Brain Scans: Buddhists really do know secret of happiness

0 Replies

truth
Twyvel, SO good to hear from you. You never cease to amaze me with your insight, and it is never expressed in the form of principles or formal platitudes. Like the comments of Krishnamurti, they sound like expressions of your present consciousness. Enough flattering.
You ask the crucial question, "Who is it that is attached?" I answer that no-one is attached; there is only attachment and that attachment generates the illusion of a self (an attatcher, as it were). How does "one" become unattached, then? By simply being aware of the nature, the process, of attaching. This can be seen--we are assured by the adepts--if one looks closely enough, that there is only the experience, not the fact, of attachment. That, too, is illusory. Buddhism is infinitely subtle. Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

wow.
yes that is quite unbelievable(your age that is). How are you so theological and yet new to what is tangeable?

My problem is that I think about things in differant order. You guys think about what the first domino is and I think about the last one is. See we are incapable of anything without those reactions. We would be nothingness. Actually I am one who is prone to taking short cuts. This may not be the best method, but ultimatily well get there at the same time. Ill probally get lost somewhere in unreality(short cut) and have to straghten things out. This is mostly due to the fact that I have no teacher(at the moment) to help in deciphering my visions.

dont get full of yourself, because that will set you back. adhere to the fact that things change and you will change. also be carefull who you talk to in reality, some people are pretty mean when it seems that you got it togather, and they have some other religion(christian identity?). at least to my own experience.

I guess that it is time to famuliarize myself with buddism. Ive been spending time with ancient religious philosiphy, and practice. I am especially interested in estaic practice. This is what I see as being the orgin of thought, drug induced vision.. I dont profess to know anything that of which I cannot prove, but our relationship with plants are too close for them not to speak to us....chemically I mean......Im a crazy fool. Oh well Ill come into my on some day, eh?

0 Replies

truth
Bongstar Smile

0 Replies

Re: truth

JLNobody wrote:

X-Surf, I find it difficult to believe that you are only 13. Your level of understanding is impressive. I've been toying around with buddhism since 1960, and I consider your views quite advanced.

It means that being with a buddhist teacher for 2 years is equivalent to decades toying around with Buddhism Very Happy

That's why, a person who wants to be enlightened should follow a teacher. That's my view, btw.

0 Replies

Oh now I see. Why couldnt I be so fortunate, all I have around me are christians and such. They seem disalusioned and mixed up. Besides they dont have answers to the kinds of questions that I ask.

0 Replies

truth
Yes, X-surf, I've been wasting my time. I don't even know what enlightenment is. All I know is that my ordinary mind is good enough. Smile

0 Replies

Thanks JLNobody, good to see you're still kicking around these here hills. We have some common understandings and they are well appreciated.

Trying to explain (understand) something that cannot be expressed with words or thought about is futile but working up to it is not. There's understanding but no understander. There's no attacher and no attachee, just attaching. There's running but no runner, speaking but no speaker, there's just verbing,.but no verbs. There's no producer or product, just processing. And what is processing other then a series of consecutive moments that appear to connect/relate to one another.

There's no happy Buddhists just happiness.

Who understands this? No one. Who knows this? No one. Who writes these words? No one. Who reads them? No one.

If there is no self's (ego's) how can we be separate?nondualism

And on the relative ego plain none of this makes sense, it's incomprehensible that the ego would be in pursuit of its own annihilation, even though I think they, we are all going in that direction; the realization of no self, although some are taking a hell of a detour, Smile

0 Replies

Trying to explain (understand) something that cannot be expressed with words or thought about is futile but working up to it is not. There's understanding but no understander. There's no attacher and no attachee, just attaching. There's running but no runner, speaking but no speaker, there's just verbing,.but no verbs. There's no producer or product, just processing. And what is processing other then a series of consecutive moments that appear to connect/relate to one another.

There's no happy Buddhists just happiness.

Who understands this? No one. Who knows this? No one. Who writes these words? No one. Who reads them? No one.

If there is no self's (ego's) how can we be separate?nondualism

This is sort of how I see death. Sort of everything and nothing. Existing and non-existing. A dissipation into the universe to become part or all, without an active conciousness. I think. Maybe not. I dont even know what I myself think. Its hard to decipher.

0 Replies

truth
Bongstar, that's also the way I see death. We become nothing (i.e., no particular thing); therefore we become everything. But in a sense that's what we are now, and it's what we have always been, even before our birth. Everything

0 Replies

XyB3rSurF wrote:

Quote:
or jesus or gandhi.
not a single blood is shed on "true buddhism"? i can say the same about "true christianity" or "true islam."
but blood has been shed in the name of buddhism though you would probably call it "fake buddhism."

What I'm trying to say is that Buddhism clearly disapproves wars to uphold its name, and if one does not follow that, he isn't a true buddhist. In fact, there is a special sutra (scripture) specially written for Peace. There are many cultist religions in the east which practices worshipping of spirits or even Buddha and does not follow his teachings, who call themselves Buddhists. There is one such worshipping cult which even threatened to kill the nobel prize winner Dalai Lama, which I believe you all have heard of. This is what I call "fake buddhism". In which, some of them are militaristic. My defination of "true buddhism" is any buddhist sect that teaches Buddhist teachings (Dharma) and practices it. There was not a single war fought on "true buddhism" in history. Buddhism has been peaceful since the very beginning, no wars and conflicts with other teachings.

what i'm saying is that, you can say the same thing about any religion if you segregate its followers into "true followers" and "fake followers" according to your own definitions.

0 Replies

truth
Do you ever wonder what the experience of living would be like if we should put aside notions of good and bad, truth and falsehood, and pleasure and pain and just pay close attention to what we are doing and what we are seeing and hearing at each moving moment? I suspect we would be in a state called Eden--before eating from the tree of knowledge of good and bad and right and wrong.

0 Replies

Well simple to put it, my defination, and the worldwide defination is any buddhist sect that bases its teachings on Buddha. That is more of a "world-wide" defination, in chinese its called "Zhen Fa", or true teaching. Those that bases its teachings on Buddha have not resorted to violence in history. Those that resort to violence are totally not affiliated to Buddha in teachings or practice, its only their own claim by words, and it is very easy to know and differentiate whether one sect is teaching the right stuff in Buddhism by looking straight at the teaching. But don't get me wrong, I'm not pointing out that other religions, not abused or practiced wrongly, are violent.

0 Replies

Anybody wish to comment on the "practicality" of a majority being Buddhists. To put it another way, is "selflessnes" a cognitive luxury based on the "attachment" of others for providing the necessities of life ?

0 Replies

truth
Fresco, your question is based on a misconception. I've known a number of zen priests and monks, all of them very practical and worldly individuals. Their non-attachment (not to be confused with detachment) has not in any way that I could see deterred their living as full participants in the lives of their "attached" neighbors

0 Replies

JLN

Thanks....I guess I was thinking of the charity bowl procession of Tibetan monks.

0 Replies

truth
Fresco, Japanese zen monks also traditionally passed through neighboring towns and neighborhoods with the begging bowl. These are/were usually the young monks of a training center. I'm thinking more of "post-graduate" monks and lay practicioners in Asia and the West.
BTW, I'd love to hear a few lines describing "esoteric philosophy" either here, by pm, or perhaps on a thread devoted to the topic.

0 Replies

Re: truth

JLNobody wrote:

Bongstar, that's also the way I see death. We become nothing (i.e., no particular thing); therefore we become everything. But in a sense that's what we are now, and it's what we have always been, even before our birth. Everything

This is something like Pantheism, which christians find to be a preposterous idea. I think that is sounds a little more sensible then going to heavin, of which does not sound to great to me(No sex, pot, rock, etc.). But disease free sounds good. What am I supposed to change my pleasures when I die. Then I wouldnt be me, I be someone else entirely.
Any ways ancient practices see things like this? So do Native Americans, which are apparentialy at least 5000 years old.

0 Replies

Re: truth

JLNobody wrote:

Do you ever wonder what the experience of living would be like if we should put aside notions of good and bad, truth and falsehood, and pleasure and pain and just pay close attention to what we are doing and what we are seeing and hearing at each moving moment? I suspect we would be in a state called Eden--before eating from the tree of knowledge of good and bad and right and wrong.

Ayahauca! And any thing like that. Havent experienced it myself, but I will. It is almost always quite a religious, and enlightening trip. Be careful, you can come to see what real evil is too! Setting is the key.

0 Replies

XyB3rSurF wrote:

Well simple to put it, my defination, and the worldwide defination is any buddhist sect that bases its teachings on Buddha. That is more of a "world-wide" defination, in chinese its called "Zhen Fa", or true teaching. Those that bases its teachings on Buddha have not resorted to violence in history. Those that resort to violence are totally not affiliated to Buddha in teachings or practice, its only their own claim by words, and it is very easy to know and differentiate whether one sect is teaching the right stuff in Buddhism by looking straight at the teaching. But don't get me wrong, I'm not pointing out that other religions, not abused or practiced wrongly, are violent.

so korean buddhism is not real buddhism?

0 Replies

Brain Scans: Buddhists really do know secret of happiness

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know