Hvorfor er det ikke "teit" å tro på gud?

[Gjest Bruker-95147]

Du kan jo prøve en typisk buddhistisk teknikk som kalles "letting go", fordi det virker ikke som du klarer legge bort din egen fantasi om hva du tror dette handler om!

Letting Go

 

Notes from a talk, April 21, 1953

Letting go.

 

One of the important reasons why the Buddha taught the Dhamma was to teach us to let go, not to hold on to things. The more we really know the Dhamma, the more we can let go. Those who know a little can let go of a little; those who know a lot can let go of a lot.

 

As a first step we're taught dana — to be generous, to give donations — as a strategy for getting us to learn how to let go. The next step is caga — renouncing rights of possession — which is letting go at a higher level than dana. And finally, on a more refined level, we're taught to relinquish all our upadhi, or the acquisition-defilements in the mind. This is the level on which we examine and explore until we can gain total release.

 

Dana means giving away material things. If we don't give them away, they're hard to let go. For the most part, if we don't give things away, we hold rights over them and regard them as belonging to us. But if we give them away, we no longer have any rights over them. Things we hold onto are dangerous. (1) They can cause us harm. (2) They cause harm to people who steal them from us. And (3) once those people have stolen them, then they claim rights over them. The Buddha saw these dangers, which is why he taught us to be generous, to learn how to give things away.

 

People who develop the habit of being generous reap many rewards. Their act of generosity comes back to them both in the present and on into the future. They have lots of friends. Other people trust them. Their hearts are light — they aren't weighed down with worries about looking after the things they've given away. And these same results will keep coming in the future, just as when we have a bucket of rice grains: if we plant them in a field, we'll reap ten buckets of rice in return. The same holds true with the goodness we develop in this lifetime. It gives enormous returns. That's how people of discernment understand it.

 

Caga is the next step. Dana is something that even crazy people can do, but caga is a type of giving that only wise people can do, because their sense of personal possession has to end immediately in the act of giving. They see that all material things are common property: things don't really belong to us, they don't really belong to other people. If you see things as belonging to you, that's addiction to sensuality (kamasukhallikanuyoga). If you see things as belonging to others, that's addiction to self-affliction (attakilamathanuyoga). When we're born, we didn't bring anything along with us when we came. When we die, we won't take anything along when we go. So what really belongs to us? Our sense of possession has to fall away from the heart if our giving is to count as caga.

 

The third level of letting go is relinquishing what's in the heart. Whether or not we give things away, we let go of them in the heart every day. We let go of the things we have. We let go of the things we don't have. Just as a person has to wash his mouth and hands every day after he eats if he wants to stay clean at all times. What this means is that we're not willing to let anything act as an enemy to the heart by making us stingy or grasping. If we don't do this, we're the type of person who doesn't wash up after a meal. We're not clean. We stay asleep without ever waking up. But when we let go in this way, it's called viraga-dhamma, or dispassion. The lower levels of letting go are things we can do only from time to time. Dispassion is something we can develop always.

 

Ordinarily our defilements tie us down hand and foot, and then nail us to the floor. It's hard to get free, which is why we need a high level of skill, called bhavanamaya-pañña — the discernment that comes from developing the mind in meditation — to gain release.

 

Dispassion is a mental quality that's really delicious and nourishing. Whoever hasn't reached this level of the Dhamma has eaten only the rind of the fruit, without knowing the taste and nourishment of the flesh. The good part of the flesh lies deep.

 

The upadhi-kilesas, or acquisition-defilements in the mind, are ignorance, craving, and clinging. If we reach the level where we see the Dhamma for ourselves within us, then we take responsibility for ourselves. We can take care of these things on our own, just as when we come of age in terms of the law.

 

If we can get our minds into the first jhana, we can let go of the five hindrances.

 

Most of us are like inexperienced children: when we eat fish or chicken, we eat the bones along with the flesh because we haven't developed any intuitive insight. When this insight arises, it's more dazzling than the light of a fire, sharper than a spear. It can consume anything: meat, bones, rice, husks — anything — because it's smart enough to pound everything into a powder. It can consume sights, sounds, smells, flavors, tactile sensations, and ideas. Good or bad, it isn't picky. It can eat them all. If people praise us, we can use it to nourish the heart. If they criticize us, we can use it to nourish the heart. Even if the body is in terrible pain, the heart can be at its ease, for it has all the utensils it needs to fix its food properly: grinders, mixers, steamers, pots, and pans. The fog of ignorance will scatter. Everything that ties us down — the nails of the five clinging-aggregates, the three ropes (love for spouse, love for children, love for material possessions), and the eight chains of the affairs of the world (loka-dhamma) — gain, loss, status, loss of status, praise, criticism, pleasure, and pain — will all fall away.

 

Stupid people think that staying in jail is comfortable, which is why they keep on doing more and more evil. They see the world as pleasant and so they're like prisoners who don't want to get out of jail. As for people with discernment, they're like the caged quail who keeps looking for a way to get out of the cage. As a result the chains that hold them down will fall away one link at a time. The eight affairs of the world are like the chains put on criminals to keep them bound. Stupid people think these chains are necklaces of gold to wear as ornaments. Actually, they're things that defile the mind. People who get tied down by them will never get away, because they're afraid they'll lose their wealth and status, afraid of criticism and pain. Anyone who is stuck on pleasure, who is afraid of criticism, will never manage to come to the monastery to practice.

 

The Buddha saw that we're like monkeys tied to a chain. If we don't develop liberating insight, we'll never get free from our chains. We'll never make it to dispassion.

 

In the first stage we let go of evil and start doing good. In the second stage we let go of evil and some forms of good. In the third stage we let go of everything, good and evil, because everything is fabricated by nature and thus undependable. We do good but we're not attached to it. When you let go, you have do it intelligently, and not in a ruinous way — i.e., by not doing good. You can't hold on even to your opinions, much less to material things. When you do good, you do it for the sake of the living beings of the world, for your children and grandchildren. You do everything in the best way possible, but you're not attached to it, because you know that all things fabricated are inconstant. This way your heart can be clear and bright like a jewel.

 

If you get caught up on criticism or praise, you're foolish. It's like drinking other people's saliva. When you act rightly, there are people who will say that you're right and those who will say that you're wrong. When you act wrong, there are people who will say you're wrong and those who will say you're right. There's nothing constant about good or bad, for they're all nothing but fabrications.

[fokkeslasken]

Du kan jo prøve en typisk buddhistisk teknikk som kalles "letting go", fordi det virker ikke som du klarer legge bort din egen fantasi om hva du tror dette handler om!

Nuvel... Nå startet vel dette med at jeg hadde påstander om det du skrev (helt korrekt så skrev du litt og limte inn mye). Handler det da ikke om mine påstander om det du skrev? Eller har du byttet tema uten å fortelle om det? Det ville jo forklare mange av svarene i så fall.

Jeg skal innrømme at det er mange sider siden nå, men på den annen side så har du heller ikke på alle disse sidene klart å ta tak i det.

Du husker sikkert blant annet "infinite regress" påstanden. Det var mer, men det var omtrent der det startet.

[Gjest Bruker-95147]

Jeg har sagt mitt, og var ferdig for mange poster siden.

[Abigor]

Du kan jo prøve en typisk buddhistisk teknikk som kalles "letting go", fordi det virker ikke som du klarer legge bort din egen fantasi om hva du tror dette handler om!

Letting Go

Har ikke sett deg "letting go" med det evig maset ditt om din favorittfilosofi. Kanskje preke til seg selv før du preker til andre?

[Gjest Bruker-95147]

Akkosa Sutta: Insult

translated from the Pali by

Thanissaro Bhikkhu

© 1999

Alternate translations: Buddharakkhita | Walshe

Alternate format: [suttaReadings.net icon]

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Sanctuary. Then the brahman Akkosaka[1] Bharadvaja heard that a brahman of the Bharadvaja clan had gone forth from the home life into homelessness in the presence of the Blessed One. Angered & displeased, he went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, insulted & cursed him with rude, harsh words.

 

When this was said, the Blessed One said to him: "What do you think, brahman: Do friends & colleagues, relatives & kinsmen come to you as guests?"

 

"Yes, Master Gotama, sometimes friends & colleagues, relatives & kinsmen come to me as guests."

 

"And what do you think: Do you serve them with staple & non-staple foods & delicacies?"

 

"Yes, sometimes I serve them with staple & non-staple foods & delicacies."

 

"And if they don't accept them, to whom do those foods belong?"

 

"If they don't accept them, Master Gotama, those foods are all mine."

 

"In the same way, brahman, that with which you have insulted me, who is not insulting; that with which you have taunted me, who is not taunting; that with which you have berated me, who is not berating: that I don't accept from you. It's all yours, brahman. It's all yours.

 

"Whoever returns insult to one who is insulting, returns taunts to one who is taunting, returns a berating to one who is berating, is said to be eating together, sharing company, with that person. But I am neither eating together nor sharing your company, brahman. It's all yours. It's all yours."

 

"The king together with his court know this of Master Gotama — 'Gotama the contemplative is an arahant' — and yet still Master Gotama gets angry."[2]

 

 

[The Buddha:]

Whence is there anger

for one free from anger,

tamed,

living in tune —

one released through right knowing,

calmed

& Such.

 

You make things worse

when you flare up

at someone who's angry.

Whoever doesn't flare up

at someone who's angry

wins a battle

hard to win.

 

You live for the good of both

— your own, the other's —

when, knowing the other's provoked,

you mindfully grow calm.

 

When you work the cure of both

— your own, the other's —

those who think you a fool

know nothing of Dhamma.

When this was said, the brahman Akkosaka Bharadvaja said to the Blessed One, "Magnificent, Master Gotama! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has Master Gotama — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. I go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, & to the community of monks. Let me obtain the going forth in Master Gotama's presence, let me obtain admission."

 

Then the brahman Akkosaka Bharadvaja received the going forth & the admission in the Blessed One's presence. And not long after his admission — dwelling alone, secluded, heedful, ardent, & resolute — he in no long time reached & remained in the supreme goal of the holy life, for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for himself in the here & now. He knew: "Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for the sake of this world." And so Ven. Bharadvaja became another one of the arahants.

[Abigor]

Eventuelt bare fortsette å preke til andre uten å følge det selv...

[Gjest Bruker-95147]

Avijja Sutta: Ignorance

translated from the Pali by

Thanissaro Bhikkhu

© 1997

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi, in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. There he addressed the monks, "Monks!"

 

"Yes, lord," the monks responded.

 

The Blessed One said, "Monks, ignorance is the leader in the attainment of unskillful qualities, followed by lack of conscience & lack of concern. In an unknowledgeable person, immersed in ignorance, wrong view arises. In one of wrong view, wrong resolve arises. In one of wrong resolve, wrong speech... In one of wrong speech, wrong action... In one of wrong action, wrong livelihood... In one of wrong livelihood, wrong effort... In one of wrong effort, wrong mindfulness... In one of wrong mindfulness, wrong concentration arises.

 

"Clear knowing is the leader in the attainment of skillful qualities, followed by conscience & concern. In a knowledgeable person, immersed in clear knowing, right view arises. In one of right view, right resolve arises. In one of right resolve, right speech... In one of right speech, right action... In one of right action, right livelihood... In one of right livelihood, right effort... In one of right effort, right mindfulness... In one of right mindfulness, right concentration arises."

[fokkeslasken]

Jeg har sagt mitt, og var ferdig for mange poster siden.

Likevel fortsetter du å lime inn spaltemeter med svar.

 

 

Du kan jo prøve en typisk buddhistisk teknikk som kalles "letting go", fordi det virker ikke som du klarer legge bort din egen fantasi om hva du tror dette handler om!

Letting Go

Har ikke sett deg "letting go" med det evig maset ditt om din favorittfilosofi. Kanskje preke til seg selv før du preker til andre?

 

Det legger en aldri så liten komisk tvist til det hele.

[Gjest Bruker-95147]

Takk for nothingness

[fokkeslasken]

Takk for nothingness

Som greit summerer opp alle svarene jeg har fått fra deg da du ble konfrontert med at din filosofi ikke var mye mer enn uendelig regress. Som tilfeldigvis også indikerer at jeg hadde rett.

Men, igjen, jeg mistenker du har byttet tema uten å informere om det, så det betyr vel lite nå.

[Sement]

 

3. Har selv ligget "under kniven" uten at jeg en eneste gang tenkte på å be eller annet tull. Har også vært i situasjoner der jeg var hundre prosent sikker på å dø og tenkte ikke en eneste gang på å be eller annet tull, men på hvordan jeg skulle klare å komme med ut av knipa for egen maskin. Det virket åpenbart...

 

 

Ser du fortsatt er aktiv, så hadde vært interessant med litt utdyping om disse sikker-død-situasjonene du har hatt utenom sykehusopphold. Litt av et liv du har hatt! Hvor gammel er du?

Endret 24. november 2015 av Quantage

[Gjest Bruker-95147]

 

Det jeg legger ut av læren, er kvalitetssikret av utallige enkelt individer som skjønte poenget, nemlig at det må realiseres av hver og en!Hvorfor skal jeg da gjøre noen tilføyelser eller trekke fra noe?

Men hvis du vil utfordre mine kreative ferdigheter, er det bare å komme med noe gjennomtenkt selv, så kan vi ha det litt moro sammen.

 

Det var akkurat det som var poenget mitt Utfordre hvilke kreative ferdigheter? Jeg vil ikke påstå at det er så kreativt å bruke klipp og lim metoden. Du klarer ikke engang å oversette tydeligvis.

 

Å komme med noe gjennomtenkt svar til en vegg gir like mye mening som å drikke VX.

Skal jeg måtte lære deg å bli kreativ, eller lurer du på om jeg får til noe kreativt? Svaret er jo bare for deg å prøve, jeg er helt klar for hva du kan få til, og det jeg har sett av andre ting du har "kokt sammen" gjør meg ikke særlig engstelig - så, versågod!

 

Å endre på kvalitetssikrede og offisielle tekster er på den ene siden ulovlig, og på den andre siden ett sikkert tegn på uærlighet. Er det sånn du foretrekker å diskutere, behøver du ikke prøve deg!

 

Og sist men ikke minst: hva er det du ikke skjønner når det sies at "det må realiseres i hver og en"?

Endret 24. november 2015 av Bruker-95147