The Gift of Material Goods

[This is a talk originally delivered to Red Clay Sangha on September 18, 2011 during the 2011 annual pledge drive.]

This month, the month of the Red Clay Sangha’s annual membership drive, we are taking our theme from Cariyapitaka Atthakatha.  This is a Pali commentary on an ancient text (the Cariyapitaka – Basket of Conduct) which contains stories of thirty-five of Buddha’s prior lives retold in verse at Shariputra’s request to illustrate the Bodhisattva’s practice of the paramitas – including dana.  The commentary talks of dana being:

“threefold by way of the object to be given: the giving of material things (amisadana), the giving of fearlessness (abhayadana), and the giving of the Dhamma (dhammadana).”   

Related talks are being given about the gift of fearlessness and the gift of dana; this talk is about the gift of material things, which the Cariyapitaka pointedly observes can be twofold: internal and external.

The instruction of the test offers us that: 

“When the Great Man (the Bodhisatta) gives an external object, he gives whatever is needed to whomever stands in need of it; and knowing by himself that someone is in need of something, he gives it even unasked, much more when asked. He gives sufficiently, not insufficiently, when there is something to be given. He does not give because he expects something in return. And when there is not enough to give sufficiently to all, he distributes evenly whatever can be shared.”

This seems straight forward, right?  So why do we need stories about it (and the Cariyapitaka Atthakatha runs for over 3,000 words)?  Why do we need to talk about it?  For me it is because giving the gift of material possessions is not as easy as it sounds.  The Fourth Pillar of Islam, Zakat, instructs the faithful to give as charity 2.5% of their personal possessions every year.  That seems pretty tough to me: this is not income, but rather the instruction is to give 2.5% of everything you own every year.  How many of us do that?  How many of us could do that?  I know that for me it would be really, really difficult.

It gets more difficult still when we talk of internal gifts.  Here the the Cariyapitaka Atthakatha instructs that such gifts should be understood in two ways.

“How? Just as a man, for the sake of food and clothing, surrenders himself to another and enters into servitude and slavery, in the same way the Great Man, wishing for the supreme welfare and happiness of all beings, desiring to fulfill his own perfection of giving, with a spiritually-oriented mind, for the sake of enlightenment, surrenders himself to another and enters into servitude, placing himself at the disposal of others. Whatever limbs or organs of his might be needed by others — hands, feet, eyes, etc. — he gives them away to those who need them, without trembling and without cowering. He is no more attached to them, and no more shrinks away (from giving them to others), than if they were external objects.”

The problem, as I see it, is that we become attached to our possessions - worst among them money - and our own selves – which includes the time we guard so jealously, for it is in time that we give of our hands and feet and minds in service to others. 

The detailed exposition in the text is but a tiny portion of all Buddhist writings on the paramita of dana, and these extensive writings are intended to help us transcend such concerns.  But even if they help us get to the place of sincere consideration of giving, we are inclined to intellectualize and analyze our giving, our intentionality, our state of mind when giving, whether the cause or individual we are giving to is truly worthy. 

And we complicate it further with thoughts of tax breaks on our donations, directing donations to causes that are meaningful to us, and particularly those that provide quality services either directly to us or to those close to us who have suffered, or those suffering from conditions analogous to those the took away to parinirvana one who was close to us.

Our human nature and our particular American society make it easy for us to look at the gift of giving material possessions from a viewpoint that is very shallow.  We live in a society not just driven by consumerism, but also one driven by image and the display of material wealth.  Driving a nice car, wearing nice clothes, having nice jewelry, demonstrating through vocabulary and knowledge that one has a good education, all of these affect considerably how one is received and treated.  The right to accumulate wealth is taken to be the practical implementation of the “right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  Our society raises us in the face of TV soaps and sports stars and movie stars to believe that success in life and happiness come from accumulation of material possessions.

We also come to believe that we need to accumulate these things in order to protect ourselves and those we love.  We feel the need to preserve our “quality of life” – which means not how happy we are, but how much stuff we have, how new our car is, and how expensive our vacations can be.  But for many of us the greatest driving force in the accumulation of wealth is the desire to plan for that future date when we will retire and move to the beach.  But not only does this drive an ever-expanding craving for a longer retirement, and a more pleasurable one, we have incentives of “forced giving” built into our society that essentially put barriers in the way of most people who try to achieve this end:  school fees for children are income-tested, as is the subsidy for long-term-care.  It is very easy to find that the more we put aside, the greater the social burden, and therefore the greater our resentment of this giving, and the greater our desire and ambition to “beat the system” and sequester assets to ensure us our own personal happy ever-after.

I have many business acquaintances that make a lot of money, and many of them advocate the wonder of capitalism, and tell me that mandated giving through taxes is wrong, and that they give generously to charity.  I am certainly in no position to question their integrity, but I would certainly suggest that before any one of us make this claim, we look carefully at the self-interest we are protecting with that we set aside before we even consider giving from that which is left.  How can we believe ourselves to be practicing sincere dana when we are first putting aside amounts to protect our own extreme comfort in an old age that may never come?  I come up very short when I look at my behavior against this measure.

I would also suggest we truly and the quality and intentionality of our giving.  One of the most visible forms in society of giving is political donations, and in this world we like to believe that we give to politicians who support causes we believe in, but remember, the most successful politicians are those who look after their constituents well.  In this regard the constituents are not just the local electorate, who benefit to the extent that the particular official can divert resources from the larger politic to serve the local agenda, but also the larger donors, often large corporations, whose sole purpose and measure of success is to drive earnings growth.

I would submit that the world we live in has a tendency to close in and limit our views of giving, both from the standpoint that this is something that comes after providing for an ever-expanding definition of a comfortable life for our families, and from the standpoint of the politicization of giving.

So is there a way that we can come back to the true spirit of dana and begin to practice it in our lives?  In the Cariyapitaka Atthakatha we read:

“When the Great Man has made a mental determination to completely relinquish whatever possessions come his way, whether animate or inanimate, there are four shackles to giving (which he must overcome), namely, not being accustomed to giving in the past, the inferiority of the object to be given, the excellence and beauty of the object, and worry over the loss of the object.”

The text expounds on each of these and I thought it would be useful to read the first in full, and to provide highlights of the third and fourth:

(1) When the Bodhisatta possesses objects that can be given and suppliants are present, but his mind does not leap up at the thought of giving and he does not want to give, he should conclude: "Surely, I have not been accustomed to giving in the past, therefore a desire to give does not arise now in my mind. So that my mind will delight in giving in the future, I will give a gift. With an eye for the future let me now relinquish what I have to those in need." Thus he gives a gift — generous, openhanded, delighting in relinquishing, one who gives when asked, delighting in giving and in sharing. In this way the Great Being destroys, shatters, and eradicates the first shackle to giving.

(3) When a reluctance to give arises due to the excellence or beauty of the object to be given, the Great Being admonishes himself: "Good man, haven't you made the aspiration for the supreme enlightenment, the loftiest and most superior of all states? Well then, for the sake of enlightenment, it is proper for you to give excellent and beautiful objects as gifts." Thus he … destroys, shatters, and eradicates the third shackle to giving.

(4) When the Great Being is giving a gift, and he sees the loss of the object being given, he reflects thus: "This is the nature of material possessions, that they are subject to loss and to passing away. Moreover, it is because I did not give such gifts in the past that my possessions are now depleted. Let me then give whatever I have as a gift, whether it be limited or abundant." Thus he … destroys, shatters, and eradicates the fourth shackle to giving.

The text, then, suggests that we bring the focus of our practice to dana.  It is not just an ethical practice, but also one that embodies the wisdom and effort elements of the Eightfold Path.

Dana may have peculiar Buddhist connotations, but the principle is not one that is exclusive to Buddhism.  Rather, like the Golden Rule which was the theme of the Interfaith Gathering in Decatur last weekend, it is universal.  In fact dana can be seen as a practical embodiment of the Golden Rule (in Christian terms to love thy neighbor as thyself and love the Lord thy God above all – which translates easily into Buddhist terms).

In the Bible (Acts 10:2) we can read:

“It is so easy for us to get caught up in our day-to-day activities and forget God. This is not how God desires for us to live. He desires us to acknowledge Him in all things. This can be done through prayer and meditation, but it is also done through our alms giving. By sacrificing something we hold valuable such as our money or our time, we are acknowledging that God is first in our lives. Being holy means being set aside for God.”

And the mandate in Islam to give generously in a manner dependent on wealth describes giving in more detail as including good deeds and time, and requires that it must be given in the community from which it was taken.

I’ll give you two stories.  The first happened just yesterday.  Yesterday afternoon Cherry, David, and Cynthia went to the Dharma Jewel Temple and after the class spoke at length to the Abbess, who was just delightful and enormously generous.  She opened up her practice to us and invited us to join them in their regular activities, which sound quite beautiful.  At one point she asked one of her nuns to look in the closet and she presented us with beautiful little bracelets – Cherry can show you hers.  This is a gift recognizing the Medicine Buddha given after the summer retreat, and intended to be given for the well-being of others.  I arrived home around the same time as my daughter who was bearing up well after breaking up with her first boyfriend, but was very sad.  I explained the meaning of the bracelet to her and put it on her wrist, and she immediately felt better.

The second is something that came to me when talking to a group of students at Marist.  In order to deflect from questions about the afterlife and to show Buddhism has a different emphasis, I talked of Christmas giving.  Many of us have memories of the excitement and anticipation of the special gift you wrote on your letter to Santa, and of running down the stairs on Christmas morning to see the perfect bike shining there for you.  But for my part if I compare that joy to that which arises as a father giving these gifts to my kids, or a son to my father, or of working with others and seeing the pure happiness in their eyes when I give them something special, there is no comparison. 

Cultivating one’s ability with the gift of material goods grows with compassion, and this comes out of our practice.  As we sit and practice mindfulness, and have conversations such as this among ourselves, we cultivate openness, compassion, and selflessness which enable us to grow naturally into giving selflessly of what we have to those who need without thought of the fruit.  I’ll leave you with two short quotes from our text: 

When he gives a material gift, the Great Man gives food thinking: "May I, by this gift, enable beings to achieve long life, beauty, happiness, strength, intelligence, and the supreme fruit of unsullied bliss."

And in a later portion of the text we read:

“Just as, when a house is blazing, the owner removes all his property of essential value and himself as well without leaving anything important behind, so does the Great Man invariably give, without discrimination and without concern.”