What Do You Tell Your Kids?

[November Rain]

sutnyod, I like that your children believe they were stars before. My little boy believes his Daddy is in the moon (he decided this, nothing to do with me!) and he goes outside to talk to his Daddy.

endure, you mentioned the absence of passion being something to strive for. I have heard this before, but I'd like to ask why this is desirable? For me, passionate emotions are one of the ways we know we are alive. I would hate (no pun intended) to give up passion.

[lannarebirth]

sutnyod, I like that your children believe they were stars before. My little boy believes his Daddy is in the moon (he decided this, nothing to do with me!) and he goes outside to talk to his Daddy.

endure, you mentioned the absence of passion being something to strive for. I have heard this before, but I'd like to ask why this is desirable? For me, passionate emotions are one of the ways we know we are alive. I would hate (no pun intended) to give up passion.

NR,

For a very brief explanation, I would direct you to page 126 of your new online book. The "Everything Is Changeable" section.

[November Rain]

sutnyod, I like that your children believe they were stars before. My little boy believes his Daddy is in the moon (he decided this, nothing to do with me!) and he goes outside to talk to his Daddy.

endure, you mentioned the absence of passion being something to strive for. I have heard this before, but I'd like to ask why this is desirable? For me, passionate emotions are one of the ways we know we are alive. I would hate (no pun intended) to give up passion.

NR,

For a very brief explanation, I would direct you to page 126 of your new online book. The "Everything Is Changeable" section.

Thanks, lannarebirth. Should have checked there before asking silly questions, shouldn't I?

[chownah]

About having to give up important things. My view is that the Buddha did not expect people to give up the things that they hold to be improtant in their lives. The Buddha taught the "middle path" which is sometimes described as neither indulging in self gratification nor a life of and self-deprivation.....he chose the middle between these two extremes. To me this means that to deprive yourself of the things that are important in your life will not lead to inner peace..or nibhanna..or whatever you want to call the goal. I think that the Buddha teaches about following a path which will eventually lead to inner peace...and that the path starts right where you are now. I think he teaches how an individual can learn about how life works and that as you learn more about how life works the things you hold dear are likely to change over time...because you will gain knowledge about what life is all about. For instance the passions that are important to you now will probably not be the same ones you will have near the end of your life....etc.....

Chownah

[thaibebop]

Firstly Buddhism doesn't so much skirt the issue as considers it irrelavent.

The Buddha had a wee story to illustrate this. It's like if someone gets shot with an arrow but before accepting medical help wants the answer to questions like; who fired the arrow, what kind of bow was he using, where did he fire it from, what is the arrow tip made of, what is the shaft made of, who made it...

I have heard this story before and it doesn't really ring true. Why should our desire to know how we came to be created (whatever form that question takes) be equated with a story of someone getting shot with an arrow?

You have to live in the now. Asking such questions instead of tending to the wound means you lose focus on what is happening now and thus do not make the right clear decisions and die. So, caring about what happened before is useless because you need to decide what to do now to have better karma for tomorrow. It's the same as saying that what sins you comitted yesterday are of no value to focus on becasue today is another day in which you can avoid sin........well, it's kind of like that.

[longway]

How are you going to solve your "immediate" problem if you don't know what caused it????

i think if u look at the parable it is concerned with answering irrelevant questions before allowing treatment. the poisoned smeared arrow is the obvious cause of the suffering, and knowing the the type of posion would help in the treatment. but nevertheless refusing to have it pulled out til you knew the type of poison would also be detrimental. so i dont think your analogy holds up.

but none of the answers to the questions below would help.

'I will not have this arrow pulled out until I know who wounded me, of what caste he is, what his name is, whether he is tall, short or of medium height, what colour his skin is, where he comes from, what kind of bow I was wounded with, what it was made of, whether the arrow was feathered with a vulture's wing or a heron's or a hawk's

Sometimes you keep your subordinates on the need to know basis - but that doesn't mean that it's the best and the ultimate management solution.

i am not sure i agree with you in this case on a number of levels. for example i think the buddha was very careful in what he taught and for good reason. it seems to be a common feature of many religions that petty disagreements over (to seems to outsiders anyway) minor doctrinal points leads to considerable bloodshed and suffering.

i think its remarkable that fter 2500 years buddhism has remained largely free of that kind of problem and possibly can be attributed to the foresight of the buddha in what he taught and the way he taught. well i think so anyway.

I have not explained these other things because they are not useful, they are not conducive to tranquillity and Nirvana. What I have explained is suffering, the cause of suffering, the destruction of suffering and the path that leads to the destruction of suffering. This is useful, leading to non-attachment, the absence of passion, perfect knowledge."

i dont think anyone here thinks he ignored the cause and treated the syptoms.

[banchang]

You could tell them the truth and buy them this dvd to help them.

[Plus]

Thread resurrected!

I think we agree here that some questions are very relevant to solving immediate problems while other aren't. I guess sometimes knowing the tribe of the shooter would help if you know their preferred type of poison, while at other times you should just yank the arrow out and get on with your life. Sometimes you should bring the snake that bit you to the doctor, sometimes it's not necessary.

I don't think that it would be fair to say that questions about our origin are irrelevant in absolute terms.

Buddhism is also a fragmented religion, certainly not to the degree of Christianity but fragmented nevertheless. For westerners Dalai Lama is a kind of Pope but for Thais he is no one special. Weterners ask questions about killing animals but Thais have explained away their gluttony long time ago.

How are you going to solve your "immediate" problem if you don't know what caused it????

i think if u look at the parable it is concerned with answering irrelevant questions before allowing treatment. the poisoned smeared arrow is the obvious cause of the suffering, and knowing the the type of posion would help in the treatment. but nevertheless refusing to have it pulled out til you knew the type of poison would also be detrimental. so i dont think your analogy holds up.

but none of the answers to the questions below would help.

'I will not have this arrow pulled out until I know who wounded me, of what caste he is, what his name is, whether he is tall, short or of medium height, what colour his skin is, where he comes from, what kind of bow I was wounded with, what it was made of, whether the arrow was feathered with a vulture's wing or a heron's or a hawk's

Sometimes you keep your subordinates on the need to know basis - but that doesn't mean that it's the best and the ultimate management solution.

i am not sure i agree with you in this case on a number of levels. for example i think the buddha was very careful in what he taught and for good reason. it seems to be a common feature of many religions that petty disagreements over (to seems to outsiders anyway) minor doctrinal points leads to considerable bloodshed and suffering.

i think its remarkable that fter 2500 years buddhism has remained largely free of that kind of problem and possibly can be attributed to the foresight of the buddha in what he taught and the way he taught. well i think so anyway.

I have not explained these other things because they are not useful, they are not conducive to tranquillity and Nirvana. What I have explained is suffering, the cause of suffering, the destruction of suffering and the path that leads to the destruction of suffering. This is useful, leading to non-attachment, the absence of passion, perfect knowledge."

i dont think anyone here thinks he ignored the cause and treated the syptoms.

[longway]

I don't think that it would be fair to say that questions about our origin are irrelevant in absolute terms.

i think its an interesting question, but i am pretty sure from a buddhist POV its irrelevant or perhaps taking you in the wrong direction. to assume an origin is to assume a beginning and that is not what the buddha taught (or at least thats how people have interprepted his teachings from what i have read). explaining our origins in terms of evolution, alien dna, stardust, sex or a stork is adequate enough.

Buddhism is also a fragmented religion, certainly not to the degree of Christianity but fragmented nevertheless. For westerners Dalai Lama is a kind of Pope but for Thais he is no one special. Weterners ask questions about killing animals but Thais have explained away their gluttony long time ago.

yep but the nice thing is that i can pick and choose among the various traditions or schools without getting into conflict with the local religious authorities or committing a 'blasphemy'. i understand there's a bit of snobbishness between various traditions, but thats pretty much it AFAIK.

[Luckydog]

Kids do ask some excellent questions...

My 3yr old Son "Where did I come from Daddy?"

Me "You came out of Mummies Tummy, Son"

Him " I know THAT. But how did I get in?

[chownah]

Didn't Mommy make a seed or egg inside her tummy? and that's where we came from?

[sabaijai]

Bhikkhus, the round is beginningless. Of the beings that travel and trudge through this round, shut in as they are by ignorance and fettered by craving, no first beginning is describable.

SN 15:1

[Plus]

Perhaps the wiser answer to the OP would be that "I" that came from Mommy's womb is not the real "I" we should be concerned about or something along these lines.

[DrFisher]

I suppose I am fortunate in the respect my daughter was born and thus far raised in a Buddhist country, although she is only 5 she does come up with some deep questions mostly because her school follows all the Christian and Buddhist holidays and traditions. I get hit with the Santa Clause and Easter Bunny questions and I don't know the answer myself so I just explain it is an idea of goodness, kindness and giving but not literal truth and I liken it to giving alms to the monks. The question I have a problem answering is why I am not a monk any longer (I was a monk for 12 years) the only answer I can give is "because I wanted to be with you and mommy".

[rikpa]

I suppose I am fortunate in the respect my daughter was born and thus far raised in a Buddhist country, although she is only 5 she does come up with some deep questions mostly because her school follows all the Christian and Buddhist holidays and traditions. I get hit with the Santa Clause and Easter Bunny questions and I don't know the answer myself so I just explain it is an idea of goodness, kindness and giving but not literal truth and I liken it to giving alms to the monks. The question I have a problem answering is why I am not a monk any longer (I was a monk for 12 years) the only answer I can give is "because I wanted to be with you and mommy".

Hi DrFisher, you were a monk for 10 or 12 years? And in China? A full vinaya-following monk or more like the Japanese style "priests"? Just curious.

Anyway, this thread is interesting, to a degree. If my four-year-old daughter ever asks me where she came from, I'll tell her "me and your mommy." And if she insists, I'l tell her a little bit more about biology and the birds and the bees (but she already knows she came from her mom's tummy).

Parables about arrows and eliminating suffering here & now just seem waaaay too abstract and pointless for her at her age, and I cannot imagine ever saying anything like that to her. What would I be thinking? Perhaps when she is older, in the throes of teen angst, and even then I might hesitate.

The Buddha spoke to people at their level. His strategy using "vohara vaca" makes complete sense to me. There is no point speaking about the deepest reality to someone who cannot process it. It is a waste of your time and theirs, and there is simply no lasting benefit, and quite possibly harm.

Kids will be kids, and I want to let my daughter be a kid. There is certainly time, later in life, where she may have serious questions about the nature of life and where it all leads. That is the perfect entree to me to tell her the parable of the arrow. But not a moment before.

[sabaijai]

I suppose I am fortunate in the respect my daughter was born and thus far raised in a Buddhist country, although she is only 5 she does come up with some deep questions mostly because her school follows all the Christian and Buddhist holidays and traditions. I get hit with the Santa Clause and Easter Bunny questions and I don't know the answer myself so I just explain it is an idea of goodness, kindness and giving but not literal truth and I liken it to giving alms to the monks. The question I have a problem answering is why I am not a monk any longer (I was a monk for 12 years) the only answer I can give is "because I wanted to be with you and mommy".

Hi DrFisher, you were a monk for 10 or 12 years? And in China? A full vinaya-following monk or more like the Japanese style "priests"? Just curious.

Anyway, this thread is interesting, to a degree. If my four-year-old daughter ever asks me where she came from, I'll tell her "me and your mommy." And if she insists, I'l tell her a little bit more about biology and the birds and the bees (but she already knows she came from her mom's tummy).

Parables about arrows and eliminating suffering here & now just seem waaaay too abstract and pointless for her at her age, and I cannot imagine ever saying anything like that to her. What would I be thinking? Perhaps when she is older, in the throes of teen angst, and even then I might hesitate.

The Buddha spoke to people at their level. His strategy using "vohara vaca" makes complete sense to me. There is no point speaking about the deepest reality to someone who cannot process it. It is a waste of your time and theirs, and there is simply no lasting benefit, and quite possibly harm.

Kids will be kids, and I want to let my daughter be a kid. There is certainly time, later in life, where she may have serious questions about the nature of life and where it all leads. That is the perfect entree to me to tell her the parable of the arrow. But not a moment before.

Makes a lot of sense.