Destroying Mara Forever 1

I've completed the first chapter, "Śāntideva, Virtue, and Consequentialism" by the great Śāntideva and Buddhist ethics scholar, Barbara Clayton.

The chapter argues for a version of "character consequentialism" (p.15) or "perfectionist consequentialism" (p.15 and 26) to make sense of Buddhist --- specifically Māhāyana --- specifically Śāntideva ethics. I note that because it should be an open question whether and/or how Śāntideva deviates from prior Buddhist ethics.

Clayton nods to this question when suggesting that Keown has it right (in his 1992 The Nature of Buddhist Ethics and the 1996 article "Karma, Character, and Consequentialism") when he suggests that if Buddhist ethics is consequentialist, it must be a form of ethical egoism (an ethics based on consequences for oneself) and this is clearly wrong (p.17). Keown argues this because in early Buddhism the consequences one is seeking are the elimination of one's own greed, hatred and delusion (aka the roots of suffering). So if we call Buddhism consequentialist, we are saying it is quite selfish indeed. Keown argues, rightly, that this misses the point of early Buddhist ethics, which instead focuses heavily on cultivating right kinds of other-regarding behavior.

But, Clayton adds, this just the case for Theravādin Buddhism. Buddhists who focus on the bodhisattva ideal explicitly identify all suffering as equal - refusing to differentiate the suffering of oneself and others. The consequence sought is not merely removing one's own suffering, but that of all beings. She notes several instances of this, notable one from the Compendium:

"When fear and suffering are dear neither to me nor others, what is special about me, that I protect myself and not others?" - p.19; ŚS 2.10-11 (Cf. BCA 8.96)

Universalism and Agent-neutrality

Two related notions are discussed here: Universalism and "Agent-neutrality." Universalism means that ones ethics are concerned with all beings, clearly a trait of Māhāyana ethics. And arguably not a feature of Aristotelian virtue ethics - the analogue argued for by Keown. Agent-neutrality, expressed in Śāntideva's quote above, denies the possibility of privileging one person's pain or pleasure above others. Clayton clarifies that not all of Śāntideva's work is so clear on this issue, including, for example, the suggestion that it would be worse to impede the progress of a bodhisattva than to kill every man, woman and child in India! (p.20, ŚS 83.20 - 84.5)

This, it is worried, might disqualify Śāntideva from being a consequentialist. But, Clayton argues, the reasoning here is still consequentialist in nature. The reasoning is that the results of impeding a bodhisattva, even the slightest bit, is an incredibly horrible thing to do because a bodhisattva does so much good in the world.

My sense that Śāntideva's words here can only be religious hyperbole, to be read with reverence and gratitude to bodhisattvas, and not to be read as a rational argument. Thought about rationally, too many obvious questions arise.

Along similarly troubling grounds is Śāntideva's claim that even a transgression of precepts rooted in the defilement of passion (rāga) may be acceptable if it benefits others (somehow). (p.23) It is here that the consequentialist strain in Śāntideva becomes worrisome.

Moral Accounting

A third concept that Clayton brings up is moral accounting (pp.24-25). Moral accounting, weighing out the pros and cons of a given act or rule, is a hallmark of consequentialist theories. And Keown, rightly again, argued at length that this is not the way Buddhists derive their ethics. The first precept, for instance, is not there because "more or less" it reduces suffering.

Clayton argues, however, that Śāntideva engages in just this sort of moral reasoning. Quoting again from the ŚS, I paraphrase, "what good is one's happiness when the world is suffering? What good is it when a body is in flames to have a fingernail unburnt?" This, Clayton suggests, is Śāntideva's way of saying that a little suffering (on his part) should be accepted if it relieves more suffering in others.

However, it is not clear to me that this is the kind of reasoning going on. It may not be a case of ethical reasoning at all, but rather exhortational, "hey, I, we, you have got work to do!" Based on pan-Buddhist karmic theory, one's happiness is a result of past good deeds, and, according to pan-Buddhist psychological theory, unless we're awakened, we're ignorant and thus likely to misunderstand this and waste our lives and all the good karma in them. So Śāntideva is likely just rousing these obvious understandings in his reader as a pep-talk. Based solely on the lines quoted, we needn't read into this some deeper moral accounting, as Clayton does: "bodhisattvas should do whatever will ultimately yield the most benefit to sentient beings."

The problem, here, is that it presents a paradox. Either the bodhisattva is an ignorant chump like you or me and this cannot possibly know what will "ultimately yield the most benefit..." or he/she is awakened and thus will spontaneously, that is, without the need of moral reasoning of this kind, always act in ways that will ultimately yield the most benefit to sentient beings. If the bodhisattva is ignorant, then this "decision rule" is either empty or, like the above, exhortational. If the bodhisattva is awakened, it's just empty.

I'm not sure that this critique of mine holds water and I invite your thoughts on it.

Clayton's article concludes by agreeing with Keown on his critique of the Transcendency Thesis, but comes back to restate her position that this does not disqualify Buddhist ethics, at least in the case of Śāntideva, from being a form of consequentialism.

Update 2/1/10: on second thought, perhaps the paradox is not as intractable as it seems. Even mainstream consequentialists, who have great faith in people's ability to reason and thus make the best decisions, would admit that noone is omniscient and that mistakes happen. So Śāntideva could, too, be making a clearly consequentialist plea/argument here.

Buddhist India by TW Rhys Davids

Some light reading from the 19th century for when time permits:

Buddhist India

Buddhist Morality and the Two Standpoints

Buddhism presents us with a particular orientation in the world. Another word for this broad sense of orientation in the world is cosmology. It seems that what unites Buddhist throughout history and geography is this shared cosmology: a cosmology in which we find “an ethically oriented “samsaric” cosmology coexist[ing] with an ethically oriented “Buddhic” cosmos brought into being by the achievements and teachings of the Gautama Buddha.” (1)

What that means is that the Buddhist, starting with the historical Buddha himself 2500 years ago, sees the cosmos from two standpoints (to borrow Kantian language). The first standpoint is normal everyday life, dominated by the eight worldly conditions (aṭṭha lokadhammā): gain and loss, fame and disrepute, praise and blame, pleasure and pain. But the Buddha elucidated (we could say introduced but that would be incorrect) a path to freedom from all of these, or at least freedom from the “hedonic treadmill” of craving that goes with the former and the mental anguish that tends to accompany the latter.

This “Buddhic” or awakened standpoint is said to be one of perfect mental clarity, understanding of the “true nature” of all things and thus freedom from getting upset with life’s natural ebb and flow. The Buddha and his awakened followers, the arahats, still ate, slept, and had illnesses and died. Yet the difference between them and the unawakened has often been described both in terms of what they lacked, (greed, hatred, delusion) and what they had in terms of simple awareness along the lines of: “when they ate they were aware of themselves eating, when they walked they were aware of themselves walking, when they felt pain they were aware of feeling pain.”

Thus we find the two very different standpoints within Buddhism. Scholars who accuse Buddhism of being overly pessimistic and world or life-denying tend to look only at the former, “samsaric” perspective,(2) and those who find Buddhism to be overly dry and detached have probably only been exposed to the latter, “Buddhic” perspective.(3) A subtle example of the supposed tension between the two perspectives is found in a recent work by Donald Swearer. We begin with the canonical account of the Buddha just after his awakening: (4)

Enough with teaching the Dharma [this is the Buddha thinking to himself]
That even I found hard to reach;
For it will never be perceived
By those who live in lust and hate.

Those dyed in lust, wrapped in darkness
Will never discern this abstruse Dharma
Which goes against the worldly stream,
Subtle, deep, and difficult to see.

"Fortunately," writes Swearer, "Brahma Sahampati intercedes on behalf of the world by pleading with the Buddha: "The world will be lost, the world will perish, since the mind of the Tathagata, accomplished and fully enlightened, inclines to inaction rather than teaching the Dharma." Upon hearing Brahma's plea, the Blessed One "out of compassion for all beings surveyed the world with the eye of a Buddha" and decided to teach the supreme truth he had attained in his enlightenment."

Swearer concludes that, "The story demonstrates that although priority is given to the wisdom of enlightenment, the most complete expression of Buddhahood includes the compassion that motivates the Buddha to teach the dharma to a suffering humanity."

Swearer’s reading of wisdom having priority over compassion, while common, is both outdated and problematic. For instance it raises the obvious question, “did the Buddha not have compassion before his chat with Sahampati?” In his discussion of this question, Damien Keown (1992, The Nature of Buddhist Ethics, pp.72-76) finds that, "The Buddha's moral concern was not a consequence of his enlightenment: it preceded it and, indeed, motivated it." (p.73). This conclusion is supported by Aronson in Love and Sympathy in Theravada Buddhism and argued against by Jones, "Theravada Buddhism and Morality" (JAAR 1979).

While still a matter of some dispute, further analysis of the Buddha’s awakening suggest that these two aspects must be fully realized (in fact, complete wisdom is none other than compassion and vice versa), and that textual preference of one over another was likely for pedagogical reasons. This particular instance was likely one of many cases in which aspects of the existing Brahmanic worldview were turned in service of a new Buddhist supremacy. We could go into further depth with the usefulness and difficulties of these analyses, but for the sake of time we will now simply look at a discourse from the Pāli Canon that brings wisdom and compassion as well as ethics and meditation together into a single sphere. (the Karaniya Metta Sutta)

1. Cosmology, Frank E. Reynolds & Jonathan W. Schofer in Blackwell Companion to Religious Ethics, (2005), p.121.

2. For instance as early as F. Max Müller, see Sully, James (1891) Pessimism: A History and A Criticism, pp.37-38.

3. Famously, Pope John Paul II stated in 1994’s Crossing the Threshold of Hope that Buddhism “in large measure an ‘atheistic’ system’.” He seemed to undercut constructive Catholic-Buddhist dialogue by further pointing out that the ultimate end of man for Christians is union with God, while for Buddhists it is Nirvana (complete detachment, or a state of nothingness).

4. Swearer, “Gautama the Buddha through Christian Eyes: Buddha Loves Me! This I Know, for the Dharma Tells Me So” (BCS 19.1, 1999)

Buddhism and Ecology - Dr. Brook Ziporyn

(from the video page):

A leading scholar in Tiantai (Tendai) Buddhism will clarify the true nature of reality in relation to environmental concerns and the relevance of Buddhist practice for today.

Lecturer: Dr. Brook Ziporyn
Associate Professor, Department of Religion, Northwestern University

He specializes in Chinese Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism. He earned the Ph. D in Chinese philosophy at the University of Michigan and has taught Buddhism and Chinese thought at the University of Michigan, Harvard University, the Chung-hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies,Taiwan, and Northwestern University (since 1998).

An interesting journey through both Theravadin and Mahayana sources for a Buddhist Ecology, as well as the difficulties with such a concept (there is no Buddhist word for ecology, for instance). Each of the stories he tells should be ready at hand for students of Buddhism interested in dealing with our ecological crises. Highly recommended.

Gradual Path

From the Buddhist Dictionary:

• progress of the disciple

Gradual development of the Eightfold Path in the: In many suttas occurs an identical passage that outlines the gradual course of development in the progress of the disciple. There it is shown how this development takes place gradually, and in conformity with laws, from the very first hearing of the doctrine, and from germinating faith and dim comprehension, up to the final realization of deliverance.

"After hearing the law, he is filled with confidence, and he thinks: 'Full of hindrances is household life, a refuse heap; but the homeless life (of a monk) is like the open air. Not easy is it, when one lives at home, to fulfill in all points the rules of the holy life. How if now I were to cut off hair and beard, put on the yellow robe, and go forth from home to the homeless life?' And after a short time, having given up his possessions, great or little, having forsaken a circle of relations, small or large, he cuts off hair and beard, puts on the yellow robe, and goes forth from home to the homeless life.

Having thus left the world, he fulfills the rules of the monks. He avoids the killing of living beings and abstains from it; without stick or sword, conscientious, full of sympathy, he is desirous of the welfare of all living beings. He avoids stealing ... avoids unchastity ... avoids lying ... tale-bearing ... harsh language ... vain talk.

"He abstains from destroying vegetal germs and plants; eats only at one time of the day; keeps aloof from dance, song, music and the visiting of shows; rejects floral adornment, perfumes, ointment, as well as any other kind of adornment and embellishment. High and gorgeous beds he does not use. Gold and silver he does not accept ... keeps aloof from buying and selling things ....

"He contents himself with the robe that protects his body, and with the alms-bowl with which he keeps himself alive. Wherever he goes, he is provided with these two things, just as a winged bird in flying carries its wings along with him.

"By fulfilling this noble domain of morality (sīla) he feels in his heart an irreproachable happiness."

In what follows thereafter it is shown how the disciple watches over his 5 senses and his mind, and by this noble restraint of the senses (indriya-samvara) feels in his heart an unblemished happiness; how in all his actions he is ever mindful and clearly conscious; and how, being equipped with this lofty morality (sīla), and with this noble restraint of the senses (indriya-samvara), and with mindfulness and clear consciousness (sati-sampajañña), he choses a secluded dwelling, and freeing his mind from the 5 hindrances (nīvarana, q.v.) he reaches full concentration (samādhi, q.v.); and how thereafter, by developing insight (vipassanā q.v.) with regard to the impermanency (anicca), misery (dukkha) and impersonality (anattā, q.v.) of all phenomena of existence, he finally realizes deliverance from all cankers and defilements, and thus the assurance arises in him:

• "For ever am I liberated,

• This is the last time I am born,

• No new existence waits for me."

Cf. D.1, 2f; M. 27, 38, 51, 60, 76; A. IV, 198; X, 99: Pug. 239, etc.

Ethics as a Path

I am coming to the conclusion, or at least having the thought, that ethics must be about a path. Now, this is wrong immediately if we consider forms of ethics that at least seem to have nothing to do with a path or pathiness (to throw in a random neologism).

Prima facia Mill's Utilitarianism doesn't seem to be about a path, more of a set of reasonable guidelines for the individual to follow to live in an orderly society. Aristotle's is path-like. Kant's doesn't seem to be (but can be construed as such - and I'll do just that). Buddhism is probably the most obviously path-based. Scanning Rupert Gethin's book, "The Buddhist Path to Awakening" we get a quick set of reasons for understanding early Buddhism as a path:

In their own terms, the Nikāyas teach but two things: dukkha and the cessation of dukkha. In other words, they postulate a situation where there is a problem and a solution where there is no longer a problem, and are concerned with the processes and means involved in passing from the former to the latter. If this is the Nikāyas' ultimate concern then everything in them might be viewed as at least intended to be subordinate to that aim....

In other words we might say that Buddhist thought is about the Buddhist path -- a path that is seen as leading gradually away from dukkha towards its cessation, and as culminating in the awakening from a restless and troubled sleep. (p.18)

And he goes on, discussing the western scholarly attraction to philosophical concepts in early Buddhism:

The point is that in Buddhist thought discussion of paṭicca-samuppāda, anattā, and nibbāna is not pursued as an end in itself but subordinated to the notion of the spiritual path, which is hardly true of the discussion of causality, change and metaphysics in western thought. (p.19)

Some food for thought...

Sutta on Protection, Pali and English

Maha-mangala Sutta: Protection

translated from the Pali by

Thanissaro Bhikkhu

© 1994–2009

(with Pāli from here)

4. Maṅgalasuttaṃ

Evaṃ me sutaṃ – ekaṃ samayaṃ bhagavā sāvatthiyaṃ viharati jetavane anāthapiṇḍikassa ārāme. Atha kho aññatarā devatā abhikkantāya rattiyā abhikkantavaṇṇā kevalakappaṃ jetavanaṃ obhāsetvā yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavantaṃ abhivādetvā ekamantaṃ aṭṭhāsi. Ekamantaṃ ṭhitā kho sā devatā bhagavantaṃ gāthāya ajjhabhāsi –

I have heard that at one time the Blessed One was staying in Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Then a certain deva, in the far extreme of the night, her extreme radiance lighting up the entirety of Jeta's Grove, approached the Blessed One. On approaching, having bowed down to the Blessed One, she stood to one side. As she stood to one side, she addressed him with a verse.

261.

‘‘Bahū devā manussā ca, maṅgalāni acintayuṃ;

Ākaṅkhamānā sotthānaṃ, brūhi maṅgalamuttamaṃ’’.

Many devas and human beings give thought to protection, desiring well-being. Tell, then, the highest protection.

262.

‘‘Asevanā ca bālānaṃ, paṇḍitānañca sevanā;

Pūjā ca pūjaneyyānaṃ [pūjanīyānaṃ (sī. syā. kaṃ. pī.)], etaṃ maṅgalamuttamaṃ.

The Buddha: Not consorting with fools, consorting with the wise, paying homage to those worthy of homage: This is the highest protection.

263.

‘‘Patirūpadesavāso ca, pubbe ca katapuññatā;

Attasammāpaṇidhi [attasammāpaṇīdhī (katthaci)] ca, etaṃ maṅgalamuttamaṃ.

Living in a civilized land, having made merit in the past, directing oneself rightly: This is the highest protection.

264.

‘‘Bāhusaccañca sippañca, vinayo ca susikkhito;

Subhāsitā ca yā vācā, etaṃ maṅgalamuttamaṃ.

Broad knowledge, skill, well-mastered discipline, well-spoken words: This is the highest protection.

265.

‘‘Mātāpitu upaṭṭhānaṃ, puttadārassa saṅgaho;

Anākulā ca kammantā, etaṃ maṅgalamuttamaṃ.

Support for one's parents, assistance to one's wife and children, consistency in one's work: This is the highest protection.

266.

‘‘Dānañca dhammacariyā ca, ñātakānañca saṅgaho;

Anavajjāni kammāni, etaṃ maṅgalamuttamaṃ.

Giving, living in rectitude, assistance to one's relatives, deeds that are blameless: This is the highest protection.

267.

‘‘Āratī viratī pāpā, majjapānā ca saṃyamo;

Appamādo ca dhammesu, etaṃ maṅgalamuttamaṃ.

Avoiding, abstaining from evil; refraining from intoxicants, being heedful of the qualities of the mind: This is the highest protection.

268.

‘‘Gāravo ca nivāto ca, santuṭṭhi ca kataññutā;

Kālena dhammassavanaṃ [dhammasavaṇaṃ (katthaci), dhammasavanaṃ (sī. ka.)], etaṃ maṅgalamuttamaṃ.

Respect, humility, contentment, gratitude, hearing the Dhamma on timely occasions: This is the highest protection.

269.

‘‘Khantī ca sovacassatā, samaṇānañca dassanaṃ;

Kālena dhammasākacchā, etaṃ maṅgalamuttamaṃ.

Patience, compliance, seeing contemplatives, discussing the Dhamma on timely occasions: This is the highest protection.

270.

‘‘Tapo ca brahmacariyañca, ariyasaccāna dassanaṃ;

Nibbānasacchikiriyā ca, etaṃ maṅgalamuttamaṃ.

Austerity, celibacy, seeing the Noble Truths, realizing Unbinding: This is the highest protection.

271.

‘‘Phuṭṭhassa lokadhammehi, cittaṃ yassa na kampati;

Asokaṃ virajaṃ khemaṃ, etaṃ maṅgalamuttamaṃ.

A mind that, when touched by the ways of the world, is unshaken, sorrowless, dustless, at rest: This is the highest protection.

272.

‘‘Etādisāni katvāna, sabbatthamaparājitā;

Sabbattha sotthiṃ gacchanti, taṃ tesaṃ maṅgalamuttama’’nti.

Maṅgalasuttaṃ catutthaṃ niṭṭhitaṃ.

Everywhere undefeated when acting in this way, people go everywhere in well-being: This is their highest protection.

"The Khuddakapatha" (Khp 1-9), translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight, June 7, 2009, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/khp/khp.1-9.than.html.

Instruction is the Greatest Miracle

Here the Buddha describes instruction as the highest miracle (over psychic powers and telepathy) because it helps many people, not only the one who has it. This is a refutation of the brahman's initial argument that his practice of communal sacrifices is better than the individual Buddhist practice of renunciation because it benefits multitudes.

It's a good passage to cite in refuting the tired old argument of Mahayanists that Theravada is individualistic (Mahayana may push the emphasis of karuna/compassion, but it is very evident in the Theravadin tradition).

I don't understand the Buddha's saying he is "affronted" by the brahmin's praise - perhaps I'm missing something there.

AN 3.60

PTS: A i 168

Thai III.61

Sangarava Sutta: To Sangarava

translated from the Pali by

Thanissaro Bhikkhu

© 2001–2009

Then the brahman Sangarava went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "I say, Master Gotama. We brahmans perform sacrifices and get others to perform sacrifices. And whoever performs a sacrifice, whoever gets others to perform a sacrifice, they have all practiced a practice of merit — the business of a sacrifice — [that benefits] countless beings. But whoever, leaving his family, has gone forth from the home life into homelessness, and tames his single self, brings his single self into tune, brings his single self to Unbinding: his practice of merit — this business of going forth — is one [that benefits] only one being."

"Very well then, brahman, in that case I will cross-question you. Answer as you see fit. What do you think? There is the case where a Tathagata appears in the world, a worthy one, rightly-self-awakened, consummate in clear-knowing & conduct, one who has gone the good way, knower of the cosmos, unexcelled trainer of those who can be taught, teacher of human & divine beings, awakened, blessed. He says: 'Here! This is the path, this is the practice that, having practiced, I make known the unexcelled coming ashore in the holy life,1 having directly known & realized it for myself. Come! You, too, practice in such a way that you will remain in the unexcelled coming ashore in the holy life, having directly known & realized it for yourselves.' Thus the Teacher teaches the Dhamma, and others practice, for Suchness. And there are countless hundreds of them, countless thousands of them, countless hundreds of thousands of them. This being the case, is this practice of merit — this business of going-forth — one that benefits countless beings, or only one being?"

"This being the case, Master Gotama, this practice of merit — this business of going-forth — is one that benefits countless beings."

When this was said, Ven. Ananda said to the brahman Sangarava, "Of these two practices, brahman, which appeals to you as the less complicated, the less violent, the more fruitful, & the more rewarding?"

When this was said, the brahman Sangarava said to Ven. Ananda, "Just as with Master Gotama & Master Ananda, I worship them, I praise them [both]."

A second time, Ven. Ananda said to him, "I didn't ask you whom you worship and whom you praise. I ask you, 'Of these two practices, brahman, which appeals to you as the less complicated, the less violent, the more fruitful, & the more rewarding?'"

A second time, the brahman Sangarava said to Ven. Ananda, "Just as with Master Gotama & Master Ananda, I worship them, I praise them [both]."

A third time, Ven. Ananda said to him, "I didn't ask you whom you worship and whom you praise. I ask you, 'Of these two practices, brahman, which appeals to you as the less complicated, the less violent, the more fruitful, & the more rewarding?'"

A third time, the brahman Sangarava said to Ven. Ananda, "Just as with Master Gotama & Master Ananda, I worship them, I praise them [both]."

Then the thought occurred to the Blessed One, "Being asked a legitimate question by Ananda up to the third time, the brahman Sangarava evades it and does not reply to it. Suppose I were to get him out [of this dilemma]."

So the Blessed One said to the brahman Sangarava, "Brahman, what was the topic of conversation that arose today when the royal court sat gathered in the royal palace?"

"Master Gotama, this was the topic of conversation that arose today when the royal court sat gathered in the royal palace: 'In the past, there were fewer monks but more who, endowed with superior human attainments, displayed the miracle of psychic power. Now there are more monks but fewer who, endowed with superior human attainments, display the miracle of psychic power. This, Master Gotama, was the topic of conversation that arose today when the royal court sat gathered in the royal palace."

"Brahman, there are these three miracles. Which three? The miracle of psychic power, the miracle of telepathy, & the miracle of instruction.

"And what is the miracle of psychic power? There is the case where a certain person wields manifold psychic powers. Having been one he becomes many; having been many he becomes one. He appears. He vanishes. He goes unimpeded through walls, ramparts, & mountains as if through space. He dives in and out of the earth as if it were water. He walks on water without sinking as if it were dry land. Sitting cross-legged he flies through the air like a winged bird. With his hand he touches and strokes even the sun & moon, so mighty & powerful. He exercises influence with his body even as far as the Brahma worlds. This is called the miracle of psychic power.

"And what is the miracle of telepathy? There is the case where a certain person reads [another person' thoughts] by means of a sign (vision), [saying,] 'Such is your thinking, here is where your thinking is, thus is your mind.' And however much he may read, that's exactly how it is, and not otherwise.

"Then there is the case where a certain person reads [another person's thoughts], not by means of a sign or vision, but by hearing the voice of human beings, non-human beings, or devas, [saying,] 'Such is your thinking, here is where your thinking is, thus is your mind.' And however much he may read, that's exactly how it is, and not otherwise.

"Then there is the case where a certain person reads [another person's thoughts], not by means of a sign or vision; not by hearing the voice of human beings, non-human beings, or devas; but by hearing the sound of the directed thought & evaluation of a person thinking directed thoughts and evaluating, [saying,] 'Such is your thinking, here is where your thinking is, thus is your mind.' And however much he may read, that's exactly how it is, and not otherwise.

"Then there is the case where a certain person reads [another person's thoughts], not by means of a sign or vision; not by hearing the voice of human beings, non-human beings, or devas; not by hearing the sound of the directed thought & evaluation of a person thinking directed thoughts and evaluating; but by having attained a concentration devoid of directed thought & evaluation, and encompassing the awareness [of the other] with his own awareness, he discerns, 'Given the way the mental fabrications of this venerable person are inclined, the directed thoughts of his mind will immediately think about this.' And however much he may read, that's exactly how it is, and not otherwise.

"This, brahman, is the miracle of telepathy.

"And what is the miracle of instruction? There is the case where a certain person gives instruction in this way: 'Direct your thought in this way, don't direct it in that. Attend to things in this way, don't attend to them in that. Let go of this, enter and remain in that.' This is called the miracle of instruction.

"And these are the three miracles.

"Now, brahman, of these three miracles, which one appeals to you as the highest & most sublime?"

"Master Gotama, of these three miracles, the miracle of psychic power where a certain person wields manifold psychic powers... (and) exercises influence with his body even as far as the Brahma worlds: that is a miracle experienced only by him who does it; it belongs only to him who does it. It seems to me to be of the nature of an illusion.

"As for the miracle where a certain person by means of a sign or vision... by hearing the voice of human beings, non-human beings, or devas... by hearing the sound of the directed thought & evaluation of a person thinking directed thoughts and evaluating, [saying,] 'Such is your thinking, here is where your thinking is, thus is your mind.' ... [or] who by having attained a concentration devoid of directed thought & evaluation, and encompassing the awareness [of the other] with his own awareness, he discerns, 'Given the way the mental fabrications of this venerable person are inclined, the directed thoughts of his mind will immediately think about this.' And however much he may read, that's exactly how it is, and not otherwise: that is a miracle experienced only by him who does it; it belongs only to him who does it. It seems to me to be of the nature of an illusion.

"As for the miracle where a certain person gives instruction in this way: 'Direct your thought in this way, don't direct it in that. Attend to things in this way, don't attend to them in that. Let go of this, enter and remain in that': this is the miracle that, of the three, appeals to me as the highest & most sublime.

"It is amazing, Master Gotama. It is astounding, how well this has been said by Master Gotama. And we hold that Master Gotama is endowed with these three marvels: Master Gotama wields manifold psychic powers... (and) exercises influence with his body even as far as the Brahma worlds. Having attained a concentration devoid of directed thought & evaluation, and encompassing the awareness [of the other] with his own awareness, Master Gotama discerns, 'Given the way the mental fabrications of this venerable person are inclined, the directed thoughts of his mind will immediately think about this.' Master Gotama gives instruction in this way: 'Direct your thought in this way, don't direct it in that. Attend to things in this way, don't attend to them in that. Let go of this, enter and remain in that.'"

"Of course, brahman, you have affronted me with your personal statement, but nevertheless I will respond. Yes, I wield manifold psychic powers... (and) exercise influence with my body even as far as the Brahma worlds; having attained a concentration devoid of directed thought and evaluation, and encompassing the awareness [of the other] with my own awareness, I discern, 'Given the way the mental fabrications of this venerable person are inclined, the directed thoughts of his mind will immediately think about this.' I give instruction in this way: 'Direct your thought in this way, don't direct it in that. Attend to things in this way, don't attend to them in that. Let go of this, enter and remain in that.'"

"Aside from Master Gotama, is there another monk who is endowed with these three miracles?"

"Brahman, there are not only one hundred other monks... two... three... four... five hundred other monks: the monks who are endowed with these three miracles are many more than that."

"And, Master Gotama, where do those monks now live?"

"In this very same community of monks."

"Magnificent, Master Gotama! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has Master Gotama — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. I go to Master Gotama for refuge, to the Dhamma, & to the community of monks. May Master Gotama remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge from this day forward, for life."

Note

1.

The Commentary divides this phrase into two: the "unexcelled" refers to nibbana. The coming ashore (ogadha) in the holy life refers to the path of arahantship. The analogy here is that of crossing a stream: as one approaches the far shore, one reaches a point where one can touch bottom and gain a footing; even though one is not yet on the shore, one is safe from being swept away. Throughout the Canon, however, the word "gaining a footing" is frequently used in connection with Unbinding and the Deathless.

Provenance: ©2005 Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

Transcribed from a file provided by the translator.

This Access to Insight edition is ©2001–2009 John T. Bullitt.

Terms of use: You may copy, reformat, reprint, republish, and redistribute this work in any medium whatsoever, provided that: (1) you only make such copies, etc. available free of charge; (2) you clearly indicate that any derivatives of this work (including translations) are derived from this source document; and (3) you include the full text of this license in any copies or derivatives of this work. Otherwise, all rights reserved. For additional information about this license, see the FAQ.

How to cite this document (one suggested style): "Sangarava Sutta: To Sangarava" (AN 3.60), translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight, June 7, 2009, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.060.than.html.

Compassion: Mahayana vs Theravada

Roshi Robert Aitken (wiki) writes:

Nowhere among Mahayana practices is concern for other beings expressed more
clearly than in the metta practice of loving kindness in Theravada Buddhism. One
begins with a focus upon the self:

May I be free from danger.
May I have mental happiness.
May I have physical happiness.
May I have the ease of well-being. 8

Metta then is directed to those near and dear—may they be free from danger, and so on—then to those about whom one feels neutral, then to enemies, and so on to all beings. Under the guidance of a seasoned teacher, the resistance one feels to this compassionate practice is faced squarely and allowed to wither and disappear.

"Formal Practice: Buddhist or Christian" - Buddhist-Christian Studies 22 (2002)

8) Sharon Salsberg, Loving Kindness: The Revolutionary Art of Happiness (Boston: Sham-
bhala, 1995), p. 32.

Gethin poking some fun at modern revisionist scholars

...the "ethical" portion of the discourse is to be preferred to the "mythic" precisely because it is ethical, and, as we all know, the earliest Buddhist teachings were simple, ethical teachings, unadulterated by myth and superstition; we know that early Buddhist teaching was like this because of the evidence of the rest of the canon. Here the argument becomes one of classic circularity: we arrive at a particular view about the nature of early Buddhism by ignoring portions of the canon and then use that view to argue for the lateness of the portions of the canon we have ignored. (p.215)

From "Cosmology and Meditation: From the Aggañña-Sutta to the Mahāyāna," Rupert Gethin, History of Religions, Vol. 36, No. 3 (Feb., 1997), pp. 183-217

Notes on Keown's review of Kalupahana's Book on Buddhist Ethics 1997

I have not read the book, "Ethics in Early Buddhism", or anything (that I recall) of substance from David Kalupahana. This review makes me want to read it (eventually) just to see what NOT to do in my own work. I recall being warned to be wary of Kalupahana's ideas by Paul Williams in Bristol as well.

The review is in The Journal of Religion, Vol. 77, No. 2 (Apr., 1997), pp. 337-340

Hammalawa Saddhatissa, a Father of Buddhist Ethics

Now that I'm working again on my thesis (for real this time, really... really!), I should be posting more on that topic here.

One thing I'm working on is using wikipedia and wiki software elsewhere to develop and store my knowledge-base. I'll keep you updated on how that works out. For now, here is my first entry on wikipedia (it's on Hammalawa Saddhatissa, a Sri Lankan Buddhist monk an author of Buddhist Ethics, 1970):As Wikipedia is open to all, feel free to go in and add or change things that need changing. It is, as you will see, very bare-bones now, as I don't know much about the life or teachings of Saddhatissa (beyond what could be found in/on the cover of his book) and couldn't find much on the web.

And yet it is expanding even as I write this blog post...