God in Buddhism

[sentient]

Originally Posted by Gem

This is important in Buddhism because of refuge. Taking refuge is dhamma is like surrendering to nature's way. The teachings are also called dhamma because they explain how nature is. This doesn't mean the teachings are true. The teachings are only the philosophical aspect of it, and it is only by checking the teachings against yourself that you can fine out if it is true or not, and the way in which it is true.

Which I trust was what sky was expressing …. even repeating …

Not according to The Buddha nor His Teachings which is what were discussing .
But at the end of the day everyone makes their own choice and the proof of the pudding is in the eating....

It is actually the Teachings of The Buddha and the reason to believe it is through ' Practice ' .

I think most everybody starting to study and practice Buddhism learns from the teachings, but then one verifies the truth of these teachings (not through one's opinions) but through one’s own firsthand experience.

It is just, that some of our firsthand experiences about ‘desire & Buddhist practice' are different to yours Gem.

*

[Gem]

Originally Posted by sentient

Which I trust was what sky was expressing …. even repeating …

I think most everybody starting to study and practice Buddhism learns from the teachings, but then one verifies the truth of these teachings (not through one's opinions) but through one’s own firsthand experience.

It is just, that some of our firsthand experiences about ‘desire & Buddhist practice' are different to yours Gem.

*

Well, all I say is next time these apparently sanctioned as noble desires arise, see for yourself the aversion they come with, see the 'me' at the centre of that. For example, the person has already noticed that the enlightenment quality is not experienced, and they notice they are in the bondage of compultion, but instead of taking that as a fact and examining it so as to understand it, they become adverse to their bound state of mind and desire a different state than the state that IS. Considering the bound state is the state of being compelled by reactivity, continuing the aversion/desire activity isn't the 'way'. Ceasing the desire/aversion activity/reactivity is. Hence the meditation is tricky. It is subtle, nuanced and intricately refined, and isn't the desire for enlightenment or anything so simply stated. It's not that crude.


It is tricky because the ego is what desires, but 'you', the one aware, can observe the desire arising in your mind, notice how it agitates the mind, and see it pass by again, but the one aware is constant as opposed to coming and going. The one aware is unaffected, impervious, and beyond all observables. You 'already are' the one aware, and the one who desires is 'not-me'.

[sky]

Originally Posted by Gem

Well, all I say is next time these apparently sanctioned as noble desires arise, see for yourself the aversion they come with, see the 'me' at the centre of that. For example, the person has already noticed that the enlightenment quality is not experienced, and they notice they are in the bondage of compultion, but instead of taking that as a fact and examining it so as to understand it, they become adverse to their bound state of mind and desire a different state than the state that IS. Considering the bound state is the state of being compelled by reactivity, continuing the aversion/desire activity isn't the 'way'. Ceasing the desire/aversion activity/reactivity is. Hence the meditation is tricky. It is subtle, nuanced and intricately refined, and isn't the desire for enlightenment or anything so simply stated. It's not that crude.


It is tricky because the ego is what desires, but 'you', the one aware, can observe the desire arising in your mind, notice how it agitates the mind, and see it pass by again, but the one aware is constant as opposed to coming and going. The one aware is unaffected, impervious, and beyond all observables. You 'already are' the one aware, and the one who desires is 'not-me'.

' Most of us, when looking at the four noble truths, don't realize that they're all about desire. We're taught that the Buddha gave only one role to desire — as the cause of suffering. Because he says to abandon the cause of suffering, it sounds like he's denying any positive role to desire and its constructive companions: creativity, imagination, and hope. This perception, though, misses two important points. The first is that all four truths speak to the basic dynamic of desire on its own terms: perception of lack and limitation, the imagination of a solution, and a strategy for attaining it. The first truth teaches the basic lack and limitation in our lives — the clinging that constitutes suffering — while the second truth points to the types of desires that lead to clinging: desires for sensuality, becoming, and annihilation. The third truth expands our imagination to encompass the possibility that clinging can be totally overcome. The fourth truth, the path to the end of suffering, shows how to strategize so as to overcome clinging by abandoning its cause.

The second point that's often missed is that the noble truths give two roles to desire, depending on whether it's skillful or not. Unskillful desire is the cause of suffering; skillful desire forms part of the path to its cessation. Skillful desire undercuts unskillful desire, not by repressing it, but by producing greater and greater levels of satisfaction and well-being so that unskillful desire has no place to stand. This strategy of skillful desire is explicit in the path factor of right effort: '


https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/...inglimits.html

What is right effort? There is the case where a monk (here meaning any meditator) generates desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds and exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful mental qualities that have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen... for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, and culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen. This is called right effort.

— DN 22

[Gem]

Originally Posted by sky123

' Most of us, when looking at the four noble truths, don't realize that they're all about desire. We're taught that the Buddha gave only one role to desire — as the cause of suffering. Because he says to abandon the cause of suffering, it sounds like he's denying any positive role to desire and its constructive companions: creativity, imagination, and hope. This perception, though, misses two important points. The first is that all four truths speak to the basic dynamic of desire on its own terms: perception of lack and limitation, the imagination of a solution, and a strategy for attaining it. The first truth teaches the basic lack and limitation in our lives — the clinging that constitutes suffering — while the second truth points to the types of desires that lead to clinging: desires for sensuality, becoming, and annihilation. The third truth expands our imagination to encompass the possibility that clinging can be totally overcome. The fourth truth, the path to the end of suffering, shows how to strategize so as to overcome clinging by abandoning its cause.

The second point that's often missed is that the noble truths give two roles to desire, depending on whether it's skillful or not. Unskillful desire is the cause of suffering; skillful desire forms part of the path to its cessation. Skillful desire undercuts unskillful desire, not by repressing it, but by producing greater and greater levels of satisfaction and well-being so that unskillful desire has no place to stand. This strategy of skillful desire is explicit in the path factor of right effort: '


https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/...inglimits.html

What is right effort? There is the case where a monk (here meaning any meditator) generates desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds and exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful mental qualities that have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen... for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, and culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen. This is called right effort.

— DN 22

You know I'm not interested in cut and pastes because the person who wrote it is not here for me talk to, and if they were here we could have a back and forth which is about the subject rather than pretending that there are answers. For example, to know what your hand feels like you just feel you hand, but it doesn't give you an answer as to what hands feel like. IOW, you have to pay attention right now attention to know.

The four truths are simply facts. There is suffering, it has a cause, it can be resolved and there is a way to resolve it. Indeed, the cause is said to be 'craving', which is the reactive dynamic between desire and aversion.

The right effort basically involves noticing unwholesome states and ceasing to generate them, not because you are adverse toward them and desire wholesome states, but because unwholesome states arise from delusion and create the conditions for harm. It is the insight into how unwholesome states generate misery and wholesome states generate happiness that enables one to recognise the delusion and futility of generating unwholesome states of mind. It is not the aversion toward unwholsome states and desire for wholesome states that constiture 'right effort', because such a state of desire and aversion is, itself, unwholesome. Rather, it is ardency for the truth. One can be factual as in, 'I see this is an unwholesome state' without any aversion toward it, nor desire for wholeness, and similarly, recognise wholesomeness as, 'this is a wholesome state' without the slightest desire or clinging involved. As one becomes more acutely aware of what their mind is doing, and less distracted, they can recognise that their unwholesomeness is function of desire and aversion - craving - and rather than trying to generate wholesomeness per-se, cease the root cause of desire and aversion that generates unwholemeness. That is done by being aware of the actual state you are in as a pure plain fact without any judgment of aversion toward it nor desire for a different state. Taking out that root 'craving' is the basis of right effort, and it's very hard to do. It requires honesty, commitment, diligence, persistence, determination and an unrelenting ardency for the truth.


The tricky part is the aversion to craving, which is the complex we are in, the aversion to aversion, the desire for desire, the craving for craving... that's a real loop right there...

[sky]

Originally Posted by Gem

You know I'm not interested in cut and pastes because the person who wrote it is not here for me talk to, and if they were here we could have a back and forth which is about the subject rather than pretending that there are answers. For example, to know what your hand feels like you just feel you hand, but it doesn't give you an answer as to what hands feel like. IOW, you have to pay attention right now attention to know.

The four truths are simply facts. There is suffering, it has a cause, it can be resolved and there is a way to resolve it. Indeed, the cause is said to be 'craving', which is the reactive dynamic between desire and aversion.

The right effort basically involves noticing unwholesome states and ceasing to generate them, not because you are adverse toward them and desire wholesome states, but because unwholesome states arise from delusion and create the conditions for harm. It is the insight into how unwholesome states generate misery and wholesome states generate happiness that enables one to recognise the delusion and futility of generating unwholesome states of mind. It is not the aversion toward unwholsome states and desire for wholesome states that constiture 'right effort', because such a state of desire and aversion is, itself, unwholesome. Rather, it is ardency for the truth. One can be factual as in, 'I see this is an unwholesome state' without any aversion toward it, nor desire for wholeness, and similarly, recognise wholesomeness as, 'this is a wholesome state' without the slightest desire or clinging involved. As one becomes more acutely aware of what their mind is doing, and less distracted, they can recognise that their unwholesomeness is function of desire and aversion - craving - and rather than trying to generate wholesomeness per-se, cease the root cause of desire and aversion that generates unwholemeness. That is done by being aware of the actual state you are in as a pure plain fact without any judgment of aversion toward it nor desire for a different state. Taking out that root 'craving' is the basis of right effort, and it's very hard to do. It requires honesty, commitment, diligence, persistence, determination and an unrelenting ardency for the truth.


The tricky part is the aversion to craving, which is the complex we are in, the aversion to aversion, the desire for desire, the craving for craving... that's a real loop right there...

' You know I'm not interested in cut and pastes '


No your not interested but maybe some who wish to understand Buddha's Teachings may find them interesting as I have done .

Btw when you go to the Ashram to ' Learn ' Buddhist Meditation as taught by The Buddha is He there for you to speak with

[sentient]

Originally Posted by Gem

Well, all I say is next time these apparently sanctioned as noble desires arise, see for yourself the aversion they come with, see the 'me' at the centre of that.

You are talking about the relative reference point, with the “me” as its centre.

But one can step out of the endless self-referencing, after all the Buddhist view of Reality consists of 2 truths:
https://www.lionsroar.com/what-are-the-two-truths/

The All-inclusive Totality has Emptiness at its Centre or “Vairocana” as its Central Deity (meaning reality in its totality).

A devotion develops for this wholesome centre which is beyond all dualities.
It is nonspecific love without anything objective to desire, yet it is like falling in love and desire to reflect or be a reflection of this emptiness arises with arising bliss.

*

[Phaelyn]

Originally Posted by Gem

Exactly. Meditation is the ability to keep a mindful balance regardless of what the experience is. As part of the life-long training there is breath awareness and so on, but it soon becomes the practice of everything.

It's kinda like a master pianist continues to study music I guess.

I'd guess around 99% of the human population who use the word "meditation" define, apply, and use it differently.

It's funny that the intelligent makers of online dictionaries recognized this problem, that everyone defines the word differently, as I just googled it and found this as the main definition.

med·i·ta·tion

noun
the action or practice of meditating

A definition that defines nothing lol

So what does online dictionary say meditating is?

verb

think deeply or focus one's mind for a period of time, in silence or with the aid of chanting, for religious or spiritual purposes or as a method of relaxation.
think deeply or carefully about (something)

think deeply - depends on what thinking is in a person - usually means identification with thought as self - which is just normal waking habitual consciousness which is not "meditating" or an unusual state at all

focus one's mind for a period of time, in silence - do they mean external silence or internal silence? very different things. one can be externally silent while their inner minds are screaming endlessly....then the inner thoughts can be going non stop....and then what is our, the awareness's relationship with this thought stream?

aid of chanting - or watching the breath eh.... or some other technique as taught by a group or religious organization or tradition.

a method of relaxation - as is drinking some alcohol or going to the beach or enjoying some activity we like, listening to peaceful music

think deeply or carefully about - better word for think there would have been contemplate...maybe

how bout a definition that states, to be aware of thought or the mindstream without concern or attachment or identification

[sky]

Originally Posted by Phaelyn

I'd guess around 99% of the human population who use the word "meditation" define, apply, and use it differently.

It's funny that the intelligent makers of online dictionaries recognized this problem, that everyone defines the word differently, as I just googled it and found this as the main definition.



A definition that defines nothing lol

So what does online dictionary say meditating is?



think deeply - depends on what thinking is in a person - usually means identification with thought as self - which is just normal waking habitual consciousness which is not "meditating" or an unusual state at all

focus one's mind for a period of time, in silence - do they mean external silence or internal silence? very different things. one can be externally silent while their inner minds are screaming endlessly....then the inner thoughts can be going non stop....and then what is our, the awareness's relationship with this thought stream?

aid of chanting - or watching the breath eh.... or some other technique as taught by a group or religious organization or tradition.

a method of relaxation - as is drinking some alcohol or going to the beach or enjoying some activity we like, listening to peaceful music

think deeply or carefully about - better word for think there would have been contemplate...maybe

how bout a definition that states, to be aware of thought or the mindstream without concern or attachment or identification

There are many different ways to Meditate as you noticed, even in Buddhism. I personally think it's best to find what suits you and continue practicing rather than jumping from one to another.

Buddhism uses Visualization also so which rarely is mentioned.

Originally Posted by Gem

I personally find it hard to understand why anyone would get invoilved in chanting or other spiritual rituals, but it's generally fine. Some people like it so they should go ahead. It's just that these things are sectarian in nature, and not universal dhamma. The only reason these ritualistic practices could be problematic is if craving and clinging might be associated with them, which I think maybe there usually is.

They are not sects, they are traditions - all equally valid and wholesome in how they guide students towards realization and discovery and maturity. Each appeals to different personality types, but if authentic, they should be similar in realization.

Aversion to chanting and forms etc. is just another aversion. This perception, I feel from where I sit, is a little one sided and drier than my experience of Buddhist traditions.

There's a reason that all spiritual traditions including Sufism, Christianity etc. utilize chants and the like - because it takes one of oneself - and in that there is commonality.

JL

[sentient]

Originally Posted by sky123

Buddhism uses Visualization also so which rarely is mentioned.

Ok. since you twisted my arm:

Onto the disk of the autumn full moon you transplant a seed syllable.
https://english.cdn.zeenews.com/site...86150-moon.jpg

Cool blue rays of the seed syllable radiate immense, cooling compassion beyond the limits of space, which fulfil the needs and desires of sentient beings. They radiate basic warmth, so that the confusions of sentient beings may be clarified.

Tathagatagarbha, the most immaculate, pure, clean, beautiful white Buddha nature.
https://i.pinimg.com/236x/c1/23/ce/c...1--letters.jpg

Shingon seed syllable A
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/i...HGvJw&usqp=CAU

of Ajikan meditation:
https://cdn-az.allevents.in/events7/...g?v=1600389224

*