Someone wrote: "What
are the methods non-tantric buddhism has for this? I know of vipashyana
but do not know how it is practiced in classical buddhism. Does anyone
know? Is it reasonable for a modern layman to expect liberation from all
personal karmas with this method, without tantric tools?"
I replied:
Even
in the earliest tradition of Buddhism, the Buddha himself have stated
that the numbers of his lay followers attaining the stage of non
returner were numbering in the range of thousand ( Majjhima Nikaya 73 ), likewise for lay
once returners or lay stream
enterers, in other words in addition to removing the first three
fetters of self-view, attachment to rites and rituals, and skeptical
doubt, a very substantial number of his lay students also attained the
elimination of the fetter of 'sensual desire' and 'ill will', therefore
they will no longer take birth in the sensual planes like the human and
lower deva realms, and instead at most be reborn one more time in the
pure abodes to attain arahantship there. That's non-tantric Buddhism.
Are
there lay arahants? Yes, a number of arahants have attained arahantship
as laymen in the suttas, however, interestingly all the laymen arahants
simply renounced after attaining full arahantship. Why is this so? I
can only say, with my own logical deduction (since I am not arahant),
that since arahants have cut off all attachments, they simply are
completely unattached to worldly life, they have no more interest in
living a worldly life or enjoying pleasures of the worldly life. They
have no more attachments to family ties or material belongings at all,
and see no more reason to continue living as a lay man. I think they
would rather live a simple life of pleasant abiding in their nirvanic
bliss. This however does not mean they no longer engage in human
interactions - many arahants are known to have many students in dharma
and continue to benefit many people.
Now
when it comes to later forms of Buddhism, like Mahayana Buddhism, (even
before the formation of Tantric Buddhism), there is becoming greater
and greater emphasis on the role of a lay person in Buddhism. It does
not mean that laymen have no role in Theravada Buddhism - in the suttas,
one of the layman (I think was either a sakadagami or an anagami) was
designated as the 'best lay dharma teacher' (in fact - one best lay Male
and one best lay Female lay dharma teacher) basically by the Buddha,
which also indicates his approval for experienced laymen and laywomen to
teach the dharma, and the potential for laymen to be advanced in dharma
practice and knowledge... nonetheless later on as the Theravada
tradition developed it would appear that the emphasis has been more on
the monastic community. It is unfortunate that in many Asian Theravada
countries, most lay people only aim for gaining merits (e.g. through
giving alms to monks) to be reborn in a higher realm or as a monk in the
future lifetime, since they do not believe it is realistic for them to
attain awakening and liberation as a lay person. This is without any
scriptural basis, since their scriptures clearly state that there were
abundance of awakened lay persons. This is especially so in recent
centuries whereby Theravada has degenerated quite a bit, and it is only
in the recent 1-2 century that there has been revival of the vipassana
practices and emphasis on bringing dharma to lay practitioners, which
has seen very good results so far. More and more people - monastic and
lay practitioners alike are learning to do vipassana meditation.
So,
it is accepted notion even in the earliest tradition that laymen have
great potential to attain liberation, and that Nirvana is not limited
only for monastic monks and nuns. Nonetheless there is more emphasis on
cultivation and practice within the monastic context.
The
Mahayana further shifts the focus away from monastic to the lay people
and community. i.e. all the images of Bodhisattvas you see are almost
always in the form of laymen, there is only Ksitigarbha Bodhisattva
which manifested as a monastic monk. In the Vimalakirti Sutra, the
Vimalakirti Bodhisattva is a 10th stage bhumi bodhisattva living as a
lay person completely engaged in living the lay life and benefitting
people in all walks of life, which probably became the role model for
the emphasis of 'entering the marketplace' in Zen Buddhism. Because of
this, laymen are seen in Mahayana (including non-tantric) Buddhism to be
as equally capable of attaining the fruition of spiritual life as a
monastic person.
"The
character of Vimalakirti is a pretext to express the teaching on
emptiness ⎯ the ungraspability of phenomena ⎯ the most difficult aspect
of the Buddhist teachings. He manifests this aspect by presenting
seemingly contradictory characteristics: he lives alone yet he is
surrounded by many servants; he lives a life of celibacy yet has a wife
and children. He takes the teachings of the Buddha into every context:
bars, brothels, schools and the market place. Vimalakirti is completely
integrated within Indian society and, as a fictional figure, he
illustrates integration in any type of society." -- http://www.vimalakirtiusa.org/about_vimalakirti.html
The
practice and engagement of the 10 paramitas (or 6) in the daily life
becomes of utmost importance, allowing the twofold cultivation of merits
and wisdom so necessary for the attainment of full Buddhahood. It is in
fact in the very mundane activities of daily life and interactions that
allows us the opportunity to attain the ten perfections (paramitas)
that allows us to attain full Buddhahood. The paramitas are not just
'mundane qualities', but the actualization of awakened wisdom - for
example, the perfection of generosity is not just the ability to give
lots of money to other people, but rather, the selfless giving freed
from any confusion of a giver-giving-gift. The wisdom of the emptiness
of self and phenomena allows our act of generosity to be perfected. When
our giving transcends giver-giving-gift, without attachments we
relinquish and give and sacrifice for other beings out of genuine
compassion, that is true generosity. The cultivation of the ten
paramitas in conjunction of the wisdom of emptiness is itself a method
for the liberation of taints, and does not require tantric methods,
though one can very well implement them.
It
is said that at each of the ten bhumi stages, one of the perfections
have been perfected. For example, the first bhumi perfects the
perfection of generosity, second bhumi the perfection of precepts, so on
and so forth... all these are part of the so called 'common/non-tantric Mahayana' path.
In short, in the Mahayana (even non-tantric) path, as Huayan Patriarch Cheng'guan explained ( http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com.au/.../httpssites... ), the essential wisdom that allows for the twofold liberation of
afflictive obscurations and knowledge obscurations is the wisdom of
twofold emptiness (this is similar to Tantric Buddhism as well). Then
there is the emphasis on cultivating the paramitas.
If you're asking about specific meditation methods, there are lots of meditation methods.
For
example in the early tradition, i.e. the suttas, Theravada, etc, the
four foundations of mindfulness are said to lead someone to the stage of
non-returner and arahant, in at most 7 years and as little as 7 days
(mahasatipatthana sutta). I would think that would mean practicing them
in a very diligent manner and not merely in a half hearted way. There
are many methods involved in the four foundations of mindfulness, from
anapanasati, to the contemplation of the impurities of the body.
Different methods are taught with different emphasis. For example, the
practice of the mindfulness of breathing is very suitable for someone
with a very distracted and wandering mind, full of discursive thinking.
Anapanasati is very suitable for developing the sort of calm abiding,
mental samadhi, etc. Whereas, the contemplation of the impurities of the
body can lead to the elimination of sensual lust. So there are also in
fact many kinds of practices in the early tradition that can help
overcome the taints.
In
Theravada Buddhism, there are number of different systems of vipassana
being practiced nowadays, including for example the Mahasi Sayadaw's
system which emphasizes the technique of 'noting' and the progress of
insight based on Venerable Buddhaghosa's Visudhimagga, as well as the
Goenka's system of vipassana practices. One similarity between them is
that both emphasizes mindfulness of one's direct perception/sensations
and being mindful of the three dharma seals of impermanence,
unsatisfactoriness and non-self in direct experience. This leads to
direct insight and realization.
The
Mahayana (non-tantric) tradition has its own set of shamatha and
vipashyana teachings. Venerable Dharmamitra has a number of translations
including Master Zhiyi's meditation manual of the Tiantai tradition's
shamatha-vipashyana methods: http://www.kalavinka.org/ . Due to a large number of various Mahayana traditions, there are focus
on different methods of practices, however the many non-tantric sects
of Mahayana Buddhism have in recent centuries died out only leaving Zen
and Pure Land Buddhism. Zen has a system of zazen, koan,
practice-enlightenment.
Also: realizing
anatta does not mean that at once you will overcome all sense of
grasping and mine-making. Something Thusness wrote years ago concerning
the difference between I-making and mine-making:
Hi Simpo,
How have you been getting on? I am planning for my retirement.
I
think after stabilizing non-dual experience and maturing the insight of
anatta, practice must turn towards ‘self-releasing’ and ‘dispassion’
rather than intensifying ‘non-dual’ luminosity. Although being bare in
attention or naked in awareness will help in dissolving the sense of ‘I’
and division, we must also look into dissolving the sense of ‘mine’.
In my opinion, dissolving of the sense of ‘I’ does not equate to
dissolving the sense of ‘mine’ and attachment to possessions can still
be strong even after very stable non-dual experience. This is because
the former realization only mange to eliminate the dualistic tendency
while the latter requires us to embody and actualize the right view of
‘emptiness’. Very seldom do we realize it has a lot to do with our
‘view’ that we hold in our deep most consciousness. We must allow our
luminous essence to meet differing conditions to realise the latent
deep. All our body cells are imprinted and hardwired to ‘hold’. Not to
under-estimate it.