All posts by brian@brianschell.com

Rewards and Punishment

This one is a little different, as the question is longer than the answer, but I thought it would be good to print the whole thing, as there is quite a lot of good information:

Question:

It came up in a conversation that the majority of religions are based on a ‘reward’ system. By this, I mean if we perform good will towards man, we will be granted eternal happiness. For those that falter throughout life, continuously acting upon transgressions, they are sent back on the continuous wheel of life known as rebirth or sent to the flames of Hell.

Muslims follow the Koran, which provides vivid descriptions of both Heaven and Hell. Heaven is viewed upon as “Worldly Delights”. Whereas torments of Hell are explained in lurid detail. On Judgment Day, Allah will rise and determine ones destiny. Also being described as, “passing over Hell on a narrow bridge in order to enter ‘Paradise’, or Heaven. Those who fall, weighted by their bad deeds, will remain in Hell forever.”

Hinduism states that in order to be freed from the endless rounds of birth, death, and rebirth, one must follow a life completely devoted to the Brahman. Their afterlives continue in many forms, and in many different worlds depending on how one lived his/her life on earth. Good for good, bad for bad, etc. In fact, neither life nor after-life are permanent unless the soul is liberated. Liberation is defined as “freedom from the individual soul from the cycle of births and deaths, from the sense of duality and separation, and union with Brahman, the supreme soul.”

In the Jewish religion, they await the coming of the Messiah, where he will hand out the eternal judgment and reward to all. One large belief in Judaism is that their entire Jewish race and the whole of creation will be judged, as opposed to individual men. Again, it comes down to good for the good, bad for the bad, etc.

Christianity is a strong representation of this view. Those that follow God, abiding by his will, will be rewarded upon death with eternal happiness, and into the gates of Heaven. Those that turn their face from God, performing a life of everlasting sin, will be doomed to the gates of Hell. “He who overcomes shall inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son. But for the cowardly and unbelieving…their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8.

And finally, with Buddhism, the doctrine is summed up in the Four Noble Truths: Life is suffering; The origin of suffering is attachment; The cessation of suffering is attainable; The path to the cessation of suffering, The way down that path is known as the Noble Eightfold Path. As well as the FNT, we have to factor in Karma. In Buddhism, from what I’ve learned, it is basically the result of our own past actions and our own present doings. In other words, we are responsible for our own happiness and misery, “the architects of our own fate.”

And finally my question: Why is it that Religions have to be so black and white regarding eternal happiness. Shouldn’t Religion and Spirituality be celebrated as Love? If God is Love, or the God of your understanding, then why would such a world be created in which suffering and pain is inevitable. Thus creating opportunities and “excuses” for sin. Creating anger and hatred, revenge and spite, good and evil. Shouldn’t everyone be granted eternal happiness? Not forced into the cycle of rebirth, in the sense of “try try again? Shouldn’t all men and woman be accepted for who they are, and not judged by their actions? Which, by the way, are all a result of ones family life, and how their father treated their mother, grandfather to grandmother, so on and so forth. Our minds exploited by the information and beliefs of our elders. We are all products of societies influence, generation after generation. And are a direct result of our environment. Love should be rewarded with love, as should pain, suffering, anger, hatred and the like.

What is your take on all of this, from a Buddhist’s standpoint?

Answer:

I’m going to turn off “Buddhist-teacher mode” for this one and put on my old Comparative Religions hat for this one to look at it from the outside. This answer has a lot to it, so if I offend anyone, I apologize in advance. Take issue with it in the comment section if you want, better yet, add your ideas!

Whether or not there is a God behind any of it, all religions seek to explain the world around us and also answer the big questions, such as what happens when we die? How they answer these questions lies partially in the cultures and regions from which they came. Those in the East involve reincarnation, while those in the West involve some higher power that sits in judgment.

The last line of your own question, “Love should be rewarded with love, as should pain, suffering, anger, hatred and the like,” explains the rest. Humans have an innate need for fairness and justice. If I spend my life helping others, being generous and compassionate, etc. and my neighbor is a greedy, cheating, liar, then what’s fair about that? The afterlife, in most religions, is there to balance the scales. That nasty old neighbor will get what’s coming to him later when I enjoy my rewards! Pain should be rewarded with pain, hatred with hatred, and so forth; you reap what you sow; karma; it’s all a form of eternal justice to make up for the inequities of this life.

The source of the idea that “God is love,” is 1 John 4:8, yet beyond that one line, there isn’t much evidence of that. The line has been blown way out of proportion in my opinion. According to everything else in the Bible, God is a person or being with desires, plans, and wishes of his own; he’s not a generic entity such as Love. You asked, “Should religions and spirituality be interpreted as love?” Why? Religions are there to explain the world, and if the people in a certain area don’t see love as the highest ideal, then that’s not going to be reflected in their religion.

Much of your question is also based around an old theological trap called “The Problem of Evil.” You may have heard it before, but here it is. It’s from Christian theology, but it applies to Islam and most other god-centric religions:

1. God is all-knowing and all-powerful.
2. God is perfectly good, wanting only the best for us.
3. There is evil and suffering in the world.

Do each of those statements look true to you? They should.But taken as a whole they contradict each other. If God is good and wants the best for us, then how can Evil exist? Either God cannot cannot defeat evil or he won’t for some reason. If he cannot, then #1 is wrong. If he will not, then #2 is wrong.

Buddhism, as in many other things, is a bit different than all this. Whether or not you believe in the more religious flavors of Buddhism, they all place an emphasis on this world. You are supposed to do your best to follow Buddha’s Path now, not after death. By doing so, we build a better world right here. This is one reason Buddhism is so vague on Nirvana or “Heaven,” no one knows what it really is, and we’re not that attached to getting there (if you think of it as a place at all). It’s not the goal that really matters, it’s the life and the practice that matter.

Right Now.

Buddhists vs. Jehovah’s Witnesses: The Jihad

watchtowerQuestion:

My question pertains to how a Buddhist should deal with religious solicitation, specifically Jehovah’s Witnesses. They’ve yet to stop at my house, but other people I know have already had them come to the door and I’m trying to decide the best approach to what I feel is an awkward situation. I’d hate to be blatantly rude to them, they mean well in their own way, but I just don’t agree with the idea of ‚Äúbothering‚Äù people at home to try and peddle your religion. I feel like I should be receptive to anyone who means well, and in a perfect world I’d like to be hospitable and invite these people in to sit down- I recognize they must face a lot of very negative people during their day and my heart would want to be sympathetic and understanding, but this isn’t a perfect world, and I was brought up that you do not talk to strangers, much less invite them in your house. Is it better to be straight forward and say ‚Äúno thanks I’m content with what I’m currently doing‚Äù and risk seeming rude, or should I let them make their speech? I feel like the latter may be misleading since I really have no interest in converting, so is that lying? So‚ĶWWBD? What would Buddha do if someone knocked at his door? any thoughts you or any other reader/listening might have would be much appreciated.

Answer:

This annoys me. I know, as a Buddhist, I shouldn’t get annoyed. Let’s call it a pet peeve then.

I have to admit, in my younger days, I’d always quickly explain that, “I can’t talk right now, I’m sacrificing a goat in the basement,” and hastily close the door. Was it rude? Yes. Was it ethically wrong? I’m not so sure. Let’s look at all the factors here:

You want to invite them into your house and be hospitable to them. That’s nice. I’m sure they do meet many negative people during their travels; that’s because they are bothering people with ideas with which they disagree. If you could have a legitimate conversation with them, and explain your beliefs to them, that might be a valuable opportunity for both “sides” to learn, but it just doesn’t work that way; like any good sales professional, they know how to get around your objections.

You say they mean well; that they have your best interests at heart. That’s probably true in most cases, but here’s something that many people don’t know. Did you realize that some of these groups actually have quotas on the number of hours per month that they MUST knock on doors and proselytize? It’s a requirement of membership in the church. So don’t necessarily just assume they are doing it out of their love for you or desire to save your souls; they simply have no choice.

jehovasI think everyone should be made aware of what the major religions teach; I’d love to see Comparative Religions as a required course in high school (Yes, in all high schools). I know roughly what the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and other groups believe, and I don’t believe in it. I am aware of it, and I have made an informed decision to disagree. There is nothing in Buddhism that says you cannot listen to other groups preach their religions; they all have some good ideas. So if you are curious about them and actually want to sit through a lesson or lecture, then there’s no harm in listening. But if you are happy where you are, and already know that you aren’t going to convert, then by inviting them in, you are wasting their time as much as they are yours.

Buddhism is the FOURTH largest religion in the world, after Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism. Why is it only number four? Generally speaking, it’s because Buddhists are more passive and do not actively proselytize and evangelize looking for converts. There are very few “Buddhist Missionaries” out there. It’s better that people make the decision to follow the Buddha’s Path on their own. Forcing them to do it, or annoying them into giving in to it, isn’t the Buddhist way.

So no, I think closing the door on them and getting them to move on in the fastest possible way is going to be less frustrating for you as well as less time-wasting for them, reducing suffering for all. Choose your battles wisely, this is one you won’t be able to win.

Am I being overly harsh here? I don’t know, maybe. As I said earlier, it’s one of my big pet peeves. And, as always, feel free to comment in the section below if you agree, disagree, or want to share your own experience on this.

Living Death

Question:

You recently wrote about your last will & testament, and that made sense to me. One of the people commenting on that mentioned getting a living will. What are your thoughts on those?

Answer:

Interesting point! A “living will” for anyone who might not know is a document that explains your wishes concerning life support equipment and whether or not you want to be kept alive artificially in case of some very severe medical condition. As that same commenter mentioned, the most famous situation involving this was the one involving Terry Schiavo a few years ago; she was in a coma and couldn’t say what she wanted, so there was a hugely publicized court battle between her parents and husband over what to do with her.

My own wishes are pretty straightforward, and probably the same as most people. In case of an emergency, I want the doctors to do anything and everything within reason they can to fix me, but if the problem is irreparable to the point where I need a machine to live one minute to the next, that they should stop and let me go. Yes, I have a living will that says this, so obviously, I am “pro” living will.It’s a good idea for everyone to have a living will whether or not you want to live on a machine or be allowed to die; it’s the only way to make your wishes known legally. A regular “Last Will” is only good after you have died; it doesn’t do anything if you are in a coma.

But you probably knew all this already. The real question here is what is “The Buddhist Perspective?” It’s more complicated than it appears at first. There are two conflicting ideas at work:

1. Life is “sacred.” We cannot take a life, either by murder or suicide. Depending on your perspective, not using a machine when the option is there could count as either. Pulling someone off a machine who is already on one really does look and feel like murder.

2. On the other hand, keeping someone alive in that condition only prolongs suffering, both for the victim and their families. Staying alive on the machine is another form of “irrational grasping” which causes suffering.

These are the same two ideas that make the issue controversial for Christians, Muslims, Atheists, and everyone else; they aren’t just Buddhist questions. Buddhists, however, would probably place more emphasis on the second point, concerning suffering, than the others.

If you hadn’t guessed already, there really is no simple right and wrong with this; we each have to decide for ourselves. Once again, I’ll go back to the importance of getting a Living Will.

Learning to Meditate with Sakyong Mipham

We haven’t talked much about meditation lately, so it’s time for a refresher. Today, let’s watch a video as Sakyong Jamgon Mipham Rinpoche explains his thoughts on meditation. I don’t think The Sakyong Jamgon Mipham Rinpoche has been mentioned on this site before, but he’s one of the up-and-coming big names in Buddhism. He is the son of Chogyam Tungpa Rinpoche, and holds many various titles.

Here are two short videos. One is about the Sakyong himself, and the other is a video of him discussing meditation with a group of students.

The Sakyong Jamgon Mipham Rinpoche – Video Biography

Learning to meditate from Sakyong Mipham

If the videos do not appear above, you can find them at Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2g3Kl0oC2Xs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsMLM2zVRbM

Koan: Mokusen’s Hand

Mokusen’s Hand

Mokusen Hiki was living in a temple in the province of Tamba. One of his adherents complained of the stinginess of his wife.

Mokusen visited the adherent’s wife and showed her his clenched fist before her face.

“What do you mean by that?” asked the surprised woman.

“Suppose my fist were always like that. What would you call it?” he asked.

“Deformed,” replied the woman.

Then he opened his hand flat in her face and asked: “Suppose it were always like that. What then?”

“Another kind of deformity,” said the wife.

“If you understand that much,” finished Mokusen, “you are a good wife.” Then he left.

After his visit, this wife helped her husband to distribute as well as to save.

Resentment, Fear, and Anger

Question:

Hello, I am a big fan of the podcast. I am a Soto Zen practitioner and have been doing zazen very regularly. Recently an overwhelming feeling of resentment for my mother has popped into my psyche. Although we have a great relationship and talk almost everyday it seems that through zazen practice this has come to the surface. I have been previously unaware of this. My resentment stems from the fact that when I was 17 she moved to another state, leaving me and my younger brother with my father. Now that I am older and am supporting a family I sometimes feel that I could really use her help. The funny thing is that I know that my feelings are selfish and that my mom is happier where she is. I am trying to work with these feelings and was wondering if you could give me some feedback/advice from a Buddhist perspective.

Answer:

I thinks it’s perfectly normal for a child to feel “abandoned” in those circumstance. The question is whether or not it’s healthy to continue feeling this way as an adult. Obviously, it’s not healthy. Your mother had her reasons for leaving at the time, and whether or not they were reasonable to anyone else, they made sense to her in that situation. We all make decisions, and sometimes those decisions are wrong or hurt others. I don’t know whether or not she was right or wrong to leave, or if that was an overall good thing or bad thing, but it is clear that in this case, her decision hurt you at the time, and the resentment from that is still with you.

So what to do? Resentment is a form of anger, and we talked about that only a few weeks ago. This resentment has continued to grow in you subconsciously over the years until you became aware of its presence. You are grasping at anger or holding on to fear from years ago, and this is affecting your relationship with her today. Having these harmful old feelings is causing you suffering now, and if she senses it, it’s causing suffering for her as well.

I am not a psychologist, but it seems to me that you need to talk this out with her. You need to fully understand her reasons for doing what she did, and when you understand it, you need to forgive it and accept it. This may be a very tough thing to do, but you need to let it go, anything else is going to continue to build up and cause problems later on.

Stringing Us Along

white_string_wristQuestion:

Can you please tell me the name and origin of the Buddhist blessing where a monk ties a blessed string around a persons wrist? Thank you from a new listener.

Answer:

This is very common in Thailand, and is called sai sin. As you already said, it is a form of blessing or “good luck charm.” It’s often done as a thank-you for those who donate or otherwise help the monks in Thailand, although a monk may choose to do this for anyone at any time.

There seems to be some debate on just how long you leave the string on. Some will say that it’s just a part of the ritual, and you can throw it away after the ceremony, while others will tell you to keep the string on until it comes off by itself- as much as several years later.

buddhistmonkIf you do a quick Google of sai sin, you will find several websites that all give differing descriptions of the meaning and importance of the string. Some say it wards off bad spirits, while others call it superstition. But essentially, this is one of those “cute” regional traditional practices that impresses visitors, but has little to do with basic Buddhist teachings.

And yet, it’s for good luck and safe travels, and we all could use a little more of that, so why be in a rush to cut the string off? Enjoy your Buddhist blessing for months to come.

I, Being of Sound Mind and Body…

Question:

Brian, I’ve been practicing for eight years. I will soon be going to an attorney to do my Will. I plan to be cremated. To be buried as a Buddhist, what other arrangements should I include in my Will?

Answer:

We discussed the preference of most Buddhists to be cremated here:

http://www.dailybuddhism.com/archives/1164

There were many great comments and additional thoughts on that posts , so be sure to look at the comments.

Now on to your question. First, I am not a lawyer; my own will doesn’t contain anything special about my funeral. I’ll be dead, I don’t really care.

As far as special arrangements put into your will are concerned, that would be up to you. Like many other Buddhist practices and rituals, funerals are heavily influenced by the local culture. If you live and die in Japan or China, you would probably want a Japanese or Chinese-style funeral. Similarly, if you are an American or European, you would probably want a funeral that is “normal” for your homeland. If, however, you want a Japanese-style funeral in America (or any other non-standard combination), you should probably make arrangements for that beforehand.

In the other article I mentioned above, some of the commenters mentioned that they wanted a simple, environmentally-friendly funeral. These are things to discuss with your attorney, but if you really want it done right, you may want to contact a funeral director and talk about pre-planning. There’s always a chance that the executor of your estate won’t know anything about Buddhism. You probably don’t want a Zen ceremony if you are Tibetan, so it’s best to be very clear.

I dont really have much in the way of advice about this, so I’ll ask for reader input here. Have you done anything in YOUR will or made any special after-death arrangements that relate to your Buddhism? Please explain in the comment section.

Koan: Everything Is Best

When Banzan was walking through a market he overheard a conversation between a butcher and his customer.

“Give me the best piece of meat you have,” said the customer.

“Everything in my shop is the best,” replied the butcher. “You cannot find here any piece of meat that is not the best.”

At these words Banzan became enlightened.

Guest Post: Transformational Practice, by Thomas Hochmann

thomas_hochmann

Today’s guest post is from Thomas Hochmann, a former English teacher and a student of Buddhism since 2002. Today, he will lead us through something called transformational practice. His blog can be found at http://www.hochmann.org and you can follow him on Twitter (@hochmann).

Transformational Practice, by Thomas Hochmann

When you think of religion, what comes to mind? Here in the USA, I believe most people would answer with words like church, God, prayer, belief, faith, etc. For myself, the words “faith” and “belief” were always synonomous with religion. It always seemed to me that religion was primarily an exercise of the heart and the mind, something private between oneself and the cosmos. Over time I have come to see that my understanding of religion (and spirituality in general) was only half of the equation. I owe perhaps the deepest gratitude to a Vietnamese monk named Thich Nhat Hanh, also known as Thay. Let me show you why with a quote from his book Living Buddha, Living Christ:

Our faith must be alive. It cannot be just a set of rigid beliefs and notions. Our faith must evolve every day and bring us joy, peace, freedom, and love. Faith implies practice, living our daily life in mindfulness. Some people think that prayer or meditation involves only our minds or our hearts. But we also have to pray with our bodies, with our actions in the world. And our actions must be modelled after those of the living Buddha or the living Christ. If we live as they did, we will have deep understanding and pure actions.
— Thich Nhat Hanh, Living Buddha, Living Christ
(emphasis added)

Thay is well-known for representing “engaged Buddhism” — Buddhism in action. He has written many wonderful books, but everything he has ever said or written is summarized in the quote above. For him, Buddhism and Christianity and every other religion are not effective unless they are put into practice, here and now, in the real world we live in. Religion cannot just be something you think about or even something you feel. It needs to become part of everything you do.

Thay talks extensively about the difference between devotional practice and transformational practice. In my early approaches to Buddhism, I paid attention only to the devotional side. Growing up in a scientifically-minded family and spending all my time studying, it was natural for me to focus on the brainy parts. Perhaps knowing people like me would see things that way, the Buddha was careful to emphasize both sides of the equation:

If you have confidence in the Dharma, if you practice the Dharma, I am always with you.
— The Buddha

“Have confidence in the Dharma” is what Thay calls devotional practice. This is having faith in the teachings and believing them with every fiber of your being. In your mind, you accept those truths. And in your heart, you believe them strongly.

“Practice the Dharma” is what Thay calls transformational practice. That means using the teachings and your faith as the fuel for concrete action in everyday life. You mindfully use your spiritual knowledge to promote goodness, healing, love, and positivity. In that way, the Buddha is “always with you.” Your actions stem from what the Buddha taught, and so bring him to life in you. As long as the Buddha’s teachings are confined to books, web sites, and the reasoning brain, the Buddha is dead. It is not until the Buddha comes out in our actions that he is alive.

As an example, take the Five Precepts in Buddhism — refrain from destroying life, from stealing, from speaking unskillfully (lying, manipulating, etc.), from misusing sexuality, and from taking intoxicants. These make up an excellent code of conduct. However, if you see them as merely somebody else’s rules being imposed on you, they will do little good. The first step is to look deeply into the Precepts, and know their truth deeply in your heart. If you know in your heart that it’s a bad thing to steal, this is devotional practice. You know that it’s wrong to steal literally (e.g. taking someone’s bicycle) as well as in subtle ways (wasting somebody’s time). Knowing this in a deep way will form the basis for actions in line with what you are devoted to — your actions will be such that you will avoid stealing bicycles and wasting people’s time, because you truly know the negative side. This is transformation: your actions express the truths that you know and the things you believe.

The power of any religion or spiritual tradition is not just to settle our hearts or to tantalize our minds. The real power is to shape our actions. Accepting the teachings of Buddha, or Jesus, or another great teacher is a good first step. But the real value of those teachings is when they become the foundation for every breath, every thought, every word, and every act. Transformational practice is an ongoing process that never ends. Being spiritual, being enlightened is not like graduating from college. You graduate from college, and you are now a “college graduate.” You don’t have to do anything more to be a college graduate — that label is a label of state, a label of accomplishment. It is forever true from that point on. But enlightenment and wisdom don’t work that way — you have to be enlightenment and wisdom.

We need to understand that Master Dogen’s statement “There is no enlightenment without morality and no morality without enlightenment” arises directly from his equation “Practice is enlightenment.”
– John Daido Loori, The Heart of Being