| First of all there is the caveat that we are not automatons living each moment generated by past causes with no hope of making any change. Much of life is simple cause and effect, however, we are on a general path toward our individual destiny. There is ample opportunity along this path for the expression of manifest effect, but the bottom line is that there is volition in every decision we make to some degree.
As an example: you're texting while driving and hit a car. Got insurance? No problem, get a new car (simple cause and effect). Same scenario, no insurance; can't get to work; lose your job; house gets foreclosed and now you're homeless (manifest effect). Understanding the danger of this practice you decide not to text while driving (simple volition).
All life is conditioned at every moment of our existence and it is this conditioning that forms the basis of our response to our individual environments. For some, the conditions they are born into limit their ability to act with volition in certain circumstances. For example, those that are born with less than adequate functioning in certain areas are more apt to be limited in the amount of volition they have.
As was mentioned earlier, life is a complex and interconnected interplay between entities and their individual environments. We are all dependant upon each other to fulfill our karma. To be blunt, the victim is dependant upon the victimizer, and vice versa. This is the quantitative realization of Dependant Co-arising.
No matter how much a person may complain about how life is treating them, it is their own bad karma that is to blame. The victimizer is the person that we blame for what has been done, but that is really just an example of the complexity of the interconnectedness of life. The victimizer is just making the cause for his or her own unhappiness in the future, and has not acted with volition. The victim has received the effect, and together they are caught in a cycle of repetition throughout future lives. This can be seen in the Middle East with the cycle of violence that is perpetuated by the conditioning of revenge. On the other hand, Martin Luther King and Gandhi both used volition in that they were determined not to sink into the cycle of violence. Which of these two examples has been the most effective?
History is replete with examples of people acting with volition, but much more replete with examples of acting within the confines of their own conditioning, and even though it could be argued that all exercises of volition are products of conditioning, there are also many cases where people make decisions from the basis of emotion, instinct, and in knee jerk fashion. The wisdom which comes from the process of leading an ethical Buddhist life results in the use of correct volition, however, in everyday life when faced with someone that wants to make you angry, do you act with volition born of wisdom and choose not to be angry, or act with the volition born of conditioning and let the other person influence your environment? Incorrect volition is born from conditioning, while correct volition is born from wisdom.
This leads us to the difference between Theoretical Ichinen Sanzen and Actual Ichinen Sanzen, because no amount of knowledge of the theory can actually change your karma. In Buddhism there is mutable karma and immutable karma and only through practice can the mutable karma be lessoned so that a person is free to act with volition in all circumstances. Tien-t'ai stated that "even though you may perform ten thousand good deeds, you will never escape your karmic entanglements until you understand the nature of your own mind." This points to the need for a practice and not just the act of making good causes.
It isn't good enough to understand the nature of life when the next thing you know you get slapped down by your own karma. That is why positive thinking doesn't work for everyone! The underlying negative karma overpowers any good that comes from the act of positive thinking alone.
Ichinen Sanzen is all about positive thinking and observation of the mind, but karma tends to get in the way. Observation of the mind requires a practice to keep your karma in check from the start, allowing the person to become in rhythm with their environment. T'ien-t'ai provided a practice but it wasn't suitable for most people, and in fact, he looked toward the future when the One Vehicle of the Lotus Sutra would be the primary practice.
At this point it must be understood that in Buddhism there are Three Time Periods [the Former Day of the Law, the Middle Day of the Law, and the Latter Day of the Law]. Tien-t'ai was assumed to be the Buddha for the Middle Day of the Law and was responsible for systematizing the Three Truths and Ichinen Sanzen. Dengyo [Saicho 767-822 C.E.] did work on the precepts (Candle for the Latter Dharma) and how the precepts change in regards to the Three Time Periods, and was responsible for the Mahayana Ordination Platform at Mt. Hiei, Japan where the Ten Good Mahayana precepts replaced the 250 Hinayana precepts.
With the Three Time Periods in mind we see the progression of Buddhist practice over time. During the Middle Day of the Law the practice that T'ien-t'ai advocated was the 37 facets of spiritual awakening, the 42 stages of Bodhisattva development, the Paramitas, etc, along with the observation of the mind (Kanjin). However, then we find that Dengyo refines the precepts, and Nichiren refines even further so that in the Latter Day we only have the One Precept of the Diamond Chalice.
In the refining of the practice can there also be observation of the mind? It is the contention of this paper that it is not only possible, but better suited than the provisional practices, because the practice today is the original gateway. T'ien-t'ai states that the Buddhism of the Latter Day "is the original cause for the inspiration of the mind."
Is the original cause not suitable for the practice of Kanjin? The key is to understand that the original cause leads backwards to the provisional practices of the precepts, but is also the "great universal door that allows everyone entry into the path, regardless of their spiritual capacity."
Once there is a basis of positivity that is born from practice, leading to the person becoming in rhythm with their environment, which leads to a persons basic needs always being fulfilled; then, it is possible to undertake the task of mastering your own mind through observation, which leads to mastery over ones environment. |
