Review previous lecture.

The person known as the Buddha was an actual historical individual. His personal name was Siddhartha, and his family name was Gautama, so he is sometimes referred to as Siddhârtha Gautama . The word "Buddha" is actually a title, rather than a proper name. "Buddha" means "enlightened one." So the person, Siddhartha Gautama, was considered a Buddha, or enlightened one, but other people can also be called "Buddha's," if they are considered enlightened. Finally, he was of the Shâkya tribe, so he is sometimes also referred to as Shâkyamuni, which means "the sage from the Shâkya tribe."

The Buddha probably lived around 500 B.C. That is to say, he was born some time before 500 B.C. and died some time after 500 B.C. As such, his lifetime would have overlapped with that of Confucius; however, neither Confucius nor the Buddha knew anything about the other person.

Discussing our historical knowledge of the Buddha is a lot like discussing our historical knowledge of Jesus of Nazareth (that is, the person known to Christians as Jesus Christ). Many believing Christians accept as historical the reports about Jesus contained in the New Testament. However, if you talk to secular scholars of New Testament history, or many believing Christians, they'll tell you that much of the New Testament account is not historically accurate. Likewise, there are many stories about the Buddha, and accounts of his teaching. However, scholars have a very hard time sifting out which, if any, are historically accurate.

Some scholars have argued that the following meagre details of his life are likely to be true, since they are attested to in many early independent sources. The Buddha was married and had a child. After starting a family, he entered the ascetic life without the permission of his father. And he had some deeply moving personal experience, what Buddhists would describe as his "enlightenment," but his first efforst to share his newfound wisdom with others were rebuffed: people did not want to accept his teachings at first.

The comparison of the Buddha with Jesus is apt in another respect as well: even leaving aside the textual and historical issues, there is disagreement about what the actual teachings of both the Buddha and Jesus are. Just as Christians are divided into sects like Protestants and Catholics, so are Buddhists divided into Theravada and Mahayana sects. Because of these divisions, I cannot tell you much about Buddhism without taking sides in certain heated debates within Buddhism. Consequently, you should keep in mind that many things that I say could be challenged by scholars of Buddhism, most of whom know the Buddhist tradition much better than I.

According to tradition, the Buddha was born into a noble family, with wealth and political power, in Northeastern India. He could have had a very pleasant and easy life; however, as a young man he had some experiences that profoundly altered his life. While going on an outing to a park, the Buddha happened to see a very aged man. Because he had led a very sheltered life, the Buddha had never seen a really old person before. On being told that old age was inescapable, the Buddha was horrified, and asked to be taken home imediately, saying that he could not enjoy a day in the part knowing thta such suffering was part of human existence. On a later day, the Buddha tried again to go to the park, but he encountered a very ill man en route. Once more, the Buddha was horrified to discover that sickness was a part of human existence, and returned home. On a third attempt to go to the park, the Buddha ran into a funeraly possession, and was once again deeply disturbed.

After these experiences, and against the wishes of his father, the Buddha left his family behind and went to becoming an ascetic mendicant . After six years of asceticism, frustrated with his inability to achieve wisdom, the Buddha gave up asceticism. His fellow ascetics immediately abandoned him. But the Buddha sat down by a river, underneath a kind of tree called a Bodhi tree , and thought for himself for a while. According to tradition, while sitting under the Bodhi tree, the Buddha attained enlightenment . He then went to a nearby dear park, and gave his first lecture on his new enlightenment to the ascetics who had abandoned him earlier. That first lecture contained the basic teachings of Buddhism, which are referred to as The Four Noble Truths .

In my own study of Buddhism, I have become convinced that there are really two levels of understanding one can have of the Four Noble Truths. There is a less philosophically complicated way of explaining and understanding them, and there is a more philosophically complicated way of understanding them. I think both ways of understanding have been important. Many people find the less philosophically complicated way of understanding the Four Noble Truths both comprehensible and compelling. However, intellectuals are often more satisfied by the more philosophically sophisticated understanding. So I'm going to give you both ways.

First, the the less philosophically complicated understanding of the Four Noble Truths.

1. Life is suffering. (We not only suffer in this life, but we will be reincarnated to suffer in the next life.)
2. The cause of suffering is desire.
3. The way to end suffering is through ceasing to desire, which leads to the joys of nirvana.
4. The way to cease to desire is through following the Eightfold Path

The Noble Truth of Duhkha
Life is duhkha . What is duhkha?
"Sorrow" or "suffering"
This is part of it, but there is more.
Unpleasant experiences are duhkha: dentist appointment.
The end of pleasant experiences are duhkha: leaving high school friends behind, or leaving college friends behind.
As the Buddha said, "Birth is sorrow, age is sorrow, disease is sorrow, death is sorrow; contact with the unpleasant is sorrow, separation from the pleasant is sorrow, every wish unfulfilled is sorrow . . . ."

This way of thinking about the First Noble Truth has wide appeal. But there seems to be a fairly obvious objection to it. Can you think of an objection to the suggestion that life is nothing but suffering ?

Duhkha is also "impermanence" or "imperfection."
Everything in the world changes. This is most clear in the case of people. E.g., I have changed much since I was a child; I change from moment to moment (sensations, perceptions and consciousness changes; desires, intentions, beliefs change). We might be tempted to say that "I" am the one who undergoes all these changes. We might be tempted to say that "I" continue to exist despite all these changes. However, according to Buddhism, there is no "self" or "soul" or "me" that persists beneath, or beyond all these changes. There is only the changing.

What is it that changes? Buddhists speak of "the five aggregates":

1. Form or matter.
   
2. Sensations.
   
3. Perceptions.
   
4. Mental formations -- all volitional activities, like desire, will, etc.
   
5. Consciousness.
   

Notice that all of these are constantly changing.

The idea that there is no persistent self is a very paradoxical. Some of these paradoxes are discussed in an early Buddhist work called The Questions of King Menander. Menander was a Greek king who ruled a part of NW India in the 2nd century B.C. The Questions records his dialogue with a Buddhist monk named Nâgasena.

Nagasena begins by telling the King his name, and remarking casually that there is no "permanent individual" that corresponds to that name.

The King responds with what philosophers would call a "reductio ad absurdum." [Explain.] In particular, the King says if there are no permanent individuals, "who gives you monks your robes and food, lodging and medicines? And who makes use of them? Who lives a life of righteousness, meditates . . . ? Who destroys living beings, steals, fornicates, tells lies, or drinks spirits?"

This is a sharp challenge, because Buddhism is very concerned with ethical issues. So Menander's challenge is to explain how Buddhist practice is possible without appealing to some notion of a self.

Nagasena responds with a famous simile involving a chariot. I'll modernize to use the example of a car: Is this car the muffler? the carborator? the wheels? No. [Explain.] Is the car the sum total of all the parts? No. [Explain.] Is the car something other than the sum total of the parts? No. [Explain.] So where is the chariot? The King responds,

"It's on account of all these various components . . . [the muffler, the carborator] the wheels, and so on, that the vehicle is called a chariot. It's just a generally understood term, a practical designation."

Nagasena says it is the same with his own identity. His name is a "practical designation." What does it mean for something to be a "practical designation"? I think what he means is that it is simply useful to label certain arrangements of parts in certain ways, even though they really lack any genuine self or identity. There is no thing which is an automobile, but it is practically useful to use the term "car" or "automobile" in certain ways. Likewise, there is no thing that is "Nagasena," there is no thing that is "King Menander," there is no thing that is "Van Norden," there is no thing that is "you," but it is practically useful to talk as if there were.

So Nagasena's answer to King Menander's reductio ad absurdum is to say that his doctrine does not have the absurd consequences that King Menander suggests. Nagasena does believe that there are no permanent individuals. However, this does not mean that he has to stop talking or acting as if there were permanent individuals, because it is practically useful to talk about individuals who perform certain actions. Talking and acting as if there were permanent individuals does not require believing that there really are such individuals.

This doctrine raises an imporant and interesting aspect of Buddhism. Buddhism is one of those philosophies that teaches us that the world is very different from the way that it appears to common sense. Nonetheless, Buddhism does not advocate giving up ordinary ways of speaking, because it thinks that these ways of speaking are useful . Furthermore, Buddhism holds that people are at different levels of enlightenment. A person at a lower level of enlightenment may not be capable of understanding the truth. Consequently, ways of speaking that are not, strictly speaking, true, may be the only way to communicate with people at a lower level of understanding.

Discuss upaya (skillful means). Metaphor of the children in the house on fire.

So the First Noble Truth is Duhkha, the truth of sorrow or impermanence. To recognize this truth is to recognize that everything is in a constant state of change. There is nothing permanent that actually persists through change.

The Second Noble Truth of the Origin of Duhkha

The second noble truth concerns how the "sorrow or impermanence" arises: tanha (Pali). Tanha is often translated as "desire."

". . . all is burning. And what is the all that is burning? . . . the eye is burning, visible forms are burning, visual consciousness is burning, visual impression is burning, also whatever sensation, pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, arises on account of the visual impression, that to is burning. Burning with what? Burning with the fire of lust, with the fire of hate, with the fire of delusion; I say it is burning with birth, aging and death, with sorrows, with lamentations, with pains, with griefs, with despairs."

The Buddha goes on to say that the ear and sounds are burning, the nose and odors are burning, the tongue and flavors are burning, the body and touch are burning, and finally the mind and mental objects are burning. And all burn with lust, hate and delusion.

We can see how desire leads to sorrow or suffering. I desire to have nice clothes, or I desire to have a new car, or I desire to have a beautiful house, but I cannot afford them. I suffer because my desire is unfulfilled. More subtlely, I desire to be the best student at Vassar, I desire to be the fastest at the 100 yard dash, or I desire to be the best philosopher in the world, but I fail. Again, I suffer because my desire is unfulfilled.

Of course, sometimes we get what we desire. But what we get is never permanent, so we suffer when we lose what we desire. Say I can afford the beautiful car I want. I buy it and it makes me happy to own it. But the car soon gets scratches and dings, and eventually wears out. I suffer as this happens. How many people have seen the show Wings ? On one episode of Wings we learn that one of the characters, Joe Hacket, holds the record in his high school for the most hits in one season of baseball. Joe's days as a baseball player are long gone. He no longer gains pleasure from the satisfaction of being the best local high school baseball player. However, he still holds the record. In this episode, though, Joe suffers because a current high school baseball player breaks his old record. So not only is Joe no longer the best local high school baseball player now , he also no longer holds the record for having been the best local high school baseball player. As the Buddha said, not only is ". . . contact with the unpleasant . . . sorrow," but also "separation from the pleasant is sorrow."

However, if we say that duhkha arises through desire, then the term must be understood more broadly than "desire" in some senses, but more narrowly than "desire" in some other senses.

Tanha must be more broad than "desire" in the sense of a "longing" or "craving," because we are motivated to do many things that we do not long or crave to do. I might be motivated both to eat a piece of cheesecake and to get up in the morning to go to work. Nonetheless, although I long for or crave the piece of cheesecake, I do not long for or crave getting up early to go to work.

Tanha must also be understood more narrowly than some senses of "desire," for there are things we might be inclined to describe as "desire" that do not count as bad motivations for Buddhists. In general, it is only cravings, "thirsts," or desires based on the mistaken assumption that one is a permanently existing entity interacting with other permanently existing entities that leads to suffering or duhkha .

The Third Noble Truth of the Cessation of Duhkha

This is the truth that to eliminate duhkha we must eliminate desire. The elimination of desire is a state called Nirvana.

Nirvana is not like "Heaven," as understood in the Christian tradition. It is not a place where the souls of the saved go after death. Indian Buddhism does not believe that there is a soul or self, so there is nothing that could go anywhere after death. Achieving Nirvana has been compared to a candle blowing out. And, indeed, the word "Nirvana" means "extinction" or "blowing out.

One gets the impression, though, in reading Buddhist texts, that there is more to Nirvana than simple extinction. However, Buddhists will insist that, whatever Nirvana is, we cannot really put it into words. Human language develops out of ordinary experience, and Nirvana is no ordinary experience, so human language cannot fully express it.

These ideas, that Nirvana is more than simple extinction, and that what it is cannot be expressed in ordinary language, is brought out in the following brief anecdote. A monk once said, "Nirvana is happiness! Nirvana is happiness!" Another monk asked, "What happiness can it be if there is no sensation?" The first monk replied, "That there is no sensation is itself happiness."

The Fourth Noble Truth of the Eightfold Path Leading to the Cessation of Duhkha
1. Right Understanding
2. Right Thought
3. Right Speech
4. Right Action
5. Right Livelihood
6. Right Effort
7. Right Mindfulness
8. Right Concentration

These may be grouped under three headings:

I. Ethical Conduct

1. Right Speech -- no lying, no impolite or insulting language, no gossip
   
2. Right Action -- no killing, no stealing, no cheating, no adultery
   
3. Right Livelihood -- no dealing in weapons, poisons, intoxicants.
   

II. Mental Discipline

1. Right Effort -- the committment to prevent, or get rid of, evil states of mind, and to produce and develop good states of mind
   
2. Right Mindfulness -- to be aware of one's feelings, thoughts and bodily activities
   
3. Right Concentration -- meditation
   

III. Wisdom

1. Right Understanding -- understanding the four noble truths
   
2. Right Thought -- selfless and compassionate thoughts
   
   

Compassion: recognition that there is no self ends selfishness and encourages compassion. Why should I care especially about "my" suffering or "my" pleasure when there is no "me"?

[To here, 1/23/97]
[1. Collect essays. 2. Hand out attendance. 3. Review Four Noble Truths through discussion -- ? ]

Philosophical Problems

1. How is reincarnation possible without persistent selves?
Nagasena attempts to answer this question. Recall that flame is a symbol for desire. [Light candle from candle to illustrate transmission without substance.]

2. What is the cause of the problematic human condition?
There is no "first cause" of evil. This is not thought to be a serious theoretical problem. In contrast, for theistic traditions, it is crucial to explain the origin of evil in a way that preserves God's omnipotence, omniscience and goodness.

Development of Buddhism

The Indian Emperor Ashoka was the first great patron of Buddhism in the 3rd century B.C. In addition to endowing Buddhist monasteries, Ashoka encouraged Buddhist missionaries, who began the spead of Buddhism outside India.

There were apparently doctrinal disputes within Buddhism from fairly early on. However, the major division with Buddhism, between Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism, occurred some time in between the 1st and 3rd centuries A.D.

"Theravada" means "way of the elders," and the teachings of Theravadan Buddhism have a good claim to being the oldest teachings of Buddhism. What I have been teaching so far is Theravada Buddhism. Among the characteristics of Theravadan Buddhism are the following: enlightenment must be obtained for oneself. This is illustrated in one of the readings I assigned for today, in which the Buddha has the following exchange with some of his disciples:

[The Buddha asks,] "...would you, possessing this knowledge, say, 'We declare it because we revere our teacher'?" [His disciples reply,] "No, sir."
"Or would you say, 'We don't declare it as from ourselves -- we were told it be a teacher or ascetic'?" "No, sir."
"Or would you look for another teacher?" "No, sir."
"Or would you support the rituals, shows, or festivals of other ascetics of brahmans?" "No, sir."
"Do you only declare what you have known and seen? " "Yes, sir."
[The Buddha concludes,] "Well done, brethren! I have taught you the doctrine which is immediately beneficial, eternal, open to all, leading them onwards, to be mastered for himself by every intelligent man. "

"Mahayana" means "greater vehicle." It seems clear that the basic texts and teachings of Mahayana Buddhism developed later. This suggests that Mahayana Buddhism is a corruption of the original teachings of Buddhism. However, Mahayanists will respond that their movement contains the highest teachings of the Buddha, which were not revealed to the ordinary monks, but were part of an esoteric teaching the Buddha gave to only his most advanced disciples. Mayahana Buddhist therefore refer to Theravadan Buddhists by the derogatory term, "Hinayana," meaning "lesser vehicle."

There are at least two ways to look at how Mahayana developed. Sociologically, Mahayana developed as Buddhism increasingly came into contact with foreign, i.e. non-Indian, peoples. Since these peoples had beliefs and practices very different from those of traditional Indian Buddhists, Buddhism gradually changed, adopting practices and doctrines more amenable to the sensibilities of the people the Buddhists encountered. (Something similar happened in the history of medieval Catholicism -- the doctrine of the saints, relics, etc.)

There are also intellectual reasons why Mahanaya developed. In order to understand these, it is helpful to say something about the distinction between the arhat (aka arhant ) and the bodhisattva . An arhat is someone who has reached a sufficient level of enlightenment that, upon his physical death, he will achieve nirvana. To become an arhat is the goal of traditional, Theravadan Buddhism. Mayahana Buddhists called the ideal of the arhat into question, though. They suggested that there is something fundamentally selfish about aiming at achieving enlightenment and nirvana oneself . A truly enlightened person, they argued, would focus instead on helping others to end their suffering and achieve Nirvana. Such a person, who essentially is enlightened and could enter nirvana him- or herself now, but who postpones achieving enlightenment so as to help others in this life, is called a bodhisattva.

There are two broad philosophical movements within Mahayana Buddhism: Mâdhyamika and Yogâcâra . The founder of the former was Nâgârjuna . His arguments are subtle, but they may be described in outline as follows. Everything is ultimately empty in the sense that no thing has a persistent existence. However, we mistakenly see things as persistent. Enlightenment is coming to see that things are empty. In coming to see things as empty, we do not see a different world from the world of ordinary experience. There is nothing hidden behind the world of ordinary experience. Rather, enlightenment is seeing the world as empty: "...roughly samsara is how Nirvana seems to the unenlightened...." Nagarjuna sees that his line of argument leads to mysticism in the following way. [Explain.] Two levels of truth. No positive doctrine.

Yogacara is called because of its use of Yogic techniques of meditation. Yogacarans hold that all that exists are the perceptions of minds. No differences between a hallucination and reality. Problem: Why do we generally perceive the same things (both individually and collectively)? Answer: The "storehouse consciousness."

Other features of Mahayana include (1) the worshipping of the Buddha as a god. Hinduism is polytheistic, so it was natural for both Hindus and Buddhists to add the Buddha to their pantheon. Philosophical Buddhists would justify the practice of worshipping the Buddha as a god by means of the principle of upaya .

(2) The development of ritual practices to help achieve nirvana. These are especially associated with Tantric Buddhism. The best-known tantric Buddhism is that of Tibet, but it has existed in India and China as well. An example is the the use of mantras , the most famous of which is om mani padme hum . This is usually translated as, "Oh, the jewel is in the lotus." (The lotus is a symbol of the Buddhist teachings.) However, mantras are strictly speaking meaningless. (Some suggest that their meaninglessness is a symbol of the meaningless of the phenomenal universe.) The incantation of such mantras is thought to have an almost magical effect.

(3) The transfer of merit from one individual to another. This last development reached it logical (if extreme) conclusion in Pure Land Buddhism . According to Pure Land Buddhism, which was very influential in China and Japan, the "Pure Land" is a special region in which there is no suffering, much like the "Heaven" of the Christian and Islamic religions. This pure land was created by the merit of previous Boddhisattvas. Any simple act of faith in the Buddha (such as saying the name of the Buddha upon one's deathbed) will result in being reborn in the Pure Land.

Theravada Buddhism spread SE to Ceylon (Sri Lanka), off the coast of India, and to SE Asia, to places like Burma (Myanmar), Thailand, Cambodia, Laos.

Mahayana Buddhism spead NE to China (1st century A.D.), from China to Tibet (mid 7th century) and Korea, and from Korea (around A.D. 500) to Japan.

The influence of Buddhism in India peaked around A.D. 100. It gradually lessened in influence until it effectively ceased to be an important Indian movement around A.D. 1200. Nowadays there are few Buddhists in India, but many outside of it. There is no agreement about why Buddhim declined in India. However, factors that are often mentioned include the gradual assimilation of Buddhist ideas by Hinduism, the fact that Buddhism, with its costly monasteries, was largely dependent on royal patronage, and the Muslim invasion of India.