Dharma Notes
Buddhist / Dharma Practitioner?
"What’s the difference between a Buddhist and a non-Buddhist?
Only non-Buddhists think there’s a difference."
Despite the above saying, what actually differentiates a Buddhist, or dharma practitioner, from a non-Buddhist? Traditionally it is explained that a Buddhist is someone who has studied Buddhism for a while and then makes a commitment to the practice both by taking the triple refuge (in the buddha, dharma, and sangha) and by accepting the five precepts, or mindfulness trainings. In my opinion, to which I am hopefully not attached, this traditional explanation has much value. Despite that, I don’t claim to speak for all Buddhists, nor do I wish to start any sectarian arguments over what exactly defines a Buddhist as opposed to a non-Buddhist—an argument that is rendered meaningless in the light of the dharma anyway.
Now there are many groups of Buddhists in which such things aren’t even discussed, such as certain Zen schools or the Nichiren Buddhist groups that mainly focus on chanting parts of the Lotus Sutra. And there are a lot of Western Buddhists who don’t see it being very important to formally accept the five precepts or to take refuge. But in these cases, one can look at their actual practice and lifestyle. You would find that despite the lack of any formal acceptance of the five precepts, those people are still keeping them. Likewise despite the fact that they haven’t had a formal ritual where they took refuge, you can see that by their lifestyle and practice, they are in fact taking refuge in spirit, if not in letter.
For me, to be Buddhist means to practice the dharma. It means to take refuge in the triple jewel of buddha-dharma-sangha (wisdom-teaching/practice-community of practitioners). It means mindfulness training and awareness in daily life and an ongoing process of awakening with the goal of eventual buddhahood. It means the five precepts are to be studied and applied in daily life. It means nirvana, here and now and not as some state or place to enter or attain after a long course of practice. For most schools and lineages of Buddhism, these basic things are important, regardless of whether they are spelled out exactly like this.
I didn’t consider myself an actual practicing Buddhist until I took refuge by learning the old Pali chant "buddham saranam gacchami, dhammam saranam gacchami, sangham saranam gacchami" ("I go to the Buddha for refuge, I go to the dharma for refuge, I go to the Sangha for refuge") and then chanting it wholeheartedly. That was when I crossed over, or changed, from being a Buddhist-influenced person, or from being someone who was reading up a lot on Buddhism, or someone who considered myself ‘Buddhist’, to actually being Buddhist—or a dharma practitioner…one who was re-orienting my life towards enlightenment by walking along the central path. So perhaps for me, the issue of taking refuge in the triple jewel is the most important criterion for defining someone as a ‘Buddhist’.
Like many American Buddhists, I have had the opportunity to practice with various sangha groups at various centers, and I have also had the opportunity to read much of the plethora of Buddhist literature, whether completely new, or whether translations of classical Buddhist texts. My own preferences include the teachings of the famous Thich Nhat Hanh, His Holiness the Dalai Lama—along with other engaged Buddhist leaders—and the Theravada teachings from some of the Thai Buddhist teachers and their Western lineage holders. I also tend to gravitate more towards the Vajrayana aspects of Buddhism as it has come to us through the Tibetan Diaspora. But I couldn’t be totally comfortable with any of the ethnic-type labels such as ‘Tibetan Buddhism’ or ‘Thai Buddhism’, preferring instead to call myself an American Buddhist because I want to focus on Buddhism as it is adapting to its circumstances here in my country. Likewise, even though I tend towards the Mahayana outlook of the bodhisattva ideal mixed with inspiration from Vajrayana teachings, I actually consider myself non-sectarian. I see all of the streams of Buddhism as a ‘culture of awakening’ (as Stephen Batchelor calls it in his Buddhism Without Beliefs) or as an ‘Enlightenment Movement’ (as Robert Thurman calls it in his Inner Revolution). I am comfortable with many Buddhist contexts, from simply sitting in calm abiding meditation to the more complex devotional chanting and puja-rituals. The various techniques and styles themselves are unimportant. What is important is the outlook and results of the practice: a lifestyle of awakening. I love the traditional Tibetan chant of Om Mani Pémé Hung[1]
as much as I love the Nichiren Namu Myoho Renge Kyo[2] as much as I love the traditional Pali sabbe sankhara anicca, sabbe sankhara dukkha, sabbe dhamma anatta[3]. (Or even the Pali Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammasambuddhassa[4]. ) So it can be said that my approach is rather eclectic, but that’s to be expected of one on the bodhisattva trail.
Do not be satisfied with hearsay or with tradition or with legendary lore or with what has come down in scriptures or with conjecture or with logical inference or with weighing evidence or with liking for a view after pondering it or with someone else’s ability or with the thought "The monk is our teacher." When you know in yourselves: "These things are wholesome, blameless, commended by the wise, and being adopted and put into effect they lead to welfare and happiness," then you should practice and abide in them…
-The Buddha (Kalama Sutta)
"The dharma is not a belief by which you will be miraculously saved.
It is a method to be investigated and tried out."
- Stephen Batchelor
Notes:
[1]Om Mani Pémé Hung is the Tibetan pronunciation of the famous Om Mani Padme Hung chant. It is probably the ‘national’ motto of Tibetans. It is the chant of Chenrezig/Avalokiteshvara, the Buddha of Supreme Compassion, of which it is said that His Holiness the Dalai Lama is an incarnation. The chant it self is often translated literally as "the jewel in the lotus" but represents the profound distilled wisdom and compassion of the bodhisattva path.
[2]Namu Myoho Renge Kyo is well known as the Japanese Nichiren Buddhist chant. It means "Homage to the Lotus Sutra". Despite this literal meaning, the chant is said to encompass the entire meaning of the Lotus Sutra as well as of Buddhism itself.
[3]This is literally translated as "all conditions are impermanent, all conditions are anguish, all phenomena are not-self". A better understanding of it is the version coined by Stephen Batchelor as "No conditions are permanent, no conditions are reliable, nothing is self."
[4]This means "Homage (or "Salutations") to the Blessed One, the worthy Unblemished One, the perfectly Self-Awakened One." It is either chanted alone or as a preliminary to a longer series of Pali chants.
Back to Dharma Notes Intro
Until All Beings Are Free