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.
Serene is Silent Equanimity!
samahita
Veteran
Friends:
How is Release by Equanimity Achieved?
The Blessed Buddha once said:
And how, Bhikkhus, is release of mind by serene equanimity (Upekkha)
achieved? What does this liberation have as its destination, what is
its culmination, what is its sweet fruit, and what is the ultimate goal
of mental release by universally neutral & imperturbable equanimity?
Here, a Bhikkhu dwells pervading first the entire frontal quadrant,
with a mind imbued with infinite equanimity, so the second quadrant,
the 3rd quadrant, and the 4th quadrant. As above, so below, across,
and everywhere, & as to all beings also to himself, he dwells pervading
the entire universe with a mind saturated with unlimited equanimity,
immense, exalted, measureless, without hostility, without any enmity,
without any ill will! Thus prepared and expanded, he then develops:
1: The Awareness Link to Awakening joined with limitless equanimity.
2: The Investigation Link to Awakening fused with such equanimity.
3: The Energy Link to Awakening together with infinite equanimity.
4: The Joy Link to Awakening accompanied with absolute equanimity.
5: The Tranquillity Link to Awakening linked with serene equanimity.
6: The Concentration Link to Awakening associated with equanimity.
7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening joined with endless equanimity.
Based upon seclusion, disillusion, ceasing, and culminating in release.
If he then wishes:
May I dwell experiencing the repulsive in any unrepulsive & tempting,
then he can dwell experiencing repulsiveness therein. If he wishes:
May I dwell experiencing the unrepulsive in any disgusting & repulsive,
then he dwells experiencing pleasing beauty in whatever disgusting!
If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the repulsive in what is both
unrepulsive & repulsive, he dwells experiencing repulsive disgust in it.
If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the unrepulsive in what is both
unrepulsive & repulsive, he experiences only unrepulsive beauty by it!
If he wishes: Avoiding both the repulsive and the unrepulsive, may I
dwell in equanimity, just aware and clearly comprehending, then he
dwells in equanimity, just aware and clearly comprehending! Or else,
completely transcending the realm of infinitude of consciousness,
only aware that there is nothing, he enters & dwells in the sphere of
the void, empty & vacuous nothingness.. I tell you Bhikkhus for a wise
Bhikkhu here, who has not yet penetrated to an even more superior
mental release, the mental release by imperturbable equanimity has
the subtle sphere of the nothingness as its final culmination !
More on this serene mental state of Equanimity (Upekkha):
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Even_is_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/High_and_Alert.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/V/Divorced_Freedom.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/V/Serene_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Empty_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/V/Exquisite_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Feeding_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Equanimity_Upekkha.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/u_v/upekkhaa.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Unshakable_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/The_7_Links_to_Awakening.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Imperturbable_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Serene_Equanimity_and_Beyond.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/s_t/tatra_majjhattataa.htm
Source of reference (edited extract):
The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya.
Book [V: 115-21] 46: The Links. 54: Joined by Friendliness...
Serene is silent Equanimity!
Imperturbability induces Peace...
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Empty_Equanimity.htm
How is Release by Equanimity Achieved?
The Blessed Buddha once said:
And how, Bhikkhus, is release of mind by serene equanimity (Upekkha)
achieved? What does this liberation have as its destination, what is
its culmination, what is its sweet fruit, and what is the ultimate goal
of mental release by universally neutral & imperturbable equanimity?
Here, a Bhikkhu dwells pervading first the entire frontal quadrant,
with a mind imbued with infinite equanimity, so the second quadrant,
the 3rd quadrant, and the 4th quadrant. As above, so below, across,
and everywhere, & as to all beings also to himself, he dwells pervading
the entire universe with a mind saturated with unlimited equanimity,
immense, exalted, measureless, without hostility, without any enmity,
without any ill will! Thus prepared and expanded, he then develops:
1: The Awareness Link to Awakening joined with limitless equanimity.
2: The Investigation Link to Awakening fused with such equanimity.
3: The Energy Link to Awakening together with infinite equanimity.
4: The Joy Link to Awakening accompanied with absolute equanimity.
5: The Tranquillity Link to Awakening linked with serene equanimity.
6: The Concentration Link to Awakening associated with equanimity.
7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening joined with endless equanimity.
Based upon seclusion, disillusion, ceasing, and culminating in release.
If he then wishes:
May I dwell experiencing the repulsive in any unrepulsive & tempting,
then he can dwell experiencing repulsiveness therein. If he wishes:
May I dwell experiencing the unrepulsive in any disgusting & repulsive,
then he dwells experiencing pleasing beauty in whatever disgusting!
If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the repulsive in what is both
unrepulsive & repulsive, he dwells experiencing repulsive disgust in it.
If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the unrepulsive in what is both
unrepulsive & repulsive, he experiences only unrepulsive beauty by it!
If he wishes: Avoiding both the repulsive and the unrepulsive, may I
dwell in equanimity, just aware and clearly comprehending, then he
dwells in equanimity, just aware and clearly comprehending! Or else,
completely transcending the realm of infinitude of consciousness,
only aware that there is nothing, he enters & dwells in the sphere of
the void, empty & vacuous nothingness.. I tell you Bhikkhus for a wise
Bhikkhu here, who has not yet penetrated to an even more superior
mental release, the mental release by imperturbable equanimity has
the subtle sphere of the nothingness as its final culmination !
More on this serene mental state of Equanimity (Upekkha):
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Even_is_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/High_and_Alert.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/V/Divorced_Freedom.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/V/Serene_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Empty_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/V/Exquisite_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Feeding_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Equanimity_Upekkha.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/u_v/upekkhaa.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Unshakable_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/The_7_Links_to_Awakening.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Imperturbable_Equanimity.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Serene_Equanimity_and_Beyond.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/s_t/tatra_majjhattataa.htm
Source of reference (edited extract):
The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya.
Book [V: 115-21] 46: The Links. 54: Joined by Friendliness...
Serene is silent Equanimity!
Imperturbability induces Peace...
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Empty_Equanimity.htm
4
Comments
That's a pretty detailed quote.
:bowdown:
It's a little late to start complaining about the material.
yourself, you can experience a lot of serenity. I sort of think equanimity about the suffering of others inhibits the full exercise for the aspirations of Bodhicitta and the Paramitas. Why bother to be a Bodhi if all outcomes are equal in your view? I mean why bother if it is all illusion? I want to help end suffering for others in this world. I believe in Nirvana in this life. If you don't clear the knots at the heart chakra how can you bring the winds to dissolve in the central channel? I don't think you can untie those knots if you don't care about others and where does that leave complete equanimity. Meaning clear light is not just a blank nothingness. There is awareness and perhaps some care.
I think this is the essence of the middle way. It is the grasping after self we give up. Not care for the world. mtgby
What to do about it?
If not a direct quote then what? Someone's interpretation.
All hell broke loose yesterday because some of you don't care for a certain type of interpretation of the teachings.
Go back to what I indicated in my previous post here, as well as in other discussions. Present them as teachings ("The basic premises of the teachings"), rather than direct quotations. The substance remains the same and it is a more accurate description of the reality of Buddha's teaching. It's really no different than writing a modern book. When you quotes, present them. When you don't, paraphrase. That's honest.
Not about yesterday's activities. I have my own view on that.
The suttas and sutras are presented as teachings. Each one of them.
I don't get why they need to be rearranged and presented as teachings.
So why not just be realistic and relate Buddha's teachings, rather than say you are directly quoting Buddha?
Again, this is not a big deal. Please don't make all hell break loose...or even all heck break loose. It's just a discussion.
something still studied by anthropologists today. You'd be surprised how accurate oral transmission can be.
as far as phrases being " exact worded direct quotes from the words of the Buddha", very doubtful, but the general concept and meaning and some of the more well known phrases are passed on.
all you need to do is read the suttas to notice they are from an oral tradition... repetition upon repetition that is often abridged or omitted in modern writings. I have little doubts as to the importance and authenticity of the Pali suttas, whether they are the direct/exact words of the Siddhartha or not.
To say there wouldn't be different interpretations of at least a minimum of singular words or phrases within any and all of the "direct teachings from Buddha" or the suttras or suttas, or any oral story.... is truly magical thinking... or should we say "faith"?
http://newbuddhist.com/discussion/20075/what-can-we-gain-from-the-sutras-are-they-all-corupt?new=1
When you talk about the accuracy of oral transmission over time, I would just point out that there is great variance there. Many things that have turned out to be total fables exist as a result of oral transmission. Other times, some fairly basic history is kept only by oral transmission. But when you get down to volumes of actual quotes over several hundred years...no.
And not only is that illogical, but if you study linguistics (as I have to some extent), you find that each and every language evolves constantly. Think about how quickly the English language has changed. Do we speak the same as Colonial Americans? Civil War era Americans? Turn-of-the-century Americans? Or even Americans back in the 1950s? (Of course, you can substitute any culture, rather than Americans).
So what it comes down to for me is -- is the teaching wise. No matter who said it. No matter what exact words he or she used.
Can hell break loose if you don't believe in it?
Isn't "oral transmission" a form of sexual abuse?
And if something is real it will break loose wether you belive in it or not. No one believed Al Gore about manbearpig and he was proved right in the end.
Bhante just wants to pass on the teachings of the Buddha, its up to us if we actually want to learn or debate silly things.
(ah jeez I spelled equanimity in a million places. Too lazy to edit
. . . and now back to the serene scene . . .
Based on extensive study of the suttas I'm reasonably confident that they are not too far from what the Buddha taught - there are some ambiguities but on the whole they seem consistent. Obviously different scholars and translators have different interpretations, but I think it's difficult to make intelligent comment on these differences of opinion without having studied the suttas oneself in some depth.
I don't find simplistic dichotomies helpful on questions like this eg blind faith in the suttas v. complete skepticism.
Also equanimity is a jhana absorption factor and the 7th factor of enlightenment.
Well sometimes, @SpinyNorman, the simple answer IS the best answer.
Systematic doesn't equate to infallible, nor even reliable.
And I don't believe studying the suttas in depth or having just a passing glance at them makes one bit of difference as to how one views their accuracy.
I could study them until the Buddhist cows come home, but that won't change the reality that we can NEVER know - for sure- just how tweaked they are.
Does that make them bad? Useless? "Corrupted"?
No, just makes them a HUMAN (imperfect) product, not a "godly" product.
I hope this doesn't spark another 5 pages of finger wagging and pearl clutching... but I honestly believe that most, if not all of us here, right on this very forum, could willingly and determinedly take refuge in the three Jewels -Today- and with time and devotion become wholly 'good' Buddhists; practicing and meditating and living the Dharma, to the best of our imperfect abilities, without ever cracking open a book of Suttas or Sutras. Ever.
The Dharma is based on compassion, awareness, kindness and respect. It's meant to show us a way - The Middle Way - to be free from our own 'suffering'. I can't tell you how many times I've read, or heard that the entire foundation of Buddhism is in the Nobel Truths, the 8 Fold Path and following the precepts. It really IS quite simple, elegant, and straight forward.
Someone screaming from the rooftops that the Suttas are The Words of Buddha doesn't matter one bit. Someone screaming the exact opposite also doesn't matter one bit. It changes nothing.
That is a Faith based determination that is up to the individual -- and doesn't matter, anyway.
Warning: long night, no morning coffee yet.... I could even be dreaming I'm typing this.
MaryAnne: Did the Buddha really say that?
Reminds me of:
Eve: God said don't eat of this tree.
Serpent (Satan): Did God really say that?
Just a joke, don't take it personally.
Eve who? Serpent, Satan? We know they're 'real' too, right? ;-)
Actually god said thou shalt surely die and the serpent said thou shalt not surely die.
Well now they didn't die right away-but they did die. If they hadn't eaten would they have been immortal-is that why the flaming sword was set at the garden gate. Or, was the serpent right. Viewpoints and interpretation mean a lot. When the Buddha says hungry ghosts, I think he means: people who can never grasp after the self enough to gain satisfaction. I don't think He is talking about the person reincarnating into a life or a hell. That is not consistent with his other teachings-ditto hell beings and etc.. It's good to know the whole story before arguing the ending.
And I still think you're setting up over-simplistic straw-man dichotomies.
If you're going to quote me, use at least a cohesive chunk of what I'm saying... I usually explain my comments /ideas/opinions further ;
"And I don't believe studying the suttas in depth or having just a passing glance at them makes one bit of difference as to how one views their accuracy.
I could study them until the Buddhist cows come home, but that won't change the reality that we can NEVER know - for sure- just how tweaked they are.
Does that make them bad? Useless? "Corrupted"?
No, just makes them a HUMAN (imperfect) product, not a "godly" product."
And how do you know I haven't read any? Sheesh, any day of the week there are pages and pages of them posted right here on this forum. I've read plenty of them here, and from other sources, as well.
Doesn't change my opinion. But, we don't have to agree, you know... I'm OK with that.
(ah jeez I spelled equanimity in a million places. Too lazy to edit
It would keep us aware of everything without being distracted by or attached to anything.
So to answer, no, I'm not complaining about the material. But I also don't believe it's all we have to go on. Clearly the Buddha was brilliantly enlightened, and had much to teach. His disciples had much to learn. But I am amused by the wealth of detail in the "quotes." I'm not criticizing the value of the concepts, I am questioning the value of the detail.
More importantly, there are a few elements I think we may be overlooking:
1. Accuracy and precision are quite different, and though the precision may in these quotes be laughable, they could certainly very well be fundamentally accurate (though the disciples being less brilliantly enlightened than their teacher, important concepts may be missing, until rediscovered by others).
2. Those who ultimately learned to write, and who initially wrote down these teachings best as they could, were the intelligentsia of their day, so although they would certainly have added their own lenses to the recorded image, the lenses were of good quality.
3. Many people, brilliant and not, have spent lifetimes with these teachings, added their own translations, additions, insights, and other forms of value. It's not invaluable -- quite the contrary. But it's also not direct quotes, nor need it be to be valuable.
4. Buddha taught a method to become enlightened; he didn't just teach the revelations he acquired. We can all follow the method(s), attain enlightenment in our own context, and have profited from the teaching much more so than if we slavishly believed an obscure quote to be both precise and currently culturally relevant and tried to blindly obey.
I can't tell what the club is, though. Is it sacrilegious to question as I have? Are there camps and I enrolled in one but not the other?
Take Sutta X...anyone you choose...doesn't matter...perhaps your favorite. Is it wise? Yes or no?
So tomorrow you learn that Buddha never said that, never taught that. Does it now become un-wise?
2.
Right here in this forum we have people misquoting each other, even when the direct quote is visible just a few posts up...and that's happening on the same day...the same hour.
Yet you ask me to believe that exact quotes were memorized for hundreds and hundreds of years without a syllable or punctuation mark changed. That's folly.