FREE Zen Newsletter!
Posts
Provisional Teachings are Skillful Means, but Skillful Means are not Provisional...
...
A Buddha’s discourse is beyond the
sentient and the non-sentient; it is beyond the relative and the absolute. Even
so, when He became aware of bodhisattvas, of ordinary humans, of the Real Form
of things, and of this discourse, He opened the Gate of Skillful Means. The
Gate of Skillful Means is the unsurpassed meritorious functioning of the fruits
of Buddhahood. It is the Dharma that resides in the place of Dharma and It is
the form of the world as it constantly manifests. The Gate of Skillful Means
does not refer to some momentary skill.
~Shobogenzo, Shohō Jissō, Hubert Nearman
“Skillful means” or “expedient means”
(upaya) refer to the actual phenomenal
form or forms of Buddhism, that
is, to all of Buddhism that is actually accessible to human experience.
Thus, when used in a general sense, rather than in the context of a particular
teaching or technique, “expedient means” is inclusive of the whole range of
Buddhist doctrine and methodology. While technically equivalent with “doctrine
and methodology,” “skillful means” nevertheless puts greater emphasis on the
significance of actual techniques and
practical teachings than does more
general terms. Also, as when we refer to the expedient means of law, or the skillful means of medicine, for example, referring to the
skillful means of Buddhism focuses
attention on the actual form or forms of the specific course, path, or way Buddhism is realized
in the world.
To clarify and emphasize the significance
of the specificity or uniqueness of “expedient means” or “skillful means,”
consider, for example; the process of law is only realized (made real) through
and as the actual engagement of the skillful
means specific to law, medicine through
and as the engagement of the skillful means particular to medicine. The
manifestation (phenomenal appearance) of law in the world is seen and known as
“practicing law,” the manifestation of medicine as “practicing medicine.”
Similarly, the actual manifestation of Buddhism is realized as and through “practicing Buddhism.” In other words, medicine is not realized apart from practicing medicine (exercising its
means), law does not exist
independent of practicing law, and Buddhism
does not appear apart from practicing
(engaging the means of) Buddhism. It
should go without saying, but for completeness notice; drugs, scalpels, medical
procedures, or therapies are not “medicine” apart
from the presence of skillful application – independent of actual
“practice” such are mere abstractions or, at best artifacts with as much
potential to harm as to heal. Recorded codes of lawful conduct, precedents, or
policies existing in the absence of means
to manifest cannot be considered “law,” and Buddhist scriptures, temples,
icons, rituals, practices – even teachers or students – could not be qualified
as “Buddhism” in an absence of adequate
means for manifestation.
