Is Buddhism a religion?

[AYJAYDEE]

But what I wanted to know was, "Is it worth abandoning your everyday life, to live an ascetic life as a Monk in order to gain self improvement?

it obviously is for many . as far as I can determine not many thai monks really believe they will achieve enlightenment in this life

[rockyysdt]

buddha's words were not written down for hundreds of years and as such we have no REAL way of knowing exactly what h said of rebirth. many monks are satisfied with the moment to moment alone.

It's true.

Many question what has been documented about the Buddhas teachings.

The Buddha gave us the Sangha.

There are many Aranhants who confirm much of the teachings.

This forum is Thai based.

Three names which come to mind are Bikkhu Buddhadasa, Bikkhu Mahha Boowa, & Mae Chee Kaew.

Others can reel off many other names.

These offer many pearls which can inspire us about the original teachings.

• Many, uncomfortable about anything to do with that which is beyond the ordinary, and the mundane, focus on re birth "moment to moment".

Quote:

Another view of rebirth describes the cycle of death and birth in the context of consciousness rather than the birth and death of the body. In this view, remaining impure aggregates, skandhas, reform consciousness.

Buddhist meditation teachers suggest that observation reveals consciousness as a sequence of conscious moments rather than a continuum of awareness.^[18] Each moment is an experience of an individual mind-state such as a thought, a memory, a feeling or a perception. A mind-state arises, exists and, being impermanent, ceases, following which the next mind-state arises. Thus the consciousness of a sentient being can be seen as a continuous series of birth and death of these mind-states. Rebirth is the persistence of this process.

• Also much of what was written may be controversial and open to skepticism.

• However a core doctrine accepted by all is the 4 Noble Truths & Eightfold Path.

Quote:

1. The Truth of Dukkha is that all conditional phenomena and experiences are not ultimately satisfying;
2. The Truth of the Origin of Dukkha is that craving for and clinging to what is pleasurable and aversion to what is not pleasurable result in becoming, rebirth, dissatisfaction, and redeath;
3. The Truth of the Cessation of Dukkha is that putting an end to this craving and clinging also means that rebirth, dissatisfaction, and redeath can no longer arise;
4. The Truth of the Path Of Liberation from Dukkha is that by following the Noble Eightfold Path—namely, behaving decently, cultivating discipline, and practicing mindfulness and meditation—an end can be put to craving, to clinging, to becoming, to rebirth, to dissatisfaction, and to redeath.

• I indicated earlier:

Quote:

Buddhism, accepts that everything is non self, but at the same time it accepts the existence of things in one of two states: one state continually arising, ceasing, and changing, and the other state having neither origination nor cessation and being unchangeable.

Buddhism is not nihilistic because it accepts existence of things in one of the two states that which is uncertain and impermanent characterizes the conditioned things, and that which is certain and permanent characterizes the unconditioned.

The group that does not result from causes and contributory factors, it can exist by itself without having to arise, will never cease to exist, and will also be permanent and is referred to by the Buddha as Nibbana.

My question to you is, that if you cling to Re Birth Moment to Moment, but don't entertain full Re Birth, then if you Awaken, won't you stop the cycle of Re Birth (Moment to Moment) and immediately cease?

The 4 Noble Truths indicate that the cycle of Re Birth will cease.

Going by the limited re Birth model of "moment to moment" doesn't this mean that there will no longer be an arising of your consciousness?

What is the point of doing this?

Edited September 1, 2015 by rockyysdt

[AYJAYDEE]

buddha's words were not written down for hundreds of years and as such we have no REAL way of knowing exactly what h said of rebirth. many monks are satisfied with the moment to moment alone.

It is true.

Many question what has been documented about the Buddhas teachings.

Many, uncomfortable about anything to do with that which is beyond the ordinary, and the mundane focus on re birth "moment to moment".

Quote:

Another view of rebirth describes the cycle of death and birth in the context of consciousness rather than the birth and death of the body. In this view, remaining impure aggregates, skandhas, reform consciousness.

Buddhist meditation teachers suggest that observation reveals consciousness as a sequence of conscious moments rather than a continuum of awareness.^[18] Each moment is an experience of an individual mind-state such as a thought, a memory, a feeling or a perception. A mind-state arises, exists and, being impermanent, ceases, following which the next mind-state arises. Thus the consciousness of a sentient being can be seen as a continuous series of birth and death of these mind-states. Rebirth is the persistence of this process.

Also much of what was written may be controversial and open to skepticism.

However a core doctrine accepted by all is the 4 Noble Truths & Eightfold Path.

Quote:

1. The Truth of Dukkha is that all conditional phenomena and experiences are not ultimately satisfying;
2. The Truth of the Origin of Dukkha is that craving for and clinging to what is pleasurable and aversion to what is not pleasurable result in becoming, rebirth, dissatisfaction, and redeath;
3. The Truth of the Cessation of Dukkha is that putting an end to this craving and clinging also means that rebirth, dissatisfaction, and redeath can no longer arise;
4. The Truth of the Path Of Liberation from Dukkha is that by following the Noble Eightfold Path—namely, behaving decently, cultivating discipline, and practicing mindfulness and meditation—an end can be put to craving, to clinging, to becoming, to rebirth, to dissatisfaction, and to redeath.

I indicated earlier:

Quote:

Buddhism, accepts that everything is non self, but at the same time it accepts the existence of things in one of two states: one state continually arising, ceasing, and changing, and the other state having neither origination nor cessation and being unchangeable.

Buddhism is not nihilistic because it accepts existence of things in one of the two states that which is uncertain and impermanent characterizes the conditioned things, and that which is certain and permanent characterizes the unconditioned.

The group that does not result from causes and contributory factors, it can exist by itself without having to arise, will never cease to exist, and will also be permanent and is referred to by the Buddha as Nibbana.

My question to you is, that if you cling to Re Birth Moment to Moment, but don't entertain full Re Birth, then if you Awaken, won't you stop the cycle of Re Birth (Moment to Moment) and immediately cease.

The 4 Noble Truths do indicate that Re Birth will cease.

Going by the limited model of "moment to moment" this means there will no longer be an arising of your consciousness.

What is the point of doing this?

not at all. arahants awaken in their present lives , as did buddha, and did not cease to exist. they merely ceased to fall victim to the arising (or rebirth) of greed, aversion and delusion.

[rockyysdt]

But what I wanted to know was, "Is it worth abandoning your everyday life, to live an ascetic life as a Monk in order to gain self improvement?

it obviously is for many . as far as I can determine not many thai monks really believe they will achieve enlightenment in this life

I was interested in whether you would find it is worth doing.

I'm endeavoring to learn what you are looking for from Buddhism and what is your purpose for being Buddhist?

[AYJAYDEE]

But what I wanted to know was, "Is it worth abandoning your everyday life, to live an ascetic life as a Monk in order to gain self improvement?

it obviously is for many . as far as I can determine not many thai monks really believe they will achieve enlightenment in this life

I was interested in whether you would find it is worth doing.

I'm endeavoring to learn what you are looking for from Buddhism and what is your purpose for being Buddhist?

being a buddhist is merely feeling that what buddha taught makes sense. its not a matter of having a purpose to become buddhist. you either feel what he taught was sensible or it was not.

[VincentRJ]

The 4 Noble Truths indicate that the cycle of Re Birth will cease.

Going by the limited re Birth model of "moment to moment" doesn't this mean that there will no longer be an arising of your consciousness?

What is the point of doing this?

Rocky,

It's possible that an experience of ecstasy might result, when all thoughts have ceased. Better than sex, some claim.

[only1]

It don't take me long to find out who is who in a religious forum. Why are there 2 non Buddhists here who stayed more active than anyone one else in a Buddhism forum ?

Or maybe 3 ?

Cyber troopers from elsewhere ?

Edited September 1, 2015 by only1

[rockyysdt]

Such a state is low (Piti: Jhana-Nimitta) in the order of states.

Well below Nibanna.

Close to the top there is a state without consciousness at all, but not nothing.

The final step is destruction of attachment to self or ego.

Any experience of Ecstasy (feeling) is suggestive that Ego remains.

Edited September 1, 2015 by rockyysdt

[rockyysdt]

not at all. arahants awaken in their present lives , as did buddha, and did not cease to exist. they merely ceased to fall victim to the arising (or rebirth) of greed, aversion and delusion.

All Awakening will eventually be "in this life" of a successful practitioner.

Using the model that there is only "moment to moment" re birth is suggestive that consciousness will no longer arise and one would no longer exist.

As you've indicated, Arahants do not cease to exist.

My contention is that there is more than "moment to moment" re birth, as an Arahant demonstrates that something continues after Awakening.

Certainly there is no longer attachment to Greed, Aversion, & Delusion.

What I'm suggesting is that once any link has been broken with the Self (Ego), then an Arahant perceives the residue of consciousness from a higher level.

As consciousness is purely a moment to moment link of contact, craving, clinging, becoming, re Birth, dissatisfaction, and death, then as still frames in a movie appear to come to life, so do we perceive consciousness.

The Arahant will observe his residual consciousness as the illusion that it is.

If human beings consciousness is a continuous series of moment to moment birth and death mind states, with re Birth being the persistence of this, then if re Birth ceases (4th Noble Truth: "an end can be put to craving, to clinging, to becoming, to re Birth, to dissatisfaction, and to re death), then this is suggestive that an Arahant no longer functions by simple consciousness, as this is illusory and results in Self or Ego.

No longer is an Arahant controlled by, acts, or reacts through repetitive sequences of contact, craving, clinging, becoming, re Birth, dissatisfaction, and death (consciousness).

The Buddha observed those who could enter a Jahnic state in which they remained alive but there was no longer consciousness.

The Buddha replied as follows to a Medicant, Pogthapada who was enquiring about Self, Not Self.

The Buddha replied:

In the iikincanfliiyatana jhana (absorption in the realm of nothingness), the consciousness of the act of consciousness disappeared but that of nothingness appeared instead.

Finally, in the sanfliivedayitanirodha, which is the last level of jhana, the consciousness of nothingness also disappeared, and no new consciousness appeared.

Therefore, the complete cessation of consciousness existed continually in such a state.

During the time, we could not say that there was consciousness, for the person has no feeling at all.

But we could neither say that there was no consciousness, for the person could be conscious again after he came out of the jhana.

Neither could he be declared dead ~or could he be declared not dead.

This is the complete cessatIon of sannii or consciousness which could be caused to occur by human's control, power or action.

What the Buddha was teaching is that there are levels of existence without consciousness, Nibanna being the ultimate state.

Quote 2:

After attainment of Nibbana, the five aggregates (physical forms, feelings/sensations, perception, mental formations and consciousness) will continue to function, sustained by physical bodily vitality.

This attainment is termed the nibbana element with a residue remaining. But once the Arahant pass-away and with the disintegration of the physical body, the five aggregates will cease to function, hence ending all traces of existence in the phenomenal world and thus total release from the misery of samsara. It would then be termed the nibbana element without residue remaining. Parinibbana occurs at the death of an Arahant, but by that which was never born and will never die, that which is permanent & unconditioned.

Al this is suggesting that there is a state beyond consciousness, and that consciousness, and self, are illusory.

Edited September 1, 2015 by rockyysdt

[Om85]

But what I wanted to know was, "Is it worth abandoning your everyday life, to live an ascetic life as a Monk in order to gain self improvement?

it obviously is for many . as far as I can determine not many thai monks really believe they will achieve enlightenment in this life

I was interested in whether you would find it is worth doing.

I'm endeavoring to learn what you are looking for from Buddhism and what is your purpose for being Buddhist?

In my opnion being a monk is just a waste of time, people should stop thinking about the next life and rebirth(concepts that need to be proven) and focus on this present life that we have.

[only1]

But what I wanted to know was, "Is it worth abandoning your everyday life, to live an ascetic life as a Monk in order to gain self improvement?

it obviously is for many . as far as I can determine not many thai monks really believe they will achieve enlightenment in this life

I was interested in whether you would find it is worth doing.

I'm endeavoring to learn what you are looking for from Buddhism and what is your purpose for being Buddhist?

In my opnion being a monk is just a waste of time, people should stop thinking about the next life and rebirth(concepts that need to be proven) and focus on this present life that we have.

Monks don't live or think for next life or rebirth. You misunderstood.

[rockyysdt]

But what I wanted to know was, "Is it worth abandoning your everyday life, to live an ascetic life as a Monk in order to gain self improvement?

it obviously is for many . as far as I can determine not many thai monks really believe they will achieve enlightenment in this life

I was interested in whether you would find it is worth doing.

I'm endeavoring to learn what you are looking for from Buddhism and what is your purpose for being Buddhist?

In my opnion being a monk is just a waste of time, people should stop thinking about the next life and rebirth(concepts that need to be proven) and focus on this present life that we have.

Unless afflicted physically/mentally, or have deteriorated with age, Monks who indicate they won't Awaken in this life have surrendered to the power of their Ego.

Being a Monk is a waste of time if one doesn't apply the practice diligently and with conviction.

Don't think of a Monk with religious connotations, but rather one who possesses an opportunity to practice full time, a luxury working people don't have.

One can't underestimate the time it takes to practice Concentration and Mindfulness to a state in which one can easily enter and hold deep levels of Samadhi for long periods in order to perform investigation.

For any given individual, one can only Awaken in this lifetime.

This is because everything of this world is impermanent & conditioned.

As we a impermanent and always changing due to changing factors and contributory causes, that which is Re Born will not be you.

[DogNo1]

I kind of like the concept in the Bhagavad Gita that life is a daily struggle. Fighting attachments and negative thoughts is certainly a daily struggle for me. To me the idea of entering Nibbana is too idealistic. To the extent that I can follow Buddhist philosophy, I am pretty happy but it is a struggle. I find the teachings of the Buddhist-like Eckhart Tolle to be helpful. He seems to be in touch with the fact that for many people, shedding attachments and unhappy thoughts must be worked at constantly although it is possible to get better and better at it. He finds a commonality with the teachings of many philosophers and Buddhism. Some posters have commented that science hasn't explored the nature and existence of gods. Philosophers have exhaustively (and somewhat tediously) discussed the issue.

[only1]

Our science just can't explore the world of gods. They are of a different world, if any. Although Science can debunk some belief of God of certain religions for e.g humans created from mud as compared to evolution. Not the other gods believing religions.

Edited September 1, 2015 by only1

[VincentRJ]

The Buddha replied:

In the iikincanfliiyatana jhana (absorption in the realm of nothingness), the consciousness of the act of consciousness disappeared but that of nothingness appeared instead.

Finally, in the sanfliivedayitanirodha, which is the last level of jhana, the consciousness of nothingness also disappeared, and no new consciousness appeared.

Therefore, the complete cessation of consciousness existed continually in such a state.

During the time, we could not say that there was consciousness, for the person has no feeling at all.

But we could neither say that there was no consciousness, for the person could be conscious again after he came out of the jhana.

Neither could he be declared dead ~or could he be declared not dead.

This is the complete cessatIon of sannii or consciousness which could be caused to occur by human's control, power or action.

What the Buddha was teaching is that there are levels of existence without consciousness, Nibanna being the ultimate state.

Al this is suggesting that there is a state beyond consciousness, and that consciousness, and self, are illusory.

Rocky,

Thanks for your detailed quotes, but I have to confess that I sometimes struggle with these concepts of nothingness, from a logical and linguistic aspect. Nothingness, by definition, cannot 'appear'. Such wording, perhaps as a result of the translation, is creating the impression that 'nothing' is 'something'.

As for, 'complete cessation of consciousness', we have a very simple word for that, 'unconscious', which raises the question, why would anyone want to strive to become unconscious?

An explanation that makes sense to me, is for reasons of power and control over oneself and one's own mind. To have such control over one's mind, as to be able to put oneself into a state of anaesthesia without the use of drugs or anaesthetics, is remarkable.

However, I'm not suggesting that achieving such states of unconsciousness through long practice, is no different from taking an anaesthetic, or sleeping. I can imagine that the complete rest from the constant activity of the mind, achieved without the use of drugs, and a more complete rest than anything achieved even during the best sleep, could result in a completely new and liberating experience.

Even when we are asleep, and are not dreaming, or are under the effects of an anaesthetic, the mind is still active to a degree, known as 'slow-wave' activity.

[rockyysdt]

The Buddha replied:

In the iikincanfliiyatana jhana (absorption in the realm of nothingness), the consciousness of the act of consciousness disappeared but that of nothingness appeared instead.

Finally, in the sanfliivedayitanirodha, which is the last level of jhana, the consciousness of nothingness also disappeared, and no new consciousness appeared.

Therefore, the complete cessation of consciousness existed continually in such a state.

During the time, we could not say that there was consciousness, for the person has no feeling at all.

But we could neither say that there was no consciousness, for the person could be conscious again after he came out of the jhana.

Neither could he be declared dead ~or could he be declared not dead.

This is the complete cessatIon of sannii or consciousness which could be caused to occur by human's control, power or action.

What the Buddha was teaching is that there are levels of existence without consciousness, Nibanna being the ultimate state.

Al this is suggesting that there is a state beyond consciousness, and that consciousness, and self, are illusory.

Rocky,

Thanks for your detailed quotes, but I have to confess that I sometimes struggle with these concepts of nothingness, from a logical and linguistic aspect. Nothingness, by definition, cannot 'appear'. Such wording, perhaps as a result of the translation, is creating the impression that 'nothing' is 'something'.

As for, 'complete cessation of consciousness', we have a very simple word for that, 'unconscious', which raises the question, why would anyone want to strive to become unconscious?

An explanation that makes sense to me, is for reasons of power and control over oneself and one's own mind. To have such control over one's mind, as to be able to put oneself into a state of anaesthesia without the use of drugs or anaesthetics, is remarkable.

However, I'm not suggesting that achieving such states of unconsciousness through long practice, is no different from taking an anaesthetic, or sleeping. I can imagine that the complete rest from the constant activity of the mind, achieved without the use of drugs, and a more complete rest than anything achieved even during the best sleep, could result in a completely new and liberating experience.

Even when we are asleep, and are not dreaming, or are under the effects of an anaesthetic, the mind is still active to a degree, known as 'slow-wave' activity.

I'm quoting from passages attributed to the Buddha and an Arahant, Ven Maha Boowa as well as others.

It has been taught that the Self or Ego is a construct and illusory, as is its consciousness.

It is supported by a flow of events contact, craving, clinging, becoming, re Birth, dissatisfaction, and death.

Each string of events occur as a still frame in a movie, quickly moving to the next, that, as moving stills bring life to a movie, each arsing and passing give the illusion of consciousness, and a Self which we then attach to.

The illusory consciousness you describe is not all that there is.

Ven Maha Booha calls it "Citta"

Quote:

• The Citta is the minds essential knowing nature, the fundamental knowing that underlies all sentient beings.
• When associated with a physical body, it is referred to as "mind" or 'heart".
• Being corrupted by the defiling influence of fundamental ignorance (Avijja), its currents flow out to manifest as feelings (Vedana), memory (Sanna), thoughts (Sankhara), and consciousness (Vinnaoa).
• Thus the Citta is embroiled in a web of self deception.
• It is deceived about its own true nature.
• The true nature of the Citta is that it simply "knows".
• There is no subject, no object, no duality, it simply knows.
• The Citta does not arise or pass away, it is never born and never dies.
• Normally the "knowing nature" of Citta is timeless and boundless, and radiant, but this true nature is obscured by defilements (Kilisa) within it.
• Through the power of fundamental ignorance, a focal point of the "knower" is created from which that knowing nature views the world outside.
• The establishment of of that false centre creates a "self" from whose perspective consciousness flows out to perceive the duality of the 'knower" & the "known".
• Thus the Citta becomes entangled with things that are born, become ill, grow old, and die, and therefore, deeply involved in suffering.

As you can see, the consciousness you refer to is illusory.

Awakening uncovers "knowing".

Edited September 2, 2015 by rockyysdt

[VincentRJ]

The Buddha replied:

In the iikincanfliiyatana jhana (absorption in the realm of nothingness), the consciousness of the act of consciousness disappeared but that of nothingness appeared instead.

Finally, in the sanfliivedayitanirodha, which is the last level of jhana, the consciousness of nothingness also disappeared, and no new consciousness appeared.

Therefore, the complete cessation of consciousness existed continually in such a state.

During the time, we could not say that there was consciousness, for the person has no feeling at all.

But we could neither say that there was no consciousness, for the person could be conscious again after he came out of the jhana.

Neither could he be declared dead ~or could he be declared not dead.

This is the complete cessatIon of sannii or consciousness which could be caused to occur by human's control, power or action.

What the Buddha was teaching is that there are levels of existence without consciousness, Nibanna being the ultimate state.

Al this is suggesting that there is a state beyond consciousness, and that consciousness, and self, are illusory.

Rocky,

Thanks for your detailed quotes, but I have to confess that I sometimes struggle with these concepts of nothingness, from a logical and linguistic aspect. Nothingness, by definition, cannot 'appear'. Such wording, perhaps as a result of the translation, is creating the impression that 'nothing' is 'something'.

As for, 'complete cessation of consciousness', we have a very simple word for that, 'unconscious', which raises the question, why would anyone want to strive to become unconscious?

An explanation that makes sense to me, is for reasons of power and control over oneself and one's own mind. To have such control over one's mind, as to be able to put oneself into a state of anaesthesia without the use of drugs or anaesthetics, is remarkable.

However, I'm not suggesting that achieving such states of unconsciousness through long practice, is no different from taking an anaesthetic, or sleeping. I can imagine that the complete rest from the constant activity of the mind, achieved without the use of drugs, and a more complete rest than anything achieved even during the best sleep, could result in a completely new and liberating experience.

Even when we are asleep, and are not dreaming, or are under the effects of an anaesthetic, the mind is still active to a degree, known as 'slow-wave' activity.

I'm quoting from passages attributed to the Buddha and an Arahant, Ven Maha Boowa as well as others.

It has been taught that the Self or Ego is a construct and illusory, as is its consciousness.

It is supported by a flow of events contact, craving, clinging, becoming, re Birth, dissatisfaction, and death.

Each string of events occur as a still frame in a movie, quickly moving to the next, that, as moving stills bring life to a movie, each arsing and passing give the illusion of consciousness, and a Self which we then attach to.

The illusory consciousness you describe is not all that there is.

Ven Maha Booha calls it "Citta"

Quote:

• The Citta is the minds essential knowing nature, the fundamental knowing that underlies all sentient beings.
• When associated with a physical body, it is referred to as "mind" or 'heart".
• Being corrupted by the defiling influence of fundamental ignorance (Avijja), its currents flow out to manifest as feelings (Vedana), memory (Sanna), thoughts (Sankhara), and consciousness (Vinnaoa).
• Thus the Citta is embroiled in a web of self deception.
• It is deceived about its own true nature.
• The true nature of the Citta is that it simply "knows".
• There is no subject, no object, no duality, it simply knows.
• The Citta does not arise or pass away, it is never born and never dies.
• Normally the "knowing nature" of Citta is timeless and boundless, and radiant, but this true nature is obscured by defilements (Kilisa) within it.
• Through the power of fundamental ignorance, a focal point of the "knower" is created from which that knowing nature views the world outside.
• The establishment of of that false centre creates a "self" from whose perspective consciousness flows out to perceive the duality of the 'knower" & the "known".
• Thus the Citta becomes entangled with things that are born, become ill, grow old, and die, and therefore, deeply involved in suffering.

As you can see, the consciousness you refer to is illusory.

Awakening uncovers "knowing".

It's still not clear, Rocky. I can understand that many of our interpretations of sensory perceptions might be illusory in the sense of being incorrect to various degrees, either completely incorrect or partially incorrect.

TRD, who used to post here, (what's happened to him? Hope he's all right) gave the obvious example of a person who sees a coil of rope on the ground, and immediately jumps to the erroneous conclusion that it is a snake, probably as a result of a fear or phobia about snakes. That's an illusion in the sense of a misinterpretation, but not necessarily a complete misinterpretation. The coil of rope was perceived as a 'coil' which is correct at a very basic level.

The 8th century A.D. Chinese romantic poet, Li Po, apparently drowned, according to legend, by trying to grasp the reflection of the moon in the water, whilst in a boat on a lake. He was drunk.

Again, this was not a complete misinterpretation. He was at least able to recognise that the reflection was of the moon, but missed the fact it was just a reflection.

However, when I gaze at the full moon on a clear night, whilst completely sober, and see the subtle shades of patterns and craters, and decide to photographic the moon with a telephoto lens, is what I'm conscious of an illusion? Can we not be completely certain that the moon exists?

Edited September 2, 2015 by VincentRJ

[rockyysdt]

The Buddha replied:

In the iikincanfliiyatana jhana (absorption in the realm of nothingness), the consciousness of the act of consciousness disappeared but that of nothingness appeared instead.

Finally, in the sanfliivedayitanirodha, which is the last level of jhana, the consciousness of nothingness also disappeared, and no new consciousness appeared.

Therefore, the complete cessation of consciousness existed continually in such a state.

During the time, we could not say that there was consciousness, for the person has no feeling at all.

But we could neither say that there was no consciousness, for the person could be conscious again after he came out of the jhana.

Neither could he be declared dead ~or could he be declared not dead.

This is the complete cessatIon of sannii or consciousness which could be caused to occur by human's control, power or action.

What the Buddha was teaching is that there are levels of existence without consciousness, Nibanna being the ultimate state.

Al this is suggesting that there is a state beyond consciousness, and that consciousness, and self, are illusory.

Rocky,

Thanks for your detailed quotes, but I have to confess that I sometimes struggle with these concepts of nothingness, from a logical and linguistic aspect. Nothingness, by definition, cannot 'appear'. Such wording, perhaps as a result of the translation, is creating the impression that 'nothing' is 'something'.

As for, 'complete cessation of consciousness', we have a very simple word for that, 'unconscious', which raises the question, why would anyone want to strive to become unconscious?

An explanation that makes sense to me, is for reasons of power and control over oneself and one's own mind. To have such control over one's mind, as to be able to put oneself into a state of anaesthesia without the use of drugs or anaesthetics, is remarkable.

However, I'm not suggesting that achieving such states of unconsciousness through long practice, is no different from taking an anaesthetic, or sleeping. I can imagine that the complete rest from the constant activity of the mind, achieved without the use of drugs, and a more complete rest than anything achieved even during the best sleep, could result in a completely new and liberating experience.

Even when we are asleep, and are not dreaming, or are under the effects of an anaesthetic, the mind is still active to a degree, known as 'slow-wave' activity.

I'm quoting from passages attributed to the Buddha and an Arahant, Ven Maha Boowa as well as others.

It has been taught that the Self or Ego is a construct and illusory, as is its consciousness.

It is supported by a flow of events contact, craving, clinging, becoming, re Birth, dissatisfaction, and death.

Each string of events occur as a still frame in a movie, quickly moving to the next, that, as moving stills bring life to a movie, each arsing and passing give the illusion of consciousness, and a Self which we then attach to.

The illusory consciousness you describe is not all that there is.

Ven Maha Booha calls it "Citta"

Quote:

• The Citta is the minds essential knowing nature, the fundamental knowing that underlies all sentient beings.
• When associated with a physical body, it is referred to as "mind" or 'heart".
• Being corrupted by the defiling influence of fundamental ignorance (Avijja), its currents flow out to manifest as feelings (Vedana), memory (Sanna), thoughts (Sankhara), and consciousness (Vinnaoa).
• Thus the Citta is embroiled in a web of self deception.
• It is deceived about its own true nature.
• The true nature of the Citta is that it simply "knows".
• There is no subject, no object, no duality, it simply knows.
• The Citta does not arise or pass away, it is never born and never dies.
• Normally the "knowing nature" of Citta is timeless and boundless, and radiant, but this true nature is obscured by defilements (Kilisa) within it.
• Through the power of fundamental ignorance, a focal point of the "knower" is created from which that knowing nature views the world outside.
• The establishment of of that false centre creates a "self" from whose perspective consciousness flows out to perceive the duality of the 'knower" & the "known".
• Thus the Citta becomes entangled with things that are born, become ill, grow old, and die, and therefore, deeply involved in suffering.

As you can see, the consciousness you refer to is illusory.

Awakening uncovers "knowing".

It's still not clear, Rocky. I can understand that many of our interpretations of sensory perceptions might be illusory in the sense of being incorrect to various degrees, either completely incorrect or partially incorrect.

TRD, who used to post here, (what's happened to him?) gave the obvious example of a person who sees a coil of rope on the ground, and immediately jumps to the erroneous conclusion that it is a snake, probably as a result of a fear or phobia about snakes. That's an illusion in the sense of a misinterpretation, but not necessarily a complete misinterpretation. The coil of rope was perceived as a 'coil' which is correct at a very basic level.

The 8th century A.D. Chinese romantic poet, Li Po, apparently drowned, according to legend, by trying to grasp the reflection of the moon in the water, whilst in a boat on a lake. He was drunk.

Again, this was not a complete misinterpretation. He was at least able to recognise that the reflection was of the moon, but missed the fact it was just a reflection.

However, when I gaze at the full moon on a clear night, whilst completely sober, and see the subtle shades of patterns and craters, and decide to photographic the moon with a telephoto lens, is what I'm conscious of an illusion? Can we not be completely certain that the moon exists?

They all exist.

It's just that there is a higher reality.

[VincentRJ]

That seems very elitist, Rocky. Higher and lower reality. Higher class and lower class; ruling class and working class. Surely the truth is free of all class distinctions. Lower and higher don't apply.

[rockyysdt]

I am limited by words.

The Buddha was teaching of two states.

That which is conditioned and imperment and that which is permanent and unconditioned.

Nothing to do with class.

The description of Citta covers it.

It's something that you don't have to accept or belief but revolves around that 4 Noble Truths.

In your posts you often refer to the kalama sutta, in which you are invited to investigate for yourself.

This is what the Buddha was asking you to investigate.

Edited September 2, 2015 by rockyysdt

[VincentRJ]

I am limited by words.

The Buddha was teaching of two states.

That which is conditioned and imperment and that which is permanent and unconditioned.

Nothing to do with class.

The description of Citta covers it.

It's something that you don't have to accept or belief but revolves around that 4 Noble Truths.

In your posts you often refer to the kalama sutta, in which you are invited to investigate for yourself.

This is what the Buddha was asking you to investigate.

I am investigating it, Rocky, and thinking about it, in accordance with the advice of the Kalama Sutta.

The two states your refer to, conditioned and impermanent, and permanent an unconditioned, seem like the duality of 'either/or'. This is not how I understand reality. Rather, there's a continuum of different states, not just two. It's too simplistic to describe something as 'either hot or cold'.

[rockyysdt]

I am limited by words.

The Buddha was teaching of two states.

That which is conditioned and imperment and that which is permanent and unconditioned.

Nothing to do with class.

The description of Citta covers it.

It's something that you don't have to accept or belief but revolves around that 4 Noble Truths.

In your posts you often refer to the kalama sutta, in which you are invited to investigate for yourself.

This is what the Buddha was asking you to investigate.

I am investigating it, Rocky, and thinking about it, in accordance with the advice of the Kalama Sutta.

The two states your refer to, conditioned and impermanent, and permanent an unconditioned, seem like the duality of 'either/or'. This is not how I understand reality. Rather, there's a continuum of different states, not just two. It's too simplistic to describe something as 'either hot or cold'.

This is everyones crossroad.

We can stop here and proceed no further, or accept that the Buddha went before us and is recommending a way.

The Buddha already indicated there will never be a way to understand Awakening other than be self experience.

Given this, how will we ever know except by adopting a little faith.

If it causes you to experience harm you can pause and enlist guidance from a teacher.

If you stop at the crossroad, then, in terms of Buddhism, it all becomes just a label, flavour, club, or image.

The Buddha did say, knowledge is useless without practice.

By the way, What did happen to TRD.

I think we was Advaita Vedanta.

Bikkhu Buddhadasa said that Advaita Vedanta practice begins as does Buddhism, but stops short in the house of Brahman as the ultimate.

The Buddha taught that one must go further, fully eliminating any trace of Ego/Self, for the Citta to become fully cleansed, thus resulting in Awakening.

Edited September 2, 2015 by rockyysdt

[VincentRJ]

I am limited by words.

The Buddha was teaching of two states.

That which is conditioned and imperment and that which is permanent and unconditioned.

Nothing to do with class.

The description of Citta covers it.

It's something that you don't have to accept or belief but revolves around that 4 Noble Truths.

In your posts you often refer to the kalama sutta, in which you are invited to investigate for yourself.

This is what the Buddha was asking you to investigate.

I am investigating it, Rocky, and thinking about it, in accordance with the advice of the Kalama Sutta.

The two states your refer to, conditioned and impermanent, and permanent an unconditioned, seem like the duality of 'either/or'. This is not how I understand reality. Rather, there's a continuum of different states, not just two. It's too simplistic to describe something as 'either hot or cold'.

This is everyones crossroad.

We can stop here and proceed no further, or accept that the Buddha went before us and is recommending a way.

No-one can stop. Everything is in a state of change. This is where modern science is in agreement with Buddhism.The Buddha and his recommendations went before us, no dispute about that. But his environment and cultural circumstances were very different to ours.

We should not ignore that fact.

Let's accept only what is meaningful in Buddhist teachings, and what we can relate to, and what makes sense, in accordance with the Kalama Sutta.

[DogNo1]

I struggle with Buddhist terminology. The language describing Citta is rather lofty. I think that I have a pretty good idea of what state of mind I want to achieve guided by the Buddha's instruction but I find the concepts discussed rather slippery and put in an absolute way. The extent to which I am able to experience awakening is rather transitory. Sometimes I can get in the groove but I often slip out. I believe that this must be true for most people. A friend of mine who is a Buddhist monk sometimes shows flashes of ego but he soon recovers. I respect and admire his aspirations but don't expect him to be perfect. He is a great person WITH his flaws.

[rockyysdt]

We can stop here and proceed no further, or accept that the Buddha went before us and is recommending a way.

No-one can stop. Everything is in a state of change. This is where modern science is in agreement with Buddhism.The Buddha and his recommendations went before us, no dispute about that. But his environment and cultural circumstances were very different to ours.

We should not ignore that fact.

Let's accept only what is meaningful in Buddhist teachings, and what we can relate to, and what makes sense, in accordance with the Kalama Sutta.

When I said stop, I didn't mean to stop existing, but rather, to take the correct road which involves the adoption of the Buddhas prescribed practice.

The environmental and cultural circumstances have very little to do with the 4 Noble Truths.

How would the practice of the Eightfold Path be affected by the changed environmental and cultural differences, and why shouldn't we ignore these changes?

You mention accepting what is meaningful in Buddhist teaching.

Isn't practicing the Eightfold Path the core message and therefore meaningful?

Isn't all else just chatting?

How can one proceed if one restricts acceptance to only that which makes sense & that which one can relate to, when much is beyond being related to without practice leading to first hand experience?

Wouldn't this relegate one to permanently observing the path but not travelling along it?

Edited September 3, 2015 by rockyysdt

[nithisa78]

Its a way of life. Before religions just became more scams, that's all they are to be , A Way Of Life. Follow your heart, end of struggle. The teachings of the Masters indicate that to me.

I like going to the Temple. reflection. Away from the madding crowd.

It has been my experience; the best place to meet like minded people (The Temple.) When a woman is married to a foreigner, also a safe haven.

The best of people follow my Mrs there. The ones that aren't they might go , but retreat quickly.

Have Senior Monk friends and they enjoy the debates (dialog.) Laughter. One of my friends (Monk) he tells me Thai people don't talk like I do and they enjoy the additional perspective. Especially the ones that have studied abroad. Not with broads.

Edited September 3, 2015 by nithisa78

[rockyysdt]

Its a way of life. Before religions just became more scams, that's all they are to be , A Way Of Life. Follow your heart, end of struggle. The teachings of the Masters indicate that to me.

I like going to the Temple. reflection. Away from the madding crowd.

This is a very fine life.

It's a fine line between:

a: Diligently practicing the Eightfold Path in order to gain insights leading to Awakening and

b: Swapping one egocentric persona, with another one.

When becoming a dedicated Buddhist, one must look at and beware of attachment to ones reasons for doing so.

[VincentRJ]

We can stop here and proceed no further, or accept that the Buddha went before us and is recommending a way.

No-one can stop. Everything is in a state of change. This is where modern science is in agreement with Buddhism.The Buddha and his recommendations went before us, no dispute about that. But his environment and cultural circumstances were very different to ours.

We should not ignore that fact.

Let's accept only what is meaningful in Buddhist teachings, and what we can relate to, and what makes sense, in accordance with the Kalama Sutta.

When I said stop, I didn't mean to stop existing, but rather, to take the correct road which involves the adoption of the Buddhas prescribed practice.

The environmental and cultural circumstances have very little to do with the 4 Noble Truths.

How would the practice of the Eightfold Path be affected by the changed environmental and cultural differences, and why shouldn't we ignore these changes?

You mention accepting what is meaningful in Buddhist teaching.

Isn't practicing the Eightfold Path the core message and therefore meaningful?

Isn't all else just chatting?

How can one proceed if one restricts acceptance to only that which makes sense & that which one can relate to, when much is beyond being related to without practice leading to first hand experience?

Wouldn't this relegate one to permanently observing the path but not travelling along it?

Hi Rocky,

All the categories of the Eightfold Path are basically common sense. I don't believe any intelligent person, whatever his religion or philosophical outlook, could disagree with those 8 principles as a guide to a successful and ethical life.

Consider the first two, Right Understanding and Right Thought. Who in their right mind would think that Wrong Understanding and Wrong Thought might be preferable?

Consider the third, Right Speech. Who in their right mind would think that telling lies, being rude and impolite, using malicious and abusive language, spreading hatred and disharmony, and so on, might be a better way to live?

The environmental and cultural circumstances have very little to do with the 4 Noble Truths.

Didn't the Buddha make the point that everything is connected through cause and effect? Haven't you mentioned frequently on this forum the great significance of conditioning?

It's unfortunate that we don't have written accounts of the conditions of ordinary life during the times of the Buddha. I imagine it would have been truly awful.

1. Right Understanding (Samma ditthi)

2. Right Thought (Samma sankappa)

3. Right Speech (Samma vaca)

4. Right Action (Samma kammanta)

5. Right Livelihood (Samma ajiva)

6. Right Effort (Samma vayama)

7. Right Mindfulness (Samma sati)

8. Right Concentration (Samma samadhi)

[rockyysdt]

Sure, conditioning differs over time periods, but ones aim remains, to overcome it.

It doesn't change ones need to practice.

What difference do you think it makes, other than presenting a different set of obstacles?

Edited September 4, 2015 by rockyysdt

[VincentRJ]

Sure, conditioning differs over time periods, but ones aim remains, to overcome it.

It doesn't change ones need to practice.

What difference do you think it makes, other than presenting a different set of obstacles?

Rocky,

Are you implying that all conditioning, good or bad, healthy or unhealthy, should be overcome?

For example, I was conditioned by my parents to eat wholesome food and to pay attention to the nutritional content of the various types of food I ate. I was also conditioned to take regular exercise. My father used to cycle to work every day, and sometimes cycle really long distances from England to Scotland to visit his parents.

Throughout my life, I've always insisted on a preference for wholemeal bread and brown rice whenever the choice was available. There's no way I would want to overcome such conditioning, but I am aware of the influence of such conditioning on my behaviour and preferences.

Now in my seventies, I'm very grateful for that conditioning. I'm in good health, not overweight at all, go for long walks which include periods of jogging, can work all day felling trees on my 5 acre property then still go for a jog in the evening.

Because I've been conditioned to place an emphasis on the nutritional value of food rather than the taste, (although I can still appreciate the pleasure of tasty food, such as ice cream), I find I have much more control over my appetite than most people. Complete fasting for 2 or 3 days is no problem, except when I'm doing hard physical work.

The one-meal-a-day lifestyle of the monk would be no problem at all for me. What I would object to is needlessly shaving my head and face, and eating food of substandard nutritional value, which contravenes the advice of the Kalama Sutta.