(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. - So it's not a job to kick off the series really. So this series is on worker's spiritual practice. And when we're talking about it in our meetings, we're sort of thinking yeah, be good if we made it as broad as possible, as relevant to as many of you as possible. So what I'm gonna talk about is a model that, well actually it's not a traditional model, it's something that appeared in a book in the 90s by some of the called Reginald Ray and the book was called Buddhist Saints in India. And Reginald Ray comes from the Tibetan tradition. And what he, in his book, what he uncovered really in looking at the history of Buddhism was that it wasn't that, 'cause the traditional understanding is of having a two-tier model in Buddhism, of having monks and lay people. And when Sangeracchids have founded the Western Buddhist order, he, I think one of the problems that he saw really in that model was that it didn't really leave unless you became a monk. It wasn't very graded, you know, you're either a monk or you weren't really expected to practice. And he just didn't agree with that. And I think he's Tibetan teachers, even though they're embedded in a monastic tradition. I don't think they really agreed with it either. 'Cause it's not what the Mahayana is saying, really. Mahayana's saying, everybody can practice. So what Ray came up with was, well, when he looked at how things actually were in Buddhism, he saw that there were just two types of people, there were three. There was what he called a settlementastic, which is the monks, the lay practitioner, something he called a forest renunciant. So in the Buddhist time, there were all forest renunciants, basically. They were all living in the forest, and then they were coming into the village of the town, beg for arms, get their arms, then just go back into the forest and live in quite difficult conditions. But then that later, you know, there was such a settling down into the formation and monasteries and things like that. And you ended up with this kind of two-tier model. So I think, I mean, I'll just put my cars on the table. I'm really in favor of the three-fold model. I think it's really good, because I think what it does is it brings in the possibility of the originator or the solitary person, which is what I'm doing, the solitary person working away in some way or other who can then contribute something towards the whole. And, you know, if you look at the history of Buddhism, it's always, it's gone through various phases. It's gone through the three great phases, the Hinyana, Mahayana, Vadriyana phases. And you could see those as having a kind of a natural life to them, where it's almost like anything, really. You start something, when you start it, it's all new. You're just making it up as you go along. You need trying to sort of keep to the truth of things and stuff like that. But over time, it becomes established. And then it becomes the only thing that there is. It becomes everything. And then it almost kind of starts to sort of choke on its own success. It's a bit like American, you know, consumerism. It's just become everything. And it starts to choke on its own pollutants. It suffers because of its success. And you then need something new brought in that refreshes the whole thing, that has new ideas, that doesn't just run with what's been happening before. And another in economic theory, there was a guy called Russian economist Kondratiev, who was around sort of 1920s or something like that. And he posited a cycle that happens every 60 or 70 years where you get this thing happening where, you know, things fall to pieces and then you get innovation and then it grows. And then eventually it all kind of comes to a head and it chokes on its own pollutants. And then you need a new something new happening. And I think this is what has just happened, actually. We had the 1930s, Great Depression, which was the last trough. And we're just, we're getting the next one now, you know. So we need new innovation to happen, to bring us out of it. So you had, yeah, you had the Hinyana. And then that somehow sort of got a bit lost. And then you had the Mahayana, which brought in the altruistic dimension to things. And then in a way, each lasted for about 500 years and that got a bit lost and maybe it got a bit too cosmic. And then you had the Vajrayana, which brought everything down to earth again and made it, embodied it. You know, made it, everything had relationships with actual people, you know, gurus and symbolism that you could actually relate to that's quite there in your face sort of thing. So this thing of like having innovation every so often, I think is that, you know, you can see it's there in the Buddhist tradition. And I think what Reginald Ray has done is he's sort of, he's drawn a model out that actually is saying, yeah, this is relevant, you know, to us now, really. I mean, it is interesting how his model has been received in the, not the after the year, the T3 Ratner Buddhist community. Some people do, I accept it. Some people say, no, it's not relevant to us. And some people are quite in favor of it. And I think those who don't really accept it are often those people who are kind of quite embedded in the institutions who are in a way, they're part of the, you know, what needs to be innovated. And those who don't favor of it are the innovators. So I think it just points to the fact that different people will have different responses. And in a way, it's an innovator's model. It's bringing in the innovator, saying the innovator is important in some way. I mean, what people often say is, oh, yeah, but, you know, if I say, well, I identify with the forest renunciants, they'll say, we don't live in a forest, which is kind of like, it's hard to answer, but it's a little bit beside the point, you know, because the point is, the forest renunciant is pointing to the innovator, of the artist, or the scholar, or the meditator, or whatever. Okay, so in a talk given earlier this year by Vajigupta called something like radical, something to do with radical Sangha, he sort of, he changed the three names. So he's kind of, I think he's trying to sort of update it a bit for us. So he calls the, he calls the forest renunciant, the retreatant, the settlement estate, the Sangha builder, and the layperson, the socially engaged Buddhist, or the social activist. And I think, you know, we can look at the, I think these are quite, quite good, actually. And I think we can look at where we fit in with each of these categories. So as a way of like, what we're gonna do over the course is we're gonna look at the different categories in turn. So tonight we're gonna look at retreatant, or forest renunciant, and I'm gonna talk a little bit about my experience of that. And then next week, is it, which one we're doing next week? Yeah, so next week, DiMala, we'll be doing the Sangha builder. So she, you know, she's the chairman of the Center, and so that's very much her role. And then the third, the next, the following week, we'll do the socially engaged Buddhist, which is like the Buddhist working in the world, which Chandon now has had a lot of experience of. So he's gonna talk about that. So I'm just gonna sort of go through the different ones, and say, you know, what they do, what's the sort of thing outlines them. So the retreatants, basically all the forest renunciant deliberately steps back from society, or from the community, really. In order to practice the dharma in a particular way. So that might be intensively getting into study, studying the dharma, living in a, you know, kind of a cave or whatever Kamal Shila did at 18 month retreat, not something, well, a few years ago, for instance. Or full-time artists. And their aim is to maximise the amount of time that they give to that. And, you know, to have a quiet life, to have to be in the conditions where that can happen. And their role, really, is to guard in a way. To guard the founding principles, you know, to sort of stay in touch with what the dharma actually is, by studying intensively about it, or by meditating on it. You know, having a sense of proportion about it. There isn't sort of solid in any way, by actually having to bring it into the world, or come into contact with where there's less clarity, or there's less space to really think about it. So, yeah, so the aim is to get away and purify that inspiration or that understanding or whatever. And they can come in and remind the rest of us of the depths in things, of the real meaning, the, you know, the, you know, so I remember Arloka. I mean, he's one of the most accomplished artists we've got in the movement. And he's so fantastic when it comes to talking about symbolism. I mean, he's just got so much at his fingertips, 'cause he's just doing it all the time. He's just constantly doing paintings and stuff. And, yeah, so that's the retreatant. And then the Sangha builder. So the Sangha builder is at the interface between the Sangha and the surrounding society. So, they live and work in the institutions. So, you know, people who live and work in the Buddhist center here, also who run our donation training retreats or what sort of thing. They help ordinary people kind of connect with the Dharma. And attract people, do all advertising. In a way, they're kind of like the kind of public face of Buddhism, they're the face that people meet. You know, very much involved in trying to put that into practice to exemplify the Dharma, you know, because that is what is attractive. That's how Sangha is built through, through the four Sangha Avastives, exemplification, beneficial activity, kindly speech, and Dharma, generosity. Yeah, and, you know, the people who put their, you know, two years of their lives into converting this, what was a warehouse here into a Buddhist center, you know, very much Sangha builders, and some of them gone on to, like one of them's very much involved in Buddha field, as a central pillar of Buddha field, you know. So, kind of like doing a lot of the work and practicing intensively in the institutions. And then you've got the socially engaged Buddhist or social activists, what Ray called the lay practitioner. So, these Buddhists step out into society. There's an emphasis on the Dharma transforming the world. So it's a bit like the hearts are in just the world, you know, people wanting to have an effect, wanting to create a, you know, create a better world. And, yeah, if I've got to talks about, sometimes they can be explicitly Buddhist, whether sort of saying that the Buddhist, or it can be more kind of implicit. So, you know, like I said, breath works, in an example of, or John Cabot's in. It's not, they're not explicitly Buddhist when they go out and teach mindfulness, for instance, but it is, the aim is to get that out in the world, helping people. And so each of the three roles, or whatever, in a way, they're all important, well, they're very much all important to the whole. So they all contribute something to the whole, you know. And in a way, if one of them is missing, a major sort of part of the sanger is missing, you know, if the retreatant is missing, that inspiration, you know, isn't fed, you know, isn't being regularly fed. If there's no institutions, there's no place for people to meet, you know, there's no place for people to come into contact with the sanger. And if there's no lay practitioners, it's all a bit academic, it's not kind of getting funneled out into the world, you know, it's not meeting the world. And I think we could see the three different roles, or whatever they call them, as all potentially present within an individual. So it's like we all need to do our bit. I mean, it's not good that we have particular predilections to do one or the other. I think that's the case, you know, but it depends on what we feel most comfortable with, what we want to do with our lives. So I feel most comfortable sitting at home writing a book, you know, but, you know, yeah, we all feel comfortable in one or another of the areas. But in a way, we need to develop all the areas. We need to develop the ones we're not so comfortable with, you know, and we need to kind of come into the centre and get involved, or if we're for a renunciant or a retreatant. You know, we need to sort of be, you know, be able to be, you know, in the world, and not sort of be kind of precious about what we've developed and things. And Hakwen talks about the life of activity and the life of calm, and saying that the life of calm on its own, just, you know, being able to be calm by yourself, is not, you know, inferior to the life of activity where you can actually be calm, but you can also be in the world, take that into the world, and not be afraid of it being sort of, you know, solid or whatever. So it's like, you know, they're all needed, all three poles are needed. And they're all contributing something very specific to the necessary, to the whole. And they all have the dangers as well, you know, so the danger of the retreatant or the forest renunciant is that they live a kind of sort of, what we call a day-go-like life, a god-like life, where everything's gray and you just do what you want and, you know, kind of. And the danger is that it just kind of drift away from the Sangha or from kind of like what's relevant, and forget about the fact that, you know, what you're doing is beneficial to other people. You need to bring it into the world. You need to bring it to people in the Sangha. The danger of the Sangha builder, to the Sangha builder, is that they get, this is the kind of algebra, they get a bit stuck and a bit habitual, because it's often a repetitive task doing the same thing, meeting people every day, you know, kind of doing. And sort of settle down a bit. I think that's why Ray called them, settle monastics, and become a bit conservative, and become not open, not so open to hearing what the voice from the forest is saying, or the meditator, or, you know, or even the meditator within themselves. You know, they forget about the need to go on retreat or to connect with their inspiration. And the social activist in the world, the lay practitioner, their danger is that they suffer burnouts and, or they become confused about what the Dharma is and what it isn't. And, you know, in a way, what happens is they get a bit sort of overwhelmed by the amount of stuff that they've got to do in the world. So it's a bit like the dangers that just lose that thread of connection, you know, with the Dharma and with the Sangha. But, you know, like when all three sort of strands are quite strong, then that's a very, that's quite a powerful thing to have. Because, in a way, all the bases are covered. You know, you're able to be, you keep your inspiration going, you can do the ordinary stuff, you know, and you can relate to the institutions. And you've got the energy that's required through, you know, that's needed through being in the world. Yeah, so, you know, that... So, in a way, meeting all three bases actually gives you kind of kind of powerful base for your spiritual life. So, it might be that, you know, somebody is working in the world. But they balance that out by, say, living in a Buddhist community or something like that. So they would get a kind of, they would get the institutional side of things as well. So, I hope that's kind of gives you a clear overview of this model and that you find, you can kind of connect with it in some way in terms of the theme which is "Work of Spiritual Practice." So, what I'm going to do now is I'm just going to talk for a little bit about my experience of being the retreatant of the forest room and soon. And kind of trying to relate that to "Work of Spiritual Practice." Okay. Member, do you, are you going to do that on both sides of the tea break? No, I'll do it before, and then we'll have some discussion afterwards here. Okay, so, I feel like I've only really started doing what I feel like I was destined to do about seven years ago, and I'm now in '55. I used to be really confused about as to why my brother, who's an architect, just managed to get one job after another, and he's doing what he wants to do, and he gets paid loads of money for it. And I felt, how come that hasn't happened to me, you know? And I suppose like that's the main reason. It's like, I don't, you know, as a forest renunciant, oh, you know, I wouldn't say forest renunciant, because people would go, "You don't live in a forest." I'll say retreatant. As a retreatant, you don't get paid anything for it, basically. So unless you've got a kind of rich benefactor or something, it's very difficult to do. You know, you've got to find a way of going, living in a cave for next to nothing. And you can't really do that. If you want to live in Manchester or in a city, you know, you need a certain amount of money to live on. You don't live in a cave for a while. No, I don't know. So, yeah. So in a way, I kind of, I always thought it would do something substantial with me intellect, you know? But I've never, you know, I got to like 48, and I thought, "This is not happening." You know, if you don't do it by, I mean, 50s. I've had it, you know. It's just been a myth, you know? So I actually set about, and I thought, "Oh, you know, come on. Take yourself seriously." So I, I started, I started asking people for money, you know, for writing the book. So I actually entered into the real forest renunciant lifestyle, and I was actually sticking my hand out and waiting by the door. Well, you know, not literally, but, you know, asking friends and trying to do it in a way that the, the, the forest renunciant would do, which is like not having any expectations of anything coming back. I feel like having a sense that the other person is totally free to say no, and has, you know, I want them to, to say no if they mean no, and I totally accept it. So, but actually, it really worked. You know, I had to sort of put a fair amount of time into how I did it, and thinking how I'd do it properly, but, but it worked. So, you know, for a couple of years, I managed to keep myself going. And, and it, it really focused, focused me mind actually on, oh, actually no. You know, this is really valuable what I'm doing, and, and I'm going to put this effort into trying to get the money because it's valuable. So, it was quite a lesson for me that, doing that. I mean, in the end, I ended up sort of going part-time in the, working part-time in the cafe and getting some support from the mom who had two pensions, and then I've inherited some money now, so I'm all, I'm all right, you know. But, but it still, you know, means that there's a, you know, I've still got to pay for an editor and things like, you know, so it's, there's still the issue isn't in the, it's not so bad now. There's still the issue of like not getting any money coming in. And, but it's a, it does seem like that, you know, because the Dharma is not supposed to be, is supposed to be free. So, it's like, you can't, well traditionally, you can't charge for it, because it would solely it in some way. You know, it's like saying, it's like charging for the truth. I mean, you know, the truth is just the truth, isn't it? The truth just exists, so, yeah, I don't know. So, so, I mean, I've thought that, you know, it's gradually dawned on me, why that is, because I think you have to actually, you know, you're motivated, I'm quite worked with that, but you smell your motivation is kept pure by the fact that you don't get paid in for it. You know, there isn't any temptation to do to, you know. And actually, it gives you a kind of a, it gives you a kind of Dharma pride in some sort of way. Like, oh yeah, no, that is what I'm doing. I'm working on the Dharma, and I'll get me money from somewhere, but this is the Dharma, you know. So, it keeps, it helps keep the Dharma pure in your mind and distinct from all other things, which people charge money for or whatever. So, I think it's, you know, I used to think more about it a bit, but I think I'm retrospect. It's a good idea. Well, the other things that I have, I've found I have to work with a bit. I mean, nobody is obliged to, to listen to what you've got to say. You know, nobody's a blind. Nobody has to read your book or agree with your opinion and anything like that. And I think I've had to work on understanding that or allowing that. And to sort of be patient about how I put things across. I mean, you know, what can happen is that the artist's scholar can get a bit impatient about people not understanding or not seeing what to them is obvious. And yeah, I think one of my tendencies in me writing has been a bit too, like I'm dead excited about the ideas. But then when it comes to communicating, and I can go, oh, like that. And I just kind of dump them all in the reader's lap and they go, it's a bit like it's too much, you know. So, I'm not really getting into the reader's mindset, you know. What is going to help them take this in? What is going to, you know, having some empathy for, you know, the person on the other end of the communication. So, yeah, so that is something that I have to work on. Or, you know, I'm finding that I've been working a bit with Vishipani. He's been helping me as a kind of editor. And I'm getting a handle on that a bit more now. And I'm starting to sort of see the benefits of it. Another thing I've found important is, in being on my own, is trying to keep a connection with the kind of lineage of P, you know, I suppose the tradition, really, of what I'm involved in. So, I remember last about a year ago, I started reading Sangerachi to his memoirs going, I've only ever read a couple of them. So, I started reading them. And then, it was fantastic because it just put me in contact with the whole tradition that I'm involved in. And I go, "Oh, yeah, this is what I'm doing." You know, I mean, I'm doing the same thing that he was doing, really. But, you know, 40 years later, or 50 years later. And I'm sort of, yeah, I can see he had the same sort of problems and stuff like that. And then, you know, yeah, it's very important, I think, for the solitary practitioner to keep that thread of connection with the kalyanamitras, the people who respect. So, I started doing a meditation where I'd imagine all the two people, Surna and Kamalashili were ordained me. And then, all the kind of people I really respect in the order. And then, Sangerachi took in his teachers and all the teachers of the past. And then, they all, I'd imagine them witnessing me then, doing my visualization practice and have a look at Teshwa. So, it's a bit like, I'm going, yeah, it's really important what these people think of me, you know. So, I think when I do that, it makes what I'm doing a lot easier, because I can get into worrying about my own authority and their authority. And, you know, I'm going off on my own. Things like that. Because being on your own, you are on your own. So, it's me like, as long as I'm sure I'm embedded in that sort of live tradition where I'm connected with these people, then I relax on some level. I go, yeah, you know, I'm all right, I just need to keep doing this. And keep having a sense of caring what they think and respecting and all that sort of stuff. Yeah, I mean, I went to Oxford University in March to a colloquium on Buddhism and science. And I was in this room with, there was about 70 of us. And most of them were kind of professors and, you know, Buddhist scholars, people with Nobel Prize nominations. And, I mean, there's a, I don't know, it's a bit like, as a practitioner, and practitioners as well. So, there were monks, there was a Tibetan nun there. And it's a bit like, I kind of, I was there, I experienced it, I said things. And then afterwards, I kind of experienced all these poles, you know, of what do they think? You know, like some of them were really academic and I could feel like the pole towards academia. And sort of worrying about it that, oh no, it's a bit like that's not practice, you know. You know, I'm a practitioner, I'm interested in studying the Dharma, but I'm a practitioner as well. And it's a bit like kind of, there's all, yeah, I just experienced kind of quite a sort of slightly destructive lot of tensions happening afterwards. And it's made me think a bit about some of the, I suppose, yeah, some of the dangers of being on your own. You know, among, in a way, quite a lot of powerful intellects and practitioners that come from other traditions. And I think there is a danger in that, that you kind of get a bit knocked off be more, you're not quite substantial enough to pull to your own in all of that, you know. And I don't know, you know, maybe there's a positive to be brought out of that, which is that, well, maybe it's saying something to me that I need to become more substantial, or I need to be more certain about what it is that I believe in, or what it is that I'm kind of standing for, or whatever. And I kind of felt the real sort of need to sort of connect with me practice, to connect with the basics or something. And I kind of, I suppose, a sort of sympathy with Sankarachita and what he must have experienced when it was like a young man in India. And he would get invited to speak at some all-India religious conference, and he'd be like the only Buddhist. And he's in his twenties, and they're all going, tell him that Buddhism's part of Hinduism, you know, which obviously isn't. But you know, it's like just that pressure to go along with different views and things. Yeah, and I think, well, maybe I think just to finish, I think, you know, we can always come back to that thing that, to what we're most comfortable with, I think, as well. So I think maybe my answer to my own question I've just posed is that I come back to just sitting in my flat and just enjoying thinking, you know. And sort of forgetting about the pause and the other. So I kind of come back and kind of refresh, you know, my own inspiration, once I've been out interacting a bit like I did in the sort of Oxford. And then, you know, come back again with something to offer. Okay, that's it. We hope you enjoyed the talk. Please come and help us keep this free at freebuddhistaudio.com/community. And thank you. (Music) (Music) [BLANK_AUDIO]
