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.
Much Trouble Understanding Buddhism.
I've been attempting to study buddhism and practice ideas pertaining to such as of the last 3-4 months. Some changes I have made and stuck to in these last 3-4 months:
-I do not eat meat..I'm a vegetarian, so therefore I do still eat dairy and sometimes eggs (I realize this is not mandated in buddhism.)
-I have engaged in breath meditation and mantra meditation very often, usually daily.
-I have made a significant effort in learning the four noble truths, eightfold path, and the precepts and attempted to introduce this knowledge into my life. Although I seem to fail at bringing it into my daily life.
Now onto the things that I'm horribly confused and in some instances put off by. These are the things I'm really reaching out to you guy for.
For one, I really can't understand the notion of no attachment. I do get it, I understand that attachment leads to suffering in ways. But..let's face it, you are attached to your parents. You are attached to your close friendships and relationships etc. Aren't these the things that make you "human". Yes..I get it..the notion of emptiness, that inherent existence is not real..but still, I am human..whether or not I inherently exist as such, I still certainly feel very strong emotions towards other sentient beings that I am in contact with daily. For one to say that we need to eliminate these emotions, feelings, attachments..it makes me feel as though one is saying we should eliminate life. No attachment..no relationships etc. If everyone lived like this, noone would have sex, noone would exist and no notion of the Buddha or buddhism or humanity would exist...how does that make actual sense?
When one examines much of the deeper philosophy of buddhism, the notion of emptiness, the notion of attachment as stated above etc. It is very easy for one to fall into a nihilist trap. Atleast for me it has been easy. I tend to think to myself, if this is the case would we all be better off never having sex again, never procreating again, end of the life cycle that's it. That is horribly dreadful to me. I also don't see how one can have a life fulled with happiness and enthusiasm with the idea that this is all unneeded..that is the cycle of death and rebirth, which would obviously include this particular life that I'm leading now. How can one have enthusiasm and appreciation and meaning for life when one has a realization that it is something you are trying to escape by reaching "nirvana". I hope I am formulating my words properly so that my points can be interpreted the way I'm thinking them.
The things in buddhism that do make sense to me are being compassionate towards others. Wishing for the happiness of others. Trying to be less selfish and give more. Trying to realize that hate, anger, jealousy etc impeed on my happiness as well as the happiness of those around me. These things I do understand. Please help me understand the other concepts without having a nihilistic view on life. Thank you in advance for your time and answers.
-I do not eat meat..I'm a vegetarian, so therefore I do still eat dairy and sometimes eggs (I realize this is not mandated in buddhism.)
-I have engaged in breath meditation and mantra meditation very often, usually daily.
-I have made a significant effort in learning the four noble truths, eightfold path, and the precepts and attempted to introduce this knowledge into my life. Although I seem to fail at bringing it into my daily life.
Now onto the things that I'm horribly confused and in some instances put off by. These are the things I'm really reaching out to you guy for.
For one, I really can't understand the notion of no attachment. I do get it, I understand that attachment leads to suffering in ways. But..let's face it, you are attached to your parents. You are attached to your close friendships and relationships etc. Aren't these the things that make you "human". Yes..I get it..the notion of emptiness, that inherent existence is not real..but still, I am human..whether or not I inherently exist as such, I still certainly feel very strong emotions towards other sentient beings that I am in contact with daily. For one to say that we need to eliminate these emotions, feelings, attachments..it makes me feel as though one is saying we should eliminate life. No attachment..no relationships etc. If everyone lived like this, noone would have sex, noone would exist and no notion of the Buddha or buddhism or humanity would exist...how does that make actual sense?
When one examines much of the deeper philosophy of buddhism, the notion of emptiness, the notion of attachment as stated above etc. It is very easy for one to fall into a nihilist trap. Atleast for me it has been easy. I tend to think to myself, if this is the case would we all be better off never having sex again, never procreating again, end of the life cycle that's it. That is horribly dreadful to me. I also don't see how one can have a life fulled with happiness and enthusiasm with the idea that this is all unneeded..that is the cycle of death and rebirth, which would obviously include this particular life that I'm leading now. How can one have enthusiasm and appreciation and meaning for life when one has a realization that it is something you are trying to escape by reaching "nirvana". I hope I am formulating my words properly so that my points can be interpreted the way I'm thinking them.
The things in buddhism that do make sense to me are being compassionate towards others. Wishing for the happiness of others. Trying to be less selfish and give more. Trying to realize that hate, anger, jealousy etc impeed on my happiness as well as the happiness of those around me. These things I do understand. Please help me understand the other concepts without having a nihilistic view on life. Thank you in advance for your time and answers.
0
Comments
b) I've read comments on this site that say when you're in a relationship with someone, you practice non-attachment by not being attached to the outcome. You want the best for them, you want them to be happy, so that means that if the day comes when they decide they need to be with someone else in order to be happy, you accept that. (Easier said than done, for sure.) Anyway, the whole non-attachment to people thing is more for renunciates rather than lay people, I think. Maybe as you progress in the path (you've only been at it a few months; give it a few years, or a decade or two), non-attachment to people gets easier. I read about a lama who advised his young student to experience all life has to offer while he's young. As you get older, your perspective changes, he said. Non-attachment gets easier.
So many people new to Buddhism have trouble with the concept of non-attachment. I don't think it's for beginners. Put it aside while you practice other concepts. You can pick it up later.
I think you're on the right track, now. Good summary.
We could learn more Buddha from other living even non-living depand on awareness . Learning Buddha MUST be easy if hard ( example to memorize all terms / procedure etc ) then it must be WRONG , if boring then it must be wrong . The more u know buddha the more fun you will experience .
So friend lets discuss ..... trust me we could learn more this way .
thks
Ee
However..this would prove much more difficult to apply to say my parents. I can agree that I should have no ideal conceptualization of my parents in my life, and that due to impermanence and uncertainty, I should accept that they can and may very well pass away before I do...however, I realize that I would still feel much pain and suffering if they were to pass away. It is in this that attachments can be very deep and very difficult to overcome. Of my 22 years of life, they have been a huge part of it...I wouldn't be able to just move along and say well I knew this would happen already..
examples of mundane teachings are below:
Sigalovada Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.nara.html
Samajivina Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.055.than.html
Anana Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.062.than.html
Maha-mangala Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.2.04.piya.html
For example: I am a professional musician and several years ago I developed a severe case of tendonitis. I thought I was finished as far as being able to perform music on my instruments. Fortunately, I was able to recover and it gave me a new way of looking at things.
I came to the realization that this is inevitable. At some point I will no longer be able to play music. It may be because I am dead or it may be for some other reason but it will happen.
The choice I have is how I will accept this. I could choose to be a bitter old man and that would be because I am still attached to the idea of performing music. I could also choose to accept that all things are temporary, including my music and carry on with the next part of my life. Perhaps I could teach and find joy in sharing my experience with younger musicians - I could give it back like those who helped me in the past.
You mentioned human relationships. They are also temporary and will, at some point, come to an end. I love my wife dearly and we are totally committed to one another but we both realize that, at some point, our relationship will end. If we were to remain attached to our relationship as if it was going to last forever, it would only lead to suffering.
Understanding the temporary nature of all phenomena is the key to understanding non-attachment. It does not mean we cannot love or enjoy the things we have in life. It just means that, at some point we will have to let them go and it will be much better if we are okay with that when it happens. The best way to be okay with it is to be prepared for it.
It is useless to try and fight death so I choose to embrace it. My objective in life is to die well.
unless you move to a monastery and dedicate your life to meditation you will not eliminate, or even come close, to eliminating all attachment.
From a practical point of view, all you can do is reduce your attachments.
So go ahead and meditate as much as lay life will allow you to. You wont end up a nihilist. On the contrary, you will probably expend more energy trying to do good and improve your life.
This is a very important and confusing point of Buddhism. Attachement is a relationship and that is natural, we can see that the Buddha was attached. As we can ask, what made him get rise from the Bodhi tree or continue to get out of bed and eat, etc. So, the question is what is it that is not healthy attachment, and what is it that does furthers you on the way? In terms of human relationships, we all know when the ego gets in the way things don't work very well, so we can see that some forms of attachment are not very productive. If our attachment is based on greed, hatred or delusion of some form it is certainly not a good relationship.
Many teachers see Buddhism as being about seeing into the true nature of self, and that it is not the anihilation of the self. If we had no conception of self, we would not be able to function, as we wouldn't know who we are and what are our limits. These are necessary to survive. When we see through the self as simply a construct and when we viscerally, not intellectually know that, we find that key attachments fall away. Buddhism also requires understanding the two relational aspects of the dharma generosity and compassion, the ones that led the Buddha and many others to teach and this is derived from a sense of interconnectedness. Open hearted engagement with the world comes from dropping our thoughts about I, me and mine and beign truly open to find that compassion and generosity arise naturally when we pay attention. It might mean recognising that the arising of love for a single person is the right thing for you, as it did for my wife and I. For both of us, this loving relationship seemed magically written in the stars and I know that might sound like folly au duex, but I found that in my life all things pointed to this conjunction as being completely right. So, I trusted this, as my path, and I think I was right. Now that we have been together for over a decade, we both practice the dharma and I have no complaints whatsoever. So, the main thing is not to get caught up into detachment, but just hold on to things lightly and know that our lives arise out of the mystery and some things are meant to be and we are drawn to a life with less choice than we think we have, it might be lukemia or falling in love.
The supramundane teachings are about attachment, craving, Nirvana, etc.
Generally, the Buddha did not teach such teachings to laypeople or taught them in a more moderate form.
The OP is having trouble understanding Buddhism. This is because the teachings the OP is studying were originally taught for monks & renunciates.
However, Buddhism offers teachings for laypeople also.
Kind regards
DD
These days, lay teachers often are very well, if not, better equiped to teach the dharma than their monastic counterparts. Many lay teachers have had intensive monastic experience, a University education and are often exceptionally talented people, nothing like the subsistence and illiterate peasants of the Buddha's time. Special transmission outside of the suttas does not exist in the Vipassana/Theravada tradition and in Zen most lay teachers have completed Koan training and offer it freely to the laity. Moreover, in my own experience, no special techniques are necessary, nor do I hear from the many ex-monastics I have talked to that they are teaching a watered down version of the Dhamma. On the contrary, exmonastics on the whole are very respectful of lay practitioners, many of whom, I would include the deepest practitioners I have ever met. So, while the Tibetan tradition might have secret practices - I think it is something special to the Tibetans. Personally, I take these with a grain of salt and my sense is that this is it is probably a Mahayana supremacy hangover. History has shown us with the Boxer uprising that secret practices and teachings can be a form of magical thinking. And, I think it was Jack Kornfield who challenged a Lama about the benefits of a particularly complex, special practice; the Lama claimed that whilst he hadn't mastered it, his teacher had, but when Jack met with his teacher, he in turn deferred to his own teacher as being someone who had really mastered the techique, but unfortunately he was dead.
Now, you might say they are just keeping the secret safe, and that could be true. But given that over the years so many of these paranormal stories have been put to the test and failed, beginners should beware: there is no substitute for a regular and lifelong practice. Buddhism has survived millenia in a premodern world, where it needed to compete with a range other religions and some sects, probably with a genuine intention, engaged in magical thinking and remanents of this remain today. Very enticing...but wanting to be Godlike is a trap for tigers.
Your description is mere conjecture.
In the suttas, we do not find the Buddha often teaching non-attachment to laypeople.
It follows the concerns of Quips are to be expected.
I can do my best to explain the benefits of non-attachment to a person whose mode of living is imbued with attachment.
However, I can also explain Buddhism offers many beneficial teachings apart from non-attachment.
All the best