At the end of the day, How do we know that any of it is true (Awakening - Nibbana)?

[Diddl]

There can be no satisfaction in them as long as you are seeking.

Some of the simplest things can be the most profound.

Perhaps part of the answer is to simply be?

In order to just be, you need to practice to be, which is in itself a contradiction, but don't let that worry you. That too will fall away.

What would you say “to be” is exactly?

My view of “to be” would be to not follow the crowd, to not copy or be influenced by society, doctrine, culture, beliefs, in other words not to be a copycat. “to be” is to be an individual, a free-thinking person, not someone who wants to be integrated into society and live a falsehood. A lot of people live this falsehood because they want to be accepted and loved. Do you have the courage “to be”?

Please note - When I mention "you", I am addressing everyone, not any individual person.

[KhnomKhnom]

Even the Ven Maha Boowa, upon awakening, viewed his passed lives and said: "My, the number of past lives I've lived is so great, the bodies would fill all of Thailand?

I don't know much about this kind of buddhism, but it seems that the question should have been decided while this man lived. If he could "view his past lives" in any meaningful way, should it not have been trivial for him to prove this by sharing knowledge that could not have been obtained any other way?

Do we know if Ven Maha Boowa ever made such an attempt? Or offered an explanation as to why doing so would not be helpful?

Very few advanced Buddhists will try to prove anything to you. That is just silly. BTW, "Buddhism" is always capitalized.

[trd]

Diddl, you misunderstand what I mean by satisfaction. I do not mean satisfaction derived from some object, but the absence of attachment to any object. That in itself is satisfaction, to be free of seeking satisfaction in objects.

[Sheryl]

On the subject of Reincarnation - can can someone who believes in this explain how approx 150 years ago the human population was 1 billion whereas today its some 7 billion.

If 1 billion souls were reincarnated over this period where did the other 6 billion come from ?

Perhaps we should start a million years ago when the human population was only in the thousands.....

First of all, reincarnation is incompatible with Buddhist teachings. I think you mean rebirth, there is an important difference. reincarnation implies the movement of a soul -- a permanent, unchanging entity - from one body to another. This is a Hindu concept. One of the central teachings of Buddhism is that there is not such thing as a soul, in the sense of anything permanent and unique to an individual. It is a complicated teaching and in practice the Hindu view remains common in lay thinking in Asian Buddhist countries, which were mostly Hindu originally anyhow.

Both reincarnation as understood by Hindus and rebirth i nthe Buddist sense can easily take place in a different living form, i.e. an animal or even lower being can become human. Buddhist cosmology speaks of multiple planes of existence. Looked at that way, the growing human population just suggests that an increasing number of beings are taking birth in the human realm on earth now as opposed to the past.

Certainly animal life forms are rapidly decreasing in numbers..and certainly there are a lot of people to be found who do not appear very developed, i.e. may not have been long in the human plane. I've certainly encountered some that seem to barely have a foothold here...

Secondly nothing in Buddhism requires any particular "belief" in this, in fact a "belief" is rather incompatible with Buddhism, which emphasizes direct knowledge.

Personally I don't "know" what the actual situation is re rebirth, except that when I cast my mind back to the very youngest age I can remember (abut 2 years), my mind then seems much older; I seem to already have had a very long history. And -- trying to frame this carefully and exactly without reading into it -- I have had experiences which feel like first hand memories of things that did not happen in this life. Many other meditators report this too.

And, intuitively, I strongly sense truth in the law of Karma and that consequences of actions in this life continue beyond death.

Of course, that does not necessarily mean a 1:1 correspondence. Maybe all the karma goes into one vast karma that all living beings share. And maybe all "past lives" are just lives that were led and are now memories stored in one vast collective unconscious, from which we can all access memories if conditions are right.

I don't know and I don't need to know.... The Buddha was teaching to a Hindu audience. Hence when he referred to rebirth, he was not introducing it as a new idea. Rather he was talking to people for whom it was an accepted fact that there were multiple lives and attempting to correct the underliying misconception of a unique, permanent individual soul. He might have explained matters differently had he been speaking to a Judeo-Christian audience.

[KhnomKhnom]

Interesting subject. It is nice to have thinkers discussing a subject that I am not used to on TV.

My impression is that there are many paths to finding the truth about anything. One path may suit one person, another another. At the end of the day, my personal experience is that one must have courage to face the truth. We always want what we want and not what is sometimes clearly staring us in the face. We are in constant denial of what might seem obvious. The only way of finding anything is to have the courage to go down a path to find out whether all these books and people are telling us the truth and to accept the disappointment when we find out it is all lies and rubbish, and then to have the courage to continue our path to further experiment with.

As far as I am concerned, belief is mankind’s biggest enemy. We believe something and, therefore, go around in circles trying to justify it to be true rather than being open-minded and admitting that we don’t really know. Most people are like children wanting a big daddy to show them the way. It is only when you stand on your own two feet that learning and discovery can take place. If you need to join a group in order to feel safe and comfortable, then you will only ever experience that belief system and feel comfortable in that cul-de-sac and go no further! Aaaaahh, comfort and security – that is what we want!

Perhaps we were all brought here to experience the adventure of discovery, to annihilate lies and deceit within ourselves; perhaps this is the only objective in life.

There are many things that I like in Buddhism but I have never found anyone truly enlightened, or maybe enlightenment is not what I envisaged it to be!

He who speaks does not know; he who knows does not speak.

[Diddl]

Interesting subject. It is nice to have thinkers discussing a subject that I am not used to on TV.

My impression is that there are many paths to finding the truth about anything. One path may suit one person, another another. At the end of the day, my personal experience is that one must have courage to face the truth. We always want what we want and not what is sometimes clearly staring us in the face. We are in constant denial of what might seem obvious. The only way of finding anything is to have the courage to go down a path to find out whether all these books and people are telling us the truth and to accept the disappointment when we find out it is all lies and rubbish, and then to have the courage to continue our path to further experiment with.

As far as I am concerned, belief is mankind’s biggest enemy. We believe something and, therefore, go around in circles trying to justify it to be true rather than being open-minded and admitting that we don’t really know. Most people are like children wanting a big daddy to show them the way. It is only when you stand on your own two feet that learning and discovery can take place. If you need to join a group in order to feel safe and comfortable, then you will only ever experience that belief system and feel comfortable in that cul-de-sac and go no further! Aaaaahh, comfort and security – that is what we want!

Perhaps we were all brought here to experience the adventure of discovery, to annihilate lies and deceit within ourselves; perhaps this is the only objective in life.

There are many things that I like in Buddhism but I have never found anyone truly enlightened, or maybe enlightenment is not what I envisaged it to be!

"finding the right path to truth

having courage to face the truth

not being in denial of what might seem obvious

standing on your own two feet

learning and discovering"

1. These are all abstract notions which have different meanings from moment to moment according to changing circumstances which are beyond your control and hence mean nothing.

2. There can be no satisfaction in them as long as you are seeking.

3. The original OP question and subsequent replies have come about because of Point 2.

Point 1. - Do you honestly think that “changing circumstances which are beyond your control and hence mean nothing” is true? That is a belief as far as I am concerned! If what you say is true, then we are just incapable robots designed for no purpose at all. This belief system is an easy way out of denying that whatever is created is our fault – we don’t like a finger pointed at us, we prefer to point it at others, or to ‘uncontrollable circumstances’! As far as I am concerned, we are in total control; we attract to us what needs to be seen within us, but we refuse to see because it is usually too hurtful.

Point 2. - “Satisfaction”? If I understand you correctly, there is only satisfaction when you are not seeking. Do you expect satisfaction? That is the problem – we want satisfaction, comfort, security, etc., when we follow a path or don’t follow a path. It is desire for satisfaction, reward, comfort, security, that blocks the way. When you expect nothing but the truth, no matter how horrible it is, then things can be ‘seen’ in their true light and ‘heard’ in their true context.

That is my experience so far anyway.

Find out first if there is a "you" in control. What is this "you" to which "you" refer?

When I speak of control, I am referring to the power within you.

Please explain what "you" or 'non-you' means in your view? I have read many texts that say there is no "you" but how can you define in words this non-you? Language has many barriers, as has the brain that interprets words solely upon its own experience and data collection.

[trd]

There can be no satisfaction in them as long as you are seeking.

Some of the simplest things can be the most profound.

Perhaps part of the answer is to simply be?

In order to just be, you need to practice to be, which is in itself a contradiction, but don't let that worry you. That too will fall away.

What would you say “to be” is exactly?

My view of “to be” would be to not follow the crowd, to not copy or be influenced by society, doctrine, culture, beliefs, in other words not to be a copycat. “to be” is to be an individual, a free-thinking person, not someone who wants to be integrated into society and live a falsehood. A lot of people live this falsehood because they want to be accepted and loved. Do you have the courage “to be”?

Please note - When I mention "you", I am addressing everyone, not any individual person.

Your definition of "to be" still contains an act of volition. To be is to be without volition of any kind. If there is no thought in your mind, what remains?

[cocopops]

In order to bring more along, although Awakening is a personal experience, he could have given a list of lives with information which could be investigated.

But then, how could he prove that each of those lives were actually incarnations or re births of himself?

I don't think he would need to. Simply proving he was able to observe lives that occurred in the past would be miracle enough to support everything else he says. Suppose I claimed to recollect my past life as a cab driver in 18th century London. Or even just a few specific events from it. Even if we couldn't really "prove" things one way or another, I suspect that a very brief interrogation would show whether or not my recollections were real or imagined.

If you study human behavior you'll find most have beliefs and look for things which support those beliefs, rather than be truly open to investigation.

Perhaps, Ven Maha Boowa understood that no amount of proof will persuade those mired in their beliefs?

It's certainly possible that he believed so. And I would accept there are probably people like that out there. The devotees of Abrahamic religions for example. But it should be fairly obvious that a very great number of people would be extremely interested in anything approaching a concrete proof of reincarnation. Are you seriously suggesting otherwise? That such an event would not change the world?

At a bare minimum, I think the OP would be very interested.

I have a lot of time for Buddhists. And I'm no master, but there is no doubt that meditation has improved my life and made me a better person. As it has for millions of others. But that doesn't change the fact that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. The most likely reality remains that meditation and other exercises of the mind are good for you, and Buddhism provides a body of empirically researched data to support this, but that's as far as it goes. Reincarnation, omniscience, nirvana (at least in the way that a layman uses the term) - are all imaginary concepts.

Edited December 27, 2014 by cocopops

[Diddl]

Diddl, you misunderstand what I mean by satisfaction. I do not mean satisfaction derived from some object, but the absence of attachment to any object. That in itself is satisfaction, to be free of seeking satisfaction in objects.

Yes, I understand what you mean now. Apologies, but I was not trying to correct you at all, I was just extending the conversation as it is an interesting one and I enjoy reading all the comments. We can all learn from each other.

[trd]

Interesting subject. It is nice to have thinkers discussing a subject that I am not used to on TV.

My impression is that there are many paths to finding the truth about anything. One path may suit one person, another another. At the end of the day, my personal experience is that one must have courage to face the truth. We always want what we want and not what is sometimes clearly staring us in the face. We are in constant denial of what might seem obvious. The only way of finding anything is to have the courage to go down a path to find out whether all these books and people are telling us the truth and to accept the disappointment when we find out it is all lies and rubbish, and then to have the courage to continue our path to further experiment with.

As far as I am concerned, belief is mankind’s biggest enemy. We believe something and, therefore, go around in circles trying to justify it to be true rather than being open-minded and admitting that we don’t really know. Most people are like children wanting a big daddy to show them the way. It is only when you stand on your own two feet that learning and discovery can take place. If you need to join a group in order to feel safe and comfortable, then you will only ever experience that belief system and feel comfortable in that cul-de-sac and go no further! Aaaaahh, comfort and security – that is what we want!

Perhaps we were all brought here to experience the adventure of discovery, to annihilate lies and deceit within ourselves; perhaps this is the only objective in life.

There are many things that I like in Buddhism but I have never found anyone truly enlightened, or maybe enlightenment is not what I envisaged it to be!

"finding the right path to truth

having courage to face the truth

not being in denial of what might seem obvious

standing on your own two feet

learning and discovering"

1. These are all abstract notions which have different meanings from moment to moment according to changing circumstances which are beyond your control and hence mean nothing.

2. There can be no satisfaction in them as long as you are seeking.

3. The original OP question and subsequent replies have come about because of Point 2.

Point 1. - Do you honestly think that “changing circumstances which are beyond your control and hence mean nothing” is true? That is a belief as far as I am concerned! If what you say is true, then we are just incapable robots designed for no purpose at all. This belief system is an easy way out of denying that whatever is created is our fault – we don’t like a finger pointed at us, we prefer to point it at others, or to ‘uncontrollable circumstances’! As far as I am concerned, we are in total control; we attract to us what needs to be seen within us, but we refuse to see because it is usually too hurtful.

Point 2. - “Satisfaction”? If I understand you correctly, there is only satisfaction when you are not seeking. Do you expect satisfaction? That is the problem – we want satisfaction, comfort, security, etc., when we follow a path or don’t follow a path. It is desire for satisfaction, reward, comfort, security, that blocks the way. When you expect nothing but the truth, no matter how horrible it is, then things can be ‘seen’ in their true light and ‘heard’ in their true context.

That is my experience so far anyway.

Find out first if there is a "you" in control. What is this "you" to which "you" refer?

When I speak of control, I am referring to the power within you.

Please explain what "you" or 'non-you' means in your view? I have read many texts that say there is no "you" but how can you define in words this non-you? Language has many barriers, as has the brain that interprets words solely upon its own experience and data collection.

There is the feeling which is constantly regenerated from moment to moment that you are you. If I ask you who you are, you will say what? This is my name, this is where I live. This is what I like to do etc etc. Do you think that although you have a fixed idea in your mind about your identity (ego), it is nevertheless constantly changing. What happens if you investigate that? Not as an idea or a concept, but as an observer of this phenomena. If what you see is changing phenomena in the form of thoughts and perceptions of objects, who is the observer? Is the passive observer changing in relation to changing mind.

[KhnomKhnom]

I am not surprised at the novice level of Buddhist understanding are voiced here. Many respondents are polluted by Western materialism and thinking the self is so important. Too, I think most Westerners are better served by study of Tibetan Buddhism because it is more philosophical and less tied to what appears in Thai Buddhist practice as very practical prayers "for things" and a thinking of Buddha as more of a god.

I wish you good luck as you try, I hope you do try, to make the transition from the Western mind you got stuck with early in your life. I took Bodhisattva vows and yet feel very sad I can not help you except to say study, open your minds, and stop trying to force a result.

[Diddl]

Interesting subject. It is nice to have thinkers discussing a subject that I am not used to on TV.

My impression is that there are many paths to finding the truth about anything. One path may suit one person, another another. At the end of the day, my personal experience is that one must have courage to face the truth. We always want what we want and not what is sometimes clearly staring us in the face. We are in constant denial of what might seem obvious. The only way of finding anything is to have the courage to go down a path to find out whether all these books and people are telling us the truth and to accept the disappointment when we find out it is all lies and rubbish, and then to have the courage to continue our path to further experiment with.

As far as I am concerned, belief is mankind’s biggest enemy. We believe something and, therefore, go around in circles trying to justify it to be true rather than being open-minded and admitting that we don’t really know. Most people are like children wanting a big daddy to show them the way. It is only when you stand on your own two feet that learning and discovery can take place. If you need to join a group in order to feel safe and comfortable, then you will only ever experience that belief system and feel comfortable in that cul-de-sac and go no further! Aaaaahh, comfort and security – that is what we want!

Perhaps we were all brought here to experience the adventure of discovery, to annihilate lies and deceit within ourselves; perhaps this is the only objective in life.

There are many things that I like in Buddhism but I have never found anyone truly enlightened, or maybe enlightenment is not what I envisaged it to be!

"finding the right path to truth

having courage to face the truth

not being in denial of what might seem obvious

standing on your own two feet

learning and discovering"

1. These are all abstract notions which have different meanings from moment to moment according to changing circumstances which are beyond your control and hence mean nothing.

2. There can be no satisfaction in them as long as you are seeking.

3. The original OP question and subsequent replies have come about because of Point 2.

Point 1. - Do you honestly think that “changing circumstances which are beyond your control and hence mean nothing” is true? That is a belief as far as I am concerned! If what you say is true, then we are just incapable robots designed for no purpose at all. This belief system is an easy way out of denying that whatever is created is our fault – we don’t like a finger pointed at us, we prefer to point it at others, or to ‘uncontrollable circumstances’! As far as I am concerned, we are in total control; we attract to us what needs to be seen within us, but we refuse to see because it is usually too hurtful.

Point 2. - “Satisfaction”? If I understand you correctly, there is only satisfaction when you are not seeking. Do you expect satisfaction? That is the problem – we want satisfaction, comfort, security, etc., when we follow a path or don’t follow a path. It is desire for satisfaction, reward, comfort, security, that blocks the way. When you expect nothing but the truth, no matter how horrible it is, then things can be ‘seen’ in their true light and ‘heard’ in their true context.

That is my experience so far anyway.

Find out first if there is a "you" in control. What is this "you" to which "you" refer?

When I speak of control, I am referring to the power within you.

Please explain what "you" or 'non-you' means in your view? I have read many texts that say there is no "you" but how can you define in words this non-you? Language has many barriers, as has the brain that interprets words solely upon its own experience and data collection.

There is the feeling which is constantly regenerated from moment to moment that you are you. If I ask you who you are, you will say what? This is my name, this is where I live. This is what I like to do etc etc. Do you think that although you have a fixed idea in your mind about your identity (ego), it is nevertheless constantly changing. What happens if you investigate that? Not as an idea or a concept, but as an observer of this phenomena. If what you see is changing phenomena in the form of thoughts and perceptions of objects, who is the observer? Is the passive observer changing in relation to changing mind.

Yes, you are right, if you ask me who I am I will instinctively give you my name because most people would not understand any other explanation if I had one. As I said before, language is a problem as there are no words to explain many spiritual findings and one has to live in a physical world with physical people.

How can you explain who you are in words? Even if I knew, I could not explain it to you unless you have experienced it yourself.

[trd]

Yes, you are right, if you ask me who I am I will instinctively give you my name because most people would not understand any other explanation if I had one. As I said before, language is a problem as there are no words to explain many spiritual findings and one has to live in a physical world with physical people.

How can you explain who you are in words? Even if I knew, I could not explain it to you unless you have experienced it yourself.

When you give your name or where you were born, these are things which are fixed in time. If I asked who you are, you are unlikely to say, "today I am someone who wants to eat rice". If I ask you tomorrow, will you say, "I am someone who wants to eat pasta", that's who I am.

This is all the function of the ego which is only interested in preserving its identity. You are right, you cannot answer the question with words because who you really are is beyond words and concepts. But did you notice how the question to yourself forced you to momentarily stop thinking and just turn inwards to just be aware even for a brief moment. Investigate what that is. This is the true essence of Buddhism or any religion for that matter.

[camerata]

A lot of off-topic posts have been deleted. Stick to the topic, please.

The topic is "How do we know that the Buddhist proposition of Nirvana/Awakening/Enlightenment - i.e. the end of suffering in this life - is for real?"

[Docno]

There's a reason they call these 'faiths'.

Thread drift alert-

Is Buddhism a "Faith"?

I don't believe that it is in the west, at least not as practiced by most westerners in the west. The practice consists mostly of meditation, with some instruction- at least in places like Spirit Rock (Vipassana), which is what I am familiar with.

Yet there seems to be another way of Buddhism, that does involve prayer and is more Church-like: that is, asking a higher power for intervention in some way, either through granting strength, influencing outcome, or whatever.

Are there two branches of Buddhism, one largely direct and more of a philosophy or practice than a religion, and one that takes place in a more Faith based access through the Monk or Spiritual Leader form?

Well, this is the never-ending debate isn't it. There are certainly non-religious elements of Buddhism--relating to meditative practice, psychology, and philosophy--and these are things that western self-proclaimed Buddhists usually focus on. But there are also other elements that clearly fall into the realm of faith in that they involve assertions of 'fact' that are ultimately unprovable. Among these I include the belief in reincarnation, the existence of multiple heavenly realms, the existence of gods/devas (who, like humans, suffer in samsara), the miraculous characteristics of Siddartha Gauthama, etc. Now you can argue that one can be a Buddhist without accepting those beliefs, and that's fine, but that might be akin to calling yourself a Christian while believing that Jesus was just a philosopher or calling yourself a Sufi Muslim because you get a buzz out of dancing in circles.

[Diddl]

Yes, you are right, if you ask me who I am I will instinctively give you my name because most people would not understand any other explanation if I had one. As I said before, language is a problem as there are no words to explain many spiritual findings and one has to live in a physical world with physical people.

How can you explain who you are in words? Even if I knew, I could not explain it to you unless you have experienced it yourself.

When you give your name or where you were born, these are things which are fixed in time. If I asked who you are, you are unlikely to say, "today I am someone who wants to eat rice". If I ask you tomorrow, will you say, "I am someone who wants to eat pasta", that's who I am.

This is all the function of the ego which is only interested in preserving its identity. You are right, you cannot answer the question with words because who you really are is beyond words and concepts. But did you notice how the question to yourself forced you to momentarily stop thinking and just turn inwards to just be aware even for a brief moment. Investigate what that is. This is the true essence of Buddhism or any religion for that matter.

To be truthful, I cannot say who I am – I hesitate and say, “I don’t know”! I wrote a poem on the subject some time ago, hahaha!

Yes, it is said that it is the ego but what is the ego apart from self-identification? Why do we want to retain it apart from the reason that we are told it is because we will no longer exist? If we no longer exist, how do we function in a physical world, or is the physical world only in our mind, so are we really dreaming? Why do we naturally go against something that does not allow us to ‘know’? Where does this ego come from? Was the ego created by evil? If we created the ego, why would we do this? It is as if someone/something has programmed us to stay in a state of ignorance, but why? Is it all a bad joke?

I have not come across explanations to such questions in Buddhism or any other religion.

[trd]

Yes, it is said that it is the ego but what is the ego apart from self-identification? Why do we want to retain it apart from the reason that we are told it is because we will no longer exist? If we no longer exist, how do we function in a physical world, or is the physical world only in our mind, so are we really dreaming? Why do we naturally go against something that does not allow us to ‘know’? Where does this ego come from? Was the ego created by evil? If we created the ego, why would we do this? It is as if someone/something has programmed us to stay in a state of ignorance, but why? Is it all a bad joke?

I have not come across explanations to such questions in Buddhism or any other religion.

If I said that the formless absolute which has no beginning or end got bored with itself and expressed itself as a universe of form and diversity, a state of ignorance in which it forgets it's unmanifest true nature, but with the possibility of rediscovering itself again just to enjoy the dance, would that work for you.

Can the mind ever answer such "Why" questions?

Edited December 27, 2014 by trd

[Diddl]

Yes, it is said that it is the ego but what is the ego apart from self-identification? Why do we want to retain it apart from the reason that we are told it is because we will no longer exist? If we no longer exist, how do we function in a physical world, or is the physical world only in our mind, so are we really dreaming? Why do we naturally go against something that does not allow us to ‘know’? Where does this ego come from? Was the ego created by evil? If we created the ego, why would we do this? It is as if someone/something has programmed us to stay in a state of ignorance, but why? Is it all a bad joke?

I have not come across explanations to such questions in Buddhism or any other religion.

If I said that the formless absolute which has no beginning or end got bored with itself and expressed itself as a universe of form and diversity, a state of ignorance in which it forgets it's unmanifest true nature, but with the possibility of rediscovering itself again just to enjoy the dance, would that work for you.

Can the mind ever answer such "Why" questions?

I would ask, why would the absolute ever get bored if it is so perfect? And if the absolute is in control, then it has a bad sense of humour, hahahaha!

[trd]

I would ask, why would the absolute ever get bored if it is so perfect? And if the absolute is in control, then it has a bad sense of humour, hahahaha!

I just knew you were going to say that.

[CapeCobra]

"When someone seeks," said Siddhartha, "then it easily happens that his eyes see only the thing that he seeks, and he is able to find nothing, to take in nothing because he always thinks only about the thing he is seeking, because he has one goal, because he is obsessed with his goal. Seeking means: having a goal. But finding means: being free, being open, having no goal.”

When I was 18, "Siddhartha" by Hermann Hesse was my favorite inspiration.

I understood that following any religion would compromise my spiritual development.

I enjoy life to the fullest but I am also looking forward to dying consciously. After all, that's a once-in-a-lifetime-experience.

What to expect has changed a lot over the years. Churches have no answers. Some of their heretics do as well as some off-track quantum scientists.

[Commander Tamson]

Yes, it is said that it is the ego but what is the ego apart from self-identification? Why do we want to retain it apart from the reason that we are told it is because we will no longer exist? If we no longer exist, how do we function in a physical world, or is the physical world only in our mind, so are we really dreaming? Why do we naturally go against something that does not allow us to ‘know’? Where does this ego come from? Was the ego created by evil? If we created the ego, why would we do this? It is as if someone/something has programmed us to stay in a state of ignorance, but why? Is it all a bad joke?

I have not come across explanations to such questions in Buddhism or any other religion.

If I said that the formless absolute which has no beginning or end got bored with itself and expressed itself as a universe of form and diversity, a state of ignorance in which it forgets it's unmanifest true nature, but with the possibility of rediscovering itself again just to enjoy the dance, would that work for you.

Can the mind ever answer such "Why" questions?

I am far from knowing the 'why', but that's the closest I've come to it so far. And why does everyone instinctively believe that God or Paradise or the Afterlife or the 'formless absolute' is perfect? Can you even begin to imagine how boring eternity must get? Or how lonely a 'formless absolute' must be?

Didn't Buddha say that to achieve awakening you must first be able to truly perceive eternity/infinity?

[Sparkling]

Yes, it is said that it is the ego but what is the ego apart from self-identification? Why do we want to retain it apart from the reason that we are told it is because we will no longer exist? If we no longer exist, how do we function in a physical world, or is the physical world only in our mind, so are we really dreaming? Why do we naturally go against something that does not allow us to ‘know’? Where does this ego come from? Was the ego created by evil? If we created the ego, why would we do this? It is as if someone/something has programmed us to stay in a state of ignorance, but why? Is it all a bad joke?

I have not come across explanations to such questions in Buddhism or any other religion.

If I said that the formless absolute which has no beginning or end got bored with itself and expressed itself as a universe of form and diversity, a state of ignorance in which it forgets it's unmanifest true nature, but with the possibility of rediscovering itself again just to enjoy the dance, would that work for you.

Can the mind ever answer such "Why" questions?

I would ask, why would the absolute ever get bored if it is so perfect? And if the absolute is in control, then it has a bad sense of humour, hahahaha!

because perfection is absolute boredom

if this will be considered a bad joke, a formerly written version of this attitude is offered, found in "FAUST" from GOETHE as the main deal in there between the also searching Dr.Faust and Mephisto (devil) is, that if the devil leads the Doc to a moment, which feels so perfect to him, that he admits, he wants it to stay, the devil gets his soul to take it straight to hell.

just for now - happy new year

[Sparkling]

Yes, it is said that it is the ego but what is the ego apart from self-identification? Why do we want to retain it apart from the reason that we are told it is because we will no longer exist? If we no longer exist, how do we function in a physical world, or is the physical world only in our mind, so are we really dreaming? Why do we naturally go against something that does not allow us to ‘know’? Where does this ego come from? Was the ego created by evil? If we created the ego, why would we do this? It is as if someone/something has programmed us to stay in a state of ignorance, but why? Is it all a bad joke?

I have not come across explanations to such questions in Buddhism or any other religion.

If I said that the formless absolute which has no beginning or end got bored with itself and expressed itself as a universe of form and diversity, a state of ignorance in which it forgets it's unmanifest true nature, but with the possibility of rediscovering itself again just to enjoy the dance, would that work for you.

Can the mind ever answer such "Why" questions?

I am far from knowing the 'why', but that's the closest I've come to it so far. And why does everyone instinctively believe that God or Paradise or the Afterlife or the 'formless absolute' is perfect? Can you even begin to imagine how boring eternity must get? Or how lonely a 'formless absolute' must be?

Didn't Buddha say that to achieve awakening you must first be able to truly perceive eternity/infinity?

ah the commander was taking the point of my post and i am now quite dissatisfied ;-) truly but not eternally

[Diddl]

If perfection is boredom and everything is a big joke, then there must really be no reason to life as such. Are we just a product of a game because the absolute is bored? – sounds pretty selfish to me! It also sounds to me that this absolute still has desire – I thought that desire had to be eliminated according to Buddhism.

And if the absolute is perfect, then evil must be perfect also, as the absolute seems to have created it for its own pleasurable entertainment!

[trd]

My little joke is running away with itself.

[poweratradio]

At the end of the day, everyone's experience is subjective, isn't it? Cognitive Therapy as pioneered by Burns at the University of Pennsylvania attempts to have suffering people change their interpretation of events, hence their thoughts, to relieve their unhappiness. I see this as being in consonance with Buddhist practice just different in its specific objectives. I ventured the opinion before that nibbana could be subjectively experienced by taking many approaches but I guess that this is getting close to blasphemy in the opinion of Buddhist practitioners and my post was removed. I hope that it won't be this time. My Buddhist monk friends don't find my views to be outrageous, but I guess that they are quite liberal in their thinking.

Try to be at the temple when 2 or more monks begin chanting and bouncing back and forth offff each other. You will feel the vibe in your chest.

[rockyysdt]

Alternatively perfection isn't a joke but s state beyond comprehension to us.

After all how can that which is finite comprehend that which is infinite.

Infinity not limited to its size but in every way.

[Sparkling]

If perfection is boredom and everything is a big joke, then there must really be no reason to life as such. Are we just a product of a game because the absolute is bored? – sounds pretty selfish to me! It also sounds to me that this absolute still has desire – I thought that desire had to be eliminated according to Buddhism.

And if the absolute is perfect, then evil must be perfect also, as the absolute seems to have created it for its own pleasurable entertainment!

Dear Diddl, you didn´t really get it. Where did you read, everything is a big joke ? Life won´t need a reason. Who said the absolute is bored ? What are those sounds you listen to ?

THe absolute (as it is called here) is not perfect. At least not as a invariable state of perfection. The so called absolute is evolving. Infinitely evolving and in this evolution "perfect" in total. Still the word perfect is maybe not the perfect description of this. Words maybe to weak to describe anyway.

The evil wants to be perfect. Maybe not all evil. I haven´t asked it. The evil is the opposite of live. e v i l - l i v e. Not: life. Because of the constant action it is more accurate to use a verb.(just a funny game with letters) The evil (as it is called here) is by that the stop of the action in order to keep the desired perfection of the moment. In the long run that moment will wear out and die away. The evil (in this sense) is not created by the absolute, but an option used out of fear to loose the perfection. No need to fear. People are capable of fear of course. The possibility of that option is nessecity of freedom of choice. I like the freedom :-) Natural desires include some good. We can enjoy them and they make us move on. Being hungry lets me experience great food and create variety. there are millions of examples.

[Sparkling]

Alternatively perfection isn't a joke but s state beyond comprehension to us.

After all how can that which is finite comprehend that which is infinite.

Infinity not limited to its size but in every way.

Personally always have been very suspicious about any concept, which told me there is something (great , big, holy and bla bla) , that is beyond my comprehension, yet real and rules over me, have to fear it and so on. Do you know the emperor´s new clothes ?

Humans maybe finite. Is our mind, spirit , soul finite , too ?

As a matter of logic our finite existence is part of the infinite.

(If we wouldn´t, we would be excluded of it. If there is anything outside of the infinite (like us the excluded) it can´t be the true infinite.)

As part of the infinite, we may also comprehend it, can´t we ?

[Nayet]

In "Waking up: A guide to spirituality without religion", Sam Harris makes a pretty strong case for the benefits of meditation while disentangling the positive aspects of Buddhism from its metaphysical claims. I am currently reading it as a matter of fact. Anyone else read it?