(upbeat music) - This podcast is brought to you by Free Buddhist Audio, the Dharma for real life. Our work is funded entirely by donations from our generous listeners. If you would like to help us keep this free, come and join us at freebuddhistaudio.com/community. Thank you and happy listening. - Thank you very much, Pyrami. So, getting it. I've just come back from America and while I was there, one of the things I did was a study retreat. It was a pretty intensive study, I have to tell you. And getting it became rather a theme. People would say, "Well, I kind of get it, "but I just don't get it." So, given that my brief is to talk about study as a weight of wisdom, I thought, "Well, what we need to do is think about "how to move from getting it to getting it." Getting it, right. So, I want to talk about this in terms of the middle way. Particularly because the middle way happens to be something I'm working on at the moment, so I wanted to give a talk about it. You know the middle way, it's about transcending opposites. It's not just about finding like a middle point between opposites, it's about transcending them. So, I just wanted to have a look at various ways in which we can relate to Dharma study, various ways in which we can go between extremes maybe and something about how to find that middle way with study. I think something it's very important to be aware of with Dharma study is that we go about it in very different ways and there are very many quite legitimate ways to think about Dharma study. I went on an event, a seminar at Marginaloka in March, which was a collection of scholars of various persuasions from around the movement. We had a question and answer session with Sangarakhta with Bante. And I was very struck by how in answer to a number of the questions, he started off by saying, well, people are very different in that respect. And that phrase has resonated with me a lot and I thought, well, it's true of study. People relate to study very, very differently because we're temperamentally very different. And I think that's the first thing I want to say, don't feel that there's just one way to do Dharma study. There are many ways. So I want to just run through a few pairs of opposites if you like, don't have very long to speak. So there'll be kind of headlines really. You just, just things to think about, I guess. So the first one I want to consider is theory and practice. I noticed doing study that quite often there's a kind of, there can be rather two schools here that can be people who are very comfortable with and enjoy abstract thinking and feel that it's very important. And then there are other people who feel that the very important thing is to talk about our own lives and what's really going on. And that in a way, all this abstract stuff is a bit beside the point, you know, or even being in one's head and out of touch and all that sort of thing. Whereas the abstract thinker can, with justice, I suppose, sometimes feel that the person who insists on relating everything to our own experience is in a sense being, well, I'd use the word reductionist. What I mean is reducing, if you like, Dinandi's vast sky to this particular star. And I suppose I wanted to suggest that we might try to see if we can find a middle way between these positions. And some of us are going to be very much more at home in the world of the abstract, so to speak. And some of us are going to be very, very much more at home in something more down to earth. And somehow, whichever part of that spectrum we're on, it seems to me that we're going to need to find a balance somehow, because ultimately, it's going to be about integrating both perspectives. We're trying to, in relating to the dharma, relate to something that's actually beyond or outside our current experience. And at the same time, we are trying to relate it to ourselves. We're trying to ground it in ourselves. So we have that kind of play going on. I think it relates to a number of other things. The play between the ideal and the real. And the play between the conceptual and the non-conceptual. I think Kula Prabadi quite a good job last night of arguing for the value of clear thinking. And that just because wisdom is beyond the reach of thought doesn't mean that we don't have to think about things. The beyond part means we think, and then it's beyond that. We can't sort of just duck underneath it. At least that's the way I take it. But again, you know, dharma study, if you think about it, involves quite a lot of grappling with concepts. But also, we get a lot of opportunity to do very non-conceptual things. We can dwell in the world of images. We can dwell in the world of stories. And again, it's probably useful for us to experiment with both, if you like. There's going to be one where we're more at home, probably. But it's good to sort of get a balance there. I wanted to read you a little bit from Vercentra's new book, Tales of Freedom. Great tiger on the front. And you just say something interesting, I think, about conceptualizing. I've been thinking a bit about this, following on from a retreat I did last year, where we were talking about refining our car conceptualizing. So that, because sometimes our concepts are rather blunt instruments, you could say. Actually, what we need to do is to keep refining the way we think about things. And I like the way Vercentra puts it here. Clearly, in order to describe the world to ourselves, we need to use language. Ideally, there should be a spiraling dialogue between our experience and our description of it. Experiencing life as deeply as we can, we should hone our language into as a wieldy a tool, as possible for describing it. This refinement of our conceptual description will then allow us to dive more deeply into our experience. The continuing effort to explore experience and refine our picture of it will free us from false and inadequate ideas about the nature of life and how we exist, and enable us to experience ever more fully. So you get the picture, ideally, a kind of play, if you like, between concepts and language on the one hand, and experience, which language can never quite capture on the other. We've got a play between those things. I think the play between meditation and study is interesting here too. So another related thing, another pair of in-way opposites, that's taking things literally and taking things metaphorically. Bantier once said that at least half the questions he's asked, he's asked because people are taking things too literally. So I think that's very interesting. On the other hand, I think, it's a trouble with describing a middle way, it can all sound rather tricky. There is a bit of a catch to taking things metaphorically also. I think sometimes we can be a bit too quick to take things metaphorically. We can think, oh, that's metaphorical, somehow that doesn't have something to do with me. That's in some way, that's outside of me. Again, I think there's something of a play to happen here. We can take things too literally, sure. We can also sometimes afford to take things more literally than we do, I somehow feel. Plus, there's the added twist that we can take our metaphors literally, which is that you can come up with a really brilliant image for something, an idea that really seems to capture just exactly your experience. And then you can get rather fond of it so that you come to almost feel that that image, whatever it is, the cave, the piece of toast, the mountain, whatever it is, somehow is your experience. It's not just evoking it for you in a helpful way. It's sort of become, you've reified it, it's become literal. So, rather a lot to think about in the whole area of literalism and metaphor. I'll try to not talk about that anymore either. I'm not a fond of metaphors. The third area, objective and subjective. Now, when we're studying the Dharma, what we're trying to do is to take on a different way of seeing things. We're trying to, if you like, set those topsy-turvy views upright. We're trying to get to grips with a worldview, which is not the worldview we currently have. And in a way, the Dharma gives us a very good objective framework to do that from. On the other hand, I think there's a certain value, of course, in having a subjective attitude to Dharma study. A couple of years ago, I was on retreat here, and I've more or less had it with Dharma study, I have to tell you. It was a study retreat, but I think I'd just finished editing rather a complicated book. And, you know, I wouldn't walk across the room to meet a concept at that time. (audience laughing) I would have had it, but during the course of that retreat, realized that that was because it had just become a whole bunch of words, a whole bunch of concepts. And, you know, 100,000 words, a lot in a book, to have all of that wandering around in your mind is a lot. And I realized that to keep my own interest in the Dharma alive, I really absolutely had to bring myself into the picture, which is not the kind of advice one always feels like one wants to take, but I sort of thought, well, yes, that's true. And I sort of regrouped around what I myself was interested in, you know, and it really, I felt I learned something, actually, because I thought, well, unless we really go with what interests us, what grabs us, and actually organize our Dharma study around that, well, it's actually, again, we're separate from the Dharma. It's just as important that it has its subjective dimension as its objective dimension. That's what I've ended up thinking. And we can relate this to the personal and the impersonal, as well, I think. In a way, which, let me invoke method and doctrine before you hear at this point. Okay, there are many truths about in the Dharma, which are universal truths. In a way, they're impersonal. They're not about me, you or anybody in particular. They just refer to life in general. You know, we can fill in the blank there. There are other kinds of teachings which, in a sense, are personal. This is what's meant by method and doctrine. The certain things which are just doctrinal, they're true according to Buddhism. There are other things which are methodological. They're a teaching that's intended in a particular circumstance. So, for example, if I'm falling asleep in meditation, well, you might advise me to sort of, you know, find more awareness, find more energy, brighten up and all of that. And that would be good advice. But if the person next to me is, you know, wired, high as a kite, you know, anxious, whatever, and you say, well, you know, just keep on brightening up and keep on, you know, you have to go up for more alertness and awareness, well, that's not going to work. What they need to do is relax, calm down. You know, the opposite of me, actually. So, and that's a very simple and obvious example, but I think there are very many cases in the Dharma where it's not that obvious. But actually, what we're talking about is method. You know, when we say Buddhism says this, you say, well, does it say it universally, or does it say it in this case, and may it say the opposite in some other case. So, it's very interesting, I think, to think about that. And another thing on this same area, I guess, authority as against one's own experience. This is another related area, I think. Kula Prabh was talking about the Kalamasuta last night. The Kalamasuta says, don't go on the consideration, the monk is our teacher, or don't go on tradition, don't go on here, so you're kind of looking at, well, what authority to base yourself on? There's a lot to be said here, but I just wanted to mention something that came out of the same question and answer session with Banti. We said something like, well, do you feel that your word should be taken as an authority? Do you feel that when we read, you want me to listen to your talks? Which say, oh, Bantis said that, so that's it. And he suggested that we might consider words in that way to be an authority in the same way that we might quote a poet, say, or a philosopher. And I found that very helpful, because I find when, you know, if I want to quote Sangarachita, which I often do, I find that the reason why is because I want to make a point myself, and then I want to substantiate that point with something else that, you know, gives it some weight and I think is well expressed. And, well, that's true. I mean, I might, I would very typically, in fact, quote a poet or perhaps a philosopher. And I found it useful to think of quoting my own teacher in that same way. Do you see what I mean? It's an authority in the sense of something being well expressed that you feel to be true, rather than simply, he said it, so it has to be true. There's rather a difference there. I found that very useful to reflect on. OK, a few more pairs of opposites. Simplicity and complexity. I don't want to say much about this, but I think, well, a friend of mine said to me a few months ago that he felt that the world was divided into two kinds of people, people who are likely to say. But it's all so simple. And people who say, well, it's all a lot more complicated than that, yeah. And furthermore, he said that those two kinds of people find it very difficult to talk to each other. And I thought this was a very good point, actually, especially if we're studying together. It's useful one to watch for. And it's possible that the simplicity may become simplistic, and it's possible that the complexity may just become way too complicated. So there actually are, if we can find ways of talking to each other, there are ways we can help each other out here as well, that, yes, viewed in one way, the Dharma is very complex, viewed in other way. It's all very simple. And somehow, we have to find a middle way between those two things. OK, lightness and seriousness. So I like the-- I think Bantamus like this too, because he quotes it often. Yates says, wisdom is a butterfly and not a gloomy bird of prey. I think we can afford, in fact, we have to have a sense of lightness when we're studying the Dharma. In fact, we can play. We can play with ideas. We can play with concepts. We're not going to break anything. We can really experiment. We can enjoy it. And also, as we'll know from our Dharma study, it's very important to hold our concepts lightly. They're provisional. Our understandings are provisional. A light holding of them is just really what we need to do. At the same time-- and I noticed Kula Prabhi using the word sobering more than once last night-- well, there's a seriousness about Dharma study, about Dharma practice. If we allow the Dharma to have its impact, it does have quite an impact. We could say it's a very serious matter. So again, we've got that sort of play. Is it light? Is it something to be taken very seriously? I think all of these things, what I'm trying to get at, is it's a matter of judgment. We have to be really, I suppose, taking a study as practice and noticing what's going on, noticing which extreme we're likely to be going to, all that sort of thing. This same area, I think there's a tendency to-- I notice in myself-- to either place too much weight on something or too little, to get things out of proportion in a way. I don't have to mention the issue of women in Buddhism in this context, so I won't. It's-- well, I will say one thing, though. That's that-- well, Sarah and I are putting together a book on Buddhism and gender next year, right? So we're hoping to explore the whole issue in more depth. And one of the things I like about that idea for a book is the diversity of perspectives that I hope it will allow for. I think to remember that it's possible to have very many different ways of seeing things, and also to not let ourselves be overbalanced. It makes me so sad, actually, especially in the context of our own movement to feel that one issue, if you like, and not necessarily that one, can be the thing that makes all the difference in some way. And one is getting things out of proportion, one really is. And I do think it's rather a tendency. I notice it in myself. I'll pick up, I don't know, a book we've published, which is lovely and perfect in almost all details and turn to the one page where there's a misprint that you think, oh, no, dear. And that's a trivial example. But I do somehow sense that this is something that I do. We all do quite a lot. It's easy to seize on something, and then stay seized on it. And at that point, that's our time for holding things lightly. Keep an open mind. You don't like the sound of it. All right, you want to discuss it, fine. Remember lightness at that time. That's all I would say. I guess related to this, how to put this. What do we think the dharma is? Sometimes I think we can think about it quite strictly. And other times, we look forward to think about it quite loosely. So loosely, for example. Well, I don't usually say this to very many people, so I don't know why I'm about to say it to all of you. [LAUGHTER] Well, something that seems to be something of a guiding principle in my life is the pop songs that wander through my head. And particularly, the songs are Paul Simon. I don't know why he's always got to me. He's always thought he's rather a good poet. But I didn't have to ever listen to them on CD anymore, because I can sort of go through my mind. And for the last couple of years, the one that's been in my mind is the one with the line, I got nothing to do today but smile, which has been so untrue, usually. [LAUGHTER] But in a sense, that's what's given me a sense of perspective again, right? It doesn't matter how little like smiling I feel. It doesn't matter how much I've got to do. I got nothing to do today but smile, right? So in a sense, that's a sort of truth teaching, in a sense. And I do think that such a broad approach can be useful. However, it's also the case that sometimes we just need to be very clear about distinctions, distinctions between the Dharma and other things. I guess that's one of the purposes of Dharma study, to really figure out what the Dharma's saying and also what it's not saying. And I think that what it's not part is the rather more difficult part for us to get hold of. I think because of cultural factors at the moment, that's not the way we think and think inclusive. So I think it's quite a challenge, intellectually and emotionally, just sometimes to think, OK, how clear can I be about what's being said and what's not being said? There's a possibility for a clarity of definition, I suppose, there. So just a couple more juxtapositions for you to think about. The poetic or the inspirational, as against the philosophical or the deconstructive. So poetry and prose have been something that I thought about a lot. I am passionately fond of poetry. I've spent a lot of my life floundering around in prose. It seems to me. I really appreciate the value of explanatory prose. I really love the way poems point beyond words, just a little way. They show you something. They explain it. They just show it to you. I love that sort of tension, if you like, between those two things. And that's only talking about words, of course. Those aren't our only way into the Dharma. But I think the point I wanted to make here is about, well, maybe right view and wrong view. We're contemplating right view when we contemplate something that's inspirational, something that's maybe poetic. Or if you like, we can deconstruct our experience. We can root out combat, wrong view. Both the legitimate ways into Dharma study. And again, I think a balance is going to be good for us. And if we look at the history of Buddhism, we can see that that's been important all the way through, in the sense, getting that balance right. So that we've got something that's not pessimistic, nor optimistic, but somehow beyond those things. Again, a lot more I could say here. I think, in a way, our whole approach to the Dharma is likely to be in here somewhere. And it's not that we can necessarily choose, actually. I mean, if we have a very critical deconstructing kind of mind, we can't just say, oh, well, I think I'd rather be poetic. And if we have a very poetic, responsive sort of attitude to things, we can't say, right, philosophy. We can learn to balance things. But I think one of the ways we do this is actually through studying with each other. We may find that temperamentally, we just are one or the other. And we can balance it out. But yes, we can learn a lot from each other in that respect. So yes, my last point, really, knowing and not knowing. What can we know? What do we not know? In what way is it useful to think of ourselves as learning and knowing? In what way is it just useful to think of our realizing more and more that we don't know, continuing to question? I do think that questioning is a crucial aspect of being a Dharma practitioner, I must say. But how do we balance faith and questioning? How do we spot it when our questioning is just becoming skeptical doubt? How do we spot it when our faith is becoming dependent on rules and rituals as ends in themselves? That's another, that's a traditional balance. But that's something else we've got to strike. In relation to which, I can't do a talk without reading a poem. So here's today's poem. This is a poem I came across, I guess, when I was still at school, but I hadn't seen it for years until it occurred to me I could get it off the internet, which I did. It's called In Broken Images. It's by Robert Graves, who is a English poet in the 20th century. He is quick thinking in clear images. I am slow thinking in broken images. He becomes dull, trusting to his clear images. I become sharp, mistrusting my broken images. Trusting his images, he assumes their relevance. Mistrusting my images, I question their relevance. Assuming their relevance, he assumes the fact. Questioning their relevance, I question the fact. When the fact fails him, he questions his senses. When the fact fails me, I approve my senses. He continues quick and dull in his clear images. I continue slow and clear in my broken images. He, in a new confusion of his understanding, I, in a new understanding of my confusion. So I suppose we could think of Dharma studies coming to an understanding of our confusion, in a sense. And also, I like to reflect on that idea of broken images, because I think I'm amassing little bits and pieces about the Dharma and making something of them, perhaps, somehow, feels little that way. So just to conclude, I want to convey that, in my opinion, Dharma study is a path for us, for all of us, whatever our temperament, whatever our interest. We can find a way into it. I think it's really important that we develop awareness of ourselves in terms of what our tendencies are when it comes to study, and I've given a few ideas of things I think we can look for. I think we can approach it all with imagination, lightness, and honesty, those are the main things. And we can learn from each other. I think that's the real value of studying together, that we do get just very, very different perspectives on things, and we are very different in this respect. I was in Ladakh last year, briefly, amongst other places. And I met a nun who is doing a really good job of initiating Dharma study for Ladakhi women. Ladakhi nuns and also lay women. Molly was there, too, right? And one of the things that really struck me was that there were nuns who were now on study retreats who had been nuns since they were little girls, and they were now in their maybe '60s or '70s, who were in tears, because for the first time, they understood the Dharma. So they'd been going through Dharma practice, if you like, for years and years. But Dharma teaching for women in Ladakh has not been attended to, let's put it like that. There's quite a long story here. So they just hadn't had access to it. And to feel the gratitude that they felt, just to have those explanations, really, was very well-moving and sort of chastening, really, makes one understand the value of what we have, perhaps a little more. A final pair of things to think about, utility and beauty. I think it's really good that we use what we know, as Kula Prabha was saying. I think bringing our Dharma study into our life all the time is what's going to make it real for us. At the same time, in a way, as well as getting it, we have to know that we're not getting it. We can't grasp it. We can't have it. There's something very beautiful and wonderful and even terrible, sometimes, mysterious about the Dharma and Dharma study, and that's something that we have to really get in there. This is something that's included in Vidya. Vidya, it's a word that it can refer to intellectual knowledge, intellectual understanding, and it goes right the way through aesthetically appreciation to some kind of intuitive wisdom or intuitive knowledge, it seems. It has many connotations. But for me, the word itself seems to encompass this kind of journey, this step, these steps, between getting it and getting it. So yes, one last, I don't seem to have quoted the Dharma at all in my talk. OK, here's one very brief quote. It's my absolute favorite so far. It's from the white Lotus Sutra. And somebody says in that sutra, when one hears the Buddha's teaching, one's heart is as peaceful as the sea. And it's my favorite, I suppose, because it's paradoxical. I mean, what could be, in a way, less peaceful than the sea? But I have a sense that underneath all the kind of wave storms and sort of general sort of hecticness of the sea, you have the deep rhythm, which is so peaceful of the ocean. And I think that's, in a way, what we can contact when we're really engaged, immersed in Dharma study. [APPLAUSE] [MUSIC PLAYING] We hope you enjoyed the talk. Please come and help us keep this free at freebuddhistaudio.com/community. And thank you. [MUSIC PLAYING] [MUSIC PLAYING] [MUSIC PLAYING] [BLANK_AUDIO]
