For this entry, I'll not be writing about my experience in Bodhgaya or anywhere in India, since I have yet to set foot there. Instead, in the tradition of getting to know a place prior to a travel, today, I write about my perception of Buddhism, its root in India, and its significance to me. The title is very much an euphemism, and in fact, what you're about to read is more of my babbling based on whatever limited knowledge I have concerning Buddhism.

Since Buddhism has always been perceived as a religion, we will start by dwelling on one point: "What is a Religion?". A religion is defined as "a set of common beliefs and practices generally held by a group of people, often codified as prayer, ritual, and religious law" (source: Wikipedia). Ok, very nice... but what does it actually mean? From a layperson's perspective, since I do not have a Th.D. nor am I a monk or priest, if a bunch of people pray to the same God or the same set of Gods, then they belong to the same religion, or at least, the different denominations of a religion. Now, isn't that simple. But what if that group of people does not believe in a God, or at least, does not believe in "an Absolute Creator God who created the universe ex nihilo and to whom worship and adoration are due" [cite]. Well don't be surprise if you've been all your life a follower of Abrahamic religions. There are such religions that do not subscribe to the notion of a Creator God. "What a God-less bunch of people", you might say. Well, to start with, we have Buddhism. And please note that Devas are not the same as a Creator God.

Very briefly, the World's major religions can be roughly grouped into Abrahamic religions and Eastern religions. Followers of the Abrahamic religions subscribe to the prophet Abraham, or Avraham in Hebrew, Ibrahim in Arabic, as a part of their beliefs. We can also look at religions from the context of polytheism, monotheism or atheism, where the first, second and third refers to the belief in many, single and no God(s), respectively. Abrahamic religions include Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and rarely, the Baha'i Faith. On the other hand, we have as Eastern religions the following: Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism, Taoism, Confucianism, Shinto, etc. While being composed of only three religions, Abrahamic religions, as a group, covers more than 50% of the World's population. We will not dwell further into comparisons or debate regarding any religions. I know better than to get tangled into the endless and often hostile, futile inter-religious discussions. My point is, for whatever noble, righteous or mystical reasons the other parties may have, it has become my principle to back-off from any religious rhetoric. We have seen too many "blood-sheds" in the past in the name of religions, haven't we? No pun intended. Perhaps, growing up in Malaysia, a multi-racial, multi-religious nation, have its effect on my increased level of tolerance, sensitivity and silence when it comes to religions. 

Anyway, moving back to our discussion on Buddhism, lets briefly reiterate the already well-known and commonly told story, a story about a prince who gave up wealth, comfort, family, etc in search of ways to end human sufferings. Yes, you might have come across this story some point in time, whether from a friend during a religiously-heated conversation, or as a bed-time story from your parents, or even from movies like the Little Buddha. The story began about 500 years before Christ in a place called Lumbini (on map) where Queen Mayadevi gave birth to a young Prince Siddharta, which loosely translates to "he whose aim is accomplished" [cite]. Lumbini is a UNESCO World Heritage Site in Nepal, about 22km away from the sleepy town of Bhairawa which is a necessary stopping point for many travellers who enter Nepal from nearby Varanasi, Gorakhpur and even Gaya in India. Yes, Siddharta was a Prince, the Prince of a small ancient kingdom of Kapilavastu, which was the home of an independent tribe/clan called the Sakyas. In the recent years, archaeologists such as Prof Robin Coningham have unearthed what they believed to be the ancient city of Kapilavastu [ref] at Tilaurakot in Nepal. However, there are Indian historians who considered Piprahwa in India to be the actual site of Kapilavastu. Prince Siddharta had Princess Yashodhara as wife at the age of 16, and on the very day he left his palace in search of enlightenment at the age of 29, he was blessed with a boy named Rahula. He travelled throughout northern India for years until he achieved what he was searching for at the age of 35 under a Bodhi tree in Bodhgaya (on map) . Bodhgaya now houses the famous Mahabodhi Temple and the descendant of the Bodhi tree under which Siddharta reached enlightenment. Buddha then travelled for about 230kms to the west of Gaya, to reach the then center of cultural and religious importance, Varanasi. Varanasi is still an extremely important holy city for Hindus. This is where you'll witness the common sights of pilgrims and believers cleansing away their sins, or finding their way to eternal peace by having their ashes scattered on the Ganges river [ref]. It was at a deer park in Sarnath (on map), about 13kms north-east of Varanasi, where Dharmacakra was put into motion. This was where Buddha gave his first sermon, and founded the order of Sangha. Buddha entered Mahaparinirvana at the age of 80. You can consider it as death, but please don't be stupified, petrified or looking at me with that evil grin, when I say that it is no conventional death. It is more of reaching the "final deathless state abandoning the earthly body" [cite]. Anyway, this happened in a town which is now known as Kushinagar (on map), India. Most travellers will stop at Gorakhpur for a day-trip to cremation site of the Buddha.

After getting briefly acquainted with the Greatest Teacher in Buddhism, I'll move on to narrate my side of the story, as a young (not-so young really) Buddhist by birth in Malaysia. But what does it mean to be one? I'm not sure about other countries, but being a "Buddhist" in Malaysia can be quite eventful and colourful. We idolise inanimate objects, we offered poultries and meats to deities, etc. Besides the universal Buddhist celebration of Wesak Day (i.e. Visakah Puja, Buddha Purnima or Buddha Jayanti if you're in India, Bangladesh and Nepal, Visakha Bucha for Thais, Phat Dan in Vietnam, Waisak in Indonesia, Saga Dawa for Tibetans), we have various other special dates observed by the so-called "Buddhist" in Malaysia. In Malaysia, some observe the Nine Emperor God Festival, and we have various commemoration dates for Tua Pek Kong, Na Tuk Kong and other deities unique to Malaysian Chinese or Chinese in general. Many of these deities are local guardian spirit that resides in trees, ant hills, caves, riversides and in strange stone formations. Due to the discrete nature of even discussing about one's system of belief in many traditional communities, we were brought up to believe that these practices were an intricate part of Buddhism. But are these animistic practices of worshipping deities, trees, rocks, etc (1) part of the "real-deal" according to the Dharma, or (2) are they the result of centuries of amalgation between Buddhism, local Shamanistic beliefs, Taoism, Confucianism, ancestor worshipping, etc. I suppose many would agree with me when I say that (2) is definitely the answer. Such trend is not unique to "Buddhism" in Malaysia, but happened all over the World. For example, the intermingling of the Shinto belief and Buddhism in Japan. Only when I started to really think about what I belief in and question my system of belief, then I realise that there is a whole lot more in Buddhism than just incense and statues. And hence, my quest began,

"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it." - Buddha

Yes, those words were supposedly uttered by Buddha Himself and this was the first out of his many utterances which caught my attention. Indeed, one, regardless of his/her religion, has to agree that a strong call for truth, the promotion of reasoning, the re-examination of faith and self-discovery emanates from these words. And again, it does not take a scientist to acknowledge that these virtues are the pillars of Science. Yes, there is already an age-old realm of discussion agreeing on the compability between Buddhism and Science [ref]. Similarly, one can easily associate these fundamentals of Buddhism to the principles of freethinking. As I will point out later, Buddhism is not very much of a religion to me. Since "Buddhism itself, being generally neutral on the subject of the supernatural..." [cite] and "...is open to scientific discoveries" [cite], then all of my previous beliefs were brought into question. 

From my experience so far, which is not much, if we were to label Buddhism as a religion, then the question of what a religion is, which we have defined earlier, would have to be reformulated. Questions and concerns about metaphysical issues are a main part of most religions other than Buddhism. Who created the Universe or what is the nature of reality? Even more interesting, if I exist, then what is the purpose of my existence? The notion of a Creator God can be regarded as the "center of gravity" of most religions except Buddhism. This brings us to the concept of the cosmological argument [adapted from ref and ref]:

1. Firstly, things exist.
2. Then it is possible for those things to not exist.
3. Whatever has the possibility of non existence, yet exists, has been caused to exist. However, something cannot bring itself into existence, since it must exist to bring itself into existence, which is illogical.
4. There cannot be an infinite number of causes to bring something into existence for (a)an infinite regression of causes ultimately has no initial cause, which means there is no cause of existence, and (b) since the universe exists, it must have a cause.
5. Therefore, there must be an uncaused cause of all things.
6. The uncaused cause must be God.

A deeper look into this argument reveals several flaws, and one of them is that since all things need a cause to exist, then, by definition, God him/herself too would need a cause. Anyway, we wouldn't want to dwell into the infinite argumentative space of whether God exists or not. Else, I'll be long dead before we can come to an agreement. My point is the cosmological argument is more of a metaphysical one defending for the existence of God, or the first cause, also known as the a first mover of the cosmos. If you insists on knowing, since we do not subscribe to a Creator God in Buddhism, Avidya is the closest 'thing' we can relate to the first cause of creation [ref]. If you speak Sanskrit, then you'd already know its meaning by now. To me, Buddhism is not a religion after all. In fact, the irrelevance of such meta-physical questions in Buddhism is clearly reflected through the refusal of Buddha Himself to address them in the Pali Cannon. Well, I know some of you might say that his refusal is due to his lack of answers to such questions, but again, we can go on forever on such arguments. Nevetheless, Buddha gave me an extremely satisfactory answer to the issue of existence and the state of the World. He uttered [cite],

"We are what we think.
All that we are arises with our thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the world." - Dhammapada, 1.1-3

From my point of view, and many other Buddhists, such definition is much more "responsible" and "realistic" rather than blaming or attributing everything to the one God. If you "strike big" in lottery or you got a promotion, then you praise God. If something nasty happened to you, then you point your fingers to God. Have the human race ever pause and consider questioning oneself for everything that happens, be it good or bad. Have we considered that the diseases, famine, global warming, disasters, etc arise from our own doings? Once in a while, I read from newspapers, priests or religious men putting blame on humans' lack of faith in God as the cause of the disasters we are facing now in the 21st century. I do not want to comment on such articles. You be the judge. Someone once asked [cite]:

"For many people today, faith in an all-powerful and all-knowing God is hard to reconcile with true freedom of choice exercised by human beings. If God knows everything that will happen and has a plan for creation, what is the use of racking our brains to try and make authentic choices?"

This whole concept of our actions and the fruits we reap is the "center of gravity" in Buddhism. For a layperson, like me, it simply translates to cause and effect. If you like fancy terms or prefer Sanskrit, then, strictly speaking, the actions or doings of a person which arise specifically from mental intent or obsession is called Karma, while the results of Karma is Vipaka. This term tend to be overused to the point of being a cliche when people start to say, "oohhhh...that's bad karma". Hehehee.... I would like to stress that thoughts supercede the apparency of the action itself in Karma, which is why notions like meditation, mindfulness, etc are very important in Buddhism. This makes perfect sense since a person who has a misguided intention for buying you a drink will yield bad Karma instead. This is why when you help someone, make sure you truly, wholeheartedly intend to bring good to that person instead of hoping for something in return. Now isn't that sensible. Food for thought [cite]:

"According to the seed that’s sown, So is the fruit you reap therefrom, Doer of good will gather good, Doer of evil, evil reaps, Down is the seed and thou shalt taste the fruit thereof." - Samyutta Nikaya

Again, just for the record, we rarely use the term "bad karma" but instead "wholesome" and "unwholesome" where "kusala-kamma" refers to the former and "akusala-kamma" refers to the latter. It is important to stress that "Karma is not pre-determinism, fatalism or accidentalism" [cite]. Imagine if Karma is predetermined or an accident, then again, this would nullify the whole purpose of being responsible for one's actions. This would bring us back to having "God" making all the decisions. In general, there are three misguided perceptions related to Karma in Buddhism [cite]:

• Pubbekatahetuvada: The belief that all happiness and suffering arise from previous lifes' karma;
• Issaranimmanahetuvada: The belief that all happiness and suffering are caused by the directives of a Creator God; and
• Ahetu-apaccayavada: The belief that all happiness and suffering are random, having no cause.

As one can see, a person is not entirely choiceless in life and not everything that happens is predetermined, either by God or from previous lifes. Similarly, a person is not absolutely free to make choices without any resulting consequences. In other words, Karma in Buddhism is simply the idea that a person (regardless of the current state one is in such as poverty, disability, wealthy, clever, stupid, good-looking, not-so-good-looking, human, animal) is FREE to make choices for the betterment of his/her's tomorrow through self-effort. To rephrase, the present state which I am in now, in this life, has its reasons (obviously due to my deeds in my previous lifes) but lets not dwell into that. It's history, it's the past and it cannot be undone. However, if I wish for a better tomorrow, or a better year ahead, or even better next lifes, I have the POWER to shape, control and determine NOW! It's in my own hands, through self-efforts. This is in sharp contrast with Hinduism, which also subscribes to Karma. In Hinduism, the things that happended to you in this life is definitely due to your past deeds. However, there is really nothing much you can do about it mate. If you want a better life for your next rebirth, then start working now. Please, don't look at me like that. I did not make this up myself [ref]. Anyway, it is really a middle-path of subscribing to the notion of Karma in Buddhism, and this concept of middle-path is what Buddhism is famous for. Also known as madhyamâ-pratipad in Sanskrit. It is through our attempts to improve our subsequent rebirths through many, many, many, many lifes of wholesome karma, which will eventually free us from human suffering (dukkha) or further rebirths (samsara). Such state of ultimate "happiness" where our minds are free from desire, lust, anger, craving, etc. is fondly referred to as Nirvana.

These notions of Karma, Dukkha, Samsara, Nirvana bring us to the essence of Buddhist teachings, namely, the Four Noble Truths.

Firstly, we have to understand the nature of Dukkha. What is suffering? Well, birth is suffering, at least for our mothers. Then, aging is definitely suffering. Lets not even start to mention about diseases. We also suffer from death. In short, anything that displeases us mentally, emotionally or physically is suffering. It is nicely put in Buddhism the five aggregates which constitute all human experiences, namely, matter (or Rupa), sensation (or Vedana), perception (or Sanna), mental formations (or Sankhara) and consciousness (or Vinnana). These are known as the five Skandhas, and suffering can be eliminated by de-attaching oneself from these aggregates. It is interesting to note that what we define as "self" in Buddhism is the agglomeration of these aggregates, upon which realising the impermanence or "non-self" nature of these constituents will lead to the higher realisation of "no-self" or Anatta, which is an important aspect of reaching enlightenment. Anatta, together with Dukkha and Anicca (i.e. impermanence) are the three characteristics of everything in the physical world. Together they are known as the Dharma Seals.

Secondly, after acknowledging the existence of suffering and its nature, we need to look for its origins (Samudaya). Just like a medical doctor, he/she would first determine if there is a complication and the nature of the complication. Then he/she would need to find out the cause of the disease. Similarly, what is the cause of suffering? Craving of course. For example, why do some people suffer from gout? One possibility is their consumption, excessive consumption and undefeatable craving for red meat such as beef, and also alcohol such as beers. Then why do spouses cheat on each other and families fall apart? Well, perhaps the husband or wife craves for the pleasure of flesh and senses (or Kâma).

Thirdly, having acknowledged that craving is the cause of suffering, we move on to try to put a stop to it (Nirodha). Well, obviously, to stop or to improve on one's suffering due to gout, one has to cease or refrain from taking more beefs and beers. How to improve husband-wife relationship? Try not to cheat and sleep with other men/women. How's that for a start? In short, the cessation of suffering will follow from the relinquishing of cravings.

Lastly, "I, of course, know that to stop suffering requires the detachment from craving", you might say, "but how...?" (Magga). Briefly, the way to stop suffering requires one to follow the Noble Eightfold Path. This Eightfold Path is what we have briefly introduced earlier, represented as the Dharmacakra. As part of the Eightfold Path, we are thought the importance of having right wisdom, right ethical conduct, and right mental discipline. When further segregated, the eight necessities of right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration are revealed. Both right speech and right action constitute the famous Five Precepts, also known as the Pancasila in Pali, for lay Buddhists like myself. Well, if you can't wait for another 100 more rebirths to be enlighten, then may I suggest to you other more demanding precepts:

• The eight precepts for 'basic morality with asceticism'
• The ten precepts for 'novice monkhood'
• The most rigorous set of 200-over rules (i.e. Vinaya) for 'monkhood'

Lets focus on the five precepts. It is the most basic Buddhist code of ethics subscribed to by lay followers of the Buddha. Below are the five precepts with their Pali-equivalence [ref]:

1. I undertake the precept to refrain from taking the life (killing) of living beings.
   Pânâtipâtâ veramani sikkhâpadam samâdiyâmi
2. I undertake the precept to refrain from stealing. (lit. "taking what is not offered")
   Adinnâdânâ veramani sikkhâpadam samâdiyâmi
3. I undertake the precept to refrain from sexual misconduct (adultery, rape, exploitation, etc).
   Kâmesu micchâcâra veramani sikkhâpadam samâdiyâmi
4. I undertake the precept to refrain from false speech (lying).
   Musâvâda veramani sikkhâpadam samâdiyâmi
5. I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicants which lead to heedlessness. (Can include intoxicating ideas)
   Surâ meraya majja pamâdatthânâ veramani sikkhâpadam samâdiyâmi

And in my humble, simple terms, these five precepts are simply memorised as, "don't kill", "don't steal", "don't f*** around", "don't lie" and "don't drink and don't do drugs". Again, is it not that all of these five precepts are simple, common moral values? In other words, anyone, with a heart and a sensible mind, ought to follow all of these precepts, regardless of religions? These are the foundations of human morality. The lack of any of these virtues will lead to murder, theft, family breakdown, suicide, etc, which are all the different manifestations of sufferings! You see, when a person drink excessively, which is a common problem in many cultures, or under the influence of psychotropic substance, which is common among teens, all sorts of other problems follow suit. When you're drunk, you beat your wife and kids, then we have domestic violence. When you're out of funds to quench your neverending craving for alcohols, you steal. When you're "high" and "not yourself", you f*** around. Now even these precepts, the most fundamental of all fundamentals in Buddhism, many people find it difficult to practice. Let's not even start to discuss about other more complex, demanding stuff in Buddhism.

Having mentioned the five precepts, it is, as always, easier said than done. Which is why we are having more lay buddhists compared to monks. Hehehe....just kidding. 

At the very bottom of my heart, Buddhism is not so much of a conventional religion to me. Instead, I see Buddhism as more of a philosophical and intellectual school of thoughts and practices. It doesn't really bother me and other Buddhists if a Creator God exists or not, or if Armageddon was to come tomorrow. Obviously, assuming no pain, you're afraid to die tomorrow because it's likely that you haven't done enough good and afraid of hell. Or perhaps, you haven't love your loved ones enough when you know you should have. Similarly, it doesn't discomfort me for not knowing if I'll go to heaven or hell when I die. Even more so, I'm least offended by people questioning my belief, and bad-mouthing Buddha or Buddhism. I will not try to force Buddhism on any of you. After all, there is no COMPULSION in Buddhism. Have you ever seen any monks or Buddhist missionaries bugging you, distributing leaflets, etc? The diffusion of Buddha's teachings can be more or less described in terms of "demand and supply" [ref]. It is said that "it is a miracle that Buddhism continues to gain supporters without big buck missionaries" [ref]. What really concerns a Buddhist is trying to do more good and speak less evil, which the World is in dire need of. It is important for me to think before I speak and do anything, and obviously, to always back my speech and action with good intentions. Equally important is the need for me to experiment before accepting. All because I know for sure that as you sow, so shall you reap. This paragraph by [cite] nicely sums up what we've discussed thus far:

"To all Buddhists the question of religion and its origin, is not a metaphysical one. But a philosophical and an intellectual one. Religion is no real creed or a code of revelation or fear of the unknown fear of a supernatural being who rewards and punishes his good deeds and ill deeds. In other words it is not a theological concern. But rather a philosophical and an intellectual concern resulting from the experience of suffering, conflicts, unsatisfactoriness of the empirical existence of the nature of life. The Buddhist way of life is an intensed process of cleansing one's speech action and thought. It is self development and self-purification resulting in self-realization. The emphasis is on practical results and not on mere philosophical speculation or logical abstraction or even mere cogitation. "

Before I end, I'd like to express my love and care for my wife Joe, my parents, my sister, my in-laws and other family members, just in case Armageddon does come tomorrow. And with that, I shall stop my babbling by professing,

• Buddham sharanam gacchami
• Dhamman sharanam gacchami
• Sangham sharanam gacchami

P.S. Do keep a lookout for my future entries after my travel to India and Nepal, describing our experience at the various Buddhist pilgrimage sites described earlier.