The Gift of the Buddha - A Happy Life

Homage to the Fortunate One, the Pure One, the One Rightly and Completely Enlightened.

For those newly coming to the Buddha’s teaching:

King Asoka of India promoted various teachings of the Buddha, which warned about future dangers leading to the loss of the Buddha’s teaching, one specifically [Source: Paali A v 79] mentioned choosing to pay attention to the words of others rather than the Buddha. I pay attention to this warning. For me it makes sense that, if I want to understand the Buddha’s teaching, I listen to what he had to say. I heard that the radical, but well respected monk of South Thailand, Buddhadaasa Bhikkhu also paid attention to this warning. When I went to visit him, I was impressed that he encouraged people to actually pay attention to what the Buddha said.

The Buddha taught he had no "secret doctrine". Suggesting a word used in one place, does not have the same meaning as the same word used somewhere else, is promoting a secret doctrine. It means the teaching needs to be explained by the one suggesting this, or some other. In effect one doing so is setting themselves, or their colleagues, up as interpreters and fostering dependence on them. This is common in the development of religions, but is not a feature of the Buddha’s teaching.

Click here for a free collection of the Buddha’s teachings that I have found have passed the authentication test [the study method that] the Buddha gave for his teaching. I would encorage you to first read these sorts of teachings ascribed to the Buddha. They are down to earth. Once you have read and are very familar with the discourses via the link above, you may want to buy this book: "In the Buddha’s Words: An Anthology of Discourses from the Pali Canon" from Amazon.com by Bhikkhu Bodhi. You could also subscribe to this free RSS for Daily Words of the Buddha. I hope these collections help you avoid the problem I had, when I first wanted to study the Buddha’s teaching, that is, to sort down to earth teachings out from the one’s that are very dry and philosophical [probably later corruptions or fabrications]. That is where the study method that the Buddha gave for his teaching comes in. Please focus on the two collections of teachings linked to above first and don't bother reading the other sections in this web site. Once you are familiar with those teachings, you will have a sense of the Buddha’s teaching and will be able to better see where I am coming from in the other sections here.

I’d like to say that the Buddha’s teaching has given me a way to be happy, really happy, a deep inner peace, peace with myself. It has helped me realise the true meaning of "justice" in my everyday dealings with people. It has helped me find a healthy place for, and expression of, such emotions as anger, which would be judged and dismissed by "religious" attitude as "bad", "evil" or "unenlightened". It has helped me find a compassionate way to deal with people who mistreat me and others [usually unintentionally]. Mistreating oneself or others is the Buddha’s definition of "wrong". That compassionate way, may not be saying or doing what they want, but it is NOT abusive. [It’s up to them to know if their wants are egotistic - if they get upset and judge me without trying to understand by asking, that is egotistic.] Unlike "Buddhism", I have found the Buddha’s teaching to be wholly logical, but it does not stop there. If one doesn't know the theory is true or false, it requires testing in life. Ego can use us-thinking-we-are-logical to stop one moving to the next step, that is, testing in experience, by letting us have the reason, "it seems logical, but I'm happy with what I have". Someone who is not fully satisfied with life and says they want to be fully satisfied, but who will not test a logical teaching, is fooling themselves/has been fooled by ego. In brief, the Buddha’s teaching has shown me how to integrate emotion and intellect. So I fall less and less into either exclusive extreme and the saying "let emotions be guided by reason, or you will be guided by unreasonable emotions" is more and more a lived experience.

As the Buddha’s teaching moved to different countries, translating had to be done, but the translators didn't always know the meaning of terms.

For those dedicated to the Buddha’s teaching who want a clearer picture:

If you are reading on from the previous section, there is some information repeated here.

You may find that you're dedicated to the Buddha’s teaching, but you have not actually read much of what he is supposed to have said. In that case click here for a free collection of the Buddha’s teachings that I have found have passed the authentication test [the study method that] the Buddha gave for his teaching. I'm sure you will find that these teachings are down to earth. Once you have read and are very familar with the discourses via the link above, you may want to buy this book: "In the Buddha’s Words: An Anthology of Discourses from the Pali Canon" from Amazon.com by Bhikkhu Bodhi. I hope these collections help you avoid the problem I had, when I wanted to study the Buddha’s teaching, that is, to sort down to earth teachings out from the one’s that are very dry and philosophical [probably later corruptions or fabrications]. Also you might want to click here for a free compilation of teachings the Buddha encouraged his followers to reflect on frequently. Though the Buddha encouraged us to reflect on these teachings very often, they are very rarely found in the morning and evening chanting that is done in many Buddhist Temples. Instead passages from later writers are chanted. You could also subscribe to this free RSS for Daily Words of the Buddha.

King Asoka of India promoted various teachings of the Buddha, which warned about future dangers leading to the loss of the Buddha’s teaching, one specifically [Source: Paali A v 79] mentioned choosing to pay attention to the words of others rather than the Buddha. I pay attention to this warning. For me it makes sense that, if I want to understand the Buddha’s teaching, I listen to what he had to say. It is only when I had not understood and applied the study method the Buddha gave for his teaching that I needed others to interpret his teaching for me. I could not "take the Buddha as a teacher" [see quotes] and could not "take myself as a refuge or a island/light" [D 16.2.26 : D ii 100 ; D iii 58 : D 26.1 ; S 22.43 : S iii 42], as he taught to do. I used to chant "the Buddha is the greatest teacher" [S 55.3 etc], but then not pay much or any attention to what he said. It was an empty chant. I heard that the radical, but well respected monk of South Thailand, Buddhadaasa Bhikkhu also paid attention to this warning from King Asoka and the Buddha. When I went to visit Buddhadaasa Bhikkhu, I was impressed that he encouraged people to actually pay attention to what the Buddha said.

The Buddha taught he had no "secret doctrine". Suggesting a word used in one place, does not have the same meaning as the same word used somewhere else, is promoting a secret doctrine, e.g. "equanimity" in the 4 divine abidings [brahma-vihara] and "equanimity" in the 3rd and 4th level of awareness [ruupajhaana]. It means the teaching needs to be explained by the one suggesting this, or some other. In effect one doing so is setting themselves, or their colleagues, up as interpreters and fostering dependence on them. This is common in the development of religions, but is not a feature of the Buddha’s teaching.

It is ego, or greed, hatred and delusion [=suffering], that we need to see clearly in and eradicate from our lives. Putting out the fire of suffering is "Nibbaana" or "Nirvar.na". When we do it we can live a happy life. There is a Zen saying "Before enlightenment: chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment: chop wood, carry water." There are basic things that we need to do in life, but there are other things we do, which are counter-productive to our happiness and those around us. It is only the latter that we need to eliminate.

This could be why, enlightened people are quite hard to spot. It is often more what they DON'T do, than what they DO, that makes them different. Often the characteristics or signs the Buddha gave of a Noble Person, were things NOT done by them. Those basic things that all people do for living, enlightened people would do slightly differently, with a different motivation. They wouldn't do them to prove themselves worthy, or to prove they are a good person, a good father/mother, a hard worker, or any other stereotype or self-image, no matter how "good" it may seem. In other words, they don't do them egotistically, with a negative compulsion. They do them with a peaceful joy, from a state of inner peace, compassion and wisdom drives them.

The eradication of self-image, or self-identification [sak-kaaya di.t.thi] is where the Buddha’s teaching goes beyond modern psychology, which would encourage a positive self-image. Surely it is better to have a positive self-image than a negative one [if one is stuck in the process of building self-images], but the Buddha’s teaching traces the cause of suffering back to ignorance of the process of making a self-image, or self-identification, which is from the conceit "I am".

There are many ego games we all seem to play to stop us being a person of integrity, a Noble Person. Go to "ego games - games the ego uses to maintain itself" to see some of the ones I have spotted in me and eradicated to various degrees. But don't let the number of such games get you down. The Buddha taught how to go to the root cause of these games and that we have to do that to make real progress. That is, understanding the process of building self-images and how they maintain the conceit "I am". That is Right View or Right Understanding in the Buddha’s teaching. One can then start living by this understanding. Until then they just mutate and permeate and we can only make surface changes, because the cause is not dealt with.

[M 117 : M iii 71-72] We have to theoretically understand the path, from beginning to end. This is theoretic "Right Understanding", the first level of Right Understanding. Then we have to apply/test that understanding in our life. If we find it frees us from clinging, that is, from suffering, then we have developed Noble Right Understanding that "is independent of others" and unshakable, as it is based on our direct experience. We have "unshakable faith" and the shift in view makes us UNABLE [much stronger and reliable than unwilling!] to break the fundamental level of ethics that we find in all major religions proscriptions [see The Mirror of the Dhamma D 16 : D ii 93-4], don't intentionally: "kill another human being" etc. "Avoiding killing ALL other living beings" etc is the higher training, we then develop. It is this testing in experience that the Buddha taught was the ULTIMATE AUTHORITY.

To understand the path the Buddha taught theoretically, we have to apply the study method he gave for his teaching. If we don't have much time to do that, then we should at least find a spiritual friend who has done this [and who encourages others to do it and thereby does not foster dependence on himself or herself] and be willing to test what he or she has to say. The Buddha taught that the most important internal factor for progress on the path is "wise reflection" and the most important external factor is "spiritual friendship". [SN 45.49 = SN v 29]

Here is a brief example of applying the "sutta test" to find authentic teachings of the Buddha.

Click here for some of the common misrepresentations of the Buddha’s teaching that you may find. [This is the Diighaavu discourse referred to in the picture of the table just linked to.] These are some differences between "Buddhism" the religion and "The Teaching of the Buddha." WARNING regarding dogma: some possible corruptions have been identified in the Paali texts!

I’d like to say that the Buddha’s teaching has given me a way to be happy, really happy, a deep inner peace, peace with myself. It has helped me realise the true meaning of "justice" in my everyday dealings with people. It has helped me find a healthy place for, and expression of, such emotions as anger, which would be judged and dismissed by "religious" attitude as "bad", "evil" or "unenlightened". It has helped me find a compassionate way to deal with people who mistreat me and others [usually unintentionally]. Mistreating oneself or others is the Buddha’s definition of "wrong". That compassionate way, may not be saying or doing what they want, but it is NOT abusive. [It’s up to them to know if their wants are egotistic - if they get upset and judge me without trying to understand by asking, that is egotistic.] Unlike "Buddhism", I have found the Buddha’s teaching to be wholly logical, but it does not stop there. If one doesn't know the theory is true or false, it requires testing in life. Ego can use us-thinking-we-are-logical to stop one moving to the next step, that is, testing in experience, by letting us have the reason, "it seems logical, but I'm happy with what I have". Someone who is not fully satisfied with life and says they want to be fully satisfied, but who will not test a logical teaching, is fooling themselves/has been fooled by ego. In brief, the Buddha’s teaching has shown me how to integrate emotion and intellect. So I fall less and less into either exclusive extreme and the saying "let emotions be guided by reason, or you will be guided by unreasonable emotions" is more and more a lived experience.

For those heavily involved in Buddhist Studies, or those who want to be:

If you are reading on from the previous section, there is some information repeated here.

A true academic would be looking for what Gotama Buddha *most likely* taught. They would want to take in all the available evidence, not just blindly believe one tradition and they would be open to the findings of scientific research in the areas of archaeology and linguistics for example. They would value the early texts from any source, but accept that ANY source might be corrupted.

The most complete early texts we have are in Paali [a fairly new term, ~ 120 years old, for an old spoken Indian language called Magadhi] and Chinese [translated from Sanskrit]. As far as I know, there are only fragments of extant Sanskrit texts and a few early India texts translated into Tibetan. To find counterparts of texts in different language sources, try: Sutta Central. The actual texts are being entered.

There is a piece of general advice ascribed to the Buddha for those who have not yet developed unshakable faith in him as their teacher, which also applies to his own teaching. It is to test a reasonable theory in experience before accepting or rejecting it. The example the Buddha set regarding testing others' teachings, while he was still only searching for enlightenment, was to find someone who at least claimed to have realised enlightenment, examine his teaching to see if it would harm oneself or others and if not, then to stick with that teacher until he mastered the teaching. If, after testing, he found it was not enough, only then to move on. He didn't just move on because his comfort zones were challenged.

Any hypothesis, even from the Buddha, is still to be tested in experience and not just believed [clung to as the truth]. If it worked, one would only know it worked for oneself, not the whole world. One may have faith it would work for others, but faith is not "knowing". In the Buddha’s teaching I would say, faith is NOT "the evidence of things unseen" [Heb. 11:1], but rather, the encouragement to test things unseen or unknown.

The approach of testing in personal experience, as well as these other pieces of the advice from the Paali texts attributed to the Buddha and addressed to the faithful, would comprise the attitude needed and the study method to be used for the Buddha’s teaching:

1. a) Make a thorough investigation [MN 56 = MN i 379, A iv 183-4 etc] by
   b) Making internal comparative studies: "... All you to whom I have taught these truths that I have realised by super-knowledge should come together and recite them, *setting meaning beside meaning and expression beside expression*, without dissension, in order that this holy life may continue and be established for a long time for the profit and happiness of the many..." [Paali DN 29 : PTS D iii 127] [a] [I’ve found this one makes sure I combine the power of various suttas [threads] so that I have a strong rope to pull myself out of suffering. Before I did this, I had a very narrow view of the Buddha’s teaching and I tended to cling to one teaching as "IT".]
2. Focus on the Buddha’s own words:
   a) Warnings the Buddha gave about listening to disciples:
   Paali SN 20.7
   and
   Paali AN v 79
   And why?:
   b) "Mendicants, these two misrepresent the One-Thus-Come. Which two? He who explains what was not said by the One-Thus-Come as said by the Him and he who explains what was said by the One-Thus-Come as not said by the Him: these are two who misrepresent the One-Thus-Come" [AN 2.23 = AN i 59]
   If one did not have a good sense of the Buddha’s teaching from his own words, one could not judge statements that contradict his teaching.

Regarding #1a: From the context of this quote, we know that the Buddha was referring to his teaching. Making a through investigation of internal phenomena in meditation, is PART of his teaching. We have to understand what his teaching is first. We have a saying, "the truth does not suffer from investigation."

Regarding #1b, for me it is the only method which allows the Buddha to explain himself. Those who maintain and study the records of the Buddha’s teaching have that important duty to perform out of compassion for the many. It involves identifying and correcting corruptions, but from a point of the evidence, not promoting the beliefs one clings to, one’s dogma.

Regarding #2a: The commentaries say these texts talk about "disciples outside the teaching", which would be correct, since any one who was not a Noble One, would not have understood the Buddha’s teaching and so, would be "outside" it. The texts show that Noble Ones point to the Buddha as the teacher, rather than trying to establish themselves or their colleagues as the teacher. Many Buddhists chant regularly "the Buddha is the greatest teacher". This may be a lived experience or a dogma. Until I used his study method, it was an empty chant. The study method lets the Buddha interpret his teaching for us. When I rely on the Buddha to interpret his teaching, then I have faith in him and I am taking him as the teacher. I am also taking myself as a refuge, which he taught [D 16.2.26 : D ii 100 ; D iii 58 : D 26.1 ; S 22.43 : S iii 42]. When I don’t rely on the Buddha to interpret his teaching, then I am relying on others to interpret his teaching for me, as if the Buddha needed help! In those situations, I now think "it is more likely the case that I need the help". The Buddha taught he had no "secret doctrine". Linguistic’s "semantic change" [b] acknowledges that one word may currently have many meanings. Also some meanings that were once there, may have been lost. We must not assume all the meanings we have now, were current at the time the Buddha spoke, or that there were no other meanings that we don't have now. That would be clinging to our view, or beliefs, our interpretation, as the truth and would be suffering. If one takes that path, one is promoting a secret doctrine that needs to be interpreted by the holder of that view, or their colleague/s and, in effect, they are setting themselves up as interpreters, rather than translators, as the expert, or teacher and fostering dependence on them. Dependence on a third party for interpretation [an intermediary] is common in the development of religions, but is not a feature of the Buddha’s teaching, as the above texts show. Translating is one thing, interpreting is another. We need the help of translators, when the Buddha’s teaching is in a language we don.t understand. It is a challenge to translators to avoid promoting their beliefs as what the Buddha taught, vis #2b above and the note below. One must be honest and admit to oneself and others, in the translations, that one is not sure of the meaning of a term, when that is the case. To say one language cannot be translated to another, is an example of "a bad crafstman always blames his tools". Of course, idioms cannot be directly translated, but the meaning of the idiom can be given in the second language, if the idiom in the first language is understood. Sometimes an equivalent idiom can be found in the second language. An example of setting oneself or another up as an interpretor would be saying "equanimity" in the 4 divine abidings [brahma-vihara] and "equanimity" in the 3rd and 4th level of awareness [ruupajhaana] [4 ruupajhaana in Paali] are not the same thing, or had a different meaning at the time the Buddha spoke. [c]

There many examples of #2b. Here are some of the common misrepresentations of the Buddha’s teaching that you may find. [This is the Diighaavu discourse referred to in the picture of the table just linked to.] These are some differences between "Buddhism" the religion and "The Teaching of the Buddha." [WARNING regarding dogma: some possible corruptions have been identified in the Paali texts!] It is for this reason that the Buddha encourages us to follow the advice in #2a. The practice of referencing in tertiary studies is a very noble practice and addresses this point. It is being totally honest about information supplied, ommitting references, in the context of ME writing something, implies it is MY original work. Referencing honours the source person of the idea. The information here is from my book and the references are supplied there. In my book, if I realise the information came from another, but cannot remember the reference, then I put "[ref?]".

When one has developed a theory, one can test it by applying the Four References and according to these qualities the Buddha said his teaching has:

1. Anguttara Nikaya 11.12:
   1. Svaakkhaato: Well spoken, good in the beginning, middle and end.
   2. Sandi.t.thiko: Verifiable. The Dhamma is testable by practice.
   3. Akaaliko: Timeless, no need to wait until the future for results.
   4. Ehipassiko: Invites inspection.
   5. Opanaayiko: Leads onwards.
   6. Paccattam veditabbo vinynyuuhi. To be known by the intelligent, each for themselves.
2. Gotami Sutta
3. Diighava Sutta

The path the Buddha taught is often summarised as Ethics, Meditation and Wisdom. Rather than being a path to some abstract, superhuman idea or ideal, it is the path to happiness in this very life, whether that be as a monk or nun, or a family oriented layman or laywoman [the fourfold community].

When we use reason, I think we would have to agree that a PATH has to be progressive [1], with logical, sequential steps. A path that does not show the way, step by step, is really not path at all, or at least is not a useful, practical path. There are enough such paths out there, why assume this is so with the Buddha’s teaching? I’d like to attest that this is NOT the case with the Buddha’s teaching, that it IS a logical and realistic, step by step path. This would seem to be what the Buddha was getting at when he said: "I mendicants do not say that the attainment of profound knowledge comes straightaway; nevertheless, mendicants, the attainment of profound knowledge comes by a gradual training, a gradual doing, a gradual course." [MN i 479-480, AN Sutta 8.2.19 etc]

The Dalai Lama has said that he would not encourage his followers to practice anything that was against science. The Buddha said his teaching avoids the two extremes, but the two extremes may be presented in different ways. I have found that the Buddha’s teaching is the only spiritual teaching that truly values BOTH logic/intelligence AS WELL AS feeling/emotion.[2] We can develop a theory based on either, but the next step is to TEST the theory IN EXPERIENCE, rather than remain in blind faith in either extreme.

The Buddha taught personal experience is the ultimate authority, not blind faith in intellect or comfort zones. Usually we swing from one extreme to the other, but the Buddha’s teaching shows us how to integrate the two, so they are working together, complimenting each other in our everyday life. Science usually focuses on logic/intelligence and excludes feeling/emotion.[3] Religion usually focuses on feeling/emotion and excludes logic/intelligence. Both fields of study may extend beyond their main focus at times, when it suits them, but when taken further by another party [an "outsider"], they often retreat if it requires them to question their dogma [cherished beliefs].

The Buddha encouraged those with faith in him to make a "thorough investigation" of his teaching to see "the logic of its unfolding" [D iii 121 : D 29, Walshe’s translation] and he taught that scientific faith is part of his teaching, not blind faith. He also taught that his teaching would be lost over time. These ideas may not be particular to the Buddha, but what I have found IS particular is that he has given a STUDY METHOD for his teaching.

With a different study method, we just tend to develop an interpretation of our own, or we choose which interpretation we like best, from those presented by the different schools of Buddhism. At best, we agree to disagree when talking with others who hold different interpretations. I’ve found this doesn’t work. Ego leads me to choose interpretations that maintain my ego-nurturing comfort zones or beliefs. I don’t get challenged to expand my comfort zones, or change my beliefs in ways that lead to the destruction of ego.[4]

Developing an interpretation is how the many various schools of Buddhism arose. Those schools all hark back to the Buddha in one way or another and focus on an important part of the Buddha’s teaching, but as far as I have seen, each school over-emphasises the important aspect it focuses on and does not value ALL important aspects, nor sees how they are interdependent. I could not avoid doing the same until I applied the study method the Buddha gave. The general ignorance about this study method may have come about because the method got lost through a probable corruption of the text which mentions it. [See above.]

The study method itself seems to be the key to identifying corruptions in the texts. It matters not whether the texts are recorded on paper or in someone’s memory. So even though the Buddha said his teaching would get lost over time, as other teachers may have said about their teachings, the study method would be the Buddha’s antidote to this situation. Truly a wise and compassionate approach! The Buddha not only points out a problem, but gives a solution to it.

The study method is essentially seeing the links between different teachings. One simple example is comparing the popular summary of the path mentioned eight paragraphs above [at the start of this section], with another popular quote about the Buddha’s teaching, Dhammapada verse 183:

Regarding this comparison, we see in the Buddhist texts, that when the Buddha talks about Ethics, he usually speaks of avoiding certain harmful behaviours. So the match of "Ethics" with "Avoiding doing evil" is quite apt. Meditation is related to developing good states of mind. So we can see a parallel there too. Wisdom is related to purifying the mind of the causes of corruption. It is about understanding cause and effect of suffering in our everyday lives and applying, or living by that understanding. The links between two teachings may not be exact, that is, ethics may not necessarily equate to avoiding doing evil, etc. In this case it would seem there is a very close match between each set of three items.

I call the above a simple example because both teachings have three items. The method becomes more powerful in seeing links when one compares teachings with different main points, or different numbers of items. One simple example would be:

Here is an example of comparing four teachings of different numbered items [10, 3, 4 and 7]:

Until I applied this study method to a large number of teachings, I did not see the "big picture" of the Buddha’s teaching and I clung to one form of the path as THE [one and only] path the Buddha taught. This is one type of "clinging to form", which the Buddha taught against [see the 10 fetters in the link above - "lust for forms" in this case a subtle form - see the page on Wisdom for the scope of "forms"]. The Buddha said he taught the path "perfect in letter AND spirit". The study method he seems to have given reveals HOW he did so.[5]

Comparing many teachings showed me how authentic teachings all fit together and bring light to each other. It is only when I did this study, that I truly saw the teachings of the Buddha were threads [sutta]. Threads may have weaknesses at different points in themselves, but when combined, even with those weaknesses, they form a strong rope. The rope of the Buddha’s teaching is used to pull oneself out of suffering.[8]

The next couple of texts ascribed to Buddha in the Diigha Nikaya after the one which gives the study method above, would seem to be early attempts at doing this kind of study, as they start to list different teachings in point form. One clear early example of this method is from the Nun Dhammadinna in Culavedalla Sutta - MN 44. There she links the Noble Eightfold Path with the three tranings of Ethics, Meditation and Wisdom mentioned above.

This simple study method matched with the powerful quote from the Buddha:

lead me to comparing Dependent Arising [7] with other teachings. This lead me to the conclusion that, in fact, ALL authentic teachings of the Buddha are versions of Dependent Origination.

This kind of study required of me to be willing to question beliefs that I clung to as the whole truth. Clinging to beliefs as the truth is otherwise called "being dogmatic" and is suffering [clinging to one’s beliefs as the unchanging truth - conception-clinging-component (sannyyaa-uupadaana-kkhanda) - see the page on Wisdom]. It is easy to say "the Buddha didn’t teach dogma", but it is not easy to recognise and give up the dogma we have regarding the Buddha’s teaching. As always, the truth sets us free, or the ending of clinging is freedom from suffering.

You may have heard that the Buddha taught according to the individual’s need. That’s why his teaching varies so. I believe this is true, but at the same time I have not found a school of Buddhism that shows how, that even though the presentation varies according to individuals, the SAME path is taught to each individual. It MUST be the SAME path, if the Buddha taught only ONE path. I believe he taught the only path out of suffering, but that he taught it in different forms, adjusted to the conditions of the individuals listening. If he was teaching a group, the path would have been adjusted to the general conditions of that group. This method of comparison of teachings reveals HOW this is the case.

I have seen that authentic teachings cover all three trainings of Ethics, Meditation and Wisdom, but in varying number of steps and with varying detail with regard to steps. In some teachings the Buddha speaks in detail about a particular training, but only briefly mentions the training before [if any] and the training after [if any]. Thus he spoke on the whole path in each teaching and the listener could see that the Buddha understood and valued what the listener had already accomplished – confirmation that they were heading in the right direction. The detailed steps would address where the listener was, at that point in his journey and what they needed to do now. Then briefly mentioning what lay ahead, would give the listener something to look forward to, or prepare them for what was ahead.

Click here to see the table of my comparison of Positive Dependent Arising with other teachings. WARNING regarding dogma: some possible corruptions have been identified in the Paali texts!

Another benefit of comparing teachings in this way is: those teachings that have a lot of detail about different steps in the path, when put together "flesh out" the Buddha’s teaching so to speak. Studying in this way gives one a much better understanding of the breadth of each step. Without that it would be difficult to adjust a step or phase to the individual needs of the person asking for guidance.

I believe there are individuals in the various schools of Buddhist that have seen the interconnectedness of different teachings of the Buddha – those who later may have become enlightened masters of the various traditions. For example, even though there is a great emphasis on "non-reliance on texts" in Zen, I heard of one Zen master who studied the early texts and encouraged others to do so. Their seeing the letter AND spirit of the Buddha’s teaching would have helped them on their journey.

May you attain complete freedom from suffering in this very life.

Peace and good health to you and those close to you from Dhammadarsa Bhikkhu [formerly Jou Smith].

15th of March 2008

For more information email Dhammadarsa Bhikkhu [formerly Jou Smith] .

Your time has been much appreciated and if you tell others about my work, your support has too.

From the 11th of October 2007, you are unique visitor number:
Counter Stats

"sydney doctor" Counter

[a] The Chinese Aagama parallel is in DA 17 and the section in question is at T01 0074a13 - 0074b23. "The Chinese does not seem to have phrases corresponding exactly to "setting meaning beside meaning and expression beside expression". Rather, it speaks of comparing one monk’s account of a teaching with another monk’s account of it. (This may be due to the poor language skills of the translator rather than a difference in the original text, as such advice is really not as wise/helpful as what is recorded in the Paali.) And whereas the Paali goes on to list the teachings to be recited together as only the 37 bodhipakkhiya-dhammas, the Chinese lists those 37 and 'the 12 angas: sutta, geyya, veyyaakaraa, gaathaa, udaana, itivuttaka, nidaana, jaataka, vedalla, abbhutadhamma, avadaana, upadesa'." [A quote from an email from Rod Bucknell, 12th March 2008, except for my comment in "( )".] In my book I have compared the 37 bodhipakkhiya-dhammas and that comparison is not as helpful as the comparison of ALL teachings with Dependent Arising. See later in body of this paper. That there is a difference in the Paali and Chinese, speaks to me of early modification of this text. It is possible that earlier than 500 BE [~1st Cent. CE], by which time the texts had been written down in Paali and translated to Chinese, that no specific teachings were mentioned, or that something else was, though I think the former more likely.

[b] "Semantic change" is the change in the meanings of words in any given language over time. It would be unreasonable to suggest the meanings of words in Paali have not also changed over time. WARNING regarding dogma: some possible corruptions have been identified in the Paali texts!

[c] There would be very, very few words that have double meanings in Paali. One example I can think of straight up is "diipa" which could mean "lamp" or "island". Usually the context indicates the meaning, sometimes not.

[1] The quality of "progressive" is debated somewhat in some schools of Buddhism, but comparative study of the early records of the Buddha’s words shows His path is just that.

[2] There may be other teachings out there that do this, but I have not encountered them.

[3] Vis "objective" versus "subjective".

[4] The destruction of ego would mean one stops being egotistic. It doesn’t mean one stops looking after oneself. The Buddha took medicine and rested, when he was sick or tired.

[5] More than 50 different presentations of the path in the texts by the Buddha have come to light through applying this study method, but they all fit the pattern of Ethics, Meditation and Wisdom, or Calm and Insight. Now I don’t need the path to be presented in any one particular way, but I can recognise an authentic presentation of the path, even though it might not be a quote of the Buddha. This is called empowerment and it is a quality of the Buddha’s teaching.

[6] The Chinese Aagama parallel is in MA 30 : T01 0467a18-19. This is an exact translation.

[7] Dependent Arising is generally accepted in various Buddhist Schools, as a very important teaching of the Buddha. That it was not in the list of teachings mentioned in the text that gives the study method, may be that, by the time specific teachings were added, what I call "Positive Dependent Arising", had fallen into dis-use. The now commonly used version of Dependent Arising, explains how SUFFERING arose, whereas the positive version of Dependent Arising explains how FREEDOM FROM SUFFERING arises. Therefore the positive version of Dependent Arising will match the other teachings of the path, which is said to be "the path to the ENDING of suffering". Both versions of Dependent Arising apprear in this discourse.

[8] I call "threads" [suttas] those teachings that pass the comparative test, "authentic teachings of the Buddha". They might not be the words of the Buddha himself [not His in letter], but they agree in spirit with His words. The "weaknesses" I am referring to are simply a lack of detail at certain parts. By "weakness" I am not referring to corruptions. Corruptions would invalidate a teaching as a "thread" [sutta].

Another thing I have not found in various schools of Buddhism, is although that say "all conditioned things are impermanent" and the written record of the Buddha’s teaching would be a conditioned thing, they do not identify corruptions in their records of the Buddha’s teaching. This study method offers a way to do so, yet at the same time honour the great work that has been done in maintaining the texts to the great extent that they have been. The Buddha’s teaching still can be found in the Paali Canon!

Bhikkhu Bodhi: This translator has done a great service to English speakers wishing to study the Buddha’s teaching, but he continues to "translate" the Pali word "jaati" as "life". "Jaati" means "birth" not "life", which translates as "jiivam". The Thai Buddhist tradition uses "jaati", but gives it a Thai pronunciation: "chaat". He also often adds the English prefix "re" [meaning 'again'] to "birth", but this is not consistent with the original text and the teaching of the Buddha of impermanence. Misrepresenting the Buddha is serious bad kamma/karma. If one is 'born again' or 'reborn', there is an aspect of oneself that goes beyond impermanence. One will misunderstand the Buddha’s teaching using Bhikkhu Bodhi’s "translations". If you buy the book, I suggest you note these mistakes and not pay much attention to his section introductions, nor the discourses he passes off as "the words of the Buddha" which are actually from disciples.

Stream Entry:
- [MN 115 = MN iii 64-5 and other places]
It is impossible that one with Right View (a Stream Enterer) would:

1. Treat any formation as permanent
2. Treat any formation as pleasant
3. Treat any formation* as the soul
   [* I following the Chinese and Tibetan reading here. The first three also at AN iii 438, next five also at AN iii 146, 438]
4. Take his mother’s life
5. Take his father’s life
6. Take a Worthy One’s life
7. Shed the blood of One-Thus-Come with a mind of hate
8. Cause a schism in the Community of Practitioners, and
9. Acknowledge a teacher other than the Awakened One.

The Four Sublime States - From the Discourses of the Buddha - DN 13 - D i 250

1. Here, monks, a disciple dwells pervading one direction with his heart filled with loving-kindness, likewise the second, the third, and the fourth direction; so above, below and around; he dwells pervading the entire world everywhere and equally with his heart filled with loving-kindness, abundant, grown great, measureless, free from enmity and free from distress.
2. Here, monks, a disciple dwells pervading one direction with his heart filled with compassion, likewise the second, the third and the fourth direction; so above, below and around; he dwells pervading the entire world everywhere and equally with his heart filled with compassion, abundant, grown great, measureless, free from enmity and free from distress.
3. Here, monks, a disciple dwells pervading one direction with his heart filled with sympathetic joy, likewise the second, the third and the fourth direction; so above, below and around; he dwells pervading the entire world everywhere and equally with his heart filled with sympathetic joy, abundant, grown great, measureless, free from enmity and free from distress.
4. Here, monks, a disciple dwells pervading one direction with his heart filled with equanimity, likewise the second, the third and the fourth direction; so above, below and around; he dwells pervading the entire world everywhere and equally with his heart filled with equanimity, abundant, grown great, measureless, free from enmity and free from distress.