![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cattasallaFor a long time, I refused to ever use the word “spiritual.” I could not articulate a precise definition, so I discarded it as a useless term. I still don’t have a precise definition, but now I find it useful for pointing to things that can happen in the heart and mind at a deep level, resulting in profound transformations in the way we exist in the world. They are things that go beyond the work we might do in a therapist’s office, but not wholly disconnected from that, either; when we untie the knots of our traumas, we clear out avenues for spiritual expression.
There isn’t a word in the Indian languages the Buddha taught in that could be translated exactly as “spiritual.” The closest is nirāmisa, which literally means “not flesh” or “not raw meat.” In a narrow sense, we might restrict the idea of a Buddhist “spiritual” path to nothing other than that which the Buddha taught as the highest aspiration: complete liberation from suffering, and from the great Wandering (the literal definition of saṃsāra). But, since we really don’t have a precise definition for the word, can there be other options? I’d like to step back and consider.
In Buddhist cosmology, there are a number of destinations one might go to after death, including hells, the realm of the hungry ghosts, the animal and humans realms, and the heavinly realms. We can broadly define the heavinly realms into two: the sensual, and that which goes beyond the sensual. The former belongs to a type of deity called the devas, the latter to a type of deity called the brahmas (simplying things perhaps too much). It is those two I’d like to think about, if the reader will indulge me (especially any monastic readers who might bristle at what I’m about to say!).
Neither of these realms is the highest goal of nibbāna. But neither can be reached without having put a significant amount of good into the world. I see no reason why we can’t regard those good works as a form of spirituality.
The deva realm is, as I mentioned, a realm of sensuality. The devas are long-lived; some of them have lifespans on the scale of billions of years. And the entire time, until shortly before their death, they are young and beautiful. In the deva realm, they are supplied with every sensual pleasure, and they live in constant sensual bliss.
Being born in the deva realm can only happend for someone who is generous, with good moral conduct. Someone who helps when they can in whatever way they can, and who refrains from intentionally doing harm. For most laity, this is all the Buddha advised. He didn’t even each meditation to most lay people! Mindfulness meditation being so widespread is an innovation of the last few centuries, rooted in the nationalist, anticolonial resistance of southeast Asians. He encouraged laity to enjoy sensual pleasures that were not immoral. He encouraged laity to accumulate wealth, as long as the means for doing so were not immoral and they set aside a portion of it to give away.
As an aside, the Buddha did not consider sex work and immoral way to make money. One of his disciples was a sex worker named Ambapali, who provided him with one of his final meals. After he died, she became a nun and reached full enlightenment as an arahant. In fact, only five professions were specified as always wrong—manufacture and distribution of weapons, enslaved or trafficked humans, meat, intoxicants, or poisons—although lying or cheating should also not be done as part of any profession, such as one might do in sales.
All of this is to say, we can certainly look at this path to devahood, a path that is not free from sensuality, but is fundamentally generous and moral, as a form of spirituality. I would be remiss to leave it unsaid that this is still binding oneself to the Wantering, because attachment to sensuality always will, but kindness and generosity are obviously better than injuriousness and stinginess.
Then, there’s the world of the brahmas. This is a world beyond sensuality. One is reborn as a brahma deity through deep meditation, which requires giving up attachments to sensual pleasures, and more importantly, to the drive to grasp for sensual pleasures to avoid pain or boredom. Once that drive is set aside, once boredom is no longer feared and one can simply abide, a profound letting go is possible that unveils a peaceful, blissful, stillness, to which no sensual pleasure can compare.
There’s another important aspect to the brahma realm, though. In Buddhism (likely coming from contemporary traditions and not unique to Buddhism), we have what are called the four brahmavihāras, or “dwellings or brahma.” These are all aspects of love. This does not mean anything like “romantic” love. It is not the feelings of attachment, or clinging, that might get called “love” in English. It is not something that can ever lead to anxiety or despair. In Buddhism, we speak of four aspects to this love: loving-kindness, compassion, rejoicing in the good fortunate of others, and serene acceptance of everyone, no matter how faulted they might be.
When I think of the path to the brahma realm, then, I think of setting aside a worldly life and cultivating peace and unconditional love.
Now, I don’t mean to imply that these two are completely disjoin ways of being. obviously, someone on what I’m calling the deva path should also be cultivating love—this will support morality and generosity, and is just generally good to do. They can even cultivate meditation as best they can while indulging in the sensual. In fact, if we were to draw a line between the deva path and the others, that’s where it would be: the importance of sensuality.
Finally, there is the highest path that leads out of the Wandering. This is the path of the buddhas and arahants, the path that leads to complete liberation from suffering and the causes of suffering. This is full enlightenment, and the eradication of even the possibility of ever experiencing emotional anguish again. Lest my reader be confused on this point, this is not indifference, nor detachment. The buddhas and arahants are deeply involved in the lives of others through their love for others. But they are released, perfectly free, and unburdened by anything.
I think there’s a tendency, at least in the more stringent Buddhist circles I run in, to only place value on the path out of the Wandering. This is the only one some will call “spiritual.” And I think that does a disservice, in part because not everyone is interested in leaving everything behind. Most people who become interested in Buddhism just want to improve their lives a bit, and become a bit happier. They don’t see value in doing what it takes for unconditioned happiness. They probably don’t even believe such a thing is real. I would rather not shut them out and tell them that only the highest path is truly spiritual. A life of morality, generosity, and love, whether involved with sensuality or not, is still a spiritual life.
There isn’t a word in the Indian languages the Buddha taught in that could be translated exactly as “spiritual.” The closest is nirāmisa, which literally means “not flesh” or “not raw meat.” In a narrow sense, we might restrict the idea of a Buddhist “spiritual” path to nothing other than that which the Buddha taught as the highest aspiration: complete liberation from suffering, and from the great Wandering (the literal definition of saṃsāra). But, since we really don’t have a precise definition for the word, can there be other options? I’d like to step back and consider.
In Buddhist cosmology, there are a number of destinations one might go to after death, including hells, the realm of the hungry ghosts, the animal and humans realms, and the heavinly realms. We can broadly define the heavinly realms into two: the sensual, and that which goes beyond the sensual. The former belongs to a type of deity called the devas, the latter to a type of deity called the brahmas (simplying things perhaps too much). It is those two I’d like to think about, if the reader will indulge me (especially any monastic readers who might bristle at what I’m about to say!).
Neither of these realms is the highest goal of nibbāna. But neither can be reached without having put a significant amount of good into the world. I see no reason why we can’t regard those good works as a form of spirituality.
The deva realm is, as I mentioned, a realm of sensuality. The devas are long-lived; some of them have lifespans on the scale of billions of years. And the entire time, until shortly before their death, they are young and beautiful. In the deva realm, they are supplied with every sensual pleasure, and they live in constant sensual bliss.
Being born in the deva realm can only happend for someone who is generous, with good moral conduct. Someone who helps when they can in whatever way they can, and who refrains from intentionally doing harm. For most laity, this is all the Buddha advised. He didn’t even each meditation to most lay people! Mindfulness meditation being so widespread is an innovation of the last few centuries, rooted in the nationalist, anticolonial resistance of southeast Asians. He encouraged laity to enjoy sensual pleasures that were not immoral. He encouraged laity to accumulate wealth, as long as the means for doing so were not immoral and they set aside a portion of it to give away.
As an aside, the Buddha did not consider sex work and immoral way to make money. One of his disciples was a sex worker named Ambapali, who provided him with one of his final meals. After he died, she became a nun and reached full enlightenment as an arahant. In fact, only five professions were specified as always wrong—manufacture and distribution of weapons, enslaved or trafficked humans, meat, intoxicants, or poisons—although lying or cheating should also not be done as part of any profession, such as one might do in sales.
All of this is to say, we can certainly look at this path to devahood, a path that is not free from sensuality, but is fundamentally generous and moral, as a form of spirituality. I would be remiss to leave it unsaid that this is still binding oneself to the Wantering, because attachment to sensuality always will, but kindness and generosity are obviously better than injuriousness and stinginess.
Then, there’s the world of the brahmas. This is a world beyond sensuality. One is reborn as a brahma deity through deep meditation, which requires giving up attachments to sensual pleasures, and more importantly, to the drive to grasp for sensual pleasures to avoid pain or boredom. Once that drive is set aside, once boredom is no longer feared and one can simply abide, a profound letting go is possible that unveils a peaceful, blissful, stillness, to which no sensual pleasure can compare.
There’s another important aspect to the brahma realm, though. In Buddhism (likely coming from contemporary traditions and not unique to Buddhism), we have what are called the four brahmavihāras, or “dwellings or brahma.” These are all aspects of love. This does not mean anything like “romantic” love. It is not the feelings of attachment, or clinging, that might get called “love” in English. It is not something that can ever lead to anxiety or despair. In Buddhism, we speak of four aspects to this love: loving-kindness, compassion, rejoicing in the good fortunate of others, and serene acceptance of everyone, no matter how faulted they might be.
When I think of the path to the brahma realm, then, I think of setting aside a worldly life and cultivating peace and unconditional love.
Now, I don’t mean to imply that these two are completely disjoin ways of being. obviously, someone on what I’m calling the deva path should also be cultivating love—this will support morality and generosity, and is just generally good to do. They can even cultivate meditation as best they can while indulging in the sensual. In fact, if we were to draw a line between the deva path and the others, that’s where it would be: the importance of sensuality.
Finally, there is the highest path that leads out of the Wandering. This is the path of the buddhas and arahants, the path that leads to complete liberation from suffering and the causes of suffering. This is full enlightenment, and the eradication of even the possibility of ever experiencing emotional anguish again. Lest my reader be confused on this point, this is not indifference, nor detachment. The buddhas and arahants are deeply involved in the lives of others through their love for others. But they are released, perfectly free, and unburdened by anything.
I think there’s a tendency, at least in the more stringent Buddhist circles I run in, to only place value on the path out of the Wandering. This is the only one some will call “spiritual.” And I think that does a disservice, in part because not everyone is interested in leaving everything behind. Most people who become interested in Buddhism just want to improve their lives a bit, and become a bit happier. They don’t see value in doing what it takes for unconditioned happiness. They probably don’t even believe such a thing is real. I would rather not shut them out and tell them that only the highest path is truly spiritual. A life of morality, generosity, and love, whether involved with sensuality or not, is still a spiritual life.