Jump to content
BANGKOK
madusa

True and Proper Buddhist teaching

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

Your post reminds me of the four Immeasurables. 😀

 

  • metta (loving kindness)
  • karuna (compassion - to feel another's pain as if it were yours)
  • mudita (sympathetic joy or empathy)
  • upekkha (equanimity).

 

When being Mindful of those around us, I observe myself being analytical/critical at times.

 

When interacting with others, or observing others interactions, I'm also analysing intentions of ones behaviors.

 

When cultivating Immeasurables ones intentions are vital.

 

Many make offerings to Monks for future good luck, or to accumulate positive Kharma.

I come away thinking, such offerings are hollow if they are done for personal gain.

 

One purpose of the Immeasurables is to turn attention outward away from Ego, focusing instead towards those receiving your benevolence.

 

The Buddha taught the following in order to cultivate the immeasurables.

 

A monk suffuses the world in the four directions with a mind of benevolence, then above, and below, and all around – the whole world from all sides, completely, with a benevolent, all-embracing, great, boundless, peaceful and friendly mind … There is no limit to the unfolding of this heart liberating benevolence.

 

Until Awakened we are all compromised to varying degrees.

When I analyse myself or others interacting, I'm learning that there is usually an ulterior motive.

Mindfulness of ones motives can assist us to move towards a mind of true benevolence.

 

I really like your summary of the points.

 

And I don't think we should be too harsh on not being spotless on having no ulterior motive.

 

No ego is hard and being aware we have some ulterior motive maybe good enough as a start.

 

Some people cultivate kindness to other people but they miss out on kindness to themselves.

 

Also forgiveness cultivated for others but they forget to let go and forgive themselves.

 

I feel this 4 qualities are the best way to approach any and every problem in life. And I mean small like relationship with your next door neighbour to big things like politics and climate change.

 

Any other approach I think will have negative side effects. 

 

I always say we (including me) don't give enough credit and appreciation to the Buddha because we (or maybe its only me) haven't worked out the the Buddha has already worked out the best approach to take for any and all problems in life.

 

I think the difficulty is if we identify with the self then its very natural to be self centred. 

 

But I guess if we are aware then we can gradually minimise the ego and as that decreases so naturally will the self centredness.

 

And I feel that karma helps puts us in situations that always gives us an opportunity to minimise the ego.

 

So what looks like the most negative situations on the surface are the most positive if we look deeper.

 

I guess that equanimity teaches us calmness and this comes from patience and patience with ourselves and other people is the key we need.

 

Too many people don't have enough patience for their own journey to awareness and also other people's path to awareness. This also includes me.

 

😀  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Props guys. This is actually one of the most informative and enjoyable topics I've come across on here. 

 

Well done! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The beauty of Buddhism is that its a path to truth. It doesn't tell us what the truth is but allows us to decide for ourselves.

 

But the more important thing about Buddhism is that it allows us to drop what we thought was true yesterday but with more current information we know is not true today and to embrace what we know to be true today.

 

I heard on the BBC world service the latest science research says that just as it is possible to move both forwards and backwards in space it is also possible to move forwards and even backwards in time.

 

This is a real break though as it was always thought that we can only move forwards in time and never back.

 

They did say that moving a person back in time would be very difficult but sending a message would not be as difficult although a lot more research would be needed before anything like that can happen.

 

This means that if we are awaken in the future or in the future after many lives then its theoretically possible to send back a message to us now on how to be awaken.

 

In theory this should shorten the process and make things a lot easier.

 

The best person to teach us the path to awakening is us after we have been awakened.

 

😀  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually know nothing about Buddhism.

 

I learn a lot from rockyysdt and this guy.

 

😀

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In an effort to reclaim the "mindfulness" practice from being overrun by secular industries and a recent claim that it is not owned by Buddhism,

 

Ajahn Brahm clarifies that mindfulness is a practice within the rest of the supporting factors of Buddhism (the Noble Eightfold Path: right view, right motivation, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right endeavor, right mindfulness, and right stillness).

 

Mindfulness is part of a great training which is called Buddhism, and to actually take away mindfulness from Buddhism is unhelpful, inaccurate, and deceiving – mindfulness is a cultural heritage of Buddhism.

 

Practicing mindfulness without wisdom and compassion is not enough.

 

Therefore, drawing from the Pāli Suttas,[16] Ajahn Brahm created the term "Kindfulness", meaning mindfulness combined with wisdom and compassion – mindfulness with also knowing the ethical and moral compassionate consequences of the reactions to what is happening (a.k.a. satisampajañña).[17]

 

😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Some misguided scientists maintain the theory that there is no rebirth, that this stream of consciousness is incapable of returning to a successive human existence. All one needs to disprove this theory, according to science, is to find one instance of rebirth, just one!

 

Professor Ian Stevenson, as some of you would know, has already demonstrated many instances of rebirth. The theory of no rebirth has been disproved. Rebirth is now a scientific fact!"

 

Buddhism, the only real science

 

Venerable Ajahn Brahmavamso Mahathera

 

 

I used to be a scientist. I did Theoretical Physics at Cambridge University, hanging out in the same building as the later-to-be-famous Professor Stephen Hawking. I became disillusioned with such science when, as an insider, I saw how dogmatic some scientists could be. A dogma, according to the dictionary, is an arrogant declaration of an opinion.

 

This was a fitting description of the science that I saw in the labs of Cambridge. Science had lost its sense of humility. Egotistical opinion prevailed over the impartial search for Truth. My favourite aphorism from that time was: "The eminence of a great scientist, is measured by the length of time that they OBSTRUCT PROGRESS in their field"!

 

o understand real science, one can go back to one of its founding fathers, the English philosopher Francis Bacon (1561 - 1628). He established the framework on which science was to progress, namely "the greater force of the negative instance".

 

This meant that, having proposed a theory to explain some natural phenomenon, then one should try one's best to disprove it! One should test the theory with challenging experiments. One must put it on trial with rigorous argument.

 

When a flaw appears in the theory, only then does science advance. A new discovery has been made enabling the theory to be adjusted and refined. This fundamental and original methodology of science understood that it is impossible to prove anything with absolute certainty. One can only disprove with absolute certainty.

 

For example, how can one prove the basic law of gravity that "what goes up comes down, eventually"? One may throw objects up one million times and see them fall one million times. But that still does not prove "what goes up comes down".

 

For NASA might then 'throw' a Saturn rocket up into space to explore Mars, and that never comes down to earth again. One negative instance is enough to disprove the theory with absolute certainty.

 

Some misguided scientists maintain the theory that there is no rebirth, that this stream of consciousness is incapable of returning to a successive human existence. All one needs to disprove this theory, according to science, is to find one instance of rebirth, just one!

 

Professor Ian Stevenson, as some of you would know, has already demonstrated many instances of rebirth. The theory of no rebirth has been disproved. Rebirth is now a scientific fact!

 

Modern science gives a low priority to any efforts to disprove its pet theories. There is too much vested interest in power, prestige and research grants. A courageous commitment to truth takes too many scientists out of their comfort zone.

 

Scientists are, for the most part, brainwashed by their education and their in-group conferences to see the world in a very narrow, microscopic, way. The very worst scientists are those who behave like eccentric evangelists, claiming that they alone have the whole truth, and then demanding the right to impose their views on everyone else.

 

Ordinary people know so little about science that they can hardly even understand the jargon.

 

Yet, if they read in a newspaper or magazine "a scientist says that?", then they automatically take it to be true. Compare this to our reaction when we read in the same journal "a politician says that?"! Why do scientists have such unchallenged credibility?

 

Perhaps it is because the language and ritual of science has become so far removed from the common people, that scientists have become today's revered and mystical priesthood.

 

Dressed in their ceremonial white lab coats, chanting incomprehensible mumbo jumbo about multi-dimensional fractal parallel universes, and performing magical rituals that transubstantiate metal and plastic into TVs and computers, these modern day alchemists are so awesome we'll believe anything they say. Elitist science, as once was the Pope, is now infallible.

 

Some know better. Much of what I learnt 30 years ago has now been proved wrong. There are, fortunately, many scientists with integrity and humility who affirm that science is, at best, a work still in progress.

 

They know that science can only suggest a truth, but can never claim a truth. I was once told by a Buddhist G.P. that, on his first day at a medical school in Sydney, the famous Professor, head of the Medical School, began his welcoming address by stating "Half of what we are going to teach you in the next few years is wrong. Our problem is that we do not know which half it is!" Those were the words of a real scientist.

 

Some evangelical scientists would do well to reflect on the (amended) old saying "Scientists rush in where angels fear to tread" and . . . . . . 

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20120728024727/http://www.dailynews.lk/2007/03/28/fea04.asp

Edited by jamesc2000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Buddhism is more scientific than modern science. Like science, Buddhism is based on verifiable cause-and-effect relationships. But unlike science, Buddhism challenges with thoroughness every belief.

 

The famous Kalama Sutta of Buddhism states that one cannot believe fully in "what one is taught, tradition, hearsay, scripture, logic, inference, appearance, agreement with established opinion, the seeming competence of a teacher, or even in one's own teacher".

 

How many scientists are as rigorous in their thinking as this? Buddhism challenges everything, including logic."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"A Grade-One teacher once asked her class "What is the biggest thing in the world?" One little girl answered "My daddy". A little boy said "An elephant", since he'd recently been to the zoo. Another girl suggested "A mountain".

 

The six-year-old daughter of a close friend of mine replied, "My eye is the biggest thing in the world"! The class stopped. Even the teacher didn't understand her answer. So the little philosopher explained "Well, my eye can see her daddy, an elephant, and a mountain too. It can also see so much else. If all of that can fit into my eye, then my eye must be the biggest thing in the world." Brilliant!

 

However, she was not quite right. The mind can see everything that one's eye can see, and it can also imagine so much more. It can also hear, smell, taste and touch, as well as think.

 

In fact, everything that can be known can fit into the mind. Therefore, the mind must be the biggest thing in the world. Science's mistake is obvious now. The mind is not in the brain, nor in the body. The brain, the body and the rest of the world, are in the mind!

 

Mind is the sixth sense in Buddhism, it is that which encompasses the five senses of sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch, and transcends them with its own domain. It corresponds loosely to Aristotle's "common sense" that is distinct from the five senses."

Edited by jamesc2000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Indeed, ancient Greek philosophy, from where science is said to have its origins, taught six senses just like Buddhism. Somewhere along the historical journey of European thinking, they lost their mind! Or, as Aristotle would put it, they somehow discarded their "common sense"! And thus we got science. We got materialism without any heart. One can accurately say that Buddhism is science that has kept its heart, and which hasn't lost its mind!

 

Thus Buddhism is not a belief system. It is a science founded on objective observation, i.e. meditation, ever careful not to disturb the reality through imposing artificial measurements, and it is evidently repeatable.

 

People have been re-creating the experimental conditions, known as establishing the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, for over twenty-six centuries now, much longer than science. And those renowned Professors of Meditation, the male and female Arahants, have all arrived at the same conclusion as the Buddha.

 

They verified the timeless Law of Dhamma, otherwise known as Buddhism. So Buddhism is the only real science, and I'm happy to say that I'm still a scientist at heart, only a much better scientist than I ever could have been at Cambridge."

 

Courtesy: Buddhist Society of Western Australia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, jamesc2000 said:

"Buddhism is more scientific than modern science. Like science, Buddhism is based on verifiable cause-and-effect relationships. But unlike science, Buddhism challenges with thoroughness every belief.

 

The famous Kalama Sutta of Buddhism states that one cannot believe fully in "what one is taught, tradition, hearsay, scripture, logic, inference, appearance, agreement with established opinion, the seeming competence of a teacher, or even in one's own teacher".

 

How many scientists are as rigorous in their thinking as this? Buddhism challenges everything, including logic."

Hi James.

 

The Buddhas 4 Noble Truths, (the truth of suffering, the truth of the cause of suffering, the truth of the end of suffering, and the truth of the path that leads to the end of suffering), is all about practice, and finding out for oneself through personal experience.

 

The only ones who can ever know what the state of Nibbana is, are those who have successfully navigated the path to the end of suffering.

 

What is such a state, and how does one prove it?

Can an Awakened Being ever be able to describe such a state to those who remain?

 

Those who remain in the state of Samsara can never comprehend, nor prove, nor understand it.

Practitioners can achieve esoteric powers along the way, but attachment to these is Ego.

If poorly navigated these can only hinder ones journey.

 

Speculation in such matters is pointless.

The only thing that really matters, if one accepts the first three truths, is to practice and discover for oneself.

 

 

 

Edited by rockyysdt
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are all stuck in the state of Samsara.

 

Afflicted by Greed, Delusion, & Aversion.

 

Short exercise:  Understand that everything we do or say has a motive to reason behind it.

                        Be Mindful of your behavior (what you do and or say).

                        Ask yourself why you behaved this way (what you did or said)

                         Analyse your motives.

                        Do they involve Ego?

                        

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buddhists are supposed to be vegetarians but I see a lot of pigs being slaughtered.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zen Master Man Gong was Seung Sahn Soen Sa's Dharma grandfather.

 

As a thirteen year old child, he was studying sutras at the temple Donghaksa in Korea. The day before vacation, everyone gathered to listen to some lectures. The lecturer said, "All of you must study hard, learn Buddhism, and become as big trees, with which great temples are built, and as large bowls, able to hold many things.

 

The verse says:

"Water becomes square or round according to the shape of the container in which it is placed. Likewise, people become good or bad according to the company they keep. Always keep your minds set on holiness and remain in good company. In this way, you will become great trees and containers of Wisdom. This I most sincerely wish."

 

Everyone was greatly inspired by this lecture. At this point, the Sutra Master turned to Zen Master Kyong-Ho, who was visiting the temple, and said, "Please speak, Master Kyong Ho; everyone would like to hear your words of wisdom."

 

The Master was quite a sight. He was always unshaven and wore robes that were tattered and worn. Although he at first refused, after being asked again and again, he reluctantly consented to speak.

 

"All of you are monks. You are to be great teachers, free of ego; you must live only to serve all people. Desiring to become a big tree or a great container of Wisdom prevents you from being a true teacher.

 

Big trees have big uses; small trees have small uses. Good and bad bowls both have their uses. Nothing is to be discarded. Keep both good and bad friends; this is your responsibility.

 

You must not reject any element; this is true Buddhism. My only wish is for you to be free from discriminating thoughts."

 

Having completed his talk, the Master walked out the door, leaving the audience astonished. The young Man-Gong ran after him, and called out, "Please take me with you; I wish to become your student."

 

The Master shouted at him to go away, but the child wouldn't listen. So he asked, "If I take you with me, what will you do?"

 

"I will learn. You will teach me."

 

"But you are only a child. How can you understand?"

 

"People are young and old, but does our True Self have youth or old age?" "You are a very bad boy! You have killed and eaten the Buddha. Come along."

 

From Manhattan Chogye Sa temple website

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pigs? Pigs?

 

Some of them even killed the Buddha and eaten him.

 

A book can have all the solutions people are desperately looking for

 

but what good is the book if people never read it, know it even exists and where to find it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do we know if what we do and say is motivated by ego?

 

If we see people not practising true Buddhism and we say he is not practising true Buddhism and we shake our heads and she is not practising true Buddhism and we shake our heads

 

and think only I practice true Buddhism is that words and action motivated by ego?

 

No danger of that from me. I know so little about Buddhism I cannot say this is true Buddhism and that is not so true Buddhism.

 

😀

 

Surely if we feel only we practice true Buddhism and others do not, that must be ego.

 

Ego creates separation and superiority and feelings of smugness.

 

If there is I and others there must be ego involved.

 

I was thinking hard how to diminish ego and I thought anything that makes us feel annoyed, angry, slightly miffed must be due to ego.

 

If there is no ego there is nothing to break our equanimity.   

 

I guess being happy and cheerful is the best antidote to ego.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...