VincentRJ

I am limited by words.

The Buddha was teaching of two states.

That which is conditioned and imperment and that which is permanent and unconditioned.

Nothing to do with class.

The description of Citta covers it.

It's something that you don't have to accept or belief but revolves around that 4 Noble Truths.

In your posts you often refer to the kalama sutta, in which you are invited to investigate for yourself.

This is what the Buddha was asking you to investigate.

I am investigating it, Rocky, and thinking about it, in accordance with the advice of the Kalama Sutta.

The two states your refer to, conditioned and impermanent, and permanent an unconditioned, seem like the duality of 'either/or'. This is not how I understand reality. Rather, there's a continuum of different states, not just two. It's too simplistic to describe something as 'either hot or cold'.

This is everyones crossroad.

We can stop here and proceed no further, or accept that the Buddha went before us and is recommending a way.

I am limited by words.

The Buddha was teaching of two states.

That which is conditioned and imperment and that which is permanent and unconditioned.

Nothing to do with class.

The description of Citta covers it.

It's something that you don't have to accept or belief but revolves around that 4 Noble Truths.

In your posts you often refer to the kalama sutta, in which you are invited to investigate for yourself.

This is what the Buddha was asking you to investigate.

That seems very elitist, Rocky. Higher and lower reality. Higher class and lower class; ruling class and working class. Surely the truth is free of all class distinctions. Lower and higher don't apply.

The Buddha replied:

In the iikincanfliiyatana jhana (absorption in the realm of nothingness), the consciousness of the act of consciousness disappeared but that of nothingness appeared instead.

Finally, in the sanfliivedayitanirodha, which is the last level of jhana, the consciousness of nothingness also disappeared, and no new consciousness appeared.

Therefore, the complete cessation of consciousness existed continually in such a state.

During the time, we could not say that there was consciousness, for the person has no feeling at all.

But we could neither say that there was no consciousness, for the person could be conscious again after he came out of the jhana.

Neither could he be declared dead ~or could he be declared not dead.

This is the complete cessatIon of sannii or consciousness which could be caused to occur by human's control, power or action.

What the Buddha was teaching is that there are levels of existence without consciousness, Nibanna being the ultimate state.

Al this is suggesting that there is a state beyond consciousness, and that consciousness, and self, are illusory.

Rocky,

Thanks for your detailed quotes, but I have to confess that I sometimes struggle with these concepts of nothingness, from a logical and linguistic aspect. Nothingness, by definition, cannot 'appear'. Such wording, perhaps as a result of the translation, is creating the impression that 'nothing' is 'something'.

As for, 'complete cessation of consciousness', we have a very simple word for that, 'unconscious', which raises the question, why would anyone want to strive to become unconscious?

An explanation that makes sense to me, is for reasons of power and control over oneself and one's own mind. To have such control over one's mind, as to be able to put oneself into a state of anaesthesia without the use of drugs or anaesthetics, is remarkable.

However, I'm not suggesting that achieving such states of unconsciousness through long practice, is no different from taking an anaesthetic, or sleeping. I can imagine that the complete rest from the constant activity of the mind, achieved without the use of drugs, and a more complete rest than anything achieved even during the best sleep, could result in a completely new and liberating experience.

Even when we are asleep, and are not dreaming, or are under the effects of an anaesthetic, the mind is still active to a degree, known as 'slow-wave' activity.

I'm quoting from passages attributed to the Buddha and an Arahant, Ven Maha Boowa as well as others.

It has been taught that the Self or Ego is a construct and illusory, as is its consciousness.

It is supported by a flow of events contact, craving, clinging, becoming, re Birth, dissatisfaction, and death.

Each string of events occur as a still frame in a movie, quickly moving to the next, that, as moving stills bring life to a movie, each arsing and passing give the illusion of consciousness, and a Self which we then attach to.

The illusory consciousness you describe is not all that there is.

Ven Maha Booha calls it "Citta"

Quote:

• The Citta is the minds essential knowing nature, the fundamental knowing that underlies all sentient beings.
• When associated with a physical body, it is referred to as "mind" or 'heart".
• Being corrupted by the defiling influence of fundamental ignorance (Avijja), its currents flow out to manifest as feelings (Vedana), memory (Sanna), thoughts (Sankhara), and consciousness (Vinnaoa).
• Thus the Citta is embroiled in a web of self deception.
• It is deceived about its own true nature.
• The true nature of the Citta is that it simply "knows".
• There is no subject, no object, no duality, it simply knows.
• The Citta does not arise or pass away, it is never born and never dies.
• Normally the "knowing nature" of Citta is timeless and boundless, and radiant, but this true nature is obscured by defilements (Kilisa) within it.
• Through the power of fundamental ignorance, a focal point of the "knower" is created from which that knowing nature views the world outside.
• The establishment of of that false centre creates a "self" from whose perspective consciousness flows out to perceive the duality of the 'knower" & the "known".
• Thus the Citta becomes entangled with things that are born, become ill, grow old, and die, and therefore, deeply involved in suffering.

As you can see, the consciousness you refer to is illusory.

Awakening uncovers "knowing".

The Buddha replied:

In the iikincanfliiyatana jhana (absorption in the realm of nothingness), the consciousness of the act of consciousness disappeared but that of nothingness appeared instead.

Finally, in the sanfliivedayitanirodha, which is the last level of jhana, the consciousness of nothingness also disappeared, and no new consciousness appeared.

Therefore, the complete cessation of consciousness existed continually in such a state.

During the time, we could not say that there was consciousness, for the person has no feeling at all.

But we could neither say that there was no consciousness, for the person could be conscious again after he came out of the jhana.

Neither could he be declared dead ~or could he be declared not dead.

This is the complete cessatIon of sannii or consciousness which could be caused to occur by human's control, power or action.

What the Buddha was teaching is that there are levels of existence without consciousness, Nibanna being the ultimate state.

Al this is suggesting that there is a state beyond consciousness, and that consciousness, and self, are illusory.

The 4 Noble Truths indicate that the cycle of Re Birth will cease.

Going by the limited re Birth model of "moment to moment" doesn't this mean that there will no longer be an arising of your consciousness?

What is the point of doing this?

Rocky,

It's possible that an experience of ecstasy might result, when all thoughts have ceased. Better than sex, some claim.

........Instead of using placebo effect which is just temporary, why not let them understand the truth ?

Because we don't know the truth. Don't you realise that? Only a very few individuals are claimed to know the truth, such as Buddha and Jesus Christ. Whether those individuals actually did know the truth in reality, is a matter of belief. Furthermore, when talking about the truth in a scientific context, one has to be very specific. The truth about what, precisely? Even the Buddha did not claim to know whether or not their exists a creator God. The combined knowledge of modern science has arrived at a stage where it is able to potentially detect or observe, using the best scientific instruments available, only 5% of the matter and energy that surrounds us. The rest, about 95%, is an unknown. It's existence is mere speculation. Didn't you know that?

As I've mentioned before, there are basically two types of people. Those who know that they don't know, and those who don't know that they don't know. You appear to be in the latter group, Only1.

Well said.

This is the best way.

If it turns out that the goal was self improvement, would you still devote a life to dedicated practice, living an ascetic life devoid of any possession other than your robe and bowl, and remove yourself from the consumer world completely?

I guess that depends on how you define 'self improvement', Rocky? Isn't the term 'self' rather problematic in Buddhism?

I believe you were once a monk in Thailand. Why did you disrobe? (I'm assuming you have disrobed, so apologies if I've got that wrong.)

Speaking for myself, my interest in Buddhism is related to a certain fascination with the concept that one can achieve satisfaction, equanimity and even joy, without lifting a finger. Perhaps at a subconscious level this appeals to my innate sense of laziness.

Hi V.

No, was never a Monk.

Why should I don a costume, give up all my possessions and become a full time ascetic?

I don't think the costume is important, but the experience of being a full time ascetic, living alone in a cave for 12 years, might be invaluable. You might become a world-wide celebrity.

Have you seen this video of Tenzin Palmo's experiences in a cave. It's quite remarkable that she claims she was not lonely at all. It's quite a long video.

http://www.tsemrinpoche.com/tsem-tulku-rinpoche/videos/tenzin-palmo-cave-in-the-snow.html

Exactly, no one can be sure, meaning a person may end without heaven despite believing with the church an entire life. All the more my actions are proven good intentions and right thoughts.

You've missed the point. It doesn't matter whether or not there is life after death, or a heaven and hell. The placebo effect is a real effect. We don't fully understand it yet, but we recognise that all belief has a placebo effect. It's why Drug companies need double-blind tests using placebos to test the efficacy of their new drugs. The placebo effect is always at work, even if the drug is useless. An effective drug is one that has an effect that is greater than the placebo effect. It's estimated that, on average, about 30% of the effectiveness of any drug, can be attributed to a placebo effect. It's always present.

Religion can have a tremendous placebo effect. I've got no objection to that. The problem is with those who try to reinforce the placebo effect by killing anyone who disagrees with their belief. I think you know who I am referring to.

Placebo may work only if a person don't know about it. Once a person understand placebo effects, it will never work.

The same for those who believe a religion out of faith or blind faith. I have see too many Christians suffered miserably near death, when they awakens from their heavenly dreams.

Well said.

This is the best way.

If it turns out that the goal was self improvement, would you still devote a life to dedicated practice, living an ascetic life devoid of any possession other than your robe and bowl, and remove yourself from the consumer world completely?

Speaking for myself, my interest in Buddhism is related to a certain fascination with the concept that one can achieve satisfaction, equanimity and even joy, without lifting a finger. Perhaps at a subconscious level this appeals to my innate sense of laziness.

I am not confused and I am logical and reasonable. I read that Enstein mentioned Buddhism is the best and most futuristic too. Need not listen to anyone. The Buddha said one must use his own mind.

Shall we start a Creator God concept thread separately ? Allowed in Thai visa ?

It is ego, vanity and pride that causes us to think we are so clever and knowledgeable. The reality might be, we are so clever that we might be the first species in the history of the planet to cause its own extinction.

The other state, Nibanna , is a state existing without causes and contributing factors and is eternal.

Rocky,

Such a concept is in the same category as scientifically undetectable and invisible spirits and forces from a Creator God.

Totally different from a creator god concept which is both debunked by science ,logic defying and unreasonable(the creator created two similar religions to fight on order to "test" them?). Nirwana concept is not debunked by science or unreasonable or logic defying.

Hi M.

Bikkhi Buddhadasa, the Buddha's slave as he referred to himself, and one believed to be an Arahant, refers to Buddhism as a religion.

Religions are not restricted to theism.

An important ingredient of religion is existence beyond our mortal state. This is accommodated with Nibanna. Also religions have a state/place which is ever lasting or forever.

Nibanna, permanent and unconditioned.

Unfortunately, the descriptions of Nirvana seem as vague and implausible, and as unknowable, as the descriptions of an Almighty Creator God, so in a sense, we are back to square 1.

Do you think just because a God created humans, he can choose anyone at anytime to kill him ?

Exactly, no one can be sure, meaning a person may end without heaven despite believing with the church an entire life. All the more my actions are proven good intentions and right thoughts.

You've missed the point. It doesn't matter whether or not there is life after death, or a heaven and hell. The placebo effect is a real effect. We don't fully understand it yet, but we recognise that all belief has a placebo effect. It's why Drug companies need double-blind tests using placebos to test the efficacy of their new drugs. The placebo effect is always at work, even if the drug is useless. An effective drug is one that has an effect that is greater than the placebo effect. It's estimated that, on average, about 30% of the effectiveness of any drug, can be attributed to a placebo effect. It's always present.

Religion can have a tremendous placebo effect. I've got no objection to that. The problem is with those who try to reinforce the placebo effect by killing anyone who disagrees with their belief. I think you know who I am referring to.

How sure are you or we that there is no life or hell after death ?

Descriptions of Heaven after death, which one goes to if one has behaved properly, are enticements and encouragement for people who might otherwise not behave properly. Descriptions of Hell for misbehaviour, reinforce that encouragement to behave properly. This is known as the 'carrot and stick' approach, to get people to behave in a particular way, often used by governments and the taxation system.

AYJAYDEE,

My good intentions.

By sharing the truth behind their religion, I will not only prevent more people from being cheated by them but also let their people understand life and don't get disappointed to find no heaven as promised, after their death.

Also, I can reduce the sins of their pastors. No way I can be wrong for doing it. Isn't it ?

The flaw in the argument is, one can't necessarily be certain, logically, that the Christian principles one is following, represent the actual will of God, assuming that God exists. They might have been misinterpreted, at least to some extent, if not completely, so what any individual might consider to have been impeccable behaviour on this Earth, might be considered by God to have been flawed behaviour, not deserving of the highest rewards of everlasting heaven.

How much time to you have to discuss the topic.?

For the rest of my life of course, although not continuously, you understand.

2. Don't mix up Buddhism with other religions for the purpose of this thread. Here, I only wish to talk about the Buddhistic part of science or the scientific part of Buddhism, which you may call it later.

However, in case there is any confusion, I should add that the translation of this Sutta is perhaps not ideal. I assume that all these instructions to 'not believe' in a particular thing have the qualifying word 'merely', which should be at least implied. It would not be wise to instruct one's children not to believe what the teacher tells you, full stop.

On the issue of 'logic and inference' in point #7, it might seem odd, or non-scientific, to advise against accepting logic alone. However, my understanding is that logic is not infallible. There are certain logical, mathematical constructs which can lead to absurdity, but don't ask me to give you examples.

The world was flat once, the sun revolved around the earth at another time...your not telling us anything we didn't know so what you trying to prove?

Your wrong that many people are ignorant, they have free will and choice to choose there belief structure, better to not label people because they don't fit into your box, religion like politics is a subject that has no boundaries, to each his own as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

I think you might be on the wrong forum, mate. This is the Buddhist forum. Ignorance and suffering are central to the Buddhist understanding of mankind. A major purpose of the Buddhist teachings is to help people dispel their ignorance, particularly with regard to deluded notions about 'self' and 'ego'.

In Buddhism, the only people who are free from ignorance are those who have achieved full enlightenment. Those who are not enlightened fall into two categories (for the sake of simplicity); those who know they are ignorant, and those who don't know they are ignorant.

Which are you? I fall into the first category. I know I'm ignorant.

I think one must understand logic before understanding science.

If any belief is logic defying e.g. an almighty God, I think science will not even search for him as the logic of the claim itself is already not coherent with logic. Science proved many things through research. Religious beliefs of gods, ghosts, spirits, souls, rebirth, karma,etc may not be believed by many people or scientists but they are not debunked or proven to be non existence by science too.

Anyone agree or disagree with any part of my above comments before I continue ?

Spirituality is basically consciousness and awareness. These are hard to prove scientifically especially when most scientists don't want to prove it, despite some experiments like the quantum dual slit thing which changes when people observe it.

Those wanting scientific proof are ignorant IMHO, how can one prove scientifically that the Buddha, or anyone else was enlightened for example?

Now, for the benefit of Neeranam, I've modified this prayer as follows. I hope he pays attention.

Science and religion do not align, science needs hard proof religion is based on faith and acceptance.