using the arrow buttons.
by clicking on the page.
the page around when zoomed in by dragging it.
the zoom using the slider when zoomed-in.
by clicking on the zoomed-in page.
by entering text in the search field, and select "This Issue" or "All Issues"
by clicking on thumbnails to select pages, and then press the print button.
displays sections with thumbnails and descriptions.
displays a slider of thumbnails. Click on a page to jump.
allows you to browse the full archive.
about your subscription?
Buddhadharma : Spri 2007
buddhadharma| 5 |spring 2007 commentary aJahN puNNadhaMMo iS aBBoT of arrow river foreST herMiTage iN NorTherN oNTario, CaNada. iN 1990 he waS ordaiNed iN ThailaNd iN The foreST TradiTioN of aJahN Chah. The first factor of the eightfold noble path is right view. While it is true that the eight fac- tors should be developed together, it is also true that there is always a reason for the order of the factors in the lists given by the Buddha. The path factor of right view may be thought of as the foundation stone for the whole edifice of practice. The Buddha was quite explicit in defining the content of what he called right view. One endowed with right view would understand the world as fol- lows: “He has right view, undistorted vision, thus: ‘There is that which is given and what is offered and what is sacrificed; there is fruit and result of good and bad actions; there is this world and the other world; there is mother and father; there are beings who are reborn spontaneously; there are good and virtuous recluses and brahmins in the world who have themselves realized by direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world’” (Majjhima Nikaya 41.14). This formula implies that the real existential basis of our being is governed by the laws of karma (“result of good and bad actions”) and rebirth (“there is this world and the other world”), includ- ing the possibility of rebirth into the deva realms (“spontaneously born beings”). This is difficult for some Western Buddhists to accept, and there is an active project to formulate a Buddhism that does not include these teachings. The origins of this project are understandable. Most Western converts to Buddhism have con- sciously rejected some faith-based tradition. What is initially appealing about Buddhism is its empha- sis on personal experiential unfoldment. This is all well and good, but it can become very one-sided. The spiritual faculty of discriminating wisdom must be complemented with that of faith or, in the words of the Buddha, it becomes “cunning, which the right View of rebirth by aJahn punnadhammo is as hard to cure as a disease caused by medi- cine.” If right view, as formulated by the Buddha, is rejected, the practice must instead be resting on the shaky foundation of one wrong view or another, whether this is clearly articulated or not. In the Brahmajala Sutta the Buddha enumerates a table of sixty-two wrong views. All these com- plicated errors can be simplified into three broad categories: eternalism and annihilationism plus one odd man out. Eternalism is the view that the self is eternal and unchanging. This view usually goes hand in hand with the doctrine of a creator god. The annihilationist view holds that the self is extinguished utterly at death. The contemporary form of this view is materialism or physicalism. But the Buddha taught that we are neither immortal souls nor human machines. There is no self either to endure or to be destroyed. Con- sciousness is itself void and conditionally arisen. It is neither created nor destroyed; rather, it arises dependent upon certain causal factors, which include an object, a physical base, karma, and pre- vious moments of consciousness. For conscious- ness to arise in the womb must imply a previous existence to activate this causal link. Otherwise we would have an arbitrary or random arising, which would violate the dependent origination. The remaining wrong view is called, in a literal translation, the “eel-wriggler” view. This is one who cannot or will not make up his mind: “It may be this, or it may be the other, or perhaps it’s both or maybe it’s neither.” In modern parlance, it’s called agnosticism. It is significant that the Bud- dha was quite dismissive of this view, regarding it as the product either of cowardice or stupidity. It is sometimes asked if holding the view of karma and rebirth is necessary for practice. I would argue that for significant progress to be made, it is. Or rather, more accurately, the one-life-only view