The Three types of Craving (Buddhism) and relation to Advaita Vedanta - some personal observations.

 Some personal observations on approaches in Early Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta towards the elimination of craving, suffering.

 I was recently reading some material from Thanissaro Bikkhu related to the three types of craving, as seen in early Buddhism.
 The three types of Craving can be identified as craving for sensuality in general (ie objects in contact with the senses- usually in a pleasurable way), craving for "becoming" and craving for "not-becoming".



 We are all familiar with craving for sensuality and objects deemed as nice, good, pleasurable etc. as they come in contact with the 6 sense media and are then labelled and remembered (perception).



 These components form a part of the 12 links of dependent origination elsewhere detailed in early Buddhism. The links in particular that are 'hit' above are name+form, 6 sense media, contact, feeling tone (like, dislike, neutral), craving, clinging and becoming.



 In regards to the other two types of craving, which are "becoming" and "not becoming", it is interesting that TB explains "becoming" in terms of desires and perceptions that form one's "sense of who they are in a particular world of experience". This sense of who one is, isn't fixed, and is changing along with the world of experience at a particular moment.



 Craving for "becoming" and "not becoming", then seem to be very closely tied to the sense of being a subject, an individual self, with a perceived separate existence tied to memory, perception, etc. This autonomous 'self' is challenged in Buddhism, under the teaching that everything existing (phenomenal) is "not self" (Anatta) and "impermanent" (Anicca) and thus suffering/sorrow/stress (Dukkha). (The 3 Marks of Existence).



 Craving itself forms an integral part of the 12 links of Dependent Origination, and is dealt with extensively in most Buddhist schools using a variety of means (and no-means) to manage. Early Buddhist schools chiefly focused on the practices of Mindfulness and Concentration (along with Ethics) in order to deal with craving and becoming (which lead to suffering and stress). Later developments in Buddhism (Mahayana and Vajrayana) used a variety of means which had no link to the Buddha's historical teachings, but were nonetheless also efficient (or in some cases more efficient for certain students) in giving the same end.



 Moving to Advaita Vedanta we can see a similar focus on the "Becoming" aspect of the 12 links. In fact, the primary focus of many Advaita schools seems to be directly on hitting the "Becoming" aspect (as in challenging the existence and perception of a separate, subjective self). Self-Inquiry is one such practice that concentrates on this aspect. A secondary focus is also involved in demonstrating and experiencing the illusory, temporary and unsatisfactory nature of the world and existence (Maya). In regards to the craving for "Becoming", it is interesting to note that Nisargadatta spends considerable time in some of his lectures talking about 'Self-Love', which is the natural desire for conditioned consciousness (wakefulness) to perpetuate itself and experience itself through objects. This outgoing nature of consciousness serves as bondage for the apparent individual, which itself is consciousness misidentified or lost in delusion (Maya).



 We can also find a primary focus in some Advaita Vedanta schools on the aspect of "Consciousness"- which both forms a part of the 12 links (prior to Name/Form), and also one of the 5 Clinging Aggregates (skandas) in Buddhism. (This focus is also shared by some Mahayana schools such as the Mind-Only school (Cittamattra) and several Zen sects). These Advaita schools used methods to directly experience or come to know bare "consciousness", its nature and its source, and thus nip the bud of Feeling, Craving, Becoming before they manifest as problematic further down the 12 Links track. Further, "Consciousness" itself was both explored in terms of being both subject/object (ie nondual), and in some schools, finite or temporary itself (as an imposition on the un-manifest Absolute). Early Buddhism was largely silent on these matters (ie consciousness vs Absolute or Ultimate Self), since discussing alternative views were not deemed to be conductive to a direct means to ending stress, and all too often (especially in historical India, and probably also now with digital media!) led to conjecturing and adherence to philosophical sects, which although interesting, was not helpful.



 So overall, we can find many similarities between the practical methods of both Early Buddhism and later practical focus points in Advaita Vedanta, which both aim at the understanding and managing of stress, suffering and delusion.

To practice or not to practice - nonduality notes - 1

I was reading a post on a Tony Parsons group, whereby someone questioned why TP seemed to be promoting  'his' message, and that it almost seemed evangelical. There was a response given by one of the members, detailing how 'this message' wasn't anyone's in particular, and that it differed from other nondual teachings. 

The difference given was that most nondual paths involve 'doing and performing action in order to become more aware, more nondual, whole etc.', while with TP's message, the idea is that things are already as they are, and that you are just THIS. That's it. Nothing to do, and nobody to do it. Nothing can be attained that trumps this already existing perfection that is nondual unity. No practices are necessary, or effective.



My response to the above is both agreement, and disagreement, and a note that this (above) view of nondual paths that use practices, is almost always misconstrued by the neo-Advaita type do-nothing-nowhere-to-go crowd.



Let's set the record straight- practices in regards to nonduality and nondual teachings do not aim at attaining anything new. Nothing new CAN be attained apart from what already is. They are not aimed at developing the individual (as opposed to self-development trainings), although some training in basic attention or concentration may often be involved. This is because even to read this sentence, some training is needed by the apparent individual, and an amount of attentiveness and focus is required to contemplate. The same can be said for attending a Tony Parsons meeting, reading a book on nonduality, or sitting in a satsang with a nonduality teacher that advises individuals present to do nothing and cease seeking.



What nondual practices aim at doing is this: creating space for the apparent invidivual to awaken from the dream that he/she finds themselves in, and seeing that all of it was nothing more than a dream, an illusion, and case of mistaken identity. Nothing changes, and nothing new is attained. An error in perception, and belief (thought), is seen through. That's it. The rope laying on the ground that was mistaken for a snake, is seen as just being a rope. The snake never existed except as a thought/belief, and thus the idea/belief/perception that there was a snake, is dropped. Things are allowed to be as they always have been and always will be. The story that there was a practice to complete becomes just another part of the dream story that has ceased to take place along with the individual.



There is a big fat proviso however, in assuming that one need do nothing-- and it is this-- does the individual see the snake or the rope right now on the ground?? This cannot be reasoned away or thought about or intellectualised away. If someone sees a snake, and is in a state of fear, then yes, there's apparently some work that needs to take place!! Advising such a person that there's nothing to do sounds idiotic, even though it may ultimately be true. It shows clearly that such an adviser is working in a state of level confusion, and speaking a language that the receiver cannot understand.


Hence practice!


Not doing anything in such a situation, or trying to intellectualise things in a nondual way is a huge ego trap that leads nowhere.. as many a burned-out nonduality student/teacher/former seeker can show. Being thus disillusioned with the teachings, who knows when such an individual will then approach the teachings again, or have another opportunity to awaken. Hence the admonition in traditional nondual paths to find a valid teacher, path, etc.



So yes, practice is important. It matters. Not for gaining anything, but for undoing the illusion of separation and individuality that seems to have taken place.

 

Suffering as a starting point.

"I teach suffering and the cessation of suffering." (reportedly The Buddha)

"In this world, all things come into being and perish, therefore there is the repeated experience of sorrow." (Sri Vasistha)

"The settling of the mind in its goal by turning away from the mass of objects, through observing their defects again and again, is known as peace." (Sankara)

"Suffering has made you dull; unable to see its entirety and enormity. Your first task is to see the sorrow in you and around you." (Nisargadatta)

"Vanity of vanities, all is vanity." (Ecclesiastes 1)


The question often strikes me, when out and about mixing with society, 'How does one relate on a deeper level with those seeming 'others' we meet in our life? How can we relate to these strangers, apart from the concepts overlaid automatically by our own mind?'

Is there a way to relate to 'the other', which can bypass the conditioning and sabotaging of the ego that is only interested in obtaining something from others? Even altruism and so called self-less acts for others, in the end, seem empty, done usually for secret self-serving motives such as pleasant feelings, future rewards 'in heaven' etc.

One way which has been recommended by sages since time immemorial is that of recognising and working with suffering. We can find references to the use of suffering as a foundational base in many orthodox and esoteric spiritual traditions. The reason for this is manifold, but in essence, there are not so many other starting places which begin as close to the bone, ie. our ordinary, present experience as felt during our daily suffering existence.

This doesn't mean that one intentionally needs to find specific areas of suffering, such as physical pain, relationship conflicts and other problematic areas we all have, though it can include this. Rather, these teachings point to the UNIVERSALITY and all-pervasiveness of suffering and sorrow inherent in our very existence, which we all initially find ourselves, usually started from around age three; as separate physical entities living in a seemingly random universe. Despite our individual beliefs about the universe and our existence, the hard facts that we find when on the street or alone at home verify the truth that sages have taught in the past- life itself, and the body itself, IS suffering. "There is suffering."

But isn't this just another mental filter? Do not mystics also proclaim the unreality of "the dream" of existence? Yes, but we have no choice but to start from where we are. Attempting to start from a conceptual place of 'elsewhere', while ignoring our present state of affairs leads to further suffering down the track. As all things in existence are also temporary, then views and beliefs themselves, and attempts to circumvent our present state of affairs must end at some point, and appear as the awful truth we were attempting to escape from via our magical thinking. Follow up on any "Law of Attraction" devotee after a few years and find out whether they still have the energy and motivation to attempt to will unreality onto their reality. Fortunately, all of us have only a limited supply of energy, motivation and will-power, which will one day be exhausted and bring us to the ultimate discovery of suffering and its inescapable presence in our lives and in those around us, while we exist in a body.

Yet a strange thing happens once we embark on this via dolorosa and embrace the existence of suffering everywhere we look. We find that the separateness and power of the ego seems to diminish slightly. External objects and people are no longer simply objects of attainment. We join creation on a fundamental level and are united "in suffering" with others, high and low. Our heart opens up, even ever so slightly, in the form of compassion for those around us, as they are no longer "perfect" or idealised, or despised.. but merely other entities also "fighting the good fight" and trying as best they can to live with their own sufferings of existence.

Most importantly though, working with suffering and investigating its all-pervasiveness, may allow us to come to certain life-changing conclusions. Perhaps there is no solution to suffering within this reality we experience here. Perhaps all efforts to obtain "perfection" (physical, financial, emotional, intellectual and whatever your 'summum bonum' happens to be) are doomed to failure due to inherent limitations in existence- impermanence. Perhaps we've been looking in the wrong place for happiness and love all along, the wrong place being any external place whatsoever. As we become less enchanted with possible solutions and imaginations for a pleasant future, our desire for real, permanent liberation also increases. A doorway is opened, which previously did not exist.

We have no choice but to start where we are. Man is a machine, sages such as Gurdjieff tell us, man who sits in a public house drunk with dreams about himself. Yet there are clues and hints within the dream, as in the movie 'Inception'. As a dog that traces the scent of its master, we can trace the scent of Godhead if we truly desire. The subtle fragrances of love, kindness, contentment, and happiness float past a dozen times a day unnoticed, and often amongst the messiest of situations.

May we have the grace today to see ourselves as we truly are.