Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
It is not about kusala and akusala kamma.
- For a puthujjana to start comprehending Buddha’s teachings, they must first live a “moral life,” where the base level of “morality” is to abide by society’s standards. That is the only “morality” they know. The key point is to have a calm mind to start understanding Buddha Dhamma.
- When a puthujjana engages in an action not approved by society, their minds become agitated, which is not conducive to learning. Thus, if society approves having multiple wives, they don’t need to worry about having multiple wives.
- If the Buddha had started changing societal norms, that would have taken most of his lifetime. Of course, once one becomes serious about attaining Nibbana, it may be better not to have a single wife (i.e., to become a bhikkhu).
- In that context, even keeping slaves was accepted by society at the time of the Buddha. While the Buddha did not consent to that practice (obviously an immoral practice by any standards), he did not try to change it, which would have taken most of his time.
One’s moral values will change as one advances on the Path, but this change cannot be forced in some cases.
2 users thanked author for this post.
The Buddha defined “morality” based on societal acceptance.
- Yes. If it is accepted by society (or the country), having multiple wives is fine. In the days of the Buddha, many disciples had several wives (until they became Anagamis).
- For example, kings had harems with many women. There is an account of a gahapati (householder) with three or four wives. I forget his name, but the day he became an Anagami, he came home and told the wives that he would consider them his sisters from then on, and they could live with him. But if they wanted, they were free to marry another man. One wife chose to marry another man, but the others stayed with him.
- It becomes sexual misconduct when one goes beyond societal norms.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Please note that the above are Jittananto’s thoughts. I (or this website) do not encourage nor discourage anyone from becoming a bhikkhu. It is a personal decision to be taken after careful consideration.
1 user thanked author for this post.
There is nothing wrong with earning money. One has to earn money to live life unless you are a bhikkhu. Problems arise only when you focus on earning too much money.
- Buddha taught lay people to live moral lives, not miserable lives. He discouraged excess indulgence in sensual pleasures and, at the other extreme, submitting one’s body to suffering. He recommended the “middle path,” away from the two extremes.
- Eating well, exercising, and living a healthy life are essential. Our brains use 25% of the energy we get from our food. If you neglect to eat well, your brain may not function well. A healthy brain is necessary to understand Buddha’s teachings.
- You may get sick if you don’t eat and exercise well; taking long walks is an easy exercise. Otherwise, you will not be able to learn Buddha’s teachings.
- Please read all my above comments carefully. You seem to rush into things. Relax and take the time to absorb the teachings.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I am afraid you have some misconceptions.
1. “Sangha” refers ONLY to those with magga phala (Noble Persons), i.e., at or above the Sotapanna stage.
- Not even all bhikkhus belong to “Sangha.“
- However, all bhikkhus deserve our respect.
2. Since bhikkhus, in most cases (especially in Buddhist countries), receive food from the lay disciples, they are not expected to cook for themselves. They are expected NOT to earn money, so they have no way of buying food. Furthermore, they are expected to commit their time to learning, practicing, and teaching Dhamma to lay people.
- However, lay people (including those with magga phala) must cook for themselves. The main reason is that others cannot determine whether a given lay person (“householder”) is a Noble Person.
- Cooking for oneself and eating by oneself does not break the sila of a layperson, even if he/she is a Noble Person. I assume you are a layperson.
2 users thanked author for this post.
You wrote: “Only thing where I might have to break sila is to cook for exclusively myself. “
- Why do you think you will break sila by cooking for yourself?
- What sila is broken that way?
1 user thanked author for this post.
Hello Cat,
I did not realize you had been reading the forum for a while. I thought you were new to the forum.
- So, some of the posts I recommended (on the thread “Contact with Noble Sangha“) could be familiar to you. I thought that was your first post on this forum.
P.S. Regarding your question above: “One thing that I didn’t grasp fully was what “offering your merits” actually means and therefore I didn’t do it this time, but of course I would like to pay as much of my own debts in the future.”
- The case of the two bhikkhus discussed in my earlier comment above (on this thread) is an exception since it was figures out by the Buddha.
- These days, no one knows what type of debt each of us is carrying (due to past deeds). We don’t know to whom such debts we owe. So, we can only engage in metta bhavana and “give merits to all beings” each time we do a good deed.
- Also see “Transfer of Merits (Pattidāna) – How Does it Happen?.”
1 user thanked author for this post.
1. Don’t worry. At least 90% of the “Buddhists” are not aware of the actual teachings of the Buddha, let alone the general population.
- Please go through the following sections and read whatever interests you. Once you identify an aspect that interests you, that will give you a good start.
- “Bhāvanā (Meditation)” and ” Moral Living and Fundamentals.”
- Please feel free to ask questions. Referring to a specific post and bullet numbers helps others to answer the questions.
2. Breath meditation attracts many people because it calms the mind. It is OK to do it as needed to calm the mind, but don’t spend too much time on it.
3. If others have suggestions for Cat, please post. Different insights/experiences can be valuable.
1 user thanked author for this post.
The Buddhist Anapanasati meditation is not “breath meditation.” Let us start with that discussion.
- Please read “Is Ānāpānasati Breath Meditation?” and let us know your thoughts.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Hello, Cat,
We have had many discussions about Goenka Vipassana retreats in this forum.
- One key point was that he uses breath meditation to calm the mind before engaging in Vipassana. Is that correct?
- We can discuss this further after your reply.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Thank you for the update, Dawson!
- We are glad to hear about your progress. Keep it up. Things can move fast under the right conditions. Try to maintain this mindset. Even if you lose it, you can regain it if you keep trying. Eventually, it becomes easier to get back to it. It is indeed a samādhi.
2 users thanked author for this post.
Yes. That is a good description.
- The automatic reaction to “distorted saññā” will reduce as the number of samyojana (or anusaya) reduces.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Yes. Arahants feel physical suffering but not mental. For example, they will feel the pain of an injury; however, unlike a puthujjana, they will not keep worrying about it and generate domanassa vedana, which is mind-made.
- But they will also feel “distorted saññā,” like the yucky taste of rotten food or the unpleasant smell of feces. Again, they will not worry about it generating domanassa vedana. They fully understand that such “distorted saññā” will arise as long as they have the human physical body.
1 user thanked author for this post.
“Bhante mentioned that when a person becomes an arahant, even their traumas disappear. For instance, someone who is claustrophobic , fears animals, or has experienced personal traumas such as rape and intimidation—along with paranoia and various fears—will no longer experience these issues at the arahant stage. Do you agree with this perspective?”
- It is hard to say. We can only guess. It is possible that memories of trauma may not bother them.
______
” I ask because there are cases where some attitudes seem to persist even among arahants. For example, there was an arahant who spoke inappropriately to others; I can’t recall his name or story. “
- It was Ven. Pilindavaccha: “Pilindavaccha Sutta (Ud 3.6).”
_____
“If I am not mistaken only the Lord Buddha is completely devoid of all idiosyncrasies. “
- Yes. That is correct.
_______
“Bhante also said that taste is a useless sense. Is that true for science?”
- I don’t think that is entirely correct. Our bodies are made to provide that “saññā.” As we have discussed, taste is a “saññā.” However, it is not discussed that way in the suttas because Abhidhamma was not developed during the Buddha’s time. Per Abhidhamma, only “bodily vedanā” are real vedanā. But in the suttas, saññā and vedanā are clumped together as “vedanā.”
- Even Arahants experience “manāpa/amanāpa” or a sense of “like/dislike” generated by that “distorted saññā.” See “Nibbānadhātu Sutta (Iti 44)“: “Tassa tiṭṭhanteva pañcindriyāni yesaṁ avighātattā manāpāmanāpaṁ (“manāpa/amanāpa“) paccanubhoti, sukhadukkhaṁ paṭisaṁvedeti.” The English translation there is correct: “Their five sense faculties still remain. So long as their senses have not gone they continue to experience the agreeable and disagreeable, to feel pleasure and pain.” Also, note that “sukhadukkha” (sukha and dukkha) means “pleasure and pain,” and those are the genuine vedanā per Abhidhamma. Agreeable and disagreeable (“like/dislike”) arise due to saññā. In this sutta, at least those are separated, as in Abhidhamma.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Claude seems to be able to extract insights from the post. Thanks for sharing it!
- You may get a better analysis by feeding Claude the first seven posts in this section: “Worldview of the Buddha.” The other posts in the section are old posts that require revision; feeding Claude those old posts may lead to confusion.
