The nice thing about Vietnamese Buddhism is that it is so very eclectic: it has influence from all the different kinds of Buddhism still alive in Asia: Zen, Chinese, Theravada etc. Of course Thich Nhat Hanh is quite the master of combining them all in a way that is both wise and relevant for today.

It sounds like this sutra was written before the divisions between Theravada and Mahayana were as complete as they have been for the past 1000 years. Global communication may change that again though

I think it’s perfectly reasonable to accept you don’t know all the answers, even for a philosopher

Yes, I was very happily surprised to to read this philosophy student starting about pluralistic causality. Hadn’t heard it before either. However, there is the issue of: how does it all come together into ONE world? And Blavatsky does talk of a ‘first cause’ – I’m planning to go into all that next week (if I don’t get side tracked).

I’ve thought along those lines myself, it’s neat to be able to label it now. I’ve never understood people who seem to think that either “spirit” or “matter” have a monopoly on causality. I think I stand close to where Descartes stands. I see them as possibly two sides of the same coin, two modes of manifestation of the same “stuff.” I’ve read that the “mind-body problem” never concerned Descartes–that he just kind of accepted that the two work together as a whole somehow, without feeling the need to explain how. Kind of a dubious position for a philosopher, but I forgive it.

Regarding the balance of your reply, it seems quite complete and would only be marred by carrying on. Thanks.

It’s always hard, I think, to balance priorities. Doing people a favor is something very different from really helping them. Truly helping them is something different from seeming to help them.

The famous saying that it’s better to teach a man to fish, than to feed him is one example of this. Better to help in a way that the person can go on helping themselves, than to get them through the night. But still, if it’s a choice between doing nothing and helping them through the night – one should obviously help them through the night.

I’m sure there are enough examples of the Buddha helping others in the pali sutras and Jakata tales to support this.

Several seems okay.

Thank you for this blog of yours.

The thought in the comment from the Dalai Lama, is echoed in the words of Paramahansa Yogananda:

“Thus we see that though the true aim of mankind is the avoidance of pain and the attainment of Bliss, yet owing to a fatal error man, through trying to avoid pain, pursues a deluded something named pleasure, mistaking it for Bliss. That the attainment of Bliss and not pleasure is the universal and highest necessity is indirectly proved by the fact that man is never satisfied with one object of pleasure…..And so he is constantly falling into pain, even though he wishes to avoid it by the adoption of what he deems proper means. Yet an unknown and unsatisfied craving seems ever to remain in his heart.”

Regarding delayed gratification. Perhaps the words in the previous comment were not written clearly (one certainly wasn’t ;^). Of course there can be no wisdom in delayed gratification if it thought of as an end in itself. In such a case, it is just a formalized ritual consisting of bouts of repression. Afterwards the desire is just as likely to be even stronger as a result of the delay.

The intention is not merely to pretend to be good by denial.
The thought is this. If that which prevents gnosis is the ego’s false image that we are separate and disconnected from the universe, then we enhance the experience of separation by clinging to that false image.

It that is taken as true, then is it not worthwhile to observe and examine and alter the ego’s influence? And, will we not discover that the ego desires things and conditions which provide it with the sense of security, affirmation and belonging — relative to the manifest world? (Is it not from the ego’s selfish point of view that selfish actions arise?)

If that is found to be the case, then Self-imposed delay of gratification can be viewed as a tool of exerting control over the ego — prior to the work of reprogramming (by replacing the false views through study, introspection and meditation).

Hopefully, this clarifies the previous comment.

Namaste

“The Buddha spoke of sickness and suffering as effective medicines; times of difficulty and accidents as times of freedom and realization; obstacles as liberation; the army of evil as guards of the Dharma; difficulties as required for success;….”

Other portions, bring to mind the thought that Karma simply cannot be interfered with. Who, other than avatars, can presume to be able of judging properly? Yet, still, we have not merely the option, but the responsibility to exist, to act. We must create a positive vision, then use the powers alloted to us to attempt to act in accordance with that vision. In doing so we may erase previous Karmic debts and we may create new Karma, but only for ourselves.

Whether our powers have the capacity to alter or positively influence the state of another’s experience will, of course, be constrained by that person’s Karma (both from the past, and that generated by his or her current state). Sometimes our attempts to help succeed, sometimes they fail.

We cannot alter other’s Karma, though we may be an instrument whereby they come to alter it for themselves.

The influence of such an act (of healing, suggestion or instruction) upon our own Karma, as the last paragraph in the blog mentions, is related to motive.

The matter of “self-interest” refers to the interest as understood by the ego-image — that false belief that we are separate and not connected to the universe. From this person’s experience, as that false image is slowly challenged and altered, the assumption that the one must master the world (for survival, affirmation, belonging) also slowly dissipates. It is a frightfully long path of following an ideal in darkness before discovering that the universe is a benevolent place. This is a challenge everyone faces when setting out.

In any case, when considering “doing good,” it is more important to try to create a good nature from which good acts arise, rather than merely acting good in a desire to be good. Returning again to the Sutra:

“[The Buddha spoke of]…..the act of doing someone a favor as base as the act of casting away a pair of old shoes…..”

Namaste