The Buddhist Hour Radio Broadcast Archives

From time to time, an experiment or something else overthrows the standard notion of validity of a theory in science held at that time.

The phlogiston theory is such an example.

The English word "phlogiston" refers to a hypothetical substance or "principle" formally supposed to exist in combination in all combustible bodies, and to be disengaged in the process of combustion.

The use of the term and the theory connected with it were introduced by Stahl in 1702, in his edition of Beccher's Physica Subterranea of 1669.

The existence of phlogiston was denied by Lavoisier in 1775, and although stoutly maintained by Priestly, the belief in it was generally abandoned by 1880.

The English word has its origins in modern Latin language, which can be traced back to the ancient Greek language.

The famous Michelson-Morely experiment was conducted in order to test the proposition that there is a medium, called "ether", through which light travels.

The data of the experiment did not conform to the predicted value.

This 'negative experiment' played a significant role in science. Popper's Logik der Forschung, published in 1934 (translated into English as "The Logic of Scientific Discovery 1959") made little headway initially, but as the difficulties of positivism became apparent his epistemology came to be widely embraced by philosophers and scientists.

Popper's thesis that science proceeds by falsifying theories proved, however, to be as flawed as the claim that it proceeds by setting up empirical tests than can verify them.

For example, as Professor Scott Gordon (1991) stated, the universal law that wood burns when its temperature rises above 400 degrees C is not invalidated if a discarded match, or an unattended campfire, or even the deliberate act of an arsonist, fails to start a forest fire.

Positivist epistemology called into doubt the very possibility of constructing an objective body of scientific knowledge.

Part of the problem we encounter in the individualism­holism debate is semantic rather than philosophical or scientific.

At times, we happen to work with uncertain data about "value".

When data is statistical, such as in the "law of demand", we accept up to a 10% risk or more that our figures are not the best at times.

For example, this week our Founder bought a new fully lined light wool reefer jacket for $339 from a well-known store.

The general view of both our Founder and Members is they consider that the price paid was "good value".

Yet no Member had a current wide survey of prices available.

Objectivity, like certainty, must be regarded as a philosophical ideal because somehow we feel it would be nice to have more knowledge of the value of things in the world and then we may become more objective and more certain that we get good value.

Certain types of research such as that undertaken by mainstream social scientists who work with an epistemology of empiricism means they cannot be brought together in to some "Solomon's House" where they speak as a unified authoritative agency speaking with one voice.

The 227 rules of conduct of the Buddhist Nuns and Monks were codified as the Vinaya Canon over two thousand years ago.

The compilers of the Vinaya rules were well enough acquainted with the contingencies surrounding each rule that they knew which factors were and were not crucial in determining what is and is not an offence.

For Monks and Nuns, any explanation that adds or subtracts factors from those mentioned in the Vibhanga should give way to one that follows the Vibhanga's analysis.

The compilers were careful enough in reporting the Vinita Vatthu ­ the precedents in which the Buddha judged individual cases against an existing rule ­ to include all the important factors bearing on the judgement.

Any explanation that requires rewriting the precedents, adding extra details extraneous to the Vibhanga to account for the judgement, should give way to an explanation that can make sense out of the precedents as they are reported and in terms of the analyses presented elsewhere in the Vibhanga.

From time to time, in different countries, cases where the Monk or Nun is accused of breaking the rules of practice are investigated.

Special Committees are set up by the Chief Monks who can rely on Buddha Dhamma scholars for advice. None of these take any joy in arguing with the written Commentary.

In fact, wherever possible, they have been happy to give it the benefit of the doubt. Such proceedings, which may last a year or more, are not open to lay persons.

Still, now that Buddha Dhamma is coming to the West, some persons feel it is time to stop and take stock of the tradition, an to check the later traditions against the earliest sources. This is especially important in a way of thought and life whose primary appeal to the Western mind is in its reliance on reason and investigation, rather than on blindly accepted authority.

In commenting along these lines of thought, we are simply following a pattern that has repeated itself through the history of the Theravadin tradition: of returning to the original principles whenever the religion reaches an historic turning point.

It might be as simple as considering the case where a Monk or Nun carries and uses a Gold American Express credit card.

In our view, if there is a case where a lay Committee supporting the Venerable pays the account and the Venerable does not handle the payment, it seems clear enough.

Some reporters consider there is, of course, a danger in being too independent in interpreting the tradition, in that strongly held opinions can lead to disharmony in the Community.

Thus, in evaluating the Commentary against the Canon, we do not want to imply that our conclusions are the only or the best ones possible.

Important points may have slipped our attention or escaped our understanding.

For this reason, even in rules where we think that the Commentary does not do justice to the Vibhanga, we have tried to give a faithful account of the important points from the Commentary so that those who wish to take it as their authority may still use this book as a guide.

Our Centre's view is when we look after Monks, as in the Rainy Season, we arrange things so that our laypersons handle money and the Venerables do not have to handle finance.

We do not intend to disparage the motives of other persons who interpret things in a different manner.

If this were a point on which we are mistaken, I would be pleased if knowledgeable people would correct me with reference to the Canon.

At the same time, we hope that this example will show that there are many areas on which the Vibhanga is unclear, and lends itself to a variety of equally valid interpretations.

Some scholars point to the proof of this notion, by looking at the various traditions that have developed in the different Theravada countries, and even within each country.

For some reason, although persons tend to be very tolerant of different interpretations of the Dhamma, they can be very intolerant of different interpretations of the Rules of the Venerables ­ the Vinaya.

At times, heated arguments arise over minor points having very little to do with the training of the mind.

Any interpretation must be based n a reasonable interpretation of the Canon as something that should be respected: that each Bhikku or Bhikkuni should follow the interpretations of the Community in which he or she is living, as long as they do not conflict with the Canon, so as to avoid conflict over minor matters in daily life.

We should try to show respect for the differing interpretations of other Communities where they too are not in conflict with the Canon, so as to avoid the pitfalls of pride and narrow-mindedness.

This is especially true now that monasteries of different nationalities are taking root in close proximity to one another in Australia.

In the past, Thais, Burmese and Sri Lankans could look down on each other's traditions without danger of causing friction, as they lived in separate countries and spoke different languages.

Now, however, in Australia, they have become neighbours and have begun to speak a common language, so it is best that we take to heart the writings of the Chinese pilgrims who visited India centuries ago.

They reported that even after the early Buddhists had spit into 18 schools, each with its own Tripitaka and Patimokkha, and the Mahayanists had added their texts to the tradition, Bhikkhus belonging to different schools could be found living together in the same monastery, practising and conducting communal business in peace and harmony. Theirs is a worthy example for Australia.

We should not let our minor differences become stumbling blocks on our way.

We aim to be friendly, practical and non-sectarian.

Academic issues concerning the authenticity and reliability of the tradition do not belong in this present talk.

One commentator in a USA website proposed an eight-element system.

He thought that whatever the unconscious factors that have influenced our choice of the present materials, the conscious considerations shaping this choice were briefly as follows:

1. We are dealing primarily with rules.

2. Rules are not the only way to express disciplinary norms.

3. Texts we survey express their norms in a variety of forms ­ as rules, principles, models and virtues.

4. The different forms work best for different people, and are best suited for different purposes.

5. Principles, models and virtues are meant as personal subjective standard, and tend to be loosely defined.

6. Their interpretations and application are left to the judgment of the individual.

7. Rules are meant to serve as more objective standards.

8. To work, they must be precisely defined in a way acceptable to the Community at large.

The compilers of the Canon, recognising such needs, provided definitions for most of the terms in the rules.

Present day authors study the commentaries and have continued this task, carrying it out with even greater thoroughness.

This need for meticulousness is a Western world characteristic for removing doubt.

However, there are other more energetic ways of thinking about approaches to remove scepticism in persons' minds.

It is clear from the Teachings that the mind that knows what is what is colourless, odourless, tasteless and so on.

The Buddha Dhamma appears in the mind.

Hence, the Buddha Dhamma cannot be displayed for the world to perceive with its senses of sight, hearing, smell, taste or touch in the way other things can.

Even though there may be other immaterial phenomena similar to the Dhamma ­ such as smells ­ still they are not like the true Dhamma which is touched by the hearts of those who have practised it.

If the Dhamma could be displayed like material objects, there is no doubt but that the human world would have to respect the religion for the sake of that Dhamma.

So, we are fortunate that those who experienced superior Dhamma over the last two and a half thousand years left writings and clear statements of what happened.

All practitioners report that the Dhamma is something more marvellous than anything else.

In all the three levels of existence, there is no greater marvel than in the Dhamma.

For those who experience the Dhamma each for himself or herself, it can appear as a marvel, conspicuous and clear in the mind.

The mind is what knows things of the nature of the mind ­ and only the mind.

It cannot be displayed in general like material objects, as when we take things out to admire or to show off to others.

The Dhamma cannot possibly be displayed as material objects.

Persons who like grabbing and grasping things with materialistic thinking would tend to disapprove of the Dhamma.

As one writer put it: "This is what makes the world lack interest ­ and lack the things, which could be hoped from the Dhamma ­ in a way which is really a shame."

Even those who want the marvel of the Dhamma do not know what the marvel is, or what the profundity of the Dhamma is, because the mind has never had contact with that profundity.

The eye has never had contact with the marvel. The ear has never obtained any marvel from the current of the Dhamma, because the Dhamma cannot be displayed as a current of sound as other things can.

This is one obstacle which prevents persons from becoming moved by the Dhamma, which prevents them from fully believing and fully entrusting themselves to the Dhamma in a way consistent with the world's long-felt hunger for well-being and prosperity.

Many persons come to know that each of the Buddhas who has gained Awakening and taught the Dhamma to the world has had to reflect to the full extent of his intelligence and ability on the myriad ways of teaching the Dhamma to the world so that the world could see it as a marvel, inasmuch as the Dhamma cannot be put in shop windows or in public places or in radio broadcasts.

The words of one Teacher state this is because the true Dhamma lies in the heart, and reveals itself only in words in deeds, which does not excite a gratifying sense of absorption in the same way as touching the Dhamma directly with the heart.

Since there is no way to display the Dhamma directly, the Buddhas and Teachers display it indirectly through teaching.

They point out the causes ­ the Dhamma of conduct and practices leading to the Dhamma of results at this or that point or this or that level; and at the same time they proclaim the results ­ the excellence, the marvels of the stages and levels of the Dhamma which can be touched with the heart, all he way to the highest marvel, vimutti, the mental release called nibbana within the heart.

Every Buddha has to devise strategies in teaching the Dhamma so as to bring that marvel out to the world by using various modes of speech and conduct ­ for example, describing the Dhamma and showing the conduct of the Dhamma as being like this and that ­ but the actual Dhamma cannot be shown.

It is something that is known exclusively in the heart, in the way in which each Buddha and each Arahant possesses this marvel.

None of the Buddhas, none of the Arahants who possess this marvel are in any way deficient in this regard.

The marvel lies in their hearts ­ simply that they cannot take the marvel, which appears there, and display it in the full measure of its wonder.

Thus one Teacher has stated they devise strategies for displaying it in their actions, which are simply attributes of the Dhamma, not the actual Dhamma itself.

For instance, the doctrine they teach in the texts is simply an attribute of the Dhamma.

Their act of teaching is also just an attribute of the Dhamma.

The actual Dhamma is when a meditator or a person who listens to teachings about the Dhamma follows the Dhamma in practice and touches it stage by stage within his or her own heart. This is called beginning to make contact with the actual Dhamma, step by step. However much contact is made, it gives a sense of gratification felt exclusively within the heart of the person who has gained that contact through his or her own practice.

When it comes to ingenuity in teaching, no one excels the Buddhas.

Even so, they reveal only what they see as appropriate for humanity. They cannot reveal the actual Dhamma ­ for example, by taking out the true marvel in their hearts and unfolding it for the world to see, saying, 'This is the marvel of the Tathagata, of each Buddha. Do you see it?'

This cannot be done, for here we are talking about the marvel of the purity of a heart which was previously swamped with defilements like a heap of assorted excrement, but now has become a pure, unsullied nature, or a pure, amazing nature because of the practice of constantly and relentlessly cleansing it.

They cannot show the Dhamma to the world, saying, 'Do you see this? Look at it. Look at it. Feast your eyes until you are full, and then strive to make this treasure your own!'

So instead they teach by using various strategies for those who practice, describing the path in full detail, in terms both of causes and of results.

What they bring out to show is simply the current of their voices, the breath of their mouths.

That's what they bring out to speak, simply the breath of their mouths. They cannot bring out the real thing.

For example, when they say "It's marvellous like this", it is just sound.

The marvellous nature itself cannot be brought out.

All they can bring out is the action of saying, 'That nature is marvellous', so that we can speculate for ourselves as to what that marvel is like.

Even though this does not remove our doubts, it's better than if we had never heard about it at all.

Strong Teachers know details of where Students are at a given time.

Our Teacher prefers to talk about "awaking" the minds.

With the union of tranquillity and insight at the culmination of the path, Awakening occurs.

The Canon records many instances where Awakening is sudden and total, and many where it occurs in stages: The reason for the difference is not stated, but perhaps in sudden Awakening the mind goes through the various stages in quick succession.

At any rate, a brief look at the stages will give something of an idea of the dynamics of the mind's Unbinding.

The standard list of the stages gives four, and describes them in terms of how many of the ten fetters the mind sheds: (1) self-identity views, (2) grasping at precepts and practices, (3) doubt, (4) sensual passion, (5) irritation, (6) passion for form, (7) passion for formlessness, (8) conceit, (9) restlessness, and (10) ignorance.

The Buddha stated:

"There are in this community of Monks, Monks who, with the total ending of (the first) three Fetters, are Stream-winners, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening . . .

There are . . . Monks who, with the total ending of (the first) three fetters and the thinning out of passion, aversion and delusion, are Once-returners. After returning only once to this world they will put an end to stress . . .

There are . . . Monks who, with the total ending of the first set of five Fetters, are due to be reborn (in the Pure Abodes), there to be totally unbound, never again to return from that world . . .

There are . . . Monks who are Arahants, whose mental effluents are ended, who have reached fulfilment, done the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, totally destroyed the fetter of becoming, and who are released through right gnosis".

The records of other teachers are informative of the process.

A thirteenth-century teacher, Hua-yan Zu-kin (???), talked about his own student days:

"At first I contemplated the word Mu. When a thought suddenly arose, I would look back on it and the thought would immediately freeze.

I became clear all the way through, unmoving and unwavering.

A whole day would pass like a snap (snaps finger) of the fingers.

I did not hear the sounds of the bell and the drum at all.

When I was nineteen I settled at Ling-yuan (???) Temple.

Here I met a secretary who had come from the city of Chu-zo (???).

He said to me: Kin, your meditation work is stagnant and does not accomplish anything. To study Zen one must arouse the sentiment of doubt.

From a small doubt there is small awakening; from a great doubt, great awakening.

So the doubt is all the struggles and struggles that come to us day by day.

It's all the confusion and fog; all the suffering and disturbance.

This arises, the old teachers felt from the fact that our minds are not yet clear. It could all be called doubt. They advised us to gather all this together and give it to the koan.

That's what the koan is. It's the gathering of all the confusion, all the suffering, all the sorrow, everything we cling to is gathered up into the koan and that way everything can be resolved.

Everything you keep out of the koan and do not gather into the koan will have to be resolved later by another koan.

Naturally Westerners tend to have many questions concerning the meditation practice.

Some typical questions with their answers given by Ajahn Chah of Wat Nong Pah Pong and translated by Jack Kornfield are as follows.

Question: I'm trying very hard in my practice but I don't seem to be getting anywhere.

Answer: This is very important. Don't try to get anywhere in the practice. The very desire to be free or to be enlightened will be the desire that prevents your freedom. You can try as hard as you wish, practise ardently night and day, but if it is with the desire to achieve in mind, you will never find peace.

The energy from this desire will be cause for doubt and restlessness.

No matter how long or how hard you practice, wisdom will not arise from desire.

So, simply let go.

Watch the mind and body mindfully but don't try to achieve anything.

Don't cling even to the practice or to enlightenment.

Question: What about other methods of practice? These days there seem to be so many teachers and so many different systems of meditation that it is confusing.

Answer: It is like going to town. One can approach from the north, from the southeast, from many roads. Often these systems just differ outwardly.

Whether you walk one way or another, fast or slow, if you are mindful it is all the same.

There is one essential point that all good practice must eventually come to.

That is not clinging.

In the end, all meditation systems must be let go of.

Neither can one cling to the teacher. If a system leads to relinquishment, to not clinging, then it is correct practice.

You may wish to travel, to visit other teachers and try other systems.

Some of you have already done so.

This is a natural desire.

You will find out that a thousand questions asked and knowledge of many systems will not bring you to the truth.

Eventually you will get bored. You will see that only by stopping and examining your own mind can you find out what the Buddha talked about.

No need to go searching outside yourself.

Eventually you must return to face your own true nature.

Here is where you can understand the Dhamma.

Question: Is it necessary to sit for very long stretches?

Answer: No, sitting for hours on end is not necessary. Some people think that the longer you can sit, the wiser you must be. I have seen chickens sit on their nest for days on end! Wisdom comes by being mindful in all postures.

Your practice should begin as you awaken in the morning. It should continue until you fall asleep. Don't be concerned about how long you can sit.

What is important is only that you keep watchful whether you are working or sitting or going to the bathroom.

Each person has his or her own natural pace.

Some of you will die at age 50, some at age 65, and some at age 90.

So too, your practices will not be all identical.

Don't think or worry about this.

Try to be mindful and let things take their natural course.

Then your mind will become quieter and quieter in any surroundings.

It will become still like a clear forest pool. Then all kinds of wonderful and rare animals will come to drink at the pool.

You will see clearly the nature of all things in the world. You will see many wonderful and strange things come and go.

But you will be still.

Problems will arise and you will see through them immediately.

This is the happiness of the Buddha.

The Pali word "sanna" is the awareness of objects' distinctive marks (e.g. when one perceives blue, yellow, etc.) and so, if, in repeated perception of an object, these marks are recognised, sanna functions as "memory".

So usually we do not translate "memory" because if you think about it, you can understand that you use perception to picture what you are going to do tomorrow or next week or next life.

So because we are human our perceptions tend to be convincing and it may be that the sanna record is blurry to say the least.

Because all beings experience sanna as part of their mental makeup, even heavenly beings, some of you may intuitively grasp why the Buddha could see, without error and explained over 2500 years ago, that omniscience cannot occur with any being.

For the highly trained mind, it is possible to have enough insight to know things as they really are, have knowledge about properties of matter and the various types of minds can be known without doubt.

The numbers of items the Buddha's pure mind could know within one second could hardly be counted, item by item, but certainly runs to multiple billions of events; past, present and future.

The Buddha made an interesting statement to the effect that, although there never appeared to be a beginning to the various minds, none of them have a permanent existence and not even one atom of matter can be permanent because all things rise and fall into and out of existence.

This is in accordance with modern quantum physics.

Some views and opinions may be cultural matters of great interest, but tend to dilute your motive to learn and must be put down when you practice.

Any talk giving undue attention to such sundry issues is not required.

Clear motive does not need extending for persons who intend to practice the Way towards freedom from enmity.

Having formed and established right motive, each for himself or herself (which is simple if you keep the mind free from slander) the next obstructing block should be examined.

This stage is where you have some doubt that anyone less than a "good person" could follow the Way.

Consider the "mind with doubt" as a saboteur or a dead thing which poses reasons against good things. For the time being, think of it as empty of talent you could use.

Leaving this empty shell behind, replace the doubt with confidence or with faith that there exists an emptiness you are looking for.

The first mark is it is empty of doubt so allowing confidence that makes it possible to begin the events that culminate in the mind state free of all cares.

This Way allows you to appear as a human being.

The sense of self is transcended; its polar opposite ­ the sense of something standing in contradistinction to a self ­ is transcended as well.

In the Discourse at Kalaka's Park, the Buddha expresses this lack of a self/non-self polarity directly in terms of sensory experience. For a person who has attained the goal, experience occurs with no 'subject' or 'object' superimposed on it, no construing of experience or thing experienced. There is simply experience in and of itself.

Monks, whatever in this world ­ with its gods, Maras and Brahmas, its generations complete with contemplatives and priests, princes and men ­ is seen, heard, sensed, cognised, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That do I know. Whatever in this world . . . is seen, hear, sensed, cognised, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That I directly know. That is known by the Tathagata, but the Tathagata has not been obsessed with it . . .

Thus Monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, does not construe an (object as) seen. He does not construe an (object as) unseen. He does not construe an (object as) to-be-seen. He does not construe a seer.

When hearing . . . When seeing . . .

When cognising what is to be cognised, he does not construe an object as) cognised. He does not construe an (object as) uncognised. He does not construe an (object as) to-be-cognised. He does not construe a cogniser.

Thus, Monks, the Tathagata ­ being such-like with regard to all phenomena that can be seen, heard, sensed and cognised ­ is "Such". And I tell you: There is no other "Such" higher or more sublime.

Whatever is seen or heard or sensed and fastened onto as true by others, One who is Such ­ among those who are self-bound ­ would not further assume to be true or even false. Having seen well in advance that arrow where generations are fastened and hung ­ I know, I see, that's just how it is!' ­ There is nothing of the Tathagata fastened. (A iv. 24)

A view is true or false only when one is judging how accurately it refers to something else. If one is regarding it simply as an event in and of itself, true and false no longer apply. Thus for the Tathagata ­ who no longer needs to impose notions of subject or object on experience, and can regard sights, sounds, feelings and thoughts purely in and of themselves ­ views are not necessarily true or false, but can simply serve as phenomena to be experienced. With no notion of subject, there are no grounds for 'I know, I see;' with no notion of object, no grounds for "That's just how it is.'

So ­ although a Tathagata may continue using 'true' and 'false' in the course of teaching others, and may continue reflecting on right view as a means of abiding mindfully and comfortably in the present, notions of true, false, self and not-self have lost all of their holding power over the mind.

As a result, the mind can seen conditioned events in their suchness ­ 'such are the aggregates, such their origin, such their disappearance' ­ and is left free to its own Suchness: unrestrained, uninfluenced by anything of any sort.

***

This concludes our survey of the four modes of clinging/sustenance ­ passion and delight for sensuality, for views, for precepts and practices, and for doctrines of the self ­ and should be enough to give a sense of what is loosed in the Unbinding of the mind. All that remains now is the question of how.

Many of the passages we have considered seem to suggest that total Unbinding may be realised by letting go of any one of these four modes of sustenance.

What most likely happens in such cases, thought, is that the abandoning of one mode immediately triggers an abandoning of the remaining three, for there are other cases reported in the Canon where the experience of Unbinding comes in stages spread over time: the arising of the eye of Dhamma, which frees one from passion and delight for doubt, self-identity views, and grasping at precepts and practices; the attainment of Non-returning, which frees one from passion and delight for sensuality; and the attainment of Arahantship, which frees one from passion and delight for all views, the practice of jhana, and the conceit 'I am'.

Why these stages happen in this order, and how they relate to the practices meant to induce them, is what we will take up next.

May all beings be well and happy.

This script was written and edited by John D. Hughes and Leanne Eames.

Disclaimer:

As we, the Chan Academy Australia, Chan Academy being a registered business name of the Buddhist Discussion Centre (Upwey) Ltd., do not control the actions of our service providers from time to time, make no warranty as to the continuous operation of our website(s). Also, we make no assertion as to the veracity of any of the information included in any of the links with our websites, or another source accessed through our website(s).

Accordingly, we accept no liability to any user or subsequent third party, either expressed or implied, whether or not caused by error or omission on either our part, or a member, employee or other person associated with the Chan Academy Australia (Buddhist Discussion Centre (Upwey) Ltd.)

This Radio Script is for Free Distribution. It contains Buddha Dhamma material and is provided for the purpose of research and study.

Permission is given to make printouts of this publication for FREE DISTRIBUTION ONLY. Please keep it in a clean place.

"The gift of Dhamma excels all other gifts".

For more information, contact the Centre or better still, come and visit us.

Disclaimer

© 2002. Copyright. The Buddhist Discussion Centre (Upwey) Ltd.