Union of Incarnation-Liberation

[Inspired by the Three Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma.]

Secret Dharma

The secret to Buddhism is the secret of bhakti.

Vedanta Vallabha

Stephen Schaffer, better known as Shyamdas, was launched into his spiritual quest at age 17 through contact with Neemkaroli Baba. Now 33, Shyamdas is an avid practitioner of the Vaishnava Vallabhacharya lineage (Pushti Marg, or the Path of Grace), having studied for 7 years with various Vaishnava pundits in the Vrindavan area of India. He is a translator of Hindi, Braja Vasa and Sanskrit and Vice President of the International Pushti Margiya Vaishnava Parishad. An art dealer by profession, Shyamdas resides with his wife in Vermont. He lectures on various aspects of Hinduism and publishes his English translations of Vallab sampradaya scriptures into English. Shyamdas shared the following insights with Hinduism Today in Hawaii on March 14, 1986.

Hinduism Today: Please tell us how you became involved so deeply in the Vallabhacharya sampradaya.

Shyamdas: I went to India, got going there originally by a teacher, Neemkaroli Baba, who was the guru of Ram Dass and he resided in Vrindavan as well as in the Himalayas. So I went to Vrindavan to meet him and remained in the Vrindavan area, a 168-mile area which encompasses all the areas that are sacred to Lord Krishna. I eventually took initiation in Vallab sampradaya about a year or two afterward and lived on the Goverdan hill, which was the hill which Lord Krishna upheld to ward off Indra's rains for 7 days. There I studied with various bhaktas and acharyas on Vaisnav Vedanta. I specialize in 16th century Vrajbhasha poetry which are the poems of Surdas, who is very well known. He is perhaps the Shakespeare of Hindi literature, like Jayadev is the Shakespeare of the Sanskrit devotional literature. Surdas and Tulsidas. Surdas is considered the sun of bhakti devotion, and Tulsidas, who wrote on Rama, would be considered the moon. So I studied the poems of Surdas and I translated his life story and many of his poems, and those of a number of other poets.

I also studied Vedanta, Shuddha Advaita Vedanta of Vallabhacharya, which could be translated as "realistic monism." Vaishnavism has a number of schools, four main schools: Nimbarka, Madhva, Ramanuja (often known as Sri Sampradaya) and Vallab sampradaya. Vallab sampradaya's realistic monism is different from Shankara's interpretation of monism and parallels closely Kashmiri Shaivism and perhaps other forms of Saivism as well in that it is a real advaita philosophy that does not incorporate Shankaracharya's theories of maya, the world being false. The world Is true. But what could be false about the world is the way we see it But the world itself is true and is the manifestation of the Supreme Godhead...Vallab sampradaya believes that everything is Krishna and nothing but Krishna.

Q: Who is your guru?

A: My teacher is His Holiness Goswami Prathameshji, who heads the first seat of Vallab sampradaya. Vallab sampradaya has seven seats. He is very active in Hindu activities. He does a lot of preaching. Hindu Vishwa Parishad invites him to many of the functions.

Vallab sampradaya does not have a monk lineage per se. It's a primarily householder lineage. None of the teachers in Vallab sampradaya are sannyasins. They are all grihastha. They are all householder. That is the way the lineage was set up, unlike the other Vaishnav sampradayas. Some of them are more oriented toward sannyas. The ISKCON lineage is more sannyas oriented.

Q: Do the goswamis wear orange?

A: No, no. White. It is an extremely Vedic sampradaya. Householders are traditionally initiating gurus, too. That is something that is according to Vedic teachings, that sannyasis initiate sannyasis, and householders traditionally initiate householders. The acharyas in Vallab sampradaya observe homa and other Vedic rites as well. Of course bhakti is the main emphasis...Vallab sampradaya has a following of perhaps 30 million people. It is one of the largest Vaishnav sampradayas in India. It is not well known in the West. Its followers are all through Gujarat...And in London you have thousands of Vallab sampradaya Vaishnavas.

Vallab sampradaya is also not well known in the West. There has not been much written in English on it. And what has been written by other people who were not initiated nor studied with the lineage is often incorrect. And that is what I have been trying poetic aspect and some which have to do with its Vedantic side.

Vallab sampradaya is centered in the lilakirtan which means singing the exploits or the divine pastimes of Sri Krishna in a more classical Indian raga system. And Vallab sampradaya is very oriented towards seva, the worship of the swarupa or deity. In Vaishnavism there is no lineage that has such sublime worship - I would not call it temple worship because the worship is supposed to be a private home worship, although there are temples. It is taught in Vallab sampradaya that you should always worship Krishna. One of the ways is offering food and ornamentation, music and bhajan.

Q: Could you elaborate on your perception of Sri Adi Shankara's impact on Hinduism especially in the West.

A: Let me first say I think Shankara was a genius. I don't think there is any teacher, from Saivism to Vaishnvism, who has written as beautiful Sanskrit as Shankaracharya. He was a fantastic writer and a great teacher of what he was teaching. But if you want to view Shankara in the spirit of Vedic teachings, I think there is a problem. Number one, he is called "Buddha in disguise" by many of the earlier teachers, and this is correct. At the time Shankaracharya appeared in India, India was fairly Buddhist, and Shankaracharya could not teach a true Vedic school, because Vedic school teaches of an atma or a soul, and Buddhism does not have an atma concept, per se, and they don't accept the soul existing within the body. Shankaracharya could not bring the theistic aspect of the Vedas directly back to the people because they were too influenced by the teachings of Buddha. So what he did was bring in a teaching which was cloaked in Vedic terminology and mirrored Buddhist teachings. He brought in the pantheon of all the Hindu devas, but his teachings were essentially Buddhist to a large part. When Shankaracharya writes about Buddhism, he is unable to criticize it directly because it parallels his own thinking too much. So he just says the whole school is too ridiculous to even comment on.

Shankaracharya's theory of maya is not supported in the Upanishads. It's not supported in the Brahma Sutras and it's not supported in the Vedas - as the world being false, that this world is an illusion, a dream with no substance and in some way separate from God. This is not a Vedantic thought. Even Western scholars who are impartial who have studied the Brahma Sutras and have studied the teachings of Shankara and, let's say one of the Vaishnav teachers, Ramanuja or Madhva - they would have to side with Ramanuja as being more true to the spirit of the Brahma Sutras.

Q: Why do you think Shankara's teachings have been so popular in the West?

A: I think perhaps because many of the Western practitioners who go into Eastern studies have had it with Western theology. They are either disenchanted with the heaven/hell duality of Christianity and with the personal Godhead as being a father image that strikes terror in the hearts of those who sin against him. They are afraid of a god image, so they move toward something that is far away from it, which is Shankara. Shankara does give respect to all the different deities, to Krishna to Ram to Shiva. But to him, in the final analysis they are mayic. They are illusion, and you must leave all of them and merge into the Ultimate Formless, which for him is the final state. This, I think has appealed to many Westerners because they didn't want any sort of Godhead or God in between them and their final liberation of Ultimate White or Nothingness.

And I think it's because of a lack of study of the true Vedic teachings which do point to a personal theistic deity, if you are going through Saivite or Vaishnavite traditions. And the teachers who have come from India have been predominantly influenced by the Shankaracharya teachings,...because Shankara had such a strong influence on the Indian teachings. He swept India. He was only 36 years old when he left, but he had left such an impression on the Indian mind that even today in India if you say the word Vedanta, people think that you are speaking about Shankara. They say, "Oh, he is a Vedanti," which in certain circles means that he is a follower of Shankara, which is not correct. Vedanta means Vedanta: that which is the end [or final conclusion] of the Veda or knowledge.

This confusion which Shankara put into the world of this world being false means that Shankara's teachings must also be false. So there are certain contradictions. He says the world is false, and he is Jagadguru, meaning guru of the world. This means he is guru of the false world. There are many many problems when we look into the actual teachings of Shankaracharya (If it is an illusion, where did the illusion come from?), if you want to get into the subtleties of where Shankara faltered. And this has always been a great spirit of the Vaishnavas and the Shankaracharyas to have debates, which I think is good, because if you want to have a debate about something it should to do. I've published five or six books on the different aspects of Vallab sampradaya, some historical, some having to do with its be a debate about the Ultimate Reality as opposed to just squabbling about commonplace matters.

Q: Do you agree with the idea that Shankara overlaid his mayavadin philosophy onto the prevailing theistic religion?

A: Yes. Today if in fact you visit some of the Shankaracharya tents when you visit the Kumba Mela, you'll see that the Shankaracharya lineages have Rama and Krishna lila, the play in which children between 10 and 15 enact the pastimes of Krishna. Shankaracharya has these. They ultimately have to go back into the whole Hindu trip of Krishna and Rama and Shiva and all the different pastimes to try to attract followers into their fold to ultimately tell them that it's all false. It's wild and that's what most Westerners follow.

But then again, I think that the concept of Sanatana Dharma is so great that it allows for these things to occur...I may have said something about Shankaracharya, how I don't personally agree with his interpretation, but I respect Shankaracharya...Contradictions can exist within truth, and no one has a turnkey formula. That is one of the most important concepts of Vedantic thought, that the person who says he knows, doesn't know. And the person who says he doesn't know knows. Hinduism is perhaps the only religion in the world that has allowed an incarnation to establish a religion which is anti-Vedic in its actual teachings. What other religion would accept a teacher who taught against their own school? It is a mind-boggling religion if you try to look at it and say this is Hinduism. Hinduism is so broad that to study any particular school of Hinduism would take at least one lifetime and probably several. And to try to make broad, sweeping statements about Hinduism being this or that-Hinduism has the most theistic attitudes of any religion in the world, and it has attitudes that are almost atheistic in terms of the very abstract forms of yoga that don't give importance to the Godhead and just give importance to deep contemplation and samadhi. It's got everything in between. It's got tantra. It's got devotion. It's got Goddess worship. It's got sacrifice. It's got a complete code of law. It's a complete religious system that did not separate art, music, science, philosophy, medicine, from its actual main scriptures. So hence you have all the different branches of the Vedas. It was not essentially a religion. It was a dharma.

The Brightening of the World

Dwelling at Savatthi. There the Blessed One addressed the friends: "I will teach you the origination of the world and the brightening of the world. Listen and pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, Bhagavan," the friends responded to the Blessed One.

The Blessed One said: "And what is the origination of the world? Dependent on the eye and material form there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes perception. From perception as a requisite condition comes difference. From difference as a requisite condition comes fear. From fear as a requisite condition comes seeking. From seeking as a requisite condition, then aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. This is the origination of the world.

Dependent on the ear and sounds there arises ear-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes perception. From perception as a requisite condition comes difference. From difference as a requisite condition comes fear. From fear as a requisite condition comes seeking. From seeking as a requisite condition, then aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. This is the origination of the world.

Dependent on the nose and aromas there arises nose-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes perception. From perception as a requisite condition comes difference. From difference as a requisite condition comes fear. From fear as a requisite condition comes seeking. From seeking as a requisite condition, then aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. This is the origination of the world.

Dependent on the tongue and flavors there arises tongue-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes perception. From perception as a requisite condition comes difference. From difference as a requisite condition comes fear. From fear as a requisite condition comes seeking. From seeking as a requisite condition, then aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. This is the origination of the world.

Dependent on the body and tactile sensations there arises body-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes perception. From perception as a requisite condition comes difference. From difference as a requisite condition comes fear. From fear as a requisite condition comes seeking. From seeking as a requisite condition, then aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. This is the origination of the world.

Dependent on the intellect and mental qualities there arises intellect-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes perception. From perception as a requisite condition comes difference. From difference as a requisite condition comes fear. From fear as a requisite condition comes seeking. From seeking as a requisite condition, then aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. This is the origination of the world.

And what is the brightening of the world? Dependent on the eye and forms there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes perception. From perception as a requisite condition comes non-difference. From non-difference as a requisite condition comes the end of fear. From the end of fear as a requisite condition comes the end of seeking. From the end of seeking as a requisite condition, then the recognition of the luminous heart even within aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair comes into play. This is the brightening of the world.

Dependent on the ear and sounds there arises ear-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes perception. From perception as a requisite condition comes non-difference. From non-difference as a requisite condition comes the end of fear. From the end of fear as a requisite condition comes the end of seeking. From the end of seeking as a requisite condition, then the recognition of the luminous heart even within aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair comes into play. This is the brightening of the world.

Dependent on the nose and aromas there arises nose-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes perception. From perception as a requisite condition comes non-difference. From non-difference as a requisite condition comes the end of fear. From the end of fear as a requisite condition comes the end of seeking. From the end of seeking as a requisite condition, then the recognition of the luminous heart even within aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair comes into play. This is the brightening of the world.

Dependent on the tongue and flavors there arises tongue-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes perception. From perception as a requisite condition comes non-difference. From non-difference as a requisite condition comes the end of fear. From the end of fear as a requisite condition comes the end of seeking. From the end of seeking as a requisite condition, then the recognition of the luminous heart even within aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair comes into play. This is the brightening of the world.

Dependent on the body and tactile sensations there arises body-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes perception. From perception as a requisite condition comes non-difference. From non-difference as a requisite condition comes the end of fear. From the end of fear as a requisite condition comes the end of seeking. From the end of seeking as a requisite condition, then the recognition of the luminous heart even within aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair comes into play. This is the brightening of the world.

Dependent on the intellect and mental qualities there arises intellect-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes perception. From perception as a requisite condition comes non-difference. From non-difference as a requisite condition comes the end of fear. From the end of fear as a requisite condition comes the end of seeking. From the end of seeking as a requisite condition, then the recognition of the luminous heart even within aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair comes into play. This is the brightening of the world."

[Inspired by the Loka Sutta]

Casting Off the Burden

At Savatthi. "Friends, I will teach you the burden, the carrier of the burden, the taking up of the burden, and the casting off of the burden. Listen and pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, Bhagavan," the friends responded.

The Blessed One said, "And which is the burden? 'The five types of clinging,' it should be said. Which five types? Clinging to form, clinging to feeling, clinging to perception, clinging to conceptions, clinging to sense-awareness. This, monks, is called the burden.

"And which is the carrier of the burden? 'The person,' it should be said. This venerable one with such a name, such a clan-name. This is called the carrier of the burden.

"And which is the taking up of the burden? The fear that makes for further limitations — accompanied by worry and anxiety, avoiding now this and now that — i.e., fearing sensual pleasure, fearing limitation, fearing ungroundedness. This is called the taking up of the burden.

"And which is the casting off of the burden? The remainderless fading and cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, and letting go of that very fear. This is called the casting off of the burden."

That is what the Blessed One said. Having said that, the One Well-gone, the Teacher, said further:

A burden indeed

are the five types of clinging,

and the carrier of the burden

is the person.

Taking up the burden in the world

is unsatisfactory.

Casting off the burden

is bliss.

Having cast off the heavy burden

and not taking on another,

pulling up fear,

along with its root,

one is free from hunger,

totally unbound.

[Inspired by the Bhara Sutta]

With What

[A deity:]

With what
is the world tied down?

With the subduing of what
is it freed?

With the abandoning of what
are all bonds cut through?

[The Buddha:]

With fear
the world is tied down.

With the subduing of fear
the world is freed.

With the abandoning of fear
all bonds are cut through.

[Inspired by the Iccha Sutta]

Defeating the Army of Death

This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Buddha, the Arahant, so I have heard.

"These three divine sounds sound forth among the deities on appropriate occasions. Which three? When a disciple of the noble ones, shaving off his hair and beard, clothing himself in the ochre robe, makes up his mind to go forth from the home life into homelessness, on that occasion the divine sound sounds forth among the deities: 'This disciple of the noble ones has made up his mind to do battle with Death.' This is the first divine sound that sounds forth among the deities on appropriate occasions.

"When a disciple of the noble ones lives devoted to developing the seven sets of qualities that are wings to Awakening, on that occasion the divine sound sounds forth among the deities: 'This disciple of the noble ones is doing battle with Death.' This is the second divine sound that sounds forth among the deities on appropriate occasions.

"When a disciple of the noble ones, through the ending of the taints of lust, fear, and ignorance, dwells in the awareness-release and discernment-release that are free from the taints of lust, fear, and ignorance, having known and made them manifest for himself right in the present life, on that occasion the divine sound sounds forth among the deities: 'This disciple of the noble ones has won the battle. Having been in the front lines of the battle, he now dwells victorious.' This is the third divine sound that sounds forth among the deities on appropriate occasions.

"These are the three divine sounds that sound forth among the deities on appropriate occasions."

Seeing he's won the battle —
the disciple of the Rightly Self-awakened One —
even the deities pay homage to this great one,
thoroughly mature.
"Homage to you, O thoroughbred man —
you who have won the hard victory,
defeating the army of Death,
unhindered in emancipation."
Thus they pay homage, the deities,
to one who has reached the heart's goal,
for they see in him
no means that would bring him under Death's sway.

[Inspired by Iti. 82]