Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I see, so it is safe to say that those English translations are not accurate. Tathagata experiences vipāka viññāṇa with pabhassara citta.
Dr. Lal wrote: “Since five entities have stopped arising in Buddha, rupa DO NOT imply rupa in the external world. They refer to “rupa” that arise in the mind together with defilements.“
Does this refer to the subtle rupa generated by javana citta in viññāna paccayā nāmarūpa? A Tathagata can still generate rupa using mental power, right?
My translation:
“Bāhuna, the Realized One has escaped from ten things, so that he lives detached, liberated, his mind free of limits. What ten?
Attachment to Rupa (Dhammā, Dhātu, etc.)…
Attachment to (Mind-made) feelings…
Defiled Perception…
Abhisaṅkhāra (negative mental volition)…
Kamma viññāṇa (Defiled Consciousness)…
Rebirth…
Old Age (as there is no future existence)…
Death (as there is no future existence)…
Future Suffering (associated with Rebirth)
Mental Defilements of Lobha, Dosa, and Moha…”
My mano sankhara suddenly caused some cittas involving the memory of this thread, so I wanted to get back to mend things. I think I need to say sorry for the way I spoke above. I started on a quest about 8 months ago to discover as much truth about the world as I can. I have spoken to many people about issues that tend to go beyond what people normally discuss like the mystery of consciousness, death & life, etc. The sad part is that most of them have been really ignorant towards me. Creationists have tried to lure me into their religion. Some interactions I had with Christian missionaries honestly felt like a pedophile trying to groom its victim. They self-proclaim to be moral people but when you bring up doubts like the problem of suffering, they responded with anger and contradictions. Many Materialists, on the other hand, act like they know everything about the world. Yet, when you try to discuss the complexity of the conscious experience and the possibility that the mind may not be what the brain does, they become insecure and act like it’s a “sin”. Here’s a cry-bully materialist video. Then there are those who don’t even seem to have any urge to investigate things. Because I had many negative interactions, I feel like I was a little insecure about my stance on the mysteries of the world. But I am really impressed by the responses here, especially the way Dr. Lal handled this thread. Good job!
Yash wrote: “Then they will repeat the same answer! ” We also have compassion and want to spread Christianity to every person”
I know they will say that. But if their God is as almighty and compassionate as they say he is, they shouldn’t need to spread their religion. Someone born in a place like North Korea, for example, wouldn’t have a chance to get any exposure to this anyway. If God wants all of us to be Christian, everyone should be born in a Christian family. Animals in the wild shouldn’t need to kill and eat each other to survive too.
On a shallow level, it might look they’re the same things but someone with even a basic understanding of Dhamma knows it is light years ahead of cartoon Bible. A Sakadagami obviously wants to do their best to help others before they die. But their help doesn’t involve telling people to embrace some divine imaginary sugar-daddy with cheap faulty promise of eternal life and threats of eternal damnation otherwise. It involves teaching people how they can use their own efforts to see the suffering associated with this world and ultimately be free from it.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I lost brain cells trying to go through the video referenced by Dr. Lal in #3 of his comment. If you think you will enter heaven simply because you’re a Christian, why not jump off a bridge and die? There is no need to be alive in this suffering filled world and continue creating problems for others to deal with. These idiots are the reason why contemporary scientists are still reluctant to consider anything other than matter in this universe.
What makes you serious about these things? They sound spooky and interesting at the same time but I would suggest taking them with a grain of salt. These events are really unusual so we can’t be sure if they were literally “paranormal” or just misunderstandings.
To be honest, we can’t really control what other people do. So we should stop worrying about them and focus on ourselves. I know that an experienced Dhamma practitioner would not be bothered by other’s incompetence but I guess I feel bothered due to my lack of experience. I would be more than happy to help those that are open minded and willing to learn. But we can’t save everyone and this world is too messed up. It is what it is.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Yash wrote: “If that person would have been open minded and truly in search of the truth, he would have listened to you and also tried to do some research by himself. So practically nothing it is that we can do in such a matter.”
You are right. I did not realize that people tend to be quite sensitive towards this stuff. We are living in a really unique time of the world where modern science helps verify many aspects of Buddha Dhamma and many fascinating research like NDE, Rebirth accounts from children, etc. have been done that support the Dhamma and are easily accessible via internet. The explanations are there. All one needs to do is have an open mind and make an effort to go through them. Sadly many people create a road block for themselves out of their own ignorance and ego. Could this be some kamma vipaka?
Another example is one of my close friends who still thinks Buddhism belongs to the same category as Hinduism, despite me repeatedly encouraging him to look into Dhamma sources like this website. I was so disappointed when he claimed Buddha taught “Nirvana” and insinuated that I shouldn’t be like Christian missionaries trying to convert people into my religion, smh. Like dude, how can you tell me what to do when you are not even close to having a basic understanding of Buddha’s teachings?
1 user thanked author for this post.
No, the Commentaries will not help either. First, one needs to sort out which Commentaries are reliable. For example, Visuddhimagga is not. I mentioned the reliable Commentaries included in the Tipitaka in those posts. However, even those cannot be understood without some basics.
Why didn’t they make it easier to understand though? For example, things are really simplified with elaborate meanings and translations in this website. Shouldn’t the commentaries in Tipitaka serve a similar purpose?
That clarifies things quite a lot. Buddha’s denial of immortal soul/unchanging self is often mistaken as denial of existence. Many threads on this issue on platforms like reddit are quite depressing to read.
In Anidassana Viññāṇa – What It Really Means
The question is not whether there is a “self” or not. Is it wise to think that it is worthwhile to have the perception of a “self” and do things only for the pleasure of the “self”?
So, having the perception of self means clinging to the 5 aggregates or thinking that it is worthwhile to take them as one’s own. “Own” or “mine” refers to something that can be maintained to one’s satisfaction (icca). Of course there is nothing in this world that can be maintained to one’s satisfaction in the long run. So losing the perception of self simply means no longer thinking the aggregates are worth taking as one’s own i.e. anicca and anatta. This explains why an arahant doesn’t become a zombie after losing the perception of self. They experience the 5 aggregates but know that they are anicca, anatta and dukkha which is why an arahant’s mind doesn’t attach to anything in this world.
Does this summarize it well?
