two aspects of western buddhism

These are selected excerpts from “The Island: An Anthology of the Buddha’s Teachings on Nibbana” by Ajahn Pasano and Ajahn Amaro

1. Is Buddhism a negative teaching?

The word: ‘nothingness’ can sound like annihilation, like nihilism. But you can also emphasize the ‘thingness’ so that it becomes ‘no-thingness.’ So Nibbana is not a thing that you can find. It is the place of ‘no-thingness,’ a place of non-possession, a place of non-attachment. It is a place, as Ajahn Chah said, where you experience “the reality of non-grasping.”

In contemplating Buddhist terms, and many of the ways of speech employed in the text, it is important to bear a couple of things in mind. Firstly, it is a feature of the Buddha’s teaching, particularly in the Theravada scriptures, that the Truth and the way leading to it are often indicated by talking about what they are not rather than what they are. This mode of expression has a rough parallel in the classical Indian philosophy of the Upanisads, in what is known as the principle of ‘neti… neti,’ meaning ‘not this… not this,’ – it is the phrase through which the reality of appearances is rejected. In Christian theological language this approach, of referring to what things are not, is called an ‘apophatic method’, it is also known as the via negativa and has been used by a number of eminent Christians over the centuries. The Pali Canon posesses much of the same via negativa flavour and because of this, readers have often mistaken it for a nihilistic view on life. Nothing could be further from the truth, but it’s easy to see how the mistake could be made, particularly if one comes from a culture commited to life-affirmation, such as is commonly found in the West. The story has it that shortly after the Buddha’s enlightenment he was walking along a road through the Magadhan countryside, in the Ganges Valley, on his way to meet up with the five companions with whom he had practised austerities before going off alone, to seek the Truth in his own way. Along the road a wandering ascetic, Upaka by name, saw him approaching and was greatly struck by the Buddha’s appearance. Not only was he a warrior-noble prince with the regal bearing that came from his upbringing, he was also unusually tall, extraordinarily handsome, was dressed in the rag robes of the ascetic wanderers and he shone with a dazzling radiance. Upaka was moved to enquire: “Who are you friend? Your face is so clear and bright, your manner is awesome and serene. Surely you must have discovered some great truth – who is your teacher, friend and what is it that you have discovered?” The newly-awakened Buddha replied: “I am an Alltranscender, an All-knower. I have no teacher. In all the world I alone am fully enlightened. There is none who taught me this – I came to it through my own efforts.” “Do you mean to say that you claim to have won victory over birth and death?” “Indeed, friend I am a Victorious One; and now, in this world of the spiritually blind, I go to Benares to beat the drum of Deathlessness.” “Well, good for you friend,” said Upaka and, shaking his head as he went, he left by a different path.

The Buddha realized from Upaka’s departure that mere declaration of the Truth did not necessarily arouse faith, and was not effective in communicating it to others. So, by the time he reached the Deer Park outside of Benares and had met up with his former companions, he had adopted a much more analytical method (vibhajjavada). He began his first systematic teaching, the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta (The Discourse on the Setting in Motion of the Wheel of Truth), by explaining the raw truth of the spiritual disease (dukkha, ‘unsatisfactoriness, discontent, suffering’) and then worked through the cause of the disease (tanha, ‘craving’), the prognosis (yes, dukkha can indeed cease – nirodha), and finally outlined the medicine (the Noble Eightfold Path – magga).

This via negativa method is most clearly displayed in the Buddha’s second discourse, the Anattalakkhana Sutta (MV 1.6), also given in the Deer Park at Benares and the teaching which caused the five companions all to realize enlightenment, the liberation of the heart from all delusion and defilement. In this discourse the Buddha uses the search for the self (atta in Pali, atman in Skt) as his theme, and by using an analytical method he demonstrates that a ‘self cannot be found in relation to any of the factors of body or mind; he then states: “the wise noble disciple becomes dispassionate towards the body, feelings, perceptions, mental formations and consciousness.”

In this way, he states, the heart is liberated. This explanation implies that once we let go of what we’re not, the nature of what is Real becomes apparent – this was the realization that the Buddha had tried to communicate to Upaka when they met on the high road. And as that Reality is beyond description, it is most appropriate, and least misleading, to let it remain undescribed. This is the essence of the ‘way of negation’ and will be a repetitive theme throughout (this text).

Secondly, throughout the Buddha’s teaching career of forty-five years, most of his attention was placed on offering descriptions of the path. If the goal was spoken of, it was usually in simple, general terms (e.g. at §1.5). However, one of the effects of having placed so much emphasis on the path, is that the Theravada tradition has tended to speak very little about the nature of the goal – thus often causing that goal, Nibbana, to disappear from view, or become impossibly vague in concept, or even to be denied as being realizable in this day and age. One of the aims of the book “The Island” is to collect many of the passages of the Pali Canon where the Buddha does indeed speak about the nature of the goal, elucidating this profound Truth and encouraging its realization.

2. No-self or not-self?

One of the first stumbling blocks in understanding Buddhism is the teaching on anatta, often translated as no-self. This teaching is a stumbling block for two reasons. First, the idea of there being no self doesn’t fit well with other Buddhist teachings, such as the doctrine of karma and rebirth: If there’s no self, what experiences the results of karma and takes rebirth?

Second, it seems to negate the whole reason for the Buddha’s teachings to begin with: If there’s no self to benefit from the practice, then why bother? Many books try to answer these questions, but if you look at the Pali Canon you won’t find them addressed at all. In fact, the one place where the Buddha was asked point-blank whether or not there was a self, he refused to answer [i.e. §5.14].

When later asked why, he said that to answer either yes, there is a self, or no, there isn’t, would be to fall into extreme forms of wrong view that make the path of Buddhist practice impossible. Thus, the question should be put aside. To understand what his silence on this question says about the meaning of anatta, we first have to look at his teachings on how questions should be asked and answered, and how to interpret his answers.

The Buddha divided all questions into four classes: those that deserve a categorical (straight yes or no) answer; those that deserve an analytical answer, defining and qualifying the terms of the question; those that deserve a counter-question, putting the ball back in the questioner’s court; and those that deserve to be put aside. The last class of question consists of those that don’t lead to the end of suffering and stress. The Buddha advised paying no attention to such questions as “Do I exist?” or “Don’t I exist?” for however you answer them, they lead to suffering and stress.

To avoid the suffering implicit in questions of ‘self and ‘other,’ he offered an alternative way of dividing up experience: the four Noble Truths of stress, its cause, its cessation, and the path to its cessation. These truths aren’t assertions; they’re categories of experience. Rather than viewing these categories as pertaining to self or other, he said, we should recognize them simply for what they are, in and of themselves, as they are directly experienced, and then perform the duty appropriate to each. Stress should be comprehended, its cause abandoned, its cessation realized, and the path to its cessation developed. These duties form the context in which the anatta doctrine is best understood.

If you develop the path of virtue, concentration, and discernment to a state of calm well-being and use that calm state to look at experience in terms of the Noble Truths, the questions that occur to the mind are not “Is there a self? What is my self?” but rather “Does holding onto this particular phenomenon cause stress and suffering? Is it really me, myself, or mine? If it’s stressful but not really me or mine, why hold on?” These last questions merit straightforward answers, as they then help you to comprehend stress and to chip away at the attachment and clinging – the residual sense of self-identification – that cause stress, until ultimately all traces of self- identification are gone and all that remains is limitless freedom.

“In this sense, the anatta teaching is not a doctrine of no-self, but a not-self strategy for shedding suffering by letting go of its cause, leading to the highest, undying happiness. At that point, questions of self, no-self, and not-self fall aside. Once there’s the experience of such total freedom, where would there be any concern about what’s experiencing it, or about whether or not it’s a self? ~ Thanissaro Bhikkhu, ‘Noble Strategy,’ pp 71-4

This explanation clearly points out that the anatta teaching is simply a means to an end. On a practical level it points to the root delusion, and what to do about it. Here are some of the Buddha’s words which both underscore the necessary process and also point out the joyful result of following that process to its completion.

Contemplation of unattractiveness of the body should be cultivated for the overcoming of sexual desire; loving-kindness should be cultivated for the overcoming of ill will; mindfulness of breathing should be cultivated for the cutting off of discursive thinking; contemplation of impermanence should be cultivated for the dispelling of the conceit ‘I am’ (asmi-mana). For when one perceives impermanence, Meghiya, the perception of not-self is established. With the perception of not-self, the conceit ‘I am’ is eliminated, and that is Nibbana here and now.” ~Ud4.1, A9.3 5.18) “Seclusion is happiness for one content, who knows the Dhamma, who has seen; “Friendship with the world is happiness for those restrained toward al beings; “beings; “Dispassion amidst the world is happiness for those who have let go of sense desires; “But the end of the conceit ‘I am’ that’s the greatest happiness of all.” ~ Ud 2.1

This text ends with a few words on the closely related area of attachment to ‘being’ and ‘non-being.’ The average reader might well believe that such issues are not the burning concerns of an average day, and only of tangential or academic interest. However, there are numerous subtle ways in which our hearts incline towards the longing to be someone, something, and then towards the longing not to be, not to feel, not to experience.

Does this sound at all familiar? Probably thousands of times a day the heart of the average person tilts towards bhava-tanha or vibhava-tanha (the former is defined as the yearning to be, to become; the latter embodying the yearning to switch off, to annihilate experience). It is in the light of this reality that these teachings take on great meaning and practical value – they describe the habits of the heart which are deeply ingrained and which continually drive the wheel of birth and death: enthusiasm and disappointment, the return of the nemesis we have tried to escape, union and bereavement, the results of impulses to “Just get rid of this…” If we use the reflective capacity of the mind, we begin to see how these teachings map the terrain of such habits quite precisely, and point the way to attitudes which will break the imprisoning spell such habits have woven.