Philosophy

Do you remember this verse by Dromtonpa (1005-1064) from the article on the tools for meditation?

Some think, Meditators do not need to study; those who teach need to study. Actually, learning is more necessary for the meditator; teachers may just incur the fault of explaining something incorrectly.

Have you thought about it’s meaning? It is pretty simple really. Dromtonpa is saying; it is vital for a meditator to study in order to properly understand what to meditate on. This may sound obvious however, for many studying or doing philosophy is thought of as getting in the way of real practice. Dromtonpa, however, is saying, it is more important for a meditator to study than a teacher, because all a teacher can do is say something wrong. Whereas a meditator who has not studied, could potentially waste years meditating on an incorrect object or wrong understanding of the nature of reality - Emptiness¹.

In this essay I intend to argue (not in the sense of a quarrel but, rather in the sense of a philosophical argument or essay) that studying philosophy is a form of dharma practice in and of itself. That there is real and tangible benefits in the practice of studying philosophy. Moreover studying philosophy is vital if one is seriously engaging the Buddhist path. Without the ability to think deeply and clearly on subjects such as; the nature of conditioned existence or Dependant Arising, these subjects cannot be properly understood. Do you really expect to be able to meditate on these subjects, if you cannot think deeply and clearly on them? In fact, I would argue, without the ability to analyze and use critical thinking, even the compassion spoken of in Buddhism cannot be fully developed. Therefore the wisdom lineage, as in “method and wisdom”, pervades the method lineage.

The late Gelug lama Geshe Jampa Gyatso, who was one of my teachers, a great scholar and meditation master² once said:

The Kadampa Geshes have a saying:
‘Meditating without having listened to teachings
is like someone without hands trying to climb a snow mountain’.

In order to fully appreciate the benefits of philosophical knowledge. I believe a distinction needs to be made between studying philosophy and doing philosophy. There has been much made of the worthiness of Buddhist scholars. That perhaps they are merely academics. That their knowledge of the dharma is merely knowledge for the sake of knowledge. This sentiment has, at times, caused me great concern, because I feel it is sometimes used as an excuse to do no study at all. Although there will be a time when a practitioner needs to focus almost exclusively on meditation. This is only after gaining a proper foundation in Buddhist thought. While it is true that some people think all they need to do is meditate. That thinking gets in the way of real practice and that study is for teachers and academics, upon reflection most people can see this to be incorrect. However these people may not intuitively see the benefits of doing philosophy. Therefore I will attempt to detail the difference between studying philosophy and doing philosophy.

Studying Philosophy vs Doing Philosophy

Studying is generally thought of as, the act of analyzing a given subject as a means of understanding that subject. However more often than not, we engage this process by merely learning definitions and divisions. We then think we know the material. If we are studying computer programming as a means to find employment this method of study is fine. We will be able to find suitable work and earn a living. However, this approach doesn’t work when it comes to the study of dharma. Why? Because the purpose of studying dharma is not merely the collection of information. Understanding the dharma is not merely the ability to repeat the definition and divisions of a text.

Philosophical truths are not things that we look up in books; they are truths we acquire by hearing, reading, thinking, contemplation and meditation. If you merely report what someone else says, then you are not doing the thinking for yourself. Moreover, doing philosophy requires analysis and an ability to think critically. As Buddhist practitioners, we need to unearth the wisdom of an ancient tradition for ourselves. Therefore we need to think for ourselves. We are not reinventing the dharma wheel, but we are discovering that wheel for ourselves.

Doing philosophy is therefore an investigation into the fundamental ideas and concepts we hold as true. We must challenge our every day assumptions of personal identity, free-will and even if enlightenment is possible! Doing philosophy is taking, for example, the idea that all phenomena are dependant on causes and conditions, parts and an imputing consciousness and, critically and rigorously investigating these assertions to see if in fact, this is the case. Being able to merely explain Dependant Arising is therefore not doing philosophy and therefore I suggest it is also not studying philosophy.

However this investigation is only part of the process of doing philosophy. Developing responses to these questions is an important component in this process. Traditionally in India and in the monastic traditions of Tibet, this process of doing philosophy was engaged through debate. But this required the participants be in one place at the same time.

On the other hand, in western philosophy³ this same conversation of the rigorous questioning of our unchallenged assumptions takes place via a written essay. In this tradition, the essay is the central communications device. It is the tool used to tease out from our subconscious those assumptions, to investigate them, and to formulate clear and concise thoughts on them. The written essay speaks our ideas, if you like. There is also the tradition in western philosophy of other philosophers responding to our claims via their own essays. Bringing to the conversation, points of difference, counter-arguments and objections. In this tradition the same conversation of “call and response”, takes place, albeit over a longer period of time.

My point here is, I would like to see more of this type of conversation take place between western Buddhists. We as a tradition can leverage our own cultural heritage in the form of essay writing, and use it to benefit both Buddhism and our own understanding of it. Lets not leave this conversation to only university professors and those from academia that merely engage it because it is interesting. Let us learn how to communicate as they do, and use these tools to forward the project of presenting Buddhism to the west.

There are also other benefits by communicating in this way. The most powerful of which is; writing as a means of learning. When writing in your own words for example, what is meditation, your thoughts on the subject need to be very clear. Writing is therefore a tool for learning and engaging the tradition. The other advantage is that others may also benefit from your efforts. This is something that western university philosophy departments have been acutely aware of for some time. Much emphasis is placed on the ability to think critically and write clearly. Because of the importance of these skills, students of western philosophy in universities are taught how to read and write critically.

Raising Possible Objections

Some people might object to the argument that doing philosophy is a practice in and of itself. They might say that knowledge for knowledge sake is a waste of time. That wisdom will arise through meditation alone. They assume that study is knowledge for knowledge sake. They do this because they fail to see the distinction between doing philosophy and knowing lots of different stuff. As to whether wisdom will naturally arise through meditation. I believe that even the action of meditation comes from learning it from a teacher or a book. So, if one needs to hear and think about how to meditate, how can the ultimate nature of reality dawn without any guidance? Surely if this were the case we would have already finished the job of becoming enlightened.

Others criticize those who debate details of, for example, the view of emptiness or the meaning of cessation. They believe that these things are beyond conceptuality and therefore; speaking, debating (as in the monastic sense) and discussing them will not bear fruit. That one should just meditate, they might say. However, these people fail to understand that discussion is part of the process of hearing, thinking and meditating. While it may be true that the direct cognition of emptiness is beyond words. That does not invalidate the benefits gained by investigating the nature of such things. Moreover, I would assert that in order for the direct non-conceptual cognition of emptiness to arise, it must be proceeded by a conceptual cognition, which is a union of calm-abiding and special insight. This union in turn is proceeded by thinking about the meaning of emptiness. So you can see from this, an understanding of the ultimate truth of all phenomena starts by deeply, clearly and critically contemplating the meaning of reality.

Yet others may think that combining western and Buddhist philosophy will weaken what the Buddha had to say. Besides that fact that this counter-argument commitments the Straw-person fallacy⁴, I would suggest that if something is worth believing, it is worthy of critical analysis. If the basic assertions of Buddhism are true, then these assertions will be validated when placed under critical analysis. I would also suggest that we are not conflating two traditions but, rather leveraging the tools of one tradition for the betterment of the other.

Summary and Call to Action

Given the different locations and time zones of Buddhist scholars, authors and practitioners, using the tool of essay writing to discuss ideas and thoughts on philosophical truths seems like the perfect communication device. I would like to see those in the position to do so, begin to engage each other in this way. I don’t know where or how that would happen. Perhaps one of the Buddhist magazines could help publish and distribute these essays much like university academic philosophical journals do.

In this essay I have tried to posit the benefits of rigorous investigation and critical thinking as a means of gaining insights. That is to say, studying philosophy is not merely knowledge for knowledge sake. That it can in fact be an actual dharma practice. Much of the Buddhist path is made up of insights and perspectives. So if we are to achieve the paths to enlightenment, we need to develop these insights and perspectives. In order to do that, we need to challenge our everyday assumptions on how things exist. Thus we must do philosophy.

Footnotes:

1. Emptiness is a technical Buddhist term that relates to the ultimate nature of reality [↩]
2. At the time of his death, Geshe Jampa Gyatso remained in clear light for seven days [↩]
3. though perhaps this is merely my observation based on limited exposure to this tradition [↩]
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man [↩]

The Buddha said more than two and a half millennia ago, all beings want happiness and wish to avoid suffering. At first glance, this may seem like a simplistic observation however, a closer examination will reveal an extraordinary implication.

Everyone has this innate wish, the wish for greater happiness, it is not a selfish wish, however, we often use erroneous methods in our endeavors to find it. Many people believing that happiness can be found through physical stimuli or financial security, spend their entire lives chasing after money, power and fame only to be exhausted by their efforts. Buddhism asserts that although external conditions, such as, money or a nice car do play a role in a good life, they are not the real causes of happiness. You don’t need to look too far to find people who are materially well off, yet experience unhappiness, which if left unchecked can lead to depression. This does not mean we should not have material things or work towards providing for our families. Owning a nice car, a big house or having a highly paid career is not the issue. The issue is how we relate to these things. The real source of life’s problems and their resolutions can be found within our mind.
What I find most compelling about the Buddha’s statement is he hints at our fundamental capacity to expand and develop our experiences of happiness. Not the kind of happiness that is generated by forcing yourself to laugh or the kind of happiness that is sometimes jokingly described as happy happy joy joy. The happiness that is referred to here, is a genuine feeling of joy that naturally arises due to the cultivation of functional states of mind. It is a feeling of contentment with yourself, your life and the things and events that you encounter. It is not a passive experience. It makes you want to embrace life and the people you encounter through it. So his statement, all beings want happiness and want to avoid suffering, is not merely an observation but rather a supremely optimistic statement.

This statement of the Buddha also hints at our current situation. Like it or not, most people experience unwanted problems. Be they big or small, they are problems nonetheless and they are unwanted! No one wakes up in the morning and thinks, today I hope nothing but problems come my way. In fact the opposite is often the case. We wake up thinking about all the good things that might happen. We plan our day, thinking of the things we need to get done. Yet unexpected problems do arise. We can find ourselves experiencing the tension of a strained relationship, the stress of deadlines, or even the boredom of work. The Buddha points this out as a means of motivating us to begin our journey. Don’t live in denial. Face up to the fact that we do, even if just occasionally, experience these problems but, understand there is something you can do about this situation. You have the power to change your life, no one else can do it for you. In this regard the Buddha once said,

You are your own protector,
who else will be this protector?

This is great news, you can change your life and it is not that difficult. However, it is a journey, and like all good journeys, it starts with making the decision to go. To sum up then, the basic framework of the Buddha’s message is. All of us want happiness, yet what happiness we currently experience is fleeting at best. However, it is possible to experience real and lasting happiness that transcends any experience of happiness or bliss that is generated from physical stimuli, and that the methods which enable this can be found within our own mind.
This is where meditation comes in. Meditation is the tool used in the Enlightenment Project. It is both a diagnostic and therapeutic tool in this endeavor. Meditation introduces you to the world of your mind. A world that for many has remained hidden. Meditation brings the world of your mind to the forefront of life. Making it work for you rather than letting it enslave you. Many people are unaware of the potential of their mind or the role it plays in your life. Many unaware of this go through life acting out in habitual ways, reacting with events habitual tendencies, many of which lead to the problems describe earlier. The removal of dysfunctional states of mind, such as anger, jealousy or pride and the development of functional minds such as the minds of loving-kindness, compassion and wisdom constitutes the Enlightenment Project.

I have just finished watching the DVD’s of teaching His Holiness the Dalai Lama gave on Dependent Origination, a key Buddhist concept.

The teaching were organized by Gyuto Vajrayana Center in San Francisco. The texts HHDL uses for these teachings are Nagarjuna’s and Lama Tsong Khapa’s spiritual songs of devotion to the Buddha. This teachings are outstandingly translated by Thubten Jinpa. I only hope we see Jinpa-la in Sydney this June for the Dalai Lama’s teaching in Australia 2008.

Anyways if you have a spare $30.00 or 40.00 I’d go and purchase the DVD’s or at least download the free mp3’s from here

This is the first post of a series on Buddhist epistemology entitled Awareness and Knowledge. An introductory post for this series can be found here the benefits of understanding Buddhist epistemology and psychology. If you haven’t read this post as yet, do so before reading further.

As I post each new section I will link to it from here. This will enable people to bookmark this page for future reference and make it easier for new readers to follow the progress of the series.

Don’t forget you can subscribe to the blog either via RSS or email and receive updates as they are posted.

Part One: Objects
(1) Appearing objects.
(2) Determined objects.
(3) Objects of engagement

Part Two: Subjects
I. Persons

II. Awarenesses
   (1) Valid cognizers
      (A) Direct perceivers
         (1) Sense direct perceivers
         (2) Mental direct perceivers
         (3) Self-knowing direct perceivers
         (4) Yogic direct perceivers
      (B) Direct valid cognizers
         (1) Self-knowing direct valid cognizers
         (2) Sense direct valid cognizers
         (3) Mental direct valid cognizers
         (4) Yogic direct valid cognizers
      (C) Facsimiles of a direct perceiver
         (1-6) Conceptual facsimiles of a direct perceiver
         (7) Non-conceptual facsimiles of a direct perceiver
      (D) Inferential valid cognizers
      (E) Terminological divisions of valid cognizers
         (1) Inference for oneself and for another
         (2) Ancillarily, minds apprehending a sign
         (3) Valid cognizers that induce ascertainment by themselves and valid cognizers when ascertainment is induced by another
         (4) Valid cognizers that are persons, speech, and consciousnesses
      (F) Definite enumeration of valid cognizers 
   (2) Non-valid consciousnesses
      (A) Subsequent cognizers
         (1) Directly perceiving subsequent cognizers
         (2) Conceptual subsequent cognizers
      (B) Correctly assuming consciousnesses
      (C) Awarenesses to which the object appears without being ascertained
      (D) Doubting consciousnesses
      (E) Wrong consciousnesses
   (3) Threefold division of awarenesses and knowers
      (A) Conceptual consciousnesses that take a meaning generality as their apprehended object
      (B) Non-conceptual non-mistaken consciousnesses that take a specifically characterized phenomenon as their apprehended object
      (C) Non-conceptual mistaken consciousnesses that take a clear appearance of a nonexistent as their apprehended object
   (4) Twofold division of awarenesses
   (5) Another twofold division of awarenesses and knowers
      (A) Minds
      (B) Mental factors
         (i) Five omnipresent factors
            (1) Feeling
            (2) Discrimination
            (3) Intention
            (4) Contact
            (5) Attention
         (ii) Five object determining mental factors
            (1) Aspiration
            (2) Belief
            (3) Mindfulness
            (4) Meditative stabilization
            (5) Wisdom
         (iii) Eleven virtuous mental factors
            (1) Faith
            (2) Shame
            (3) Embarrassment
            (4) Non-attachment
            (5) Non-hatred
            (6) Non-ignorance
            (7) Effort
            (8) Pliancy
            (9) Conscientiousness
            (10) Equanimity
            (11) Non-harmfulness
         (iv) Six root afflictions
               (1) Attachment
               (2) Anger
               (3) Pride
               (4) Ignorance
               (5) Doubt
               (6) Afflicted views
                  (a) View of the transitory collection
                  (b) View holding to an extreme
                  (c) Conception of a afflicted view as supreme
                  (d) Conception of afflicted ethics as supreme
                  (e) Wrong view
         (v) Twenty secondary afflictions
               (1) Belligerence
               (2) Resentment
               (3) Concealment
               (4) Spite
               (5) Jealousy
               (6) Miserliness
               (7) Deceit
               (8) Dissimulation
               (9) Haughtiness
               (10) Harmfulness
               (11) Non-shame
               (12) Non-embarrassment
               (13) Lethargy
               (14) Excitement
               (15) Non-faith
               (16) Laziness
               (17) Non-conscientiousness
               (18) Forgetfulness
               (19) Non-introspection
               (20) Distraction
         (vi) Four changeable mental factors
               (1) Sleep
               (2) Regret
               (3) Investigation 
               (4) Analysis
   (6) Ancillarily, the mode of asserting tenets

III. Expressive Sounds
(1) Names
(2) Phrases
(3) Letters

Awareness and Knowledge an Introduction

Buddhism asserts the mind is not merely a function of the brain nor is it an emergent property of physical processes. Buddhist epistemology - a branch of philosophy that investigates the origin, nature, methods, and limits of knowledge - defines consciousness as: that which is clear and knowing. Consciousness, knower and awareness are synonymous. Awareness is ‘clear’ as in it is not obstructed by physical phenomena. It is the luminous aspect of mind and the knowing is the minds capacity to know or cognize phenomena - both internal and external phenomena. Therefore it is that which is clear and knowing.

Regardless of your inclination toward either the current Western notion of the nature of consciousness or the Buddhist definition. The project of developing a ‘good life’ or to use Buddhist terminology ‘practicing Dharma’ or ‘the path to Enlightenment’ is contingent upon understanding your own mind. Given that consciousness in the Buddhist tradition has been the primary object of investigation for more than 2500 years, it makes sense to at least understand what Buddhist literature has to say about the subject regardless of whether you are Buddhist or not.

The Buddhist approach to epistemology and psychology is one of enumerating the basic functions of the mind, as opposed to understanding it through brain processes or behavioral manifestations. By understanding how perception, conception and various mental factors such as the mental factor of feeling - one of the Five Omnipresent mental factors - operate and how the mental factor of feeling plays a crucial role in determining how we relate and react to most of life’s events, one can develop a greater understanding of our dependent nature. We, that is, you and I are after all dependent on various factors other than ourselves. My mind is not me, although it is a part of what makes up me. So by developing a deeper understanding of this very fact, we can better understand who we are, and how we exist. To a greater of lesser extent, it is this process that Buddhists are undertaking.

The lineage of Buddhist epistemology comes from two Indian scholars Dignaga 5th CE and Dharmakirti 7th CE. Dignaga wrote a treatise on what constitutes valid cognition, valid ways of knowing, called Compendium of Valid Cognition. While Dharmakirti wrote Seven Treatises on Valid Cognition his treatise called Commentary on (Dignaga’s) Compendium of Valid Cognition is the foundational text for much of Tibetan monastic education of Buddhist logic and epistemology . The study of mental factors or psychology comes from Compendium of Knowledge written by Asanga 3rd CE.

In the Tibetan monastic education system, the study of epistemology and psychology are studied under the topic of Awareness and Knowledge (blo-rig) pronounced Lo-rik. Lo-rik is the study of consciousness, of mind and the understanding of mind is seen as essential in both it’s practical and theoretical aspects, as the process of the enlightenment project is one of replacing dysfunctional mind with functional ones. Therefore the clear identification of dysfunctional states of mind and the recognition of why they are dysfunctional is of vital importance in the progression from an unenlightened experience to an enlightened one. Meditation which is seen as an indispensable tool in a spiritual aspirant life, is used as both a diagnostic and therapeutic tool in this process. The culmination of this process is a state of mind, an experience that is free from all dysfunctional states. According to Buddhism, such a mind has the capacity to know all objects of knowledge without error. Buddhists merely label this experience Enlightenment. Perhaps this is what can explain gamma levels leapt’s of 700 to 800 percent

In Lo-rik, consciousness is studied by dividing it into types and sub-types from several different point of view, such as the seven-fold division of:

1. Direct Perceivers
2. Inferential cognizers
3. Subsequent cognizers
4. Correctly assuming consciousness
5. Inattentive awareness
6. Doubting consciousness
7. Wrong consciousness

The Three-fold division:

1. Conceptual consciousnesses that take a meaning generality as their apprehended object.
2. Non-conceptual non-mistaken consciousnesses that take a specifically characterized phenomenon as their apprehended object.
3. Non-conceptual mistaken consciousnesses that take a clear appearance of a nonexistent as their apprehended object.

The Two-fold division:

1. Self-knowers
2. Other-knowers

Another Two-fold division of:

1. Minds
2. Mental factors

This enables a student to develop a sense of how consciousness exists and manifests, by understanding the various types, their functions and how they interrelate. The study of Lo-rik also plays the role in formulating foundational concepts that a student will use in their future studies of Madhyamaka, as well as the Grounds and Paths found in texts like Maitreya’s Ornament for Clear Realizations.

Awareness and Knowledge - Table of Contents

from Philosophy for kids

Teaching children the art of collaborative philosophical inquiry brings them persistent, long-term cognitive benefits, according to psychologists in Scotland.

For me the main issue here is to develop the facility of critical thinking within a community of inquiry. I think a great example of this is in the Tibetan tradition of debate. From a very early age monks spend many hours debating (a form of formalized discussions, not just auguring with each other) after receiving teachings on a particular subject. This all takes place from within a support base that encourages open mindedness, with a strong community of participates willing to hear new ideas as long as they are logically based.

I would like to see Buddhist philosophy included in something like this. Or al least have philosophy classes embrace other traditions than Western ones.

Update: 12/12/2007

I finally got around to listening to the second hour of this podcast.
In the second half I found myself less enthusiastic about Owen’s presentation. I find it hard to hear someone present fiction as fact…I can understand how someone not a belonging to a tradition can speak for that tradition. He even suggested that the Dalai Lama doesn’t believe in rebirth! I love thought provoking discussions, I mean to did link to this podcast in the first place but, I was disappointed by the second Question and answer section.

    
In the following lecture, the philosopher Owen Flanagan explores whether Buddhism is eudaimonistic. In so doing, he presents some interpretive points about the general structure of Buddhist ethics, and the plausibility of empirical claims about Buddhism and happiness.
http://www.cbs.columbia.edu/weblog/2007/11/the-bodhisattva.html

If you are into philosophy this podcast is worth a listen. Owen is thought provoking. There are some assertions he puts forward as Buddhist theories that are simply incorrect and this is a shame.

Minute 10.35 At one point his says that Buddhist ethics is rich although.
He goes on to say the practice of compassion and loving-kindness for all beings might be way too demanding but it is nonetheless ethically rich.

This shows me that he really doesn’t get the process of transformation presented in Buddhist meditation. Yet he says at the very start of the lecture that he is a skeptic in regards to whether Buddhist meditation can produce eudaimonistic.Is this tantamount to not believing in modern physics just because the experiments were not done by you the individual? I NOT saying that he should just accept Buddhist theories on the production on eudaimonistic or what Buddhist yogis would call the bliss of meditation. What I am saying is it is not good science to dismiss them outright without first doing the tests.

He also over simplifies the Buddhist theory of emptiness. Minute 9.40 His description of the self as a psychologically continuous and connected being is classic Sautrantika’s view of selflessness and this is not emptiness. It is not the final view of the Buddha nor that of Nagarjuna, Chandrakirti or Tsong Khapa.

Also he says that Jay Garfield says that the Dalai Lama is pandering to Westerners by presenting Buddhadharma as a path to happiness. Because the Buddha first teaching was about removing suffering.

I think that there is something in that statement that is worth looking at.
Happiness for the sake of happiness, or put another way, happiness as the goal is not a Buddhist practice. However it is a byproduct of the path and to suggest otherwise is simply silly.

Having said all that, I really enjoyed it and I’m looking forward to the next one.