Questions on the Path of Practice
1. Making Aspirations
In reality, you do not need to make aspirations. When you are in extreme pain, you have no choice but to make an aspiration: a determination to escape suffering and reach the shores of bliss. At the peak of suffering, your aspiration arises without you having to consciously make it. True aspiration is not a conscious act; rather, it is a passive behavior that arises from necessity. There are two types of aspirations: one that comes from above, and one that comes from below. The one that comes from above originates in the mind, while the one that comes from below arises from the heart. Aspirations originating in the mind typically stem from superficial desires or goals; they are external, unconscious, and lack depth. In contrast, aspirations arising from within come from the heart and are often a self-aware action born out of your life experience, possessing subtle yet profound influence.
Generally speaking, ordinary beings’ aspirations come from the mind and are characterized by being external, superficial, and driven by temporary purposes; thus they cannot last long and often become mere slogans that fail to generate genuine motivation. True aspirations do not need to be vocalized; they are deep-seated and fundamental, lying hidden within life itself with eternal power. In fact, making an aspiration should not even be considered a problem; when it becomes an issue, it is usually false. Genuine aspirations are silent; they do not require manifestation or articulation—your efforts and diligent practice already express those aspirations.
Do we still need to emphasize making aspirations? On the path of practice, when making aspirations is emphasized, it essentially shows that you are not a truly self-aware practitioner. Those who genuinely intend and prepare for liberation have their profound wishes transformed into universal diligent practices—they do not need reminders or stimuli about what they should do through aspirational statements. An aspiration begins with desire but ends in non-desire; this marks its own conclusion as well as the conclusion of all practice. If you continuously hold onto desires, you will never attain liberation. Desire can be both motivation and bondage. Based on holding onto desires, true liberation occurs only when non-desire arrives. Desire is a story you firmly believe in; ultimately, you will lose it.
2. The Bodhicitta
At the beginning of our practice journey, we are often urged to generate bodhicitta—so what exactly is bodhicitta? Why should we cultivate bodhicitta? These questions need clarification before generating bodhicitta. From my perspective, bodhicitta is awareness; bodhicitta embodies equality; bodhicitta represents purity (detachment from all narratives); bodhicitta signifies liberation (freedom). In other words, bodhicitta has four characteristics: 1) awareness nature; 2) equality nature; 3) purity nature (detachment from all stories); 4) freedom nature (liberation).
Any heart possessing these four characteristics is considered bodhicitta; any heart lacking these four characteristics is not bodhicitta. What then constitutes bodhicitta? To elaborate further: bodhicitta is your true nature because our true nature inherently possesses these four characteristics. What we refer to as generating bodhi does not mean creating bodhicitta but rather discovering it. Why discover bodhicitta? Because only with bodhicitta can one attain liberation. When you find and possess bodhicitta, liberation is imminent—that’s why we emphasize generating this state.
Bodhicitta has always been present; it follows us at all times—even during moments of confusion or ignorance—it remains intact and undiminished. Right here and now, you possess buddhi-cittā: its brilliance universally shines forth—you just haven’t recognized it yet nor utilized its benefits fully for yourself yet. Generating buddhi-cittā means discovering this inherent quality within yourself and using it as a tool for liberation. Discovering this buddhi-cittā is crucial for attaining freedom—that’s why we stress generating this state so much! How do you understand generating buddhi-cittā?
3. The Bodhisattva Path
Some people genuinely believe there exists a distinction between Mahayana (Great Vehicle) and Hinayana (Small Vehicle) practices in spiritual cultivation: focusing solely on oneself belongs to Hinayana while having intentions or actions aimed at helping others falls under Mahayana practices according to their understanding—wherein actions of Mahayana practitioners are termed “Bodhisattva actions” while those of Hinayana practitioners aren’t considered so at all! Is this really true?
I don’t share such views regarding Bodhisattva actions! Any intention towards liberation through practice or action qualifies as Bodhisattva action! In other words: anyone who works diligently on their inner heart qualifies as a Bodhisattva—any action stemming from such inner work counts as Bodhisattva action too! Actions taken by Mahayana practitioners qualify as Bodhisattva actions while those taken by Hinayana practitioners equally qualify—they actually aren’t distinct categories at all! All practitioners stand equal regardless of which methods they follow or which paths they walk upon! The definition of Bodhisattva action cannot hinge solely upon whether one helps others but must instead focus on whether efforts were made towards refining one’s own heart!
If an individual’s actions aim at helping others without first working on their own heart—that person merely engages in moralistic acts akin to Lei Feng’s altruism rather than genuine Bodhisattva action! To determine if someone’s behavior constitutes Bodhisattva action requires examining whether their deeds arise outwards toward others while also returning inwardly back toward themselves—whether such behavior aims towards achieving liberation! If not—it cannot be deemed genuine Bodhisattva action! From this perspective then—those who consider themselves practicing Mahayana—are your behaviors more like Lei Feng’s altruistic deeds or authentic Bodhisattva endeavors? There exists an essential difference between Lei Feng’s conduct versus actual Bodhisattva behavior!
4. Mahayana vs Hinayana
Within the realm of spiritual cultivation there exists no real distinction between Mahayana versus Hinayana—the ordinary being creates these perceptions themselves! Buddhas & Bodhisattvas declare such distinctions between Mahayana & Hinayana exist only provisionally—as if Cao Cao was quenching thirst along his military route by looking at plums—the Buddhas & Bodhisattvas speak about these vehicles merely for guiding beings along their paths—but presently many fail recognizing truth believing real distinctions exist—that represents erroneous understanding indeed! Neither Mahayana nor Hinayana truly exist—they arise solely due human minds’ discriminative tendencies—all notions regarding them reside purely within conceptual frameworks without any actual existence!
Some practitioners see certain speakers discussing “Mahayana teachings” thus assume them as truly representing Great Vehicle teachings—or hear “Hinayana teachings” thus assume them genuinely represent Small Vehicle teachings—or hear discussions surrounding ultimate perfect Buddha Dharma thus conclude them representing Buddha Vehicle too—all such assumptions reflect flawed perceptions indeed! According to narratives surrounding Buddha himself he spoke about Small Vehicle teachings—can anyone claim he was merely practicing Hinayana? He also taught Great Vehicle principles—does that mean he was strictly adhering only towards Mahayana practices? He even expounded countless ultimate supreme truths regarding Buddha Dharma—is he then confined exclusively within Buddha Vehicle categories? Clearly none apply since Buddha transcends all vehicles entirely existing beyond any classifications!
Whether discussing Mahayana or Hinayana—or even Buddha vehicle—the speaker tailors what kind of teaching based upon current conditions faced by practitioners present before him/her today! For those overly attached towards false notions surrounding Great Vehicles—they may receive Small Vehicle teachings counteracting their biases—for narrow-minded adherents toward Small Vehicles—they might receive Great Vehicle instructions addressing their limitations—and for those clinging tightly onto Great Vehicles—they may encounter discourses centered around Buddha vehicle aiming at breaking free attachments altogether—to those embodying true realization however no longer perceive distinctions among either vehicles!
5 . Supplementary Notes
Some individuals struggle distinguishing between making genuine vows versus indulging in mere fantasies—it’s quite easy actually: any heartfelt wish arising deeply within signifies right mindfulness whereas externally imposed desires attached superficially represent delusions instead ! Regarding making vows , authentic wishes don’t require emphasis ; emphasized wishes lack authenticity . For attaining liberated ease , relying solely upon wishes proves insufficient ; deep-rooted intentions must transmute entirely into actionable practices rendering them truly effective !
Concerning Boddhistava actions : simply aiding others doesn’t warrant encouragement ; until thorough eradication occurs concerning personal habitual tendencies , focusing outwardly upon others proves misguided . That means prior engaging sufficiently inwardly before directing attention externally leads only increased vexations potentially complicating matters further ! Thus , merely aspiring grandly towards assisting others doesn’t equate genuine spiritual cultivation ; intervening when inappropriate could very well become karmic entanglement instead !
Should anyone aspire , let them formulate four specific vows : First , wish for personal liberation ; Second , refrain harming others ; Third , benefit fellow beings ; Fourth , cultivate non-aspiration vow . Practitioners ought first establish intention toward personal emancipation since without achieving self-liberation seeking aid elsewhere remains futile ! Once liberated oneself then pursue remaining three vows accordingly : refraining harm signifies solitary virtue indicative small vehicle aspiration while benefiting fellow beings embodies inclusive compassion characteristic great vehicle ambition whereas cultivating non-aspiration reflects universal harmony embodying ultimate enlightened wish . Initial vow-making alongside final non-aspirational vow harmonize seamlessly reflecting varying stages addressing diverse needs throughout journey undertaken !
by – Taiwan Fearless Tathagata Ya Great Perfection Zen Center
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.