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.
7 basic questions, thank you
I'm really happy to have found this website, I've had some questions for a while.
There is a little Buddhist temple in the city I moved to, yet it costs money to go to, and being a university student, thats not really an attractive option, although I suppose the monks must need the money to keep their temple open.
1) Why don't monks get jobs? It's an honest question, no offense meant. If I decide I would like to practice Buddhism, I would definitely like to have a job. Is their not working related to why so many hippies are also buddhists? (okay, that one was a joke :P)
2) Does Buddhism ever tell you how to live, and tell you its the "right" way, yet doesn't give any explanation to why exactly its right to do so? Personally I don't believe it is correct to do something just because someone has told me, even if it comes from the creator himself. The act of creation and limitless power doesn't presuppose righteousness, if such as thing exists! If I burn in hell as a result of my actions then fine - but at least let me have some means to understand why those actions were truly wrong. Otherwise, the only difference between me and someone who has gone to heaven is that the person in heaven was ruled by fear, or was too apathetic to wonder. There has to be an answer beyond "because this important guy said so." I'd rather be a corpse than a puppet. (Wow thats waaay too dramatic. I'm really not that passionate about it)
3) Does Buddhism believe in mystical things like demons and hell? I heard there was only Nirvana, and existence itself is suffering due to the absence of an equilibrium, like when you are happy you can be sure you will be sad again - life is paradoxical in that it is constant in being unconstant. I like things that make sense like that, and don't rely on mystical stuff to shock me into awe or subservience. Of course, I could also have interpeted that wrong, oops.
I think I read on wikipedia about different planes of existence, and then some of them are hell, which you can get banished to. If they exist for a different reason other then to scare me then I don't mind their inclusion and I may find them plausible, but otherwise... meh.
On a related note, I don't find Gods to be mystical, and are logical if anything. Does Buddhism have Gods? That said, I think by looking at the structure of life that its fairly evident they were far from perfect. I think no truer words were spoke when the Christian god proclaimed us made in his image, and proceeded to claim infallibility. Pretty tragic stuff - real or no.
4) So the goal of Buddhism is to achieve Nirvana, right? The only way I see this as possible is if you give up your sense of self, and I'm pretty sure I read something like that on wikipedia. Do you essentially try to rid yourself of your sense of self? I can roll with that. Is that more or less correct?
I do have some questions about being enlightened (which I understand it very rare and takes many lives usually) if it is correct though.
5) I hear there are different schools in Buddhism. Is it kind of like being a Jehovahs witness or a Catholic: Other then some small alterations they're pretty much the same thing? Or is there a significant shift between content?
6) Where can I find a Buddhist "bible", or whatever your religious texts are?
7) Does Buddhism believe in a soul? I'm just guessing it does if one identity can survive death and get recycled.
If so how does Buddhism explain population growth and decline? Is there line up for the souls to get reincarnated back onto earth? If not, who creates new souls, and for what purpose? Is a ginger created when a soul isn't available? (joking, couldn't resist.)
Thank you very much.
There is a little Buddhist temple in the city I moved to, yet it costs money to go to, and being a university student, thats not really an attractive option, although I suppose the monks must need the money to keep their temple open.
1) Why don't monks get jobs? It's an honest question, no offense meant. If I decide I would like to practice Buddhism, I would definitely like to have a job. Is their not working related to why so many hippies are also buddhists? (okay, that one was a joke :P)
2) Does Buddhism ever tell you how to live, and tell you its the "right" way, yet doesn't give any explanation to why exactly its right to do so? Personally I don't believe it is correct to do something just because someone has told me, even if it comes from the creator himself. The act of creation and limitless power doesn't presuppose righteousness, if such as thing exists! If I burn in hell as a result of my actions then fine - but at least let me have some means to understand why those actions were truly wrong. Otherwise, the only difference between me and someone who has gone to heaven is that the person in heaven was ruled by fear, or was too apathetic to wonder. There has to be an answer beyond "because this important guy said so." I'd rather be a corpse than a puppet. (Wow thats waaay too dramatic. I'm really not that passionate about it)
3) Does Buddhism believe in mystical things like demons and hell? I heard there was only Nirvana, and existence itself is suffering due to the absence of an equilibrium, like when you are happy you can be sure you will be sad again - life is paradoxical in that it is constant in being unconstant. I like things that make sense like that, and don't rely on mystical stuff to shock me into awe or subservience. Of course, I could also have interpeted that wrong, oops.
I think I read on wikipedia about different planes of existence, and then some of them are hell, which you can get banished to. If they exist for a different reason other then to scare me then I don't mind their inclusion and I may find them plausible, but otherwise... meh.
On a related note, I don't find Gods to be mystical, and are logical if anything. Does Buddhism have Gods? That said, I think by looking at the structure of life that its fairly evident they were far from perfect. I think no truer words were spoke when the Christian god proclaimed us made in his image, and proceeded to claim infallibility. Pretty tragic stuff - real or no.
4) So the goal of Buddhism is to achieve Nirvana, right? The only way I see this as possible is if you give up your sense of self, and I'm pretty sure I read something like that on wikipedia. Do you essentially try to rid yourself of your sense of self? I can roll with that. Is that more or less correct?
I do have some questions about being enlightened (which I understand it very rare and takes many lives usually) if it is correct though.
5) I hear there are different schools in Buddhism. Is it kind of like being a Jehovahs witness or a Catholic: Other then some small alterations they're pretty much the same thing? Or is there a significant shift between content?
6) Where can I find a Buddhist "bible", or whatever your religious texts are?
7) Does Buddhism believe in a soul? I'm just guessing it does if one identity can survive death and get recycled.
If so how does Buddhism explain population growth and decline? Is there line up for the souls to get reincarnated back onto earth? If not, who creates new souls, and for what purpose? Is a ginger created when a soul isn't available? (joking, couldn't resist.)
Thank you very much.
0
Comments
They do, its called being a Monk:p
Some schools do, not essential.
Its fine to be Meh about them:)
Not so much give up as see it for what it is, an illusion and delusion:)
It was very common in the time of the Buddha and took as little as a few hours to achieve:)
Same path, different scenery and route:)
6) Where can I find a Buddhist "bible", or whatever your religious texts are?
There are many many resources online and off. what The Buddha taught is a great introduction and Bikku Bhodi's "In the Buddhas words" is a great anthology (though quite mystical in selection)
7) Does Buddhism believe in a soul?
No. One of the key grounding of truths of Dharma is Anataman which is often taken as "no soul". This does leave philosophical questions for those who believe in litteral rebirth, as I am sure you will encounter:)
Good luck!
mat
I once lived in a monastery for a year, just meditating. It is important to be able to do this, without having to worry about earning a living.
No. The Buddhist teaching is based in the principle of cause & effect. It generally will always explain the benefit or effect of living or conducting oneself in a certain way. Like here.
Buddhism certainly teaches about "hell". One word for hell is 'dukati', which means the unhappy or painful state. For example, sometimes human beings consider committing suicide. Obviously, they think this way not to go to hell but because their mind's are experiencing hell already.
Nirvana is mental equlibrium or peace. That things are inconstant and prone to inevitable unsatisfactoriness does not mean the mind must lose its innate joy & buoyancy.
Nirvana comes via understanding & acceptance of the inconstant & unsatisfactory.
The planes are of mental existence. Hell is suffering, hungry ghost is addiction, animal is ignorance, lacking of reflective wisdom, human existence is to have a reflective reasoning mind and heaven is bliss & love.
But if people interpret the planes as physical, this leads to them fearing doing bad things. As such, this belief can protect them from self-harm.
Buddhism does not have creator Gods. The 'gods' are simply those with special powers. There are different kinds of gods. There are worldly gods, like politicians, dictators, kings, etc, who have worldly power. Or there are benevolent gods, people blessed with extra-special love & compassion. Or there are blissful gods, people whose mind dwell in deep blissful meditation.
Yes, more or less. It is more like understanding the sense of self. But when this occurs, it is given up. That is, it does not affect the mind in ways that lead to suffering.
Your understanding is incorrect. Enlightenment comes from right practise & right view (rather than from "many lives"). The Buddha taught when people practise correctly, the world will not be empty of enlightened beings.
Indeed there are. The "many lives" school is simply one.
Internet. Bookshop. This link, this link and this link.
No soul in Buddhism. Recyclement is a moral teaching.
After the Buddha, some Buddhists started to teach about a recycled consciousness or recycled mental continuum. This recycled consciousnes carries with it the past mental dispositions. This is essentially the same as a soul but the Buddha himself did not teach like this.
Well...one woman can bear more than two children and one man can impregnate more than one woman. You do the math.
Best wishes
DD
No. The Buddha taught that one should be mindful and self-reflect on verbal, mental, and physical actions and consider them in the following way before, during, and after:
There is also the Five Precepts, which you may willing choose to try to uphold. There is no "you're going to hell if you fail to uphold them" - if you do something unskillful then you'll see the consequences of it here-and-now and you can learn from it.
That's good. The Buddha taught it's not correct to do something just because someone has told you to do it, too, including himself.
You may, however, find some people practicing Buddhism who will tell you that certain things are absolutely wrong, and even get "thou shalt burn in hell" talk. Nod and
There is talk of of such things in the suttas at times. Some people take this all metaphorically, as different states of mind as opposed to physical places. Some people take it literally. Tibetan forms of Buddhism probably aren't for you, and I would suggest looking into Theravada or Zen instead.
The Buddha didn't teach that existence itself is suffering. He taught that it is dukkha because of delusion and clinging. When happiness is sought in impermanent things, when there is clinging, then these things are dukkha. This is conditioned, mundane happiness. But he also taught a path to unconditioned peace and happiness in this very existence, for those who are unsatisfied with this, the Eightfold Path which leads to Nibbana (quenching of the fires of greed, aversion, and delusion).
Like I said, some people take it literally, others do not.
See above.
There is talk of gods and demigods, not a God. These are not unconditioned states-of-being either. Even the devas sought the Buddha's teachings.
No, you don't. If you're inclined towards certain things, have an interest in certain things, that isn't dukkha. Dukkha is when there is clinging. The Buddha taught that as all things are impermanent, there is nothing fit to be clung to as I/self/mine. If you're relying on these things for happiness, then they are dukkha.
Google.
The Pali Canon is common to all schools and you can view it online here. The Sutta Pitaka is what you're looking for, and I would suggest beginning with suttas from the Majjhima Nikaya.
No, it absolutely does not. It teaches the opposite: anatta. This teaching is unique and central to Buddhism. Believing there is a fixed "identity" to begin with is an illusion. There is just cause-and-effect and anatta. Rebirth is a highly debated topic in Buddhism to begin with. But those who follow the traditional rebirth doctrine do not hold the view you're presenting, either.
Can I has cheezeburger?
This particular hick in America makes it a point not to make fun of Canadians, since that would be out of sync with Right Speech. Which of us understands the importance of the dhamma?
I've dated a hick from NC since I was 16 who happens to be the father of my baby. I make fun of Canadians all the time - don't you love that South Park episode? I think it's hilarious.
Relax.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">4) So the goal of Buddhism is to achieve Nirvana, right? The only way I see this as possible is if you give up your sense of self, and I'm pretty sure I read something like that on wikipedia. Do you essentially try to rid yourself of your sense of self? I can roll with that. Is that more or less correct?
I do have some questions about being enlightened (which I understand it very rare and takes many lives usually) if it is correct though.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Buddhist practice enable one to identify which are generating relative happiness ( based on condition arising ) and which are absolute happiness ( attaining of unconditional happiness that nothing can take them away you )
Hello! May this wall of text answer these questions!
1.
That's Ajahn Kusalo, from Tisarana Monastery in Perth, Ontario. He belongs to the Thai Forest tradition. As I understand it, in his lineage, at least, they do a great deal of work building their own huts, renovating the main halls, painting the buildings, etc. They do it all themselves.
2. The aim of the Noble Eightfold Path is to guide one's conduct not just for the sake of virtue, but for the sake of turning the mind towards the big eight perfected mental states. Which eight? Dispassion, not passion; being unfettered, not being fettered; shedding, not clinging; modesty, not conceit; contentment, not restlessness; seclusion, not entanglement; persistence, not laziness; and being unburdensome, not being burdensome. There's also the Four Divine Abodes (brahmavihara) which are specific emotional states that we are encouraged to foster: metta (difficult to translate precisely, but think of it as "allowing all things to be as they are"); karuna ("compassion; mercy"); mudita (sympathetic joy); and upekkha ("equanimity"). Finally, there are, of course, the Five Precepts: not killing, not stealing, not being harmful with sexuality, not lying, and not consuming mind-altering compounds like alcohol, cannabis, etc. The point of this all is, of course, achieving liberation/enlightenment.
3. Depends on your interpretation. In the Pali Canon, which is what I am most familiar with, there are the devas and brahmas, the former of which are comparable to minor deities and the latter to major deities. They live for extremely long amounts of time, but they are not immortal, and they are subject to dissatisfaction, impermanence, and not-self, just like every other sentient being. There's also Mara the demon, a being of illusion and deceit and the personification of unskillful action. However, Mara is not really a frightening demon like we are familiar with in Western stories. In the stories I've read from the suttas, the monks and nuns who encounter Mara essentially make fun of him.
The different traditional realms of incarnation are based on mental states which the sentient being has fostered. The hell-realms are only for the most destructive and painful mental states in past births: hatred, rage, etc. The descriptions make Dante's Inferno look rather mild. There's also the deva-realms, which are the exact opposite: beings who have accumulated huge amounts of loving, generous, and positive mental qualities, but who are not enlightened, are reborn as various types of devas, varying from the "lower devas" who live in joyous festivals that go on for millennia, up to the devas without physical form, absorbed in meditative absorptions of infinite consciousness, infinite space, etc. However, again, the devas are not fully liberated beings, and it is possible for a deva to "descend" back to lower realms after the eons of their present form have run out. (Though there are a few exceptions.)
Believing precisely in these things varies from person to person. Many in countries that have traditionally followed the Buddha believe strongly in a literal interpretation, and the goal of the laypeople is often to achieve favorable rebirth in a form where liberation will be achieved more readily (correct me if I'm inaccurate here!
4. Nibbana (Nirvana in Sanskrit) is the state following the shedding of the ten fetters and final death: creating identity; doubt; clinging to rites and rituals; sensual desires; ill will; lust for material existence; lust for immaterial existence; arrogance; restlessness; and ignorance. There are also degrees of liberation: plenty of people are written of in the scriptures as having shed some, but not all, of the fetters, which leads to "stream-entry." Essentially, shedding the first few of the fetters inexorably draws one into the Dhamma, and will lead to future fetter-shedding.
Anatta seems to be the most difficult of the three marks of existence for Westerners. What it means is that all things which exist are not yours: body, memory, thought, consciousness, perceptions, and such are all interrelated processes, but are not part of an indivisible soul or self. The simile that I believe the Gotama Buddha used was the chariot. When you disassemble a chariot into wheels, axles, and such, there is no "essence of chariot" residing in those constituent parts. It only becomes a chariot due to the interactions of those parts. But views on the self-itself are also mistaken. "I have a self" is wrong. "I do not have a self" is wrong. "I both have and do not have a self" is wrong. "I neither have nor do not have a self" is wrong. The point is to simply stop clinging to any questions of having a self at all, and focus on other matters. I hope that was clear enough!
5. "I don't like sects." - Ajahn Brahm
6. I'm most familiar with the Pali Canon, which, as has been noted, can be found here! http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ If you're interested in Mahayana, I understand that the Heart Sutra and the Diamond Sutra are fundamentals (I have copies of both and have read them, but I'm not fully aware of their significance within Mahayana :P ).
7. I went over this in an above post, but I think I'll quote Ajahn Amaro on this: "What's being reborn is habits." The Gotama Buddha was emphatic that there is no eternal, unchanging soul that wanders around existence. He described the human mind and body as a process, an eternally-changing stream of mental and physical formats, rather than an object. It can be born as an animal, a deva, a demon, a human, or perhaps a preta (hungry spirit).
Questions on the origin of the world, on where the mind was created, and so on the Gotama Buddha rejected: they have no utility other than for the sake of idle speculation. Understanding the Dhamma is about being mindful of the present moment.
(When I say the "Gotama" Buddha, I'm referring to the fact that his name was Siddhattha Gotama, and that there are other Buddhas besides him.)
Point taken, however I might point out that the label deal could be used to excuse anything, and avoid taking responsibility for using a derogatory term like "hick" to describe your fellow man. :rolleyes:
This truck-driving redneck admits to having a distracted Saturday morning, and perhaps being too sensitive. How 'bout that, a happy ending.