Cessation of Suffering Can't Happen In Your Life

Transmetaphysical

I was reading a Sutra (a handout I got from a Zen lecture) called "The Essense of Mahayana Practice" by Bodhidharma (with annotations.) In one of the annotations, it said "to have a body is to suffer. Birth, aging, illness, and death are all afflictions of the body that are unavoidable as long as one has a physical body."

And this is all true. Who would deny this? How can we even think we can end all suffering? Perhaps the Four Noble Truths are there to minimize suffering? Or cessation can happen, but not while we're alive?

Let's hear your thoughts.


.

federica

That's a minimal view, and one posed, I would imagine, to those who as yet have neither encountered nor understood the 4NT.

I think those who have learnt, understood, known and accepted the 4NT are capable of perceiving what their suffering is. And whilst this is all we have, and as such, must suffer in this way, we don't have to suffer in every way.

Stephen

We can go back and forth forever on literal rebirth, so let's not.

Instead, let's understand that the primary goal of Buddhism is immediate: to end suffering now. How do we suffer? By taking things the wrong way. This is mental. We suffer because we are ignorant of the true nature of reality, and in our ignorance our mind creates a false self and supports it with attachments. This self desires permanence in an impermanent reality; inevitably, it is always disappointed.

What you call suffering of the body is just life. You can't live and not feel pain; pain is there for a reason. All things are. This is something to be embraced as a part of the experience that we get to have. True you should avoid the harmful, but do not misunderstand it.

Dukkha, which is better called "unsatisfactoriness", is an attribute of the entire universe and all of its component parts. We don't "get away" from all forms of dukkha, but we can end that which is purely of our own delusion. That is liberation. That is true freedom.

Valtiel

And yet the Buddha lived, and in his physical body to boot, long after attaining nibbana. And yet he was described up to his last days as experiencing awful physical ailments. The Buddha taught of dukkha, mental dis-ease. "though his body was afflicted, his mind was unafflicted." Physical pain is not dukkha to anenlightened being.

Dazzle

Transmetaphysical wrote: »

I was reading a Sutra (a handout I got from a Zen lecture) called "The Essense of Mahayana Practice" by Bodhidharma (with annotations.) In one of the annotations, it said "to have a body is to suffer. Birth, aging, illness, and death are all afflictions of the body that are unavoidable as long as one has a physical body."

And this is all true. Who would deny this? How can we even think we can end all suffering? Perhaps the Four Noble Truths are there to minimize suffering? Or cessation can happen, but not while we're alive?

Let's hear your thoughts.


.

We can end suffering through our perception of it and our attitude towards it and through the results of our meditation practice.

An enlightened being ceases to suffers mentally.(while alive)





.

federica

Physical pain need not be dukkha to an unenlightened being.
It's simply a question of understanding the concept of the two arrows.....

pegembara

Transmetaphysical wrote: »

I was reading a Sutra (a handout I got from a Zen lecture) called "The Essense of Mahayana Practice" by Bodhidharma (with annotations.) In one of the annotations, it said "to have a body is to suffer. Birth, aging, illness, and death are all afflictions of the body that are unavoidable as long as one has a physical body."

And this is all true. Who would deny this? How can we even think we can end all suffering? Perhaps the Four Noble Truths are there to minimize suffering? Or cessation can happen, but not while we're alive?

Let's hear your thoughts.


.

Liberation in the Dhammic sense is freedom from mental not physical pain. The aggregates are still there.

Nibbana with remainder is used to describe this state and parinibbana with the final death of the arahant.

"Now what, monks, is old kamma? The eye is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The intellect is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. This is called old kamma.

Valtiel

federica wrote: »

Physical pain need not be dukkha to an unenlightened being.
It's simply a question of understanding the concept of the two arrows.....

That's all it is? Understanding it? You never experience pain as dukkha then?

federica

No.

I experience pain as pain. But I don't attach any 'woe is me' misery to it.

I get pain, it intensifies, I notice I hurt, it fades, it passes.

What's so difficult about that?

FoibleFull

Transmetaphysical wrote: »

I was reading a Sutra (a handout I got from a Zen lecture) called "The Essense of Mahayana Practice" by Bodhidharma (with annotations.) In one of the annotations, it said "to have a body is to suffer. Birth, aging, illness, and death are all afflictions of the body that are unavoidable as long as one has a physical body."

And this is all true. Who would deny this? How can we even think we can end all suffering? Perhaps the Four Noble Truths are there to minimize suffering? Or cessation can happen, but not while we're alive?

Let's hear your thoughts.


.

Of course the body feels pain, and the mind will always recognize its presence. That doesn't mean that the pain has to trigger or involve us in emotional, aversive responses.

(Pulling the motherhood trump) ... I gave birth naturally, with no medication, and I observed the pain and let it do its thing but it didn't carry me along. I did not experience it as painful, but I watched the interplay of pain and fatigue, and the rise and fall of attempted-instinctive responses to pain. I visualized myself as a cork, floating on the ocean, rising and falling with the waves, but staying in position and not moved by them. And this was just plain-old cognitive attitudes ... I can only imagine what it must be like for an enlightened one.

Valtiel

I experience pain as pain. But I don't attach any 'woe is me' misery to it.

I get pain, it intensifies, I notice I hurt, it fades, it passes.

What's so difficult about that?

I don't know. Ask a cancer patient.

RichardH

Suffering can be ended now. The moment you put it down. You pick it up again, but then you put it down again. It goes on like that, putting suffering down over and over again, tending to pick it up less over time.

Physical pain is not suffering (debatable definitions sure). When there is no I-ing happening, the pain is alone. The pain is only happening to the pain. There is no suffering, no little captain, no little sufferer. People who have heard the Dharma and digested it, during a serious illness involving pain can sometimes spontaneously "give up the ghost" and realize non-suffering in the midst of it. My partner who was a cancer patient last year went through this.

Deshy

There are two kinds of suffeirng. Physical and "spiritual". The Buddha gave a remedy for the "spiritual suffering" which is the suffeirng caused by wrong views of the mind. A mind that sees natural phenomena as self or something belonging to self, such a mind suffers from the spiritual disease. A person free from this wrong view will only have the physical suffering, which is not really suffering but merely pain IMO.

federica

o0Mundus-Vult-Decipi0o wrote: »

I don't know. Ask a cancer patient.

That's a bit crass.
You're making an assumption I'm not one.

federica

FoibleFull wrote: »

(Pulling the motherhood trump) ... I gave birth naturally, with no medication, and I observed the pain and let it do its thing but it didn't carry me along. I did not experience it as painful, but I watched the interplay of pain and fatigue, and the rise and fall of attempted-instinctive responses to pain. I visualized myself as a cork, floating on the ocean, rising and falling with the waves, but staying in position and not moved by them. And this was just plain-old cognitive attitudes ... I can only imagine what it must be like for an enlightened one.

Pulling this trump is not a reasonable argument.

First of all, it's not a pain that can be common to all.

Secondly, childbirth pain is different for every woman, and it cannot be used as an accurate measure of pain.
My labour with my eldest daughter lasted seven hours from the waters breaking, to her being born at 7-and-a-half pounds..
Her labour lasted 22 hours, and she needed a caesarian to deliver her 11lb boy. .
Two completely different experiences for two genetically-connected women. never have I seen such a disparity in experience!

Thirdly, it is a pain that can be forgotten. I personally have spoken to many women who have had children, and we all agree that the type of pain peculiar to childbirth cannot be remembered in any significant detail.
Whereas the pain I felt when I broke my ankle five years ago, still makes me physically sick to think about it.

Valtiel

You could replace it with any severe illness. Cancer wasn't the point. Although I am sorry if I offended you (or did not?).

I know and understand the two arrow parable. There are times when I can actively practice it. Sometimes it isn't enough, and pain can become so severe that I still find my mind agonizing over the physical pain even if in only the subtlest ways. As Richard said: "Suffering can be ended now. The moment you put it down. You pick it up again, but then you put it down again. It goes on like that, putting suffering down over and over again, tending to pick it up less over time."

But you're making it sound like it's a total non-issue as if simply knowing that there are two distinct elements to pain - the physical and mental - and that they aren't mutually exclusive is enough to totally eliminate the needless mental suffering that we tend to tag on to the experience.

Perhaps I'm wrong and you would be able to experience even the most severe forms of torture in perfect equanimity. I admittedly doubt it, though.

Whereas the pain I felt when I broke my ankle five years ago, still makes me physically sick to think about it.

:skeptical Wait a minute...

Deshy

o0Mundus-Vult-Decipi0o wrote: »

Suffering can be ended now. The moment you put it down. You pick it up again ...

That is because we are not enlightened beings? We still cling to the ego in the most subtle ways thus when physical suffeirng arises we pick it up as mine?

patbb

o0Mundus-Vult-Decipi0o wrote: »

Perhaps I'm wrong and you would be able to experience even the most severe forms of torture in perfect equanimity.

yes.

actually, sometimes it may help. the extreme pain make it obvious.
Where you can truly detach yourself for the body and simply observe it.

I've had this experience with a severe migraine during a retreat (away from my then vital prescription meds .
Something that helped me was that at one point, i figured that even if the pain would intensify by a thousand, and stay forever, it will never affect me (the observer). So after that i could look at the pain, and truly be okay/indifferent with it to stay for as long as it wanted.
Soon after the pain completely dissipated.

I've had migraines since i was 3 years old (one of my first memory was to be in the hospital getting 30 electrodes inserted in my skull...)
Usually completely disabling me for the day, throwing up and in complete misery. Just a pain that i always consider unimaginable for someone who never experience something like this. I always thought that if somebody who did not know that such pain was possible, if that person would get one of my migraine, this person would believe that he was dying, would freak out and be in a ambulance shortly after.

But I did not suffer any migraine ever since the day i truly let go of my craving for controlling the pain, and it dissipated.

Ajahn Brahm had a similar experience with a serious tooth ache.
(scroll down and read Ajahn Brahm tooth ache story)
http://lola-jameson.com/painrelief.html

Theswingisyellow

Transmetaphysical wrote: »

I was reading a Sutra (a handout I got from a Zen lecture) called "The Essense of Mahayana Practice" by Bodhidharma (with annotations.) In one of the annotations, it said "to have a body is to suffer. Birth, aging, illness, and death are all afflictions of the body that are unavoidable as long as one has a physical body."

And this is all true. Who would deny this? How can we even think we can end all suffering? Perhaps the Four Noble Truths are there to minimize suffering? Or cessation can happen, but not while we're alive?

Let's hear your thoughts.


.

Buddhism is not denial of life, there is pain as well euphoria, and one is not different from the other they are all a part of this life. When you make self, you make that which is apart from self. When there is no self there is merely the "thusness" of this experience. Buddha didn't promise you a rosegarden or a life that is devoid of feeling and sensations.
Yours in the Dharma,
Todd

FoibleFull

federica wrote: »

Pulling this trump is not a reasonable argument.

First of all, it's not a pain that can be common to all.

Secondly, childbirth pain is different for every woman, and it cannot be used as an accurate measure of pain.
My labour with my eldest daughter lasted seven hours from the waters breaking, to her being born at 7-and-a-half pounds..
Her labour lasted 22 hours, and she needed a caesarian to deliver her 11lb boy. .
Two completely different experiences for two genetically-connected women. never have I seen such a disparity in experience!

Thirdly, it is a pain that can be forgotten. I personally have spoken to many women who have had children, and we all agree that the type of pain peculiar to childbirth cannot be remembered in any significant detail.
Whereas the pain I felt when I broke my ankle five years ago, still makes me physically sick to think about it.

Yes, childbirth comes in all forms and packages. Not only does the course of labor itself vary, but the experience of that course varies too. I taught childbirth classes for 6 years, and coached many a woman through her labour and delivery. As for my personal experience, I never spoke of as a teacher, because my mandate was to help each woman find her own footing with it.

You will notice that I spoke in this forum only from my own experience. If it does not match your own experience, that does not invalidate it. And yes, I do remember it all in great detail, perhaps because I was mindful and unmedicated and not trying to run from it. At your request, I can supply the details.

pegembara

Deshy wrote: »

That is because we are not enlightened beings? We still cling to the ego in the most subtle ways thus when physical suffeirng arises we pick it up as mine?

Not so simple I'm afraid.

‘Friend, Sariputta, I do not feel well, will not survive. My unpleasant feelings are severe and increasing, not decreasing. The unpleasant feelings are increasing until the end. Friend, Sariputta, my top hurts a lot. I feel as though a strong man was giving me a headdress with a strong headband. I do not feel well and will not survive. My unpleasant feelings are severe and increasing, not decreasing. The unpleasant feelings are increasing until the end. Friend, Sariputta, my belly hurts a lot as though a lot of air was turning about in my belly. I feel as though a clever butcher or his apprentice was carving my belly with a sharp butcher’s knife I do not feel well and will not survive. My unpleasant feelings are severe and increasing, not decreasing. The unpleasant feelings are increasing until the end. Friend, Sariputta, there is a lot of burning in my body. I feel as though two strong men taking me by my hands and feet are pulling me to a pit of burning embers and are scorching and burning me. I do not feel well and will not survive. My unpleasant feelings are severe and increasing, not decreasing. The unpleasant feelings are increasing until the end. Friend, Sariputta, I will take a weapon to end life.’

Venerable Sariputta and venerable Mahcunda having advised venerable Channa, in this manner got up from their seats and went away. Soon after they had gone venerable Channa took a weapon and put an end to his life. Then venerable Sariputta approached the Blessed One, worshipped, sat on a side and said.’Venerable sir, venerable Channa has put an end to his life, what are his movements after death?’

‘Sariputta, wasn’t the faultlessness of the bhikkhu Channa declared in your presence?

’

‘Sariputta, there may be the families of venerable Channa’s friends, well-wishers and earlier relatives, I say, there is no fault to that extent. Sariputta, if someone gives up this body and seizes another, I say it is a fault. In the bhikkhu that fault is not apparent. Bhikkhu Channa took his life faultlessly.’

http://www.dhammaweb.net/Tipitaka/read.php?id=178

Transmetaphysical

Thanks to all who answered. It certainly clarified the confusion and helped me understand this better.

federica

FoibleFull wrote: »

Yes, childbirth comes in all forms and packages. Not only does the course of labor itself vary, but the experience of that course varies too. I taught childbirth classes for 6 years, and coached many a woman through her labour and delivery. As for my personal experience, I never spoke of as a teacher, because my mandate was to help each woman find her own footing with it.

You will notice that I spoke in this forum only from my own experience. If it does not match your own experience, that does not invalidate it. And yes, I do remember it all in great detail, perhaps because I was mindful and unmedicated and not trying to run from it. At your request, I can supply the details.

Actually, that makes two of us. No Pethadine, no Entonox, no pain relief, nothing. I did it all au naturel, just like you.
And found it to be the most overwhelmingly incredible experience I have ever had. It's matchless, in my opinion.
No argument here.

federica

o0Mundus-Vult-Decipi0o wrote: »

You could replace it with any severe illness. Cancer wasn't the point. Although I am sorry if I offended you (or did not?).

It "offended" me because an extremely dear friend died of cancer, and it was extraordinarily painful for her. Her anguish was palpable, and not being Buddhist, she was subject to great personal distress.

I know and understand the two arrow parable. There are times when I can actively practice it. Sometimes it isn't enough, and pain can become so severe that I still find my mind agonizing over the physical pain even if in only the subtlest ways.

And I don't.

As Richard said: "Suffering can be ended now. The moment you put it down. You pick it up again, but then you put it down again. It goes on like that, putting suffering down over and over again, tending to pick it up less over time."

This is what I practice. Whenever I feel intense pain, I consider the point of origin, and try to visualise what is happening within my body at that point. And I tell myself that "THis too shall pass, it's only pain".

But you're making it sound like it's a total non-issue as if simply knowing that there are two distinct elements to pain - the physical and mental - and that they aren't mutually exclusive is enough to totally eliminate the needless mental suffering that we tend to tag on to the experience.

No, it's not a total non-issue. Until we make it so. Pain in the physical sense, and pain in the mental sense are not synonymous. One can feel mental anguish without physical anguish. Therefore to permit one's self to feel mental anguish at the same time as physical anguish manifests, is unnecessary.

Perhaps I'm wrong and you would be able to experience even the most severe forms of torture in perfect equanimity. I admittedly doubt it, though.

Right now, so do I. But I have the deepest of respect for those who can and have. If they can do it, why not I?

:skeptical Wait a minute...

yes, that's why I highlighted that it makes me physically sick.
The pain of my breaking my ankle was so intense that actually it succeeded in wiping all thought from my mind, for at least a minute. It was so intense, I turned grey, and actually vomited. And I can still 'feel' that pain. And when I think of the level of pain I experienced, it makes me nauseous.
Just as seeing a needle goes into somebody's arm, does. Watching pain being inflicted onto another being (for whatever reason) is stomach-churning to me, and if done on purpose, it's a reprehensible action.

Jeffrey

Trans,

They say you good never overcome suffering if you only chop at the branches.

That is why in meditation you chop at the root. Even with a body if the root is chopped away you will experience pain as sensitivity rather than suffering.

NomaDBuddha

Transmetaphysical wrote: »

I was reading a Sutra (a handout I got from a Zen lecture) called "The Essense of Mahayana Practice" by Bodhidharma (with annotations.) In one of the annotations, it said "to have a body is to suffer. Birth, aging, illness, and death are all afflictions of the body that are unavoidable as long as one has a physical body."

And this is all true. Who would deny this? How can we even think we can end all suffering? Perhaps the Four Noble Truths are there to minimize suffering? Or cessation can happen, but not while we're alive?

Let's hear your thoughts.


.

You suffer as long as you think end is near. For that, the cure is detachment. You know that one day you'll age and die, and you'll be reborn again (if you haven't reached Nirvana, and if rebirth is real) but don't add too much sentimental value to it.

thickpaper

I find the whole notion of "total cessation of suffering" a bit extreme and "unmiddle way". Me, personally, I am happy with the dramatic reduction in negativity that my Dharma practice bestows upon me.

That's the way I like it, uhh huh, uhh huh:)

RichardH

thickpaper wrote: »

I find the whole notion of "total cessation of suffering" a bit extreme and "unmiddle way".

So the middle-way is a sort-of cessation of some suffering,? ......somewhat? ..... kinda?

Sorry to be goofy, but total cessation of suffering is the point. Not someday, but now.

Stephen

Life is a balance, never perfectly or wholly light; never perfectly or wholly dark. Our transcendence brings us into harmony with that balance. We are only temporary owners of our component parts; we are truly the stuff of stars, and some day will be again.

RichardH

Stephen wrote: »

Our transcendence brings us into harmony with that balance. We are only temporary owners of our component parts; we are truly the stuff of stars, and some day will be again.

Who is in harmony with what? Who is the temporary owner of the skandhas? Wha? This seems like a different kettle of fish than you've posted before.

Stephen

Maybe my mind is finally settling down. I've had a lot to think about since January. Think on it for a while, and get back to me if you don't figure it out.

RichardH

Stephen wrote: »

Maybe my mind is finally settling down. I've had a lot to think about since January. Think on it for a while, and get back to me if you don't figure it out.

I don't doubt the sincerity or truthfulness of your understanding and experience. Hope all is well.

Stephen

All is great. It's nice to see you back on the forums by the way. I know you got fed up and took a break a while back. I myself left for a wee bit, but my plans didn't succeed and so I was able to come back.

RichardH

Stephen wrote: »

All is great. It's nice to see you back on the forums by the way. I know you got fed up and took a break a while back. I myself left for a wee bit, but my plans didn't succeed and so I was able to come back.

Thanks. About once every three months or so I walk away in a huff. ..... then drift back. sooooo predictable

Transmetaphysical

I've always felt that the only way to reach cessation of suffering and reach Nirvana is to either meditate or just die. Since I can't meditate and reach thoughtlessness, death seems to be the only way I can reach such state of thougtlessness.


.

RichardH

Transmetaphysical wrote: »

I've always felt that the only way to reach cessation of suffering and reach Nirvana is to either meditate or just die. Since I can't meditate and reach thoughtlessness, death seems to be the only way I can reach such state of thougtlessness.


.

Whoa there.... What is this state of "thoughtlessness" you are talking about? Are you trying to achieve a state of thoughtlessness? This is impossible and really of the mark. There may be cessation of thought during certain absorptions, but that is only temporary. Thought is no problem.

Floating_Abu

A Buddha is a human par excellence, a perfected human being

That essence will always be compassion

_/\_

Floating_Abu

Transmetaphysical wrote: »

I've always felt that the only way to reach cessation of suffering and reach Nirvana is to either meditate or just die. Since I can't meditate and reach thoughtlessness, death seems to be the only way I can reach such state of thougtlessness.


.

I think your assumptions are misguided. I think if you are open enough it might be useful to find a real life teacher and sangha. Be open enough though. You can continue meditating of course but the point about death is not consistent with any Buddhist teachings, and Buddhas' are in the business of enlightenment.

Best wishes.

Transmetaphysical

Richard Herman wrote: »

Whoa there.... What is this state of "thoughtlessness" one achieves in meditation?

Isn't the purpose of meditation to clear your mind of all thoughts? The only reason we experience pain and displeasure is because of thought. Pain comes in the form of electrical signals to the brain.

RichardH

Here is an old post on the subject of thought. But no, getting rid of thought is not the point, and it will fail.


http://newbuddhist.com/forum/showpost.php?p=88382&postcount=1

Stephen

Methinks you've missed the point entirely TMP, and in fact fully and completely. Meditation's purpose is only to clear your mind enough that you can focus on the contemplation of, and unraveling of, the teachings. True and complete understanding by concentrated effort and mindfulness. To understand the teachings fully, the mind contemplates them based on the direct experiences of your life. So, to realize the teachings is to realize reality (that sounds strange... sorry lol).

And the point of that is to bring the mind into harmony with the true nature of reality, and in such a state there is no mental dukkha because of this full understanding that has been developed in meditation. The mental processes are changed on the fundamental level, at the root; at the core. Because the very base foundation, the beginnings of all mental fermentation, has been transformed... nothing unwholesome can arise in the mind.

We are removing the conditions for mental dukkha by supplanting our ignorance with correct understanding. That is Right View. That is Wisdom. It can not be given, not be told, but must be developed because the mind must change one step at a time. It takes longer for some than for others, because all is based on conditionality.

Floating_Abu

Thoughtlessness and thoughtlessness are two different things

Jeffrey

It would be impossible to know whether anyone had reached thoughtless meditation.

Because if they noticed it were thoughtless that noticing itself would be a thought....

Nirvana is not thoughtless. Rather there is equanimity towards thoughts. Thoughts are not angels or devils. (not saying there is no discernment however)

Transmetaphysical

For me, Nirvana is a state of Omniscience (Supreme Enlightenment). I imagine Omniscience to be being able to observe and understand the Universe and the nature of reality itself from all angles as well as possessing infinite knowledge. However, existence is ultimately Empty and thougtlessness is being free from all delusions. These two ideas are completely contradictory, yet appear to be both true. Such is the profound nature of Buddhism. "It is neither this nor that." Well, it's also "this" and "that."

.

federica

thickpaper wrote: »

I find the whole notion of "total cessation of suffering" a bit extreme and "unmiddle way". Me, personally, I am happy with the dramatic reduction in negativity that my Dharma practice bestows upon me.

That's the way I like it, uhh huh, uhh huh:)

Actually, total cessation of suffering is precisely The Middle Way.

Total ignoring and denial of suffering is unreal.
Extreme pandering to suffering is too engrossed and clinging and grasping.

Cessation of suffering - that is, understanding it and knowing it, dealing with it without attachment - Is the Middle Way.

Oh, and incidentally, it's -

"That's the way uhh huh, uhh huh I like it, uhh huh, uhh huh"

If you're going to quote great 'KC and the Sunshine band' timeless classics, at least get them right....:rolleyes:






That's the way I like it, uhh huh, uhh huh

RichardH

Transmetaphysical wrote: »

For me, Nirvana is a state of Omniscience (Supreme Enlightenment). I imagine Omniscience to be being able to observe and understand the Universe and the nature of reality itself from all angles as well as possessing infinite knowledge. However, existence is ultimately Empty and thougtlessness is being free from all delusions. These two ideas are completely contradictory, yet appear to be both true. Such is the profound nature of Buddhism. "It is neither this nor that." Well, it's also "this" and "that."

.

I would echo Abu. The value of having a teacher and practicing within a Sangha is impossible to overstate Trans. It makes all the difference in the world, really. "Enlightenment" at least in the Zen tradition is no big deal. Anyone who practices, and I mean really puts in the hours and hours will have "Enlightenment" and realize "True Nature", "non-duality" and so forth. But life still goes on, practice goes on. The main difference is that one is no longer fucked-up about being fucked-up. One is just fucked-up. Big difference. Ordinary, broken. perfect. It isnt out of this world. Find a sangha. go for it.

Deshy

pegembara wrote: »

Not so simple I'm afraid.


http://www.dhammaweb.net/Tipitaka/read.php?id=178

Friend, Sariputta, I will take a weapon to end life

Was bhikkhu Channa enlightened?

pegembara

Deshy wrote: »

Was bhikkhu Channa enlightened?

‘Friend, Sariputta, eye, eye-consciousness, and things cognizable by eye consciousness, are not me, I’m not in them, they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, ear, ear-consciousness, and things cognizable by ear -consciousness, are not me, I’m not in them, they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, nose, nose-consciousness, and things cognizable by nose-consciousness, are not me, I’m not in them, they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, tongue, tongue-consciousness, and things cognizable by tongue-consciousness, are not me, I’m not in them, they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, body, body-consciousness, and things cognizable by body-consciousness, are not me, I’m not in them, they are not self Friend, Sariputta, mind, mind-consciousness, and things cognizable by mind-consciousness, are not me, I’m not in them, they are not self.’

‘Friend, Sariputta seeing the cessation of the eye, eye-consciousness and things cognizable by eye-consciousness I realized, eye, eye-consciousness and things cognizable by eye consciousness are not me, I’m not in them and they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, seeing the cessation of ear, ear-consciousness and things cognizable by ear-consciousness I realized, ear, ear-consciousness and things cognizable by ear consciousness are not me, I’m not in them and they are not self. Friend, Sariputta seeing cessation of the nose, nose-consciousness and things cognizable by nose-consciousness, I realized, nose, nose-consciousness and things cognizable by nose consciousness are not me, I’m not in them and they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, seeing the cessation of taste, taste-consciousness and things cognizable by taste-consciousness I realized, taste, taste-consciousness and things cognizable by taste-consciousness are not me, I’m not in them and they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, seeing the cessation of the body, body-consciousness and things cognizable by body-consciousness I realized, body, body-consciousness and things cognizable by body-consciousness are not me, I’m not in them and they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, seeing the cessation of the mind, mind-consciousness and things cognizable by mind-consciousness I realized, mind, mind-consciousness and things cognizable by mind-consciousness are not me, I’m not in them and they are not self’

No clinging to 5 khandhas as me, mine and myself.

Deshy

pegembara wrote: »

No clinging to 5 khandhas as me, mine and myself.

It doesn't seem like he was enlightened. He was merely answering venerable Sariputt's questions. If he was enlightened then the other two monks probably had no reason to give him advice on not-self don't you think?

shenpennangwa

Transmetaphysical wrote: »

I've always felt that the only way to reach cessation of suffering and reach Nirvana is to either meditate or just die. Since I can't meditate and reach thoughtlessness, death seems to be the only way I can reach such state of thougtlessness.


.

This is a perfect example of the view that is to be avoided. Ordinary physical death and Nirvana are not even comparable situations.
What makes you feel that a state of thoughlessness is something you need to achieve?

shenpennangwa

Transmetaphysical wrote: »

For me, Nirvana is a state of Omniscience (Supreme Enlightenment).
.

It may be what it means to right now but I dont think thats what has been taught.