View Printer Friendly Format Page 1 of 12

“I am the Way and the Truth and the Life; no one comes to the Father except through me.” John 14:6

A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO I was invited to join with Father Laurence Freeman OSB, to co-lead an evening of reflections at Old St Mary’s Catholic Cathedral, in San Francisco. This was something of a follow-up to the seminar entitled “The Good Heart” that HH the Dalai Lama had led in London in 1994, where he was invited by the World Community for Christian Meditation, to give commentaries on the Gospels. Father Laurence had hosted and chaired that event and I had also been honoured to take part.

One of the people who had greatly appreciated that event, and the richness of inter-religious dialogue that it had roused, was Janice Del Fiacco, a Bay Area resident. She was keen to encourage similar discussions in her hometown, so the gathering in San Francisco was arranged. Furthermore, just as HH the Dalai Lama had commented on the texts from the Gospels, she asked if I would do the same and if Father Laurence would give reflections on something from the Buddhist scriptures.

I pointed out from the start that, like HH the Dalai Lama, I was an amateur at Christianity and could not speak authoritatively from Latin or Greek sources. However, as Father Laurence pleaded the same ignorance of Pali and Sanskrit, and the spirit of the event was the reflections of contemplatives rather than textual analyses by scholars, we agreed that such lack of scholarship should not be an obstacle. We would just refer to received texts and offer reflections on that basis; similarly, in this current essay, I can only refer to derived sources and offer comments based on direct experience – the reader is encouraged to bear that in mind as you proceed.

When we pondered what passages might be most interesting and useful to the group that would be gathering in the shadowy hallows of the cathedral, one quote from the Gospels immediately came to my mind: “How about ‘I am the Page 2 of 12

Way and the Truth and the Life; nobody comes unto the Father except through me’?” I suggested, a little brashly. “Really?” Queried Father Laurence, his face taking on an expression wrought of surprise, interest and a little anxiety. “Do you think that’s wise…?” “I think it’s ideal,” I responded, “it’s the verse of the bible that’s most often quoted to us when someone is speaking from a triumphalist or exclusionist position – trying to assert that, whatever it is that we Buddhists believe (or those of any faith other than Christian) it must be wrong. However, when you look at that verse reflectively, it is a very powerful meditation teaching.”

Since we only had enough time for one piece each, and perhaps in response to my idea to use John 14:6, he chose for himself to recount the Kalama Sutta. This is the teaching where the Buddha encourages his listeners not to believe in scripture, logic, parental tradition, common custom, or even the words of a trusted teacher like himself, but rather to weigh the efficacy of any spiritual teaching or practice by the real wealth of goodness that it brings to one’s life: if it leads to welfare for yourself and others, take it and use it, if it leads to difficulty and division – leave it aside.

Even though my parents were not churchgoers, I was educated in Church of England schools, with a short service and bible reading at the start of each day. The way that this verse from John came across to me, from early childhood, was always somewhat off-putting. There was a harshness in the way it was always pronounced: Jesus was made to sound like an aggressive elder brother guarding the door to Dad’s office, or a bossy prefect proud of his privileged position. More to the point, it was used to say: “Christianity is right – everybody else is wrong!”

Globally today, it doesn’t seem to be an exaggeration to say that this is most often how the words are used – and almost certainly the reason for Father Laurence’s Page 3 of 12

reticence at my commenting on it. Just recently (September 2006) there it was on the placards of some ardent evangelists outside the Dalai Lama’s teachings in Pasadena; good hearted folks eager to save us from the fiery pits.

From the earliest times that I began to think about such things, when I was 6 or 7 years old, I wondered, “What makes them right? They say that but can they prove it?” So it was at this time that I eventually abandoned Christianity, mostly because of the demand to believe what was not credible or provable to me. It was only in later years I realized that, if the words are taken on a personal level, understood only to support tribalist tendencies – “My team is better than yours!” – we are missing a rich and liberating teaching.

My introduction to Buddhism, meditation and monastic life all occurred in Thailand. After having been there for a couple of years I returned to England and to Cittaviveka – the monastery in West Sussex that had recently been opened by Ajahn Sumedho.

It was not so much that an interest in Christianity arose in me then, it was more that, being in a Buddhist monastery in England rather than Thailand, there was a steady trickle of visitors and encounters with Christians; some of whom were committed, and others who were questioning or straight-out aversive to it.

Suffice to say that there was more talk of, and thus cause to reflect on, Christian teachings than I had been exposed to since left school, in 1973, some seven years before. I do not now recall what brought it to mind one day – perhaps a talk by Ajahn Sumedho or a chat with one of the monastery’s guests – but I have a clear memory of sitting in meditation one evening and bringing to mind the verse from John: “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life....” It then occurred to me: “I have been meditating for a few years now and I have a clear Page 4 of 12

understanding of both what ‘the Way’ and ‘the Truth’ are, but neither of these have anything whatsoever to do with Jesus… Hmmm.”

There were no doubts in my mind that I was agonizing over, I was simply using the faculties of wise reflection (yoniso manasikara) and investigation of reality (dhammavicaya) in order to explore this interesting theme. The topic then proceeded to unfold further: “Well, if I know what the Way and the Truth are, and they are this current experience of Reality, then Jesus Christ was obviously using the words “I am” in a way very different to that put forth by the evangelical and triumphalist voices. Aha! Maybe that’s it…”

I then recollected that once, when Ajahn Sumedho had been remarking on this passage, he had said: “To me, that just means ‘be mindful’.” These words immediately brought to mind the famous verse from The Dhammapada:

Mindfulness is the path to the Deathless,
Heedlessness is the path to the Death;
The mindful never die,
The heedless are as if dead already.
Dhp 21

As these phrases formed in my memory it became clear that, mysteriously, these two passages, from the bible and the Buddhist scriptures, seemed almost analogous – given a little flexibility with religious symbolism and terminology.

I am fully aware that it can be presumptuous, if not downright dangerous to put words into the mouths of others, especially great seers and sages. However, it should be remembered that these reflections are offered here in the spirit of being for contemplation, rather than as being categorical statements. In this way the hope is that they will be a cause for fertile insights to arise and novel realizations to be sparked.

On one occasion a catholic priest, who had been staying at one of Ajahn Chah’s monasteries, asked: “Do you think the goal of the spiritual life according to Christians and that according to Buddhists is the same goal?” Ajahn Chah responded, “How could there be two Ultimate Realities? If there were, one of them wouldn’t be ultimate.” So, Page 5 of 12

if we assume that Ajahn Chah’s insight was correct, that means we are talking about a single Ultimate Reality that can be realized through many and various skilful means, and that can be symbolized in a variety of ways.

The term ‘the Father’ is used throughout the Gospels to refer to God, being the Ultimate Reality. Ajahn Buddhadasa, a highly influential Buddhist master of the Twentieth Century and one of Thailand’s great philosopher monks, as well as a translator of the bible into Thai, has said that ‘Dhamma’ (‘Dharma’ in Sanskrit) is the best translation in Thai for the word ‘God’ – the two principles having many characteristics, eg immortality or deathlessness, in common. The key difference is that ‘Dhamma’ cannot be personified in any way; ie it cannot be rendered as some kind of separate being, it is rather the transcendent Reality which is the source and fabric of all mental and physical realms. However, if we take the liberty of laying aside the personal element for the time being, then the verse from John can be re-rendered: “…no one comes to the Deathless Reality except through me.”

By drawing these parallel passages together, and in this equating of terms, then, if ‘the Father’ is equivalent to ‘the Deathless,’ the ‘I am’ has its counterpart in ‘Mindfulness.’ In the Pali, the word translated here as ‘mindfulness’ is ‘appamada’ which can also be rendered as ‘heedfulness’ or ‘awakened awareness’; it means a fully attuned, wholehearted knowing of the present moment, free from any delusory biases and embedded in a profound and genuine wisdom. The implication of Jesus’ statement, “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life....” when taken in this way, is thus that mindful awareness is the embodiment of his nature – what some have called the Christ consciousness.

The use of the words ‘the Life’ in the verse from John is also echoed in the Buddha’s words: “The mindful never die…” – interestingly it is further borne out in other statements from the Gospel of John:

He that believeth on the Son Page 6 of 12

hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him (John 3:36).

Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live… And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. (John 11:25-26)

Along with these words of Jesus, there are obviously various ways that this phrase of the Buddha’s can be understood: if it’s taken at a superficial level it sounds as though the Buddha is saying that: “If you play your cards right and are careful enough, your body will never die.” Since his own body ceased to live after 80 years, that’s a big clue that he’s not talking about bodies here.

Rather he is saying that when there is full awakened awareness, then there is no identification with the body or with conditioned factors of mind. The realization of the Dhamma is so complete that the life or death of the body is of as little consequence as the turning of the earth is to the sun. The body and mind are not-self, as is reiterated so often in the Buddhist scriptures, so the heart remains serene with all of life’s ups and downs, its many psychological births and deaths, triumphs and failures, as well as the ‘big death’ of the body’s ending. As St Theresa of Avila put it, when expounding on this same theme: “We die before we die so that when we die, we won’t die.”

Even though numerous Christian groups think in terms of the physical resurrection of all bodies of the faithful on Judgement Day, to the contemplative heart it seems highly likely that Jesus was intending his words to be understood in the same manner as the Buddha – and just as St Theresa captures the essence of it in her succinct aphorism.

Another point to emphasize here is that, in Buddhist philosophy, mindfulness (sati or appamada) holds a uniquely significant position: it is the first Page 7 of 12

of the Seven Factors of Enlightenment and as such was said by the Buddha to be, “always useful.” The development of the Four Foundations of Mindfulness was said by the Buddha to be “ekayana magga” sometimes (also triumphalistically!) translated as: “The only way to deliverance,” is more faithfully rendered: “the direct path for the purification of beings…” (M10.2); and sati is the pivotal member of the Five Spiritual Faculties.

Most importantly, however, this same quality of wakefulness is seen as being the very essence of the Buddha’s nature. This is in fact why the word ‘Buddha’ – meaning ‘The One Who is Awakened’ or ‘The One Who Knows’ has come to be used as the primary epithet of the great teacher.

At one time the Blessed One was travelling by the road between Ukkattha and Setavya; and the brahmin Dona was travelling by that road too. He saw in the Blessed One’s footprints wheels with a thousand spokes, and with rims and hubs all complete. Then he thought: “It is wonderful, it is marvellous! Surely this can never be the footprint of a human being.”

Then the Blessed One left the road and sat down at the root of a tree, cross-legged, with his body held erect and mindfulness established before him. Then the brahmin Dona, who was following up the footprints, saw him sitting at the root of the tree. The Blessed One inspired trust and confidence, his faculties being stilled, his mind quiet and attained to supreme control and serenity: a royal tusker self-controlled and guarded by restraint of the sense faculties. The brahmin went up to him and asked:
“Sir, are you a god?”
“No, brahmin.”
“Sir, are you a heavenly angel?”
“No, brahmin.”
“Sir, are you a spirit?”
“No, brahmin.”
“Sir, are you a human being?”
“No, brahmin.”
“Then, sir, what indeed are you?”
“Brahmin, the defilements by means of which, through my not having abandoned them, I might be a god or a heavenly angel or a spirit or a human being have been abandoned by me, cut off at Page 8 of 12

the root, made like a palm stump, done away with, and are no more subject to future arising. Just as a blue or red or white lotus is born in water, grows in water and stands up above water untouched by it, so too I, who was born in the world and grew up in the world, have transcended the world, and i live untouched by the world."
"Remember me as one who is awakened (buddha)."
A 4.36

So, mindful awareness is not just part of the Way, one prerequisite condition for realizing Ultimate Truth, it can also be said to be an embodiment of it as well. Furthermore, just as Jesus Christ equates himself with Truth in the verse from John, the Buddhist scriptures also equate, on other occasions, the physical manifestation of spiritual awakenedness and the Ultimate Reality. For example: the story so far is that the bhikkhu Vakkali has fallen gravely ill and the Buddha has come from his dwelling, at the squirrels’ sanctuary in the Bamboo Grove, near Rajagaha, to pay him a visit. The Buddha asks him how he is doing and, after recounting to the Master that his sickness is worsening, he expresses the one regret remaining in his heart.

“For a long time, venerable sir, I have wanted to come and see the Blessed One, but I haven’t been fit enough to do so.”

“Enough, Vakkali; why do you want to see this filthy body? One who sees the Dhamma sees me; one who sees me sees the Dhamma. For it is when one sees the Dhamma that they see me; and it is when they see me that they see the Dhamma.
S 22.87

On a different occasion, one of the enlightened disciples, Ven. Maha-Kaccana, extolled the qualities of the Buddha’s nature:

“For knowing, the Blessed One knows; seeing, he sees; he is vision, he is knowledge, he is the Dhamma; he is the holy one; he is the sayer, the proclaimer, the elucidator of meaning, the giver of the Deathless, the Lord of the Dhamma, Page 9 of 12

the Tathagata!”
M 18.12

All of these instances of identification with Truth, by the Buddha or his disciples, should, however, be considered in the light of the emphasis he gave to the fact that the “Tathagata is only one who points the way” (akkhataro Tathagata). Merely by staying close to him or clinging to his teachings can never be enough to liberate the heart, we have to make the effort ourselves to go in the direction he is pointing.

If we now refer back to the verse from John and we re-read it in a non-personal way, it too seems to encourage this same quality of self-reliance. If it is read to say: “Awakened awareness is the Way, the Truth and the Life; no one can realize the Deathless unless it is through this quality,” then we are similarly thrown back onto our own resources. Its up to us to rouse the energy, interest and resolve, and to consider wisely how to let go of those attributes that obstruct the heart, and to cultivate and maintain those that clarify it. It implies that there needs to be an effort from within – in Japanese known as ‘jiriki’ – as well as assistance from without, that we can helpfully derive from those who point the way and who can embody the Truth for us – known, again, in Japanese as ‘tariki.’

In offering these reflections, I am aware that depersonalizing the Christian teachings might be illuminating to some but be off-putting, distressing or confusing to others. For many practising Christians, the most important element of their faith is ‘a personal relationship with God’ and I have no intention to be dismissive toward that dimension of spiritual practice. It’s simply that, from the Buddhist perspective, there are many and various ways of exploring the mystery of experience and arriving at a unified quality of peace, freedom and fulfilment, total spiritual emancipation.

It is also at about this point in the discussion, that it’s often asked: “What about love?!? Doesn’t that come into it for you? The sacred heart Page 10 of 12

of Jesus is more that just mindfulness!?*!? Surely…” And, for many, the love they feel that comes from God or Mary or Jesus is a tangible presence; as is the love they extend to the deities in return. In response to this, I often ask – just as one can enquire on being quoted John 14:6: “What exactly do you mean by ‘I am’?” – “What exactly do you mean by ‘love’?” Interestingly, both of these kind of questions are usually met with an identical silence.

When you get right to the core of it, the experience of loving totally, or being loved totally, is an experience of wholeness – at that moment, self and other, lover and loved have been lost in the presence of completion. Having an external object or person that is the focus of devotion is one way that the experience of the wholeness of Reality can be arrived at, but it is by no means the only one.

In the Buddhist traditions of the Southern, or Theravada school, even though the Buddha is certainly described as embodying an all-encompassing love, a substantial emphasis is also made on the non-personalizing language of the scriptures. In Buddhist philosophy, a phrase like “The Dhamma loves me” is utterly meaningless and is found in no Buddhist traditions whatsoever. It is also, more importantly, impossible to place the Dhamma outside yourself, even as some kind of non-personal element. It is seen, rather, as we see Nature, as something every aspect of ourselves is intrinsically a part of.

To quote another famous passage from the Gospels that alludes somewhat to this same principle: “The kingdom of God is within you.” (Luke 17:21).

The Northern Buddhist traditions have developed more in the way of devotional practices directed toward various deities and lofty spiritual beings – such as the recitation of the name of Amitabha Buddha, Kuan Yin Bodhisattva, or the various forms of deity yoga – where a deliberate invocation of a divine ‘other’ is employed to open the heart to Reality. However, such practices are always Page 11 of 12

seen, in Buddhist tradition, as skilful means (upaya) to help break through limited habits of vision. Thus there might be a profound, devoted relationship to Kuan Yin Bodhisattva, in the heart of an aspirant, nevertheless that devotion is recollected within the light of emptiness and the ‘not-self’ teachings – when asked whether Tara really existed, a Tibetan lama once replied: “She knows that she’s not real.”

These two methodologies – deliberate self-reliance on the one hand and conscious adherence to a revered being on the other – are both seen, within Buddhist tradition, as valid spiritual paths. However, the path of self-reliance, the jiriki track, is seen as the most direct and, understandably, more demanding – it’s the path straight up the mountain. Whereas the tariki practices, although seen as effective, are more circuitous and can be compared to the winding lanes that ascend the mountain at a more gentle grade.

Interestingly enough some Christian contemplatives have also recognized these complementary qualities to be part of the spiritual life. In his “Ascent of Mount Carmel,” St John of the Cross describes various spiritual practices using this same simile of a spiritual peak that needs to be climbed as his central image. The most demanding and direct of all the approaches he outlines is referred to as ‘the way of pure spirit’ and, in his analysis of its nature, he summarizes it as: “Nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing and even on the Mountain, nothing.”

By the use of this expression, it seems he is pointing to an equivalent, complete non-identification with, and a letting go of all things, internal and external, as the Way. This is the same radical quality of non-clinging that is exemplified in the nature of the Buddha and as is borne out in the verse 21 from the Dhammapada. Neither does the pure heart have anything, nor does it lack anything – it is simply Ultimate Reality aware of its own nature. This quality is evinced both in Jesus’ words from John 10:30: “I and the Father are one,” and also in the Buddha’s words Page 12 of 12

to Vakkali: “One who sees the Dhamma sees me; one who sees me sees the Dhamma.”

As a final word, the reflections presented here are offered in the spirit of spiritual cross-fertilization and dialogue, just as similar themes were on that evening at Old St Mary’s Catholic Cathedral. It is hoped that these wonderful teachings might be seen in a somewhat more universal way which, it would seem, could only be a good thing.

Needless to say, if we want our team always to be seen as the best, and we are clinging to our beliefs in a plaintive effort, either to fill up the roaring vastness of the unknown, or because we are still carrying around our raft although we are already on the safe shore, well, these reflections will not have been of much use. Whatever is the case, may the reader take what is useful and illuminating here, and the rest can be gently laid aside.

Abhayagiri Monastery - 6th of October, 2006