Buddhism

[Behappyalways]

Ghost Talk.......initially did not want to put this up...but then someone was talking about the title......one of the guest was talking about 万贯家财三顿饭， 千屋万屋一张床


http://bbs.wenxuecity.com/fortune/241775.html

[chialc]

there is only one reason why Buddha decided to give up his worldly life...as a future king.

as a future king,
he can build old folks home and take good care of old folks...
he can build schools and educate his people...
he can build hospital and cure the sick...
he can build temple and monastery for the people/spirit...

but, he choose to be a monk... (of course, initially, he can not predict that he is going to to be 'the' Buddha... In fact, he has no clue at all. He had tried many different way to be enlighted.)

As a king, he can do many things to help his people... spiritually as well as physicall, but he gives up his life as a all powerful king and to be a monk... (note: not buddha).

meaning?

[Behappyalways]

Reason why Buddha decided to give up his worldly life...........First Noble Truth.....There is Suffering....

Every living beings from humans to animals when they are born, they 'signed' a life time contract with 'suffering'. It could be physical sufferings or mental sufferings.

So when the 'pain' and 'realisation of suffering built in our life contract' gets too intolerable, one decides to give up everything to search for a solution.

Budhha has his trials and errors and He finally found the Way.

People claimed that Buddhism is a pessimistic because we always talk about Sufferings....Well do u agree and see the sufferings in our 'life contract'? And Buddha from his trials and errors and efforts has found a solution which he unselfishly shared to all.

The ball is then thrown back to the rest of us. Can we follow his teachings and precepts? Can we correct our 'incorrect' lifestyle?

There are many 'bad' monks, nuns and teachers who are more interested in sensual pleasures but they seem to forget that Suffering has a contract with all......

[Jared Seah]

"As a king, he can do many things to help his people... spiritually as well as physicall, but he gives up his life as a all powerful king and to be a monk... (note: not buddha).

meaning?"



1. Some have expectations others (kings, governments, gurus, religious leaders, bosses, philanthropists, etc) can, and should do more for others beneath them.
They see hierarchy and outside in (money and power can solve everything).

2. Some see all fellow humans as equal despite their social standings, and believe in inside out (empower others to solve their own problems).


Simple things can tell the difference between the above two:

Some have to be told what to do with their rubbish (either through compliment or fear of punishment). Some even behave differently depending on whether they think others are watching.

Some will do naturally with their rubbish based on their beliefs.

(How many clear their own trays in fast food joints?)

[kopihothot]

my humble view is that Buddha went into finding enlightenment first and then into mass education.

being a good king might benefit 1, 2 generations but now his teachings is still going strong and most probably will last way way longer.....and if his teachings could educate more & more people to do good and attaining enlightenment, isn't it way beneficial than the benefits a small king can achieve in his mini life-time.

but still, as a normal human being at that point of time, luckily he chose this path.

[Blackjack]

I have these questions recently that I can't figure out, and I would appreciate any thoughts from fellow travellers here who plod the same journey that I am trying to make.

Amongst Buddha's teachings, there are those that pertain to the nature of self that are most abstract and difficult to understand for the laymen. Thus simply from my limited understanding -

1) Buddha teaches that "you" are not an integral autonomous entity, and that there is no-self possessing qualities of self.

2) At the same time, there is supposedly a distinction between happiness (worldly happiness) and True Happiness (Enlightenment), which is what a practising mind seeks to achieve.

My questions are :

1) If there is no real "self" (or me), what is the purpose in seeking True Happiness and ultimate enlightenment (since the "self" would not have existed and there is no benefit to be derived from enlightenment being granted)?

2) Are we longing for liberation from a fettered state of mind, one that is ironically bound to a belief that it should be a final path? (Again, an idea of permanence which seemingly is against the central concepts of Impermanence) If we can accept that all things are impermanent, why can't we accept that our ideals of end cultivation should not be permanent?

[Jared Seah]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwq2sixfn...re=related

I have my hand in the cookie jar clutching the stone of desires - body, ego, relationships, possessions, etc.

I'm in awe of Hui Ke in his cutting his arm to "seek" the path... It puts into question the conviction of my "seek".

If my hand (self) did not exist in the first place, who is holding the stone of desires?

[Behappyalways]

A week ago there was a talk on this topic in another forum.....

http://groups.wenxuecity.com/discussion....089&page=2

This question was put up by my cousin many years ago and recently I came across this article and hopes it might help

http://www.vipassanaforum.net/forum/index.php?page=9

My answer to the question is 'silence'....

How do one describe water? or describe Nirvana? One can drink water but hard to describe .....just like if u are given the task to describe The Sun to someone who is born blind....how do u describe to him......which is why sometimes silence is the answer. Not that Buddha does not know the answer but when u try to describe you might cause more confusion.....

look at the video from 5:28 onwards.....Hui Ke choose to keep silence and bow.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwq2sixfn...re=related



My questions are :

1) If there is no real "self" (or me), what is the purpose in seeking True Happiness and ultimate enlightenment (since the "self" would not have existed and there is no benefit to be derived from enlightenment being granted)?


If there is No Self there is No Suffering. Even though one might try to convince himself there is No Self but as long as he suffers that meant he is still holding to a notion of Self.

2) Are we longing for liberation from a fettered state of mind, one that is ironically bound to a belief that it should be a final path? (Again, an idea of permanence which seemingly is against the central concepts of Impermanence) If we can accept that all things are impermanent, why can't we accept that our ideals of end cultivation should not be permanent?

Because there is impermanence, that meant you can change.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOK8f7ZymDI

my two cents worth.....Cheers ^^

[Behappyalways]

有位师兄说：佛教最高是空性，守戒也是一种执著；吃素吃肉我从不选择，这叫随缘不强求，心空放下不执就好。他说这个境界也没有错，但问题若他未证空性，弄口头禅的话，这样做就反害自己了！罪性本空，心空，罪当然无所依附；若心未空，吃一口肉就得一分罪，罪也附於心中，所以持戒是唯一最安全的选择。



（谈师兄修行话）

[Behappyalways]

魔鬼與天使
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_61b02c6d01019gbo.html


錯覺
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_61b02c6d01019gfs.html