Hi Kaarine

I agree. Often we do not know exactly what suffering is or the various ways in can arise.

Kind regards

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/grin.gif

Thanks Element

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/wink.gif

How can you look into higher teachings when you are repeatedly taught mundane dhamma and you continue to seek peace from them For my money, I think a lot of people really underestimate the value of the so-called "mundane dharma." Sharon Salzberg puts it this way: "In order to live with integrity, we must stop fragmenting and compartmentalizing our lives. Telling lies at work and expecting great truths in meditation is nonsensical. Using our sexual energy in a way that harms ourselves or others, and then expecting to know transcendent love in another arena, is mindless. Every aspect of our lives is connected to every other aspect of our lives. This truth is the basis for an awakened life. When we live with integrity, we further enhance intimacy with ourselves by being able to rejoice, taking active delight in our actions. Rejoicing opens us tremendously, dissolving our barriers, thereby enabling intimacy to extend to all of life. Joy has so much capacity to eliminate separation that the Buddha said, 'Rapture is the gateway to nirvana.'"

The contemplative practices are nice and all, but they're really only intended at a very specific audience of people for a very specific purpose: to disillusion one from worldly life and thus free one from the clinging that leads to further becoming. This is not a goal that most people -- whether in the Buddha's own time or today -- will really identify with or share. And yet a lot of (admittedly well-intentioned and earnest) people end up banking on Buddhism's meditative practices as "the answer" -- a sort of cure-all for all of life's psychological ills and champion them as the "missing ingredient" for everyone. I think this is a misguided misappropriation of the original contemplative practices meant for renunciants.

People end up getting hung up on this system of meditation, when simple changes in conduct are a far more effective antidote to what ails them. The psychologists, IME, are simply taking what elements are relevant to a wider lay audience and creating self-contained systems that are designed for a specific audience for a specific purpose, just as the Buddha did. His lifestyle and the body of his philosophy wasn't meant for everyone, but there are definitely aspects of his teaching that might help certain problems and others that, to be frank, are rather an irrelevant waste of time and a detour for most people going about their lives. I think we do a disservice to "mass-market" teachings not intended for mass-consumption.

Thanks again Glow for your insightfull reflexions; it is true that buddhism is not for everybody. I takes a huge amount of courage to admit that the way we have been living and understanding is at the origin of Dukkha. Nobody likes to move away from their own comfort zone.

:)

Not sure why you quoted me because I am not underestimating the importance of sila.

"a lot of people" != "Deshy"

Which is why it makes sense to guide people in such a way so that they realize what suffering is. Often, when you are taught something repeatedly you tend to believe it is true and start practicing in that way (eg: doing good in order to be born in a better place or thinking you cannot get enlightened in this life so it is required to gather up more good kamma to be enlightened in a future life etc). Once in that delusion, it is hard to wake up from that and start searching because you believe it is true. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...s/dontknow.gif

!= means not equal? I am not sure what you are trying to say http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...s/confused.gif

Yes, I was referring to the post your quoted of mine:

^ In this post, I wasn't implying that you were among the people who underestimated sila. I was agreeing with what I thought you were saying.

However, after reading your latest reply to Element, it seems I actually misinterpreted your post. I hadn't realized the mundane teachings you were referring to were couched in terms of being reborn into a better life, without ever offering anything of the mind-training aspects of the Buddha's teaching. In that case, I think such teachers do a disservice to those that come to hear them and possibly contribute to keeping disadvantaged individuals... at a disadvantage with little or no means out of their situation.

Well mundane teachings generally reflect around rebirth and kamma to encourage people into morality don't you think. I think even the Buddha did that according to the suttas. There are people who are not interested in going forth thus they have been taught according to their beliefs and the lengths they are willing to go.

My point is that, teachers generally should reflect both teachings in their talks so that practitioners are aware what is what and choose to select what works for them rather than be deluded into something.

Well mundane teachings generally reflect around rebirth and kamma to encourage people into morality don't you think. I think even the Buddha did that according to the suttas. There are people who are not interested in going forth thus they have been taught according to their beliefs and the lengths they are willing to go.

My point is that, teachers generally should reflect both teachings in their talks so that practitioners are aware what is what and choose to select what works for them rather than be deluded into something. My impression from the suttas was that the Buddha was careful to emphasize the benefits that conduct brings about in the here and now, as in the Samannaphala Sutta. Most of my own teachers have emphasized this as well, but this may simply be due to the fact that I avoid teachers who talk a lot about literal rebirth as I find it inscrutable. My first teacher simply taught sila as "fertilizing the ground" in which to cultivate wholesome qualities of mind established through a meditation practice; e.g., if you behave in skillful ways, your mind will be at peace and thus more conducive to insight. No mention of rebirth except maybe the small-scale "rebirth into a more skillful mind-state." But I agree with your main point.

When I first became involved with Tibetan Buddhism (I now practice mainly according to the Theravada Forest Tradition), the first instruction I received before and after Refuge was related to what's called 'the four ways of changing the mind', namely the precious human birth, impermanence and death, karma and its results, and the sufferings of Samsara.

'Impermanence and death' strongly emphasised the after death 'Bardo' state. 'Karma' strongly emphasised rebirth in lower realms as a result of bad actions, and rebirth as a human or in 'heaven' as a result of good action and commitment to Dharma.
'The suffering of Samsara' was taught as a circle of existence rather than a mental state and there was a lot of emphasis on the suffering of the six different realms of existence, including of course Avici hell.

From my Refuge book -
" It is said that the Buddha cannot bear to talk about the terrible misery of the Avici hell, the eighth and worst of the hot hells with a name meaning 'unremitting' suffering, and that when He does so, Bodhisattvas vomit blood and nearly die "

Heavy stuff ! http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/grin.gif

Yes. The aspect of mental suffering here and now was clearly obscured in the earlier teachings I have got. I was exposed to that idea only after I started following the Thai forest tradition, which happened accidentally rather than choice. The suttas can be misinterpreted when you read them with pre-existing beliefs.

Well mundane teachings generally reflect around rebirth and kamma to encourage people into morality don't you think. I think even the Buddha did that according to the suttas. There are people who are not interested in going forth thus they have been taught according to their beliefs and the lengths they are willing to go.

My point is that, teachers generally should reflect both teachings in their talks so that practitioners are aware what is what and choose to select what works for them rather than be deluded into something.
I think this is what you was refering to


Anuruddha, for what purpose does the Thus Gone One tell the disciples, without wasting time, before you die, be born in something higher. Stating one is born there, another there. (* 2) The Teaching’s origin is the Blessed One, its lead is from the Blessed One, and its refuge is the Blessed One. Good that the meaning occurs to the Blessed One. We, bhikkhus, hearing it from the Blessed One, will bear it in mind. Anuruddha, the Thus Gone One tells the disciples, without wasting time before you die, be born in something higher. Telling them one is born there, another there. Not to deceive people, not for prattling, and not for gain honour or fame and not thinking may the people know me thus. Yet, Anuruddha, there are sons of clansmen who are born in faith and are pleased, to hear it. Hearing it they would arouse interest and direct their minds to that and it would be for their good for a long time.


http://www.mahindarama.com/e-tipitak...kaya/mn-68.htm

Are you saying the suttas do not talk about rebirth at all? If rebirth is mentioned in suttas then why else is it mentioned if not for morality?


As far as I understand, the Buddha seems to have used rebirth beliefs for morality in people who already have faith in it. I don't know how else to comprehend this:

Telling them one is born there, another there, not to deceive people, not for prattling, not for gain honour or fame and not thinking may the people know me thus. Yet, there are Anuruddha, sons of clansmen who are born in faith and are pleased hearing it they would arouse interest and direct their minds to that effect. It would be for their good for a long time.

ah, you seem to have posted while I was typing *)

Sure Aloka, I have ever thought that this issue about hells, terrible sufferings and the like are a hook for people with religious heritage or Chirstian heritage in their minds.

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/grin.gif

I think too, that rebirth was taught by the Buddha in terms of moraltiy. Some people really believe that being good now will lead to a better rebirth in their next life. This woks well with people that practice because of fear about hellish punishments and not through understanding about the origin and cessation of Dukkha. One is about fear and the good and bad issue and the second one is about dissernment.

But even that, sometimes the idea of rebith can be understood in the here and now. The enlessly rebirth of our own delussions again and agen also in a single day.

Deshy help me... what is meant by mundane Dhamma? Just to keep going witht the thread.

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/wink.gif

Ordinary worldly Dhamma