Many impoverished Asian countries possess ancient cultures and profound Buddhist traditions. The “impoverished” attribute stems from the modern Western system which has spread across the world from Great Britain. This system reduces every citizen to a competing individual whose self-worth is measured solely by the size of a bank account. Similarly, countries that follow this system act like inidividuals in the international arena – making strategic alliances with other State actors designed to protect this status. Just as an individual “purchases” every service and attribute required for a comfortable life – a modern Nation State develops and purchases weaponry, dominates locations and projects its will around the globe. The accumulation of money is the prime-mover of this system which causes various degrees of misery for everyone living within its confines – whilst a few live very well and possess the greatest measure of choice due to the monetary wealth they control. The acquisition and control of money is the entire purpose of predatory capitalism. As this is the only recognisable method for living – every citizen is broughtup to habitally cultivate “greed” as the highest virtue for modern living. Of course, as the Buddha states that greed, hatred, and delusion are the basis of all human suffering – the answer to this human suffering is to uproot these taints through the practice of meditation and physical discipline. Therefore, Buddhists diverge from the demands of predatory capitalism through the requirement to cultivate non-greed, non-hatred, and non-delusion. The practice of genuine Buddhism, therefore, is a contradiction to the reality of predatory capitalism. This explains why places such as Thailand – which is currently dominated by US Neo-Imperialism – possesses both a vibrant Theravada Buddhist tradition as well as large areas of abject (material) poverty. As Thailand is NOT a Socialist country (and is still a victim of Western colonial and imperial conquest) – its society offers an interesting dichotomy between two systems of self-worth, one ancient and Buddhist, whilst the other modern and entirely foreign. An individual might not possess any monetary wealth – but could be well-educated in Buddhist Studies. This aligns with the Buddha’s statement that the gift of Dharma excels all other gifts! A Buddhist monastic (or a devout lay-Buddhist) might well live a life of non-greed, non-hatred, and non-delusion – and therefore possess NO position within the predatory capitalist system. This is true regardless of whether an individual lives within an impoverished Asian country or an affluent Western country. Conversely, an Asian country that has successfully taken the path of monetary wealth accumulation must accommodate citizens who which to practice the Dharma to a greater degree within their everyday lives. Although it is doubtful that a capitalist country would ever allow any type of non-profit based existence – the superior morality of Socialism must ensure that individuals who which to practice the Dharma must be given the right to do this with the State facilitating this lifestyle as a matter of right.
0 Comments
Author’s Note: I was shown a far-right propaganda post online which attempts to project modern notions of ‘White Supremacy’ backwards thousands of years into cultures that have no association with such ahistorical and pseudoscientific concepts! The far-right has become ‘efficient’ at issuing sound bites which are simple, straightforward, compelling and which remove the requirement for their intended audience to ‘think’. My article below replaces that need to ‘think’ by providing in depth and accurate academic knowledge. The far-right ‘lies’ to its audience. This stems from Adolf Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ - within which he advocates ‘lying’ about everything as a means to leverage political advantage, control and influence. The Sanskrit terms ‘Shakya’, ‘Buddha’ and ‘Aryan’, etc, have absolutely NOTHING to do with the modern notions underpinning the ideology of ‘White Supremacy’! As the average person lacks the specialist knowledge required to navigate this complex territory in the West – the far-right ideologues deceitfully take advantage of this fact and attempt to fill the vacuum with inaccurate, misunderstood or misleading information! As the saying goes - ‘The price of freedom is eternal vigilance!’ ACW (25.6.2023) Shakya (Sanskrit-Pali) = शाक्य Shakya (Chinese) = 释迦 (Shi Jia) Shakya is the Sanskrit name of the high-ranking clan of the historical Buddha who lived in Northeast India. The historical Buddha was of the ‘Warrior and King’ (Kshatri) Caste – which was (in the era he was born) the highest of the various Hindu castes. Eventually, five Hindu castes would formulate with the ‘Brahmins’ being the highest caste and the ‘Warriors and Kings’ being the second highest. Far-right (anti-intellectual) ideologues attempt to subordinate material fact to their own ‘inverted’ (ideological) machinations – in support of ‘White Supremacist’ mythology. For instance, such attempts often perpetuate the false assertion that the Sanskrit name ‘Shakya’ equates to non-Indian designation of ‘Scythia’ or ‘Scythian’. This is an attempt to superimpose an imagined ‘Greek’ racial identity into North India and thus claim that ‘Europe’ (rather than ethnic Indians) are responsible for the development of Indian thought. This myth is easily dispelled through a brief moment of research: Hindi term for ‘Scythia’ = सीथिया Sanskrit term ‘Shakya’ = शाक No structural connection between these two (written) Indian terms. Chinese term for ‘Shakya’ = 释迦 (Shi Jia) Chinese term for ‘Scythia’ = 斯基泰 (Si Ji Tai) No structural connection between these two (written) Chinese terms. If there was some ‘hidden’ conceptual unifier between these two terms (i.e., ‘Shakya’ - ‘Scythia’) – then it is logical to assume that this identity would be transmitted through the word structures formed within the same language development. Furthermore, as the early Chinese scholars would be looking for a ‘connection’ between these foreign terms should such a connection exist (as a means to generate ‘clarity’ of translation and transliteration) - it also follows that the Chinese ideograms chosen would indicate this supposed ‘connection’ - but the chosen Chinese ideograms clearly do NOT record any such connectivity. Therefore, simply based upon the objective assessment of Sanskrit, Hindi and Chinese word structure (and meaning transmission) – there is NO connection between the non-Indian name ‘Scythia’ and the Indian designation of ‘Shakya’. In other words, the historical Buddha was NOT ‘Greek’, was not ‘White’ and his ideology was NOT simply a version of Greek thought! Other far right myths involve the following terms: Aryan (Hindi-Sanskrit) = आर्य Aryan (Chinese) = 雅利安人 (Ya Li An Ren) Indeed, the Chinese transliteration literally means the ‘People whose culture imposes ‘Refinement, Benefit and Peace’ upon society! This alludes to those Indians who followed the teachings of the Vedas – and more to the point - could understand the language these teachings were recorded within. The Scriptures could be understood, verbally (or inwardly) recited, and could be read by the Brahmin Priests (although originally these texts were transmitted only by word of mouth and were ‘remembered’ only by a chosen few from one generation to the next – at a time when reading and writing was very rare)! As this meditative and reflective culture disciplined the mind and body – society was externally and inwardly ‘well-ordered’. Those who applied these teachings were renowned for their great, accumulated wisdom which made them ‘noble’ in the eyes of their peers. Those who followed the ‘Vedas’ were ennobled by these teachings (as opposed to those who did NOT follow these teachings) and were further ‘ennobled’ when a personal wisdom was accrued (above and beyond the Scriptures) through self-cultivation. Although the Buddha rejected the Vedas – he made use of the term ‘Aryan’ to refer to his followers of the Dharma who had achieved a similar understanding as his own (as the Buddha was illiterate – his teachings were passed on only through the agency of ‘memory’ and public ‘recital’). This term was applied freely to any member of the Indian caste system and broader society (including ‘Untouchables’) and therefore had NO association with skin colour or ‘Whiteness’. Strictly speaking, within its narrow Hindu usage – the term ‘Aryan’ – refers to someone who can ‘speak’ and ‘understand’ the language of the Vedas. Those who could not understand this language were excluded from this thought community and were referred to as ‘Anaryan’. As there were people with a light skin tone who were referred to as ‘Anaryan’ - this proves that the term ‘Aryan’ did not (and does not) refer to a ‘White’ skin colour. Buddha (Sanskrit-Pali) = बुद्ध Buddha (Chinese) = 佛 (Fo) The left-hand particle of the Chinese ideogram is ‘亻’ (ren2) which refers to a ‘person’. The right-hand particle is ‘弗’ (fu2) - which breaks down into the following three elements: 1) 弓 (gong1) = A bow – an arched (stringed) weapon used in hunting and warfare. 2) 丨(gun3) = To pass through – travel up and down – a unifier as in ‘number one’. 3) 丿(pie3) = To raise one’s head – to move from right to left (as in a ‘dropping’ stroke) - to abandon and discard that which is not needed. As the ancient scholars of China had to translate the unfamiliar Indian Buddhist terms very carefully – they often sought the guidance of visiting Indian Buddhist monks. This was a process of transmission that developed from the 1st century CE onward – and was still ongoing during the 5th and 6th centuries CE and beyond. These scholars were told EXACTLY what Buddhist terms meant and if they did not know – they would wait patiently for guidance. Eventually correct knowledge would arrive. This is why the original ‘meaning’ of the Sanskrit terms used within Buddhist ideology is clearly retained within the body of traditional Chinese ideograms. In the case of ‘Buddha’ (佛) is defined as someone (亻) who has mastered a complex art (such as ‘archery’ [弓] - which the Buddhist Suttas state the Buddha did study as a youth) - through which an ‘arrow’ (丨) is skilfully affixed. Then an appropriate effort is applied so that the two ends of the bow are drawn (taut) down toward the centre - and the ‘arrow’ is let fly so that it directly ‘hits’ (丿) the intended target. In the Buddhist Suttas – the Buddha describes self-cultivation as being similar to stringing an instrument. If the strings are too loose – the correct note cannot be produced. If the strings are too ‘tight’ - then the strings might ‘snap’ when played! Self-cultivation, therefore, requires the ‘correct’ amount of effort so that the required result is achieved. As the Buddha ‘knows’ this is the objective – and ‘knows’ how to achieve this objective – this correct ‘knowing’ is two-fold. There is the ‘knowing’ of the correct path and its methodology – and there is the ‘knowing’ that the following of this correct path bestows upon the earnest seeker. Although the Sanskrit term ‘बुद्’ (Aryan) is ‘phonetical’ - like the Western alphabet - no real internal structure regarding inherent (or historical) meaning can be gleamed from the dissecting of its constituent parts. For that meaning it is the corresponding Chinese ideogram that is used. As can be seen, basic dictionary definitions do not convey the full or intended meaning of the Sanskrit term ‘Buddha’ (बुद्). This word is said to be derived from the Sanskrit term ‘बुत’ (But) doubled – whilst also being related to the doubled term ‘बुद्ध’ (Buddh): a) बुत (But) = Idol and mistress. This implies a correct spiritual positioning (such as that implied through a religious icon or statue) and the corresponding social influence such an inner orientation generates in the outer world (similar as the power a strong woman accrues through her scheming and planning). b) बुद्ध (Buddh) = The ability to ‘understand’ - and to apply that understanding in the outer world. This suggests a perfect integration of ‘methodology’ and ‘application’ - of ‘theory’ and ‘objective’. The Sanskrit term ‘Buddha’ (बुद्) is generally taken to mean: i) Consciously ‘aware’. ii) Wise. iii) Intelligent. iv) Transcendentally ‘awake’. The Chinese ideogram 佛 (Fo) also suggests that a ‘bent’ arrow’ (丿) must be made ‘straight’ by tightly binding it with an already correct arrow (丨) - until the task is completed. There is a peculiar negative connotation associated with the Chinese term suggesting the term ‘no’ is being implied. This is not surprising as the Buddha taught exclusively by explaining what enlightenment ‘is NOT’ - and not what enlightenment IS’! Nirvana, therefore, is the state of mind, body and environment generated when greed, hatred and delusion is no longer present in the mind and body of the practitioner. Although the far-right ideologues cherry-pick to attempt to make material reality match their deficient academic model – the spurious ‘linguistic’ associations that may (or may not) exist between ancient Indian words and words deriving from other cultures – does NOT automatically correspond to those different ethnic groupings sharing any systemic cultural link with India or its spiritual practices. Apparent linguistic associations can be found throughout the different and diverse cultures of the world – but this fact in itself does NOT mean that Yoga, Hinduism, Jainism or Buddhism or any cultural construct - existed (or originated) in these non-Indian places. What this phenomenon might suggest is that humanity once possessed a common (unified) culture before it diversified into the ethnic-specific variations observable today.
The Buddha developed a system that generates the conditions of ‘inner’ Socialism by uprooting greed, hatred and delusion from the functionality of the ordinary human mind. Through a corresponding physical behaviour that is ‘free’ of greed, hatred and delusion, Socialism In the ‘outer’ world is built. The Buddha’s path is an expression of early Socialism that places the emphasis upon the individual ‘freed’ from the collective tyranny of the faceless caste-system. Marx and Engels, by way of contrast, denies the ultimate validity of the individual, and instead defines the collectivity of ‘class’ as the only genuine driving-force behind any and all genuine Revolutionary action. Things are not quite this simple, for instance, as the Buddha (whilst advocating the ‘disciplining’ of the individual mind) describes how the notion of ‘self’ (that is, the ‘individual’) is a culturally conditioned concept with no basis in material reality. The ‘Sangha’ in Early Buddhism may well be an indication of the formation of an early-class system. In this case, made-up entirely of ordained Buddhist monastics whose function was to preserve, practice and convey the ‘Dhamma’, or Buddha’s enlightened Teaching. The non-ordained laity, by way of contrast, circumnavigated the Sangha and drew inspiration, guidance and support from it. The Sangha of Early Buddhism was a primitive ‘Communist Party’ defined around the concept of ‘membership’ and ‘non-membership’. The ‘members’ (monastics) conditioned the ‘non-members’ (laity) to develop to the extent where they were psychologically and physically prepared to become Buddhist monastics themselves. Although all Buddhist monastics are ‘equal’, it is also true that the Buddhist monastic community is led by the eldest (and ‘wiser’) strata of the population. This is generally comprised of those monks and nuns who have been ‘ordained’ the longest and not necessarily those who are the eldest in the (literal) chronological sense. These qualified elders had spent a lifetime carefully studying the Dhamma, teaching and advising others, as well as personally putting into practice each minute element of the teaching. In this sense, this ‘inner core’ of the Buddha’s elite disciples formed what might be termed a ‘Polit-Buro’ concerned with the perpetuation of an ideological purity and orthodoxy.
Later, with the liberalisation of Buddhism, the term ‘Sangha’ was expanded to include not only the ordained Buddhist elite, but now also included all lay-people who considered themselves a ‘follower of the Buddha’ (but not those ordinary people who did not support Buddhism). This expanded the membership of this primitive ‘Communist Party’ to include a non-ordained laity. Furthermore, Buddhist monastics lost their ‘elite’ status and became quite literally ‘beggars’ who existed in a privileged position (where they did not have work or participate in family life), that was ‘inferior’ to the lowest lay-person! Why was this? Everything each monk or nun used was not owned by them per se, but was the collective property of the monastic community ultimately provided by the hard-work of the lay-community that had provided it! Now, with the biographies of Hui Neng (the Sixth Patriarch of the Chinese Ch’an tradition), and the Indian merchant Vimalakirti (the ‘married’ contemporary of the historical Buddha) were well-known, lay-practice within Buddhism was transformed into ‘matching’ or even ‘transcending’ that of the Buddhist monastics. Although a profound example of democratisation, Buddhism today is still led by an elite monastic core, although with one or two lay-practitioners now included in the ‘Polit-Buro’! As the Buddha ‘rejects’ greed, hatred and delusion, it is inherently anti-capitalist. It is a philosophical and ideological impossibility for Buddhism to follow or advocate the predatory capitalist system. Buddhist meditation is a Proletariat device for clearing the human mind of the conditioned (habitual) patterns that generally define human society. As the Buddha states that ‘rebirth’ and ‘karma’ do not exist in the post-enlightened state – it is logical to assume that ‘rebirth’ and ‘karma’ do not exist in the pre-enlightened state. These two concepts only appear to exist because they are common elements of pre-Buddhist (Indian) religion that many Buddhist practitioners brought with them when they decided to approach the Buddha for discipleship. The Buddha used these terms to inspire morally ‘pure’ actions on the physical plane so that the inner mind could be more readily transformed through meditation. Only when advising advanced practitioners did the Buddha decide to ween them off of these childish concepts of religiosity. As there is no ‘rebirth’ or ‘karma’, the Buddha’s path is a purely material ideology centred around the Vinaya Discipline which modifies the external behaviour so that the inner mind (and its functionality) can be permanently modified into a Proletariat (enlightened) state. If a fall into the abyss of mysticism is to be avoid, then logic and reason must be applied to any and all Buddhist explanations of mind development. This process not only replicates the manner in which the ancient Greeks assessed reality, but also the method appears to make use of as recorded in the Pali Suttas. As an interesting aside, this would mean that any apparent talk of ‘rebirth’ or ‘polytheistic’ gods must be later additions to the texts, or inheritances from the past that contemporary readers (including Buddhists) do not know how to correctly ‘interpret’. Why should this be the case? If ‘rebirth’ in numerous other realms, together with the belief in ‘gods’ and a semi-spiritualised version of ‘karma’ are upheld as being a genuine part of Early Buddhism, then logic demands an answer to the question of ‘What is the point of Buddhism if it is just another version of Brahmanical teaching?’ In this regard, there is a ‘pull’ between the Buddha’s use of a pristine ‘logic’ and ‘reason’ - and the parts of the text that subtly try to undermine this reason and replace it with mythology and theology! In this regard, ‘gods’, ‘dimensions and ‘karma’ all fall under the categories of greed, hatred and delusion – or those psycho-physical traits which are thought to bind humanity to ‘Samsara’ - the ‘cycle of suffering’, etc. A living human body is created through two adult humans engaging in sexual intercourse. Nine to ten months later the woman gives birth to a child. As the child develops in the womb, he or she is receiving stimulus from the outside world through the mother’s body. This process continues at an increased pace after the baby is born and leaves the inside of the mother’s body. At this time, the mother’s body no longer gives direct protection from the physical environment. The human brain is a physical organ that sits inside the head of a physical body. From the brain emerges what is called the human mind. The mind can sense the thoughts it creates, is aware of the past, present and future, and is able to sort-through and make sense of the sense data received through the other five senses – the nose (smell), the ear (hearing), the tongue (taste), the eye (vision) and the body (touch). Each human mind is conditioned to think in patterns that reflect the outer conditions of the individual concerned. This process is believed to adjust the individual to ‘survive’ in whatever environment is present, (pleasant, unpleasant or neutral). An individual builds an inner image of the outer world through all kinds of experiences. Cultural considerations define what particular circumstances are ‘preferred’ as to what conditions should be ‘ignored’, etc. The ‘self-awareness’ that is an implicit part of the mind is taken in the modern world as comprising the foundation of the individual. This ‘individuality’ sits ‘juxtaposed’ to the five other sense-organs of the body and generates a ‘dualism’ of perception. A foundational and all-enveloping mind-awareness sits atop the five bodily-senses that continuously ‘receive’ information about the outside world. Human culture dictates how this ‘duality’ is to be perceived, managed and expressed. An individual traverses through life building-up a reservoir of knowledge and experience, ad seeking the best ways in which life can be lived, and other people interacted with. Yes, life is not always ‘good’ or ‘pleasant’ - but the good times are often understood as emerging from the bad times – and a compromise of experience is usually a key to a balanced life. However, throughout human history, some individuals have ‘rejected’ this cycle of human existence, and actively sort-out a different way of living – the historical Buddha was one such being. The point is that much of human life is defined by terrible poverty, illness and calamity. The daily psychological, emotional and physical pain is often unbearable, and reduces an individual into a shivering mass of suffering and stupidity! Much of this suffering pre-exists in areas of poor economic, social and cultural development. In the Greek model, for instance, ancient Greece was an affluent State within which most of the work was carried-out by male and female slaves. The philosophers had plenty to eat, did not have to work, and inhabited a warm climate! This is similar to the Buddha’s upbringing of luxury and opulence in a world of utter poverty and death! What the Buddha sought was a profound ‘indifference’ to physical circumstance premised upon a permanent inner calm. In other words, such a person would remain exactly the same both inwardly and outwardly regardless of whether their circumstances were considered ‘good’ or ‘bad’! To test this idea, the Buddha shifted his everyday experience to that of abject poverty – away from the opulence he had once routinely enjoyed. Continuous sexual indulgence was replaced with an absolute celibacy, etc. Enlightenment is the experience of an all-embracing and all-expansive conscious awareness that is permanent and ever-lasting. The five bodily-senses – ‘receive' data from the environment in an indifferent manner, and this data is processed by a mind that does not waiver and which is free of greed, hatred and delusion. Painful experiences are no longer viewed as something to be ‘avoided’ just as ‘pleasant’ experiences are not something to be sort-after. Bare attention free of greed, hatred and delusion generates wisdom, compassion and loving kindness. All this is verifiable and correct. However, what interests me here is the perception of ‘three-dimensional emptiness’ by the mind, which appears to permeate the inside of the human-body, and which expands outward into the environment (in an infinite ‘roundel’ shape or ‘circle’, etc). This perception of ‘all-embracing emptiness’ unites the inner body and the outer world in a totality of integrative interaction. An interesting question from a scientific perspective is ‘is this experience ‘real’ or an illusion created by the mind?’ Why could this perception of ‘all-embracing’ emptiness be an ‘illusion’? The mind possesses the ability to ‘generate’ and ‘sense’ thought. Thought is a concept or ripple in the psychic life of the individual. Although the mind can inwardly replicate any external image found in the environment – it can also amalgamate its many experienced impressions and generate entirely ‘new’ inner images (imaginations) that have no bearing on the existing outside world. Through a difficult and disciplined path of self-cultivation, an experience that is ‘real’ in the physical sense, it could well be that the objective of all this effort is that the human mind is ‘forced’ or ‘conditioned’ into generating a single but permanent ‘thought’ that it is experiencing as ‘three-dimensional’ empty space! This type of thought is different to everyday thoughts which traverse the surface mind – as it is singular, consolidating and apparently ‘underlying’ all other sensory activity generated in the mind. This ‘thought’ of ‘unified space’ is all-encompassing and seems to include the inner body and outer environment, and is ‘limitless’ in scope. It is as large as the universe is infinite – but suppose it exists nowhere else than in the individual human-mind that experiences it? If this is the case, then it is not the underlying reality of the universe and does not truly exist either within or outside of the body. It is, in reality, just another form of hard-earned delusion very different from the norm. As a state of mind this sense of ‘unified oneness’ brings inner and outer peace, and changes the human character and behaviour for good. Such a state rejects the more brutal aspects of human instinct and instead emphasises peace, love and tranquillity. The inner and outer life is ‘transformed’ because of this realisation (which is not easy to achieve). Although probably a by-product of the evolutionary process, the Buddha suggests that true enlightenment is beyond both ‘perception’ and ‘non-perception’, in other words, reality is beyond both ‘thought’ and ‘non-thought’. Perception and non-perception is stage four in the Caodong School of Ch’an’s Five Ranks of Prince and Minister – with stage five representing ‘that’ which is beyond ‘perception’ and ‘non-perception’. Although all-embracing emptiness is a difficult stage of reality to perceive – even so it must be ‘seen through’ and understood to be ‘empty’ even of ‘emptiness’! When the human-body ‘dies’ - then all perception and non-perception will quite naturally fall away. Given that this is the case, it seems that all-embracing unity is a difficult to acquire state of being which is rarefied and ultimately ‘empty’ of any permanent reality. It is a door-way through which a spiritual aspirant must pass, but which is an illusion just like any other. It heals and it cures but is not unexplainable or truly ‘mystical’ in the divine sense. Through achieving ‘enlightenment’ - a ‘new’ perceptual base is laid - through which the individual experiences the world. This achievement raises the individual from primordial instinct to a higher level of reasoning and interacting. All perception, regardless of its shallowness and depth is ultimately a delusion because it all falls away at the point of physical death. In reality, the organ of the brain exists in a dark and lonely place, but its capacity to generate ‘mind’ and then fill that mind with all kinds of interesting data serves to transform human existence. In-short, the ‘religious’ and ‘spiritual’ experience has nothing to do with the assumed presence of divine beings – and everything to do with a brain that has met the challenges of evolution in a most spectacular and meaningful way! Building an inner reflection of the outer world is an illusionary event – but which has been crucial for the evolution of humanity!
|
AuthorAdrian Chan-Wyles PhD - Political Commissar and BMA (UK) Historian & Researcher. Archives
April 2024
Categories
All
|