Emptiness and Transience

[Xan]

Sakyamuni Buddha didn't use the term 'soul' but he taught that to be free of suffering we must become conscious or 'awake' in empty awareness... which is the soul in English, and atman/brahman in Sanskrit.

The title Buddha means, an awakened one.


Xan

Samana, you have a limited and scholarly understanding of Buddhism.

You should be careful about explaining concepts which you do not understand fully.

If you believe in Wikipedia, even it has an article on atman

Buddha attained Enlightenment, and was able to be truly egoless. But he did not deny you.

[Samana]

Originally Posted by enscion

Samana, you have a limited and scholarly understanding of Buddhism.

You should be careful about explaining concepts which you do not understand fully.

If you believe in Wikipedia, even it has an article on atman

You know nothing about me - why make such rude comments ? The Buddha said ''Kamma is intention. "

"Atman" in sanskrit means "self" rather than soul.

Have you never heard of "anatta"(anatman) the not-self characteristic ? Please read ''Is there an eternal soul ?"

http://www.budsas.org/ebud/whatbudbeliev/115.htm

and also

''Anatta and rebirth'': http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books7/Buddhadasa_Bhikkhu_Anatta_and_Rebirth.pdf


kind regards

S.

My intention was not to be rude, only to awaken you to the Truth.

There is a difference between reading and studying the teachings, and actually understanding the teachings.

The link you provided explains the five aggregates in a logically inconsistent way. It will not lead to true awakening, it is only a denial.

So you can choose either to believe in something illogical, or logical.

Don't you see the difference between Emptiness and Enlightenment?

[Samana]

Originally Posted by enscion

My intention was not to be rude, only to awaken you to the Truth.

There is a difference between reading and studying the teachings, and actually understanding the teachings.

The link you provided explains the five aggregates in a logically inconsistent way. It will not lead to true awakening, it is only a denial.

So you can choose either to believe in something illogical, or logical.

Don't you see the difference between Emptiness and Enlightenment?

It is extremely presumptuous of you to assume that you can 'awaken' me !!

I have been an offline Buddhist practitioner for most of my life and have received many teachings and instructions from respected teachers.

Maybe you should focus on your own misperceptions instead, my friend. Emptiness, anatta and enlightenment are not different.

[Lazarus72]

Originally Posted by enscion

Samana, you have a limited and scholarly understanding of Buddhism.

You should be careful about explaining concepts which you do not understand fully.

If you believe in Wikipedia, even it has an article on atman

Ironically, a central tenet of Buddhism is that of 'dependent arising' whereby it is understood that 'phenomena are merely imputed by terms and conceptualities in dependence upon bases of imputation'. One implication being that, ultimately the reification of terms is unhelpful, another that the same applies to self.

Don't you see the difference between Emptiness and Enlightenment?

Essentially enlightenment is the realisation of the emptiness of inherent existence. Refer to above.

[JaysonR]

*The ocean has a current which produces a wave; janamana (to produce mind/to produce to perception [another way of saying this: to make available for witness)

*The wave will move on a course influenced by this current; samsara (under flow)

*The wave has an action; karma (my action)

*The water's reaction to the current within itself is the uniqueness of that wave (the part of the current that is within the body of the wave itself); atman (my movement [at (move). man (my/me).])

*When the wave reaches the shore it stops being the wave; marana/jaramarana (expending to cessation of action ['my action': karma])

*It is then no more as it has reached full expense and recedes back to the ocean unbound; nirvana (lit. without blow, fig. unbound)

*What was the wave is now part of the ocean, which the ocean has a current which produces a wave; punarjanam (back to produce [implied: mind/perception; from janamana])

*The wave will move on a course influenced by this current; samsara...


The illusion being described is that of confusing mana with atman.
To consider that one is their mana and that mana has their atman.
Mana is the provoked; atman is the iteration.
But neither remain.

Jan remains; the current.
Nirvana is after each iteration, and true nirvana is when the current; jan; is done producing like waves (nirvana through jaramarana of punarjanam).

Until then, a new atman (my movement) will be produced into consciousness [capable of being witnessed] (janamana) every time the same motion of the current (sara) brings the same wave into motion (samsara) permitting it its action (karma) within the confines of its force of current (samsara) until it reaches the shore and expends itself in the same way as its preceding like waves (jaramarana)...and repeat.

The idea that was provocative was to realize that the way to reach final nirvana was to release the attempt to control sara in samsara by using mana in hopes of preserving atman after jaramarana in samsara.

To realize the only way that your type of wave stops returning in form is when the energy of the current has been expended by the ocean and the ocean therefore stops returning the current.

Ultimately, the disillusion, therefore, is to understand that control over this is not within oneself.
There is no possession, save for the temporal atman which will reach nirvana after jaramarana in samsara; so this too is not entirely possessed at all.
After this, if it is to be that the appearance of your type is to come again with another atman over and over, then so be it. That is for that time; that janamana; that samsara...not this janamana; this samsara; this atman.


Or, to say it another way...
Give up and just live.