New answers tagged

0

Knowing is not dependent upon the external senses, otherwise, how would you know that you have dropped the senses in 2nd Jhana? How would you know the 3rd and 4th Jhanas? Now to answer your question about what is mind. Mind is created or produced by that-which-flows. That-which-flows is the activity of the unborn. Do not think that the unborn is static. It ...


0

If you have a system with infinite distance and infinite elements, you will have infinite variance. What does not change is the principle or the mechanics of the system. Ie a coinflip retains an average 50/50 probability as a principle across the immeasurable distance of various flips. Therefore a system follows the same principles with infinite variance in ...


1

Infinity is surprisingly complicated, so let's look at what the Buddha said: SN15.14:1.2: “Mendicants, transmigration has no known beginning. … It’s not easy to find a sentient being who in all this long time has not previously been your mother. Why is that? Transmigration has no known beginning. … This is quite enough for you to become disillusioned, ...


0

Rebirth is like consequent experience after death. It is also consequent arising of suffering after the breakup of the body. "Rebirth" is pivotal to the inference of all transient phenomena being classed as suffering. For feelings to be categorically classed as suffering you need to infer the dependent origination of existence, in particular you ...


0

There is no reincarnation. There is rebirth. Rebirth is merely the continuation of that-which-flows in the realm of space-time.


1

The second? I met a pigeon this year which was crippled with an illness. I gave it shelter, food, and water, for about 10 days until it died. I figure that was maybe kinder than trying to kill it when it was helpless. If so, how can I mitigate this bad kamma? "Stop doing it" -- see this answer which quotes SN 42.8. And finally, how can we help him ...


0

What do you think of this story? Was I wrong the first time? The second? First time: no kamma ( unwitting/unintentional action ). Second time: mixed kamma with bright and dark results ( active intention/action to kill + active intention to alleviate the state of prolonged suffering ) If so, how can I mitigate this bad kamma? Be more mindful of whatever ...


2

Wrong second time. First time there is no factor of intention, second time you wanted him to die for whatever reason. Take a hypothetical example of a person who is unable to kill another intentionally, it being not in his range he couldn't have done it. If not killing is classed categorically as good then the person who doesn't kill can not be blamed for ...


2

What do you think of this story? Was I wrong the first time? The second? I think these questions are displaying concern for what others might think. There's a risk that it contributes to throwing us off balance: Now, gain arises for a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones. He reflects, 'Gain has arisen for me. It is inconstant, stressful, & ...


0

I apologize if this is a bad example but I hope I made myself somewhat clear. Interesting analogy but it does raise some valid point. If you look at some simple single-cell organism under the microscope, the material inside its cell wall versus what's outside are pretty similar, which's composed mostly of water. But since that "stuff" is inside the cell ...


0

What you have described with your water analogy is Hinduism, and not Buddhism. Buddhism does not teach that there is no self, or that there is non-self, but rather, that all phenomena is not-self (sabbe dhammā anattā). A very apt analogy for this can be found in the Vina Sutta: "Suppose there were a king or king's minister who had never heard the ...


0

The self concerns itself with small issues. Suppose the rain does not fall. Suppose that big lake shrinks. Suppose that big lake shrinks to just a cup of water between two thirsty people. At such times we often hear "MINE!" And in such harsh times, where did that "big lake of non-self" go? Why does "MINE!" keep getting reborn in life after life? So even ...


0

This is one of the most difficult concepts if not the most difficult concept to understand. I am absolutely sure that %99.99 Buddhists don’t understand this. If you completely toppled the question without any doubt, you will have become Sothapanna ( stream entered). I will try to explain it. Basically, we all have a thought that we are eternal beings ( or ...


0

Great example! The example gives you cover only the Rupa aggregate. Buddha said we take five aggregate as self. (five clinging-aggregate) If you substitute the word self with the word ignorance it is easy to understand this. Ignorance is the on create rebirth. Even Buddha had the body created by his past ignorance which will end only at Parinibbana. We can't ...


Top 50 recent answers are included