Subhuti is shaken by Buddha's teachings of the previous five chapters. I can understand that. Becoming unattached to all outcomes and my current situation in the world is difficult and scary. However, the Buddha has rightly emphasized contact with other beings to go along with this. It's not like we renounce the world an disappear into a void, it's more like we turn the light on so we can see what we are doing and be free from the constraints of our compulsions.
In any event, Subhuti is shaken and asks the Buddha whether anyone in the far future will uphold this teaching. Buddha responds to Subhuti's question with a resounding yes, and then gently redirects Subhuti's attention to the teaching itself. Do not be attached to anything, even a teaching. Subhuti's focusing on distractions.
One of the confusing things about this passage is the saying about not holding on to dharma and no-dharmas. It seems to be impossible since one seems to be the negation of the other. But I don't think it is. I think believing no-dharmas (translated on Scott Newton's page as `confusion`) means to renounce teachings in the wrong spirit, without the right mental state, without being on the bodhisattva path. Not believing or renouncing or letting go of a dharma, on the other hand, means to discard the bonds that hamper you so that you can progress further.
Speaking of dharmas and distractions, the thing that jumped out at me about this passage at first was the apparent supernatural element. "The Tathagata is aware of them, Subhuti, by means of his buddha-thought.." in reference to Buddha's claim that there will be bodhisattvas in the future. It is surely relevant that the word 'tathagata' is used here. And Red Pine explains it by saying that bodhisattvas all share the immeasurable, inconceivable reality body. A rough gloss might be 'the self-aware part of the universe (tathagata) is aware of (parts of) itself.' [Now I see why new-age mysticism gets along with buddhism so well.] I have to say, I don't really get this part. In what sense is the 'Tathagata' aware of these future bodhisattvas? What is 'buddha-thought' like? Perhaps I will lay aside this portion of the teaching, and either come to understand it in the future, or never use it as my particular raft. It may be that Buddha spoke this way because he needed to in order to communicate with Subhuti and the other people at the assembly.
2 comments:
I don't get the supernatural stuff either ... of anything, it freaks me out the most ... too religious.
A note about the boat (alright, raft). To renounce the teachings when one understands the teachings is important. Holding onto the teachings is another form of attachment, another way of gaining place.
So, yes, do not carry the raft on the other side of the river, but perhaps you can enter the river without the raft.
BTW, you are a dedicated pupil, posting through the weekend.
And I'm glad you're enjoying this conversation. So am I.
The Dalai Lama has stated that if scientific evidence comes around that contradicts a teaching of Buddhism, that we should be prepared to let go of that teaching. That's really an amazing statement, and completely jibes with my own deepest views of the way the world works. The Dalai Lama represents Tibetan Buddhism, which has more supernatural elements than does Zen Buddhism, but still, his comment is relevant and consistent with what this sutra has so far taught.
Post a Comment