The Moon and the Clouds - Dhammapada, Chapters 12, 13, 14

This talk was given in 2001

I am talking about the chapters of the Dhammapada called Self, World and The Enlightened One. (Attavaggo, Lokavaggo, Buddhavaggo) I'm not going to go through the text systematically and I'm not even going to deal with the chapters in the order in which they appear. I'm going to talk about chapter 13 (World) first and then chapters 12 and 14.

Chapter 13 of the Dhammapada is titled Lokavagga, the World. The main point of the chapter is that we need to be less attached to the things of this world. We need to become less worldly. Being worldly is associated with being thoughtless or stupid. The idea is that we see the world through eyes of ignorance, mistake it for what it is not, and become attached. The translation says: “Look on the world as a bubble, look on it as a mirage; then the King of Death cannot even see you. Come look at his world! Is it not like a painted royal chariot? The wise see through it, but not the foolish.” (verses 170-171) We are being asked to take a fresh look at the world. Verse 168 says, “Get up (rouse yourself), do not be thoughtless”

There is a sort of urgency about these verses. It is reminiscent of the parable of the Burning House in the White Lotus Sutra. In that story the house is on fire but the children are continuing to play their games inside heedless of the danger they are in. The father has to entice them out with promises of other toys. The burning house is the mundane world and we are the heedless children playing our games. The father represents the Buddha and the toys are a whole variety of teachings that attract our interest.

I think perhaps both these images of the world are complementary; the painted royal chariot and the burning house. The painted royal chariot is all the wonderful seductive things of the world that we consume and accumulate. All the clothes we must have, the shoes and jackets etc., all the food we crave, all the gadgets, smart phones, computers, always better and faster and more mobile, all the cosmetics and creams that seduce our vanity, all the people we want to notice us, all the TV programmes and films we must see, all the things we think will make us happy if only we have a little more or better.

The Buddha is saying here; look, wake up, don't be stupid, it is all just so much show, a painted royal carriage . It is not what it seems to be. It's a mirage and you'll only cause yourself suffering by getting attached to it all. It's a burning house; more dangerous than you realise. What you need to do, he says, is stop being so thoughtless, follow the spiritual path, speak the truth and be generous. “Get up! Don't be heedless! Live practising the Dhamma, which is good conduct. One who lives practising the Dhamma (dhammacari) dwells happily (both) in this world and the other (world).” (Verse 168)

“There is no wrong that cannot be committed by a lying person who has transgressed one (good) principle (ie that of truthfulness), and who has given up (all thought of) the other world.” (verse 176)

Truly misers do not get to the world of the gods. (Only) the spiritually immature do not praise giving. The wise man rejoices in giving, and therefore is happy in the hereafter.” (verse 177)

If you do this then, he says, you will be like the moon breaking free form behind the clouds. You will light up the world. “When a foolish man becomes wise, he gives light to the world like the moon breaking free from behind the clouds. When his good deeds overcome his bad, a man gives light to the world like the moon breaking free from behind the clouds.” (verses 172-3) This is a challenging assertion of the intelligence of following the spiritual path and the ignorance and stupidity of not doing so. And it is also very practical. It speaks of not being thoughtless, of being truthful and being generous. Not being thoughtless means reflecting on life, reflecting on the nature of the world, and trying to discern what is of value, what is the best way to live. To be thoughtless is to accept the myth of secular materialism, the fallacy that consumption equals happiness, which is the prevailing wrong view in our world.

In verse 167, the Buddha says do not follow false doctrine. The Pali word translated as false doctrine is micchaditthi. Ditthi is a view or vision, a way of seeing and miccha is wrong or false. He is saying do not follow or live by a false view and wrong way of seeing things. The scriptures of this false doctrine are everywhere around us, on the magazine shelves, on TV, on the internet, at the cinema. There is a constant propaganda that is impossible to avoid and we have to be very thoughtful indeed, very mindful and aware, not to be taken in by it all and believe it and live by it. There is a very strong group pressure from the world around us to conform to this particular vision too. So the Buddha says, do not be thoughtless; wake up, think, reflect, be aware. And the urgency of his advice is very applicable to our current situation.

He also exhorts us to speak the truth. “He who speaks falsely – there is no evil he will not do” It's not enough to be thoughtful, to think the truth, we must also speak the truth. Our relations with each other need to be truthful. The truth is that we want to improve and that often we fail to live up to our ideals. Sometimes we are tempted to hide the truth about ourselves. Either we pretend that we don't care, we don't really want to change at all, take me or leave me, or we pretend that there is nothing to be changed, we are pretty much perfect as we are. Or we are tempted to pretend that we don't really believe we can change. We are just not up to it. But the truth is is usually much simpler. The truth for any spiritual aspirant is that there is work to do, we can do it, and when we do we change. Part of the work is recognising that there is work to be done, that we have faults and weaknesses that we need to change. So the Buddha urges us to be truthful.

As well as thought and speech there is action and the Buddha urges generosity. “Truly misers do not get to the world of the gods. (Only) the spiritually immature do not praise giving. The wise man rejoices in giving, and therefore is happy in the hereafter.” The world of the gods is the devaloka and can be taken to mean higher states of consciousness, such as experienced in meditation. He is saying that generosity leads to happiness and higher states of consciousness. Generosity is the opposite of the acquisitiveness, accumulating and consuming that is the practice of thoughtlessness.

In this chapter the Buddha is encouraging us to go forth from worldliness and practice renunciation. That is not an attractive message for most of us. But if we say practice generosity which leads to happiness for yourself and others that is much more attractive. The two messages amount to the same thing, but I think for most of us it is more useful and effective to think in terms of generosity rather than renunciation. In time we will see the connection and be less frightened by the prospect of letting go of over-attachment to things and people. In the meantime we can just practice generosity, for its own sake and as an antidote to the prevailing ethos of consumerism. This is what is in our own best interests as well as in the best interests of other people and the planet.

Chapter 12 of the Dhammapada tells us what is in our best interests. This chapter is titled The Self (attavagga). The word self is not used here in any philosophical or metaphysical way, but in the ordinary sense that we use it in our speech when we say myself, yourself and so on. The basic message of the chapter is that you are responsible for your own life and for your own spiritual practice. Nobody else can practice for you and you cannot do it for them either. “By oneself evil is done; by oneself one is injured. Do not do evil, and suffering will not come. Everyone has the choice to be pure or impure. No one can purify another.” (verse 165)

A second point is that you should work on yourself first before trying to teach or advise others. And especially you should not make doing good deeds an excuse for not changing your own bad habits. “First establish yourself in what is suitable, then advise others. The spiritually mature person should not besmirch himself (by acting otherwise).” (verse 158)

“(Consequently) one should not neglect one's own (spiritual) welfare for the welfare of others, great as that may be. Clearly perceiving (what constitutes) one's personal welfare, one should devote oneself to one's own good.” (verse 166)

This (verse 166) does not mean that you should have nothing to do with other people or you should never try to help them. It means that you should be aware of what you need to work on, what you need to change and get on with the task, rather than concerning yourself with the faults and habits of others. They will have to purify themselves. As verse 165 says, no-one can purify another. You cannot be ethical on behalf of others and they cannot be ethical on your behalf.

“Easily done are things which are bad and not beneficial to oneself. What is (both) beneficial and good, that is exceedingly difficult to do.” (Verse 163) What is being highlighted here is the need for effort. Each individual has to make an effort to change, to grow, to practice the precepts, to be mindful. It takes an effort of will to move beyond greed, ill-will, and spiritual ignorance. It takes an effort of will to change habits, whether habitual ways of seeing ourselves and the world, or habitual unskilful activities or habitual unskilful speech. It takes an effort of will to lead a spiritual life, because it is more natural for us to follow the appetites and tendencies of our lower nature. But it is in our best interests to make that effort.

We all want to be happy, we are dear to ourselves, we don't want to suffer. This is as it should be, but often we just don't realise what will really make us happy. We are not aware enough. As we become more aware, we begin to realise that our happiness depends on qualities and activities such as generosity, love, patience and so on. The means of happiness and well-being are in our own hands and we have to act. We need to be loving and kind to others, we need to be generous, we need to be patient and so on and by developing these qualities and acting in this way,we do what is for our own well-being, we promote our best interests. And because of the nature of reality, because we are all interconnected, our own best interests spiritually are also everybody else's best interests. But the first step is awareness.

Verse 157 says, “If you hold yourself dear, guard yourself diligently.” This means be mindful. Notice what you are thinking, feeling, saying and doing. Notice. This indicates the necessity of meditation, and the necessity of taking the awareness gained in meditation into our everyday lives. Through meditation we gain self-knowledge and this gives us the raw material for our spiritual practice. We can then take responsibility for ourselves and take the Buddha's advice to heart. “(Consequently) one should not neglect one's own (spiritual) welfare for the welfare of others, great as that may be. Clearly perceiving (what constitutes) one's personal welfare, one should devote oneself to one's own good.” (Verse 166) If we devote ourselves to spiritual practice,if we make the effort of will required, then we can be assured of success. Eventually our progress will become so well established that it is irreversible and then we are well and truly on the Path to Buddhahood.

Chapter 14 of the Dhammapada is titled The Awakened One or The Buddha. This chapter covers a huge area, from the most basic practices to the highest attainment. There is a verse here that some of you will be familiar with. It is one of the “verses that protect the Truth”. It is also the verse that Bodhidharma is reputed to have quoted to explain Buddhism to the emperor of China. The emperor heard that this great spiritual teacher had arrived from India or the West as they would have seen it, so he sent for Bodhidharma, expecting no doubt to have a very interesting philosophical discussion. He asked Bodhidharma what the teaching of the Dharma was and Bodhidharma replied: “Not to do evil, to cultivate the good, to purify the mind. This is the teaching of the Buddhas.” (verse 183) To which the emperor said, “That's so simple that even a child could understand it”, and Bodhidharma said, “Yes, so simple that even a child can understand it and so difficult that even an old man of eighty can't put it into practice.”

Bodhidharma is pointing to the central issue in the spiritual life, namely that our intellectual understanding can far outstrip our ability to practice. This can lead to complacency for some people and frustration for others. It can lead to complacency when we think that having grasped an idea is sufficient. We can think that because we now know the three marks of mundane existence or the five hindrances or whatever, we don't need to do anything else. This sort of intellectual brightness, which can be very sophisticated, is in fact t very intelligent. That way lies a spiritual cul-de-sac.

For others the inability to put into practice what they have understood leads to frustration. They perhaps think, with Socrates, that to know the good is to do the good. This is manifestly not the case. We are not entirely rational beings, nor are we fully conscious. We need to temper our frustration with sympathy for ourselves in our dilemma and patience with ourselves as we gradually make the effort to change. The next verse of the Dhammapada emphasises this. It says: “Patient endurance is the highest asceticism.”

There is always some sort of struggle in the spiritual life, some effort to make, whether we are struggling with our own recalcitrant nature, struggling with ideas and concepts, struggling with ritual and devotion, or struggling with the failure of other people to meet our expectations. For a long time there will be some conflict or struggle, some effort to make and therefore we need patience, bucketfuls of patience. Patience is another word for loving kindness (metta) when we meet obstacles on the Path. Metta towards ourselves and others in the face of hindrances and frustration is patience.

Then the spiritual life is looked at from another angle. “Many people, out of fear, flee for refuge to (sacred) hills, woods, groves, trees and shrines. In reality this is not a safe refuge. In reality this is not the best refuge. Fleeing to such a refuge one is not released from all suffering.” (Verses 188 and 189) Here we are introduced to the image of refuge, the metaphor of going for refuge. It goes on to say: “He who goes for refuge to the Enlightened One, to the Truth, and to the Spiritual Community, and who sees with perfect wisdom the Four Ariyan truths - namely, suffering, the origin of suffering, the passing beyond suffering, and the Ariyan Eightfold Way leading to the pacification of suffering - (for him) this is a safe refuge, (for him) this is the best refuge. Having gone to such a refuge, one is released form all suffering.” (verses 190-2) A true safe refuge is something we can rely on, something dependable, something that won't let us down. A false refuge is something that we can't depend upon, that will let us down.

To go for refuge to something means it gives meaning to our lives, we live for it, we organise our lives around it, we give our energy and attention to it. To go for refuge to the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha means to put the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha at the centre of our lives, to organise our lives around them and to give our time and attention and energy to embodying them in our lives. But as the text says, many people, out of fear, flee for refuge elsewhere. For us it may not be sacred hills, woods, groves,, trees and shrines, which are relatively positive and harmless. We may put something else at the centre of our lives. We may give meaning to our lives in other ways; career, family, lover, money, children, possessions etc. but all these things will pass, none can be completely depended upon.

According to the Dhammapada the only safe refuge, the only safe refuge, the only thing that can be completely depended upon, the only thing that can really give full meaning to your life is Enlightenment, Nirvana, the state of Buddhahood. And to put this at the centre of your life means going for refuge to the Buddha, as the Ideal for humanity, the Dharma as the Truth about existence, and as the Path leading to Buddhahood, and the Sangha or spiritual community of all those who have successfully trodden the path. One thing that is very noticeable about the Dhammapada is that it doesn't put in any qualifications, no “ifs” or “buts”. It just says this is the truth, this is the way things really are and you are left to make of it what you will.

It does give a little clue though as to why it's not so straightforward for many people. It says: “Many people, out of fear, flee for refuge to (sacred) hills, woods, groves, trees and shrines.” Fear is highlighted as the reason why people rush to false refuges. Fear takes many forms, insecurity about money and old age, anxiety, lack of confidence, worry. Whatever form it takes fear can be a powerful motivating factor in our lives, leading us to try to escape facing up to the existential situation.

The first step in dealing with fear is to recognise it, to name it even. When you know that fear is motivating your actions or holding you back from acting then that awareness can be a powerful ally in regaining perspective. Anger, jealousy, greed, all based in fear and insecurity. The perspective we need to gain is that our fear is subjective, it is not an objective view of reality. It is a fog that has descended on us. So when we see our fears as fears, and see how they are affecting our lives, we can begin to gain some objectivity. For that we may need the help of other people, as well as or own reflection. With more awareness and more objectivity we are then in a good position to start taking risks, we can risk failure, risk getting things wrong, risk disapproval or even risk getting things right. Every time we take a little risk, we overcome fear and transcend a previous self-view. Taking risks is a way to self-transcendence and greater confidence. What risks you need to take depends on what you are fearful of. Some people fear speaking in a group, some people fear being silent in a group. Some people fear socialising, some people fear being alone. Some people fear hard work, some people fear idleness...and so on and so on. You need t notice honestly what it is that you fear and then start taking little risks to overcome it.

But of course the big fears are existential fears. Perhaps the greatest fear is the fear of death. According to Bhante Sangharakshita, all fear is at bottom a fear of death. It is in the face of death that we feel the urgency to find meaning to our lives. And that is where Going for Refuge comes in. When we see and understand that Enlightenment, the perfection of Wisdom and Compassion, the evolution of our humanity into Buddhahood, when we see that this is what life is about, then we go for refuge to the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. And according to the Dhammapada “(for him) this is a safe refuge, (for him) this is the best refuge. Having gone to such a refuge, one is released form all suffering.” (verse 192)

Going for refuge to the Buddha means taking the Buddha as the embodiment of the highest spiritual Ideal. It doesn't mean admiring the Buddha, or thinking he was a good person like lots of other people down the centuries. The Buddha is a refuge for someone when they have complete faith in him as the embodiment of the highest ideal for humanity and are striving to emulate him. Going for refuge to the Dharma has two elements to it. We go for refuge intellectually by studying and trying to understand the Dharma as a teaching and we go for refuge to the Dharma spiritually by having personal insight into or realisation of the Truth. Going for refuge to the Sangha means looking to those who are more spiritually experienced for guidance and inspiration and it also means harmonious and open communication with our peers. Bhante Sangharakshita describes this communication as “a vital mutual responsiveness, on the basis of a common spiritual ideal” and he also says that this is essentially what makes a Sangha. A Sangha is a group of people who engage in “a common exploration of the spiritual world in compete harmony and honesty”.

Going for refuge to the Three Jewels of Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha involves faith and devotion, study and realisation, and receptivity and communication. If we wholeheartedly go for refuge to the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha and make the necessary effort of will to cease to do evil, learn to do good and purify the heart then eventually we will gain Insight into the nature of Reality. We will be victorious over greed, hatred and ignorance. Our minds will be free to be continuously creative, continuously self-transcending, like the skylark in Shelley's poem singing as he soars and soaring as he sings.

The Dhammapada speaks of the Enlightened one whose victory is irreversible and whose sphere is endless. There are no more limitations, no more fears and anxieties. It also speaks of the Enlightened one who is free from ensnaring, entangling, craving. Wanting and not wanting things, having preferences, likes and dislikes, all of this ensnares and entangles us in a realm of suffering. Our hearts and minds are restless in pursuit of ease and comfort and the restless pursuit gives us no rest, no ease or comfort. The Enlightened one is free of this restless craving that ensnares and entangles. They, according to the Dhammapada, are intent on higher states of consciousness.

“Happy is the appearance of the Enlightened Ones. Happy is the Teaching of the Real Truth (saddhamma). Happy is the unity of the Spiritual Community. Happy is the spiritual effort of the united.” (verse 194) May you all be happy

A Delightful Practice

This talk was given in 2001

The word “Sangha” means “association” or “society” and in this context it is the association or fellowship of all those who follow the teaching of the Buddha. This includes people living very different lifestyles. It includes men and women and it includes people of all ages.

Initially there were two kind of people in the Sangha. Those who left home and took up a life of homelessness, wandering from place to place,begging their food and telling people about the Buddha's teaching. And there were those who had a strong positive response to the Buddha and his teaching but didn't leave home. They carried on with their family life and the business of making a livelihood. The early Buddhist Sangha consisted of wandering mendicants, who were initially all men, but later joined by women and ordinary householders. All of them took refuge in the Buddha and followed his teaching. The wandering mendicants came to be known as bhikkhus or bhikshus. This word comes from the root “bhiks”which means to “share” or “partake” and referred to the fact that the wanderers shared in the food of the wider community. This word Bhikkhu or bhikshu is often translated as “monk”. “Monk” comes form the Greek word “monos” meaning “alone”. It's perhaps not a bad translation if understood in this way. Many early Christian monks were wanderers or hermits too. These Buddhist wanderers in Northern India, 2500 years ago were forced to stop wandering every year when the monsoon rains came. They would gather together on the outskirts of a settlement and meditate and discuss and recite the teachings and mend their robes (and probably exchange travellers stories about how to cope with tigers etc).

As time went by, some of them decided not to wander on at the end of the monsoon season and in this way there gradually came into being a community of settled bhikkhus as well as wanderers. Now there were three kinds of people in the Sangha. Those who were still householders living their ordinary lives, those who left home for a life of wandering homelessness and those who left home and settled in one place. This was still very much alive in Thailand right up until the 1950s when the forests began to be cut down. In the book”Forest Recollections”, there are many descriptions of the lives of the wanderers whose lifestyle was modelled directly on the way of life of the early Buddhists 2500 years earlier. “Thudong monks valued wandering as an ascetic practice, as a means of training the mind to face hardship and the unpredictable. Whenever they wandered far from the relative comfort and security of the monastic life, they had to contend with fear, pain, fatigue, hunger, frustration, and distress; and sometimes they risked death. The areas in which they wandered were not confined by the political boundaries of Siam/Thailand. They often walked across national borders to the Shan states, Burma, Laos, and Cambodia. In Man's time a monk could wander freely into neighbouring countries, and thudong monks willingly did so. Unlike academic and bureaucratic monks in the Sangha heirarchy, they had a keen interest in faraway places and thought nothing of walking great distances to reach them.

The wandering monks' journeys were uncharted. They had no maps, no guides, and often no specific idea of where they were going. It did not matter how long it took to get from one place to another. It was the going, the wandering, that counted. Wandering into unfamiliar terrain forced a monk to be constantly alert and aware. He never knew where he would spend the night, where the next meal was coming from, or what difficulties he would encounter. He learned to live with insecurities and discomforts – life's inevitable dukkha.” (Kamala Tiyavanich, Forest Recollections, p.143)

Incidentally the lives of some of the hill tribes in Thailand in the early 20^th century was also little different from ancient India. “Once Waen and Teu, exhausted and hungry after walking through the forest in Meuang Phrae, entered a Yao settlement hoping to find alms. But the houses were empty, the inhabitants having left for the fields. As they approached the very last hut, a man stuck his head out. “Friend, we have nothing to eat,” Waen said. “Please give us some rice.” “I have only a small supply of rice,” said the man. “I have cooked rice, but it's for us to eat. The uncooked rice is for sale.” Then he looked straight at Waen's empty alms bowl and offered to buy it; he wanted to use it as a pot for cooking rice. “Almost laughed at this,” Waen recalls, “and for a moment forgot how starved we were.” Waen, like many thudong monks, was accepting of local diversity and did not pass judgment. “the Yao man was straightforward and honest. He had no pretensions; he spoke what was on his mind. He wasn't intending to hurt anyone's feelings or displease anyone. He was sincere.”

But, seeing that it was hopeless to get alms, Waen and Teu pushed on. Along the way they encountered a Yao woman. Determined to get some food this time, Waen was more direct. “Friend, we are starving. We have no rice to eat. Please give us some.” The woman asked the monks to wait, then she went into the hut and came back with a container full of rice, which she then emptied in to the monks' bowls. Having found a good place to sit and eat, the monks poured some water into their bowls, mixed it with the rice, and ate.” (Forest Recollections, p148-150)

This description of Thailand in the early 20^th century reads almost like a passage from the Pali Canon. Also in Thailand there were many settled monks whose main practice was study and scholarly work. These would be seen as the direct descendants of the first monks who began to settle down in residential communities. Those who settled preserved the teaching through meditation and discussion and eventually after some four or five centuries the teachings of the Buddha were committed to writing. Down through the centuries it has been the settled bhikkhus, those who preserved the letter of the teaching whether orally or in writing, who have had the greatest influence on how the the Buddhist spiritual life is understood. They set the standards as it were and determined what was to be considered the norm. This could still be seen in Thailand in the 20^th century where the wandering monks were heavily criticised by the settled monks and not considered to be real monks at all.

Right form the very earliest days of the Buddhist Sangha there were these different kinds of people, different trends in practice and different lifestyles. The householders practised generosity and ethics and a little meditation. The wanderers were full-time meditators who occasionally came together for discussion or visited teachers for instructions and the settled monks were the scholars, the preservers of the letter of the teachings. And these different lifestyles and practices led to a certain amount of tension which could be creative tension or could be destructive. How creative the tension was depended on the spiritual insight of the members of the Sangha. In theory those who led the lifestyle of wanderers and engaged in more full-time meditation would be expected to be the more spiritually developed, but real life is never so neat. There may be a hierarchy of conditions which are more and less conducive to spiritual practice and there may be a hierarchy of persons who are more and less spiritually mature but the two hierarchies don't necessarily fit neatly together. As Reginald Ray says in his Buddhist Saints in India: “Not only may saints be found in monasteries and lay life, but – obviously – rogues may be found in the forest. A three-tiered model, with forest renunciants at the top, might suggest that individuals attain value based on their place within the scheme rather than that the scheme attains its value based on what individuals reflecting one or another place in the scheme actually accomplish. It is realized people who are of supreme value rather than the particular lifestyles by which they become realized or in which, once realized, they are found. Any model of Buddhist types must remain to some extent relative and open, for no one can ever know how much, from a spiritual point of view, any individual can or will attain in one situation as opposed to another.” (p.438)

Traditionally the Sangha is spoken of in terms of an Arya Sangha, a Bhikkhu S and a MahaSangha. The MahaSangha or Great Sangha includes all Buddhists, regardless of lifestyle or level of commitment or attainment. The Bhikkhu Sangha is the Sangha of full-timers; not necessarily monks in the Christian sense of the term, i.e. those who live in monasteries. This Sangha is distinguished by the fact that they observe certain rules. It is Sangha as organisation. The Arya Sangha is the “noble” or holy Sangha and this is the spiritual community of all those who have experienced some insight into the nature of Reality. This is the Sangha of those who have reached a stage in their spiritual life which means that they can never fall back from the Path. They have seen into the nature of Reality and what has become clear to them can never become unclear again. This is known as the point of no return, or the point of Stream Entry.

A Stream Entrant is a spiritual practitioner who has seen through fixed self-view, has seen through doubt and indecision, and has seen through any tendency to go through the motions of spiritual practice. Bhante Sangharakshita talks about a Stream Entrant in positive terms as someone who has transcended habit, vagueness and superficiality and attained creativity, clarity and commitment. Stream entry occurs when we break through these three fetters of Self View, doubt and going through the motions of practice. Or as Bhante puts it the fetters of habit, vagueness and superficiality.

The first fetter is the habit of being a particular kind of person. We act as if we have always been and will always be a particular kind of person, with particular abilities and shortcomings. Consciously or unconsciously we tell ourselves stories about who we are and what we can or cannot do and we keep on telling ourselves the same stories, constantly reinforcing a particular version of “Me” with a capital M. A Stream Entrant is someone who breaks through this and has a much more creative view of themselves and others. A Stream Entrant is always aware of the greater potential that has yet to unfold; the Buddha nature yet to be unveiled.

The second fetter is doubt and indecision or a constant lack of clarity. This is not an honest questioning in order to get to the truth. This is a more emotionally based avoidance of clarity, avoidance of the truth. Throwing up obstacles constantly to deliberately obscure the truth about ourselves and about life. This kind of doubt and indecision is a resistance to going deeper into things. A resistance to clarifying what the dharma is all about, a resistance to the implications of practice. It is closely related to the first fetter because this resistance is all about preserving a fixed self-view. Doubt and indecision of this type leads to an inability to truly value the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha and therefore an inability to Go for Refuge or make a commitment to the Buddhist spiritual path. A Stream Entrant is completely free of doubt about the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha and it is therefore no great effort for a Stream Entrant to place trust in the Three Jewels. For a Stream Entrant it would be very difficult indeed, or even impossible, to not Go for Refuge to the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha.

The third fetter is the tendency to go through the motions of practice or, as it is usually put, reliance on rites and rituals as ends in themselves. When we have been practising for a while we can lose sight of the purpose of practice and then our practice of mediation, puja, study and even ethics becomes empty, empty of deeper meaning. We may forget about the spiritual goal of becoming more aware, and more compassionate. We may forget that we are trying to undermine selfishness and harshness and gain more wisdom and equanimity. We may meditate in order to have good meditations or to have strong experiences. We may do puja in order to feel good and get a bit of a buzz, we may study simply to acquire knowledge and we may practice ethics to be a good Buddhist. But we have forgotten the higher Ideal, we have forgotten about Insight and Enlightenment and we are satisfied with being a little bit happier. This is the fetter of superficiality as Sangharakshita calls it. It keeps us on the surface of our own experience and keeps us immunised against the reality of dissatisfaction, impermanence and insubstantiality. It means we have lost creativity in our practice, we no longer have a cutting edge in our spiritual life. We are a bit lost and in need of re-orientation and re-inspiring. A Stream Entrant is constantly aware of the reason for practice, constantly on the path of compassion and awareness.

A Stream Entrant is someone who has broken through these fetters of fixed self-view, doubt and indecision, and superficiality and has insight into the true nature of reality and the real reason for spiritual practice. Stream Entrants and all those who are even more advanced than Stream Entrants make up the Arya Sangha, the Noble Sangha. This is the Sangha we refer to when we talk about the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. This is the Sangha we Go for Refuge to. This is the Sangha we can rely on. This Sangha, the Arya Sangha, is the living, breathing Dharma. This is where the teachings of the Buddha leave off being concepts or images and take on human form. The teachings live in the Arya Sangha and it is because the teachings have stayed alive in this way that it is still possible for us to encounter the essential spirit of Buddhism even now 2500 years after the Buddha's lifetime.

According to one sutta in the Pali Canon you can recognise a Stream Entrant by four characteristics: unwavering confidence in the Buddha, unwavering confidence in the Dharma, unwavering confidence in the Sangha and as the text says, being “possessed of morality dear to the Noble Ones, unbroken, without defect, unspotted, without inconsistency, liberating, praised by the wise, uncorrupted, and conducive to concentration.” (Digha Nikaya 33)

If you are concerned about someone's spiritual development, whether they are the real thing or not, you need to observe whether they are free from doubt in the Three Jewels and whether they are skilful. Elsewhere it says that a Stream Entrant will confess any breaches of precepts immediately. (Majjhima Nikaya 48.11). However it is not easy to tell whether another person is spiritually developed or not. Externals such as behaviour and speech can tell you something but not everything. There is a sutta in the Anguttara Nikaya entitled “How to judge a person's character” and here it says, “Four facts about a person, O monks, can be known from four circumstances. What are these four?

By living together with a person his virtue can be known, and this too only after a long time, not casually; by close attention, not without attention; by one who is wise, not by one who is stupid.

By having dealings with a person his integrity can be known, and this too only after a long time, not casually; by close attention, not without attention; by one who is wise, not by one who is stupid.

In misfortune a person's fortitude can be known, and this too only after a long time, not casually; by close attention, not without attention; by one who is wise, not by one who is stupid.

By conversation a person's wisdom can be known, and this too only after a long time, not casually; by close attention, not without attention; by one who is wise, not by one who is stupid.” (Anguttara Nikaya, 4.192)

If you really want to tell whether someone is a Stream Entrant, you have to develop attentiveness and wisdom and then you need to live with them, work with them (have dealings with), be around them at times when things are going badly and be in communication/conversation with them. It is not an easy matter to judge another person's character or the nature of their spiritual development. You need to have substantial experience of them (as this sutta points out) and I would say you need to bring intuition and reason into play as well. But perhaps more importantly you need to know yourself too, so that your view of someone else isn't just a projection of the unconscious contents of your own mind. This is what I think is meant by a wise person and an attentive person.

I've spent quite a lot of time talking about the Arya Sangha because this is such an important level of Sangha, this, as I said, is where the Dharma is embodied, where the Dharma is kept alive in its essential spirit. And this is the Sangha that we go for refuge to. Now it is probably too difficult for us to work out whether particular people we know are Stream Entrants, or even beyond that, but fortunately it is not necessary to do this. In fact it is not only not necessary but not even useful. All we need to know is that there are some people whom we feel confident are sincerely and effectively Going for Refuge and are more experienced on the Path than we are. If we can have contact with such people then we will be either directly or indirectly in contact with the spirit of the Dharma, because we can be sure that they are to some degree saturated with the spirit of the Dharma themselves, the spirit of awareness, generosity and loving kindness. If we are intent on finding Stream Entrants or realised Gurus or great spiritual beings, we are probably engaged in the business of looking for a saviour. But Buddhism is the wrong place to look for saviours. The Buddha never claimed to be a saviour, only one who points out the path. The Arya Sangha can do no more. If we put people up on pedestals and worship them and try to turn them into saviours, we will only be disappointed. Nobody can save us. Nobody can live our life for us. The Sangha, our spiritual friends, are part of the conditions which help us to make an effort with spiritual practice, but the effort is all our own. We can draw inspiration from the lives of others, past and present, but we have to act from that inspiration.

As well as the Maha Sangha and the Arya Sangha, traditionally there is the Bhikkhu Sangha and in some places a Bhikkhuni Sangha. This is the Sangha of monks and nuns, or to put it another way, the full-timers. What distinguishes monks and nuns from the rest of the Buddhist populace is the rules they live by . There are many different Orders of monks and nuns spanning many schools of Buddhism and several different countries. The history of the development of the Bhikkhu Sangha is very complex and not something I can go into here. If you want to find out more, then look in “A Concise History of Buddhism” by Andrew Skelton, which has a very clear and readable account of the whole history of the monastic Sangha.

In contemporary Buddhism sometimes the Bhikkhu Sangha is spoken of as if it were the only Sangha. But this is either an error of terminology or an error in understanding. The monastic Sangha, whether Theravadin or Mahayana, Vietnamese or Korean, is simply those members of the Sangha who have adopted a lifestyle based on the rules of the Vinaya. Sangha or Spiritual Community is not an organisation, not even an ecclesiastical organisation. It is a common response to the Ideal; a shared response and a shared practice. It is being on the same wavelength. It is something dynamic, something that happens, something that people do. It is not a fixed thing. We can have labels, such as Bhikkhu or Lama or Master or Mitra or Order Member – but those are just labels. Spiritual Community transcends labels. Spiritual Community is the actual experience of a coincidence of wills; an experience of resonance with the spiritual aspirations and spiritual endeavours of others.

I think it best to think of Spiritual Community or Sangha as a practice rather than as an institution that you become a member of. It is something you do rather than something you belong to. And it is something you practice “both in public and in private”. You come across this phrase in the Pali Canon in relation to harmony between monks. Harmony is maintained and lost because of what they do and say and think “both in public and in private”.

Here is what the Sangiti Sutta says about the the practice of spiritual community, “Six things are conducive to communal living: As long as monks both in public and in private show loving kindness to their fellows in acts of body, speech and thought,..share with their virtuous fellows whatever they receive as rightful gift, including the contents of their alms-bowls, which they do not keep to themselves,...keep consistently, unbroken and unaltered those rules of conduct that are spotless, leading to liberation, praised by the wise, unstained and conducive to concentration, and persist therein with their fellows both in public and in private, ….continue in that noble view that leads to liberation, to the utter destruction of suffering, remaining in such awareness with their fellows both in public and in private” (Digha Nikaya, Sutta 33, similar list in Majjhima Nikaya, Sutta 48)

There is this interesting repetition of the phrase “in public and in private”, which reinforces the idea that spiritual community is a practice. In this case it is a practice of loving kindness, generosity, ethics, and right view. The text goes on to say how problems arise in the spiritual community and by implication tells us what we need to avoid. “Six roots of contention: Here, (a) a monk is angry and bears ill-will, he is disrespectful and discourteous to the Teacher, the Dharma and the Sangha, and does not finish his training. He stirs up contention within the Sangha, which brings woe and sorrow to many, with evil consequences, misfortune and sorrow for devas and humans. If, friends, you should discover such a root of contention among yourselves or among others, you should strive to get rid of just that root of contention. If you find no such root of contention...then you should work to prevent its overcoming you in future. Or (b) a monk is deceitful and malicious...,(c) a monk is envious and mean...(d) a monk is cunning and deceitful...(e) a monk is full of evil desires and wrong views...(f) a monk Is opinionated, obstinate and tenacious. If, friends, you should discover such a roof of contention among yourselves or among others, you should strive to get rid of just that root of contention. If you find no such root of contention..., then you should work to prevent it overcoming you in future.” (ibid)

The practice of spiritual community involves avoiding these things. Firstly avoiding anger, resentment, being disrespectful and discourteous to the Three Jewels. Avoiding stirring up contention and argument. Then there is avoiding deceit and malice, avoiding envy and meanness, avoiding slyness, avoiding wrong views, avoiding being opinionated and stubborn. This points again to the sort of practice that we need to undertake if we want to create the spirit of Sangha among ourselves. To put it more positively, we need to cultivate goodwill and be respectful to the Three Jewels and to our teachers. We need to be honest and kindly. We need to rejoice in others and give freely. We need to be open in our dealings with each other. We need to study and discuss so that we develop right views about the nature of existence. We need to hold our opinions lightly and be less attached to them.

The practice of spiritual community is nothing onerous, not something heavy and difficult. It is a joyful, delightful practice of kindness and openness and generosity. It is the practice of relating to the best in each other and living in harmony with each other and the practice of continually cultivating positive mental states. It's a very attractive practice and one that brings great rewards. But it must be emphasised it is a practice and therefore something you have to do for yourself. The spiritual community is mutually helpful, mutually supportive but each and every one of us has to play our part for this fragile network of conditions to flourish. There is no room for complaining that we have no friends or that others are not taking sufficient interest in us. We have to act and befriend people and take an interest in others and as we act in this way we begin to enter into the spirit of Sangha and become part of the “free association of individuals” who experience a mutual spiritual resonance and a mutual delight in each others' very existence.

No Choice

This talk was given at the London Buddhist Centre in 2001

Perhaps the greatest issue facing us in the world today is how to stop destroying the planet and how to begin to reverse some of the damage we have already done. One of the reasons we have done this to ourselves and to our home, the planet Earth, is because we, the human race, have been and continue to be ignorant of the connections between things, ignorant of how all life is interconnected and interdependent. We have been ignorant of the very existence of an ecosystem. And it would be a great mistake for us to continue this ignorance into our search for solutions. It would be a mistake for us to think of environmentalism as concerned with a particular aspect of life. It would be a mistake to think that environmental issues were separate from issues of war or poverty or economics or politics or leisure or work or spiritual life. To think of environmental issues as separate in that way would be to continue the ignorance that has brought us into this plight in the first place. The social, the spiritual and the ecological are not separate spheres of knowledge and activity, they are intimately and irrevocably interconnected and it is ignorance of this that leads us to behave in ways that are destructive to the planet and therefore destructive to ourselves. This ignorance comes about because human beings have developed self-reflexive consciousness. We are aware and we are aware that we are aware.

This consciousness, which is what distinguishes us from the animals, is our greatest asset, our greatest gift and perhaps our greatest curse. Because of this consciousness of self there is a consciousness of other and a consciousness of insecurity in relation to other. The consciousness of self is crude, rudimentary even, and is closely identified with the body, with things, with people as things and with a rigid world view. This self is constantly buffeted by the winds of change externally and internally by the primitive forces of survival and reproduction. So a sense of insecurity is an inevitable accompaniment of emerging self-consciousness. As Subhuti says in The Buddhist Vision "the rudimentary self or immature ego tries to find security by using the same instincts as those by which the animal preserves itself. Just as the animal hunts for the food which will nourish its organism, so the ego tries to possess those things it considers as securing its identity. And as the animal will attack and destroy whatever threatens its survival, so the ego seeks to destroy whatever undermines its integrity. Aided and amplified by the human power of imagination, these reactions can reach the monstrous proportions of ruthless empire-building and of mass destruction through war."

The immature ego is ignorant of interconnection and experiences itself as separate, and as fixed and unchanging. This according to Buddhism is the basic spiritual ignorance, experiencing ourselves as separate and as fixed and unchanging. It is this basic spiritual ignorance that gives rise to the greed for possessions and people to give us a sense of security and it is this basic spiritual ignorance which gives rise to hatred and a violent rejection of anything that appears to threaten this separate fixed and unchanging self. Here we can see the source of all human conflict, the source of consumerism, the source of overpopulation, the source of our blind destruction of our own environment.

This is what is depicted at the centre of the Tibetan Wheel of Life. There are three animals, a cock, a snake and a pig biting each other's tails and going round and round in circles. The cock symbolises greed, the snake hatred and the pig ignorance. They symbolise the animal within us which is covered over with a thin veneer of civilisation. Animals of course are not destructive; it is only the animal in conjunction with self-consciousness that is destructive. This picture is not saying anything about animals. It is a mirror for us to look into and if we are honest we will recognise, perhaps with a shock, that what we see is our own inner self, motivated by greed for possessions, for sex, for status, motivated by aversion to discomfort or criticism and motivated by the yearning for security. This is what the first circle on the Wheel of Life shows. It is directly confronting us with our spiritual ignorance and spiritual immaturity. Because we are dealing with symbolism here it is perhaps better not to over-conceptualise. Ideas can become a barrier between us and the truth. It is better just to look in the mirror and see what we see; a cock, a snake and a pig; pecking, strutting, crawling, hissing, rooting, snuffling animals. However we are self conscious, we are human beings and that spark of consciousness is what can save us from the excesses of ignorance. We have the choice to eat from the fruit of the tree of knowledge, to borrow an image from elsewhere. We have the choice to do something with our awareness. What we can do with our awareness is develop it. We can evolve further. We can make the choice to evolve our awareness and dissolve the fetters of ignorance, neurotic greed and hatred. We can embark on what has been called the path of the higher evolution, that is the evolution of consciousness or awareness. This is what the spiritual life is about, you could say this is what the truly human life is about and this is the long term and fundamental solution to the problem of human destructiveness. This is the radical solution in that it goes to the roots of the problem.

The second circle on the Wheel of Life is about this choice we have. A choice we make whether we want to or not because even doing nothing is a choice. This circle of the Wheel is divided into two segments, one white and one black. In the black segment, naked and anguished men and women tumble downwards tormented by demons, in the white segment men and women wearing bright garments and performing various benign activities are ascending. The message of this section of the Wheel of Life is that we experience the consequences of our actions. This is what is known in Buddhism as the law of Karma, a much used and often misunderstood term. To understand what Karma is we need to understand a very fundamental Buddhist teaching, the teaching of conditionality. After the Buddha's Enlightenment experience he tried to communicate what he had seen and understood in many different ways. One of the ways he used to explain his insight is formulated as the law of conditionality, which very simply states that everything arises in dependence upon conditions. In the texts it says "this being that becomes, from the arising of this that arises. This not being that does not become, from the ceasing of this that ceases." so everything comes into being in dependence upon preceding conditions. This applies to everything: a thought, a giraffe, a mountain, a war, a planet, a universe. This would appear to be a very obvious and simple assertion, that everything arises in dependence upon conditions. However, simple and obvious as it may seem, it is the most fundamental teaching of Buddhism and it has vast implications. Karma is just one kind of conditionality.

There are five kinds; there is conditionality on the inorganic level, the level covered more or less by the laws of physics. There is conditionality on the organic level, the level of biology. There is conditionality on the lower mental level involving such things as perceptions and instincts. Then there is conditionality on the level of intentional action which is the Karmic level and above that is the transcendental, Dharmic level of conditionality. The reason I have enumerated this rather technical list is simply to make the point that Karma does not explain everything that happens to us. There are a multitude of conditions at work all the time and it is impossible to separate out what results from our own intentional actions and what results from other kinds of conditionality. We need to beware of simplistic understandings of Karma. It is not a model of linear cause and effect and it is not an exhaustive explanation of everything that happens to everyone. Everything arises in dependence upon conditions but not all conditions are Karmic.

Put simply Karma is intentional action. Buddhism teaches an ethics of intention. Traditional ethical systems in the West speak in terms of 'good' and 'bad'. Buddhism doesn't think in terms of good and bad actions. It focuses instead on the intention behind the action. Indeed the terms good and bad are alien to Buddhist ethical teaching, instead we use the terms skilful and unskilful. A skilful or ethical action is one that arises out of a mind that is loving, generous and wise and an unskilful or unethical action is one that arises out of a mind that is selfish, hateful and ignorant. Actions are understood to be of thought, speech and body. So the law of Karma states that unskilful actions have negative consequences and skilful actions have benign and positive consequences. Difficulties, suffering and unhappiness which we experience may be due to our unskilfulness in the past i.e. may be due to our past Karma, or may be due to other conditions. Happiness and good fortune may be due to our skilfulness in the past, i.e. may be due to our past Karma, or to other conditions. But the importance of the law of Karma is not that it may explain our present circumstances or help us to analyse the past. The importance of the law of Karma is that it allows us to shape the future and, because all things are interconnected, how we shape our own future inevitably affects others and even the whole planet.

Skilful or ethical action of thought, word and deed is the best way to create a happy and satisfying life. Skilful action is based in mental states of kindness, generosity and wisdom which are by nature expansive, outgoing and compassionate. This has a beneficial effect on everybody we encounter and on all the creatures and plant life. When we are experiencing kindness, love, generosity and wisdom we do not harm the world around us, we enjoy and protect it.

So the choice we have to make is whether to embark on the difficult task of overcoming our natural instinct to seek security for our fragile ego sense or go beyond that natural instinct by deliberately evolving consciousness that is expansive and self-less. It would seem that the obvious answer would be to say yes, lets go for it. However that is not a choice that the majority of people make. Most people decide to stay within the confines of their narrow self interest and seek as much security as they can from the world around them. This is because the spiritual path, the path of the higher evolution of consciousness, is truly difficult. It is not the work of a day or a week or year but of twenty, thirty, or more years and even then the fruits are gathered slowly. The truly spiritual life goes against the whole trend and logic of ordinary life. I have to make the effort, I have to change, I have to be transformed even, but ultimately it is not about any acquisition for me, not even the acquisition of wisdom. Certainly we must use our natural self interest to get started. We can be legitimately motivated by a desire for happiness and well-being. But ultimately all self-centredness is transcended, and our sense of self and other is radically transformed, so that to act in the interests of others is no different from acting in the interests of self. This is something that can be understood intellectually, but intellectual understanding is not sufficient to sustain consistent effort over many years. We need to have a heart response to the possibilities open to us, the possibilities of great wisdom and compassion that transcend all hankering after security all desire for personal gain, status, happiness even. We need to have a heart response to the ideal of becoming more truly human so that we come to value co-operation above competition, to value simplicity above wealth, value harmony above gain, value peace above revenge, and the welfare of all beings above our own life. We need to have a heart response because the heart or the emotions are where our energy is, where our motivation is and we will need energy and motivation to make progress on the spiritual path. Because if we are not motivated strongly enough we will not be able to overcome the many obstacles and struggles that we will inevitably meet along the way.

For instance we will want to meditate but may get discouraged when we experience nothing but distraction for weeks or months on end. We will want to be loving and kind but may get discouraged when we meet people, especially Buddhists, who are not nice kind people and who perhaps don't even like us. We will want to be wise but may get discouraged when nobody wants to listen to our wisdom and they even laugh of us. We will want to be ethical but may get discouraged when others take advantage of us. We will want to be more aware but may get discouraged when we become more aware and realise that we are not as good and truthful and kind as we liked to believe. We will want to transcend selfishness but may get discouraged by the tenacity of our egotism.

Spiritual life is not easy, it is not for the faint-hearted. It is a tough choice but it is worthwhile and it works. The alternative is to continue to seek security and happiness in ways that cannot ever deliver happiness and security. It may be difficult to make progress on a spiritual path but wisdom, happiness and compassion do arise in dependence upon the effort made. The mundane path of material success and status may appear easier but it is an illusion from top to bottom and it only brings sorrow and pain. This doesn't need any great elucidation, it is plain to see all around us and it is evident in the history of the human race down through all the generations. The great difference that has occurred over the last couple of centuries is that the world has become smaller due to the advances in technology and the human race is capable of massive destructiveness also due to the advances in technology. Our choice to pursue the life of material gain, power and status has greater implications now than ever before. And those implications have become more visible in such things as climate change, radioactive waste, weapons of mass destruction, large scale poverty and starvation and overpopulation. The implications of choosing a life of awareness, simplicity, ethical behaviour and compassion for all sentient life are also greater than ever before because of the possibilities of global communication and because of the spiritual vacuum at the heart of the world.

When we choose a life of spiritual quest within a Buddhist context, we undertake to live by five specific principles. These are the principle of non-violence, the principle of generosity, the principle of contentment, the principle of truthfulness and the principle of awareness. The practice of meditation helps us to live by these principles.

The first principle underlies all the other principles and is the cornerstone of the whole edifice of Buddhist philosophy and practice. This is the principle of non-violence or to put it more positively, the principle of love. This love is what we call Metta, a love that is sustained, consistent, spontaneous and seeks no reward. This principle has implications for every aspect of our lives; most obviously it implies cooperative, forgiving and kindly relations with other people, even those we disagree with or dislike. It rules out revenge, it rules out prejudice, it rules out persecution, it rules out discrimination, it rules out character assassination, it rules out slander, it rules out doing anything to others that they don't wish us to do. It rules out all kinds of manipulation and exploitation. All of these things appear in gross forms in the world around us, but as we become more ethically sensitive we will discover their more subtle forms in our own hearts and minds. We will begin to notice the edge of competitiveness or malice in our humour. We will begin to notice the subtle emotional blackmail between lovers. We will notice all the little ways we have of undermining the achievement of others. We can multiply the examples if we pay honest attention to what goes on in the privacy our hearts and minds. Here we find our working ground and it is here in our everyday relations with others that we can begin the process of cultivating a compassionate mind.

The principle of non-violence has implications beyond our relations with other people. It applies to our relations with all living things: animals, birds, insects, trees, flowers etc. Before the Chinese invasion in 1950, Tibet was a safe haven for wildlife, and vast herds of antelope and musk deer roamed the plains together with bears, wolves, foxes and wild sheep. But all that has changed now. The American photographer and author Galen Rowell in his essay" The Agony of Tibet", writes, "the invaders made a sport of shooting indiscriminately at wildlife. In 1973, Dhondub Choedon, a Tibetan now in exile in India, reported that "Chinese soldiers go on organised hunts using machine guns. They carry away the meat in lorries and export the musk and furs to China". Important habitat for vast herds of animals was soon over grazed as the Chinese forced nomadic families into communes to raise livestock for export instead of their own subsistence. Tibetans, including the children, were forced to kill 'unnecessary animals' such as moles and marmots that vied with humans for grain and dug up valuable grazing land. Children were given a qouta for small animals to kill that, if not met, resulted in beatings and other forms of punishment." It is so sad to think of the children being conditioned to kill animals. A stark illustration of how totally different a materialistic outlook is from a spiritual and non-violent outlook.

The principle of non-violence or love extends also to our attitude to the natural world. The Thai monk Prayudh Payutto has said that it is best to avoid using the word 'environment' in our concerns for ecology. He feels the word 'environment' betrays its origins in Western attitudes that separate human beings from the rest of nature. Nature includes us. Ecology includes us. When we really begin to understand and see this then we see that the effort we make to transform ourselves is ecological work and that all our activities have ecological implications. If a river dries up it is relatively easy to see the ecological implications. If human hearts dry up the ecological implications are far greater. We must keep our hearts moist with the life-giving waters of love.

Prayudh Payutto has written an essay entitled "Buddhist solutions for the 21st century". In it he states that modern human civilisation is in the grip of three harmful and tenaciously held views, these are:

"1. The perception that mankind is separate from nature, that mankind must control, conquer, or manipulate nature according to his desires.

2. The perception that fellow human beings are not fellow human beings. Rather than perceiving the common situations or experiences shared among all people, human beings have tended to focus on the differences between themselves.

3. The perception that happiness is dependent on an abundance of material possessions.

The first perception is an attitude toward nature; the second perception is an attitude toward fellow human beings; the third perception is an understanding of the objective of life."

He goes on to say that for human beings to live happily there must be freedom on three levels: physical freedom, social freedom, and inner freedom. Inner freedom is the ability to live happily and contentedly within ourselves without needing to manipulate and exploit the world around us. Without inner freedom human happiness is totally dependent on manipulation of the external environment and social exploitation. This inner freedom, which is freedom from neurotic craving, freedom from hatred and freedom from spiritual ignorance is essential to the ecology of our planet. Without this inner freedom we are at the mercy of forces which push us into over-consumption and violent competition and a search for happiness and security where happiness and security cannot be found.

These are some of the implications of this first principle of Buddhism, the principle of non-violence. The other four principles are, as I said, based on this one. The principle of generosity extends the principle of love into our relationship to property and possessions. Generosity is basically an attitude to possessions, property and money which sees sharing and giving as more important than acquiring and owning. It is an attitude that holds things lightly, regarding ourselves as only temporary owners of whatever we have. In fact it is even better if we can see ourselves not as owners but as stewards, we are simply looking after something until it passes on to someone else. The Buddha said that a strong possessiveness about things or people leads to suffering; all things are impermanent and the stronger we hold on to them the more painful is the inevitable letting go. This applies to everything including our own body and sense of identity.

The principle of generosity runs completely counter to what has been called the 'religion of consumerism', with its scriptures and liturgies dedicated to exciting greed and its places of worship designed to entice us to acquire things we neither need nor want. Consumerism could be said to be the dominant ethic in the developed world today and this makes the principle of generosity all the more radical. Generosity as a practice in a society and world which is dedicated to its opposite is not an easy practice. To develop a truly generous attitude, an attitude of non-ownership, non-possession, non-acquiring, an attitude of sharing, stewardship and giving requires a big effort to overcome the constant conditioning and brainwashing that we are subjected to and have been subjected to since childhood.

Another Thai monk, Sulak Sivaraksa, writes "consumerism supports those who have economic and political power by rewarding their hatred, aggression, and anger. And consumerism works hand-in-hand with the modern educational system to encourage cleverness without wisdom. We create delusion in ourselves and call it knowledge. Until the schools reinvest their energy into teaching wholesome, spiritual values instead of reinforcing the delusion that satisfaction and meaning in life can be found by finding a higher-paying job, the schools are just cheerleaders for the advertising agencies, and we believe that consuming more, going faster, and living in greater convenience will bring us happiness. We don't look at the tremendous cost to ourselves, to our environment, and to our souls. Until more people are willing to look at the negative aspects of consumerism, we will not be able to change the situation for the better. Until we understand the roots of greed, hatred, and delusion within ourselves, we will not be free from the temptations of the religion of consumerism, and we will remain stuck in this illusory search for happiness.” (Dharma Rain, Sources of Buddhist Environmentalism, p.182)

The third principle is the principle of contentment and this is traditionally related to our sexual activity. On the one hand we are enjoined to refrain from any form of exploitation or manipulation to satisfy our sexual desires and on the other hand we are encouraged to practise contentment with our current sexual status, instead of constant neurotic seeking after new experiences. Ultimately this principle aims at what is referred to as a state of stillness, simplicity and contentment which frees us to a large extent from any neurotic dependence on sex. For most of us this principle will in practice mean trying not to use subtle, or even not so subtle, manipulation or emotional blackmail to get others to behave as we want them to and it will also mean meditating to attain to more tranquil and contented states of mind.

The fourth principle of Buddhist ethics is truthfulness. Truthfulness is essential to the functioning of any society. Without truthfulness there can be no trust and without trust human relations fall apart and we are left with an atmosphere of suspicion and hatred. (Since I gave this talk in 2001 the paucity of truthfulness in public discourse has become even more pronounced) Truthfulness as an ethical principle has to be based on loving kindness and not used as a weapon to hurt others. And truthfulness, like all these ethical principles, begins with ourselves. We need to be honest with ourselves about what we think, what we feel, what we do and what we say. To be honest with oneself is not necessarily an easy matter, it may entail facing up to unpleasant aspects of our character and it may seriously dent our pride and even possibly put us in the position of needing to apologise to others.

Truthfulness means, firstly, being factual in what we say or write. It also means steering clear of exaggeration for effect. Exaggeration is one of the great building bricks of egotism. Truthfulness means not understating things and it means not deliberately omitting relevant information. Omissions can distort a narrative to the point of falsehood. And of course, truthfulness means not deliberately lying. When we tamper with the truth it is usually because we want to be seen in a particular light or we want to gain some advantage: we want to be liked, we want to be popular and bending the truth can seem to be an easy way to get attention and approval or get whatever we want. Of course if we do that habitually the person who gets attention and approval will be a fiction and in our hearts we will be lonelier than ever. For friendship to exist, for any loving human relationships to exist, there has to be honesty, otherwise we only have fictions relating to fictions, facades relating to facades, which is, to say the least, unsatisfactory.

The fifth principle of Buddhist ethics is the principle of awareness or mindfulness. You could say that awareness is just as fundamental as love. We need awareness that is saturated with love and compassion and our love and compassion needs to be as aware as possible. Love and compassion without awareness can degenerate into sentimentality and pity and awareness without love can be cold and alienated. So these two qualities, love and awareness, need to be developed in tandem. That is why we teach the two meditation practices, Mindfulness of Breathing and the Metta Bhavana. The Mindfulness of Breathing cultivates awareness and the Metta Bhavana practice develops loving kindness. Awareness begins with ourselves. We need to become more aware of our bodies and our actions, we need to become aware of our thoughts and of our emotions. This forms the basis for awareness of other people, awareness of the world around us and ultimately awareness of reality.

Sangharakshita has said ''awareness is revolutionary”. It is revolutionary in that it brings about change of a far reaching and profound nature. Awareness is naturally expansive. As we become more and more aware we become more expansive and full of life. Our energy becomes more focused and more available to us and we become more capable of taking responsibility for our lives. Our normal state is not really one of being aware, we don't really know what we're thinking, feeling, doing or saying and other people are just projections of our unconscious needs, desires and aversions. We think we're being original when all our views and opinions are received. We think we are independent of influence when our whole life is a constant swinging from one influence to the next.

Awareness gives us the possibility of a genuine individuality and more real relationships with other people. It is revolutionary in that it throws the light of truth onto our lives and wakes us up to what is really going on. Awareness transforms us. The greater the awareness the more far reaching the transformation and there is no limit to how aware we can become. Buddhahood or Enlightenment could be said to be a state of perfected awareness. Awareness of other people and awareness of the world around us shows us that we are one with humanity and one with nature. It shows us that there is beauty everywhere. Lack of awareness, which is self-centredness, is narrow in perception and sees threat and ugliness everywhere. Awareness sees beauty and optimism even in the most unlikely places.

Awareness of reality is a constant immersion in the reality that all life is process, all life is flux and change, all life is interconnected and interdependent. To be constantly immersed in this vision, to experience this all the time is to be free from all ill-will and possessiveness. This awareness gives life a quality of lightness and a vast perspective that turns all personal fears and anxieties into absurdities and makes much of what seems important in the world around us look ridiculous. Perhaps that is why the Dalai Lama is always laughing so heartily! However because of the presence of compassion there is no arrogance or impatience in this awareness. There is rather, a tender regard for the suffering of the world which is one's own suffering too when one ceases to separate oneself from others and the world.

These then are the five principles that we undertake to live by when we embark on the spiritual path: non-violence, generosity, contentment, truthfulness and awareness. These are the principles that we train ourselves in over and over again in order to transcend the poisons of neurotic greed, ill-will and spiritual ignorance, which are the cause of human suffering, both on the personal level and the global level. By training ourselves to live by these principles we contribute to our own well-being and to the well-being of the whole world.

The Wheel of Life is a mirror of truthfulness and in it we see ourselves, warts and all. We also see the seeds of our happiness, the seeds of our Enlightenment even. Sometimes our vanity leads us to the mirror and sometimes our vanity keeps us away from a mirror, but this mirror shatters our vanity so that we can begin to see things as they really are and so that we can make the choice to embark on the path of the higher evolution of consciousness, which is in reality no choice, because we cannot live by choosing death, we can only live by choosing life.

To conclude here is a little story from 'The Snow Leopard' by Peter Matheson which perhaps illustrates this point quite well, "the Lama of the Crystal monastery appears to be a very happy man, and yet I wonder how he feels about his isolation in the silences of Tsakang, which he has not left in eight years now and, because he's crippled may never leave again. Since Jang-bu, the interpreter, seems uncomfortable with the Lama or with himself or perhaps with us, I tell him not to inquire on this point if it seems to him impertinent, but after a moment Jang-bu does so. And this holy man of great directness and simplicity, big white teeth shining, laughs out loud in an infectious way at Jang- bu's question. Indicating his twisted legs without a trace of self-pity or bitterness - they belong to all of us - he casts his arms wide to the sky and the snow mountains, the high sun and the dancing sheep, and cries, "Of course I am happy here! It's wonderful! Especially when I have no choice!"

Manjughosa

This talk was given at Vajraloka Retreat Centre, March 2001

Manjughosa is the archetypal Bodhisattva of Wisdom. There are four things in that sentence which need to be elucidated – Manjughosa, archetypal, Bodhisattva and Wisdom and that's what I will endeavour to do in this talk, although not in that order. I will look at what is meant by archetypal first, then I will go into the term Bodhisattva, then Wisdom and finally Manjughosa. But before I say anything about these I want to talk about the weather and the landscape. We are here in North Wales with its lush green landscape watered by frequent rainfall throughout the year. This very beautiful landscape is a product of geological and meteorological conditions prevailing over large periods of time. If we move in imagination to Australia or Libya or Alaska or Ecuador, we will find very different landscapes, all beautiful and unique in their own way and all the product of a myriad of interacting conditions.

We ourselves, our minds, are like landscapes . The landscape of your mind, your consciousness, has been moulded by a vast web of conditions over a very long time and each mindscape is very different and has its own beauties and unique features. When you introduce something new into a landscape it can have a huge effect. Whether it is a new weather condition or a new insect or a new tree. So we have to be careful what we introduce onto our landscapes. Similarly with our minds, when we introduce something new it can have a big effect. In fact we often introduce something new in order to have an effect. We introduce a new language for instance so that we can become familiar with another people and culture. And we introduce meditation and Buddhism into the language of our minds so that we can become more aware and kinder and be a better person all round.

But when we introduce something new into a landscape it will often encounter resistance from what is already there and when we introduce new ideas and views into our mindscape, resistance is encountered too. Existing views and ideas don't want to be disturbed. Our minds often want to stay as they are and to a certain degree they will stay as they are. Our uniqueness is our uniqueness. But by introducing new elements such as meditation, study and retreat our whole mindscape can be vastly expanded and its creative fertility boosted to a very high degree, like bringing water to a desert.

When you listen to a talk you will have many responses. Something is being introduced into the environment of your mind and your mind will respond in various ways depending on the conditions that have brought your unique consciousness into being and into contact with these ideas of the Dharma. So as you listen you could note your responses and use them as food for reflection later. With a talk you have the content to reflect on, you have what the speaker communicates apart from the words to reflect on and you have your own responses to reflect on. If you approach a talk in this way you can gain a great deal, even from a mediocre or bad talk, because you are engaging in a practice of awareness of thoughts and emotions as well as learning from the ideas and person of the speaker. In this way the landscape of your mind becomes more expansive, as if you were seeing the stars of the night sky for the first time. We need to remember that our minds are often limited like a local landscape but we have the potential to be whole countries, continents or planets even, embracing many variations of landscape and in harmonious communication with the numberless galaxies. Our minds can become universes and the gateway to that vastness is awareness. I will return to this later but for now I will go back to Manjughosa the Archetypal Bodhisattva of Wisdom and I'll begin by looking at archetypal. What does archetypal mean?

An archetype is a pattern. It is a psychic pattern, a pattern of the mind. This pattern or archetype manifests in the form of symbols. The archetypal pattern is the deep unconscious strata of the mind. Archetypes of the mind become visible as symbols. These symbols are common to all humanity, although they may take different forms at different times and in different cultures. Examples of archetypal symbols are the wise old man, the dark lord or devil, the young hero or warrior. These are deep unconscious layers of experience and perception in the human psyche that form into patterns which manifest as archetypal symbols.

In Buddhism, the archetypal Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are manifestations of the pure or Enlightened mind. When the human psyche is purified of hatred and greed and ignorance what emerges are the basic patterns or archetypes of Wisdom and Compassion. Wisdom and Compassion are two words which hint at the basic reality of consciousness when it is free from delusion. This basic reality of consciousness finds expression in the symbolism of archetypal Buddhas and Bodhisattvas – a rich symbolism of sound, image, colour and gesture. All the myriad forms of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are symbols of the same archetype, the same pattern, the psychic pattern of Enlightened, purified consciousness.

Bodhisattva literally means “Awakened being” and the word is used in many different ways. In early Buddhism, which is recorded in the Pali scriptures, the term Bodhisattva (Bodhisatta in Pali) refers to the previous lives of Gautama the Buddha. Before he gained Enlightenment or Awakened he was a Bodhisattva during many lifetimes. A Bodhisattva is someone who is striving for Enlightenment, especially someone who is motivated by compassion for the suffering of others. Any of us could be referred to as a Bodhisattva if we are genuinely striving for Enlightenment out of motives of compassion. We would be novice Bodhisattvas. More usually the term would be used to refer to someone who had attained some level of transcendental Insight and was therefore compassionate in the true sense of being concerned for the spiritual welfare of others. And then the term Bodhisattva is used to refer to purely archetypal and symbolic figures such as Avalokitesvara and Tara and Manjughosa. A Bodhisattva in this sense is a symbol of the Enlightened mind which emphasises a particular aspect of the Enlightened mind. But all Bodhisattvas symbolise the same purified Enlightened consciousness. There is in a sense only one archetype but we in our comparative spiritual ignorance see many different Bodhisattvas and are attracted to some more than others. All this symbolism is a communication from Awakened consciousness to unawakened consciousness and every means is employed to engage our minds, to attract us to the reality of Wisdom and Compassion.

An archetypal Bodhisattva arises out of the deep meditation of Transcendental awareness and communicates something of that Beauty and profundity to us. Some Bodhisattvas will emphasise compassion, like Tara and Avalokitesvara, or energy, like Vajrapani, or wisdom like Prajnaparamita and Manjughosa. Again there really is no difference between the spiritual qualities of Compassion, Energy and Wisdom. These words or concepts also just give emphasis to an aspect of Enlightenment. But there is no quality of Compassion that is separate from Wisdom, no Wisdom that is divorced from Compassion, no transcendental energy that is different form Wisdom and Compassion. There is just one state of Enlightened Consciousness that these words point to.

Manjughosa is the Bodhisattva of Wisdom. The emphasis is on Wisdom but we need to understand that Manjughosa is just as much a Bodhisattva of Energy and Compassion. But we will approach Manjughosa through this concept of Wisdom. Jnana or Prajna in the Sanskrit. Perhaps we need to understand what spiritual ignorance is first and based on that we can begin to intuit or imagine what Wisdom might be. If you watch your own mind for a while you will have a direct experience of spiritual ignorance. There are many ways to talk about spiritual ignorance and about Wisdom. We can speak in terms of hindrances and expansiveness, in terms of defilement and purity, in terms of blindness or obscurity and Insight or clarity, in terms of ignorance and realisation, in terms of duality and non-duality and so on. These are all ways in which we can talk about ignorance and Wisdom and it is good that we have many concepts and images so that different temperaments can approach the whole process of spiritual life form different angles.

In terms of hindrances, the spiritually ignorant mind is limited by craving, aversion or doubts. In very ordinary terms this means that we want some things or experiences and we don't want other things or experiences and we get confused or uncertain about spiritual practice when it doesn't give us what we want or gives us what we don't want. When we are no longer limited by preferences, likes, dislikes, wanting and not wanting, when our consciousness expands into a realm of abundance where no lack is felt, then we are moving into the arena of Wisdom. Wanting and not wanting is the functioning of the ego. Wanting and not wanting and the fear of not getting what we want or getting what we don't want. This is the limited and limiting ego at work. Egotism or selfishness is a mode of consciousness, a mode of awareness. It is the mode of consciousness that operates from the basis that there is a fixed self at the centre of life which has to be served and defended in all sorts of ways. This is an unconscious and deeply held belief that forms the basic pattern for unenlightened consciousness. And it's not true. According to Buddhism there is no fixed self. There is only the process of thoughts, perceptions, feelings and so on, ever-changing and ever-changeable. This deeply held unconscious belief is the big hindrance that limits us. And when we see through this completely our consciousness is no longer fettered by wanting and not wanting – no longer fettered by fears and preferences. It becomes expansive and happy.

We can also look at ignorance and Wisdom in terms of duality and non-duality. Duality here is the duality between self as subject and other as object, me and you, I and the world. This is how we experience the world and in a sense it is how we have to experience the world in order to function on a day to day basis. It is a relative truth. You and I are different and separate. However according to Buddhism we are not separate in an absolute sense. This is because consciousness is essentially process rather than substance. The fluid and expansive nature of mind means that we interpenetrate and flow through each other rather than remain discrete and separate. This is the reality. But that is not our normal experience and as Sangharakshita says: “For practical purposes we must think in terms of going from a lower state of consciousness to a higher state. Any kind of spiritual development has to be based upon dualistic assumptions; we posit two principles, one of which we move away from and the other of which we move towards. All spiritual systems have a practical working dualistic basis of this kind. Some, like Zoroastrianism, regard that basis as metaphysically ultimate. Others, like the Mahayana, do not regard it as metaphysically ultimate, and still others, like Hinayana Buddhism, don't say anything one way or the other.” (Complete Works, Vol.14, p.591)

From the viewpoint of Mahayana Buddhism, the dualistic framework is considered inadequate. Again to quote Sangharakshita: “....the dualistic framework is seen to be insufficient, something to be dismantled or dissolved. This is achieved through realizing the third dimension of sunyata: mahasunyata, the “great sunyata”, the emptiness or non-validity of the distinction between the conditioned and the Unconditioned. What this means from a practical point of view is that Enlightenment consists not in passing from samsara to nirvana – as though both were separate realities – but in realizing their essential non-difference. Thus in the highest sense the spiritual life is an illusion. As this cannot be realized except through the spiritual life, it must be said that non-dualism has no meaning for us at all. It is only words, or at best an abstract idea. If a non-dualistic perspective discloses itself to us as we work our way up the spiritual ladder, that's fine. But we realize that there was never any ladder in the first place, or that there is no difference between the “top” and the “bottom”, only when we have worked our way to the “top”. We cannot base our spiritual practice upon a purely intellectual understanding of non-duality.

Even on the philosophical level the idea of non-duality presents an insurmountable difficulty. Owing to the fact that thought itself is irreducibly dualistic, it is impossible to construct a statement of non-dualism that is not dualistic, at least in form.…..

….In stating your position as one of non-duality you inevitably imply a duality. Every philosophy is bound to be dualistic inasmuch as no statement is possible without at least two ultimate principles....

...We cannot win – we are not meant to win. There is really not much we can usefully discuss at all. We must change the very structure of our consciousness – especially through meditation – so that it ceases to split everything up into subject and object.” (Complete Works, Vol.14, p.591/593)

So, yes we can talk about ignorance and Wisdom in terms of duality and non-duality, but for practical purposes we have to content ourselves to work within the duality imposed by thought, language and concepts. Even when we have an intuitive realisation of non-dual mind, we can only communicate that realisation in dualistic, subject /object, terms. Although the rational mind may be confounded we still need to try to understand and experience the significance of dualism and non-dualism. Another way to look at ignorance and Wisdom is in terms of defilements or poisons and purity. Looked at from this perspective our minds are poisoned by greed, envy, doubt, hatred and pride and our task is to purify ourselves by, as it were, taking the antidotes to the poisons.

The antidote to greed or craving in the Buddhist tradition is the Recollection of Death, meditation on a dead body and meditation on the six elements: earth, water, fire, air, space and consciousness. This could be seen also as reflection and meditation on the changing nature of all things including ourselves. The antidote to envy is to perform skilful actions so that we have something to commend ourselves for. The antidote to doubt is wisdom, in the sense of studying and assimilating the Dharma. Also we can combat doubt by looking at the spiritual progress already made by ourselves and others. The antidote to hatred is Metta Bhavana, rejoicing in merits and the Sevenfold Puja. Also the practice of Kshanti which is patience and tolerance. The antidote to pride is generosity. Pride is an over-focussing on self and generosity implies awareness of others. By applying these antidotes we can gradually purify ourselves of the poison of negativity until our minds are bright with the light of Wisdom.

These are a few ways to talk about ignorance and Wisdom; hindrances and expansiveness, duality and non-duality, defilement and purity. Whichever way we talk about Wisdom, Wisdom itself is something different. Wisdom is essentially a complete and radical transformation of consciousness that cannot be fully grasped in concepts and can be hinted at and pointed to by metaphors, images, and symbols. Manjughosa is a symbol of Wisdom. If we can fully engage with Manjughosa to the point where we become Manjughosa then we will have become Wisdom too. And the task of the spiritual aspirant is to become Wisdom rather than know Wisdom.

I'm not going to say very much about Manjughosa because really symbols are not to be explained. You need to engage and relate to a symbol, not with a picture or statue but with the archetype. Manjughosa is in the form of a young man, sixteen years old. His body is a golden amber colour. He is seated in the full lotus posture. His right hand is raised aloft and he is very gently holding a sword, with flames dancing round the end of the sword. His left hand holds a book to his heart. He has long black hair and wears a crown of jewels. He is seated on a white moon mat which rests on on a light blue lotus. The name Manjughosa means “gentle-voiced one”. I'm going to look at just two elements in this symbolism, the sword and the book.

The sword held by Manjughosa is the word of Wisdom; it cuts through all ignorance. It is not a blunt instrument. It is a very sharp sword, held very gently and gracefully. The sword of wisdom requires very little exertion to cut off ignorance. It is a subtle and refined instrument and the flames that dance on its end symbolise the transformation that happens when the sword of Wisdom comes into play.

In practice what this means is that we need to refine and subtilise our minds through meditation and puja so that wisdom can come into play. Wisdom is a very very subtle awareness. Wisdom can manifest as a very fleeting intuition which reaches deep into the roots of our psyche and turns us upside down. The effects can be enormous, but the experience may be like a tiny half-thought, almost imperceptible. The name Manjughosa, “gentle-voiced” one, points to this subtlety too, as does the pale blue of the lotus. Egotism is subtle, always rationalising and we need to find an even greater subtlety to catch egotism at work and undermine it. We have to constantly ask ourselves where the egotism is in our thoughts and in our responses to the world and to other people.

The sword of Manjughosa is the sword of our awareness. When our awareness becomes so subtle and refined that egotism cannot escape it, it becomes sword-like. Our minds run on in the channels cut by habits of thought. We are made up of assumptions and ideas and beliefs which we defend and protect. When we meditate and when we come into contact with the ideas and concepts of Buddhism, our minds may feel threatened and rationalisations start to multiply as our defences get to work. But as we grow in awareness another aspect of our minds strengthens and we begin to see through the assumptions and beliefs and habits that we have identified with. This seeing through is like the sword of Manjughosa transforming us. The more we resist it, the more painful it feels. Growing awareness is often experienced as making us unhappy, as our mind tries desperately to push away the sword of our own awareness. If we continue to grow in awareness eventually we will experience the sword as gently and sweetly cutting through the fetters of our fears and hopes and liberating us into the vastness of unlimited consciousness. However the first step in the road to freedom is to become aware of all the views, beliefs, assumptions, ideas and so on, that have been part of our lives since birth and which have formed and conditioned us. As we start to become familiar with these we can start to let go of those that are unhelpful and allow ourselves to be more receptive to spiritual ideals, more receptive to Manjughosa perhaps.

The book which Manjughosa holds to his heart is the Perfection of Wisdom. The Perfection of Wisdom texts consist largely of paradox which deliberately thwarts the rational mind again and again. Inevitably we try to make rational sense of the text but continually we find that what was said in one line is contradicted in the next. Here is a bit from the Diamond Sutra: “Subhuti asked: How, O Lord, should one set out in the Bodhisattva-vehicle stand, how progress, how control his thoughts? - The Lord replied: Here, Subhuti, someone who has set out in the Bodhisattva-vehicle should produce a thought in this manner: “all beings I must lead to Nirvana, into that realm of Nirvana which leaves nothing behind; and yet, after beings have thus been led to Nirvana, no being at all has been led to Nirvana”. And why? If in a Bodhisattva the notion of a “being” should take place, he could not be called a “Bodhi-being”. And likewise if the notion of a soul, or a person should take place in him. And why? He who has set out in the Bodhisattva-vehicle – he is not one of the dharmas.

What do you think Subhuti, is there any dharma by which the Tathagata, when he was with Dipankara the Tathagata, has fully known the utmost, right and perfect enlightenment? - Subhuti replied: There is not any dharma by which the Tathagata, when he was with the Tathagata Dipankara, has fully known the utmost, right and and perfect enlightenment. - The Lord said: It is for this reason that the Tathagata Dipankara then predicted of me: “You, young Brahmin, will be in a future period a Tathagata, Arhat, fully Enlightened, by the name of Shakyamuni!”

And why? “Tathagata”, Subhuti, is synonymous with true Suchness (tathata). And whosoever, Subhuti, were to say, “The Tathagata has fully known the utmost, right and perfect enlightenment”, he would speak falsely. And why? (There is not any dharma by which the Tathagata has fully known the utmost, right and perfect enlightenment. And that dharma which the Tathagata has fully known and demonstrated, on account of that there is neither truth nor fraud.) Therefore the Tathagata teaches, “all dharmas are the Buddha's own and special dharmas”. And why? “All dharmas”, Subhuti, have as no-dharmas been taught by the Tathagata. Therefore all dharmas are called the Buddha's own and special dharmas. (Just as a man, Subhuti, might be endowed with a body, a huge body.) - Subhuti said: That man of whom the Tathagata spoke as “endowed with a body, a huge body”, as a no-body he has been taught by the Tathagata. Therefore is he called, “endowed with a body, a huge body” (quoted in Complete Works, Vol14, p.387)

The rational mind is confounded. This is not to say that the rational mind is useless. Far from it. What we need to do is think as clearly as we can and as far as we can. We need to exhaust the possibilities of the rational mind as we transcend it. This is not to say that we all have to become great scholars or philosophers. It is our own mind that we have to transcend, not somebody else's mind. The book at Manjughosa's heart represents the furthest that language and thought can take us. Then the sword of wisdom cuts through all concepts and we are left speechless. In that speechless silence, that thunderous silence, we hear the sound of Wisdom, the mantra Om ah ra pah cha na dhih, and we encounter the archetypal bodhisattva of Wisdom, Manjughosa, in the midst of a vast blue sky, shimmering with a golden amber light and radiating the perfect peace of freedom from all limitations, freedom from all views; the perfect peace of the perfection of Wisdom.