Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: to be the buddah

Expand Messages
  • Swee Boon
    Hi Ryan, ... In my opinion, to be the Buddha now means to end Ignorance now. ... http://www.what-buddha-said.net/drops/II/Cause_of_Ignorance.htm What is
    Message 1 of 57 , Aug 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Ryan,

      > What does it mean to be the buddha now?

      In my opinion, "to be the Buddha now" means to end Ignorance now.

      ---------------
      http://www.what-buddha-said.net/drops/II/Cause_of_Ignorance.htm

      What is ignorance, what is the origin of ignorance, what is the ceasing of ignorance, and what is the way leading to the ceasing of ignorance? Not knowing about suffering, not knowing about the origin of suffering, not knowing about the ceasing of suffering, not knowing about the way leading to the ceasing of suffering, this is called ignorance! With the arising of the mental fermentations, ignorance also arises. With the ceasing of the mental fermentations, ignorance also ceases! The way leading to the ceasing of ignorance is just this Noble 8-fold Way: That is; Right view, right motivation, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right awareness, and right concentration.
      ---------------

      The Buddha teaches that clinging to a doctrine of a self is suffering, because it propels one towards further becomings, further births, further agings and further deaths.

      The Buddha teaches that craving is the cause for clinging to a doctrine of a self. There are these six kinds of craving: craving for delightful forms experienced with the eye, craving for delightful sounds experienced with the ear, craving for delightful aromas experienced with the nose, craving for delightful tastes experienced with the tongue, craving for delightful tactile sensations experienced with the body and craving for delightful ideas (such as a refined doctrine of a self like yours) experienced with the mind.

      The Buddha teaches that with the ceasing of craving, there is also the ceasing of clinging to a doctrine of a self.

      The Buddha teaches that the Noble Eightfold Path is the way that leads to the ceasing of clinging to a doctrine of a self.

      Swee Boon
    • Ken H
      Hi Swee Boon, ... KH: You gave the same wrong impression as before: namely, that the doctrine of self was not the problem. ... SB: Yes, it is indeed
      Message 57 of 57 , Aug 4, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Swee Boon,

        ----------
        KH: > > You gave the same wrong impression as before: namely, that the "doctrine of self" was not the problem.
        > >

        SB: > Yes, it is indeed not the problem
        ----------

        If you look up "ditthi" in the Buddhist Dictionary you will see:

        "No other thing than evil views do I know, o monks, whereby to such an extent the unwholesome things not yet arisen arise, and the unwholesome things already arisen are brought to growth and fullness. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent the wholesome things not yet arisen are hindered in their arising, and the wholesome things already arisen disappear. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent human beings at the dissolution of the body, at death, are passing to a way of suffering, into a world of woe, into hell." Further in A. I, 23: "Whatever a man filled with evil views performs or undertakes, or whatever he possesses of will, aspiration, longing and tendencies, all these things lead him to an undesirable, unpleasant and disagreeable state, to woe and suffering."(end quote)

        Doesn't that say to you that wrong view is the problem?

        ------------
        KH: > > The sotapanna can have lobha but, because wrong view has been completely annihilated, he can never have lobha and wrong view together (which is the worst kind of lobha).
        > >

        SB: > So do you agree with my statement?
        -------------

        That depends on which statement. Your original statement was entirely misleading, and I strongly disagree with it. Your second statement was a watered-down version of the first, and I suppose I can agree with it - with the above proviso.

        ----------------------
        <. . .>
        KH: > > As to whether right view leads to further rebirth, I can't say. It has been discussed at DSG, but I forget. Certainly the right view of an arahant does not.(An arahant has neither kusala nor akusala kamma.)
        > >

        SB: > But you said both kusala and akusala dhammas lead to dukkha and to further becomings in the rounds of births and deaths in your previous post. It seems that you have become uncertain now. Sorry if I am being rash about that statement.
        --------------------

        That's very kind of you to consider my feelings, but no, I am not uncertain. You had been talking about Dependent Origination, and I tried to point out to you that, according to that doctrine, both kusala and akusala kamma were causes of rebirth.

        --------------------------
        <. . .>
        KH: > > But I wonder why you were offended. Are you opposed to his teachings?
        > >

        SB: > You are indeed guilty. I only feel gratitude to him for making his translations of the suttas so easily available.
        ---------------------------

        You haven't answered my question. Are you opposed to his teachings? Or do you think he is right in announcing to the world that anatta is just a meditation strategy and does not mean there is no self?

        -----------------------------------
        KH: > > <. . .> is what Ven T describes as an unbound consciousness (one that leaves the conditioned world and enters nibbana).
        > >

        SB: > If Thanissaro really teaches that, I would also disagree with him. I don't believe in an unbound consciousness that leaves the conditined world and enters nibbana. It sounds like believing there is a self that continues on after awakening.
        -------------------------------------

        I think Ven Thanissaro learned that particular wrong view from his teacher (and his teacher before him). He refined it by adding the "not-self strategy" theory.

        ---------------------------------------------
        <. . .>
        KH: > >Yes, that is what Ven T teaches. But it is wrong, and nothing could be more wrong.
        > >

        SB: > In that case I disagree with you. Do you come to the realization of no self by taking up the view "anatta is the absence of a self", or do you come to the realization of no self by taking up the contemplation: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.'?
        -----------------------------------------------

        We are talking about two things here. Firstly, there is the notion that anatta does not mean "no self". I am pleased to learn that we both dismiss that notion.

        Secondly, there is your question above.

        My answer is: I understand anatta to be the absence of self. It is one of three characteristics that are borne by all conditioned dhammas - impermanence (anicca), unsatisfactoriness (dukkha), and absence of self (anatta).

        As for the phrase, 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself,' I believe that addresses three separate issues: craving, conceit and wrong view.

        Ken H
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.