Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Thank you for sharing your experience and thoughts about this complex issue, Amin.
- It provides an aspect/point of view from a different angle.
- I hope more will share their experiences, too. I suspect those born in Western countries would have another perspective. Many of them look at it from a scientific or Christian point of view.
3 users thanked author for this post.
Taryal wrote: “I’ve decided to prepare a few books and audio clips of (my understanding of) essential Dhamma concepts in local language so that those interested could learn a thing or two whenever they want. The primary goal remains to remove the defilements from my own mind.”
- Noble thoughts. Same for Yash.
It is good to try once, but if the response is not welcoming, it is better not to persist. Rather than chasing people, post your teachings/ideas somewhere. Such a “passive teaching” may be the best. Those interested will seek the truth and come across it. Several years ago, I also tried to engage in debates, etc., and I saw the drawbacks. It affected my practice and could have affected the practice of some who engaged in such “debates” and verbally abused me. One person started a website just to post abusive comments on me. I don’t ever “hold a drudge,” but it could not have been good for that person’s mindset to generate such hateful thoughts.
- The Buddha also warned that chasing people to teach Dhamma (who resist) is a lowly deed like chasing after a woman who has said “no.”
- We cannot “save” all—even the Buddha could not—but we must do what we can to help those who seek the truth.
4 users thanked author for this post.
Hello Simple,
“What does it mean/refer to by “four kinds of mindfulness meditation”?”
- It refers to Satipaṭṭhāna meditation. Satipaṭṭhāna has four categories: kāyānupassanā, vēdanānupassanā, cittānupassanā, and dhammānupassanā.
- The four parts are briefly discussed in #5 of “Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta – Structure.”
- More posts in “Mahā Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta.”
1 user thanked author for this post.
1. Several factors contribute to the tendency of the majority of people (puthujjana) to reject the Buddha’s more profound teachings.
- Of course, most people agree with the “mundane versions” of “Buddhism,” which encourage moral living. Most religions share this aspect.
- However, sticking to the idea that just “observing five or eight precepts” can remove suffering falls under the wrong view of “silabbata parāmāsa,” one of the three samyojana to be broken at the Sotapanna stage.
- To stop future suffering, one’s mind must AUTOMATICALLY reject the tendency to attach to sensory inputs. As we have discussed repeatedly, attachment to sensory inputs sooner or later leads to committing akusala kamma. Trying to live a “moral life” by forcefully observing precepts will not remove that inevitability.
- Instead, one MUST follow one of the following two approaches:
(i) One must constantly contemplate the drawbacks of sensory pleasures. For that, it is necessary to understand the Paticca Samuppada process. Even then, it is difficult to stop the tendency to attach to the “built-in saññā” or the “sense of joy” upon experiencing specific sensory inputs.
(ii). One can make the process easier by understanding that such a “sense of joy” arises from a false/distorted saññā. The external world and each “lifestream” are designed to provide that false/distorted saññā. This is the greatest magic trick. See “Saññā Gives Rise to Most of the Vedanā We Experience” “Saññā Nidānā hi Papañca Saṅkhā – Immoral Thoughts Based on “Distorted Saññā”,” and “Fooled by Distorted Saññā (Sañjānāti) – Origin of Attachment (Taṇhā).” Of course, it is not easy to understand this “trick.” - For most people, such an idea is not acceptable. They cannot fathom the idea that sensory pleasures are a mirage. By the way, the word puthujjana comes from “puthu” meaning “most” and “jana” meaning “people.”
2. Trayal wrote: “I noticed that there are mainly 2 approaches to learning Dhamma – one is the moral approach and the other is the intellectual. For me, taking the intellectual route clearly shows that Buddha’s teachings don’t stem from a mere speculation or religious foundation. It contains rigorous analysis of mental phenomena that can be challenging to even the brightest minds and I’m often discovering something new. But for most people, this approach doesn’t seem to work.”
- Yes. That is what I tried to explain above. Even before getting into the fact that “saññā” is a mirage, the idea of “stopping rebirth” is a “show stopper” for many. They cannot even fathom living without “sensual pleasures.” Even those who cannot afford that many sensory pleasures are hopeful that one day they will make a lot of money to afford all sorts of such “pleasures.”
- To eliminate that notion, one must comprehend the origin of the false/distorted saññā. We are discussing that (again) in the new series of posts in the “Worldview of the Buddha” section.
- However, it is not easy. As Yash pointed out: “For that one must be open minded and have the ability to analyse any given information ,example , the pleasure cycle, anicca,etc.”
3. Most people tend to seek the “easy way out.” If someone teaches that one can be born in heaven by killing people of other religions, many are willing to accept that on faith.
- This is why the Buddha’s teachings tend to “go underground” relatively quickly. They are not easy to grasp, so the tendency to lose the “deep meanings” is very high.
- That happened in India merely 500 years after the Buddha’s passing. Instead, the Vedic teachings took hold very quickly. While they share many concepts from Buddha’s teachings, those are only superficial. Furthermore, one is guaranteed to “live forever” in a Brahma realm, which plays a huge role in ready acceptance. (Of course, they don’t realize that such a permanent existence is impossible if they examine Buddha’s teachings.) It happened with the previous Buddha (Buddha Kassapa), who appeared millions of years ago. The Vedās propagated the (twisted) teachings of Buddha Kassapa until Buddha Gotama appeared. See “Vedās Originated With Buddha Kassapa’s Teachings.”
- Thus, Vedic teachings are a mundane version of Buddhist teachings. Of course, they are much better than many other teachings practiced by puthujjana today.
3 users thanked author for this post.
That was explained (indirectly) in #8 of the recent post “Mind-Pleasing Things” in the World Arise via Paṭicca Samuppāda.” I reproduce that below.
_____
“Paṭi+ichcha” also Leads to “Sama+uppāda“ – Making of the External World
8. The second, still mostly hidden, aspect of Paṭicca Samuppāda is that it creates the necessary environment (external world) to generate the appropriate “saññā.” I have been trying to explain this aspect for two years now; I don’t know how many have grasped this concept. I hope the current approach will be helpful!
- The kammic energies generated when one engages in akusala kamma (based on upādāna) lead to two effects: (i) they can bring vipāka for that person in the future (for example, lead to rebirth in a given realm), and (ii) that energy also contributes to the preparation of the external environment necessary to bring that vipāka. For example, a suitable environment must exist for an animal to be born.
- For example, when the Sun, Earth, and other planets are “re-formed,” initially, all four lowest realms are absent. Then, as people (Brahma-kāyika humans) start gradually “going back to their old ways and engaging in akusala kamma,” they generate kammic energies for their individual futures and also collectively to make the environment for such births to occur.
- In a newly-formed Earth, the animal realm will likely emerge first before the other three apāyās. Initially, the environment for animals to survive (vegetation) was absent. With the collective kammic energy being generated, that environment emerges first, i.e., plants appear first, plant-eating animals, and then carnivorous animals. The first animals of a given type appear with opapātika births. Depending on the situation, one of four birth types can occur; see “Four Types of Births in Buddhism.”
_______
The collective kammic energies by all living beings in our cakkavala (Earth-based) can affect the motions of the Sun and the Moon, thereby leading to changes in environmental conditions. These include droughts, hurricanes, floods, etc. Since abhisankhara (javana power) generated by humans is the strongest, human behavior dominantly affects these issues/conditions.
- The physical environment can drastically change over time if the collective human psyche becomes increasingly moral/immoral. That is how the lifetimes of humans (physical human bodies) move up to around 100,000 years and move down to around 10 years. Such changes occur over many millions of years.
- For example, human lifetimes have not changed significantly since the days of Buddha Gotama (around 100 years). But they are expected to increase to around 20,000 years when the next Buddha, Buddha Maitreya, will be born in millions of years. See the recent discussion, “Why Was Gotama Buddha’s Lifespan So Short Compared to Other Buddhas?“
2 users thanked author for this post.
Yes, this is a complex issue. Let me think about it a bit more. I hope others have their own experiences and will share them, too.
- But something caught my eye about Taryal’s comment. I thought you previously stated (or I somehow got the idea) that your family was Buddhist. From the above comment, it appears that your family practiced Hinduism.
Getting answers to the questions you raised requires understanding the following:
1. Suppose a Deva dies and is born a human; when that human dies, he/she is reborn a Brahma. The human existence between Deva and Brahma existences is called “human bhava;“ it can last thousands or even millions of years. During that whole time, the essential part of the human is a subtle, invisible body called “manomaya kaya” or “gandhabba.” Thus, human existence is maintained by the gandhabba. It is born simultaneously with the death of the Deva, and at its death, a Brahma is born in this example.
- Within that human bhava, the human gandhabba can enter a womb and be born with a physical body (like ours); that birth with a physical and dense human body is called “jāti.” (Thus, many jāti can occur within a bhava, each time born with a different physical body.) The lifetime of that dense human body can vary from about ten years to about 100,000 years. That depends on the physical environment. Some physical environments can sustain a physical, dense human body for 100,000 years, and when the conditions are bad, it can be as low as tens of years.
- The change in environment is not linear. For example, even though a dense human body these days lasts about 100 years, it will decrease to about 10 years and then increase again to about 20,000 years (as I remember) before the next Buddha (Buddha Maitreya) appears.
- The “Mahāpadāna Sutta (DN 14)“ is another reference for those lifetimes during various Buddhas. The difference between bhava and jāti is discussed in “Bhava and Jāti – States of Existence and Births Therein.”
2. You asked: “Why did Gautama Buddha choose to be born in a time when the human lifespan was naturally shorter?”
- A Buddha (more correctly, a Bodhisatta) does not have control over when he attains Buddhahood. He may be born when the physical lifetime is long or short. Such things are “dhammatā,” which happen according to nature.
- That answers your third question, too.
2 users thanked author for this post.
It is likely that the movements in the “dog’s face” are just nerve impulses. An analogy is a plant turning to sunlight.
- There cannot be any “thoughts” arising because the hadaya vatthu (seat of the mind) is not in the head (at least in humans).
2 users thanked author for this post.
You should read relevant material if you are serious about investigating these issues.
- “.. just throwing thoughts” is a waste of time for everyone.
“I haven’t read Abhidhamma yet..”
1. That is one reason why you don’t understand why teaching Abhidhamma in the days of the Buddha was impossible.
- Also, Abhidhamma was not necessary in those days. Most people could grasp the essence of Buddha’s teachings without learning Abhidhamma. They had fulfilled paramita in previous lives and did not need much help completing that process. Many people only listened to one or two discourses and attained magga phala.
2. Abhidhamma is more suited for the current environment.
- You may want to read the post “Abhidhamma—Introduction” and also take a look at Ref.1 there. It is a free PDF file of a book by Bhikkhu Bodhi. Then, you will understand that learning Abhidhamma takes a while and is almost impossible to learn by only listening.
- Furthermore, it took almost 250 years to finish compiling the Abhidhamma theory, as explained in the post.
- After that, rereading the above comment may help clarify the situation further.
I don’t think there is a post with further description.
- Adhimokkha is mentioned only in a couple of suttas.
Thank you, Lang. I had forgotten about making this translation. I think it was done because of a similar situation in the discussion forum.
1 user thanked author for this post.
If ten people listened to a discourse by Wahraka Thero (or anyone else), they would understand it in their own way. Thus, the quality of translation depends on the translator.
- Reading my posts is the same. Different people understand at various levels, including not much understanding in some cases.
- Bahiya understood one verse by the Buddha and attained the Arahant stage in a few minutes; none of us have that level of wisdom (it is based on pāramitā or how much one has learned in previous lives). Devadatta spent a lifetime with the Buddha and did not learn anything useful (imagine how many discourses of the Buddha he listened to); he ended up in an apaya. Each person is different.
Yes. That is a good description!
- Also, see the discussion in another thread: Ignorant Mind perceives a “self”
The root cause of all this is the following: All our attachments are due to a “perceived self,” and that sense of a “self,” “me,” or “mine” arises due to the (distorted) saññā of experiencing “a sense of joy” with certain sensory inputs (for a human it is things like the taste of honey, the smell of perfume, beauty of a woman or handsomeness of a man, etc; but that is not common to other living beings, for example animals. Thus, such “a sense of joy” is not real, but it is a bit hard to see how it arises.)!
1 user thanked author for this post.
Good discussion!
The root cause of all this is the following: All our attachments are due to a “perceived self,” and that sense of a “self,” “me,” or “mine” arises due to the (distorted) saññā of experiencing “a sense of joy” with certain sensory inputs (for a human it is things like the taste of honey, the smell of perfume, beauty of a woman or handsomeness of a man, etc; but that is not common to other living beings, for example animals. Thus, such “a sense of joy” is not real, but it is a bit hard to see how it arises.)!
