The Lump of Foam Sutta states:
Form is like a lump of foam,
Feeling like a water bubble;
Perception is like a mirage,
Volitions like a plantain trunk,
And consciousness like an illusion,
So explained the Kinsman of the Sun.
“However one may ponder it.
And carefully investigate it,
It appears but hollow and void
When one views it ...
There is no awareness beyond the khandhas.
There is no such thing as the "Thai Forest Tradition" having a uniform set of teachings. The "Thai Forest Tradition" is just a variety of different jungle gurus who made up their own versions of Buddhism.
Ajahn Amaro has wrong view when he said: "that which knows the khandhas is not part of the khandhas".
UPDATE based on the edited question with a suggested definition of karma.
While it is true that the Buddha taught that each and every volitional action has specific consequences this is most definitely not in opposition to the fact that repeated actions based on volitional thoughts can be habit forming. Indeed, consequences of a karmic action can be that it ...
Not clinging to pleasure does not mean there is no pleasure. It is the opposite. The more there is non-clinging, there more there is pleasure. For example, the suttas say the pleasure of 'jhana' ('meditative absorption') is reached by making 'non-clinging' the meditation object (SN 48.10). Or the suttas say Nibbana is the supreme pleasure (Dhammapada 204).
Abhidharma deals with ultimate realities. Buddha rejected Nihilism (natthikavāda).
The ultimate realities of the world are hidden from us due to our lack of concentration to see clearly and the wisdom to realise things as they are.
Vipassanā helps one see things as they are. Hence there is no view as "nothing is real". For an untrained mind things are not ...
As far as i can tell the delineation of school/sect doesn't really come into play until one plans to join a community for the long term or is in a doctrinal discussion.
The various schools have collections of texts, some doctrines therein are non-negotiable whereas a lot of texts will be in a "maybe true maybe not true" category (ie commentary) and the ...
“The real meaning of upekkha is equanimity, not indifference in the sense of unconcern for others. As a spiritual virtue, upekkha means stability in the face of the fluctuations of worldly fortune. It is evenness of mind, unshakeable freedom of mind, a state of inner equipoise that cannot be upset by gain and loss, honor and dishonor, praise and blame, ...
In my opinion, the Dhamma is in-between those two extremes. The Dhamma teaches us Dependent Co-arising.
One's mind is not free from the influence of past conditions. What affects the aggregates in the present will influence its future state (or the state of the next group of aggregates causally derived from and connected to a past group of aggregates). In ...
Why do people pretend? Or show off
The cause is something called "Asmi-māna", meaning "I-am-conceit". It's one of the 10 fetters (samyojanas) that bind a being to Samsara.
As seen in the illustration below, this fetter is only done away with at the attainment of Arahantship meaning that unless one is an arahant one has this fetter of conceit.
Puthujjanas love 2 things
being told that they are good people, precisely for craving sensuality. If nobody tells them they are virtuous for craving sensuality, they build a little story in their head where they are good people for craving sensuality.
puthujjanas who crave sensuality will tell other puthujjanas who have good items and fame that ...
A self, a tree are merely concepts - they don't exist in reality. Ultimately one cannot go out and locate a tree or a self. What exist is experiences; the experience of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, feeling and thinking.
When you see a tree, there is a seeing going on, ie. the visual process - there is the eye sense faculty and its corresponding ...
There are several questions brought up here. One I see you asking: is the entire teaching of Buddha- with everything it has to offer -- is a true explanation of reality or is it merely a useful fiction, an expedient mean for achieving a goal (liberation from suffering)?
To me the answer is clear.
Any explanation of reality is a conceptual model. Every ...
Dhammadatu gave an excellent answer that I wholeheartedly suggest you reflect on, but here is something a bit more personal that may also be helpful.
For a long time, I had much the same question about Buddhadharma that you have. There was something compelling and wise that struck me about it, but there were also aspects I found puzzling and concerning. It ...
There are a number of Buddhist schools, mostly falling under the umbrella of Theravada, Mahayana or Vajrayana. Well, Vajrayana is technically under Mahayana too. Zen, Pure Land and so on fall under Mahayana. Tibetan Buddhist schools mostly fall under Vajrayana. You can read about them in Wikipedia and also answers on this site for e.g. from this question.
From Help! The Kalama Sutta, Help! by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu:
Ma takkahetu: Don’t believe something solely on the grounds of logical reasoning (takka). Logic is merely one branch of knowledge
that people use to try to figure out the truth. Takka or Logic is not
infallible. If its data or inferences are incorrect, it can go wrong.
Ma nayahetu: Don’t ...
I guess there aren't many Buddhist monks on this site at the moment, who could tell you from their own experience whether they're happy without a car, home, or job.
I don't have a car. I decided when I was young that a car is more trouble and expense, to buy and to own, than I want.
I do like my bicycle. I fell off it two days ago, and had to go get the ...
Happiness is pleasant feelings.
Unhappiness is painful feelings.
Early childhood experiences condition us to generate painful feelings and pleasant feelings depending on the situation and act in certain ways (by age 5 humans reach 90% of their adult brain size).
Negative unconscious impulses caused by bad memories that generate painful feelings are one ...
It is the people who rely on the commentaries, like [REMOVED BY A MODERATOR], who talk a lot about ''doer''
They say that being enlightened is when there is no doer, instead there is ''pure action'' or ''pure phenomena''.
for instance Mahasi quotes this
Thus one realizes that feeling itself is what feels the plea- sure
associated with pleasant sense ...
You may as well ask: is the left hand the same as the right hand? Both are part of a greater whole, both work together to tie a knot, sure. But that knot wouldn't get tied if the two hands were the same.
When you see a tree, there is you, there is the tree, and there is the awareness that you are seeing a tree. That last is like a knot that you and the tree ...
Your physical body counts as one of the five aggregates (skandha-rupa). As such it's considered impermanent, a source for craving/clinging, and therefore problematic to be identified with.
There's the Milinda Panha. It records a dialogue between the Buddhist sage Nāgasena, and the Indo-Greek king Menandernda_Panha). English Translation available here. It's not considered a core text by all Buddhist disciplines, but it is one of the oldest surviving apologetic dialogues between Buddhism and Hinduism.
Another interesting text is the Buddhist ...
A feature of Buddhism is Noble Silence -- i.e. not getting drawn into speculation (or "unwise attention").
I don't want to complain about the question, but the first paragraph is fiction (referencing the Matrix) and the second is like a "thought experiment" but I don't know what you're saying with it or if it's a metaphor for something -- it appears to ...
As i see it, one can't rightfully declare suicide to be a solution to the drudgery of mundane life lest one knows exactly what life is.
Saying things like 'life is unjust' ie is quite rediculous because it begets the question what exactly is unjust about it, is the spin of an electron unjust? Is the speed of causality ulucky? Hence when one thinks about ...
I believe this is one of those questions which we need to make less complicated, rather than more.
In my opinion 'dukkha' doesn't take some kind of profound realization. That life is difficult is something that most people intuitively understand, whether or not they've studied Buddhism.
The question from that point - life is hard - forward, is how you deal ...
I'd like to hear your views on the arguments on both sides. Anatta: only a strategy for realization or a real "ontological" position?
It is both.
From Sutta Nipata 4.14:
Seeing in what way is a monk unbound,
clinging to nothing in the world?"
"He should put an entire stop
to the root of objectification-classifications:
'I am the thinker.'
Personnal experience is a good way to learn. From what i understand, buddhism isn't based on blind faith, so experience is an excellent teacher in that sense.
Although i won't quote any buddhist text, i don't think you need to see past lives to understand karma.
Anyone has experienced hatred, selfishness, and the following results on the mind. Actions born ...
Have you heard of the old South Indian Monkey Trap (from this article)?
In Zen And The Art Of Motorcycle Maintenance, Robert Pirsig’s
bonkers-but-brilliant philosophical novel that turns 40 this year, he
describes “the old South Indian Monkey Trap”. ... The trap
“consists of a hollowed-out coconut, chained to a stake. The coconut
has some rice ...
Rejecting clinging to both pleasure and displeasure
Herein lies your main misunderstanding of Buddhist (and Taoist) thought, namely in thinking that the expression pain-and-pleasure is referring to two separate concepts (as is evident from the placing of the word both before the aforementioned phrase), instead of one indivisible unit (as is actually the ...
There are three types of emotions, pleasant, unpleasant and neutral. Just like everything else, they are impermanent/anicca, as you already have stated.
When we attach (upadana) to pleasant emotions we create unwholesome karma, since pleasure/sukha becomes dukkha/unsatisfaction as soon as it ceases. So yes, clinging to harmony means "waiting for a disaster" ...