Buddhism and psychic phenomena.

[budsci]

The Vedic philosophy on which Buddhism is based provides a clear scientific framework for understanding and explaining psychic phenomena. It also describes exercizes capable of developing psychic faculties, along with cautions about their use.

Western society has always been conflicted about such things, and is especially so today. On one hand is the official view that denies and ridicules them, and on the other is the popular, widespread practice of "kitchen parlour" psychism: card reading, fortune-telling, spells and charms by New Age "witches" and so on.

And there is a lesser-known "third hand": decades and millions of dollars spent investigating them by secret services and a few university departments. There are well-documented claims of success, allegations of application to espionage (Remote Viewing), mind control (Remote Influencing) and other less-publicized techniques.

If any of this is true, those denying or ignoring psychic phenomena are ideal victims. Techniques for protection - both personal and social - would seem to be a wise precaution. Do Buddhists recognize and/or practise any of these things?

[Fat is a type of crazy]

My girlfriends into Buddhism in a big way - her main temple is in fact a Hindu temple in Bangkok - and she's never mentioned such things as a part of her beliefs.

I think in a free enterprise and social media world if such phenomenon did exist the proof would be out there..so put me in the denier category at this point. 

[budsci]

> if such phenomenon did exist the proof would be out there

 

It is, and plenty of it. As just one example you could look at Professor Emerita Jessica Utts' page at the Parapsychological Association (an affiliated organization of the American Association for the Advancement of Science since 1969):

https://www.parapsych.org/users/jutts/profile.aspx

... and read her 1995 report "An assessment of the evidence for psychic functioning" which begins:

 

"Research on psychic functioning, conducted over a two decade period, is examined to determine whether or not the phenomenon has been scientifically established. A secondary question is whether or not it is useful for government purposes. The primary work examined in this report was government sponsored research conducted at Stanford Research Institute, later known as SRI International, and at Science Applications International Corporation, known as SAIC.

 

"Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well established ...
  :

"It is recommended that future experiments focus on understanding how this phenomenon works, and on how to make it as useful as possible. There is little benefit to continuing experiments designed to offer proof, since there is little more to be offered to anyone who does not accept the current collection of data."

 

Download it here if you want:

http://www.ics.uci.edu/~jutts/air.pdf

 

But I'm sure this won't shake your belief in your girlfriend as an expert in the matter. For myself, I'll continue to follow the science.

[khaowong1]

There were some earlier Monks who did study and practice these things, but haven't heard of any of the current crop.   

[budsci]

That's not only interesting but confirms some of my worst suspicions.

 

For those not so acquainted, psychic faculties are otherwise known as "siddhis" in Sanskrit; don't know the equivalent Pali. A terse description of them can be found in the third chapter of Patanjali's "Yoga Sutras". They were regarded as the "ladder of achievement" for those pursuing, not merely "enlightenment", but the active application of the "illumination" so gained to real-world manifestations. At the same time, stern warnings were offered to all so engaged that success in such endeavours created temptations so powerful that few could resist them. This was the final stage of the Buddhas own enlightenment: standing at the threshold of multiple worlds of pleasure, mastery and self-indulgence; being fully aware of them, and what they offered; and choosing to pass them by without condemnation or curiosity. Few have such single-mindedness of purpose. Gita 2:41:

 

"The determinate Reason is but one-pointed, O Joy of the Kurus; many-branched and endless are the thoughts of the irresolute."

 

If modern Buddhist monks have abandoned development of the siddhis, then they have abandoned the core of their calling. What remains is just the fantasy of pursuing "enlightenment" without any understanding of what it is: mere mental masturbation.

 

Any Buddhist who fails to remember the Shakyamuni's final words before kneeling to pray for his "blessing" and assistance has failed to understand his teachings:

 

"Seek out YOUR OWN path to enlightenment with diligence."

[olfu]

Admittedly I dont know much about Buddhism but when I see these supposedly monks buying Iphones and paying cash I guess they up to something I miss.

[Brucenkhamen]

In Buddhist practice psychic powers are understood as possible side affects of advanced meditation practice, they are never seen as a goal, or something to cultivate as an end in themselves.

 

Monks are forbidden from telling lay people that they have had such attainments, the idea being such monks may be motivated to manipulate others into following them.

 

Buddhism is about self purification, eradicating craving aversion and delusion, and these kinds attainments can often work against this goal leading to pride, distraction, and craving more.

 

The Buddha practiced these Siddhis with the teachers of the day reached the conclusion that they were a dead end, and moved on to practice by himself to look for something more meaningful.  It seems to me that equating Enlightenment with mental masturbation and the gaining of Siddhis as the path then you're already on the wrong path.

[budsci]

> they up to something I miss.

 

Of course. Progress in psychic development occurs in stages - in "quantum jumps" to use a modern phrase. You must not expect daily progress. Instead, you must be prepared to devote continuous, determined effort over a considerable period during which little that is encouraging occurs. Even worse, negative developments are inevitable, because the increase in "inner psychic potential" pushes all of the "garbage" - the inner psychic impediments - to the surface. So it seems like you're going backwards.

 

Eventually the inner potential becomes strong enough to "burst through". The garbage is expelled and eliminated, a bright inner light appears, and a flood of personal satisfaction - bliss - floods the heart. The mind, like a clear pool settling after a storm, becomes transparent. Only a clear inner vision remains. This is often accompanied by physical changes: chronic discomforts and diseases seem to "cure themselves".

 

And this is where enhanced psychic perceptions and faculties appear. They become a "measuring stick" by which REAL progress can be gauged. Not just fantasies of "more enlightenment", but demonstrable capabilities.

Then the process starts over. A new round is entered. Another period of determined effort, "going backwards" again, but with renewed confidence and purpose.

 

But if no REAL progress is achieved, interest wanes. Boredom sets in. The truth of the matter cannot be admitted: too much loss of face, even shame. Instead, CLAIMS of progress must be asserted; and, being vain, visible proof of some sort is essential.

 

A new iPhone is most convincing. Perhaps a gold ring with a jewel just like on the Buddha's statue. Or a solid silver begging bowl to PROVE one's humility ...

 

> equating Enlightenment with mental masturbation

 

I did no such thing: in fact, I stated the opposite.

 

The siddhis are only dangerous when adopted as an end in themselves. If avoided completely, the "path" becomes delusional due to lack of proactical achievement. And saying that you can't tell others about it because it's TOP SECRET - strictly NEED TO KNOW - suggests that you've been watching too many "action movies".

 

Both the left-hand AND the right-hand path must be known and mastered for REAL, lasting achievement. Those who avoid that which they fear end up buying iPhones from Amazon.

 

[Brucenkhamen]

>I did no such thing: in fact, I stated the opposite.

 

I reread your sentence, though it isn't clear it's hard to interpret it any other way.

 

>suggests that you've been watching too many "action movies".

 

There weren't too many action movies available in 5th century BCE India when these rules were formulated,. 

 

The Buddha did not teach a left hand or a right hand path, he called his path the Middle way.

[Pilotman]

Haha, I just love this morning phllosophising about mystic, psychic religious BS.  Very entertaining.   It is a constant reminder of the gullibility of human kind, or at least some sections of humanity. 

[budsci]

My exact words were:

 

> What remains is just the fantasy of pursuing "enlightenment" without any understanding of what it is: mere mental masturbation.

 

Perhaps a course in Basic English?

 

> he called his path the Middle way.

 

And so it is: that which lies midway between the others, and avoids their traps and extremes. Gita 4:21-22:

 

"Hoping for naught, his mind and self controlled, having abandoned all greed, performing action by the body alone, he doth not commit sin. Content with whatsoever he obtaineth without effort, free from the pairs of opposites, without envy, balanced in success and failure, though acting he is not bound."

 

> you're already on the wrong path.

 

I've explored many paths - right, wrong, firm and muddy. The Middle Path is NOT firm, straight and narrow, with clear road-signs and traffic lights. It has ever been difficult of discovery, even more so of following.

 

Except to The Enlightened, of course, of which you must SURELY be one!

 

> It is a constant reminder of the gullibility of human kind

 

Yep, we're gullible alright, but NOT your Enlightened Self, it seems. Two Enlightened Ones in a single thread! It's surely Blessed by Buddha Himself!

[Brucenkhamen]

>Perhaps a course in Basic English?

 

No, need, your english is good overall.  Just rephrase for clarity if "what it is:" was not intended to indicate that this that follows is the definition of pursuing enlightenment.

 

Either way I'd rather have a mind that is free, than one that has developed the ability to perform tricks but still lacks freedom.

[budsci]

> lacks freedom

 

Ah! The Secret AT LAST!

 

For the sake - if not of my poor self, but of all other earnest seekers following this thread - would you PLEASE explain to us, in clear simple English, just what IS this "freedom" that is SURELY the salvation of the world.

 

If not of the entire Universe?

[Brucenkhamen]

It's quite simple and hardly a secret.

 

We all experience un-satisfactoriness in life, in some cases there is strong pain an suffering but for all there is at least a subtle thread of unease.  The Buddha taught that through seeing clearly that craving, aversion, and delusion is what fuels this instead of letting it snowball we can dis-identify with it and gradually let go of it.  When we practice to purify the mind gradually it stops perpetuating itself it's like a candle blowing out (Nibbana/Nirvana) which is the metaphor the Buddha used to explain this freedom.

[budsci]

And I don't have that! ... ?

 

Hmmm! ... Let's see now ...

[olfu]

Other point I find strange that monks depend for food from society exactly as military and/or government.

In plain English religion have to be private matter.

[budsci]

Nope. Sorry. You're wrong!

 

> It's quite simple and hardly a secret.

 

Quite right. In fact it's boring, and undoubtedly well-known to everyone here, including myself.

 

Perhaps you could explain how it's relevant to the topic of this thread, the intelligent use of the siddhis?

 

And by what process of reasoning you deduced that I lack this freedom?

 

Or do you simply regard everyone who disagrees with you as your spiritual inferior, and therefore in desperate need of your very suburban sermonizing?

[budsci]

> religion have to be private matter.

 

This can be so, but not necessarily. I've long been of the view that politics is just religion without God. From this perspective, the nations of South East Asia have adopted a different social model in which Buddhism serves as the social foundation, and government is a modern addition needed to cope with a world dominated by politics and money. The West has taken the other approach: government and money rule the roost, and the priests must ply their trade is deference to them.

 

> monks depend for food from society

 

I believe that this is a good and necessary thing up to a point. The early stages of any skill, trade or craft are basic, repetitive, and of little value to any except the practitioner. However, each practitioner should reach a stage where he or she can make useful, even valuable contributions to society. The carpenter can build durable furniture, the weaver can produce mats and rugs, the tailor fashionable clothes.

 

And the monk? Well, once they master a siddhi it can be placed at the service of those seeking the insights it yields. The diagnosis and remediation of an ailment or disease; the krma afflicting a child or loved one; the vagaries of wind and weather on which farming depends. All of these and more are susceptible of investigation and explanation by capably developed psychic faculties, often with far greater success than their modern scientific equivalents, as any competent dowser will attest.

 

Sadly, Buddhism everywhere has abandoned any attempt at developing the practical skills that were once expected of them, and on which their societies depended. Instead, the Buddhist countries are turning to Western substitutes, ignoring their own traditions, yet keeping up the practice of supporting a priesthood that, with increasingly few but valuable exceptions, is becoming puerile and parasitic.

 

A great pity.

[Sheryl]

This thread has lapsed into bickering and even flaming between 2 members.

 

The offending posts have been removed.

 

Kindly take some time to reflect in the 4th precept before posting.