|
Fuligin posted:Is there a specific translation of the Dhammapada that anyone would like to recommend? I've seen this translation get a lot of praise. It also comes with a good introduction by Bhikkhu Bodhi, which lends it a bit of weight as well.
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 03:22 |
|
|
People who say they are Christian and Buddhist are usually either misunderstanding fundamental parts of either faith, or are simply choosing to ignore the parts of Buddhism that they don't like (rebirth and kamma, anatta, etc), while focusing on the more pleasing aspects like the paramis and the bramaviharas that are more compatible with theistic traditions.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2013 19:24
|
|
|
PiratePing posted:While I agree that picking and choosing which parts of Bhuddism you like defeats the purpose (how do you even do Buddhist practice while ignoring anatta), how essential is believing in rebirth? I was raised with the idea "It's there, but just forget about it because you're living this life now" and now that I'm leaning more towards non-belief I still feel like the issue is neither here nor there. Believing in it because that would make me a Good Buddhist without really understanding it to be true just makes it feel like a convenient idea to cling to so I let it be for now, maybe it's something I will come to understand later in life. I'm not rejecting it but I also can't find a way to accept it with integrity. I think taking a wait and see attitude is probably fine. I know this debate comes up often, and it doesn't ever seem to resolve anything or change anyone's views. The Buddha clearly teaches rebirth as a fairly integral part of the path, and does so often enough that I think it is important to at least consider as you progress. That article by Gil Frondsal is kind of weak in my opinion. I have a lot of respect for Gil as a teacher, but saying "rebirth isn't present as much in the Sutta Nipata, therefore it isn't probably important" is a bit shortsighted, as it basically ignores the rest of the Pali Canon, which is massive. I do think however, that practicing with an open mind about rebirth is much better than taking an all-or-nothing approach, and abandoning the Dhamma because you can't accept the whole package all at once. People Stew fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Aug 2, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2013 17:27
|
|
|
he1ixx posted:This thread can be so drat good sometimes. Nice job on those last few posts, people. This thread is an inspiring example of cross-tradition dialogue and I'm glad you are all keeping it alive. This situation very often turns to doctrinal bickering and I'm glad to see very little of that. Also, am I the only Theravada practitioner here? I mainly attend a Thai Forest Tradition center that is a kind of branch center of the Ajahn Chah/Ajahn Sumedho lineage. Although my practice has fallen off lately as I struggle with some issues that are keeping me mentally clouded.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2013 08:08
|
|
|
I'l think about putting something together when I get home from work. On skimming what you wrote, I think you did a pretty thorough job though.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2013 22:10
|
|
|
Bhikkhu Bodhi has a pretty good piece on rebirth and kamma and their relationship toward each other. It is a bit short of sutta references but I think it does a good job of laying down the way that rebirth and kamma fit into the teachings. For those of you not familiar with this monk, he is a very well-respected and accomplished translator of the Pali texts, and the author of one of the best introductions to the Buddha's teaching that is currently available (in my opinion). It is more tailored to those who want an academic approach to the teachings, with lots of footnotes, references to the commentarial literature, and historical references. And a great foreward by the Dalai Lama!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
Ajahn Sucitto posted:‘Bad’ & ‘good’ (or unskilful/unwholesome/‘dark’ and skilful/wholesome/‘bright’ in Buddhist terms) are consequently not just value-judgements imposed by a society. They are references to energies that are Ajahn Sucitto has a book called Kamma and the end of Kamma that is a good read if anyone is interested in getting their hands dirty on this topic in a way that is fairly easy to understand. It is Theravadin (he comes from the Thai Forest Tradition), and I can't speak of its relevance to other schools, but I found it a good read. The group that I sometimes sit with has a Dhamma study group that meets once a week to discuss various books or suttas, and this book was their focus for several months. As far as source books for the OP, I am a huge fan of Bhikkhu Bodhi, both for his Pali translations and his educational efforts in general. He has a Youtube channel (BAUS Chuang Yen Monastery) with hundreds of videos of him teaching and going over suttas from the Majjhima Nikaya, so you can basically follow along with the text and have the middle length discourses taught to you by one of the most well respected scholar monks of our era. Specific books I'd recommend to people interested in Theravada: What the Buddha Taught - Walpola Rahula - this has been mentioned in the thread a few times I think. It can be found for free online if you look around. In The Buddha's Words - Bhikkhu Bodhi. I think this is the best possible introduction to the Dhamma if you are interested in studying the original Pali texts as we know them today. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha - Nanamoli/Bodhi Also, Eight Mindful Steps to Happiness and Mindfulness In Plain English by Bhante Gunaratana. This version of the Dhammapada, which was translated from the Pali by Acharya Buddharakkhita, and has a very good introduction by Bhikkhu Bodi These books, especially Mindfulness in Plain English, are applicable across traditions I think, but happen to be written by Theravadin monks, so they won't draw from any suttas or interpretations that fall outside the Pali canon. Also, Access to Insight has some great Study Guides which are perfect for those of you who want to focus on a specific topic or facet of the Buddha's teaching. They are put together by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, another monk who is very well regarded for his Pali translations. I'm sure I am missing some but these could be helpful in the OP.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
Blue Star posted:I'm just wondering whether or not complete egolessness can be experienced through meditation. I'm intrigued by it. I understand emptiness and dependent origination intellectually but I don't feel them. This is a common thing I have heard and experienced myself. Reading the teachings, studying the sutras and getting your head around things intellectually is only going to take you so far. I think it was Ajahn Chah who compared it to reading a menu but never sitting down to eat, or planning a trip and studying maps, but never actually getting on the road. Meditation will start you in that direction. You'll start to see the arising and passing away of things, your tendency to cling to conditioned states, and all the tricks your mind constantly plays in order to keep you fooled. It was really intense at first but it is very valuable. I thought I was insane for a while. At some point in "mindfulness in plain English", the author says something like "after a few says of sitting in meditation and wrestling with your mind, you will realize you are totally insane." And he is totally right. But it passes.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
Gantolandon posted:After reading "Mindfulness in Plain English", I tried to meditate and realized it is harder than I thought it to be. This is very common and very frustrating at first. You'll find yourself distracted by aches, pains and sensations that arise while you try to watch the breath. The best thing to do is realize that these are temporary sensations, and simply note them, and then return to the breath. You may only manage to maintain attention on the breath for a few seconds before being distracted again by another sensation. And when this happens, you note the sensation, and then gently return attention to the breath. You will spend entire meditation sessions doing this, and while it may seem immensely frustrating, it is part of the training. You are training your mind to be able to maintain attention on a particular thing (your meditation object), without instantly darting to each sensation or thought that arises. Meditation is difficult. Be gentle with yourself and start with small sessions, increasing the length of meditation as you feel comfortable. Mindfulness in plain english is a great book and there is a section about dealing with difficult sensations as they arise. I refer back to that area often.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2013 21:50
|
|
|
I don't think it necessarily means sleep. I've experienced the feeling of my eyeballs rapidly shifting or trembling behind my eyelids even a few minutes into meditation while very much awake and alert. It can be very distracting. Like most sensations that arise during a sitting, the best thing to do is note the sensation, and then gently return your attention to your breath. Sometimes you'll spend your whole session going back and forth between the two objects which can be very frustrating, but it is part of the practice.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
Cambodia is mostly a Theravada country from what I understand. I don't know anything specific about the sangha there, but I highly doubt there are just allowances for intoxicants. Is your friend actually cambodian? Because there may be some cultural things that are attached to Cambodian Buddhism that allow this kind of thing. The 5 precepts are pretty standard across all traditions. You'll see Buddhists who smoke, as it isn't really specifically prohibited as far as I know. It is obviously an attachment and a destructive practice, but we all have those. You'll see monks smoking and using money in Thailand, watching sports, eating after noon, sometimes drinking fermented beverages, etc - all things that are prohibited in some form either by the precepts or the Vinaya. People have different levels of adherence when it comes to that kind of thing. As far as the candles go, I haven't heard of that. Again, it might be a cultural practice that has been brought into Buddhist practice. This is a really common thing in southeast asia. There are all kinds of things in Thai Buddhism that are done by monks (making amulets, predicting lottery numbers) that are seen as very much part of the religion, but are actually explicitly forbidden by the Vinaya (monastic code).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2013 17:57
|
|
|
Consciousness or mind (viññāṇa) is just "that which knows", or "that which discerns". It is not to be identified as one's self, or me, or mine in any way, as identifying with the skandas is what leads to suffering. They are often called "the 5 aggregates of clinging" in Theravadin texts.The Buddha posted:"Consciousness that arises in dependence on the body & tactile sensations is classified simply as body-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the intellect & ideas is classified simply as intellect-consciousness. The Buddha posted:"And why do you call it 'consciousness'? Because it cognizes, thus it is called consciousness. What does it cognize? It cognizes what is sour, bitter, pungent, sweet, alkaline, non-alkaline, salty, & unsalty. Because it cognizes, it is called consciousness. Access to Insight has a study guide on the skandhas/khandas that has a lot of helpful sutta references. The way it is phrased in the original texts can be kind of tedious to read through but it is always helpful to go to the source, in my opinion.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
Razage posted:This was enlightening so thank you! Strange sensations are very common during meditation, especially in the beginning. You may experience odd sensations, like the feeling that your body is slowly expanding or contracting, or that your head seems very large. You will often see light patterns behind your eyelids that take on strange shapes. Your body may also feel hot or cold at times. You will find your mind dredging up old memories you hadn't thought of in years or decades - things from your childhood that you'd forgotten, conversations you wish you had approached differently. These are all attempts by the mind to return your attention to the endless train of discursive thought that normally progresses during your waking hours. Attention might not be the right word here, since we often don't pay attention to discursive thought, but your mind wants freedom to do this without consequence. Sometimes, like in your example, they only last a few seconds, and might seem almost like hallucinations. This is common and happened to me quite a bit. I'd have some sort of strange thing happen in my mind, and then find myself snapping out of it and thinking "wow, what was that all about?". It was almost like a very brief psychedelic drug experience for a few seconds. In those cases, just note what happened and return to the breath or whatever object you are using. The experiences aren't worth dwelling over, as interesting or strange as they might seem. There is a section in "mindfulness in plain english" that talks about this, and how to deal with these things as they come up. They are common, and may be a byproduct of your mind protesting against having its normal activities disrupted. You'll find your mind playing all kinds of tricks to distract you from keeping your attention on the breath. It is like a spoiled child that wants attention. You have to gently and repeatedly turn your attention away from the distractions, physical or mental, and return to your meditation object. I think it was Ajahn Chah who compared this to training a puppy to sit in your lap. At first the puppy will squirm and want to run and chase anything that catches its attention. You simply take the puppy back into your arms and set it where you want it. The puppy will again squirm away, and you place it back in your lap. Eventually, through repetition, the puppy will get the point and stop fighting you. Your mind will generally work in the same pattern. There is a sutta where the Buddha compares the training of the mind to taming a wild elephant but I can't find it right now and I'm too busy at work to dig through the Nikayas, but I'll see if I can quote it later. Just keep trying, be patient with yourself, and realize that meditation is very hard, and but also very rewarding once you develop a steady practice. People Stew fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Aug 27, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2013 20:02
|
|
|
Guided meditation is certainly worth checking out. There are plenty of guided meditation/dhamma talk mp3s available online. I like Ajahn Jayasaro personally - could be the accent, but it is calming. There are some days when I just can't keep my mind from chasing thoughts, so guided meditation is a good thing to have in your toolbox.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2013 23:49
|
|
|
It was most likely a partial file. There should be a few other guided sessions from that same monk. He is quite well known in the Thai Forest Tradition and I find his style really resonates with my temperament. Glad you found it helpful! If it works for you I would really recommend checking out some more talks on that site. All of the monks there are part of the Ajahn Chah lineage, which is what I practice in.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2013 05:16
|
|
|
Also, a 30 minute session for a beginner is great. It took me weeks to get to the point where I could have a comfortable sit of that length. You're doing very well.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2013 05:19
|
|
|
Razage posted:Well I was reading this thing: http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/karma.htm and it just seems a bit too weird, it also talks about superpowers and people literally flying (what?) I don't think I'm going to go that far but your explanation of Karma makes sense to me. There are accounts of people (including the Buddha) flying, teleporting into different dimensions to talk to gods and devas, reading minds, stopping charging elephants with a small hand gesture, and all kinds of other things in the suttas. They are usually attributed to high levels of meditative absorption (jhana). How seriously you take those things is, of course, up to you. As I recall, a lot of those stories come from the Digha Nikaya, which also contains a sutta in which the Buddha cautions against using these kinds of psychic powers to gauge a monk's attainments. As these things are not important to the goal of ridding ourselves of suffering, they are not terribly important. The link you posted about karma was written by a very well known and respected monastic, but it might be a bit overly technical. Ajahn Sucitto has a book called Kamma and the end of Kamma that deals with the topic at length. The Dhamma center that I attend was using this as their dhamma study text a few months ago. If you like listening to talks more than reading (like me), this talk by Bhikkhu Bodhi covers rebirth and kamma. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=le4vQ_5uKl8 People Stew fucked around with this message at 23:08 on Aug 28, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2013 23:04
|
|
|
Razage posted:Well, it's good to know that it was written by someone well respected. I don't think I can accept that people have or had super powers, documented or no, but I'll just keep that to myself as I don't want to upset people that might be trying to attain these things. Same if I encounter crystal healers when I check out Shambahla next week. A lot of Buddhists don't accept those kinds of things. They aren't very important in terms of the noble truths or the eightfold path, or your meditation practice. I don't give much thought to whether or not the Buddha actually spoke to Brahma on the eve of his enlightenment. I have my hands full remembering practice metta and keep the precepts. 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2013 23:36
|
|
|
It is different than reincarnation in that there is no distinct self or soul making the transition. This may seem minor but it is a crucial difference. All conditioned things are impermanent and without self, constantly in a state of flux, even the bundle of conditions that make the leap between bodies after death As for the exact mechanics, I don't have a good answer for that. I don't really ponder those things very often, to be honest, but I think it is a perfectly valid question. It is probably addressed in the commentarial literature but I don't recall ever reading the Buddha discussing it directly. In the sutras he usually confronts such questions with a "this is not important to the cessation of suffering" kind of answer, which can be frustrating but is also ultimately true. I'm on my phone right now but I'll take a look sometime this weekend as it is an interesting question.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2013 01:34
|
|
|
Cardiovorax posted:What tradition do these stories belong to? They kind of make it look like there are at least a few Buddhist groups who consider rebirth essentially the same as reincarnation. I'm on my phone but those look like the Jataka stories, which are part of the Pali canon. They detail the previous births of the Buddha. His realization of his previous lives is one of the three knowledges that came to him on the night of his enlightenment. I think this is constant across most traditions but I could be wrong. These recollections are not to be viewed in the same way as reincarnation is understood. They indicate the ability of a fully enlightened Buddha to discern the chain of events that led to the birth in which he could achieve complete enlightenment. People Stew fucked around with this message at 03:47 on Aug 30, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:
This is crucial. When metaphysical questions start to get technical and sidetrack us into losing sight of the core of the Dhamma, I find the simile of the arrow a good thing to refer to and reflect on. It is a short but very important sutta. quote:"It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a brahman, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short... until I know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored... until I know his home village, town, or city... until I know whether the bow with which I was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until I know whether the bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the feathers of the shaft with which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, or another bird... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.' The man would die and those things would still remain unknown to him. The Buddha generally deflected these kinds of questions away as unimportant and didn't make a lot of firm declarations of the sort. They do not lead to the cessation of suffering.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
Shnooks posted:Oh god D: we had someone ask us a similar question at my sangha meeting. She had an ant problem and wanted to know the most humane way to get rid of them. Of course that's probably easier than bed bugs. I had this exact same problem last summer! I spent a lot of time thinking about how to fix it aside from squashing a lot of insects. I eventually figured out what they were eating, moved it, and spent a long time hiding things they could eat, and they left. I may have gotten lucky, but it worked. They only exist in your house if there is food for them to eat, so investing in containers they can't penetrate is a good option. And wipe your counters down. They'll eat anything. edit: I just realized the original question was about bedbugs. I have no idea. That would be a problem. People Stew fucked around with this message at 00:59 on Sep 1, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
I'm on my phone again so I can't look up specific sutras, but the Buddha himself discusses meditation in the "4 positions": there is standing meditation, walking meditation, seated meditation, and meditation where you are laying down. All four are viable and productive. If you are experiencing back pain, sitting in a chair while meditating is completely fine. There are several people at my center who are older and sit entire 40 minute sessions on benches. Don't worry about how you are seated too much. I never sit full or half lotus. I sit Burmese style. As long as you are doing what you need with you mind, you are on the right track. And walking meditation is a great way to change things up. I strongly recommend looking into it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2013 04:18
|
|
|
As long as you aren't slouching or contorting yourself into a position that causes a lot of pain, you'll probably be ok meditating in whatever position is comfortable for you. For what it is worth, I have sat in meditation with several monks at our center, some of whom have been ordained in Thailand, Sri Lanka or elsewhere for decades, and I don't think I've ever seen them sit full lotus. Most of the people seem to sit Burmese style, which is what I also happen to find most comfortable. One thing I found helpful at first was to put some small supports under my knees to keep them slightly propped up. I would use washclothes, or even balled up socks to keep them supported. I don't need to do this anymore but it was a huge help during my first few sits.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:I'd be wary of this this particular thing just because the risk is injury to the hip and pelvis joints. This will address that somewhat but generally the knees should be lower than the hips when sitting in any of these positions. This is usually achieved with a small cushion or blanket or somesuch up underneath the butt so that you can sit with your knees lower than your pelvis, which will increase comfort and stability without introducing strain or weakness. I might not have explained it properly but the knees aren't level with the pelvis in this case. It just lessens the strain. It is basically an impromptu version of the cushion or mat that many people put under their meditation cushion. It gives a very small amount of elevated support to your knees in the event that they are hurting you by resting too far down on the floor. The goal is to relieve strain, not increase it. It is hard to explain without pictures perhaps. One of the monks mentioned it as a way to relieve strain and discomfort for new meditators and it really helped me out at first.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
comaerror posted:Even though I'm a total noob at meditation, I've noticed this exact same thing spilling over into my normal day. Like, "Oh, I was just mad about a thing. Welp, back to what I was doing" and so on. Ajahn Chah would often respond to situations in the same way, by saying "It's just like this." I find myself saying it to myself throughout my daily life quite a bit.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2013 01:16
|
|
|
Generally, coffee is not considered to be covered by the fifth precept. Not from what I've read anyway. I've seen monks drink tea with caffeine in it, and these are monks who are pretty strict on vinaya practices for the most part. It isn't generally considered an intoxicant in normal doses, although you could easily deal with addiction to the substance, which opens an entirely different can of worms. Talk about craving and clinging. A pretty literal translation of the fifth precept is "I undertake the training rule to abstain from fermented drink that causes heedlessness." (Surāmerayamajjapamādaṭṭhānā veramaṇī sikkhāpadaṃ samādiyāmi.) The word Surāmerayamajjapamādaṭṭhānā is usually used in conjunction with alcohol, but is now also used to refer to "intoxicants" of any kind which cause heedlessness. While you can make an argument that caffeine is an intoxicant, the key is whether or not the consumption leads to heedlessness, which is the real point of the precept. I don't see that happening generally, unless you were to drink a very unreasonable amount of caffeine. Of course, if the substance causes you to act in a way which is not helpful in the alleviation of suffering, you might want to edge it out of your daily habits. I used to drink a lot of coffee, and I would become very irritable without it. Plenty of dukkha involved, not just for myself. Bhikkhu Pesala, who was ordained under Mahasi Sayadaw, held this same view when it came up in an online discussion a while back about the details of the 5th precept. edit: pretty much exactly what Paramemetic said, except a little later. And I agree very much about the "stronger" stimulants. They can lead to very much heedlessness, both during use, and during acquisition. People Stew fucked around with this message at 22:26 on Sep 10, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
Mr Tastee posted:Reading the OP, it seems that being a good person by Buddhist standards is impossible short of committing suicide. Can you give some insight as to why you came to this conclusion? I am not really sure how you arrived at suicide as a result when one of the pillars of the Buddha's teaching is a very clear eightfold path that helps point us in the direction of alleviating suffering. From the point of view of a Buddhist (one who believes in rebirth anyway), suicide does nothing but hasten your progression toward the next round in the endless cycle of rebirth.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2013 19:46
|
|
|
Mr Tastee posted:Wow. Buddhism is a lot bleaker than I imagined. Nirvana is literally impossible. I don't really think there is anything bleak about Buddhism at all. What is bleak is our habitual attachment to things that arise and pass away, and our suffering when we treat impermanent things as though they are permanent. The Buddha had a remedy for this, and that is a good reason to be hopeful. If anything, I find Buddhism to be very optimistic. We can greatly alleviate the suffering we experience, and the suffering of others, by changing the way we see and interact with the world. A lot of people tend to focus on the concept of suffering, as though it was what the Buddha was teaching. He didn't. He led people toward the end of suffering. He also taught compassion toward all sentient beings, loving-kindness, empathetic joy, and equanimity. What's so bleak about that?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2013 22:00
|
|
|
Mr Tastee posted:You spend eternity trying again and again to attain Nirvana, but it never works. That just seems like a massive waste of time. Who says it never works? Certainly not the Buddha. If it was a waste of time or considered unattainable, he wouldn't have given a path for doing so. And even if you spend a lifetime working toward that goal, but end up not reaching it, it isn't as if the work you have put in is a waste. Not by any means. There is a good deal of the Buddha's teaching that focuses on how you reap the fruits of the path in this very life. There are immediate and tangible benefits, regardless of your progress. I've seen them myself, and I've seen them in others. Learning how to reduce the amount of suffering you experience is never a wasted effort.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
You guys are really great with these answers. I've spent enough time on cross-tradition Dhamma forums to know this kind of discourse is rare and special. Also, a path that places emphasis on loving kindness and compassion is antithetical to nihilism in my opinion. The Buddha argued against nihilism in a few suttas, specifically. I'm on my phone so I can't look them up specifically but they are on access to insight.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2013 22:43
|
|
|
There are sutras where the Buddha debates with the views of the annihilationists. If that differs from what you are referring to as nihilism that is my mistake. I'll try and find the specific suttas later tonight.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2013 23:44
|
|
|
Cardiovorax posted:That sounds kind of like the exact opposite of realism, though. Realism is all about the statement that things are, in fact, independently real in a tangible and permanent fashion, whatever the observer thinks about them or whether an observer is even there. Existential nihilism on the other hand basically holds the same opinion on meaning, stating that "meaning" is something that exists only in the way humans relate to things or ideas, not that it doesn't or can't exist at all. The nihilistic approach to meaning is basically like talking about heat and cold where heat doesn't exist - cold, or meaninglessness, only makes sense in a context where meaning is a tangible thing that you can lack. I wasn't able to find the specific sutta I was looking for. The Ananda Sutta has an account of the Buddha talking with Vacchagotta, who I think is referred to as an annihilationist in the commentaries somewhere. He usually serves as a figure who tries to pin the Buddha down on his stance toward what are referred to as "speculative views". Anyway, I was originally equating the view of annihilationism with nihilism, and they seem to apply to different things entirely. So this may not be relevant at all, but the Buddha's discourses with Vacchagotta make for some interesting reading, especially this one. The Buddha is confronted with a variety of views that he waves aside as speculative or unimportant to the path, or simply not applicable to one who has been freed from clinging. quote:"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?" The translation is a little clunky, in my opinion, but the point is there. Bhikkhu Bodhi's is probably an easier read but it isn't online as far as I know.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2013 13:14
|
|
|
Shnooks posted:I have the option to receive the Five Mindfulness Trainings (basically the Five Precepts) formally this weekend and I'm not sure if I should do it. I'm not familiar with the practice of "receiving" them, but they are often taken by lay practitioners on a somewhat regular basis. Normally in the Theravada tradition, the precepts are taken at the beginning of a meditation session of Dhamma talk or a retreat as part of the opening chanting that is often done. This is usually done after taking refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. They don't need to be administered or granted as some kind of sacrament or rite or initiation that is done by a monk or a Dhamma teacher, although some centers or traditions may do it this way. I don't think that is a bad thing, just different than what I have seen. Either way, they are helpful to reflect on, which is why they form a core part of the chanting that is done at many lay buddhist centers and monasteries. If you intent to start practicing in a serious way, taking refuge and taking the precepts is a good way to help center your practice, in my opinion.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2013 01:32
|
|
|
Shnooks posted:I guess I was hoping to do it up at the monastery some time soon versus in some person's house in Boston. Being at the monastery is such a spiritual experience for me. Totally understandable. I really enjoy chanting also. It puts me in a good space for meditation.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2013 03:33
|
|
|
Are there any sutta references for this idea that "everything is connected" or "we are all one"? I don't recall the Buddha ever stating this idea in the Pali Canon. I haven't read every sutta by any means, I just havent seen this view explicitly stated before, so I am just curious as to why it seems to come up so often during discussion of the Dhamma. As far as a view, specifically, it reminds me of something that would be brushed aside as a thicket of views, something that isn't necessarily relevant or important to the path. I can see how people would come to this conclusion after considering the idea of non-self, as there is no real ultimate distinction between selves. But this seems to just as easily lead toward the idea that "nothing is connected", rather than everything being connected. Is this idea of interconnectedness present in Mahayana Sutras? People Stew fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Sep 26, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
Third Murderer posted:
There are people who identify as Buddhist without believing in rebirth. I think the path can still be beneficial to you if you don't believe in rebirth. I also think it is also perfectly reasonable to start down the path and withhold judgement on the issue. There are plenty of ways to benefit from meditation and the moral aspects of the eightfold path without concerning yourself with the ideas of rebirth and kamma. I think the problem starts to develop when people attempt to twist or interpret the Dhamma in such as a way as to justify their lack of belief in rebirth. You'll see people start to make statements like "The Buddha didn't actually teach rebirth" or things like that, which are completely untrue. If you have an issue with the concept of rebirth (and if so, you'll find yourself in good company), don't let it keep you from starting your practice. You may find that the idea becomes less problematic as your progress continues, and you may find yourself coming out of a meditation session in a few years and finally starting to understand how it can actually make perfect sense. A few good reads on the topic that approach this idea from different perspectives: Dhamma without Rebirth The Truth of Rebirth And Why it Matters for Buddhist Practice People Stew fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Sep 26, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2013 19:58
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:The interconnectedness is a result of interdependent origination and emptiness as concepts. Everything is devoid of intrinsic nature, everything arises in relation to everything else. The concept of "I" is irrelevant because it is a matter of viewpoint, and the viewpoint is not intrinsic. Thus when I say "I" I conventionally refer to myself, but there is nothing "myself" to be distinct from, say, you. So it is possible to think "I" and mean "all sentient beings." There is nothing but an arbitrary distinction, no true disconnect aside from mental appellation, which is illusory. That all makes sense to me. I guess I always wondered at the concept because I see it stated so often and so emphatically, but never with any kind of sutta references. On the topic of Nagarjuna, I was actually thinking about writing a post for this thread regarding the role of sunyata/suññatā in Theravada. I haven't read anything by Nagarjuna but I'm interested in doing so if you have any recommendations for particular translations of his work. I realize his ideas are immensely important and the concept of emptiness in Buddhist thought is fascinating to me, especially as I see it having more emphasis than normal for Theravada in some of the writings and talks from the monks and teachers in the Thai Forest Tradition. So anything you can suggest in that area would be appreciated.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
ad infinitum posted:The Buddha is saying that there is a path for experiencing the heavenly realm, and it is through practicing the jhanas that one realizes this realm of only pleasant feelings, now, not in a future rebirth. The non-formless jhanas are often described as a greater pleasure than the greatest sense pleasure. So it's clear that this is a mind-realm that is being realized when practicing the jhanas. Jhanic attainments beyond the first four, mundane jhanas are directly linked to rebirth in what are called the "formless realms". These higher jhanas (arūpajhānas) are descriptive of mental states that can be attained in this life, but it is also stated that those with mastery of these particular jhanas are likely to be reborn into the corresponding formless realms, after death.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2013 20:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 03:22 |
|
|
Tubba Blubba posted:Not to poke the hornet's nest too much, but where would that leave someone such as me? In my opinion you do not need a localized sangha to take refuge, so I think you're just fine. But I would not let it worry you either way. There are plenty of monks who practice in complete seclusion for years or decades. I'd call them real Buddhists also. Solitary practice has a very real and direct presence in the Suttas. Of course they usually refer to people living in caves, but still. No local sangha. edit to clarify: The refuge in the Sangha does not specifically apply to your local sangha, or a group you sit with or associate with. Venerable Nyanaponika Thera posted:
From Nyanaponika Thera's The Threefold Refuge. Lots of detail and commentary about the Triple Gem. People Stew fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Oct 9, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2013 17:59
|
|