Enlightened humans in Pattaya and beyond.

[trd]

Yes Vincent, I can appreciate that you are puzzled, so why don't you stick with my explanation.

[peeba7]

 

Some well-known teachers are scholars who don't meditate. Bhikkhu Bodhi is one.

Of course, the word 'meditate' has a general meaning which also includes the specific and perhaps rather rigid techniques of traditional Buddhist meditation practices.

The English verb 'to meditate' is derived from the Latin, 'meditari', meaning 'to think, contemplate, devise, ponder'.

Some of us are by nature introspective and introverted, so meditating comes naturally.

 

Nice to see further discussion, thanks and I promise to catch up.

There will always be exceptions to everything or perhaps Bhikkhu Bodhi and some others end up in a state of complete and total meditation 100% of the time, at one with everything all of the time and knowing it.

As posted above, it depends on how you define it.

[peeba7]

One of the greatest 'illusions' and lies constantly being promoted all around us and in us is 'separate sense of self' or separate sense of anything. It looks like even science is seeing, finding and even proving this. Whatever perpetuates this separation strays off a divine path and whatever acknowledges and promotes how everything is connected to everything else keeps one on the path. There are an infinite number of distractions and dead ends that a teacher/master can help one avoid. That is why a teacher/master may be necessary for most of us typical egocentric I-me-mine types.

[peeba7]

 

The only definition of meditation I'm prepared to accept is the practice of going back to the source, to abide in thought free awareness.

 

The mind keeps us in a state of past and future thinking. The past is dead and the future is imagined. You speak truth: being fully present in the moment with no filters. Getting there, being there and staying there sounds like liberation. How? Just do it? Find the right teacher? Keep at it, it may take lifetimes? We may have micro seconds of quiet mind at best. Focus, concentration, and breathing, lots of hard work, dedication and devotion? It's been said: it is all very simple, just not so easy.

[VincentRJ]

Yes Vincent, I can appreciate that you are puzzled, so why don't you stick with my explanation.

Perhaps because I have so much respect for the Kalama Sutta.

[trd]

Yes Vincent, I can appreciate that you are puzzled, so why don't you stick with my explanation.

Perhaps because I have so much respect for the Kalama Sutta.

Which says nothing about samadhi.

[TuskegeeBen]

The Finding of The Third Eye, is an individual achievement of Human Grow_&_Development. No teacher, or so-called master can teach you how to see the path.

The only master/teacher that any student who's seeking the path to enlightenment requires, is the ability to read, comprehend, and know, while courageously standing alone, in the steadfast practice of the following "universal" meditative principles:

1. Right View. The right way to think about life is to see the world through the eyes of the Buddha--with wisdom and compassion.

2. Right Thought. We are what we think. Clear and kind thoughts build good, strong characters.

3. Right Speech. By speaking kind and helpful words, we are respected and trusted by everyone.

4. Right Conduct. No matter what we say, others know us from the way we behave. Before we criticize others, we should first see what we do ourselves.

5. Right Livelihood. This means choosing a job that does not hurt others. The Buddha said, "Do not earn your living by harming others. Do not seek happiness by making others unhappy."

6. Right Effort. A worthwhile life means doing our best at all times and having good will toward others. This also means not wasting effort on things that harm ourselves and others.

7. Right Mindfulness. This means being aware of our thoughts, words, and deeds.

8. Right Concentration. Focus on one thought or object at a time. By doing this, we can be quiet and attain true peace of mind.

The Buddha, Jesus, Muhammed, etc., proselytiz(s)ed the exact same principles. Actions, speak substantially louder than words! Good Morning

[VincentRJ]

Yes Vincent, I can appreciate that you are puzzled, so why don't you stick with my explanation.

Perhaps because I have so much respect for the Kalama Sutta.

Which says nothing about samadhi.

But I believe all things are related.

[trd]

Yes Vincent, I can appreciate that you are puzzled, so why don't you stick with my explanation.

Perhaps because I have so much respect for the Kalama Sutta.

Which says nothing about samadhi.

But I believe all things are related.

Such statements of belief are exactly what Buddha is warning against in the Kalama Sutta.

[TuskegeeBen]

Every prophet, throughout the Ages, has said the exact same thing ~

"Rid yourself of the emotional crutches associated with faithful, religious believings; of following such, the paths leading only to conquest, war, pestilence and death".

Instead, seek knowledge to find your own path, leading you to an evolved human "conscious" level of enlightenment; pure, positive thought, and true spiritual liberation.

"I think, therefore I am" ~ Rene Descartes, 1537. Cheers,

[VincentRJ]

But I believe all things are related.

Such statements of belief are exactly what Buddha is warning against in the Kalama Sutta.

Not when such beliefs are based upon understanding through thoughtful consideration and examination of the facts, which is the process that the Kalama Sutta recommended.

(In case there is any confusion, my use of the word 'belief' in this context means, 'accepting that something is true'.)

[TuskegeeBen]

But I believe all things are related.

Such statements of belief are exactly what Buddha is warning against in the Kalama Sutta.

Not when such beliefs are based upon understanding through thoughtful consideration and examination of the facts, which is the process that the Kalama Sutta recommended.

(In case there is any confusion, my use of the word 'belief' in this context means, 'accepting that something is true'.)

"Not when such beliefs are based upon understanding through thoughtful consideration and examination of the facts" is contradictory.

Perhaps one should not proceed any further in their search, prior to gaining a "clearly" defined understanding, re: the profound differences between believing the facts, and knowing the facts.

Again, Good Morning

[VincentRJ]

But I believe all things are related.

Such statements of belief are exactly what Buddha is warning against in the Kalama Sutta.

Not when such beliefs are based upon understanding through thoughtful consideration and examination of the facts, which is the process that the Kalama Sutta recommended.

(In case there is any confusion, my use of the word 'belief' in this context means, 'accepting that something is true'.)

"Not when such beliefs are based upon understanding through thoughtful consideration and examination of the facts" is contradictory.

Perhaps one should not proceed any further in their search, prior to gaining a "clearly" defined understanding, re: the profound differences between believing the facts, and knowing the facts.

Again, Good Morning

Can you give me some examples of the differences between believing the facts and knowing the facts?

There are beliefs based upon pure emotion and the conditioning of a person's upbringing, which often cannot be demonstrated as factual. In that sense belief is different from knowledge.

However, when considering situations that lend themselves to some sort of factual verification, it doesn't seem possible to know that something is true without also believing that it's true.

The Kalama Sutta advises people not to believe in something merely because it's a tradition, or is mentioned in some scripture, or is claimed to be a pronouncement from some God, or is a statement from a teacher or some authority, but advises them to examine the teachings from so-called wise people and work out for themselves how such teachings are helpful to themselves and others. The emphasis is on belief.

Knowing that something is true implies a certain arrogance. I believe that all things are related, but I cannot possibly know that this is true, for certain, because I do not 'know' all things.

I know very little. Perhaps I know nothing. Perhaps that's the most important thing I know.

[TuskegeeBen]

Reply to Post #74. Read post #68. Adios!

[camerata]

One off-topic post deleted. Stick to the topic at hand, please.

[IMA_FARANG]

Personal opinion.

A person who is "enlightened" would not claim such a thing because to do so would demonstrate that he or she had not yet passed the "gate of the Ego I mind delusion", and without passing through that gate to "enlightenment"(a word they would not use anyhow) and the illusion-delusion of the separation of their "I Ego mind" and the "other" outside would prevent their understanding and their 'enlightenment".

Note carefully that I aid that such a person could be a male or female (he or she) because to such a person Gender would be irrelevant.

In my life, long ago when I was only 21 years old, and young and stupid, I meant one Vietnamese woman who the locals called enlightened.

Being only 21 at the time, and full of my own illusions and delusions, I paid no attention to such nonsense then.

Now, many years later, i wonder.

[VincentRJ]

Personal opinion.

A person who is "enlightened" would not claim such a thing because to do so would demonstrate that he or she had not yet passed the "gate of the Ego I mind delusion", and without passing through that gate to "enlightenment"(a word they would not use anyhow) and the illusion-delusion of the separation of their "I Ego mind" and the "other" outside would prevent their understanding and their 'enlightenment".

Note carefully that I aid that such a person could be a male or female (he or she) because to such a person Gender would be irrelevant.

In my life, long ago when I was only 21 years old, and young and stupid, I meant one Vietnamese woman who the locals called enlightened.

Being only 21 at the time, and full of my own illusions and delusions, I paid no attention to such nonsense then.

Now, many years later, i wonder.

Your post is not clear. A person who is "enlightened" would not claim what thing? Can you be more specific? Which post are you referring to?

[thai3]

in my opinion anyone calling himself a master, or letting himself be called one is no where near one

[nausea]

Since true enlightenment doesn't involve any suoernatural powers, these guys are probably living among you, and you don't realise it.

[peeba7]

" Shortly will commence a retreat. "

Details on retreats, temples, talks in English, meditations, meetings, etc...?

[peeba7]

Been meaning to catch up with all the responses here.  Eventually as promised. Thanks all!

[peeba7]

This may be beginner stuff for you and he has a free PDF even better than this short article about the two minds:

 

https://markmanson.net/your-two-minds

 

Check out his archives, you are bound to find something that catches your fancy.  Funny AND deep yet easy to read.  He is like an east meets west kind of guy, a 21st century young alan watts.

 

 

[Moo du]

I wish you good luck with your spiritual quest.

It is correct that you need  a  guide -or teacher- if you want to seriously advance in the spiritual  path.

You cannot choose your guide, he has to choose you (the teacher chooses the student, never vice versa). On your behalf, you have to show a huge, ininterupted willingless to understand and learn. If you go on looking for a guide, having true faith in the divinity of the human spirit,  your guide will,  summon you.

 

I can assure you that, even if only for one moment you come to the point to realise  the divinity and uniqueness of the human

(your own) soul, you will never again  have the wish to communicate about it.

 

Your original post shows that you are heading that way.