The side of Buddhism Westerners don't want to know about!

[rockyysdt]

I'm just going on what you were saying, that Nibanna is the end of the conditioned state.

In this state, free from conditioning, greed and aversion, what takes over?

How do you function without moment to moment re birth?

you have moment to moment rebirth but each birth is free from conditions

According to the 4 Noble Truths, a key plank to Buddhism it states that rebirth can no longer arise.

Quote:

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;

My understanding is that even when one achieves Awakening in this life, conditioning remains, only attachment or clinging to this conditioning dissolves.

Arahant Ven Maha Boowa:

Whilst presenting a Dhamma talk about his Awakening, this is what he said:

Tears flowed when I experienced it.

Look at me even now!

Even now my tears are flowing at the recollection of that event.

These tears are the work of the khandhas.

Please understand that they do not exist in the natural state of purity that appeared at that moment.

That natural state appeared suddenly, in all of its incredible magnificence.

I want all of you who are so complacent to realize what the Dhamma of the Lord Buddha is really like.

Oh! So truly, truly amazing! My goodness, the tears came streaming down my face.

The Buddha also displayed conditioning during his life after Awakening.

The conclusion appears to be that the body/mind remains conditioned after one Awakens.

This is the way the body/mind functions.

However, one no longer clings to such conditioning as Ego has been extinguished.

Whilst alive, an Awakened one is at the intersection of that which has form (conditioned & impermanent) with that which is formless (unconditioned & permanent).

Which brings us back to the beginning.

Re Birth.

In the 3rd Noble Truth it states rebirth, dissatisfaction, and re death can no longer arise.

Ego, Self, I, a construct, operates and controls the body/mind.

Attachment, and clinging results in re birth of I.

When craving and clinging has completely ended, the last traces of Ego vanish.

Without Ego, what controls or operates you?

Without another state, doesn't this mean annihilation (we already said there is no soul)?

Edited September 13, 2015 by rockyysdt

[AYJAYDEE]

I'm just going on what you were saying, that Nibanna is the end of the conditioned state.

In this state, free from conditioning, greed and aversion, what takes over?

How do you function without moment to moment re birth?

you have moment to moment rebirth but each birth is free from conditions

According to the 4 Noble Truths, a key plank to Buddhism it states that rebirth can no longer arise.

Quote:

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;

My understanding is that even when one achieves Awakening in this life, conditioning remains, only attachment or clinging to this conditioning dissolves.

Arahant Ven Maha Boowa:

Whilst presenting a Dhamma talk about his Awakening, this is what he said:

Tears flowed when I experienced it.

Look at me even now!

Even now my tears are flowing at the recollection of that event.

These tears are the work of the khandhas.

Please understand that they do not exist in the natural state of purity that appeared at that moment.

That natural state appeared suddenly, in all of its incredible magnificence.

I want all of you who are so complacent to realize what the Dhamma of the Lord Buddha is really like.

Oh! So truly, truly amazing! My goodness, the tears came streaming down my face.

The Buddha also displayed conditioning during his life after Awakening.

The conclusion appears to be that the body/mind remains conditioned after one Awakens.

This is the way the body/mind functions.

However, one no longer clings to such conditioning as Ego has been extinguished.

Whilst alive, an Awakened one is at the intersection of that which has form (conditioned & impermanent) with that which is formless (unconditioned & permanent).

Which brings us back to the beginning.

Re Birth.

In the 3rd Noble Truth it states rebirth, dissatisfaction, and re death can no longer arise.

Ego, Self, I, a construct, operates and controls the body/mind.

Attachment, and clinging results in re birth of I.

When craving and clinging has completely ended, the last traces of Ego vanish.

Without Ego, what controls or operates you?

Without another state, doesn't this mean annihilation (we already said there is no soul)?

This is HUGE!! I think you better tell the buddha quick. he continued to exist in a physical body for quite some time after his awakening.

[rockyysdt]

I'm just going on what you were saying, that Nibanna is the end of the conditioned state.

In this state, free from conditioning, greed and aversion, what takes over?

How do you function without moment to moment re birth?

you have moment to moment rebirth but each birth is free from conditions

According to the 4 Noble Truths, a key plank to Buddhism it states that rebirth can no longer arise.

Quote:

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;

My understanding is that even when one achieves Awakening in this life, conditioning remains, only attachment or clinging to this conditioning dissolves.

Arahant Ven Maha Boowa:

Whilst presenting a Dhamma talk about his Awakening, this is what he said:

Tears flowed when I experienced it.

Look at me even now!

Even now my tears are flowing at the recollection of that event.

These tears are the work of the khandhas.

Please understand that they do not exist in the natural state of purity that appeared at that moment.

That natural state appeared suddenly, in all of its incredible magnificence.

I want all of you who are so complacent to realize what the Dhamma of the Lord Buddha is really like.

Oh! So truly, truly amazing! My goodness, the tears came streaming down my face.

The Buddha also displayed conditioning during his life after Awakening.

The conclusion appears to be that the body/mind remains conditioned after one Awakens.

This is the way the body/mind functions.

However, one no longer clings to such conditioning as Ego has been extinguished.

Whilst alive, an Awakened one is at the intersection of that which has form (conditioned & impermanent) with that which is formless (unconditioned & permanent).

Which brings us back to the beginning.

Re Birth.

In the 3rd Noble Truth it states rebirth, dissatisfaction, and re death can no longer arise.

Ego, Self, I, a construct, operates and controls the body/mind.

Attachment, and clinging results in re birth of I.

When craving and clinging has completely ended, the last traces of Ego vanish.

Without Ego, what controls or operates you?

Without another state, doesn't this mean annihilation (we already said there is no soul)?

This is HUGE!! I think you better tell the buddha quick. he continued to exist in a physical body for quite some time after his awakening.

I don't understand and am surprised by your response?

Edited September 13, 2015 by rockyysdt

[AYJAYDEE]

I don't understand your response?

Could this be due to you not understanding what I'm trying to convey?

it all seems to be word games to me. if conditioning is not clung to then I dont see it as conditioning as it has no effect. how others define these things is not important to me.

[rockyysdt]

I don't understand your response?

Could this be due to you not understanding what I'm trying to convey?

it all seems to be word games to me. if conditioning is not clung to then I dont see it as conditioning as it has no effect. how others define these things is not important to me.

Can we summarise then where we are at?

[AYJAYDEE]

I don't understand your response?

Could this be due to you not understanding what I'm trying to convey?

it all seems to be word games to me. if conditioning is not clung to then I dont see it as conditioning as it has no effect. how others define these things is not important to me.

Can we summarise then where we are at?

i just did. we experience rebirths every moment, awakening cause conditional arising to cease. There may be actual physical rebirth after physical death or there may not but its not something I feel to be worth thinking about.

[rockyysdt]

I don't understand your response?

Could this be due to you not understanding what I'm trying to convey?

it all seems to be word games to me. if conditioning is not clung to then I dont see it as conditioning as it has no effect. how others define these things is not important to me.

Can we summarise then where we are at?

i just did. we experience rebirths every moment, awakening cause conditional arising to cease. There may be actual physical rebirth after physical death or there may not but its not something I feel to be worth thinking about.

Of that (highlighted) I partially agree.

Conditional arising has many aspects.

They include mental habits, thoughts, ideas, opinions, prejudices, compulsions, and decisions triggered by an object.

One type of conditional arising is to respond in a automatic way to a given stimulus (someone abuses me in a hurtful way, and I may automatically punch him).

Another type of conditional response is one made after careful consideration (someone abuses me in a hurtful way, but I think about it carefully and decide to let it go, and I leave the area).

Both are conditional even though, with the second I needed to an internal discussion.

My choice of response, though different, was still conditioned by my mental programming.

For example, in some circumstances I refrain, but in other I may still strike back, even after careful consideration.

Our whole lives operate by conditioning (stored memory tables of beliefs and behaviors, each with their own set of unique rules, much like the data base of a computer program).

Conditional arising is our response (thought, feeling, action) triggered by an object.

If Awakening causes conditional arising to cease, what then takes over?

[AYJAYDEE]

Conditional arising is our response (thought, feeling, action) triggered by an object.

If Awakening causes conditional arising to cease, what then takes over?

equanimity

[rockyysdt]

Conditional arising is our response (thought, feeling, action) triggered by an object.

If Awakening causes conditional arising to cease, what then takes over?

equanimity

Equanimity is the ground for wisdom, freedom, compassion and love.

The Buddha described a mind filled with equanimity as "abundant, exalted, immeasurable, without hostility and without ill-will."

It's one of the 4 sublime attitudes.

If conditional arising ceases who or what does this attitude spring from?

[AYJAYDEE]

Conditional arising is our response (thought, feeling, action) triggered by an object.

If Awakening causes conditional arising to cease, what then takes over?

equanimity

Equanimity is the ground for wisdom, freedom, compassion and love.

The Buddha described a mind filled with equanimity as "abundant, exalted, immeasurable, without hostility and without ill-will."

It's one of the 4 sublime attitudes.

If conditional arising ceases who or what does this attitude spring from?

its also one of the seven factors of enlightenment. it is not an attitude

[VincentRJ]

I think we've hit the perennial problem of trying to explain unusual and rare experiences in terms of a language which must, by definition, apply to common experiences in order to be understood.

Let's consider the following description of Nirvana.

"He who has realised Truth, Nirvana, is the happiest being in the world. He is free from all 'complexes' and obsessions, the worries and troubles that torment others. His mental health is perfect. He does not repent the past, nor does he brood over the future."

Would you agree that's a fair description of Nirvana or enlightenment? It's certainly a description of a state of 'mind' (for want of a better word) that is worth striving for.

However, if you don't mind, I'm going to play the role of 'devil's advocate' here.

We know already that outside of specifically Buddhist cultures, there exists a wide range of degrees of 'happiness' and satisfaction.

Just as some people might fly into a rage over the most trivial of things, such as their new car being scratched by a flying stone from another passing vehicle, others, as a result of their conditioning, might be quite unperturbed by such events.

At one extreme we have mental conditions described as an 'Obsessive Compulsive Disorder' (OCD) whereby people are obsessively concerned about small matters, such as ensuring their house is perfectly free of any speck of dust or dirt. Such concerns result in the housewife cleaning and vacuuming the house every single day.

The basic Buddhist narrative of Gautama being profoundly disturbed by the conditions of suffering he witnessed when leaving the palace for the first time, seems to me to be a reaction to an extreme set of circumstances; so extreme in fact, that it led Gautama to the point of almost starving himself to death in search of a solution.

Now, what has occurred to me, as a result of my Western, science-oriented conditioning, is that the experiences described as Nirvana or Enlightenment, might be a 'normal' reaction of the human brain to extreme deprivation, such as prolonged fasting and/or abstinence from all the usual pleasures of life.

Leading the life of a monk is a deliberate choice to deprive oneself of the normal satisfactions of life, in search of something better. Is it not likely, after years of such deprivation, sitting in a cave meditating, having only 3 hours of sleep a night, striving to deprive the mind of any form of stimulation, that the physical brain might eventually react with a compensatory experience unlike anything one has experienced before, simply in order to create a state of mental equilibrium, like a person with bi-polar disorder who will swing from periods of great depression to periods of great elation.

Furthermore, is it not likely that the joy of such an experience will be felt in relation to the previous years of deprivation? I'm thinking here of Rocky's quote from Maha Boowa's experience of enlightenment.

"Tears flowed when I experienced it.

Look at me even now!

Even now my tears are flowing at the recollection of that event. "

This brings me to another issue of the problem of 'everyday' language and basic logic. I recall having a conversation with a Buddhist monk in Thailand some years ago. I raised the issue of the Buddhist precept that everything is an illusion. He agreed, but with one major exception, the Dhamma. Everything is an illusion, except the Buddhist Dhamma..

I could understand why he would think that way, but to me it didn't seem rational and logical. Surely the Dhamma exists as an interpretation in one's own mind, as everything else is merely an interpretation, and not 'true' reality.

As I previously wrote, I'm playing 'Devil's Advocate' here. I have no intention of offending anyone. Just trying to sort through the confusion.

[AYJAYDEE]

I think we've hit the perennial problem of trying to explain unusual and rare experiences in terms of a language which must, by definition, apply to common experiences in order to be understood.

Let's consider the following description of Nirvana.

"He who has realised Truth, Nirvana, is the happiest being in the world. He is free from all 'complexes' and obsessions, the worries and troubles that torment others. His mental health is perfect. He does not repent the past, nor does he brood over the future."

Would you agree that's a fair description of Nirvana or enlightenment? It's certainly a description of a state of 'mind' (for want of a better word) that is worth striving for.

However, if you don't mind, I'm going to play the role of 'devil's advocate' here.

We know already that outside of specifically Buddhist cultures, there exists a wide range of degrees of 'happiness' and satisfaction.

Just as some people might fly into a rage over the most trivial of things, such as their new car being scratched by a flying stone from another passing vehicle, others, as a result of their conditioning, might be quite unperturbed by such events.

At one extreme we have mental conditions described as an 'Obsessive Compulsive Disorder' (OCD) whereby people are obsessively concerned about small matters, such as ensuring their house is perfectly free of any speck of dust or dirt. Such concerns result in the housewife cleaning and vacuuming the house every single day.

The basic Buddhist narrative of Gautama being profoundly disturbed by the conditions of suffering he witnessed when leaving the palace for the first time, seems to me to be a reaction to an extreme set of circumstances; so extreme in fact, that it led Gautama to the point of almost starving himself to death in search of a solution.

Now, what has occurred to me, as a result of my Western, science-oriented conditioning, is that the experiences described as Nirvana or Enlightenment, might be a 'normal' reaction of the human brain to extreme deprivation, such as prolonged fasting and/or abstinence from all the usual pleasures of life.

Leading the life of a monk is a deliberate choice to deprive oneself of the normal satisfactions of life, in search of something better. Is it not likely, after years of such deprivation, sitting in a cave meditating, having only 3 hours of sleep a night, striving to deprive the mind of any form of stimulation, that the physical brain might eventually react with a compensatory experience unlike anything one has experienced before, simply in order to create a state of mental equilibrium, like a person with bi-polar disorder who will swing from periods of great depression to periods of great elation.

Furthermore, is it not likely that the joy of such an experience will be felt in relation to the previous years of deprivation? I'm thinking here of Rocky's quote from Maha Boowa's experience of enlightenment.

"Tears flowed when I experienced it.

Look at me even now!

Even now my tears are flowing at the recollection of that event. "

This brings me to another issue of the problem of 'everyday' language and basic logic. I recall having a conversation with a Buddhist monk in Thailand some years ago. I raised the issue of the Buddhist precept that everything is an illusion. He agreed, but with one major exception, the Dhamma. Everything is an illusion, except the Buddhist Dhamma..

I could understand why he would think that way, but to me it didn't seem rational and logical. Surely the Dhamma exists as an interpretation in one's own mind, as everything else is merely an interpretation, and not 'true' reality.

As I previously wrote, I'm playing 'Devil's Advocate' here. I have no intention of offending anyone. Just trying to sort through the confusion.

I, for one, don't feel confused.

[Fatboi]

There's a monk who does a Google hangout every day and takes questions, why not put it to him?

Questions page:

meditation.sirimangalo.org

Livestream/YT channel:

https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCQJ6ESCWQotBwtJm0Ff_gyQ

[VincentRJ]

As I previously wrote, I'm playing 'Devil's Advocate' here. I have no intention of offending anyone. Just trying to sort through the confusion.

I, for one, don't feel confused.

I see! You're completely enlightened, are you? Or are you perhaps neither enlightened nor confused?

[AYJAYDEE]

As I previously wrote, I'm playing 'Devil's Advocate' here. I have no intention of offending anyone. Just trying to sort through the confusion.

I, for one, don't feel confused.

I see! You're completely enlightened, are you? Or are you perhaps neither enlightened nor confused?

its not an either or. its a neither nor

[VincentRJ]

As I previously wrote, I'm playing 'Devil's Advocate' here. I have no intention of offending anyone. Just trying to sort through the confusion.

I, for one, don't feel confused.

I see! You're completely enlightened, are you? Or are you perhaps neither enlightened nor confused?

its not an either or. its a neither nor

I see. So my second option applies; you are neither enlightened nor confused; in which case, why do you want to be enlightened if you're not confused?

[AYJAYDEE]

I see. So my second option applies; you are neither enlightened nor confused; in which case, why do you want to be enlightened if you're not confused?

because its a worthy goal worth pursuing. I have faith that following the path as laid out will ultimately result in the achieving of wisdom and enlightenment.

[AYJAYDEE]

I see. So my second option applies; you are neither enlightened nor confused; in which case, why do you want to be enlightened if you're not confused?

and my question to you is: Do you think it a skillful use of your time to try and lure others into word games?

[VincentRJ]

I see. So my second option applies; you are neither enlightened nor confused; in which case, why do you want to be enlightened if you're not confused?

because its a worthy goal worth pursuing. I have faith that following the path as laid out will ultimately result in the achieving of wisdom and enlightenment.

Why is it a worthy goal for someone who is already free of confusion? Is suffering not, at least in part, due to a confusion about the true nature of reality?

and my question to you is: Do you think it a skillful use of your time to try and lure others into word games?

Do you mean 'scrabble' and ' crossword puzzles'? Is that what you think I am doing?

I'm merely raising issues that cause a degree of skepticism in my own mind and am trying to resolve any resulting confusion through discussion. If that makes you feel a bit uncomfortable, please accept my apologies.

[AYJAYDEE]

I see. So my second option applies; you are neither enlightened nor confused; in which case, why do you want to be enlightened if you're not confused?

because its a worthy goal worth pursuing. I have faith that following the path as laid out will ultimately result in the achieving of wisdom and enlightenment.

Why is it a worthy goal for someone who is already free of confusion? Is suffering not, at least in part, due to a confusion about the true nature of reality?

and my question to you is: Do you think it a skillful use of your time to try and lure others into word games?

Do you mean 'scrabble' and ' crossword puzzles'? Is that what you think I am doing?

I'm merely raising issues that cause a degree of skepticism in my own mind and am trying to resolve any resulting confusion through discussion. If that makes you feel a bit uncomfortable, please accept my apologies

if I thought you were seriously pursuing answers I would answer but to me these questions seem nothing more than a baiting game.

Edited September 14, 2015 by AYJAYDEE

[VincentRJ]

Maybe you're right. I shall desist, and sit down quietly to meditate.

[Fatboi]

I just asked a monk what evidence there was to suggest that consciousness survives after death and his answer was that they do not require evidence, rather that unlike science, in Buddhism the burden of proof was to prove it doesn't exist so they are not concerned with proving it.

Pretty unsatisfying answer, bit disappointed...

[AYJAYDEE]

I just asked a monk what evidence there was to suggest that consciousness survives after death and his answer was that they do not require evidence, rather that unlike science, in Buddhism the burden of proof was to prove it doesn't exist so they are not concerned with proving it.

Pretty unsatisfying answer, bit disappointed...

why did you expect proof?

[VincentRJ]

I just asked a monk what evidence there was to suggest that consciousness survives after death and his answer was that they do not require evidence, rather that unlike science, in Buddhism the burden of proof was to prove it doesn't exist so they are not concerned with proving it.

Pretty unsatisfying answer, bit disappointed...

why did you expect proof?

I would think it reasonable to expect that at least some convincing evidence should be revealed, such as providing some verified examples of the recollection of previous lives by certain meditating monks.

It is written that Gautama recalled thousands of previous lives in all their detail, during his night of enlightenment under the Bodhi tree, but the details of such former lives were not written down prior to Gautama's life, and therefore cannot be historically identified, so it all has to be taken on trust.

From the Buddhacarita of Asvaghosha:

　

"In the first watch of the night he recollected the successive series of his former births. 'There was I so and so; that was my name; deceased from there I came here' - in this way he remembered thousands of births, as though living them over again. When he recalled all his own births and deaths in all these previous lives of his, the Sage, full of pity, turned his compassionate mind towards other living beings, and he thought to himself: 'Again and again they must leave the people they regard as their own, and must go on elsewhere, and that without ever stopping. Surely this world is unprotected and helpless, and like a wheel it turns round and round.' As he continued steadily to recollect his past thus, he came to the definite conviction that the world of samsara is as unsubstantial as the pith of a plantain tree."

Since in modern times historical records and registers of births and deaths have been kept in certain countries for the past couple of hundred years or so, it should now be easier to verify the existence of a previous life recalled by anyone alive today. Remember the advice of the Kalama Sutta? Do not accept something as true merely because it is written in the scriptures.

Edited September 29, 2015 by VincentRJ

[Fatboi]

I just asked a monk what evidence there was to suggest that consciousness survives after death and his answer was that they do not require evidence, rather that unlike science, in Buddhism the burden of proof was to prove it doesn't exist so they are not concerned with proving it.

Pretty unsatisfying answer, bit disappointed...

why did you expect proof?

To put it in context here's the question as I put it:

Bhante, I was raised Christian and and asked to rely on faith so have become cynical beyond anything I can't experience first hand. If rebirth is a fact and Buddhism the way to not waste this incarnation how can one know this to be true without relying on faith before committing to a lifetime of practice?

His reply here:

https://youtu.be/_qcIJ5G0XJQ?t=1248

[VincentRJ]

I just asked a monk what evidence there was to suggest that consciousness survives after death and his answer was that they do not require evidence, rather that unlike science, in Buddhism the burden of proof was to prove it doesn't exist so they are not concerned with proving it.

Pretty unsatisfying answer, bit disappointed...

why did you expect proof?

To put it in context here's the question as I put it:

Bhante, I was raised Christian and and asked to rely on faith so have become cynical beyond anything I can't experience first hand. If rebirth is a fact and Buddhism the way to not waste this incarnation how can one know this to be true without relying on faith before committing to a lifetime of practice?

His reply here:

https://youtu.be/_qcIJ5G0XJQ?t=1248

Hi Fatboi,

Thanks for the video link.

I think Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu has got this point at least slightly wrong if he thinks that science accepts something as true if it cannot be disproved. He says, to quote from the video, "in science you don't prove things, you disprove them."

If this were true, then science would have to accept the existence of some sort of God, as well as reincarnation, rebirth, invisible spirits and so on, because science cannot disprove that such things exists.

He seems a bit unsure of himself with regard to many of your questions, as though he's answering such questions for the first time.

When answering your first question, he probably had in mind the scientific process of falsification whereby a theory or explanation for the behaviour of real and observed phenomena is put to the test by attempting to disprove the theory.

In other words, if a theory is true then it might predict that in a particular set of circumstances, such and such will happen. Whatever the theory predicts, one attempts to perform the appropriate experiment to test if the predicted result do in fact occur. If they don't occur as predicted, then the theory is either wrong, (it's been falsified), or some other unknown influence is affecting the outcome.

[AYJAYDEE]

I just asked a monk what evidence there was to suggest that consciousness survives after death and his answer was that they do not require evidence, rather that unlike science, in Buddhism the burden of proof was to prove it doesn't exist so they are not concerned with proving it.

Pretty unsatisfying answer, bit disappointed...

why did you expect proof?

To put it in context here's the question as I put it:

Bhante, I was raised Christian and and asked to rely on faith so have become cynical beyond anything I can't experience first hand. If rebirth is a fact and Buddhism the way to not waste this incarnation how can one know this to be true without relying on faith before committing to a lifetime of practice?

His reply here:

https://youtu.be/_qcIJ5G0XJQ?t=1248

the Buddha instructed us to believe nothing he said until we have seen and understand it for ourselves. In other words until you experience it for yourself. so you cant ask someone else for proof.So if youre going to try and experience this knowledge for yourself, youre going to have embark on the practice based on faith. If you cant, then dont.

Edited September 30, 2015 by AYJAYDEE