How are the 5 aggregates (khandas/skhandas) suffering

[Tibetan_Ice]

 

Of course the philosophical views are preliminary to actual awakening, I think that is understood. The 'view' is a perspective in that it informs the way you look at things. The Mahayana view is classed as non-dualist. So it is not correct to say there is no non-dualism in Buddhism (as a general statement).

Well I'm not sure what says for Mahayana, but the author claims that there is no nonduality in what the Buddha taught..

From that article:

 

The teaching of the Buddha as found in the Pali canon does not endorse a philosophy of non-dualism of any variety, nor, I would add, can a non-dualistic perspective be found lying implicit within the Buddha's discourses. At the same time, however, I would not maintain that the Pali Suttas propose dualism, the positing of duality as a metaphysical hypothesis aimed at intellectual assent. I would characterize the Buddha's intent in the Canon as primarily pragmatic rather than speculative, though I would also qualify this by saying that this pragmatism does not operate in a philosophical void but finds its grounding in the nature of actuality as the Buddha penetrated it in his enlightenment. In contrast to the non-dualistic systems, the Buddha's approach does not aim at the discovery of a unifying principle behind or beneath our experience of the world. Instead it takes the concrete fact of living experience, with all its buzzing confusion of contrasts and tensions, as its starting point and framework, within which it attempts to diagnose the central problem at the core of human existence and to offer a way to its solution. Hence the polestar of the Buddhist path is not a final unity but the extinction of suffering, which brings the resolution of the existential dilemma at its most fundamental level.

 

Is there even a term in Buddhism for nonduality?

I thought even Mahamudra has the two truths, a form of dualism. Only Bon, according to Tenzin Namdak, is beyond the two truths.

The words "dualism" and "nondualism" are not great words because they can apply to anything. Without proper definition and context they are meaningless and simply point out seemingly logical opposites. But conceptual knowledge is never black or white. There are many shades of gray in between...

 

Isn't son clear light and mother clear light a form of dualism?..

Edited February 11, 2015 by Tibetan_Ice

[C T]

 

Is there even a term in Buddhism for nonduality?

 

If i may point out, Mahayana Buddhism makes a lot of reference to 'One Taste', but some people confuse this to mean that everything is subsumed into the All, or the One, but upon deeper investigation, it can be said this is an incorrect assumption.

 

In this sense, on a very mundane level, One Taste is simultaneously a training path and a fruition of the path rolled into one: For example, one who practices Dzogchen or Mahamudra will learn not to discriminate between good and bad to the point of eliciting two different sets of reaction - for example, If one has a good day, thats fine... if its a lousy day, thats fine too. So on this very ordinary level, that sort of attitude in training the mind is called directing it at evenness, a sort of pervasive, non-reactionary, calm, composed and centred way of being. When the fruit of this practice is realized, then one is said to have integrated the wisdom of One Taste into everyday life.

 

On the not-so mundane level, One Taste points to the inseparability of wisdom and compassion as the two wings which completes the path to liberation, and on the absolute level, it points to the undifferentiated essence of samsara & nirvana.

 

Not sure if this helps to explain things in some small way, but its what came to mind.

[seekingbuddha]

Clarity is essentially awareness but the specific aspect of awareness that is knowing as opposed to the awareness associated with the 6 senses and subject/object duality, it is also referred to as clear light and is what permits self-awareness. Warmth is much harder to explain without a common experiential ground. It is essentially the feeling of well-being associated with the experience of truth. As we rest deeper and deeper in what is without the intrusion of sense forms, that sense of belonging, being home, feeling supported, unconditional love - all this and more is spontaneously present. It's often referred to as bliss.

Wonderful explanation. Yes, now i understand what you meant. It is extremely tough to even reach this stage, which you describe with various adjectives (like unconditional love), even during silent meditation retreat periods. So, i am long way from experiencing these descriptions in my daily life, but striving hard to get further along the path. This is where becoming a monk helps in progress.

 

What i am find in my current practice is that when i try to practice mindfulness/awareness/clarity and equanimity/calmness/restfulness in daily life, there is a small degree of stillness in my mind, that other people can sense. This stillness might come across as withdrawn/sad/defeated/unhappy to other people. It depends on the mind of the other person, that looks into my eyes. I realize that i lack that compassion/love for beings around me, but i do not want to force it into my daily life, unless it arises naturally. I have seen this compassionate love (metta) naturally arise only at the end of my purification process in a meditative retreat (when i purposefully direct my mind to metta). A suffering/stressed/deluded mind does not incline towards the higher states that you are describing, during day-to-day activities, as ordinary person. To some degree, the higher states of mind also arrive with aging process, i suspect. I know my mind was restless and agitated when i was a young man, which i confusedly understood as happiness and joy.

 

In Buddhism, there are too fundamental errors - as we study sutra and the thinking mind wrestles with concepts related to reality it can deviate towards nihilism or eternalism. Nihilism is the error we make when our view is that of non-existence, mistaking emptiness for non-existence. In fact, the emptiness is fully alive with potential.

Indeed, these discussions are fruitful to me. Yes - people do tend to take extreme views such as nihilism or eternalism, when it comes to views about oneself/their soul/spirit/consciousness/atman/etc. I have thrown them all out, as advised by my only teacher, the Supremely Enlightened One. As you say, Emptiness is indeed alive with great potential - reminds me of what i wrote, few of days ago......

In the beginning there was nothing,

Then came nama rupa,

Giving rise to everything..........

Can you be more clear on which part this refers to?

I think you have discussed it already. But would be useful to hear more, if you could. I was referring to your words " Emptiness without clarity and warmth would be a nihilistic view. ..............So I think it's important to remind ourselves of the inseparable nature of emptiness, clarity, and warmth lest we fall into the error of nihilism when we are studying sutra. The Bonpos speak of this as the union or inseparability of space, light, and warmth."

[Apech]

Well I'm not sure what says for Mahayana, but the author claims that there is no nonduality in what the Buddha taught..

From that article:

 

Is there even a term in Buddhism for nonduality?

I thought even Mahamudra has the two truths, a form of dualism. Only Bon, according to Tenzin Namdak, is beyond the two truths.

The words "dualism" and "nondualism" are not great words because they can apply to anything. Without proper definition and context they are meaningless and simply point out seemingly logical opposites. But conceptual knowledge is never black or white. There are many shades of gray in between...

 

Isn't son clear light and mother clear light a form of dualism?..

 

I don't want to hijack this thread into this debate. I don't think you have understood what non-dualism is because your examples miss the point. The author of that paper you quoted is a Theravedan monk and he will teach as his system does that the Buddha did not teach non-dualism. But there are other forms of Buddhism which are non-dualist. So it is not correct to say that there is no non-dualism in Buddhism. Whether such ideas are right wrong or whatever is another matter entirely.

[doc benway]

I think you have discussed it already. But would be useful to hear more, if you could. I was referring to your words " Emptiness without clarity and warmth would be a nihilistic view. ..............So I think it's important to remind ourselves of the inseparable nature of emptiness, clarity, and warmth lest we fall into the error of nihilism when we are studying sutra. The Bonpos speak of this as the union or inseparability of space, light, and warmth."

 

I think those comments came from the fact that I see and have myself experienced how easy it is to misunderstand emptiness, especially if we are focused on intellectual study and understanding. In our formal and informal practice, that's less of a problem since we are working with awareness, perceptions, feelings, and so on, rather than concepts. Whether these things are "real" or "empty" or whatever other words we use to describe them from a metaphysical perspective, there's no denying that they are with us (at one level there ARE us) and it is basically what we have to work with, along with our intellect, of course. But when we are working primarily with the conceptual, I think we can lose sight of the tangible (sic).

 

The basis of what I mention above is the idea of the sku gsum (Tibetan) or trikaya (Sanskrit) or three bodies. You may well know more about these than I do but I'll give a brief (and hopefully, reasonably accurate) description. These three aspects of existence can be considered a description of Buddhahood itself. Bön sku or Body of Bön (dharmakaya) is the emptiness of the natural state and is described as having the attributes of space and the sky is often used as an example in the teachings (the Bönpos have been referred to as sky worshipers). Rdzogs sku or Body of Perfection (sambhogakaya) is related to clarity or luminosity and the infinite potential for manifestation. Sprul sku or Body of Emanation (nirmanakaya) is related to energy and movement. The three are inseparable and inter-related at all levels. Our discussion of them as separate is artificial.

 

In practice, these three are related to the three doors of body, speech, and mind. One of my practices involves resting in the stillness of body, silence of speech, and spaciousness of mind. The stillness of body is a doorway to the wisdom of the dharmakaya - emptiness. This is not an intellectual understanding but a connection that develops over time with inner stillness and then, in turn, with it's inseparability from the stillness that surrounds us. It's often referred to as space. Similarly, when we gain stability resting in silence of speech (including the internal narrator), this is a doorway to the wisdom of the sambhogakaya - clarity, spontaneous presence, knowing (dare I use the word rigpa?). It's often referred to as light or luminosity. Finally, spaciousness of the mind involves cultivation of opening, allowing, embracing, non-interference, feeling oneself as the space that one occupies, and so on, and this is related to the wisdom of the nirmanakaya which is the energy of manifestation. The direct experienced is often referred to as warmth or bliss.

 

Others may have a better understanding of these things or see them differently and I welcome any corrections or comments.

[Songtsan]

Hmmm...I remember reading once somewhere that even if one were to get everything one wanted in life, no matter how pleasurable or ecstatic, there would still be traces of suffering (I like 'dissatisfaction' better). This is not only due to an instinctive awareness that everything is transitory, but also due to the very fact that one is separated from the objects or perceptions that one desires. In the end, it is not the object itself we are attached to, but the perception of the object. Notice the next time you are really happy, and forget about noticing the happiness, and instead look for dissatisfaction. You will always find it in the midst of even the most heavenly bliss. Just think of the Buddha, he had everything, yet still was not content.

 

I think suffering exists due to our ignorance and due to the fact that we feel separate from everything else. That dissatisfaction is likely due on some level to a desire to expand, to be free.

 

Study samadhi states...all the various types and the nirvanas, which transcend suffering, and you might get a new view. If, what is the highest goal, paranirvana? is freedom from suffering, then see if you can understand why...

[seekingbuddha]

I think those comments came from the fact that I see and have myself experienced how easy it is to misunderstand emptiness, especially if we are focused on intellectual study and understanding. In our formal and informal practice, that's less of a problem since we are working with awareness, perceptions, feelings, and so on, rather than concepts. Whether these things are "real" or "empty" or whatever other words we use to describe them from a metaphysical perspective, there's no denying that they are with us (at one level there ARE us) and it is basically what we have to work with, along with our intellect, of course. But when we are working primarily with the conceptual, I think we can lose sight of the tangible (sic).

Yes, i clearly see what you mean. Intellect and contemplation are tools, and they have to be properly used to tangible results. I used to get caught up in them during my initial meditation retreats, and i still struggle with them (but to a lesser degree).

 

The basis of what I mention above is the idea of the sku gsum (Tibetan) or trikaya (Sanskrit) or three bodies. You may well know more about these than I do but I'll give a brief (and hopefully, reasonably accurate) description. These three aspects of existence can be considered a description of Buddhahood itself. Bön sku or Body of Bön (dharmakaya) is the emptiness of the natural state and is described as having the attributes of space and the sky is often used as an example in the teachings (the Bönpos have been referred to as sky worshipers). Rdzogs sku or Body of Perfection (sambhogakaya) is related to clarity or luminosity and the infinite potential for manifestation. Sprul sku or Body of Emanation (nirmanakaya) is related to energy and movement. The three are inseparable and inter-related at all levels. Our discussion of them as separate is artificial.

 

In practice, these three are related to the three doors of body, speech, and mind. One of my practices involves resting in the stillness of body, silence of speech, and spaciousness of mind. The stillness of body is a doorway to the wisdom of the dharmakaya - emptiness. This is not an intellectual understanding but a connection that develops over time with inner stillness and then, in turn, with it's inseparability from the stillness that surrounds us. It's often referred to as space. Similarly, when we gain stability resting in silence of speech (including the internal narrator), this is a doorway to the wisdom of the sambhogakaya - clarity, spontaneous presence, knowing (dare I use the word rigpa?). It's often referred to as light or luminosity. Finally, spaciousness of the mind involves cultivation of opening, allowing, embracing, non-interference, feeling oneself as the space that one occupies, and so on, and this is related to the wisdom of the nirmanakaya which is the energy of manifestation. The direct experienced is often referred to as warmth or bliss.

 

Others may have a better understanding of these things or see them differently and I welcome any corrections or comments.

I know nothing about Mahayana views. I looked up trikaya just now, and it reminded me of christian trinity Father, Son and Spirit. Regarding silencing the body and speech - it has been my experience that the subtlities of mind are clearer only when body and communication (speech included) are brought to stillness, in day to day life. This alone brings great fruits, leave alone this way of penetration into dhamma.

[Tibetan_Ice]

 

I don't want to hijack this thread into this debate. I don't think you have understood what non-dualism is because your examples miss the point. The author of that paper you quoted is a Theravedan monk and he will teach as his system does that the Buddha did not teach non-dualism. But there are other forms of Buddhism which are non-dualist. So it is not correct to say that there is no non-dualism in Buddhism. Whether such ideas are right wrong or whatever is another matter entirely.

So you are copping out from explaining your version of nonduality? Why don't you look it up on the wiki?

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondualism#Madhyamaka_-_Two_truths

 

 

I mentioned the two truths. Is that not A good example of nondualism?

 

Your statements are equally misleading. You imply that what Theravada's monks teach is dualism? Think again..

 

By saying that You are calling Theravada Buddhism a dualistic teaching.

 

Here is another point of view about what the Buddha taught with regards to non dualism. It is a point of view from a practitioner, not an intellectual philosopher like Nargajuna..

 

The Controversy

 

There is no consensus in Buddhism about what Ultimate Reality is. Let's be honest about this from the start and not soft-pedal it. Broadly speaking, there are two competing and mutually exclusive views about what constitutes the "final understanding." One view is that everything that can be experienced is "dependently arisen" according to conditions. That means that there is no inherently existing Primordial Awareness. Let's call that the conservative Theravada view. The other view is that there is an inherently existing Primordial Awareness that is uncompounded and unconditioned. It is said to pervade and give rise to all things, and as such is considered "non-dual" or "not-two." Let's call this the Mahayana/Vajrayana Buddhist view, although it is also shared by the more progressive elements within Theravada Buddhism such as the Thai Forest Tradition.

 

Buddhists have been arguing about this question of "dependently arisen" vs. "inherently existing" awareness for over two thousand years, and there is no resolution in sight. We are not going to resolve it here. One thing we can do, though, is acknowledge that there is this disagreement and see for ourselves how it comes about--because it is not some obscure point of doctrine; rather, these views are based on the actual experience of real flesh and blood humans who do these practices and come to radically different conclusions.

 

So let's look at how this happens. It is simultaneously easy to understand and impossible to resolve. It has to do with the assumptions you take into your practice. If you believe, as do the conservative Theravada Buddhists, that everything must be investigated for the three characteristics of suffering, impermanence, and no-self, you will not find primordial awareness. You will find only suffering, impermanence, and no-self.

 

If, on the other hand, you believe that nothing you can do will reveal the truth and that the best thing to do is to surrender completely to this moment, you will discover Primordial Awareness.

 

This is actually quite a good joke on all of us, so let's take a moment to enjoy it. It isn't even complicated. Because the recognition of Primordial Awareness is "uncompounded," anything you can do will distract you from recognizing it. "Anything you can do" includes investigating your experience through an act of will. The very act of investigation is compounding the situation and preventing the recognition of Primordial Awareness. This awkward situation of using the fabricated mind to seek out the truth of the un-fabricated has been likened to sending the chief of police to investigate an arson, when the chief of police is himself the arsonist. The culprit will never be found.

 

As a practical matter, I can only recommend that you try both approaches and see which one leads to happiness for you. In the course of a day, there is plenty of time to do some investigation practice and some non-dual practice. If you've read my description of 3rd Gear of the 3-Speed Transmission, you know that I have come down on the side of an inherently existing "cognizant emptiness" as the Tibetan Dzogchen masters are fond of saying. Although all of my formal training in Buddhism is in the conservative Mahasi Sayadaw lineage of Burmese Theravada Buddhism, the only thing that makes sense to me now is to surrender. I don't believe that "I" can find out anything true, given that "I" am a fiction. So, I surrender. And in this moment of surrender, I know the happiness that is not dependent upon conditions.

 

I urge each of you to find out what makes the most sense for you and to pursue that. And I urge you not to spend a lot of time and energy trying to win people over to your view, which in any case is likely to change over time as you spiral ever deeper into an infinitely deep universe.

 

May you be happy.

 

Kenneth Folk

July 2009

 

 

 

[seekingbuddha]

.................... You will always find it in the midst of even the most heavenly bliss. ................

I think someone raised an objection to this view, earlier in this discussion. But i understand what you are trying to convey, as the core message there. Anything that is subject to anicha is dukka/unsatisfactory/stressful/suffering.

 

Just think of the Buddha, he had everything, yet still was not content.

He was not content because all he wanted was to find the truth about suffering and an end to suffering. One he attained this Super knowledge, he lived content for the rest of his life.

 

I think suffering exists due to our ignorance and due to the fact that we feel separate from everything else. That dissatisfaction is likely due on some level to a desire to expand, to be free.

As you pointed out, the suffering/dissatisfaction will end once a higher stage of liberation is reached and the mind realizes/feels/immerses/lives in the knowledge that it is NOT separate from everything else.

 

Study samadhi states...all the various types and the nirvanas, which transcend suffering, and you might get a new view. If, what is the highest goal, paranirvana? is freedom from suffering, then see if you can understand why...

Yes i did study them repeatedly; it helped me further my understanding of dhamma, but what really moved me (measurably) along the path, is embedded in the discussion between me and steve.

 

If we translate Parinirvana as death, then we can clearly see that it is going to end the suffering in human form. But according to buddhist literature, that is not the end of suffering, since beings arise and pass away everywhere, caught up in this web of suffering. How far do you take your faith in buddhist literature ? Are you willing to go all the way ?

[Apech]

You are attempting to explain a Buddhist concept by using Advaitan concepts.

 

There is no non-dualism in Buddhism.

 

I would suggest reading this link..

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_27.html

 

And finally, your last statement about judgements becoming meaningless without identity is a form of nihilism which I am sure Buddhism does not ascribe to. Buddha did not teach that there is no good or bad nor did he say that good or bad is meaningless.

 

This is what you said and what I was responding to. I think as a statement it is misleading and incorrect and since you are now quoting 'two truths' and so on presumably you would like to withdraw what you said.

[doc benway]

Yes, i clearly see what you mean. Intellect and contemplation are tools, and they have to be properly used to tangible results. I used to get caught up in them during my initial meditation retreats, and i still struggle with them (but to a lesser degree).

Who doesn't?!

As my wife likes to say, I am a work in progress...

 

 

I know nothing about Mahayana views. I looked up trikaya just now, and it reminded me of christian trinity Father, Son and Spirit. Regarding silencing the body and speech - it has been my experience that the subtlities of mind are clearer only when body and communication (speech included) are brought to stillness, in day to day life. This alone brings great fruits, leave alone this way of penetration into dhamma.

Yes, it's fascinating how many similarities we can find among disparate traditions.

Trinities are found in many ancient traditions - Babylonia, Sumeria, India, Tibet, Greece, Egypt, and others...

 

Day to day life - I think this is the key.

Our informal practice (off the cushion) is more important than our formal practice, IMO.

[doc benway]

As you pointed out, the suffering/dissatisfaction will end once a higher stage of liberation is reached and the mind realizes/feels/immerses/lives in the knowledge that it is NOT separate from everything else.

This is what the teachings seem to converge on - the non-separation:

Dependent origination / emptiness - everything is dependent on every other thing, nothing exists inherently or independently (of itself)

Karma - every action is dependent on every other action, no action exists without cause and effect

 

The Tibetans have a term they use for this extensively in the dzogchen teachings - thig le nyag cig - which literally translates to single sphere and implies wholeness, perfection, non-duality, completeness

[Songtsan]

I think someone raised an objection to this view, earlier in this discussion. But i understand what you are trying to convey, as the core message there. Anything that is subject to anicha is dukka/unsatisfactory/stressful/suffering.

 

If the habitual reifying self is aware of self/other dualities, it will always be aware that change is eternal. That awareness, no matter how deeply nestled in the background, will generate dukkha due to the fact that even though it has all it wants in the present, that that will eventually change...this is one prime source of dukkha - knowledge of transitoriness

 

He was not content because all he wanted was to find the truth about suffering and an end to suffering. One he attained this Super knowledge, he lived content for the rest of his life.

 

Just out of curiosity, would you say that he was content before he knew of old age, sickness, death, etc.?

 

As you pointed out, the suffering/dissatisfaction will end once a higher stage of liberation is reached and the mind realizes/feels/immerses/lives in the knowledge that it is NOT separate from everything else.

 

Yes i did study them repeatedly; it helped me further my understanding of dhamma, but what really moved me (measurably) along the path, is embedded in the discussion between me and steve.

 

If we translate Parinirvana as death, then we can clearly see that it is going to end the suffering in human form. But according to buddhist literature, that is not the end of suffering, since beings arise and pass away everywhere, caught up in this web of suffering. How far do you take your faith in buddhist literature ? Are you willing to go all the way ?

 

I don't have faith in any literature 100%

 

I do remember reading that it is the fabrications of the mind that are essentially the cause of suffering. If there is no merely imputed 'I' to whom the pain/longing/disatisfaction occurs, then there is no suffering.

 

Suffering is the reaction to pain, not the pain itself. Ending the fabrications of the mind ends suffering.

 

Now many view suffering as the disease, but it also has a purpose. It gets things done. Envy, hunger, fear - these things all have a purpose and have arisen because they ensure survival of the species.

 

I think that someone who is interested in Buddhism would benefit from studying evolutionary psychology. All things that arise over the eons have a specific function, in that they turned out to benefit the life-form in its survival on the whole. In the case of humanity, suffering is mind-based (lower animals - simpler life forms - do not suffer - they dont have that reflective capability....they just have stimulus/response). It causes people to think of creative ways to transcend the situation that is bothering them. Suffering is the mother of invention! It leads to development and unique adaptations.

 

Anyways, back to the point....Buddha stated that ending the fabrications of the mind ends suffering. How are the five skandhas fabrications?

[seekingbuddha]

Who doesn't?!

As my wife likes to say, I am a work in progress...

Hahaha - all wives want to "work on their husbands and shape them to their wishes".

 

Yes, it's fascinating how many similarities we can find among disparate traditions.

Trinities are found in many ancient traditions - Babylonia, Sumeria, India, Tibet, Greece, Egypt, and others...

You are way more knowledgable than me - i know only 3 religious philosophies.

 

Day to day life - I think this is the key.

Our informal practice (off the cushion) is more important than our formal practice, IMO.

We both seem to realize the importance of this. I get so disturbed afterwards, when i realize that i lost my inner stability/equanimity/mindfulness/tranquility after a human interaction. Sometimes i keep stability, having sensed that the other mind is unstilled/undeveloped/suffering. But other times, i lose my focus, get excited, lose my insight.

 

I need to work on this area - I realize that i can overcome this obstacle by cultivating the warmth that you were talking about earlier. If mind has warmth, it will naturally spread to the other minds around - but i am unwilling to take up specific practices (like compassion/kindness meditations) at this stage, because i feel that these feelings should arise naturally out of insight and stillness, developed during sitting-time. What are your insights/tips into warmth/metta/joy of mind in day-to-day activities/interactions ? And, do you care to share how you deal with these daily mini-destabilizations that occur throughout the day ? (sigh, monks have it easy).

[seekingbuddha]

Just like steve declared earlier, i also am neither a teacher nor consider myself advanced enough in my practice. But, i will share what i gained so far, and wish that you find it useful.............

If the habitual reifying self is aware of self/other dualities, it will always be aware that change is eternal. That awareness, no matter how deeply nestled in the background, will generate dukkha due to the fact that even though it has all it wants in the present, that that will eventually change...this is one prime source of dukkha - knowledge of transitoriness

Knowledge is a double edged sword. It gives rise to dukkha and it can be used to anihilate dukkha. Change or "awareness that change is eternal" is an insight - if one clings to this insight, that would give rise to craving of some sort. If one does not cling to ANYthing (including knowledge), there is cessation of being/becoming/birth/suffering/stress. Towards this end, we can use knowledge of any kind, with the right-view, and acheive cessation (to varying degrees) in daily life.

 

Just out of curiosity, would you say that he was content before he knew of old age, sickness, death, etc.?

In what i have read so far of the scriptures, there is no mention of the state of mind of Gotama during his life of confinment within the palace. There is only reference to his state of mind when he was a child (and had meditated already as a child, spontaneously). So, we don't know how he felt in mind as a teenager. If i am asked how content he was as a teenager, i would say he was as content as any rich, spoilt teenage brat that you find in todays world - maybe more content. But this in no way compares to the content/stillness/bliss that arises when one is liberated from all taints and clinging.

 

I don't have faith in any literature 100%

You do not need 100% faith, to start with or progress to a large degree. Buddha asked us to use our rational mind. So, we can start with that, and accept only parts of the literature that seems acceptable to our rational mind. That is exactly how i started. As we progress along the recommended path, we find fruits that are delightful to the mind. And as mind gets nutriment from these delightful fruits, it gains more strength and confidence/faith in the path; mind progresses further along the path; upon reaching right destinations along the path, mind starts having more faith based on the rationality at that stage of mind.

 

I do remember reading that it is the fabrications of the mind that are essentially the cause of suffering. If there is no merely imputed 'I' to whom the pain/longing/disatisfaction occurs, then there is no suffering.

 

Suffering is the reaction to pain, not the pain itself. Ending the fabrications of the mind ends suffering.

 

Now many view suffering as the disease, but it also has a purpose. It gets things done. Envy, hunger, fear - these things all have a purpose and have arisen because they ensure survival of the species.

 

I think that someone who is interested in Buddhism would benefit from studying evolutionary psychology. All things that arise over the eons have a specific function, in that they turned out to benefit the life-form in its survival on the whole. In the case of humanity, suffering is mind-based (lower animals - simpler life forms - do not suffer - they dont have that reflective capability....they just have stimulus/response). It causes people to think of creative ways to transcend the situation that is bothering them. Suffering is the mother of invention! It leads to development and unique adaptations.

Buddhism does not limit suffering to any specific species or beings. (Note that suffering/dukkha has multiple meanings). So, the right view would be that even a single cell organism suffers/stresses/has un-satisfactory life. And higher beings that have material-formness also have the same property. Right view would be that stimulus/response itself is a form of suffering. This is evident simply by looking at an animal form that we can understand (rather than considering an amoeba) - take a dog for example - it has no reflective capability (i will go with your theory on this one here), but it is easy for us to experience and see the suffering of a dog and tears in its eyes at times.

 

Anyways, back to the point....Buddha stated that ending the fabrications of the mind ends suffering. How are the five skandhas fabrications?

I will present a simpler view for this question. The 5 khandhas are fabrications because they cease to exist in a dead person. Without a live-mind, fabrications can not exist. Without live-fabrications of the mind, 5 kandhas can not exist. It is actually part of the mind that fabricates/creates/distinguishes these 5 kandhas. Realization/understanding/feeling this in the bones/penetration of this truth, is one of the delightful fruits that we find along the path.

[doc benway]

I need to work on this area - I realize that i can overcome this obstacle by cultivating the warmth that you were talking about earlier. If mind has warmth, it will naturally spread to the other minds around - but i am unwilling to take up specific practices (like compassion/kindness meditations) at this stage, because i feel that these feelings should arise naturally out of insight and stillness, developed during sitting-time.

I sometimes wonder about how necessary it is to do specific practices to cultivate the warmth vs simply allowing it manifest and blossom spontaneously. I've come across those to whom it seems to come easily and naturally. Some seem to have much more resistance. In the Mahayana, there are quite a few formal practices for developing this so I've got to imagine that the masters felt that the practices were necessary and valuable, at least for some. Cultivating bodhicitta has a very central role in the dzogchen methods both in the ngondro and in the more advanced, formal practice. Ultimately, the idea is that the bodhicitta is no longer a practice, but rather an expression of one's life. In my experience, the people who struggle with it tend to be those who are more focused on the intellectual study and not committed enough to the experiential practices.

 

What are your insights/tips into warmth/metta/joy of mind in day-to-day activities/interactions ?

 

The key for me is the knowledge that I am the same as everyone else, on so many levels. All people want to be comfortable, secure, and avoid pain and other unpleasant experiences. There but for the workings of karma (or the grace of God, some like to say), I could be in any other person's situation. Everyone we meet has people who love them and that they love. Anyone could be our child, sibling, or parent. We all make foolish decisions. If you believe in reincarnation, everyone you meet has been your mother or son at some point. And so on...

 

Most people are so deeply conditioned that they basically go through life like a robot, having very little possibility of waking up and making meaningful choices. It's like they're on a roller coaster and can't get off or change direction because they don't even know they're on it. So when they do something irritating or infuriating, I remind myself of the fact that they've not had the opportunity to awaken and grow beyond their social and cultural programming and I feel more sympathy and less anger.

 

And it goes much, much deeper than that. We are truly and literally one indivisible organism-environmental system. No living organism has lived or will ever live outside of an environment. No environment is recognizable or identifiable as such in the absence of a perceptive organism.

 

Not only do scientists recognize this but people who have direct non-dual experience do as well at an experiential level. Direct non-dual experience can lead one to absolute certainty regarding the connection of all sentient beings and this serves as the foundation of bodhicitta. If that happens, the day to day part is much easier. Otherwise, I do think there is value in the formal practices. The masters put a lot of emphasis on such practices so there's got to be some value there. I suspect that the more we practice these things, even if it feels artificial or contrived in the beginning, the more we become familiar with the real thing and the more like these things are to manifest in our lives.

 

Beyond that, I think that it boils down to making the choice to be nice, be civil, be patient, and supportive. We can be as concerned with others achieving their objectives as we are at achieving our own. We can choose to serve others, rather than serve our own desires. So many different ways to work on this but it boils down to committing to the 4 immeasurables.

 

 

And, do you care to share how you deal with these daily mini-destabilizations that occur throughout the day ? (sigh, monks have it easy).

 

First and foremost, accept them. They are unavoidable, at least for me, and I can only speak to what I know personally. Be kind to yourself when it happens, take it with a sense of humor rather than frustration. When I find myself worrying about something, I thank the narrator in my head for his concern. When I find myself getting distracted or carried along in my head for the thousandth time in an hour, I laugh at how ridiculously persistent that narrator is. When someone or something causes me to get off track, I remind myself that it has nothing to do with them, it is simply my misstep and an opportunity to continue to grow.

 

One thing that can be very effective is to cultivate the ability to use the recognition of these 'destabilizations' as a cue. The first step of course is awareness, and once aware we simply need to reconnect and continue. The more habitual this becomes, the more quickly we are able to get back on track. If we link that cue to a specific practice, it can be very powerful. An example is the Tibetan practice of dream yoga. Not only is there a night time practice but the practice goes on 24/7. Throughout the day, whenever something generates a strong emotion or reaction we learn to use that as a cue to take certain measures that lead us toward becoming more effective in our dreaming practice. One way to practice this is these 3 steps: 1) recognize (that we have lost the connection), 2) reconnect (re-establish the mindful connection), and 3) continue (resume the practice, whatever that my be). Over time it improves but we really need some sort of fuel to drive that never-ending commitment, that's very challenging.

[seekingbuddha]

Thank you steve, for the suggestions. My reluctance to practice metta (compassion/kindness) as part of my daily routine has been removed today. Coincidentally, while i was reading scripture today, i came across these words of the Supremely Enlightened One (this was uttered to tell the monks how to react to someone's speech, good or bad):

 

"'Our minds will remain unaffected, and we shall utter no evil
words; we shall abide compassionate for their welfare, with a
mind of loving-kindness, without inner hate. We shall abide
pervading that person with a mind imbued with loving-kindness,
and starting with him, we shall abide pervading
the all-encompassing world with a mind imbued with loving-kindness,
abundant, exalted, immeasurable, without hostility
and without ill will.'

That is how you should train, bhikkhus."

As you mentioned, my practice has to progress, in order to maintain my concentration/tranquility/equanimity during daily interactions. There are so many aspects of the practice to keep in mind, especially if one tries to focus at night, on a single subject/object.

 

As for the "never ending fuel for commitment.....", i got it through my sufferings, and i sustain it through daily practice. Once a mind starts inclining to something, and continues to incline to that subject/object, there is a tendency in the mind to continue that inclination - sort of like addiction, but in a good way and not as bad as other addictions. This is where mindfulness becomes important; because if we let the mind fall away from that good inclination towards dhamma, then slowly we lose that fuel for commitment. Like a horse, it needs constant prodding (at-least daily), to keep to the right path.

Edited February 14, 2015 by seekingbuddha

[Tibetan_Ice]

 

This is what you said and what I was responding to.  I think as a statement it is misleading and incorrect and since you are now quoting 'two truths' and so on presumably you would like to withdraw what you said.

I stand by what I said. Buddha did not teach dualism nor nondualism.

How about this, you read this book and pay particular attention to the part where it says:

 

“Not relying on duality,

You cut down the banner of pride.43

You are free from duality and non-duality,

And you are free of any point of reference:

I bow to you!

 

 

Here is the link: http://read.84000.co/#!ReadingRoom/UT22084-047-002/40

 

The book is called "The Ornament of the Light of Awareness"

 

So now are you going to withdraw your comments?

[Tibetan_Ice]

Here is a good summation of the plethora of meanings for the term "nondualism".

http://www.swamij.com/pdf/nondualism-paper-101105.pdf

 

And after reading that, you might want to read this:

 

http://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/the-precious-treasury-of-the-basic-space-of-phenomena/d/doc115564.html

 

Even though you might make an effort to do this, it would be pointless, so don't! Don't! Do not strive or try to achieve!

Don't look! Don't look! Do not look at the concepts in your mind!

Don't meditate! Don't meditate! Do no meditate on the phenomena of your ordinary consciousness.

Don't analyze! Don't analyze! Do not analyze sense objects and ordinary mind!

Don't try to achieve! Don't try to achieve! Do not try to achieve results out of hope and fear!

Don't reject! Don't reject! Do not reject afflictive emotions and karma!

Don't accept! Don't accept! Do not accept anything as true!

Don't bind! Don't bind! Do not bind your mindstream!

 

Edited March 3, 2015 by Tibetan_Ice