Every now and then I trip over an article about Buddhism in which someone says he or she "tried" Buddhism and rejected it. Almost inevitably the article reveals that the writer's understanding of Buddhism is laughably superficial.
I found a good example of the "rejection of Buddhism" genre today. The author, whose name is Jake Shannon, at least has read Walpola Rahula's What the Buddha Taught and has a little cognitive understanding of some basic teachings. But Shannon makes the tiresomely common misunderstanding that anatta is a teaching of non-existence.
He writes, "To the Buddha, the self or Atman (ego) was an ever-changing composite of the Five Aggregates, namely matter sensations, perceptions, mental formations, and consciousness. For Buddha, since these five composites were in flux, they somehow ceased to exist."
Shannon says this is absurd, and of course it is, but that isn't what the Buddha taught. The teachings challenge us to change the way we understand existence, and to perceive that existence, or "reality," isn't what we think it is. However, to say that our ordinary understanding of existence and reality is delusional is not the same thing as saying there is no existence and no reality.
For a more interesting, and challenging, "walking away" narrative, listen to this conversation between Mike Reeves and Ellis Potter from Theology Network. Potter was a Zen Buddhist monk for a time, but he has chosen to resume belief in the Christian Trinity and is now a Christian pastor.
Potter has some worthwhile perspectives on shunyata and Buddha nature -- he calls shunyata "a pregnant nothing that is pregnant with everything" -- interesting way to put it. He loses me when he compares Buddhism and Christianity as a difference between monism and the Trinity, however.
Buddhism seems to be monist, but my understanding is that it is not exactly monist. The Buddha taught us not to hold on to views that we are component parts of a One Thing, or that our individual self is "false" and only an infinite self-that-is-everything is "true." Understanding the self requires going beyond concepts and ideas.
Master Seng-ts'an said,
In the world of things as they are, there is no self, no non self.
If you want to describe its essence, the best you can say is "Not-two."
Potter's explanations of why he chooses to believe in the Trinity are not terribly satisfying -- "It takes less faith to believe in Christianity than to believe in everything else" -- but at least he has a pretty good idea of what it is he is walking away from.
Update: I fear I must re-evaluate the Rev. Ellis Potter. I found an essay he wrote where he continues the diatribe about monism, and also says,
In the first circle, when everything is one, hatred is evil. This sounds fine to us as Christians! However, love is equally evil. Why is this the case? Because one is the only good. Two is bad. Three is worse. Only one is good. In order to be enlightened, one has to stop hating - but he or she also has to stop loving, as well. You have to stop relating. Buddhists will never speak of the love of the Buddha. They will rather speak of the compassion of the Buddha. "Compassion" is a desire, a sympathy to help you toward oneness. But love is a recognition of who you are as an individual, thus it is not tolerated.
That's wrong on so many levels it makes me tired just thinking about explaining it. And he was a monk? Somebody's got some 'splainin' to do ...
Misunderstandings like these are depressingly common. For my own part, I had taken a relatively shallow look into Buddhism when I was in my early-20s, and dismissed it because I mistakenly understood it to be about cutting off all human emotion in favor of blissing out in some detached cosmic state. I was emphatically not interested in any form of spirituality that, to me, amounted to denying reality or my own humanity. It would be another several years before an actual Zen priest set me straight, and I learned that Buddhism doesn’t demand that we deny or reject reality or our own humanity at all. Rather, I was delighted and intrigued to learn, the Dharma beckons us to embrace the whole of life in its totality, with nothing left out. Once I understood that, I was hooked. I’ve never looked back.
The extent to which it might seem tempting to classify Buddhist philosophy as a form of (what in the western philosophical traditions is referred to as) monism, probably depends upon where one stands in relation to Buddha Nature Doctrine debates. There are schools of thought which see Buddha-Nature as a kind of essence, existing from its own side.
Where the differences become clear, it seems to me, is in the actual practice of Buddha Dharma — how the final reference point for all Buddhist philosophical doctrine is meditative insight.
Re monism and Buddhism — by understanding is that Theravadins very explicitly deny Buddhism is monistic. Mahayana can seem monistic, but when you get more deeply into it you see that’s not quite right. In any event, Nagarjuna (whose work is the main philosophical foundation of Mahayana) specifically denied the possibility of monism in the Eight Negations and elsewhere.
Barbara;
Barbara:
Sorry for the blank response, but I just wanted to say that you are a treasure to the dharma and those of us seeking to augment our studies and understandings. You help make this path so interesting, informative and less confusing for all of us.
I want to ditto Athene, Barbara, and add that (since you mention Walpola Rahula above), I have ‘What the Buddha Taught’ right next to the computer as a I write, and know of this book solely because of your recommendation on this site. It truly is the best summary of Buddhism I have yet seen and very, very useful. How Jake Shannon said what he said after reading Rahula is a mystery to me, since that author takes such tremendous pains to expose common misconceptions about Buddhism–he just about does handstands to make his points, in particular about anatta NOT meaning the annihilation of existence.
Some years ago I read an account by a Zen priest whose name most of us would recognize, of a visit he made to his dying father in the hospital, when he was still in the early stage of training. Intending to comfort (and enlighten, no doubt!) his father, he said to him, “Fundamentally, you have never existed.”
“Don’t tell me I don’t exist!” snapped his father.
Who was the real teacher?
By and large, many of these pervasive misunderstandings can be traced back to one common cause– lack of a decent teacher. Man!!! When I think back to my initial understanding of Buddhism…colored as it was by the likes of Jack Kerouac and Ginsberg!!! The four precepts Jack!? I’ll bet you can guess which one he left out!!!
In any event, after my first year with my current sensei, much of that nonsense and most gross misconceptions were cleared up…often through some pretty embarrassing dokusans!!! It’s Buddha, Dharma, AND Sangha folks…. It’s not Buddhism until it’s all three!!!!! Books will only take you so far. The cushion and community are the two best teachers……
Of course, in Potter’s case, I have no idea what went wrong….
Just want to comment on one idea in the convert’s remarks.
It is:
As Christians, we believe that there is Truth and that God has revealed it to us.
I simply do not believe that what Christians call revelation has any extra-terrestrial origin and that it contains any truth that is not purely man-made. Buddhists believe that truth is discovered by existential self examination, by introspection, and by what human experience reveals.
If revelation is true, why do Jews, Muslims, Mormons etc. have different revelations? Which revelation is one to believe? Is God confused in giving different revelations to different peoples? Why should I beleive that Christian truth is superior to Muslim truth?
Speaking strictly for myself, I find Buddhism a difficult path sometimes. In many instances it can seem to present contradictory ideas. For example, the idea that there is no soul or self and yet there is a belief of some kind of reincarnation. I don’t doubt that the fault lies in my poor understanding rather than Buddhism itself, but I do get frustrated.
Hi Lee — I also find rebirth to be one of the most challenging & slippery of Buddhist concepts. Barbara has written about it in two essays:
Karma & Rebirth
Reincarnation & Rebirth
I’ve found the simple practice of observing the breath — the birth and death of each inhalation, and each exhalation — to be a useful way to begin to intuit what rebirth might be about.
It’s also been suggested to me that I consider: When I have several different dreams during a single night, what is it that travels from one dream to the next?
Walking away from Buddhism will be more in the future unless the religious part of it is not removed. Its practice contradicts its own teaching.
As several people mentioned above they have to believe in Karma, Rebirth, Samsara etc.
All problems arose since the loss of the “practcle” Noble Eightfold Path (NEP). All what The Buddha taught can be seen and realised though it only. Otherwise people have to learn and believe all Buddha’s teaching and become believers in Buddhism.
Breathing meditation is not Buddhist. It was practised by Brahmins in India long before The Buddha! If one concentrates the mind on any thing there is attachment to it and no non-attachment. Buddhist meditation should be practice of non-attachment. Nobody thinks as to what did The Buddha do to become a Buddha and realise all what is found today as his teaching?
It is nothing other than the practical Noble Eightfold Path (NEP) the only Buddhist meditation which was lost for the last 2,000 odd years until rediscovered in Sri Lanka recently.
If you practice the NEP you can see Dukka, Samsara, Karma, Rebirth, Anatta etc. exactly as how The Buddha saw them.
Buddha Dharma is not for learning it is for practice, experience and realise. When you practice NEP you will see Buddha Dharma has no worshiping, believing, praying, chanting etc. etc. of a religious nature.
NEP is exactly what the people of the future would accept. It is available in Sri Lanka.
Walking away from Buddhism will be more in the future unless the religious part of it is not removed. Its practice contradicts its own teaching.
As several people mentioned above they have to believe in Karma, Rebirth, Samsara
I don’t see my belief in Karma, Samsara or Rebirth as having been FORCED onto me. In fact, it makes sense to believe in those. I try to practise NEP everyday. In fact, practise is not the right word. You don’t practise NEP, you need to (try to) live it.
I’m still a newbie when it comes to Buddhist practise, I haven’t been a serious practicioner of Buddhism for even 18 months yet. But I have already experienced some great benefits and small insights into things.
And ALL paths need some degree of belief in something, even if it’s to believe in anatman or nothing at all.
NEP is exactly what the people of the future would accept. It is available in Sri Lanka.
NEP is available everywhere that people have access to the Buddha’s teachings, not just in Sri Lanka, and it doesn’t help if it’s available and not everyone utilises it. One just has to look at the current situation to see that.
In a perfect world, everyone in the future will practise NEP and the world will become Utopia. But in real life, I think sadly that Samsara will continue and the precious few true Boddhisattvas will continue their work. Hopefully we will have more Boddhisattvas.
@ Dhammachick & Reshwetmuti
Ofcourse all Buddhists know NEP. But only as a “way of life” which is given in text books as a list of 08 items. Nobody knows even whether the list is in correct order.
What I talk about is Practical NEP where the word practical I have put within quotation marks in the earlier post.
NEP is not a way of life. It is the form of meditation discovered by The Buddha. It was lost to the world well over 2,000 years ago due to practice of it being given up by then Sangha. As a result Buddhism split into verious sects known today as Therawada, Mahayana, Zen, Tibetan etc. The original teaching was one. Therefore, if you know the practical NEP you can re-unite all forms of Buddhism.
Few years back it was rediscovered by Ven. Lanakapura Sariputhra in Sri Lanka. If you learn how to practice it you can see the list of NEP known by everybody is in a wrong order, it is found in all types of Buddhism in hidden form and with it you can realise, for your self, all such as Karma, rebirth etc. It is the measuring tool to decide anything found in any form of Buddhism today is whether correct and original or a wrong later addition.
From the begining it has to be practised in 01 hr sessions keeping the body absolutely motionless. Due to severe pains encountered at the early stages 99% of the new commers would run away showing the exact reason for losing it in the history!
Few years back it was rediscovered by Ven. Lanakapura Sariputhra in Sri Lanka. If you learn how to practice it you can see the list of NEP known by everybody is in a wrong order, it is found in all types of Buddhism in hidden form and with it you can realise, for your self, all such as Karma, rebirth etc. It is the measuring tool to decide anything found in any form of Buddhism today is whether correct and original or a wrong later addition.
So is it a secret practise or are there links and resources available? I’d be interested to see what the “true NEP” is all about. But I’m not able to just up and go to Sri Lanka to find out at this point in time.
Monism vs. Dualism. I would like to point out that Buddhism does not espouse monism.. Its philosophy is based on non-dualism. It is neither monistic nor dualistic. Non dualism rejects the separation into oppositional entities of self and other, matter ans spirit, good and evil etc. Non dualism holds that there is an intertwining and relational link and not an antagonistic
opposition between what seem to be pairs in opposition to each other.
It is my understanding that the Buddha taught that there are “84,000 dharma gates” — symbolic of the many ways of realizing our Original Nature — in response to the “84,000 sicknesses” of human beings, i.e. all the various ways in which we are trapped in deluded/dualisitc/samsaric perception …
& that any teaching or technique that is in alignment with the Four Dharma Seals can be considered to be a “Buddhist” teaching or technique.
This great variety of “Dharma gates” is one aspect of the Buddha’s infinite compassion. So no — I don’t believe we all have to go to Sri Lanka to have access to authentic Dharma. (Which isn’t to say that Ven. Lanakapura Sariputhra isn’t an authentic teacher, offering to his students an authentic Dharma gate ….. just that he’s not the only one!)
@ Dhammachick & emr
It is not a secret practice. It was lost in the history due to followers giving it up. No body tried to find it again. That resulted in original Buddhism breaking into various sects. Out of the 18,000 original Suthras Therawada has some 17,000 odd. They gave up what they couldn’t explain. So it seems each sect took up what ever was favourable for them.
If you learn and practice the practical NEP you will easily find you can correct whatevr the Buddhist teaching you are presently following. You will be taken to the top of everything so that you become capable of critically analyze any religion even if it is not Buddhism of any form.
The 18,000 Suthras are various descriptions of the same single unique path, the practical NEP! There is only one Dharma gate to freedom. It is the NEP. The only way out of attachment is detachment. There are no other means.
When you learn it you will see all 18,000 are no more than NEP. That was the super ability The Buddha posessed. That was why The Buddha said “if you see the Dharma you will see me and if you see me you see Dharma”. The Suthras are there to guid and ensure the follower that even after thousans of years following the death of the teacher that the follower is on right course if he practice NEP.
Its true it’s been rediscovered in Sri Lanka by Ven. Lankapura Sariputhra. But unfortunately the majority Therawada monks do everything possible to keep him away from the public. This is simply due to fear of their losing the present status in the soceity. The original teaching never needs belief, worship, praying, chanting etc. etc. Therefore, you can understand…..
He is not given the TV, Radio and the press. But he is extensively criticised in all media. That is why I being one of his followers try evrything to give it to the world if the local Buddhists never want this. This is a 100% similar case to what happened to Buddha. The Brahmins were at that time the advisers to the kings and leading characters in the soceity. The appearance of The Buddha was a real headache for them and as a result they tried to kill him and did everything against him. As a result Buddhism vanished from India first and it was first written in Sri Lanka and taken to the world from Sri Lanka later. This is exactly what is happening here with the Buddhist monks. “The Buddha never had TV, radio or press therefore, I don’t need them” is what Ven. Sariputhra is saying. He is 76 years old and healthy as a young boy and you can see he is not afraid of anything like a lion. He says those who deserve it and have merit to find it will come accross it despite any barrier and errespective of at what corner of the world they are!
One important benefit in practising NEP is that you erase previous Karma and as a result you can see yourself becoming healthy by the day. You have results from the very first session!
Pls write to me on keertiwijet@gmail.com to tell you how to practice NEP.
You don’t need to come to Sri Lanka. You don’t need to go to meditational retreats. You can practice and achieve unbelievable results at your home, office etc. Then you will decide to visit the great teacher!
With that you become your own teacher. It is a great research.
It is better not to ask about this from teachers as they are affraid of this. (Still I have fullest regard to all teachers.) You can go over the Buddhist teachers of present day.
Now you have one fully enlightened teacher in Sri Lanka. Fully qualified to teach!
The only way out of attachment is detachment. There are no other means.
This is basically a Theravadin view. A Mahayana response might be:
“Attachment” and “detachment” are two sides of a single conceptual polarity. They arise interdependently — one cannot exist without the other. True realization is accessed only in the moment of transcending this and all polarities mind.
To the extent that we could represent it in words, it might be something like: not-(neither attachment nor detachment).
emr — You are exactly right about Mahayana, but I don’t think “detatchment” is the right word for Tharavadins, either, and the common belief that Buddhism advocates “detatchment” does a lot of harm to the dharma in the West. However, I have tried explaining the nuances of English to Keerthi in the past, and he will not listen.
Hello everyone here,
I have just visit this site for the first time and found this topic is interested me so I have read it.
I would like to correct something.
“Buddhists will never speak of the love of the Buddha. They will rather speak of the compassion of the Buddha.”
Actually, compassion is just a tool to help you developing yourself. It is not the purpose of Buddhism.
From the four noble truths, the purpose of Buddhism is only one thing, Dukkha-nirodha: the cessation of suffering; extinction of suffering.
Additionally, if you understanding the word “Shunyata”, you won’t say that Buddhism is monism.
People walk away from Buddhism because they cannot understanding or misunderstanding in the heart of Buddhism. It is very difficult to be understand even in Buddhism country.
misunderstandings of religious tenets — in christianity, islam and judaism, as well as buddhism — are depressingly common in the west. i know very few adults, and even fewer children that have any exposure to the most basic belief system of their religion of origin, let alone being introduced to a relatively neutral overview of other views. much of this discussion thread seems a reflection of this lack. it is a safe bet, i think, that one’s level of certainty regarding their ownership of “religious truth” is inversely proportional to how much he or she has actually studied and contemplated other traditions.
I encourage everyone to reflect on calling someone’s understanding of Buddhism “laughably superficial.” Not because of that person’s understanding but because of our own.
Metta