source
stringlengths 620
29.3k
| target
stringlengths 12
1.24k
|
|---|---|
How are the three marks of existence experienced through Samadhi meditation? Could dry vipassana & pure one-pointed samadhi type meditations just be different approaches to the same enlightenment? If one attains the fourth jhana with one pointed concentration does one experience anatta? What about anicca & dukkha? How is sunyata related to anatta? Is it really necessary to focus on non-consepts at some point in order for one pointed (ekaggata) concentration to lead to enlightenment? Are there scriptures that can help us understand this? <Q> The question is loaded with erroneous doctrines that epitomise this other question . <S> There is no such thing as "dry vipassana". <S> Since the suttas (SN 22.59) say vipassana results in dispassion & nirodha, obviously any vipassana-dispassion-nirodha will contribute to calmness & samadhi. <S> Vipassana means 'clear seeing'. <S> Since 'vipassana' is 'seeing', it is 'non-conceptual'. <S> When the Burmese teach the practise of "mental noting", such mental noting is not vipassana. <S> Instead, it is a crude form of 'sampajjana'. <S> Samadhi means the mind is not distracted; which is the meaning of 'one-pointedness'. ' <S> One-pointedness' does not mean have narrow awareness upon a tiny object or point. <S> Vipassana is a result or fruit of samadhi (AN 4.41; AN 11.2; MN 149). <S> Samadhi & vipassana are not "two different approaches". <S> When the mind is not distracted, it naturally automatically knows the breathing. <S> When the mind naturally knows the breathing, it also naturally automatically experiences the breathing is impermanent and also experiences the body breathes rather than the self breathes. <S> Seeing this not-self of the breathing is what the suttas mean by "alien". <S> This is the beginning of vipassana. <S> "Dukkha" in relation to impermanence has a different meaning to "dukkha" as a noble truth. <S> In relationship to impermanence, "dukkha" means "unsatisfactoriness", i.e., the incapacity of an impermanent thing to bring lasting reliable happiness. <S> Suttas about how vipassana is a result of samadhi include AN 4.41, AN 11.2 and MN 149. <S> Having thus developed the noble eightfold path... <S> for him these two qualities occur in tandem: tranquillity & insight. <S> MN 149 <A> A search for anicca dukkha anatta jhana yields 9 suttas, including AN9.36 <S> which starts with the first absorption and continues deeper. <S> Notice that the meditator is not just experiencing passively, but is encouraged to be actively involved. <S> Mendicants, I say that the first absorption is a basis for ending the defilements. <S> ... <S> They contemplate the phenomena there—included in form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness—as impermanent, as suffering, as diseased, as an abscess, as a dart, as misery, as an affliction, as alien, as falling apart, as empty, as not-self. <S> The instructions given in the suttas are terse and can be misinterpreted. <S> Please consult with a teacher for personal guidance. <A> Parrot Thinking if you can think <S> In india I am hindu. <S> I am muslim. <S> I am Christian .I am buddhist . <S> That create division from human beings. <S> If you see Christian hate hindu. <S> Hindu hate Christian That "I" create division <S> I am that. <S> but our believe i am buddhist. <S> I am hindu .I <S> am Christian. <S> Create division <S> Parrot never understand truth Parrot replay words. <S> I am buddhist. <S> I am that .this is division form me <S> and you beacuse your are Buddhist <S> and I am Christian .. <S> So parrot caught in meMe divide
|
Every one is same you know that In summary, the Buddha taught one path (Noble Eightfold Path) which culminates in samadhi and has two fruits ( samatha & vipassana ) that occur in tandem.
|
Parents suppressing the teaching I love my parents, but for some reason they do not understand my teaching and misinterpret what I say and won't listen to me. Their misinterpretations led them to take all of my books on Buddhism I was studying as well as prevent me from meditation whenever I try or try to be mindful of doing anything, they prevent me from having to do with the Buddha's teachings (However, I can still do online things in secret as you can see). They say that when I leave the house or grow to a sufficient age, then I can resume, but for now, they have the right to take away my religion basically and it is really putting a hard toll on my spiritual growth and practice for purity. They hope it will fade away, but I have used the Dhamma as my practice for two years now and I have grown to know its truth, unlike my parents. Does anyone have any recommendations on what I should do? Are thereany ways I can continue the practice even though my parents workeffortlessly for me not to do so? How can I work to show metta to themwhen I want to but get frustrations when they push away my teachingsor speak as if Buddhism is a "cult" that makes me anti-social and abad person, even though I have explained all of it to them? Please help! Metta! <Q> You should not be teaching your parents Buddhism. <S> It is forbidden in Buddhism to teach others Buddhism; unless the other people request to be taught (AN 9.5). <S> As a Buddhist, your practise is to not cause harm or distress to others. <S> In your parent's home, when with others, you should act naturally and normally. <S> Apart from this, there is nothing stopping you from meditating in private and also practising right speech, right action & right livelihood in public. <S> Buddhism (DN 31) says your parents have the duty to train you for a profession, i.e., ensure you receive an education. <A> You don't have to make a show out of your Dharma. <S> You don't need to make it fly in your parents faces. <S> There's no need to convince them of anything. <S> Buddhism is what you practice in your mind . <S> No-one needs to know. <S> In fact, making it a secret practice only makes it more powerful. <S> When you practice the perfect Buddhism - which is defined as Buddhism without Ego - on the outside you will be perfect, too. <A> When we care about someone we want to share good things with them. <S> If they don't want that gift it can be painful. <S> We must respect their decision to accept or reject the gift. <S> Part of growing up is to take responsibility for our own life and how we choose to live. <S> Your parents may be scared that you are growing up fast. <S> They may find it difficult to understand that you have found something important for yourself that is different from the life they had in mind for you. <S> During growing up this is often a source of tension and arguments between parents and children. <S> Eventually a child's way of life becomes their own responsibility, but along the way, the parents give the best guidance they can (even if they are not always so well-informed). <S> Arguments about who's way is right are normal and to be expected, even if it is painful to have those arguments. <S> The arguments are a sign that they care about your life and want the best for you (as they see it). <S> At times it can be valuable to have another adult to discuss these things with, a teacher or counsellor, an aunt or uncle or just a family friend. <A> In the past I wondered why Buddhism was a small religion (Theravada). <S> Later I realised that the truth does not need to be told and spread fanatically as the Truth will be slowly emerge to them with Karma. <S> People are ignorant, therefore they will not like to listen to the Truth. <S> Once you know the Truth, stick to it, live that way. <S> You do not need to teach others as if they have not much good Karma <S> they won't understand the truth as they will live in ignorance. <A> Consider that some parents take away childern's video games, rigs and or cables because they do no approve. <S> It's very standard thing, if it wasn't Buddhism it would probably be something else. <S> Just keep doing your thing where there is an opening and develop your understanding and the expression of meaning so that you can later establish effective communication with your parents and straighten them out, this is good for you and that way you can express your gratitude for showing you the world and repay your debt to them. <S> Also i would advice any parent to keep their children from religious sects even the contemporary Buddhist traditions, i would do so lest i was fairly confident they would be capable of providing adequate training and not confuse the young person. <S> There are many Buddhist monks who hold wrong views, even in the time of the Buddha. <S> Your parents are just looking out for you imho <S> and you would be well adviced to identify as an Analyst rather than a Buddhist <S> , be one who analyzes, searches for truth, committed to discovery of philosophical principles and elimination of delusional ideas. <S> If you present yourself in this way to outsiders you avoid all association with any particular religious sect even if you say you study the Pali Canon and approve of that exposition. <S> Buddha said himself he was teaching the doctrine of Analysis <S> so maybe you would be more accurately describing yourself in the forementioned manner.
|
Your Buddhism should not interfere with your schooling and education. You should not be practising "zombie mindfulness" in sight of your parents because this will freak them out.
|
View of Thervada and Mahayana Buddhism on where Conciousness is located Does these 2 types of Buddhism claim that conciousness is located inside our brain or somewhere else, beacuse I have started studying a Thervada monk that claims that conciousness is not inside the brain which makes me confused and seems not logical for me to accept. What did the Buddha teach? <Q> Even though there needs to be a physiological base for our consciousness, there are more prerequisites for consciousness to establish itself, meaning that it emerges in the mind when any of these six different senses makes contact with external sense objects (for example ear - sound). <S> In other words, it's not until internal sense bases "contacts" with external sense objects that consciousness manifests itself through declarative cognitions. <S> According to the buddhist concept of dependent origination, to define consciousness therefore isn't just a matter of where it might be localized, there also has to be cognitions/perceptions in order to properly determine what it is. <A> Ultimatley views are wrong views. <S> They are made up by us and thus are not the focus of getting to the root of truth. <S> Behind both Theravada and Mahayana views is a common aim that discovers that consciousness happens moment by moment. <S> That it has anything to do with the brain isn't admitted of by non-conseptual, non-materialistic, experiencial present moment by present moment reality. <A> This is a question that modern scientists and quantum physicists are unable to answer. <S> If you ask your family doctor, he would probably say that in medical college the subject of the location of consciousness was never discussed. <S> Alan Watts, used to say that people think that consciousness is located between the two ears! <S> This is indeed a difficult question to answer, without a proper foundation in the Higher Doctrine of Buddhism. <S> The Buddha said that Consciousness along with 52 x Mental Phenomena and 28 x Material Phenomena are primarily responsible for the ''creation'' of the world around us. <S> Therefore, one could argue that Consciousness is ''God'' the Creator. <S> This subject has been discussed by Bhikkhu Bodhi, on utube, over many years commencing in 2013, in his Abhidhamma Retreats , conducted in New York. <S> He also recommends reading material in support of the workshop. <S> Suggest you turn to the workshop for guidance. <A> According to Abhidhamma... <S> The consciousness can arise everywhere in alive body. <S> There are 6 types of consciousness arising locations. <S> Eye sense location Ear sense location <S> Nose sense location Tongue sense location <S> Body sense location <S> Bhavaṇga-Consciousness -sense-location, Mano -sense-location. <S> Body sense locations are locating everywhere, so the Body Consciousness can locate everywhere as well. <S> There are 6 types of consciousness arising form-location as well. <S> Mano -sense-location, Bhavaṇga-Consciousness -sense-location, is not Hadaya-form-location, HadayaVatthu. <S> See the explanation below. <S> The Actual Abhidhamma ManoViññāṇa, Thinking, must arise at Mano-sense-location, Bhavaṇga-Consciousness -sense-location. <S> Mano -sense-location often arising at the heart, Hadaya Vatthu <S> , so ManoViññāṇa often arise at the heart as well. <S> (Saṅgaha Chapter 3; Chapter 7 ) <S> Manāyatana <S> - There is no special organ for the mind like the physical organs. <S> By mind-sphere is meant the 'adverting consciousness' (manodvārāvajjana) together with the preceding 'arrest bhavanga' (bhavangupaccheda). <S> See Chapter 1. <S> The Bhavaṇga-Consciousness is Mano-sense-location, of ManoViññāṇa by Anantara-Paccaya, Proximity/Contiguity condition, because ManoViññāṇa can't arise without arising and vanishing before of the Bhavaṇga-Consciousness. <S> (AbhidhammaPitaka Paṭṭhānuddesa Anatarapaccaya Uddesa ; Saṅgaha Chapter 8) <S> Eye-consciousness-element, CakkhuViññāṇa , and its associated phenomena are related to mind-element, Mano , and associated phenomena by contiguity condition. <S> Mind-element, Mano , and its associated phenomena are related to mind-consciousness-element, , ManoViññāṇa , and its associated phenomena by contiguity condition. <S> However, sometime ManoViññāṇa is arising at Mano-sense-location <S> but not arising at the heart (HA), e.g. in Arūpa-Brahmma-Bhumi--Formless-sphere or heart surgery, so Hadaya-Vatthu is not IndriyaPaccaya, but the other sense locations are IndriyaPaccaya (AbhidhammaPitaka Vibhanga; Saṅgaha Chapter 3; Saṅgaha Chapter 5; Saṅgaha Chapter 7; Saṅgaha Chapter 8 ). <S> All these, too, (94) are found in the Sense-sphere. <S> But in the Form-sphere three bases - nose, tongue, and body - are not found (96). <S> In the Formless-sphere no base (96) exists. <S> and there is no HadayaVatthu in <S> 20 IndriyaPaccaya ... <S> Eye, 2. <S> Ear, 3. <S> Nose, 4. <S> Tongue, 5. <S> Body, 6. <S> Vitality, 7. <S> Mind, 8. <S> Happiness, 9. <S> Pain, 10. <S> Pleasure, 11. <S> Displeasure, 12. <S> Equanimity, 13. <S> Confidence, 14. <S> Effort, 15. <S> Mindfulness, 16. <S> Concentration, 17. <S> Wisdom, 18. <S> The thought, "I will realize the unknown", 19. <S> Highest Realization, 20. <S> The faculty of the person who has fully realized <A> In actual buddhist practice of mindfulness, it isnt difficult at all to experience that the mind isnt in the brain. <S> Just notice when you are lost in thought often, and then pay attention to the body walking or moving and you'll see the body and all of its parts, including the gewy stuff in the head, isn't you.
|
According to buddhism, consciousness (vinnana) are characterized as originating from the ayatanas, our senses (eyes, ears, nose, tongue, touch, and mind).
|
Can anyone give me a suggestion of a good monk to learn Buddhism? Can someone give a name of a monk to learn Buddhism? Thanks <Q> For the doctrinal/technical side of the Teaching, you can't go wrong with Bhikkhu Bodhi. <S> He actually live streams his courses from Chuang Yen monastery every Saturday morning US Eastern time at 10 AM. <S> Simply go to youtube.com and type: "chuang yen". <S> Also check out his excellent book In the Buddha's Words <A> You might not think that a monk with a Youtube channel would work but he makes it work for beginners. <S> Teacher monastics no longer with us: <S> Ayya Khema, Ajahn Chah, Pema Chodron, Mahasi Sayadaw and Dogen are all examples of very skilled teachers each with their own unique yet appropriately conforming approaches. <A> Bhikkhu Buddhadasa. <S> Consider staring with: <S> Two Kinds of Language Buddha Dhamma for University Students <S> Nirvana <S> For Everyone Natural Cure for Spiritual Disease <S> Anapanasati: <S> Mindfulness with Breathing - Unveiling the Secrets of Life Anatta & Rebirth Kamma in Buddhism <A> For samatha;Ajahn Brahm, Ajahn Sujato, Ajahn Kalyano, Ajahn Anan (EN) <S> In general the TFT seems to have a strong samatha training. <S> For mindfulness, ardency, alertness & discipline;Ven. <S> Yuttadhamma <S> For wisdom;Imho you need to do your own analysis <S> but you can entertain the ideas of the manyfold various teachers until you make up your mind in regards to the points of controversy. <S> For the more doctrinally accurate translations;Ajahn <S> Thanissaro <S> Foremost pleasant <S> translations;Bhikkhu Bodhi <S> There are many other monks who all have their own relative good qualities but these stand out as specialists in those particular fields as far as i can tell.
|
There are so many but just off the top of my head, Bhante Bodhidhamma is good for students that are a bit advanced & Bhante Yuttadhammo has a Youtube channel that I think works quite well.
|
Can mind be free from becoming? Can mind be free from becoming (Suffering) ?I should be and I should that.I am thin and I want to be a body builder. I am this and I want to that.Can mind free from becoming? <Q> Of course you can! <S> If you want to be free of something, get rid of the cause of it. <S> The cause of becoming is attachment. <S> The cause of attachment is craving. <A> Yes. <S> For more information please see an3.66 <S> They <S> understand:‘Formerly there was greed, which was unskillful. <S> Now there is none, so that’s skillful. <S> Formerly there was hate, which was unskillful. <S> Now there is none, so that’s skillful. <S> Formerly there was delusion, which was unskillful. <S> Now there is none, so that’s skillful. <S> ’So <S> they live without wishes in the present life, extinguished, cooled, experiencing bliss, having become holy in themselves.” <A> I will attack this question from another points of view. <S> There is a real paradox in the idea of the end of becoming. <S> In the process of end of becoming, we are becoming more Buddhist or more serene. <S> This leads the natural question: Is Buddhism seeing the true ontology or is it making one see a Buddhist ontology? <S> This topic is rather dense and requires a lot of framework, so I will tell you, from faith, that the 3rd noble truth says there is an end to suffering and thus and end to bhavana (becoming). <S> If you want to read more, refer to "The Paradox of Becoming" by Thanissaro Bhikku. <S> It is a beautiful read and leads to many insights, if one spends time with it. <A> I'd say no since it seems to me <S> Mind is what we need to be free of becoming. <A> Becoming exists when desire exists. <S> Desire for the abandonment of desire is the last desire and there is no more resolve on the synthesis of created phenomena after that abandonment.
|
Work on getting rid of the craving to end all suffering.
|
Satori and stream entry Is Satori like a stage of stream entry? Is Satori only an intellectual knowing or something deeper than that? <Q> From the wikipedia entry about Satori : Satori is considered a "first step" or embarkation toward Buddhahood <S> This is very much what Stream Entry means in Theravada. <S> Everything else in that entry makes Satori appear to be the same thing as Stream Entry. <S> Therefore it seems that these two terms do refer to the same thing. <A> In the context of Zen training, I think the word you are looking for is kensho. <S> The connotations associated with that word point to a fundamental change in consciousness and self perpection that is much more akin the Theravadan notion of stream entry. <S> Satori simply means insight. <S> While is can be used almost synonymously with kensho, it is much more often used to described fleeting, incomplete, and momentary insight. <A> The dictionary definition of 'Satori' reads: sudden enlightenment. <S> At what stage a Bodhisattva has "sudden enlightenment" is hotly debated in Mahayana Buddhism, and some will weight that stage the same as stream entry, whereas others won't. <S> The point really, in the so called sudden schools, is that with sudden enlightenment the practitioner has realized they are a Buddha, in a key way. <S> Even when there is further to go. <S> This can be "intellectual", though the term 'Satori' is common in zen, which famously discredits all intellectual insight. <S> I believe that kensho is talked down by Dogen; cf Rinzai Buddhism. <S> Part of that will be secrarian, and partly it will reflect different conceptions of practice. <S> But all zen Buddhism highly prizes "sudden enlightenment". <S> If you want to know what stream entry is and how it is achieved <S> then I'd advise reading the Abhidhamma. <S> If you want to know what 'Satori' is in zen then practice zen, read its poetry, etc. <S> If you want to what 'sudden enlightenment' is in general, read important Mahayana Sastras and commentaries, etc.. <S> I think you'll probably find that they are not treated as synonyms anywhere . <S> Simply because surely all contemporary zen, even, acknowledges that Theravada Buddhism is a different thing. <S> If you're asking whether a stream winner knows anything someone with Satori doesn't -- or vice versa: give up now. <S> A joke, but anyway Satori is an insight into Buddha-nature , and stream winners have right view in and for Theravada. <S> Someone here can probably detail the qualities of each.
|
The meaning of Satori as "seeing into one's true nature" is also the same as the meaning of Stream entry when you consider that "one's true nature" in the context of Chan Buddhism is Nirvana/Nibbana.
|
What should we accept? What should we let go? What is it to let go in Buddhism? What is it to accept in Buddhism? What are the things we accept? What are the things we let go? Why? How? What do Buddhists scriptures have to say about it? <Q> What is it to let go in Buddhism? <S> Is that the Noble Truths? <S> So <S> recognise suffering associate that with (recognise that as arising with) craving and attaching let go <S> It's also a past-tense, is it, i.e. -- "suffering having been known in the past, it was dropped". <S> What is it to accept in Buddhism? <S> I'm not sure it is -- <S> does acceptance imply a specific view of a specific "thing" accepted (which may be contrary to the doctine of things being empty), also of a "me" doing the accepting? <S> Realistically, though, maybe monks accept what "necessary" (i.e. the "requisites"). <S> There's also conventional wisdom (to be accepted) -- like from here : <S> And what is wrong view? <S> 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. <S> There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. <S> There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' <S> This is wrong view... <S> So an excess of "nothing exists" is wrong too. <S> So I suppose that "accepting" in Buddhism is, at least, not rejecting being kind and so on. <S> What are the things we accept? <S> Should accept good advice, probably. <S> What are the things we let go? <S> Bad habits. <S> And heedlessness. <S> Why?How? <A> Let go of what is not yours, the stress & ill. <S> The semantics of acceptance and letting go of things are fairly mundane. <S> However the term letting go appears in texts in not so mundane context like; 'eye is not yours, let go of it' <S> the relinquishment of the clinging based on misconception about 'the eye' is what is referred to as i understand it. <S> Letting go is talked about as a release in the general sense of releasing as in letting something go and disconnecting, ie; <S> "And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of stress: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving." <A> Right view <S> Right resolve <S> Right speech <S> Right action <S> Right livelihood <S> Right effort <S> Right mindfulness <S> Right Concentration <S> Everything that goes against that, should be rejected. <S> FYI, The Eightfold Yoga System has the same injunctions. <S> In Yoga, the first two steps are called yama (that what should be accepted) and niyama (that what should be rejected). <A> And what is right effort? <S> It’s when a mendicant generates enthusiasm, tries, makes an effort, exerts the mind, and strives so that bad, unskillful qualities don’t arise. <S> They generate enthusiasm, try, make an effort, exert the mind, and strive so that bad, unskillful qualities that have arisen are given up. <S> They generate enthusiasm, try, make an effort, exert the mind, and strive so that skillful qualities that have not arisen do arise. <S> They generate enthusiasm, try, make an effort, exert the mind, and strive so that skillful qualities that have arisen remain, are not lost, but increase, mature, and are fulfilled by development. <S> This is called right effort. <S> https://suttacentral.net/sn45.8/en/bodhi <A> What should we accept? <S> What should we let go? <S> Every evil never doing and in wholesomeness increasing and one's heart well-purifying: this is the Buddhas' Sasana (Dhammapada, 183) <A> I am not sure there is a difference between letting go and acceptance , <S> If there is a let go ,there has already been acceptance. <S> And its not directed towards anything specific, its basically all that manifests, everything including the sense of a self that needs to accept and let go. <S> Expressed well here in the Na Tumhaka Sutta <A> I am not going to quote a sutra, but I am trying to let go of everything, including letting go. <S> :)
|
You should accept The Eightfold Noble Path : Liberation from suffering -- personal welfare and the welfare of others. Accept the truth; all created things are impermanent, all created things are not self.
|
How are metta and dana related? In accord to Dhamma, What is appropriate to give oneself? What is appropriate to give to others? Does dana ever go to oneself? Could oneself be seen impersonally as another that needs dana? How is metta and dana related or not related? <Q> 'Dana' can be a 'test' of true 'metta'. <S> For example, the Christian Bible refers to 'metta' without 'dana' as being something 'dead', as follows: <S> Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. <S> If one of you tells him, “Go in peace; stay warm and well fed,” but does notprovide for his physical needs <S> , what good is that ? <S> So too, faith byitself, if it is not complemented by action, is dead.… <S> James 2:16 <S> The Pali suttas often refer to 'dana' as follows: ... <S> devoid of the stain of stinginess, freely generous, open-handed, delighting in relinquishment, devoted to charity, delighting in giving and sharing SN 11.11 'Dana' can show we have true metta towards others rather than the fake metta of politicians, virtue signallers and social justice warriors. <A> That which is conducive to dissipation of stress is an appropriate gift, both to oneself and others. <S> However we don't say that we give to ourself what is already ours to give lest it is supposed to be given to a person/group of our choosing. <S> Therefore in general i don't think it is an appropriate expression and use of the term Dana. <S> There are other ways of explaining the relation between giving and good-will like;One who sympathizes is provoked to give. <S> Development of giving is a support for the abandonment of greed, anger and delusion; the development of metta is for the abandonment of those same qualities. <A> Metta is the highest form of dana . <S> According to Okkha Sutta : <S> Staying at Savatthi. " <S> Monks, if someone were to give a gift of one hundred serving dishes [of food] in the morning, one hundred at mid-day, and one hundred in the evening; and another person were to develop a mind of good-will — even for the time it takes to pull on a cow's udder — in the morning, again at mid-day, and again in the evening, this [the second action] would be more fruitful than that <S> [the first].
|
Compassion and sympathy for oneself can be seen as dana if one 'gives oneself a break' or an opportunity to be put in a favorable situation for example. Metta and dana are related in that both Dana which is an act and the base sympathy are based on right views, they are both dispersive of ill.
|
Can we use Piti as a meditation subject? Can we use Piti as a meditation subject?There are 40 meditation objects are given in Visuddhimagga as follows.Ten recollections; ten foul objects; ten kasinas; four sublime abidings; four formless absorptions; one resolution into elements; and one perception of the filthiness of food.My question is whether we can keep four form absorptions as a meditation objects, but specifically Piti as a meditation object. <Q> Hell, you could use a chocolate cake if it tickled your fancy. <S> But just because you can use anything, it doesn't mean that you should. <S> The best objects are those that are consistent, stable, repeatedly accessible, and don't give rise to additional mental formations. <S> Piti <S> can meet those same requirements, but until you hit the 1st jhana, it is entirely too unstable and inconsistent. <S> It can also give rise to clinging and attachment which would ultimately prevent you from moving past the 2nd jhana. <A> Piti can be used as a meditation subject. <S> When one is moving from the 2nd Jhana to the 3rd one notes the Piti and gradually suppress it. <S> In this instance, ones focus it the Piti. <A> Similar to dishonesty about attaining jhana, clinging to rapture & jhana leads to rebirth in hell. <S> Therefore, the Lord Buddha did not teach those who have unshakeable permanent faith in Him to "keep rapture" as meditation object. <S> Instead, the Buddha taught those with unshakeable permanent faith to view impermanent alien diseased rapture with Right View. <S> There is the case where an individual, withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. <S> He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. <S> Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — <S> then when he dies he... goes to hell <S> AN 4.123 <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.' <S> AN 9.36 <A> Teachers like ie Leigh Brasington teach directing attention away from the breath to a pleasant sensation when such a feeling has spawned so that it may grow in intensity. <S> One can't just use joy as a meditation because it has to be brought about by directing the mind to a theme for the purpose of joy and withdrawing from the theme when achieved. <S> Also piti is only a factor in the 1st and the 2nd jhanas (by 4 fold classification). <S> The 3rd and the 4th are without piti.
|
Anything can be used as an object of meditation. The breath is most often used because it checks all of those boxes quite easily.
|
Can we be too analytical It seems to me that analysing everything to the tiniest degree takes joy and spontaneity out of life. I admit, being mindful can make for better decision making and therefor better outcome, but do you want to be around me if I am so thoroughly earnest? <Q> I think i get what you mean and being too analytical can seem strange because one will definitely be no fun at a party nor is one likely to participate to begin with. <S> However being constantly serious and ardently training is going to make one more happy and one will be able to benefit other people in a far more useful way. <A> One can be sharply analytical in all matters, but also warm towards all fellow beings. <S> We can find joy from fellowship even as we analyse our fellow beings' behaviour. <A> ,thats what you discover from mindfulness ,there are dimensions in life ,not all people are going to be mindful or anything in particular. <S> Analysis thats also a dimension of life ,it also has its own beauty ,attachment to a dimension is the issue but that is also natural and happens ,from that understanding one is spontaneous even in analysis ,analysis then comes out of your spontaneity ,spontaneity is not against it ,it simply chose to do it. <S> The spontaneity of another person may choose intellect or basketBall they are all dimensions of life. <A> It depends on whether you want to be an automobile designer, mechanic, driver or passenger. <S> -) <A> One of the oddest concepts in Buddhism is "neutral feeling. <S> " <S> The neutral feeling is neither pleasant nor painful. <S> And how should we deal with that neutral feeling? <S> The underlying tendency to ignorance should be given up when it comes to neutral feeling.” <S> MN44 <S> In other words, we should not wallow in "meh indifference" when feeling neutral. <S> Instead, we should understand: <S> “What is the counterpart of neutral feeling?” <S> “Ignorance.” <S> “What is the counterpart of ignorance?” <S> “Knowledge.” <S> Knowledge requires effort, practice and insight. <S> It also requires restraint. <S> And restraint is important given that thinking is one of the six senses. <S> In particular they: know a thought with their mind. <S> If it’s pleasant they don’t hold on to it, and if it’s unpleasant they don’t dislike it. <S> They live with mindfulness of the body established and a limitless heart. <S> sn35.247 <S> In other words analysis paralysis is not mindful practice. <S> Nor is blind action taken in ignorance without thought to consequence. <S> Right mindfulness balances effort with restraint guided by right view. <S> What do you think? <A> When the thought is binding you <S> the truth is hidden for everything is murky and unclear. <S> And the burdensome practice of judging brings annoyance and weariness. <S> What benefit can be derived from distinctions and separations? <S> Training is, first and foremost, about intimacy. <S> You can't be fully and wholeheartedly intimate with the world if you are caught up in internal analysis. <S> The smallest, discursive thought sets you miles apart from experiencing the way. <S> Just let things be in there own way. <S> Don't actively seek enlightenment. <S> Don't actively try to be mindful. <S> When you walk, really walk. <S> When you eat, really eat. <S> If there is even a single remainder of your mind that isn't fully walking or fully eating, you've gone astray. <S> If the eye never sleeps, all dreams will naturally cease. <S> If the mind makes no discriminations, the ten thousand things are as they are, of single essence. <S> (Quotes from the Verses on the Trusting Heart) <A> There is a misnomer here. <S> In fact, being analytical can be antithesis of the mindfulness. <S> In example: For instance, when I am greeted by a friend, I will get happy. <S> Now if I were to analyze this, my mind may say this feeling is rising due to some mental quality and this related to some form of bhāvanā or one could dive deeper and put it into terms of conciousness in the Yogacara tradition. <S> In a mindfulness approach , one would see that happiness is rising from the base of my chest and one may realize that we long for that feeling. <S> Simply noting it, but not analyzing its means or it's path. <S> It is said that if one were to try and understand the complex interworkings of kamma, their head would explode. <S> Kamma and Pratītyasamutpāda are nonlinear functions. <S> We must learn to understand them through observation, which adds to why we cannot learn the dhamma through words but practice alone. <S> In short, yes you can be too analytical, but one can not be too mindful. <S> Note: <S> One may feel stress from being "mindful", but indeed they are not being truly mindful. <S> Typically this comes from judgemental noting, rather than noting and feeling for what is truly going on. <S> If your mindfulness is tiring, it is not being done correctly. <S> Practice Notes: <S> If you find that you are taking joy from being too analytical, try watching that analysis. <S> What type of views are you holding with the analysis? <S> Are you trying to be a "good" buddhist? <S> Are you reinforcing views that you are not good enough? <S> So on and so forth. <S> The true beauty of Buddhism comes from watching the arising and ceasing of phenomena. <S> Watch the happiness arise, watch the mind cling, and then watch the mind release from that clinging. <S> Watch the experiencing of freedom in that moment. <S> May you be safe. <S> May you be happy. <S> May you be free.
|
Mindfulness does not equal analytical. Its okay if thats your nature,there is nothing really wrong
|
Did Buddha had issues in meditation? Well, I Keep hearing this dialogue by a few Buddhist meditation teachers, "It's very common for everyone to get distracted by thoughts when you start the meditation practise initially". I am curious to know whether Buddha, himself, faced any issues while meditating, initially, (lack of concentration, etc)? <Q> You can read this sutta about how the Buddha-To-Be overcome obstacles: https://suttacentral.net/mn19/en/bodhi <A> The buddha says he had plenty of worries with ''breathless absorption'' https://suttacentral.net/mn100/en/sujato <A> Probably a few minor ones. <S> But remember we're talking about someone who attained the 1st jhana back when He was a kid, and then quickly mastered all form jhanas and formless attainments when studying under his two meditation masters. <S> He was so good that those masters even asked him to become co-leader to help them teach their students! <S> So it's like asking a math prodigy <S> whether s <S> /he faces any issues doing math. <S> Sure, there'd be some, but they'd be just a tiny fraction compared to what a regular average student has to face. <A> Siddharth Gautama , a prince had issues with the misery of this world. <S> Even in stories we hear & read that," In childhood days , Gautama used to meditate under a tree by closing eyes & sitting calmly & focusing on in-out breath . <S> Buddha used to teach others without any issue. <S> Siddharth Gautama had issues with misery & path to end the misery. <S> In a way , it can be said that Gautama might had issues with meditation but Buddha . <A> "I thought: 'Not only does Alara Kalama have conviction, persistence, mindfulness, concentration, & discernment. <S> I, too, have conviction, persistence, mindfulness, concentration, & discernment. <S> What if I were to endeavor to realize for myself the Dhamma that Alara Kalama declares he has entered & dwells in, having realized it for himself through direct knowledge.' <S> So it was not long before I quickly entered & dwelled in that Dhamma, having realized it for myself through direct knowledge <S> Alara Kalama was the Buddha-To-Be's first ascetic teacher, and he taught the sphere of nothingness, the 7the Jhana. <S> I'm not sure his learning of this absorption has a date, but the Buddha was an ascetic for about six years, and must have already mastered the earlier concentrations. <S> There is no sign of him struggling with it, and this sutta is more about his difficulty in giving up the pursuit of wealth and a happy family live -- upon learning of sickness, old age, and death. <A> another sutta where the buddha talks about wrong concentration, ie concentration which have lots of defilements. <S> then he says he bases his samdhi on the jhanas, ie the jhanas are good samadhi, contrary to whatever he was doing before. <S> https://suttacentral.net/mn128/en/sujato
|
Buddha ,an enlightened version of Gautama ( with no self) can never be with any type of issue.
|
Introductory/Beginner books on Buddhism, but for children There are a few posts on the site asking for good introduction/beginner books on Buddhism, but I can't seem to find any that a child could read and understand. Although age range doesn't really matter to the answer that people might post, let's say someone between the age of 7 and 14, just to have some context. <Q> I don't have a title for you <S> but there are the Jataka Tales which would introduce some Buddhist ideas to entertain and there are english publications of these. <S> However if the child is over 7 years old it is possible that they would understand whatever you throw at them in regards to the Dhamma, there are mentions of very young Arahants from the time of the Buddha. <S> Other than that there are the Gathas (poems of the Elders) which come to mind if you are looking for something like that. <A> I was reading adult and young adult books by the age of 14. <S> I haven't read <S> this one in particular but Penguin Classics tend to be alright as a pseudo-scholarly introduction to a reader who is otherwise naive about the subject. <S> I'm pretty sure I read the Penguin Classic edition of the Dhammapada at one stage. <S> I guess the classic introduction to Buddhism is the story of Gautama's meeting the "four divine messengers" and leaving home, becoming enlightened -- see for example Meeting the Divine Messengers . <S> I think that story is published in innumerable editions and translations, some wth more and some with less attempt to make the story seem realistic (as opposed to e.g. supernatural, viz the Buddha's remarkable powers and Mara etc). <S> Canonically I think that story is the introduction to the Jataka. <S> I haven't seen the Gathas in an edition for children, it might be an interesting suggestion though -- perhaps something to read together and discuss? <S> The commentary to the Dhammapada consists of stories (including the supernatural), one per verse (and many verses), see e.g. Buddhist Stories from the Dhammapada Commentary -- the stories are included in <S> this online edition <S> (click on the links to each verse e.g. Verse 1 ) <S> I'd guess there might be a for-children edition of that. <S> A Google search for Buddhist school books might be useful, for example <S> my first result from that search was this page: Buddhist Studies for Schools: eBook Library (PDF documents) <A> The Buddha provided a teaching to his 7 year old son, which instructed two things, namely: To never tell a deliberate lie. <S> To always reflect (think; consider) about whether an action to be performed or performed harms oneself or another. <S> This teaching is called: Advice to Rāhula at Ambalaṭṭhika . <A> Flowing visuals combined with painstaking details and merge seamlessly with strong contemporary narrative. <S> Read at above link about book description. <S> (If above link doesn't work ,check this link , taken from my web-browser).
|
Please check book at below link : The Story of Buddha : The Enlightened One (Tripti Nainwal, Ayeshe Sadr, Ishaan Dasgupta) Above book is specifically designed for children.
|
How to avoid subtle biases and inclinations to influence phenomena when doing vipassana? In other words, how do I know if I'm really being objective? <Q> Find out the difference between what are concepts and what is. <S> Follow the sensation of the breath not the idea of the breath. <S> Notice what mental content is being reacted to, notice intentions. <S> When you merely witness what is in attention and realize that it is what it is then there cannot be any bias in that moment. <S> Bias comes with consepts. <A> One of the most powerful and useful suttas is SN12.23 <S> Dependent Origination. <S> . <S> SN12.23 lists the things you can observe while being rightfully mindful of biases and inclinations. <S> For example, suppose a seductive thought comes to mind. <S> Then one can use this sutta to find the roots of that craving: <S> I say that craving has a vital condition. <S> And what is it? <S> You should say: ‘Feeling.’ <S> … You should say: ‘Contact.’ <S> … You should say: ‘The six sense fields.’ <S> … You should say: ‘Name and form.’ <S> … You should say: ‘Consciousness.’ <S> … You should say: ‘Choices.’ <S> … I say that choices have a vital condition, they don’t lack a vital condition. <S> And what is the vital condition for choices? <S> You should say: ‘Ignorance.’ <S> One can look for and relinquish the feeling (e.g., "there was attraction" vs "I liked") <S> One can look for and relinquish the contact (e.g., "there was a sight" vs. " <S> I saw") <S> One can look for and relinquish the six sense fields (e.g., "there was a sight" vs. " <S> I saw softly billowing hair in the sunny breeze") <S> One can look for and relinquish the name and form (e.g., "healthy person" vs "beautiful blonde") <S> Etc. <S> In other words, use the the efforts to restrain, to give up, to develop, and to preserve <A> By not trying to avoid them .You let it all come, your very avoidance is recognized ,there is no certain state that needs to be achieved,because if you put that in your mind then always you will need to get to that state else you feel disconnected <S> and thats called rapture . <S> The play of life is happening and at emptiness there is looking without a looker ,no conceptual understanding is forced ,the play is simply happening with all its colors .In <S> Vipassana there is realization of that which is already happening <S> no special state needs achievement no miracle <S> ,just realization of the miracle that is already there , <S> when that realization is perfectly clear and not just a flash ,there is a new rooting in the emptiness instead of the identity and no need for methods.
|
Notice thoughts as they happen or as they are remembered but don't make an effort to notice or not notice the content of the thoughts. Follow the sensation of the feet as they move exactly in the present moment and don't follow the idea of the feet.
|
Are loving-kindness and compassion (metta and karuna) special kind of attachments? To alleviate someone from suffering, Buddhism teaches one to practice mettā karuṇā . But it seems to me that to thinking good about someone and wish them the best, we need to have a better version of the suffered person, so that we can disagree with their current version. If we don't have that image, then we wouldn't say the suffered person is suffered at the beginning. Thus, it seems correct to say that in order to practice metta and karuna, we need to have an attachment? Since this attachment is necessary, then I think it's fine to have? For example I ask this question, thus I have some attachment to it, and that's fine. I think this is related to the conventional truth and absolute truth. So is it correct the in order to practice metta and karuna, we need to have an attachment to begin with? Edit: One can simply say that the better version of that person is just a ideal fabrication of them (because they are not actually like that), or just the good side of them that they always have but not shown yet. In either case, I think it's necessary to assume good faith . Would that assumption be an attachment? Related: • Is radiating loving kindness increase attachment? • How to view people with metta and karuna? • Is there any source saying that Buddhists can temporarily form relationship to help people? <Q> So is it correct the in order to practice metta and karuna <S> , we need to have an attachment to begin with? <S> Well, attachment is a default software built into the core kernel of every human's "operating system", so whether we need to have it or not is kinda irrelevant. <S> It's a truth that both evil and goodness co-exist within every single human being, it's just that the relative ratio is different from person to person. <S> So it's not a fabrication to focus on a person's 'good side', because s/ <S> he does have a good side! <S> So the beauty of metta/karuna cultivation is that one can start training right away, even with their existing attachment at the beginning stage. <S> But as one proceeds to higher, deeper, more subtle levels of the Path, the attachment will naturally subside and eventually goes away completely. <S> Once it's become second nature, Metta/karuna at that stage will no longer involves any kind of attachment at all. <A> Metta and karuna are an attitude of kindness and compassion towards yourself and others in order to transcend the the sense of separation between you and the next being. <S> It's good wholesome stuff. <S> You can learn to just hold the metta in your heart without attatchment. <S> Remember why they have all those meditation practices and the dharma teachings? <S> So you can learn how to let go and not attatch to the fruits of practice and anything else. <A> Good question. <S> That is why we have Upekka (equanimity) as a part of four Brahma Viharas. <S> Equanimity balance the other three. <S> There are the near enemy and the far enemy of Brhma Viharas. <S> ============= <S> Each of the four brahma-viharas has what is called a near enemy and a far enemy. <S> The near enemy is a state of mind that is close to the brahma-vihara and is sometimes mistaken as the good emotion, but is actually “a near enemy” and not the correct mental state. <S> The far enemy is virtually the opposite of the brahma-vihara and is completely off the mark for the emotion that is strived for. <S> This is shown in this table: https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/4_Brahma_Viharas <A> I think you're implying that metta is a fabrication and an attachment to a fabrication. <S> But this answer implies that the non-existence of something is a different kind of "conditioned", is not even impermanent, and I think "unfabricated" rather than fabricated. <S> I think that metta might be an example of the latter, i.e. not a fabrication but an unfabrication. <S> The words of the metta gatha , for example, May [each and every one] ... ... be free from enmity and danger ... <S> be free from mental suffering ... <S> be free from physical suffering <S> I think that's talking about an absence -- an absence of suffering, an absence of malice. <S> What's "fabricated" might be the opposite of metta -- for example <S> "I don't like that person -- may they receive payback for what they've done, for what they've said!" <S> I guess that metta is -- at least partly -- intended to undo your own malice and selfishness, conceit -- and that it's these (i.e. enmity) which are fabricated, not the metta. <S> That said the practice is also described as metta bhavana -- the development or becoming of metta.
|
And no, there's no need to come up with some fabrication or some altered reality about the other person's personality in order to cultivate metta/karuna.
|
What happens if no beings choose to act on one's bad karma? What happens if no beings choose to act on one's bad karma? Does one then hallucinate one's bad karma? ( By this I mean i.e. is there experiencing of hallucinations (or illusions) alongside things such as real pain? ). E.g. What would have happened to Moggallāna if no being chose to attack him? <Q> You can find the answer for your question from a Jataka called "Matakabhatta-Jātaka". <S> Herewith I've quoted the section of the Jātaka which may answer your question. <S> " <S> In times past, brahman," the goat began, "I was a brahman who taught the Vedas like you. <S> I, too, sacrificed a goat as an offering for a Feast for the Dead. <S> Because of killing that single goat, I have had my head cut off 499 times. <S> I laughed aloud when I realized that this is my last birth as an animal to be sacrificed. <S> Today I will be freed from my misery. <S> On the other hand, I cried when I realized that, because of killing me, you, too, may be doomed to lose your head five hundred times. <S> It was out of pity for you that I cried." <S> "Well, goat," said the brahman, "in that case, I am not going to kill you. <S> " <S> "Brahman!" exclaimed the goat. <S> "Whether or not you kill me, I cannot escape death today. <S> " <S> "Don't worry," the brahman assured the goat. <S> "I will guard you." <S> "You don't understand," the goat told him. <S> "Your protection is weak. <S> The force of my evil deed is very strong." <S> The brahman untied the goat and said to his students, "Don't allow anyone to harm this goat. <S> " They obediently followed the animal to protect it. <S> After the goat was freed, it began to graze. <S> It stretched out its neck to reach the leaves on a bush growing near the top of a large rock. <S> At that very instant a lightning bolt hit the rock, breaking off a sharp piece of stone which flew through the air and neatly cut off the goat's head. <S> A crowd of people gathered around the dead goat and began to talk excitedly about the amazing accident. <S> Quoted from: Matakabhatta-Jātaka <S> (Jātaka, Khuddaka Nikaya, Sutta Pitaka, Tipitaka) <S> The subject of Kamma is very deep and hard to understand. <S> Only a Tatagatha Samma Samubuddha can understand. <S> Note <S> : This is how I understood. <S> I may be wrong but not Dhamma. <A> Kamma is only one of the five Niyamas. <S> Five Niyama's are Citta, Dhamma, Utu, Biju, and Kamma. <S> The operation of Kamma is hard to understand in certainty. <S> If Arhant does not exhaust of all his Kamma in this life all residual Kamma become non-operative. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/kamma.html <A> This will dissolve the results of old kamma. <S> This is why the suttas (AN 6.63) say the Noble Eightfold Path destroys/ends kamma. <S> As for Moggallāna, according to mythology, he was attacked because he made the Jain religion look bad when he reported Jain followers had poor rebirth. <S> This is just a worldly matter and unrelated to any kamma of Moggallāna because, as an Arahant, Moggallāna would not have identified with any past actions & present painful feelings & therefore would not have suffered when he was attacked. <S> Many people hated the Buddha & wanted to kill him. <S> That people hated the Buddha is not related to the Buddha's kamma. <S> The Buddha has no "kamma" in the ordinary sense of the word. <S> MN 117 explains the ordinary meaning of "kamma" is connected to "asava" ("defilements" ) and "acquisitions" ("upadhi"; "attachment"). <S> Arahants are free from "acquisition" thus are free from "kamma". <A> I believe that beings have the choice to act or not act on one's bad karma. <S> It seems like a good idea and safest to assume that the consequences of one's bad karma will necessarily be severe. <A> In short one can say that at some point it became determined that he would experience assault. <S> If a car is on a course of collision, the eventuality of collision at some point becomes inevitable due to the circumstances like ìt's velocity. <S> Analogically events become determined for this or that being due to the prior development of circumstances.
|
The suttas ( SN 12.37 ) say [the results of] old kamma are to be felt [as feelings] & not identified with (not acted upon).
|
Permission of parents to be a Monk I already know this much https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/35802/17220 Still ,there is a particular case where ,I have no experience/knowledge which is below. Person with 27 yrs. of age and above. Parents are alive. No responsibility over Person. Person is having exemplary character & is unmarried. Person is unsatisfied by any meditation center , monastery , ashram , yogi etc. ,so want to meditate alone in forest alongside other *religious meditators. Parents are not ready to accept buddha or buddha's teachings for their child cause they think that it(buddhism) is only to destroy householdness. It tears down parents if person flees away to forest or even tries to do so. Update Under these circumstances, is permission required ,if yes ,then how to convince parents. Note:: 'To be a monk' means 'to go forth to be' :: detached one , beyond all sense of his own name and form. Without any existence of I, my or mine. Not to grieve if his name and form entity were to decay and deteriorate. <Q> It is possible to find a monestary that will let that slide. <S> Some are more flexable and take the rules as guidelines instead of law to be followed rigidly, not out of laziness but out of wise practicality and out of an attempt at a sense of what the Buddha might do in today's times. <S> Also relentlessness in your dedication to break into the monkhood is often a help as they like to <S> know you are serious. <A> Person is unsatisfied by any meditation center , monastery , ashram , yogi etc. ,so want to meditate alone in forest alongside other *religious meditators. <S> Then he isn't immediately seeking an ordination as that would usually entail integrating into an existing group for which such an allowance is to be obtained. <S> I hope the person figures out a good solution ensuring a comfortable & safe abiding; not subjecting themselves to unnecessary hardship and stress. <S> It is going to be difficult to be a yogi without ordination because going forth in the dispensation of Buddha Gotama without a formal ordination is very uncommon. <S> As it is, it is often asked of one to complete a trial period before being given a formal going forth which is like a meal ticket to an extent. <S> Imo a yogi without formal association is more likely to be assumed to be an outcast holding wrong views, unable to get along with 'the contemporary masters'. <S> Therefore it will be difficult lest one makes a living recycling stuff or otherwise gets the money. <A> It tears down parents if person flees away to forest or even tries to do so. <S> It seems person is having very strong bond/attachment with h-is/er caring parents. <S> Parents are not ready to accept buddha or buddha's teachings for their child cause they think that it(buddhism) is only to destroy householdness. <S> That's an obvious reaction from parents who have not been established in dhamma or they are established but worry about person's capability. <S> Even buddha used to question, when his disciple/s want to go to dangerous/full-of- dukkha places to preach like with the case of 'poorna'. <S> Moral:: <S> You will have to prove in front of them that you are worthy of independent homelessness. <S> Under these circumstances, is permission required ,if yes ,then how to convince parents. <S> Surely, there is a way for someone aspiring to be established on Noble 8 fold path, a 'middle path'. <S> If parents are very caring, person might start by bearing his own responsibility first, slowly-slowly increasing independent-meditation-time, slowly-slowly showing parents about his/her calibur of asceticness and decision making capability. <S> Wait for the right time, start reducing any communication-gap among relation. <S> No caring parent wants to harm his/her child or to be a cause for any harm. <S> It's just the worriness about safety that they pretend to act as a barrier . <S> Understanding them from their perspective will enable person to see/feel them as Helpers in person's decision . <S> If parents are not so caring , then tears might be out of society-fear but such perception requires one to be very hard-hearted. <S> In this case, person must make his stand in society first. <S> Person should start by bearing his own responsibility first••• same-as-before ••• decision making capability, ultimately leading him/her to win over everyone's ego. <S> Wait for the right time, start reducing any communication-gap among relation and society. <S> With right time and right understanding, person will surely be able to take his/her decision of independent-meditation(asceticness). <A> This rule is put in place because joining a monastic order (like any thing else one does in life) is a karmic act, and one should strive not to do harm. <S> The idea that a child might disappear into a monastic order, never accomplishing any of the 'normal' things that parents expect of children — gainful employment, grandchildren, social status or respect, or any of the other hallmarks of worldly 'success' — can be frightening and disturbing to a parent. <S> It's an act of compassion for parents and the world they live in.
|
One is asked to seek parent's permission so that one does not enter monastic life leaving a cloud of fear and resentment in one's wake.
|
Meditation on a concept Is samatha concentration meditation's object always an idea, concept or something else? Why meditate on a concept and what else besides concepts are there to meditate on? <Q> There are 40 meditation objects are prescribed in Visuudhimagga. <S> https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/40_meditation_subjects <A> Samarha means tranquillity state of the mind. <S> Keeping this state for the considerable time is the result of the meditation. <S> There are many ways you can do it, there are many meditation techniques to do this which are not advised in buddhism. <S> Meditation can be done concentrating on something like air, fire, soil etc. <S> But in buddhism you may concentrate on insatiable state of the world . <S> When mind is thinking about something it goes to neutral/calm state, where it won't react to inputs but just read them as it is. <A> Apart from the brahmaviharas, meditations on the foulness of the body, and a handful of other techniques, samatha almost by definition <S> can't involved any kind of discursive thinking. <S> It would simply be impossible to enter into higher states of concentration with this kind of mental content in place. <S> In fact, the Visuddhimagga and other texts make a point of saying that while the 1st jhana can be reached by any number of techniques, in order for it to be exceeded discursive content has to be abdonded (and frankly, I'd argue that the 1st jhana can only be approached by conceptual techniques; there's just no "room" for conceptual thought when one attains absorption). <S> Even in Rinzai Zen, where we work with koans, you aren't brooding or ruminating on the huatou (i.e. the part of the koan that you say over and over again in seated meditation). <S> Rather, the word becomes an object of focus - no different than the tip of your nose, the breath, a kasina, the dan tien, etc. <S> What you are really aiming for is a mental energy that is applied and sustained. <S> It's why it's often better to stick with objects like the breath. <S> You can direct your mental energy there in a way that doesn't give rise to extraneous mental content. <S> So much of samatha involves letting go (vossagga). <S> As your concentration deepens, it will become exceedingly apparent just how riling and disruptive even the slightest thought object actually is. <S> If what you are after is pure concentration, it seems counterproductive to enter into any practice relies on the production of mental content <S> no matter how refined or virtuous that content might seem. <A> To do samatha means to still something. <S> In first jhana unwholesome perception is stilled/tranquilized, in first arupa jhana the perception of form has been stilled, with the attainment of 'cessation of perception & feeling' perception and feeling is stilled. <S> This is clearly explained in Patisambhidamagga. <S> The modernist expression of to samatha meaning to meditate on a concept unlike doing vipassana whereas one meditates on 'an ultimate reality', is foreign to the pali canon. <S> It is to me a disagreeable expression with a disagreeable meaning. <S> The 'vipassanists' who use this framework will usually tell you that the way they present the teaching is quite different to the canon but they do go on to justify their way loosely drawing from various commentaries and works produced in the last century. <S> It is very sectarian way of teaching and is imo one shade off chakra and kundalini frameworks.
|
At its best, samatha meditation almost never involves an idea, concept, etc. The less discursive that mental energy is, the easier it will be for your concentration to stabilize and mature.
|
When will a Buddhist accept doing analysis? As the core goal of Buddhism is to cease sufferings, any task that not relevant to it will be unawarely ignored, and any task that hindering it will be strongly rejected. Analysis/intellect can either be irrelevant to the goal (as in, don't forget that the finger is not the moon), or an obstacle that Buddhists have spent all their life to fight (as in, it's the source of proliferation). However, in some cases where analysis is necessary to remove an attachment, automatically rejecting intellect means (1) the attachment is not removed, and (2) they don't think they have attachment at all. Or as someone puts it, they seem to have anti-thought bias , and I think anything they say would be thought-terminating clichés at that point. How to fight this bias? How to make them realize that before you see the moon, as least you should have the finger? How to present them an analysis and they accept to read it as it is, rather than questioning anything irrelevant? Related: intellectualism or anti-intellectualism and Buddhism I explain why I prefer discuss Buddhism intellectually but others don't seem to accept my point. Why is that? How to ask other Buddhists doing analysis, rather than advising me to stop analyzing? How does philosophy not fall into the confirmation bias? <Q> In the Hindu tradition they talk about four different yogas , or spiritual learning styles (the following adapted from the Vedanta Society , of whom I am fond): Bhakti Yoga : the path of love and devotion. <S> This path emphasizes practices such as prayer, chanting, and meditation on the loving presence in our lives. <S> Jnana Yoga : the path of knowledge. <S> This path uses reason and discernment to discover the divine nature within by casting off all that is false, or unreal. <S> Karma Yoga : the path of selfless work. <S> Those who follow this path do work as an offering and expect nothing personal in return, practicing detachment and equanimity. <S> Raja Yoga : the path of meditation. <S> This path allows us to experience higher states of consciousness where we achieve a deeper understanding. <S> The Hindu tradition sees these as equally valid and non-exclusive, and while this can cause some confusion and consternation at times, it rarely leads to outright disputes. <S> The Buddhist path focuses on what the Hindus would call raja yoga . <S> There are many examples of the other modes — e.g. the Bodhisattva vow, which is karma yoga; metta practices, which are bhakti; and studying the precepts and teachings, which is jnana — but since Buddhism has always been (to coin a term) 'anagnostic' (rising up out of innate knowledge), the other modes have always held a lesser place in its worldview. <S> All of which is to say: you cannot expect everyone to follow your path, or to agree with you that it is correct, and if you wish to challenge a dominant paradigm you must first respect that paradigm and the people who practice it. <S> I see you have a bee in your bonnet on this issue. <S> You want to 'fight' a 'bias', and that attitude is itself problematic. <S> The best way you can serve others is by understanding what they are trying to offer you. <S> When you understand them, then you will be in a position to change their minds; not before. <A> As I said in other answers, in Mahayana there's plenty of analysis. <S> No need to convince them. <S> Perhaps the only correction necessary is to your own attitude, to realize there were lots of smart people before you, and to try and learn from them. <A> Avoiding conceptual thought and eschewing analysis isn’t necessarily exclusive of self reflection. <S> In fact, conceptual thought is often responsible for keeping us at one remove from our neuroses, hang ups, and obstacles (one common one, at least in Zen, is the devaluing of the intellect!) <S> The less we rely on the conceptual mind, the clearer we can see ourselves. <S> Buddhist practice, in a nut shell, is the suspension of our ordinary minds, a looking into emptiness, and then the turning of that empty mind back to the realm of form. <S> Everything then becomes an opportunity for insight - especially our own psychological shortcomings. <S> Any Buddhist practice that isn’t self reflective is ultimately disingenuous. <S> In fact it’s better if you don’t. <S> But if you aren’t honestly confronting your hangups and attachments over and over again, you’re using your practice to protect your ego rather than uproot it. <S> Walking the great way is a constant discovery of failings <S> we never knew we even had. <S> Unless you are in a constant state of discovering your own stupidity, you aren’t really practicing. <A> yes the usual word for proliferation of thoughts is papanca and the buddha says that this is bad. <S> The way for intellectuals to stop the proliferation of their fantasies is to see that thoughts are just objects, like the objects of the 5 senses, instead of deifying them and claiming that thoughts are a gateway to truth, knowledge and what not. <S> however rationalists are precisely people infatuated with thoughts, so they become very upset when they hear that thoughts are pretty much worthless to directly reach peace and truth. <S> In fact all puthujjanas base their life on thoughts, ideas, dreams, fantasies ,speculations, and the first thing to do for those people is to discriminate between ''imbued with sensuality, thinking imbued with ill will, & thinking imbued with harmfulness one sort, and thinking imbued with renunciation, thinking imbued with non-ill will, & thinking imbued with harmlessness'' <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.019.than.html <S> And then the buddha says that when people base their life on good thoughts, they manage to get into right samadhi which is the basis for wisdom, ie ''to see things as they really are''. <A> Afaik;Dhamma is easily grasped when there is sufficient predisposition. <S> Otherwise one should have faith in the Buddha's awakening and focus on mastering the expression of the teaching to think about so that one may penetrate the meaning and otherwise develop the faculties, factors of awakening and the four frames of mindfulness. <S> Dealing with ignorant people is not going to be pleasant but the supposed intellectual one has only himself to blame and being more intelligent one is usually quite responsible for being in that situation for a fool <S> doesn't know better. <S> Avoid them for the most part.
|
You needn’t use intellectual analysis.
|
In the doctrine of no arising does the past and future still exist? In the doctrine of no arising does the past and future still exist, and if so do they exist in the same way as the present does? And if not, why ? From Dogen's Genjo-koan: Firewood becomes ash. Ash cannot turn back into firewood again. However, we should not view ash as after and firewood as before. We should know that firewood dwells in the dharma position of firewood and it has its own before and after. Although there is before and after, past and future are cut off. Ash stays at the position of ash and it has its own before and after. As firewood never becomes firewood again after it is burned and becomes ash, after person dies, there is no return to living. However, in buddha dharma, it is a never-changing tradition not to say that life becomes death. Therefore we call it no-arising. It is the laid-down way of buddha's turning the dharma wheel not to say that death becomes life. Therefore, we call it no-perishing. Life is a position at one time; death is also a position at one time. For instance, this is like winter and spring. We don't think that winter becomes spring, and we don't say that spring becomes summer. I wondered whether Dogen is saying that there is a before and after and these are the same as the past and future that are cut off -- from the present: so that anything that occurs only does so in the past or future. <Q> Dogen is saying that from Buddhist perspective, a dharma does not "become" another dharma. <S> Each dharma is a "presence" at its time, static in its own quality, followed by another "presence-quality" and so on. <S> So wood is wood and <S> ash is ash <S> , it's not the same "thing" changing while moving from point A in time to point B. <S> To this I can add that the temporal succession of dharmas is similar to a set of real numbers - each individual dharma is a generalization, and we can infinitely "zoom in" on a particular moment between "wood" and "ash" to see a some-level-of-burning-in-progress-dharma. <S> Wood and ash are connected as cause and effect. <S> Ash exists due to wood (among other things). <S> Similarly, it's not like a living person dies. <S> They exist in succession, first life, then death. <S> Life and death are connected like cause and effect. <S> Death exists due to life (among other things). <S> Therefore, there is no perishing of the living. <S> Correspondingly, there is no arising. <S> It's not like the newborn was dead before it was born. <S> Nor is it like the mother turned into the newborn, nor mother's egg, nor the sperm. <S> Instead, these dharmas exist in causal succession. <S> Now, if you think about it, it's not like any given dharma has exactly one dharma as its predecessor - not at all. <S> Instead, most if not all dharmas have many, many "causing" or "conditioning" dharmas. <S> Which one we consider "the main" cause is entirely up to us. <S> In this sense, someone who lives now is a "dharma" that has quadrillions of other dharmas as its "inputs" - going up the infinitely forking chains of physical ancestry, informational ancestry, circumstantial conditionality and who knows what else. <S> This is why there is no arising, because it's an infinitely spanning network of static non-discrete dharmas causing and conditioning each other. <S> The whole thing is like a multidimensional vector space, without one global time dimension. <S> So, to answer your question, Past and future are something observed relative to a particular dharma. <S> Ontologically, there is no becoming, no objects moving through time, nor one global time dimension. <A> The knowledge of non-arising is referenced in the following two Early Buddhist Texts: <S> dn34 : knowledge of ending, and knowledge of non-arising. <S> dn33 : <S> Knowledge of ending and knowledge of non-arising. <S> The knowledge of ending is the knowledge of the ending of defilements, the end of even the conceit <S> "I am". <S> With that knowledge comes, in parallel, the knowledge that the perceived continuity of existence (i.e., "firewood becomes ash") is just an illusion. <S> Firewood is just firewood and ash is just ash. <S> Although they may be conditionally related via combustion, there is no common identity that joins them. <S> Firewood does not seek to be ash. <S> Ash does not miss being firewood. <S> Firewood is firewood. <S> And ash is ash. <A> The Sarvastivadins were the main school that thought the past and future exist in some sense. <S> But even here the past and future do so differently from the present: as causality is what makes something real. <S> Most other Buddhists, while agreeing on the Sarvastivadins about causality, claimed that, since the past and future are not presently causing anything, they are unreal and imaginary. <S> I do not know of any school that claimed or claims that this imaginary existence in particular -- of the past and future -- is all that is, so that the present is nothing whatsoever.
|
Past is the transitive closure of all its causes, and future is the superset of dharmas directly or indirectly conditioned by a given dharma.
|
Can the change due to impermanence be considered intelligent? What is the nature of the change due to impermanence ,is it just a random change or intelligent change ?,are the actions resulting from it considered right action or that depends on the degree of identification that the impermanent person/thing is having towards another person/thing?. The more I watch it I see that sometimes this change or flux is not just random and is intelligent.All the changes happening inside the body and mind do not require a doer but are intelligent.Can the nature or the behavior of the change be also recognized ?. <Q> Buddhism isn't overly concerned with the source or cause of impermanence. <S> The Buddhist problematic is that the mind fixates on permanence — on wanting things to be a certain way, always — and that fixation causes misery of various sorts when things do change (as they inevitably will). <S> I'm not certain what thought or insight is bubbling around behind this question <S> (perhaps it hasn't made itself clear even to you, yet), but you should be aware that fixating on impermanence can be just as problematic as fixating on anything else. <S> Who or what are you trying to ascribe intelligence to? <A> What is the nature of the impermanence ,is it just a random change or intelligent change ? <S> Impermanence is a characteristic of conditioned existence, ie. of Samsara. <S> All compounded and conditioned things are tainted by this characteristic. <S> It is an impersonal law with no known origin. <S> It should be thoroughly contemplated and observed mindfully as it is part of the Triple Gateway to Liberation , signs that lead to the outlet of this world. <A> So much time it took to put up a correct question ... <S> ÷) ÷). <S> Impermanence : It is defined at atomic level for tiniest possible energy particle which shows dual nature :: matter(as existence) and wave(as non-existence or Maya or Delusion). <S> Whatever happens due to this dual nature , is called as change. <S> Change is intelligent upto what seems to be good. <S> But ,my friend , what seems to be good is ,in itself, a biggest hinderance than not-good. <S> Pain, actually ,is a pleasure in early form. <S> When one gets used to this pain , it becomes pleasure and seems to be intelligent. <S> Fruits of change in living beings is due to Ignorance and in non-living beings is due to chemical reactions. <S> Now unless you are a believer in God or something like that , it won't create a confusion otherwise you might think who is causing these chemical reactions. <S> Such questions are hindrances to meditation. <S> Sit again and try to analyze that seems to be intelligent to you , it's just a pleasure feeling. <S> Otherwise ,when you see it WISELY , it becomes merely cause and conditions passing by while Ignorance as stand-by...÷) <A> I don't know if I'm following your point but impermanence in Buddhism isn't intelligent or a belief but is merely what one notices objectivly when not distracted by habits & beliefs. <A> The Oxford dictionary defines intelligence as "the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills. <S> " The nature of impermanence is that what is born also dies, and what is acquired is lost. <S> And this applies to knowledge and skills, which are also acquired and lost. <S> Intelligence itself is impermanent--it waxes and wanes as well. <S> dn16 : ‘ <S> Conditions are impermanent. <S> How could it possibly be otherwise?’” <S> Buddhism addresses the end of suffering. <S> And that would require an end to grasping at impermanence: an10.93 : <S> “Sirs, anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. <S> an10.93 : <S> And what’s impermanent is suffering. <S> Specifically, what is important about impermanence is that, intelligent or random, impermanence is just ... ... unsatisfactory . <A> I think the "intelligence" is a projection -- i.e. that it is your saying, "that's clever, that fits, that's purposeful, that make sense to me." <S> I think impermanence happens because of causes -- e.g. a cup is made from clay, later the cup is broken. <S> I don't see it's useful to apply the word "intelligent" -- <S> maybe the cup being broken is "negligent" rather than "intelligent", or maybe it's "natural". <S> It may be a human tendency to ascribe intelligence -- see animism . <S> I don't remember suttas which support the view that "impermanence is intelligent", although of course it says a lot of other things.
|
Change seems to be intelligent to a human till it makes one happy ,otherwise it seems to be a curse.
|
Buddhism and Losing Determination I noticed that I tend to very well know what I must do, and that I also strive and attempt to do these things, but that often I am filled with a kind of 'defeatism' or 'pessimism'. I know the right way, attempt the right way, but this heavy and saddening discouragement just makes me go: "What's the point? It's all futile anyways." How would Buddhism describe and remedy such an emotion? I feel like this is distinct from not knowing the right way, and not attempting the right way. It's more of a temporary emotion dragging me down, a kind of hopelessness or shame or maybe even self-hatred. This emotion doesn't always occur, but it occurs enough for me to be held back in my practice. What should I do? <Q> Sit on the cushion. <S> You’ve posted scores of variants on this question and still seem to be under the impression that there’s an answer out there somewhere that’s going to get things to click for you - <S> that somehow someone will say something that will miraculously make you committed and motivated to practice. <S> That answer simply doesn’t exist. <S> No amount of intellectualizing, sage advice, or sutra is going to change your mind or your circumstances. <S> Words don’t change behavior; behavior changes behavior. <S> Suck it up and sit. <S> It’s not going to be fun <S> , it’s going to take monumental effort, you aren’t going to see any discernible benefit for a long time. <S> This is what practice looks like. <S> It’s why it’s called a discipline. <S> Effort doesn’t come from the outside. <S> It comes from within. <S> You have to provide the energy to make it happen. <A> For those who practice, illusions disappear. <S> sn12.23 : <S> Truly knowing and seeing is a vital condition for disillusionment. <S> Without illusion, craving and aversion fade away, leading to dispassion. <S> sn12.23 <S> : Disillusionment is a vital condition for dispassion. <S> And with dispassion, there is freedom for right actions, etc. <S> sn12.23 <S> : Dispassion is a vital condition for freedom. <S> And then perhaps one might encounter: <S> sn12.23 : <S> Freedom is a vital condition for the knowledge of ending. <S> So if you're struggling with disillusionment, put it to good use. <S> Help someone with their life, clean up something that is dirty, listen to someone who feels ignored. <S> Extend metta, compassion, rejoicing and inclusive equanimity to all you meet without illusions. <A> This emotion doesn't always occur, but it occurs enough for me to be held back in my practice. <S> What should I do? <S> If Samsara is a very very long marathon, then just remember that if the race requires trillions steps to reach the finish line, any effort you make to put 1 step forward would mean that you're 1 step closer toward the finish line. <S> But if you don't move your foot forward at all, you will never reach the finish line. <A> If you sit with it and watch it mope that thread of mental energy will (eventually) settle down and align with the practice. <A> What should I do? <S> Read the Sabbasava Sutta (MN 2) <S> Watch Ven. <S> Yuttadhammo's 7 Dhamma discourses on the sutta Listen to Ven. <S> Bhikkhu Bodhi's comprehensive 4 Dhamma discourses on the sutta <S> In brief, the Sabbasava Sutta is one of the most complete suttas in the Pali Canon. <S> It encompasses the Buddhas entire teaching. <S> Here the Buddha teaches how one should train oneself in order to become free from the root defilements that bind us to Samsara. <S> The sutta is divided into 7 sections and all 7 methods work for all the defilements. <S> The defilements should be removed by: Seeing, Restraining, Using, Enduring, Avoiding, Dispelling and Developing . <A> This answer might strike a little but pardon me for that in advance. <S> I will try to give one of my friend's experience who went through same . <S> Currently you are feeling like..."It's more of a temporary emotion dragging me down, a kind of hopelessness or shame or maybe even self-hatred" <S> Considering feeling("what's the point ,it's all futile anyways") makes you truly detached from everything at that time. <S> To know whether it's a detached feeling ,check if you feel satisfied by spiritual meditation of ,'Anaapaana' during those temporary emotions/feelings <S> i.e. .... <S> Yes ,then it's detachment <S> It's not a temporary emotion but beginning of something else. <S> 1.) <S> If you have no responsibilities :: It's better to become a full time truth-seeker ,time has come to meditate deeply to get rid of Ignorance because nothing can satisfy you other than spiritual path. <S> 2.) <S> If you have responsibilities ,i.e. few are dependent upon you : <S> : Stand in front of Mirror & Smash it behind that thick skull <S> that , "I have responsibilities left and there are few (remember the relation) Lives who would become living-Dead without me". <S> If this is the right time , I would have been free from any responsibility. <S> Start meditation at point when that emotion arise and declare that to be a hinderance of life like monkey thoughts of lust , Laziness etc. <S> Wait for right time to come and <S> when that time(of no responsibility) comes , be a full-time truth-seeker. <S> No <S> it's not a detachment <S> Then it's called as laziness(प्रमाद) in mind. <S> It can be due to a previous shock_of_life or due to too_much_comfortness in life. <S> In this case ,it's Better to do a monitored meditation retreat for around 1-2 months & do some free-service (सेवा) before returning back to usual life .It <S> will re-track you in right direction. <S> That friend of mine is waiting for right time and has already started his spiritual journey partially. <S> Actually ,he is waiting for permission of parents <S> i.e. he wants his parents to remain happy while he seeks for truth.
|
My advice is to: Be mindful and guard the sense faculties Find a good teacher Do a 10 day (or longer) intensive meditation course One becomes...disillusioned. Defeatism and pessimism are just other activities of the mind; it's the thinking mind getting sulky because it's bored and not being allowed to do what it wants to do.
|
What does zen have to do with spontaneity? Someone told me that I don't need to read about Dogens teachings of zen. They said that "zen is just about being spontaneous and free from rules." Are they right? Why or why not? Is it deeper than just being spontaneous? <Q> They said that "zen is just about being spontaneous and free from rules. <S> " Are they right? <S> Why or why not? <S> Is it deeper than just being spontaneous? <S> Well, it depends on the audience. <S> Take a martial art analogy, you'll never hear a serious master instructing his white-belt student to be "spontaneous and free from rules". <S> You'll only hear that once you've earned a 3rd dan on your black belt. <S> If you're a white-belt, he's gonna have you do tons of drills, physical conditioning, fixed katas, sparring, etc. <S> until your knuckles bleed. <S> Why? <S> 'cuz for any fighting discipline, one still has to put his money where his mouth is by proving how his "spontaneity and freedom from rules" helps him surviving 3 rounds inside the ring. <S> Similarly for spirituality, tell a zen novice to be spontaneous and free from rules on day one, and he'll die inside the ring against Mara in under 3 seconds, let alone 3 rounds. <A> Good question. <S> Zen is about discovering your true nature. <S> This means being true - true to yourself, true to others. <S> Being true to oneself can also be described as spontaneity. <S> This goes very deep, being true without inner conflict. <S> As for the rules, one should be free from blindly taking them as something absolute - while understanding that certain actions do have certain results. <S> One should be certainly free from the cargo-cult mentality: following rules superficially without true understanding. <S> Within this framework: being careful about results of one's actions, going beyond the cargo-cult mentality, being true to others, and being true to oneself - spontaneity is the pinnacle, the cherry on top. <S> And how can one be spontaneous if one is bound by definitions of self <S> : "I am such, I am someone, I am [xyz]"? <S> Hence emptiness, going beyond definitions. <S> Your interlocutor has a point, in the sense that action is what really matters - action moment by moment, suchness, fearlessness, being true. <S> That said, Dogen is good too. <A> Spontaneity is possible where a conceptual system of ethics is replaced with an embodiment of Truth and Reality. <S> In theistic terms - God can be spontaneous and must be, since He must always act according to His nature. <S> The same would be the case for the true sage. <S> As Andrei says, this all about discovering ones' true nature. <S> Once one has then one can and will act spontaneously according to that nature. <S> By his very nature the true sage will act appropriately.
|
Zen has everything to do with spontaneity!
|
"true love", compassion and suffering According to Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh, "true love" has four elements: Loving kindness: this produces a lot of joy and happiness. Compassion: it makes us and the other people suffer less. Joy: "If love does not generate joy, it is not [true] love." Inclusiveness: "In true love there is no frontier between the one who loves and the one who is loved." I'd like to focus on "compassion" here. Don't people who are more compassionate suffer more because they experience the suffering of other people in some sense? So aren't the elements 2 and 3 as mentioned above contrary to each other? I think this question is related but not identical to another question asked before: love and caring is suffering . <Q> Don't people who are more compassionate suffer more because they experience the suffering of other people? <S> The above appears to be the Western/Christian meaning of compassion, namely, " to suffer with ". <S> In Buddhism, the term " karuṇā " (often translated as "compassion") is the wish to ending suffering. <S> It does not mean " to suffer with ". <S> karuṇā - “ahita-dukkh-âpanaya-kāmatā,” the desire of removing bane and sorrow (from one’s fellowmen) <A> When we do not see the roots of other people's suffering, we become involved in their suffering: we grow attached, which can lead us to be angry, resentful, pitying, snobbish, distant, cruel... <S> That does nothing except compound the suffering of others, and lead us to suffer ourselves. <S> When we do see the roots of their suffering we can relate to them: we too have suffered under misperception. <S> Then we are filled with kindness and tenderness. <S> Our kindness and tenderness does more to ease their suffering than any action we could take. <S> Compassion is not about entering into their a person's suffering to fix what's wrong. <S> Compassion is about seeing the person who suffers in their true (non-suffering) light, so that they can find themselves in our eyes. <A> I'd like to focus on "compassion" here. <S> Don't people who are more compassionate suffer more because they experience the suffering of other people in some sense? <S> So aren't the elements 2 and 3 as mentioned above contrary to each other? <S> That's why when studying the Brahmavihara/the Four Sublime Attitudes , one should be careful not to confuse these sublime states with what's called their "near and far enemies". <S> Afterall the practice is really a selfless practice. <S> If one's clinging to the self is not there, if there's no "I", "mine", or "myself", there's no anchor for suffering to take shape. <S> Loving kindness(metta) <S> : wish for welfare/happiness of others; near enemy: attachment; far enemy: ill will; Compassion(karuna) <S> : empathy with others suffering; near enemy: worldly grief; far enemy: cruelty(vihesa); Altruistic joy(mudita): joy from seeing others' success/good fortune; near enemy: worldly joy; far enemy: aversion, discontent(arati); Equanimity(upekkha) <S> : impartiality towards others; near enemy: dull indifference of apathy; far enemy: attachment and aversion(patigha); For a fuller treatment, see Vism IX page 312-313 ;
|
Being compassionate towards another means to see the roots of their suffering — the cravings and discontentments that drive it — not to embrace it or enter into it.
|
Why Mind is Fickle? Monkey mindI don't think.I live in present.My mind always thinking.Past thinking Future thinking. Hate thought.. Worry thought.. Pleasure thought.. Lust thought.. <Q> Bhante Vimalaramasi talks about this in his talk about MN182015 Day 4 Easter Retreat 2 <S> "Perceptions" MN18 - Bhante VimalaramasiBhante discusses sutta MN18 from the majjhima nikaya on the subject of Perception. <S> How perception leads to thinking and craving. <S> Proliferations of mind. <S> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1hNpff_JaA <A> The nature of the mind is dominated by attachment (greed), aversion (fear), and ignorance(curiosity). <S> There are six mind doors with millions of objects. <S> So the mind is continual scans (attention) <S> these objects with a short span of time. <S> If you can keep your attention on only one object, it is called Jhana. <S> Once you eliminated or suppressed attachment, aversion and ignorance then you can keep your attention on a neutral subject without mind fickle. <A> Quoting from Master Junhong Lu's dharma talks -- V 10-9 By Emptying your Mind completely, where do Contaminants settle? <S> : <S> Don’t let your mind waver, in other words, you mustn’t casually desire for anything you see, as that means you have a wavering mind, and that usually spells trouble. <S> The hardest thing to control is one’s own mind; if you can’t control it, then it’s easy for it to be dragged down by the karmic forces of other sentient beings. <S> ... <S> and ... Don’t involve yourself too deeply into all matters within the human realm. <S> In other words, don’t be attached to anything in the human realm. <S> If you constantly think that something must be like that, or something must be done by you, then you’ll be contaminated in the world. <S> You must be in a state of emptiness to confront all afflictions. <S> What is the state of emptiness? <S> It’s to empty your mind; it’s not to have any expectations or thoughts about something. <S> It’s to be devoid of hate or love. <S> Nothing is there, and therefore it’s empty. <S> As long as you use the state of emptiness to confront all afflictions, then your afflictions disappear. <S> Your afflictions of today might disappear tomorrow.
|
You must understand that if you mind frequently allows itself to get distracted, then it means you don’t have control of it, and it’s easy for you to become defiled.
|
When we do any moral act on the basis of greed, we get merit or sin I am hindu. So My mind say if you Will help anyone . you get rewards for example job,beautiful wife, health,Rebirth good place and rebirth in healthy human beings.So I do good act for rewards. This is also my greed .?This is sin?This is good deed? <Q> The Buddha speaks of three sorts of kamma:Deeds done with the intention to create the experience of pleasure,deeds done with the intention to create the experience of pain,and deeds done with the intention to end kamma. <S> Good deeds, your helpful deeds, are deeds done with the intent to create pleasureable experience. <S> Such deeds will create pleasurable experience. <S> There is no denying that. <S> Good deeds that produce pleasurable experience tend to result in attachment to the things of this world and the things of this world, being ending things, will result in pain to one who is attached to them. <S> But there is no thing in Buddhism like 'sin'. <S> It is a matter only of personal welfare. <S> In Buddhism the goal is the ending of kamma, and good deeds are kamma, so the advice for one seeking the goal is not only to eliminate bad deeds, but to eliminate good deeds as well. <S> Deeds that end kamma are those based on the 8-fold Way. <S> They are intentional deeds of not-doing and letting go. <S> For example, Samma Vaca, High Talk, speaks of training yourself to abstain from saying what is not true. <S> Faced with a desire to get something that is thought to be obtainable only through a lie; one intentionally abstains from that lie. <S> By that abstention from reaction to that desire, that old kamma that resulted in the desire is halted, and that potential stream of kamma that would have resulted from the lie is still-born, dead in its tracks. <S> The whole of the 8-fold Way consists of those places and behaviors and ideas which when followed result in the ending of kamma. <A> when it comes to giving, the buddha says that the expecting a good rebirth out of giving is not the best view, but at least there is still good rebirth out of it. <S> As usual with the buddha what matters a lot is how the mind is when giving. <S> He says the best view is to know that dana is part of the path. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.049.than.html here is a way to give https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.037.than.html <A> You will probably have good material reward, which gives you pleasure on many levels; however, your dukkha (your attachment to pleasures as one of many causes of dukkha) does not subside as intended with respect to true practitioners of the Dharma. <A> See the world from this view. <S> When people born they will die someday. <S> When poison is eaten he killed no matter whether it is purposely eaten or mistakenly eaten. <S> When baby touches the flame of a candle he get burnt, no matter baby does or doesn't know it. <S> This is the world, it behaves in a way that it supposed to be. <S> Sometimes we can control it (we think we can <S> but it is not how it should be understood) sometimes we can't. <S> In that world there's something called karma which explains the variations of living beings in tge world. <S> If you do a good you will get back a good one day. <S> If you do a bad you will get back a bad one day. <S> If you look more deeper; Imagine you take a stone from the ground and you place it on a table <S> Now what have you done? <S> you have made change (make it unstable) to a balanced and a stable system by changing the location of a stone. <S> Now when the system get a chance to be stable again it tries to get the stone back to they where it was. <S> (Imagine someone accidentally hits the stone and it directly goes to the ground level) <S> You may think its gravity. <S> Yes of course ots gravity. <S> But what happened the system always tries to keep its stable position by using all those forces. <S> That's the nature! <S> Now when we apply this to sin and good deed, by doing good or sin you are unstabling the system. <S> When ever the system get a chance it does stable the system. <S> If you do bad you will be given bad. <S> Now to answer your question, doing bad while doing good, your results should be the same. <S> If we take some examples on this, you may have seen very rich people who they can't enjoy the life because they are busy or they don't like to enjoy. <S> Tha's because they have done the good but in a bad way <S> So do good but do not expect rewards for that. <S> You will get it definetly. <S> Just try to be happy on what you did but not on what you are supposed to get..! <A> When I feel anger. <S> My speech and body and mind are both rude... <S> Every one knowing these experience... <S> When I feel fear My speech and body and mind are scared . <S> When I do any act base on greed <S> .My <S> body speech and mind are .... <S> No experience now
|
If you do good you will be given good.
|
How to cultivate good q: 1) How do you cultivate good? 2) what is good? <Q> Elsewhere in the Dhammapada <S> it suggests to cultivate good "drop by drop": <S> Think not lightly of evil, saying, "It will not come to me." <S> Drop by drop is the water pot filled. <S> Likewise, the fool, gathering it little by little, fills himself with evil. <S> Think not lightly of good, saying, "It will not come to me." <S> Drop by drop is the water pot filled. <S> Likewise, the wise man, gathering it little by little, fills himself with good. <S> Buddhism is called a "gradual training" -- and I think that's because it's taught gradually, step by step -- <S> but I also think it's practised gradually, e.g. you might learn from moments of kindness or moments of suffering. <S> As for "what is good" one hint might be found in MN 61 <S> Having done a bodily action, you should reflect on it: ' <S> This bodily action I have done — did it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? <S> Was it an unskillful bodily action, with painful consequences, painful results?' <S> If, on reflection, you know that it led to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it was an unskillful bodily action with painful consequences, painful results, then you should confess it, reveal it <S> , lay it open to the Teacher or to a knowledgeable companion in the holy life. <S> Having confessed it... you should exercise restraint in the future. <S> But if on reflection you know that it did not lead to affliction... <S> it was a skillful bodily action with pleasant consequences, pleasant results, then you should stay mentally refreshed & joyful, training day & night in skillful mental qualities. <S> There are different Pali words being used in different verses, for example puñña , kusala , and sampadā <A> We cultivate good the same way we cultivate anything: by giving light and water, and carefully weeding out anything undesired. ' <S> Light' in this sense is conscious attention, which focuses the source of energy for everything we are. ' <S> Water' is compassion (for ourselves and others), that soothes and smooths over every conflict. ' <S> Weeding' means seeing our attachments and delusions for what they are, so we deprive them of the unconscious energy they need to survive. <S> You don't need to worry about what 'good' is. <S> The seeds of it are already present, and you just need to tend it so it will grow naturally. <A> Good is peace and what leads to peace (i.e. not to pain). <S> Good is understanding and what leads to understanding (i.e. not to confusion). <S> Good is health and what leads to health (i.e. not to sickness). <S> Good is acceptance and what leads to acceptance (i.e. not to aversion). <S> Good is love and what leads to love (i.e. not to hate). <S> Good is freedom of being oneself and what leads to freedom of being oneself (i.e. not to fear). <S> Our every action sows the seeds that will become the causes and conditions of future results. <S> An apple seed grows into apple-tree, it doesn't grow into cucumber. <S> Similarly, actions of certain kind grow into results of the same nature, they don't become something completely different. <S> Violence and anger is a seed that grows into problems, it does not grow into peace. <S> Lies and divisive speech are seeds that grow into problems, they do not grow into peace. <S> Consuming junk physical good and junk mental food are seeds that grow into bodily junk and mental junk, they do not not grow into health. <S> Indulging into vulgar pleasures is a seed ... <S> Making friends with people who do the above is a seed ... <S> Watching movies and TV series about people who's goal in life is all of the above is a seed ... Thinking negative and egoistic thoughts is a seed... <S> Thinking <S> "I am (we are) good <S> and they are not" is a seed ... <S> It is kind of simple. <S> Do not sow seeds of conflict. <S> Be selective about what you consume. <S> Do not feed your ego. <S> Whatever remains - be strong and don't doubt yourself.
|
Good is harmony and what leads to harmony (i.e. not to discord).
|
Buddhism and Integrative Complexity I noticed a coincidence between something I read in a book by Thich Nhat Hanh, and an article on research about a psychological phenomenon known to facilitate inner and outer peace. My question is: What Buddhist concepts are similar or have something in common with the "integration" and "differentiation" phenomenon mentioned below? My guess is emptiness and impermanence, I could be wrong about those and doubtless there are others. Here's the coincidence. Years ago I was reading Zen Keys by Thich Nhat Hanh. I found it had my mind going in many interesting directions. I saw some parts of the book, like those describing impermanence, encouraging the Differentiation of things. A book isn't a book. It's made of wood and glue, was put together by a machine somewhere and hauled to the book store by a guy in a truck. The book is made up of many non-book elements. Everything changes, so the book itself isn't even that book over the smallest amount of time depending one which features you choose to measure. But there was also a call for Integration. Even as we distinguish between the book and the truck and the guy hauling the books in the truck to the bookstore, they are all part of the process leading to the experience of reading the book. The book might have one meaning to one reader, and a different meaning to a different reader. So many things depend on the context bringing them together. The same elements at a different time and place produce a different experience. The individual elements create the here and now into a unified whole, any part of which alters the thing when changed. With my math background I was inclined to think of these things as Integration and Differentiation, just as helpful mnemonics, they are pretty different from the math concepts. A few months back I was reading about Integrative Complexity . "The measure of integrative complexity has two components: differentiation and integration. Differentiation refers to the perception[or weighing] of different dimensions[or qualities] when considering an issue. Integration refers to the recognition of cognitive connections among differentiated dimensions or perspectives. 1 " It has some things in common with what Thich Nhat Hanh was talking about, in terms of understanding of all things as composed of not-that-thing elements. One can find similarities in different things, and differences in similar things. The interplay of those techniques are proving conducive to both inner and outer peace according to the researchers. <Q> While I don't have any comments on the individual concepts of Differentiation and Integration, reading that wikipedia article about Integrative Complexity as a style of thinking - strikes me as being very similar to the "Buddha can see from all perspectives" idea I presented in my answer here . <S> Quoting the wikipedia: Integrative Complexity is ...recognition and integration of multiple perspectives and possibilities and their interrelated contingencies. <S> For example, it could take the form of explaining why someone may view an event in a different way or in what ways a compromise could be made between conflicting values. <S> So by this definition Buddha is the champion of Integrative Complexity. <S> That said, these parts: <S> Integratively complex thinkers are also more prone to defer to others or put off making a decision when faced with difficult cost–benefit decisions. <S> and Additionally, while integratively complex thinkers are more likely to reach a mutually advantageous compromise when dealing with reasonable opponents, unreasonable opponents are much more likely to be able to exploit them. <S> -- do not sound relevant at all. <S> Perhaps whoever wrote this did not realize that one's ability to integrate diff. <S> perspectives does not preclude one from having clear agenda. <S> Buddha knows what is ultimately good (cessation of suffering!) and has no problem utilizing his Integrative Complexity skills to use people's own motives to their ultimate good. <S> So perhaps we could say that Buddha is the champion of Integrative Complexity AND ethics. <A> There is an important notion of conjoinment and differentiation in the discoursed. <S> Discernment and consciousness are conjoined elements; what one discerns that one cognizes but consciousness is to be understood and the latter developed. <S> An analogy i can offer is that of the Doppler Effect and Sound. <S> The two are conjoined but are not the same and it is not possible to take them apart for that sound is the effect and the effect is sound. <S> There is this famous thought experiment where an observer watches a passing train being struck by two lightnings simultaneously on each end and in due time comparing his observation to a person located inside the train to whom it would appear as if the front of the train was hit by the lightning first, preceeding the second strike, that is because he was in motion and the light from the first lightning made contact with the external eye & consciousness elements before the second eventuality, thus the expression of causes coming into play is different. <S> Herein both the internal and the external contact are understood to come into play but both the external& internal elements are conceived and perceived internally. <S> It is by analyzing what your senses present that one analyzes the world with it's internal and external elements to make sense of what the senses present and how it happens. <A> Interesting idea in regards to the realm of form, but it has little to do with emptiness or the experience of shunyata. <S> What is left when there is no perceiver, no object, no components, and no form? <S> When you can point to that, you’ll have identified what Thay was talking about. <S> See the following: <S> CASE 3 of the Mumonkan GUTEI'S FINGER Gutei raised his finger whenever he was asked a question about Zen. <S> A boy attendant began to imitate him in this way. <S> When a visitor asked the boy what his master had preached about, the boy raised his finger. <S> Gutei heard about the boy's mischief, seized him and cut off his finger with a knife. <S> As the boy screamed and ran out of the room, Gutei called to him. <S> When the boy turned his head to Gutei, Gutei raised up his own finger. <S> In that instant the boy was enlightened. <S> When Gutei was about to die, he said to the assembled monks,"I received this one-finger Zen from Tenryu. <S> I used it all my life and yet could not exhaust it" <S> and then he passed away. <S> Mumon's Comment:Where Gutei and the boy attained enlightenment is not at the tip of the finger itself. <S> If this simple truth is not comprehended, Tenryu, Gutei, the boy and you also will be bound together once and for all. <S> Gutei made a fool of old Tenryu, With the sharp blade he did simply harm the boy. <S> That's nothing compared to the Mountain Spirit when he raised his hand And split Kasan (the great mountain) in two. <A> The impermanents come only with arisable-reality. <S> The perspective of something can be reality or not. <S> A present thing must be depending on widely factors. <S> The factors could be widely present, past, and future factors. <S> When each factor is present, it has widely factors as well. <S> Every arisable-reality must has its own factors. <S> Every arisable-reality is difference from the others, but is same impermanent, suffering, and uncontrollable. <A> An opened mind freed from worries and stresses has more space to understand things that catches its attention. <S> This includes seeing the painful actions of others more clearly.
|
They are conjoined but are not the same thing, having delineated the difference it is still not possible to separate them.
|
How not to alter breathing in Anapana meditation? When I practice Anapana meditation ,I often get a feel that I tried to alter my breathing instead of observing natural breathing.So,how can I observe natural breath?What are the best tips for this? <Q> A simple and natural way to relinquish breath obsessions is to count your breaths. <S> This is a traditional Zen meditation practice that I still use 4 decades after I learned it. <S> It works because it gives your grasping mind something to do. <S> It's actually quite difficult to maintain a count. <S> One has to relinquish distractions in order to not lose count. <S> And that is actually why breath counting of any sort is initially effective. <S> With extended practice, the counting itself becomes a distraction since it engages the verbal processes. <S> In the meditation practice guide of MN44, we have: MN44:17.2 : “ <S> Verbal processes cease first, then physical, then mental.” <S> So to deepen the practice, we have to relinquish the numbers. <S> One way to do so is to switch to something like prayer beads where the counting is relinquished while retaining the mindfulness of the passage of time. <S> Or one can simply follow the breath in and out as recommended by the suttas. <S> Consult with a meditation teacher for individual advice on breathing. <A> When you're learning any skill, not just breath meditation, it's natural that people's body, mind, breath are going to tense up. <S> The only way you're going to be more relaxed is through practice and familiarity. <A> Breath changes only if there is an intention to alter the beath like: breathing in deep/shallow breathing in long/short breathing in slow/fast <S> By making sure you have no intention to alter the breath, you breath naturally. <A> Short answer: no need to worry about it. <S> Long answer... <S> If you find yourself trying to control your breathing, then observe yourself trying to control your breathing. <S> There is some discontentment there: maybe some thought process is worried that you're not breathing 'correctly,' or some part of you is bored and wants to play with the breath. <S> And as your breathing becomes natural, that part of you that's trying to control it will get stagnant and fade, and you'll fall back to watching your breathing. <S> Breathing is breathing. <S> There's no right or wrong to it, and you can only have so much control over it in any case. <S> And really, controlling your breathing is not 'wrong'; that is literally how you are breathing at that moment, so all you need to do is watch it as you'd watch any other breathe. <S> Part of the practice here is quell the idea that anything needs to be done. <S> No need to control the breath, no need to suppress controlling the breath: <S> either way, breathing will merely continue. <A> Simply give up the intention to watch the breathing and only have the intention to sit with a quiet mind. <S> It is not necessary to bend or direct the mind to watch the breathing. <S> If the mind is quiet, the mind will automatically know the breathing. <S> The Buddha did not teach to watch breathing. <S> The Buddha taught to abandon craving. <S> The word " mindfulness " means to " remember " to apply the teachings (of abandoning craving). <S> "Mindfulness" does not mean to "observe". <S> " Anapanasati " means " mindfulness with breathing ". <S> It does not mean " mindfulness of breathing ".
|
But as you watch yourself trying to control your breathing your breathing will become natural, because you're no longer identifying with the part of you that's trying to control it.
|
If teacher punishing student is also supposed bad karma? Either school teacher or Buddhist teacher in monastery, if they would punish their students is also supposed bad karma even if it cause of bad behavior of students? <Q> Buddha did not do any violence. <S> The suttas say: it is true, Kesi, that it's not proper for a Tathagata to take life. <S> But if a tamable person doesn't submit either to a mild training or to a harsh training or to a mild & harsh training, then the Tathagata doesn't regard him as being worth speaking to or admonishing. <A> It depends on how you punish. <S> Buddha also punished. <S> ============= <S> "If a tamable person doesn't submit either to a mild training or to a harsh training or to a mild & harsh training, then I kill him, Kesi." <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.111.than.html <A> If teacher punishing student is also supposed bad karma? <S> It depends on thoughts Chethanaham bikkawe kamman wadami <S> (question on this can be found here ). <S> And only teacher knows what kind of thoughts were on his mind at that time. <S> Either school teacher or Buddhist teacher in monastery, if they would punish their students is also supposed bad karma even if it cause of bad behavior of students? <S> As said above, it doesn't matter from the student's side, it matters from teacher's side, because he owns his karma as a return to his own actions. <A> We donot know karma <S> and it's fruit. <S> We aren't buddha. <S> So this question is not right .If <S> I give any answer for this question. <S> I will give wrong answer beacuse <S> I do not know karma.. <S> I gave answer from memory. <S> Book memory .Buddha memory.. <S> Memory can not give right answer. <S> My experience not book answer <S> .If <S> This is Not right. <S> This is my anger. <S> Angry man can't kind speech. <S> This is voilence both inner voilence and outer voilence for students.
|
I punish any student..if I feel guilt for punishment.
|
Problems of a Lay Mediator Questions: Is it normal to shy away from your family when it is hard to interact with them because they are so caught up in defilement and shaming my practices? And is it proper to not respond to other people's questions or comments such as "wasn't that so good" or "do you like/dislike that?" or even "you believe in God, right, and you're a good Christian, right?" I seem to get these questions and have a hard time putting together an answer. <Q> It is important to focus on your education because obviously you will not be able to live with your parents, forever. <S> Skilling yourself for a job or career is most important if you want independence. <A> The Buddhist practice revolves around 3 practices: development of morality and ethics with a view to developing control over the mind development of control over the mind with a view of developing wisdom through direct and empirical experience developing wisdom through direct and empirical experience <S> Regardless of if you are from a particular culture or religious background you can practice them. <A> They’ll get over it. <S> I come from a family of devout Polish Catholics. <S> At first, they were openly hostile. <S> Then they were upset. <S> Then they were accepting. <S> Now they just make fun of me. <S> And if your family doesn’t get over it, well, then you know where the problem lies. <S> And you get to learn first hand how to wisely handle conflict. <A> Putting up an answer is not a concern .This <S> is your current orientation , <S> so its normal people ask if they aren't accustomed to seeing that .Buddha wasn't ashamed to beg with a bowel ,because he understood the purpose of his action ,only when you aren't sure about what you are doing ,do you start asking such questions. <S> I read a story about Buddha when he came back to his town after enlightenment <S> ,he came with his begging bowel ,and took his son Rahula as well to the path. <S> He met his father on his death bed ,his father was so hurt and angry, telling him now I have no heir and started crying for minutes on end ,telling Buddha "what all this non-sense you're doing ,begging ,you have wasted your life",and Buddha <S> felt compassion and just removed his tears , <S> after his father settled down ,opened his eyes,and saw Buddha's face in such peace and silence,he told him "I never saw you so beautiful". <S> Buddha was in perfect harmony with his path ,because it was his experience ,not because he was blindly following some principles or Sadhanas. <A> I do not think anyone shames you if you practice or observe the five precepts. <S> However, if you want to meditate be a bit more obscure about it as some people will find it strange. <S> However, you can practice Satipathana without the attention of other people. <S> What exactly are they shaming you? <A> Teaching good at the beginning, in the middle and at the end full of meaning even in the letter, complete in every way stating the pure holy life. <S> Hearing this a householder or a householder’s son, born to some clan, gains faith in the Thus Gone One. <S> With that faith he reflects. <S> The life in a household is full of defilements, going forth is like open space. <S> It is not easy for one living a household life to lead the holy life complete and pure without defilements. <S> What if I shave head and beard, don yellow robes and go forth as a homeless. <S> Later he gives up a little wealth, or much wealth, a small circle of friends, or a large circle of friends, shaving head and beard, and donning yellow robes goes forth as a homeless. <S> One intent on realization is distancing himself from those who don't. <S> As one distances oneself from unwholesome perceptions by giving appropriate attention to wholesome perceptions, thus attaining seclusion, just so one will be distancing oneself from situations where inappropriate attention is given and people who give inappropriate attention. <S> In my experience you can try to teach friends and family but lest they become your equals or better there will be that proportional distance.
|
There is no shame in doing any of the above.
|
Is it OK for a Buddhist teacher to charge their students an hourly rate for their time? Charging money for teaching time seems like it goes against the spirit of the dharma. I’m asking because I was looking for a teacher and came across one that did charge money. <Q> It's not OK. <S> “It’s not easy to teach the Dhamma to others, Ānanda. <S> The Dhamma should be taught to others only when five qualities are established within the person teaching. <S> Which five? <S> “The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, ‘I will speak step-by-step.’ <S> “The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, ‘I will speak explaining the sequence (of cause & effect).’ <S> “The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, ‘I will speak out of compassion.’ <S> “The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, ‘ I will speak not for the purpose of material reward. ’ <S> “The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, ‘I will speak without hurting myself or others.’ <S> ( AN 5:159 ) . <S> One should not make an effort everywhere, should not be another’s hireling, should not live dependent on another, should not go about as a trader in the Dhamma. <S> ( Ud 6:2 ) <A> The Buddha taught the Dhamma is a "gift". <S> A "gift" is something given free of charge. <S> The best of gifts is the gift of the teaching. <S> Etadaggaṃ, bhikkhave, dānānaṃ yadidaṃ dhammadānaṃ. <S> The best sort of kindly speech is to teach the Dhamma again and again to someone who is engaged and who lends an ear. <S> Etadaggaṃ, bhikkhave, peyyavajjānaṃ yadidaṃ atthikassa ohitasotassa punappunaṃ dhammaṃ deseti. <S> AN 9.5 <A> Hm. <S> What exactly will this person be teaching you? <S> Buddhist philosophy? <S> Proper sitting posture? <S> Some special 'technique'? <S> Most buddhist things you can learn for free from other teachers, so in what way are this person's teachings special or unique, so that you'd be willing to fork out an hourly rate? <S> Don't get me wrong, I'm not against the idea of charging money for certain kinds of training. <S> But it's a tricky issue. <S> It's one thing to attach a monetary value to your time as a teacher; that's almost a necessity in our debased commercial world, at least if you want to teach full-time. <S> But it's quite a different thing to attach a monetary value to Buddhism itself . <S> The practice is how we establish value in our lives, and so it can't really be reduced to other forms of value. <S> If someone is trying to sell h'er insights because s'he believes h'er insights are superior, <S> well... hm. <S> This reminds me of a joke I made up once: Olympic competitive meditation events. <S> Is that really where we want to go? <A> Because the student is just trying to gain some qualification required for his or her career. <S> But if it is someone who is genuinely trying to attain enlightenment or someone seeking counselling for his or her misery, it's immoral to ask for a payment. <S> Donations can be accepted. <S> In simple terms, it's immoral to ask a payment from those who seek refuge in the Dhamma. <A> In my opinion, it is OK for a layperson to charge money as a teacher if the student prepares to pay for it. <S> I can't recall Buddha saying that his Dhamma should be taught free of charge. <S> However, Buddhist monks are not allowed to handle money according to the Vinaya. <S> It is great to see some people are prepared to pay money to learn Dhamma! <A> In Mahayana, Dharma is considered precious, as precious as gold and diamonds, to put it very mildly. <S> Because of this, it's not unheard of in Mahayana for a student to offer something valuable, or indeed expensive, to one's prospective teacher as a gesture of respect for the value of the teaching as well as a sign of one's serious intentions. <A> I myself teach Dhamma and never charge for that. <S> After class, students may leave a donation, which I share by half with the owner of the place where we sit. <S> That's a best solution, because I don't feel as selling something, but giving a gift. <S> And that makes me really happy. <S> On the other hand, students also practice generosity, which makes them happy. <S> That way, at the end of the class we all part happy. <S> If there would be some price set, maybe I would think the price is low for the effort invested and they would feel maybe the price is too high for what they got. <S> So we would all part unhappy. <S> Of course, this is all possible, since I am financially independent and teaching is not source of my income, but of my joy of sharing something really precious. <S> Other teachers are maybe in different situation and I can understand that. <S> But, on the other hand, nobody force them to be teachers and they can find maybe some other, less morally conflicting source of income. <S> Besides, as mentioned, if it is about longer retreat, where place should be rented and food provided, of course some fee is a must. <S> But again, I think, only to cover the costs and not the paycheck for the teacher. <A> It is not uncommon to see a donation box in a Sri Lankan temple, It is not uncommon for a senior monk to ask tourists for a donation for work on the temple. <S> It is not uncommon to make a donation after a meditation event, especially if food and lodging is provide. <S> In Sri Lanka it is standard practice for a tutor to charge a fixed price to a student studying for a religion exam, the same as with any other exam. <S> This person would prefer to learn dharma from a person teaching for merit rather than cash. <A> It depends on intention. <S> “The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, ‘I will speak not for the purpose of material reward.’ <S> Payment could cover costs of hiring a space, of travel or materials. <S> Asking for these doesn't mean it is taught without thought, the teacher may well not actually profit, financially, from it at all.
|
If you are teaching someone to pass an exam on Buddhism, it's ok to accept a payment.
|
Who is experiencing the non self? There is no self that is permanent. All this results from 5 aggregates, then who is experiencing the non self? <Q> There are several questions on this site which are more-or-less about this topic. <S> One which I found helpful was, <S> How is it wrong to believe that a self exists, or that it doesn't? <S> I also liked this little summary of Right View , which includes, "A thicket of wrong views". <A> Why, of course Buddha is experiencing the non-self. <S> Arahant is experiencing the non-self. <S> Bodhisattva from the first Bhumi and above is experiencing the non-self. <A> You have this question a bit upside down and backwards. <S> The point is that we mistakenly associate the 'self' with the five aggregates. <S> What we think is the 'self,' isn't. <S> It's like walking around wearing a name-tag that says 'me,' and pointing at it whenever anyone asks who we are. <S> If someone rips off our name-tag and runs away, do we suddenly stop being 'me'? <S> But we are so used to pointing at the name-tag, that we lose track of the distinction between it and us. <S> The idea of 'no self' is a way of ripping off the name-tags. <S> It's not a question of who is there experiencing 'non self'; it's a question of who is there experiencing all the false labels of 'self'. <A> Questions about "who" are irrelevant, per the Phagguna Sutta . <A> I can't give answer this question. <S> But I will attempt this question. <S> We aren't going "non self " First question " who am i <S> " I am "name" <S> so I can live without "name" <S> so I am not "name". <S> Who told you aren't name?. <S> Answer =mind saying You can understand.... <S> I am "identity " identity means docter, engineer, monk, Hindu,Muslim. <S> So without identity you can live <S> so you aren't identity.. <S> Who told you aren't identity? <S> Answer =mind saying. <S> I am physical body. <S> In physical body many parts so we are discussed. <S> I am hair <S> so without hair we can live <S> so I amnot hair. <S> I am leg and hand <S> But without leg we can live <S> so I amnot leg. <S> I am eye, ear , but without eye <S> and ear <S> we can live <S> so I amnot eye and ear.. <S> I am mind <S> but without mind can live <S> so I amnot mind for example <S> comma . <S> I am "breath" but without breath we can't live.. <S> This is my last lever. <S> I amnot going next level.
|
The mind experiences not-self.
|
Is upaya a lie? According to upaya, the doctrine of 'skillful means', as it appears in the Lotus Sutra, was the Buddha lying when he said that there are three vehicles? Presumably he knew there was only one: so why wasn't his deception evil? I am referring to the claim in e.g. the parable of there being three chariots, when there is in fact only one. Or Shariputra's claim that he thought he was "deceived" when believing he could not be a Buddha. I believe it's generally characterized as "deception" according to the scholastic tradition that is based on the lotus sutra. <Q> The starting point of Buddhism is the idea that everyone begins in a state of ignorance. <S> It is our ignorance that creates tanhā and dukkha, and it is the cessation of tanhā and dukkha that brings about wisdom and enlightenment. <S> But ignorance, by its nature, comes in a multitude of forms. <S> Your ignorance is not the same as my ignorance, his ignorance is not the same as hers, theirs is not the same as ours... <S> Upaya is an acknowledgement that we are all working out of different bubbles of ignorance, and that — so long as we are trapped in our own bubble — different tools might be 'skillful' for the context of ignorance we happen to be trapped in. <S> Even tools that are not entirely correct might be sufficient for the state we are in. <S> For instance, someone deeply attached the sensual world, filled with urges and cravings and jealousies, might find a more structured, disciplined environment useful (sravakayana); someone more critical and mind-oriented might find it hard to accept and embrace doctrine, and might find an independent path useful (pratyekabuddhayana). <S> There's no value judgement to this; it makes no sense to think that your ignorance is <S> right <S> and my ignorance is wrong . <S> And we don't want to commit to a one-size-fits-all policy that helps some more than others. <S> In that sense, upaya is a form of compassion, because it allows for the differences in our misunderstandings so that all can see progress. <A> What's more, every utterance of the Buddha was an approximation of the truth when heard, understood, and conceptualized by sentient beings. <S> This is necessarily so because all conceptualizations are mere approximations and are by nature deceptive in that they are tainted by the ignorance of sentient beings. <S> The only way to the real truth - untainted by conceptualizations and elaborations - is via direct perception of emptiness. <S> This must be experienced, not just inferred or understood by way of explanation, even if that explanation is coming from an Enlightened One. <S> But have no doubt the Buddha's actions - all of them - are Noble and motivated purely for the benefit of sentient beings. <S> Evil does not enter into it. <S> That is a category error. <S> Karma is a universal law much like universal physical laws. <S> There is no great scale or moral arbiter dispensing justice or punishment based on moral judgements of karmic actions. <S> This is just a wrong conception of what the Buddha was after when describing karma and dependent origination. <S> Often western peoples who grow up with the cultural traditions and religions of monotheism where moral absolutes are a result of judgement by a higher power struggle with this. <S> The Buddha never understood or intended to describe the law of karma as a form of universal justice or punishment for moral laws given from on high. <S> You can judge karmic actions based on the fruits they produce. <S> Do they lead to suffering? <S> To happiness? <S> Do they have benefit? <S> Do they harm? <S> What has been empirically found is that actions that are undertaken out of pure motivation - cherishing others in combination with wisdom - are of benefit and bring happiness. <S> Similarly, actions undertaken out of selfish motivation - cherishing oneself in combination with ignorance - are harmful and bring suffering. <S> The Buddha is the personification of perfect motivation and perfect wisdom. <A> "The “Expedient Means” (second) chapter of the Lotus Sutra says, “The Buddhas, utilizing the power of expedient means, apply distinctions to the one Buddha vehicle and preach as though it were three.” <S> It also says, “In the Buddha lands of the ten directions there is only the Law of the one vehicle, there are not two, there are not three.” <S> Nichiren Buddhism Dictionary <S> It's a question of tailoring the teaching to be most useful to the person given their stage of realisation. <S> Thus in Mahayana there are the 'Three Turnings of the Wheel' - each suitable at their level. <S> But it's all one process and one teaching. <A> His upaya wasn't a deception, not evil, and definitely not a lie. <S> Say, one takes up Taekwondo, Judo, and Karate. <S> Are they 3 different vehicles? <S> yes (meaning there're different forms, methods, and techniques). <S> Are they one vehicle? <S> yes (meaning the ultimate goal is the same, maximizing one's survivability in combat and perfecting one's character).
|
In a very meaningful sense, every action of the Buddha whether of body, speech, or mind was upaya : skillful means. Insofar as all conceptualizations or elaborations are mere approximation of the truth and tainted by ignorance, then you could say they are lies.
|
Misconception about remembering past lives? I have been digging really deep into the philosophy of Buddha. What I have come to know is that Buddha has never talked about remembering past lives in any original text. If he has then please let me know. Now, what he may have said is the idea of Dependent Origination, that surely many past actions/events were the cause of his birth. The other thing what I have found is that rebirth in Buddhism is not reincarnation. Keep this in mind. It is the rebirth of consciousness in this life. We go through different perception of the self as long as we cling to desires. Also, sexual desires work vaguely here to change the perception of "I". However, my question is Buddha has never talked about past life as in life about past bodies before physical birth, if he has then please let me know. (Also, I have found that Jataka tales is fabricated because it is post Canon.) All the stories of remembrance of past life is fabricated as well, in my point of view, there is also a story where Buddha remembers past life after enlightenment, but it's wrong. He was just pointing out Dependent Origination. Please let me clarify on this topic. Thank you. <Q> However, my question is Buddha has never talked about past life as in life about past bodies before physical birth, if he has then please let me know. <S> (Also, I have found that Jataka tales is fabricated because it is post Canon.) <S> And it's mentioned not only in the Jataka, but in all the Nikayas . <S> So, it'd be a mistake to interpret rebirth as only exclusively the momentary rebirth of consciousness in the same life. <A> There's MN 36 for example which is translated like this: <S> When my mind had immersed in samādhi like this—purified, bright, flawless, rid of corruptions, pliable, workable, steady, and imperturbable—I extended it toward recollection of past lives. <S> So evaṃ samāhite citte parisuddhe pariyodāte anaṅgaṇe vigatūpakkilese mudubhūte kammaniye ṭhite āneñjappatte pubbenivāsānussatiñāṇāya cittaṃ abhininnāmesiṃ. <S> I recollected my many kinds of past lives, with features and details. <S> So anekavihitaṃ pubbenivāsaṃ anussarāmi, seyyathidaṃ—ekampi jātiṃ … <S> pe … iti sākāraṃ sauddesaṃ anekavihitaṃ pubbenivāsaṃ anussarāmi. <S> There are people who dispute or debate the meaning of pubbenivāsānussati . <S> Some people say it might refer to times or states within this lifetime when we identified as a self -- and maybe say that a better translation might be past "abodes" not past "lives". <S> I posted this question here a while back -- <S> Is rebirth a delusional belief? <S> There are people, including on this site (and even quoting some modern-day monks), who agree with and promote the idea that "past lives" doesn't mean that (and that people who say otherwise are wrong). <S> More generally that might be one of the tenets of secular buddhism . <S> I think that's unorthodox though and that a majority of monks would say that, absolutely, the suttas and other texts are full of references to past lives -- and that people who say otherwise are sort of not accepting what the texts say. <S> I hope that, perhaps, being "agnostic" about the subject (of how to translate or understand that topic) is a way to avoid misunderstanding and misleading people. <S> The whole topic seems to me to be potentially a form of identity view, which we are warned against, part of the " thicket of views " -- also attachment to a specific view etc. <S> Here was an answer that was willing to "understand figuratively not physically" -- the question was, <S> How do we know that the suttas talk about past lives? <S> And here another answer that you might find helpful <S> -- the question was, <S> What's the value or harm of a literal belief in rebirth? <A> In the discourses, is always clear when the Buddha is using similes and when he is not. <S> Thus, I don't see any reason to believe that he was refering to rebirth, other realms and the inhabitants these realms as similes. <S> I can remember a few suttas which elucidate rebirth as a literal death followed by a literal birth. <S> So Ven. <S> Sāriputta—when there was still more to be done, having established <S> Dhanañjānin <S> the brahman in the inferior Brahmā world — got up from his seat and left. <S> Then, not long after Ven. <S> Sāriputta’s departure, <S> Dhanañjānin <S> the brahman died and reappeared in the Brahmā world. <S> MN 97 . <S> Then Ven. <S> Sāriputta and Ven. <S> Ānanda, having given this instruction to Anāthapiṇḍika the householder, got up from their seats and left. <S> Then, not long after they left, Anāthapiṇḍika the householder died and reappeared in the Tusita heaven. <S> Then Anāthapiṇḍika the deva’s son, in the far extreme of the night, his extreme radiance lighting up the entirety of Jeta’s Grove, went to the Blessed One [...] <S> Then when the night had past, The Blessed One addressed the monks: “Last night, monks, a certain deva’s son in the far extreme of the night, his extreme radiance lighting up the entirety of Jeta’s Grove, came to me [...] <S> When this was said, Ven. <S> Ānanda said to the Blessed One, “Lord, that must have been Anāthapiṇḍika the deva’s son [...]”. <S> “Very good, Ānanda. <S> Very good, to the extent that you have deduced what can be arrived at through logic. <S> That was Anāthapiṇḍika the deva’s son, and no one else.” <S> MN 143 Buddha revelead one of his past lives as a chariot maker “ <S> [...] Now, monks, the thought may occur to you that the chariot maker on that occasion was someone else, but it shouldn’t be seen in that way. <S> I myself was the chariot maker on that occasion. <S> AN 3:15 <S> And what is wrong view? <S> And what is wrong view? <S> ‘There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. <S> There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. <S> There is no this world, no next world , no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no contemplatives or brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.’ <S> This is wrong view. <S> MN 117
|
The Buddha did talk quite explicitly about physical rebirths before and after the physical death of the body.
|
Attention to itching makes me unable to focus on anything else I am spending some time alone in a day (in solitude). During that alone time and during the rest of the day i am feeling itching and tingling. I can ignore both by just watching it as someone described in the below article about itching. However, both are really annoying and feels like i'm unable to focus on anything, as my focus then turn to the itch/tingling. Reference: https://zenhabits.net/itchy/ <Q> Here's the canonical answer: <S> In this way he dwells contemplating feelings in feelings internally,or dwells contemplating feelings in feelings externally, or dwellscontemplating feelings in feelings [both] internally and externally;or dwells contemplating in feelings [their] nature of arising, ordwells contemplating in feelings <S> [their] nature of vanishing, ordwells contemplating in feelings <S> [their] nature of [both] arising andvanishing. <S> Or else his mindfulness that ‘there are feelings’ isestablished simply to the extent necessary for bare knowledge, forrepeated mindfulness. <S> And he dwells independent, and does not cling toanything in the world. <S> Thus also, monks, a monk dwells contemplatingfeelings in feelings. <S> ( Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta, MN10 translated by Aggacitta Bhikkhu ) Take note though that feelings here does not refer to the itch, but how you feel about it. <A> In addition to itching, there are many more bodily functions. <S> One of the monks said that it is called Dathu Manasikara. <S> Actually this is a sign of your progress in meditation according to him. <S> Do you see the itch come and go or it moves to some other place sometimes? <A> In Chapter 10 of Mindfulness in Plain English , Bhante Gunaratana speaks of itches and other troublesome sensations, specifically in the context of meditation, saying “Watch it come up and watch it pass away. <S> Don’t get involved.” <S> A few are more insistent, and do not go away as easily; I have yet to find a solution for those. <A> You can and should practice mindfulness of feelings [sensations] <S> You should also develop perception of drawbacks; <S> And what is the perception of drawbacks? <S> It’s when a mendicant has gone to a wilderness, or to the root of a tree, or to an empty hut, and reflects like this: ‘This body has much suffering and many drawbacks. <S> For this body is beset with many kinds of affliction, such as the following. <S> Diseases of the eye, inner ear, nose, tongue, body, head, outer ear, mouth, teeth, and lips. <S> Cough, asthma, catarrh, inflammation, fever, stomach ache, fainting, dysentery, gastric pain, cholera, leprosy, boils, eczema, tuberculosis, epilepsy, herpes, itch, scabs, smallpox, scabies, hemorrhage, diabetes, piles, pimples, and ulcers. <S> Afflictions stemming from disorders of bile, phlegm, wind, or their conjunction. <S> Afflictions caused by change in weather, by not taking care of yourself, by overexertion, or as the result of past deeds. <S> Cold, heat, hunger, thirst, defecation, and urination.’ <S> And so they meditate observing drawbacks in this body. <S> This is called the perception of drawbacks. <S> https://suttacentral.net/an10.60/en/sujato <S> This condition has it's drawbacks <S> but i think that it also has it's positives in that it can make one a bit more loathsome and serious. <S> I think in general one can replace loathsomeness by equanimity and endure the sensations. <S> Afaik there is no trick or technique to it other than a comprehensive development of the faculties. <S> Also obv try to figure out what causes the itching and see if you can reduce it to a min.
|
I often get itches during meditation, and I find that if I simply unattach from the sensation, not thinking about it, most itches go away fairly soon. This experience is quite normal.
|
Is it fine to learn Vipassana meditation online? Is it essential to go to SN Goenka centre for 10 days to learn Vipassana ? Or is it fine to learn Vipassana online? <Q> Doing an intensive course at a dedicated meditation centre is incomparably better than online learning, but doing an online course or something similar is actually better in my opinion as a first step. <S> Often when people come to our centre having never practiced or having practiced a different tradition, they spend quite a bit of time becoming accustomed to the practice and accepting it. <S> They waste a lot of time doubting and fumbling, and given they often have a limited number of vacation days it often makes finishing a foundation course difficult. <S> Much of the doubt and fumbling is mitigated by online teachings - most people coming to our centre have little doubt and lots of practice based on static teachings they have found on the internet. <S> Moreover, those meditators who have completed our online course (which just means they practiced at least an hour a day and we talked once a week, giving them new exercises weekly) veritably and invariably sail through the intensive course since they are very well prepared for it. <S> You can check out https:/meditation.sirimangalo.org/ for our online course system. <S> There are some testimonials you can read I think, but I can say myself the online courses have made a big difference in our community. <A> Going to a centre has the following advantages: <S> unburdens <S> you <S> from responsibility <S> provide you with proper instructions and guidance <S> Household Responsibilities <S> When doing a course online <S> you are not unburdened from responsibilities which might need your attention. <S> This, breaks your attention on meditation creates fabrication which is avoided in a centre Proper Guidance <S> In a 10 day course is intense. <S> Generally in the oldern days courses were longer. <S> So much instructions were packed into the 10 days. <S> If you are doing a course online <S> it might be easy that you might miss some crucial instruction or skip over something and there is nobody to check and correct you. <S> Though there are teachers who teach online now, it is always best to go to a centre for the 1st course and when you learn the technique in full <S> then you can do it one your own. <A> I don't think one should put off starting the training until one gets the opportunity to learn from a teacher in person. <S> That being said it's definitely good to get the guidance if the opportunity presents itself. <S> My advice is to keep it simple as in sticking to what is least confusing. <S> Second advice is to inquire about the experiences of other people and doing your own experimentation. <S> The third is to study the canon yourself because therein is a lot of guidance that is not generally taught on retreats or courses. <A> For learning Vipassana meditation as taught by S.N Goenka you need to learn it in a ten days course, and to be present. <S> It requires a fully physical presence <S> so... <S> May you be fully successful!
|
So, yes, online meditation is perfectly valid, but I think it serves better as a preparation, rather than a replacement, for intensive practice which is best done with a teacher at a centre.
|
How a sotapanna person experiences the mind? What is the difference between lay person and a person who achieves sotapanna?Does sotapanna person experience less thoughts?Would they experience as dukka,happiness,pain like mind states? <Q> Maybe the simplest answer to this question is that a sotāpanna does experience the mind, whereas most people identify with the mind so strongly that they cannot experience it at all. <S> Someone is sotāpanna when they have eliminated the following three obstructions: Self-view Clinging to rites and rituals <S> Skeptical doubt <S> The first — the elimination of self-view — means that they have abandoned the idea that the self is intrinsically bound to the 'five aggregates': physical forms, feelings or sensations, perceptions, mind structures, and discriminative thinking. <S> All of these still arise in a sotāpanna, but the sotāpanna realizes that these are not identical to him/herself. <S> For instance, imagine a man who feels a sudden wave of hatred towards something. <S> If he is unskilled he merely hates, with no qualifiers; if he has the skills of a sotāpanna he recognizes the hatred as something separate arising within his mind. <S> He may still be controlled by it because his attachments are still strong, but he has created a certain spaciousness — a mental distance from the arising — that he can cultivate with further practice. <S> As he progresses, this spaciousness grows and those arisings weaken. <S> Sotāpanna is just the first step, and there's no sense expecting the unconscious habits of a lifetime to fall away like dead leaves. <S> So yes, dukkha and tanhā will still be there; the mind will still be filled with thoughts and feelings and urges. <S> We have to get into the water first , and only after that can we start to learn how to swim. <S> But getting into the water is an accomplishment. <A> The biggest difference is in their actions. <S> Instead of acting impulsively (I want this / <S> I hate this) they think: "will this get me deeper into Samsara or further out of Samsara? <S> " Their every choice is like this. <S> The second biggest difference is in their vision. <S> So whatever happens in their daily life, good or bad, they see it differently and they react differently. <S> They may not do it 100% right (because they are only sotapanna, not Buddha) - <S> but on the overall their mental framework is like this. <S> The more they act like this, the better they see, and the better they see - the more they act like this. <S> This practice and this teaching improves itself automatically. <S> This is the reason they are called stream-enterers, because in their own life they have established the self-reinforcing self-perpetuating tendency that inevitably flows towards Nirvana, in maximum of seven lives. <A> AN6.97 summarizes the benefits of stream-entry as follows: <S> AN6.97:1.1 : “Mendicants, these are the six benefits of realizing the fruit of stream-entry. <S> What six? <S> You’re bound for the true teaching. <S> You’re not liable to decline. <S> You suffer only for a limited period. <S> You have unshared knowledge. <S> You’ve clearly seen causes and the phenomena that arise from causes. <S> These benefits accrue because stream-enterers do not have faith in identity view. <S> They have faith in the Buddha, the Teachings and the Sangha. <S> Stream-enterers do not view the world with a mind thinking "this or that is mine". <S> That is unshared knowledge because an everyday layperson habitually considers the world with a mind thinking "this or that is mine". <A> What is the difference between lay person and a person who achieves sotapannna? <S> From AN 9.12 : <S> “Again, some person fulfills virtuous behavior but cultivates concentration and wisdom only to a moderate extent . <S> With the utter destruction of three fetters, this person is a seventimes-at-most attainer who, after roaming and wandering on among devas and humans seven times at most, makes an end of suffering. <S> This is the ninth person, passing away with a residue remaining, who is freed from hell, the animal realm, and the sphere of afflicted spirits; freed from the plane of misery, the bad destination, the lower world. . <S> Does sotapannna person experience less thoughts?would <S> they experience as dukka,happiness, pain like mind state? <S> Not necessarily less thoughts, more like right thoughts, due to the abandonment of self-view, doubt, and wrong grasp of rules and observances.
|
They are immersed in their thoughts, emotions, and urges, and cannot effectively separate themselves from these mental conditions. Instead of thinking "this thing is so" / "this thing is not so" like the regular people blindly do - stream-enterer thinks "my mind delineates this object and assigns it such and such qualities because I operate within such and such frame of reference".
|
Joining and then leaving the monastic order? One thing that seems fascinating about the rules of the monastic life, the rules of poverty and celibacy, and so forth, is that as strict as the rules are, it seems that compliance is voluntary. A monk could, at any moment, choose to disrobe and leave the order, and he would still be welcome to hear the Buddha and practice as a lay believer. It seems almost as if he is lauded for acknowledging his limitations rather than continuing to struggle without making progress, and continuing to eat the alms food in vain. I haven't yet read any sutras where a lapsed monk is told that he earned himself a rebirth in a bad destination. Am I mistaken? Does a lapsed monk earn bad karma from leaving the order, or from having mistakenly joined the monastic order? On the other hand, is it possible that he earns good karma and a good rebirth for having been in the Sangha? Suppose that his time in the Sangha makes him more wise, compassionate, forbearing as a lay person than he was previously. Suppose a recently divorced banker or stock broker resolves to join an established Therevadin order for exactly seven years. He will memorize the teaching and meticulously follow the rules during that time, after which he will return to his profession (and find a new wife). Is this permissible and beneficial, according to the Dhamma? <Q> I do not recall any suttas that refer to a bad outcome due to disrobing. <S> This said, I do not recall any suttas about a monk returning to lay life given the Buddha generally intervened and prevented them. <S> However, the suttas do have teachings I recall about bad monks, such as the Dhammapda verses below: <S> There are many evil characters and uncontrolled men wearing the saffron robe. <S> These wicked men will be born in states of woe because of their evil deeds. <S> It would be better to swallow a red-hot iron ball, blazing like fire, than as an immoral and uncontrolled monk to eat the alms of the people. <S> As for good rebirth, this can only come from general good karma (rather than a token amount of time as a monk). <S> For example, in Thailand, often corrupt politicians temporarily become monks to redeem their reputations. <S> However, if they are inwardly rotten, ordaining temporarily won’t help much change their destiny. <A> Does a lapsed monk earn bad karma from leaving the order, or from having mistakenly joined the monastic order? <S> On the other hand, is it possible that he earns good karma and a good rebirth for having been in the Sangha? <S> Suppose that his time in the Sangha makes him more wise, compassionate, forbearing as a lay person than he was previously. <S> Depends on the situation right before he leaves. <S> If he violated some key precepts which the discipline codes requires an expulsion from the order, then that would incur negative kamma. <S> But if he has not broken any precept and simply found that monkhood was not really the most suitable for him, he can leave the order without any negative kamma. <S> Once back to lay life, if he applies what he's learned and implement the Three grounds for meritorious activity , then indeed he'll earn good kamma and favorable rebirths. <S> Suppose a recently divorced banker or stock broker resolves to join an established Therevadin order for exactly seven years. <S> He will memorize the teaching and meticulously follow the rules during that time, after which he will return to his profession (and find a new wife). <S> Is this permissible and beneficial, according to the Dhamma? <S> Again, it depends on how he'll apply what he's learned for his post-monastic life. <S> If he only follows the training rules during the monastic time, but then commits unwholesome deeds once back to lay life, then chances are he'll only reap what's called mixed kamma with dark and bright results , which we can see all around us: smart intelligent man but destitute and in constant debts; rich wealthy guy but subjected to throat diseases which prevents him from enjoying good food; beautiful woman who was sold into brothels; man who seems to have it all: intelligence, wealth, fame, looks, but die tragically at a young age, etc.. <A> There is nothing 'special' about being a monk. <S> People join monastic orders in order to accelerate their development. <S> They merely go back to the life they had before — perhaps with some new insights, perhaps not — and develop at the 'normal' (layperson) rate. <S> They can return to the order later when they are properly ready to try the accelerated path. <S> It would be far worse for someone to someone to remain within the order if they have become jaded about the practice. <S> That just leads towards corruption.
|
If they find the process of development too difficult, or come to believe that they will not make progress on the path, or otherwise become disenchanted with the monastic life, then there is no harm in leaving the order.
|
Reincarnation of a Sotapanna person (Stream Enterer) When the life of a Sotapanna ends, let's say he/she reincarnates as a human. Does that mean, the reincarnated is capable of demonstrating the qualities of a Sotapanna since a very young age? Or, does it take years of practice (again) to regain Sotapanna qualities ? And how long roughly does it take ? And is there anyway to tell if a kid attained Sotapanna in his/her past life ? <Q> I'm answering this with some experience I know similar to this. <S> I haven't seen a reference for this <S> but it is said by many people. <S> An example for this is prince Rahula become a monk when he was at age of 7years. <S> Anyway according to some stories I've heard present day, They no need to practice anything, they them selves starts to realise that there's a problem in the things they do. <S> That's because they have the right view. <S> So that right view starts to conflict with the view of the other people ( puthujjana ). <S> So with their understanding they have started to search for Dhamma. <S> And they have come and stopped at some monks. <S> And these monks' view is not accepted by the majority of the people (same as in this forum). <S> But those stream entrants <S> people say that it is what they have looked for. <S> How long does it take? <S> Can't give an exact answer to that. <S> But as mentioned earlier it's said that minimum age is 7. <S> With the experience it can go up to 20, 30 as well. <S> Only way to tell about past life is through pubbe-nivās-ānussati-ñāṇā ( which is used to see the past lives ) which can be obtained by meditation, or by asking buddha. <S> But a rough idea can be get by asking the right view With metta..! <A> When the life of a Sotapanna ends, let's say he/ <S> she reincarnates as a human. <S> Yes, Sotapannas can either come back as devas or humans for seven times at most: <S> "Again, some person fulfills virtuous behavior but cultivates concentration and wisdom only to a moderate extent. <S> With the utter destruction of three fetters, this person is a seventimes-at-most attainer who, after roaming and wandering on among devas and humans seven times at most, makes an end of suffering. <S> This is the ninth person, passing away with a residue remaining, who is freed from hell, the animal realm, and the sphere of afflicted spirits; freed from the plane of misery, the bad destination, the lower world" ~~ AN 9.12 <S> ~~ . <S> Does that mean, the reincarnated is capable of demonstrating the qualities of a Sotapanna since a very young age? <S> Quite possible. <S> It's like the cases of those music or math prodigies who demonstrate extraordinary potential at very young age. <S> A more concrete example related to the Dhamma was when the Buddha attained the First Jhana when He was a kid! <S> Or, does it take years of practice (again) to regain Sotapanna qualities ? <S> Since it's all about potential and capability, it's not that one has to "regain" Sotapanna qualities, but it's just that there're various differnt sub-levels within Sotapanna: some do take the maximum span of 7 lifetimes, some only takes 1 life, etc. <S> So, again, really depending on how much one cultivated in his previous lives that he could either be like a Mozart, or a Chopin, or a Paul Mauriat. <S> And is there anyway to tell if a kid attained Sotapanna in his/her past life ? <S> It'd take a Sotapanna himself to really know AND experience firsthand all the Sotapanna's quality, in order to truly tell if someone else is also a Sotapanna. <S> However, just like the attributes of a math prodigy, a Sotapanna kid could show early signs of Dhammic maturity, some natural instinctual tendencies toward virtues, calmness, wisdom( Sila/Samadhi/Panna ) without much coaching or close guidance from his/her parents. <A> There is nothing in the Pali suttas to support answering any of the questions. <S> For example, there are no stories of Sotapanna reappearing as human after death. <S> Instead, every story in the suttas has Sotappana reappear as a deva (god), such as in MN 143. <S> For example, the suttas have a short verse ( Thag 6.10 ) about a 7 year old Arahant <S> however the sutta merely says the boy was " educated and trained " by Arahant monk Anuruddha. <S> Also, there are no accounts of contemporary famous (reputed enlightened) monks who claimed to have Supramundane Knowledge from a young age and did not acquire Supramundane Knowledge from study and practise.
|
It's says that 7years is the minimum age that it would take to understand Dhamma. There are no stories in the suttas of a child born with Supramundane Knowledge.
|
Is being conscious of actions' consequences enough to attain nibbana? I apologize if this has an answer on this site or if this does not make any sense. I am wondering if being conscious alone is enough to attain nibbana? If not, why? I think conscious person will (always?) act in a way that will not cause sorrow to themselves (and others?). I just thought someone who is fully aware of their thoughts and actions will only work towards a joyful life. If someone does anything that leads to sorrow, I think it's only due to lack of consciousness of it's consequences. However, I am not sure if being conscious alone is enough to develop the wisdom required to attain nibbana. Can someone consciously do unwholesome deeds? I would like to clear this up. Any help is appreciated. <Q> It seems to me you are defining consciousness as "being fully aware of consequences" and therefore "acting towards a better state", correct? <S> (Just so you know, usually this is called "acting with virtue".) <S> If this is how you define it, then yes - acting with virtue is enough for Nibbana. <S> The cool thing about acting with virtue is, the more you do it, the more it changes your life in the direction of Nibbana, the easier it gets to act even more virtuously. <S> In fact, clearly understanding this self-fulfilling principle is exactly what's called Stream Entry. <S> The only other factor you need for Nibbana is to always keep improving your virtue, always looking for ways to make it more sublime and more refined. <S> For this, you need to be 100% honest with yourself, even critical. <S> Taken together, these two factors - Acting with Virtue and Continuous Improvement - will create the right cyclic engine to propel a sentient being to more and more sublime forms of happiness until complete Nibbana. <A> No. <S> It won't. <S> Right Mindfulness is the seventh stage of the Noble Eightfold Path. <S> The eighth step is Right Immersion. <S> Immersion provides the insight and wisdom that informs Right View. <S> SN12.23:2.13 : I say that truly knowing and seeing has a vital condition. <S> And what is it? <S> You should say: ‘Immersion.’ <S> The Noble Eightfold Path is conditioned. <S> This means that eventual success is obtained in some life at some point for stream-enterers. <S> However, since rebirth in a life conducive to practice is quite rare, it would be best to embrace the entire path sooner rather than later. <S> Please also practice Right Immersion in this very life. <A> There are three levels you have to be conscious of:- <S> latent- transgression- Manifestation <S> It appears you are conscious only of the manifestation level. <S> Only by practicing Satipathana you can tap to the other two levels. <S> Root condition. <S> Buddhist training is directed towards eliminating the defilements (kilesaa). <S> The foremost defilements are the three unwholesome roots — greed, hate, and delusion. <S> From these spring others: conceit (maana), speculative views (di.t.thi), skeptical doubt (vicikicchaa), mental torpor (thiina), restlessness (uddhacca), shamelessness (ahirika), lack of moral fear or conscience (anottappa). <S> These defilements function at three levels: Transgression (viitikkama) leading to evil bodily and verbal acts. <S> This is checked by the practice of morality, observing the five precepts. <S> Obsession (pariyu.t.thaana) when the defilements come to the conscious level and threaten to lead to transgression if not restrained by the practice of mindfulness. <S> Latency (anusaya) where they remain as tendencies ready to surface through the impact of sensory stimuli. <S> Security from the defilements can be obtained only by destroying the three roots — greed, hate and delusion — at the level of latency. <S> This requires insight-wisdom (vipassanaa-paññaa), the decisive liberating factor in Buddhism. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mendis/wheel322.html <A> Conscious of what? <S> One can have eye consciousness and can see, but he/she could be deluded and get attached to beautiful things or could be averse to ugly sights. <S> However, If one is conscious of the three marks of existence on everything then that person is wise and free from suffering.. <A> Once nibbana gets realized ,everything becomes possible ,wholesome unwholsome ,concious un conscious ,all life is embraced,with all its colors ,just a total surrender to whatever the case,even to not surrendering. <S> When you say "I just thought someone who is fully aware of their thoughts and actions will only work towards a joyful life. <S> If someone does anything that leads to sorrow, I think it's only due to lack of consciousness of it's consequences." <S> that is a valid observation <S> ,thats why the tool is effective. <S> However as I said once the realization occurs , nobody needs to stay concious all the time to maintain nibbana. <A> Can someone consciously do unwholesome deeds? <S> Pick your definitions of "consciously" and "unwholesome". <S> Somebody might believe, for example ... <S> I'll be happier when I marry <S> I'll be happier if I behave in a way that's admired by this group of friends, in order to fit into that group <S> It's better to be rich <S> It good to punish anyone who hurts me <S> It's better to be superior ... <S> I think these are all examples of conventional or normal beliefs, which are more-or-less common in society. <S> People might consciously as well as unconsciously believe them -- i.e. they might be "a view". <S> Maybe that's why Buddhism emphasises "right view" as an important prerequisite -- or even, before that, right morality.
|
Being conscious is just a tool,and yes it can be enough ,but once you realize nibbana ,the tool doesn't have to be a concern anymore. You have to delineate what you mean by conscious.
|
Trying to Meditate Longer I am currently meditating thirty minutes per day. I wonder whether I should meditate an hour instead or meditate for thirty minutes twice. Basically, I meditate on compassion and after thirty minutes I'm not generating much of anything. I just sit there moving about on my chair, wondering about the time, etc. Does this saturation after thirty minutes occur because I have always meditated this amount of time before? Or is it because I'm just not ready yet? In other words, are we used to whatever amount of meditation we're usually doing? If this is so, would it be better to just always try to sit an hour if I'm capable? Should I just meditate as long as I can sit, whatever the quality may be? <Q> Joggers or long distance runners didn't just start out running for hours. <S> They build up their stamina slowly and steadily over time. <S> So use the same approach for meditation. <S> Build it up gradually and don't settle for the 30-min achievement. <S> It's probably too short for any significant deep absorption state anyway. <S> There're advanced meditators who immerse themselves in deep absorption for days. <A> Right Immersion is the eight stage of the Noble Eightfold Path. <S> It is upheld and nurtured by the preceding seven stages of Right View, Right Thought, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort and Right Immersion. <S> AN7.45:1.1 : “Mendicants, there are these seven prerequisites for immersion. <S> What seven? <S> Right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, and right mindfulness. <S> Circle back and deepen the seven prerequisites. <S> Then, naturally, immersion will deepen. <A> Please do not enter into competing with yourself mode. <S> Pushing yourself to sit one hour just to follow the clock does not bring much benefit to us. <S> It is just misusing our power of will. <S> What does it say? <S> "Ah, I'm glad I'm finished!" <S> And immediately after that: "But I should sit longer!" <S> And the struggle starts. <S> This might bring an important insight into how with all these shoulds and shouldn'ts we create our own suffering. <S> Once you understood that, just relax and stay sitting as long as it is appropriate for the situation you are in. <S> Sometimes it's 30 minutes, other times 45 or 60. <S> Good luck! <A> Should I just meditate as long as I can sit, whatever the quality may be? <S> If you don't have good enough teacher, YES <S> you should because you maybe get the problem and fix them yourself when the very long long time gone by. <S> It is definitely better than watching TV. <S> However, if you have good teacher, NO you shouldn't because he will teach you the proper better faster tools to modify your living for the meditation, such as yoga before meditation, or body trick for longer sitting, etc. <S> The meditation will be faster higher qualities and longer period by this way. <A> If your purpose of meditation is to achieve jhana, the quality of your concentration while meditating is much more important than the length of your sitting. <S> Jhana is defined in "The Path of Purification" as "The centering of consciousness and consciousness-concomitants evenly and rightly on a single object, undistracted and unscattered". <S> In order to approach this state of mind, one should try to eliminate any trivial thoughts and focus on your meditation subject in a period of time. <S> Try not to resist or indulge in your thoughts. <S> Just put them in the "background" once you find them. <S> During 30 minutes of meditation, you may find that you can only concentrate for 5 minutes or even less. <S> Making this concentration-time longer should be the objective.
|
So I think you should try your best to prolong the time you focus on your meditation subject without any trivial thoughts arising. Instead, better try to listen to your mind when 30 minutes is about to finish. But whatever are the minutes, the benefit is the same if you manage to maintain this kind of awareness of your mind's work and than manage to extend this awareness also into the rest of the day.
|
Overcoming sensual craving for food I've become interested in Buddhism a couple of months ago, and I try to meditate daily, which had very positive effects on my anxiety and overall feeling so far. I am prone to feeling overwhelming cravings for unhealthy, sugary food. Although the intensity of the cravings has been reduced since I started meditating, it is still a significant problem. I wonder if there is any specific practice which could help with that. I tried reading texts about the elimination of sensual cravings, but unfortunately they all focused primarily on sexual desire and not on craving for food. If someone could enlighten me on the topic, I would be very thankful. :) <Q> Sexual desire and the craving for food both fall under the umbrella domain of sensual desire, which can be countered with various different strategies as highlighted in MN 20 <A> Sexual desire and the craving for food both fall under the umbrella domain of sensual desire, which can be countered with the strategy highlighted in MN 19 , namely, " This leads to my own affliction/harm ". <A> Glad to hear that meditation had good results on your anxiety. <S> Keep up the good work! <S> Vividly imagine the costs of it. <S> Then, you also better be prepared that cravings might still arise. <S> When they arise I have a couple of steps that might help you: Recognize the urge/thought & perhaps spot the location in your body. <S> If you're not aware of the urge, you're much more likely to give in. <S> Realize that it's not a life necessity to give in immediately <S> (this gives you a break from the thought-action fusion) <S> Keep in mind that you have a choice: To act upon your urge or to refrain. <S> Here it is important that eating sometimes chocolate etc. <S> might not be in conflict with your long-term goals & as humans we often also have short-term goals/desires that want to be met. <S> Be specific with your goals & guard yourself against rationalizations <S> If you decided to refrain, counter any "positives for giving in"/"negatives for not giving in" & keep in mind of your goal. <S> This step is particularly important so that you balance your thoughts so that they have a lesser hold on your decision-making. <S> Don't spend too much times with the 4. point and accept that urges will reside for a while in the mind, and will fade if you allow them to be there without resistance or clinging. <S> In a word "let them be". <A> can help to develop a new habit. <S> That might be as simple as, "stop buying it, so you don't have it in the house with you". <S> It's easier to be moral briefly ("I won't buy that because it's not good") when you're at the shop once a week, than it is to keep it nearby and overcome cravings throughout the week including during weaker moments. <A> Mindfulness in eating takes several forms. <S> For example there is the meal chant: <S> Wisely reflecting, I use this food not for fun, not for pleasure, not for fattening, not for beautification, but only for the maintenance and nourishment of this body, for keeping it healthy, for helping with the Spiritual Life; Thinking thus, I will allay hunger without overeating, so that I may continue to live blamelessly and at ease. <S> And there is eating at the right time: <S> AN10.99:18.2 : They eat in one part of the day, abstaining from eating at night and food at the wrong time. <S> And there is non-identification with food: <S> MN62:11.8 : This should be truly seen with right understanding like this: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’ <S> Studying the suttas, one learns about the nature of craving and its escape. <S> These lessons are universal. <S> Indeed, we find that: SN42.11:2.11 : ... desire is the root of suffering. <A> Doing this can help you become aware of your true intention when making decisions,(why and for whom am I making this a point for me?) <S> Try this: Ask yourself everyday all day long, and when not asking yourself this question, be Thankful for everything!!!!!! <S> What is it I am basing my decisions and actions on.? <S> Me. <S> Or. <S> We. <S> ( Understand that We can be you and the collective of any and all things)Don't forget to be Thankful that your hand can reach out from your mind and touch everything around you. <S> It helps to actually allow yourself to hear you say it as much as possible!!!!! <S> Hope this helps!!!!!(Healing Drum) <S> P.S. don't forget URok!!!! <A> My dear friend. <S> Aware your food craving... <S> this is fantastic for knowing craving. <S> You can go deep and deep. <S> How to arise food craving. <S> For example Thoughts is responsible for lust craving. <S> Thoughts condition lust craving. <S> Thought depends memory <S> Knowing all structure .. <S> This is awareness. <A> I had a monster midnight chicken curry craving season in 2016. <S> I was beginning to understand the secrets of the world back then. <S> I became fat and thought my liver will never help me lose weight. <S> In late 2019, I lost weight after I discovered thst you can make cheap tomato soup out of spaghetti sauce with a tin of hot water. <S> I now can wear a men’s 32.
|
As already mentioned, there are various suttas that deal with sensual cravings such as MN 19 & MN 20. You can periodically reflect on the advantages & disadvantages of your food craving (both short & long term). For me, I find it very helpful to say that I have a craving, (acknowledging that it is present), that usually starts an irregular breathing pattern, then starts an anxiety and change of heart rate, I acknowledge that it to is present, then restart my normal breathing patterns, regulate my heart rate back down and steady then, (say out loud or in thought loudly), this to shall pass, I will overcome this craving!! Another strategy might be "seclusion" perhaps -- deciding to not have the object of craving nearby
|
how do we know about parts of Buddha's life where he was clearly alone? for example, when he was being tempted by Mara, he said "the Earth bears witness." how do we know this? he was clearly alone, right? no one was there witnessing this to write about it. did Buddha just tell it to everyone later? not just that, there are so many instances in his story where he was clearly alone. no one else could've known about those moments to write about them. <Q> Some of it is in suttas, see for example Buddha meditation under the bodhi tree <S> The detail you mentioned come from the introduction to Jataka -- <S> Where is the description of the vow and the Bodhi tree? <S> Parts of the Jataka might be described here as "a charming story" -- see also Does Theravada Buddhism accept Jataka Stories? <S> See also <S> Why did the Buddha touch the earth at his enlightenment? <S> -- people understand that as instructive. <A> The Buddha is capable of showing images and movies from his mind (like holographic projection) in his sermons to the audiences. <S> One Sutra mentioned, the Buddha shows the scenes of the many worlds (the cosmos) to Ananda. <S> It infers all other 5 versions of original and earliest vinayas in the Chinese Tripitaka should also recount this event. <S> Second, the celestial beings are all-knowing, they also bear witnesses to all events that are missing of human observation. <S> Third, the accomplished disciples - arhats - they could retrieve past events and look into the future. <S> Also they have direct channel to communicate with the celestial beings. <S> In the ultimate, time and space is not linear. <S> However, if we human must defile anything that we don't master or understand until it's falsified or mythologized, then nirvana or the perfection of wisdom must be violated too. <S> Since, which human being has mastered or understood it? <S> A sparrow can never know how humans walking on two legs, a human also can never do flying like a sparrow either. <S> What one doesn't know doesn't endorse the right to refute what it is. <A> We don't know this and cannot. <S> All we can do is hope to gain enough wisdom to realise why this story is so carefully preserved. <S> Buddha is said to have turned Mara's dancing girls, sent to tempt him under the Bodhi tree, into cherry-blossom. <S> Is this a true story? <S> If it's meaning is studied it becomes an immensely valuable teaching story and method for dealing with Mara, so who cares? <S> Did Jesus really say, 'Get thee behind me Satan'? <S> The message is that we can defeat Mara with ease if we are Awake, and it would not mean denying the beauty of the temptation. <S> A great proportion of the literature of the Perennial tradition is attributed to writers who are not the author and there is a reason for this, one of which would sometimes be to convey the idea that it doesn't matter who wrote it. <S> What matters is the words. <S> Whether we read the Buddhist literature as mythology and metaphor or as historical and scientific fact doesn't really matter. <S> What matters is its usefulness. <S> If we are a practitioner the truth will out. <A> Buddha mentioned his life story to monks as he went and when it was relevant to particular occasions. <S> You find these discussions in throughout Suttas. <S> Please read the Sutta to clear your doubts. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/index.html <A> We cannot know the Buddha was being tempted by Mara & he said "the Earth bears witness". <S> We cannot know whether or not the Buddha reported this to his disciples. <S> The Refuge in the Dhamma is as follows: <S> Svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko opaneyyiko paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhīti <S> Well taught is the Buddha´s Dhamma, visible here and now, immediately effective, inviting inspection, leading onwards, to be experiened directly by the wise. <S> The many stories & teachings that fall outside of the above definition are not the essential or true Dhamma. <A> "earth bears witness" means a lot of hidden meaning in front of temptive Mara( a recollection of Ignorance instincts). <S> To understand this, you must be adult enough & spiritual too. <S> 2 meanings out of them are stated here:: 1.) <S> Sexy girls couldn't touch him, sexy boys couldn't touch him, sexy others couldn't touch him because Soil nearby buddha is clear of any footprints, otherwise Mara could've quoted it. <S> 2.) <S> This earth also refers to the base point where karmic dhamma activity occurs at atomic scale. <S> That base point is clean means that buddha is completely free from any 'Sankharas' & they have not arisen & there is not even a trace of any cause&conditions that may lead to arising of sankharas. <S> This was a statement for an ignorant dweller. <S> Now, tell me what type of witness would be required in any of the above case. <S> In 1st case, Mara is strong enough to argue in front of buddha anywhere, anytime. <S> In 2nd case also, devas/bak-brahmaas would be enough to point that out.
|
From my reading I've come across the Buddha recounting his enlightenment to the disciples in the Mahisasaka-vinaya - brought back by Faxian (400CE) from Ceylon (Sri Lanka) to China but this vinaya doesn't exist in the Pali "Tipitaka".
|
Can a Buddhist mix Buddhism with other religions? Is there any authoritative sourced that a man can have more than one religion if he pleases? <Q> It seems significant that HHDL advises us not to abandon the religion of our birth yet also encourages us to strive for realisation. <S> This is the view that religion is a vehicle, not a destination. <S> All those I know who endorse more than one religion also say, equivalently, that they have no religion. <S> And then, talk to any three Christians and they will probably have three different religions <S> , such is the game of Chinese Whispers. <A> Buddhism doesn't accept false views such as those listed in DN 1 . <S> Many religions with soul and God reinforce the self view, the view of eternalism or other false views. <S> As such, it is not compatible to mix other religions with Buddhism, if they have false views according to DN 1. <A> Personal conclusion :: <S> Dhamma gives me wings, free me from blind-faith, free me from sensual-pleasing-tradition-bounds, ... enable me to be more powerful . <S> Religion <S> whether it be Hinduism or buddhism or sikhism or christianism or jainism or muslim etc. <S> binds me to blind-faith, binds me to sensual-pleasing-tradition-bounds,... <S> makes me weak. <S> To quest for authoritative sources <S> All the suttas were composed 100s of years after buddha. <S> So how much originality is still left, can't be claimed. <S> Still, you may see this pre-sect-buddhism which is considered to be original teaching, still it is also considered to be mix of vedic, jain and sramanic schools of thoughts . <S> Along with above, you might be interested in Mahayana , which in itself is a mixture of various thinkings, rituals, traditions, worships etc. <S> To get to know how people, who call themselves to be on the path of dhamma , are engaged in various practices which can be easily found in other religions also which were either developed far from dhamma-touch or before buddha or after buddha can be seen here too . <S> So now it's up to you whether you wish to remain within traps of religions or want to live freely under dhamma's guidance ... <S> Still, it's the practice and right understanding through which you will be able to claim dhamma. <S> :::::::: To give a kick-start, you may go for Majjhima Nikaya . <S> My ego-satisfying-view claims that Mulpariyaya, sabbasava, dhammadayada's 2nd half, bhaybhareva, Vattha, sallekha, sammaditthi, satipatthana, are as per dhamma . <S> It is because my ego thinks that , "1st half of dhammadayada considers self-respect-issue(1 of the 8 worldly concerns ), anangana lacks compassion, <S> aankhankheya depicts somewhat maintain/gain-respect-issue. <S> These might encourage some to practice more dedicatively but it will start with either greed or fear and work started for worldly concern is not a Noble path. :::::::: <A> Whether Buddhism is called a religion or not, the thing to consider is do the two systems of thought contradict each other? <S> If there is contradiction then one cannot follow at least one of the religions. <S> For example, Buddhism and Christianity contradict each other so you could not be a Buddhist-Christian. <S> But you may be able to be a Buddhist-Quaker (in the liberal since) <S> depending on what you took from Quakerism, since they have no creed. <S> There are plenty of examples of how Buddhism has absorbed ideas from different countries. <S> However, there are no texts which grant or deny the possibility of having multiple religions. <S> I think it is just not probable since Buddhism is so much different from what we normally call religions.
|
It depends whether we see our religion as a proscribed set of beliefs or a set of methods and practices for transcending belief.
|
Looking for help for Practise / Method to overcome distubring external sounds Can anyone recommend a practice to overcome disturbing sounds. Many times when I meditate or turn inwards I am disturbed by a neighbors loud barking dogs or other loud sounds. I've tried doing visualization, clearing the space energy, Feng Shui mirrors, ear plugs (help to some degree), even talking to the neighbor but I seem to be often in irritation by this. The external disturbance is affecting my inner-commune.I also find my attention goes to that external sound and I feel tense/disturbed by the energy of it. I'd appreciate any ideas / thoughts on how to stay centered and undisturbed in the face of external disturbance / inconsiderate neighbors.Thanks in advance.Rich <Q> You got to get to the bottom of this "disturbance" thing. <S> There is a sound(the dog barking) and then there is a feeling of disturbance? <S> The more you just witness the sound of the dog barking as it happens, the less disturbing is happening. <S> If you only witness the sound then how could you witness the disturbance? <S> how could there even be a disturbance? <A> The dog's bark has got to be the most distracting noise ever made. <S> It is intended to get your attention. <S> The dog is usually feeling lonely, left in the house/apartment all alone all day. <S> It will respond to projected friendly thoughts. <S> Sometimes. <S> Those are the worst because they can bark all day/night long; at least the dog that is protecting its home will stop when the danger is gone. <S> With most other noises remembering that transience is the nature of all things will help. <S> It isn't going to last forever. <S> It will also help for you to know that with time and practice you will soon enough be able to ignore sound. <S> See this as a sign of your current state; your ability to concentrate needs to be strengthened. <S> When you see it as your problem and not that it is a problem that is likely to be solved by trying to change the nature of dogs or their owners, half the problem will disappear. <S> Lowbrow's answer is also helpful. <S> It gets to the essence. <A> When the screams of the world intrude, it's hard to feel blissful. <S> And in the beginning of practice, one does need peace to develop. <S> We can't all summon the forest as dogs bark and neighbors squabble. <S> Those sounds irritate us with memories of our own daily struggles. <S> We crave peace and seek it in meditation. <S> But meditation initially requires a focus. <S> And focusing on something that isn't readily available is very frustrating. <S> It's hard to focus. <S> Some remedies include: Attend a retreat. <S> Retreats leave us with a memory of peace that we can focus on in the noisy city. <S> Listen to suttas as you sit. <S> Suttas are not silent, but they are a perfectly fine and wholesome focus for your mindfulness. <S> In this way, your practice Right Mindfulness attending to the words of the Buddha. <S> And Right Mindfulness precedes Right Immersion, which is the eighth step in the Noble Eightfold Path. <S> Listen to Buddhist chants as you sit. <S> The chants are wholesome and you don't even need to understand them--they simply provide a wholesome focus. <S> Focus on your breathing. <S> This is mindfulness of the body. <S> Use noise-cancelling headphones. <S> These give a measure of distance so you can focus better. <S> They are also a prop to be abandoned as your focus gets stronger. <S> Meditate with a group for mutual support. <S> Meditate on a koan or meaningful phrase as a focus. <S> Abandon resentment and focus on love, compassion, rejoicing and equanimity. <S> May you become an island of peace for the world. <A> You know, once I was leading a meditation group when a whole bunch of laughing, screaming children came running through the room. <S> Long story, <S> that, but it wasn't an issue. <S> Meditation happened. <S> One of the things we have to learn, eventually, is that there are no external disturbances. <S> There are only internal disturbances as our mind reacts to things with anger, outrage, irritation, or whatever. <S> If it's not screaming kids or a barking dog or a low-flying plane, it will be a persistent itch or the hum of a fan or a cricket <S> that's just a little bit off key. <S> If the mind is looking to unsettle itself, the mind will find something to unsettle itself over, and it doesn't matter how big or small, how loud or quiet, how far or near that might be. <S> The mind will seize on it and magnify it into a crisis. <S> The trick is to realize that the thinking mind wants to be unsettled, because when it's unsettled it has something to do. <S> It can happily occupy itself complaining about or trying to solve whatever problem it has fixated on. <S> When it does that, all we can do is sit with it like a parent with a child, and let it fuss itself to sleep. <S> Part of what we're trying to do in meditation is teach the thinking mind that it doesn't have to fuss over every little violation of its expectations: <S> that a dog can bark or a child can scream and it does not necessarily call for any action or reaction on your part at all. <S> Of course, that equanimity doesn't come overnight, but keep it in mind as a standard for your practice. <A> Thank you for all your wonderful replies. <S> I've been given something to work with here. <S> I've been reciting a mantra (Om Man Padme Hum) which seems to help although not certain if it's the unending answer. <S> Work in progress.
|
When the sound is sufficiently reduced, it is possible to introduce distraction by concentration on something interesting and to generate 'friendly vibrations' towards the dog. One needs a focus for meditation. Try changing the thing you are focusing on to the experience of the external "disturbance". Try thoroughly sound insulating the 'sitting' room.
|
What is the meaning of "Nothing new will be said here, nor have I any skill in composition. Therefore I do not imagine that I can benefit others." To my knowledge, Bodhicaryāvatāra expressed the Nothing new will be said here, nor have I any skill in composition. Therefore I do not imagine that I can benefit others. I have done this to perfume my own mind. . In my limited understanding, it refers to the negative thoughts although I do not have complete comprehension of it. What does it refer to, what is the intention and what is to be practiced? <Q> Shantideva’s work is among the most beautiful and profound pieces of writing ever composed on earth in any language. <S> It is jaw dropping in its profound beauty and the author must have been an extraordinary Bodhisattva if not a fully accomplished enlightened being. <S> Personally, I prefer to see it as the work of a fully and completely enlightened being. <S> To me this verse was written out of compassion by this perfect being to show others how to accomplish the same by overcoming the foes of conceit and self-importance. <S> The purpose of this verse is a thought training by the author intended to show others how to subdue conceit and lust for reputation. <S> Shantideva's text is a master class in training the mind to be a Bodhisattva. <S> All the verses are examples illustrating how a Bodhisattva practices and thinks. <A> Possibly related topics but from the Theravada tradition: What is the difference between 'compassion' and 'pity'? <S> What is right gifting? <S> How are 'conceit' and 'identity-view' not the same? <S> I'm not sure what "negative thoughts" are -- though I know the term is used in pop psychology -- which teaches or uses "negative" as a synonym of "defeatist" ... <S> a person who expects or is excessively ready to accept failure ... <S> and perhaps also as a symptom of stress and depression and conflict (and maybe loss of focus or "unwise attention"). <S> The phrase is, literally or grammatically, negative ("nothing" ... "nor" ... <S> "no") -- so it is "negative", but beneficially so, in the sense that it negates the arising of unskilful mental states like "conceit" etc. <A> A fool with a sense of his foolishness is — at least to that extent — wise.[the "teacher"] But a fool who thinks himself wise really deserves to be called a fool. <S> [most of his follower] dhp
|
It is a verse which is full of humility and self-deprication designed to counteract conceited and prideful thoughts.
|
Guidance for how to handle stomach problems arising during Vipassana? During concentration the main thing I can feel during the first half hour or so is the feeling of the stomach/ top part of the intestine area or feelings inside the belly. There's really nothing else for me to feel, especially when mediating topless so that the skin's interaction with fabric doesn't give a sense of rising and falling. Although I'm aware painful sensations can be expected, this uncomfortable feeling does feel like the wrong type of discomfort but is my only point of focus. It seems like something I shouldn't be focusing on, or maybe I am over extending when breathing, but I don't think so. That being said, my practice has eventually led to pleasant sensations and having a tension to wave-like movement when breathing. Anyone have any guidance or suggestions? NB my posture is quite straight. Thanks! <Q> When practicing vipassana, you simply just witness whatever sensations that are happening moment to moment. <S> If a mental reaction arises as you focus on the belly, like a thought, an opinion or a feeling then simply note it and go back to the belly. <S> and if it seems like nothing then it's ok to note "nothing". <S> Maybe you would be waiting for the breath to arise, if so you could note "waiting". <S> You know, even if you get confused in your practice you can note "confused". <S> Truth itself is not dangerous but our reactions to truth can be dangerous. <S> If you feel a bodily sensation isn't <S> right then you might note in your head "doubt", "fear or whatever seems appropriate. <S> Of course call a doctor if by "not right" <S> you mean you might have something physically wrong. <S> Getting a good teacher is one of the most fundamentally beneficial things a meditator can do. <S> If you have one be sure and ask them about any outside advice you get. <A> Thanks for the advice, I'm aware of the noting process and do note it as ',uncomfortable' or 'sharp'. <S> It is not something I'd see the doctor about <S> but I am concerned that too much attention to one spot could cause some sort of energy blockage/pooling/ or stress internally. <S> I have my first vipassana course in a couple of weeks, but have read numerous books and watched numerous videos on the process. <S> That's why I'm aware unpleasant sensations may arise, I just feel like my concentration is causing them to arise because its more internal. <A> OP: <S> Although I'm away pain sensations can be expected, this uncomfortable feeling does feel like the wrong type of discomfort but is my only point of focus. <S> It seems like something I shouldn't be focussing on, or maybe I am over extending when breathing, but I don't think so. <S> That being said, my practice has eventually led to pleasant sensations and having a tension to wave like movement when breathing. <S> Judging the type of sensation can lead to negative latent tendencies: (1) the latent tendency to lust reinforced by being attached to pleasant feelings; (2) the latent tendency to aversion reinforced by rejecting painful feelings; (3) the latent tendency to ignorance reinforced by ignoring neutral feelings. <S> Pahāna Sutta <S> Whatever feeling on feels one should: <S> If he feels a pleasant feeling, he understands that it is impermanent; he understands that it is not to be clung to; he understands that there is no delight in it. <S> If he feels a painful feeling, he understands that it is impermanent; he understands that it is not to be clung to; he understands that there is no delight in it. <S> If he feels a neutral feeling, he understands that it is impermanent; he understands that it is not to be clung to; he understands that there is no delight in it. <S> If he feels a pleasant feeling, he feels it in a detached manner. <S> If he feels a painful feeling, he feels it in a detached manner. <S> If he feels a neutral feeling, he feels it in a detached manner. <S> Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta <S> OP: <S> During concentration the main thing I can feel ... <S> Since you seem to be practising concentration meditation, one should: <S> know your mind has wandered off <S> know the sensation or stimuli experienced while being equanimous without any aversion to the unpleasant or attachment to the pleasant <S> know the sensation or stimuli experienced is impermanent <S> bring back your focus to the object of meditation (initial application - vitakka) after bringing it back try to sustain the focus with the object of meditation (sustained application - vicāra)
|
If you can't feel anything then note whatever reality is in your attention at that moment It just seems that lying down or sitting, as soon as I put attention to the belly area I am more aware of an internal sensation which leads to discomfort and gurgling noises/ feelings.but as a result, is easy to concentrate on.
|
How could the Buddha know that he had attained enlightenment when he didn't know what it was? Having learned and gained complete mastery from the two most famous teachers of his time, he decided to apply extreme austerities for some six years. With these skills acquired, driving a powerful concentration, he abandoned it all in favour of a skill he discovered when as a child at the Kings Plowing Ceremony, where he entered the first jhana [Dhyāna] quite effortlessly. Furthermore, added to this cache of tools, he prior added a powerful determination to not move from that spot, even if his blood should dry up, etc, etc. The subsequent release of this energy resulted in a spectacular display of meditative attainment. In the first watch of the night investigating Kamma with respect to successive past lives, revealing causal sequence. In the second watch of the night, investigating Kamma with respect to consequences of currently available choices. In the third watch of the night, the realisation of deliverance. Not much is said about the results of the third watch. It is a fairly common experience where insights coming from seeing a new possibility after examining two different phenomena with a common factor giving rise to a eureka moment. But what may have happened in this case, such a eureka event further resulting in a realisation that Dukkha had ceased? The Buddha's quest finally achieved. During the next eight weeks, the problem of describing a way of enabling others to achieve this result, though necessarily not in the same way, given the death of the two teachers, plus avoiding austerities, plus the absence of psychic powers. In developing a tangible expression for the inexpressible, the Buddha further developed the right view, that Dukkha exists, arises and ceases according to conditions. Enabling the further development of the 'noble eightfold path'. According to tradition, all this happened in an instant, that is to say, the sequence happened very rapidly: the problem is to give it coherent expression. The result: the four noble truths. <Q> In the third watch of the night He had the knowledge of the exhaustion of cankers, knowing that He had eradicated all defilements and made an end of ill. <S> The Three Supreme Knowledges of Lord Buddha <S> So the Buddha knew he had overcome defilements and was enlightened due to knowledge of the exhaustion of cankers. <S> Also with the arising of knowledge of the exhaustion of cankers the Buddha knew what enlightenment was. <A> This is a great question. <S> In Buddha's time, there were many other ascetics claimed that they have attained Nibbana. <S> However, the definition of Nibbana was varied. <S> Buddha realised that the elimination of Dukkha is the Nibbana. <S> Then he defined the Dukkha with his revolutionary definition including Sankhara Dukka. <S> He realised the cause of Dukkha is the craving. <S> He also realise that the way to eliminate craving is to follow the Noble Eightfold Path. <S> He also discovered the way to stop Dependent Origination'The night he enlightened he knew that he does not have any craving. <S> This process is called the review. <S> Paccavekkhana ñana: <S> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vipassan%C4%81-%C3%B1%C4%81%E1%B9%87a <S> He also the first person to realise not self-nature of our existence. <A> Ever get drunk? <S> How did you know you were drunk the first time it happened? <S> Upon reaching it, the scales fall away and the very experience of self and suffering is irrevocably and fundamentally altered. <S> The Buddha knew full well that this , what he had discovered, was utterly different from anything he had learned up to that point. <S> Enlightenment really does speak for itself. <A> I am citing my answer to another question - Question Part of my Answer: <S> When the Buddha (and so many other Buddhas) talk about no-self, they come from a direct experience of unity with everything. <S> That is the source of “no self”. <S> Their perspective is abolished. <S> There is only truth for them. <S> Unlike our experience where we are this body and mind and everything else is separate. <S> And we have opinions about everything from our perspective. <S> Ever know the difference between Gautama and Buddha? <S> Gautama is a person. <S> Like you and me. <S> Buddha is one who has attained self realization. <S> So, there are many Buddhas. <S> So when Gautama attained to self realization he BECAME a Buddha. <S> And when Gautama attains and becomes a Buddha, Gautama as a person is gone. <S> There is only the knowing, Tathagatha . <S> The knower takes a backseat. <S> What we know as I, me, self (in this case Gautama) takes a backseat. <S> So he just knows. <S> This article highlights an important point like <S> so <S> The Buddha asked himself similar questions, and after some years of searching came to extremely subtle, profound, and liberating truths—and these were truths, not beliefs; they were self-evident, obvious actualities. <S> The view of himself as an individual, as ‘this person Siddhartha Gautama’, dissolved when he saw beyond thoughts, and he woke up as if from a dream. <S> In consequence, he knew freedom from the horrors of the dreamlike existence that many, perhaps most, of us are engaged in right now. <S> His life then opened out into the immediate, the spontaneous, that which is beyond thoughts, beyond views and opinions, and beyond habits and shadows of the mind. <A> I only read the title first - and user17's answer. <S> I really don't get the story in OP. <S> But the title question strikes me, and it reminds me so much of L. Wittgenstein in his Tractatus . <S> He tries to logically prove that 1+1=2, and in the end says something like: <S> "Well somehow I deeply understand all this, but due do limitations of myself and of language I cannot explain in words. <S> May my words be helpful for you as a throw-away ladder." <S> Now in Buddha's case a biological (man/nature) and spiritual (moral) enlightenment is also involved. <S> And before I get lost (or raise protests) because I chop up enlightenment , I stop. <S> How could the Buddha know that he had attained enlightenment when he didn't know what it was? <S> He felt it. <S> Where does this question or idea come from, if I may ask? <A> Imagine for a moment that you are walking around feeling tired and achy and miserable, and you don't why. <S> Then you happen to look down and see that you're carrying a bowling ball. <S> You must have picked it up the last time you went bowling ( <S> whenever that was) and forgotten to put it own, and it's been dragging on you all this time. <S> So you put the bowling ball down, and the difference in how you feel is immediately tangible. <S> That's all that's happened here. <S> The Buddha put down the weight of egoic existence, and the feeling was immediately tangible. <A> Having experienced a completely profound release from stress and dissatisfaction, he let the contemplations of past and present Kamma go, so as to turn to this immediate experience and how to share it with others, in such a way as to attain to it themselves. <S> The Four Noble Truths bear little relation to the account of this first night of Awakening, yet enabled the listeners to share the experience themselves. <A> In terms of Dependent Origination, the role of ignorance is particularly subtle. <S> Unknowingly activities, conditionally arise, resulting in a consciousness that doesn't know of the arising of its own origination factors. <S> Instead, it progresses to the unspoken, unquestioned projection of Subject and Object, Nama Rupa. <S> Which in turn also knows nothing of its own arising. <S> After stream-entry, a consciousness may arise that can discern this, but it too knows nothing of its own arising. <S> The arahat just lets it all go.
|
Enlightenment isn’t like being drunk, but like that state, entrance into it is unmistakable. Buddha is a general term given to one that knows the truth of everything.
|
Causes of downfall of a Man, pointed by Buddha in Mangala Sutta As, pointed out by Buddha in Mangala Sutta, the causes of downfall of a man. Among those following is the one among them;1) Those who have ample wealth does not support his old aged father and mother has a downfall! Question remains, How if pursuing the goal of Nibbana, one abandoned the all relation and property. Including that of old age mother and father, won't have Downfall.How, if that 1st statement is assumed valid, there was not a downfall of Buddha, although abondened his old age parents?Please answer the above correctly! <Q> Among those following is the one among them; 1) <S> Those who have ample wealth does not support his old aged father and mother has a downfall! <S> Philosophy aside, just by going with plain simple logic and there's no contradiction here. <S> The statement and the premise is clear: those who have ample wealth <S> who do not support their aging parents will face downfall. <S> The Buddha and His noble disciples did not have ample wealth and hence did not satisfy the condition for the downfall. <S> Now including the philosophy, one can safely say that what the Buddha did at the end for His parents, siblings, son, their many relatives, and countless many people was an extraordinary kind of support no other worldly support was able to match: <S> "I tell you, monks, there are two people who are not easy to repay. <S> Which two? <S> Your mother & father. <S> Even if you were to carry your mother on one shoulder & your father on the other shoulder for 100 years, and were to look after them by anointing, massaging, bathing, & rubbing their limbs, and they were to defecate & urinate right there [on your shoulders], you would not in that way pay or repay your parents. <S> If you were to establish your mother & father in absolute sovereignty over this great earth, abounding in the seven treasures, you would not in that way pay or repay your parents. <S> Why is that? <S> Mother & father do much for their children. <S> They care for them <S> , they nourish them, they introduce them to this world. <S> But anyone who rouses his unbelieving mother & father, settles & establishes them in conviction; rouses his unvirtuous mother & father, settles & establishes them in virtue; rouses his stingy mother & father, settles & establishes them in generosity; rouses his foolish mother & father, settles & establishes them in discernment: <S> To this extent one pays & repays one’s mother & father.” <S> ~~ <S> AN 2.32 <S> ~~ <A> Mangala Sutta discusses things which are blessing or auspicious. <S> Parabhava Sutta is what discusses what leads to one's downfall. <S> We understand this as explained by thee; this is the third cause of his downfall. <S> Tell us the fourth, O Blessed One. <S> What is the cause of his downfall? <S> Parabhava Sutta <S> Supporting one's parents is a blessing. <S> To support mother and father, to cherish wife and children, and to be engaged in peaceful occupation — this is the greatest blessing. <S> Mangala Sutta <S> If you are wealthy and having the means and do not take care of your parents this lead to your downfall. <S> This essentially is applicable to householders, though the Vinaya explicitly allows for monks to take care of their parents. <S> In the case of the Buddha or a monk, one leaves a householders life to seek enlistment and one is living on the charity or alms of others who support you seek liberation. <S> In this case, you do not have the means to support your parents as a householder would do. <S> So this does not lead to your downfall. <S> The Buddha searched for the Dhamma and found it. <S> In Anguttara i, 62, the Buddha said that even if one should carry his mother on one shoulder and his father on the other shoulder for a hundred years serving them dutifully, one could never repay them. <S> But if one could incite one's parents to practise generosity and morality and establish them in faith in the Triple Gem and wisdom, one does repay what is due to one's parents. <S> Among the Ten Subjects of Right View, understanding that there are results of one's actions (kamma) towards one's mother and father constitutes Right View. <S> Therefore, one should always hold them in veneration in one's thoughts, speech and action. <S> TEN BASES OF MERITORIOUS ACTION <A> His mother died after childbirth, and his father was a Sakya clan leader, he didn't need wealth. <S> Filial piety or family commitment wise, all craving must be abandoned, so as sad and irreconcilable that instant is (even though, always, the story of the Taoist farmer is good to remember), it is anyways at some point necessary on the path. <S> Buddha later put in rules that disallowed his own path to a Sramana, such as the parents had to consent to their child's wish to become a monk. <S> In the end though, the wealth was given away, and as a revealer of Dhamma, as he said to Rahula when he demanded his wage for being his son, the 'only' remaining wealth he had to give was through teaching Dhamma, which he did to him, and to other members of his clan.
|
When the time was right The Buddha gave the gift of Dhamma to his parents which surpasses any material benevolence he could have given them.
|
Is there something specifically wrong with keeping the 8 precepts as a lay person? I know that the 5 precepts were intended for lay people. I know that in lay life, most people choose to only keep the 5 precepts, and there is no requirement to keep any more. I know that sometimes lay people take the 8 precepts temporarily. However, is there anything specifically wrong with a lay person keeping the 8 precepts on an ongoing basis? I know it's harder to do as a lay person as opposed to a novice(edit: I meant anagarika). But is it specifically discouraged or wrong for any reason? <Q> No. <S> In fact, an anagarika (literally a homeless one) would observe the Eight Precepts on a full time basis, but in addition, would not maintain a lay household i.e. they would live a nomadic lifestyle or live in a monastery. <S> An anagarika is neither a novice monk ( samanera ) or a fully ordained monk ( bhikkhu ), but is a kind of informal state between lay life and novice monk, with far less rigid rules compared to monkhood. <S> For e.g. they can deal with money and perform financial transactions. <S> They can also cook their own meals. <S> Monastic rules related to non-intimate interactions with the opposite sex also do not apply to them. <S> Usually, those who are interested in becoming monks would be asked to spend some time in a monastery, first as an anagarika , then some more time as a novice monk (who keep the Ten Precepts ), before undergoing full ordination. <S> However, there are some people who have preferred to become full time <S> anagarikas like Anagarika Munindra . <S> Even if one is not an anagarika , it is still foreseeable that a lay person could keep the Eight Precepts on a full time basis. <A> No. <S> That is the entirety of my answer as I don’t think it needs elaboration, but I am adding this to get around the 30 character limit. <A> If your intent is to live a renunciant's life, then yes. <S> From personal experience, it is much easier to follow the eight at a monastery. <S> Because of this, you need to be more lenient with beautifying the body (you cannot wear all white all of the time!) <S> and the practice of not eating after noon (just make certain not to eat after your noon meal.) <S> Anything from which you are running show up on the eight precepts. <S> They are hard, so the practice of the eight precepts must be taken with respect. <S> Good luck. <S> You are doing a practice that the noble ones respect. <A> I would not say "wrong". <S> The precepts encourage awareness that leads to greater skill in practice. <S> MN8:13.1 <S> : Cunda, I say that even giving rise to the thought of skillful qualities is very helpful, let alone following that path in body and speech. <S> As we study the suttas, we become aware of many other aspects of practice that also apply, such as the brahmaviharas, which are limitless. <S> Love, compassion, rejoicing and equanimity are to be extended and nurtured as an aspect of practice. <S> For example, I prefer to sleep on futons, but my wife prefers to sleep on high and comfortable beds. <S> She has trouble sleeping and prefers me close, so when she sleeps I sleep by her. <S> When she is not around I sleep wherever. <S> Another example is that I cook dinner for her but save my portion for eating the next day. <S> Cooking requires tasting, which is eating. <S> When she is away I don't cook in the evening. <S> Even though my observances are lax, the benefits have proven themselves again and again with greater joy and equanimity. <S> I no longer get "hangry" and can sleep anywhere. <S> I take the Buddha's advice to Cunda to heart. <S> However, if I were to go forth as a monastic, my behavior would certainly be more strict!
|
Taking the eight precepts is the best thing you can do to calm the mind.
|
How can you know that meditating isn't selfish? Perhaps 'selfish' isn't the right word for it as the 'self' is not the goal. But if you define the 'self' as your inner core/soul is it still possible to meditate selfish? If so how to know this and how to prevent this? How to distinguish between 'good' and 'bad' ('achieved') enlightement? <Q> But if you define the 'self' as your inner core/soul is it still possible to meditate selfish? <S> Meditating as intended, one develops a different view on the self than the definition above, for instance. <S> If so how to know this and how to prevent this? <S> On one hand - among other things - one needs to familiarize oneself with the theoretical concepts of: the twelve nidanas, for general understanding on how wrong view leads to suffering bhava tanha, for specific understanding of wrong striving for defining a self the five skandhas, for right understanding of a wholesome alternative to defining a self <S> On the other hand, to prevent that our insights stays a mere theoretical product, we must also examine how these phenomena plays out in real life, with the aid of: right mindfulness, in order to recognize when we falsely identify with a certain concept of self right effort, to explore new habits allowing us to break the patterns creating more suffering, and to develop habits conducive to the cessation of suffering <A> Keep at it. <S> Eventually you’ll hit a stage in your meditation where the self cannot exist. <S> In fact, you have to essentially kill yourself [metaphorically speaking] to reach that place. <S> When you do, any talk of selfishness becomes moot. <A> The goal of meditation is certainly 'selfish', i.e., to improve & liberate oneself. <S> However, the effect of meditation is unselfishness, i.e., the capacity to greatly give to others. <S> What actually hinders the capacity to give of an attained meditator is the incapacity of others to receive. <S> Often it is pointless to attempt to give Dhamma because others are too ignorant to receive it. <A> I have always considered "my" limited view on meditation as the loss of self and a reconnection to the soul that connects us all. <S> As such it isn't selfish, but a "coming home" into the spiritual haven that connects all things and can only be reached by achieving meditation and leaving the self - and its selfish amibitions - behind. <S> And that is what gives us strength, it reconnects us, it replenishes us. <S> Of course, one might argue, that the result of a successful meditation is selfish as it helps the individual. <S> But the connection to the "over soul" makes us feel more connected to all the other things in the world and that makes us a part of a larger community. <S> Being refreshed in such a community is helpful for the entire community and thus not selfish.
|
One purpose of meditation is to deepen your understanding for anatta, non-self.
|
How anger is developed? Most of the time I experience the situations that provoke my anger.I hate people. How to overcome this?how to let go anger? <Q> Generally speaking anger can be the result of any/all of the three root kleshas. <S> They are: not knowing the full reason for our anger (moha) holding on too hard to something (raga) <S> lacking compassion for others (dvesha) <S> Mindfulness can help easing the first two kleshas, by investigating the cause for your anger, and to examine whether your anger is caused because someone/something is getting in the way of your attachment. <S> Mindfulness can also help you identify any hindrances to develop understanding or non-attachment. <S> It may be helpful to both you and your surrounding, and can contribute to a more objective or balanced outlook on things. <A> Don't hate people because everything happen to you <S> happened because of your actions in Sansara. <S> So whenever you get angry because of people just think that I have done a similar action in Sansara and this is why I am being treated like this and determine to not to do that similar thing again in Sansara. <S> Always be mindful of anger. <S> whenever anger is starting to build up think about the above fact. <S> To improve mindfulness practice Anapansathi meditation regularly. <S> To control anger practice Mythri meditation regularly. <S> For more teachings check this playlist <A> I understand your pain and I can feel it. <S> You are suffering because things aren't going the way you know them to be right. <S> Everybody has that feeling sometime. <S> It's common and at times I feel just like you. <S> You don't mean to hurt - neither yourself nor the other, but you are feeling hurt and I am sorry for that. <S> It will get better. <S> Let the anger go. <S> If you offer resistance, it will be the cause of more anger. <S> Anger is a way of saying that you have certain idea how you expect other people to behave. <S> And if they don't, anger wells up, because your own ideas are violated. <S> There is a limit as to how much you can control other people, but you can always control yourself and how you react to other people. <S> Leave them the benefit of the doubt. <S> We're all human, we're all trying to survive and maybe the other person's way isn't your way, there is nothing you can do against it and anger will only hurt you, but refusing to accept that there are limits to your own control. <S> In other words <S> : Forgive them, nothing annoys them so much. <S> Be kind to them, they are hurting too. <A> By not fighting anger ,and if you accept that anger is a possibility ,there is every possibility you will witness it when it arises.
|
Lastly, metta bhavana meditation can also help in easing your anger, by developing warmth towards others (the opposite of anger, essentially), and by seeing the others side of things. Let anger get through you, like a wind that passes through your being.
|
How does rebirth fit with the fact that everything is impermanent? One of the lessons Buddhism teaches is that everything is impermanent. Our thoughts, our feelings, our emotions, our bodies, our life. Everything. We are surrounded by death. We are mortals. There is an end to this. However, Buddhism also has the concept of rebirth. Karma follows you not just in this life but in your next. It's also said that the Buddha gained the ability to recall his previous lives. This to me implies some sort of a soul (for lack of a better word), condition, or consciousness that is not impermanent. After you die you get reborn. There is an "you" that transcends the current (impermanent) existence. I guess, my question is, is there some sort of a soul, consciousness, or a condition, that is not impermanent? When one reaches enlightenment (nirvana) and stops the cycle of rebirths, what happens to them? <Q> "Rebirth" is a moral teaching in Buddhism; about destiny due to action ( karma ). <S> "Impermanence" is a transcendent teaching in Buddhism. <S> "Rebirth" and "impermanence" are not intended to "fit" together. <A> One of the lessons Buddhism teaches is that everything is impermanent. <S> Our thoughts, our feelings, our emotions, our bodies, our life. <S> Everything. <S> We are surrounded by death. <S> We are mortals. <S> There is an end to this. <S> However, Buddhism also has the concept of rebirth. <S> Actually think about it, rebirth is there due to impermanence. <S> For if one dies and there's no rebirth, then death itself is permanent, which breaks impermanence! <S> Now the point about kamma, sure it follows you from this life to the next, but it constantly changes depending on one's volitional actions. <S> So a crude analogy is your physical self. <S> Is Pips the 3 year-old boy <S> the same exact Mr. Pips <S> the 93 year-old man? <S> Not really. <S> Although there seems to be a "permanent-something" Pips from 3 to 93, that's only an illusion for everything change (impermanence): <S> every single physical cell on Pips body grows, age, and got replaced. <S> Every feeling, perception, volition, cognition change and get replaced from moment to moment. <S> The perception of "permanence" is an illusion just like one sees a movie in the cinema with all its seemingly alive people and animals while in fact they're just a bunch of still frames appearing sequentially one after another. <A> There is no difference in manner or extent between how rebirth happens in this very life from moment to moment and what happens from life to life. <S> So ask yourself, how does rebirth in this very life that happens from moment to moment fit with the fact that everything is impermanent? <S> It is precisely because we are impermanent beings that we are reborn from moment to moment. <S> Like you say we are surrounded by death! <S> Indeed! <S> How could something be any more impermanent! <S> So how does rebirth from life to life change the picture?? <S> It doesn’t. <S> In exactly the same way that we are impermanent and thus reborn from moment to moment... in just that way and for just the same reasons... we are reborn from life to life. <S> In summary, if you have no problem with understanding how impermanence fits with the true rebirth of beings from moment to moment you should have no problem with the true rebirth of beings from life to life. <S> If it does perplex you, then you have most likely fallen to the extremes of eternalism or annihilationism. <S> The Buddha did not teach these extremes, but rather taught the truth of the Middle Way. <S> Hope this helps! <A> Dīgha Nikāya 1, the Brahmajālasutta, discusses theories of a self in great detail. <S> Studying DN1, we realize that there are indeed very many theories of a self. <S> For example: DN1:1.30.1 : There are some ascetics and brahmins who are eternalists, who assert that the self and the cosmos are eternal on four grounds. <S> (etc.) <S> Regarding these theories, the Buddha indicates that all such the theories arise out of repeated contact with sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches or thoughts. <S> Such theories are traps for those who crave the continued existence of these contacts. <S> The escape is to relinquish the craving, allowing the impermanence, letting go of continued existence and rebirth. <S> Regarding the Realized One after death, the Buddha said quite simply: DN1:3.73.7 : <S> But when his body breaks up, after life has ended, gods and humans will see him no more.” <A> Rebirth doesn't fit impermanence and anatta. <S> It is the accepting of a psychological 'I', and the consequences of such a view of self.
|
We die and are reborn in every moment of this very life!
|
What is mind contain of? What are the contain of the mind?Are emotions being mind contain or they are from of mind energy?how does mind differ from each other?how person being act differently.? <Q> Here's the standard answer of what the mind is according to Buddhism. <S> 4 aggregates. <S> Feelings. <S> (Pleasant, unpleasant, neither pleasant nor unpleasant.) <S> Perception. <S> (Spontaneous recognition) Volitional formations. <S> Consciousness. <S> (6 consciousnesses, 5 physical sense base consciousness and 1 mind consciousness.) <S> We all have the same structure of the mind. <S> The difference from person to person is merely that different feelings at different time for different people, (only 3 possibilities) <S> We can possibly speak different languages, so our perception of sounds is different, I perceive Russian language sound as noise, those who knows the language perceives their meaning spontaneously. <S> We choose to react differently to different things, but we all have the same basic template to choose from. <S> Metta, or anger, or generosity, or greed. <S> Emotions fall under the category of volitional formations. <S> We can be conscious of different things at different times. <S> Like he's sleeping, I am awake etc. <S> The mind object can be anything, including the 4 aggregates of the mind itself, it's perceived via the mind base, and when mind consciousness arise to come together, we have contact of mind object. <S> When contact happens, feelings arises and is dependent on what contact it is, what perception we have of the contact etc. <A> A bit more esoteric response would be as follows: <S> The true mind, or Buddha Mind, is one that is shared between all sentient beings and is pure, clear, true and excludes nothing. <S> It does not require zazen to be still, it does not lack enlightenment. <S> It is this mind that we experience in deep samadhi. <A> I think this is an interesting video about: His Holiness the Dalai Lama talks on the "Nature of the Mind" <S> I find it a very interesting point of view, also because is very similar to the most advanced knowledge that we have in neurosciences. <S> Hope it helps! <A> It is the combination of Thoughts and Mental factors that creates the mind, however, the brain and consciousness also a requirement for the sense sphere to function which finally gives rise to experience the awareness of the five aggregates of existence.
|
“The Mind” that we think we have doesn’t exist.
|
What does buddhism say about mind and heart? Some gurus like osho says that the heart should dominate mind but reverse is happening in real world.Some like sadhguru from isha foundation says that heart is just a pumping device. It is driven by our mind. What point of view does buddhism have on heart and mind. I mean in terms of differences, dominance, reality, etc. <Q> In spiritual traditions, the heart is not the physical heart, but the intuition, the non-discursive or non-conceptual mind. <S> The conceptual mind gradually auto-emerges thanks to the mechanism known as Dependent Origination. <S> As conceptual mind develops, it constructs an experience of a world, Samsara. <S> Or we could say, the conceptual mind and Samsara are one and the same. <S> All our griefs and worries exist inside the framework of conceptual mind. <S> For example the concept of Death is like that <S> , it's an abstract concept, in reality there is no death but endless transformation. <S> The non-conceptual mind aka heart does not operate in such terms, so it does not have the same issues. <S> In Early Buddhist texts the process of letting go of the concepts until only the non-conceptual remains is described as "animitta" or The Signless. <S> You can read more about it in this nice article: http://www.ahandfulofleaves.org/documents/Articles/Signless%20Meditations%20in%20Pali%20Buddhism_JIABS_Harvey_1986.pdf <A> Venerable Ānanda approached the Buddha and asked about the five lower fetters. <S> After learning about the practice for giving up the five lower fetters, Venerable Ānanda had one more question: MN64:16.1 : “Sir, if this is the path and the practice for giving up the five lower fetters, how come some mendicants here are released in heart while others are released by wisdom?” <S> The Buddha answered simply: MN64:16.2 : “In that case, I say it is the diversity of their faculties.” <S> And Venerable Ānanda was happy with that... <S> In other words, we're all different. <S> Another sutta explains further. <S> For example, those with serenity of heart should seek those with discernment: <S> AN4.94:2.1 : <S> As for the person who has serenity but not discernment: they should approach someone who has discernment ... <S> And those with discernment should seek those with serenity of heart: <S> AN4.94:3.1 : <S> As for the person who has discernment but not serenity: they should approach someone who has serenity ... <S> We're all different. <S> And we can all help each other because of those differences. <A> What point of view does buddhism have on heart and mind. <S> I mean in terms of differences, dominance, reality, etc. <S> The meaning of "heart" and "mind", their differences, and their tendency to dominate a personality can be understood in several ways, according to buddhist dhamma. <S> One possible interpretation within buddhist doctrine is the concept of the five spiritual faculties (indriyas) which aids on the path to enlightenment. <S> Here, heart or mind can be considered corresponding to the factors listed below. <S> They are: Faith (saddha), to overcome doubt in buddhist teachings. <S> Persistence (viriya), to overcome tiredness/laziness and to achieve right effort. <S> Mindfulness (sati), to overcome thoughtlessness. <S> Concentration (samadhi), to overcome distraction and deepen your focus. <S> Wisdom (panna), to overcome lack of understanding of the four noble truths. <S> According to the Sona sutta in Anguttara Nikaya, these factors needs to be balanced in order to work in favor of attaining further cultivation. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.055.than.html <S> Another interpretation of the aspects of heart and mind that comes to mind is the idea of general personality traits with regards to meditation. <S> Each type is described with a particular temperament, and is therefore recommended a specific meditation practice (kammatthana). <S> From this perspective, someone may be inclined to being faithful (heart), or to a more intellectual proclivity (mind), among others: <S> Six main character types are recognized — the greedy, the hating, the deluded, the faithful, the intelligent and the speculative — this oversimplified typology being taken only as a pragmatic guideline which in practice admits various shades and combinations. <S> The ten kind of foulness and mindfulness of the body, clearly intended to attenuate sensual desire, are suitable for those of greedy temperament. <S> Eight subjects — the four divine abidings and four color kasinas — are appropriate for the hating temperament. <S> Mindfulness of breathing is suitable for those of the deluded and the speculative temperament. <S> The first six recollections are appropriate for the faithful temperament. <S> Four subjects — mindfulness of death, the recollection of peace, the defining of the four elements, and the perception of the repulsiveness in nutriment — are especially effective for those of intelligent temperament. <S> The remaining six kasinas and the immaterial states are suitable for all kinds of temperaments. <S> But the kasinas should be limited in size for one of speculative temperament and large in size for one of deluded temperament. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html
|
The Buddhism I was taught is pretty much in favor of re-discovering and utilizing one's "heart".
|
How to find an appropriate sex partner for a sakadagami? Is it true that sakadagami can have sex that is pure so between a wife and husband. how can one gain the attention of a wise man who intends to marry and upholds The Way of Noble Ones. <Q> With all due respect, many people overestimate their "achievements". <S> Just because a once-returner has remainders of sensual pleasure & anger, doesn't mean that he/she will act on those. <S> It's of course all really speculation because none of this has been mentioned in the suttas, but I believe a sotapanna and even moreso <S> a sakadagami has such profound level of anatta, that enables them to detach from sensual desire and anger quickly. <S> A Buddha would have no interest in being in a relationship. <S> Since you also mentioned that you are a misanthrop, I doubt that you achieved higher states because misanthropy is a generalized hatred towards human beings. <S> With regards to sex <S> I guess no one can give you a definite answer because humans are way too complex, have different wants & preferences in different life periods, and also their personal attitudes (and former experiences) <S> can influence their relationship life & sexual life. <A> It is gradual training.just try to find a partner who observes five precepts. <S> I think it is a good start. <A> If what you want is sex (or a sex partner), you might find it frustrating to be married to "a Buddha". <S> FYI <S> I take this answer to be advice for choosing a partner, based on the suttas -- although that is arguably not tantra <S> mind you.
|
If you seek for a more loving relationship, make sure to look for a person who has somewhat same interests and goals as you do, and ideally both should practise Buddhism (or some other spiritual endeavor).
|
About suffering, expectations and unfalsifiable beliefs I've been wondering if it's possible to "progress" towards enlightenment if one has certain set of beliefs which may (or may not) be false (or illogical), but which do not generate conflict between expectations and experience. If we understand dukkha as the result of a dissonance between worldview and experience, one could a priori think that unfalsifiable theories may not generate such dissonances (and therefore, may not contribute to the perpetuation of the conditions of dukkha), because there's no experience that can disprove such notions. For example, if one says that "our true self is formless, without comprehensible features", how could this view be a hindrance in the path? After all, that belief does not seem to necessarily contradicts the essence of anattā, because no khandha can be considered that alleged "true self", and so, non-attachment to khandhas may also be the path to attain that "true self". Being more general: can someone attain Nibbana while still holding some false notions about self or reality? Kind regards! <Q> The Buddhist problematic isn't about whether beliefs are true or false, or provable or unprovable. <S> It's about whether we cling to beliefs, because the clinging itself creates dukkha. <S> So for instance, let's take your statement: <S> "Our true self is formless, without comprehensible features. <S> " You adopt this belief, and like it, and it doesn't seem to interfere with your meditation or other practices. <S> Fine. <S> But then along comes another Buddhist, who says: "No, no no: <S> that's not right. <S> What <S> I believe is this ...". <S> Suddenly you find yourself involved in an intellectual dispute, wrestling (good-naturedly) with another practitioner about whose perspective is better, and which of you has more experience to back up their view. <S> One way or another (unless you're very careful) someone's ego is going to get bruised. <S> And then along comes some decidedly less enlightened person who says: "You two are a pair of blowhards and it's all a crock of sh*t anyway, so stop pretending you're so high and mighty. <S> " So not only did your statement make you a target for abuse, it gave this poor guy something concrete to vent about. <S> Fixed beliefs — even innocuous-seeming ones, and particularly ones that are not otherwise decidable — are focal points for conflict. <S> Just think about the Christian faith, where a fixed, undecidable belief in a loving God indirectly fills the world with anger, resentment, and hate. <S> I'm not going to go so far as to say that a belief like this is an obstacle , because beliefs like this are useful tools at certain stages of spiritual development. <S> But in the end, even beliefs like this will have be released. <A> “ Being more general: can someone attain Nibbana while still holding some false notions about self or reality?” <S> No, in the same way and for the same reason that one cannot wake up from a dream without being entirely sure that the experience is a dream. <S> If you still have some doubt or hold some false notion that the experience is not a dream you simply cannot wake up to the fact that it is. <S> In just the same way one cannot “wake up” from this waking life without being thoroughly convinced and sure - even more directly perceiving it! - <S> that this is just like a dream, a mirage, the flame of a lamp, an illusion, a drop of dew, a bubble, a flash of lightning. <S> This is the teaching of the Buddha. <A> The answer to your question is specific to the person in yr example. <S> We could weigh the amount of damage this being produced by maintaining this view. <S> For instance if this being took sentient beings money to help them but doesnt deliver or isnt accountable and causes someone to stumble or kill themself this should lead to distress in the being. <S> This would assume the being has had initial enlightenment and is at minimum bodhisattva. <S> How the being deals with the consequences of his actions is his karma so he could still attain full enlightenment at death. <A> I'm not sure I can answer this well; but to attempt an answer, in note form: <S> It's difficult for me personally <S> (e.g. given my training) to see an unfalsifiable belief as being even a belief at all. <S> It seems that it isn't "right view", nor "wrong view" -- that instead it is " not even wrong ". <S> We're told in MN 22 (this was Dharmafarer's translation of that): <S> Bhikshus, you may well cling to the self-doctrine that would not cause sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair to arise in one who clings to it. <S> But do you see any such possession, bhikshus?” <S> “No, bhante.” <S> “Good, bhikshus. <S> I, too, do not see any doctrine of self that would not arouse sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair in one who clings to it. <S> We might be meant to beware of clinging to views perhaps especially in later stages of enlightenment (see e.g. the parable of the raft) <S> Buddhist doctrine often seems to judge a view by its effect -- does it lead to morality and to unbinding? <S> If so then good and if not then not -- which is a circular answer to the question. <S> This might be an orthodox answer here -- i.e. that some inchoate sense-of-self might continue to arise occasionally until a person becomes fully and finally enlightened, but that (perhaps by definition) a semi-enlightened person will not "hold" that as a "view". <A> I've been wondering if it's possible to "progress" towards enlightenment if one has certain set of beliefs <S> which may (or may not) be false (or illogical), but which do not generate conflict between expectations and experience. <S> That's why the Dhamma is not an armchair philosophy. <S> The validity of the particular view will need to be tested over and over again by applying it in real life. <S> So, using your example, "true self is formless, without comprehensive features", ok, sounds good in theory. <S> But one'd need to do a lot more to see how it fares when the rubber meets the road, ie. <S> does it still hold when one's being touched by the soft and warm body of a young voluptuous woman? <S> or being showered with all kinds of flowery words? <S> with wealth, fame, beauty, or prestige? <S> So right view will be attained, developed, AND re-inforced as one makes the actual climb toward the mountain top. <S> For a right view without implementation can quickly and easily slide back toward the wrong side. <S> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YbMqcQK0k4
|
One doesn't make progress toward enlightenment by starting out with all the correct views and beliefs.
|
Intensifying sensations during meditation after switching to an Ayuverdic lifestyle I've been a Vipassana meditator for some time (2 10-day retreats and regular meditation on a near-daily basis). I've found it tremendously helpful and life changing. I'm also a type-1 diabetic. I sought the advice of a good Ayuverda doctor near me and started following his guidelines for what to eat/not to in accordance with my "prakriti". I eat mostly vegetables and rarely ever touch meat. I've been eating very healthy and have noticed a lot of improvements in overall wellbeing. However, I have been experiencing some bizarre things in my meditation. Extremely intense emotions and sensations began to arise in my body and it makes me wonder if a cleaner diet had anything to do with it. I feel a constant clenching and tightness in my whole neck which goes up to the left side of my head up the jaw. I feel much more from the left side of my chest. Various sensations have begun to arise from there and it makes me wonder if this is a natural evolution when one goes along the path. I am constantly in touch with my healthcare team and have a clean bill of health even after many years with diabetes. I feel much more in my body, but cannot describe it to my doctors as i feel this has something to do with my awarenss gained from meditation. Unfortunately, I use cannabis (trying to quit) and feel that the cannabis greatly intensifies very unpleasant sensations, particularly in the chest area where I even feel some stabbing pain and burning. Does eating vegetables increase the "sharpness" of meditation? Should I quit drinking coffee/using cannabis? I am intrigued by what is happening in my body and have no clue which person I should consult about these sort of things. I am a vata/pitta individual living in the Netherlands. <Q> First, good to hear that you have your health in check thanks to the medical care you mention. <S> With their attention, we could likely rule out the medical aspect of your sensations. <S> However, i can't tell from your description if they have been consulted about the tightness in the neck and head you describe. <S> Does eating vegetables increase the "sharpness" of meditation? <S> It's more likely that eating vegetables keeps you from being dull or drowsy, by staying away from food that requires a lot of energy to digest. <S> In fact, the sixth buddhist precept has this particular purpose. <S> Should I quit drinking coffee/using cannabis? <S> According to buddhism, substances keeps us in an unbalanced way of life due to craving (tanha). <S> If you manage to reduce your craving habits it will help you develop better karma for yourself, in turn helping calm and concentration in accordance with the fifth buddhist precept. <S> This goes primarily for cannabis, as it is altering your perception/concentration, but also to a lesser extent coffee, since caffeine can prevent you from developing samatha or tranquility during meditation. <S> I am intrigued by what is happening in my body and have no clue which person I should consult about these sort of things. <S> I am a vata/pitta individual living in the Netherlands. <S> The experiences you have are addressed in many different traditions of thought. <S> Buddhism very much provides a framework for understanding and dealing with your questions, but may/may not correspond to ayurvedic practice (i know practically nothing about those things). <S> Put <S> shortly, what you are experiencing could be considered citta sankhara, or formations of perception as a result of your habits, generally speaking. <S> Provided <S> it's not a medical cause for your sensations, they will probably be stilled if you continue your meditation practice. <A> The Noble Eightfold Path is conditioned but can be grasped too tightly from a desire for rapid progress or attainments. <S> Observances and practices that lead to obsession are not skillful. <S> Find a middle ground that leads to less craving, less aversion and less delusion. <S> In the practice of Buddhism, we let go of our cravings. <S> We don't grasp them. <S> Thag16.7:6.1 <S> : Today I am fortunate, persistent, happy with the scraps in my bowl: Bhaddiya son of Godhā practices absorption without grasping. <S> Regarding diet, when I wore a glucose monitor, what I noticed is that subtle changes in diet have great impact on glucose levels. <S> Eating a banana alone causes a glucose spike. <S> Eating a banana with peanut butter smooths out the spike. <S> So it's not just what we eat, it's also how and when we eat. <S> Be gentle with your body and observe it mindfully and carefully in consultation with good doctors and teachers. <A> Many people have described "spiritual" or energetic feelings after changing their diet, particularly vegetarian/fruitarian diets, without those people necessarily practising meditation or following a relgious practise. <S> Buddhist monks have sometimes been encouraged to eat meat if their health was poor/they were sick, and the Shaolin monastery monks practising kung fu eat meat as part of their training, although their meditational practise may be limited. <S> It may well have made you more sensitive, but I have no proof of that. <S> However embrace these changes as something positive. <S> As you diet becomes cleaner, you may react to those unclean parts of your diet: eg coffee/cannabis and quite naturally want to reduce them. <S> This has happened to me with regard to my coffee intake. <S> As my diet has cleaned up, coffee occasiaonlly tastes toxic to me, even though I generally love it from and have been addicted to it for a long time.
|
Although I have not personally noticed any changes in my Buddhist practise from reducing my meat/fish intake, it is possible that, as another user has said, that you are more focused because plant food digests more quickly. Embrace slow, steady and gentle practices and observances.
|
I am finding myself being unable to enjoy things, my mind keeps going to meditation I have noticed that while watching TV or trying to do work, my mind keeps getting caught up in the feeling of my breath, or the random noises around me. These are the exact things that I notice while meditating, and while meditating I allow myself to notice those things and observe myself noticing them. But, when I want to read a book I am finding that I am now noticing those things instead of reading the book, like I am going back to meditating without meaning to. I’m having a hard time getting into a flow state at work or while doing something enjoyable. It’s bothering me. I don’t want to stop meditating, but if this keeps happening then I will have to stop. <Q> Skill at anapanasati means being able to read & work with awareness of breathing. <S> Here, the tempo or pace of reading & work adjusts to conform with the rhythm of the breathing. <A> There are six kinds of immersion: <S> DN33:1.10.120 : Three kinds of immersion. <S> Immersion with placing the mind and keeping it connected. <S> Immersion without placing the mind, but just keeping it connected. <S> Immersion without placing the mind or keeping it connected. <S> Another three kinds of immersion: emptiness, signless, and undirected. <S> The last five are advanced and require skill in the first, which is placing the mind and keeping it connected. <S> As you meditate, you keep your mind connected with your breath and that is immersive. <S> As householders, we have to work and this introduces a challenge of attending to breath while we work or read. <S> The attention becomes split and one ends up feeling conflicted in focus. <S> There's actually a simple solution that works quite well and results in better work or reading. <S> The simple solution is to work and read with each exhalation. <S> For example, during Zen retreats, our Roshi instructed us to do calligraphy with a single breath. <S> With this simple technique we can harmonize our breathing with our daily activities. <S> It will feel odd at first <S> but then one notices an overall improvement in our work and reading. <S> Clarity emerges attending to the breath while working and with anything we do. <A> When I meditate, if I notice that I'm distracted then I return to the breath. <S> It's not really "bad" to get distracted, so no need to be harsh. <S> With love, I return to the breath. <S> During daily life it's the same, if I get distracted, then I return to what I was doing. <S> Maybe try some body scan. <S> Or some breath and some body scan each day. <S> I hope you solve this problem.
|
Attend to the breath on each inhalation. Anyway, if it is becoming a habit so strong that it's interfering with your life, maybe you can mix in other meditations to try to get enough change to brake the habit.
|
How to not to attach to the vinaya? I feel very guilty when I break the vinaya / shila. Now it became a couse for suffering. Some times I feel very bad about people who not follows vinaya.How do I get out of this ? How to follow vinaya without attaching to it ? <Q> We can derive some clues about how to deal with kukkuca, if we look at its characteristics: <S> It is a mental factor (cetasika) <S> It is one of the five hindrances (nivarana) during meditation <S> It is originating from aversion (dosa) <S> https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/kukkucca <S> Seeing as it is considered a cetasika, we can try to still it during meditation, and proceed to investigate them mindfully as with any mental factor. <S> And what is lack of food for the arising of unarisen restlessness & anxiety, or for the growth & increase of restlessness & anxiety once it has arisen? <S> There is stillness of awareness. <S> To foster appropriate attention to that: This is lack of food for the arising of unarisen restlessness & anxiety, or for the growth & increase of restlessness & anxiety once it has arisen. <S> The fact that it is based in aversion, means that we can dilute the karmic effect of the aversion by practicing metta bhavana, not least towards those who struggle with the precepts/vinayas. <S> And what is lack of food for the arising of unarisen ill will, or for the growth & increase of ill will once it has arisen? <S> There is awareness-release [through goodwill, compassion, empathetic joy, or equanimity]. <S> To foster appropriate attention to that: This is lack of food for the arising of unarisen ill will, or for the growth & increase of ill will once it has arisen. <S> https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN46_51.html <A> The vinaya is more of a guideline than a book of commandments. <S> You undertake to 'observe' the precepts/vinaya. <S> While you are proceeding with day to day activities you might by accident 'break' a precept. <S> After that you should be mindful to not cause the same mistake again as you would not break the certain precept in the same way. <S> But you might break the precept, in another way, which again you must inspect mindfully like I said before. <S> This way you will ultimately be able to observe all precepts without breaking them. <A> In simple words, Vinaya is defined to help to the people who follow the Path to the Nivana . <S> As I've heard, there were Lord Buddha's time (early Lord Buddhas before the Gauthama Lord Buddha) where the vinaya was not defined, because it was not a need. <S> Anyway <S> since it's defined in this Lord Buddha's (Gauthama) time, it's good to follow. <S> But if you understand the core thing in Buddhism as advised by Buddha, what we need to do to attain Nivana is to -> Stop ruining the mind with Ragha, Dvesha and Moha . <S> Therefore if you do this, if you get ruined your mind with these while trying to control others who are not following Vinaya, think twice. <S> And the other thing to think about is, what's the purpose of worrying others, it's good to help others or showing the way, or sharing you experience (on Nivana), <S> but if you conflicts with them, you earn bad Karma, because you've ruined your mind, which causes you to delay your journey to Nivana.
|
One should not scold himself but instead, mindfully recall what went wrong and how the specific precept was broken.
|
How come enlightened people don't have any laziness? I just heard that enlightened people have zero laziness. How is it possible? What is "laziness" ? What is the connection between laziness and ego/desire? Edit: Also that monk said: "Laziness is caused by ignorance." <Q> Speaking from the first hand experience, laziness comes from attachment, fear, or ignorance. <S> No attachment, no fear, and no ignorance - translates to no laziness. <S> And how does attachment cause laziness? <S> Someone is attached to what they think is a pleasant pastime, taking delight and enjoying that experience. <S> For such person, anything apart from that experience is unpleasant, hence they will have inner resistance and avoidance: <S> laziness. <S> And how does fear cause laziness? <S> Someone is afraid of failure or is afraid of judgement or is afraid of difficulties, or is afraid of all three. <S> For such person, doing anything that has a risk of the three looks dangerous, hence they will have inner resistance and avoidance: laziness. <S> And how does ignorance cause laziness? <S> Someone is confused about what is important, confused about what's good and what's bad for oneself and others, confused what actions lead to what outcome. <S> For such person there's no understanding: <S> "this needs to be done". <S> Having no understanding, they have no motivation. <S> Having no motivation, they are lazy. <S> An enlightened one, having no attachment, taking no delight in pleasant experiences, having overcome the sign of "pleasant", having no fear, having no resistance to difficult experiences, having transcended the notion of "difficult" - does not have a basis for the arising of inner resistance and avoidance, therefore laziness can't arise. <S> Having the perfect understanding of what's good and what's bad, knowing what is important, an enlightened one acts with wisdom and compassion. <A> Once enlightened one does not have the 5 Hindrances including Thīna - Middha which makes us lazy. <A> I observed bodily feelings in myself with which I identified or at least liked. <S> Especially in the sexual arena. <S> They "made" me lazy. <S> I had diffuculty to let go of these and really get going. <S> I can see enlightened people to not have these problems. <S> They are probably feeling much more alive from within and feeling good. <S> There is probably no need for all the comfort stuff for them. <S> Hopefully that helped. <S> Blessings! <A> This is due to ignorance, i.e., not knowing what is necessarily for oneself. <S> Enlightened people have zero laziness because their body & mind is without mental pollution & blockages thus their energy flows optimally & freely.
|
Laziness often is due to a lack of desire or motivation.
|
Is lazyness a killer? If so, in how far is it a killer, a quality that harms? How does it arises, when arising? How does it vanish? [Note that this isn't given/asked for trade, exchange, stakes or other layziness supporting means but for liberation] <Q> Once the Exalted One spoke to the Venerable Maha-Moggallana thus: "Are you drowsy, Moggallana? <S> Are you drowsy, Moggallana?" — "Yes, venerable sir." <S> (1) <S> "Well then, Moggallana, at whatever thought torpor has befallen you, to that thought you should not give attention, you should not dwell on it frequently. <S> Then it is possible that, by so doing, torpor will disappear...................... <S> AN7.58 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel026.html <A> In Buddhism, this is called Sloth and torpor (Thina Middha). <S> The fifth Mara. <S> It arises as a result of the first four Mara is subdued. <S> Buddha has given many ways to overcome this. <S> ============== https://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=35806&p=543234&hilit= <A> Laziness arises due to lack of true knowledge or false knowledge. <S> False knowledge can also demand mental alertness. <S> Laziness is a definite killer. <S> It destroys mental health necessary for liberation. <S> Laziness encourages ignorance. <S> One should be alert all the time if possible even in dreams. <S> A person who knows he is going to drown soon if he doesn't mend his ways will definitely try to save himself and become alert of the direction he is going on. <S> He will mindfully change his direction and put himself on the righteous path of mental alertness.
|
One way to kill Laziness is to realize the true knowledge.
|
Are monks expected to accept life lessons from (time spent with) the laity? In general, the monks are expected to preach the Dhamma and the laity should listen. But "behind the scenes", so to say, should monks really be learning from at least some situations they run into without the attitude they know better or that they already have the full truth? I think I might know the answer, but I am looking for any sutta/tipitaka references or analyses. Also, additional/complementary mahāyāna point of views and references are welcome. <Q> In Ubon Ratchatani Luang Por Char talked about (translating from Isaan language) <S> how "everything is teaching us." <S> Also, working with people was developing strength in him, he said. <A> Yes, it has happened that the monastic Sangha learns from the lay Sangha. <S> The vinaya has many cases where laity understood what was proper and complained about transgressions even before they became rules. <S> For example, Venerable Udāyī was caught whispering in a lay woman's ear. <S> The training rule on teaching (origin story): <S> How can Venerable Udāyī give teachings by whispering in the ear? <S> Should not teachings be given audibly and openly? <S> This is from the origin story of the training rule on teaching. <A> this is one example . <S> So far as I know many of the Vinaya rules have an "origin story" in the commentary which explain why/when the rule was enacted. <S> Also the Udayi Sutta: <S> About Udayin (AN 5.159) says, <S> "It's not easy to teach the Dhamma to others, Ananda. <S> The Dhamma should be taught to others only when five qualities are established within the person teaching. <S> Which five? <S> "[1] <S> The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speakstep-by-step.' <S> "[2] <S> The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speakexplaining the sequence [of cause & effect].' <S> "[3] <S> The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak outof compassion.' <S> "[4] <S> The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak notfor the purpose of material reward.' <S> "[5] <S> The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speakwithout hurting myself or others. <S> '[1] <S> ... <S> where, according to the footnote ... <S> According to the Commentary, "hurting oneself" means exalting oneself. <S> "Hurting others" means putting other people down. <S> Perhaps that -- i.e. "exalting oneself and hurting others" -- is applicable to the question i.e. "the attitude they know better". <S> I expect that probably a monk does indeed or in fact know better -- <S> so if it were " conceit " ... <S> Māna (Sanskrit, Pali; Tibetan: nga rgyal) is a Buddhist term that may be translated as "pride", "arrogance", or "conceit". <S> It is defined as an inflated mind that makes whatever is suitable, such as wealth or learning, to be the foundation of pride. <S> It creates the basis for disrespecting others and for the occurrence of suffering. <S> ... <S> then I guess it's likely to be "true conceit" as defined here <S> -- i.e. "thinking one is superior when one is superior", if the venerable compares his attainments with laypeople's and vice versa -- which I guess is part of what might make that so difficult. <S> I'd also like to answer that no, I'm not aware of such a doctrine in the suttas. <S> I gather that generally monks teach if they're invited to and only when the audience shows respect -- but it's difficult to prove this answer, i.e. difficult to "prove a negative". <A> Your example could be a case of conceit (mana), and is one of the ten fetters. <S> From Samyutta Nikaya, Sona sutta: <S> When any ascetics and brahmins, on the basis of feeling … on the basis of perception … on the basis of volitional formations … on the basis of consciousness—which is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change—regard themselves thus: ‘I am superior,’ or ‘I am equal,’ or ‘I am inferior,’ what is that due to apart from not seeing things as they really are? <S> /... <S> / Any kind of feeling whatsoever … Any kind of perception whatsoever … <S> Any kind of volitional formations whatsoever … Any kind of consciousness whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all consciousness should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ <S> Seeing thus, Soṇa, the instructed noble disciple experiences revulsion towards form, revulsion towards feeling, revulsion towards perception, revulsion towards volitional formations, revulsion towards consciousness. <S> Experiencing revulsion, he becomes dispassionate. <S> Through dispassion his mind is liberated. <S> When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’ <S> He understands: ‘Destroyed is birth <S> , the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.’” <S> https://suttacentral.net/sn22.49/en/bodhi
|
I think there were several cases where the Buddha "learned life lessons" from monks's interactions with laypeople --
|
Is it a bad heavy karma to criticize or give up your guru? "However it is said in the Guhyasamaja Root Tantra:" "If sentient beings commit an action As grave as the five heinous crimes He [still] can attain the superior Vajra Vehicle, But who from within disregards his master Shall never attain, even if exerted." "That means having given up your guru, criticized the guru, or having heresy or broken samaya with one’s guru. It is not possible to explain how heavy the negative karma is from these things. One who criticizes, hurts, or belittles one’s guru from the heart will not achieve anything in this life; even if one practices one won’t achieve anything." https://www.lamayeshe.com/advice/killing-ones-parents Does asking a sceptical question count as criticism? Such as why the guru is charging x-amount for teachings? And giving up a bad guru is it bad? Does it matter if the guru is buddhist or not? Perhaps this only applies to certain types of buddhism? <Q> Heavy bad kamma is always a matter of strong wrong view, and ingratitude is such especially if it's toward real and lasting help: Toward one's Gods, Parents, people of goodness. <S> Much done . <S> It's how ever not bad if based on right view and if the relation is a more or lesser good trade with the world, it would be even good to seek for leaving, correct of course <S> and not just for another similar way. <S> [Not given for trade, exchange, stacks and what ever relations not dedicated toward real liberation] <A> It's kinda simple logic: if guru does something that is ultimately beneficial, but in your confusion you think it's wrong, then by denying the guru you are shutting the door to that goodness, hereby creating bad karma. <S> If guru is bad then you're not. <S> But how do you know, if by definition he is the more enlightened, not you, <S> so how can you have capacity to correctly judge him? <S> In Vajrayana "type of Buddhism" there is unique situation when the guru may do crazy stuff on purpose to provoke you and create the teaching moments. <S> So in that school it is even harder to trust your guru but also that much more important to trust, so you two can keep working. <S> In other "types" it's simpler in the sense that you can follow basic guidelines like the guru is not supposed to do anything immoral, so that makes it easier to identify what's what. <A> This is a complex subject and I will defer to those who practice vajrayana, but from what I understand it is the giving up of vows that incur the very heavy karmic cost. <S> The solution is simple: if you are at all unsure - whether the guru might be bad, whether they have your best interest at heart, whether you are capable of keeping the vows, whether they are capable of keeping the vows, whether the vows are worth keeping even if the guru manifests utterly reprehensible non-dharmic behavior... don’t take the vows. <S> Period. <S> Trouble comes when the student and/or the guru are not ready. <S> So be ready and completely sure you are ready and your guru is ready before you embark.
|
Briefly, when someone with full understanding of what they are getting into, chooses to take the vajrayana vows with regard to a particular guru, then if they break those vows ... there is very heavy karmic cost.
|
What is the difference between panna vimutti and ceto vimutti? I wonder if the difference has something to do with the permanent destruction (through vipassana bhavana) vs. the temporary destruction (through samatha bhavana) of the kilesas? <Q> I wonder if the difference has something to do with the permanent destruction (through vipassana bhavana) vs. the temporary destruction (through samatha bhavana) of the kilesas? <S> Having only performed a very brief search of the suttas, I follow my intuition and disagree with the question above. <S> It appears the terms 'cetovimuttiṃ' & 'paññāvimutti' are both used as constituents of the same attainment; therefore 'cetovimuttiṃ' does not appear to refer to 'samatha' or 'samadhi'. <S> A search for 'paññāvimutti' obtains 171 results. <S> Of these, many of the results contain the words "cetovimuttiṃ paññāvimutti" together, particularly in the following phrase: āsavānaṃ khayā anāsavaṃ cetovimuttiṃ paññāvimuttiṃ diṭṭheva dhamme <S> sayaṃ abhiññā sacchikatvā realize the undefiled freedom of heart and freedom by wisdom in this very life About 'paññāvimutti', SN 22.58 says: <S> A bhikkhu liberated by wisdom, liberated by nonclinging through revulsion [towards the five agggregates]... through... fading away and cessation, is called one liberated by wisdom. <S> About 'cetovimuttiṃ', MN 29 says: <S> Yā ca <S> kho ayaṃ, bhikkhave, akuppā cetovimutti — etadatthamidaṃ, bhikkhave, brahmacariyaṃ, etaṃ <S> sāraṃ etaṃ pariyosānan the goal, heartwood and final end of the spiritual life is the unshakable freedom of heart. <S> Now the terms 'cetovimuttiṃ' & 'paññāvimutti' are a type of word compound where the translation is uncertain. <S> Thus, translators such as Ireland & Thanissaro have translated 'cetovimuttiṃ' & 'paññāvimutti' literally as "mind-release" & "wisdom-release". <S> Where as translators such as Bhikkhus Bodhi & Sujato have translated the terms interpretatively as "liberation of mind" and "liberation by wisdom". <S> Given the descriptions found in SN 22.58 and MN 29 quoted above, I personally would agree with the translations of Bhikkhus Bodhi & Sujato. <S> In other words, 'paññāvimutti' sounds like a 'means/method' and 'cetovimuttiṃ' sounds like a 'goal/end'. <S> The meditator uses 'paññāvimutti' to achieve 'cetovimuttiṃ'. <A> I wonder if the difference has something to do with the permanent destruction (through vipassana bhavana) vs. the temporary destruction (through samatha bhavana) of the kilesas? <S> Per the Pali dictionary, CetoVimutti and PannaVimutti carry different meanings depending on context (restricted sense versus highest sense). <S> In the highest sense, both are on the same level for they both signify the fruition of Arahantship. <A> Having thus found a firm footing on the first Jhana, he gained the second absorption, which he called "the noble silence" (Samy. <S> 20,1), because all thoughts are silenced in it. <S> Thus he advanced up to the fourth absorption (Samy. 40 2f). <S> As he later told, he had practiced the absorptions in a twofold way, first by cultivating the "Ways of Power" ( iddhi-pada ; Samy. 51, 31),[4] <S> and then by the "Liberations" ( vimokkha ; Thag. 1172). <S> On his path towards the final Deliverance by Wisdom ( pañña-vimutti ), the absorptions ( jhana ) served as stages to the "Ways of Powers," which led to various kinds of super-normal faculties and also opened up many gate-ways to wisdom. <S> This twofold approach was his strong point when he became an arahant, a Saint. <S> For attaining to the "Liberation of Mind" (ceto-vimutti) <S> the absorption led him to the eight Liberations ( vimokkha ), culminating in the four formless (immaterial) absorptions ( arupajjhana ). <S> On his way to become one "Liberated in Both Ways" (that is through both concentration and insight),[5] he used the fourth absorption as basis for both. <S> In doing so, he gained the "Signless Concentration of Mind,"[6] <S> which is free from all that marks (or signifies) conditioned existence and which affords a glimpse of the "Signless Element," Nibbana (Samy. 40,9). <S> But this attainment, too, was not final as yet. <S> For even here he lapsed into a subtle enjoyment of it. <S> Such refined attachment is still a delusive "sign" or "mark" superimposed on a high spiritual attainment of greatest purity. <S> But aided by the Master's instructions, he could free himself from these last fetters and attain to perfect "Deliverance of Mind" and "Deliverance by Wisdom," in all their fullness and depth. <S> Thus the venerable Maha-Moggallana had become one of the Saints. <S> He admitted that he could well say about himself that "Supported by the Master a disciple may obtain the great state of the super-knowledges. <S> "[7] <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/hecker/wheel263.html
|
They're just different in regards to the specific pathway as a result of the practitioner's dominant faculty on either concentration or insight.
|
Are the Pali-words Patinissagga and Vossagga synonyms? Are both Pali-words synonyms or is there a slight difference between 'patinissagga' and 'vossagga'? <Q> While not always, paṭinissagga is often used for more lofty situations, such as connected to Nibbana (in SN 56.11; AN 3.32 & MN 118). <S> Vossagga appears always used in less lofty situations and appears more 'personal'. <S> vo <S> enclitic from tumha to you; of you; by you <S> Each use of each word in the suttas should be examined; as for the etymology of each word. <S> A post on the topic is here . <S> MN 118 contains both words. ' <S> Vossagga' is found describing the maturation of the qualities each factor of enlightenment relies upon. <S> Therefore, 'vossagga' appears used with path factors Anapanasati relies on. <S> 'Paṭinissagga' is used to describe the end of the path of Anapanasati. <S> Therefore, 'paṭinissagga' appears more lofty than 'vossagga'. <S> Start with 'vossagga' and end with 'paṭinissagga'. <S> It’s when a mendicant develops the awakening factors of mindfulness, investigation of principles, energy, rapture, tranquility, immersion, and equanimity, which rely on seclusion, fading awa, and cessation that ripen as letting go . <S> Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu satisambojjhaṅgaṃ bhāveti vivekanissitaṃ virāganissitaṃ nirodhanissitaṃ vossaggapariṇāmiṃ. <S> Dhammavicayasambojjhaṅgaṃ bhāveti … pe … vīriyasambojjhaṅgaṃ bhāveti … <S> pītisambojjhaṅgaṃ bhāveti … <S> passaddhisambojjhaṅgaṃ bhāveti … <S> samādhisambojjhaṅgaṃ bhāveti … <S> upekkhāsambojjhaṅgaṃ bhāveti vivekanissitaṃ virāganissitaṃ nirodhanissitaṃ vossagga pariṇāmiṃ. <S> They practice breathing in observing impermanence. <S> They practice breathing out observing impermanence. <S> ‘Aniccānupassī assasissāmī’ti sikkhati, ‘aniccānupassī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati; They practice breathing in observing fading away. <S> They practice breathing out observing fading away. <S> ‘virāgānupassī assasissāmī’ti sikkhati, ‘virāgānupassī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati; They practice breathing in observing cessation. <S> They practice breathing out observing cessation. <S> ‘nirodhānupassī assasissāmī’ti <S> sikkhati, ‘nirodhānupassī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati; <S> They practice breathing in observing letting go . <S> They practice breathing out observing letting go. <S> ‘ paṭinissaggā nupassī assasissāmī’ti <S> sikkhati, ‘paṭinissaggānupassī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati. <S> MN 118 <S> In conclusion, 'vossagga' may possibly mean when the 'self' or 'will' lets go by employing mindfulness to bring to mind right view. <S> Where as 'paṭinissaggā' may possibly mean when the mind itself lets go due to direct seeing or vipassana. <A> It seems to me, 'patinissagga' means gradual and progressive letting go (or giving up), while 'vossagga' simply means letting go, without emphasizing the progression. <S> Pati or prati looks like the same prefix as in 'pratipada' and 'pratityasamutpada'. <S> In my research, prati implies that something happens in multiple stages as opposed to all at once. <S> So I suppose 'patinissagga' tells us to methodically let go, first of more obvious hang-ups and then of progressively more and more subtle, I think. <A> PED: Paṭinissagga : giving up, forsaking; rejection, renunciation Vossagga : relinquishing, relaxation; handing over, donation, <S> gift sati-Vossagga : relaxation of attention, inattention, indifference Vossajjati : to give up, relinquish; to hand over, resign
|
The difference, if any, appears to be in a greater emphasis of vossaga on the mental or personal side of the issue of letting go.
|
Is it necessary to be socialize to understand dhamma? If some one is a anti-social person , there is no reason to get angry, to be jealous, to have conciet .... All those problems arise when people socialize. So, Is it necessary to be socialize ? If it is, Why buddha said, go to a forest to meditate ? Get a free and quite time ? If it isn't How do I recognize those thoughts ? (If we have no reason to get those feelings, we might think we haven't those thoughts) Or should I not think about that ? (Being social or not being social is out of my control ?) <Q> So, Is it necessary to be socialize ? <S> Life would be difficult, even impossible, living completely alone. <S> There is a reason that the sangha is considered one of the three jewels in buddhism. <S> If it is, Why buddha said, go to a forest to meditate ? <S> Get a free and quite time ? <S> Yes. <S> Your understanding is on point. <S> Withdrawing into reflection is helpful for developing a buddhist practice from time to time. <S> If it isn't How do I recognize those thoughts ? <S> (If we have no reason to get those feelings, we might think we haven't those thoughts) <S> Perhaps you are right, one could possibly avoid developing aversion in solitude. <S> However, to a larger extent, it seems to have a tendency to foster a feeling of alienation. <S> In the noble eightfold path, right effort isn't just about preventing aversion to take a hold of us. <S> It is also about developing skills that we may not have right now. <S> From Magga-vibhanga Sutta: <S> "And what, monks, is right effort? <S> (i) <S> There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. <S> (ii) <S> He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. <S> (iii) <S> He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. <S> (iv) <S> He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html <S> Or should I not think about that ? <S> (Being social or not being social is out of my control ?) <S> It is likely within your control, and i believe it is a form of control that is beneficial, and not the clinging/grasping type of control. <A> Ānanda brought a similar question to the Buddha, attempting to hedge and bridge the issue of solitude and social interaction: <S> SN3.18:3.3 : ‘ <S> Sir, good friends, companions, and associates are half the spiritual life.’ <S> But the Buddha would have none of that and corrected Ānanda immediately: <S> SN3.18:4.2 : ‘ <S> Not so, Ānanda! <S> Not so, Ānanda! <S> Good friends, companions, and associates are the whole of the spiritual life. <S> "Socialization" is conventionally conducted to seek and provide affirmation of individual identity or conformance to group identity. <S> One compliments a hair style, for example. <S> Or one suggests a current fashion of dress. <S> The purpose of the Saṅgha is different. <S> The purpose of the Saṅgha is to support all those on the Noble Eightfold Path: <S> SN3.18:4.4 : <S> That said, solitude does support deeper study. <S> Indeed, AN4.138 details ways of accomplishing such retreat with body and/or mind. <S> AN4.138:5.1 <S> : And how is a person on retreat in both body and mind? <S> It’s when a person frequents remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest. <S> And they think thoughts of renunciation, good will, and harmlessness. <A> Case 57 of the Blue Cliff Record I Alone Am Holy <S> A monastic said to Zhaozhou, "It is said, 'The real Way is not difficult. <S> It only abhors choice and attachment.' <S> Now, what are nonchoice and nonattachment?" <S> Zhaozhou said, "I alone am holy throughout heaven and earth." <S> The monastic said, "It is still choice and attachment." <S> Zhaozhou said, "You country bumpkin! <S> Where are choice and attachment?" <S> The monastic was speechless. <S> If you're going to practice Buddhism, expect to have everything challenged. <S> There's not a single thing about you that is going to go unexamined. <S> All those soft places in your psychological underbelly will be prodded until you are sore, bleeding, and begging for mercy. <S> This is the only way to wake up. <S> All of your petty fears and preferences are way stations on the one going road to Buddhahood. <S> Confronting them, gaining insight into them, and eradicating them is the very essence of the great way. <S> The great way is not difficult for those who have no preferences. <S> When love and hate are both absent, everything becomes clear and undisguised. <S> Make the smallest distinction, however, and heaven and earth are set infinitely apart...to set up what you like against what you dislike is the disease of the mind (from the Hsin Hsin Ming ). <S> Of the two possibilities - being social and distancing yourself from others - which of the two is more difficult? <S> Which of the two challenges you? <S> Which would you rather not do? <S> Pick the harder way. <S> You alone are holy throughout earth and heaven but <S> only when the barrier between you and others - when petty concerns of liking and disliking - dissolves. <S> When that happens, who are you? <A> No it is just another life experience .Buddha <S> did this because he was just starting the way ,so you can start like that <S> but ultimately you have to interact with life .Actually <S> sometimes its harder to be by oneself if one is used to socializing or not used to solidarity .So <S> don't mind that ,just take it step by step .
|
Too much time alone may make us less accustomed to relate to others, even though we may have good intentions. Prosocial virtues, such as the brahmaviharas is most likely impossible to cultivate in complete solitude. A mendicant with good friends, companions, and associates can expect to develop and cultivate the noble eightfold path.
|
Is understanding a practice? Enlightened people doesn't have any desire, because they see impermanence in everything. All the things are useless to them. To achieve enlightenment , one required to practise deattachment, uncertainty through out the samsara. So , Is understanding a practise ? If it is: We loose skills when we don't do somethings for long time. But enlightenment can not be undone. If it isn't: When we do vipassana meditation for a long time, we started to see impermanance in every day life. We loose attachments to lot of things . What is happening there ? I'm not sure I express and structured the question as I want . So Improves are well come. <Q> OP: So , Is understanding a practise ? <S> Understanding arises through the practice. <S> OP: <S> If it is: We loose skills when we don't do somethings for long time. <S> But enlightenment can not be undone. <S> Yes. <S> As enlightenment is understanding of reality as it is and this does not change in light of new experiances. <S> OP: If it isn't: When we do vipassana meditation for a long time, we started to see impermanance in every day life. <S> We loose attachments to lot of things . <S> What is happening there ? <S> Attachment leads to pain. <S> When you understand this through Vipassana you do not get attached. <A> There is wisdom that is practised to develop & support samadhi (concentration) and wisdom that arises from the practise of samadhi (concentration), as described below: Of those, right view is the forerunner. <S> And how is right view the forerunner? <S> In one of right view, right resolve comes into being. <S> In one of right resolve, right speech comes into being. <S> In one of right speech, right action... <S> In one of right action, right livelihood... <S> In one of right livelihood, right effort... <S> In one of right effort, right mindfulness... <S> In one of right mindfulness, right concentration... <S> In one of right concentration, right knowledge ... <S> In one of right knowledge, right release comes into being. <S> Maha-cattarisaka Sutta <S> The wisdom or wise reflection that is practised to develop & support samadhi is called Right Understanding/ <S> Right View and sampajjana. <S> This pre-learned or pre-experienced wisdom is brought to and kept in mind by the practise of mindfulness (sati). <S> The wisdom or direct seeing that arises from the practise of samadhi is called vipassana (insight), samma nana (Right Knowledge), etc. <S> Note <S> : vipassana is not a 'technique, method or practise'; as commonly taught. <S> As already said, vipassana is a result of practice, as described below: <S> Having thus developed (practised) the noble eightfold path... <S> these two qualities occur in tandem: tranquillity (samatha) & insight (vipassana). <S> Maha-salayatanika Sutta <A> If you've never seen the color red before and someone finally points it out to you, you'll never again be able to unsee the color red. <S> You don't have to practice to keep seeing red. <S> Instead, you begin to see it everywhere. <S> You even begin to see different shades - raspberry, scarlet, vermilion - and how they differ from each other yet still can be classified as the color red. <S> Seeing impermanence works exactly the same way. <S> An untrained person, even one who's read every book on Buddhism on the planet, has ultimately no idea what impermanence actually is. <S> One day, after many hours of meditation, maybe that person directly sees impermanence for the first time. <S> From that day forward, he can't unsee it. <S> It begins cropping up everywhere. <S> He doesn't have to practice seeing impermanence, it just becomes an undeniable feature of his existence. <S> After many more hours on the cushion, perhaps he even begins to see impermanence with even more subtlety - how it ties into other facets of the path, <S> how it powers his meditation, how it liberates him from his fear of death. <S> Once these these things are perceived, they don't go away. <S> Even if they are forcefully ignored, they are like irritants... <S> sand in your underwear. <S> (That's why once you start, it's best to finish!) <A> So, Is understanding a practise? <S> There's some idea of progressive enlightenment -- Four stages of enlightenment . <S> But after that is first seen, there remain various attachments -- bad/residual habits, see for example: <S> What is effluent? <S> How are 'conceit' and 'identity-view' not the same? <S> So "practice" may occur after or because of "seeing impermanence" (not just the other way around, i.e. seeing impermanence because of practice) -- because seeing correctly is a start (the first step of the noble eightfold path) but isn't enough for complete/final liberation. <S> Enlightened people doesn't have any desire, because they see impermanence in everything. <S> I think it's that fully-enlightened people don't experience "craving"; because craving is associated with suffering, they practised to put an end to craving and to uproot the conditions from which it arises.
|
I think that the first stage of enlightenment includes "right view" and seeing the tilakkhaṇa -- "understanding" the dhamma, in general.
|
Are there any sila / vinaya for mind? There are five precepts. I don't kill living species. I don't do sexual miaconduct. ........ Similary, Are there any for mind ? Like, I don't think ...... .... We can think according to the five precepts , Not thinking about killing or harming others etc. However, are there any especially for mind ? Is "indriya samvara" some thing like that ? If it is, how to practise it ? <Q> There are three types of Sankhara. <S> Mano,Vaci and Kaya. <S> Avoiding Vaci Sankhara and Kaya Sankhara considered Sila. <S> They are also called "Papa"Suppressing Mano Sankhara considered as Samadhi. <S> These are also termed Kusala when practice in conjunction with Sila. <S> http://buddhismpathtowellbeing.blogspot.com/2017/11/18-avoid-ten-immoral-actions-dasa.html <S> There is another set of precepts called eight and ten precepts. <S> They are considered higher Sila as it contained Sila required to contain wholesome mental activities. <S> To answer your question I would say that Samadhi is the Sila for the mind. <S> Even the term is not used in that way. <A> There are "Dhamma lists" listed here: Dhamma Lists -- many of these are lists of (harmful) mental states to avoid or escape, or of (beneficial or virtuous) mental states to cultivate. <A> Vinaya Pitakaya is the book you should read to know about it. <S> There are kind of sil. <S> Basic sil is Pansil. <S> Atasil and Dasasil which are observe in poya day. <S> Samanera sil for samanera monk. <S> Upasampada sil for upasampada monk.
|
Yeah, actually there any sil and vinaya.
|
Why work on one thing at a time? Why work on one thing at a time according to the buddhism ? Did Lord Buddha advise us to do that ? Are there any deep desires in multi-tasking ? (Like wanting to gain more in short amount of time) Edit: I mean by "doing one thing at a time" is working on 2 different subjects at the same time(Without finishing the first work) . Ex: practising samatha and vipassana together, learning maths and arts at the same time. Edit: Example for "not doing one thing at a time" : Started to write a book yesterday. Whithout finishing it, starting to write an another book today. <Q> The instruction to do "one thing at a time" is implied by the Buddha's praise of Sāriputta's practice, which was intense, deep and accomplished methodically one by one : <S> MN111:1.6 : <S> The Buddha said this: “Sāriputta is astute, mendicants. <S> He has great wisdom, widespread wisdom, laughing wisdom, swift wisdom, sharp wisdom, and penetrating wisdom. <S> For a fortnight he practiced discernment of phenomena one by one. <S> That fortnight was critical for Sariputta because it made him an arahant. <S> MN111:21.1 : And if there’s anyone of whom it may be rightly said that they have attained mastery and perfection in noble ethics, immersion, wisdom, and freedom, it’s Sāriputta. <S> And if there’s anyone of whom it may be rightly said that they’re <S> the Buddha’s true-born child, born from his mouth, born of the teaching, created by the teaching, heir to the teaching, not the heir in material things, it’s Sāriputta. <S> Clearly, driving while listening to the radio and thinking about what we want for dinner isn't practicing "one by one". <S> Instead, conventional multi-tasking normally manifests as intermittent aversion to the unpleasant necessities while intermittently attending to the pleasant. <S> The delusion that multi-tasking is effective is what makes it necessary to have laws that forbid dangerous multi-tasking such as texting and driving. <S> Multi-tasking is therefore unskillful. <S> Practicing one by one is skillful. <A> According to Abhidhamma, we can do only one thing at a time. <S> (mind or thought-moment) <S> However, as we are not paying attention we think they all happen at once. <S> When you practice Satipathana you will understand this. <S> In Vipassana you keep your attention only on one bodily activity (walking or breathing normally) <S> but when you are experienced you extend to various daily activities. <A> It is not possible to practice Samatha and Vipassana together. <S> When it says practicing Samatha and Vipassana in tandem does not mean you practice them at the same time. <S> However, you can interchange between the two. <S> Generally in Vipassana, the first four stages <S> (upto "He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication. <S> '[3] <S> He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication.'" are considered Samatha. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html <A> "Never half ass two things; whole ass one thing." <S> - Ron Swanson Put another way, there's only one road to enlightenment. <S> The terrain of that road is less important than there only being one of them. <S> What is your one road? <S> Case 48 of the Mumonkan Kempõ's One Road <S> A monk asked Kempõ Oshõ, "It is written, 'Bhagavats in the ten directions. <S> One straight road to Nirvana.' <S> I still wonder where the road can be." <S> Kempõ lifted his staff, drew a line, and said, "Here it is. <S> " <S> Later the monks asked the same question to Unmon, who held up his fan and said, "This fan jumps up to the thirty-third heaven and hits the nose of the deity Sakra Devanam Indra. <S> When you strike the carp of the eastern sea, the rain comes down in torrents." <S> Mumon's Comment One, going to the bottom of the sea, lifts up clouds of dust; <S> the other, on the top of the highest mountain, rises towering waves to wash the sky. <S> One holding fast, the other letting go, each stretches out his hand to support the profound teaching. <S> They are just like two riders starting from opposite ends of the course and meeting in the middle. <S> But none on earth can be absolutely direct. <S> When examined with a true eye, neither of these two great masters knows the road.
|
When you practice Samatha you keep your attention only on the meditation object. Multi-tasking entails that one momentarily averts attention from one task in order to attend to other things in rapid succession.
|
Difference between Kamma, Kammanto, and Kammanta? Question Hi all, i would like to ask if anyone knows the difference in meaning between these three pali words: Kamma Kammanto Kammanta What i've found so far I can see from looking at the pali words for "right action" that this is called "samma kammanto" (sometimes "samma kammanta"), so i'm guessing that these two are the same? I'm also guessing that Kamma is a more general term which includes speech and thought/intention as well as physical action? Context I'm building a to-do-list and life-organizing application and since i have a Buddhist background i'd like to give the application a name inspired by Buddhism <Q> They are basically the same word, though the anta suffix does give it some specific meaning. <S> Remember that the word karma has heavy religious baggage in ancient India every though it simply means action, from the verbal root / kar = "in regards to doing". <S> kamma is still often used to mean mundane work, however, e.g.: <S> tena kho pana samayena aññatarā itthī kammaṃ karoti. <S> aññataro bhikkhu sāratto taṃ itthiṃ etadavoca -- “tiṭṭha, bhagini, ahaṃ karissāmīti <S> At one time, a certain woman was doing some work. <S> A certain bhikkhu, enamoured with that woman, said this to her: " Rest, sister, I will do it." <S> (duṭṭhullavācāsikkhāpadaṃ) Nouns in Pali and Sanskrit are "declined", meaning their endings change depending on how they are used. <S> -o declension is used in Pali for masculine singular nominative (when it is the subject of the sentence) of -a nouns. <S> That's where kammanto comes from. <S> As to the idea of a task, something one must or should do, there are words like karaṇiya and katabba . <A> From the New Concise Pali English Dictionary: <S> kamma <S> neuter work, occupation; activity, performance. <S> act, deed, action or actions of moral import (producing for the agent an inevitable result or consequence in the same or another life; the action appears to exist in some sense until the effect is completed) an official act of the saṅgha (i.e. an action or ceremony agreed on and ratified by a properly constituted group of bhikkhus). <S> kammanta masculine (& n.) <S> action; work, task, business, occupation (esp. <S> farming, agriculture); place of work (esp. <S> the fields). <S> Perhaps kammanto is the nominative version of kammanta. <A> From the New Concise Pali English Dictionary: <S> kamma <S> neuter work, occupation; activity, performance. <S> act, deed, action or actions of moral import (producing for the agent an inevitable result or consequence in the same or another life; the action appears to exist in some sense until the effect is completed) an official act of the saṅgha (i.e. an action or ceremony agreed on and ratified by a properly constituted group of bhikkhus). <S> kammanta masculine (& n.) <S> action; work, task, business, occupation (esp. <S> farming, agriculture); place of work (esp. <S> the fields). <S> Note: In the sutta quote below, the word 'kammanta' has been translated as both 'work' & 'workplace'. <S> In the sutta below: ' kammante ' appears to be the accusative (object of a verb) <S> case of 'kammanta' , i.e., " supervising (verb; anusaññāyamāno) <S> the work (object; noun; kammante) " ' kammanto ' is the nominative (subject) <S> case of 'kammanta', i.e, " Moggallāna’s workplace or Moggallāna <S> ’s work ". <S> For just then the brahmin Vassakāra, a chief minister of Magadha, while supervising the work <S> [plural] at Rājagaha, approached Ānanda at Moggallāna’s <S> workplace <S> [singular] and exchanged greetings with him. <S> Atha kho vassakāro brāhmaṇo magadhamahāmatto rājagahe <S> kammante <S> anusaññāyamāno yena gopakamoggallānassa brāhmaṇassa kammanto , yenāyasmā ānando tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā āyasmatā ānandena saddhiṃ sammodi. <S> In your situation, if you named your app 'The Work App' or 'Sunyata's Work App', the Pali would probably be (merely guessing) 'kammanta' because the word 'kammanta' would be an adjective and form the first part of a khammadharaya (merely guessing) word compound, as follows: <S> When nouns join together with two or more words they are called nominal compounds or samāsa. <S> The first member of a compound can be another noun, an adjective, an adverb, a pronoun, a verbal form, or a numeral. <S> In general the last member of the compound gets inflected according to its declension while the other members keep their stem form book page 21 <S> Therefore, your app might be called: Kammanta-App (The Work App) <S> Suññatāya Kammanta-App (Sunyata's Work App)
|
So kammanta is a way of specifying that one is merely talking about actual mundane action or work. Kammanta is the basic or 'stem' word for kammanta.
|
Why we must have a confident mind? “Here, bhikkhus, some person has a confident mind. Having examined his mind with my mind, I know that if this person were to die at this time, as if carried there he would be placed in heaven. What is the reason for that? It is because his mind is confident. It is because of the mind’s confidence that some beings here, when the body perishes, are reborn after death in a good bourn, in a heavenly world.” Iti 21 Why we must have a confident mind ? What is a confident mind according to the Lord Buddha ? What are the differences between confident and Conceit Clinging to a view <Q> What is a confident mind according to the Lord Buddha? <S> From your quote, confidence is translated from the pali word pasannacitta. <S> https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/pasannacitta <S> Why we must have a confident mind? <S> It is considered one of the five mental faculties/indryas that aids progression towards enlightenment. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn48/sn48.010.than.html <S> What are the differences between confident and conceit Conceit (mana), is a cetasika with attachment/lobha as base. <S> Mana means that we are attached to the misconception that there is a self that is superior to others. <S> What are the differences between confident and clinging to a view <S> Primarily the difference is the fruit of their karma. <S> Besides being a mental faculty mentioned above, AN 5.38 also lists five benefits of saddha for laypersons, for instance. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.038.than.html <S> Clinging to a view, on the other hand is simply not beneficial, and perpetuates dissatisfaction. <S> Your comparison with conceit seems like an appropriate example. <A> The word in question is pasanna (see dictionary definition here ). <S> I don't know why Ireland translated that as "confident". <S> The other modern translations I'm able to read are Italian, " una mente pura " (meaning a mind that is "pure" or "sinless"), and French, " l'esprit clair " (meaning a mind or spirit <S> that's "clear" or "transparent" or "bright") -- <S> though I beware that any modern language might not have a single word that's an exact translation. <S> In SN 55.40 there's a word translated "experiential confidence" or "verified confidence" -- <S> that word is aveccappasāda , a compound of pasāda with avecca . <S> I note that the definitions of pasanna and pasāda are similar. <A> Confidence can be the result of seeing directly some phenomena by oneself. <S> After seeing, if one is paying attention wisely, real understanding can be developed over what one has seen. <S> A mind with confidence is a mind that has all its emotional and rational assessment and values aligned towards the wisdome developed; is a mind that has no doubts and contradictions on its judgements. <S> If you ask me, I don't see the need to attach to such understanding, because, at least theoretically, there's always the possibility of the arising of new information that could contradict what one has learnt in the past. <S> I think one should be always open to the possibility the unknown, while in the meantime, until contradictory information arrives, using what has been learnt as a valid and useful, tentative hypothesis for go through the events of life. <S> Also, there's no need to take such understanding as 'I' or 'mine'. <S> Conceit and clinging to views arise alongside confidence when ignorance hasn't been uprooted yet. <S> Despite all of the above said, what's really amazing is that the Dhamma seems to be timeless in its application. <S> But do not trust me on that; you might be able to see it for yourself (or maybe you already have). <S> Kind regards!
|
Confidence may arise without conceit and clinging to views. Pasannacitta literally means devoted mind, and can be interpreted as a person having faith (saddha).
|
Why do I get a feeling on my forehead as if someone is touching it during meditation? I do meditate sometimes,not everyday. After 5 to 10 minutes during meditation I start getting a feeling on my forehead as if someone is touching in it. Sometimes after listening to binaural waves or do yoga, I get this same feeling. I understand that something is happening to the pineal gland.But my friends who meditate they don't get this, its only me. What exactly happens here and how does it work? Can someone explain? <Q> Due to ones past store of conditioning one gets different experiences. <A> I would suggest that this is a quite normal phenomenon. <S> However, it is nothing to be concerned about, and there is nothing in the Buddhist teachings in the ways of interpreting this as something special. <S> Rather, there is the teaching of noticing the sensation as just a sensation - as one of the six sense inputs - and noticing the feeling that arises from it as just a feeling. <S> The purpose is to not get caught up in sensations like these, but being mindfully aware, notice them, acknowledge them and by knowing them for just sensations, remaining equanimously unattached to them. <S> I would suggest that with patient endurance, including this as just a phenomenon of your practice, deliberately avoiding getting enchanted by it or averse to it. <A> <A> That comes as a natural result of relaxation. <S> The conditions of the body are always changing, so that's likely to change. <S> The underlying principle at work, is when you deeply relax, force pervades through the entire body. <S> If your energy channels are open, then this will be experienced as the 4 jhanas described with similes in AN 5.28. <S> If your channels aren't open yet, then the force will feel uncomfortable, itchy, strange, and painful wherever the force is hitting energy channel blockage.
|
The main thing is not to attach too much importance to these experiences as thinking about it will be a distraction main task at hand which is the meditation and also perhaps a source of attachment or aversion on how you react to it which is also decremental to meditation. It's very normal and common for people to feel the sensation such as someone is touching a particular area, or ants crawling on your skin. You might be concentrating too hard, causing stress in your forehead.
|
How can I overcome the breathing trouble while meditating and increase concentration? At certain point of meditation,I feel like I can't breathe properly as in the beginning of meditation(lose of oxygen) and thus I stop meditating and try to get oxygen into my brain.I do no know why this is happening or how to overcome this condition. Is that not a correct way of meditating? Or what am I doing is wrong ?Or do I have to push through? <Q> It is difficult to answer your question due to not many facts. <S> However, the impression is you are suppressing your mind or pushing your forehead down into your body; making your mind & forehead/forebrain rigidly still; and, at the same time, pushing your air/breath/outbreathes out; clenching your jaw & emptying the lungs & nostrils of breath. <S> The Buddha taught to start meditation by establishing awareness in front of one's face. <S> Possibly do some practise keeping your eyes gently open and keeping your face & jaw relaxed. <S> Buddhist meditation is the practise of "non-attachment" rather than forceful suppression. <S> It is probably best to visit a Buddhist/meditation centre and talk to a teacher. <A> Just before the nimitta appears, a lot of yogis encounter difficulties. <S> Mostly they find that the breath becomes very subtle and unclear; they may think the breath has stopped. <S> If this happens, you should keep your awareness where you last noticed the breath, and wait for it there. <S> A dead person, a foetus in the womb, a drowned person, an unconscious person, a person in the fourth jhāna, a person in the attainment of cessation (nirodha·samāpatti), and a brahmā: only these seven types of person do not breathe. <S> Reflect on the fact that you are not one of them, that you are in reality breathing, and that it is just your mindfulness which is not strong enough for you to be aware of the breath. <S> When it is subtle, you should not make the breath more obvious, as the effort will cause agitation, and your concentration will not develop. <S> where you last noticed it. <S> You will find that, as you apply your mindfulness and wisdom in this way, the breath will reappear. <S> Knowing and Seeing (Fourth Revised Edition) <S> Pa-Auk Tawya Sayadaw <A> How do i avoid this and not lose concentration <S> Some instructions suggest that concentration is developed gradually -- for example the article Calm Abiding describes three stages, starting "with external support" and then "internal support" etc. <S> Instructions don't tell you to stop breathing. <S> Some instructions tell you to be aware of the breath -- notice whether the breath is long or short. <S> at a certain point in meditation i feel like i cant breathe (lose of oxygen) <S> If I ever feel I can't breathe or <S> "I forget to breathe" <S> then I breathe out (exhale, blow out) -- after that the body will breathe in. <S> I think that the body is meant to be able to breathe by itself i.e. without "my" help, it's that "I" shouldn't try to stop that. <S> It sounds like you might be attaching to a specific point in the breathing cycle and wanting to prolong that moment, instead perhaps you should allow that point to happen again and again as the breathing cycles -- i.e. "continually" (again and again) not "continuously". <A> It's impossible to lose consciousness through meditation in the way you're describing. <S> Your reptilian brain simply won't allow you to not breath for any length of time. <S> Just let go. <S> Don't force your breath. <S> What you are running into right now is a mental obstacle, not a physical one. <S> Your body/mind is trying to act - trying to stay in control. <S> Don't let that happen. <S> Don't be taken aback if the next few breaths are sharp or jagged. <S> If you let go, they will taper off into more subtle inhalations. <S> I'd also second dhammadhatu's answer - you might be slouching. <S> Make sure your body is erect and relaxed. <S> Imagine someone hold you up by a loop that's attached to the top of your head. <S> The body just kinda hangs from that point. <S> Everything is in a perfect line from the top of your head to your coccyx.
|
Just be aware of the breath as it is, and if it is not clear, simply wait for it In Buddhist meditation, the face should be relaxed and the mind/brain bright, awake & open. Your body is going to take what air it needs.
|
Is there a pali term for "natural concentration"? In the book, "Handbook for mankind" Buddhadhasa Bikkhu describes two types of concentration: One "as a result of organized practice", which he refers to as vipassana-dhura, and is mentioned in post-tipitaka commentaries. One that "come about naturally". In the text, there are no pali words given for the latter, and the only reference given is that it is described in the Tipitaka. My questions are, Is there a name in pali for the latter type? Are there specific descriptions of the second type of concentration somewhere in the tipitaka or elsewhere? (Please note that i'm not asking for the correctness, efficacy, or other evaluations of the statements above. This is primarily a reference request). <Q> I used to study Ajahn Buddhadasa very comprehensively. <S> However, Handbook For Mankind was a book I was never partial towards. <S> While it contains many basic teachings, I always found the verbal style of delivery difficult or abrasive to read. <S> However, merely browsing and offering an answer: <S> The book is from 1956 lectures <S> the Venerable Buddhadasa Bhikkhu gave to a group of prospective judges. <S> Therefore, the two chapters on meditation are addressed to laypeople. <S> The chapter on "Nature Method" concludes: " Summing up, natural concentration and insight, which enable a person to attain the Path and the Fruit, consist in verifying all day and every day the truth of the statement that nothing is worth getting or being ." <S> The statement: " nothing is worth getting or being " essentially comes from MN 37 . <S> It is a statement of Right Understanding: Samma Ditthi . <S> In his book Heartwood From The Bo Tree , Bhikkhu Buddhadasa said about concentration: " As for samadhi, an empty mind is the supreme samadhi, the supremely focused firmness of mind. <S> The straining and striving sort of samadhi isn't the real thing and the samadhi which aims at anything other than non-clinging <S> to the five khandas is micchasamadhi (wrong or perverted samadhi) . <S> You should be aware that there is both micchasamadhi and sammasamadhi (right or correct samadhi). <S> Only the mind that is empty of grasping at and clinging to 'I' and 'mine' can have the true and perfect stability of sammasamadhi. <S> One who has an empty mind has correct samadhi. " <S> To conclude, the teachings above by Bhikkhu Buddhadasa accord with the following sutta teachings about samadhi: sattahaṅgehi cittassa ekaggatā parikkhatā sammādiṭṭhi pubbaṅgamā: mind with single intent equipped with seven factors in use where right view is the leader (MN 117) samādhindriyaṃ vossaggārammaṇaṃ: faculty of concentration reliant upon letting go (SN 48.10) samādhisambojjhaṅgaṃ vivekanissitaṃ virāganissitaṃ nirodhanissitaṃ vossaggapariṇāmiṃ: concentration factor of enlightenment that relies on solitude, dispassion & cessation maturing as letting go (MN 118). <S> In summary, "natural concentration" means "concentration without craving". <A> I have concentration even when I type this answer. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mendis/wheel322.html <A> For the benefit of all I would like to share my experience. <S> Organized Concentration can be attained through practice. <S> We can focus on the five aggregates or Truths and thus achieve concentration. <S> But natural concentration is also interesting. <S> You find it everywhere. <S> As child I craved for entertainment. <S> I was highly concentrated while watching cartoon on TV. <S> So much so that any disturbance was highly opposed. <S> If you have lost ability to naturally concentrate then the good news is that you can regain that strength. <S> You need to discover your passion. <S> Know what you really want and give your heart to it. <S> I find myself concentrated when things do not work <S> and I become obsessed with trying to fix it. <S> I do not like broken things. <S> That is my passion now a days. <S> I become naturally concentrated... <S> I am effortless in trying to concentrate. <S> That is what I think is the meaning of natural concentration.
|
Concentration (ekaggatā), the mental focus on one object to the exclusion of all other objects is a universal mental state applicable to all mental states.
|
Is wanting to do something = desire? Is wanting to do something = desire ? Doesn't enlightened people want to do anything ? They just react to whatever comes ? ( "react" may not be a suitable word). A related question that I hope to ask in Buddhism SE: How a enlightened monk differs from a enlightened lay person ? As I know: Monks have intention to teach dhamma to others. Monks can live more than 7 days. The first one have some relation to this question. <Q> An enlightened mind has eradicated the fetters that bound that mind with wandering around with suffering born from ignorance and craving. <S> What kind of craving? <S> In the Discourse of the Setting in Motion the Wheel of Dhamma (SN 56.11), the Buddha said this about the kind of desires than bind to suffering and dissatisfaction: <S> "And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming. <S> These three kinds of craving are called Tanha , or 'thirst'. <S> As the objects desired from that thirst are impermanent, the emotional and mental thirst is never quenched by getting this or that object. <S> Other kinds of desire may still arise for the enlightened mind. <S> The main difference is that such kinds do not lead to suffering, because ignorant expectations, assumptions and generalizations about the world have been uprooted. <S> For such liberated mind, the task has been done. <S> There is nothing further for the sake of this world. <S> Kind regards! <A> Is wanting to do something = <S> desire ? <S> Not really. <S> Wanting to do something is a thought process. <S> In Buddhism, desire ( Taṇhā ) refers to greed or craving pleasure, material goods, and immortality, all of which are wants that can never be satisfied as the world is impermanent in nature <S> and it is always subjected to change. <S> This causes suffering. <S> People generally desire a better life, family, children, money, cars, boats, planes, vacations etc. <S> All these things which are impermanent. <S> Enlightened people do not possess material craving. <S> Yes, they do feel hunger, they do feel pain and pleasure but they understand that both pleasures and sufferings are impermanent. <S> For example, a normal person might crave luxurious food while an enlightened person might only eat food just to survive and stay alive. <S> "Monks have intention to teach dhamma to others" The monks intention to teach Dhamma is not done for the pleasure or for greed of spreading the religion. <S> If I am not mistaken, I think there are some guidelines for monks when leading an ascetic life and some of them do require a monk to teach so more people open their eyes. <S> How a enlightened monk differs from an enlightened lay person ? <S> A monk would abide by the guides related to being a monk such as preaching Dhamma and any other responsibilities set around a monkhood. <S> Lay person is not given these rules hence might live a quiet life. <S> Either way both have understood the impermanence taught in Buddhism and will have no material craving. <S> If by enlightment you mean attained nirvana, they will no longer have another life. <S> ( Remember there are stages of enlightenment. <S> More explained here . <A> Is wanting to do something = <S> desire ? <S> Abhidhamma... <S> Thinking to do can be wholesome, unwholesome, or neither wholesome nor unwholesome. <S> Thinking to attach can be unwholesome only. <S> When one thinks to eat, he can eat by wholesome, unwholesome, or neither wholesome nor unwholesome. <S> His mind is unwholesome by desiring in eating, wanting to eat more and more without proper reason. <S> Doesn't enlightened people want to do anything ? <S> They just react to whatever comes ? <S> ( "react" may not be a suitable word). <S> The Arahant want to do the best for people without attachment. <S> The enlightened people are not a robot. <S> They react by developed wisdom. <S> The developed wisdom is automatic, but it is adaptable for peoples' 6 advantages . <S> The robots can't act like that because they still are programmed. <S> A related question that I hope to ask in Buddhism SE: How an enlightened monk differs from an enlightened lay person? <S> They are the same, but Vinaya Rules are forcing all monks, either enlightened or not, to teach in the way leading Dhamma to 5,000 years. <S> In Vinaya's commentary commented "The Arahants' job is reciting, memorizing, and understanding whole Tipitaka." <S> Every enlighten people should teach and memorize Tipitaka. <S> Vinaya and commentary allowed even the ordinary in reciting and teaching the Dhamma, but the Vinaya and <S> it's commentary <S> focus on Arahanta and all Buddhist Teachers, either enlightened or not, in memorizing Tipitaka because they has no left meditation for enlightenment to do. <S> That's why the Buddha denied the monks to keep foods for eating, the Buddha forced the Arahant to meet people and teach them.
|
Followers of Buddhism tries to mitigate these desires and understand that everything is impermanent.
|
How do you understand the Cakkavatti Sutta? https://suttacentral.net/dn26/en/sujato How could humans have lived 80 000 years in the past? And how could we live 10 years in the future, with people reaching sexual maturity at five, when life expectancy is constantly increasing? <Q> I have never read the sutta. <S> Bhikkhu Sujato wrote: The Dīgha contains truly mythic texts in DN 26 Cakkavattisīhanāda and DN 27 Aggañña. <S> These set forth a myth of origins, replacing conventional creation mythology with an evolutionary account of how the world came to be the way it is. <S> In these stories, human choices play a critical role in how the environment evolves, and in how it will all fall apart. <S> The Aggañña depicts climate change quite explicitly, showing how human activity affects the plants, the weather, and the natural ecosystem of which we are a part (see also AN 3.56). <S> The mythology is essentially cyclic. <S> There is no absolute beginning; just another turning of the wheel. <S> Thus even when the world falls apart and civilization collapses, there will be a new renaissance, far in the future, and ultimately another Buddha will arise. <S> He is named as Metteyya (Sanskrit: Maitreya) who in the early texts appears only in DN 26 Cakkavattisīhanāda. <S> He went on to become one of the most important figures in Mahāyāna Buddhism, and many Buddhists even today still await his coming with hope. <S> Yet DN 26 is not taught in order to encourage devotees to dedicate themselves to Metteyya, but to illustrate the impermanence and uncertainty of our lives. <S> The Buddha always taught that we should practice as best we can to understand the Dhamma in this life. <S> The Long Discourses: Dhamma as literature and compilation <A> Ethics generally progress or deteriorate. <S> This determines life expectancy. <S> The humans who lived 80,000 did not necessarily live on planet earth. <S> See my answer to: <S> How can we correlate Buddhist cosmology with astronomical cosmology? <S> for more colour on this. <A> In general, one way to try to understand a difficult sutta is to read what Piya Tan says about it -- http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/ <S> His translations include footnotes, references to commentary and other authors. <S> One of the comments from the introduction to this sutta, DN 16 : <S> Steven Collins’ critical remark on the Sutta is helpful here: <S> [The Cakka,vatti Sīha,nāda Sutta] depicts life in time, however good or bad, as slightly absurd; and therefore its opposite, timeless nirvana, as the only serious thing in the long run. <S> I suggest that the intention (at least in part) of the long-drawn-out sequence of decline and revival, in all its detailed specificity, numerical and otherwise, and also of the humor and irony of the parable, is to induce in its audiences—or at least to make possible as a reaction from some among them—a sense of detachment from, or at least a (briefly) non-involved perspective on the passage of time. <S> ... <S> which isn't a very satisfying explanation, but what do you expect? :-) <S> My personal understanding of it is presumably unorthodox, but for what it's worth that includes: <S> The sutta's subject being a "wheel-turning monarch" suggests that's maybe a later sutta e.g. developed for king Ashoka <S> -- I can't imagine why that would have been an interesting topic for "early Buddhists" ( <S> like it was argued in this answer <S> that the idea of a "next Buddha" probably didn't arise while the original Buddha was still teaching). <S> The thesis is that this age (aeon) is worse than before but not as bad as it is going to be. <S> That kind of reminds me of the doctrine that being born human is a good time to practice Buddhism -- maybe better than when you're born in one of the higher or the lower realms.
|
Life expectancy in the human realm (collectively all humanoid planets in the universe) vary based on the ethics of the era.
|
What does Buddhism teach on cultivating energy for those who are drowsy? This is rather a personal question. Sometimes, I am a very depressed individual, and besides other things, I'm struggling with a lack of energy. It happens that I sleep for 10 or more hours. Usually, after waking up, I'm not actually awake, but just keep on dreaming, being half-asleep. It's very hard to get up: the urge for sleep and dreaming is so strong, while consciousness is not awakened yet... In sleep, often there are nightmares about the conflicts and rejection, although I usually forget everything. Also, sometimes I feel drowsy during the day. It's very hard for me to maintain mindfulness, often I keep on doing a dull, pointless activity, probably again because I'm deprived of energy. In AN 7.58 Buddha says: But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then — reclining on your right side — take up the lion's posture, one foot placed on top of the other, mindful, alert, with your mind set on getting up. As soon as you wake up, get up quickly, with the thought, 'I won't stay indulging in the pleasure of lying down, the pleasure of reclining, the pleasure of drowsiness.' That is how you should train yourself. I really try to train myself like that, but forget about everything in the morning and just "stay indulging in the pleasure of lying down." So, what would you recommend me to be more alert and mindful during the day, to sleep less and to get up more quickly? <Q> Present situation is the result of past causes, so it would be interesting to see what led you to that constant state of fatigue in the first place. <A> SN46.51:8.1 : <S> And what fuels the arising of the awakening factor of energy, or, when it has arisen, fully develops it? <S> There are the elements of initiative, persistence, and exertion. <S> If you're exhausted from exertion, then lying down and waiting for energy can give your body and mind a chance to recharge and retake the initiative. <S> But if you haven't exerted yourself, then lying down won't restore any energy. <S> Fortunately, te Buddha follows with more advice. <S> Indeed, the Buddha recommends various ways of fostering energy in the Nodding Off sutta that you quote. <S> For example, walking for a time does take initiative, persistence, and exertion. <S> In particular, we have: <S> AN7.61:8.1 : <S> But what if that doesn’t work? <S> Then walk mindfully, concentrating on the perception of continuity, your faculties directed inwards and your mind not scattered outside. <S> There are several ways to "concentrate on the perception of continuity". <S> A simple one is to count your breaths. <S> If that is too dull and makes you sleepy, listen to a sutta repeatedly (i.e., for continuity) as you walk and see if you can predict what will be spoken next. <S> Perhaps it may work for you as well. <A> You should do walking meditation to counter your depression. <S> Walk around focusing on your meditation object of choice. <S> I strongly recommend recollecting on your generosity ( caganusati ) and recollection of virtue ( silanusati .) <S> When practicing caganusati reflect on previous generous deeds and think, "How nice it is that I practice generosity in a world tainted by greed." <S> When practicing silanusati reflect on your observance of the five precepts and think, " <S> By keeping the five precepts perfectly, I have real worth as a human being." <S> Alternatively, you can recollect on the Buddha. <S> You can do this by thinking " Buddho, buddho, buddho ..." over and over again <S> or you can think, "How wonderful the Lord Buddha was: a person that completely shared his teachings with no expectations. <S> He is completely free of ulterior motives, free from defilements, and has ocean-like compassion."
|
I personally tend towards couch potato, so walking meditation has been very helpful and allowed me to develop energy. To develop energy we need initiative, persistence and exertion:
|
What would be the karmic result of worrying? How come worrying is a bad karma ? Buddha stated that Having a confident mind gives a good rebirth ( in heaven etc.). Most of the time, I worried about not able to complete a task within the desired time. What would be the karmic effect of this worrying and any other worries ? <Q> Worrying, because of its obsession with self (i.e., "I won't finish") is a form or wrong mindfulness . <S> Right mindfulness attends to what will help oneself and others (e.g., "What effort and action would be of value now?"). <S> But you ask about the effects of worrying. <S> These are listed starting here: <S> AN10.114:9.1 : Wrong mindfulness is a bad principle. <S> Right mindfulness is a good principle. <S> And the many bad, unskillful qualities produced by wrong mindfulness are bad results. <S> The remedy for worrying is to become aware of and be mindful of those around us. <S> In this way we can communicate and coordinate, building what is needed by shared effort rather than by fixating and worrying about "my job" or "my things". <S> Worry is often tied up in Identity View. <S> And the escape is not laziness or blissing out. <S> The escape is right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right immersion. <A> Generally, worry is would be of and unwanted thing happening or a wanted thing not happening. <S> A wanted thing generates craving and unwanted thing generates aversion. <S> Dwelling on these states of mind continuously generates much negativity which makes you sad and depressed. <S> If you do not act out by word or deed on the frustration created due to worry this will not be weighty karma which can result in rebirth. <S> Nevertheless, even if you do not act out this will create misery. <S> So if you seem to be having undue worry best is to take some time to meditate to alleviate it. <A> Strictly speaking from personnal experience : Anxiety, sleepless nights, have greatly damaged my health during a decade. <S> So worrying, stress, anxiety, are extremely harmful to the body (more than what is currently understood by allopathic medecine). <S> I had to change life direction and resort to cultivating health and mental balance for a few years to restore my energy and health to an acceptable level. <S> I noticed a pattern that when i feel stressed, worried, things tend to go south for me while when i don't worry things are easier. <S> So surprisingly, anxiety and worry are very negative karmas. <A> More worrying. <S> Worry is habitual, thus you should train in concentration to be able to catch it and destroy this defilement. <S> Think, 'Worry is useless. <S> I must meditate to deal with worry. <S> If my fear becomes true, then it is all the better to practice meditation right now so that I can deal with my fear if it is to happen.'
|
On the mental level, worry and stress created very unlucky events for me.
|
Are there any similar characteristics between Nama and Rupa? We can define location, size, velocity for rupa. Can we define these for Nama ? Can we say "a moving mind", "mind is located inside the body", "after the death, mind leaves the body and step into a new body" ? Can we imagine "How mind looks like" ? <Q> The best thing to remember the fire simile. <S> The campfire become a grass fire. <S> the grass fire becomes a bush fire. <S> The bushfire becomes the housefire. <S> Here the fire is similar to the consciousness (Nama). <S> What fire depends on (grass etc) are the Rupa. <S> When we take the fire with say grass it is called Namarupa. <A> We can define location, size, velocity for rupa. <S> Can we define these for Nama ? <S> No, you can't do that in the same way. <S> However, they are all in the difference between Nama such as wholesome, unwholesome, man's mind, girl's mind, etc. <S> Can we say "a moving mind", "mind is located inside the body", "after the death, mind leaves the body and step into a new body" ? <S> Both Nāma and Rūpa completely vanish where they arise immediately. <S> Nothing move. <S> However, there are many vanished origins can cause new Nāma Rūpa in the future. <S> Can we imagine "How mind looks like" ? <S> Yes, you can imagine of mind. <S> However, no one can see mind by their eyes because mind has no color. <S> So, if you want to imagine about mind, you need to learn Abhidhamma and meditate Jhāna. <S> If you attain Jhana, you can understand your mind easily. <S> And you can learn everything easily because of Jhana. <S> Jhana can develop your mind faster and brighter more than whenever you have been before And by the trick in Tipitaka, especially Abhidhamma, Nāma and Rūpa will clearly appear for you. <A> The answer to your question is yes, there are three characteristics they have in common <S> they are illness, are impremanent and are not self. <S> There are more; they should not occur, they should not be, and so on with inferable from the first 3; they do not belong to a self, are empty of a self, are unpleasant, so forth and so on inferring from the first 3. <S> You seem to assume that the word 'body' as is used in conventional language & terms in the world <S> has the same meaning the word Rupa as is used throughout the Sutta across the contexts, in particular the context of Dependent Orgigination. <S> This isn't the case and a quick glance at the Vibhanga section on Form will make this obvious. <S> I suspect you have come to hold an assumption that namarupa means mind & body, wherein body is as is spoken of in conventional terms of newtonian physics. <S> Buddha spoke of that body you seem to speak of, which rots away, flesh & bones, in conventional terms, also referred to in pali as 'Kaya' but he also spoke of 'Rupa' in the context of 'namarupa' in Dependent Origination, that word is hard to see the meaning of. <A> OP <S> : We can define location, size, velocity for rupa. <S> Can we define these for Nama ? <S> Location, size, velocity, shape, time, ... all these are conventional. <S> According to the ultimate truth neither rūpa nor nāma has those characteristics. <S> OP <S> : Can we say "a moving mind", "mind is located inside the body", "after the death, mind leaves the body and step into a new body" ? <S> They arise, exist, and cease then and there. <S> New rūpa may arise at the same place or nearby. <S> They will also exist, and cease then and there. <S> This is called "Deshāntarotpatti". <S> OP <S> : Can we imagine "How mind looks like" ? <S> No one can see mind with eye consciousness. <S> So you can't imagine "How mind looks like". <S> But you can understand the behaviour and characteristics of your mind. <S> OP <S> : Are there any similar characteristics between Nama and Rupa? <S> Both rūpa and nāma are conditioned. <S> All the conditioned things share three common characteristics. <S> They are anicca (impermanence), dukkha (suffering), and anatta (not-self). <A> OP <S> : We can define location, size, velocity for rupa. <S> Can we define these for Nama ? <S> No. <S> OP: "after the death, mind leaves the body and step into a new body" ? <S> This arises and passes. <S> When one state passes away the next state arises. <S> At death when the last though moment passes the next the rebirth linking though moment arises in another moment. <S> Distance is immaterial.
|
To answer your original question above, yes, there are similar characteristics between rūpa and nāma. No, neither rūpa nor nāma can move.
|
Why we need Samadhi to attain enlightement? Why we need Samadhi to attain enlightement ? Do people with better samadhi can think more than the people with less within short amount of time ? experiment of people with low IQ, and high IQ, put them in the same room, and you give them the same job. Rob a bank. You’ll find out that the low IQ people probably do a much better job of robbing a bank, plotting the bank robbery, than high IQ people, who get all messed up with legal implications and stuff like that. - Michio Kaku Is widom something like that ? What is the connection between samadhi and wisdom ? <Q> If you are in the dark with a touch with shaky hands can not focus it in a particular direction, then you cannot make out what lies ahead clearly. <A> Is widom something like that ? <S> What is the connection between samadhi and wisdom ? <S> There's a big difference between wisdom and being book-smart. <S> If you have a fish tank full of muddy water, and if you constantly shaking it, will you be able to see through the tank and detect the objects on the other side? <S> How about letting the tank settle on a solid level ground for a while, then see through it? <S> Sila is that solid level ground. <S> Samadhi is the "settling" of the tank, Wisdom (or penetrating insight) <S> is the "seeing through" to the other side. <A> Wisdom and immersion (i.e., samadhi) are only two of the three practice categories. <S> Let's look at all three. <S> The three practice categories are wisdom, ethics, and immersion . <S> The Noble Eightfold Path defines the right practice in each of these three categories. <S> We start first with the practice of right wisdom: <S> MN44:11.5 : <S> Right view and right thought: these things are included in the category of wisdom.” <S> With that beginning of right wisdom, we can then practice right ethics: MN44:11.3 : <S> Right speech, right action, and right livelihood: these things are included in the category of ethics. <S> And eventually we are able to practice right immersion: <S> MN44:11.4 : <S> Right effort, right mindfulness, and right immersion: these things are included in the category of immersion. <S> The practice of right immersion yields greater insight which helps wisdom grow. <S> In this way, the three right practices circle around and strengthen each other. <S> Together, the three right practice categories span the Noble Eightfold Path and give us more light to make our way in a life clouded by the darkness of ignorance.
|
Samadhi helps you steady your mind on one object to see it clearly like steadings your hands and focusing your touch on a particular object of interest like a snake on the path.
|
A person with almost zero sati vs A person with perfect sati What are the characteristics of a person with zero sati and a person with higher level of sati ? How does this level of sati affects day to day life ? What does it really mean to have sati ? <Q> Zero sati is a sad situation: <S> AN8.29:7.1 : <S> Furthermore, a Realized One has arisen in the world. <S> And a person is reborn in a central country. <S> But they’re witless, dull, stupid, and unable to distinguish <S> what is well said from what is poorly said. <S> This is the seventh lost opportunity … <S> Yet there is also wrong mindfulness, attending to the unskillful: AN10.119:12.1 : <S> ‘Wrong mindfulness has a bad result in both this life and the next.’ <S> Right mindfulness is described here: <S> SN45.8:9.1 : <S> And what is right mindfulness? <S> It’s when a mendicant meditates by observing an aspect of the body—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. <S> They meditate observing an aspect of feelings—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. <S> They meditate observing an aspect of the mind—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. <S> They meditate observing an aspect of principles—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. <S> A simple example of wrong mindfulness is texting while driving. <S> Minding the text is wrong while driving. <S> It kills people. <S> Another example is alcohol or drugs, which impair the attentiveness that is the foundation of mindfulness: <S> AN5.174:8.1 : Anyone who uses alcoholic drinks that cause negligence creates dangers and threats both in the present life and in lives to come, and experiences mental pain and sadness. <S> Anyone who refrains from using alcoholic drinks that cause negligence creates no dangers and threats either in the present life or in lives to come, and doesn’t experience mental pain and sadness. <A> A person with zero sati would have less control than that of an animal <S> An anagami has perfect sati. <S> In fact, an anagami is considered one perfected in consideration. <S> Thus, one with perfect sati would have no desire or aversion: they would be entirely dispassionate. <A> Here from the Sutta The Blessed One said, "Suppose, monks, that a large crowd of people comes thronging together, saying, 'The beauty queen! <S> The beauty queen!' <S> And suppose that the beauty queen is highly accomplished at singing & dancing, so that an even greater crowd comes thronging, saying, 'The beauty queen is singing! <S> The beauty queen is dancing!' <S> Then a man comes along, desiring life & shrinking from death, desiring pleasure & abhorring pain. <S> They say to him, 'Now look here, mister. <S> You must take this bowl filled to the brim with oil and carry it on your head in between the great crowd & the beauty queen. <S> A man with a raised sword will follow right behind you, and wherever you spill even a drop of oil, right there will he cut off your head.' <S> Now what do you think, monks: Will that man, not paying attention to the bowl of oil <S> , let himself get distracted outside?""No, lord. <S> ""I have given you this parable to convey a meaning. <S> The meaning is this: The bowl filled to the brim with oil stands for mindfulness immersed in the body. <S> Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will develop mindfulness immersed in the body. <S> We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it as a basis, give it a grounding, steady it, consolidate it, and undertake it well.' <S> That is how you should train yourselves." <S> - sn22.48 This from abhidhamma <S> Therein <S> what is faculty of mindfulness? <S> That which is mindfulness, constant mindfulness, recollection, mindfulness, act of remembering, bearing in mind, non-superficiality, non-forgetfulness, mindfulness, faculty of mindfulness, power of mindfulness, right mindfulness. <S> This is called faculty of mindfulness. <S> Mindful.’ <S> Herein, what is mindfulness? <S> That which is mindfulness, recollection, recall, mindfulness, remembrance, bearing (in mind), not losing, not confusing, mindfulness, the Faculty of Mindfulness, the Strength of Mindfulness, <S> Right Mindfulness: this is called ‘mindfulness.’ <S> With this mindfulness he is endowed, truly endowed, having attained, truly attained, being possessed, truly possessed, furnished (with it). <S> Because of this ‘mindful’ is said. <S> - vibhanga <A> Every person has Sati. <S> This is called the Sati as a Cetasika. <S> Mindfulness is essential to insight meditation, when it must be conjoined with a clear comprehension of the suitability, purpose, and conformity with reality of any action. <S> Then it is called right mindfulness (sammaa sati). <S> Usually the average person acts without any form of mindfulness; his acts are prompted by force of habit. <S> Right mindfulness has two functions: one is to increase the power of recollection and the other is to evaluate what is wholesome and what is unwholesome. <S> Right mindfulness is a spiritual faculty that maintains a proper balance of the other faculties — faith, energy, concentration and wisdom. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mendis/wheel322.html <S> Then there are many levels of Sati as you progress. <S> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhipakkhiy%C4%81dhamm%C4%81
|
Mindfulness (sati): this is alertness, which makes us aware of what is happening to us, from moment to moment, through the five physical senses and the mind. Zero sati would be insanity: breaking precepts, acting on every urge...
|
How to stop a war according to Gouthama Buddha? Are there any scriptures discussing on how to prevent wars? I mean for example, from the insights of scriptures, if Buddha were alive then how would Buddha have tried to stop World War 2? <Q> There's a description of that here: <S> Why Was the Sakyan Republic Destroyed? <S> I think the article is based on the canon, but I've forgotten where in the canon I read of it. <S> Anyway to quote from the article: <S> When the Buddha learned about this outbreak of hostility, he came there himself. <S> On seeing this revered and eminent person from their royal clan, the warriors of both sides became deeply embarrassed. <S> All of them laid down their weapons and paid homage to him. <S> This was the traditional way of paying respects to the Buddha in those days. <S> Whenever King Pasenadi of Kosala went to pay respects to the Buddha, he would leave the royal insignia such as his sword, turban, fan, parasol and sandals outside with his attendant before entering the chamber of the Buddha. <S> The Buddha took the seat prepared for him on the open ground of the riverbank. <S> The Sakyans and the Koliyans paid homage to the Buddha and sat respectfully on one side before him. <S> The Buddha explained to them that their blood was much more valuable than the river-water. <S> They should not spill blood unnecessarily. <S> Instead, they should find a way to share the water peacefully. <S> The Buddha was a peacemaker filled with compassion. <S> He did not consider it proper that human life should be lost for the sake of trivial material gains. <S> And it goes on <S> -- you can read the article for more. <S> The eventual outcome was that the Sakyan clan was massacred. <A> There has been a debate among monks on the relationship to war that a Buddhist must have. <S> War and Peace: <S> A Buddhist PerspectiveBy Bhikkhu Bodhi <S> Thanissaro Bhikkhu's rebukes of Bhikkhu Bodhi's advocacy for a Buddhist doctrine of Just War <S> I advise you to read it. <S> The two monks explicitly discuss what a Buddhist should have done during WWII, and the Buddha's position on the subject. <A> War is usually caused by some sort of conflict. <S> And conflict is caused by taking sides, " <S> us" vs "them". <S> And taking sides mostly happens due to attachment to some concept or generalization for example <S> : <S> only this is right, everything else is wrong. <S> only this is good, everything else is bad. <S> this is ours, it belongs only to us. <S> this is how it's always been, it must continue to be this way. <S> And so on.
|
So the Buddhist way to prevent war is to explain the dangers of limited thinking and promote the virtue of enlightened mindset that does not take sides based on generalizations.
|
Minimum common grounds for all sotapanna and all arahant I'd like to know what will all sotapanna have in common with each other. And the same for arahants (both for separate, please, not comparing a sotapanna with an arahant). What are the common grounds in terms of what has been uprooted? What do they share in terms of understanding, ideas and views (independently if they are not attached to those views)? I ask this, because I've noticed that there are lots of differences between all the ideas about what should a sotapanna/arahant know, be, feel and think, for example. And, according to the level of confidence/attachment/understanding of those asked about what a sotapanna is, they will be more on the defensive, disparaging any other idea conflicting with theirs, stating that a sotapanna/arahant is only what they think it is, with more or less grounding on suttas. For an outsider, it may almost seem like a discussion based on "No true scotsman" fallacies. EDIT: Thanks for the answer given so far! I wanted to add another point. Now that OyaMist has written about interpretations on those common grounds, I realize that that might be exactly the main source of problems. Since we're using texts written in a language not used as vernicular in current societies; since most concepts can be interpreted in multiple ways; and since there are a lot of discussion (with more or less logical arguments or irrefutable evidence) about the "authenticy" of some texts or discourses, most conclusions seem to fall into what feels the most coherent to the particular follower, or into what seems to produce the best results. For example, some say one cannot reach stream-entry without attaining 1st jhana. But I think this criterion becomes problematic, to say the least, when the problem of interpretation and definition occurs in the exact same way when talking about what jhana is or is not. If that's the case, how to differenciate between the most relevant/fundamental and secundary/optional interpretation for those common grounds? EDIT 2: Just for the sake of context, and to give some (possibly) hints to a potential answer, maybe we can rephrase the question about the minimum common grounds for all sotapanna as: What is the minimum knowledge that Right View HAS to contain in order to really be Right View? I'd appreciate any help on this issue. Thanks in advance! Kind regards! <Q> For stream-enterer we have: <S> AN6.34:4.4 : <S> But those who have experiential confidence in the Buddha, the teaching, and the Saṅgha, and have the ethics loved by the noble ones, do know that they are stream-enterers.” <S> For arahant we have release from ten fetters: <S> AN10.13:1.1 : <S> “Mendicants, there are ten fetters. <S> What ten? <S> The five lower fetters and the five higher fetters. <S> AN10.13:1.4 : <S> What are the five lower fetters? <S> These are the five lower fetters. <S> AN10.13:2.1 : What are the five higher fetters? <S> Desire for rebirth in the realm of luminous form, desire for rebirth in the formless realm, conceit, restlessness, and ignorance. <S> The interpretation may differ, but the above definitions are common ground. <S> A key point of potential dispute is the validation of "experiential confidence. <S> " <S> Historical, this was even an issue in the Buddha's time: <S> AN3.21:2.3 : <S> The personal witness, the one attained to view, and the one freed by faith. <S> These are the three people found in the world. <S> Of these three people, who do you believe to be the finest?” <S> For those who experienced confidence in the Triple Gem via first jhana, they would be a personal witness . <S> AN3.21:5.7 : <S> Because this person’s faculty of immersion is outstanding.” <S> For those who experienced confidence in the Triple Gem via deep study of the Dhamma, they would be attained to view . <S> AN3.21:7.7 : Because this person’s faculty of wisdom is outstanding.” <S> For those who experienced confidence in the Triple Gem via faith, they would be attained by faith . <S> AN3.21:3.7 : <S> Because this person’s faculty of faith is outstanding.” <S> Yet the Buddha answered quite simply and inclusively: <S> AN3.21:12.1 : <S> In this matter, it’s not easy to definitively declare that one of these three people is finest.” <A> There is the idea of the ten fetters (samyojana), and how each of the four stages towards enlightenment is a progressive liberation from these fetters (or uprooting as you put it). <S> They provide a framework of how we can label the stages of progress: <S> "Bhikkhus, there are these ten fetters. <S> What ten? <S> The five lower fetters and the five higher fetters. <S> And what are the five lower fetters? <S> Personal-existence view, doubt, wrong grasp of behavior and observances, sensual desire, and ill will. <S> These are the five lower fetters. <S> And what are the five higher fetters? <S> Lust for form, lust for the formless, conceit, restlessness, and ignorance. <S> These are the five higher fetters. <S> These, bhikkhus, are the ten fetters". <S> https://suttacentral.net/an10.13/en/bodhi <S> Nanamoli, B. & Bodhi, B. (1995) gives a detailed description of each of these stages and how they relate to the abandoning of the ten fetters <S> (It's a bit heavy to recap several pages of text on a Q&A site, but here's the source): <S> The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha A New Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya. <S> Buddhist Publication Society, 41-43. <S> Retrieved from http://lirs.ru/lib/sutra/The_Middle_Length_Discourses(Majjhima_Nikaya),Nanamoli,Bodhi,1995.pdf <S> I write "theory" and "label", since an individuals path and practice may not necessarily correspond identically to dhamma, and the latter should not be used as a procrustean bed. <S> Buddha used a raft simile for making this point: <S> "This raft has been very helpful to me, since supported by it and making an effort with my hands and feet, I got safely across to the far shore. <S> Suppose I were to haul it onto the dry land or set it adrift in the water, and then go wherever I want.’ <S> Now, bhikkhus, it is by so doing that that man would be doing what should be done with that raft. <S> So I have shown you how the Dhamma is similar to a raft, being for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of grasping. <S> Bhikkhus, when you know the Dhamma to be similar to a raft, you should abandon even the teachings, <S> how much more so things contrary to the teachings". <S> https://suttacentral.net/mn22/en/bodhi <A> Minimum common grounds for all sotapanna and all arahant. <S> The "minimum common grounds" both literally and symbolically is the fulfillment of virtues: <S> “These nine persons, Sāriputta, passing away with a residue remaining, are freed from hell, the animal realm, and the sphere of afflicted spirits; freed from the plane of misery, the bad destination, the lower world. <S> What nine? <S> (1) <S> “Here, Sāriputta, some person fulfills virtuous behavior but cultivates concentration and wisdom only to a moderate extent.. <S> 1857 <S> With the ending of three fetters, they have at most seven rebirths. <S> They will transmigrate at most seven times among gods and humans and then make an end of suffering. <S> (2) <S> "Again, some person fulfills virtuous behavior... (3) "Again, some person fulfills virtuous behavior... (4) <S> "Again, some person fulfills virtuous behavior... ... <S> (9) <S> "Again, some person fulfills virtuous behavior... <S> ~~ <S> AN 9.12 <S> ~~ <A> All of them have heard Dhamma taught by Buddha.
|
Identity view, doubt, misapprehension of precepts and observances, sensual desire, and ill will.
|
What can I practise to avoid expectations? Today, I have realized that I have lot of expectations about my life and about others. Until today, I didn't aware of it because,today I face a big disappointment.So, Experiences of expectations and hopes breakings are way to understand the nature of expectations. Other than that, What can I do to avoid expectations ? <Q> What one can prevent is having false expectations as these are due to general bewilderment and are a cause of suffering. <S> Understanding counters ignorance, removes delusion and is supported by learning. <S> Whether we favor one outcome over another and it causes grief is a related matter of attachment rooted in delusion. <S> Correct knowledge & understanding begets right expectations and dispassion. <A> Expectation is normal human behavior, there's nothing wrong with that. <S> But there is something wrong if you are cling to it, You need to have expectations for your life(if <S> i get it <S> right <S> you mean the goals of your life) otherwise it's hard move on without a purpose. <S> But the thing is don't let your self down once the expectations or dreams falls apart. <S> Simply don't regret about what happened, it's also makes mind impure. <S> What you can do for having less expectation is that think about the Death <S> , what happens the next moment if i die, where would this thoughts leads me(afterlife). <S> I hope this would help. <A> I piece of (non-Buddhist) advice I read once is that you shouldn't reward young children for being successful. <S> Consider this scenario: <S> Give a group of children a task to do When it finishes, praise half of them for succeeding, praise the other half for trying <S> Give them another <S> , more difficult task -- those who are motivated by success will be inclined to give up if they think they can't succeed (those who are motivated by trying, by engaging with the task, by the effort, are more likely to continue) <S> I think I might have read something like that advice in a Buddhist context, here (i.e. "live with cause"): <S> When witnessing the good action of another encourage yourself to follow his example. <S> Hearing of the mistaken action of another, advise yourself not to emulate it. <S> Even though alone in a dark room, be as if you were facing a noble guest. <S> Express your feelings, but become no more expressive than your true nature. <S> Poverty is your treasure. <S> Never exchange it for an easy life. <S> A person may appear a fool and yet not be one. <S> He may only be guarding his wisdom carefully. <S> Virtues are the fruit of self-discipline and do not drop from heaven of themselves as does rain or snow. <S> Modesty is the foundation of all virtues. <S> Let your neighbors discover you before you make yourself known to them. <S> A noble heart never forces itself forward. <S> Its words are as rare gems, seldom displayed and of great value. <S> To a sincere student, every day is a fortunate day. <S> Time passes but he never lags behind. <S> Neither glory nor shame can move him. <S> Censure yourself, never another. <S> Do not discuss right and wrong. <S> Some things, though right, were considered wrong for generations. <S> Since the value of righteousness may be recognized after centuries, there is no need to crave an immediate appreciation. <S> Live with cause and leave results to the great law of the universe . <S> Pass each day in peaceful contemplation. <A> It is quite difficult but possible to reduce expectations in daily life. <S> Start with realising that everything you get is because of the Karma you have acquired through your previous births. <S> Sometimes the things you recieve may not only be affected by Karma but by effort as well <S> (Eg: Results of an exam) but sometimes things happen that you just have to accept and move on as everything is temproary <S> and we won't live for much long anyways.
|
Try to always see the good side of things even of the outcome is bad. I don't think one can avoid having expectations in general because if we know the possibilty of an outcome we can be said to expect it to the extent to which it is known to be a possibility. No Attachment to Dust Zengetsu, a Chinese master of the T'ang dynasty, wrote the following advice for his pupils: Living in the world yet not forming attachments to the dust of the world is the way of a true Zen student.
|
Can I plan for future while doing meditation on death? Buddha said about meditation on death : "Even if a person aware about his death can be happen within that day is late. If someone thinks, his death can be happen within current breath is not late". According to that, Can we think about future at all? How can we manage neccessery things without thinking about future ? (I know that, for a buddhist, there can only be one dream or goal. But what about food, money for living ?) Why meditation on death is a good karma ? Isn't it a good karma to meditate on other things ? (thinking about failure of an ongoing project, end of a relationship etc.) (However thinking on death covers all) Sorry for bad english. King regards. <Q> Not sure where the quote is from, but the instant death that buddha talks about seems to regard the death of the self. <S> He is talking about anicca and anatta, in other words. <S> One can of course plan for the future - or ones livelyhood - for instance, but there is a difference whether one plans with attachment or whether one plans with reminiscence of impermanence. <A> Buddha's advice was to always concentrate on the present moment, but it may prove very challenging for basically for any regular person. <S> therefore I don't think you should stop doing that either. <S> But as Buddha said if you could at least think that you will die every day (at the beginning) you could have less attachments in life. <S> Later on you can increase the frequency to every breath but it may prove difficult for a layperson as it is much more suitable for a monk who has less duties and bondages. <S> Another way of doing the meditation on death <S> (Taught to me by a Thero) would be to think how you would be on your deathbed, you will lose your senses, lifting your arms or even your fingers would be an almost impossible task. <S> Regrets in life on not being able to cultivate Kusala Kamma (Kusal is different from merits, as Kusal leads you to liberation while merits lead you to more births which are comfortable) etc... <S> That way you would be able to become much more motivated to achieve Nibbana as soon as possible. <S> Insight meditation generates good karma (Kusal), as when you see the truth (past the veil of illusion) you see what it is for what it is, which is nothing. <S> When recollection and Mindfulness of death is done to a certain point you will realise that we are dying and being born every second <S> but this would be a bit complex for now, <S> but I digress. <S> When meditating on worldly things like "(thinking about failure of an ongoing project, end of a relationship etc.) <S> " it doesn't generate Kusala Kamma as it is not real (Again the concept of instant death, which leads to Impermenance (Anicca) and Soullessness (Anatma). <S> You can gain more information about the last past of your question by knowing about the lifespan of Rupa Kalapa. <A> There is case where one develops perception of death, in short; Life is uncertain death is certain I may die in 100 years... in 1 year... in a month... in a week... in a day... in an hour... on the in or out breath. <S> The dying on the in & out breath is the one bringing about most urgency. <S> Furthermore before going to sleep and after waking one contemplates; In many ways can death come to me, proceeding to contemplate causes having contemplated the various causes, one reviews; <S> Are there any bad qualities in the mind that would lead to my detriment if i was to die during the night or to die during the day? <S> If there are such bad qualities one resolves on working to elimimate them asap. <S> This would be kind of planning for future. <S> Refer to maranasati sutta <S> 1&2. <S> Thereis also a Sutta where the Buddha talks about how short the human life is in terms of how many seasons, days, nights and meals, it is a good one. <S> Don't recall the title of the latter. <S> The way i do it is by starting with the general shortness of human life and then narrow it down to in and out breath. <S> I also do the other morning/evening contemplation and the reviewing of mind. <S> One who develops perception of death is getting a lot of motivation & urgency to train <S> and the priorities are straightened up. <S> It is also tied up with perception of impermanence and parting. <S> These also have good results as they establish these inclinations in mind, distancing from the perception of attractiveness and reliability. <S> I usually get an affinity for that theme and am not much distracted. <S> If i am distracted i change to something that i think will calm it down. <A> In general, planning is willful thinking and willful thinking is not meditation. <S> This means that you CAN plan, but that is not true meditation. <S> "Meditating on death" actually means "thinking deeply on death". <S> That is reflection, not meditation. <S> It can be useful, but thinking, pondering, reflecting is not meditating. <A> meditation on death is not what on dhamma. <S> It's a misunderstanding by some people. <S> It’s mentioned to focus on rising ( udayangama ) and falling(=death) <S> ( aththangama ) of five aggregates which are rupa, vedana, sagna, sankara, vingnana. <S> Instead of this now some teachers are teaching to focus only on falling or death or ending of the life but not about aggregates. <S> So find the correct teacher or study the canon by your self. <S> But translations has many mis interpretations due to the lack of knowledge in original language.
|
Recollection and Mindfulness of the death is a meditation for people who have weak willpower to acheieve nibbana and it could also be used for worldy achievments as well but is not recommended. Planning about the future cannot be stopped if you are living as a layperson
|
How to do the Koan study? I want to work on the Koan, 'What was your original face before you were born' and ' Who am I ',How do I go about it. Should I constantly ask myself this question? Should I write it down? How is the Koan practise done? <Q> Koans break the intellectual mind and require deeper investment. <S> SN41.6:1.4 : <S> “Householder, there are three processes. <S> Physical, verbal, and mental processes.” <S> Practice a koan physically, verbally and mentally. <S> For example, walk with it, speak it and feel it. <S> This sounds mysterious, but is actually practical. <S> To walk with a koan, one might attend to "left foot original face", followed by "right foot original face". <S> To feel it one could look at anything that appears as "this tree original original face feels tall", "this car original face feels fast". <S> And so forth. <S> In other words, tie the koan into everything seamlessly. <S> In this way one discovers "original face" and can answer the Roshi by presenting the original face. <S> It takes much practice because most of us are distracted by other stuff day-to-day and moment-by-moment. <S> My koan was Joshu's Mu. <S> Everything was Mu. <S> Same practice, however. <A> "Hey, Newbie! <S> What was your original face before you were born?" <S> Choose ONE koan. <S> Not two. <S> Of the two you refer to, I recommend 'original face', unless you are spending a LOT of time with your teacher, as the second one will become a philosophical fiasco otherwise. <S> Don't rationalise. <S> It's not a philosophical or intellectual exercise. <S> Ask yourself the question when you are not thinking about it. <S> Lots of Zen practitioners write it down. <S> Paint it. <S> Draw it, etc. <S> Does it help? <S> Maybe. <S> Maybe not. <S> Don't talk about it. <S> It's your practice. <S> Don't talk about your practice except to your teacher. <S> Maybe your students, one day. <S> Importantly, it's not a question about rebirth. <S> You don't need to believe in rebirth in order to realise this koan. <S> Also, and paraphrasing @OyaMist's answer, also, there's nothing special about you either. <S> So when you perceive anything, you can ask yourself in that moment: "what was its original face before it was born?", <S> whereas for @OyaMist, it's often "does it have the buddha nature?" <S> The main, core, essential process? <S> Just sit. <S> It's going to kill you. <S> That's the point. <S> But don't lose your life. <S> If you are on the correct path, the path itself is an enriching and empowering experience. <S> Hard work sometimes, painful sometimes. <S> I have heard of students kicking and screaming; having to be literally dragged to sanzen. <S> Maybe ask yourself: Why is that? <A> Maybe a koan is provided, maybe by The Teacher, when appropriate, and might be selected by The Teacher for the Student: there are a number of documented koan. <S> Asking what to do with it/them, eg. <S> is a start. <S> Maybe some patience, and typically koan mightn't be suggested to someone right away etc. <S> Describing koan with words is sort of counter to koan. <S> Maybe consider it some, and develop quiet contemplation. <S> Thats maybe more when addressing koan would be done more. <S> Maybe aren't lots of specific schedules for it either in terms of months, years etc. <S> Maybe write them down, or, they're brief enough, may be able to remember them. <S> Attempting to consider koan at the outset & before some development of quiet contemplation may tend to result in less effectiveness. <A> All of the answers given so far are correct, but ultimately incomplete. <S> Your practice will not be effective until you learn to work with samadhi. <S> Koans will never reveal themselves to you unless you sit facing emptiness. <S> There's a stock passage from the sutras that describes the nuts and bolt of koan study (and really all forms of insight practice): <S> "When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of defilement, pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to..." (MN 4) <S> We enter samadhi to brighten our minds and temporarily rid ourselves of our coarser defilements. <S> When we shift these obstacles to the side, we are better able to work with our original minds and directly see what the koan is pointing at. <S> Our smaller mind is simply unequipped to perceive what the bigger mind is capable of investigating. <S> It works with logic and language. <S> The big mind we access through samadhi, on the other hand, works with the unintelligible fragments of our store house consciousness that koans seek to address. <S> Put another way, trying to answer a koan without samadhi is like trying to hear a symphony with your nose. <S> Your nose is great if you want to smell a flower, but it is useless for the purposes of listening. <S> Koan study requires that we direct the proper, purified sense to the case we are given. <S> Before you embark on koan study, it is absolutely essential that you learn to purify your mind and body. <S> Work with your breath. <S> Master doing nothing. <S> Mingle your eyebrows with those of the patriarchs and pass the barrier where the foaming billows wash the sky. <S> Until you do, koans will remain inaccessible.
|
When meditating, one could silently speak the koan.
|
Is there a Buddhist school / tradition wich recognizes the endless cycle of rebirth but doesn't teach that we should get liberated from it? And even more, that we should embrace it and accept it (while at the same time avoiding the sufferings) ? <Q> But suffering is not to be avoided. <S> It is to be prevented. <S> The avoidance of suffering is what binds us to it. <S> Recognising <S> it's root causes and eliminating them is the journey to enlightenment. <S> This is why 'Right View' is so important within Buddhism. <S> When we are able to see that the root cause of our misery is the mistaken view that sees permanence where there is none, sees joy where there is none, and sees self-existence where there is none, then our new view engages in a transvaluation of our experiences. <S> Because of this transvaluation, our attitude towards some things will invariably change. <S> For instance, we may look at a new car in a showroom - and just see it as a source of new trouble rather than as a source of joy. <S> So accepting and embracing the continuum of rebirth is to be encouraged; But to accept and embrace the unmodified, ignorant view of the transitory, empty, miserable shit-hole of the unenlightened state, and holding onto the idea that there is joy to be found in it - <S> that's not a buddhist thing. <A> Embracing samsara and avoiding suffering is an oxymoron, since samsara equals suffering. <S> Therefore it's impossible and goes against the four noble truths. <S> To complicate things, i am sceptic that buddhism teaches that we should liberate ourselves from samsara, but i'm probably getting caught in semantics now. <S> My point is that buddhism says there's a way out of samsara, without imposing the noble eightfold path on people. <A> Some Buddhist schools such as Dhammayutaa tradition believe in Nibbana as an objective reality. <S> The opponent's Buddhist schools argue that the objectification of Nibbana is not inline with Buddha's teaching. <A> I don't think there are Buddhist schools that teach this explicitly. <S> There are some that say don't train for the cessation of suffering in this life, instead you can be a Buddha in some trillions of years, when you then pass away you go to the special Buddha heaven from where you can keep interacting with people stuck in Samsara for all of eternity. <S> Basically i don't think there is a school which would put it like this <S> "our goal is to stay in samsara" but if one analyzes the doctrine it might turn out that their Dhamma is counterfeit and doesn't lead to liberation because it's closer to sci-fi than reality, complete with impossible worlds, a soul and other unforunate ideas of how things work.
|
Many Mahayana Buddhist traditions believe that liberation is specifically freedom from suffering rather than freedom from being present in the universe. If the definition of buddhism is adherence to the four noble truths, the answer to your question is no.
|
How to stop thinking about metaphysical questions? I have been practicing seriously for a month now. I'm mindful a lot of the time but not 100% yet and whenever I'm not I start thinking about metaphysical questions or what could be after death or if it is nothing etc. How can I stop this? Or how to stop thinking about something in general when you don't want to? For some reason I can't be equanimous with metaphysical questions. They run through my head like there's no tomorrow and nothing more important than that. It's quite annoying. Would noting help? <Q> This will help you to contemplate on wholesome thought. <S> If you want to stop Vitakka and Vicara you have to practice Samatha meditation. <S> Vitakka and Vicara stop at second Jhana which is I have not experienced myself. <S> Being aware that your mind is unrest alone is meditation. <S> If you can increase this awareness, you will improve your meditation eventually. <A> Take a look at the suggestions in the Discourse on the Relaxation of Thoughts or also called the Discourse on the Removal of Distracting Thoughts . <S> Below, let me summarize the techniques found in that sutta or discourse. <S> This is the recommended sequence. <S> If the first one works, you don't need to go to the second one. <S> Force yourself to stop thinking about those distracting thoughts <S> With your teeth clenched and your tongue pressed against the roof of your mouth - you should beat down, constrain, and crush your mind with your awareness. <A> I can actually give you an answer...but would that satisfy you? <S> Would you trust this stranger enough to trust her words? <S> "metaphysical questions or what could be after death or <S> if it is nothing etc" <S> The answer is neither of those things happen. <S> What happens is something that you cant imagine. <S> Its impossible to imagine, it is unfathomable. <S> If it could be experienced through a break down of the body (NDE), it would still be innefible (unexplainable or impossible to put into words.) <S> This being the case, it is not a matter to think about but to experience. <S> You can actually uncover this knowledge through deep meditation, the eightfold path, total purification of the heart and mind. <S> This is what the buddah and thousands buddahs and thousands arhants have done; they have diligently practiced to the point of reaching this total wisdom about the fabric of reality. <S> They could not think about it, it is inefficient to think about it... <S> they practiced their way into it. <S> The knowledge fell on their lap so to say, as inevitably will happen to an ascetic practicing meditation diligently and with loving compassion and luck. <A> Recite a mantra like Buddho each time you think of it. <S> Then, you'll eventually break the habit <A> Don't you think metaphysics is only a grammar-playing with "transcendental" or "universalia" !? <S> You play with concepts when you ask about the border between the finite and infinite or about the place where the space is ... Better <S> paint something as a kind of vipassana ... <S> Better learn new language <S> and you'll see new paradigms of metaphysics ... <A> Metaphysics is rendering Language as Reality. <S> Grammar as Physical Law. <S> That's why The Buddha answered wth epoché to Metaphysical questions and added PRACTICE IN PHYSICAL LIFE and body's (Sati)patthana. <A> “ IN THEORY THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEORY AND PRACTICE, IN PRACTICE THERE IS.” <S> & “ You can observe a lotby just watching. ” <S> — Yogi Berra
|
Practice Vipassana meditation using breath or walking. Think about something else, which is skillful Scrutinize the drawbacks and unskillfulness of the distracting thoughts and see how they result in suffering Pay no attention to those distracting thoughts
|
Do insects feel less pain and humans more? Buddha has asked to refrain from killing. However if small insects do not feel any pain then what is the harm in killing them? To simply put : Do insects feel less pain and humans more ? <Q> The purpose of the precept is to protect you and lift you up in terms of virtue ( sila ) . <S> Undertaking the first precept of not killing is about changing YOUR state of mind. <S> It's so that YOU become compassionate, wishing for happiness of other beings, and not have violent and harmful tendencies. <S> Cultivation of virtues also has the effect of freedom from remorse, which leads to enlightenment. <S> This is according to AN 11.1 . <S> Also, please see this answer . <A> All living things feel pain. <S> What seperates insects and humans is that we not only feel pain, but also suffering. <S> Pain is in the physical body. <S> Suffering is in the mind. <S> Buddhism is about the end of suffering. <S> Pain, a physical thing, is unavoidable since we have a physical body in the world and things happen. <S> But the suffering, which is what we make of pain (physical sensations), is in the mind. <S> That is an important difference between pain and suffering. <A> I agree with Ruben's answer because it answers correctly from virtue point of view. <S> I also agree with HomagetoManjuShri <S> but I think I need add few more thoughts to it. <S> First and foremost , All beings are capable of experiencing suffering. <S> The suffering is a result of grasping of five aggregates. <S> Different beings grasp at different level. <S> For example if you kill an ant it may not mean much <S> but if you destroy an ant colony it hurts the whole ant family. <S> Moreover Buddha said there is no being which is immune to suffering. <S> Had it been <S> so he would have recommended that state of existence as bliss. <S> There is intelligence everywhere. <S> Insects are also capable of expressing that intelligence and experiencing pain. <S> If we compare human suffering with the suffering of an ant , I think human would like to be an ant because there is so much less suffering. <S> But when change occurs all beings suffer the pain and lamentation which grows with level of grasping of five aggregates. <S> Therefore humans or insect may or may not experience same level of pain. <S> Intensity of pain depends of level of attachment which varies from being to being. <S> So why hurt anyone ? <S> You never know how much pain they feel.
|
Feeling pain is a mark of having a life.
|
Why am I getting upset after meditation and sleepy during meditation? I've started to meditate in recent days. After meditation, one day I feel happy and the other day I feel upset, angry and depressed. Also, at the end of the meditation I feel like I just woke up from sleep.Why is this happening to me? Is there any solution to overcome this issue? <Q> Ven. <S> Vijithananda said this is due to practicing Samatha meditation. <S> When you practice Samatha you have the irritation towards any disturbances to your meditation such as sound and the people around you. <S> You also irritated for not being able to experience that meditative happiness. <S> As per Ven. <S> Vijithananda, sleepiness is some sort of progress (defeating four Maras) <S> however you have to go beyond sleepiness. <S> The solution for this is to practice Satipathana. <A> Are you sure you’re not just noticing your regular mood fluctuations? <S> Meditation makes us more aware of our internal states. <S> Without sitting, we are often oblivious to what’s going on within us. <S> When you start sitting, you begin to notice the good along with all the time you really spend being tired, despondent, and annoyed. <A> This happens because the meditation lack alertness. <S> You focused on calmness without cultivating vitality. <S> That will surely bring about drowsiness, and it leads to sleepiness. <S> In this state of non-wakefulness, of non-clarity, discernment is very weak. <S> So, it's easy for any mental obscurations such as anger or sadness to build up without your noticing. <S> So, by the time you 'got up' from the blurry state, your mind is filled with them. <A> Meditation link people easily to the spiritual world including underworld as well. <S> This is why lots of people declared that they can “see” the ghost or other beings without physical bodies in spiritual world and at the same time they usually have physical or mental health problems because the ability to “see” is die to them being possessed by the spirit. <S> So it is not recommended for ordinary people to do meditation especially without being guided by a professional around. <S> The safest way to reach enlightenment is by reciting for an example in Guanyincitta Yin Citta Dharma Door <S> the daily homework’s and combined mantras called Little House paying back karmic debts. <S> With the debts reducing for the time being, one will live healthy and happily since the spirit/karmic creditor and the karmic obstacles are the root reason for problems. <A> It is good that you take note of your mind throughout the day. <S> When you discern these mindstates you can learn how to they come into being and start to discriminate which states get to direct your behavior, eventually one can attain seclusion from unprofitable states and get deep into meditative composure. <S> Things you might want to study on this are sutta dealing with;- timely development of factors of enlightenment- denourishment of 5 hindrances- stilling of distracting thought sutta- <S> 36 mental explorations mn140- honeyball sutta- verbalizations of craving sutta- noble search sutta
|
Here's an easy way to prevent this: Meditate with your eyes open.
|
Is being emotional means worthless? When it is come to "dana" I heard many times "First do something for loved ones". I don't have any confusion regarding "dana" generosity. But lately I'm thinking indulge partner is means worthless (being emotional or emotionally doing something for partner) or just fragile thing. If I'm buying something or even giving rose to partner, is it worthless? Is being emotional means cheap, am I thinking wrong? Happy Vesak to all of you <Q> There's some talk about that here -- A Happy Married Life: <S> A Buddhist Perspective <S> THE HUSBAND <S> The Buddha, in reply to a householder as to how a husband should minister to his wife declared that the husband should always honor and respect his wife, by being faithful to her, by giving her the requisite authority to manage domestic affairs and by giving her befitting ornaments. <S> This advice, given over twenty five centuries ago, still stands good for today. <S> Knowing the psychology of the man who tends to consider himself superior, the Buddha made a remarkable change and uplifted the status of a woman by a simple suggestion that a husband should honor and respect his wife. <S> A husband should be faithful to his wife, which means that a husband should fulfill and maintain his marital obligations to his wife thus sustaining the confidence in the marital relationship in every sense of the word. <S> The husband, being a bread-winner, would invariably stay away from home, hence he should entrust the domestic or household duties to the wife who should be considered as the keeper and the distributor of the property and the home economic-administrator. <S> The provision of befitting ornaments to the wife should be symbolic of the husband's love, care and attention showered on the wife. <S> This symbolic practice has been carried out from time immemorial in Buddhist communities. <S> Unfortunately it is in danger of dying out because of the influence of modern civilization. <S> That's a reference to DN 31 " <S> In five ways should a wife as the western direction be respected by a husband: by honoring, not disrespecting, being faithful, sharing authority, and by giving gifts. <S> "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. <S> In this way, the western direction is protected and made peaceful and secure. <A> It hardly matters whether you give rose or not. <S> It hardly matters whether you consider emotions or feelings as cheap or not. <S> If a person has a dart in his heart will you ask him how is his relationship with his girl friend or wife ? <S> No , you will not. <S> Your focus will be on remedying the wound. <S> Buddha asks us to do exactly that. <S> Understand this is suffering, this is the origin of suffering , this is the cessation of suffering and this is the path leading to the cessation of suffering. <S> On the path leading to the cessation of suffering you will find that one should not cling to any feelings. <S> Good feeling or bad feeling or neutral feeling , just do not cling to it. <A> Buddha compared even a tiny spell of existence to excrement and taught cessation of feeling & perception. <S> There is that sense of them being worthless. <S> There is another sense in which some feelings lead to the cessation of perception & feeling, they are to that extent wholesome states, are path. <S> These on that account aren't worthless <S> as they are means to achieving value even tho <S> they aren't the value they are the right ones leading to attainment of value.
|
All feelings are inferred to be impermanent, inconstant, an ill, and you can say worthless to that extent sure.
|
Over control and energy dissipation As a beginner, after 3 months of quiet intensive meditation, i feel exhausted. And I understand that it’s linked to my relation with every type of duty during my life. Studying, working, relations or just simply living, where i feel “ have to do “ emotions, and being extreme with behaviours and self control. So i go out of energy. I really enjoy meditation and i am enthusiastic about it, also as a philosophy, trying to bring it to everyday life. But I feel that i control too much my self, with thoughts and actions, and it’s frustrating a lot. This is not a new thing but, being aware of it now makes it a strong obstacle. I feel a little bit lost. Maybe someone could share some similar experience and to how to deal with it. <Q> Meditation burnout is a thing. <S> In buddhist terms one can consider it as one or many of the types of clinging/grasping, upadana: <S> Bhikkhus, there are these four kinds of clinging. <S> What four? <S> Clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rules and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self. <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.011.ntbb.html <S> Looking into the different types can yield clues regarding what it is that motivates you to maintain such a high pace. <S> Some examples are concepts like the five skandhas, equanimity (upekkha), impermanence (anatta), and renuncation (nekkhamma). <S> Perhaps the ideas behind the five hindrances during mediation (panca nivaranani) has something to say about your practice as well. <S> I mention these briefly as a scratch on the surface. <S> If they seem interesting, consider them a rabbit hole to dive into. <S> Sometimes the experiences we make in our lives can be a fruitful springboard into deepening our theoretical understanding of dhamma and ourself, as opposed to reading without any particular question in mind. <A> If one has just one method by which one tries to attain a pleasant abiding it will often be a hit or miss with regards to attaining seclusion from states that are hindrances because sometimes developing calm be difficult and attempts to do it lead to sleepiness which is a hindrance. <S> Therefore in the pali texts one takes note of mind and accomodates the various perceptions that are in charge of mind & behavior by directing the mind based on knowledge. <S> Here excerpts from sutta; <S> Sluggish/Tired Mind <S> "At such times, monks, as the mind is sluggish, that is the wrong time to cultivate the enlightenment-factor[1] of tranquillity, the enlightenment-factor of concentration, the enlightenment-factor of equanimity. <S> What is the reason? <S> A sluggish mind is hard to arouse by these factors. <S> "But <S> , monks, when the mind is sluggish, that is the right time to cultivate the enlightenment-factor of investigation-of-states, the enlightenment-factor of energy, the enlightenment-factor of rapture.[2] <S> What is the reason? <S> A sluggish mind is easy to arouse by these factors. <S> Restless/Agitated <S> "Monks, when the mind is agitated,[3] that is the wrong time to cultivate the enlightenment-factors of investigation-of-states, of energy, of rapture. <S> Why? <S> An agitated mind is hard to calm through these factors. <S> "When the mind is agitated, that is the right time to cultivate the enlightenment-factors of tranquillity, concentration, equanimity. <S> Why? <S> Because an agitated mind is easy to calm[4] through these factors. <S> Eventually wants wants to counter some dominant perspectives by developing other perceptions; <S> Bhikkhus, to the bhikkhu practicing the perception of loathing and abiding much in it, the sexual thought keeps away, it shrinks and rolls away. <S> Bhikkhus, to the bhikkhu practicing the perception of loathing in regards to food and abiding much in it, the craving for tastes keep away, it shrinks and rolls away. <S> The mind stretches out and gets established in equanimity or loathing. <S> There are many more like this. <S> If you want i can give you some excerpts. <A> David, you've actually partly answered your question. <S> You know the over-controlling has caused the energy loss. <S> This is the opposite of proper meditation, which brings about more energy, and wakefulness. <S> Try this: Don't try to meditate. <S> Why is that a good idea? <S> Because presently your view of meditation is incorrect. <S> That's why it isn't bringing you good result. <S> When you try to meditate, your current view of meditation will certainly make you meditate wrongly. <S> So, drop the idea of 'meditation' first. <S> Then, just be aware . <S> Just let the mind be aware of whatever it's naturally aware of. <S> You don't even have to be able to label it/them. <S> As you continue to be aware, the awareness grows. <S> Because you're not spending energy trying to do something, you retain energy, and over time you'll notice that you have more energy, not less. <S> Later, you may begin to notice more things: feelings, thoughts. <S> It's okay. <S> It's completely ok. <S> Hope that helps.
|
If you feel tired of practicing sitting meditation right now, you can always try to look into what the dhamma has to say about the experiences you've made. The important thing is that you're aware in the right way: not trying to manipulate what's happening, seeing them as they are.
|
Did the Buddha himself say anything about 'greater good'? The phrase comes up -- especially when discussing 'militarism' -- in the secondary literature; e.g. that “one must sacrifice the lesser good for the greater good”; so too must “our heroes sacrifice their lives in order to preserve the naition... Buddhism and Politics in Thailand, p154 Did the Buhddha say anything like this? The closest I know of is "be a lamp unto yourself", but in effect that could legitimize all sorts of errors. Specifically I mean examples analogous to serving in the military: when some wrong doing is permitted due to "the greater good". <Q> If this is the lesser good: <S> AN4.95:2.2 : <S> The person who practices to benefit neither themselves nor others is like this, I say. <S> Then this is the greater good: <S> AN4.95:3.1 : The person who practices to benefit others, but not themselves, is better than that. <S> If this is the lesser good: <S> AN4.95:3.2 : <S> The person who practices to benefit themselves, but not others, is better than both of those. <S> Then this is the greater good: <S> AN4.95:3.3 : <S> But the person who practices to benefit both themselves and others is the foremost, best, chief, highest, and finest of the four. <S> Notice in particular that "heroes sacrificing themselves for the nation" is only third best. <S> There are two practices <S> better than that. <S> Indeed, one reads that practicing to benefit oneself is better than being a hero. <S> But to understand this fully, one must also know that practicing to benefit oneself requires one to make progress on the Noble Eightfold Path. <S> The first step of the Noble Eightfold Path is Right View. <S> And that Right View includes the direction to perform good deeds. <S> MN117:6.1 : <S> And what is right view? <S> Right view is twofold, I say. <S> There is right view that is accompanied by defilements, has the attributes of good deeds, and ripens in attachment. <S> And there is right view that is noble, undefiled, transcendent, a factor of the path. <S> The greatest good, however, is to practice to benefit both ourselves and others. <S> And how do we practice to benefit others? <S> We teach them Right View. <S> AN2.126:1.1 : <S> “There are two conditions for the arising of right view. <S> What two? <S> The words of another and proper attention. <S> These are the two conditions for the arising of right view.” <A> Something similar is said in the Dhammapada <S> Dhammapada 290 https://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/verseload.php?verse=290 <A> "There are these four types of brightness. <S> Which four? <S> The brightness of the sun, the brightness of the moon, the brightness of fire, and the brightness of discernment. <S> These are the four types of brightness. <S> And of these four types of brightness, the foremost is the brightness of discernment." <S> An4.144 <S> There are other similar comparisons of pleasant abidings, ranking various classification of pleasure & happiness ìn the pali texts of early schools. <S> "And what, Ananda, is another pleasure more extreme & refined than that? <S> There is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of nothingness, enters & remains in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. <S> This is another pleasure more extreme & refined than that. <S> Though some might say, 'That is the highest pleasure that beings experience,' I would not grant them that. <S> Why is that? <S> Because there is another pleasure, more extreme & refined than that. <S> "And what, Ananda, is another pleasure more extreme & refined than that? <S> There is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, enters & remains in the cessation of perception & feeling. <S> This is another pleasure more extreme & refined than that. <S> Now it's possible, Ananda, that some wanderers of other persuasions might say, 'Gotama the contemplative speaks of the cessation of perception & feeling and yet describes it as pleasure. <S> What is this? <S> How can this be?' <S> When they say that, they are to be told, 'It's not the case, friends, that the Blessed One describes only pleasant feeling as included under pleasure. <S> Wherever pleasure is found, in whatever terms, the Blessed One describes it as pleasure.'" <S> The difference between these classifications and the saying "that “one must sacrifice the lesser good for the greater good”; so too must “our heroes sacrifice their lives in order to preserve the naition..." <S> is that the Sutta classification is precisely expressed & <S> it's meaning is easily here drawn out, sun is brighter than the moon obv. <S> The quotation about "hero sacrificing life for the nation" is far from precise because the words 'hero, nation' are very abstract terms and open to interpretation. <S> It can easily be argued against as not being 'the greater good' and one can argue about what constitutes a real hero. <S> It's kind of typical of politians&poets to use language in this way.
|
If by giving up small pleasures great happiness is to be found, the wise should give up small pleasures seeing (the prospect of) great happiness.
|
Unintentionally killing insects when playing sports and running I jog everyday and teach children how to play basketball. There are some insects on the path where I jog and on the basketball court, and I’m sure we unintentionally kill a few of them. We live in a place where there are lots of trees and forests so it would be difficult to get rid of bugs. Am I violating the first precep? <Q> Formally the Vinaya, or Buddhist monastic law, states this about killing: <S> pli-tv-bu-vb-pc61 <S> There is no offence if it is unintentional; if (he is) not thinking; if he does not know; if he is not meaning death; if he is mad, if he is the first wrong-doer. <S> In particular, notice that ignoring the knowledge that there are living creatures on sports grounds is also intentional and therefore harmful if one proceeds to practice sports and thereby kill insects. <S> How to resolve this? <S> One observes that small creatures flee the sun. <S> Because of this, one can skillfully choose a time for sports when small creatures will be safe from harm. <S> Children will understand this logic, therefore adults can as well. <S> Intention therefore affects skillful means. <S> If we play sports intending entertainment, then stadiums emerge along with massive environmental impact, death and destruction. <S> Yet if we exercise for harmony and coordination, then the "need to kill" evaporates and <S> our relationship with the world decreases suffering skillfully. <S> Even a monk walking meditation can intend to walk peacefully without stomping and therefore with less killing. <S> But cowering inside afraid to step out and kill an insect is also wrong because it is self-mortification. <S> Bodies need exercise for health. <S> Children need physical practice that promotes teamwork. <S> So a balance for all enters consideration. <S> Unskillful choices generate suffering. <S> Skillful choices end suffering. <S> The path revolves around the skillful. <S> AN3.69:9.1 : <S> There are these three skillful roots. <S> What three? <S> Contentment, love, and understanding. <A> Of course, if you are observing the first precept, you must not intentionally kill those insects on your jogging path i.e. if you see them while jogging, you should avoid them. <S> On the other hand, on a regular jogging track that many people use, you would find that insects and other animals would start to avoid this path and find other routes. <A> If you go to exercise your legs or do walking meditation in the open air you are likely to step on some beings. <S> It can be unintentionally caused by not looking where you put your feet or due to an inability to see. <S> If it was due to carelessness, then that carelessness is blameworthy much like drunk-driving ie. <S> If one is lost in unwholesome thought and steps on some insect, one is essentially reckless and not concerned about the consequences of one's action as they might affect others. <S> If however one was blind and went to do walking meditation, unaware of the stepping on bugs one is then blameless. <S> An incident like this is in the pali texts. <S> If going for a run you would see the road in front covered in bugs and worms, would you still run on it seeing that you would inevitably kill? <S> Some would out of compassion for those beings do something else. <S> It seems like we are generally uncomfortable knowing that for certain we are going to step on bugs, that enough to not go through with it. <S> However if we think there is a chance of not stepping on other beings in the process we roll the dice. <S> It's akin to this analogy;Drunk-driving <S> is bad because one puts lives at risk, therefore all driving is bad if and to the extent that it puts lives at risk. <S> As i see it we do not say that all driving is always bad but some circumstances are certainly seen to be more or less unjustified and blameworthy. <S> If a monk jumps of a high cliff and unintentionally lands on someone's head he is not blamed for killing but he is blamed for jumping from that cliff. <S> We should think about actions more as long run evaluation of this or that resolve rather than focusing on the short-term. <S> Ie; what are the consequences of this if performed 100, 1000, 10000 times. <S> It is on this basis society blames drunk driving in that even if nothing bad happened it doesn't matter as it is a variable circumstance. <S> I hope you get the sentiment i try to communicate, there is a reason why we don't see monks running around playing sports in general. <A> I am sure when he first said it <S> he just meant we shouldn't go around killing each other. <S> Over the years it has come to mean an ants life is worth the same as a humans. <S> Both are valid depending on your point of view. <S> It is just some words. <S> Interpret it how you wish. <A> But if that monk is to truly avoid killing shouldn't he be exercising in his room instead? <S> In context that monk might not have a room: monks are "homeless". <S> And monks might be discouraged from playing sports at all: walking might be their only physical exercise. <S> Perhaps monks are expected to be more virtuous -- more careful about not taking life -- than laypeople. <S> Monks won't dig the ground for example, nor kill plants, which laypeople do -- see this commentary about Killing ... <S> Intention is an essential factor here. <S> For example, if a bhikkhu only intends to sweep a path but accidentally kills ants in the process, there is no offence because it is not deliberate. <S> ... <S> and Destroying Vegetation <S> ... <S> Bhikkhus who live in tropical forest monasteries constantly have to protect both the jungle and themselves. <S> When paths are overgrown, snakes and other dangerous 'creepy-crawlies' can be trodden on — and bite back! <S> There also may be a need for firebreaks. <S> One way that forest monks cope with this is a daily routine of sweeping the paths. <S> However they are not allowed to dig or clear the land.
|
If you unintentionally killed an insect on a regular jogging track, that's ok.
|
Shouldn't we care only "What I think" instead of "What I + Others think"? Our own thoughts make something wholesome or unwholesome. Not what other's think. So, is there a need to care about what others think regarding a certain thing? We can do good for others, but they might think that we do something bad for them. Isn't it their responsibility to think in a wholesome manner? The title of this question should be "Should we care about what others think?", but I found a related question here: Should we care about what others think? However, it doesn't have any answers regarding this case (karma). Kind regards <Q> We should not harass other people, including with what is wholesome. <S> The suttas say: Enduring patience is the supreme austerity, Nibbāna is supreme say the Buddhas, for one gone forth does not hurt another, nor does an ascetic harass another. <S> Dhammapada 184 Drawing in the mind’s thoughts <S> As a tortoise draws its limbs into its shell, Independent, not harassing others, fully quenched, A bhikkhu would not blame anyone. <S> SN 1.17 <S> But if we discover others are not interested in our wholesome intentions, we should refrain from harassing them & care about what they think. <S> However, if we unintentionally offend them with our wholesomeness, we have done nothing wrong. <S> As Jesus said: " Do not give pearls to swine; do not give the children's food to the dogs; they will turn to attack & trample upon it ". <A> I think it can be said that if our behavior is spotless, guided by true knowledge & due analysis, then in that case we do not need the external approval. <S> It is like knowing the truth, being in agreement with others is a different variable circumstance. <S> I sometimes think about the training and the relating to others along these lines; 'surely the principals of the training do not depend on other people because the principles of the training would not change if one was the only person around'. <A> The Kalama Sutta ( AN 3.65 ) says: <S> So, as I said, Kalamas: 'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher. <S> " <S> When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise ; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering" — then you should abandon them.' <S> Thus was it said. <S> And in reference to this was it said. <S> Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, ' <S> This contemplative is our teacher.' <S> When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise ; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them. <S> I think that implies you should care about and understand, as well as "know for yourself", what wise people think. <S> I think there's a lot of mention too, in the suttas, about social harmony within the sangha -- and its being important to have good or spiritual friends -- I think that might be what's meant by "the holy life" <S> ( brahamacariya ): <S> Not so, Ānanda! <S> Not so, Ānanda! <S> “Mā hevaṃ, ānanda, mā hevaṃ, ānanda. <S> Good friends, companions, and associates are the whole of the spiritual life. <S> Sakalamevidaṃ, ānanda, brahmacariyaṃ, yadidaṃ—kalyāṇamittatā kalyāṇasahāyatā kalyāṇasampavaṅkatā. <S> SN 45.2 <S> We also have precepts (e.g. to be harmless). <S> They too are motivated by what other people think: <S> All tremble at violence; all fear death. <S> Putting oneself in the place of another , one should not kill nor cause another to kill. <S> Dhp 129
|
If we act with a wholesome intention, this is not wrong.
|
Can lay people acheive enlighment (Arahanthship) in this life by adhering to Buddhist principles? During the time of Buddha, it is said many people at one gathering attained enlightenment by listening to only one one of his sermons. How can a mind develop such a achieving within matter of hours. There are millions of devoted Buddhist in the world now but I have not heard a single person achieving higher mental status. Are there any other explanation this other than karma? <Q> If you analyse the Sutta, you will find those who became Arahants by just listening to discourse are people who have already perfected Sila and Samadhi. <S> For instance Buddhas first disciples, five ascetics. <A> There are several traditional takes on this. <S> According to some commentary the Dhamma declines gradually so that there is a steady decline and progressive lack of higher attainments in the world until there are no attainments left. <S> Based on this kind of reasoning some hold that there is a cap on what will be attained in our time, some hold that Sotapannaship is possible whereas other hold that as being impossible because they base it on a different calculation and values <S> ie 500 years for disappearance of this or that attainment instead of a 1000. <S> Another popular interpretation is that Dhamma can be revived so that even if there is nobody with attainments during a decline, it is still possible to get all or some of the attainments. <S> These are the basis for popular theravadin positions. <A> Samadhi(Concentration) should be developed, Sila(Morality) should be practiced and with the help of these 2, Paññā(Discernment) will be developed. <S> Only by having discernment can one understand the Buddhist teachings. <S> In the present if you want to achieve 'awakening' you should perfect Sila(Minimum 5 precepts) and Samadhi ( Samata Meditation) and move onto Insight (Vipassana) Meditation, with time you will awaken. <S> The reason today's laypeople and even Bhikkus do not achieve awakening is because they do not practice Buddha's teachings. <S> The teachings have turned to lip recital but not practice. <A> To share one's attainments is generally frowned upon as we do not have the buddha here to verify attainments. <S> However, in the vipassana tradition there are some lay people who have demonstrated extreme discipline for example: <S> Dipa Ma <S> https://dipama.com/ <S> May find peace and happiness, With Metta :) <A> How can a mind develop such a achieving within matter of hours. <S> Sorta like math prodigies being able to master calculus, differential equations, or number theory when still in middle school. <S> There's no difference, an inevitable result of many lives of cultivation and dedication to the discipline. <S> There are millions of devoted Buddhist in the world now <S> but I have not heard a single person achieving higher mental status. <S> Are there any other explanation this other than karma? <S> Probably because the real deal who's truly achieved those higher attainments wouldn't go around and proclaim it to others. <S> Anyway, it's not necessarily true that modern men's intelligence or capacity are duller or dumber than their ancient counterparts, it's definitely true that the environment our ancestors once lived was vastly more conducive to the cultivation of the Dhamma. <S> Back then, there were no TVs, radios, internet chatrooms, facebook, snapchat, twitter, zoom, tik tok, and a gazillion of other modern day distractions.
|
At the time of Buddha, as SarathW said, people who attained stages of awakening already perfected Sila and Samadhi therefore it was easy for them to understand the Buddha's teachings.
|
How do experienced Buddhists preserve their equanimity and well-being in unfavourable circumstances? What are the examples in ancient texts or in history when a trained Buddhist sustained their equanimity and well-being through torture, forced isolation or other unfavourable circumstances? Which tools given in Dhamma do you think would be useful if one had to survive, for example, through the years in prison? Could it be possible to keep on the development of skilful qualities in places like this? Would you consider suicide as a solution? <Q> Would you consider suicide as a solution? <S> A big NO...., suicide is not a solution, it creates more problems. <S> Which tools given in Dhamma do you think would be useful if one had to survive <S> Buddhism teaches us consequences for our each action, <S> For example if you hate someone, that person won't even know that you've hated him/her unless you told, but if you hating someone else and it isn't hurt them or do bad for them, it's really bad for the person who hate. <S> Because hater's mind is impure, and it count as bad Karma. <S> When you collect bad Karma for long time, and suddenly die, while do the another bad Karma, there's high probability of being reincarnate in one of Four Hell(Animals, Pretha, Asura, Hell). <S> And that's the danger of reincarnation. <S> And those four places has lot more Pain, Suffering than human world, it's unimaginable. <S> " Imagine while four muscular guys hold your hands and legs and another two of'em rip your body apart with a saw, and no way to survive, And advice for the person who getting hurt is not to hate those six guys, being nice them. " <S> And this is a allegory for Meththa. <S> So if someone think those accordingly and believe that's it truth, no one would do any bad things, And i think that is the best Motive for the survival of such situations.(If you follow and believe Lord Buddha). <S> I hope this would help. <A> There are numerous stories in Tibetan Buddhism about Lamas getting imprisoned for years or decades by the Chinese and how they not only endured the hardships but became spiritual guides for other inmates and even their prison guards. <S> It's all about your perspective, and if your perspective is that your situation is a blessing, then you will perceive it as such. <A> First the stories as i remember them; In the commentary to Dhp there is a story of queen who hires a prostitute for the king because the queen is otherwise occupied attending to the monks. <S> The prostitute later throws hot oil at the queen but the queen is established strongly in perception of sympathy and remains thus unharmed. <S> In a Sutta, a lay disciple Mahanama is worried about getting mad at his servants and expresses these unholy bad qualities to the Tathagata. <S> Buddha assures him that he isn't going to fall to lower realms and of having fruition of stream entry. <S> I don't recall anything else relevant which is a story and not an instruction nor a simile. <S> The general answer on the how-to is in dealing with the five hindrances, all and any one in particular. <S> One removes perception of aversion and perception of sensuality by establishing wholesome perceptions; of unattractiveness, inconstancy, death, dispassion for all worlds; and does not tolerate unwholesome thoughts. <S> As for suicide it is blameless only if one does not take another body. <S> An Arahant is said to be using the knife blamessly. <S> Sāriputta, when one lays down this body and takes up another body, then I say one is blameworthy. <S> This did not happen in the case of the bhikkhu Channa. <S> The bhikkhu Channa used the knife blamelessly. <S> Thus, Sāriputta, should you remember it.” <S> https://suttacentral.net/sn35.87/en/bodhi <S> But this is not enough for me to call someone ‘blameworthy’. <S> Na kho panāhaṃ, sāriputta, ettāvatā saupavajjoti vadāmi. <S> When someone lays down this body and takes up another body, I call them ‘blameworthy’. <S> Yo kho, sāriputta, tañca kāyaṃ nikkhipati, aññañca kāyaṃ upādiyati, tamahaṃ https://suttacentral.net/sn35.87/en/sujato <S> Fwiw; some hold that an Arahant can't kill himself and that the people in the Sutta who are said to use the knife blamelessly kill themselves as worldlings and become Arahants at the moment of Death. <A> Which tools given in Dhamma do you think would be useful if one had to survive, for example, through the years in prison? <S> Could it be possible to keep on the development of skilful qualities in places like this? <S> Would you consider suicide as a solution? <S> Look at it on the bright side, there're certain kinds of life outside of prison <S> that are much much worse than inside. <S> Imagine living in a war-torn region, working like a slave for at least 15 hours a day, witnessing the living hell going on all around you, seeing your parents killed, your sisters raped, your younger brothers forced to do child soldier's work, etc. <S> But if you believe in the law of Kamma, you'd already knew that's the worst possible option, for bad Kamma is like a debt, and the collector is one cruel ruthless s.o.b who, like a terminator, will never ever ever stop hunting down his debtor until the debt's been paid in full, in this life or the next. <S> So, make the best of what you've got. <S> At least the inmate has an 8-hour/day(or more) advantage to cultivate the Dhamma, over the poor brothers outside of prison who have to work their behinds off every day to be able to afford little morsel of food to feed some hungry mouths and some money to keep a roof over their heads.
|
Of course killing oneself would be the easy way out. Tibetan Buddhism in general has a recurring theme of teachings about "putting all obstacles on the path" - meaning, using every real life problem as a practice aid, instead of seeing it negatively.
|
Basic readings and references: where to start Although I have read some basic articles and book about buddhism, they are all written by modern western sources, and I would like to get to know the foundations. Even when reading this site, I sometimes feel at a loss because I miss so many of the particular terms, and all the names of the classical texts are kind of mixed in my mind, I don't even know where to start. My question is then: What would be a good "programm" to introduce myself in buddhist (foundational) readings? I am aware of other questions dealing with introductory texts to Buddhism, but, as I see it, that is easy to find. What I want is sort of a guide to start navigating the important foundational texts of which I keep hearing/reading a lot, but that I cannot grasp. Also, I would love to learn at least a bit of the languages (Sanskrit, Pali) to improve my understanding of what I read, and some references in this sense would also be much appreciated. <Q> You can use the book by bikkhu Nyanatusita to learn the vinaya. <S> It has the pali, then the english translation, then the definition of all the pali words. <S> The draft from 2008 is here https://www.dhammatalks.net/Books14/Bhikkhu_Nyanatusita-Analysis_of_the_Bhikkhupatimokkha.pdf <S> the book from 2014 is here <S> https://books.google.com/books?id=6s3iBQAAQBAJ <S> For a list of suttas and a super short summary, there is alwaysAn Analysis of the Pali Canon and a Reference Table of Pali Literature <S> By Russell Webb and Bhikkhu Nyanatusita https://www.bps.lk/olib/bp/bp607s_Webb_Analysis-Of-The-Pali-Canon.pdf which has also a huge catalog of texts on buddhism, as of 2011, <S> and it has also A Reference List of Pali Literature, which is also found here separately <S> http://gretil.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil_elib/Nyt008__Nyanatusita_ReferenceTableOfPaliLiterature.pdf <S> The course by bikkhu bodhi for Pali is a good introduction <S> https://bodhimonastery.org/a-course-in-the-pali-language.html and the little help for Pali Verb Conjugation and Noun/Pronoun Declension Tables, by Bhikkhu Nyanatusita (2005; 486k) <S> https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanatusita/index.html <S> For the suttas themselves, you can begin with the short ones, so DN which is some copies of suttas form SN and AN, MN, dhammapada, sutta nipata, then SN and AN Also do not forget the parallel suttas. <S> Scholars already know about this since the 80s, like lamotte says in HISTORY OF INDIAN BUDDHISM (Peeters Press, 1988, page 156): <S> However, with the exception of the Mahayanist interpolations in the Ekottara [the Chinese equivalent to the Pali Canon's Anguttara], which are easily discernable, the variations in question affect hardly anything save the method of expression or arrangement of the subjects. <S> The doctrinal basis common to the agamas [preserved in Chinese and partially Sanskrit and Tibetan] is remarkably uniform. <S> Preserved and transmitted by the schools, the sutras [discourses] do not however constitute scholastic documents, but are the common heritage of all the sects. <S> THere is a short book <S> The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A Comparative Study Based on the Sutranga Portion of the Pali Samyutta-Nikaya and the Chinese Samyuktagama by Mun-keat <S> Choong http://www.ahandfulofleaves.org/documents/The%20Fundamental%20Teachings%20of%20Early%20Buddhism_Mun-keat.pdf <S> and of course lots of work by Bikkhu Analayo <S> A Comparative Study of the Majjhima-nikāya <S> https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/compstudyvol1.pdf <S> https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/compstudyvol2.pdf <S> Madhyama-āgama Studies https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/mastudies.pdf <S> Saṃyukta-āgama Studies <S> https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/sastudies.pdf <S> Dīrgha-āgama Studies <S> https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/dastudies.pdf <S> Ekottarika-āgama Studies <S> https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/ekottarikastudies.pdf <S> Vinaya Studies https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/vinayastudies.pdf <S> Early Buddhist Meditation Studies <S> https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/ebms.pdf <S> Perspectives on Satipaṭṭhāna https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/perspectives.pdf <A> I found the https://www.buddha-vacana.org/ site an interesting introduction to Pali -- see for example <S> https://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/samyutta/maha/sn56-011.html -- use a mouse to hover over Pali words to see a popup with a translation and a link to a dictionary definition. <S> Another site with Pali and English on the same page is https://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/ for example <S> https://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/verseload.php?verse=001 <S> And all of Ven. <S> Sujato's translations on suttacentral have side-by-side or line-by-line copies of the Pali -- see for example <S> https://suttacentral.net/sn56.11/en/sujato <S> -- click on the Settings icon near the top of the page, and activate "View original text with translation" and "Activate Pali word lookup", then again use a mouse to hover over the words of interest. <S> Pali nouns have "case" -- i.e. nominative, accusative, ablative, etc., which show what place they have in a sentence -- <S> that's instead of word-order being significant, and using conjunctions -- <S> so it's like Latin or Greek. <S> And there are compound nouns , often you might guess how a word is compounded in order to look up each portion individually -- for example " manopubbaṅgama is a Pali compound consisting of the words <S> mano and pubbaṅgama " (with mano being one of the words for "mind" ). <A> You can learn effectively just by following the public discourse and asking questions. <S> What will be most important is the self-study of the referenced texts and remembering them. <S> This is more important than how other people interpret it. <S> Eventually you will learn many texts, various interpretations and controversy. <S> Reading about the pali sutta is not as important as reading the sutta and the public discourse is more or less an introduction because questions repeat themselves quite a lot. <S> As you study the Buddha's pali discourses you will also learn a bit about commentary and pick up on things here & there from the public discourse. <S> As for Pali language you will eventually learn many technical terms from the public discourse and comparing pali translations. <S> If you want to learn the grammar and to expand your vocabulary you can attemp reading stories from jataka, vinaya and dhp commentaries. <S> For grammar one can find some course. <S> One can also memorize pali for recitation, ie the patimokkha. <S> One will learn some this way <S> but it's rather negligible in & by itself.
|
There are several online resources for that -- grammar and dictionaries -- an introductory one is https://www.buddha-vacana.org/toolbox.html My advice is to stick around where people quote and recite texts known to be true.
|
Is this nibbana or god? There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to-being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. (Sutta pitaka , khuddaka nikaya , udana 8:3) <Q> That is Nibbana , and not god or Brahman or any kind of Ultimate Reality. <S> It is that which is experienced by the mind, when it is completely free of all fetters and defilements. <S> I quote from this answer below. <S> Please see that answer for details. <S> So, Nibbana is not a thought of the mind, not a concept of the mind, not a state of the mind, not a state of consciousness and also not a feeling. <S> However, when the mind experiences this Nibbana , which is not conditioned, not compounded, not suffering, not impermanent, not arising, not ceasing and not changing, it experiences bliss. <S> The mind can therefore experience Nibbana , but it cannot feel it or think about it. <S> Sukha or happiness for an unenlightened person is experienced when encountering pleasant feelings (from the six senses) or when encountering the cessation of painful feelings (from the six senses). <S> But for an arahat , sukha or bliss (in this context) is experienced when encountering neutral feelings, no feelings and Nibbana . <A> It is similar, Maimonides of the Hebrew faith also ended up saying that God could only be described through negation, and the Hindus say Brahman is 'neti neti' - 'not this, not that'. <S> However the difference between nibbana and God is that God is Ultimate Reality, which is where the term differes from nibbana. <S> If God is seen as a '1' to the '0' of our daily experience, then nibbana is the '0' to the '-1' of our daily experience. <S> It is perhaps more melancholy, but it is less contrived, as no 'thing' needs to be pulled out of a hat. <A> God, is not neccesary. <S> Buddha didnt said, it exist, doesnt, both or neighther. <S> Birth is the origination of dependant phenomenon. <S> Its like Electric field is always present with magnetic disc around it. <S> Magnetic disc can be called as dependent origination, as it attract the Iron. <S> Iron can be term as 5 khandas and when one attain nibbana, it cease to that magnetic disc. <S> Know for sure, that magnetic disc never ceases, it always accompanied by electric field. <S> Magnetic field can be term as anatta. <S> You are asking about electric field, the source of life. <S> If you see above statements, then question of electric field is not neccessary. <S> Real question likes in how to attain cessation! <A> There is no god, creator of all. <S> Nothing remains of mind as you know it. <S> Nibbana is unborn. <S> It creates nothing. <S> The question is, how does manifestation come into being?
|
Nibbana is the cessation of the manifested, cessation of perception of the manifested, and cessation of the memory of the manifested.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.