Buddha !!

     After reading the Early Buddhist Discourses the following topics resonated with me strongly. For once, the struggle and permanent fight against the self which is drawing us down with desires like greed, jealousy, hate and anger, but also the things that we would judge uplifting in our lives, like successes, material gain, fame etc. Even the positive aspects of life arise from our desires and are in the way of a proper detachment from our own selves that are permanently trying to rule and drive us. Not cheering when we are winning is surely not an easy thing to remember, but it is true, that our 'ups' can easily turn out to be 'downs' and that every gain comes with responsibility to use its fruit in the right way. So as a consequence nothing is purely good or bad in life. Therefore our suffering stems from the way we look at things and the things we desire to happen.
Another interesting part of the Discourses was the "Discourse to Potthapada, who seems to busy himself with all the wrong questions. He continues to ask about soul/perception and body and their relation, the state of this world and other while neglecting the most important message to abandon the material self, the mind made self and the immaterial self. In the discourse Gautama uses different       ways to explain the same thing to him. He also uses the rhetorical mean of repetition in order to make sure that his pupil understands. Potthapada is taught by the Gautama that the things he inquires about do not matter, but what matters is to find the way to end the suffering and attain enlightenment through detachment from all the selves he is carrying - logically that can only be one, but I suggest that he means different levels of desires or bodily and mental restrictions here, while speaking of more than one.
After these explanations Potthapada is convinced of the legitimacy of the Gautama and he decides to stay and to become a student of the Gautama and later receives his ordinations from him after reaching his goal.

    Why do you assume a ‘person’?

Mara, you have adopted a wrong speculative view.

This is only a heap of processes

There is no person to be found here.

Just as the word ‘chariot’

Refers to an assemblage of parts,

So, ‘person’ is a convention

Used when the aggregates are present.

Only suffering arises

And suffering remains and disappears

Nothing other than suffering arises

Nothing other than suffering ceases.”

In these verses of Sister Vajira from Early Buddhist Discourses, Vajira is explaining to her ego - addressed as “Mara” in the poem - in return to its questions about her origin as a ‘person’ that its assumption about her being a person in the sense of an unchangeable eternal being is incorrect. She continues that her being is determined by ‘a heap of processes’. Processes are something flowing, therefore when we visualize processes we are forced to do this in flow-charts and it cannot be done in a definition; processes are something that is always moving and in action and cannot be determined or defined by one specific state, they rather keep evolving from one state into the other. In addition to that, she states that a person is nothing but a, commonly agreed on, definition to name an ensemble of ‘flowing properties’ of ‘characteristic occupations’ of the whole.  To clarify this to herself (or her ego), she uses the example of the chariot, that is made out of an assemblage of parts that forms, as an end result, something new, namely the vehicle. For a human these parts are called aggregates and refer to the Five Aggregates that Buddha determined as: 1.form or matter, 2.sensation or feeling, 3.perception, 4.mental formation (mental habits, thoughts, opinions etc.) and 5.consciousness. All five terms describe processes that are in permanent motion within a ‘non-person’; the ‘non‘ has to protrude the ‘person’, because at no time can there be a definable permanent state. Therefore there is no-self, as the self is through the aggregates in a state of permanent change and motion. 

She then moves on to the consequences of being an assemblage of these five aggregates mentioned above. As Buddha refers to the aggregates in his ‘Discourse on the Parable of the Watersnake” (page 110-116), as subject to permanent change, there is no possibility to hold on to one of its moments, to define a particular person, because it will never reflect the person entirely, but only a moment of the person’s life. Buddha explicitly explains to his bhikkus (students) that this momentary thought, form, sensation etc. does not belong to them as a person and that it will flow away. Therefore, to avoid dhukka, a person must realize this and let go of what they think is theirs, in order to attain a state when their aggregates cannot cause them suffering any more.  Vajira is referring to this when she is speaking about the arising of suffering and the cessation of it. Once the non-person realizes that they are not a certain idea,feeling or thought and that this is not something that they can eventually lose, as it has never been theirs that is when the possibility of the disappearance of suffering begins.

     Why doesn’t the Buddha put forward a determinate position in Afterlife?

On page 99 of the Early Buddhist Discourses, Buddha explains his position towards the determination/non-determination of the afterlife. He repeatedly explains that he does not confirm nor does he negate the ten speculative views, and he carries on:

“For what reason are these undeclared by me? Because these are not useful in attaining the goal; they are not fundamental to the religious life and do not lead to aversion, dispassion, cessation, peace, higher knowledge, enlightenment, and nibbana – for these reasons, these are not declared by me.

And what is declared by me? ‘This is suffering’ is declared by me. ‘This si the origin of suffering’ is declared by me. ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ that is declared by me. ‘This is the way leading to the cessation of suffering’ is declared by me.

He makes it very clear in this discourse that he is not here to promise an afterlife or give details about the eternity, soul or the afterlife of the enlightened ones. His mission is to end the suffering as it exists here and now. He does not encourage the individual to look for the life after death, because his teachings concern this world, and have to be accomplished and worked on in this world to contribute on an individual basis to end all the suffering in this world; like the parts of a puzzle that fit together as a whole, all suffering can only be defeated by all beings following the path of enlightenment to universally contribute to the complete cessation of dhukka. If suffering in this world can be ended by his path, then there might not be a necessity of a defined afterlife, and he leaves it to the follower to determine if the ‘afterlife’ will be the complete cessation of dhukka.  Therefore, the Buddha’s teaching is directed on this life and does not include answers concerning an afterlife in the traditional sense, as changing from one world to another.

    The Mindfulness and why is it central to Buddhism?

“The mind, hard to control,

Flighty-alighting where it wishes-

One does well to tame.

The disciplined mind brings happiness.” (The Dhammapada, 3. The Mind, p.9)

For Buddha the mind follows our desires, caters to our desires. The mind is the force that can keep us imprisoned in our perceptions, opinions, experiences and thoughts. Because it determines these activities, it ultimately decides how to act or react to the people and events in our life. Mindfulness is the art to control our mind in ways that enable it to follow us instead of us follow the temper and mood of our minds. As self centered individuals we tend to use the mind in ways that we believe are useful and beneficial for us; but this often happens on the expenses of others. Only when we understand about the interconnectedness of dhukka in this world, are we able to shift our mind away from an ego-centered thinking toward an attitude of all encompassing compassion. 

The result of a lack of Mindfulness is demonstrated by these verses who state that who does not control his mind and actions will not get closer to the enlightenment and wisdom, he is looking for:

 “For those who are unsteady of mind.

Who do not know true Dharma,

And whose serenity wavers, 

Wisdom does not mature”  (The Dhammapada, 3. The Mind, p.10)

However the one who has learned to control his mind and use it in the most beneficial way and who is not blinded by success or defeated by failure has reached the degree of detachment necessary to be a mindful person in the Buddhist sense. He is now able to contribute to the cessation of dhukka:

For one who is awake, 

Whose mind isn’t overflowing, 

Whose heart isn’t afflicted, 

And who has abandoned both merit and demerit,

 Fear does not exist. (The Dhammapada, 3. The Mind, p.10)

     A significant obstacle to meditation and explaination of Suzuki’s advice/insight for overcoming it.

“It is when your practice is rather greedy that you become discouraged with it.” (Zen Mind, Beginner’s mind, p.57)

One of the most obvious signs of greediness is the following of an ideal that the student is trying to reach as a goal. Suzuki explains that this is a very poor and shabby kind of practice and largely misses the point, for when the student continuously thinks of how he wishes to be in the future, he loses the perspective of the here and now, and misses all the benefit that come with the living in the present and learning from the present.  Also, Suzuki emphasizes that it is impossible to reach the set ideal and that the expectations of the student will keep growing while he is trying to approach his ideal. The attachment to his expectations will cause disappointment and encouragement. Suzuki advices the student to never form ideals or even worse some form of competitive situation in his mind. He insists that the mind can only benefit in a detached condition and a free state from mediation.  He explains, that when practicing zazen, there is no joy, or disappointment, or any other feeling involved. Zazen is done anyway, he insists, “…we just do it” (quote Suzuki, p.57), regardless what is the feeling or emotion of the time. It also goes back to Suzukis original requirement of the ‘beginner’s mind’ as the best quality to benefit from zazen. Logically, if one’s mind is filled with expectations or ideals, about how practice and achievements should look like, the mind is no longer a blank page readily absorbing the merits of the practice.

    My thoughts on something specific gained from watching Buddhist films that has added to the experience of reading Buddhist texts.

In the movie Samsara, the conflict between a monk’s secluded life and the influences of the outer life becomes very obvious. While the film is intelligibly demonstrating the struggle with the desires of this world, it also brought up some questions of the practicality of Buddhism, and gave impetus to further investigation. We are faced with the choice of the main protagonist to return to his monastery on the account and the resulting suffering of his wife and child, and the question arises: When does a person who is searching for enlightenment have to take this path over the interest of others and his duties towards them? And further, does he theoretically and ethically have the right to do so? He is at this very moment thinking about what is best for him on his path of betterment, but by taking this decision he contributes to the dhukka of his family and consequently of this world.  So is he actually making a step forward or backward in this case? We cannot tell, as the movie stops at this point, but we can reflect about future scenarios and the consequences of him, abandoning his child, which might have grave or positive impact on the child for example. How will the role of the mother develop and will the monk himself succeed this time. As all events in this life are potentially connected and dhukka can be spread by selfish acts and can be defeated by following the right path of Mindfulness and Compassion, all kind of scenarios are potentially there. The outcome of a deed is often determined in the far future. Generally, it was very interesting to reflect on the practical cases, we were confronted with during the video sessions, and I believe that this is actually the most beneficial part: seeing Buddhism confronting ‘real life’ situations and the possible consequences on the lives of those who are trying to live according to it.