Buddhist meditations for extinguishing the self

[steve]

41 minutes ago, Maddie said:

While I'm not familiar with some of the other things that you mentioned I don't see how dependent origination relates to non-duality?

 

One way to look at it is that what dependent origination means or where it leads is to an understanding that everything is interconnected. Everything is connected to and dependent on something else, ultimately everything is related to and connected to everything else. Nothing stands on its own as unique or independent and nothing is permanent in our samsaric experience. When this is felt and realized deep in one's bones and heart as the truth, that is what is referred to as non-dual experience. This is the basis for absolute Bodhicitta, for unconditional love, equanimity, all of the enlightened qualities. When I genuinely experience myself as connected at a fundamental level to all living creatures, to all of existence, these qualities arise spontaneously because my felt experience goes beyond the experience of a separate and independent me. Not sure if that is at all helpful - these things open up to us when circumstances allow and aren't always accessible based on what we read or discuss with each other. 

[Maddie]

So what exactly is meant by non-dualism?

[Mithras]

14 minutes ago, Maddie said:

So what exactly is meant by non-dualism?

Cruelty to others first and complete devastation of tempo

 

Better off cursing monks and collecting their wealth

Edited February 25, 2023 by Mithras

[Cobie]

2 hours ago, Maddie said:

So what exactly is meant by non-dualism?

 I asked that question before …

[blue eyed snake]

we had a thread on it last year

 

 

[wandelaar]

The idea of the self as an independent or autonomous part of reality creates a dichotomy between "me" and the rest of the world. This way of perceiving our human existence is a form of dualism. When you realize that there is no fundamental difference between the part of the world called "me" and the rest of the world, than this way of perceiving our human existence is a form of non-dualism. There are many ways to arrive at a non-dual perspective.

But as Johan Cruijff said:

 

Quote

Je gaat het pas zien als je het door hebt.

 

[stirling]

5 hours ago, steve said:

One way to look at it is that what dependent origination means or where it leads is to an understanding that everything is interconnected. Everything is connected to and dependent on something else, ultimately everything is related to and connected to everything else. Nothing stands on its own as unique or independent and nothing is permanent in our samsaric experience. When this is felt and realized deep in one's bones and heart as the truth, that is what is referred to as non-dual experience. This is the basis for absolute Bodhicitta, for unconditional love, equanimity, all of the enlightened qualities. When I genuinely experience myself as connected at a fundamental level to all living creatures, to all of existence, these qualities arise spontaneously because my felt experience goes beyond the experience of a separate and independent me. Not sure if that is at all helpful - these things open up to us when circumstances allow and aren't always accessible based on what we read or discuss with each other. 

 

This is beautifully done, Steve. _/\_

[Cobie]

1 hour ago, blue eyed snake said:

we had a thread on it last year …

@Maddie  I got recommended this thread before …  85 pages … my digest: 

 

Spoiler

Als ik zou willen dat je het begreep, zou ik het beter hebben uitgelegd. ~ Johan Cruijff

 

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

But as Johan Cruijff said: “Je gaat het pas zien als je het door hebt.”

 

 ime totally true.

 

 

Edited February 25, 2023 by Cobie

[Maddie]

3 hours ago, wandelaar said:

The idea of the self as an independent or autonomous part of reality creates a dichotomy between "me" and the rest of the world. This way of perceiving our human existence is a form of dualism. When you realize that there is no fundamental difference between the part of the world called "me" and the rest of the world, than this way of perceiving our human existence is a form of non-dualism. There are many ways to arrive at a non-dual perspective.

But as Johan Cruijff said:

 

 

 

Okay that's more or less what I thought was being mentioned in non-dualism although I can't think of a single Sutta where the Buddha stated this view.

[wandelaar]

1 minute ago, Maddie said:

Okay that's more or less what I thought was being mentioned in non-dualism although I can't think of a single Sutta where the Buddha stated this view.

 

The Buddha didn't like losing himself in metaphysical speculation, because he regarded preaching the way and having his followers practice it as much more important. But I ain't no Buddha, and what I wrote was my own understanding. I'm more of a thinker than a practicing Taoist, Buddhist or whatever. However non-dualism can be found in diverse religions and philosophies.

[Maddie]

1 minute ago, wandelaar said:

 

The Buddha didn't like losing himself in metaphysical speculation, because he regarded preaching the way and having his followers practice it as much more important. But I ain't no Buddha, and what I wrote was my own understanding. I'm more of a thinker than a practicing Taoist, Buddhist or whatever. However non-dualism can be found in diverse religions and philosophies.

 

Oh no argument there I just don't think the Buddha taught it.

[wandelaar]

There were a lot of things the Buddha deliberately didn't talk about because he knew all to well that those things would lead to endless debates and confusion, or even to schism's. So we can only guess what the Buddha thought about those things he preferred not to speak about.

[Cobie]

7 hours ago, wandelaar said:

There were a lot of things the Buddha deliberately didn't talk about because he knew all to well that those things would lead to endless debates and confusion, or even to schism's. So we can only guess what the Buddha thought about those things he preferred not to speak about.

 “we can only guess what the Buddha … preferred not to speak about.”

[wandelaar]

The Buddha talked a lot, and he even at certain occasions refused to answer certain questions. So we have good reason to believe that we know what he preferred not to speak about. But all if my memory serves me well. Those who know more about Buddhism than me will have to provide the sources - or correct me if I am wrong.

[Maddie]

4 hours ago, wandelaar said:

The Buddha talked a lot, and he even at certain occasions refused to answer certain questions. So we have good reason to believe that we know what he preferred not to speak about. But all if my memory serves me well. Those who know more about Buddhism than me will have to provide the sources - or correct me if I am wrong.

 

Hand full of leaves 

[blue eyed snake]

16 hours ago, Cobie said:

@Maddie  I got recommended this thread before …  85 pages … my digest: 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Als ik zou willen dat je het begreep, zou ik het beter hebben uitgelegd. ~ Johan Cruijff

 

 

 ime totally true.

 

 

 

well, once you've seen it you cannot unsee it anymore, imho the length of that thread shows how ridiculous it is to try to explain it.

Nonetheless, there are many very interesting posts in that thread, totally worth a read.

[steve]

13 hours ago, Maddie said:

 

Oh no argument there I just don't think the Buddha taught it.

 

How would anyone know what the Buddha taught?

Nothing was written during his lifetime or for hundreds of years after.

The Pali canon was put together five centuries after his death.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Maddie]

1 minute ago, steve said:

 

How would anyone know what the Buddha taught?

Nothing was written during his lifetime or for hundreds of years after.

The Pali canon was put together five centuries after his death.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good questions deserve good answers 😊

 

https://youtu.be/1h477l5gT2w

[wandelaar]

7 minutes ago, Maddie said:

Good questions deserve good answers 😊

 

https://youtu.be/1h477l5gT2w

 

Sorry - but do you also have a more condensed video or article that wouldn't take me hours to listen to or to read?

[Maddie]

16 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

 

Sorry - but do you also have a more condensed video or article that wouldn't take me hours to listen to or to read?

 

I can try lol.

 

So basically after the Buddha died there was the first Buddhist council where 500 perfectly enlightened monks got together to recite all of the suttas. So they recited them and then agreed upon what was canon and what was not. They put it down into a rhythmic chanting format because back in a preliterate society that's how people memorized things. They have been doing the same thing with The Vedas and other things for centuries.

   Then the monks went their various ways but from time to time they would all get together to do Tripitika chanting (which is still done to this day to prove that it can be done), where they would recite the entire cannon to make sure everyone is still on the same page and hadn't forgotten any or hadn't strayed.

   Anyway eventually about 400 years after the Buddha there was a famine in Sri Lanka and so many people were dying they decided to put the cannon into written form so that it wouldn't become lost. 

   Early fragments scattered around India and then eventually the Chinese translations all agree and are very close to each other in content.

   Anyway this is one way to know that what we have in the Pali Cannon today is most likely very close to what the Buddha actually said. 

Edited February 26, 2023 by Maddie

[Maddie]

33 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

 

Sorry - but do you also have a more condensed video or article that wouldn't take me hours to listen to or to read?

 

I guess also to answer the big "so what" as to why this matters. It's because right view is the very first component of the eightfold Noble path, and the eightfold Noble path is how the Buddha said to become liberated. So it is quite important.

[wandelaar]

That is how I understood that in the old days teachings were transmitted. So I find it kind of surprising that apparently nowadays this method of oral transmission is seen as practically worthless. Are there any reasons for this skepticism given within academia that might be worthy of consideration? - Or perhaps I should ask steve this question?

Edited February 26, 2023 by wandelaar

[Maddie]

46 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

That is how I understood that in the old days teachings were transmitted. So I find it kind of surprising that apparently nowadays this method of oral transmission is seen as practically worthless. Are there any reasons for this skepticism given within academia that might be worthy of consideration? - Or perhaps I should ask steve this question?

 

One of the primary examples of why this is seen as a worthless method is the telephone game. If you're not familiar with it, it's where one person whispers a phrase into one person's ear and then it goes around to several other people and then when it comes back to the original person it's usually very different.

[stirling]

15 hours ago, Maddie said:

 

Okay that's more or less what I thought was being mentioned in non-dualism although I can't think of a single Sutta where the Buddha stated this view.

Quote

 

"All living beings, whether born from eggs, from the womb, from moisture, or spontaneously; whether they have form or do not have form; whether they are aware or unaware, whether they are not aware or not unaware, all living beings will eventually be led by me to the final Nirvana, the final ending of the cycle of birth and death. And when this unfathomable, infinite number of living beings have all been liberated, in truth not even a single being has actually been liberated.

"Why Subhuti? Because if a disciple still clings to the arbitrary illusions of form or phenomena such as an ego, a personality, a self, a separate person, or a universal self existing eternally, then that person is not an authentic disciple." - Buddha, Diamond Sutra

 

 

Quote

Avalokiteshvara Bodhisattva, when deeply practicing prajña paramita, clearly saw that all five aggregates are empty and thus relieved all suffering. Shariputra, form does not differ from emptiness, emptiness does not differ from form. Form itself is emptiness, emptiness itself form. Sensations, perceptions, formations, and consciousness are also like this. Shariputra, all dharmas are marked by emptiness; they neither arise nor cease, are neither defiled nor pure, neither increase nor decrease. Therefore, given emptiness, there is no form, no sensation, no perception, no formation, no consciousness; no eyes, no ears, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind; no sight, no sound, no smell, no taste, no touch, no object of mind; no realm of sight ... no realm of mind consciousness. There is neither ignorance nor extinction of ignorance... neither old age and death, nor extinction of old age and death; no suffering, no cause, no cessation, no path; no knowledge and no attainment. With nothing to attain, a bodhisattva relies on prajña paramita, and thus the mind is without hindrance. Without hindrance, there is no fear. Far beyond all inverted views, one realizes nirvana. - Heart Sutra

 

For more examples:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondualism#Buddhism

 

Buddhism is a well-known non-dual practice.

[Maddie]

13 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

 

For more examples:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondualism#Buddhism

 

Buddhism is a well-known non-dual practice.

 

Granted I'm much more familiar with the Pali texts than the Mahayana texts, but that being the case I believe that the diamond sutra and the heart sutra are speaking about the teaching of non-self as opposed to non-duality.

 

The difference being that non-self would teach that what you think of as yourself or your ego is not really yourself, and to my understanding non-duality teaches that there's no distinction between yourself and other things.