//Visuddhimagga// (Chap. XIX):
Everywhere, in all the realms of existence, the noble disciple
sees only mental and corporeal phenomena kept going through the
concatenation of causes and effects. No producer of the
volitional act or kamma does he see apart from the kamma, no
recipient of the kamma-result apart from the result. And he is
well aware that wise men are using merely conventional language,
when, with regard to a kammical act, they speak of a doer, or
with regard to a kamma-result, they speak of the recipient of the
result.
No doer of the deeds is found,
No one who ever reaps their fruits;
Empty phenomena roll on:
This only is the correct view.
And while the deeds and their results
Roll on and on, conditioned all,
There is no first beginning found,
Just as it is with seed and tree. ...
No god, no Brahma, can be called
The maker of this wheel of life:
Empty phenomena roll on,
Dependent on conditions all.
For example, simple minded people may think that 'God' was the one that made almost 300 people die in the recent air crash in Ukraine. As Buddha said -- if these suffering was made by God, then that God must surely be very evil. There is no such God that controls or makes things. Nor is there a 'Self' that is acting as an agent or controller of everything. Everything manifests due to dependent origination. The very idea of a creator, or creation, or agency, or Self, is a false, naive way of thinking. The thinking that everything happened randomly is even more naive and foolish.
The air crash happened because:
1) It happened to be flying in East Ukrainian airspace
2) East Ukraine (like Crimea) population makeup is mostly Russian -- their allegiance mostly lies with the Kremlin rather than with Kiev. The rebels wish to join Russia.
3) A civil war was going on
4) There was recent efforts by Ukrainian government to increase military skirmish to retake Ukrainian lands from the rebels
5) Vladimir Putin was under pressure to give support to the pro-Russian separatists under strain in recent developments, as he has vested interests or agenda to exert control over Eastern Europe, therefore, he sent very advanced surface to air missiles to the rebels, and trained them to use it
6) His agenda was based on perceived Western nations trying to gang up against Russia and taking all its former soviet colonies into a hostile EU. Plus, he wants to regain former glory of Russia in Soviet Times as a powerful empire
7) The pro-Russian separatists mistaken the airplane for a Ukrainian airplane -- they have shot down a few other Ukrainian military aircrafts in the previous days
8) The collective karma of the passengers
This is just making the dependencies sound simple. It is actually much more complex and intricate than that. If any of these conditions were lacking, the air disaster could not have happened. There is no single creator, or origin, for the disaster.
It is very easy if we do not see dependent origination to push all the blame to one single person or origin or source, for example, Russia or Vladimir Putin. This is why the view of a 'Source', 'Origin' or 'Inherent Existence' causes affliction. For example, the view that the origin of this disaster can be pinned down to Putin or Russia causes great anger or hatred against him. If I were not a practitioner, I might be very angry at Russia or Vladimir Putin now. But because I practice the dharma and see the dharma of dependent origination, I only see impersonal processes of dependencies, there is no anger. None of it is personal, but due to dependent origination things happen.
Let us pray for all those victims of this vast chain of interdependencies. May all victims be well and happy and take a fortunate birth.
Originally posted by Bio-Hawk:Thanks for this. Makes sense in many ways.However though i still don't understand why it is so?For example every action has a reaction,why?Who made it like this?there re many realms where ghosts to gods live each seperated,how did it come?All of this by random?
Presumably these questions are a curious approach to the analysis of perception, discursive thought and of the phenomena of mental processes.
No object is permanent, and the subtle impermanence of things is such that an object must be changing every instant. As consciousness is triggered by the object, there are as many instants of consciousness as of states of the impermanent object. In terms of relative truth, each instant of consciousness is born from contact with an object triggering a perception. You could say that there's a subject for each object, at each moment of perception. Despite an apparent continuity, perception and discursive thought arise and cease in each instant. However, in the final analysis, even in the present moment, consciousness doesn't exist as an independent and distinct entity. Rather, consider it as a flow or a continuity made up of ephemeral instants that have no individual existence. It is said only 'awareness', which transcends discursive thoughts, never changes, because it is beyond time...
This idea of the instant-by-instant impermanence of phenomena, and the mind, goes a long way, because it shows that if there were even one single, fixed, permanent, intrinsically existing entity in the phenomenal world, consciousness would remain as if stuck to that object, and would be prolonged indefinitely. In the end, all the consciousnesses in the world would find themselves trapped by that object, and wouldn't be able to detach themselves from it. It's the presence of the subtle impermanence that leads Buddhism to compare the phenomenal world to a dream or an illusion, to an ever-changing and ungraspable flux. Even things that seem solid to us, like a table, are changing every instant. The stream of our thoughts is also made up of infinitesimally short instants triggered by each of the infinitesimally tiny changes in the world outside. It is only through the aggregation of these instants that gives one the impression of gross approximation/gross reality.
For example, when you perceive an object, even a simple one, a blue square for instance, you can distinguish the area of the square, its corners, it sides, and so on. These several elements are all perceived integrally as a sqaure. Now, is there an instantaneous overall perception of the object with all its components, or does it happen rather through a rapid succession of brief instants of awareness of each detail of the object, assembled into an integrated image - like when you swing a torch rapidly around in a circle at arm's length and see a circle of light, even though it's actually composed of mulitple perceptions of a point of light in continuous movement?
Greek philosphers, including Plato, took the view that we cannot know anything that moves or undergoes change. For them, phenomenon - the Greek word, which means 'that which appears', the world of apperances - being in a state of permanent motion, cannot be the object of any stable, certain, definite knowledge. Hence the efforts of ancient and modern Western philosphy to find behind the phenomenon some permanent and stable element that could be the object of definite knowledge. The model for such stability was supplied by mathmatics, which at the starting point of Western thought was the first model that completely satisfied conceptual thought. As such, the principles behind phenomena and governing them were sought. To escape from the chaotic motion of the phenomenal world, the structures behind it need to be identified. These are the relationships of cause and effect, which subsequently evolved into the 'laws' of cause and effect.
Towards this end, Buddhism accepts perfectly that the phenomenal world is governed inescapably by the laws of cause and effect. However, neither these 'laws' nor the phenomena they govern are permanent, autonomous entities that exist in themselves. Nothing at all exists by itself and in itself; everything appears through the play of the interdependence of causes and conditions. For instance, the law of gravity doesn't exist in itself, in the absence of objects. A rock is composed of atoms, which are themselves equivalent to energy. A rainbow is formed by the play of a shaft of sunlight falling on a cloud of raindrops. It appears, yes, but it's intangible. As soon as one of the factors contributing to it is missing, the phenomenon disappears. So the 'rainbow' has no inherent nature of its own, and you can't speak of the dissolution or annihilation of something that didn't exist in the first place. That 'something' only owed its illusory appearance to a transitory coming together of elements which aren't intrinsically existing entities themselves, either.
All phenomena are certainly the result of a combination of transitory factors. Knowledge of phenomena can only come through the mind, and it's a metaphysical choice that science makes when it states that with the help of our concepts we can discover the ultimate nature of a phenomenal world that exists independently of our concepts. Conversely, Buddhism would say, in essence, that whatever the nature of a reality independent of the mind conceiving it might be, that reality will forever be inaccessible to us. Furthermore, one could say that in the absence of human beings, reality as human beings perceive it would cease to be.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:The air crash happened because:
1) It happened to be flying in East Ukrainian airspace
2) East Ukraine (like Crimea) population makeup is mostly Russian -- their allegiance mostly lies with the Kremlin rather than with Kiev. The rebels wish to join Russia.
3) A civil war was going on
4) There was recent efforts by Ukrainian government to increase military skirmish to retake Ukrainian lands from the rebels
5) Vladimir Putin was under pressure to give support to the pro-Russian separatists under strain in recent developments, as he has vested interests or agenda to exert control over Eastern Europe, therefore, he sent very advanced surface to air missiles to the rebels, and trained them to use it
6) His agenda was based on perceived Western nations trying to gang up against Russia and taking all its former soviet colonies into a hostile EU. Plus, he wants to regain former glory of Russia in Soviet Times as a powerful empire
7) The pro-Russian separatists mistaken the airplane for a Ukrainian airplane -- they have shot down a few other Ukrainian military aircrafts in the previous days
8) The collective karma of the passengers
Was this not caused because of Karma?If the missile had missed would a malfunction of plane have killed them?What aboutpeople who missed this flight or shouldn't have beenbutwas on?Karma guided each of them to this very specific moment?If so none of them had the free will to change their destiny.NO?
Originally posted by AtlasWept:Presumably these questions are a curious approach to the analysis of perception, discursive thought and of the phenomena of mental processes.
No object is permanent, and the subtle impermanence of things is such that an object must be changing every instant. As consciousness is triggered by the object, there are as many instants of consciousness as of states of the impermanent object. In terms of relative truth, each instant of consciousness is born from contact with an object triggering a perception. You could say that there's a subject for each object, at each moment of perception. Despite an apparent continuity, perception and discursive thought arise and cease in each instant. However, in the final analysis, even in the present moment, consciousness doesn't exist as an independent and distinct entity. Rather, consider it as a flow or a continuity made up of ephemeral instants that have no individual existence. It is said only 'awareness', which transcends discursive thoughts, never changes, because it is beyond time...
This idea of the instant-by-instant impermanence of phenomena, and the mind, goes a long way, because it shows that if there were even one single, fixed, permanent, intrinsically existing entity in the phenomenal world, consciousness would remain as if stuck to that object, and would be prolonged indefinitely. In the end, all the consciousnesses in the world would find themselves trapped by that object, and wouldn't be able to detach themselves from it. It's the presence of the subtle impermanence that leads Buddhism to compare the phenomenal world to a dream or an illusion, to an ever-changing and ungraspable flux. Even things that seem solid to us, like a table, are changing every instant. The stream of our thoughts is also made up of infinitesimally short instants triggered by each of the infinitesimally tiny changes in the world outside. It is only through the aggregation of these instants that gives one the impression of gross approximation/gross reality.
For example, when you perceive an object, even a simple one, a blue square for instance, you can distinguish the area of the square, its corners, it sides, and so on. These several elements are all perceived integrally as a sqaure. Now, is there an instantaneous overall perception of the object with all its components, or does it happen rather through a rapid succession of brief instants of awareness of each detail of the object, assembled into an integrated image - like when you swing a torch rapidly around in a circle at arm's length and see a circle of light, even though it's actually composed of mulitple perceptions of a point of light in continuous movement?
Greek philosphers, including Plato, took the view that we cannot know anything that moves or undergoes change. For them, phenomenon - the Greek word, which means 'that which appears', the world of apperances - being in a state of permanent motion, cannot be the object of any stable, certain, definite knowledge. Hence the efforts of ancient and modern Western philosphy to find behind the phenomenon some permanent and stable element that could be the object of definite knowledge. The model for such stability was supplied by mathmatics, which at the starting point of Western thought was the first model that completely satisfied conceptual thought. As such, the principles behind phenomena and governing them were sought. To escape from the chaotic motion of the phenomenal world, the structures behind it need to be identified. These are the relationships of cause and effect, which subsequently evolved into the 'laws' of cause and effect.
Towards this end, Buddhism accepts perfectly that the phenomenal world is governed inescapably by the laws of cause and effect. However, neither these 'laws' nor the phenomena they govern are permanent, autonomous entities that exist in themselves. Nothing at all exists by itself and in itself; everything appears through the play of the interdependence of causes and conditions. For instance, the law of gravity doesn't exist in itself, in the absence of objects. A rock is composed of atoms, which are themselves equivalent to energy. A rainbow is formed by the play of a shaft of sunlight falling on a cloud of raindrops. It appears, yes, but it's intangible. As soon as one of the factors contributing to it is missing, the phenomenon disappears. So the 'rainbow' has no inherent nature of its own, and you can't speak of the dissolution or annihilation of something that didn't exist in the first place. That 'something' only owed its illusory appearance to a transitory coming together of elements which aren't intrinsically existing entities themselves, either.
All phenomena are certainly the result of a combination of transitory factors. Knowledge of phenomena can only come through the mind, and it's a metaphysical choice that science makes when it states that with the help of our concepts we can discover the ultimate nature of a phenomenal world that exists independently of our concepts. Conversely, Buddhism would say, in essence, that whatever the nature of a reality independent of the mind conceiving it might be, that reality will forever be inaccessible to us. Furthermore, one could say that in the absence of human beings, reality as human beings perceive it would cease to be.
This doesn't explain how a samsara came into existence ver well designed with different realms, cycleof re-births,possibility to escape it as a human etc. I still cannot understand what is Karma? And why it cannot be negated? IF I caused one pain and I hurt myself,would this cancel each other?If not why?
From what i learned in Buddhsim so far the purpose of life is to achieve Nirvana, which is negating myself.However this can only be acquired via meditating,living well etc. There are some levels well presented by Eternalnow of which after reaching a high level,wait for existing Karma to act on you and then one reaches Mahaparinirvana when all is finished. Very noble but also sounds a bit silly that if this is really the purpose of life one is not by default aware of this,such as need for food expressed by hunger.
Originally posted by Bio-Hawk:Was this not caused because of Karma?If the missile had missed would a malfunction of plane have killed them?What aboutpeople who missed this flight or shouldn't have beenbutwas on?Karma guided each of them to this very specific moment?If so none of them had the free will to change their destiny.NO?
Karma is one of the causes. Karma needs to meet secondary conditions in order to ripen. If a missile had missed I suspect their karma would ripen in some other ways in the future. People who missed the flight may not be sharing the collective karma. It is hard to say how karma has influenced their decisions to take that flight. Karma is one of the four imponderables -- it is too complex, only the Buddha can know it in all its full details.
If one practices dharma, then like Angulimala who killed 999 people -- still one can achieve Nirvana in that life. So yes karma is not fixed. Angulimala had to suffer some ripening karma in his life (receive little alms, feared by others, etc), but it is nothing compared to the aeons in hell he may have to spend if he did not meet with the Dharma.
Originally posted by Bio-Hawk:This doesn't explain how a samsara came into existence ver well designed with different realms, cycleof re-births,possibility to escape it as a human etc. I still cannot understand what is Karma? And why it cannot be negated? IF I caused one pain and I hurt myself,would this cancel each other?If not why?
From what i learned in Buddhsim so far the purpose of life is to achieve Nirvana, which is negating myself.However this can only be acquired via meditating,living well etc. There are some levels well presented by Eternalnow of which after reaching a high level,wait for existing Karma to act on you and then one reaches Mahaparinirvana when all is finished. Very noble but also sounds a bit silly that if this is really the purpose of life one is not by default aware of this,such as need for food expressed by hunger.
I am most grateful for your tenacity and continued dedication towards this end. I have heard it said that existence is the congruency of the human world, and that the facilitation of existence is the driving force behind the activities of the mind and body.
From a certain point of view and definement, what is called samsara, the 'vicious circle of the world of existences', which is bore, maintained and propelled by any and all measure of ignorance, is a world of suffering, distraction and confusion. Therefore, in this manner of contemplation, existence, the notion of existence through acknowledgment of dependent phenomena, the acknowledgment of ego, of I, past, present and future, is the well-spring from which all samsara manifests. Yet, samsara is no more than an illusory manfestation, an illusory aggregated effect, caused by the concatenation of wrong view, action, speech, and so forth.
It is here where we wander endlessly, impelled by the force of our actions, called karma. Actions, once they've been carried out, will eventually bring their results and propel us into other states of existence; moment by moment, life by life. Nevertheless, all living things possess within themselves the potential to become Buddha, or in other words to attain perfect liberation and wisdom, 'enlightenment'. Everything that veils that potential and prevents it expressing itself is only adventitious and ephermeral. The veils are called 'ignorance' or 'mental obscurations'.
Therefore, the spiritual path consists of freeing oneself from ignorance and, in so doing, actualizing the perfection that's already present within us. The motivation that makes us progress on the spiritual path is the idea of transforming ourselves to be able to help others be free of suffering. Through this altruistic point of view, we first acknowledge our impotence in the face of others' suffering, and then give rise to the wish to perfect ourselves in order to be able to do something about it. It's far from an indifference to the world. Invulnerability to the ravages of outer circumstances becomes the armor in which we clad ourselves for the battle to deliver others from suffering.
The goal isn't to get out of the world, it's to no longer be enslaved to it. It's not a matter of dissolving into some state of extinction, but of discovering ultimate wisdom within oneself. The world in itself isn't what's bad, it's the way we perceive it that is mistaken. I have heard it said, 'It is not appearances that will bind you, it's your attachment to appearances.'
the only way to stop hatred and war or fight is to return and re-act with compassion, love, caring, forgiveness and forget...
but how to forgive our enemy from inside? this is a very big endless education...
people might not agree but this is the way we should...
hahaha just my crazy thought
Originally posted by AtlasWept:I am most grateful for your tenacity and continued dedication towards this end. I have heard it said that existence is the congruency of the human world, and that the facilitation of existence is the driving force behind the activities of the mind and body.
From a certain point of view and definement, what is called samsara, the 'vicious circle of the world of existences', which is bore, maintained and propelled by any and all measure of ignorance, is a world of suffering, distraction and confusion. Therefore, in this manner of contemplation, existence, the notion of existence through acknowledgment of dependent phenomena, the acknowledgment of ego, of I, past, present and future, is the well-spring from which all samsara manifests. Yet, samsara is no more than an illusory manfestation, an illusory aggregated effect, caused by the concatenation of wrong view, action, speech, and so forth.
It is here where we wander endlessly, impelled by the force of our actions, called karma. Actions, once they've been carried out, will eventually bring their results and propel us into other states of existence; moment by moment, life by life. Nevertheless, all living things possess within themselves the potential to become Buddha, or in other words to attain perfect liberation and wisdom, 'enlightenment'. Everything that veils that potential and prevents it expressing itself is only adventitious and ephermeral. The veils are called 'ignorance' or 'mental obscurations'.
Therefore, the spiritual path consists of freeing oneself from ignorance and, in so doing, actualizing the perfection that's already present within us. The motivation that makes us progress on the spiritual path is the idea of transforming ourselves to be able to help others be free of suffering. Through this altruistic point of view, we first acknowledge our impotence in the face of others' suffering, and then give rise to the wish to perfect ourselves in order to be able to do something about it. It's far from an indifference to the world. Invulnerability to the ravages of outer circumstances becomes the armor in which we clad ourselves for the battle to deliver others from suffering.
The goal isn't to get out of the world, it's to no longer be enslaved to it. It's not a matter of dissolving into some state of extinction, but of discovering ultimate wisdom within oneself. The world in itself isn't what's bad, it's the way we perceive it that is mistaken. I have heard it said, 'It is not appearances that will bind you, it's your attachment to appearances.'
Thanks for the answer,on which I was reflecting on the last few days.This has led to more questions and I hope they could be answered as well.
Why is the real purpose of life to achieve wisdom within oneself from this enticing samsara where one is compelled to go in different births in realms without any knowledge? And how was this real purpose discovered?If this is indeed the real purpose, why is this not innate to beings like hunger for example?To a practical mind like mine it seems kind of punishment where un aware existences go on in their cycle.
Leaving aside the creation of Samsara as imponderable,I still don't get the Buddhist view on souls. I can imagine everything physical being nothing,if this universe originated in Big Bang from a very small'thing' and most of space in atom is empty. But for spirituality its beyond my mind.I read in a book recently Buddha didn't deny the existence of souls but taught they are too illusory. Is it the terminology(not soul but called mindstream) that doesn't exist in buddhism or the concept?Where did this mindstream which forms the basis of life come from?IS it when this leaves the body a being is dead? And according to buddhism since this is not the same when it leaves a body and goes to next, it is not the same thing.Which brings the question how does Karma gets carried on and redeemed if the same mind stream doesn't go to another body.
I read some books about journey of souls how they leave the body, go to a place where they review their past lives,make resolution for future and accept their life of learning. This was discovered by past life regression,though I can't say it's true,I have to say it makes sense if one believes in soul. In parallel I saw a video about Tibetean Buddhism speaking of Bardos after death leading to a new one. After the judgement stage a soul is shown many couples making love and it choses one of them. This to me seems like a soul as it is described in Hinduism or Sikhim or by Sufis. But then Buddhist says, soul doesn't exist.
Please explain.
Any to answer the above queries?
"And how was this
real purpose discovered?"
When people like Shakyamuni realized the suffering of birth, sickness, ageing and death, and other kinds of suffering. Have you read the story of how Buddha started out his path?
Then for his students: either due to suffering, or other reasons, or meeting with the teaching and pondering on it, etc.
"If this is indeed the real purpose, why is
this not innate to beings like hunger for example?"
Sentient beings are short sighted. Hunger has a short term solution: just grab some food. Then hunger is appeased for a few hours. For human beings, we only seek short term solution to suffering: when painful, take aspirin. When bored, watch TV. When sad, drink alcohol. We drown ourselves with sensual stimulation as a means to appease our suffering. We do not know any higher way out. Buddhism offers this way... by letting us gain wisdom into the true nature of things as they are, we release suffering completely, forever, and attain the highest peace and bliss of Nirvana.
"I still
don't get the Buddhist view on souls"
The Buddhist view is that there is no soul. But there is a stream of dependently originated series of moments of consciousness. This is why there is rebirth, but not the passing on of a soul from one body to another. The new moment of consciousness being born is neither the same nor different from the previous moment of consciousness conventionally labelled 'the previous lifetime', but like a candle lighting another candle, the new moment of consciousness is dependently originated based on the previous moment of rebirth-consciousness/karma/etc.
Having said that there is no soul, there is nonetheless an intermediate body which is called the antarabhava in Mahayana Buddhism or the rebirth-consciousness in Theravada Buddhism. It should be noted however, that this antarabhava is also empty of a truly existing soul or self, and is merely an aggregate of psycho-mental activities -- "Antar�bhava-skandha, means the five aggregates of a being in the bardo [antar�bhava]."
The Buddha rejects self-view of soul/consciousness being passed on from lifetime to lifetime. Read http://www.leighb.com/mn38.htm :
Then the Blessed One addressed a certain bhikkhu and said, "Come bhikkhu, in my name, call the bhikkhu Sati, tell him the Teacher wants him." That bhikkhu consented and approached the bhikkhu Sati and told him, "Friend, the Teacher wants you." The bhikkhu Sati said "Yes, friend" and approached the Blessed One, paid homage and sat to one side.
Then the Blessed One said: "Sati, is it true, that such an pernicious view has arisen to you. ‘As I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else’?"
"Yes, venerable sir, as I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else."
"Sati, what is that consciousness?"
"Venerable sir, it is that which feels and experiences, that which reaps the results of good and evil actions done here and there."
"Foolish man, to whom do you know me having taught the Dhamma like this. Haven’t I taught, in various ways that consciousness is dependently arisen. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness. Yet you, foolish man, on account of your wrong view, you misrepresent me, as well as destroy yourself and accumulate much demerit, for which you will suffer for a long time."
Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus: "Bhikkhus, what do you think, has this this bhikkhu Sati, son of a fisherman, learned anything from this dispensation?" "No, venerable sir."
When this was said the bhikkhu Sati became silent, unable to reply back, and sat with drooping shoulders and eyes turned down. Then the Blessed One, knowing that the bhikkhu Sati had become silent, unable to reply back, and was sitting with drooping shoulders and with eyes turned down, told him: "Foolish man, you will be known on account of this pernicious view; now I will question the bhikkhus on this."
Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus: "Bhikkhus, do you too know of this Teaching, the wrong view of the bhikkhu Sati, the son of a fisherman, on account of which he misrepresents us and also destroys himself and accumulates much suffering?"
"No, venerable sir. In various ways we have been taught that consciousness arises dependently. Without a cause there is no arising of consciousness."
"Good, bhikkhus! Good that you know the Dhamma taught by me. In various ways I have taught that consciousness arises dependently. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness. Yet, this bhikkhu Sati, son of a fisherman, by holding to this wrong view, misrepresents us and destroys himself and accumulates much demerit, and it will be for his suffering for a long time.
"Bhikkhus, consciousness is reckoned by the condition dependent upon which it arises. If consciousness arises on account of eye and forms, it is reckoned as eye consciousness. If on account of ear and sounds it arises, it is reckoned as ear consciousness. If on account of nose and smells it arises, it is reckoned as nose consciousness. If on account of tongue and tastes it arises, it is reckoned as tongue consciousness. If on account of body and touch it arises, it is reckoned as body consciousness. If on account of mind and mind-objects it arises, it is reckoned as mind consciousness. Bhikkhus, just as a fire is reckoned based on whatever that fire burns - fire ablaze on sticks is a stick fire, fire ablaze on twigs is a twig fire, fire ablaze on grass is a grass fire, fire ablaze on cowdung is a cowdung fire, fire ablaze on grain thrash is a grain thrash fire, fire ablaze on rubbish is a rubbish fire - so too is consciousness reckoned by the condition dependent upon which it arises. In the same manner consciousness arisen on account is eye and forms is eye consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of ear and sounds is ear consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of nose and smells is nose consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of tongue and tastes is taste consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of body and touch is body consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of mind and mind-objects is mind consciousness.
"Bhikkhus, do you see, This has arisen?" "Yes, venerable sir". "Do you see it arises supported by That?" "Yes, venerable sir." "Bhikkhus, Do you see if the support ceases, the arising too ceases?" "Yes, venerable sir."
all is correct in ones ... all act is kind, everything is kind ... 。。。。
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:"And how was this real purpose discovered?"
When people like Shakyamuni realized the suffering of birth, sickness, ageing and death, and other kinds of suffering. Have you read the story of how Buddha started out his path?
Then for his students: either due to suffering, or other reasons, or meeting with the teaching and pondering on it, etc.
"If this is indeed the real purpose, why is this not innate to beings like hunger for example?"
Sentient beings are short sighted. Hunger has a short term solution: just grab some food. Then hunger is appeased for a few hours. For human beings, we only seek short term solution to suffering: when painful, take aspirin. When bored, watch TV. When sad, drink alcohol. We drown ourselves with sensual stimulation as a means to appease our suffering. We do not know any higher way out. Buddhism offers this way... by letting us gain wisdom into the true nature of things as they are, we release suffering completely, forever, and attain the highest peace and bliss of Nirvana.
"I still don't get the Buddhist view on souls"
The Buddhist view is that there is no soul. But there is a stream of dependently originated series of moments of consciousness. This is why there is rebirth, but not the passing on of a soul from one body to another. The new moment of consciousness being born is neither the same nor different from the previous moment of consciousness conventionally labelled 'the previous lifetime', but like a candle lighting another candle, the new moment of consciousness is dependently originated based on the previous moment of rebirth-consciousness/karma/etc.
Having said that there is no soul, there is nonetheless an intermediate body which is called the antarabhava in Mahayana Buddhism or the rebirth-consciousness in Theravada Buddhism. It should be noted however, that this antarabhava is also empty of a truly existing soul or self, and is merely an aggregate of psycho-mental activities -- "Antar�bhava-skandha, means the five aggregates of a being in the bardo [antar�bhava]."
The Buddha rejects self-view of soul/consciousness being passed on from lifetime to lifetime. Read http://www.leighb.com/mn38.htm :Then the Blessed One addressed a certain bhikkhu and said, "Come bhikkhu, in my name, call the bhikkhu Sati, tell him the Teacher wants him." That bhikkhu consented and approached the bhikkhu Sati and told him, "Friend, the Teacher wants you." The bhikkhu Sati said "Yes, friend" and approached the Blessed One, paid homage and sat to one side.
Then the Blessed One said: "Sati, is it true, that such an pernicious view has arisen to you. ‘As I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else’?"
"Yes, venerable sir, as I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else."
"Sati, what is that consciousness?"
"Venerable sir, it is that which feels and experiences, that which reaps the results of good and evil actions done here and there."
"Foolish man, to whom do you know me having taught the Dhamma like this. Haven’t I taught, in various ways that consciousness is dependently arisen. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness. Yet you, foolish man, on account of your wrong view, you misrepresent me, as well as destroy yourself and accumulate much demerit, for which you will suffer for a long time."
Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus: "Bhikkhus, what do you think, has this this bhikkhu Sati, son of a fisherman, learned anything from this dispensation?" "No, venerable sir."
When this was said the bhikkhu Sati became silent, unable to reply back, and sat with drooping shoulders and eyes turned down. Then the Blessed One, knowing that the bhikkhu Sati had become silent, unable to reply back, and was sitting with drooping shoulders and with eyes turned down, told him: "Foolish man, you will be known on account of this pernicious view; now I will question the bhikkhus on this."
Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus: "Bhikkhus, do you too know of this Teaching, the wrong view of the bhikkhu Sati, the son of a fisherman, on account of which he misrepresents us and also destroys himself and accumulates much suffering?"
"No, venerable sir. In various ways we have been taught that consciousness arises dependently. Without a cause there is no arising of consciousness."
"Good, bhikkhus! Good that you know the Dhamma taught by me. In various ways I have taught that consciousness arises dependently. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness. Yet, this bhikkhu Sati, son of a fisherman, by holding to this wrong view, misrepresents us and destroys himself and accumulates much demerit, and it will be for his suffering for a long time.
"Bhikkhus, consciousness is reckoned by the condition dependent upon which it arises. If consciousness arises on account of eye and forms, it is reckoned as eye consciousness. If on account of ear and sounds it arises, it is reckoned as ear consciousness. If on account of nose and smells it arises, it is reckoned as nose consciousness. If on account of tongue and tastes it arises, it is reckoned as tongue consciousness. If on account of body and touch it arises, it is reckoned as body consciousness. If on account of mind and mind-objects it arises, it is reckoned as mind consciousness. Bhikkhus, just as a fire is reckoned based on whatever that fire burns - fire ablaze on sticks is a stick fire, fire ablaze on twigs is a twig fire, fire ablaze on grass is a grass fire, fire ablaze on cowdung is a cowdung fire, fire ablaze on grain thrash is a grain thrash fire, fire ablaze on rubbish is a rubbish fire - so too is consciousness reckoned by the condition dependent upon which it arises. In the same manner consciousness arisen on account is eye and forms is eye consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of ear and sounds is ear consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of nose and smells is nose consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of tongue and tastes is taste consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of body and touch is body consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of mind and mind-objects is mind consciousness.
"Bhikkhus, do you see, This has arisen?" "Yes, venerable sir". "Do you see it arises supported by That?" "Yes, venerable sir." "Bhikkhus, Do you see if the support ceases, the arising too ceases?" "Yes, venerable sir."
Thanks for the detailed answers.
What happens to this conciousness which arises moment to moment dependently after liberation,ceases to exist? Is there no way Buddha or some one else can stop this formation of new one from old one of all beings in this Universe and bring liberation to all?Speaking of sense conciousness,which makes much sense,If one were to be devoid of these 5 senses(they destroyed) that would help in liberation then?
The Buddha said:
Misdeeds cannot be washed away with water,
the suffering of living beings cannot be removed with the hand,
my realization cannot transferred to another,
but by showing the true nature of things, there will be liberation.
The Buddha said:
[Alternate translation: Thanissaro]
This was said by the Lord...
"Bhikkhus, there are these two Nibbana-elements. What are the two? The Nibbana-element with residue left and the Nibbana-element with no residue left.
"What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of attachment, hate, and delusion in him that is called the Nibbana-element with residue left.
"Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with no residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant... completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbana-element with no residue left.
"These, bhikkhus, are the two Nibbana-elements."
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:The Buddha said:
Misdeeds cannot be washed away with water,
the suffering of living beings cannot be removed with the hand,
my realization cannot transferred to another,
but by showing the true nature of things, there will be liberation.
The Buddha said:§ 44. The Nibbana-element {Iti 2.17; Iti 38}
[Alternate translation: Thanissaro]
This was said by the Lord...
"Bhikkhus, there are these two Nibbana-elements. What are the two? The Nibbana-element with residue left and the Nibbana-element with no residue left.
"What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of attachment, hate, and delusion in him that is called the Nibbana-element with residue left.
"Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with no residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant... completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbana-element with no residue left.
"These, bhikkhus, are the two Nibbana-elements."
These two Nibbana-elements were made known By the Seeing One, stable and unattached: One is the element seen here and now With residue, but with the cord of being destroyed; The other, having no residue for the future, Is that wherein all modes of being utterly cease. Having understood the unconditioned state, Released in mind with the cord of being destroyed, They have attained to the Dhamma-essence. Delighting in the destruction (of craving), Those stable ones have abandoned all being.
Thanks for the info.
As far as I understood in Buddhism, Nirvan is attained by lack of attachmnt and extinguishment of Karma. And the conciousness is a continuation with dependency on previous.
Can this process be not interrupted and a way to provide Nirvana to all be created?And if one were to disable all his sense organs,would it help in this achievement?
Nirvana means the cessation of craving, anger/aggression, and ignorance. It is attained through wisdom into the way things are -- empty of self, impermanent, unsatisfactory, dependently originated.
In the nirvana element with remainder, the five senses are still functioning but there is no craving or attachments. In the nirvana element without remainder, "here in this very life, all that is
experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished".
Disabling sense organs has nothing to do with nirvana (the cessation of craving, anger, and ignorance through wisdom), it is just becoming a crippled person with physical disabilities.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Nirvana means the cessation of craving, anger/aggression, and ignorance. It is attained through wisdom into the way things are -- empty of self, impermanent, unsatisfactory, dependently originated.
In the nirvana element with remainder, the five senses are still functioning but there is no craving or attachments. In the nirvana element without remainder, "here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished".
Disabling sense organs has nothing to do with nirvana (the cessation of craving, anger, and ignorance through wisdom), it is just becoming a crippled person with physical disabilities.
One can take some drugs and remove all feelings I have.And one don't have any craving, anger/aggression, and ignorance during sleep or when unconcious.But he's not in Nirvana.
Can you tell how the Karma attaches itself to a changing mind stream especially during re-births?And why it cannot be stopped or destroyed by Gods or Buddha or some one else.
Karma is the changing mind stream, it does not 'attach to' changing mind stream. I already addressed this earlier:
"Your question about karma attaching to mind stream is erroneous,
as karma IS the mind stream. Or are you asking how does ones mind
stream get reborn in the mothers womb?"
I also provided you a Mahayana sutra which describes the rebirth process as taking place due to the ripening of the karma of that mindstream, as well as the father and mother having sexual intercourse:
"Then, the Bhagavan said this to Ä€yusman Nanda, “Nanda, when a
sentient being wishes to enter the womb, if causes and conditions
are perfect, a body will appropriated. However, if [the causes and
conditions] are not perfect, a body will not be appropriated. If
one should ask how is it that a sentient being does not possess the
conditions, it is as follows. Though a man and a woman have the
mental factor of desire, and the intermediate state aggregate is
present and seeking a womb, should that male and female have sexual
intercourse too soon or too late or not have intercourse at that
one time; or should there be some diseases in the body of either
[the male or the female], there will be no ‘entry into the womb’.
If family line of the male and the female are noble and their merit
is great, but the intermediate state aggregate has small merit, or
should the the intermediate state being have a noble family line
and great merit, [65] but the male and female have small [merit] or
though they both have merit, but if the accumulation of karma is
not mutual, then there will be no ‘entry into the
womb’.”"
Nirvana is not a state that a person is in, because a state can be entered and left. Nirvana is not a state -- Nirvana simply means
"cessation" and in the case of Nirvana, it is the permanent cessation or
termination of craving, aggression and delusion due to the awakening of prajna/Wisdom that realizes the nature of dharma, just that is what's
meant by Nirvana.
A state of unconsciousness induced by sleep or
drugs is not analytical cessation but a non-analytical cessation.
Analytical cessation is Nirvana. And that is where the difference lies.
What does this mean?
Cessation (Wyl.‘gog pa; Skt. nirodha) — generally the word refers to the absence or extinction of a given entity. As the third of the four noble truths, it refers specifically to the pacification of suffering and its causes, and is therefore a synonym of nirvana.
Cessation is of two kinds:
In his commentary to Mipham Rinpoche’s Khenjuk, Khenpo Nüden writes:
This is the unconditioned aspect of the permanent elimination of destructive emotions and other factors to be eliminated, through the force of developing realization of the undefiling path, such as the wisdom of discernment, within the mind.
This does not refer to the ceasing of latent habitual tendencies as a result of analysis and investigation, but rather to the absence of a given thing in a particular place due to an incompleteness of necessary causes and conditions, as in the case of horns on a horse’s head, for instance. Another example which is mentioned in the commentaries is the fact that other types of consciousness do not arise when the eye-consciousness is distracted by a visual form. This also includes all the various forms of non-existence (or absence), such as the absence of a vase in a particular place.
Thanks for the info.
So if I understood what you mentioned right,what is reborn is mindstream which is Karma? Which is equivalent of soul in other religions? Which means Karma realizes itself and extinguishes itself and achieves nirvana?the self which awakens is too karma?
Reading some other books I came across something called Kundalini awakening.Is this something also in Buddhism? There was also another book which spoke of spiritual awakening by crossing various knots/centers mind,heart etc. Do you know anything about this in Buddhism as well?
Karma is not equivalent to 'soul', because a 'soul' has the connotation of being a self -- a hidden, inherently existing entity. Karma is an activity -- a happening, empty of an inherently existing, hidden entity/self-ness. Just like in hearing there's just sound, no hearer, in seeing just seen, no seer, in action there's just the deed (karma), no doer, no 'soul' inherently existing or hiding somewhere.
Secondly, karma is one of the activities of the mindstream -- it is the 2nd and 10th link of the 12 chains of afflictive dependent origination. The 1st, 8th and 9th links are 'afflictions' and the remaining seven are 'suffering'. So the psychophysical makeup of deluded sentient beings is basically 1) karma, 2) afflictions, 3) suffering. The 12 links are the entirety of the afflictive chain.
It is not 'karma' that realizes itself, but 'wisdom' -- i.e. when wisdom -- seeing all things in their actual state (luminous and empty) -- is realized, all aggregates are transformed from a delusional, impure, afflictive chain into pure wisdom, pure vision. The afflictive chain ceases, and is replaced by pure vision of everything as it is, non-afflictive dependent origination.
The chakras are taught in Tibetan Buddhism.
Nice text on the Q&A with Nagasena the Arahat, excerpt:
http://www.aimwell.org/rebirth.html#
Is the Same Person Reborn?
“He who is reborn, NÄ�gasena, is he the same per¬son or another?”
“Neither the same nor another.”
“Give me an illustration.”
“In the case of a pot of milk that turns first to curds, then to butter, then to ghee; it would not be right to say that the ghee, butter and curds were the same as the milk, but they have come from that so neither would it be right to say that they are some¬thing else.”
What is Reborn?
“What is it, NÄ�gasena, that is reborn?”
“Mind and matter.”
“Is it this very mind and matter that is reborn?”
“No, it is not, but by this mind and matter deeds are done and because of those deeds another mind and matter is reborn; but that mind and matter is not thereby released from the results of its previous deeds.”
“Give me an illustration.”
“It is like a fire that a man might kindle and, having warmed himself, he might leave it burning and go away. Then if that fire were to set light to another man’s field and the owner were to seize him and accuse him before the king, and he were to say, ‘Your maj¬esty, I did not set this man’s field on fire. The fire that I left burning was different to that which burnt his field. I am not guilty.’ Would he deserve punishment?”
“Indeed, yes, because whatever he might say the latter fire resulted from the former one.”
“Just so, O king, by this mind and matter deeds are done and because of those deeds another mind and matter is reborn; but that mind and matter is not thereby released from the results of its previous deeds.”
The One Who Knows
“Is there, NÄ�gasena, such a thing as ‘The one who knows’ (vedagÅ«)?”
“What is this thing?”
“The living principle within that sees, hears, tastes, smells, feels and discerns things; just as we, sitting here, can look out of any window we wish to.”
“If, O king, the living principle within can see, hear, taste, smell and feel things like you say, can it not also see forms through the ear and so on?”
“No, venerable sir.”
“Then, O king, the living principle within cannot make use of which¬ever sense it pleases as you sug¬gested. It is, O king, by reason of the eye and forms that sight and those other conditions arise, namely; contact, feeling, perception, inten¬tion, one-pointedness, vitality and attention. Each arises simultane¬ously with its cause and herein ‘The one who knows’ cannot be found.”
Transmigration or Rebirth?
“Is there any being who transmigrates from this body to another?”
“No there is not.”
“If that is so, would there not be an escape from the result of evil deeds?”
“Yes there would be an escape if they were not to be reborn, but there would not be if they were to be reborn. This mind and body process commits deeds either pure or impure, and because of that kamma another mind and body process is reborn. Therefore this mind and body is not free from its evil deeds.”
“Give me an illustration.”
“If a thief were to steal another man’s mangoes, would he deserve punishment?”
“Indeed he would.”
“But the mangoes he stole were not those that the owner had planted; why should he deserve punish¬ment?”
“Because those that he stole resulted from the others.”
“Just so, O king, this mind and body process commits deeds either pure or impure, and because of that kamma another mind and body process is reborn. Therefore this mind and body is not free from its evil deeds.”
Where is Kamma Stored Up?
“When deeds are committed by one mind and body process, where do they remain?”
“The deeds follow them, O king, like a shadow that never leaves. But one cannot point them out saying, ‘Those deeds are here or there’, just as the fruits of a tree cannot be pointed out before they are produced.”