seeking clarification. The times when I myself have failed to do so have been much to my detriment.
In these next two parts, I will often mention very specific high states and attainments for the purpose of attempting in some small way to refocus Buddhism on those things that go far beyond philosophy, psychology, and dogmatic religion. It is full enlightenment that finally makes the difference and was, according to the Buddha himself, the whole reason for all of this. Unfortunately, even fairly rational adults can suddenly lose the ability to stay in touch with ordinary reality when such language is used, and I will do my best to try to counteract this and bring things back down to Earth whenever possible.
It has become almost taboo to mention actual attainment or mastery of this stuff among many meditation communities, and this is grossly unfortunate, which is to say it is completely ridiculous and frighteningly ironic. Some reasons for this will be touched on occasionally, as well as some of what might be able to be done about this. However, if we are to have a clear standard for whether or not these techniques and teachings are working for us, it is vital that we have a thorough knowledge of what is possible and even expected of those who really practice well. That is the primary reason for Part III. Remember, you are reading a book called Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha. It has been written on the assumption that its readers actually want to do this.
That said, there will probably be readers who will think that most of what is written in Part III, which details the stages of enlightenment, the high concentration attainments, and even more unusual territory, is pure fantasy, myth, dogma and nonsense. I have little to say to these readers except that this book is obviously not written for them.
I hope that you will realize the difficulties inherent in language, concepts, doctrines, and maps of spiritual terrain. They are particularly clumsy tools even when used to their fullest potential, and this is unlikely to have happened here. Despite the fact that I will often use a tone implying certainty, it should be said that nothing whatsoever that I have written here is absolutely true. Language at its best is a useful tool, though by its very nature it artificially divides, reduces and over-simplifies. Hopefully, one will concern oneself with what is pragmatic rather than what is absolutely correct from some arbitrary point of view.
90
Introduction to Parts II & III
The crucial thing is practice and direct experience for one’s self. Once you understand for yourself, you will be able to laugh knowingly at my efforts.
91
13.BUDDHISM VS. THE BUDDHA *
One of my teachers once commented, “Buddhism and the
teachings of the Buddha have been at odds for 2,500 years!” These are cynical but appropriate words. What the Buddha taught was really extremely simple and, as a practice, particularly unglamorous and generally quite difficult though manageable. If one has a chance to read the original texts, one sees again and again that what the Buddha taught was generally practical and as non-dogmatic as could be expected. He basically said, “Do these very specific things, and these specific results will happen.” He had little use for ritual, ceremony or philosophy that was not for some practical purpose.
Now, it is true that things did get a bit more complex and religious in the later years of his teaching as The Vinaya, or code of conduct for monks, was established. The Buddha said that the added rules and regulations were a response to the increased quantity of low-quality students with whom he had to work in the later years of his life and the problems inherent in running a large organization. After the Buddha died, however, the process of turning the teachings of the Buddha from a practical path for awakening into a number of ritualistic religions reached new extremes of dogma and division. It is also true, however, that many worthwhile and practical variations on the fundamental teachings and techniques have been added that have provided great benefit to many of those who actually followed them rather than just talked about them.
In general, as mystical teachings become religions, all sorts of things get added on to them depending on the prevailing cultural norms, the current government’s attitude towards the teachings, how well or poorly the teachings are understood by those teaching them, and economic pressures. Christianity as a dogma (rather than as a mystical tradition or set of spiritual practices, e.g. sitting in the desert for 40 days, facing one’s demons, and finding God) is a just one scary example of this, but perhaps no scarier than the religions of Buddhism. Just as Christianity often seems to have little to do with what Jesus was talking about (and practically nothing to do with doing the practices he did or living the kind of life he did) just so Buddhism often seems to have largely forgotten about the core teachings of the Buddha. As Buddhism enters
Buddhism vs. The Buddha
America, a whole new layer of cultural dust is being added to it, most of which is related to the shadow sides of Western psychology and those of the New Age movement. However, there are also signs that fresh new life and health is being breathed into aspects of Buddhism that had become somewhat moldy and calcified in their countries of origin.
The extra trappings are not necessarily all harmful in and of themselves, but they may dilute the amount of practical information about how to awaken with all sorts of other information that may have little to do with awakening and may even be an impediment to it. This may then lead to less than complete emphasis on the three fundamental trainings in morality, concentration and wisdom, which are quite a handful and a great undertaking even in their most simple forms. I was extremely lucky, in that I learned some great Buddhist meditation technology long before I really got to know the culture of mainstream Western Buddhism. I have much use for the former, and as for the latter, well, read on.
It is true that Buddhist training can take on many valid forms, and this is a fine and beautiful thing, as different training methods may be appropriate for different meditators at different times. The added
“padding” of tradition and religion can be a comfort and a support, as most people seem to really like having some kind of dogmatic, mythical or cultural foundation from which to work.
Traditions and standardized conceptual frameworks can also
provide the means by which people can talk to each other about experiences and techniques that might otherwise be very hard to explain clearly. I have a friend from another mystical tradition who knows much that I find useful and interesting, but it took us months to even begin to line up our terminology so that we could benefit from each other’s understanding.
However, these conceptual frameworks and trappings may also
produce the huge amount of useless, harmful and divisive sectarianism that exists within Buddhism and between the various meditative or mystical traditions, as well as all sorts of effort going into things that produce no freedom and may cause other forms of suffering.
Every time I leave my sheltered little academic life and enter the rough and tumble world of endlessly petty, sectarian dharma scenes, I 93
Buddhism vs. The Buddha
am again astounded at how fixated people can be on the minute differences between their tradition and traditions that are so similar to theirs they can only be differentiated by the clothes people wear and the names they call things. I can’t tell you how tiring it is. Sometimes I wonder how these otherwise kind and reasonable people can stand themselves or each other when they are like that. We all want to be special, but I beg you, find a way to be special that allows others to be special also. It is what is common to the great mystical paths that makes them special. The differences are 100% guaranteed to be fundamentally irrelevant. Now, that said, I am going to turn around and bust on cultural aspects of traditions that are not into awakening and mastering what the Buddha was talking about. This is Buddhism, after all, and so it seems only natural that I should be into what the old boy was into.