Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Bringing attention to peace
Floating_Abu
Veteran
Split from another thread --
Floating AbuPrairieGhost firstly claimed:It wasn't about usefulness, it was about accuracy.It was an accurate correction.
In Buddhist terminology we could argue that passion is absolutely to be ended without remainder etc. That attention, (and Floating Abu, sorry, but it is in the Pali Canon and is Buddhism) should be directed towards nibbana, or peace, but...
PrairieGhost then brings an out of context alternately translated phrase:
He gives attention to imperturbability. While he is giving attention to imperturbability, his mind enters into imperturbability and acquires confidence, steadiness, and decision. When that is so, he understands thus: ‘While I am giving attention to imperturbability, my mind enters into imperturbability and acquires confidence, steadiness, and decision.’ In this way he has full awareness of that.
This is a meditation reference. And the alternate translation blows your connection i.e. the word "attention": http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.122.than.html
How does your out of context quote back up your claim that Buddhism says attention should be directed towards nibbana, or peace.
And is nibbana a place now or is it now just the word imperturability?
Additionally, in the context of all this - how does one change one's habits using this claim you have made (but cannot back up)
Finally for credibility, please explain where Buddhism says that "passion is absolutely to be ended without remainder"
Quote sutras or authentic teachers in context.
Abu
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
You say meditation instructions are out of context, but at later stages there is no duality between meditation and any other activity. Meditation is just sitting.
Imperturbable is synonymous with peace, attends to is synonymous or close to being synonymous with bringing attention to, attend and attention are from the same root. I'd say the former has more of an active connotation than the latter, however. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/attend+to
The common Mayahana Buddhist vows are as follows:
Please reference: Finally, the translation you bring -- These are endless vows, please know that.
It is different to your initial claim: "passion is absolutely to be ended without remainder"
Therefore, this is no evidence at all of it.
I will address your other point regarding passion shortly.
Best wishes,
Abu
Please provide the link to this sutra as you have a habit of providing quotes out of context.
And even before then, please note the defintion of dispel: Webster
Note regardless, that the phrase quoted is a description of the Deathless -- and it is entirely different to your claim that Buddhism says: "passion is absolutely to be ended without remainder"
This is an example where we spread and mis-spread our own understandings. Of course I am also guilty to this, but it should be clearly noted - for ourself and others.
Abu
These are other parts of the sutra you quoted, which you conveniently forget: The Buddha's instructions for deep meditation, jhanas etc is a specific context for guidance.
For you to generalise it out as saying one should direct attention to "peace" as you say is incorrect.
If you are faced with a life situation, a life threatening one, will you be directing your attention to peace?
All I am saying is your understandings need to be reconsidered and not in the light of an internet chat forum - go find a real teacher and a real Sangha who won't put up with your half baked understandings.
Well wishes,
Abu
http://www.here-and-now.org/wwwArticles/nibbana2.html
I don't find your rebuttals compelling, but I'll give them further consideration, and your other comments too. As I said before, I'm happy to leave this where it is.
To understand further what is meant by the unbinding of the mind, it is also important to know that the word upādāna — the sustenance for the fire — also means clinging, and that according to the Buddha the mind has four forms of clinging that keep it in bondage: clinging to sensuality, to views, to precepts & practices, and to doctrines of the self. In each case, the clinging is the passion & desire the mind feels for these things. To overcome this clinging, then, the mind must see not only the drawbacks of these four objects of clinging, but, more importantly, the drawbacks of the act of passion & desire itself.
The mind does this by following a threefold training: virtue, concentration, & discernment. Virtue provides the joy & freedom from remorse that are essential for concentration. Concentration provides an internal basis of pleasure, rapture, equanimity, & singleness of mind that are not dependent on sensual objects, so that discernment can have the strength & stability it needs to cut through the mind's clingings.
i.e. A rich person does not need to burn all their belongings to be a Buddhist because the source and the problem is the mind, it is not the object.
Buddhism encourages clarity, insight and genuine understanding - not half baked ideas.
Best wishes,
Abu
Anything that is "aflame"?
You are quoting completely without any understanding of what you are talking about. A word match does not equate to an understanding. Please stop misrepresenting the Buddha's teachings, and if you intend to continue, then at least you should be aware of yourself.
Abu
But perhaps you are too enarmored with your"self" to read the facts.
Abu
If you look back at my original point, it takes into account what you say here: As I criticised the kind of narrow view you attribute to me above.
And you are talking about nibbana.
How sad.
Abu
Best wishes,
Abu
The Arhat is one who has no more fetters. This is the dualistic vision of Buddhism. Where one realizes nirvana, yet the world is seen apart from self. Thus one attains peace, yet everything around is still suffering.
In Mahayana personal peace isn't necessarily the final goal though it is still realized on the path. This non dualistic vision of Buddhism teaches emptiness of self and phenomena. Thus coming to the conclusion that phenomena and self have no distinction. Appearance of suffering is non dual. Meaning anothers or our suffering is just suffering, thus compassion naturally arises. Both suffering and compassion are spontaneous arisings of emptiness itself. Thus even peace is seen to be the inherent condition of self and phenomena.
In the first stream of thought the vision of nirvana is narrow.
Whereas in Mahayana the vision is that of enlightenment, which leads to nirvana, but not necessarily the end goal.
Ignorance or rather the capacity for sentient beings to suffer is infinite.
Wisdom or the capacity to see directly the emptiness as suchness is infinite.
Just sharing some theories. I don't necessarily believe any of this but its just food for thought.
In the path of the Arhat, one needs to extinguish the fetters through renouncing. Thus karmic habits are not formed or planted. Thus the Arhat is able to abide in Nirvana without having to worry about afflictive emotions, etc.
Whereas in the Bodhisattva path, the fetters are extinguished through renouncing and cultivating positive karma. The goal is full Buddhahood and all the qualities of a Buddha.
In Vajrayana the goal is to transform the negative emotions and thoughts into positive ones through working with the energies. Thus nothing is lost but everything is used for the sake of enlightenment. This is structured on top of the Bodhisattva path.
In Dzogchen nothing is transformed or renounced. Ones real condition is introduced by the guru and all practices revolve around recognizing one's natural state, which is enlightenment.
The whole bringing attention to peace is part of the dualistic vision of Buddhism. Where one actively renounces harm and negativity so that one can cultivate concentration and ultimately allow wisdom to fruition. Thus realizing peace.
In the non dual vision of Buddhism nirvana and samsara corresponds with wisdom and ignorance. Wisdom is the recognition of owns own natural state. Ignorance is falling into dualism thus not recognizing the natural state.
Just more info.
I showed quite clearly that
a. nibbana is regarded as the peaceful, and of course we are to bring our attention to peace.
b. In Buddhism passion is to be ended
Now I am not dogmatic on these points, their effectiveness as doctrine is conditional on many factors.
But to be frank, the important point is the graceless way in which you have conducted this debate, which I think will be clear to anyone reading; and this kind of behavior is dealt with in the following extracts from the Pali Canon: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.012.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn11/sn11.004.olen.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn07/sn07.002.than.html
Your 'apparent' manners belie your depth.
You did not respond to any of the points above which clearly show the mistaken nature of your understandings. The most comical one was where you posted an article about 'fire' and forgot to read the point of teaching was the clinging -- not the fire itself.
You conveniently respond to what is convenient for your game.
Anyway I am happy you found new quotes to back you up. Let's look at them again, one at a time: Here is the full sutra:
At Savatthi. "Monks, I will teach you the phenomena to be comprehended, as well as comprehension. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."
"As you say, lord," the monks responded.
The Blessed One said, "And which are the phenomena to be comprehended? Form is a phenomenon to be comprehended. Feeling ... Perception ... Fabrications ... Consciousness is a phenomenon to be comprehended. These are called phenomena to be comprehended.
"And which is comprehension? Any ending of passion, ending of aversion, ending of delusion. [1] This is called comprehension."
Note
1.
Comprehension here means the arahant's full-knowing (see MN 117). As SN 56.11 shows, the first noble truth of suffering and stress is to be comprehended. As SN 56.20 further implies, when the first noble truth has been comprehended, the tasks with regard to all the other noble truths have been completed as well.
What the Buddha says is correct. Comprehension is the ending of greed, hatred and delusion ie. the realisation of the Four Noble Truths in this context.
It is the Buddha's way of enuncation of this again. Any ending of delusion is a comprehension. If you see through that now, you have comprehended with insight into the realisation of truth. And so it is with anger, with greed, with fabrications etc.
But it is not as you say to cease passions without remainder.
Perhaps you imagine through your readings that a Buddha is a robot perhaps, with no passion?
The Fundemental vehicle is the ending of all passions, fetters, and what not.
This is where Mahayana diverges.
The Mahayana vehicle does ends negative passions but places emphasis on developing positive passions. Because individual peace is not enough. The vision is non dualistic and such positive qualities are manifested for the benefit of the whole existence, which in essence is the truth body that we all share.
Please note the alternate translation which gives you the SPECIFIC translation of the word you call passion in this text.
"Thus it should be understood that the eye is not the fetter..., the tongue..., the mind..., but that based on these two desire and lust arise, and they are the fetter. The Blessed One, friend, has eyes, he sees objects with the eye. But in the Blessed One there is no desire or lust. The Blessed One's heart is completely liberated. The Blessed One has a tongue..., a mind, he knows thoughts with the mind. But in the Blessed One there is no desire or lust. The Blessed One's heart is completely liberated. Thus it should be understood that the eye is not the fetter..., the tongue..., the mind, but that based on these two desire and lust arise, and they are the fetter.
"Thus it should be understood that the eye is not the fetter..., the tongue..., the mind..., but that based on these two desire and lust arise, and they are the fetter. The Blessed One, friend, has eyes, he sees objects with the eye. But in the Blessed One there is no desire or lust. The Blessed One's heart is completely liberated. The Blessed One has a tongue..., a mind, he knows thoughts with the mind. But in the Blessed One there is no desire or lust. The Blessed One's heart is completely liberated. Thus it should be understood that the eye is not the fetter..., the tongue..., the mind, but that based on these two desire and lust arise, and they are the fetter."
And the specific translation for what you call passions is actually:
Chandaraaga. Chanda is, as such, an ethically neutral term for "intention," etc. But in combination with raaga "lust, greed," it is definitely unwholesome. It is this state, based on the coexistence of eye and sight-objects, etc., that constitutes the "fetter."
In the absence of that proof, you must at least accept that apparent manners are better than none.
It is good to take the suttas I posted to heart. At first one has to struggle to apply them, but in time it becomes one's effortless nature. In between, there comes a point when we directly see the suffering we cause ourselves from not heeding their advice.
I am at the limit of my skill now. I see the impermanence of the hope that you will let this go, and allow that others see differently to you, and see that there is a better way to discuss the dhamma than through animosity.
That was your initial statement, which you have been failing to be able to back up ever since. Or have you forgotten completely in your word searches.
And the person who said 'There is no desire or passion in the Blessed One.' was Thanissaro's translation above. Now you are trying to take his words as your own. Too bad.
Abu
I also see that when this is interpreted as Buddhas being robots, the same words are incorrect.
That was the original point which sparked this whole thread, and it appears this is your view also.
You also selectively quoted me. The quote should read:
b. No, that is not true.
Every point you brought was false. Only the last quoted sutra was more credible as at least you did not divert the points or misrepresent the meaning - but please kindly reference the alternate translation, which might be better.
Thanks for the Pali Canon sutras, I agree with them.
It's also standard practice to understand the teachings before you go around spreading them as fact. When in doubt, quote.
I hope you have a good path, you have a good mind.
Abu
Definition of lie -
1. a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.
2. something intended or serving to convey a false impression; imposture:
3. an inaccurate or false statement. Floating Abu referenced - http://newbuddhist.com/discussion/comment/286719#Comment_286719 @PrairieGhost - I will say it again.
You have lied and unabashedly.
Hiding under the ad-hominem, niceties game is just a facade.
You made the statements definitively - i.e. completely false statements, and misrepresentations.
It's very obvious. Why do you want to hide from what you have done?
Best wishes,
Abu
Sorry, but I am more interested in the substance than facades, but granted being nice is nice for the social wheels. And generally we are nice to nice people.
I generally don't like people who lie outright etc. i.e. actions speak louder than words.
Yes and your effortless nature is really shining through :rolleyes:
I'm sure someone will believe you, probably yourself for one...
Abu
But this is also very interesting -- So now you are saying that your whole argument in this thread was arguing against yourself as you are now saying that some passion is needed?
Maybe you are just completely unclear?
Best wishes,
Abu
Very interesting indeed.
No interest, nice touch :ninja:
i.e passion does not need to be ended without remainder now apparently
So make up your mind - you are lying or you are just confused
Does passion need to be ended as you have been arguing through this WHOLE time
Or
Should there be passion left?
:facepalm:
Changing the story, the lies, the lines to suit your arguments, image and self preservation.
Well your quotes don't lie unfortunately for you but I grant you, you are a slick little bee
Go find a teacher, and if you can't, try not to drag people down with you.
:rolleyes: