Buddhism and the Four Noble Truths.

The Truths are:

1. The truth of suffering (dukkha)

2. The truth of the cause of suffering (samudaya)
3. The truth of the end of suffering (nirhodha)
4. The truth of the path that frees us from suffering (magga)

What You Do Is What Happens to You

When we seem stuck in old, destructive patterns, it may not be

the karma of the past that's causing us to be stuck. If we're stuck,
it's more likely that we're re-creating the same old patterns with
our present thoughts and attitudes. To change our karma, and
change our lives, we have to change our minds. Zen teacher John
Daido Loori said, "Cause and effect are one thing. And what is
that one thing? You. That’s why what you do and what happens to
you are the same thing."

Certainly the karma of the past impacts your present life, but
change is always possible.

No Judge, No Justice

Buddhism teaches that there are other forces beside karma that
shape our lives. These include natural forces like the changing
seasons and gravity. When a natural disaster like an earthquake
strikes a community, this is not some kind of collective karmic
punishment. It's an unfortunate event that requires a
compassionate response, not judgment.

Some people have a hard time understanding karma is created by

our own actions. They want to believe there is some kind of
mysterious cosmic force Out There somewhere, directing karma,
rewarding good people and punishing bad people. Some religions
may teach that, but not Buddhism. Buddhist scholar Walpola
Rahula said,

"The theory of karma should not be confused with so-called 'moral

justice' or 'reward and punishment'. The idea of moral justice, or
reward and punishment, arises out of the conception of a supreme
being, a God, who sits in judgment, who is a law-giver and who
decides what is right and wrong. The term 'justice' is ambiguous
and dangerous, and in its name more harm than good is done to
humanity. The theory of karma is the theory of cause and effect,
of action and reaction; it is a natural law, which has nothing to do
with the idea of justice or reward and punishment."

The Good, the Bad, and the Karma

Sometimes people talk about "good" and "bad" (or "evil") karma.
Buddhist understanding of "good" and "evil" is somewhat different
from the way Westerners usually understand these terms. To see
the Buddhist perspective, it's useful to substitute the words
"wholesome" and "unwholesome" for "good" and "evil."
Wholesome actions spring from selfless compassion, loving
kindness, and wisdom. Unwholesome actions spring from greed,
hate, and ignorance.

BuddhaNet has a useful essay on wholesome and unwholesome

karma. See also "Evil in Buddhism."

Karma and Rebirth

The way most people understand reincarnation is that a soul, or

some autonomous essence of self, survives death and is reborn
into a new body. In that case, it's easy to imagine the karma of a
past life sticking to that self and being carried over to a new life.
But Buddhist teachings are very different.

The Buddha taught a doctrine called anatman, or anatta -- no

soul, or no self. According to this doctrine, there is no "self" in the
sense of a permanent, integral, autonomous being within an
individual existence. What we think of as our self, our personality
and ego, are temporary creations that do not survive death.

In light of this doctrine -- what is it that is reborn? And where

does karma fit in?
A full discussion of this teaching would, I'm afraid, take several
more essays explaining the Buddhist teachings of self, life and
death. In brief, the karma of one life carries itself forward and
results in a new life. See this short essay on karma and rebirth,
for a little more explanation.

The Natural Law

The theory of karma harps on the Newtonian principle that every

action produces an equal and opposite reaction. Every time we
think or do something, we create a cause, which in time will bear
its corresponding effects. And this cyclical cause and effect
generates the concepts of (or the world) and birth and
reincarnation. It is the personality of a human being or the
jivatman - with its positive and negative actions - that causes
karma.

Karma could be both the activities of the body or the mind,

irrespective of the consideration whether the performance brings
fruition immediately or at a later stage. However, the involuntary
or the reflex actions of the body cannot be called karma.

Your Karma Is Your Own Doing

Every person is responsible for his or her acts and thoughts, so

each person's karma is entirely his or her own. Occidentals see
the operation of karma as fatalistic. But that is far from true since
it is in the hands of an individual to shape his own future by
schooling his present.

Hindu philosophy, which believes in life after death, holds the

doctrine that if the karma of an individual is good enough, the
next birth will be rewarding, and if not, the person may actually
devolve and degenerate into a lower life form. In order to achieve
good karma it is important to live life according to dharma or what
is right.
Three Kinds of Karma

According to the ways of life chosen by a person, his karma can

be classified into three kinds. The satvik karma, which is without
attachment, selfless and for the benefit of others; the rajasik
karma, which is selfish where the focus is on gains for oneself;
and the tamasik karma, which is undertaken without heed to
consequences, and is supremely selfish and savage.

In this context Dr. D N Singh in his A Study of Hinduism, quotes

Mahatma Gandhi's lucid differentiation between the three.
According to Gandhi, the tamasik works in a mechanic fashion,
the rajasik drives too many horses, is restless and always doing
something or other, and the satvik works with peace in mind.

Swami Sivananda, of the Divine Life Society, Rishikesh classifies

karma into three kinds on the basis of action and reaction:
Prarabdha (so much of past actions as has given rise to the
present birth), Sanchita (the balance of past actions that will give
rise to future births - the storehouse of accumulated actions),
Agami or Kriyamana (acts being done in the present life).

The Discipline of Unattached Action

According to the scriptures, the discipline of unattached action

(Nishkâma Karma) can lead to salvation of the soul. So they
recommend that one should remain detached while carrying out his
duties in life. As Lord Krishna said in the Bhagavad Gita: "To the
man thinking about the objects (of the senses) arises attachment
towards them; from attachment, arises longing; and from longing
arises anger. From anger comes delusion; and from delusion loss of
memory; from loss of memory, the ruin of discrimination; and on
the ruin of discrimination, he perishes".
 Karma
by

Thanissaro Bhikkhu

Karma is one of those words we don't translate. Its basic meaning is

simple enough — action — but because of the weight the Buddha's
teachings give to the role of action, the Sanskrit word karma packs
in so many implications that the English word action can't carry all
its luggage. This is why we've simply airlifted the original word into
our vocabulary.

But when we try unpacking the connotations the word carries now
that it has arrived in everyday usage, we find that most of its
luggage has gotten mixed up in transit. In the eyes of most
Americans, karma functions like fate — bad fate, at that: an
inexplicable, unchangeable force coming out of our past, for which
we are somehow vaguely responsible and powerless to fight. "I
guess it's just my karma," I've heard people sigh when bad fortune
strikes with such force that they see no alternative to resigned
acceptance. The fatalism implicit in this statement is one reason
why so many of us are repelled by the concept of karma, for it
sounds like the kind of callous myth-making that can justify almost
any kind of suffering or injustice in the status quo: "If he's poor, it's
because of his karma." "If she's been raped, it's because of her
karma." From this it seems a short step to saying that he or she
deserves to suffer, and so doesn't deserve our help.

This misperception comes from the fact that the Buddhist concept of
karma came to the West at the same time as non-Buddhist
concepts, and so ended up with some of their luggage. Although
many Asian concepts of karma are fatalistic, the early Buddhist
concept was not fatalistic at all. In fact, if we look closely at early
Buddhist ideas of karma, we'll find that they give even less
importance to myths about the past than most modern Americans
do.
For the early Buddhists, karma was non-linear and complex. Other
Indian schools believed that karma operated in a simple straight
line, with actions from the past influencing the present, and present
actions influencing the future. As a result, they saw little room for
free will. Buddhists, however, saw that karma acts in multiple
feedback loops, with the present moment being shaped both by
past and by present actions; present actions shape not only the
future but also the present. Furthermore, present actions need not
be determined by past actions. In other words, there is free will,
although its range is somewhat dictated by the past. The nature of
this freedom is symbolized in an image used by the early Buddhists:
flowing water. Sometimes the flow from the past is so strong that
little can be done except to stand fast, but there are also times
when the flow is gentle enough to be diverted in almost any
direction.

So, instead of promoting resigned powerlessness, the early

Buddhist notion of karma focused on the liberating potential of what
the mind is doing with every moment. Who you are — what you
come from — is not anywhere near as important as the mind's
motives for what it is doing right now. Even though the past may
account for many of the inequalities we see in life, our measure as
human beings is not the hand we've been dealt, for that hand can
change at any moment. We take our own measure by how well we
play the hand we've got. If you're suffering, you try not to continue
the unskillful mental habits that would keep that particular karmic
feedback going. If you see that other people are suffering, and
you're in a position to help, you focus not on their karmic past but
your karmic opportunity in the present: Someday you may find
yourself in the same predicament that they're in now, so here's
your opportunity to act in the way you'd like them to act toward you
when that day comes.

This belief that one's dignity is measured, not by one's past, but by
one's present actions, flew right in the face of the Indian traditions
of caste-based hierarchies, and explains why early Buddhists had
such a field day poking fun at the pretensions and mythology of the
brahmans. As the Buddha pointed out, a brahman could be a
superior person not because he came out of a brahman womb, but
only if he acted with truly skillful intentions.

We read the early Buddhist attacks on the caste system, and aside
from their anti-racist implications, they often strike us as quaint.
What we fail to realize is that they strike right at the heart of our
myths about our own past: our obsession with defining who we are
in terms of where we come from — our race, ethnic heritage,
gender, socio-economic background, sexual preference — our
modern tribes. We put inordinate amounts of energy into creating
and maintaining the mythology of our tribe so that we can take
vicarious pride in our tribe's good name. Even when we become
Buddhists, the tribe comes first. We demand a Buddhism that
honors our myths.

From the standpoint of karma, though, where we come from is old

karma, over which we have no control. What we "are" is a nebulous
concept at best — and pernicious at worst, when we use it to find
excuses for acting on unskillful motives. The worth of a tribe lies
only in the skillful actions of its individual members. Even when
those good people belong to our tribe, their good karma is theirs,
not ours. And, of course, every tribe has its bad members, which
means that the mythology of the tribe is a fragile thing. To hang
onto anything fragile requires a large investment of passion,
aversion, and delusion, leading inevitably to more unskillful actions
on into the future.

So the Buddhist teachings on karma, far from being a quaint relic

from the past, are a direct challenge to a basic thrust — and basic
flaw — in our culture. Only when we abandon our obsession with
finding vicarious pride in our tribal past, and can take actual pride in
the motives that underlie our present actions, can we say that the
word karma, in its Buddhist sense, has recovered its luggage. And
when we open the luggage, we'll find that it's brought us a gift: the
gift we give ourselves and one another when we drop our myths
about who we are, and can instead be honest about what we're
doing with each moment — at the same time making the effort to
do it right.

KARMA

Today we have come to a couple of related ideas which are common

in Buddhism and they are the ideas of karma and rebirth. These
ideas are closely inter-related, but because the subject is a fairly
wide one, we will begin to deal with the idea of karma today and
rebirth in the following lecture.

We know that what binds us in samsara are the defilements -

desire, ill-will and ignorance. We spoke about this when we talked
about the Second Noble Truth - the truth of the cause of suffering.
These defilements are something which every living being in
samsara shares, whether we speak of human beings or animals or
beings who live in the other realms which we do not normally
perceive. In this, all living beings are alike and yet amongst all the
living beings that we can normally perceive, there are many
differences. For instance, some of us are wealthy, some are less
wealthy, some are strong and healthy, others are disabled and so
forth. There are many differences amongst living beings and even
more so there are differences between animals and human beings.
These differences are due to karma.

What we all share - desire, ill-will and ignorance - are common to

all living beings, but the particular condition in which we find
ourselves is the result of our particular karma that conditions the
situation in which we find ourselves, the situation in which we may
be wealthy, strong and so forth. These circumstances are decided
by karma. It is in this sense that karma explains the differences
amongst living beings. It explains why some beings are fortunate
while others are less fortunate, some are happy while others are
less happy. The Buddha has specifically stated that karma explains
the differences between living beings. You might also recall that the
understanding of how karma affects the birth of living beings in
happy or unhappy circumstances - the knowledge of how living
beings move from happy circumstances to unhappy circumstances,
and vice versa, from unhappy to happy circumstances as a result of
their karma - was part of the Buddha’s experience on the night of
His enlightenment. It is karma that explains the circumstances that
living beings find themselves in.

Having said this much about the function of karma, let us look more
closely at what karma is. Let us define karma. Maybe we can define
karma best by first deciding what karma is not. It is quite often the
case that we find people misunderstanding the idea of karma. This
is particularly true in our daily casual use of the term. We find
people saying that one cannot change one’s situation because of
one’s karma. In this sense, karma becomes a sort of escape. It
becomes similar to predestination or fatalism. This is emphatically
not the correct understanding of karma. It is possible that this
misunderstanding of karma has come about because of the popular
idea that we have about luck and fate. It may be for this reason
that our idea of karma has become overlaid in popular thought with
the notion of predestination. Karma is not fate or predestination.

If karma is not fate or predestination, then what is it? Let us look at

the term itself. Karma means action, means "to do". Immediately
we have an indication that the real meaning of karma is not fate
because karma is action. It is dynamic. But it is more than simply
action because it is not mechanical action. It is not unconscious or
involuntary action. It is intentional, conscious, deliberate, wilful
action. How is it that this intentional, wilful action conditions or
determines our situation? It is because every action must have a
reaction, an effect. This truth has been expressed in regard to the
physical universe by the great physicist Newton who formulated the
law which states that every action must have an equal and opposite
reaction. In the moral sphere of conscious actions, we have a
counterpart to the physical law of action and reaction, the law that
every intentional, wilful action must have its effect. This is why we
sometimes speak either of Karma-Vipaka, intentional action and its
ripened effect, or we speak of Karma-Phala, intentional action and
its fruit. It is when we speak of intentional action together with its
effect or fruit that we speak of the Law of Karma.

In its most basic sense, the Law of Karma in the moral sphere
teaches that similar actions will lead to similar results. Let us take
an example. If we plant a mango seed, the plant that springs up will
be a mango tree, and eventually it will bear a mango fruit.
Alternatively, if we plant a Pong Pong seed, the tree that will spring
up will be a Pong Pong tree and the fruit a Pong Pong. As one sows,
so shall one reap. According to one’s action, so shall be the fruit.
Similarly, in the Law of Karma, if we do a wholesome action,
eventually we will get a wholesome fruit, and if we do an
unwholesome action eventually we will get an unwholesome, painful
result. This is what we mean when we say that causes bring about
effects that are similar to the causes. This we will see very clearly
when we come to specific examples of wholesome and
unwholesome actions.

We can understand by means of this general introduction that

karma can be of two varieties –

wholesome karma or good karma and unwholesome karma or bad

karma. In order that we should not misunderstand this description
of karma, it is useful for us to look at the original term. In this case,
it is kushala or akushala karma, karma that is wholesome or
unwholesome. In order that we understand how these terms are
being used, it is important that we know the real meaning of
kushala and akushala. Kushala means intelligent or skilful, whereas
akushala means not intelligent, not skilful. This helps us to
understand how these terms are being used, not in terms of good
and evil but in terms of skilful and unskilful, in terms of intelligent
and unintelligent, in terms of wholesome and unwholesome. Now
how wholesome and how unwholesome? Wholesome in the sense
that those actions which are beneficial to oneself and others, those
actions that spring not out of desire, ill-will and ignorance, but out
of renunciation, loving-kindness and compassion, and wisdom.

One may ask how does one know whether an action that is
wholesome or unwholesome will produce happiness or unhappiness.
The answer is time will tell. The Buddha Himself answered the
question. He has explained that so long as an unwholesome action
does not bear its fruit of suffering, for so long a foolish person will
consider that action good. But when that unwholesome action bears
its fruit of suffering then he will realize that the action is
unwholesome. Similarly, so long as a wholesome action does not
bear its fruit of happiness, a good person may consider that action
unwholesome. When it bears its fruit of happiness, then

he will realize that the action is good. So one needs to judge

wholesome and unwholesome action from the point of view of long-
term effect. Very simply, whole-some actions result in eventual
happiness for oneself and others, while unwholesome actions have
the opposite

result, they result in suffering for oneself and others.

Specifically, the unwholesome actions which are to be avoided

relate to the three doors or means of action, and these are body,
speech and mind. There are three unwholesome actions of the
body, four of speech and three of mind that are to be avoided. The
three unwholesome actions of body that are to be avoided are
killing, stealing and sexual misconduct. The four unwholesome
actions of speech that are to be avoided are lying, slander, harsh
speech and malicious gossip. The three unwholesome actions of
mind that are to be avoided are greed, anger and delusion. By
avoiding these ten unwholesome actions we will avoid their
consequences. The unwholesome actions have suffering as their
fruit. The fruit of these unwholesome actions can take various
forms. The fully ripened fruit of the unwholesome actions consists of
rebirth in the lower realms, in the realms of suffering - hell, hungry
ghosts and animals. If these unwholesome actions are not sufficient
to result in rebirth in these lower realms, they will result in
unhappiness in this life as a human being. Here we can see at work
the principle of a cause resulting in a similar effect. For example,
habitual killing which is motivated by ill-will and anger and which
results in the taking of the life of other beings will result in rebirth in
the hells where one’s experience is saturated by anger and ill-will
and where one may be repeatedly killed. If killing is not sufficiently
habitual or weighty to result in rebirth in the hells, killing will result
in shortened life as a human being, separation from loved ones,
fear or paranoia. Here too we can see how the effect is similar to
the cause. Killing shortens the life of others, deprives others of their
loved ones and so forth, and so if we kill we will be liable to
experience these effects. Similarly, stealing which is borne of the
defilement of desire may lead to rebirth as a hungry ghost where
one is totally destitute of desired objects. If it does not result in
rebirth as a ghost, it will result in poverty, dependence upon others
for one’s livelihood and so forth. Sexual misconduct results in
martial distress or unhappy marriages.
While unwholesome actions produce unwholesome results -
suffering, wholesome actions produce wholesome results -
happiness. One can interpret wholesome actions in two ways. One
can simply regard wholesome actions as avoiding the unwholesome
actions, avoiding killing, stealing, sexual misconduct and the rest.
Or one can speak of wholesome actions in positive terms. Here one
can refer to the list of whole-some actions that includes generosity,
good conduct, meditation, reverence, service, transference of
merits, rejoicing in the merit of others, hearing the Dharma,
teaching the Dharma and straightening of one’s own views. Just as
unwholesome actions produce suffering, these wholesome actions
produce benefits. Again effects here are similar to the actions. For
example, generosity results in wealth. Hearing of the Dharma
results in wisdom. The wholesome actions have as their
consequences similar wholesome effects just as unwholesome
actions have similar unwholesome effects.

Karma, be it wholesome or unwholesome, is modified by the

conditions under which the actions are performed. In other words, a
wholesome or unwholesome action may be more or less strong
depending upon the conditions under which it is done. The
conditions which determine the weight or strength of karma may be
divided into those which refer to the subject - the doer of the action
- and those which refer to the object - the being to whom the action
is done. So the conditions that determine the weight of karma apply
to the subject and object of the action. Specifically, if we take the
example of killing, in order for the act of killing to have its complete
and unmitigated power, five conditions must be present - a living
being, the awareness of the existence of a living being, the
intention to kill the living being, the effort or action of killing the
living being, and the consequent death of the living being. Here too,
we can see the subjective and the objective conditions. The
subjective conditions are the awareness of the living being, the
intention to kill and the action of killing. The objective conditions are
the presence of the living being and the consequent death of the
living being.

Similarly, there are five conditions that modify the weight of karma
and they are persistent, repeated action; action done with great
intention and determination; action done without regret; action
done towards those who possess extraordinary qualities; and action
done towards those who have benefited one in the past. Here too
there are subjective and objective conditions. The subjective
conditions are persistent action; action done with intention; and
action done without regret. If one does an unwholesome action
again and again with great intention and without regret, the weight
of the action will be enhanced. The objective conditions are the
quality of the object to whom actions are done and the nature of
the relationship. In other words, if one does a wholesome or
unwholesome action towards living beings who possess
extraordinary qualities such as the arhats, or the Buddha, the
wholesome or unwholesome action done will have greater weight.
Finally the power of wholesome or unwholesome action done
towards those who have benefited one in the past, such as one’s
parents, teachers and friends, will be greater.

The objective and subjective conditions together determine the

weight of karma. This is important because understanding this will
help us to understand that karma is not simply a matter of black
and white, or good and bad. Karma is moral action and moral
responsibility. But the working of the Law of Karma is very finely
tuned and balanced so as to match effect with cause, so as to take
into account the subjective and objective conditions that determine
the nature of an action. This ensures that the effects of actions are
equal to and similar to the nature of the causes.

The effects of karma may be evident either in the short term or in

the long term. Traditionally we divide karma into three varieties
related to the amount of time that is required for the effects of
these actions to manifest themselves. Karma can either manifest its
effects in this very life or in the next life or only after several lives.
When karma manifests its effects in this life, we can see the fruit of
karma within a relatively short length of time. This variety of karma
is easily verifiable by any of us. For instance, when someone
refuses to study, when someone indulges in harmful distractions
like alcohol and drugs, when someone begins to steal to support his
harmful habits; the effects will be evident within a short time. They
will be evident in loss of livelihood and friendship, health and so
forth. We cannot see the long-term effect of karma, but the Buddha
and His prominent disciples who have developed their minds are
able to perceive directly the long-term effects. For instance, when
Maudgalyayana was beaten to death by bandits, the Buddha was
able to tell that this event was the effect of something
Maudgalyayana had done in a previous life when he had taken his
aged parents to the forest and having beaten them to death, had
then reported that they had been killed by bandits. The effect of
this unwholesome action done many lives before was manifested
only in his last life. At death we have to leave everything behind -
our property and our loved ones, but our karma will accompany us
like a shadow. The Buddha has said that nowhere on earth or in
heaven can one escape one’s karma. So when the conditions are
correct, dependent upon mind and body, the effects of karma will
manifest themselves just as dependent on certain conditions a
mango will appear on a mango tree. We can see that even in the
world of nature certain effects take longer to appear than others. If
for instance, we plant the seed of a papaya, we will obtain the fruit
in shorter period than if we plant the seed of a durian. Similarly, the
effects of karma manifest either in the short term or in the long
term.
Besides the two varieties of karma, wholesome and unwholesome
karma, we should mention neutral or ineffective karma. Neutral
karma is karma that has no moral consequence either because the
very nature of the action is such as to have no moral consequence
or because it is done involuntarily and unintentionally. For example,
sleeping, walking, breathing, eating, handicraft and so forth in
themselves have no moral consequence. Similarly, unintentional
action is ineffective karma. In other words, if one accidentally steps
on an insect, being unconscious of its existence, this also
constitutes neutral karma because there is no intention - the
intentional element is not there.

The benefits of understanding the Law of Karma are that this

understanding discourages one from per-forming unwholesome
actions which have suffering as their fruit. Once we understand that
in our own life every action will have a similar and equal reaction,
once we understand that we will experience the effect of that
action, wholesome or unwholesome, we will refrain from
unwholesome behavior, not wanting to experience the effects of
these unwholesome actions. And similarly, understanding that
wholesome actions have happiness as their fruit, we will cultivate
these wholesome actions. Reflecting on the Law of Karma, of action
and reaction in the moral sphere encourages us to renounce
unwholesome actions and cultivate wholesome actions. We will look
more closely at the specific effects of karma in future lives and how
karma conditions and determines the nature of rebirth in our lecture
next week

Evil as intrinsic characteristic.

It's common to think of evil as an intrinsic characteristic of some

people or groups. In other words, some people are said to be evil.
Evil is a quality that is inherent in their being.

Evil as external force.

In this view, evil lurks about and infects or seduces the unwary
into doing bad things. Sometimes evil is personified as Satan or
some other character from religious literature.
As I've said, these are common, popular ideas. You can find much
more profound and nuanced ideas about evil in many philosophies
and theologies, eastern and western. But for this essay I want to
focus on Buddhist teachings and explain why Buddhism rejects
both of these common ways of thinking about evil. Let's take
them one at a time.

Evil as Characteristic

The act of sorting humanity into "good" and "evil" carries a

terrible trap. When other people are thought to be evil, it
becomes possible to justify doing them harm. And in that thinking
are seeds of genuine evil.

Human history is thoroughly saturated by violence and atrocity

committed on behalf of "good" against people categorized as
"evil." I dare say most of the mass horrors humanity has inflicted
upon itself have come from this kind of thinking. People
intoxicated by their own self-righteousness or who believe in their
own intrinsic moral superiority too easily give themselves
permission to do terrible things to those they hate or fear.

Sorting people into separate divisions and categories is very un-

Buddhist. The Buddha's teaching of the Four Noble Truths tells us
that suffering is caused by greed, or thirst, but also that greed is
rooted in the delusion of an isolated, separate self.

Closely related to this is the teaching of interdependent

origination, which says that everything and everyone is a web of
interconnection, and every part of the web expresses and reflects
every other part of the web.

And also closely related is the Mahayana teaching of shunyata,

"emptiness." If we are empty of intrinsic being, how can we be
intrinsically anything? There is no-self for intrinsic qualities to
stick to.
For this reason, a Buddhist is strongly advised not to fall into the
habit of thinking of himself and others as intrinsically good or bad.
Ultimately there is just action and reaction; cause and effect. And
this takes us to karma, which I will come back to shortly.

Evil as External Force

Some religions teach that evil is a force outside ourselves that

seduces us into sin. This force is sometimes thought to be
generated by Satan or various demons. The faithful are
encouraged to seek strength outside themselves to fight evil, by
looking to God.

The Buddha's teaching could not be more different --

"By oneself, indeed, is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By

oneself is evil left undone; by oneself, indeed, is one purified.
Purity and impurity depend on oneself. No one purifies another."
(Dhammapada, chapter 12, verse 165)

Buddhism teaches us that evil is something we create, not

something we are or some outside force that infects us.

Karma

The word karma, like the word evil, is often used without
understanding. Karma is not fate, nor is it some cosmic justice
system. In Buddhism, there is no God to direct karma to reward
some people and punish others. It is just cause and effect.

Theravada scholar Walpola Rahula wrote in What the Buddha

Taught,
"Now, the Pali word kamma or the Sanskrit word karma (from the
root kr to do) literally means 'action', 'doing'. But in the Buddhist
theory of karma it has a specific meaning: it means only 'volitional
action', not all action. Nor does it mean the result of karma as
many people wrongly and loosely use it. In Buddhist terminology
karma never means its effect; its effect is known as the 'fruit' or
the 'result' of karma (kamma-phala or kamma-vipaka)."

We create karma by the intentional acts of body, speech, and

mind. Only acts pure of desire, hate and delusion do not produce
karma.

Further, we are affected by the karma we create, which can seem

like reward and punishment, but we are "rewarding" and
"punishing" ourselves. As a Zen teacher once said, "What you do
is what happens to you." Karma is not a hidden or mysterious
force. Once you understand what it is, you can observe it in action
for yourself.

Don't Separate Yourself

On the other hand -- it's important to understand that karma is

not the only force at work in the world, and terrible things really
do happen to good people.

For example, when a natural disaster strikes a community and

causes death and destruction, someone often speculates that
those harmed by the disaster suffered "bad karma," or else (a
monotheist might say) God must be punishing them. This is not a
skillful way to understand karma.

In Buddhism, there is no God or supernatural agent that rewards

or punishes us. Further, as I said, forces other than karma cause
many harmful conditions. When something terrible strikes others,
don't shrug and assume they "deserved" it. This is not what
Buddhism teaches. And, ultimately we all suffer together.
Kusala and Akusala

Regarding the creation of karma, Bhikkhu P.A. Payutto writes in

his essay "Good and Evil in Buddhism" that the Pali words that
correspond to "good" and "evil," kusala and akusala, don't mean
what English-speakers usually mean by "good" and "evil." He
explains,

"Although kusala and akusala are sometimes translated as 'good'

and 'evil,' this may be misleading. Things which are kusala may
not always be considered good, while some things may be akusala
and yet not generally considered to be evil. Depression,
melancholy, sloth and distraction, for example, although akusala,
are not usually considered to be 'evil' as we know it in English. In
the same vein, some forms of kusala, such as calmness of body
and mind, may not readily come into the general understanding of
the English word 'good.' …

"…Kusala can be rendered generally as 'intelligent, skillful,

contented, beneficial, good,' or 'that which removes affliction.'
Akusala is defined in the opposite way, as in 'unintelligent,'
'unskillful' and so on."

I urge you to read all of this essay for deeper understanding. The
important point is that in Buddhism "good" and "evil" are less
about moral judgments than they are, very simply, about what
you do and the effects created by what you do.

Look Deeper

This essay provides the barest of introductions to several difficult

topics, such as the Four Truths, shunyata and karma. If
something I have written here makes no sense, please do not
dismiss the Buddha's teaching without further examination.

I hope you will think about how you conceptualize evil. I urge also
that you read this dharma talk on "Evil" in Buddhism by Zen
teacher Taigen Leighton. It's a rich and penetrating talk originally
given one month after the September 11 attacks. Here is just a
sample:

"I don't think that it's helpful to think about forces of evil and
forces of good. There are good forces in the world, people
interested in kindness, such as the response of the firemen, and
all of the people who have been making donations to the relief
funds for the people affected.

"The practice, our reality, our life, our liveness, our non-evilness,
is just to pay attention and to do what we can, to respond as we
feel we can right now, as in the example Janine gave of being
positive and not falling for the fear in this situation. It is not that
somebody up there, or the laws of the universe, or however we
want to say that, is going to make it all work out. Karma and
precepts are about taking responsibility for sitting on your
cushion, and for expressing that in your life in whatever way you
can, in whatever way may be positive. That is not something that
we can fulfill based on some campaign against Evil. We cannot
exactly know if we are doing it right. Can we be willing to not
know what is the right thing to do, but actually just pay attention
to how it feels, right now, to respond, to do what we think is best,
to keep paying attention to what we're doing, to stay upright in
the middle of all of the confusion? That is how I think we have to
respond as a country. This is a difficult situation. And we are all
really wrestling with all of this, individually and as a country."

This or That?

In my experience, people who say Buddhism is a philosophy and

not a religion usually mean it as a compliment. They are trying to
say, I think, that Buddhism is something other than the
superstitious rubbish they believe religion to be.

In this view, religion is a jumble of primitive folklore that

humankind drags through the ages like a cosmic security blanket.
Religion is passionate and irrational and messy. But philosophy is
the flower of human intellect. It is reasonable and civilized.
Religion inspires war and atrocity; at worst, philosophy incites
mild arguments over coffee and dessert.
Buddhism -- some Buddhism, anyway -- is a practice of
contemplation and inquiry that doesn't depend on belief in God or
a soul or anything supernatural. Therefore, the theory goes, it
can't be a religion.

Killing the Buddha

Sam Harris expressed this view of Buddhism in his essay "Killing

the Buddha" (Shambhala Sun, March 2006). Harris admires
Buddhism, calling it "the richest source of contemplative wisdom
that any civilization has produced." But he thinks it would be even
better if it could be pried away from Buddhists.

"The wisdom of the Buddha is currently trapped within the religion

of Buddhism," Harris laments. "Worse still, the continued
identification of Buddhists with Buddhism lends tacit support to
the religious differences in our world. ... Given the degree to
which religion still inspires human conflict, and impedes genuine
inquiry, I believe that merely being a self-described 'Buddhist' is
to be complicit in the world's violence and ignorance to an
unacceptable degree."

"Killing the Buddha" is from a Zen saying -- If you meet the

Buddha on the road, kill him. Harris interprets this as a warning
against turning the Buddha into a "religious fetish" and thereby
missing the essence of what he taught.

But this is Harris's interpretation of the phrase. In Zen, "killing the

Buddha" means to extinguish ideas and concepts about the
Buddha in order to realize the True Buddha. Harris is not killing
the Buddha; he is merely replacing a religious idea of the Buddha
with a non-religious one more to his liking.

Head Boxes
In many ways, the "religion versus philosophy" argument is an
artificial one. The neat separation between religion and philosophy
we insist on today didn't exist in western civilization until the 18th
century or so, and there never was such a separation in eastern
civilization. To insist that Buddhism must be one thing and not the
other amounts to forcing an ancient product into modern
packaging.

In Buddhism, this sort of conceptual packaging is considered to be

a barrier to enlightenment. Without realizing it we use
prefabricated concepts about ourselves and the world around us
to organize and interpret what we learn and experience. One of
the functions of Buddhist practice is to sweep away all the
artificial filing cabinets in our heads so that we see the world as-
it-is.

In the same way, arguing about whether Buddhism is a

philosophy or a religion isn't an argument about Buddhism. It's an
argument about our biases regarding philosophy and religion.
Buddhism is what it is.

Dogma Versus Mysticism

The Buddhism-as-philosophy argument leans heavily on the fact

that Buddhism is less dogmatic than most other religions. This
argument, however, ignores mysticism.

Mysticism is hard to define, but very basically it is the direct and

intimate experience of ultimate reality, or the Absolute, or God.
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has a more detailed
explanation of mysticism.

Buddhism is deeply mystical, and mysticism belongs to religion

more than philosophy. Through meditation, Siddhartha Gautama
intimately experienced Thusness beyond subject and object, self
and other, life and death. The enlightenment experience is the
sine qua non of Buddhism.
Transcendence

What is religion? Those who argue that Buddhism is not a religion

tend to define religion as a belief system, which is a western
notion. Religious historian Karen Armstrong defines religion as a
search for transcendence, going beyond the self.

It's said that the only way to understand Buddhism is to practice

it. Through practice, one perceives its transformative power. A
Buddhism that remains in the realm of concepts and ideas is not
Buddhism. The robes, ritual and other trappings of religion are not
a corruption of Buddhism, as some imagine, but expressions of it.

There's a Zen story in which a professor visited a Japanese master

to inquire about Zen. The master served tea. When the visitor's
cup was full, the master kept pouring. Tea spilled out of the cup
and over the table.

"The cup is full!" said the professor. "No more will go in!"

"Like this cup," said the master, "You are full of your own opinions
and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty
your cup?"

If you want to understand Buddhism, empty your cup.

Buddhists often say that they practice Buddhism. What exactly

does "practice Buddhism" mean?

First, "practice" most often refers to a specific activity like

meditating or chanting that one does every day. For example, a
person practicing Japanese Jodo Shu (Pure Land) Buddhism
recites the Nembutsu every day. Zen and Theravada Buddhists
practice bhavana (meditation) every day.
 Many lay Buddhists maintain a home altar. Exactly what goes on
the altar varies from sect to sect, but most include an image of
the Buddha, candles, flowers, incense, and a small bowl for a
water offering. Taking care of the altar is a reminder to take care
of practice.

Buddhist practice also includes practicing the Buddha's teachings,

in particular the Eightfold Path. The eight elements of the path are
organized into three sections -- wisdom, ethical conduct and
mental discipline. A meditation practice would be part of mental
discipline.

Ethical conduct is very much part of daily practice. We are

challenged to take care in our speech, our actions, and our daily
lives to do no harm to others and to cultivate wholesomeness in
ourselves. For example, if we find ourselves getting angry, we
take steps to let go of our anger before we harm anyone.

We are challenged to practice mindfulness at all times.

Mindfulness is nonjudgmental observation of our moment-to-
moment lives. By remaining mindful we remain clear to present
reality, not getting lost in a tangle of worries, daydreams and
passions.

Buddhists strive to practice Buddhism at every moment. Of

course, we all fall short at times. But making that effort is
Buddhism. Becoming a Buddhist is not a matter of accepting a
belief system or memorizing doctrines. To be a Buddhist is to
practice Buddhism.

The Eightfold Path

The Fourth Noble Truth Is the Eightfold Path

The Eightfold Path is the means by which enlightenment may be realized.

The historical Buddha first explained the Eightfold Path in his first sermon
after his enlightenment, preserved in the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta.

The Eightfold Path is:

1. Right View
2. Right Intention
3. Right Speech
 4. Right Action
5. Right Livelihood
6. Right Effort
7. Right Mindfulness
8. Right Concentration

The Path is divided into three main sections: wisdom, ethical conduct and
mental discipline.

Wisdom: Right View and Right Intention are the wisdom path. Right View
is not about believing in doctrine, but in perceiving the true nature of
ourselves and the world around us. Right Intention refers to the energy
and commitment one needs to be fully engaged in Buddhist practice.

Ethical Conduct: Right Speech, Right Action and Right Livelihood are the
ethical conduct path. This calls us to take care in our speech, our actions,
and our daily lives to do no harm to others and to cultivate
wholesomeness in ourselves. This part of the path ties into the Precepts.

Mental Discipline: Through Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right

Concentration we develop the mental discipline to cut through delusion.
Many schools of Buddhism encourage seekers to meditate to achieve
clarity and focus of mind.

The Pursuit of Happiness

Because people don't take the time to understand Buddhism before they
form opinions about it, much criticism of Buddhism misses the point. For
example, in an interview, "positive" psychologist Jonathan Haidt claimed
the Buddha taught that happiness requires disassociation from things in
the external world. And Haidt disagrees with this: "Some things are worth
striving for, and happiness comes in part from outside of yourself, if you
know where to look.”

We "pursue" happiness because we think it comes outside of ourselves.

But it's also because we think things are outside of ourselves that we are
stressed about them and worry about them. Whatever can be found can
also be lost.

There's nothing wrong with striving to accomplish something, or making

friends, or loving your spouse and children. The Buddha himself, after all,
spent his life after his enlightenment associating with people, and
teaching them. Non-attachment does not require extreme asceticism or
shunning human contact. Non-attachment comes from the wisdom that
nothing is truly separate.

Yes, some Buddhists enter monastic life to concentrate on Buddhist

practice without distraction. But monastics do not isolate themselves from
human contact. The sangha itself is a human society in which people
support each others' practice.

The Four Noble Truths

Understanding the Buddha's teachings about attachment begins with the
Four Noble Truths. Very briefly, life is stressful (dukkha) and the cause of
this stress is craving, or thirst.

The Buddha taught that this craving grows from ignorance of the self.
Because we see ourselves as something separate from everything else,
we go through life grabbing one thing after another to ease our stress.
We attach not only to physical things, but also to ideas and opinions
about ourselves and the world around us. But physical things can be lost,
and we get frustrated when the world doesn't conform to our ideas and
opinions.

There is a way to get off the hamster wheel of chasing happiness. By

practicing the Eightfold Path, we can realize the true nature of self-and-
other, and put an end to craving. The Buddha also taught us that this
realization releases our fears of death and enables deep compassion and
loving kindness for others.

"Realize" is an important word. In Buddhism, just believing in some

doctrine of no-separation is pointless. To become transformative, the
truth of the Buddha's teachings must be intimately experienced and
realized for oneself. For this reason, Buddhism is more of a discipline than
it is a belief system.

Pleasure and Pain

The Buddha said, "When the thirty six pleasure-bound streams of craving
are strong in a man, then numerous desire-based thoughts pull the
deluded man along." People go through life running toward what they
desire and away from what they dislike.

In other words, we're being jerked around by attraction and aversion.

Most of the time, we don't see little personal freedom we really have. Our
culture tells us that it's good to acquire things like material possession
and fame, so there's nothing wrong with desiring and pursuing them. We
don't see how much of our lives are eaten up in a vain pursuit of things
we think will make us happy. And when we acquire those things, we don't
stay happy for long before we start chasing something else.

And how much of our lives are eaten up with anxiety over the things we
think we have to have to make us happy? Worrying about something
you've lost is attachment. Disappointment is attachment. What we think
will make us happy can also make us miserable.

No Separation

Seeing through the delusion of separation means we no longer give

"external things" the power to make us miserable. The ideal is
equanimity, free from the compulsion to chase what we want and run
from what we don't want.
Realizing non-attachment is not easy. It's not a matter of going to a
weekend retreat and being released from anxiety the rest of your life.
Buddhism is a life practice, not a quick fix. Ironically, it's a practice that
requires giving up ideas about goals and rewards, or escaping to a better
place.

Buddhism teaches that the better place is right here, and the reward is
already yours. Realizing this is non-attachment.

The Challenge for Lay Buddhists

Let's go back to lay Buddhists and the vague precaution about "sexual
misconduct." People mostly take cues about what constitutes
"misconduct" from their culture, and we see this in much of Asian
Buddhism. However, Buddhism began to spread in western nations just as
many of the old cultural rules were disappearing. So what's "sexual
misconduct"?

I hope we can all agree, without further discussion, that non-consensual

or exploitative sex is "misconduct." Beyond that, it seems to me that
Buddhism challenges us to think about sexual ethics very differently from
the way most of us have been taught to think about them.

Living the Precepts

First, the precepts are not commandments. They are undertaken as a

personal commitment to Buddhist practice. Falling short is unskillful
(akusala) but not sinful -- there is no God to sin against.

Further, the precepts are principles, not rules. It's up to us to decide how
to apply the principles. This takes a greater degree of discipline and self-
honesty than the legalistic, "just follow the rules and don't ask questions"
approach to ethics. The Buddha said "be a lamp onto yourself." He taught
how to use our own judgments about religious and moral teachings.

Followers of other religions often argue that without clear, external rules,
people will behave selfishly and do whatever they want. This sells
humanity short, I think. Buddhism shows us that we can release our
selfishness, greed and grasping and cultivate loving kindness and
compassion.

Indeed, I would say that a person who remains in the grip of self-
centered views and who has little compassion in his heart is not a moral
person, no matter how many rules he follows. Such a person always finds
a way to bend the rules to disregard and exploit others.

Specific Sexual Issues

Marriage. Most religions and moral codes of the West draw a clear,
bright line around marriage. Sex inside the line, good. Sex outside the
line, bad. Although monogamous marriage is the ideal, Buddhism
generally takes the attitude that sex between two people who love each
other is moral, whether they are married or not. On the other hand, sex
within marriages can be abusive, and marriage doesn't make that abuse
moral.

Homosexuality. You can find anti-homosexual teachings in some schools

of Buddhism, but I believe these are based on cultural attitudes. My
understanding is that the historical Buddha did not specifically address
homosexuality, and I can think of no Buddhist teaching that would call for
homosexual relationships to be treated differently from heterosexual
relationships.

Desire. The Second Noble Truth teaches that the cause of suffering is
craving or thirst (tanha). This doesn't mean cravings should be repressed
or denied. Instead, in Buddhist practice we acknowledge our passions and
learn to see they are empty, so they no longer control us. This is true for
hate, greed and other emotions. Sexual desire is no different.

In The Mind of Clover: Essays in Zen Buddhist Ethics (1984), Robert

Aiten Roshi said (pp. 41-42), "For all its ecstatic nature, for all its power,
sex is just another human drive. If we avoid it just because it is more
difficult to integrate than anger or fear, then we are simply saying that
when the chips are down we cannot follow our own practice. This is
dishonest and unhealthy."

I should mention that in Vajrayana Buddhism, the energy of desire

becomes a means for enlightenment; see "Introduction to Buddhist
Tantra."

The Middle Way

Western culture at the moment seems to be at war with itself over sex,
with rigid puritanism on one side and licentiousness on the other. Always,
Buddhism teaches us to avoid extremes and find a middle way. As
individuals we may make different decisions, but wisdom (prajna) and
loving kindness (metta), not lists of rules, show us the path.

The Six Realms are an allegorical description of conditioned existence, or

samsara, into which beings are reborn. The nature of one's existence is
determined by karma. Some realms seem more pleasant than others --
heaven sounds preferable to hell -- but all are dukkha, meaning they are
temporary and imperfect.

The Six Realms often are illustrated by the Bhava Chakra, or Wheel of
Life.

Please note that in some schools the realms of Devas and Asuras are
combined, leaving five realms instead of six.

1. Deva-gati, the Realm of Devas (Gods) and Heavenly Beings

MarenYumi / Flickr, Creative Commons License Attribution-
Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 Generic

In Buddhist tradition, the Deva realm is populated by godlike beings who

enjoy great power, wealth and long life. They live in splendour and
happiness. Yet even the Deva grow old and die. Further, their privilege
and exalted status blind them to the suffering of others, so in spite of
their long lives they have neither wisdom nor compassion. The privileged
Deva will be reborn in another of the Six Realms.

2. Asura-gati, the Realm of Asura (Titans)

MarenYumi / Flickr, Creative Commons License Attribution-

Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 Generic

The Asura are strong and powerful beings who are sometimes depicted as
enemies of the Deva. Asura are marked by their fierce envy. The karma
of hate and jealousy causes rebirth in the Asura Realm. Chih-i (538-597),
a patriarch of the T'ien-t'ai school, described the Asura this way: "Always
desiring to be superior to others, having no patience for inferiors and
belittling strangers; like a hawk, flying high above and looking down on
others, and yet outwardly displaying justice, worship, wisdom, and faith
-- this is raising up the lowest order of good and walking the way of the
Asuras." You may have known an Asura or two.

3. Preta-gati, the Realm of Hungry Ghosts

MarenYumi / Flickr, Creative Commons License Attribution-
Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 Generic

Hungry ghosts (preta) are pictured as beings with huge, empty stomachs,
but they have pinhole mouths, and their necks are so thin they cannot
swallow. A hungry ghost is one who is always looking outside himself for
the new thing that will satisfy the craving within. Hungry ghosts are
characterized by insatiable hunger and craving. They are also associated
with addiction, obsession and compulsion.

4. Naraka-gati, the Hell Realm

MarenYumi / Flickr, Creative Commons License Attribution-
Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 Generic

As the name suggests, the Hell Realm is the most terrible of the Six
Realms. Hell beings have a short fuse; everything makes them angry.
And the only way hell beings deal with things that make them angry is
through aggression -- attack, attack, attack! They drive away anyone who
shows them love and kindness and seek out the company of other hell
beings. Unchecked anger and aggression can cause rebirth in the Hell
Realm.

5. Tiryagyoni-gati, the Animal Realm

MarenYumi / Flickr, Creative Commons License Attribution-
Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 Generic

Animal beings are marked by stupidity, prejudice and complacency. They

live sheltered lives, avoiding discomfort or anything unfamiliar. Rebirth in
the Animal Realm is conditioned by ignorance. People who are ignorant
and content to remain so are likely headed for the Animal Realm,
assuming they aren't there already.

6. Manusya-gati, the Human Realm

MarenYumi / Flickr, Creative Commons License Attribution-
Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 Generic

The Human Realm is the only realm of the six from which beings may
escape samsara. Enlightenment is at hand in the Human Realm, yet only
a few open their eyes and see it. Rebirth into the Human Realm is
conditioned by passion, doubt and desire.

Buddhism has enlightened minds the world over, by propagating a

truthful, candid, and ingenious way of life. Buddhism encourages people
to find meaning in their life. You will find these Buddhist quotes
enlightening as they reveal the power and beauty of Buddhism.

Teachings of Gautam Buddha

On Judgmental People:
People with opinions just go around bothering each other.

On Anger:
Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing
it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned.

On Truth:
Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.

On Anger:
You will not be punished for your anger; you will be punished by your
anger.

On Work:
To be idle is a short road to death and to be diligent is a way of life;
foolish people are idle, wise people are diligent.

On Friends:
An insincere and evil friend is more to be feared than a wild beast; a wild
beast may wound your body, but an evil friend will wound your mind.

On Love:
You, yourself, as much as anybody in the entire universe, deserve your
love and affection.

On Envy:
Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others. He who envies
others does not obtain peace of mind.

On Good Deeds:
Neither fire nor wind, birth nor death can erase our good deeds.

On Thought:
The mind is everything. What you think you become.
On Gratitude:
Let us rise up and be thankful, for if we didn't learn a lot today, at least
we learned a little, and if we didn't learn a little, at least we didn't get
sick, and if we got sick, at least we didn't die; so, let us all be thankful.

On Hatred:
Hatred does not cease by hatred, but only by love; this is the eternal rule

The esoteric teachings, secret initiations and erotic imagery associated

with Buddhist tantra have fueled no end of interest. But tantra may not
be what you think it is.

What Is Tantra?

Countless practices of several Asian religions have been lumped together

by western scholars under the heading "tantra." The only commonality
among these practices is the use of ritual or sacramental action to
channel divine energies. The earliest tantra probably grew out of the
Hindu-Vedic tradition. Buddhist tantra developed independently of Hindu
for many centuries, however, and they are barely related now in spite of a
surface resemblance.

Even if we limit our study to Buddhist tantra, we are still looking at a vast
range of practices and multiple definitions. Very broadly, most Buddhist
tantra is a means to enlightenment through identity with tantric deities. It
is sometimes also called "deity-yoga."

It's important to understand that these deities are not "believed in" as
external spirits to be worshiped. Rather, they are archetypes representing
the tantric practitioner's own deepest nature.

Mahayana and Vajrayana

One sometimes hears of three "yanas" (vehicles) of Buddhism --

Hinayana ("small vehicle"), Mahayana ("great vehicle") and Vajrayana
("diamond vehicle"), with tantra being the distinguishing feature of
Vajrayana. Sorting the many schools and sects of Buddhism into these
three categories is not helpful to understanding Buddhism, however. The
Vajrayana sects are founded solidly on Mahayana philosophies and
doctrines; tantra is a method by which the teachings are actualized.
Vajrayana is best understood as an extension of Mahayana.

Further, although Buddhist tantra is most often associated with the

Vajrayana sects of Tibetan Buddhism, it is by no means limited to Tibetan
Buddhism. To a greater or lesser degree, elements of tantra can be found
in many Mahayana schools, especially in Japan. Japanese Zen, Pure Land,
Tendai and Nichiren Buddhism, for example, all have strong veins of
tantra running through them. Japanese Shingon Buddhism is thoroughly
tantric.

Origins of Buddhist Tantra

As with many other aspects of Buddhism, myth and history don't always
find their way to the same ball park.

Vajrayana Buddhists say tantric practices were expounded by the

historical Buddha. A king approached the Buddha and explained that his
responsibilities did not allow him to abandon his people and become a
monk. Yet in his privileged position he was surrounded by temptations
and pleasures. How could he realize enlightenment? The Buddha
responded by teaching the king tantric practices that would transform
pleasures into transcendent realization.

Historians speculate that tantra was developed by Mahayana teachers in

India very early in the first millennia CE, possibly as a way to reach those
who weren't responding to teachings from the sutras.

Wherever it came from, by the 7th century CE tantric Buddhism was fully
systemized in northern India. This was significant to the development of
Tibetan Buddhism. The first Buddhist teachers in Tibet, beginning in the
8th century with the arrival of Padmasambhava, were tantric teachers
from northern India.

By contrast, Buddhism reached China about the year 1. Mahayana

Buddhist sects that emerged in China, such as Pure Land and Zen, also
incorporate tantric practices, but these are not nearly as elaborate as in
Tibetan tantra.

Sutra Versus Tantra

Vajrayana teachers compare what they call the gradual, causal or sutra
path of Buddhism to the speedier tantra path. By "sutra" path, they mean
following the Precepts, developing meditative concentration and studying
sutras to develop seeds, or causes, of enlightenment. In this way
enlightenment will be realized in the future. Tantra, on the other hand, is
a means to bring this future result into the present moment by realizing
oneself as an enlightened being.

The Pleasure Principle

I've already defined Buddhist tantra as "a means to enlightenment

through identity with tantric deities." This is a definition that works for
most tantric practices in Mahayana and Vajrayana.

Vajrayana Buddhism also defines tantra as a means to channel the energy

of desire and transform the experience of pleasure into realization of
enlightenment. According to the late Lama Thubten Yeshe,

"The same desirous energy that ordinarily propels us from one

unsatisfactory situation is transmuted, through the alchemy of tantra, into
a transcendental experience of bliss and wisdom. The practioner focuses
the penetrating brilliance of this blissful wisdom so that it cuts like a laser
beam through all false projections of this and that and pierces the very
heart of reality." (Introduction to Tantra: A Vision of Totality [1987], p.
37)

Behind Closed Doors

In Vajrayana Buddhism, the practitioner is initiated into incremental levels

of esoteric teachings under the guidance of a guru. Upper-level rituals and
teachings are not made public. This esotericism, combined with the sexual
nature of much Vajrayana art, has led to much winking and nudging
about upper-level tantra.

Vajrayana teachers say most of the practices of Buddhist tantra are not
sexual, and what is mostly involves visualizations. Many tantric masters
are celibate. It's likely nothing goes on in upper-level tantra that couldn't
be shown to schoolchildren. I believe the reason for the secretiveness is
that the teachings could easily be misunderstood or misused by people
who are not being properly guided by an authentic teacher.

Among all the Buddha's teachings, those on the nature of the self are the
hardest to understand, yet they are central to the religion. In fact, "fully
perceiving the nature of the self" is one way to define enlightenment.

The Five Skandhas

The Buddha taught that an individual is a combination of five aggregates

of existence, also called the Five Skandhas or the five heaps. These are:

1. Form
2. Sensation
3. Perception
4. Mental formations
5. Consciousness

Various schools of Buddhism interpret the skandhas in somewhat different

ways. Generally, the first skandha is our physical form. The second is
made up of our feelings, emotional and physical, and our senses --
seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling.

The third skandha, perception, takes in most of what we call thinking --

conceptualization, cognition, reasoning. This also includes the recognition
that occurs when an organ comes into contact with an object. Perception
can be thought of as "that which identifies." The object perceived may be
a physical object or a mental one, such as an idea.

The fourth skandha, mental formations, includes habits, prejudices and

predispositions. Our volition, or willfulness, also is part of the fourth
skandha, as are attention, faith, conscientiousness, pride, desire,
vindictiveness, and many other mental states both virtuous and not
virtuous. The causes and effects of karma are especially important to the
fourth skandha.
The fifth skandha, consciousness, is awareness of or sensitivity to an
object, but without conceptualization. Once there is awareness, the third
skandha might recognize the object and assign a concept-value to it, and
the fourth skandha might react with desire or revulsion or some other
mental formation. The fifth skandha is explained in some schools as base
that ties the experience of life together.

The Self Is No-Self

What's most important to understand about the skandhas is that they are
empty. They are not qualities that an individual possesses, because there
is no-self possessing them. This doctrine of no-self is called anatman or
anatta.

Very basically, the Buddha taught that "you" are not an integral,
autonomous entity. The individual self, or what we might call the ego, is
more correctly thought of as a by-product of the skandhas.

On the surface, this appears to be a nihilistic teaching. But the Buddha

taught that if we can see through the delusion of the small, individual self,
we experience that which is not subject to birth and death.

Two Views

Beyond this point, Theravada Buddhism and Mahayana Buddhism differ

on how anatman is understood. In fact, more than anything else it is the
different understanding of self that defines and separates the two schools.

Very basically, Theravada considers anatman to mean that an individual's

ego or personality is a fetter and delusion. Once freed of this delusion, the
individual may enjoy the bliss of Nirvana.

Mahayana, on the other hand, considers all physical forms to be void of

intrinsic self (a teaching called shunyata, which means "emptiness"). The
ideal in Mahayana is to enable all beings to be enlightened together, not
only out of a sense of compassion, but because we are not really
separate, autonomous beings.

The practice of compassion is essential to Buddhism, and the practice of

compassion begins with the cultivation of compassion within. The Buddha
taught his monks to arouse four states of mind, called the "Brahma-
vihara" or "four divine states of dwelling." These four states are
sometimes called the "Four Immeasurables" or the "Four Perfect Virtues."

The four states are metta (loving kindness), karuna (compassion), mudita
(sympathetic joy) and upekkha (equanimity), and in many Buddhist
traditions they are cultivated through meditation. These four states inter-
relate and support each other.

Metta, Loving Kindness

"Here, monks, a disciple dwells pervading one direction with his heart
filled with loving-kindness, likewise the second, the third, and the fourth
direction; so above, below and around; he dwells pervading the entire
world everywhere and equally with his heart filled with loving-kindness,
abundant, grown great, measureless, free from enmity and free from
distress." -- The Buddha, Digha Nikaya 13

The importance of metta in Buddhism cannot be overstated. Metta is

benevolence toward all beings, without discrimination or selfish
attachment. By practicing metta, a Buddhist overcomes anger, ill will,
hatred and aversion.

According to the Metta Sutta, a Buddhist should cultivate for all beings
the same love a mother would feel for her child. This love does not
discriminate between benevolent people and malicious people. It is a love
in which"I" and "you" disappear, and where there is no possessor and
nothing to possess.

Karuna, Compassion

"Here, monks, a disciple dwells pervading one direction with his heart
filled with compassion, likewise the second, the third and the fourth
direction; so above, below and around; he dwells pervading the entire
world everywhere and equally with his heart filled with compassion,
abundant, grown great, measureless, free from enmity and free from
distress." -- The Buddha, Digha Nikaya 13

Karuna is active sympathy extended to all sentient beings. Ideally, karuna

is combined with prajna (wisdom), which in Mahayana Buddhism means
the realization that all sentient beings exist in each other and take
identity from each other (see shunyata). Avalokiteshvara Bodhisattva is
the embodiment of compassion.

Theravada scholar Nyanaponika Thera said, "It is compassion that

removes the heavy bar, opens the door to freedom, makes the narrow
heart as wide as the world. Compassion takes away from the heart the
inert weight, the paralyzing heaviness; it gives wings to those who cling
to the lowlands of self."

Mudita, Sympathetic Joy

"Here, monks, a disciple dwells pervading one direction with his heart
filled with sympathetic joy, likewise the second, the third and the fourth
direction; so above, below and around; he dwells pervading the entire
world everywhere and equally with his heart filled with sympathetic joy,
abundant, grown great, measureless, free from enmity and free from
distress." -- The Buddha, Digha Nikaya 13

Mudita is taking sympathetic or altruistic joy in the happiness of others.

The cultivation of mudita is an antidote to envy and jealousy. Mudita is
not discussed in Buddhist literature nearly as much as metta and karuna,
but some teachers believe the cultivation of mudita is a prerequisite for
developing metta and karuna.

Upekkha, Equanimity

"Here, monks, a disciple dwells pervading one direction with his heart
filled with equanimity, likewise the second, the third and the fourth
direction; so above, below and around; he dwells pervading the entire
world everywhere and equally with his heart filled with equanimity,
abundant, grown great, measureless, free from enmity and free from
distress." -- The Buddha, Digha Nikaya 13

Upekkha is a mind in balance, free of discrimination and rooted in insight.

This balance is not indifference, but active mindfulness. Because it is
rooted in insight of anatman, it is not unbalanced by the passions of
attraction and aversion.

The Precepts

The various schools of Buddhism have different precepts. However, these

five are acknowledged by all schools.

1. Not killing
2. Not stealing
3. Not misusing sex
4. Not lying
5. Not abusing intoxicants

It is said that enlightened beings perfectly follow the Precepts even if

they've never heard of them.

Most schools of Buddhism regard the Precepts as guidelines, not

commandments. Mahayana Buddhism in particular emphasizes the Middle
Way, meaning Buddhists should sincerely apply the Precepts to their lives
but avoid fanatical perfectionism

The Truth of Suffering

The First Noble Truth often is translated as "Life is suffering." Many

people new to Buddhism tune out as soon as they hear this. But the Pali
word dukkha also refers to anything that is temporary, conditional, or
compounded of other things. Even something precious and enjoyable is
dukkha, because it will end.

Related to the nature of life is the nature of self. Are we not also
temporary, conditional and compounded of many parts? We can
understand that life is impermanent but are we, also, impermanent? The
Buddha taught that before we can understand life and death we must
understand the self.
Read More: What is the self?
Read More: What the Buddha Meant by "Suffering"

The Truth of the Cause of Suffering

The Second Noble Truth teaches that the cause of suffering is craving or
thirst (tanha). We continually search for something outside ourselves to
make us happy. But no matter how successful we are, we never remain
satisfied.

The Buddha taught that this thirst grows from ignorance of the self. We
go through life grabbing one thing after another to get a sense of security
about ourselves. We attach not only to physical things, but also to ideas
and opinions about ourselves and the world around us. Then we grow
frustrated when the world doesn't behave the way we think it should and
our lives don't conform to our expectations.

The Buddha's teachings on karma and rebirth are closely related to the
Second Noble Truth.

Read More: Karma and Rebirth

The Truth of the End of Suffering

The Buddha's teachings on the Four Noble Truths are sometimes

compared to a physician diagnosing an illness and prescribing a
treatment. The first truth tells us what the illness is, and the second truth
tells us what causes the illness. The Third Noble Truth holds out hope for
a cure.

The Buddha taught that through diligent practice, we can put an end to
craving. Ending the hamster-wheel chase after satisfaction is
enlightenment (bodhi, "awakened"). The enlightened being exists in a
state called Nirvana.

Read More: Enlightenment and Nirvana

The Truth of the Path That Frees Us From Suffering

Here the Buddha as physician prescribes the treatment for our illness:
The Eightfold Path. Unlike in many other religions, in Buddhism there is
no particular benefit to merely believing in a doctrine. Instead, the
emphasis is on living the doctrine and walking the path

Ego Is Not a Good Teacher

My first teacher used to say that his entire function was pulling rugs out
from under people. He'd see a student grow complacent or settle into new
conceptual patterns, and riiiiip.
If your understanding is never challenged you can spend years fooling
yourself. I can't tell you how many times I've gone into the interview
room thinking I knew something. But when challenged, what my ego told
me was great insight vanished like smoke in the breeze. On the other
hand, when realization is genuine, a teacher can guide you to deeper
realization.

Remember, you are not likely to see through the illusion of ego by
protecting your ego.

True and False Teachers

How do you know which teachers are for real and which are phonies?
Many schools of Buddhism place great importance on lineage -- the
teacher's teacher, the teacher's teacher's teacher, and so on, going back
generations. Most schools of Buddhism only recognize teachers who have
been authorized to teach either by that school's institutions or by another
authorized teacher.

It's true that such authorization is no guarantee of quality. And not all
unauthorized teachers are charlatans. But I would be very cautious about
working with anyone who calls himself a "Buddhist" teacher but who has
no association whatsoever with a recognized Buddhist lineage or
institution. Such a teacher is almost certainly a fraud.

A few tips: Only the phonies claim to be "fully enlightened." Beware of

teachers who ooze charisma and are worshiped by their students. The
best teachers are the most ordinary ones. The true teachers are those
who say they have nothing to give you.

No Students, No Teachers

It's common to develop an attitude about authority figures, usually

because of bad experiences with them. When I was younger I was easily
intimidated by authority figures, including teachers.

But remember the Madhyamika teaching -- things have identity only in

relation to each other. Students create teachers. Followers create leaders.
Children create parents. And vice versa, of course. No person is, in fact,
an authority figure. "Authority figure" is a relationship construct that is
caused to manifest by "submissive figure." It is not anyone's intrinsic
identity.

When I began to see that, I became less fearful of authority figures.

Certainly in many situations -- employment, the military -- one cannot
exactly blow off the authority figure illusion without consequences. But
seeing through dualistic delusions -- such as authority figure/submissive
figure -- is an essential part of the Buddhist path. And you can't very well
resolve an issue by avoiding it.
Also, in the case of working with a Buddhist teacher, if you feel
something's wrong, you can always walk away. I've yet to hear of a
genuine teacher who would try to hang onto or control a student who
wished to leave.

But keep in mind that the spiritual path goes through our wounds, not
around them or away from them. Don't let discomfort hold you back.

Finding Your Teacher

Once you decide to find a teacher, how do you find a teacher? If there are
any Buddhist centers near where you live, start there. Studying year-
round with a teacher within a community of Buddhists is ideal. The
famous teacher whose books you admire may not be the best teacher for
you if you can only travel to see her occasionally.

Consider that karma put you where you are. Begin by working with that.
You don't have to go out of the way to find your path; it's already
beneath your feet. Just walk.