source
stringlengths 620
29.3k
| target
stringlengths 12
1.24k
|
|---|---|
The needs of the same human being may differ at different stages of life. Can there be one Dharma for all stages? From infancy till old age, our bodily, psychological and even spiritual change and evolve. Also, their faults or risks differ at each stage of life. For instance, the greatest "fault" of an infant is ignorance of the world, and simultaneously, her greatest need is to physically explore. The same infant may grow into a youth whose greatest fault is lack of self-knowledge, and his/her greatest need is to explore the word of relationships and seek romance. The same youth may grow into an old person whose greatest fault may be a false sense of power, authority and ownership over other people, and whose deepest need may simply be peace and rest. So, is there one dharma preaching for all stages of life (or stages of evolution) in Buddhism? or are there many? <Q> Is there one dharma preaching for all stages of life (or stages of evolution) in Buddhism? <S> or are there many? <S> There are many dharma preachings relevant to life stages. <S> Buddhism teaches Five Niyamas <S> In Kamma Niyama, it says every action has reaction. <S> So don't do to others what you dislike. <A> There is one Dharma for all, however one may emphasize certain aspects of Dharma to take on certain challenges. <S> For instance, some Buddhist teachings will prescribe certain types of meditations for certain temperaments. <S> The problem with trying to have a different Dharma for different life stages is that it assumes that every person faces the same challenge at any given stage in life, and this is simply untrue. <S> People's challenges are a function of their genetic dispositions, circumstances, stage in life and so on. <S> Having said that, there very well may be broad themes that come into play in the stage of life. <S> For instance, in old age, issues of health, impending morality and even irrelevance can come into play. <S> However, it's dangerous to focus exclusively on those themes as how they manifest as challenges is still based on the individual. <S> Furthermore, even if one were to focus on those broad themes, the Dharma would remain the same, one would simply shift one's energies to different aspects that seem most suited to the theme. <S> For instance, how does the theme of mortality factor into one's ego-lessness? <S> Would something like increased death contemplation be appropriate? <S> What about if one is concerned with physical appearance at a certain age? <S> Would contemplation on the unattractiveness of the body be appropriate here? <S> But this comes back to different temperaments; entering a life stage (along with one's other factors) could be "reduced" to a shift in temperament, with the appropriate shift in emphasis on the practices involved. <S> On an unrelated note, what you ask seems more in line with Hinduism, which acknowledges different practices for different life stages, but that's not relevant here. <S> I just thought it interesting given the common religious mileu from which both arose. <A> The needs of the same human being may differ at different stages of life. <S> Can there be one Dharma for all stages? <S> Yes there can be one Dhamma for all. <S> The Dhamma taught by the Buddhas is timeless and does not change. <S> These rare beings discover the path for themselves, they discover an ancient path , after which they teach it to other beings. <S> The Dhamma is always the same. <S> The Four Noble Truths do not change whether one is 5, 30 or 90 years old. <S> There is though, different approaches to the Dhamma, depending on what age a human being has. <S> If one is 5 years old, then a more simple and fantastic approach might be used. <S> For example one uses in greater deal the stories from the Jatakas, to illustrate the different path factors such as ethical conduct. <S> One might also approach it from a school teachers angle as Crab Bucket has done. <S> He used clay to form dhamma wheels and drawings of the Buddha surrounded by animals. <S> Ven. <S> Yuttadhammo has made a video-series on how to do Metta meditation for kids. <S> In the videos he speak very slowly, calmly and simply. <S> It works really well for kids. <S> So in other words. <S> If one is pretty young in age then the complexity of the Dhamma, such as the technicalities of the Abhidhamma might not be the best approach:) <S> If one is 30 or 90 years old, there are many different approaches. <S> The best way to explain this, is to look at the different affiliations of Buddhism and then find an affiliation or several affiliations, that fits ones own understanding of the Dhamma. <S> In the end, they all lead to the same goal, Liberation . <S> Ultimately, to understand the Dhamma, one has to practice meditation.
|
In the meditation one will truly understand that the Dhamma is timeless and always the same for all ages and stages.
|
Should a beginner try to educate others about the benefits of Vipassana? As a practitioner (but a beginner) of Anapana and Vipassana meditation, I have realized and experienced the immense benefits of the technique and the immense potential of Dhamma to bring change and goodness in whoever applies it in life. As is natural, when one samples something as beneficial as the Dhamma, one cannot contain the benefits to oneself and is always tempted to suggest the practise of Vipassana to those around us, so that they may also start coming out of their misery. This is what I understand is one of the qualities of Dhamma, "Ehipassiko". But, the question really is, should a beginner like me even talk about it to others? Because, I still have my share of mental defilements and as a result I'm still prone to wrong thoughts, words and deeds. Therefore, although I genuinely feel like recommending the practise of Vipassana to others out of compassion, I'm apprehensive that I may not be the best example to show others what practitioners of Vipassana really are and that may as a result corrupt the idea of the Buddha's teachings in the minds of someone who may be listening to Dhamma for the first time. So, should one really talk about the Dhamma and Vipassana to others and if yes, when (at what minimum level of advancement or personal progress on the path, so that one inspires others as a personal living example)? <Q> Well, if you take your own case as a guideline, most people really just need a point or nudge in the right direction. <S> Depending on how interested people are, you might share the benefits you've discovered. <S> If it's a teacher or another great being who is putting practice into their daily life, talking and discussing can be great. <S> Especially view these people as pure guides so you can benefit as much as possible. <S> On the whole, the practice should transform your life and pysche, so if you are talking about practice without letting the transformation happen first, it's no good. <S> We must transform, then let our lives-as-examples embody the truth we wish to speak. <S> Writing is also very important, so if you have a friend with whom you can write back and forth about Dharma, so much the better. <S> To journal your own notes and gather your thoughts is prime. <A> Vipassana is a very simple thing to talk about: observe "yourself" (a collection of factors) <S> accept yourself do not get caught up in yourself <S> That being said, vipassana is surprisingly simple and most people will not try it even if they understand the above facts and even if they understand the tremendous benefits. <S> I myself need to practice much much more even though I understand all the benefits, I do not do pure vipassana often enough (although I integrate vipassana within other activities and meditations). <S> You may need to call "vipassana" self-observation for those of a close-minded religious background such as Islam or Catholics. <S> Give instruction and explanation if they are curious but do not speak (or be very conservative) about your personal experiences though, that will have negative psychic effects on your own practice if revealed to non-Buddhists and may also have a negative impact on them unless you are giving them a guided meditation. <A> However, if you've only just started on your path not long ago, I would agree with the gist of the above posts <S> : Give them the information you have found, give them your experiences, and explain what you know. <S> With this, if they are interested, they will be able to learn more about it and exercise in their own way. <S> The real big thing here is that Vipassana doesn't require Dhamma to practice. <S> You can walk a person to the waters of Vipassana, but you can't make them drink. <S> Similarly, you can bring someone the Dhamma, but you can't make them know. <S> The best way to share the Dhamma is through action. <S> Cultivate Metta in your daily life, practice Dana, and exercise the refrain suggested in the 5 precepts. <S> If a person wants to learn of course share what you know, but don't try to force the information on anyone. <S> They will follow the path if it is right for them.
|
In general, if you are really interested in bettering someone else's life, a master would spend a decent amount of their effort trying to understand what that person needed and how they could present it in a gradual and follow-able way that would lead to fruition for the person, but also the knowledge that it is effort which carries you. Go ahead and try sharing it to anyone in an unobtrusive, gentle manner. We are all always beginners; so one could say that it is only beginners who give instruction.
|
Question about how to generate more motivation to meditate. I just wanted to hopefully get some ideas on how some of the fellow users of this site motivate themselves to meditate on a more frequent basis. What ultimately motivates each one of you to continue meditating? The good feelings of samadhi or the tranquility of insight? I'm struggling with staying with the object of meditation as my mind is extremely restless. Anyways, this is my first time here so I'll leave it at that. Thanks in advance! <Q> It's really important to do wise and healthy things even if they take a bit of effort to get the ball rolling. <S> Very fortunately, we can use habit to overcome our habits, which is something very beautiful. <S> Personally, on days when I do not formally sit I cultivate many aspirations and cast the thought (joyously) <S> "How good it would be to sit and meditate, to cultivate wisdom and insight, to perfect samadhi." <S> Meditation is not the only branch of the Eightfold path as was historically presented by Shakyamuni Buddha, so keeping all the folds in balance will help with your meditation, and vice versa. <S> The purpose of meditation is to uncover these enlightened qualities that are within us all. <S> On a mundane, physical level meditation strengthens the density of the cortical structure of the brain. <S> Please read about the methods of calm abiding, insight, and the altruistic motivation, because knowing what those are can really help nudge our patterned-ways into open ways. <S> It has been taught that beings should seek enlightenment like trying to put out a fire on their heads. <S> It's true! <S> Based on how well we can see the value of our present condition (!) <S> and how well we understand what we can accomplish through practice <S> , the more clear it will be the need for meditation in our daily life, until the blurry edge between formal and off-the-cushion becomes such a natural and melodious flow that we will wonder why we had not been doing it this way the whole time. <A> In his book 'Good to Great', author Jim Collins describes how to build a great business using an analogy of a flywheel. <S> Right now, the flywheel is at a standstill. <S> To get it moving, you make a tremendous effort. <S> You push with all your might, and finally you get the flywheel to inch forward. <S> After two or three days of sustained effort, you get the flywheel to complete one entire turn. <S> You keep pushing, and the flywheel begins to move a bit faster. <S> It takes a lot of work, but at last the flywheel makes a second rotation. <S> You keep pushing steadily. <S> It makes three turns, four turns, five, six. <S> With each turn, it moves faster, and then—at some point, you can’'t say exactly when—you break through. <S> The momentum of the heavy wheel kicks in your favor. <S> It spins faster and faster, with its own weight propelling it. <S> You aren't pushing any harder, but the flywheel is accelerating, its momentum building, its speed increasing. <S> -- <S> Source <S> : See the section titled 'How change does happen' <S> This concept works very well with meditation also. <S> One way to generate motivation is to think of your current effort as the necessary labor to get the flywheel moving until it works in your favor and becomes second nature. <A> I just wanted to hopefully get some ideas on how some of the fellow users of this site motivate themselves to meditate on a more frequent basis. <S> Sometimes motivation comes in the form of doing a thorough job. <S> Say if you sit for meditation trying be mindful of the breath <S> and you cannot then this might be a demotivator. <S> The best is to switch to perhaps insight meditation. <S> Mostly motivation come through overcoming the hindrances . <S> For more on this see: Nīvaraṇa by Piya Tan. <S> Do you feel less stressful and unhappy than before, but chasing after positive results can set you back by developing restless - worry and even doubt when you feel progress is lacking. <S> What ultimately motivates each one of you to continue meditating? <S> The knowledge that you are doing a good job and also some insight to inspire faith . <S> You should feel glad and happy (pamojja) about what you are doing and progress. <S> This is what will keep you on track. <S> Upanisa Sutta contains a path on how to get to liberation through faith. <S> The good feelings of samadhi or the tranquility of insight? <S> I'm struggling with staying with the object of meditation as my mind is extremely restless. <S> (Yuga,naddha) <S> Paṭipadā Sutta mentions <S> either one (insight or calm) can develop before the other. <S> Let it take its natural cause. <S> When doing breath meditation you have to keep bringing the object of your meditation to the breath by continuously reviewing if your mind has wandered away or not even when it has not. <S> Knowing and Seeing by The Venerable Pa-Auk Tawya Sayadaw, p45 give 4 methods which you can use to keep focus, though this mentions in the context of calming the breath is is valid even before you come to this stage. <S> Also have a look at: ANAPANASATI - MINDFULNESS WITH BREATHING Unveiling the Secrets of Life: a Manual for Serious Beginners by BUDDHADASA BHIKKHU. <S> Anyways, this is my first time here <S> so I'll leave it at that. <S> Hopefully this is helpful and you would keep coming to the site as also do not feel shy to ask question.
|
Also a motivator would be experiencing some positive results. In general, reflecting on the many benefits and really making a strong wish to spend more time and regular time meditating will be great.
|
Perception (saṃjñā) and discrimination How do perception and discrimination relate? I remember thinking (when reading) that they were near synonyms <Q> Discernment (wisdom; panna) & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. <S> It's not possible, having separated them one from the other, to delineate the difference between them. <S> For what one discerns, that one cognizes. <S> What one cognizes, that one discerns. <S> Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. <S> It is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them. <S> For what one feels, that one perceives. <S> What one perceives, that one cognizes. <S> Mahavedalla Sutta <A> Discriminant is wisdom. <S> You try to see things clearly or as they are, especially uncluttered by perception. <S> (See introduction of Discernment: The Buddha’s Strategies for Happiness II ) <S> Perception clouds seeing things as they are hence the relationship. <A> This question tagged as five-skandas. <S> So the words perception and discrimination may relate to it. <S> In pali (Thipitaka - language) 'five-skandas' are "aggregates" ( <S> Pali: khandha; Skt. <S> : skandha) are material "form" (rupa), "feeling" or "sensation" (vedana), "perception" ( Saṃjñā ), "volitional formations" or "fabrications" (sankhara) and consciousness ( viññāṇa ). <S> So the word "discrimination" is meen by (viññāṇa) consciousness. <S> taking two examples A) seeing Flower, and b) seeing leaf. <S> The action of separating (recognition) flower and leaf is perception (Saṃjñā). <S> The action of separating flower and I, leaf and I is discrimination (viññāṇa). <S> Quote from Maha Thera Nyanatiloka. <S> Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines, Buddhist Publication Society, first edition 1952. <S> Viññāna : 'consciousness', is one of the 5 groups of existence aggregates or clusters;khandha, one of the 4 nutriments āhāra, the 3rd link of the dependent origination paticcasamuppāda, the 5th in the sixfold division of elements; dhatu. <S> Viewed as one of the 5 groups; khandha it is inseparably linked with the 3 other mental groups feeling, perception and constructions and furnishes the bare cognition of the object, while the other 3 contribute more specific functions. <S> Its ethical and kammic character, and its greater or lesser degree of intensity and clarity, are chiefly determined by the mental constructions associated with it. <S> Quote from Andarei <S> Nothing is solid, everything is made of pieces or depends on conditions. <S> This includes "I" which cannot possibly be a solid/independent entity. <S> Since "I" is really just a compound phenomena, it is not independent and too is subject to conditions. <S> What we call "consciousness" is too an interplay of conditions and not a substance or entity.
|
Perception is your outlook of the world or mind map of the world.
|
Five Precepts - did Buddha really preach them? The five precepts are (from wikipedia) I undertake the training rule to abstain from killing. I undertake the training rule to abstain from taking what is not given. I undertake the training rule to avoid sensual misconduct. I undertake the training rule to abstain from false speech. I undertake the training rule to abstain from fermented drink that causes heedlessness. I am very new to Buddhism, but from what I'm understanding right now, Buddha's teachings are very simple.The first 4 rules make sense. They are all forms of practicing detachment. But the 5th... it's too human. Too specific. I just don't see Buddha teaching it to his disciples. It's the same as with Ānantarika-karma , where the last crime is creating a schism in the sangha (the community of Buddhist monks and nuns) . It's too specific and so Buddhist oriented. Once again, I just don't see Buddha teaching it. The question is, did Buddha teach the five precepts? <Q> The five precepts are mentioned in Dhammika sutta. <S> The main reason for teaching the fifth precept is said to be that intoxication easily instigates people to break other precepts by concealing the seriousness. <S> "Now I will tell you the layman's duty. <S> Following it a lay-disciple would be virtuous; for it is not possible for one occupied with the household life to realize the complete bhikkhu practice (dhamma). <S> "He should not kill a living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should he incite another to kill. <S> Do not injure any being, either strong or weak, in the world. <S> "A disciple should avoid taking anything from anywhere knowing it (to belong to another). <S> He should completely avoid theft. <S> "A wise man should avoid unchastity as (he would avoid falling into) <S> a pit of glowing charcoal. <S> If unable to lead a celibate life, he should not go to another's wife. <S> "Having entered a royal court or a company of people he should not speak lies. <S> He should not speak lies (himself) nor incite others to do so. <S> He should completely avoid falsehood. <S> " A layman who has chosen to practice this Dhamma should not indulge in the drinking of intoxicants. <S> He should not drink them nor encourage others to do so; realizing that it leads to madness. <S> Through intoxication foolish people perform evil deeds and cause other heedless people to do likewise. <S> He should avoid intoxication, this occasion for demerit, which stupefies the mind, and is the pleasure of foolish people . <S> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.2.14.irel.html <S> As for creating a schism in the sangha, my understanding is that this is not applicable for laypeople. <S> Only monks are capable of causing a split. <S> But a layperson can be a cause indirectly which isn't a severe offense. <A> Thus I have heard...a monk got drunk and pointed his feet at the Buddha (a serious sign of disrespect in the Buddha's culture). <S> At this, the Buddha banned the drinking of alcohol based on the fact that it can cause such serious lapses in mindfulness so as to lead a monk to show an extreme lack of respect. <A> This answer says that the fifth precept was added a little later: <S> Alcohol is frequently absent from lists of prohibited activities, including the famous Pansil, i.e., Five Precepts. <S> There is a fourfold version of pansil called the Four Restraints. <S> As to why this is the case, the answer is that it is because the Buddha did not prohibit alcohol for the first eight years of the sangha. <S> The Buddha only prohibited alcohol when a monk got drunk and passed out, embarassing the sangha. <S> This comment adds some support for that statement -- for example you can see that the section titled "The Short Section on Virtue" in DN 1 only mentions the first four precepts.
|
He should not steal nor incite another to steal.
|
Can vipassana cause mental stress? I tried Vipassana for some time. I feel some fear of death and reality of life. So what do I want to do? When I do anapanasathi, I feel relaxed. <Q> Vipassana is about seeing things as they are. <S> If you fear death during vipassana meditation then be mindful of the fear. <S> One has to let go of comfort when practicing Vipassana. <S> Anapana leads to temporary comfort, calm and relaxation but one could not become liberated with an anapana practice alone. <A> The Buddha taught on how to come out of stress. <S> This is systematised in the 4 Noble Truths . <S> All animals feel the fear of death. <S> This also can be a source of stress. <S> So keep up your pratice. <S> Anapana especially creates more calmness and relaxation hence you can try this also. <S> Anapana contains the full 4 foundations of mindfulness hence you can use this as means to liberation. <S> See: ANAPANASATI - MINDFULNESS WITH BREATHING Unveiling the Secrets of Life: a Manual for Serious Beginners by BUDDHADASA BHIKKHU , <S> Right Mindfulness: <S> Memory & Ardency on the Buddhist Path by Thanissaro Bhikkhu <S> The cravat is to pratice the right way under proper guidance of a teacher. <S> Then you can overcome stress. <S> Wrongly practiced this might create stress. <S> You can try some formally organised courses: http://dhamma.org/ , IMC - International Meditation Centre , World Buddhist Directory <A> Vipassana literally means watching. <S> Buddha wanted you to see your mind. <S> You feel fear because you wanted to run away from death which is perfectly natural. <S> If you feel stress or fear don't run away, accept it as it is and you will come to know that because of your acceptance, fear is vanished. <S> Watch your stress. <S> Just be a watcher. <S> Classifying it as good or bad destroys the very essence of watching. <S> Buddha wanted to get rid of all clinging, good or bad. <S> Just accept it as it is. <A> Sure it can. <S> The path is all about balance, that's why it's called the "middle way". <S> Find a balance that works for you between calming meditation and investigative meditation (samatha/vipassana). <A> I think it will help if you practice a different version of vipassana. <S> Death is not the only form of vipassana <S> so here are some links that will teach you different practices of vipassana. <S> And please note that what you are going through is not a bad side of vipassana <S> ,it is simply a matter of choosing the right one for you.once you have done that everything will be fine. <S> so here are the other forms of vipassana that you could practice without that particular discomfort. <S> Meditation of foulness Meditation of elements Meditation of nine cemetery contemplations <S> If you feel discomfort while meditating it is better to temporarily meditate "Meththa - The loving kindness meditation" . <S> Learn more about "Abhidhamma" before you practice that discomforting method to understand what life is. <S> Hope this helped, Click on the blue highlighted words and they will open the links i have given. <S> Remember the path is not a one full of comfort,it is full of discomfort and hard tasks but each step forward brings much pleasure and freedom that can't be achieved by any other comfortable thing in life.
|
Vipassana is a an integral part of overcoming stress.
|
Do modern-day Buddhists take "Mara The Evil One" literally? I find that a good number of believing Christians and Muslims think that Satan literally exists and is a very real actor in the real world. Is "Mara the Evil One, the Tempter" a rhetoric device in Buddhist tales -- a personification to enable the construction of a certain kind of parable? Or is "Mara" understood by contemporary Buddhists as an evil being who actually exists in the physical plane that we inhabit? <Q> Of course, I can't speak for all modern-day Buddhists, but for myself, those that I have learned from, and those that I have known, we believe that Mara is the metaphorical personification of the forces that oppose enlightenment. <A> There are 5 kinds of Maras . <S> The fifth is Devaputta Mara who is an actual being(god) <S> who controls a portion of the paranimmita-vasavatti heaven. <S> But he is not similar to the Satan concept in Christianity. <S> Mara is not an eternal being. <S> Unlike Satan, Mara is not against doing good deeds. <S> He at times encourages beings to do good deeds and prolong their Samsara. <S> Mara is only against attaining Nibbana. <S> It is a position taken up by different beings from time to time. <S> During the time of Buddha Kakusandha who was the first Buddha in this eon, venerable Moggallana himself was the Mara(Dusi) . <S> The Mara during the time of Gautama Buddha is his nephew who took up the position when Dusi perished trying to attack the chief disciple of the Buddha Kakusandha. <S> There's a whole section in the Samyutta Nikaya , listing the Mara's encounters with the Buddha who was already enlightened. <S> If Mara is merely a personification of defilements, there can be no encounters with enlightened beings as they have already removed all defilements. <S> Refusing to accept Mara as an actual being seems to be nothing more than the discomfort of accepting the existence of heavenly and hell beings. <A> Mara is simply the gatekeeper of Samsara, it wants to keep all life in an endless cycle of death and rebirth without beginning or ending. <S> This cycle is full of unresolved karma and is full of suffering. <S> Mara wants to keep you trapped in this cycle. <S> It wants you to listen to evil thoughts and behave badly in life so you die. <S> It absolutely hates people trying to escape from death and those who are enlightened. <S> Think of Mara like this: Everything we see is the result of our thoughts. <S> Now sit still, meditate, try not to think anything, seperate your thoughts in good and evil. <S> You will find Mara soon enough... <S> It will tell you "why am I sitting here doing nothing?". <S> Where do you think that thought comes from? <A> I would go so far as to say that neither Christians nor Muslims agree that Satan is a real being in the material world. <S> After all, during the Holocaust, some Christians hid Jews in their homes. <S> If Satan was actually an invisible person with eyes and ears and feet and a mouth, surely it would have been impossible to hide Jews from the Nazis. <S> The Buddha spoke against the caste system; he spoke against astrology, horoscopes, palm reading, fortune telling, faith healing or prayers made for the sick. <S> He spoke against holy lands, consecrated objects or lucky amulets. <S> He never claimed to perform miracles. <S> Whenever he spoke of gods or spirits, it was to teach people how to benefit from their example; you, too, can enjoy the good fortune of the gods. <S> Belief in an intervening devil is a fearful belief. <S> The Buddha never taught people to fear a benevolent creator god, much less a devil.
|
I've not met any Buddhist who believes that Mara is a literal personal being.
|
Is meditating while on the bike at the gym an effective method of meditation? Walking meditation : http://www.meditationoasis.com/how-to-meditate/simple-meditations/walking-meditation/ is considered as "just as profound as sitting meditation". If we were to extrapolate this idea into a situation where instead of walking you were on a bike, would an expert's opinion consider this meditating on the bike at the gym an effective practice of meditation? <Q> Short Answer : <S> Yes. <S> Longer Answer : <S> The Satipatthana Sutra implies this. <S> Here's a snippet... <S> Moreover, when a practitioner walks, he is aware, ‘I am walking.’ <S> When he is standing, he is aware, ‘I am standing.’ <S> When he is sitting, he is aware, ‘I am sitting.’ <S> When he is lying down, he is aware, ‘I am lying down.’ <S> In whatever position his body happens to be, he is aware of the position of his body. <S> Moreover, when the practitioner is going forward or backward, he applies full awareness to his going forward or backward. <S> When he looks in front or looks behind, bends down or stands up, he also applies full awareness to what he is doing. <S> He applies full awareness to wearing the sanghati robe or carrying the alms bowl. <S> When he eats or drinks, chews, or savors the food, he applies full awareness to all this. <S> When passing excrement or urinating, he applies full awareness to this. <S> When he walks, stands, lies down, sits, sleeps or wakes up, speaks or is silent, he shines his awareness on all this. <S> The gist of the above is that mindfulness should be applied throughout the day -- including time on the exercise bike. <S> However, I don't think this should replace formal meditation practice. <S> Setting aside time for meditation allows you to better control distractions, which in turn can allow you to go deeper. <A> This philosophy (which is used in the 'meditationoasis.com' practice, which you you were asking about), is different from Buddhist philosophy. <S> So the effectiveness cannot compare. <A> I've always considered the ultimate mindfulness practice to be that which is constant: <S> that is, a meditative state of mind every moment of every day, no matter what else is happening. <S> However if you start by running a marathon before you've trained on smaller runs, your body won't be prepared to fully benefit from the marathon. <S> Similarly, while I think meditating on an exercise bike could be effective, starting with "easier" methods, especially sitting meditation, and careful walking meditation, will build your ability to be successful in other methods. <S> TL;DR: <S> Better to start small and simple, and eventually, your meditative state of mind will carry over into everything else you do, including exercising. <A> I am a novice meditator with a stationary bike at home. <S> I find it an easy way to integrate a 20 minute meditation session into a workout. <S> It can be difficult to find the time otherwise. <S> I find it much easier than sitting only as there is a built in focus on your cadence and rhythm and the sensations of a fan and sweat on the skin. <S> If your goal is to be some super athlete <S> If your goal is to get an hour of moderate exercise while working in some mindfulness <S> zzIt works well. <S> If at a gym you can put on head phones and play white noise or any music or audio <S> you feel helps. <S> I'm not the Dalai Lama <S> but I have found this a method that has actually got me doing it instead of thinking and reading about it for years.
|
Meditating on the exercise bike should be done in addition to your regular meditative practice, and should be part of an attempt to maintain continuous mindfulness. no you won't get the best workout.
|
Meditation Into A Dream State Does anyone know if one can fall asleep into a dream while in the process of mindful insight practice and still maintain mindfulness and concentration? This would be different than establishing mindfulness while dreaming. <Q> Before I became Buddhist <S> I did a lot of random "spiritual" practices, including "astral travel". <S> The later is when you try to retain "waking" consciousness as you fall asleep. <S> I only had mixed success with the various techniques for achieving that, but the one that worked more or less well was to relax the body and completely refrain from any movement until you lose all bodily sensations. <S> So effectively you let the body "fall asleep" while keeping the mind awaken. <S> The major difficulty for me was (to avoid) getting overexcited at the moment the body falls asleep - which (overexcitement) resulted in hyperventilation and loss of control. <S> Eventually I realized that establishing lucid mind inside the dream was easier for me than carrying it over from the waking state, and so I dropped that frustrating practice. <S> Another related technique I had better success with was doing the Four Immeasurables type meditation at that same moment of falling asleep. <S> This works better as you don't have to artificially restrict body movements, which seems to go counter to deep meditation in my experience. <A> When you are in deep sleep your Bhavanga consciousness is active and at this stage you are not mindful. <A> I've experienced that several times. <S> It took me around ~45 minutes up to an hour to enter a state of dreaming, while meditating. <S> I did not fall asleep for sure as I was sitting up. <S> The experience was different from lucid dreaming. <S> I experienced lucid dreaming over hundreds of times, so I am confident I am familiar to know a distinct state. <S> Just like with lucid dreaming, the very first times it is difficult to stay asleep yet mentally aware of your self. <S> Resulting in either loosing self awareness of waking up from the dream. <S> With this I found the same, but this balance seems even more delicate to me. <S> I was wakefully present in this dream while meditating, but as soon as I realized I was, <S> it lasted only very short. <S> These dreams while meditating seem more close to wakeful life experiences in a sense that I have a goal, a mental concern or puzzle to solve. <S> Whereas in dreams while being asleep, this tends to be more and more irrational. <S> How the two states differ in dynamics (wakeful dreaming while asleep/meditating) is not clear to me yet. <S> With dynamics I mean some sort of mechanistic behavior, like gravity here in this physical reality, but then more mentally related. <S> Like when becoming fearful it is more apparent that I am loosing control of the scenario in a lucid dream than in this physical reality because the whole scenario visually starts to mirror my state of mind. <S> How that is different in these dreams <S> while meditating, I am not sure yet. <S> Good luck with experimenting!
|
If you are in a dream state there is some metal activity hence there can be some mindfulness and concentration, but this goes in hand with Sloth and Torpor hence the level of mindfulness and concentration would be weak.
|
Was The Buddha only human, or was he super-human? Before Siddhartha Gautama attained Enlightenment, did he have a normal human body with normal human attributes? Or was his body anatomically different or superior to yours and mine in its physical attributes? If different, in what ways was it different? Before Enlightenment, did Siddhartha Gautama have a mind (or mental/spiritual capabilities) that was different from a normal human mind? If his mind differed from yours and mine, in what ways did it differ? What do scriptural writings and recent gurus say about this? What are your own thoughts about this? <Q> Yes, Gautama Buddha had 32 major qualities , as do all Buddhas a.k.a. one who has attained the dharmakaya, sambhogakaya, as well as the nirmanakaya--the latter two of which correspond to the physical attainments. <S> These physical attainments progress according to the Taoist timeline of physical transformation of jing, chi, shen transformation but in Buddhism, which focuses on Wisdom, it is not necessary to focus on the physical aspect because this occurs automatically when one's mind is in the right place (Four Noble Truths, <S> Right Samadhi, 8 + 2 Eightfold Path). <S> His mind is a mind free from the skandhas. <S> As for atman... <S> He experientially discovered that there is no atman, that it is a causation illusion via the aggregates/skandhas, that we are the an ocean of interdependence... of Self and thus paradoxically, he attained the true Atman, the dharmakaya , becoming free from birth-and-death and forever serving ourself as a Buddha because such a perfectly compassionate immortal has nothing better to do with their time... <S> this didn't happen at once and occured in a step-wise progression through the Four Noble Truths (which includes letting go of the things that bind one to Atman). <S> The above idea would be a Mahayana and Tibetan idea... <S> less a Theravadin idea which insists on "annihilation" of self... <S> (which in a sense is the same meaning because one annihilates oneself into the Buddhahood of serving others manifesting limitless skillful means and having uprooted one's poisons and afflictions already...) <A> Adding to Ahmed's answer. <S> The Buddha had the 32 physical characteristics . <S> They are too detailed to be listed here. <S> Please see the link. <S> The Theravada paramis are listed here: <S> Dāna pāramī : generosity, giving of oneself Sīla pāramī : virtue, morality, proper conduct <S> Nekkhamma pāramī : <S> renunciation <S> Paññā pāramī : <S> transcendental wisdom, insight <S> Viriya pāramī : energy, diligence, vigour, effort <S> Khanti pāramī : patience, tolerance, forbearance, acceptance, endurance Sacca pāramī : truthfulness, honesty Adhiṭṭhāna pāramī : <S> determination, resolution Mettā pāramī : <S> loving-kindness <S> Upekkhā pāramī : equanimity, serenity <S> And as for Atman, he had just the same as everybody else, which is no Atman i.e. no permanent absolute soul or self. <S> You can read on anatta , which is from the Third Mark of Existence. <S> It is said that anatta was uniquely discovered and taught by the Buddha and is not part of Hinduism and Jainism. <S> The other two marks of existence may overlap with Hindu and Jain teachings. <S> This article may also be useful. <S> As for your question on whether I believe in these or not, <S> well, to be honest, I'm a little skeptical that any human had 40 teeth. <A> The 32 attributes are a very curious feature of early Buddhist texts. <S> I have tried, unsuccessfully, to trace them to any other system of thought. <S> They are sometimes hinted to have come from Brahmins, but do not occur in any of the Vedas or Upaniṣads. <S> The characteristics could not be seen by most people anyway, so to argue that they were "physical characteristics" is inaccurate. <S> Only people with psychic powers were able to discern the marks, and some of them could not see all of the marks. <S> In all other respects the Buddha as portrayed in the early Buddhist texts <S> had an ordinary human body. <S> He had to sleep, eat and defecate; he felt pain; he grew old; and he died. <S> Later Buddhists however began to make the Buddha more and more super-human. <S> By the mature Mahāyāna the Buddha is fully superhuman and <S> somehow still not a god, like Jehovah. <S> He did not create the world and karma is still largely responsible for morality, though the Buddha has a godlike perspective on the workings of karma right from the beginning. <S> A similar story seems to play out with the Buddha's mind. <S> Through his practices he gains knowledge (ñāna) that sets him free, but that knowledge includes all kinds of supernatural powers, ESP and so on. <S> He becomes omniscient and omnipresent, but not omnipotent. <S> It's very important to emphasise that Buddhists do not believe in ātman. <S> Indeed we would argue that we know that there is no ātman. <S> Thus nothing could be said about the Buddha's ātman, since he does not have one.
|
As for mind, heart and character, he had all the Paramis . Some Mahāyāna texts argue that his human body was simply a manifestation of a higher order existence.
|
Is there any mention of child adoption in any Buddhist writings and what is the view on child adoption with regard to Buddhism? Being married, I have of late been coming across the dilemma of whether to have a child or not and if yes, if a biological child or not (which by itself may be another question which I may ask separately). So, when I ponder on the subject, I get the thought if it may be more meaningful to adopt an orphaned child instead of having a biological child. But again, although at the surface adoption appears to be an altruistic and more meaningful thought, if I think deeper, I really wonder if the desires as a result of which I would want to have a biological child (and which I want to avoid) are pretty much the same as those which want me to adopt one. Additionally, adopting a child has its own administrative and emotional complications, which may result in unhappy experiences and which may therefore defeat the entire purpose. So, I thought it may help me build a perspective on the subject, if I come to know what is the opinion on child adoption with regard to the Buddha's teachings. So, my questions are:- Is there any mention of the merits/ demrits of adoption in the Tipitika or any other Buddhist writings? Is there any incident from during the life of the Buddha in which child adoption was involved? Would it help to strengthen one's ethics by adopting a child? How can we compare or weigh the merits of dana to several orphan children vs adopting and nurturing one? <Q> I view it as adoption can be nothing but good. <S> you are providing a child with a home, food and most importantly love. <S> if it is done with good intention then it cant be bad. <A> Yes, there is something mentioned in Buddhist canon, in the section of Vinaya, disciplines part. <S> Two nephew of Ananda was wandering aimlessly with crying, Ananda saw it, asked to children "what happened to you, and why you crying?" <S> child responded that their parent was killed. <S> Ananda felt so sad and adopted these two children,brought them into Monaster for study gave education. <S> Two children took enrolled in the monastery, as their age is already above seven and able to scare the crow away. <S> In the text of Vinaya stated that child who reached seven year must be able to scare the crow away. <A> Only my opinion, but since you will be looking after and caring for another being, supplying them with food, water, shelter and affection, I cannot see that being anything but positive. <S> There is no specific mention of child adoption as far as I know <S> but there is mention of compassion and loving-kindness. <S> You should probably avoid adopting lots of orphans if you have financial or administrative concerns for the reasons you stated <A> Is there any mention of the merits/ demrits of adoption in the Tipitika or any other Buddhist writings? <S> It's only short, but the Zen story Is That <S> So? <S> features an adoption. <S> I think it's intended to portray a wise attitude, and good parenting. <S> Is That <S> So? <S> The Zen master Hakuin was praised by his neighbours as one living a pure life. <S> A beautiful Japanese girl whose parents owned a food store lived near him. <S> Suddenly, without any warning, her parents discovered she was with child. <S> This made her parents angry. <S> She would not confess who the man was, but after much harassment at last named Hakuin. <S> In great anger the parent went to the master. <S> "Is that so?" was all he would say. <S> After the child was born it was brought to Hakuin. <S> By this time he had lost his reputation, which did not trouble him, but he took very good care of the child. <S> He obtained milk from his neighbours and everything else he needed. <S> A year later the girl-mother could stand it no longer. <S> She told her parents the truth - the real father of the child was a young man who worked in the fishmarket. <S> The mother and father of the girl at once went to Hakuin to ask forgiveness, to apologize at length, and to get the child back. <S> Hakuin was willing. <S> In yielding the child, all he said was: "Is that so?"
|
As long as the intent is good it does not matter whether you adopt someone who already has a body or if you create a body for a being to manifest as.
|
Ways to strengthen the perception of the breath I would like to hear all the ways to strengthen the feeling of the breath so i will know when it enters the body and when it leaves it i tried to put a hand on the stomach and feel the air go out and in of the nose - with limited success would like to hear tips on how to do the standard methods people use above - maybe i can improve them - and also i wonder if there are different ways to know strengthen my ability to know when the breath enters and leaves the body - any interesting way you have i would love to hear about it - it dosnt have to be buddhist in any way it can involve equipment even - whatever can help improve my skill of sensing the breathing I am not looking for different ways to meditate without the breath (only for ways to iprove my breath sensing skill) - thats a different subject and it can be addressed in another thread i created : Can't notice the breath <Q> You could also "breathe strongly, firmly and rapidly", as they do in Sunlun 's method . <S> Rapidly means really rapidly, see the last part of this video . <A> You should put your attention to the centre of the upper lip <S> You should be aware of if breath is in or out, long or short to start with <S> There is no need to feel anything like the touch sensation thought this also becomes apparent with practice. <S> What you should do to strengthen your perception of breath is the to: Sense <S> the start of the breath <S> The acceleration of the inhaling or exhaling process <S> The peak of the process <S> The deceleration <S> The gap between breaths (This is split second and many miss this as loose or weaken your attention breath at this point. <S> Hence this is the point mostly your mind starts wandering away from the breath.) <S> Also the following book might be of interest: Mindfulness With Breathing : A Manual for Serious Beginners <A> Increase your mindfulness: if you aren't aware of your breathing, then where is your awareness? <S> Is there something bigger distracting your attention? <S> For me, my breath had become more subtle than my heartbeat during meditation. <S> It helped to ask, are you breathing or are you not breathing? <S> How do you know if you're breathing? <S> To do so I had to develop my mindfulness further, notice the most infinitesimal sensation of breath, with full attention over the entire cycle, and let nothing come between my mind and my breath. <A> Being a thought, it is a hindrance to awareness. <S> It brings limited results because it calms the breath but does not calm the mind commensurately, which makes the breath disappear from awareness when the breath calms. <S> In my experience, the best method I found to strengthen the perception of the breath was to stop trying to perceive the breath & to just sit still & quiet. <S> This method will allow the mind to collect (gather) itself upon the breath. <S> I would recommend the introductory parts of Ajahn Brahm's Mindfulness, Bliss, and Beyond , which can be read here .
|
Directed mental effort or intention to know the breathing is a thought. Different things will distract you to lesser or greater degrees, but remember this is an exercise in mindfulness.
|
Is there a middle way between working towards personal liberation and liberation for all sentient beings? I may be a little off-mark here, but if I understand correctly there are two broad opinions on liberation. The first where a practitioner works towards her own liberation (the way of the Sravaka or Pratyek-Buddha) and the second where they work towards the liberation of all sentient being (the way of the Boddhisattva). Is there a middle way between these two? Perhaps surrendering a specific desire and to work towards removing one's defilements and allow liberation to come when it does and as many sentient beings be helped as possible. <Q> There is no conflict, the dichotomy is false and is based on incorrect understanding. <S> As Buddha said in Sedaka Sutta: <S> When watching after yourself, you watch after others. <S> When watching after others, you watch after yourself. <S> And how do you watch after others when watching after yourself ? <S> Through cultivating , through developing , through pursuing . <S> This is how you watch after others when watching after yourself. <S> "And how do you watch after yourself when watching after others ? <S> Through endurance , through harmlessness , through a mind of goodwill , & through sympathy . <S> This is how you watch after yourself when watching after others. <A> Dhammapada verse 166 <S> For the sake of another's benefit, however great it may be, do not neglect one's own (moral) benefit. <S> Clearly perceiving one's own benefit one should make every effort to attain it. <S> My own approach is to help others, but when it's not possible, or if such help, though well intentioned will not be effective, and worse, if it will harm me (morally), then I choose personal liberation. <S> Compassion towards all should mean compassion towards oneself too. <S> To not be captured by either extreme is the essence of Buddhist wisdom. <S> Initially, when someone is introduced to Buddhist ideas it can be explained in stark contrasts to help the learner understand. <S> As learning matures though one must learn to deftly weigh the situation and choose the teaching appropriately. <S> The middle way teaching is to cut through this morass of opposites. <S> The middle way is not the half point, or doing things in half measure, or being confused. <S> See Dharma talk by Thích <S> Nhất Hạnh on the Sutra on the Middle way <S> Part 1 | <S> Part 2 <S> The middle way is not a simplistic teaching, it is not mere common sense. <S> It is perhaps the most sophisticated of Buddha's teachings, requiring a working understanding of both emptiness and dependant origination. <S> In the above talk Thầy Nhất Hạnh so eloquently teaches it, do read it. <A> It depends on what you or your school has decided about the nature of who we really are. <S> If we are so throughly interconnected, interdepedent, either in a Huayen way or maybe just as one big shared soul, (albeit a changeable, mortal one) then the relevant unit for liberation is all of us. <S> Either we all make it to the other side or none of us do. <S> The middle way applied outside of it's original domain, debauchery vs asceticism, can lead to some weird results. <S> The sum divided by two of any pair of actions that are opposing on some scale isn't necessarily going to be the point of wisdom or even coherent. <S> Should I take a girlfriend? <S> Well, how about for 1/2 the time. <S> Or 1/2 a girlfriend. <S> Shall I buy a car? <S> Well, I'll buy 1/2 car. <S> (Mahayana thinking in general are often at danger of this, especially when applying sunyata/emptiness to things outside of its original domain-- the investigation of experience.) <S> The logic of the Bodhisattva vow leads people towards various theories of univeralism. <S> The Lotus Sutra is a good example, where it is posited that the other two paths (arhat and pratyekabuddha) are illusory, rest areas on the way to full Buddhahood. <S> In the Lotus Sutra, and other Mahayana systems, the difficulty level of achieving full Buddhahood declined, where it sufficied to have faith in the Lotus Sutra, or where it sufficed to do nothing at all and rely on Amida's vow, and in many text I read, I feel like it is saying that vows and bodhicitta are like lighting the fuse on dynamite, once it is started, it creates an inevitable chain reaction. <S> So the task of the Bodhisattva is to light these fuses more than to work on each step of everone's enlightenment. <S> (That said, in both the Brahma Net Sutra, Avatamsaka, etc, the lay and monastic bodhisattva is expected to above all teach as the primary way of helping others reach the other side.) <A> Many thanks to everyone who answered. <S> All the answers got me to think of the issue in different ways and to refer to Suttas to get a better understanding. <S> I recently came upon this article on the Bodhisattva Vows , and Hui-neng's explanation finally lit the lightbulb for me. <S> Perhaps this is what Andrei and Buddo also meant. <S> Beginning <S> students commonly ask how they can honestly vow to save all beings. <S> It sounds like missionary arrogance. <S> Hui-neng offers a response: "You are saving them in your own mind. <S> " It is bodhichitta that you are cultivating—your own aspiration for wisdom and compassion, and your determination to practice it in the world as best you can.
|
The whole of Buddhism is the middle way. It's a case by case thing, no single answer for all situations.
|
What kind of vipassana retreats do you recommend in South East Asia? I've been meditating for 2.5 years, and have done two retreats before (Goenka and Gil Fronsdal). I'm looking forward to expanding to my understanding of the practice in South East Asia. I was wondering which 10 day retreat people here recommend for westerners (i.e. English is available, and there isn't any esoteric content being taught). My most likely bet seems to be Suan Mokkh in Thailand, but was wondering if there are others in the Theravada tradition that are recommended by people here (i.e. Burma, or other places in Thailand) An up to date list of centers would also be appreciated. Most of the information I've been able to gather through googling seems quite out-dated. <Q> The head monk there is venerable Madawala Upali thera who has been a meditation teacher over 40 years. <S> The main meditation taught there is the Vipassana(insight) meditation of the Mahasi Sayadaw tradition. <S> But venerable Upali also teaches Anapanasati, Kasina and other Samatha(tranquility) meditation techniques as well. <A> Full retreat is one month, but no problem leaving early. <S> Let me know if you are interested in more details. <A> Goenka's Vipassana techniques is very effective, hence I would recommend to stick with it. <S> Also a similar techniques is taught at International Meditation Centre . <S> Also <S> Suan Mokkh is a pretty good place to study Anapana I would expect though I have not been there Ven. <S> Buddhadasa 's books on this are very effective. <S> Also if you are going to Burma you can try Pa-Auk Forest Monastery . <S> Also have a look at World Buddhist Directory . <S> This might help you find more centres. <S> If you are interested in coming to Sri Lanka there is a directory of meditation centres here: <S> Information about Meditation Centers in Sri Lanka . <A> I would look for monastery that is absent of tiracchana vijja (tiracchana literally means non-human animal, or crossed animals (animals that cant make progress in Dhamma). <S> tiracchana vijja means low art. <S> Or practices that crossed with path to nirvana. <S> Also monasteries that do not have donation box <S> every 10 ft. <S> Ajahn Cha's monasteries are nice. <S> the appendices of this books shows tiracchana vijja or wrong livelihood for Bhikkhus. <S> tiracchana vijja
|
If you come to Sri Lanka, there's nice place up in hill country called the Rathmalkanda Meditation Center for Insight Knowledge . I will be taking a retreat near Kuala Lumpur starting 1st December (Mahasi style). Also you can try out Mogok Sayadaw's Meditation techniques, there many monasteries but little web presence hence you might need to do a bit more searching.
|
What are the "defilements"? Simple question, but I would like to know- what are the defilements, according to Theravada Buddhism? I keep hearing this term and would like to find out what it means, according to the original teachings of the Buddha. Thank you <Q> In simple words, defilements are like little clouds that descend on the head -- and when you look around through one of them, you see everything in a different color or blurry or distorted. <S> That's what they are, they are glitches that affect your interpretation and evaluation. <S> The problem with defilements is that subjectively they are indistinguishable from reality, it just looks like that's the way the external object actually is -- not a cloud over your head. <S> Or you may get really angry with someone and yell at them, thinking your anger is justified - but <S> it really just a defilement, a temporary madness. <S> In the original Buddha's teaching, as recorded in Pali Canon, the major types of defilements are: lobha -- usually translated as desire or greed -- that's the defilement that suddenly makes some things appear very likable. <S> dosa -- usually translated as anger or hatred <S> -- that's the defilement that makes some things appear very wrong. <S> and moha -- usually translated as ignorance or delusion <S> -- that's the defilement that makes you confused about what's what. <S> The traditional metaphor is that these three are like the three base paints that mix in various proportions to create the innumerable variety of defilements observed in real life. <A> The term is used differently in different places in Theravada literature. <S> In the 27th Samyutta of the Samyutta Nikaya, there are ten Suttas that talk about the kilesas, and the term is equated with desire-passion (Chanda-rago). <S> For example, the first Sutta reads: <S> At Savatthi. "Monks, any desire-passion with regard to the eye is a defilement of the mind. <S> Any desire-passion with regard to the ear... <S> the nose... <S> the tongue... <S> the body... <S> the intellect is a defilement of the mind. <S> When, with regard to these six bases, the defilements of awareness are abandoned, then the mind is inclined to renunciation. <S> The mind fostered by renunciation feels malleable for the direct knowing of those qualities worth realizing." <S> and the other nine suttas are the same, but just apply this stalk formula to different thigs such as forms, consciousness, contact, etc. <A> You might want to bookmark the following site that gives excellent definitions for common Buddhist terms: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm or download the PDF of this dictionary from: http://urbandharma.org/pdf/palidict.pdf . <S> I have a hard copy of this dictionary <S> and it is the most used book in my collection. <S> An excellent resource for beginners and intermediate level. <S> Here is the definition of kilesa (defilements) from that source: <S> kilesa: 'defilements', are mind-defiling, unwholesome qualities. <S> Vis. <S> M. XXII, 49, 65: "There are 10 defilements, thus called because they are themselves defiled, and because they defile the mental factors associated with them. <S> They are: (1) greed ( lobha ), (2) hate ( dosa ), (3) delusion ( moha ), (4) conceit ( māna ), (5) speculative views ( diṭṭhi ), (6) <S> skeptical doubt ( vicikicchā ), (7) mental torpor ( thīna ), (8) restlessness ( uddhacca ); (9) shamelessness ( ahirika ), (10) lack of moral dread or unconscientiousness ( anottappa ). <S> " For 1-3, s. mūla ; 4, s. māna ; 5, s. diṭṭhi ; 6-8, s. nīvaraṇa ; 9 and 10, s. ahirika - anottappa . <S> The ten are explained in Dhs. <S> 1229f and enumerated in Vibh. <S> XII. <S> No classification of the kilesa is found in the Suttas , though the term occurs quite often in them. <S> For the related term, upakkilesa (q.v.; 'impurities') <S> different lists are given - (App.). <A> Defilements are like when you want to calm down or want to be peaceful, or want to be at ease, or want to focus, you can't because something else is bothering you. <S> That something else is call defilements. <A> Just like a cloth can be stained and dirty, a mind can be exploited. <S> According to the Vatthupama Sutta: The Simile of the Cloth (MN 7 PTS: M i 36) there are <S> 16 defilements.(1) Covetousness and unrighteous greed are a defilement of the mind; (Abhijjhāvisamalobho cittassa upakkileso)(2) <S> ill will is a defilement of the mind; <S> (byāpādo cittassa upakkileso)(3) <S> anger is a defilement of the mind; <S> (kodho cittassa upakkileso)(4) hostility... <S> (upanāho...)(5) denigration...(makkho... <S> )(6) <S> domineering...(paḷāso <S> ...)(7) envy...(issā... <S> )(8) jealousy... <S> (macchariyaṃ <S> ...)(9) hypocrisy...(māyā <S> ...)(10 <S> ) fraud...(sāṭheyyaṃ... <S> )(11) obstinacy...(thambho... <S> )(12) presumption... <S> (sārambho... <S> )(13 <S> ) conceit...(māno...)(14) arrogance... <S> (atimāno...)(15) vanity...(mado <S> ...)(16) negligence is a defilement of the mind (pamādo cittassa upakkileso)
|
Defilements are impurities in one’s mind.
|
What does the word "world" mean in the Buddhist context? The Hemawatha Sutta Is a (very old)? sutta in "Sutha Nipatha" of KN, Just after the first sermon of "Dammachakka". 'Hemawata' (General of yakka's ) is also a listener of that. He give the news about Buddha to his friend 'sathagira' and both came to meet load. That Dialog is in this sutta. some extract of it as follows ... The Great One like a lion who lives alone, among all pleasures he’s expectation-free, let us draw near that we may ask of him how to escape from the snarefulness of death. O proclaimer of the Dharma, expounding it too, one who’s beyond all dharmas’ Further Shore, all fear and hatred you’ve utterly overcome both of us then of Gotama inquire— Hemavata What co-arises with the world ? With what’s it make acquaintance? The world grasps after what indeed? Why’s the world afflicted? Buddha Six with the world do co-arise, with six becomes acquainted, the world’s attached to six indeed, so, world’s by six afflicted. The word 'world' is used in this verses and throughout the thipitaka. What is the meaning of this word in this context? <Q> The Buddha often used the word “world” in a metaphorical sense. <S> Here are some Suttas where "world" is used in a similar way: SN 35.82: <S> Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. <S> As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: "'The world, the world' it is said. <S> In what respect does the word 'world' apply? <S> "Insofar as it disintegrates, monk, it is called the 'world.' <S> Now what disintegrates? <S> The eye disintegrates. <S> Forms disintegrate. <S> Consciousness at the eye disintegrates. <S> Contact at the eye disintegrates. <S> And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye — experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain — that too disintegrates. <S> (repeat for ear, nose, tongue, body and mind-sense) SN 12.44: Dwelling at Savatthi. <S> There the Blessed One addressed the monks: "I will teach you the origination of the world & the ending of the world. <S> Listen & pay close attention. <S> I will speak." <S> "As you say, lord," the monks responded to the Blessed One. <S> The Blessed One said: "And what is the origination of the world? <S> Dependent on the eye & forms there arises eye-consciousness. <S> The meeting of the three is contact. <S> From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. <S> From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. <S> From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. <S> From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. <S> From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. <S> From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. <S> This is the origination of the world. <S> (repeat for ear, nose, tongue, body and mind-sense) <A> In the context of presentations of dependent-arising as exposed in the Pali canon (as in, for instance, the quotes you give, or also Thanissaro Bhikkhu phrasing " <S> There is nothing further for this world" at the end of the Adittapariyaya Sutta) <S> I would trust Geshe Sonam Rinchen's explanation (in "How Karma Works"): "The world," used to translate the Tibetan term jigten ( jig rten ), here has a very specific meaning because it refers to the five aggregates - forms, feelings, discriminations, compositional factors, and the six kinds of consciousnesses - which constitute our own and others' bodies and minds. <S> The person[...] depends on these five aggregates, and it is in relation to them that we come into existence and disintegrate. <S> Thus "basis of disintegration" is one meaning for jigten." <A> This world is blind! <S> There are so few who see things as they truly are. <S> ... <S> Whose Dhamma is well-taught? <S> Who has practiced well in this world? <S> Who in the world is well-gone?" <S> ... <S> He has made known — having realized it through direct knowledge — this world with its devas, maras, & brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & brahmans, their rulers & common people. <S> ... <S> He who in this world takes nothing that is not given to him, be it long or short, small or big, good or bad — <S> him do I call a holy man. <S> ... <S> This world completely lacks essence \ <S> It trembles in all directions <S> \ <S> I longed to find myself a place \ Unscathed — but I could not see it. <S> ... <S> He who having been heedless is heedless no more, illuminates this world like the moon freed from clouds. <S> ... <S> Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. <S> There is nothing further for the sake of this world. <A> Load Buddha has realize new visions. <S> to communicate those ideas he need new words (for new concepts). <S> Instead of defining new words he sometimes use them with new meaning.(This is one example). <S> The word "world" has two usages, one for normal meaning as shown in Andrei's answer . <S> The other meaning is for new understanding about the 'world' we create by our self. <S> It create by 'Six sense doors'. <S> Instead of using the word "world", '5 Aggregate', '12 Ayathana'(faculty),' <S> 18 Dathu' or 'Dukka'(suffering), 'Bimba'(Illusion), 'Maya', etc also used to as appropriate. <S> In ' Hemawatha sutta ' the dialog goes as...... <S> Hemavata <S> The grasping—what is it then by which the world’s afflicted? <S> When asked about this, please do speak: how to be free from dukkha? <S> Buddha <S> The sensual pleasures five are taught in the world with mind as six, having let go of all desire for those, be thus from dukkha free. <S> This for the world’s the leading out, its “as-it-is” declared to you, and this to you I do declare: be thus from dukkha free. ...
|
In the quote you have provided, the “world” is the six senses. I believe by "world" Buddha usually means the human civilisation, the society, the world of people:
|
Is the sound an object or an experience? For experience to occur you need to have an object( sound or speaking man? ), a sense faculty(ear) and a sense consciousness(hearing). If a sound is an object, what is then an experience? <Q> According to MN 18: Dependent on the ear and sounds, ear-consciousness arises. <S> Definitions <S> Ear = <S> the sensitive part of the ear that is able to detect sound <S> Sound = vibration Ear-consciousness = <S> the Thought Moment that is aware of sound <S> This is the sensing process by which a vibration is registered by the mind. <S> Later thinking processes may combine multiple vibrations into a syllable and multiple syllables into a word. <S> Later thinking processes may recognize the word and start associating a meaning with the word. <S> So when you "hear a person speaking", it is actually a large number of sensing processes followed by a much larger number of thinking processes. <S> The sensing process is "impersonal"; a mechanical process that would be the same for you and for me. <S> The thinking process is "personal"; your thinking sequence and my thinking sequence will be different based on our individual past experiences (for example, if the word is in a language that you know <S> but I do not know, then obviously your associations will be very different from my associations). <A> From a Tibetan point of view, it concerns what is referred to as <S> Lo Rig (epistemology), 'Awarenesses and knowers' and 'Minds and mental factors'. <S> Strictly speaking, experience refers to a characteristic of the 'feeling' mental factor. <S> As in Yeshe Gyeltsen's Necklace for Those of Clear Awareness : <S> QUESTION: <S> What is the defining characteristic of feeling? <S> RESPONSE: <S> It has the characteristic of experience through the entity of experience, <S> it experiences individually the fruitional results of virtuous and non-virtuous actions. <S> Also, from a Sautrantika point of view (Dignaga's Compendium of Valid Cognition , Dharmakirti's commentary, Purbuchok's Explanation), sound would be the observed object condition, casting its aspects onto the ear-consciousness apprehending it. <S> Sound is an object of a sense direct perceiver (ear-consciousness). <S> As such, it is form. <S> Sautrantika characterize form as being “atomically established”, contrary to Yogacara. <S> Thus, if you states that “sound is [an] experience”, if absurdly follows that “experience is form... experience is atomically established... <S> experience is an object of a sense direct perceiver... <S> so experience must be seen, heard, tasted, touched or smelled”. <S> As it is not so, experience is not form, and sound is not an experience [because sound is form]. <S> One might assert that the ear-consciousness, “perceives its object” or “experiences its object”, and in this way “has an experience” or “possesses an experience” and is an object-possessor of both the sound and the experience. <S> It would probably not stand in debate, but we might present things like that generally. <A> "Sound" is an oject and an experience. <S> Anything or anybody can be the object of experience. <S> The object is the part of the experience that is being experienced. <S> The subject is what is experiencing or witnessing the object of experience. <A> Sound is an object. <S> When the mind directs itself towards an object, that is the experience. <S> What is the experience? <S> Whatever arises when the mind directs itself towards an object. <S> What arises? <S> Senses and consciousness. <S> Then, thoughts. <A> As Master Dogen said: The ways of viewing mountains and waters are different depending upon what kind of beings we are . <S> There are some beings that view water as a jewel . <S> However, this does not mean that they view a jewel [for human beings] as water. <S> How do we see what they view as water? <S> What they see as a jewel is what we see as water . <S> Some beings see water as wondrous flowers. <S> But they do not use flowers [for human beings] as water. <S> Hungry ghosts view water as raging fire or as pus and blood. <S> Dragons and fish view it as a palace or a lofty building . <S> [Some beings] see it as the seven treasures or the mani jewel. <S> [Others] see it as a forest or walls, or as the dharma nature of immaculate liberation, or as the true human body, or as body as the form and mind as the nature. <S> Human beings view it as water . <S> And these [different ways of viewing] are the conditions under which [water] is killed or given life. <S> Some beings (dogs) perceive vibrations of higher frequencies that other beings do not perceive as sound at all. <S> For some (tiny) beings, the vibrations we perceive as sound are perceived as physical movement. <S> Some beings, like bats, perceive sound as vision. <S> There is nothing inherent in the vibration that makes it sound. <S> Very slow vibrations (< 1Hz) are not perceived as sound at all. <S> Vibration itself is not an entity either - it is a process of cause-and-effect propagating through various media. <S> The point here is that phenomenal reality is projection, an interpretation that depends on the point of view. <S> Because experienced reality is projection, we can control it by controlling our point of view.
|
"Sound" is a certain experience that is an object.
|
Did Mara win over Buddha? There is incident where Mara is trying to get to Buddha even after he became enlightened.Finally Mara win him over by his death.With that knowledge is it correct to assume he had hunger feeling and sexual feelings too? From Parinibbana Sutta There was a time, Ananda, when I dwelt at Uruvela, on the bank of the Nerañjara River, at the foot of the goatherds' banyan-tree, soon after my supreme Enlightenment. And Mara, the Evil One, approached me, saying: 'Now, O Lord, let the Blessed One come to his final passing away! Let the Happy One utterly pass away! The time has come for the Parinibbana of the Lord. Then, Ananda, I answered Mara, the Evil One, saying: 'I shall not come to my final passing away, Evil One, until my bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, laymen and laywomen, have come to be true disciples — wise, well disciplined, apt and learned, preservers of the Dhamma, living according to the Dhamma, abiding by appropriate conduct and, having learned the Master's word, are able to expound it, preach it, proclaim it, establish it, reveal it, explain it in detail, and make it clear; until, when adverse opinions arise, they shall be able to refute them thoroughly and well, and to preach this convincing and liberating Dhamma. I shall not come to my final passing away, Evil One, until this holy life taught by me has become successful, prosperous, far-renowned, popular, and widespread, until it is well proclaimed among gods and men. And again today, Ananda, at the Capala shrine, Mara, the Evil One, approached me, saying: 'Now, O Lord, bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, laymen and laywomen, have come to be true disciples of the Blessed One — wise, well disciplined, apt and learned, preservers of the Dhamma, living according to the Dhamma, abiding in the appropriate conduct, and having learned the Master's word, are able to expound it, preach it, proclaim it, establish it, reveal it, explain it in detail, and make it clear; and when adverse opinions arise, they are now able to refute them thoroughly and well, and to preach this convincing and liberating Dhamma. And now, O Lord, this holy life taught by the Blessed One has become successful, prosperous, far-renowned, popular and widespread, and it is well proclaimed among gods and men. Therefore, O Lord, let the Blessed One come to his final passing away! Let the Happy One utterly pass away! The time has come for the Parinibbana of the Lord. And then, Ananda, I answered Mara, the Evil One, saying: 'Do not trouble yourself, Evil One. Before long the Parinibbana of the Tathagata will come about. Three months hence the Tathagata will utterly pass away. And in this way, Ananda, today at the Capala shrine the Tathagata has renounced his will to live on. <Q> No, the Blessed One renounced his will to live-on on his own volition since the bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, laymen and laywomen, have come to be true disciples... <S> just like the paragraph says. <S> It's not like Mara could've done anything about it, had the lord said no. <S> Enlightened beings feel hunger, taste, smell and other bodily sensations caused by contact as long as they have functional sense doors. <S> But they do not get sexual feelings as it requires lust to play it's part. <A> You misread the story. <S> Mara did not win over the Buddha. <S> Rather, Mara successfully influenced Ananda, to not request the Buddha to extend his life, when the Buddha dropped the hint that he could choose to extend his life, because he had the ability to do so. <S> Parinibbana Sutta <S> And the Blessed One said: "Whosoever, Ananda, has developed, practiced, employed, strengthened, maintained, scrutinized, and brought to perfection the four constituents of psychic power could, if he so desired, remain throughout a world-period or until the end of it. <S> The Tathagata, Ananda, has done so. <S> Therefore the Tathagata could, if he so desired, remain throughout a world-period or until the end of it." <S> But the Venerable Ananda was unable to grasp the plain suggestion, the significant prompting, given by the Blessed One. <S> As though his mind was influenced by Mara , he did not beseech the Blessed One: "May the Blessed One remain, O Lord!. <S> May the Happy One remain, O Lord, throughout the world-period, for the welfare and happiness of the multitude, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, well being, and happiness of gods and men!" <S> And when for a second and a third time the Blessed One repeated his words, the Venerable Ananda remained silent. <S> Then the Blessed One said to the Venerable Ananda: "Go now, Ananda, and do as seems fit to you." <S> " <S> Even so, O Lord." <S> And the Venerable Ananda, rising from his seat, respectfully saluted the Blessed One, and keeping his right side towards him, took his seat under a tree some distance away. <S> Commentary : <S> According to Comy., Ananda's mind had been influenced (pariyutthitacitto) by Mara's exhibiting a frightful sight which distracted his attention, preventing him from grasping the Buddha's suggestion. <A> In Buddhism, where is the place that says " Finally Mara wins him over by his death." <S> According to Buddhism, Load Buddha Win the Mara at the Boo Tree shrine. <S> Buddhist literature says in Maha-parinibbana Sutta: <S> Last Days of the Buddha <S> Then the Blessed One said to the bhikkhus: "So, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. <S> Strive with earnestness. <S> The time of the Tathagata's Parinibbana is near. <S> Three months hence the Tathagata will utterly pass away." <S> And having spoken these words, the Happy One, the Master, spoke again, saying: My years are now full ripe, the life span left is short. <S> Departing, I go hence from you, relying on myself alone. <S> Be earnest, then, O bhikkhus, be mindful and of virtue pure! <S> With firm resolve, guard your own mind! <S> Whoso untiringly pursues the Dhamma and the Discipline <S> Shall go beyond the round of births and make an end of suffering. <S> Here Parinibbana is defer from death. <S> After parinibbana there is no rebirth as a normal human. <S> Others will have rebirth. <S> Who is Buddha? <S> Who remove the roots that course to sexual feelings(“Kama Thanha”) and Becoming(“Bava Thanha”) is Buddha. <S> But He has hunger feelings until death. <S> ** <S> “Kama Thanha" is not just "sexual feelings". <S> It represents all the desires generated through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind. <A> My version of the story: When young Gotama discovered the thorn of aversion to Samsara / thirst for Enlightenment in his heart and realized the Three Marks of Existence, his first impulse was to kill himself. <S> He did not realize this was the very Enlightenment he sought. <S> It took him time to recover physically and emotionally from the misery of his radical asceticism. <S> But through understanding of his thorn he also understood the mechanism of "this/that conditionality" ( idappaccayata ) and the third noble truth, so he clearly understood why he had suicidal thoughts. <S> He started reviewing his realization of the dukkha mechanism and as he did that, the retroactive realization of his Enlightenment slowly dawned on him, making him actually very glad. <S> This was his first jhana. <S> He then naturally fell through the rest of the four jhanas, from second to fourth, and once he was through he knew he was done-done. <S> Mara is personification of his crazy thoughts, the impulse of suicide being one of them. <S> It is true that he had some of these thoughts come back <S> post-Enlightenment, particularly some fear in connection with his human limits and some doubts about his Enlightenment. <S> Thoughts do not belong to anyone, they arise from causes and conditions. <S> But because he now had wisdom of Enlightenment, he had the framework for proper evaluation of thoughts, so he could no longer fall victim to them. <S> This is why every time Buddha encounters Mara or one of the yakshas he says, you can't overturn my mind, not anymore. <S> So the reference to Mara is not in connection with death, it is in connection with his early suicidal thoughts. <S> He was completely fulfilled as a teacher and re-discoverer of Sat Dharma. <S> Mara did not win over him. <S> But yes, he certainly had hunger feelings and sexual feelings. <S> There is a story in one sutta when he even felt a glimpse of lust towards a young woman, a daughter of one brahman who wanted him to marry her (post-Enlightenment!). <S> But he did not like the feeling of lust in the least and dropped it immediately, to brahman's disappointment.
|
Buddha has feelings, just like a normal person - he just does not let them control him. When Buddha died he died at an old age and for natural reasons, nothing to do with Mara.
|
Difference between Samsara and Dukkha What is the difference between the terms "samsara" and "dukkha"? What is the relationship between the two? <Q> Samsara is a continuum of our individual mind moments. <A> In my own words: Samsara is the same world you see on TV and read about in newspapers. <S> This world is a hallucination (a subjective reality) fabricated in dependence on the fundamental confusion caused by the fundamental ignorance. <S> This confusion causes dukkha and dukkha causes further confusion, which is why Samsara is dubbed "cyclic existence" - but also because the confusion is passed on from previous lives to future lives. <S> Dukkha is the painful and bitter feeling of wrongness you experience while in Samsara, because of the mismatch between the hallucination and reality. <A> Saṃsāra is endless cyclic existence ( Anamataggo bhikkawe samsaro pubbha kota na pannayati ) caused by Avijja and Tanha ( Avijja neevarananang thanha sanyojanag ). <S> Note that Avijja means ignorance about four noble truths including Dukkha. <S> Avijja Sutta -SN 45 <A> Dukkha not only means suffering but means breakable, changing, fragile, breaking, falling apart, changes, stressful etc.. <S> it is clearer with buddha quote "all Vedana [feelings; <S> pleasurable, suffering, or equanimity] end with Dukkha. <S> So dukkha is a property of those who are traveling in Samsara <A> Others have nicely explained the different meanings of the two terms. <S> As for their relationship, I'd actually say that samsara and dukkha are the same thing from different perspectives -- samsara from a cosmological standpoint, dukkha from an individual (psychological) standpoint. <S> To be in samsara is to experience pervasive, self-reinforcing (cyclic) dukkha due to ignorance. <S> To be in ignorance is to suffer and hence to be in samsara. <S> So samsara = <S> > dukkha and dukkha = <S> > <S> samsara, hence samsara <= <S> > dukkha. <S> This is an elementary example of how cosmology and psychology (phenomenology, experience) mirror each other. <S> Rupert Gethin treats this at some length in a great series of papers, though with more intricate concepts. <S> Here it is summarized in the Wikipedia article on samsara. <S> You can look up his papers on the subject, and he also treats it in chapter 5 of his text, The Foundations of Buddhism . <S> You could also add avidya (ignorance) as a third element of the equivalence, perhaps from the philosophical or conceptual perspective. <A> They are conjoined in the dispensation: what is samsara is dukkha, cessation of dukkha is cessation of samara and dukkha is a characteristic of samsara. <S> analogy: <S> What is water is liquid, cessation of liquid is cessation of water and liquid is a characteristic of water. <S> It would not be appropriate to use them as synonyms always as they are different abstractions.
|
Dukkha is the deep down feeling that something is missing or wrong that occurs throughout Samsara.
|
Any recommended monasteries in Sri Lanka that offer extended meditation retreats? Could anyone provide links and/or info about Buddhist monasteries in Sri Lanka that offer extended meditation retreats? For those who have taken part in such retreats, how was the experience? Would it be challenging in any way for me, an American, who has never been to Asia before, to travel there/adapt to the culture? Thank you <Q> Please refer these links. <S> http://nauyana.org/ <S> http://www.sadahamarana.org/?page_id=48 <S> You can google for these links. <S> Please do some background checks, before you go there. <S> False teachers can be exists like infamous 'Pitiduwe Siri Damma'. <A> I've heard Mithrigala Nissarana Vanaya is a good place. <S> I don't know if they do long retreats but most monasteries will accommodate the sincere aspirants. <S> In Burma, I've personally hoped to someday spend a long retreat at Panditarama <S> (Vipassana) and/or Pa Auk (Samatha). <S> In Thailand I've considered Wat Chom Tong near Chiang Mai. <S> There's also the Panditarama center in Nepal . <S> The Goenka centers are located around the world, as well as in the above countries, but they are aplenty in India, including at Bodh Gaya . <S> They do 45-60 day retreats, but one needs to work up to it over a few years since they require one to have graduated several preparatory retreats. <S> The above are all Theravada retreats. <A> Rathmalkanda Meditation Center Meditation Techniques Vipassana(Mahasi Sayadaw) Samatha(Anapanasati/ Kasina) <S> I stayed there for a short period about 8 years ago. <S> You have to call the number in the website and book in advance. <S> Mostly foreigners come to meditate there. <S> Its free of charge but donations are accepted. <S> Interactions with the locals are minimal. <S> So you wouldn't face any cultural difficulties. <S> The food is quite good. <S> It is situated at a cold mountain area. <S> So you neither need A/C nor have to worry about mosquitoes and snakes. <S> Rooms are clean, spacious and have electricity. <S> The beds are comfortable with warm blankets. <S> There are several mats lying on the floor as well. <S> The bathrooms are western style with hot showers. <S> Attire : <S> Anything that is decent. <S> It doesn't have to be white. <S> Rules <S> : Keep quiet and keep clean. <S> Sila : <S> Eight Precepts <S> (you will be given refreshments in the evening. <S> You can bring a snack to eat at nights if you find it hard to keep to the 6th precept) <S> Usually I got meditation instructions after the breakfast or lunch. <S> In the evening you can meet venerable Madawala Upali(the head monk) to have a Dhamma discussion. <S> He speaks English well. <S> If you are into Abhidhamma or a fan of modern science, you will enjoy the talks as he was a former science teacher and a visiting lecturer of Buddhist philosophy at the Kelaniya University Course duration : 2 weeks. <S> But you can stay longer or leave before. <A> Sri Lanka, Thailand and Burma are the main three Theravada Countries. <A> Mitirigala Nissarana Vanaya Teacher- Ven. <S> Udairiyagama Dhammajiva Maha Thero (U DhammajivaSayadaw), Excellent knowledge in Dhamma, Pali, Burmese and English, Specialty in Mindfulness and emphasizes the value of mindfulness Meditation Technique - Satipatthana meditation, Burmese Mahasi/Panditarama Technique (Vipassana) and SriLankan Nanarama Method (Vipassana with Samatha) <S> Retreats - 3 days, 7 days, 10 days, 20 days and extensive periods areallowed for serious practitioners and for the meditators who areexpecting the ordaination Location - Mitirigala,Kirindivela, Sri Lanka <S> More Information - nissarana.lk (Official Website) <S> Sanghopasthana <S> Suva Sevana Teacher- Ven. <S> Katukurunde Nyanananda Maha Thero <S> (Bhikkhu Nanananda)[A famous book author and a meditation master], Excellent knowledge in Dhamma, Pali and English, Advises not to be in a hurry but to practice Samatha also for aiding Vipassana, Slowly-Mindfully-Carefully. <S> Appreciates dedication for practicing. <S> Meditation Technique - Both Samatha and Vipassana, Metta Meditationand <S> probably Sri Lankan Nanarama Method <S> (Vipassana with Samatha) <S> Retreats - Any time is possible with prior notice. <S> No allocated dates. <S> special consideration for dedicated meditators and dedicated practitioners who are expecting the ordaination. <S> Location - Kirillawala Watta, Dammulla, Karandana, Sri Lanka <S> More Information - http://www.seeingthroughthenet.net <S> (OfficialWebsite) <S> These are two prominent places in Sri Lanka. <S> Sri Lanka offers 1 year residence visa easily if you have a recommendation beforehand. <S> Additionally there are more meditation centers which are famous in different aspects. <S> NaUyana Aranya in Melsiripura (Burmese Pa-auk system), Kanduboda M.C. (Burmese Mahasi System), Goenka centers in Kandy, Anuradhapura and Kosgama (Burmese Sayagi U Ba Kin system)
|
In Sri Lanka: Venerable Katukurunde Nananada Thero's Monastery ( http://www.seeingthroughthenet.net ), Mitirigala Nissarana Vanaya (Burmese Panditarama tradition) are for serious practitioners. If one is interested in the Mahayana tradition I would unhesitatingly recommend Plum Village in France. Normally in Sri Lanka, temporary ordination is discouraged but permanent ordination is possible at anytime.
|
Are there any websites that contain Buddhist dictionaries? I believe that there many words translate from Buddha Sutra and I want to ask is there any website can translate the words meaning in English? Example Samman Samadhi <Q> I recommend the Digital Pali Reader (a browser extension for Firefox and Pale Moon ). <A> E.g. Samma Samadhi . <A> For Sanskrit I use http://spokensanskrit.de/ and for Pali http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/ <A> I've tried the PTS Pali-English dictionary (for Pali). <S> There's a trick to using it though. <S> Enable <S> Search entry words only (not definitions) <S> Type in the word you're looking for e.g. Samadhi <S> When you search it may not find the result. <S> So: <S> Also select Words starting with <S> (Example: bud) <S> Type in fewer (just the first few) <S> letters of the word you're looking for e.g. Sama <S> This may display several results -- hopefully you can find the word you're looking for on this list (maybe Samatha in this case). <S> This searching for a prefix (instead of for the full word) if often necessary, because Pali words have declensions and conjugations when they're used in sentences, which alters their suffixes. <S> I think that samadhi versus samatha (used in the example above) is a difference between Sanskrit and Pali. <S> The fact remains, however, that when looking for Pali words in the PTS dictionary it's often necessary to search for the prefix. <S> Another reason why that's so is, I think, that Pali words are joined together (like in German). <S> Look at this answer for example (which uses the Critical Pali Dictionary instead of the PTS dictionary), which shows for example various words created from ārāma . <S> I note that ārāma isn't in the PTS dictionary however arañña <S> is — <S> which is another reason why you may need to look for prefixes (I found it by searching the PTS dictionary for ara after a search for aram <S> found no results), i.e. that the Latinesque alphabet spelling might not be standardized. <S> Beware that the PTS dictionary requires of you a semi-exact spelling when you do a lookup, for example to find Kālika <S> you must search for Kālika (and searching for Kalika won't find it). <S> There's also this Glossology . <S> It only lists dhamma-related words <S> (so it's not a full dictionary), but its entries are a bit fuller than the dictionaries'. <A> Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism is another source. <S> http://www.international.ucla.edu/institute/article/149341 <A> I found this one, which seems to aggregate answers from several different dictionaries. <S> Still a LOT of words missing from the Dhammapada (which I'm working on adapting) but a very useful resource for trying to pick apart Pali texts: http://dictionary.sutta.org/ <A> Here are the options I choose for best results (in general) <S> i.e. Search entry words <S> only and Words starting with (as mentioned by ChrisW in his answer) <S> For Sanskrit , I use Sanskrit Dictionary and Spoken Sanskrit . <S> I will even use Wiktionary e.g. for etymological information. <S> In fact, I tend to look up a Pali word, explore its Sanskrit ancestor/relative in the Sanskrit Dictionary and then check etymology in Wiktionary.
|
For Pali , I use The Pali Text Society's Pali-English dictionary . Wisdom Library is one of the most reliable. Also Access To Insight has a glossary.
|
Do you become unhappy when happiness disappears? Do you become unhappy when happiness disappears? Or is there some other state of mind between happiness and unhappiness? <Q> When you are hungry and you take a first bite of your favorite meal, the happiness in the aspect of a pleasant feeling that you experience is not actual happiness, it is not in the nature of happiness: it is contaminated happiness . <S> That pleasant feeling you experience is merely a relief. <S> You experience the first bite as [contaminated] happiness only because it relieves you from a greater suffering (i.e. hunger), not because it is in the nature of happiness. <S> It is actually in the nature of suffering; it is suffering of change (a quiet subtle form of suffering). <S> As Tsongkhapa puts it in the Middle-Length Lam Rim: <S> At present most of the happy feelings that increase our attachment are minds of happiness that arise with respect to a relief of suffering. <S> If you eat when you are not hungry, there is no such relief, no such pleasant feeling, no such experience of "happiness in the aspect of a pleasant feeling", and it is experienced as suffering of suffering (a quiet gross form of suffering). <S> You are not mislead to conceive of the object as being in the nature of happiness. <S> There are three types of equanimity. <S> The first of the three is 'equanimity feeling', which his neutral feelings. <S> Furthermore, when pleasant feeling arise, you wish to associate further with it. <S> When suffering arises, you wish to be separated from it. <S> Tsongkhapa writes further: That which is neither pleasant nor suffering is that which, when it arises, neither of the two wishes occurs. <S> You can think of it this way: you enter a crowded room <S> , you look at people and you immediately have “I like this one... <S> I like that one... <S> I don't like this one... and so forth” in dependence upon pleasant and unpleasant feelings. <S> There also will be plenty of people you will not have really noticed, you are indifferent to, your attention wasn't drawn towards, because of neutral feelings. <S> Another more abstract examples of arising of neutral feeling (which is other than neither-pleasant-nor-unpleasant feeling arising in the 4th concentration of the form realm) is: the conception of the body as permanent , that produces neutral feeling and increases ignorance. <S> Tsongkhapa also adds in the Lam Rim Chen Mo that: In the case of [these] neutral feelings, ignorance ceases when you see that they are impermanent, permanent, exhaustible, and perishable in nature. <A> You are very correct to point out the false dichotomy of happiness and unhappiness. <S> If you are not unhappy then surely you are happy? <S> Perhaps it's the way that language works that makes us think in black and white terms. <S> Or maybe it's the way that our minds work that makes language black and white. <S> However as Ben Goldacre says - t hings are a bit more complicated than that . <S> There are many states that equate to happiness and unhappiness and in between states too. <S> If you consider the Dyana factors <S> then there are states accessible that normally people might equate to happiness <S> but in fact are subtle (and not so subtle) manifestations of various mental processes. <S> For instance rapture (pīti) and bliss (sukha) could both be said to be related to happiness but are different. <S> Then after this there is equanimity (upekkhā) which could be though of as happiness but could be thought of as a stage in between. <S> But it isn't just Buddhists that recognise the subtley in happiness. <S> Aristole spoke of happiness as flourishing ( eudaimonia ) but this wasn't something that could be said to occur moment by moment. <S> I've heard it said that it someone could only have been judged to have (or have not) eudaimonia at the end of their life. <S> So in a way that is happiness - but not as we know it . <S> If we can perhaps indulge in some dichotomies in the Pali language. <S> It have been taught that a antonymn of dukkha (suffering) is sukha (bliss). <S> Which seems straightforward. <S> However if we consider what the four noble truths tell us then the end of suffering is Nirvana. <S> Is Nirvana then the inbetween state? <A> There are many states of mind that can be categorized either as happy or unhappy. <S> This categorization is individual. <S> This categorization arises because of lack of knowledge about our-self and the reality outside our-self: For a lay person: <S> Happiness is satisfying desires. <S> Unhappiness is not being able to satisfy desires. <S> When happiness disappears, desires are not satisfied and a lay person becomes unhappy. <S> He has 3 choices: <S> Satisfies <S> his desires -> becomes happy <S> Doesn't satisfy his desires -> is unhappy <S> Knows his unhappiness, the cause of his unhappiness and removes the cause of his unhappiness -> becomes enlightened. <S> For an enlightened person: There is no happiness. <S> There is no unhappiness. <S> By abandoning both happiness and unhappiness, a person becomes liberated. <S> Liberated is beyond happiness and unhappiness. <S> It is neither happiness, nor unhappiness. <S> It is the ultimate. <S> The all and beyond all. <S> An enlightened person cannot become unhappy. <S> He knows unhappiness leads to a bad future. <S> Knowing, he abandons unhappiness. <S> An enlightened person can become happy. <S> He knows happiness which leads to a bad future and happiness which leads to a good future. <S> Knowing, he abandons happiness which leads to a bad future and accepts happiness which leads to a good future. <A> Happiness is used to mention Nirvanic bliss ("Vimukthi suka"). <S> According to that the other mind states are Unhappy(Dukka). <S> Because the roots of unhappiness(" greed, hate, ignorance) are still in the background of mind. <S> So there can be blissful overjoyed states to sorrowful miserable states. <S> In between there can be deep sleep states. <S> But when we awake, we are in the same (dull/joyful) world. <S> It can be change in between any time. <S> But if we have a 'State' that not change/varying for worldly things('8 world dhamma'). <S> It is called the real Liberation/ Happiness.
|
For a lay person, he becomes unhappy when happiness disappears.
|
Computer Feedback in Meditation Are there any meditation computer feedback programs out there? Like Biofeedback. What could they do? Allow a teacher much insight into a student? Allow a meditator to know when wandering is happening, when subtle thinking is happening or to know when reality is seen directly or with concepts? Would this be a helpful tool to be used all the time, only sometimes or never?-(Perhaps because it creates a duality, it creates aversion, it's unnessasary, it's not in the Pali Canon or anything). <Q> Biofeedback programs just take data such as heart rate, blood pressure, etc... and display them on a screen so that the person can see them. <S> The underlying theory is that if a person can directly see what's going on, they would be better able to adjust themselves to slow them down. <S> Because these devices cannot directly access the mental activity of the meditator, I don't see how they could be of much use. <S> Certainly if one is developing some form of calm abiding it might be useful to an absolute beginner, but once they start making progress, even stopping to check the machine readout would be comparatively distracting and would erode one's concentration. <A> I've heard of some meditators who use tools like EEGs. <S> Of late these models are becoming pretty cheap, USD 100-500, which was unthinkable even a few years ago. <S> They can't be very accurate at this price but they are there, see for example Neurosky Brainwave . <S> At least in theory they can reveal whether thoughts stray frequently or stay in one spot, and we can train using the feedback to move brain waves to certain areas and stay there. <S> I don't immediately see how this will add any more than novelty value to my meditation practice, since I already know the familiar zones my brain hits by observing the breath and other bodily signs. <S> If I was more curious I'd probably read up on the possible patterns of breaths and their associated brain states, as far as I know the advanced Buddhist meditation literature is pretty encyclopaedic about such patterns. <S> Of course, such tools might be very useful - having never tried one I can't be certain. <S> A lot of reviews I've read claim these don't work very well. <S> They seem to be mostly marketed for kids with ADD, but the geeky meditator is an emerging sub-category. <S> If someone I knew had one around <S> I'd try it since I am curious, but since I know it'll probably be a useless toy on the shelf after a few weeks, in the spirit of letting go, I've skipped buying one for myself. <A> There is a device called a muse. <S> It is a personal EEG. <S> I purchased it and have been using it for months. <S> This device is now invaluable to my practice. <S> You wear the device while meditating, and use a mobile app that listens to your brain and translates the level of activity into natural weather sounds. <S> If your concentration is good and you are focused the weather is mild, if you are thinking or distracted the weather is more severe. <S> You can calm it by bringing your attention back to your breath. <S> This device does exactly what it claims to do. <S> The more you use it the better <S> it gets also,as there is machine learning that builds a profile specific to your pattern of neural activity. <S> After two months the detection is so precise that the weather noise accurately detects nearly every thought that I have <S> while meditating, it is incredible. <S> Here is a link to what I am referring. <S> muse website
|
If you have issues with a wandering mind, or getting lost in planning or lamenting while meditating, then this device could certainly be of good use to you.
|
Is the next Buddha the same entity/being as the previous Buddha, or another discrete being who comes to the same realizations as the previous Buddha? I do not have a strong theoretical grasp of the concept of rebirth, so I am wondering: Is each Buddha that has existed/will exist the same being, reincarnated? Or is each Buddha a totally unrelated person from the previous Buddhas and Buddhas to come, who just happens to realize all of the same truths that the previous Buddha realized? Thank you <Q> Next Buddha is a totally unrelated separate person to previous Buddha. <S> He will realize the same truth as previous Buddha when his(previous Buddha) teachings are no longer among us. <S> Once someone becomes Arahant, He will never be born again. <S> The whole purpose of being Arahant is not to be born again. <S> How can previous Buddha can tell prophecy about next Buddha? <S> To be a Buddha, its saying we have to do lot of good Karma and endless sacrifices. <S> Buddha can see someone's Karma and how these Karma going to effect them. <S> Therefore, Buddha can see whose Karma is fulfilled to be next Buddha and when it happens. <S> As become a Buddha is so difficult, it's only for great persons who has endless courage and such a kind heart for all beings to preach them Dharma and make them aware of Samsara. <A> I think it's famously difficult to identity the Buddha; for example, in the Sariputta-Kotthita Sutta <S> Now, what more do you want, friend Kotthita? <S> When a monk has been freed from the classification of craving, there exists no cycle for describing him. <S> Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta , <S> Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. <S> Freed from the classification of form, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. ' <S> Reappears' doesn't apply. ' <S> Does not reappear' doesn't apply. ' <S> Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. ' <S> Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply. <S> "Any feeling... <S> Any perception... <S> Any fabrication... "Any consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. <S> Freed from the classification of consciousness, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. ' <S> Reappears' doesn't apply. ' <S> Does not reappear' doesn't apply. ' <S> Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. ' <S> Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply. <S> That being so I don't see how it's possible to compare two Buddhas, to ask whether they're the same or different. <S> Asking the question might presume some Identity view ( sakkāya-diṭṭhi ) , which the Buddha denied. <S> Apparently there's a Trikaya and Dharmakāya doctrine. <S> I don't know, maybe you might want to say that all Buddhas are of the same Dharmakāya -- perhaps analagous to saying that there's no such thing as two different nirvanas. <S> But Dhammakaya is not especially a Theravāda doctrine (except see also the 'Dhammakaya Movement of Thailand'). <A> Which you believe will depend on tradition since it is impossible to determine without insight. <S> Some believe he is a different being, others that he is a manifestation of the same entity. <S> It does not really matter does it? <S> The lotus sutra may ease your curiosity, however there were many arrogant disciples who were frightened and could not bear to hear it. <S> If you have a teacher you may want to ask them whether you should read it. <A> But Buddhism is saying that the very nature of your question is incorrect... that there is no self nor no-self. <S> That these individuation of consciousness into selves is by itself incorrect for myriad reasons, one of them being that the 'new Buddha' could not exist without the 'old Buddha' ... and <S> even the 'old Buddha' won't exist without the possibility of the 'new Buddha', someone to help This is especially because in order to become a Buddha, one's resolve for helping others (compassion paramita) must become completely pure, including taking the 1st Mahayana Vow to "not enter Nirvana until all beings are saved. <S> " We must look to the Mahayana to explain the concept of Buddahood because a Buddha is certainly different from an Arhat who would rather abide in emptiness (which is still helping beings) but that is another argument entirely.. <S> Anyway, you won't understand till you are Enlightened yourself (not that I am) because the illusion of self-and-other is from whence <S> your question comes in the first place. <S> Also, there is the perspective that bodhisattvas are nirmanakaya manifestations of the Buddha. <S> So if you became Enlightened, it might be because you are a projection body of a Buddha (who has a spiritual parent as well)! <S> Don't let this discourage you from practice though: this and the previous illusion mentioned are important at the Ultimate level of reality and in the relative senses of things, the answer reigns that yes, there is a relative person who mustered up the characteristics necessary to become a bodhisattva/Buddha and escaping forced rebirth and afflictions, consciously able to manifest myriad powers and help others according to causes and conditions.
|
Yes, they are totally different beings.
|
Why does my mind feel slow to think nearly half day after my meditation? I would like to know if I should expect any problems after I have done my meditation in the morning for a half hour? For the whole morning afterwards, my mind felt very slow to think of anything. Is that a good or bad sign? <Q> Re: mind feeling "very slow", "very slow to think of anything" -- when someone tells you something, can you reply immediately without thinking? <S> That's a sign of good meditation. <S> If your "very slow to think of anything" just means you are going around basically without thoughts, and you can respond to anything spontaneously with no blockages / <S> no doubts - that's good. <S> While, if your "mind very slow" means you can't respond - that means your meditation was basically cultivation of sloth/torpor. <S> It is said, if your meditation is wrong it can be a cause of being reborn in an animal world! <S> Meaning, if in your meditation you generate "laxity", then you are only training in making your mind dull, like the mind of a cow or sheep! <S> So you need to know what is laxity in real experience, and must be able to recognize it when it arises. <S> Meditation mind should be very sober, not like a drunk mind or sleeping mind. <A> If "slow to think of anything" means less distracted thoughts <S> then that's good. <S> But if that means your overall awareness/mindfulness decreases instead of increases <S> then you might want to check your meditation technique. <S> A nice effect of meditation is a decrease of the Five Hindrances: desire, ill-will, sloth/torpor, restlessness/worry, and doubt. <S> (ref: The Five Mental Hindrances and Their Conquest ) <A> Since this episode when you wake from sleep are you groggy and tired or relaxed and alert? <S> The lack of activity isn't an indicator of anything, the quality of the mind and body is. <S> Do you see a decrease in sense desires and aversions? <S> Do you see a decrease in any addictions or obsessive habits, such as checking your phone for notifications? <S> This can be a very good sign if any of the above positives are true. <S> Otherwise something is seriously wrong with your meditation technique, but not to worry such errors are early corrected. <A> Because you're grinding through it rather than being relaxed and clear and enjoying it Simplest way to fix it is after you've done your stuff, take a small break, then focus on the meditation point and notice how it feels as you focus, then drop the focus and rest a second and focus again. <S> Notice that how you focus affects how you feel when you link to it. <S> Try lots of different ways and at some point you'll hit on one where it feels 'exciting' and 'clear', then stick with that onhe
|
Laxity is when your mind is not sharp and bright during meditation.
|
When do I realize that I am free from rebirth? By following the Buddha's Path, when will I realize that I am free from rebirth and suffering? Is there any indication or sign ? Does one knows it at one's death bed? <Q> From Milindapanha : <S> The king said, “Is there anyone who is not reborn after death?” <S> “Yes there is. <S> The one who has no defilements is not reborn after death; the one who has defilements is reborn.” <S> “Will you be reborn?” <S> “ If I die with attachment in my mind, yes; <S> but if not, no. ” <S> ... <S> He who is reborn, Nàgasena, is he the same person or another?” <S> “Neither the same nor another. <S> ... <S> “Is the man who will not be reborn aware of the fact?” <S> “Yes, O king.” <S> “How does he know it?” <S> “ By the cessation of all that is cause or condition of rebirth. <S> As a farmer who does not plough or sow or reap would know that his granary is not getting filled up. ” <S> ... <S> What is it, Nàgasena, that is reborn?” <S> “Mind and matter ( namarupa ).” <S> “Is it this very mind and matter that is reborn?” <S> “No, it is not, but by this mind and matter deeds are done and because of those deeds another mind and matter is reborn; but <S> that mind and matter is not thereby released from the results of its previous deeds. <S> ... <S> “Does he who will not be reborn feel any painful feeling?” <S> “He may feel physical pain, O king, but not mental pain.” <S> “If he feels painful feelings then why doesn’t he just die and attain the extinction of grasping, and put an end to suffering?” <S> “The arahant has no fondness for or aversion to life... ... <S> “Will you, Nàgasena, be reborn?” <S> “What is the use of asking that question again? <S> Have I not already told you that if I die with attachment in my mind <S> I shall be reborn, if not I shall not.” <S> ... <S> “Would he who is about to be reborn know it?” <S> “Yes he would, just as a farmer who puts seed into the ground, seeing it rain well <S> , would know that a crop will be produced. ” <S> So, do you feel that you still have attachments, mental or emotional? <S> That's how you know. <A> In other words, when you attain the undying. <A> In the training that I've received (Soto Zen), both rebirth and being free from it are considered completely metaphorical. <S> As such, it's something that changes about your experience of your current life, when you break yourself of the cyclical behavior of clinging to your thoughts as though they are real. <A> As soon as you become an Arahant. <S> In other words, when you fully realize the Three marks of existence. <S> Emptiness(Sunya). <S> No personal viewpoint. <S> Nature of without cravings. <S> Elimination of the 3 roots of carving. <A> By following the Buddha's Path, liberation from birth is realized when your past lives are experienced, known, seen, looked into and the answer to the question "Why was I born?" is answered. <S> Only then, the cause of birth is known, its cessation is known and birth is: removed, removed.
|
As soon as you become an Arahant.
|
Possible to get stomach discomfort because of meditation? I have been starting meditation more recently for about twenty minutes at a time. I am able to slightly focus on the breath and have noticed I focus better when the breathes are long. I have also noticed after these sessions I may have air in my stomach possibly that leads to gas buildup and stomach discomfort. Is this something others have had before? If so how can I prevent this? <Q> Possible Causes: <S> You are eating too much and too soon to doing sitting meditation. <S> While meditating or doing any relaxing activity, your digestive system functions much better thus producing more gas along with other things. <S> Solutions: eat less and have at least an hour or two gap for meditation or try a different posture like standing/non-lotus. <S> Let go of those thinkings and be present and pleasant. <S> You are already quite gassy. <S> Have some probiotics in the form of yogurt, kombucha, or fermented food. <A> Same experience of air in stomach some 20 years ago. <S> Just carried on meditation. <S> It will go away. <A> I am able to slightly focus on the breath and have noticed I focus better when the breathes are long. <S> You have to be able to concentrate when breaths are short also. <S> Look at this as a training for a major competitions. <S> When you take up the sport the exercises are light as easy as you go on it becomes intense. <S> If you are to see the mind-matter process at the level of subatomic particles you have to be able to be sensitive to the subtlest of breaths and also in places which <S> a the least sensitive to for a beginner like the centre of the upper lip though this becomes very sensitive beyond a certain point. <S> You need not start with this <S> but this is where your focus should be after some pratice. <S> I have also noticed after these sessions I may have air in my stomach possibly that leads to gas buildup and stomach discomfort. <S> Is this something others have had before? <S> If so how can I prevent this? <S> Maybe you are swallowing air. <S> This could be the case. <S> Or generally you have become sensitive to your digesting process which you didn't notice before. <S> Heavy meals can do this perhaps. <S> Try lighter meals. <S> Sometimes based on olf Karma practitioners get certain recurring issues for a period. <S> See if this is the case after a few months. <S> If you have a teacher discuss this with him <S> / her. <S> If not perhaps you can try visiting one or andd organised course where you have a chance to discuss these issues with a teacher. <S> Some easily accessible courses are: https://www.dhamma.org/en/index , http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/global/index.html , or alternatively search World Buddhist Directory - http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/ <A> Experienced the same problem. <S> I wasn't eating before meditation and it continued to be a problem to the next day. <S> So I think above advice on eating does not apply. <S> I am sorry but haven't found a solution neither. <S> Maybe walking meditation could be a good alternativ. <S> Best,Jasmin
|
You are stresing out (more than normal) while you are trying to relax (meditate) thus causing intenstinal ineffectiveness.
|
How do you decide when to stick up for yourself and when to let things go? I'm trying to apply Buddhist principles to the way I lead my life, but right now I'm struggling with an issue.In short, the problem is that someone caused damage to our home and refuses to acknowledge this and pay the damages. The problem is that I'm having difficulty deciding whether to stick up for myself and my family and pursue this matter, or to simply let things be and go on with our lives. I think there are 2 conflicting Buddhist principles that apply here (or perhaps more, but I just don't see them?): One shouldn't attach him/herself (to material matters). One should move toward truthfulness in all things and correct harm. I guess what decision to make is somewhat subjective and depends on the exact circumstances, but I'm very much interested in what Buddhism in general has to say about making decisions like this. When should you stick up for yourself and when should you let things be? <Q> you said: One shouldn't attach him/herself (to material matters). <S> but... the second one does not sound like a Buddhist principle... <S> where did you get that from? <S> The first one (nonattachment, dispassion) is a universally valid Buddhist principle. <S> As a rule of thumb I would stick with this one. <S> However, according to training I received, there are two places detachment can come from: 1) from strength or 2) from weakness . <S> when detachment comes from strength -- it comes from the idea of freedom, of independence, of being one's own island, of needlessness and emancipation, from wisdom, from compassion. <S> when detachment comes from weakness -- it comes from fear of confrontation or involvement, from laziness, from doubts, from incomplete understanding, from "spiritual materialism", from attachment to private peace of mind. <S> So you should look inside and see where your detachment comes from. <S> If it comes from weakness then, while on the surface it looks like detachment, it really is a form of attachment. <S> If that is the case then you should definitely engage with that "someone" - not as much for the sake of what you see as "truth" from your side - as for the practice of overcoming your (hidden) attachment. <A> The answer is up to you, since it will be you who affirms his power. <S> Letting go of the outcome means that you can be ok with either decision <S> , I.e. You can act accordingly either way without becoming attached and overcome with grief. <S> If you let it be, so you let it be. <S> Do you think that would be wise? <S> If you follow it up, that's ok too. <S> In the next instant, the opportunity will arise again, and you simply follow what you believe and what is in your heart. <S> If it is in your best interest and strength to pursue the matter further, then it would be Buddhas recommendation to correct and act accordingly to your knowledge, and not be cowardly or lazy. <S> After all, you clearly value your family and seek to protect them, so you should question the importance of the matter and for what purpose are you seeking to fulfill. <S> If you or your family are not impacted whatsoever, could you still let it go? <S> If you continue following up, it may come as a surprise to what consequences arise. <S> Even if you are patient with your own choices, you may still take action at a more appropriate time and remain happy. <S> It is important to notice whether feelings of guilt, fear or grief arise with any choice, as they indicate attachment. <A> Right Speech and Right Effort. <S> Those are the two pieces of the Eightfold Path that will answer your question in regards to decisive action. <S> What is Right Speech? <S> What is Right Effort? <S> Right Speech is speaking for a purpose that is beneficial to all parties involved and at the right time and in the right way (nicely, usually). <S> In short, Speak effectively for a universally beneficial cause at the most effective time. <S> Right Effort is taking efforts that increase the total good and reduce the total bad. <S> I hope the above Buddhist principles of action help to guide you to the correct behavior for the highest good of all. <A> As a householder and a lay person, I don't really feel that buddhist principles conflict with everyday life in any meaningful way. <S> Just because you see your material belonging as what they are - be it an aggregate of stones, wood, cloth, or other synthetic material <S> does not mean you have to allow others to damage or steal them. <S> The pursuit of truth is ultimately what brings you dissipation and emancipation from conventonal attachments. <S> That is your self view arousing ill will. <S> Kamma inforces itself. <S> You don't need to act as an enforcer. <S> Whether to pursue damages or not pursue damages is entirely up to you. <S> As long as you maintain wise attention by not acting out of averice, ill will, or restlessness. <A> I think there are 2 conflicting Buddhist principles that apply here (or perhaps more, but I just don't see them) <S> FWIW <S> I think that these are some other principles. <S> This seems typical of the sort of material problem you may face as a lay householder. <S> If you didn't want that, why aren't you a monk? <S> if you aren't a monk, then perhaps you did want that? <S> I think (I'm not sure) that the Sigalovada Sutta implies you have (more) responsibilities towards those who are close[r] to you: <S> your parents, your children, your teachers, your employees, etc. <S> But another principle is to consider the welfare of others: if you "stick up for yourself" then would that harm others or would that benefit others? <S> What about the attitude of "sticking up for others"? <S> When should you stick up for yourself and when should you let things be? <S> I think you might find theoretical or scriptural justification for both/either course of action. <S> Also apart from these two courses of action, is there a third, or a compromise? <S> E.g. offer to share the cost of repairs? <S> Or ask your lawyer's opinion? <A> Buddhism says you need to obey the country's law. <S> If the law says that it is an offence to rob, then it is an offence and you have to report it. <S> If the law says that it is an offence to damage others property, then it is an offence, and you have to report the matter, regardless of whether the property is your property or others. <S> Otherwise you are seen as a Buddhist conspiring with the offender, which is contradictory. <S> Of course, you can take the "see no evil", "hear no evil", "speak no evil" approach, but that is quite a high level practice, and takes many years to reach that level.
|
You have no obligation to correct any perceived harm done to you. One should move toward truthfulness in all things and correct harm. Be guided, not by your desires, but by your responsibilities: i.e. try to fulfill your responsibilities.
|
If there is no soul or self, why did the Buddha speak of his past lives? How is it possible that he had past lives and how did he know they were his? What defines them as his? <Q> How is it possible that he had past lives? <S> Because until he became the Buddha he hadn't eliminated craving. <S> Craving leads to clinging, clinging leads to becoming, becoming leads to birth. <S> how did he know they were his? <S> What defines them as his? <S> Do you remember your childhood? <S> If so, why do you call it your childhood? <S> Because your current existence(assuming you are an adult now) is conditioned by how the child behaved. <S> In the same manner, if your mind had the power to go further back in time, even before your birth, you would see what actions you performed in your last life to condition your present birth. <S> In that sense, it makes it your past life. <S> But here we are merely talking about a causes and effect relationship. <S> Such a relationship does not require an existence of a soul. <S> A mango seed does not require a soul to result into a mango tree. <S> It rather requires sunlight, water, fertilizer, air etc. <S> Water does not require a soul to turn into steam. <S> It requires heat. <S> Which means, it shouldn't be existing without your consent, it shouldn't be changing without your consent, it shouldn't be dying without your consent. <S> Can you find anything in your mind or body that meets those conditions? <S> Could the child have stayed as a child if he/she didn't like to become an adult? <A> In Maha-sihanada Sutta : <S> The Great Discourse on the Lion's Roar section of Ten Powers of a Tathagata. <S> "Sariputta, the Tathagata has these ten Tathagata's powers, possessing which he claims the herd-leader's place, roars his lion'sroar in the assemblies, and sets rolling the Wheel of Brahma.[5] <S> Whatare the ten? <S> .... <S> (8) "Again, the Tathagata recollects his manifold past lives, that is, one birth, two births, three births, four births, five births, tenbirths, twenty births, thirty births, forty births, fifty births, ahundred births, a thousand births, a hundred thousand births, manyaeons of world-contraction, many aeons of world-expansion, many aeonsof world-contraction and expansion: 'There I was so named, of such aclan, with such an appearance, such was my nutriment, such myexperience of pleasure and pain, such my life-term; and passing awayfrom there, I reappeared elsewhere; and there too I was so named, ofsuch a clan, with such an appearance, such was my nutriment, such myexperience of pleasure and pain, such my life-term; and passing awayfrom there, I reappeared here.' <S> Thus with their aspects andparticulars he recollects his manifold past lives. <S> That too is aTathagata's power... <S> (9) <S> "Again, with the divine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, the Tathagata sees beings passing away and reappearing,inferior and superior, fair and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate, andhe understands how beings pass on according to their actions thus:'These worthy beings who were ill-conducted in body, speech and mind,revilers of noble ones, wrong in their views, giving effect to wrongview in their actions, on the dissolution of the body, [71] afterdeath, have reappeared in a state of deprivation, in a baddestination, in perdition, even in hell; but these worthy beings whowere well-conducted in body, speech and mind, not revilers of nobleones, right in their views, giving effect to right view in theiractions, on the dissolution of the body, after death, have reappearedin a good destination, even in the heavenly world.' <S> Thus with thedivine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, he sees beingspassing away and reappearing, inferior and superior, fair and ugly,fortunate and unfortunate, and he understands how beings pass onaccording to their actions. <S> That too is a Tathagata's power... <A> There is no independent soul, there is no independent self. <S> Everything depends on something. <S> Buddha's past life depends on his past deeds. <S> Thus there are souls and self <S> but they are dependent on past causes <A> the original question is about "jathaka Katha". <S> My dear friends,there is huge discrepancy with doctrine of no soul(what the Buddha thought by Walpola Rahula thero) with Jathaka katha is mislead people towards continuous conciseness.so i think jathaka katha belongs to Buddhist literature.
|
In order for something to qualify as a soul, it has to be under your total control.
|
Who is really suffering in Hell and Enjoying in Heaven? When a person dies, s/he goes to heaven or hell based on present life karma and any past karmas. In Buddhism, if there is no soul, who is punished in hell and who enjoys in heaven? as there is no physical body to feel pain and pleasure. If that person has learnt the art of detachment, how can s/he suffer/enjoy in hell/heaven? Does different realms really exists and do we travel through them? <Q> From Milindapanha : -- “What is it, Nàgasena, that is reborn?” -- “Mind and matter (namarupa).” <S> -- “Is it this very mind and matter that is reborn?” <S> -- “ No, it is not , but by this mind and matter deeds are done and because of those deeds another mind and matter is reborn ; but <S> that mind and matter is not thereby released from the results of its previous deeds. <S> Just like an adult "inherits" results of the choices made by the child - even though most of the original body cells are gone, similarly future existence "inherits" karma from the past existence. <S> --“Can <S> there be any rebirth where there is no transmigration?” <S> --“Yes <S> there can, just as a man can light one oil-lamp from another but nothing moves from one lamp to the other; or as a pupil can learn a verse by heart from a teacher but <S> the verse does not transmigrate from teacher to pupil.” <S> It is information and causation that is reborn, or is re-embodied. <S> Or, as Chogyam Trungpa said, it is our neuroses that are reborn. <S> as there is no physical body to feel pain and pleasure? <S> Oh yes, there is definitely a body every time. <S> Information always needs some kind of media, it does not exist without media... <S> But that media could be virtual as well -- after all, form is emptiness and emptiness is form. <S> Depending on a particular realm it may not be a crude material body. <S> Besides, pain and pleasure do not require a body. <S> Did you never experience mental pleasure and mental pain? <S> If that person has learnt the art of detachment, how can s/he suffer/enjoy in hell/heaven? <S> If that person has learnt the art of detachment, why would he or she be reborn in heaven or hell? <S> Does different realms really exists and do we travel through them? <S> ;) <S> Even in this world some people live in hell - don't you agree? <A> In Buddhism, if one dies , one goes to any of the 6 realms based on present life karma and any past karmas. <S> In Buddhism, since there is no soul, it is the minds that are punished in hell <S> and it is the mind that enjoys in heaven. <S> If one becomes a buddhist and has learnt the art of detachment, one will not suffer/enjoy in hell/heaven or any other realms. <S> Different realms does exists and we do cycle through them in our countless number of past lives. <S> The aim of Buddhism is to be free from cycling through these 6 realms which are suffering or eventually leads to sufferings. <S> Another example of understanding the 6 realms is through ones' everyday life when our mind goes from happy to sad to neutral to any moods which are beyond one's control. <S> Buddhism teaches one to have control over the mindand become free from these cycles. <S> So that one is prepared when death comes <A> Quote from the Acela Sutta (This comes from here but the full text can be found here ). <S> This is a similar question in the Sutta, to this question, where the Buddha says not to consider whether the one in the previous birth is the one causing the karmic responses in the current birth or not. <S> Both assumptions are based on eternalism and annihilationism. <S> Rather, the Buddha asks to consider dependent origination . <S> For the rest of the questions, I think Andrei has replied them well. <S> Again, when the Buddha was asked by the naked ascetic Kassapa whether suffering was of one's own making or of another's or both or neither, the Buddha replied "Do not put it like that." <S> When asked whether there was no suffering or whether the Buddha neither knew nor saw it, the Buddha replied that there was, and that he both knew and saw it. <S> He then said "Kassapa, if one asserts that 'He who makes (it) feels (it): being one existent from the beginning, his suffering is of his own making,' then one arrives at eternalism. <S> But if one asserts that one makes (it), another feels (it); being one existent crushed out by feeling, his suffering is of another's making,' then one arrives at annihilationism. <S> Instead of resorting to either extreme a Tathaagata teaches the Dhamma by the middle way (by dependent origination )" (S. XII, 17/vol. <S> ii, 20).
|
When one dies, one goes to heaven or hell or animal realms or ghost or human or higher heaven realm based on present life karma and any past karmas. Yes, we do travel through them. Of course they really exist, just not necessarily in a naive way below the ground or above the sky
|
Should a person never lie? If someone would hide from the Nazis and then the Nazis came and asked me if I'm hiding a Jew - should I say "yes" or "no"? When is it ok to lie? <Q> In Good Question Good Answer , in the chapter about the five precepts, Ven. <S> S. Dhammika wrote, QUESTION: <S> If you were sitting in a park and a terrified man ran past you and then a few minutes later another man carrying a knife ran up to you and asked you if you had seen which way the first man had gone, would you tell him the truth or would you lie to him? <S> ANSWER: <S> If I had good reason to suspect that the second man was going to do serious harm to the first I would, as an intelligent caring Buddhist, have no hesitation in lying. <S> We said before that one of the factors determining whether a deed is good or bad is intention. <S> The intention to save a life is many times more positive than telling a lie is negative in circumstances such as these. <S> I can always make amends for breaking these, but I can never bring a life back once it is gone. <S> However, as I said before, please do not take this as a license to break the Precepts whenever it is convenient. <S> The Precepts should be practiced with great care and only infringed in extreme cases. <A> If serious with the practice, if having real faith in the Buddha, or even insight, YES: never ever lie and become more innovative in complicated seeming cases. <S> There is no reason to ly. <S> If starting reasoning all precepts have no use at all, but actually to simply cut of the danger of reasoning (opposition of the defilements) is the Sīlas purpose. <S> In regard of this merely polemic question, Breath had posted, here some general and specific answers to help those still having the need of reasoning in regard of strict precepts for a strict aim: release. <S> from a letter of Ven. <S> Thanissaro in response of the undermining undertaking by Bhikkhu Bodhi in regard of justifying the break of precepts for "higher" seeming purposes: 5) <S> The Buddha never said that the intention underlying the precepts was something as vague as “reducing harm and suffering” or “the preservation of life.” <S> Those principles can be used to justify all sorts of evil. <S> The only general principle he expressed for ideal actions is one that he expressed both negatively—that such actions not afflict oneself or afflict others (see Majjhima <S> 61)—and <S> positively: that they benefit oneself and benefit others (Anguttara 4:99). <S> As this latter sutta makes clear, you benefit yourself by abiding by the precepts. <S> You benefit others by encouraging them to abide by the precepts. <S> When you try to get others to believe that there are times when it’s morally laudable to kill (equal in regard of the other 4 precepts), you’re working for their affliction. <S> Essays explaining the function of Sīlas: Virtue without Attachment Justice vs. Skillfulness Monks and lay teacher, seeking favor under their target followers and for a broad audience, jet still worldling, not full faith in the Three Gems come constantly up with ways to pull the Dhamma into their own tendency rather to let Dhamma form one fit for liberation. <S> Note that doubt into the absoluteness of the simple precepts <S> is a clear sign for not having gained path or fruit on the Noble Eightfold Path. <S> The only way to really find out the impact of practicing the precepts like they are, simple, is to put it by one self into action, based on convidence at first place. <A> In Mahayana, the Lotus Sutra in specific, the issue of truth telling is complicated by Upaya . <S> So in the case of teaching the Dharma, a Buddha himself might lie for if move the student forward towards enlightenment, or was a suitable thing to do for other unfathomable reasons as long as the end point was okay. <S> Anyhow, I find the five precepts sort of un-Buddhist-- 1-- no killing- <S> A more Buddhist precept would be cause no suffering. <S> 2,3-- no lying, no stealing- <S> These have to do with not upsetting the basic order of things <S> , i.e. don't break the law and get the Sangha into trouble with the local government. <S> 4- no sex. <S> This is an organization thing, the Sangha wasn't set up for taking care of kids. <S> 5- no alcohol. <S> This is trying to solve an ancient and modern social illness by decree. <S> It provides a foundation for throwing misbehavers out of the sangha, but As such, I don't look to it for guidance on ethics. <S> You have to read the ancient and modern texts, get a feel for what the ancient monks were driving at and on those grounds <S> , I think a better criteria is what choices create and lead to suffering and which don't. <S> Letting Nazis, mass murders, spree shooters, rabid dogs, the neighboring country hellbent on genocide kill creates suffering. <S> Killing the aggressors to put an end to the suffering is okay <S> and so is lying to them to thwart their goals. <S> If I had some time I'd say something about consequentialism and utilitarianism, (the principle that what matters is the outcomes and the greatest good for the greatest number), which to me appear to be similar to Buddhist ethics, but I'm out of time.
|
If lying, drinking, or even stealing meant that I saved a life I should do it.
|
Is there some technique to surpass noises when meditating? I'm having a lot of troubles with noises. I try to close my ears with cotton, but it does not works great.Is a little bit difficult to me try to meditate rounded by noises (here, where a live, people seems to be sensible to noise, and worst, they like to put their automotive stereo system at high decibels despite the fact that it is forbidden by law (here the State does not get to apply its own laws), its like some kind "meat show").So, is there some technique to surpass noises when meditating? <Q> Noises are going to be a problem if you are just starting out. <S> This is especially so if they are the abrupt, jarring type of sounds that you seem to be contending with. <S> I would highly recommend that you do your best to find a quiet place to sit at first - even if this means leaving your home and sitting somewhere else. <S> You might be surprised to find that many of the more liberal Christian denominations and the Unitarians might offer you some space in their respective sanctuaries to practice. <S> The same goes for campus chapels. <S> My own sangha has used everything from a classroom in a Methodist Sunday school to a yoga studio! <S> If you must sit in a noisy area, my best advice is to treat sound just as you would any other distraction or phenomenon you might encounter on the cushion. <S> Be with it for its entire duration. <S> Watch the blankness in the space between your exhalation and inhalation. <S> Sound is a difficult obstacle to work with, but like pain, agitation, sensual desire, or really any of the five hindrances, it won't be able to gain a foothold in a mind that is closely applied to its object. <S> Also, for the love of Pete, don't spend your time on your cushion fantasizing about how much better your meditation would be if only it were quieter! <S> That'll kill your concentration faster than the sound of a truck driving through a nitroglycerin plant! <A> This sounds like perfect opportunity to practice insight meditation! <S> If you watch your mind when these noises happen, you can notice how you become unhappy due to the mismatch between "is" and "should" (aka "this" and "that"). <S> If you examine this mismatch very carefully as it happens in your own mind, and learn to let go of the "that" - you will realize the meaning of the Third Noble Truth. <S> Another technique as per Thrangu Rinpoche is to imagine even worse sounds (shrieking screams etc.) and reflect on how much nicer the present sounds are, in comparison. <A> You should watch this Youtube video , in which Ajahn Brahm speaks about his experiences with mosquitoes in Thailand, when he first became a monk. <S> As a monk, he is not allowed to kill them and his teacher also did not allow them to use mosquito repellants or coils. <S> Instead, his teacher Ajahn Chah , told his students to see the mosquito as their teacher. <S> From then on, they became Ajahn Mosquito (Ajahn means Teacher in Thai). <S> He explains that when he went deeper into his meditation, he became unaware of the mosquitoes. <S> If his mind wandered, the pain from the mosquito bites would draw him to that fact, and he would go back to his concentration. <S> Later on, the mosquitoes left him, possibly because his metabolic rate dropped and he produced less carbon dioxide that attracted mosquitoes. <S> Similarly, I suggest that noises can also be considered a training medium. <A> Shamata meditation would be beneficial as it improves continuous focus and awareness of the mind state. <S> I did read about advanced stages of Shamata practice which would produce a kind of trance, but it would require a lot of meditation within reclusive retreats. <S> But I think at the beginning it is mostly impossible to meditate with the kind of sounds you describe. <S> There are sounds with more abstract nature like of wind, birds, people walking or whispering and even machines, cars, trucks and horns. <S> Its possible to to not get disturbed by these sounds and keep the meditation going. <S> Now if there is loud harsh music or people is chatting close to you <S> it is very likely <S> these sounds will inevitably pull your attention to them, and out of the practice. <S> Of course this division is arbitrary. <S> People can get annoyed with birds singing, others aren't bothered by the neighbor's late night party. <S> My advice is that the best way to surpass these intrusive noises is going to a quiet place. <S> I think that in the beginning you need some silence to learn and progress. <S> And with practice you can train to be mindful even in noisy situations. <S> There is no need to make it difficult right at the beginning. <A> My recommendation <S> These kind of noises are called "White Noises", and you can find a lot of resources online: (Wind, waves, rivers, rain, fire, etc..) <S> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=white+noise <A> I'm with the 'Old School' on this one.. <S> if noises are a problem while you meditate, then you should surround yourself with noises.. perhaps gradually, perhaps abruptly.. <S> thus your practice will become rapidly better, even though it may seem at the time that it is very difficult. <S> If it is not noises, then it will be something else. <S> The idea of meditation is not to get into some kind of state, but to practice, over and over again, in different conditions, the discipline of meditation and thus improve. <S> In that sense, any type of meditation has "The Goalless Goal"
|
maybe it's not the more orthodox, but the best way to ignore noises, if your meditation skills do not allow you to ignore them yet, is to hide them with another noise less annoying and easier to ignore. This is going to vary depending on your tradition, but coming from the samatha school that I practice, I'd advise you to double down on your meditation object. If you are following the breath, continue to watch the whole body of your breathing as closely as you can.
|
Can anyone recommend some guided anapanasati resources on the Web? I'm trying to take my practice back to the beginning in the hopes of energizing it and I think this might be helpful.I currently don't have access to a teacher so some Web resources would be great particularly some guided mediations that I could follow. <Q> There are 2 good translations by Piya Tan: Anapanasati Sutta Anapanasati Sutta, Trilinear edition <S> A more detail explanation of the Sutta is available in Mindfulness with Breathing: a Manual for Serious Beginners, 2nd edition which does a wonderful detailed explanations. <S> (Don't use the 1st as this is a poor translation.) <S> In addition there are some lectures by Budddhadasa Bikkhu: Anapanasati by Ven. <S> Buddhadasa . <S> For the very basics have a look at: Mini Aanapana . <S> Also Anapana Sati Sutta by Bhante Vimalasiri <S> Anapana Sati Sutta by Ven. <S> Bikku Bodhi would be helpful guides. <S> Also you can try to locate a more formal retreat like through: http://www.dhamma.org/en/index or http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/ which will solve the issue that you do not have a teacher. <A> I used to think that "guided" meditation was a superficial thing. <S> Now I know that that view isn't very true... <S> Off the top of my head there is <S> Gil Fronsdal's guided meditations(only "Anapana" was searched for... <S> he has a ton of other guided meditations and talks.) <S> Joseph Goldstein, Ajahn Brahma, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Jon Kabbat-Zinn and many others <S> I didn't think of are all great at giving guided meditation like Anapana, Vipassana and Metta. <S> To find more guided meditations(all <S> these teachers do not charge money), you can google the teachers name in quotes plus "guided Anapana". <S> Here is a bunch of guided Anapana by Gil Fronsdsal: http://www.audiodharma.org/talks/ ? <S> search=Anapana <A> also This book compiles Buddhawajana (exclusively Buddha's words) regarding Anapanasati. <S> It's free. <S> Buddhawajana anapanasati
|
There are some very "not superficial" guided meditations out there that are made by some serious meditation teachers. The best is to go to directly to the Sutta or what the Buddha directly had to say about it.
|
What difference is there in reciting and listening to mantras? When reciting or listening to mantras such as Om Mani Pade Hum , what difference does it make when either listening, reciting or both? <Q> The esoteric vibrations are what its all about. <S> This is why the best mantras are in their original language (usually Sanskirt) not the transliterated and especially not the translated versions. <S> To answer your question: How much stronger would the vibrations be if you say it with your voice than your mind? <S> Much much stronger. <S> You are basically doing a magic summoning spell, summoning good karma and asking for the respective forces to help you. <S> The more in-sync you are with the vibration the more likely they will be able to "hear"/feel your call and help you. <S> Thus, do it loudly verbally, using it as your focus. <S> Once your focus is developed (jhana) then you can do it silently. <S> I would recommend "How to mantra" by William Bodri for more esoteric information in regard to this subject. <A> Reciting increases the concentration of just listening. <S> Other benefits of reciting are listed in these Buddhist Mantra FAQS : <S> What are some of the benefits? <S> Development of intent, focus and concentration <S> Improved breathing patterns and improved health Sonic healing, similar to the way cats and dolphins use sound for healing and keeping healthy Development of attributes or experiences associated with specific mantra A graduated system of improvement. <S> In particular through assessment of needs and provision by teachers specialising in mantrayana <A> Could be everything, could be nothing. <S> Everything depends on you. <S> You could recite one million mantras without meaning anything and viceversa. <S> Only counts what you get from it.
|
At higher stages of focus, where you are doing it mentally and you can ignore everything else, it does not make much of a difference because the focus is the same and the vibrations have already sufficiently transformed the body.
|
Having trouble meditating long sessions (Physical pain) I like to meditate but because of me being new to it i guess, it is hard for me to meditate more than ten minutes. I have no trouble concentrating only got some physical pains , that occur during long sessions of meditation. Can someone please help? <Q> Are you using a posture that is too strenuous for you? <S> For example, trying to sit in a lotus position, when you have never done it before? <S> Be careful of pain. <S> Some pain is comes from restlessness and disappears the moment you move, and it is OK- you can even use it and study it, as a way of getting to know dukkha and impermanence. <S> But if the pain endures after your sit (especially if it is in your knees), use an easier posture. <S> Don't try so hard that you injure yourself permanently. <S> If you are new, and you're doing 10 minutes, and you're doing it every day, then you are starting very well. <A> Basic Buddhist meditation is not difficult to learn, although it may take a lifetime to get it right. <S> You can start today with only a few things. <S> You already have a willing mind. <S> Over time, meditation will help you maintain a clear mind and a peaceful outlook on life <S> 1.Get a pillow or soft cushion to sit on. <S> 2.Find a reasonably quiet room or outdoor space. <S> 3.Sit down on the mat or cushion. <S> 4.Let <S> your hands rest one in the other on your lap, palms facing upwards, or place your hands palm up on your knees with your thumb touching your second finger. <S> 5.Close your eyes and start to count your breaths. <S> 6.When thoughts come into your mind, try not to follow them. <S> 8.If <S> you decide to continue with meditation, you may wish to invest in meditation cushions, prayer beads (malas), incense and perhaps some decorations to create a meditation area in your home. <S> 9.if you still can't count your breaths you can listen to flow of water which is available in audio format for 10min,15min,20min, in internet . <S> I hope this link will help you the most. <S> http://www.wikihow.com/Practice-Buddhist-Meditation <A> This way you can avoid physical pain and meditate for long hours even without any physical movement. <S> This is by creating mind states which contain Kāya (body) and Citta (mind) <S> Lahutā as Chetasikas. <S> The achievement of this you can practice meditation on the wind element (expansion contraction feeling tied to inhalation and exhalation process) or passing you consciousness or attention in a zigzag manner though any heavy, gross, solidified or painful areas or just simply being consciously aware of the sensation in itself. <S> Also developing continuous and recurring attention on a particular object might be of help as this creates bodily pleasantness when closing on the the Jhanas. <S> Also smiling mildly helps as it creates pleasant feeling in the body and mind.
|
You have to relax body and mind. If so, use an easier posture: a chair that allows you to sit in an upright or balanced way, folding your legs one in front of the other in the "Burmese posture" with a cushion or folded towel to support your backbone a bench 7.For a beginner, try to meditate for just a few minutes -- 10 minutes or so is a good start.
|
What happens after the great doubt of koan practice? I read that koan practice is meant to create doubt. But what happens when the koan has been passed? Does doubt end, or begin again, or get literally "shattered"? Does the practitioner experience a moment of hope? <Q> Andrei's answer is pretty spot on, but I think you need a little background on koan practice to really get the gist of the kind of doubt it's referring to. <S> Say you are given the Mu koan. <S> You might sit with that for a couple of months. <S> During an interview with your teacher, he might ask what mu is or to show it to him. <S> You might say "it's emptiness". <S> Ding! <S> He rings the bell. <S> Wrong answer. <S> You go back to sitting. <S> You go to him again and say something like "thoughts stopping". <S> Ding! <S> Back you go. <S> "No mind?" <S> Ding! <S> "Everything is one." <S> Ding! <S> "The cypress in the garden." <S> Ding, ding, ding! <S> The whole time this is going on, you are getting frustrated. <S> Your hope is getting crushed. <S> It seems like everything you say is wrong. <S> All your theories are dashed. <S> Even what you take to be subtle observations aren't the answer your teacher is looking for. <S> Your mind has no refuge. <S> You have nothing to hold onto. <S> It's all not this, not this! <S> That is great doubt. <S> And it's visceral. <S> Mumon even likens it to swallowing a hot ball of iron. <S> But if you practice, you will eventually come tottering into a place where insight is possible. <S> You might say something to your teacher, something you take to be completely outlandish or that you don't even understand yourself, and he'll pass you on your koan. <S> On some occasions, you may even get a pretty clear, momentary glimpse of the blue sky through the clouds. <S> But most of the time, and I don't mean to disappoint, but even after "answering" your koan, you'll walk away feeling just as confused as ever. <S> The doubt comes slamming back down on your head and back to the cushion you go... <S> just this time with a different koan. <S> Koans are like holes knocked into a wall with a sledgehammer. <S> Every one that you answer does a little damage. <S> Some might even let a little light through. <S> But over time, if you smack it enough, it will eventually fall over. <S> Only then is anything really shattered. <S> It's best not to have hope. <S> Hope is a temporary refuge. <S> Better to come at that wall with the full force of your doubt. <A> It is not just any doubt, it is a highly perplexing doubt, a sense that the entire world is pulling your leg. <S> When the doubt gets shattered there is a return to natural clarity, free of false hope. <S> But because the koan-induced satori is more often not the complete enlightenment, there is still some lingering seeds of hope in the background, which eventually come back to life and become the new round of longing, aversion, and confusion. <S> From my personal experience, dropping hope is a good thing - but not dropping the koan type of perplexing doubt. <S> This doubt is like the smell that gets you to the cheese. <A> do we see the true nature of ourselves reallity of oneness that you become everything around you <S> and it becomes you. <S> Mind is only your own idea or concept that there is no mind that there is nothing yet you are everything <S> but you can't explain it in words this can take one moment to see any a lifetime of sitting with mu to get the satori experince in zen .Going beyond dualisim that there is no self that the dharmakaya is you or you are <S> the Buddha realised so is everything else around you
|
The answer goes beyond words ,doubt does not exist anymore or neither does hope or any cause or condition only when we drop off body and mind
|
Reducing the power of a bad karma As we all agree none of us have a white past, we've all have done some bad thing in our past before coming to the path and in previous lives. So how should we use the good karma we generate today toreduce the impact of bad karma from previous lives and from our past? I've heard that this is possible. <Q> The Sankha Sutta is one of the best sutta's I know of that provides instructions on how to transcend and overcome the effects of past unskillful kamma. <S> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn42/sn42.008.than.html <S> This is how there comes to be the abandoning of that evil deed. <S> This is how there comes to be the transcending of that evil deed. <S> ... <S> when the awareness-release through equanimity is thus developed, thus pursued, any deed done to a limited extent no longer remains there, no longer stays there." <A> Depends on the tradition, but there are some well described ways, some purification ways. <A> Of the 6 fundamental things about karma that Buddha said we should know, the 6th one is the cessation of karma. <S> The Nibbedhika Sutta (AN 6.63) says, <S> And what is the cessation of kamma? <S> From the cessation of contact is the cessation of kamma; and just this noble eightfold path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration — is the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma" <A> There are few ways you can do this: Increase counteracting or store of good Karma (see: Loṇa,phala Sutta ) <S> Develop habitual good karma as these tend to counteract occasional somewhat grave bad karma <S> ( Maha Kamma,vibhaṅga Sutta ) Karma is extinguished when felt 1 , hence experiencing the past Karma effective <S> now you reduce the store of past karma. <S> This is not by self mortification but not letting past Karma surfacing gaining strength to give more adverse results later, i.e., experience it when the seed of karma gives its 1st sproute than waiting for a forest to grow. <S> 2 <S> In order to do this whenever you experience pleasant, neutral or unpleasant you should be fully aware of the feeling without craving or aversion knowing its arising and passing nature or impermanent nature if you cannot see arising and passing of phenomena. <S> ( Pahāna Sutta , Avijja Pahana Sutta 2 ) 1 Loṇa,phala Sutta <S> ‘Whatever experienceable karma [that do entail a consequence] that a person does, he would experience the result of that karma [that is, whatever fruits he reaps, they would accord with his karma] 2 Karmas which cause calamities in like has a snowballing effect. <S> It surfaces as a minor experience (e.g. repentant memory) to which you react to reinforce it, each time surfacing with larger and stronger effect. <A> There the medicine: The Healing Power of the Precepts <S> And here are nice stories around this issue: The Healing of the Bull: A Story Prisoners of Karma: A Story by Suvimalee Karunaratna <A> I hope you feel no bitterness towards anyone. <S> this is one of the principles of Buddhism. <S> everything has a reason. <S> If there is sorrow that you have to experience, then there is a root cause for it too. <S> It is not the fault of the boys you used to know... <S> It is not the fault of the husband, or the relatives.... <S> The pain within you is the result of a pain you have given others in some previous birth. <S> I hope you understand what I'm saying. <S> How you react to the pain is VERY IMPORTANT. <S> You can understand the dhamma behind the pain.... <S> or you could start blaming everyone else... <S> If you choose to blame everyone else..... then the cycle of Hate,Blame, Suffering continues.... <S> If you chose to UNDERSTAND THE DHAMMA behi nd the suffering....then you can use the four noble truth principle and ARYA MAITHREE to end this suffering. <S> If you understand the root cause to be "suffering you caused others in the past"....then apply ARYA MAITHREE towards all beings you may have associated in the past.... <S> now that you understand the DHAMMA and you are a follower of BUDDHA in this life it would be possible for you to get compassion for any wrongful deeds that you may have caused in the past for others.... <S> Theruwan Saranayi..
|
For example, in vajrayana buddhism or tantra you could do the Vajrasattva practice for karma purification purposes.
|
Is there a gradation of proper and improper deeds? When somebody asks if it's OK for a Buddhist to do this or that, different answers may be given: It goes against n'th precept It is an unwholesome action It will produce bad kamma It will cause rebirth in hell Anything else? If there is something more, please let me know. Other possible answers may include: It does not break any precepts It is a wholesome action It will produce good kamma It will cause rebirth in heaven It will lead to nibbana/enlightenment Anything else? If there is something more, please let me know. I wonder which of these things are completely equivalent (e.g. is an unwholesome action exacly the same as an action that produces bad kamma?), and if there is a gradation of these things (e.g. is breaking a precept worse than an unwholesome action that doesn't break a precept?). <Q> All actions are always either kusala or akusala . <S> kusala : <S> skillful, wholesome, good, meritorious akusala : <S> unskillful, unwholesome, bad, demeritorious <S> As people, though, we will always feel compelled to judge and compare actions. <S> Stealing from the cookie jar is not as bad a stealing a car. <S> Killing a fly is not as bad as killing a bird. <S> But these distinctions are mind-made: in the end there is just kusala and akusala . <S> Now, whether there is a gradation tied to the kamma produced by any given action is an entirely different question (to which I have no answer, but I'd guess that there is a correlation between kamma and quality of the action). <S> is an unwholesome action exacly the same as an action that produces bad kamma? <S> Yes. <S> Without mincing words, both of these are two sides of the same coin. <S> (Also, in your two sample lists, you could also mention that an action could go with or against the Noble Eightfold Path.) <A> My opinion is that there is no such gradation. <S> Actions begin with a thought or Chēthanā . <S> These are the seeds that determines the eventual actions. <S> So if our Chēthanā are pure it will lead to pure actions. <S> If they are impure, the actions will be impure. <S> Verse 1. <S> Suffering Follows The Evil-Doer Mind precedes all knowables, <S> mind's their chief, mind-made are they. <S> If with a corrupted mind one should either speak or act dukkha <S> follows caused by that, as does the wheel the ox's hoof. <S> Verse 2. <S> Happiness Follows The Doer of Good Mind <S> precedes all knowables, <S> mind's their chief, mind-made are they. <S> If with a clear, and confident mind <S> one should speak and act as one's shadow ne'er departing. <S> - Treasury of Truth , Ch.1 ("Twin Verses) <S> Hence, as these verses quite clearly justifies, thought precedes all actions . <S> Since thoughts cannot be graded, it is more so the quality rather than the quantity of the thought that really matters. <S> Forget all the jargon that comes with the precepts and rules. <S> Follow your heart. <S> Ask yourself truly, at the very point of thought , "Is this what I really want to do? <S> Does this go against my self conscience and pure gut feeling? <S> Does the action that comes with this thought hurt me, others and both above mentioned parties?" . <S> If the answers are satisfying, then put that thought into action. <S> It will bring good. <S> Life is not like a game of basketball or cricket where a judge keeps score. <S> It all comes from the strength of the thought itself. <S> If your thought is strong enough, you can even attain higher Pāramitās or 'states of perfection' which are stepping stones to Nibbana. <A> The question illustrates emptiness. <S> Our habits only want us to quantify absolutely, we want to grasp at something concrete, but this habit is futile due to dependent arising.
|
I don't think there is a gradation where the quality of the action itself is concerned.
|
Can we program or pre-define our last thoughts? I have heard the last thoughts of a person can define next life. If so can we somehow define them through practice, so when the time comes they will be as we planned? Or is there a practice that would cause them to be positive? <Q> Autopositivity is indeed a great skill, virtue, accomplishment, and in its own way a paradise. <S> With constant watchfulness and training in the Four Immeasurables (the four Divine Abodes) <S> ones natural and spontaneously occurring thoughts can be patterned and trained to be of a purely helpful and nonharmful nature. <S> Essentially we are developing the skill of choosing positive conscious states and being patient with nonpositive states. <S> Anyway, as mentioned above, the four immeasurables are worthy of your immediate attention and application. <A> According to the Dvedhavitakka Sutta , whatever one keeps pursuing with his thoughts, that becomes the inclination of his awareness. <S> And from my understanding, the last thoughts of this life is based on the "inclination of awareness". <S> The solution according to the sutta, is the consistency in practice towards reshaping the inclination of awareness towards renunciation, non-ill will and harmlessness. <S> This can be achieved through the Noble Eightfold Path . <S> " Whatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that becomes the inclination of his awareness . <S> If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with renunciation, abandoning thinking imbued with sensuality, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with renunciation. <S> If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with non-ill will, abandoning thinking imbued with ill will, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with non-ill will. <S> If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with harmlessness, abandoning thinking imbued with harmfulness, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with harmlessness. <S> "Just as in the last month of the hot season, when all the crops have been gathered into the village, a cowherd would look after his cows: While resting under the shade of a tree or out in the open, he simply keeps himself mindful of 'those cows.' <S> In the same way, I simply kept myself mindful of 'those mental qualities.' <S> - Dvedhavitakka Sutta <S> According to this <S> quote by V. F. Gunaratna: <S> This last thought series is most important since it fashions the nature of his next existence, just as the last thought before going to sleep can become the first thought on awakening. <S> No extraneous or arbitrary power does this for him. <S> He does this for himself unconsciously as it were. <S> It is the most important act of his life, good or bad, that conditions the last thought moment of a life. <S> The kamma of this action is called garuka kamma or weighty Kamma. <S> In the majority of cases the type of act which men habitually perform and for which they have the strongest liking becomes the last active thought . <S> The ruling thought in life becomes strong at death. <S> This habitual kamma is called acinna kamma . <A> You have to be mindful of the arising and passing away of what is felt or sensation pertaining to the 4 Frames of Mindfulness, 5 Aggregates, Sense Doors with no clinging or aversion. <S> Even if you are not fully liberated this will result in a conducive next birth with the ability to practice the Dhamma, i.e., triple- rooted (ti-hetuka). <S> If you do not make use of this opportunity in the next birth then your have no guarantee things will be up hill in Samsara unless you have reach a stage of sainthood. <S> Increased practice of Vipassana increases the balance of probability your will do so at the last moment if you do not reach some stage of Sainthood.
|
The practice of Vipassana aims at this, i.e., making your next life better by being in control of your last moment.
|
What is "love" to a lay person? As a budding Buddhist, one cannot help but investigate day to day phenomena with the magnificent tools made available to us by the Buddha. An interesting thought occurred to me today and prompted me to ponder the nature of love. The conclusion that was arrived at the end of this particular stream of consciousness is that love is non hate, non greed, and (hopefully) non delusional. It is experiential, highly conditional, impinges on all faculties, and reverberates through the heartstring. As with all formations, it is impermanent. Wordly beings crave it, but few truly uncover it. How do other lay people conceptualize love? And how would a monk approach this investigation? <Q> Love is a very overloaded term. <S> There are many different phenomena that fall under the umbrella label of "love": <S> There is love as obsessive kama (liking/desire) towards someone or something. <S> This should probably be classified as lobha (greed, obsessive desire). <S> There is non-reciprocated love, longing for something you can't get. <S> This is probably tanha <S> (unsatisfied thirst, craving) - the root of dukkha . <S> There is love towards your mother, family, friends, town, country. <S> This could be pure metta (loving-kindness) or metta with attachment. <S> The first is a wholesome kind of love, producer of good karma. <S> The second subtype, love with attachment, will serve as the root of dukkha once the impermanence kicks in. <S> There is love of self. <S> This can be an egoistic form of love, or a kind of acceptance/appreciation - a factor of healing. <S> There is love as unconditional acceptance/appreciation of someone or everyone and everything -- a non-dual kind of love that does not draw lines between "self" and "other". <S> In my understanding, such love is a factor of Enlightenment. <S> Summarizing the above, there seems to be two main types of love: attachment-type and acceptance/appreciation-type. <S> The first type is a factor of dukkha , the second type is a factor of good karma, healing, Enlightenment. <A> If you mean kind some kind of romantic love , my own experience isn't the same as yours. <S> You said ... <S> love is non hate, non greed, and (hopefully) <S> non delusional ... <S> but I'm not sure I agree: <S> "non-hate" -- if the 'love' is the result of (i.e. conditioned by, conditional on) experience[s] <S> that you like, then when the experience ends <S> the love-you-experience becomes aversion-you-experience. <S> "non delusional" -- to the extent that "identity view" (of self) is a delusion then love might be a similar type of delusion <S> (e.g. seeing the object of your love as a person who has/is a fixed identity) <S> In summary I suspect that love is "attachment". <S> There's a book I mentioned in <S> this answer titled The Buddha's Teachings to Laypeople: <S> Practical Advice for Prosperity and Lasting Happiness . <S> It says that most of the suttas were written by and for monks, but that some of the Buddha's advice was for people in lay society, and it summarizes some of that advice. <S> In my limited experience the good side/aspect of love might be right/moral/ethical actions and views. <S> In retrospect (i.e. looking back) there was a time in my life when I was motivated by (i.e. when my love was expressed as) wanting to be kind and to do the right thing. <S> It's these "ethical" actions that I don't regret -- which is inline with the Buddhist suttas, for example the Kimattha Sutta : <S> Skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose, Ananda, and freedom from remorse as their reward <S> It might be worth also considering the doctrines about admirable friendship . <S> The various doctrines (e.g. "Keeping company with the wise" and "Never with an evil companion") suggest that the benefit is conditional on who you love -- i.e. not just on the nature of your love but on the nature of your beloved. <S> "The whole of the holy life" is <S> I suppose (in context) about the benefit of the monastic sangha; perhaps if you're lucky or wise or both then you might experience something like that in a lay relationship. <A> One can give freely to the other, not out of obligation or expectation or even altruism, but simply because one does not see a reason to distinguish between giving to their love and giving to oneself.
|
The deepest description of love I have come across in my walk is a state where one does not oblige oneself to draw a distinction between one and the subject of one's love.
|
Is nirodha (cessation of suffering) dependent on the existence of suffering? This answer includes the following statement: But some other dharmas are still empty without being dependently originated , like nirodha or tathata . A comment after the answers gives the following definitions: nirodha is cessation of suffering (nirvana), and tathata is true reality. Doesn't the cessation of suffering depend on the existence of suffering, and is therefore dependently originated? <Q> Although nirodha is usually translated "cessation", its main meaning is "restraint", "prevention" - e.g. of crime or any undesired activity/outcome. <S> In modern Hindi, nirodh is even used as a word for condom. <S> If you really think about it, this makes sense. <S> The way cessation of dukkha is achieved is through non-attachment - i.e. non-creation of conditions that make arising of dukkha possible. <S> In other words, non-attachment is prevention of dukkha . <S> Prevention of X does not depend on existence of X. <A> I don't know if the word "dependent" is 100% correct. <S> I would say suffering is the supporting condition for cessation. <S> From Upanisaa Sutta suffering is the support condition for faith <S> faith is the support condition for joy joy is the support condition for delight delight is the support condition for tranquillity <S> tranquillity is the support condition for happiness happiness is the support condition for concentration concentration is the support condition for for knowledge and wisdom for things as they are knowledge and wisdom for things as they are is the support condition for disenchantment disenchantment is the support condition for dispassion <S> dispassion is the support condition for liberation (another word Buddha used for Nirodha or nibbana) <A> Suffering (un-satisfactoriness) is the result of impermanence of Sensations / what is felt and Fabrication in general when Perceived through Mental Distortions when there is a gap between reality and Perception. <S> (In many Suttas, inclusive of the latter, it is mentioned "in short 5 aggregates of clinging is suffering" but in Titth’ayatana <S> Sutta it is mentioned <S> "Now, it is for one who feels that I make known: This is suffering ... <S> ") <S> Nirodha is not creating more un-satisfactoriness through Becoming or creating Fabrications by Distortion through Perception as well as Craving and Clinging. <S> If it was conditioned it will be unsatisfactory as condition or its existance ceases it also ceases. <S> This leads to a Paradox in the line of thinking in the question as when suffering ceases so does end of suffering. <A> The distinction you are making is a lower octave of the ultimate distinction between nirvana and samsara. <S> From the perspective of samsara, nirvana is negation and therefore dualistic and relative. <S> Thus the Buddha says that nirvana is the door to the supermundane, not the supermundane itself, which is transdual. <S> This led to the distinction between a nirvana attainment that excludes samsara, and a nirvana attainment that includes samsara. <S> One can fall back into nirvana from the former, but not from the latter. <S> Even in the Pali Canon one finds a distinction between nibbana and parinibbana, the latter only being attained at death. <S> From the supermundane perspective, both nirvana and samsara are illusions. <A> Let me give an explain from a famous teaching from Lord Buddha (The Four Noble Truths).... <S> Suffering exist because of not understanding If the person understood the reality there wouldn't be a suffering inthe first place <S> To end the suffering one must first understand If understanding happens in a person's mind he will not sufferanymore! <S> Lord Buddha said... <S> Everything is born because of reasons <S> Everything exist because of reasons <S> Things will exist only till the reasons exist if you take them away <S> it will not exist anymore <S> What are the Four <S> Noble Truths - <S> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Noble_Truths <S> This is the answer to your question and any such questions about connections between things.
|
There is a connection, If there was no suffering there is no nirodha. Nirvana is unconditioned hence non dependent on anything.
|
Is it important to be vegetarian when meditating "Metta meditation"? Is it essential or somehow profitable to be vegetarian when doing "Metta/Maithree" meditation? Or Is it essential or somehow profitable to any other form of meditation? If not why a lot of people seems to be becoming vegetarian some time after they start their path? <Q> Based on Theravada, which is what I'm most familiar with, vegetarianism is not essential for any meditation that I know of. <S> Even so, I've chosen to be a vegetarian. <S> As I understand it, the Mahayana tradition tends to strongly encourage vegetarianism, but even then I'm not certain if they do it specifically to aid meditation practice. <S> As to it being profitable, it depends on what effects adopting vegetarianism has on that person's state of mind. <S> If being a vegetarian helps your compassion towards beings, then you might consider it profitable. <S> For some people, choosing vegetarianism might result in no improved state of mind, in which case it doesn't matter. <S> This also answers your third question as to why a lot of people become vegetarian after they start their path. <S> Of course this won't be the only reason, but for some it might be. <S> Try it, and see what works for you. <A> When my SO became vegetarian <S> she said she liked animals (e.g. horses and cows and so on) and other living creatures; and said it would be hypocritical to cause them (e.g. to pay a butcher for them) to be killed for her to eat. <S> I think she felt that being non-vegetarian (i.e. that being a carnivore or predator) would interfere with or cloud her perception of her love for living animals. <S> I think there's some justification for that in a text like the Dhammapada, for example in the whole chapter on violence , which starts for example with, <S> All tremble at violence; all fear death. <S> Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill. <S> I think that, logically, that justification depends on three assumptions: That the "all" (who tremble at violence) includes annimals, i.e. sentient beings <S> That lay people who buy their food encourage or cause killing if they pay for meat (that argument is slightly different or doesn't apply to monks who take alms and who eat whatever they are given) <S> That vegetarianism is feasible (practicable) and is not contrary to the doctrine of the middle way <A> Vegetarianism is sila or part of the training in virtue. <S> According to Buddhaghosa, such moral discipline serves two functions - to compose the mind and to aid in the cultivation of non-regret. <S> I'd say it's fairly obvious that if you are on the cushion and worrying about what you take to be a contradiction between your actions and the lovingkindness meditation you are practicing, then yes, you might benefit from vegetarianism. <S> It's important to understand, however, that eating meat isn't going to "short circuit" your metta meditation. <S> If that were the case, than the whole of Tibetan Buddhism would be marked by deficiencies in lovingkindness! <S> I will say, however, that eating a vegetarian diet does amazing things for your concentration and that these benefits extend well beyond the absence of regret. <S> Like anything else, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, right? <S> Just not a meat pudding in this case. <S> ;-) <A> One part of your bodily sensations are due to food we take. <S> Light vegetarian food can help concentration and meditation including Metta. <S> This is beneficial but not necessary. <S> Buddhism is not an extreme ideology and centres around intention. <S> If you do not have the intention of killing and also the situation is not such what you would be tainted by the guilt that an animal was killed on by behalf, then there is nothing wrong to eat non Veg. <S> food. <S> The main thing is keeping your mind pure and conducive to meditate hence if you find yourself uneasy or guilty about eating non Veg. <S> food then it will be beneficial to give up. <S> But if you are a monk you have no choice but accept what has been offered. <A> The Buddha clearly and explicitly prohibited vegetarianism for the monastics. <S> This was part of the controversy that culminated in the heretic Devadatta's failed attempt to foment a schism and to murder the Buddha. <S> There are various possible reasons for this, all speculative: the obligation of monastics to accept alms to enable ordinary people (puthujjana) to acquire merit, many of whom would not have been able to offer non-meat items to the monastics, seems to be the most likely reason; the scarcity of non-meat food items in many areas, which would cause monastics to leave those areas or starve (starvation was a constant problem for the monastics); religious pride and self-righteousness; and the law of karma, which only holds an individual responsible for actions of which he or she is the direct cause. <S> Some Mahayana sutras prescribe vegetarianism, however.
|
They might have noticed that becoming a vegetarian, for them, improves their personal state of mind. The Buddha did forbid that any animal should be killed specifically for a monastic, and monastics were not allowed to accept such offerings.
|
What advice should i give for a person with self destructive thoughts? If someone is really depressed and having self destructive thoughts and behavior what can i do to help such a person? Is there a good meditation for such a one? What kind of advice will it be best for a such a one? <Q> Metta meditation can help as it subdues hatred which is a major cause for suicide. <S> Other Samatha meditations like Anapanasati can help to attain extremely pleasant states of the mind like the Jhanas where there's no depression. <A> I would try to advise the following: Do some volunteering work, so they will see how valuable they can be in changing the lives of the people in need. <S> Depression can be something people go through when they feel life is not worth living. <S> Helping others should actually bring meaning to life. <S> Meditate on whatever arises in the mind and know that emotions are just transient and they don't really define anyone. <S> If it is depressed mental state, accept it and meditate on it. <S> Whatever you resist will persist. <S> Enjoy the small little things you encounter, e.g. nice warm sunshine, clean air, clean running water in one's own home. <A> Ending one's life prematurely or self-mutilating behavior does not change one's karma for the better, that is to say, if they are in a situation with extreme suffering in the present life, they will continue their suffering in their next lifetime as well. <S> So, one can not escape their suffering. <S> Reverend Kusala Bhikshu is fond of saying, "Karma has no eyes, karma has no ears. <S> " <S> No matter how much one tries to escape their suffering they will not be able to escape their past deeds. <S> Suicidal behavior goes against the first precept which is to avoid killing. <S> A loving kindness (metta) meditation may be useful. <S> This can be done by first wishing happiness for people that are hostile to the meditator. <S> Then wishing happiness for people that are neutral to the meditator, and then finally wishing happiness for those that are close to the meditator(oneself). <S> This is usually done with eyes closed while sitting on the floor or a chair with some kind of timer.
|
Vipassana can be practiced to make one not react to unpleasant feelings or thoughts and eventually achieve lasting peace. Be mindful in everyday life and be thankful for all the things one has and may be for the things one doesn't have as well.
|
Why does killing produce bad karma? Is it because we cause a being to suffer and experience pain while it's/he's being killed? Or, is it because we put an end to its/his relationships and desires? Or what reason can it be? <Q> It is our Perception of the Sensation / Feeling experienced when result bears fruit is what distinguished the Karma as bad and not. <S> I.e., Bad Karma is what you Perceive the results as undesirable and Good Karma is what we would perceive the results as favourable when the doer experiences the result, as well as skill full when this is conducive to reach the Buddhist Goal of Nirvana and un skilful when it is un conducive in reaching the final goal. <S> Say you kill you will experience the same when your actions catcher upto you. <S> Hence what is needed is to treat other like you would be treated, or treatments you would evaluate positively if you experience it. <S> Also there is skilfulness of your action towards the goal of liberation. <S> In this light any action which creates fabrication which hamper concentration and insight or the opportunity to practice can be considered unwholesome. <S> Killing has aversion and / or craving as base. <S> This creates fabrication which give painful sensation when meditating which will hamper concentration, insight as well as the needed longevity and conducive human birth to practice Vipassana hence such actions are un skilful. <S> For a worldly person (or someone not very deep and intensive in Vipassana) it is helpful to build-up Perception (Sanna) <S> what these are good action and bad action <S> so he is steered away from un skilful / un wholesome action towards skilful / wholesome action. <S> As Perception clouds your sense of reality such mental maps ultimately have to be dissolved away too. <A> Karma is generated by intention, according to the Buddha, in contradistinction to Jainism, which identifies the cause of karma with action. <S> Although all karma represents bondage to samsara, some karma generates more positive results and some karma generates more negative results, including the karma of liberation itself. <S> All experiences reflect the quality of the karma that one engenders. <A> The proximate cause of killing is always hatred accompanied by delusion. <S> But acts of killing can originate from all three evil roots. <S> Greed accompanied by delusion can be the motivating factor in cases of killing to gain material benefits. <S> Killing motivated by delusion is seen in cases of animal sacrifices done outof wrong views and killing the followers of other religions thinkingit is a religious duty. <S> So intentional killing is bad karma as any thought or a thought process tainted by greed, hatred and delusion is bad Karma by definition. <A> Killing causes bad karma because of these reasons.... <S> According to lord Buddha there must be Dvesha (a state of mind that feeds emotions like anger, confusion, hate) in a being's mind, to kill another or to harm another. <S> So killing or hurting someone crates bad karma because of internal reasons, not external reasons. <S> For example imagine you kill a baby who is yet to be born and who is yet to mature a proper body. <S> This baby has no relatives or relationships yet, it's not even a proper baby yet, and we are not sure if it can feel anything yet. <S> But if you kill this baby it will cause bad karma to you: but why? <S> Here is the reason.... <S> The "Dvesha" I mentioned above is one of the three sources of bad karma. <S> These are the three sources of bad karma: <S> Loba - Lusting for things and people Dvesha - State of mental collision (anger, hate, vendetta) <S> Moha - Mental confusion <S> So any verbal, mental or physical action that could cause these three states of mind is going to create bad karma. <S> These three can completely divert one's path towards nirvana and make him or her wrong do things. <S> They pollute the mind of a person and diminish the potential they have to reach nirvana and to do anything in their lives.
|
Killing originates in states of desire, passion, agitation, anger, and unhappiness, and thus those states return to one who has the intention to kill.
|
Accurate translation of "Satipatthana Sutta" I'm looking for an accurate translation of "Satipatthana Sutta". Could someone let me know what is the best available accurate translation? I don't want to be confused by just reading all available versions.Thank you <Q> In my opinion, one of the best translations is the one in Analayo Bhikhu's "Satipatthana: The Direct Path to Realization". <S> see https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/direct-path.pdf or https://ahandfulofleaves.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/satipatthana_direct-path_analayo_free-distribution-copy2.pdf <A> Mahasatipatthana Mahasatipatthana Trilinear Edition <S> An Introduction to the Satipatthana Suttas <S> Satipatthana Mula by Ven. <S> Sujato Edited By Piya Tan After which the next best is from VRI : <S> Mahāsatipaṭṭhāna Sutta Discourses on Satipatthana Sutta - which carries a more detail explanation and companion the the above. <S> This slants towards the interpretations of certain Pali phases as done by Ven. <S> Ledi Sawadaw, Ven. <S> Webu Sayadaw and U Ba Kin. <S> Piya Tan's translation is more balanced. <S> Ven Analayo's books are also very good but in my opinion not as a 1st read or for a novice as it misses out on certain angles and detailed explanation in certain interpretations. <S> (Much of this is best covered in Piya Tan's translations in a more balanced manner.) <S> You can try this after reading the above two as some of the omissions will not effect your understanding. <S> Ven. <S> Soma Thera translation covers only the angle of interpreting the Suttas in the light of the Commentaries. <S> Some of these interpretations are abstract and cannot be put to direct practice in certain interpretations as explained in the Discourses on Satipatthana Sutta by the VRI . <S> From my point of view this is the least recommended as a meditation manual, nevertheless useful if you are doing research into commentarial interpretation of the Sutta. <S> There are other translations (mentioned in the other answers) which are from the purely from the stand point of the commentaries, even when there potential inconsistencies, though discussed in other works are left out of the translations to keep them concise. <S> If you are familiar with these issues these would be great benefit due to the conciseness. <S> Again only if you are familiar with the certain phases where these issues pop up. <S> (E.g. when the translation say "... establish mindfulness in front ... <S> " it does not carry the same literal meaning.) <A> There is also the book "The Way of Mindfulness - The Satipatthana Sutta and Its Commentary" by Soma Thera. <S> Highly recommended book. <A> The Satipatthana Sutta (MN 10) and the Mahasatipatthana Sutta (DN 22) are essentially the same. <S> Fortunately for you, there are two excellent scholarly translations of these texts, the former in Nanamoli and Bodhi's Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha and the latter in Maurice Walshe's Long Discourses of the Buddha. <S> Both are published by Wisdom Publications and may also be available online in PDF format. <S> The Pali Tipitaka is also available online (www.tipitaka.org) for looking up particular words and phrases.
|
If you are looking to most accurate and reliable the best translations are by Piya Tan:
|
Understanding anatta via "there are no computer programs" analogy I tried to find an analogy that would help me to understand anatta: Just as we can say "there is no self" (there are just mental aggregates interacting with each other and eventually causing some bodily reactions), we can also say "there are no computer programs" (there are only electrons arranged in different patterns, and they eventually cause some changes in the output devices). Buddhism claims that anatta is the ultimate truth, and that it is beneficial to know that truth. I wonder if it applies to my analogy, too: can we regard "no computer programs" as the ultimate truth? I don't see how it could be beneficial for a computer user or a programmer to realise that "there are no computer programs". If we assume that the analogy is correct, there should be no benefit in realising that "there is no self". I see two points where the above reasoning could be flawed: It is actually beneficial to realise that "there are no computer programs". It is not beneficial to realise the above, but there is no analogy between "there are no computer programs" and "there is no self". Which point is true and why? Or is it something else that is the problem here? EDIT: There are already quite a few general questions about anatta. Here I hope to get answers that would comment on whether the analogy I presented is relevant to understanding this concept, and relate to the specific questions I asked. <Q> I find it helps to try to relate things back to the core teachings: <S> suffering, the cause of suffering, the extinction of suffering and the way to achieve that. <S> So the relevant teaching here as I understand <S> it is not "there is no self" but rather "clinging to a false sense of self causes suffering." <S> On its face, "there is no self" is patently false, much like the claim that there is no computer program. <S> There's room here to quibble about language, allowing you to see it one way or the other, but that distracts from the real matter at hand. <S> Suffering is a visceral thing and getting to its root requires delving into the nitty-gritty viscera of this self-delusion. <S> Otherwise "there is no self" is just a word game. <A> It's because the understanding you are describing is intellectual. <S> Enlightened understanding of anatta isn't factual, philosophical, or based in analogy. <S> It is a realization. <S> When the veil is lifted, we see it directly. <S> It's like realizing for the first time that you have use of your legs. <S> It puts you in a complete different world. <A> If a computer program were to realize the truth about itself then: <S> It wouldn't be surprised to find bugs (i.e. unwanted behaviour) <S> It wouldn't be surprised to find subroutines (encapsulated behaviour) <S> It wouldn't be surprised to find side-effects (interactions between this and that) <S> It wouldn't be surprised to find that its interactions with other software/programs/systems sometimes work as desired or "designed", and <S> sometimes don't <S> It wouldn't resist being upgraded with newer/better versions <S> It wouldn't have an inflated view of itself as being more capable than it actually is And (possibly) it wouldn't suffer from dukkha <A> Neko already explained it pretty well. <S> The realization of Anatta on an intellectual level, simply cannot happen. <S> The doctrine of Anatta is too profound. <S> One must realize it through the practice of insight meditation and the gaining of experiental knowledge. <S> Imagine an onion. <S> An onion has many layers. <S> Intellectual knowledge can only penetrate the top layers. <S> Experiental knowledge can penetrate all the layers, right into the core of the onion. <S> Its the last type of knowledge that one needs to realize the marks of existence and eventually Nibbana. <A> In Buddhism the concept is there is nothing worthy of identifying as self since you do not exercise absolute control over whatever you identify. <S> but there is no such thing as as everything (5 aggregates) that creates a being is changing. <S> Ultimate truth is what you realise through meditation which transcends the spear of Perception and Views. <S> Basically what pertains to: phenomenon of consciousness (citta) <S> associated mentality (cetasika) materiality or physical phenomena (rūpa) nirvana <S> A normal person will Perceive oneself as such, but in reality you cannot be exactly what you perceive <S> and also you do not become exactly what you perceive of want to be. <S> (Say a person is 80 but wants the body of a 20 year old.) <S> Hence when you transcend Perception (Sanna) you will realise there is no everlasting controllable part which is worthy to be called or identified as self. <S> Since there is not part which is unchanging or immortal or which is completely in your control the Buddha rejected the contemporary definition of Atta hence becoming the doctrine of Anatta. <S> This is what has been translated as non self or no soul to English. <S> Also see: <S> What is the best translation of Anatta into English? <S> https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/8669/295 <S> https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/2454/295 <S> http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abhidharma/ <S> http://www.abhidhamma.com/
|
Put it another way if there is something which is everlasting and unchanging and within your control you can rightfully call it self Buddhist concept of non self stems from the contemporary belief system which gave definition and doctrines of the Soul .
|
Does Buddhism teach about "Parallel worlds" I have heard something called "Mangala Sakwala" (The special universe or galaxy where lord Buddhas are born) This is a real puzzle for me because does it mean that there are many other worlds like this where the words of lord Buddha will never reach? If such places exist what causes a being to be born there instead of here? For example if i die now and get a birth as a human what would cause me to be born here (This galaxy/universe) or there (the unknown galaxy/universe)? The exact word ( "parallel universes" ) hasn't being used in Buddhism but if you search you will find stories about Human like or Humanoid creatures who are just like us (Beings in the human realm) but not with the chance to reach Dhamma because Lord Buddhas never born there. I am referring to some Theravada teachings i heard many years ago. Hope someone can help! <Q> Coming together of 31 planes of existance forms an universe. <S> (At least when it is not collapsed.) <S> Likewise there infinite universes 1 . <S> Also there is view that each universe contains multiple humanoid planets which is called the human plane 2 . <S> Out of these universes there is only one universe a Buddha can appear. <S> This is called the Mangala Sakwala (The special universe or galaxy where lord Buddhas are born). <S> This can be viewed in terms of the number line where there is infinite numbers but there is only one zero . <S> Likewise in the infinite universe there is only one universe conducive for a Buddha to appear. <S> 1 <S> Abhidhammattha Pradeepika <S> By Amaradasa Rathnapala, Volume 1, page 27, paragraph starting at line 6. <S> 2 <S> Perhaps based on: Kosala Sutta: The Kosalan <S> "As far as the sun & moon revolve, illumining the directions with their light, there extends the thousand-fold cosmos. <S> In that thousand-fold cosmos there are a thousand moons, a thousand suns, a thousand Sunerus — kings of mountains; a thousand Rose-apple continents, a thousand Deathless Ox-cart [continents], a thousand northern Kuru [continents], a thousand eastern Videha [continents]; four thousand great oceans, four thousand Great Kings, a thousand [heavens of the] Four Great Kings, a thousand [heavens of the] Thirty-three, a thousand [heavens of the] Yamas, a thousand [heavens of the] Tusitas, a thousand heavens of the Nimmanaratis, a thousand heavens of the Paranimmitavasavattis, and a thousand Brahma worlds. <S> And in that thousand-fold cosmos, the Great Brahma is reckoned supreme. <S> Yet even in the Great Brahma there is still aberration, there is change. <S> Seeing this, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with that. <S> Being disenchanted with that, he becomes dispassionate toward what is supreme, and even more so toward what is inferior. <S> "There comes a time when this cosmos devolves. <S> When the cosmos is devolving, most beings head to the [heaven of] the Radiant. <S> There they remain for a long, long time — mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-radiant, faring through the sky, abiding in splendor. <S> When the cosmos is devolving, the Radiant Devas are reckoned supreme. <S> Yet even in the Radiant Devas, there is still aberration, there is change. <S> Seeing this, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with that. <S> Being disenchanted with that, he becomes dispassionate toward what is supreme, and even more so toward what is inferior. <A> But to know the definition of a "World" according to the lord Buddha; please study Rohitassa Sutta. <S> "I tell you, friend, that it is not possible by traveling to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one does not take birth, age, die, pass away, or reappear. <S> But at the same time, I tell you that there is no making an end of suffering & stress without reaching the end of the cosmos. <S> Yet it is just within this fathom-long body, with its perception & intellect, that I declare that there is the cosmos, the origination of the cosmos, the cessation of the cosmos, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of the cosmos." <S> Rohitassa sutta -AN 4.45 <A> I never heard that Buddhism teach about parallel universes. <S> Buddhism teaches only one Human world, which is exists here on earth. <S> There are other worlds (loka dhathu) for gods (dewa) and others. <S> And there are some worlds which are <S> even thousand Buddhas tries at once, can't be reach. ' <S> Aroopa thaala Brahmana' worlds are such worlds. <S> Can not answer your second part as it assumes first part <S> is true and it is not true as per my answer.
|
I have not heard of such a “Parallel world”.
|
Differently able people and their "Vinyana" Say i am a Differently able person and i cant move my arms so how does my Vinyana work? Is that part of my "Kaya Vinyana" (The vinyana that works with the body) deactivated or lost contact with the arms? What is the connection between the Vinyana and a uncontrollable body part like arms or legs? I am not reffering this question about Blind,Deaf or Mute people only about the people who are not able to use existing and functioning body parts <Q> In my opinion, Vinyana is always present, but it is the function and sharpness of the faculty that distinguish the different experiences or what is felt through the faculty. <S> In the context of mediation your faculties should be sharp for your the experience the reality as it is, so a person with diminished faculties generally will not be able to progress in Vipassana. <S> E.g. if your arm is lost then your limps then you have are not without or diminished Kaya Vinyanaya but due to the fact that a part of the faculty is missing there is not chance that to make contact of even if there is contact I does not register in the case of a blind person. <S> The ability to move is Power or Ability (Irdi) in which our body reacts to our intentions. <S> The function of Vinyanaya is to register any contact which comes through the sense doors. <A> There is no Vinyanaya that "takes care of body". <S> Kaya Vinyanaya arises as soon as body contacts with something ( Kayan patichcha pottabbecha <S> uppajjathi kayavinyanan - Madupindika Sutta). <S> So if one can feel the body, kaya vinyana arises. <S> Irrespective of its mobility. <A> Vinaya is consciousness. <S> If you keep Buddhist doctrine aside <S> then it is simple to describe consciousness. <S> Kaya Vinaya is a description of that part of consciousness which is in touch with body. <S> Consciousness can be thought of very fine grained body which becomes grosser and takes shape of various subtle bodies some of which are described by terms as Pranic, Astral etc. <S> Consciousness in its subtlest forms governs life and death. <S> If you are alive then it means Vinaya is there. <S> But if you do not have control over a limb it means Vinaya has lost touch due to malfunction of grosser bodies inside. <S> Since Buddha did not want people to experiment with grosser bodies he never spoke about them. <S> I am sure anybody who meditates and adopts a right lifestyle will start witnessing subtle bodies inside.
|
Kaya Vinaya is that part of consciousness which is in direct contact with body.
|
What makes "Dhamma" worthy of worship? We as Buddhists consider "Dhamma / Dharma" to be holy.But do we know the reasons that make it holy? <Q> Bodhidharma is the legendary founder of Zen in China. <S> He is said to have arrived in China about 520 CE. <S> (Buddhism had by then been known in China for about 400 years.) <S> He was soon summoned to the emperor, who had questions for him. <S> "I have endowed hundreds of temples and monasteries, and endorsed the ordination of thousands of monks and nuns; what is my merit?" -- the emperor asked. <S> Bodhidharma, usually depicted as a scowling, hooded, bearded figure, shot back: "There is no merit." <S> "What then is the main principle of the Holy Teaching?" the emperor asked. <S> "Open, empty, nothing holy!" <S> (廓然無聖) replied Bodhidharma. <A> In India there are many practices aimed towards liberation from the satisfactoriness of Dhamma. <S> Hence the Buddha used this model where the Dhamma is revered and forms a "religion" like institution around it. <S> In addition, if the teaching is not revered people will not learn it and practice it. <S> Also it will not attract others. <S> It is very rarely you get to know that the reality is in the form of a teaching <S> hence you should have respect to the teaching. <S> Hence the reverence to the Dhamma. <S> Also the Buddha has asked to treat the Teaching like a Boat to get to the other shore and not carry it with you. <A> Lord Buddha advised a form of meditation and worshiping that focus on the holiness of Dhamma / Dharma. <S> It is called "Dhamma Anussathii". <S> These are the reasons that makes Dhamma / Dharma holy. <S> Dhamma Anussathii <S> Swakkhatha - Lord Buddha taught Buddhism inn the best way/ in the best manner possible <S> Sandhittika - Dhamma/Dharma can be realized in this life itself <S> Dhamma is not incapable,anyone can understand and realize it in this life and therefore there is no need to postpone the path. <S> Akalika - Dhamma/Dharma can be understood and realized in any time. <S> In present and in future. <S> Just like how the great ones did in the past. <S> Dhamma/Dharma is timeless, <S> so there is no need to modify,upgrade or modernize it. <S> Just like the past it is still equally effective today and in future. <S> Ehipassika <S> - Dhamma/Dharma has no secrets or hidden paths/teachings, <S> Therefore anyone can be invited in to come and see for themselves. <S> Dhamma/Dharma itself is fully open and contains no hidden paths or teachings. <S> As Dhamma/Dharma contains no secret there is nothing to mask or hide. <S> So anyone can enter and learn or inspect Dhamma/Dharma. <S> Opanaika - Dhamma/Dharma can only be understood from the inside,by yourself. <S> Thw ewalization can't be given,one must find it within. <S> No one can give you the realization or nirvana <S> you must find it yourself. <S> Pachchaththan wedithabbo vinyohithi - Dhamma/Dharma must be understood by wise ones in their own capacity or potential <S> Only the wise will understand Dhamma/Dharma in their own capacity. <S> The ones who are not wise may not.
|
Dhamma/Teachings of Lord Buddha has been presented by Lord Buddha in the best manner possible and therefore can't be explained in any better way above lord Buddha's teachings.
|
What is the best way to forget bad choices in the past? We all have done bad karma,so if something is bugging my mind constantly (Like killing some mosquito) what is the solution for me,what can i do to overcome it/or to forget it? <Q> Short answer is, you should not forget bad choices. <S> You should learn from bad choices. <S> Long answer: <S> Kukucca is characterized by regret. <S> It's function is to grieve about what has or what has not been done. <S> It manifests as remorse. <S> It should be regarded as slavery. <S> --from <S> Visuddhimagga XIV, 174 <S> The Dalai Lama was working with an American psychiatrist who was interviewing him for a book on happiness. <S> The subject of remorse was broached: His Holiness explained that one time an elderly Buddhist man came to see him to ask for instructions on how to do a very difficult Yoga pose. <S> The Dalai Lama told the man that he was too old and should not attempt the pose as it would be too dangerous. <S> The old man thanked the Dalai Lama, went home and killed himself so he could be reincarnated as a younger, healthier man who could attempt the pose. <S> After hearing the news, the Dalai lama was overcome with guilt at being the reason for another man’s death. <S> “So how did you deal with that?” <S> asked the interviewer. <S> “How did you get rid of the remorse.” <S> The Dalai Lama sat there in silence for a minute or two, thinking hard about the question. <S> “I didn’t get rid of it” the Dalai Lama explained. <S> “It’s still with me every day. <S> I just continue to live with my heart open. ” <S> -- from http://toryshulman.com/how-to-live-with-remorse-efficiently <S> So, what does it mean, "to live with one's heart open"? <S> It means to see it like so: "What was done in the past cannot be changed. <S> Thinking about it will not help me undo it. <S> Now I have learned my lesson and will not make exactly the same mistake. <S> I don't know what will happen in the future, but if similar situation comes up, or even a completely different situation -- I will do my best!" <A> If you remember something, note it as remembering, remembering, remembering... until it stops. <S> If you remember something and have already become upset or sad, note it as sad, sad sad... until the sadness goes away. <S> Simply observe the 3 characteristics of regret. <A> You have a mental reaction (remorse) which leads to more though proliferation (Papancha). <S> So what ever through that comes be equanimous. <S> If you have equanimity this becomes a Rootless Conciousness while if you do react or have reaction then this becomes otherwise creating future Fabrications. <A> Forgetting our past karma is not skillful, but if the memory of a past deed is amplified to the point of being unhealthy, you may want to write down the deed on a piece of paper. <S> For example, you can write, "I took a parking spot from an old lady three years ago today. <S> " Then leave the paper on a coffee table or desk for a couple of days where you will see it several times in your day. <S> This way, you may be able to see the deed in a neutral context. <S> Originally, my sister suggested this method for getting rid of a song that repeated in my mind. <A> The best way to overcome this is to work with the object and learn about it. <S> Remorse is one of the 5 hindrances. <S> They are objects that can slow one down on the path. <S> They block progress in e.g. meditation. <S> When a hindrance is present, make a mental note that a hindrance is present. <S> This way you can use the hindrance to cultivate insights, i.e. the 3 signs of existence. <A> Accept them and let them go. <S> Don't force them to go away, know them <S> and they will go home on their own accord. <S> And you are not really forgetting anything, you are just accepting things that arise. <S> Because they arise in the moment, they belong to the moment. <S> I wholeheartedly recommend reading "The Teachings of Ajahn Chah" as you will find great Dhamma talks there.
|
Keep observing the hindrance with mindfulness, in the present moment and note it as "remorse, remorse", until it ceases. In Buddhism we overcome "problems" by learning about them and thereby understanding them. The best way is to accept them.
|
What is the difference between "Bhāva" and "Ātman" in Pali I have read in Buddhist text, Buddhism is about "Bhāva" and not "Ātman". What is the difference between "Bhāva" and "Ātman"? <Q> Both have their places in Buddhist thought/practice. <S> First, the definitions: <S> bhāva : condition; nature; becoming atta (ātman is the Sanskrit form): self; ego; soul <S> Here are a couple of relevant quotes: <S> In Buddhist thought, bhāva denotes the continuity of life and death, including reincarnation, and the maturation arising therefrom. <S> ( source ) <S> So, bhāva could be described as the "seamlessness of existence". <S> Although the Buddha argued that no permanent, unchanging "self" can be found, some Buddhist schools, sutras and tantras present the notion of an atman or permanent "Self", although mostly referring to an Absolute and not to a personal self. <S> ( source ) <S> And atta is about the person in the moment; though as mentioned above, it's really more about a higher level conceptual "self". <S> In Buddhist thought, the opposite of atta ( an atta ) is a generally more significant concept: <S> In Buddhism, the term anattā refers to the perception of "not-self", recommended as one of the seven beneficial perceptions, which along with the perception of dukkha and impermanence is also formally classified among the three marks of existence. <S> ( source ) <S> I hope this helps! <A> They are more or less the same. <S> Well, different aspects of the same mistaken view. <S> that reincarnates and/or the little boss inside our brain who decides what to do. <S> Modern cognitive science is mostly on board with anatta . <S> There is no soul, there is no single command center in the brain. <S> Bhava <S> (literally "being", "existence") refers to the deeply ingrained experience of individual existence: " <S> I am this thing here - and that stuff over there is the rest of the world". <S> "I'm in here looking at the world through the holes in the eyes. <S> " It is a habit to self-identify with the point of view located inside a living organism. <S> If you are the living organism then obviously when the organism dies you die. <S> Because the habit of bhava goes very deep, it remains the unspoken assumption behind our lives, regardless of our theoretical understanding of physics and brain. <S> Theoretical understanding is separate, experiential assumption is separate. <S> Maybe if memetics matures one day we will have a better model to supersede bhava. <S> As long as we don't self-identify with the memes... <S> Anyhow, the reason Buddhism is interested in abandoning Atman/Bhava is not because non-dualism is the panacea (although it does reduce conflicts caused by egoistic behavior and suffering caused by wrong expectations) - but largely because Buddhism is interested in going beyond naive reification of all and any models, including that of non-dualism. <A> The word 'Bhava' as used in the Paticca Samuppada means Becoming . <S> The Buddha explains that due to Vedana (feelings), one may out of Avijja (ignorance) generate Tanha (craving) which leads to Upadana (clinging) which in turn leads to Bhava . <S> Now the same Vedana , out of Panna (wisdom), can lead to freedom from Bhava and take one to Nibbana . <S> When the feelings arise, if one watches their impermanence and remains equanimous, one understands that craving for that feeling is futile. <S> This generates wisdom. <S> Coming to Atman , the Sanskrit word simply means 'self' or 'ego'. <S> The Buddha taught the teaching of Anatta , the Pali for Anatman , which means non-self. <S> It means that there is nothing in this structure of Body-Mind to be called self. <S> Everything is impermanent and hence not suitable to clinging <A> Atman - View there is a Soul or Entity. <S> Here the belief is there either controllable, non changing entity. <S> (Entity view.) <S> This is a process under which your next moment is create through the rolling of the Dependent Origination (DO). <S> This is like a stochastic process . <S> (Process view.) <S> In simple terms the general tendency is the look at a being as an Entity <S> but actually there is a Process (Bhava) which does not properties you associate with and Entity (Atman).
|
Bhava - Becoming or creating further existences. Atman (literally "spirit", "breath") refers to the soul (the entity, the identity)
|
Meditating with chronic illness I'm an American living in Bangkok. I have Parkinson's disease and have recently (last week) developed restless leg syndrome. It's now 4:30 AM & I can't sleep - because of the discomfort in my legs. I haven't had a good night's sleep in a long time. I'm trying different therapies for the legs but nothing seems to work so far. Although I have an Angel looking after me, she doesn't really know what I'm going through - and I'm trying to keep a positive outlook, which is getting harder with this sleep depravation! I'm feeling afraid and alone. I've been attracted to Buddhism for a long time and have meditated off & on for quite a while. When I try to meditate, I'm just too uncomfortable to do so, even while lying down. Has anyone been in a similar situation? Any advice? <Q> Giri-m-Ananda Sutta has details of how to overcome illness. <S> At a superficial level you can start as following and go deeper as in the Sutta. <S> Also there is a book Meditation on Perception <S> : Ten Healing Practices to Cultivate Mindfulness by Bhante Henepola Gunaratana which might be of interest. <S> Even in a terminal illness Contemplation of anatta (absence of a permanent self or soul) - detach your self from the pain Contemplation of foulness (asubha) <S> - look at your body part by part from head to foot and foot to head Contemplation of disadvantage (danger) - everyone is prone to illness Contemplation of abandonment - contemplate on non evil thoughts <S> Contemplation of detachment - benefits of being without attachments Contemplation of cessation - destruction from craving and relief from creating fabrications Contemplation of distaste for the whole world - abandoning latent tendencies . <S> Contemplation of impermanence of all component things - develop revulsion Mindfulness of in-breathing and out-breathing - see Anapana Sati <S> With regard to sleep deprivation try Metta Bhavana . <S> One benefit of this is you sleep easy. <S> Also remember pain is not pain unless you make it your pain. <S> There is the physical sensation feeling and the mental cognising that this is my pain. <S> The latter is bigger than the physical pain hence try look at the pain as mere pain. <S> See: Vedenaupassana in Satipatthanas . <S> You may also try taking a course at: http://dhamma.org/ <A> I'm sorry you feel uncomfortable, and afraid and alone. <S> Some of the answers to the question, " Experiencing physical pain ", might be helpful. <S> The article " Using Meditation to Deal with Pain, Illness & Death " is perhaps the most helpful answer I have found so far. <A> First, I'm very sorry to hear about your situation. <S> I wish you strength and good health in spite of your obstacles. <S> And you are not alone. <S> Many people meditate with different kinds of chronic pain. <S> The pain hinders the process, but it need not prevent you from enjoying meditation or gaining benefits from it. <S> For instance: as you focus on your breath during meditation, if you feel pain in your legs, allow your attention to remain on the pain. <S> Be mindful of the pain: consider the way the pain feels, and examine the nature of pain in great detail. <S> What kind of pain is it? <S> Where exactly is it felt? <S> Are there subtle things you can do to change the way you feel it (like shifting positions)? <S> Stay with the pain for a while, and then gently turn your attention back to your breath. <S> The practice should not be to ignore the pain, or otherwise mask or cover it, but to experience it mindfully so that you can fully understand it. <S> You may find some comfort in this very recent study from the Journal of Neuroscience that discusses the pain relief benefit in vipassanā meditation: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/302620.php <S> Good luck and stay strong! <S> You can conquer this.
|
If you're practicing vipassanā meditation, you can apply the mindfulness practice to your pain as part of the meditation experience. Contemplation of impermanence - When you experience any discomfort look at this as "this will also pass".
|
What is the object of Faith in Buddhism I am quite new to Buddhism. One of the reasons for starting practice was that I don't believe in God. But I belive in the four Noble Truths. I believe it because the more I think about it, the more I see it is true. And practicing accordingly strenghtens my faith. My question is, is the four Noble Truths the "correct object of faith" in Buddhism? <Q> Faith in Buddhism has many function. <S> Also faith in upon which wisdon is built. <S> Firstly you listen to the Dhamma and see that this sounds right <S> Secondly you see this is logical when you think and analyse it Lastly <S> you should practice and see for your self <S> then you know that in fact it is right by direct experience <S> hence faith becomes unshakable <S> You might have past 1 and 2. <S> Now is the time to put some serious effort into meditation to realise 3. <S> And practising accordingly strengthens my faith. <S> At a more mundane level you can increase your faith by recollection of the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. <S> Noble Truths the "correct object of faith" in Buddhism? <S> This is what you should realise at the experiential level to cement your faith. <S> You should have: you have to have faith <S> the teacher knows what he is teaching some faith to lean the teaching and training properly and put it to practice according to instruction <S> you have to have faith in your ability practice accordingly and gain results <S> you have to have faith that the time is always right to practice <S> (it worked in the past, it works not and it will work in the future) if practice properly <A> Faith and Shraddha are two concepts people often get confused. <S> Faith is more of a blind belief that encourage following without question. <S> Shraddha is the concept given in Buddhism. <S> Shraddha is having unshakable trust in Lord Buddha, In Lord Buddha's teachings and the monks. <S> But this trust should come from realization not from blindly following. <S> This realization should come with learning and practicing Lord Buddha's words. <S> More you realize more you believe. <S> Lord Buddha encouraged a Shraddha that is formed through realization rather than just believing. <S> Shraddha without reason (Blind following) is called "Amulika Shraddha" (Rootless Shraddha) <S> What is the object of faith/shraddha? <S> The object of Shraddha are <S> - Triple gems Buddha (Lord Buddha) <S> Dharma (Lord Buddha's teachings) <S> Sanga <S> (Monks) <S> Once you reach the first step in the path "Sovan / Sothapanna" your Faith / Shraddha can't be shaken by anything. <S> So what about Four Noble Truths? <S> There are some things in Buddhism to believe,some to remember,some to practice and some to realize. <S> The Four Noble Truths come in the category - "To be realized" So Four Noble Truths must be realized through practice of meditation and Dharma. <S> It is not an object of worship or faith. <S> It is simply the realization of holy Buddhas. <S> So you too must learn and practice in order to reach understanding and realization. <A> Yes: the "four noble truths" is arguably the first doctrine. <S> And sayings like like Simsapa Sutta <S> suggest that it's maybe the most essential. <S> And some other suttas end with a phrase like, <S> Both formerly & now, it is only stress that I describe, and the cessation of stress. <S> However see also: <S> Answers to Is Anatman the most important concept in Buddhism? <S> suggest that different people have slightly different ideas about what's "most important" Answers to How to explain what Buddhism is? <S> suggest that not every school of Buddhism has exactly the same doctrine, and not everyone will relate to the four noble truths Answers to <S> What teachings do all schools of Buddhism share? <S> list some other doctrines <S> which all schools of Buddhism might (inasmuch as they are common to all schools) consider essential. <S> More generally, I suppose that an object of faith is " the Dhamma " in general. <S> More broadly, not only the Dhamma but the Three Jewels <S> i.e. Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha . <S> Some canonical justification for the "three jewels" as the "correct object of faith" can be found in for example SN 55 which talks about "stream entry", summarized in Wikipedia as : <S> The sotāpanna ... has unshakable confidence in the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. <S> The Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha, sometimes taken to be the triple refuge, and other times listed as being objects of recollection. <S> In general though, confirmed confidence in the Buddha', Dharma and Sangha, respectively, is considered to be one of the four limbs of stream-winning ( sotāpannassa angāni ). <S> That's assuming that "confidence" and "faith" are sufficiently similar; I think that "confidence" implies verified not blind faith -- <S> maybe slightly different Pali words <S> i.e. pasāda as opposed to saddhā . <S> See also Refuge (Buddhism) <A> In my own experience, would I be interested in Buddhism if I did not have faith in Enlightenment? <S> Probably not... <S> If there was no Goal, nothing in Buddhism would make sense, right? <S> There would be no escape from suffering... <S> So the Path would lead nowhere. <S> There would be no knowing The Nature of The Mind... <S> There would be no Directly Seeing it For Yourself... <S> There would be no Ultimate Result of Wholesome Action... <S> If we did not have Goal, all we would have is good behavior for the sake of better living - before you die. <S> How fun would that be?
|
It seems to me the central object of faith in Buddhism is The Goal: Enlightenment or Nirvana.
|
Why do beings, even in lower/hell realms, like their lives? As to Lord Buddha beings suffer because they were born : Jaathi pachchaya jara marana soka paridewa dukka domanassa upayasa sambhawanthi From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. It is understandable why beings in the higher realms like their lives; but is there an explanation for why beings in very lower realms (like hell) like their lives? <Q> Yayam tanha ponobbhavika nandiragasahagata tatratatrabhinandini, seyyathidam, kamatanha bhavatanha vibhavatanha <S> It is this craving(tanha) which produces re-existence and re-becoming (Punobbhava) and which is bound up with passionate greed’ (Nandi raga sahagatha) and <S> which finds fresh desire now here <S> and there (tatratatrabhinandini) <S> namely (1) thirst for sense-pleasures (kama tanha) <S> (2) craving for existence and becoming (bhava-tanha) and <S> (3) craving for nonexistence, self annihilation (Vibhava tanha) <A> Due to past fabrication - in order for consciousness to arise relevant faculties and body and mind gets created, or in other words to house consciousness the body and mind is created with relevant faculties tied to the particular consciousness. <S> Your faculties will be such that you sense and perceive things differently than being in other realms. <S> (A Deva may look down upon humans but are we disgusted of ourselves, perhaps this can be generalised to realms below as as well.) <S> Regardless of what level of life form you are if you perceive a threat to your existance through external stimuli you react to preserve your self. <S> exist. <S> Interesting in Asannasatta Brahma-loka, which is actually a higher plane, you do not cling to life or have love for life. <S> 1st act of Karam performed in new being reborn is cling to the plane. <S> (Bhavanikanthika lobha-javanas) <S> In the Asannasatta Brahma-loka this does not happen. <S> Any other place you love life because you cling to the plane regardless it is low or high. <S> More on this is covered in: <S> Abhidhamma for the Beginner by Egerton C Baptist, page 103. <A> It may be that they have a sense of karmic justice in a lower or hell realm.
|
The pain of losing life or death is above all else as even in these realms the notion of "I am", "myself", "my life", etc.
|
The path of jhana vs the path of dry insight From everywhere I've read and heard in the suttas they talk about the jhanas being needed for insight, but as I understand it the Visuddhimagga gives the option of dry insight not requiring the jhanas. Does anyone know what canonical source Buddhagosa was basing this on? <Q> This notion has arisen by the commentarial re interpretation of the (Yuga,naddha) <S> Paṭipadā Sutta . <S> More details are given in the following easy: Samatha and Vipassanā by Piya Tan. <S> Also the modern Vipassana Movement has some effects in spreading this nortion. <S> Some discussion about the Vipassana Movement can be found in <S> How Buddhist traditions are transforming – and being transformed – through their relation with Western psychology by Ven. <S> Sujato Also see: The Experience of Samadhi: An In-depth Exploration of Buddhist Meditation by Richard Shankman <A> Please limit yourself to reading only canonical texts (Sutta Pitaka) until you are fully established in the Path. <S> Do not go into the Visuddhimagga – it is only a thesis that Buddhagosha Thera wrote to show his qualifications. <S> When there are nearly 18,000 suttas that are found in the canonical texts why would one want to check the commentaries and others first? <S> Even Abhidhamma came only after the 3rd Buddhist Council. <S> If one starts with Abhi-dhamma first, it will confuse things further. <S> At the time of Ven. <S> Mahinda arrived in Sri Lanka the native language of the island was not called Sinhala, but known as “dipa bhasa”, the language of the island, and this was closely related to the Brahmi language of Asokan inscriptions. <S> Ven. <S> Mahinda used the Pali language to preach to the people, but used the native language for the purpose of commenting on suttas <S> and it is these that became known as Sinhala-atthakatha. <S> Only a learned individual can identify errors found in these atthakatha. <S> So it is advisable to limit yourself to reading only canonical texts (Sutta Pitaka) until you are fully established in the Path. <S> Venerable Buddhagosa came to Sri Lanka in the 5th century AC and translated these Sinhala-atthakatha or Sinhala commentaries on the texts into Pali. <S> He was not translating the canonical texts. <S> So as I mentioned earlier, his Visuddhimagga is a text written to show his proficiency to convince the Mahavihara monks that he was capable of undertaking such a daunting task of translating the Sinhala-commentaries into Pali. <A> Jhana is only required for arahantship. <S> The noble eighthold path is the path to Nibbana or arahantship but not necessarily a path that must be fully completed for insight (vipassana). <S> At this link , Bhikkhu Bodhi gives an excellent account of how, in the suttas, stream-entry does not require jhana. <S> Yet to be a stream-enterer there must be some clear insight of anatta (not-self) since a stream-enterer is defined by breaking the fetter of 'self-view' ('sakkaya ditthi'). <S> In the Nakhasikha Sutta , it is stated the stream-enterer has "not a hundredth, a thousandth, a one hundred-thousandth" of their former suffering. <S> To extinguish so much suffering cannot occur without insight (vipassana). <S> Yet such a stream-enterer has not yet reached the 'world' of jhana . <A> Ajahn Brahm wrote an excellent book called Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond. <S> I have to agree with him. <S> I would add that Jhana, Zazen and absolute samadhi meditation are the same thing based on focused concentration/absorption. <S> Seventeen years ago I started Vipassana (mindfulness) meditation and although it's a good foundation, it never led me to deeper stages of awakening. <S> When I started studying and practicing Zen especially absolute samadhi meditation as taught by Katsuki Sekida this is when I began totruly understand the Buddha's teachings. <S> Katsuki Sekida wrote a book called Zen training (methods and philosophy) <S> I would get it, along with Ajahn Brahm book it definately will help you. <S> I guarantee it will deepen your understanding of meditation and Buddhism. <S> I know in my own practice learning to let go of all conceptual understanding, thinking, and just let things happen, is when the magic appears in meditation, or I should say drops off. <S> Waste of time talking about Buddhism. <S> Buddhism is a very personal practice... <S> absolutely no one can help you. <S> All that really matters is the meditation. <S> All the bestM <A> You can reach Stream Entry just with Vipassana Directly <S> (Mahasi <S> Tradition).But from our experience in Myanmar , with AungThuKha method , which is Hybrid of Samatha and Vipassana. <S> There we are practiced till samahta meditation and reaches 1st Jhana within 3 -5 days. <S> After it is is fulfilled , we are moved to vipassana , the retreat last 15 days <S> and it is fastest way to reach Stream Entry.
|
His central thesis is that without Jhana there is no enlightenment, and that it was jhana that led to the Buddha's awakening.
|
Is ignorance a sin? If I do not know the rules of a country, that does not count for that much in a court of law. I will still be punished for breaking the law. Likewise, if I do not know that bad speech results in bad karma will I be punished (in the sense of bad karma in the future )? Or maybe if I don't know what bad speech is will I be punished? To put the most extreme example, if I murder millions of people but I have a brain disorder and don't realize that is wrong, then will I be punished in the future by karma? <Q> If you are ignorant of the cycle of day and night, or the phases of the moon, or even of gravity, your ignorance does not prevent them from happening. <S> Universal laws are just that -- universal -- and they don't change for those who don't know of, understand, or follow them. <S> There is an element of intention behind all karma/action, and this intention factors into the quality of the actions. <S> A wrong action done with pure intention is certainly less bad than a wrong action done with evil intention, but it's still a wrong action. <S> The "brain disorder" example is interesting, but again, ignorance of universal laws does not halt or change the manifestation of the laws. <S> Even Angulimala could not escape the accumulation of karma from his time of killing: Being an arahant, Angulimala remained firm and invulnerable in mind and heart. <S> But his body, the symbol and fruit of previous kamma was still exposed to the effects of his former evil deeds. <S> As an arahant, he needed no words of consolation, but a reminder of the kammic concatenation of cause and effect, which still has to be endured until the end. <A> <A> Ignorance is simply a lack of knowledge. <S> You can educate an ignorant person! <S> So the hickory smoked answer is. <A> I've heard there's a tribe in Africa that speaks using a heavy and chronic form of sarcasm -- at first the academic from some Western university <S> thought they were just messing with him, until he realized it was a cultural thing to prevent people from gaining too much pride. <S> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somali_Bantu#Profile <S> A brief mention.... <S> Let's assume there is a society like this for the sake of argument. <S> Something like Wrong Speech would likely not exist, in the context of being a wrong action that leads to suffering, unless a person's actions were a lie that were to lead to someone dying or there were some other result of speech that could really separate people in a harmful way. <S> As I understand right speech, it's abstention from right action; wrong action could be probably understood in a similar light. <S> (In a society without property, theft would not really exist, for instance.) <S> If this kind of action is really universally prohibited against all humans, perhaps birth into life-long ignorance could just be seen as being as a unfortunate rebirth as the result of past karma. <S> But I understand wrong view as meaning those that lead to harmful behaviors and beliefs, first and foremost...
|
You can fix ignorance buy ya can't fix stupid! One can never escape the effects of one's actions, regardless of the circumstances. Being ignorant of the repercussions is the very reason what we accumulate Karma which will give future experiences which the receiver perceive as unfavourable or painful, hence this this sense it can be considered a sin .
|
What is Inner and Outer Peace and how can I achieve them? I am bit Confused about Inner and Outer Peace. If they exist, how can I know and how can I achieve them? <Q> Using Buddhist vocabulary, what you call "inner peace" might be "tranquility" (i.e. Passaddhi ); and what you call "Outer Peace" might be a consequence of ethical/virtuous/moral behaviour (i.e. Sīla ). <A> Viveka nissita (peace from solitude): <S> Outer - seclusion or detachment from the sense doors, i.e., you do not delight any sensations or feelings born from external objects coming in contact with the respective faculties. <S> Avijja Pahana Sutta 2 Inner - Absence of 5 hindrances. <S> Overcoming the 5 hindrances is rather a long topic but <S> the essay Nīvaraṇa by Piya Tan might give you the right pointer. <A> Peace can only be achieved in two states. <S> In a Dhyana In the state of an arahant <S> In a Dhyana Dhyana means the peace you achieve through meditation. <S> In this state of mind you are free from the chaos of the world and the mind. <S> But this is temporary,when you loose Dhyana you will face chaos again. <S> In the state of an arahant <S> An arahant is a person who has gone beyond greed,lust,anger,They have achieved Nirvana. <S> Their peace is permanent. <S> Other than in Hollywood movies we have not heard of peace having two sides. <S> In Buddhist reality there is no outside and inside. <S> There is only the processes of the mind. <S> To have peace one must have peace within, <S> Once you have it there is no reason to worry about an Outer peace. <S> Here is a link to a book <S> , It is free and you can read it online or save it to your device. <S> Take your time and Read this. <S> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/khema/allofus.html#ch1 <A> Peace can be lost due to inner or outer reasons. <S> so, keep mindful on inner or outer obstacles. <S> when we feel inner weakness like anger, greed, hate etc. <S> we lost our peace. <S> We think these are due to outer reasons, but they are due to our (inner )weakness.
|
Outer peace is achieve through the being eqaunimous and realising the impermanent nature of sensual experience. Simply put it, MIND IS THE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE.
|
mindfulness thinking about future and past? Is there such thing as mindfulness thinking about the future or past? I have a job that requires a lot of "going" into the future and past (projecting forward and assessing the past). I was wondering if could practice mindfulness while working. But it's not like I'm working with my hands, where I can be completely concentrated at the current moment with what I'm doing. From what I understand, mindfulness practice has to do with staying in the present. So my understanding is that it is inherently in conflict with what I do for work. <Q> As you suggest by writing that your work involves ‘going’ into the future and past, the reality of our experience is that past and future exist only in thought (which includes memories, imagination and so on). <S> This is the key to approaching your experience with mindfulness. <S> In any given moment it is possible to recognise, from a place of awareness, that thought is occurring. <S> In my experience the best place to start with mindfulness is the body and breath. <S> They help root us in our present, moment by moment experience. <S> It is not you, it is not necessary to identify with the thoughts nor get lost in them. <S> And then to frequently ‘check in’ with your body and breath as your work continues, continuing like this throughout the day. <S> In this way you can gradually develop the ability to think but not be lost in thought. <S> I hope that helps… <A> Mindfulness thinking about future and past? <S> Actually any object can be taken as a meditation-object, it does not matter if the object is a physical or mental phenomena. <S> If you are practicing Vipassana meditation (insight meditation), then you have to be with reality in the present moment. <S> That is the foundation of the technique. <S> When you are on the job and working with past and future you can be mindful of the thoughts, ideas and other mental formations , as they arise and pass away. <S> If you observe them with mindfulness, in the present moment, then you are practicing correctly. <S> If you are getting lost in the thoughts, that means that mindfulness is absent and the Mind has followed after the object or run away from the object. <S> When one is mindful, the Mind is kept in the present moment, unable to stray from the object. <S> Is there such thing as mindfulness thinking about the future or past? <S> Thinking about past and <S> future is actually done in the present moment, since past and future are concepts and do not really exist. <S> There is only the present moment. <S> The tradition I practice <S> (Mahasi Sayadaw, The Burmese Method), has a technique of noting. <S> There is already an answer in the thread which describes the noting. <S> If one is thinking, then one makes a mental note saying "thinking, thinking" while sending the Mind out to the object. <S> That means that full attention has to be placed on the object (in this case mental formations ), while the mental note is being applied. <S> When one has observed and noted the object a couple of times, one places attention on the feeling of the rising and falling of the abdomen. <S> The abdomen functions as an anchor, so that the Mind will not get lost. <S> One keeps attention on the abdomen until a new object arises, then one notes that object a couple of times and again returns attention to the rising and falling of the abdomen. <S> The function of the noting is the remind oneself to stay in the present moment and to stay objective. <S> This way the Mind cannot identify with the objects. <S> Instead one is seeing their ultimate reality, i.e. the 3 marks of existence; Impermanence, Unsatisfactoriness and Uncontrollability of conditioned phenomena. <S> In this tradition one tries to cultivate insight about the 3 marks of existence. <S> They are gateways to Nibbana. <A> When you must plan for future business then simply note something like, "planning planning" in the present moment when you are planning. <S> If you don't note then simply intentionally focus your awareness on the planning <S> but I recommend noting at least in the beginning. <S> When remembering the past then always make sure to note 'remembering, remembering", in the present moment, moment by moment as the "remembering," arises. <S> Does that help? <A> Is there such thing as mindfulness thinking about the future or past? <S> I have a job that requires a lot of "going" into the future and past (projecting forward and assessing the past). <S> If you look at the Abhidhamma each though has either pleasant, neutral or unpleasant sensation associated with it. <S> (Ref: Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma ). <S> These cover all the 4 Satipatthana. <S> You have to be mindful of the arising and passing of these sensations with equanimity. <S> This method is given Pahāna Suttas ( Pahāna Sutta , Avijja Pahana Sutta 2 ). <S> From what I understand, mindfulness practice has to do with staying in the present. <S> No necessarily true. <S> This is the general thought this way so students do not make mistakes in practising the instructions. <S> The instuction and easier and simplified also. <S> Saṃyutta Nikāya > Saḷāyatana Saṃyutta <S> > <S> saṭṭhipeyyāla gives practising on the past, present and future 6 sense bases, 6 faculties, 6 external objects, 6 contacts from the respective faculties, 6 feelings from the particular contacts.
|
When aware of being in the present moment it is possible to notice that thinking is happening. One way to work with this is to start work with a kind of ‘checking in’ with yourself, with a minute or two of mindfulness, being present, however you find it is best done for you.
|
Why talk and think about self as noun? We always talk and think about self as a noun. When reading Buddhist philosophy, I have never seen exceptions to this. Both "common sense looking" and "metaphysical looking" is looking for the self. For me, it has been helpful to think about the word 'self' as a verb. Something like this: Self is action, even the sheer directedness of mind is an action. "I" self therefore "I" am. Apart from that, "I" am not. There is no looker apart from the looking, no self apart from the selfing. To me, the question "what/where is the 'I' doing the selfing?" is redundant. The self is the (dependently arisen) selfing. If, and only if, the causes and conditions for selfing is present, there is selfing. If they're not present in the first place, or removed, there's no selfing. Why even assume or presuppose that there could be the slightest possibility of finding this “thing” self? Why look? It’s not helpful at all, in my opinion. Does anyone know thinkers/writers explicitly talking and thinking about self as action/verb? <Q> I think it's conventionally useful to identify 'the agent' of an action, for example, " Who se turn is it to wash the dishes? <S> " implies there's a someone who'll be doing that (more or less reliably). <S> People (or people's feelings) are also nouned when they're used as the object of a sentence, for example, "I hurt him ." <S> Personal identity (including family) are also important (in law/jurisprudence) in assigning ownership of property, for example, "Who owns this land?", and inheritance etc. <S> Having nouns in sentences is partly grammar. <S> For example, Chinese sentence structure allows sentences without verbs (Wikipedia calls it "to some degree <S> pro-drop <S> or null-subject language"), Today hike up mountains, tomorrow camp outdoors. <S> Perhaps similarly, a nounal subject is optional/implied/unecessary in Latin, where the suffix of the verb is conjugated to indicate the person . <S> So for example amo , amas , amat is (or must be) translated into English by adding pronouns (required by English grammar) as "I love", "You love, and "He or She loves"; but maybe you can think of it without a noun (or with less of a noun) as "first person loving", "second person loving", and "third person loving". <S> I might have heard that linguists have theorized that there's a correlation between grammar and reality, but I haven't heard any details about that. <S> I don't know Pali well enough to include it in this answer, but look at an example of some Pali at the top of this page (which starts with the Pali atta for "self", from which we then get anattā or "non-self"). <S> I found a comment about Sanskrit -- Jayarava said , There’s nothing wrong with creating new verbs from nouns. <S> We do it all the time. <S> There’s even a technical term for such verbs: denominative. <S> We also go the other way and create verbal nouns. <S> And it’s not just English that does this. <S> Sanskrit is full of denominative verbs and verbal nouns. <A> I don't think there's an overly good answer to your question. <S> " <S> Quite simply, this is why people use it as a noun. <S> Your suggestion to use it as a verb is interesting. <S> I'd offer yet another suggestion: <S> why think of words as being "nouns" or "verbs" at all? <S> Noun and verb are just mind-made constructs to add a certain level of detail to concepts; you could just as easily opt to ignore them and consider the raw nature of the concepts themselves. <A> Your question stands on the shoulders of giants and still can't get the job done. <S> I don't mean this badly; I mean you are starting from a very high state of being and inquiry (in relationship to most human thought), and asking the question that is kind of at the heart of the matter; and you're asking "the question" as if it was a ' duh ' question - ( how could anyone not know this? <S> duh ), <S> and it's not. <S> What's interesting is that any intellectual knowledge you (not you specifically) have about this subject is fairly useless. <S> The answer to this question as an answer is not helpful, because what matters is the ability to unlock that understanding gradually (or all at once), pulling apart the masses of accumulated attachments that help construct the prison of the self (I prefer the word identity when attempting to distinguish the self of attachments). <S> What's important isn't so much - ' <S> Why talk and think about self as noun?' <S> , because this isn't an error that arises in grammar. <S> Grammar makes the trap that much stickier, but the process of relating to one's self as being fixed - of having immutable qualities, etc. <S> - arose not out of the language used to identify us skin sacks - but rather the morass that us stuffed into those skin sacks. <S> Thinking about it in basic terms - the question isn't Why talk about self as noun? , but something closer to <S> Why is it that I experience myself as - and only as - an * <S> it <S> * <S> ; an object sitting inside a sack of skin, looking out through two holes at a world outside of; and also separate from; myself? <S> There is a source to the experience of a permanent, unchanging self, and the access to getting to that source is not attempting to codify your experience in transitional language. <S> That's like putting a bow tie on a bowel movement. <S> The access to unminding is different for all of us - it involves dismantling our own barriers and attachment. <S> It's also a similar enough process that techniques such as those espoused by the Buddha and other great teachers were set up - and could be set up - to give people an access back to themselves. <A> Self as a noun implies an entity which implies that the person is unchanging or has an unchanging core or identity. <S> Self as a verb implies that the the entity has control. <S> This is also not the case, though there might be some apparent control it is not absolute. <S> In Buddhism there is no concept of Atman as this would imply. <S> A being is nothing but the cyclical rolling forward of the dependent origination which takes a more of a process oriented view of a being. <S> A being that is dependently arisen. <S> Here there is nothing permanent, the next arisen person is not someone entirely different not the same, all constituents of the being are transient. <S> This is more like stochastic process in terms of modern understanding.
|
Self", as a word, in every language, is a noun.
|
Why sitting meditation, and is vippasana and breath meditation sufficient? Why do we have to watch body sensations separately by sitting meditation , when even in our daily life we are experiencing sensations moment to moment (and realizing everything is vibrating in our body)? And can we achieve omniscience and knowledge of our past lives, karma, etc., by watching breath and watching body sensations only? Or there is more to it in vippasana meditations, other than watching breath and body sensations? (This question was originally titled "tibetan buddhism chanting om mani padme hum and watching the breath meditations and watching mental states") <Q> Breath meditation, vipassana and Samadhi meditation are two sides of the coin. <S> Breath meditation is about focused attention that quiets the mind of chatter and noise. <S> It's as if you let a muddy pool settle after stirring it up. <S> Once the mud (chatter) has settled, the water (mind) becomes clear and can now focus more easily and powerfully than before. <S> Now that's all well and good <S> but what do you do with this focused mind? <S> You point it towards the three marks of existence, and/or the four noble truths. <S> There is a section in the Visuddhi margaya that talks about reflecting after exiting the jhanas that is essential to jhanic meditation. <S> I'm at work now but can find the reference later today. <A> Why do we have to watch body sensations separately by sitting meditation, when even in our daily life we are experiencing sensations moment to moment (and realizing everything is vibrating in our body)? <S> Generally what happens is <S> : Body sensation > Perception <S> > <S> Concept formation <S> > <S> Thinking and pondering. <S> Being mindful and aware you do not let this stream lead upto Thinking and Pondering which creates mental fabrication or mental Karma. <S> Being ardently aware is what helps you cut this off before it comes to the last stage of creating Karma. <S> This can also be thought as: <S> Feeling <S> > Craving (for perceived experience - perceive as good, bad or neutral) <S> > <S> Clinging (concepts and thoughts) <S> And can we achieve omniscience and knowledge of our past lives, karma, etc., by watching breath and watching body sensations only? <S> Or there is more to it in vippasana meditations, other than watching breath and body sensations? <S> Genrally Vippasana is practiced to gain revolution towards the 5 aggregates. <S> If you develop deep absorptions then yes you can gain insight to past lives and karma. <S> Some Vippassana teachers teach in such away that both concentration and wisdom develops. <S> Interpretations of the Jhanas by Leigh Brasington covers some teachers who teach in such a way, which can lead to absorptions which give psychic abilities (omniscience and knowledge ), as well as, insight. <A> In samadhi meditation, you calm your mind and bring it to a state where you can give commands to the subconscious mind. <S> Then using vipassana you tell your mind (at this stage the mind is clear) <S> the mortality of your life. <S> By doing this your mind will understand the real truth (anitya, dukka and anatama). <S> If you follow the arayan method (arya ashtangika margaya) you can go to enlightenment easily. <S> It consists three stages: Controlling your movements and words (seela) Training your mind <S> (samadhi) <S> Understanding the truth/reality (pragcha) <S> Each of these stages also consist certain steps, 8 in total.
|
While breath meditation is sufficient as a vehicle to carry you into higher states of concentration (the jhanas) if it is not coupled with insight meditation or some sort of reflection then all you will be doing is building up your concentration faculties without reflection or thought.
|
Death vs Birth - Birth & Death of what? Death - What dies with death? Birth - What is born with birth? Can you provide any Sutta / Sutra references. <Q> I think "death" is often described/translation as "dissolution of the aggregates". <S> So I suppose it's the skandhas which "die" or come to an end, are impermanent. <S> This reference includes, <S> And, bhikkhus, what is death? <A> What dies or is born? <S> What looks like death or birth is just the mind and body changing just like the mind and body are changing right now. <S> There is no-self if one is having a near death experience or an out of body experience. <A> Conditioned (samsaric) phenomena are subject to birth and death. <S> It is their very nature to arise and pass away. <S> Samsaric phenomena are compounded and conditioned. <S> They have causes and effects and function as causes for other effects and vice versa. <S> Conditioned phenomena are in a constant flux. <S> There is no stability or permanence. <S> There is no solidity to be found anywhere. <S> Break up and decay is bound to happen. <S> Actually, there is only the present moment. <S> It arises and passes away. <S> One can verify that for oneself, by practicing insight meditation and thereby experience how mental and physical phenomena arise and pass away incessantly. <S> There is birth and death every moment. <S> A sound, a smell, a feeling, a sight, a taste, a mental formation ( <S> e.g. the notion/concept of a body or a Self) arises and passes away constantly. <S> Birth <S> - What is born with birth? <S> What arises must eventually pass away, due to the fact that it arose in the first place. <S> Something that comes into existence must also fall away. <S> "Now, bhikkhus, do ageing and death have birth as condition or not, or how do you take it in this case? <S> Ageing and death have birth as condition, venerable sir. <S> " -- MN 38: Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta, Bodhi Trans . <S> Death - What dies with death? <S> These are the the Buddhas words: "The passing of beings out of the various orders of beings, their passing away, dissolution, disappearance, dying, completion of time, dissolution of the aggregates, laying down of the body - this is called death". <S> -- MN 9: Sammaditthi Sutta, Bodhi Trans . <A> Death - What dies with death? <S> Every moment all the 5 aggregates arise and passes away. <S> This can be viewed as momentarily death. <S> Physical deaths (marana) is when the the 5 argerates pass away in one body and arise in another body leaving the residue of corporeal body (rupa) behind. <S> Clearing the Path by Ven. <S> Ñānavīra further discusses this citations to Suttas. <S> Some of the main citation are Mahā,nidāna Sutta and Nidāna Saṃyutta from the Tripitaka. <S> Also see: The Buddhist View of Death - An Interview with Bhante Gunaratana by Samaneri Sudhamma and Margot <S> Born Birth - <S> What is born with birth? <S> Certainly, the start of life, at conception, is seen as involving the flux-of-consciousness, from a past life, entering the womb and, along with the requisite physical conditions, leading to the development of a new being in the womb: ' <S> Were consciousness, Ananda, not to fall into the mother's womb, would mind-and-body (nama-rupa) be constituted there?' ' <S> It would not, Lord'. ' <S> Were consciousness, having fallen into the mother's womb, to turn aside from it, would mind-and-body come to birth in this present state?'. ' <S> It would not, Lord.' <S> (D. II. <S> 62-3) Source: <S> The mind-body relationship in Pali Buddhism: A philosophical investigation , Peter Harvey <S> The quoted Sutta is: Mahā,nidāna Sutta <S> Can you provide any Sutta / Sutra references. <S> See above links. <S> Also bibliography of Clearing the Path . <S> Also the following essay might be of interest: <S> Death: <S> An early Buddhist perspective by Piya Tan
|
The falling away from existence, the passing away from existence, the dissolution, the disappearance, the end of life, the passing away due to completion of the life-span, the breaking up of the Aggregates, the discarding of the body, the destruction of the life-faculty of various beings in various categories, — this, bhikkhus, is called death. No-self dies , is born or changes.
|
What is Buddhism "for" (in favor of)? Aside from ending suffering, encouraging compassionate action and leading one to nirvanna, is there anything that Buddhism promotes, or says is good? The reason that I ask is because in another recent question I asked about musical composers, and as I look around at related questions, I find that dance, singing and listening to music seem to go against the 7th Precept. I am not aware of any sutras promoting art or creativity, other than skillful actions and insightful discourse. It seems pretty flat to me, but I cannot find fault with it. As a person who has always danced and listened to music, and sometimes draws or paints, I am wondering just what we should be doing with our " one wild and precious life "? (Assuming that this is the last one.) Is life good in itself , once cleared of defilements? Can it not be enjoyed - meaning that something worthwhile is done that uplifts self and others? <Q> In one of the teachings I received, there is this concept of Five Joys: <S> The joy of having your basic needs satisfied (food, shelter, safety). <S> The (higher) joy of material comfort and sensual enjoyment. <S> The (even higher) joy of professional/creative realization. <S> The (highest) joy of Enlightenment. <S> So assuming you're in your 50s and done with the first three, I suppose you can derive joy from helping the less lucky ones? <A> is there anything that Buddhism promotes, or says is good? <S> Buddhism promotes the well being of oneself and others or general good of society inclusive of onself. <S> “Guarding oneself, one protects others.” <S> “Guarding others, one protects oneself.” <S> - Sedaka Sutta dance, singing and listening to music seem to go against the 7th Precept. <S> This is not interested for general householder. <S> Generally you can enjoy the what this though it is called non pure. <S> Also the joy of renunciation or joy born from parting from seeking sensual objects is considered pure. <S> Extensive discussion see: Vedanā (Feeling): <S> A study of the 2nd aggregate - Theme: <S> A reflection on the Datthabba Sutta by Piya Tan ... <S> Is life good in itself, once cleared of defilements? <S> Can it not be enjoyed ... <S> You have the joy and pleasure of renunciation. <S> This is pure and considered more pleasurable. <S> You have eliminated all avenues on which you can become unhappy, stressed or sad, hence you are joyful and happy person who can truly enjoy life. <A> Your question is very broad, with multiple aspects and many possible answers. <S> I will just address one aspect. <S> In the Pali Canon we do find a tradition of spontaneous ecstatic poetry, uttered at significant moments in order to express a realization or insight, especially in the Theragatha and the Therigatha but also in the suttas. <S> This traditon developed into the Tibetan mahasiddhi tradition where spontaneous utterances puntuated ganachakras, or "tantric feasts," which in turn has analogies with the uposatha, properly the eve of the soma festival that the Buddha adapted to the sangha. <S> The verbal expression of poetry is, of course, an aesthetic act, which seems to be what your question is about. <S> Zen koans might also be said to have an aesthetic aspect, and of course one has the highly refined Buddhist aesthetics of China and Japan, also related to Zen.
|
The (very high) joy of helping society: teaching, healing.
|
How are expectations seen in Buddhism? If one has expectations of others, how is this perceived in Buddhism? For example, if one expects others to show respect, not hurt others, help others, make effort to understand others, etc, how is this perceived? If these expectations are not met or remain unfulfilled, does one simply class these are ignorance, lack of maturity, etc? <Q> This may sound surprising to you... but as I understand, in Buddhism the expectations like you described would be seen as your attachments and your ignorance. <S> Indeed, if you were infinitely wise, you would see this person as they are, and would not be mistaken by the appearance. <S> The fact that your original opinion turned out to be wrong means you are not infinitely wise! :) <S> Two, once the expectations have been unfulfilled and you become disenchanted, to continue to be upset and to regret that things are not the way you thought they were, is a case of attachment. <S> Meaning, you had one experience of the world, and now situation has changed - hence another experience, but you continue to hold to the past picture. <S> So in this way, these expectations are your ignorance and your attachment. <A> If one needs reality to be something else, that partiality will lead one to suffering however it is possible for one to act appropriately without needing reality to change. <S> The more one practices what cultivates wisdom, the more one will make the appropriate decisions without partiality to the decisions one makes. <A> Simply put it expectations are a source of stress and misery as in many instances your expectations are never met.
|
Expectations arise from ignorance real state of the world or not seeing this as they are (lack of yathā bhūta ñāna dassana ).
|
How does one do mindfulness of breathing with relaxation? In this lecture , by B. Alan Wallace, of mindfulness of breathing with relaxation, it has been instructed that I have to release all thoughts, relax every part of the body and let go of all involuntary thoughts during exhalation. Now what exactly is meant by releasing all thoughts with exhalation? What should I do during exhalation? Does it mean that mind will go blank during exhalation? If yes, then how is it possible? <Q> Briefly, "let go" here means you turn your attention to something else (like the room in front of you) - <S> and then whatever thoughts you had the moment before dissolve by themselves. <S> Normally our attention is dragged around by thoughts and experiences. <S> Specifically in this case you're learning to disengage from whatever particular thoughts you have at the moment - to disidentify and to stop feeding. <S> It doesn't mean your mind goes blank, since you still have experiences of your body and surroundings, exhaling etc. <S> , <S> - and you have an overall idea of what it is that you are doing (meditating, disengaging). <S> So all mental functions keep on going <S> , it's just that you are learning to gently let go of mental chatter, daydreaming, worrisome replays etc. <S> (no reference for this: I'm summarizing broadly based on what I was taught by the live Zen Master, what I read in books, and on my own meditation experience) <A> Relaxing body and mind has a deep meaning though many never get to know what actually this means. <S> What this means if Kāya (body) and Citta (mind) Lahutā . <S> The achievement of this you can practice meditation on the wind element (expansion contraction feeling tied to inhalation and exhalation process) or passing you consciousness or attention in a zigzag manner though any heavy, gross, solidified or painful areas or just simply being consciously aware of the sensation in itself. <S> Also developing continuous and recurring attention on a particular object might be of help as this creates bodily pleasantness when closing on the the Jhanas. <S> Also smiling mildly helps as it creates pleasant feeling in the body and mind. <S> Also though during meditation you have to cut out thought (Vachi Sankhāra) and concept <S> proliferation (papañca). <S> This is not the same as the mind going blank but more towards developing: <S> Samadhi - collection of the mind with the ability to direct it to a chosen object which is felt, or mastery over the mind. <S> Jhana - close scrutiny and examination of an experienced object what is felt. <A> Watching breathing is like learning alphabets of watching. <S> Thats how we practice vipassna. <S> First you just get read of this idea of doing something. <S> This destroies all meditation,attempt to be calm or release thoughts. <S> Keep it simple the way of Zen. <S> let them come and gradually go. <S> Just don't cling to them. <S> After some time you will be blank without any effort watching your breath. <S> Meditation is simple we insist making it complex.
|
Being able to disengage from them, and either hold on firmly to one thing, or to switch around at will, or to kinda suspend mid-air as thoughts and experiences flow by - is a useful skill to have. Just watch your breath don't try to resist the thoughts
|
Metta and Loving-Kindness as a Team Can Metta be practiced in a partnership or as a team? I can think of two people practicing Metta together, or a group which meets for meditation, or across borders, across continents people meditate together at a certain time. Are there any indications of a Sutta? Are there practices of a tradition? <Q> Meditation influences the surrounding by vibration created. <S> (You can really feel the vibration when you experience Piti ) <S> So when you pratice as a group these vibrations influence others, especially when you are having a bad patch in meditation then the influence of others will help in to develop calmness and concentration and perhaps dispel agitation and other hindrances that might have surfaced during your worldly interactions. <S> This is true for all types of meditation but most effective when doing Metta as vibrations tend to be stronger. <A> Yes there is a mentioning, the famous sutta, its starts out with hints of being withdrawn from the world like "not overly attached to families" and is actually not meant as a social event. <S> But since "sex" sells it is broadly sold like that, introduced like that. <S> If one just likes to maintain pleasant feeling, one can go on an thinks this way, but if one has certain metta (maybe for the living beings that would lose there lives to be able to meet in a beloved group) and like to put his practice also in line with metta, this first lines of the Suttas become to have reasons. <S> There is a nice summary of all qualities required to practice metta and its really not an ordinary mans task and so is it with the benefits one would gain, of which you would just gain sort time pleasure if its made for simply some personal pleasure. <S> Karaṇīya Metta-Sutta - The Message of Peace and Universal Friendliness , by Ven. <S> Ñāṇadassana Maha Thera. <S> And to your question if there are such metta-events and practices, actually 95% are of such as you have thought of. <S> One might also consider the question and answer here in: Metta and Loving-Kindness as a Team <S> See also: Metta Means Goodwill (Thanissaro Bhikkhu). <S> At least metta is not meant to get involved, but more a beneficial kind of thought for others for one who is actually on leave or on a journey, leaving for a good with the thought " Sabbe sattā sukhī attānaṃ pariharantu. " <S> "May all living beings look after themselves with ease." ( The Sublime Attitudes | audio ) <S> So where do you like to go? <S> (Note: <S> this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. <S> How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.) <A> You are allowed to practice as a team. <S> In fact in Lord Buddha's time and even now people and Monks do it. <S> But the important thing is to use this good friendship as a boat and use the excitement of teamwork to your benefit. <S> Remember not to be too attached to the team. <S> You will be more willing to meditate when yo got friends around. <S> Even Lord Buddha said Good friends (Kalyana mitta) are the strength of Buddhism <S> But if you have any issues with your practice seek the help of a good master. <S> I would advice you to seek a kind monk because ordinary people can be a bit ego driven.
|
But never discuss your meditation with your friends, Because it will awake each others ego and that would do more harm than good.
|
How and when did the name "Buddhism" appear? What is called "Buddhism" is a whole range of different schools, sects, practices etc. that has in common that they are based on the teachings of Siddharta Gautama/the Buddha. But is the name "Buddhism" used as a name for these teachings anywhere else than in the "West"? How and when did the name "Buddhism" appear? <Q> How and when did the name "Buddhism" appear? <S> I'm not an expert, but here's what I found this evening: <S> the article SCHOPENHAUER AND BUDDHISM by Peter Abelson says, <S> When the tenets of Buddhism became known in Europe during the third and fourth decade of the nineteenth century ... and says that Schopenhauer referenced work by Isaak Jacob Schmidt. <S> Wikipedia's article for Isaac Jacob Schmidt says that one of his publications was titled, Über die Verwandtschaft der gnostisch-theosophischen Lehren mit den Religions-Systemen des Orients, vorzüglich des Buddhaismus , Leipzig 1828 <S> And this book Prisoners of Shangri-La: Tibetan Buddhism and the West quotes Isaac Schmidt as saying, <S> So according to Isaac Jacob Schmidt, The peoples of that faith call themselves followers of the teachings of the Buddha. <S> According to Wikipedia he was living in Russia and studying Mongolian and Tibetan history. <S> His scientific work became noted after the publication of a work on the history of Mongols and Tibetans in 1824. <S> ... <S> Until his death in 1847, Schmidt published a multitude of works on Mongolian and Tibetan studies <A> I don't think I understand your question. <S> It's simply an '-ism' made from what should be referred to as "Buddhadhamma". <S> All schools agree that Buddha showed a way to nibbana which anybody can follow by critically understanding every step themselves. <S> All schools also agree that their minute differences are mainly in the monastic rules and conduct which themselves are nothing but a raft used to reach a state, Buddha refers to Dhamma itself. <A> Good question! <S> The Buddha introduced his "religion" as (this) Dhamma- <S> (this) Vinaya, Dhamma-Vinaya (Teaching & Discipline) <S> and there is and was also the use of Buddha Sasana (the teaching of the Buddha). <S> The "ism"-isation is actually already against his teachings, especially such nuances as "my", "our" Buddhism, and indicates even much lack of respect, since the teaching of the Buddha, the Dhamma, is just for an Arahat his own and even so, a person who actually owns it, would not refer to it other than Buddha-Sasana. <S> As far as Atma knows, this name firstly came up about 1850 in UK (you find certain dates or orign and hints in older English dictionaries) and his actually a label of and everything that likes to use the Buddhas reputation for mainly wordily purposes, attachment, (wrong) views and identifications, so really not a good label if one seeks for the good teachings. <A> Buddhism is an English word that means the practice,system or doctrine of the Buddha, lit. " <S> awakened, enlightened. <S> " Obviously the Buddha didn't speak English, but he did use a Pali phrase that means "followers of the Shakyan," referring to the Buddha's clan and territory (lit. <S> " <S> the able ones"), which means very nearly what is connoted by the English term. <S> More usually, however, he simply refers to the Dharma-Vinaya, meaning "the doctrine and the practice," without specificially alluding to himself. <S> Moreover, "Buddha" is really a collective term. <S> The Buddha did not claim to present an original teaching specific to himself, but rather to an ahistorical or prehistorical lineage of perfected beings (buddhas) going back hundreds of thousands of years at least, which he equates with (but does not limit to apparently) the Vedic rishis. <S> He states that this teaching is archaic, even primordial, and that he has only rediscovered it in the degenerate age, thus establishing a buddha dispensation (sasana) that will last 5,000 years (i.e., till 4600 CE approx.). <S> Only the latter is actually Buddhism. <S> There is no evidence whatsoever that the Buddha taught or thought in an exclusive or sectarian way.
|
The teaching of the ekayana, single or universal vehicle, is that all of these schools and sects are merely facets of one universal teaching that reconciles them all.
|
Panic arising during contemplation about 4 elements This is not a general question about how to deal with overwhelming fear, but a question about an specific experience. I contemplated about the 4 elements and how my body is made up of it (for the first time ever you could say). I was not having a formal sitting with closed eyes, but I was rather looking at my body like 'here I can see the solid bones of my hand (through the skin)', 'when I press with my fingers at this spot of my arm it moves, so there must be fluid under the skin' ... And while doing this I had a feeling as if I was some scientist who examines the body of an unknown species and my body looked so strange to me, that great fear (of the body I think) suddenly arose. I was so shocked and overwhelmed, that I had to stop there immediately. My question is: What happened there? <Q> Most of the time people live most of their lives without changing contexts too much. <S> For the mind, living in the same context gives a sense of security. <S> It also makes us dumb and highly vulnerable. <S> Once we believe in a context and objectify it, it becomes reality for us. <S> At the end of the day, this is why we die. <S> When you start playing with your context by adopting a different perspective (mode) of seeing things, you are getting into an unknown territory - unknown for your mind anyway. <S> Naturally, there is a sense of panic. <S> What Buddhism teaches us is freedom from any context. <S> Doing what you did is a first step. <S> It's not necessarily valuable in and off itself - but it gives you a glimpse at how your mind reacts to its attachments being challenged. <A> The terror is likely caused by the clinging to wrong view of the self. <S> Who was the unknown species? <S> Why did it look so strange? <S> Was it because you, like everybody, already greatly cling to an idea of what you are and this new mindful approach to experiencing what you are, can show you something that is real but alien to your normal way of experiencing yourself? <S> So if I understand what you are saying, the terror happens because you have the wrong idea or wrong view <S> that you are dying or being wiped from existence when really it is just a different way of perceiving reality. <S> These kinds of experiences are common with insight practice. <S> Sounds like your practice is going in the right direction towards dropping the wrong view of self. <S> Remember that nothing is permanent like these terrorizing experiences. <A> Very good, Tealine, don't be scared and try to find that point again and investigate more. <S> In regard of terror, samvega is less introduced, but the main source nad drive for the effort to walk the path to awakening. <S> This essay might be useful: <S> Affirming the Truths of the Heart-The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada as well as Body ContemplationA Study Guide <S> Although early Buddhism is widely believed to take a negative attitude toward the body, the texts of the Pali canon do not support this belief. <S> They approach the body both in its positive role, as an object of meditation to develop mindfulness, concentration, and the mental powers based on concentration; and in its negative role as an object for unskillful states of mind. <S> Even in its negative role, the body is not the culprit: the problem is the mind's attachment to the body. <S> Once the body can be used in its positive role, to develop mindfulness and concentration, those mental qualities can be used to free the mind of its attachments to the body. <S> Then, as many a modern meditation master has noted, the mind and body can live in peace. <A> I cannot give you an exact answer to what happened, but it seems like you've had a moment of "seeing yourself as you really are" (in the words of the 14th Dalai Lama) . <S> The acute experience of seeing oneself as detached and naked is bound very closely to the experience of existential anxiety, the "just-is-ness" of being in the world, that phenomenology and existentialism speaks about. <S> They call it "being there". <S> I've had the same experience and after some reflection and repetition it can be very helpful indeed. <S> If you want to go more systematically forward with these kinds of trainings, I recommend trying the exercises described in the book <S> " The Direct Path: A User Guide " by Greg Goode , a non dual inquiry into direct experience, both of your own body, thoughts, feelings and the external world. <S> Goode is definitely and directly inspired by the Buddha.
|
I've also found that seeing the "compositeness" of oneself and one's body gives you a more realistic and irreconcilable view of your existential situation.
|
Iconography in Buddhism - from the Greeks? And why isn't the Buddha bald? When you read or hear about Gotama leaving his home and family, the story is usually something like "he shaved his face and head and went out to be a wandering monk". But very few depictions of the Buddha (perhaps apart from the laughing, fat buddha) is of a bald man. Why is that? I've also heard, but don't remember the source, that in early times there was no iconography in Buddhism. As far as I remember hearing, depictions of the Buddha did not appear for many hundreds of years. Actually I've heard that the iconography of Buddhism actually comes from the Greek,,that the first to make icons of the Buddha were Greeks living in India. There's obviously a lot of variations over time and between traditions. But can anyone give me some information, and sources about Greek influences on Buddhist iconography? Also I wonder why Buddha almost always is depicted with hair? <Q> About the Statue called Laughing Buddha... <S> The Statue called Laughing Buddha is not Lord Buddha or any Buddha. <S> It's correct pronunciation <S> should be like this or something <S> close - Laughing Budhai <S> About the Greek connection... <S> The statues were not made by the Asian artists because of respect and the fear of their creation being not god enough, This should go withot saying Gauthama Buddha was considered the most charming person in India and people even became monks just to see Buddha's beauty. <S> As the story goes the appearance was unique and it was not alike with any other person (But as the suttas say only The great arahant kashyapa looked a bit like Lord Buddha). <S> With the scientific knowledge we have today we can say the DNA structure of a Lord Buddha is either unique or a complete anomaly. <S> A king called Kanishka who ruled a certain part of India took a Greek wife and with her came a lot of people as it was a tradition to send skilled people as gifts with princesses who marry to countries abroad. <S> At the time Buddhists had many other depiction of Lord Buddha to worship Like the "Anandha Bodhi" - Video and Lotus carvings on rock pallets. <S> The princess questioned the king Kanishka why there is no statue of Lord Buddha in his kingdom and the king explained why. <S> So she ordered her people to create a statue and with time finally Asian artists came up with their designs. <S> Why Buddha is not bald and what was the appearance of Gauthama sage? <S> When Prince Gauthama started his journey he used his sword to cut his hair. <S> But later on even though Lord Buddha advised monks to shave the hair there is no mentioning about Lord Buddha shaving hair. <S> This should go with the special look all the Lord Buddhas shared "The hair with very small curves. <S> " <S> A lord Buddha never appears without hair and the unique hair is sign for others to know who it is. <A> Re. <S> the hair or head (but not the Greek influence) <S> I found some references: Ushnisha (Wikipedia) The ushnisha was not described initially in the Physical characteristics of the Buddha spelled out by the Buddhist canon. <S> Rather, there are several mentions about a topknot: <S> "His topknot is like a crown." <S> (Secondary characteristics, No 53) <S> "He has a topknot as if crowned with a flower garland." <S> (Secondary characteristics, No 80) <S> The hair and the Usnisa on the head of the Buddha and the jinars <S> So by the time when the sculptors of Mathura began to carve images of Gautama Buddha there were two rival traditions relating to hair on the Buddha's head: <S> an older one now preserved in the Pali Nikayas represented Gautama as mundaka or shaven-headed monk; and another tradition preserved in <S> the Mahavastu, the Lalitavistava and the Nidanakatha represented him as having cut his hair with his sword leaving part of it intact on the head. <S> Usnisa-siraskata (a mahapurusa-laksana) in the early Buddha images of India <S> The correct interpretation of this peculiarity of a Buddha, especially in connection with its representation in Buddhist iconoplastic art of different periods, has engaged the attention of many a scholar. <S> For more about prefigurative and early iconography, see answers and comments to these topics: <S> Examples of early Buddhist art <S> Why did physical representations of the Buddha only start to appear a few centuries after his death? <A> As it happens, there is an article on this very question, by Eisel Mazard, entitled " <S> The Buddha Was Bald," located at http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2010/12/30/the-buddha-was-bald/ . <S> Obviously I cannot quote it here in full, but I quote part of the conclusion: <S> "Thus far, we have demonstrated that (1) the core canon explicitly describes the Buddha as a bald-shaven man <S> ; moreover, (2) implicitly, these texts are incompatible with the historically-subsequent assumptions about the Buddha’s physical appearance now commonly found in statuary. <S> The ancient texts can neither be reconciled with the image of the Buddha having a full head of hair, nor with his having magical curls of hair, nor with his having a freakishly deformed skull. <S> There is no doubt as to the antecedence of one source of information over the other."
|
He is some local divine figure in some culture in the east and this statue is misunderstood as a Buddha because it has a name that sounds a lot like Buddha.
|
Spirits in Buddhist Folklore Are there any references to spirit of ancestors in Buddhist folklore? As seen in some movies, communication with spirits is shown. Is this practical ? What is the Buddhist view on spirits? <Q> These correspond to the nature spirits found in all traditions. <S> I cant think of any examples of spirits of ancestors as such, but King Bimbisara appears to the Buddha as a king in the realm of the Four Great Kings after the former's decease. <A> There is actually an English version of the Peta-Vatthu , but since it does not gives any references of its origin and certain other shares are not very in the frame of the original giver, you should be aware that it could be actually not really given, put simply pirated like it is very usual today. <S> So beware of do not becoming a hungry ghost in this realm, a therm that is very proper for may kinds of existences here in this world, on googlyana: <S> Offerings for hungry ghosts in Googleyana <S> (Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of trade and keep people trapped and bound. <S> How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.) <A> Not exactly, there are stories where relatives want to find out where a recently deceased loved one was reborn. <S> However no communication happens between them, the Buddha just states, they were reborn here, because of X. Communication with deities is sometimes mentioned, but spirits or ghosts, not so much in my knowledge.
|
"Spirits" are lower ranking devas that occupy the realm of the Four Great Kings, and include earthbound devas too, that live invisibly in human cities and influence human beings telepathically.
|
What is the best way to develop a mind observation habit? Different spiritual traditions, including, but not limited to Buddhism, emphasize that it is important to always keep in mind that one's thoughts and emotions do not constitute the essence of a person. That is: When some thought crosses my mind, makes me like or dislike something (emotion), then these thoughts and emotions are not my true self in that they come and go like they want (similar to breathing, blood circulation and other bodily processes, which most people can't consciously control). The true self is the entity that observes them. Theory and practice shows that realization 3 often leads to an increase in happiness (e. g. I feel pain, I acknowledge the thought I'd rather prefer to experience pleasure and the emotion of sadness as inevitable by-products of the activity of my brain, which usually eliminates suffering despite presence of pain) and - as a result - higher productivity (less time and energy is wasted on useless thoughts emotions). Right now, I occasionally do the whole process (observe thoughts, observe emotions they've generated, remember that they aren't my true self), probably when the pain gets too hard. I want to develop a habit of doing this routine so that I'm automatically doing those 3 steps all the time (as frequently as possible). As a result I expect my stress resistance (ability to do productive work in suboptimal conditions) to dramatically increase. What routine can I use to develop that habit (apart from the process described below), ideally scientifically proven? Notes: I need some practical, actionable recipe for developing the desired habit, which is better than the option below. I do not need some theoretical, philosophical stuff. If your routine is well-suited for people with tendency towards premature action and ADHD , it's even better. Standard habit formation process Install on your mobile phone an application, which vibrates every 20 minutes. Every day in the morning, turn on the application. Whenever you feel the vibration, do the three steps (observe thoughts, observe emotions they've generated, remember that they aren't my true self). Before you go to sleep, turn off the application. Repeat steps 2-4 for at least 40 days. Update 1 (05.01.2016 12:13 MSK): Below you can find a selection of techniques, which seem to help me observe the mind. I don't guarantee that they will work for anyone else. And I don't guarantee that it really helps me - it just seems to help. Morning observation ritual Write out at least 10 thoughts that are running in your head. For each of them do the 3 steps (observe the thought, observe the emotions it generates and remember that you aren't either of them). Imagine the thoughts on a diagram It helps to imagine the different thoughts as diagrams with time on the horizontal axis and the intensity of a particular thought on the vertical one. Music Some music seems to be more conducive to mind observation than others. I noticed it when listening to the Focus at will music, section Focus Spa . I'm not affiliated with Focus at will, I'm not getting any remuneration for this and you probably can get the same music in other ways. <Q> Well this is a suggestions question because your mileage may vary based on what you do and what's your environment. <S> I'd suggest to use the most natural way available. <S> For this maybe you can use the entrances at your home or workplace to be a reminder. <S> Or an action like drinking coffee or water or using the toilet. <S> Or you can mark a person you see around you everyday. <S> Side by side, cultivate a more natural inside reminder. <S> Can't beat this one. <S> This could be autosuggestion like telling yourself to be mindful and relax. <S> Or it could be some action like scratching your head or ear. <S> Or it could be any time you are walking. <S> And you could use rubbing your knees when you're sitting. <S> But you see all this requires predisposed awareness. <S> Try to be aware of your body movements. <S> This will certainly help in future. <S> This would help in cultivating general environmental awareness in other places also. <S> In the sense, this is more habit-forming. <S> These are some tips. <S> But beware of the fact that any external thing you use, should not become a crutch such that when you are away from it, you lose all reminders altogether or you cannot be mindful at all. <A> External help like apps can be a hindrance when you get to rely on them. <S> Even guided meditation instructions can become as you get used to them. <S> The issue with habits is that most of the action is not strictly mindful. <S> Having said this much of the standard advice is to systematically bring your attention to a chosen object and then to continuously keep re targeting this object, while continuously reviewing if your attention is with the object. <S> This is like 1st looking at the object and then looking under a magnifying glass, or taking aim and shooting with a machine-gun to the object. <S> When you practice this your mind will stay with the object. <S> After sometime this will become pleasant also. <S> Also this will increase your concentration. <S> Ideally this redirection should be aimed at the 4 foundations of mindfulness or Metta, Muditha, Karuna and Upekka. <A> As I read your post, and the answer given by @BlackFlam3, some ideas came to me about the question. <S> I think it is easy to turn these spiritual practices into the focus of your worship, and thereby miss the moment. <S> You start turning your focus to the thoughts about your thoughts. <S> Making it into a routine is what the mind wants, as to take control away from awareness. <S> I would re-emphasize @BlackFlam3's suggestion in bringing the focus back to something inside. <S> As I read the recommendation about "scratching your head", it occurred to me that I've developed a habit of stroking my beard. <S> Ironically, I'll get lost in thought and have my arm twisted in a strange way, which causes my shoulders to become tense as I do this. <S> In this, I can give awareness to my habit and perhaps laugh at it - use the pain as a reminder. <S> Then, perhaps, I can use my beard as the reminder directly. <S> My favorite author, Eckhart Tolle, talks about this. <S> I paraphrase, but something like, "in the act of observing your non-presence, you become present." <A> Observation is always there. <S> There is no need to do all this tracking. <S> Just being able to be clear when one thought is coming and the next coming is more than enough. <S> Then you will be able to find the peace that exists in between every thought. <S> Do concentrated practice sessions and strengthen this awareness muscle. <S> And then be lightly aware of your skandhas through the day, powered by your trained mindfulness. <S> Be aware of yourself trying to be aware as well. <S> Awareness of everything comes before your attachment so just let go of the attachment when you notice. <S> I reccommend this guide on observing your thoughts and eventually flowing it into your daily life. <A> You are on your way. <S> There is an old saying: "What you focus your attention on grows." <S> So, you will develop a mind observation habit. <S> It is inevitable, you cannot fail. <S> It just takes time and effort. <S> The way I see it, the mind is like a big party or caucus, or place where opinions are debated: some become more popular, others less. <S> The most 'popular' are those that hold your attention the majority of the time, and which control most of your awareness. <S> The large get larger and the small get smaller, because you only have so much focus at any one time. <S> Mindfulness is a way of crowding out the unwanted, distracting aspects of awareness, which brings the act of being aware to center stage. <S> When this is the case, the important truths about life can be experienced, confirmed, deepened, and made more primary / automatic. <S> If you build it, it will happen. <S> You are doing it.
|
The main idea here is to have a reminder in place. In formal meditation, cultivate awareness of your sitting and the environment by using the sounds or smell or feel of the place.
|
Right view of the external modern world Did Gautama Buddha make any statements about the justices or injustices of the world? I would like to elucidate the right view to a person who has undergone a certain injustice. The person in question has not got a particular position she rightfully deserved due to a conspiracy of people blocking said person from achieving it. I would also like a parallel to the contemporary world so that it is more practical when reaching this society's person. <Q> The first thing that the story (i.e. "not got a particular position she rightfully deserved due to a conspiracy") reminded me of was verse 3 of the Dhammapada <S> (i.e. "he robbed me" etc.). <S> " <S> He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me. <S> " <S> Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred. <S> " <S> He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me. <S> " Those who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred. <S> Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. <S> By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. <S> This is a law eternal. <S> The associated story is here . <S> I hesitate to tell this story because it seems like blaming the victim, not sympathetic. <S> I don't want to say, "you were robbed ... <S> and I expect you to like that!" <S> But if the friend to whom the injustice was done now continues to hate their situation (or, it's called, aversion ), if you're continuing to hold <S> hate, then that's continuing to 'suffer', prolonging the suffering ... and <S> that's maybe part of the types of suffering (see here and see also " not getting what is wanted is stressful ") <S> that the Buddha certainly made statements about: not injustice so much as our reaction to it. <S> Of course he also made statements about justice; for example, Sila (virtue, moral conduct) is the cornerstone upon which the entire Noble Eightfold Path is built. <S> There's also, <S> The Vinaya Pitaka , the first division of the Tipitaka, is the textual framework upon which the monastic community (Sangha) is built. <S> It includes not only the rules governing the life of every Theravada bhikkhu (monk) and bhikkhuni (nun), but also a host of procedures and conventions of etiquette that support harmonious relations, both among the monastics themselves, and between the monastics and their lay supporters, upon whom they depend for all their material needs. <S> And actually the Dhammapada does say more on the subject of justice. <S> The story behind Verse 331 , Verse 331: It is good to have friends when the need arises; it is good to be content with anything that is available; it is good to have merit when life is about to end; it is good to be rid of all dukkha. <S> ... <S> starts with people being "ill-treated by some wicked kings". <A> The way Buddha explained these things, was not as much about justice/injustice as with references to how the world/society works. <S> For example he would say, if someone were to rob people, he will likely get caught by the king and get his feet and hands cut off. <S> Dharma is not as much about justice as it is about understanding how things work. <S> Same way, when your friend had people conspire against her - this would mean she probably did a bad job making friends with people. <S> When someone is good at making friends, people don't conspire against them. <S> There could be exceptions but this seems a general rule of thumb, right? <S> As per the Occam's Razor principle, the explanation with fewer assumptions is more often the right one. <S> So in my experience, more often than not, our social problems are caused by our own behavior. <S> This would be the most Buddhist advice, to start with yourself. <S> Even if you are not THE source of the problem, in reality you are the only thing you can control (to a degree) - so whatever you want to achieve you have to achieve it by changing your own behavior. <S> Unless of course you are in a position of authority to tell people what to do, but that's not the case here. <S> The key to the right view is to shift the focus from personal preconceptions ("this is not fair" etc.) <S> to the context of kusala/akusala action-and-result: this action leads to this result - <S> that action leads to that result, these words will have this effect - those words will have that effect, these thoughts of mine will result in this - those thoughts of mine will result in that. <S> Not sure if I can find any quotes or anecdotes for this. <S> Hopefully someone else can think of some canonical story. <A> The world is perfectly just in the sense that the law of karma is <S> ubiquitous, i.e., every cause results in an effect, and every effect results from a cause. <S> Also, because everything is illusory (except one thing, which is therefore the only thing that really matters), it is as absurd to agonize over it as it would be to agonize over something that happens in a video game. <S> In this regard Buddhism inculcates an attitude a bit like stoicism. <A> Your friend is caught in the cronyism of unjust, unethical & non-impartial people. <S> This is very common. <S> Your friend should look for a new job in an ethical workplace. <S> The Buddha taught the world has many defiled unethical people. <S> It is not a matter of your friend not being good at making friends because true friends don't collectively conspire against individuals. <S> Generally, befriending such people requires the diminution of one's ethical values. <S> We should try to associate with good people & good friends (even though they can be difficult to find).
|
Therefore, right view is to regard every experience as a personal opportunity for change and growth, rather than blaming others, which merely magnifies the suffering. In the Dhammapada, is the chapter called 'The Just', which states: He who does not judge others arbitrarily, but passes judgment impartially according to the truth, that sagacious man is a guardian of law and is called just. In the Sigalovada Sutta, it is taught in life there are true friends & false friends.
|
Is the path an individual journey? When seeking or on the path, is the journey intended to be for the one on the path or can it be travelled by more than an individual i.e. is the path different for each being? <Q> The Path is the same for all beings, although since all beings have different kamma due to past actions, all beings are on different stages of the Path. <S> So one being might need to practice certain path factors, e.g. Sila more than another being and vice versa. <S> Regarding <S> The Ten Perfections (Paramis) <S> they are often compared to jars and when one practices a parami one fills the jar with a drop. <S> So again, how full a jar is, is different from being to being. <S> One being might have worked extensively on the Dana-parami , while lacking in the Aditthana-parami . <S> Is the path an individual journey? <S> A fully enlightened Buddha does not invent the Path. <S> He discovers the Path by himself with no help from anyone else, then he proclaims it and teaches it to other beings. <S> Its often described as discovering an ancient path (purānam añjasam), covered by a dense forest which leads to a bygone kingdom. <S> The Path is an individual journey. <S> No one can walk the Path for us. <S> We ourselves has to work. <S> Only oneself can free oneself. <S> Only oneself can issue liberation from the rounds of suffering by practicing the Dhamma. <S> One has to become ones own refuge. <S> The Buddhas only show the way and guide us <S> but we ourselves must walk the Path. <S> Throughout the Buddha's 45 years of teaching-career he constantly emphazized the importance of practicing diligently, consistently and with great effort in order to win Nibbana. <S> If you are interested in further readings about the self-reliance-factor of the Path, then I recommend the following chapter in the book "What Buddhists Believe" , by Ven. <S> K. Sri Dhammananda. <A> Perhaps this excerpt from "From the Zen Kitchen to Enlightenment, Refining Your Life" by Dogen and Uchiyama, from the section called "How to cook your Life", and the chapter, "Tenzo Kyokun and Shikan-Taza", will go some way toward answering your questions. <S> "When we look at a cup that is set down between two of us, we have the feeling that we are looking at the same cup, though actually that is not so. <S> You look at the cup with your vision, and from a certain angle. <S> Moreover, you see it in the rays of light and shadows that come from your side of the room. <S> This applies equally to me as well. <S> In a very rough sense, we proceed to separate the reality of the situation by entertaining the idea that we both see the same cup. <S> This is what I mean by the fabrication of ideas." <S> "In the same way, we assume that there exists a world which you and I experience in common with all other human beings, that this world existed prior to our births, and that it will continue to exist even after our deaths. <S> But again, this is nothing more than an idea. <S> Not only that, we wind up thinking that we live and die within this world of fabrication. <S> This is an utterly inverted way of looking at ones life. <S> My true Self lives in reality, and the world I experience is one that I alone can experience, and not one anyone else can experience along with me. <S> To express this as precisely as possible, as I am born, I simultaneously give birth to the world <S> I experience; I live out my life along with that world, and at my death the world <S> I experience also dies." <A> There is one Goal but many starting points (different kinds of confusion). <S> To the extent that you and someone else have the same set of delusions, your paths will be similar, and to the extent that your preconditions are different, your paths will be unique. <A> The path is the same for everyone which is the noble 8 fold path divided into morality, mastery of the mind and wisdom. <S> Any body seriously practicing can walk the path but you have to practise yourself. <S> Sometimes the path is described differently using the landmarks than the direction in different audience in the Suttas.
|
The practice is individual as nobody else can walk the path for you or take you on the path. The Path proclaimed by a fully englightened Buddha is always the same.
|
Not getting what one wants as a good thing or something to be thankful I understand that craving stuff leads us to suffering (Second Noble truth) and that getting what we think we want won't lead to happiness. However, is there any explicit indication that it's even good not to get what we want? (any similarity with The Rolling Stones' lyrics is just a coincidence). The only quote I can find is from the Dalai Lama: 'Remember that sometimes not getting what you want is a wonderful stroke of luck. <Q> Certainly not getting what you want is unsatisfactory. <S> This is Dukka Dukka. <S> I will not say this is a good thing though this kind of thought can help you emotionally. <S> Even if you get what you want this is not satisfactory as you have to part with it at some point. <S> The root cause of craving is sensations experienced then in contact with the object that you want or mental satisfaction in owning it (has come into the spear of mine). <S> If you don't get something wanted then the sensation you experience is painful. <S> You have to look at it as impermanent or if you are developed in meditation as arising and passing of sensations (phenomena which is experienced or felt). <S> By doing this you are weakening your root of aversion. <S> When you experience satisfactory experiences you have to look at the sensations again equnimously. <S> When you experience the pleasantness passing away do the same. <S> This is because doing so weakens the root of craving. <S> When you experience neutral sensations, the process of fabrication continues. <S> Use this as means to eradicate your ignorance. <S> Neutral sensations are unsatisfactory since we still have conditioned existence. <S> By reaction to sensations you create craving. <S> Carving with further thinking and pondering and conpept polifration creates clinging. <S> At this point you will be planning on how to aquire what you want. <S> If you miss de railing the train at feeling this is the next place you can try this by developing mastery over the mind. <S> This is nothing wrong working towards getting what you want within the framework of morality and right livelihood. <S> But in doing so you should try to be equanimous as possible to sensations and try developing more mastery over the mind to prevent craving and clinging. <A> My opinion is that when you get what you want (and not what the other sentient beings want) both an action and its result are driven by your craving and attachments (the three poisons). <S> An action driven by attachment is impure in its nature, and its result, too. <S> And what is impure in its nature <S> gives rising to suffering. <S> When you have no result of an impure action, you don't accumulate negative karma, since your karma is at worst just neutral then. <S> Hence, not getting what you want may sometimes mean luck. <A> is there any explicit indication that it's even good not to get what we want? <S> Depends on the "what" of what we want. <S> If one wants to get filthy rich so that s/he can indulge in all sensual pleasures of life, then it's obviously not good. <S> If one wants to perfect their own virtues, attain the peace of meditation, or put an end to suffering, then those are wholesome desires. <S> The important key here is to have wholesome desires, not having no desire whatsoever: From SN 51.15 : <S> "In that case, brahman, let me question you on this matter. <S> Answer as you see fit. <S> What do you think: Didn't you first have desire, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular desire allayed?" <S> "Yes, sir. <S> " <S> "Didn't you first have persistence, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular persistence allayed?" <S> "Yes, sir. <S> " <S> "Didn't you first have the intent, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular intent allayed?" <S> "Yes, sir. <S> " <S> "Didn't you first have [an act of] discrimination, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular act of discrimination allayed?" <S> "Yes, sir." <S> "So it is with an arahant whose mental effluents are ended, who has reached fulfillment, done the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, totally destroyed the fetter of becoming, and who is released through right gnosis. <S> Whatever desire he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular desire is allayed. <S> Whatever persistence he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular persistence is allayed. <S> Whatever intent he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular intent is allayed. <S> Whatever discrimination he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular discrimination is allayed.
|
Sometimes it might be true that not getting something may be better as you might be blinded by craving as not to see the downside e.g. a partner lower in morals.
|
What force keeps you bonded to samsara? Superficially, people say that there are a lot of people who love them (and vice versa ), but if you analyze your life, you will find that there is no such thing as true love . I've realized that what we call love is essentially selfishness in disguise . The strongest love in this world is maternal love of a mother for her children. But classical psychology will tell you that maternal love is also based on maternal instinct , which is endowed by nature to ensure survival of the race. Coming out of that circle, love for siblings, brothers and sisters are more of social transactions - there is give and take, something in return for the so-called love which is given. If you don't have anything to give in return, they will be annoyed at best and shunt you altogether at worst. Maybe, there used to be such a thing as true love back in the old days when Dhamma had a stronger hold, but I hardly see it in today's world. People say they love their spouse, but the search for your spouse itself begins with a selfish interest - Do they have a big house? What is the salary? Are they sexually attractive? Coming back to the question, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that true love has vanished, then what force makes people cling to this wretched samsara knowing full well that its an exercise in futility? Even in the midst of utmost Dukkha , why doesn't the realization come that let me leave this path that causes Dukkha altogether? Is it the past Kamma which is holding its grip on you so strongly, that you are unable to come out of the while loop of samsara? Will past never let the present achieve freedom from Dukkha ? <Q> The force that keeps one bonded to samsara is desire. <S> "Even in the midst of utmost Dukkha, why doesn't the realization come that let me leave this path that causes Dukkha altogether" Because, most likely, you only intellectually realize Dukkha and unless you are enlightened , you have the habit of wanting to continue your apparent existence. <S> Many words, like "ignorance" are not exact and precise translations from the original Pali words. <S> A better meaning of ignorance (in a Buddhist context) is what one doesn't deeply understand. <S> If one only has an intellectual understanding of things like dukkha, impermanence and not-self then one is still ignorant in the heart of those things. <S> People mix love and attatchment. <S> This is just what is. <S> It is possible to love without attatchment. <S> Maybe I am missing something somewhere <S> but <S> what does our ability to love one another have to do with what keeps us bonded to samsara? <A> In addition to desires as the Buddha mentioned in his first sermon, he also explained the 10 fetters saññojana ). <S> They are supportive of each other. <A> There are 3 main thing I gather you are asking. <S> Love - this is the people who you have immediately when expanding the spear of me and mine hence tremendous attachments arise. <S> This it self gives a heap of experiences which are pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. <S> Raising a family does have a lot of these experiences. <S> This can be a blessing and a bondage. <S> As bondage because you can't practice seriously at a beginner or intermediate level. <S> For a advance meditators this can be a blessing since the diversity of experiences can keep your defilements on check which otherwise you will not realise that are there. <S> Past Karma - this only decides part of the experiences which are either pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. <S> The way out of misery is to objectively observe these sensations and realized they are unsatisfactory regardless if they are Karmic results from past action or not. <S> Karma as a bondage <S> - Yet again past Karma is the vehicle to study these experiences (Karmic results are in directly linked to the Karma giving rebirth) and get your mind free from creating new Karma. <S> You past and present existence and the experiences that come with it gives you the the opportunity to study the workings of Karma by removing the roots of ignorance, greed and aversion. <S> All this you can be experienced and dealt with within the framework of the body. <S> What keeps you bonded in Samsara is not being able to learn the path of liberation for some and when you get the chance not practicing seriously. <S> In the latter it is choice or become of oneself this happens. <S> Since having the opportunity to learn the Dhamma the ability to break free from the Fetters that tie your to misery is in your hands. <S> Use this opportunity to break free from this bondage than having doubts about the ability to do so due to Karma. <S> The doubt can also set you back in your practice. <A> Very good, very good, Mr. Prahlad Yeri. <S> King <S> Pasenadi <S> Kosala had a similar certain insight as well; and later on he had even a glimpse of the way out or which would be the way to justify his staying. <S> There are few who know real love . <S> Look for example why people are bound to places like this. <S> Is there real love behind? <S> When somebody who has compassion tries to point you the way out of such place, there will be many who "love" you and fear that such would happen. <S> Why? <S> Because they nourish on you, so you do as well. <S> Or what do you love? <S> Form, sound, smell, taste, touch, ideas... <S> what is sensed as pleasant, all of what gives that support, that is what keeps you loving. <S> Investigate this topic since people are willing to die for everything, but never would they like to die for virtue, concentration, insight and liberation. <S> Beings die to become, but not for abandoning every kind of desire for becoming, out of "love". <S> Helping others, the first step is to keep precepts without excuse, without a notion to negate it out of love for this or for that. <S> Don't believe that such was told you out of love :-) <S> There are more important reasons, you should not get attached to it but investigate for yourself on a line of proper investigation you had found: investigate Tanha and its cause . <S> This talk is of course very useful to understand where to investigate: Seeds of Becoming <S> " <S> The author points out the place where we are able to lean to understand all issues which are moving this world. <S> A Dhammatalk on Bhava (Becoming) and how we are able to transcendent birth, aging, sickness and death, exactly here and now. " <S> (Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of trade and keep people traped. <S> How you handle it lies in your sphere.)
|
Desire for continued existence.
|
What is the goal of Meditation- is it increasing the gap? When I sit for meditation, sometimes I realize my breath has stopped and thoughts are subtle, for but a very minimum amount of time, but that time I feel totally in a present moment, in a moment. It this a goal of meditation? or something else? or analyzing? When is the awareness aware of awareness? Is feeling the gap awareness? <Q> Source: Anapanasati <S> If you see step 4 above it says "Tranquilise the bodily activities". <S> In this stage you do calm the breath, i.e., increase the gap, but you do not manipulate the breath directly. <S> For further reference on claiming the breath see: LECTURE THREE: CALMING THE KAYA from ANAPANASATI - MINDFULNESS WITH BREATHING Unveiling the Secrets of Life: a Manual for Serious Beginners by BUDDHADASA BHIKKHU , Knowing and Seeing <S> 4th Ed. <S> by Ven. <S> Pa-Auk Sayadaw <S> p35. <S> Also in meditation you have to be in the present moment and see arising and passing or sensation at the present moment as you have realise. <A> There are many reasons why people meditate, who should know what your intent is. <S> As for the path of Dhamma, its to get insight, knowledge and vision: pañña. <S> And it's purpose <S> is to get ride of dukkha (suffering and stress). <S> It's pretty good to ask one self why do I meditate or better <S> , why I still don't do it. <S> Atma does not know where Ajay actually stand and where his/her general thought about it come from, but a good guide in simple words would be Buddho . <S> (Note: <S> this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. <S> How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.) <A> Goal Of Meditation <S> Why? <S> Because Past and Future does not exist. <S> They exist only in the mind. <S> What really exist is a Present moment, and what we really have is a Present Moment. <A> Meditation leads to silence (here-now) which leads to Nirvana. <S> But you cannot aim for it in a direct way. <S> You cannot work for it. <S> It will come on its own.
|
The Goal of Meditation is being in the PRESENT MOMENT . Therefore if you talk about goal then probably it is Nirvana.
|
Do thoughts 'create' vedana? Vedana is described as reaction to a sense contact. Are these only the 5 senses or is vedana also 'created' by thoughts or emotions? <Q> Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta <S> On cognizing a mind-object with the mind, one investigates the mind-object that the basis of mental joy, one investigates the mind-object that is the basis of mental pain, one investigates the mind-object that is the basis of equanimity. <S> Titth’ayatana <S> Sutta Cognizing a mental object with the mind, one examines the mental object as the basis for pleasure, or for pain, or for neither-pain-nor-pleasure Saññā Nānatta Sutta <S> Dependent on the mind-object element, there arises the perception of mind-object; dependent on the perception of mind-object, there arises the thought regarding mind-object; dependent on the thought regarding mind-object, there arises the desire for mind-object; dependent on the desire for mind-object, there arises the passion for mind-object; dependent on the passion for mind-object, there arises the searching for mind-object. <S> Here searching is for the pleasure the intellectual stimulation brought. <S> Also all 121 minds <S> according to Theravada Abhidhamma is associated with sensation as the mental factors of sensation is present in each of them. <S> When dealing with any sensation from any source (Contact with Faculties, 4 Frames of Mindfulness) you have to look at the arising and passing of sensations. <S> Use painful sensation to eradicate aversion, pleasant sensation to eradicate craving and neutral to eradicate ignorance. <S> How to sensation tied to thoughts are as follows: <S> Adopted from Pahāna Sutta (also found in the introductory commentary as is). <S> This goes for thoughts as well. <S> (1) the latent tendency to lust reinforced by being attached to pleasant feelings; (2) the latent tendency to aversion reinforced by rejecting painful feelings; (3) the latent tendency to ignorance reinforced by ignoring neutral feelings <S> Avijja Pahana Sutta 2 <S> Here, bhikshu, the monk has learned [heard] that nothing is worth clinging to. <S> And a monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to, thus: he directly knows all things. <S> Having directly understood all things, he fully understands all things. <S> Having fully understood everything, he sees all signs differently: <S> He sees the mind differently; he sees mind-objects differently; he sees mind-consciousness differently; <S> he sees mind-contact differently. <S> Whatever that is pleasant, or painful, or neutral, that arises on account of mind-contact as condition, that, too, he sees differently. <S> Monk, when a monk knows and sees thus, ignorance is abandoned by him and true knowledge (vijja) arises. <A> Yes, (as per Yogacara Abhidharma) vedana is also created by thoughts. <S> For the purposes of your question, we can say that the main part of emotions - their somatic component (what you feel in your chest etc.) <S> - are vedana. <A> Contact causes feeling. <S> What ever sense door it enters/touches: <S> Eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, intellect. <S> And what does it touch? <S> The Eye does not feel, the ear does not feel... <S> the intellect maybe? <S> Nandakovada Sutta: <S> Nandaka's Exhortation <S> (Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. <S> How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.) <A> According to Mahayana abhidharma, a main mind and the mental factors in its retinue share five similarities. <S> Also, as Kyabje Yeshe Gyeltsen says: <S> Moreover, the two – a main mind and the mental factors in its retinue – are said to be one entity and concomitant by way of five types of similarities. <S> Hence, it is incorrect to assert that minds and mental factors are not similar in time and that they are different entities, as well as to posit that their observed objects are separate. <S> Concretely, a mental consciousness remembering blue and the feeling associated with it: <S> Arise simultaneously <S> Have the same object [of engagement] <S> Take the same aspect [of blue] Arise in dependence upon the mental sense power <S> And so forth. <S> Thus, it is not the case that 'thoughts create feelings' because thought is the object of both the main mind and the mental factors associated with that main mind, and because both of these [main and mental factors] arise simultaneously. <S> The mind-object - thought - does not precede feelings, and thus it is not created by it.
|
The thoughts, just like sense-objects, stimulate samskaras (imprints) in the memory, and that generates vedana (feelings).
|
What are the suttas in which the Buddha provides instruction on how to meditate? What are the actual suttas in which the Buddha described how to meditate? A list of all such suttas would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! <Q> To straighten view before meditation: Samma,ditthi Sutta Anapana Anapanasati Sutta Satipatthana Satipatthana Sutta and Mahāsatipaṭṭhāna Sutta <S> Kayagatasati Sutta <S> Saṅkhitta Dhamma Sutta Elements / properties Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta Titth’ayatana <S> Sutta Maha Hatthi,padapama Sutta Bahu Dhātuka Sutta Reflective / perception based Giri-m-ananda Sutta Indriya Bhāvanā Sutta Amba,latthika Rahul’ovada Sutta Metta, Karuna, Mudita, Upekka Saṅkhitta Dhamma Sutta <A> Additionally, the Karaniya Metta Sutta addresses the practice of mettā meditation. <A> My favorite sutta on meditation is Cula-suññata Sutta <S> (The Lesser Discourse on Emptiness). <S> Thanissaro Bhikkhu provides a good commentary on this in his article The Integrity of Emptiness , the section called "Emptiness as an Approach to Meditation". <S> The two other suttas everyone else mentions - Anapanasati and Satipatthana suttas - are very good too. <S> There are also nice tidbits in the Northern recording of the Anapanasati Sutta, called Ānāpānasmṛti Sutra from Ekottarika Āgama. <S> Also, if you are specifically into Jhana meditation, then Samadhanga Sutta provides the canonical definitions of the Four Jhanas. <A> Gelanna Sutta is the sutta through which Buddha provides instructions on how to meditate. <S> Other forms of meditations are Anapanasati sutta,Satipatthana sutta, Bhikkhunuppasaya Sutta. <S> In Buddhism, the Tripitaka (in Pali) is earliest collection of Buddhist teachings and the only text recognized as canonical by Theravada Buddhists. <S> Tripitaka means 'three baskets' from the way in which it was originally recorded: text was written on long, narrow leaves, which were sewn at edges and grouped into bunches and stored in baskets.
|
Two notable suttas in which Buddha provided meditation instructions are: Satipatthana Sutta Anapanasati Sutta
|
Is attachment to the word "Meditation" a problem? I like to Meditate, I like to read about Meditation, I like to think about Meditation; but the word ... "MEDITATION.. MEDITATION.." ... is always in my mind, I am attached to it. How can I avoid this attachment? I don't want to make Meditation as a PROBLEM. I just want to use it as a Solution. I think it will lead me to SUFFERING. How I will meditate but remain unattached to it? <Q> You'll grow out of it eventually. <S> What you are experiencing right now is the honeymoon period. <S> Everyone goes through it. <S> It's no different than the start of a new relationship. <S> Everything is fresh, exciting, captivating. <S> The word discipline is meaningless. <S> How could you not want to sit! <S> There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. <S> Sit as much as you'd like. <S> Work on developing your concentration. <S> Just like working out, the gains that come in the beginner phase have no equivalent at any other point in your practice. <S> Things are easy now. <S> Take advantage of them. <S> But everything fades in intensity. <S> Eventually, you are going to come to a point in your practice where maybe your sits aren't going so well. <S> Maybe progress isn't coming as fast as it was. <S> Who knows. <S> You might even find yourself getting bored from time to time. <S> All of this is also normal. <S> In fact, it's where the real practice begins. <S> From here on out, you will learn that while sitting reaps unimaginable rewards, they don't come without work. <S> Here, you get to stare face to face with the obstacles that are holding you back. <S> This is where you truly understand why one Zen koan calls "sitting long and getting tired" the heart of Buddhism. <S> These difficulties are all to be embraced. <S> They are what cause real transformation to occur. <A> Here is the thing about attachment... <S> New Buddhists learn how bad attachment is and they immediately thing\k all attachments are bad. <S> Any ironically no one care to ask "Are all the attachments bad?". <S> Good attachments vs Bad attachments <S> As you are afraid of bad attachments i assume you already know what they are <S> so i will move on to good attachments..... <S> Good attachments <S> Not all the attachments are bad, For example the need to reach the end or the need to reach nirvana is an attachment. <S> But without such an attachment you will not reach anywhere. <S> So it is necessary for a being to have some incentive to work on something. <S> And this is true to both good and bad things. <S> So as you can see Lord Buddha never said that you should get rid of good ones along with the bad ones. <S> You must have this need to Meditate and you should feed it. <S> This is called "Shraddha". <S> Now you have realized the path and you are willingly going towards the goal. <S> So what is good and what is bad? <S> It is very simple... <S> If some attachment is driving you towards bad things you should try your best to get rid of that attachment. <S> It some attachment is driving towards the path or your personal practice you should keep that need and feed it, because it is your only true friend to push you towards the path and away from other distractions. <S> Hope you well, and remember... <S> The path is a one with comfort, But if you feel much discomfort it is because you are paying too much attention to insignificant details. <S> will last... <A> Just do it, Mr/Mrs Ajay. <S> It's like if you are in love. <S> Talking, thinking, hoping... and then remember the time when you have been in love, when it seems to lose interest or you tend to look for a side relation.
|
If you keep practicing all the unnecessary attachments will fall without your influence and only good ones Perhaps you want to jump over and try a different tradition. Use this opportunity to learn as much as you can.
|
What are the different ways of protecting one's practice? I am mindful of my skandas, but that doesn't prevent other's samsaric action, trying to influence me and my practice. What are the different ways of protecting one's practice? <Q> Mindfulness is a wholesome mental factor (cetasika) and when it is present, one is not reacting to phenomena, i.e. by running away from unpleasant phenomena and running after pleasant phenomena. <S> Instead one is standing still. <S> One is in the present moment, clearly recognizing that it is our own reactions to phenomena that create suffering. <S> An unwholesome thought or anger is still just a thought and a feeling. <S> Its our own aversion towards these objects, that create our suffering. <S> So by keeping mindfulness at all times, one is protecting ones practice. <S> I would recommend the video "How Mindfulness Creates Understanding (The Buddhist TV)" by Ven. <S> Yuttadhammo. <A> There are what are traditionally called the four protective meditations (Caturarakkha) <S> Buddhanussati - Remembrance of the Buddha (and his qualities) <S> This would be protecting a sense of purpose in the practice, preserving your faith and confidence in following the path <S> Metta - Goodwill <S> This would protect your goodwill and patient forbearance with others who might interfere with your intentions. <S> Asubha - Meditation on unattractiveness of the body or of physical nourishment <S> This would protect your mental calm and dispassion in the face of sensual temptations. <S> Marananussati - Meditation on (the imminence of) death <S> This would protect your sense of urgency in doing your best while you are able. <S> On a related note this might be also worth reflecting: SN 47.19: <S> Sedaka Sutta - The Bamboo Acrobat <S> And how does one look after others by looking after oneself? <S> By practicing (mindfulness), by developing (it), by doing (it) a lot. <S> And how does one look after oneself by looking after others? <S> By patience, by non-harming, by loving kindness, by caring (for others). <S> (Thus) looking after oneself, one looks after others; and looking after others, one looks after oneself. <A> "I am mindful of my skandas, but that doesn't prevent other's samsaric action", such can not be, Mr/Mrs 8CK8. <S> "What are the different ways of protecting one's practice?" <S> Mindfulness, Mr/Mrs 8CK8. <S> Actually this can be also a hint to improve or rethink your question, ponder a little about and investigate. <S> If Mr/Mrs 8CK8 still thinks, that he is mindful and also understands the clinging aggregates, then he/she should read About Khemaka <S> (Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. <S> How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.) <A> This answer is from a Mahasi Vipassana perspective. <S> The worst influence on us is ourselves and our own wrong view. <S> If you have no views or opinions then you could feel more secure because you couldn't influence yourself with (wrong) views or let anyone influence you with (wrong) views. <S> At least while practicing have no views and no opinions. <S> Right or wrong views during practice is wrong view. <S> To have any thoughts on purpose is wrong practice anyway. <S> "Right view is no view" is one way to explain right view. <S> Let's hope you find a good teacher and they plant the initial seed of right view and good practice within you. <S> Metta
|
Mindfulness will "protect" your practice.
|
How to remove dullness of mind, without sitting meditation, in regular activity? When you have to perform a certain task, you can't meditate during that time, but mind needs clarity. I feel very dull during that time, I want to increase my awareness and alertness in that performance time. So, how I can remove dullness of mind (while performing a certain task during which I can't meditate)? What are the causes that lead to dullness? <Q> ex: if you are sweeping, keep reminding: sweeping.. sweeping.. <S> sweeping.. <S> Ignorance is the cause of it. <S> To overcome dullness, simply note it as it is without taking it as "I am bored" or "it is boring". <A> Dullness of mind is associated with sloth and torpor . <S> When this happens you feel: sleepy or drowsy <S> heavy <S> This itself is a sensation. <S> Concentrate on the impermanence or arising and passing of this sensation. <S> When you have this Ignorance dominates and to overcome this when sensation arises contemplate is impermanence, dispassion, ending and letting go as per advise in Pacalā Sutta . <S> Similar advice is also found in Avijja Pahana Sutta 2 , Pahāna Sutta , etc. <S> As in the case of Pacalā Sutta <S> you can note this but best is to avoid mental verbalisation of which is discussed in section 4 Note on noting in Giri-m-ananda Sutta commentary by Piya Tan which takes a more lenient stance; S.N. Goenka like the Thai Forest Tradition on verbal noting take a more hard stance on verbalisation or visualisation which I feel is right. <S> "Nothing is worth clinging to" When this was said, the venerable Mahā Moggallāna said this to the Blessed One: "In what way, bhante, in brief, is a monk freed through the destruction of craving, that is, one who has reached total perfection, the total security from bondage, the total holy life, the total consummation, <S> the highest amongst gods and humans?" <S> "Here, Moggallāna, the monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to. <S> And, Moggallāna, a monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to, thus: he directly knows all things [he directly knows the nature of the all]. <S> Having directly known the nature of all things, he fully understands all things. <S> Having fully understood all things, he knows whatever feelings <S> there are, whether pleasant, painful or neither painful nor pleasant. <S> As regards to those feelings, he dwells contemplating impermanence in them; he dwells contemplating dispassion [fading away of lust] in them; he dwells contemplating ending (of suffering) in them; he dwells contemplating letting go (of defilements). <S> When he dwells contemplating impermanence in them, contemplating dispassion in them, contemplating ending in them, contemplating letting go, he does not cling to anything in the world. <S> Not clinging <S> , he is not agitated; being not agitated, he himself surely attains nirvana <A> From meditation instructions we know that dullness happens when you suppress (forcefully restrict/constrict) <S> yourself too much. <S> This usually happens when you try to focus on task that has absolutely no connection with any of your goals and interests. <S> In meditation the usual advice is to "expand" your awareness a little to "connect" your activity with your surroundings and your goals. " <S> Where am I, what am I doing and why? <S> " Sometimes we need to actually go as far as to deliberately think through: "I am doing this because it will lead me to that; I need that because I want to get so and so" - etc. <S> Then once you have a notion of why you're doing this and how it fits with your bigger goal "loaded" into your immediate awareness, then it makes more sense to your mind - and dullness will be replaced with either a sense of gladness (if you know you're making good progress) or with a sense or worry and urgency (if you know you are not making progress). <S> So you can generate excitement by thinking of a realistic goal that is not too far, and thinking how you are making progress. <S> Or you can generate urgency by thinking about a bigger goal and about the danger of what will happen if you don't make it. <S> By connecting what you are doing with what's important to you, you can overcome dullness. <S> By carefully choosing the background narrative, you can control your state of mind. <A> As per me, my personal observation is: mind is delicate but not stable. <S> I meditate to stablise it by performing different-2 tasks in my day to night, unending actions. <S> When i sleep i meditate with closed eyes & slow working senses ' <S> but mind do not sleep and get stablised itself. <S> I have nightmares and some precious dreams. <S> What i get is 'what i concentrate', a perception against distractions, pressing my will in favor of my belief , i start thinking (create a perception) that i am meditating. <S> When i convince myself that my dullness is my own perception, that very moment i start meditation by taking the advantage of my illusion-free mind(as all the senses are asleep), 'that very moment i feel good, breathfree, out of the body. <S> It is true that mind never stablises itself, it is true that mind creates a problem by creating a perception(while editing my perception), it is true that i am able to make my mind to concentrate on my belief. <S> It is true that i can practise buddhism or any kind of perception or do meditation, everywhere, anytime. <S> Even now, actually in present. <A> A lot of good answers above. <S> A few extra points to consider: Being really tired, a lot of lay meditators prefer to meditate inthe morning. <S> Get to know your circadian rhythm. <S> Lack of quality sleep, due to excessive snoring or sleep apnea. <S> Being too full, difficult to meditate on a full stomach. <S> The environment is not conducive, too dark, too much noise or distraction. <S> Ill health (diabetes, HBP, etc), obesity, nutrient deficiency. <S> Psychological reasons - e.g. depression. <S> Medications and intoxicants. <S> Lack of interest in the task at hand Lack of purpose or understanding of the task at hand.
|
Dullness or boredom is a form of aversion. You can indeed meditate(Vipassana) while performing any task.
|
What exactly did Lord Buddha say about Size of Atom? I have heard that Lord Buddha wrote or discussed about the smallest indivisible particle i.e the atom. What exactly did he say. Is it mentioned in some scriptures? If yes, did he give any argument or detail of his observations. <Q> As described in Theravada Buddhist texts of the Abhidhamma Pitaka in the Tipitaka, there is no indivisible part of the atom. <S> Every atom is divisible. <S> If anyone divides it infinitely, the ultimate outcome is energy = <S> there is nothing that exists in reality, it's a mirage that we experience because of the four major qualities. <S> And the atom is made out of four major qualities and due to those 4 major qualities, there are another four qualities are generated. <S> The four major qualities can exist in different or equal proportions within the atom. <S> When the proportions changes, the elements change to another element. <S> The four major qualities are: "patavi" - which gives the quality of roughness to the atom "aapo"- which gives the quality of flowing (fluidity) "thejo" - the quality which gives warmth or heat (and this accounts for the coldness too, when the heat decreases we humans feel coldness, so it is both heat and cold) <S> "waayo" - the quality of expansion. <S> Then because of those four, another sub qualities being generated: "warna" - the quality which gives colour to atoms "ghanda" - which gives smell "rasa" - which gives the quality of taste "oja" - the energy that keeps those four main qualities intact (it's like food to the atom). <S> And the proportions of the four major qualities in atoms are constantly changing, the change can take fraction of second in some materials, sometimes it might take uncountable years to change. <S> And according to Buddhist texts the atom itself appears and disappears very fast <S> and we humans can only see its existence if you don't have developed your mind to understand and see those happenings <S> (just like our human eye see the tv screen or a video as a one motion, it actually contains many frames to make a full video, but we only see it as a one frame with people moving inside it), but Buddha have said this is a mirage we see <S> and it is "non-eternal". <S> Source: I have read Abhidhamma Pitaka. <S> And I'm a Buddhist. <S> P.S: if you want to know the what's really happening, my advise is, you have to read it by yourself and understand, rather than reading some English translated text. <A> In Theravada buddhism, atoms are not the same as those found in western physics. <S> Instead, they are As described in Buddhist texts, it is a ‘non-eternal’ unit of the four elements (water, fire, earth, and air) that are impermanent and constantly changing... <S> Like other seemingly external objects, these atoms are perceived by the senses, but do not truly exist beyond cognitive awareness <S> There really isn't much similarities between the two atoms because one can be divided and the other cannot. <S> So what are the Buddhist atoms? <S> They are earth, water, fire, air, color, smell, taste and nutritive essence (food). <S> These eight components of matter, forming an octad (atthaka), are called “indivisible matter” or simply “inseparable” <S> they make up the four elements, also known as the "Four Greats", spoken from the Surangama Sutra <S> explains how we are able to see the world today. <S> There are also two additional elements (Emptiness and consciousness) which lets the illusory forms take shape. <S> It's to complicated for me to read, but I guess it does go into depth on buddhas explanation of matter. <S> < http://iteror.org/big/Source/buddhism/Lalitavistara-ch12.html <A> You might be thinking of Kalapas . <S> Wikipedia says , In Theravada Buddhist phenomenology, Kalapas are defined as the smallest units of physical matter.[1] <S> Kalapas are described as tiny units of materiality, “tens of thousands of times smaller than a particle of dust,” coming into existence and disappearing in as little as a billionth of a second or a trillionth of the blink of an eye.[2][3 <S> ] Kalapas are understood by some Therevada thinkers as actual subatomic particles and the smallest units of materiality.[4][5] <S> Kalapas are not mentioned in the earliest Buddhists texts, such as the Tripitaka, but only in the Abhidhammattha Saïgaha, an Abhidhamma commentary that was composed between the 5th and 11th centuries.[6] <S> They are not universally accepted in Theravada Buddhism, and the Buddha never directly speaks of kalapas.[7] <S> See also the answers to this question: Meaning of 'kalapas'
|
In the Mahayana Tradition there is a Sutra known as the Lalitavistara Sutra .
|
Watching Darma Talks on 2x Speed I really like Ajahn Brahm's Darma talks on YouTube. But, I can perfectly understand what he's saying on 2x speed. Am I losing anything by listening at this speed or is it ok as long as it's not for any other reason than I can understand it so I can watch two in the same amount of time as one? <Q> I have done the same thing for slower speakers. <A> Good idea but be mindful because in sometime your mind will feed your ego with "I am faster" feeling and you mind end up trying to listen or read faster than you should. <S> That can cause some harm because i have seen that sometimes it is better to listen slower when learning certain teachings. <S> And as Lord Buddha advised you should listen to things you have already learnt again and again because sometimes even if you know something going over and over makes you realize a whole another side of it. <A> It is said that the Buddha spoke very quickly. <S> How quickly? <S> During the time an ordinary person speaks one word the Buddha could speak 128 words. <S> Buddha spoke very fast. <S> Source: <S> Handbook of Abhidhamma Studies, by Venerable Sayādaw U Sīlānanda, Volume 1, page 19. <S> So it might be OK to listen fast <S> but if you can comprehend what is been said. <S> Perhaps to 128x times faster. <S> But remember though the Buddha spoke (I would say communicated) 128 words when someone else spoke 1 word, each listener would hear a subset as if this has been said to him. <S> So in this case the amount you can speedup is something less than 128x but also limited by the rate you can understand what is spoken and also comprehend what is spoken. <S> If you can understand what is spoken and comprehend what is spoken at the rate of 2x speed <S> then it is OK. <A> If the content of the Dhamma talk can be understood in a satisfactory way, there should be no problem in increasing the speed. <S> If increasing the speed is done due to restlessness , then that is a hindrance that should be dealt with by taking it as a meditation object, in order to cultivate insights. <A> Great question... <S> I would say consider the fact that his calmness and slowness might be characteristics you want to absorb/emulate
|
In my opinion, it's just fine to speed up your listening as long as you grasp the content.
|
Views of world during insight meditation I am reading books on Buddhism and I come across this sentence in every book. It states that our world view will change and we will know actual working of the world during insight meditation. It doesn't provide any explanation on how different it is / will be from the view which I have. Whether this actual view of world is same for everyone who does insight meditation or it is different based on the experience one has? What is difference between these two views? <Q> It's a moment by moment view of our own individual experience. <S> You know the workings of your imediate experience more and more the more you practice seeing reality as it is. <S> Seeing reality as it is means putting more focus on whatever you're aware of on purpose, in your own experiencial reality, moment by moment. <S> This is basically insight meditation or mindfulness. <S> When you understand your own world of experience then you know the rest of the world because it all works fundamentally the same. <S> Approached another way, your experience is the world for you as my experience is my world for me.-Metta <A> Your world view changes when you become Sotāpanna . <S> I.e. you have understood dependent origination (DO) and 4 Noble Truths and Ignorance <S> is no more hence <S> you see things as they are . <S> The difference is that before you mind had Ignorance , i.e., you had a mind with Ignorance and Delusion and subsequently becomes a that is a mind without Ignorance due to the paradigm shift when you perfectly understand <S> DO and the 4 Noble Truths . <S> When you reach the final goal your mind is rootless or without mental influxes or broken from the fetters or devoid of Defilements . <S> In understanding the DO and the 4 Noble Truths the 3 Marks of Existence is instrumental. <A> When one does not practice insight meditation ones world view is subjective and not in line with reality. <S> One has no reference point so to say. <S> An enduring Self-entity can also be called a Self, Me, Soul etc. <S> There is no such thing which is verifiable through the practice of insight meditation. <S> What is believed to be a Self is merely a mental formation. <S> When practicing insight meditation one will see how conditioned phenomena are not stand alone units. <S> They have causes and conditions and they themselves become causes for the arising of other phenomena. <S> The relational factor and interdependency of conditioned phenomena becomes visible to the insight meditator.
|
When one is practicing insight meditation one sees for oneself how reality functions and delusion is done away with, e.g. the illusion of permanence and an enduring Self-entity.
|
Is Chant of Metta from Tipitaka? I came across 'The Chant of Metta' ( Metta Gatha ), in a beautiful rendition by Imee Ooi in this YouTube video . Here is the full text in Pali, with English translation: THE CHANT OF METTA Is this chant from the Tipitaka or is it a later composition? The Karaniya Metta Sutta from Tipitaka has different wordings in this translation. <Q> The popular chant of metta is originated from the Theravada Tripitaka. <S> This can be found in Kuddaka Nikaya->Patisambhidamagga->Yuganaddawagga Mettakatha <S> Read from page 130 <A> The chant which you're asking about included in, for example, The Complete BookofPâliChanting(Theravada Tradition)ByDr. <S> Phra Achan Dhammarato, Bhikkhû, PhD. (page 152). <S> I think that it is traditional (not written recently by or for Imee Ooi). <S> It starts with " homi ", i.e. "May I be". <S> That's compatible with the commentary in The Path of Purification , which says on page 292, First of all it should be developed only towards oneself, doing it repeatedly thus: "May I be happy and free from suffering" or "May I keep myself free from enmity, affliction, and anxiety and live happily." <S> The next paragraphs explain why that "does not conflict with what is said in the texts": maybe that's evidence that this formula, i.e. starting with the first person singular, isn't found in the (earlier) suttas. <A> When translating Pali into a languages which does not have similar constructs there will be variations. <A> Mr. Bharat will find most part of it in the traditional Chant The Sublime Attitudes . <S> Obviously the designer of this chant did not like to share some of the more insightful parts but merely replaced them with more heart beat. <S> Here also an audio of it <S> Sublime Attitudes - chanting in Pali and English <S> Aside of the entrance part "May I be... <S> " the other parts are all copies from certain Suttas (That "I" derives also from the Canon, but from the commentary which explain the way to practice.).The meaning of this quested linked one, is how ever, in line with the traditional ways. <S> You may find an explaining of practicing metta here: Karaṇīya Metta-Sutta: <S> The Message of Peace and Universal Friendliness <S> As for who actually wrote it, the answer would be surely best places over the websites owners email: <S> info(at)satipatthana.ca and the appearance of Yogi and other renderings like the teacher part, give hints, that it is written by lay people who have not much connection with the Sangha.
|
The Chant of Metta is not from the Tripitaka but the Karaniya Metta Sutta is from the Tripitaka.
|
How to balance samatha and vipassana practice? Should one practice vipassana every day in a formal sitting? If so, how long should it be compared to samatha meditation, should it be practiced right before/after (not asking which comes first!) samatha or at anytime during the day? <Q> When meditating from person to person and even from session to session the following can happen: <S> insight develops before calmness calmness before insight neither calm nor insight both calm and insight <S> Calmness and insight should be balanced through personal effect and also you should seek guidance on balancing both. <S> [ (Samatha Vipassanā) <S> Samādhi Sutta 1 - 3 ] <S> Also it is helpful if the calmness is developed through concentrating on one of the Satipatthana [ Saṅkhitta Dhamma Sutta ] as the object of meditation is not tainted by a Vipallasa [for more on Vipallasa <S> see: Vipallasa Sutta ]. <A> I would like to recommend a great book: Mindfulness in Plain English by Ven. <S> Henepola Gunaratana: <S> I learned that it is good to practice various types of meditation until you are quite comfortable with them. <S> After that, a normal meditation session could start with Loving Kindness meditation, followed by Samadhi until you get a good concentration, then continue with Vipassana (to see the 3 marks of existence). <S> Enjoy your meditation. <A> If you can practice any form of meditation on a daily basis, that's wonderful! <S> Keep meditating, but also be patient with your progress. <S> Regarding the ratio of time spent in shamata vs vipassana: it depends on your current ability. <S> That said, some days you need (want) <S> more shamata, sometimes you want more vipassana. <S> It can change day to day. <S> By the way, it's okay (and even recommended) to mix shamata with vipassana during a given session. <S> Basically, do what feels right. <S> Don't over analyze it. <S> Just do it. <S> In my Buddhist lineage, it is generally taught that shamata supports vipassana, and that has been confirmed by my experiences (many years of practice). <S> Stable, powerful insight depends on having a strong foundation.
|
You will find that you naturally spend more time in vipassana as you gain experience in both types of meditation. The key is to let it happen naturally, and not try to do more than you are ready for.
|
Did the Buddha Meditate? This may come off as a very strange question. From small days I have been taught Buddhism, not in the way it should have been, but in a way which took most stories and teachings for granted. Those who know Buddhism know that Lord Buddha attained enlightenment on a Vesak Poya day (a full moon in May). According to Theravada teachings (and maybe even Mahayana I am not sure) what came next was seven weeks of very "Holy" or special events/activities concerning Lord Buddha. First of which was the "Animisa Locana Pooja" where the Buddha was believed to have shown gratitude to a Bo tree. Later on was a week named "Ruwan Sakmana" where the Buddha meditated while walking. This I found very strange. A Buddha is a person who has found the ultimate liberation from all the sorrows, one whose kindness and compassion has no bounds. Laymen meditate to basically calm themselves and to improve "Maithri"/ kindness. Why does an enlightened being meditate? I doubt a Buddha would just meditate to pass time! My opinion is that a Buddha does not meditate because he does not need to do it anymore. But does a Buddha meditate? <Q> I can't find the reference at the moment <S> but if I recall correctly, the Buddha continued to meditate after enlightenment for two reasons, according to the Theravada tradition: <S> (1) To dwell in a pleasant abiding here and now (jhana) (2) to set an example for his followers <A> All Arahaths meditate whenever they are not busy with teaching or day to day activities. <S> But it is not to get rid of any defilements like ordinary beings. <S> Instead, they attain a state called the Nirodha Samapatti . <S> It's like going home after busy day at the office(the world of Sankhara). <S> Nirodha Samapatti is a pleasant abiding. <S> If I remember right, the Buddha attains the Jhanas after every sentence he speaks, when he gives a sermon. <S> The Buddha's Daily Routine Buddha would get up at 4.00 a.m. and as soon as he had had a wash would sit down to meditate for an hour . <S> From 5.00 to 6.00 a.m. he would look around the world with his mental eye to see if anybody needed help. <S> At 6.00 a.m. he would put on his robe and either go out and help the needy or beg for food.... <A> The most obvious and in detail is in a sutta describing Bhuddha's parinibbana process. <S> Process monitored and confirmed by Ven Anuruddha. <S> When Buddha closed his eyes he enter jhanna 1 - 2 -3 -4, and then infinite space, infinite consciousness, no-thingness, neither perception nor non-perception, cessation. <S> and then from cessation to neither perception nor non-perception, no-thingness, infinite consciousness, infinite space,then jhanna 4 -3 -2 -1 . <S> and then again from Jhanna 1 -2 -3 -4 , and when he left jhanna 4, his 5 skhanda was over. <S> PS. <S> (I noticed Buddha never once called infinite space, etc. <S> a 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Jhanna ever. <S> He always used their full names. <S> ) <S> only called the entire group as arupa Jhanna <S> but when it comes to individual level, Buddha called them their full names.
|
In fact, the Buddha meditated everyday.
|
Does meditation giving you 'joy' because there is lack of suffering, or does it give something positive? Let's say that the summon of meditation is enlightement or nirvana. It is supposed to be a good 'thing'. But is it good because there is no suffering any more, or did you get something instead of it that is good in itself? <Q> Both. <S> Meditation when done properly will allow one to abandon the Five Hindrances (greed, anger, sloth/torpor, restlessness, doubt); and give rise to the Five Jhana Factors where each factor counters a particular hindrance: <S> Applied Examination to counter sloth/torpor Sustained Examination to counter doubt Joy to counter anger Happiness to counter restlessness One-pointedness to counter greed. <S> It's important to notice that meditation alone will not lead one to nibbana. <S> It's only 1 out of 8 limbs of the Noble Eightfold Path , which a practioner will need to train to perfection. <A> Meditation involves mastery over the mind (concentration) and to know things as they are (wisdom). <S> When developing concentration <S> the the Jhana Factors <S> arise of which one is Joy. <S> Also when wisdom increases the Enlightenment Factors develop out of which Joy is one. <S> Meditation does induce Joy and in progress <S> where one stage you encounter is Joy: Upanisa Sutta , (Ekā,dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya <S> Sutta , (Dasaka) <S> Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta , etc. <S> Nirvana is the final goal. <A> I feel like I'm on small dose of opiate. <S> My guess is that it increases dopamine release but not to the point that i dont have enough of it to function normally when not meditating (no crash landing or withdrawal)
|
There is no Joy associated with it but is a good thing as there is no suffering but Joy is included in suffering as it is impermanent, can come to an end, pass away, fade away, cease, change as described in Raho,gata Sutta .
|
I am having hyper vigilance issue in my daily life I self diagnose myself of having hyper vigilance, maybe as a result of having psychological trauma in the past. It is a condition where I can't really trust other human being. Often perceiving other human being around me as a threat. I am completely relax near animals or very-close person. My condition is not severed, only fired up if certain condition arise. For example when speaking to new business acquaintance, I am in alert condition frantically trying to gather and analyze as much information as possible before giving out comment or response. Somehow I have feeling that I will be doomed if I didn't give a perfect response. what kind of buddhist teaching that can ease this symptom? <Q> First and foremost, you must establish mindfulness of the body. <S> Your mind should always be in your (lower) Dantian . <S> Initially you may have to do exercises, push your abdomen out 100 times, several times a day, until you get used to being aware of your dantian. <S> Whenever you deal with people (talk to strangers), you should force yourself to stay in your body. <S> Do not "fly" over to their perspective, or to some imaginary point in abstract space. <S> Stay inside your body. <S> You need to develop a good posture, good grace, and good gait. <S> You should sit, stand, and walk conveniently, with good energy flow. <S> Second, you need to stop relying on people's opinions for your right-and-wrong. <S> Your right-and-wrong should come from Dharma. <S> When your right-and-wrong comes from Dharma, as long as you act by the Dharma, you'll no longer care what people think about you. <S> Then you will not try to please them or be likable. <S> Then you can be your own center, with Dharma being your center. <S> Third, you should also sit without doing anything for one hour every day. <S> When you sit you reconnect with your center. <A> One recommendation is to stay aware of feelings (sensations) in your body, instead of being aware of a badly-defined fear. <S> Am I conscious of painful bodily sensations, am I being physically aggressed? <S> No Are painful bodily sensations likely to begin in the next few seconds, will I be aggressed? <S> No <S> Well, alright then <S> The cause of your worry is presumably a " fabrication ". <A> Metta meditation might help - wishing others to be happy and free of pain. <S> What might also help is Tonglen meditation. <A> You should start by being mindful on when you perceive something as a threat, friendly and neither. <S> Look at the associated sensation that arise with such perceiving. <S> Best is to do a course on meditation. <S> You can try: https://www.dhamma.org/en/index , http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/global/index.html , http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/ <A> An example doing loving kindness is decribed here. <S> http://www.mettainstitute.org/mettameditation.html <S> You can also do a short and simple loving kindness by saying in your mind "Be peaceful". <S> That will help to reduce your worrying. <S> By accompanying with silanussati, loving kindness will be more effective. <S> Silanussati is recalling/remembering your moral values. <S> For example, not killing anyone including ants, insects during the day. <S> Talking politely to people etc. <S> You can read about silanussati here. <S> http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/15.11-Silanussati-Vism-7-piya.pdf <S> with Metta
|
I would recommend for doing Loving Kindness meditation. To summarize, develop awareness of your body esp dantian, stay in your body when you talk to people, develop grace, don't try to please people - instead be your own center acting by the Dharma, sit daily and reconnect with your center.
|
Losing in thought and autopilot kicked in Every day I ride my bike from home to office. It takes 1 hour journey.During that hour, many times I found myself somehow teleported to certain distance. It is not magic, I simply lost in thought when that happened. I am so absorbed in my own thought that I am clueless to my surrounding, although my autopilot will guide me safely during that teleportation. that is only an example of many activities where my autopilot kicked in. Problem is, I feel that it is a mistake to be lost in thought. I feel it is not supposed to happen. I feel I supposed to being in present moment. So to counter it, I try to being aware of my body movement, such as opening/closing gas, shifting up/down gear. I recite the word in my mind when the body move. After doing so, I came to realization that my body movement/reaction is faster that my mind. the questions are: Is it really a mistake to be lost in thought? Is my way of countering have bad effect? <Q> Is it really a mistake to be lost in thought? <S> When Satti is absent you create fabrications hence future misery. <S> Therefore, it is a "mistake" to be lost in thought. <S> Is my way of countering have bad effect? <S> In addition be mindful of the bodily sensation when moving like the fabrics touching your body, the wind sweeping over your skin, etc. <S> Also look at muscular pains and pain and pleasure in changing postures. <S> Ultimately what you have to work with is to realise 4 Noble Truths and Dependent Origination this you can realise through any experience you perceive as good, bad and neutral and this leads to sensation <S> which are pleasant, unpleasant and neutral and even the pleasant and neutral are unsatisfactory due to <S> 3 Characteristics <S> while unpleasant is unsatisfactory on its own and neutral opens us for further existence and it can still give unpleasantness in the future. <A> I think you're supposed to stay aware instead of daydreaming when you're driving. <S> Try moving your eyes repeatedly to look at different things: ahead, behind, the traffic lights, the other cars, pedestrians on this or that side who might be about to step into the road, etc. <S> Also breath enough to stay alert. <S> And think about what someone might do unexpectedly, don't assume they've seen you until they prove it. <S> I think it's OK to react to changing road and bike conditions without too much conscious thought, but in order to react (even to react automatically) you need to retain awareness of what's happening around you, you need to have seen it, you need to have been paying attention. <S> When there's an accident it's usually someone else's fault (e.g. a car turning into your right of way because they weren't paying attention and stupidly didn't notice you), but even though it's their fault there's often something you could/should have done to avoid it. <S> For example a common type of motorbike accident is where you come up to a green light, ride through the intersection, and a car coming in the other direction turns across your path (so it's the car's fault), but the motorcycle doesn't even brake before hitting the car (so apparently the rider wasn't paying much attention either). <S> Also it's not just about you. <S> When I'm on a bicycle I'm fairly harmless <S> and I'm looking out for my own safety; when I'm driving a car <S> I'm fairly well protected but conscious that unless I'm always careful I could really hurt someone else, and that it's my responsibility to never drive where I'm not looking. <A> Being mindful..... <S> It is not only OK to be aware it is essentially something that Lord Buddha asked all Buddhists to do as long as they stay awake. <S> But Buddhist version of " Mindfulness (Sathi) " is a bit more deep, it includes being aware of the mind as well. <S> We as Buddhists believe that not being aware or not being "Mindful" is the very source of all bad thoughts,actions & words that we choose to exercise. <S> Even though it is a very famous Word a lot of people do not know that Mindfulness was invented By Lord Buddha. <S> This is the Buddhist teaching on awareness.... <S> Meditation of Postures <S> full Awareness <S> Is it bad to have control over wandering mind? <S> No, Because the mind is in nature wander among memories,imaginations,hopes,desires,thoughts & etc. <S> This is why people are almost always lost in their own worlds. <S> The bad side of this is that being lost like this can cause a lot of trouble. <S> A mind is by nature very exposed & vulnerable to bad things and as we are not aware of our own emotions and thoughts we often find ourselves in the wrong side of black and white. <S> This is caused by not being mindful. <S> What you should take from all of this is that you have stumbled apon a good practice and you should develop it further move from "Being aware of the body" to Being aware of the mind . <S> Here are some links.... <S> Mindfulness of breathing. <S> four foundations of mindfulness <S> clear comprehension direct understanding Satipatthana Sutta - Full teaching on Mindfulness <S> May triple gems bless you! <A> Your body and mind recognizes that the path you take to work is easy, therefore you feel relaxed mentally and physically. <S> This process will make your mind more cautious of your surroundings and paths because everything is new. <A> I think this is fairly common to those people who are observing where they are or what they are thinking. <S> The presence gets better over time. <S> So, the idea is to not get stuck in the moment when you got lost. <S> Don't judge. <S> Keep going to this moment or the NOW :) <A> You're still in the present moment because you can't not be. <S> The daydream happens in the present moment. <S> The issue is one of habitual retreating from the world out of sheer boredom. <S> Just develop the habit of looking from the perspective of pure awareness without getting bogged down by the mind. <S> It's really simple but you have to stick with it over many years. <S> Eventually you can retreat into the mind but the awareness stays open such that you can decide whether you want to or not.
|
The boredom shifts because once you start REALLY looking then you realise that the real boredom is when you retreat into your mind rather than merely sticking with what you've got. Try taking different paths that you have never taken before. You are doing Kayanupassana hence this is one of the solution is being mindful, i.e., mindfulness of the body.
|
what the buddha said about his own karma? I have a strong believe in buddha but i am not much in karma logic. Had the buddha said anything of karma? If yes then what and if not then how? I am seeing some people getting back in a very amazing way whatever they had done in their respective past. Sometimes it is related to extreme past events, even. Like having a generation gap, too. <Q> what the buddha said about his own karma? <S> See: Why the Buddha Suffered - Apadāna 39.10 <S> but i am not much in karma logic. <S> Karma is one of the things that only a Buddha completely understands. <S> We can only have a rough idea of its operation. <S> I am seeing some people getting back in a very amazing way whatever they had done in their respective past. <S> Even outside Buddhism there is a saying your past catches up with you. <S> In the Buddhist perspective this is termed Karma. <S> Sometimes it is related to extreme past events, even. <S> There are 5 Niyamas or causal factors which define your experiences and also being in the wrong place the wrong time and the right place in the right time, i.e., random events. <S> So past Karma or action does not dictate all results. <S> Like having a generation gap <S> I do not think the generation gap has anything to do with Karma. <S> This is more to do with social, technological and attitude changes. <A> Karma is one of the main teaching in Buddhism. <S> Basically what buddhism teach us is this. <S> We are in a wrong understanding of me. <S> Even thought we thinks there is something called me, the truth is there is no anything called me. <S> (At least there is not a define constant thing) <S> Because of this wrong understanging, we are doing 'things' which were not existed before and we become the owner of this 'things'. <S> These 'things' have re-acts. <S> e.x. <S> Say we kill a moquito. <S> This incident of 'killing that mosquito' was never before. <S> We did it. <S> Hence we are the owner of that incident. <S> This killing incident has a negative power which will make us suffer. <S> So we will suffer for that incident in future. <S> The power of incident came from the strength of our own thoughts and from the act. <S> (First we are thinking we want to kill this mosquito, then we think to kill it, then we do the act) <S> This is simply what Karma is. <S> For each and every thing we are doing, this law applies. <S> Lord Buddha describes, this same law plus the miss understanding I mentioned above cause us to born over and over again. <S> Each time as of the Karma we did for the rebirth. <S> Main aim of buddhism is get the right understanding and stop these re-births. <A> Pardon me my direct knowledge is not that clear on the issue <S> so let me forward you to the very teachings themselves..... <S> These are the Sutras / Suttas By Lord Buddha on Karma. <S> Maha Kammavibhanga Sutta: <S> The Great Exposition of Kamma Cula-kammavibhanga Sutta: <S> The Shorter Exposition of Kamma Go to this link and look for " Vimanavatthu " <S> (Contains good returns of Karma) <S> Khuddaka Nikaya: <S> The Collection of Little Texts <S> This Contains bad returns of bad karma <S> Khuddaka Nikaya - Petavatthu <S> - The Real Truth of Life
|
The Buddha mentioned that there were 8 past Karma which were effective even after becoming Buddha.
|
How Does Buddhism Handle Internal Conflict Few years ago, family put matrimonial ad in newspaper in India. We thought we selected nice person, but turns out he was abusive, unfaithful, and only wanted green card. Worse, he made me have miscarriage. Now, I wish to move on with my life. One minute my heart says I want family to put matrimonial ad in newspaper in India again, next moment my heart says I want to keep busy in USA, maybe I will find person I am meant to marry here. I asked God to give me sign, a "Yes" or "No" as to whether we should put another matrimonial ad (of course we learned from last time, will be million times more careful), but literally, one hour I think "Yes", next hour I think "No". What does Buddhism teachings say in this case. For past few months I have been torturing myself mentally just thinking of this. <Q> It's important to understand that any amount of external situations happen which may not go your way. <S> When it goes your way, you're happy and God doesn't come into the picture. <S> And when it doesn't, sometimes God doesn't help. <S> ;) <S> So the idea is to accept the external situation as it is, because it was never in your control. <S> And keep living with the moments in life. <S> If you let an external situation faze you out too much, you're lost. <S> Understand this fact. <S> What we are in control of is ourselves, our internal reactions and responses to anything. <S> So whatever situation life brings you, just take it in the right stride and keep smiling and going. <S> Simply accept it. <S> Fear is ego's response to a threat on its existence. <S> Don't struggle with yourself. <S> If you put an ad in the matrimonial page, don't expect things to go right. <S> But don't expect things to go wrong either. <S> Just let it be. <S> Because the future is only imaginary if we think about it. <S> So let the future be whatever it is. <S> Have faith in yourself that you can deal with anything. <S> The way to deal with it is to introspect if you are ready, put the ad. <S> And hope it goes right by analyzing the person clearly. <S> Go with the flow. <S> Because life is to be lived whatever the situation may be, sportively. <S> (PS: And please, don't expect a certain God, to help out whenever you are in trouble. <S> That is simply wishful thinking.) <A> Sama-jivi dhamma concerns four qualities: <S> Sama-saddha : having compatible faith; they uphold the same religion, revere the same objects of worship, concepts, beliefs or principles, and share the same lines of interest- <S> they are equally firm in all these or can reach agreement on them. <S> Sama-sila : having compatible morality; they have conduct, morality, ethics, manners and upbringing which are harmonious or compatibility. <S> Sama-caga : having compatible generosity; they are in accord, not conflict, with each other in their generosity, hospitality, munificence, sacrifice, and readiness to help others. <S> Sama-panna : having compatible intelligence; they are sensible and can understand each other; they can at least reason with each other. <S> You can try all the accepted ways. <S> But, whether it is a love marriage or an arranged marriage, it is best to date for about an year and find out if you are compatible, before tying the knot. <S> As far as dealing with the capricious nature of your own mind, Vipassana meditation is the way to go. <A> Love is foundation of a relationship. <S> Instead of marriage focus on love. <S> If you have positive vibration you will attract persons of positive vibrations to you. <S> Also you will be able to feel the person instead of judging the person. <S> Looks like your understanding of very natural phenomenon (man/woman) is shallow and taking recourse to religion to understand simple basic concepts is not advisable at this stage. <S> Love is energy and if you are full of love i.e. energy it will attract others to you. <S> Try to be healthy and cheerful and forget about marriage. <S> Marriage is second step when love changes its dimension. <S> When two people want to dissolve themselves into each other and decide to live together its called marriage. <S> I know of a couple where if one is hurt the other feels it (one in a million). <S> Marriage which you know of is a lawful arrangement by the society and therefore utterly flawed.
|
There is no need to fear anything. Buddhism has principles called “ Sama-jivi Dhamma ” for couple to ensure their compatibility and provide a firm foundation for a long married life. You don't have to limit yourself to one method of finding a partner.
|
Are there meditations for forgiveness? I'm having a lot of trouble forgiving someone for something they did quite a little while ago. The repercussions of which I am still dealing with today. I feel a lot of anger and frustration when I think about what this person did, and it's very hard to ignore. I have already spoken to this person, and told them how I feel about the situation - ultimately forgiving them, but it still troubles me internally. What can I do to "purge" the thoughts from my mind and the negative connotations that come with them? EDIT: I do not wish to forget what happened, only learn to better manage the emotions that are felt when recalling the incident. <Q> Well this form of meditation is not well established or part of the more common meditation object <S> but Bhanthe Vimalasiri does teach forgiveness meditation. <S> The instructions are here: http://www.dhammasukha.org/forgiveness-meditation.html <A> Hmm. <S> I think "selfless action" will let you be peaceful, hard as it sounds. <S> There is no need to sit and meditate in some way. <S> Try this. <S> Whatever you do, try to let go of an idea of yourself. <S> Just be totally aware and conscious and involve yourself in the activity. <S> This is really meditation. <S> And you'll see yourself loosening up automatically. <S> And you'll be more content. <S> To really forgive, you need to understand that everyone is looking for "something" and that's why we do things. <S> Some inexplicable happiness. <S> To express ourselves. <S> Even criminals do so. <S> In trying to look for happiness outside, we get misguided and do unnecessary things. <S> This includes things like alcohol or drugs. <S> It is a satisfying-the-ego nature. <S> This happiness is not true happiness. <S> We try to fit in with the crowd or friends to be "accepted" to be happier. <S> Edit: This can also go the other way. <S> Disillusionment with life could indicate more focus, or blowing up the suffering/disappointing/frustrating aspects. <S> With a cool rationality and temperament by mindfulness/awareness, we can gain more equanimity. <S> To really see bliss and happiness, look inward and make yourself that way. <S> By being more open to pleasantness and reducing the ego qualities, you won't ever have to look outside. <A> I suggest maitri meditation because not only you'll be able to forget but will develop a loving kindness attitude towards the person of interest and all other beings <A> You might try compassion for the person who hurt you: understand that they were trapped themselves, by their own circumstances (and, maybe, ignorance). <S> I guess that's part of the message in The Moon <S> Cannot Be Stolen (where I think that the moon is a symbol representing enlightenment). <S> Another possibility might be reconsider your theory that they hurt you. <S> Verses 3 through 6 of the Dhammapada say that "those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred" ... <S> so, taking that to be true, maybe you need to let go of those thoughts. <S> For example if the person hurt you by not doing what you wanted, or not doing what you expected, it might help to see "what you want" and "what you expect" as impermanent, non-self, and non-satisfactory, and maybe to disassociate "me" from them, or abandon them -- maybe in favour of another less harmful theory, a theory that doesn't involve "me". <S> See also the answers to questions about "identity view" (for example answers to this question ) ... this (suffering as the result of not having forgiven a hurt) might be one of the myriad ways in which identity view leads to suffering: so <S> "purging" <S> that view might be a way to "purge the thoughts from my mind and the negative connotations that come with them" -- not just purging a symptom but a root cause. <A> Take the blame. <S> I understand they hurt you, nevertheless, you can take responsibility for it. <S> In many cases, that punctures the ball of negative energy and helps it dissipate. <S> Try it, take it on and live with it for a day, see how it feels. <A> There are only two ways to forgive - forget about it or achieve no mind state. <S> Forgetting takes a hell of a lot of time and most of the time it does not happen. <S> Scientists are working on selective erasing of memory. <S> But the research is years away from mass deployment. <S> Meditation will help you but prior to that you have to physically, mentally and emotionally cleanse yourself. <S> Another very simple way is to live a creative, conscious and fulfilled life. <S> Such a life has meditation built into it. <S> Hatred will reinforce itself. <S> More you try to forgive more strength you give to mind to start the hate process. <S> Have you seen a child who is denied candy? <S> If you deny mind the hatred through thought of forgiveness it will hate even more. <S> Meditation helps you reach no mind state in which mind only functions when you want it too. <S> Forgiveness is built into meditation. <S> There is no meditation for anything. <S> There are different meditation techniques for different people to reach no-mind state. <A> [Basing this answer in part on a comment by the OP on one of the answers] <S> This is not just about forgiveness: this is about dealing with suicide. <S> Which is huge. <S> I think you are being too hard on yourself. <S> You want to move to forgiveness before going through all the mourning necessary given the gravity of what happened. <S> It is part of life - and it does not go away with a simple meditation. <S> That said: you could try meditation on the inevitability of dukha (sorrow, stress, suffering, pain). <S> Your own and theirs. <S> Once you have really realized that, forgiveness will likely come easier too. <S> That you have repetitive thoughts <S> tells me that there are underlying emotions that you are not allowing yourself to feel. <S> These are likely anger, sorrow, disappointment etc. <S> Allow yourself to feel whatever it is you are pushing away. <S> It will pass. <S> In the meantime: look up the stages of grief. <S> While they are often not followed in the order listed, they may give you an idea of what to expect.
|
You may be able to forgive this person in time, but (in Buddhist terms) you have to accept the suffering of the situation first. Do not try to forgive anyone. Take the time to cry, to be angry.
|
Losing interest in Samsara and transformation one undergoes when following Buddhism I have been reading books on Buddhism and contemplating on the Suttas. Lately the things which I was interested about like reading novels, watching movies, playing games and girls is losing its sheen. I am more inclined to just observe things happening around me. What is the process of transformation one undergoes when one is following Buddhism? <Q> Being depressed and delusional are also normal. <S> Being enlightened is what is not normal in the world. <S> Becoming disappointed of sensual pleasures and wanting to figure out what is really going on around you is a good thing. <S> It's a mild version of what prince Siddhartha felt before he left the lay life. <S> It's called Nekkhamma Sankappa (a part of the right intention). <S> But it will soon disappear and you will be defeated by sensual desires again, if you don't practice Samma Vayama (right effort) of the noble eight fold path. <A> If you observe what is around you the <S> right way you can make progress. <S> Whatever you observe will be perceived as: <S> desirable undesirable <S> neither which results in: pleasure pain neutral. <S> This is discussed in Sal-āyatana Vibhanga Sutta , Indriya Bhāvanā Sutta . <S> When you experience any of these sensations you should remain equanimous and aware of the arising and passing nature to eliminate the roots. <S> See: Pahāna Sutta <A> "I am more inclined to just observe things happening around me" <S> Is reading novels, watching movies, playing games, etc, not observable as something happening around you? <S> It is true that some things lose their edge, but mostly because they never had an edge to begin with. <S> The practice of observation is actually more than a practice because it's really the naturally way of being. <S> As such you can just go about your normal life and still be practicing and being, which effectively are the same thing. <S> There is no more that needs to be done. <S> This is the process of transformation. <A> [...] is losing its sheen [...] <S> What is the process of transformation one undergoes when one is following Buddhism? <S> Not too different from the dispassion one starts to feel towards children toys when growing old: they are no longer a source of craving or clinging. <S> That does not mean that growing old one becomes depressed, however. <S> While depression has many kinds and many symptoms , it is invariably associated with not feeling well -- feelings of sorrow, sadness, guilt, hopelessness, anxiety/irritability, lack of energy for anything / fatigue, feeling empty, lack of concentration, difficulty remembering things and making decisions, etc. <S> Buddhism, however, is associated with hapiness . <S> We can even pair some of the depression symptoms with the 7 factors of enlightenment (which a buddhist is supposed to master): <S> While a depressed person develops difficulty remembering and concentrating, a buddhist develops mindfulness and investigation . <S> While a depressed person develops lack of energy and fatigue, a buddhist develops energy . <S> While a depressed person develops sadness and sorrow, a buddhist develops joy . <S> While a depressed person develops anxiety and irritability, a buddhist develops tranquility , concentration and equanimity . <A> What is the process of transformation one undergoes when one is following Buddhism? <S> In Theravada Buddhism <S> there are identified Four stages of enlightenment . <S> The Viññana Sutta seems to mentions earlier stages too: "faith follower" and "Dhamma-follower". <S> It may be (I know very little about it) that Mahayana Buddhism describes a different set of attainments (or describes or defines stages of enlightenment in a different way): see e.g. Ten Bodhisattva Bhūmis . <S> I suppose the "process" varies from person to person and from school from school. <S> One description of the process is presumably the description of the "noble eight-fold path". <S> I can't tell you what the methods of all the various schools are. <S> I'm not even sure what chiefly motivates all Buddhists. <S> For example some people talk about Saṃvega , conversely I think that some people have as their motive something like Mettā . <S> Also there is equanimity ... <S> but as 'compassion' and 'pity' are 'near enemies' <S> so are 'equanimity' and 'indifference' <S> (so e.g. you should aim for equanimity but not indifference). <S> At some point this might be a question to ask an actual teacher. <A> What is the process of transformation one undergoes when one is following Buddhism? <S> The eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body, the mind are impermanent, subject to destruction, vanishing, subject to origination, subject to cessation. <S> Forms, sounds, odors, flavors, tactile sensations, mind objects … Eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mind-consciousness… Eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mind-contact … <S> Whatever feeling arises with eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mind-contact as condition, whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant … that too is impermanent, subject to destruction, vanishing, subject to origination, subject to cessation. <S> Seeing thus you experience revulsion towards the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body, the mind; towards forms, sounds, odors, flavors, tactile sensations, mind objects; towards eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mind-consciousness; towards eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mind-contact; towards whatever feeling arises with eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mind-contact as condition—whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant. <S> Experiencing revulsion you become dispassionate . <S> What is impermanent is suffering. <S> What is suffering is nonself. <S> What is nonself should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ <S> When one sees this thus as it really is with correct wisdom, the mind becomes dispassionate and is liberated from the taints by nonclinging. <S> By being liberated, it is steady; by being steady, it is content; by being content, he is not agitated. <S> Being unagitated, he personally attains Nibbāna. <S> Based on SN 35.39-43, 22.45 in Ven Bodhi's translation <S> Through repeated examination and contemplation of the truth over time, your views change and what you once mistakenly perceived as attractive gradually loses its appeal as the truth of its unattractive nature becomes apparent. <S> Ajahn Chah "Clarity of Insight"
|
One way of thinking is that dispassion is the process a buddhist undergoes: dispassion for things that are, ultimately, unsatisfactory.
|
Why is human population increasing? Better kamma? Human population is increasing whether we like it or not and might even hit 10bn in the next few decades. But why is this happening according to a Buddhist's perspective? Some that I know that don't believe in kamma use this as a counter example saying that if people are becoming more sinful they ask how come the population is increasing. While I have my own understanding (devas being born back among humans, kamma alone doesn't determine the next birth "cuti sitha" does) I would like your expert opinion this. <Q> Here is not an expert opinion: which is that I don't know why you expect that the total number of sentient beings is finite, countable, and constant. <S> The perspective in the OP seems to be that the total number is constant, and is asking, "If the number of humans is increasing, then where (which realms) are they (pre-existing beings) coming from and why?" <S> It has a view of, "this used to be (countably) one old sentient being, and that (same) being is now being reborn as (countably) one new sentient being" ... <S> it has a view that, the type of being and/or realm might change (hell, animal, human, deva), but the total number of beings must be constant. <S> I don't see why you'd expect that view to be true, though: it seems to me an atman (self/soul) view, not an anatman view. <S> So far as I know a more anatman view might be look <S> "there's no person now" <S> (there are are just skandhas, an assemblage of parts, c.f. <S> the parable of the Milinda's chariot), "the number of sentient beings isn't countable" (except perhaps to the Buddha), and fabricated things are inconstant. <A> here's an interesting perspective on this from the Pali Canon, which implies that it's rather when human morals are high that the population is growing, not the other way round superstitious quite a bit <S> Depopulation <S> Then a certain affluent brahmin approached the Blessed One … and said to him: “Master Gotama, I have heard older brahmins who are aged, burdened with years, teachers of teachers, saying: ‘In the past this world was so thickly populated one would think there was no space between people. <S> The villages, towns, and capital cities were so close that cocks could fly between them.’ <S> Why is it, Master Gotama, that at present the number of people has declined, depopulation is seen, and villages, towns, cities, and districts have vanished?” <S> (1) “At present, brahmin, people are excited by illicit lust, overcome by unrighteous greed, afflicted by wrong Dhamma. <S> As a result, they take up weapons and slay one another. <S> Hence many people die. <S> This is a reason why at present the number of people has declined, depopulation is seen, and villages, towns, cities, and districts have vanished. <S> (2) “Again, at present people are excited by illicit lust, overcome by unrighteous greed, afflicted by wrong Dhamma. <S> When this happens, sufficient rain does not fall. <S> As a result, there is a famine, a scarcity of grain; the crops become blighted and turn to straw. <S> Hence many people die. <S> This is another reason why at present the number of people has declined, depopulation is seen, and villages, towns, cities, and districts have vanished. <S> (3) “Again, at present people are excited by illicit lust, overcome by unrighteous greed, afflicted by wrong Dhamma. <S> When this happens, the yakkhas release wild spirits. <S> Hence many people die. <S> This is yet another reason why at present the number of people has declined, depopulation is seen, and villages, towns, cities, and districts have vanished.” <S> “Excellent, Master Gotama! … <S> Let Master Gotama consider me a lay follower who from today has gone for refuge for life.” <S> Paloka sutta (AN 3.56) <A> Human population is increasing whether we like it or not and might even hit 10bn in the next few decades. <S> But why is this happening according to a Buddhist's perspective? <S> Since life expectancy on average is falling (famine, wars, etc.), the needed Karma need to gain human birth is falling. <S> Some that I know that don't believe in kamma use this as a counter example saying that if people are becoming more sinful they ask how come the population is increasing. <S> While I have my own understanding (devas being born back among humans, kamma alone doesn't determine the next birth <S> "cuti sitha" does) <S> I would like your expert opinion this. <S> Cuti sitha is determined by Karma.
|
When humans become sinful the criteria to become human falls and life expectancy falls and life in the human realm becomes hellish with more conflicts.
|
What is the purpose of the 5th precept? “Furthermore, abandoning the use of intoxicants, the disciple of the noble ones abstains from taking intoxicants. In doing so, he gives freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings.” To be clear, I am trying to figure out the spirit behind the 5th precept. To see how far it spans and what exactly constitutes intoxication. To dispel any doubt about his reasons for prescribing this precept, the Buddha has written the explanation into the rule itself: one is to refrain from the use of intoxicating drinks and drugs because they are the cause of heedlessness (pamada). Heedlessness means moral recklessness, disregard for the bounds between right and wrong. It is the loss of heedfulness (appamada), moral scrupulousness based on a keen perception of the dangers in unwholesome states. Heedfulness is the keynote of the Buddhist path, "the way to the Deathless," running through all three stages of the path: morality, concentration, and wisdom. To indulge in intoxicating drinks is to risk falling away from each stage. The use of alcohol blunts the sense of shame and moral dread and thus leads almost inevitably to a breach of the other precepts. One addicted to liquor will have little hesitation to lie or steal, will lose all sense of sexual decency, and may easily be provoked even to murder. Hard statistics clearly confirm the close connection between the use of alcohol and violent crime, not to speak of traffic accidents, occupational hazards, and disharmony within the home. Alcoholism is indeed a most costly burden on the whole society. -- A Discipline of Sobriety (byBhikkhu Bodhi) Where do addictions enter the equation? Drugs other then alcohol? These do not seem to be covered by the explanation (assuming the claim is true, which I do not know of). What about intoxicating love? Where do we draw the line between lust and intoxication? What about intoxication and ignorance? Is there even a difference? Thank you <Q> The 5th precept is not about addictions. <S> Love/sexual misbehavior is covered under the 3rd precept. <S> Again, it's not about addiction. <S> The intoxication discussed under the 5th precept is chemically muddling your senses. <S> Especially the mind. <S> Ignorance plays a role in wanting to do that. <S> Once you are intoxicated, it leads to more ignorant acts. <A> Its very simple. <S> If your goal is the spiritual path, you must do well to not harm yourself, or other people mindlessly. <S> Alcohol used for intoxication is not good for this purpose. <S> If you're looking for a good time just generally, socially, it is okay in small amounts. <S> You won't do much wrong because it is moderate. <S> In this regard, I also have something to say about abstaining from alcohol. <S> You can still have a nice time without it and don't need to depend on it unless it is a social stigma. <S> This includes things like excess of love or lustful feelings. <S> If you are mindful of what you want to do, you will understand what to do. <S> :) <S> With alcohol/drugs, there is a tendency to go mindless and do "weird" things. <S> Without alcohol/drugs, you have your senses firmly with you and you can control your actions well. <S> Which part of this did you not understand? <S> Its not a rule. <S> It is a basic understanding or reasoning of what your goal is, and what your action should be. <S> Thus, it very clearly depends on which path you are taking, either spiritual or material. <S> The path is the goal. <S> PS: I see NUMEROUS questions about the precepts on this site. <S> Don't get too technical about what is mentioned and what is not mentioned in the texts. <S> That will become endless interpretation . <S> Measure yourself and your goal and you will automatically know the actions you need to take up. <A> What about intoxicating love? <S> it's the cause of all suffering. <S> AFAIK <S> The 5th precept in my country translation is avoid the food and drink that can cause intoxicate and addiction. <S> Some people believe the smoking is not one of the consideration because it's not a food neither a drink, even though it is caused addiction. <S> And small amount of alcohol would not cause the intoxicate. <S> It's all can be arguable <S> and I don't think the winner also hold the right answer. <S> So, the best I think we look at the original purpose of following the precepts like you mentioned above "In doing so <S> , he gives freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings." <S> And know what the best for us. <A> Intoxicants usually refers to alcohol and drugs. <S> But it can also refer to the five pungent herbs: onion, garlic, leeks, chives, asofoetida. <S> Supposedly, these act as aphrodisiacs. <S> So, they are banned by one of the minor bodhisattva precepts in the Brahmanet Sutra.
|
It is referring to taking substances that lead to heedlessness, whether you get addicted to it or not.
|
Head oscillations, magnetic force movement, dizzy head after Vipassana I did my first Vipassana course in Feb 2016. 10 Days.As a first timer, it went pretty well till the 7th Day. 1) On 5th, 6th and 7th day i was suffering from my head thrown back, or front, or sideways. At that that i thought i had dozed off hence the jerk. I ignored it. (I can never sleep while sitting, what i learnt in life from flights and long bus rides). 2) My forehead, third eye, used to feel strong sensations from past 1-2 yrs. It increased in vipassana and Teacher said it was normal. 3) On 7th day, I started having a feeling of light-headedness, like I was flying. I did the evening meditation very dedicatedly. I started "flying" even more, and i went ahead with it thinking it happens in meditation. It drove me away from focusing on body sensations. My focus went to forehead and head which was feeling extremely high sensations and feeling of flying.I ceased to feel my body. There was no pain anymore due to sitting for long without moving. My head was spinning, very high sensations, and flying high and high. I went with it. This was last meditation of the day and I went to bed. 4) The sensations wouldnt stop. Even with eyes open, even if I focused at the wall, the head would spin, sensations in forehead were strong and i would "fly".I tried to sleep, but as soon as i closed eyes, head was extremely dizzy, strong sensations, like maddening. Head was oscillating back and forth and sideways.I had to open my eyes. I sat up and rested my head against the wall.I fell asleep very late, when the body was so damn tired that it gave up, when i went to sleep in 1 second, before the closed eyes could feel the sensations i fell asleep.The night was spent sitting.Next day I talked to the teacher and she said the experiences were normal. She asked me not to "fly" and focus on sensations. 5) Day 8, 9, 10: I was not able to meditate. Day 8 - I was not able to close eyes. The moment i would close, the spinning and flying sensation would start and was unbearable for me. To stop from flying and focus on sensations i had to open my eyes. Day 8 i pretty much spent with few minutes of closed eyes only. Rest, i have sat with eyes open looking here and there, or focusing on breathing with open eyes. 6) Day 8, i realized that the spinning feeling was because of an invisible magnetic field moving around me. I was feeling it like wind blowing around me. Passing time nothing to do, i was casually looking at my thumbs together. My palms were in shape of a ball/cup. And it was like oh my god!.. There was a ver strong magnetic field rotating between my palms!!With this revealation, i focused on it and realized, that was what causing my head oscillate upto 135 degrees left and right, back and forth, 24 hrs, if i didnt held it with force. 7) Day 8, i decided not to meditate in evening. I sat through the sessions blankly with open eyes, after permission from teacher.But this helped me fall asleep at night. 8) Day 9, I met the teacher again. She said, meditate 2-3 min as much as i can. The moment i start flying too much, i should move to Aanapan and focus on breath. If i still fly, i should open eyes, come back to normal, and restart again with sensations. 9) I accepted it and spent my day9 and 10 like this. My concern was, what after 10 days? Do I continue like this? Am i doing anything incorrectly? 10) after returning home, the dizzyness continued.Flying sensations continued. It has been 10 days since i have returned, but i still feel little dizzy all 24 hrs. Dizzyness has reduced as my meditation has come down to 1 hr per day. But not gone.A hard rock music listener before, now even loud talking hurts my ears and head badly. But i take it as anitya and bear with it neutrally. The first time i drove car after vipassana, i took reverse to take it out from house. The reverse movement spinned my head so badly, if there was a car behind me, i wd hv hit it. It's difficult to focus on one thing, like a book, screen, one car ahead close to you, someone talking to you standing close,etc. This is going on with me all the time. I am not reacting, letting it go. 11) Meditation : I try for 1 hr daily, but the same problem persists. In 3-4 mins, i start flying. Forehead has severe sensations and takes my attention away. If i dont open my eyes, i start flying with the flying feeling. Magnetic force starts running around me again.If I continue with it, my head will oscillate again.But I shift to Aanapan, and open my eyes. Take 2-3 mins to be normal.Then restart. I am a strong believer, and I am not gonna leave it being scared.I am hear to face it, and if anything needs to be changed i am ready. Question..whats happening to me?did i do anything incorrectly?what should i do with problems in normal life?what should i do with meditation practice? Please help Be happy and God bless <Q> When you do meditation you stop creating new Sankhara. <S> The implication of this is past Sankhara surfaces and gives minute results and pass away. <S> When this happens you get positive or negative out of the ordinary experiences. <S> Best is not to give importance to them. <S> These experiences can stay for a long time but eventually will pass off. <S> Do not make yourself unstable by worrying about them. <S> An analogy is opening a soda bottle. <S> It initially fizzers and then settles after the gas is gone. <S> Also see: Why is my head going all Poltergeist on me <A> One day a young man came to our monastery asking to be a monk. <S> He was a committed person and soon he started screaming in the night <S> and he had other discomforts too <S> (Loosing focus & interest). <S> One night he was screaming and the Monks gathered to see why. <S> The young man was talking oddly and monks understood that he is under the control of a "Pretha" (A being from a lower ralm, a bad birth caused by bad karma).When <S> the conversation went on the being revealed his true identity. <S> It was his Grandfather. <S> The being said "I can't let him reach nirvana, i will never see him again". <S> No matter how much Monks tried the being did not listen. <S> But in the end the young man was relieved from that.(Monks had to chant). <S> The Reason <S> i said this was that sometimes the reasons aren't tangible. <S> So it's better to take all precautions than being ill prepared. <S> The solution for this issue is... 01 - Start your meditation with this :- Paying Homage to Buddha <S> 02 - Learn this Meditation ( Loving Kindness Meditation ) and practice it <S> (This meditation can be done on the go and does not require you to sit down). <S> This Meditation can help you with any other realm disturbance and it will also gain good Karma too. <S> 03 - Breathing Meditation can aid any other meditation. <S> So use it before your meditation begins. <S> 04 <S> - If you feel any discomfort stop and give it a break. <S> After it pass away start with this Meditation Budhdhaanussathi meditation . <S> This is Lord Buddha's values so after doing this wish no pain or discomfort to come by the power of good karma you gained from this meditation and by the power of lord buddha. <S> My friend i must suggest that you should see a good teacher. <S> Maybe something can be wrong with your posture, it can lead to many discomforts. <S> Pick a position that is good for your Body Weight. <S> May the triple gems bless your efforts! <S> Use this Link to learn additional things on meditation Dhamma Talks <A> all sensations will pass away. <S> if u so mind about unpleasant sensation it will multiply the magnitude of the unpleasant sensation just ignore it. <S> tell your self anicca anicca annica impermanent you will be fine. <A> You are having classic signs and symptoms of neurological problems--Lightheadedness, dizziness, head spinning, very high sensations, flying/spinning sensations, strong forehead sensations, palm sensations, head oscillationsfeeling dizzy 24 hours, inability to focus. <S> THESE ARE DANGEROUS NEUROLOGICAL SIGNS/SYMPTOMS DUE TO MEDITATION. <S> http://kundalini-brahmajnani.blogspot.com/2016/05/dangers-in-meditation-meditation-or.html <S> You are going to end up in the hospital if you continue your meditation. <S> If you want your well-being, give up all meditation/concentration/focusing practices. <S> Shubhamsatu = Let Good Happen To You!
|
don't give attention to that sensation and by time it will fell less stronger.
|
Best type of meditation for attention I struggle tremendously with ADHD despite years of exploring traditional and nontraditional treatments. There are certainly many different kinds of meditation one can practice, so I was wondering what kind of meditation works best for creating lasting focus and a higher attention span in the mind. <Q> You might want to try Samatha meditation. <S> This type of meditation would have you fix your attention on a single object of meditation over a period of time. <S> The common object is your in and out breaths. <S> The point of focus is usually the tip of the nose or the upper lips where you could feel the in and out breaths making contact. <S> Since this training requires you to stay with a single object over a long period of time, it could help your mind maintains a higher attention span and lasting focus on a subject. <S> Sutta reference is available here and a detailed analysis is available here . <S> Good luck.. <A> ... <S> I was wondering what kind of meditation works best for creating lasting focus and a higher attention span in the mind. <S> ... <S> Anapana meditation increases focus and attention. <S> Scientifically demonstrated benefits <S> See also: Research on meditation <S> The practice of focusing one's attention changes the brain in ways to improve that ability over time; the brain grows in response to meditation. <S> Meditation can be thought of as mental training, similar to learning to ride a bike or play a piano. <S> Meditators experienced in focused attention meditation (anapanasati is a type of focused attention meditation) <S> showed a decrease in habitual responding a 20-minute Stroop test, which, as suggested by Richard Davidson and colleagues, may illustrate a lessening of emotionally reactive and automatic responding behavior. <S> It has been scientifically demonstrated that ānāpānasati slows down the natural aging process of the brain. <S> (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anapanasati#Scientifically_demonstrated_benefits ) <S> So does Metta meditation <S> His mind can concentrate quickly <S> (Source: Metta (Mettanisamsa) Sutta: <S> Discourse on Advantages of Loving-kindness ) <A> <A> I'm relatively new to meditation, but a few things spring to mind from my experience within one tradition: From my experience, <S> I'd be very surprised if one form of meditation will suffice (this is true for most people). <S> You may need a combination of awareness/mindfulness meditation to cultivate undistracted (while unstrained) concentration, kindness meditation to allow whatever arises in your experience to open up in its own way and time, and to give yourself the confidence to continue, and a receptive meditation such as the zen <S> zazen or just sitting practice to encourage openness and patience with your experience, and an unforced approach. <S> Choose a set of meditations which work well together . <S> If you are a beginner, it might be best to find a particular system or teacher and stick with their practices. <S> I can offer the Triratna tradition's meditations, with free guided meditations here: https://www.freebuddhistaudio.com/audio/ (search "metta bhavana", "mindfulness of breathing", and "just sitting" - I would, but <S> my internet's playing up) Stick with the practices rather than jump around between traditions/styles . <S> This will allow you to cultivate momentum and depth in your practice, whilst avoiding confusion. <S> ONE CAVEAT: <S> this is unlikely, but if the meditation is putting you in a worse state of mind, STOP (though unpleasant isn't necessarily bad). <S> Discuss your difficulties and problems with someone, and consider changing teacher/style. <S> You will greatly benefit from a lifestyle which compliments your meditation , otherwise you will be pulling in two directions at once. <S> For example, try spending time outside of meditation without occupying yourself with activities (i.e. stillness), e.g. sitting in a chair without a purpose (not reading, talking etc) - even if this is only 5 minutes a week at first, increase it over time. <S> If you forget - that's fine. <S> I suspect this might be the most important one for you (though it's difficult to tell without meeting you) extending your kindness meditation to generosity, patience etc. <S> outside your meditation finding things that you naturally enjoy focussing on undistracted - perhaps landscapes, relaxing music <S> etc <S> And if you can, I strongly urge you to find people who are also practising meditation to discuss the process with in person .
|
You should also try these Meditations Breathing Meditation :- Help increase the focus and calmness of a mind Meththa Meditation :- If you are an angry person this will help you to come over it Meditation of posturest full awarness :- Increases Mindfulness
|
What does Buddhism say about how to manage other people's anger? What does Buddhism say about how to manage other people's anger? Does Buddhism suggest any specific attitude when we are facing angry people, especially when they are unable to control their anger and/or unaware of their anger? Intuitively I try for example to listen to the person, understand him/her and remain calm myself as much as possible. What kind of recommendations or advice does Buddhism offer to help us in such situations? <Q> A very apt verse in the case of anger is this one from Dhammapada - Na Hi <S> Verena Verani - Hatred is never appeased by Hatred. <S> It is appeased only by loving kindness. <S> Here is the Dhamma talk by Ven. <S> Yuttadhammo on that particular verse. <A> Stop focusing on "other people" and focus on the experience. <S> Focus on what causes anger to arise in the mind. <S> ex: <S> If someone scolds at you, it's just sound hitting the ears. <S> What's wrong with sound hitting the ears? <S> Why you need to get so upset about it? <S> Anger arises due to ignorance. <S> Ignorance personifies the experiences caused by bad Karma. <S> That leads to aversion. <A> you may want to take a look at this list of suttas and Dhammapada <S> verses dealing with anger, hatred, aggression and hostility just one example from Theragatha Brahmadatta 6.12 <S> One who gets angry at an angry person Just makes things worse. <S> One who doesn’t get angry at an angry person Wins a battle hard to win. <S> When you know that the other is angry, You act for the good of both Yourself and the other, If you are mindful, and stay calm. <S> only that these are not words attributed to the Buddha <A> In Engaged Buddhism (a belief started by Thich Nhat Hanh during the vietnam war in the 1960's) <S> Thich <S> Nhat Hanh states that "Be aware of anger; anger blocks the communication and brings suffering" <S> He then advises that in order to reach Dhamma one must rid their mind of defilements of such things like suffering and ignorance, which cause angry fits of passion. <A> This desire to demonize an emotion is disturbing, and I have always had a problem with it. <S> Anger is a useful emotion. <S> It can allow us to react properly to a life threatening situation, either for ourselves or for another. <S> The problem is not Anger. <S> The problem is not being able to recognize when it is harming, rather than helping, the situation you are currently experiencing. <S> It is also the problem that Anger severely limits our ability to reason, trading reason for energy. <S> If you understand these things, then Anger can be your friend, just like all other emotions. <S> Loving Kindness, in some situations, might be scolding someone back, if that is what teaches them the proper lesson. <S> It could even be defending someone, or yourself, physically. <S> But to recognize <S> that moment is the hard part. <S> THAT is what I believe is the liberating thought in this case. <A> In the Dhammapada, The Buddha says: "Conquer the angry one by not getting angry; conquer the wicked by goodness; conquer the stingy by generosity, and the liar by speaking the truth." <S> (Dhammapada, 223) <S> And also here The Buddha says: <S> "Whence is there anger for one free from anger, tamed, living in tune — <S> one released through right knowing, calmed & Such. <S> You make things worse when you flare up at someone who's angry. <S> Whoever doesn't flare up at someone who's angry wins a battle <S> hard to win." <S> (Akkosa Sutta, SN 7.2) <S> But with making an end to mental fermentations, why would you be concerned about managing another's anger? <S> Happy, angerless, fearless, doubtless, sorrowless, becomes the one who's put an end to mental fermentations, such an extreme form of pleasure.
|
By being constantly aware and in control of one's actions, conciously one can prevent from experiencing these selfish emotions and focus on the communication and the content of the heated debate, occurrence, and/or problem. Although there are certain differences in anger and hatred, the basic approach will be the same - Remain equanimous by knowing Anicca, Dukkha and Anatta at the level of your body and then based on your sensations cultivate Loving Kindness towards the person.
|
What is the "nature of reality" according to the Buddha? I have read that the Buddha said the cause of suffering is ignorance of the "nature of reality". Is this correct? What is the "nature of reality" that the Buddha talks about? <Q> Realities are called Paramattha Dhamma in Buddhism. <S> There are 4 such realities. <S> Citta ( consciousness )ex: <S> Vipaaka-citta, Karma, Kiriya-citta. <S> Cetasika ( mental concomitants )ex: <S> Vedana, Sanna, Sankhara Rupa ( materiality )ex: <S> Patavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo <S> Nibbana <S> What is the "nature of reality" that the Buddha talks about? <S> The first 3 realities listed above have 3 qualitative natures : Anicca (impermanent) Dukkha (unsatisfactory) <S> Anatta (impersonal) <S> The fourth reality only has the impersonal nature. <S> The cause for suffering is craving according to the 2nd noble truth . <S> But craving cannot arise without ignorance. <S> It also cannot be uprooted without eliminating ignorance. <S> Ignorance is given as the first link of Paticca Samuppada , the dependent arising process which explains the origins of suffering. <S> I don't recall any sutta in which the Buddha making that exact statement, but it is inline with Buddhism. <A> I have read that the Buddha said the cause of suffering is ignorance of the "nature of reality". <S> Is this correct? <S> Yes it is correct. <S> If you knew the real nature of something you will not crave or averse to any experience which deals to suffering. <S> E.g.: <S> attached to something impermanent as permanent and be sad when this thing you hold dear breaks or decays <S> we are in a roller coaster of sensation which we have no control over and laos changing <S> , i.e., all thing we hold as good and pleasurable comes to an end, we encounter things we do not like and when things are neutral this also can change into some unwanted situation as we still creating a future for ourselves consider things that actually bring displeasure in the long haul as me or mine <S> What is the "nature of reality" that the Buddha talks about? <S> From the simplest framework way this has been described to the hardest nature of reality is described is as follows: <S> Knowledge of Three marks of existence Knowledge of the 4 Noble Truths <S> Knowledge of Dependent Origination Knowledge of Patthana - Conditional Relations <S> (7th book of the Abhidhamma) or a more elaborate description of Dependent Origination <A> Can I answer that with some Wikipedia links? <S> I don't know how much detail you want. <S> The "nature of reality" might refer to the " three marks of existence ". <S> "Ignorance" is said to be the "root" of the " three poisons ". <S> There's a description of ignorance on Access to Insight : which quotes a sutta which defines ignorance (its definition of ignorance is not knowing the "four noble truths"); and which quotes a sutta which explains why it's the cause of suffering (its explanation of the cause is as first of the "twelve nidanas"). <S> Incidentally I was interested to read of the " Four Dharma Seals " recently: they are the three marks, plus nirvana as the fourth. <S> Then there's a note which says, "As suffering is not an inherent aspect of existence sometimes the second seal is omitted to make Three Dharma Seals." <A> I have read that the Buddha said the cause of suffering is ignorance of the "nature of reality". <S> Is this correct? <S> Coming into existence or 'birthing' (jati) is the cause of suffering (dukkha). <S> Dependent Arising - Paticca samuppāda by Piya Tan <S> What is the "nature of reality" that the Buddha talks about? <S> All conditioned things (forms, verbalization, mental thoughts), are forever changing (anicca), lead to suffering (dukka), and devoid of a permanent entity/owner (anattma). <S> Read about the Tilakkhana or the Three Characteristics in the Dhamma. <S> may you be happy. <A> You are talking about the nature of reality right now <S> If you really want to know, <S> You want to experience not reading or knowing. <S> Readimg and knowing can be a danger without proper guidance. <S> They can be a hinderance to not being ignorant. <A> This may be wrong and may possibly not be answering your question completely, but are you maybe refering to "the ten factors" which I have heard described as the "fundamental reality of life". <S> Additionally, I have heard of delusion being, in essence, the root of suffering. <S> The only problem is that I'm can't quite remember who had said this. <S> The ten factors go as follows: Appearance-Nature-Entity-Power-Influence-internal cause-relation-latent effect-manifest effect-consistency from beginning to end- From this standpoint of logic, ignorence or mis-interpretation (i.e. delusion) of the the ten factors can cause one to not be "in-sync" with the "fundimentql reality of life" which then would lead to suffering. <S> I hope this helps, and I'm sorry that I havn't been able to give a very good explination or cite who said what very well in this answer, but if you look up "the ten factors" there should be better info. <S> on it. <A> According to Buddhism, ultimate reality is samsara, endless existence, but it is also impermanent, ever in flux, ever changing. <S> It is empty, yet full. <S> That is, form is always a temporary state of being. <S> Some forms last for millennia, like mountains and oceans, and some are as brief as a lightning bolt. <S> Elements come together to create a particular form, but eventually those elements will break apart again and the object will cease to exist. <S> This is true of everything in the universe. <S> Source : <S> http://www.patheos.com/Library/Buddhism/Beliefs/Ultimate-Reality-and-Divine-Beings
|
It would be more correct if you say " The cause of suffering is craving, which arises due to the ignorance of the nature of reality ".
|
How can one point to one's consciousness? For example, I can point to my eye: the eye itself; I can point to an object of the eye: a book; But I cannot point to the eye-consciousness that arises based on the two. <Q> From MN 28 : If, friends, internally the eye is intact but no external forms come into its range, and there is no corresponding conscious engagement, then there is no manifestation of the corresponding section of consciousness. <S> If internally the eye is intact and external forms come into its range, but there is no corresponding conscious engagement, then there is no manifestation of the corresponding section of consciousness. <S> But when internally the eye is intact and external forms come into its range and there is the corresponding conscious engagement, then there is the manifestation of the corresponding section of consciousness. <S> Trying to point to one's consciousness is like trying to point at the wind. <S> One can't really "point" it out. <S> One can only point to its manifestation. <S> How to point at the wind? <S> When seeing a tree and its branches are shaking or feeling a breeze brushing against one's face, etc. <S> Similarly, how to point out one's eye consciousness? <S> By the fact that one's able to cognize the form object like a book, a table, etc.. <A> Based on the Vipassana retreat I attended (and translated), when it comes to place one's mindfulness one one's mind(s), the trick is to start with identifying the function of the mind: seeing, hearing, thinking, etc. <S> The mind is that which is clear and knowing. <S> Its function is to know (realize) objects and it is easier to identify this aspect than it is to identify its clarity factor (which is its nature and makes it able to take the subjective aspect of what it apprehends, in the same way a mirror takes the aspect of whatever it reflects). <S> You can also read Analayo Bhikkhu on the topic. <A> In short: You cannot point to your consciousness nor can you feel it directly <S> You can direct [point] your attention to the respective consciousness at any of the 6 sense doors to which you can feel the sensations born out of contact (passa - also see: What is the definition of passa ? ) <S> In the case you point to your eye through body consciousness by feeling the sensations around the eye. <S> Here you are not pointing to the eye consciousness but directing your attention to the body consciousness around where the eye physically exist. <S> In the case what to point to an object of the eye you direct your attention to the eye consciousness whereby you see the object at the eye. <S> In both cases above once contact with the eye happens this is followed by the contact with the mind in which further processing and thinking is done. <A> Pointing to a consciousness is the same as pointing to a computer program. <S> The best you could do is point to your brain, which would be comparable to pointing to your monitor or hard drive. <A> Consciousness a not a thing. <S> Its a knowing. <S> The misunderstanding arises because we are forced to talk about such phenomena using the limitations of language, e.g. nouns . <S> Consciousness exists as a taker of objects. <S> Its the basic awareness of an object. <S> Its divided into 6 types by way of its bases; (a) <S> eye consciousness cognizes visual objects, light (b) <S> ear consciousness cognizes sound waves (c) <S> nose consciousness cognizes smell <S> (d) tongue consciousness cognizes taste <S> (e) body consciousness cognizes tangible sensations <S> (f) mind consciousness cognizes mental objects such as ideas, concepts,images, abstract notions etc. <S> The above 6-fold classification is mentioned by Ven. <S> Bhikkhu Bodhi in his short text on " The Five Aggregates Of Clinging" .
|
You can't point to your consciousness, just like you can't point to Microsoft Word. I suggest you start by identifying the functions of your mind: seeing, hearing, and so forth. Your consciousness is not an object, but rather a property of another object (your brain), similar to how a computer program's behavour is really just a convenient side-effect of a very specific arrangement of million of bits.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.