On Theravada, Tibetan, and Zen Buddhism (...possibly unedited)

Theravada Buddhism:

What exactly is Buddhism? Clearly, it is understood in a religious context; however, it stands apart from most on a variety of issues. First and foremost, Buddhism involves a great focus on the physical world, and how we can attain Truth in it. Both the Four Noble Truths, and the Eightfold Path, emphasize leading a fulfilling life rather than offering some sort of salvation, or promise of an afterlife. Also, an emphasis is placed on human freedom. Practicing Buddhism in the strictest sense will not guarantee enlightenment; it will merely point one in the right direction. In this respect, it is also true that one can see Truth with no previous Buddhist training. These teachings undoubtedly set Buddhism apart from western religions, and lead us on a search for a better way of life, rather than a way out of life.
To properly understand how the Buddha places emphasis on the physical world and human freedom, it is necessary to first delve into some of his basic teachings. Most essential are the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path.
The first Noble Truth is dukkha (Rahula 16). Inherent in existence is pain, suffering, impermanence, and unhappiness. It is impossible to go through life without any type of suffering. We will undoubtedly come in contact with people, situations, or feelings that cause suffering at some point in life. In fact, the Buddha even describes the skandhas, or five aggregates, which combine to form the idea of the self as inherently painful (Burtt 6). This may seem like a very pessimistic outlook on life; however, Theravada Buddhism maintains that it is actually a realistic view (Rahula 17).
The Second Nobel Truth deals with the arising of dukkha through selfish desire, or tanha (Rahula 29). The tanha deals with desire for, and attachment to all of the sense pleasures, ideas, and objects we can find in this life. This tanha gives rise to all of the suffering we experience through existence, though due to the cyclical outlook inherent in Buddhism, it should not be viewed as the primary cause. On top of the arising of dukkha, tanha, also acts as the catalyst for the cycle of birth and rebirth, which will be discussed later.
The Buddha teaches escape from multiple lives of suffering through the Third Noble Truth of cessation of dukkha (Rahula 35). Once we have learned to eliminate tanha, a full realization of Truth will be attained. The elimination of tanha leads to a break in the cycle of birth and rebirth, leading to a state of full awareness of Truth, where one exists in the state known as Nirvana.
The Fourth Noble Truth offers us the Buddha’s guidelines to help us in the realization of Nirvana. These guidelines are known as the Noble Eightfold Path. The term “guidelines” because they are not a specific set of rules that can guarantee us Nirvana, rather they point us in the right direction for individual realization. The eightfold path is as follows:
1: Right Understanding
2: Right Thought
3: Right Speech
4: Right Action
5: Right Livelihood
6: Right Effort
7: Right Mindfulness
8: Right Concentration (Rahula 45)

Again, it is important to emphasize that the Path should be understood as guidelines. It is very individualistic in nature, assuming that with right mindfulness, proper understanding of dukkha, and the causes of dukkha, one will know when they are acting in accordance with the Path. Also, it is not to be taken in a step by step manor, rather, all of these actions are interdependent, and can be practiced simultaneously.
Perhaps most importantly, is the concept of right mindfulness, as it is described as “the only way… for reaching the right path” (Rahula 109). The foundations of mindfulness can be accounted for under four categories: body, feelings, mind, and mental objects. A proper understanding of right mindfulness is crucial, as it leads to a purity of vision, which allows us to see and understand the human condition. Much as it is impossible to diagnose an illness without recognition and understanding of the symptoms, right mindfulness must be utilized to understand the human condition, and point to The Path for a cure.
First, mindfulness of the body can be brought about through mindful breathing (Rahula 110). Exercises such as cultivating full awareness of ones’ breathing, as well as other processes of the body act as a means to allow us to experience the impermanence of the body. Secondly, deep awareness of the feelings is necessary. It is very important to experience the sensory feelings this world has to offer, however, attachment to, or desire for those feelings can be a very painful experience (Rahula 113). Similarly, our full awareness of the mind allows us to experience anger, frustration, et cetera, without becoming attached. It is necessary to acknowledge that the mind exists, however we must not become concerned with amplifying or desiring emotions if we are to live with inner peace (Rahula 114). The final category is that of mental objects. Once again, it is important to become fully aware of mental objects, yet not be attached to them. For example, when anger arises, one cultivating full mindfulness will understand that anger has arisen, yet he will not grasp onto that anger and amplify it (Rahula 115).
As a whole, the foundations of mindfulness can be understood as a means to become fully aware of the physical and spiritual world, and the pain inherent in it. Once we are able to recognize the symptoms of the human condition, then we can begin to follow The Path. Thus, right mindfulness is the path to The Path, and is necessary to purify our insights, and understand the world in which we exist, so we can better follow the Buddha’s Noble Eightfold Path towards enlightenment.
Through this preliminary understanding, it has been shown that the Buddha places an emphasis on our existence in a physical world, and the problems inherent with it. In the process he steers clear of offering blind faith or the hope of an afterlife. Also, through illustrating that the Noble Eightfold Path is more like a set of guidelines than strict rules, more freedom is given to the individual than in most religions.
In sync with the Buddha’s emphasis on the physical world, he takes a stance against metaphysical questions that bear no real meaning on our human condition. To illustrate this point, we are offered the parable of Malunkyaputta. Malunkyaputta becomes disturbed, because the Buddha has not answered many metaphysical questions, such as whether or not the world is eternal (Burtt 10). He is distraught by the lack of explanation on such matters, and claims that he will leave the life of a monk if he does not get answers (Burtt 9)The Buddha wisely responds to this query by creating a metaphor. The Buddha states that a man refusing to lead the religious life due to a lack of explanation of metaphysical questions, is like a man who has been shot with an arrow refusing medical attention, until he learns details about his attacker (Burtt 10).
This understanding is vital to the Buddha’s emphasis on the physical world, as well as personal freedom. We are all faced with existence, which necessarily contains suffering. With the above stated metaphor, the Buddha claims that questions such as whether or not the world is eternal are meaningless to us in this life. What help would answers to such questions be towards the elimination of suffering (Burtt 12)? As long as we are alive, we are facing death, so it is better not to concern ourselves with questions that have no relevance to how we live our lives. Much like the man who was shot with the arrow, asking metaphysical questions such as Malunkyaputta’s will not help us with the cessation of pain, or alleviate our primary problems.
The Buddha also sees these types of metaphysical questions as unable to be established as absolute Truth. When one aligns him or herself with a teacher who claims knowledge of these types of metaphysical questions, individual realization of Truth is necessary be impeded. The Buddha holds the notion that “man’s emancipation depends on his own realization of Truth and not on… any external power as a reward for his obedient good behavior” (Rahula 2). In this respect, following one who can guarantee answers to many unanswerable questions is akin to impeding on both one’s personal freedom, as well as one’s own realization of Truth.
Not all forms of metaphysical questions, however, are rejected by the Buddha. Those that have value to understanding the human condition are accepted and embraced. One such example is the Buddhist rejection of mind/body dualism. In Buddhism, the mind is seen as an organ, much like our sensory organs (Rahula 21). This metaphysical unification of the mind and body is of fundamental importance to concepts such as the five aggregates, and the dissolution of the ego-self, which will be discussed. It is important to note that a lack of mind/body dualism is a metaphysical question; however, because it is one that can help in the realization of Truth, it is valuable.
Our concept of individuality, or ego-self, according to the Buddhist, is only a combination of physical and mental energies called the five aggregates (Rahula 20). This combination is in continual flux, so in reality one cannot identify with an individual self. These five aggregates are also referred to as the “five aggregates of attachment” and the source of dukkha, so an argument is made that to eliminate dukkha, we must eliminate the ego-self, and our attachments (Rahula 20).
To do this, a proper understanding of the five aggregates must be attained. First is the Aggregate of Matter. This includes all physical objects in the universe, including those that compose our bodies. Within this realm exist the Four Great Elements –solidity, fluidity, heat, and motion- as well as our sense organs, and the external objects which those organs sense (Rahula 20). It is important to note here that Buddhism eliminates mind/body dualism by understanding the mind as a sense organ. Secondly, there is the Aggregate of Sensations (Rahula 21). This aggregate describes the relationships between our sense organs, and external objects. For example, if I were to touch a hot stove, I would feel a sensation. Without both sense organs, and external stimuli, this sensation could not exist. Third is the Aggregate of Perception (Rahula 22). This aggregate also involves the relationship between our sense organs, and external stimuli; however, it is based on recognition of the sensations. The sensation of the relationship between my hand and the stove would fall under the aggregate of perception as pain. The Aggregate of Mental formations includes all of those mental activities that one chooses to pursue, including decisions made and actions undertaken. Finally, there is the Aggregate of consciousness (Rahula 23). This is not to be understood as cognizance, as it often is in western thought. Rather, Buddhism breaks consciousness into parts, based on relationships between our sense organs and the outside world. For example, there is a keyboard in front of me, and my eye can see it. Thus, I have visual consciousness. It is also important to understand that consciousness exists separately from perception. In the above example, visual consciousness was based on my sight, and the existence of the keyboard as a physical object. The recognition of the object as a keyboard is under the Aggregate of Perception.
The understanding of the five aggregates, and the mind as a sense organ are obviously metaphysical in nature. However, the world becomes seen in a much more dynamic way with a proper understanding of these concepts. Seeing the mind as separate from the body, and physical and mental forces as separate and unrelated, leads to the formation of an ego-self, and an idea of permanence in the world. The Buddha, then, accepts an outlook based on change and interconnectedness, which leads to recognition of Truth. Because of this, these metaphysical questions can be addresses, while those not involving the human condition should not.
If the mind is seen as a sense organ, dependant on some sort of external stimuli, rather than a completely independent soul substance, an argument can be constructed showing that the ego-self does not exist. We get the concept of ego-self from a mistaken perception of the five aggregates (Rahula 25), as well as a thirst for existence (Rahula 29). When one experiences sensations or perceptions, it could be thought that there is some sort of thinker or independent entity that experiences the physical world. This, however, is a false mental formation, brought about by a lack of understanding of the interdependence of all the five aggregates. A beautiful example of this concept lies in the face of change throughout a person’s lifetime. A man in his sixties, is obviously not the same person he was as a child, however, he is not a different person either (Rahula 34). No one is an independent, permanent entity; rather, individuals exist within a system of interdependent parts that are all in constant change.
The development of the ego-self can also be seen though thirst for existence, which continues the cycle of birth and rebirth. As has been discussed, selfish craving leads to the arising of dukkha. When one does not see the world in constant flux, attaches to combinations of the five aggregates, and mistakenly referrers to those combinations as “I”, suffering is sure to follow. Thus, one of the steps we must take towards eliminating dukkha, is to eliminate the illusion of an ego-self, or any type of other independent permanent idea of self.
It has been illustrated that Buddhism rejects the notion of a permanent soul-substance. One may find it difficult to understand how Buddhism could both reject soul substance, and embrace the idea of rebirth. It seems that if one is to be reborn, there must be some sort of carry over that could be referred to as a soul. The Buddhist reply to this is that there is carry over; however, it is in the form of the khandhas, or aggregates (Rahula 33). This is perhaps easier to understand when thinking of change over a person’s lifetime. Since the aggregates are in constant change, and a person is understood as a configuration of the aggregates, at each passing moment, that individual is not the same individual, nor a different one. With this understanding, “every moment we are born, and die” (Rahula 33). When the physical body dies, however, we cannot expect all of the energies associated with it to just disappear. It is said that, because everything is interrelated and deeply dependant on cause and effect, those energies will transfer to a new physical body (Rahula 33). Thus, just as one is not the same individual, nor a new one, at every moment of life, one is not the same individual, nor a new one, in each consecutive life. No permanent soul substance has transferred, merely a configuration of energies. And similarly, just as a child has the potential to grow into an adult, through birth and death in life, we also have the potential to attain Nirvana though consecutive physical births and deaths.
Nirvana, or enlightenment, is seen as the fulfillment of one’s potential as a human being. But, what exactly is this state? It is claimed that we do not have language capable of describing Nirvana, and so the question must remain unanswerable (Rahula 35). While understandable, this evasion of the question cannot quell those deeply interested in the realization of Truth. The term “realization” is also of fundamental importance here. Nirvana is not a state that can be taught or shown directly. The Buddha’s teachings merely act as a guide, not a strict set of rules. It is up to the individual to realize Nirvana, not a teacher to grant it (Burtt 90).
Even if Nirvana can only be realized, and transcends the limits of our language system, there must be something it can be compared to. It is perhaps best to understand Nirvana in terms of attaining Truth, as well as breaking the cycle of life and death. Nirvana is realized upon the elimination of selfish desire, leading to a realization of Truth. This does not involve denying sensations, or mental formations, but becoming fully aware of them, and letting them exist without attachment to them. The elimination of selfish desire is a reconfiguring of the aggregates, so upon death, those energies become unbounded, and integrate themselves with the rest of the universe. Once this happens, rebirth will no longer occur, as the ego-self and selfish desires for existence have been extinguished.
One must not view this, however, as a complete extinction of the human being. As was described earlier, our “self” is a configuration of ever-changing aggregates. Upon reaching Nirvana, those aggregate configurations to not disappear, but rather unify with the energy flow of the universe. In this sense then, it cannot be said that one exists after Nirvana, does not exist after Nirvana, both exists and does not exist, or neither exists nor does not exist (Burtt 92).
Buddhism, as it has been shown, places a great emphasis on our existence in the physical world, as well as the need for human freedom. It has been shown that through existence we experience suffering, yet there are ways to combat this suffering aside from the hope of salvation and eternal living in an afterlife. Also, because the Buddha’s teachings must be taken as guidelines, rather than rules, a great emphasis on human freedom can be seen. The only way to reach Nirvana, for example, is through realization, not strict adherence to the eightfold path. So, more than most Western religions, Buddhism also involves a way of life, and a possible answer to all the questions we face through existence.



Part 2:

It has been illustrated above that Buddhism puts a great emphasis on both the physical world, as well as human freedom. With these thoughts in mind, a great many parallels can be drawn between it and the existentialist philosophers. While they both offer a similar insight into the human condition, Buddhism contains a spiritual element to fill the void left by existential nihilism. Also, both have been considered pessimistic ways of thinking due to the treatment of the human condition, however, through this treatment, a great amount of freedom is bestowed upon the individual.
Both ways of thought recognize a universal human condition. Buddhism sees man as wrought with desire to resist change. Obviously, this does not sit well with a process view of the world. When the world exists as continual change, yet our minds seek eternal existence, a crisis necessarily arises which is referred to as the universal human condition. This can be better understood through the relationship of the mind-produced ego-self and the physical world. Buddhism maintains that ego identity is an illusion, and thus the source of the human condition.
Similarly, Camus describes the human condition as absurdity. He also notes the crisis that exists when a separation of mind and world comes into being. He sees absurdity in the fact that our minds wish to attribute meaning to worldly phenomena; however, those phenomena are inherently meaningless (Camus 29). Thus, the absurd is not in the human mind, or inherent in the world, but in the relationship between the two. The schism that develops as a result of this outlook is so deep that Camus questions whether or not we can ever be truly happy in the world.
It seems that ego-identification may also be fundamental to Camus’ concept of absurdity. To explore this, the question of why the human mind desires to impose meaning on the world must be examined. Perhaps, the answer can be derived from the Buddhist notion of selfish desire, especially that of existence. When we impose meaning on the world, we create a separation, and build up the idea of a permanent ego-self. Perhaps this is why Camus is forced to question whether or not we can be happy in this world. It seems that both Buddha and Camus have recognized the same human condition, but at different levels.
To combat this universal human condition, both schools of thought emphasize total awareness of phenomena; rather than attempting to impose human meaning on the world. They seem to differ, however, on the means of obtaining happiness in this life. Camus’ nihilism does not allow for any type of rebirth, and so he must conclude that it is that quantity of life that is important (Camus 61). Buddhism, on the other hand, recognizes the same human condition, but offers an escape through the elimination of tanha, and would undoubtedly argue that Camus’ idea of the importance of the quantity of life reinforces the selfish desire for existence.
Both schools of thought also hold a similar view of metaphysical questions. Both consider adherence to dogmatic teachings as an intrusion on personal freedom, as well as a means of obscuring Truth. As was discussed earlier, the Buddha dismissed metaphysical questions that had no value to the human condition. Adhering to such unanswerable questions is not helpful in dealing with reality, but a crutch, which hurts us in the long run.
Sartre holds a similar view in his doctrine of bad faith. He explains that bad faith involves denying responsibility of one’s actions, through an association with a group, or the past (Pojman 1207). For example, if my grandmother was sick, and wanted me to come visit her in the hospital, but this would cause me to miss the Birthday Ball here at WAC, I would be faced with a dilemma. If I chose not to visit her, and go to birthday ball, and based my decision on the fact that I am a WAC student, and all WAC students go to Birthday Ball, I have necessarily given up a portion of my freedom. This action was taken in bad faith, because I ceased to regard myself as a rational individual, and allowed a group association to make a decision for me.
Similarly, the Buddha claims that following the dogma of a teacher, because you are the student, also amounts to surrendering a portion of your freedom. You have ceased to inquire, and can have no real insight into Truth, because your decision was not based on individual realization.
It has been shown that both Existentialism and Buddhism hold a similar view of the universal human condition, as well as an emphasis on human freedom. Existentialists such as Camus and Sartre, however, embrace nihilism, and lack the spiritual element in their ways of thinking. Buddhism, on the other hand, maintains that death is not an escape from existential angst, only The Path leading to Nirvana. Both views are also realistic in nature, rather than pessimistic, and invite us to embrace freedom as a means to find happiness in life.





Tibetan Buddhism:

In Tibetan Buddhism, a shift is made from the emphasis on wisdom found in Theravada traditions. As part of the Mahayana tradition, a great emphasis is instead placed on the role of compassion. This shift from wisdom to compassion has vast implications for the practice of Tibetan Buddhism. Instead of an emphasis on individual enlightenment, we see the desire to liberate all of mankind. Fundamental to this is the proper understanding of the nature of mind, which also acts as the central pillar to a full understanding of the concepts of reincarnation and compassion. Tibetan Buddhism, however, also has a large amount of metaphysical baggage, though one could question its reality.
The Nature of Mind seems to be of fundamental importance to Tibetan Buddhism. What, then, is the nature of mind? I am able to count objects, and discriminate between one item and the next. Is this the true nature of mind? Tibetan Buddhism staunchly says: no. Mind may be divided into two parts; sem, or the ordinary mind, and the ever-expansive big sky mind (Rinpoche 47).
Sem can be understood as the faculties, including reason, that are necessary for survival. To function properly, sem requires a falsely conceived reference point, which enforces ego attachment, and our notions of duality (Rinpoche 47). Attachment to this ordinary mind, then, is the root of suffering. However, we are not to completely dismiss the ordinary mind, we are only to dismiss attachment to it. For example, if I were cooking a meal, duality and reasoning skills are a necessity. I must understand distinctions between various ingredients, or risk serving an inedible meal. Thus, in every day circumstances, the ordinary mind is a necessity; however, we must be aware that it cannot account for the entirety of existence.
As language exists as a function of ordinary mind (it is used to classify and account for objects and events) the nature of mind is not easily definable. Rinpoche instead offers us a beautiful metaphor to help illuminate the mystery of the nature of mind. He describes a frog, which has lived his entire life in a well. One day, a frog from the sea comes to visit, and attempts to describe his home to the frog of the well. He says the sizes of the two are beyond comparison. The frog of the well cannot comprehend this, so he goes to visit the sea, and upon arrival his head explodes (Rinpoche 42).
This metaphor can be taken in two ways. It can be used to illustrate the difficulties in realizing the nature of mind, as the frog’s head explodes in an attempt to understand the sea. More importantly, however, it illustrates the vast scale of the nature of mind, in comparison to our ordinary mind. We are often times bound up in our ordinary mind, which creates barriers to our expansive consciousness. When we fully realize the nature of mind, these barriers are shattered, much like the head of the frog. When this happens, Truth can be realized through complete awareness and compassion.
The expansive consciousness that is nature of mind is, also akin to the buddha nature (Rinpoche 49). Tibetan Buddhism tells us that we all have an inner buddha nature, and we are all capable of realizing the nature of mind. Rinpoche explains this phenomenon quite similarly to a gestalt shift. When we view a drawing in which two pictures may be perceived, both pictures are always present. Upon first glance, we may see only one; however, this does not mean the second does not exist. With closer inspection, and perhaps a bit of help, we may suddenly be able to see both pictures. Thus is the buddha nature. It is always within us. A closer look within ourselves, and help from a teacher, can help us attain a shift in perspective to realize Truth. When we do this, the delusions used by our ordinary mind are stripped away and we come in contact with our inner buddha nature.
If the buddha nature is always with us, how can it be so difficult to realize? Rinpoche offers us several reasons. First he gives us the Four Faults. Namely, he states that, the nature of mind is too close to be recognized, too profound to fathom, too easy to believe, or to wonderful to accommodate (Rinpoch 51). These faults all seem to imply simplicity inherent in the nature of mind, which, due to our attachment to ordinary mind, makes the nature of mind difficult to realize.
Also fundamental to the realization of the nature of mind is karmic purity. A proper understanding of karma is necessary here to fully understand many Tibetan Buddhist concepts. In contrast to the common Western view of karma, it is not any type of fate or predestination (Rinpoche 96). Rather, it should be understood as the eternal law of cause and effect. As we willingly undertake various actions, we cannot escape the consequences of those actions. When we act under the influence of the ordinary mind, we build up habits, which will effect our future actions. We are now what we have done in the past, and we will become what we do in the present (Rinpoche 103). Thus, if we become habituated to a perception of the world through the lens of ordinary mind, it becomes more and more difficult to see the buddha nature within us.
The role of karma and the understanding of the nature of mind are also essential to fully understand the Tibetan Buddhist concept of reincarnation. Many have a hard time understanding the concept of reincarnation, perhaps because they are thinking in terms of the ordinary mind. Reincarnation should not be understood as the continuation of a self from life to life, as this idea of self is attachment to the ordinary mind. Rather, it is a continuation of the buddha nature, which is not the same individual from one life to the next, yet not an independent one. Rinpoche uses the example of different lives not as pearls connected by a string, but as dice stacked upon one another (Rinpoche 95).
How are we to interpret this? The answer lies in the connection between karma and the nature of mind. If every action has a consequence, we cannot expect consciousness to spontaneously arise or fade away. Instead, it is cyclical. In this life, one moment of consciousness cannot exist without the one before it (Rinpoche 93). This is based on the eternal law of karma, as moments of consciousness are also subject to cause and effect. Thus, ones life cannot exist without all previous lives. The ordinary mind collects karma, which directly affects the conditions of rebirth in the next life. In this way, there is no soul-substance that progresses from life to life, merely a causal connection, which builds upon itself like stacked dice.
We are not, however, eternally trapped in this cycle of birth and death. Rinpoche offers us the bardos, which simply mean transitions or gaps, as special times of opportunity to escape the cycle (Rinpoche 108). As attachment to the ordinary mind is the agent for collecting karma, through realization of the buddha nature we no longer collect karma, and may escape from the cycle of rebirth. Understanding the bardos, then, is of great importance to the realization of the nature of mind.
Rinpoche defines four bardos. The natural bardo of life spans the entire period of one’s existence, from birth to the beginning of the process of death. The painful bardo of dying includes the process of dying up until the moment of death. The luminous bardo of dharmata refers to the after death experience, and the “radiance of the nature of mind” (Rinpoche 108). Finally, the karmic bardo of becoming is the transition up until the time of rebirth.
It seems that far from being specific periods of transition, these bardos account for the entirety of existence. Perhaps they are best understood, not as independent states of transition, but similar to a geometric line, which is made up of an infinite number of points. All of the points exist independently; however, we are unable to distinguish one from another, as they are infinitesimally small. Only by looking at the entire line itself can we say that it is made up of an infinite number of interrelated points.
In this manner, bardos exist in our every day consciousness, and every moment is a bardo. However, due to our dependence on the ordinary mind, we may habitually overlook these gaps (Rinpoche 109). Our ordinary mind oftentimes jumps from one concept to the next; however, if we are to look between these conceptualizations we can catch a glimpse at the nature of mind. Every moment a feeling arises within us, and we are in a position to recognize this feeling for what it truly is. Many times, this opportunity is lost; attachment to the feeling ensues, which reinforces our ego identification, making utilization of the bardos ever more difficult.
In this way, ignoring the transition states of our lives can be understood as the forces working against the gestalt shift necessary to perceive our inner budda nature. If we ignore the bardos, we will continue to build up karma, as our attachment to ordinary mind is enforced. This buildup of karma will then ensure that we remain part of the cycle. Through exploring the gaps present in every moment of our lives, we are able to perceive the buddha nature that has always been with us, and in turn, break the cycle of rebirth.
While the recognition of the bardos can help us gain insight into the nature of mind, the practice of compassion is extremely important for further development. Compassion can be understood as taking on the pain and suffering of others, and in turn sharing with them all of the joys which we experience. Rinpoche believes that compassion is the “source and essence of enlightenment, and the heart of enlightened activity,” and offers us several practices to help arouse compassion within ourselves (Rinpoche 193).
Tibetan Buddhism takes a karmic approach to compassion, stating that every negative thing one has ever done has been a result of ego attachment (Rinpoche 192). Once again, this builds up negative karma in the bank of the ordinary mind; obscuring our view of the buddha nature, and subjecting us to the continuation of the cycle of birth and death. In addition, this reinforcement of the ego attachment impedes our ability to choose between our own self interests and the ultimate interest of true compassion.
Tibetan Buddhism also understands suffering as having no objective existence (Rinpoche 194). Instead, it is seen as a relationship between an ego-self, and an object or situation that causes displeasure. Suffering can only exist through an ego-attached aversion to one of these objects or situations. So, through dissolution of the ego-self, we are able to eliminate suffering in our own lives.
Perhaps more importantly, the practice of compassion can help us to break our ego-attachments, and purify our karma. As we take on the suffering of others, an insight is gained into the human condition to which we are all subjected. Taking on the suffering of others is also not in the best interests of our ego-self, and so a type of unification with others is reached, through the destruction of our ego-attachments. This, of course, takes a large amount of practice, as we are habituated through negative karma to satisfy our own self interests.
Rinpoche cites several practices which can be used to bring about compassion, including the practice of Tonglen, much of which involves visualization. To arouse compassion within ourselves we must try to peer into our buddha nature, consider ourselves the same as others, visualize a deep love we have felt in the past, exchange ourselves for others, or visualize a friend in a painful situation (Rinpoche 198). It is of great importance to utilize these practices within ourselves, behind the conceptualizing mind. Once conceptualization has occurred, and with it ego-attachment, true compassion cannot be realized.
Once compassion is realized within ourselves, we may use the practice of Tonglen to expand that compassion to others. Tonglen can be understood as the practice of taking on the suffering of others, and giving them happiness and deep love (Rinpoche 206). Tonglen practice begins with letting go of ego-attachments, and bringing the mind to a state of calm. We must then let compassion arise within ourselves, so that we may prepare to expand that compassion to others. Visualization is required for this practice. We must visualize a person close to us in immense pain, and see the pain as disgusting smoke surrounding this person. With mindfulness of the in breath, we picture this smoke being pulled inside of us, permeating our being. As the pain of another enters the body, karma is purified, and attachment to the ego-self is diminished. Then, with the out breath, a visualization of pure compassion can help to purify the karma of another (Rinpoche 209). This practice can be used to visualize a larger and larger group of people, as there is no limit to the expanses of pure compassion.
Tibetan Buddhism holds compassion for all things as a fundamental belief. It is also a necessary result of the dissolution of the ego-self as we realize the unity inherent in all things. It seems wrong then, that some one could attain enlightenment, liberate themselves from suffering, and leave the rest of humanity behind. For this reason, Mahayana traditions, including Tibetan Buddhism, have developed the concept of a bodhisattva.
A bodhisattva is one who has realized buddha nature, and the oneness of all things. However, as was discussed, this realization of oneness leads to deep compassion. Through this compassion for others, the bodhisattva refuses to enter nirvana, and instead continues the cycle of birth and death so that he/she may take on the suffering of others. This is the ideal for Buddhists in the Mahayana tradition, as it reflects a full understanding of the unity of all things.
In addition, taking on the suffering of others, as was discussed, also purifies their karma, so the bodhisattva remains in this existence until a time when universal liberation is won. The bodhisattva remains as a spiritual guide, aiding all of humanity, until a time comes in which all may be liberated from suffering and enter nirvana together.
As has been shown, the nature of mind or the buddha nature, is of fundamental importance to Tibetan Buddhism. It seems to be the force behind the shift from wisdom to compassion, as seen in all Mahayana traditions. Once we learn to peer between the gaps in the conceptualizing mind, we may catch a glimpse of the buddha nature within us all. Practices to arouse compassion further develop this glimpse as our ego-attachments are stripped away, and we begin to see the unity of all things. Truly, Tibetan Buddhism is a Big Vehicle, with the intent to liberate all suffering beings.


Part II

In the above exposition of Tibetan Buddhism, I have attempted to strip away much of the metaphysical baggage, in order to bring the underlying philosophical presuppositions to light. In our class discussions, Tibetan Buddhism has been faulted for mentioning a pantheon of deities, as well as six different realms in which we may exist. The question, then, is whether or not Tibetan Buddhism recognizes these things as ontologically real or just human projections.
Mahayana Buddhism expands on the teachings of the Buddha, and emphasizes compassion; however, they still abide by his original teachings. The Buddha taught against metaphysical questions that have no meaning on the human condition. It seems then, that recognizing this pantheon of deities or different realms of existence would be a contradiction of the teachings of the Buddha. Even if one were to consider these beings as transcending the universe, a problem arises, as Buddhism regards everything as interconnected. It seems absurd that Tibetan Buddhists, then, would recognize the existence of a separate, individual entity that transcends the universe.
A second possibility is that these deities are merely human projections, meant to help guide us along the path towards the realization of buddha nature. As has been illustrated in the exposition, language is based on the uses of the ordinary mind. Therefore, it becomes very difficult to account for things which penetrate the nature of mind. Perhaps these deities are metaphorical, then, and are used to account for different mental states. In this way, they act as guides to help us along our spiritual paths, but do not exist in an ordinary way of thinking.
The notion of these concepts as human projections seems satisfying. However, throughout the readings, Rinpoche refers to various types of mystical experiences as if they are, in fact, real. He reminds us that our karmic vision limits what we see, and it would be arrogant to assume that nothing exists beyond this vision (Rinpoche 116). This complicates the situation, as Rinpoche seems to believe that they are truly real.
I feel that to solve this dilemma, Rinpoche’s notion of “real” must be explored. When I go to sleep and dream, are these dreams not real in some sense? They are mental states, and cause me to experience various phenomena. One could argue that dreams are in fact real, in some way, but not ultimate reality. When I awaken, for example, my dreams have in no way affected the natural world around me. The natural world, then, and dream states are different levels of reality. Both are real, however, my dreams are only real to me as an individual.
In this respect, perhaps the deities do exist in the same way as our dreams. They exist at a different level of reality. Perhaps, much as we see the illusory nature of dreams when we awaken, we shall see the illusory nature of the pantheon of deities when we are liberated from the ordinary mind. Thus, the deities exist, as do our dreams, yet they are not a part of Truth. Like many other things in Buddhism, these deities both exist and do not exist.
Practices of visualization seen in Tibetan Buddhism also support this. One of the meditation practices suggested by Rinpoche involves meditating on an object (Rinpoche 69). Calming the mind, and viewing an object without attachment, can promote unity, and thus eliminate ego-attachment. This can lead to a practice of visualization, where the practitioner is able to completely visualize the object he or she is meditating on. As mental states, being one of the five aggregate, are also seen as real, the object and the practitioner are able to overcome dualism and become one.
This can be transferred to the understanding of certain mystical aspects of Tibetan Buddhism. The pantheon of deities, or different realms of existence, are in fact real in that they are human projections. They may not be a part of Truth, but until we are able to look within ourselves and realize the buddha nature, they exist within our minds on a different level of reality. Rinpoche, then, is free to believe in the reality of the metaphysical baggage found in Tibetan Buddhism, without obscuring any of the main philosophical points.




Zen Buddhism:


In the development of Buddhism, Zen Buddhism stands apart, as it does not place an emphasis on the direct teachings of the historical Buddha (Ross 141). Zen Buddhism sees the true teachings of the historical Buddha as unable to be accurately represented in words; rather, they must be directly transferred from mind to mind (Ross 141). This amounts to a recognition of the abstract nature of the concepts found in Zen Buddhism. Concepts such as the emptiness inherent in all things cannot be fully understood with words alone, thus, the individual must experientially realize these concepts through practicing mindfulness. Once the concept of emptiness is fully realized, boundless compassion comes too fruition. The boundless compassion arising from the Zen Buddhist notion of emptiness also draws strong parallels to many aspects of true Christianity.
Fundamental to the Zen Buddhist approach to enlightenment is the concept of emptiness. However, to fully understand emptiness, it is essential to first give treatment to the Zen Buddhist understanding of mind. This mind, as Zen Buddhists see it, can be understood in terms of the big mind, and the small mind. It would be incorrect to assume that these concepts are distinctly separate; however, it would be equally incorrect to assume that they are the same. Further clarification, then, is necessary.
Zen Buddhism understands the small mind as based in dualism. Small mind promotes the conceptualization of the natural world, allowing one to differentiate between, and value, different objects and feelings. It can be better understood, perhaps, as a limited consciousness, based on an understanding of the independence of the thinker to the surrounding natural world (Suzuki 35). For example, the statement: I am in a chair, and there is a computer in front of me, can be seen as thinking dominated by the small mind. This is because I have recognized a distinction between myself, the chair and the computer. In addition, I may perceive certain experiences as good, or bad, implying that there is a distinction between myself and the experience.
The big mind, however, is a representation of expansive consciousness. Suzuki claims that nothing happens outside of our minds, as an illuminating example of understanding big mind (Suzuki 34). Even if we have experiences that support dualism, we must understand that these are feelings created by the small mind. While a dualistic understanding, such as this, may be necessary in some aspects of life, Zen Buddhism feels that attachment to the functions of the small mind inhibits us from seeing the Truth of the wholeness of the universe (Ross144). Thus, we must recognize the small mind as a tool; however, it is a tool which cannot help us in the understanding of Truth.
In this respect, it is important that we recognize the importance of the small mind, as there is, in fact, no difference between the small mind and the big mind; and yet they are not independent of one another. To illustrate this difficult concept, Suzuki uses the metaphor of waves in an ocean (Suzuki 35). Feelings and dualistic thoughts can be understood as waves within the vast ocean of big mind. Waves can be seen and analyzed independently of the ocean, however, they’re existence is dependant on the ocean. In fact, it is in the nature of the water to produce waves (Suzuki 35). In this respect, it is in the nature of the big mind to produce feelings and dualistic understandings as a means to efficiently live ones’ life when these understandings are necessary.
Attaching to the small mind, then, appears to be the source of our ego-attachments in Zen Buddhism; as it promotes the conceptualization and categorization of the natural world. The big mind acts as the expansive consciousness that allows us to understand the unity of all things; however, it manifests small mind experiences for use in our day to day existences. Attachment to the functions of the small mind will not provide insight into the human condition, yet we would be unable to live fully without any of its functions. Thus, both minds are necessary, but we must properly understand the small mind as a manifestation of big mind to avoid ego-attachment, and direct us towards the realization of Nirvana.
Suzuki further clarifies this understanding, by stating that “in the beginners mind there are many possibilities, but in the expert’s there are few” (Suzuki 21). This enigmatic statement reveals much about the understanding of the big mind and the small mind. The beginner’s mind is analogous to the expansive consciousness of the big mind. When one first begins to meditate or recite sutras, there are no preconceived ideas. The emptiness of the beginner’s mind, then, is the source of infinite possibilities. The fostering of the beginner’s mind directs us towards the understanding of emptiness and boundless compassion, through a lack of conceptualizations, and an understanding that everything exists in the mind (Suzuki 21).
But maintaining this beginner’s mind can prove quite challenging. As we repeat processes, we may begin to lose our beginner’s mind. When an experience is no longer new, we develop preconceptions about it, which supports the dualistic approach of the small mind. The same is true on a much broader level as well. As we develop throughout life, we are apt to rely on past conceptions to dictate our present actions. This constitutes a loss of the original mind we possessed as beginners in life.
We must, then, empty our minds of our conceptualizations of the world. When this has been accomplished, the expansive consciousness of the big mind may be understood, and the infinite possibilities of the original mind may be utilized. As these conceptualizations promote ego-attachment, the development of the understanding of big mind must be promoted as the means to realize enlightenment.
This original mind of emptiness, and infinite possibilities, is also our innermost essence. The original mind we had as beginners in life is lost, as human development promotes the conceptualization of the natural world. Only through a fundamental realization of the oceanic consciousness that spawns the waves of the small mind, can we realize enlightenment.
It must also be stressed that enlightenment is to be realized, as opposed to achieved, as it must not be seen as a goal for the Zen Buddhist. To view enlightenment in such a way implies duality and ego-attachment. Only through the emptiness of the big mind can one realize that enlightenment is here and now, rather than some future goal that must be achieved. If one thinks of one’s self as existing outside of a state of enlightenment, it must be recognized that this understanding is based on the dualism promoted by the small mind. Rather, enlightenment is always with every individual, it just requires a shift in perception to realize.
The shift of perception that allows the realization of the big mind of enlightenment also has wide reaching implications; affecting notions of suffering and compassion. For example, a cloud does not have a conception of the value of the rain it drops to the earth. It has no understanding of such a notion as the rain being “good” or “bad,” nor is it able to differentiate itself from the organisms that depend on it for water. The cloud simply is. To simply “be” is our innermost essence as well, as it is based on the infinite possibilities of emptiness. When the realization of the big mind is experienced, the Zen Buddhist does not differentiate between himself and others any more than he or she suffers as the result of a disagreeable experience. The emptiness of the mind, leading to the oceanic consciousness of the big mind, views life as a process. This process is necessarily devoid of human-projected valuations, and differentiation between various forms of life.
Now, the Zen Buddhist concept of emptiness must be examined. In the western world, people generally take a negative attitude towards emptiness. This is not so in Zen Buddhist thought, as emptiness is to be seen as a positive (Ross 146). Zen Buddhism sees emptiness as the metaphysical source of all things, and back to which, all things will return. All forms, then, the author, the reader, the computer, the chair, etc. are temporary phenomena which have arisen from the vast emptiness of the universe, and will eventually return.
To illustrate this concept, Suzuki uses the metaphor of a waterfall. As the river approaches the fall, one cannot distinguish individual forms within the river. As the water falls over the edge, however, many individual forms can be recognized briefly, before returning to the flow of the river at the base of the fall (Suzuki 93). The same is true of our perception of forms in the natural world. The emptiness described by Zen Buddhism is akin to the river, as it is understood as the flow of the universe. Within this flow, no individual existences can be recognized. However, the concept of the self emerges as forms arise from the emptiness, as illustrated by the falling water. As these forms will decay and once again join the flow of the universe, all individual existences must then be seen as transient and illusory.
Zen Buddhism sees all of us as part of this vast emptiness. Only through utilizing the big mind can we begin to penetrate ourselves, and in turn, realize the emptiness in all things. This understanding of emptiness also spawns boundless compassion for all living beings, which provides the framework for many strong connections between the teachings of the historical Buddha, and those of Jesus Christ. These connections could not even be explored, however, if it were not for the absence of conceptualizations brought about by the full understanding of the emptiness of the big mind.
Thich Nhat Hanh shows his full understanding of these Zen Buddhist concepts through acceptance of aspects of Christianity. Living in Vietnam during a time when Christianity was seen almost as an imperialistic force, Nhat Hanh was able to empty his mind of conceptualizations; enabling him to draw strong parallels between aspects of Christianity and Buddhism, through the lives of Jesus Christ and the historical Buddha.
Nhat Hanh suggests that we must look at the lives of Jesus Christ and the historical Buddha, rather than their teachings. The teachings of both men must be understood in their given contexts; meaning that a strong attachment to the actual words of either teacher may not lead to a deep understanding of their true messages (Nhat Hanh 53). Because of this, he suggests that to get at the deep meaning of the teachings of both men, we must live as they did, not strictly adhere to what they taught. With this understanding, Nhat Hanh draws strong parallels between the lives of Jesus Christ and the historical Buddha, and explains that, in one respect, these men are still alive today.
Both the historical Buddha and Jesus were men who recognized the suffering inherent in existence, and searched for ways to alleviate it. This search led to the awakening of both men, as Jesus accepted the Holy Spirit and Buddha realized enlightenment (Nhat Hanh 37). Out of compassion, gained from their awakenings, both the historical Buddha and Jesus Christ taught others, and lived lives as pure examples of compassion.
Although both of these men have been physically dead for thousands of years, in some respects they live on with us today. In their lives, these men represented a purity of the traits of love and compassion (Nhat Hanh 57). When we practice love and compassion in our everyday lives, then, we are able to experience the living Buddha and living Christ. As Jesus said: “the Kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you” (Nhat Hanh xxiii). Much like the Zen Buddhist understanding of enlightenment, when we practice love and compassion, we experience the Kingdom of Heaven in this life, and are thus liberated from suffering. We need only to aspire to how these men lived to touch the spirits of the living Buddha and the living Christ.

Part II
The question has been raised as to whether or not a society composed entirely of practicing Zen Buddhists would be one in which we would wish to live. Dwelling on this question seems to be a misunderstanding of Zen Buddhist concepts. With a full understanding of Zen Buddhist concepts, it seems that a society in which all of the members were practicing Zen Buddhism would be one that was full of peace and understanding. It would undoubtedly appear as a society very different form our own, yet it may be a necessary realization to prevent the self-destruction of the human race.
A common misconception regarding Zen Buddhism is that its practitioners simply sit in meditation all day attempting to empty their minds. This, however, is not entirely true. Zen teaches us to live in reality, with full awareness of each moment (Suzuki 89). While it is true that Zazen can be used to calm the waves of the mind, this practice should carry over to our everyday tasks as well. This means that to practice everything with full awareness is to cultivate a deep understanding of the big mind. Going to work, then, becomes an exercise in non-dualistic thought, and necessarily brings increased efficiency as every task is undertaken mindfully.
The emptying of conceptualization from the mind also brings great compassion and understanding of all things. Tich Nhat Hanh is a beautiful example of this. Zen Buddhist practices have allowed him to cast aside conceptions he had of the Christian Church; opening the doors for communication and peace. If society as a whole were able to do this, we can easily imagine a world devoid of war and intolerance, as dogmatic attachments and conceptualizations would no longer inhibit our minds from the realization of emptiness.
A society of practicing Zen Buddhists would undoubtedly be very different from our own. No longer would people devote their lives to the development and production of war machines. We would no longer have people scrambling on the floors of stock exchanges, attempting to find happiness in a few extra dollars. Things would still “get done,” however; they would be done with mindfulness. Perhaps this society would not be a materialistically rich one, but it would provide a backbone of deep spiritual acceptance; an acceptance that may prove necessary if we wish to eradicate the wars and wide-spread poverty seen today, which may well lead to tragedy for all of mankind.