|
Yiggy posted:Sure, in a way it is speaking directly to a modern malaise many of us find ourselves in. However, in certain respects it seems to be doing so in a way thats treating the symptoms rather than the disease. He rightfully points out that many people seem to be complacent in their lives and unhappy because of it. But rather than question why we're unhappy beyond passing up opportunities, the prognosis is do stuff and forget about the humdrum for a bit. Good points. "Getting what you can now." is, as was said, not the Middle way. I think that this is the exact thinking that has so many of us in the state we are in in our affluent and commercialized society. It just seems like a dead end where you are left with these "good memories and experiences" when you get older to look back on but this ends up being completely counter to the Buddha's advice that existing in the present moment is where true happiness lies. Those experiences may help you grow in some ways as a person, or at least expose you to ways of thinking that you might not have had otherwise -- that's a good thing in some cases -- but they seem to be too focused on the short term and promote craving/grasping in both the short & long term. You want to have an experience, you either enjoy it (and want more) or hate it (and want it to go away) and in both ways it is pulling you away from the here and now where the real poo poo is going down. Yiggy posted:Hard questions, and I certainly don't have all the answers. Personally though? I think first and foremost, that there is a sort of duty to meditate on compassion and the situations of others, at the least, and from there more concrete actions and results begin to evolve on their own. This would in part mean the material condition and suffering of others, certainly, but not only that. How one acts on that compassion can have a variety of outlets. Some of it more overt, like giving to charity, some of it less so like trying to act as a positive example for the people directly around you. As far as helping others and compassion, I'd agree with Yiggy here too. Concentrate on yourself, be kind to others around you and be a good example by being aware of how you act, what you do, how you treat people, what you eat, what you consume in general, etc. All of these things reduce suffering for yourself and for others in the short term and down the road, whatever your belief systems are. Doing these things will invariably lead you to more ways to help others too. Being stuck wondering what to do helps no one so its best to just take first steps and do what you can to be the best person you can be. Helping others comes with assumptions too. If a rich person decided that the best way to be compassionate for others by giving people a free car, it is an act that comes with a lot of ignorance that may not be obvious to someone who hasn't be meditating on things and being truly open, aware and compassionate. A poor person can't afford insurance, gas, parking, etc. May not live in a safe area to keep it. What the benefactor did to help ends up being a bad thing because their method of "relieving the suffering" was centered around what the rich thought was compassion and what it really did was give them a possession that makes their lives worse. This is an extreme example of how we apply our starting understanding of compassion and charity in incorrect ways but, as we meditate and contemplate on these things, real ways to be compassionate and helpful reveal themselves naturally. I think ultimately they really do start with ourselves, first and foremost.
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2013 17:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 1, 2024 07:36 |
|
|
This thread can be so drat good sometimes. Nice job on those last few posts, people.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2013 04:47
|
|
|
comaerror posted:Hey thread, I have a noob sitting question. So, when I'm sitting and observing my breath and my brain starts doing stuff, I just try to observe it with, "thinking, thinking..." etc. Though, I've noticed that this observation sometimes ends up getting forceful, like I'm trying to stop the thinking, even though I know I should just be watching it go by. I'm trying to correct this by observing the forcefulness with "forcing, forcing..." etc. It is my understanding that ultimately, I shouldn't have to use mental words at all to do the observing, but it does seem to help me since my sitting experience is still in the beginning stages. So, is noting the forcefulness a reasonable solution? I think the idea of noting the thoughts with the word "thinking.." is to get you used to noticing them in the first place. Thoughts aren't the enemy really. Just observe the thought and don't hold on to it. It will more-or-less go away on its own. Some useful analogies I've heard/read: - Imagine you're standing alongside a stream and your thoughts are leaves floating by. There's no reason to catch them or touch them. Just note that you had one and then go back to breathing. - The mind is initially like the surface of the ocean covered in debris. There are all manner of things floating by but beneath the surface there is nothing but calm clean open-ness. I was a lot like you when I started (I'm still a beginner :3) but was finding I was too tight -- too focused on breath and suppressing thoughts. As I meditated for longer periods of time (full day sessions), I started to drop a lot of that forcefulness and just let things go. I don't know if it was that my mind got tired or just finally relaxed or what. I just found that over longer periods my mind would naturally calm down; I discovered the tightness wasn't my fault or a failing per se. The short 15-20 minute sessions just don't provide enough time to fully relax my mind. I can't do long sessions daily due to time constraints but just knowing that I am not doing things wrong was a great help in the shorter sessions regardless. I am much more able to just, observe, not get frustrated and move on. Another thing that helped was listening to a Reggie Ray recording where he was talking about building a "toolbox" of Shamatha techniques being useful. Some days, counting works to relax our mind, some days it is just enough to concentrate on the breath. Sometimes we need to be tighter at first and then relax or sometimes we need to do the opposite. That whole idea helped me a lot. You don't just have to do one thing forever and ever if it isn't working or doesn't feel right. Over time I've come to know what I feel like on a given day and can shape my morning practice to the technique that might work best on that day. Anyway, that's what helped me.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
Razage posted:This was enlightening so thank you! Your mind really wants to do what it wants to do. It takes a while to get it settled and honestly the longer you stick with it, the easier it gets to settle your mind down. I still go off on flights of fancy or some weird imagined scenario where I'm explaining some aspect of the dharma to an imaginary person and then I snap back to present time and try to stay with it. Spacing out and being tired or bored are just other mental states - it's just part of it. Like others have said, just be ok with it and realize its part of the process. The more forgiving I got with myself about these little excursions, the better my sessions went. I settled down faster and ended up being able to develop much better states of concentration (during shamatha specifically). What Shambhala center are you going to try out? Just curious. Let us know if its weird  I've met some really cool Shambhala folks -- down to earth, smart about the dharma and kind. Hope you have a good experience.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2013 21:58
|
|
|
Cardiovorax posted:That sounds kind of weird and pop-religiony, no offense. Does anyone maybe have a statement by some ordained Buddhist monks or whatever on what they think about this stuff? This looks like a secular form of meditation practice referred to as MBSR (mindfulness-based stress reduction) centered squarely on removing the Buddhist parts of meditation and leaving behind what people commonly think is the pith of Buddhist practice -- the meditation. Honestly, this is the type of approach that got me interested in meditation because I was having a ton of stress-related issues, but I quickly realized that it was leaving behind all of the important stuff and I went fully into Buddhist study and Shambhala training. So, in a sense, it isn't that great as a holistic practice of self-improvement but it can lead to bigger things if you have the right frame of mind. This seems very similar to GetSomeHeadspace which was actually set up by a monk from the UK.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2013 17:13
|
|
|
Shnooks posted:I want to set up a small alter at home with some incense and a little bell and what not. Does anyone have any suggestions on where to pick that stuff up? I checked online but I want to get it all from some place nice Our little altar has grown over time. We have a little Buddha, a small box which holds matches and incense, a crystal ball, some offering bowls (7), and a plant or flower of some kind. Each thing has some meaning for us or is meant to snap our mind to the practice of meditation. The Buddha represents well... the Buddha -- someone who has become awakened. The crystal ball represents the clarity of mind, the offering bowls (filled with water) are a representation of giving and sacrifice. The incense is really, for me, something that helps me remember the day's session with the lingering of the smell throughout the day. The plants or flowers are a representation of impermanence. Hope that helps. he1ixx fucked around with this message at 03:00 on Aug 29, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2013 02:53
|
|
|
I meditate on a cushion, legs crossed loosely. I place my hands on my upper thighs, push back slightly on my shoulders and keep my back straight. I "suspend" my head from the crown ("brahmarandra"?) and have a loose gaze on the ground at about 8-12'. This is how I learned originally but it's also presented in Reggie Ray's talks on the points of meditation posture in his Mahamudra series too. It seems to work just fine. If you can't force your legs into a pretzel shape, I wouldn't worry about it too much.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2013 13:05
|
|
|
No More Toast posted:I used to dip in and out of the old thread and I've found this one very informative so far, so much so that I've decided to actually dip my toe into Buddhism instead of skirting around the edges. I've ordered a few books that were recommended in the OP and am looking forward to reading them. Buddhism has always struck me as making a lot of sense, but I've always stumbled over the idea of reincarnation. However, discussion here about how Buddhism teaches about rebirth rather than reincarnation seemed more 'right'. I don't think I understand it fully yet, and apologies if I have it wrong, but it sort of clicked for me. I'm going to try and educate myself further, but there are a couple of questions I'd like to ask first. No one has touched on these yet so I'll post what I know here. This thread generally says avoid anything from NKT. They tend to operate around the term "cultish" and, despite espousing Tibetan Buddhism and being founded by a Geshe once associated with the Gelug tradition, they have an ax to grind and an agenda that runs counter to much of what I know about Buddhism. They boycott HHDL and have said some pretty hateful poo poo about him mainly because HHDL said they need to stop worshiping a fringe figure in Tibetan bôn folklore (Dorje Shugden). NKT believes he is a Buddha, everyone else thinks he's a cult figure. There are some really weird stories of murdered monks in the Dalai Lama's lodgings in the 90s that were attributed to this group although there was no proof to back it up that I'm aware of. I've heard some pretty vitriolic things about this group from other Buddhists -- enough that I think avoiding them seems warranted. Whatever your views on each side's arguments, I don't even want to get involved with it. Here is a more authoritative voice than me on the subject with actual facts: http://www.tricycle.com/two-sides-of-the-same-god No More Toast posted:2. I've tried meditation before and often had trouble focusing. A friend (who isn't Buddhist, but is into most things 'new age') said that mala beads might work by giving me something else physical to do while breathing. Would that be weird/appropriative? I'm definitely interested in exploring Buddhism, but I can't rightly say at the moment whether or not I will decide to practice it. I don't know whether it's appropriate to use/attempt to use mala beads while you're just starting to learn about Buddhism itself. I wouldn't use mala beads for this purpose. They have specific purposes but to distract your mind from thoughts or help concentration isn't one of them. Try doing different things while meditating to help you reach a state of calm. Also make sure you're giving yourself enough time to reach this state. I would say, just starting out, you should sit for at least 20 minutes working on slowing and calming down before you feel like things aren't "working". There is no right or wrong way for your brain to work when meditating especially when starting out. You can help your mind reach a quieter state by doing things like doing body scans, focusing on specific parts of the body while breathing, meditating with your eyes closed (instead of the usual "unfocused gaze forward"). The key should be building a bag of tricks to help you reach a state of equanimity quicker than if you were just sitting there sitting about your grocery list for 20 minutes. Here is what I have been doing lately: I often find that I feel somewhat scattered when I first sit. I do what Reggie Ray describes as the 12-fold belly breathing. It's nothing special other than a form of deep breathing intended to help you deepen your concentration and help focus your mind on the present (specifically your body). It takes a minute or two and then I find I can focus on the breath much easier. I have tried things like counting (which I'll still do on occasion if I still need more help concentrating) or just focusing on the body via a body scan. Each day brings a different challenge and the key is to be gentle with yourself. The goal isn't to "stop thinking". It's just to be present and aware so don't beat yourself up if you keep having thoughts arise. Just acknowledge you had one and continue. Eventually your brain will get the hint
he1ixx fucked around with this message at 00:07 on Sep 6, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
The-Mole posted:I'm curious now, because I really can't think of any reason whatsoever why a person shouldn't use Mala beads basically however they wish? Especially if they seem to find it helpful? You can certainly use them however you wish. I didn't say that was an "incorrect" use, I just said its not how they are used traditionally. The main point I really wanted to get across to No More Toast was that using them as an external distraction when practicing shamatha is definitely not what they are used for. Calm abiding meditation is all about the present moment and using devices to distract you goes very much against that idea, I think. I welcome comment on this. My understanding is that mala beads are traditionally used for counting when chanting, praying, etc. especially during the Tibetan ngondro when you're counting to very high numbers for a specific purpose. I assume that, given their role in accumulation of merit etc, they are held as precious by many practitioners. Interestingly, when I went to meet with my meditation instructor today, he suggested using them for a purpose that I never heard of so I guess you never know...
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2013 03:10
|
|
|
I kept my phone on (ringer off) at our recent Shambhala retreat in case of emergency with the kids or something. I would suggest mentioning it to one of the directors of the weekend when you get there so they know it's a possibility but I'm sure it's no problem.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2013 12:48
|
|
|
I found it very helpful to "set aside" the topics of karma and rebirth when I first started looking at Buddhism. Our teacher didn't push the topics too much as he definitely sensed my resistance to them. Leaving them as open topics helped though and I'd suggest you do the same. It isn't totally essential to be at peace with the concepts of karma and rebirth before you start practicing meditation or reading books and really those things will be what leads you to some semblance of answers for yourself anyway. It isn't a coincidence that Chögyam Trüngpa (and the Buddha for that matter) didn't push these concepts as part of the introductory, primary teachings. The main thing to consider when getting started is the Four Noble Truths and starting a real meditation practice. The rest will come. Or it won't. Best to not worry about it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
Ugrok posted:When you don't hope for a perfect you, for a perfect life, when you abandon all hope of being someone different that the one you are right now, you have the possibility to discover the present moment, the present you, and it's a great present indeed ! We were at a course recently and the instructor was talking about how Chögyam Trunga used the term "hopelessness" and I could tell it freaked a lot of people out. "Hopeless" brings to mind bleak despair. But what you're describing above is what he was talking about. Once we cease to have hope that things are going to be different than they are right now and just accept the present moment for what it is, we can start living life with less suffering.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2013 13:24
|
|
|
Pepsi-Tan posted:Wafflehound, can you help me better understand the separate realms? I see some people in the thread claiming that Buddhism can be done from a secular/atheist perspective, but I don't know how that'd be possible with the multiple realms. The idea of separate realms is talked about sometimes as a metaphor for your mind; states for your mind to be in. (Even CTR mentions this in one of this talks about the realms in "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism" which I read again recently (and so should anyone interested in this stuff IMO)). Chögyam Trungpa posted:The six realms are: the realm of the gods, the realm of the jealous gods, the human realm, the animal realm, the realm of the hungry ghosts, and the hell realm, The realms are predominantly emotional attitudes toward ourselves and our surroundings, emotional attitudes colored and reinforced by conceptual explanations and rationalizations. As human beings we may, during the course of the day, experience emotions of all of the realms, from the pride of the god realm to the hatred and paranoia of the hell realm. Nonetheless, a person's psychology is usually firmly rooted in one realm. This realm provides us with a style of confusion, a way of entertaining and occupying ourselves so as not to have to face our fundamental uncertainty, our ultimate fear that we may not exist. I think, personally, there's no need to buy the Buddhist goods whole cloth right off the bat. Reading, studying and learning with open-minded and smart people will reveal certain things to you that you never would have previously considered months before just because you are always working with your mind in meditation practice etc. Don't feel bad about not believing in rebirth or karma. Just leave them as open questions and practice the part that matters -- being a good person. You can argue that the Buddha said this and that in a sutta thus proving thus and such but there was a reason he often pushed the questions about karma and rebirth away; You need to be a good, kind person. That's basically the most important part. If you do that, the rest doesn't really matter so much. People in this thread (and the old versions of this thread were downright poisonous with it) will generally tell you that you need to believe it all or you're a closed-minded simpleton. I can say that, after doing this a while (and being scared off of "Buddhism" "buddhists" and this thread in the past), that type of dogmatism is something I've never experienced from Buddhists practicing for 40+ years yet is something I see regularly from posters in these threads. It's baffling but I guess not completely surprising since we're talking goons here. So don't get scared off. Just read books and take classes from smart people and things will start to make sense. Leave karma and rebirth as open questions and get about the business of being kind and keep turning the mind back to the four noble truths when you have some sort of question or conflict.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2013 13:36
|
|
|
WAFFLEHOUND posted:This is a really important thing. I've never heard of a tradition that was okay with people just coming in and blindly believing everything from day one. Buddha encouraged people to probe his findings for themselves, but at the same time there's an understanding in Buddhism that you'll come to the same view the Buddha held. If you don't, that's fine, maybe next life. Rev. Kusala of Urban Dharma puts it pretty well when he says you're better off karmically trying to be a good person in your own way in succeeding than trying to be a Buddhist and doing a bad job of it. I personally take the view that you shouldn't take Refuge until you can at least see the four noble truths, which include the impermanence of death. Without refuge you're not a Buddhist, so that's where I'm coming from on that angle. Yeah, I'm totally on board with this actually. And I would hope that the folks giving the refuge vow would only be giving it to people who have shown some understanding of the concepts and, at the very least, an open mind about them if not some indication that they're heading down the path to a deeper understanding. That said getting people "in the door" and learning the dharma is also a really important thing and also how people wear their labels is a malleable thing too. I think taking refuge formalizes it for some people (and in the eyes of other people) but its totally possible to have a person who believes this stuff (I'm being hesitant in calling them a "good Buddhist") and hasn't taken refuge. Of course maybe that wouldn't care about the label anyway  WAFFLEHOUND posted:I'm assuming I'm one of the people you said was being poisonous with this in the old threads, so I want to address this right here: I entirely, 100% agree with you. On the part I said above about people being able to go to the Sangha if they don't believe things, I'm not talking about people who think like this. It's perfectly reasonable from the perspective of Dharma not to accept everything right away. Maybe you'll never come to accept things. The important thing is to keep your mind open to the Dharma, not to say "This is wrong. Buddha was wrong when he said this" or worse, "Buddha wasn't speaking to those poor ignorant orientals, he was speaking to me, the monolingual white guy convert whose atheist mind is better capable of understanding the Dharma than those poor eastern ignorants who are stuck in their silly superstitious ways". Uncertainty is absolutely acceptable and healthy, but if you are certain that Buddha was wrong, or if you are willing to ignore all existing understanding of Buddha's teachings in favour of a view founded in Orientalism and Imperialism then you probably shouldn't feel that you should intrude on the religious settings of others. That is totally reasonable and I get that. I don't remember if you were one of the ones back in those old threads, to be honest, but I remember the whole conversation took a tone that made me run screaming even though I have an open mind about this stuff. You have been doing this long enough to know that there's a process to the path. People who come to this thread are looking for pointers and guidance on specific tenets. That's great because there are some amazing practitioners in here with a wealth of experience and reach across many different schools (theravadan, tibetan, shambhala, zen, etc). I think answers that guide and mentor tend to pull people into the conversation much quicker. I think the inclusive, patient nature of the thread so far has really yielded not only some good answers but some really good questions! WAFFLEHOUND posted:I think you're misrepresenting the argument a bit. If you believe Buddha was onto something, then you need to be willing to examine what he said. If you feel he was wrong, keep the practice that works for you, but shed the label. If you never come to an understanding, but don't believe he was wrong, then that's different. That makes sense to me and I'd agree with that. That said, if a Buddhist provides me with a really good argument for why they believe that karma or rebirth aren't an actual thing (as much as anything can be ) or that's not what the Buddha said and gives me good reasons to believe him/her (differences in translation, theory around the state of the world during that time that led to why certain suttas were written etc) then I'm just as OK with exploring that as a viable thing. I like the string theory analogy because its possible at some point that some mathematician presents a theory stating that it was decidedly false. As the Dalai Lama said, "If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change." I think he's probably a "good Buddhist" and probably believes very much in karma and rebirth but his open mind serves as a great example for this type of discussion.  My teacher always says, however, that "many brilliant minds have studied this for 2500 years and none of them disagree on the fundamental principles of the mechanisms of karma and rebirth." I don't know how totally accurate that is but its certainly food for thought.You reply didn't come across as dickish at all. It was all really good stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2013 20:57
|
|
|
Rurik posted:Heh, I've teetered on the verge of that slope too many times. I've just been too compassionate to slide down it. Could you point me some reading about this Joyful Heart of Sadness? Googling it brought up nothing. I'm very interested in hearing about it, since nowhere have I been able to read about this particular cause for my suffering. Trüngpa talks about it in chapter three of Shambhala: Sacred Path of the Warrior. There's a lot of stuff about what you're talking about in there actually.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2013 01:56
|
|
|
Rhymenoceros posted:To debate, to argue, isn't it really a futile battle against our own perceptions? You're never going to change someone's mind unless the person you are trying to change respects and trusts you anyway. So isn't it better to always use our speech as a tool to train ourselves to be more compassionate, to be more kind, especially towards people who we think are saying 'the wrong things'? Well put.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2013 14:57
|
|
|
I recently started reading this book which goes *very* in depth about the Tibetan scholastic and monastic traditions, how they work, where they originated from and centrally focused on the role of debate. The writer was a Westerner who moved to Tibet to join a monastery and knew the Dalai Lama. It's an interesting book, if not a little dry: The Sound of Two Hands Clapping: The Education of a Tibetan Buddhist Monk. It's worth a look if you're really interested in this stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2013 20:55
|
|
|
I had a lot of trouble reconciling the same things when I first started down this path. Coming from a Christian religious upbringing, there's an overriding sense that you need to believe it all to not be an imposter, yet it was clear to me most of what was being taught didn't ring true. With Buddhism, I couldn't put my finger on why it didn't ring true to me but two things happened. 1.) I started thinking that what I was imputing on this whole rebirth/karma thing was just my closed take on things, boxed in by my anti-belief and natural skepticism. 2.) My teacher said to not worry about it. Just keep meditating and reading. He said, for the things that I didn't "buy", just set them aside and keep practicing and reading. It was (and is) a long slow processes but his karma class and his lojong class certainly challenged pretty much everything I turned out I actually did believe (out of habit). This whole process of dharma seems like the boiled frog approach to me. Just take your time with it and really try, if faced with something you just can't reconcile with what you know to be true, to loosen your hold on what you know and just test the waters with some of these teachings over months and years. Reality isn't as solid as we think it is and science can't give us the safe comfort of certainty we're looking for either, even though it presents itself as if it can. Also, I brought up threads like this one and he said stop reading threads on the internet.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2013 14:22
|
|
|
Rhymenoceros posted:You don't have to either believe or not believe. It's not like rebirth and neuroscience are like two pair of pants, and you have to choose which one to put on. The best you can do is to always be willing to adapt your understanding when you get new information. You said what I said, only better.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2013 14:36
|
|
|
Rhymenoceros posted:I'd say karma is like ingredients and free will is like a chef. Even the worst ingredients can be made into a tasty meal by a skillful chef. This Is how I understand it. In relative reality, karma comes to fruition and our reaction to it is what goes forward generating new karma. It's completely a compatible idea with free will. I've heard it explained similarly (via Trungpa?) that karma is a chessboard and it is up to us to move the next piece. We can't really affect past karma (sure we can apply antidotes etc but leaving that aside..) but how we react to each moment is what is important right now because that is what is generating karma. Regarding ObamaCaresHugSquad's comment about anti-depression drugs -- they often are prescribed to correct a real chemical imbalance in the brain. No amount of meditation is going to help that and maybe seeking help to get that medication was the most skillful thing they could do. he1ixx fucked around with this message at 14:39 on Dec 13, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2013 14:36
|
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:Ok I will agree to disagree at exactly this point. I do not see "clinical depression" as a bogeyman above all bogeymen, in the grand scheme of things. I don't therefore think the same thing about exhibitions of symptoms all possible kinds of mental distress. Thanks, doctor. I'm with Ruddha on this one. I was going to say that you telling folks they aren't meditating hard enough after they've been prescribed meds for their physical condition was stupid and dangerous but I deleted it to be more kind and gentle but since you keep pushing these angles, I need to say it. People have been committing suicide since recorded history. Saying folks were "just fine" in the past and that clinical depression is no big deal is maybe the dumbest, most irresponsible thing said in this thread and we've seen some doozies lately. Depressed people reading this thread: please meditate, but also get help if you feel you need it. Taking medication to help a condition isn't a failing. Talk to a trained professional instead of listening to a misguided college student who has the audacity to tell you that your clinically diagnosed condition is the result of society, good marketing and a bad grasp of shunyata. OCHS, you've chased at least 1 person I know of away from this thread. Seems like you're trying for more? For all of our sakes, stop posting.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2013 18:46
|
|
|
PrinceRandom posted:I hear some people call him a Secular Buddhist and it doesn't quite seem that way to me. I've heard him talk on rebirth and such and he seems much more agnostic than Batchelors making a name off of outright rejecting the teachings. Brad definitely is not a secular buddhist. His latest book makes me think he swings too far the other way, saying that Buddhists have been talking about God all along. Overall, I like the guy. He seems earnest and has some decent views on this stuff (I like the videos he did here: http://www.dogensanghalosangeles.org/dsla/video.html) but this whole God thing he's talking about is pushing the boundaries in a very misleading way. I'm at the point where I think he's just being inscrutable to shake things up.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
This thread sometimes can be a great way to chase off people who are interested in Buddhism. Good job, guys. Wafflehound, I can understand your premise that a person shouldn't call themselves a "Buddhist" without buying into a certain set of beliefs but man, you go about it so ham-fisted and awful, I can't think of a worse spokesperson for the faith itself. For a religion based on compassion and wisdom, and self-defining yourself as one of the "True Buddhists" in the thread, your responses to people who disagree with you often lack both of those things. The last time we had one of these little "You're not a proper Buddhist, you heathen scum" blow-ups, I stopped reading the thread for months because it seemed so completely counter to what I have seen Buddhism be with people who are truly compassionate, open, accepting and willing to help people understand. Do you really think your approach is a good way to teach people the dharma? It already chased my wife away (who was born into a Buddhist family) because she can't stand the vitriol (in a Buddhist thread no less!). The refrain of "Look you just don't get it. You make things bad for me personally in a very indirect way." is just as intolerant of those Buddhist groups you want to fit into (which sound poisonous and awful if you ask me). I can't imagine going up to Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche (if he were still alive...) and saying "I am not sure I buy this 'rebirth' thing." and having him give anything approaching your reaction let alone showing me the door. I'll be honest, I came to Buddhism very skeptical of rebirth, karma, etc. but kept an open mind because of a good, patient and knowledgable teacher. I went to many classes about these topics and now have a much less skeptical view of them. His response to my criticism and my attempts to redefine those topics to suit my worldview at the time was "well, this is critical to understanding Buddhism but just leave it as an open question and keep practicing and learning as much as you can and it will make sense as your practice deepens." was almost verbatim what Paramemetic was saying. You really need to work on how you express your dogma, dude (I'm no exception. We all need to improve, obviously) If that's too difficult, I'll just unbookmark it and move on. This thread is so aggro and unwelcoming sometimes. It's depressing because it should be the opposite of that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
Thanks for the well-reasoned response, Waffles. I agree with the differences in how people tend to define compassion in the Buddhist vs non-Buddhist context. Having someone spout shite in a thread (obamacareshugsquad) is something that needs to be dealt with directly but there are ways to do it that don't end up blunting the truth of the criticism. That's part of what I was trying to say.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
I bought the Ingram book back when it cost cash money after hearing good things and I was seriously disappointed by him, his approach, his writing,... everything. It seemed like the exact opposite of what I was hearing by the teachers I was learning from with regards to meditation and Buddhism in general. Ingram's whole approach smacks of a "level-up to LEVEL FOUR on the attainment ladder on the road to mastering enlightenment blah blah" was a dishearteningly blank, empty approach. I read the comments he makes in the book, his blog, on podcasts, in talks and on forums regarding the fact that "no one talks about being enlightened when they're enlightened but I will because that's bullshit" and I can't see how it is anything other than the the biggest red flag in Buddhism. I think its far more likely that he's completely deluded and he's not really enlightened. Yet the people at the Buddhist Geeks conference lap this poo poo up. What an iconoclast! The Internet and mind technology wins! I have no doubt he's done *something* with his mind. It sounds like he is convincing himself that his method is matching up with this jhana and that whatever and therefore he's got the map. It all smacks of grasping in the most Buddhism 101 way I can't even see why people are giving this guy the time of day. I'm glad this thread is giving this bozo a rough ride. I'm with Ugrok. He's the one making sense.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
WAFFLEHOUND posted:The real question is has Ingram reached the attainment of a Level 5 Laser Lotus yet or not? Is that before or after you beat the boss?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Holy poo poo. Please go away. Waffle and I have have some slight differences in the past but wow I'm glad he's around when idiots like you come around. Go. The. gently caress. Away. Your argumentative posts do far more harm than good in a thread like this. You've said some of the most harmful, ignorant, arrogant posts I've ever read on SA. I wish you has stayed banned. Sorry. You're just not helping anyone with bullshit like this.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2014 03:52
|
|
|
Brad Warner posted an interesting article on his blog recently that ties in with the whole "attainment" culture surround meditation and enlightenment (which I describe often as the "Daniel Ingram bullshit"). bradwarner posted:This is why the Heart Sutra says that there is nothing to attain. It’s not a joke. It’s not a metaphor. There is nothing to attain. Good stuff. http://hardcorezen.info/attaining-enlightenment/2605
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
The-Mole posted:Supposedly Rinzai was fond of saying that he couldn't find even one single un-enlightened person. Dogen was fond of saying that Rinzai was correct in that, but that one also can't find even one enlightened person. Dogen was great.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
ashgromnies posted:Has anyone read much of Brad's stuff? Hardcore Zen is great and I like a lot of what he writes on his blog. I feel that he is one of the strongest advocates for modern Buddhism in the West. He has a good sense of humor, and a good sense of what's important. I've read all of Brad's books (except for his last one about the idea of God). I like his writing a lot. He's moving to Philly so maybe I'll get a chance to say hi. He's an interesting guy with some interesting views on all of this. I also read "Confessions..." by Batchelor early on in my study of Buddhism when many of the concepts like rebirth and karma chafed my angry-at-christianity-dogma "self" (I've relaxed on that stuff obviously) I think the idea of collecting attainments like they were something that goes on a shelf is pretty wacky and viewing the whole thing as a competitive focus almost is pretty much the opposite of what I understand Buddhism to be about. I think that's the important part of having a real life teacher you can talk to about this stuff. You come to them and you're "hey I had this thing where I dissolved and blah blah" and the teacher says, "That's nice. So anyway..." so you don't get carried away trying to chase that experience again and again or get a big head because you did something that the Buddha supposedly wrote about in the Pali canon. It's a very good way to stay centered. I think Brad actually mentioned (as have others) that the day after you have an experience while meditating, you still get up in the morning and have to live in the world. It changes things but then again, it really doesn't.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
Popcornicus posted:Brad's article states that awakening is like any other skill, in that awakening disappears if you don't continue to practice. This directly contradicts every extant form of Buddhism I'm aware of. It seems insane that he could make that argument without realizing that's at odds with what 'awakening' has meant throughout history. I guess it's possible he isn't aware of that background, which is scary. Then there's his claim in the non-duality interview that Eckhart Tolle could be a pratyekabuddha. A pratyekabuddha is a special type of self-awakened being that can only appear in the world when a Buddha's teaching isn't currently available. This is Buddhism 101. I've read a lot of books about zen buddhism and none really touch on any of the stuff you're taking as Buddhist dogma so its not really a surprise that he wouldn't be an expert on it. Popcornicus posted:I'm speechless. So...Brad Warner actually knows next to nothing about Buddhism. It's likely that the Buddha himself came up with the 10-fetter model, the earliest known map of what happens when you practice a lot of Buddhist meditation. These are things I would expect a big-name Buddhist teacher to at least be aware of, even if they disagree with them. This is wacky stuff. I think he knows maybe next to nothing about Theravadan Buddhist canon maybe. Zen buddhism doesn't touch on the same models and maps that the Theravada seems pretty obsessed with defining. I don't recall coming up against the 10-fetter model in my Tibetan buddhist reading either. I think its more revealing that a "big-name" Buddhist teacher can do just fine in communicating the ideas of Buddhist thought to people without knowing anything about it. Popcornicus posted:I agree with the criticisms of hardcore dharma and proclaiming attainments publicly (meaning outside a community of meditators) in this thread and elsewhere, but Brad Warner happens to be arguing the opposite approach (attainments don't exist) from a position of astounding ignorance. I think we need to be careful with how we are talking here. It isn't "taken as a given" that these four attainments are even a thing in some branches of Buddhist thought. Because this stuff isn't fitting what you're choosing to define as Buddhist canon doesn't make it so. Your terms like "attainments", "do exist", "practical knowledge" and "serious meditators" are all things that will generally chafe with it comes to Zen Buddhism because they define boxes around things that are undefinable, unprovable and subjective. And how do you *know* they don't go away if you stop practicing? What "self" do they stick with? What if you stop practicing Buddhism? Do you still keep the anagami badge you earned when you were practicing and pick up where you left off if you pick up meditating 50 years later? You seem pretty sure about how this whole "path to enlightenment" thing works but from where from where I'm standing, all of this stuff is pretty amorphous. Interesting nonetheless.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 13:26
|
|
|
ThePriceJustWentUp posted:I want to side with everything Popcornicus is saying. Enlightenment is the dissolution of the whole structure. It does not come back. It is not a skill to be practiced, but the delusion to be eradicated. And Buddhism and so-called "harsh speech" are not at odds. When you're saying something concrete and important, I think it is important to say it strongly. Anyone who is put off by that is looking for milquetoast Buddhism, and milquetoast life, if I can use the expression in that way. You've gotta swing for the fences sometimes. However harshness for the sake of harshness is never really helpful. I hope its not too harsh for me to speak this way but a lot of the stuff you say makes no sense -- neither from a Buddhist perspective or from a human one. There are specific mentions against "harsh speech" in Buddhist texts and someone who is such an "expert" should know that. But a lot of your recent posts are really wacky lately. Hope you're doing ok, buddy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
ThePriceJustWentUp posted:All I can say then is that if you really think that about what I've written, you are in for one big surprise after another. Just trying to prepare you all for them in whatever way I can. Wafflehound hit the nail on the head. You seem to think that Buddhism is something that you use to get to a point where you can do whatever you want and say whatever you want because once you really KNOW you don't need the dharma or the "rules". This "go the distance"/"never go back" stuff sounds like complete and utter nonsense and I'm genuinely worried about you. It sounds like the writings of someone who's had some sort of mental break and is reinforcing how they feel by saying they've reached the "other side". I was serious about saying I hope you're ok and that all of this bullshit feels like a forum persona you're trying to propagate. That'd be nice. if you were really on the other side of something profound like liberation, I doubt you'd spend so much time defending your ego by posting here because the stuff you're typing isn't helping anyone. Thanks for not posting and good luck in the future. Get better.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
I listen to Gil Fronsdal's dharma talks sometimes. There's a podcast or you can listen here: http://www.audiodharma.org Surprisingly the Tricycle magazine podcast has had some interesting guests as well.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2014 12:42
|
|
|
Leon Sumbitches posted:I always appreciate reading this thread, but things tend to take a turn towards being incomprehensible and confrontational when TPJWA pops up. I noticed that. I really wish he'd stop posting here. I've never read posts from a more confrontational, egotistical blowhard on a forum like this but maybe I don't get around much. Paramemetic took time to try to decipher his patience-taxing, obtuse garbage only to have different garbage thrown back. At this point, I think its best if we just ignore every post or question from him, not because he challenges the things laid out to help him understand this stuff but because he ignores the actual responses given to him and seems more intent on winning some argument only he is having. Paramemetic, your posts in the last few pages have been some of the most cogent and well-written posts on the subject of mindstream, karma, consciousness, etc. I appreciate adding perspectives to this stuff. sorry that you wasted so much time on TPJWU. Also Rhymenoceros posted:So in the same way with karma, the Buddha is saying "these actions lead to suffering, these actions lead to happiness". He's just describing the rules by which the mental phenomenons of pleasure and pain behave. There is no concept of reward or punishment here; if you jump from a tall building, gravity is not punishing you by accelerating you against the pavement, it's just what gravity does.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2014 13:00
|
|
|
ThePriceJustWentUp posted:You are all looking to extract pleasure out of Buddhism but all it has for you is ways to acknowledge your existing pain. I think you're projecting. I have "followed" you since you started posting, I just think you're wrong about almost everything you put into words, you project your own confusion on things and then label it logic and you derail otherwise interesting discussions. Your "exploration" isn't meant to grow understanding, it's there to mislead people back to your own twisted view of the dharma and I seriously wish you'd stop. Your basic views are "I get it, you don't and this Buddha guy wrote stuff that none of you seem to be understanding. Also all Buddhist teachers in the last 2500 years got it wrong too. Let me set you straight, Buddhist noobies". Dude, we "get" you. We just wish you'd stop posting. When people call your drivel "word salad" they're being nice. I'm being honest with you. Read some books, take a class. Actually *read* what people are trying to tell you here on this board. Anything really. Just stop posting here. Please.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
ThePriceJustWentUp posted:See the problem is we are all on an internet forum and so we all have an equal voice. But in person the difference in conviction between me and many of you would be clear. At times at least. Oftentimes recently I feel "toothless" but that's a phase of some kind. What? You know nothing about me but you think I (and about 40 other people) lack conviction? Hell, I don't even know what that means in this context. 
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
ThePriceJustWentUp posted:Man, you're making me miss Wafflehound. Not that he did it any better, you guys are about equal in your I'm not "viscerally" frustrated (more word salad -- what does that even mean?). Again, you're conflating how I you think I feel about you with what you're actually doing in real life. I'm mildly frustrated that you took a decent discussion on mindstream, emptiness and karma and turned it into more discussion about you, how we don't "get what you're saying", how nobody is Buddhist but you, etc. I won't poo poo up this thread with more stuff about how bad you are at the internet and just ignore you from now on. I've been pretty frank with you in the past but you seem to thrive on attention -- good or bad -- so responding just encourages you to post more. Sorry to everyone else who is reading this.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
ThePriceJustWentUp posted:
How did what I just say not come from logic? I am frustrated with your lovely posts -- that is both logical and reasonable, not visceral. If I was the only one saying this in response to your drivel, then maybe you'd be right. Anyway, enjoy spewing your idiocy into the void. You're on ignore from here on out .
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 1, 2024 07:36 |
|
|
This is a bummer -- I've ignored him and I still see TPJWU's word garbage. Is that a good word for it? "Emptiness posing"? "Superiority complex"? ThePriceJustWentUp's bullshit is bad "advice" as usual, however. Telling someone who is getting into Buddhism, concerned with personal issues, and navigating some pretty serious issues with their spouse that everything is useless except the Heart Sutra is idiotic at best. Irresponsible at worst (but he has made it standard practice to say irresponsible stuff in this thread). Starting to read about Buddhism and wanting to be happier is "self improvement". Getting yourself into a better state to be able to practice is "self improvement". Not that bullshit Oprah self improvement but real self improvement. Some people need to "believe" something to even start on the path because we're so conditioned to take everything with a pound of salt. Hell, Buddhist texts talk about "belief" and "faith" all the time. TPJWU, please just shut the gently caress up already. You're really really not helping. De Nomolos, here's my take: - Doing this whole thing on your own, without having a spouse who is even slightly interested, with be pretty tough. The first year of reading, meditation and classes changed how I thought about everything. And I do mean everything. My wife was raised Buddhist since she was born so I was lucky in that respect but re-evaluating everything with an uninterested spouse is bound to cause a little friction. If she's supportive, you're probably in OK shape but if she doesn't understand what you're doing, why you're doing it or wondering why there are stacks of books on emptiness sitting around, it could lead to some friction. If she sees that you're feeling happier and interested in something profound, she may get interested enough to start meditating with you. That's a good start. - My wife, as I said above, has been Buddhist since she was born. She's one of the happiest, least dramatic people I've ever known. Her mom is super cool too. - We found our group by pure luck so avoid the cult-y groups, keep reading, and take another look around in 6 months or so. Hopefully you'll find one. If not, widen your search area. We've driven 3 hours away to take a weekend course and I'm sure others travel much farther. Good luck.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2014 18:30
|
|