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.
@Grayman said:
Somehow I feel like you didn't even answer my question...?
Have you ever been in contact with a person who has had a psychotic breakout?
Do you think they can bring themselves to even consider "controlling" anything or anyone?
Do you really think your question is relevant to the thread?
@AllbuddhaBound said:
Dhammadragon - The thing I wanted to consider was about our insistence on clinging to delusions. In the strictest sense, most people who live a secular life can be considered to be clinging to delusions. The lifestyle we lead, our indulgences, the sex we have, our standing in community, our beliefs about what is right and wrong, our paranoias and personality disorders are considerably different than the experiences of those that live in a monastery. Most of us dabble. Who is willing to live an austere and simple life of a monk? And if you don't go for the full life, doesn't that make a person a half-assed Buddhist? I admit it, I am a half-assed Buddhist. If I really wanted to be an all out Buddhist, my life would be very different. I like holding onto delusions far too much to be anything else.
Well, in some suttas the Buddha seems to have addressed the situation of the layman, too.
In Asvaghosha's "A Life of the Buddha" (this quotation comes from the Dhammapada), you can read: "Though a person be ornamented with jewels, the heart may have conquered the senses. The outward form does not constitute religion or affect the mind. Thus the body of a shramana may wear an ascetic's garb while his mind is immersed in worldliness. _
_"There is no distinction between the layman and the hermit, if but both have banished the thought of self."
I have mentioned Anâthapindika on other threads.
He was an extremely wealthy but compassionate man who supported the Buddha's work and did plenty of charity work.
When one day he expressed certain qualms about his affluent social standing in life, specifically whether he should relinquish his family and fortune to follow a hermit's life, the Buddha discouraged him.
He said that he was more useful to his fellow human beings in the place he now occupied.
In my opinion, becoming a monk, or leading an austere lifestyle, is no guarantee that you will be an all-out Buddhist.
You can be plunged deeply in the world and not be deluded by attachment and craving.
2
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
@Grayman, That's right. She didn't. because it's off-topic, and not what she meant.
@AllbuddhaBound said:
Most of us dabble. Who is willing to live an austere and simple life of a monk? And if you don't go for the full life, doesn't that make a person a half-assed Buddhist? I admit it, I am a half-assed Buddhist. If I really wanted to be an all out Buddhist, my life would be very different. I like holding onto delusions far too much to be anything else.
@AllbuddhaBound: the last couple of days, I've been thinking about your words here.
Have you ever considered taking up a monastic path or do you feel incomplete as a Buddhist if you don't go "all the way"?
We are not all cut out for a monastic life, but I do feel we can do a lot of good and be good Buddhists even within the turmoil of the maddening crowd.
I have just been reading Chapter XXII of the Dhammapada, "Hell," and better to be a consistent layperson than a bad monk.
@AllbuddhaBound. Leaving the life of a householder and becoming a left home person is not free of struggle or vexation. The simple and austere life may upon experience be far from what you think. The layperson is not lesser nor the anchorite greater.
@grackle said:
AllbuddhaBound. Leaving the life of a householder and becoming a left home person is not free of struggle or vexation. The simple and austere life may upon experience be far from what you think. The layperson is not lesser nor the anchorite greater.
The thing is, not that monks are better than laypersons. And not that Buddhists are superior to other people. The question is, can a person become enlightened and live in a secular world? The standard people in the secular world hold themselves to, does not compare with a life where the only thing you have is the clothes on your back and a bowl to hold other people"s charity.
0
HamsakagoosewhispererPolishing the 'just so'Veteran
Yes, that's exactly what the peeps been saying. You can.
What standard do you hold yourself to? Your opinion matters for you, other people's opinions are for them.
It doesn't matter what you have or don't have. Waking up is not a condition of how 'little' of the world you have. You are seeing the world as inherently hostile to your practice maybe? It actually isn't, but I remember when it felt that way. Ride this out and see where you go with it over time. You aren't about to be kicked out or struck by a lightning bolt. A monk has all the capacity in the world to screw it up as a layperson does. Yes they do.
@seeker242 said:
I should hope so! If it weren't for delusions, there would be no point in practicing Buddhism to begin with. Buddhism is only useful for people with delusions. A being with no delusions doesn't even need Buddhism!
Indeed.
Accepting or understanding we are living in a fabrication of our making, choices, karma, socialisation, life choices, parenting, experiences etc.
'I am not sure I am that deluded', is where we start.
Understanding the extent of our ignorance is the path.
Knowing the basis of our being, it's emptiness, changes the nature of our being.
@SpinyNorman said:
It depends what we mean by "delusional" and "Buddhist".
The core of the OP would be, in @AllbuddhaBound's words, "The thing I wanted to consider was about our insistence on clinging to delusions. In the strictest sense, most people who live a secular life can be considered to be clinging to delusions. The lifestyle we lead, our indulgences, the sex we have, our standing in community, our beliefs about what is right and wrong, our paranoias and personality disorders are considerably different than the experiences of those that live in a monastery. Most of us dabble. Who is willing to live an austere and simple life of a monk? And if you don't go for the full life, doesn't that make a person a half-assed Buddhist? I admit it, I am a half-assed Buddhist. If I really wanted to be an all out Buddhist, my life would be very different. I like holding onto delusions far too much to be anything else."
This is what AllbuddhaBound means by "delusional" and "Buddhist" in this context.
Well @SpinyNorman, I did not mean that it does not make real difference to our lives. Just that there are differences, and then there are DIFFERENCES. I do not think for a moment that Buddhism has no value in your life unless you become enlightened.
I have seen a number of changes in my own attitude and way of looking at things and believe me, it was needed and welcomed. But when we live in a secular world, we are constantly being drawn back into our own delusions. And sometimes, we like those delusions and we don't really want to give them up. By dedicating your life to Buddhism, you would hopefully be able to overcome most delusions if not all. But do we really want it? I tend to be comfortable with some areas of my life and I am not willing to go to any measure to overcome my delusions. I suspect many others are like me.
That may be why I am not able to consistently sustain practice that would create Jhanas as others have experienced.
But when we live in a secular world, we are constantly being drawn back into our own delusions. And sometimes, we like those delusions and we don't really want to give them up.
I wonder though if "habits" would work better than "delusions" in this context. We are constantly drawn back into our habits ( attachments? ) due to the persistence of underlying delusions, for example believing that habitual behaviour can bring lasting satisfaction.
I believe delusions works better. It may have nothing to do with habits at all. What if we are deluded and thinking the world has it in for us. Is that a habit or is it an attitude? What if we think we won't be happy unless we have a certain possession? No habit, just a deluded belief. In fact, the yearning and desire for a situation which we do not have, leads to delusion. It is not okay unless things change, when they don't have to change at all. When our thinking is faulty, it leads to delusion. First comes the thought, then comes the action (or habit).
To quote the Buddha:
"“We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts, we make the world.”
Can behaviors be deluded, or thoughts?
1
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
For a start that's not an accurate translation, and has been demonstrated to be not really what the Buddha taught.
You have a bit of a bee in your bonnet about delusions, haven't you?
I myself suffer from some delusions, and so I have been thinking a lot about them. Mine tend to be delusions of persecution but they made me think about delusion in general. I believe we are all deluded, but it is a matter of degree. It is on a spectrum the way I see it.
Is anyone truly free of delusions? I believe if you have convinced yourself you hold no delusions, you are deluding yourself. In much the same way Buddhist thought asks us to accept imperfection as a reality, is it ok to believe in our own perfection?
@AllbuddhaBound said:
To quote the Buddha:
"“We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts, we make the world.”
@federica said:
For a start that's not an accurate translation, and has been demonstrated to be not really what the Buddha taught.
Dear old Max Müller's translation of the Dhammapada begins: "All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts."
A newer translation by Gil Fronsdal begins:
_"All experience is preceded by mind, led by mind, made by mind." _
Bodhipaksa's explanation of why the former is not quite accurate:
@Greg911 said:
Go some place where there is noting but nature No roads no signs only you and nature. No delusions.
Impossible. If you are deluded, you carry your delusions with you wherever you go.
The whole world, your reality will be a projection of your delusions.
Have you ever stopped naming and stopped talking to yourself.
If you believe that we are what we think. What are you if you are not thinking?
Or do you believe you can not be in the here and now without thinking?
0
Toraldris -`-,-{@ Zen Nud... Buddhist @}-,-`- East Coast, USAVeteran
edited November 2014
Thinking isn't everything. Our views and perceptions color our world, and they are prior to thought.
My comments are open to everyone. I have given you a way to verify what I am saying you are just giving me words. You were responding to my post. You didn't answer my question. Are you assuming I have read Deepak Chopra I haven't.
@Toraldris said:
I'm not the one you were asking, I was just chiming in with better information.
@Greg911 said:
You were responding to my post. You didn't answer my question. Are you assuming I have read Deepak Chopra I haven't.
I don't know if I am the one you were asking.
Just in case, I found the shoe and I'm lacing it up.
One thing is sure: it's not me who assumed you read Deepak Chopra.
(Who brought up Deepak Chopra, anyway?? )
You have your experiences. We have ours.
This experience tends to colour our view of the world, as @Toraldris so rightly expressed with other words.
Only through relentless practice and a good dose of suprahuman effort, can you escape the lens of your preconceptions and your delusions.
That is why we tread the N8P: to hopefully broaden the scope of our lens and rise above our delusions.
We can respond to posts as best we can.
Whether our posts actually answer your questions, that does not depend on us.
2
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited November 2014
@AllbuddhaBound, my opinion is that your stream of thinking with regard to this specific topic is too rigid, too inflexible, too yes/no, either/or, this or that.
I would recommend you read the sutta here, and not be constrained into thinking that if you don't do ~this~ then you're on the road to failure.
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
edited November 2014
The only problem with being drawn back into delusion is that it means the delusion was never dispelled. Once we see the snake is really a garden hose, there is no going back to thinking it's a snake.
Being willfully ignorant is more akin to trying to keep the delusion whereas falling back into old patterns is to give in to habit.
1
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
I can't say if I am deluded or not. If I believe something to be true but it isn't, I am deluded but won't know that until I learn otherwise.
If I am not deluded I will never know.
I think I will just keep on trying to get wisdom and compassion to line up. Then the delusions can come and go as they please.
@iamthezenmaster said:
aren't we all delusional untill we awake?
Not so.
The awake are aware of their delusions, for example that they were ever asleep . . .
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
What if we think we won't be happy unless we have a certain possession? No habit, just a deluded belief. In fact, the yearning and desire for a situation which we do not have, leads to delusion.
Though it seems like delusions are habitual, or at least lead to habitual thinking and behaviour. Also desire and delusion seems a bit chicken and egg - maybe it's more like delusion leads to desire, rather than the other way round?
@DhammaDragon said:
We can respond to posts as best we can.
Whether our posts actually answer your questions, that does not depend on us.
Actually it does.
Metta
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
@Greg911, no it doesn't. How you choose to interpret meaning and intention, is up to your perception. We can try to be as clear as we can; if however, "you" refuse to see the response as helpful, that is not 'our' problem, that's 'yours'.
I don't thing @AllbuddhaBound is deluded. I think in some ways he is disillusioned, because he believes that unless he leads the life of a renunciate, he is doomed to never attaining enlightenment, which in my personal opinion, is misguided and incorrect.
@dhammachick said:
Or you are deluding yourself by thinking we have to be the ones to answer your questions..........
How would I be deluding myself by asking you to answer a question? Your answer helps us see where we are it helps us both. I feel I have already come to understand a great truth from my interactions.
Comments
Yes.
Have you ever been in contact with a person who has had a psychotic breakout?
Do you think they can bring themselves to even consider "controlling" anything or anyone?
Do you really think your question is relevant to the thread?
Well, in some suttas the Buddha seems to have addressed the situation of the layman, too.
In Asvaghosha's "A Life of the Buddha" (this quotation comes from the Dhammapada), you can read:
"Though a person be ornamented with jewels, the heart may have conquered the senses. The outward form does not constitute religion or affect the mind. Thus the body of a shramana may wear an ascetic's garb while his mind is immersed in worldliness. _
_"There is no distinction between the layman and the hermit, if but both have banished the thought of self."
I have mentioned Anâthapindika on other threads.
He was an extremely wealthy but compassionate man who supported the Buddha's work and did plenty of charity work.
When one day he expressed certain qualms about his affluent social standing in life, specifically whether he should relinquish his family and fortune to follow a hermit's life, the Buddha discouraged him.
He said that he was more useful to his fellow human beings in the place he now occupied.
In my opinion, becoming a monk, or leading an austere lifestyle, is no guarantee that you will be an all-out Buddhist.
You can be plunged deeply in the world and not be deluded by attachment and craving.
@Grayman, That's right. She didn't. because it's off-topic, and not what she meant.
Back to topic!!
Sorry, I dont understand.
I was only trying to understand what was written in response to me not deviate from the topic.
@AllbuddhaBound: the last couple of days, I've been thinking about your words here.
Have you ever considered taking up a monastic path or do you feel incomplete as a Buddhist if you don't go "all the way"?
We are not all cut out for a monastic life, but I do feel we can do a lot of good and be good Buddhists even within the turmoil of the maddening crowd.
I have just been reading Chapter XXII of the Dhammapada, "Hell," and better to be a consistent layperson than a bad monk.
@AllbuddhaBound. Leaving the life of a householder and becoming a left home person is not free of struggle or vexation. The simple and austere life may upon experience be far from what you think. The layperson is not lesser nor the anchorite greater.
The thing is, not that monks are better than laypersons. And not that Buddhists are superior to other people. The question is, can a person become enlightened and live in a secular world? The standard people in the secular world hold themselves to, does not compare with a life where the only thing you have is the clothes on your back and a bowl to hold other people"s charity.
Yes, that's exactly what the peeps been saying. You can.
What standard do you hold yourself to? Your opinion matters for you, other people's opinions are for them.
It doesn't matter what you have or don't have. Waking up is not a condition of how 'little' of the world you have. You are seeing the world as inherently hostile to your practice maybe? It actually isn't, but I remember when it felt that way. Ride this out and see where you go with it over time. You aren't about to be kicked out or struck by a lightning bolt. A monk has all the capacity in the world to screw it up as a layperson does. Yes they do.
It depends what we mean by "delusional" and "Buddhist".
Oh like THAT'S not going to muddy the waters further..........
Indeed.
Accepting or understanding we are living in a fabrication of our making, choices, karma, socialisation, life choices, parenting, experiences etc.
The core of the OP would be, in @AllbuddhaBound's words, "The thing I wanted to consider was about our insistence on clinging to delusions. In the strictest sense, most people who live a secular life can be considered to be clinging to delusions. The lifestyle we lead, our indulgences, the sex we have, our standing in community, our beliefs about what is right and wrong, our paranoias and personality disorders are considerably different than the experiences of those that live in a monastery. Most of us dabble. Who is willing to live an austere and simple life of a monk? And if you don't go for the full life, doesn't that make a person a half-assed Buddhist? I admit it, I am a half-assed Buddhist. If I really wanted to be an all out Buddhist, my life would be very different. I like holding onto delusions far too much to be anything else."
This is what AllbuddhaBound means by "delusional" and "Buddhist" in this context.
Thank you @DhammaDragon, that is exactly what I meant.
So "delusional" in the sense that thinking that if we dabble with practice it will make any real difference to our lives?
Well @SpinyNorman, I did not mean that it does not make real difference to our lives. Just that there are differences, and then there are DIFFERENCES. I do not think for a moment that Buddhism has no value in your life unless you become enlightened.
I have seen a number of changes in my own attitude and way of looking at things and believe me, it was needed and welcomed. But when we live in a secular world, we are constantly being drawn back into our own delusions. And sometimes, we like those delusions and we don't really want to give them up. By dedicating your life to Buddhism, you would hopefully be able to overcome most delusions if not all. But do we really want it? I tend to be comfortable with some areas of my life and I am not willing to go to any measure to overcome my delusions. I suspect many others are like me.
That may be why I am not able to consistently sustain practice that would create Jhanas as others have experienced.
But when we live in a secular world, we are constantly being drawn back into our own delusions. And sometimes, we like those delusions and we don't really want to give them up.
I wonder though if "habits" would work better than "delusions" in this context. We are constantly drawn back into our habits ( attachments? ) due to the persistence of underlying delusions, for example believing that habitual behaviour can bring lasting satisfaction.
I believe delusions works better. It may have nothing to do with habits at all. What if we are deluded and thinking the world has it in for us. Is that a habit or is it an attitude? What if we think we won't be happy unless we have a certain possession? No habit, just a deluded belief. In fact, the yearning and desire for a situation which we do not have, leads to delusion. It is not okay unless things change, when they don't have to change at all. When our thinking is faulty, it leads to delusion. First comes the thought, then comes the action (or habit).
To quote the Buddha:
"“We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts, we make the world.”
Can behaviors be deluded, or thoughts?
For a start that's not an accurate translation, and has been demonstrated to be not really what the Buddha taught.
You have a bit of a bee in your bonnet about delusions, haven't you?
Why is that, exactly....?
Care to share?
I myself suffer from some delusions, and so I have been thinking a lot about them. Mine tend to be delusions of persecution but they made me think about delusion in general. I believe we are all deluded, but it is a matter of degree. It is on a spectrum the way I see it.
Is anyone truly free of delusions? I believe if you have convinced yourself you hold no delusions, you are deluding yourself. In much the same way Buddhist thought asks us to accept imperfection as a reality, is it ok to believe in our own perfection?
No. They would cease to exist.
I can point out the Buddhas delusions and mine and even the Sun of Cods - but hey that would be picky . . .
It is perfectly OK to know what is free and what is the price of delusion . . .
Go some place where there is noting but nature No roads no signs only you and nature. No delusions.
Whether you are alone in nature or not, you can still suffer from the deluded belief that you exist. Or that you don't exist. Or both, or neither.
If you do not name it and you don't talk to your self there will be no delusions.
Don't think about it do it..
Dear old Max Müller's translation of the Dhammapada begins:
"All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts."
A newer translation by Gil Fronsdal begins:
_"All experience is preceded by mind, led by mind, made by mind." _
Bodhipaksa's explanation of why the former is not quite accurate:
http://www.fakebuddhaquotes.com/what-you-think-you-become/
Impossible. If you are deluded, you carry your delusions with you wherever you go.
The whole world, your reality will be a projection of your delusions.
Have you ever stopped naming and stopped talking to yourself.
If you believe that we are what we think. What are you if you are not thinking?
Or do you believe you can not be in the here and now without thinking?
Thinking isn't everything. Our views and perceptions color our world, and they are prior to thought.
You didn't answer my question.
If you want to see how your senses affect what you see. Then watch the tv with the sound off.
I'm not the one you were asking, I was just chiming in with better information.
My comments are open to everyone. I have given you a way to verify what I am saying you are just giving me words. You were responding to my post. You didn't answer my question. Are you assuming I have read Deepak Chopra I haven't.
I don't know if I am the one you were asking.
)
Just in case, I found the shoe and I'm lacing it up.
One thing is sure: it's not me who assumed you read Deepak Chopra.
(Who brought up Deepak Chopra, anyway??
You have your experiences. We have ours.
This experience tends to colour our view of the world, as @Toraldris so rightly expressed with other words.
Only through relentless practice and a good dose of suprahuman effort, can you escape the lens of your preconceptions and your delusions.
That is why we tread the N8P: to hopefully broaden the scope of our lens and rise above our delusions.
We can respond to posts as best we can.
Whether our posts actually answer your questions, that does not depend on us.
@AllbuddhaBound, my opinion is that your stream of thinking with regard to this specific topic is too rigid, too inflexible, too yes/no, either/or, this or that.
I would recommend you read the sutta here, and not be constrained into thinking that if you don't do ~this~ then you're on the road to failure.
aren't we all delusional untill we awake?
Being willfully ignorant is more akin to trying to keep the delusion whereas falling back into old patterns is to give in to habit.
If I am not deluded I will never know.
I think I will just keep on trying to get wisdom and compassion to line up. Then the delusions can come and go as they please.
Not so.
The awake are aware of their delusions, for example that they were ever asleep . . .
I agree @lobster
Even though mountains are not mountains and rivers are not rivers, they are once again mountains and rivers.
Some delusions are tools.
But presumably the awake wouldn't have any delusions to be aware of?
What if we think we won't be happy unless we have a certain possession? No habit, just a deluded belief. In fact, the yearning and desire for a situation which we do not have, leads to delusion.
Though it seems like delusions are habitual, or at least lead to habitual thinking and behaviour. Also desire and delusion seems a bit chicken and egg - maybe it's more like delusion leads to desire, rather than the other way round?
Whether our posts actually answer your questions, that does not depend on us.
Actually it does.
Metta
@Greg911, no it doesn't. How you choose to interpret meaning and intention, is up to your perception. We can try to be as clear as we can; if however, "you" refuse to see the response as helpful, that is not 'our' problem, that's 'yours'.
I don't thing @AllbuddhaBound is deluded. I think in some ways he is disillusioned, because he believes that unless he leads the life of a renunciate, he is doomed to never attaining enlightenment, which in my personal opinion, is misguided and incorrect.
Or you are deluding yourself by thinking we have to be the ones to answer your questions..........
How would I be deluding myself by asking you to answer a question? Your answer helps us see where we are it helps us both. I feel I have already come to understand a great truth from my interactions.
Metta
Asking a question is not the delusion, expecting us to have the answers you want is the delusion.
No you don't want to be told to answer. That is your delusion. Don't try to hide your childish ways. With Buddhist teaching.
And you can quit accusing people of poor behaviour, because that's the pot calling the kettle black.