a very helpful article
taken from http://www.tricycle.com/dharma-talk/undivided-mind?page=0,1&offer=dharma
Becoming
Whole
By
Rodney Smith
Over the last half-century, Buddhist practices in the West have
grown in popularity. Mindfulness has become associated with stress
reduction, enhanced immunological protection, psychological
well-being, and profound states of happiness. In many cases,
mindfulness has been uncoupled from the Buddha’s teaching
altogether and is a stand-alone cognitive therapy for the treatment
of various mental difficulties, from depression to
obsessive-compulsive disorder.
The term
anatta, which means “no [permanently abiding] self or soul,” is at
the heart of the Buddha’s teaching, but with our Western emphasis
on psychological health it is perhaps inevitable that this
essential aspect of the teaching is downplayed or even avoided.
Emptiness, after all, stands in opposition to many of our most
important values such as self-reliance, individual initiative, and
the pursuit of pleasure. We want the contentment and happiness
promised by the Buddha, but with “me” fully stabilized and
intact.
This
selective approach to Buddhism would seem to allow the best of both
the Eastern and Western worlds. We can use the techniques and
practices that serve our immediate purpose without asking the
deeper spiritual questions concerning our very existence. Best of
all, the methods work, and the benefits of greater mindfulness
dramatically affect both our mental health and the ease of our
life.
The
story would end happily here, except that there is a rub when we
pare back the dharma, the Buddha’s teaching. Externally we see the
earth’s environment eroding before our eyes, the population
soaring, and our natural resources diminishing. We see unparalleled
greed and anger forming greater divisions within an evershrinking
planet. At a time when the world pleads for kindness and
compassion, we see cultures continuing their ancient bickering
while forgetting their shared heritage.
Internally
our problems continue as well. We hurt, and we do not understand
why. Fear, desire, and grief fill our life. Our psychological
sophistication should solve our problems, but therapies and
self-improvement methods do not seem to diminish our isolation and
separation. We would like to feel compassion for all beings, but
our own problems are so demanding that we have little time to
include others in our heart. We try to compensate for these
shortcomings with more socially engaged activities, but we find
that our motivation is often based in righteousness, which further
divides the world.
Through
all our techniques and procedures, the sense-of-I remains the
cornerstone of our existence. When we look at our experience, we
appear to be the center of the universe. All experiences seem to
confirm our central place in life, and every input is interpreted
through the lens of self. We hear about the corrupted power of the
ego but seem unable to shake off this ever-present sense-ofme. Its
authority seems absolute; most of us eventually acquiesce to its
rule, and we engage our dharma practice carrying the sense-ofme
along within our spiritual development.
Many of
us incorporate a gentler and kinder spiritual “me” into our
practice, which is in opposition to the worldly “me,” the
troublemaking twin that needs a resolution. We then play the
familiar theme of divide and conquer, pitting our spiritual ideals
against our worldly reactions. Eventually we see that calling the
ego different names serves to strengthen its overall grip and
control, which inevitably leads to greater pain and ill
will.
Some of
us pursue the path of wisdom to weaken the ego’s influence, and we
have genuine insights into the ego’s insubstantiality, but we may
return from those revelations with the power and force of “me” very
much intact. The ego has a way of claiming reference to its own
demise by saying, “Oh, I just had an experience of my own
emptiness.” No matter what we do, no matter how many revelations we
have regarding our true nature, we still seem to organize the world
around the basic premise that “I” am in here looking out at
everything else. At some point the sincere dharma practitioner
realizes that as long as the “I” is the governing force behind
thoughts and emotions, then our internal world will be filled with
abstract arguments and the external world will be laden with
conflict and struggle. We begin to further understand that the
cause of our suffering is not what we do but the way we perceive,
and until this obstacle is addressed, all actions of body, speech,
and mind will predictably reinforce our old perceptions of self and
other, problem and solution, and limitation and freedom.
Spiritual
practice is stepping out of the assumed reality of “me” by
understanding what the “me” is and withdrawing energy from its
perceptual fixations. The Buddha made the realization and
integration of anatta central to his teaching—we are without
separate existence; that is a fact. When we align all our practices
and efforts with this fact, the spiritual path becomes quite simple
and transforms everything we do. All the monasteries,
renunciations, restraints, skillful means, full-lotus posture, and
nose-tip awareness, all of it, has only this intended purpose. We
must be very careful not to carry the assumption of separation to
the practices that have the intended purpose of stepping out of
self-deception. If we do, we will be reinforcing our egoic
conditioning and move in the opposite direction from the freedom of
the Buddha.
Much of
my early practice carried this contradiction. My heart genuinely
sought the truth, but I conceived of freedom as a very long and
arduous process that needed focused determination and hard work. My
efforts were directed toward surmounting myself. “I” was the
problem, and “I” would apply effort toward resolving the difficulty
of “me.” Often my teachers spoke of lifetimes necessary to achieve
awakening and the long cultivation of mental qualities that freedom
depended on. I thought of freedom as something that I was working
toward but that was not accessible now.
After a
few years of strenuous retreating, I ordained as a Buddhist monk
and went on a pilgrimage to Bombay in January 1980, to visit the
renowned sage Nisargadatta Maharaj. I had known of him years
earlier through his book I Am That. After a few days
of bantering back and forth about my attachment to being a monk, he
said, “You are like a man holding a flashlight, trying to run
beyond its beam. The view you are holding…is undermining your
intent.”
“You
don’t understand Buddhism,” I retorted.
“You do
not understand the truth,” he replied.
I was
righteous, but he was right, and his message stuck. As the days
unfolded, I lost my arrogance and my identification with the
Buddhist robes, leaving me naked and exposed. By directly pointing
to the truth, Nisargadatta destroyed my spiritual structure,
purpose, and frame of reference. In their absence, something awoke
with an upsurge of energy that seemed impossible to contain. It
exploded with the revelation of what the Buddha was pointing to:
The path that Nisargadatta revealed was not a search but a find,
not a struggle but an abiding, not a cultivation but something
intrinsic to all. I had been committed to the long-enduring mind of
practice but not the essence, not the inherent freedom that was
immediately available. From this vantage point, there seemed far
too much methodology in the Buddhism I had been practicing and not
enough release.
he
Buddha’s Eightfold Path can either build upon or dismantle the
sense-of-self, depending upon how we use it. When aligned within
its proper orientation, the path appears like a perfectly formed
diamond, each facet complimenting the beauty of the whole. After my
meeting with Nisargadatta, the Buddha’s teaching became
breathtaking in its simplicity and elegance. The entire path was,
and had always been, accessible. Prolonged retreats in silence or
conversations over dinner had the same reference point. Nothing was
ever at odds with its opposite. Every practice and action had its
place and appropriate time, but never contradicted or enhanced what
was already there. Everything was perfectly together, and every
movement arose from that perfection.
This was
the beginning of my understanding of lay Buddhism. A lay Buddhist
is one who fully embodies his or her entire life of work, family,
and relationships without spiritually prioritizing any activity.
From this perspective all moments are equally precious, and whether
we are practicing formal meditation on retreat or showing up for
ordinary moments of our lay life, freedom is never diminished. The
unequivocal resolve not to move away from where we are is
essential. Once we abandon the belief that there is a more
spiritually useful moment than the one we are in, we have embraced
our life and infused it with the energy for awakening.
There
are three impediments to lay Buddhist practice. The first is the
belief that monasticism and long retreats are the only way to
realize one’s true nature. In Asia monasteries have served as the
central training ground for aspiring Buddhist practitioners, and
because of this strong history within a monastic tradition, much of
Buddhism is derived from that formal culture. Now, as the Buddhist
tradition settles in the West, monasteries have played a
diminishing role in the training and teaching of Buddhism, and in
their place residential retreat centers have formed as substitute
monasteries. The lay Western Buddhist often undertakes intensive
training during residential retreats, which last from a few days to
several months, much as their predecessors did within monasteries
in previous centuries. All of this has given rise to an emphasis on
a silent, secluded life as being central to Buddhist
training.
For a few people, a full lifetime as a monastic or living many
years on retreat is a wise direction. Each of us has a unique
spiritual design that pulls us toward freedom. The problem arises
when we listen to others for our direction, or think we “should” do
something because others have done it in the past. Spiritual growth
is a fine-tuning of our ear to the needs of our heart.
What
obscures this understanding in many of us is the belief that the
silent retreat is a priority over other expressions of life. When
we believe we are not where we need to be for spiritual growth, we
relegate our daily life to a secondary tier. We energetically pull
out of our spiritual life and wait for the appropriate secluded
moment in order to fully engage. Leaning toward or away from any
experience creates an anticipation of fulfillment in the future,
and the sacred that exists here and now is lost. Discovering the
sacred within all moments is the hallmark of awakening.
We often
feel our everyday existence is a distraction from our spiritual
intention. When this happens, life is divided between the sacred
and mundane, and the mind pits one concept against the other. But
belief shapes reality, and if the belief is maintained that the
sacred lies somewhere else other than Now, our spiritual life will
be governed by that limitation. The truth is that the sense-of-self
is not separate from the moment in which it is arising, any more
than the sense-of-self is outside the mind that it thinks it
possesses. In fact, realizing the undivided mind also heals the
dualistic notion of “me” being outside the moment.
We
cannot delay fully embracing the moment. To do so maintains the
divisions within the mind, the division between the mind and the
body, and the division between the organism and its environment.
All divisions are attempts to keep us from the truth of what is
right here. When this is understood by the sincere practitioner,
there can be no more hesitation, no more postponement, and no more
pulling back and waiting for a more opportune time. It is literally
now or never.
Suddenly
the Buddha is found in the middle of relationships, work, and
family, within all activities, reactions, thoughts, and emotional
responses. Nothing is outside Now, because no boundary is drawn to
separate Now from then. The message of the Buddha is equally
relevant in all locations and at all times. Until this is fully
realized and until there is no movement to escape this environment
for a better spiritual setting, we will continue to
suffer.
The
second way in which lay Buddhist practice is impeded is through
misunderstanding the teaching of the long-enduring mind. Buddhism
is full of metaphors of time that disarm us. “You have cried more
tears than the waters of the great oceans,” says the Buddha,
speaking of our endless lifetimes in terms of inconceivable
numbers.
I have
heard some students express hopelessness with these numbers. They
interpret the metaphors to mean that it takes endless
reincarnations to achieve freedom. I believe the Buddha uses these
analogies to point toward patience. The numbers he uses are so vast
that he seems to be taking time away, but he certainly is not
discouraging our efforts. When time is removed, so is the future
expectation of what and when something might occur. Anticipation is
actually counterproductive to the practice, because by waiting to
be fulfilled in the future, we drift away from what is immediately
present.
Perhaps
the Buddha’s use of time is also an attempt to motivate us out of
complacency. Through these analogies he seems to be pointing out
that if we do nothing, nothing will change, and we will spend
endless lifetimes lost in our divided mind. These examples are a
call toward urgency—but it is an urgency moderated with patience.
Patience is essential on the spiritual path, but delay is not.
Patience invites the timeless back in, and practicing becomes a
waking game, not a waiting game, because patience is the state of
full wakefulness.
The most
important understanding for a lay Buddhist is the immediate
availability of awakening. Awakening need not arrive after a long,
protracted practice history unless we believe that this is
necessary. We deliberately delay our readiness because we are
divided about what we really want. We practice until we are tired
of preparing for what has always existed here and now, then we
become quiet and surrender.
The
question of readiness is really a question of intentionality. Do we
want this or not? If we do, we have to look squarely at our
competing interests. We can use our time most skillfully by
observing the value and limitation of our opposing desires. A fully
engaged lay life allows continuous feedback regarding those
interests. Most of us indulge our desires rather than learn about
their limitations, but that learning opportunity is always present.
Again, it is the sincerity of the student that will determine
whether her life is a hindrance or a support to her spiritual
growth.
A third
way a lay approach to spiritual fulfillment can be impeded is by
investing the sacred within particular practices and conditions.
When I was younger, I followed the example of an experiment once
performed by Krishnamurti: I placed a rock that held no special
significance on my mantel and bowed to it each day. I did this
deliberately to see whether I could infuse a unique quality into
something completely ordinary, simply by incorporating the rock
within a morning ritual. At the end of a month, the rock held a
special, holy place in my perception.
The
Buddha statue, the zafu [cushion] we sit upon, the saintly picture
or poem, the states of mind accessed in meditation, solitude, or
even nature itself, can all become accentuated beyond the ordinary
by infusing them with special attention. When we invest the sacred
into specific conditions, we feel spiritual only when we are having
those experiences. The rest of life goes spiritually
unnoticed.
Spiritual
forms and rituals can be very helpful in focusing our intention and
providing a doorway to the sacredness of all life. They can awaken
a sensitivity of heart and allow our mind to become quiet. Forms
and rituals become a problem when they stop representing a gateway
into oneself and become an exclusive presentation of the sacred,
such as the belief that the only way to commune with God is by
going to church or taking a walk in nature, or that the only way to
meditate is to be alone in quiet surroundings. When we think of
rituals and forms as the only way to access the sacred, the rest of
our life is placed on spiritual hold. The lay Buddhist begins to
recover the sacred in the most remote areas of life, in the midst
of difficulty and dissatisfaction, loneliness and despair. The
reality of problems is challenged and investigated, and life begins
to thrive free of circumstances and conditions. The heart takes
over and is resurrected from the conditioned habits of
mind.
The lay
Buddhist harbors no defense, seeks no shelter, and avoids no
conflict for the resolution of wholeness. It is here in the middle
of our total involvement that this alchemy of spirit can best be
engaged. Our life becomes focused around this transformation as our
primary intention for living. We find everything we need
immediately before us within the circumstances and conditions we
long begrudged ourselves. Spiritual growth becomes abundantly
available and is no longer associated exclusively with any
particular presentation of form.
Rodney
Smith is the founding and guiding teacher of
the Seattle Insight Meditation Society and a guiding teacher of the
Insight Meditation Society, Barre, Massachusetts. He leads classes
and retreats throughout the United States. He is also the author
of Lessons from the
Dying, a book that grew
out of the many years he spent in hospice
work.