The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and scriptures.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by mikenz66 »

So does it mean technically difficult, like math or philosophy? It doesn't seem so, judging from the sutta descriptions of how the Buddha taught lay people:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... ml#gradual" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
and how the gradual path for monks is described:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .horn.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

However it would be interesting to hear from a Pali expert.

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
mikenz66 wrote:So does it mean technically difficult, like math or philosophy?
I think it's more to do with the difference between nippapañca and papañca... maths, sciences, philosophy etc. falling into the latter category.

The deepness of the Dhamma resides in the layers of defilement, differentiation and obscurity that are removed with proper knowing of the Dhamma... not the layers added.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by mikenz66 »

You mean, in English, the Dhamma is straightforward, not complicated?

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote:You mean, in English, the Dhamma is straightforward, not complicated?
I wouldn't say either, actually.

Nippapanca is a synonym of nibbana, and signifies the absence of conceptual proliferation.

The absence of conceptual proliferation is not straightforward to achieve, because it is nibbana, and nibbana is elusive.

It is not complicated either, because complication involves conceptual diffusion and differentiation, which is the antithesis of nibbana.

Therein lies part of the "challenge"... explaining that which goes beyond concepts, with language that is inherently conceptual.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by mikenz66 »

Hmm, OK, let me try to express myself better.

My argument, is, in short:
  • 1. The path is straightforward, not hard to understand intellectually, but accepting it and doing it is not easy.

    2. Where there is complication, the complication is over matters of interpretation. It's important to get the interpretation straight but those complications are not actually Dhamma challenges in themselves.
Let's look at how the teachings are delivered:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... ml#gradual" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Suppabuddha the leper, he gave a step-by-step talk, i.e., a talk on giving, a talk on virtue, a talk on heaven; he declared the drawbacks, degradation, & corruption of sensual passions, and the rewards of renunciation. Then when he saw that Suppabuddha the leper's mind was ready, malleable, free from hindrances, elated, & bright, he then gave the Dhamma-talk peculiar to Awakened Ones, i.e., stress, origination, cessation, & path. And just as a clean cloth, free of stains, would properly absorb a dye, in the same way, as Suppabuddha the leper was sitting in that very seat, the dustless, stainless Dhamma eye arose within him, "Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to cessation."
There is a nice talk on this by Gil Fronsdal that elaborates on this:
http://www.audiodharma.org/teacher/1/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Pedagogy of the Buddha 2012-02-19

In his Dhamma talk the Buddha "softens up" the student by talking about giving, positive things such as heaven, then points out the drawbacks of sensuality to make renunciation seem attractive. At the point the student is ready to accept that suffering is caused by clinging (i.e Noble truths/dependent origination).

The description for monks goes:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .horn.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Morality, Sense-control, Moderation in eating, Vigilance, Mindfulness and clear consciousness, Overcoming of the five hindrances, Jhana, Liberation.
"With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, the monk directs and inclines it to the knowledge of the ending of the mental fermentations. He discerns, as it has come to be, that 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress...
The descriptions in those suttas are very similar to what one would do on a modern meditation retreat, restraint, mindfulness while walking, sitting, etc...

Looking at the description of how the Buddha addresses his lay followers, or instructs his monks, I see nothing particularly complicated. And thinking about this has clarified, at least for me, what really a "Dhamma Talk" (Step-by-step talk" in the first quote above) actually is.

Such a talk is designed to gladden the mind and prepare the student to accept the teachings. To prepare the student for liberation. They are straightforward and uncomplicated.

There are, of course, other types of talks/writings, that are difficult and complicated. And for good reason. They are discussing how to interpret the suttas, commentaries, etc, in order to be able to accurately practice. Examples of these would be Ven Nananada's discourses on Nibbana, Ven Nanavira's various notes, and comparative analyses of the suttas by the likes of Vens Sujato and Analayo. Such analyses may well be useful in making sure that one is practicing the path correctly (if one doesn't trust that one's teachers to have their interpretations reasonably straight).

However, in view of how the Buddha taught, based on the suttas I quoted above, I think that it wold be a mistake to think that such analysis is the path, or the real "Dhamma Challange".

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by kirk5a »

Really nicely said, Mike. My mind is gladdened by reading it. And now, the laundry.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote:Hmm, OK, let me try to express myself better.
Much clearer, thanks. I think you've drawn distinctions clearly now.
mikenz66 wrote:There are, of course, other types of talks/writings, that are difficult and complicated. And for good reason. They are discussing how to interpret the suttas, commentaries, etc, in order to be able to accurately practice.
... though I'd replace "in order to be able to accurately practice" with "in order to understand experience". This seems more consistent with the example you give of Suppabuddha the leper who didn't seem to do any great volume of any particular "practice" in the example given in order to achieve stream-entry (at which point he becomes a sekha, aka "trainee"), but if those two phrases in question are synonymous "in practice", then that's great.

The point about stream-entry is relevant, because once someone has the stainless Dhamma eye, the "challenge" in teaching the Dhamma to them is greatly reduced, because they are already en route to nibbana.

The "challenge" seems to be in getting them to that point of stream-entry.
mikenz66 wrote:The path is straightforward, not hard to understand intellectually
If that is so, why does it take a sammasambuddha to rediscover it?

If that is so, why does the Blessed One say, "if I were to teach the Dhamma and if others would not understand me, that would be tiresome for me, troublesome for me." (note that he says "not understand me", as opposed to "not follow the straight-forward path I teach")

Perhaps there is more to "the path" than how it looks from here? To put what I'm saying into perspective, Suppabuddha achieved more through attentive listening to the Buddha, than any ascetic or Brahman outside the Buddhasasana achieved, no matter how much or how diligently they practiced their respective Wrong Paths. If "the path is straightforward, not hard to understand intellectually", I'd suggest you're either under-estimating the path, or too lightly dismissing the intense efforts and intelligence of some of the Buddha's contemporary religionists who went in search of freedom. Possibly both.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
nowheat
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by nowheat »

Interesting topic.

1) A genuine story or saint-making storytelling? Is it true that the dhamma is difficult to teach?

I'd assume the story is original to the time and that the Buddha had a hand in its creation. Did the events actually happen? No, but it's great representative storytelling. Does it make a valid point? Yes -- teaching the dhamma is a challenge.

2) How did the wide variety of people he was speaking to affect the form of his teaching?

As far as I can tell, he taught by trying to understand where people were in their lives and practices, and to speak to them in the paradigm they were familiar with, bending its terms to match his dhamma.

3) Why does he mention dependent arising? Is all the dhamma hard to see or just the bits he mentioned?

Now that's a tough question to answer, because the answer is complex.

As mentioned above, the things he specifically names are either directly dependent arising or liberation from it. The Buddha is naming the difficulties as seeing the process and how hard it is to imagine what it would be like to be free of it.

Is it actually hard to see? This might depend on one's background and life experience. To anyone who has never delved into any actual "science of the mind" the concept itself could be difficult. Even for those of us who started from science, a beginner's grasp of what's being said can result in an uncomfortable feeling in the gut (speaking from personal experience), and perhaps even a reluctance to grasp the full implications. And then once one has really understood it, seeing it in action -- finding ALL the ways it plays out in one's own life -- that's *really* challenging.

Is the rest of the teaching as hard to see? As mentioned by Ñāṇa, the rest of the teaching *is the same stuff* (it is all dependent arising and the escape from it) so in that sense, yes. But the rest of the teaching has more of an "entry level" access to it that provides a great "front door" for the teaching. It offers a place to start to see things in one's own life, and the skills to make that possible, so at that level it's not as difficult. But because all the apparently "entry level" teachings are actually trying to get us to see dependent arising and how to escape from it, it's really not as easy as it seems.

:namaste:
nowheat
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by nowheat »

mikenz66 wrote:It occurred to me that perhaps ... One could observe that the problem is not "for a generation unable to understand complicated concepts", it's "for a generation delighting in attachment...". The Buddha despairs of the generation "relinquishing acquisistions, ending craving", not "failing the Dhamma-study exam".

Since the Dhamma is "beyond the scope of conjecture", it's clearly not some intellectual pursuit...

Words like "understand", are, perhaps, a misleading translation in this case if they invoke associations with intellectual analysis.
:goodpost:

:namaste:
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by mikenz66 »

retrofuturist wrote: If that is so, why does the Blessed One say, "if I were to teach the Dhamma and if others would not understand me, that would be tiresome for me, troublesome for me." (note that he says "not understand me", as opposed to "not follow the straight-forward path I teach")
Addressed above. Understand is a very general word.
If I said: "Do you understand that what you did was wrong?" to someone I caught cheating, it wouldn't be a philosophical inquiry...
retrofuturist wrote: Perhaps there is more to "the path" than how it looks from here?
retrofuturist wrote: Obviously there is, and I don't want to waste time on the wrong sort of effort.
To put what I'm saying into perspective, Suppabuddha achieved more through attentive listening to the Buddha, than any ascetic or Brahman outside the Buddhasasana achieved, no matter how much or how diligently they practiced their respective Wrong Paths.
Yes, exactly, the Buddha taught him directly and clearly, as the Sutta explains. He got just the right information he needed.
retrofuturist wrote: If "the path is straightforward, not hard to understand intellectually", I'd suggest you're either under-estimating the path, or too lightly dismissing the intense efforts and intelligence of some of the Buddha's contemporary religionists who went in search of freedom. Possibly both.
Not at all. I'm saying that the difficulties do not appear to me to be ones of intellectual analysis. Are there any suttas where the teaching is done by complex intellectual analysis?

The suttas where progress is made seem quite the opposite.
Consider, for example, SN 22.59 Anatta-lakkhana Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nymo.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
No rocket science in that, just straightforward question and response. I recall one of my teachers going through much the same process with our group, sitting attentively after walking and sitting. Towards the end one (Christian) participant looked a little puzzled and asked "But what about my soul?".

Unfortunately, the teacher wasn't the Buddha, so had not prepared our mind expertly enough for use to achieve arahantship... Presumably still quite a bit of clinging there, hindering the understanding...

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4528
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by Dan74 »

fig tree wrote:The idea that an "awake one" would in any meaningful sense be reluctant to help out has always seemed very out of place to me.

I have no way of knowing, but my gut reaction has been to suspect that what really happened is that the Buddha described to some of his followers how upon awakening he had reflected on the comfort of awakening, the challenges of leading anybody else to it, and the benefits to the many of deciding to do so in spite of those challenges (with or without a friendly deva to serve as a sounding board), and that the story that has come down to us is a kind of dramatization.

It provides an opportunity to highlight the merits of the gradual path, that benefits people of all levels of nearness to awakening.

Fig Tree
For what it's worth, my reaction to these words was very similar.
_/|\_
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by mikenz66 »

As some further clarification, in case it sounds like I am making light of intellectual analysis of the suttas, I'd like to mention the example of Tiltbillings' discussion of translations of "the deathless", etc.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 69#p160907" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 2&#p159172" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The usual translations of Udana 8.3 go something like:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .irel.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to-being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned.
or
"Verily, there is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed. If there were not this Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed, escape from the world of the born, the originated, the created, the formed, would not be possible"
This sounds awefully mysterious, whereas Tilt's translation:
"Monks, there is freedom from birth, freedom from
becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning.
For, monks if there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from
becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning,
then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making,
conditioning, would not be known here. But, monks, because there
is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from
making, freedom from conditioning, therefore the escape from that
which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning is known."
is a reasonably straightforward statement that says, rather forcefully, that the goal is attainable.

Now, the intellectual rigor needed to be able to make that translation accurately is considerable, and certainly not a waste of time. Similarly with Ven. Nananada's many such analyses and clarifications in his seminars on Nibbana.

However, I don't think that the challenges in making correct translations are Dhamma challenges. They are translation and interpretation challenges. If we were as fluent in Pali and related languages as the Buddha's contemporaries there would be no such issues as poor translations sending the meaning in the wrong direction. Since we're not in that happy situation, someone has to make some intellectual effort to unravel the translations, so that (with the benefit of those translations) we can face the Dhamma challenges.

The real Dhamma challenges are, as I see it, to do with implementing the instructions. It's all very well to know intellectually that the problem is craving (or a more elaborate dependent origination version), but actually accepting ("understanding") that fully and experientially is a huge challenge, as the Buddha stated in the Sutta quoted in the OP:
“This Dhamma that I have discovered is deep, hard to see, hard to understand, peaceful and sublime, not within the sphere of reasoning, subtle, to be experienced by the wise. But this generation delights in adhesion, takes delight in adhesion, rejoices in adhesion. For such a generation this state is hard to see, that is, specific conditionality, dependent origination. And this state too is hard to see, that is, the stilling of all formations, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbāna"
This is Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation. He comments that the commentary explains ālaya objectively as the five cords of sensual pleasure, called “adhesions” because it is these to which beings adhere.

:anjali:
Mike
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by Nyana »

mikenz66 wrote:Now, the intellectual rigor needed to be able to make that translation accurately is considerable, and certainly not a waste of time. Similarly with Ven. Nananada's many such analyses and clarifications in his seminars on Nibbana.
Yes, it is. And what I find unfortunate is the numbers of Theravāda teachers -- ordained and lay, Asian and Western -- who either don't know these issues, or don't understand their significance, and choose to advance novel views.
mikenz66 wrote:However, I don't think that the challenges in making correct translations are Dhamma challenges. They are translation and interpretation challenges.
I get your point, but insofar as understanding and interpretation lead to right view, they are also dhamma challenges. Practice becomes much more straightforward when the practitioner understands the elements of Theravāda theory which inform ethical conduct, meditation, and discernment.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Geoff,
Ñāṇa wrote: I get your point, but insofar as understanding and interpretation lead to right view, they are also dhamma challenges. Practice becomes much more straightforward when the practitioner understands the elements of Theravāda theory which inform ethical conduct, meditation, and discernment.
I certainly agree that there is not a clear distinction. And, of course, translations and interpretations are informed by practical experience: one of the reasons that English translations have improved immensely over the last 100 years is that many have now made by monastic or lay practitioners.

One of the key issues that this discussion raises is how one should prioritize one's time. How much theory is enough? Certainly knowing some of the theory could be helpful in avoiding pitfalls with:
Ñāṇa wrote: ... Theravāda teachers -- ordained and lay, Asian and Western -- who either don't know these issues, or don't understand their significance, and choose to advance novel views.
so this would inform the decision to place confidence in particular teachers:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"There is the case, Bharadvaja, where a monk lives in dependence on a certain village or town. Then a householder or householder's son goes to him and observes him with regard to three mental qualities — qualities based on greed, qualities based on aversion, qualities based on delusion:...
:anjali:
Mike
nowheat
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: The Buddha's Challenge in Teaching the Dhamma

Post by nowheat »

mikenz66 wrote:The real Dhamma challenges are, as I see it, to do with implementing the instructions. It's all very well to know intellectually that the problem is craving (or a more elaborate dependent origination version), but actually accepting ("understanding") that fully and experientially is a huge challenge...
This seems to be your central point and it seems to me to be the Buddha's point. The underlying tendency we all have to cling to a sense of self is, for many, difficult to accept as being the source of a problem in any way in the first place: What's wrong with feeling like there is a me? Am I not supposed to care about myself at all? So at the start it can be difficult to see what the issue is.

When we are past that point, then comes the effort of seeing how it plays out in our lives, and as we find more and more ways and put an end to each of them, the ones that remain go even deeper and are more entrenched.

In both cases -- the inability to quite understand why that sense of self is a problem in the first place, and the inability to notice how it plays out as we go deeper and deeper -- the problem is, at base, caused by that underlying tendency blocking us from seeing accurately.

This would be why the Buddha points out that the people he knew were going to have a hard time understanding what he taught, because all our instincts at self preservation go against us seeing it.

:namaste:
from a non-Theravādin of novel views
Post Reply