Now that we can discuss religion here without having to recommend literature for it all the time, let's discuss Buddhism, shall we?
What are your opinions of each of the three traditions? Do you practice? Thoughts on the Dalai Lama? General discussion on the history of Buddhism?
All topics welcome here. Buddhism general, I guess.
Will post related images.
>already on page 3
Damn, board moves faster than I thought it would.
>>80903
There is so much to unlearn that it's too bad they burned all the libraries.
>>81075
Care to elaborate? Are you referring to something in particular?
>>81091
Buddhism is a meta-topic. In the one hand one learns to quite the inner dialog through meditation and emptying oneself and in the other there's a wealth of lost knowledge.
I've been studying Soto Zen Buddhism for the past two years. It's really interesting and has helped me a lot with finding a purpose in life and getting past some of my anxiety problems. I think Vajrayana is interesting but I don't agree with a lot of it. Theravada to me isn't all that applicable in the modern world, but makes some interesting points. Mahayana makes sense in some regards but when some of them worship the Buddha as if he is a God, that runs counter to the point of his teachings. Also I like the Dalai Lama, I think he's a good guy and he is bringing a lot of important issues to light.
>>81193
I'm talking about discussing the general religion of Buddhism.
I still don't really know what you mean about a wealth of lost knowledge, unless you're referring to Dhamma deterioration.
>>81324
>Theravada to me isn't all that applicable in the modern world
What makes you say this?
I really only have read stuff out of Mahayana schools. The koans and general zany monk antics are probably the most well known, but the actual arguments put forth by Buddhist philosophers are amazing. In terms of scope and complexity they make Medieval scholasticism look tame.
>>81439
Even if you don't follow Buddhism, you can't deny the knowledge that exists in its teachings. The Buddha knew what he was talking about.
I feel like the only thing I usually see people have problems with is the focus on not killing for any reason. I mean, I wouldn't expect lay followers to not defend themselves, but monks especially have to live by this rule.
>>81392
Well from what I've studied of it, and I will be honest it is the branch that I am the least familiar with, it seems to have a strong focus on monasticism. I personally think that's not what the Buddha's intentions were with his teachings, and that people in the modern world have a hard time with the rigid monastic life that Theravada promotes. But that's just my opinion. I email and network with plenty of people who are totally calm and educated Theravada Buddhists who are happy with their lives.
>>81345
>I'm talking about discussing the general religion of Buddhism.
Understood
>I still don't really know what you mean about a wealth of lost knowledge, unless you're referring to Dhamma deterioration.
The Chinese alone have burned libraries with a wealth of knowledge we will never know.
How do you expect to discuss something you do not know?
All I know is Pure Land Buddhism is baller as fuck.
>>81324
I recently left Soto Zen.
>>81568
Why's that?
>>81517
Yeah, the Theravada branch places slightly more emphasis on monkhood than the other sects, but lay life is still existent as well. Generally the biggest difference I see is the teaching that it is extremely rare for lay people to reach liberation, and that if they do so they either immediately seek ordination or they are on their death bed.
Still, I can't think of any monastic practices in Theravada that differ all that much from monasticism in Mahayana (Vajrayana is a whole other subject, and one that I'm critical of).
Maybe there's more of a focus on solitary meditation and veneration of monks, but I'm not as familiar with Mahayana monks.
>>81529
>How do you expect to discuss something you do not know?
Why do you assume that these libraries held all the knowledge?
>>81324
>but when some of them worship the Buddha as if he is a God
Religion needs it's great men. Lowering the Buddha would ruin Buddhism. Imagine Christianity without the deep love and respect for Christ. Christians would literally be Muslims who just see Christ as one of the numerous prophets and thus nothing special. So while the Buddha shouldn't be worshiped as God, the respect that eastern Buddhists have should never diminish.
The library is more of an non-physical thing anyways.
>>80903
>His followers called him Mahasamatman and said he was a god. He preferred to drop the Maha- and the -atman, and called himself Sam. He never claimed to be a god. But then, he never claimed not to be a god. Circumstances being what they were, neither admission could be of any benefit. Silence, though, could.
>>81687
I never implied they held all the knowledge.
That idea came from your mind, but since you asked I'd like to know, how do you know something without knowing all of it?
>>81627
Yeah, I wrote about it a long time ago, but I can write again point by point my issues with Soto:
>Early Ch'an had more fluidity to it with figures like Joshu. There was more emphasis on unpremeditated, spontaneous creativity and manifesting your own personal understanding, which I feel expresses the Dharma more. Dharma discourse in Soto is too structured in a manner to indoctrinate others.
>Anti-intellectual. I feel some of the biggest "progress" or deepening of understanding comes from reading poetry or watching art-house films. The entirety of Ch'an and Zen's message is in Andrei Tarkovsky's Zerkalo. If you get that film, deeply, then you get Zen. I think there should have been more eclectic and expansive discourse on sophisticated artwork rather than regurgitating Dogen quotes over and over again.
>Time spent in solitude is valuable too, and there seems to be a kind of gung-hu attitude about becoming one with the "hive mind" of the Sangha. Because of this, aloneness was a topic that wasn't discussed enough. I feel Toni Packer (check her up) got this idea more.
>Proper Shikantaza posture should not matter. I have met so many Westerners with knee problems. The mind and breathing are the most important. encouraging people to sit full-lotus is crazy.
>People like Brad Warner destroy and distill Buddhism for general audience, and they sound more like Marquis de Sade when they abandon virtue ethics and/or negative consequentialist ethics.
>Idolization of Dogen. Seriously, let's move past that...
>Be more selective. I have encountered so many hipster assholes and racist old men I cannot begin to express the annoyance. I look White myself but have a bit of an accent. This was probably the main reason I left: felt more like a Catholic gathering where people pat each other's backs rather than a sincere practice.
Any Jodou Shinshu Buddhists here? I'm from a Japanese family and I grew up in Hawaii where we have many Buddhist temples.
>>81831
To expand further, I feel like solitude in natural scenery is really the most important thing for Ch'an. check out the documentary "Amongst White Clouds".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKfl7SQOSPA
Figures like Han Shan and Shiwu understood hat Buddhism was all about.
Creative fluidity is important
*gasshos and flips over*
>>81808
you work with what you have and hope you're not outright falsifying the message.
>>81723
This.
Sometimes it's hard for westerners to differentiate between veneration and worship. Of course the Buddha should be worshiped, because he was the most enlightened being of our age who cleared the path for those to escape suffering. This worship is different than, "Hello, can you help me with something in my life", prayer-worship though. It is simply showing great respect for the Buddha.
>>81324
Amida Buddha=/=Siddhartha Buddha
>>81674
I'm guessing you're Theravada?
>>81910
There's more than one Buddha, and not all of them are celestial ones that can be worshiped as gods like Kannon or Amida
>>81910
>outright falsifying the message.
Here is where the message becomes dogma.
>>81831
Interesting point. I suppose everyone has there own reasons, and its best for one to come to conclusions on there own. You make some fair criticisms.
>>81831
Also, one last thing,
>Most people don't realize how central money is to the functioning of a Sangha. I heard my Sensei once wanted extra money for his own family. When the Dharma meshes with familial and societal life, it becomes a bit insincere, and you start to realize practice becomes more of a way of coping with financial instability or whatnot. If you have money, you can do far more interesting things that are meditative. You just need creativity. Soto is full of shit thanks to Meiji era influences
>>81723
I don't disagree that the Buddha needs to be respected, I just think that he should not be worshipped as a literal God. Many Japanese people call him Kami-sama which literally means God.
>>81831
Dogen's stuff is pretty good though m8
the mountains and rivers are alive and buddha
>>82062
Yeah, Hongwanji
>>82062
Do you recommend any books on Theravada so that I could possibly learn more about it? I am interested in where they differentiate from other schools and branches.
>>80903
I've watched this thread and have come to the conclusion that all you want to do is stroke your own ego.
Burn your Buddha's and bust your mirrors; lose your books and forget about it. You're lost in the woods.
>>82116
In the Buddha's Words by Bhikkhu Bodhi is the only thing I can think of that isn't entirely scripture, though scripture is the bulk of it.
It's what served as my best introduction to Theravada Buddhism, but it doesn't really get into mentioning differences in schools or anything like that. Most I've read is Pali canon translations and commentaries on them.
Still, Bhikkhu Bodhi's notes on the above book are really good, and I recommend that one to everyone that asks.
Other than that, I hear that Gil Fronsdal has some pretty good books. My copy of the Dhammapada is translated by him. Jack Kornfield is talked highly of as well.
>>82076
A lot of his stuff is good, but a lot of it is gibberish too due to losing the context and metaphors he used. A lot of Japanese have trouble understanding Dogen's prose too because it's complex Kanji.
Hakuin is a bit easier to understand in this day and age.
You can spend a lifetime studying Dogen, and I really think Nishijima didn't get everything. Also, Dogen's views did change near his death. His death poems were pretty great.
>>82223
>This is your brain on Zen
>>82279
How many bottles of knowledge can you shove up your ass before they break and you call it wisdom?
>>82086
Is that a specific Chinese school? Don't think I've ever heard of it.
>>82366
Contrary to misconceptions, Ch'an / Zen did not encourage being an anti-intellectual.
I think a lot of people misinterpret emptiness as being equivalent to dulling the mind or dumbing it down. It discourages clinging to conceptual knowledge as an absolute.
>>82465
>implying
>>82464
Japanese
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hongan-ji
Thai Forest Tradition master race, Dalai Lama is a hypocritical cunt theocrat absolutist dictator.
>>82685
Are you sure the Dalai Lama isn't a pagan Bonpo high priest?
The Tibetan theocracy was a bad thing for it's people, and the Chinese have dramatically raised the standard of living for the average Tibetan.
Debate me.
>>80903
where can I learn/read more about this, I want to take a scholarly journey into this like I did my own religion and Islam. I know jack shit and just asking here probably would just be annoying and not help
>>82928
>the Chinese have dramatically raised the standard of living for the average Tibetan.
Shit in one hand and pray in the other.
>>82935
Try In the Buddha's Words by Bhikkhu Bodhi.
Really helpful introductions and notes with teachings straight from the Pali canon.
>>82935
Your lack of knowledge shouldn't turn you away from asking questions. Feel free to ask a bunch of pretentious Buddhist wannabes and I'm sure we'd be more than willing to flex our e-peens
>>82952
how do you hold a prayer?
Is it like holding a turd?
>>82935
I'd suggest starting with the Pali text so you can be bored to death with repetition from the get go.
>>83014
Exactly.
Am I wrong in comparing Buddhism to Diogenes? I kind of merge both philosophies into a general harnessing of positive cynicism to be analytical of everything instead of emotional and to attempt to detach myself from unnecessary attachments.
I've always been curious what kind of conversation would occur between Sidartha Guatama and Diogenes.
>>83058
So do you have at least one prayer movement a day? That's only healthy you know.
>>83074
>should I also download the pali canon?
If you want to.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/index.html
Here is the vast majority of it translated. Reading through it all takes a good bit of time. I'd recommend some good introductions before delving straight in, but as long as you've got good note accompanying the suttas, they shouldn't be too difficult.
>>83091
Diogenes would probably make fun of him for not wanking in public and not moving for like the entire day.
>>83091
Diogenes resembles Daoism more. Siddhartha advised kings and lead an organization. He realized that extreme asceticism wasn't getting him anywhere
>>83074
Buddhism from very early on developed into multiple schools that emphasized challenging traditions personally to hone the best methods and to eradicate the less useful ones. Tibetan Buddhism in particular has an interesting system of theological debate with passionate hand gestures.
As it turns out the first Buddha did get a lot right, but there are many very well respected teachers that diverge here and there from his teachings to prove a point.
Mainly though you have two major groups of Buddhists: Monks and Lay Disciples. Monks tend to stick to a very regimented and traditional lifestyle to speed up and expedite the path to enlightenment with like minded individuals. Lay disciples however are people who live outside monasteries and try to honour the teachings of Buddha and his inheritors. Buddha however said that it is the lay disciples who are the most important practitioners because unlike monks that can hide away from the world and focus, lay disciples are still living in the thick of the nature of suffering that is inherent in large cities and highly populated areas.
>>83136
You could call it that, at least, as long as I don't have Montezuma's revenge :^)
>>83074
>is Bhuddism itself a unified religion or is their sectionalism out the asshole like nearly every other religion?
There's always some people pushing sectarianism, but in terms of violence Buddhism's pretty low on the scale in comparison to other religions.
I don't know if I'd use the word "unified", as there are various different schools with views that can vary greatly. The three largest sects are Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana.
Theravada is the forest monks in Southeast Asia.
Mahayana is the zen priests you see in most media.
Vajrayana is the Dalai Lama and the weird tulku traditionalists.
>>83181
>Upside down.
Siddhartha was the son of a Brahman king whereas Loa-Tzu advised kings.
>>83231
Doesn't India have a Buddhist/Hindu Syncriatic tradition?
>>83265
Buddha was a Hindu from India.
>>83253
Siddhartha advised the kings of Kosala and Maghada. I was meaning more their lifestyles, since the formation of the Sangha meant he was a social person. Diogenes and Laozi were hermetic.
>>83265
Organized? I wouldn't know.
The Buddha practiced many different austerities under different ascetics before achieving enlightenment. It would be pretty far-fetched to think that none of these practices related to Hinduism.
Meditation and veneration of statues is something they have in common, but the Buddha was pretty critical of the native traditions of the time.
Vietnamese Mahayana Buddhist here. I recently took Buddhist refuge. Despite being pseudo-commie, Vietnam has an amazing Buddhist culture.
I don't believe a historical Buddha existed. He was a tree shrine God.
>>83385
That's like saying the heroes of the Trojan War or King Arthur didn't exist
>>83385
There's actually historic evidence that leads most scholars to believe Buddha was an historical figure in fact.
>>80903
something something opium of the people
something something herbivore behavior
Being buddhist makes you a Cûck
>>83416
I can give sources. I mean a historical Buddha as a person didn't exist. It's all just hagiography, man.
That's why I prefer Ch'an and Zen, and Buddhism really only makes sense when it's mixed with Daoism.
>>83385
I bet you think Jesus was a Roman invention, too.
>>83448
I'll start a new thread. Remember after Buddha died, supposedly, it took 200 yrs to write it down based off oral transmission.
>>83450
Worrying about being a kek is a form of suffering.
>>83473
Yeah, I don't think Jesus, Muhammad, or Zarathustra existed either.
>>83488
>kek
Nobody told me there was a filter in place.
>>83450
>opium of the people
Using Mao's argument are you?
>>83502
Not believing in Jesus is at least just mildly retarded.
Not believing Muhammad existed is full on downs syndrome.
>>83502
Just because their legends are larger than life doesn't mean they never existed.
Vlad Tepes for example
>>83523
I'll make a new thread for all this stuff later.
Muhammad was a fiction for Arab expansionist agenda. Originally Koran was a Syro-Aramaic esoteric Christian text that was later distorted when translated into Arabic. Arabs also created a fiction of Muhammad as a messenger to justify invasion of numerous countries.
" virgins" original meant "berries on a tree" or something like that
>>83502
I guess you also don't believe Hannibal, Marcus Agrippa, or Alexander III existed either, right?
>>83523
I agree with Richard Carrier on Christ Myth Theory
>>83572
Nah, we have more sources about that stuff, but when it comes to religion, fiction becomes more real than the actual.
>>83563
I believe the Virgin myths all stem etymologically from Greek and refer to unmarried women that had power. They were very sexual and not virgins by the common definition.
>>83563
Fucking bot thinks it's spam.
Search for and read pic related. You're essentially a conspiracy theorist that every non-amateur scholar/historian disagrees with.
>>83616
then you just swallowed Cold War era Soviet propaganda, courtesy of the Kremlin.
Putin would be disappointed in you.
>>83637
We actually have no contemporary sources of Hannibal.
By your logic he doesn't exist.
>>83666
Look up Richard Carrier. He's recent and pretty stellar. A lot of historians admit he's onto something.
>>83666
666 - I love you
SATAN
SATAN
SATAN
>>83687
We can use archaeology, written sources, and so forth to deduce Hannibal existed, but we can't do that for Jesus, Muhammad, and Buddha since they didn't.
>>83705
here you go: http://www.amazon.com/On-Historicity-Jesus-Might-Reason/dp/1909697494
>>83687
>it was actually a rogue legion running around sacking the Italian countryside for 15 years
makes sense.
>>83729
>http://www.amazon.com/On-Historicity-Jesus-Might-Reason/dp/1909697494
Look at all the 5 star reviews for that book. We have strong reason to the doubt the existence of Jesus.
>>83690
What's a summary of his argument?
>>83718
Too bad the overwhelming majority of historians and scholars thinks you're full of shit though.
Explain how Christ didn't exist.
I'm not even going to bother with Muhammad since you're idea is such an unbelievable conspiracy theory that it could only stem from sheer stupidity.
>>83718
wat?
>>83718
You don't even know what deduction means.
deduce the existence of the average Roman citizen. Yes that one completely average guy, prove he existed using archeology.
>>83767
"The assumption that Jesus existed as a historical person has occasionally been questioned in the course of the last hundred years or so, but any doubts that have been raised have usually been put to rest in favor of imagining a blend of the historical, the mythical and the theological in the surviving records of Jesus.
Carrier re-examines the whole question and finds compelling reasons to suspect the more daring assumption is correct. He lays out extensive research on the evidence for Jesus and the origins of Christianity and poses the key questions that must now be answered if the historicity of Jesus is to survive as a dominant paradigm.
Carrier contrasts the most credible reconstruction of a historical Jesus with the most credible theory of Christian origins if a historical Jesus did not exist. Such a theory would posit that the Jesus figure was originally conceived of as a celestial being known only through private revelations and hidden messages in scripture; then stories placing this being in earth history were crafted to communicate the claims of the gospel allegorically; such stories eventually came to be believed or promoted in the struggle for control of the Christian churches that survived the tribulations of the first century.
Carrier finds the latter theory more credible than has been previously imagined. He explains why it offers a better explanation for all the disparate evidence surviving from the first two centuries of the Christian era. He argues that we need a more careful and robust theory of cultural syncretism between Jewish theology and politics of the second-temple period and the most popular features of pagan religion and philosophy of the time.
For anyone intent on defending a historical Jesus, this is the book to challenge."
Check out the book I linked and read some reviews.
>>83821
>Literally how do you prove this?
How do you prove or deduce he existed? Because some gospels and so forth said he was a real, living human being?
>>83869
Krishna definitely existed though. Bhagavad Gita is real history.
>>83855
I bought the new hot cross buns butt plug and shoved Jesus up my ass thinking about your mother and that's proof your mother is a dirty whore so there.
>>83891
I was joking, but my point is, I just don't believe those guys existed...
>>83855
If Jesus was not a historical being, why would the Gospels include him being baptized by John when it would seem ludicrous that the Messiah be baptized by anyone else?
Why would he be said to be of Nazareth; a small city with little religious significance, when the Messianic prophecies of the time claimed the messiah would be born in bethlehem?
Why would crucifixion even be mentioned in regards to the messiah, when crucifixion was the most humiliating way to be executed at the time?
It's because a historical rabbi who started Christianity actually existed, and these events that so confused the messianic prophesies actually took place. If he was an invention, the presence of these elements would make no sense whatsoever.
>>83912
Read some of the Amazon reviews and stuff.
But yeah, Jesus, Buddha, and Muhammad were all narrative fictions that were used to strengthen the ethos of the people.
>>83869
History is basically just a contemporary invention.
None of it is true, or at least if it happens to be it's completely accidental.
>>83931
You don't believe the citizens of the Roman empire existed?
>>83951
>But yeah, Jesus, Buddha, and Muhammad were all narrative fictions that were used to strengthen the ethos of the people
Literally a conspiracy theory with no proof.
>>83939
Because SATAN is the author of the bible.
>>83959
You heard it here, folks; history just never happened.
It never existed, it's all a hoax. The world was created when you were born, and there is literally no evidence for everything, ever.
>>83939
>the presence of these elements would make no sense whatsoever.
try to make sense out of the gospel of thomas, please. There's a weird element to early Christianity were things don't have to make sense.
>>80903
the fuck wrong with his ears?
http://strawpoll.me/5908001
should mods enable IDs???
What is the best place to get started with Bhuddism?
>>84038
In Asian cultures, long earlobes denoted wisdom.
>>84051
It makes no difference where you start.
>>80903
>>80995
>>81049
>you will never be as blissful and at absolute peace and serenity as the faces of these statues
>>84013
I see no contemporary evidence for it's existence. All I see are these old ass books and shit that ain't contemporary with the contemporary.
>>84103
Speak for yourself.
>>84013
>The world was created when you were born, and there is literally no evidence for everything, ever.
I actually think you could make a valid argument for this if you use German idealism in combination with Dharmic metaphysics.
>>84106
I don't think those are holes, I think the artist just painted those lines instead of leaving a blank area there.
>>84200
Buddhism states that there is no discoverable beginning to existence, so I don't think it would fit in so nicely.
>>84223
it's a smeared dream then and its boundaries indeterminate
>>84182
>It's entirely true that you can be.
I get incredibly bored when I'm meditating 30-1 hour in
>>84250
That would depend on if we're talking about an individual life or existence in itself.
An individual can practice in accordance with the Dhamma and cease to exist, but existence itself is without foreseeable end.
>>84286
that depends on if you're mahayana or not and accept the heart sutra
>>84271
Boredom, or sloth, is one of the five hindrances. It can also be overcome, and this is also not out of your reach.
Ajahn Brahmavamso has this to say on it:
>"Sloth and torpor is overcome by rousing energy. Energy is always available but few know how to turn on the switch, as it were. Setting a goal, a reasonable goal, is a wise and effective way to generate energy, as is deliberately developing interest in the task at hand. A young child has a natural interest, and consequent energy, because its world is so new. Thus, if one can learn to look at one's life, or one's meditation, with a 'beginner's mind' one can see ever new angles and fresh possibilities which keep one distant from sloth and torpor, alive and energetic. Similarly, one can develop delight in whatever one is doing by training one's perception to see the beautiful in the ordinary, thereby generating the interest which avoids the half-death that is sloth and torpor. [...] Sloth and torpor is a common problem which can creep up and smother one slowly. A skilful meditator keeps a sharp look-out for the first signs of sloth and torpor and is thus able to spot its approach and take evasive action before it's too late. Like coming to a fork in a road, one can take that mental path leading away from sloth and torpor."
>>84396
I've read a lot of the Pali canon and stuff, man.
I like how Theravada avoids the nihilism of some Mahayana teachers at least
>>84250
CHIM
H
I
M
>>84360
nice, thanks
I really have to work on it and pick good times, then
>>84565
You don't get good at anything without practice.
That's why Buddhism is a practice, you have to work on it.
Happiness is attainable in this very life.
how is buddhism a religion if there is no god in it?
>>84038
>>84202
Having stretched ear lobes with heavy jewelry that made your lobes droop like that was a status symbol at the time. As Siddartha was a prince, he wore those heavy ear gauges.
When he renounced worldly possessions the jewelry went away, leaving his ears that way.
>>84685
There is, it's just that white people disillusioned with their own religion see in this relatively foreign tradition what they want to see.
>>84685
I religiously bathe all the time. Why would I need a god to be religious?
buddhism believes in reincarnation right? Does that mean that the number of souls in existence is fixed? Where do souls come from? Am I trying to apply a western idea to religion in which it is inapplicable?
>>84745
You don't understand the religion of Buddhism if you think there must be a god.
>>84608
>Happiness is attainable in this very life.
Neither Buddhism nor Jainism are about happiness.
The 9th Jhana is extinction of perception and feelings. They are about breaking of the duality of happiness and suffering, neither perception nor non-perception.
How can Theravadans not be persuaded by Nagarjuna's tetralemma and argument in MMK?
>>84685
A religion consists of four things:
Transcendent discourse (suttas)
Rituals (meditation, statue veneration, etc.)
Community (the sangha)
Order (abbots, novice monks, lay people, etc.)
Buddhism fits the bill on this one.
By the way, does anyone know who it was that defined religion like this? I can't remember and my school's website is broken.
>>84805
Yes. I hope I come back as a Ghandarva
>>84685
There are tons of gods in Buddhism. They just aren't necessarily important to your practice and progress and progress toward enlightenment. The Buddha taught about devas, pretas, nagas, talked to celestial beings, etc. Some westerners try to whitewash that stuff out of it though because a lot of fedora tippers see Buddhism as some sort of quasi-religious haven for them to participate in.
>>84823
>Transcendent discourse
I disagree. Buddhism is all about immanence. There is no transcendence.
That's the main distinction between Theravada and Mahayana.
>>84805
Who told you what Buddhists believe and why did you believe them?
>>84808
yeah cause all Buddhists believe the same thing about everything and never disagree
>>84810
The path leading up to full realization, and even the higher jhanas, is blissful though.
The act of practicing and making progress on the path brings bliss, it is just that worldly happiness must be seen through and dropped to achieve the true bliss of Nibbana.
>>84821
I haven't read anything from Nagarjuna. Is there a way you can summarize what he's arguing in favor of?
>>84805
Rebirth is a better term. `Soul' isn't the appropriate word here because there isn't a `Self' which is continues after death.
>>84805
Rebirth =/= Reincarnation
There is nothing substantial or a "self" that is carried over in rebirth... rather everything is always arising and perishing each moment and compactness of aggregates is an illusion.
>>80903
>>84843
what's the purpose of those beings (nagas, pretas etc) on my way to enlightenment?
>>84843
>devas
>pretas
>nagas
Those are Hindu ideas aren't they?
>>84805
There is no soul, the Buddha rejected the notion.
Buddhism teaches rebirth. Similar to reincarnation, but with the fundamental difference that there is nothing that can be said to be "reborn". There is no soul or self, so what is it that continues?
>>84846
"Transcendent", in this case, refers to anything that is "higher" than the material world. It can refer to supernatural elements, which Buddhism is full of.
>>84843
This is very misleading.
>>84892
>there is no self
which is consistent
I am.
I am not.
To anyone in this thread who thinks you're being wise and helpful by trying to replicate the style of speech of a Zen koan translated into English or something, I'd step back and evaluate whether or not you're just stroking your own ego by posting paradoxical gibberish in a thread with a lot of newcomers and beginner's asking questions in it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_J._Griffiths#Buddhist_hybrid_English
Shits weak desu senpai.
>>84935
They are simply beings trapped in samsara like you.
You don't need them for anything, they're just currently living out there lives in their respective realms, like you.
>>84872
Buddhists simply don't all agree - that is true.
>>84885
>I haven't read anything from Nagarjuna. Is there a way you can summarize what he's arguing in favor of?
He is basically moving Buddhism more towards nondualism. His arguments are way too complex to summarize here without sounding contrived
>>84971
>evaluate whether or not you're just stroking your own ego
What if I am? You wanna do something about it?
>>84971
Who's been posting gibberish?
I've talked with plenty of people who think nonsensical speech is automatically wise, but I haven't seen much of that here at all.
>>84971
>stroking your own ego
Why is this a bad thing?
>>84935
There likely isn't one. What's the purpose of a tree in your backyard in relation to your path toward enlightenment? It's just there. The Buddha taught that these celestial realms and beings "exists" in some fashion, but they are beings just like you and me, beholden to the wheel of samsara and capable of suffering. Even devas (deities) suffer and die, and have to work toward achieving nirvana.
>>84843
>Some westerners try to whitewash that stuff out of it though because a lot of fedora tippers see Buddhism as some sort of quasi-religious haven for them to participate in.
Nice alienation.
>>84857
pop culture and wikipedia because I don't know any better
>>84810
in other words attaining some kind of complete neutrality?
>>84892
if nothing at all is carried over than how is it a rebirth?
I'm not sure I understand. Is there kind of a soul or spirit, an atomic unit life, or is it more like a life is an organization of smaller "raw materials"?
has anyone read the lankavatara sutra?
>>84948
You realize that Buddhism grew out of Hinduism, right?
>>85042
why?
So much hate in this thread.
>>84971
Is this really necessary?
>>81831
>There was more emphasis on unpremeditated, spontaneous creativity and manifesting your own personal understanding,
This is completely a modern, romantics-inspired thing though. It's not what Buddhism is about.
>>85071
Criticism isn't hate. If you see a statement that's critical of something else and fear/some negative emotion arises in you, that's your own problem to figure out.
>>85104
Nah, that was hate.
>>85075
It's been said that a deva, because they live in a celestial realm and experience a long life of pleasure, actually have a much harder time achieving liberation than a human being, because there is less of an incentive to try and be free of samsara.
>>85122
You've likely never seen actual hatred.
>>85027
>I'm not sure I understand. Is there kind of a soul or spirit, an atomic unit life, or is it more like a life is an organization of smaller "raw materials"?
I can give you the Mahayana answer based off storehouse consciousness (Ālayavijñāna). Basically old school Zen buddhists believed explicit memory is not stored in brain but another scale that is reciprocally connected to it, think Henri Bergson. This field is always in a persistent connection with the brain whereby explicit memory is consolidated or retrieved in a fragmented manner. Keep in mind, such a reservoir is in motion too and impermanent, but it has some kind of overlapping depth of some sort, and it is also disparate and lacks any core.
It is always giving the illusion of numerical connection with preceding and proceeding moments. It gives the illusion that this moment and the previous one there was a build-up, and that you are a unified, cohesive being when in fact everything is arising and perishing each moment. Check out Dharmakirti.
The more you cling to autobiographical memories and reify the sense of self, the more this explicit memory storage or storehouse consciousness gives illusion of a discrete self. When you die, it is involved in influencing the formation of new volitional formations:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa%E1%B9%85kh%C4%81ra
However, there is no "you" that lives on in it.
Consider this thought experiment: each time you think of explicit memory, it is a new instance of "your" self, right? Yet these memories are fragmented and not compact, and they of course do not interact in a manner whereby you have an essence...
That's the argument in Lankavatara Sutra in some more modern terminology
>>85075
Only that it may be easier or harder for them, depending on the realm they are born into.
Other than that they must follow the same path we have to.
Generally, beings born in a higher realm are so focused on sensual pleasures that it is more difficult for them to practice. Similarly, beings born in a hell realm are subjected to more anguish, making practice harder.
Humans are offered a very rare treat in that we experience neither too much bliss nor too much suffering. Being born into the human realm is extremely rare, and that's why it is wise to practice now while you remain here.
Dharmakirti also seems to argue this:
>"This not only rules out “horizontal universals” (tiryaglakṣaṇa), like blueness, which would have to be present in several blue particulars at one time, but it also rules out “vertical universals” (ūrdhvatālakṣaṇa), or substances persisting throughout time, the numerically identical individual that would be present in each time-slice of a thing.[13] It is only series of qualitatively similar moments that constitute what we conventionally take to be enduring objects, but there is actually nothing that remains numerically the same for more than one instant"
It's the skandhas that create illusion of numerical continuity, and storehouse consciousness is the main one involved in rebirth after cessation of bodily functions.
>>85027
>pop culture
Herein lies the problem with trying to explain something in meme speak or learning from Hollywood because it (Buddhism) is more akin to muscle memory attained through practice than image. The images cannot replicate reality but merely point in a direction, take it or leave it.
>>85142
>>85075
I should elaborate on beings that have it "easier".
Really, the only rebirth that makes it easier to practice is one that requires practice to reach in the first place. If you practice enough and achieve what is known as Once-returning, you will experience one more rebirth in the sense-sphere realm (in a rebirth where practice is made very easy for you, as it is all you will have interest in by this point in your path).
If rebirth after the cessation of bodily functions was not a reality, then there is no reason to practice and you're best off doing something else.
Check out Nobel Laureate's Henri Bergson's arguments of explicit memory being like an explicit cone in Matter and Memory:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/bergson/#4
>>85057
Of course, but there is a distinction for a reason and the Buddha left Hinduism behind with many of the Hindu beliefs, like caste systems for instance.
>>85027
>I'm not sure I understand. Is there kind of a soul or spirit, an atomic unit life, or is it more like a life is an organization of smaller "raw materials"?
In a way you could say that consciousness is kept.
Actually you have to keep in mind that "death" in Buddhism refers at the same time to a physical death in a certain life, as well as death "in the mind". Which to say, it occurs every moment, but we are unable to perceive it. Thus when physical death occurs, it's just a more visible kind of death, but has no special meaning aside from being a bridge between 2 different existences.
The type of birth depends on karmic fruits, that is the fruition of past acts and intention, and birth takes place because we want more renewed existences. When the physical matter sustaining the mind runs out, the mind just carries over into a new set of physical matter, but it changes accordingly, which is why you can't just think back and remember previous births (but many small children can tell you stuff they possibly couldn't know about). Thus there's a link between different reborn persons, but you can't say that they're the same person either.
This is not a fully adequate explanation, so I suggest reading about rebirth in Buddhism in books such as The Foundations of Buddhism.
>>85057
"Hinduism" didn't exist back then. If Buddhism grew out of anything it did from the Sravaka tradition. Devas, pretas and the like were common heritage to all religious people.
>>85129
Nice assumption. You sound very tense.
>>85245
>karmic fruits,
Karmic fruits take place in storehouse consciousness (Ālayavijñāna)
He's saying the same thing as me but in different terms
I agree with him
>>85245
The fact is, Mahyana and Theravada don't really disagree on the fundamental stuff like rebirth, except for some revisionist Japanese.
I think if you take out rebirth after cessation of bodily function though, you're left with nihilism because Buddhist ethics is contingent on accepting rebirth as being foundational to draw an ethics from
>>85141
I'm asking about life not memory. When I say soul, I really mean pneuma, spirit, life force, an animating force independent or otherwise of consciousness. Life in a purely literal sense, the same kind of thing that an amoeba has, or a mushroom
Cool though. So basically there's some big server consciousness and the human brain is just a client accessing it and interpreting in a way that's convenient but incomplete?
>>85347
>being a bridge between 2 different existences.
I'm saying residues in the storehouse consciousness influence the "bridge between 2 different existences". They're just involved in creating new volitional formations:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa%E1%B9%85kh%C4%81ra
I think, as a religious practice for enlightenment, you need to be either a hermit living on the mountains or somewhere else with solitude OR in a monastery. Lay practice is good for personal well-being, but it is not sufficient for enlightenment and ending rebirth.
Sort of interested in learning a little more about Buddhism. Only thing that worries me is I have a pretty severe hatred for the hippy newage wankers who seem to be western Buddhists.
Anyway, where does one start?
>>85599
Why would you want to end rebirth?
>>85663
>Only thing that worries me is I have a pretty severe hatred for the hippy newage wankers who seem to be western Buddhists.
More alienation. Fuck off.
>>85663
Pali suttas
This book is a good introduction:
http://www.amazon.com/Early-Buddhist-Discourses-Hackett-Classics/dp/0872207927/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1446536142&sr=8-3-fkmr0&keywords=old+buddhist+discourse
It really depends on if you want to go mahayana or theravada route
fuck vajrayana tho
>>85672
because life is dukkha...
there is no core to reality, just ceaseless change. everything is like sand that falls through the fingers, and your fingers are sand too but the mind tricks you into thinking it is not.
all your loved ones and family will die. no matter how much feeling of security or stability you have right now, it is an illusion. everything you cling to will eventually be upended.
all pleasurable sensation comes to an end, for it is fleeting. your apparition of a self has no discernible core or compactness, being disparate and within the fiery flux, all arising and ceasing constantly.
life is strife and never involves finding the true green grass
given the myriad of interdependent factors in the flow of life, one can see how it can easily be eradicated in any moment...
plato sucks
>>85721
Cheers dude.
>>85696
be quiet
>>85771
So?
>>85814
well, then, i guess daoism is the best path for you. Buddhists are typically more cynical about life
>>85814
you kind of have to realize how dukkha is inextricably tied to impermanence and interdependence before you go the buddhist path, man...
I mean, if you are more affirming of it all, then daoism is better for you. find that elixir of immortality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taoism_and_death#Immortality
>>85696
And this is why I dislike hippies. I've met a few western buddhists, they're usually pretty fucking out there. Hippies seem to crave being apart from everyone else, more than anything else.
I've worked alongside a few Buddhists from Taiwan. Pretty cool dudes and very much normal people - albeit with a slightly alien outlook. To me, at least. I should add, I met these guys working in an abattoir.
it should be noted when buddhism is forced to be compatible with naturalistic or materialistic outlooks on life, it loses its strict ethical guideline of 8-fold path. buddhism is not compatible with reductive physicalism and such, even though many Western buddhist force it as such. Moreover, Buddhism is not compatible with feel-good new age belief either, since it goes against the whole aim of the practice too.
if you're interested in buddhism for therapeutic purposes, i recommend mindfulness based stress reduction (MBSR) which has evidence that shows its efficacy.
Furthermore, let me say that mahayana buddhism has always been multicultural. Some of the oldest buddhist practitioners were Greeks and Persians. Check here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism
>>85908
what i am saying is there's a difference between practising a religion for metaphysical vs. therapeutic reasons. MBSR is superior for the latter whereas if you want to do buddhism for metaphysical reasons, I recommend being a bit more careful and scholarly in your approach.
>>85931
I am not saying temporal existence is bad. I am saying it is dukkha.
Neither perception nor non-perception is not equivalent to non-existence. Also, there is a blissfulness in nirvana outside the duality of pleasure and pain
You can't achieve it with intent, hence why i recommended either monastic or being a hermit for serious practitioners
Buddhists are ultimately trying to achieve parinirvana aafter cessation of bodily functions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parinirvana
Parinirvana is the ultimate goal of buddhist practice.
>>85908
You get as many do-overs as you need with Buddhism. You don't need to become enlightened before you die, in fact it is very unlikely. As long as you strive to become a little more Buddhist in this life, and in the next, your karma builds up. That's why you can be Buddhist and still eat meat.
It's not like Christianity where you go to eternal hell for sinning when you die. At worst, you go through one of the 134 hells which are just temporary purgatories where you may get flayed, tortured, boiled alive, dismembered, burned, crushed, frozen, or literally eat shit for a few lifetimes, and you're off to your new life to improve your karma a bit more, one life at a time.
>>85971
>dukkha commonly translated as suffering
>isn't bad
ok
>can't achieve it with intent, hence why i recommended being serious practitioners
>>86002
>you go to eternal hell for sinning when you die
lol nice 3rd grade theology there
my cat, who i love like my daughter, ran out late at night... i'm worried for her. if she got her, i don't know what i'd do, probably off myself. that's a lot of dukkha right there and you're delusional if you want to experience that over and over again. there is no reprieve except to those who renounce the dust of worldly life
>>86015
well, nvm, you can interpret in a deontological, nothing wrong with that, just don't make it gnostic
it's very easy to make the misstep and become gnostic about it all. demiurge please spare my cat
>>86079
I'm just saying Buddhism isn't incompatible with normal life. Enlightenment is. But if you're on your road to enlightenment, you'd probably already be a monk or an ascetic.
>>86147
True.
>>86099
>if she got her,
meant to say if she got herself killed*
see, cats are buddha nature
I don't agree with this kind of stuff though:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_characteristics_of_the_Buddha#The_32_Signs_of_a_Great_Man
Interested in what the Theravadan here thinks though
>>83690
lol no
anyone /Taoist/ here or is my kind not welcome
>>81674
>Generally the biggest difference I see is the teaching that it is extremely rare for lay people to reach liberation, and that if they do so they either immediately seek ordination or they are on their death bed.
the trend with the vipassana meditation is the renewal of access to 8 fold path for the pleb.
>>81831
>Brad Warner
>He agreed to write articles for SuicideGirls, the online soft porn site.[7]
top lel
>>86570
I like the main works but calling myself a practising taoist seems a bitch much.
>>82042
the wish to poverty is indeed recurrent in all practices of religion. the christian monks became wealthier and wealthier during the middle ages and it was a disaster.
>>83450
>>83452
We don't know what Buddha originally thought because of time.
>>84103
These statues actually exist to remind that it's absolutely possible to reach. In fact, you're already in it; the problem is, you're focused on the wrong things. Meditation is realizing you were always home.
>>85908
Shame the Indohellenes were totally forgotten by Buddhists and other Indians.
t. Indohellene-in-Andalas
>>85093
That's why Buddhism is so monolithic, with no art, literature, and poetry, and different schools, right?
I will tell you a secret: what separates Eastern religious philosophy from Western is the emphasis on personal experience. All the Buddhist philosophers you know practiced daily. They didn't seat in monasteries and created arguments, but were engaged in the practices, making philosophical claims as an attempt to rationalize their experience. Because experiences, even of the same thing, vary from person to person, Buddhism kept growing into different schools and subschools, and undergoing the same process in the present. The fact that Buddhism is grounded in personal practice and understanding is what made its spread so easy and allowed to assimilate with other cultures. Enlightenment is paragon in all school of Buddhism, but techniques and philosophical description of enlightenment differ, and experience is always considered more valid than sophistry.
Hello friends whats he general feeling about Souka Gakkai/Nichiren Buddhism? I live in Japan and some old fuck came up to me and spoke to me about how great it was for like 2 hours, then revealed his intention of making me his 'son' as he never had children and giving me his legacy and his lifes mission to carry out (world peace) (probably through spreading Souka Gakkai)
>>85305
Pretty much.
>>85318
I'd actually say that Mahayana and Theravada don't disagree on many things. Maybe in the case of Pure Land it's a bit different?
>>85347
>When I say soul, I really mean pneuma, spirit, life force, an animating force independent or otherwise of consciousness.
A "life force" is recognized, but it's pretty much gasoline for the car and is necessarily there wherever life is, but it does not "cause" life and expires at death.
>>85663
I would suggest reading "The Foundations of Buddhism" (Rupert Gethin). It's the best introductory material I know, and is not from the point of view of a specific tradition but tries to take a global look while explaining the core of Buddha's teaching.
After that I'd suggest reading "In the Buddha's Words", which is an anthology of discourses from the Pali Canon. This will again be beneficial to get a solid grounding on the fundamental teachings of the Buddha, regardless of school/tradition.
After that you can start exploring Buddhism in whichever direction you want.
>>86265
The physical characteristics are not to be taken as actual fact. Very simple proof: if the Buddha looked that strange, it would be impossible for people to not recognize him, yet there are many examples of people that haven't seen him before talking to him or just looking at him without recognizing him as the Buddha. He looked just like any other monk, complete with shaved head, but if you saw him "in action" then you'd recognize him.
>>87303
> with no art, literature, and poetry, and different schools, right?
Art, literature and the like don't necessarily arise out of "spontaneous creativity". And Buddhism is not and never was about that. It's a modern fabrication that has no basis in Buddhism. That's what I take issue with.
Read "The Making of Buddhist Modernism" if you want to know how exactly this works. It's pretty much a must read in any case.
Other than that, of course experience plays a key role in the development and practice of Buddhism, but it's not exactly in the same way that romantic-inspired people present it. They don't actually vary from person to person that much because their core is the same, the person has to recognize what is what and filter accordingly, especially filtering out misleading experiences. If this wasn't the case, the Buddha's words would be fruitless, practicing meditation under teachers would be pointless and the kind of Enlightenment set out in Hesse's Siddhartha would be accurate in the frame of Buddhism.
>>83091
>r. Everything stoicism boils down to there being two kinds of things: things withing one's control (their mind) and things outside of their control (literally everything else). The things outside of your control are still important, they just can't direct you towards evil or falsehood because you alone are in control of your thoughts and actions.
but then the stoic understands that even his thoughts are not his, his emotions are not his, precisely because he does not control them: he has no clue why he chooses such words, why he has such tastes, why his body is not controllable.
so he goes full reflexivity: he leaves a space between what he thinks he controls and what he is. he applies equanimity towards things outside of him and inside of him. he has the intuition that the physical immobility is interesting and he begins to analyse., thanks to remaining equanimous as much as he can, what happens (likely inside of him) once that he is immobile. then he should become a buddha.
Reading Mystics and Zen Masters by Thomas Merton.
History of Buddhism is especially interesting because it is heavily linked to that mess that is Silk Road studies.
In the recent years I've been particularly interested in Early Buddhism and its spread along the Silk Road, as well as the impact of early Buddhism in post-Han Chinese culture.
Early Buddhism can be better understood if you have some knowledge regarding Upanisadic metaphysics (especially the concepts of Brahman vs Atman); however you can't fully understand Chan/Zen Buddhism without at least a basic knowledge of Daoism and Confucianism (the link between Buddhism and Daoism has been forced a bit too much by some enthusiasts, but it's no doubt that Chan Buddhism is the result of a Chinese digestion of Mahayana Buddhist doctrines).
>>87593
As a system Stoicism has similarities with Buddhism but it doesn't take into account things like the 4 Noble Truths and Dependent Origination, and without the development of wisdom related to those enlightenment/buddhahood is not possible. However, it's not unthinkable that some stoics intuitively figured these out in one way or the other and became pacekkabuddhas.
what happens to a girl is this:
-as a child, she can be saved by buddhism [or any doctrine not promoting hedonism]
-once she learns to spread her legs, she falls too much, too fast into hedonism
-after decades of her liberation, after her cunt used-up, she is exhausted by the hedonistic life, she calms herself a bit.
If she stumples into a religious person, she is willing to explore her spiritual side, through an exotic religion, since she remains still a hedonist.
Liberated women cannot be salvaged from hedonism. they just love hedonism and love to love hedonism. Sure the grannies are calmed enough to listen to another doctrine a bit, but they are old and remain incapable to make headway since they have been lacking reflexivity all their lives.
The least effort is already too much, and they will swing back into a milder hedonism many times before they reach an intermediate level.
Plus, they are scared of not reaching the goals as they feel the death coming for their relatives and themselves.
The sole female who can be in buddhism [or any religion which is studied AND applied] are little girls and the effect of the spiritual life must be appear before the liberation.
In passing, note that many future-nuns spread their legs, just like the other girls, before going into a monastery. generally, the young nuns became nuns because they think that they were hurt by chads and alphas in failing to understand what women are doing on earth.
the enrolment is different for men, because most men being betas, they experience dukkha far more than the whores. They gain a mild reflexivity quickly and durably so that they can make headway in buddhism.
BUT
many bikkhus still long for some meaning through women especially when their results have stalled. they loose faith and go back to their betaness.
>Nobody understands the dhamma but me
>>80903
you guys have read this ?
>Erik D. Curren Buddha's not smiling: uncovering corruption at the heart of Tibetan buddhism today
>All these ridiculously complicated practices outside of theravada
The Thai meditation masters do little else than grounding their sati in breath-, buddho- or walking meditation.
Ajahn Maha Bua didn't ever let go of his meditation word and attained in nine years.
>>86147
>I'm just saying Buddhism isn't incompatible with normal life. Enlightenment is
Please explain how enlightenment isn't compatible with modern life.
>>86570
In general, calling oneself Taoist is contrary to Taoism.
>>80903
I've always thought that Buddhism was an interesting topic. What do you guys think about all of these new age people jumping onto it? Is this age old religion doomed?
>>85599
>I think, as a religious practice for enlightenment, you need to be either a hermit living on the mountains or somewhere else with solitude OR in a monastery.
this is why the christians have their monasteries. but the christians decided to have priests to deal with the populace and monks who actually prACTICE. i THINK THAT this is divide is detrimental. It is better to show the monks practising to the people, instead of telling them, once a week, through the priests, to follow blindly such moral doctrine otherwise they will go to hell.
Christians have not used their powers well when they were trendy, and now that the lost it, they whine that the meditation is through buddhism
How many accomplished buddhists are there? I mean, can you show me a guy who fully realized everything buddhism strives for, like a rolemodel? If you're still practizing you must do something wrong I imagine.
There are nine levels of meditative concentration. The first four are the Four Dhyanas. These are concentrations on the form realm. The next five levels belong to the formless realm. When practising the first dhyana, you still think. At the other eight levels, thinking gives way to other energies. Formless concentrations are also practised in other traditions, but when they are practised outside of Buddhism, it is generally to escape from suffering rather than to realize the liberation that comes with insight into our suffering. When you use concentration to run away from yourself or your situation, it is wrong concentration. Sometimes we need to escape our problems for relief, but at some time we have to return to face them. Worldly concentration seeks to escape. Supra-mundane concentration aims at complete liberation. To practice samadhi is to live deeply each moment that is given us to live. Samadhi means concentration. In order to be concentrated, we should be mindful, fully present and aware of what is going on. Mindfulness brings about concentration. When you are deeply concentrated, you are absorbed in the moment. You become the moment. That is why samadhi is sometimes translated as "absorption."Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration lift us above the realms of sensual pleasures and craving, and we find ourselves lighter and happier. Our world is no longer gross and heavy, the realm of desires (karma dhatu). It is the realm of fine materiality, the realm of form (rupa dhatu). In the form realm, there are four levels of dhyana. Mindfulness, concentration, joy, happiness, peace, and equanimity continue to grow through these four levels.
After the fourth dhyana, the practitioner enters a deeper experience of concentration — the four formless dhyanas — where he or she can see deeply into reality. Here, sensual desire and materiality reveal their illusory nature and are no longer obstacles. You begin to see the impermanent, nonself, and interbeing nature of the phenomenal world. Earth, water, air, fire, space, time, nothingness, and perceptions inter-are. Nothing can be by itself alone. The object of the fifth level of concentration is limitless space. When we begin to practice this concentration, everything seems to be space. But as we practice more deeply, we see that space is composed of and exists only in "non-space elements,"like earth, water, air, fire, and consciousness. Because space is only one of the six elements that make up all material things, we know space does not have a separate, independent existence. According to the teachings of the Buddha, nothing has a separate self. So space and everything else inter-are. Space inter-is with the other five elements. The object of the sixth level of concentration is limitless consciousness. At first, we see only consciousness, but then we see that consciousness is also earth, water, air, fire, and space. What is true of space is also true of consciousness. The object of the seventh level of concentration is nothingness. With normal perception, we see flowers, fruit, teapots, and tables, and we think they exist separately of one another. But when we look more deeply, we see that the fruit is in the flower, and that the flower, the cloud, and the earth are in the fruit.
We go beyond outward appearances or signs and come to "signlessness."At first, we think that the members of our family are separate from one another, but afterwards we see that they contain each other. You are the way you are because I am the way I am. We see the intimate connection between people, and we go beyond signs. We used to think that the universe contains millions of separate entities. Now we understand "the nonexistence of signs." The eighth level of concentration is that of neither perception nor non-perception. We recognize that everything is produced by our perceptions, which are, at least in part, erroneous. Therefore, we see that we cannot rely on our old way of perceiving, and we want to be in direct touch with reality. We cannot stop perceiving altogether, but at least now we know that perception is perception of a sign. Since we no longer believe in the reality of signs, our perception becomes wisdom. We go beyond signs ("no perception"), but we do not become perceptionless ("no non-perception"). The ninth level of concentration is called cessation. "Cessation"here means the cessation of ignorance in our feelings and perceptions, not the cessation of feelings and perceptions. From this concentration is born insight. The poet Nguyen Du said, "As soon as we see with our eyes and hear with our ears, we open ourselves to suffering."We long to be in a state of concentration where we cannot see or hear anything, in a world where there is no perception. We wish to become a pine tree with the wind singing in our branches, because we believe that a pine tree does not suffer. The search for a place of nonsuffering is natural.
