I am no respecter of authority or tradition. I don't blindly follow any tradition, but I do look to tradition to give clues as to how we can progress towards enlightenment. There are three forms of Buddhist tradition that we can examine. I look at all three in turn below.
1. The Pali Canon. This is the collection of the oldest Buddhist texts, but half of them don't make any sense. It's difficult to work out which are the ones that we can have confidence in. Many have espoused one text from the Pali Canon called the Satipatthana Sutta but there are problems with this. The Anapanasati Sutta is also used. A much later text from Sri Lanka called the Visuddhimagga is advocated by some.
2. The monastic tradition in Theravada Buddhist countries. Some people like to believe that Buddha's teachings have been handed down through the centuries from teacher to pupil. They believe that in monasteries in Burma, Thailand and Sri Lanka the old meditation practices have been preserved. We know this is not the case though. The practice of meditation died out or nearly died out. Even monasticism itself died out in parts of the Theravada world. Monks from Burma re-established ordination in Sri Lanka in 1065 AD and Thai monks did the same in 1753. Ordination for nuns has yet to be re-established in places.
Theravada Buddhism is the nearest we have to the original Buddhism, but it is not the same as the original Buddhism.
3. Recent attempts to re-invent Buddhist meditation. In all three of the main Theravada countries there have been attempts to re-invent the original meditation practices. In Sri Lanka someone called Dharmapala (1864-1933) examined old Buddhist texts, not just as a scholarly exercise as others had done but to practice meditation. In Burma, two lineages came to be established. In Thailand another one began.
The first of the two Burmese lineages was started by U Narada (1868-1954). The most influential person in this tradition was Mahasi Sayadaw (1904-1982) who developed the method of labeling (also called noting or naming) of thoughts and feelings during meditation.
The second Burmese lineage was started by Ledi Sayadaw (1846-1923). The most influential person in this tradition was U Ba Khin (1899-1971). He developed the method of 'body scanning'. An Indian man called S N Goenka (1924-2013) spread this method widely, and his technique is probably the best known Theravada meditation practice.
Both the Mahasi Sayadaw method and the U Ba Khin method are forms of vipassana meditation (also called insight meditation). Neither of them makes use of the other traditional form of Buddhist meditation called samatha meditation (also called concentration meditation) which is meant to be used in conjunction with vipassana. So their methods seem a long way from that taught by Buddha. Also, despite the talk of 'lineages' and 'traditions' there has been much change in methods. Mahasi Sayadaw's method is not the same as U Narada's. U Ba Khin's method is not the same as Ledi Sayadaw's. So they are definitely not ancient, as some seem to believe.
A lineage in Thailand seems to go back a bit further in time. It could be said to date back to King Mongkut, who wanted to reform Thai Buddhism. Ajahn Mun Bhuridatta (1870-1949) developed a method. The most influential person in this tradition was Ajahn Chah (1918-1992). It's difficult to work out what his form of vipassana meditation is, but it is different from either of the two Burmese methods. He taught samatha meditation as well as vipassana (unlike either of the Burmese methods). This tradition is called the 'Thai forest tradition'.
Have any of these three traditions found the true vipassana meditation which can take a diligent meditator to enlightenment? Somehow I doubt it. They all seem to do something, but are they all they should be? Several Buddhist authors seem to combine Mahasi style noting vipassana with samatha meditation. Is this the way forward?
The problem with traditions is that they seem to ossify inadequate methods. Four men, all of them born within 24 years of each other in the 19th century, made their own attempts to re-create Buddha's methods (Dharmapala, U Narada, Ledi Sayadaw and Ajahn Mun). The methods that the last three developed were considerably altered by their followers (principally Mahasi Sayadaw, U Ba Khin and Ajahn Chah). However, today people seem to think we have to protect the purity of the tradition, whatever tradition they have become involved with, thinking that it has been passed down intact from the time of Buddha.
Perhaps people should learn more than one vipassana technique. It would seem sensible to also practice samatha meditation. There seems to be more agreement about what samatha is. I don't just mean meditating on the breath to calm oneself before vipassana, I mean experiencing the first four jhanas. Perhaps people should keep an open mind about what vipassana is or could be. Maybe something can be learned from Zen or Tibetan Dzogchen meditation. Many people seem to be trying Dzogchen and other forms of non-dualist practice.
Buddha said that when he was making his way towards enlightenment he felt like 'a man wandering through a forest' who comes on a forgotten 'ancient path travelled upon by people in the past'. (Nagara Sutta). I feel that we are in the same position today.
That doesn't mean we should give up. If you want to make your way across a landscape but only have a faulty map there are four options. You could decide not to make the journey. You could make the journey and trust blindly in the map. You could make the journey but leave the map behind. Or you could make the journey using the map to give you clues about which way to go. In this analogy the 'map' is the Pali Canon together with the experiences of meditators who seem to have progressed along the path.
Some Buddhists would say that we already have the method that leads to enlightenment. One or two Buddhist authors say they are enlightened (Daniel M Ingram and Kenneth Folk). Others say that the search for enlightenment should not be the priority in the life of a Buddhist. One idea is that the more you seek enlightenment the less likely you are to find it.
One Buddhist author, Jack Kornfield, says that if we choose a spiritual path it doesn't have to be Buddhist but it should be a tradition. In chapter 16 of A Path With Heart he writes "Lineage and tradition are the sacred containers for preserving practices and wisdom that have been discovered and accumulated over generations". It seems to me that a tradition can get you started, but you need to go beyond a tradition if you want to get enlightened.
There are many uncertainties, but some things are more certain than others. The idea that there are two forms of meditation that complement each other (samatha and vipassana) seems sound. What exactly vipassana is, or should be, is what we still need to search for.
For more information on the reinvention of vipassana see below
Theravada spirituality in the West
Theravada reinvents meditation
1. The Pali Canon. This is the collection of the oldest Buddhist texts, but half of them don't make any sense. It's difficult to work out which are the ones that we can have confidence in. Many have espoused one text from the Pali Canon called the Satipatthana Sutta but there are problems with this. The Anapanasati Sutta is also used. A much later text from Sri Lanka called the Visuddhimagga is advocated by some.
2. The monastic tradition in Theravada Buddhist countries. Some people like to believe that Buddha's teachings have been handed down through the centuries from teacher to pupil. They believe that in monasteries in Burma, Thailand and Sri Lanka the old meditation practices have been preserved. We know this is not the case though. The practice of meditation died out or nearly died out. Even monasticism itself died out in parts of the Theravada world. Monks from Burma re-established ordination in Sri Lanka in 1065 AD and Thai monks did the same in 1753. Ordination for nuns has yet to be re-established in places.
Theravada Buddhism is the nearest we have to the original Buddhism, but it is not the same as the original Buddhism.
3. Recent attempts to re-invent Buddhist meditation. In all three of the main Theravada countries there have been attempts to re-invent the original meditation practices. In Sri Lanka someone called Dharmapala (1864-1933) examined old Buddhist texts, not just as a scholarly exercise as others had done but to practice meditation. In Burma, two lineages came to be established. In Thailand another one began.
The first of the two Burmese lineages was started by U Narada (1868-1954). The most influential person in this tradition was Mahasi Sayadaw (1904-1982) who developed the method of labeling (also called noting or naming) of thoughts and feelings during meditation.
The second Burmese lineage was started by Ledi Sayadaw (1846-1923). The most influential person in this tradition was U Ba Khin (1899-1971). He developed the method of 'body scanning'. An Indian man called S N Goenka (1924-2013) spread this method widely, and his technique is probably the best known Theravada meditation practice.
Both the Mahasi Sayadaw method and the U Ba Khin method are forms of vipassana meditation (also called insight meditation). Neither of them makes use of the other traditional form of Buddhist meditation called samatha meditation (also called concentration meditation) which is meant to be used in conjunction with vipassana. So their methods seem a long way from that taught by Buddha. Also, despite the talk of 'lineages' and 'traditions' there has been much change in methods. Mahasi Sayadaw's method is not the same as U Narada's. U Ba Khin's method is not the same as Ledi Sayadaw's. So they are definitely not ancient, as some seem to believe.
A lineage in Thailand seems to go back a bit further in time. It could be said to date back to King Mongkut, who wanted to reform Thai Buddhism. Ajahn Mun Bhuridatta (1870-1949) developed a method. The most influential person in this tradition was Ajahn Chah (1918-1992). It's difficult to work out what his form of vipassana meditation is, but it is different from either of the two Burmese methods. He taught samatha meditation as well as vipassana (unlike either of the Burmese methods). This tradition is called the 'Thai forest tradition'.
Have any of these three traditions found the true vipassana meditation which can take a diligent meditator to enlightenment? Somehow I doubt it. They all seem to do something, but are they all they should be? Several Buddhist authors seem to combine Mahasi style noting vipassana with samatha meditation. Is this the way forward?
The problem with traditions is that they seem to ossify inadequate methods. Four men, all of them born within 24 years of each other in the 19th century, made their own attempts to re-create Buddha's methods (Dharmapala, U Narada, Ledi Sayadaw and Ajahn Mun). The methods that the last three developed were considerably altered by their followers (principally Mahasi Sayadaw, U Ba Khin and Ajahn Chah). However, today people seem to think we have to protect the purity of the tradition, whatever tradition they have become involved with, thinking that it has been passed down intact from the time of Buddha.
Perhaps people should learn more than one vipassana technique. It would seem sensible to also practice samatha meditation. There seems to be more agreement about what samatha is. I don't just mean meditating on the breath to calm oneself before vipassana, I mean experiencing the first four jhanas. Perhaps people should keep an open mind about what vipassana is or could be. Maybe something can be learned from Zen or Tibetan Dzogchen meditation. Many people seem to be trying Dzogchen and other forms of non-dualist practice.
Buddha said that when he was making his way towards enlightenment he felt like 'a man wandering through a forest' who comes on a forgotten 'ancient path travelled upon by people in the past'. (Nagara Sutta). I feel that we are in the same position today.
That doesn't mean we should give up. If you want to make your way across a landscape but only have a faulty map there are four options. You could decide not to make the journey. You could make the journey and trust blindly in the map. You could make the journey but leave the map behind. Or you could make the journey using the map to give you clues about which way to go. In this analogy the 'map' is the Pali Canon together with the experiences of meditators who seem to have progressed along the path.
Some Buddhists would say that we already have the method that leads to enlightenment. One or two Buddhist authors say they are enlightened (Daniel M Ingram and Kenneth Folk). Others say that the search for enlightenment should not be the priority in the life of a Buddhist. One idea is that the more you seek enlightenment the less likely you are to find it.
One Buddhist author, Jack Kornfield, says that if we choose a spiritual path it doesn't have to be Buddhist but it should be a tradition. In chapter 16 of A Path With Heart he writes "Lineage and tradition are the sacred containers for preserving practices and wisdom that have been discovered and accumulated over generations". It seems to me that a tradition can get you started, but you need to go beyond a tradition if you want to get enlightened.
There are many uncertainties, but some things are more certain than others. The idea that there are two forms of meditation that complement each other (samatha and vipassana) seems sound. What exactly vipassana is, or should be, is what we still need to search for.
For more information on the reinvention of vipassana see below
Theravada spirituality in the West
Theravada reinvents meditation
No comments:
Post a Comment