Find the cause of suffering

[sky]

Originally Posted by Gem

So you've never had a close relationship of any kind?

What connection does your question have with attachments ?

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by Gem

Sometimes clarity is the realisation that our ideals don't actually apply to life. This is why ideals of non-attachment aren't actually practical in any absolute sense, because you really need to make emotional attachments in your close relationships. We know such attachments are going to involve suffering, but we do it anyway because ya gotta take the good with the bad.

Then you are not talking Buddhism at all or any spiritual tradition.

What you are saying goes against my experience and others I know who have changed through various practices.

An example from Theravada:

In Theravada Buddhism the Buddha himself is first identified as an arahant, as are his enlightened followers, because they are free from all defilements, without greed, hatred, delusion, ignorance and craving. Lacking "assets" which will lead to future birth, the arahant knows and sees the real here and now. This virtue shows stainless purity, true worth, and the accomplishment of the end, nibbana.

In the Pali canon, Ānanda states that he knows monastics to achieve nibbana in one of four ways:[original research?][27][note 5]
one develops insight preceded by serenity (Pali: samatha-pubbaṇgamaṃ vipassanaṃ),
one develops serenity preceded by insight (vipassanā-pubbaṇgamaṃ samathaṃ),
one develops serenity and insight in a stepwise fashion (samatha-vipassanaṃ yuganaddhaṃ),
one's mind becomes seized by excitation about the dhamma and, as a consequence, develops serenity and abandons the fetters (dhamma-uddhacca-viggahitaṃ mānasaṃ hoti).

Abhidhamma Pitaka's list of ten fetters

The Abhidhamma Pitaka's Dhamma Sangani (Dhs. 1113-34) provides an alternate list of ten fetters, also found in the Khuddaka Nikaya's Culla Niddesa (Nd2 656, 1463) and in post-canonical commentaries. This enumeration is:[21]

1.sensual lust (Pali: kāma-rāga)
2.anger (paṭigha)
3.conceit (māna)
4.views (diṭṭhi)
5.doubt (vicikicchā)
6.attachment to rites and rituals (sīlabbata-parāmāsa)
7.lust for existence (bhava-rāga)
8.jealousy (issā)
9.greed (macchariya)
10.ignorance (avijjā).

Fetters related to householder affairs

Uniquely, the Sutta Pitaka's "Householder Potaliya" Sutta (MN 54), identifies eight fetters (including three of the Five Precepts) whose abandonment "lead[s] to the cutting off of affairs" (vohāra-samucchedāya saṃvattanti):

1.destroying life (pāṇātipāto)
2.stealing (adinnādānaṃ)
3.false speech (musāvādo)
4.slandering (pisunā)
5.coveting and greed (giddhilobho)
6.aversion (nindāroso)
7.anger and malice (kodhūpāyāso)
8.conceit (atimāno)




Nothing much else to say, if you don't believe you don't.

All the best to you,

Tom

Originally Posted by jonesboy

Then you are not talking Buddhism at all or any spiritual tradition.

Thank you,

I was fearing I was one of the few left to see that.
Again I'm not saying Gem doesn't have any understanding. Just that it isn't exactly Buddhism or rather in line with what we know the Buddha taught.

With Love
Eelco

[Gem]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

Then you are not talking Buddhism at all or any spiritual tradition.



What you are saying goes against my experience and others I know who have changed through various practices.


An example from Theravada:

In Theravada Buddhism the Buddha himself is first identified as an arahant, as are his enlightened followers, because they are free from all defilements, without greed, hatred, delusion, ignorance and craving. Lacking "assets" which will lead to future birth, the arahant knows and sees the real here and now. This virtue shows stainless purity, true worth, and the accomplishment of the end, nibbana.

In the Pali canon, Ānanda states that he knows monastics to achieve nibbana in one of four ways:[original research?][27][note 5]
one develops insight preceded by serenity (Pali: samatha-pubbaṇgamaṃ vipassanaṃ),
one develops serenity preceded by insight (vipassanā-pubbaṇgamaṃ samathaṃ),
one develops serenity and insight in a stepwise fashion (samatha-vipassanaṃ yuganaddhaṃ),
one's mind becomes seized by excitation about the dhamma and, as a consequence, develops serenity and abandons the fetters (dhamma-uddhacca-viggahitaṃ mānasaṃ hoti).

Abhidhamma Pitaka's list of ten fetters

The Abhidhamma Pitaka's Dhamma Sangani (Dhs. 1113-34) provides an alternate list of ten fetters, also found in the Khuddaka Nikaya's Culla Niddesa (Nd2 656, 1463) and in post-canonical commentaries. This enumeration is:[21]

1.sensual lust (Pali: kāma-rāga)
2.anger (paṭigha)
3.conceit (māna)
4.views (diṭṭhi)
5.doubt (vicikicchā)
6.attachment to rites and rituals (sīlabbata-parāmāsa)
7.lust for existence (bhava-rāga)
8.jealousy (issā)
9.greed (macchariya)
10.ignorance (avijjā).

Fetters related to householder affairs

Uniquely, the Sutta Pitaka's "Householder Potaliya" Sutta (MN 54), identifies eight fetters (including three of the Five Precepts) whose abandonment "lead[s] to the cutting off of affairs" (vohāra-samucchedāya saṃvattanti):

1.destroying life (pāṇātipāto)
2.stealing (adinnādānaṃ)
3.false speech (musāvādo)
4.slandering (pisunā)
5.coveting and greed (giddhilobho)
6.aversion (nindāroso)
7.anger and malice (kodhūpāyāso)
8.conceit (atimāno)




Nothing much else to say, if you don't believe you don't.

Kind of abrupt ending there.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Eelco

Thank you,

I was fearing I was one of the few left to see that.
Again I'm not saying Gem doesn't have any understanding. Just that it isn't exactly Buddhism or rather in line with what we know the Buddha taught.

With Love
Eelco

If it doesn't comply with Buddhist texts, that's because spiritual ideals are neat and clean but real day to day life is all muddled and messy.

Originally Posted by Gem

If it doesn't comply with Buddhist texts, that's because spiritual ideals are neat and clean but real day to day life is all muddled and messy.

It's not about the texts..
Or teachers for that matter.
It's about what Buddhists seem to have found as truth. Verified by the texts in line with what are believed to be the Buddha's teachings.


Your findings seem to differ, so you can either say that the Buddha must have taught what you found, Or ??? Maybe there's more to be discovered.


I suspect it's the latter option. Now your findings as I said may well be on point for you, valuable to your place in life at this time.
To call it Buddhism however.. Why not abandon that. It seems you're abandoning texts, teachings and teachers anyway.. SO why not the nomer Buddhism. I have some ideas about that, but I guess you wouldn't want to hear them.



I'm just glad that I am not the only one who sees this since Blossomingtree left.



With Love
Eelco

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Eelco

It's not about the texts..Or teachers for that matter.

That's what I'm saying.

It's about what Buddhists seem to have found as truth. Verified by the texts in line with what are believed to be the Buddha's teachings.

But you just said...

Your findings seem to differ, so you can either say that the Buddha must have taught what you found, Or ??? Maybe there's more to be discovered.


I suspect it's the latter option. Now your findings as I said may well be on point for you, valuable to your place in life at this time.
To call it Buddhism however.. Why not abandon that. It seems you're abandoning texts, teachings and teachers anyway.. SO why not the nomer Buddhism. I have some ideas about that, but I guess you wouldn't want to hear them.

People are saying what I said isn't about Buddhism, but I didn't say it was, and nor do I make the demand that everyone has to talk about Buddhism. The subject is find the cause of suffering and I am just saying we make emotional attachments in our close relationships and that involves some suffering.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by Eelco

To call it Buddhism however.. Why not abandon that. It seems you're abandoning texts, teachings and teachers anyway.. SO why not the nomer Buddhism. I have some ideas about that, but I guess you wouldn't want to hear them.

I'm just glad that I am not the only one who sees this since Blossomingtree left.

With Love
Eelco

With Love? PSHAW!

To Gem (re sky's responses as well), it strikes me that Paul's advice may pertain:

"Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind."

Paraphrasing one of Jesus' comments: "Naysayers will always be with us."

Originally Posted by davidsun

With Love? PSHAW!

Didn't we agree not to talk to each other on this forum?


With contempt,
Eelco

Originally Posted by Gem

People are saying what I said isn't about Buddhism, but I didn't say it was, and nor do I make the demand that everyone has to talk about Buddhism. The subject is find the cause of suffering and I am just saying we make emotional attachments in our close relationships and that involves some suffering.

Just a question,
Why are you cluttering the buddhist subforum with non-buddhist nonsense?
You talk about, suffering, right speech, right understanding and the like as if you are using those words from a buddhist perspective..


Anyone with some understanding of buddhism has some framework around those terms, even the cause of suffering in a realationship, and emotional attachments and the like can be viewed from a buddhist perspective..


Anyway.. keep on keeping on, I'll leave you to your findings..


With Love
Eelco