Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Few indeed have the courage to acknowledge their flaws and admit their mistakes. Though I’m late, I want to commend Jittananto for doing so and also extend my sincere apology to him and everyone else in this thread—Buddhists and non-Buddhists alike. No matter how flawed someone else’s beliefs may appear to be, deprecating them with harsh words is never a noble deed. I, too, recognize that I’m not perfect and at times, I don’t realize that my spontaneity might negatively affect others. Having struggled with anger issues throughout my life, I’ve often found it difficult to tolerate environments or perspectives that I’ve perceived as “idiotic” or “nonsensical.” And I won’t deny that it used to be much worse before encountering the Dhamma. It has taken a lot of work for me to get to where I am but this is another sign that there’s a lot more to be done. I would like to make it known that I’ve had friends who are Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Agnostics, Mahayanists, and more, and have no intention in wishing or causing harm to any of them. We are all in this world together trying to figure out what it means to exist and our struggles are very real. The worst thing we can do is tear each other down.
I also want to address a possible misunderstanding. Some may have taken my words as criticism of Jethavanarama Monastery, but that was never my intent. I have personally spoken to the monks there and have nothing but respect for them and their dedication. They were the ones who taught me many fundamental concepts like cause and effect, pleasure and vexation, etc. that filled important gaps in my understanding. My comment was never meant to accuse them of sugarcoating the truth; it was simply an attempt at genuine critique. If my words gave the wrong impression, I deeply regret that.
“Bhikkhus, don’t get into arguments, such as:
“You don’t understand this teaching and training. I understand this teaching and training. What, you understand this teaching and training? You’re practicing wrong. I’m practicing right. I stay on topic, you don’t. You said last what you should have said first. You said first what you should have said last. What you’ve thought so much about has been disproved. Your doctrine is refuted. Go on, save your doctrine! You’re trapped; get yourself out of this—if you can!”
Why is that? Because those discussions aren’t beneficial or relevant to the fundamentals of the spiritual life. They don’t lead to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment.”
“Even if low-down bandits were to sever you limb from limb with a two-handed saw, anyone who had a malevolent thought on that account would not be following my instructions. If that happens, you should train like this: ‘Our minds will not degenerate. We will utter no harsh words. We will remain full of sympathy, with a heart of love and no secret hate. We will meditate, spreading a heart of love to that person. And with them as a basis, we will meditate, spreading a heart full of love to everyone in the world—abundant, expansive, limitless, free of enmity and ill will.’ That’s how you should train.”
2 users thanked author for this post.
I don’t take orders from sensitive people but I’ll make sure this is my last response to calm you down.
You know nothing about me so I think you should refrain from making such silly accusations. I will continue to stand by what I believe and do not care how it makes you feel. If Bible/Quran/Bhagavad Geeta can lead you to “Nibbana”, why bother looking into the Pali Canon (Buddha’s teachings)? Making a statement like that can be misleading and that is what I’ve seen in some of the Jethavanarama discourses.
I believe so. I too find it strange to see how liberal they sound in some of their discourses. But when I spoke to monks personally, they had a different attitude. My best guess is that in their public discourses, they try to sound more tolerant or accepting of non-Buddhist ideas, perhaps to avoid controversy or appeal to a wider audience.
Jittananto wrote: “If Buddha Dhamma increases your hatred towards non-Buddhists you are no better than all these radicals.”
I’m sorry but I do not understand how my comments count as “hatred towards non-Buddhists.” I’ve always been honest and have no interest in sugarcoating things just to please others. If my honesty comes across as “hateful” to you, that likely has more to do with your own interpretation than my intent. This is probably why you said: “One thing I notice on this forum, some insult other religions as idiots and imbeciles. This is a wrong speech and, therefore, an Akusala Kamma. You accumulate demerit no matter the target of your insult. “
I agree that insults made out of malice aren’t ideal, but even the Buddha used words like “fool” and “uninformed run-of-the-mill” to describe ignorance. In this thread, I was specifically referring to zealots who aggressively push extreme Abrahamic propaganda. If someone is being an idiot, I don’t see how it’s wrong to call them out for what they are.
“What do you know about Jesus and Muhammad?? I know that many Indians and Nepalese have hatred towards everything related to Islam and Arabs. How will this hatred lead you to Nibbāna?! I understand that according to Buddha Dhamma, they are wrong, but can you say with certainty that you are free from micchādiṭṭhi and that you are sotāpanna??!”
As for Jesus and Muhammad, I don’t even know if they existed. My critique is of the scriptures, not the individuals they endorse (who may or may not be real). For you to say, “many Indians and Nepalese hate Islam and Arabs” is a broad generalization and an unfair way to associate me with that sentiment. I evaluate religious doctrines based on their content, not based on the ethnicity or background of their followers. The Abrahamic scriptures contain numerous scientifically inaccurate claims and endorse outdated moral practices such as slavery, stoning, and genocide. Pointing out these flaws is not an expression of hatred.
“Most Venerable Bhante Nivanthapa Thero (Abbot of the monastery) told the audience, “Give me the bible, the Quran and the Bhagavad Gita, and I will show you Nibbāna.””
I don’t think he was being literal. I’ve listened to his discourses, and he has made it clear that other religions don’t lead to Nibbāna. The monastery takes a more diplomatic approach, likely because people today tend to be easily offended. But I don’t run a monastery, so I don’t feel the need to soften my words in the same way.
At the end of the day, my goal is not to appease or offend but to speak the truth as I see it. If someone finds that offensive, perhaps it is worth reflecting on why that is the case.
People who wrote those “holy books” had no clue about “distorted perception” so instead of pointing out the delusions of the mind, they blame the women instead. Little did the so-called “prophet” know that an anagami could be swarmed by naked women and not generate a trace of lust.
But like mentioned above, dwelling over such bastards-led farce is a waste of time and would only contribute to further agitating our minds. To be bothered less by such worldly issues, we have to create the environment that’ll help trigger the meritorious causes, which can be done by listening, reading, and practicing Dhamma. I strongly suggest attending online personal Dhamma talks with the monks at Jethavanarama as much as possible. We can use our time to do beneficial things instead. That’s what we have control over!
Additionally, if you’re interested in a philosophy that’ll help you be more resilient in your lay life, I also recommend Stoicism.
1 user thanked author for this post.
“How do you (or scientists) know that the movement of tectonic plates could not be due to the shifting of a liquid mass underneath it?”
The primary reason is that seismic waves don’t indicate the presence of a large liquid layer beneath the crust. If there were an ocean-like layer under the plates, we would expect clear seismic wave disruptions, but we don’t see this.
“The Buddha did not provide any details, and I will not speculate. But my point is no one knows for sure. Yes. The shifting of tectonic plates could be the “immediate cause” But that could be due to the other reasons. We don’t know enough about the Earth’s core to say for sure.”
That’s a fair perspective but the reason I was concerned was because the sutta’s description sounded quite basic and medieval. There isn’t an evidence that weather conditions can influence earthquakes short term, but in the long term the movement of the oceans could have an impact. I apologize if I sound like a nitpicker but the mind is often curious. Buddha had to adjust his discourses to people of his time who had a very limited understanding of the world and in his own words, he said he only teaches 2 things – suffering and the end of suffering, which perhaps doesn’t include explaining physical details like seismography.
But I would still like to discuss the sutta though. It lists the causes for “great earthquakes”, which doesn’t seem to include small foreshocks. Do we know if the whole planet (or a big portion of it) shakes when one of the listed events occur? I also wonder which one of the 8 causes did Ananda experience that led him to ask the question to Buddha.
Yash wrote:
“Another thing I realised that I overthink alot. Whenever I see people of different religions on YouTube talk about how their religion is true and everything else is false and if you don’t follow them, you will be burnt in hell forever. This is about abrahmic religions. These things kind of depress me and make me anxious and I feel like why do they say this? Whats the evidence for their such claims? Then on further research I found how every such religion has found a way to claim that their holy books contain all the scientific verses.”
“I understand that sir. But it happens automatically. That’s why I also tried to cultivate jhanas along with the dhamma to overcome such nonsense thoughts.”
Mind is a machine that runs on views. If you’re annoyed by the things that dogmatic people say, it is a reflection of your mental tendency (gati). Your views influence a subconscious algorithm that will automatically bring a reaction (output) when a corresponding input is provided. In your case, it sounds like your mind is attached with aversion (dosa). From my practice, I think that the only way of combating this issue is through the realization of right views.
Until the eradication of kama raga, we can only be tentative about the deep workings of the world. But we can do our best by carefully examining whatever worldview is presented to us. On the internet, you will find 100 different religion videos that say 100 different things that contradict each other. To list a few examples – “Accept Jesus or rot in hell”, “Believe Allah or die an eternal death”, “Chant Namo Amitabha to enter pure land”, “Hare Ram for good karma”, etc. They all claim that they’re speaking truth, but can they all be right? No, but they can certainly all be wrong. I remember getting into a heated fight with a few Muslims online when they praised the Islamic adultery punishment of 100 lashes. A girl (a minor!) was apprehended and lashed repeatedly and forcefully woken up even after she fainted to make sure that 100 painful lashes were delivered. Those idiots were not only praising such an inhumane action but insisting that they should be strictly enforced into all Islamic countries. I confronted them by asking who the hell are they to decide what a woman should do with her body. What rights do they have to impose their dogmatic beliefs onto others? They responded by trying to defend the authority of the Quran and one of the things that they told me was that it contains many “scientific verses” – one of which provides an accurate description of the human embryo formation. I decided to investigate it, only to end up laughing at their stupidity and mourning for those who have to put up with it.
“Man We did create from a quintessence of clay. Then we placed him as a drop of sperm in a place of rest, firmly fixed. Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood. Then out of that clot We made a fetus lump. Then We made out of that lump bones, and clothed the bones with flesh. Then We developed out of it another creature. So blessed be Allah, the Best to create!” (23:12-14)
Religious people like to twist their interpretations to pretend that their holy books contain “scientific verses”. But do you think the above is even remotely similar to how embryogenesis actually works? Every single sentence above has an error.
“Man We did create from a quintessence of clay.”
A clay is primarily made up of inorganic compounds like silica and alumina, but a human body is primarily made up of organic compounds and water.
“Then we placed him as a drop of sperm in a place of rest, firmly fixed.”
A sperm cell continues to move until it fertilizes with the ovum, after which a zygote is formed and the sperm cell practically disappears. There is no “resting” for a “drop of sperm” and it is certainly not “firmly fixed”.
“Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood.”
A zygote is formed by the coitus of the parents, during which the mother must be in season. In other words, there can’t be an embryo without the ovum but this crucial aspect is not even mentioned.
“Then out of that clot We made a fetus lump.”
A blood clot is a gel-like mass that is formed in the blood at the site of an injury, primarily to seal further blood loss. An embryo is not a “clot”. It is a multicellular organism that continually grows.
“Then We made out of that lump bones, and clothed the bones with flesh.”
The skeletal system forms gradually in 2 ways – Intramembranous ossification and Endochondral ossification. This process continues throughout the fetal life so it makes no sense to say that a lump of bones was created and stitched with the flesh.
“Then We developed out of it another creature.”
Embryogenesis shows that an embryo goes through 20 different stages within the first 23 days. Based on that, it is different at each stage, so what the hell does “another creature” mean?
“So blessed be Allah, the Best to create!”
Lol! Pregnancy is an utterly stressful process that puts the mother and the baby through insane risks and suffering. Even an accidental point mutation can have a devastating consequence. Some are even raped and forced into pregnancy (that includes children). And it is not just humans that get pregnant, animals do too and their suffering is even worse as they also need to bear with the risk of predators. So I DO NOT understand how anyone can be ignorant enough to think that this process is worthy of any praise.
This is just one example. The so-called holy books of the worldly religions are frequently littered with scientific errors like “earth being created before the stars and that they can fall from the heaven, disease caused due to demons, usage of geocentric model, implication of 6000 years old earth, etc.” (of course, I am talking about Abrahamic religions here but it’s not limited to that). A common excuse is asserting that they’re “metaphors” meant not to be taken literally. When the claims are factually false, they’re metaphors but when they’re somewhat right, they’re “scientific verses”. That is their hypocrisy.
I didn’t do the above analysis to waste anyone’s time but to attempt to provide some insights because I myself have gone through similar experience. I can’t control what other people do. But what frustrates me the most is that the mere existence of these people “blocks” the path of many others who could have the potential to comprehend the profound teachings of Buddha. A good example is the emerging studies of “Near Death Experiences” which is often discarded without a second thought by even the most well known scientists like Richard Dawkins and Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Any implication of the word “supernatural” can generate discomfort in many bright minds today because they are aware of how nonsensical the worldly religions are, and the last thing you’d wanna do is associate with zealots.
It is an absolute mess and I have personally given up on trying to fix any of it. I can’t change others but I can certainly work on changing myself. There is a very specific reason why a Bhikkhu gives up the lay life and fully embraces the monastic life. Detaching from the worldly mess is an important part of the process.
1 user thanked author for this post.
“Yet, some babies die within days. How is their destiny determined?”
By making excuses. If one is faith oriented, counterarguments are always secondary. But difficult indeed it is to justify the suffering of babies. Some blame the first humans (“original sin” in Abrahamic faiths) while others blame the babies themselves (“karma” in Hinduism). The former is often scrutinized for its injustice of punishing one for the sins of the other while the latter is criticized for it insinuating cosmic cruelty instead of evoking God’s benevolence.
But the other thing is how incompatible these “faiths” are with observation. Reports from Near Death Experiences clearly disprove the “heaven/hell forever” argument. Even agnostics report encountering dead relatives. How is this possible if they were supposed to be sent to hell or get annihilated? This supports paraloka way more than the “soul” argument. I am surprised to see that even some doctors in the west are dumb enough to endorse Christianity. But perhaps there is little one can know without exposure to Dhamma?
Dhamma rightfully views consciousness as a manifestation of causes and conditions (therefore, various kinds of viññāṇa), but other religions portray it as something continuous like a “soul”.
For example, the following are necessary conditions for eye consciousness (chakkhu viññāṇa) to manifest:
object (arammana) + light + physical eye + Peripheral Nervous System (PNS) + Central Nervous System (Brain/mana indriya) + chakkhu pasada + hadaya vatthu
Steps listed:
- Light reflects off the object
- Photons are received by eye ball
- Neurons from PNS transfer electric signals to Brain
- Brain converts it into a form that chakkhu pasada can receive
- Mana indriya sends ray signal (kirana) to chakkhu pasada rupa
- Chakkhu pasada impinges the hadaya vatthu
- If the person is attentive, awareness manifests at this step
- So far it is a plain awareness (vipāka viññāṇa). But if it is an object of interest, the initial attachment is automatic.
- Then the person can choose to generate conscious thoughts about the object or try to avoid it by distracting themselves. This can strengthen the perception of ‘I’ or ‘me’. But if a single condition above is removed, awareness of the object can not occur.
Do you see anything unchanging/eternal above?
And here is the empirical proof of paraloka. It appears that this is as close as we can get to understanding paraloka using the “mundane” approach (i.e. without jhana):
1 user thanked author for this post.
How come some 10-20% of ONLY Western societies have this issue now? As I said, it is a mental issue.
I’m not sure how true this is. People will freely identify as long as they don’t feel threatened but that hasn’t been the case for most of recorded history. For example, here’s what the Bible says about homosexuality:
If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. (Leviticus 20:13)
Many societies are now more liberal and tolerant which is why people feel more safe to share how they actually feel. That includes many Western societies AND some eastern ones like Thailand for example: Why are there so many ladyboys in Thailand?
But even nowadays, not all societies are tolerant of trans/gay people. Some even go as far as public executions: The Islamic State’s Views on Homosexuality
To be honest, I had been thinking about this issue myself as it wasn’t something I was used to in my country Nepal, which is still intolerant. I knew that such people exist but they often hid themselves as many only show up past midnight in regional city areas. It wasn’t until I moved to USA for college that I saw many LGBTs freely expressing themselves. Mental Health America succinctly states that LGBT is not a mental health issue, even though they’re prone to mental health problems: LGBTQ+ Communities and Mental Health
Many researchers argue that gender is likely a neurochemical phenomenon that is different from the biological sex which is a chromosomal phenomenon (see for example, Neurobiology of gender identity and sexual orientation). From the Dhamma, I have learnt that the gandhabba can undergo drastic changes even while inside the physical body. So even if one had a purisa gati at conception (hence, pulled into a zygote with XY chromosome leading to a male physical body), there could be (hidden) underlying causes that can surface into the (re)cultivation of itthi gati leading to female tendencies and behavior. Some appear to have a mixture of these qualities leading to them identifying as non-binary, etc.
But if one is a dedicated Dhamma practitioner, I think it is reasonable to say that they will worry less about their gender identity (and sexual orientation). When one removes kama raga, it becomes irrelevant anyway. And to my knowledge, Buddha neither condoned nor commended transgenders so perhaps it is not something to worry about but it is good to be informed indeed, especially in our contemporary world.
I think you made good observations. One of the issues I’ve had with the Hindu idea of “kali yuga” (and “satya yuga”) is how they try to tie it with a creator God (but fail to do so). Why would a supposedly benevolent cosmic order make it so difficult to escape lower births, especially when most animals don’t have the cognitive ability to accumulate good kamma?
Most Hindus think that they will be sent into a favorable birth (like heaven) because they followed the precepts, worships and generally lived a moral life, but others will be taken away by deity Yamraj. But if the Yugas represent moral and spiritual decay or purity, how does that apply to the countless animals that vastly outnumber humans? Like Abrahamic religions, it is ignorant of the suffering experienced by non-human species.
Furthermore, when viewed as a divine order, I also don’t understand the suffering of babies and toddlers who barely know anything about the world. If the individual doesn’t remember their past deeds, then the suffering feels arbitrary rather than meaningful. Punishment or reward only makes sense if the person experiencing it understands why it’s happening. Otherwise, it just seems like cosmic cruelty rather than justice (which very likely seems to be the case anyway).
This is another aspect that makes me think that Buddha Kassapa’s teachings were in fact distorted overtime and turned into a ritual bound religion.
