Buddhist Meditation

by Samdhong Rinpoche | 29,256 words

No description available...

Whatever method is adopted, the goal of meditation should be to achieve a state of mind which is a totality of perception. Buddhists recognize four different types of perception :-

First, there is ordinary perception by the sensory mind (indriya-jnana) which comes to us through our eyes, ears, and so on.

Secondly, there is mano-vijnana or inner perception which remains only for a short period of time with an ordinary person, for it is almost immediately disturbed and destroyed by relative or associated thoughts.

The third is svasamvedana which means the perception of the mind or consciousness itself. This is also perceived in the ordinary state.

The fourth is yoga perception which can only be achieved when one has developed one-pointedness of mind through the practice of meditation. After we have achieved the yoga perception, we shall be able to meditate on many phenomena. At present there is no way by which we can perceive shunyata or anityata (the changeableness of compounded things). We know about these things only by inference. In other words, our mind only learns through logic and reason about some facts which we are not able to perceive in any other way. But when a meditator develops one-pointedness of mind and achieves shamatha, he will be able to proceed further. Thus after shamatha he will achieve prajna, or the wisdom which knows the Truth; then vipassana, or sight, which will enable him to venture out into the unknown, of which a person in the ordinary state of mind has no conception.

In Buddhism, devotional types of meditation such as dhyana, samadhi and samapatti, are not considered important. What is regarded as important is the development of the power of enquiry, discrimination and analysis and this can only be achieved through vipassana when the mind is in the same concentrated state as in shamatha. But in shamatha the mind remains concentrated on one point only while in the state of vipassana it is not centred. On the contrary, it enquires, thinks and analyses without distraction or sinking; it retains its full energy. It is in this state of mind that a person should meditate on the Four Noble Truths – the reality of suffering, the cause of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the nature of the cessation of suffering.

In his first sermon, the Buddha repeated the Four Noble Truths three times to his five disciples, and in this first message he gave the entire doctrine of Buddhism. He expounded and repeated them in accordance with the mental development of his disciples, expounding them, as it were, step by step. In the first exposition, the Buddha simply enumerated the Four Noble Truths saying; 'This is the truth of suffering, this is the truth of the cause of suffering, this is the cessation of suffering, and this is the way to achieve the cessation of suffering.' When his disciples had thought over, meditated on and contemplated this, he gave them further guidance. He said: The truth of suffering must be known, the cause of suffering should be eradicated, the cessation of suffering must be achieved, and the way of the achievement of the cessation of suffering must be practised.' Thus he added something to the Truths by not only pointing out the reality of suffering but by declaring that it must be eradicated. The cessation of suffering must therefore be achieved and the way to the achievement of the cessation of suffering must be practised. The disciples meditated again. Then the Buddha gave the third sermon. 'The truth of suffering must be known, but there is nothing to be known; the cause of suffering must be eradicated, but there is no such cause to be eradicated; the cessation of suffering must be achieved, but there is no such thing to be achieved; the way which leads to the cessation of suffering must be practised, but there is no such way to be practised.' This was the culmination of the teaching of the Four Noble Truths.

It is clear from this that the Buddha first made certain statements that pointed to a reality. First he simply stated the subject; then, the 'musts' were added to the initial statements; and, finally, he negated all the statements he had previously made. This indicates to any meditator who begins to experience a transcendental state of mind, the necessity for proceeding gradually. If he follows this hint, he will reach a state where the meditator, the object of meditation and the act of meditation all dissolve into nothingness, into voidness. In short, we could say that whatever is perceived by us in our ordinary state of mind must be dissolved or transformed.

There must be a change. And this change in the present working condition of our mind is the purpose of meditation; it is the beginning of meditation. Once this transformation takes place, there is neither a beginning nor an end because there is no measurement in time. We might call it a realization of Is-ness, of things as they are, or the dissolution of the mind into a higher state of consciousness.

There is something that troubles me and perhaps troubles all of us. We have all well-developed personalities; we have had a good education; we enjoy taking part in serious discussions about the spiritual life. We think, read, study and enquire into these matters in depth. From time immemorial there have been numerous religious systems, traditions, doctrines, philosophies and schools, yet man is unable to end the suffering of all living beings in general and of his own species in particular. Actually, his suffering seems to have become more acute although he is supposed to have reached the highest level of consciousness and to be evolving in accordance with the theory of evolution. But is that so? Is man's level of consciousness of a high order and is it developing or unfolding to an ever higher state? Experience reveals that it is not developing, but rather deteriorating.

Man has acquired great knowledge in the fields of science, technology and in all temporal material fields and by it he has provided himself with all that is necessary for living a more comfortable life. But the misery of the mind – the inner body – does not seem to be decreasing. We may discuss subjects of a lofty nature in the fields of philosophy and religion, but our thoughts on philosophical subjects become immaterial and are left high and dry in the face of the stark reality of conflict, contradiction and disorder in the everyday lives of so many people. Even in one single day, whether during the morning or evening, whether we are sleeping, eating or talking, our minds are always in a state of contradiction and conflict between 'I', or my present individual self and 'the others', or society. Having observed all this, one may wonder what is the use of all these great systems, doctrines and philosophies, since we are not able to apply their principles to the upliftment of humanity. The suffering of mankind is not an illusion, it is not mayo as many like to think; it is a fact – a reality of life which has to be faced by everyone. And we, so-called spiritual people, have become almost helpless under these circumstances. We are not only incapable of doing good to the world at large but we are not able to be helpful to even a single individual.

When I was a child, I was placed in a monastery to become a monk – a good person who would benefit a large number of people. But looking back on my life, I cannot think of one person who has become more peaceful or less violent as a result of my talks or of my contact with him. It seems to be that we are not able to do anything for other people;

we can only help ourselves. I wonder then whether it is of any use to hope that in the future we shall be able to help with the upliftment of mankind. It may be worth while to consider the following questions:

  1. even if we are not able to help the entire community is there any method by which people could develop through our contact with them and be inspired to live a better or more spiritual kind of life?
  2. are we really incapable of benefiting even a single person by bringing about some change in his mind?
  3. would it be better to do something about our personal transformation and development first?

Perhaps we could diffuse more loving-kindness or give a message which would make people less violent and the world a happier place to live in. Then mankind might advance towards the discovery and realization of Truth.

We do many things, but when we seriously examine ourselves at the end of every action, perhaps nothing has resulted from the effort. Let us, for instance, examine what has happened to the effort which was put into this course. A large number of good and mature people have spent a number of hours patiently listening to these talks. I, myself, came here from a distant city and have been struggling with the English language in order to explain certain things to you. But if we look closely at the entire programme it might seem to have been absolutely useless. What I had to say, I have said; and when I set off for Varanasi there will be nothing to carry away with me because nothing has happened and I have achieved nothing. When I talked to you about meditation, I just repeated words that might just as well have been done by a parrot. These words were noted by you in much the same way as words read in a newspaper – 'Oh yes, this was said and that happened', and so forth. This is exactly what happens in the course of our entire life; this tendency is visible in all our activities which are too often valueless and useless. To feel one's way through life, to earn one's livelihood and to talk casually about philosophical or spiritual subjects neither benefits people in general nor any individual in particular. I may be wrong in thinking that there is no hope or sign of encouragement in the present-day world. Mankind is facing serious problems and no one – neither the politicians nor the religious leaders – seem to have a solution, for them. They all appear to be busy but people are still suffering.

Is there, then, any possibility of freedom from these difficulties? Can we find a more effective solution for the problems which face us today – the deterioration of moral values, corruption, poverty, disorder and violence? Everywhere people are talking about human misery and seem to be seriously concerned about it; can we not find a solution and change the world?

Among the many people who talk about these problems it seems as if there must be a number who have the necessary will-power and determination to eradicate at least some of them. But perhaps, after all, people are not so seriously concerned with humanity's predicament except when they themselves are personally involved. We talk about violence and wars, but our inner consciousness remains unmoved. We may say, 'It is a bad war', but we do not have the force of mind even to wish that wars should end unless, as we said, our own lives are endangered. Similarly, we may read in the newspaper that people were killed but our minds are not moved. We may talk about it, but it is only talk, and we never use our mental force towards the ending of such problems. We may vaguely think about it, but our total mental force is not directed towards ending violence so that in the future mankind will not suffer this kind of immorality.

The Buddha taught us that suffering is a truth. It is a daily truth, because everybody suffers. The cause of suffering will not cease unless we try to find out what it is. There is something lacking in us and so the question of how to tread the way by which suffering is eradicated never seriously arises.

Serious suffering continues to be present in the world today. Is there anything we can do for humanity in general, or anything we can bring about in our personal, individual self? Can we perhaps think of something which will be immediately effective in bringing about a change for the better?



Q. You said that we are not able to do anything for the majority of people but that we could perhaps do something for ourselves. But you also said that Truth cannot be eliminated, so it must be here even in this dark time of Kali-Yuga in which we find ourselves. We have to polish ourselves up in order to find it and in the process we shall very gradually progress. Where there is Truth, there must be progress and no effort is lost. Although we may not make much progress in meditation, surely even meditation at the level where we achieve a certain sense of peace and bliss is valuable in itself.

A. Of course, people can meditate and can develop and those efforts are not lost. But the question I was trying to put before you is: Would it not be possible for us to improve the standard of human society and make it better by our efforts, by our meditations and by leading a pure life? And even if the whole of human society may not benefit by it, at least our immediate surroundings and those people with whom we have direct contact would. The results of such an effort, and the impact it would make on society should, somehow, be visible. Perhaps our 'purity' is so insignificant that it does not reflect and radiate an effective force of energy.

If we blame society for all the wrong things we do, why do we not think about changing society? There are philosophers who say that society cannot be changed. There are others (together with scientists) who believe that a change in a number of individuals would not produce the required impact to change society, and that only a radical social change should be striven for. When such a change comes, then, they claim, individuals will change also.

Human society, made up as it is of individuals, is indeed obviously and visibly deteriorating. Our moral standards, our behaviour and our dealings with one another are on the decline. And when in this disturbed condition we perform wrong actions we blame the society in which we live. We say: What else can I do? Everybody else is living this sort of life and if I do not do the same how can I survive? Society would throw me out. Besides, if whatever we do should be in the pattern set by society, we have to tell lies, be dishonest, injure enemies, and so forth.

The object of the spiritual life is not the development of the individual alone. The spiritual development of the individual is for the sake of others, if not for all. Therefore, I ask again, can we not think of some way by which we could effectively and immediately affect, perhaps not the whole world, but at least that very small part that contains the people we are in direct contact with? Can we think of something that would be more effective than the systems of meditation or philosophy?

Q. Could you explain a little more what is meant by 'the truth of suffering'? We know that there is widespread suffering but it does not really move us. We still continue to be centred in our own little pleasures and preoccupations, if suffering does not present itself to the consciousness as a tremendous fact, then the question of finding its cessation does not arise. The Buddha did not say, 'Look here, this is suffering'; he said, 'This is the truth which you have to know.' This seems to imply something deeper than simply drawing attention to the suffering which we all know because we have all suffered at some time. The Four Truths are fundamental, so there must be a great deal that's implied in each one of them.

A. The truth of suffering is what I have been trying to put before you. The Buddha and the whole of the Buddhist teaching is contained in them and in nothing else. The Buddha said that the truth of suffering must be known. This is the first Truth and the keynote of this Truth is that we should know it, which implies that we do not know or understand it. Our efforts do not bring about the required results because our consciousness is not deeply touched by this truth. Until and unless suffering affects a particular person, directly or indirectly, he does not know it. We are not conscious of suffering as a whole, whether it be the suffering of humanity or of other living beings.

Each one of us has an individual body in which we have built for ourselves our own mental forces, our consciousness and thoughts. We have built a shell around all of this and tried to retain within it these forces for our own private use. This means that our individual mind and consciousness is unconnected with the wholeness of all life, with the all-pervading principle of 'Be-ness'. Since our consciousness is thus unconnected with any outside phenomenon our efforts become limited to ourselves and so we cannot send out the energy or the force required to help others in an appropriate and effective manner. Whatever we do is self-centred and on a very small scale. It is on account of this that I asked whether we could not think of any possible way by which we could expand our thoughts and our visions, find ways and means to make our consciousness aware of suffering. Whether the way is meditation, another kind of practice, determination, will-power or whatever, it must result in making us more deeply concerned with and aware of the suffering of other beings.

The "Buddha said: 'You should know suffering', which implies that we do not really know it. We have all kinds of knowledge about suffering but this does not mean that we know the suffering of others. Awareness of suffering is something else. It is to know suffering as the sufferer does: it means experiencing his suffering with our own consciousness for we have established a direct relation between suffering outside ourselves and our own consciousness. It is only then, when we make an effort to reduce, if not eradicate, the cause of suffering outside ourselves, that it will be effective.

Q. But there is a problem here. If I know suffering as the sufferer does, if he breaks down and cries, I would also break down and cry, which does not do any good at ail. Is this what is meant by knowing the suffering as the sufferer, or is it something else? Would it be correct to say that if one knows the truth of suffering it would bring about a revolution in oneself? If you just know suffering superficially, or as a piece of news, it does not do anything. But if you know the truth of it, since Truth is powerful, it brings about some kind of a revolution within oneself. It creates a tremendous movement, it releases energy. If one sees the truth of suffering there should be a new energy to go further and enquire into its cause.

A. I did not mean that one has to know the suffering as the sufferer does, and that when he cries one should cry with him. That would be mere sentimentality. The news of an accident which we read in the newspaper has a very different kind of effect on our minds. I read that a plane has crashed in, say, the United States and I know the number of people who died, but the occurrence has no effect on my feelings or my mind. But if the same thing happened in Varanasi while I am there and I read about it in the papers, that would disturb me more, especially if the names of the victims were not mentioned for I would worry about whether friends of mine were involved. There is a difference for me between an accident in America and an accident in Varanasi. The newspapers every day are full of news related to events resulting in the death of people. None of it disturbs us, except that one news item which is connected with ourselves. This shows that our relationship with suffering is not a true one. Who suffers makes a difference for us, which means that there is no equality in our relationship; it is exclusive and personal. Even when you think that you have a truly fine relationship with a particular person, your thoughts really never touch him because he is only an image in your mind built up by your own thought process and having nothing to do with the real person. So, although you may think that you have a great affection for your friend, the truth of the matter is that the affection you feel is not for your friend but for the image of your friend which your thoughts have created in your mind. It is this image-making thought process, constantly going on within our minds which reduces the true meaning of love for it is evident that one does not love one's friend but one's own self. This phenomenon is even more pronounced where one expects some benefit from another. Real love is quite different. It is an outgoing force which expands and embraces all sentient beings. But we do not know anything about that while we are all the time surrounded by our own images of hatred and love which enclose us in a very narrow shell. Our knowledge of suffering is also only imaginary for it, too, is related to the love of self.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: