BUDDHACARITA 13.65: Knowing as Growing

⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−   Upajāti (Kīrti)

kṣamā-śipho dhairya-vigāḍha-mūlaś cāritra-puṣpaḥ smti-buddhi-śākhaḥ |

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−

jñāna-drumo dharma-phala-pradātā notpāṭanaṁ hy arhati vardhamānaḥ || 13.65

13.65

For the tree, deeply rooted in constancy, 

whose fibres are forbearance,

Whose blossom is good conduct,

whose branches are awareness and good judgement,

The tree of knowing, the bestower of dharma-fruit,

Does not deserve to be uprooted, now that it is growing.

COMMENT:

The present series of verses, from BC13.61 – 66, are full of figurative expressions. But their main thrust, as I have been reflecting in the titles of these blog posts, has to do with knowing.

Thus

• BC13.61 contains the metaphor jñānauṣadham, “the medicine of knowing;”
• BC13.63 contains the metaphor jñāna-pradīpaḥ, “the lantern of knowing;”
• BC13.65, today's verse, contains the metaphor jñāna-drumaḥ, “the tree of knowing.”

The other three verses in the series do not contain the word jñāna, but...

• BC13.62 is about path-finding, or knowing the terrain like a good guide;
• BC13.64 is about knowing where the far shore of saṁsāra is, and knowing how to get there;
• BC13.66, tomorrow's verse, as I read it, as I will discuss tomorrow, suggests the oneness of knowing and undoing – thereby emphasizing the point I have been at pains to make already, that what Nāgārjuna meant by jñānasyāsyaiva, “just this act of knowing,” is an act of knowing, and NOT an act of doing. Insofar as it has to do with doing, it is an act of undoing, or an act of coming undone.

Today's verse, by the way, was one of the first that tempted me to venture my own translation and commentary of it back in November 2008. The link is here. 

When I read that translation and commentary now, I feel my translation was trying too hard to be different. Besides that, a lack of familiarity with Aśvaghoṣa's Sanskrit allowed me to take liberties in translation that I would not take now.

But one thing that has not changed in the last six years – and it is the main point I emphasized in my commentary then – is my understanding that jñāna is not best translated, as per EHJ, EBC and PO, “knowledge.” Jñāna is better translated as “knowing,” and better understood as an act of knowing – as in Nāgārjuna's words which I hereby quote again:

The doings which are the root of saṁsāra thus does the ignorant one do. / The ignorant one therefore is the doer; the wise one is not, because of reality making itself known. //MMK26.10// In the destruction of ignorance, there is the non-coming-into-being of doings./ The destruction of ignorance, however, is because of the bringing-into-being of just this act of knowing.//MMK26.11//

Yesterday, at the request of the author of one of the articles in question, I skimmed two or three articles related to Zen, non-doing, and the vestibular system. The bloke who emailed me supposed that the content would have been up my street. 

Browsing the articles caused me to reflect, again, on the difference between knowledge, or knowing about, and jñāna, knowing. Knowing about stuff, knowledge -- especially scientific knowledge -- tends to be valued highly in our world, as sometimes reflected in Nobel prizes, awards of doctorates, intellectual property rights, lucrative copyrights, et cetera. 

In the realm of practice, in contrast, the people I revere are the ones who not only know about stuff but who are evidently content to practise knowing, as its own reward. 

The truest Zen masters in the world today, if you ask me, don't see themselves as Zen masters at all. I think of people like Ānandajoti Bhikkhu in the Theravada tradition, and Mathieu Ricard in the Tibetan tradition. Those guys, true monks, are not interested in the baubles that society dangles as rewards for the pursuit of knowledge. For them knowing is its own reward. That, I think, is part of the reason why a person like Ānandajoti Bhikhu makes his dharma-fruit freely accessible, totally free of charge.  He for me is a role model, and his website to me is exemplary. 

When, in contrast, I received an unsolicited email recently inviting me to purchase a book on Zen, I felt angry. Hey look at me everybody, I am Zen master, anointed by Gudo Nishijima as one of his true Dharma-heirs. His teaching is my teaching. You can buy my book in print or, for the same price, on Kindle. 

No, fuck off, you fraud. You are just the person I don't want to be.

The mirror principle at work? Undoubtedly. But at least I see it. 

"As long as you know you are a fraud," a wise person once told me, "you are not a complete fraud." 

VOCABULARY 

kṣamā-śiphaḥ (nom. sg. m.): mfn. having patience as fibres (said of the tree of knowledge), Bcar. xiii, 65.

śiphā: f. a fibrous or flexible root (used for making whips &c )

dhairya-vigāḍha-mūlaḥ (nom. sg. m.): deeply rooted in constancy

dhairya: n. (dhīra) firmness , constancy , calmness , patience , gravity , fortitude , courage ,

vigāḍha: mfn. plunged into , entered ; deep

mūla: ifc. = rooted in , based upon , derived from

cāritra-puṣpaḥ (nom. sg. m.): whose flowers are good conduct

cāritra: n. manner of acting, conduct, good conduct, good character, reputation

smṛti-buddhi-śākhaḥ (nom. sg. m.): whose branches are awareness and good judgement

jñāna-drumaḥ (nom. sg. m.): the tree of knowing

dharma-phala-pradātā (nom. sg. m.): bestower of the fruit of dharma

pradātṛ: m. a giver , bestower (mostly in comp. with the object)

na: not

utpāṭanam (acc. sg.): n. the act of tearing out or up ; pulling up by roots , eradicating

hi: for

pāṭana: n. splitting , dividing , tearing up , cutting to pieces , destroying

√paṭ: to go ; to split , open , burst asunder

arhati = 3^rd pers. sg. arh: to deserve , merit , be worthy of , to have a claim to , be entitled to (acc.)

vardhamānaḥ = nom. sg. m. pres. part. vṛdh: to grow

忍辱爲法芽 固志爲法根
律儀戒爲地 覺正爲枝幹
智慧之大樹 無上法爲果
蔭護諸衆生 云何而欲伐

BUDDHACARITA 13.64: Knowing as Navigation

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−   Upajāti (Indravajrā)

dṣṭvā ca saṁsāra-maye mahaughe magnaṁ jagat pāram avindamānam |

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−

yaś cedam uttārayituṁ pravttaḥ kaś cintayet tasya tu pāpam āryaḥ || 13.64

13.64

Again, seeing the world sunk in the great flood of saṁsāra

And unable to find the far shore,

He has committed to ferry this world across –

What man of honour would think evil upon him?

COMMENT:

What was it again that Nāgārjuna said about saṁsāra?

The doings which are the root of saṁsāra thus does the ignorant one do. / The ignorant one therefore is the doer; the wise one is not, because of reality making itself known. //MMK26.10// In the destruction of ignorance, there is the non-coming-into-being of doings./ The destruction of ignorance, however, is because of the bringing-into-being of just this act of knowing.//MMK26.11//

In the metaphor in today's verse, saṁsāra is a great flood and ignorance is not being able to find the far shore.

Again, then, although there is no explicit mention in today's verse of jñāna, the act of knowing, the sense is that the bodhisattva is going to ferry the world across because of the bringing-into-being of just this act of knowing.

Finding the far shore in today's verse is a metaphor for what in Nāgārjuna's words is the destruction or cessation of ignorance, and this destruction is accomplished not by an act of doing, but by an act of knowing.

What Aśvaghoṣa suggests using metaphor, Nāgārjuna spells out more drily.

A point to note in passing in connection with today's verse, as also with yesterday's verse, is that the being of distinction appeals to Māra's sense of Āryan honour. EHJ thinks this curious. Maybe Aśvaghoṣa had it in mind that, as a general rule, beings of distinction are polite -- unless they are distinguished by a tendency not to conform to general rules. 

But in conclusion, and on reflection, every bodhisattva's commitment is to see this world safely across, even before the bodhisattva himself or herself safely arrives -- whether the crossing over is assisted by a ferry or raft in Aśvaghoṣa's boathouse; or whether that destruction of ignorance in which doings are not done is realized, as an act of knowing. assisted by a dry and literal translation of Nāgārjuna, e.g.: 

saṁsāra-mūlaṁ saṁskārān avidvān saṁskaroty ataḥ

The doings which are the root of saṁsāra thus does the ignorant one do.

In today's verse, Aśvaghoṣa does not speak of doings (saṁskārān).  In the part of BC Canto 14 which we don't have in Sanskrit, Aśvaghoṣa will discuss doings  (saṁskārān) as the second in the twelve links, in connection with the teaching of pratīyta-samutpāda. But in today's verse Aśvaghoṣa does not speak directly of doings. Thanks to Nāgārjuna, though, we can exactly know that when Aśvaghoṣa's being of distinction spoke of saṁsāra, he was talking, metaphorically, about a great flood of suffering that is rooted, literally, in the doings that the ignorant one does do. 

VOCABULARY  

dṛṣṭvā = abs. dṛś: to see

ca: and

saṁsāra-maye (loc. sg. m.): made of saṁsāra

mahaughe (loc. sg.): m. the great flood

ogha: m. flood , stream , rapid flow of water

magnam (acc. sg. n.): mfn. sunk , plunged , immersed in (loc. or comp.)

jagat (acc. sg.): n. the world

pāram (acc. sg.): n. the further bank or shore or boundary , any bank or shore , the opposite side , the end or limit of anything , the utmost reach or fullest extent

a-: (negative prefix)

vindamānam = acc. sg. n. pres. part. vid: to find , discover , meet or fall in with , obtain , get

yaḥ (nom. sg. m.): who

ca: and

idam (acc. sg. n.): it, the world

uttārayitum = inf. causative ud- √tṝ: to deliver , assist , rescue ; to convey or transport across , land , disembark

pravṛttaḥ (nom. sg. m.): mfn. set out from (-tas) , going to , bound for (acc. loc. inf.) ; having set about or commenced to (inf.)

kaḥ (nom. sg. m.): who?

cintayet = 3^rd pers. sg. optative cint: to think , have a thought or idea , reflect , consider ; to think about , reflect upon , direct the thoughts towards (acc.)

tasya (gen. sg.): of/for him

tu: but (expletive)

pāpam (acc. sg): n. evil , misfortune , ill-luck , trouble , mischief , harm

āryaḥ (nom. sg. m.): Āryan, noble person ; a respectable or honourable or faithful man 

衆生悉漂沒 生死之大海
爲脩智慧舟 云何欲令沒 

BUDDHACARITA 13.63: Knowing as Shedding of Light

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−   Upajāti (Indravajrā)

sattveṣu naṣṭeṣu mahāndha-kāre jñāna-pradīpaḥ kriyamāṇa eṣaḥ |

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−

āryasya nirvāpayituṁ na sādhu prajvālyamānas tamasīva dīpaḥ || 13.63

13.63

While living beings are lost in a great darkness,

He is being made into a lantern of knowing –

It is no more right for a noble Āryan to snuff him out

Than to snuff out a light being kindled in the dark.

COMMENT:

The metaphor in today's verse jñāna-pradīpaḥ, “a lantern of knowing,” brings to mind what the Buddha told Nanda towards the end of the final canto of Saundarananda:

vihāya tasmād iha kāryam ātmanaḥ kuru sthirātman para-kāryam apy atho /

bhramatsu sattveṣu tamo-vṛtātmasu śruta-pradīpo niśi dhāryatām ayam // SN18.57

Therefore forgetting the work that needs to be done in this world on the self, 
do now, stout soul, what can be done for others. / 
Among beings who are wandering in the night, their minds shrouded in darkness, 
let the lamp of this transmission be carried.//

At one level the metaphor jñāna-pradīpaḥ, “a lantern/lamp of knowing,” may seem to compare with a lantern or a lamp the knowledge which the bodhisattva is in the process of acquiring.  

More literally, however, the bodhisattva is described not as in the process of acquiring the lantern, but as in the process of being made into the lantern. 

At this level, then, darkness is ignorance and the bodhisattva is compared to a lantern-to-be which, by knowing, will dispell the darkness of ignorance.

A deeper reading might be that the being of distinction is rightly prophesying that the bodhisattva is going to be the one who shines light not only into the darkness of ignorance but also onto the one great matter which is knowing itself. 

This latter reading is possible because of the way that pradīpa is used in titles of works that elucidate a particular subject. MW gives as an example mahābhāṣya-pradīpa, which means “The Lantern of [Patañjali's] Mahā-Bhāṣya” i.e, “Commentaries that Shed Light on Patañjali's Great Exposition.”

So one reading of jñāna-pradīpaḥ is as “the lantern which is knowing itself” and another reading is as “the lantern which will illuminate knowing.”

Either way, the great darkness is ignorance, and what opposes this ignorance, as in Nāgārjuna's most excellent elucidation, is jñāna, the act of knowing...

The doings which are the root of saṁsāra thus does the ignorant one do. / The ignorant one therefore is the doer; the wise one is not, because of reality making itself known. //MMK26.10// In the destruction of ignorance, there is the non-coming-into-being of doings./ The destruction of ignorance, however, is because of the allowing-into-being of just this act of knowing.//MMK26.11//

In today's verse, then, I submit, as in MMK, jñāna does not mean intellectual knowledge. It means knowing as an act. It means knowing as an act of knowing, as opposed to an act of doing. It might describe as "an act of knowing," the one great lantern which is buddha sitting. 

VOCABULARY 

sattveṣu (loc. abs.): n. beings

naṣṭeṣu (loc. abs.): mfn. lost

mahāndha-kāre (loc. sg.) m. the great darkness ; thick darkness , gross spiritual darkness

jñāna-pradīpaḥ (nom. sg. m.): a lamp of knowing

pradīpa: m. a light , lamp , lantern MBh. Ka1v. &c (often ifc. " the light i.e. the glory or ornament of " e.g. kula-pr° q.v. ; also in titles of explanatory works = elucidation , explanation , e.g. mahābhāṣya-pr°)

kriyamāṇaḥ = nom. sg. m. pres. part. passive kṛ: to make

eṣaḥ (nom. sg. m.): this one, he

āryasya (gen. sg.): an Āryan, a noble person

nirvāpayitum = inf. causative nir- √ vā : to put out , extinguish

na: not

sādhu (nom. sg.): n. the good or right or honest , a good &c thing or act

prajvālyamānaḥ = nom. sg. m. pres. part. passive pra- √ jval: to begin to burn or blaze , be kindled (lit. and fig.)

tamasi (loc. sg.): n. darkness ; gloom

iva: like

dīpaḥ (nom. sg.): m. a light , lamp , lantern

衆生墮大冥 莫知所至處
爲燃智慧燈 云何欲令滅 

BUDDHACARITA 13.62: Knowing as the Willing of a Path

⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−   Upajāti (ddhi)

hte ca loke bahubhiḥ ku-mārgaiḥ san-mārgam anvicchati yaḥ śrameṇa |

⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−

sa daiśikaḥ kṣobhayituṁ na yuktaṁ su-deśikaḥ sārtha iva pranaṣṭe || 13.62

13.62

And when, by many wrong byways, the world is being carried away,

He who, with effort, is willing the right path,

He who knows the terrain, should no more be harassed

Than should an experienced guide when a caravan has got lost.

COMMENT:

One of the good things about translation work is that it throws up alternative translations that call upon the translator to clarify core conceptions. 

In the 2^nd pāda of today's verse, for example, which combination of

 a/the 

true/right 

path/way/pathway

might be most appropriate as a translation of san-mārgam?

• a right path
• the right path
• a true path
• the true path
• a right way
• the right way
• a true way
• the true way, etc. 

If we were travelling in a caravan and were not sure whether or not we were lost, we might say, “Are we on the right path?” or “Is this the right way?” We wouldn't normally say “Are we on the true way?” or “Is this the true way?”

So perhaps “right” is better in this context than “true” – in which case, mindful of the truth that “there is no such thing as a right position, but there is such a thing as a right direction,” we might be right in thinking that the criterion of rightness is the direction in which the path is leading.

Even though we would normally speak of the right path or the right way, the problem with such use of the definite article is that it implies the existence of only one right way. Exactly thinking, there is likely to be more than one way that leads in the right direction – a right way which, once we have taken it, becomes in our minds and in our speech the right way.

What also calls for comment in the 2^nd pāda of today's verse is the use of the verb anvicchati, from anv-√iṣ (to desire, seek after), with its object san-mārgam, the right way, and its adverbial assistant śrameṇa (with effort; EBC: toilsomely; EHJ: laboriously). EBC translated anvicchati as “pursues” and EHJ as “is searching”; hence:

He who toilsomely pursues the one good path, when all the world is carried away in devious tracks, — he the guide should not be disturbed, like a right informant when the caravan has lost its way. (EBC)

And since the world is being carried away along wrong paths, it is no more proper to harass him, the guide who is laboriously searching for the right path, than it is to harass a good guide, when a caravan has lost its way. (EHJ)

A more literal translation like “He who, with effort, is willing the right way,” or “He who, with effort, is willing the right path,” sounds somewhat strange on first listening.

But on reflection this strangeness is entirely in accordance with the principles of that funny business which is non-doing.

The particular principle I refer to is the principle that a true direction (e.g. "spine to lengthen") is not something to be done. It is rather an undoing. As such, it is a direction to be thought, or wished for, or willed. 

"A direction to be wished for" sounds like the essence of wishy-washiness. But, to quote Alexander virtuoso Nelly Ben-Or, "It is wishing that won't take No for an answer!" 

One who knows these principles well, not in theory but in practice, is one who, in the words of gruff AT-teaching Yorkshireman Patrick Macdonald (teacher of Nelly Ben-Or), “knows the score.”

Knowing the score in the 3^rd pāda of today's verse is called daiśikaḥ (“knowing the terrain”; MW: knowing a place).

Yesterday's verse, then, was related with the metaphor that in her book A Metaphorical Study of Saundarananda, Linda Covill discusses as “the medical metaphor.” And today's verse is related with the metaphor of a path, as LC discusses in her final chapter titled “Nanda Rerouted.”

I am convinced as I can be that Buddhacarita preceded Saundarananda. It only makes sense that way. If Saundarananda had come first, for a start, Aśvaghoṣa would have devoted more than a passing reference to the core teaching of pratītya-samutpāda, via the 12 links, which comes into centre stage in BC Canto 14. So the present series of similes can be read as the forerunner for Aśvaghoṣa's extensive development of metaphors in Saundarananda.

VOCABULARY 

hṛte (loc. sg. m.): being carried

ca: and

loke (loc. sg.): m. the world

bahubhiḥ (inst. pl. m.): mfn. much , many , frequent , abundant , numerous , great or considerable in quantity

ku-mārgaiḥ (inst. pl.): m. a bad way (lit. and fig.)

san-mārgam (acc. sg.): m. the right path (fig.)

anvicchati = 3^rd pers. sg. anv- √ iṣ : to desire , seek , seek after , search , aim at

yaḥ (nom. sg. m.): who

śrameṇa (inst. sg.): m. exertion , labour , toil , exercise , effort either bodily or mental , hard work of any kind

sa (nom. sg. m.): he

daiśikaḥ (nom. sg. m.): mfn. (fr. deśa) relating to space or to any place or country ; knowing a place , a guide

kṣobhayitum = inf. causative kṣubh: to agitate , cause to shake , disturb , stir up , excite

na: not

yuktam: (with yad or an inf.) = it is fit or suitable that or to

su-deśikaḥ (nom. sg. m.): a good guide

deśika: mfn. familiar with a place , a guide (lit. and fig.) ; m. traveller

sārthaḥ (nom. sg.): m. a travelling company of traders or pilgrims , caravan

iva: like

pranaṣṭe (loc. abs.); mfn. lost , disappeared , vanished , ceased , gone , perished , destroyed , annihilated

世間諸癡惑 悉皆著邪徑
菩薩習正路 欲引導衆生
惱亂世尊師 是則大不可
如大曠野中 欺誑商人導 

BUDDHACARITA 13.61: Knowing as Medicine

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−   Upajāti (Sālā)

tal lokam ārtaṁ karuṇāyamāno rogeṣu rāgādiṣu vartamānam |

⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−

mahā-bhiṣaṅ nārhati vighnam eṣa jñānauṣadhārthaṁ parikhidyamānaḥ || 13.61

13.61

Therefore, in his compassion for the afflicted world

As it twists and turns 

through illnesses and through emotions like red passion 

-- through breakdowns and booms -- 

This great man of healing deserves no impediment,

As he wears himself out,

in his quest for the medicine of knowing.

COMMENT:

Implicit in the medical metaphor in today's verse, as I read it, is that the world is essentially subject to two kinds of affliction. Roga literally means a breakdown, i.e. a disease, an episode of infirmity; or, in socio-economic terms, a bust. Rāga literally means redness or inflammation, i.e. passion; or, in socio-economic terms, a boom or a bubble. 

EBC translated jñānauṣadha as “the remedy knowledge” and EHJ as “the medicine of knowledge,” and these translations accord with the MW dictionary definitions of jñāna as “knowledge, (esp.) the higher knowledge (derived from meditation).” In this sense, jñāna could equally be translated as “wisdom.”

Thus when Nāgārjuna wrote that

saṁsāra-mūlaṁ saṁskārān avidvān saṁskaroty ataḥ |

avidvān kārakas tasmān na vidvāṁs tattva-darśanāt ||MMK26.10

avidyāyāṁ niruddhāyāṁ saṁskārāṇām asaṁbhavaḥ |

avidyāyā nirodhas tu jñānasyāsyaiva bhāvanāt ||MMK26.11

one could reasonably translate jñānasyāsyaiva bhāvanāt as “because of the cultivation of just this wisdom.” Hence:

The doings which are the root of saṁsāra, thus does the ignorant one do./

The ignorant one therefore is the doer; 

the wise one is not, because of his realization of reality.//26.10//

In the destruction of ignorance, there is the non-coming-into-being of doings./

The destruction of ignorance, however, 

is because of the cultivation of just this wisdom.//26.11//

Exactly thinking, however, jñāna is an -na neuter action noun, and so it is more literally translated as “knowing” or “the act of knowing.”

And the literal translation, in my book, is in this case more meaningful. Which is to say that when ignorance is destroyed by just sitting, it is not so much that knowledge is being brought to bear, and more that ignorance is being destroyed by the bringing-into-being, or the allowing-into-being, of the act of knowing in which the right thing is allowed to do itself. Hence:

The doings which are the root of saṁsāra, thus does the ignorant one do./

The ignorant one therefore is the doer; 

the wise one is not, because of reality making itself known.//26.10//

In the destruction of ignorance, there is the non-coming-into-being of doings./

The destruction of ignorance, however, 

is because of the bringing-into-being of just this act of knowing.//26.11//

What is interesting  about today's verse, then, is that, following Nāgārjuna, we would normally think of knowing  (jñāna) as the antidote to ignorance. But in today's verse the suggestion is that knowing is the antidote to afflictions in general, including the exuberance and greed associated with booms and bubbles. 

Speaking of bubbles, it seems that a great big money bubble has been keeping the global financial system on life support since 2008. So let's be grateful for that... until such time as the whole damn thing bursts. Then we will be confronting the debris of a massive breakdown, or bust, and the world will be in dire need of men of great healing who at least have some insight into what has been stopping the right thing from doing itself.

Such is knowledge I have gleaned from Alexander work over the past 20 years. Nobody knows how the right thing does itself, and nobody can make the right thing do itself. The wise one, in the act of sitting as an act of knowing, is not the doer but is the allower. He or she knows what NOT TO DO. And in the act of knowing what not to do, on a good day, the right thing is given a chance to do itself. 

The wise one, then, is not the one who knows what to do. The wise one, primarily, is the one who knows what NOT TO DO. 

We can contrast individual scapegoats, like Alan Greenspan, who Bill Fleckenstein singles out in his book Greenspan's Bubbles - The Age of Ignorance at the Federal Reserve; or like "Fred the Shred" Goodwin, former boss of the Royal Bank of Scotland, much reviled in the UK around the time of the 2008 crash and now largely forgotten. These are individuals who didn't know what they were doing, but got where they were by pretending that they did know what they were doing. Thus, somehow they were allowed to rise to positions where their wrong decisions could lead to massive misallocation of resources -- which is the socio-economic equivalent of individual misuse of the self. 

Since the crash of 2008, the truth still has not really made itself known. Stock markets have kept going up, enabling politicians in Europe to keep playing the game of "extend and pretend." They have talked about bailing out broken economies and about reform, while really bailing out nobody but the big banks and reforming nothing. 

One man in Europe who has been telling the truth in this regard, it seems to me, is Greece's new finance minister Yanis Varoufakis. 

This interviewer on Russia Today, ironically enough, since Russia is not generally thought of as the land of free speech, shows the virtue of allowing YV to speak freely. She asks the question and then shuts the %^&* up. I wish more BBC journalists would follow that example, and listen to answers, instead of trying to show how clever they are with rapid follow-up questions. 

The interview last Friday on BBC's Newsnight is a case in point. The interviewer, most annoyingly, seems not to want to give YV time to answer any of the questions that she -- in her evident profound indifference to what is really going on -- has already prepared. 

How are we ever going to know what is going on, if BBC journalists keep asking questions without waiting to listen to the answers? 

Written as one disgruntled license-payer. 

VOCABULARY 

tad: ind. therefore

lokam (acc. sg.): m. the world

ārtam (acc. sg. m.); mfn. fallen into (misfortune) , struck by calamity , afflicted , pained , disturbed ; injured ; oppressed , suffering , sick , unhappy

karuṇāyamānaḥ nom. sg. m. pres. part. karuṇa: to pity, to have compassion

rogeṣu (loc. pl.): m. ( √1. ruj) " breaking up of strength " , disease , infirmity , sickness

ruj: to break , break open , dash to pieces , shatter , destroy  ; to cause pain , afflict , injure 

rāgādiṣu (loc. pl.): red passions, et cetera

rāga: m. the act of colouring ; colour , hue , tint , dye , (esp.) red colour , redness; inflamation ; any feeling or passion , (esp.) love , affection or sympathy for , vehement desire

vartamānam = acc. sg. m. pres. part. vṛt: to turn ; to move or go on , get along , advance , proceed ; to be , live , exist , be found , remain , stay , abide , dwell

mahā-bhiṣaj (nom. sg.) m. a great healer

bhiṣaj: m. a healer , physician

na: not

arhati = 3^rd pers. sg. arh: to deserve (acc.)

vighnam (acc. sg.): m. an obstacle , impediment , hindrance , opposition , prevention , interruption , any difficulty or trouble

eṣaḥ (nom. sg. m.): he, this one

jñānauṣadhārthaṁ (acc. sg. n.): for the sake of the medicine which is the act of knowing

jñāna: n. knowing , becoming acquainted with , knowledge , (esp.) the higher knowledge (derived from meditation)

auṣadha: n. herbs used in medicine , simples , a medicament , drug , medicine in general

parikhidyamānaḥ = nom. sg. m. pres. part. pass. pari- √ khid: to be depressed or afflicted , feel uneasy

khid: , to strike , press , press down ; to be depressed or wearied

世間無救護 中貪恚癡毒
哀愍衆生故 求智慧良藥
爲世除苦患 汝云何惱亂

BUDDHACARITA 13.60: True Doing, Via the Truth of Non-Doing

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−   Upajāti (Indravajrā)

kāṣṭhaṁ hi mathnan labhate hutāśaṁ bhūmiṁ khanan vindati cāpi toyam |

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−

nirbandhinaḥ kiṁ cana nāsty asādhyaṁ nyāyena yuktaṁ ca ktaṁ ca sarvam || 13.60

13.60

For by twirling the fire-stick

one obtains the oblation-scoffing flame.

Again, by digging the earth one finds water.

For one who persists, nothing is impossible.

Done according to principle, everything is truly done.

COMMENT:

The hallmark of happiness, asserted FM Alexander, is doing well something you enjoy.

The paradoxical question for a follower of Zen Master Dogen to answer, then, might be:

How to do well the sitting that Dogen described as 

最上無為の妙術 

SAIJO-MUI NO MYO-JUTSU

a subtle method which is supreme and free of doing 

?

Words are useful in helping to clarify how paradoxical the paradox is...

“Give up all idea of moving the leg... 

in order to be free to go ahead and move the leg!”

But words can only take us so far.

The principle of non-doing might most truly be realized when the moving of the leg goes ahead and does itself.

People say that the fundamentals of the French economy are weak. But last summer I witnessed Frederique the master builder and his assistant doing an extremely thorough building job. Painful though it was to my ears, the work left a deep impression on me of a master craftsman working to principle, or working to a plan.

FM Alexander contrasted that kind of effort with what he called end-gaining.

We used to joke in Birmingham in the 1970s that the tool-kit for a worker in the local British Leyland car factory was a hammer and a condom – “If you can't fix it, fuck it.” That is a colourful expression of Alexander's principle of end-gaining which is opposed to working according to principle.

Working according to principle, in building a house, or building a car, or realizing the truth of non-doing, does not mean never going ahead and gaining the end. It means not doing so in a haphazard unconscious manner, guided not by principle but governed by an instinctive impatient desire to get the job done. 

The latter, end-gaining approach is the essence of ignorance, and when we follow this approach, we can observe exactly how ignorance gives rise to doings, just as Nāgārjuna describes in the penultimate chapter of MMK:

The doings that lead to rebirth one veiled in ignorance, in three ways [by end-gaining with body, speech and mind], / Does do; and by these actions he enters a sphere of existence. //MMK26.1 // Consciousness seeps, with doings as causal grounds, into the sphere of existence./ And so, consciousness having seeped in, pychophysicality is infused. //26.2// Conversely, once psychophysicality is infused, there is the coming into existence of the six senses; / The six senses having arrived, contact arises; //26.3// And when the faculty of sight, going back, has met a physical form, and met indeed a meeting together, / – When sight has gone back, in this way, to psychophysicality – then consciousness arises. //26.4// The combination of the three – physical form, consciousness and faculty of seeing – / Is contact; and from that contact arises feeling. //26.5// On the grounds of feeling, there is thirst – because one thirsts for the object of feeling. / While the thirsting is going on, grasping hold takes hold in four ways. //26.6// While there is grasping hold, the becoming originates of the one who grasps – / Because becoming, in the absence of grasping hold, would be set free and would not become becoming. //26.7// The five aggregates, again, are the becoming. Out of the becoming rebirth is born. / The suffering of ageing and death, and all the rest of it – sorrows, along with lamentations; //26.8// Dejectedness, troubles – all this arises out of rebirth. / Thus there is the coming about of this whole mass of suffering. //26.9// The doings which are the root of saṁsāra thus does the ignorant one do. / The ignorant one therefore is the doer; the wise one is not, because of reality making itself known. //26.10// In the destruction of ignorance, there is the non-coming-into-being of doings./ The destruction of ignorance, however, is because of the allowing-into-being of just this act of knowing.//26.11// By the destruction of this one and that one, this one and that one are discontinued. / This whole edifice of suffering is thus well and truly demolished.//MMK26.12//

People seem to think that the destruction of ignorance means realizing how everything is causally connected with everything else, through “dependent arising” or “interdependent origination” or some similar translation of pratītya-samutpāda. All well and good. But please can you demonstrate to me, then, exactly how, in this kind of enlightenment, there is the non-coming-into-being of doings. 

My intention is to clarify that pratītya-samutpāda is better understood not as “dependent origination” but as a complete springing up, realized by going back to the root of suffering – that root of suffering residing in ignorant doings.

Can I demonstrate in practice what I mean by this kind of destruction of ignorance? Not very well, I fear. But I do know, for damn sure, that FM Alexander's niece, Marjory Barlow, did most truly demonstrate the means-whereby to me.

Thus, as I approach the end of this blog, my end-point turns out to be the same as my starting point six years, ago, which was also my starting point when I came back from Japan to England twenty years ago. The starting point was a desire to connect the teaching of Zen Master Dogen, which I intuited to be true, and the teaching of FM Alexander, which I also intuited to be true.

So my new starting point this year will be the same as my old starting point when I started Alexander teacher training back in 1995. Except that some things have changed for the worse. And some things have changed for the better.

One of the things that has changed for the better is that, some time during the course of 2014, I saw the usefulness of translating samskāran as “doings” and saṁskaroti as “does do” in MMK26.10. Thus:

saṁsāra-mūlaṁ saṁskārān avidvān saṁskaroty ataḥ

The doings which are the root of saṁsāra thus does the ignorant one do.

Now that Nāgārjuna's teaching has been translated into English like that, the link to FM Alexander's teaching should be easier to clarify.

As Marjory Barlow reminded me, however, these things can't be hurried. We are dealing with a process of growth, and growth cannot be hurried.

As Marjory during the course of this video (around 56m in) says for herself: “I am not going to rush for anybody!”

VOCABULARY 

kāṣṭham (acc. sg.): n. a piece of wood or timber , stick

hi: for

mathnan = nom. sg. m. pres. part. math / manth: to stir or whirl round

labhate = 3^rd pers. sg. labh: to get; to gain possession of , obtain ,

hutāśam (acc. sg.): m. oblation-eater , fire

huta: mfn. offered in fire , poured out (as clarified butter) , burnt (as an oblation) , sacrificed

āśa: m. eating

bhūmim (acc. sg.): f. the earth

khanan = nom. sg. m. pres. part. khan: to dig , dig up , delve , turn up the soil , excavate , root up

vindati = 3^rd pers. sg. vid: to find , discover , meet or fall in with , obtain , get , acquire

ca: and

api: also

toyam (acc. sg.): n. water

nirbandhinaḥ = gen. sg. nirbandhin: mfn. insisting upon (loc. or comp.)

nir- √ bandh: to fix or fasten upon , attach one's self to , insist upon , persist in , urge

kiṁ cana na: in no way

asti: there is

asādhyam (nom. sg. n.): mfn. not to be effected or completed , not proper or able to be accomplished ; incurable , irremediable

sādh: to go straight to any goal or aim , attain an object , to be successful , succeed , prosper; to bring straight to an object or end , further , promote , advance , accomplish , complete , finish

nyāyena (inst. sg.): m.that into which a thing goes back i.e. an original type , standard , method , rule , (esp.) a general or universal rule , model , axiom , system , plan , manner , right or fit manner or way

yuktam (nom. sg. n.): mfn. yoked or joined or fastened or attached or harnessed to (loc. or instr.) ; furnished or endowed or filled or supplied or provided with , accompanied by , possessed of (instr. or comp.) ; fitted , adapted , conforming or adapting one's self to , making use of (instr.)

ca: and ( ca-ca may express immediate connection between two acts or their simultaneous occurrence (e.g. mama ca muktaṁ tamasā mano manasijena dhanuṣi śaraś ca niveśitaḥ , " no sooner is my mind freed from darkness than a shaft is fixed on his bow by the heart-born god ")

kṛtam (nom. sg. n.): mfn. done , made , accomplished , performed ; prepared , made ready ; obtained , gained , acquired , placed at hand ; well done , proper , good

ca: and

sarvam (nom. sg.): n. everything

鑚木而得火 掘地而得水
精勤正方便 無求而不獲