- This topic has 17 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 2 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
When talking to my friend (who doesn’t know dhamma) I stumbled upon a question that I felt could have been answered better. When explaining the worthlessness of attaching to things, he gave the example of pet owners, especially those who have multiple pets over time, who had full knowledge of the suffering they will go through as they will see the pets till their death. In this case, they have knowledge of:
The anicca nature, as they know that they have to part with their pet in the end. They know that the pets will grow old, get sick and die.
The dukkha nature. They know that they have to spend time and effort to maintain the pet and even stress over it (sankhara dukkha), that the pet will die (viparinama dukkha), and the possible physical pains from labour of taking care of the pet (dukkha dukkha)
However, they do not see it as unfruitful and of no essence (anatta nature). They would argue, that the satisfaction gained from taking care and loving the pet, far outweighs all the suffering mentioned above. Even after the pet died, they would look back with fond memories, and have no regrets owning it. Even if it is “mind-made” happiness, it is still happiness to them. Much like an olympic winner who is happy to have won the olympics years ago, even though he has suffered great lengths to achieve it.
I replied that by living this way, we live by conditional happiness. Our happiness becomes subject to what the world gives us, which is hard to influence. Why not try to find unconditional happiness instead? And there is a way towards that.
However, i was thinking if there could be a better answer. WITHOUT bringing in concepts of kamma, rebirth and how attachment leads to rebirth, is there a better way to answer this question? I did not want to bring in “supernatural” concepts because it becomes harder to believe. How would y’all have handled it?
-
Yes. It is not easy to stay away from “sensory pleasures.” Some spend hours recalling and enjoying “fond memories” of past sensory experiences.
- Even after it is fully grasped that most “sensory pleasures” are mind-made (due to “distorted sanna“), the tendency is to indulge in sensory pleasures because that is what we all have been doing for an eternity. It is not easy to break that habit.
- That is why people pay to watch good magic shows. They know that those effects are not real, but they are mind-pleasing. The same applies to watching movies.
- That is why the Buddha advised bhikkhus to engage in “mindful meditation” or Satipatthana constantly. Most of those bhikkhus fully understood how the “distorted sanna” arises, but it needed to be contemplated constantly to “wear away” the “bad gati” accumulated over innumerable past lives.
I don’t understand the last part of your comment: “However, i was thinking if there could be a better answer. WITHOUT bringing in concepts of kamma, rebirth and how attachment leads to rebirth, is there a better way to answer this question? I did not want to bring in “supernatural” concepts because it becomes harder to believe. How would y’all have handled it?”
- The fact that a mind attaches not to “real pleasures” but to “mind-made pleasures” (via “distorted sanna“) can not be understood without understanding those concepts.
- One must at least understand the bad consequences of attaching to sensory pleasures if the better explanation of “distorted sanna” is not yet comprehended. That also requires understanding the concepts of kamma, rebirth, and how attachment leads to rebirth, i.e., the ‘big picture.”
-
Hi Lal, thank you for sharing. Actually the context behind this question was that I am inspired by how monks in the Jethavanarana Buddhist Monastery were able to explain dhamma concepts to lay people without invoking much of kamma and rebirth, yet they can provide such convincing explanations for the lay person about how the puthujjana way of living is highly flawed. (By the way for those who have been trying to teach dhamma to their friends, i highly recommend their videos, they explain with simple logic which people are more willing to accept)
From here I thought that most problems can be solved without invoking the “wider worldview”. Of course to gain complete understanding, one must also ultimately learn the Noble Truths, Tilakkhana, Paticca Samuppāda.
You also remind me of the reflections from the conversation I had, and watching the sermons is that explaining dhamma concepts to a lay person with just “lay logic” would be a good way to comprehend the dhamma. That way you can be fully convinced yourself by explaining things with just logic.
However, my other reflection is that if we continue to do this, it may make us stray from the path because ultimately paticca samuppada cannot be understood with “lay logic”, and we won’t contemplate this wider worldview which is necessary for Nibbāna. For example, the second noble truth requires the understanding that attachment leads to birth, with does not follow “lay logic”
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
Puthujjanas, even though they might see the drawbacks of such actions,still indulge in those as they don’t know any alternative way of true happiness. They have not yet realised the Peace and Calmness that comes from staying away from such actions is of great value. That is unconditional happiness.
So they continue to indulge in such things. The fact is that Even a Sakadagami indulges in sensuality. He has realised dhamma to a great extent and yet his mind is attached to such mind made pleasures(at a lower level). So what about puthujjanas? They will continue to do that, they lack wisdom in this regard.
The only way to feel pleasure (here, mental) , is to first vex for that or rather be in a state of depression/ stress . Now try to get relief out of that stress. You will feel pleasure.
So this could have been a more “lay level” point that you could have made.
Their mind is deliberately creating/ accumulating all that stress to feel relief later and to experience pleasure! This is a very very crucial point to understand! I hope I am able to express the gravity of this issue.
If their dog dies, they will get stressed and then they will recall all those memories to get relief from it, and then feel pleasure. What a pitiful life!
Just like an Olympic winner has earned a Gold medal from years of intense effort, he will feel great happiness upon achieving this success. But what next? Is that happiness forever? Usain Bolt retired at a much younger age only because he felt no competition(no vexation/wanting). He couldn’t really feel the happiness when he used to feel in his early career, as there was a goal in the mind ( wanting/vexation) . And once it was achieved pleasure was felt, and then nothing else.
-
Hi Yash, I have tried to make that point a few times. However, people will see their happiness as a sine curve, where y axis is happiness and x axis is time. On the other hand, they will see the buddhist ones as a flat zero across time. Actually this I cannot refute so strongly. We will no longer be able to feel the happiness of a gold medal as much as olympic winners do, as you said, there is no longer/ not much vexation. Even when they understand that the pleasure is actually mind made and the release of vexation, pleasure is still pleasure, so what if it is mind made? And also with the Usain Bolt example, if people could, they would just find the next peak of the sine wave. To them, it would be better than experiencing a flat 0. “Nothing worth having comes easy” is the mentality that we all have.
The only point I can make is that the sine curve has more downs than ups for lay people, and perhaps buddhists will not be at flat 0 but progressively go higher with feelings of “well being”. Even this may be hard to get across, they would think it is a “placebo effect”. Another possible way of explaining is that buddhist can experience the highs without the lows. But I think that is not possible, to feel that much of pleasure you must have that much of vexation.
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
In the absolute truth , there is no Happiness. Only Suffering and No Suffering. That “No Suffering” part is the true happiness which is the 0 on the graph. That is the unshakable happiness.
I understand people are interested in such highs and lows. Then we can’t actually do anything. The only thing is that they have not realised the value of mental peace, that’s why they indulge in those things . They then suffer from all types of mental stresses, anger, fear, sorrow, grief,etc. due to such highs and lows. So if they all want that, let them have that.
Note that Buddha Dhamma is only for the wise!
-
-
“Unfortunatly true. The most we can do is to help them see bit by bit” – this is bad mindset, as Buddha stated personal Nibbana is more important than trying to convince anyone to Dhamma. If one reach Anagami or Arahanat then may do “convincing” but at that stage I doubt anyone will see point of doing so
-
-
Christian: “If one reach Anagami or Arahanat then may do “convincing” but at that stage I doubt anyone will see point of doing so”
We can do so out of compassion. If you see a child about to eat a glass shard will you just stand there? And why did the Buddha travel to teach Angulimāla? Of course they tried to preach to those who can understand. For those who cannot, it may be counter intuitive because it will make them dislike the dhamma more. Therefore we have to realise when to stop. But you’re right that we do need some good foundation ourselves.
I would also agree with Lal that just a sotapanna stage is enough. Even if we do not have the complete understanding ourselves, we can still pique their interest and point them to the necessary sites for them to gain a deeper understanding.
-
We can do so out of compassion. If you see a child about to eat a glass shard will you just stand there?
People who are ignoring Dhamma or not are willing to learn it or practice it, or they are not interested, etc. are not children who are about to eat glass, if you think this way you will pretty much suffer as there is no way to changing the people or the world, being idealistic will cause a lot of harm to yourself. Focus on Nibbana first then you may try to bother with people if you are even willing
And why did the Buddha travel to teach Angulimāla?
Buddha and Arahants ignored many people in suttas for various reasons, you can not compare yourself to Buddha and do not do that or you will be delusional about yourself. Just because you find this site and it has an impact on you – you should not suddenly think that you are “bigger” than you are. This is a mistake that plenty of new people make before realizing the depth of Dhamma and how much there is to understand before opening your mouth to speak about Dhamma.
Sometimes even being an Arahant is not enough to teach Dhamma and some Arahants vary when teaching for various reasons. Sotapanna is not enough to teach on a high level as you will be agitated with people and you will do “dispromotion” for Dhamma as people have always high expectations for “spiritual” people, super unrealistic expectations.
**Keep in mind I’m talking about being like a “missionary” or trying to “save” people through Dhamma. Creating spaces like this site or aiming for people who are “seekers” looking for spiritual liberation is okay.
-
I think the main points are the following:
1. We must do all we can to inform others of Buddha’s teachings. It is out of our hands how many would be interested.
2. However, the Buddha discouraged anyone from forcefully teaching Dhamma to others or engaging in “debates” that may escalate and become unproductive.
Regarding who is qualified to teach:
1. The “Ministry of the Buddha” or the “Buddha Sāsana” with the unique message of the Buddha will last only as long as there are Noble Persons (those who have attained magga phala, i.e., Sotapanna through Arahant) stages.
– They have the special name “kalyāṇa mittā” of a “Noble friend.”2. Only a Buddha or a true disciple of the Buddha (who has grasped the teachings of the Buddha) can explain those teachings.
– Once there is no longer any such kalyāṇa mittā on the Earth, Buddha Sāsana will disappear. Full copies of the Tipitaka may be there, but there will be no one to explain their contents. This is also why “word-by-word” translations are useless: “Elephant in the Room 1 – Direct Translation of the Tipiṭaka“
– Then, the world will have to wait for the next Buddha, Buddha Maitreya, to be born to attain magga phala (Nibbana.) That is supposed to happen in a billion years or so.
– The current Buddha Sāsana of Buddha Gotama is expected to disappear within the next 2000 years.3. That is why the Buddha told Ven. Ananda (in the Upaḍḍha Sutta (SN 45.2)) that the continuation of his Buddha Sāsana depends TOTALLY on kalyāṇa mittā.
-
The point is that, I too was very much inspired by the Dhamma and wanted to spread it to many people. Apart from my parents, no one listened!
Some listened but tried to find mistakes in the Dhamma, some said “we will do it later, I am busy currently”, some started mocking and some generated hate. Then I was very much broken by such things.
Then I realised, if someone has the merits, he will find the true Dhamma just like we all have.
Yes we can teach them but only if we are at a very good level, otherwise frustration and agitation may start to ignite during such a debate and we may wrongly portray the Dhamma. Then the people will more and more mock the dhamma. As Christian said, people have a high and weird expectations of someone preaching spirituality. So it will become counterproductive.
The Buddha knows who can understand the Dhamma so that’s why it is easier for him. But unfortunately we can’t do that.
Thats why we should focus on ourselves first and if someone in the way shows some keen interest or asks you about these things , then you can tell him. That too should be done without any expectation of him suddenly following the Buddha Dhamma.
-
Yes, of course one should be able to control oneself in these discussions to prevent it from being heated, and it is wrong to impose onto others, it will be unproductive. However we can always try our luck and see if they are interested. And it doesn’t mean that when you try to introduce the dhamma to other people, you stop progressing on the path. It’s not like teaching the dhamma becomes a “full time job”, one can try to teach it when the opportunity arises, but yes it should not be the main goal. Also, one of the ways of meditation is to teach others! (Vimuttāyatanasutta) This is in line with the Feynman technique where the best way to learn something is to teach it. So far there has not been heated discussions for me, for example one can approach the topic even without rebirth and kamma initially. We do not even need to say that this is “buddhist philosophy” and not include pali words for a start! It is only after they are curious to learn more that you can explain in detail.
Christian: “People who are ignoring Dhamma or not are willing to learn it or practice it, or they are not interested, etc. are not children who are about to eat glass, if you think this way you will pretty much suffer as there is no way to changing the people or the world”
Perhaps my analogy of the glass shard is not good. Let’s say you found out that smoking is harmful, and most people don’t know it. You see that your friend smokes. Would you try to explain to him that it is harmful? If he still doesn’t believe it after some explanation then sure, we can leave it as it is. But at the same time, will you suffer because millions of people in the world smoke? Similarly when your friend has many desires, you can drop the hint “hey, have you ever thought that having desire is the problem?”
At least, the dhamma can be explained. This is where you know your lack of understanding. When explaining to my friends, there are questions which i found hard to answer, which led me to realize the gaps in my understanding.
-
I think Pathfinder is referring to the characteristics of this sutta. He is right to want to try to convince others of the benefits of the Dhamma.
WHO IS A LAY BUDDHIST DISCIPLE? MAHĀNĀMA SUTTA
“In what way, Venerable Sir, a lay disciple practises for his welfare but not for the welfare of others?”
“Mahānāma,
When a Buddhist disciple is himself accomplished in faith but does not encourage others to accomplish faith;
when he is himself accomplished in morally virtuous behaviour but does not encourage others to accomplish morally virtuous behaviour;
when he is himself accomplished in generosity but does not encourage others to accomplish generosity;
when he has the desire to see the monks, but does not encourage others to see them monks;
when he has the desire to listen to true Dhamma, but does not encourage others to listen to true Dhamma;
when he remembers the Dhamma he has heard but does not encourage others to remember the Dhamma that they have heard;
when he investigates the meaning of the Dhamma that he has remembered, but does not encourage others to investigate the meaning of the Dhamma;
when he has understood the Dhamma, understood its meaning, and practises by the Dhamma, but does not encourage others to understand the Dhamma, to understand its meaning and to practise by the Dhamma.
“In what way, Venerable Sir, a lay disciple practises for his welfare and the welfare of others?”
“Mahānāma,
When a Buddhist disciple is himself accomplished in faith, and encourages others to accomplish faith;
when he is himself accomplished in morally virtuous behaviour and encourages others to accomplish morally virtuous behaviour;
when he is himself accomplished in generosity and encourages others to accomplish generosity;
when he has the desire to see the monks and encourages others to see the monks;
when he has the desire to listen to true Dhamma and encourages others to listen to true Dhamma;
when he remembers the Dhamma he has heard and encourages others to remember the Dhamma they have heard;
when he investigates the meaning of the Dhamma that he has remembered and encourages others to investigate the meaning of the Dhamma;
when he has understood the Dhamma, understood its meaning, and practises by the Dhamma and encourages others to understand the Dhamma, understand its meaning and practise in aby Dhamma.
However, the others also have a point which is supported by the story of Cunda the butcher.
- Cunda had been a butcher for 55 years. Although he lived close to Lord Gautama Buddha, he never wanted to listen to the Dhamma and no one wanted to teach it either. The commentaries say that the reason was that Lord Buddha saw that he did not have enough Paramis and Kusulas to understand the Dhamma. If Lord Buddha taught it Cunda would insult him and it would be a big akusalas which would block his understanding in a future life. Unfortunately, right now he is in the underworld because of his destructive profession. Lord Buddha ignored it all these years. People don’t like it when people criticize their way of life, whether it’s immoral or not. They express psychological resistance. They say “Why change?” “I have always lived like this, nothing has happened to me.” “We only have one life, we might as well make the most of it.” They don’t realize it until it’s too late. Living well for 55 years before falling into the worst hell nirayas; Avici. The first thing they will do is find flaws in your argument before even trying to understand the deeper points. Getting out of the comfort zone is hard. It’s up to you to see Pathfinder if you can teach friends or loved ones open enough to at least understand the basics of the Dhamma. We must not forget that it is only a Lord Buddha who knows perfectly who to teach.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
Thank you, Jittananto.
- Yes. We need to handle each case differently, depending on the situation.
- The following post is relevant: “Right Speech – How to Avoid Accumulating Kamma.”
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
We need to handle each case differently, depending on the situation.
This is the point I wanted to make, to handle a lot of people with different types of gathi, mindset you need to be beyond average as person in standing, insight, discipline etc. otherwise people will not take you seriously. The best course of action now is to make possibility for those people who want to learn Dhamma have way to learn a real and proper Dhamma with proper understanding, once this is established we can move forward towards people
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
Yes, well said, Jittananto, Lal and Christian.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/dotdash_Final_Sine_Wave_Feb_2020-01-b1a62c4514c34f578c5875f4d65c15af.jpg)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.