Buddhist Dilemma?

To experience Awakening, while profoundly altering our understanding of the nature of things, does not transform a person into a "saint", or some sort of superior being. Understanding does not prevent us from ever making essentially the same mistakes that anyone else does. To exist in the perceptual world entails having an ego, anxieties and desires. To understand that Ultimately difference comes to nothing does not prevent a person from suffering, but it does mitigate that suffering.

I do not deny my pride (valueless though it is) in the way that I've responded to life's challenges. I've been ignorant and foolish, but tried to rectify those conditions with some success. I believe I've mitigated suffering for many others, and that is a source of pride. My sons are both productive citizens and a credit to their Buddhist upbringing. I never pursued financial wealth, yet we are in retirement well-off. I'm mostly deaf and have diabetes. I'm certainly opinionated. Personally the amount of suffering I have to endure is small.

I probably deceive myself on many things, and certainly don't have any super powers. On the other hand, I'm aware of these and other faults and work to control them as they crop up. I'm pretty sure I could lead a "better" more acceptably "pure" life if I returned to the monastery, but I am content and believe that my life as a householder serves the overall goal of Buddhism. The Awakening experience makes me alive to the understanding that nothing has to be, nor is accomplished, in a hurry. We live in a world of illusion, but it is also a rational world and must be dealt with on its own terms.

Beware of the person, no matter how exalted or revered, who gives the world to believe that they are somehow "better", more "superior" than other sentient beings.

BTW, I don't believe that I usually go on so much about myself, my accomplishment, etc. In this instance we have a person whose posts lead us to believe that they have had something at that may have been the Awakening experience, but that the experience has left them depressed and aimless in the world. The question we are posed is what alternatives does this person have? I've tried to make the following points:

1. Depression is not unheard of after having the Awakening experience when the subject has not been suitably prepared for it. I expect that the period of depression is likely to pass.

2. There are three alternatives for this person in my estimation:

a. Plunge more deeply into the effort to achieve full personal Enlightenment. This would entail more directed study, meditation and discipline under the guidance of a Buddhist Master. Probably the monastery.

b. Become a householder and try to mitigate the suffering of others by the practical application of the understanding stemming from their Awakening experience. Get a job, marry, and live as well and with as little suffering as possible. Continued study, meditation and discipline are still required, but these are all directed from within the person rather than from the monastic discipline. My life experiences are provided as an example of how this is can be a productive choice, both personally and in terms of the larger Buddhist goal of conquering suffering.

c. Go back to sleep, accept the Illusory World as Real. This involves writing off the Awakening experience as a brief abnormality. The truly dedicated seeker after wisdom and understanding would then go on to examine other systems. Get up in the morning, and meet the world strictly on its own terms. Be driven by desire and fear of what might happen to the individual. Try to hold on to the idealized past, and chase a fugitive future. Pile up rewards believing they mean more than they really do.

Hope this clears up any misunderstanding.

East is meeting West and I'm more impressed--and enriched--by the viewpoint of the East.

EDIT - reading new comments...

I did not mean to say that one who has "awakened" is superior...but from the perspective of the person who has "awakened", their understanding of life is more correct and therefore superior to others'. This does not mean that they feel superior as a person, either.

Asherman, I mean no offense by this...but the way of Buddhism seems contradictory to me. It seems that your mission statement is to help others and reduce suffering, to help others before helping yourself...you have mentioned not seeking financial wealth, and how buddhists often live a sparse life. But at the same time, you devote so much of your life to reaching this enlightened mental state...which does not assist you in helping other people. Rather, it just makes you feel more important...this seems more selfish than anything.

And yes, the Eastern cultures do seem very interesting to us...there is much that is mysterious about them, almost magical. But I think to them, the West is more interesting!

The Awakening experience, as we've come to call it here, is to my mind THE PEAK experience, bar none. For the ego to vanish, even for a "moment" absorbed into the the indivisible Essence outside time and space, is worth more than anything else. Infinity is beyond joy (for joy is a relative term compared to suffering), for it encompasses ALL.

Separateness is antithetical to ALL, as beginnings and endings are meaningless to infinity. Zero is equal to infinity, and nothingness.

Folks often chase after the experience expecting that they will somehow acquire "magical" and superhuman powers by having it. To float in the air, to travel across the galaxies on a whim, and able to laugh in the extremities of heat and cold. To walk in the rain without becoming wet. Mostly nonsense, though in infinity in that which encompasses ALL possibilities, times and spaces and remains null anything and everything is possible. I've never known anyone, not even the Dali Lama, who chooses to do such parlor tricks.

Without the understanding of Ultimate Reality that comes with direct experience, one can hardly deal with their own suffering much less help others. Until we understood the causes of disease, physicians treated illness with superstition and on the basis of poorly understood theories. Having the experience is a great privilege, but rather than making the individual feel exalted or somehow superior to others is wrong. The experience underscores the meaninglessness of "self" and all the things associated with the illusory world. One's consciousness of self returns and the perceptual world re-forms itself as seeming real after the experience as before. Our perspective, on the other hand, will have been changed by the experience.

To the Teravadan, the end goal is for full and complete personal enlightenment. We can escape our suffering by strictly following the discipline of the Eight-Fold Path. This is the form followed by most, if not all, of the Buddhists who lived and were taught by the historical Buddha. This is roughly my alternative 2a above. The discipline and focus required leaves virtually no time for anything else. In that time, folks abandoned their families and businesses to seek enlightenment and the end of personal suffering. A laudable goal, but one that pretty much excluded the great majority who are involved in producing food, goods and children.

Mahayana Buddhism, extrapolating from and interpreting the teachings came to believe that the Buddha's compassion extends to all suffering sentient beings. Rather than "step off the wheel" leaving other sentient beings to suffer, Mahayana advances the Bodhisatava ideal. Rather than accept full enlightenment for oneself, it is better to extend the benefits of Enlightenment to the masses unable in "this" lifetime of pursuing the goal for themselves. In a way this is tricky business, and has led to a number of Buddhist schools that in some cases are so far removed from the initial teachings that Siddhartha might not recognize them to day as springing from his teaching. The adoption of the Bodhisatva ideal, and other Mahayana refinements, made it possible for Buddhism to grow and gain large following in distant lands. Theravada, on the other hand, has always had a relatively small following mostly in S.E. Asia. This is roughly my alternative 2b. above, and the choice of many Buddhists today.

One of the strengths of Buddhism has been its ability to adjust and adapt itself to different cultural milieus. The sutras and basic Buddhist vocabulary springs from the Hindu, the cultural set that the historical Buddha live within. Planted in Chinese soil, Buddhism adapted and adopted many Chinese philosophical approaches. Confucism and Taoism served much of the Chinese need for religious/social structures, but Buddhism found a strong niche there. China, with its large population, is the engine that drives its Asian neighbors. Korea and Japan both have cultures that were strongly influenced by China, and its social/religious structures. Beginning in the 18th century Europeans became increasingly interested in Asian religion, and the trend increased well into the 20th. Much of what the West believes about Buddhism, Hinduism, et. al., is derived from materials that were partial and often misunderstood. The East, Asia, has long seemed a magical place where mystical sages have superhuman powers. All romance.

One of the problems, to my mind, in spreading Buddhism in the United States is overcoming our cultural yearning for those imagined "secrets" of the East. Some American Buddhists apparently would become Japanese, or Chinese, or Tibetan, in a heartbeat if that were possible. They try so hard to adopt Japanese, or Chinese, or Tibetan culture in the belief that somehow they will be closer to realizing their ideal Buddhism. What I would rather see is the development of a Buddhism adapted and fully integrated into Western culture. We don't need to use other languages, or metaphors to express the doctrines. We need to live them.

Asherman, I'm always impressed with your knowledge on many subjects, and greatly appreciate your contributions on A2K that is both educational and enlightening. Those legless dolls are called "daruma" in Japanese. The following link explains it very well. Thanks again. c.i.
http://www.ponddoc.com/WhatsUpDoc/FunArticles/Daruma.html

BTW, on our buddhist pilgrimage to Japan in April, we visited 33 buddhist temples. Most were built in the 8th century, but many burned down through wars and lightening, but rebuilt. We learned during our pilgrimage that both Indian and Chinese monks traveled to Japan in the very early history of buddhism, and many Japanese monks traveled to China to learn from buddhist 'masters.' The sect that my wife belongs to believed that life must be ended at age 62. The founder of this sect, Gobo Daishi, committed suicide by drinking mercury, believing that mercury will preserve his body. Monks in the olden days used to go out on a boat with a cork on the bottom. When they were far enough from land, they pulled the cork and committed suicide by drowning. Our buddhist priest and leader from Sacramento told us that it's a good thing their sect did away with that belief, because he would not be a preist today if they still followed that practice. We all had a good laugh.

Ci,

Natalie and I will be in San Francisco for our youngest son's wedding on May 1, 2005. We expect to be there for perhaps a week, and will probably be staying at the Mosser. Logistics of the trip still to be determined, but I hope that we can arrange at the very least a dinner with you and other interested A2K folks from the Bay Area.

Daruma. Thanks, the word for the dolls had slipped my age infeebled mind.

Sensei at one of the temples we visited.

Hey, I could read a little Japanese. It's temple number 30, "omikuji."

Asherman, I still don't have my 2005 calendar, but will post it on my December as a reminder. We'll talk about it more when it closer to that date. Please remind us early next year. I'm planning on attending the A2K Gathering at Walters place in Germany in April or October of next year. The only travel plans I have thus far for 2005 is a 18 day cruise to Antarctica in January.

There are a number of stories where a Master would call his followers to him, and announce that he wanted to say goodbye, and answer any last questions before dying. The Master would patiently respond, and then sit down in meditation and die.

Long years of sitting meditation can confer really astounding control over one's breath and metabolism. I understand that scientific measurements have documented greatly reduced BP, heartrate, and Alph waves. When one first enters into sitting meditation even ten, or fifteen minutes of focus is hard to maintain. Then, after becoming a veteran the difficulty is to avoid falling asleep. Knew a monk once who ended up snoring almost every session. I don't sit enough anymore, but it seems that almost everything that I do well is a result of the same meditative focus learn while sitting.

This is a very good point. But it also seems to me that once the Eastern candywrapper is removed from Buddhism, the basic underlying concepts of Buddhism are already quite integrated into American society...such as the concepts of helping others before yourself, meditation (if not in the traditional sense then in other forms such as martial arts, yoga, running), seeking knowledge, and seeking the middle path (more than a pauper, but not spoiled). I don't mean to say that all of America follows these ideals, but I think a good number of people do...and they're not considered Buddhists...but is it really necessary to isolate oneself at a temple, or learn complex history and story, just to be a positive and enlightened member of society?

Q. "I don't mean to say that all of America follows these (Buddhist-like)ideals, but I think a good number of people do...and they're not considered Buddhists. "

A. The degree to which American values parallels those of Buddhist doctrine is gratifying, and makes one optimistic that progress is being made toward a more civil society. We are still far more materialistic than is probably good for us, in that the materialistic basis for valuing things is almost certain to cause suffering, not mitigate it. In all the world, I don't think there is anyplace that has done more to alleviate suffering within its borders than the United States. Those countries that have adopted more socialist forms, it seems to me, are in the long run more likely to have problems than in the controlled capitalist economy of the U.S. Ultimately, the best solutions I believe will be found within individuals rather than in trying reform all of society at once.

Q. "... Is it really necessary to isolate oneself at a temple, or learn complex history and story, just to be a positive and enlightened member of society?"
A. Nope. What is necessary is that we learn self-discipline, and focus our whole attention on each moment. Learn from the past, but let it go. Plan for the future, but patiently accept the need for flexibility in meeting the moments that lead toward the future. Schedule spontaneity on a regular basis. Attend completely to what you are doing, and fewer errors will result. Be compassionate, but not foolish. See clearly, use your mind for something beyond just reducing the echos inside the skull. Be slow to judge, and quick to extend a helping hand. Tend to your own garden, and don't insist that your neighbor use your excess fertilizer. Tolerance is golden, even for the zealots of the Abrahamic religions.

Asherman:

First of thank you for your posts. They are enlightened and patient. However, as with many things in my life they have given me more questions that answers.

So if you will be so kind I would like to start simple.

You talk of this dream world - and I understand the concept. It seems that if Buddhism did not influence Platonic realism then the two were within the same vien.

There is an ultimate reality that seems to generate these 'images / dreams' of our percieved reality.

We are to move beyond these images and see the totality of the universe and its monism.

However, why would we as all being one thing choose to manifest ourselves in such an illusionary way? Why would be generate the samsaric cycle if it is one of attachment and pain?

Thank you for your patience and the clarification on the 'heavy set' buddhist statues. I had never taken the time to research the difference and now understand.

TF

1 - if someone were to feel they completely understood and agreed with the dream world and all that...wouldn't they have just had their awakening?

2 - you described what is necessary: self-discipline, learning from mistakes, forgiveness, patience, compassion, non-judgemental, helpful, etc...these things are admirable qualities for anyone, I'm sure everyone strives for them...atheists, christans, and buddhists alike.

3 - earlier you mentioned a dislike for american materialism. what i have noticed is that the people who have the least posessions are the most materialistic. they want what they cant have. people who have everything stop caring about it. americans may have the most money and therefore have the most stuff, so its easy to say they are the most materialistic, but id say that makes americans the least materialistic.

4 - but why is materialism bad, anyway? materialism supplements happiness that isn't being gotten socially...certainly, it is not long lasting, but temporary happiness is a small positive at least...and what harm does it do?

Materialism is necessary for capitalism to be successful.

Thinkfactory,

I think your question is, "why the illusion, what caused the indivisible to dream multiplicity?" I don't know, nor is it much use to speculate. The thing is that the illusion of separateness, time and space, leads to suffering. If sheep were to realize that their fate was the slaughterhouse, wouldn't they be less docile?

stuh,

The Awakening isn't ultimately an intellectual construct, but a direct if subjective experience. We can talk about it, and come to believe that we understand the concept, but until you actually lose your ego, all sense of time and space, and re-merge into the fundamental reality it is all just words. While immersed in the experience one understands a lot, perhaps everything, but that understanding tends to fade somewhat as we fall back into the illusory world of perception.

Buddhists do not have a monopoly on good intentions. The difference is that Buddhist notions of Ultimate Reality are significantly different than the Abrahamic faiths. Buddhism is about infinity, while the Abrahamic camp insist that the Universe is finite with a beginning and end. The Abrahamic folks have a judgemental monotheistic God outside the Universe who tinkers with it. Buddhists see the Universe as an indivisible unity where everything is interconnected and indivisible. No God(s), no soul(s), no differences that can be labeled "good", nor "evil". Buddhists have all of eternity to "get it right", while the abrahamic crowd expect one shot at eternity in heaven or hell. These differences are evident in the comparative history of the two approaches to Ultimate Reality. The history of the Abrahamic faiths is one of intolerance, conversion by force, and religious war. In the history of Buddhism we see tolerance and accommodation between it and other religious systems, Buddhist missionaries are so low-key that they hardly show up on the radar screen of history, and there are no significant "Buddhist" violent conflicts.

I think there is much to your point that those with material resources tend to be less driven by them than the deprived. There isn't anything inherently "wrong" in acquiring wealth and material goods. Those who aren't fortunate enough to have adequate food, shelter, and health care I'm sure suffer more directly than those who live in palaces. No, I would be hypocritical to "slam" those who work hard, and live prudently so as to build up a reserve of material resources. I've been so poor that I slept in telephone booths, and ate soup concocted of water and those free little packets of catsup one gets in fast food joints. Being rich is better, and don't let anyone tell you different.

The problem with acquiring material wealth and resources is the constant temptation to become attached to it, to value it greater than the consequences and costs of getting it. To have material well-bing causes us to fear its loss, to be too frugal when it comes to charity. We tend to put a price tag on compassion, and look down upon those who have less. To the rich man, every stranger (especially in rags) is a prospective thief and a threat. Folks confuse good fortune and the rewards of thrift and hard work with virtue. BTW, for the person whose aim is full Enlightenment for themselves, the strict poverty and discipline of the monastery makes the problem of acquiring wealth moot.

If I had a magic wand, I'd love to see hunger, disease and want become obsolete terms. In perceptual reality, the world of multiplicity and illusion, we are constantly making distinctions. This v. that, and with every distinction we make there is a value judgement made. "This" is better, or worse than "that". If we are ever to fully conquer suffering then all distinctions and comparisons must merge back into the indivisible, that from which the illusion of time, space and multiplicity arise.

About 2500 years ago there was an explosion of religious systems. Since that time we've come to see what each those systems means when applied to the world we live in. The fundamental mission statement, as you said earlier, of Buddhism is the conquest of suffering through the attainment of understanding resulting from the Awakening experience. In that short time, Buddhism has made great strides toward mitigating suffering, and making the Awakening experience more widely available. Just think what another 10,000 kalpas might accomplish. A kalpa is one cosmic turn, i.e., from Big Bang to Big Crunch (though the actual life cycle of the material universe may follow quite a different course).

Hmm, my experiences and observations of materialism are certainly the opposite. There are certainly many people who are predisposed to giving, and those are usually not the ones who become rich...but I think overrall as people gain more, they are more willing to give more. For instance, in extreme cases such as your Buddha, he had so much that he stopped caring about materialism.

I have not heard of a kalpa before but thank you for filling me in on that. I do think it's a little silly that we even have a unit for a measurement that we don't know exists I recently read some article in science news saying that the expansion of our universe is actually accelerating...who knows.

Thank you everyone for your great replies to my original post.

Here's a secondary question/concept that I'm interested in. I'd especially like to hear Asherman weigh in on this one:

Anyone have a "peak experience" permanently change their personality? (not necessarily in a good way)

It seems that once one goes through the experience of losing their ego and merging, along the way, one thing that disappears is the personality. That is, the personality is de-constructed.
At some point, one has a choice: stay in the void, go further out, or...come back to the world. If you choose to come back to this world, at some point its like you almost must consciously re-construct your personality. Its weird, almost a flavor of insanity.

Now, it seems like once I had this experience, and came back, I was never quite the same. A little disconnected and numb to the world. Mostly, though, my personality had actually changed. Like maybe some of the unnecceary garbage in the personality was jettisoned.

Yet, this was part of the "me" that my loved ones knew. And I think this changed saddened them.

Asherman writes that having an awakening doesn't necessarily mean the person will no longer make the same mistakes in this world, etc. I agree. This is actually a bit shocking. I thought once one realized certain things, reached a certain level of understanding, they would be beyond the same old mistakes. Not at all. For example, I've seen Buddhist monks bickering in a temple over who's turn it is to sweep, heard tales of them arguing over petty things, etc.

Anyway, back to the question: Can following Buddhism radically alter/deconstruct the personality (not necessarily in a good way)?