The Buddha Wasn’t Buddhist

In the magic of the ordinary moment
 a band of colours holds the clouds in place

The explosion of interest of psychology and the neurosciences in Buddhist practices has given us powerful techniques for connecting differently with the human experience. And we Buddhists have become greedy. Seeing that the way the Buddha practiced has been adopted as a therapeutic tool, we also want his thought about the working of the human psyche to have been prescient. We want his understanding to be the Genesis of what we now know about the way the mind works.  This flurry of intellectual and academic activity around our religious practices generates a sense of competiveness with other religions that haven’t made into this inner circle comprised mostly of the liberal leaning, well educated privileged.

Prince Siddhartha, once he attained enlightenment and became a Buddha, had serious concerns about sharing his radical understanding of the causes of and the cure for human suffering. Eventually he was convinced. He then spent the next forty years repeating one simple message to anyone who would listen. That message outlined in his First Dharma Talk at Deer Park was that we suffer because we want what cannot be—for pleasure to last and sadness to never arise. The cure—It is to live fully in the life we have, rather than live for a life that may never come or in regret for a life that is no longer available. His understanding was radical because it was so common sense.

If he was prescient, it was in understanding that we have trouble accepting the truth that is staring us in the face; thus his initial reluctance to share his radically simple understanding. We need to infuse the common truth that informs our spiritual practice with a deeper meaning that only we and perhaps a few elite can understand. 

We create a sense of Buddhism as being a special spiritual practice that enables us, as Buddhists, to reach extraordinary heights of understanding. We forget the Buddha, himself, wasn’t a Buddhist. He was just one of the many spiritual ascetics wandering the countryside. He, like the rest, used a set of well developed spiritual practices. And like the rest, he was searching for meaning in human existence at a time when empires were collapsing and old meanings had been lost. It is also likely that his ultimate insight wasn’t the result just of his commitment to his spiritual practice. In all probability, the conditions for his insight were set by the milk-maiden who found him near death and fed him milk and rice.  Her compassion and generosity diverted him from the stringent asceticism that he had been practicing for seven years. But her compassionate action did not negate the years of spiritual discipline that had taught him to bring his attention to the present experience. It is not hard to imagine that it was this new path—one that was only one step away from the path followed by his spiritual brothers—which led him to an enlightenment that had eluded the other seekers.

In many ways, he and the other spiritual seekers were like modern day scientists all rushing to find a cure to some deadly disease. They all have the same technical skills. They are all equally bright. But a sudden insight, a stroke of luck, some random event, some brief moment of ordinary magic pushes one to the discovery one step ahead of all the others. 

Without the milk-maiden, would there have been a Buddha? Would another Buddha other than Prince Siddhartha have emerged? 

To be continued in the next post.

With Gratitude 

Frank