December 1, 2014 · 12:05 pm

Women In Buddhism: Lessons On Cultural Bialateral-Transformation

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

I have been wanting to explore the role women played in monastic Buddhism over the centuries for a while now, not only to be better informed when asked, but to clear up some of the ambiguities as presented in Buddhist scriptures. The subject is being more actively discussed today in various journals and documentaries, but more importantly, it is also a glaring fact that many of the contemporary Buddhist teachers in the West are women representing all traditions. Yet, almost all of the legacy discourse is from men. I began to ask questions and was confronted with answers that I did not expect.

It seems to me that the Bhikkhunis (nuns) make up a growing number in the monastic community in the East today as the pressures on them to remain in their traditional social/family roles are relaxed. I don’t know the figures, but I would think that the number of women in the West that are also choosing to take their practice into the monastic modality is growing too. So, as I began my research on this important subject, I was struck by the lessons that emerged. These lessons point directly to the basic principles of Buddhism themselves, and highlight an aspect of Siddhartha’s life that is in conflict between his doctrine and the prevailing cultural norms of the day that he subscribed to.

It is against this background that one has to view the impact that Buddhism has had on indigenous cultures especially the social norms of the time, and the pressure these cultures imposed on gender definition. This is true over the centuries as Buddhism moved across the East toward the West, as it was during the life and times of Siddhartha Gotama. We must first understand how individuals 2500 years ago in India viewed the differences between men and women. Especially biologically as well as socially. Discrimination against women is a feature common in all societies. The social attitude towards women in pre-Buddhist days can be traced from the early Vedic literature. Women came to be considered as greatly inferior to men, both physically and mentally. Although the Buddha was enlightened as to how the Universe is, he still held many of the views of his day relative to social norms and class distinction. Yes, the Buddha inaugurated a campaign for the liberation of Indian women, and he also created a stir against Brahman dogma and superstition. Don’t forget Siddhartha was a Hindu reformer. He condemned the caste structure and denied the existence of a Creator, as well as the social structure that valued the supremacy of the male. He spoke often about liberation by one’s own efforts, which would presuppose the spiritual equality of all beings, male and female. But he was also conflicted on how women should obtain their liberation from suffering as reflected in the Four Nobel Truths according to ancient text. Although he had pointed out on many occasions the natural tendencies and weakness of women, he had also given due credit to their abilities and capabilities. He truly paved the way for women to lead a full spiritual life among his disciples.

It was in the midst of such extreme social discrimination and degrading attitudes towards women that Siddhartha made his appearance in India. His teachings on the real nature of life and death associated with suffering, and about the nature of the causal universe, gave rise to considerable changes in the social attitudes towards women during his long life. Despite the fact that the Buddha elevated the status of women, he was pragmatic in his observations and advice given from time to time in that he realized the social and physiological differences that existed between men and women.

In many of the sutras he is reported as saying that women would find liberation upon their rebirth as a male. We must remember that there is no evidence to suggest Siddhartha left for posterity any written documents of his own, and the sutra scriptures were written by disciples recording what they remember the Buddha saying that most likely integrates their own notions of the social norms of their day, and projecting them into their writing. The Nikaya’s, some of the most early Buddhist texts, were most likely written over decades, or even centuries, after the death of the Buddha, for example.

The Buddha permitted women to join his monastic community and fully participate in it, although there were certain provisos that acted to separate them as well. The nun’s Sangha was a radical experiment for its day. And the historical record suggests that these active and educated women early on were teaching on the same level as the monks. However the admission of women into the Sangha was a step too advanced for the period and became short-lived. Whenever an innovation or improvement was in advance of the thinking development of a people during a particular era, the people were unable to adapt themselves to the improved conditions and tended to regress back to the society that they were used to. Hostile propaganda by the Brahmins was also a factor that caused the reversal of advances women enjoyed under the Buddha’s guidance and protection. But over time restrictions were imposed that restricted their community involvement. These restrictions were instituted by the Buddha we are told because of the customs of the time, but modern scholars doubt that these rules can be traced back to him at all.

The Aganna-Sutta from the Pali Canon is often interpreted as showing women being responsible for the downfall of the human race. However, modern scholars studying the original language generally think this interpretation is incorrect, and point out that it was more likely the idea of lust in general rather than women as causing this downfall. However, despite this type of negative description of women in early Buddhist texts, there are also examples in the Pali Canon that are positive which suggest that the very concept of gender differentiation can serve as a hindrance to attaining awakening. It is stated in both the Sagatha-vagga and the Soma Sutta in the Samyutta Nikaya, that gender discrimination is an inhibitor to the spiritual path, and gender neutrality to the Buddhist concept of ‘not-self’ is a strategy the Buddha taught for release from suffering. The Buddha states that when either a man or a woman clings to gender identity, that person is in bondage. He even said that in certain circumstances, women are considered more discerning and wise than men, and women are even considered capable of attaining perfection after walking on the noble Eightfold path.

Just a few hundred years later in Mahayana text, however, it was maintained that a woman can become enlightened, but not in the female form. We can find this conflicting thought and language throughout the scriptures. Even in the Vinaya Pitaka of the Pali Canon another statement by the Buddha suggests that Siddhartha speaks of the fact that a woman can attain enlightenment, but could never become a female Buddha. This is a good example where it does not necessarily follow that social practice conforms to theory. The egalitarian ideals of Buddhism appear to have been impotent against the universal ideology of masculine superiority. This worldview remained strong for centuries, and influenced how women were allowed to practice Buddhism beyond private home devotion.

With the advent of the modern era in the 19th and 20th centuries, a far cry from the days of the Buddha, women’s emancipation and quest for freedom and equality achieved tremendous strides. This was the result of modern trends and modern education offered to women in most places of higher learning. As Buddhism marched into the West and encountered how one views the equality of women in most civilized settings, it is clear that these medieval notions of biological inequality has evolved out of the haze of time, and into the light of an awakened society. The Dalai Lama in speaking at a conference on Women in Buddhism at the University of Hamburg in 2007 stated, “Warfare has traditionally been carried out primarily by men, since they seem better physically equipped for aggressive behavior. Women, on the other hand, tend to be more caring and more sensitive to others’ discomfort and pain. Although men and women have the same potentials for aggression and warm-heartedness, they differ in which of the two more easily manifests. Thus, if the majority of world leaders were women, perhaps there would be less danger of war and more cooperation on the basis of global concern — although, of course, some women can be difficult! I sympathize with feminists, but they must not merely shout. They must exert efforts to make positive contributions to society.” I do not know the context from which the Dalai Lama was speaking, but this is perhaps not the most enlightened statement on the role of women in contemporary society, but yet a definite and clear change of view from the ancient texts he was exposed to as a young man training in Tibet.

When we reflect on how far the image, roles, and worldview about women has changed over the past 2500 years, it is glaringly obvious how causal factors have imposed themselves in real terms on cultural norms and social justice, that teach the importance of the Buddhist principle of impermanence, and the transformative nature of situational ethics and moral values. And perhaps one of the more interesting aspects of Buddhism moving to the West is how Western culture, including how communication technology acts as a conduit that helps to drive this social bilateral transformation, is changing East Asian acceptance of the role of women on a more equal footing providing opportunities that were not available to them even a few decades ago. This is especially evident in the growth of contemporary monastic women’s communities arising from the enriched soil of ancient cultures.

To highlight this bilateral transformation I would like to bring your attention to a feature-length documentary project entitled Daughters of Dolma: the Spiritual Journey of Tibetan Buddhist Nuns in Nepal, by a group of students from the University of St Andrews, UK, about Tibetan Buddhist Nuns in Nepal. It has as its objective to provide an in-depth look at a contemporary group of nuns by highlighting their spiritual vocation as women, the diversity of the community that reflects social and educational differences within the Sangha, as well as shining light on a country in the throws of modernizing. The challenge for the producers is to go beyond their Tibetan Buddhist philosophical training, and capture their interactions with modernity, interaction with world class technology, and the inter-generational differences inherent in any established monastic community. What was clear to me when viewing the trailer is that these women are not just Buddhist nuns locked away behind walls of practice, but modern women who are not cutting themselves off from the world around them. They reflect all that is of value in an engaged Buddhist practice beyond the confines of the monastery, as do their Western counterparts. Alex Co, the Co-Project Leader, reflects on how the project was conceived and points out one of his major aims was for the general public to understand what it really means for someone to take formal vows, and to show the struggles involved in living the monastic life in a modern world, as well as its rewards. Though this encounter it is hoped that the innate spirituality that all of us has the capacity to awaken to, is abundantly evident in each of these nuns lives, and that there should be little difference between monks and nuns today, which function equally toward a practice of awakening.

When ever we engage others at the level that producing a documentary with the scope that this one has, there is bound to be profound changes on both side of the lens. It is a journey of connection, of finding common ground, of challenging stereotypes, and ultimately impacting cultural behavior in ways that may not be clear for decades. This is true for the film makers, as well as the causal nature associated with the viewer’s reaction to it. In watching the trailer for this documentary, it was very evident to me the feminine nature of a group of women dedicating themselves to the well-being of others, while advancing their spiritual knowledge as well. It is the nurturing characteristics of women that add a unique dynamic to how they engage their community. It seems obvious to me that this is as true today as it must have been in Buddha’s Sangha. The difference is that women today are give “almost” equal opportunities to engage the Dharma and a serious Buddhist practice that provides an opportunity for them to move out into their communities as equal partners with their male dharma-brothers. An opportunity a long time coming. When ask what was so special about the culture of these nun’s in Nepal, Nadia Buhova the Communications Manager of the project, said, “Empathy and compassion are their philosophy and way of life. For me, it was overwhelming to see how these values served as grounding principles in the Buddhist communities and the nunneries in particular.” While the nuns reflected their national heritage in many ways, they were also modern and interested in the same aspects, values, and developing worldviews as are women following the spiritual path around the modern world, and do not cut themselves off from the communities they serve. (This documentary was finished in the Spring of 2012 and released in different film festivals as well as available on DVD)

This brings me back to the question of Buddhism’s attitude towards women and the differences between Siddhartha’s time and our contemporary practice today. It is important for us to remember that Buddhism arose into a belief system and eventually practiced as a religion decades after the death of Siddhartha. The Buddha was a reformer within the Hindu Indian culture. His views of the role of women were liberating for his day, and he achieved some success in bringing women into the Sangha of monks. While he showed amazing flexibility in social justice for all beings, he was still constrained in how he considered the limitations women manifested in their gender differences. Nevertheless, under his guidance women flourished in ways that were not allowed in Brahma society. Over time, however, Buddhist monastic practice became limited to monks. Scripture, Buddhist philological study, and ritual practice was generally closed to women, who were encouraged to provide a supporting role that acted to enable men to achieve enlightenment. As Buddhism moved East it encountered even more cultural restraints for women throughout the Tibetan mountain range and into China. And over the centuries the legacy teachings contributed to this notion that women were inferior for receiving the dharma, let alone contributing in any significant way to its transmission. I find it almost unbelievable that learned and enlightened men awakened to the principles of Buddhist thought still could not reason that a serious practice could not include women. There were communities of nuns in ancient times, but they were a very small element of Buddhist practice, and were again relegated to non-learning support roles, or completely isolated from society altogether. History has noted several periods in China where women were allowed to contribute in significant ways to Buddhist practice, but they were few and far between. Women only fared a little better in Japanese culture where women of aristocrat rank could achieve a successful Buddhist monastic practice. But this too depended on dynastic considerations.

As Buddhism moved West and encountered a culture that evolved into a pragmatic and pluralistic worldview, the contributions of women have become recognized as reflecting the valuable lesson of no-distinction. And this change is reverberating across West to East and changing the face of the Buddhist monastic. The Daughters of Dolma reflect this reality. If we allow ourselves to peruse the literature of the Buddhist tradition, even the fraction of that literature found in the Pali scriptures, or Nikayas, we find the metaphor of healing emerging again and again in ways that are creatively applied to many different situations. It is indicative of the fact that healing is an intrinsic paradigm of the entire Buddhist construct. If we study these texts and the extent to which this healing can occur quite independently of any establish doctrine so often associated with classical understanding, we come to realize the importance that culture plays in influencing how we understand the principles we diligently practice. At the same time, the Buddhist Sangha, both ordained and laity, is a society mutually helping each other along the path we all share toward liberation. We come to embrace the non-dualistic reality of Universal nature, and as we are expression of this Universe, there is no room for gender distinction to inhibit an enlightened body-mind.

Real freedom is freedom from all forms of bondage. It can be achieved only through proper spiritual development and clearing of one’s own mind from greed, hatred and delusion. No amount of public debate, demonstrations or creation of universal charters can bring true freedom. Buddhists the world over are working to achieve liberation through their own diligence by walking the path strengthened by meditation and adoption of Siddhartha’s Universal-worldviews. For promoting the cause of women, the Buddha can be considered perhaps the first emancipator of women and promoter of a pragmatic way of living. The causal chain that he put in motion took time to grow and nourish, and is now reflecting back in the positive action he generated 2500 years ago, and can be witnessed, for example, in the lives of the nuns depicted in the work Daughters of Dolma. It is to the eternal credit of this bilateral transformation that women are now given a chance to have equal status with men in their spiritual endeavors to gain wisdom and a chance to become enlightened in our contemporary monastic communities, temples and practice centers. There is still much work to do, but shining light on this progress as this wonderful documentary is in the process of achieving, is one way the causal chain will continue to grow in useful and productive ways.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as ,

November 30, 2014 · 8:59 am

Transforming Relationships Through Wisdom

By:  David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

There are many human emotions that challenge the harmony in our personal relationships. It is so easy to get caught up in the moment and lose sight of the causal-chain of what is really happening.

Take anger for example. If someone were to hit us over the head with a club, we would not get angry at the club would we? No, of course not. We would show anger at the person who struck us. So consider how we often act when someone uses angry words directed toward us. We should use wisdom gained through our practice to not get angry back at this individual, because they are acting out of some disturbing emotions to the nature of the root cause of their anger. In other words, the person is not the cause of anger, but a thought or emotional situation that moves the ego to act in angry ways.

If we respond back with an equal emotional response we will continue the causal-chain of negative emotions effecting additional unsatisfactoriness. A more positive and constructive way to see these moments of anger presents us with opportunities to shift the trajectory of the moment and relationship in a more useful and productive way.

When we can achieve this type of response, if we can respond in new ways, then we can transform our relationship with others in a pragmatic and mature manner that reflects the maturity of our practice.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , ,

November 26, 2014 · 11:03 am

Engaging Cultural Differences And Prejudicial Behavior

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

The past few weeks developments relative to what is happening in Ferguson Missouri has yet again exposed this ongoing cultural issue of  how we confront our personal identity relative to how we engage the reality of human differences. As a consequence we are given an opportunity to consider race/gender/religious differences and the role of prejudicial behavior that can arise from distorted dispositions. This is not an easy lesson to present, either from a Buddhist perspective or from a pluralistic one. Pragmatic philosophy as a model when coupled with Buddhist thought can be a guide for our ethic and moral outlook relative to this social reality. This tragedy is, yet again, an example of an opportunity to apply situational ethics to our practice. So, I would like to share with you some of my thoughts that might give you an idea on how, as a Buddhist, we might approach a discussion on these events. Both Jesus and Siddhartha spoke in a very clear voice that can guide us through these very real, and very divisive, situations with lessons on our obligation as social-selves to act with astute and applied compassion. A compassion not just extended to one side. That would just ignore the causal-chain culminating in an act of violence. Acts of violence often cloud the underling emotions of suffering. We are challenged to find the interconnective lessons that bring all of us as subjects to these events. From my perspective, no one has the luxury of being a bystander.

Buddhists are naturalists, and naturalists are first of all champions of causal accounts of the Universe. As such, we look for naturalistic accounts to help us understand “why” something expresses itself the way it does. This allows us to plan, take and succeed through deferential action aimed at undoing what is unhealthy, destructive, and promoting discontent while promoting that which is instead healthy, harmonious and satisfying in the psycho-emotional sense. The social/cultural interpretation of events are often bound by it’s racism/prejudicial imposing dispositions and in need of help and intervention as much or more than the individuals involved, as it is easier to tell a new story to oneself about a wrongdoing done to us than it is for a society to change how to express cultural expectations when viewed across differing human view of reality. It is easier to think differently than to act differently. It takes a deep understanding and appreciation for causality to see this, because we are, in a liberal democratic society, “wired” today to feel strong disgust first and foremost at the individual of negative attitudes and actions before we feel the urge to make it better. The feeling of disgust is protective of cultural values because if we don’t feel this way, who will preserve the values? However, it is not sufficient, and is far from sufficient, for anyone seeking to make the world qualitatively better just to feel disgust. If one person is a “political or attitude racist” we all still have work to do to promote change. It takes practice, but Buddhists as well as Christians (and especially leaders) living in their communities aim to develop a sense to stop the immediate repercussions of negative attitudes and actions, such as scolding someone’s extreme bias remarks or standing in the way of an angry boyfriend ready to hit his girlfriend (this is the disgust part), followed up immediately by the ethics of the Bodhisattva ideals: asking ourselves how do we reform these circumstance for the better?

Research is going on in bridging disciplines of social science and psychology to investigate how much of our attitudes are learned and how much are inborn (genetic). A recent study in the Scientific American Mind explains that the majority of humans beings initially have a subconscious stereotype for differences other than their own, remnant of the 10,000 year ago tribal life where it did enhance survival. Civilization and liberal democratic ideals are a cultural, learned phenomenon of very recent origin, the result of telling a new story about how we should live. 10,000 years ago which is the most recent major phase of human evolution according to the best of current science, members outside of one’s own tribe were likely to kill or capture members of another tribe as the concepts of selflessness had not been thought up yet. This does NOT mean we were not then interconnected; we were, but we were not aware of the kind of ethical notion of selflessness and altruism we have developed today in a civilized society. So, the inborn tendency to fear others that are different is a problem that is far deeper than one person’s ignorance or overactive ego, and our job is to play the all important role of promoter of useful and positive ideas that will ultimately become the new inborn tendency. Here is the interesting part: as soon as a person of a particular group learns to pay attention to differences of individual members of other groups than his own, he becomes less and less fearful and therefore more tolerant of others. We have all heard the saying at one time or another perhaps that “individuals of a particular ethnic group all look alike”. There is a genetic basis for this, and all genetics are causally arisen from some previous attitude or behavior and did function to enhance the ability to live on earth successfully.

Though today we have newer and healthier ideas about ethics that serve the welfare of more people than ever, we cannot forget how they got here and that they are not the result of one person’s random hate or ignorance, or the belief system they have chosen to live by. We can and must feel disgust by events like what is happening in St. Louis, but then it must transfer immediately to the motivation of how do we reform this circumstance for the better? Not just politically. There is nothing positive to achieve by intentional acts of violence or organized conflict (war) in the long run. Everything is grounded in causality and the chain of effects, and it is precisely this fact that allows us to change human nature for the better. It is a challenge we all must bring into our daily worldview as we strive to live by our professed Buddhist precepts, while at the same time not getting caught up in only feelings of disgust.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , ,

November 3, 2014 · 9:08 am

A Universal Communal Spirituality

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

The discovery and emergence of community between and among the religions and the various cultures around the planet are a vital component of interspirituality. The active commitment to this large community is itself a new type of pragmatic spirituality. All those who are working in this area of interspiritual community are actually engaged in developing this new form of spiritual life. I especially want to give credit to Wayne Teasdale and Thomas Keating’s work in this field, along with Thomas Merton of course.

What does it mean to be human? Of all the different species on this planet, man has the most complex brain structure of all of them. Our body is designed to sustain life and give order and meaning to it. We have a unique ability to SEEK. What are the processes that maintain human life moment to moment? When we look deeply at how humans structure and live life, and compare it with the processes inherent in the universe, we see chaos vs. order. We humans have the unbelievable capacity to create chaos. It is in our DNA maybe. When we seek order we look at both nature around us and look out into the vast reaches of space. And we experience order. Experience yes, but understand – maybe not. BUT…what humans have developed over time is a capacity to understand changes of the world around us, and have developed the capacity for SPIRIT, equanimity and moral order. Thus we attempt to control this social chaos in meaningful ways. Another human characteristic is that of WONDER. A wonder we can share with others of deep faith that in turn motivates energy for seeking. Seeking the integrity of everything.

We have developed a transcendent quality to over come our tendency for self destruction. This quality I will call spirit, that has permeated our civilization and created the moral by which we are sustained. Human spirit is a quality of human life that results in living a creative existence; a poetic humanness that in turn engenders the feeling of wonder. You might be interested to know that the word spirit in Latin means “to breath”. As Jon Kabat-Zinn puts it, “The in breath is inspiration; the out breath expiration. From these come all the associations of spirit with the breath of life..”. This, I see, is the root of spirituality. Human spirit is an enrichment. We use our consciousness to make our selves a better person when we come to realize the interconnectiveness we have to the whole universe; to all creation; and especially with each other.

Now, I agree with Kabat-Zinn when he says that he avoids using the word “spiritual” particularly in the way we hold the sharpening and deepening understanding of a meditation practice; especially in my own Buddhist practice. This is not to deny that meditation can be thought of fundamentally as a spiritual practice. It’s just that I have a problem like he does with the inaccurate and frequently misguided notion of the word. But I also recognize that when using mindfulness meditation and practices this allows everything to shine with the luminosity that the word spiritual is meant to mean. So in this context I use the word with no trepidation.

This conscience understanding of interconnectiveness and interdependency is how we come to realize the social nature of human existence. We are social beings. Promoting the growth of bonds of community is a necessary spiritual activity. Such an activity is an act of solidarity with all living beings. Breaking down the barriers that separate the religions and spreading the spirit of acceptance, mutual trust, and understanding is a profoundly spiritual act and one that advances community in the world and lays the foundations for a universal spiritualism.

We all originate from the tribe, although the narrative of our lives depends on how we are as we adapt to our individual experiences. So many of our skills as a species were learned and perfected in this early formative experience within this tribal community. It is in community that compassion and altruism have a room to unfold and take root in individuals. It is in and through community that the human family will resolve the ecological crisis that has been at least partially caused by people living apart in cultural divides.

Just as interspirituality became possible with the rise of community in the interfaith movement, the emergence of a global spirituality is only feasible as a result of the openness, mutual trust, goodwill, and generosity of the members of the world’s diverse traditions. The spiritual life of the next thousand years and beyond will have these significant components: it will be contemplative, interspiritual, socially engaged, environmentally responsible, holistic, engaging of other media, and cosmically open.

I am not suggesting a monolithic spiritual belief. But a respect for the common nature of the spiritual practice each of our traditions has that makes us a family within “the universal human expression.” The various religious and spiritual traditions will remain viable as long as they respond to the changes that come to reflect the contemporary discoveries of science, global social realities, and most importantly – by keeping this capacity for seeking the wonder of the spirit that is found in all of us if we quite the mind and listen for the voice within.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , ,

Image

Risk Factors Associated With Death

diagram

Leave a comment

October 28, 2014 · 10:11 am
October 28, 2014 · 10:06 am

Sacredness Of Work

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

I would like to speak to you today about one of the lessons in the Buddha’s teachings on the Eightfold Path. And that one is on right livelihood. In fact I would like to modify the description by changing the word “right” with encompassing and corrective. By doing so I am being both pragmatic and also modernizing the language. “Right” becomes two words, encompassing reminds us that our actions will have wide ranging effects, positive, negative or neutral, and corrective reminds us that these are the actions necessary to make positive changes necessary in order to move away from unsatisfactoriness and discontentment.
When we consider livelihood, or the major activity we engage in to sustain our own and our family’s welfare, as individuals on a spiritual path, we must also think of it as the sacredness of work. Just as time orders and measures our life’s activities, work orders our life’s purpose and the resources we require. Our work contains an innate dignity when it is truly connected to self — when our creativity finds concrete expression in what we do, how we shape our environment, in the fruits of our efforts. Work is sacred and uplifting when it springs from who we are, when it bears a relationship to our unfolding journey. For work to be sacred, it must be connected to our spiritual awareness. Our work has to represent our passion, our desire to contribute to our culture, especially to the development of others. By passion I mean the talents we have to share with others, the talents that shape our destiny and allow us to be of real service to others in our community.

It is this balance that enhances the sacredness of work, because it allows our talents, our innate creative passions to express themselves positively for the benefits of others. The root of this balance is purity of INTENTION: the state of the heart itself, that point within the depths of our subjectivity from where motivation springs. It is a noble aspiration to contribute to the improvement of the world in some meaningful way. It’s simply not enough to be successful economically; our lives have to possess meaning and value in relation to our community. I will repeat what you have heard me say before, we our social-selves first and foremost. This goes to the lesson on interdependence and connection with others that is how we can see ourselves as expressions of the Universe.

For someone on a spiritual path, work plays a central role, as our work should be, or nearly always will be, meaningful. All our activities require regular, creative effort — the real key to meaningful work. As long as what we do is good for the world, the important thing is that we do it well, with a creative and discipline mind always returning to the larger good. Labor is a disciplined activity, and while engaged in it, we strive to be conscious of our purpose, and the outcomes of our actions.

Now as you know I am not a temple monk anymore, but one that lives in the world. I like to say my life is my monastery. In fact, it is not unusual for either a Christian or Buddhist monk to live away from their monastery. I strive to be equally self sufficient in both my contemplative living and how I work and interact in my community; for my community. I am very fortunate to have variety in how my practice becomes “my work.” No matter what I do I strive to make my work sacred. It has not always been that way. And I have been just as caught up in struggling to achieve success as most everyone else. Especially my “work” as an author, teacher, and monastic leader. But I have accepted a different frame of mind mostly as a result of my dedicated meditation practice. You do not have to be a monk, or spiritual leader, or a priest to find the sacredness of work. It is found in any work you are engaged in, as long as it does not promote unsatisfactoriness.

For this to manifest within our commitment to earning a living, our task is always the same: to bring light to an activity and dimension of our ordinary experience that is often darkened by the uncaring coldness of the economic realities in our culture. Consistency in each moment and experience is the goal, not the fragmented existence that oppresses our culture these days. Consistency through the discipline of a spiritual life and the application to our work and the people we meet is the ultimate goal in career and work. When we meditate on a consistent basis we develop the capacity for developing a state of calm, even serenity. When that is brought into the work place it both effects how you approach your tasks, as well as all those you come in contact with. It is motivating and enhances the encompassing and corrective actions we strive to maintain. It is a single mindedness that guides us into a steadiness of action, a habit of spiritual life that colors our work, our family, our friendships, and all our interests.

Perspective, the gift of vision, gives us a powerful determination to live out of the center of our awareness. Determination is the key. And how do we increase our determination? We need to become more single minded in our practice, to develop and maintain the requisite perspective in every situation. I continue to strive toward that goal. It is not easy, but with practice, achieving some positive results will come. Ultimately all our activities are opportunities for growth, including the important function of work.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , ,

September 30, 2014 · 1:21 pm

Impermanence And The Psychophysical Personality

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

One of the core principles of Buddhism that is accepted by all traditions is that of no-self (anatman). It is an essential teaching of Buddhism that states that there is no permanent enduring substance within any entity. The Buddha taught that the notion of a self is just an idea. In our contemporary language when we consider “who we are” we encounter the term psychophysical personality that introduces us to all kinds of interpretations. No matter the complexity surrounding coming to terms with no permanent self, we also must reconcile that this impermanent universal nature is also of a non-dual nature too. When we say we have no permanent self we are rejecting the metaphysical self which presents a problem that man has two distinct entities in the form of mind and matter. For the time being, we will not discuss 21st century physics and string theory for now. The Buddha was skillful in not speaking of man’s having a dual nature in a single entity. This is not always clear when we read many of the legacy teachings, especially when they seek to explain how conscientiousness interacts with the psycho-physicality of our “humaness”.

What is clear though, is that the Buddha was not willing to consider that a mind can have independent existence. When he spoke of human nature, he did so by always associating the body and mental capabilities as making up a single physical personality; there could be no consciousness unless it was associated with a living physical entity. He said that consciousness is nothing more than the act of being conscious. Both at the time of the Buddha, as it is now in our time, there was/is a universal tendency to look upon the mind and the body as two distinct “things” both existing independently. Based on the Buddha’s personal experience he came to consider this notion to be unsubstantiated. To take the opposite view would be to surrender to an unknown notion that “something” is of a permanent nature in each of us that is hidden to scientific investigation.

Siddhartha (the Buddha) was centuries ahead of his peers in empirical reasoning. When considering the interplay between the body and mind he referred to the material body as “contact with resistance” (patigha-samphassa), and the mind as “contact with concepts” (adhivacana-samphassa)1 . In doing this he was reducing both the mind and body to contact elements and processes of experience, and avoiding making them both have material characteristics. This also avoids any metaphysical entanglements. It is an example of the Buddha abandoning metaphysical notions that would result in the doctrine of Dependent Origination (causality) being put into question.

For Siddhartha, any thought of something that has permanence although hidden, even though subject to metaphysical theories and the evidence of the “creativity of man” to try to explain the unexplainable, does not hold strong against validated personal experience, either subjective or objective. The psychophysical personality considered by the Buddha emphasizes the dependence of consciousness on the physical personality as well as the interconnectiveness of the body-mind that answers to how the causal universe is expressed in us as we strive to be positive agents for change. This change is effective at the same time as having the properties of impermanence too. How we humans effect change is dependent on our dispositions. Not only our personalities, but how we live, what we find of interests, the art we create, our culture and civilization, what drives our exploration toward new horizons, is all dominated by our dispositions. Our dispositions, not our consciousness as a substantial entity, drives the human contribution to the causal-chain. Another reason for us to study and refine our dispositions as we struggle to understand the power of a non-permanent self in a world that matters.

________________

1 Digha Nikaya 2, 62

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , ,

September 19, 2014 · 12:53 pm

When Is Social Disobedience Skillful Means?

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

There is a fine line between skillful action and speech, and that which is not. In our Buddhist practice we our encouraged to internalize the Eightfold Path for its power to energize our pledge to live according to the Three Pure Precepts. Both of these Buddhist principles require rigorous action on our part in order to effect positive and useful change. But it is difficult sometimes to know when our actions cross over the line from cultural and civilized expectations to social discord. This is where situational ethics comes into play to guide our actions from a platform of wisdom. I speak often about situational awareness because of its vital importance for informing us of how our intended actions are encompassing and corrective, or not.

Someone once said that those who are not students of history are doomed to repeat it. I am reminded of this wise statement when I read about what is happening in St. Louis currently, the recent Occupy Wall Street movement, and other action in communities reacting to unjust experiences according to their interpretation of events. I say movement because that is what it looks like to me. Not well formed yet, and in many ways a bit disturbing, but a movement nevertheless. I am old enough to remember the 60’s “cultural revolution” as it is referred to now, and what is happening now looks a lot like how cultural change takes root. As the world struggles to find a way to move from the anxiety of this decade of financial crisis, as we are reminded daily of millions who live in poverty, joblessness, or plunging personal worth, while corporate greed seems unabated, we are tempted to withdraw and to close our ears and our eyes to the troubling sights and sounds of protest that is far away from our community.

“Things” are in the saddle and ride us, said Thoreau. These “things” include not only material objects and desires, but also our subservience to our politics, our nationalism, our own ideas, and our own convictions of what is just or unjust. Engaging the dharma is not always easy, or even comfortable. It seems to me that we are living in another significant time of social and cultural change. Or at least, a time of questioning our communal-social values. We must keep informed of what is happening around us, so we can engaged the issues of our day with thoughtfulness and encompassing and corrective action.

Injustice ultimately is not converted into justice by governmental or social agencies. Those agencies are simply weapons against injustice. Injustice is converted to justice only by the passion for justice we become awakened to, and expressed in our actions. Expressing this in action that can be interpreted as social disobedience is sometimes the only alternative, and can result ultimately in positive outcomes. This style of action calls for considerable caution.

Let us seek to keep our minds free from the bondage of habit, class distention, and the comfort of too easy a conscience. May we listen to the voice of reason within each of us which allows us to judge not by the name of goodness, but by the nature of goodness, to know how to do good for ourselves and for the welfare of all beings. And then take intentional action with some idea of cultural expectation, even if that action challenges the status quo and the power that maintains it. Social disobedience is not outside the confines of walking the dharma path either, but during these types of action we must still keep firmly in mind the Three Pure Precepts. The value of harm is also a situational ethical construct, and the karmic reality is always interwoven in all our actions – on both sides of the cultural divide.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , ,

September 15, 2014 · 1:45 pm

Street-Smart Buddhism: Tools to Find Your Way Home

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

We speak so often in our teaching about the core principles of Buddhism. If not directly, then by example. By now, many of you should be familiar with the awakened teachings of Siddhartha Gotama, the principle of the Four Ennobling Truths, the Eightfold Path, impermanence, not-self, the principle of interdependent co-origination (or dependent origination), to name a few. We speak about Zen teachings of the Chinese and Japanese masters as they reflect the nature of self and other. We speak about the enriching empowerment of nature, as well as useful and productive psychoemotional self-help tools we can use to promote human flourishing. We even give history lessons that attempt to bring the ancient Buddhist culture into contemporary renewal that all of us today can relate to. In other words, we teach the dharma. In fact, most of the books about Buddhism on our modern shelf are about these topics in various forms. We are luck to have most of them.

Fewer people are aware that Siddhartha also provided frequent and compelling lessons on a wide range of social, political, and economic issues that impact the general welfare of all life on this planet. It is interesting that the issues of his day, 2500 years ago, are many of the same problems we are dealing with still today. He taught about ineffective government, rankest politics, the disparity of accumulated wealth, and the difficulties involved in mature interpersonal relationships. He even spoke about integration and immigration concerns of his day. He was a very modern man for his time. That his teaching extends so dynamically into “compassing and corrective action” indicates that he was wise in appreciating the concerns of the ordinary people on the streets and in the homes, of all classes, not just those that flocked around him as monks and nuns. His concerns were those that can resonate with us in the 21st century, both spiritual and corporal. And with the numbers he was able to attract in his public lectures, considering some of the controversial topics he spoke about, he was clearly a social activist in every meaning of the word. A man awakened to the issues of the day that brings unsatasfactoriness to so many, but offering a path away from this social-suffering by skillful means, not just clamor. As we navigate the moral and ethical dilemmas of modern life, the Buddha’s teaching can provide a way to see our way home. Indeed, the precepts of Buddhism can transform that navigation into something frankly wondrous: the life of a Buddha realized as our own life. And in so doing, avoiding the alienation of the growing number of have-nots from those few with almost all the advantages.

Being thoroughly educated and originally trained to become a ruler in his nation-state, Siddhartha was exposed to the conflicts and problems arising in the social sphere. This would have made him acutely aware of the complexities of social conditions and their moral and ethical underpinnings. He was an extraordinary person by conventional standards. I think his enlightenment integrated his character with a deep appreciation of all the various ways the Universe expresses itself, and the nature of human emotion and psychology gave him a deeper awareness of the nature of the roots to individual and social suffering. In all its aspects, not just birth, sickness, old age, and death.
We know that after his awakening, he remained in the world teaching for almost fifty years, developing skillful means to respond to the searching questions of his day. This is the nature of the Buddhist path. When we have mastered one situation, a new one presents itself and we are challenged to reflect on it with renewed thoughtfulness, using the tools we have developed to seek answers. In other words, we work to find the lessons. He had plenty of opportunities to see how his teachings were making a difference and to correct, redirect, broaden, and refocus them when necessary to achieve excellent results. I can only image that over those fifty years, his teachings evolved to better meet the challenges that each new situation presented.

Because his experience as an astute social observer became intertwined with his wisdom, it is worthwhile to study his teachings about social and economic conditions in relation to a spiritual practice and an ethical life. Many of those that came to ask question of him were not monastic’s. Many of the dilemmas they encountered remain relevant today and will remain relevant as long as human nature does not evolve away from its current state. He had to address the life questions that were of burning concern to the people coming to his discourses. He was directly confronted, you see. We are spoiled today with our mass communication options where we get our information without having to going to the source. Not so in his day. And we know from the Buddhist Cannon, they flocked to him. He was in many ways, a superstar of the spiritual world in Hindu culture.

One of the central observations Buddha made about the breakdown of the social fabric is that poverty is the chief cause of discontent, immorality and crime. Theft, violence, hatred, cruelty, financial trickery, all result from poverty. Poverty also restricts people from acquiring an education. It seems that ancient governments in India, like many governments today, tried to handle the social problems of the day through a less then equal set of measures that restricted liberties and imposed restrictions mostly targeted to the lower classes. Siddhartha said that attempts to control and solve social problems in this manner would ultimately fail. He related this to building a dam to hold back the water, but the barrier will always need to be there, and there will always be a threat of the water’s spilling over or sweeping the dam away. Buddha said that if you want to eradicate social problems, the economic conditions of the people have to be improved.

He encouraged people in businesses to provide adequate wages to their employees. He said that governments should make opportunities for everyone to be employed, for everyone to earn a sufficient income. It was in the governments best interest to do so, from both a socially-just perspective, as well as for the economic wellbeing of the state. When people are freed from their poverty, they rarely commit negative actions born from desperation. He said this is nothing more then common sense. He was astute enough to suggest that contented workers were more productive, enriching both themselves as well as the business owners. It could be a win-win situation.

While Buddha championed improvement of economic conditions, he clearly differentiated this from hoarding wealth. He taught about “just a right amount” of wealth. There should be enough to sustain oneself, some savings, and plenty to share appropriately with others. He actually spelled out how much of the earnings one should save, how much to operate with, how much to reinvest in one’s business, how much to give to people who are more needy. He did not just expound the lofty dharma; he also got nitty-gritty and pragmatic in his teachings. Sometimes he talked like a political-activists, sometimes like a street preacher, sometimes like a CPA. Remember, he was working among the people he would have been ruling one day, if he had not left that inherited role behind. If you will allow me to use some of the new terminology just now emerging from the conflict-dialog of today’s social unrest, it is important to understand that Siddhartha came from the 1%, but his teaching reflecting the sensitivities he awakened to of the suffering of the 99%. Remember, Buddhism is a conduit for understanding the world around us. Buddhism is not ultimately about Siddhartha, it is about us and how we are in this world in this very moment.

In the context of the teachings of the Eightfold Path, Siddhartha helped ordinary people by elaborating on the topic of right livelihood. Besides indicating what trades a person should avoid in order to actualize the innate harmony of this world, he spoke about the qualities one should cultivate in our work. When a student asked for doctrines that would help in attaining happiness and harmony in this lifetime, the Buddha listed four points pertaining to one’s profession. First, one should be skilled, efficient, honest, and energetic in what ever profession one engages in. One should thoroughly master it. Second, one should protect one’s income and savings, one’s home, the fruits of one’s efforts. Third, one should cultivate good friends, individuals who are honest, faithful, and open-minded, friends who reinforce the virtuous qualities of the dharma. Fourth, one should find the middle way in dealing with money: do not be extravagant, do not be self-abnegating he said.

Buddha also described four virtues that are conducive to happiness. A person should have trust and confidence in their moral, spiritual, and intellectual values. He put these in a specific order of importance, I think. Each one of us should keep these values conscious; we should really know what they are. We must think hard about what worldview we have been living our lives by, and make corrections if necessary that reflects the ethical and moral principles of our Buddhist practice we have professed to uphold. This is reflected in Zen training today when we make vows to keep the Buddhist precepts and when we periodically renew those vows, making our values conscious and public. I and every OEB monk do this every day as a part of our daily monastic service, something we share together. As we follow the Buddhist precepts, we are striving to develop the wisdom that leads to a complete cessation of suffering, both for ourselves and other.

On one occasion, while talking with a successful banker who was one of his disciples, Siddhartha offered him advice about circumstances associated with happiness. He pointed out that there are several types of contentment; the happiness associated with enjoyment of economic security and sufficient wealth that was acquired by just and righteous means; the happiness that comes form spending that wealth liberally on one’s self, one’s family, one’s friends, and on meritorious deeds; the happiness of being free from debts; and the happiness of living a faultless and pure life, without committing evil in thoughts, words, or deeds; of not creating evil karma. It is interesting that three of these four contentment’s are economic in nature, implying that the Buddha clearly saw that not all of his students were destined for the monastic life, and that there was a vital spiritual teaching and practice involving the secular laity too. Especially those who were in a position to do so much for the welfare of others.

Siddhartha was acutely aware of corruption in government. He knew about the hunger for, and the addiction to, power, and the vanity, intrigue, and malice that could infect rules, ministers, and local bureaucrats. He saw that when officials were corrupt and unjust, the whole country would fall into a state of economic and spiritual decline. Sound familiar? In his teaching “The Ten Duties of the King,” he establishes guidelines for an effective and just government. What he said about the duties of the king can easily be translated and applied as the duties of a president, a prime minister, the head of a union, the chief officer of a large corporation or a small business, a legislator, or a judge. It is applicable to that broad segment of society that wields power and in many ways and controls the lives of its people. And since all of us, whether we like it or not, have a role to play in our society, this teaching applies to each of us as we realize our responsibility to this great earth and to one another. Because we are agents-for-change.

But remember this, all of the Buddha’s teachings are really none other than the precepts: the vow to give life to the Dharma, to return to the heart of being. Any time we renew our precepts vows, we renew our ability to practice them more vigorously. Practicing them does not mean never violating them. It means practicing them, and like practicing with the breath, we are always starting fresh. This is right action. When we bring our practice into our communities, and onto the streets, we create an energy around us that is palpable to others. This practice is contagious.

We have a wonderful gift at our disposal in these teachings of the Buddha; we should vow together that this gift will continue to nourish all beings for countless eons to come.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , ,

September 11, 2014 · 1:55 pm

Buddhism In Two Voices

By: David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

It has become resoundingly clear for me as my Buddhist study deepens and my attention to contemporary scientific understanding broadens that Buddhist thought can be very modern in how it gives emphasis to the core principles, especially in those themes of what it means to be human. At the same time, however, there are aspects to Buddhist doctrine that remain in ancient-language-of-understanding as it comes down to us in our 21st century. Mutual causality, impermanence and the lessons from the Four Noble Truths that substantiate modern notions of human psychology has the contemporary voice. Karma (rebirth and mystical planes of existence too) is spoken of in an ancient voice because it has no counterpart in Western languages to convey beyond basic terminology. So karma, for example, is still spoken of in a language that comes from past centuries. This does not necessity ignoring karma if we want to present Buddhism as being relevant for the modern age. But it does require a very serious interrogation of how it has been interwoven throughout Buddhist philosophy. Karma requires creative re-description for us. In this way we can begin to find answers to the question, “How is understanding the laws of karma a help to us today in the world of science?”

When we study the Buddhist canon, we quickly learn from the various sutras that the community of monks (known as Sangha then) was supported by the generosity of the lay members. This was the tradition in ancient India. The merit of this lay support (dana) for the individual was the hope that they could be reborn as a Bodhisattva so they could have a chance to gain enlightenment. This earning merit was considered an aspect of karma. Karma in this case being “attached” to the individual. I call this Velcro karma.
When viewed this way, karma was a kind of product that could be purchased by one’s efforts. The understanding of karma, and its value, was of great importance in ancient Hindu society.

One’s status in this ancient society determined quality-of-life realities. The laws of karma were used to rationalize what in our modern era would be call social injustice. To these ancient people, however, social justice situations were built into the moral fabric of the society as their life played out on the various social levels as universal fate. In a big way this understanding of how the universe functioned helped to maintain order, and life struggles were viewed as helping propel one to a better place after the present life ended.

Siddhartha, the Buddha, worked to transform this notion of the universe and through understanding mutual causality taught a very different interpretation of karma. He came to realize that accepting fate as a universal reality was the engine that continued human suffering. One of the pillars of the Four Noble Truths supports the wisdom of this philosophical sea-change. The intent of an individual’s actions is karma. Karma has no value, however, until it is given value. Our actions, and the effect of those actions, is multidirectional. That is to say that it effects both subject and object. Yet it is not something we “have”, or own. However, this does not mean that we are not responsible for our actions either. Considering that the only reality we can directly experience is what we can experience in the moment, our actions come from a sense of self and the choices we make. By intentionally choosing to make changes in how we are, we change the very nature of the person we continually transform into.

As we work to understand the kind of person we are, we are confronted with how we can change, not only our character, the community around us, and our various relationships, but in ways unknown to us. We awaken to the reality that we are agents-for-change acting in the capability of the social-self. As we gain this wisdom in our practice we come to awaken to the fact that karma drives (or influences) what we have done and how we change as a result of both the intent of our actions and their consequences. If we want to be a different kind of person, we must gain insight in the world around us with a new kind of vision. Karma is not a fatalistic doctrine, but one that empowers us to find the good in our selves, and in others. In this way, karma brings a rebirth to us moment to moment as our actions bring change before are very eyes.

The challenge for a modern Buddhist practice today is to continue to find a contemporary language that speaks to these ancient principles that have not always been successfully transformed from their original cultural language. This adds to the confusion we teachers encounter from our students when they begin to take a deeper interest in the Buddhist path, yet have gotten their initial understanding from works that are stuck in the past. Because of this, Buddhism often speaks with two voices, contemporary and ancient. Yet, if we keep the teachings simple, straightforward, and rich in modern understanding, we will move forward with confidence that we will find a common language from which Buddhist thought will ride on the stream of karmic change through the next century. The lessons the Buddha spoke of often seems so simple, yet so difficult to glimpse until we awaken to how things are beyond just words.

For example:

Take “Buddhist math” in the simple expression of 2 – 1 = 1, where 2 – 1 represents the individual and = 1 represents unity. Now remove the math symbols of – and =. We have an expression of 2 1 1. Now we can rationalize that the first 1 is the individual expression and the second 1 represents the unity of 2 – 1.  By the way, the math symbols can be viewed as metaphors for how we learn to see the world around us.  They are like filters that either make our world clear or distorted.

Now I ask you, are the two 1’s different or the same?

When you can answer that, you will clearly come to the wise understanding of what “form and emptiness” is expressing as we often read those words in many of the legacy teachings from the past.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , ,