Explain what Buddhism has to say about materialism

Vajraheart

There is a difference between liberated becoming and bound becoming. Samsara is Nirvana when correctly cognized.

You are speaking a different language here, namely, Mahayana.

In Theravada, when the Buddha said a arahant still speaks "I" and "mine" in conventional social interaction, he did not regard this as 'samsara'.

The Buddha regarded samsara is being fettered by ignorance & hindered by craving.

There is also a difference between attachment to desire as inherent and use of it as relative.

The desire of a Buddha to help beings is realized as relative to the fact that there are those that suffer, yet are empty of inherent existence.

But, yes... I am of the Mahayana, so already we're going to have entirely different views of what the Buddha means even in the Pali Suttas. But, I trust that you are doing your inner work. I feel that you are, no matter your conclusions that I personally find delusional. LOL! Just like you find my conclusions delusional. I as you, will eventually reach the end of our contemplation, due to the fruit of intention, due to the law of dependent origination.

I wish you well!

Dazzle

You mean transmission into Dzogchen from Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche? Yes, plus meeting various other tulkus. I actually grew up my entire life Hindu in the Shaivite Tantra tradition involving kundalini, etc. , then started studying Buddhism.

Didn't know he was still alive. So what's your experience of Theravada since you claim Jhanas?

Vajraheart

There is a difference between liberated becoming and bound becoming. Samsara is Nirvana when correctly cognized.

You are speaking a different language here, namely, Mahayana.

The reported views of the Buddha do not correlate with those of Nargajuna.

Well, Nagarjuna disagrees, and so do Mahayanists. We interpret the words of the Buddha as reported in the Pali Suttas differently. We see the same words from different perspectives... I know... interesting, right? Ah, the human mind, what a wonder!!

Jeffrey

Jhanas are not unique to Therevada. I think they are called Dhyanas in the Mahayana.

Vajraheart

You mean transmission into Dzogchen from Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche? Yes, plus meeting various other tulkus. I actually grew up my entire life Hindu in the Shaivite Tantra tradition involving kundalini, etc. , then started studying Buddhism.

Didn't know he was still alive. So what's your experience of Theravada since you claim Jhanas?

Jhanas are not the ownership of Theravada. Jhana is just the language of the Pali. I would most likely call them Samadhi's if I were talking to Mahayanists or Vajrayanists. The result of focus is the same arisen dependent upon the focus. The result of insight based upon right view should be the same, but seems as if there is space for interpretation dependent upon level of experience I suppose? Or level of logical inference? Or a mixture of the two... I suppose there are many causes to that effect of difference in interpretation.

Most of my Jhanas were attained through the Shaivite Tradition of Kaula or Trika Shaivism, mostly known as Kashmir Shaivism. But, I've re-filtered the experiences through insight into dependent origination gained through study, debate then further illumination through transmission into Dzogchen by a master, thus clarifying my interpretation of my Samadhi experiences as proof of "god" as delusional arisen dependent upon mis-conditioning and clinging to "self", into further proof of the insight that is Buddha.

Basically... I realized that Hinduism and all theisms of any sort were incomplete leading merely to formless bliss realms or deva realms that only last as long as a cosmic eon, dependent upon personal karma. So, I moved on and took refuge in Buddhadharma through Dzogchen lineage.

Dazzle

You mean transmission into Dzogchen from Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche? Yes, plus meeting various other tulkus. I actually grew up my entire life Hindu in the Shaivite Tantra tradition involving kundalini, etc. , then started studying Buddhism.

Didn't know he was still alive. So what's your experience of Theravada since you claim Jhanas?

Jhanas are not the ownership of Theravada. Jhana is just the language of the Pali. I would most likely call them Samadhi's if I were talking to Mahayanists or Vajrayanists. The result of focus is the same arisen dependent upon the focus. The result of insight based upon right view should be the same, but seems as if there is space for interpretation dependent upon level of experience I suppose? Or level of logical inference? Or a mixture of the two... I suppose there are many causes to that effect of difference in interpretation.

Most of my Jhanas were attained through the Shaivite Tradition of Kaula or Trika Shaivism, mostly known as Kashmir Shaivism. But, I've re-filtered the experiences through insight into dependent origination gained through study, debate then further illumination through transmission into Dzogchen by a master, thus clarifying my interpretation of my Samadhi experiences as proof of "god" as delusional arisen dependent upon mis-conditioning and clinging to "self", into further proof of the insight that is Buddha.

Basically... I realized that Hinduism and all theisms of any sort were incomplete leading merely to formless bliss realms or deva realms that only last as long as a cosmic eon, dependent upon personal karma. So, I moved on and took refuge in Buddhadharma through Dzogchen lineage.

My simple understanding comes from a long time practising Vajrayana after taking Refuge with 16th Karmapa.... and then more recently Forest Tradition
wisdom.
I have no interest in 'who's the most realised and knowledgeable' games.

Time for bed now. Goodnight.

DhammaDhatu

Vajraheart declared she had directly experienced vajrayana and jhanas above the 4th. That doesn't mean she is an enlightened being! My teacher says that not all of the jhanas are even useful on the path.

At least in the Theravada Vinaya, any declaration of a supernormal state is a transgression, which includes jhana.

Why? For most, there is not way to prove whether a person is lying or telling the truth.

Also, it is attachment. It is foolish. Declarations cannot help anyone because the path to the cessation of suffering is motivated from within & not from without.

Declaring any state is simply spiritual materialism.

The internet is full of posters declaring jhana where in reality they have simply experienced momentary rapture or something similar.

DhammaDhatu

The result of focus is the same arisen dependent upon the focus.

The Buddha taught samma samadhi (right concentration) has relinquishment as its sole object.

Jhana is like pulling the plug out of the bottom of a bath tub. The water whirlpools out by 'releasing' the plug, by 'creating emptiness' in the hole.

The other stuff (like rapture, etc) is just the passing scenery.

If we study MN 111, will can learn how Sariputta, in his lucidity, regarded the "scenery".

Dazzle

Vajraheart said "Most of my Jhanas were attained....etc etc"

Public declarations about attainments just aren't done in the offline Vajrayana circles I know of. People discuss their experiences privately with their teachers they don't announce them to the internet, or to others in general.

formermonkJohn

sound like youre claiming to have experienced jhanas youself, dhamma, so what's the problem, are you the only one deserving to feel them.

Cloud

C'mon guys/gals let's not pick on someone because of a taboo, because of dogma and monastic code of all things! This forum is much nicer without all the judging. The tone of this thread just doesn't seem to be very accepting anymore; it's gotten rancid.

DhammaDhatu

Jhanas are not the ownership of Theravada. Jhana is just the language of the Pali. I would most likely call them Samadhi's if I were talking to Mahayanists or Vajrayanists. The result of focus is the same arisen dependent upon the focus. The result of insight based upon right view should be the same, but seems as if there is space for interpretation dependent upon level of experience I suppose? Or level of logical inference? Or a mixture of the two... I suppose there are many causes to that effect of difference in interpretation.

Pali uses both the terms samadhi & jhana. Jhana is a subset or particulary degree of samadhi.

Insight (vipassana) is not logical inference. It is direct seeing.

Vipassana = to see clearly

Yoniso manasikara = logical thinking or wise reflection

Directly seeing impermanence, unsatisfactoriness & emptiness does not require logical thinking.


:wow:

Dazzle

C'mon guys/gals let's not pick on someone because of a taboo, because of dogma and monastic code of all things! This forum is much nicer without all the judging. The tone of this thread just doesn't seem to be very accepting anymore; it's gotten rancid.

Nothing wrong in explaining what happens in the non-internet world away from one's computer, Cloud.

DhammaDhatu

...it's gotten rancid.

I must agree there

Jeffrey

Since Vajraheart is not practicing in the Therevada tradition I would be interested in what the bodhisattva and vajrayana vows say regarding announcing jhana.

Dazzle

Since Vajraheart is not practicing in the Therevada tradition I would be interested in what the bodhisattva and vajrayana vows say regarding announcing jhana.

That can be your homework then, Jeffrey !

Jeffrey

Or maybe Vajraheart will come back? One interesting question would be on what basis teachers give their students advice about experiences the student believes is jhana. If it is taboo to admit to jhana then the teacher would have to offer silence to their students question. Or say 'I don't know'. Or tell them that they were not allowed to talk about it.

Dazzle

Vajrayana (and Theravada) students talk to their teachers about their experiences and practices and get advice, Jeffrey, but they just don't normally tell the rest of the world about it .... well not in my experience anyway!

Personally I don't take any notice of the people who announce their attainments on the internet, because all we have is the written word, so how can we know that they're not mistaken or making it up?..and as DD said earlier, there's no way of proving it anyway.
No offence to anyone here intended though.

Jeffrey

Thats the nature of the internet. No way to prove anything. I might be President Obama in actuality participating in an forum incognito. Or a 20 year old girl. I do take what she says with a grain of salt. I think there is nothing wrong with discussing your experience as a practioner of the dharma. In fact I think that is the most important thing to talk about. Personally I am bored to death when someone posts scripture or links a 10 minute long youtube video about aliens or something. I am interested in peoples own understanding of buddhism. I do not enjoy it when something is expressed using terminology that you may not pick up from context. I do enjoy it when I learn something new when that terminology is explained!

I am not here to receive the correct dharma but rather to form community bonds and sharing of personal experience. Regardless of whether it is 'true jhana' I am interested in her tale to tell.

I don't expect everyone to enjoy the same aspects as I do.

Vincenzi

(...)
Again, it doesn't say anything about his teachings or him being a 'Mahayanist.' And a monk stating after the fact that "since Ajahn Brahm was now out of WPP he was a Mahayanist" doesn't mean that he was expelled for being a Mahayanist, whatever that even means. Frankly, I'm going to need more than that to believe he was expelled for anything other than his participation in the bhikkhini ordination ceremony.

bikkhuni is not the same as bikini...

Vincenzi

Hi Dazzle... seeing past lives directly. Actual re-experiencing of them, it's more like time travel than seeing a memory. Leading more to experiential faith than doubt.

Probably what you experienced was cryptomnesia.

Nope, it was and are various past lives. From animal, to heaven realms, to human realm stuff. It's interesting when people from outside the experience like to project all sorts of limitations onto it in order to fulfill their own clinging or pre-conceptions instead of opening to the possibility of another outcome for themselves?

could you elaborate on how you started recollecting past lives?

...maybe we can start a "recollection of past lives" thread.

Vincenzi

Hi Dazzle... seeing past lives directly. Actual re-experiencing of them, it's more like time travel than seeing a memory. Leading more to experiential faith than doubt.

Probably what you experienced was cryptomnesia. My previous Vajrayana teacher said people often can make things up when they think they are regressing to their past lives.
I also asked 2 other tulkus if they remembered their past lives and they didn't.

do you believe it is impossible to remember past lives? because that contradicts the sutras (and the experience of those that recollect past lives). "past homes" is a metaphor to explain the recollection of past lives.

Vincenzi

(...)
Hi

You have added nothing above, apart from admitting your "level of delusion".

There is no evidence whatsoever. Just like when child lamas are chosen, the only reason it is only children who have supposed past life recollections is because religious zealots with psychic powers control the children's minds by transmitting thought messages into the children's minds.

Once the children become older, those with psychic powers do not do this because it will be too mentally conflicting for the older child or person.

The Venerable Sariputta, who was a master of jhana & who's mind was more lucid that the other arahants, did not acquire any special powers from his jhana.

This is unrelated to "past lives" but simply demonstrates your rhetoric in relation to jhana.

Whatever is observed by the mind between the 3rd & 4th jhanas are merely mental formations.

Whether the mind flies thru the sky like a bird in jhana, in exotic places, is still just mental formations.

For example, when we sleep, we may dream, of places & people we do not know in our ordinary daily lives.

These dreams are mental formations. They are merely the imaginings of the mind. The Buddha taught such sankhara are void of substance, like a banana tree that has no inner core or heartwood.

I can only say your mind is beguiled, what the Buddha called "chewed up".

Your mind is lost in magic rather than realised how to end suffering.

recollection of past lives is one of the "fruits of the contemplative life"; "ending mental fermentations" (nirvana) is the last and better one of this fruits... but the prior ones can help too!

Vincenzi

Vajraheart declared she had directly experienced vajrayana and jhanas above the 4th. That doesn't mean she is an enlightened being! My teacher says that not all of the jhanas are even useful on the path.

They can even lead to delusion without insight into dependent origination.

...and conceit if not used as another tool along the path (which includes ethics and wisdom).

Vincenzi

(...) People discuss their experiences privately with their teachers they don't announce them to the internet, or to others in general.

unfortunately, some don't have that luxory and think it is helpful to share the experiences for improvement and guidance.

DhammaDhatu

recollection of past lives is one of the "fruits of the contemplative life"...

i have not disputed this but, if you read the thread carefully, the Pali word 'nivesa' does not literally mean 'lifetime'. it literally means 'dwelling' or 'home'

in his Vissuddhi Magga, which was composed at around 500AD, a much closer to the Buddha than today, Buddhaghosa explained 'birth' in this sense means 'becoming' rather than birth from a womb. Becoming or bhava is something mental. Bhava is one of the three fermentations (asava)

Now this word 'jati' has many meanings.

For in the passage 'he recollects one birth, two births, etc', it is becoming.

In the passage 'Visakha, there is a kind (jati) of ascetics called Niganthas (Jains)', it is monastic order.

In the passage 'birth is includes in two aggregates', it is whatever is formed.

In the passage 'his birth is due to the first consciousness in the mother's womb' (Vin.i,93), it is rebirth-linking.

In the passage 'as soon as he was born (sampatijata), the Bodhisattva' (M.iii,123) it is parturition [childbirth].

In the passage 'one who is not rejected and despised on the account of birth', it is clan.

In the passage 'sister, since i was born with noble birth', it is the Noble One's virtue.

a possible issue with Buddhism is it disappeared from India & only existed in later years in foreign lands with foreign languages

but for modern Hindus, the word 'jati' or 'birth' still appears to retain an original meaning distinct from physical birth from a mothers womb

jati - (Hinduism) a Hindu caste or distinctive social group of which there are thousands throughout India; a special characteristic is often the exclusive occupation of its male members (such as barber or potter)

Vangelis

But you appear to be declaring you are an enlightened being, just like Vajraheart.

Oh really? Have I? Now that you have put words in my mouth, please show me where I have declared enlightenment.

Vangelis

As inoccous as if we were talking about italian coffee and I said "my brother said Lavazza is good". Brother knows best?

Beautifully put into context! And tell your brother that organic Columbian coffee is the best. I should know, I've personally experienced it. Am I enlightened now?

federica

I think this topic has ground itself down enough, It also needed filtering.
So while you all brew on that, think of pouring another coffee, another time.
Happy Sunday everyone!