jamesc2000

Zen Master Man Gong was Seung Sahn Soen Sa's Dharma grandfather.

 

As a thirteen year old child, he was studying sutras at the temple Donghaksa in Korea. The day before vacation, everyone gathered to listen to some lectures. The lecturer said, "All of you must study hard, learn Buddhism, and become as big trees, with which great temples are built, and as large bowls, able to hold many things.

 

The verse says:

"Water becomes square or round according to the shape of the container in which it is placed. Likewise, people become good or bad according to the company they keep. Always keep your minds set on holiness and remain in good company. In this way, you will become great trees and containers of Wisdom. This I most sincerely wish."

 

Everyone was greatly inspired by this lecture. At this point, the Sutra Master turned to Zen Master Kyong-Ho, who was visiting the temple, and said, "Please speak, Master Kyong Ho; everyone would like to hear your words of wisdom."

 

The Master was quite a sight. He was always unshaven and wore robes that were tattered and worn. Although he at first refused, after being asked again and again, he reluctantly consented to speak.

 

"All of you are monks. You are to be great teachers, free of ego; you must live only to serve all people. Desiring to become a big tree or a great container of Wisdom prevents you from being a true teacher.

 

Big trees have big uses; small trees have small uses. Good and bad bowls both have their uses. Nothing is to be discarded. Keep both good and bad friends; this is your responsibility.

 

You must not reject any element; this is true Buddhism. My only wish is for you to be free from discriminating thoughts."

 

Having completed his talk, the Master walked out the door, leaving the audience astonished. The young Man-Gong ran after him, and called out, "Please take me with you; I wish to become your student."

 

The Master shouted at him to go away, but the child wouldn't listen. So he asked, "If I take you with me, what will you do?"

 

"I will learn. You will teach me."

 

"But you are only a child. How can you understand?"

 

"People are young and old, but does our True Self have youth or old age?" "You are a very bad boy! You have killed and eaten the Buddha. Come along."

 

From Manhattan Chogye Sa temple website

"Indeed, ancient Greek philosophy, from where science is said to have its origins, taught six senses just like Buddhism. Somewhere along the historical journey of European thinking, they lost their mind! Or, as Aristotle would put it, they somehow discarded their "common sense"! And thus we got science. We got materialism without any heart. One can accurately say that Buddhism is science that has kept its heart, and which hasn't lost its mind!

 

Thus Buddhism is not a belief system. It is a science founded on objective observation, i.e. meditation, ever careful not to disturb the reality through imposing artificial measurements, and it is evidently repeatable.

 

People have been re-creating the experimental conditions, known as establishing the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, for over twenty-six centuries now, much longer than science. And those renowned Professors of Meditation, the male and female Arahants, have all arrived at the same conclusion as the Buddha.

 

They verified the timeless Law of Dhamma, otherwise known as Buddhism. So Buddhism is the only real science, and I'm happy to say that I'm still a scientist at heart, only a much better scientist than I ever could have been at Cambridge."

 

Courtesy: Buddhist Society of Western Australia.

"A Grade-One teacher once asked her class "What is the biggest thing in the world?" One little girl answered "My daddy". A little boy said "An elephant", since he'd recently been to the zoo. Another girl suggested "A mountain".

 

The six-year-old daughter of a close friend of mine replied, "My eye is the biggest thing in the world"! The class stopped. Even the teacher didn't understand her answer. So the little philosopher explained "Well, my eye can see her daddy, an elephant, and a mountain too. It can also see so much else. If all of that can fit into my eye, then my eye must be the biggest thing in the world." Brilliant!

 

However, she was not quite right. The mind can see everything that one's eye can see, and it can also imagine so much more. It can also hear, smell, taste and touch, as well as think.

 

In fact, everything that can be known can fit into the mind. Therefore, the mind must be the biggest thing in the world. Science's mistake is obvious now. The mind is not in the brain, nor in the body. The brain, the body and the rest of the world, are in the mind!

 

Mind is the sixth sense in Buddhism, it is that which encompasses the five senses of sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch, and transcends them with its own domain. It corresponds loosely to Aristotle's "common sense" that is distinct from the five senses."

"Buddhism is more scientific than modern science. Like science, Buddhism is based on verifiable cause-and-effect relationships. But unlike science, Buddhism challenges with thoroughness every belief.

 

The famous Kalama Sutta of Buddhism states that one cannot believe fully in "what one is taught, tradition, hearsay, scripture, logic, inference, appearance, agreement with established opinion, the seeming competence of a teacher, or even in one's own teacher".

 

How many scientists are as rigorous in their thinking as this? Buddhism challenges everything, including logic."

"Some misguided scientists maintain the theory that there is no rebirth, that this stream of consciousness is incapable of returning to a successive human existence. All one needs to disprove this theory, according to science, is to find one instance of rebirth, just one!

 

Professor Ian Stevenson, as some of you would know, has already demonstrated many instances of rebirth. The theory of no rebirth has been disproved. Rebirth is now a scientific fact!"

 

Buddhism, the only real science

 

Venerable Ajahn Brahmavamso Mahathera

 

 

I used to be a scientist. I did Theoretical Physics at Cambridge University, hanging out in the same building as the later-to-be-famous Professor Stephen Hawking. I became disillusioned with such science when, as an insider, I saw how dogmatic some scientists could be. A dogma, according to the dictionary, is an arrogant declaration of an opinion.

 

This was a fitting description of the science that I saw in the labs of Cambridge. Science had lost its sense of humility. Egotistical opinion prevailed over the impartial search for Truth. My favourite aphorism from that time was: "The eminence of a great scientist, is measured by the length of time that they OBSTRUCT PROGRESS in their field"!

 

o understand real science, one can go back to one of its founding fathers, the English philosopher Francis Bacon (1561 - 1628). He established the framework on which science was to progress, namely "the greater force of the negative instance".

 

This meant that, having proposed a theory to explain some natural phenomenon, then one should try one's best to disprove it! One should test the theory with challenging experiments. One must put it on trial with rigorous argument.

 

When a flaw appears in the theory, only then does science advance. A new discovery has been made enabling the theory to be adjusted and refined. This fundamental and original methodology of science understood that it is impossible to prove anything with absolute certainty. One can only disprove with absolute certainty.

 

For example, how can one prove the basic law of gravity that "what goes up comes down, eventually"? One may throw objects up one million times and see them fall one million times. But that still does not prove "what goes up comes down".

 

For NASA might then 'throw' a Saturn rocket up into space to explore Mars, and that never comes down to earth again. One negative instance is enough to disprove the theory with absolute certainty.

 

Some misguided scientists maintain the theory that there is no rebirth, that this stream of consciousness is incapable of returning to a successive human existence. All one needs to disprove this theory, according to science, is to find one instance of rebirth, just one!

 

Professor Ian Stevenson, as some of you would know, has already demonstrated many instances of rebirth. The theory of no rebirth has been disproved. Rebirth is now a scientific fact!

 

Modern science gives a low priority to any efforts to disprove its pet theories. There is too much vested interest in power, prestige and research grants. A courageous commitment to truth takes too many scientists out of their comfort zone.

 

Scientists are, for the most part, brainwashed by their education and their in-group conferences to see the world in a very narrow, microscopic, way. The very worst scientists are those who behave like eccentric evangelists, claiming that they alone have the whole truth, and then demanding the right to impose their views on everyone else.

 

Ordinary people know so little about science that they can hardly even understand the jargon.

 

Yet, if they read in a newspaper or magazine "a scientist says that?", then they automatically take it to be true. Compare this to our reaction when we read in the same journal "a politician says that?"! Why do scientists have such unchallenged credibility?

 

Perhaps it is because the language and ritual of science has become so far removed from the common people, that scientists have become today's revered and mystical priesthood.

 

Dressed in their ceremonial white lab coats, chanting incomprehensible mumbo jumbo about multi-dimensional fractal parallel universes, and performing magical rituals that transubstantiate metal and plastic into TVs and computers, these modern day alchemists are so awesome we'll believe anything they say. Elitist science, as once was the Pope, is now infallible.

 

Some know better. Much of what I learnt 30 years ago has now been proved wrong. There are, fortunately, many scientists with integrity and humility who affirm that science is, at best, a work still in progress.

 

They know that science can only suggest a truth, but can never claim a truth. I was once told by a Buddhist G.P. that, on his first day at a medical school in Sydney, the famous Professor, head of the Medical School, began his welcoming address by stating "Half of what we are going to teach you in the next few years is wrong. Our problem is that we do not know which half it is!" Those were the words of a real scientist.

 

Some evangelical scientists would do well to reflect on the (amended) old saying "Scientists rush in where angels fear to tread" and . . . . . . 

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20120728024727/http://www.dailynews.lk/2007/03/28/fea04.asp

In an effort to reclaim the "mindfulness" practice from being overrun by secular industries and a recent claim that it is not owned by Buddhism,

 

Ajahn Brahm clarifies that mindfulness is a practice within the rest of the supporting factors of Buddhism (the Noble Eightfold Path: right view, right motivation, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right endeavor, right mindfulness, and right stillness).

 

Mindfulness is part of a great training which is called Buddhism, and to actually take away mindfulness from Buddhism is unhelpful, inaccurate, and deceiving – mindfulness is a cultural heritage of Buddhism.

 

Practicing mindfulness without wisdom and compassion is not enough.

 

Therefore, drawing from the Pāli Suttas,^[16] Ajahn Brahm created the term "Kindfulness", meaning mindfulness combined with wisdom and compassion – mindfulness with also knowing the ethical and moral compassionate consequences of the reactions to what is happening (a.k.a. satisampajañña).^[17]

 

^????

I actually know nothing about Buddhism.

 

I learn a lot from rockyysdt and this guy.

 

????

 

 

The beauty of Buddhism is that its a path to truth. It doesn't tell us what the truth is but allows us to decide for ourselves.

 

But the more important thing about Buddhism is that it allows us to drop what we thought was true yesterday but with more current information we know is not true today and to embrace what we know to be true today.

 

I heard on the BBC world service the latest science research says that just as it is possible to move both forwards and backwards in space it is also possible to move forwards and even backwards in time.

 

This is a real break though as it was always thought that we can only move forwards in time and never back.

 

They did say that moving a person back in time would be very difficult but sending a message would not be as difficult although a lot more research would be needed before anything like that can happen.

 

This means that if we are awaken in the future or in the future after many lives then its theoretically possible to send back a message to us now on how to be awaken.

 

In theory this should shorten the process and make things a lot easier.

 

The best person to teach us the path to awakening is us after we have been awakened.

 

????  

10 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

Your post reminds me of the four Immeasurables. ????

 

• metta (loving kindness)
• karuna (compassion - to feel another's pain as if it were yours)
• mudita (sympathetic joy or empathy)
• upekkha (equanimity).

 

When being Mindful of those around us, I observe myself being analytical/critical at times.

 

When interacting with others, or observing others interactions, I'm also analysing intentions of ones behaviors.

 

When cultivating Immeasurables ones intentions are vital.

 

Many make offerings to Monks for future good luck, or to accumulate positive Kharma.

I come away thinking, such offerings are hollow if they are done for personal gain.

 

One purpose of the Immeasurables is to turn attention outward away from Ego, focusing instead towards those receiving your benevolence.

 

The Buddha taught the following in order to cultivate the immeasurables.

 

A monk suffuses the world in the four directions with a mind of benevolence, then above, and below, and all around – the whole world from all sides, completely, with a benevolent, all-embracing, great, boundless, peaceful and friendly mind … There is no limit to the unfolding of this heart liberating benevolence.

 

Until Awakened we are all compromised to varying degrees.

When I analyse myself or others interacting, I'm learning that there is usually an ulterior motive.

Mindfulness of ones motives can assist us to move towards a mind of true benevolence.

 

I really like your summary of the points.

 

And I don't think we should be too harsh on not being spotless on having no ulterior motive.

 

No ego is hard and being aware we have some ulterior motive maybe good enough as a start.

 

Some people cultivate kindness to other people but they miss out on kindness to themselves.

 

Also forgiveness cultivated for others but they forget to let go and forgive themselves.

 

I feel this 4 qualities are the best way to approach any and every problem in life. And I mean small like relationship with your next door neighbour to big things like politics and climate change.

 

Any other approach I think will have negative side effects. 

 

I always say we (including me) don't give enough credit and appreciation to the Buddha because we (or maybe its only me) haven't worked out the the Buddha has already worked out the best approach to take for any and all problems in life.

 

I think the difficulty is if we identify with the self then its very natural to be self centred. 

 

But I guess if we are aware then we can gradually minimise the ego and as that decreases so naturally will the self centredness.

 

And I feel that karma helps puts us in situations that always gives us an opportunity to minimise the ego.

 

So what looks like the most negative situations on the surface are the most positive if we look deeper.

 

I guess that equanimity teaches us calmness and this comes from patience and patience with ourselves and other people is the key we need.

 

Too many people don't have enough patience for their own journey to awareness and also other people's path to awareness. This also includes me.

 

????  

5 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

 

Hi J.

 

I don't think it's correct to say "the Buddhist way is the only way".

 

Even the term "Buddhist" was never coined by Gautama Siddhartha.

I don't think he would have liked it, preferring to be known as tathagata (teacher).

 

There are others who also taught Awakening. 

Their focus, words and practices may differ but the end state is the same.

 

Even within Buddhism itself, there are several paths and practices.

Hi R

 

Thank you very much for your insightful post. I always learn a lot from your writings.

 

Its quite clearly wrong to say the Buddhist way is the only way.

 

Maybe it would have been better to say its a great way. Other ways that work would also be great.

 

I guess Buddhist way is open to interpretation but I was thinking of things like Therapy. Rightly or wrongly I understand this to be from the root word Theravada.

 

I also understand that Buddha always gave people the freedom of choice and the freedom of thought. There is not a lot of dogma and doctrine and that's fantastic. There is not a lot of dogma and doctrine to bog people down. 

 

And the Buddhist's way is always current. I think Buddhism says something like yesterday is gone and tomorrow hasn't come what is important is today. So its never stuck in time.

 

Buddhism is not faith based and that is beautiful allowing people to make up their own minds and none of this you must believe and my way is the only way.

 

I don't know if mindfulness is exclusive to Buddhism but did anyone espouse it before the Buddha? I am not sure. I understand today mindfulness is marketed as a new age technique but there is nothing new about it to Buddhism.

 

Acceptance I am sure is not exclusive to Buddhism but I am not sure any other religion practices it as much. 

 

Same with kindness, compassion and tolerance, every religion preaches this but how many really believe in it?

 

Loving kindness is also every religion's mantra but how much is really absorbed and not lip service. Not to say some or many Buddhists do not just pay lip service.

 

But to be fair the message of Jesus of kindness, compassion, tolerance and forgiveness is exactly the same as that of Buddhism.

 

And rightly or wrongly I understand his message to be exactly the same for the only that he studied Buddhism in Tibet. I am not going to push this as I don't want to open any controversy.

 

Please feel free to correct anything or add anything you like. 

 

????

I don't think enough credit is given to the Buddha as the Buddhist way is the only way.

 

And this is everything. Climate change, science, trade between countries, how companies should work, stock markets etc.

 

I maybe conditioned and bias but its Buddhist conditioning and bias which I don't want to swap for anything in the world.

 

Not for all the money in the world, not for anything.

 

????

 

 

I have no clue how karma works but its seem at least to me it works really well for our benefit.

 

On the BBC world service I heard this story about a black lady who really wanted to work and signed up with a cleaning company.

 

They send her to the other side of town where she has never been before - the white side of town. She knocked on the door and a white lady screamed at her Go away. go away.

 

And she explained I am the cleaner sent to clean your house. And she heard the lady on the phone arguing with the cleaning company and they made it quite clear they will not be sending anyone else so she reluctantly opened the door still with the hostile suspicious look.

 

Refusing to talk to her the old lady led her upstairs to a bed with an old man connected to tubes from his body to a machine. The machine was pumping frothy liquid from his lungs into a container which will overflow when full and spill on the floor.

 

The stench was so bad she had to control her gag reflex not to throw up. She worked out she has to care for the old sick man and clean up the mess.

 

She refused to concede defeat and started cleaning up. The old lady from a distance keeping an eye on her and still refusing to say a word to her. In between cleaning up she found a chair to rest and saw a bible and went to it to take comfort. Above a bible she saw a white robe and the thing that caught her eye was the exquisite sewing on the robe and then stepping back to admire it she saw the hood with two holes for eyes.

 

Then it struck her it was the robe of a grand wizard of the KKK to her utter horror. At which point the old lady gave her the - that's what I have been trying to tell you look.

 

I think at that time the machine overflowed and she went to clean it up and carried on work as normal.

 

This went on for a few days and one day she had a call from the cleaning company saying she didn't need to work there anymore. The company explained that the old man died and the lady wanted the company to pass her a very big tip and to tell her - no one had ever looked after her husband so well and she had never see him so well cared for and peaceful.

 

Can you imagine a man devoted his whole life to the belief of white supremacy and racism and for his last few days to be so well cared for and comforted by a black lady with so much care and kindness he had to have a change a view he had for his whole life.

 

And this was at a time where feedback to service companies was not a norm and the old lady wanted her to know what a good job she did and to pass her and the lady's and her husband's appreciation.

 

I think this is karma in action working fantastically well changing people's views and targeting directly to our core.

 

There are so many stories like that this that I cannot help believe in the goodness of karma.

 

Or that karma works to everyone's benefit and never to our detriment although maybe when karma deflates our ego its good for us but may not feel so good to us at that moment.

 

????    

So many good points by so many people here. Interesting points and points that on the surface may seem at odds with each other and even maybe contradictory.

 

Is there a framework that can marry all these points together in such a way that they are all true,

 

I think there is and its not even a complicated framework.

 

I listen a lot to Ajahn Brahm and one story is about a rich old lady that went for an operation. She went to Harley street and got a high price well established doctor.

 

And during the operation something went wrong and she flat lined and I think its what they term as clinically dead. She floated out of her body and can clearly see and hear everything that is going on and she saw the doctor frantically trying to revive her and blurted out, "don't die on me you stupid bitch."

 

In her out of body experience she also met a gatekeeper and he said to her your time is not up yet and you have to go back. And she shot back I am not going back because for the first time in many years she didn't have the pains and aches that afflicted her.

 

She could move so freely and enjoying her spirit body with her same cantankerous personality. The gatekeeper again told her her time is not up yet and refused and he shoved her back into her body at the same time the doctor managed to get her back.

 

Now if people wanted to do their own research on out of body experience there are so many medical and scientifically rigorously vetted papers published on this.

 

Now I believe this story by Ajahn Brahm to be exactly true and at the same time I also believe we don't have a permanent self.

 

Yes I understand this maybe a direct contradiction but I believed both to be true at the same time.

 

Our conditioned self works in the state of delusion and the delusion causes us to believe in time where there is a past, present and future where we are born, get old and die and there is rebirth and or reincarnation.

 

The delusion also caused us to see separation of us and other people and the concept of space.

 

Lastly the delusion also causes us to have a self.

 

So how to tie everything up together?

 

Well I always dream when I sleep even if I dose off for 2 minutes. And I think most people also dream at least sometime if not every second of sleep like me.

 

In our dreams we exist with realistic and very real life like experiences.

 

If monsters are chasing us we get frighten and it feels real. Has anyone here every stop, turned around and laugh at the monster and say it just a dream and you don't exist?

 

I had a really delightful dream playing with a shaggy dog for what felt like 20 minutes and I woke up feeling really happy as I love dogs and the first thought I had was I don't need to wash my hands as it was just a dream but in the dream I didn't know it was a dream and it felt so real.

 

So if dreams feel real and in the dream we cannot tell its a dream what makes us so sure what we are feeling now is real and not just a dream? Because we can pinch ourselves? If we can do that then please pinch yourself in your dream when monsters are chasing you to wake yourself up. No one can do that.

 

Now in our dreams we exist and we feel real but that "self" has never been born and will never die.

 

But we all know the us in our dreams does not exist at all but is an illusion created by our minds.

 

To end the story the doctor went to check up on the old lady and ask how she was feeling.

And she asked him pointedly not letting him off - why did you call me a stupid bitch?

 

????

What a delightful post.

 

"the results of kamma" is one of the four incomprehensible subjects that are beyond all conceptualization and cannot be understood with logical thought or reason.

 

Lucky for some of us we have never been accused of logical thought or reason.

 

I have been accused of talking nonsense many many times. So if we cannot understand with a logical mind and with reason it might work with an utterly illogical mind and unreason. I have been called unreasonable many times I would very proudly say if I had one of those egos people keep talking about.

 

I have never discussed the range of powers a Buddha develops as a result of becoming a Buddha. Until I read this I never knew there was a range. Not that I have put any thought into this matter but I would have assumed it was all the same had I put any thought to it.

 

Same with the range of powers that one may obtain while absorbed in jhāna. Until I read this I have put any thought into this matter.

 

However I have discussed karma and this might bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it."

 

If we live in a sane world and what everyone is doing is sane then maybe a little bit of madness and doing things differently might not be a bad thing.

 

If we keep going the same way, we might not have a planet left.

 

Discussing karma and listening to people explaining karma to me have never brought vexation which is the state of being annoyed, frustrated and worried. I have always found the opposite. Refreshing and delightful and even liberating.  

 

As for the "you" that have been warned? Not so sure which me its referring to.

 

Me the ego that doesn't exist? The me that is permanent and unconditioned was never born and therefore is deathless or the me that is impermanent & conditioned?

 

I am hoping not to get an answer as "I" don't want to put anyone at risk or going mad or getting annoyed, frustrated and worried.

 

That would only bring bad karma.

 

????

 

Taking ourselves too seriously, taking what we say too seriously that just expands the ego and big egos are not a good thing.

 

But I would just like to say I heard on the radio today that mediation changes the brain and helps people increase their attention span and hence help focus longer and think better.

 

And people that meditate put emotions down faster. As in something makes you angry and upset and you move onto something else you let go that emotion faster.

 

So I guess you don't carry on being angry or upset when you move onto doing the next thing. 

 

And someone said if everyone spend as much time mediating as much as they do brushing their teeth the world would be a much better place.

 

I really believe this and its like just 3 minutes twice a day for most of us.

 

Although some people never brush their teeth.

1 hour ago, rockyysdt said:

My experience is limited and some of my knowledge results from a level of faith in what was written.

 

Basically, your thoughts are the result of conditioning and genetics.

 

If you were raised from birth by another couple the resultant you would have a completely different set of values, beliefs and habits which would result in different thoughts.

 

You could say the values, beliefs and habits you express were someone elses, but you negotiate life thinking these are yours/you.

 

Most people act on their thoughts, often without thought as to whether their action was appropriate or the best one to take.

Your accumulated values, beliefs and habits are impermanent.

 

Practicing Sitting Meditation eventually yields another state in which there is consciousness without thought.

This can be difficult to achieve as ones thoughts are associated with ones Ego.

Ego thinks this is you and will try anything in its powers to remain in control.

 

With dedicated practice one can achieve long periods of consciousness without thought.

This state, free from thought, is said to be unconditioned and can yield many incites.

 

The real answers to your questions about I, me, my reveal themselves in consciousness without thought.

 

However, those who are unable to quieten the mind will remain in the state of Samsara.

A state anchored in I, me, my (ego).

While in this state there is no escaping the fruit of ones actions.

 

 

Wow this is really true.

 

Really good post.

 

????

I am open to new ideas as the thoughts I write here are not my thoughts. They are just thoughts that come into my head.

 

Even "my" head is so wrong. Its as wrong as the concept of "my" body. How is it "my" body? How much control do "I" have over "my" body? Very little.

 

My hair is turning white. How did that happen? I never ask my hair to turn white and I certainly didn't control it to turn white.

 

If my heart stops beating I will be dead. I am not controlling my heart beating. It beats by itself. Sometimes it beats faster and sometimes it beats slower, I don't control any of it.

 

My eyes sees and I don't control any of that. It just sees. I don't say rods and cones start seeing and tell me what you see.

 

So the thoughts are not mine, the body is not mine what is it that is me or mine or I? Maybe really nothing. 

 

???? 

 

Not me, not mine, not I.

 

However if I double park and I get a ticket I will pay the fine as I do not deny the actions and the consequences to be "mine".

 

However I happily pay with money that belongs to the person that is not me.

 

There is nothing like spending other people's money. Absolutely nothing.

I could also be totally wrong and if anyone has any Buddhists teachings that dispel what I wrote it would be most welcome.

 

???? 

I am not so sure faith and believe has any part to play in anything in Buddhism.

 

Say I get food poisoning and an ambulance brings me to hospital. Now I don't believe in western medicine but they pump me full of drugs and I get well. If they pump me full of the right drugs I get better regardless of whether I believe in western medicine or not.

 

Surely its the same with karma. I don't believe in karma and I do lots of bad things and if karma is true lots of bad things happen to me. Now if karma is true even if I never heard of karma let alone believe in it bad things are going to happen to me.

 

Same with reincarnation. Reincarnation like karma IF its true whether you believe in it or even heard of it, if it's a fact you will be reborn and maybe many times regardless.

 

However since Buddha said our thoughts create the world and I think in Buddhism there is this concept of we live in delusion or something like that then it is possible the biggest delusion our thoughts create is this concept of time.

 

It maybe possible that the real world not the one we create with our thoughts is always now. Our thoughts create the yesterday, today, tomorrow. If there is no past present and future then the concept of rebirth is moot.

 

The other big delusion I suspect is the concept of space. There is no yesterday I was far away, today I am here and tomorrow I will be going some where else. I suspect we are all stuck in the same place together. I think science says something like this is not only possible but also happened.

 

Before the big bang all the material in the world came together and got squashed into a very small space something like smaller than a pin head and then exploded outwards to create the world.

 

So its possible that our thoughts create time and space and our thoughts create the concept of reincarnation because rebirth needs time and space.

 

So rebirth and even karma for that matter may just be concepts created by our thoughts and our thought may not be true.

 

It maybe possible that our thoughts actually stops us from seeing the real world.

 

????  

6 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Hi James,

I'm impressed by the following quote from the  Dhammapada, which is a collection of the sayings of the Buddha, found in the Pali Canon

 

‘‘We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts we make the world.’’
 

Wow I am also very impressed with that quote.

 

I know very little about Buddhism so its the first time I have read this quote. Thank you for highlighting it. I really appreciate hearing this.

 

The quote is really complete and put with so few words.

 

We really do make the world with our thoughts.

 

Not me, not mine, not I is something that is stuck in my head and keeps repeating but I don't know where it comes from.

 

But if "my" thoughts make "my" world then to see the real world then I cannot use "my" thoughts as it will only show "my" world and not the real world.

 

I think the Zen question also teaches us the truth of the Buddha's quote.

 

If a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it does it make a sound?

 

Buddhism not only tells the truth but also expresses it so elegantly.

 

???? 

11 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

Hi James.

 

Regarding achievment of  Awakening, I would teach that the focus would be a doing practice well and diligently.

 

The focus would not be on Awakening, as this would take care of itself.

I found my best periods of meditation without thought were during periods where I gave up trying to meditate.

What I did, though, was concentrate on mindfulness of breathe, mindfulness of body, mindfulness on thought, and mindfulness of feelings.

Especially mindfulness of breathe.

 

Regarding "who Awakens", the answer would be, to "know for oneself". ????

 

My contention is that knowing about Buddhism is pointless without practice.

We have a roadmap.

Using it simply allows one a crack at Awakening.

 

But overcoming ones laziness, one of many deep seated habits, a measure of faith and dedication is required, as there is no first hand knowledge of what awaits without having successfully accomplished the practice.

 

I'm thinking, anything short of this is simply Ego related.

 

Hi Rocky

 

Is it possible that working on diminishing the ego is more important than awakening?

 

Maybe no more ego means no one to awaken?

 

Possible?

 

????

I never see being lazy as a negative. I have always seen it as a positive.

 

To some Buddhism is target oriented. Focus on achieving a goal.

 

That's one view point but another view could be Buddhism is about letting go.

 

Thai visa being a Thai forum maybe sees the technique to being awaken from Theravada eyes with the need for a life time of effort or maybe many life times of effort.

 

Looking at Japan with their emphasis on speed and efficiency they may use a Zen approach with their funny questions technique to being awaken.

 

Maybe quicker and don't need a life time or many life times of effort.

 

Anyway this fixation of achieving  the goal of enlightenment.

 

Who is the one that is trying to achieve the goal?

 

Who is the one that is trying to be awaken?

 

Who is the one that is trying to reach enlightenment?

 

Definitely not me, not mine, not I.

 

????  

On 2/6/2020 at 1:52 PM, rockyysdt said:

Hi Vincent.

 

The only caveat to this criterion is that one must devote ones entire life (or perhaps lives) towards conscientious practice before one can arrive at "knowing"!

 

In other words, considerable faith is needed.

 

Rocky

 

Maybe its like a good book you just cannot put down.

 

Do you need faith to believe you will reach the end?

 

Maybe it like people don't want to stop or cannot stop.

 

????

 

If you have received a precious gift will you want to throw it away? 

Most people don't even have the slightest urge to want to be awaken.

 

They are too busy getting on with their lives.

 

For people that even think about it is really wonderful.

 

????

10 hours ago, ThaiBunny said:

'42' surely?

Hehe I am partial to 69 myself.

 

????

10 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

Hi Vincent.

 

When I look at Buddhism, I don't just see the journey, but I see the ultimate goal, Awakening.

 

How can one "know for themselves" Awakening?

 

Why would one embark on a very demanding lifestyle and practice if there is no "know for themselves"?

 

Further, isn't thoughtful reasoning and introspection coloured to varying degrees, due to each individuals conditioning?

Wouldn't such reasoning and introspection be tainted by each individuals degree of greed, hate, and delusion?

 

Things, such as reasoning before acting, to avoid greed, hate, and delusion, can also be achieved through ethical living.

 

Why the Buddhist path unless there is more?

 

 

Doesn't that bring us back to the need for quite a lot of faith, for without it how can one possibly embark on immense sustained effort (specific practice), in order to work towards attaining a level of "knowing for oneself"?

 

 

The beauty of Buddhism is that its a science. Provable and repeatable.

 

Sure many "Buddhists" see it as a religion with the faith aspect. Like believing a Buddha amulet will protect them from a bullet.

 

Buddhism is exactly not faith based as no one says just believe I have all the truth and you will never understand the truth but just do what you are told.

 

Buddhism is all about try for yourself and if its not for you move on to something that is.

 

I can only guess that if a person is awaken the last thing they would want to be is greedy, selfish, hateful etc.

 

If you see monks womanising, getting drunk, hoarding money then its because they are not awakened.

 

I think Buddhism also talks about reincarnation so if this life you do a bit and get tired next life you can do a bit more if that's what you want.

 

I don't think time or lives is a constraint.

 

????