Guarding the Truth, Realizing the Truth

Posted: January 17, 2009 | Author: Doug | Filed under: Buddhism, Religion | 2 Comments »

Recently I stumbled upon the Canki Sutta (MN 95) on E-sangha’s forum, and found this to be an interesting sutra, so I thought I’d explore it.

This sutra seems to be one of the few times where the Buddha really goes after someone. In it, he is talking with a group of Brahmins, and one young Brahmin who’s a real upstart, keeps interrupting their conversation. The Buddha disciplines him for interrupting the conversation, but the Brahmins defend the young man saying he’s special because he’s mastered the three Vedas, the ancient hymnal books to the gods (each of which is massive). The young Brahmin decides he wants to challenge the Buddha:

So he said to the Blessed One, “Master Gotama, with regard to the ancient hymns [the Vedas] of the brahmans — passed down through oral transmission and included in their canon — the brahmans have come to the definite conclusion that “Only this is true; anything else is worthless.” What does Master Gotama have to say to this?”

He is in essence throwing down the gauntlet. At that time, Brahminism was the only real religion in India; Hinduism as we know it didn’t exist yet. He’s asserting that for the Brahmins the Vedas are the only real truth, and since the Buddha hasn’t studied the Vedas, and his position contradicts the Vedas, what is his response?

The Buddha turns the discussion around with this point:

“Tell me, Bharadvaja [the young Brahmin], is there among the brahmans even one brahman who says, ‘This I know; this I see; only this is true; anything else is worthless?’”

He’s not asking the young Brahmin about his opinion, he’s asking if the Brahmin can verify its truth through direct insight and contemplation. The young Brahmin says ‘no’, so he asks if there were any Brahmins alive or dead who could confirm the truth of the Vedas by direct insight and contemplation. Again, the young Brahmin says ‘no’.

So the Buddha then brings down the hammer:

Suppose there were a row of blind men, each holding on to the one in front of him: the first one doesn’t see, the middle one doesn’t see, the last one doesn’t see. In the same way, the statement of the brahmans turns out to be a row of blind men, as it were: the first one doesn’t see, the middle one doesn’t see, the last one doesn’t see. So what do you think, Bharadvaja: this being the case, doesn’t the conviction of the brahmans turn out to be groundless?”

Ouch. The unbroken tradition of the Brahmins is compared to a row of blind men following one after another. So the young Brahmin backtracks and says:

“It’s not only out of conviction, Master Gotama, that the brahmans honor this. They also honor it as unbroken tradition.”

But the Buddha doesn’t relent. He questions the five ways of understanding things:

• Conviction
• Liking
• Tradition
• Reasoning by analogy
• Pondering a viewpoint

The Buddha states that through any of these view ways, one can have strong conviction that something is true, but still be wrong. Or, one doesn’t have conviction on something, and yet it turns out to be true. The applies for others. You could like a teaching, but it could still be wrong, or you might not like to hear a teaching but it could be true. Of course, it’s possible that you could like a teaching and it is true as well. The point is that none of the five ways above is a really definitive way of confirming the truth. They’re just not sufficient.

So the Buddha tells the young Brahmin that guarding the Truth is one thing, realizing it is another thing altogether. He then talks about actually awakening to the truth, and explains it like so:

Lending ear [to his teacher], he [the disciple] hears the Dhamma. Hearing the Dhamma, he remembers it. Remembering it, he penetrates the meaning of those dhammas. Penetrating the meaning, he comes to an agreement through pondering those dhammas. There being an agreement through pondering those dhammas, desire arises. With the arising of desire, he becomes willing. Willing, he contemplates (lit: “weighs,” “compares”). Contemplating, he makes an exertion. Exerting himself, he both realizes the ultimate meaning of the truth with his body and sees by penetrating it with discernment.

This leads to an awakening of the truth, but not yet final attainment of the truth, where one directly sees it. However, the Buddha states that one is on the right course, and if they keep it up, they will attain direct knowledge of the truth. Notice how it begins with establishing a good relationship with a good teacher, and listening to the Dharma. This leads to a sense of conviction and a willingness to put it into practice. Exertion is the final key.

So, when I write the blog and research Buddhist stuff, in a sense, I am safe-guarding the truth, which is all well and good, but (not surprisingly) it is not the same as discerning the truth myself. Nothing wrong with it, just that it’s even better if you can put it into practice and see for myself, instead of always relying on others’ teachings. After all, it’s quite possible I either understood them wrong, or that that teaching could have been wrong.

How to get in touch with a good teacher and such is another matter entirely. When people try to put in the effort themselves, it usually doesn’t last long, which is understandable if one is alone or not in good close contact with a good teacher. Without listening to the Dharma frequently, pondering its value, and so on, there doesn’t awaken a continual desire to exert ourselves, and before long we backslide.

That’s a challenge for many of us, I am sure.

Namu Amida Butsu
Namu Kanzeon Bosatsu

---