Bhikshuni
Heng Yi (Kuo Li), 69, left the home-life in 1958 in Hong Kong at Western Bliss
Monastery. She now lives in Tse
Hsing Monastery, Da Yu Mountain, one of the Venerable Master’s Way-places. In order to reach the monastery from
Hong Kong, one must first take a one-hour ferry ride, then ride a bus for
another hour, and finally hike for more than an hour up the mountain. The isolation of the monastery and its
scenic location provide a serene environment that is ideal for cultivation.
While
Dharma Master Yi was still a lay person, after she took refuge with the
Venerable Master, she worked hard for the monastery, cultivating barren ground
and planting crops. She gave rise
to many afflictions, however, because of the lack of manpower at the monastery
and various obstructions. In order
to eradicate her karmic obstacles, she wanted to burn her entire body as an
offering to the Buddha on Amitabha Buddha’s birthday.
The
Venerable Master asked her, “So, you want to burn yourself. Aren’t you afraid of pain?” She replied that she didn’t know. Under the guidance of her good knowing
advisor, she did not carry out her plans.
Later she read the Sutra of Ten Demonic Obstacles and realized that she
was undergoing the “affliction of phenomena” obstacle. Everything is impermanent. As a result, she brought forth the
resolve to leave the home-life.
She shaved her head on Shakyamuni Buddha’s birthday.
Shortly
after she left the home-life, the Venerable Master moved to the United States
to propagate the Buddha-dharma. At
that time, only she and a few older Bhikshunis lived in the Hong Kong
Way-place. Before leaving for the
States, the Venerable Master expressed his concern that they would lose their
resolve, because their mind for the Way was not firm. Dharma Master Heng Yi replied, “Don’t worry! We will not retreat!” And in fact, she has not. She has remained at Tse Hsing Monastery
for almost forty years, planting vegetables and taking care of temple business.
In
the summertime, there are many snakes around the monastery. Although the snakes are not harmful,
people are afraid of them and often kill the snakes. Dharma Master Yi says that one snake kept returning,
although they chased it away many times and once even took it far away. They didn’t know what to do. The Venerable Master instructed them to
put the snake in his bowl. Oddly
enough, when the snake was in the bowl, it couldn’t move. They told the snake that if it kept
coming back, they would kick it out of Hong Kong! From then on, the snake did not reappear.
Dharma
Master Yi recites the Great Vajra Sutra and the Shurangama Mantra every
day. The Great Vajra Sutra
comprises six hundred volumes, and she has recited the entire set more than ten
times. She only leaves Tse Hsing
Monastery to participate in Dharma assemblies, such as the Buddha’s Birthday at
the Buddhist Lecture Hall in Happy Valley. Despite her age, she carries more than one hundred kilos of
supplies with her each time she returns to the monastery from Hong Kong. She carries the supplies on the ferry
and then on the bus, and then up more than one hundred steps as she climbs the
mountain to return home. Her hard
work and vigorous cultivation have kept her strong and healthy in both body and
spirit.
The
One Great Matter, the reasons for cultivating, is the matter of ending birth
and death. Three deaths inspired
Liung Soo Hoong to cultivate the Buddha-dharma. Her personal experiences of suffering caused her to abandon
her art career and multiple interests in order to “concentrate on only the most
essential one, which is: to try and live my life as closely as I possibly can
to my own spiritual ideals, and to continue to persist in this direction until
I realize my ultimate goal”.
Soo
Hoong began to seriously investigate the religion in 1983 after the death of
her pet bird. One night, she woke
up and saw a rat in her room. She
immediately became concerned about her bird downstairs, but went back to
sleep. The next morning, her
birthday, she found the bird’s cage bitten through; the bird was gone and only
blood and some feathers remained.
“I
felt utterly depressed and responsible, but I was also determined to find out
‘where’ it had gone. This matter
concerned me deeply. I searched,
inquired, read and thought intently.
Eventually I was introduced to the wonderful Buddha-dharma. I had a few encounters with Buddhism in
the past, but the impact was never this great. The timing was almost perfect because I was now ready to
receive the Dharma. I will always
be grateful to that little friend for rekindling in me a firm resolve. Its sudden death was a powerful
reminder of the transience of life and of the urgency in earnestly pursuing and
realizing my spiritual ideals”.
A
second experience with death further helped her to realize the truth of the
Buddha-dharma. She describes the
experience:
“In Shih Fu’s commentary to the Sutra of the Past Vows of Earth Store Bodhisattva, he explains,
Those who have this illness may become emaciated, consumptive and racked with pain and spasms, and be always on the verge of tears. All of this is because the offences which they have committed are numerous, and although they are not yet dead, their retributions are being determined in the hells”.
The above passage became painfully clear to me when my elder sister was bed-ridden with cancer. I kept watch over her day and night and saw how rapidly her condition deteriorated. Tears frequently welled up in her eyes. She suffered severe and intense pains constantly. During her last week, she had degenerated into a state almost beyond recognition.
Three
days before she passed away, she underwent physical and mental agony. She had conversations with unseen
beings in the evening, throughout the night and until almost noon the next day. From her extremely pathetic
expressions, painful reactions and pleadings, it became frightfully clear to us
that she was undergoing unpleasant interrogations and torments in the
hells. We were all utterly stunned
by the fierce reality of retribution.
Towards
the end, we all witnessed a miracle happening right before our eyes. But, at the most crucial moment,
‘something’ intervened and the whole healing process stopped. We lost her the following day.
“During
that time I felt so ashamed and cried a lot because I realized then that I had
no merit or virtue to pull any living being out of their plight or sufferings”.
After
the death of her dearly loved mother -- “the kindest and most understanding
lady I ever knew” -- however, her feelings of despair were transformed into
feelings of hope, and her experiences with the suffering of death served to
nurture her faith.
“[My
mother’s] sudden death left me with a lingering, intense kind of dull and numb
pain inside … I thought then that I could never feel happiness again”. Her feelings changed when she joined a delegation
from Malaysia to attend the Ten Thousand Buddhas Jewelled Repentance Bowing
Ceremony at the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas. “Shih Fu was in the office when the delegation and I
arrived. … Surprisingly my heart
was filled with joy when I saw the Venerable Master. … What I learned during
that first trip here helped me immensely during my grief”. With strengthened resolve, she now
hopes “to be able to fully repay the Buddhas, Bodhisattvas and Shih Fu’s boundless
compassion, and my mother’s deep kindness someday by slowly attempting to walk
the Path of the Sages”.
In
order to realize this hope, Soo Hoong has come to live at the City of Ten
Thousand Buddhas.
I
never knew that I would one day be able to find a place where the people will
not deliberately step on ants or even kill little creatures that are considered
to be pests… Every day there are
tests. Every living being I meet
is a teacher. Every moment is a
challenge. Those who are able to
maintain the daily schedule here without showing signs of laxness, conceit or
impatience have certainly earned my respect. This is truly a rare and inconceivable Way-place and I
honestly wouldn’t want to live or cultivate anywhere else.
This talk by D.M. Ch’au given on June 29, 1990
in Wonderful Words Hall is a continuation of a series of reports by members of
the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas delegation to China in the Spring of
1990. See issue #243 for a talk by
D.M Sure.
I
would like to say a little bit about our trip to China mostly from the point of
view of living in a non-Western country and then the experience of coming
back. The trip we made some years
ago to India produced a culture shock of going from the West to the East
(India). This time for me,
however, the culture shock was experienced not in going to the East (China),
but in coming back to the West (United States). I want to say very clearly though, that the culture shock
was not in coming back to the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas, because here I felt
just fine, very elated and happy to really be home. The only place in the world where I travelled that feels
like home anymore is in coming back here.
Every place else feels “foreign”.
And this time America in many ways more foreign to me than the foreign
country I went to.
To
briefly outline the trip: we arrived on the fourth of May and stayed in the
Shanghai area, mostly at Dragon Flower Monastery. We did some travelling in and around the Shanghai area to
visit other temples, such as Jade Buddha Monastery. But most of the time in Shanghai was spent in the
preparation and transmission of the Three Platforms of the Precepts to about a
thousand people - six or seven hundred monks and nuns and between three and
four hundred lay people. The lay
people either took the Five Precepts or the Bodhisattva Precepts.
Incidentally,
they don’t take the Ten Major and Forty-eight Minor Bodhisattva Precepts as we
know them from the Brahma Net Sutra.
They take a simplified version that is not nearly as strict. The people who take them consider this
revision to be expedient. We
stayed at Dragon Flower Monastery until the twenty-fifth - about three weeks -
and on the twenty-sixth we took a train south to Ningpo and stayed in that area
for a while visiting Way-places such as Ten Tung Sz and Chi Ta Sz.
After
a few days there, we travelled by ferry boat to Pu Tou Island and spent about
three or four days on Pu Tou Shan, bowing and seeing the island there. Pu Tou Shan is actually made up of two
islands - Pu Tou and Lo Chieh, an adjoining island. The combined names are Pu Tou Lo Chieh, meaning Potalaka. Pu Tou and Lo Chieh - those two
together make up the complete pilgrimage to Gwan Yin’s sacred mountain.
From
Po Tou Shan we took a much longer boat ride, about eight or nine hours
overnight, back to the Shanghai area.
We rested in Shanghai for a day or two and then set out by bus to Jyou
Hwa Shan, Nine Flowers Mountain, the sacred mountain of Earth Store
Bodhisattva. We stayed there for
about three or four days, climbing the mountain, bowing to the various shrines,
then we were bussed back to Shanghai.
After
a few days rest, we took an airplane to Cheng Du and stayed overnight. The next morning we started out by bus
- a very rugged bus trip - to Mt. Omei, the sacred mountain of Universal Worthy
Bodhisattva. We didn’t spend
as much time as we anticipated at Omei.
Our visit was cut short.
After bowing to the mountain, we endured another rugged bus ride back,
with visits to the various temples in the Cheng Du area, and then a flight to
Taiyuan. We stayed in Taiyuan a
few days, getting ready for a long bus ride to Wu Tai Shan - Five Peaks
Mountain - the Way-place of Manjushri Bodhisattva.
We
bowed and hiked Wu Tai Mountain for about three days and then took a bus
back. Again, this was a very
arduous journey because the roads in China are very primitive. Most are under construction or repair
and the type of construction being done is labour intensive. Dirt and gravel with hot tar are poured
out of little buckets that people carry.
There is no machinery to do the work; all of it is done by hand. So, bus rides are usually long, hot and
uncomfortable.
From
Taiyuan we flew to Xian. In the
Xian area we saw the Way-places of Venerable Sywan Dzang and Venerable Dau
Sywan, the Vinaya Master. Also we
had an interesting visit to Jung Nan Shan, South Mountain, outside of Xian. Afterward, we flew back to Shanghai to
rest for a couple of days before taking another trip south to the Soujou
area. The trip included visits to
Han Shan Sz, Xian Sz and Lingyan Shan, a training academy on an interesting
mountain overlooking the Soujou area.
There was one other note worthy side trip to Famen Sz (five or so hours by
bus from Xian to the Dharma Door Temple).
Here a finger-bone relic of the Buddha was discovered and enshrined.
So
that was pretty much the extent of our travels through China. We were able, by talking to people to
learn a good deal more of what is going on all throughout the rest of the
provinces. But again, how reliable
this information is we really don’t know.
Before
I went to China I was always under the impression that Nine Flowers Mountain or
Pu Tou Mountain or South Mountain were merely mountains by metaphor. I thought that people called them
“mountains” for poetic effect but that they weren’t really what we would
consider mountains; that the term “mountain” was used because they were
Way-places and meant to give you the feeling of leaving the world. But in going there, I discovered they
really are mountains, and quite spectacular mountains. Jou Hwa Shan in particular and Jung Nan
Shan are just like the Chinese landscape paintings; they rise up abruptly,
stand magnificently tall, have incredible rock formations and are marbled with
winding hiking trails.
Many
of the hiking trails are laid over with three-feet-wide slabs of stone. I would say that each block probably
weighs two or three hundred pounds.
They are laid in step-by-step by step, mile after mile after mile. It must have taken years and years of
incredible human effort to lay these by hand.
We
watched them being repaired. They
are still built and maintained by hand.
Men carry them with ropes and bamboo sticks bent over their shoulders. They strain and sweat with each slab
weighing sometimes two, three or four hundred pounds and carefully lay in these
stairs for people to make pilgrimages.
The kind of merit and virtue generated by those who take care of the
shrines is inconceivable. And when
you see these people doing it, literally giving up bodies and lives in exertion
to lay these steps, you really appreciate every step of your pilgrimage.
The
four holy mountains are incredible mountains. Some of them are quite dangerous to climb; some of the
trails are too steep and demanding for people who are not strong and in very
good shape. We all had a good
workout even though we were in fairly good shape. The physical rigors of hiking these mountain trails and
climbing their heights enhanced the spiritual experience of the pilgrimage.
One
of the concerns that our hosts and guides constantly expressed was that we rest
a lot and bolster our energies with all kinds of supplements, tonics and the
like, which we generally refused.
And they felt that since we ate only one meal a day, we would never have
the stamina to climb the peaks.
They were genuinely concerned.
But as it turned out, they themselves, eating three and four meals a day
were the ones petering out all the way along, resting and getting tired and
needing more time. We monks seemed
to get more and more strength as we hiked and bowed. I think this says something for the practice of eating one
meal a day. Three square meals
don’t give you the kind of energy you think they will. In fact, if you eat too much, you
probably lose energy.
The
one impression I wanted to share is this: Buddhism and I believe every
religious contemplative tradition, whether Catholicism, Islam, Judaism, Taoism
or Protestantism are united by a very clear and common principle; namely that
the world of pleasure, the world of material things is false, illusory, an
impediment to spiritual practice, to enlightenment, or to union with God or the
Divine. In other words, the path
to the sacred comes about through transcending or seeing through the very
common, ordinary playthings of material existence. This is particularly true in Buddhism. The subduing of the six sense organs
internally, by not uniting with sights and sounds, smells, tastes, objects of
touch and dharmas, is fundamental to the first stages of meditation. It is what the Venerable Nanajiviko was
talking about last night. He said
you develop or cultivate a disinterest in worldly things, even to the extent of
disinterest in your own body and doting over it.
Every
trip I’ve ever made to Asia and particularly this trip, I’ve found something in
the “backwardness” of Asian society and especially Chinese society, that is
very conducive to spiritual practice and the contemplative life. The un-development makes it a little
easier for cultivators to subdue the sense organs. Poor and primitive conditions (and I don’t use these terms
in a negative way) have the effect of allowing you “to return the light and
look inward”. The lack of material
glut aids contemplation and creates less distraction.
I
was keenly aware of this on first arriving in China. I actually felt a kind of relief. “Ah,” I thought, “I don’t have to guard myself nearly as
much as I did in San Francisco or at the airport, where the billboards and the
advertisements, the smells, the music and the way people dress and comport
themselves is all designed to allure and entice”. That out flowing is the energy in America and most Western
societies. Life here travels at a
very high speed in the fast lane, hitting all the six senses and telling you to
indulge, to enjoy and go out. This
isn’t to say that people in Asian societies are necessarily contemplatives or
meditative, but only that it is easier to be so if you prefer the contemplative
life. I found it easier to be more
mindful and more pure in the precepts.
So, the Buddha said, “With few desires one discovers contentment.
Living
in that simple kind of environment where there are very few pleasures or
diversions naturally stills the mind.
I seldom heard any kind of music, except traditional Chinese music every
once in a while floating around in the air and I saw almost no billboards. Everybody rides bicycles, so you are
not bombarded with all these images of flashy cars each with a different shape
and colour. The clothes people
wear are generally simple - drab, colourless and not eye-catching.
In
the countryside, everything goes at a much slower pace. People get about on donkeys,
water-buffalo, horses, bicycles and mostly on feet. Once into that environment, you start moving a little bit at
the pace that rice grows, because that’s the way and the rhythm of people’s
lives. China is an agricultural
society. One starts slowing down
to the speed of nature and becoming more mindful. You grow more aware of what you are doing and less
interested in going out and getting something, because there is not much to
get.
China
is a very poor country, unlike the United States where you go to a shopping
mall and have so much variety and so much money in your pocket, thinking. “What am I going to buy?” In China there is little money in
anybody’s pockets and little to buy.
The shelves are basically empty and what commodities do exist are not
the things we hanker to buy, coming from America or the West. Here we are spoiled with high quality
goods and luxuries. Perhaps that
is why Lao Tzu wrote,
“The
five colours confuse the eye,
The
five sounds dull the ear,
The
five tastes spoil the palate.
Excess
of hunting and chasing makes minds go mad.
Products that are hard to get
Impede
the owner’s movements.
Therefore
the Sage looks within, not outside.
Truly,
he rejects externals and lays hold of what is within”
And
so this kind of environment can be very conducive to non-out flowing. It’s actually a good environment to
cultivate in. However, I have to
qualify this and say that I still find it easier to cultivate in the United
States rather than China because we enjoy religious freedom here. So, an irony, a twist is present:
although the natural environment of a “backward” country like China makes it
easier to cultivate non-outflow wisdom, the actual social and political
realities of setting up Way-places where people can freely get together and
cultivate is occurring in the Western countries.
And
so, in the Western countries I think one of the things we’re going to have to
deal with in a very real way in the future is how do you gather back your six
sense organs in the midst of a highly material culture, geared and polished to
lure and force them outward? This
is precisely why a place like the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas is so important:
it is neither too Western nor too Eastern. The City of Ten Thousand Buddhas takes, I feel, the best of
both those worlds and combines them in a unique and special way.
to
be continued ……
The
following talk was presented on July 14, during the “Buddhism and Science” weekend
of the Conference by Dr. George Weissmann, a theoretical physicist and former
researcher at the Federal Polytechnical University in Zurich.
We
are living in a world today, which, in some ways, is dominated by science, by a
science which has come to be regarded as a pseudo-religion in the sense that it
claims to have access, at least in principle, to ultimate truth. And although most people will admit
that science is not at that point yet, that it still has a few details to work
out, nonetheless, many people feel that science and humanity are well on their
way to understanding the ultimate laws of nature and the ultimate nature of
reality.
This
view of science and its importance is held not only by scientists, but it
appears to be held by large portions of society in general. As an example, medical science in the
West is regarded in a quasi-religious sense, so that if people choose to treat
their children by other than Western medical science, they can be put in jail.
Somewhat less oppressive in a legal sense, but quite oppressive in a subtle sense, is the domination of scientific ideology in politics and in the legal system, where the ultimate arbiter of truth is the expert who is brought in from the outside.
Yet
at that moment when this view of science and technology seems to be spreading
across the world and dominating it ever more, from within science itself, a new
view is arising which challenges the right of science to its claim in
representing the absolute view of truth.
This new direction has several names: “the new science”, “new physics”,
“the new paradigm”, or “post-modern science”. Many words describe it, but it is far too early to call it a
unified, well-developed view. It’s
more like something arising with different aspects, depending on your point of
view and approach. It’s similar to
the parable of the blind men and the elephant. Some blind men touch its legs and think the elephant is a
tree, while others touch the ear and think it’s a banana leaf, or touch the
trunk and think it’s a fire-hose.
From each angle you see a different feature. But in general, people are beginning to speak of new
paradigm.
From
this perspective it is clear that what we call science in the last 200 years is
just a particular approach to science.
Science itself is something broader. It is an attempt at never-ending exploration, which keeps an
open mind and challenges its own presuppositions again and again, and for whom
experience is the ultimate arbiter.
By
contrast, what we traditionally call science is only a particular manifestation
of this exploration. Science is,
moreover, weighted down by a lot of baggage of presuppositions, which, however,
have not been recognized as presuppositions, but have been taken to be simply
true and often have gone unquestioned.
Some
of these are: (1) that the world is essentially objective; (2) that the world
is material; (3) that phenomena are related only in causal ways; (4) that the
causality is carried by matter; (5) that if you look at hierarchies of systems,
the lowest, the most fundamental one can explain the most complex and
sophisticated ones, that is, living systems. This idea, called “reductionism”, suggests that living
systems can be understood in terms of atoms, and atoms in terms of elementary
particles, and the deepest and most fundamental understanding is at the
smallest level; (6) that things that we can measure objectively are the only
phenomena worth investigating.
This is the theory called “positivism”. I could go on.
These
are known as presuppositions, and they are taken to be fundamental and not
worth challenging. If you accept
them as fundamental, it will lead to a very specific optic (viewpoint), and if
it projects itself as truth, and the only truth worth knowing, you have in the
making a new religion - a very poor religion, without spirit, without morality
and without any orientation.
If
this system of thought, however, were taken as just one way of looking at the
world, then science has shown its power to yield many interesting insights and
powerful technologies. It’s not
science itself that is harmful, but its hubris and its self-aggrandizement into
a total approach to reality that is dangerous.
Because
of the reductionism nature of science, the level of electrons, protons and so
forth is regarded as the most fundamental level of science, and the area that
deals with this is called “particle physics”. It has been regarded as the “high-priesthood” of science,
and the other areas of science have traditionally looked toward particle
physics as the most promising approach to yield ultimate truth. It is therefore deliciously paradoxical
that from this very field has arisen the most radical challenges to the whole
view; as if, having gone to the furthest and deepest, particle-physicists have
begun to realize that the whole approach is essentially flawed.
The
twentieth century theory of elementary process called “quantum theory” has
shown a world, which is not essentially material as we, think of it, but a
world of process. Challenges to
the presumptions that I mentioned have come largely from this theory. It has shown a deep inter-connectedness
between all phenomena, which is quite different from the “separate-system”
approach of the older science. It
has shown a world in which causality is not enough, but in which what others
have called “synchronicity” or “meaningful coincidences” play an important
role. It shows a world, which is
alive in the sense that each process shows a consciousness or a
“knowing-quality” to it, rather than consciousness being an isolated phenomenon
in special kinds of systems, such as human beings. Consciousness may be a basic phenomenon in the universe.
It
shows us that matter is not a thing but a tendency or, if you will, “karma” and
that gives us a whole new perspective on the freedom of every moment and
causation. And it shows us that
the separation between subject and object, which was essential to the old
science, is illusory, and that subject and object are fundamentally
connected. This has sometimes been
called a participatory and not an observer universe. There is not enough time to go into these interesting and
radical new insights, which are radically new only within science. I think each of you here is familiar
with many of these theories from within your own disciplines. This may explain why some people have
said that the most modern directions of science and traditional spiritual
disciplines are showing a common view of the universe. While this is true, it has sometimes
been distorted to say that modern science is proving this or that spiritual
view. This cannot be said at all.
Rather,
what is emerging as a real possibility is a new paradigm or “over-all view of
the universe” that is wide enough to encompass within its folds both the new
kind of science which is emerging and the spiritual views of the world. If this were to come about and I think
it will, it would be very important because it would allow us to operate
without “changing hats”. When we
emerge from meditation and go into the laboratory, we won’t have to change
hats, and there will be no discontinuity between the two worlds. There will be a common framework in
which we can operate throughout our lives.
I
would hope to learn how the monks and nuns at the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas
relate to the ‘old science’ that you learned in school, and how you react to
the old science’s claims that what your lives are about is non-essential and
obsolete. It matters to challenge
this point of view because, given the power of science, which it demonstrates
with all its technologies, that wrong view carries a lot of weight, and it
gains the acceptance of science as a whole. How do you spiritual people bring that view and the truth
“under one hat”, so to speak?
I
heard Dharma Master Heng Chau, for instance, say that Buddhism can be
considered a science in its empirical method of exploring the principles of
nature that the Buddha spoke, rather than mere dogmatic acceptance by faith
alone. The way he described this
approach to Buddhism was an inner discovery with all the open-mindedness that
is characteristic of science at its best.
From the side of science in recent years, there has been a similar approach
from the other side, let’s call it “external discovery”. Certain physicists discovered that the
old paradigm of reality outside us had been invalidated by, among other things,
quantum theory. They discovered
that we ourselves cannot only observe reality, but in a way we are reality. So, by looking in our own mind,
in our own being, we can observe the same principles in operation that
scientists can observe outside of us. In looking at quantum theory in particular, in one
sense it is easier to see its principles in operation in our own mind than it
is in external Nature. To see
these principles at work in external Nature, we have built costly and
complicated machines, whereas the same principles can be observed most clearly
in our own minds.
Doug
Powers, of Dharma Realm Buddhist University and I have actually recently formed
a group of explorers who try to combine inner contemplation and practice with
external observation and rational discourse in a synergistic, complementary way
to pursue our exploration.
I
can see this new science and spiritual practice approaching one another, but
they are not quite the same thing.
Even so, it is becoming more and more clear that they are not
incompatible and there are many features in common.
I’d
like to share my personal experience of fifteen years ago when I went to study
quantum theory more deeply. I was
like many other physicists in the same situation: deeply perplexed at the fact
that the old science just stopped.
The old picture had been destroyed, but no new picture had been put in
its place, and you could get caught in paradoxes where nothing fits. So most people just retreated from the
whole question. But if you want to
stay with the question, it’s as if the old paradigm is a prison with no escape,
it’s closed in itself, and you know it’s not right. You know it’s a prison and you don’t know how to get out.
Only
understanding a kind of spiritual practice, a direct experiential practice can
one gets a new vista. I don’t want
to say that I have a new vista, but I have caught a glimpse and so have other
people. And all the other people,
be they physicists or biologists, who seem to exhibit some of the same
intuitive understanding of this new paradigm, all of them that I know have
engaged in some form of practice.
I think that what we need to do as scientists who are looking for more
evolved formulation of the new paradigm is to make steps in an actual
disciplined form of practice and engage in working dialogues with monks and nuns
who have a great deal more practice in this discipline.
What
we would like to do is build up a working dialogue and actually look at the
questions. We want to practice
together to get more insight into these questions. In this way, there can be a very exciting and fruitful
overlap between spiritual practices and science.
Bhikkhu
Yanesaro - Theravada monk: The question is irrelevant to my life. What happens to a new or old science is
not important to my practice. By studying
my own phenomena - my body and mind - I will reach my own conclusions. I will not be able to learn truths from
another person. Only by a
self-journey into the nature of things will I discover what is real and
unreal. Many people want
scientists to tell us what is right and wrong. A true cultivator finds out on his own.
Heng Chau -
Bhikshu and teacher: Science brought me to my life as a monk. The reasons why science did not sustain
my interest is a story I can document through my changes of mind in reaction to
events.
As a high-school student at the time of Sputnik, I was suddenly introduced to an education that emphasized hard science because as a nation we had to beat the Russians. The whole program was identified with fighting and competition. I rejected delving deeper into science for two reasons: (1) the fighting energy was clearly harmful to oneself and others and was motivated by other interests, not selfless or pure, but political and economic. I further rejected having to pith frogs and dissect fetal pigs. My moral sense revolted at having to pith lesser species. So I turned from science. It had a positive side because it made me realize that all people have a spiritual nature and our highest goal as people is to unite with that nature. I am now a monk because I felt that my time to realize the goal of that search was limited. I chose not to invest that time in science.
Physics,
in the future as it changes, may go down a wrong road - for instance, to
satisfy material ends alone. I
hope not, for the goal of the search is the same for all people.
Ricardo
Stocker - anthropologist, educator: There are two illusions currently being tested and discarded
in our modern world that is flooded with information: (1) one illusion holds
that there is nothing left to discover - that all discoveries are already
written down in a book somewhere or in a library or in a computer. But the truth is revealed in the lives
of all sages and scientists: the need, the surge to discover is universal and
always new; we want to discover for ourselves; (2) another illusion holds that
one needs the language of mathematics and science and much equipment to
discover; “only scientists can discover and penetrate reality”. We must now break through these illusions
because the body and mind are the most sophisticated equipment available. To mediate quietly, one enters a
journey of discovery and makes possible a new dimension of the universe waiting
to be discovered by you. Each time
one-person wakes up, everyone wakes up.
George
Weissmann: Buddhism can be seen as identical with scientific approaches in
that one comes to both with an open mind and a self-challenge. Within science itself in recent years,
many scientists are challenging the basic approach - and doubting that human
life exists outside of “reality”.
This assumption of an external reality has been invalidated by the
quantum theory. We now know we
cannot observe reality, we are reality. Reality exists in our own being and one can observe within
the phenomena of the universe.
There is no need to build costly, complicated machines to know reality
completely. The same principles
can be seen in one’s own mind.
Chancellor Powers and I belong to a group of explorers who pursue these
truths in a synergistic/complementary way. We feel science and spiritual practices are not
incompatible.
Marty
Knowlton - founder of Elderhostel: Yes, scientists and spiritualists are
the same people, but we won’t get to the root of the problem through discussion
of science and Buddhism. These
truths and basic matters become real and we grow aware of them only by daily
living. These awarenesses are now
shifting. Perhaps we need a new
language. Maybe we are conducting
the meeting in the wrong language - based on nouns like English.
What we need
is to think in Chinese, a language based on verbs to really experience the
on-goingness of reality. What can
those of you who think in Chinese tell us about these questions?
Harry
Wells: Last night Dharma Master Chi talked about the Bodhisattva who in
being aware, can use scientific empiricism more fruitfully. It might help the scientist if he could
understand the spiritual knowledge of the Bodhisattva. A contemplative reality experiences
levels of being as interdependent, yet distinct. Consciousness levels are inseparable in terms of subject and
object. In New Science, subject
and object are not so distinct. We
need to engage all levels of being.
I like the Net of Indra concept from the Flower Adornment Sutra, where all
aspects of reality reflect the whole.
Reality is totally subjective.
George
Weissmann: A personal answer: fifteen years ago, after studying quantum
physics, I was, like many physicists, totally perplexed. The old picture had been destroyed,
nothing replaced it. We had come
to a paradox where nothing fit the old paradigm. It was a blank wall, a prison. We knew it wasn’t right, but we couldn’t get out. Only through direct experience could we
hope for a new vista. All the
concerned physicists and biologists I know began some sort of practice at that
point. Through disciplined
practice and a dialogue, we expect some new insights to emerge.
Dr.
George Foote, physiologist, environmentalist and meditator for 20 years:
Science has its direction - the pursuit of knowledge - but its ultimate
direction is unknown. Buddhism
teaches a specific direction - resolving birth and death. Objective observation rarely leads to
deep intuitive understanding. Once
I heard a story about impermanence.
Meditation students in Berkeley heard that the inventor of the
bubble-chamber or some such device, a Nobel-prize winner, was in Berkeley and
could be interviewed. They were
overjoyed at the prospect of talking with someone who had witnessed the secrets
of the universe, its constant change, instability and so forth. After their talk they returned
disappointed and crestfallen. He
was just an ordinary mortal, afflicted and filled with greed. They were surprised that his great
knowledge had done so little for his life.
Harry
Wells: Two points here: (1) Is objective or subjective research superior?
(2) What is the direction of the teachings? The Buddha once taught the monks that the leaves in his hand
compared to the leaves in the forest represented the teachings he had given
them compared to the totality of teachings. What matters is knowing which ones are useful in gaining
liberation from Samsara. Do
we focus on spiritual in our pursuit of knowledge?
Heng
Chau: George, you asked how monks and nuns deal with science and
cultivation to resolve its paradoxes.
I’d like to ask you how a scientist integrates spirituality with his
training. Do you have to be a
schizophrenic who leads two lives?
Many educated people in the recent past left religion and dogma;
religious practice fell away sharply since science arose. Now many educated men and women, many
scientists are turning to spirituality for answers science can’t supply. What do you say about this?
George
Foote: The focus in Buddhism is on suffering. Ultimate reality, as I knew it through science could not
even ask the questions that Buddhism answered. Only after looking into the
Dharma did I even know to ask such questions. I’m not sure I did integrate the two, I surely moved away
from science. I see it now as a
tool, like a screwdriver in a tool-box but there are lots of other tools as
well. I desire to explain science
to non-scientists to inform them of what it can’t do, what questions it can’t
answer. Many people feel that
science holds the answer to all problems.
I believe it creates more problems than it solves. We are searching for a new
paradigm. It is important for our
culture that we find it to integrate the two, so we can change our frames of
reference. We need to work
together with the monks and nuns to evolve the larger paradigm, a bigger
frame-work, broader than the religions we knew in the past.
Bhikkhu
Nanajivako, philosopher, educator, Buddhist monk: Henri Bergsson spoke of
karma as ripening fruit. William
James wrote an essay called “Does Consciousness Exist”, after listening to
talks on Buddhism by Swami Vivekananda.
These early thinkers on Buddhism taught that biology was the primary
science. James’ answer was the
Buddhist answer - he tried to say how it does not exist, but that it is
born and dies in an instant, repeatedly.
Bhikshuni
Heng Syin, City of Ten Thousand Buddhas: No matter whether you understand
laws of science or the truths of Dharma, what ultimately counts is the law of
cause and effect and one’s personal account of good and evil karma. Anyone who observes the Ten Good Deeds
and draws near a good and wise spiritual teacher will be able to understand any
principles he hears, because his practice makes him or her a receptive
instrument for containing the truth.
Bhikshu
Heng Chi, Abbot Tathagata Monastery: We have two levels of interest and two
of relevance here. On one hand we
are investigating the philosophies of Buddhism and science to compare their basic
assumptions and recent developments. On the other had, we are investigating the
real nuts and bolts of our lives to find out how people can change themselves
and correct their conduct. One
monk said science was not relevant to his life, another said he preferred
spiritual investigation to phenomenal analysis. A nun said that practicing goodness was most important. My
answer is different, but I believe it is harmonious with true science.
Bodhisattvas
and scientists study the same illusion.
The Buddha-dharma’s approach and teachings, I believe, are perfect and
complete. If physicists want to
accept the Dharma and expand their definitions, then there is no need for a new
paradigm. If the mind moves, false
events occur. All phenomena are
illusory creations of the six senses and fundamentally they don’t exist. That is not to say that cause and
effect do not exist. But cause and
effect equally create the illusion of all conditioned things. To understand the illusion, we need to
study cause and effect.
The
Bodhisattva does this big job to the ultimate, subtle detail, omitting
nothing. The Shurangama Sutra
describes three such Buddhist cultivator/scientists – we have the brothers
Medicine King and Medicine Superior Bodhisattvas, who study medicine;
Upholding-The-Earth Bodhisattva, who is a civil engineer and Maitreya
Bodhisattva, who deals directly with consciousness. Bodhisattvas differ from physicists because they want to
benefit living beings and then come to complete knowledge and realize Buddhahood.
In
their study, their first job is to end the illusion of self, which is the cause
of all errors and troubles in the world.
One reason scientists have had some success is because they understand
how emotions and delusive notions distort reality. Thus science uses methods that reduce the emotions that
cover the mind. But this is only
the first step towards totally destroying those notions on the way to understanding
the body, the mind and consciousness.
When the self is gone, the Bodhisattva’s inherent wisdom appears. The content of one’s consciousness; the
Alaya-vijnana, determines the reality one experiences. The contents of one’s consciousness are
a function of one’s good and evil conduct. So a cultivator takes good and evil seriously, since it
produces the illusions I perceive.
If he does not start his cultivation at this basic level and examine his
conduct, he will never get wisdom.
With right conduct he can still his mind; his mind once quieted, enters
samadhi and great wisdom can emerge.
This is known as the three-fold study of precepts, samadhi and wisdom.
A
Bhikshuni: We heard that
science is unable to address questions of human meaning in life; Buddhism’s
principles refer equally to sentient and insentient life, there are 84,000
Dharma doors and 84,000 living beings.
Science cannot represent Buddhism; Buddhism can contain the entirety of
science. Bodhisattvas can engage
themselves in the illusory world and with upaya, skill in means, knowing
that all is illusory, then benefit living beings. Science is not aware traditionally of the illusory nature of
its own assumptions. The big
lesson is that all thoughts distort.
The Bodhisattva teaches that the ability to see comes not from thinking,
but from no-thought cultivation.
Thinking is the basis of science.
Bodhisattvas show scientists the limits to their concepts of reality.
George
Weissmann: Before it was said we don’t need a new paradigm, and that it
need not be integrated. I won’t
say I don’t believe it, but I have to be shown or else it won’t be useful to
me. A scientist needs a framework
to incorporate both his views and science. It must include the basic accepted constants of physics:
linear time, causality, the speed of light, three realms and calculus. I am not a philosopher, but I do
understand mathematics. The
Rainbow Bridge Group in Australia has conceived a paradigm that uses scientific
foundations - I challenge you to hammer out a paradigm that can satisfy someone
who takes the phenomenal world and science seriously. Suppose that person says, “I acknowledge Buddhism goes
deeper and that matter is illusory, but I still want to understand how that
illusory phenomenon arises, why it takes the form it does”.
D.M.
Heng Chau: I can see many parallels in the two discussions: (1) Dharma
describes the nature of phenomena as they really are, nature as it is; (2)
karma teaches that cause and effect is a given, a constant; (3) methodologies
of both traditions agree that emotion is not a vehicle for understanding. One obstacle for creating a working
paradigm is that Buddhism takes ethics as the basis for all enquiries. This is the sine qua non of the
Dharma. Science is a moral,
willing to use only the mind and methods to investigate. Since the observer is now called into
question, since the observer and the observed cannot be separated, morality
becomes so important. What is
observed depends on the observer.
So the lens of his apparatus must be spotless. He then must turn the lens inward to observe and break through
all illusions. It will be
interesting to see how the scientific community will accomplish this. An ancient thinker once said:
What
people seek to know is that,
The
means for knowing is this.
The ancients
also said that:
All
learning, science, seeks to know by addition,
Cultivators
of the Tao learn by subtraction.
When we reach
the ultimate point, we have to purify our understanding further so that:
When
not even one thought arises,
The
entire substance manifests.
Then the
Cartesian split can be healed. The
prospects for the new paradigm are very exciting.
Ricardo Stocker: When we purify the instrument, the observer’s body and mind, then the light of consciousness shines through. In other words, we simply stop interfering with a light that is always there. I want to say something about the Bodhisattva. “Sattva” is “beingness”. When we talk about science taking a quantum leap, I see it taking that leap towards the understanding and perception of beingness. We are not concerned only with “thingness”. The whole world is an interaction of beings and their emanations. The Bodhisattva represents the high ideal that we are striving for and also a level of being. There are many beings present, perhaps even Maitreya, who are inspiring and aiding this conferences.
D.M.
Heng Chau: I would like to return to the idea of a new paradigm, because
the Bodhisattva vows to learn infinite Dharma-doors. This vow includes quantum physics. If a Bodhisattva hasn’t mastered subatomic particles, his
vows are not complete. I vow to
penetrate this and all Dharma-doors, and I will need Dr. Weissmann’s methods if
I start before my wisdom is open.
In my mind, the Buddha-dharma is enough to study.