From the Foundation to the Apex

[Gem]

If there is cause and effect, and we are subject to that, then we are bonded in that cycle, but because Buddhist philosophy is of the view that liberation is possible, there must be 'a way' of transcending the cause to effect cycle.

People like to say it is a choice, yes, we are very fond of choice, but in reality we find we feel effected by circumstances and are compelled to react, and try as we might to retain a perfect balance of mind, we become perturbed and agitated through action/reaction.

I think we have to look at cause as the volition, as in Buddhist philosophy kamma is the volition. However, we can't just look at volition in the abstract, but rather, consider the bigger picture of how volition relates to 'what we want it to be'. Then we might notice when we have uncomfortable feelings we react adversely, and how that adverse reaction is also an action we take to 'make it as we want it to be'. There is, therefore, no particular difference between the aversion/desire dynamic and volition.

Meditation is to be aware without such reactions, which is to say, without volition, and although one can make that their clear intent, they will find that they can't control it and are utterly compelled into reacting to everything. That makes liberation a bit tricky... and thus the 3rd NT: suffering can end; and the 4th NT: there is a way to end suffering are extremely nuanced.


Might as well face up to the truth that you don't have a choice, You first do your beast to be entirely non-reactive, find out that you can't, and then you can no longer honestly believe that you have that choice.

However. The volition is essentially 'the cause' but it not also an effect. Volition is incited via the reactive processes that you generate (not an effect of circumstances). Meditation is the practice of not doing that. At first you are terrible at it because you react all the time, but after a bit of practice you start to stablise. The more you practice the better your balance becomes - but you still have limitations and there's a point at which you can't control your reactivity.

In relation to the purification, when you stop, that means volition stops, and forgoing your volition is the same as 'surrender'. Observe it yourself. Resistance is volition, craving is volition, and the whole dynamic of running from discomfort and chasing pleasure is the volition of 'making it as you want it to be'. That is 'choice'. Meditation is the cessation of that - to be aware of it 'as it is', and therefore, a choiceless observation.

When we stop choosing and trying to make it as we want it to be, and remain choiceless as we 'see it as it is', the resistance stops and the obstacles or blocks in the lifeform are untied and set free. They emerge from the shadow of unconsciousness and exposed to pure (unreactive) awareness and 'allowed to be'. It manifests in the experience undisturbed and unhindered, and passes away like all things do.

We know 'what to do': be aware without reacting to anything, but in practice we find we don't actually have that choice. We find ourselves reacting compulsively and we can't stop it. Thus we remain bound in the action/reaction cycle and continue to generate kamma (volition), and are reborn in perpetuation of the delusion that the 'same person' endures from one moment to the next.

[Gem]

The ability to keep a balance of mind is what is practiced and the purification is consequential.The way Buddhist philosophy frames this is interesting. In the texts it is laid out more of less linearly, but only for the sake of explanation. It is better to think of it in a circle or a feedback loop or in a way that each aspect affects all others, and ultimately check in yourself to find out what is true in your experience of yourself.

It really stems from ignorance, which is like incomplete awareness, a wrong perception of the way nature is, you know not what you do, and that sort of thing. As part of that we have a belief that we endure time and our experience is enduring. Because we erroneously believe we are are an identity enduring time, we think we are affected by experiences. Hence we react to our circumstances by craving and being adverse to experience. From those reactions the volition is incited, which is the 'force' that perpetuates the false sense of an enduring self from one moment to the next. All reactivity incites the volition, but not in a linear fashion. You react adversely to something uncomfortable and the urge to move mind is already happening. This is 'suffering', the cause of 'rebirth', 'bondage' because you become subject to cause and effect via this reactive/volitional process.

When volition is incited thus, it creates the potential which must manifest as experience when all the conditions for it to arise in conscious awareness come together. That means volition has consequence, which is what most people think of as kamma. In Buddhist philosophy, kamma specifically refers to the volition. Hence there is kamma and there are outcomes.

Every time you generate kamma, the potential is created and the outcome is inevitable. Since kamma has been generated in the past, there is inevitability in life, and we have to live through that as our path. Just like you read these words knowing you have no control over them, things happen in life that are inevitable outcomes of volitions of the past. Once the volition is generated, the outcome is destined.

In the meditation context, we are not concerned with future outcomes or past volitions. We can only be aware of where kamma is generated, that is, the volition being generated now, momentarily. Hence you might be reacting to this I am saying, and that is 'your kamma'. What I'm saying is not your kamma, but how you react to it is.

Because volition or kamma is the cause of rebirth and liberation is freedom from the cause and effect cycle, meditation is the cessation of volition via non-reactive awareness. What we call 'pure awareness' is quite simply awareness sans reactivity/volition. If we can observe 'what happens' without reacting, the manifesting potentials of past kamma continue to arise in experience and pass away, but because we do not react, we are not generating new potentials. In that way, the outcomes of old kamma continue to dissolve away and no new potentials are created. This is how we 'empty out'. In Buddhist analogies this has been referred to as 'emptying the storehouse', and that is what they call 'the purification'.

This implies that meditation is not volitional. That's why volitional activity such as controlling breaths, counting, timing, and so forth directly contradict the fundamental principle of mindfulness. Mindfulness is inherently non-volitional because the cessation of volition is what enables the purification, is cessation of kamma, the end of rebirth, the surrender and/or liberation.

It's the way nature works. Dhamma means nature's way - the way things really work in the universe.

Breath meditation is a particular thing based on these principle. Buddhism has 'right meditation' (samma samadhi and sama sati) which means you can breath meditate rightly, or you can do it wrong. That's going to be unpopular, but just like you drop a stone and it falls to the ground, the universe has its way, and that's the way it is.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by Gem

G'day

Buddha said meditation is for purification, overcoming sorrow, staying the path of truth and spiritual liberation, and his lessons pertained to universal aspects of thoughts and feelings and virtues such as compassion and equanimity rather than sectarian beliefs and traditions. Not to put sectarian things down, as they might have some sort of cultural significance, just to say spiritualism is essentially universal and variations in culture/tradition aren't particularly relevant, but when I say 'truthfulness', you get it no matter your background, and since it's universal, we're on the same page.

The bolded is where you are going to have troubles if having a serious debate.

The fact that there are differences is why you have different traditions with different practices.

Also, not everyone is of moral standing, the practices are designed to help those with those issues. For instance Buddhism puts a lot of focus on opening the heart. Why? Because people need an open heart and most don't have it.

Morals are good and everyone should strive for right speech, etc.. but just like realizing energy or silence, some are farther along than others and shouldn't be judged.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by Gem

The ability to keep a balance of mind is what is practiced and the purification is consequential.The way Buddhist philosophy frames this is interesting. In the texts it is laid out more of less linearly, but only for the sake of explanation. It is better to think of it in a circle or a feedback loop or in a way that each aspect affects all others, and ultimately check in yourself to find out what is true in your experience of yourself.

Really not sure what you are saying here.

Violation creates kamma so any type of violation meditation does not purify you? So mantra meditation for instance is bad or not as effective? Energy techniques which are universally known to speed up purification is bad because it involves intent within the practice? Like focusing on your breath is intent.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by Gem

I guess that brings me to refuge. Taking refuge is a Buddhist tradition which is basically trust. There is refuge in Buddha (the enlightenment in yourself), dhamma (way of the universe) and sangha (the community and monks or teacher(s)). Obviously, if you don't trust your teacher or community, you won't take refuge in them, and you don't just throw your trust-pearls before the swine. People have show their trustworthiness to build up your trust in them, so refuge is a bit of process. Refuge in your enlightenment within is easier in principle, but in reality, there is a process of coming to full trust in 'life'.

Anyway. I talk a bit and people drift off, so this is enough. Make a comment and be happy.

Would you consider explaining what refuge is correctly when teaching others right speech? What you just explained as the 3 refuges is incorrect and is your take but is not what Buddhist teach.

Right speech would dictate that one would clearly inform the audience of the differences.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by Gem

You know I'm just ranting, right, but still, it's important, this stuff. We could be all wound up in our delusions of spiritual grandeur you know, and forget that things we take for granted are important whereas the spiritual nonsense is actually menial.

It actually means a lot to many millions of people.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by Gem

The first meditation is breath observation, which is called anapanasati in Buddha-speak.

There's really only one instruction. Be aware of what breathing feels like. I prefer the traditionalist method of feeling the breath in or under the nose. Usually a teacher will add things like counting breaths, timing breaths, breathing deeply, belly breathing etc, but I would say stop doing things and merely pay attention to what your normal breathing feels like.

Just going to say it... That is not how buddhist teach breath meditation nor is it the only thing you do.

Okay, i'm done with this thread.

[sky]

[ Originally Posted by Gem ]


[ I guess that brings me to refuge. Taking refuge is a Buddhist tradition which is basically trust. There is refuge in Buddha (the enlightenment in yourself), dhamma (way of the universe) and sangha (the community and monks or teacher(s)). Obviously, if you don't trust your teacher or community, you won't take refuge in them, and you don't just throw your trust-pearls before the swine. People have show their trustworthiness to build up your trust in them, so refuge is a bit of process. Refuge in your enlightenment within is easier in principle, but in reality, there is a process of coming to full trust in 'life'.]


But that is definitely not what Buddhism Teaches regarding The Triple Jewels...

This may help you,

https://www.diamondmountain.org/what...-three-jewels/

[Gem]

Originally Posted by sky123

[ Originally Posted by Gem ]
[ I guess that brings me to refuge. Taking refuge is a Buddhist tradition which is basically trust. There is refuge in Buddha (the enlightenment in yourself), dhamma (way of the universe) and sangha (the community and monks or teacher(s)). Obviously, if you don't trust your teacher or community, you won't take refuge in them, and you don't just throw your trust-pearls before the swine. People have show their trustworthiness to build up your trust in them, so refuge is a bit of process. Refuge in your enlightenment within is easier in principle, but in reality, there is a process of coming to full trust in 'life'.]But that is definitely not what Buddhism Teaches regarding The Triple Jewels...

This may help you,

https://www.diamondmountain.org/what...-three-jewels/

I thought the article had mostly similarities with what I said, main difference being, they say to assume your teacher is enlightened and take refuge, whereas I'm more realistic about cultivating trust sensibly based on morality and kind treatment. However, niggly pigglies aside, I though it was a fairly reasonable article, which seems to me, parallels what i was saying.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

Just going to say it... That is not how buddhist teach breath meditation nor is it the only thing you do.

Okay, i'm done with this thread.

The validation I rely on is Not 'because a teacher said therefore it is right'. The congruence of my explanation allows people to discern for themselves: does it seem to add up, or is it contradictory? If it adds up, is congruent, makes sense, then discern merit on that basis. If it contradicts itself and seems senseless, then discern it's nonsense on that basis.