[CO2490pL]

Tanha itself is the problem, not the object for which one has tanha...

Hello daverupa,

Is illusion (the ego) caused by tanha? or tanha is the ego way to fulfil and strengthen itself? which one causes the other?

Thanks,
Bundokji

[dubballey]

Relationships are about taming tanha, channeling it into a framework which is conducive to worldly happiness and less likely to bring about suffering to oneself and others. To really solve the problem of tanha, one would ultimately need to give up relationships as well -- hence the reason for going forth (becoming a monastic).

That doesn't mean all Buddhists go forth or give up relationships, though -- far from it. It's a question of clarifying one's goals at the given time, and of being honest about priorities.

[invasuant]

Hello Lazy Eye,

Thank you very much for your answer.

I was wondering if we as Buddhists have a common objective. I ve always thought that the ultimate goal for Buddhists is to get awakened by getting rid of illusion (the ego). But your answer implies that it all depends on our personal priorities, so if i want to become enlightened i have no choice but to become a monastic,

Its quite depressing when i think that it took a genious like the Buddha six years to completely drop his ego, so its almost mission impossible for someone like myself. Maybe i should rethink my priorities.

Once again, thank you for your calrification.

Regards,
Bundokji

[Vodonaeva]

I guess my answer would be that there is a common objective, and a path that leads to that objective, and different people are at different points on the path.

Whether one has to become a monastic (or at least live like a monastic) to become enlightened...well, that's one of those questions that leads to a lot of heated argument on Buddhist forums. What I can say, personally, is that as a layperson with a relationship and a family I know very well that the household life is intertwined with what Buddhism identifies as the afflictions of samsara.

For example, family or spousal love is called tanha-pema or lobha-pema. And obviously anyone who is not celibate is involved with kama, or sensual craving. So traditionally, for the layperson, the goal has been to keep these things from dragging us into suffering, while planting the seeds of enlightenment.

Even though there is attachment -- pema and tanha -- for each other, people will not be thrown down to the lower woeful worlds if they get the support of wholesome deeds. For example, a stone sinks in water, but will float if carried on a boat. (Links here and
here...)

The Pali suttas say that a layperson can achieve the first and second stages of enlightenment (sotapanna and sakadagami) -- so it's not as though progress is impossible even though one hasn't ordained.

But I think the question in general becomes clearer if we understand that enlightenment=the uprooting of the afflictions. It's not a matter of what Buddhism allows or doesn't allow, according to some rule book. It's just that as long as one is involved with tanha, one is by definition not enlightened. And as long as one wants to be in a relationship, one is making the choice to be involved with tanha. The choice is not "wrong" -- but it places certain constraints. That's why I say it's a matter of being honest with ourselves and acknowledging our priorities.

[vesiasmepay]

The Pali suttas say that a layperson can achieve the first and second stages of enlightenment (sotapanna and sakadagami) -- so it's not as though progress is impossible even though one hasn't ordained.

Bhikkhu Bodhi states that a layperson was able to achieve the first 3 stages in ''The Jhanas and the Lay Disciple according to the Pali Suttas"

many of the Buddha's followers who attained the first three stages of awakening, from stream-entry through non-returning, were lay people. The only stage that the Canon depicts as the near-exclusive domain of monks and nuns is arahantship. This clue is more important than might appear at first glance, for a close examination of texts describing the personal qualities and lifestyles of noble lay disciples might bring to light just the material we need to unravel the knots tied into this perplexing issue.

http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha267.htm

.

[DoctorDeryOne]

Hello Lazy Eye,

You said: And as long as one wants to be in a relationship, one is making the choice to be involved with tanha. The choice is not "wrong" -- but it will result in certain constraints. Your answers are clear and easy to understand, hence i hate to sound like a broken record. But how can i reconcile the above with the following Buddha quote:

“There are two mistakes one can make along the road to truth...not going all the way, and not starting.” As you know, living like a layperson means "not going all the way" which have been described as "a mistake" by the Buddha!

Or is the above quote was directed only to monastics, not to laypeople?

Regards,
Bundokji

[ssiikmuz]

Commitments and vows I have made to others, especially children, continue to have preceedance for me personally.
Also, my understanding is that as much as human beings would like to have black and white rules to follow and clear explanations this is not how life is and not what Buddhism is about.

[TXmjLW9b]

Admin note

Off topic posts from "I was just thinking" have been moved to this new discussion thread.

[hansen384cbh]

how can i reconcile the above with the following Buddha quote:

"There are two mistakes one can make along the road to truth...not going all the way, and not starting.”

As you know, living like a layperson means "not going all the way" which have been described as "a mistake" by the Buddha!

Or is the above quote was directed only to monastics, not to laypeople?

Regards,
Bundokji Hi Bundokji,

Can you give the source of any quotes please? (Quotes from 'Buddha Quotes' sites can be inaccurate by the way and can often be someone else's version of what the Buddha is actually recorded as saying in the suttas)

[CefGemYAffews]

Hello andyrobyn,

Commitments and vows I have made to others, especially children, continue to have preceedance for me personally.
Also, my understanding is that as much as human beings would like to have black and white rules to follow and clear explanations this is not how life is and not what Buddhism is about. I totally agree with you that life is not white or black, but dont you think that there should be some sort of uniformity between Buddhists?

I joined this forum three months ago but i still cant see what Buddhists have in common. For instance, i found out that you can be a Buddhist without believing in rebirth!! i also noticed how different traditions have different interpretations of the Buddha's teachings and different meditation techniques. So i started to convince myself that what we share in common is our desire to get enlightened and to beome free of suffering (to follow the path).

What is the criteria we use to consider someone a Buddhist? To choose to live as a layperson means to follow a different path than the one leads to end of suffering, right? so how can we consider them Buddhists?

Can you be a Christian without believing in God?

Regards,
Bundokji

[GroosteFoessy]

Hello Aloka,

The above quote is all over the net, i am not quite sure if its an accurate translation of the suttas, but here is one link for your reference:

http://btr.michaelkwan.com/2011/06/1...a-on-mistakes/

Even if the above quote is not from the Buddha, personally it makes sense to me.

Regards,
Bundokji

[DouseAuthott]

Hello andyrobyn,



I totally agree with you that life is not white or black, but dont you think that there should be some sort of uniformity between Buddhists?

I joined this forum three months ago but i still cant see what Buddhists have in common. For instance, i found out that you can be a Buddhist without believing in rebirth!! i also noticed how different traditions have different interpretations of the Buddha's teachings and different meditation techniques. So i started to convince myself that what we share in common is our desire to get enlightened and to beome free of suffering (to follow the path).

What is the criteria we use to consider someone a Buddhist? To choose to live as a layperson means to follow a different path than the one leads to end of suffering, right? so how can we consider them Buddhists?

Can you be a Christian without believing in God?

Regards,
Bundokji

I am not sure what to say being a Buddhist means - it is not something I label myself with ... there are many different traditions which are culturally appropriate interpretations.
In a country like Australia, where I have always lived and is multicultural, and we have access to the internet, it is possible to gain information about many different traditions and discuss online with many individuals, as we do here at BWB.
If you are serious about developing a practice,and wish to have instruction about Buddhist meditation as a beginner I would strongly suggest offline information.
I practice within Tibetan Buddhism and always have and with my guru ' teacher' have done studies on ancient Buddhism and Pali Canon.
I have had several previous teachers and after taking refuge, it was several years before I found my first guru - hope this information is helpful.

[Pataacculako]

Or as the quote you gave us says - in real life, Just do it!

Warmest wishes, Andrea

[Starichok]

Hello andyrobyn,

If you are serious about developing a practice,and wish to have instruction about Buddhist meditation as a beginner I would strongly suggest offline information. I wish i can find an offline teacher here in Jordan, but things aint as easy as i thought. The other day i tried to use the internet to search for any buddhist community where i currently live, and this is what i found:

http://en.ammonnews.net/article.aspx?articleNO=10987

Regards,
Bundokji

[CymnMaync]

The above quote is all over the net, i am not quite sure if its an accurate translation of the suttas, but here is one link for your reference:

http://btr.michaelkwan.com/2011/06/1...a-on-mistakes/

Thanks Bundokji - it isn't a reliable quote because it still doesn't mention the source it originated from such as a sutta reference.

I wish i can find an offline teacher here in Jordan, but things aint as easy as i thought. The other day i tried to use the internet to search for any buddhist community where i currently live, and this is what i found:

http://en.ammonnews.net/article.aspx?articleNO=10987

Regards,
Bundokji

Oh dear, I'm sorry to see that Bundokji.

You could try the Buddhanet worldwide search - but maybe it won't come up with anything in your area.

http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/

From my own offline experience, I'd advise seeking a meditation teacher if at all possible - but to be cautious of people who are known as 'gurus' and investigate carefully! It's possible to become over-dependent on charismatic teachers... rather like a long-term addiction in some ways.

[LindaSmithXV]

Hello Aloka,

Thanks Bundokji - it isn't a reliable quote because it still doesn't mention the source it originated from such as a sutta reference. May i ask you, where do you think the many websites online came up with the abovementioned quote from? and why would they lie?

Personally, i dont pay too much attention to the source but to the content. I prefer to answer the message, not the messenger!

Thank you for the link Aloka. I checked it already and unfortunately did not come up with anything in my area.

Peace,
Bundokji

[wvbwxol]

What is the criteria we use to consider someone a Buddhist?

To me, a person is a Buddhist if he/she believes that Buddha was "awaken" and saw the Truth, and he did his best to explain the Truth to us and how he "woke up," and is doing his/her best to follow Buddha's path.

Other than this, to say that this person is not a Buddhist because he/she disagree with you on the meaning of some Buddhist Texts or walking down the wrong path or in the wrong school or whatever is all unnecessary "judgement."

Because, ultimately, what does it matter to you?

If what a self-proclaimed Buddhist said something that you think make sense, accept it and apply it. If that person that you think does not make sense, then don't accept it. That's really all there is to it.

[Mqcawkzd]

Hello Aloka,

May i ask you, where do you think the many websites online came up with the abovementioned quote from? and why would they lie?

Hi again Bundokji,

Quote sites on the internet are often unreliable and BWB is a learning community which requires the sources of any reference material used here.

I can't find a sutta reference and on Wiki quotes that particular one is on their list described as:

"Unsourced

Wikiquote no longer allows unsourced quotations, and they are in process of being removed from our pages (see Wikiquote:Limits on quotations); but if you can provide a reliable and precise source for any quote on this list please move it to Gautama Buddha. --Antiquary 19:45, 6 April 2009 (UTC)"

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Gautama_Buddha


If you want to reference anything from the Buddha, I suggest you do it from this site and give the name and/or the reference of the sutta it came from:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/

[Dodoerabe]

Is illusion (the ego) caused by tanha?

If by illusion you mean ignorance (not realizing anicca, dukka and anatta) this quote from AN will help:

"A first beginning of ignorance cannot be conceived,[58] (of which it can be said), 'Before that, there was no ignorance and it came to be after that.'

Though this is so, monks, yet a specific condition[59] of ignorance can be conceived. Ignorance, too, has its nutriment,[60] I declare; and it is not without a nutriment. And what is the nutriment of ignorance? 'The five hindrances,'[61] should be the answer.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/a.../wheel238.html

[suilusargaino]

As you know, living like a layperson means "not going all the way" which have been described as "a mistake" by the Buddha!

I'm not sure the quote is irreconcilable with lay life. The point is not to lose sight of the ultimate goal, not to stop practicing, not to think one has finished the path when in reality one isn't even at the halfway mark.

There are countless areas where we can work on reducing our greed, aversion and delusion. Simply perfecting the five precepts is a lifetime of work. A layperson will probably direct his or her efforts towards those areas that are appropriate to his/her situation.

For example, personally speaking, I try to simplify my life, follow Buddhist ethical principles in my interactions at work and in society, spend less of my time chasing after material satisfactions, contemplate the truths of annica, anatta and dukkha, cultivate the paramitas, practice loving-kindness, and so on. It would be a mistake to say "because I'm not a monk, I can't really get anywhere in my practice".