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.
Am I correct...?
Hello all. This is my first attempt at a serious study of Buddhism. I have taken many years to get to this point, and to be honest, really don't know anything. I have studied many religious expressions, mostly Christianity in its many and diverse (and sometimes viciously oppposing) segments. At this time i attend a Quaker meeting, and the mystical qualities of the Quakers have appealed to me. As such, universalism has become my understanding of salvation, but the actual appearance of persons of great evil, Hitler, Jeffery Dahmer, Jack the Ripper and so on, causes me to think of exactly how this universal salvation works. This has led to a real grasp of either Roan Catholic purgatory, or re-birth. I truly believe that our consciousness survives, and here it may be too long to detail. Suffice to say this, as our mind uses electrical impulses to controll our nervous system, and this is energy, and energy does not cease to exist, thus our consciousness is pure energy, and goes to another "border" as I read once, to live on with whatever it's vital essence is. Am I correct in this?
0
Comments
Not saying consciousness doesn't exist independent of the brain. Don't know. But I do know that all eastern traditions repeatedly tell us that Truth can neither be grasped nor communicated using our intellect.
We are Buddhists because 'Buddha' merely means 'awake'.
And that's all he said. That he was 'awake'.
he'd 'got it'.
And as his teachings bear out, he was right.
What do you mean? O_o What do you think Nibbana means?
Why can't you change in this life?
I firmly believe that you can change in this life, thats not my question. My question related to whether or not kamma can be changed. Or is it the same thing. You must understand that I am very new to Buddhism, and come from a strictly christian background, for us, christians I mean, all you get is this life, and if you "choose" not to believe in Christ, you go to hell. I no longer believe this, and so this is the reason why I'm lookingat aith traditions different than my own.
pure naked intuition, direct realization of mind essence, Feeling, which is beyond the intellect, you could say the intellect of the spirit, of the senses, of the whole totality of being
for even something underlies the intellect. knowing has multiple dimensions, perceived in one place, but maybe not the other. what is reasoning? what is it founded upon?
it's an imponderable.
But if you examine his teachings, you will find he was right. His subsequent teachings bear this out.
Yes, of course.
Through your thoughts, words and actions, you can create Positive Kamma, and transform negative Kamma.
Well, either this, or proof that your disbelief is correct....
You need convincing, don't you?
Is that it?
I'm not looking for information only, but the experience of the truth. The quote earlier, how do I know I'm readingthis post, sitting in front of a computer only proves the point. But there must be a measuring rod to gauge the answer, or is this also only a perception?
I think that is about right - that consciousness survives after life. This is something I read in Buddhism. But be careful that what I say "consciousness" is just a conventional word to describe the essence that survives to eternality. The "consciousness" that is aware that you are sitting in front of the computer, or that the color blue is blue. This unenlightened "consciousness" will always take rebirth due to the force of karma.
We are given the practice, and over time as we follow it, we begin to gain an understanding of what the goal actually is. Then, somewhere down the path, we come to understand how elementary and inadequate our understanding was, because we have come to a deeper understanding, and then ... Well, somewhere along the way we relax into the process and stop worrying about what our destination is like.
I read somewhere in the sutras that the Buddha and his disciples did that too. Do I believe?
How do you "read something in Buddhism"? Nothing about a "relinking consciousness" in the suttas. In fact, "Buddhism" states that the Buddha scolded a monk for suggesting such a thing. [MN 38]
And even IF "Buddhism told you so":
That would be "atman." That would go against everything the Buddha taught.
Yes, if we are talking Theravada, you are absolutely right.
There are many prespective in Mahayana that explain things differently. So we will leave the thread as it is, and let the oringinal poster take what he/she can.
Thank you.
Right, but it would be better to cite sources and explain your perspective rather than telling beginners things that the suttas directly contradict covered by a blanket statement of "Buddhism says."
When reflecting upon this deeply complex issue its important to distinguish between Buddhist 'rebirth' and other forms of 'reincarnation'. I know others have pointed you in this direction but here is my spin.
I've often thought of 'Rebirth' like a chain of vexatious ripples running through the cosmos. The disturbance of the water represents the collective consequence of temporary minds trying to fix themselves in a single place (suffering). Yet since agitation creates more agitation, other ripples (other minds) are created and the process repeats over and over again.
Here is the interesting bit. These ripples contain the affects of past ripples, stretching back through time. So it could be that a subsequent ripple has the same trajectory as its next door neighbour i.e. contains the same affects (e.g. emotional disposition) although it is a seemingly different ripple. So while there is definitely continuity in rebirth that is not the same as saying that there is a fixed 'self' or essence which travels from life to life. For a Buddhist that would be like saying that a droplet of water keeps its individual identity even after it has been droped into an ocean.
To extend this metaphor a little, the goal of Buddhism is to still the ripples so that the water (the universe) is serene. This is not the same as anihilation or the end of consciousness, merely the end of its desire to be fixed in one place, precipitating the cycle of birth and death. Other people on this forum may have a different interpretation of this of course. I'm more than happy to be corrected
Again, you are right - from the Theravada point of view.
Although I did not cite a Mahayana sutra that says such things, the sutras still falls within "Buddhism says", if at all you consider Mahayana as true Buddhist teachings.
Apparently, this site seem to welcome mostly Theravada view of Buddhism. And I respect that and will sign off this site all together. Thanks for the stay.
May all be happy then.
Then you should cite a Mahayana sutra or at least say, "according to certain Mahayana traditions...". Otherwise, people walk around saying "Buddhism says that pigs can fly." "Buddhism says..." is a blanket statement and it isn't a responsible statement to make in a beginners' forum where many people haven't chosen a particular path and many are even unaware that there are different schools to begin with.
This makes no sense.
Absolutely not what I said. You completely missed the point.
Pretty silly to leave the site over this.
Hope you'll be back after you take the Bodhisattva vow.
No, what this site welcomes is people who are willing to quote and verify sources for what they attest the teachings say.
Whether it's Theravada, Mahayana, Zen, New land or whatever - if you say "Buddhism says" - prove it.
or simply say "I believe I remember once reading *such-and-such* but I don't remember where, who said it, when or in what context".
Frankly, anyone who tells me 'Buddhism says' is fudging the issue and clouding the discussion, and I do NOT consider it 'true Buddhist teachings', no matter what school they purport to be saying it comes from.
so either come up with the goods, or admit you're unsure.
Simple.
Thanks.
Oh come on now.
It is my understanding that the ego-mind cannot know what Enlightenment/Awakening/Realization is. Mind can only 'know of' Realization. But, mind is a very good tool for knowing what is not Awakening. So, it is simply a matter of elimination of what is not Awakening.
To me, if it comes and goes it is the ego-mind, or a part of this finite dream, better known as illusion or suffering. When you takes these dreams/sufferings to be real, than you are still asleep. That simple. So my advice to you would be to pay close attention, and to begin cleaning house.
One symptom of cleaning house well is less suffering, a sure sign.
After a while, what isn’t illusion will become more obvious to you. It will be the only thing left standing.
Thoughts are only dreams. So, great thoughts are only great dreams. They are not your goal. Wake up from ALL dreams.
Peace,
S9
Apparantly according to hinduism there is no self, but it doesn't deny the existence of a "soul" even though buddhists don't like to use the word because of its implications, buddhism basically states that there is a subtle part of the mind that persists after death, though (most importantly), it is nothing constant and is always undergoing change. In my book that is a soul...
F: It would therefore be illogical to assume that such a consciousness would continue after death, as the central nervous system would then cease to operate as an organized, cohesive unit and would instead dissociate into individual atoms and/or molecules, each taking their energy with them.
S9: It would only be illogical if your initial premises that the body/mind preceded consciousness, and was fundamental to it, was true, which it isn’t IMPO.
S9
As I understand it, Hindus believe in a 'self' or atman (atta). In meditation, they apparently seek "self-realisation" as a way to escape samsara.
I think the "soul" is generally taken to be the eternal and unchanging part of a living being. Therefore, it is my opinion that a Buddhist will not call that "impermanent constantly changing something" that transmigrates from being to being in samsara as a "soul".