Why is it so difficult to reach Nibbana?

[fabianfred]

There will always be doubt amongst many people about things like rebirth and karma and other realms. Like most spiritual things they need to be experienced and even when one has absolute proof for oneself it cannot be shared or used to convince anyone else.

As you have quoted, the Buddha described how he was able to see his past lives, back and back until 'no starting point was evident' ...then he saw beings existing in various realms, dying and taking rebirth and could see the karma which caused their birth or rebirth in those realms.

He KNEW the truth of rebirth and karma ...but could only teach those who would listen.

Those who demand proof before they will believe ... are just not ready.

Doubt is a hinderance!

[trd]

There is no point in flogging a dead horse. If the obstacles put up are so great that someone doesn't even allow for the possibility of direct experience and is only receptive to endless theories and speculation, it is better to give your time to someone else who might be more receptive. That is just the way of things.

It's like sitting in a restaurant studying and debating the menu without actually tasting any of the food.

[VincentRJ]

It's like sitting in a restaurant studying and debating the menu without actually tasting any of the food.

Good analogy, Trd. Most people don't give a stuff about the nutritional qualities of the food they're about to eat in a restaurant. It's the experience and the taste that counts. As a result, most people in many countries are overweight, and a significant percentage of those overweight people are actually obese, a condition which makes getting around and doing normal tasks more difficult, and which will probably shorten their life and probably result in huge medical expenses which could otherwise have been avoided if such people had been more receptive to 'so-called' endless theories and speculation... on what constitutes an ideal diet.

I think you've misunderstood the nature of the discussion if you think that I, or anyone else in this thread, are not allowing for the possibility of direct experience. Direct experience of some sort is an unavoidable condition of everyone's life. It's the interpretation of that experience that I've been addressing here in recent posts.

We know for a fact that many adults who have claimed to have experienced a former life, whilst under hypnosis for example, are merely repeating the details that are contained in a book sitting on the shelves in the house of their aunt or uncle, for example, which they would have read a number of years earlier whilst a child.

However, such examples do not prove that all memories of previous lives are merely concoctions of the imagination. More research needs to be done. Without some degree of doubt and skepticism we wouldn't have something called 'science', and we'd probably all still be living the life of a hunter-gatherer, in the Stone Age.

A certain degree of skepticism is healthy. I think you might be confusing the term 'skepticism' with 'cynicism', Trd.

The word “skepticism” comes from the Greek word, “skeptikos” which means “to inquire” or “to find out.” Thus, skepticism is really just a means or a way of finding out the truth. We doubt (or “are skeptical”) at first, then later, as we learn more, we can decide if something is true or not.

However, cynicism tends to be a negative reaction to something, and such negative reactions are difficult to change even when evidence is provided that refutes the basis for the cynical attitude.

I claim to have an open mind. I'm a skeptic rather than a cynic. Okay?

[trd]

>Direct experience of some sort is an unavoidable condition of everyone's life. It's the interpretation of that experience........<

It is that one statement which reveals your ignorance.

Edited May 28, 2014 by trd

[VincentRJ]

>Direct experience of some sort is an unavoidable condition of everyone's life. It's the interpretation of that experience........<

It is that one statement which reveals your ignorance.

Wonderful! I'm overjoyed to be able to learn something and become less ignorant.

I've never met anyone who is not hugely ignorant on all sorts of matters. Life is a full-time learning experience. However, we have to be selective. We can't learn everything.

I look forward to your explanations of why the above quoted statement from me reveals my ignorance.

I hope you are not going to claim, "Ooh! I cannot explain in words why you are so ignorant. Only when you have reached a deep state of meditation will you realise your ignorance." That would be a cop-out.

[trd]

What you write about is relative knowledge. It is worthless. It comes and goes like all phenomena. It is maya and is essentially ignorance. True knowledge is the transcendent reality of being. It cannot be interpreted. It is beyond interpretation. To believe that who you are has anything to do with mind, body and relative phenomena is to be in darkness.

I can say this because I know who I am. I am devoid of fear. I experience no conflict of any kind at any time. I know my true nature which is beyond all classifications and interpretations. The whole universe is expressed through me. I speak with absolute authority. It is unshakeable. I am invincible. There can never be any doubt whatsoever of my true nature. Not for one second. There has never been a time in the past nor will there ever be a time in the future when I am not here. Abandon your ideas and concepts and learn from someone who knows the reality.

But first you have to be prepared to recognise your ignorance. To put your faith and trust in someone who knows. Do you have the courage to do that?

[VincentRJ]

What you write about is relative knowledge. It is worthless. It comes and goes like all phenomena. It is maya and is essentially ignorance.

Wow! That's an extraordinary statement. You think that all our scientific understanding of our physical, material surroundings is worthless? You think the application of antibiotics when you have a life-threatening disease is worthless? You'll have to excuse me for being a bit skeptical on this point.

True knowledge is the transcendent reality of being. It cannot be interpreted. It is beyond interpretation. To believe that who you are has anything to do with mind, body and relative phenomena is to be in darkness.

Well, I can't deny that I'm emotionally impressed with part of this concept here. It touches my heart because I feel that any seriously disadvantaged person with mental or physical disabilities would take great comfort in the notion that who they really are has nothing to do with their mind or body.

I can say this because I know who I am. I am devoid of fear. I experience no conflict of any kind at any time. I know my true nature which is beyond all classifications and interpretations. The whole universe is expressed through me. I speak with absolute authority. It is unshakeable. I am invincible. There can never be any doubt whatsoever of my true nature. Not for one second. There has never been a time in the past nor will there ever be a time in the future when I am not here. Abandon your ideas and concepts and learn from someone who knows the reality.

Now the first sentence is encouraging. I'm glad you know who you are. I'm reminded of an instance when a very important person waiting for his flight at the airport, was angry at the delay of the departure of his flight, and approached the information desk to enquire what the problem was.

The lady at the information desk was not able to help, which caused the 'very important person' to get angry. He shouted, "Do you know who I am?" The lady picked up her intercom microphone and relayed the message,"Ladies and gentlemen. We have a man at the information desk who doesn't know who he is. He's wearing a dark brown suit and a floral tie. Any help would be appreciated."

However, I'm a bit confused by the second sentence. To know your true nature which is beyond all classification and interpretation is surely to have a knowledge which cannot be communicated by any recognised methods of communication, and therefore cannot be discussed. The fact that we are discussing it would suggest that it is not beyond all classification and interpretation. The statement that something is beyond all classification and interpretation, is itself a statement which is still within our recognised terms of communication, and is a statement which can be interpreted.

For example, I could interpret your statement as meaning that your true nature is in the world of the spirits, with no material form. The interpretation may be wrong, but it's an interpretation nevertheless.

Perhaps you mean that your true nature is beyond any correct classification and interpretation. In that case, I still see a problem. If your true nature is beyond any correct classification and interpretation, then surely that raises the question as to whether your opinion of yourself, as expressed on this forum, that you know your true nature, is correct. If your true nature is beyond correct classification and interpretation, and you say that you know your true nature (which is itself a form of classification and interpretation) then your statement cannot be true.

If this is confusing for you, I'll try another example. Let's say a Thai person makes the statement that all Thai people are liars (God forbid). Since the person making the statement is also a Thai, then the statement that 'all Thai people are liars' must also be a lie. In other words, all Thai people are not liars, because the person making the statement is himself a Thai and must therefore be lying about the fact that all Thai people are liars.

But first you have to be prepared to recognise your ignorance. To put your faith and trust in someone who knows. Do you have the courage to do that?

Ignorance is the human condition. Our salvation lies in the fact that we know we are ignorant. The total sum of human knowledge, despite significant progress in our scientific understanding on many matters, is just a small fraction of what remains to be learned. As I mentioned before, we don't even know what 95% of the matter and energy in our universe consists of. We call it Dark matter and Dark Energy. It's as invisible and as indecipherable as your claimed 'true nature'.

[trd]

So I'll take that as a no.

Edited May 28, 2014 by trd

[lungmi]

My experience:

1. You want to be happy? - Stop! Happiness is running behind you and cannot touch you! (Bertolt Brecht)

2. You want to have a Big Face? Big Faces have nothing inside. (Adjahn Akasit)

3.You want to reach Nibbana? Stop! You are not vacuous (empy,void) enough. (Jiradhammo)

Edited May 28, 2014 by lungmi

[beautifulthailand99]

I have to say that to me this is the most fascinating discourse I have read on TVF Buddhism section and a big thank you to all the contributors for making such a lively and insightful debate. There is light emanating from many places along with a little heat it is fair to say.

[trd]

What you write about is relative knowledge. It is worthless. It comes and goes like all phenomena. It is maya and is essentially ignorance.

Wow! That's an extraordinary statement. You think that all our scientific understanding of our physical, material surroundings is worthless? You think the application of antibiotics when you have a life-threatening disease is worthless? You'll have to excuse me for being a bit skeptical on this point.

The relative world and all that happens in it is worthless in terms of who you really are. It is a continually changing landscape that passes before the unchanging, passive witness of pure unbounded consciousness or awareness. You don't know that yet. You haven't discovered it. It is a country you have yet to visit. For you, it is the mind and memories of the past which define who you are. Yes, antibiotics were discovered and synthesized in the past. You benefit from them to treat an infection today and sometime in the future you will die.

If you think that you came into being at the moment you were born and that your existence will be extinguished when you die, then Buddhism has nothing to offer you. I have seen nothing in your writings to suggest you are even open to the possibility of a state which transcends mind. The idea of a serious meditation practice is anathema to you. If that is the case, why the interest in Buddhism?

To know your true nature which is beyond all classification and interpretation is surely to have a knowledge which cannot be communicated by any recognised methods of communication, and therefore cannot be discussed. The fact that we are discussing it would suggest that it is not beyond all classification and interpretation. The statement that something is beyond all classification and interpretation, is itself a statement which is still within our recognised terms of communication, and is a statement which can be interpreted.

You are just playing with semantics. I know the colour blue. I don't even have to give it a name to see it and recognise it. I don't need to classify it. I don't need to understand that it is part of the electromagnetic spectrum. But how would I describe the colour blue to someone who has been blind from birth?

Perhaps you mean that your true nature is beyond any correct classification and interpretation. In that case, I still see a problem. If your true nature is beyond any correct classification and interpretation, then surely that raises the question as to whether your opinion of yourself, as expressed on this forum, that you know your true nature, is correct. If your true nature is beyond correct classification and interpretation, and you say that you know your true nature (which is itself a form of classification and interpretation) then your statement cannot be true.

It is not an opinion. An opinion is a projection of the mind. To just be who you are, to rest in that which is your natural state does not require a mind to know it. You make the mistake of thinking you are the mind. The mind is just a bundle of thoughts. What are you when there is no thought?

Ignorance is the human condition. Our salvation lies in the fact that we know we are ignorant.

There are two kinds of ignorance. There is ignorance of relative knowledge. The list is endless and will always be endless and can never be a means to salvation. But in terms of salvation, if you want to call it that, there is only ignorance of your true nature. This ignorance is born of one thing only and that is the mistake of identifying yourself as a mind and body that is separate from the external world.

[VincentRJ]

The relative world and all that happens in it is worthless in terms of who you really are. It is a continually changing landscape that passes before the unchanging, passive witness of pure unbounded consciousness or awareness. You don't know that yet. You haven't discovered it. It is a country you have yet to visit.

I understand quite well that everything undergoes a variable rate of change continuously, but I can't understand why that fact should cause such things to be worthless. Even the atoms in a stationary object, such as a gold coin, which is a very durable item, are constantly moving and colliding with each other, within the metal. If you wanted to stop them moving, you'd have to reduce the temperature to absolute zero (-273 degrees C). The atoms would then overlap and become essentially one, giant atom.

Do you think perhaps that a gold coin at a temperature close to absolute zero suddenly becomes very valuable because all internal movement of its atoms have stopped?

Why are you searching for something permanent? Is it because of the imagined lure of a potential experience of complete joy, greater than you've ever experienced before?

If you think that you came into being at the moment you were born and that your existence will be extinguished when you die, then Buddhism has nothing to offer you. I have seen nothing in your writings to suggest you are even open to the possibility of a state which transcends mind. The idea of a serious meditation practice is anathema to you. If that is the case, why the interest in Buddhism?

One important challenge in life for me is to be able to know when I don't know, and to be able to distinguish between what I do know and what I don't know.

I'm sensible enough to know that I don't know whether or not rebirth is a reality. I don't like to kid myself on such matters, which is what I'd be doing without strong evidence.

I'm interested in Buddhism because I can recognize for myself that there are lots of good advice and words of wisdom in the Buddhist scriptures. There are also lots of stuff that belongs to the era in which the Buddha lived, mythology and miracles and so on, which are out of place in our modern scientific era, in my opinion. I'm very selective in what I believe in.

I don't know where you get the idea that serious meditation practice is anathema to me. This is something that can take up a lot of time. I'm considering that some time in the near future, when I can free myself of all chores, I will spend a few weeks in a meditation retreat somewhere. However, at this stage I have no firm plans. I'm in no hurry, and I have no anxiety about the matter. As I go about my chores, I practice mindfulness.

[beautifulthailand99]

There are many strands to Buddhism and it would be a brave or maybe foolhardy soul who proclaims they have found the true and only path path - the Dalai Lama seems to have distilled his take in a beautiful quote. I need to meditate more , follow the 5 precepts and open my heart is my simple route map at the moment.

This is my simple religion. There is no need for temples; no need for complicated philosophy. Our own brain, our own heart is our temple; the philosophy is kindness.

Dalai Lama

can we not agree that these are both wise words and a guiding light and leave the rest to Advanced Buddhist Studies in a University of Buddhism rather than who is the Best Buddhist forum bake off ?

That said the civilized battle that is developing here is very enlightening but also very male.

I was on the Thai Buddhist retreat last year at Amaravati Monastery in the UK founded by Luang Phor Sumedho and there was a cacophonous group of Thai women , on the phones , breaking the noble silence and doing what groups of Thai women usually do .I got into talking with one of the senior nuns there who had spent many years in Thailand meditating in a forest cave and brought food daily and sustained by simple villagers. I asked her did the annual Thai invasion upset the smooth running of the Wat. Her response surprised me - she said not at all , I love Thai people, the children and all the bustling life that they bring into the temple adding a lot of the monks can be very serious you know - with a twinkle and a smile in her eyes. She had opened her heart in very demonstrable way.

[trd]

There are many strands to Buddhism and it would be a brave or maybe foolhardy soul who proclaims they have found the true and only path path - the Dalai Lama seems to have distilled his take in a beautiful quote. I need to meditate more , follow the 5 precepts and open my heart is my simple route map at the moment.

This is not a discussion about different strands of Buddhism. I am not a Buddhist. I am from the Hindu Vedic tradition which predates Buddhism by a thousand years. This is a discussion about truth, how to realise it and become free of suffering and bondage. I started this whole discussion in another thread a few months ago in answer to a post concerning Buddhist belief and mythology. I answered that post by asking the question, "Do you want to wake up to your true nature or do you want to get lost in scripture and dogma?"

Buddha said he taught only one thing, suffering and the end of suffering.

I have remained consistent throughout in making the point in post after post that all you need to do is to turn the attention back to simple awareness, become established in that which is your true nature and your seeking will be at an end. You would do well to carefully read these posts and try and understand this simple message from someone who has awakened to the transcendent reality of being and who lives it from moment to moment in constant bliss.

When you say there are many strands to Buddhism, I wouldn't argue with that. But this is somewhat missing the point. If you want to cross a river, there may be different boats available to you, but once you have crossed, the boat is abandoned. You don't continue carrying the boat with you. All of these teachings from whatever tradition are just pointers to the silence within. There is no doubt that letting go of the false identity of personhood and all its attachments is no easy task although the method itself is simple.

This is my simple religion. There is no need for temples; no need for complicated philosophy. Our own brain, our own heart is our temple; the philosophy is kindness.

Dalai Lama

can we not agree that these are both wise words and a guiding light and leave the rest to Advanced Buddhist Studies in a University of Buddhism rather than who is the Best Buddhist forum bake off ?

What the Dalai Lama says is indeed wise. The only thing you need to "bake off" is your identification with mind and body. Then you will have the perfect pudding.

That said the civilized battle that is developing here is very enlightening but also very male.

No room here for gender politics. In terms of what you really are, you are neither man nor woman.

I was on the Thai Buddhist retreat last year at Amaravati Monastery in the UK founded by Luang Phor Sumedho and there was a cacophonous group of Thai women , on the phones , breaking the noble silence and doing what groups of Thai women usually do.......

When you are at peace, it will be the same whether you are in a quiet forest or standing in the middle of Hyde Park Corner.

[trd]

Why are you searching for something permanent? Is it because of the imagined lure of a potential experience of complete joy, greater than you've ever experienced before?

Vincent, this is an intelligent question deserving of an answer.

Searching for something permanent is the only pursuit that is worthwhile. Why search for that which is impermanent? Why search for that which appears and disappears? Why search for that which changes from one thing to another. Where is the satisfaction in that? Where is the fullfillment in that? Why waste your time on that? Something brings you temporary joy and is just as easily replaced by sorrow. Throughout your life you accumulate experiences of one kind or another. They pass from one moment to the next and are stored away as memories. And what do you have to show for it at the end of your life. Nothing. You enter the world naked and you leave the world naked, leaving behind all the possessions you have collected as part of the grand deception of defining who you think you are.

Let is just accept for one moment that anything which is impermanent is unreal by definition. If something is temporal, that is bound by space and time, implying a beginning and end, or if it appears and disappears or changes in any way, then it is unreal. But yet the external world manifests as matter and energy but is always changing. Within the limitations of language and insofar as there is identification with it as a person, we could say it is neither real nor unreal.

That poses the question, what is real in its absolute sense? By definition we would have to say that what is real cannot appear and disappear. It must exist always. If it exists always, it must be outside of time and space, without a beginning or end. To be real, it cannot be influenced by or be dependent on anything else.

Sages throughout time, including Buddha, discovered that this absolute reality lies within ourselves and there are volumes of scriptures that, within the limitations of language, describe this state. And that state, as I've been saying so many times over the last few months in various threads is the silent, unbounded pure awareness that is the substratum of being which is prior to mind. In the Vedic tradition it is called the Supreme Self (atma) which is also Brahman, which is all that ultimately exists. Buddha spoke of emptiness and no self (anatta). He said that everything in the relative world is not self. In Vedanta, it is similar to "neti neti" (not this, not this) to describe that which manifests as duality but is not the reality. Buddhism refers to the aggregates, Veda refers to the sheaths.

Buddha was very much a product of his time. During his lifetime, Brahmanism in India had become corrupt. The temple brahmans were only interested in accepting money for granting merit and many became rich and powerful. Does that remind you of anywhere? He rejected it and as a result developed his own teachings. But it is interesting to note that he too predicted that his teachings would one day become distorted and misunderstood. It didn't take long for Buddhism to splinter into various schools as it spread throughout Asia.

So to go back to your question. That which is permanent is already within you. You cannot search for something which is permanent as an idea or belief, because as I have already said, anything created by mind appears and disappears, so a mere belief in something permanent is like any other thought. It comes and goes. If you search for something permanent, that implies you are going on a journey from something impermanent to something permanent. If something is permanent it must also include that which appears to be impermanent. Clearly this cannot be achieved by the mind which is limited.

Silent awareness has no sense of beginning or end. It has no boundaries. It is not dependent on anything else. It requires no validation. It requires no belief. It simply knows itself. Its very essence is joy.

There has been much talk of birth, death and rebirth. But this is happening all the time. Each moment is birth, death and rebirth as each thought is born, dies and is replaced by the birth of a new thought. This is happening within the unchanging silence which is your true nature. The giving up of the physical body will also happen within the unchanging silence that is your true nature.

[VincentRJ]

Trd,

I thank you for your detailed reply. It will take a while to respond to every point you have made, so I'll just concentrate on a couple issues.

First, among your lengthy explanations, I see the following statement, which I think gets to the gist of the matter. You write:

Silent awareness has no sense of beginning or end. It has no boundaries. It is not dependent on anything else. It requires no validation. It requires no belief. It simply knows itself. Its very essence is joy.

As I thought, there is an incentive to search for Nirvana. It is the experience of joy.

I agree that most people are on a treadmill of a continual search for some sort of 'joy' through their material pursuits, accumulation of wealth, purchases of objects of status, such as expensive automobiles, designer clothes, luxury dwellings in a fashionable part of the city, the latest iPhone, tasty food in restaurants and/or a large fridge at home stocked with cartons of delicious ice cream, beer, wine and so on; not to mention the pursuit of attractive, sexy women by the male, and the seduction of handsome or wealthy men by the female.

To be able to experience a more satisfying and permanent joy any time one wants, by simply sitting down and going into a deep state of meditation, must be a tremendous lure for those who believe it is possible, although such a practice could be devastating for the economy if it ever caught on, in a widespread manner.

That poses the question, what is real in its absolute sense? By definition we would have to say that what is real cannot appear and disappear. It must exist always. If it exists always, it must be outside of time and space, without a beginning or end. To be real, it cannot be influenced by or be dependent on anything else.

I have to say, this concept of appearance and disappearance, and real things not being dependent on anything else, is not quite in accord with our scientific understanding, which I would humbly suggest the Buddha was not privy to. Generally, there is not much on this earth that appears and disappears. It merely changes its form, from one complex molecule to another through a continuous process of chemical reactions. The atoms that comprise the molecules, are extraordinarily durable. Some radioactive substances gradually decay over thousands of years, but to completely destroy an atom requires an atomic explosion, which as you know releases a huge amount of energy, that is, the atom is transformed from matter into energy.

This is reality in scientific terms. We have a 'conservation of energy' principle. Nothing in reality appears and disappears. It merely changes its form. Even when an atom is destroyed, it's really just a change in form, from matter into energy which consists of various frequencies of electromagnetic radiation.

When you gaze at a star-studded sky on a clear night, the photons entering your eyeballs were emitted hundreds, or thousands, or even millions of years ago, depending on which individual star you direct your attention to. The most distant object in the night sky, faintly visible to the unaided eye, is the Andromeda Galaxy. The photons impinging upon your retina, are 2.5 million years old. When the photons reach your retina, they end their life as photons but don't disappear without a trace. They are transformed, through a complex photochemical reaction into another form of energy which results in electrical signals being sent via nerves to the visual cortex in the brain. The image formed in your brain, of a softly glowing, pin-wheel type of structure (the galaxy), has been created from bits of light that were born in the belly of stars 2.5 million years ago. Now that's amazing. However, I admit that 2.5 million years is not forever. To detect photons that are older than that, we need a modern astronomical telescope, such as the Hubble Space Telescope. That amazing telescope can pick up photons that are 13 billion years old.

Is that not permanent enough for you, Trd.

To be continued.

[rockyysdt]

Hi Vincent.

You are a very fortunate man in this life.

Your scientific background has led you to Buddhist practice (albeit rudimentary), due to its power to influence your life at the relative level.

As basic as this is, relatively speaking, this can improve your life immeasurably.

The plus for you is that it has the potential to expose you to the absolute.

The beauty is that you need not have belief, but simply, include practice in your life.

Your imperative, as a man of science and need for provable fact, is that when you tackle anything, you do it well.

Token practice is to kid oneself. An Olympic athlete will not win gold without training.

Your imperative is to review your practice and replace it with the best it can be.

Practice:

Repeated performance or systematic exercise for the purpose of acquiring skill or proficiency: Practice makes perfect.

As a man who understands logic and science, you have a limited time on this planet in your current form.

Time is a valuable commodity and should not be wasted.

You need to review your practice to make it the best it can be given your limited resource of time.

Your reward, (Vipaka: the fruits of kharma), may not be limited to life at the relative.

It may expose you to personal experience of what TRD teaches).

Enjoy your wondrous life.

NB: Healthy scepticism is good.

To reject that which is unprovable can be as wrong as belief in it.

To remain open to possibility, without attachment, is healthy.

Edited May 31, 2014 by rockyysdt

[trd]

To be able to experience a more satisfying and permanent joy any time one wants, by simply sitting down and going into a deep state of meditation, must be a tremendous lure for those who believe it is possible, although such a practice could be devastating for the economy if it ever caught on, in a widespread manner.

Was it not David Cameron who recently suggested that instead of measuring the success of the UK economy by GDP alone, we should have a happiness index. Who do you think would be the more productive, happy workers or miserable workers?

Generally, there is not much on this earth that appears and disappears. It merely changes its form, from one complex molecule to another through a continuous process of chemical reactions.

What kind of atoms is a thought made from? What kind of atoms is the view of a sunset made from? What kind of atoms is the concept of which you write made from? All will pass.

[trd]

Silent awareness has no sense of beginning or end. It has no boundaries. It is not dependent on anything else. It requires no validation. It requires no belief. It simply knows itself. Its very essence is joy.

As I thought, there is an incentive to search for Nirvana. It is the experience of joy.

Nothing in my statement implies a search for Nirvana. (pali: Nibbana). Only a search for oneself. There is no one to experience either ignorance or liberation.

[VincentRJ]

Searching for something permanent is the only pursuit that is worthwhile. Why search for that which is impermanent? Why search for that which appears and disappears? Why search for that which changes from one thing to another. Where is the satisfaction in that? Where is the fullfillment in that? Why waste your time on that? Something brings you temporary joy and is just as easily replaced by sorrow. Throughout your life you accumulate experiences of one kind or another. They pass from one moment to the next and are stored away as memories. And what do you have to show for it at the end of your life. Nothing. You enter the world naked and you leave the world naked, leaving behind all the possessions you have collected as part of the grand deception of defining who you think you are.

Trd,

You ask why search for that which is impermanent. That's an interesting question, because people do not consciously make a deliberate choice to search for something which is impermanent as opposed to something which is permanent. I'd say there's no need to bother even trying to search for something impermanent. Impermanence is an unavoidable condition of existence. Whatever happens in life is impermanent. One can't escape it. Even as you sit meditating, striving to achieve a state of Nirvana, or your true self as you put it, your body is undergoing constant change. No matter how still your mind, if you are still alive, the blood is flowing through your arteries and veins; countless chemical reactions are taking place throughout your body at any given moment, and huge, inestimable numbers of bacteria are swirling around, consuming small particles of food, regenerating themselves about every 20 minutes and providing necessary functions to keep you alive. Without the continuous activity of such bacteria, at least 10 times as many as the number of cells in your body, you'd soon die.

[VincentRJ]

Hi Vincent.

You are a very fortunate man in this life.

Your scientific background has led you to Buddhist practice (albeit rudimentary), due to its power to influence your life at the relative level.

As basic as this is, relatively speaking, this can improve your life immeasurably.

The plus for you is that it has the potential to expose you to the absolute.

The beauty is that you need not have belief, but simply, include practice in your life.

Your imperative, as a man of science and need for provable fact, is that when you tackle anything, you do it well.

Token practice is to kid oneself. An Olympic athlete will not win gold without training.

Your imperative is to review your practice and replace it with the best it can be.

Practice:

Repeated performance or systematic exercise for the purpose of acquiring skill or proficiency: Practice makes perfect.

As a man who understands logic and science, you have a limited time on this planet in your current form.

Time is a valuable commodity and should not be wasted.

You need to review your practice to make it the best it can be given your limited resource of time.

Your reward, (Vipaka: the fruits of kharma), may not be limited to life at the relative.

It may expose you to personal experience of what TRD teaches).

Enjoy your wondrous life.

NB: Healthy scepticism is good.

To reject that which is unprovable can be as wrong as belief in it.

To remain open to possibility, without attachment, is healthy.

Thanks Rockyystd,

That's a very positive and encouraging post. What more can I say.

[trd]

You ask why search for that which is impermanent. That's an interesting question, because people do not consciously make a deliberate choice to search for something which is impermanent as opposed to something which is permanent. I'd say there's no need to bother even trying to search for something impermanent. Impermanence is an unavoidable condition of existence. Whatever happens in life is impermanent. One can't escape it. Even as you sit meditating, striving to achieve a state of Nirvana, or your true self as you put it, your body is undergoing constant change. No matter how still your mind, if you are still alive, the blood is flowing through your arteries and veins; countless chemical reactions are taking place throughout your body at any given moment, and huge, inestimable numbers of bacteria are swirling around, consuming small particles of food, regenerating themselves about every 20 minutes and providing necessary functions to keep you alive. Without the continuous activity of such bacteria, at least 10 times as many as the number of cells in your body, you'd soon die.

Correct. Most people do not makes choices or have insights into what is permanent or impermanent because the illusion of being a person made of mind and body is difficult to break. However, with self investigation, that veil of ignorance can be lifted.

I agree that impermanence is an unavoidable condition of material existence. That is what I have been saying all along. But it is irrelevant that the cells of my body are changing. I have often heard that all the cells of a human body are completely replaced every seven years. That changes nothing. The same unchanging, unbounded, undifferentiated awareness was there was I was ten years old as it is now.

[trd]

I have to say, this concept of appearance and disappearance, and real things not being dependent on anything else, is not quite in accord with our scientific understanding"...........

When you are in the sleeping state of consciousness, there is no scientific understanding of any kind, or world, or universe, or mind, or body. In the waking state, world appears together with all its laws. There is no universe without mind to witness it.

[CharlesHH]

In Buddhism, it is often what you intend to do that matters more than what you did. That applies to keeping the five precepts. If you really want to and intend to obey them, then you are ok.

Do not confuse misguided Christian guilt for sinning with Buddhism which has no guilt........ shame but no guilt.

Try honestly and enjoy life. What better "religion" could one ask for?

[RandomSand]

Would you accept, "You are conceived pure."?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Which conception do you refer to... sperm & egg ?

[rockyysdt]

.

Trd,

You ask why search for that which is impermanent. That's an interesting question, because people do not consciously make a deliberate choice to search for something which is impermanent as opposed to something which is permanent. I'd say there's no need to bother even trying to search for something impermanent. Impermanence is an unavoidable condition of existence. Whatever happens in life is impermanent. One can't escape it. Even as you sit meditating, striving to achieve a state of Nirvana, or your true self as you put it, your body is undergoing constant change. No matter how still your mind, if you are still alive, the blood is flowing through your arteries and veins; countless chemical reactions are taking place throughout your body at any given moment, and huge, inestimable numbers of bacteria are swirling around, consuming small particles of food, regenerating themselves about every 20 minutes and providing necessary functions to keep you alive. Without the continuous activity of such bacteria, at least 10 times as many as the number of cells in your body, you'd soon die.

V.

I don't that is what trd is attempting to convey.

From the little I have taken in, awakening is your impermanent experiencing the permanent.

Your impermanent will continue to age and die.

It is just a shell.

The practice is to grow Awareness and become Aware of what is.

This is your (Vincents) opportunity to experience what is.

To become aware of what has always been.

If you return to your scientific self.

Contemplate infinity which has no end nor beginning.

Edited June 1, 2014 by rockyysdt

[rockyysdt]

Would you accept, "You are conceived pure."?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Which conception do you refer to... sperm & egg ?

A post made on the run.

An attempt to convey that conditioning takes place in the womb.

Prior to this, apart from genetic influence, I can only speculate.

[VincentRJ]

I have to say, this concept of appearance and disappearance, and real things not being dependent on anything else, is not quite in accord with our scientific understanding"...........

When you are in the sleeping state of consciousness, there is no scientific understanding of any kind, or world, or universe, or mind, or body. In the waking state, world appears together with all its laws. There is no universe without mind to witness it.

I'm afraid I can't get my head around this concept, Trd. I can understand that everything we see, hear and feel about the world around us is an illusion in the sense that our perceptions and opinions of all that surrounds us, including other people, are experiences that exist only in our mind, and such experiences will vary from individual to individual, from culture to culture, and from one species of animal to another.

Is a leaf green and a strawberry red? Most people have the sensation in their mind, when viewing a leaf or a strawberry, that this is indeed true. However, a small percentage of the population is color blind and have difficulty distinguishing between red and green. A strawberry may appear just another shade of green.

Likewise, certain species of birds can see a fourth primary color in the part of the spectrum which we would call ultra-violet. What color would that be? Who knows! Possibly a color as different from violet as blue is different from green.

However, whilst I agree that everything we experience about the material world around us is of the nature of an interpretation in our mind, I don't think it follows that the stuff that is the subject of that interpretation has no actual existence outside of our mind. That's stretching credulity a bit far, don't you think?

On the other hand, there might be instances and examples of things we see that really don't exist outside of the mind, such as a particular star in the night sky. If such a star, for example, is 100 light years away, that means that I'm seeing the star, or getting a visual interpretation of it, as it appeared 100 years ago. For all anyone knows, that particular star might have exploded 50 years ago. It might not exist anymore in the sense that all its parts have dispersed. If it did explode 50 years ago, we would not see the explosion for another 50 years because it takes 100 years for the light to reach us.

However, that situation is quite different from our experiences of the much closer things on this planet.

[trd]

Vincent, I am trying to get you to focus on what you directly know rather than on what you think you know. Let me give you an example. You are in a room and you notice there are various pieces of furniture and other objects scattered around the room. If you switch off the light and plunge the room into complete darkness, it would be true to say that the furniture has disappeared. You might say the furniture is still there. But this statement is not true. There is no evidence to show the furniture is still there. There is no proof or certainty that these objects exist.

There is no proof that the universe has an independent existence. You can only refer to it because you are conscious of it. The external world is contained totally within your mind. Moreover, if you are in sleep, there is no mind, hence no universe. In dream, there is mind, but there exists a completely different world which seems just as real as the world you see when awake.

This second hand knowledge about the world which you know about from books, school, TV shows and any other source of learning cannot be relied on as a means to know yourself. In fact it is not possible to know any object. If you look at a coffee cup in front of you, you cannot truly know it. There is just the perception of it. The colour of the cup will not look the same in different lighting conditions. The shape will change according to the viewing angle. If I change the cup by repainting it a different colour, how different does it have to be to not be the cup you think you know?

This is the same with all relative knowledge and that also includes the idea of who you think you are. If you ask anyone, who are you? they will usually answer with something that seems to be fixed. Their name, the place they were born, their job, where they live. The mind is looking for something to hang its hat on as it were. But if you really investigate you will find that hardly anything remains the same yet there is still an unshakeable idea that you are you.

This conviction is born of the reality that you are already complete. This could not be otherwise. How could you attain perfection if you were not already liberated. When I speak of your true nature, clearly it must already exist. It cannot be a process of becoming. The only thing preventing you from seeing this is the misplaced idea that identifies the egoic mind with objects through attachment. Exactly how and why this happened is the great mystery that cannot be answered by mind or science. But by letting go of this wrong association you can be free. Then you will have no need of these questions because you will be a total expression of that which is.

You must understand that in order to find out who you really are, you have to abandon the world. I don't mean you have to abandon your friends and go live in a cave. I don't mean you stop believing the sun will rise tomorrow or that if you flick a switch the light won't come on or if you put your foot on the brake your car won't stop. Clearly the world has some kind of substance and consistency to it. But it is not who you are. By turning the attention away from the "noise" of the world, little by little you will discover that you are not always thinking. There are gaps between thoughts. Look a little closer and this space between two thoughts will begin to open up. You will realise that the space is not nothing, but a silence that is perfectly contained within itself. It has structure but without form. As you become more familiar with it, you may experience some feeling of peace or bliss bubbling up from this stillness. This should encourage you to pursue this investigation. Your discrimination will become sharper and with it will come the direct understanding that what you are experiencing is non conceptual and formless and appears more real than anything the mind experiences as form.

Unless you are willing to take this next step, you will forever be lost in the world of ideas which is never ending and ultimately of no consequence.

[VincentRJ]

Vincent, I am trying to get you to focus on what you directly know rather than on what you think you know. Let me give you an example. You are in a room and you notice there are various pieces of furniture and other objects scattered around the room. If you switch off the light and plunge the room into complete darkness, it would be true to say that the furniture has disappeared. You might say the furniture is still there. But this statement is not true. There is no evidence to show the furniture is still there. There is no proof or certainty that these objects exist.

Trd,

I'm not sure these analogies of yours are useful. I know that most analogies break down when you take them too far, but this one above seems broken from the start.

I'm trying to imagine the sort of circumstances that might exist for anyone to have any doubts whatsoever that the furniture and other objects around a room continue to exist when the room is temporarily plunged into total darkness.

I think maybe a 2 or 3 year old child who is still learning to make basic sense of visual stimuli, might wonder if the things he saw when the light was on continue to exist when the light is switched off.

I think if the environment was very chaotic, such as a house full of naughty children who couldn't keep their hands off things whenever their parent's back was turned, or, if the room was unsecured and located in an area subject to frequent burglaries, then someone might have reason to doubt that everything would remain in place if the room were temporarily plunged into toal darkness.

However, in the absence of such unusual circumstances (unusual from my perspective, but perhaps not unusual in India 2,500 years ago) I have no doubt whatsoever that things in my room do not disappear when the light is switched off. I'd stake my life on it, or my entire wealth and possessions.

One fundamental process of the scientific method which is required to establish proof of something, or of some theory, is repeated experimentation. The same, or similar experiment needs to be performed over and over again by different scientists to see if the outcome is the same. If the outcome is sometimes different, then there has to be a satisfactory explanation as to why the outcome is different. Was there some other factor at work, that wasn't accounted for. If not, perhaps the theory is wrong?

For example, if you drop something that has weight, such as a cup of coffee or a book, we are quite certain it will fall to the ground or floor. However, if there is a breeze outside, or a strong fan in operation inside, and the object is very light, such as a feather or a piece of paper, then the object might not drop to the ground or floor, but might be blown away.

Likewise, with the furniture and other objects in the room, repeated experimentation has shown that the furniture in a room continues to exist, even when the lights have been switched off, causing the room to be in complete darkness. The experiment has been carried out literally billions of times throughout the world over a great number of years by all sorts of people, not just scientists.

It's difficult to imagine anything about which we can be more certain, that objects do not cease to exist when the lights are switched off. That they may be carried away by a burglar or a mischievous child is another issue.

Let's consider your final point.

Unless you are willing to take this next step, you will forever be lost in the world of ideas which is never ending and ultimately of no consequence.

I'm getting a sense here of a certain 'lack of competence in handling ideas' as one of the motives for following the path of Buddhism. I'm reminded of a conversation I had with a Jehova Witness man some years ago. He was promoting his particular version of Christianity and we got talking about religion in general. I made some point about the absurdity of anyone thinking that he could know anything about the character, wishes, likes and dislikes of a creator God, as described in the Bible, assuming that such a God existed. It would be like expecting an ant or a worm to have an understanding of a human being.

The man appeared a bit despondent and responded with the comment that he didn't think he could continue living without a belief in the Christian God, whereupon I felt it necessary to apologise, and the conversation on religion ended. However, I felt I had learned a lesson from the man, or at least experienced a confirmation of what I already suspected was true. That is, that some religious people, perhaps most religious people, have an emotional need for their belief, and without such belief life has no meaning for them.

I feel glad I am not in that position. I'm fairly comfortable in the world of ideas. I don't feel lost in them. However, I'm always searching for greater greater understanding, and greater control over my own desires, thoughts and moods. In this respect, I think Buddhism has a lot to offer.