Materialism, which the Buddha called a pernicious wrong view, says when we die from here, everything ends, we dissolve, there is no result of actions (karma); life had no meaning, and everything is lost. This is the Annihilationist view, the fear or relief that we will be annihilated at death when we will not.
Escape the rebirth trap of samsaranow before it's too late.
Eternalism is what the Buddha called a pernicious wrong view that takes the other extreme -- that we do not die at death but persist and go on. This is closer to the (conventional) truth, as anyone who has a near-death experience will realize, but it is wrong in assuming that an eternal "soul" or "substance" carries on. An impersonal process carries on, a chain of causation, so that karma bears fruit. And while the person who passes from here and rearises (reappears) hereafter are not identical, so there is no "identity" to cling to even now at this moment. What is there? There are the ever-changing Five Aggregates clung to as self, dependently arisen, and hurtling toward destruction, dissolution, disappearance at every moment. There is nothing to cling to, but the aggregates nevertheless grasp and cling.
As with Gnosticism, this needs to be realized while we are yet alive, or the process will continue, and we will simply be reborn again and again and again.
Gnostics, what goes on, what remains?
(Gnostic Talk) I've stopped calling it "death" because the Gnostics had a completely different word for it. What is the Pistis Sophia? (It is comforting to think that Jesus Christ/Saint Issa understood this, but sad that modern sectarian Christians do not.
Buddhism is nontheistic, not atheistic, and Buddhists are free to believe, follow, worship, or depend on a god (Maha Brahma, the Great Supremo), gods (brahmas, devas), or whatever conception they have of the "divine" (divinity)
It's like we always say at Wisdom Quarterly, Who needs the historical Buddha's instructions when you can have magic and mystery in Tibet and lots of political mumbo jumbo from a corrupt lapsed empire and its pope-king? The Himalayas were like that until Mao's Army crashed in and crushed Lhasa, the Oracle told the leader to get out quick, and ruling elite made a deal with the devils (CIA). Tibet still wields disproportionate influence in the region, now annexed and part of the PRC. Who has time for a tradition akin to American hippies turning their backs on their parents' Christianity to become dirty hippie "Jesus Freaks"? Of course they would want to because who wouldn't want to get back-to-basics and away from corrupt institutions and an out-of-control clergy? If faced with organized religion, do what seekers like Siddhartha have always done: become a shaman (shraman) on a quest for a personally verified experience of ultimate truth. If one has to do it at all, do it right, spiritual exploration over religion rules. Who could possibly choose the holy Roman Empire's version of Catholicism ("Universalism") instead of the direct teachings of an entheogen-consuming, just-back-from-India, dirty, Jewish, Essene, vegetarian Nazarene adept who spent time in a Buddhist monastery and in ashrams and secret initiation site training and preparing for 18 years?
But many will choose the institution, as most of Tibet (a massive region a quarter to half the size of China) did in centuries past. But the real practice of Buddhism involves moving beyond comfortable institutions, rituals, and dogma and onto the mat for purification of heart/mind and view. That's when the real progress begins. Few are probably ready for that, so let's get back to Tibetan politics with the pope-king who is now just "pope" of one Tibetan school or sect, the Gelug Yellow Hats.
With a peaceful expression, the Tibetan deity is depicted seated on a moon disc lotus seat which is encircled by beautiful flowers. This thangka was exquisitely painted by Enlightenment artists utilizing genuine 24K gold and acrylic paints. More: artofit.org
(Study Buddhism) Why "meditation" [striving, straining, struggling to get into absorption] feels so hard (and what to do about it) | [Western scientist and Vajrayana Buddhist lama] Ven. Matthieu Ricard [known as "the happiest person in the world"*]. "There is no Samsara 2.0."
Who is he?
Sure, I'm happy, but the happiest?
Matthieu Ricard (French matjø ʁikaʁ, Nepali माथ्यु रिका, born Feb. 15, 1946) is a French Nepalese writer, photographer, translator, and Buddhist monk (lama) who resides at Shechen Tennyi Dargyeling Monastery in Nepal.
Dr. Matthieu Ricard grew up among the personalities and ideas of French intellectual circles. He received a PhD degree in molecular genetics from the Pasteur Institute in 1972.
He then decided to avoid a common scientific career and instead did the daring thing and took up the practice of Tibetan Buddhism (Vajrayana Bon), living mainly in the Himalayas.
Matthieu Ricard is a board member of the Mind and Life Institute. He received the French National Order of Merit for his humanitarian work in the East with Karuna-Shechen, the non-profit organization he co-founded in 2000 with Rabjam Rinpoche.
Since 1989, he has acted as the French interpreter for the 14th Dalai Lama. Since 2010, he has been traveling and giving a series of talks with and assisting in teachings by Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche, the incarnation of Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche....
*Matthieu Ricard has been called the "happiest person in the world" [4, 5]. Why?
It is because Matthieu Ricard was a volunteer subject in a study performed at the University of Wisconsin–Madison on happiness. He scored significantly above the average of hundreds of volunteers [4].
Matthieu Ricard, however, has called the label "absurd" and untrue [6, 7]. More
LYRICS "Death Certificate" (by Carcass): A grim myriad/ A grey kaleidoscope/ Sterile, contrasting/ Born and die/ Institutionalized/ A bleak epitaph/ An epilogue so sad
The Heart Sutra is the world's most popular Buddhist sutra. Sadly, from a young age, even I recognized something in its magical wording (Edward Conze translation). It had a small tract of it in English and Chinese, and I would approach Chinese friends to translate some of the incomprehensible parts -- one line in particular: "until we come to."
What in the world? It turns out that was just Conze's way of saying "...". And other parts were explained to me as having been written in an archaic form of Old (liturgical) Chinese few people spoke, which they were very embarrassed to admit. The Berkeley Zen Center was even more forthcoming, suggesting it was just something to chant, not something one could hope to make sense of, like a Sanskrit seed-mantra. So they just chanted it, on the one hand, rote, mindlessly, thoughtlessly, with no investigation that it might actually mean something sensible. I, on the other hand, was tenacious, spending years making sense of it. And every year it made more and more sense.
The lost meaning has been recovered.
My Theravada study of it revealed exactly what it was all about after a few years due to some key phrases that do not make sense on their own but make perfect sense as references to ancient Buddhist texts, such as lists of the BASES (ayatanas). The final crowning explanation came from Alan Watts* making sense of the strange wording, which might trip one up for years. I attribute this to a flexible way of translating any Sanskrit or Pali word, all of which have much wider valence, admitting to a range of translations, not one fixed English word to serve all situations.
The key secret is to realize that Śūnyatā ("Emptiness," void) is synonymous with the Pali suññatā ("impersonal" = anatta). Then everything else falls into place.
This is because what the Heart Sutra (Prajñā-pāramitā-hṛdayaDiscourse) is talking about are the Five Aggregates clung to as self, pointing out that every "heap" -- each one of the Five Aggregates -- is actually devoid of self. It is impersonal and is in that sense "empty." It has no "independent existence." What kind of existence does it have? It has a dependently-originated one. It is foolish to think there is nothing there at all as if all things were the void: There is no thing there, but there is something, some stuff, something is appearing. In the ultimate sense, "things" (dhammas, dharmas, phenomena) have an existence and so are called "things." The one thing that is not a thing is nirvana (the deathless, amata/amrita, the unconditioned element). Nirvana, being free of conditions, does not bear the (three universal) marks of "things." This "self" we cling to is just such a "thing," a conglomeration of other "things" (aggregates, groups, heaps), bearing the universal marks of being impermanent, unsatisfactory, and impersonal.
"Self" arises in this way, not as a real entity but an illusion brought about by the presence of the aggregates. When one grasps that all there has ever been are phenomenal aggregates -- impermanent, disappointing, and impersonal -- then the heart naturally lets go with no prompting and becomes free of all clinging and all further suffering.
It is called the "Heart" (hṛdaya) Sutra not because of emotions or sweetness but because it comes as the culmination, the brief summary, the pith, the essence of 100,000 lines or verses of detailed explanation. It is the essence of perfected wisdom. It is the key to stream entry, that which when not grasped keeps us as ordinary worldling but when grasped causes a "change of lineage" (gotrabhu) to the noble ones. The Buddha himself said it. There are not enlightened disciples to be found in other traditions, at least not in the Buddhist sense of the term bodhi ("awakened," "enlightened," "liberated") because nowhere else is this Doctrine of No-Self ever taught, ever revealed, ever explained, although all popular religions seem to have an innate understanding that being egoless is far wiser than being full of ego. For example, in popular Christianity, in the eyes of God, what is the worst sin? Pride.
Beloved Kwan Yin (Guanyin)
Better than [the Goddess of Compassion] Kwan Yin (the feminine form of Avalokiteshvara)? More beloved than [the Cosmic Buddha of Light] Amitabha? No, probably not, but what is higher and more exalted than wisdom?
The Buddha himself noted how popular and beloved Ananda was, whereas the monastics did not seem to realize the kalyana-mitta (noble/enlightening friendship) potential of Ven. Sariputta, the male monastic he declared foremost in wisdom. One can easily imagine the same thing must have happened among the females with the Buddha highlighting the value of the great bhikkhuni Ven. Khema, the nun he declared foremost in wisdom.
Now, one may ask, Why is Avalokiteśvara -- who is later transformed into the Goddess or Personification of Compassion (Kwan Yin/Guanyin) -- addressing Ven. Sariputra of all people in this most famous of all apocryphal "discourses"?
UCLA Prof. Robert E. Buswell Jr. (who ordained as a monk in Korean Zen then Sri Lankan Theravada before becoming a Western academic) explained the reason to us in class. Brahminical/Chinese Mahayana is holding up the monk disciple (shravaka) the Buddha declared "foremost in wisdom" as a scarecrow, stick figure, or punching bag to mock his supposed "wisdom," as if he were a mere intellect, a clueless egghead, a Brahmin nerd, a clueless dork compared to their god (deva, deity) Avalokita, whom they declare an "enlightenment being" (bodhi-sattva) and "great being" (maha-sattva, a Mahayana maha-sthamaprapta).
Wow, this perfection of wisdom is cool! It's eye-opening!
Avi, awake and wanting to awaken others, was reviewing the wisdom that has gone beyond. He looked down from on high and saw just five heaps, saw that in and of themselves they are impersonal, NOT A SELF, empty.
Herein, Sali, form implies emptiness, and emptiness implies form. Emptiness is not different than form, and form is not different than emptiness. They are mutually dependent. Anything that is empty, impersonal, and not-self is form.
[Conze translates these famous line as: "Form is emptiness, and the very emptiness is form; emptiness does not differ from form; form does not differ from emptiness; whatever is emptiness, that is form; [whatever is form, that is emptiness;] the same is true of feelings, perceptions, impulses (cetana, volitions), and consciousness."
What in the world does it mean? "Form" (Rūpa) and "Emptiness" (Pali Suññatā, Sanskrit Śūnyatā), Alan Watts explains in the video below, go together, are inseparable, are relational, one revealing the other, making no sense without the other. The instant one comes into being (arises), the other necessarily comes into being at the same time, for one cannot be without the other, just as opposite pairs depend on one another: being/nonbeing, birth/death, origin/cessation, yin/yang, figure/background. One would be meaningless without the other, for the other provides contrast and give it its definition.
So it would, in fact, be more sensible (better for meaning) to translate this line as, "Form (shape, color) reveals (exactly is, is inseparable from, always goes with, is inseparably related to) emptiness..." or "Form (solidity, density, tangibility) is not (designated, defined, found) without emptiness (a hollow or void) because they co-arise mutually. "One (exhibits) brings out the fact of the other.]
Herein [here within this Doctrine], Sali, all phenomena are impersonal. They bear the mark of being impersonal, empty: They are not produced and not stopped, not dirty and not clean, not missing something and not full.
There are no bases for these things [that are all dependently originated]: no eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind, nor the things that impinge on them: forms, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, or objects of mind, nor the things these sense depend on for their sensitivity: no element (sensitive tissue) of sight, and so forth, until we come to: no element (sensitive tissue) at the heart of consciousness.
[Why? It is because, after all, all things are impersonal, empty, not a self, so a bunch of them together don't make a self either).]
Likewise, really, there is no ignorance, so there is no end of ignorance [since it doesn't really exist except as an illusion), and so forth, until we come to: There is no aging and death, no end of aging and death. There is no disappointment, no coming into being, no extinction, and no path to the extinction of disappointment. There is no knowing, no attainment, and there is no non-attainment of this realization.
And so, Sali, because of one's not-attaining anything that a being-bent-on-enlightenment, perfecting this wisdom that has gone beyond, dwells free of discursive thoughts. In their absence, one is free of trembling. One has overcome all that can upset and so realized nirvana.
All those who appear as supremely awakened teachers the three periods of time -- past, present, and future -- fully awake to this utmost realization, right and perfect awakening because they have perfected the wisdom that has gone beyond.
So, Sali, everyone should know this perfection of wisdom as a kind of mantra, the mantra of great knowing, the utmost mantra, the unequalled mantra, the allayer of all disappointment and ill. It's true; I mean, what could really go wrong except that it be an illusion?
By perfecting the wisdom that has gone beyond, this mantra becomes clear, and it runs like this:
Gate gate paragate parasamgate bodhi svaha!
("Gone, gone, gone beyond, gone altogether beyond, oh what an awakening, it's true!")
(Dalai Lama) Can everyone be enlightened?Moksha("liberation," vimutti, "freedom" from samsara and suffering, "deliverance," salvation) is of two kinds, two levels, a happy life here and now [with possibly a heavenly rebirth for moral behavior hereafter] or attaining liberating-insight and final emancipation here and now in this very life through moral behavior, stillness (samadhi, settled calm, concentration), and vipassana (comprehending and cultivating Dependent Origination sufficient in theory and complete in practice).
Buddha's Wisdom (video); Dalai Lama (Q&A); Khenpo Sodargye (Q&A); Alan Watts (Zen Reconsidered, Pt. 2); Dhr. Seven (text), CC Liu (ed.), Wisdom Quarterly
All materials on this site are submitted by editors and readers. All images, unless otherwise noted, were taken from the Internet and are assumed to be in the public domain.
In the event that there is still a problem, issue, or error with copyrighted material, the break of the copyright is unintentional and noncommercial, and the material will be removed immediately upon presented proof.
Contact us by submitting a comment marked "private."
Do not follow this journal if you are under vinaya or parental restrictions. Secure protection by Sucuri.
Wisdom Quarterly: American Buddhist Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at creativecommons.org/about/licenses.
_LACMA_M.81.90.8_(2_of_2).jpg){kind=link}
#/media/File:Statue_of_Sveta_Sofia.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
#/media/File:Ephesus37.jpg){kind=link}
#/media/File:Holy_Wisdom_(16th_c.,_Vologda_museum).jpg){kind=link}