According to the Buddha, "Who am I?" is an inappropriate question to ask

[ajasatya]

2 minutes ago, Flow With Life said:

I do not refer to a physical body, as such. Simply the experience of being embodied. One life, human, next life, pig. What happened to the previous "human body"? Who knows. Who cares? I'm pig now.

so you're implying that there is something that goes from a body to another, which is against what buddha himself taught (anatta).

4 minutes ago, Flow With Life said:

Indeed, there can be no path to Nibbana, or else, there would be a path out, defeating the whole purpose of a permanent salvation.

then what's the difference between an enlightened being and a regular dude?

[Flow With Life]

Just now, ajasatya said:

so you're implying that there is something that goes from a body to another, which is against what buddha himself taught (anatta).

No, I am not implying. I am using conventional language to describe a phenomenological experience. I can be more precise: there is now an experience of being a human. Now there is the experience of old-age and illness of this human. Now there is the experience of this human's death. Now there is the experience of birth as a pig. Etc. Nothing passes from moment to moment, simply the workings of causality, and the unfolding phenomenal experiences.

Quote

then what's the difference between an enlightened being and a regular dude?

There is no enlightened being, nor regular dudes. There is suffering as experienced, or there is not.

[Hellspeed]

Take in mind that Gautama did not write what you are describing. His disciples wrote it, and in time got lost the depth of it. 

[Flow With Life]

1 minute ago, Hellspeed said:

Take in mind that Gautama did not write what you are describing. His disciples wrote it, and in time got lost the depth of it. 

The authenticity of the Buddha's words in the texts is a contentious topic for the scholars to squabble about.

I'm interested in whether this 2600-year body-of-knowledge consisting of (1) texts and commentaries, plus (2) unbroken living lineages of monks, is a worthwhile map to follow. A combination of my intellectual understanding of the teachings, combined with personal meditative experience seems to suggest that it is worth following. However, I'm not here to convert anyone. Just engage in some stimulating conversation.

[ajasatya]

8 minutes ago, Flow With Life said:

I can be more precise: there is now an experience of being a human. Now there is the experience of old-age and illness of this human. Now there is the experience of this human's death. Now there is the experience of birth as a pig. Etc. Nothing passes from moment to moment, simply the workings of causality, and the unfolding phenomenal experiences.

alright, i see that you've gone through these insights yourself. but when you say that the experience of existence can be halted, you sound like a parrot.

let's keep it up. i think we're getting closer.

can ALL the causes of the next life be found and eliminated on this one that's being experienced right now?

[Flow With Life]

 

Quote

can ALL the causes of the next life be found and eliminated on this one that's being experienced right now?

Oh, the causes of the next life are closer than even "this life". Because "this life" still implies time... past and future. There is ONLY now, this moment, and all of the causes are found here. But the untrained mind cannot see the causes; the trained mind can. That's why there is a path to follow, simply to train the mind to see the causes. Simply seeing is sufficient to bring the cause to an end. Refer to the prior pinching example.

[Flow With Life]

1 hour ago, ajasatya said:

here, a more experienced practitioner than both of us talking about what he's been doing for 40+ years
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odWIPhj-ivo

I watched it. Thich Nhat Hanh is of the Zen tradition, and as I said, I have no knowledge of Zen traditions. I do not believe that the Zen enlightenment and the Theravada enlightenment are referring to the same thing. Zen does not seem to touch on the ending of birth, but rather dispelling the "illusion" of death.

But the problem is not whether death or birth are illusions. The problem is that there is suffering. If your enlightenment is based on "knowing that death is an illusion", then you will suffer once you stop knowing that. Hence, why I keep mentioning pigs, aka. unenlightened minds.

Edited September 18, 2018 by Flow With Life

[ajasatya]

9 minutes ago, Flow With Life said:

Because "this life" still implies time... past and future. There is ONLY now, this moment

so there's not even a next life to talk about. why make use of such a word like "nibbana"? why walk on a path? is it even possible to step outside the path?

6 minutes ago, Flow With Life said:

But the problem is not whether death or birth are illusions. The problem is that there is suffering. If your enlightenment is based on "knowing that death is an illusion", then you will suffer once you stop knowing that. Hence, why I keep mentioning pigs, aka. unenlightened minds.

physical death is real. existential death is the big lie.

you're still holding the belief that enlightened beings are somewhat different in a fundamental level because they've escaped existence and suffering. but they're just like everyone else. whatever happens to them happens to everybody else. they may have cleansed their attachments on this life and learned to live a peaceful and blissful life. but that's it... after physical death, the same thing happens with enlightened beings and your pigs.

they go nowhere. there's nobody to go anywhere...

[Flow With Life]

1 minute ago, ajasatya said:

so there's not even a next life to talk about. why make use of such a word like "nibbana"? why walk on a path?

The Buddha taught in different levels in accordance with his audience. To most followers, he would speak about rebirth. But to more advanced students, you are correct, there isn't really a "next life"; the only statements that can be made are about whether something is present or absent in immediate experience.

Why walk on a path? Because Samsara. Because their are realms of woe: hell, the animal womb, not to mention human sufferings. Because since beginning-less time there has been this wandering lost through such realms of suffering. Yes, there are heavenly realms too. You can become one with God or the Cosmos, for instance. In Buddhism, these are just pleasant experiences that do not last, and they do not mean anything more than that.

And now you say, "aha! but just there you are talking about past/future lives!" Then put aside the issue of past/future lives. This moment is as it is. Suffering arises. Suffering passes away. Suffering arises. Suffering passes away. The Buddha is actually highly optimistic... he teaches the permanent eradication of the arising of suffering. Someone in the "future" might be flayed and burned for 30 days straight. Maybe it is "me" or maybe it isn't. I don't care. If the outcome is avoidable, then it is worth avoiding. It matters not whose suffering it is, or whether it is "real", whatever that means.

Quote

is it even possible to step outside the path?

That is the paradox. No. The path, all the Buddhist teachings, even Nibbana must be let go of. Even letting go, must be let go of. But if you let go too early, say if you let go of the raft before reaching the further shore where it is safe, then you will be cast adrift once more.

Quote

you're still holding the belief that enlightened beings are somewhat different in a fundamental level because they've escaped existence and suffering. but they're just like everyone else. whatever happens to them happens to everybody else. they may have cleansed their attachments on this life and learned to live a peaceful and blissful life. but that's it... after physical death, the same thing happens with enlightened beings and your pigs.

they go nowhere. there's nobody to go anywhere...

No, the problem is that YOU keep positing these conceptual phantoms: "beings". I speak not of beings, I speak of phenomenal experiences. Suffering as an experience, and non-suffering as an experience are distinct. I have no idea what these "beings" you speak of are. I don't care who or what goes or doesn't go anywhere or exists or stops existing. Tear down these Towers of Babble. Suffering is something to be experienced, not conceptualized away.

[ajasatya]

1 minute ago, Flow With Life said:

I have no idea what these "beings" you speak of are. I don't care who or what goes or doesn't go anywhere or exists or stops existing. Tear down these Towers of Babble.

 

46 minutes ago, Flow With Life said:

Hence, why I keep mentioning pigs, aka. unenlightened minds.

 

[Flow With Life]

Context, my friend. You speak of "beings" transmigrating from one moment to the next. It seems you are not able to step out of that paradigm. You keep asking where beings go, or where they come from. All inappropriate attention, as stated in the OP.

The experience of being a pig, with a mind totally unenlightened, is one possible experience that can "take place" in this only present moment.

The kinds of enlightenment that you seem to be alluding to do not eliminate the possibility of the above experience. Yeah, absolute infinity is great. But again, next you will be butchered as a pig.

The being butchered as a pig part is what is being avoided.

[ajasatya]

12 minutes ago, Flow With Life said:

The being butchered as a pig part is what is being avoided.

nothing can be done about it unless humans actually stop butchering pigs.

exploding stars, rising suns, molten planets, peaceful monks, serial killers, fighting lions, colliding atoms. it's unstoppable.

"uh, oh, the eternal ending of suffering!"

grow up...

[Flow With Life]

10 minutes ago, ajasatya said:

nothing can be done about it unless humans actually stop butchering pigs.

exploding stars, rising suns, molten planets, peaceful monks, serial killers, fighting lions, colliding atoms. it's unstoppable.

"uh, oh, the eternal ending of suffering!"

grow up...

Well, you have your path and I have mine. When you gain a deeper insight into the 1st noble truth of suffering, then perhaps these teachings may become open to you. I wish you well.

[ajasatya]

2 minutes ago, Flow With Life said:

Well, you have your path and I have mine. When you gain a deeper insight into the 1st noble truth of suffering, then perhaps these teachings may become open to you. I wish you well.

sure... the "you're not so wise yet" argument.

i've been there for 3+ years and contemplated all the way through, but buddhism has a way of kicking you out of buddhism.

the teachings of buddhism have a huge hole when it comes down to existential matters. i'm sure you'll be able to notice it soon enough.

the only thing that's left is the ability to focus: the sharp and present mind.

 

[Flow With Life]

26 minutes ago, ajasatya said:

sure... the "you're not so wise yet" argument.

Sorry. I did not mean to make it sound like "you're not so wise yet". Simply that the factors that lead me to Buddhism, and whatever factors lead you to your path differ. I was simply trying to point out what the differentiating factor might be.

I am not enlightened in either sense of the word, yours or mine. But I have seen enough to have an idea of where the two paths might lead. I seek not happiness nor understanding. I know suffering in my heart, and if there is a way to put it to an end, then that is what is worth pouring my efforts into. I don't even mean to say that I'm depressed and I'm looking for happiness. Nah, I've tasted pure cosmic bliss and heaven. If I wanted to pursue cosmic union or non-dual "perfection of everything", I could have chosen to do so. But heaven doesn't wash out the taste of knowing that suffering exists. When you climb the throne of God and look down upon the cosmos and say "This is perfection", and the denizens of hell look up from their torment and find no saviour... well, then the search for a way out begins; a totally individual journey, although it is nice to have compassionate beings to help guide the way.

Quote

i've been there for 3+ years and contemplated all the way through, but buddhism has a way of kicking you out of buddhism.

the teachings of buddhism have a huge hole when it comes down to existential matters. i'm sure you'll be able to notice it soon enough.

I have noticed the hole, that's what this whole post is about. The hole is explicit and intentional, not an accidental "oops we forgot to talk extensively about the nature of reality, our bad!". It is pragmatic. Focus only on what is absolutely necessary to end suffering. You need not wonder about the nature of the burning house you are in. Just find the exit, and walk out.

Edited September 18, 2018 by Flow With Life

[Shadowraix]

@Flow With Life From my view, to eliminate suffering means to eliminate happiness. They are 2 sides of the same coin. Suffering can often be seen as a learning mechanism.

[Nahm]

@Shadowraix

When one no longer desires that the coin flip, it flips. Lol. 

[Flow With Life]

2 minutes ago, Shadowraix said:

@Flow With Life From my view, to eliminate suffering means to eliminate happiness. They are 2 sides of the same coin. Suffering can often be seen as a learning mechanism.

Yes, suffering is a learning mechanism. Without suffering, one would be complacently happy. But with suffering, comes the search for a way out. I don't know what you mean by "to eliminate suffering means to eliminate happiness", unless you mean it in some non-dual sense in which one no longer sees a distinction or preference between them. But then that non-dual state of awareness could be considered a sort of "happiness". Thought experiment: say you are getting dental surgery and their anaesthetic isn't working... in scenario A, you are non-dual enlightened where pain and pleasure don't "exist", and in scenario B, you are not enlightened. I'm sure you can understand why A would be preferable to B.

[RichardY]

 

[Shadowraix]

25 minutes ago, Flow With Life said:

Yes, suffering is a learning mechanism. Without suffering, one would be complacently happy. But with suffering, comes the search for a way out. I don't know what you mean by "to eliminate suffering means to eliminate happiness", unless you mean it in some non-dual sense in which one no longer sees a distinction or preference between them. But then that non-dual state of awareness could be considered a sort of "happiness". Thought experiment: say you are getting dental surgery and their anaesthetic isn't working... in scenario A, you are non-dual enlightened where pain and pleasure don't "exist", and in scenario B, you are not enlightened. I'm sure you can understand why A would be preferable to B.

 

27 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@Shadowraix

When one no longer desires that the coin flip, it flips. Lol. 

I feel like I have a reply to this, but its solely a feeling and can't really express it in language. I'll contemplate on this a bit.