source
stringlengths 620
29.3k
| target
stringlengths 12
1.24k
|
|---|---|
The dilemma of enlightenment As a lay Buddhist, I know it is almost impossible for me to attain Enlightenment in this life. So if I keep enlightenment as a goal in mind it creates frustration, as I am not progressing in meditation and, life seems hopeless as Enlightenment is an impossible pursuit. However, if I don't think of enlightenment then I don't have any good motivation to do meditation and keep the precepts. How should I get out of in this confusion? Life as a Buddhist seems almost unpracticle. Any advise? <Q> Don't focus on suffering as it is the reason for suffering. <S> You can have a goal of reaching that eternal freedom. <S> But, make sure you enjoy the journey without too focusing on the end... <A> The goal in Buddhism is the end of suffering. <S> But why do you want to reach the end of suffering? <S> The reason is to attain the only permanent happiness, which is Nibbana. <S> So, the mission in Buddhism is really the pursuit of happiness. <S> The Buddha discovered that both over-indulgence and over-asceticism are not conducive to the path to the end of suffering. <S> So, he prescribed the middle way through the Noble Eightfold Path . <S> The long term goal associated with this mission is attaining Nibbana (permanent happiness). <S> It might take multiple births, maybe even aeons to achieve this. <S> The medium term goal would be to try to achieve: at least stream entry for Theravada and strong cultivation of Bodhicitta for Mahayana. <S> You can also get more info on stream entry in this YouTube video talk . <S> The short term goal would be to try to achieve and maintain happiness in this life and future lives (which includes avoiding unfortunate rebirths). <S> Going a little further, you need to practise more of virtue (sila) with heedfulness (appamada) . <S> This short term goal is described in the Ittha Sutta : <S> Long life, beauty, status, honor, heaven, high birth: <S> To those who delight in aspiring for these things in great measure, continuously, the wise praise heedfulness in making merit. <S> The wise person, heedful , acquires a two-fold welfare: welfare in this life & welfare in the next. <S> By breaking through to his welfare <S> he's called prudent, wise. <S> For lay followers, there is plenty of advice on achieving the short to medium term goals in the Gihi Sutta (or Discourse to the Householder) , Sigalovada Sutta , Dighajanu Sutta and Anana Sutta . <S> The minimum training rules imposed on lay followers are the five precepts . <S> For those in a hurry to Nibbana, there are the more advanced training paths of anagarika (sort of a pre-monk or pre-nun), novice monk or nun, and fully ordained monk or nun. <S> Please see this answer for details. <A> Did you kill your mother or father? <S> If the answer is no, you cannot say for sure that it is impossible for you to attain enlightenment within this life. <S> So when you are meditating if this worry arises, simply remind yourself worrying... <S> worrying... <S> worrying... or doubting... doubting... doubting... until it goes away. <S> Then get back to your meditation. <A> Its like you hear about a fantastic doctor who is a miracle worker & you are so inspired by the doctor that you decided to visit the doctor, even though you are not even sick. <S> The doctor asks you: " What is your problem? " <S> and you answer: " I don't have any problems <S> but I heard you are a miracle worker ". <S> Mass-market Buddhism is the similar. <S> It advertises meditation & enlightenment, similar to advertising I-Phones, even though you might have no self-perceived need for an I-Phone. <S> The Buddhist teachings are for the prevention & eradication of suffering. <S> If there is no self-perceived suffering in your life, there is no point in practising Buddhism & meditation.
|
If you are not practising to end suffering, I'd suggest to quit Buddhism. If you follow the middle way, you can have long term, medium term and short term goals of happiness. At the very minimum, you need to keep the five precepts with heedfulness (appamada) .
|
What to do when overwhelmed with Doubt - Practical Advice I have a major problem in my practice. When things are going well in life ,doubt rarely raises its head and I practice diligently. However , when something bad happens , I feel, how could this happen , I practiced so much. I start losing faith in the Dhamma and start to question whether it is real or helpful. This is a very painful position to be in. There are things causing doubt; frequently giving unwise attention to them — that is the nourishment for the arising of doubt that has not yet arisen, and for the increase and strengthening of doubt that has already arisen. — SN 46:51 When in the midst of painful emotion , this is what revolves in my head. How do I take this advice of the Buddha on a practical level. How do I stop giving "unwise attention" to the events that arise doubt like when accosted with suffering even though I practice so diligently. I would like to hear you own practical experience or links to any meditations out there. Furthermore, for denourishing of doubt , there are the five antidotes: Knowledge of the Buddhist scriptures (Doctrine and Discipline); Asking questions about them; Familiarity with the Vinaya (the Code of Monastic Discipline, and for lay followers, with the principles of moral conduct); 4.Firm conviction concerning the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. Noble friendship; Suitable conversation. In addition, the following are helpful in conquering Doubt: Reflection, of the factors of absorption (jhananga);Wisdom, of the spiritual faculties (indriya);Investigation of reality, of the factors of enlightenment (bojjhanga). How do I apply these antidotes practically , I read Dhamma books almost everyday , chant everyday and meditate. But when I am suffering , I feel anger and disbelief at the Dhamma . Even though I am practising so much ,I am still suffering. How can I overcome this very toxic and negative wrong-view to continue my Dhamma practice? <Q> There are times when there's nothing to do but watch. <S> Unwise attention, in this case, would include reading about arahants and then judging yourself for not being like them. <S> Just focus on what is right here. <S> Focus on the doubt itself, or on the body, and the feelings in the body created by the negative emotions - the constricted breath, the aches and tensions, the agitation, the rushing thoughts. <S> Resolve to sit, but don't expect anything from the sitting- just put in the time. <S> If chanting feels like a chore, just sit instead. <S> Find some small, easy, thing to do that is useful, or is kind and helpful to someone else, and do that. <S> Or just sit still and count to 100, if that's all you can manage. <S> These are all wise and skillful actions and are Dhamma. <S> If you just do your best to not nourish the already-arisen thoughts, then you are practicing Dhamma. <S> The flood is pulling away your energy and faith. <S> Wise attention, in this case, is to let the flood wash through, watch your energy and faith fade away, and stay aware. <S> Later, the energy and faith will return - <S> it is inevitable- <S> and you will have have strength again to nourish new, increased faith and energy, but for now, just do what you can. <A> There's no such thing as "something bad happens". <S> The painful emotion you experience is solely because of your attachment. <S> The unwise attention is to project this emotion outwards as "something bad happened even though I practice so hard". <S> The wise attention is to see "here is a painful emotion. <S> Let me see which attachment it's caused by and let that go ASAP" <A> OP: <S> But when I am suffering , I feel anger and disbelief at the Dhamma . <S> Even though I am practising so much, I am still suffering. <S> According to Itivuttaka 44 , enlightened ones can still feel pain and pleasure: <S> "What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with residue left? <S> Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. <S> However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. <S> It is the extinction of attachment, hate, and delusion in him that is called the Nibbana-element with residue left. <S> However, the enlightened ones don't suffer, even when they feel pain and pleasure (from DN16 ): <S> And soon after the Blessed One had eaten the meal provided by Cunda the metalworker, a dire sickness fell upon him, even dysentery, and he suffered sharp and deadly pains. <S> But the Blessed One endured them mindfully, clearly comprehending and unperturbed. <S> So, it is not that negative situations stop happening when you practice or even become enlightened, but rather, you face them differently. <S> This applies to both health and other types of situations. <S> Also see this answer . <S> In the Nakulapita Sutta : <S> "So it is, householder. <S> So it is. <S> The body is afflicted, weak, & encumbered. <S> For who, looking after this body, would claim even a moment of true health, except through sheer foolishness? <S> So you should train yourself: ' Even though I may be afflicted in body, my mind will be unafflicted. ' <S> That is how you should train yourself."
|
Put aside the expectations for yourself gained by reading the Dhamma. You're experiencing an emotional flood, created by long-past circumstances.
|
Thinking during Vipassana meditation Please correct me if I'm wrong. From what I read, the purpose of Vipassana meditation is to get insight, and wisdom about one self, in order to achieve a better life and eventually nibanna. The way I have been taught to practice Vipassana, is to focus on the present moment, feeling the sensations or emotions as they appear and disappear, observe the changes in the mind, and so on. However, in order to get insight, am I not supposed to analyse what is going on, looking for answers ? In order to think in that way, isnt'it necessary to break the focus on the present moment and therefore break the meditation ? Maybe it is part of the meditation ? As an example , suppose that I am meditating. Suddently a feeling of anxiety arises. I turn my focus to this feeling, gathering informations, feeling it for what it is, seeing the impermanence in it, etc. Then the anxiety disappears or some other thing arises, so I need to switch my focus in order to stay in the present moment. Instead, I would like to investigate this feeling, trying to guess why it happened, seeing if there is a way I can prevent myself from feeling it again, or if there is a way to prevent myself from the suffering I create by repeling this feeling. Experience as shown that I can get to great insight by interrupting the focus on the present moment to investigate the feeling. However on some other occasions it distracted me. In addition I imagine that the insights I get may be sometimes incomplete or false views ? How I am supposed to go about this ? <Q> All in all, the boundaries between thinking and not thinking are more conventional than real. <S> The brain is a machine that is always at work doing its thing, whether we create narratives like "I'm thinking", "I'm meditating" or not. <S> It's a machine that can see patterns and connections between the things it sees -- so as you keep looking, seeing happens (semi-)automatically. <S> As long as you look with clear attention, that is. <S> Learning some dharma theory does help with seeing things in the right perspective, but it sounds like you already have that. <S> So in some sense it doesn't really matter what you do - as long as you keep looking with right attention your mind will almost "enlighten itself". <S> You can interleave analytical meditation and introspection if you want. <S> You can read a paragraph of a book, put it down, think about it. <S> Or you can watch your mind in parallel with reading a book. <S> As you become more advanced all boundaries between different types of meditation begin to melt and look obviously contrived. <S> As my Zen master used to say, regular thinking is not different from meditation. <S> Regular mind is not different from the Diamond Samadhi. <S> However, there is virtue in formal meditation that is pure introspection. <S> In this approach we don't discursively reason about things we see. <S> We engage attention in looking inside and let the pattern-seeing machine of our brain do it's work connecting the dots on autopilot. <S> Makes sense? <S> So you just look and stare at that emotion, trying to go deeper into it, and then boom <S> , you see it's root in some sort of childhood event, that created a preconception that now manifests as attachment. <S> You don't "calculate" this insight analytically, it happens by itself through deep looking. <S> Similarly, there are other, deeper, types of insights that are only accessible through this sort of intuitive staring, informed by dharma theory. <S> For example, you can stare at your mindstream and then suddenly realize you now know what they meant by suffering and attachment. <S> Or what they meant when they said everything is empty. <S> The bottom line is that meditation is not entirely non-analytical, but it's not your regular thinking either. <A> I believe that it is natural. <S> That means, when you breathe you can feel your stomach going up and down or the warm air touching the edge of your nostrils... observe a bit and understand what you feel the most and try to focus on that. <S> I know it can be harder when you practically do it rather than typing here. <S> But it is worth to give it a try. <A> You appear to be trying to mix two methods of insight in one sitting, and by doing that you are getting confused. <S> Try this. <S> Release (for the moment) <S> what you know or have studied. <S> The framework is that of an eager and scientist watching the events of a fascinating experiment. <S> Don't push it, and don't relax too much, otherwise you will sleep! <S> Just remain engaged and alert, and basically comfortable - even playful. <S> You are engaging in monitoring your mind, so always go back to that. <S> Very quickly you will notice the mental nature of the experiential narrative of 'sitting doing meditation', and that's okay - <S> you are just monitoring - but these experiences begin to lose their concreteness, as we see them for what they are. <S> This is an experiential wisdom method. <S> It differs from (but is very well augmented by) an conceptual wisdom method, such as using the anti-philosophy of Nagarjuna's madhyamaka - which, through understanding that substance ontologies (ie. <S> a biological conviction in essential, or objective truth) are mistaken leads us to a powerful understanding of how we keep buying into something (essence) which isn't really there. <S> In the end the strong understanding (wisdom) of the nature of reality will become manifest from either (or both) - one through experiencing how what we take to be 'hard fact' is merely a conceptual narrative - the other through determining that the objects of fascination and abhorrance that we dress our universe in are not efficacious in the way that we believe them to be. <S> When we perceive that we are conflating objects as being the causes of our pleasure rather than merely the circumstances against which our pleasure arises, then we are able to see clearly how ignorance is the cause of suffering - and then we are able to develop renunciation and compassion.
|
Don't get caught up in thinking about thinking, thinking about meditating, or anything like that. Anything you do is fine, there are no hard rules. In your sitting, engage in monitoring your mental processes - the subject (monitoring mind) and the object (monitoring mind) are the same. However, when you feel like you are losing your focus, try to get it back by focusing on the strongest feeling of breath.
|
Can Buddha be insulted by disrespect? I found a video about Leshan Giant Buddha and was watching it with my family. In that video some workers were cleaning the statue's head while walking on it (it is a giant statue) - and my family members were surprised that people walked on Buddha's head, because to them that looked disrespectful. I replied that it's not a real problem, because Buddha does not have attachment to respect and would not feel insulted. Was I wrong or is this correct? The Buddha would never cling to such concepts like respect and feel insulted, right? <Q> The answer comes in the Akkosa Sutta below. <S> Even if someone insults him or speaks to him in a hurtful manner, he doesn't accept it i.e. react to it. <S> And so it goes back to the originator. <S> However in the case of the Giant Buddha Statue, perhaps they have no choice but to walk on its head in order to clean it. <S> The Buddha statue is not the Buddha himself. <S> It's only a symbolic representation. <S> I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Sanctuary. <S> Then the brahman Akkosaka Bharadvaja heard that a brahman of the Bharadvaja clan had gone forth from the home life into homelessness in the presence of the Blessed One. <S> Angered & displeased, he went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, insulted & cursed him with rude, harsh words. <S> When this was said, the Blessed One said to him: "What do you think, brahman: Do friends & colleagues, relatives & kinsmen come to you as guests?" <S> "Yes, Master Gotama, sometimes friends & colleagues, relatives & kinsmen come to me as guests." <S> "And what do you think: Do you serve them with staple & non-staple foods & delicacies?" <S> "Yes, sometimes I serve them with staple & non-staple foods & delicacies." <S> "And if they don't accept them, to whom do those foods belong?" <S> "If they don't accept them, Master Gotama, those foods are all mine." <S> "In the same way, brahman, that with which you have insulted me, who is not insulting; that with which you have taunted me, who is not taunting; that with which you have berated me, who is not berating: that I don't accept from you. <S> It's all yours, brahman. <S> It's all yours. <S> "Whoever returns insult to one who is insulting, returns taunts to one who is taunting, returns a berating to one who is berating, is said to be eating together, sharing company, with that person. <S> But I am neither eating together nor sharing your company, brahman. <S> It's all yours. <S> It's all yours." <A> We have giant Buddha statues in Sri Lanka too. <S> But nobody walks on the head to clean them. <S> There are respectful ways to do it if you are smart enough. <S> I have heard this ridiculous argument many times - "The Buddha wouldn't get upset. <S> Therefore it is ok. <S> " The Buddha didn't get upset even when Devadata tried to drop a rock on him. <S> The Buddha didn't get upset when Cinca Manavika falsely accused him of making her pregnant. <S> That doesn't mean such actions are not wrong and not bad Karma. <S> That is not the point. <S> It's important to keep in mind that being disrespectful does not require the other person to become upset. <A> Agree with what you said. <S> They are only statues and not attached to Buddha. <S> Actually, his teaching is about having the wisdom to understand this idea. <S> No one can insult you as long as you have the ability to stay calm and not getting attached to the feeling of insult. <S> Same with Buddha... <A> This is not disrespecting Buddha. <S> As people who have quoted above in their replies are Buddhist teachings by Buddha himself. <S> It is the intention that matters.
|
The Buddha will never get upset whatever you do. The point is if your actions are disrespectful, it is bad Karma for you.
|
Annoyed by nasal congestion and hyper-salivation during meditation? I just attended a 10-day Vipassana retreat and during the whole retreat I was constantly annoyed by nasal congestion and hyper-salivation. For many years I've had a sort of chronic nasal congestion, whether it's summer or winter, it doesn't matter, I always have at least one stuffy nostril. I know I need to go to the doctor but I've been lazy all this time, but now I'll do it, I promise. Anyways, it seems that in tandem with the nasal congestion I've also developed the automatic habit of "fighting" the nasal congestion by sucking/breathing the mucus in, producing saliva and then swallowing the saliva which kind of carries some of the mucus with it, thus producing a temporary feeling of relief from the nasal congestion. However, as I said the relief is partial and only temporary, because a few seconds later the feeling of nasal congestion comes back again, the urge to "fight" arises and the whole process repeats again. This almost subconscious process became blatantly obvious during the 10-day retreat where we were meditating 12 hours a day. It was super annoying. I was developing aversion towards it which totally defeats the purpose of Vipassana. So I tried to remain equanimous to my nasal congestion and hyper-salivation, but then I realized that even if I remain equanimous to the feeling of the air hitting the clogged nostril, the saliva production would not stop. The saliva would start accumulating quickly in my mouth, and eventually I would have no choice but to swallow it all. This was super annoying and many times I just gave up and started swallowing quickly and compulsively, hopelessly trying to get rid of the saliva, but then my mouth would keep producing saliva anyway. So one way or another I ended up fighting my nasal congestion and swallowing a lot of saliva, and felt like a weirdo making all these mouth noises during the group meditations, which probably annoyed my unfortunate fellow meditators in the room. So it seems as if my brain has somehow learned to automatically produce saliva whenever I experience nasal congestion, which is pretty much all the time. It's as if I've developed a sort of OCD of fighiting my nasal congestion and producing and swallowing saliva, and I don't know how to get rid of it. After the 10-day retreat I still keep experiencing this, in fact I had experienced this problem even before the retreat too, it's just that the retreat allowed me to become extremely aware of it. What can I do? Has anyone experienced something like this and managed to solve it? Thank you very much in advance. <Q> I was developing aversion towards it which totally defeats the purpose of Vipassana. <S> The purpose of Vipassana is to gain insight. <S> Is there any way you can gain insight into the workings of your experience through your newfound aversion? <S> You can observe any experience to gain insight into the truth, but looking into suffering is particularly helpful. <S> Moments of suffering house so much delusion, they are information treasures! <S> Wishing your physical condition to go away is a manifestation of fundimental aversion. <S> Next time you are meditating, I encourage you to ask yourself these questions. <S> What makes up your desire to have your condition go away? <S> How often is the desire/suffering being felt by you? <S> What physical and mental sensations occur that show you your desire is absolute/a need? <S> What part of you is your condition harming? <S> The beautiful thing about being dissatisfied is that although it is painful, it is an insight jumping in front of your face, ready to occur! <S> Best of luck to you <S> and I hope you find what you are looking for! <A> For example, if you could run five kilometers this nasal problem probably would not occur. <S> Pornography was also mentioned in another topic. <S> Pornography can contribute to this because watching the secretion of fluids in pornography (such as when a women performs oral sex on a man) will naturally cause the watcher's own body to secrete similar fluids (as the woman); similar to how watching a man's body aroused in pornography will stimulate the watcher's body to be aroused. <S> Whatever the mind fixates, the watcher will also "become". <S> Pornography is deliberately designed using Freudian principles of phallic, oral & anal arousal to trap men into a self (male) fixation. <S> Pornography is not primarily the watching of naked women but the watching of men having sex. <S> Both posts on this forum are indicative of an unhealthy lifestyle. <S> The benefit of doing the Vipassana Retreat is it had you become personally & intimately conscious of these problems & therefore it provided you with an insight & opportunity to change your life for the better. <A> Did you tell the assistant teacher about your problem? <S> I've attended a few 10-day Vipassana courses and even though my symptoms perhaps weren't as acute as yours, I've also had problems with the blocked nose and saliva in my mouth. <S> Almost every time I attended the course I asked the assistant teacher what I should do with the excess saliva in my mouth, and they all consistently answered that I may swallow it as often as I wish. <S> I suggest you ask that question yourself next time you attend the course, but it seems that the simplest solution is to swallow the saliva and return to observing sensations. <S> Note, however, that during Ānāpānasati you're supposed to breath through your nostrils, but it's apparently not so crucial during Vipassanā, and you can resort to breathing though your mouth, if there's no other option. <S> Again, this is what an assistant teacher told me, but you should ask this question yourself.
|
This appears to be a physical issue; that probably needs to be resolved in a physical way; such as by proper exercise, proper eating, non-consumption of intoxicants, herbal detoxification medicine, acupuncture, etc. As for the problem with nasal congestion, I don't know any good solution for that, perhaps a physical/medical solution is needed here.
|
What to do after becoming free from suffering and attachments? Suppose I'm free from suffering, free from attachments, untouched by pain and pleasure, with absolute, constant calm and peace of mind; feeling profound compassion towards all beings (from an ant, to my mother, to a murderer). I no longer see any vexation in front of me. There's nothing to fix. There's nothing to overcome. There's nothing to attain. (I'm not really interested in enligthenment). What would you recommend me to do? Is there a way to make good use of this state, maybe to help others somehow? What would you do in my place? <Q> If nothing is left for attainment. <S> Why would you ask anyone else to tell you to do , is this still not a form of an attachment to views of others ? <S> If someone is not interested in enlightenment or if it is not achieved then in particular , they would consider to promote and propagate compassion and kindness amongst beings so that it could lead to path of partial fulfilment of end of suffering. <A> Simply cultivate what you've reached and help others to find their very own path accordingly. <A> In the Mahayana tradition, liberation is a step on the path to full enlightenment. <A> what to do after getting rid off suffering and attachment is the question and answer to this is as follows. <S> at that stage no such question will arise bcs the driving force behind doing something will also be ceased. <S> the sankharas (prime movers for actions )will be nil. <S> Upon this no any type of doing will happen except those which happens out of outburst of unconditional compassion. <S> In our day to day life also we experience that if we are compassionate for a slight second of time towards any being in some or other pathetic condition, it is observed that, that being starts changing /improving. <S> after liberated state, only compassion works .there remains no self to generate such question as what to do now ?
|
To become a fully enlightened buddha, practice generosity, morality, patience, enthusiasm, meditation, and wisdom (the 6 perfections).
|
What is the word in Pali that is translated as being by some and as becoming by others? I'm referring to translations in accesstoinsight.org; what is the word in Pali that is translated as "being" by John D. Ireland and "becoming" by Thanissaro Bhikkhu? For example, in Itivuttaka: The Group of Twos - 49. Held by Views. links and sample translations are given below. John D. Ireland translation "Bhikkhus, held by two kinds of views, some devas and human beings hold back and some overreach; only those with vision see. "And how, bhikkhus, do some hold back? Devas and humans enjoy being , delight in being, are satisfied with being. When Dhamma is taught to them for the cessation of being, their minds do not enter into it or acquire confidence in it or settle upon it or become resolved upon it. Thus, bhikkhus, do some hold back. Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "Overcome by two viewpoints, some human & divine beings adhere, other human & divine beings slip right past, while those with vision see. "And how do some adhere? Human & divine beings enjoy becoming , delight in becoming, are satisfied with becoming. When the Dhamma is being taught for the sake of the cessation of becoming, their minds do not take to it, are not calmed by it, do not settle on it or become resolved on it. This is how some adhere. <Q> The word is "bhava" and in my understanding it refers to a particular state of individualized existence: "being a living being", "being a human", "being a person". <S> So it's not about just the mathematical fact of existence, it is about your subjective position of identifying with this particular organism and its personal story, its narrative. <S> So when Buddha says "devas and humans enjoy being", and "Dhamma is taught for the cessation of being" - it does not mean, Dhamma advocates death or annihilation, it advocates transcending identification with an individual living being. <S> Does not mean Dharma advocates identitying with Universe either, that's another wrong view. <S> Instead, the right view is to see the unhealthy outcomes of any and all identification and to abandon identification altogether. <S> P.S. <S> As @ChrisW noted, bhava is also notably mentioned in the Second Noble truth as classification of tanha (craving) into bhava-taṇhā and vibhava-taṇhā. <S> In that context, again, bhava refers to a particular sate of existence - in this case a state of existence that we crave for: "I want to live in a certain way <S> , I want to be X <S> , I want to be surrounded by Y, I want my life to look like Z". <S> Vibhava then refers to not being in a particular state: "I want to stop being poor, I want to stop being sick, I want to stop being lonely" etc. <S> In all cases bhava seems to always be connected with an idea of self in a broad sense - self not as subject of experience or agent of actions, but rather as one's state of existence. <A> The Pali word is 'bhava', which is defined in AN 3.76 as the mind 'established' (patiṭṭhitaṃ) in a sensual, material or immaterial element. <S> For example, if the mind is stuck in delighting in the taste of delicious food, this is 'bhava'. <S> Lord, this word, ‘becoming (bhavo), becoming (bhavo)’—to <S> what extent is there becoming? <S> Kamma ripening (vepakkañca) in the sensuality-element.. is sensuality-becoming... <S> Kamma ripening in the form-element... is material-becoming... <S> Kamma ripening in the formless-element... is immaterial-becoming... <S> Thus kamma is the field, consciousness the seed and craving the moisture. <S> The consciousness of beings (sattānaṃ) hindered by ignorance & fettered by craving is established in (patiṭṭhitaṃ) <S> the sensuality... material ... immaterial element. <S> Thus there is the production of new becoming in the future. <S> AN <S> 3.76 'Bhava' is caused by 'craving' & 'attachment' and includes self-views: <S> The craving that makes for further becoming (bhava) — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving to be, craving not-to-be: This, friend Visakha, is the origination of self-identification described by the Blessed One. <S> MN 44 <S> Most importantly, 'bhava' is a mental defilement (rather than the existence of life), as follows: <S> There are these three kinds of fermentations: the fermentation of sensuality, the fermentation of becoming, the fermentation of ignorance. <S> AN 6.63 <S> Iti kāmayogo bhavayogo diṭṭhiyogo avijjāyogo, saṃyutto pāpakehi akusalehi dhammehidhamma saṃkilesikehi <S> Such are the bond of sensuality, the bond of bhava, the bond of views and the bond of ignorance. <S> One is fettered by bad unwholesome states that are defiling.... <S> AN 4.10 <S> For him — thus knowing, thus seeing — the mind is released from the fermentation of sensuality, the fermentation of becoming (bhava), the fermentation of ignorance. <S> MN 121 <S> The Blessed One has realized for himself with direct knowledge, in this very life, the fermentationless liberation of mind, liberation by wisdom, and having entered upon it, he dwells in it. <S> AN 10.30 <A> Here is a copy of the corresponding Pali: <S> Vuttañhetaṃ bhagavatā vuttamarahatāti me sutaṃ: <S> “Dvīhi, bhikkhave, diṭṭhigatehi pariyuṭṭhitā devamanussā olīyanti eke, atidhāvanti eke; cakkhumanto ca passanti. <S> Kathañca, bhikkhave, olīyanti eke? <S> Bhavārāmā, bhikkhave, devamanussā bhavaratā bhavasammuditā tesaṃ bhavanirodhāya dhamme desiyamāne cittaṃ na pakkhandati <S> na pasīdati <S> na santiṭṭhati nādhimuccati. <S> Evaṃ kho, bhikkhave, olīyanti eke. <S> The root "bhava" appears three times (corresponding to the three places where the translations say "being" or "becoming"). <S> Here is a dictionary definition for bhava: https://suttacentral.net/define/bhava
|
Tayome, bhikkhave, āsavā— kāmāsavo, bhavāsavo, avijjāsavoavijjā
|
How is one reborn as a chakravartin? Chakravartin (Sanskrit cakravartin, Pali cakkavattin) is a Sanskrit term used to refer to an ideal universal ruler who rules ethically and benevolently over the entire world. Such a ruler's reign is called sarvabhauma. How does one achieve such a venerable state ? <Q> I think that what is taught to children about a "universal monarch" -- together with <S> The Legendary Account of the Four Sights , in the Introduction to the Jâtaka -- is that the prince Siddhattha might have been one (and that his father wanted him to become a ruler), and that he chose not to be: Seven of these raised two fingers each, and gave a double interpretation, saying, "If a man possessing such marks and characteristics continue in the household life, he becomes a Universal Monarch; if he retire from the world, he becomes a Buddha." <S> And then they set forth all the glory of a Universal Monarch. <S> But the youngest of them all, a youth whose clan-name was Kondañña, after examining the splendid set of marks and characteristics on the person of the Future Buddha, raised only one finger, and gave but a single interpretation, saying, "There is here naught to make him stay in the household life. <S> He will most undoubtedly become a Buddha, and remove the veil of ignorance and folly from the world." <S> For this Kondañña was one who had made an earnest wish under former Buddhas, and was now in his last existence. <S> Therefore it was that he outstripped the other seven in knowledge, and saw but one future; inasmuch as a person possessed of such marks and characteristics would never stay in the household life, but would undoubtedly become a Buddha. <S> So he raised only one finger, and gave that interpretation. <S> So at least one of the requirements for that "achievement" is to "stay in the household life". <S> Wikipedia says, The first references to a Chakravala Chakravartin appear in monuments from the time of the Maurya Empire (322–185 BCE), dedicated to Chandragupta Maurya and his grandson Ashoka. <S> In Buddhism, the Chakravarti came to be considered the secular counterpart of a Buddha. <S> I guess that the conceit (of comparing "universal monarch" and "Buddha") might have been consolation and/or flattery for the emperor, or perhaps just good advice for the emperor. <S> The biographies (including birth, achievements, etc.) of Chandragupta Maurya and of Ashoka are also linked on Wikipedia -- see especially Conquest of Kalinga & Buddhist conversion but also Buddhist kingship . <A> Just double checking, you asked how one is reborn to... right? <S> now how one accomplish such task? <S> In Sankharupapatti sutta , though it does not say exactly "cakkavattin", Buddha talked about causes for one to become whatever he/ <S> she wish: from human world, heavenly worlds, all the way to liberation. <S> If he poses/accomplishes in faith (saddhā), virtue (sīla), learning (suta), charity (cāga), wisdom (paññā). <S> Interestingly, if you look at 5 qualities above, it is above quality of a stream enterer. <A> DN 26 states <S> Cakkavatti was achieved as follows: <S> He had over a thousand sons who were valiant and heroic, crushing the armies of his enemies. <S> After conquering this land girt by sea, he reigned by Dhamma, without rod or sword. <S> More brief reasons for this 'rebirth' or 'becoming' can be read in AN 3.14 . <A> Chakra-vartin ("wheel-turner") is, by definition, a ruler that turns the wheel of Dharma. <S> The wheel of Dharma is a metaphor for tradition of wisdom and virtue, passed from generation to generation. <S> As the wheel keeps going in the established rut, an established tradition keeps getting passed from generation to generation of people. <S> So the chakra-vartin is an epithet of an ideal ruler that preserves and maintains the tradition of wisdom and virtue as the mainstream principle and paradigm during the time of his rule. <S> As described in DN26, the way a ruler becomes a chakra-vartin is by upholding the primacy of law providing justice and security to all people protecting the animals supporting the poor consulting with the sages on questions of ethics <S> The key requirement seems to be consulting with the sages vs. ruling according to one's own ideas. <S> Generally speaking, over many lifetimes, it is "doing what's skillful" is what culminates as rebirth of a chakravartin.
|
In other words, to become a chakravartin one needs to educate oneself on ethics and consistently implement those principles in one's rule.
|
Is OM an imported religious term from Hinduism? OM or AUM is used in "OM MANI PADME HUM" and some other mantras. To my knowledge, OM is found only in Mahayana and Vajrayana schools. It's not found in Theravada. The 14th Dalai Lama explained the meaning of OM here: On the meaning of OM MANI PADME HUM . It's an extremely important and venerated word in Hinduism -- see " What is the significance of ॐ (Om/Aum)? " on Hinduism.SE. Is OM in Buddhism an imported religious term from Hinduism? Or like " namo " which means "salutations" or "adoration", does OM have an ordinary meaning and therefore not considered an imported religious term? <Q> And according to hindu mythology Shiva's abode is Kailash mountain which is in tibet. <S> So inhabitants of that part of Tibet were using the word AUM or OM either for purpose of meditation or as ordinary word to mean Consciousness. <S> Hinduism was mostly rooted in Afaganistan, Pakistan and the Gangaitic plains of India during ancient time. <S> With this line of reasoning there is a heavy possibility that Hindus themselves adopted OM from Tibeteans. <S> OM is not used by Theravadins only by Vajrayana Buddhists and Mahayana Buddhist whose roots are in Tibet. <S> So basically Tibetians are using it <S> and it belongs to them. <S> So I wont say it is imported. <A> does OM have an ordinary meaning <S> Although it's hard to prove a negative, people don't explain its "ordinary meaning" when they explain it, so I assume the answer is "no". <S> I guess it has two actual meanings. <S> but, there are diverse explanations of what those three things are. <S> The Hinduism. <S> SE topic says they refer to: "Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva" and/or to "creation, preservation, and annihilation" and/or to " satva (goodness), rajas (passion), and tamas (ignorance)" H. H. <S> The Dalai Lama's explanation says that they refer to: the practitioner's impure body, speech, and mind <S> the pure exalted body, speech and mind of a Buddha <S> So the symbolic meaning seems to be "three syllables representing three things" -- but (importantly) what those three things are , what the symbol represents , differs. <S> So (perhaps like other words, karma for example) it's a word repurposed by Buddhism. <S> If it has a different meaning in Buddhism, I don't know whether you'd want to think of it as the same word. <S> The second "actual meaning" of it is (or comes from) <S> where and how it's used, its positional or contextual meaning -- i.e. it's used to begin mantras. <S> I think that, in the real world, people tend to learn words from hearing them in place, in context, in practice (and not from dictionary definitions). <S> So the basic meaning of "om" is "here starts a mantra" and/or "prepare to be conscious of a mantra". <S> It's hard to think of an equivalent in English ... possibly "Amen" which has an overtly religious origin but may possibly be used in other contexts to mean "I solemnly agree with what was just said." <S> Perhaps this could be called a "formulaic" meaning -- possibly for example like: <S> " Evaṃ me sutaṃ " -- prepare yourself to hear a sutta "Once upon a time" -- prepare yourself to hear a children's story "Dear sir" -- prepare yourself to read a business letter Ringing a little bell at the beginning of a period of silence <A> Namo Buddhaya. <S> Aum stands for states of consciousness. <S> A , U , M stands for wakened consciousness , dreaming consciousness , sleeping consciousness. <S> Hinduism and Buddhism share a common heritage of the great sages who discovered OM and many other Truths. <S> It would be inappropriate to say those sages were Hindu or Buddhist. <S> Therefore Aum is not an imported religious term from Hinduism. <S> Aum is not a religious term. <S> Aum predates religion.
|
OM is basically associated with Shaivya tradition of Hinduism i.e. those hindus who worship Shiva. The first "actual meaning" IMO is that people explain that it has three syllables (or four if you count the silence afterwards); and, that each of the three syllables refers to different things ...
|
Can the mind be trained to maintain equanimity in the face of compulsive urges/cravings (without giving in / acting out)? Are there any practices or habits that one can employ, either frequently or on a daily basis, to train one's mind to remain still and equanimous in the face of compulsive urges or cravings, without giving in to them / acting them out? Can this skill be developed in a general sense, applicable to all types of urges/cravings, or does one need to train a different, tailored technique to handle each type of urge/craving individually? <Q> Please refer to my answer on "How can I forget my old girlfriend?" <S> Urges and cravings come up because we seek sources of external energy. <S> We assume that these things can give us something: make us happier, elevate us, entertain us. <S> So all these cravings even though they seem different are really cravings for one thing - energy. <S> However, if you look at them really carefully you will see that obtaining these things does not give large amounts of energy for a long time. <S> It's like browsing Facebook: we hope we will see a post that will be interesting, educating, motivating, and will improve our day - but most of the time we just keep scrolling and scrolling, and most of the posts don't give us more than a few seconds of joy, so the entire experience is very frustrating. <S> But we still keep craving, funny <S> huh? <S> Because we are so confused! <S> The real source of energy is only our own strength. <S> Giving in to the urges will never give enough energy. <S> Only authentic challenges that we really believe in can give us what we are looking for. <S> So the only way to obtain that energy that we crave for is to sit down, meditate, and see what we really want deep inside. <S> Which personal weakness we want to overcome to get something we dream about. <S> Then go ahead and overcome that weakness and achieve that goal. <S> That will give you energy that will be real, and all small urges and cravings will be so obviously hollow comparing to that, that they will all subside by themselves. <A> Yes, that is what the Satipatthana meditation is about. <S> It works for all types of cravings. <S> It makes you immune to cravings at first, but if you keep practicing till the end, craving wouldn't even arise in the first place. <A> 1. <S> 2. <S> Realize, that you dont have to give in immediately 3. <S> Acknowledge that you have a choice (to act or not to act) <S> 4.Reflect on the Drawbacks ( <S> long and short term) in giving in. <S> (write them down on a sheet of paper and go over them) 5. <S> Again, do that on a sheet of paper/ app etc. <S> and go over them. <S> Regarding point 4+5: Preferably, you should write both aspects down and concentrate at 2 points for each side (these aspects that are most negative or important to you). <S> Really see that the positive reasons to give in are usually just of short term benefit <S> and then they bite you back BY PERPETUATING THE HABIT/URGE. <S> If you like you can also reflect on the positives for NOT GIVING IN, LIKE: <S> You weakened the habit by a little, building self confidence, you overcame a challenge rather than a problem etc.. etc. <S> Be creative. <S> One more point: Try to create an acronym like A-R-A-R-C or something like that in order to memorize it and then to employ it when necessary. <A> Buddhism teaches urges arise from ignorance therefore urges are eradicated by developing wisdom.
|
Acknowledge that you have a craving (be honest with yourself and try to watch it in a curious manner) Counter positive reasons why it's supposedly good to give in (rationalizations).
|
Setting foot in two different boats First some introduction: I am in my ending teen years and like a normal teen would aspire for success, I aspire for it too. But there is a catch... I don't want to get too lost into material world, such that, at the end of the day I will be lost. In a sense I don't want to waste time. I have desire to be a little above mediocrity which can take lots of time(and there is no guarantee that I will succeed), so I believe it would be better if I realize the pointlessness of it as(many gurus claim). Some say to realize pointlessness of money(and any such desires like higher social status) it is important to have them first. So is it like I have heard that at the end of tough road is a steep fall and for me to realize it I have to work hard and see for myself, is there no better choice? Can't I move towards it(worldly successes) and in the meantime practice something so I realize it is not that important? Right now I don't have courage to live like a monastic and even if I do, I'll be thinking of worldly pursuits most of the time and will have this sense of failure with me, that, I chose this path(spiritual) because I would fail in material path(this idea of choosing spiritual path because of failure in materialistic path is frowned upon where I live). Note: I know that I have to try to keep precepts and be moral, I want little bit advanced practice(while I try to build my career) Thank you! <Q> Open yourself up to the world. <S> Let the possibilities excite and draw you in. <S> The greatest gift you can bring to the world is yourself, enlightened by your own spiritual practice. <S> Whichever path you take, you will end up where you were meant to be. <S> The lessons you need will find you, where ever you are. <S> Allow yourself to look towards what inspires you, not only what is safe and has good financial prospects. <S> Youth has magic to it (even if being young is not an accomplishment), you can breathe in possibility. <S> Don't allow the disappointments of others to guide you to a lesser path with the idea that it is safer. <S> There is nothing safe in unhappiness. <S> As you walk along your path, keep checking on whether your path has the aspects you need most. <S> Here is a list that I think is well worded, but you can craft your own. <S> (I welcome edits if someone can make Right Livelihood clearer) <S> • Is what we are doing causing harm to others or suffering for ourselves? <S> • Is the way we live and the way we support ourselves causing harm or suffering? <S> • What are the purposes for which we work? <S> • What values do we express in our work? <S> • What consequence does our work have on the quality of our inner life? <S> • What consequences does it have on the world? <S> • Is the way we live our life satisfying and meaningful? <S> If it isn’t, what can we change to create greater joy, satisfaction, and meaning? <S> (I copied it from here: https://www.care2.com/greenliving/how-buddhism-helped-me-find-a-better-career.html ) <A> Please see this answer for the question " Can a Buddhist own and run a billion dollar business? ". <S> Also, please see this answer on the pursuit of happiness in Buddhism. <S> The first step in the Noble Eightfold Path is developing Right View and you need to do this by studying the Dhamma . <S> At the same time, you should learn about developing virtue (sila) and wholesome qualities , and practising them with heedfulness . <S> The most minimum set of training rules to undertake are the five precepts . <S> But developing skillful living and skillful thinking exceeds the five precepts by far. <S> Meditation can come later. <A> Live your lay life according to the Singalovada Sutta . <S> Dedicate one hour a day or as much as you can spare for meditation , listening to the Dhamma. <S> When you get vacation, visit a meditation center and practice intensively. <S> This way yo can succeed at both. <A> You can always build your "worldly success" while practicing Buddhism. <S> There is no conflict of each other. <S> If you are talking about go the monastic direction and live like a monk, that's a totally different story.
|
You can definitely pursue materialistic happiness while following the Noble Eightfold Path .
|
Anapannasati - Why the breath? Is there a specific reason why the breath is used as the object of anapanasati or to be more precise: Why did the Buddha chose the breath. Does it mean then that in daily life our main object should also be the breath? <Q> Seems that moderators are expecting a particular style in these answers, and so deleted my initial answer. <S> I'll rephrase... <S> The reason that the breath is the most important meditation object is that unlike other objects they are always available. <S> For example, you might forget your TM mantra or misplace your mandala. <S> Other objects of meditation, such as decaying corpses, aren't usually freely available in the UK either :-) <A> Does it mean then that in daily life our main object should also be the breath? <S> In the context of Buddhist meditation, there are 40 subjects of meditation ( Kammaṭṭhāna ). <S> These are divided into Samatha for concentration and mastery over the mind <S> Vipassanā for wisdom <S> The Noble Eightfold Path has 3 subdivisions : morality ( Śīla ) - developed though recollection of morality ( Śīla ) <S> mastery over the mind ( Samadhi ) - developed through Samatha wisdom ( Paññā ) - developed through Vipassanā <S> Vipassanā is easier to develop in daily life as Samatha requires longer hours of meditation to develop concentration ( Samadhi ). <S> Anapanasati helps develop both Samadhi and Paññā at the same time, but this is not the only technique at your disposal. <A> The Buddha did not chose the breath. <S> Instead, the breath chose the Buddha. <S> When the mind surrenders or abandons craving, the sense organs/objects of sight, sound, smelling, tasting, external touching & pre-occupation with thinking disengage. <S> What remains, as the most coarse or gross sense object, is the breathing. <S> This is the meaning of Anapanasati, namely, ' mindfulness with breathing ' rather than ' awareness of breathing '. <S> Those who attempt to practise ' awareness of breathing ' may experience some samatha (calmness) but will not progress very far because the path of the Buddha is the path of abandoning craving. <A> The first good thing about the breath is that while you are alive, it is always available. <S> Another good thing is that it is internal, not an external object. <S> The purpose of this kind of meditation is to train the mind to be able to focus single pointedly. <S> Ultimately, this ability can be used to meditate on the emptiness of self and all phenomena, eventually resulting in a direct perception of emptiness, AKA, Nirvana. <A> It's simple. <S> Breathing affects body, feeling (or sensations) and mind. <S> When you breath, your abdomen inflates or deflates, and your rib cage also moves. <S> When you breath, you can feel the sensation of the breath on your upper lip, nostril and/or nasal passage. <S> If you breath fast, your mind becomes agitated. <S> If you breath slowly, your mind calms down. <S> So, anapanasati includes realistic observation of body, feeling and mind, whereas meditation on bright white light or a mantra would only include observation and manipulation of mental objects. <S> Realistic observation of body, feeling and mind is needed to gain understanding into the nature of the five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness) and dependent origination . <A> When I first started serious meditation in 1975, I heard the breath being called the maha mantra - 'the great mantra'. <S> This was also a term used by Hare Krishna for a chant. <S> At the time I was meditating on 4 objects/subjects: the breath, light, music and nectar. <S> Breath was always my favourite :-)
|
When the mind is quiet, empty & free, i.e., when " mindfulness is established to the fore ", the breathing automatically, without choosing, becomes the natural object of meditation. Anapanasati is one of the meditation techniques under Vipassanā to develop the 4 Satipatthana .
|
How does Paticcasamuppada or 12 Links of Dependent Origination relate to Aversion? Buddha mentions in the Paticcasamuppada that craving leads to clinging and this leads to existence ,birth and death. In other places Buddha mentions that Aversion is a very unwholesome state of mind and we should practice to remove it from our mind. However, I would like to know how aversion plays a role in the 12 links of dependent origination as only craving and clinging are mentioned. <Q> Aversion is simply the disliking of an experience. <S> When a person gets angry, sad or afraid, it is the craving to be rid of the experience that is going to lead to clinging. <S> Not aversion itself. <S> It is called Vibhava-tanha. <S> Hence aversion isn't considered a direct cause of Samsara. <A> Craving just means: “wanting” Clinging means: “getting fixated on wanting” <S> Suppose we give up this “wanting”Then what would happen? <S> One thing is clear: “wanting” is not really the best state. <S> Is it? <S> The very fact that we are “Wanting” <S> something automatically implies we are not happy with currently what we have. <S> That is why we want something. <S> What we “want” may be attachment or aversion. <S> They are both the same thing. <S> If you think about it. <S> Attachment means wanting to Get something - for example, I like this <S> or I like that. <S> So the problem is not attachment or aversion. <S> They are both wanting. <S> That is why they both feel the same in the body. <S> They appear as some type of tension and tightness in chest and in mind. <A> Aversion is a form of craving, as follows: <S> On seeing a form with the eye, he lusts after it <S> if it is pleasing; he dislikes it if it is unpleasing. <S> He abides with mindfulness of the body unestablished, with a limited mind, and he does not understand as it actually is the deliverance of mind and deliverance by wisdom wherein those evil unwholesome states cease without remainder. <S> Engaged as he is in favouring and opposing , whatever feeling he feels—whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant—he delights in that feeling, welcomes it and remains holding to it. <S> As he does so, delight arises in him. <S> Now delight in feelings is clinging. <S> With his clinging as condition, being comes to be; with being as condition, birth; with birth as condition, ageing and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair come to be. <S> Such is the origin of this whole mass of suffering. <S> MN 38 <S> Bhikkhus, dependent on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact; with contact as condition there arises a feeling felt as pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant. <S> When one is touched by a pleasant feeling, if one delights in it, welcomes it and remains holding to it, then the underlying tendency to lust lies within one. <S> When one is touched by a painful feeling, if one sorrows, grieves and laments, weeps beating one’s breast and becomes distraught, then the underlying tendency to aversion lies within one. <S> When one is touched by a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, if one does not understand as it actually is the origination, the disappearance, the gratification, the danger, and the escape in regard to that feeling, then the underlying tendency to ignorance lies within one. <S> Bhikkhus, that one shall here and now make an end of suffering without abandoning the underlying tendency to lust for pleasant feeling, without abolishing the underlying tendency to aversion towards painful feeling, without extirpating the underlying tendency to ignorance in regard to neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, without abandoning ignorance and arousing true knowledge - this is impossible. <S> MN 148
|
Aversion also means wanting to get something - if I say I dislike something means, I like something else
|
Reference request: the ways of the world I am looking for sutta text where the Buddha says something like... The ways of the world will never be finished find your own salvation with diligence... Meaning, all the politics, hatered, war in this world will always continue you need not heed them and instead you should work towards your own salvation... <Q> "The affairs of the world will go on forever. <S> Do not delay the practice of meditation. <S> " - Milarepa <A> Possibly Pupphavagga or Lokavagga or Jesusvagga . <S> 178. <S> Better than sole sovereignty over the earth, better than going to heaven, better even than lordship over all the worlds is the supramundane Fruition of Stream Entrance. <A> There are some (famous) lines in the Maha-parinibbana Sutta (DN 16) <S> Therefore, Ananda, be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto yourselves, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as your island, the Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge. <S> And Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. <S> Strive with earnestness! <S> These don't quite match, "The ways of the world will never be finished"; but they are a good (maybe the best) match for, "find your own salvation with diligence".
|
There are various English translations, e.g. it's often translated "diligence" instead of "earnestness".
|
Importance of the first three Brahmaviharas in Theravadan Buddhism So while reading a lot of teachings, especially "higher" teachings, a great deal is mentioned about dispassion in worldy things, unattractiveness in the body and various contemplations on death. It's quite easy to get lost in these kind of contemplations without developing the Brahmaviharas to feel something positive (especially social positive emotions are important for humans). I'm wondering if positivity is highly stressed in Buddhism? On the one hand the brahmaviharas are not withot reason called "the divine abidings ". So I think one needs to dwell in them as much as possible. Also the last two points of Right Effort stress the importance of cultivating and maintaing positive emotions. On the other hand though, being non-delighted in things makes this look rather grim. Maybe I haven't read much Suttas on Compassion, loving kindness, generosity etc.. <Q> Brahmavihara manifest naturally from non-defilement. <S> Regardless, Brahmavihara is taught as a preliminary practise to Anapanasati. <S> For example, from MN 62 and MN 118: Develop the meditation of good will. <S> For when you are developing the meditation of good will, ill-will will be abandoned. <S> Develop the meditation of compassion. <S> For when you are developing the meditation of compassion, cruelty will be abandoned. <S> For when you are developing the meditation of appreciation, resentment will be abandoned. <S> Develop the meditation of equanimity. <S> For when you are developing the meditation of equanimity, irritation will be abandoned. <S> Develop the meditation of the unattractive. <S> For when you are developing the meditation of the unattractive, passion will be abandoned. <S> Develop the meditation of the perception of inconstancy. <S> For when you are developing the meditation of the perception of inconstancy, the conceit 'I am' will be abandoned. <S> Develop the meditation of mindfulness of in-&-out breathing. <S> Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. <S> And how, Rahula, is mindfulness of in-&-out breathing developed & <S> pursued so as to be of great fruit, of great benefit? <S> There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, and setting mindfulness to the fore. <S> Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. <S> It is reported that, for the Buddha, metta was very important. <S> For example: Monks, if for just the time of a finger-snap a monk produces a thought of loving kindness, develops it, gives attention to it, such a one is rightly called a monk. <S> Not in vain does he meditate. <S> He acts in accordance with the Master’s teaching, he follows his advice, and eats deservingly the country’s alms-food. <S> How much more so if he cultivates it! <S> AN 1:6.3–5 <A> I find the sutta; Sankhitta Sutta: <S> In Brief (Good Will, Mindfulness, & Concentration) , helps a lot both in explaining the Brahmaviharas and in showing their connection to mindfulness of breathing. <A> I do agree with the statement by Dhammadhatu that the brahmavihara manifest naturally ones the mind is free from defilements. <S> But, they can also be developed independently from anapanasati, meaning not as a preliminary practise. <S> My teacher sees and treats them as great support of vipassana meditation. <S> I guess their role ranges nowadays from: independent to preliminary to supportive. <S> I'm wondering if positivity is highly stressed in Buddhism? <S> Well, the teachings of the Buddha are about liberation from suffering. <S> So, yes. <S> If you accept being liberated from suffering as a positive thing then I would say it is highly stressed. :)
|
Develop the meditation of appreciation.
|
Most effective meditation techniques to develop empathy, love and compassion for others? I feel like a very cold and sensual person. Easily attracted to sensual pleasure but very cold and numb when it comes to bonding with other human beings. I want to change, and therefore I want to make a meditation plan in order to develop empathy, love and compassion for other human beings, and possibly extend it to all sentient beings in general. However, I'm not sure about how to make such a meditation plan. Based on your experience / knowledge, which meditation techniques are most effective to develop these emotions? <Q> There are different ways of going about this goal. <S> A problem with merely reciting the standard formula could be that it may feel like internally, you are actually experiencing the opposite intention. <S> Not being satisfied with oneself, even feeling aversion towards oneself, is quite common, especially in many Western cultures, and to extend metta from that position can be very difficult. <S> The same thing is true when there are people you do not actually like, or even feel strong aversion or hate towards. <S> Personally, I suspect just reciting, going against one's actual experienced intention in the present moment could be counter-productive. <S> There are other methods to try. <S> You may first want to consider if there is anything or anyone that actually does bring up a sense of compassion and a wish for well-being inside of you. <S> Ajahn Brahm provides various suggestions: perhaps babies? <S> Perhaps kittens or puppies? <S> Some other animal? <S> Perhaps somebody who showed you love and care when you were a child - one of your parents, one of your grandparents, etc. <S> Whatever or whoeever it is, is not so important, with the caveat that somebody you have been sexually attracted to is probably not the best choice. <S> The point is to find the feeling and amplify it as much as you can, before you start to extend the metta. <S> You can also use logic to strengthen your resolve. <S> You can imagine what your situation would be like, and by extension, what the world could be like if people genuinely wished everyone else <S> well. <S> Finally, there is a "backwards metta hack" that a kind monk taught me. <S> He explained that for him, metta had been the biggest challenge in his practice. <S> He had a miserable upbringing and major problems with depression, even suicidal ideas, before he was introduced to Buddhism. <S> So when he started out, he simply could not do it. <S> He just couldn't find the feeling within himself. <S> However, as he started to learn how to calm the body and mind through meditation, he would experience increased peace and well-being within himself, and had a breakthrough at one time, as he was coming out of a very peaceful meditation and felt very calm, very soft and yet very clear and bright. <S> At that moment, something inside of him clicked: 'What if I can radiate this state?' <S> - and then he started the metta meditation. <S> Immediately, it felt genuine. <A> I recommend you metta meditation. <S> It is simple meditation you can do even when you are traveling in a bus etc. <S> Basically what metta meditation does is, it help us to think about others well being and betterment with wishing their success. <S> We can do metta meditation direction wise or group wise. <S> Read meththanisansa sutra and karaneeyametta sutra for further information. <S> First thing a person do in meththa meditation is hope the well being of himself <S> May I be happy. <S> May I be at peace. <S> May I live with ease. <S> May I be free from suffering. <S> Then you can move direction wise or group wise and wish well being of other people. <S> All the people in the direction of north,be happy.be at peace.live with ease.be free from suffering. <S> This way you can spread metta for all 10 directions or for parents, relations, neighbors ,people who are friendly, people who are neutral, people who are hatred etc.... <S> From this meditation you can earn 11 benefits during this life..read them on those sutras. <S> In practical mannaer you can spread metta at any time.. <S> for example, when you are going to work in early morning.. hope all people who are walking to work... <S> going on bus.. going on train <S> etc may they all happy today.. may everything they do be successful..etc. <S> When you see a person with a illness sadness or any problem, spread metta to him... <S> may this person be recovered from the illness..may this person happy and peaceful etc.... <S> When you hear of see an ambulance is passing by.. <S> in your mind think may this person feel well, may this person recover from illness.. may this person live long etc. <S> Developing these kind of thoughts will automatically brings those people's love , affection and kindness to you back too. <A> You can try metta meditation. <S> There are some guided metta meditation YouTube videos: <S> Ajahn Brahm's Guided Metta Meditation Bhante Gunaratana's Guided Metta Meditation <S> Thanissaro Bhikkhu's Guided Metta Meditation Matthieu Ricard's Guided Metta Meditation <S> Mindah-Lee Kumar's Guided Metta Meditation <S> I cannot make a recommendation from the list above. <S> It's up to you to find the one that you like.
|
Ayya Khema's Guided Metta Meditation
|
Is it forbidden to fight to defend your possessions from a thief? From the last few days i have been trying to meditate to generate equanimity. My question is simple: If i practice equanimity, compassion, loving kindness, forgiveness, there would always be people who would take advantage of that right? For instance if someone comes to steal from me, i should give him my belongings right? Like thats the Buddhist way right? Fighting and resisting is forbidden right? And he informs 10 other thieves about this kind man. How to be wise in this situation where you know people take advantage of your compassion, niceness? <Q> Resisting or protecting what you have is not forbidden. <S> But you shouldn't kill. <S> It is perfectly fine to say no to someone who is trying to take advantage of you. <S> It's perfectly fine to have a non-lethal security system for your house. <S> That does not get in the way of Brahmavihara . <A> If i practice equanimity, compassion, loving kindness, forgiveness, there would always be people who would take advantage of that right? <S> Yes there will be people who will like to take advantage of your position to prove their point. <S> But it is generally our own karma which puts us in the bad position. <S> If you are really good <S> then no one can <S> , I repeat no one can steal even a single penny from you. <S> For instance if someone comes to steal from me, i should give him my belongings <S> right? <S> Yes and remember Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. <S> Give up your belongings and be grateful that he did not hurt you. <S> If he hurts you be grateful that he did not kill you. <S> Like thats <S> the Buddhist way right? <S> Fighting and resisting is forbidden <S> right? <S> I dont exactly know about the Buddhist way but from <S> I have read, the right way to find in which ways you are blessed and find a way to bless the tormentor. <S> And he informs 10 other thieves about this kind man. <S> How to be wise in this situation where you know people take advantage of your compassion, niceness? <S> As I said it is generally your own karma which confronts you with bad situations. <S> Do not run away from it. <S> Do not fill your heart with hate. <S> Just realize that what is needed is more compassion and not less. <S> I quote a famous verse from Dhammapada: <S> Hatred is, indeed, never appeased by hatred in this world. <S> It is appeased only by loving-kindness. <S> This is an ancient law. <A> If your intention is to practice generosity there are better ways to do that and practice the Dhamma. <S> Buddhist need to stop thinking that practicing the Dhamma means allowing people to walk over you and take advantage of your practice. <S> You have a right to your life, liberty and your property, just don't let your attachment add to your physical or mental suffering. <S> If you want to practice that level of non attachment become a monastic. <S> If he tells others that you are an easy mark you will have to use your wisdom to avoid those circumstances because sooner or later you will meet a thief who lacks wisdom and compassion and will hurt you. <A> For instance if someone comes to steal me, i should give him my belongings <S> right? <S> Like thats <S> the Buddhist way right? <S> Fighting and resisting is forbidden right? <S> The Buddha teaches us the path to enlightenment. <S> When enlightenment occurs, the sense of self, attachment, and suffering no longer arise. <S> In my opinion, the Buddhist way is analyzing your experience in order to cultivate wisdom and become enlightened. <S> If someone attepts to steal from you, yes a Buddhist who is attempting to emulate an arahant would give the thief their belongings. <S> But now that your things are gone, how do you react? <S> Are you attached to those possessions? <S> Where does that attachment come from? <S> What does it feel like deep within you? <S> If you are walking the path and your goal is enlightenment, what is most important is not what happens and how you act, but how through your investgation of your experience is. <S> Training in morality is essential, but I would argue not as important as concentration and wisdom. <A> No, just do what you do. <S> The great Rinzai Master, once said Followers of the way, often get frustrated by thinking that Theory, Practice, and reality somehow have to be perfectly aligned. <S> No, When you are able to follow this advice, which wasn't spoken to you, in the first place. <S> Then, more power to you. <S> If you are really asking these questions in good faith, which I doubt, just "do your best", That's it. <S> Keep asking questions. <S> Here read thisThe criterion for rejection4. <S> "It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. <S> Come, Kalamas. <S> Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' <S> Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them. <S> Now, I found a link for you to read the entire Teaching. <S> Please, respect yourself, and think for yourself. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.013.than.html Take Care, be happy, Please take care of your health. <S> Enjoy life.
|
If someone attempts to rob you it is wise not to resist and give them what they ask for because of safety reasons, you are less likely to be hurt in that situation. If you have walked the path, it is impossible for someone to steal from you. No, what you have learned seems like it is crippling you.
|
Other than Nirvana , what else is not changing? It is said that Nirvana is not changing. But I found a text here which states that dharma of conditioned arising is unchanging. The Buddha said to the monk: “Conditioned arising was neither made by me, nor made by others. Whether a Tathāgata arises in the world or not, this element of dharma remains unchanging. If sabbe dhamma anatta then how is it possible that Dhamma of conditioned arising is not changing ?And is it possible that Nirvana and Dhamma of conditioned arising are the same? <Q> I think that most things are considered "conditioned" -- especially, anything that you perceive: any perception (including the perception of a sight, for example, but also the perception of some idea). <S> And anything that's conditioned is impermanent (disappears when its condition no longer exists). <S> I'm not sure, however, that "unconditioned" and "not impermanent" means the same thing. <S> In particular I don't know whether "Dhamma" (i.e. the kinds of "laws" which the Buddha taught) is considered "conditioned" <S> -- I'd guess that the perception of Dhamma is conditioned. <S> I think that the Dhamma itself is described as "timeless", i.e. " akaliko ", rather than unconditioned. <S> See also verse 183 of the Dhammapada -- the commentary says that the Dhamma taught by the Buddha is the Dhamma taught by all the Buddhas. <A> The Buddha said to the monk: “Conditioned arising was neither made by me, nor made by others. <S> Whether a Tathāgata arises in the world or not, this element of dharma remains unchanging. <S> The above teaching is about the Law of Nature (Dhamma-Niyama) pertaining to suffering. <S> It explains whenever suffering arises; it will always arise via the process of Dependent Origination. <S> This Law of Nature is permanent; just as Nirvana is permanent. <S> However, just because both the Law of Nature and Nirvana are permanent does not mean they are the same thing; just as an impermanent rock and an impermanent cloud are not the same things. <S> Is it possible that Nirvana and Dhamma of conditioned arising are the same? <S> No, as was explained above. <S> The logical fallacy of the question is similar to the logical fallacy of Nargajuna, who wrongly taught Dependent Origination and Emptiness are the same thing. <S> Dependent Origination is marked by Emptiness but Emptiness is not necessarily marked by Dependent Origination because Nirvana is marked by Emptiness but Nirvana is not marked by Dependent Origination. <A> This answer is in the context of the Tibetan Gelug School and is taught in modern Buddhist Monasteries of this tradition. <S> Uncompounded space (as opposed to the usual idea of space) is a permanent phenomenon. <S> This is the standard example of an existing thing that is permanent. <S> Like emptiness, uncompounded space is taught to be a non-affirming negation. <S> So what is uncompounded space? <S> First, we have to understand what compounded space is... <S> Compounded space is the vacuum between material things. <S> Take two material objects (made of matter) that are spacelike separated. <S> This means not only do they not occupy the same space, but that they have a vacuity between them. <S> Imagine they are placed in the void of deep space with a meter of distance between them. <S> In this meter of distance between them, there is no air, there are no molecules, no matter. <S> This is what is meant by compounded space. <S> Uncompounded space is the complete absence of obstructive contact. <S> Those two things we imagined above are spacelike separated and sitting in a void. <S> They have no contact with anything. <S> They have a complete absence of obstructive contact. <S> They are sitting, if you like, in uncompounded space. <S> This is thought of as a permanent phenomenon and not dependent on causes and conditions. <S> How can it be said to be independent of causes and conditions? <S> Unlike compounded space, it does not rely upon matter. <S> Whether there is something sitting in uncompounded space or not, the mere absence of obstructive contact remains. <S> It is unproduced. <S> Objection! <S> Doesn't this mean that uncompounded space contains a self? <S> Doesn't it mean that it is inherently existent? <S> Answer... <S> No, because it is a mere non-affirming negation. <S> It is the mere lack of obstruction. <S> No matter how hard you look "inside" of uncompounded space you will find nothing. <S> There is no inherently existent self in uncompounded space that can be found. <S> This is what is meant by a non-affirming negation. <S> There is nothing left whatsoever to be reified. <S> Objection! <S> But isn't uncompounded space an independent phenomena? <S> Answer... <S> It is empty of inherent existence just like all phenomena. <A> Element of Dhamma remains unchanging <S> This simply means that the teachings of the Buddha are true for all times whether a Buddha is there to reveal it to the world or not. <S> It doesn't mean that all phenomena are permanent.
|
No, it is dependent upon name and designation.
|
Can we reach Nirvana without removing ignorance? Namo Buddhaya.I am learning dependent origination. If we follow the dependent origination strictly then by cutting off craving , the attachment ceases to be and with cessation of attachment, continuation ceases to be and with cessation of continuation , birth ceases to be and with cessation of birth , the suffering ceases to be. As the suffering ceases, Nirvana is attained. In the above sequence of happenings we do not need to mention Ignorance. However we know that dependent origination begins with Ignorance. My question is : can we reach to Nirvana ,without removing ignorance and just by cutting off craving ? Or is cutting off of the craving is same as removing the ignorance? <Q> Maybe you've heard of the old South Indian Monkey Trap (from this article ): <S> In Zen <S> And The Art Of Motorcycle Maintenance , Robert Pirsig’s bonkers-but-brilliant philosophical novel that turns 40 this year <S> , he describes “the old South Indian Monkey Trap”. <S> ... <S> The trap “consists of a hollowed-out coconut, chained to a stake. <S> The coconut has some rice inside which can be grabbed through a small hole”. <S> The monkey’s hand fits through the hole, but his clenched fist can’t fit back out. <S> “The monkey is suddenly trapped.” <S> But not by anything physical. <S> He’s trapped by an idea, unable to see that a principle that served him well – “when you see rice, hold on tight!” – has become lethal. <S> The monkey needs to let go of the rice in order to free himself from his suffering. <S> The way to end his suffering, is to end his craving for rice. <S> But in order to end his craving for rice, he must first understand how his hand is stuck inside the coconut. <S> When the monkey overcomes his ignorance about how the trap works, he would let go of his craving for rice, and release his clenched fist. <S> With this, he would be free from his suffering. <S> Also you can say that the monkey's suffering originated with his ignorance of the trap. <S> (Illustration above: Paul Thurlby for the Guardian) <A> The reason why you crave is because of ignorance. <S> When you have a pleasurable experience, you like it because you do not see the Dukkha(suffering) nature of it. <A> If you want go for Nirvana, you have to ignore happiness and sad situations. <S> Need to think in middle position. <S> Otherwise without removing ignorance, you should trap into normal life style of human. <A> Ignorance ( avijjā ) can be understood as ignorance about the Four Noble Truths, which indirectly includes ignorance about the three marks of existence: impermanence ( anicca ), unsatisfactoriness ( dukkha ) and non-self ( anattā ). <S> If you manage to get rid of craving, that probably means that you have removed your ignorance about dukkha , but not necessarily about the other two. <S> Dependent origination is a difficult topic with a lot of different interpretations. <S> The way I see it, I think it's helpful to look at it from the perspective of removing ignorance about anattā , and not about dukkha . <S> If it was about dukkha , removing the link between sensation ( vedana ) and craving ( taṇhā ) would indeed make more sense as the starting point. <A> Craving is cut because of the knowledge that craving is a primary cause of suffering. <S> Such knowledge is the cutting of ignorance. <S> Not knowing about suffering, the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering. <S> This is called ignorance. <S> SN 12.2; MN 9.
|
Without getting rid of ignorance, you cannot get rid of craving.
|
Severe sensations in throat during Vipassana I have had very strong sensations in my throat since I started practicing Vipassana 2 years back. They keep changing shapes and sharpness - they started like a picket fence and now are like hard pokey stone(s). They get overwhelming at times and am not able to focus on other body parts. Has anyone experienced something like this ? Have you managed to be equanimous in the face of sensations that seemto be communicating with you? <Q> I haven't had the "throat" experience, but it's not uncommon to have long or recurring periods of some kind of weird painful or uncomfortable physical/somatic sensation. <S> Teachers that I know of link it to the "knowledge of the three characteristics" phase of the Theravada "progress of insight". <S> It's a sign of maturing insight into the non-self nature of your physical and mental sensations. <S> It's not a reflection on you or the state of your practice- <S> in fact, it may be a sign that your practice is healthy and getting results. <S> However, if it stays purely physical/somatic, then it's not that unusual. <S> You just won't feel equanimous about it in the short term, but your non-equanimous feelings about it can be part of your vipassana practice. <S> Examine the sensations in terms of "vedana" - the quick arising and disappearance of pleasant, neutral, and unpleasant feelings. <A> Great answer from Namrata. <S> Can you turn towards the experience with curiosity and kindness? <S> If you can't give your attention to other experience because this is too overwhelming, perhaps it is just something that is asking for attention. <S> Sometimes, the issue with something like this is merely that it feels ignored. <S> Once we really become interested, in a kindly way, it feels seen and met, and quietens down. <S> Or, it has a story to tell, perhaps of past trauma, etc. <S> Curiosity and kindness are crucial. <S> Along with gentleness. <S> Just look, see what you can actually know about these. <S> Perhaps as Andrei suggests, it is connected with smoking. <S> Perhaps turning towards the sensation with kindness might help you see more what is there? <A> Believe it or not I had exactly same problem back in the day, and I used to smoke cigarettes then, which is why I asked if you were a smoker. <S> I had these nagging sensations in the throat, surprisingly they were somewhat pleasant, as in I actually enjoyed what felt like warmth and movement in my throat. <S> But sometimes they were getting slightly too strong and it worried me. <S> It all started as my self-awareness increased as a result of my Buddhist practice. <S> I did not meditate back then but did apply serious effort to practice mindfulness . <S> Around the same period of time I felt increasing disgust to the smell and taste of tobacco products. <S> As my self-awareness grew, I kept enjoying the sensations in my throat but did not want to experience the smell and taste in my mouth. <S> Also, my head started spinning a bit too much after having another cigarette. <S> So at some point I started to reduce the frequency and amount I smoked, until I quit. <S> I never applied any force, never used nicotine patches - <S> it just happened by itself, through awareness and disgust and some head spinning. <S> As I quit smoking, the throat sensations have briefly increased, and then were gone forever. <S> but you simply did not notice before. <S> In a way, this could be interpreted as your throat talking to you: "please stop smoking". <S> Might as well listen :)
|
However, if it starts to be accompanied by disturbing imagery or strong negative emotions, especially if it seems linked to memories of past potentially-traumatizing experiences, then reduce your meditation periods and look for professional psychological support before continuing intensive vipassana practice. I'm not saying your case is the same, but perhaps it's not entirely out of question that your awareness of your body has increased as a result of your meditation practice, and now you feel what was always there
|
Does sexual liberalism lead to rebirth in the hungry ghost realm? In DN 31, the Buddha said a libertine is an evil companion leading to ruin. There are, young householder, these six evil consequences in associating with evil companions, namely: any gambler, any libertine, any drunkard, any swindler, any cheat, any rowdy is his friend and companion. These are the six dangers inherent in bad companionship: any rogue, drunkard, addict, cheat, swindler, or thug becomes a friend and colleague. In the Tanhavagga, the Buddha taught craving, particularly when developed, leads to woe and suffering: 334. The craving of one given to heedless living grows like a creeper. Like the monkey seeking fruits in the forest, he leaps from life to life (tasting the fruit of his kamma). 335. Whoever is overcome by this wretched and sticky craving, his sorrows grow like grass after the rains. 342. Beset by craving, people run about like an entrapped hare. Held fast by mental fetters, they come to suffering again and again for a long time. Therefore, if a person pursues and engages in sexual activity merely for sexual gratification, will they increase craving in both themselves and another? If a man, for example, has sex with a woman because his has lust but has not personal commitment towards the woman, will not craving be created in the woman leading her to keep searching for a sexual partner? Are those who are always searching for sex, love & companionship destined for rebirth in the hungry ghost world or even hell? <Q> Let me present the so-called Tathagata Dhamma viewpoint, represented by Dhammadhatu . <S> The answer is no, sexual liberalism doesn't lead to rebirth in the hungry ghost realm. <S> You may want to want to read this answer to see why, according to this viewpoint, rebirth cannot fall into the dhamma of the Buddha. <S> If there is no rebirth, then, logically speaking, there is no rebirth in the hungry ghost realm either. <A> I don't believe sexual liberalism is the same thing as sexual misconduct. <S> Like all such non-virtuous actions, it can lead to rebirth in the lower realms. <S> So yes, sexual misconduct, like all non-virtuous actions can result in rebirth in the lower realms which include the realm of the pretas. <A> No, not "hungry ghost" (I think Ajahn Chah used "Hungry Shadow" which is better terminology), but animal realm, in specific the fowls species. <S> This information can be found in the Chinese Canon. <S> Modern scientific research found that fowls engage most frequently in sexual intercourse activities, with the duck family the crudest, rape and evolution of sex tools by both male and female to invade and defend; here , many many more in google. <S> Pigeons are sex addicts, so are birds family, they are always starving in looking for food for it's very hard to sustain their vigorous physical activities, therefore it's a very tiring livelihood for them. <S> Therefore sexual liberalism leads to rebirth in fowl kingdom of animal realm, most likely. <S> And look at the battery chicken and speedy-grown-duck industries, I think never in history so many fowls existed on earth, perhaps a proof that it's true? <S> They are in so sad a condition! <S> For their strongest craving was sex <S> but it all stripped human just lure after their meats keeping them in cages breeding from machines, they can never ever have sex in their entire lives! <S> Gravest punishment! <S> Therefore, if a person pursues and engages in sexual activity merely for sexual gratification, will they increase craving in both themselves and another? <S> Yes. <S> If a man, for example, has sex with a woman because his has lust but has not personal commitment towards the woman, will not craving be created in the woman leading her to keep searching for a sexual partner? <S> Yes, very likely. <S> Are those who are always searching for sex, love & companionship destined for rebirth in the hungry ghost world or even hell? <S> Not sure. <S> But definitely lower than human realm. <S> Hungry Shadow is related to greed, hell anger, in general. <S> The Buddha's teaching is the practitioner should transmute the sexual desire this energy to greater love, to compassion. <S> I heard some Buddhist sect(s) claiming can use sex-intercourse to reach Buddha-hood is questionable, others said it's contaminated by later Hindu-tantra tradition, or left-hand Daoist. <S> The teaching in the Chinese Canon has this term: 菩薩有內觸妙樂, translate: <S> Bodhisattva has the internal self-generated sublime bliss , that is a transmuted sexual energy giving the bliss. <S> And it's related to Dhyana cultivation. <S> Sorry <S> these are not Pali Canon but Chinese Canon knowledge, but I think it may be able to give some clues to your question.
|
Sexual misconduct is a non-virtuous action and will thus have harmful fruits.
|
Most efficient (timewise) meditation techniques to experience joy and bliss? If meditation techniques were ranked by how quickly they can instill and develop the feelings of joy and bliss within oneself, which ones would be ranked at the top and why? <Q> Joy and bliss arise when the five hindrances (desire, ill-will, sloth-and-torpor, restlessness-and-worry, and doubt) subside. <S> The desire for joy and bliss falls under the first hindrance. <S> So whatever is the fastest technique to make you forget that you're seeking bliss... <S> that's the fastest technique for seeking bliss :) <S> Subduing the five hindrances is the "first stop" for all meditation techniques, whether it is breath-counting, breath-following, metta, noting, or devotional practices. <S> Different people respond in different ways to each of these. <S> So try them all out and see which one motivates you to stick with it- <S> that will be the best. <S> Two warnings: <S> (1) Joy and bliss are conditioned states, so they can disappear as quickly as they arise, especially early in your practice (and "early" may mean years). <S> If joy / bliss fades, or doesn't last past the sitting time, it isn't a failure. <S> It's the natural passing away of all conditioned states. <S> (2) Not everybody experiences joy and bliss when the hindrances subside. <S> Some people, particularly those with a trauma history (though nobody knows for certain why), may experience disturbing imagery or emotions. <S> If this happens, be careful about pushing your technique too hard. <S> Some Buddhists will insist that it is a sign that you are not meditating hard enough. <S> Be wary of this kind of advice. <S> Not all problems are solved by meditation, and other kinds of work may be necessary too. <A> In my opinion, the fastest method to achieve bliss is the first Jhana meditation, which is essentially a form of autogenic training . <S> In this meditation, you review your progress in Dharma with regards to your Sila (ethics) and Prajna (understanding), and congratulate yourself on your achievements. <S> You also congratulate yourself on the fact that you have actually managed to stop cycling through bad karma and accumulated enough good karma to the point when you can finally enjoy the peace of sitting in meditation, as opposed to endlessly chasing all kinds of samsaric goals. <S> As you thus congratulate yourself, joy and bliss are generated. <S> In Satipatthana you sit and feel your body, breathing, emotions, thoughts, and the overall state of everything - and make a conscious effort to relax and "gladden" all that. <S> You do that by letting go of all negative stuff you're holding on to, and by simply generating a sense of enjoyment. <S> As you do that successfully, joy and bliss are generated. <S> Another type of meditation that can lead to the same result, is Tibetan Yidam Generation meditation. <S> In this meditation you sit down and convince yourself that you are an actual embodiment of a spirit or deity. <S> Practically speaking, you can use any image you want, it doesn't even have to be a Buddhist deity. <S> You can imagine yourself to be a reincarnation of Einstein if that's what works for you. <S> If you find it hard to convince yourself that you actually are the deity, you make up some kind of ritual to invite the deity within yourself. <S> The exact details don't matter, what matters is that you have to convince your subconscious that you are the deity. <S> In some schools they go as far as to re-imagine the entire process of your birth and growth as that of a deity. <S> As you do this, the emotional/mental traumas and obstacles that you have are purified, leading to experiences of joy and bliss. <S> Another meditation that can lead to joy and bliss, is meditation on chakras and channels. <S> This is primarily an exercise at visualization. <S> In this meditation you imagine all kinds of colors, energies, and symbols going through the psychosomatically significant spots of your body-image, which again serves to purify the emotional obscurations and lead to an experience of joy and bliss. <A> Try " Entering the Jhanas " guide by Leigh Brasington. <S> Entering the first Jhana, confers piti (glee or rapture) and sukha (joy or happiness). <S> This guide may provide a timewise efficient way from the perspective of the trainer, to enter the first Jhana. <S> However, if you have problems with this, you may need to spend more time developing virtues (sila) first. <A> Buddhism is about non-attachment. <S> The more we are attached to bliss, the more there is no bliss. <S> The more we look for bliss, the more bliss cannot be found. <S> Practice renunciation.
|
Another type of meditation that can help with joy and bliss is Satipatthana.
|
List of Buddhist podcast recommendations This is in the spirit of this (previously requested) List of book recommendations Books are wonderful for learning (and audio books are great travel partners/work listening), but I wondered if those of you who listen to podcasts could suggest a Buddhist podcast that serves your learning style. Please include: a link to it, a few words about what it brings you (or a description, as you like) If it is in a language other than English please mention it to help those who would prefer to listen in a language in which they are more fluent. I would prefer only a list of the ones you like/recommend. thank you MODERATOR's MESSAGE: please post one podcast per answer, so people can vote for each podcast individually. <Q> Ajahn Brahm <S> - Based out of Australia. <S> There are a few others that upload on the BSWA channel. <S> The talks are very easy to follow. <S> Ajahn Brahm is one of the more entertaining monks, as he brings comedy and jokes into his talks. <S> What I personally enjoy about this channel is that the videos are labeled very well, so you can search for topics that you want to learn. <S> Say you're having a difficult day and aren't positive you can search the channel for "staying positive" and there will be several videos on the subject. <S> Resources: <S> Meditation Videos: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ajahn+brahm+guided+meditation <S> Talks: <S> https://www.youtube.com/user/BuddhistSocietyWA/search?query=Dhamma+Talk <S> Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6M_EhnSSdTG_SXUp6IAWmQ <A> He has alot of videos on English and Vietnamese, take a look: https://www.youtube.com/user/MasterYongHua/videos <A> Jack Kornfield <S> - Based out of California. <S> His talks are uploaded to the following channel. <S> He has several very good talks on compassion and developing the heart. <S> Resources: <S> Talks: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqGJSfj5N-pIrpWHP9ITJzmyK8UDHJGzM <S> Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCc1lvEoC5PZWm-MzgUfJQfg <A> Alan Watts - Not a formal monk, but he has several philosophical discussions that complement the study of the dharma. <S> Resources: <S> Videos: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Alan+Watts <A> I listen to Chogyam Trungpa's teachings up on <S> chronicleproject.com/teachings <S> There are both audio and video talks. <S> They also have a number of podcasts from students and related people connected with Trungpa Rinpoche's lineage. <A> i listen to this channel most of the time but most of the programmes are in sinhala but there are english ones too. <S> Shraddha TV <A> Tricycle is a Buddhist magazine. <S> Wisdom podcast - Available on Apple podcasts/Itunes and Spotify. <S> Its a well known Buddhist book publisher. <S> Dharmapunx NYC podcast - Available on Apple podcasts also. <S> Dharmapunx is a New York City community with Theravada flavour to it. <S> Its led by Josh Korda. <A> Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu - former moderator of Buddhism. <S> SE and is based out of Canada. <S> His videos include in-depth discussions of the Dhamma. <S> Resources: <S> Videos: https://www.youtube.com/user/yuttadhammo/videos and https://video.sirimangalo.org/
|
Tricycle podcast - Also available on Apple podcasts/Itunes. I like Master YongHua, he explains the Dharma in a way that makes it accessible to laypeople; he also has a great sense of humor and talks about topics that I don't find covered anywhere else.
|
Why should progress in meditation lead to rebirth in a more worldly setting? It seems that the more successful your meditation is, the more lavish the surroundings of your next life (e.g. rebirth in a heavenly realm following the attainment of certain meditative states). However, this seems contrary to the goal of non-attachment, and a more logical karmic result of meditative attainment would be rebirth in some setting that would most easily propel you into a monastery. So, why does progress in meditation cause rebirth in a more worldly setting? <Q> As I have understood, Heavenly and Hellish realms are determined by state of mind. <S> It is well said that two people can be walki g down the same street and one is in hell and other is in heaven. <S> Heaven and hell is the way we experience this universe. <S> So if you do meditation and you get born in a monastry world setting and it is still heavenly as it will all be experienced. <A> Heaven can meditate and enlightenment easier than human life. <S> But partial correct that it will also lead to get lost eaiser when there were full of happiness and no suffer there. <S> Your old karma will lead you to more worldly setting, Not meditate. <A> There are 2 types of meditation.samatha and vipassana. <S> Samatha which concentrate our mind lead us to obtain samadhi and dhyana.. <S> samatha meditation is was there even before the enlightenment of budhda. <S> Ex: 5 monks who were meditating with sidhdhartha had the highest level of dhyana even before sidhdhartha's enlightenment. <S> Samatha helps for rebirth in heaven and brahma according to the level of dhyana. <S> But meditation introduced in buddhism is vipassana. <S> Which gives you wisdom and nibbana. <S> Even when someone do samatha and got dhyana is definitely end up in world of brahma. <S> So as brahma get very large life span he might lose period of dhamma when he leaves world of brahma. <S> So guiding in buddhism is to practice vidarshana and end up with nibbana and not to practice samatha and end up with world with more attachments.
|
Rebirth in a heaven doesn't mean more worldly settings.
|
Is there a difference between the 32 physical characteristics and the the 32 physical marks? Why does the Buddha ask the same question twice, and why does Subhuti answer it two different ways? In Diamond Sutra Chapter 13 “Subhuti, what do you think? Can the Buddha be perceived by means of his thirty-two physical characteristics?” “No, Most Honored One. The Buddha cannot be perceived by his thirty-two physical characteristics. Why? Because the Buddha teaches that they are not real but are merely called the thirty-two physical characteristics.” but in Diamond Sutra Chapter 26 “What do you think Subhuti? Is it possible to recognize the Buddha by the 32 physical marks?” Subhuti replied, “Yes, Most Honored One, the Buddha may thus be recognized.” Is there a difference between the 32 physical characteristics and the the 32 physical marks? <Q> is there any difference between 32 phy.characteristics and 32 physical marks. <S> there are many hindrance to be encountered ,out of which one is doubt .a <S> slightest of it can ruin our walking on the path. <S> a little effort to clear the same is as follows----the answer has arisen after giving a slight thought upon and is not backed by any reference pl. <S> here he may mean about the nature ,traits,habits of person . <S> in the other instance when subhuti asks about physical marks buddha says yes. <S> here may mean that a person who is going to become a enlightened buddha has some physical marks on the body sya a lotus mark on toes, high forehead,hands reaching below the knees etc.i <S> don't know them exactly how many and what they are really. <S> but a slight surfing will fetch inf of the same. <S> the point to be searched as physical marks on a reincarnated soul(avatar), enlightened yogi <S> "s <S> physical body.answer may put forth a slight light to clear your doubt. <A> Wesak:~The death of the self (God/Bodisatva), of Siddhartha and the birth of the selfless, Gauthama (Lord Buddha).If you understand that Wesak, is not the birth of the prince Siddhartha.from mother's womb <S> , Lord Buddha is neither physical entity nor idol. <A> May be Hon. <S> Subhuti was in some way pedantic about the use of word 'recognised' and 'perceived'. <S> So you can't perceive a Buddha through 32 characteristic... <S> as in may be all of them cant be preceived by everyone of us straight away. <S> And if perceived then you can recognize a Buddha. <S> But this looks like a reasoning based on semantics and not on wisdom.
|
The physical characteristics when asked upon by subhuti, buddha replies that they are impermanent and cannot be treated as lighthouse to know buddha.
|
Why do I have swaying/floating feeling after completing 10 day Vipassana course? These sensations and a feeling that my whole body is swaying/floating started on the 7th day of the course. On the 8th day I had quite a surreal experience during one of the group sittings. My eyes would also start watering during meditation. I did share my experience with the assistant teacher and told her that I was scared something was happening to my body. I was also feeling dizzy. The teacher said that this was normal and I should just be aware of these sensations and feelings and not try to control them. The next days until the course ended, I did not pay much attention to the swaying/floating. If I focused on it, I could feel it strongly, otherwise sometimes I would just not be aware of it at all. My question is that it's been two days that I've been back from the course and the last I meditated was on the morning of the 11th day (final day) of the course. But I still have a swaying/floating feeling. Is this normal? Has anyone experienced this? If yes, what did you do about it and did it stop on its own? After how many days? Any insight into why this is happening and if its alright to experience this will be appreciated. Thanks! <Q> Yes, it's alright that it's happening (assuming you didn't somehow hurt yourself in an odd way). <S> What you are describing is a normal occurrence at retreats of many varieties, not just Vipassana. <S> Piti occurs when a yogi concentrates in the right way for an amount of time. <S> You're having the opposite reaction most have to these things - many yogis get attached to Piti and never go beyond it, or stop going deeper because they think they've reached Nibbana. <S> So you're ahead of the curve in knowing that these pleasures are also Dukkha. <S> You're having an anxious reaction to it, which in turn causes additional problems like trouble sleeping, which in turn causes more anxiety, panic, and stress in an endless feedback loop. <S> What we resist, persists. <S> Surrender. <S> It will pass. <S> You may also be experiencing a new, deeper awareness of your body that you haven't had before. <S> Your mind is now more clear, focused, and observant <S> - it's no wonder you're experiencing new strange things. <S> That's pretty neat! <S> A shift in perspective may be all that you really need. <S> Your feeling of lightness may be akin to the early stages of what is described in the suttas and by monks as the power of levitation. <S> ;) Just try to let go, stop worrying, and enjoy these new things for now. <S> Get back on the meditation cushion. <S> Observe them just like any other meditation object, investigate them. <S> Where exactly is the sensation? <S> What makes it so insufferable, in terms of experience? <S> Does it have an essence? <S> Does it change? <S> When does judgement arise, before or after the sensation? <S> Hope you feel better, find peace, and liberate yourself from this suffering. <A> Note it as a feeling. <S> Ex: <S> Swaying... <S> Swaying... <S> Swaying... <S> Feelings are not important regardless of whatever form they come in. <S> The are caused, impermanent and cause suffering when clung to. <S> You just need to note them until they go away. <A> I am having the same thing and the course ended over a week ago. <S> It feels like I have been on a long haul flight <S> and I am still flying. <S> I don’t feel sick and my balance is ok but the swaying won’t stop. <S> Did yours finally shift? <S> After how long? <A> Obviously, the Goenka long duration sitting meditation was too intense, causing your brain & neurons to become overloaded. <A> You can get different experiences in meditation use to past karmic factors (sankhara) and surfacing of past exercise (sanna) which manifests by the mind playing tricks on you. <S> When Pīti this can cause swaying and vibrations of the body. <S> Again it is best is not to give too much importance to this and continue meditation.
|
Piti's effects are temporary, and will fade with time, depending on how much and how deeply you experienced it. They are simply symptoms of prolonged concentration, the degree and type of which are determined by your unique body, mind, and karmic history. I've personally experienced what you're describing many times. Sensations of lightness, swaying or rocking, tears, tingling, heat, chills, intense joy, bright images, etc. are all common occurences of Piti (also known as Rapture). Best is not to give too much importance to this and continue meditation.
|
How much concentration do I need to practice vipassana? I have read some articles and book, it says that you need to develop some basic level of concentration before you can start practicing vipassana(insight) meditation. What are the criteria to know if I already reached that basic level of concentration? Thank you very much! <Q> According to a traditional presentation, Calm Abiding is considered attained when a meditator can effortlessly focus on a chosen object of observation, without getting distracted and without falling into lethargy, for a substantial period of time . <S> "substantial period" is a subjective measure. <S> Some say it is 2 minutes, some say 10 or 15. <S> "object of observation" means any object or theme, like a flame of a candle, flower, a far away mountain peak -- or a visualized/imaginary object of any kind, the most popular being an image of Buddha statue. <S> (With imaginary objects it is best to use something very familiar that you remember very well.) <S> "without getting distracted" means without forgetting about meditation and getting carried away in thoughts. <S> "without falling into lethargy" means, without getting sleepy or even losing clarity of mind. <S> "effortlessly" means without fighting with oneself over distractions and lethargy. <S> Here is a set of more detailed guidelines on achieving Calm Abiding: an excerpt from a lecture given by Gelug meditation master Lati Rinpoche . <A> I recently did a 10 day Silent Retreat based on Vipasanna Meditation by S. N. Goenka. <S> https://www.dhamma.org/en-US/index <S> There are no prerequisites for the course and it is given in many centers around the US, Canada and other parts of the world. <S> I recommend it highly. <S> I did read a recommended book, Art of Living by William Hart (The Art Of Living as Taught by S.N. Goenka from Amazon). <S> I also practiced meditating on my own for two months before I did the course – there is usually a pretty long wait list for the course at least here in Texas. <S> You will be minimally qualified to do Vipassana meditation when you leave the course and follow up practice on your own or through a Vipassana Sangha is recommended. <A> To practice Vipassana, what you need is right mindfulness or Samma-sati. <S> Concentration comes as you develop right mindfulness. <S> There are actually four ways of doing it. <S> You can develop concentration first and then switch to Vipassana or develop both concentration and Vipassana in tandem or develop Vipassana first and then switch to concentration. <S> Whoever claims that developing concentration first is the only way is misinformed. <S> Read the Yuganaddha Sutta for details.
|
In Tibetan tradition, before you can do Vipashyana, you have to practice Shamatha-type meditation until you learn to attain so-called "Calm Abiding" or "Fully Pacified Stable One-Pointed Effortless Meditative Equipoise".
|
Hereditary illness and kamma Many physical and mental illnesses are genetic or hereditary, whether partially or completely, the contributing factor is genetic, nevertheless. For example, you are born into a family that has genetic illness e.g. anxiety disorder, compulsive disorder, cancer, diabetes, to name a few. The question is, since genetic or hereditary illness will then pass down to your children.If you get married and have children, as parents, are you doing bad kamma? <Q> Hereditary illness or not...the offspring you will produce will become old, fall ill and die. <S> The dukkha is inevitable. <S> We may as well say that dukkha is hereditary to all humans <S> so should we have kids? <S> If your intention in having a child is good, if the child is born out of love and not lust, if child is born not out of any form of sexual misconduct...then you will be fine...there will be no bad kamma. <A> The occurence of genetically inherited diseases are in most cases, not 100%. <S> There is always a chance that they may or may not manifest. <S> Part of this depends on lifestyle and environmental reasons as well. <S> Some diseases like diabetes and heart disease can be avoided or delayed by lifestyle modifications. <S> Genetics can be quite complex - two siblings who are not identical twins, may not experience the same type of diseases or medical problems. <S> That being said, kamma depends on one's intentions. <S> Whether your children would get a specific disease or not, cannot be known with perfect certainty. <S> However, with perfect certainty, we can say that they will grow old, experience disease and death. <S> They will also experience pain and pleasure. <S> They will also burn with the fires of passion, aversion and delusion, for as long as they are unenlightened. <S> The fact that your child would experience sufferings of any kind, is not caused by their birth. <S> Birth is merely a symptom of suffering. <S> It's not the cause of suffering. <S> You should not feel responsible for the phenomena of samsara. <S> It moves along perfectly fine on its own. <A> Your Karma, good or bad, will depend on how you treat, raise, and teach your child. <S> It is What you do with him/her, that will result in good/bad/neutral karma. <S> Hence, by just bringing a child into the world, it is neither a good or bad karma, it is neutral.
|
If you had children without evil intentions, then it's not bad kamma.
|
How does Karma work for an inventor who changed lives of millions? Consider an inventor who has nothing to do with spirituality but her innovation helped change lives of millions. Her innovation helps people even after her death. Further, innovations can be used for evil as well. <Q> The Buddhist version of karma may not be the same as the version of karma in other Indian religions. <S> It's not a system of cosmic justice. <S> If you invented something to help millions of people, you would not get more rewards compared to someone who helped just 10 people. <S> In Buddhism, karma is about cause and effect, due to intention and volition (see this page ). <S> It's about one's state of mind and its expressions in actions and words. <S> It's not about the impact made on the world or on others. <S> This means that one who has unintentionally helped others, but out of originally evil intentions in mind, he would experience negative karmic results. <S> On the other hand, if one had good intentions, but his actions inadvertently harmed others, he would still experience positive karmic results. <S> It's all about intentions. <S> From the Dhammapada <S> : <S> Verse 1 : <S> All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they have mind as their chief; they are mind-made. <S> If one speaks or acts with an evil mind, 'dukkha' follows him just as the wheel follows the hoofprint of the ox that draws the cart. <S> Verse 124 <S> : If there is no wound on the hand, one may handle poison; poison does not affect one who has no wound; there can be no evil for one who has no evil intention. <S> From the Nibbedhika Sutta : <S> "Intention, I tell you, is kamma. <S> Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect. <A> So, let's get this straight. <S> If you get an answer of how Karma works for the particular situation you're mentioning, OR any answer at all as to how Karma works, then you may be lead the wrong way. <S> Because you need to understand that all this is NOT true in your experience. <S> It won't make a difference. <S> You may ask the question and somebody may give you an answer. <S> You can either choose to believe or disbelieve that answer. <S> But, consider this. <S> What is the truth? <S> Will you be closer to the truth by either believing it or disbelieving it? <S> Contemplate this. <A> Karma depends on the mindstate. <S> At least if she became happy after seeing how others benefited from her inventions, it's good Karma. <S> If no such thoughts arose in her mind, it does not amount to much other than improving her worldly skills. <A> The fundamental structure and workings of Kamma is the same for all beings, i.e. "only mangos can grow from a mango tree" , meaning that only wholesome intentions can cause wholesome future resultants to arise and vice versa. <S> The exact workings of a beings Kamma cannot be known, unless one is a fully enlightened Buddha. <S> Its volition, intention (cetana) , that is kammically potent.
|
If she invented something with the intention that it will be beneficial to others, it is good Karma.
|
if the self is an illusion - all my relationships are illusion too? If the self is an illusion - of little importance - where does that leave my relationships? All the people I know, have a relationship with this 'fake self' of mine -- so the relationships are groundless? an illusion also? <Q> You are asking something like " If superman is fictional, what happens to his relationship with Lois Lane? ". <S> In ultimate reality, relationships don't exit. <S> It's just craving/ <S> clinging arising in the mind for seeing, hearing, smelling, touching etc. <A> The person is not an illusion, it is like an illusion. <S> It is like an illusion in that it does not appear the way it exists. <S> An illusory horse appears as if it was an actual horse while it is not. <S> From a Prasangika viewpoint, similarly, persons and phenomena (such as relationships) appear as if they were inherently existent while they are not. <S> In this respect, the person is like an illusion. <S> In a commentary to Je Tsongkhapa's middle-length Lam Rim, Geshe Gyaltsen says: One will come to perceive the person as like an illusion when one has realized emptiness. <S> Therefore one will know the illusory aspect of the person in that the person appears as truly existent, but does not exist as such. <A> All relationships are subject to impermanence, just like all illusions. <S> Also, the way you perceive a relationship, will always differ to the other person within that particular relationship. <S> The relationship is merely 'true' only within your perception, which is also impermanent, just like an illusion. <A> Your relationships are simply conditioned and impermanent. <S> Even your closest relationships may be subject to death, disputes and drifting away. <S> The Buddha praised admirable companionships in SN 45.2 : <S> As he was sitting there, Ven. <S> Ananda said to the Blessed One, "This is half of the holy life, lord: admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie." <S> "Don't say that, Ananda. <S> Don't say that. <S> Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life. <S> When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, & comrades, he can be expected to develop & pursue the noble eightfold path. <A> There is hope friend! <S> Your question leads me to believe you might have misunderstood the meaning of anatta or emptiness and drifted toward nihilism. <S> Take heart that this is just a misunderstanding and that the Virtuous Teachers have said emptiness and nihilism are completely different. <S> Emptiness or anatta is an extremely hard concept to wrap your head around and there is danger in misapprending it for nihilism like there is danger in mishandling a snake. <S> Fortunately, we can use this warning as a handrail to support ourselves: when we recognize ourselves drifting towards nihilism then let’s happily put down that view knowing confidently that we have misunderstood. <S> Hope this helps! <A> As @Tenzin said relationships are not illusion. <S> They are like illusion. <S> They are ,as @ruben2020 ,said conditioned and impermanent. <S> But they play a role in your evolution towards Anatta. <S> Like wholesome and unwholesome qualities , relationship can be good or bad. <S> When a relationship is good then it is like a medicine. <S> For example you can have good relationship with Sangha or community or people with integrity. <S> The purpose of medicine is to cure the disease of self <S> and then the medicine is left. <S> Many wholesome qualities like compassion , loving kindness etc also act like medicine. <S> But when the relationship is bad you can leave it right away unless offcourse you want to improve it out of compassion. <S> Realisation of Anatta is like Nirvana which is attained by developing various wholesome qualities and developing good relationships.
|
Good relationships are vitally important.
|
Impermanence: How do we know when a thing ends or if it's just changing? It seems to be a big deal that we see things as they are. If we are merely assuming when things begin and end or change then how do we ever really see things as they are? <Q> Great question. <S> because separate self-identical things are imputations of the mind. <S> In reality things do not have firm spatial and temporal boundaries. <S> Things do not by themselves have identities that stay unchanged throughout their lifecycle, allowing us to designate it as "still the same thing, just changed a little". <S> These identities are chosen by us. <S> So to speak of any "thing", "ending", "changing but still staying itself" - is a simplification. <S> Ontological reality has nothing like that, it is totally up to observers to define "things" in space and time. <S> How do we "see things as they are" then? <S> We see them with our "wisdom eye" (wink wink). <S> We remind to ourselves that what we see is not all there's to it, until we are used to seeing it all. <S> For a trivial example, when someone dies, we say: it only looks like this person ended, but that is not true - there are children, books, students, flowers, social influence - whatever imprints they left on the world - it lives on. <S> When we practice this enough we get in the habit of seeing "energies", "influences", "connections", "processes" behind things. <S> We no longer see separate things, we see the matrix - and that's called "seeing things as they are". <S> From Mahayana perspective, this is the real nature of Impermanence: everything is continuously in flux, but the mind grasps after "entities" that it itself designates, and then gets upset when these imputed entities morph beyond recognition, like the cloud figures. <A> It seems to be a big deal that we see things as they are. <S> When we say, ' to see things as they are ' in Buddhist context, we mean to see things not clouded by ignorance, for e.g, when you see a beautiful women, you really only see a beautiful women... <S> because at that moment your perception is clouded by desire and lust... <S> you dont really see her as she is, for e.g. the father or brother of same women will see her differently. <S> That is why the Buddha gave us the meditation on bodily parts... <S> so yes its a really big deal to see things as they are... <S> If we are merely assuming when things begin and end or change <S> No, we are not merely assuming the begining or end or change... <S> according to the second law if thermodynamics there is a perpetual change of entropy of the universe. <S> Everything is in a constant state of flux, the sub-atomic particles inside the atoms are moving, the atoms inside things are moving and all things are slowly or otherwise undergoing molecular disintegration. <S> Annicha is a universal law. <S> The begining of things is not disernable and nor is the end. <S> Change is discernable if you are sensitive enough, aware enough, meditative enough. <S> then how do we ever really see things as they are? <S> We ever really see things as they are when we get rid of the three poisions of ignorance, greed and lust. <S> In other words by being more aware to the present moment. <S> By following the eight fold path you gain the wisdom, then you see things as they are. <A> I guess the concept of emptiness makes that a meaningless question. <S> If a thing isn't even itself (its own thing) to begin with, how could it stop being that or change? <S> Maybe you can't identify what you're talking about: a thing, an element of a thing, a contact with an element, an experience of a contact, a description of an experience, etc. <S> : " turtles all the way down ". <S> It might be worth remembering "the purpose" of the doctrine about "really seeing things as they are" -- Kimattha Sutta: <S> What is the Purpose? <S> (AN 11.1) -- here's an extract: <S> And what is the purpose of concentration? <S> What is its reward?" <S> "Concentration has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its purpose, knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its reward." <S> "And what is the purpose of knowledge & vision of things as they actually are? <S> What is its reward?" <S> "Knowledge & vision of things as they actually are has disenchantment as its purpose, disenchantment as its reward." <S> If a doctrine is something like, "Gold is forever", that might have a result -- like lust and craving (for gold), attachment. <S> If a doctrine is something like, "You can't take it with you", that might have a different result -- detachment, dispassion, etc. <S> Other suttas use the term to describe the knowledge and vision of someone who is without fetters. <S> Also people sometimes express an opposite take on it -- <S> i.e. that there's <S> No coming and no going . <A> Lord buddha taught us to see everything in the world as anithya (changes in every moment) <S> dukka (sad) anathama(nothing to get as me or mine) <S> so that's the real state of every worldly thing,try to see them as their real state
|
From Mahayana perspective "things" do not "end", nor do they "change" -
|
How to meditate before going to bed and after waking up? I read on some online page that the time before going to bed and immediately after waking up is benificial to meditation. I searched over internet but there aren't any specific instructions about any such Buddhist practise. Is this true? Is there any special meditation we can do in this time? <Q> Actually there is a reference to this and it is this video where the Dalai Lama advises a group of people to meditate before going to bed and immediately after waking up. <S> Before after waking up: <S> our mind is filled freshness,you are relaxed and generally this continues to the rest of the day! <S> You can face your obstacles easier! <S> You too help your body relax better! <A> In Anapasati sutta Lord budda tells, There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building , sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, and setting mindfulness to the fore. <S> 1 <S> Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. <S> Here we can take our room or meditating place while it's empty of sounds as the empty building, <S> So in night and morning time is the best time for that because there is less noise in that time.. <S> Someone feels better in night before go to sleep and someone may feels better in morning if feels tired in night before sleep.. <S> So this can be applied for other meditations too,You can choose better time between before sleep and just after wake up <A> Answering my own question after some research. <S> Immediately after we get up from sleep and just before we fall asleep the mind is in a different state of being than the usual day state. <S> So we can utilize this state of mind to do deeper into meditation and make huge progress. <S> The answer is do Samatha meditation with or without sitting. <S> Try consciously and with lot of efforts not to have any thoughts at all. <S> Stay aware and mindful.
|
Before going to bed: The stress built up during the day has to be gradually released before you can fall asleep. Try to be as aware as possible.
|
How to extend the counter-part sign? What even is this? As I'm learning to master the first jhana one must do two things, master the five masteries & be able to extend the sign. For the masteries, • Mastety Of Adverting ×Turning your attention & focus on any jhana factor after! anywhere,time or place • Mastery Of Attainment × Entering jhana concentration quickly, Anytime you wish • Mastery of Resolving×Staying in the absorption for as long as one wants. • Mastery of Emerging× Emerge from The Jhanas Quickly • Mastery Of Reflection×Looking at & learn each thing you did to enter each jhana factor. Please tell me if I'm incorrect. Now for extending the sign. I don't truly understand how to do such a thing, or even what it is. Here's a passage from the book I'm reading. The perfecting of the first jhana involves two steps: the extension of the sign and the achievement of the five masteries. The extension of the sign means extending the size of the counterpart sign, the object of the jhana. Beginning with a small area, the size of one or two fingers, the meditator gradually learns to broaden the sign until the mental image can be made to cover the world-sphere or even beyond (Vism. 152-53; PP.158-59). Can someone please elaborate for me please. I need to understands what the counter-part sign is & how to extend it. Is it a mental image you have? So a kasina ot any other mental image you form? <Q> From my own meditation experience... <S> For what it's worth... <S> Usually, when meditation is going well, you feel very comfortable and can relax, your level of concentration grows. <S> Concentration on what? <S> On nothing really, just on sitting and being in the moment. <S> At some point even the breath stops being important, it's more like you no longer get distracted from sitting and staring at your own "raw" mind... <S> When that happens, it feels almost like you start tripping. <S> I'm sorry for using a highly contemporary comparison, but I can't come up with a better image for what happens at that moment. <S> At least in my experience, I start floating into some altered state of mind... <S> While staying firmly in the present moment, without losing my concentration... <S> In this state of mind I "see" feelings as "shapes" and "colors". <S> It's hard to describe, because that "seeing" is not really visual, the shapes are not really shapes and the colors are not colors. <S> They are feelings. <S> But they are much more "loud" and "thick" than our normal feelings, they have more structure and differentiation so to speak. <S> I believe this is the so-called "counterpart sign". <S> No two people have the same experiences, but when your get in touch with your deep subconscious emotional mind, you will experience something strange. <S> This something, whatever it is in your case, will start small and then grow and expand. <S> Then you have a choice to either keep relaxing and going deeper into that, or hold on, or come back out. <S> In my experience, when I go deeper I eventually fall into something like a dream state. <S> In this dream state I lose sense of time, and I don't really have control, but there is still a sense of something going on, and I feel that, and it is good. <S> Sometimes there is a feeling of some mental knots getting untied. <S> Sometimes there is a feeling of resting. <S> Sometimes there is a feeling of opening. <S> Sometimes there is a feeling of sweetness. <S> It also serves as a kind of reset button, meaning, when you "wake up" you feel much refreshed, more grounded, well-rested, balanced, and calm. <S> It's not really that magical. <S> It's rather similar to a moment when you're falling asleep. <S> So my answer to your question, "how to extend the counterpart sign" is: "by relaxing into it, by relaxing deeeeep into the present moment". <A> I am a practitioner of tummo and I can say that after I after entering jhana multiple times can enter jhana quicker than I used to. <S> This is how I gained proficiency! <S> Gaze into space with both eyes, with the body motionless, without speaking, and with a gentle and natural coming and going of the breath. <S> Tilopa has said: Hold the mind as if it is space. <S> Make it like space and bind the breath evenly. <S> When there is complete knowledge of equality, it dissolves completely. <S> You can different exercises in order to gain proficiency like changing your object of meditation size,colors ect... <S> Also take a look at this <A> I think i found some insight into <S> so i want to provide my own answer for others. <S> This is just one view though. <S> Pure, Beautiful mental image. <S> It will feel strange at first. <S> But mentally joyful. <S> We never experienced such things but the mind will try to described & understand it. <S> For some its some form of light, some a ecstasy feeling. <S> But all 5 sense are gone. <S> You see no light you feel no sensations <S> but this is just the mind trying to understand & classify the beauty. <S> Even though the mind experience different perspectives one thing is the same the pure mental object.
|
The best advice I can give to anyone is relaxed awareness in your meditation object!
|
Infinite loops of Rebirths I have a question. A man should attain enlightenment to liberate himself from cycle of rebirths and every other aspects. What if a MAN don't even care to try out to attain enlightenment. Will he be stuck in a cycle and no place to stop his process of rebirth until he attains enlightenment. Does he be a prisoner of this birth cycle. Is there no way for him to escape until he attains Enlightenment . What is the end of this birth cycle? I don't have in-depth knowledge in Buddhism or the question I ask. So please correct me if I am wrong. <Q> Vimalakirti Sutra : <S> Śāriputra: Goddess, where will you be born when you transmigrate after death? <S> Goddess <S> : I will be born where all the magical incarnations of the Tathāgata are born. <S> Śāriputra: <S> But the emanated incarnations of the Tathāgata do not transmigrate nor are they born. <S> Goddess: <S> All things and living beings are just the same; they do not transmigrate nor are they born! <S> Śāriputra: <S> Goddess, how soon will you attain the perfect enlightenment of buddhahood? <S> Goddess: <S> At such time as you, elder, become endowed once more with the qualities of an ordinary individual, then will I attain the perfect enlightenment of buddhahood. <S> Śāriputra: <S> Goddess, it is impossible that I should become endowed once more with the qualities of an ordinary individual. <S> Goddess: <S> Just so, reverend Śāriputra, it is impossible that I should attain the perfect enlightenment of buddhahood! <S> Why? <S> Because perfect enlightenment stands upon the impossible. <S> Because it is impossible, no one attains the perfect enlightenment of buddhahood. <S> Śāriputra: But the Tathāgata has declared: “The tathāgatas, who are as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, have attained perfect buddhahood, are attaining perfect buddhahood, and will go on attaining perfect buddhahood.” <S> Goddess: <S> Reverend Śāriputra, the expression “the buddhas of the past, present, and future” is a conventional expression made up of a certain number of syllables. <S> The buddhas are neither past, nor present, nor future. <S> Their enlightenment transcends the three times! <S> But tell me, elder, have you attained the state of arhat? <S> Śāriputra: It is attained, because there is no attainment. <S> Goddess: <S> Just so, there is perfect enlightenment because there is no attainment of perfect enlightenment. <A> They are very, very rare. <S> Since they achieved enlightenment solely on their own, there is no way to know if they cared about enlightenment; they might have, and they might have not, but it does not really matter. <A> Enlightenment(Nibbana) is the only way out. <S> There is no other. <S> As long as the causes are present, the effect will arise. <A> If a MAN don't even care to try out to attain enlightenment then he is not a prisoner. <S> As for the end of this "birth" cycle, it is when the mind stops conceiving "self". <S> Refer to SN 22.99 Gaddula Sutta . <A> One who need to stop this cycle of birth,at least have to become sovan,A person who became to sovan state has just 7 rebirths.. <S> All others haven't even understood sovan state'll be in this circle of rebirth <A> The process of purification of mind, is like the refinement of gold. <S> One needs to do away with the impurities (fetters/hindrances) to obtain pure gold. <S> As long as they exist, one is confined to Samsara. <S> According to Theravada Buddhism, there are Three Gateways to Liberation. <S> In the Visuddhimagga , they are described as realizing the Three Characteristics of Existence . <S> The Triple Gateway <S> To Liberation <S> It enters upon the state of the triple gateway to liberation now with the predominance of [one of] three faculties according as the contemplation occurs in [one of] the three ways. <S> For it is the three contemplations that are called the three gateways to liberation, according as it is said: <S> “But these three gateways to liberation lead to the outlet from the world, [that is to say,] <S> (i) <S> to the seeing of all formations as limited and circumscribed and to the entering of consciousness into the signless element, (ii) to the stirring up of the mind with respect to all formations and to the entering of consciousness into the desireless element, (iii) <S> to the seeing of all things (dhamma) as alien and to the entering of consciousness into the voidness element. <S> These three gateways to liberation lead to the outlet from the world”. <S> -- <S> Visuddhimagga: <S> The Path of Purification, p. 685-88, by Ven. <S> Buddhaghosa
|
To your first question, the Pacceka-Buddha are individuals who attained enlightenment without the Buddha's teaching. To your second question, 'Enlightenment' is the only way to end the birth-cycle.
|
Difficulty with Meditation Posture I am able to meditate when on a bus, or when I'm walking, or sometimes standing; however, no matter how hard I try I seem to avoid formal sitting. I can't help but have the feeling that formal sitting would be most effective, and that I'm avoiding something about a formal posture that is also responsible for growth. I think this is merely effort. What can I do to engage in formal sitting, and avoid always only meditating when it is effortless? Should I: 1) diminish the time of sessions 2) change my meditation type 3) change the consistency of my meditations 4) apply something else? In terms of consistency, I wonder if consistent yet short sessions are better than long and inconsistent ones? Thank you. <Q> As per my teacher, this happens when we train ourselves to hate meditation. <S> We do that by turning meditation into torture and punishment. <S> -- 1) diminish the time of sessions ? <S> Yes. <S> You can start from something as short as 30 seconds. <S> Do not ramp up too fast, only ramp up when you really WANT to sit more. -- 2) change my meditation type ? <S> Yes. <S> Do not weigh your emotional mind with any notion of the correct target state. <S> Do not blame yourself for not conforming to some ideal style, posture, or state of mind. <S> Allow your meditation to be a natural discovery process that it is. <S> Like a child playing a game, completely natural and spontaneous. <S> -- 3) change the consistency of my meditations ? <S> Yes. <S> Better meditate regularly, twice a day, 30 seconds each time - than randomly for an hour. <S> -- 4) apply something else? <S> Yes. <S> Make it pleasant for your emotional mind. <S> Beautiful setting, nice scenery, little visual noise in your peripheral field, comfortable pants, etc. <A> I am inner heat practitioner and I have had the same difficulties as you! <S> I could not understand the importance of <S> why should I take the lotus posture when I am way more comfortable sitting in a chair or even laying in the ground. <S> Know that my type of Yoga works with internal energies and posture is very important! <S> Milarepa used a belt: <S> Milarepa can often be seen depicted in paintings with round white earrings along with a bright red meditation belt, extending from the right shoulder to the waist on the left side, used to hold the body in particular and sometimes difficult to perfect yoga postures. <S> Practice after practice I started to see some changes,the more I became proficient the more the more <S> I started to give importance to posture,energy alignment,breath length and relaxation. <S> Soon enough(6 months) I found staying in the lotus posture for hours without moving at all,totally relaxed and emerged into the fire! <S> I hope that this helps you understand that relaxation is the key in the posture position and I would encourage you to find that relaxation stop,still as a mountain! <A> You are having aversion towards formal sitting and that is something to work on in mindfulness practice. <S> Start to note this aversion more often, don't ignore it as you have to transform it into eagerness and diligence. <S> It is the desire of only pleasant experience of meditation that you are most likely developing and that is to be let go of. <S> It (from experience) is also subconsciously rooted fear of unpleasant meditation session experiences and negative outcome of a session. <S> That too is state of clinging to. <S> It is something that meditation and especially Insight of meditation is designed to work with by concentrating on unpleasant sensations, pain, and hinderances such as desires, aversions and restlessness. <S> There is the mud, and there is the lotus that grows out of the mud. <S> We need the mud in order to make the lotus. <S> Thich <S> Nhat Hanh Buddhism and Eightfold path is focused on alleviating suffering, how else can you train yourself to deliver this knowledge if not from letting go of unpleasant, miserable feelings? <S> Let dukkha in, acknowledge it, and then let it out. <S> You can then start increasing it by small increments.
|
Instead, meditation should be something natural and (yes) pleasant. I would advise on seated meditation 20 minutes in the morning after waking up and 20 minutes in the evening for the first 6 months or until you are fully comfortable with it.
|
Why is in the budda days, jhana seem so easily attainable but so hard now? As i read text from canon. It seem like in the budda day jhana was a lot easier and highly recommended for the fold path. But now it seem like this rare thing only a handful of people can attain. If it was so easy how can we find the path to enter it without all the complication? <Q> All my teachers without exception said that the idea of "goal" that you are striving to "attain" is THE final obstacle to attainment. <S> To that aim, one is advised to completely eradicate the idea of goal from one's mind. <S> As in, on the deepest emotional level you have to give up any slightest hope, dream, or intent to attain jhana - and keep meditating on the resulting state. <A> There is probably lots of propaganda in the Pali suttas. <S> For example, if the core of the Pali suttas are actually understood then the doctrinal perversions in Buddhism that arose less than a few hundreds years after the Buddha's passing (including doggy suttas placed into the suttas) give the impression there could not have been as many arahants as the suttas claim. <S> Also, at least in the West, many people with jhanic potential are Christians. <S> As for reaching jhana, it is not complicated. <S> SN 48.10 refers merely to "letting go of craving" as the way to reach jhana (which includes letting go of craving for jhana). <A> I guess it was equally equally achievable. <S> Hard or Easy is only relative. <A> It has not become harder. <S> These things have always been hard. <S> Even to be born as human and getting the chance to listen to the Dhamma is also rare and hard. <S> From Dhammapada 182 <S> : <S> Rare it is to gain birth as a human being. <S> Difficult is the life of mortals. <S> Hard is the hearing of the Sublime Truth (Dhamma). <S> Rare is the appearance of the enlightened ones. <S> Kiccho manussa patilābho <S> kiccham maccāna jivitam <S> Kiccham saddhamma savanam kiccho buddhānam uppādo <A> One thing has to be understood that people who joined the Buddha many of them were already trying on different ways to attain liberation. <S> Like Mahakasapa and Sariputta were already asectics practising elsewhere. <S> And that time in India was really a peak for people trying attain Nirvana. <S> So many people must have been ready psychologically to attain jhnana. <S> They just needed right instructions. <S> I have heard in some youtube talk by Ajahn Brahm that a retreat participant with him attained jhnana. <S> I am just not able to find that video atm. <S> Besides, so many Buddhist monks meditating everywhere must be achieving jhnana they just have no need or even bother about putting it on internet and tell everybody about it. <S> They might not even have the resources. <S> Besides, its very important for advancing on the path that your spiritual experiences should be kept secret and should only be discussed with your teacher . <S> This rule is like 101 of practising spiritual path. <S> That leaves us with rest of us internet noobs who have recourse to internet and can discuss such things and who dont attain it. <S> So the point is, you just dont hear it. <S> The difficulty level is left unchanged by the system.
|
Even for today you need right teacher to get there and a firm practise. From my personal opinion, the reason for less and less to achieve jhana or even Arahant-hood, is because the effectiveness of teachings of the dharma is gradually less as 'original' as time passes.
|
I had peace initially while meditating and then lost it? I set up a routine to do my meditation where i just watch my thoughts. After some days i found a peace after meditating which continued through out my day. I enjoyed the calmness inside me. Following a stressful period for 2 or 3 days my peace was lost but i am continuing my meditation still. I try to be detached from the results of meditation but the peace was so good, i am searching it now. Did anyone felt this kind of experience ? Any suggestions for me or encouragement to continue on the path ? <Q> States of higher bliss (like Jhanas) might be addictive and therefore, it may become a hinderance in practice in the long run. <S> Important part is not to feel too attached to such states as they arise by letting go of desires. <S> If they arrive, fine, but if they aren't there, it is fine too. <S> In each of these states of feeling "good" and "bad" there is contained the opposite of it. <S> Not seeing what is pleasant brings pain; seeing what is unpleasant brings pain. <S> Therefore go beyond both pleasure and pain. <S> Don't go selfishly attached to anything, for trying to hold on to it will bring you pain. <S> When you have neither likes or dislikes, you will be free. <S> It is a hint conveyed there, in Dhammapada , that to achieve states of unconditional higher bliss, freedom and peace in the long run is to go beyond the desire for good, and aversion for not-so-good experiences. <A> Calmness is not real peace. <S> Real peace comes when craving is cut off. <S> What you are dealing with is a mind state that liked(Tanha) <S> the feeling of calm and got attached(Upadana) to it as a result. <S> Now you are trying(Bhava) desperately to experience it again. <S> Try Vipassana meditation if you want real peace. <S> Not just Samatha. <A> The question is about searching peace once attained for a while when in meditation.---It is totally human and normal <S> whatever is happening to you. <S> For understanding this we have to understand the working of "panch skandha". <S> Afterall <S> it is age old habit/conditioning of the mind to react with aversion/craving to the sensations arised after contact of sensory bases with external/internal inputs. <S> still reacting skandha is reacting in aversion to the stressful situation. <S> observe that by doing vipassana ,you may come out of the situation.
|
The meditation had brought you few glimpses of peace and tranquility and after going through some stressful situation ,you are not able to get it again.
|
In satipatthana, how does mindfulness lead to nirodha? What is the difference between "cessation" and "nirodha"? How would it be experienced during meditation? <Q> The between cessation and nirodha is "cessation" is an English word and "nirodha" is a Pali word that often does not literally mean "cessation" although often it does. <S> Cessation of attachment. <S> Cessation of I-making & my-making. <S> Cessation of suffering. <S> Cessation of ignorance. <S> Cessation of ego-birthing, ego-aging & ego-dying. <S> In summary, all of the above "cessations" amount to the cessation of suffering (dukkha-nirodha). <S> Therefore, often, when the Pali teachings refer to "consciousness-nirodha"; "nama-rupa-nirodha"; "sense-contact-nirodha" and "feeling-nirodha"; what this means is consciousness, nama-rupa (mind-body), sense contact & feeling are no longer imprisoned by ignorance, craving, egoism & suffering. <A> Cessation can be experienced during meditation. <S> And if cessation happens it is unmistakable. <S> You just know that it happened. <S> Sometimes just one or a couple of senses/sense perceptions seem to be missing, no longer there. <S> Just for a split second. <S> For instance the perception/sense of smell can suddenly drop/cease. <S> Full blown cessation would be if every one of the six senses drops/ceases simultaneously. <S> In that case you will only know when you are back, so to speak, that cessation happened. <S> In any case, you will know it. <S> It can't be missed because it has too much impact. <A> In Satipatthana, your job is to breath while calming your body and mind. <S> As you do that, you don't think about the world, your life, your problems etc. <S> - you only think about your immediate phenomenological environment: thoughts, feelings, broodings, pyschosomatic sensations etc. <S> - in a sort-of detached impersonal "scientific" manner. <S> Nirodha is stopping and non-arising of asavas. <S> Asavas are self-centric action impulses like "OMG <S> I want to get this thing" or "OMG I want to get rid of this thing" etc. <S> The "scientific" perspective of Satipatthana combined with breathing and calming leads to letting go of asavas, stopping of reifications (I-making and object-making) and settling down in peace. <S> The end result feels like Peace which is not-unconscious, but can't be characterized using any specific characterization. <S> It is completely free from egoistic action impulses and ego-centric judgements. <S> It is free from all reifications. <S> It is free from any sense of conflict. <S> It is suchness.
|
In meditation, the important "cessations" to be experienced are: Cessation of craving.
|
How can I keep from feeling dishearted while trying to live mindfully I find it very difficult. I get bored sometimes and other times simply struggle to stay focused on the breath and the body. Does my attention span improve over time? I'm ADHD so it's very difficult to keep thinking out. Is it ok to think? <Q> Thoughts are generally wholesome and unwholesome, so yes, everything might be a tool for achieving your happiness. <S> Just be mindful that this is a wholesome thought when it arises. <S> In the same way, achieving bliss cannot be done without utilising Self in the "desirous" (but not thrisna here) way to let go of Selfishness. <S> In a way that confidence should trump doubt. <S> Such is the way. <S> Also, what does it actually mean <S> right mindfulness : <S> "One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness... <S> "One is mindful to abandon wrong resolve & to enter & remain in right resolve: This is one's right mindfulness... <S> "One is mindful to abandon wrong speech & to enter & remain in right speech: This is one's right mindfulness... <S> "One is mindful to abandon wrong action & to enter & remain in right action: This is one's right mindfulness... <S> "One is mindful to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter & remain in right livelihood: This is one's right mindfulness..." From Right Mindfulness: <S> samma sati <S> You are simply aware of the body and breath in order to recollect you to keep the right view and refrain from cultivating the wrong view. <S> It is a "reminder" that is always available at hand (breath). <S> It also calms the mind giving clarity. <S> You also probably try too hard since Middle way should mean Right effort as described above. <S> It should bring joy and peace. <S> I agree, it is not easy to keep balance <S> but you know when you find it. <A> 'I' do not get bored. <S> Boredom arises. <S> Note it as it arises. <S> 'I' do not get unfocused. <S> Unfocusedness(Uddhacca) arises. <S> Note it as it arises. <S> It is not very difficult. <S> Worry and aversion arise in the mind. <S> Note them as they arise. <S> 'You' are not thinking. <S> Thoughts arise in the mind. <S> Note them as they arise. <A> Once you feel joy, you are not distracted, you are mindful and vice versa. <S> The way to feel joy is mentioned here : Bhikkhus, for a virtuous person, one whose behavior is virtuous, no volition need be exerted: ‘Let non-regret arise in me.’ <S> It is natural that non-regret arises in a virtuous person, one whose behavior is virtuous. <S> “For one without regret no volition need be exerted: ‘Let joy arise in me.’ <S> It is natural that joy arises in one without regret. <S> “For one who is joyful no volition need be exerted: ‘Let rapture arise in me.’ <S> It is natural that rapture arises in one who is joyful. <S> “For one with a rapturous mind no volition need be exerted: ‘Let my body be tranquil.’ <S> It is natural that the body of one with a rapturous mind is tranquil. <S> “For one tranquil in body no volition need be exerted: ‘Let me feel pleasure.’ <S> It is natural that one tranquil in body feels pleasure. <S> “For one feeling pleasure no volition need be exerted: ‘Let my mind be concentrated.’ <S> It is natural that the mind of one feeling pleasure is concentrated. <S> “For one who is concentrated no volition need be exerted: ‘Let me know and see things as they really are.’ <S> It is natural that one who is concentrated knows and sees things as they really are. <S> “For one who knows and sees things as they really are no volition need be exerted: ‘Let me be disenchanted and dispassionate.’ <S> It is natural that one who knows and sees things as they really are is disenchanted and dispassionate. <S> “For one who is disenchanted and dispassionate no volition need be exerted: ‘Let me realize the knowledge and vision of liberation.’ <S> It is natural that one who is disenchanted and dispassionate realizes the knowledge and vision of liberation. <A> Meditation is not easy, for most. <S> Instead, examine the benefits of the five precepts & non-harming, and adhere to them. <S> Practise loving-kindness towards yourself & others. <A> I think you're doing great. <S> You see that you can't control what's going on. " <S> Shoot, there is boredom. <S> And I can't stay with the breath and the body. <S> Darn.... <S> "That's the nature of the mind. <S> It has nothing at all to do with 'your' ADHD. <S> :) <S> Don't think things out. <S> Just notice that you're thinking (thinking, thinking, thinking). <S> That's enough. <S> Don't get involved in what you're seeing/experiencing. <S> Don't try to gain anything (attention span). <S> That's all you have to do. <S> Objectively observing is your only task. <S> Things will become clear by themselves. <S> Good luck. :) <A> For the beginners, effort is absolutely necessary. <S> So don't judge yourself negatively, but keep the effort in your practice. <S> Later on mindfulness will be totally natural for you. <S> Mahasi Sayadaw's noting technique is very effective for the people who want to learn to live mindfully in their daily lifes.
|
Therefore, do not place great expectations upon meditation. Just keep noticing and noting. It may take time to get used to the new way of living.
|
Eradication of identity view is a cause or effect of stream entry? I am asking this question due to this answer . Is the removal of identity view (sakkāya-diṭṭhi) required before stream entry can be attained? Or would identity view be removed only with the achievement of stream entry? <Q> To me this question sounds like an example of reification. <S> In my opinion, in real life the numerous factors of Understanding and Liberation develop gradually, supporting each other in lockstep. <S> The more someone sees through the numerous simplistic assumptions underlying our idea of "self" <S> - the more one can be said to be free from the self-view. <S> The entire maturity model is pretty much a reification - defining clear-cut categories where even the criteria for delineation are not well-defined. <S> This is why in Mahayana we are advised against obsessing over categorization too much, because it can lead to dead-end arguments, but also supports the self-view. <S> On which level am I? <S> - this very question already presupposes existence of "I" that can occupy a level. <S> I think the whole model is a bit sarcastic on Buddha's part towards the junior students (and Buddha <S> WAS known for his sarcasm) in the spirit of "oooooh <S> , sounds like you still have many more lives to go, brother" etc. <A> Sakkhaya Ditti is eradicated as a result of attaining stream entry. <S> Read the detailed answer given here by venerable Yuttadhammo. <A> Stream entry is a label to concisely announce that the person has the usual 3 characteristics of ''stream entry'', with what you call the lack of ''sakkāya-diṭṭhi'' being one of those. <S> If you want to know what the lack of ''sakkāya-diṭṭhi'' is all about, which has nothing to do with being an expert on dependent origination like it is written on another thread on this website, you can read https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.089.than.html and his statements like " <S> In the same way, friends, it's not that I say 'I am form,' nor do I say 'I am other than form.' <S> It's not that I say, 'I am feeling... <S> perception... <S> fabrications... consciousness,' nor do I say, 'I am something other than consciousness.' <S> With regard to these five clinging-aggregates, 'I am' has not been overcome, although I don't assume that 'I am this.' <S> that's all there is to the lack of ''sakkāya-diṭṭhi'' . <S> the lack of ''sakkāya-diṭṭhi'' is itself a label regrouping all the statements in this quote. <S> I you want to now <S> what ''''sakkāya-diṭṭhi'''' is all about, since you are a puthujjana, you already naturally regards the ''5 aggregates'' as ''I am this'' and even more stupid from you, you turn that into a ''I am'', typically by regarding as and calling them ''mine''. <S> You have been doing this for many years already, so no need to explain more. <S> Once you no longer regard any aggregate as ''mine'' you can claim that you lack ''sakkāya-diṭṭhi''. <A> SN 22.122 states that meditation over five grasping aggregates is a continuos process. <S> It applies to all , stream enterer, once returner, non returner and the perfect one. <S> Meditating on five grasping aggregates leads to the fruit of stream enterer, once returner, non returner and perfection. <S> I answered a similar question here . <S> Although nothing is left for the perfect one to achieve,eradication of self view is a desired meditation even for the perfect one.
|
In practice the stream-entry is gradual, just like Enlightenment itself (I believe). It's wrong to say that it is required to remove the identity view before attaining stream entry.
|
Unintended but mindless action resulted in death of a living thing I am very new to Buddhism and am learning the teachings, so I am reaching out. I avoid hurting any living thing at all cost, but this morning while walking my dogs I was texting and I crushed a snail. My heart broke the moment it happened and I felt ill. I know it was not intentional, and I mourned the loss of life, but it happened while I was distracted and not mindful. I still feel it so deep. So I guess I have a couple of questions. What are the implications of this action? And how do I correct this wrong? <Q> What are the implications of this action? <S> The implication is that you will suffer. <S> Well, actually, you already are. <S> Your heart broke and you felt ill. <S> These are the immediate results of your bad kamma. <S> And feeling guilt and remorse is bad kamma as well, since it leads you to suffer more. <S> Reflect on how it makes you feel, with kindness and compassion. <S> Make the determination to avoid both in the future. <S> Take up the five precepts, if you haven't already. <S> Or take them up again, if you already had and wish to renew them ( https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/pancasila.html ). <S> This is Theravada view, btw. <S> Be kind to yourself! :) <A> I've encountered such in a few occasions. <S> And how I attempt to avoid it from happening again <S> is to be mindful while walking. <S> While walking my vision is looking at the floor in front of me in a natural posture. <S> So that I know where I am heading <S> and if I need to be extra careful if there are any obstacles. <S> Every step I make is with the awareness of stepping. <S> If my attention is drawn towards something around me. <S> I would take note of the distraction and bring my focus back to my steps. <S> Else I will stop walking and pay attention to the distraction. <S> The drawback of this is at times people that you might know passes you <S> but you missed noticing them until they call out to you. <S> Sukhihotu. <A> Our very existence is a cause and condition for others suffering. <S> Consider that the air we breathe and the food we eat and the shelter we take no doubt serves as a condition for the suffering of other sentient beings. <S> This is sometimes referred to as the all-pervasive aspect of duhkka and what makes samsara so unsatisfactory. <S> What you can do is work tirelessly for the benefit of other sentient beings by taking the Bodhisattva vows and working to generate true bodhicitta and true wisdom to accomplish the Great Enlightenment for the benefit of all. <S> Meditate on that snails death and how unsatisfactory samsara is. <S> Renounce this life and this world of samsara and use that snail’s death as motivation to accomplish the highest aim’s of mother sentient beings. <S> Highly suggest you read Shantideva <S> ’s <S> Guide to the Bodhisattva’s <S> Way of Life three times over the course of this summer to honor the life of that snail.
|
Reflect on the fact that you didn't intend the snail to die.
|
Vipassana and sleep quality disturbance I tried vipassana meditation and where i used to follow my belly for the inhale exhale. Every time I practised, I found that my sleep quality was disturbed. I found myself tired next day after the disturbed sleep. Did anyone experience the same? <Q> What happens when you observe the lying position (not focused but more in a relaxed way, as Lanka describes) instead of rising/falling? <S> Addition:I thought about it a bit. <S> What came to mind is that due to vipassana your awareness increases. <S> Which means that it's possible that you can become more aware of all sorts of conditions. <S> For instance: temperature. <S> What I find myself is that when I'm more aware of let's say temperature I can't sleep like when I'm not. <S> My sleep is more disturbed too due to this (as an example). <S> It depends also on the meditation object. <S> You could try to switch to a different object. <S> Also, you could do metta instead of vipassana right before sleep. <S> It supposedly brings better sleep. <S> Eleven benefits to practicing Metta (loving kindness meditation: You will sleep easily <S> You will wake easily <S> You will have pleasant dreams <S> People will love you Devas (gods or angels) and animals will love you Devas will protect you External dangers, such as poisons, weapons, and fire, will not harm you <S> Your face will be radiant <S> Your mind will be serene <S> You will die <S> unconfused <S> You will be re-born in happy realms https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=11_benefits_to_practicing_Metta http://www.vipassana.com/meditation/facets_of_metta.php <A> When going to bed (as a Vipassana meditator) its a good idea, to try to not have a too concentrated mindfulness but <S> instead a more general or relaxed form of mindfulness of The Four Satipatthana. <A> i used to follow my belly for the inhale exhale <S> If you follow anapasathi meditation, Buddha said to do it by concentrating on the breath air touch in the end of your nostrils, that is a better way to do anapanasathi than concentrating on belly.. <S> If you need more details read Anapanasati Sutta.. <S> If your sleep was disturbed by meditation, try to chage the time you meditate, Sleep early and awake early in morning, Then your mind and body is fresh, not tired also.. <S> For anapanasathi meditation you need a empty place of sounds and other outer obstacles according to anapanasati sutta <S> ,That may be a empty hall/room or place under a tree as suitable.. <A> certain meditations release energy. <S> it could be this energy is still flowing when you're in bed so you can't sleep as well. <S> I know a regular meditator who gets up at 4am every night because of this, then sleeps again later in the day.
|
But sleep is not always disturbed when practising vipassana before sleep.
|
Health anxiety - how to deal with it? Health anxiety is defined in the quote below. A person suffering from it may mistakenly believe certain fluctuations in bodily sensations to be dangerous or a sign of impending critical illness, and this may cause them to become anxious. When they become anxious, they may get symptoms of anxiety (like rapid heart rate and chest discomfort) which may lead to a positive feedback loop, resulting in a panic attack, where they may think that they have a heart attack and go to the ER. That's the worst case. The best case is frequent unnecessary visits to the doctor. Based on Buddhist techniques, what could a health anxiety sufferer do to help himself or herself? On the other hand, if he really did have some critical illness, but convinces himself that it's not really the case, then it's not good for his health. So, how could Buddhist techniques help him find the balance? According to this article on health anxiety: The False Alarm Health anxiety is the misinterpretation of normal bodily sensations as dangerous. Healthy bodies produce all sorts of physical symptoms that might be uncomfortable, painful, unexpected, and otherwise unwanted — but not dangerous. Picture a car with an alarm system. It’s useful if your car alarm goes off when a criminal is breaking in, but it’s problematic if it goes off every time someone walks by. Your car alarm would be misinterpreting innocent pedestrians as dangerous criminals. Normal physical symptoms that often produce fear and worry include changes in visual acuity, heart rate and blood pressure, saliva levels, depth of breathing, balance, and muscle tone, to name a few. These are normal and harmless. But when a person misinterprets them as symptoms of some terrible disease, it creates undue worry. This explains why medical tests come out negative: The physical sensations are real, but they are not symptoms of a disease. Overestimating Danger Misinterpretation may be due to assumptions about health and illness, such as, “My cousin died of cancer, so it’s only a matter of time for me.” Or, “Viruses spread quickly. Since people in Africa are dying of Ebola, it could easily spread to the United States.” People with health anxiety might hold rigid definitions of good health, perhaps believing that any discomfort means bad health. If they hear a news story about a few cases of a serious virus, people with health anxiety might start scanning their own bodies for symptoms of the virus. Looking for symptoms makes you notice subtle sensations that you might otherwise ignore. With uncertainty, the imagination has room to create stories. And that’s when your body’s alarm sounds off as you imagine the worst. It Gets Tricky Symptoms of anxiety produce very real physical symptoms: Dizziness, stomachaches, rapid heartbeat, tingling in the hands and feet, muscle tension, jitteriness, chest pressure, and the list goes on. These symptoms add fuel to the fire. Now you have real evidence that something is seriously wrong. Or do you? Perhaps it’s anxiety. So how do you know if these symptoms are serious? You go to the doctor… and then to a therapist. Health anxiety persists despite reassurance from the doctor. Seeking reassurance from doctors, insisting on repeated medical tests, and visits to the ER and urgent care are common if you have health anxiety. This habit leads you to rely on such reassurance to obtain relief from health worries. A vicious cycle develops of noticing a sensation or learning of an illness in the world, misinterpreting it as threatening, then becoming anxious, and finally going to the doctor for reassurance. Reassurance from the doctor reduces the anxiety and brings relief temporarily. Soon the cycle starts again. <Q> When the thoughts of worry come to the mind the patient can practice Cittanupassana(mindfulness of mental activities) and Dhammanupassana(mindfulness of realities). <S> This technique will reduce the worry that leads to anxiety. <A> Looking at Pali Canon... here is what I see. <S> (It would take too much space to quote every idea, so I'm just summarizing it here.) <S> Look at your condition and check whether the medical situation is objectively improving or getting worse. <S> If it's not getting worse - that's a reason to calm down. <S> If it's improving - that's a reason to be glad. <S> This should create a positive feedback cycle that will improve the situation. <S> If situation is getting worse, contact a doctor if you can. <S> Otherwise, ask yourself if you have done anything bad that you regret, or whether you have done anything good that you can be proud of. <S> If there are no major regrets and something to be proud of - that's a reason to be glad. <S> This should create a positive feedback cycle that will improve the situation. <S> If there is something to regret - you should repent and promise to yourself to learn from that mistake and not repeat again. <S> A firm decision will make you feel inspired and create a positive feedback cycle that will improve the situation. <S> If you still feel bad, you should review the elements the person is made from and let go of any identification with them. <S> Starting from physical, and then the information of the mind, and finally subjectivity (representation). <S> Review how this works based on objective laws understood by science and let go of identification with self. <S> Look at things philosophically and impersonally until you enter a detached state of mind. <S> There is always something you can find if you try. <A> Reassurance from doctors or knowledge doesn't really work. <S> I know it experientially. <S> Doctor's reassurance results in finding another doubt where the former one has been patched. <S> It is temporary ease in the cycle of aversion and desire, typical samsaric, vicious cycle. <S> Aversion from feeling anxiety and feeling ill that results in the desire of reassurance is the main agent that spawns endless knots, knots that have even aversions towards knots. <S> Mind is quite crafty and will always try to find a hole in the new logic-driven defence line. <S> It is, therefore, not through intellectual reassurance that one gets released from such trapping. <S> Wisdom should arise naturally, through a mood change, when body and mind are calm. <S> Then, thoroughly check your body reaction(s). <S> Try to do mindfulness of scanning the body down and notice these tensions. <S> For instance, typically you will have tense abdomen muscles and tense jaw area, mindfulness of the body will let you see it as its a fight or flight response . <S> Muscles should then let loose after acknowledged, furthermore, combined with breath - worry will wane. <S> Another thing is not to cling or have aversion to anything and importantly, remember three characteristics, especially impermanence - everything will eventually die or dissolve. <S> We should not feel aversion toward chronic, or terminal condition, illness. <S> We have to navigate through confusion to calm abiding, illuminating clarity and make peace with the bodily condition.
|
Now, for being trapped in anxiety best you might do is to focus on breathing and note that you are feeling anxiety, if you are feeling pain, then note that you are feeling pain, all with kindness if possible . When the patient feels sensation, he can practice Kayanupassana(mindfulness of the body) and Vedananupassana(mindfulness of feelings). In general, try to switch attention to objectively valid reasons to be happy and detached about things.
|
How did the Buddha subdue fear and terror while standing, sitting, etc.? The Bhaya Bherava Sutta (MN4) states the following: ...I stayed in the sort of places that are awe-inspiring and make your hair stand on end, such as park-shrines, forest-shrines, & tree-shrines. And while I was staying there a wild animal would come, or a peacock would make a twig fall, or wind would rustle the fallen leaves. The thought would occur to me: 'Is this that fear & terror coming?' Then the thought occurred to me: 'Why do I just keep waiting for fear? What if I, in whatever state I'm in when fear & terror come to me,were to subdue that fear & terror in that very state?' So when fear &terror came to me while I was walking back & forth, I would not standor sit or lie down. I would keep walking back & forth until I hadsubdued that fear & terror. When fear & terror came to me while I wasstanding, I would not walk or sit or lie down. I would keep standinguntil I had subdued that fear & terror. When fear & terror came to mewhile I was sitting, I would not lie down or stand up or walk. I wouldkeep sitting until I had subdued that fear & terror. When fear &terror came to me while I was lying down, I would not sit up or standor walk. I would keep lying down until I had subdued that fear &terror. However, it does not say how the Buddha subdued the fear and terror while standing, sitting, etc. How could a practitioner understand and use this method? <Q> Buddha has given a detailed answer to handling fear and trepidation in the Sutta SN 11.3 . <S> Below I quote the relevant part: <S> “But, bhikkhus, I say this: If you have gone to a forest or to the foot of a tree or to an empty hut, and fear or trepidation or terror should arise in you, on that occasion you should recollect me thus: ‘The Blessed One is an arahant, perfectly enlightened, accomplished in true knowledge and conduct, fortunate, knower of the world, unsurpassed leader of persons to be tamed, teacher of devas and humans, the Enlightened One, the Blessed One.’ <S> For when you recollect me, bhikkhus, whatever fear or trepidation or terror you may have will be abandoned. <S> “If you cannot recollect me, then you should recollect the Dhamma thus: ‘The Dhamma is well expounded by the Blessed One, directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise.’ <S> For when you recollect the Dhamma, bhikkhus, whatever fear or trepidation or terror you may have will be abandoned. <S> “If you cannot recollect the Dhamma, then you should recollect the Saṅgha thus: ‘The Saṅgha of the Blessed One’s disciples is practising the good way, practising the straight way, practising the true way, practising the proper way; that is, the four pairs of persons, the eight types of individuals—this Saṅgha of the Blessed One’s disciples is worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of reverential salutation, the unsurpassed field of merit for the world.’ <S> For when you recollect the Saṅgha, bhikkhus, whatever fear or trepidation or terror you may have will be abandoned. <S> To answer the question <S> How did the Buddha manage fear? <S> I would say that he recalled Dhamma. <S> If anyone recalls Dhamma, all the fear will vanish or fade away. <A> There is another sutta in SN (very hard to find, so not giving a reference) in a group of suttas that speak about Four Right Exertions. <S> In that sutta Buddha speaks about unwholesome states and how the bhikkhus should not let the unwholesome states linger, but subdue them right there <S> and then, on the spot. <S> To me it looks like this emphasis is about focus : putting 100% of one's attention onto dealing with the problem at hand rather than "kicking the can down the road". <S> My teacher(s) taught me the following methods for dealing with fear and anxiety: <S> If fear and/or anxiety is very strong (to the point of vomiting) - one should dissipate it by doing any physical exercise. <S> Jogging or sit-ups or push-ups or pull-ups work well for this. <S> An intermediate practice in this vein is spontaneous dancing a-la qi-gong with focus on one's emotional projections in and around the body. <S> When student becomes relatively stable and can deal with strong fear/anxiety directly, he or she should stare directly at fear, trying to go "as close" to it as possible and even "go inside". <S> When this is done, through gazing at fear it can be "transmuted" into its pure form, that of energy, without being colored by an attitude. <A> There're a series of repetitive paragraphs at the beginning of MN 4 that list the reasons why fear and dread arise, starting with unpurified bodily conduct and ending with lack of wisdom. <S> Purifying those aspects is the way to subdue fear and dread: <S> I considered thus: ‘Whenever recluses or brahmins unpurified in bodily conduct resort to remote jungle-thicket resting places in the forest, then owing to the defect of their unpurified bodily conduct these good recluses and brahmins evoke unwholesome fear and dread. <S> But I do not resort to remote jungle-thicket resting places in the forest unpurified in bodily conduct. <S> I am purified in bodily conduct. <S> I resort to remote jungle-thicket resting places in the forest as one of the noble ones with bodily conduct purified.’ <S> Seeing in myself this purity of bodily conduct, I found great solace in dwelling in the forest. <A>
|
In vipassana terms one would simply acknowledge 'fear, fear, fear' and observe in an objective way. When fear/anxiety is medium - one should repeatedly tap one body in those areas where the fear is felt: abdomen, solar plexus, chest, throat, sides of the head etc. - trying to relax corresponding muscles and through that let go of the preconceptual fabrication. He then gives a very similar elaboration to that in the Bhaya Bherava Sutta, saying that if a bhikkhu is standing he should subdue it while still standing, if he is sitting - then while still sitting etc.
|
Sila & (Non)Remorse AN 10.1 Suppose a person does certain acts that are not in line with the precepts but he does not feel remorse because it seems to the person as an trifling act, for example taking something from his/her parents without their consent or gossiping and lying (as skillful means for example). What is the Buddhist answer to that? As I know, regarding lying and gossiping for example, it is quite clear that one shouldn't do it regardless of an alleged benefit. <Q> Bikkhu bodhi issues a video mentioning precisely the topic of discussion Anguttara Nikaya: Duka Nipāta, The Book of the Two <S> (2018.07.07) Bhikkhu Bodhi Sutta <S> 77- <S> I do not recall at what time he talks about that. <S> But his answer is that the kamma of somebody who does not feel shame of doing bad things as exposed by the buddha is worse than the karma of the guy who feels shame for the same acts. <S> This answer leads to the conclusion that dangerous are the people who claim that the feeling of shame must be avoided once you follow the path, and that other people who follow the path must not judge other followers. <A> ...a person does certain acts that are not in line with the precepts <S> but he does not feel remorse... <S> (i.e., delusion/ignorance) <S> A child, craving a memory of love might steal from parents. <S> A person once slandered might gossip. <S> A person once betrayed might lie. <S> And these actions perpetuate suffering. <S> This is suffering. <S> And what is dependent co-arising? <S> From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. <S> ... <S> then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. <S> Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering Like gravity, kamma happens. <S> Always and eventually. <S> Consequences do arise. <S> For lying, trust is lost. <S> For stealing, fear of loss arises. <S> However, we tend to consider solutions <S> only when we know suffering . <A> The Buddha discovered the Middle way before He attained Nibbana. <S> The middle way is also in the first sermon of the 'turning of the wheel'. <S> Its an important aspect of following the path. <S> The point I am making is, to attain to Nibbana <S> you have to live as the Zen says 'on the razor's edge'. <S> You have to balance the Eightfold path. <S> This means that you don't have to live on the extremes of moral behaviour. <S> So the trivial acts you should learn to ignore. <S> In modern times creating work-life balance, we do a lot of things which strictly speaking won't be moral but can be trivial. <S> If you end up being pedantic to every action you will become paralysed. <S> You don't have to be critical <S> but you do have to be aware and mindful of every action. <S> Edit: There will be another set of answers pointing the obvious references to Karma, but one has to understand there is a difference between 'do-gooders' and the current generation of 'Stream-enterers'.
|
So as long as your actions don't cause suffering to others and yourself it is fine.
|
Is pīti physical and sukha emotional? I always read piti: joy is mental happiness and sukha is physical. But lately i have been reading pīti is physical, sukha is emotional. At first i thought this didn't matter but now for Jhana training I'm reading move from the piti physical sensation to sukha emotional sensation, which completely throw me off. Any help? <Q> Can't separate like that. <S> Mental-emotional-somatical is a continuum, not discrete. <S> Or, more precisely, they are layers of the same, like different frequencies that can be isolated within the same signal function - not separate. <S> Everything is just the way it should be. <S> It feels peaceful, subtle and sweeeeeeet. <S> It also has somatic component. <S> The breath becomes fluid, the body feels light, the movements are spontaneous. <S> It's like that feeling when you just woke up after wonderful sleep <S> and you feel refreshed and blissful, gentle and peaceful. <S> Piti is a much more coarse condition. <S> It is like that feeling when you listen to a very inspiring lecture or a song and suddenly realize - and feel - profound significance and gratitude, and then you may get goosebumps or the tears may start rolling. <S> Somatically at that moment, you may feel being aflame or tingling or orgasm-like waves going through your body. <S> Unlike sukha, piti is kinda taxing, one can get tired of it. <S> So <S> yeah, <S> piti is coarser of the two and sukha is subtler - in this sense <S> you could say, piti has <S> a stronger somatic component and sukha is more focused on the mental/emotional end of the spectrum. <A> With this sutta , it is Vinnana which is secluded, which means fewer objects cognized, then it is mano which has piti and <S> the kaya has passambhati then sukhaṃ vediyati, and the citta has sukhha then samadhi. <S> Here is the pali version. <A> Sukha as well as piti are both mental factors. <S> The bodily unpleasant or pleasant sensations are domanassa and somanassa. <S> If you want to dive deeper into mental states and their accompanying factors you might want to read the Abhidhamma. <S> A free pdf version can be downloaded here . <A> A few useful links that could help distinguishing the two: Piti definition ; sukha definition ; and detailed analysis at Vism Chapter IV.94
|
Sukha is that mental/emotional state/feeling when everything is just right.
|
How can we stop overthinking? Many people suffer because of an endless mind-thoughts. What is the simplest way to stop overthinking and make the mind still? <Q> As a person with obsessive thought disorder I might shed some light on this issue. <S> The very fact that you are overthinking is that you are clinging to resolving an issue you believe is of highest importance at the moment, as Andrei Volkov already wrote. <S> Label it "Obsessiveness." and continue with your mindful gate keeping. <S> Don't let <S> scattered thoughts (vicàra) roam freely unnoticed. <S> Try to let only wholesome and directed thoughts (vitakka) free. <S> It is the case of a habit. <S> It is mostly the issue that such thoughts of overthinking take on subjects that aren't important or even difficult to solve with calm and clear mind, so along with mindfulness of thoughts please add concentrating on breathing. <S> Do not try to tackle such thoughts in the state of confusion, as you will be like a man standing on the deck of the ship in the middle of the sea storm - you don't want to be out in such conditions, it is far better to keep yourself safe inside the ship and wait for better conditions . <S> No matter how tempting it is to continue inner chatter or how critical it might seem - let go of the need. <S> As what they say: Don't try to talk with the madman - it is not going to work. <S> Bonus: <S> Ajahn Sumedho <S> - Let Go, Let Go, Let Go <A> Wrestling the mind with the mind generally just makes more chaos. <S> You could torture yourself to death wondering why you are thinking this or that when you should be thinking this or that. <S> What a mess. <S> Instead, consider the Satipatthana Sutta which starts with the body: <S> Breathing in long, he discerns, 'I am breathing in long'; or breathing out long, he discerns, 'I am breathing out long.' <S> Or breathing in short, he discerns, 'I am breathing in short'; or breathing out short, he discerns, 'I am breathing out short.' <S> He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to the entire body.' <S> As you do this, you will notice that simply being aware of the breath may result in longer breaths. <S> As this awareness deepens, so will your breath. <S> Oddly, a side effect of this awareness is that overthinking gently evaporates effortlessly. <S> The sutta continues in this clear, deliberate manner. <S> Eventually it does touch on mind and delusion, but only much later. <S> After body. <S> After feeling. <A> TL;DR: " <S> The way my teacher explained this, some thought-patterns can be seen as quasi-living beings, relying on human carriers for their survival. <S> These thought-patterns (he called them "maras") capture our attention by appealing to our sense of importance. <S> By thinking about them and acting out these thoughts in verbal and physical action, we provide maras (~memes, informational quasi-beings) with sustenance and help them propagate to the new carriers. <S> In some sense the thought-patterns can be seen as mental parasites, feeding on human thought energy, propagating through social- and mass-media and virally from carrier to carrier. <S> Much of our stress and overthinking comes from internalizing the thought-patterns as our own opinions! <S> Maras work by narrowing the carrier's attention: "this is all-important and nothing else is important". <S> Liberation from maras requires letting go of the sense of importance they use to capture the carrier's attention. <S> To break through a mara's bubble of narrowed attention, we have to make an effort to deliberately expand our attention: "this is not all-important! <S> Here are some other things that are truly important: A, B, C". <S> Lay on your back or sit, and stretch your legs forward. <S> Tap your feet sideways on one another for 5-15 minutes. <S> Peripheral vision. <S> In my own experience the most effective technique is to simply recognize a mara as a mara and stop identifying with the thought-pattern it represents. <S> The very act of realizing that a particular thought-pattern with its sense of all-importance is an extraneous construct that we don't have to believe in, strips the mara of its power and brings back equanimity. <A> A few practical things you can do to help: <S> Recognize that thinking, and particularly thinking too much, is normal, and that there is also nothing wrong with thinking negatively. <S> This avoids the downward cycle of 'I'm stressed, then I'm stressed about being stressed' Given that overthinking is normal, you can also seek out mindfulness techniques (I'd recommend ACT and CBT) Beyond that there are physiological things you can do: cut down on stimulants like caffeine and alcohol, get regular exercise and sleep <S> Overall, the biggest thing is to accept that negative thought patterns are how we're built, and that there's nothing wrong with feeling bad from time to time. <S> I would also definitely recommend checking out the above mindfulness techniques. <A> From the Mogharājamāṇavapucchā Sutta • The Young Man Mogharāja’s <S> Questions : https://suttacentral.net/snp5.16/en/anandajoti <S> “So, to the One With Excellent Sight, I have come in need with a question:Looking on the world in what way <S> does the king of Death not see one?” <S> “Look on the world as empty, Mogharāja, being always mindful. <S> Having removed wrong view of self, in this way one will cross beyond Death. <S> When looking on the world in this way the king of Death does not see one.” <A> The question is how to manage overthinking? <S> Overdue thinking and late thinking can stop by planning. <S> Over wrong view thinking and wrong decision can stop by right view thinking practice. <S> Over five-strings thinking can stop by upacara/appana-jhana and can cease by vipassana. <S> Over right view thinking <S> (vipassana-upakkilesa) can relax by upacara/appana-jhana. <S> Overall suffering can cease by Nibbana. <S> And the practitioner can attain Nibbana by adhisila+adhicitta+adhipanna.
|
The simplest way to stop overthinking" is to let go of importance . What you might do is to be mindful of obsessiveness as it comes. I was also taught some somatic exercises that help re-expanding one's narrowed attention: Tapping the feet. Move your eyes from side to side and/or roll them, to expand your awareness of the peripheral vision.
|
Why meditate? want a truthful answer without spiritual terms? What I think of meditation is sitting with a good posture and concentrating on breathing and thinking about nothing. How does this help a person with anything? The only plus point that I can think of meditation is that, during the time you meditate, you forget all the distractions around you and become calm and stress free. Why do people talk about enlightenment? I saw this definition of enlightenment on Google: Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-incurred immaturity. (Kant, 1784) Doesn't that imply "Enlightenment" equals "being disciplined, mature and independent"? How does meditation achieve this? Don't we become mature through experience and growth, disciplined through hard work and independent by accepting yourself? Hence why do we meditate? Why do we say things like "enlightenment can be achieved through meditation" when it can be achieved without it? <Q> Stop spreading non-sense. <S> Both of you. <S> Please refer to AN 10.1 <S> “Sir, what is the purpose and benefit of skillful ethics? ” <S> “Ānanda, having no regrets is the purpose and benefit of skillful ethics.” <S> “But what’s the purpose and benefit of having no regrets?” <S> “Joy is the purpose and benefit of having no regrets.” <S> “But what’s the purpose and benefit of joy?” <S> “Rapture …” <S> “But what’s the purpose and benefit of rapture?” <S> “Tranquility …” <S> “But what’s the purpose and benefit of tranquility?” <S> “Bliss …” <S> “But what’s the purpose and benefit of bliss?” <S> “Immersion …” <S> “But what’s the purpose and benefit of immersion?” <S> “ Truly knowing and seeing …” <S> “But what’s the purpose and benefit of truly knowing and seeing?” <S> “Disillusionment and dispassion …” <S> “But what’s the purpose and benefit of disillusionment and dispassion?” <S> “Knowledge and vision of freedom is the purpose and benefit of disillusionment and dispassion. <S> So, Ānanda, the purpose and benefit of skillful ethics is not having regrets. <S> Joy is the purpose and benefit of not having regrets. <S> Rapture is the purpose and benefit of joy. <S> Tranquility is the purpose and benefit of rapture. <S> Bliss is the purpose and benefit of tranquility. <S> Immersion is the purpose and benefit of bliss. <S> Truly knowing and seeing is the purpose and benefit of immersion. <S> Disillusionment and dispassion is the purpose and benefit of truly knowing and seeing. <S> Knowledge and vision of freedom is the purpose and benefit of disillusionment and dispassion. <S> So, Ānanda, skillful ethics progressively lead up to the highest.” <S> @dhamma4life <S> : Meditation is never forced concentration. <S> Please refer to MN 118 <S> I tell you, monks, that this — the in-&-out breath — is classed as a body among bodies, which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. <A> Your quote (definition of "Enlightenment") isn't from a Buddhist source -- it's from an 18th century German philosopher (not Buddhist at all ... unrelated to Buddhism). <S> The English word "Enlightenment" has several meanings/usages which are unrelated to Buddhism -- <S> When was the word enlightenment introduced into Theravada Buddhism? <S> -- yet it has also been used as a translation of various/several different Buddhist terms, see for example: <S> Enlightenment vs nibbana/nirvana Is Satori the same as Enlightenment? <S> gradual versus sudden enlightenment Four stages of enlightenment <S> You're sort of right <S> (that meditation isn't essential), in that the Buddhist path is sometimes described as a Threefold Training , of which "virtue" (not meditation) is described the most fundamental. <S> I think some people say that meditation is primarily for monks rather than lay-people (Buddhism has a lot of other, not meditation-related, instruction for lay people). <S> As for meditation, it is sometimes described as being of two categories, i.e. meditation for calm or concentration ( Samadhi ), and meditation for insight ( Vipassanā ) -- <S> and there's talk (different doctrines) about whether to practice one, or the other, or both together. <S> Two more things I'd modify slightly about the assertions you made: <S> Perhaps it (i.e. "maturity" and/or "Buddhism") is, but is perhaps not exactly, about "accepting yourself". <S> Perhaps it's about changing your self too, or changing (or even "abandoning") your "view" of "self". <S> Part of the Buddhist doctrine is anatta (a.k.a. "non-self" or "without self") -- which may be difficult to explain <S> (there are more than 100 questions about it on this site), but I found these to be helpful or understandable introductions to the topic: <S> How is it wrong to believe that a self exists, or that it doesn't? <S> and How are 'conceit' and 'identity-view' not the same? <S> I'm not sure (I doubt) whether it is about "concentrating on breathing and thinking about nothing". <S> The form of meditation which you're referring to is probably what's called ānāpānasati , where ānapāna refers to breathing and sati refers to mindfulness, so perhaps not "without thinking" -- see Mindfulness of Breathing, Mindfulness with Breathing "Without thought" might possibly refer to some of the higher jhāna states (or forms of meditation) but that's an advanced topic. <A> Enlightenment (attaining Nibbana) in a Buddhist context means the end of suffering. <S> Saying that enlightenment is just about being matured could be the understatement of the century :) <S> There are mainly 2 types of meditations: Samatha (tranquility): This type of meditation leads to calm, joy, concentration and magical powers. <S> Buddhists do both Samatha and Vipassana meditations to achieve the results they bring about.
|
Vipassana (insight): This type of meditation leads to wisdom and the end of suffering.
|
Why are all the Buddhas born in Indian subcontinent only? From this list of previous Buddhas it looks like all were Indians.( I mean from their names). Ancient Greece or Egypt were also developed enough to have understood the Dhamma. We can consider Socretes and Moses from that part, but India(Nepal) was chosen for the Buddha. What's the reason? <Q> Just as fishes are found in water and monkeys are found on trees. <S> Different races are found in different regions of the world. <S> They differ in their skin color, language , necessities , dominating elements and philosophies. <S> Out of this segregated reality Jesus , Ram , Buddhas are born. <S> Nothing happens without reason. <S> Jesus manifested because of the conditions around him. <S> Ram or Krishna manifested because of the conditions around them. <S> Similarly Buddha manifested because of the conditions around him. <S> That insight required conditions created by Hindus. <S> Similarly we can say Jesus came up his theory to resolve the issues faced by middle east people. <S> Ram and Krishna also had a purpose which was relevant to their surroundings. <S> No one was taught to be Buddha or Ram or Jesus, they were the product of Life and its environment. <S> There should be no shame in saying that Indian subcontinent has been a place from where great sages and Buddhas came into being. <S> If Buddha arises again then most probably he will arise in the East because East has the conditions for his growth. <A> We have to keep in mind the fact <S> that general knowledge and education level of folks 2500 years ago was way different from modern time people. <S> It was an age without internet and without any effective communication means. <S> Geography wasn't a standardized formal academic discipline in schools, and majority of the population were un-educated folks. <S> To them the concepts of Ancient Greece, Egypt, China, their cultures and languages were virtually non-existent. <S> So if there was an ancient Buddha in China with a name "Chong", or Europe with a name "Kon", or Africa with a name "! <S> Non", it would be much easier to be rendered as "John" by an American Buddha when He teaches His disciples in a subsequent period. <S> The Dhamma would be much easier propagated to everyone once its ideas, concepts, and names were translated to the dialect local people back then could understand. <A> There is no reason. <S> Instead, if we actually use "reason" or "intelligence" ("yoniso manasikara"), we will conclude this is totally improbable, which is why the teachings about past Buddhas found in the DN are probably fake propaganda composed after the Buddha when Ashoka and the Buddhist clergy were undermining Brahmanism/Hindism. <S> Theravada teaches to wisely reflect on any teaching heard or read. <S> Theravada Buddhism is not about blind faith in every sutta but the verification of a sutta via meditative insight. <S> To believe Buddhas only arise in India is like believing the Messiah only comes to the Chosen People (Jews) in Israel. <S> Its non-sense religious political propaganda. <A> You surmised that the previous Buddhas were all born in the Indian subcontinent, simply because they had names that sounded Indian. <S> If you look at the excerpt from an academic paper below, certain Greek and Egyptian kings had Indian-sounding names in Emperor Ashoka's edicts, but this did not mean that they were Indian. <S> Turamaya was <S> Ptolemy, Maka or Maga was Magas, Alikasudara or Alikyasudala was Alexander. <S> In fact, Greece was known as Yavana in Sanskrit (from Ionia). <S> So, just because previous Buddhas had Indian-sounding names, it does not mean that they were Indian or that they resided in the Indian subcontinent. <S> It only shows that they had Prakritized or Sanskritized names. <S> From the paper entitled " Antiochus, King of the Yavanas " by Jarl Charpentier : <S> As concerns Turamaya there can happily be no doubt. <S> That it denotes one of the Ptolemies has been taken for granted ever since the days of Prinsep; and it seems quite obvious <S> that none but Ptolemy II Philadelphus, whose long reign covered nearly four decenniums (285-247 B.C.) , would fit into the chronology of Asoka's reign. <S> " <S> As for Maka or Maga there existed, no doubt, more than one princeling of the name of Magas; but there can be little doubt that we hare to do here with that Magas of Cyrene whose regnal years fall between c. <S> 300-250 <S> B.C. <S> Already Buhler(3) remarked that <S> Amtekina (G., K.) or Amtikini (Sh.) would rather render a Greek Avtigenes than Avtigenes. <S> However, although we know of at least one Antigenes," he, for obvious reasons, cannot come in here. <S> The old Antigonos who met his fate at Ipsus (301 B.C.) seems to be Out of the question; and thus there <S> remains only his grandson, surnamed from the place of his birth Gonatas, whose reign extended between 276 and 239 B.C. Finally, Alikasudara (or Alikyasudala, K.) has long been taken to be Alexander of Epirus(5) <S> who was the son of Pyrrhus and Antigone. <A> It's Universal law. <S> Which we cannot simply understand why.
|
It is no surprise that Buddha came from Indian subcontinent because he came up with a theory of Anatta which was opposite to what was preached by Hindus.
|
Conscious death and afterlife meditation Lets keep the rebirth concepts aside for a moment. Is there a way we can die consciously? (i.e.) Being aware of our death.And can we still meditate after death without a human body? If yes, then in what thing we concentrate on. Let's say we are on concentrating on breath while we are alive. But after death we don't have breath and also we don't have any bodily sensations too... What happens to the awareness after death, Does it still exist? Is the awareness eternal? Is the after life awareness is called soul? Do we need a human body to meditate?? I suddenly feel weird getting this idea? So is there any concepts based on this??? <Q> You might follow Buddha's example who entered the fourth Jhana, but it is only possible while you are aware of your peaceful death, the fact that you are dying slowly, so therefore - not very reliable advice. <S> Apart from that, only thing I know of about conscious death is Maraṇasati, which are only preparatory contemplations and meditations on death. <S> These are closely related to Right effort. <S> But it is not really same as meditating through death. <S> For Vajrayanic approach, Tibetans have the whole technique and special meditation practice on the moment of death and what follows (Bardo), which is divided in many phases of dying, also including the clear light you see at the moment of death. <S> I presume you're not into Tantra <S> so this is of little use though. <A> And what I know from personal meditation experience is that: awareness is not eternal. <S> It arises and ceases like any other of the khandas. <S> So, it's definitely not a soul. <S> meditation can continue independent of any awareness of the body. <S> If there is no body sensation then the mind will turn to other objects: mind itself, mind states, feeling of calm and so on. <S> I guess that meditation itself can also be a good preparation for death. <S> In one of the last retreats I was in a state where I no longer felt any breath, the heartbeat was gone, any bodily sensation was gone. <S> It's quite interesting to see if and if so, how the mind reacts to this. <S> That's all I can offer. <A> In Anapanasati, awareness of breathing. <S> Buddha mentioned that it is possible to focus on breathing until the last breath is drawn and when there is no more breath, there is no place for conciseness to exist (consciousness cannot exist without one of 4 skandhas). <S> And when no longer have consciousness to count as self, name/form ends.. <S> and so on The problem is counting as self is that will go on and continue to count other consciousness out there and calls it as self, thus rebirth. <S> the definition of sattanam is not easy to understand. <S> Technically, there is nothing to transmigrate but the dilution of self. <S> Thats how i understand it. <A> "Death" ("marana") means the death of the idea of a "person" or "self"; as defined in SN 12.2, which refers to the death of "beings" ("satta"). <S> "Satta" is merely a "view" or "idea" (SN 23.2; SN 5.10). <S> For the untrained mind, this "death" is traumatic & brings suffering. <S> But for the trained mind, when the mind experiences "Emptiness" ("Sunnata"), this is also includes experiencing the death of the "self-idea" but in a peaceful way (which is why Emptiness is not called "death"). <S> "Conscious death" occurs via the experience of the Empty Mind; free from all "self-views".
|
From what I gather trying to fall asleep consciously will prepare one for consciously dying.
|
How can I live life knowing other people work so hard for so little and people and animals suffer I cry, I don't know why. I just feel things so deeply and want to solve everyone’s problems I don’t know but I can’t help it, it’s just in me, I can’t distance myself from their suffering, because we all suffer. It makes living life really hard. If I get too carried away I desire to deny being compassionate and having connections with people because they hurt. Then I picture my life as always worrying about sad things and the problems of others and then there’s no more me. How can I live life knowing other people work so hard for so little and people and animals suffer? <Q> The fear of the lottery winner. <S> It Might Not Be Mine . <S> This is suffering. <S> When we have more than others, we suffer in their suffering. <S> Some turn a blind eye--that is just delusion and more suffering. <S> Mendicants, before my awakening—when I was still unawakened but intent on awakening—I thought: ‘Alas, this world has fallen into trouble. <S> It’s born, grows old, dies, passes away, and is reborn, yet it doesn’t understand how to escape from this suffering...’ <S> And with that awareness of suffering you could go indeed go forth. <S> Gotama was sheltered from suffering by palaces and went forth upon first seeing others suffer. <S> However, it might be more immediately practical to address one's own suffering first. <S> When the airplane oxygen masks flop down, we are instructed to put on our own mask first so that we may help others. <S> Some of the tears we cry for other's suffering may actually be tears for our own suffering. <S> Following the path of one's own tears, one can usually find some craving, some holding on to, some clinging. <S> It might, for example, be delight in good fortune. <S> If so, with metta embracing equanimity, one can relinquish the hold on delight, to let it be and be gone. <A> What you are experiencing is too much empathy. <S> Many people believe that empathy is a universal virtuous trait that should always be increased, but this is not so. <S> To be very clear, empathy is distinct from compassion. <S> The two are not the same thing although they are often conflated and misunderstood. <S> The definition of compassion is very simple: the wish for others to be free from suffering. <S> That's it. <S> Empathy is different from compassion. <S> Empathy is the capacity to put yourself in someone else's shoes and feel what it is they are feeling. <S> To imagine what someone else is feeling and experience some amount of it yourself. <S> So what is the relationship between compassion and empathy? <S> Well, to some extent you need to be able to recognize someone else's suffering in order to develop the wish for them to be free of it. <S> However, once this recognition is accomplished it does not require you to keep feeling what they are feeling. <S> To suffer with them. <S> When people in the west talk about "compassion fatigue" they are really talking about empathy fatigue. <S> So in summary, empathy can be both good (allowing us to recognize the suffering of others) and bad (rendering us powerless/overwhelmed or biased towards those we empathize with) depending upon the context. <S> It sounds like you are definitely experiencing the latter and should stop empathizing so much. <S> In order to do so, you first have to become clear on the differences between compassion and empathy. <S> Compassion is a universal good that should always be increased. <S> There is no such thing as compassion fatigue, but there is such a thing as empathy fatigue. <S> Have a look here for a modern account of how a western psychology recently discovered something that Buddhists have known for centuries <S> ;) <S> Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion <S> You can also find an interesting interview with the author here. <A> It would be helpful for you to be more specific about the types of suffering you’re talking about? <S> Many higher belief systems such as Buddhism recognize that suffering is a part of Life. <S> No matter who, rich or poor. <S> It is necessary for growth. <S> They teach not to take on another person’s suffering as your own, because they are on their own trajectory, suffering to learn the lessons they are in this life to learn. <S> Let them learn it! <S> You also can never assume how much someone is suffering just by looking at them. <S> Not every homeless person is suffering in the way you might think. <S> Any well dresed person on the street might be suffering perhaps more than you could possibly know because you don’t know them and are making assumptions about what their world looks like. <S> If your talking about 3rd world hunger & feel guilty that you have food, why not alleviate some of that guilt by volunteering at a charity or other helpful organization? <S> But the saying goes if you want to make a difference start locally. <S> Start with yourself... <S> as another user mentioned; don’t confuse your own suffering with that of others. <S> Know the difference and explore your suffering so that you can more specifically help yourself and others. <S> You may also be using the pain of others as a way to avoid something in your life -connecting with the pain, just not your own. <S> If you are a true Empath there are tools you can learn and train yourself to do to block out some of these feelings so that you can function. <S> But there’s nothing wrong with caring about how others are feeling <S> so I think it matters less that you put a label on it and more that you act on it. <S> If it keeps you from functioning and living your life look for professional help. <S> I hope you feel better.
|
There is a personality type where you feel others pain too intensely, called “Empath.”
|
Can a girl & a boy be friends I didn't use to have much boys as friends but with time I made several boy friends from which some were really close. I want to know what has Lord Buddha chanted about a girl & a boy being friends? Will it be something bad when I get married? <Q> With regard to women who are old enough to be your sister, establish the attitude you'd have toward a sister. <S> With regard to women who are young enough to be your daughter, establish the attitude you'd have toward a daughter.' <S> SN 35.127 <S> If a person wishes to get married, the Buddha taught a suitable partner has the same life goals & attitudes; particularly living according the five precepts: <S> Householders, if both husband and wife wish to see one another not only in this present time but also in the future, they should have the same faith, the same virtuous behavior, the same generosity and the same wisdom. <S> Then they will see one another not only in this present time but also in the future. <S> AN 4.55 Householders, there are these four ways of living together. <S> What four? <S> A male wretch lives together with a female wretch; a male wretch lives together with a female goddess; a male god lives together with a female wretch; a male god lives together with a female goddess. <S> AN 4.53 When both husband and wife are endowed with faith, charitable and self-controlled, living their lives righteously, addressing each other with pleasant words, Then many benefits accrue to them <S> and they dwell at ease. <S> AN 4.53 & AN 4.55 <S> If one or both people had many sexual partners before they get married and do not respect the precept of sexual fidelity then, as the Buddha taught above in AN 4.53 & AN 4.55 , their marriage will most likely (but not always) have problems. <S> The Buddha particularly emphasised sexual misconduct should be avoided by and towards women, as follows: 242. <S> Unchastity is the taint in a woman. <S> 242. <S> In a woman, misconduct is an impurity. <S> Dhammapada <A> According to Bodhisattva, if you are unmarried then treat every boy and girl like your sibling. <S> So, your question can be boiled down to, "Can siblings be friends? <S> " to which I will answer, "Siblings are almost always friends!" <S> The Buddha never spoke explicitly about this, though he mentioned that adultery is a sin and a hindrance to Nirvana- and anybody who commits his mind to such thoughts is also as much at fault as the one who actually commits the sin. <S> There is no place for lust in friendship, so I think, yes. <S> Boys and girls can be friends. <A> For the monastic, celibacy is a precept . <S> For the lay follower planning to get married and become a householder, the consideration is much gentler, with a clear prohibition against illicit sexual conduct . <S> And what is the treasure of virtue? <S> There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones abstains from taking life, abstains from stealing, abstains from illicit sexual conduct, abstains from lying, abstains from taking intoxicants that cause heedlessness. <S> This, monks, is called the treasure of virtue (AN7.6 Thanissaro) <S> Notably, the lay path will be difficult: <S> “… the sentient beings who refrain from sexual misconduct are few, while those who don’t refrain are many. …”
|
If you are not married, the Buddha said to look at opposite sex friends like brother & sister: 'Come now, monks: with regard to women who are old enough to be your mother, establish the attitude you would have toward your mother.
|
Which case is "I am a professor" with identity view? According to the Yamaka Sutta quoted below, a run-of-the-mill person thinks one of the following: the form to be the self the self as possessing form the form as in the self the self as in form And the same applies to the other aggregates. If someone says with identity view, that "I am a professor", "I am an American", "I am successful" etc., what would this case be? Is "professor" a mental fabrication? So, "I am a professor" (with identity view) would be the case of assuming a mental fabrication to be the self? From the Yamaka Sutta (SN 22.85) : "In the same way, an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. "He assumes feeling to be the self... "He assumes perception to be the self... "He assumes (mental) fabrications to be the self... "He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. <Q> "I am a professor" is conceit not self view. <S> But if self view arises before conceit as "professor is attā", then the conceit, which arises after that, will become misunderstood conceit. <S> The explanation <S> There are 3 clauses in tipiṭaka: "etaṃ mama-this is mind" <S> is thought by taṇhā. <S> "esohamasmi- <S> I am this" is thought by māna. <S> <<< this is conceit. <S> "eso me attā-this is my attā <S> " is thought by diṭṭhi. <S> <<< only this one is compatible with your quoted identity view, Yamaka Sutta (SN 22.85). <S> But there are the complicated arising of taṇhā, māna, and diṭṭhi, because taṇhā must co-arises with only one, diṭṭhi or māna, per mind-moment arising. <S> And diṭṭhi can't co-arises with māna. <S> So: 2 taṇhā = 1. <S> sotāpanna's taṇhā 2. <S> puthujana's taṇhā. <S> 2 diṭṭhi = <S> 1. <S> sotāpanna's diṭṭhi 2. <S> puthujana's diṭṭhi. <S> 3 māna = 1. <S> we are the same 2. <S> I am better 3. <S> I am worse. <S> There are sotāpanna's taṇhā and 3 māna of sotāpanna, but there are not diṭṭhi of sotāpanna. <S> There are 2 taṇhā, 9 māna, and 2 diṭṭhi of puthujana. <S> Therefore, there are just 3 māna of sotāpanna, but there are 9 māna for puthujana, 6 Diṭṭhi-Before&After(misunderstood) and 3 No-Diṭṭhi-Before&After māna's arising (right understood). <S> "eso me attā-this is my attā <S> " is thought by diṭṭhi. <S> <<< only this one is compatible with your quote, Yamaka Sutta (SN 22.85). <S> There are 20 sakkāya- diṭṭhi which thinking about attā in Yamaka Sutta (SN 22.85). <A> Conventionally, "I am <S> X" is a simple inclusive assertion of a facet of identity. <S> Since professor-ship is acquired post-birth, it would pertain to the delusion/conceit of possessing an earned identity: the self as possessing form <S> However, in the context of native citizenship or genetic identity, the situation would be somewhat different if the delusion did not include rebirth. <S> I.e., the delusion would be about inherent identity: the form as in the self <S> Generally, the materialistic acquisition of objects or traits serves the delusion of self as super-aggregate of all these possessions. <A> Sankhara defines the behavior(conditioned behavior). <S> As a professor you are expected to be able to teach. <S> But this behavior is Anicca. <S> This behavior is also the cause of suffering. <S> Therefore Professorship is Anatta. <S> To say " I am professor" is unfortunate if you cling to the idea that you will forever be the teacher <S> but if you can say "I am a professor" without clinging to the idea of ever lasting teacher then you have just destroyed the reason to suffer due to such statements which shows attachment. <S> The impermanence of professorship takes away the conceit regarding the job. <S> Similarly for "I am an American" and "I am successful".
|
"I am a professor" belongs to the volitional formations or the sankhara category.
|
What is the best of Jhanas and breathing meditation? I have heard two ways off approaching mindfulness of breathing: Breath in a inhale-pause-exhale-pause pattern, focusing on thesensations of the breath at the nostrils and the silences at thepauses between breaths.You would control your breath in this method. Quiet your mind and just follow the sensations of your breath as it naturally arises. Questions are Should you control your breathing if you want to reach the Jhanas? Which one is best if you want to attain the jhanas? <Q> At the start of practice, it helps to cultivate concentration, so focusing on one object single-pointedly, whether it's the breath, a sound, or something in the visual field. <S> The manners in which this concentration is developed can give different results for different people, so I'd say to experiment and see which works for you. <S> I will say though, that focusing on the natural arising and passing of the breath can lead to a subtle realisation that the breath is arising and falling all by itself, utterly disconnected from the noticing of it. <S> It's very interesting to 'catch' your body breathing, independent of your control. <A> Method #2, as the Buddha taught: <S> There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, making it his object to let go, attains concentration, attains singleness of mind. <S> Quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he enters & remains in the first jhana.... <S> SN 48.10 <A> Should you control your breathing if you want to reach the Jhanas? <S> In the Anapanasati Sutta , there's no mentioning of controlling one's breath. <S> If it's long, simply aware that it's long; if it's short, simply aware that it's short: Breathing in long, he discerns, 'I am breathing in long'; or breathing out long, he discerns, 'I am breathing out long.' <S> [2] Or breathing in short, he discerns, 'I am breathing in short'; or breathing out short, he discerns, 'I am breathing out short.' <S> [3] <S> He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to the entire body. <S> '[2] <S> He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to the entire body.' <S> [4] <S> He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication. <S> '[3] <S> He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication."
|
Instead the emphasis is on the "awareness" of one's natural breathing.
|
How to navigate the impracticality of Sigalovada sutra? Consider the advice of Buddha about friends and Wife in the Siglovada Sutta . friends and colleagues so respected reciprocate with compassion in five ways: by protecting you when you are vulnerable, and likewise your wealth, being a refuge when you are afraid, not abandoning you in misfortunes, and honoring all your descendants. Some are drinking buddies, Some say, 'Dear friend! Dear friend!'. But whoever in hardship stands close by, That one truly is a friend. Sleeping late, adultery,Hostility, meaninglessness,Harmful friends, utter stinginess:These six things destroy a person.... In today's world where Smoking and drinking has become such a common thing and where socializing has become equivalent to having a few drinks at least a glass of wine, it's hard to find a guy to make a friend who would fit into Buddha's description of a friend here. I mean I have given up the vices but if I will try to find a mate like me its impossible, I will be left alone. A similar thing goes with the wife, And, the wife so respected reciprocates with compassion in five ways: by being well-organized, being kindly disposed to the in-laws and household workers, being faithful, looking after the household goods, and being skillful and diligent in all duties. In today's time of the hit and run relationships and all that we know of modern day relationships, this seems impractical. Following this Sutta will leave you lonely. How do you navigate this problem? <Q> The truth of the Buddha's teaching is timeless and doesn't get affected by modern norms or customs. <S> Imagine if it's influenced by social norms, then there'll be a possible scenario in a distant future where human virtures and values becoming severely degenerated. <S> It'll be common practice and acceptable social norm for humans to do all kinds of evil and little to none of virtuous conducts. <S> If going by the standard of that future time, the Buddha's teaching will be perceived as completely irrelevant, or at least only deemed valuable to a very very small number of people. <S> The Dhamma drum will have so many pegs that it won't be able to make audible sound. <S> So for the OP question, you'd have a better chance of finding a friend or a soulmate with similar mentality or conducts if s/ <S> he also cultivates similar virtues. <S> Finding fellow Buddhist practitioners would be best, but any other sincere followers of other world religions would also be fine since they pretty much share similar codes of conduct. <S> If all else fail, then it's perfectly ok to walk the path alone like a proud Rhinoceros <A> Following this Sutta will leave you lonely. <S> How do you navigate this problem? <S> It's actually quite a relief to be free of those who are scoundrels, drunkards, addicts, frauds, swindlers, and thugs . <S> And I am always surprised and grateful at how many others are left in the world to meet and greet in passing or again as friends. <S> Ultimately, when one becomes a good friend, loneliness ends. <A> The Buddha said he teaches about suffering & freedom from suffering. <S> Drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, women with broken capacity for fidelity, etc, are suffering and to be avoided; for financial reasons and for reasons of mental & physical health. <A> If you don't gain a mature companion, a fellow traveler, right-living & wise, <S> wander alone like a king renouncing his kingdom, like the elephant in the Matanga wilds, his herd. <S> We praise companionship — yes! <S> Those on a par, or better, should be chosen as friends. <S> If they're not to be found, living faultlessly, wander alone like a rhinoceros <S> Avoid the evil companion <S> disregarding the goal, intent on the out-of-tune way. <S> Don't take as a friend <S> someone heedless & hankering. <S> wander alone like a rhinoceros. <S> Knowing the meanings, subdue your perplexity, <S> [then] wander alone like a rhinoceros.
|
Consort with one who is learned, who maintains the Dhamma, a great & quick-witted friend. The answer comes in the Rhinoceros Sutta (mentioned by @santa100): If you gain a mature companion, a fellow traveler, right-living & wise, overcoming all dangers go with him, gratified, mindful.
|
Is it possible to attain wrong mindfulness and wrong concentration? Concentration and mindfulness is a rare achievement. People can have wrong views , wrong intentions but it seems they are able to achieve high concentration and mindfulness. My question is : Is it possible to achieve wrong mindfulness and wrong concentration? <Q> Many attempts were made to separate Mindfulness from Buddhist context. <S> Example is mindfulness for mindfulness sake as in therapy; if people don't know the reason are they mindful, then the problem arises. <S> As in, what is there to be found in the present moment, any why? <S> They often don't know the <S> why and what , <S> and this is confusion. <S> All of the non-Buddhist approaches as MBSR might go extremely awry. <S> Many charlatans make money by trying to make people to be mindful of the present moment as a "cure-all" therapy for everything. <S> It has caused some cases of depression and people suffering from mental breakdown. <S> Mindfulness like that has long history of creating examples of blind obedience in the East, such as creating Samurai culture in feudal Japan, as means of controlling people without questioning the orders. <S> In Buddhism however, the reasons are very clear, we want to apply wisdom of the teachings, releasing and transforming karmic seeds, breaking bad habits. <S> It is much safer to do it this way, rather than apply it as a therapy for a specific case. <S> Mindfulness should not be devoid of ethics, for performing good deeds ultimately lead us to a better life. <S> Performing selfless acts destroys clinging and disease of "mine" and therapeutic mindfulness <S> doesn't go that far. <S> Thus, mindfulness without practising other parts of the path in tandem is wrong mindfulness. <S> As for Right concentration, there has been a lot of issues recently about mixing Samatha, or mediation in general with psychedelics as it might be profound experience. <S> Many magazines were involved in promoting such ideas. <S> That I would call wrong concentration, the one that goes against composing the mind, but altering it. <A> Mindfulness can be wrong, according to venerable Yuttadhammo. <S> He gave a short speech about this at the 10th Global Conference on Buddhism. <S> You might want to watch it. <S> I don't remember him saying anything about wrong concentration. <S> But, since concentration comes up together with mindfulness I would assume that with wrong mindfulness comes wrong concentration. <A> Is it possible to achieve wrong mindfulness and wrong concentration? <S> Of course they all can be developed to a "zen" level of wrong practice if the intention is unwholesome. <S> An expert sniper can stay mindful 100% on his enemy target for hours, ready for the right moment to pull the trigger. <S> A master samurai can single-mindedly concentrate on a single spot of his target, ready to strike and kill with one single precision hit. <A> No, it is impossible. <S> Because the uddhacca-cetasika (restlessness-mind-factor) arises with every unwholesome-mind , such as diṭṭhi-mind. <S> This mind factor is the enemy of the main keyword of achievement , ekaggatā-cetasika (concentration-mind-factor). <S> See the path of purification samādhiniddeso pathavīkasiṇaniddeso. <S> This is the reason that why in tipitaka the effects of unwholesome-minds have shorter period than the effects of wholesome-minds. <S> And This is the reason that why the wholesome-minds have more mind factors than the unwholesome-minds. <A> In the first sermon, the budha claims that the citta had samadhi and that there was headaches, tummyaches due to following the breath, but since the citta was in samadhi, the buddha was not troubled by those and he continued to follow the breath like that. <S> Of course, at the time, the goal of the buddha was not to be disturbed by tummyaches by putting the citta in samadhi, the goal was to stop dukkha so he acknowledges the failure of his actions with respect to his intentions and then with the citta still in samadhi, he turned the citta to know about karma and to know about rebirth. <S> The conclusion is that there are wrong meditation of following the breath. <S> Even when the citta has all the samadhi that is possible, which prevents being upset by all the aching that humans can endure, it is still not the cessation of dukkha. <S> The good concentration when you deal with the breath is having the citta in samadhi and then following the breath with knowing annicca like in the Ānāpānasati sutta: getting the citta in samadhi and on this good basis, turning the citta to right view to achieve viapassana. <S> That's for breath mediation. <S> Besides wrong concentration, there is the incomplete concentration, still about breath mediation, https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn54/sn54.006.than.html here <S> are chinese parallels about the proper breath meditation https://lapislazulitexts.com/tripitaka/samyukta-agama <S> https://lapislazulitexts.com/articles/anapanasmrti-in-the-agamas
|
I think a lot of wrong mindfulness persists today utilised mainly in a non-Buddhist way.
|
Are there any Buddhist charities or organisations funding education in Buddhist studies? Further to answers to this question , I am looking for any Buddhist organizations or charities that may offer to fund for pursuing a higher academic education in Buddhism, all over the world. I searched but I don't really get proper keywords. So if you know any such institution... <Q> Maitripa College in Portland, Oregon has scholarship opportunities available: https://maitripa.org/event/scholarship-applications-are-available/ <A> It says: <S> The American Council of Learned Societies (ACLS) announces the sixth year of an initiative supporting research and teaching in Buddhist studies, funded by The Robert H. N. Ho Family Foundation. <S> In cooperation with the Foundation, ACLS offers an integrated set of fellowship and grant competitions supporting work that will expand the understanding and interpretation of Buddhist thought in scholarship and society, strengthen international networks of Buddhist studies, and increase the visibility of innovative currents in those studies. <S> These are global competitions. <S> There are no restrictions as to the location of work proposed, or the citizenship/residence of applicants. <S> The final products of research supported may be in any language. <S> In order to qualify for this, you can be doing your studies in any country in any language. <A> There are no real behind the Buddhas (re-)ligion, the "institution" of his monks, the Sangha. <S> What ever other ways outside the Vinaya and tradition, one should know as corrupt in measures of Dhamma-Vinaya, not able to transport the Sublime Buddhas heritage, simply ways of livelihood and eager tries to make copies and deprive the world of the existence of his heritage. <S> The Buddhas "economy" is based on goodness with no interest to bind or increase and nurish debts to the world and not tending to leave home and stands. <S> Dhamma-Vinaya is nothing that can be studied in schools and out of books but requires proper cirumstances so that it is not hurtful at least. <S> Nothing to fear to get not really enough founded once having joined an upright Sangha and to life exclusively on generosity without objectives and impure motivations toward world but straight to liberation. <S> If not able to join the Sangha, the Ven. are usually open for serious questions any time. <S> Also this, how ever, requires temporary leaving home and ones <S> stand. <S> So you may be informed that such ways, either not knowing(aware) or deliberatly organised, are neither proper nor respectful but always "greedy" or "harmwishing" motivated. <S> Be special careful if Monks join such improper undertakings. <S> There is only one "Buddhist organization" and this is the Sangha of the Buddhas good Bhikkhus. <S> What ever organe else presented, one should know as "fake" and harmful for many.
|
Please see the The Robert H. N. Ho Family Foundation Program in Buddhist Studies .
|
Is it true that arahants don't have sati? A couple of months ago someone tried to convince me that arahants no longer have sati. He said that sati is like a raft in the sense that it should be given up as soon as the goal, arahantship, has been reached. To give more strength to his claim he also pointed out that sati is not one of the 10 parami (perfections). I myself think that his claim is absurd, I think that arahants have nothing but sati. But, I'm neither a scholar nor an arahant. So, I can be wrong. I also don't understand the link he makes to the 10 parami. Does someone have a reference or source from the tipitaka that would support or deny his claim without a doubt and put my mind at ease? And does someone understand the link he makes to the perfections? <Q> He said that sati is like a raft in the sense that it should be given up as soon as the goal, arahantship, has been reached. <S> To give more strength to his claim he also pointed out that sati is not one of the 10 parami (perfections). <S> This does not make sense because effort, determination, patience, etc are parami. <S> Why would a mind that has destroyed/uprooted the defilements need effort, determination, patience, etc? <S> Regardless, the Buddha never taught the 10 parami; particularly for Arahants. <S> I myself think that his claim is absurd, I think that arahants have nothing but sati. <S> When the defilements are destroyed/uprooted; naturally the sati of a non-arahant (which includes the abandoning of wrong view) is not required. <S> The sati of a non-arahant or learner is described as follows: <S> One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. <S> MN 117 <S> This being said, the mind of an arahant obviously cannot forget the Dhamma Truth. <S> Thus MN 117 also says: <S> Thus the learner is endowed with eight factors, and the arahant with ten. <S> MN 117 <S> In short, the sati of an arahant is automatic because an arahant can never forget the Dhamma Truth. <A> Maybe your friend meant to say that an arahant no longer has to consciously make an effort to develop sati? <S> An arahant has developed all 8 limbs of the Noble Eightfold Path to perfection such that they've become second nature. <S> To him, sati's no longer an effort to be developed. <S> It's become his way of life. <S> It's like <S> a novice martial arts student at first has to constantly practicing many drills to build up his reflex and awareness. <S> Once he's become a martial arts master, it'd be absurd to say he "no longer has reflex and awareness", but reflex and awareness have become second nature to him. <S> The Blessed One said, "Now, what are the eight thoughts of a great person? <S> This Dhamma is for one who is modest, not for one who is self-aggrandizing. <S> This Dhamma is for one who is content, not for one who is discontent. <S> This Dhamma is for one who is reclusive, not for one who is entangled. <S> This Dhamma is for one whose persistence is aroused, not for one who is lazy. <S> This Dhamma is for one whose mindfulness is established, not for one whose mindfulness is confused . <S> This Dhamma is for one whose mind is centered, not for one whose mind is uncentered. <S> This Dhamma is for one endowed with discernment, not for one whose discernment is weak. <S> This Dhamma is for one who enjoys non-objectification, who delights in non-objectification, not for one who enjoys & delights in objectification. <S> ~~ <S> AN 8.30 <S> ~~ <A> That's not what DN 16 appears to say. <S> The Buddha, who is also an Arahant, endured his physical pains mindfully (sati) according to DN 16. <S> After the Buddha had commenced the rainy season residence, he fell severely ill, struck by dreadful pains, close to death. <S> Atha kho bhagavato vassūpagatassa <S> kharo ābādho uppajji, bāḷhā vedanā vattanti māraṇantikā. <S> But he endured with mindfulness and situational awareness, without worrying. <S> Tā sudaṃ bhagavā sato sampajāno adhivāsesi avihaññamāno. <S> And also: But the mendicants who were free of desire endured, mindful and aware, <S> thinking: <S> Ye pana <S> te bhikkhū vītarāgā, te satā sampajānā adhivāsenti: <S> “Conditions are impermanent. <S> How could it possibly be otherwise?” <S> “aniccā saṅkhārā, taṃ kutettha labbhā”ti. <A> In my understanding, The Five Powers develop in progression: Faith/Conviction (saddhā bala) Energy/Effort/Persistence (viriya bala) <S> Mindfulness (sati bala) <S> Concentration (samādhi bala) <S> Wisdom/Discernment (paññā bala) <S> Each Power supercedes the previous, subsumes it and makes it obsolete. <S> First, the only Power helping the neophyte move forward on the Path <S> is Faith in Buddha and Dharma. <S> Then the student, inspired by Faith, develops the power of Effort or "Working Hard", which, while not necessarily removing Faith, certainly supercedes it as the main factor of moving forward. <S> As the student applies Effort again and again, failing and trying again to overcome ignorance, desire, aversion, and the habitual pathologic mindstates - the power of Mindfulness (=remembering the Instructions during daily activities) develops and becomes the main engine and guardian of one's practice, superceding both Brute Effort as well as Blind Faith. <S> When the power of Mindfulness fully matures, it grows into ability to maintain the Dharmic perspective, which is a certain choice of interpretation of what's going on. <S> It's not just remebering the teaching anymore, it's a kind of Focus or Concentration, keeping the mind on reality of Dharma-world. <S> When this power fully matures it makes one a different person living in a very different world and supersedes the power of Mindfulness. <S> Finally, as the student acquires the wisdom of seeing "how things are", the power of Samadhi, or fabricating and maintaining a certain perspective, gives way to Prajna, also known as The Knowledge of All Modes - which is the power of seeing all realities beyond conceptual limitations and skillfully navigating them. <S> As you see, according to this model at some point sati is overgrown, subsumed and superceded by samadhi.
|
Sati is "non-forgetting" of the Dhamma Truth.
|
Why the view "I am the owner of my karma" not contradict anatta? Why did the Buddha advise lay people and monks to think, " I am the owner of my kamma, the heir of my kamma; I have kamma as my origin, kamma as my relative, kamma as my resort; I will be the heir of whatever kamma, good or bad, that I do " when this seems to contradict anatta? Isn't thinking " I am X " contradicting the teaching of anatta? There are suttas where the Buddha advised not to associate the five aggregates with the self e.g. SN 22.93 . Aren't these two teachings contradictory? Isn't " owner of kamma, heir of kamma " a mental fabrication (sankhara) that we shouldn't associate our self with? Why didn't the Buddha advise lay people and monks to think, " there's no self in this body and mind doing anything "? What's the consequence of this view? From AN 5.57 : “And for the sake of what benefit should a woman or a man, a householder or one gone forth, often reflect thus: ‘I am the owner of my kamma, the heir of my kamma; I have kamma as my origin, kamma as my relative, kamma as my resort; I will be the heir of whatever kamma, good or bad, that I do’? People engage in misconduct by body, speech, and mind. But when one often reflects upon this theme, such misconduct is either completely abandoned or diminished. <Q> This is how you practice equanimity (upekkha). <S> It's the one of the four divine abodes. <S> Just like in Metta(loving-kindness) meditation where you say "may I/my parents/relatives/friends be happy, well, free from suffering etc.", Upekkha meditation is also practiced at a conceptual level. <S> The purpose of Upekkha meditation is to cultivate equanimity in the mind. <S> It does not lead to realization of Anatta nor enlightenment unless you turn it into Vipassana at some point. <S> Anatta is at the level of ultimate reality. <S> That is for advanced practitioners of Buddhism. <S> That's why there are teachings in Buddhism that help you develop the mind at a conceptual level where you are familiar and comfortable. <S> It is important not to mix up these teachings with the teachings of ultimate reality. <A> Because we unenlightened worldlings act, say, and think anything and everything in terms of "I", "mine", and "myself" anyway; regardless of whether He teaches AN 5.57 or not. <S> So He might as well teach and speak in the language that we worldlings can parse while still not attaining enlightenment just yet. <S> And just for kicks, imagine if AN 5.57 said the opposite, how the worldlings would interpret, and the potential consequences? " <S> a householder or one gone forth, often refelct thus: ' <S> I am NOT the owner of my kamma, NOT the heir of my kamma; NOT kamma as my orgin, etc." <S> Now, SN 22.93 is different in that its' strictly for monks, there's no "householders", nor "any man or woman" mentioned like in AN 5.57. <S> Another important point worth noticing is that the 2 statements of the 2 suttas are not contradicting each other: "I am the owner of my kamma" vs. " <S> The Five Aggregates are not the self". <S> It's only contradicting if one automatically equates the "I" in AN 5.57 to be the same as the "self". <A> On one hand I feel it is a way to make it easier to be represented and understood by laypeople or beginners. <S> On the other hand, the concept of Anatta can be interpreted as "no permanent nature of self". <S> This concept needs to be fully understood as part of reaching enlightenment, but at the same time, this doesn't contradict to an individual being an owner of respective Kamma, if Kamma was created. <A> It is atta-anuditthi as well for the ordinary people. <S> But for the noble one it is anatta-anuditthi. <S> Because it depends on their understood of atta/anatta. <S> It is not depends on words "my/mine/me/I". <S> therefore, in tipitaka, Buddha and the other noble ones still say those words after enlightened.
|
Trying to teach Anatta to everyone regardless of their mental maturity will not be productive as many will endup being more confused than they already are.
|
Kosher, Halal and Buddhism If you are a meat eating buddhist, is there any support that eating in this way lessens the karmic impact of consuming meat? <Q> I also was told that Kosher/Halal dealt with dispatching the animal in a way that minimized suffering to the animal. <S> So if eating meat at all had a karmic effect would eating in this way minimize it. <S> I think that this (the karma of meat-eating) is a doctrine on which different schools of Buddhism differ. <S> I considered replying to your "dispatching the animal in a way" but remembered that Buddhism considers it: <S> Wrong to kill Wrong to counsel (advise) someone else to kill <S> There are a few "offences" that are so grave that a monk would be expelled or "defeated" -- <S> intentionally killing is one of these grave offenses -- and so is advising someone else to kill. <S> The end of page 79 of <S> The Buddhist Monastic Code <S> I: <S> The Patimokkha Training Rules Translated and Explained says, Again from the Vinita-vatthu: A bhikkhu tells an executioner to kill his victims mercifully with a single blow, rather than torturing them. <S> The executioner follows his advice and the bhikkhu incurs a parajika, for <S> the recommendation to kill mercifully is still a recommendation to kill . <S> Earlier on page 79, it says it's bad when the killer carries out your detailed instructions (what kind of weapon to use and so on). <S> My (this) answer is disingenuous because the Patimokkha Rule is actually/only/specifically about killing human beings -- <S> even so I don't suppose you'll find Buddhist doctrine that recommends killing, nor how to kill. <S> Getting the Message says, in part, <S> Killing is never skillful. <S> Stealing, lying, and everything else in the first list are never skillful. <S> When asked if there was anything whose killing he approved of, the Buddha answered that there was only one thing: anger. <S> In no recorded instance did he approve of killing any living being at all. <S> When one of his monks went to an executioner and told the man to kill his victims compassionately, with one blow, rather than torturing them, the Buddha expelled the monk from the Sangha, on the grounds that even the recommendation to kill compassionately is still a recommendation to kill — something he would never condone. <S> If a monk was physically attacked, the Buddha allowed him to strike back in self-defense, but never with the intention to kill. <A> My impression is the purpose of Kosher and Halal meat is to drain as much blood from the meat as possible so to make the meat healthier; including for storage. <S> In other words, it is related to physical health rather than to mental karma. <S> In the modern world though, with refrigeration, medicine and other health technology, Kosher and Halal may have no health benefits for meat eaters. <S> Also, the teaching of "kamma" is not real Buddhism. <S> MN 117 says "kamma" is a worldly doctrine for worldly people. <S> Buddhism teaches about the ending of kamma, namely, the Noble Eightfold Path (AN 6.63). <S> When the world is viewed as completely void/empty of 'self', all kamma ends. <S> Just this noble eightfold path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right <S> mindfulness, right concentration — is the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. <S> AN 6.63 <A> OP: If you are a meat eating buddhist, is there any support that eating in this way lessens the karmic impact of consuming meat? ... <S> I also was told that Kosher/Halal dealt with dispatching the animal in a way that minimized suffering to the animal. <S> So if eating meat at all had a karmic effect would eating in this way minimize it. <S> This answer comes from the Theravada perspective, and possibly the non-East Asian Mahayana perspective too. <S> There are no various grades of karmic effect for eating meat. <S> Depriving sentient beings of their life is not allowed by the precepts and by Right Livelihood. <S> Hence, a Buddhist who sticks faithfully to the precept will not kill animals or work as a butcher or livestock farmer. <S> Killing animals results in negative karmic effect. <S> When you bought it, the meat was simply a frozen dead body. <S> You did not directly participate in any aspect of the animal's killing. <S> Please see the questions " Why is contributing to the market demand for meat not wrong? " and " Eating meat and buying meat ". <S> Also, see this answer <S> which explains how the individual's intention is the most important element of karma. <S> So, you cannot possibly have had any intention to kill an animal when you bought a frozen dead body because it was already long dead before you found it. <S> However, there could be various grades of karmic effect for killing an animal, not based on the killing method but based on the state of the butcher's mind and his exertion of will. <S> This basically refers to the butcher's intention. <S> Does the butcher do his trade because he enjoys the killing act, or does he do it because he has no other better choice than to do this trade to sustain his family?
|
However, there is no negative karmic effect for buying and eating meat that was killed by somebody else, long before you came across this piece of meat as a frozen product in a supermarket.
|
Difference between desire (chanda) and craving (tanha)? What's the difference between desire (chanda) and craving (tanha)? From my understanding, tanha is always unwholesome but chanda can be wholesome or unwholesome. How is this the case? Craving (tanha) arises from feeling as many suttas say "from feeling as a requisite condition comes craving". What does desire (chanda) arise from? There are three types of craving (tanha) - sensual, becoming and unbecoming. How many types of desire (chanda) are there? <Q> Chanda is acceptation to do something to an object. <S> However, it is not decision (adhimokkha), or attachment (taṇhā). <S> In vinaya pitaka, it often use as "agreement" ( i.e. ). <S> There are: Unwholesome chanda Unwholesome chanda without tanṇhā Unwholesome chanda with sensual tanṇhā Unwholesome chanda with becoming tanṇhā Unwholesome chanda with unbecoming tanṇhā Resultant chanda Lokiya resultant chanda Lokutara resultant chanda Ineffective action chanda Ineffective action chanda of sekkha (puthujana and 3 noble one) Ineffective action chanda of asekkha (arahanta) <S> Wholesome chanda <S> Lokiya wholesome chanda Lokutara wholesome chanda See Conation in Sangaha chapter 2. <A> Great question! <S> The Abhidhamma has the following to say about that. <S> Chanda is ethically variable, meaning that the factors coming along with chanda determine whether it is unwholesome or not. <S> So, the characteristic of chanda is the desire to act; it's function is searching for an object; its manifestation is need for an object and the same object is its proximate cause. <S> It should be regarded as the stretching forth of the mind's hand towards the object. <S> Which is, btw, something one can clearly observe in meditation. <S> Chanda is a bit of a general thing. <S> It doesn't really have the need for a specific object, as long as there is an object. <S> Craving - Tanha <S> Tanha is much more interesting. <S> :) <S> In the sixth chapter of the Abhidhamma, the Rupasangaha, craving is described as entanglement. <S> [Nibbana] becomes an object to the paths and fruits, and is called Nibbana because it is departure from craving, which is an entanglement. <S> Given this description the difference with chanda becomes a bit more clear. <S> The experience of a-wish-to-act and being-entangled is different. <S> Another thing that is of interest is this, also from the Abhidhamma: <S> Herein, among the taints, etc.' <S> it is craving that is intended by the terms "sensual desire" and "(attachment to) existence," since it has them (i.e. sensuality and existence) as its basis." <S> Sensual desire has sensuality as its basis. <S> And (attachment to) existence has existence as its basis. <S> In dependent origination tanha is dependent on feeling (pleasant, unpleasant and neutral). <S> Last I heard a dhammatalk which might be of interest to you wherein the bhikkhu cites a sutta saying: "It's in craving for sights that craving arises .... <S> " <S> So, these are all kind of specific, imho. <S> Not as general as chanda. <S> Hope this helps a bit. <A> There are three types of craving (tanha) - sensual, becoming and unbecoming. <S> Becoming and unbecoming are both self-views, namely, " I want to be" and " I don't want to be". <S> Chanda Iddhipada is the "enthusiasm", "love" or intuitive aspiration" to abandon "self-views" to end suffering. <S> When a mind is ready to abandon the highest hell or horror of 'self-views'; it will understand. <S> But now, most 'Buddhists' take refuge in the rebirth of 'self'.
|
Desire - Chanda Chanda means the desire to act, that is, to perform an action or achieve some result.
|
Is there an antibuddha? Is there a figure in Buddhism corresponding to the Christian notion of such? And what would that mean, practically? <Q> He tries to stop beings from attaining enlightenment. <A> Mara its name is Mara. <S> It can be understood as unconscious desires of Buddha or as a literal being who comes to fight with him and does not want to get him enlightened. <A> It wouldn't work. <S> An antibuddha would have to be full, but not anatta is not possible. <A> There is a pachcheka buddha - <S> The one superior is the buddha. <A> If you are using the word anti- as it is used in Physics <S> then no there is no anti Buddha. <S> In physics anti-proton or anti-electron are valid particles which when meet with their counter proton or electron they get annihilated i.e particle and its anti particle annihilate each other releasing energy. <S> The particles die. <S> But Buddha has no anti Buddha. <S> Nothing can neutralize Buddha. <S> Whether after death Buddha exists or does not exist is not known. <S> However if you are using anti- for something or someone who opposes Buddha then yes there is Mara who opposes Buddha and everyone who chooses the path of enlightenment. <S> Mara is not just anti-Buddha , he is anti-enlightenment.
|
The Buddha is a dependently originated entity, therefore in finality empty. One to one comparison with Satan is not possible, but there's an angel called Mara who dislikes the existence of the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha.
|
Is it only possible to pay attention to one thing at a time? I once was at a (theravada) mini-retreat where the teacher insisted that if one really watched carefully, one would recognize that it is not possible for the mind to pay attention to more than one thing at a time. I commented that in my experience it is possible to experience a lot of stimuli simultaneously. to see "whole picture" in one glimpse, just like listening to many instruments at the same time, but he kept insisting that this was due to the fact that attention shifted at a very fast pace between objects. And that if I kept practicing I would realize this. Is what he said in accordance with buddhist teaching? I have never heard it mentioned from any teacher other than him (but I remember it from some old perception psychology which I don't know if is out dated), and it really interferes with my mindfulness when I come to think of what he said. <Q> Thinking that the mind is able to hold multiple objects at the same time is merely an illusion of continuity. <S> It is just the mind shifting very rapidly between objects and mindfulness is not yet strong enough to register/discern that. <S> As mindfulness, concentration and insight matures that fact will gradually become more apparent. <S> By practicing Vipassana meditation one can come to clearly experience this fact. <A> It's an excellent question. <S> In terms of eye optics there is a focal point where vision perceives whatever is in that focal point. <S> But there often appears, with me, a complete flooding of sensory information where the whole picture is seen as one. <S> It's as if the focal point has widened into the peripheral areas of vision. <S> This could be because saññā (perception) has ceased operating through the conditioned portion of mind. <S> How so? <S> There's a car, a tree, a pigeon. <S> From both viewpoints, there is still only one thing being perceived. <S> You can see a car, but you're also seeing the external components that make up that car. <S> In the same way, you can see a busy city street in its entirety with all of the components that make up that busy city street. <S> It's still one thing. <A> Your teacher is correct. <S> It might be helpful to explore the Zen concept of the nen in regards to this topic. <S> I find it a bit clearer than what I've heard from the Vipassana community (which isn't to say a clear, Vipassana explanation doesn't exist!). <S> You can read about it here - the three nens . <S> The short of it is that the initial moment of perception - the first nen - always involves a single object <S> be it eye consciousness, ear consciousness, etc. <S> Each nen follows one after another like beads on a mala. <S> Unfortunately, our mind left in an untrained state tends to see individual nens sort of smeared into each other. <S> The calmer one's mind becomes, however, the more evident it becomes that only one first nen can be experienced in any given moment of consciousness. <S> The second nen is essentially perception + reflection. <S> Here, you would find Dhammadhatu's "long breath" or "agitated long breath" or "smooth long breath moving from nose thru chest to abdomen", etc. <S> The third nen is discursive thought based on perception + reflection. <S> Our example of the second nen mind object of "long breath" becomes "that breath was much longer than the last one!" <S> in the third nen. <S> It goes without saying that by the time you get to the third nen, you really aren't practicing anymore as you are waxing philosophic! <S> ;-) <S> I.e: <S> Case 50 in the Hekiganroku, Ummon’s ‘Particle After Particle’s Samadhi’ <S> Engo’s <S> Introduction <S> Transcending all ranks, rising above all expedients; spirit corresponding to spirit, words answering words—unless he has undergone the great emancipation and attained the great use of it, how could he rank with the Buddhas and be a faultless exponent of the teachings? <S> Now, tell me, who can be so direct and adaptable to all occasions, and have the free command of transcendent words? <S> See the following. <S> Main Subject <S> A monk asked Ummon, “What is particle after particle’s samadhi?” <S> Ummon said, “Rice in the bowl, water in the pail.” <S> Setcho’s <S> Verse Rice in the bowl, water in the pail! <S> Even the most talkative can add nothing. <S> The North and the South stars do not change places, Heaven-touching waves arise on land. <S> If you doubt, if you hesitate, Though you are heir to millions—trouserless! <S> What does particle after particle samadhi look like? <S> I'm pretty sure you've got an idea!
|
It is only possible for the mind to hold a single object at a time. The teacher is correct. When we perceive something, we break it down into sizeable chunks because that's how we were conditioned and it also seems more convenient.
|
Sexual thoughts coming with full pace to silent mind I'm being very mindful and aware nowadays. My mind is now very much quite and I am able to watch handful of thoughts in day to day life. The problem is at a particular instant of quite mind, sexual thoughts come with full vigour. Don't know why. Is there any particular reason of sexual thoughts to come vigorously to nearly quite mind? <Q> Is there any particular reason of sexual thoughts to come vigorously to nearly quite mind? <S> Thoughts arise and disappear on their own. <S> If you are plagued by any particular thought, consider that relishing is the root of suffering . <S> Find that delight, look at it and simply understand that "this is not mine, this is not who I am, this is not my self. <S> " This simple declaration will loosen your grip on the thoughts and they will disappear. <S> Thoughts and feelings persist because there is relishing. <S> Disavow the relishing and the thoughts and feelings pass like clouds in the sky. <S> Be mindful of your breath as you do this. <S> The breath is very much a part of your life. <S> The thoughts simply come and go. <A> The mind is used to input, any input will do. <S> Whether it's thoughts or sound or images, and whether the thoughts are about sex, drugs, rock-n-roll doesn't really matter. <S> More interesting is that you consider memories popping up a problem. <S> So, there is wanting there. <S> Maybe wanting the peaceful state to continue? <S> Which it won't since everything is impermanent. <S> There is more to uncover. <S> Keep watching. <A> Sexual thoughts arise from a combination of the sensuality element ( SN 14.12 ) & the ignorance element ( SN 45.1 ). <S> In short, they arise due to wrong view. <A> Thing is you already did the first step and <S> thats recognizing its existence <S> Its just important to separate from self as the answers told you <S> Now why you get them so vigorously when your mind has developed mindful awareness you say ? <S> Mindfulness comes easy for you in some aspects and hard in others which is normal because everyone has beliefs and habituation about things learned since childhood so filtering that through mindful awareness takes time and ardency. <S> So knowing the reason why is the second step After that you can more easily divert your attention to something else it doesn't mean avoidance of what you don't like it only means that you can now do what you intend to do with less suffering. <S> Diverting your attention to something else is the last step
|
The reason is simply habituation. Because the mind still ignorantly believes sex can bring happiness & lasting pleasure, the instinctual & habituated sexual impulse (element) & thoughts still arise.
|
Is mindfulness for quick enlightenment being exaggerated in the Sutta MN10? I was reading about mindfulness here . At the end I found this paragraph Let alone seven years, anyone who develops these four kinds of mindfulness meditation in this way for six years … five years … four years … three years … two years … one year … seven months … six months … five months … four months … three months … two months … one month … a fortnight … Let alone a fortnight, anyone who develops these four kinds of mindfulness meditation in this way for seven days can expect one of two results: enlightenment in the present life, or if there’s something left over, non-return. Here Tathagata saying one keeping that kind of mindfulness for 7 days can get enlightenment? Is it exaggeration, translation problem or understanding problem or it's true? <Q> Is it exaggeration, translation problem or understanding problem or <S> it's true? <S> The translation is fine, but the reader must know the environment and situation of that sutta, before read it. <S> If the reader read it without the pre-required knowledge, it is the reader's fail. <S> The explanation <S> In atthakathā of MN 10 wrote: Why Buddha taught mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta to Kuru-people? <S> Because they had enough ability to study the advance teaching. <S> It's told that Kuru-people, such as bhikkhu, bhikkhunī, lay men, and lay women, always had the potential body and the potential mind because Kuru-country had the richness of temperature, etc. <S> Their potential body and potential mind supported their wisdom power, so they can studied the advance teaching. <S> So, most Kuru-people were diṭṭhi-cārita , who have little dust in their eyes , according to netti desanāhāravibhaṅga . <S> The diṭṭhi-cārita <S> people can attain jhāna easily. <S> So they don't have to meditate jhāna because of their pure mind. <S> They can enlighten at the listening moment. <S> That's why in the end of mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta's atthakathā wrote: 30,000 people enlightened as arahanta at the end of mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta was taught. <S> therefore, the end of mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta wrote: Let alone seven years, anyone who develops these four kinds of mindfulness meditation in this way for six years … five years … four years … three years … two years … one year … seven months … six months … five months … four months … three months … two months … one month … a fortnight … Let alone a fortnight, anyone who develops these four kinds of mindfulness meditation in this way for seven days can expect one of two results: enlightenment in the present life, or if there’s something left over, non-return. <S> But for taṇhā-carita people,who have much dust in their eyes , they have to meditate jhāna, first. <S> After they attained jhāna, they can count down for enlightenment like what buddha taught in the end of mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta . <S> Because jhāna can pause their five hindrances, then their "dust in eyes" state will be same little dust as diṭṭhi-carita and they are able to count down for enlightenment. <A> No exaggeration or translation problem here. <S> A quick mundane analogy, say there's a complex quantum mechanics problem that needs to be solved, it'd be equally valid to say it could take seven years, or six years, or five years,... <S> three months, two months, one months...or seven days for one to solve it. <S> It all depends on where one is on the path of quantum mechanics. <S> For a high school graduate, it sure would take at least seven years ( 4 years for a bachelor degree, 3-4 years for graduate degree), but for a professional physicist, seven days might be all s/ <S> he needs to crack it. <A> Here Tathagata saying one keeping that kind of mindfulness for 7 days can get enlightenment? <S> Is it exaggeration, translation problem or understanding problem or it's true? <S> In order to develop these Four Kinds of Mindfulness in 7 days, one needs to have <S> superior, fine-tuned and almost perfectly balanced faculties . <S> Without speculating too much on the workings of Kamma, I think it's safe to say, that this requires a lot of practice in this life and probably past lives as well. <S> IMO one should be careful of anything such as "quick enlightenment" or "shortcuts to enlightenment" . <S> People who gets enlightened from just listening to a Dhamma talk, have put in all the work in countless past lives, which is why their faculties are ripe and balanced in such a way, that it requires very little to attain Arahantship.
|
Noone gets enlightened without putting in the work and effort it requires.
|
Difference Between Walking and Sitting Meditation I wonder simply what the difference is between walking and sitting meditation in terms of value on the path. I have been practicing walking meditation for some time without any seeming result. Is it necessary to practice sitting meditation to see results, or for walking meditation to be truly effective? If formal sitting meditation is important, then why is that so? <Q> Walking meditation is great to developp awareness in everyday life. <S> The setting is more likely to reproduce what you will experience throughout your day. <S> While in sitting meditation, there are usually much less distractions occuring. <S> Walking meditation is also very convenient <S> when you lack energy, you will usually feel much less sleepy walking than sitting. <S> In addition, if you already seat all day at work and meditate for long periods of time, alternating between sitting and walking meditation might be a good idea to maintain a healthy life style. <A> Walking meditation brings weak results unless practised with empty mind of letting go. <S> The Cankama Sutta says the samadhi developed with walking meditation is "long lasting" ( samādhi ciraṭṭhitiko ); thus of comparable worth to sitting meditation. <S> However, for this to occur, the walking meditation must be done properly, with supramundane empty mind of letting go. <S> For meditators that practise common walking meditation of: " lifting, placing, touching , etc"; their sitting meditation is generally much better than their walking meditation because their walking meditation method is too stiff & contrived. <S> It does not allow clear consciousness to fluidly flow. <S> But for those expert in empty mind, the walking meditation is seamless with sitting. <S> A proper supramundane walker can walk very close to jhana because their samadhi is lofty; floating unhindered towards the heavens. <A> Simple explanation for term Meditation is awareness on mind, basically we can <S> Meditate at theses three position, Sitting <S> Walking <S> Lay down <S> Is it necessary to practice sitting meditation to see results, or for walking meditation to be truly effective? <S> If formal sitting meditation is important, then why is that so? <S> Sitting meditation is not necessary, we can do meditate our day to day life, when we are walking we can focus on our mind and walk,when we are Sitting and do something focus on the work,even lay down for get some rest (not sleep) we can focus on our mind. <S> Like so we can always aware about what we are doing now, and that way we can sharp our mind, then only we can see through the everything, following the VIDHARSHANA meditation. <S> Hope you could understand.
|
So, from my point of view of a relative beginner, sitting meditation is effective to empty your mind and experience higher levels of concentration, and walking meditation is effective to help you carry this concentration into your daily life.
|
Choosing a Buddhist partner ain't beneficial to spreading Dhamma? Recently seeing questions on Buddhist stack exchange community I thought to ask this question. My understanding that we can choose anyone as life partner the way Buddha said all about is kind of qualities and so on. And Because of Buddhism is nothing but liberty that's why Buddha didn't impose this thing to followers just like in other religions. So if it was like we should marry to Buddhist only then it were Dhamma's sake and would helpful to spreading Dhamma. One another question is if both partners are from different religions then how they could lead their children? May other partner have influence of it's own religion and may this would worse everything partner's child's and own life. I seen in other religion they are super religious to choose a partner. Even my own experience my ex was a Muslim and she has great impact of religion on her since my thinking is being like that. See we Indian mostly choose Buddhist to marry but absence of practicing Dhamma. So I'd choose the one who is Buddhist and practicing Dhamma as well then we could spread it well.Finally since both are Buddhist then its kind of package we have got everything in it. All qualities and as Buddha's way to choose a life partner. So why Buddha speak about qualities instead advising people to find Buddhist partner that could one of the way to spread Dhamma? Thank you. <Q> Choose a person with compatible generosity, compatible morality, compatible faith and compatible wisdom. <S> That means even among Buddhists, you still have to filter out the potential spouses. <S> Marrying a person of a different religion could be highly problematic if you are a practicing Buddhist. <S> I have seen some people make it work, but those are mostly people who are simply Buddhist by birth and not interested in it much and don't care about what religion their children pick. <S> So either you have to be that way or the other person have to be that way to make it work. <A> Good to see that Nyom Swapnil seems to do fine. <S> The way to really support and be able to transport the Dhamma is to leave house and walk the Holy Life. <S> Why should the Buddha give advices for different dangerous path one might like to choose? <S> And yes, to grow in Dhamma is not a matter of birth or religion/tradition one has grown up in, but a matter of past nissaya paccaya , even more 'strong condition cause' (upanissayapaccaya). <S> [This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for trade or exchange] <A> Spreading/growing dharma to others is not an obligation of a Buddhist. <S> Only place it needs to grow as far as you are conserned is in yourself. <S> You gain very little if not nothing by others following it. <S> If you want others to see the light, best thing you can do is to become the light. <A> For practice if one finds a friend— prudent, well-behaved, and wise, mindful, joyful, live as one <S> all troubles overcoming. <S> --SNP1.3 <A> It seems to me there is no simple answer for this one because there are many subtleties and possible scenarios. <S> Some first thoughts... <S> It would all depend on what sort of religion people are practicing. <S> A Christian and a Buddhist might be indistinguishable or utterly distinct depending on their approach to religion. <S> A Buddhist believes there is only one true religion since there is only one true doctrine and its proponents may be called Christians, Buddhists, Sufis, Taoists, Muslims or have no name at all. <S> If we take the view that it's all about discovering truth then names don't matter. <S> In real life, however, many religious folk are dogmatic rather than truth-seekers and where this is true it seems best to marry within our own belief-group to avoid endless arguments. <S> If a Buddhist and a Christian feel they cannot marry <S> then I'd suggest that one or both of of them is misinterpreting the teachings of the founders. <S> Why would he? <S> But marrying someone with similar spiritual or life goals and the same level of seriousness is bound to be sensible. <S> And in the end marrying <S> another Buddhist is not going to help spread the Dharma unless we know enough <S> abut it to know how to choose a partner. <S> but there's no mention of the name of their religion. <A> So why Buddha speak about qualities instead advising people to find Buddhist partner that could one of the way to spread Dhamma? <S> I don't get the impression from the suttas that, at the time, the Buddha counted on lay-people to even really know what the Dhamma is, let alone to propagate it. <S> Very generally speaking the function of lay-people was, at best, to be virtuous and to support the monks (and so be able to hear the Dhamma, to take refuge, and so on). <S> Note that the suttas which we have are as were recorded by monks (at the " councils "), <S> so... <S> One another question is if both partners are from different religions then how they could lead their children? <S> If you exclude violence, perhaps some of the fundamentals of ethics and wisdom may be quite similar across different religions -- see Golden Rule for example. <S> Something like the sutta of the six directions may be good advice and well-said, but it seems to me universal, i.e. advice that might come from any parent of any religion. <S> Or, if or where ethics are not compatible across different religions, it was enough to say "look for a partner with compatible morals " (without specifying "compatible religions "). <S> Also, to a certain extent, there were no "Buddhists" at the time when the Buddha was advising people. <S> I guess a main difference between different religions is in the different "rites and rituals", but I'm not sure that matters in the grand scheme of things (i.e. there are more important topics to be concerned with). <S> Another difference (between religions, or between Buddhism and other religions) is in the doctrine or view, of eternalism for example -- but maybe that (view of eternalism) isn't very far from what Buddhism might call "mundane right view", which I gather was maybe about the best you might expect from a lay-person anyway.
|
Buddhists are advised to spend their time with people of like-mind and helpful character The Dalai Lama does not recommend that we abandon the religion of out birth for Buddhism or insist that we marry within Buddhism.
|
Suttas which explain how to deal with unwholesome habits Are there any suttas where the Buddha gives advice how to change one's behaviours, like eating addiction, mindless eating, addiction to entertainment, laziness and all that? Basically giving in into worldy pleasures. Thanks <Q> Although the Noble Eight-fold Path is the all-encompassing way, one often wants specific advice on "defilements". <S> For example, searching SuttaCentral, we have AN6.58 Defilements describing six factors of dealing with defilements. <S> Mendicants, a mendicant with six factors is worthy of offerings dedicated to the gods, worthy of hospitality, worthy of a teacher’s offering, worthy of veneration with joined palms, and is a supreme field of merit for the world <S> The question you've asked is actually quite broad. <S> In fact ALL the suttas answer your question. <S> For example, simply consider that identity view is an unwholesome habit. <S> In this case, one would consult MN8 Self-Effacement . <S> As individuals, we each have our own set of unwholesome habits and it would be best to conduct such a search on a Buddhist Sutta site such as SuttaCentral.net <S> according to your own needs. <S> Inevitably, one realizes that relishing is the root of suffering (MN1) . <S> Sometimes that is enough to let go and deal. <S> Sometimes we need other suttas for more leverage. <A> <A> Even something like SN 5.10 might help: <S> But it’s only suffering that comes to be, lasts a while, then disappears. <S> Naught but suffering comes to be, naught but suffering ceases. <S> Ask yourself, "Would the cessation of this behaviour be associated with (or give rise to) the cessation of dukkha? <S> Does the existence of this behaviour give rise to dukkha? <S> " <S> I think that's where it starts, that line of thinking is the essence of what "right view" is. <S> Then there's SN 56.11 -- for example on page 41 ... <S> The first noble truth, that is, suffering is to be understood . <S> The second noble truth, that is, the arising of suffering is to be abandoned . <S> The third noble truth, that is, the ending of suffering (nirvana) is to be realized . <S> The fourth noble truth, that is, the way to the ending of suffering is to be cultivated . <S> ... <S> and on page 46: <S> The first noble truth: suffering (dukkha) <S> Suffering should be known (pariññeyya) <S> Suffering has been known (pariññāta) <S> The second noble truth: craving (taṇhā) <S> Craving should be abandoned (pahātabba) <S> Craving has been abandoned (pahīna) <S> The third noble truth: nirvana <S> (nibbāna) <S> Nirvana should be realized (sacchikātabba) <S> Nirvana has been realized (sacchikata) <S> The fourth noble truth: the path (patipadā) <S> The path should be cultivated (bhāvetabba) <S> The path has been cultivated (bhāvita) <S> Then there's MN 61 ("The Buddha teaches his young son"), which starts with being honest, and then, Whenever you want to do a bodily action, you should reflect on it: ' <S> This bodily action I want to do — would it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? <S> As for techniques to overcome withdrawal (more accurately to enable withdrawal, to enable the cessation of craving and attachment), I think there are many -- I mentioned some in this answer <S> e.g.: <S> Guarding the senses Preventing contact Seclusion or retreat (even temporary) <S> The mental equivalent of aversion therapy and/or dispassion (e.g. seeing "a bag of bones") <S> And if at first you don't succeed then try, try, and ... try something else! <S> Also maybe replace 'wrong' with 'right' -- <S> e.g. instead of dwelling on dukkha consider freedom from remorse .
|
Dvedhāvitakka Sutta - Two Kinds of Thought
|
Must one move through the various jhanas to realise nibbana? Some of these jhanas are incredibly powerful but they have an opposite, that being emotional and mental upheaval and the dark nights. Essentially, I realise that there are valuable insights to learn from both their extremes but I find that delusion can arise as part of the mental upheaval (I thought I was in love with my teacher) now that I'm out of the delusion it seems so silly. Buddha had mentioned in a few suttas (I can't remember their names) that jhanas are the way to nibana but was this within the context of who he was giving the teaching to? As an example, the satipathanna sutta was taught to the kuru people because they already possessed a deep wisdom and an advanced ability to learn quickly thus, the teaching he gave was conducive to their ability to attain higher levels of realisation very quickly. <Q> Both Theravada and (Tibetan) <S> Mahayana textual sources state that jhanas are not a hard requirement, but insight is. <S> That said, live teachers in both traditions clearly say that "insight" refers not as much to dry intellectual understanding as to practical real-life mastery of mind based on the first-hand insight into its key mechanisms. <S> In my understanding, jhanas ARE the stages of that mastery - especially if you interpret them broadly as stages of mastery of Emotional Intelligence - as opposed to concrete states. <S> In this interpretation, nirvana/nibbana is a state of 100% inner harmony without any conflict between "is" and "should" whatsoever. <S> While jhanas are progressive approximations of that state from coarse to finer, to finest, to transcendental. <S> The coarse stages entail coarser positive mindstates and coarser techniques of generating them - and the finer stages entail finer positive mindstates and finer techniques of generating them. <S> If you look at it this way, you will see that jhanas are the very nature of the gradual path and are therefore required for anyone but the most talented practitioners who can skip to pure suchness right away. <A> Jhanas are not emotional, not a mental upheaval and not dark nights. <S> The Pali suttas describe jhana as "seclusion", "composure", "happy" and "equanimous". <S> "Dark Night" happens in a transitional phase prior to establishing the path and much prior to jhana. <S> To realise final Nibbana as an Arahant, yes, the four rupa jhana must be moved though. <S> To "taste" the freedom of Nibbana, as a stream-enterer, jhana is not required however the "Dark Night" of "ego-death" must be experienced. <A> in Jhanna Sutta , you dont need to move thru 4 jhanna. <S> Budda went down each Jhanna with "' <S> I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana.' <S> Thus it has been said. <S> In reference to what was it said? <S> There is the case where a monk, secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: <S> rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. <S> He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. <S> He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: ' <S> This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding And Buddha repeated above all the way with other jhannas ONE by ONE .Interesting <S> fact, quite differently for those in dimension of neither perception nor non-perception & the attainment of the cessation. <S> You have to attain that stage and emerge from in back and forth to gain insight. <S> I remember from one sutta <S> Buddha said he could only teach those with perception, and not a twisted one, such as those with severe mental illness. <S> I guarantee you, you will not find sutta saying so. <S> However, one may twist the sutta to match his idea.
|
The idea that all 4 Jhanna has to be achieved to end the mental fermentations is taught by later teachers.
|
Three Questions about Sexual Desire I am wondering a few questions in regard to sexual desire and Buddhism. Is fantasizing a form of craving and thus worse than sexual activity without it? What are the mental processes involved? How much does a single orgasm, for example, affect the spiritual path? Basically what is the magnitude of the effect? Is it possible that some individuals cannot eradicate lust and should merely diminish it? <Q> Is fantasizing a form of craving and thus worse than sexual activity without it? <S> What are the mental processes involved? <S> Fantasising creates further sexual energy that adds to the momentum of the whole process. <S> Mental visualisations and thus sensory pleasure being the 'wanting' component. <S> How much does a single orgasm, for example, affect the spiritual path? <S> Basically what is the magnitude of the effect? <S> An orgasm doesn't effect the path in the slightest. <S> How you have come to achieve the orgasm does. <S> This can be a bit of a grey area for some. <S> Sexual encounters are still possible for a practicing Buddhist <S> but sometimes it's helpful to refrain from sex for a time in order to learn about how your physiology is guided towards the wanting of sex. <S> Is it possible that some individuals cannot eradicate lust and should merely diminish it? <S> If you practice ardently, diminishment will be the first occurrence. <S> It's not helpful to want to eradicate a natural biological process. <S> It will create frustration (dukkha) but it may be a great learning curve if you're well versed in the arisings of your own suffering. <S> Essentially, just work towards learning how it shows itself in your body and actions. <A> 1.-2. <S> It simply depends on the reason of why it is done. <S> Such as wanting to release the build up of pressure caused by the accumulation of certain fluids within the prostate gland. <S> The difference being "aversion" instead of "lust". <S> Fantasizing can be very consuming, addictive, and will incline the mind in a much more forceful manner than the occasional aversion of wanting to get rid of the tactile sensation. <S> Ideally, both should be abandoned. <S> How much a simple orgasm will affect the path, will depend on the magnitude of craving and clinging, or delight in such things. <S> Yes it's quite possible. <S> If suffering and the path leading to the cessation of suffering is not understood, and not practiced accordingly. <S> The path is neither indulging nor rejecting, neither passion nor aversion. <S> Unfortunately, it is not an easy path. <S> It is quite simple but it deals with the ultimate, mere intellectualization cannot get us very far. <S> All which is wholesome and unwholesome must be known and seen directly, with insight. <S> We cannot obtain peace by forcefully suppressing and rejecting. <S> You can advance at a slower pace, smoothly, or you can go all the way. <S> The choice is yours. <S> But, for how long will the right conditions for practice remain? <S> The path of Dhamma leads to the complete cessation of all suffering. <S> So great is this reward, it cannot be compared to anything else. <A> First Question Fantasizing a form of craving will make more and more sexual desire which eventually you cannot getaway. <S> After fantasizing mind will ask to feel sound by ears,seeing by eyes,smell by nose,taste by tongue, touch by body. <S> Actually fantasizing is not worse than activity. <S> Second Question <S> So far i haven't seen any Suttra for explain that matter, but i think that habit is huge barrier for spiritual path, whether we believe or not it's kind of a addiction. <S> Third Question <S> Lust will remain until the attain Nirvana, yet only what we can do is just bury it. <S> Hope this helps.
|
Yes, fantasizing is a form of craving and can be worse than mere sexual activity.
|
Is there any reason of restlessness in the afternoon? I have been practicing mindfulness and watching thoughts. I usually feel rapture, calm and desireless all the day but not in afternoon after lunch. In afternoon, I even forget all stability including mindfulness & various desires creeps in the mind. Situations become extraordinarily better after 4-4:30PM. Is there any particular reason of afternoon (2-4) instability? What can I do to let that not happen? <Q> AN7.61 discusses remedies at length, including: <S> But if by doing this you don’t shake off your drowsiness, then—percipient of what lies in front & behind—set a distance to meditate walking back & forth, your senses inwardly immersed, your mind not straying outwards. <S> It’s possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness. <A> I think that is not about your mindfulness, it just the habit. <S> We used to that way of life cycle for infinite long time. <S> Just because we are practicing meditation for few hours of day about month or year, that habit cannot break instantly. <S> Just forget about those thoughts. <S> It's actually good, cause you know that your mind is not controlled by your self. <S> And your still focus on mind that's how your know, <S> forget all stability including mindfulness & various desires creeps in the mind be patient and practice meditation whenever you can <A> It could just be subconscious stress. <S> Your suppressed negative emotions have nowhere to go <S> so they materialize themselves in this way. <S> Maybe you should try a physical way of venting stress like running. <A> Our hormone levels changes during different times of the day. <S> Mostly after having the lunch, the blood flows tend to direct to food digestion & hormone levels do drop during the day time. <S> This could majorly influence in not being able to concentrate. <S> Better go through the time table of Buddha's life to find a better way to live in mindfulness without feeling instable. <S> May the nobel triple gem bless you in your path.
|
Restless drowsiness is common after eating.
|
What are The Buddha's most compassionate acts? Source could be from sutras or anything else. Thank you. <Q> Probably the decision to become a samma sambuddha for the benifit of others. <S> Becoming an arahath and ending your own suffering is lot more easier and take lot less time. <S> “Then I listened to the Brahmā’s pleading, and out of compassion for beings <S> I surveyed the world with the eye of a Buddha. <S> Surveying the world with the eye of a Buddha, I saw beings with little dust in their eyes and with much dust in their eyes, with keen faculties and with dull faculties, with good qualities and with bad qualities, easy to teach and hard to teach, and some who dwelt seeing fear and blame in the other world. <S> Just as in a pond of blue or red or white lotuses, some lotuses that are born and grow in the water thrive immersed in the water without rising out of it, and some other lotuses that are born and grow in the water rest on the water’s surface, and some other lotuses that are born and grow in the water rise out of the water and stand clear, unwetted by it; so too, surveying the world with the eye of a Buddha, I saw beings with little dust in their eyes and with much dust in their eyes, with keen faculties and with dull faculties, with good qualities and with bad qualities, easy to teach and hard to teach, and some who dwelt seeing fear and blame in the other world. <S> Then I replied to the Brahmā Sahampati in stanzas: ‘Open for them are the doors to the Deathless, Let those with ears now show their faith. <S> Thinking it would be troublesome, <S> O Brahmā, I did not speak the Dhamma subtle and sublime.’ <S> MN26 <A> I particularly enjoy his compassionate ability to encourage people to experience their own learning of dharma. <S> There is a lovely example here of his compassion in the story of the mustard seed and the death of a woman's baby. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/noncanon/comy/thiga-10-01-ao0.html <S> Excerpt from the Shurangama sutta: "Ánanda, all phenomena, near and far, have their own nature. <S> Although each is distinctly different, they are seen with the same pure essence of seeing. <S> Thus all the categories of phenomena have their individual distinctions, but the seeing-nature has no differences. <S> That essential wonderful brightness is most certainly your seeing-nature. <S> "If seeing were a phenomenon, then you should also be able to see my seeing. <S> "If we both looked at the same phenomenon, you would also be seeing my seeing. <S> Then, when I’m not seeing, why can’t you see my not seeing? <S> "If you could see my not-seeing, it clearly would not be the phenomenon that I am not seeing. <S> If you cannot not see my ‘not seeing’, then it is clearly not a phenomenon. <S> How could it not be you? <S> Besides that, if you’re seeing of phenomena was like that then when you saw things, things should also see you. <S> With substance and nature mixed together, you, I, and everyone in the world would no longer be distinguishable from each other. <S> "Ánanda, when you see, it is you who sees, not me. <S> The seeing-nature pervades everywhere; <S> whose is it if it is not yours? <S> "Why do you have doubts about your own true-nature and come to me seeking verification, thinking your nature is not true?" <S> Source: http://buddhasutra.com/files/shurangama_sutra.htm <A> Almost each and every single act's of The Buddha is compassionate act's. <A> Actually it's a question which needs requires to understand, that there is no action of a Buddha/Arahat, which is not perfect in compassion/wisdom and judgement of which in particular, would be leaded for the most by personal preoccupations and benefits for worldly desires and attachments. <S> Again, as possible known, the gift of Dhamma (showing the path to the deathless), excel all other gifts. <S> Of what counts as compassion/wisdom as foundation for actions is mentioned and declared as right resolve and only then without stains, if based on right view . <S> A person not having reached the path, a worldling, is not capable to see and understand real compassion, would always praise Maras actions as most compassionate. <S> Only for one having accessed the Noble Domain, right resolve and compassionate actions ( virtue section ), is penetrated and understood. <S> Only if actions are harmless for one self and all others is it right to speak about compassion and not just another act based on personal preference. <S> It is in dependence on me as an admirable friend that beings subject to birth have gained release from birth, that beings subject to aging have gained release from aging, that beings subject to death have gained release from death, that beings subject to sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair have gained release from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. <S> ... <S> admirable beings <A> One story has the Buddha in a previous life crossing a river on a ferry. <S> It may be a teaching story rather than an historical account <S> but it would be an example of a compassionate act.
|
In the Shurangama sutta also, the Buddha skillfully guides Ananda into searching for the six senses. The passengers are attacked by a murderous thief and the Buddha kills him, accepting the karmic consequences. To accept the request to teach the Dhamma althought he neither had any duty to do so nor could see many who would accept his gift and take it to heart, put it into practice and to return so many, many times approaching his "worthless" disciples again and again.
|
When is the best time for ordination? When exactly is it worth considering to ordain as a monk?Is it something that happens automatically during the path, that is, (a) special experience(s) or insight into the three characteristics? Is strong uncomfort experienced when living the monastic life? Thanks <Q> I would suggest staying in a monastery or a meditation center first, continuously for about 6 months while keeping to the 8 precepts to see if you can handle it well. <A> The Pali suttas have the following stock phrase about the best time being when you become dispassionate in continuing the lay life: <S> Now, there is the case where a Tathāgata appears in the world, worthy and rightly self-awakened. <S> He teaches the Dhamma admirable in its beginning, admirable in its middle, admirable in its end. <S> He proclaims the holy life both in its particulars and in its essence, entirely perfect, surpassingly pure. <S> He [the person discussed above], hearing the Dhamma, gains conviction in the Tathāgata and reflects: ' Household life is confining, a dusty path . <S> Life gone forth is the open air. <S> It isn't easy, living at home, to practice the holy life totally perfect, totally pure, a polished shell. <S> What if I, having shaved off my hair & beard and putting on the ochre robe, were to go forth from the household life into homelessness?' <S> So after some time he abandons his mass of wealth, large or small; leaves his circle of relatives, large or small; shaves off his hair and beard, puts on the ochre robes, and goes forth from the household life into homelessness. <S> MN 38 <S> Some men still delight in sex but become monks because they think jhana will give them a better type of orgasmic pleasure. <S> It is doubtful these men can succeed. <A> If you have already gotten the qualified teacher , and your trust is strong enough to do everything follow to that teacher. <S> You should ordinate as soon as you can . <S> If you don't know how to prove your teacher, see the qualification of buddhist teacher here . <S> If you choose the right monastery where is most of their monks try to do follow to tipitaka-pali, such as no use money, your ordination will be very easy, then you just have to patient to stop your unwholesome mind and try to attain jhāna and magga. <A> When is the best time for ordination? <S> Now. <S> Don't waste time. <S> Intentions are not for sure. <A> To try to complement other answers: A long time ago -- some schools of Buddhism involve 20-odd years of training and people start as children, though perhaps they don't/can't ordain until they're old enough <S> Maybe in a next life -- I think that's the attitude of many lay people; some schools (e.g. Pure Land) maybe write off ordination altogether When circumstances allow -- some people ordain e.g. after a close member of their family dies, or after some other 'life-changing' event <S> Not too late -- <S> this answer suggests that after age 45 or so is getting to be too late After a trial period, and consultation with teachers
|
When you become dispassionate in continuing the lay life or when you get enough confidence that you can successfully fend off the temptations of lay life, it is worth considering ordination.
|
What is the meaning behind this chant? Who are the eight [types of] individuals that the chant refers to, and what is the meaning of the chant? Apparently, it is the Wat Phra Ratana Mahathat Monks at evening service before the great bronze Chinnaret Buddha, Phitsanulok Thailand. Source: Freesound The translation came from the YouTube comments section but I cannot locate it any longer. Here is the link to a looped version... Buddhist Chanting Of good conduct is the Order of the Disciples of the Blessed One. Of upright conduct is the Order of the Disciples of the Blessed One. Of wise conduct is the Order of the Disciples of the Blessed One. Of proper conduct is the Order of the Disciples of the Blessed One. This Order of the Disciples of the Blessed One, namely these Four Pairs of persons, the eight [types of] individuals, is worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of reverential salutation, and is an incomparable field of merit for the World. Supatipanno Bhagavato sāvakasangho Ujupatipanno Bhagavato sāvakasangho Ñāyapatipanno Bhagavato sāvakasangho Sāmīcipatipanno Bhagavato sāvakasangho Yadidam cattāri purisa yugāni Attha purisa puggalā Esa Bhagavato sāvakasangho Āhuneyyo Pāhuneyyo Dakkhineyyo Añjalīkaranīyo Anuttaram Puññak khettam lokassāti <Q> It's taken from (or quoted in) MN 7 <S> (but it's one of the Pali Formulae -- buddha-vacana.org says, of this one, "45 occurrences", so I suppose this occurs in 45 suttas; also, that it's a component of the Sekha Paṭipadā ). <S> It's one of the Anussati -- specifically Saṅghānussati . <S> Sati is "mindfulness" -- and anu is "after (behind)", "for (towards an aim)", "according to (in conformity with) <S> ", also "each/every/one-by-one" -- <S> so, combined, "remember" or "recollect" or "call to mind". <S> AN <S> 3.70 says (of all the Anussati) that, "as they recollect ... their mind becomes clear, joy arises, and mental corruptions are given up". <S> The "8 [types of] individuals" refer to the "four stages of enlightenment" <S> ( sotāpanna etc.) <S> or as it says "the four pairs of persons" -- both ordained and/or lay. <A> Supatipanno Bhagavato sāvakasangho <S> The Blessed One's community of disciples who have practised well/thoroughly <S> Ujupatipanno Bhagavato sāvakasangho <S> The Blessed One's community of disciples who have practised directly /without messing around/without dreaming about reincarnation/without trolling internet forums obsessively attempting to teach morality to worldlings/with total abandonment of selfing <S> Ñāyapatipanno Bhagavato sāvakasangho <S> Practised insightfully Sāmīcipatipanno Bhagavato sāvakasangho <S> Practised correctly This Order of the Disciples of the Blessed One, namely these Four Pairs of persons, the eight [types of] individuals, Eight individuals practising for or have realised the four levels of enlightenment, namely, stream-entry, once-returner, non-returner and arahant is worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of reverential salutation, and is an incomparable field of merit for the World. <S> The above means to not give to or place faith in idiotic monks ( duppaññā eḷamūgā ) but only revere and place faith in monks who have realised emptiness ( sunnata ). <A> For the meaning of saṅghānussati in advance, see Part II—Concentration (Samádhi) CH. <S> VII SIX RECOLLECTIONS Recollection of the Saṅgha page 215 . <S> We should be used with the tree <S> refuges according to Sutta. <S> Ma. <S> U. Sevitabbāsevitabbasuttaṃ : <S> It was said, "Sāriputta, I say, persons are also twofold those that should be used and not used" On account of what was it said by the Blessed One? <S> Venerable sir, when using certain persons demerit increases and merit decreases, such persons should not be used, when using certain persons demerit decreases and merit increases, such persons should be used. <S> It was said, "Sāriputta, persons too are twofold, those that should be used and not used. <S> " It was said on account of this. <S> Why? <S> Sutta. <S> Khu. <S> Jā.(1) <S> Vīsatinipātajātakaṃ <S> Sattigumbajātakaṃ : <S> “To whomsoever, good or bad, a man shall honour pay, Vicious or virtuous, that man holds him beneath his sway. <S> “Like as the comrade one admires, like as the chosen friend, Such will become the man who keeps beside him, in the end. <S> “Friendship makes like, and touch by touch infects, you’ll find it true: <S> Poison the arrow, and ere long the quiver’s poisoned too. <S> “The wise eschews bad company, for fear of staining touch: Wrap rotten fish in grass, you’ll find the grass stinks just as much. <S> And they who keep fool’s company themselves will soon be such. <S> “Sweet frankincense wrap in a leaf, the leaf will smell as sweet. <S> So they themselves will soon grow wise, that sit at wise men’s feet. <S> “By this similitude the wise should his own profit know, Let him eschew bad company and with the righteous go: <S> Heaven waits the righteous, but the bad are doomed to hell below.”
|
Commentary says that this is referring to the "ariya sangha" (the noble sangha), i.e. all enlightened ones.
|
Acceptance of impermanence as the right of passage to adulthood? My take on Buddha's teaching The Buddha encouraged us to find out for ourselves whether what he was saying was true. I say the same. Feel free to find what is true for you. The Buddha invented a rite of passage to adult age. He said that we need to accept impermanence. This makes us adult. As long as we refuse impermanence, we are still children. Impermanence is a polite word for failure, illness, decay, loss, death and all the **** life throws at us. During the years 50s and 60s teenagers lived a rite of passage to adult age consisting in racing on the edge of a cliff, possibly to death (see film Rebel Without a Cause). They thought that it's better to die than to live your entire life as a never-grown child. Society abolished rites of passage to adult age. Every time we accept impermanence we make our adult self-image stronger. Every time we accept discomfort, failure, mistakes, illness, decay, suffering, pain, loss and death we make ourselves invincible. The base of this rite is that what we accept helps us, what we refuse kills us. This is a psychological law. Every time we decide to accept impermanence we are Enlightened. Impermanence is not the key here, acceptance is. What do you think? What's the core of Buddha's teachings? <Q> “Rāhula, you should truly see any kind of form at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: all form—with right understanding: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’” <S> --MN62 <A> The Buddha maintained the importance of recognizing impermanence right up into his very last words. <S> It doesn't seem to be enough to formulate your own definition of impermanence, but to see how, in your direct experience, it shows its full authentic nature. <S> The three marks of existence are key: impermanence, suffering and not-self. <S> One should not focus entirely one one domain. <S> Buddha had taught one to see all the three domains concurrently. <S> This is the height of the wisdom he brings out in others from his own wisdom. <S> Yadanicca sutta Bahirani sutta <A> My roshi's roshi walked into the parlor where his roshi's (my great-grand roshi if you will) body was laid out. <S> He began to cry inconsolably at the loss of his teacher. <S> All in attendance were dumbfounded. <S> How could a man so deeply awake be so emotional! <S> After all, isn't death just another example of impermanence? <S> Seeing the minds of the other mourners written blatantly in their faces, the man said - "My teacher, who I loved like a father, has died. <S> If I want to cry, I'm going to cry." <S> Who had the more intimate understanding of impermanence? <S> The man who wept or those who wondered at his weeping? <A> Your point about becoming an adult is valid. <S> In one sense, Enlightenment is attainment of the Universal Adulthood. <S> However, accepting impermanence ("and all <S> the **** life throws at us") is not sufficient to get there. <S> The state of adulthood, unlike that of a child, is characterized by independence -- the strength and wisdom to determine one's life instead of having others (i.e. the adults) determine it for you. <S> Adulthood is a state of self-realization, of being fully and truly oneself. <S> In Buddhism the obstacles to independence are recognized to be of two kinds: emotional and cognitive. <S> Emotional obstacles are automatic reactions that make us slaves to our emotional neediness, our avoidance of discomfort, and our impulsive irritability and anger. <S> Cognitive obstacles are the ones that make us slaves to our biases, stereotypes, overgeneralizations, jumping to conclusions and other perceptual==>conceptual mistakes. <S> The complete liberation from both leads to a subjective state that is characterized by a clear understanding of How Things Work, a deep emotional Peace and a sense of Freedom to act according to one's own sound judgement. <S> It was a dark night, raining lightly, with flashes of lightning. <S> The Buddha said to Ananda: "You can come out with the umbrella over the lamp." <S> Ananda listened, and walked behind the Buddha, with an umbrella over the lamp, [lighting the way for both]. <S> When they reached a place, the Buddha smiled. <S> Ananda said: "The Buddhas don’t smile without a reason. <S> What brings the smile today? <S> " The Buddha said: "That’s right! <S> That’s <S> right! <S> The Buddhas don’t smile without a reason. <S> Now you are following me [while having your own] lamp. <S> I look around, and see everyone doing the same thing." <S> (SA 1150) ... <S> Monks, be your own lamp, be your own refuge, having no other! <S> Let the Dhamma be a lamp and a refuge to you, having no other! <S> (SN 22.43) <S> The Buddhist path is a gradual training that takes an immature sentient being and sets it on the course of figuring out and getting rid of the emotional and cognitive obstacles to Universal Adulthood, until one attains the state of clarity, peace and freedom. <A> What do you think? <S> What's the core of Buddha's teachings? <S> I think the core is the "four noble truths" -- that craving, attachment, and suffering co-arise or are related. <S> But I don't think there is one core. <S> Another core is the "Middle Way" -- classically between hedonism and self-mortification; but also e.g. between eternalism and nihilism; or between renunciation and non-self on the one hand, and the brahmaviharas, ethical conduct, and spiritual friends on the other. <S> Another is the Dhamma being visible, inviting inspection, testable (unlike doctrines of some other religions). <S> I suspect that anatta is at least as important as impermanence -- and ethics perhaps even more so. <S> Identifying the mental hindrances or fetters is a core doctrine -- "purify the mind". <S> I don't know, maybe it's every time we decide to accept things-as-they <S> -are (which includes "impermanent" -- and that may be one of the harder characteristics to accept, but is not the only characteristic).
|
Every time we decide to accept impermanence we are Enlightened.
|
Tibetan Buddhism:Recieving inititation in India/Tibet I recently read an introductory book on Tibetan Buddhism and intrigued by Tantra & Kalachakra practice. I have been practicing meditation for the last 2-3 years but not under the guidance of a guru. After struggling for 2-3 years I have finally realized the need of a guru so that I can start practicing seriously. Next year, I have 3-month vacation and I'm thinking about going to a monastery in India/Tibet (I live in India) where I can be initiated into tantric practice. Which are some of the places in India and Tibet where Tantra/Kalachakra initiation is possible ? <Q> I think you should search for vajrayana buddhist temple Vajrayana Buddhism is one of the most important and most followed Buddhist tradition in the present states of Buddhism in the whole world. <S> Also known as the Tantric Buddhism, Vajrayana Buddhism is also represented as the Diamond Way or Thunderbolt Way and Indestructible Way. <S> source <S> Not sure about India <S> but I think in Nepal you would find a master of Vajrayana. <S> Maybe you can start by taking up a course in Kopan Monastery in Kathmandu. <S> They are not vajrayana of course, they are Gelug branch of Mahayana <S> but when you go there and meet the Monks you can ask about what you want and they'll guide you. <A> Going to such a place is good. <S> Until you go you can practice it at your home also. <S> If you can analyze your mind in every moment you are living. <S> And be in consciousness always. <S> And see desires coming to your mind, and destroy the value of it from your mind. <S> Try it. <S> May triple gems bless you. <A> Lama Govinda, was of German origin and spent many years in Tibet. <S> He was initially in Sri Lanka aligned to the Theravada tradition and subsequently developed an interest in Tibetan Vajrayana. <S> He wrote many books on his spiritual experiences in Tibet. <S> He was a lecturer at the University of Shantiniketan and a world renowned scholar. <S> He had the rare ability to unknot profound spiritual questions and explain them in lucid terms. <S> Many yogis who were interested in the Tibetan tradition were inspired by him. <S> He died in California several decades ago. <S> His writings may inspire you too.
|
A book by Anagarika Lama Govinda titled 'The Foundations of Tibetan Mysticism' (pdf) may be useful to build up your knowledge on Tibetan Vajrayana.
|
What is wrong speech according to Buddhism? Is something a lie if I don’t have bad or evil intentions but what I said turns out to be false? I’m trying to protect my five precepts but sometimes when I say something it turns out to be false but I just said what I know at that time. I wasn’t trying to deceive or tell lies. I just said what I know but I found out later that I was wrong. So is that a lie? I didn’t have any bad intentions. I just said what I know and I found out later that it was false. <Q> I don't think the fourth precept is defined in detailed in suttas. <S> Actually I don't think any of the precepts are defined in detail -- perhaps they are in a commentary. <S> Something like that precept, though, is defined in the vinaya (for monks) -- see Chapter 8, page 298, of <S> The Pāṭimokkha RulesTranslated & Explainedby Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu , which includes: Intention : <S> the aim to misrepresent the truth; and Effort : the effort to make another individual know whatever one wants to communicate based on that aim. <S> But I don't understand your question saying, "I just said what I know <S> and I found out later that it was false" -- because, how could you "know" something that's false? <S> I think (I hope) <S> I'd tend to phrase that as, "I think that so-and-so", or <S> "Someone once told me so-and-so", or "I guess that so-and-so", or "Such-and-such a reference says so-and-so" -- not, "I know that so-and-so is true" when I'm not sure. <S> If I'm not sure about something, then conveying more certainty than I have (e.g. by saying, "X is definitely true") is in my opinion misrepresenting the truth about how good my knowledge is, how much certainty I have, how trust-worthy it is. <S> Anyway you should probably read that chapter of the vinaya, it includes various details which I won't quote here. <S> The vinaya says it's wrong to break a promise, too. <S> In my opinion (though, I'd guess, not according to Buddhist scripture) that means you should avoid kind of implying (perhaps an implied promise) that something is true when it isn't -- so <S> for example if you're not certain then don't imply you're certain. <S> Since you mentioned "wrong speech" you might also want to read about "right speech" more generally, i.e. one of the factors of the noble eightfold path <S> (I don't know whether that's exactly the same as the fourth precept): <S> Right <S> Speech <S> (quotes from Suttas) <S> Right <S> Speech <S> (a little essay by Thanissaro Bhikkhu) <A> In addition to the answers provided, to be safe, if you were unsure of something you have to indicate that you were unsure of it. <S> Same for if you don't know, say you don't know. <S> If it is not something you personally verified, make sure you indicate that as well. <S> Especially if the topic in question was dire or can have a big impact to others based on your answers, I would advise <S> you be very careful of giving the right answers because not only it would bring impact to others, but also risky in committing false speech. <A> In the broader context of ignoble speech, we have DN33 : <S> Four ignoble expressions: speech that’s false , divisive, harsh, or nonsensical. <S> Notice that lying is included in the first of these. <S> Lying is intentional. <S> One states what is false. <S> You had no intention of lying but your speech was false. <S> And you felt doubt and perhaps remorse later. <S> To blurt out something baldly and assertively is dangerous as you've found yourself later that the statement was false. <S> Rather than hinder yourself with remorse (part of the five hindrances), simply be mindful that as the name and forms we use in speech come into being, they also must mutate and cease. <S> Perhaps the simplest mindful thing to do is prefix statements (especially any "obvious truths") with "it is said", "i have heard", or other qualifying phrases. <S> The effort of doing so will gradually pay off and help mindfulness grow. <S> And from DN33 as well: <S> refraining from speech that’s false, divisive, harsh, or nonsensical <S> Which also means that saying nothing at all is also fine. <A> If you say for example, "from what I know:...", or, "I have heard that:...", then there would be no lie (at worst it's useless chatter). <S> If you say it as f you really know for example, "it is...", "he has...", "that is wrong...", with definite speech -- and <S> if happens that your assumptions turn out to be wrong, you understood wrong -- then you did not really know, and that it was simply a lie. <S> If you speak in ways of truthfulness, it's not possible to lie. <S> Think on that <S> , if saying, "tomorrow I will do this and that...", or in ways of, "I am...", and of how many lies are around on places like this? <S> And one should not forget that, to gain liberation, it requires to abandon all kinds of stealing the truth; and untruthfulness starts with stopping "speaking of what is not true." <S> For the most speech is to defend one's world, identification and it would require freedom from stinginess (e.g. Noble person) to have not simply just this intention, however excused or hidden. <S> One may think on Rahula's first lesson he got. <S> There is no way in Dhamma for one who does not start right here; and even the Bodhisatta, although still (before enlightenment) breaking this or that precept, never failed in sacca , truthfulness. <S> Truthfulness as well as <S> the Buddha-Dhamma is not for everyone, not to speak about careless. <S> Yet think then on the even more fine matter of changing ones mind, and it's impact . <S> Much liberating gain in going truthfully into this matter, rather to seek approve under equal and lower with the defiled <S> "I had the intention" excuse (yet not even recognize the drive). <S> [Text is not placed for trade or to be used for any wordily exchange]
|
One who says "i know" but does not; "I see" but does not; "I have heard" but hasn't; is called a liar by those who are serious.
|
How does one know if one is destined to attain Nibbana? How does one know if one is destined to attain Nibbana? (In future lives) <Q> Traditionally, one hears it from one's teacher (Buddhist mentor). <S> For example, my Zen master once said, pointing at me, "One day this guy will get everything. <S> He will be Bill Gates". <S> This is known as "the prediction". <S> Even without that, the teachings say, if you are committed to figure it out, however slowly, you will get there sooner or later. <S> This abstract idea that Nibbana is actually within reach gets concrete and personal only at pretty advanced stages. <S> Basically, once you clearly see the mechanism of conflict/suffering and how it all works, and not just see but get some grasp of mastering unconditional "rightness", that's when you know you will get there with time. <A> How does one know if one is destined to attain Nibbana? <S> There's a type of higher knowledge called "Reviewing Knowledge"/PaccavekkhanaNana, which is developed by one who has destroyed all defilements thru the cultivation of Sila/Samadhi/Panna (virtue/meditation/wisdom): <S> "As the trainee trains along the straight path, the knowledge of destruction arises first, immediately followed by final knowledge. <S> Thereafter, when the fetters of existence are destroyed, for one liberated by final knowledge, the knowledge arises: “My liberation is unshakable.” <S> ~~ <S> AN 3.85 <S> ~~ <A> When you become a Sotapanna it assures enlightenment within seven lives. <S> "The laywoman Sujata, Ananda, through the destruction of the three fetters has become a stream-enterer, and is safe from falling into the states of misery, assured, and bound for Enlightenment. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html <A> Perhaps right effort will see to that. <S> How do you know if you're sotapanna? <S> Have a read of Dhamma and Discipline of the Buddha’sOwn Words to proclaim Stream Enteringby oneself .
|
You couldn't know prior to the unfolding of right view with regards to seeing through the illusion of self (sotapanna) and even then there's no certainty in this life.
|
Ānāpānasati (mindfulness of breathing) -- concentrate on nose, or on whole body? I am meditating for the last three months, about 30 mins a day (or a little longer than that). I followed Ajahn Brahm's " Basic Method of Meditation " to bring the mind to be in the present relatively steadily (still it wanders, but not like when I started the practice). I started with trying to quiet the mind (too much internal thought etc.) by keeping my attention sometimes on the breath, sometimes on a sound without strictly sticking to a single meditation object. My understanding of Ajahn Brahm's description of the first stage was to bring the mind to the present and then make it quiet. Now I am kind of there, I am trying to figure out how to proceed. Meditation books recommend keeping your attention at the tip of the nose, but my mind is naturally drawn towards knowing the breathing as a whole (through most parts of the body, chest area, belly and sometimes the face also). I tried to go back to paying attention to the nose, but it made the meditation really hard. When I came back to the whole body experience, it was easier. Just wondering whether I am doing this wrong. If so, how should I proceed? I am particularly interested in knowing whether this way of meditation is what Buddha mentioned in the Satipatthana Sutta when he says: "'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe in,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe out,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Calming the activity of the body, I shall breathe in,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Calming the activity of the body, I shall breathe out,' thinking thus, he trains himself. <Q> The way I understand the object of Anapanasati is the breath. <S> So, Keep your attention on the breath whichever form is presented. <A> My understanding of Ajahn Brahm's description of the first stage was to bring the mind to the present and then make it quiet. <S> Correct. <S> Now I am kind of there, I am trying to figure out how to proceed. <S> Meditation books recommend keeping your attention at the tip of the nose... <S> Ajahn Brahm does not teach to deliberately watch breathing at the nose. <S> I tried to go back to paying attention to the nose, but it made the meditation really hard. <S> When I came back to the whole body experience <S> The practise is to make the mind quiet; to abandon craving & abandon ambition. <S> When the mind is quiet, the mind will feel the breathing where ever the mind naturally feels the breathing. <S> ' <S> Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe in,' thinking thus, he trains himself. ' <S> Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe out,' thinking thus, he trains himself. ' <S> Calming the activity of the body, I shall breathe in,' thinking thus, he trains himself. ' <S> Calming the activity of the body, I shall breathe out,' thinking thus, he trains himself. <S> While the translation above is not accurate, it is good enough. <S> It says to experience the "whole body" <S> therefore there is no need to watch only at the nose-tip. <S> When the breathing & body are eventually calmed, the mind will naturally converge towards the nose-tip. <S> The purpose of Buddhist meditation is not to manipulate phenomena. <S> Ajahn Brahm has said " jhanas are states of letting go " (as Buddha taught in SN 48.9 and SN 48.10). <S> You should stick to the instructions of Ajahn Brahm and ignore other teachers (except me!). <A> Of course it's hard! <S> ;-) <S> But for now, if it's helpful, you can keep focusing on the whole breath as it moves through your body. <S> Just remember that this is training wheel meditation. <S> Eventually, they need to come off. <S> Even focusing on the breath as it moves through the body - a consistent entity - isn't a stable focal point. <S> As your focus moves along with the breath, suffice it to say your mind is also moving. <S> Your mind has to stay put. <S> And that's only going to happen if you pick a single point of meditation and stick to it.
|
my mind is naturally drawn towards knowing the breathing as a whole (through most parts of the body, chest area, belly and sometimes the face also). You seem to be abandoning the instructions of Ajahn Brahm. The purpose of Buddhist meditation is to practise letting go of craving & attachment. For proper, stable meditation, the point of focus has to remain stable.
|
How does Buddhism see Islam? I am a Muslim living far away from Myanmar. I always hear about the prosecution of Muslims in Myanmar. The Rohingya people are classified by the UN among the most prosecuted minorities in the world. There is a rich history of Muslims prosecution by Buddhists. I have read about Buddhists not liking Muslim rituals of animal slaughter. I have also read about individual cases of crimes supposedly committed by some Muslims. However, what I have read does not justify this massive retaliation by Buddhists, what makes me think that maybe there is something in Buddhism clearly against Islam and Muslims. Maybe it is not only a political issue. I would like to know how Buddhism sees Islam and Muslims? How is Islam pictured in the eyes of Buddhism and Buddhists? <Q> Talking about Rohingyas puts your question in a completely different category. <S> The conflict in Myanmar is a political conflict. <S> Rohingyas are originally from Bangladesh. <S> These people invaded Myanmar and slaughtered the people living in the bordering villages, putting their heads on spikes. <S> When the Myanmar army fought back to protect the citizens, suddenly some media in the West and some officers in the UN with vested interests started talking about human rights. <S> Nowadays it's pretty common knowledge that Western powers use Human rights organizations as tools to create conflicts in countries. <S> It's just another religion based on the belief of an almighty, all creating, all compassionate God. <S> That puts it under Sassatavada , one of the 2 fundamental misbeliefs. <S> Generally Buddhists are not against anyone's right to believe in whatever they want to believe. <S> But if you think that a Buddhist society will stay idle if you start grabbing their land and butchering them, you are in for an ugly surprise. <A> I am very sorry to hear about the Rohingyas crisis. <S> I have no knowledge how it is started. <S> Does not matter how it started there is no justification to kill or displace innocent civilians. <S> Buddha never spoke about Christians or Muslims. <S> Buddha was born 2600 years ago. <S> Christ was born about 2000 years ago. <S> Mohemed was born about 1500 years ago. <S> Buddha had a great compassion for all beings. <S> So-called Buddhist involve in killings are not true Buddhists. <S> I had many great Muslim and Tamil friends. <S> I am glad you raise this question here to clarify your doubt, I suggest you start reading bit more about Buddhism. <S> Kind regardsSaratW <A> People of any background, religion, etc may have opinions of a group but that does not mean the entire population has the same view. <S> For example, radical Islamist kill in the name of Islam but other Muslims of the world do not accept or condone their actions. <S> Your happiness and liberation of suffering, no matter what religion or belief is the ultimate goal.
|
If you did not talk about Rohingyas in your question, the answer would be that Buddhists see Islam in the same way as they see Christianity. The answer to your question is that Buddhism accepts all. They do not put people in jail, stone people to death or butcher them just because they believe something different.
|
How to deal with ADHD and OCD like symptoms causing issues during meditation? I am only 2 months into meditating and I've been having some problems. I am unsure whether I truly have the behavioral/thought patterns that are considered ADHD and/or OCD, but for a while I've been noticing symptoms for a while now. The problem I am having during meditation is I overthink things to the extreme. I start thinking about whether I am doing it right. Then I overthink so much that I can't even focus on anything else anymore. I have this problem with reading as well. I start thinking about whether Im reading properly and then my mind starts going into overdrive trying to make sure I do every single detail perfectly but instead my brain just fries up and I can't do anything anymore. Then frustration and doubt sets in and it gets even worse. I know that this is an overall problem that I need to work on and fix. I am working on it. But I would really appreciate any tips on this for now as I feel it is quite a barrier in my process. EDIT: I came to the realization that I need to remember that those "symptoms" or behavioral patterns are just thoughts accompanied by strong emotions. As with any other thought, acknowledge and let go. <Q> If you think you got ADHD or OCD <S> you should seek professional help. <S> Even if it turns out you don't suffer from these disorders talking to an expert could help you with your problem. <A> Firstly, you have to understand that Thoughts, Emotions and Behaviours are interconnected, meaning: If you change one of it, the other will usually follow. <S> Secondly, I would like to introduce to you to the ABC, where A stands for Adversity (either internally or externally), <S> B stands for Beliefs, and C stands for Consequences (which are thinking, behaving and feeling consequences that are spawned from these underlying beliefs). <S> Most people jump from A -> C and neglect their beliefs. <S> Without going too deep, if you have a belief about uncomfort you have to tell yourself that it's hard to tolerate, but you can tolerate it <S> and it's in your best interest to do so. <S> It's always about tolerating discomfort as well as thinking and behaving in a helpful way. <S> If you want to reduce fear or uncomfort, one needs to rehearse helpful thoughts before, in the midst and after the adversity and act according to these thoughts. <S> This ensures that you are in a rational frame of mind. <S> This can be called uncomfort by acting On the other hand, uncomfort by abstaining is a little bit different, but you still have to tolerate discomfort since you want to abstain from something because -again-it is in your best interest to do so. <S> Usually, OCD patients are provided with behavioral and acceptance methods. <S> Debating with thoughts in a long-winded fashion will just re-activate unhelpful beliefs, and that's precisely the reason why once you have reharsed your helpful thoughts <S> you should then switch to an acceptance based focus , where you don't try to get rid or engage in your thoughts . <S> Behavioral methods can be precisely like mentioned above (uncomfort by abstaining if you ruminate a lot, <S> for example, you ask yourself the question: Does my rumination really change anything? <S> I'm here in my room right now and ruminating won't change a thing. <S> If you rehearse such thinking and behave in line with these thoughts, with time your beliefs will change. <A> My suggestion is that you trained (meditation) under a competent teacher. <S> If you do it your own make sure you have a full understanding of meditation methods. <S> In that case, start your practice slowly. <S> Is meditation bad for you? <S> https://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=33016&p=491012&hilit=
|
Seek professional help if you think that you are not well.
|
If consciousness arises from mental formations is it correct to say that consciousness has a specific tone or opinions with it? Example:I see something moving, there's contact .Then there's an unpleasant feeling and perception recognize it as a spider. Mental formations on how to deal with the "threat" of a spider arises. A new consciousness is born. Does it contain the mental formation that caused it to arise? Thank you <Q> Good question. <S> The way it was explained to me, the twelve nidanas are all "made" from each other, they are all made from the same "stuff". <S> It's like when there is water, the wave on the water and the foam on top of the wave - they all "grow" from one another. <S> Similarly, consciousness is "made from" mental formations and feelings/perceptions "grow from" consciousness like foam on top of the wave. <S> So when the "new" consciousness is "born" - yes, it certainly "contains" <S> (rides on top of, made of) <S> the mental formations that led to it. <S> Which is one of the ways karma perpetuates itself. <S> Mental formations (aka "tendencies") define the overall shape of the future action in broad brushstrokes, and then consciousness, feelings, perceptions, craving, etc. <S> get more and more specific until the action itself, which leads to some results, that manifest as new experience on the next cycle and so on - <S> this is how "tendencies" perpetuate themselves. <S> Tendencies (formations), consciousness, attraction/aversion, and karma grow from each other and carry the impulse of each other, so Samsara keeps rolling forward like this. <A> If consciousness arises from mental formation... <S> Actually consciousness doesn't arise from mental formation. <S> Consciousness together with its mental factors (feeling, perception, volition) have been compared to a king and his retinue. <S> They always appear together. <S> From Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma : <S> The cetasikas are mental phenomena that occur in immediate conjunction with citta or consciousness, and assist citta by performing more specific tasks in the total act of cognition. <S> The mental factors cannot arise without citta, nor can citta arise completely segregated from the mental factors. <S> But thought the two are functionally interdependent, citta is regarded as primary because the mental factors assist int he cognition of the object depending upon citta, which is the principal cognitive element. <S> The relationship between citta and the cetasikas is compared to that between a king and his retinue. <S> Although one says "the king is coming" the king does not come alone, but he always comes accompanied by his attendants. <S> Similarly, whenever a citta arises, it never arises alone but always accompanied by its retinue of cetasikas. <A> Eye contact is caused by the union on eye+light+eye consciousness. <S> So the consciousness is already there to begin with. <S> It's not something that arises later. <S> Consciousness is of six kinds: <S> Eye consciousness <S> Ear consciousness Nose consciousness <S> Tongue consciousness <S> Body consciousness <S> Mind consciousness <S> Feelings, perception, mental formations and consciousness arise together. <S> Not one after the other. <S> Think of it as drinking chocolate milk. <S> What do you taste first? <S> Is it the chocolate? <S> Is it the milk? <S> Is it the sugar? <S> Or do you taste them altogether? <S> In this analogy, think of the consciousness as the water in chocolate milk. <S> Water has no taste unless there is something mixed in it. <S> In the same way consciousness is neutral and simply the bare awareness of the experience.
|
Mental formation "conditions" the arising of consciousness, but that doesn't mean it gives birth to consciousness.
|
At what stage is it wrong to consider oneself wise? Is it always wrong to consider oneself wise? I don't mean consider oneself an important Buddhist, or one who has attained such and such a level of absorption or success along the path to enlightenment, but something more mundane, being wise and able to tell e.g. what is a fake way of behaving, or the difference between right and wrong. <Q> Is it always wrong to consider oneself wise? <S> To refer to yourself as wise could develop an over-inflated sense of self. <S> I think it's best to just remain silent in mind and speech about the concepts you may want to use to describe yourself. <S> In the Diamond Sutra, Chapter 10 points this out thus: “A disciple should develop a mind which is in no way dependent upon sights, sounds, smells, tastes, sensory sensations or any mental conceptions . <S> A disciple should develop a mind which does not rely on anything.” <S> “Therefore, Subhuti, the minds of all disciples should be purified of all thoughts that relate to seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, touching, and discriminating. <S> They should use their minds spontaneously and naturally, without being constrained by preconceived notions arising from the senses.” <S> If there really is wisdom, it tends not to make a fuss of itself. <A> Tough question. <S> I wonder if it is a matter of relativity. <S> Compared to some folk I'm completely sure I'm wise, compared to others I'm completely sure I'm not. <S> To be wise in something like an absolute sense would require a comprehensive understanding of reality. <S> If one has this then it seems fine to consider oneself wise. <S> After all, the masters all speak of cultivating wisdom and we should be able to know when we have cultivated it. <S> You say 'something more mundane, being wise and able to tell e.g. what is a fake way of behaving, or the difference between right and wrong.' <S> These are not mundane instances of wisdom. <S> A deep understanding of the causes of behaviour and of the relationship between right and wrong would require a profound understanding of reality. <S> Whether it would be wise to consider ourselves wise would depend on whether we are wise, and if we are we'll know the answer. <S> Yet there is a certain wisdom in the question so perhaps we would have to be at least a little wise to ask it. <S> Then again, to call the ability to tell right from wrong 'wisdom' may not be quite accurate. <S> Lao Tsu tells us 'Because right and wrong appeared the Way was injured'. <S> Perhaps wisdom is seeing the vacuity of the words 'right' and 'wrong' as absolute terms. <S> If for a moment I thought myself wise <S> I would expect my wings to melt, but I'm happy to think I'm more nearly wise than I used to be. <S> I see no harm in thinking yourself wiser than some or even than many, but if you attempt to explain exactly what you mean it may prove difficult. <S> You could ask someone at the Chicago Center for Practical Wisdom. <S> A few more decades <S> and they'll have defined the words. <S> Just thinking out loud. <S> I'd say a wise person is one who knows whether it is wise to think themselves wise. <A> You are actually asking how to behave wisely and that is a very wise question. <S> Before answering that, please note that for wisdom at all stages, consider the ten qualities of an adept (DN33) : <S> right view <S> , right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right immersion, right knowledge , and right freedom. <S> Let us also agree that considering oneself anything at all is just perpetuating identity view (MN44) . <S> And with regard to the "accomplishment of wisdom", we should also mention: never be content with skillful qualities To come back to your question on wise behavior, consider the three practices grouping (ethics, wisdom, immersion) of the noble eight-fold path DN44 : <S> Right speech, right action, and right livelihood: these things are included in the category of ethics <S> Right view and right thought <S> : these things are included in the category of wisdom <S> Right effort, right mindfulness, and right immersion: these things are included in the category of immersion <S> Right knowledge arises out of immersion (i.e., continue your practice). <S> The arising of right knowledge takes time. <S> Therefore, to guide your actions in the absence of right knowledge, simply observe the ethical precepts you have chosen. <S> This is how the three practices support each other endlessly. <S> Seeing danger in the slightest flaw, keep the rules you’ve undertaken. <S> MN6 <S> And let mindfulness be the single guard of your heart. <S> (DN33) <A> Keep doubt, and your Personal Protection Equipment, handy at all times.
|
To consider oneself wise is to possibly delude oneself as to the reality of a situation.
|
Does the effect make its cause? Does a cause depend on its effect? If so then it seems especially difficult to think about nothingness being made or created. This is almost the exact opposite of a question I have asked recently (I'm locked out and looking into that), but not quite. It's usually said that the cause does depend on the cause, in some way Nāgārjuna argues that cause and effect cannot be substantially distinct. This is because the effect depends existentially on the cause (if the cause did not exist the effect would not exist) and cause depends at least notionally on the effect (if there was no effect the cause would not be called “cause”). The kind of independence demanded by substantial existence, by existence by svabhāva, is simply not available for things which are cause and effect. But what this notional dependence means I'm not totally sure. I'm not asking about nothingness, and am not saying that sunyata is nothingness! That could only be the case if the absolute truth is that nothing exists. <Q> Cause and effect are mutually dependent like father and son. <S> If there is no son there is no father, and if no father then no son. <S> In this way Nagarjuna proves the non-existence of these things except as appearance/emptiness. <S> Ergo, it's all smoke and mirrors. <A> The cause is not dependant on the effect. <S> The concept of Śūnyatā does not mean nothingness. <S> It just means being empty of a self and being empty of satisfaction and being empty of permanence or stability. <A> Only some effects cause it cause, such as sahajāta-cause, aññamañña-cause, nissaya-cause, etc., <S> but some can not, such as pakatūpanissaya-cause, anantara-cause, etc. <S> See saṅghaha chapter 8 . <A> When there is ignorance-touch ( avijjā - phassa ) the effect becomes cause and wandering-on get's on. <S> When there is no avijjā-phassa the effect ends right there, here and now. <S> [Note: <S> this is a gift of Dhamma , not thought for trade, stakes, exchanges or other gains subject toward decay and should be deleted if it's not giften to give in Dhammic conditions]
|
He explains that the cause cannot exist prior to the effect, the effect cannot exist prior to the cause and they cannot come into existence simultaneously. The effect is dependant on the cause.
|
What is a "thought?" (Particularly in reference to thoughts that arise during meditation) I've been reading/studying E F Shumacher's A Guide for the Perplexed , a philosophical book about the nature of knowledge and our capacity for understanding the world, especially in relation to "higher" and "lower" processes of humanity, (IE, prayer or meditation vs hunger or fear) and I'm hoping a Buddhist perspective can help me to understand one aspect of it better. In it, he refers to self-awareness as the level of human existence that is activated or discovered by mindfulness-meditation, by dismissing the thoughts that come from the level of consciousness. He says that self-awareness produces insights rather than thoughts. Shumacher was a Catholic at the time of writing this, but I understand that he studied and was influenced heavily by Buddhism, and I believe that is where his ideas about thought come from. I am not a Buddhist, though I have tried meditation. An idea that I have struggled with in all of this is the definition of thought. I have always considered the processes by which one would analyze or dismiss a thought to also be thinking. I would consider an insight to be a type of thought, not something higher than a thought. I am now struggling to understand whether I simply have too broad of a definition for thought, or am simply so philosophically-challenged that I have never experienced this process-above-thought discussed by Shumacher and Buddhism. Can you help me understand what the Buddhist definition of a "thought" is? Do you have a different word for the process by which one would dismiss a thought or analyze a thought while meditating? Everything beyond this point is my own speculation on the subject, for clarity or analysis. If you already understand my problem or misunderstanding, feel free to skip it. I have wondered if Freud's ego and super-ego may shed light on this. I would say that "thought" is the word used to describe the processes of both the ego and super-ego, but I wonder if Shumacher and Buddhism would consider "thought" to be what the ego does, and perhaps have a different word for the processes of the super-ego. I have also imagined, as Shumacher does in his book, the human being as a programmer and computer. (The programmer being the self and the computer being the human brain) The human computer carries out all the day-to-day activities we do without higher thought, while the human programmer directs the computer and programs it so that it behaves as desired. In this analogy, I would consider all communication between the "computer" and "programmer" to be thought, but I wonder if Shumacher and Buddhism considers thought to be information passed from the computer to the programmer, while directions passed from the programmer to the computer is something else. I have included the translation tag, as I suspect my answer may largely pivot on the translation of the word "thought" from Buddhist texts into English, and whether there is a more thorough translation of it that could explain this. <Q> According to Buddhism thought to arise from the consciousness. <S> Which are called Vitakka and Vicara. <S> There are many types of wholesome and unwholesome thoughts. <S> A person should have a good grasp of Abhidhamma to understand the differences completely. <S> Abhidhamma in practice: http://103.242.110.22/theravadins/English-articles/abhidhamma-in-practice.pdf <A> You probably need to differentiate thinking and thought . <S> Intent is kamma . <S> One executes intent through thinking , speaking and doing (physical action). <S> Thought <S> is vinnana , which is defined as "to especially know". <S> A thought will not arise without matter & state's of matter (rupa), sensations (vedana), recognitions (sanna), intents ( sankara , kamma). <S> Another thing to note is manasikara , which means "to direct attention". <S> Thinking is considered internal, generally. <S> Generally - I use the word generally here because in dhamma, having a view of a self that is permanent (soul) is a delusion, hence both thinking and thought does not belong to a permanent self (soul), thus not well defined as internal or external. <S> In fact, a person without proper view is known to delude one self in 20 ways: that rupa, vedana, sanna, sankara, vinna x is me, I'm made of them, they are inside me, I'm inside them. <S> By all 20 such combinations, one arrives at a false view of a self. <S> This, you can now match with Freuds ego and super ego. <S> I can provide references from pali canon if you need. <S> Don't take my word for it though, research on the italicised words above, which are pali. <A> I would like to second SaranthW's suggestion with a link to an extensive Āryavasubandho Abhidharmakośakārikā commentary: https://abhidharmakosa.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/kosa-karika-study.pdf
|
Thoughts are generally considered external similar to visions, sounds, odours, tastes, physical sensations.
|
Can good karma, bad karma or neither good and bad karma arise or not arise from not doing? "Not doing" in this sense is to mean the absence of any form of action that originates from thought (for instance physical form like speech, bodily movements) in such a way that reduces the physical forms impact upon sentient beings in its environment. I realise that I'm heading into one of the unconjecturables here but for practical purposes. I don't think it'll lead me to vexation. This curiosity has arisen through partial insight into karmic laws in which the knowledge of karma became demystified into a rather obvious, almost mechanistic natural working of things. I wanted to try to understand at least from the periphery of the insight, from what Buddha said and from what others practising Buddhism understand so that I can cross-reference the three. Additional In an example from the Buddha, he chose not to be a father to his son, Rahula (not doing) in favour of seeking his own liberation. His thoughts were of himself. I imagine this would have caused considerable discomfort in Rahula and this discomfort would have been further compounded when Rahula learned of the meaning to his name: fetter or ball and chain. In an example from my own experience, a person became quite angry with me last week. I remained calm and non-responsive, guarding the senses - essentially watching after myself. I still gave a portion of my attention to the person via eye contact. Because of my "not doing" they became more frustrated. I recall thinking, "this person is lost in their emotions". I received a message from them later that day saying they had cried and let it go. *As I write this addition, Andrei's answer below seems to resonate here. <Q> Rephrasing Buddha, there's action that leads to good experience, action that leads to bad experience, and action that leads to dispassion and liberation. <S> Of course the word "karma" itself means "doing" or "action". <S> But my teacher said, the wise sees nondoing in doing and doing in nondoing. <S> Meaning, if you choose to drink coffee, you implicitly choose to not drink tea on that occasion and vice versa. <S> In Mahayana terms, an "act" is empty. <S> It is something we isolate and put a label on but <S> in actuality it is just a point we focus on in context of everything else. <S> When we begin seeing it like this, we begin getting closer to the Buddha's perspective. <S> As my Zen Master said, whenever there's choice, there's confusion. <S> From Buddha's omniscient perspective, there's no more confusion, no action, no choice - only from the perspective of a sentient being. <S> Another thing that needs to be said, not all karma is personal, which makes sense if you realize that "person" is another empty point of focus. <S> There's also group karma and other even broader kinds of karmic tendencies that don't rely on an individual action per-se. <S> So even if you don't personally act (don't choose) you are still subject to these extrinsic tendencies. <S> It's only when you are free from any group identification as well, is when you begin to get free from the fruits of karma. <S> Sorry, upon rereading this I can see it comes out a bit unclear, but this is a summary of my understanding as of the moment, based on what I have learned. <A> Generally karma stems from sankharas , but the non bright and non dark karma cannot stem from a sankhara since it ends the rebirths.this ad hoc karma called non bright and non dark stems from right view and right resolution, which follow from the discrimination between thoughts of renunciation and good will and other thoughts, and embracing only thoughts of renunciation and good will. <S> Whatever actions following those thoughts will be ''tainted'' by the only karma that leads to the ''ending of karma and rebirth''. <S> In terms of actions, this weird karma colors the right talks, right actions and so on, with their pinnacle being right samadhi. <S> SO there are plenty of actions stemming from right view, but most of those actions have nothing to do with most of the actions invented and done by puthujjanas. <A> Cetanāhaṃ, bhikkhave, kammaṃ vadāmi. <S> Cetayitvā kammaṃ karoti: kāyena, vācāya, manasā. <S> " Intention, I tell you, is kamma . <S> Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect ." <S> - Nibbedhika Sutta <S> So as you can see, Karma is the intention. <S> These intentions may or may not be followed by verbal and bodily actions in which case they are categorized as verbal karma and bodily karma. <S> When there are no bodily or verbal actions involved they are called mental(mano) karma. <S> But it is Karma nonetheless. <S> There is no Karma without the mind. <S> Every experience has a maximum of 17 thought moments . <S> Seven of these thought moments are called the Javanas. <S> They are Karmically charged. <A> There are three doors of action: bodily, verbal (signs) and thought, while the last, mind is always involved, prompted or latent. <S> Wrong, better unskilful, thoughts have their effects as well. <S> E.g. bodily killing or approving killing by thought, wishing, is not really that different to order or do by oneself. <S> To trust that "from this comes that, with arising of that, arises this" does not head toward becoming crazy. <S> So simple that to practice, while trusting that actions have formost impacts on oneself. <S> Accepting = <S> instigate = donig by one self <S> [Note: <S> this is a gift of Dhamma , not thought for trade, stakes, exchanges or other gains subject toward decay and should be deleted if it's not giften to give in Dhammic conditions]
|
For an unenlightened person, there is no experience without Karma.
|
MN 137 - Directed only to Stream Entrants (and beyond)? "And what are the six kinds of renunciation joy? The joy that arises when — experiencing the inconstancy of those very forms, their change, fading, & cessation — one sees with right discernment as it actually is that all forms, past or present, are inconstant, stressful, subject to change: That is called renunciation joy. (Similarly with sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, & ideas.) Is this achieved by intellectual pondering about the six senses (and meditative insight into the three characteristics) or just pondering alone? I'd say the former, but then this Sutta is primarily directed towards Stream Entrants, no? <Q> The way my teacher explained a crucial point about this was summarized with a single but powerful word: Immediacy! <S> At some point in our practice our familiarity with Dharma should go beyond it being something "over there" that we study and try to understand, and become something very personal that is happening "right here" in our own immediate experience, second-by-second. <S> This type of joy that arises in case of mature student, is part of this breakthrough to the Immediacy of Dharma. <S> On the initial phases of the breakthrough, we keep discovering more and more real life microsituations that turn out to be perfectly described by some ancient scripture, and this gives a sense of wonder and joy. <S> And then as we get used to this match, we get a kind of relaxed bliss of a traveler who reached the oasis, had enough food and water to recover, and is now resting in the shade (to give a traditional image of what "bliss" means in this context). <S> Specifically as it pertains to Transience/Inconstancy of all configurations, once you clearly see that every frustration you used to take seriously is a temporary arrangement of clouds that actually shifts beyond pain fairly quickly, as long as you don't hold on to it, -- this immediate observation gives a sort of deep peace and a sense of relief that you experience continuously as you interact with all kinds of situations. <S> So to answer your question explicitly <S> , it's not just intellectual pondering nor is it meditative insight, as it is the immediate observation (directly seeing) it all in your own life. <A> You will not have joy, but aside of tee-break stories of sectarians and householder <S> it is the joy <S> opposite householder-joy/satisfaction: <S> "And what are the six kinds of household joy [in MN137] ? <S> (Similarly with form, sounds, smells, tastes, tactile & sensations). <S> It's archived when leaving home, having gained higher right view, and steady when gained non-return. <S> And once gained one <S> does no more take what is not given and provides what is the deal to make use of something for ones gain. <S> The Sutta is given for distinction, that one knows the different intellectually and put it into prove, and certain explainings are given by the translator as well. <S> "'With regard to them, depending on this, abandon that': thus was it said. <S> And in reference to what was it said? <S> As in regard of "To whom was the Sutta directed?" <S> : Those who have left home/house. <S> [Note: <S> this is a gift of Dhamma , not thought for trade, stakes, exchanges or other gains subject toward decay and should be deleted if it's not giften to give in Dhammic conditions] <A> Is this achieved by intellectual pondering about the six senses (and meditative insight into the three characteristics) or just pondering alone? <S> I'd say the former, but then this Sutta is primarily directed towards Stream Entrants, no? <S> Intellectual pondering and/or meditative insight probably won't cut it. <S> While there's no mentioning of the Sutta being directed only towards Stream Entrants, the Comy.'s explanation seems to suggest it does require one who has already established insight-knowledge : Note. <S> 1: <S> [Six kinds of joy] “Based on the household life” means connected with the cords of sensual pleasure; [Six kinds of joy] <S> “based on renunciation” means connected with insight. <S> Note. <S> 2: <S> "Herein, what are the six kinds of joy based on renunciation? <S> When, by knowing the impermanence, change, fading away, and cessation of forms, one sees as it actually is with proper wisdom that forms both formerly and now are all impermanent, suffering, and subject to change, joy arises. <S> Such joy as this is called joy based on renunciation." <S> And explanation: "This is joy that arises when one has established insight and is sitting observing the breaking-up of formations with a flow of sharp and bright insight-knowledge focussed on the formations"
|
The joy that arises when one regards as an acquisition the acquisition of idea cognizable by the intelect — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, connected with worldly baits — or when one recalls the previous acquisition of such forms after they have passed, ceased, & changed: That is called household joy.
|
Buddha's views on the origin of the universe Did buddha comment anything about the origin of universe and about origin of life? And if no WHY?? So far whatever texts i have read, i haven't come across any such statement. Though it is not very important for man to know about it and rather he must concentrate on the present time on his actions and thoughts but atleast for the sake of satisfying curiosity of man he must have told . <Q> And if no WHY?? <S> The Buddha's explanation using that famous forest leaves simile from SN 56.31 : <S> Once the Blessed One was staying at Kosambi in the simsapa 1 forest. <S> Then, picking up a few simsapa leaves with his hand, he asked the monks, "What do you think, monks: Which are more numerous, the few simsapa leaves in my hand or those overhead in the simsapa forest?" <S> "The leaves in the hand of the Blessed One are few in number, lord. <S> Those overhead in the simsapa forest are more numerous." <S> "In the same way, monks, those things that I have known with direct knowledge but have not taught are far more numerous [than what I have taught]. <S> And why haven't I taught them? <S> Because they are not connected with the goal, do not relate to the rudiments of the holy life, and do not lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding. <S> That is why I have not taught them. <A> The Buddha said sentient life is composed of six elements of earth, wind, fire, water, space & consciousness (but does not comment how these six elements were created). <S> In dependence on the six elements the appearance of an embryo occurs. <S> AN 3.61 <S> If, while he is dwelling by means of this dwelling, his mind inclines to speaking, he resolves that 'I will not engage in talk that is base, vulgar, common, ignoble, unbeneficial , that does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calm, direct knowledge, self-awakening, or Unbinding — i.e., talk about kings, robbers, & ministers of state; armies, alarms, & battles; food & drink; clothing, furniture, garlands, & scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns, cities, the countryside; women & heroes; the gossip of the street & the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity, the creation of the world & of the sea ; talk of whether things exist or not.' <S> In this way he is alert there. <S> MN 122 <S> I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying in Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. <S> Now at that time a large number of monks, after the meal, on returning from their alms round, had gathered at the meeting hall and were engaged in many kinds of bestial (animal) topics of conversation : conversation about kings, robbers, & ministers of state; armies, alarms, & battles; food & drink; clothing, furniture, garlands, & scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns, cities, the countryside; women & heroes; the gossip of the street & the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity, the creation of the world & of the sea ; talk of whether things exist or not. <S> AN 10.70 <A> In Buddha's teaching, "universe" (aka All) refers to the universe we perceive, the universe as it takes shape along with the sentient beings perceiving it, the totality of subjective experience. <S> Universe is all we see, hear, and know to exist. <S> In modern philosophy this is known as Umwelt, the living being's world. <S> Buddha describes the process by which our Universe arises in a sequence of steps called The Twelve Nidanas of Dependent Origination. <S> This teaching is not sufficiently elaborated upon in the Pali Canon, but in Mahayana it has a living interpretative tradition passed along from teacher to next generation of students, which basically explains it as a gradual development of tendency for purposefull action along with the discriminating faculty of mind and capacity for deliniation of entities. <S> A modern near-equivalent of this perspective (minus the Buddhist ethics&soteriology) can be found in the works of American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce. <S> It describes cosmological development of "tendencies" and "signs", starting from complete nondifferentiation and culminating in what we know as the universe. <S> So if you want to understand (Mahayana) Buddhist view on the Evolution of Universe, I suggest you to study Depenent Origination as described in Salistamba Sutra, together with Peirce's biosemiotic cosmology. <S> It's not an easy topic <S> but it's worth it.
|
The Buddha said talk about the creation of the world is "animal talk" ( tiracchānakathaṃ ):
|
What Buddhist babies' names or meaning should be? My relatives ask me to suggest good names that must be Buddhist. I tried on internet but there are from other culture I want Indian names so what names or meaning should be? <Q> You should probably start from the Buddhist Dictionary of Pali Proper Names and then find proper Sanskrit versions of the Pali names. <S> For example, the Pali name Sariputta is Śāriputra in Sanskrit. <S> The full version of this name is known as Śāradwatīputra. <A> How about these? <S> I'm not an expert in Sanskrit or Indian languages, so you better check these out carefully first. <S> I'm also not sure about gender conversions, appropriateness and Sanskrit grammar. <S> Dharmadhara (female may be Dharmadharini) <S> - upholder of the Dharma Dharmānusara (female may be Dharmānusarini) <S> - follower of the Dharma Dharmacāri (female may be Dharmacārini) <S> - observer of the Dharma Dharma Dhārmika <S> Karuṇā - compassion Mudita - sympathetic joy Maitrī (likely female) <S> - friendly, benevolent Satya (likely male) - truthfulness, honesty (one of the paramis / paramita) Dāna (likely male) <S> - generosity <S> peace ānanda - bliss <A> I have a male friend named Buddhi (meaning wisdom). <A> This has a list <S> but it's in Sinhalese https://mahamevnawa.lk/name-for-babies-baby-names/
|
Śīla - virtue śīladhara (female may be śīladharini) - upholder of virtues Kṣānti - forbearance, patience śānti (likely female) -
|
Similarities between Daoism and Buddhism What are some of the similarities between Taoism and Buddhism? Can one achieve the Tao through Buddhism and vice versa, can one achieve nirvana through Taoism? <Q> Middle Way Buddhism rejects all positive metaphysical positions. <S> For this reason when we speak about the world we are forced to do so in riddles since we are not allowed to make or endorse a positive statement. <S> The doctrine of Two Truths explains this and gives us a way of speaking about Reality whereby we speak of the 'self' as existing and not-existing, the equality of emptiness and fullness and so forth, and get told off by outsiders for speaking paradoxically. <S> In the same way Lao Tsu tells us that we cannot state the world <S> is <S> this or <S> that in any case and lays down the rule 'True words seem paradoxical'. <S> True words seem paradoxical for reasons explained by Nagarjuna in Fundamental Wisdom . <S> Only if Reality is as Nagarjuna describes <S> would Lao Tsu's statement be true. <S> So underneath the different methodology and emphasis is the same doctrine and world-view. <S> For many people this is 'True Religion' or the Perennial philosophy. <S> There are, of course, Buddhists who deny Naharjuna's metaphysics but those who do must also deny the metaphysics of Lao Tsu, Plotinus, advaita, Sufism and other expressions of non-dualism. <S> It seems to make more sense to say that truth may be discovered by anyone who seeks it and this is why so many traditions share the same underlying doctrine. <S> I have a nice book here somewhere by a Taoist discussing the equivalence of the message of Lao Tsu, Buddha and Jesus and will post a reference if I can find it. <S> So my view would be that we can achieve liberation by way of either tradition and methodology. <S> I find Taoist ideas very useful and treat them as complementary. <S> Taoism and Zen are like twin siblings. <S> PS - It would important to distinguish between Philosophical Taoism (Lao Tsu, Chung Tsu et al) and Religious Taoism, which arrived 500 years later and introduced gods, angels, heaven and hell etc. <S> in what seems to have been an attempt to popularise the teachings. <S> Bad idea <S> but it gained a lot of ground and muddied the waters. <A> With my very little understanding of Daoism I think you can approach Tao through Buddhism but one can't achieve Theravada Nibbana via Daoism perhaps Mahayana Nibbana. <S> I think the teaching of Daoism is very beautiful. <S> https://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=30211&hilit=Daoism <A> Daoism is hard to define, isn't it? <S> There's the Tao Te Ching but sfaik most Daoists are Chinese, and <S> unless you understand e.g. the Chinese language it's a bit inaccessible. <S> So far as I know, "one" (i.e. a sense of self, identifying with the "five aggregates" of Buddhism) does not achieve either. <S> I find that the doctrine that "one" is a "straw dog" (Chapter 5 of the Tao Te Ching) <S> is suggestive. :-) <S> I think that "Taoism" is quite broad though, e.g. here's an aspect to it which values physical/bodily immortality (e.g. as maybe manifested in martial arts, in traditional chinese medicine, in the Taoist Immortals ) which, I don't know, is maybe rather different from Buddhism. <S> If you've read both you may see a lot of similarities -- I quite like how the Tao Te Ching ends with hearing dogs barking but people staying home, maybe "staying home" is a metaphor for not chasing after sensuality or something like that <S> (or maybe it's meant as purely mundane advice for a populace). <S> Not that literally "staying home" is necessarily a feature of Buddhism (which advocates "going forth into homelessness", also maybe different stages e.g. as illustrated in the Ten Bulls ).
|
Buddhism and Taoism are usually both judged to fall under the heading 'Perennial philosophy' because they share the same metaphysical message.
|
What to do when it itching (according to suttas and your own experience)? I know the question may seems a little trivial and superfluous, but rather than being interested in the itching itself, I'd like to know what to do when any kind of unpleasent feeling rises. I think itching is different from other unpleasent feelings, mainly because one can easily get rid of that feeling -at least temporarily- by scratching the zone (I mean, to scratch is an option when you have the means). What would an arahant do when itch arises?What do the suttas tell us to do in situations similar to this one?What do you do when itch arises (apart from recognizing the itch as not-self and impermanent, and the scratching as unsatisfying in the long term and impermanent as a solution)?Or am I overthinking the situation, and should I be aware of the feeling, seeing the three characteristic in it, and just scratch? I ask this because I remember reading some blog entry about a meditation retreat. The blogger wrote that when meditating, itching was a common feeling, but the hosts told her to let go of the craving for scratching and to not get personally identified with the itch. I understand these instructions and they seem totally reasonable. But she didn't tell about instructions in between meditation sessions other than following the five precepts. Basically, she didn't tell if she was supposed to not scratch even after sitting meditation. I hope you can see the point in my question, because it seems a little dumb in the surface. Thanks for your time!Have a nice day! <Q> What would an arahant do when itch arises? <S> I’m not an arahant <S> but I think an arahant would be just mindful of it without scratching it. <S> What do the suttas tell us to do in situations similar to this one? <S> I don’t think there is any suttas that talk about itch but <S> in SN 35.127, the Buddha said we should guard the six sense doors. <S> "It has been said, sire, by the Exalted One...: 'Come, monks, guard the doors of your sense-faculties. <S> Seeing an object with the eye, do not seize hold of either its general appearance or its details. <S> Because anyone dwelling with the eye-faculty uncontrolled could be overwhelmed by cupidity and dejection, evil and unwholesome states of mind, therefore practice to control the eye-faculty, guard it and gain control over it. <S> [Similarly with ear, nose, tongue, body (touch) , mind.] <S> That is how these young monks... can practice the holy life... to the end of their days.'" <S> So I think you should just be mindful of it and not think about scratching it. <S> What do you do when itch arises (apart from recognizing the itch as not-self and impermanent, and the scratching as unsatisfying in the long term and impermanent as a solution)? <S> I know that the itch is impermanent <S> so I just try to be mindful of it without scratching. <S> I scratch it if I’m not in a sitting meditation session <S> but you should not scratch it during your sitting meditation session. <S> Or am I overthinking the situation, and should I be aware of the feeling, seeing the three characteristic in it, and just scratch? <S> Just try to be mindful of it until it cease. <S> You don’t need to note “impermanent” or “not self” because when the itch cease then you will know that it is impermanence. <A> apart from recognizing the itch as not-self and impermanent, and the scratching as unsatisfying in the long term and impermanent as a solution? <S> Or am I overthinking the situation, and should I be aware of the feeling, seeing the three characteristic in it, and just scratch <S> This isn't overthinking, in fact it is correct discernment. <S> Notice, observe and watch with a very gentle overlay of the three characteristics. <S> My approach is the same but most of the time the itch disappears. <S> Sometimes though after a few minutes I'll need to scratch a persistent itch so that I can move forward with the session. <S> I do this with complete mindfulness noticing firstly my intention to lift the arm, noticing the contraction of the muscles in the arm prior to the action, noticing how the arm moves through spatial reality, all the while noticing minds urgency to want to scratch the itch. <S> While scratching the itch notice the contact between your finger and that part of the body, notice how the itch changes and notice how vedena changes. <S> They are all impersonal, but that takes a lot of knowings to see. <A> During meditation, of course you should avoid scratching your itch. <S> But outside of meditation, I suggest to follow the middle way. <S> When you're hungry, you eat. <S> But eat moderately. <S> Both starvation and gluttony are excessive and not conducive to the path. <S> Similarly, scratch your itch. <S> But do so moderately. <S> Just enough. <A> I say, when itching, just scratch. <S> Huihai Dazhu Huihai (d.788) was asked by a Vinaya master, "When one seeks to follow the Way, is there a particular manner in which he should behave?" <S> "There is," Dazhu said. <S> "Please tell me about it," the Vinaya master requested. <S> "When one is hungry, one eats; when one is tired, one sleeps. <S> " <S> "But everyone does that," the Vinaya master complained. <S> " <S> Your behavior isn't different from that of commoners." <S> "They're not the same at all," Dazhu said. <S> "In what way are they different?" <S> "When most people eat, they don't just eat; their mind are preoccupied with a thousand different fantasies. <S> When they sleep, they don't just sleep; their minds are filled with any number of idle thoughts."
|
I just try to be mindful of the itch. Mind, mind, mind... always check in with what dialogue the mind is trying to strike up between the experiences of the various components within the action of scratching.
|
Where do I find a Buddhist retreat in Asia? I have had experience in meditation, I want to have experience of living and learning with Buddhist monks. Where in Asia can I experience this for 8 to 10 weeks to start? <Q> Speaking from personal experience with stays at Zen monasteries in Japan: It depends on what you mean by retreat. <S> Many Zen monasteries in Japan offer "retreats" in their web pages, but this is not necessarily what is meant in Japanese Zen by a sesshin (接心). <S> If you want to experience the daily life of Buddhist monks in Asia, I'd advise not joining a sesshin for your first time in Japan, as this is an extremely intense period for the monks, and if you do not fully master the local language and the temple customs you will struggle. <S> First time around, I would advise you stay at one or more temples during a regular period. <S> Here are some links you may find useful: Shoganji Monastery - Rinzai lineage Soto Zen monasteries for foreigners in Japan - Soto Lineage <S> ShinShoJi <S> Temple - Rinzai Lineage Shunkoin Temple <S> - Mindfullness Japan Vipassana Association <S> There's also shukubo in Japan, a kind of pilgrim lodging associated with nearby temples. <A> Many Westerners come to here to meditate, some become monks, some as laypeople. <S> International Buddhasāsana Meditation Centre <S> https://www.paaukforestmonastery.org/ <S> You might also be interested in this monastery which the abbot has traveled to the deep forests and mountains in Karen State and meditated for many years. <S> It is also common that several monks go to the forest and return only when they achieve a certain level of enlightenment. <S> https://goo.gl/maps/BgDTUBbbDvQ2 <S> Note: <S> Free of charge. <S> Stay as long as you want. <S> These are in Myanmar, so I am afraid you might end up like Jack Dorsey. <A> If you're searching for Theravada Buddhist retreat in Sri Lanka <S> you can visit, Na Uyana Aranya Senasanaya Mithirigala Nissarana Vanaya Rathmalkanda Meditation Centre Kanduboda Siyane International Insight Meditation Centre <A> Well there are plenty of monasteries, so try to find videos by bikkhus online and then go to their website to find the contact info and ask them about retreats ex in thailand:the famous http://www.forestdhammatalks.org/en/contact.php <S> the famous https://www.phrasuchart.com/contact/ the famous http://www.wbd.org.au/visiting/overnight-and-longer/
|
If you want to sleep, meditate, eat, and work with the monks you can contact the head temple or administrative office of a Buddhist lineage in Japan and ask for possible periods and places to stay (also, indicate if you need some help with the language and customs, as this will be taken into account proposing possible stays to you).
|
Why is Nibbanna unconditioned if it's dependent on mind & brain Often it is said that nibbana is unconditioned, but nibbana is definitely dependent on other conditions. Also, according to modern psychology nothing can be 'eliminated' (greed, hatred and delusion in this case). Once learned, never able to unlearn. A skill, therefore zu can become either more efficient or less efficient, so why is it in Religion that something can be absolutely eliminated, whereas psychology tells us differently? <Q> Often it is said that nibbana is unconditioned True <S> , Nibbana is unconditioned but nibbana is definitely dependent on other conditions False. <S> This statement cannot be backed-up by any reference from Pali canon. <S> Also, according to modern psychology........ You cannot explain Dhamma with modern Sciences. <S> WHY?? <S> There is a true nature in this world. <S> That is the nature of causes and effects. <S> An effect is made by many causes and that effect will cause many other effects in several ways. <S> (This is a very complex, hard to understand, hard to see, and very deep truth which has been taught in the "Book of Causal Relationships or Patthana Pakarana" in Pali canon. <S> There have been mentioned 24 modes of conditionality). <S> Only a lord Buddha can see this ultimate truth with his own wisdom without the guidance of a teacher. <S> No other can. <S> Scientific method is the foundation for all modern sciences. <S> In scientific method you carefully observe something or a pattern in the world. <S> Observation: <S> Once learned, never able to unlearn. <S> Then a hypothesis is developed upon that observation. <S> Hypothesis: <S> nothing can be 'eliminated' (greed, hatred and delusion,...) <S> Then a prediction is developed and carried out an experiment to prove the hypothesis. <S> At the end a conclusion has been made whether the hypothesis can be rejected or cannot be rejected. <S> There lies the limitation of scientific method. <S> An experiment can only support a hypothesis but cannot prove the hypothesis. <S> So, a hypothesis can be true only under the conditions which the experiments carried out to support it. <S> This is the reason one hypothesis is criticized and proved false by another over the time. <S> Scientists may explain a natural phenomenon with theories well supported by extensive amount of researches. <S> And yes, that would have been true for a while until they find another behavior within that phenomenon which cannot be explained with the same theory. <S> For example some phenomenon cannot be explained with Newtonian Physics but they can be well explained with Quantum Physics. <S> Dhamma cannot be criticized or argued. <S> It is true for all the time. <A> Greed, hatred and delusion can be eliminated. <S> For example, if you see a beautiful girl then sensual desire or greed might arise but if you see a very ugly women then sensual desire will not arise. <S> Nibanna is not dependent on anything. <S> If you know that the beautiful girl will one day age and become ugly you won’t feel any sensual desire or greed. <S> So greed, hatred and delusion comes from ignorance. <S> Nibbana is the cessation of ignorance <A> Knowing & experiencing Nibbana is dependent upon "the brain" or having a mind. <S> The suttas (example Udana 8.1 ) say Nibbana is a sense object or 'ayatana'. <S> Many 'Buddhists' hold creationist views of godly Brahmanism; believing things exist only when they can be known by a mind. <S> But the Buddha said in AN 3.136 and SN 12.20 that realities can exist despite being unknown to a human mind. <A> In Buddhism, all conditioned constructs can be eliminated because they are directly observed as - the same epistemological commitment as the scientific method - not substantial and not permanent. <S> To achieve nibbana, wrong view is eliminated. <S> A well defined, permanent Self (not an operationally defined one for practical purposes) is the incorrect view that is eliminated. <S> Rovelli's relational quantum mechanics does just this, and EPR vanishes. <S> Now were this world somehow one of permanent entities <S> , Dhamma would be wrong, the Buddha would be wrong, and either nihilism, or some eternalist religion would offer the right path to the abandonment of stress (notice the instant contradictions). <S> But this world is empty of permanent entities, so elimination of all impermanent properties is possible.
|
However, Nibbana itself, which is an element of nature, similar to how oxygen or nitrogen are elements of nature, is not dependent upon the brain; just as the elements of oxygen & nitrogen in the universe is not dependent on brains.
|
Does Buddhist scripture mention Zoroastrianism? Do any of the Buddhist texts mention anything about Zoroastrianism? Has the Buddha ever met Zoroaster? <Q> Do any of the Buddhist texts mention anything about Zoroastrianism? <S> At the time of the Buddha the Indian spiritual scenario was under heavy influence of vedic brahminism which was on the west of Buddha's kingdom. <S> It is highly unlikely that Zoroastrianism which lay further west of Indus valley would cross the valley and influence Buddhist monks to get an honourable mention. <S> Also, it was only after the invasion of Alexander the Great that Indians came in heavy contact of Persia through the Satarps of Alexander. <S> And his conquest was some 200 years after the Buddha. <S> So it is unlikely that the Buddha himself would have encountered any human from Persia to tell him about Zoroastrianism as He met Jainas and Vedic brahmins. <S> Buddhist geography in the scriptures does not mention anything in the west not even Egypt. <S> Has the Buddha ever met Zoroaster? <S> Zoraster was hundreds or thousands of years prior to Gautama the Buddha <S> so they might not have met in person. <S> But the Buddha is known to have a council with Gods and He was also possesor of super natural powers. <S> So may be they would have had a chat in some different realms. <S> But that only a Buddha can confirm for you. <A> There is no known mention of Zoroastrianism or Zoroaster in Buddhist texts, as far as I know, but there is a mention of "Gotama" in a Zoroastrian text. <S> According to a letter published in 1898 (from here ), the reference to Gotama in a Zoroastrian text likely refers to the Vedic sage Gautama Maharishi , and not Gautama Buddha. <S> From the letter: I am able to discover an important identification of the Avestic Gaotema with the Vedic Gotama. <S> In the Rig-veda, Nodhas is Gotama's son, who is called Naidhyangho Gaotemahe in the Avesta. <S> Hence it is probable that the controversies referred to in the Farvardin Yasht was carried on by Zoroastrians against the Vedic poet Nodhas, and not against Gaotama Buddha. <S> ... <S> The Avesta <S> text runs thus:— " <S> Through their brightness and glory a man is born who is a chief in assemblies and meetings, who listens well to the holy words, who wishes for wisdom, and who returns a victor from discussions with Gaotema, the heretic." ... <S> Now there are two <S> Gotamas who are principally familiar to us in the Vedic and the Buddhistic literature. <S> One is Rishi Gotama and the other Gotama Buddha. <S> The latter is very well known to us as the founder of Buddhism. <S> The former is one of the seven rishis or sages mentioned in the Rig-veda. <S> Zoroaster seems to have lived before the time of the Buddha, far away in Persia, so it is unlikely that they have met each other. <S> There is also no known record of that, as far as I know. <S> According to this Wikipedia page , there was some persecution against Buddhists in Persia and Afghanistan by the Sassanids after Zoroastrianism became the official religion of Persia in 224 CE. <S> Apart from this, I am not aware of other Buddhist-Zoroastrian encounters. <A> Since the Buddha called the lineage of Brahmin teachers a "string of blind men" because of none them had ever seen "God" or "Brahma", obviously he would have held the same view of any superstitious doctrine the believes in a creator god
|
I have never read Zoroastrianism mentioned in the Pali suttas.
|
Sutras says that there is nothing to attain: but is there a beginning to attaining nirvana? Sutras says that there is nothing to attain: but is there a beginning to attaining nirvana? See e.g. the heart sutra No suffering, no origination, no stopping, no path, no cognition, also no attainment with nothing to attain. <Q> The teachings that describe how there is nothing to attain can easily be misleading. <S> I think, the answer to your question is twofold. <S> Nirvana is not something that can be attained. <S> This is simply because when you experience the highest truths, you realize that there is no self. <S> Since there is no self, there is no one present to attain anything. <S> For the illusory self who has not yet experience enlightenment, it appears as if there is a path to walk. <S> It begins as soon as you choose to learn who you are. <S> The illusory self will learn things and practice meditation. <S> Then, the illusory self will see itself as a farce. <S> Do not get caught up in the trap that some do when reading these quotes. <S> The Buddha very specifically tailored his teachings to the level of understanding those listening had. <S> These quotes are not useful for people who are still experiencing suffering. <S> They are an arahants understandings, meant for other enlightened beings. <S> They are very easy to be misunderstood. <S> Someone commented on your post and said something id like to clarify. <S> When it is said "Realizing there is no learning then all the learning is completed", what is being referred to is not the path of the illusory self, but what occurs once enlightenment occurs. <S> If you still believe you are this and not that, there is still more to learn. <S> If you still feel suffering, there is still more to learn. <S> The bottom line is, be careful while reading some of these teachings. <S> Know who they were meant for, because although they may be true from a perspective that holds specific knowledge, that may not be the readers perspective. <A> The way I understand you realise Nibbana. <S> It is perhaps something like by realising the world is not flat and you are not fall off the edge if you walking straight on the ground. <S> Understanding Aniccca, dukkha and anatta are the main realisation hence you eliminate attachment aversion and ignorance. <S> Noble Eightfold Path is the way to realize Nibbana. <A> No suffering, no origination, no stopping, no path, no cognition, also no attainment with nothing to attain. <S> It's important to see the full context by reading the full paragraph: <S> This is because in emptiness there is no form, sensation, conception, synthesis, or discrimination. <S> There are no eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, or thoughts. <S> There are no forms, sounds, scents, tastes, sensations, or dharmas. <S> There is no field of vision and there is no realm of thoughts. <S> There is no ignorance nor elimination of ignorance, even up to and including no old age and death, nor elimination of old age and death. <S> There is no suffering, its accumulation, its elimination, or a path. <S> There is no understanding and no attaining. <S> So basically, all those "no's", like no eyes, ears, nose, etc. are attributes pertaining to that dimension of emptiness/suchness, which an un-enlightened being is yet able to experience. <S> Sorta like us 4-dimensional beings are yet to experience what lies beyond our 4 dimensions. <S> So in order to get there, there is a need for cultivation, there is a need for exerting effort, there is a need for practicing Sila, Samadhi, Panna. <S> If there was "nothing to attain", the Buddha wouldn't have gone into great length teaching us all the details about cultivating the Noble Eightfold Path, the Four Noble Truths, the 37 Aids to Enlightenment, in which there's one key component called the Four Right Exertions <A> I'm going to answer the question creatively, and so not make a standard (scholastic) response. <S> In this way, since my attainment of Buddhahood it has been a very great interval of time. <S> My life-span is incalculable asatkhyeyakalpas <S> [rather a lot of aeons], ever enduring, never perishing. <S> O good men! <S> The life-span I achieved in my former treading of the bodhisattva path even now is not exhausted, for it is twice the above number. <S> Yet even now, though in reality I am not to pass into extinction <S> [enter final nirvana], yet I proclaim that I am about to accept extinction. <S> By resort to these expedient devices [this skill-in-means] the <S> Thus Come <S> One <S> [the Tathagata] teaches and converts the beings <S> If we take that to be an expression of emptiness, then, working forwards, nirvana is empty because it is not (coherently) final. <S> And then, working backwards, the same is twice as true of beginning to attain nirvana! <S> In Tenadi Buddhism each of the nobles truths is just as empty as the other, the path is empty in the exact same <S> was as extinction is. <S> Though, interestingly, Tendai seems to claim the opposite of yoagacara Buddhism (that the path is not one and the buddha nature), straw man or not. <S> I'll get a reference for that later.
|
One way of reading the phrase "nothing to attain" could be via the lotus sutra, which details the immeasurable life span of the buddha and time as a bodhisattva
|
How do you meditate with a blocked nose? I have a blocked nose and I can’t feel the breath sensations. Should I put my finger to feel the breath? Is it ok if I focus on other things like finger touching each other? How do I feel the breath sensations if my nose is blocked? <Q> If it's just normal nose booger, gently blow your nose before the sitting to clear nasal passage. <S> If it's allergy/inflammation, eat high vitamins fruits/veggies and maintain regular daily exercises. <S> Anyway, usually once you've gotten into some relatively settled absorption state, the allergy/inflammation tend to naturally subside <S> and you'll breathe better. <A> According to Chapter 2 "Sitting Meditation" of the book " How To Meditate " by Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu, you can try to observe abdomen movements, instead of nasal passage sensations: <S> The purpose of formal meditation is to limit our experience to the fewest number of objects in order to allow for easy observation without becoming overwhelmed or distracted. <S> When sitting still, the whole body is tranquil and the only movement is when the breath enters and leaves the body. <S> When the breath enters the body, there should be a rising motion in the abdomen. <S> When the breath leaves the body, there should likewise be a falling motion. <S> If the movement is not readily apparent, you can put your hand on your abdomen until it becomes clear. <S> If it is difficult to perceive the motion of the abdomen even with your hand, you can try lying down on your back until you are able to perceive it. <S> Difficulty in finding the rising and falling motion of <S> the abdomen when sitting is generally due to mental tension and stress; if one is patient and persistent in the practice, one’s <S> mind and body will begin to relax until one is able to breathe as naturally <S> sitting up as when lying down. <S> The most important thing to remember is that we are trying to observe the breath in its natural state, rather than forcing or controlling it in any way. <S> It is this rising and falling motion that we will use as our first object of meditation. <S> Once we are able to observe the motion of the abdomen without difficulty, it will serve as a default object of meditation for us to return to at any time. <A> Most Buddhists interpret MN 135 to mean blocked nose is due to bad evil kamma performed in past lives, as follows: <S> There is the case where a woman or man is one who harms beings with his/her fists, with clods, with sticks, or with knives. <S> Through having adopted & carried out such actions, on the break-up of the body, after death, he/she reappears in the plane of deprivation... <S> If instead he/ <S> she comes to the human state, <S> then he/ <S> she is sickly wherever reborn. <S> This is the way leading to sickliness: to be one who harms beings with one's fists, with clods, with sticks, or with knives. <S> According to the viewpoint of these Buddhists, it seems unknowable how many lifetimes, possibly billions, it will take to resolve such past kamma and attain jhana. <S> It seems attaining jhana is very difficult, even impossible, with blocked nose. <S> It would commence with cultivating metta towards all living creatures, large & small. <S> Also, vegetarianism might help.
|
In the beginning, the breath may be shallow or uncomfortable, but once the mind begins to let go and stops trying to control the breath, the rise and fall of the abdomen will become more clear and allow for comfortable observation. Maybe try to troubleshoot the causes to the blocked nose first.
|
Moderation in meditation for lay people Vipassana-style meditation has been adapted to treat patients to prevent recurrence of depression and anxiety through MBCT, and to treat chronic pain and stress through MBSR. More info on this can found in this answer . On the other hand, there have been some reported cases (see here ) of people who attended the 10-day Goenka vipassana retreats and became psychotic and suicidal. I have also heard that such negative effects may be a normal part of a meditator's progress, called the "dark night" or "death of the ego" (according to this answer ). These could be part of the sixteen stages of insight (according to this page ), namely bhaya nana or "knowledge of the appearance as terror" and adinava nana or "knowledge of the contemplation of disadvantages". Questions: Are episodes of psychosis resulting from 10-day vipassana retreats the result of something not right (e.g. pre-existing mental conditions, the side effect of combining other techniques such as mantra or tantra with vipassana), or is it a normal part of progress in vipassana meditation? If the two are different, then what is the difference? For lay people, are the Goenka retreats considered too intense and thus out-of-moderation? Is it better for lay people to attend weekly sessions and spend less than an hour daily in meditation, rather than the intense and rigorous Goenka retreats? Is it better for lay people to practise in such a way that they will not reach the "dark night" stages because these stages are more suited for monks? Is it required for lay people to find a teacher who can determine what is moderate for them, or can they just follow generic instructions? <Q> Daniel Ingram writes a lot about the 'dark night' and working through it. <S> In an interview (Buddhist Geeks I think - sorry no exact reference) <S> he said that dark night will be encountered by Intense meditators who really go for it - many hours a day over months Committed but steady meditators who meditate every day for around 30 minutes and maybe go on a week's retreat once a year. <S> Then after 20 years - bang - they are in the dark night <S> So according to Daniel you don't need to be a intensive meditator to get the dark night effects. <S> So advising lay people to moderate probably wouldn't be effective - at some point they are going to hit something unpleasant. <S> Perhaps the best thing would be to make them aware and give them tools to cope. <S> That approach is one of the major themes in Daniel Ingram;s book. <S> On a personal note - My practice is firmly in the second category <S> but I have banged up again some crappy stuff. <S> Not "dark night" but crippling doubt and inability to move forward for extended periods. <S> I think it just happens. <A> The "dark night" stages are absolutely necessary to get to the point that thoughts, emotions and feelings does not disturb your peace of mind. <S> Suffering is inevitable to have to reach the stages where peace, contentment, stillness becomes continous in daily life. <S> So yes, you can practice in moderation. <S> And then you'll experience the "dark nights" because of the "normal" way of living. <S> Look to the news and you'll see that people are frequently having "dark nights" and they don't only hurting themselves but destroying other people's lifes without any drop of guilt and remorse. <S> I think that suffering is inevitable for everyone who comes to the physical world. <S> The physical body and the brain puts our beings to a prison that there is no escape from these energies. <S> The low frequency energies that spirituality leads us to face is not something that is new to us. <S> These dark energies have always been with us, we were born to this life with these energies and in our past lifes these energies were in our mind, causing us suffering most of the time. <S> This is the truth of humanity. <S> Unless we go beyond the dark night(s) and reach to the spiritual stages that true peace, joy and contentment is continous in our daily life, these energies will continue to occupy our minds and will become even worse in time. <A> Meditation is much like a bullet train. <S> Meditation is extraordinarily efficient at what it does. <S> Going on retreat, one often ends up at new and unfamiliar destinations. <S> These can be quite unsettling to the unprepared. <S> I flipped out at my first retreat. <S> The Roshi even asked someone to look after me personally for a day or so after the retreat out of concern for my mental state. <S> Thank you, Stephen Kow, for looking after me. <S> So I got off the meditation bullet train and walked. <S> And it took decades to get back to the same place the bullet train took me to. <S> But by then it had become a good place.
|
You just need to be reasonable committed and practise over a long enough period. But practising in moderation can lead you to be lazy in spirituality and you can fall back to the "normal" way of living, which is insane and only lead to more and more suffering.
|
Buddhist marry a non-Buddhist I'm intrigued by this concept. Can a Buddhist marry a person from a faith who believe in a God that created the universe? I've got varying answers from Buddhists, some have advised that religion does not matter as it's personal, others have said it does. However I was also thinking as a marriage it 2 people, and then ramifications from that, be it extended family, children etc. Would it be recommended if the other partner's faith dictated that the Buddhist partner would not go to heaven and so creating a deep seated question of faith and tension between the 2 people. Also what would anyone learn from a couple who have disbanded their own faiths for mortal desires rather then an actual spiritual journey? <Q> There is no problem for a Buddhist and a non-Buddhist to enjoy a married life together. <S> However, the Buddha recommended couples to be in tune in conviction, for best results, in the Samajivina Sutta : <S> [The Blessed One said:] <S> "If both husband & wife want to see one another not only in the present life but also in the life to come, they should be in tune [with each other] in conviction, in tune in virtue, in tune in generosity, and in tune in discernment. <S> Then they will see one another not only in the present life but also in the life to come." <S> Husband & wife, <S> both of them having conviction, being responsive, being restrained, living by the Dhamma (the Buddha's teachings), addressing each other with loving words: they benefit in manifold ways. <S> To them comes bliss. <S> Their enemies are dejected when both are in tune in virtue. <S> Having followed the Dhamma here in this world, both in tune in precepts & practices, they delight in the world of the devas, enjoying the pleasures they desire. <S> There is no prohibition on Buddhists marrying religious non-Buddhists. <S> It is simply not optimum. <A> I married a devout Christian in 1982, then took refuge in the Buddha, Dharma, and Sanga in 2002. <S> It is not ideal, since she believes I will spend eternity tormented in hell, but this is samsara, it was not meant to be ideal. <S> She is a sincere practicing Christian with tremendous compassion for sentient beings. <S> We are apparently bound together by karma <S> and I consider her to be one of my spiritual guides. <S> OTOH, if given the choice, I would recommend you marry someone with the same view. <S> Samsara is difficult enough without arbitrarily making it moreso. <S> And religious practice is easier and more productive with less obstacles. <A> Celibacy and being a monk is the best ofcourse but for those who are considering life-long relationships with people who are coming from different religious backrounds must becareful. <S> Buddhist way of living and thinking leads you to non-self, liberation from the ego, doing good things to all living beings, purification of the mind, freedom from suffering and Nibbana while some of the belief systems leads people to the completely opposite direction. <S> And these belief systems/cultures really influences people's minds deeply. <S> Ignoring the truth is not benefical. <S> Not associating with fools, Associating with the wise, <S> Honoring those worthy of honor; This is the greatest blessing. <S> https://buddhasadvice.wordpress.com/friendships/ <S> Ofcourse everyone is free with their choices, Buddhist way is not banning people's free choices and desires. <S> But especially those who are involved in spirituality/meditation must find right people to create friendships/any kind of close relationships. <A> Would it be recommended if the other partner's faith dictated that the Buddhist partner would not go to heaven and so creating a deep seated question of faith and tension between the 2 people Depends on personality. <S> Not recommended if both are religiously extreme. <S> This bi-polar of beliefs will eventually end up as arguments and a convert from either side is eventual. <S> Recommended if the Buddhist Husband/wife is very accepting and able to keep all the belief conflicts in his/her own thoughts. <S> Or, another way is that the Buddhist can convince the Christian that Heaven/God/Godly beings are impermanent. <S> Also what would anyone learn from a couple who have disbanded their own faiths for mortal desires rather then an actual spiritual journey? <S> Well. <S> For the Buddhist to disband his/her belief, that means they might have disbanded the Dharma... <S> Hence the worldly journey goes on, while the spiritual journey stops. <S> He/she may eventually reject the ultimate reality, and accept the worldly reality as truth. <S> Ignorance continues to precede wisdom. <S> The implications are of course... <S> pretty obvious. <A> some have advised that religion does not matter <S> You might like this answer . <S> I think it's based on suttas. <S> It doesn't say religion is important: <S> Leave aside unproven traditional criteria: including race, caste, gender, and external appearance (and creed) <S> Instead it says, Find wise people who cause no fear or worry. <S> Look for someone who is compatible in four ways: <S> Similar confidence in spiritual development <S> Similar respect for self-discipline Similar respect for humanistic practices <S> Similar level of wisdom <S> These similarities are "so important for a peaceful marriage". <S> But the "confidence in spiritual development" might be exactly what you're talking about (e.g. confidence in the Dhamma) -- <S> so maybe that is important -- better if your partner doesn't have no confidence in your (spiritual) development, and vice versa.
|
Of course, if a Buddhist who does not believe in a Supreme Creator God, is married to someone who thinks that belief in a Supreme Creator God is mandatory for a pleasant afterlife, this produces some lack of compatibility between the couple, but this does not make marriage impossible.
|
How can I practice mindfulness meditation with sound, not breathing? I want to start practising meditation, but breathing exercises extremely psyche me out. I find any activity that involves intensely focusing on a part of my body distressing, sometimes nauseating. So the traditional "focus on your breath" mindfulness meditations aren't really ideal for me. I like the idea of meditating listening to sound, for example the sound of rain or waves on my phone. But I'm completely new to meditation and am not sure how best to implement this practice. Should I wear over ear headphones, or is it best to have the music ambient and not directly my ear? Should I be sitting up or lying in bed? (I don't really have any other comfortable spots in my house besides my bed.) Should it be light, dark or semi-dark? Eyes open or closed etc.? The basic question I'm asking is: what are the best practices and practicalities for mindfulness meditation using sound? <Q> Sound is a valid object of mindfulness, one of the six sense objects, part of the fourth foundation of mindfulness: <S> "He understands the ear, he understands sounds and he understands the fetter that arises dependent on both; and he also understands how there comes to be the arising of the unarisen fetter, and how there comes to be the abandoning of the arisen fetter, and how there comes to be the future non-arising of the abandoned fetter." <S> (MN 10, Bodhi trans.) <S> The point here is to observe sounds as something that gives rise to potential fetters (liking, disliking, conceit, possessiveness, etc.). <S> In my tradition, we remind ourselves "hearing, hearing..." as a means of cultivating mindfulness. <A> I listen to the suttas. <S> the mendicant thinks about and considers the teaching in their heart, examining it with the mind as they learned and memorized it. <S> Or a meditation subject as a basis of immersion is properly grasped, attended, borne in mind, and comprehended with wisdom . <S> --dn33 <S> /en/sujato <S> You can choose a sutta to listen to using SuttaCentral Voice Assistant , which offers almost 4000 suttas available in Pali and/or English. <S> The suttas can also be downloaded for offline listening. <S> If you are interested in memorizing a sutta, you can choose to walk meditation on a fixed route. <S> This integrates your memory of the sutta with a physical place and will allow you to "walk the sutta" in your mind at any time you choose. <S> Having counted my breaths during meditation for over a decade, I now prefer to listen to suttas during walking meditation. <S> I currently listen to DN33. <S> It is two hours long. <S> Choose a sutta that suits your interest. <S> They are all instructions of the Buddha. <A> I'd skip designing a sound-based approach and go with shikantaza or Silent Illumination. <S> You can learn these at Soto Zen or Chan practices centers or from teachers. <S> They are types of zazen and should fit your needs. <S> The advantage of going with an already existent meditation is the support and having others for further questions, guidance etc. <A> In Buddhism, "right mindfulness" means " to remember to keep" the mind free from attachment, craving & other unwholesome states. <S> In Buddhism, "right mindfulness" does not mean "focusing on breathing".
|
Listening to the suttas fulfills many meditation requirements. Through mindfulness, one understands sound as merely sound, as impermanent, unsatisfying, non-self, and one relinquishes craving in regards to sound.
|
Where does the consciousness (cittas) originate inside the body? I have heard that all consciousness arise in hadaya vatthu rupa (blood inside the heart) except the five doors perceiving consciousness (Cakku vinnana, Sota vinnana, Ghana vinnana, Jeevha vinnana, Kaya vinnana). There are some research articles on the internet about the impact on the heart due to brain damage. So one can argue that the brain is merely an organ which supports the functionality of other organs and hadaya vatthu rupa is the place where consciousness originate. Another one can argue the other way around. So my questions are: Where does the consciousness (cittas) originate inside the body? Is it in the brain or hadaya vatthu rupa? Consciousness is nāma (not material/formless). Then how can we talk about a place of origination of it? <Q> Space is a derived quality of matter, so consciousness cannot be said to take up or exist in space. <S> To say that the mind arises here or there is not really proper in an ultimate sense. <S> Consciousness can arise based on physical entities, and hadaya vatthu is the base for both the mind element and mind consciousness element. <S> This doesn't mean that consciousness arises in the hadaya vatthu. <S> According to the Pali commentators, the heart serves as the physical support for all cittas other than the two sets of fivefold sense consciousness, which take their respective sensitivities as their bases. <S> In the canonical Abhidhamma the heart-base is not expressly mentioned. <S> The Patthāna, the last book of the Abhidhamma Pitaka, simply speaks of “that matter in dependence on which the mind element and mind-consciousness element occur”. <S> The Commentaries, however, subsequently specify “that matter” to be the heart-base, a cavity situated within the physical heart. <S> (Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma 144–5 , Bodhi et al) <A> However, it's just the automatic thought can arise at the physical body, no one can develop or practice anything at that sense. <S> It's not important that Citta arises at Hadaya-Vatthu-Rupa because in Abhidhamma said: "Hadaya-Vatthu-Rupa is not Inḍriya-Paccaya " and <S> "Arūpa-brahma has citta but Hadaya-Vatthu-Rupa ". <S> However, thoughts arise at Hadaya-Vatthu-Rupa normally. <S> The factory-manager, Citta, can go everywhere in the factory, but the factory control center, the brain, is in the manufacturing room, head, only. <S> The factory-manager must go to the sense doors to receive a new input, outside āyatana, of the machine, and the factory-manager can control the whole factory from everywhere in the factory. <S> However, the office room, Hadaya-Vatthu-Rupa, is the best place for him to think and control the factory. <S> And many control-command are processed at the brain. <S> It's not only <S> Hadaya-Vatthu which originating Citta, actually, Cetasikas are originating Citta as well. <S> Mostly, we meditate Jhāna to see Nāma and Rūpa, before we talk about it in detail. <A> Conciseness build up in your mind. <S> It’s an energy not physical brain <S> It can be divided din to 3Raga <S> - All the attachments come in many formsDwesha – <S> All the heartfulness’s comes in many formsMooha – <S> Confusion this will create within you because of Raga and Dwesha or Raga and Dwesha can be generated because of Mooha. <S> Works both ways
|
Citta can arise everywhere inside the physical body because there are the body-senses, kāya-āyatana, in the whole body.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.