Why is it so difficult to reach Nibbana?

[trd]

If there is no point in speculating on rebirth, then there is no point in asking me if I have memories of past lives. From your point of view it would be mere heresay, not evidence, so it is pointless.

[trd]

The question is, what do you really have knowledge of? It would be good if you could answer Rocky's post rather than me stealing the limelight.

[VincentRJ]

The question is, what do you really have knowledge of? It would be good if you could answer Rocky's post rather than me stealing the limelight.

I should add that this comment from the Buddha, and also Confucius and Lao Tze, that essentially, to paraphrase in my own way, one shouldn't organise one's life on the basis of speculative and unknown factors, is very practical and sensible.

There's a huge area of ignorance, even in the scientific community, about the extent of the universe, the amount of matter and energy that exists, and what existed before the Big Bang.

Even the concept of 'nothingness' is very problematic. What is 'nothing'? Perhaps there's always 'something', whether it be an invisible particle/ray whizzing through space, or a (currently) completely undetectable particle/wave of Dark Matter or Dark Energy.

Aren't there enough, obvious, certain and clearly apparent problems to deal with in this life, without trying to deal with imaginary problems?

[trd]

Check if you are breathing.

[VincentRJ]

If there is no point in speculating on rebirth, then there is no point in asking me if I have memories of past lives. From your point of view it would be mere heresay, not evidence, so it is pointless.

Not entirely pointless. At least I would know that your belief was based upon personal experience, rather than a leap in faith devoid of experience.

[VincentRJ]

Check if you are breathing.

I used to practice Pranayama breathing exercises years ago, during lunch-time, after working in the office doing administrative work. The rules and regulations of office administrative practices would tend to scramble my mind. I got relief from the breathing exercises, and a certain calm which got me through the afternoon. Sometimes I would even stand on my head.

[trd]

So did you check if you are breathing?

[trd]

Did you check if you were breathing when you read this.

[trd]

If reading this statement prompted you to put your attention on your breath, did you notice that you momentarily stopped thinking. It is not possible to shift the attention to an object and think at the same time in the same space. If you can appreciate that moment when there was no thought, then what was there as presence?

Investigate this. Become familiar with it. Do that and you will begin to understand as a direct experience what you are now attempting to understand with your mind. You are much more than your mind, but it is not possible to understand that with your mind which is limited. The only way is to expand beyond the boundaries of the mental construct you have imagined yourself to be. Do that and your questions, concepts and analysis will be seen as the imposters that they are.

Be still. That is all.

[CharlesHH]

One can do what appears to be a ritual, but the key is to avoid ATTACHMENT to the ritual. Then the apparent ritual is that, instead. It is possible to engage in a ritual in order to seek practice in removing attachments.

Fabianfred,

Thanks for your response. The reason this 3rd Hindrance caught my attention is because all religions seem to consist of lots of rites, rituals and ceremonies, but perhaps only Buddhism warns its adherents against getting attached to such rituals.

I would say that anything that is done habitually is a ritual, including going to work each day to carry out one's regular job, cleaning the house, or taking a shower.

The fact that there might be a practical reason to perform such activity does not make it less of a ritual, and of course, there's nothing necessarily wrong with any ritual in itself. The Hindrance is the emotional attachment to the ritual, and I guess in order to determine if one has an emotional attachment to any particular ritual, one could stop performing the ritual to see how one feels.

For example, I've come across people who have returned early from their long-service-leave to go back to work, because they miss their workplace. And, it's quite common for people to miss their jobs after retirement. I would describe such people as having an emotional attachment to their job.

Likewise, if a monk has gone out every morning with his alms bowl for 10 years, then one day the Abbot instructs the monk to cease doing it (for whatever reason), and if the monk were to miss that routine and feel unhappy, and at a loss, then we could say that the monk had had an attachment to that particular ritual. Right?

[CharlesHH]

The definition of nothing includes the fact that there is a "strain" on nothing to become something.

Before the Big Bang was a total universe of all things that had expanded to the point where it began to return to the POINT where it began, point or condition. There is all things in condition of a single point which explodes, expands, expands so far it returns to the point and the process is repeated FOREVER, no beginning and no end.

The question is, what do you really have knowledge of? It would be good if you could answer Rocky's post rather than me stealing the limelight.

I should add that this comment from the Buddha, and also Confucius and Lao Tze, that essentially, to paraphrase in my own way, one shouldn't organise one's life on the basis of speculative and unknown factors, is very practical and sensible.

There's a huge area of ignorance, even in the scientific community, about the extent of the universe, the amount of matter and energy that exists, and what existed before the Big Bang.

Even the concept of 'nothingness' is very problematic. What is 'nothing'? Perhaps there's always 'something', whether it be an invisible particle/ray whizzing through space, or a (currently) completely undetectable particle/wave of Dark Matter or Dark Energy.

Aren't there enough, obvious, certain and clearly apparent problems to deal with in this life, without trying to deal with imaginary problems?

[rockyysdt]

Theoretically.

However if the universe is endless what causes it to collapse.

Perhaps it collides with others universes also expanding all around.

All theory.

Best left to practice of dharma.

Unfortunately, for most of us (99.999%) delusion, greed, and aversion gets in the way.

That is why it is so difficult.

Overcoming our conditioning.

Most prefer to have a good debate.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[IMA_FARANG]

With all due respect, others and I may hold different views.

I am a Zen follower, and I believe firmly in the possibility of a sudden awakening.

We all, as sentient beings, are given the chance of a human existence to understand and comprehend the Dharma.

What stops us from realizing our true Buddha nature which is inherent in us is our own inability and fear .... our Ego ... and our delusionary separation as perceived by us as somehow "separate" from our true Buddha nature we were born with.

Those two things .... our Ego blindness and it's attachments to this world of form, and our delusionary "separation" we feel from our true Buddha Nature are the main reasons we feel we "can not" awaken to our true nature.

To awaken to that true Buddha nature inherent in us we need to live by the precepts and to do that mindfully and consciously each day .... in fact each moment of each day.

As the saying goes:

What is it that holds you Back?

The gate is wide open before you,

and no one but yourself bars your way.

[trd]

Although there may be years of practice and preparation, the point of awakening is sudden. You are either awake or not. There can be the experience of absolute stillness, but on a fleeting basis. But when that stillness becomes permanent and irreversible it happens in a split second. When that happens everything changes and yet nothing changes. Zen refers to satoris as minor or significant shifts of perception on the way, but true awakening is when ego dissolves, fear has departed and there is complete peace of mind.

[fabianfred]

If there is no point in speculating on rebirth, then there is no point in asking me if I have memories of past lives. From your point of view it would be mere heresay, not evidence, so it is pointless.

Not entirely pointless. At least I would know that your belief was based upon personal experience, rather than a leap in faith devoid of experience.

This seems to me to be claiming that anyone who believes in Rebirth and Karma is doing so from a leap of faith without experience.

All practice and any revelations or wisdom one attains from such is personal and cannot be proven to another.

We can study and read the works of other teachers and the Buddha, and correlate these things with our own experiences through life.

One person, who might have acquired sufficient parami and karma during past existences, could meet the Dhamma and find immediate joy and revelation from it. Whereas another who has not sufficient parami or karma might turn away and find the same teachings ridiculous and unbelieveable.

Myself, I have never seen my past lives, but I am certain the Buddha's teachings are true, and even more I have read extensively the stories about the workings of karma encountered and taught by the monk and (I believe) Arahant LP Jaran.

[puukao]

I believe in rebirth at the same level of the bible. some truth, but i won't bet my life on it. i think you can get good things from both. I do wonder about how priests and Buddhists think when people are submissive to them. is this a power trip? to me it would be. yes, bow to me. i know things you do not. to me, there is something wrong there and why so many people get exploited by the church.

i am also very competitive, and that must not be good. since i can get angry at losing, or happy if my team (or I) win and they lose. but this is also like gathering money. having more money is not just a western thing, that is for sure.

i believe in sudden awakening, but subconsciously I am sure it had been developing and progressing. complete piece of mind, in america, involves, for me: no money, health, mind, relationship, life, etc... problems, concerns, or desire for more. and no worrying about anything, anyone i care about i guess. that would be hard.

[rockyysdt]

This seems to me to be claiming that anyone who believes in Rebirth and Karma is doing so from a leap of faith without experience.

All practice and any revelations or wisdom one attains from such is personal and cannot be proven to another.

We can study and read the works of other teachers and the Buddha, and correlate these things with our own experiences through life.

One person, who might have acquired sufficient parami and karma during past existences, could meet the Dhamma and find immediate joy and revelation from it. Whereas another who has not sufficient parami or karma might turn away and find the same teachings ridiculous and unbelieveable.

Myself, I have never seen my past lives, but I am certain the Buddha's teachings are true, and even more I have read extensively the stories about the workings of karma encountered and taught by the monk and (I believe) Arahant LP Jaran.

Perhaps, as you say, I may not have sufficient parami or must face much vipaka, but to me, faith without experience is like following just another religion.

The heart of religion is faith in a belief.

As I said to a believer of a given faith:

There are Christians, Muslims, Hebrews, Scientologists, Hare Chrisna followers, Hindus, Sikhis, & many others.

Who is right?

Those who indicate they are right, is this due to ego?

The beauty of a practice/way of life dictated by the 8 fold path is that it is experiential and beneficial on many levels.

If it occurs, spontaneous Awakening would be wonderful, however it would be counter productive waiting for it to occur.

[trd]

This debate has been going on for a while. Rocky, I don't think you and Fabianfred are on opposing sides. You are both right. Although you are correct that practice is paramount, the practice doesn't just appear from nowhere. A certain amount of faith or belief and exposure to the teachings was involved initially as an impetus to begin practice and I'm sure that is the case with Fabianfred as it is with you. He is not all belief and no experience and you are not all experience and no belief. Individuals will have different interests, but I'm sure in both your cases, scripture has formed the basis of practice which is ultimately what counts.

[trd]

>The beauty of a practice/way of life dictated by the 8 fold path is that it is experiential and beneficial on many levels.

If it occurs, spontaneous Awakening would be wonderful, however it would be counter productive waiting for it to occur.<

That brings to mind those machines you see in amusement arcades. There is a big tray full of coins and now and again one will fall over the edge and you can win it. But you have to keep feeding the machine so that the new coins push the others over the edge. You could say the coin falling over the edge is spontaneous, but it is dependent on the "continuous practice" of feeding the machine that leads to that outcome.

[trd]

Just to take this anology a little further. The object of course is to dislodge more coins than you put in. You might find there are ten coins all precariously balanced, but it only takes one coin to make the whole lot come tumbling down.

So you may practice for a long time and then one day, one little thing, a thought or perception or some kind of action precipitates the entire collapse of ego, a complete letting go. You cannot force it or as Rocky says, waiting for it to happen would be counterproductive, so it's best just to "stick with the program" and when the time is right, when the fruit is ripe, it will happen as it is bound to.

[VincentRJ]

Theoretically.

However if the universe is endless what causes it to collapse.

Hi Rockyystd,

Gravity. Sir Isaac Newton discovered the principles of gravitational attraction in the 17th century.

His universal law of gravitation states that any two bodies in the universe attract each other with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses, and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

However, Newton wasn't aware of the Big Bang theory, which came much later. When applying his laws of gravitation to the universe as a whole, there was a serious problem. If all objects, all planets, all stars, and all galaxies are attracting each other with a force of gravity, then why doesn't the universe collapse upon itself?

It was assumed in those days that the universe was basically static, apart from various small objects whizzing around, such as comets, and planets orbiting the sun, and so on. The major features, such as stars and galaxies, were considered to be static.

The answer for many people, including Newton who was very religious but in a heretical manner, was God.

The stars should have been moving towards each other, due to the force of gravity, but God kept them in their place. How nice and comforting!

Edwin Hubble discovered in 1929 that the universe is in fact expanding. This discovery caused Albert Einstein to change his Theory of Relativity, which had initially been modified to accommodate the incorrect assumption that the universe was static.

The Big Bang theory was developed to explain this expansion. About 14 billion years ago, the entire universe that we now see with our huge telescopes, consisted of a 'singularity', a point of infinite mass and infinite temperature, but no volume; smaller than a single atom.

I guess if you can believe that, then you can believe in Kamma and Reincarnation.

One day (but at that time, days didn't exist, you understand), that infinitely small, but infinitely massive singularity exploded, and 14 billion years later we now have what we see through our telescopes.

Until recently, it was assumed that the rate of expansion would be continuously slowing down, in accordance with those Newtonian laws of gravity. Eventually, the expansion would stop, as a bullet does if you fire it straight up into the sky, and the universe would then begin to collapse upon itself and eventually end up as a singularity once again.

However, as telescopes have got more powerful, allowing us to see farther and farther to the outreaches of the universe, we have recently discovered that the expansion of the universe is not slowing down. The expansion appears to be accelerating, just the opposite of what was expected. Well I never!!

In order to explain this unexpected acceleration, there are two competing theories. It is a general principle of the scientific method, that whenever our observations are in conflict with what our theories predict, either the theory is wrong, or there exists some other factor which we are unaware of.

Currently, the consensus of opinion among most astrophysicists, is that our theories are correct and that the cause of the acceleration of expansion is due the existence of huge quantities of totally invisible and undetectable matter and energy which they call Dark matter and Dark Energy, which comprises about 95% of all the matter and energy in the universe. In other words, what we can see with our giant telescopes and sophisticated instruments that can detect all sorts of waves, is only 5% of the stuff out there. Amazing!

The competing theory is a modification of Newtonian Dynamics, known as MoND.

Now, what has all this got to do with Nibbana, I hear you ask? I have to confess, I don't know, except perhaps that the reality of Nibbana, Kamma and Reincarnation might be no more fanciful than these theories about the universe, which I've described above.

Do we have any credible scientific evidence for the reality of reincarnation I ask myself. A search on the internet reveals a couple of scientists who are investigating, or have investigated the matter. The cases described are certainly interesting, but much more work needs to be done before any firm conclusions can be drawn.

The following links provide some fascinating reading for those who are interested in this issue. http://reluctant-messenger.com/reincarnation-proof.htm http://uvamagazine.org/articles/the_science_of_reincarnation

These scientists interviewed scores of young children who claimed to have remembered a previous life. However, the children generally remembered just one previous life. The Buddha remembered thousands.

Following is an account of Gautama's recollection of former lives as he sat under the Bodhi tree.

"Thus with the mind composed, quite purified, quite clarified, without blemish, without defilement, grown soft and workable, fixed, immovable, I directed my mind to the knowledge and recollection of former habitations: I remember a variety of former habitations, thus: one birth, two births, three...four...five...ten...twenty...thirty...forty...fifty...a hundred...a thousand...a hundred thousand births, and many an eon of integration and many an eon of disintegration and many an eon of integration-disintegration: such a one was I nourished, such and such pleasant and painful experiences were mine, so did the span of life end. Passing from this, I came to be in another state where such a one was I by name... so did the span of life end. Passing from this, I arose here. Thus I remember diverse former habitations in all their modes and detail."

"...in all their modes and detail." Wow! If only the Buddha had lived today. With so many recollections of former lives, surely we would be able to scientifically confirm the reality and accuracy of at least a few of those former lives.

[rockyysdt]

This debate has been going on for a while. Rocky, I don't think you and Fabianfred are on opposing sides. You are both right. Although you are correct that practice is paramount, the practice doesn't just appear from nowhere. A certain amount of faith or belief and exposure to the teachings was involved initially as an impetus to begin practice and I'm sure that is the case with Fabianfred as it is with you. He is not all belief and no experience and you are not all experience and no belief. Individuals will have different interests, but I'm sure in both your cases, scripture has formed the basis of practice which is ultimately what counts.

Thanks trd.

My interest in belief is its ability to alter or color ones behavior detrimentally.

The faith I have in the Buddhas teaching is due to:

The practice of the eightfold path having the ability to improve my life here & now, even if this is initially at a coarse level, &

The ability to test it for myself as it unfolds without having to firstly die.

Re birth, realms, Mara, & cosmic awakening, may or may not exist, but I don't have to believe in it in order to have faith in practice.

In Freds' case, it gives him the freedom to radically reduce his practice for family reasons, comforted in the fact that he is now a stream enterer.

If it turns out that Awakening is the very best state a human can exist, and that when body/mind ceases it is over, then Fred backed the wrong horse.

[rockyysdt]

Gravity. Sir Isaac Newton discovered the principles of gravitational attraction in the 17th century.

His universal law of gravitation states that any two bodies in the universe attract each other with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses, and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

However, Newton wasn't aware of the Big Bang theory, which came much later. When applying his laws of gravitation to the universe as a whole, there was a serious problem. If all objects, all planets, all stars, and all galaxies are attracting each other with a force of gravity, then why doesn't the universe collapse upon itself?

It was assumed in those days that the universe was basically static, apart from various small objects whizzing around, such as comets, and planets orbiting the sun, and so on. The major features, such as stars and galaxies, were considered to be static.

The answer for many people, including Newton who was very religious but in a heretical manner, was God.

The stars should have been moving towards each other, due to the force of gravity, but God kept them in their place. How nice and comforting!

Edwin Hubble discovered in 1929 that the universe is in fact expanding. This discovery caused Albert Einstein to change his Theory of Relativity, which had initially been modified to accommodate the incorrect assumption that the universe was static.

The Big Bang theory was developed to explain this expansion. About 14 billion years ago, the entire universe that we now see with our huge telescopes, consisted of a 'singularity', a point of infinite mass and infinite temperature, but no volume; smaller than a single atom.

I guess if you can believe that, then you can believe in Kamma and Reincarnation.

One day (but at that time, days didn't exist, you understand), that infinitely small, but infinitely massive singularity exploded, and 14 billion years later we now have what we see through our telescopes.

Until recently, it was assumed that the rate of expansion would be continuously slowing down, in accordance with those Newtonian laws of gravity. Eventually, the expansion would stop, as a bullet does if you fire it straight up into the sky, and the universe would then begin to collapse upon itself and eventually end up as a singularity once again.

However, as telescopes have got more powerful, allowing us to see farther and farther to the outreaches of the universe, we have recently discovered that the expansion of the universe is not slowing down. The expansion appears to be accelerating, just the opposite of what was expected. Well I never!!

In order to explain this unexpected acceleration, there are two competing theories. It is a general principle of the scientific method, that whenever our observations are in conflict with what our theories predict, either the theory is wrong, or there exists some other factor which we are unaware of.

Currently, the consensus of opinion among most astrophysicists, is that our theories are correct and that the cause of the acceleration of expansion is due the existence of huge quantities of totally invisible and undetectable matter and energy which they call Dark matter and Dark Energy, which comprises about 95% of all the matter and energy in the universe. In other words, what we can see with our giant telescopes and sophisticated instruments that can detect all sorts of waves, is only 5% of the stuff out there. Amazing!

The competing theory is a modification of Newtonian Dynamics, known as MoND.

Now, what has all this got to do with Nibbana, I hear you ask? I have to confess, I don't know, except perhaps that the reality of Nibbana, Kamma and Reincarnation might be no more fanciful than these theories about the universe, which I've described above.

Do we have any credible scientific evidence for the reality of reincarnation I ask myself. A search on the internet reveals a couple of scientists who are investigating, or have investigated the matter. The cases described are certainly interesting, but much more work needs to be done before any firm conclusions can be drawn.

The following links provide some fascinating reading for those who are interested in this issue. http://reluctant-messenger.com/reincarnation-proof.htm http://uvamagazine.org/articles/the_science_of_reincarnation

These scientists interviewed scores of young children who claimed to have remembered a previous life. However, the children generally remembered just one previous life. The Buddha remembered thousands.

Following is an account of Gautama's recollection of former lives as he sat under the Bodhi tree.

"Thus with the mind composed, quite purified, quite clarified, without blemish, without defilement, grown soft and workable, fixed, immovable, I directed my mind to the knowledge and recollection of former habitations: I remember a variety of former habitations, thus: one birth, two births, three...four...five...ten...twenty...thirty...forty...fifty...a hundred...a thousand...a hundred thousand births, and many an eon of integration and many an eon of disintegration and many an eon of integration-disintegration: such a one was I nourished, such and such pleasant and painful experiences were mine, so did the span of life end. Passing from this, I came to be in another state where such a one was I by name... so did the span of life end. Passing from this, I arose here. Thus I remember diverse former habitations in all their modes and detail."

"...in all their modes and detail." Wow! If only the Buddha had lived today. With so many recollections of former lives, surely we would be able to scientifically confirm the reality and accuracy of at least a few of those former lives.

The problem as that as matter becomes scattered further apart and with accelerating speed, the effects of gravity become weaker.

I must say though, debating with you is like wrestling with a well greased opponent.

You've avoided my pertinent questions.

Are you too comfortable in a scientifically balanced life to believe there is any benefit in practicing meditation & mindfulness?

Do you think the scientific holes in the Buddhas story affirm such a stance?

[trd]

>If it turns out that Awakening is the very best state a human can exist, and that when body/mind ceases it is over, then Fred backed the wrong horse.<

Now that's confused me Rocky. If you are supposing that awakening is limited to the body/mind mechanism then both of you have backed the wrong horse. It would be good to hear Fred's view. I am not sure he would agree with you. While it is true that I don't put the same amount of importance as Fred seems to on higher realms etc, I am not critical of that. He spent a long time as a monk and I'm sure he is well steeped in practice. Is there really much difference between your views when it comes to the experiental.

As far as belief is concerned there is a tradition of surrendering to the master. The early followers of Buddha must have placed their trust in him initially. The tradition of faith in the guru in the vedic tradition which I am more familiar with is also there.

Please let me know if I have misunderstood what you are saying.

[VincentRJ]

Are you too comfortable in a scientifically balanced life to believe there is any benefit in practicing meditation & mindfulness?

Not at all, Trd. Practising meditation in a serious manner, which takes time, has always been something that I think I should explore. The problem is, to do it seriously it does take time. Currently, I meditate frequently, but for short periods, during interludes when I'm not attending to any practical matters

I recall reading recently some excerpts of a talk given by Tenzin Palmo, to a Chines audience (I think). One of the questions asked was, how did she fill her time? 12 years in a cave by herself would seem to be very boring from the perspective of most people. Tenzin's answer was, that she was so involved in meditation, the whole period seemed like 3 months.

I couldn't help thinking how reluctant I would be to compress 12 years of my life into 3 months.

"In 1976 Tenzin Palmo commenced living in a cave in the Himalayas measuring 10 feet wide and six feet deep and remained there for 12 years, for three of which she was in full retreat. The cave was high in the remote Lahul area of the Indian Himalayas, on the border of Himachal Pradesh and Tibet. In the course of the retreat she grew her own food and practiced deep meditation based on ancient Buddhist beliefs. In accordance with protocol, she never lay down, sleeping in a traditional wooden meditation box in a meditative posture for just three hours a night. The last three years were spent in complete isolation. She survived temperatures of below −30° Fahrenheit (−35°C) and snow for six to eight months of the year."

[trd]

The question you quoted was asked by Rocky, not me. With respect, I have no further interest in conversing with you.

[VincentRJ]

The question you quoted was asked by Rocky, not me. With respect, I have no further interest in conversing with you.

Never mind, Trd. I take no offense. Maybe because my ego is moderately well under control.

And I do apologise for confusing you with Rockyystd. It must have been due to one of those lapses of concentration as a result of my failure to practice meditation more diligently.

[CharlesHH]

Buddhists are not bowing or being submissive to a PERSON but rather to the IDEA of releasing one's ego and also to show respect to the ideas of Buddhism.

I believe in rebirth at the same level of the bible. some truth, but i won't bet my life on it. i think you can get good things from both. I do wonder about how priests and Buddhists think when people are submissive to them. is this a power trip? to me it would be. yes, bow to me. i know things you do not. to me, there is something wrong there and why so many people get exploited by the church.

i am also very competitive, and that must not be good. since i can get angry at losing, or happy if my team (or I) win and they lose. but this is also like gathering money. having more money is not just a western thing, that is for sure.

i believe in sudden awakening, but subconsciously I am sure it had been developing and progressing. complete piece of mind, in america, involves, for me: no money, health, mind, relationship, life, etc... problems, concerns, or desire for more. and no worrying about anything, anyone i care about i guess. that would be hard.

[trd]

>i believe in sudden awakening, but subconsciously I am sure it had been developing and progressing. complete piece of mind, in america, involves, for me: no money, health, mind, relationship, life, etc... problems, concerns, or desire for more. and no worrying about anything, anyone i care about i guess. that would be hard.<

Puukao, I'm not entirely sure what you mean here, but if you are suggesting that peace of mind makes you dull and uninterested in life, that is certainly not the case. When I say peace of mind, I mean that which is brought about by being established in being which is both effortless and choiceless, not a temporary state of mind as a result of some kind of psychological mood making or behavioural modification or conditioning.

[rockyysdt]

>If it turns out that Awakening is the very best state a human can exist, and that when body/mind ceases it is over, then Fred backed the wrong horse.<

Now that's confused me Rocky. If you are supposing that awakening is limited to the body/mind mechanism then both of you have backed the wrong horse. It would be good to hear Fred's view. I am not sure he would agree with you. While it is true that I don't put the same amount of importance as Fred seems to on higher realms etc, I am not critical of that. He spent a long time as a monk and I'm sure he is well steeped in practice. Is there really much difference between your views when it comes to the experiental.

As far as belief is concerned there is a tradition of surrendering to the master. The early followers of Buddha must have placed their trust in him initially. The tradition of faith in the guru in the vedic tradition which I am more familiar with is also there.

Please let me know if I have misunderstood what you are saying.

I'm open to both possibilities T.

I hope Fred doesn't take my comments as critical.

For fear of being egotistical, perhaps they (comments) are a crossroad for him.

A friend of mine is heavily into Christianity.

Each week his minister gives a sermon on a varying topics.

Two weeks ago the topic was "Faith".

The consequence of this reminds me of the name of a rock band whose members included Eric Clapton, Ginger Baker, Stevie Winwood, & Ric Grech.

In terms of faith it is true that we need a measure of it, but shouldn't an initial modest level of faith unfold and grow of its own accord through experience?

After all, much may have been attributed to the Buddha, but could be far from accurate.

I agree with you regarding the tradition of being faithful to a guru.

I feel the level of faith would be greatest in the presence of a living guru.

One who is Awakened and stands before us and can guide us individually.

This would be very humbling.

Unfortunately the Buddha died 2,500 years ago and is not present to speak for himself.

Shouldn't I honor him by limiting my faith with healthy skepticism as he taught, until my wisdom & knowledge grows from practice and experience?

Perhaps anything else could have me practicing for years something which might be the opposite of what he had intended or taught.

NB: It is a little puzzling for me that you have deep faith in terms of re birth & multiple lives, but are cool on realms?