Comments on NUS Buddhist Society's (NUSBS) Reply to Pastor Rony Tan's Comments on Buddhism

I am glad that the NUSBS has published a reply to Pastor Tan's comments in the following article

NUSBS clears Pastor Rony’s misconceptions

However I thought that their reply could have been improved. My personal thoughts are as follows. I shall list the NUSBS replies and indicate

1) the Pastor Tan statements quoted by them as RT ,

2) the reply from NUSBS as NUSBS; and

3) my comments as AA.

RT: Misconception 1: Pastor Rony commented about Buddhist chanting: “One could chant ee-ee-oo-ah-ah, ting-tang-wala-wala-bing-bang, it doesn’t mean anything.”

NUSBS: Buddhist chanting is not meaningless babble. In Buddhism, chants have definite meanings, contrary to what Pastor Rony’s interviewee claimed. For instance, the chants may refer to the practitioner’s wish to radiate loving-kindness to other beings. Chanting is also an aid to meditation. By focusing on the act of recitation, chanting helps to stop the mind from wandering and instead cultivate inner happiness.

AA: Many mantras indeed do not need to be interpreted or have their literal meanings understood. The purpose of chanting them is to develop meditative concentration and to attain certain psychic potential within each spiritual being through the inherent reactions caused by articulating certain strings of sounds. Through the wisdom of Buddhas and other spiritually advanced beings, they are able to gain a profound insight into the mental device of all sentient being and, hence, are able to compose strings of sounds that, when articulated with concentration and faith, may tune one's mental device to reach a desired state in order to develop certain desired psychic power. As such, it is not necessary to decode the literal meanings of such mantras in order to derive their intended benefits.

RT: Misconception 2: Pastor Rony said, “The teaching is this, everybody is potentially a god … and you can be above God and be even more powerful than God.”

NUSBS: Buddhism does not subscribe to the theistic concept of God that is common to the Abrahamic faiths. We believe that everyone has the potential to develop into a Buddha – a perfected being free from hatred, anger, and ignorance.

AA: It is inaccurate to say that everyone has the potential to develop into a Buddha. The Faxiang School of Chinese Buddhism thinks that there are Five Kinds of potential: 1) Arahat; 2) Pecca- Buddha; 3) Buddha; 4) Uncertain; the controversial 5) No potential to attain Nirvana (Yi1chan2ti2). The Great Wisdom Sutra lists the first four Kinds of potential. Hence, it is inaccurate that everyone has the potential to become a Buddha. Some may become an Arhat or Pecca-Buddha.

RT: Misconception 3: Pastor Rony’s interviewee (a former monk) didn’t know what Nirvana was, and said that his fellow monks didn’t know either, implying that Buddhists don’t know what they’re talking about when they refer to Nirvana.

NUSBS: Answer: Nirvana is not a meaningless entity. In conventional language, the best approximate we can say is this: Nirvana is the freedom from the underlying cause of all suffering – the illusion of being a separate self. The word ‘Nirvana’ literally means ‘blowing out’, like the extinguishing of a flame. It’s the extinguishing of all delusions, leading to extraordinary clarity and peace. It is a state that defies conventional language, and belongs to the realm of spiritual attainment, not logical understanding. So we may know what Nirvana is logically, but not know what it is on the experiential level. It is like knowing the possibility of zero-gravity but without the actual experience of weightlessness in space.

AA: Let me first point out that it is quite clear that the 'ex-monk' was suggesting specifically just his Buddhist teachers who didn't know what Nirvana means, but not that none of the Buddhist teachers anywhere in the world didn't. The fact that certain Buddhist teachers lack understanding doesn't mean that all Buddhist teachers must be equally ignorant. I prefer to replace the word 'illusion' with 'attachment'. It is not necessary to be totally enlightened (wake up from illusion) to attain Nirvana for Arahats and Pecca-Buddhas. Buddhas would both be fully enlightened (void of all delusion) and have also attained Nirvana. However, Arahants don't need to be fully enlightened, but they do need to be detached.

RT: Misconception 4: Pastor Rony said, “If something bad [happens], they say it’s because of your karma … If somebody falls sick, oh it’s because of your karma. It’s so easy to explain… It seems that you cannot do anything about the bad things that are happening.”

Answer: The doctrine of karma does not entail fatalism. The word ‘karma’ literally means ‘action’, and refers to our intentional mental actions. What we are now is determined by our thoughts and actions in the past, and similarly, what we will experience in the future is influenced by our thoughts and actions in the present. Karma doesn’t mean that we’re dealt a fixed destiny that we have to passively accept. Our karma continuously changes depending on how we think and act now. By changing our thoughts and behaviour, we can definitely transform the quality of our lives for the better.

AA: I would explain 'karma' as an aggregate of all forces resulting from one's past and present mental states and actions. Karma forces may result even if one does an action unintentionally. What we are is not 'determined' by just past thoughts and actions, but 'influenced' by them, and we are also influenced by those actions and thoughts we have at the present. More importantly, we are also influenced by the karma forces from external entities, since every entity in the universe is inseparable from one another. Hence, we can only use the word 'influence' in this context since we are not the only entity that may change those aggregate forces that determine what we are. Lastly, although the interaction of these different sources of karma forces change constantly, there is no certainty that we can definitely avert every mishap in the present life by doing certain actions or having certain thoughts. Certain mishaps are destined as a result of the greater, unavoidable karma forces behind them that have matured. As such, any present actions or thoughts may not mature in time to change these mishaps' manifestations. As a result, those who do good and speak good now may still end up not having a quality life in their present lifetime, although their good doings and speech will certainly plant the seed for desirable, corresponding effects in a future lifetime (if there is any; Arhats may not have any future rebirths).

RT: Misconception 6: Pastor Rony said, “How could you ever learn from your past life when you do not know what you were or who you were; whether you were a prince or a cockroach, you also don’t know… Surely there isn’t any past life because when you were born as a baby, you started with a new slate with no recollection whatsoever… There is no such thing as a previous life, or to be reborn into the next life.”

NUSBS Answer: This understanding of the mind stems from John Locke’s epistemological theory of ‘tabula rasa’, which claims that individuals are born as a blank slate, and all their knowledge comes from experience and perception. This theory is still subject to ongoing philosophical debate. In any case, according to the doctrine of rebirth, our thoughts and actions leave imprints on our consciousness which we may not be fully aware of. These imprints result in consequences which come to fruition when causes and conditions allow them to.

AA: Indeed it is not easy for most people to learn from their past lives with their own effort. What lessons could those who can recall only a few past lives draw from these limited recollections? The reason why most cannot recall their past lives is defilement of mind, which prevents them from accessing their "memories bank" (8th sense). Certain individuals had been able to recall a few of their past lives. Their accounts had been documented by secular professional psychiatrists. Even for these individuals, their recollections are not distant and complete enough to provide any meaningful lesson. Furthermore, even if one can recall millions of past lives, he may still not be able to fully understand the workings of the interaction of karma forces. On the other hand, the Buddha had developed unrestrained power to recall his and anyone's past lives and also complete insight into the workings of the interaction of karma forces. Buddhists learn about the implications of karma by reading about the stories of those privileged individuals whose past lives had been recalled or told by the Buddha and from his explanations of the underlying interactions of karma forces: how certain actions or thoughts resulted in certain rebirths or mishaps. The most obvious examples would be the Buddha himself''s. Why did he come into this world to become a prince, endowed with superior physical features, wealth and, most importantly, wisdom, that enabled him to attain Buddhahood? From his stories, Buddhists learn how they too could do like what the Buddha did in his past lives in order to attain what he had attained in a future lifetime.

RT: Misconception 7: Pastor Rony said, “Ladies should be very offended [by the doctrine of rebirth]… One of the Buddhist persons who argued with me many years ago, he said, ‘…You are such an unbeliever, he said, next life ah, … you’ll be born as a woman!’ So you ladies, don’t believe in reincarnation.”

NUSBS Answer: Buddhism does not regard women as inferior to men. In fact, the Buddha himself was explicit about treating men and women equally; he initiated women into the Sangha (the Buddhist monastic order) despite fierce controversy. Any sexist sentiments of individuals derive from the attitudes of their cultures, not from Buddhism.

AA: The Buddha does think that females generally possess inferior qualities relative to males. However, the important things to note are: 1) it is not destined for women to be inferior. Due to karma they are born females. By the same principle they can be born males or even "sexless males" in higher Realms where there is no gender and where people are not born from the womb; 2) not every single woman is inferior to every single man. Most females have inferior physical strength than most males, but certain female bodybuilders and sportswomen may be superior to most men in this respect. Similarly, there were certain females who attained Nirvana while most men didn't and still can't; 3) the 'inferiority' changes over time. the social & economic status of women during Buddha's time was generally lower. However, women today in more and more countries enjoy a higher status.; 4) stating that females during that time generally had an "inferior" status doesn't equate to "discrimination" in the sense of denying them their due privileges. "Discrimination" in the sense of making and understanding of inherent differences is helpful. Imagine if we do not appreciate that differences between men and women do exist and insist that women compete with men on equal terms, in running, physical combat, etc. Is this fair to women? I don't think so. Meaningful differences are noted by the Buddha with the aim of helping all groups progress effectively, with good intentions. Since the Buddha's compassion for all is equal, he is concerned about the common good for all groups, in light of the overall implications of each rule or arrangement he recommended.