AwakeningBuddhism is a pragmatic religion. The Nyingma Lama, Chhi’mèd Rig’dzin Rinpoche, was once asked a question concerning the difference between world religions and the answer he gave was unusual both in its humour and simplicity. He said:

Hinduism is the religion of the King. If you want something you go to the King and ask. Christianity is the religion of the Prince. If you want something you go to the Prince rather than directly to the King, but the result is the same. Islam is the religion of the Ambassador. If you want something you go to the Ambassador rather than the King or Prince, but again - the result is the same. Buddhism is the religion of the labourer. If you want something done, you do it yourself.

It was evident at the time that Chhi’mèd Rig’dzin Rinpoche was not really simplistically encapsulating the religions to which he alluded – he was making a pragmatic point for a specific audience. He wanted them to know that he was not their saviour and that they were required to be diligent in respect of the nature of his communications. Ngak’chang Rinpoche, who told me the story, elaborated on it as follows:The labourer can naturally seek advice. The labourer can depend on guidance. The labourer can even commit to highly specific guidance – but in the end, he or she must carry out the instructions in order to realise the non-dual state.Buddhism is a threefold structure in respect of the Buddha, that which the Buddha communicated, and those to whom the Buddha communicated. The communication aspect of the threefold division of Buddhism is Dharma1, and it is eminently practical. It gives precise instructions not only of how to do it ourselves – but how to establish a relationship with a guide with whom we can check our findings. There was never a good labourer who did not have to learn the craft.

1 The word ‘Buddhism’ is neither a translation of the Sanskrit word ‘Dharma’ nor of the Tibetan word ‘chö’. The Sanskrit dictionary of M Monier-Williams translates Dharma as ‘that which is established or firm; law; practice; religion; the law or doctrine of Buddhism, precepts of Buddhism; principal Dharma called Sutra. ‘Chö’ is translated as: ‘all phenomena, all matter, and all knowledge of things worldly and spiritual’ in the Chandra Das Tibetan dictionary. The translation ‘as it is’ which is commonly used, can be understood as in ‘the property of fire to run up and water to run down’. The word ‘Buddhism’ is derived from the religion’s association with the historical Buddha Shakyamuni. However the multifarious approaches that come under the umbrella title of ‘Buddhism’ disavow their differences. The Buddhism of the Zen tradition is quite different to Theravadin, which is again different to the Dharma found in Tibet, Nepal, and Bhutan. It is thus more accurate to use the word Dharma in this text that the word Buddhism.Dharma therefore, is rich with multifarious approaches and methods which make it accessible to the widest variety of individuals. Some people are of the opinion that Dharma is not a religion2, but rather a philosophy or ‘a way of approaching life’ – and so it may appear, at the practical, functional level. This however, is fundamentally misleading when becoming involved with the principles and methods of Dharma.2 ‘Religion’ is defined by Chambers dictionary as: belief in, recognition of, or an awakened sense of, a higher unseen controlling power or powers, with the emotion and morality connected therewith; rites or worship; any system of belief or worship: devoted fidelity. Philosophy’ is given as: pursuit of wisdom and knowledge: investigation of the nature of being: knowledge of the causes and laws of all things: the principles underlying any department of knowledge: reasoning: a particular philosophical system. It could be said that the founders of Buddhist systems were philosophers, as they sought wisdom and knowledge and investigated the nature of being. However those of us who now follow the methods of Buddhism are acting from belief in and recognition of an awakened sense of some higher unseen state of potentiality; we engage in rites and offer devoted fidelity. Hence Buddhism is a religion. It is important at the outset of our interest in Dharma to define our terms. If we fail to do so we may discover, after some years have elapsed, that we were engaged

in religion, even though it was philosophy or psychology we had initially wanted. We might feel cheated by such a revelation. We might feel we were tricked into adopting alien cultural and religious forms.Through the practice of philosophy one might expect to arrive at one’s own conclusions about the nature of being – such investigations and conclusions having been mostly self-referential. Through the practice of religion of Dharma one discovers that the nature of being has already been understood by one’s teachers, and that it can be discovered for ourselves through the methods of practice they reveal. Hence, to fully engage with Dharma, we eventually have to let go of the limitations of our own view – and leap . . . without reservation, into Dharma-view.If we choose a philosophy, we are always bigger than the philosophy. We can adjust its parameters when things become uncomfortable. We can wriggle out of whatever does not conform to our wishes. A religion, however, is always bigger than we are. A religion has a structure and clear parameters which cannot be ignored when they do not suit our convenience. We have to allow ourselves to be subsumed within the more expansive view of a religion. We need to fully embrace it to be fully embraced by it. In return, religion offers us a great support and structure to our lives.Religions offer moral codes which cannot be compromised for our individual convenience. The religion of a country offers a way of life and an existential flavour to its people. The year revolves around the calendar of the religion, defining times of festival and times of prayer, times of celebration and times of reflection. Important life junctures may be celebrated by the religion, such as moving into adulthood and marriage. Difficult life circumstances such as the death of a loved one occur within the wisdom-scaffolding of religious ritual, in the context of which one is lead to incorporate such experience in a wholesome manner.In some cases and at some times the structure of religion may be experienced as limiting and

claustrophobic, causing people – often the young – to reject it. However, the supportive quality of religion may come to be appreciated later in life. In the UK many people who would not count themselves as Christian still structure their lives around the Christian calendar, looking forward to family gatherings at Easter and Christmas. They may also find that they instinctively turn to religion for solace in times of trouble and distress.Ngak’chang Rinpoche said of this:

“It is sad that people reject the solace of religion on the basis that solace is a sop. Solace is indeed a sop – but I have yet to meet a human being who does not require a sop at some point in their lives. It is foolish to assume that merely because one has the intellect to define a sop that one would never be benefited by its availability. Every religion contains its supports and it challenges – and most human beings require both.”

In 2001, I was invited to teach in Malta with my husband Ngakpa ’ö-Dzin Tridral Dorje. Malta is a primarily Catholic country. The practice of Catholicism is extremely visible. Many houses have religious icons near their front doors. Public transport buses have shrines on their dashboards. The churches we visited always had groups of people actively engaged in practice – moving rosary beads with a low humming sound of prayer. We really valued the visibility of Malta’s religious culture – it completely saturated Maltese society. We appreciated the support and structure Catholicism offered the Maltese people. In Malta it is perfectly acceptable to practice your religion openly and devoutly. We were also aware of the problems of prejudice experienced by the Buddhist practitioners who had invited us to teach, but these do not negate the value of Catholicism itself. Where there are people there will be problems. Human interpretation of religion creates limitation and prejudice, not the fundamental principle and function of religion itself.

Some people believe that they can extract aspects of religions and adopt their philosophies and practices without embracing any religion as a whole. Once again this places the philosopher in control, in the prime position, governing the scope of the philosophy. They choose what is to be adopted and what is to be abandoned. A religious practitioner always has the support of other practitioners and the structure of religion, even when they are rebelling against its limitations. The philosopher is always alone without support, because each philosopher will eclectically extract the aspects of religion that he or she sees as valuable. They may reject some practices as cultural and embrace others as pragmatic. They also have the option of letting go of aspects that become inconvenient. But only a religious teacher, who is fully immersed and proficient in the methods of a religion, has the capacity to make adjustments to the external manifestations of the religion without distorting the religion in the process.To understand what is cultural and what is essential in a religion, one has to be fully adept at its practice and view – as Khandro Déchen explained:

“It takes a Buddha to reinvent or redefine Buddhism. Padmasambhava defined Vajrayana and unless one has equal qualifications one would be like a five year old child attempting to dismantle and reassemble a television. The result could be somewhat incongruous.”

In this context it is not necessary to be Tibetan to practice Nyingma Vajrayana Buddhism3. The principle and function of Vajrayana goes beyond culture. To be able to view what in Nyingma Vajrayana is the essence of method, and what is the flavour of Tibetan culture, requires realisation through method. The perspective such realisation provides can only be offered by the Lama.4

3 There are four schools of Buddhism in Tibet: Nyingma, Kagyüd, Shakya, and Gélug. Nyingma is the oldest of the schools, predating the reintroduction of Buddhism into Tibet after it was persecuted by Langdarma (the apostate King of Tibet) in the 9th century. Vajrayana is a branch of Buddhism

that utilises mantra and visualisation, and places great emphasis on the role of the teacher.4 Lama’ is the title used for experienced and learned teachers of Buddhism in Tibet, who through study, practice, and devotion to their own teachers and lineage are able to teach and transmit Dharma.Dharma teachers continually emphasise the need to practice. Dharma must be practised. We must engage in the methods it offers in order to arrive even at the initial stages of awakening. ‘Awakening’ is what is offered by Dharma. We are offered the opportunity to awaken from our delusion, from our limited view. To engage with practice requires a degree of belief and acceptance of the view and methods offered. We cannot experience awakening without having recognised, to whatever degree, that we are asleep. We cannot awaken without engaging in the methodology involved with awakening. This is not to say that Dharma is the only religion that offers effective and tested methods of awakening. It is simply that this is a book written by a Dharma practitioner, about Dharma, and so will inevitably speak from that perspective. I make no apology for my bias. I love the path of Vajrayana Buddhism, and I wish to offer a glimpse of the opportunities it continually offers me. The experiences to which I refer, and upon which I rely, are a natural expression of my own life and practice rather than an argument in favour of Vajrayana above all other religions.To accomplish any path requires confidence in the teacher and willingness to immerse oneself in the methods of the teacher. If we wished to become proficient at playing a musical instrument, we would have to engage in years of determined and steadfast practice. Elements of that practice might seem to bear little resemblance to the goal of the practice. Endless repetition of scales or exercises to increase the span and suppleness of fingers might seem to have little to do with the inspirational overtures of the great composers. However, we engage in the practice of scales and exercises because we have confidence in our music teachers. We see that they play their

instruments well, and that they have a love of music which is infectious. We understand that they have engaged in the practice of scales and exercises on the path to proficiency in playing their chosen musical instrument – and, what is more, they continue to practise. A student of Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche who was serving Kyabjé Dilgo Khyentsé Rinpoche as an attendant during his stay, noticed that Kyabjé Dilgo Khyentsé Rinpoche was reading a text. He asked why he was reading it, when he surely knew everything there was to know concerning Dharma. Kyabjé Dilgo Khyentsé Rinpoche replied simply, that he loved to read Dharma – it was not a question of learning or not learning.It may be that we approach different teachers who offer divergent methods before we settle to work closely, and with commitment, with one particular teacher and method. However, once we have gained confidence in the teacher and method, we can progress quickly – if we apply ourselves with enthusiasm and dedication.Dharma is a path. Dharma consists of methods which enable us to awaken from our delusions and reach the goal of the realisation of chö – ‘as it is’. To achieve this goal we engage in practice. Our teachers suggest that these practices will help us reach the goal and after a period of testing the methods and getting to know our teachers, we develop confidence in them. We notice that our teachers are happy, startlingly present, vibrant people. The method may not always be enjoyable or easy, and it may not always ‘make sense’ in our limited conventional terms of reference – but if our confidence in the teacher and the teachings is well grounded, it can be maintained and we can continue to discover surprising results.It would be unrealistic to ignore the fact that it can be challenging to enter the pervasive dimension of religion. In the early stages we may be carried along simply by enthusiasm or fascination. The novelty and exotic outer form of the religion may keep us involved, but something deeper and more grounded needs to be established if we are to continue to remain engaged with practice through times of resistance and self-

protectiveness when we tend to generate doubt as a buffer.I may find myself inexpressibly opened by my initial contact with Dharma – when it is new and interesting, exotic, colourful, and charged with sound and imagery. I have been inspired by the teacher, the teachings, and the cheerful energy of the practitioners around me. On my first retreat, I may feel that it is impossible to lose the new-found energy and inspiration I have discovered, and I go home fired up to practise at least two hours a day. However, when I get home and start to practise daily on my own, I may find it is not so easy to maintain the thread of inspiration and enthusiasm. I may even find myself bored with meditation practice. I may find I have forgotten the vajra melodies to the liturgical practices I have been taught, and in the cold back bedroom of my home it all might begin to seem senseless and futile. I may begin to experience confusion and uncertainty. I may find that friends and family are threatened by the inspiration I have discovered – and they may prove less than supportive. It could begin to feel as though in my practice I am swimming against the current of social consensus.My hope in this book, is to offer a simple perspective on the nature of Dharma as a religion. My hope is to portray what it may mean to become involved with entering the view of the Buddhist religion, and engaging with the practice, in order to begin to taste something of its result. It is not possible to taste the fruits of Buddhist practice without fully engaging with its radical horticulture. Fruit will not grow if the seed of view is not sown, watered, and fed by the energy of practice. I hope to proffer the basic principles of Dharma view and practice and offer a personal perspective on how we can remain engaged and inspired at all stages of our lives as practitioners.Part of the practicality of the religion of Dharma is that each approach to the realised state includes a set of preliminary practices. These practices offer a way of experiencing the view of the method to be employed. The Tibetan term for preliminary practice is ngöndro (sNgon ’gro), which literally means ‘before-going’.

These practices are structured in sets of four – and in this respect, the teaching regarding ‘The Four Thoughts that Turn the Mind to Practice’ (lo-tog nam-zhi) could be described as the ngöndro for the entry level practitioner.Having presented a simple perspective on some of the primary principles of Dharma, from the Nyingma point of view, I shall look in detail at the four thoughts as the means of focusing attention on the necessity of practice. Once we gain familiarity with Dharma view and practice, everything we encounter in our lives begins magically to transform of itself – into view and practice. At this point there can be no other activity in our lives apart from practice – and there can be no other perspective in our lives other than Dharma view. Our perception of our lives and our response to perception becomes rooted in view and practice; and because of this, nothing else remains feasible. This is both a liberating and empowering experience.To arrive at this point, however, requires mature involvement, unwithheld dedication, and an investment of ‘quality’ time. It requires involvement based in confidence, despite the protestations of conventional societal mores. It requires dedication, despite the self-insulating sluggishness of self-protective inertia. It requires genuine application over time, simply because any path to proficiency requires time for dedicated involvement to reap the specified rewards. The Four Thoughts that Turn the Mind to Practice can be viewed as the ngöndro which keeps us in contact with view and practice as our experience and confidence develop. Through authentically contemplating the four thoughts, we can maintain our energy when boredom, confusion, and doubt periodically arise, generated by our habitual backlash of self-protectiveness. This is especially important at the beginning of involvement with practice. The four thoughts keep us engaged, inspired, and encouraged.Questioner: I thought that Buddhism wasn’t really a religion because it doesn’t have a belief in God.

Ngakma Nor’dzin: This is a commonly held idea, due to the fact that religion is defined in Britain at least as centering around a Creator God. That is why Sang-ngak-chö-dzong5 is not a religious charity in Britain – it has to be classed as an educational charity. It was also fashionable in the earlier part of the last Century to think of Buddhism as a philosophy rather than a religion. Another factor is that Buddhism is based in method rather than emphasising belief in received truth.5 Sang-ngak-chö-dzong was the name given by HH Dudjom Rinpoche to the first organisation of ngak’phang practitioners that Ngak’chang Rinpoche began in the UK in the 1970’s. This is therefore the name of the UK charity of the Aro tradition, although the tradition’s charities in other countries all include the name ’Aro’.Q: What do you mean by method exactly?NN: Method means that the way of practice can be followed without the whole structure of the religion being understood from the outset. I can engage with the form of practice, and experience its benefit, simply through the open-hearted wish to try – perhaps because I have been inspired by a teacher or another practitioner. It’s a bit like a Weight Watchers diet [laughter]. I once lost 39 pounds with this organisation. I simply followed the method they offered and I lost weight. They had worked out all the details of balancing the diet and the calorie content of various foods – I just had to stick to the rules of so many points a day. I didn’t need to know the science of the diet for it to work. I just had to have confidence that it would work, and trust in the group leader.Q: Okay, but this is still sounding more like a philosophy rather than a religion.NN: If we approach Dharma from the point of view of it not being a religion we are likely to experience a conflict of interest at some point. Dharma is structured and methodical and the view of each approach is specific. Dharma manifests as particular symbolic activities and methods which hold to particular principles – each has a particular function. The structure

and approach may not always be comfortable or convenient, and this may be the point at which we realise Dharma is a religion. When I start to think ‘I like that bit, but I don’t like this bit. Why do I have to do this bit?’ then I either adopt a philosophical approach and decide to only do the part I like, or I allow myself to enter the structure of the religion, and get on with the aspects I don’t like as well. Either I take control and lose the proven structure that has existed for generations, or I decide to engage wholeheartedly with the path and allow myself to be smaller than the religious structure. Certainly if we take any vows, we shall experience times when we have to actively engage with holding to those vows, sometimes in the face of conflicting ‘ordinary’ life view. To return to the Weight Watchers example – I stick to the diet and lose weight . . . or I don’t . . .Q: So becoming involved with Dharma means that you have to work with the whole structure of it?NN: Yes. Individuals tend to prefer to take what they like and leave what they don’t like, but still call themselves Buddhists. This is philosophy, however, because they remain in control. In the end Dharma will not function through self-directed picking and choosing.Q: My family was quite fearful when I became a committed Buddhist, whereas they hadn’t had any concerns while I was engaging in the practices without formal commitment.NN: Yes, this is also common experience. Families can fear commitment to religion because they see that I am allowing some other authority and influence to operate in my life – one that possibly they know nothing about. They fear – consciously or unconsciously – that they have lost their power and influence over me and they fear that they will lose contact with me. Buddhism has tended to be regarded by some people as a philosophy and therefore ‘safer’ and more acceptable. When they realise it is actually a religion, because I take commitments and allow it to influence major aspects of my life, then family can become concerned.

Q: I have heard Buddhism referred to as fitting well with Western philosophical or therapeutic approaches, such as counselling. Don’t you think that practices such as silent sitting can be used without the need to adopt the religion of Dharma as a whole?NN: Possibly – but then I would be a therapee who practices silent sitting. I would not be a Dharma practitioner. You see, if I am in control of my religion, then I have made it a philosophy. If I create it out of my own experience and preferences, knitting it as I go along, then my practice is always self-referential and remains a philosophy. Only religion offers us the potential of moving beyond the capacity of our own limited view of ourselves.

Footnotes: