Orthodoxy meets Tantra; Vasubandhu and the Path of the Laze
Vasubandhu on lazen: Chapter 7, The Knowledges
Vaibasikas: A good mind is called concentrated because it is not turned away from its object. A defiled mind is distracted, because it is associated with distraction.
Review thusfar:
Agreed. And a perfect mind has no object. The Perfect Laze becomes one's object of pleasure.
Vasubandhu:
The Westeners, or Masters of Gandhara say: A mind associated with laziness is concentrated; a distracted mind is any other defiled mind.
Vaibasikas: In this system, the same mind, namely a defiled mind associated with laziness will be at one and the same time concentrated and distracted. Further this system contradicts the Mulasastra which says, ``He knows in truth the concentrated mind, endowed with the four knowledges, a knowledge of dharmas, inferential knowledge, worldly conventional knowledge, and a knowledge of the Path''
Review:
Note that ambiguous and loaded word used: `defiled'. One grasps, within this text, at `concentration and nondistractedness' while emptying oneself of balance. The Laze leaves all such distraction behind in the calm and happy enjoyment of the Womb and Tomb.
Vasubandhu:
This explanation, say the Sautrantikas, does not conform to the Sutra and it does not take into account the meaning of the terms. The sutra says,
What is a mind internally concentrated?A mind which is accompanied by torpor and laziness, or a mind accompanied by calm but not insight.
What is a mind externally distracted? A mind which is dispersed towards the five objects of pleasure, or which is accompanied by insight but not by calm.
Review:
Ah, but what if the mind is concentrated upon the five objects of pleasure, or, more importantly upon the pleasure itself and what gives pleasure?! What if the mind drinks from the five objects of pleasure much as the newborn suckles from the breast? What if such suckling leads to calmness?
Vasubandhu:
But, the Vaibhasikas answer, we have said that if a mind associated with laziness is concentrated, a defiled mind, when it is associated with laziness, will be at one and the same time concentrated and distracted.
Yes, you have said this, but it does not hold. In fact, we can only affirm that that defiled mind, when it is associated with laziness, is distracted.
But, answer the Vaibhasikas, your thesis contradicts the Sastra!
It may. But it is better to contradict a Sastra than a Sutra.
Review concluded:
It is only foolish to contradict a sutra if one is a Buddha-head. Sutras are meant to be contradicted, they aren't like `Laws of Nature' which must be obeyed or Mother will have us for breakfast! Note the attachment to language, sutra and hard work in this text. This is not the work of a Laze.
Orthodoxy meets Tantra; The Theravada Hindrances
These are the `Five Hindrances of the Theravada tradition':
Review:
As in the rest of this review, I react from the perspective outside the tradition in question.
Any desire is a hindrance, so why select out the `sensual'? I suggest that this is a symptom of a tradition which is not integrated into society. It sees the social elements such as `lovers', `friends' and `children' as obstacles. This displays a weakness in the tradition which seeks to make up for itself by claiming the hindrance of the sensual over that of other desires.
Of the emotions, this seems the most potently transformative second only to love. Cannot anger be used as a means to achieve necessary change? Too many cultures see anger as something to be avoided or repressed rather than a healthy, helpful experience. I suspect that this betrays the tradition's pro-social establishment position in its culture.
Definition is required here:
These sound like one is describing another when using this term. My understanding is that if one is cajoled or coerced into practice, work, then it will have little if any beneficial result. These are simply words used to judge others and make oneself feel better.
If one feels lethargic, wishing to move, to work, and feels no energy to do so, then which is better - to stay in bed or to go against such a feeling and get up? I would not presume to make this decision for another and feel that categorizing these as `hindrances' has a very limited usefulness.
The mention of agitation here starts me wondering whether calling 'laziness' and `agitation' hindrances is like suggesting that one not move toward the extremes of oversedantariness (laziness) or over-exertion (agit ation).
Taken this way, as a whole, this makes some sense. Otherwise such a categorization of agitation as hindrance might prevent people from seeing agitation (and laziness, anger, doubt, sensual desire) as opportunities, and so as potent experiences. One is reminded that overly hierarchic social structures often sing the praises of work without resistance to its `workers' (aspirants in this case).
Now this strikes me as the most ludicrous of those listed! Doubt is a hindrance? Doubt of what, precisely? The dogma? The teacher? The meaning in context would seem to be important here.
Taken out of context, doubt would seem to be a necessity in any practice which does not hold tightly to a mental straight-jacket. Even this last can be beneficial for some.
9211.26 e.v. [Thankful for the wisdom of those who came before us!] Thyagi Tzu (Thyagi Morgoth NagaSiva) Tagi@Cup.Portal.Com House of KAos 871 Ironwood Dr. San Jose, Kali Fornica, 95125