[IntinyBut]

My dear friends,

I like the following Tai saying:

''"Easy to learn about Buddhism, buy a book. Difficult to learn about yourself."''

With compassion,

[MineOffedOvex]

Learning about Buddhism is not about learning about "yourself"

Learning about Buddhism is about learning about the laws of nature that are determining the happiness & suffering of human beings

But when the laws of nature are not comprehended, Buddhism is not understood

With real compassion

[BliliBoopsy]

the difficulty here is with Buddhism and comprehending Buddhism

for example:

Howdy,

4 noble truths and suffering, The reality and imagination. A humanbeing suffering with a cancer pain, do you think these (4 noble truts ) do help him or her? Lets be honest... At least (4 noble truths ) might be workable for some situations, but not for all of them!

***

If all of us have a Buddha nature that must be always in nibbana. If there is no self, there is no place to be in it. Whose gonna be at nibbana?

***

İn Buddhism there is no soul, no spirit, no atma and no self. Therefore there can be no rebirth neither. In other words, rebirth in Buddhism is not a personal one...

***

You need sex as you need to eat. These are natural insticts. Whoever refrain from sexual relations will be out of real life for sure.

***

The problem is that in reality Buddhism has a duality, one for lay people, one for the monks. This indicates that Buddhism is not precise. I am trying to show this dilemma. If we will not have any attachment we should not advocate this sort dualities. If Buddhism claims that Buddha Dhamma are the laws of nature, there is no such duality in nature.

Actually REBIRTH is not reencarnation. Because in order to reencarn you need a soul. In Buddhism there is no soul. So rebirth in Buddhism is not a personal one. There is no attachment, there is no personal rebirth neither. People who think the validity of rebirth are the ones who attach themselves to their no-self very tight.

[detskpit]

let us examine each of these statements in how they do not conform with Buddhism:

4 noble truths and suffering, The reality and imagination. A humanbeing suffering with a cancer pain, do you think these (4 noble truts ) do help him or her? Lets be honest... At least (4 noble truths ) might be workable for some situations, but not for all of them! 1. buddha taught suffering is attachment, caused by craving. cancer pain is not attachment. cancer pain is not craving. therefore, how can cancer pain be the dukkha the Buddha ended?

If there is no self, there is no place to be in it 2. the mind experiences nibbana.

İn Buddhism there is no soul, no spirit, no atma and no self. Therefore there can be no rebirth neither. In other words, rebirth in Buddhism is not a personal one... 3. this is illogical, first saying there can be no rebirth then saying there is impersonal rebirth

the buddha taught there is 'rebirth'. each time 'self-view' or 'jati' arises, the mind takes 'birth again'. thus 'rebirth' is always personal and never impersonal. each occassion the delusion of 'personality view' (sakkāya-diṭṭhi) arises in the mind is 'rebirth'

You need sex as you need to eat. These are natural insticts. Whoever refrain from sexual relations will be out of real life for sure. 4. did the Buddha spent most of his life "out of real life"?

The problem is that in reality Buddhism has a duality, one for lay people, one for the monks. This indicates that Buddhism is not precise. I am trying to show this dilemma. If we will not have any attachment we should not advocate this sort dualities. If Buddhism claims that Buddha Dhamma are the laws of nature, there is no such duality in nature. 5. buddha did not teach 'non-duality'. there is no natural truth to 'non-duality'. 'oneness' & 'diversity' are merely perceptions. 'man' & 'woman' represent the ultimate duality. thus the creationist religions all teach 'God created the sexual pairs'. how can engaging in sexual activity be 'non-dualistic'?

The ten thousand things carry yin and
embrace yang.
They achieve harmony by combining
these forces. There is no attachment, there is no personal rebirth neither. 6. Of course there is attachment, which is why Buddha encouraged human beings to learn to give up attachment.

But when there is no attachment, there is no rebirth. But when there is attachment, there is personal rebirth.

People who think the validity of rebirth are the ones who attach themselves to their no-self very tight. 7. This makes no sense at all & is unintelligible. Possibly, it contains a missing word?

[BalaGire]

let us examine each of these statements in how they do not conform with Buddhism:


1. buddha taught suffering is attachment, caused by craving. cancer pain is not attachment. cancer pain is not craving. therefore, how can cancer pain be the dukkha the Buddha ended?


If there is no self, there is no place to be in it

2. the mind experiences nibbana. Dear Element,

Buddha says that ''attachment is the cause of suffering'' Here bothi indicates that without having any attachment, people are facing with cancer. Or even without having no time yet for an attachment, a baby is born with a birth defect which is a life long suffering. So what dear Element is saying does not conform what bothi is trying to show...



With regards,

[Pypeassesty]

A baby born with a birth defect is a baby born with a birth defect. The life long suffering is what is commonly projected onto the baby from the adults around it from birth.

[ffflyer]

Buddha says that ''attachment is the cause of suffering''

Buddha said "attachment is suffering"

as Element said, the difficulty here is with Buddhism and comprehending Buddhism

the difficulty comprehending Buddhism comes from difficulty in comprehending the workings of the mind

however, Buddha did not say to comprehend Dhamma is easy




The Noble Truth of Suffering (dukkha), monks, is this: Birth is suffering, aging is suffering, sickness is suffering, death is suffering, association with the unpleasant is suffering, dissociation from the pleasant is suffering, not to receive what one desires is suffering — in brief the five aggregates subject to grasping are suffering.

Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta: Setting in Motion the Wheel of Truth He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it said? 'I am' is a construing. 'I am this' is a construing. 'I shall be' is a construing. 'I shall not be' is a construing. Construing is a disease, construing is a cancer, construing is an arrow. By going beyond all construing, he is said to be a sage at peace.

Dhatu-vibhanga Sutta

[sXVUOUVC]

Here bothi indicates that without having any attachment, people are facing with cancer.

yes, and Element indicated cancer pain is not the dukkha the Buddha ended

So what dear Element is saying does not conform what bothi is trying to show... yes, and what dear Bothi is saying does not conform what Buddha was trying to show

please be mindful that this chatsite is called "Buddhism With Boundaries (BWB)" rather than BWB (Bothi Without Boundaries)

with regards,

[ptmQqoxw]

yes, and what dear Bothi is saying does not conform what Buddha was trying to show

what the Buddha taught, for old people, is as follows:

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was living among the Bhaggas at Crocodile Haunt in the Bhesakala Grove at the Deer Park. Then the householder Nakulapita went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, "Lord, I am a feeble old man, aged, advanced in years, having come to the last stage of life. I am afflicted in body & ailing with every moment. And it is only rarely that I get to see the Blessed One & the monks who nourish the heart. May the Blessed One teach me, may the Blessed One instruct me, for my long-term benefit & happiness."

"So it is, householder. So it is. The body is afflicted, weak & encumbered. For who, looking after this body, would claim even a moment of true health, except through sheer foolishness? So you should train yourself: 'Even though I may be afflicted in body, my mind will be unafflicted.' That is how you should train yourself."

Then the householder Nakulapita, delighting in & approving of the Blessed One's words, rose from his seat and — bowing down to the Blessed One and circumambulating him, keeping him to his right — went to Ven. Sariputta and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, Ven. Sariputta said to him, "Your faculties are clear & calm, householder, your complexion pure. Have you had the opportunity today of listening to a Dhamma talk in the presence of the Blessed One?"

"How could it be otherwise, lord? I have just now been sprinkled by the Blessed One with the deathless ambrosia of a Dhamma talk."

"And how were you sprinkled by the Blessed One with the deathless ambrosia of a Dhamma talk?"

"Just now I went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As I was sitting there I said to him, 'Lord, I am a feeble old man, aged, advanced in years, having come to the last stage of life. I am afflicted in body & ailing with every moment. And it is only rarely that I get to see the Blessed One & the monks who nourish the heart. May the Blessed One teach me, may the Blessed One instruct me, for my long-term benefit & happiness.'

"When this was said, the Blessed One said to me, 'So it is, householder. So it is. The body is afflicted, weak, & encumbered. For who, looking after this body, would claim even a moment of true health, except through sheer foolishness? So you should train yourself: "Even though I may be afflicted in body, my mind will be unafflicted." That is how you should train yourself.' That's how I was sprinkled by the Blessed One with the deathless ambrosia of a Dhamma talk."

"But why didn't it occur to you to question the Blessed One further: 'In what way is one afflicted in body & afflicted in mind? And in what way is one afflicted in body but unafflicted in mind?'

"I would come from a long way away to hear the explication of these words in Ven. Sariputta's presence. It would be good if Ven. Sariputta himself would enlighten me as to their meaning."

"Then in that case, householder, listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, lord," the householder Nakulapita responded.

Ven. Sariputta said: "Now, how is one afflicted in body & afflicted in mind?

"There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He is seized with the idea that 'I am form' or 'Form is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his form changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration.

"He assumes feeling to be the self, or the self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in the self, or the self as in feeling. He is seized with the idea that 'I am feeling' or 'Feeling is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his feeling changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration.

"He assumes perception to be the self, or the self as possessing perception, or perception as in the self, or the self as in perception. He is seized with the idea that 'I am perception' or 'Perception is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his perception changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration.

"He assumes (mental) fabrications to be the self, or the self as possessing fabrications, or fabrications as in the self, or the self as in fabrications. He is seized with the idea that 'I am fabrications' or 'Fabrications are mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his fabrications change & alter, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over their change & alteration.

"He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. He is seized with the idea that 'I am consciousness' or 'Consciousness is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his consciousness changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration.

"This, householder, is how one is afflicted in body and afflicted in mind.

"And how is one afflicted in body but unafflicted in mind? There is the case where a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — who has regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma — does not assume form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He is not seized with the idea that 'I am form' or 'Form is mine.' As he is not seized with these ideas, his form changes & alters, but he does not fall into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair over its change & alteration.

"He does not assume feeling to be the self...

"He does not assume perception to be the self...

"He does not assume fabrications to be the self...

"He does not assume consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. He is not seized with the idea that 'I am consciousness' or 'Consciousness is mine.' As he is not seized with these ideas, his consciousness changes & alters, but he does not fall into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair over its change & alteration.

"This, householder, is how one is afflicted in body but unafflicted in mind."

That is what Ven. Sariputta said. Gratified, the householder Nakulapita delighted in Ven. Sariputta's words.

Nakulapita Sutta: To Nakulapita

[jokiruss]

yes, and Element indicated cancer pain is not the dukkha the Buddha ended

28. But when the Blessed One had entered upon the rainy season, there arose in him a severe illness and sharp and deadly pains came upon him. And the Blessed One endured them mindfully, clearly comprehending and unperturbed.

Maha-parinibbana Sutta: Last Days of the Buddha

[HedgeYourBets]

A baby born with a birth defect is a baby born with a birth defect. The life long suffering is what is commonly projected onto the baby from the adults around it from birth.

Well spoken

[GOLAGLULT]

My dear Element and dear Andy,


Buddha says attachement is the cause of dukkha.This seems correct but, in some cases, not always. For instance cancer patient did not have any attachment that will cause this result as a dukkha. A child born with an birth defect did not have time to attach anything to cause this dukkha. A birth defect is a dukkha for sure.

Attachment is not dukkha, first of all one should know this truth. Attachements in reality and mostly are enjoyable, but as a result they might give you dukkha. Therefore if Buddha has said that attachment was dukkha, this can not be right. Because mostly all the attachments give peleasure. That's why people attach themselves to these...

But if you have these pleasure for a long time at the end they will show their result as a dukkha. For insatance take gambling or drug addiction etc ...

What Bothi saying is this; without having any attachment, people having many dukkhas, so you can not show me any attachment that is causing to these of the dukkhas as I have given the examples above.

I also love Buddha but, Buddha was a human too.

Lets all be mindfull,

[Seasmillets]

Being born with a birth defect generally would be difficult indeed. It is not what most parents imagine, dream and hope for the offspring and themselves thus it is difficult for the parents too. Others in society also have reactions to birth defects which is difficult for them. All of this difficulty can lead to suffering ..... in my experience there is a tendency for guilt to impact greatly if it is allowed to develop.

[Vomekayafboke]

Buddha says attachement is the cause of dukkha.

The Buddha said attachment is dukkha:

The Noble Truth of Suffering (dukkha), monks, is this: Birth is suffering, aging is suffering, sickness is suffering, death is suffering, association with the unpleasant is suffering, dissociation from the pleasant is suffering, not to receive what one desires is suffering — in brief the five aggregates subject to grasping are suffering.

Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta: Setting in Motion the Wheel of Truth He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it said? 'I am' is a construing. 'I am this' is a construing. 'I shall be' is a construing. 'I shall not be' is a construing. Construing is a disease, construing is a cancer, construing is an arrow. By going beyond all construing, he is said to be a sage at peace.

Dhatu-vibhanga Sutta the Buddha said craving is the cause of dukkha:

The Noble Truth of the Origin (cause) of Suffering is this: It is this craving (thirst) which produces re-becoming (rebirth) accompanied by passionate greed, and finding fresh delight now here, and now there, namely craving for sense pleasure, craving for existence and craving for non-existence (self-annihilation).

Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta: Setting in Motion the Wheel of Truth I also love Buddha but, Buddha was a human too. The Buddha taught "love" comes in many forms, including greed, lust, covetousness, affection & metta

For example, when a man disrespectfully lusts after a beautiful woman, this is covetousness

As you are not reading & respecting the Buddha's words, as this stage, your "love" does not appear to be metta for the Buddha

regards

[Arexytece]

Attachment is not dukkha, first of all one should know this truth.

Attachment is the "tightening" of the mind; the grasping. I can only suggest to practise rather than consider oneself to be a teacher or guru.

Attachments in reality and mostly are enjoyable, Pleasure (sukha vedana) is what people enjoy, rather than attachments (upadana). When pleasure floods the mind, the attachment is not easy to discern.

Therefore if Buddha has said that attachment was dukkha, this can not be right. The Buddha said in many places attachment is dukkha. The Buddha was right.

Because mostly all the attachments give pleasure. That's why people attach themselves to these... Pleasure gives pleasure (rather than attachment). People attachment themselves to pleasurable feelings. People do not attachment themself to attachments.

But if you have these pleasure for a long time at the end they will show their result as a dukkha. For insatance take gambling or drug addiction etc ... The dukkha is in the pleasure. When pleasure arises, so does craving & attachment (which is oppressive & restrictive).

Please reflect. If a person needs a drug but cannot find any, this is oppressive, this is frustrating. This oppression & frustration is craving.

So when the person is successful at finding a drug, when the pleasure arises, the craving is also there. But the oppression of the craving cannot be felt due to the strength & flood of the pleasure.

The only reason why one acts to take drugs is because of the oppression, force & drive of the craving.

The only reason why the euphoria of drugs is a release is because the oppression of the craving is suppressed or covered over.

Kind regards

[Rnlvifov]

Element. You don't think you can learn many of the things the Buddha taught by studying yourself?

[steansathtpos]

imo, "studying yourself" is quite a general statement. If we say "studying the body & mind" via introspection, imo, this is more fitting

although Dogen, did famously say:

To study Buddhism is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be enlightened by all things. To be enlightened by all things is to be free from attachment to the body and mind of one's self and of others. Even the traces of enlightenment are wiped out and life with traceless enlightenment goes on forever and ever the Buddhist teachings are the description of what the buddha found when he studied his body & mind

if our description does not match the Buddha's, this may be cause for reconsideration

many human beings have meditated but not each has had the same experience

kind regards

[iklostardinn]

Element. You don't think you can learn many of the things the Buddha taught by studying yourself?

imo, "studying yourself" is quite a general statement. If we say "studying the body & mind" via introspection, imo, this is more fitting

although Dogen, did famously say:



the Buddhist teachings are the description of what the buddha found when he studied his body & mind

if our description does not match the Buddha's, this may be cause for reconsideration

many human beings have meditated but not each has had the same experience

kind regards

Gassho

The dharma can only be found by finding it yourself ... by studying yourself ... by walking Gautama's path yourself. You cannot be a follower and simply read about Buddhism, then claim to have reached the same conclusions as Gautama.

Gautama taught the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path amd meditation ... these are the first steps along the path .. if you walk the path yourself you will find the dharma ... the steps on the path will become visible as you walk it.

The dharma is about how to interact within this process which we laughingly call "the world" ... how to experience this "world" ... that is the path.

The written aspects of the dharma - the Pali Canon, the Zen texts, all the past comentaries and discussions - can help us walk the path. They can be pointers on the path ... as long as we act mindfully towards the texts.

As the much-quoted Kalama sutta says:

Do not go by revelation;
Do not go by tradition;
Do not go by hearsay;
Do not go on the authority of sacred texts;
Do not go on the grounds of pure logic;
Do not go by a view that seems rational;
Do not go by reflecting on mere appearances;
Do not go along with a considered view because you agree with it;
Do not go along on the grounds that the person is competent;
Do not go along because "the recluse is our teacher."
Kalamas, when you yourselves know: These things are unwholesome, these things are blameworthy; these things are censured by the wise; and when undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill, abandon them...
Kalamas, when you know for yourselves: These are wholesome; these things are not blameworthy; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness, having undertaken them, abide in them.

To me, this says we learn things by our own experience. And to do that we first must study ourselves - to understand our experience, and to change that experience.

If our descriptions do not match the descriptions from the written texts, then we need to reconsider - our own experiences, our understanding of those experiences .. and in doing so we change our experiences ... the change is not because it is "required" by the written sources, or required by authority. The change will come because we reconsidered ...

That is the path ...

Walk it and you will see.