Digest Number 2203

October 12, 2005

Hello Siddarth,

And what a perfect name you have to address Buddhist questions!

Thank you for your kind words. Regarding forms of address, while I appreciate greatly your sincerity in asking me about proper forms of address, I must defer to the Buddha who said it is not by our titles, our backgrounds, our caste, nor our education that we are to be regarded as wise or a “brahmin” but by our behavior. Since you do not know me nor my life you cannot judge that, so it is wise and prudent to be informal. What you may see of me here is knowledge and at my age (46) I am no longer interested in such, it is understanding I seek. So please, José is fine; we are both seekers after Understanding, peers in this great Search.

Also, I am here as someone who has a great love and respect for Sri Ramakrishna and as such prefer to learn from my brothers and sisters here than to share what little I know. But since you asked me directly, I will try to answer your questions.

What you said about Buddhism’s not surviving in India because of what has traditionally been called, “The God Question” has much merit in it. But we must be careful. It is true that the Buddha was quite hesitant to describe what was the most common, referential point in the proto-Hinduism that existed in His day, “God.” The reason for this was that he was attempting something different from the commonly used methods of teaching of his time. He wanted to teach the end of suffering and speculative questions were, in his Understanding, not conducive to such. Perhaps a famous story might illustrate this better:

Once the Buddha was asked by one of his followers a serious of questions that directly asked the Buddha’s position on questions he’d normally not addressed outright. These included whether there was a God or not, whether a Buddha existed after death or not, etc. This follower said he could no longer remain with the Buddha until he had definitive answers to these questions. The Buddha replied that this was like a man at war who, facing his enemy across the battlefield was suddenly struck by a poisoned arrow. When his kinsmen gathered to help him, the man refused assistance, saying he must know first who fired the arrow, what caste he was from, from what tree was the arrow shaft made, what plant the poison derived, etc. etc. The Buddha said, surely this man would die before gaining his answers, just so, we must first remove the arrow of suffering

and leave the speculative questions aside. Why? Because when we Awaken, our perspective would change. These questions would no longer concern us because we would attain Perfect Understanding (samma ditthi).

Now we may return to Sri Ramakrishna here for a more contemporary example. He said often to guests, “from which perspective would you like to speak of God, with form (Brahman sagunam) or without form (Brahman nirgunam)?” He understood that the place from which one proceeds to ask a question was important. We might say (and this is a stretch but not entirely) that Buddhism could fit under a “without form” heading. This is fair and applies to a degree. But either way, the Buddha wanted us to engage ourselves in the practical, immediate task of Awakening rather than indulging in speculation that might distract us from the suffering we participate in daily. one can “believe” in God and still make few efforts to be kind or gentle or to control ones bad habits. Likewise one may have little or no “faith” but be of remarkable moral and

ethical character. Sri Ramakrishna also said, “Who weeps for God?” and this is quite important. I believe he meant, with what enthusiasm do we live, for material things, or for liberation? If you devote yourself to liberation, with your whole heart and not just your head, then whether you believe or not, whether you have knowledge or not, is of little merit. What counts is the passion for true Understanding and the compassionate life you lead.

As for authoritative books, remember, your life is the most authoritative book you can possess, and even that will eventually fade away. Observe this book, pay attention to how you live, what brings ultimate happiness to yourself and maximum happiness to others and that is the true Buddhist way.

If you like, however, the Sutta Nipata (transl. by H. Saddhatissa), and Buddhist Ethics (also by Sadhatissa) along with What the Buddha Taught (by Walpola Rahula), Mindfulness in plain English (Ven. Henepola Gunaratana), the Dhammapada (I like the Byrom translation but there are many) A survey of Buddhism (by Sangharakshita) and Mahayana Buddhism (Paul Williams) are all good introductory material. Perhaps the Rahula book would be my first choice, then Sangharakshita´s work, though I have some reservations about a few of his conclusions. David Kalupahana´s The way of Siddhartha: A life of the Buddha, is a lovely introduction to the Buddha’s historical life. The Dhammapada and the Sutta Nipata are very early suttas spoken by the Buddha himself.

I hope this helps a little.

With palms pressed together,José/