The ultimate purpose of Buddhist-style meditation practices

[trd]

The main problem, as I imagine it, is with the concept of 'awareness without thought'.

We try to understand new concepts, ideas and experiences by relating them to what we are already familiar with, using a process of analogies.

For example, a youngster trying to understand the broad concept of Einstein's theory of relativity, might begin with a simple analogy of two stationary passenger trains, side by side at the railway station. As he gazes at the other train through the window, he notices that it begins to start up, moving in the opposite direction.

Then with surprise, perhaps as a result of a slight sense of a rumbling noise as the train wheels roll along the tracks, he realises that it is his train that is moving, not the other one, which is actually still stationary.

As a result of such an analogy, it becomes easier to understand the broad concept that everything we perceive as moving is actually moving only in relation to something else that we perceive and define as being stationary, and vice versa.

Trying to think of an analogy for 'awareness without thought', I've come up with the following.

Let's say I'm driving along a scenic highway, paying attention to the other traffic whilst simultaneously having profound conversations with the other passengers in the car, about the meaning and purpose of Buddhism, for example. I would say that I'm aware of the surrounding landscape through which I'm driving, without having any thoughts about it, because all my thinking is diverted to other issues. However, if I were to stop driving, and stop talking, I would then begin to have thoughts about the surrounding landscape. What a tall building! What beautiful trees on the river bank, and so on. It would be difficult to pay attention to such surroundings without having any thoughts, but possible I imagine.

Is this a relevant and useful analogy, anyone?

Your analogy would work if when you stopped having the conversation the landscape was all that was left and you just saw it for what it was without any other thoughts. If I were to show you a stunning picture, wouldn't there be a momentary suspension of thought as you reacted to it before your mind kicked in and started analysing it.

[VincentRJ]

The main problem, as I imagine it, is with the concept of 'awareness without thought'.

We try to understand new concepts, ideas and experiences by relating them to what we are already familiar with, using a process of analogies.

For example, a youngster trying to understand the broad concept of Einstein's theory of relativity, might begin with a simple analogy of two stationary passenger trains, side by side at the railway station. As he gazes at the other train through the window, he notices that it begins to start up, moving in the opposite direction.

Then with surprise, perhaps as a result of a slight sense of a rumbling noise as the train wheels roll along the tracks, he realises that it is his train that is moving, not the other one, which is actually still stationary.

As a result of such an analogy, it becomes easier to understand the broad concept that everything we perceive as moving is actually moving only in relation to something else that we perceive and define as being stationary, and vice versa.

Trying to think of an analogy for 'awareness without thought', I've come up with the following.

Let's say I'm driving along a scenic highway, paying attention to the other traffic whilst simultaneously having profound conversations with the other passengers in the car, about the meaning and purpose of Buddhism, for example. I would say that I'm aware of the surrounding landscape through which I'm driving, without having any thoughts about it, because all my thinking is diverted to other issues. However, if I were to stop driving, and stop talking, I would then begin to have thoughts about the surrounding landscape. What a tall building! What beautiful trees on the river bank, and so on. It would be difficult to pay attention to such surroundings without having any thoughts, but possible I imagine.

Is this a relevant and useful analogy, anyone?

Your analogy would work if when you stopped having the conversation the landscape was all that was left and you just saw it for what it was without any other thoughts. If I were to show you a stunning picture, wouldn't there be a momentary suspension of thought as you reacted to it before your mind kicked in and started analysing it.

Hey! Good analogy, Trd. Photography is my hobby. I must have experienced thousands of brief moments of 'awareness without thought' as I first set eyes upon some of my own stunning photos and those of others. I guess that's why I am so enlightened.

[trd]

Of course you have experienced moments without thought. Everyone has. It's just that most people don't attach any significance to it because we quickly go back to identifying with thought. That door is seen often but most don't ever bother opening it and go back to looking at objects in the room.

[Brucenkhamen]

Awareness is not a process or part of any Buddhist psychology. Awareness is like the cinema screen upon which the movie is projected. The movie is mental process. The movie begins and ends but the screen remains untouched and is uninvolved. It is merely the witness of the movie. Nothing that happens in the movie can affect the screen. Scenes of fire will not burn it. Scenes of a flood won't make it wet.

I didnt ask you what awareness is like, I know what it is like, I asked you since you dont believe it is a function of the mind (ie a mental process) what you believe it is. So while your analogy sounds quite profound and paints a good picture about what awareness is like as an answer to my question its basically BS.

So if you dont believe awareness is a function of the mind (ie a mental process) what you believe it is?

The interesting thing is I pasted the phrase Awareness is like the cinema screen upon which the movie is projected and the top half dozen or so hits appear to be theistic in nature, so youve got a few buddies.

We shouldn't pay much attention to the dictionary definition. The dictionary isn't concerned with ultimate knowledge but only with what most people experience which is thinking that they are a mind and body. If the screen mistakenly thinks it's the movie then dukkha arises.

If you dont want to use English then you are only going to confuse your reader, then what is gained? Religious and technical groups do develop their own jargon, I understand that (Buddhists do it too), but if they cant translate their jargon into English vernacular when needed then I doubt they really understand what they are talking about.

Can you translate your usage of the word awareness into English?

What you call a complex array of mental processes is neither here nor there. It's just a concept. There is only one thing you can truly know and that is what is happening in the present moment. That is all. Right here, right now. There is no past, or future. And in that present moment there will be a thought or no thought. What happens in the past is just a memory, but that memory is a new thought happening in the present moment.

If you appreciate that then all you have to do is to find out what is the source of these thoughts and discover that it is silence. That knowledge replaces all scripture.

The first paragraph is all very true but pretty much irrelevant to the question I asked.

The source of the thoughts is the conditioned mind, silence doesnt produce thoughts but thoughts arise and pass away within the backdrop of silence.

If clear seeing has nothing to do with objects, then it can have nothing to do with the process that brings them into the conscious mind either.

Of course the objects are involved in the process, the point is they are not the main thing as far as practice goes.

Just to show I can do BS too "Awareness is like the sky upon which the clouds move. The clouds are mental processes. The clouds begin and end but the sky remains untouched and is uninvolved. It is merely the witness of the clouds. Nothing that happens with the clouds can affect the sky. Lightening will not burn it. Rain won't make it wet".

Edited May 14, 2016 by Brucenkhamen

[Brucenkhamen]

Hey! Good analogy, Trd. Photography is my hobby. I must have experienced thousands of brief moments of 'awareness without thought' as I first set eyes upon some of my own stunning photos and those of others. I guess that's why I am so enlightened.

I think you should cultivate those moments. There is an honesty and wholesomeness about those moments before all the conceptualising and commentary kicks in separating you from your experience. Just put aside philosophical questions about dualism and enlightment etc, appreciate those moments and let them become more a natural part of your day.

[VincentRJ]

The source of the thoughts is the conditioned mind, silence doesnt produce thoughts but thoughts arise and pass away within the backdrop of silence.

Now, here's an interesting thought. Could it be that the goal of Buddhism is to achieve a state of awareness similar in nature to the awareness that our early ancestors would have had before the development of language.

Even today, I believe there are certain primitive tribes, perhaps in the depths of the Amazon jungle, or some similarly remote place, whose language does not discriminate between different varieties of trees. A tree is a tree, whatever the shape of its leaf.

If we go back further in time, perhaps a few million years, our first ancestors, without the benefits of cultural conditioning and language, and without any concepts of God, and without any possessions to accumulate, might have had experiences of 'awareness without thought' most of the time. Whadda you think?

Oops! Am I not supposed to think?

[trd]

So while your analogy sounds quite profound and paints a good picture about what awareness is like as an answer to my question its basically BS.

I took the time to seriously consider what you have said and gave a considered reply. Is it part of your Buddhist practice to refer to others comments as BS? Our conversation is over.

[VincentRJ]

So while your analogy sounds quite profound and paints a good picture about what awareness is like as an answer to my question its basically BS.

I took the time to seriously consider what you have said and gave a considered reply. Is it part of your Buddhist practice to refer to others comments as BS? Our conversation is over.

Never mind, Trd. You can always have a conversation with me. I'm very rational and polite.

[Brucenkhamen]

Now, here's an interesting thought. Could it be that the goal of Buddhism is to achieve a state of awareness similar in nature to the awareness that our early ancestors would have had before the development of language.

Perhaps, I think the complexity we have developed has a lot to do with the sense of unsatisfactoriness we feel, but we have evolved too much to go back to a primitive state. Rather we need to develop further to have the genuine presence and awareness to live with the conceptual complexity in a balanced way.

[trd]

So while your analogy sounds quite profound and paints a good picture about what awareness is like as an answer to my question its basically BS.

I took the time to seriously consider what you have said and gave a considered reply. Is it part of your Buddhist practice to refer to others comments as BS? Our conversation is over.

Never mind, Trd. You can always have a conversation with me. I'm very rational and polite.

I know you are

[Brucenkhamen]

I took the time to seriously consider what you have said and gave a considered reply. Is it part of your Buddhist practice to refer to others comments as BS? Our conversation is over.

You didn't answer my question, so if you did take the time to seriously composes a considered reply I can only assume it was in order to evade the question while still seeming "spiritual".

[VincentRJ]

Trd,

You could always interpret the letters BS as standing for 'Better Savoir'. After all, interpretations do exist only in the mind, don't they?

[VincentRJ]

So it seems we have now solved the problem of the ultimate purpose of Buddhist-style meditation.

Excellent! Well done!

[TuskegeeBen]

The source of the thoughts is the conditioned mind, silence doesnt produce thoughts but thoughts arise and pass away within the backdrop of silence.

Now, here's an interesting thought. Could it be that the goal of Buddhism is to achieve a state of awareness similar in nature to the awareness that our early ancestors would have had before the development of language.

Even today, I believe there are certain primitive tribes, perhaps in the depths of the Amazon jungle, or some similarly remote place, whose language does not discriminate between different varieties of trees. A tree is a tree, whatever the shape of its leaf.

If we go back further in time, perhaps a few million years, our first ancestors, without the benefits of cultural conditioning and language, and without any concepts of God, and without any possessions to accumulate, might have had experiences of 'awareness without thought' most of the time. Whadda you think?

Oops! Am I not supposed to think?

Here's an evolved human meditation practice, FYI point, for you to "debate" into infinity.

The average lifespan of a given species is approx. 100,000 years, according to a hugely respected, and published constituency school of biological research thought.

Indeed, Archaeologists are hard-pressed (even with the most accurate carbon-dating technology) to find human fossil remains, dating further back than 40,000 years, in human history.

So much for the "If we go back further in time, perhaps a few million years, our first ancestors, etc.".

Edited May 18, 2016 by TuskegeeBen

[VincentRJ]

The source of the thoughts is the conditioned mind, silence doesnt produce thoughts but thoughts arise and pass away within the backdrop of silence.

Now, here's an interesting thought. Could it be that the goal of Buddhism is to achieve a state of awareness similar in nature to the awareness that our early ancestors would have had before the development of language.

Even today, I believe there are certain primitive tribes, perhaps in the depths of the Amazon jungle, or some similarly remote place, whose language does not discriminate between different varieties of trees. A tree is a tree, whatever the shape of its leaf.

If we go back further in time, perhaps a few million years, our first ancestors, without the benefits of cultural conditioning and language, and without any concepts of God, and without any possessions to accumulate, might have had experiences of 'awareness without thought' most of the time. Whadda you think?

Oops! Am I not supposed to think?

The average lifespan of a given species is approx. 100,000 years, according to a hugely respected, and published constituency school of biological research thought.

Well, that must be true if the authority is highly respected. Never mind what the Kalama Sutta advises.

As I understand, we don't even know how many species there are on earth.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-we-any-closer-to-knowing-how-many-species-there-are-on-earth/

Indeed, Archaeologists are hard-pressed (even with the most accurate carbon-dating technology) to find human fossil remains, dating further back than 40,000 years, in human history. So much for the "If we go back further in time, perhaps a few million years, our first ancestors, etc.".

Following is the chronology of human evolution from the dated fossils that have been discovered so far. Homo Naledi is a recent discovery which has not yet been accurately dated.

Ardipithecus ramidus (4.4 million years ago) : Fossils were discovered in Ethiopia in the 1990s. Pelvis shows adaptations to both tree climbing and upright walking.

Australopithecus afarensis (3.9 - 2.9 million years ago) : The famous "Lucy" skeleton belongs to this species of human relative. So far, fossils of this species have only been found in East Africa. Several traits in the skeleton suggest afarensis walked upright, but they may have spent some time in the trees.

Homo habilis (2.8 - 1.5 million years ago) : This human relative had a slightly larger braincase and smaller teeth than the australopithecines or older species, but retains many more primitive features such as long arms.

Homo naledi (Of unknown age, but researchers say it could be as old as three million years) : The new discovery has small, modern-looking teeth, human-like feet but more primitive fingers and a small braincase.

Homo erectus (1.9 million years - unknown) : Homo erectus had a modern body plan that was almost indistinguishable from ours. But it had a smaller brain than a modern person's combined with a more primitive face.

Homo neanderthalensis (200,000 years - 40,000 years) The Neanderthals were a side-group to modern humans, inhabiting western Eurasia before our species left Africa. They were shorter and more muscular than modern people but had slightly larger brains.

Homo sapiens (200,000 years - present) Modern humans evolved in Africa from a predecessor species known as Homo heidelbergensis. A small group of Homo sapiens left Africa 60,000 years ago and settled the rest of the world, replacing the other human species they encountered (with a small amount of interbreeding).

The following article makes interesting reading.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34192447

[TuskegeeBen]

Excuse me, I remain in pursuit of the "meditation" practices, leading to more evolved human enlightenment.

However, since the topic thread has developed it's own evolutionary process, I'm curious to know if there was a fundamental (tool-making, veggie-gathering, hunter) species of "human beings" present, even during the "Jurassic" period of Earth's history; and that, despite the hugely proliferated presence of the Dienonychus during that same time frame ??? R.S.V.P.

Note: That question was fielded, at the family dinner table, by my 14-year young daughter, in 1996.

Edited May 20, 2016 by TuskegeeBen

[VincentRJ]

Excuse me, I remain in pursuit of the "meditation" practices, leading to more evolved human enlightenment.

However, since the topic thread has developed it's own evolutionary process, I'm curious to know if there was a fundamental (tool-making, veggie-gathering, hunter) species of "human beings" present, even during the "Jurassic" period of Earth's history; and that, despite the hugely proliferated presence of the Dienonychus during that same time frame ??? R.S.V.P.

Note: That question was fielded, at the family dinner table, by my 14-year young daughter, in 1996.

I certainly hope you were able to provide an edifying response for your daughter's benefit.

The Jurassic period stretched from around 201 million years ago to 145.5 million years ago. The dinosaurs became extinct during the later Cretaceous period around 65 million years ago. It is thought that the extinction of the dinosaurs facilitated the gradual evolution of small, furry creatures into apes and humans, who might otherwise have been easy prey for the dinosaurs.

The earliest stone tools that appear to be hand-made with sharp edges have been dated at a mere 3.3 million years. The divergence from apes to human-like creatures walking on two legs, is estimated to have taken place around 6 million years ago. 150 million years is just a little bit off, wouldn't you say.

Recent DNA evidence has revealed that many modern humans share certain unique genetic characteristic with Neanderthal man, which implies that we and Neanderthal man were of the same species. Only creatures of the same species can interbreed. It has therefore been necessary to create a category of 'sub-species'. We are now officially Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and Neanderthal man is the extinct sub-species now known as Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis.

My suggestion that it might be the case that the goal of Buddhist meditation is to achieve a state of awareness similar in nature to the awareness that our early ancestors might have experienced before the development of language, is just my own theory, but it makes sense to me based upon what I already understand from history.

I think it's fair to presume that people do not abandon their security and way of life in search of enlightenment without good reason. The reason appears to be usually a general dissatisfaction with their experiences of 'so-called' civilization with its constant conflicts and suffering.

This apparent nihilistic nature of Buddhism is perhaps not so much a rejection of life itself, with its unavoidable dukkha, but a striving to achieve a state of mind that might have been a common experience among early humans who lived prior to the creation of civilization, language and agriculture. In other words, a state of mind without thought or concept during a time when most humans were mainly vegetarian, calmly plucking fruit, nuts and leaves from the trees, and only occasionally eating meat.

[Brucenkhamen]

This apparent nihilistic nature of Buddhism is perhaps not so much a rejection of life itself, with its unavoidable dukkha, but a striving to achieve a state of mind that might have been a common experience among early humans who lived prior to the creation of civilization, language and agriculture. In other words, a state of mind without thought or concept

Buddhism is not about achieving a state of mind without thought or concept.

Edited May 20, 2016 by Brucenkhamen

[nongai]

The Jurassic period stretched from around 201 million years ago to 145.5 million years ago. The dinosaurs became extinct during the later Cretaceous period around 65 million years ago. It is thought that the extinction of the dinosaurs facilitated the gradual evolution of small, furry creatures into apes and humans, who might otherwise have been easy prey for the dinosaurs.

The earliest stone tools that appear to be hand-made with sharp edges have been dated at a mere 3.3 million years. The divergence from apes to human-like creatures walking on two legs, is estimated to have taken place around 6 million years ago. 150 million years is just a little bit off, wouldn't you say.

Recent DNA evidence has revealed that many modern humans share certain unique genetic characteristic with Neanderthal man, which implies that we and Neanderthal man were of the same species. Only creatures of the same species can interbreed. It has therefore been necessary to create a category of 'sub-species'. We are now officially Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and Neanderthal man is the extinct sub-species now known as Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis.

My suggestion that it might be the case that the goal of Buddhist meditation is to achieve a state of awareness similar in nature to the awareness that our early ancestors might have experienced before the development of language, is just my own theory, but it makes sense to me based upon what I already understand from history.

I think it's fair to presume that people do not abandon their security and way of life in search of enlightenment without good reason. The reason appears to be usually a general dissatisfaction with their experiences of 'so-called' civilization with its constant conflicts and suffering.

This apparent nihilistic nature of Buddhism is perhaps not so much a rejection of life itself, with its unavoidable dukkha, but a striving to achieve a state of mind that might have been a common experience among early humans who lived prior to the creation of civilization, language and agriculture. In other words, a state of mind without thought or concept during a time when most humans were mainly vegetarian, calmly plucking fruit, nuts and leaves from the trees, and only occasionally eating meat.

A classic scientific view. I prefer to believe in the genetically engineered by aliens theory and do not believe we evolved from monkeys. Atlantis finally sunk about 12,000 years ago, but before that they had a worldwide meeting to discuss the troublesome and dangerous 'huge creatures' and what to do about them.

If the question was 'the ultimate purpose of meditation' then i would answer peace, bliss, or special attainments from jhana, since the vast majority of meditation techniques and styles practiced worldwide are all ultimately Samatha or concentration techniques. Shamans, witch doctors, yoga, yogis, various holy men types of meditation etc. throughout the ages all come into this category.

The Buddha himself, throughout his life before he reached enlightenment, and all the previous births as a Boddhisatta, only knew this type of meditation.

The ultimate purpose of Buddhist meditation, which only started after he taught about Nibbana and how to achieve it, is therefore Nibbana, and the only techniques which achieve it are based upon the Four Foundations of Mindfulness or Vipassana for short.

If one could practice Samatha and achieve the high jhanas and thence discover the concept of Nibbana and achieve it by oneself, without ever having heard of it before nor any of the Buddha's teachings, then there would be no need for Buddhas. Since the concept of Nibbana and how to achieve it is too profound for ordinary men to conceive, it only becomes available or possible after a Boddhisatta achieves Buddhahood and teaches this lost Dhamma. Once his Dhamma is lost to the world again, we must await the coming of another Buddha to be able to find the way to escape Samsara.

[trd]

The Jurassic period stretched from around 201 million years ago to 145.5 million years ago. The dinosaurs became extinct during the later Cretaceous period around 65 million years ago. It is thought that the extinction of the dinosaurs facilitated the gradual evolution of small, furry creatures into apes and humans, who might otherwise have been easy prey for the dinosaurs.

The earliest stone tools that appear to be hand-made with sharp edges have been dated at a mere 3.3 million years. The divergence from apes to human-like creatures walking on two legs, is estimated to have taken place around 6 million years ago. 150 million years is just a little bit off, wouldn't you say.

Recent DNA evidence has revealed that many modern humans share certain unique genetic characteristic with Neanderthal man, which implies that we and Neanderthal man were of the same species. Only creatures of the same species can interbreed. It has therefore been necessary to create a category of 'sub-species'. We are now officially Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and Neanderthal man is the extinct sub-species now known as Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis.

My suggestion that it might be the case that the goal of Buddhist meditation is to achieve a state of awareness similar in nature to the awareness that our early ancestors might have experienced before the development of language, is just my own theory, but it makes sense to me based upon what I already understand from history.

I think it's fair to presume that people do not abandon their security and way of life in search of enlightenment without good reason. The reason appears to be usually a general dissatisfaction with their experiences of 'so-called' civilization with its constant conflicts and suffering.

This apparent nihilistic nature of Buddhism is perhaps not so much a rejection of life itself, with its unavoidable dukkha, but a striving to achieve a state of mind that might have been a common experience among early humans who lived prior to the creation of civilization, language and agriculture. In other words, a state of mind without thought or concept during a time when most humans were mainly vegetarian, calmly plucking fruit, nuts and leaves from the trees, and only occasionally eating meat.

A classic scientific view. I prefer to believe in the genetically engineered by aliens theory and do not believe we evolved from monkeys. Atlantis finally sunk about 12,000 years ago, but before that they had a worldwide meeting to discuss the troublesome and dangerous 'huge creatures' and what to do about them.

If the question was 'the ultimate purpose of meditation' then i would answer peace, bliss, or special attainments from jhana, since the vast majority of meditation techniques and styles practiced worldwide are all ultimately Samatha or concentration techniques. Shamans, witch doctors, yoga, yogis, various holy men types of meditation etc. throughout the ages all come into this category.

The Buddha himself, throughout his life before he reached enlightenment, and all the previous births as a Boddhisatta, only knew this type of meditation.

The ultimate purpose of Buddhist meditation, which only started after he taught about Nibbana and how to achieve it, is therefore Nibbana, and the only techniques which achieve it are based upon the Four Foundations of Mindfulness or Vipassana for short.

If one could practice Samatha and achieve the high jhanas and thence discover the concept of Nibbana and achieve it by oneself, without ever having heard of it before nor any of the Buddha's teachings, then there would be no need for Buddhas. Since the concept of Nibbana and how to achieve it is too profound for ordinary men to conceive, it only becomes available or possible after a Boddhisatta achieves Buddhahood and teaches this lost Dhamma. Once his Dhamma is lost to the world again, we must await the coming of another Buddha to be able to find the way to escape Samsara.

So you know about Atlantis and evolution. You know what kind of meditation Buddha knew about. You await the coming of your Buddha God to save you. You think liberation hinges on a particular meditation technique. You talk of Jhanas but think awakening is too profound for ordinary men until your Buddha arrives again. You seem to know a lot.

Let me ask you, do you know what is happening right here, right now?

[nongai]

Trd .. you seem to have completely misunderstood my post.

I never said I await the coming of Buddha nor any god. I don't need to because his teaching is still available here and now. But, sometime in the future when his teaching is lost, there will be no knowledge of Nibbana or the path to attain it, until the next Buddha comes and re-discovers the lost Dhamma. Only a Buddha can re-discover the lost Dhamma because he has practiced and perfected himself for countless aeons as a Boddhisatta.

I only pass on the knowledge of my teahcers. I don't claim to know everything.

You seem to be upset....perhaps because I have no doubts and maybe you still have many such hinderances.

What do you mean ..what is happening right here and now? Please elucidate.

[trd]

Trd .. you seem to have completely misunderstood my post.

I never said I await the coming of Buddha nor any god. I don't need to because his teaching is still available here and now. But, sometime in the future when his teaching is lost, there will be no knowledge of Nibbana or the path to attain it, until the next Buddha comes and re-discovers the lost Dhamma. Only a Buddha can re-discover the lost Dhamma because he has practiced and perfected himself for countless aeons as a Boddhisatta.

I only pass on the knowledge of my teahcers. I don't claim to know everything.

You seem to be upset....perhaps because I have no doubts and maybe you still have many such hinderances.

What do you mean ..what is happening right here and now? Please elucidate.

You don't need Buddha for you to awaken. The Dhamma has always been here long before Buddha was born. The Dhamma is already what you are. It is only ignorance that prevents you from knowing it. If you are truly present to what you are right now in this present moment which is the only experience you can have, then that is all the scripture or Dhamma you would ever want. To be what you are is to be awake. Meditation can be a way to become and know the Buddha nature which you are already. Belief in all of these Buddhist mythologies won't help you.

[VincentRJ]

This apparent nihilistic nature of Buddhism is perhaps not so much a rejection of life itself, with its unavoidable dukkha, but a striving to achieve a state of mind that might have been a common experience among early humans who lived prior to the creation of civilization, language and agriculture. In other words, a state of mind without thought or concept

Buddhism is not about achieving a state of mind without thought or concept.

As I understand, there are various schools of Buddhism which describe Nirvana in different ways, but the general impression I get from these various descriptions is that Nirvana is an unconditioned state beyond space and time and beyond any precise definition, due to the inadequacy of language.

On the basis of such definitions, it does not seem credible or rational to me that it would be possible to have thoughts that are dependent upon language whilst in a state of nirvana.

The understanding of any language is dependent upon the conditioning of the person using the language. Each word in a language which is used and understood by a group of people, will have at least a slightly different meaning to each member of that group, and sometimes a significantly different meaning, according to each individual's unique conditioning and experiences. Words are full of connotations and associated experiences (or more precisely, the mind is full of connotations and experiences associated with each and every word).

Thinking by its very nature is a 'conditioned' process.

How is it possible to have a conditioned thought whilst in an unconditioned state? Please explain. Have you created a new category of thought which is independent of language, I wonder?

[VincentRJ]

The Jurassic period stretched from around 201 million years ago to 145.5 million years ago. The dinosaurs became extinct during the later Cretaceous period around 65 million years ago. It is thought that the extinction of the dinosaurs facilitated the gradual evolution of small, furry creatures into apes and humans, who might otherwise have been easy prey for the dinosaurs.

The earliest stone tools that appear to be hand-made with sharp edges have been dated at a mere 3.3 million years. The divergence from apes to human-like creatures walking on two legs, is estimated to have taken place around 6 million years ago. 150 million years is just a little bit off, wouldn't you say.

Recent DNA evidence has revealed that many modern humans share certain unique genetic characteristic with Neanderthal man, which implies that we and Neanderthal man were of the same species. Only creatures of the same species can interbreed. It has therefore been necessary to create a category of 'sub-species'. We are now officially Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and Neanderthal man is the extinct sub-species now known as Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis.

My suggestion that it might be the case that the goal of Buddhist meditation is to achieve a state of awareness similar in nature to the awareness that our early ancestors might have experienced before the development of language, is just my own theory, but it makes sense to me based upon what I already understand from history.

I think it's fair to presume that people do not abandon their security and way of life in search of enlightenment without good reason. The reason appears to be usually a general dissatisfaction with their experiences of 'so-called' civilization with its constant conflicts and suffering.

This apparent nihilistic nature of Buddhism is perhaps not so much a rejection of life itself, with its unavoidable dukkha, but a striving to achieve a state of mind that might have been a common experience among early humans who lived prior to the creation of civilization, language and agriculture. In other words, a state of mind without thought or concept during a time when most humans were mainly vegetarian, calmly plucking fruit, nuts and leaves from the trees, and only occasionally eating meat.

If the question was 'the ultimate purpose of meditation' then i would answer peace, bliss, or special attainments from jhana, since the vast majority of meditation techniques and styles practiced worldwide are all ultimately Samatha or concentration techniques. Shamans, witch doctors, yoga, yogis, various holy men types of meditation etc. throughout the ages all come into this category.

The Buddha himself, throughout his life before he reached enlightenment, and all the previous births as a Boddhisatta, only knew this type of meditation.

The ultimate purpose of Buddhist meditation, which only started after he taught about Nibbana and how to achieve it, is therefore Nibbana, and the only techniques which achieve it are based upon the Four Foundations of Mindfulness or Vipassana for short.

If one could practice Samatha and achieve the high jhanas and thence discover the concept of Nibbana and achieve it by oneself, without ever having heard of it before nor any of the Buddha's teachings, then there would be no need for Buddhas. Since the concept of Nibbana and how to achieve it is too profound for ordinary men to conceive, it only becomes available or possible after a Boddhisatta achieves Buddhahood and teaches this lost Dhamma. Once his Dhamma is lost to the world again, we must await the coming of another Buddha to be able to find the way to escape Samsara.

Such statements of yours above imply a massive degree of detailed knowledge of human history, which I don't believe anyone has. Before the Aryan invasion of India took place, around 1800 BCE, there already existed in India (and parts of what is now Pakistan and Afghanistan) a surprisingly advanced civilization called the Indus Valley or Harappan civilization. This civilization had an advanced agricultural system and well-planned cities with roads and drainage. The people appear to have been relatively peaceful with no evidence of conflicts among competing warlords. They did not have a caste system, which was later introduced by the Aryans, but they did appear to have a system of wandering ascetics in search of 'truth'. Ancient statues of Sadhu-like people sitting cross-legged, have been unearthed, implying that the path that Gautama took in search of enlightenment had been a well-established tradition in this civilization which existed between 3300–1300 BCE, which is 2800-800 years prior to the birth of Gautama.

We cannot assume that the Nirvana-like experiences of Gautama were unique. What is perhaps unique is the way Gautama's teachings were transformed into the religion of Buddhism, through the support of various kings. The fact that Gautama was the son of a local king or chieftain no doubt facilitated the promotion of Buddhism.

For all we know, during the 2,000 years or so of the Harappan civilization, there could have been many hundreds of ordinary people without any connections to high social status, who might have achieved similar states of enlightenment to Gautama. We just don't know about them. Even Gautama was initially doubtful about expressing his experiences of enlightenment. How doubtful would an ordinary person be?

Also, there's the problem that the Harappan civilization did not appear to have a functional written language. They did use a lot of pictographic symbols, but these have not yet been deciphered, so our knowledge of details and events during the period of their civilization is rather limited.

A classic scientific view. I prefer to believe in the genetically engineered by aliens theory and do not believe we evolved from monkeys. Atlantis finally sunk about 12,000 years ago, but before that they had a worldwide meeting to discuss the troublesome and dangerous 'huge creatures' and what to do about them.

Whereas I prefer to believe in things which are supported by evidence. However, I accept that you should be entitled to believe in any nonsense you like, provided it does not harm others.

[nongai]

You see Vincent there is a lot of conjecture in your post, but you happily write mine off as nonsense.

Trd writes off any scriptures he does not agree with as myths.

Too many egos here I think.

I express an opinion and get attacked for it. Is this a private argument thread between certain long-standing members... and everyone else butt out?

Edited May 21, 2016 by nongai

[trd]

You see Vincent there is a lot of conjecture in your post, but you happily write mine off as nonsense.

Trd writes off any scriptures he does not agree with as myths.

Too many egos here I think.

I express an opinion and get attacked for it. Is this a private argument thread between certain long-standing members... and everyone else butt out?

Do you seriously think you are being attacked? Perhaps you need to look at your own ego first and find out where this reactivity comes from.

[nongai]

You don't need Buddha for you to awaken. The Dhamma has always been here long before Buddha was born. The Dhamma is already what you are. It is only ignorance that prevents you from knowing it. If you are truly present to what you are right now in this present moment which is the only experience you can have, then that is all the scripture or Dhamma you would ever want. To be what you are is to be awake. Meditation can be a way to become and know the Buddha nature which you are already. Belief in all of these Buddhist mythologies won't help you.

Who says that attainment of Nibbana can be achieved without ever having heard the Dhamma of a Buddha which describes the 4NT & 8FP? Those Dhammas are unknown until realised and taught by Buddhas.

The truth always exists and is always true, but is unknown or misunderstood because of ignorance. Nibbana, the state, and how to achieve it, can only be realised by Buddhas who have nobody to teach it to them. They are self taught, self realised. They are able to achieve this because of the ages they spend perfecting themselves as Boddhisattas. We can understand and achieve it after hearing their teachings, but we cannot realise it without the lost dhamma being taught by a Buddha.

This is why Buddhas are so rare and precious, and why human rebirth at a time when a Buddha's teachings are still extant is also rare and precious.

For vast periods of time between Buddhas when the true Dhamma has been lost to the knowledge and understanding of humans there is no chance to attain to any of the four noble states and thus Nibbana.

[Brucenkhamen]

As I understand, there are various schools of Buddhism which describe Nirvana in different ways, but the general impression I get from these various descriptions is that Nirvana is an unconditioned state beyond space and time and beyond any precise definition, due to the inadequacy of language.

Please post an example of the Buddha describing of Nibbana as being beyond space and time. Your discussions sure seem cyclic in nature as I said before I think you are relying too much on folk Buddhism. Here are some examples of how the Buddha is recorded as having described it...

When, brahmin, one experiences the remainderless destruction of lust, the remainderless destruction of hatred, and the remainderless destruction of delusion, it is in this way, too, that nibbāna is directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise. - AN 3.55

There is, monks, an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned. If, monks there were not that unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, you could not know an escape here from the born, become, made, and conditioned. But because there is an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, therefore you do know an escape from the born, become, made, and conditioned. - Ud 8.3

All foolish individuals, O king, take pleasure in The senses and in the objects of sense, find delight in them, continue to cleave to them. Hence are they carried down by that flood (of human passions), they are not set free from birth, old age, and death, from grief, lamentation, pain, sorrow, and despairthey are not set free, I say, from suffering. But the wise, O king, the disciple of the noble ones, neither takes pleasure in those things, nor finds delight in them, nor continues cleaving to them. And inasmuch as he does not, in him craving ceases, and by the cessation of craving grasping ceases, and by the cessation of grasping becoming ceases, and when becoming has ceased birth ceases, and with its cessation birth, old age, and death, grief, lamentation, pain, sorrow, and despair cease to exist. Thus is the cessation brought about, the end of all that aggregation of pain. Thus is it that cessation is Nirvāṇa. - Mil 3.4 8

Would you like more?

On the basis of such definitions, it does not seem credible or rational to me that it would be possible to have thoughts that are dependent upon language whilst in a state of nirvana.

Thats just your conjecture and quite ridiculous in my opinion, how would an enlightened person then complete their tax return, arrange travel, decide what to have for dinner without using thought?

The understanding of any language is dependent upon the conditioning of the person using the language. Each word in a language which is used and understood by a group of people, will have at least a slightly different meaning to each member of that group, and sometimes a significantly different meaning, according to each individual's unique conditioning and experiences. Words are full of connotations and associated experiences (or more precisely, the mind is full of connotations and experiences associated with each and every word).

Thinking by its very nature is a 'conditioned' process.

How is it possible to have a conditioned thought whilst in an unconditioned state? Please explain. Have you created a new category of thought which is independent of language, I wonder?

Thats a good point, understanding of language is conditioned. Of course thought does not necessarily have to use language though, often its superfluous.

However you seem to be assuming that once enlightened everything about that persons existence is unconditioned. Unconditioned I believe refers to the state itself only, the state of awakening is no longer conditioned and supports itself without further conditioning.

[TuskegeeBen]

Excuse me, I remain in pursuit of the "meditation" practices, leading to more evolved human enlightenment.

However, since the topic thread has developed it's own evolutionary process, I'm curious to know if there was a fundamental (tool-making, veggie-gathering, hunter) species of "human beings" present, even during the "Jurassic" period of Earth's history; and that, despite the hugely proliferated presence of the Dienonychus during that same time frame ??? R.S.V.P.

Note: That question was fielded, at the family dinner table, by my 14-year young daughter, in 1996.

I certainly hope you were able to provide an edifying response for your daughter's benefit.

The Jurassic period stretched from around 201 million years ago to 145.5 million years ago. The dinosaurs became extinct during the later Cretaceous period around 65 million years ago. It is thought that the extinction of the dinosaurs facilitated the gradual evolution of small, furry creatures into apes and humans, who might otherwise have been easy prey for the dinosaurs.

The earliest stone tools that appear to be hand-made with sharp edges have been dated at a mere 3.3 million years. The divergence from apes to human-like creatures walking on two legs, is estimated to have taken place around 6 million years ago. 150 million years is just a little bit off, wouldn't you say.

Recent DNA evidence has revealed that many modern humans share certain unique genetic characteristic with Neanderthal man, which implies that we and Neanderthal man were of the same species. Only creatures of the same species can interbreed. It has therefore been necessary to create a category of 'sub-species'. We are now officially Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and Neanderthal man is the extinct sub-species now known as Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis.

My suggestion that it might be the case that the goal of Buddhist meditation is to achieve a state of awareness similar in nature to the awareness that our early ancestors might have experienced before the development of language, is just my own theory, but it makes sense to me based upon what I already understand from history.

I think it's fair to presume that people do not abandon their security and way of life in search of enlightenment without good reason. The reason appears to be usually a general dissatisfaction with their experiences of 'so-called' civilization with its constant conflicts and suffering.

This apparent nihilistic nature of Buddhism is perhaps not so much a rejection of life itself, with its unavoidable dukkha, but a striving to achieve a state of mind that might have been a common experience among early humans who lived prior to the creation of civilization, language and agriculture. In other words, a state of mind without thought or concept during a time when most humans were mainly vegetarian, calmly plucking fruit, nuts and leaves from the trees, and only occasionally eating meat.

Sigh! It was a very simple answer (provided not by me), to a simple, and straight-forward, question, asked by my 14-year young grand-daughter, instead.

The (no BS verbose) edifying response, to that very simple question, was "no-way", and the general concensus of considered round-table opinions!

Adios, VincentRJ. Sadly, you sir, are truly, one boring bloke! Whew!

Edited May 22, 2016 by TuskegeeBen

[TuskegeeBen]

Excuse me, I remain in pursuit of the "meditation" practices, leading to more evolved human enlightenment.

However, since the topic thread has developed it's own evolutionary process, I'm curious to know if there was a fundamental (tool-making, veggie-gathering, hunter) species of "human beings" present, even during the "Jurassic" period of Earth's history; and that, despite the hugely proliferated presence of the Dienonychus during that same time frame ??? R.S.V.P.

Note: That question was fielded, at the family dinner table, by my 14-year young daughter, in 1996.

I certainly hope you were able to provide an edifying response for your daughter's benefit.

The Jurassic period stretched from around 201 million years ago to 145.5 million years ago. The dinosaurs became extinct during the later Cretaceous period around 65 million years ago. It is thought that the extinction of the dinosaurs facilitated the gradual evolution of small, furry creatures into apes and humans, who might otherwise have been easy prey for the dinosaurs.

The earliest stone tools that appear to be hand-made with sharp edges have been dated at a mere 3.3 million years. The divergence from apes to human-like creatures walking on two legs, is estimated to have taken place around 6 million years ago. 150 million years is just a little bit off, wouldn't you say.

Recent DNA evidence has revealed that many modern humans share certain unique genetic characteristic with Neanderthal man, which implies that we and Neanderthal man were of the same species. Only creatures of the same species can interbreed. It has therefore been necessary to create a category of 'sub-species'. We are now officially Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and Neanderthal man is the extinct sub-species now known as Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis.

My suggestion that it might be the case that the goal of Buddhist meditation is to achieve a state of awareness similar in nature to the awareness that our early ancestors might have experienced before the development of language, is just my own theory, but it makes sense to me based upon what I already understand from history.

I think it's fair to presume that people do not abandon their security and way of life in search of enlightenment without good reason. The reason appears to be usually a general dissatisfaction with their experiences of 'so-called' civilization with its constant conflicts and suffering.

This apparent nihilistic nature of Buddhism is perhaps not so much a rejection of life itself, with its unavoidable dukkha, but a striving to achieve a state of mind that might have been a common experience among early humans who lived prior to the creation of civilization, language and agriculture. In other words, a state of mind without thought or concept during a time when most humans were mainly vegetarian, calmly plucking fruit, nuts and leaves from the trees, and only occasionally eating meat.

Sigh! It was a very simple answer (provided not by me), to a simple, and straight-forward, question, asked by my 14-year young grand-daughter, instead.

The (no BS verbose) edifying response, to that very simple question, was "no-way", and the general concensus of considered round-table opinions!

Adios, VincentRJ. Sadly, you sir, are truly, one boring bloke! Whew!

However, for the purposes of purely "academic" debate, that concurrent time-frame presence of humanoids, would have been nothing more than a readily available food source, that Deinonychus would have rendered totally extinct, all things of even Neanderthals considered. So much for edifications, re: a phenomenon called "reality"!

Edited May 22, 2016 by TuskegeeBen