Hinduism Wrap-Up – Three Things Hinduism Can Teach You About

Your Self

In this wrap-up post, I describe a few of the major lessons I learned

that center around the idea that there is more to the self than a
personality and desires and aversions. There is a Self that is
connected to something infinitely greater and profound that, if we
can understand it, can help us get past the feeling that we don’t fit
in, the feeling that we would be better off if we had different jobs,
relationships, social status, etc.

Here’s what I’ve learned:

You are more than just your senses

If you pay attention, you’ll notice a consistence sequence of events

that occur when you are physically uncomfortable.

First, there is anxiety and anticipation. You know that the pain is
coming, and your brain is telling you to avoid it.
Next, you will feel the physical discomfort, which will then lead to
mental anguish. Your thoughts will mostly be variations of “OMG
WHY DID I EVER SIGN UP FOR THIS STUPID STUPID CLASS! THIS IS
THE LAST TIME I AM DOING THIS.”

Finally, when the physical discomfort ends, you will feel good about
participating in something so difficult. You will think “Ah, that
wasn’t so bad. In fact, I actually like it!”

This process is surprisingly consistent across a wide range of

difficult physical activities.

The thing is, once you realize that it is a pattern, you realize that
this pattern is separate from You. You, are not just a machine or
computer that processes physical stimuli in a predictable and
repeatable pattern. You are something more than that, as proven
by the fact that you can monitor your reactions. You notice that
pain goes away, but You stick around.

When the senses contact sense objects, a person experiences cold

or heat, pleasure or pain. These experiences are fleeting; they come
and go. Bear them patiently, Arjuna. Those who are unaffected by
these changes, who are the same in pleasure and pain, are truly
wise and fit for immortality. Assert your strength and realize this! –
The Gita

It’s important to understand that you are not your sensory

experiences because if you don’t, you will forever be a slave to
them.

You are more than your personality

The most popular personality test at the moment is the Myers-

Briggs Type Indicator. The test categorizes people into one of 16
different personality types based on self-reported assessments of
how they react and think in various situations.

For example, I am an INTJ. INTJs are “scientists” or “system-

builders” that like to develop complex solutions to interesting
problems. They love rationality and reason, and aren’t adept at
understanding relationship dynamics.

INTJ is fairly accurate for me, and it was mind blowing when I first
learned that I was an INTJ, as it described so many of my likes and
dislikes.

However, this knowledge hasn’t been as useful as I would have

liked. It can accurately predict how I will react in a typical situation,
but it doesn’t give me the deeper understanding of who I am and
what my place in the world should be. In fact, the Myers-Briggs
personality test separates you from the world. It says that you
should or should not do something based on your personality, that
you should probably only associate with people with compatible
personalities, and avoid or take on various types of works based on
your preferences.

Hinduism acknowledges different temperaments and personalities

in the form of “tendencies” called gunas.

According to Sankhya, everything in the world of mind and matter

is an expression of all three gunas, with one guna always
predominant. This becomes particularly interesting in describing
personality as a field of forces. The rajasic person is full of energy;
the tamasic person is sluggish, indifferent, insensitive; the sattvic
person, calm, resourceful, compassionate, and selfless. Yet all three
are always present at some level of awareness, and their
proportions change: their interplay is the dynamics of personality. –
Eknath Easwaran (commentary on The Gita)

However, Hindu philosophy teaches that the gunas are not the true
Self. Indeed, the only way to find the true Self is to transcend the
gunas.
All actions are performed by the gunas of prakriti. Deluded by
identification with the ego, a person thinks, “I am the doer.” But
the illumined man or woman understands the domain of the gunas
and is not attached. Such people know that the gunas interact with
each other; they do not claim to be the doer. – The Gita

And why should we care to transcend the gunas and find the true
Self?

Whoever realizes the true nature of Purusha, prakriti, and the

gunas, whatever path he or she may follow, is not born separate
again…

In contrast to the MBTI, which separates and categorizes people,

Hinduism teaches that the ultimate goal should be to understand
the Self is not separate from others, that indeed, everyone is
connected to an ultimate, permanent reality called Brahman.

This sounds completely abstract and useless for those of us who are
less concerned with philosophy and more concerned with the
practicalities of day-to-day living.

But how many of our problems are due to us seeing ourselves as

separate from others? At work, we may attribute our misery to our
boss or irritating co-workers. In our personal lives, we find
ourselves agitated by conflict with our friends, significant others, or
family? If we believe our personality is the true self, we can never
feel a true connection with others, and we can never understand
our place in the world.

Man so defined [as a separate ego] and so experienced is, of

course, incapable of pleasure and contentment, let alone creative
power. Hoaxed into the illusion of being an independent,
responsible source of actions, he cannot understand why what he
does never comes up to what he should do, for a society which has
defined him as separate cannot persuade him to behave as if he
really belonged. Thus he feels chronic guilt and makes the most
heroic efforts to placate his conscience. – Allan Watts

This abstract philosophical perspective on the Self then, is not some

trivial concern only to be pursued by hippies and people without
practical obligations, it is our top priority!

One of the paths to transcending the self (with a small s) to find the
true Self (with a big S) it to perform Bhakti yoga, or devotional
service to God.

Yet hazardous and slow is the path to the Unrevealed, difficult for
physical creatures to tread. But they for whom I am the supreme
goal, who do all work renouncing self for me and meditate on me
with single-hearted devotion, these I will swiftly rescue from the
fragment’s cycle of birth and death, for their consciousness has
entered into me.

Still your mind in me, still your intellect in me, and without doubt
you will be united with me forever. – The Gita

During my Hinduism month, I spent a few minutes every morning

performing a puja, or prayer, to Ganesh that consisted of a
ritualistic offering of food, water, fragrance (incense), etc. At the
end of each Puja, I would spend a few moments petitioning Ganesh
for the strength to embody a particular virtue. On some days, it was
endurance or strength (for particularly long or stressful workdays),
and on others it was compassion or love.

Of course, I don’t think that an elephant-headed god exists and

would help me, but I found simply by focusing on the imagery and
the request, I would try to be more virtuous throughout the day. I
would try to transcend the baser self, and act as if Ganesh were
truly helping me.

I never succeeded in completely transcending the gunas, however, I

did occasionally get the feeling that the world is some sort of game,
and that while I was connected to it, I should not take it seriously.
When I felt it was a game, it was easier to be more energetic or
become more compassionate to others. Work becomes less
burdensome because it is temporal, and ultimately, insignificant.
Irritating people become less irritating because you understand
that they too, are a part of this game, and that you are connected
to them, and that the game itself doesn’t matter.

The surprising thing about this feeling is that it didn’t feel like
something profound or serious, it felt more like…giddiness, like I
just heard some cosmic joke.

This feeling can’t be attained simply by understanding your

personality, rather, it requires that you tap into something deeper,
something that leaves you connected, and yet, detached from the
material world in which you live in.

You exist only in relation to others

It is generally accepted in Western culture and religions that every

individual is a unique, sovereign self. Every person has a personal
relationship with God and every person has free will and can
determine the course their lives will take.

As such, it’s no wonder we view ourselves as unique and different

from others. I am Dale and he is Tom and she is Julie and we all lead
separate and different lives.
This is true enough, in the sense that this is how we generally
experience the world, but the effect is we think we can exist
independently of each other, which is false.

For example, when you meet someone new and they ask you what
you do for a living. You will say that you are a consultant, a
marketing specialist, a program manager, etc. You have now
separated yourself from everyone who is a not a consultant, a
marketing specialist, or a program manager.

And, if you are like all humans and are vulnerable to pride or envy,
you will naturally compare yourself to others, again, as if you were
a separate entity. Yes, you are a consultant, and you feel superior
to someone who is a secretary, or inferior to someone who is a
successful entrepreneur. You place yourself in some sort of
hierarchy that affects the way you live your life and causes you
endless anxiety (at least, when you are not succeeding in moving up
the hierarchy).

But all this anxiety is due to the false sense that you are somehow
separate from everything and everyone else. The truth is, you can’t
exist without others. Hierarchy and status depend on the existence
of others. It makes no sense to think that your life would all of a
sudden be better if you moved up the hierarchy or your annoyingly
successful friend from high school suffered some misfortune.

Does it really take any considerable time or effort just to

understand that you depend on enemies and outsiders to define
yourself, and that without some opposition you would be lost? To
see this is to acquire, almost instantly, the virtue of humor, and
humor and self-righteousness are mutually exclusive. – Allan Watts

During my Hinduism month I was scolded by our HR rep for a stupid

reason. I stewed over the incident for a while and thought about
how overly sensitive most HR reps are and how they should really
take dumb corporate policies less seriously.

The whole thing was so irritating I thought about quitting

immediately and letting everyone know was that it was because of
this particular HR rep.

The reason it was so irritating is because I viewed the HR rep as

someone really separate from myself, but in truth, I need her to
fuel my own identity. I have a natural disdain for most corporate
policies and rules, and in truth, I like to think of myself as somewhat
of a rebel, at least in spirit. Without the HR rep, I lose this part of
my identity.
Once I acknowledged this fact, it was easier to view our relationship
as a game, one that shouldn’t be taken seriously.

“It comes, then, to this: that to be ‘viable,’ livable, or merely

practical, life must be lived as a game – and the ‘must’ here
expresses a condition, not a commandment. It must be lived in the
spirit of play rather than work, and the conflicts which it involves
must be carried on in the realization that no species, or party to a
game, can survive without its natural antagonists, its beloved
enemies, its indispensable opponents. For to ‘love your enemies’ is
to love them as enemies; it is not necessarily a clever device for
winning them over to your own side. “ – Allan Watts

In the Gita, Arjuna is deeply troubled by the fact that he will have to
kill his family. Krishna counsels him with the knowledge that there
is no such thing as “slayer” or “slain”

One believes he is the slayer, another believes he is the slain. Both

are ignorant; there is neither slayer nor slain. You were never born;
you will never die. You have never changed; you can never change.
Unborn, eternal, immutable, immemorial, you do not die when the
body dies. Realizing that which is indestructible, eternal, unborn,
and unchanging, how can you slay or cause another to slay?
What Krishna is saying is that material world is not the ultimate
reality, that the roles we play while we are “alive” are simply that,
roles. Thus we should play the roles we are assigned, and not
become overly attached to them.

I’ll do my best to resist the HR rep whenever possible, and she will
do whatever she can to make sure I don’t offend her sensibilities of
appropriate corporate behavior, but in the end, the results won’t
mater. I can’t exist without her, and she without me.

Consider these words from the Brihadarankyaka Upanishad:

“When there is separateness, one sees another, smells another,

tastes another, speaks to another, hears another, touches another,
thinks of another, knows another.

But when there is unity, one without a second, that is the world of
Brahman. This is the supreme goal of life, the supreme treasure,
the supreme joy. Those who do not seek this supreme goal live on
but a fraction of this joy.”

Separateness can only take us so far, it is only when we can

recognize that we don’t exist apart from others can we ever find
joy.
Final thoughts

My month of Hinduism leads me to believe that much of our

anxiety is caused by a false sense of identity. The modern concept
of identity is superficial, and leads us to the false belief the world is
separate from us and that is something to manipulated, to be bent
to our will.

And when we take our (false) identity too seriously, we become

miserable. We believe that other people are the cause of our
misery, or that it’s our particular set of circumstances that lead us
to wholly unsatisfactory lives.

Thus, I think we should stop defining ourselves by things like

personality tests or our jobs or hobbies or interests or disinterests.

Sure, understanding those aspects of ourselves can be useful, but if

we place too much importance on them, we risk not fully
appreciating our lives the way they are right now.

Only when we can transcend separateness, can we ever find some

sort of peace. Only when we transcend it, and realize “I” doesn’t
exist without others, can we enjoy our lives.
Of course, this is not something that can be achieved in the course
of a one-month experiment. It requires a complete shift in the way
we view ourselves and others. However, here’s what I found
helpful:

Bikram Yoga – This was useful as it revealed how much our mental
states are determined by our physical states. Bikram Yoga is an
excellent environment to practice observing your minds reactions.
You may be able to substitute another physically difficult activity to
achieve the same effect, but I find that running or weight lifting are
overly goal focused, which leads to distraction. When you’re trying
to run X miles or do Y number of reps, you are not focusing on your
mind. In Bikram Yoga, you are trying to simply move into a position
and stay still, which is less distracting.

Morning prayers – I purchased a small Ganesh figurine and some

incense and set up a shrine to which I did a ritual morning puja, or
prayer. The practice was a pleasant start to my day that often lead
me to contemplate deeper virtues. The incense was particularly
conducive to putting you into the correct contemplative mindset. I
now light incense frequently. There is a set procedure for prayer,
which I learned from Hinduism for Dummies, but I skipped a few of
the steps out of convenience. Still a worthwhile exercise.

Reading – Reading Hindu philosophical texts had the most impact

during this month. For a good overview of Hinduism, I picked up
Hinduism for Dummies, I read selections from the Upanishads and
the entire Bhagavad Gita. I also read Alan Watt’s book The Book on
the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are which is not Hindu per se
but draws on a lot of Eastern and Hindu ideas. I would start with
Hinduism for Dummies, followed by the Gita, and then Allan Watt’s
book. You can put off the Upanishads as many of the concepts are
covered in the Gita, which I think is a much easier read overall.

Hinduism contains profound and advanced ideas about what the

“true self” really is. It acknowledges the role of temperament,
which seem to be the focus of modern personality assessments, but
forces you to assess yourself on a deeper level. It teaches that you
are more than your senses or your ego or your temperament. It
teaches that you are connected to others in a way that transcends
the material world, the world of the senses. And most importantly,
it teaches you how to use this knowledge to live a good and
meaningful life, a life filled with respect for the sanctity of others
and detachment from your material circumstances.

Once we understand the nature of the true Self, we can feel

comfortable with who we are and what we do and where we’re
going.

“The Self is hidden in the lotus of the heart. Those who see
themselves in all creatures go day by day into the world of Brahman
hidden in the heart. Established in peace, they rise above body
consciousness to the supreme light of the Self. Immortal, free from
fear, this Self is Brahman, called the True. Beyond the mortal and
the immortal, he binds both worlds together. Those who know this
live day after day in heaven in this very life.” – The Upanishads
Self-analysis is indispensable for attaining success in one’s
professional and spiritual lives, as it touches upon virtually all
spiritual practices. Swami Sivananda laid great emphasis on this
aspect and prescribed it as an important chapter in his ‘20 Spiritual
Instructions’. He advocated recording one’s daily sadhana in a
spiritual diary and reviewing one’s progress periodically.

Self-inspection, also known as ‘first party audit’, is an important

part of any modern management system. Here, selected personnel
of different departments, barring one department being audited,
serve as auditors. Any nonconformance is recorded; root cause
investigation is made and appropriate corrective and preventive
actions (CAPA) are initiated.

In spiritual parlance, Self-inspection, or introspection, involves only

one individual. The higher (purer) mind serves as auditor and lower
(impure) mind serves as auditee. Introspection should be
performed every day before retiring to bed and involves very
honest reflection on thoughts harboured and actions performed in
a day.
The exercise has three objectives. First, to find out defects,
investigate the root cause and try to correct/ prevent by suitable
methods. If one method fails, another or combined methods should
be employed. This is why Bhagwad Gita and sages prescribe yoga of
synthesis combining action, devotion, will and intellect, which
means, applying all dimensions of human personality to bring about
desired results.

Negative qualities will be spotted first. But the objective should be

to control the negative and unspiritual instincts, residing in the
subconscious mind, as deep-seated impressions emerging
constantly, depending on external stimuli, and one’s karma, that is
referred to as fate.

These subtle impressions should not be underestimated. They lurk

like thieves and attack when one is vulnerable or when there is
extreme provocation. The deep rooted impressions of lust, anger
and greed manifest in a subtle way and one tends to rejoice in
them mentally even in absence of any physical objects. The senses
weaken on ageing but the mind tends to remain young and
continues to yearn.

Containing these subtle impressions demands great patience,

perseverance, intellect and courage. This is a long drawn-out
process. Restraining senses and mind is the first objective.
The second objective is to cultivate virtues independently or as
antidote to negativities referred to above. Make resolves or
pledges on a daily basis every morning: ‘I will speak the truth; not
bear ill will for anyone; I will serve the sick, read spiritual books, do
sadhana and be fearless.’ This is analogous to measuring key
Quality Performance Indicators (QPI) in an organisation and
reporting in a management review meeting.

Practice of Karma Yoga, Bhakti Yoga and Raja Yoga helps in freeing
the inner Self of all impurities and distraction. One perceives
oneself as mere instrument in the Lord’s hands and offers oneself
wholly in the service of the Lord and his creation. The stage is set
for dawn of Self-knowledge and the culmination with Jnana Yoga,
like launching satellites into space.

The third objective is to transcend the purified mind and to take it

deeper until it reaches the very core of one’s soul. One perceives
oneself as silent witness of all movements within and without and
finally, as one, homogenous, non-dual Self – dwelling eternally and
pervading everywhere. This is the divine destination, intimate,
immediate experience of the Self as peace and bliss.
INVOLUTION; INNER TRANSFORMATION AND SELF-AWARENESS

There’s a mess inside you: You clean the outside. ~ The

Dhammapada

In life we’re confronted with many puzzling, cryptic and complex

questions.

Who am I? Why do I keep making the same mistakes? Why do I

continue suffering so much pain? What am I supposed to be doing
with my life? Where am I going?

In our slow and tumultuous journeys we come across hundreds of

possible answers, and thousands more dogmas, creeds and
doctrines that claim to cure our inner sicknesses and give meaning
and direction to our confusing lives.

At the end of the day, many of us forget a very simple truth:

Change – deep, long-lasting change – comes from within.

Yet many of us outsource and externalize our efforts in an attempt

to change the way we think, behave and interact with ourselves,
other people and the world.
This is where Involution comes in.

Involution, the antithesis of evolution, does not align itself with any
particular dogma, creed or religious doctrine, but is rather an
experiential practice of life.

The practice of Involution is an all-encompassing philosophy; one

that can be observed in the actions of thousands. From the Sadhus,
yogis and monks of the East, to the New Ageists, fitness nuts and
self-help enthusiasts of the West, Involution can be observed
anywhere in which a person or group of people seek inner strength,
understanding, metamorphosis and liberation.

SELF-AWARENESS AS A TOOL OF INNER EVOLUTION

Without awareness, we are not truly alive. ~ J. Bugental

Are you a self-aware person? Think about this question for a

minute.

How conscious are you really of the many thoughts, feelings and
behaviors you exhibit during the day? If you have a tendency to:
Be unaware that your words or actions have hurt or offended
another person,

Be self-destructive and continue to make the same mistake over

and over again,

Have trouble identifying what exactly you are feeling or thinking

(poor emotional intelligence),

Have a habit of behaving without thinking,

Have an unclear perception of who you (think) you are,

… chances are that you are low on the self-awareness spectrum.

DEVELOPING SELF-AWARENESS

The most fundamental aggression to ourselves, the most

fundamental harm we can do to ourselves, is to remain ignorant by
not having the courage and the respect to look at ourselves
honestly and gently. ~ Pema Chödrön

Self-awareness is the essential building block of inner

transformation because without being aware of who we are and
what we do, there is little chance that we can grow to understand
why we feel, think and behave the way we do, and thus grow closer
to living a life of peace.
To become a self-aware person requires patience and practice.
There are no quick fixes. There are no immediate solutions. In
order to follow the path of Involution, we must be persistent in our
efforts. These efforts could include:

Paying Attention.

Consider for instance: what you are saying, how this is influencing
the people around you, what you are feeling, how this is influencing
your behavior, what you are thinking, when your thoughts
occurred, what you like and dislike, what makes you happy and
what makes you sad. Paying attention to what goes on inside of
you is an excellent way of developing self-awareness.

Mindfulness Meditation.

There’s no need to practice this for even 10 minutes a day. 5

minutes at first will suffice, but in order to make that 5 minutes
count, you must make a habit of this practice. Start ideally first
thing in the morning, in a quiet, comfortable place. Mindfulness
meditation is the practice of becoming aware of your inner chatter,
in the present moment and letting it pass. Benefits include
increased inner calm and stability, and decreased emotional
reactivity.

THE BOAT ON TOP OF THE OCEAN

Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life
and you will call it fate. ~ C. Jung

The non self-aware person can be compared to a little boat drifting

on the surface of the ocean. The stability of that boat is completely
reliant on the stability of the ocean beneath it. When the sea is
turbulent and chaotic, so too is the boat; cast here and there, to
and fro violently.

The same can be said of the non self-aware person; their peace and
happiness is entirely controlled by how calm and stable their inner
worlds are. In fact, the non self-aware person is basically a slave of
their thoughts and emotions, which is the main culprit for their
suffering.

The intensity of the person’s servitude is dependent on the

intensity of their inner turmoil. This is the principle of the Boat On
Top Of The Ocean.

FREEDOM FROM SLAVERY

Never become a slave to your own thinking and your own self.
Understand that you are continuously changing. But, in which way
you will change is your free will. ~ R. Papian
It may strike you as an odd thought to think that you enslave
yourself to yourself. But when we lack self-awareness, we
perpetuate the pain and suffering in our lives, both within and
without ourselves.

Involution can help address these problems. When we follow the

process of Involution, we realize that self-awareness is an essential
building block of inner transformation.

The First Noble Truth

After his experiences as a prince and as a wandering monk, the

Buddha had learnt that all people have one thing in common: if
they think about their own life, or look at the world around them,
they will see that life is full of suffering.

Suffering, he said, may be physical or mental. The Buddha's most

important teachings were focused on a way to end the suffering he
had experienced and had seen in other people. His discovery of the
solution began with the recognition that life is suffering. This is the
first of the Four Noble Truths.

Physical Suffering
Physical suffering takes many forms. All of us have seen at some
time an elderly person with aches and pains in their joints, maybe
finding it hard to move by themselves or worried about falling over
on their sore bones and delicate skin. As we get older all of us find
that life can become more difficult for all kinds of reasons; our eyes
may not see as well, our hears may not hear as well or our teeth
may not be as strong making it harder for us to eat. The pain of
disease, which strikes young and old alike, is a reality for us all from
time to time, and the pain of death brings much grief and suffering.
Even the moment of birth gives pain both to the mother and the
child that is born.

The First Noble Truth is that the suffering of birth, old age, sickness
and death is unavoidable. Some fortunate people may now be
enjoying relatively happy and carefree lives, but it is only a matter
of time before they, too, will experience suffering of some kind.
What is also true is that this suffering — whether it is a cold, an
injury or a sad event — must be borne alone. When you have a
cold, it is your cold and only you experience how it feels for you. In
another example, a man may be very concerned that his mother is
growing old. No matter how much he cares for her he cannot take
her place and suffer the pains of aging on her behalf. In the same
way, if a boy falls very ill, his mother cannot experience the pains of
his illness for him. The Buddha taught people to recognise that
suffering is part of life and that it cannot be avoided.
 The Story of Kisa Gautami

Mental Suffering

The Buddha also taught that suffering does not only come from the
body. There are also forms of mental suffering. People feel sad,
lonely or depressed. They suffer when they lose a loved one
through separation or death. They feel irritated or uncomfortable
when they are in the company of people they dislike or who are
unpleasant. People also suffer when they are unable to satisfy their
limitless needs and wants. A baby cries when he cannot
communicate his hunger, or when he wants something he cannot
have. Teenagers may feel utterly frustrated and dejected if their
parents won't let them join a late-night party, watch certain movies
or buy the clothes they want. Adults too can feel unhappy when
they cannot pay their bills, frustrated when their job bores them or
lonely when their relationships are unfulfilling or complicated. All
these experiences are examples of what Buddhists call mental
suffering — they can be summed up as painful feelings that arise
from being separated from the people we love, or having to be with
people we don't like, or not getting what we want.

Happiness in Life

When the Buddha said that there is suffering in life, He also spoke
about happiness. Buddhists speak of many different kinds of
happiness; the happiness of friendship; of family life; of a healthy
body and mind; happiness from celebration and gifts, as well as
from sharing and giving. Buddhists believe that happiness is real but
impermanent — that is does not last forever — and that when
happiness fades it leads to suffering. Imagine a person who is given
a beautiful vase as a gift from a close friend. They feel happy that
their friend cares about them and has chosen them a gift that suits
their house perfectly. But if the vase was to smash accidentally,
then the happiness would vanish and turn into suffering. The
person suffers because their attachment to pleasure has not lasted.

Buddhists learn that many people try to escape from the suffering
in life by distracting themselves with temporary pleasures. There
are many examples of people who try to block out sadness, pain,
loss and grief by indulging in pleasures they think will bring
happiness but actually end up disguising their real feelings, and
making them feel even worse when the temporary happiness runs
out. Imagine a person who likes chocolate, for example, and thinks
that the wonderful experience of eating chocolate will always make
them happy. If that person has a toothache and tries to make
themselves feel better by eating chocolate, it might work once or
twice, but the chocolate will never solve the toothache and soon it
will make it worse.

In this way, the Buddha taught his followers not to be distracted by

momentary pleasures, but to look at the bigger picture of their life
experiences. He taught that happiness and pleasures are temporary
and therefore that people should learn more about what Buddha
taught as the True way to end suffering. He taught these lessons in
the next Three Noble Truths.

Summary

Suffering is a fact of life. There are four unavoidable physical

sufferings; birth, old age, sickness and death. There are also three
forms of mental suffering; separation from the people we love;
contact with people we dislike and frustration of desires. Happiness
is real and comes in many ways, but happiness does not last forever
and does not stop suffering. Buddhists believe that the way to end
suffering is to first accept the fact that suffering is actually a fact of
life.

The Second Noble Truth

The Cause of Suffering

After the Buddha learnt that suffering is a part of life, he realised he

could not find a way to end suffering without finding out what
causes it. Buddhists study that the Buddha learnt this just like a
doctor learns about what's wrong with his patient by listing their
symptoms, finding out what makes them worse and studying other
cases before prescribing a cure.
By watching people Buddha found out that the causes of suffering
are craving and desire, and ignorance. The power of these things to
cause all suffering is what Buddhists call The Second Noble Truth.

Craving

What are things we crave for? Food we love to eat, entertainment,

new things, popularity, money, beauty, holidays and so many more
things and experience, depending on who we are and where we
are. Craving can be explained as the strong desires that people
have for pleasing their senses and for experiencing life itself.
Buddhists believe that anything that stimulates our senses or our
feelings can lead to craving.

People everywhere crave for their favourite tastes, but we all know
that not even the best sweets and our favourite meal lasts forever.
Soon it is finished and there can be no more to enjoy, and then it is
forgotten as though it never even happened. None of the pleasures
we crave for ever give us lasting happiness or satisfaction. This is
why people can crave to repeat these experiences again and again,
and become unhappy and dissatisfied until they can satisfy their
craving.
The trouble is, even if these pleasures are repeated again and
again, we can still feel unhappy. Imagine eating your favourite food
every meal, day-after-day, week-after-week. At first you might
think this is a great idea, but very soon the day will come when you
just cannot enjoy that food anymore, when it might even make you
feel sick! Have you ever eaten too much cake and made yourself ill?
Buddha said it's the same with all the things that please the senses.

Ignorance

Craving is like a great tree with many branches. There are branches
of greed, bad thoughts and of anger. The fruit of the tree of craving
is suffering but how does the tree of craving grow? Where can we
find it? The answer, says the Buddha, is that the tree of craving has
its roots in ignorance. It grows out of ignorance, and its seeds fall
and flourish whenever they find ignorance.

What is ignorance? Real ignorance is not just being uneducated, or

not knowing many things. Buddhists see ignorance as the inability
to see the truth about things, to see things as they really are. This
ability to see the truth is not a question of either eyesight or
education. Buddhists believe that there are many truths about the
world that people are ignorant of, because of the limits of their
understanding.
History can easily show us many examples of how
misunderstanding and limited information cause ignorance. Until
last Century, for example, most people in the world believed the
Earth was flat and that travelers could easily fall off it. People
thought that the edge of the world was a place full of monsters and
strange creatures. Yet when explorers suggested that the world
was round and that it was safe to travel far and wide they were
punished for these ideas. Today we know the Earth is round and
there is no edge to fall off and no monsters either, but for the
people who lived before us, those dangers were very real in their
own minds.

We can find many examples of how science has revealed facts

about life of which we were ignorant. Scientists know, for instance,
that there are sounds that people are unable to hear and waves of
light which we cannot see. Special instruments have been made to
help us see these things, but without those tools we would be
ignorant of the fact that there are some things that we are unable
to detect with our own senses.

Buddhists teach that as long as people remain ignorant of things

about the world, they will suffer from all kinds of
misunderstandings and delusions. But when people develop their
minds and acquire wisdom through study, careful thought and
meditation, they will see the Truth. They will see things as they
really are. They will understand the Buddha's teachings about
suffering and impermanence of life, and the Four Noble Truths will
be clear to them. The Buddha said that overcoming craving and
ignorance leads to true happiness and Enlightenment.

Summary

The way to end suffering in life is to understand what causes it.

Craving and ignorance are the two main causes of suffering. People
suffer with their craving for the pleasures of the senses and
become unsatisfied and disappointed until they can replace their
cravings with new ones. People suffer too when they are unable to
see the world as it really is and live with illusions about life and
fears, hopes, facts and behaviours based on ignorance. Craving and
misunderstanding can be solved by developing the mind, thinking
carefully and meditating. Solving these main causes of suffering will
lead a person to true happiness, just as it did for the Buddha
himself 2,500 years ago.

The Third Noble Truth

The End of Suffering

After the Buddha realised the Truth about suffering and its causes,
he spent six years committed to discovering a realization about the
end of suffering — that, and his achievement of Nirvana, were his
ultimate achievements. In those six years, the Buddha tried all the
methods available to end suffering without success. Eventually He
found his own solution to the problems of life and they are now the
core of Buddhist thought, teachings and practice.

This is what he discovered: there is an end to suffering; it can

happen to anybody, anywhere, here and now; and the key to
ending all suffering is to remove all desire, ill will and ignorance.

What Happens After Suffering Ends?

After suffering, the Buddha taught, there is supreme happiness.

Every step of the way to removing the causes of unhappiness brings
more joy. On the path to the end of suffering, which is a path that
Buddhists may spend their whole lifetimes practicing, there are
levels of happiness and freedom from craving and ignorance that
can be achieved. In the beginning the happiness might be through
better material conditions: like more contentment, or better
spiritual conditions; more peace and enjoyment of life. These are
the reasons Buddhists can live happily without greed — even
among people in cities overcome with craving and desire. They can
live happily without anger even among people harbouring ill will.
These kinds of happiness make life more rewarding and bring a
sense of freedom and joy.

The Buddhist teachings say that the more people free themselves
from desire, ill will and ignorance, the greater their happiness is —
no matter what is going on around them. When they have
completely removed desire, ill will and ignorance the Buddha says
they will experience the same supreme happiness he discovered.

Enlightenment

The second fruit of the end of suffering is what Buddhists call

supreme Enlightenment. Enlightenment can be called liberation —
a total, absolute and permanent end of all suffering. It is the
ultimate and final goal of Buddhism.

There are many, many qualities to enlightenment, but the most

important are perfect wisdom and great compassion. These are the
extraordinary qualities that only the Buddha perfected. They are
the result of complete freedom from craving and from ignorance
and the tremendous transformations from ordinary life that
Buddha's teachings exemplified. Through perfect wisdom He
understands the real nature of all things. Through great compassion
He is able to help countless beings overcome their suffering.

The experience of Enlightenment or Nirvana, as it is also called, is

very difficult to explain. Even when Buddhists describe it as
supreme happiness and perfect wisdom, they are not really
explaining it completely. Nirvana cannot be put into words —
imagine explaining the colour blue to a person who has always
been blind, or the sound of a bird to a deaf man. Enlightenment is
an experience that a person has to have for themselves to
understand. Buddhists believe that the Buddha's teachings will lead
them to Nirvana and trust his teachings of the Four Noble Truths to
take them to their goal.

The Buddha has described Nirvana in different ways. He has called

it supreme happiness, peace, immortality. He also described
Nirvana as uncreated, unformed, as beyond the earth, as beyond
water, fire, air, beyond the sun and moon, unfathomable,
immeasurable. It is also described as freedom from conflict and
selfishness, the eradication of craving, hatred and delusion.

The Buddha said, and demonstrated through his own life, that
Nirvana can be achieved in our lives, while living — it is not a place
to which we go after death. Buddhists believe that we can eradicate
all the causes of suffering in this life, and achieve enlightenment —
live in bliss, if we follow the Buddha's teachings.

Summary

Buddhists have confidence that the Buddha did find an end to

suffering, and that His teachings can bring them the same
experience. The key to ending suffering is to remove all desire, ill
will and ignorance. Without these causes of suffering we can
experience absolute happiness, perfect wisdom, peace and all the
qualities of Enlightenment. Nirvana cannot be described, it is only
understood truly by a person who has experienced it.

The Fourth Noble Truth

The Middle Path

In the beginning, Prince Siddhartha lived in luxury and wealth in his

father's palace. After he renounced his privileged life and became a
wandering monk, he experienced the hardship and difficulty of a
life with nothing. He spent years torturing his mind with hard
thoughts and solitude and starved his body, enjoyed no comforts
and suffered all the experiences of a life without belongings.

Not long before he achieved his insights and attained

enlightenment, he realised both these extreme ways of life were as
fruitless as each other. He realised that the true way to happiness
was to avoid these extremes, to follow a moderate a way of life. He
called this way of living the Middle Path.

Buddhists describe the three ways of life by comparing them to

strings of a lute. The loose string is like a life of careless indulgence
and makes a poor note when played. The tight string is like a life of
extreme hardship and denial, producing another bad sound when
played and, worse, likely to snap at any moment. Only the middle
string, which is neither slack nor tense, produces a harmonious
note — it has the same qualities as the Middle Path. Those who
follow this way, avoid the extremes of indulgence and denial. They
do not seek endless pleasures, and they do not torment themselves
with pain, lacking and self-torment. The Fourth Noble Truth is that
the Middle Path leads to the end of suffering.

The Noble Eightfold Path

The Middle Path is the Buddha's treatment for the problem of

suffering in all of our lives. In the time he spent learning about the
cause and nature of suffering he learnt also about its cure and set
out to teach it. Buddhists describe the teachings as a formula which
is described in simple steps and includes both physical and mental
treatment for ridding a person of suffering. Like all Buddhist
teachings, this formula, which is called the Noble Eightfold Path,
can only work if a person chooses to apply it to their lives, and
takes full responsibility for following the steps.

The Steps of the Eightfold Path

1. Right Understanding

To understand the Law of Cause and Effect and the Four Noble
Truths.
2. Right Attitude

Not harbouring thoughts of greed and anger.

3. Right Speech

Avoid lying, gossip, harsh speech and tale-telling.

4. Right Action

Not to destroy any life, not to steal or commit adultery.

5. Right Livelihood

Avoiding occupations that bring harm to oneself and others.

6. Right Effort

Earnestly doing one's best in the right direction.

7. Right Mindfulness

Always being aware and attentive.

8. Right Concentration
To making the mind steady and calm in order to realise the true
nature of things.

Following the Eightfold Path

Following the Eightfold path leads, ultimately, to a life free of

suffering. This is the fruit the most dedicated follower of the
teachings might hope to enjoy, however along the way to this goal
the Eightfold path helps Buddhists in other ways.

The Path develops character and personality by showing the way to

live a virtuous life, then to cultivate concentration, develop wisdom
and finally to blossom into an individual complete with compassion
and wisdom — one of the highest qualities of a human being in
Buddhism. The Path is specifically aimed at developing behaviour,
mind and knowledge and the eight steps are divided into those
three ways of practice.

The Noble Eightfold Path

Good Conduct:

Right Speech

Right Action

Right Livelihood
 Mental Development:

Right Effort

Right Mindfulness

Right Concentration

Wisdom: Right Attitude

Right View

Good Conduct

The power of speech is a unique gift of man. It is a power which,

when properly used, helps to bring harmony, happiness and
wisdom. If it is abused it can bring ignorance, delusion, pain and
deceit. Right Speech is about controlling the abuse of speech and
cultivating its best potentials. Students of the Eightfold Path learn
to control their words. They avoid lies, tale-bearing, harsh words
and nonsense while practicing speaking truth, gentle words, and
speaking sensibly and meaningfully.
Right Action is concerned with what we do; avoiding actions that
damage ourselves and others and taking action that improves our
sense of self, adds to a healthy society and brings goodness and
culture, which lay the foundations for Mental Development and
Wisdom.

Right Livelihood shows the way for a person to choose in which way
to become a useful, productive citizen who contributes to his or her
own welfare and the welfare of others as well as bringing about
social harmony and economic progress. Buddhist Teachings advise
against harmful professions such as trading in weapons, living
beings, flesh, intoxicants and poison. Buddhists also avoid
occupations of soldiering, fishing, hunting, and teach against
cunning and persuasive practices as well as cheating and gambling.

Mental Development

Through Mental Development Buddhist learn to be alert and aware

in body and mind. Right Effort is fourfold;

1. Avoid evil and unwholesome states of mind from arising

2. Overcome evil and unwholesome states of mind already present

3. Cause good and wholesome states of mind not yet present to

arise
4. Develop and perfect such states of mind already present

Right Mindfulness focuses us on the truth about what is happening

in the body, in feelings, with the mind, and through our ideas,
thoughts, etc. Right Concentration is a development of this
attention, enabling a Buddhist student to develop one-pointedness
of the mind which brings many strengths and freedoms, including
the clarity of mind and calmness to stay on the path of Good
Conduct.

Wisdom

Wisdom is Right Attitude and Right View. The practice of

developing Right View is about distinguishing between right and
wrong, good and bad, and leads to a compete understanding of the
Four Noble Truths. Right View is free from delusion and ignorance
and moves very easily into deep wisdom, clear sightedness and
acceptance.

Freedom from negative thoughts which distract, debilitate or lead

to wrong speech, actions, effort, mindfulness or concentration is
what Buddhists call Right Attitude. A follower of the Eightfold Path
who follows Right View and Right Attitude may achieve the wisdom
to understand things as they are, to perceive the relationship
between cause and effect and thus to remove ignorance and
craving and experience the end of suffering. This is the ultimate
goal of the Eightfold Path and all eight ways of practice must be
followed in order to attain it.

Truth

The Noble Eightfold Path is a very systematic and methodical

approach to solving the problem of suffering in life, and achieving a
state of wisdom, peace and Nirvana. The programme first develops
character and personality, then develops ethical conduct and
restraint which promote concentration. Concentration and
mindfulness help make the mind free of hindrances that block it
from blossoming into wisdom and accessing higher knowledge.
Higher knowledge brings a clear understanding of the truth about
how things really are. This leads craving and desire to turn into
detachment, detachment brings freedom from suffering and the
end of suffering brings Supreme Happiness.

Summary

The way to the end of suffering is called the Middle Path. It is an

Eightfold Path involving understanding and practice of Right
Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right
Mindfulness, Right Concentration, Right Attitude and Right View.
These eight elements can be divided into three ways of practice;
Good Conduct, Mental Development and Wisdom. The goal of the
Noble Eightfold Path is to bring a true understanding of the Four
Noble Truths and deliver their ultimate Teaching - the end of
suffering.

How Karma Works: The Twelve Links of Dependent Arising

An Oral Teaching by Geshe Sonam Rinchen

We all want to find happiness and be free from suffering. The

twelve-part process of dependent arising shows how actions
underlain by ignorance propel us from one rebirth into another,
keeping us trapped in suffering, and how through understanding
reality correctly we can break this cycle. The following three
excerpts from How Karma Works by Geshe Sonam Rinchen, a well-
known teacher in Dharamsala, are based on the Rice Seedling Sutra
and the twenty-sixth chapter of Nagarjuna’s Treatise on the Middle
Way.

Conditioned by formative action,

Consciousness enters rebirths.

When consciousness has entered,

Name and form come into being.

A variety of causes and conditions produce each moment of

consciousness, but here Nagarjuna emphasizes how formative
action determines which kind of rebirth the consciousness will
enter. How does consciousness continue on? It does so when the
death process is complete and the moment of death occurs. This is
simultaneous with the beginning of the intermediate state. In the
case of a human rebirth, the being of the intermediate state ceases
to exist at the moment when consciousness enters the fertilized
ovum in the womb of the mother. The end of the intermediate
existence and the beginning of the human existence are
simultaneous. The final moment of the death process is like deep
sleep; the intermediate state is like dreaming and conception like
waking.

The fourth link, name and form, describes the moment of

conception. “Name” refers to the four aggregates of feeling,
discrimination, compositional factors, and consciousness, while
“form” refers to the physical embryo. The entity of the being has
come into existence, after which development takes place.

Just as barley seed or rice seed yield their own specific crop, the
imprints implanted on consciousness through performing actions
yield their own particular results in the form of good or bad
rebirths. When rebirth in the desire realm or form realm occurs, all
five aggregates are present from the very beginning. In the formless
realm the four aggregates associated with mental activity are
present, but since beings in that realm have no actual physical
form, the physical aspect is present only as a potential.

∗∗∗

Experience and Response

The next verses of Nagarjuna’s text show how the capacity to

experience arises and how response to experience takes place
while the unborn child is growing.

When name and form have come into being,

The six sources emerge.

In dependence on these six sources

Contact properly arises.

Gradually the fetus develops and the six sources—from the eye
sense faculty to the mental faculty—are formed. The bases for
these faculties are there from the outset, but this link is called the
six sources because now the sources have developed and can
function. The mental faculty and mental consciousness in a subtle
form are present from the moment of conception.

At conception the entity of the living being came into existence.

The attributes of that living being emerge with the development of
the six sources and it now becomes a user of things, namely one
who can engage with things. All of this is the maturation of an
action performed in the past.

What are the conditions that give rise to contact? In the third verse
Nagarjuna underlines the vital role played by the faculties when he
writes, “In dependence on these six sources contact properly
arises.”

∗∗∗

A Gift for a King

During the Buddha’s lifetime there was a king called Bimbisara who,
it is said, struck up a relationship with another king called Utrayana.
Utrayana lived in a rather remote place and, although the two kings
had never met, messengers went back and forth between them. On
one occasion King Utrayana sent King Bimbisara a very precious and
special jewel. It had the power to give a feeling of well-being and to
remove poison when touched.

Since the jewel was priceless, this gift proved quite an

embarrassment to King Bimbisara, who felt obliged to send a gift of
equal value. His ministers tried to estimate the value of the jewel,
but when they calculated it in gold coins, it turned out to be ten
million. How could they reciprocate with a gift worth ten million
gold coins? They could think of no solution. King Bimbisara was
despondent and retired to a darkened room. He took off his normal
finery and lay down on his bed. Seeing this, one of his ministers,
who was a Brahmin, suggested to the king that he should consult
the Buddha.

Book cover

The Buddha’s advice was simple: he told Bimbisara to send King

Utrayana a painting of himself, the Buddha. A number of painters
were summoned and it was decided that the best painting would
be chosen as the gift. Some versions of the story recount that when
the painters saw the Buddha, they could not stop gazing at him and
were quite unable to begin painting. This once again depressed
King Bimbisara, but the Buddha solved the problem by using his
radiance to project his image onto their canvases. Other accounts
say that the Buddha’s radiance was so powerful that the painters
were dazzled and could not paint him, so he told them to look at his
reflection in a pool.
The best image was chosen and the Buddha instructed the painter
to depict the twelve links of dependent arising around the edge of
the painting. Some verses about this twelve-part process were
written at the bottom. The painting was wrapped in many layers of
costly silks and brocades. It was carefully placed in a golden box
and dispatched to the king, but it was preceded by a letter to him.

The letter announced to King Utrayana that King Bimbisara was

sending him a gift that transcended all other gifts in the world. In
order to receive it properly he should prepare the road leading to
his city and palace by having it cleaned for several miles, and that
he and his retinue should welcome it with great ceremony and
offerings.

When King Utrayana saw this letter, he felt irritated and insulted by
its tone of command, and he remarked to his ministers that he
would prepare his troops for battle. But the ministers, who were
rather more circumspect and sensible, suggested that it might be a
wiser policy first to see what the gift was and then, if it didn’t
please the king, they could make ready for war. So preparations
were made to receive the gift in the manner described by King
Bimbisara.
They escorted it ceremonially into the palace. Then, with the whole
court waiting in suspense, it was taken out of the golden box. To
everyone’s surprise, when the many layers of silk and brocade had
been removed, what lay before them was a rolled-up painting.
Eagerly they unrolled it and found a beautiful portrait of someone
they did not know. Present at court, however, were some
merchants who had visited Magadha, the area where Bimbisara
lived, and they recognized that it was a painting of the Buddha. At
once they began speaking words in praise of the Buddha and paid

homage to him. King Utrayana and his court had already been
prepared for something exceptional. Moved by the image and by
the reverence of the merchants, they were quite overcome.

Through the arrival of this gift past positive imprints were

awakened in the king and his court. The king took the painting to
his private quarters. That evening he looked carefully at the twelve
images around the edge and read the verses. Throughout the night
he thought very deeply about this whole twelve-part process in
forward and reverse sequence, and in the course of this intensive
meditation he reached the stage of a stream enterer, that is, he had
direct perception of the truth. It is said that even just seeing these
twelve links depicted creates beneficial imprints, so thinking about
them again and again with understanding of how they function will
undoubtedly have a very profound effect and bring vast benefit.
The King of Meditative Stabilizations Sutra says that even if we look
at the image of a Buddha when we are angry, negativity created
over many aeons is purified. If that is true, we can easily imagine
how much negativity is purified and how much virtue created when
we look at such an image with faith in our hearts, make a gesture of
homage as an expression of that faith and speak words of praise.
The four noble truths, the twelve links of dependent arising and the
two truths regarding conventional and ultimate reality, all
interrelated, form the very core of the Buddha’s teaching. The
many different practices of sutra and tantra become meaningful
and purposeful only when they are based on a good understanding
of these fundamental and seminal principles.

Dependent Origination

The topic of Dependent Origination sounds complex, and it is one

of the most important concepts of the Buddhist teaching. However,
in essence, it is quite simple.

The Buddha said that to become enlightened, you need only to

understand The Four Noble Truths and Dependent Origination.

Dependent Origination is also called the law of causality and was

the other main revelation which came to Buddha at his
enlightenment. In this teaching, he says that nothing exists on its
own, but always has come from earlier circumstances.

A piece of paper does not come into existence spontaneously. It is

made from wood pulp and water. The wood comes from trees,
which comes from seeds from earlier trees. If you burn paper, it
becomes smoke and ash, so it has not disappeared but
transformed. The essential components of that piece of paper were
always there, and will always be there. A pot is made because once
a potter took clay and formed it on a wheel and then fired the pot.
Many circumstances and components were needed for the process.

In the same way, we did not spontaneously come into existence at

birth, we are the result of our parents, of the circumstances of their
meeting, and of all that happened before. You are alive today
because you were once born, as a result of your parents meeting at
an earlier time. Every thing is always a consequence of something
before, that is, the origin of everything is not unique, it is
dependent on a particular set of circumstances having happened.

Dependent origination is similar to cause and effect, and closely

links to the Four Noble Truths. Desire causes suffering, one is
dependent on the other. Following the path causes desire to
reduce and so causes suffering to be reduced.
If you begin to see everything as dependant on everything else,
then you will need to look to the larger picture where everything
we think and do affects the future. As in the writing of Thich Nhat
Hanh "the world is woven of interconnected threads".

In essence, the Buddha did not see a separate and benevolent

creator who could act on our behalf. He saw the interdependence
of all life and the cause and effect of actions which create their own
future.

This is why Buddhism, at its inception, was more of a way of life

than a religion. Certainly, now it is accepted as a religion by many
followers who seek divine guidance from the Buddha nature.

said that dependent arising is both very simple, and very complex,
but always helpful, and worth the effort to understand. Let me start
with the very simple.

It Really Is Simple
Dependent arising says that we come into the world with certain
drives that cause us to build a view of the world and our place in it
in a way that leads us into trouble.

That’s a succinct overview of the three parts of DA I mentioned

briefly in the last post:

“The Givens” (that we all start out with these drives)

“The Rituals” (the habitual way we build up our views), and

“The Results” (dukkha).

It’s those three divisions that tend to get DA mistaken for being
about three lives, because the first part describes how we come
into the world, so its conditions can be mistaken as “the previous
life, leading to this one”, while the detail in the middle, including
contact and feeling, is clearly “this life”, and the resulting outcome,
which contains the word for “birth”, is seen as “the next life”.
That’s the easy overview, but that doesn’t provide enough detail to
make it a useful lesson. For that, we need to go a little deeper.

The Buddha built this detailed lesson on a structure made of shared

cultural knowledge about myths, the cosmic order, and the rituals
related to them, that were part of the common heritage in his own
time1. It isn’t in the least surprising that he did this. He certainly
couldn’t describe what he saw using our terms, could he. He saw,
very clearly, some very fundamental aspects of human nature, and
how they cause us trouble. That we can still see those aspects as
being exactly the same in us humans now is also not surprising2.
We are talking about human nature and our nature can’t have
changed much in two and a half thousand years, which is a blink of
the eye in evolution’s time scale.

In our time, we would describe what he saw in us by using different

language than he did — also not surprising. We also have more
information about the Whys and Wherefores of the behavior than
he did. He really didn’t express the Whys beyond using the
structure of a long-popular creation myth, and commenting that
the process he’s describing has no discernible beginning. But
despite those limitations, he is describing something we moderns
have come to realize for ourselves, the way our thinking gets us in
trouble. But he does more than just point out the trouble. With
dependent arising he offers insights that can help us learn how to
notice and change that thinking.

If I had to pick one modern expression for what he’s talking about,
I’d call it “cognitive bias”. He is describing the way we build up a
worldview, and then cling to it, and use it to filter our perceptions
in ways that fit our views, and how we defend those views, all in
our mistaken belief that doing so is wholly to our benefit — when
that is not necessarily so; all too often it is to our detriment. And he
offers a fairly limited insight into where that process begins, and
speaks a little to the why (we know more now), but he describes all
this in a way that requires us to not spend a whole lot of time
working on the theory. Instead, working from a general structure,
he points out the direction in which we should look. Dependent
arising asks us to do the work of seeing if we can see what’s being
pointed out in our own lives. Because only if we can see it can we
make use of it.

The whole lesson is designed to be a bit vague, not scientifically

explicit (even if we would like it to be, even if we try to Make It So
and call it a failure when it isn’t) because, as I say, theory is not the
point: how to put it into practice and see it for ourselves, is.

A Little More Detail

Here “in brief” is the twelve-cause version of dependent arising.

The first section, The Givens, is an overview of the process, with the
“whys” supplied by the structure of a very common creation myth
(more on this in a bit).

The Givens:

(1: avijjā) Given that we are ignorant of the way we cause our own
suffering (the description of causes 2-12 is intended to cure that
ignorance) and that this ignorance allows all that follows to happen
unhindered

(2: saṅkhārā) we come into the world with certain drives (desires,
volitions), among them a drive to discover who we are and how we
fit into the world, with a special focus on what is beneficial to us
and what is not — in other words, we are driven to know our selves
so (3: viññāṇa) our awareness is constantly driven (cause #2) to
seek out information about ourselves and the world, and in the
process of doing this (4: nāmarūpa) we tend to give individual
identities to ourselves and everything around us, to sort the world
into categories of “like us” and “not like us”, “for us” and “against
us”, “subject” and “object” (i.e. what is us, and what is not-us) or —
to borrow the Buddha’s way of speaking — we take all this stuff
and make it part of us, mistaking it for “self”3 and (5: saḷāyatana)
we do all this “seeking and sorting” beginning with our senses,
which are just about always busy doing this work.

The Givens, above, end with the senses seeking what the drives
compel us to find — information about our own “self” and its
relationship to the world. This is something we can catch ourselves
doing. Try looking for it.

The next section begins with those senses having found what they
are looking for (an elegant hand-off between one section and the
next). I call this middle portion “Rituals” to tie it to the underlying
structure and the multi-layered word saṅkhārā, which can (and still
does in Hindi) mean rituals. But what it’s really about is habits of
mind — which are also rituals of a different sort. Often these habits
are culturally driven, just as religious rituals are; we take on roles,
and think within the worldview provided by our social situations.

The Rituals:

(6: phassa) Our seeking senses make contact with some object that
will provide us with (7: vedanā) an experience that will satisfy our
drives, one that we categorize through the way it feels to us (good,
bad, or indifferent — or as the Buddha puts it, pleasant,
unpleasant, or neither of those) which brings up (8: taṇhā) a
reaction in us which is that craving that can be seen on either a
gross level (kāma) when dealing with the comforts of sensuality, or
of material greed for more of the good stuff and less of the bad; or
on a finer level as desiring more support for our beliefs (bhava,
vibhava), or any of many reactions to being confronted with an
experience that undermines our beliefs (here is where cognitive
bias begins to arise) all of which hardens into

(9: upādāna) clinging to opinions which are fuel for the fire of our
self-concepts. In the texts, examples of these were given in terms of
sensuality (kāma again), or views (ditthi), with two specific
examples of the actions resulting from such views given (rules and
vows, silabbata, which dominated Brahminical practice), and
holding to the particularly pernicious “doctrine of self” (attavada).
These habits of thought, driven by the desire we have from the
start to know and understand ourselves and the world we live in,
and our relationship to it, often have a detrimental result4. And the
Buddha is pointing out that when it does, the cause of the trouble
can always be traced back to what he’s trying to get us to see in this
fundamental lesson. It may seem to us as though, when we look at
our own lives and the world we live in, it’s a billion individual
problems, each with so many varied conditions going into it that it
couldn’t possibly have one underlying cause but yes — he’s saying
— it does, if only we can see it. Even when he divides DA up into
two parallel issues — sensual craving (kāma), and (as he puts it)
“craving for existence” (i.e. craving for a lasting self — bhava) —
there is behind them both only the one drive, to have and know a
self and its place in the world in order to better survive in the
world.

It’s important to recognize — and here I will use a modern

explanation that he doesn’t address because he didn’t know as
much as we do now — that the Buddha is talking about something
we do that isn’t always wrong. That is, this whole chain of events
starts with us coming into the world with a desire to know who we
are and our place in the world, and there is nothing wrong with
that, by itself. We need to be able to figure out who we are and our
place in the world in order to be able to take care of ourselves,
don’t we. We need to sort out what’s good for us, and what’s bad
for us — there is nothing wrong with that5.
It can be seen as the survival instinct, as traits that evolved to keep
us alive and breeding and successfully passing on our genes. The
Buddha didn’t know that — he wasn’t a 21st century naturalist —
but he could see the effects in action, as we all can when we pay
attention, when we are shown where to look. And it is this “being
shown where to look” that is what the entire lesson of DA is trying
to do. Each link provides detail on where to look.

We have this instinct for self-preservation, and, again, there is

nothing wrong with that in and of itself. But we tend to take it a
little too far. To have self-preservation, we have to have a self to
preserve, and — in the Buddha’s way of looking at it6 — since we
don’t have one, we create one. The problem is that we don’t do this
in a slow, thoughtful way, but in a driven way, without conscious
thought, and we end up overdoing this self-preservation (and self
creation) to the point that we have gotten so good at defending not
just our bodies but our ideas — refusing to accept evidence that
undermines our beliefs, taking action that harms “the other” in
order to ensure our own survival, starting wars to kill off those
holding competing views — that we do ourselves and others a great
deal of harm. Just look at the world we live in, in this moment, and
you will see this all around you.

With dependent arising, the Buddha is describing with great

accuracy — using a different model, but observing the same thing
we can observe — how it is that our ignorance of this process leads
us into trouble, with the hope that if we can see what he is pointing
to (in its myriad manifestations in our own lives) we can break the
habits, stop performing the rituals/habitual patterns of thinking
that instinct generates in us and society supports (as society seems
to have its own “self” that it perpetuates through us).

The Results:

(10: bhava) As a result of the way we think about our experiences,

beginning with that moment when we feel something nice, or
encounter a concept that supports our existing views — or the
opposite, something negative — our sense of who we are becomes
more solid and eventually our “selves” are (11: jāti) born in the
world, which we see through the filter of our preconceptions as
being the world as we understand it (not necessarily as it actually
is) which results in us experiencing the world we expect, in which

(12: jarāmaraṇa) aging and death cause a great deal of suffering.

When we are literally born into this world, we become visible to
others. What makes the non-physical self we have created visible to
others? The Buddha doesn’t come out and tell us the answers, he
simply poses the question, and it is up to us to look where he is
pointing and see what we can see. Whatever answer you come up
with, can you see how that visible self, born of opinion, leads to
dukkha?

The Buddha’s Truth In Layers, Revisted

There is so much to be said about the way all the pieces described
in those twelve causes fit together and work together that I know I
cannot do justice to it in a blog post. But just to describe a few . . .

Saṅkhārā, as I mentioned, is a word for a ritual. The prefix indicates

“together” and the root “making”. In Vedic society, rituals were an
act of making, together, many things, among them the self, and
shaping the cosmic order, as well as making bonds between the
participants, and between gods and participants. The myth that
gives structure to the first five links is, itself, modeled on
procreation – a different sort of “making together” — and in that
myth saṅkhārā is often described as kāma, “desire” — which is
what drives conception, of course. Desire to create a new life is a
form of desire for eternal existence, through one’s children. The
desire that is saṅkhārā is the driving force behind every link in the
chain. As “ritual” it can and in some suttas does stand in for all or
any part of the middle of the chain (contact/phassa through
clinging/upādāna), but most easily for the last two links (clinging
and craving) because of its representation of desire on at least two
levels7. This explains some of the variations we find in what gets
taken as “misordered” chains, and in several shortened versions. It
is quite true that the whole of DA can be reduced down to desire
being the cause of suffering. The rest is just details.

Looking at the last section of DA, we can see the results as, simply,
dukkha in all the ways it manifests, but I find it fascinating to notice
the difference in the way the Buddha expresses something we can
still see now. Though we express it differently, either way it is still
true. Nowadays, when we think about cognitive biases, when we
notice them in ourselves and others, we can vividly see the way our
thinking makes us perceive the world in a certain way, in the way
we expect to see it, and this makes it extremely difficult to see it
any other way. We can easily see this in the two polar opposites of
voters in the recent American election. The Buddha described this
phenomenon in terms of being born into the world constructed
from the rituals performed in his day, whichever world folks
perceived they were working with.
The descriptive words Sariputta uses in SN 38.10-.13 answering
questions about craving, clinging, and existence are all descriptions
of dominant ways people saw the world in the Buddha’s day, with
the two general lines — of sensuality (kāma) and concerns about
“existence” (bhava) of “the eternal self” and where it goes after
death. With the latter, the Buddha is saying that all our convictions
about who we are and life after death do lead us to be reborn in
the world we believe in, the world as we have, effectively, made it
by refusing (or being unable) to see it any other way. We can take
that literally if we wish and hear him saying that there are other
worlds and our actions will lead us to be reborn there (a metaphor
he uses in some suttas, e.g. the one about the dog-duty ascetic) or
we can see how perfectly it applies to our thinking about ourselves
and the world — not just as regards religion, but in all things. The
way we think about the world leads us to perceive that the world
actually is just exactly as we think it is, and those who disagree with
us are just plain wrong. Cognitive bias does make it appear that we
live in the world we believe in — until it doesn’t, until our
preconceptions cause us to crash into reality, with an instance of
dukkha born as the result. What is “born” in dependent arising is
actually dukkha, and “aging and death” is just a metonym (a so-
many-layered metonym that I’d need a third post just to describe
it) for dukkha.

I can understand how one’s first impression, on reading the suttas,

could be that he is being literal about being born into some “other
world”, but I don’t understand how anyone who actually puts what
the Buddha is teaching into practice can fail to see, in that perfect
fit between the literal interpretation and the way our thinking
shapes our perceptions, that he’s pointing out something much
subtler and more significant, deeper. To people of his own time, he
is suggesting that their beliefs about “the self” and rebirth (or union
with Brahman) cause them to see the world a certain way, but
those who practiced well and had any ability to loosen their grip on
their beliefs will have been able to recognize the lesson and use it
as it was intended.

Less Confusion

Because the Buddha was using the methods of his predecessors to

teach, rather than ours, his lessons have been hard for us to sort
out because we — with our preconceptions of what it means to
teach — expect him to be speaking more or less the way we do.
Certainly his talks are more straightforward than the poems of the
ancient RgVeda, so progress was being made toward our style of
speaking. But he was clearly making use of variations on the
methods of those who came before him. If we try to sort out his
teachings expecting, for example, there to be one version of
dependent arising in which there are X many links, and that’s the
definitive answer, resulting in us thinking there is something wrong
with every other version, we’re going to get lost.
Because the first five links — with their order and sense provided
by the Prajāpati myth of creation — are a sort of overview of what
we do, which is then described in detail in the middle section, the
various pieces can easily be swapped with each other. When the
hungry-for-self awareness (aka “consciousness”) in step three of
The Givens is seen in terms of what underlies the myth —
procreation — its description will sound just like “birth” in the final
section — a conscious being is born. The Buddha is playing with
these ideas, and in each talk he gives, he is using just the particular
parts he finds necessary to that talk, and that audience. This is what
the most skilled teachers of his time did, as Tatyana Elizarenkova
explains in her book “Language and Style of the Vedic Ṛṣis”. The
many different layers of meaning that were attached to words
allowed innovative thinkers to call into the mind of their listeners
several different lines of thought at once, all of which had value, all
of which bore thinking about when trying to understand the new
concepts being pointed out. Those used most often were most
significant.8

In our culture, we want our sentences to intend just one meaning

out of the many for each word, and we want those twelve links to
be a linear and literal explanation of what’s going on. But in his
culture, the words were intended to recall several meanings, the
links aren’t intended to be precisely linear, and the teaching
method in general is totally unfamiliar to us, in that it rarely says
anything in a direct way, but is instead intended to call up a variety
of images that provide patterns for action, and indications of where
to look to be able to apply those patterns to something else entirely
than what’s supplying the template for the action.

If dependent arising seems confusing, it is in large part because we

aren’t understanding how the lesson is structured, and that the
way it is taught is not the way of a 21st century scientist, or
philosopher, or really anyone in our times. It makes no sense to
expect that the Buddha would be teaching the way we do. For one
thing, he is relying on shared knowledge of the culture of his time,
and we don’t share that knowledge. However, once we get past the
difficulty involved in understanding the — to us — unique method
of the Buddha’s teaching, including the many levels of concepts
being touched on, and the non-linear nature of the whole thing,
when we just get down to the actual lesson, the lesson itself is both
simple and clear (as stated in the opening lines of this post).

To be able to understand his lessons as we read them in the suttas,

though, requires understanding the context, but it’s worth doing
both for the elegance of the construction and the clarity of the
lesson once understood. Understanding the context results in much
less confusion, and will keep us from getting side-tracked down
mistaken avenues (like the assumption that DA is the Buddha trying
to reconcile rebirth with not-self).

Myth Direction
An example of how the context of the times can help is found in the
perfect match of the first five links to the Prajāpati myth. Most
people in his time would have recognized that. In the myth:

(1) Before there was anything, there was neither something nor
nothing (avijjā, ignorance — we don’t know what there was).

(2) Then there was desire (for existence) (saṅkhārā, drive/lust for
existence)

(3) Which brought into being something which was everything, the
All, the Cosmic principle, that was really only that hungry desire,
and which could only be fulfilled by knowing it existed. This hungry
awareness (viññāṇa/consciousness) had nothing to observe (being
as it was, you see, the only One, the sole subject with no object)
nor anything to observe with (no sense organs) so it divided
itself/the universe/the All, into

(4) Individual forms with separate identities (nāmarūpa, name-and-

form), each a little slice of the great All but each piece unaware of
its true nature as part of something larger — much less that all
those other pieces are part of the same thing. Now the world is
divided into subject and object, and all these apparently separate
beings have the job of figuring out their nature, and which of the
other bits are “them” and which are “not them”. This they do
through gaining

(5) The senses (saḷāyatana, the six senses — the usual five plus
“thought”) which are then driven to seek the knowledge that will
satisfy the drive in the second link.

This well-known creation story is the early basis for modern Hindu
beliefs about how each of us is connected by having that slice of
Brahman within us. In DA, it is what provides not just the order and
even name of those first five links, but the shape of the movement
between them, which is never explicitly explained in the suttas.
Much of our confusion about what dependent arising is, is caused
by the lack of description of what is going on from one link to the
next. What is given is often a fairly literal definition of what the title
for the link is as pertains to the myth, or its source in procreation,
or the Buddha’s meaning, depending on what he finds useful to his
audience in that particular talk. The definitions are all of nouns. But
the relationships between the links — the action, the verbs —
aren’t described. Because of our tendency toward the literal, we
expect that whatever is the obvious tie between, say, “birth” and
“aging-and-death” is the whole of what is meant. But because of
the many-layered nature of the words used, and the very different
teaching methods of those times, sticking to the literal is going to
cause trouble because that is not what is intended. We have to
loosen our grip on the certainty our first impression gives us in
order to understand what’s actually going on here — and isn’t that
a very Buddhist thing to have to do?

Along with the myth-named links providing the action (the way the
desire for existence in saṅkhārā pushes our awareness to sort the
world into what’s like us, what’s not, what feels good, what feels
bad, separating ourselves as subject and everything else into
objects, with information coming in to us through our senses),
those names and their descriptions in the suttas are intended as
pointers to what to look at to see the action. They tell us where to
look.

Look at our desire for continued existence to see how it directs our
awareness. Look at what we are paying attention to and follow it to
see how we sort it according to categories, how we identify things
by the form they take, how we name (define) them, how that
separates them from us, or alternatively how it causes us to define
them as part of us that we cannot afford to lose. Notice how our
senses, left to their own, never stop seeking, never stop noticing
what feels good (even thoughts which, if they match our own, give
us “ahhh”s of pleasure).

Each link provides an object for meditation in the broadest sense,

of “meditating on” something. Pay attention to moments of
contact, and note the way we notice what feels good and what
doesn’t. Note the desire that arises as a result — craving for our
existence to be one in which we feel pleasure, avoid discomfort.
Notice where that takes us, into opinions (nowadays often
described as “storytelling”) about what’s going on, notice how that
leads us into the birth of our visible self in the world — the actions
we take as a result — and where that leads.

Work the chain backwards (which is easiest) — starting with the

dukkha that comes from living life (aging-and-death), and ask
where the dukkha came from. What action that made “the self”
visible in the world provoked it? What views of the world were the
source of that birth of action?

Still Less Confusion

When dependent arising is seen through the context of the

Buddha’s teaching methods — non-linear, multi-leveled — and
within the context of his time, there really is far too much depth,
and there are far too many connections that get made to discuss
them all in a blog post. But I will point out one more way it reduces
confusion: when understood, it ends all the concerns about how
consciousness comes before birth (in the “one life” model), or how
liberation can come from “the cessation of consciousness” as well
as of “contact” and “feeling” (in any model). In the suttas, the being
we are told is the fullest example of liberation — the Buddha —
was clearly conscious, made contact, and felt the pain in his back as
he aged.
Part of the answer to those oft-asked questions, is that what is
being described is a set of events that are narrowly defined as
starting with a certain kind of ignorance, and a literally selfish drive,
and end in dukkha. Though some traditional forms of Buddhism like
to portray every moment of our lives up to the instant of liberation
as suffering — even simple pleasures like watching a sunset or
laughing along with a stranger’s baby are suffering —
understanding this model indicates that isn’t so. It’s only the things
we cling to that are, and it doesn’t take someone who is particularly
wise to enjoy a sunset because it’s transient, with no desire to have
it last forever. Not every moment of consciousness is a problem,
and not every feeling has to end to experience liberation – only the
ones that start with ignorance and result in dukkha.

The monk Nanavira Thera9 pointed out that the Buddha says his
dharma is visible, and (as Nanavira puts it) timeless — though I
would translate the word akāliko10 which literally means not-
timeness as meaning “not having to do with (or governed) by time”
— and I agree with him that what is meant is that it (and here he is
speaking of dependent arising specifically) “is not the description of
a process” at least in the literal sense. I would say it describes a
process but not in the linear way we tend to think of processes as
being described. Nanavira goes on to point out that there is going
to be confusion about three lives and the necessity of belief in
rebirth (or, I’d say, belief that the Buddha was teaching that there is
rebirth) as long as DA “is thought to involve temporal succession”.
It really doesn’t. We can think of it more-or-less linearly, as I’ve
described it in this post, but it really isn’t tied to time. It isn’t limited
to the moment-to-moment flicker of consciousness over events
that is currently a popular interpretation, but it is useful to think of
it on many time scales, for example as being about habits of
thought introduced by our culture long ago that don’t get an
instant-karmic payback, but that haunt us repeatedly over time.

It also isn’t as inevitable a progression as linear interpretations

make it seem. With skill and practice, we can “break the chain of
events” at any point, and avoid the not-inevitable dukkha.

It Fits

Not only does this interpretation straighten out a lot of confusion

about the order of the links and the meaning of the terms used, but
it also fits perfectly into the larger whole of what the Buddha is
saying. Buddhists have described the way we build our worldview
and then live in the world of our own creation for quite a long time
— it’s saṃsāra. We have long recognized that what is being talked
about in the whole of the Buddha’s teaching is that it is the way we
cling to our beliefs about what is important and necessary to us
that causes us trouble — whether that’s that we must have our
sensual pleasures, or that our understanding of The Truth is the one
correct one.
What this model of DA describes says nothing that goes against
what we have long known the Buddha to be teaching. That alone is
reason to see this as a much better interpretation than it being a
failed attempt to reconcile karma and rebirth with not-self. This
explanation of DA says that it isn’t denying that karma and rebirth
are the cosmic order, it just isn’t talking about their reality at all. It
does speak of the effect belief has on us, though. And instead of
telling us what to think about karma and rebirth, it asks us to look
closely at where our beliefs lead.

Even if it isn’t an argument either for or against, it does make sense

of his so-frequent discussions of karma and rebirth. We can map
the tales he tells about karma and rebirth onto the mythic and
ritual structure used in DA. He speaks first, in The Givens, about
how we come into this world, second, in The Rituals of the things
we do to give ourselves a better future, and finally, in The Results,
of what we become in that future. These three, on that mythic and
ritual level, describe the source story for the rituals, the rituals that
modify the self in preparation for the next life, and then the
transition through the funeral pyre into the next world shaped by
those rituals.

When we see the structure as simultaneously describing that, and

pointing to what we are actually doing – as covering The Givens
which are what drives our behavior, The Rituals as our socially-
constructed habits of thought, and The Results as visible actions
leading to unhappy consequences – then when he speaks of “the
breakup of the body after death” he is talking about the experience
of the funeral pyre, and transition (bhava) from a world in the
making through our rituals, to one hardened into reality when one
is born into it. At that point one’s experiences are hardening into
convictions about who we are and how the world is, and what it
takes to get what we want out of the world, and if we’ve done that
very well and understood the reality well enough, we find ourselves
“born” into the world we made – we see the world just as we
thought it would be — and if we’ve misunderstood or done it badly,
it’s hell.11 The mapping needn’t be perfect: loosen the grip of
certainty when reading these tales, and let them speak to you in
their metaphors. If we understand the many lessons the Buddha
teaches in this way, there is no need to throw out huge amounts of
his talks as not applicable to those who don’t believe in literal
rebirth — instead they are (as I believe he intended) totally
consistent with everything else he teaches about the self we create
and how it leads to trouble.

He is not saying, with DA, that there is rebirth; he is using rebirth as

a model to convey ideas. Nowhere in it is there a denial of anything
other than that bliss can be achieved by believing, opinionating,
and acting on beliefs and opinions that more-or-less follow the
pattern described in DA. The habitual, ritual ways we have of
thinking can never lead to bliss. They lead to dukkha.
It would be totally out of character for the Buddha to deny that
there is such a thing as rebirth. Throughout the suttas he refused to
answer the Big Questions, and he repeatedly says he doesn’t argue
with the world (the world argues with him, he says). Avoiding
quarrels and disputes is absolutely central to his teaching. And that
is the final point I would make about the beauty of this structure he
built — karma and rebirth as metaphors — it allows him to teach
his lessons from a perspective that does not get in the face of
believers and tell them they are wrong about karma, wrong about
rebirth (if he ever thought so — and I have no evidence to say he
would say it was wrong, I don’t find evidence that he held any
views on the matter at all). He can tell a believer stories about his
past and future lives, he can give advice to believers from their
perspective, and have it all be perfectly consistent with everything
else he teaches, so that when (and if) that believer finally comes to
understand DA, they will see that he was telling them a truth, in the
way teachers of those times often did, all along.

Not Explicit, But Consistent

The Buddha was sometimes fairly explicit in things he said — that

the dharma he taught was visible, that the way we behave matters
— but even some of those things he said in the style of his time, not
ours. Explicit as we understand it was not the dominant style of the
day, and we shouldn’t expect it. But consistency is critical, and the
understanding of dependent arising I’ve been describing is
thoroughly consistent. There are rare pieces of suttas that don’t fit
but they are very rare. I welcome anyone to point out to me any
sutta they find inconsistent with what I’m describing — I’d really
like to examine any. It is from those bits that I usually learn
something new.

Using this way of looking at some of Doug’s problems with trying to

see if DA is true in the sense of “does it succeed in reconciling not-
self with karma and rebirth”, we come up with different answers,
too.

The problem he cites of DA seeming to only be about the second

and third noble truths is quite true — it is describing the origin of
dukkha and providing the insights needed to experience its
cessation. He’s right, it’s not about much more than the
conditioned nature of the self. It is the conditioned self that is the
origin of dukkha.

He cites MN 28 where Sariputta quotes the Buddha as saying DA =

the dharma, and where Sariputta goes on to describe “these five
aggregates affected by clinging” as being dependently arisen, and
“The removal of desire and lust, the abandonment of desire and
lust for these five aggregates affected by clinging is the cessation of
suffering.”, yet he does not find them in descriptions of DA. But
they are all there. Desire and lust are there as kāma — lust for
what’s outside us — found in descriptions of craving and clinging in
The Rituals. The five aggregates appear: form in name-and-form,
feeling as a link, perception in definitions of the nāma part of name-
and-form, saṅkhārā as a link, and consciousness (viññāṇa, which I
translate as “attention”) as a link. He says the passage points out
three things he does not see ( “at least explicitly”). One is the
arising of the psychophysical self — which is implicit in the Prajāpati
myth, and the rituals based on it that give DA its shape. Another is
that suffering is dependent on desire — but saṅkhārā is the essence
of desire, and aging-and-death a mere stand-in for dukkha12 — so
they are both there, with one leading to the other. And finally, that
suffering ceases when we abandon desire is what’s being shown —
forward how dukkha comes about, allowed by our ignorance and
driven by desire, and backward, how it ceases. Everything is there.

I’m fully with Doug when he wants to take aging-and-death as semi-

metaphorical. It’s what the Buddha meant. Its literal description is
where we need to look to see how dukkha arises, and in its
representation of impermanence, it can be understood as a root
cause of dukkha — which is why aging and death (mostly death)
effectively is dukkha in the more poetic passages where the Buddha
tells people that if they have really understood and live the dharma,
the god of death (Mara) will not be able to see them, because they
will not be experiencing the aging-and-death he is talking about:
dukkha, suffering due to impermanence.

Doug says that we must “distinguish apologetics from scholarship”

and that “So long as we do not insist on reading contemporary
metaphors back into the texts we are on firm ground.” But his
method denies the Buddha the use of metaphors and methods of
teaching that were in use in his area of the world at the time he
lived, and instead attempts to substitute an entirely literal and
unsophisticated reading, as if the Buddha had little skill and no
subtlety at all. He takes away the Buddha’s use of metaphors and
credits us moderns with adapting the teaching to our needs by
adding metaphor to it. Is that not apologetics of a different kind?
And doesn’t it result in leaving dependent arising a confusing mess?

The Buddha had his own set of metaphors — the Prajāpati myth
and its perfect fit to dependent arising, and the points Vedic
scholars make about multivalent meanings usually focusing on
myth, cosmology and ritual indicate that no one here is pushing
contemporary myths anachronistically back into the Buddha’s time.
And the way the structure fits so smoothly into the whole of the
dhamma makes it clear that something like metaphor was the
Buddha’s method of choice. We need only take the time to study
his times to better understand what he was teaching. And to my
mind, at least, this one lesson — though it is framed in contexts
unfamiliar to us — does a wonderful job of describing human
nature that remains as visible today as it was then, and through
that description gives us knowledge we can use constructively
toward living a better life.

Dependent arising doesn’t need saving from anything but

misunderstandings of what it is about. And once understood, and
judged on its own merits, it seems quite true enough, and useful.
1 This is the way the teachers before him, and of his time, and even
afterward, spoke. In her book, “Language and Style of the Vedic
Ṛṣis”, Tatyana Elizarenkova discusses the difficulty of interpreting
the texts of ancient India not just because of their obscure
references, but because those references are intentionally touching
on three different levels of meaning: myth, cosmology, and ritual.
This is why it was entirely natural to the Buddha to do the same.
“But the study of the speech-act contexts and their concretized
demarcation is often impeded or made well-nigh impossible by the
intentional obscurity of the hymns. Their contents refer
simultaneously to several levels: mythological, cosmological, and
ritual.” — Tatyana J. Elizarenkova, “Language and Style of the Vedic
Ṛṣis” (1995) p. 10

2 Though some mistake the Buddha’s ability to see the same things
we see, for us moderns pushing our ideas back in time and inserting
them into our interpretations of the ancient texts, either we agree
that he had keen insights into our behaviors that were as valid then
as now, or we don’t think he did, in which case there’s little point in
studying the texts or trying to figure them out, as he cannot have
anything useful to say to us.

If we agree that he had such keen insights into our unchanged

nature, recognizing them in the texts is not an incorrect tendency
to attribute anachronistic thinking to him, to see him as a 21st
century naturalist in the fifth century BCE (this with reference to an
earlier forum post of Doug’s).

Instead it’s the understanding that he could see many of the same
things we can; he simply explained them differently than we do. It’s
not foolish to find the Buddha pointing out problems modern
science is also pointing out; it’s not misreading the texts. What is
absurd is to think that when we find the Buddha seeing what we
can see, we have to be deluding ourselves — because, what, he
couldn’t have been that smart? — when in fact, it’s the way that he
saw something anyone can see for themselves, then or now, that
gives what he taught so great a power in our lives.

3 “Now, that which is impermanent, unsatisfactory, subject to

change, is it proper to regard that as: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is
my self’?” SN 22.59 [pts S iii 67] translated by N.K.G. Mendis

4 See versions of suttas on dependent arising in which the chain

leads forward, not to “birth” and “aging-and-death” but to
argument and violence. In DN 15, the Buddha describes the chain,
backwards from aging-and-death as far as craving and feeling, and
then goes forward again, here in Thanissaro’s translation:

“Now, craving is dependent on feeling, seeking is dependent on

craving, acquisition is dependent on seeking, ascertainment is
dependent on acquisition, desire and passion is dependent on
ascertainment, attachment is dependent on desire and passion,
possessiveness is dependent on attachment, stinginess is
dependent on possessiveness, defensiveness is dependent on
stinginess, and because of defensiveness, dependent on
defensiveness, various evil, unskillful phenomena come into play:
the taking up of sticks and knives; conflicts, quarrels, and disputes;
accusations, divisive speech, and lies.” [pts D ii 58]

This is an example of the intentional fuzziness of the lesson being

taught. It isn’t about any one thing (e.g. if it was ever intended as a
reconciliation of karma and rebirth with there being no lasting self
— and I am confident that isn’t what it’s saying, but if it were — it
would not be solely about that). However, it is often described in
the oldest texts (like Quarrels and Disputes) as being about how we
behave toward each other right here and now.

5 I believe, though, that the Buddha does acknowledge the truth of

the basic survival instinct being fine, being harmless, when he
allows each monastic “the requisites” of food, water, shelter,
clothing, and medicines. He does frequently point out that there
should be no excessive clinging to even those, though.

6 “The self” that we don’t have to start with, in the Buddha’s view,
is not “the self” modern psychology tells us about. This is another
place in which what he is saying is fundamentally different from
ideas a 21st century thinker is working with. Our sciences tell us it is
important that we have a self identity. That is no doubt true, as is
the further caveat that what we need is a healthy self, not an
unhealthy one. What underlies the idea of healthy/unhealthy is
that we have the ability to modify that self. With that idea, we are
starting from a very different position than the one the Buddha had
to work with. In his day, “the self” was eternal and changeless, and
it is that self he was arguing against, not exactly the self we
Buddhists tend to be considering in our times. We are, so to speak,
working in a post-eternal-self society, psychologically at least.

That people in his time did not see the self as we see it is significant
in two ways. One, it is indicative of these being his ideas, built for
his culture, not ideas pushed back in time anachronistically. Two,
that his denial is of an eternal, changeless self, not of a healthy,
changing self, means that we need to examine what’s being said in
the light of modern understanding. For myself, in doing so, I find
the Buddha of the Pali suttas to never be saying “there is no self”
only “there is no eternal, changeless self in evidence”. Neither does
he say “but there is a self” meaning to convey that we have an
impermanent, changing self — even if he saw it that way, he
couldn’t say so without confusing his audience (who will keep
hearing “we have a self” as it being eternal and changeless, the way
people generally do when they just cannot grasp a new concept
and keep interpreting in terms of what’s familiar to them). But it
seems to me he recognized that when we think we have a self — by
any definition — there is something going on worth examining
there, and so he leaves it open, neither denying nor acknowledging
what, exactly it is. This fits with my understanding of what he is
doing as not intended to be taken as rigid science, but as a very
general “pointing toward” that leaves it open for us to decide how
we want to explain what we are seeing.

7 As lust in the myth’s basis in procreation, and as desire for

existence in the myth itself – representing the two manifestations
of the drive the Buddha describes throughout his talks, one for
what is dear to us externally, and the other for what is dear to us
internally, in our thoughts.

8 “An essential characteristic of the vocabulary of this text is

polysemy; the most multivalent words denote the basic concepts of
the Vedic model of the universe. The peculiarity of this polysemy
consists of a word’s semantics being correlated with denotates of
different levels, usually of the myth and ritual; this becomes the
basis for stylistic play.” — Tatyana J Elizarenkova in “Language and
Style of the Vedic Ṛṣis” — p. 285

9 “Clearing The Path” p. 80

10 The breakdown of akāliko is a–kāla–iko where a– is “not” the –

kal(a)- is the base word for “time” and the –iko ending makes it into
an adjective.
11 As in “The Dog-Duty Ascetic”, in Nanamoli’s translation:

“Here, Punna, someone develops the dog duty fully and

unstintingly, he develops the dog-habit fully and unstintingly, he
develops the dog mind fully and unstintingly, he develops dog
behavior fully and unstintingly. Having done that, on the dissolution
of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of dogs. But
if his view is such as this: ‘By this virtue or duty or asceticism or
religious life I shall become a (great) god or some (lesser) god,’ that
is wrong view in his case. Now there are two destinations for one
with wrong view, I say: hell or the animal womb. So, Punna, if his
dog duty is perfected, it will lead him to the company of dogs; if it is
not, it will lead him to hell.” — MN 57 [pts M i 387]

12 In SN 12.23 [pts S ii 31] dukkha stands exactly in the place of

aging-and-death. This is because it is not literal aging-and-death
being pointed to in dependent arising, instead, we are directed to
examine what it is about aging and death that brings about dukkha
that we have the power to end through this lesson. “Aging and
death” — and indeed all of life — is the field in which the noxious
weed of dukkha grows, and meditating on that field is what’s being
described. Without aging and death, would there be dukkha?
Without impermanence, would we suffer as we do? Impermanence
not just of the people and things we love, but of our concepts, and
of our selves?
Tags: apologetics, awareness, clinging, consciousness, craving,
dependent arising, dhamma, dukkha, four noble truths, ignorance,
impermanence, not self, Pali canon, Rebirth, suffering, suttas

Category: Articles

Linda

About the Author (Author Profile)

After 20-odd years of trying to figure out what Buddhism was

about, Linda Blanchard founded the Skeptical Buddhists’ Sangha in
Second Life in 2007 to get her questions answered, and there
discovered friends and community, along with a better
understanding of the dharma. She is -- very slowly -- learning Pali,
the language of the oldest Buddhist literature. As a result, she's
written a few papers (on Dependent Arising) for the Journal of the
Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies. Links to these can be found on
the About page of her blog.

Subscribe

If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.

Subscribe via RSS Feed

Comments (8)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

Carl HCarl H says:

February 8, 2017 at 10:01 am

Nicely done Linda. This makes a lot of sense to me and I find your
recontextualizing of DA so very helpful. So often the context of
ancient texts has become invisible, the metaphors lost. I run into
the same problem with the stories from the Blue Cliff Record or the
Book of Serenity, as well as much of Dogen. John Dunne has stated
that the is no such thing as non-contextual-truth. Thank you for
your efforts in re-establishing a context for DA that clarifies the
teaching and eliminates seeming contradictions. I’m not sure that
all of the seeming contradictions in the Nikayas can be explained
away as you have with DA. As usual, I need more study and will
have to re-read your work multiple times, but again, this has been
most helpful. Thanks for your hard work and dedication.

log in to reply

LindaLinda says:

February 10, 2017 at 10:27 am

Thanks, Carl. I really am sincerely interested in hearing about

apparent contradictions anywhere in the suttas that don’t seem to
be resolved by DA. The only one I am aware of is in MN 60, and
where it contradicts, it also breaks the logic of the sutta itself (as
Thanissaro points out on accesstoinsight.org) and so I’m pretty sure
that bit is a later addition. And if that is the case, it is interesting
that someone came along and felt the need to insert words into the
Buddha’s mouth to have him saying, outright, “If you say there is no
other world, you are wrong, because there is.” It would indicate a
time in the sangha when there was disagreement over that point.

log in to reply

LindaLinda says:

February 10, 2017 at 10:34 am

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.060.than.html

“It is noteworthy that the arguments in A2 and B2 are not safe-bet

arguments, for they assume that A is wrong and B is right. Whether
these arguments date from the Buddha or were added at a later
date, no one knows.”

log in to reply

NickNick says:

February 25, 2017 at 5:45 pm

Saṅkhārā is not drives. MN 9 includes drives (asava) within

ignorance. Saṅkhārā is defined as the kaya, vaci & citta sankhara,
which are defined in MN 44 as the breathing, thought and
perception & feeling.
Nāmarūpa is not giving individual identities to ourselves and
everything around us. This occurs at jati (birth). ‘Jati’ is defined as
the mental product of ‘beings’ (‘satta’).

log in to reply

NickNick says:

February 25, 2017 at 5:57 pm

There are two uses of nāmarūpa: (i) when Buddha answers the
questions of Brahmans, which is the old Brahmanistic meaning; and
(ii) the Buddha’s redefintion in Dependent Arising, namely,
‘mentality-materiality’.

MN 19 is about two kinds of thought. This sutta shows the human

capacity of perceiving & reflecting upon ignorant internal thoughts
& perceptions. The ignorant internal thoughts & perceptions and
resultant disturbed breathing are ‘sankhara’. That which can
objectively feel, perceive, reflect upon, pay attention to & make
intentions towards the ignorant thoughts & perceptions is ‘nama’.
‘Nama’ observes the ‘sankhara’. However, when ‘nama’ is also
overwhelmed with ignorance, ‘nama’ also becomes blind &
heedless and the wheel continues to spin towards ‘dukkha’.

log in to reply

LindaLinda says:
March 28, 2017 at 1:14 am

Yes, you’re right. Namarupa is all that — and more.

log in to reply

Michael FinleyMichael Finley says:

February 27, 2017 at 2:38 pm

Wiki may not be a definitive source, but in this case I think it nicely
canvasses the wide connotations of “sankara:”

“Sankhara (Pali; Sanskrit sanskara) is a term figuring prominently in

Buddhism. The word means ‘that which has been put together’ and
‘that which puts together’.

In the first (passive) sense, sankhara refers to conditioned

phenomena generally but specifically to all mental
“dispositions”.[1] These are called ‘volitional formations’ both
because they are formed as a result of volition and because they
are causes for the arising of future volitional actions.[2] English
translations for sankhara in the first sense of the word include
‘conditioned things,'[3] ‘determinations,'[4] ‘fabrications'[5] and
‘formations’ (or, particularly when referring to mental processes,
‘volitional formations’).[6]
In the second (active) sense of the word, sankhara refers to karma
(sankhara-khandha) that leads to conditioned arising, dependent
origination.[7][8]”

Look up the references in Wiki‘s “Sankara” article if you want, or

check various Pali dictionaries. This is a word of btoad, perhaps
subtle, meaning.

In the context of DA, I’d suggest that it points to the

physical/mental factors (maybe better, biological factors) in the
embodied human organism necessary for development of the
sense of self, which thus ultimately produce or condition suffering.
In this context, I’d suggest that “drives” is a useful translation into
modern colloquial English.

log in to reply

LindaLinda says:

March 28, 2017 at 1:13 am

Yes, exactly. In the sense of all of those, ‘that which has been put
together’ can be described as ‘that which has been driven into
existence’ by the causes outlined in DA. And as ‘that which puts
together’ it is those drives themselves.
• 1st link: Ignorance • 7h link: Feeling

• 2nd link: Volitional Formations • 8th link: Craving

• 3rd link: Consciousness • 9th link: Grasping

• 4th link: Mind - Body • 10th link: Becoming

• 5th link: Six Sense Spheres • 11th link: Birth

• 6th link: Contact • 12th link: Ageing & Death

Upon the Full Moon of the month of Visakha, now more than two
thousand five hundred years ago, the religious wanderer known as
Gotama, formerly Prince Siddhartha and heir to the throne of the
Sakiyan peoples, by his full insight into the Truth called Dharma
which is this mind and body, became the One Perfectly Enlightened
by himself.

His Enlightenment or Awakening, called Sambodhi, abolished in

himself unknowing and craving, destroyed greed, aversion and
delusion in his heart, so that "vision arose, super-knowledge arose,
wisdom arose, discovery arose, light arose - a total penetration into
the mind and body, its origin, its cessation and the way to its
cessation which was at the same time complete understanding of
the "world," its origin, its cessation and the way to its cessation. He
penetrated to the Truth underlying all existence. In meditative
concentration throughout one night, but after years of striving,
from being a seeker, He became "the One-who-Knows, the One-
who-Sees."
When He came to explain His great discovery to others, He did so in
various ways suited to the understanding of those who listened and
suited to help relieve the problems with which they were
burdened.

He knew with his Great Wisdom exactly what these were even if his
listeners were not aware of them, and out of His Great Compassion
taught Dhamma for those who wished to lay down their burdens.
The burdens which men, indeed all beings, carry round with them
are no different now from the Buddha's time. For then as now men
were burdened with unknowing and craving. They did not know of
the Four Noble Truths nor of Dependent Arising and they craved for
fire and poison and were then as now, consumed by fears. Lord
Buddha, One attained to the Secure has said:

"Profound, Ananda, is this Dependent Arising, and it appears

profound. It is through not understanding, not penetrating this law
that the world resembles a tangled skein of thread, a woven nest of
birds, a thicket of bamboo and reeds, that man does not escape
from (birth in) the lower realms of existence, from the states of
woe and perdition, and suffers from the round of rebirth."
The not-understanding of Dependent Arising is the root of all
sorrows experienced by all beings. It is also the most important of
the formulations of Lord Buddha’s Enlightenment. For a Buddhist it
is therefore most necessary to see into the heart of this for oneself.
This is done not be reading about it nor by becoming expert in
scriptures, nor by speculations upon one’s own and others’
concepts but by seeing Dependent Arising in one’s own life and by
coming to grips with it through calm and insight in one’s "own"
mind and body.

"He who sees Dependent Arising, sees the Dharma."

IGNORANCE (Avijja)Ist Link: IGNORANCE (avijja)

Represented by an image of a blind woman who blunders forward,

unable to see where she is going. So ignorance is blindness, not
seeing. It is a lack of insight into the reality of things.

This Pali word "avijja" is a negative term meaning "not knowing

completely" but it does not mean "knowing nothing at all." This
kind of unknowing is very special and not concerned with ordinary
ways or subjects of knowledge, for here what one does not know
are the Four Noble Truths, one does not see them clearly in one’s
own heart and one’s own life. In past lives, we did not care to see
'dukkha' (1), so we could not destroy 'the cause of dukkha' (2) or
craving which has impelled us to seek more and more lives, more
and more pleasures. 'The cessation of dukkha' (3) which perhaps
could have been seen by us in past lives, was not realised, so we
come to the present existence inevitably burdened with dukkha.
And in the past we can hardly assume that we set our feet upon the
'practice-path leading to the cessation of dukkha' (4) and we did
not even discover Stream-entry. We are now paying for our own
negligence in the past.

And this unknowing is not some kind of first cause in the past, for it
dwells in our hearts now. But due to this unknowing, as we shall
see, we have set in motion this wheel bringing round old age and
death and all other sorts of dukkha. Those past "selves" in previous
lives who are in the stream of my individual continuity did not
check their craving and so could not cut at the root of unknowing.
On the contrary they made kamma, some of the fruits of which in
this present life I, as their causal resultant, am receiving.

The picture helps us to understand this: a blind old woman (avijja is

of feminine gender) with a stick picks her way through a petrified
forest strewn with bones. It is said that the original picture here
should be an old blind she-camel led by a driver, the beast being
one accustomed to long and weary journeys across inhospitable
country, while its driver could be craving. Whichever simile is used,
the beginninglessness and the darkness of unknowing are well
suggested. We are the blind ones who have staggered from the
past into the present— to what sort of future?

Depending on the existence of unknowing in the heart there was

volitional action, kamma or abhisankhara, made in those past lives.

VOLITIONAL FORMATIONS (Sankhara)2nd Link: VOLITIONAL

FORMATIONS (sankhara)

Represented by a potter. Just as a potter forms clay into something

new, an action begins a sequence that leads to new consequences.
Once put into motion, the potter's wheel continues to spin without
much effort. Likewise, an action creates a predisposition in the
mind.

Intentional actions have the latent power within them to bear fruit
in the future - either in a later part of the life in which they were
performed, in the following life, or in some more distant life, but
their potency is not lost with even the passing of aeons; and
whenever the necessary conditions obtain that past kamma may
bear fruit. Now, in past lives we have made kamma, and due to our
ignorance of the Four Noble Truths we have been "world-
upholders" and so making good and evil kamma we have ensured
the continued experience of this world.

Beings like this, obstructed by unknowing in their hearts have been

compared to a potter making pots: he makes successful and
beautiful pottery (skillful kamma) and he is sometimes careless and
his pots crack and break up from various flaws (unskillful kamma).
And he gets his clay fairly well smeared over himself just as purity
of heart is obscured by the mud of kamma. The simile of the potter
is particularly apt because the word 'Sankhara' means "forming,"
"shaping," and "compounding," and therefore it has often been
rendered in English as "Formations."

Depending on the existence of these volitions produced in past

lives, there arises the Consciousness called "relinking" which
becomes the basis of this present life.

Back to TopBack to Top

CONSCIOUSNESS (Vinnana)3rd Link: CONSCIOUSNESS (vinnana)

The rebirth consciousness or "consciousness that links on", is

represented by a monkey going from window to window. This
represents a single consciousness perceiving through the various
sense organs. The monkey represents the very primitive spark of
sense-consciousness which is the first moment in the mental life of
the new being.

This relinking consciousness may be of different qualities, according

to the kamma upon which it depends. In the case of all those who
read this, the consciousness "leaping" into a new birth at the time
of conception, was a human relinking consciousness arising as a
result of having practiced at least the Five Precepts, the basis of
"humanness" in past lives. One should note that this relinking
consciousness is a resultant, not something which can be controlled
by will. If one has not made kamma suitable for becoming a human
being, one cannot will, when the time of death comes round, "Now
I shall become a man again!" The time for intentional action was
when one had the opportunity to practice Dhamma. Although our
relinking- consciousness in this birth is now behind us, it is now that
we can practice Dhamma and make more sure of a favourable
relinking consciousness in future—that is, if we wish to go on living
in Samsara.
This relinking-consciousness is the third constituent necessary for
conception, for even though it is the mother’s period and sperm is
deposited in the womb, if there is no "being" desiring to take
rebirth at that place and time there will be no fertilisation of the
ovum.

Dependent upon relinking-consciousness there is the arising of

Mind-body.

Back to TopBack to Top

MENTALITY-MATERIALITY (Nama-Rupa)4th Link: MIND - BODY

(nama-rupa)

Depicted by people sitting in a boat with one of them steering. The

boat symbolises form, and its occupants, the mental aggregates.

This is not a very accurate translation but gives the general

meaning. There is more included in rupa that is usually thought of
as body, while mind is a compound of feeling, perception, volition
and consciousness. This mind and body is two interactive
continuities in which there is nothing stable. Although in
conventional speech we talk of "my mind" and "my body," implying
that there is some sort of owner lurking in the background, the wise
understand that laws govern the workings of both mental states
and physical changes and mind cannot be ordered to be free of
defilements, nor body told that it must not grow old, become sick
and die.

But it is in the mind that a change can be wrought instead of

drifting through life at the mercy of the inherent instability of mind
and body. So in the illustration, mind is doing the work of punting
the boat of psycho-physical states on the river of cravings, while
body is the passive passenger. The Tibetan picture shows a coracle
being rowed over swirling waters with three (? or four) other
passengers, who doubtless represent the other groups or
aggregates (khandha).

With the coming into existence of mind-body, there is the arising of

the Six Sense-spheres.

Back to TopBack to Top

THE SIX-FOLD SENSE BASE (Salayatana)5th Link: SIX SENSE -

SPHERES (salayatana)

Depicted by a house with six windows and a door. The senses are
the 'portals' whereby we gain our impression of the world. Each of
the senses is the manifestation of our desire to experience things in
a particular way.

A house with six windows is the usual symbol for this link. These six
senses are eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch and mind, and these are
the bases for the reception of the various sorts of information
which each can gather in the presence of the correct conditions.
This information falls under six headings corresponding to the six
spheres: sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles and thoughts.
Beyond these six spheres of sense and their corresponding six
objective spheres, we know nothing. All our experience is limited by
the senses and their objects with the mind counted as the sixth.
The five outer senses collect data only in the present but mind, the
sixth, where this information is collected and processed, ranges
through the three times adding memories from the past and hopes
and fears for the future, as well as thoughts of various kinds
relating to the present. It may also add information about the
spheres of existence which are beyond the range of the five outer
senses, such as the various heavens, the ghosts and the hell-states.
A mind developed through collectedness (samadhi) is able to
perceive these worlds and their inhabitants.

The six sense-spheres existing, there is Contact.

Back to TopBack to Top

CONTACT (Phassa)6th Link: CONTACT (phassa)

A couple embracing depicts the contact of the sense organs with

there objects. With this link, the psychophysical organism begins to
interact with the world. The sensuous impression is symbolised by a
kiss. This indicates that there is a meeting with an object and a
distinguishing of it prior to the production of feeling.

This means the contact between the six senses and the respective
objects. For instance, when the necessary conditions are all
fulfilled, there being an eye, a sight-object, light and the eye being
functional and the person awake and turned toward the object,
there is likely to be eye-contact, the striking of the object upon the
sensitive eye-base. The same is true for each of the senses and
their type of contact. The traditional symbol for this link shows a
man and a woman embracing.

In dependence on sensuous impressions, arises Feeling.

Back to TopBack to Top

FEELING (Vedana)7th Link: FEELING (vedana)

Symbolised by an eye pierced by an arrow. The arrow represents

sense data impinging on the sense organs, in this case the eye. In a
very vivid way, the image suggests the strong feelings which
sensory experience evokes - although only painful feeling is here
implied, both painful and pleasant are intended. Even a very small
condition causes a great deal of feeling in the eye. Likewise, no
matter what kind of feeling we experience, painful or pleasurable,
we are driven by it and conditioned by it.

When there have been various sorts of contact through the six
senses, feelings arise which are the emotional response to those
contacts. Feelings are of three sorts: pleasant, painful and neither
pleasant nor painful. The first are welcome and are the basis for
happiness, the second are unwelcome and are the basis for dukkha
while the third are the neutral sort of feelings which we experience
so often but hardly notice.

But all feelings are unstable and liable to change, for no mental
state can continue in equilibrium. Even moments of the highest
happiness whatever we consider this is, pass away and give place to
different ones. So even happiness which is impermanent based on
pleasant feelings is really dukkha, for how can the true unchanging
happiness be found in the unstable? Thus the picture shows a man
with his eyes pierced by arrows, a strong enough illustration of this.

When feelings arise, Cravings are (usually) produced.

Back to TopBack to Top

CRAVING (Tanha)8th Link: CRAVING (tanha)

Represented by a person drinking beer. Even though it harms you,

no matter how much you drink, you just keep on drinking. Also
known as attachment, it is a mental factor that increases desire
without any satisfaction.

Up to this point, the succession of events has been determined by

past kamma. Craving, however, leads to the making of new kamma
in the present and it is possible now, and only now, to practice
Dhamma. What is needed here is mindfulness (sati), for without it
no Dhamma at all can be practiced while one will be swept away by
the force of past habits and let craving and unknowing increase
themselves within one’s heart. When one does have mindfulness
one may and can know "this is pleasant feeling," "this is unpleasant
feeling," "this is neither pleasant nor unpleasant feeling"—and such
contemplation of feelings leads one to understand and beware of
greed, aversion and delusion, which are respectively associated
with the three feelings. With this knowledge one can break out of
the Wheel of Birth and Death. But without this Dhamma-practice it
is certain that feelings will lead on to more cravings and whirl one
around this wheel full of dukkha. As Venerable Nagarjuna has said:

"Desires have only surface sweetness,

hardness within and bitterness deceptive as the kimpa-fruit.

Thus says the King of Conquerors.

Such links renounce they bind the world

Within samsara’s prison grid.

If your head or dress caught fire

in haste you would extinguish it.

Do likewise with desire.

Which whirls the wheel of wandering-on

and is the root of suffering.

No better thing to do!"

L.K. 23, 104

In Sanskrit, the word trisna (tanha) means thirst, and by extension

implies "thirst for experience." For this reason, craving is shown as
a toper guzzling intoxicants and in the picture has been added more
bottles representing craving for sensual sphere existence and the
craving for the higher heavens of the Brahma-worlds which are
either of subtle form, or formless.
Where the kamma of further craving is produced there arises
Grasping.

Back to TopBack to Top

CLINGING (Upadana)9th Link: GRASPING (upadana)

Represented by a monkey reaching for a fruit. Also known as

clinging, it means mentally grabbing at an object one desires.

This is the mental state that clings to or grasps the object. Because
of this clinging which is described as craving in a high degree, man
becomes a slave to passion.

Upadana is fourfold: 1. Attachment to sensual pleasures; 2.

Attachment to wrong and evil views; 3. Attachment to mere
external observances, rites and rituals; and 4. Attachment to self,
an erroneous lasting soul entity. Man entertains thoughts of
craving, and in proportion as he fails to ignore them, they grow till
they get intensified to the degree of tenacious clinging.
This is an intensification and diversification of craving which is
directed to four ends: sensual pleasures, views which lead astray
from Dhamma, external religious rites and vows, and attachment to
the view of soul or self as being permanent. When these become
strong in people they cannot even become interested in Dhamma,
for their efforts are directed away from Dhamma and towards
dukkha. The common reaction is to redouble efforts to find peace
and happiness among the objects which are grasped at. Hence both
pictures show a man reaching up to pick more fruit although his
basket is full already.

Where this grasping is found there Becoming is to be seen.

Back to TopBack to Top

BECOMING (Bhava) 10th Link: BECOMING (bhava)

Represented by a woman in late pregnancy. Just as she is about to

bring forth a fully developed child, the karma that will produce the
next lifetime is fully potentialized though not yet manifest.

With hearts boiling with craving and grasping, people ensure for
themselves more and more of various sorts of life, and pile up the
fuel upon the fire of dukkha. The ordinary person, not knowing
about dukkha, wants to stoke up the blaze, but the Buddhist way of
doing things is to let the fires go out for want of fuel by stopping
the process of craving and grasping and thus cutting off Ignorance
at its root. If we want to stay in samsara we must be diligent and
see that our 'becoming', which is happening all the time shaped by
our kamma, is 'becoming' in the right direction. This means
'becoming' in the direction of purity and following the white path of
Dhamma-practice. This will contribute to whatever we become, or
do not become, at the end of this life when the pathways to the
various realms stand open and we 'become' according to our
practice and to our death-consciousness.

In the presence of Becoming there is arising in a new birth.

Back to TopBack to Top

BIRTH (Jati)11th Link: BIRTH (jati)

This link is represented by the very explicit image of a woman giving

birth to a child.

Birth means the appearance of the five aggregates (material form,

feeling, perception, formation and consciousness)in the mother’s
womb.

Birth, as one might expect, is shown as a mother in the process of

childbirth, a painful business and a reminder of how dukkha cannot
be avoided in any life. Whatever the future life is to be, if we are
not able to bring the wheel to a stop in this life, certainly that
future will arise conditioned by the kamma made in this life. But it
is no use thinking that since there are going to be future births, one
may as well put off Dhamma practice until then—for it is not sure
what those future births will be like. And when they come around,
they are just the present moment as well. So no use waiting!

Venerable Nagarjuna shows that it is better to extricate oneself:

"Where birth takes place,

quite naturally are fear,

old age and misery,

disease, desire and death,

As well a mass of other ills.

When birth’s no longer brought about.

All the links are ever stopped."

L.K. 111

Naturally where there is Birth, is also Old-age and Death.

Back to TopBack to Top

AGING AND DEATH (Dukkha)12th Link: AGEING AND DEATH (jara-

marana)

The final link is represented by a dying person. Ageing is both

progressive, occurring every moment of our lifetime, and
degenerative which leads to death.

In future one is assured, given enough of Unknowing and Craving,

of lives without end but also of deaths with end. The one appeals to
greed but the other arouses aversion. One without the other is
impossible. But this is the path of heedlessness. The Dhamma-path
leads directly to Deathlessness, the going beyond birth and death,
beyond all dukkha.

We are well exhorted by the words of Acharya Nagarjuna:

"Do you therefore exert yourself:

At all times try to penetrate Into the heart of these Four Truths;

For even those who dwell at home,

they will, by understanding them ford the river of (mental) floods."

L.K. 115

This is a very brief outline of the workings of this wheel which we

cling to for our own harm and the hurt of others. We are the
makers of this wheel and the turners of this wheel, but if we wish it
and work for it, we are the ones who can stop this wheel.

Back to TopBack to Top

Conclusion

This Wheel of Life teaches us and reminds us of many important

features of the Dhamma as it was intended to by the teachers of
old. Contemplating all its features frequently helps to give us true
insight into the nature of Samsara. With its help and our own
practice we come to see Dependent Arising in ourselves. When this
has been done thoroughly all the riches of Dhamma will be
available to us, not from books or discussions, nor from listening to
others’ explanations...

The Exalted Buddha has said:

"Whoever sees Dependent Arising, he sees Dhamma;

Whoever sees Dhamma, he sees Dependent Arising."

Anicca vata sankhara

uppada vayadammino

Uppajjitva nirujjhant

tesam vupasamo sukho.

Conditions truly they are transient

With the nature to arise and cease

Having arisen, then they pass away

Their calming, cessation is happiness.

Dependent-arising is the general philosophy of all Buddhist systems

even though many different interpretations are found among those
systems. in Sanskrit the word for dependent-arising is
pratītyasamutpāda. The word pratītya has three different
meanings— meeting, relying, and depending—but all three, in
terms of their basic import, mean dependence. Samutpāda means
arising. Hence, the meaning of pratītyasamutpāda is that which
arises in dependence upon conditions, in reliance upon conditions,
through the force of conditions. On a subtle level, it is explained as
the main reason why phenomena are empty of inherent existence.
Image source

In order to reflect on the fact that things—the subjects upon which

a meditator reflects—are empty of inherent existence because
dependently arisen, it is necessary to identify the subjects of this
reflection: the phenomena that produce pleasure and pain, help
and harm, and so forth. If one does not understand cause and
effect well, it is extremely difficult to realize that these phenomena
are empty of inherent existence due to being dependently arisen.
One must develop an understanding of cause and effect—that
certain causes help and harm in certain ways. Hence, the Buddha
set forth a presentation of dependent-arising in connection with
the cause and effect of actions in the process of life in cyclic
existence so that penetrating understanding of the process of cause
and effect could be gained.

Thus, there is one level of dependent-arising that is concerned with

causality, in this case the twelve branches, or links, of dependent-
arising of life in cyclic existence: ignorance, action consciousness,
name and form, the six sense spheres, contact, feeling, attachment,
grasping, existence, birth, and aging and death. Then there is a
second, deeper level of dependent-arising that applies to all
objects; this is the establishment of phenomena dependent upon
their parts. There is no phenomenon that does not have parts, and
thus every phenomenon is imputed dependent upon its parts.

There is a third, even deeper level, which is the fact that

phenomena are merely imputed by terms and conceptuality in
dependence upon their bases of imputation. When objects are
sought among their bases of imputation, nothing can be found to
be the imputed object itself, and thus phenomena are merely
dependently arisen—merely imputed in dependence upon bases of
imputation. While the first level of dependent-arising refers to the
arising of compounded phenomena in dependence upon causes
and conditions and thus applies only to impermanent, caused
phenomena, the other two levels apply to both permanent and
impermanent phenomena.

When the Buddha set forth the twelve links of dependent-arising,

he spoke from a vast perspective and with great import. He taught
the twelve links in detail in the Rice Seedling Sūtra. As in other
discourses, the Buddha teaches by responding to questions. In this
sūtra, the Buddha speaks of dependent-arising in three ways:

Due to the existence of this, that arises.

Due to the production of this, that is produced.

It is thus: due to ignorance there is compositional action; due to

compositional action there is consciousness; due to consciousness
there is name and form; due to name and form there are the six
sense spheres; due to the six sense spheres there is contact; due to
contact there is feeling; due to feeling there is attachment; due to
attachment there is grasping; due to grasping there is the
potentialized level of karma called “existence”; due to existence
there is birth; and due to birth there is aging and death.

When the Buddha says, “Due to the existence of this, that arises,”
he indicates that the phenomena of cyclic existence arise not
through the force of supervision by a permanent deity but due to
specific conditions. Merely due to the presence of certain causes
and conditions, specific effects arise.

When the Buddha says, “Due to the production of this, that is

produced,” he indicates that an unproduced, permanent
phenomenon such as the general nature propounded by the
Sāṃkhya system cannot create effects. Rather, the phenomena of
cyclic existence arise from conditions that are impermanent by
nature.

Then the question arises: if the phenomena of cyclic existence are

produced from impermanent conditions, could they be produced
from just any impermanent conditions? No. Thus, in the third
phase, the Buddha indicates that the phenomena of cyclic existence
are not produced from just any impermanent causes and conditions
but rather from specific ones that have the potential to give rise to
specific phenomena.
Setting forth the dependent-arising of suffering, Buddha shows that
suffering has ignorance—obscuration—as its root cause. This
impure, faulty seed produces an activity that deposits in the mind a
potency that will generate suffering by producing a new life in cyclic
existence. It eventually has as its fruit the last link of dependent-
arising, the suffering of aging and death.