In Buddhism, upaya (Sanskrit: उपाय, upāya, expedient means, pedagogy) is an aspect of guidance along the Buddhist paths to liberation where a conscious, voluntary action "is driven by an incomplete reasoning" about its direction.
Upaya-kaushalya is a concept emphasizing that practitioners may use their own specific methods or techniques that fit the situation in order to gain enlightenment.
The exercise of skill to which it refers, the ability to adapt one's message to the audience, is of enormous importance in the Pali Canon.
[1] The Digital Dictionary of Buddhism notes that rendering the Chinese term fāngbiàn into English as 'skillful' or as 'expedient' is often difficult, because the connotations shift according to the context as (1) the teaching being something to marvel at — the fact that the Buddha can present these difficult truths in everyday language (thus, skillful), yet that (2) they are teachings of a lower order as compared to the ultimate truth, and are far removed from reflecting reality, and are a kind of 'stopgap' measure (thus, expedient).
In some Mahayana texts, such as the Lotus Sutra, this is used as a polemic device against prior Buddhist traditions; it is said that the Buddha gave them various upayas rather than revealing the ultimate truth, for which they were not ready.
Gregory frames the hermeneutical classification of Buddhist schools (Chinese pànjiào 判教 "doctrinal classification") as an "expedient means:" The doctrine of expedient means provided the main hermeneutical device by which Chinese Buddhists systematically ordered the Buddha's teachings in their classificatory schemes.
Edward Conze, in A Short History Of Buddhism, says "'Skill in means' is the ability to bring out the spiritual potentialities of different people by statements or actions which are adjusted to their needs and adapted to their capacity for comprehension."
The idea is that a bodhisattva or practitioner may use any expedient methods in order to help ease the suffering of people, introduce them to the dharma, or help them on their road to nirvana.
In chapter 25 of the Lotus Sutra, the Buddha describes how the Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara changes his form to meet the needs of the student.
There are a number of other stories of Buddhist saints and bodhisattvas taking part in fairly eccentric and unusual behaviors in the practice of skillful means.
Buddhist texts metaphorically explain the upaya concept through illustrations such as a burning house and an empty fist.
The Lotus Sutra contains a famous upaya story about using the expedient means of white lies to rescue children from a burning building.
The halls and rooms were old and decaying, the walls crumbling, the pillars rotten at their base, and the beams and rafters crooked and aslant.
When the rich man saw the huge flames leaping up on every side, he was greatly alarmed and fearful and thought to himself, I can escape to safety through the flaming gate, but my sons are inside the burning house enjoying themselves and playing games, unaware, unknowing, without alarm or fear.
But though the father was moved by pity and gave good words of instruction, the sons were absorbed in their games and unwilling to heed them.
"At that time, when the sons heard their father telling them about these rare playthings, because such things were just what they had wanted, each felt emboldened in heart and, pushing and shoving one another, they all came wildly dashing out of the burning house.
[4]The father subsequently presents each of his sons with a large bejeweled carriage drawn by a pure white ox.
According to Richard Gombrich: "It is true that the term translated 'expounding in means', upaya-kausalya, is post-canonical, but the exercise of expounding to which it refers, the ability to adapt one's message to the audience, is of enormous importance in the Pali Canon.
[9] The recent rise of mindfulness-based interventions has led to debates as to just how much these short-termed programs convey the essence of the Buddhist path.
On the one hand, scholars like Jon Kabat-Zinn can be viewed as having secularized the practice and hence having made it accessible to a population who would never think of trying it had it been rendered in Buddhist terms.
On the other hand, critics such as Glenn Wallis,[10] Ron Purser,[11] David Loy[11][12] and others have strongly rejected the mindfulness movement in the ways that it has become a commercialized version of the practice.