Ask us about Buddhism: This thread is Avici

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Ask us about Buddhism: This thread is Avici

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

What tradition is that academicism from? Theravada? I have only been to a Korean Zen temple and they are much more focused on matters of more practicality eg dhammapada.

Where are those things described? In which texts, I mean.

# ¿ May 11, 2013 15:08

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 12:05

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

I can't answer your questions but to add more context to the understanding of the current situation in Burma, a video of one of the monks inciting violence: http://m.guardiannews.com/world/video/2013/apr/16/burma-bin-laden-buddhist-monk-video

Unsurprisingly, he doesn't give a religious backing for it because I don't believe there really is one. He repeats dogma similar to what a white supremacist in the West would say: they are raping our women, stealing from us, etc. and we are defending ourselves.

ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 12:30 on May 13, 2013

# ¿ May 13, 2013 12:22

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Paramemetic posted:

Incidentally, this is also why Tibetans frequently hang prayer flags, and this is the impetus for one of my favorite things HE Garchen Rinpoche has done, which is to popularize and prepare for mass dissemination mantras of liberation by sight (the Mantra of Hanu) and liberation by touch, which he has advised some people to attach to their vehicles so that if they come into contact with insects while driving the mantra provides sufficient cause for rebirth in a higher realm.

I'm sorry, but what? This is confusing to me. I don't understand all the "rebirth in higher realms" and such... it almost seems to suggest a travelling soul which I thought was antithetical to the idea of rebirth. I always hear Western Buddhists suggest that "rebirth" differs from "reincarnation" in that it's not a literal transmigration of a "soul", rather just the energy and matter of the being continuing on. I am not a Buddhist, though.

# ¿ Jun 24, 2013 18:29

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Let's get weirder/more esoteric for fun. (I know, this has little practical importance to most practitioners but it's interesting!)

Anyone know much about Buddhist cosmology, the heavens, the devas, and such? The different realms and heavens seem really broad: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_cosmology -- what are good English translations/commentaries of the source sutras? It would be interesting to read, albeit strange and unfamiliar.

What about esoteric meditation practices like deity yoga? I was reading "Confession of a Buddhist Atheist" and he has a story about meditating "as" his half-animal deity self, and I am curious how a practice like that came to be practiced in Buddhism. What are the historical and theological sources of such practices? Specific sutras or whatever source material would be cool to see.

# ¿ Jun 25, 2013 00:15

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

I just found the Sigalovada Sutta and it's pretty cool. It's basically Buddha's advice on how to live a successful lay life: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.ksw0.html

What sutras do you guys enjoy?

an skeleton posted:

Is it possible to gain the benefits of meditation through just trying to be awake and mindful during every day activities?

There are other types of meditation than just sitting meditation. For example, you could be practicing mindfulness while washing the dishes. Don't be distractedly thinking about what you're going to do after you're done with them and how boring they are, instead feel the temperature of the water, the way the sponge rubs against the dishes, etc. and remain mindful. It can improve concentration and mindfulness and bring some of the benefits of meditation but seated meditation with nothing but yourself brings its own value.

ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 14:53 on Jul 10, 2013

# ¿ Jul 10, 2013 14:45

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

I got interested in Buddhist philosophy through mindfulness based stress reduction therapy. Specifically the book "The Mindful Way Through Depression". I would recommend most anything by Jon Kabat-Zinn for a more secular, self-help based take on meditative practice.

# ¿ Jul 14, 2013 21:34

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Rurik posted:

Hmm, so impermanence or imperfection is just as valid translation for dukkha as suffering? I remember how we were told in comparative religion class in high school how according to Buddhism "life is suffering". I wonder what kind of image would've been left to us students if dukkha were traditionally translated to something else. I remember thinking that Buddhism's view must be pretty grim.

Imperfection more so than impermanence I think. Impermanence is something else, "annica". Dukkha is more like inherent unsatisfactory nature of all things. Impermanence is that all phenomena are temporary.

My question: what's up with the bodhisattva vow? Is it a literal vow with specific words or just the concept of dedication to the liberation of all beings from suffering? Isn't a bodhisattva supposed to keep themselves from becoming enlightened in order to help others, giving the idea oh the Mahayana "great vehicle"? How does a bodhisattva keep themselves from reaching enlightenment?

ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Jul 25, 2013

# ¿ Jul 25, 2013 17:23

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Blue Star posted:

I apologize if this is a stupid question, so here goes: are Hinduism and Buddhism at all compatible? I know that Hindus believe in the atman and Brahman and Buddhists don't, but then again Daoists believe in the Dao and Shintos believe in kami, and yet there has been some synchronization between those religions and Buddhism. But Buddhism seems to contrast itself strongly with Hinduism, and a lot of stuff I read about Buddhism heavily emphasizes how the Hindu concepts of atman and Brahman are totally wrong.

Are there any traditions or sects or whatever who try to reconcile Hinduism with Buddhism? What about Buddhism and other religions or philosophies? Can you be both a Buddhist and a Christian or Jew or Muslim?

I don't know much about the intersection of Buddhism and Hinduism specifically but it's important to realize they're both "dharmic" religions(along with Jainism and maybe some other stuff). Buddhism was largely a reaction to Hinduism so for them to be compatible, in my eyes, means that they would have to be the same -- because they stake out claim over atman/anatman like you say.

As for Christianity, there are a lot of Christians who say they're Buddhist too but the perspective never made much sense to me and they've always come off mushy-minded and wishy-washy to me. How can you simultaneously believe in Heaven, Hell, the rebirth of Jesus Christ, and the existence of a God who is omniscient and omnipotent while believing there is no eternal "soul" or "self" to exist in the afterlife? It seems to me they're more willing to toss out Buddhist principles that don't mesh with their Christianity than to, say, toss out the idea of a God existing. But that's my personal prejudice showing

Dao means "the way" and it's actually pretty strongly compatible with Buddhism and doesn't make any strong claims that are difficult to reconcile. The Dao is like the river of change; it's actually in many ways a bit of an extrapolation of ideas that are already present in Buddhism. Existing, being present, and accepting -- those are the ways of the Dao and of Buddhism. In my understanding, at least.

ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 18:58 on Aug 1, 2013

# ¿ Aug 1, 2013 18:56

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Christianity also has a bit of judgmental punishment involved with the concept of "sin" -- rather than examining the karmic implications of action, the perspective is "these acts are an affront to God and you won't get into Heaven if you keep willfully sinning". As opposed to a karmic viewpoint where you might look at how the "sin" affects everything around it and what karmic impact it brings in the future, rather than projecting a specific impact onto it.

# ¿ Aug 1, 2013 20:28

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

my dad posted:

Not quite. The concept of "sin" is a lot more complicated than that, and different branches of Christianity have different views on that matter. Several other things you've implied in your post are only true in some of them. You might want to check out the Liturgical Christianity thread if you're interested in the details.

Yea I guess that's the other thing, Christians don't agree on anything, not even what the Bible says. So maybe you could be a Buddhist if you're a "Christian" who doesn't believe in God, Heaven, or Hell.

# ¿ Aug 1, 2013 21:17

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

To use an analogy, would it be fair to say that karma is like the rippling of a lake after tossing a rock in?

Fish, flotsam, and jetsam might get caught up and affected by the ripples, though they didn't cause it themselves. That's the way I try to view karma, though it may be wrong view: everything has an effect on its surroundings. Destructive action tends to breed more destructive responses. Positive action generally breeds more positive responses. Be mindful of the potential impact of your actions on both yourself and your surroundings.

# ¿ Aug 6, 2013 17:16

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

What's the etiquette of if you know somebody from the street and go to a Buddhist temple and see them as a monk there?

I know he has some Buddhist monk-name now, but I only know his street name. He pours out tea for everyone at the end of the dharma talks. Is it cool to be like, "Hey, ____, how are you?"

# ¿ Nov 16, 2013 00:06

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

I haven't practiced regularly in months, but I still get the urge to meditate. I follow through, sometimes. I've been feeling evasive lately -- evasive of responsibility, of emotion, of strong investment in anything.

Disconnectedness and avoidance are obviously not the right way. What about honest passion without attachment? That's how I'd like to feel. I know the feeling, I've had it before. I desire for that feeling to be with me in general. I suppose I have attachment to that ideal, but I think that's fine.

What would you say to someone who was feeling like me? Tentative is a way to describe it. I'm not engaging fully and mindfully with the universe right now -- like I'm at the edge of a pool dipping my toes in. Push me in. Engage me.

# ¿ Mar 21, 2014 00:48

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

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 also enjoyed the book "Confession of a Buddhist Atheist"... as a westerner born to an irreligious family, I have an ingrained cynicism regarding supernaturalism and magic, but have found refuge in Buddhist ways of practicing, thinking and existing. It's nice to hear perspectives from others who have a similar background and have dealt with similar insecurities -- concerns of cultural appropriation(ever have other westerners roll their eyes when you mention Buddhism? I blame the mushy-minded granola freaks for creating that perception), improper practice, etc.

Many Western Buddhist converts have different perspectives and beliefs than those who were raised Buddhist in primarily Buddhist societies. Sometimes it feels like the more secular western practitioners are thought to be cultural appropriators, orientalist fetishists, or empty-minded malcontents looking for a way to rebel. It's nice when people provide cogent counterexamples to defeat those misconceptions.

# ¿ Mar 26, 2014 17:20

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Brad Warner's perspective(Zen) is that Kensho is an initial awakening that must be furthered after initially being reached. Buddhahood or full enlightenment is different; he was referring to kensho rather than full enlightenment when he said that it needs to be cultivated afterwards.

# ¿ Mar 27, 2014 17:47

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Rhymenoceros posted:

For me, you can't really 'convert' to Buddhism. You can adopt Buddhism as a working hypothesis about the nature of reality, but there's no point in believing for beliefs sake.

You can either confirm or debunk the teachings via your own direct experience. The validity of the teachings (to you as a person) ultimately rests on that. It is clear from the teachings themselves that it's not enough to just believe they are true, the whole point of the path is to experience it for yourself.

The purpose of meditation is to train the mind and to investigate reality. When you meditate you train the mind to be still, when the mind is still it is in a state where it can investigate reality. The physical and mental benefits are well documented in the scientific literature (just type 'mindfulness' or 'meditation' into google scholar) but the well-being that follows from meditation is just a nice side-effect and not its ultimate purpose.

Basically, the Buddha said "reality is like this" and then he left behind a detailed instruction manual on how to come to the same conclusions as he did. The instruction manual is of course the noble eightfold path, which can be followed and implemented by anyone.

Edit: I started out with mindfulness meditation for stress relief in a completely secular setting. Then I stumbled over a Dhamma talk on youtube, and I felt it put everything I had seen in meditation in place. That's how I got into Buddhism.

Experiences in meditation is for me a major motivator for continuing the practice. Also just the general pain relief that follows from practice. It is a path to end suffering after all

I'd just like to interject that the eightfold path can be followed by anyone of relatively sound mind.

Would you recommend Buddhism to a paranoid schizophrenic, for example? I find that some Buddhist practitioners experience so many changes in themselves that they begin to generalize it, not necessarily being mindful of the state of mind that would provide a good bed for seeds of dharma to grow. For people whose minds are already "off" from the norm... well, they might come up with some really weird ideas(*cough*ThePriceJustWentUp) and manipulate the dharma, not even maliciously, but still harmfully.

What are Buddhist positions on mental illness, in general? I feel personally that it can aid in issues of anxiety and depression but I'm very hesitant to put it forward as a panacea.

# ¿ Mar 31, 2014 15:31

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Leon Sumbitches posted:

I have a question about the Noble Eightfold Path and something somewhat problematic to me about it. "Right" is thrown around without qualifying it. What makes those actions described right? How are they qualified as being the correct way to view/think/act/etc?

It's inaccurate to say they aren't qualified. Maybe if you read a list of them they aren't, but original Pali suttas describe them in depth.

I suggest reading this as a start: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.141.than.html

quote:

"And what, friends, is the noble truth of the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress? Just this very noble eightfold path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.

"And what is right view? Knowledge with reference to stress, knowledge with reference to the origination of stress, knowledge with reference to the cessation of stress, knowledge with reference to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view.

And what is right resolve? The resolve for renunciation, for freedom from ill will, for harmlessness: This is called right resolve.

"And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.

"And what is right action? Abstaining from taking life, from stealing, & from sexual misconduct: This is called right action.

"And what is right livelihood? There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going with right livelihood: This is called right livelihood.

"And what is right effort? There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen... (and) for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This is called right effort.

"And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself � ardent, alert, & mindful � putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves � ardent, alert, & mindful � putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called right mindfulness.

"And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk � quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities � enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation � internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain � as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress � he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration.

"This is called the noble truth of the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.

edit: other suttas go in depth into each, e.g. for right view the Sammaditthi Sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.009.ntbb.html

ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 03:42 on Apr 1, 2014

# ¿ Apr 1, 2014 03:30

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Rhymenoceros posted:

Exactly! You really hit the nail on the head here. To sustain our life we have to kill, but because of karma we have to experience the negative consequences of that killing, in this life or the next.

So you can see that there's no way to live in samsara without suffering, so the only way to not suffer is to get out of samsara, which is the end goal of the noble eightfold path.

What's being out of samsara like? I've never thought about it. I mostly just meditate.

# ¿ Apr 1, 2014 13:11

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Three Pillars of Zen lends itself to short readings if you haven't checked it out yet.

# ¿ Apr 1, 2014 21:27

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Paramemetic posted:

Right, so I used to have a concealed carry permit. I used to keep a gun by my bed. My reasoning was exactly that I have a wife that I would want to protect, I have a life I should protect. If I am killed such as by a murderer, how can I benefit others? I have things I want to do. Ah, but there is the greed. The choice to commit violence on others in order to benefit myself is founded in greed. Even a noble greed, like protecting a loved one, is a greed. If I am free from greed, I have no need to defend myself to protect this life. I am going to die. It will happen whether by the hand of a villain or by old age. Such is writ in stone, the true cause of death is birth! So, I do not have a gun by my bed now. I would not defend myself through violent means. I would probably defend my wife, but by so doing I would have to accept the karmic result of my actions, and I can only hope that I would be motivated by true compassion and not by anger or fear or greed or desire.

It is possible, certainly, to defend oneself or others out of compassion, but such compassion must be cultivated and cultivating such compassion is impossible when clinging so hard to our lives, our loved ones, and so on.

Killing a murderer in self defense has the same exact result as if one were simply murdered. A person dies either way! Why should I choose to inflict suffering on another who values his life, the murderer, when I can allow this body to be destroyed as it already inevitably will be, which I accept, and so will not suffer so much?

If you kill your attempted murderer, you are causing an equal amount of deep suffering. He, too, has a mother who will grieve. He, too, has friends who will mourn. By killing someone who wishes to kill you, you inflict incredible suffering. How does it make sense to inflict suffering on others?

Your continued existence might lead to less suffering! You spread the dharma, you show people a different example, and maybe all beings would be better off with you being present than the murderer! It's hard to evaluate such a thing...

But it's worth keeping in mind that the Shaolin Monks were Buddhist.

# ¿ Apr 2, 2014 23:12

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Paramemetic posted:

A fair point, but being mindful of the present, by not killing I avoid suffering right now. By killing I ensure suffering right now. By willingly giving my life, perhaps I can even spare the murderer some of his negative karma.

As for benefitting people in the future, I can do that just the same in a future life.

Because I do not possess the wisdom eye, such that I can perfectly see cause and effect, I choose not to engage in non-virtue in this moment, even if it leads to my death. This doesn't mean I won't try to escape, or take reasonable precautions, and so on, but I cannot justify a non-virtuous deed like killing by a potential future. Better not to engage in killing, even if it means being killed, I think.

Your opinions agree with everything in the suttas. Like http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn03/sn03.015.than.html makes a case for ending the cycle of violence:

code:

A man may plunder
as long as it serves his ends,
but when others are plundered,
	he who has plundered
	gets plundered in turn.

A fool thinks,
'Now's my chance,'
as long as his evil
has yet to ripen.
But when it ripens,
the fool
	falls
		into pain.

Killing, you gain
		your killer.
Conquering, you gain one
		who will conquer you;
insulting, 	insult;
harassing, 	harassment.

And so, through the cycle of action,
	he who has plundered
	gets plundered in turn.

I wonder where those who commit violence as Buddhists find their justification. The Mahavamsa chronicles violence in early Buddhism and is used to justify it today, but it's clearly not canonical. How would those aforementioned Shaolin monks have justified it?

# ¿ Apr 3, 2014 02:45

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

I might guess influence from Daoism might have influenced it. Precepts are broken all the time by Buddhists. After all, if one were to follow it to the greatest degree you'd follow all 8 precepts directed towards monks to better hasten enlightenment of all beings. Does anyone here follow the 7th precept(no singing, dancing, playing instruments, garlands, music listening)?

But then it would prevent you from being an upasaka if you broke the five precepts intentionally, and the suttas did specifically lay out two lines: upasaka(lay followers) and bikkhuni(monks).

ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 05:56 on Apr 3, 2014

# ¿ Apr 3, 2014 05:47

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

midnightclimax posted:

Re: violence and buddhism, is anyone familiar with the extremists in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, who advocate violence against muslims?

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21582321-fuelled-dangerous-brew-faith-ethnicity-and-politics-tit-tat-conflict-escalating

This short paper investigates their bases: http://blogs.dickinson.edu/buddhistethics/files/2010/04/vroom-review.pdf

Basically... nothing scriptural, again. The Sri Lankans seem to use the argument that early Buddhist societies used violence to justify themselves. The actual rhetoric focuses on the evils of the Muslims in their county rather than any attempted Buddhist justification for it.

The book "In Defense of Dharma: Just-war Ideology in Buddhist Sri Lanka" would be a place to learn more.

See also: http://www.academia.edu/196626/Norms_of_War_in_Theravada_Buddhism

The Cakkavatti-Sihanada sutta features Buddha telling a Dharmic king how to rule: http://www.basicbuddhism.org/index.cfm?GPID=29

The King is described as having soldiers and retinue, but I'm not sure in what sense it's meant -- in it, he conquers "without sword or stick, but by law"(law being dharma?). In any regard, the text is strictly anti-violence unless cherry-picked and misinterpreted and describes how the cycles continue.

Edit: I am disappointed, because I often hear the argument that the war is religiously motivated and Buddhist justification is given for it, but I'm unable to find any evidence of this talking point. The book "In Defense of Dharma" even makes that case. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough.

Therevada Attitudes Towards Violence, Journal of Buddhist Ethics: http://blogs.dickinson.edu/buddhistethics/files/2010/12/Deegalle.pdf

quote:

But being metaphorical is not protection against misplaced literalism, as in the case reported by Ling, where the Buddhist Patriarch at the coronation of King Rama VI of Thailand quoted the words of Buddha 'As a town situated on the frontier must be prepared internally and externally, so too should you be prepared' in support of his assertion that 'Wars must be prepared for even in time of peace'. (Ling, Buddhism, imperialism and war, p. 137)

http://www2.hawaii.edu/~stroble/BUDDWAR.HTM

ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 14:36 on Apr 3, 2014

# ¿ Apr 3, 2014 13:54

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Can someone explain how the animal and human realms are differentiated? Accepting evolution says to me that I'm no different from any other animal. Given time and nurturement, sentient animal species could theoretically evolve to similar intelligence and emotional capability.

Yet still there's a differentiation between human and animal in Buddhism. How do you reconcile that with evolution?

# ¿ Apr 3, 2014 15:11

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Patr�l Rinpoch�s Words of My Perfect Teacher:

Sexual misconduct also includes acts associated with particular persons, places and circumstances: masturbation; sexual relations with a person who is married, or committed to someone else; or with a person who is free, but in broad daylight, during observation of a one-day vow, during illness, distress, pregnancy, bereavement, menstruation, or recovery from child-birth; in a place where the physical representations of the Three Jewels are present; with one�s parents, other prohibited family members, or with a prepubescent child; in the mouth or anus, and so on. (p. 107 in the Padmakara Translation)

I get how most of these can be construed as misconduct that can lead to non-mindfulness and lack of control, but oral and anal seem oddly arbitrary.

# ¿ Apr 13, 2014 18:55

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

If anyone else enjoys burning incense while meditating is interested in some interesting Japanese incenses, I stumbled into https://www.asakichionline.com while I was visiting San Francisco and they have a much better and cheaper selection than Amazon. I like the Beautiful Spring, Morning Zen, Sitting Zen and I have an assortment of Nippon Kodo Cho Cho San cones which burn very intensely but only for around ten minutes.

ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 00:07 on Apr 16, 2014

# ¿ Apr 16, 2014 00:04

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

WAFFLEHOUND posted:

I love traditional Tibetan sandalwood incense, because it smells like burning logs of sandalwood and reminds me of monasteries in Tibet.

I picked up some Japanese sandalwood incense. It's like the same thing except they miss the point.

I also got a singing bowl and wrist mala. Singing bowl meditation is pretty sweet. So loud and consuming.

# ¿ Apr 16, 2014 14:05

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Folderol posted:

Any brands / sites you'd recommend for Tibetan sandalwood incense?

I was just kidding about the Japanese stuff getting the point wrong earlier BTW, it was a joke about Zen Buddhism. The Japanese sandalwood incense(and Zen) are both quite nice, though I haven't compared it to the Tibetan stuff.

# ¿ Apr 17, 2014 22:16

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Smoking Crow posted:

Would it be rude to ask a question? I want to know why cessation of personal suffering is so important. I understand the cessation of someone else's suffering (no one wants someone to starve to death), but my personal suffering is what made me who I am. I wouldn't change a bit of it. As a Christian, I believe that personal suffering and struggle is important. Tears are the companion of the penitent man, after all.

The cessation of suffering is the escape from samsara, the cycle of birth and rebirth.

If your "personal struggles and suffering" are so important to you, why would you want to spend an eternity in Heaven?

# ¿ Apr 18, 2014 22:55

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Alternately: due to the doctrine of anatta(not-self), there is no such thing as personal suffering, only suffering. The idea of ownership as such is wrong view.

# ¿ Apr 19, 2014 00:03

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Frykte posted:

i hate suffering!!!

A kind of suffering in itself.

# ¿ Apr 19, 2014 13:00

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

What's the end-state of universal enlightenment?

One can be an arhat in this lifetime, correct? What if an arhat reproduced?

If arhats don't reproduce, is the end state that there are no more sentient beings as they've all escaped samsara?

Or does rebirth continue without suffering? Does nirvana have aspects of rebirth?

# ¿ Apr 19, 2014 21:02

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Mr. Mambold posted:

But seriously, what do you mean does nirvana have aspects of rebirth?

A person may experience nirvana partly or wholly and not anchor in nirvana- they will be reborn. They may experience paranirvana partly or wholly and not anchor in paranirvana- they will be reborn.
Isn't this in the scriptures somewhere?

I guess that's it, what is paranirvana/which suttas go over it?

I only know what I've encountered

I know about the rejection of metaphysical questioning... I've mostly seen it from Zen folks though, the Tibetans seem a lot more open to it. Not sure about other schools.

# ¿ Apr 20, 2014 02:20

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

I think it's related to Indian culture at the time Buddhism came around.

Avoidance of alliums is common in Indian religion for different reasons focusing on health and the ability to meditate.

Example from Hindu Puranas:

From the Puranic Encylopedia by Vettam Mani (under CANDRA VI.), (Kamba Ramayana, Yuddha Kanda and Bhagavata, Astama Skandha. Kamba Ramayana is a Tamil text by poet Kambar): posted:

Solar eclipse according to the Puranas. The Devas and the asuras jointly churned Ksirabdhi where from emerged Dhanvantari with the Amrtakumbha (pot of nectar). But an asura mayavi (magician) called Saimhikeya absconded to
Patala with the Amrtakumbha which nobody noticed as everybody was busy with dividing other divine objects. Only after the mayavi's disappearance was it noticed that the Amrtakumbha was missing. At once Mahavishnu assumed the figure of a beautiful woman, got back the Kumbha and gave it to the devas. The devas began drinking the amrta when, at the instance of some other devas, Saimhikeya, the mayavi, assuming the form of an old Brahmin reached svarga, got a share of the amrta and began to drink it. Surya and Candra (Sun and Moon) who were on guard at the gates divined the secret of the 'old Brahmin' and informed Mahavishnu about it. He cut the throat of the pseudo-Brahmin with his Sudarsana Chakra. But, half of the nectar he had drunk stayed above the throat and the other half below it. Therefore, though the head and the trunk were severed they remained alive. These two parts, in course of time, evolved as Rahu and Ketu.

When the throat was cut some blood dropped on on the ground, and became the red onion and the white onion (garlic) respectively. So both onion and garlic originated from the throat and blood of the demons or asuras, thus
their consumption brings us closer to tamo guna (mode of ignorance) which characterizes the nature of the demons and thus is detrimental to Bhakti.

I am not sure what it means for a practicing modern day Buddhist though! I am curious to see what others say.

# ¿ May 5, 2014 18:56

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

I get so confused sometimes when I read things like "Buddhists probably should avoid eating pungent plants"... then I think of things like the sake barrels outside a Zen monastery WAFFLEHOUND posted.

Buddhism on paper and Buddhism in practice seem to be wholly different. Which is, in a way, a core tenant of Buddhism: intellectual/conceptual understanding is not as valuable as lived experiential reference.

I'm curious to see how the restriction against pungent plants affects the practicing Buddhists in this thread. There are doctrinal differences on diet already: in Mahayana it's more common to reject meat as an offering, as there was suffering that lead to it, whereas in Theravada a monk would be more likely to accept any offering and not deny the giver their opportunity for good karmic seeds.

# ¿ May 6, 2014 18:12

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Myrmidongs posted:

How do you guys handle sources that claim they have magic powers? I've come across numerous well-known teachers that during talks / in the middle of a book, make claims that they have telekinesis, telepathy, levitation, and more. I feel like I'm the only person who wants to call bullshit on them.

Milarepa supposedly studied sorcery and destroyed his aunt and uncle's house with a hail storm for taking his deceased father's money. Then when the village sought revenge, he destroyed their crops. And he could fly around to get places really fast.

Buddha himself in some suttas/sutras does supernatural things -- summoning, levitating, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracles_of_Gautama_Buddha and there is a series of supernatural progression practitioners can supposedly unlock: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhij%F1ā

Edit: holy poo poo SA forums keep escaping the text when I try to link that, anyways, google abhijna. It's pretty interesting.

I'm curious which modern well known teachers are claiming supernatural powers. I have the same reaction of aversion as you, but I'd be curious to read what they're saying.

ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 04:21 on May 8, 2014

# ¿ May 8, 2014 04:14

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Rhymenoceros posted:

Well you can't levitate out of samsara, so why even talk about it? It seems to just motivate more attainment - the opposite of the path. It would depend on the context but I would question the wisdom of claiming such things.

Why talk about it? Because it is Buddhavacana expounded in the dharma so obviously people will talk about it.

I agree that focusing on it as an attainment and desiring it is counter productive.

I personally have great difficulty believing in some of these as literal attainments a practitioner can reach, but it doesn't really matter if you do or not.

Sama��aphala Sutta posted:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.02.0.than.html

Supranormal Powers
"With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to the modes of supranormal powers. He wields manifold supranormal powers. Having been one he becomes many; having been many he becomes one. He appears. He vanishes. He goes unimpeded through walls, ramparts, and mountains as if through space. He dives in and out of the earth as if it were water. He walks on water without sinking as if it were dry land. Sitting cross-legged he flies through the air like a winged bird. With his hand he touches and strokes even the sun and moon, so mighty and powerful. He exercises influence with his body even as far as the Brahma worlds. Just as a skilled potter or his assistant could craft from well-prepared clay whatever kind of pottery vessel he likes, or as a skilled ivory-carver or his assistant could craft from well-prepared ivory any kind of ivory-work he likes, or as a skilled goldsmith or his assistant could craft from well-prepared gold any kind of gold article he likes; in the same way � with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability � the monk directs and inclines it to the modes of supranormal powers... He exercises influence with his body even as far as the Brahma worlds.

"This, too, great king, is a fruit of the contemplative life, visible here and now, more excellent than the previous ones and more sublime.

Clairaudience
"With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to the divine ear-element. He hears � by means of the divine ear-element, purified and surpassing the human � both kinds of sounds: divine and human, whether near or far. Just as if a man traveling along a highway were to hear the sounds of kettledrums, small drums, conchs, cymbals, and tom-toms. He would know, 'That is the sound of kettledrums, that is the sound of small drums, that is the sound of conchs, that is the sound of cymbals, and that is the sound of tom-toms.' In the same way � with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability � the monk directs and inclines it to the divine ear-element. He hears � by means of the divine ear-element, purified and surpassing the human � both kinds of sounds: divine and human, whether near or far.

"This, too, great king, is a fruit of the contemplative life, visible here and now, more excellent than the previous ones and more sublime.

Mind Reading
"With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge of the awareness of other beings. He knows the awareness of other beings, other individuals, having encompassed it with his own awareness. He discerns a mind with passion as a mind with passion, and a mind without passion as a mind without passion. He discerns a mind with aversion as a mind with aversion, and a mind without aversion as a mind without aversion. He discerns a mind with delusion as a mind with delusion, and a mind without delusion as a mind without delusion. He discerns a restricted mind as a restricted mind, and a scattered mind as a scattered mind. He discerns an enlarged mind as an enlarged mind, and an unenlarged mind as an unenlarged mind. He discerns an excelled mind [one that is not at the most excellent level] as an excelled mind, and an unexcelled mind as an unexcelled mind. He discerns a concentrated mind as a concentrated mind, and an unconcentrated mind as an unconcentrated mind. He discerns a released mind as a released mind, and an unreleased mind as an unreleased mind. Just as if a young woman � or man � fond of ornaments, examining the reflection of her own face in a bright mirror or a bowl of clear water would know 'blemished' if it were blemished, or 'unblemished' if it were not. In the same way � with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability � the monk directs and inclines it to knowledge of the awareness of other beings. He knows the awareness of other beings, other individuals, having encompassed it with his own awareness. He discerns a mind with passion as a mind with passion, and a mind without passion as a mind without passion... a released mind as a released mind, and an unreleased mind as an unreleased mind.

"This, too, great king, is a fruit of the contemplative life, visible here and now, more excellent than the previous ones and more sublime.

Recollection of Past Lives
"With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge of the recollection of past lives (lit: previous homes). He recollects his manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two births, three births, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand, one hundred thousand, many aeons of cosmic contraction, many aeons of cosmic expansion, many aeons of cosmic contraction and expansion, [recollecting], 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose here.' Thus he recollects his manifold past lives in their modes and details. Just as if a man were to go from his home village to another village, and then from that village to yet another village, and then from that village back to his home village. The thought would occur to him, 'I went from my home village to that village over there. There I stood in such a way, sat in such a way, talked in such a way, and remained silent in such a way. From that village I went to that village over there, and there I stood in such a way, sat in such a way, talked in such a way, and remained silent in such a way. From that village I came back home.' In the same way � with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability � the monk directs and inclines it to knowledge of the recollection of past lives. He recollects his manifold past lives... in their modes and details.

"This, too, great king, is a fruit of the contemplative life, visible here and now, more excellent than the previous ones and more sublime.

The Passing Away & Re-appearance of Beings
"With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge of the passing away and re-appearance of beings. He sees � by means of the divine eye, purified and surpassing the human � beings passing away and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate in accordance with their kamma: 'These beings � who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech, and mind, who reviled the noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views � with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. But these beings � who were endowed with good conduct of body, speech, and mind, who did not revile the noble ones, who held right views and undertook actions under the influence of right views � with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the good destinations, in the heavenly world.' Thus � by means of the divine eye, purified and surpassing the human � he sees beings passing away and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate in accordance with their kamma. Just as if there were a tall building in the central square [of a town], and a man with good eyesight standing on top of it were to see people entering a house, leaving it, walking along the street, and sitting in the central square. The thought would occur to him, 'These people are entering a house, leaving it, walking along the streets, and sitting in the central square.' In the same way � with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability � the monk directs and inclines it to knowledge of the passing away and re-appearance of beings. He sees � by means of the divine eye, purified and surpassing the human � beings passing away and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate in accordance with their kamma...

"This, too, great king, is a fruit of the contemplative life, visible here and now, more excellent than the previous ones and more sublime.

The Ending of Mental Fermentations
"With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, the monk directs and inclines it to the knowledge of the ending of the mental fermentations. He discerns, as it has come to be, that 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress... These are mental fermentations... This is the origination of fermentations... This is the cessation of fermentations... This is the way leading to the cessation of fermentations.' His heart, thus knowing, thus seeing, is released from the fermentation of sensuality, the fermentation of becoming, the fermentation of ignorance. With release, there is the knowledge, 'Released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.' Just as if there were a pool of water in a mountain glen � clear, limpid, and unsullied � where a man with good eyesight standing on the bank could see shells, gravel, and pebbles, and also shoals of fish swimming about and resting, and it would occur to him, 'This pool of water is clear, limpid, and unsullied. Here are these shells, gravel, and pebbles, and also these shoals of fish swimming about and resting.' In the same way � with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability � the monk directs and inclines it to the knowledge of the ending of the mental fermentations. He discerns, as it has come to be, that 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress... These are mental fermentations... This is the origination of fermentations... This is the cessation of fermentations... This is the way leading to the cessation of fermentations.' His heart, thus knowing, thus seeing, is released from the fermentation of sensuality, the fermentation of becoming, the fermentation of ignorance. With release, there is the knowledge, 'Released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'

"This, too, great king, is a fruit of the contemplative life, visible here and now, more excellent than the previous ones and more sublime. And as for another visible fruit of the contemplative life, higher and more sublime than this, there is none."

When this was said, King Ajatasattu said to the Blessed One: "Magnificent, lord! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has the Blessed One � through many lines of reasoning � made the Dhamma clear. I go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the community of monks. May the Blessed One remember me as a lay follower who has gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life.

# ¿ May 8, 2014 12:53

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Rhymenoceros posted:

I mean "why even talk about it" in the sense when someone says "I have these powers". I think there are very few situations when saying "I have these powers" will not just end up inspiring the wrong intentions in people.

Yeah, I totally agree. Especially in this day and age... what kind of teacher is going to make such claims? It would make me highly suspicious of their intentions.

At the same time I feel like the arrow sutta is used to end conversations about things like this. Obviously the Buddha thought these things were of enough importance to describe. The way the arrow sutta is referenced by some is to be reductionist or dismissive of things like this... but the Buddha talked about it, and expounded upon it to his sangha, so there must be some importance to the teachings.

# ¿ May 8, 2014 16:56

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

Why would Ajahn Brahm claim these attainments, especially as a western white convert to Buddhism that knows people will be suspicious without something to back it up? It's suspicious and if not true, violates the vinaya. I personally would disregard as a charlatan trying to attract converts through the promise of magic powers anyone who claimed such attainments, especially if they refuse to demonstrate.

I think a lot of people here can have an initial suspicion of white Buddhist converts for a variety of reasons that aren't unfounded...

And the curious thing about magical powers is that they are never demonstrated... Interesting, that.

ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 11:58 on May 9, 2014

# ¿ May 9, 2014 11:53

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 12:05

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

ThePriceJustWentUp posted:

I don't know of powers of the more magical variety, but Ram Dass says in his book Be Here Now that the thing that more or less caused him to leave his Harvard career and move to India is a moment where his teacher there, during a conversation, told him what his mother was dying from (cancer) and where it was (the spleen). He said he was positive he had never mentioned this to anybody in India.

Could be coincidence. What if the person guessed wrong? Anyways, Ram Dass is a white guy who did a shitload of LSD with Tim Leary and converted to Hinduism, he isn't even a Buddhist.

# ¿ May 9, 2014 13:38

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Ask us about Buddhism: This thread is Avici

«‹›2 »