Saturday, April 23, 2011

Life After Death

Easter Sunday is that time of year when Christians around the world celebrate the resurrection of Jesus. Coming back to life after dying and sometimes even buried is surprisingly common. Apart from Jesus, Lazarus and a few others, the Bible says that once numerous people who had died came out of their tombs and walked around in Jerusalem (Mathew 27,52-3). In the 50s there was actually a society in the US made up of people who had been dead for a day or more before being resurrected. They used to meet once a year to welcome new members and exchange stories.
Every now and then ‘natural resurrection’ stories appear in the press. One example is a 61-year-old woman from Delaware, USA, who was given "multiple medicines and synchronized shocks", but never regained a pulse. She was declared dead but was later discovered in the morgue to be alive and breathing. She sued the medical center where it happened for damages due to physical and neurological problems stemming from the event. Another case is a 66-year-old man suffering from a suspected abdominal aneurysm. During treatment for this condition, the patient suffered cardiac arrest and received chest compression and defibeillation shocks for 17 minutes. Vital signs did not return; the patient was declared dead and resuscitation efforts ended. Ten minutes later, the surgeon felt a pulse. The aneurysm was successfully treated and the patient fully recovered with no lasting physical or neurological problems. An 18-year-old woman in Missouri, USA, attempted suicide by overdosing on sleeping medication. Resuscitation was attempted, but failed, and she was declared dead. Seven minutes later, her heart started beating and she started breathing on her own again, though she was comatose. The woman regained consciousness 5 days later and was oblivious to what had happened. A 45 year-old woman in Colombia was pronounced dead, as there were no vital signs showing she was alive. Later, a funeral worker noticed the woman moving and alerted his co-worker that the woman should go back to the hospital. A 65-year old in Malaysia came back to life two-and-a-half hours after doctors at a Penang hospital pronounced him dead.
In the late 19th and early 20th century there were enough cases like these that it was thought prudent to design tombs that could be opened from the inside so that if the corpse came back to life it (him or her) could open their tombs from the inside (see picture). There is only one resurrection story in the Tipitaka, in the Patika Sutta of the Digha Nikaya. The Buddha relates a story in which a man dies, comes back to life and describes what he experiences while dead, then drops dead again (D.III,8). Rhys Davids is probably correct in saying that the story is ‘no doubt intended to be both humorous and edifying’ and was not meant to be taken literally.
Of course all this raises the question ‘When does death take place?’ Science is understandably uncomfortable with the idea that the dead can be resurrected so it has re-defined death to take into account so-called near death experiences and the occasional cases where people have (or appear to have) died for hours or even days and come back to life. So now death is the termination of the biological functions that sustain a living organism to the stage where they cannot be re-started.

Sunday, April 17, 2011

The Silence Of The Buddha

What is called ‘the silence of the Buddha’ has become almost proverbial. Numerous writers, academic and popular, have mentioned it, given their opinions about it and tried to plum the meaning behind it. According to Raimon Panikkar, “The ultimate reason for the Buddha’s silence seems to me to be rooted neither in the inherent limitation of the human subject, nor in the imperfection of our cognition, nor in the mysterious, recondite nature of reality. Instead, it seems to me that the ultimate reason for the silence of the Buddha resides precisely in the fact that this ultimate reality is not.” Contrary to what Panikkar thinks the Buddha affirmed the is-ness of ultimate reality (Nirvana) in his famous saying, “There is an Unborn, an Unbecome, an Unmade an Unconstructed. If there were not this Unborn, this Unbecome,…etc” (Ud.80) and elsewhere.

Edmond Holmes was certain that 2500 years of Buddhists scholarship got it all wrong but that he finally straightened it out. “…Buddha kept silence, when metaphysical questions were discussed, not because he had nothing to say about great matters, but because he had far too much, because he was overwhelmed by the flood of his own mighty thoughts, and because the channels of expression which the riddle-mongers of his day invited him to use were both too narrow and too shallow to give his soul relief. As it is on the plane of spiritual emotion, so it is on the plane of spiritual thought. ‘Silence,’ says one of Shakespeare's characters, ‘is the perfectest herald of joy. I were but little happy if I could say how much.”’

Father A. Chandrakanthan has a different interpretation. “A philosopher once visited Buddha and asked him: ‘Without words, without the wordless, will you tell me the truth?’ Buddha kept silence. After a while the philosopher rose up gently, made a solemn bow and thanked Buddha saying: ‘With your loving kindness, I have cleared away all my delusions and entered the true path.’ When the philosopher had left, Ananda, a senior disciple of Buddha, enquired: ‘O, Blessed One, what hath this philosopher attained?’ Buddha replied: ‘A good horse runs even at the shadow of the whip!’ For Buddha, Silence as the inevitable path that leads to the Truth is not distinct from the Truth itself. That is, as the way to the Truth, Silence already contains the reality of the Truth. They are two aspects of the same reality. It is no wonder that even in Christian tradition silence is spoken of as the language of God. In Christian terms, we may say that for Buddha, Silence is the sacrament of the Truth.” This is fairly typical of the garbled, trite, ‘greeting card’ versions of the Buddha’s words that circulate as his genuine profound teachings.

And of course we couldn’t have a silence without someone trying to smuggle God into it somewhere. Another writer says, “Buddhists misunderstood Buddha by taking His silence for negation. The silence of Buddha about God was misunderstood and Buddhists felt that Buddha indicated the absence of God through silence. When you have concluded that God does not exist at all, then, what is the object of your meditation? If you say that the self is the object, there is no benefit in taking interest about yourself since you are always interested in yourself.”

Moving on, and perhaps in a downwards direction, we find popular writers have had a lot to say about the Buddha’s silence as well. According to Sri Chinmoy the Buddha said, “Sometimes silence is the best answer.” The Punjabi poetess Amrits Pritam, an admirer of Mother Meera and Osho has written, “Where the dance of Meera and the silence of Buddha meet, blossoms the true philosophy of Osho.” Allan Smiths in his Philosophy of the East says “The Buddha elevated silence to a philosophy. It was the very essence of his teaching.” According to the Proverbs of Buddha website he said “Silence is an empty space, space is the home of the awakened mind.” Given all this you couldn’t blame someone for thinking that the Buddha often affected an enigmatic silence when questioned and that much of his teachings was communicated through silence, perhaps accompanied by a knowing smile.

Now we have some idea of what others have said about and thought of the Buddha’s supposed silence let’s see what original sources say. The Buddha was an advocate of silence, not in response to questions, metaphysical or otherwise, but simply as an alternative to the idle chatter that often takes place in a social context. He said to his monks, “When you meet together either talk about the Dhamma or maintain a noble silence” (M.I,161). He certainly encouraged silence in the face of anger and provocation (S.I,162). Occasionally he would go into solitude for half a month during which time he probably didn’t speak (S.V,12). Nothing particularly ‘philosophical’ or ‘mystical’ about any of this!

One of the few original sources ever mentioned in discussions on the Buddha’s supposed silence is his dialogue with the wandering ascetic Vacchagotta. This man asked the Buddha a series of questions - Is the universe finite, infinite, both or neither? Is the soul the same as the body? Is it different from the body? Does an enlightened person exist after death?...etc. To each of these the Buddha replied “I am not of that view Vaccha” (Na kho aham Vaccha evamditthi). Finally Vacchagotta asked the Buddha why he had no opinion on these matters and he replied because such questions and any answers that could be given to them are “just opinions, the grasping of opinions, the jungle of opinions, the wriggling of opinions…They do not lead to giving up, turning away, dispassion, stopping, calming, higher knowledge, to awakening nor to Nirvana.” Far from responding to Vacchagotta’s barrage of questions with silence the Buddha replied coherently by saying that he has no opinion one way or another about them. He was not silent. Then he gave a clear and understandable reason why he has no opinion about them; because they are just opinions that distract attention from the things that really matter (M.I,484-8). Nothing particularly ‘paradoxical’ or ‘metaphysical’ about that either!

In fact, there is only one place, I repeat, one place, in the whole Tipitaka where the Buddha declined to answer a question or questions put to him. On another occasion the same Vacchagotta asked the Buddha, “Is there a self?” The Buddha was silent. Vacchagotta continued, “Then is there no self?” and again the Buddha was silent. Perhaps a bit peeved or disappointment Vacchagotta got up and left. Then Ananda asked the Buddha why he met these questions with silence and he replied, “If when asked if there is a self I had answered ‘yes’ I would have been siding with those teachers who are eternalists. And if I had answered ‘no’ I would have been siding with those teachers who are annihilationists. If I had answered ‘yes’ would this have been consistent with the knowledge that everything is without self?” “No Lord” replied Ananda. “And if I had answered ‘no’ there is no self’ an already bewildered Vacchagotta would have been even more so and would have thought, ‘Before I had a self and now I don’t’” (SIV,400). So once again, clearly and simply, the Buddha explains why, on this single occasion, he remained silent when asked a question; because he didn’t want to be identified with particular philosophical standpoints and because he did not want to further bewilder an inquirer. All the theoretical, fanciful and speculative explanations about the Buddha’s so-called ‘paradoxical’, ‘enigmatic’ and ‘mystical’ silence are based on this one incident. So it would seem that people have created an imaginary ‘silence of the Buddha’ and then filled it with their own noise. In some cases they have done this because they have never bothered to check original sources, and in others because they have wanted to co-opt the Buddha into their own philosophical beliefs.

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Buddhist Bells

Bells (gandi) and gongs (kamsa) are metal objects struck to make a noise. Whereas a bell is usually hollow a gong is flat. Speaking of patience and non-retaliation, the Buddha asked us to be like a cracked gong (kamsa upahato) that does not react when struck (Dhp.134). In the centuries after the Buddha monasteries in India and elsewhere throughout the Buddhist world always had bells or drums (bheri) to announce the various times for the monks’ activities. The Pali commentaries mention that certain monasteries in Sri Lanka had mechanical devices (yamayanta) that would ring the bell at designated times. A work called the Ghantastotra (2nd–3rd century CE) and attributed to Asvaghosa, is a hymn to the monastery bell ‘which calls the monks to meditation as a mother calls her children.’ Chinese, Korean and Japanese temples often have wooden bells which are struck to the keep time during chanting. These bells have two fish-like or dragon-like creatures carved in them and are called ‘wooden fish’ (Chinese muyu). The largest functioning bell in the world is the Mingun Bell cast in Burma in 1808 and which weighs 90 tons.

Another huge ‘Buddhist’ bell hangs in the Da Tzong Temple in Peking. Called the Great Yongle Bell it was caste in the early 1400s and weighs 46 tones. It also has the whole of a sutra (I think it’s the Saddharmpundarika Sutra) in raised characters, 230,000 altogether, on it’s outer surface. When I was in Peking in 1984 I bicycled around the city (you could in those days, there weren’t many cars) trying to find the temple. I had asked someone in my hotel to write the name of the temple on a piece of paper in Chinese so I could show it to people if I had trouble locating it. As happens I did have trouble finding the temple but I had even more trouble finding anyone who would give me directions. Everyone I approached to ask for help would either look the other way or wave their hand in my face, the usual Chinese way of saying ‘No!’ or ‘Go away!’ They wouldn’t even look at my piece of paper - so frightened were Chinese in those days of having any contact with what their government called ‘foreign friends’. After half a day of peddling around the city and being rebuffed or ignored I gave up and headed back to my hotel. Ten minutes later I found myself in front of the temple. But my delight was short-lived. Walking to the main entrance I saw a watchman sitting there - and I knew, I just knew. Anyone in China in a decision-making position was officious and obstructive and because the last flickering of Communist idealism still lingered even bribery wouldn’t move them. Friends tell me nowadays its the only thing that will move them. Good-old capatilism! I approached the watchman suitably obsequious and smiling and he gave me a sour look, barked ‘Jaow!’ and went back to reading his paper. Looking beyond him could see the great bell in the hall across the courtyard. I’d been so looking forward to seeing this interesting object and invested half a day in trying to find it, I decided on another strategy. I took some money out of my pocket and started going through the notes while giving the watchman a few sideways glances. No response. All during this time odd locals wandered in and out of the temple. So I never got to see the Great Yongle Bell. But here’s a picture of it.

Sunday, April 10, 2011

Religious Images

I have found these pictures while casually browsing on Google Image. It is not clear what some of them mean or indicate but I thought all of them warranted at least a second look and perhaps a chuckle.

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Spring Is Here

I have been in Europe now for about five months. I had planned my stay badly, completely failing to take the weather into account. I have endured months of cold, snow, rain and leaden skies and by the time I leave in a few weeks the Summer will be well underway. Right now the Spring is just beginning. Like most people who have spent their lives in the tropics I really did not know how beautiful, not to say how welcome the Spring is. The Indian Spring (Pali vasanta) is not as dramatic as that in the northern hemisphere but apparently it was just as welcomed. This is what Udayi Thera says of the Spring in the Nidanakatha. ‘The Winter is ended, the Spring has began, men have gathered in the harvest and are taking it along the roads. The ground is covered with fresh green grass, the forest trees are in bloom, and the roads are suitable for traveling’ (Ja.I,86).

These are some pictures of the emerging spring flowers I have taken over the last week.

Thursday, March 31, 2011

Logic, Argument And Theology

In relation to my previous post read these Twenty Arguments For The Existence Of A Supreme Being and have a bit of a laugh. I apologize for the uneven and untidy spacing. Try as I might it just wouldnt go the way I wanted it. Perhaps someone ‘up there’ was annoyed.

1. TRANSCENDENTAL ARGUMENT, a.k.a. PRESUPPOSITIONALIST (1) If reason exists then God exists. (2) Reason does exist. (3) Therefore, God exists.

2. COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT, a.k.a. FIRST CAUSE ARGUMENT (1) If I say something must have a cause, it has a cause. (2) I say the universe must have a cause. (3) Therefore, the universe has a cause. (4) Therefore, God exists.

3. ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (I) (1) I define God to be X. (2) Since I can conceive of X, X must exist. (3) Therefore, God exists.

4. ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (II) (1) I can conceive of a perfect God. (2) One of the qualities of perfection is existence. (3) Therefore, God exists.

5. MODAL ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (1) God is either necessary or unnecessary. (2) God is not unnecessary, therefore he must be necessary. (3) Therefore, God exists.

6.ARGUMENT FROM DESIGN, a.k.a. GOD OF THE GAPS, a.k.a. TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (I) 1) Check out the world/universe/giraffe. Isn't it complex? (2) Only a supreme being could have made them so complex. (3) Therefore, God exists. 7. ARGUMENT FROM BEAUTY, a.k.a. DESIGN/TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (II) 1) Isn't that baby/sunset/flower/tree beautiful? (2) Only a loving creator could have made them so beautiful. (3) Therefore, God exists. 8. ARGUMENT FROM MIRACLES (I) (1) My aunt had cancer. (2) The doctors gave her all these horrible treatments. (3) My aunt prayed to God and now she doesn't have cancer. (4) Therefore, God exists. 9. MORAL ARGUMENT (I) (1) Person X, a well-known atheist, was morally inferior to the rest of us. (2) Therefore, God exists. 10. MORAL ARGUMENT (II) (1) In my younger days I was a cursing, drinking, smoking, gambling, child- molesting, thieving, murdering, bed-wetting bastard. (2) That all changed once I became religious. (3) Therefore, God exists. 11. ARGUMENT FROM INTIMIDATION, a.k.a. TOMAS DE TORQUEMADA'S ARGUMENT (1) See this bonfire? (2) Therefore, God exists. 12. ARGUMENT FROM NUMBERS (1) Billions of people believe in some sort of supreme being. (2) They can't all be wrong, can they? (3) Therefore, God exists. 13. ARGUMENT FROM INCOMPLETE DESTRUCTION (1) A plane crashed killing 143 passengers and crew. (2) But one child survived with only third-degree burns. (3) Therefore, God exists. 14. ARGUMENT FROM POSSIBLE WORLDS (1) If things had been different, then things would be different. (2) That would be bad. (3) Therefore, God exists. 15. ARGUMENT FROM CROCKERY (1) Pots don't go around giving orders to the potter who made them. (2) Therefore, God exists. 16. ARGUMENT FROM CREATIVE INTERPRETATION (1) God is: (a) The feeling you have when you look at a newborn baby. (b) The love of a mother for her child. (c) That little still voice in your heart. (d) Humankind's potential to overcome their difficulties. (e) How I feel when I look at a sunset. (f) The taste of ice cream on a hot day. (2) Therefore, God exists. 17. ARGUMENT FROM POSTMODERNISM (1) I'm going to prove to you that God exists. (2) [Insert any of the other arguments on this page in here.] (3) [Atheist refutes argument.] (4) I cannot prove there is a supreme being any more than anyone of us can prove we really exist in a tangible world. (5) Therefore, God exists.18. ARGUMENT FROM FORTUITOUS COINCIDENCE (1) What are the odds of that happening? (2) Pretty long, I’ll bet. (3) Therefore, God exists. 19. ARGUMENT FROM MYSTERIOUS USE OF PREPOSITIONS (1) It is impossible to disprove God with your puny human intellect unless you are above God. (2) Are you higher than God? (3) I’ll take that puzzled look on your face as a 'No.' (4) Therefore, God (being the highest thing ever) exists. 20. ARGUMENT FROM HURT FEELINGS (1) God exists. (2) [Atheist makes counterarguments.] (3) I am deeply offended that you do not believe what I do. (4) Therefore, God exists.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Not Dead But Ailing

God may not be dead but he is certainly ailing – at least in some places. Surveys and statistics indicate that religion is heading for extinction in nine countries. To find out which ones go to http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12811197