 |
|
|
| DISCUSSION TOPIC NO. 8 Daw Tin Tin Myint (Thiri Kay Khine)(Singapore) sent this message on 8th August 1999 Subject: 'Hell Realm in this very world!' Dear Dhamma Friends, Here is my brain storming issue. We know there is a lot of tortures and dungeon brutality going on in this present world. There is a lot of suffering like malnutrition, injustice to break the spirit of human beings and so forth at this present times still. In torture chambers, the head is wired and sent excruciating electric shocks, slamming both ears simultaneously, heterosexual and homosexual rape, holding the victim's head under water polluted with human excrement to the verge of suffocation, beating the soles of victim in an upside down position, then made to walk bare foot on the broken glass. [Ref: Reader's Digest, June 1999 - She heals tortured souls] My question is: 'Is Hell Realm Present in this very world and not a separate realm at all'. Tin Tin Myint. |
Discussion: Dr. Tin Htut (Sheffield) sent this message on 10th August 1999 Dear Dhamma Friends, Most people used to believe that profound suffering in this life is Hell. In reality, it is the after-effect (Vipaka) of an unwholesome action that has already been resulted in a hell. There are eight types or varieties of Hell (Niraya) according to Buddhist literature. Hell is defined as the stage of existence where there is extreme suffering and total absence of pleasure. Humans who are in extreme suffering due to atrocities can have pleasure when the torture is over. Hell is said to be situated in this very world at various depths in the earth. The first layer is at a depth where human excreta are stored, the next is at a depth where there are hot ashes and the last is at a depth where there is molten iron and fire burning at all times (Avici). Each layer of hell is 15000 yojanas* apart. If we consider it from scientific point of view, earth has a layer of molten iron-nickel and cobalt in-between two layers of rock that have a 66 mile diameter each. Hell-beings have a body composition of a different type of building blocks and can survive in those extreme conditions. There is evidence in the Buddhist literature that hell-beings emerged from the depths of earth and had relayed a message that contained a few words of why and how they had to suffer before they submerged into the depths again. There is also evidence of the after-effects in Hell. Even our Gotama Buddha had to suffer from the injury to his toe when Devadatta tried to assassinate him. It was due to the unwholesome actions that he had committed in his pervious existences where he killed his step-brother by stone, hit a Paccekabuddha's toe with a stone and tortured an innocent person with a knife. Gotama Buddha had to suffer in the hell for his former unwholesome action and also had to bear the Vipaka even in his last existence. Likewise, it is well known that the Ashin Moggallana had to die in the hands of decoits which was an after-effect for what he had done to his blind parents. REFERENCE: 'How to Live as a Good Buddhist' (p216-8; 247-8), in Burmese, DPPS, Myanmar, 1991. *=a distance of 7 to 12 miles (The Moderator) |
Discussion: Thiri Kay Khine (Singapore) sent this message on 14th August 1999 MY QUESTION IS ON THE EMPHASIS NOT A SEPARATE REALM AT ALL. |
| DISCUSSION TOPIC NO. 7 Dr. Tin Htut (Sheffield, UK) sent this message on 28th July 1999 Subject: Was Jesus a Buddhist or the Future Buddha? Dear Dhamma friends, I have put forward a tantalizing question that will provoke an interesting discussion. Was Jesus a Buddhist ? I have also attached a file of my research into this context. |
Discussion: Dr. Maung M. Lwin sent this message on 4th August 1999 Dear Dhamma Colleagues, I believe 'Jesus' couldn't be the Boddhisatta, aspiring to become the next Buddha, Metteya. Bhikkhu Ajita, who received robes from Visakha during the time of the Buddha Gotama, was confirmed by the Buddha to become Ari Metteya in this auspicious aeon.( ref: Anagatavamsa). Bhikkhu Ajita taught Dhamma to a large number of other bhikkhus, passed away and was reborn in a deva realm. The life spans of devas in deva realms range from 9 million to 9.216 billion human years. 'Jesus' was born approximately 500 years later in this human realm after Bhikkhu Ajita was reborn in the deva realm. That 500 human years is equivalent to 10 days in Catumaharajika deva realm and just a quarter of a day in Paranimmita vasavati deva realm. It would appear to be a waste of celestial resources if the Bodhisatta lived an extremely short time there where the normal life span is from 180000 to 5.76 million deva days respectively. The Bodhisatta, according to the 'Culavamsa', would have other human rebirths before eventual rebirth in the Tusita deva realm, waiting to be reborn finally in India again to become the Last Buddha in this World, several millions years (perhaps 576 millions=life span in Tusita realm) from now. Even if 'Jesus' was the Bodhisatta, reborn as a man, I am a bit sceptical of his chances of landing back to the Tusita Heaven in view of his earthly incidences that have occurred about 2000 years ago. To mention a few;
Yours in the Dhamma, Maung M Lwin |
Discussion: Miss Abeysiri sent this message on 5th August 1999 I am Dr. Abeysiri's daughter and I would like to offer my view on this matter. I would question Jesus being a Buddhist because of his wrong views on the exsistance of an almighty god, but certainly it is likely that he had Buddhist influence. A book has been written by two Europeans E. Gruber and H. Kersten called ' The Original Jesus' offering convincing proof that Jesus was brought up by Theravada missionaries ( I have not read the attached file so excuse me if those are extracts from the same book). It is very possible because Jesus was said to have performed miracles. These can be done by attaining jhana through samatha meditation, and one does not need to hold the right understanding to do that. Samatha also does not help attain Nibbana, but is practiced prior to Vipassana to gather the mind together. I am not well studied in the life of Jesus but it is said that he went away for several weeks - this could be when he was meditating to attain jhana. So my conclusion is that he wasn't a buddhist but may have studied under a buddhist monk to learn samatha meditation. |
Discussion: Dr. Tin Htut's reply on 4th August 1999 Dear Dhamma Friends, Dr Lwin's discussions on the points against Jesus on the possibility that he is a Boddhisatta are interesting and we must take into consideration to judge if Jesus could be the Metteya. As far as I can gather I do not think they have ruled out the possibility of the hypothesis due to the following points: 1) If Bhikku Ajita who had been predicted by Gotama Buddha to be the next buddha passed away and was reborn in aDeva realm, it may even support the possibility of the hypothesis. Jesus was reborn as a child to Mary and Joseph after passing away from heaven (Deva realm). 2) I acknowledge the life span of Devas as put forward by Dr Lwin, but we must remember that one does not always live a full lifespan. There are a lot of infants who die at a very early stage although a human lifespan is, say 70 to 80 years. The longevity depends upon one's Kamma and not necessarily on a lifespan. A Bodhisatta has to fulfil ten Paramis or perfections namely, generosity, morality, renunciation, wisdom, effort, patience, truth, resolution, loving kindness and equanimity. Suppose Jesus needed to fulfil the last two Paramis and the only place to fulfil them is the human's world, then he must come back to the human world as soon as possible if time is running out. 3) If Bhikku Ajita, the would-be Metteya, had to undergo more existences before resting as a Deva in Tusita Heaven, and it had to be in-between the Lord Gottama Buddha's time and now, it is hardly 2600 years. It is not significantly different from 500 years in terms of celestial years as Dr Lwin has argued. It would be interesting to know who has mentioned that Mettya is presently in Tusita. 4) Dr Lwin's next argument on the holding of Wrong View by Jesus would not nullify the hypothesis that Jesus could be a Boddhisatta. Our Gotama Buddha in His last fulfilment of Parami as the King Vesantara might not hold the Right View nor he took refuge in the Triple Gems as there was no buddha in those days. A Boddhisatta may still hold the wrong view until the very moment he becomes enlightened. I reckon that it is all about being a buddha to be omniscient without any external aids. 5) Moreover, it has been put forward by scholars that Jesus used "Pariyare" (impose/pretend) as advised by his Tibetan instructor for he would face rejection and opposition when he went back to Israel to preach Buddha's doctrine. This was what he had encountered at his First Sermon! 6) There are commentaries by scholars on why and how the salvation doctrine of Christianity was imposed by Paul, whilst it was not mentioned in the gospels; how and why the belief in rebirth was taken out from the original doctrine and had been officially dropped at the Council of Constantinople in the year 553 AD by the Emperor Justinian and his spouse who happened to be the daughter of a bear-keeper at the Byzantine amphitheatre. I think that the hypothesis is still open to further discussion and is becoming more interesting. With Metta, Tin Htut |
Discussion: Paul Trafford sent this message on 6th August 1999 Dear Everyone, Hello. This is my first posting to the 'Triple Gem' mailing list. I like the name of the list and am interested to read the postings. I am half English/half Thai, raised in Britain as a Catholic, but was taught the Buddha Dhamma by my mother, who was from Bangkok, Thailand. So I hope to contribute to the thread about Jesus, though please accept my apologies since I am about to go on holiday and do not expect to use a computer for about 2 weeks(!) However, I have already expressed some thoughts in this area and have put many of them on-line. I should say that if I were to write now, then my approach would be quite different with some statements changed, but at least there may be something which can stimulate enquiry. You are welcome to take a look at: http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~pt/interfth/begin/index.htm. Regarding the specific question, "Is Jesus Christ the Bodhisatta Metteya?", I feel not, but still Jesus has many impressive Brahmanic qualities. I hope to expand on this, if anyone is interested. Yours Sincerely, Paul. |
Discussion: Syd Hill sent this message on 8th August 1999 Hi, everyone. Having written when this question was first put foreward,I decided to sit back and read the answers of others but then several answers have been posted which I think will bear answering. Firstly and the somantics with numbers and theories will neither prove nor disprove this.If indeed Jesus is the Mettaya then time will tell. I believe not but willl not prolong the topic of why. I believe that it is fairly clear that Jesus had some contact with Buddhism during his years when we hear nothing about him.The similarities in his teachings and those of the Buddha,especially in the Udana, are too Buddhist not to have been inspired from the same source. Whether as the legends of India and Kashmire are true that Jesus did study under the masters of the Dhamma or not, is purely a question of perhaps. I cannot see that the answers will bring any of us closer to Nibbana although it is stimulating to the mind. Metta, Syd |
Discussion: Dr. Tin Htut (Sheffield) sent this message on 10th August 1999 Dear Dhamma Friends, It is true that a discussion on whether Jesus was a Buddhist or a Boddhisatta would not bring us any closer to Nibbana as Syd Hill has suggested. There is no doubt about the most important thing for this context being the practice of Vipassana. However, as a working lay person as myself, could not practice Vipassana full-time, which is necessary to obtain significant results (higher insight levels). We do have to incorporate other wholesome actions to our Vipassana practice to top up our Paramis. The next best action to the practice of Vipassana is to propagate Dhamma. In participating in the discussion we are propagating Dhamma in one way or the other. The context of Jesus may have a potential role in propagating the Dhamma. If we can prove or disprove the hypothesis, or at least convince the readers, it will have immense results, namely: helping others to change from wrong view to right view, change our attitude towards those who hold wrong views, and it may even change one's ultimate objective (Bodhisatta, Aggasavaka, Arahat, Sotapanna etc.). By trying to prove or disprove Jesus as the Metteyya, does not necessarily mean that we may have to worship/pay respect to Jesus. It would be like worshipping a piece of stone or a slab of wood before they are carved or sculptured into Buddha images. However, if we have sympathy and appreciate his sacrifice for others we may gain merits. With Metta, Tin Htut |
| DISCUSSION TOPIC NO. 6 Dr. Maung M. Lwin (London) sent this message on 24th July 1999 Subject: Sangha, the Third Refuge Is practising Buddhism without physically involving the monks the right way? Even though one may say I take refuge in Triple Gem, he may play down the significance of the role of the Order of Samgha (Sangha) by not trying to see any Buddist Monks at all. |
Discussion: Dr. Tin Htut (Sheffield, UK)- 26th July 1999 May I present my view on this context ? Although it may appear that one does not require monks to practise Vipassana when one has competent laity teachers it is not right to shun monks altogether. This issue does not seem to have happened in the past when Vipassana is taught soley by monks. Nowadays, we have competent laity teachers and Vipassana is available from such sources. Theoretically, there may be a possibility for the existence of a few students of Vipassana who hold the view that monks are not a necessacity to practise Vipassana. However, I think there is a little chance, if at all, for the existence of such Vipassana students who totally avoid monks. We take refuge in Triple gems if we become devout Buddhists and are practising Vipasanna. Without this we will not progress in the practice. One may shun monks for various reasons, but if one shuns monks holding this view (Subject of the Discussion Question No. 6), it will be a great mistake and may even be an act of disgrace. Monks have been, and are still the principle source of knowledge for Vipassana despite the availability of Vipassana books and laity teachers. Without monks we would not have access to Buddha's teachings. It is the order of the monks who has maintained and propagated Dhamma in times of thick and thin throughout the history of Buddhism. Laities, however competent they may be, have contributed a very small proportion in this context. I don't think and I hope I am right, that there are people who avoid monks totally and regard themselves as genuine Buddhists practising Dhamma and Vipassana. There may be a possibility for a few extremists who hold this view, but I think for a majority, one will not shun monks when one has become a devout Buddhist. |
Discussion: Thiri Kay Khine (Singapore) sent this message on 29th July 1999 No, I don't think it is right.They have been the pillers of sasana for all the past 2500 years,since the time when there were no pens and papers. Sanghas learnt the scriptures by heart and preserved it for the coming generations. In fact I think without their role thay play in sasana scene, our sasana might be a totally different scenerio. It does not mean I take all the sanghas. Well let us just say there are sanghas and there are sanghas . Its up to each individual to choose them. There are those who have come into sasana out of saddha and those who have come because of bhaya .Whatever the case may be if he is a true monk its up to us dayakas to support for him to be able to survive in his robes, with his vinayas. They are the professional Dhamma teachers and meditation masters. We need them to guide us in our religious persuits.Shall we say our special tutors?. I say we need to see our sayadaws as much as they'll let us share their time. Thiri Kay Khine, Dana Sri Lanka, Singapore |
| Discussion: Sydney Hill sent this message on 5th August 1999 It is a very tricky question.Firstly there are still Buddhists in countries where there is little or no contact with the Sangha.Can we therefore say that these people are not Buddhists? Sydney Hill |
| DISCUSSION TOPIC NO. 5 Mr. Khin Sein (Singapore) sent this message on 10th July 1999 Subject: If you are bulliedI have a question. If one is being bullied, how should he or she react as a good Buddhist? |
Discussion: Dr. Tin Htut (Sheffield, UK)- 12th July 1999 Bullying or being bullied is a result of human nature's action and reaction. As a good Buddhist we must avoid both by consideration and patience. Firstly, we must be considerate to others and never try to bully or mistreat others. Secondly, we must try to develop patience and not to react, but show loving kindness to the one who bullies you. This is a teaching of the Buddha. There are a few stories regarding this context in the text. By patience we can even strive for Nibbana. It may be difficult to develop patience at first, but if you meditate you will come over this difficulty when you learn to be indifferent to any stimuli or sensations. It is no doubt that to be patience is easier said than done. However, for a person who has not developed enough strength to overcome it, try to avoid the bully and develop Metta to that person. Metta is really effective if you let it be known not only through the mind, but also through actions and gestures. With Metta, Tin Htut |
Discussion U Kin Sein (Singapore)- 13th July 1999 Dear Dr Tin Htut What I am asking is when one is being bullied what he should do. Your answer is good when there is no bullying. You can suggest some one who want to bully not to bully. Right now, someone is bullying. The other one is suffering. I am asking on behalf of the one who is suffering. Best Wishes, KS |
Discussion Dr. M M Lwin (London)- 13th July 1999 Here are a few examples of how others responded to 'Bully', as described in the Suttas in the Buddha's time. (1) When the Buddha was informed of the planned visit by Venerable Punna to the notorious neighbourhood of Sunaparanta District, the following conversation took place. Buddha: - "Punna, the people of Sunaparanta are rough and brutal. How would you feel , should they abuse and revile you?" Ven. Punna: -I would regard them as good people and control my temper and bear them patiently. (2)Sakka, the King of Devas, asked the Hermit Sarabhanga of Kondanna ancestry: Sakka: - Whose abusive harsh words should one bear with patience? Hermit Sarabhanga: One should bear with patience abusive, harsh words from everyone, whether superior, equal or inferior. Perfection of Forbearance (Khanti) to extreme provocation, without feeling ill-will and anger, is one of the essential achievement of Bodhisattas. We should try our best to follow their examples. M.M.Lwin |
Discussion: Dr. Tin Htut - 14th July 1999 Dear U Khin Sein, You seemed to have overlooked my answer. I have marked "NOTE" signs in the answer to your particular question. It is better to ignore or avoid the person who is bullying someone. This may not be possible sometimes. In such a case, try to smile and show your indifference to the Bully. Trying to stop reacting to anything, including bullying, is the advance stage in the Vipassana meditation practice. So, start the practice as soon as possible and you can reach to that stage eventually, provided you are pursuing the right method with sufficient effort. With Metta, Tin Htut |
| Discussion: Dr. Beng Tiong Tan (Cambridge, UK) - 16th July 1999 I do agree with Tin Htut that the transformation has to start from within through meditation. On the other hand, we are not just live in a "mind world". The "physical world" do exist conditionally. They conditioned each others. There are many passages in sutras that Buddha did advise a country to be prepare for any kind of invasion by other country when he was asked how to run a country. Similarly, the problem of bullying may not be able to solve by just meditation. We need to look at this in two aspects - internally and externally. Internally, for someone whose mind has not been trained (especially one who is not in the advance stage of practices) and he/she is in a state of suffering due to bullying by others, metta meditation is a more practical way to help this person. I have found that this is a very practical and helpful meditation to help healing the wound within and to transform the hatred which is another source of suffering. Personally, I have encountered many who have been tranformed through this meditation. Externally, we need to end the bullying action by some proper means with a compassionate heart. We need to find the cause of the bullying action just like Buddha trying to find the cause of suffering in the Four Noble Truth. Only through the understanding of the cause can the action be put into an end. This is not only to help the person being bullied but also to help the one who bullies others (i.e. to help him to end the unwholesome actions). In addition, this will also prevent him to bully others in the future. Some of the bullying action can be ignored or avoided as suggested by Tin Htut. However, some are more serious and some simply can not be avoided. Therefore, we need to handle it with great care. With metta, Beng |
Discussion: U Abeysiri (London) sent this message on 19th July 1999 You have not mentioned whether it is physical or verbal bullying. A bully is a person who is insecure about himself and tries to cure it by proving there is somebody who is worse than him. Do not show anger. Show metta, but stand up to him. Tell him although he may be stronger physically or in position as in school or work, that you do not fear him. That you have no anger but pity. Tell him aloud may you be well and happy and free from your inferiority, that you do not and cannot make you angry by any means. Also if he is physically violent and that if any harm comes to you, he may end up losing everything and in prison.. The best way to win him is to show that you do not fear him. Armed with metta you can do that. May the triple gem protect you, Upali Abey. |
Discussion Dr. Maung M. Lwin (The Moderator) - 29th July 1999 Thanks for a lively discussion on ' Bully '. I hope we can handle ' Bully' now. If you are still not so sure about it, please study the following comments on the same subject from the Most Venerable Sayadaw U Rewata Dhamma. Sayadaw has kindly given his advice on this frequently encountered kind of 'dukkha'. Sayadaw's Advice: re: BULLYING When we speak of someone being a serious Buddhist, it means a person who follows the Buddhs's teachings and principles. The Buddha taught the noble eightfold path for the liberation from Samsaric suffering. Therefore this eightfold noble path needs to be followed for one's liberation. The Buddha also taught the four sublime states or Brahama Viharas for peoples social and spiritual developments. A serious Buddhist is one sincerely practise loving- kindness (metta), compassion (karuna), sympathetic joy (mudita) and equanimity upekkha in his or her day to day life. It is a very useful and beneficial technique for living in a society which is made up of various social groups and cultures. Bullying is a common practice , now a days, in society. Because people are very much attached to their selves and personalities. Whenever they find anyone that is different and behaving contrary to their own pattern of behaviour, then they may take to bullying another. If someone is being bullied they need to practise either loving-kindness or equanimity. It is also a time for us to test our state of mind as a Buddhist. And give us the opportunity to examine ourselves to see if we can live with equanimity. Through the practice of eightfold noble path, we must learn to accept the situations with equanimity. Whenever situations arise we have to accept them as it is without any reaction. If we can accept with equanimity or our mind is unshakable. This is one of the Greatest things anyone can achieve. The perfection of Khanti- forbearance or forgiveness in the act of another's wrong doing should be exercised. The Buddha said: "Hatred cannot cease through hatred, but it can cease through loving-kindness. This is an eternal law." Finally, as a serious Buddhist if anyone is a victime of bully than he or she will benefit most not from reacting with hatred or angar, but from practising loving-kindness, equanimity or khanti forbearance. May all beings be happy, Birmingham Buddhist Vihara, U.K. |
| DISCUSSION TOPIC NO. 4 Mr. Khin Sein (Singapore) sent this message on 3rd July 1999 Subject: Meditation Methods So, friends, I have another question. I notice that there are many different methods to do meditation. Say – Mahasi Method, Moegok Method, Soonloon Method, Sayagyi Goenka Method etc. Can you advise me which is the best? I mean the best on the basis of – for someone who stay in overseas like me, - who only can spend about 15 minutes each day. Moreover, I understand from books (my understanding may be wrong); Moegok Sayadaw said that before doing meditation someone must know the basic theory of life circle. (paticcasamuppada?) On the other hand Mahasi Sayadaw said it was not essential to know basic theories to do meditation. Which one is right? Wishing you be well and peaceful, |
Discussion Dr. Tin Htut (Sheffield) - 5th July 1999 Dear U Khin Sein, All methods of Vipassana are good, but you need to find which one suits you most. For this, you may try to digest the article "In search for a teacher" in the web-site. My personal opinion on the Mogok and Mahasi methods is that both methods are excellent and can give unlimited access to learn the Truth. It is better to know a bit of theory in practising Vipassana, but it is of utmost importance that you practise it. The method of Sayagyi U Ba Khin is also very practical and can give results very quickly if one follows the instructions meticulously. Goenkaji is also following Sayagyi U Ba Khin's method, but with a different style. I gather that students of Vipassana have a tendency for discriminating individual camps which we are supposed to be avoiding. Samsara is what we are trying to overcome, I understood ! With Metta, Tin Htut |
| DISCUSSION TOPIC NO. 3 Subject: A Question of ' I ' Mr. Khin Sein (Singapore) sent this message on 30th June 1999 I have a question. If there is no "I", why we need to do meditation. Doing meditation for who? Wishing you all be well and peaceful. |
Discussion Dr. Tin Htut(Sheffield, UK)-1st July 1999 That was one of the questions that I have asked myself when I started meditation. To answer this short question I shall need to review some aspects of the Buddhist psychology and philosophy (Abhidhamma). Basically, we are trying to search for truth to get peace of mind. Truth may be quantified as conditional or conventional when it is subjective and personal (Samudhi sacca or panatta) and it may not be applicable to everybody. It has to be simplified and divided further in order to be applicable to everybody despite differences in many ways. Only this type of truth, when comprehended, can yeild peace and harmony of mind and body. Truth of this kind is called ultimate reality (Paramatha sacca). You will need to clarify yourself this aspect of truth first. With this quality of truth there are only four categories: mind; mental associations or concomitants; matter and Nibbana (ultimate peace and harmony). Out of these categories only Nibbana is stable and is always true at any time. The others are subjected to continous changes, vary with time and are therefore not substantial. This includes our mind and body which we regard as ourselves. We think that we have a stable entity in our mind and body (a soul, Atta or Atman). We know from science that our body is made up of uncountable number of infinitely small particles that are combined again and again to form larger parts. These particles are always moving, forming and dissolving continously, but a conditional truth that the body is solid and substantial prevents us from realising this instability. Moreover, the rapidity of forming and dissolving prevents us from the truth that there are changes and gives us an impression of continuity of mind and body. Now to go back to the question of 'I', a combination of mind and body may generally be regarded as 'I', which is a conditional truth. However, if we go deeper and do a meta-analysis of ourselves, we will find a combination of five aggregates which are: (1) a body containing five sense doors and together with mind can give us (2) six types of sensations; (3) recognition and expression of these sensations; (4) reaction to these sensations with like or dislike or neutral according to our taste; and (5) consciousness (some may like to consider this as soul). Apart from these five aggregates of matter and mind there is no entity that can be identified as 'I' or the soul. This is an ultimate truth. When we meditate we are trying to obtain peace of mind and that peace of mind may be momentary or permanent. Peace itself can be graded into different levels and the ultimate peace can be acheived only if we can comprehend Nibanna. We can comprehend Nibanna momentrarily when we are alive and can comprehend permanently only when we die as an Arahat. The next question that is likely to raise is "who comprehends Nibbana after death if there is no 'I' ?" To answer this question we need to go to the issue of life-after-death and how it occurs. To keep it short, it occurs spontaenously due to several factors that keep us to undergo continous rebirth and death in Samsara. The last thought at the verge of dying conditions the next rebirth which is continous. When Arahats die their last thought is Nibanna and as Arahats have already extinguished the factors for rebirth in Samsara, they are regarded as in the state of Nibbana forever without having to be reborn. Although the five aggregates disappeared at death, the thought was in the Nibanna. It is the consciousness part of the mind that comprehends Nibanna, but not any other aggregate. The analogy to this is may be similar to an expression commonly made by those who are in deep trouble. "Death is more peaceful than staying alive to end all the troubles." In this case it is the death of all aggregates and the end of all sufferings. It is the ultimate and peaceful ending of 'I'. With Metta, Tin Htut Discussion Dr.M.M.Lwin (London) - 1st July 1999 People do meditate for various reasons. For Buddhists, it is to attain Nibbana or to get to good abodes, en route to the final destination. Would we be the same person in our next life? If not why bother? When a person dies, the body disintegrates. But the 'stream' of consciousness shifts to a physical process in the next life. That stream of consciousness is conditioned by death-bed visions, which relate to his kamma and visions of the future life. It is not the consciousness of the dying person but that is what is causally related to him in his life. So we speak of one person in conventional terms. If we speak of the transfer of the ego or 'self' or 'I', becoming a Deva or a human, it is the undesirable Sassata view. The opposite one, ucchedaditthi view, which is also condemned, means there is no new life at all after death. By meditating in the Buddhist way, the yogi can hope to achieve Nibbana or be reborn as a causally related being in terms of mental units in good abodes. If a yogi attains sammasana, udayabbaya and bhangha nanas or insights during Vipassana Meditation, he or she will see clearly all these streams of consciousness of individuals taking place in Samsara. That will further convince him to progress to the Sotapatti stage, where one is free of all doubts about the future life. That is all theory, my friends, until we experience personally through Vipassana Meditation! Best Wishes Discussion Mr. Khin Sein (Singapore) , replied on 4th July 1999 Dear Dr Tin Htut, Thank you for spending your precious time to answer my question. I would like to discuss on your answer. Please take this as a free discussion. Please don't mind if my thinkings are very odd. Basically, we are trying to search for truth to get peace of mind. In order to get peace of mind, is it really necessary to search for truth? Sometimes, I feel that not knowing truth is better. That's why some people never let the patient know the truth result of his illness. Truth may be quantified as conditional or conventional when it is subjective and personal (Samudhi sacca or panatta) and it may not be applicable to everybody. It has to be simplified and divided further in order to be applicable to everybody despite differences in many ways. Only this type of truth, when comprehended, can yeild peace and harmony of mind and body. Truth of this kind is called ultimate reality (Paramatha sacca). You will need to clarify yourself this aspect of truth first. I agree. With this quality of truth there are only four categories: mind; mental associations or concomitants; matter and Nibbana (ultimate peace and harmony). Out of these categories only Nibbana is stable and is always true at any time. The others are subjected to continous changes, vary with time and are therefore not substantial. This includes our mind and body which we regard as ourselves. We think that we have a stable entity in our mind and body (a soul, Atta or Atman). We know from science that our body is made up of uncountable number of infinitely small particles that are combined again and again to form larger parts. These particles are always moving, forming and dissolving continously, but a conditional truth that the body is solid and substantial prevents us from realising this instability. Moreover, the rapidity of forming and dissolving prevents us from the truth that there are changes and gives us an impression of continuity of mind and body. I agree. Now to go back to the question of I, a combination of mind and body may generally be regarded as I, which is a conditional truth. However, if we go deeper and do a meta-analysis of ourselves, we will find a combination of five aggregates which are: (1) a body containing five sense doors and together with mind can give us (2) six types of sensations; (3) recognition and expression of these sensations; (4) reaction to these sensations with like or dislike or neutral according to our taste; and (5) consciousness (some may like to consider this as soul). Apart from these five aggregates of matter and mind there is no entity that can be identified as I or the soul. This is an ultimate truth. I agree. When we meditate we are trying to obtain peace of mind and that peace of mind may be momentary or permanent. Peace itself can be graded into different levels and the ultimate peace can be acheived only if we can comprehend Nibanna. We can comprehend Nibanna momentrarily when we are alive and can comprehend permanently only when we die as an Arahat. Here you see. That is "we" who want to comprehend Nibanna. The next question that is likely to raise is "who comprehends Nibbana after death if there is no I ?" Yes. I like to ask you this question. To answer this question we need to go to the issue of life-after-death and how it occurs. To keep it short, it occurs spontaenously due to several factors that keep us to undergo continous rebith and death in Samsara. The last thought at the verge of dying conditions the next rebirth which is continous. When Arahats die their last thought is Nibanna and as Arahats have already extinguished the factors for rebirth in Samsara, they are regarded as in the state of Nibbana forever without having to be reborn. Although the five aggregates disappeared at death, the thought was in the Nibanna. It is the consciousness part of the mind that comprehends Nibanna, but not any other aggregate. The analogy to this is may be similar to an expression commonly made by those who are in deep trouble. "Death is more peaceful than staying alive to end all the troubles." In this case it is the death of all aggregates and the end of all sufferings. It is the ultimate and peaceful ending of I. You see. Here again "I", who want to have peaceful ending. Don't forget who make that kind of expression are very very few who really in very deep trouble. Compare to those who don't want to die, it may be less than one in thousand. Most of the people do not want to die. I also do not want to die. You may remark this as "bhava-tanha". I may be noughty in the view of Buddhism. So, at the end I could not convince myself why should I need to do meditation. This may be very bad for me. Best wishes, Khin Sein Discussion Dr.Tin Htut (Sheffield, UK), 6th July 1999 You seem to be enjoying yourself with the sensous pleasures of the Western world and trying to forget that there is life-after-death. There are planes of extreme suffering. Just pay a little more attention in watching TV or other media that show wild life and predators. You will come to know how much the preys have to suffer before ending their life in the jaws of predators. Those are just a tip of the iceberg of misery of the existence in a plane of suffering. We are trying to relay this mesage in a series of our articles "Quest for Truth" that will be published shortly in the Buddhists' Three Jewelss Website web-site. Life is very short, but the Samsara is infinitely long. So try to come to a realisation that we need to prepare ourselves for the next life. I am sure you will have come across a demise of some of your relatives, your friends and colleagues who die at a young or old age. You can't really escape from death and why waste your precious time arguing over these matters and trying to avoid the truth. Face the truth and prepare yourself. Human life is very important for preparing for future existences. It is quite unlikely that we will achieve Nibanna and be an Arahat in this life. Therefore, we will have to be in the Samsara for a very, very long period. So, why waste time when you have a great opportunity to come to the realisation of the Four Nobel Truths with the Bhavana. PS. If there is a difficulty in recognising Pali words in English this may be of some help. It is spelt and pronounced Burmese Pali words in a particular way; for example Tha is spelt as Sa in the original Pali, Wa as Va, Sa as Cha, Za as Ja etc. With Metta Tin Htut |
| Discussion Mr. Khin Sein (Singapore), 18th July 1999 Dear Dr Tin Htut I am still thinking the answer of "If there is no I" question, despite you and Dr MML have answered almost completely. I have read your answers and discussions a few times. Now what I understand is that if one does really know there is no "him", he may not have this question and he may not need to do meditation for him. For ordinary man like us, it is impossible to be at that status. We now require to do meditation is to know and accept the truth that there is no "we". By doing meditation we also can hope to get ultimate freedom. Is it correct? At the moment, I am starting practice meditation and one of your article "In Search of A Teacher" is very helpful to me. I find that it is very difficult to control mind. It is all the time wondering. Thanks and Regards, Khin Sein |
| DISCUSSION TOPIC NO. 2 Subject: The MUDRAS 'Laity' (UK) sent this message on 25-06-99 Is it proper to copy some of the Mudras, the hand gestures found on Buddha's images, by lay persons ? Full Text: "The Mudras are thought to be originated from Tibetan and Indian cultures and the Mudras found on Buddha's idols in Burma may be adapted from these sources. The (Vitakka) Vitarka Mudra denotes the wisdom in depth and enlightenment endowed in Buddha. We Buddhists regard these Mudras as sacred. Although the Mudra may relay a different meaning in a different culture, it is very concerning to a devot Buddhist if someone copies these gestures in public. One may argue that the Jhana Mudra is also copied by many meditators, but it has been accepted by Elders and venerable Bhantes and it does not cause an eye-catching gesture as does the Vitarka Mudra." |
|
|
| DISCUSSION TOPIC NO.
1 'Laity' (UK) made this comment on 25-06-99 Subject: Quantity or Quality in meditation practice ? Full Text: "Some teachers of Vipassana meditation are emphasising on quantity of students recruited to propogate the Dhamma based on the fact that Dhamma has no boundaries in culture, race or faith. They are quite successful in doing so as they are well organised, tactful, and most of all Vipassana mediation is unique and give results immediately, at least in some form of peace of mind. However, if the message they are relaying is not prestine and is contaminated with a virus of personal opinion, will it effect the quality of the Dhamma that they are propagating ? They seem to believe that Gotama Buddha's contribution to the Dhamma is the Vipassana technique as other Nobel Truths were already in existence during the times of Siddhatta Gotama's quest for the Truth. This idea may appear to be sound since suffering (Dukkha), the cause of suffering (Samudaya) and the Sanskrit word Nivarna, the escape from suffering are in the Veda texts and were well known in those days of Siddhatta Gotama. If one considers these facts in depth, one will understand that the first ultimate truth (paramattha sacca) is not just a gross suffering as everybody knows, but that of impermanence of mind and matter (Anatta). The second Nobel Truth, likewise, refers to not only attachment to sensual objects, but also to the desire for existence (Bhava Tanha). Lastly, the word Nivarna may seem to be similar to Nibbana, but has a totally different meaning; liberation resulting from selflessness with a belief that the personal soul (Atman) unites with the world or universal soul (Brahman) of the creator. This will highlight the importance of Gotama Buddha's contribution of all Four Nobel Truths to Dhamma and not just the Fouth Truth as they have imagined. The meaning of Sammasambuddha does not limit to a partial knowledge and contribution. If a false belief is associated with a quick spreading culture or a campaign (they do not like to be called a cult), it will be like a deadly virus that alters the genes and may lead to the emergence of another new sect. Buddhism has already suffered significantly since the separation of Mahayana and if another separation occurs in Theravada school of thought, the consequences are enormous." |
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
