Shi Da Dao - Ch'an Caodong School

UK: On Why Genuine Buddhism is “Anti-Capitalist”! (22.10.2026)

For most people the reality of everyday life involved a mutually supporting communal-activity (a “Sangha”) with “bartering” reserved for the importing or exporting of goods and services. Every member of such communities was a) entitled to all the goods and services of that community, and b) was expected to contribute to the generating of those goods and services. Within the Vinaya Discipline, the Buddha states that the lay-community may participate in any form of “honest” (bloodless) commerce that may (or may not) involve the handling of money (coinage or otherwise). A lay-household must ethically budget to a) supporting itself, and b) the broader community (through charitable donations) – as well as “saving” money (or goods) for emergencies and hard-times. Part of this lay-budgeting involves the lay-household giving waste food and water to the bhikkhus (beggars) of the Buddha as they slowly (and consciously) “walked” through their neighbourhood on a daily basis. The reward is karmically-premised – as this action permits these monastics to pursue the Dhamma in the purest manner. The bhikkhus are “freed” from the requirement of their participating in the world of cyclic existence and this attracts an immeasurable measure of great and good karma. (The situation in China is slightly different – as although the laity is free to donate as little or as much as they like [thus generating good karma] – the monastics must grow their own vegetarian food – and not be a burden to any other community). As for the bhikkhus (and bhikkhunis) there is to be NO participation in the worldly activities associated with commerce. This is because all greed, hatred, and delusion must be uprooted during meditation practice from the mind and body.

Transcending Budhha

Early Buddhism: How the Buddha ‘Rejected’ the Treasure-Seekers!

Most lay-people, however, practice Buddhism whilst being married, having children and holding-down a job. Even so, and despite all the extra entanglements and barriers of commitment, the Buddha still stated that lay-people, if devoted to their practice, can still realise enlightenment, even though it is not an easy task. A male lay-follower of the Buddha is referred to as an ‘Upasaka’, and a female practitioner as an ‘Upasika’.  These two terms refer to ‘lay’ practitioners that sit near to the Buddha (or his monastics) and ‘listen’ carefully (and with respect) to the Dhamma instruction being explained. These ‘lay’ practitioners then go back to their homes and carefully recall (and record) the Dhamma lesson which they put into their daily practice. However, the crux of this article is about two other categories of ‘lay’ person explained by the Buddha in his Suttas, but which are not often mentioned within Western discourse. This means that the Buddha actually explained ‘six’ (6) categories of human-beings in his Suttas – with four referring to his followers – and two to ‘non-believers’. Who are these ‘non-believers’, and why did the Buddha bother to explain their presence?

Charles Luk (1898-1978) Ch’an Buddhist Scholar.

‘In the mean time Charles Luk was training in the Tibetan Buddhist (Vajrayana) lineages of Kagyu and Gelug under one teacher – the Tulku of Xikang – namely the Venerable Hutuktu, who was of Mongolian ethnic origin. Xikang is of course Xikangsheng (西康省) which is sometimes written as ‘Sikang’, and translates as ‘Western Abundance Province’. Now no longer in existence, it was once a province of easternTibet(Kham) controlled by the forces of the Republic of China. Today, part of this former province is in eastern Tibet, whilst the other part is in the western Sichuan province. This area, although comprised of a Tibetan majority, is known for its small Mongol ethnic grouping. During this time, Charles Luk was initiated into the secretive technique known as Phowa – or the method of the transference of consciousness at the point of death, to a Buddhafield (i.e. rebirth) of one’s choice. His other great Buddhist teacher was Ch’an master Xu Yun (1840-1959) – from whom he inherited the dharma of the enlightened lay-person which is believed to go back to Vimalakirti – an enlightened contemporary of the Buddha.’