🧡 If you find benefit in my videos, consider supporting the channel by joining us on Patreon and get fun extras like exclusive videos, ad-free audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: www.patreon.com/dougsseculardharma 🙂 📙 You can find my book here: books2read.com/buddhisthandbook

As usual, Doug, beautifully articulate in summarizing the difference between early and divergent thinking on the nature of Nirvana (Nibbana). As an artist, I have a linocut of the three 'poisons' that hangs on my wall ... your descriptions of Nirvana as an absence or cessations of greed, hate and dilution just adds to the simplicity and complexity of understanding. Thanks.

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Oh very nice! 🙏

My opinion: - Nibbana is without samsara since it is unconditioned (no karma involved). - Thus, it is impossible to describe nibbana with our language which is embedded within conditioned world. - Language can only be a "raft" to reach nibbana, but never describe it.

@mitrabuddhi

Ай бұрын

Nibbana can be [without samsara] as anihilation but nibbana can happens in this very life so it can be [with samsara] but samsara don't have any power to creating action based on vedana. So arahant can act only based on wisdom or compassion voluntarilly and desire or hatred can't move attention in liberated mind. This is nibbana. The cause for this is the cultivation of non-self.

@user-oj8rg6vd7q

Ай бұрын

Well as said in the suttas the fires needs grass and leaves ,once there are no leaves or grass there is no fire

Doug, I love your videos, thank you so much. I would love to understand more about stream entry!

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Yes thanks! See my video on the four stages of progress: kzread.info/dash/bejne/nYmLl8p7d9KtaLg.html

So grateful for these videos. Thank you.

Thanks for sharing, however I would like to address 3 points you made. 1) The suttas actually do say nibbana is beyond conceptualization. “If you say that, ‘When the six fields of contact have faded away and ceased with nothing left over, something else still exists’, you’re proliferating the unproliferated. If you say that ‘something else no longer exists’, you’re proliferating the unproliferated. If you say that ‘something else both still exists and no longer exists’, you’re proliferating the unproliferated. If you say that ‘something else neither still exists nor no longer exists’, you’re proliferating the unproliferated. The scope of proliferation extends as far as the scope of the six fields of contact. The scope of the six fields of contact extends as far as the scope of proliferation. When the six fields of contact fade away and cease with nothing left over, proliferation stops and is stilled.” -AN 4.173 2) There is actually an explanation for what was meant by a tathagatha neither existing after death nor not-existing. “Any consciousness by which one describing the Tathāgata would describe him: That the Tathāgata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of consciousness, great king, the Tathāgata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the ocean. ‘The Tathāgata exists after death’ doesn’t apply. ‘The Tathāgata doesn’t exist after death doesn’t apply. ‘The Tathāgata both exists and doesn’t exist after death’ doesn’t apply. ‘The Tathāgata neither exists nor doesn’t exist after death’ doesn’t apply.” -SN 44:1 This clearly says none of these apply and that it is something that can’t be fathomed. The explanation is made even for the tathagatha even while he is still alive. “And so, Anurādha-when you can’t pin down the Tathāgata as a truth or reality even in the present life-is it proper for you to declare, ‘Friends, the Tathāgata-the supreme man, the superlative man, attainer of the superlative attainment-being described, is described otherwise than with these four positions: The Tathāgata exists after death, does not exist after death, both does & does not exist after death, neither exists nor does not exist after death’?” -SN 22:86 All together all the points I made before seem to point to the fact that the tathagatha is incomprehensible in this way whether before or after death. 3) You are right that if something is incomprehensible then it won’t have much of a reason for people to see as a goal. However, the Buddha uses skillful means and describes it as the end of suffering (and many such ways) not because there is a one to one equivalence, but rather because by pointing to samsara and telling us what negative qualities of it are not present in samsara. So even though the actuality of nirvana is beyond comprehension, you can point to what about samsara won’t be present. And that makes it relatable.

@DougsDharma

14 күн бұрын

Thanks for that, I am familiar with these passages and would interpret them somewhat differently. That said, the apophatic interpretation of nirvana is not unpopular.

Thank you so much! That was what exactly I was wondering!

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Glad I could help!

“ Once I caught a fleeting glimpse Out of the corner of my eye like a distant ships smoke on the horizon I tuned my head and it was gone “ - Comfortably numb Pink Floyd ❤

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Yes, good song!

I have experienced nirvikalpa samadhi, and I was very fortunate to have experienced while walking to work. Many will say it isn’t an experience, but they are either saying this because they read about it or was told by someone who read about it. Although during the “experience” their is no experience, I wasn’t the body, my consciousness had shifted beyond space and time, as the body walked I remained motionless, it was as if I was floating and not moving. I wasn’t feeling footsteps, I saw the arms of the body swinging but I didn’t recognise them as being my arms, it was like they were nothing. There was much more to it, but will leave it there. The reason I say it is an experience is because an experience is a perceived change, so because I went into that “no state” there was a change, and then I came out of that “no state” creating another change, therefore it is an experience, however if I had remained in that “no state” then I would not be writing about it, as I would not be here , I mean my ego individuality that says “I”, “me”, “my”. Also, the reason it is often said that these experiences are ineffable is a matter of the person being told the description doesn’t have the same experience with which to associate the words to form the intended context. Can you describe the experience of any of the senses to someone lacking the faculty of that sense, for example, explain taste to a person born without the sense of taste, you will find this to be ineffable.

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Right, there is a sense of ineffable that simply means you can't bring about the same experience in another person through words alone. But that still allows words to describe the state, as you note we can describe tastes even though someone without a sense of taste wouldn't fully grasp what we are describing.

@bronsonstone725

Ай бұрын

@@DougsDharma the experiencer can describe with words anything they experience, but the person that it is being described to needs to have some level of experience close enough with which to associate, without adequate practical association their is only words and assumptions. Try to describe in words the taste of chocolate, coffee, anything on paper, then assume the position as the listener who has never had the sense of taste and go into it sincerely ignoring your experiences with the sense of taste. It's good to do these thought experiments. Thank you for your reply Doug, I very much enjoy your work.

@light-bringer294

Ай бұрын

🙏Sounds to me that you had an OOBE, out of the body experience, during which your astral body separated from your physical body. As you were walking at the time, you were simultaneously experiencing your 'I' consciousness in both your bodies. Congratulations since you now KNOW, not believe, that you can survive physical death, that your physical body is not you. I speak from experience concerning both of these experiences. Definitely not Nirvikalpa Samadhi, which I describe above.

@bronsonstone725

Ай бұрын

@@light-bringer294 Not quite, but it's certainly good to discuss, it helps others. I didn't have an astral body, I expanded beyond everything. I wasn't experiencing any "I" consciousness, my "experience" was awareness, complete equanimity. The difference between consciousness and awareness, is that consciousness experiences, whereas awareness is beyond consciousness and as a result does not experience, it is just complete neutral awareness. The reason I used quotes when I said my "experience" was awareness, was because during that samadhi I was not experiencing awareness, I was awareness, but coming out of that back to consciousness I can say I experienced being awareness. I hope that doesn't confuse, please ask if you have any questions

@light-bringer294

Ай бұрын

@@bronsonstone725 No wonder the Buddha refused point blank to discuss this subject. 😄 My guru always said that in these matters there needs to be agreement on the definition of terminology. Go well and many blessings for the future.

Concise and precise summary. Couldn't have done it any better. 🤣 Thanks, Doug! 🐱🙏

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

😄😄

Good video in good timing 👍👍

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Glad to hear it!

Hello Doug, I really enjoy the videos you make. I am very grateful for your time. Of course, like others, I have my own opinions about Nibbana, some of which I have already shared with you. Although I didn't receive an answer, I understand that you may be busy and unable to respond. That's why I'm just saying thanks this time. And I wish you health and happiness.

Thanks Doug for the video. What l appreciate is your fantastic picture quality, beautiful color and camera settings, really well done. Question, could you do a series about the differences in zenmeditation techniques. Especially what Dogen means by shikantasa and why he has problem with counting breath.

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Glad you enjoy them! I'm no expert on Dōgen, and tend to focus more on the early material, but I'll keep it in mind in case I run across some good scholarship on this question. I assume you've seen my video on Zen Buddhism? kzread.info/dash/bejne/noZ1uY-Afpe6haQ.html

Hi Doug. Great video as usual. Not to get off topic, but I was wondering if you could do some videos on the Greek connection to Buddhism. You probably already have, but I was fascinated to learn that one of the oldest images of the Buddha was on a Greek coin, perhaps from Gandhara? Not sure. Also there was a recent discovery of a locally made Buddha statue in Egypt by an ex pat community living in Egypt. Thanks!

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Hellenic contact with Buddhism happened after the invasion of Alexander to north India, typified by texts like the Questions of King Milinda, and artwork like that found in Gandhāra. Otherwise there are a few fragments of evidence here and there, but not enough for me to formalize into a real story at this point.

@davidmendoza1300

Ай бұрын

@@DougsDharma I think you give Alexander too much credit. The trade routes both by land and water are older forms of contact between ancient India and the Hellenistic world are they not?

This kind of clarity in a survey or overview is so beneficial. Although my biases would like to see you hold up a lit candle and then blow it out with a wink!

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

🕯️

That, following the path of the Buddha, is what we’re wondering about. The way we communicate is with words, and maybe there are no words to describe Nirvana. That with what we re trying to understand Nirvana, is the mind; maybe the capacity of the mind is not sufficient to understand Nirvana. I have access to it in this particular moment. It is the absence of time, therefore also the place of being. It’s all the time everywhere. Yet it cannot be described. Thanks for your video’s, always a pleasure to watch, to play with, to think deeply about.

@AGGARessiv3

Ай бұрын

absence of time is correct because you escaped from it . The place of being is incorrect. Nirvana is not a place, space ,dimension nor location.

SN 35.117 “Therefore, bhikkhus, that dimension should be understood, where the eye ceases and perception of forms fades away. That dimension should be understood, where the ear ceases and perception of sounds fades away.… That base should be understood, where the mind ceases and perception of mental phenomena fades away. That base should be understood.”* The monks then go to ask Ananda what the Buddha meant by this. “This was stated by the Blessed One, friends, with reference to the cessation of the six sense bases.” It seems quite clear the Buddha doesn’t describe it as a consciousness, but rather the cessation of all 6 forms of consciousness. But it’s still somehow a realm that is to be understand. Quite paradoxical.

was just reading an essay by Bhikkhu Sujato on Thanissaro Bhikkhu's view, perfect timing

Thank you Doug! Interesting, as always! I think we suffer less when we minimize greed, hatred and delusion. I would find it interesting to see what modern science (psychology and neurology maybe) has to say about minimizing suffering and how one person can evolve in that regard (to what extent can the same person become less greedy, hateful and deluded and to what extent does it make them happier).

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Yes it's a good question!

Thank you for the good video. The most concrete description of Nirvana, to me at least, is the cessation of six sense- doors, as mentioned in ‘ the magic of the mind’ (p.77) by Bhikkhu K. Nanananda . It’s also a prescription for achieving it. I think there are two approaches: one open mindfulness method based on the teaching of Buddha to Bahiya( Concept and Reality p.29 by the same author above); the jhana method given by Ajahn Brahm in ‘ Mindfulness, Bliss, and Beyond(p.171). If the Nirvana means the cessation of all perception, it is of course inconceivable.

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

🙏

The verb nibbana in Bengali (Bengali substitutes b for v and drops r's just like Pali) is a perfectly usable verb nowadays. It's rough equivalent in 'english' is the Pennsylvania Dutch verb 'outen' as in 'outen the light'. It means to shut the light off (or blow out the oil lamp, or whatever). It isn't so surprising that the end of suffering might be construed as bliss. In fact, in Mahayana, particularly Yogacara, the belief is that the two words sukha and dukkha are derived from the same root and are opposites.

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

🙏

@bahadursunny1674

Ай бұрын

Are you bengali?

Nirvana is Samsara without any conceptual superimposition. Samsara is a superimposition of concepts on Nirvana. The first conceptual form is “I am.” The material universe is then created by a proliferation of thought. Peace.

@amonynous9041

Ай бұрын

yeah but that is also just a conceptual view of something that is non-conceptual. Ineffable cannot be bound by descriptions and words, that's why it's ineffable.

@shivadasa

Ай бұрын

@@amonynous9041 It is a pointing out instruction. It seems obvious that we are all here on KZread, reading and commenting and thus fully immersed in the universe of conceptual thought.

@amonynous9041

Ай бұрын

@@shivadasa this is the problem, we are all grasping at straws when it comes to discussing the ineffable. We say religious things like "if you attain this, this and this will happen", but the truth is we don't know, most of the things from these Buddhist doctrines are based in belief, because you can't ask someone who's supposedly become "Tathāgata" if all these doctrines are true or not. What about reincarnation, etc. who can ever prove these things, even if you had an enlightenment experience you can't know if these interpretations or "instructions" are correct or just dogmas people believe blindly. Even if you experienced the highest possible Nirvana and came back to this world, it's hard to bridge these two worlds. It's easy to fall into delusion, into all kinds of "interpretations" which can just become another form of hindrance to true liberation.

@shivadasa

Ай бұрын

@@amonynous9041 If by “we” you mean you and me, you are mistaken.

@amonynous9041

Ай бұрын

@@shivadasa yes, you made some claims which can not be proven but are completely based on some wackadoodle belief. Something in the vein of "material things in universe are a proliferation of thought" which is just BS. Did you think of the sun? Of course you didn't, you want to claim somebody's work, you just parrot things you read somewhere.

For me, what more or less settles my mind on this dilemma is, "Am I free from suffering, knowing I am free from suffering? No? Then I don't want it." Keeping my mind clear on that goal protects me from getting caught up in doubt about my attainments or lack there-of and all those "dark nights of the soul," y'know?

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

🙏

The dimension which is without aspects of other dimensions sounds a bit like how mahayana buddhists talk about emptiness or the notion of two truths. I mean there seems to be some overlap which is interesting considering that's an early sutta. On another point, In a way the inflationary and even the deflationary descriptions serve as pointers to the ineffable nature of enlightenment, so don't seem that different to the apathetic perspective. Thanks for the video. Very interesting and well explained.

🙏🏼

☸️🙏🛐

Doug, I know this would be a huge ask, but do you have any videos or would be able to make some to help me understand Dzogchen, Mipham's "Beacon of Certainty", and the notion of rigpa itself? I feel equally compelled by both Theravada and Dzogchen traditions and texts but am having trouble understanding how Mipham's work is viewed from the perspective of the other schools.

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

It's not something I am knowledgeable enough about to make a video about, as most of my focus is on the earlier materials and this is quite late. I may do one in the future if and when I can find good, comprehensive scholarship on its historical origins.

Nirvana and its descriptions reminds me of the Zen analogy of "The Finger Pointing to the Moon" where we shouldn't mistake the Finger as the Moon. Likewise the Descriptions aren't Nirvana, just a point of reference in one's Dharma practice. On another note, it has been said that two people who have gone through the same experience describe it differently when asked about it. Hence even the experience of the mundane is expressed differently, so similarly I think the description of Nirvana for the ones who attained it would be different from the others who have experienced it as well

@DougsDharma

17 күн бұрын

Interesting point, the descriptions given of nirvana seem like they would have to be universal for it to be the true goal.

I’m wondering what your thoughts are on the purported equivalence between cessation, nirodha-samāpatti, and nirvana? I recently heard sensei Stephen Snyder say, “Cessation is the same as Nirvana in Theravada Buddhism.”

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

I dealt with some of that in this video about the cessation of perception and feeling: kzread.info/dash/bejne/d5570MOwgpvNgpM.html

@hansenmarc

Ай бұрын

@@DougsDharma thank you

Regarding the Mahayana style of nirvana, I did not really understand how it's thought to be compatible with the Buddhism of the Pali canon until I read the Lotus Sutra. Or, maybe it's better to say: the Lotus Sutra just admits that it's not compatible actually, and the non-Mahayana teachings were "skillful means," not the literal truth. Many pages are spent dancing around the topic, trying very hard not to say that the Lotus Sutra rejects the ideas in the earlier writings. I understand the dissatisfaction with the earlier ideas though, particularly if one accepts the supernatural elements: if there really are people of transcendent wisdom and compassion, who also have capabilities greater than the gods, does it make sense that they would leave us behind?

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Thanks for this, I'll be out with a few videos on skillful means in a few weeks.

Sometimes when I meditate, once in a while I feel like everything is going by and thats fine. I feel quiet, subtle and serene. Its only temporary but i wonder if that comes close to what nirvana is like?

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Well if it's a kind of calm and freedom, it's at least going in the right direction. I wouldn't worry too much about the rest.

I did hear some tales of people falsely thinking monks had died being in a deep silent stillness and pathologists getting a shock.

I was wondering if buddha ever said anything about difficult family relationships and how to deal with them. Particularly parents. Have you have ever done a video on this?

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

He didn't have a whole lot to say on that subject. I've done a couple of related videos, one on practicing with those close to you: kzread.info/dash/bejne/nnWKyNuQY7bFlLw.html , and another on the Buddha's family: kzread.info/dash/bejne/eYKp0daqe5TPptI.html . They might be useful.

@joltee9317

Ай бұрын

Thanks, I'll check them out. I've always thought that ethical behaviour should be applied to everyone equally, but i seem to recall reading something by perhaps a Mahayana lineage saying that it was particularly harmful karmically to behave poorly to one's parents. Like one has to be better to their parents regardless of how they treat you.

First council was oral recitation only. Janice Nattier from Harvard, and Charles Prebish from Penn State have both done in depth analysis on the Mahasamghikas, in their academic Mahasamghika origins. Most scholars (such as the aforementioned) understand the Mahasamghikas indeed have the oldest Vinaya, lredsting both Theravada and Mahayana. The Mahasamghika believed in eternal Buddha, this was before the second council, and the writing down of the Pali cannon. So, Historically speaking doug, eternal Buddha idea is the earliest belief of Buddha, long before the Pali cannon at the third council centuries later.

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Sutta and Vinaya are different, scholars believe the Vinaya was elaborated later.

@KeyboardPlaysGames

Ай бұрын

@@DougsDharma Hey Doug, thanks for responding 😊That's correct. I'm trying to point out that modern day Mahayana belief of eternal Buddha (Not sutras obviously) but, the belief itself, predates Theravada and Mahayana. The academic by Harvard and Penn state I cited, has proven beyond reasonable doubt the Sthaviras are the ones who altered the original Vinaya. Likewise the Theravada narrative is that the Mahasamghikas were the defect group, and wanted less stringent rules. In the academic I cited, the opposite is shown to be true from historical evidence, current scholars (myself included) study the Mahasamghika Vinaya as it is the oldest, much older than the Sthaviravada Vinaya, so indeed from a historical standpoint the Theravada account of the split at second council, is not only in accurate, it is totally opposite. I'm a scholar, so I'm not here to argue a religious narrative within the Pali Cannon, I am only providing evidence and thus far there has no no rebuttals to Janice Nattier and Charles Prebish, it has stood as conclusive for quite a long time. . I guess the primary place I was pivoting this from, was that this same original group, the Mahasamghikas, had a list of doctrine, and it included that the Buddha was transcendent and eternal. This belief was held by the group a mere 116 years after the Buddha death. So academically, it's incorrect to say the eternal Buddha stance is a "later development", when it actually predates Theravada and Mahayana. I highly recommend reading the source I provided. J. Nattier, and C. Prebish are extremely thorough on their work in Mahasamghika Origins: The Beginnings of Buddhist Sectarian ism, is extremely well done, and showcases behind reasonable doubt that the Pali cannon version of the second council split, has no bearing in actual historical evidence, and Infact it was the Sthaviravada (to be Theravada) who were the ones altering and changing the original Vinaya, which caused the split at second council, as the Mahasamghikas wanted the original Buddha Vinaya. I think you'd love the read, it'd right up your lane, take a peek at it, and thanks again for your incredible content 🙏 I was trying to say the second split was a cause of Vinaya issues according to scholars. I was pivoting that to prove as the academic does, that not only the Vinaya they held pre dates sthraviras, but also the beliefs they held which include eternal Buddha do as well.

Exactly the same as Samsara

@shivadasa

Ай бұрын

Nirvana is neither the same as nor other than Samsara.

This’s quite confusing. On one hand I’ve heard about “vimutti”, “ceto vimutti”. Some have said the Buddha said “ceto vimutti” liberation of the mind. Citta is liberated not obliterated, I guess. But some said nothing will be left even citta, original citta.

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

I would take liberation of mind as another way to discuss enlightenment, rather than nirvana per se.

If there is only bliss, then who or what is the which has become bliss? Or entered nirvana ? If Bliss or emptiness remains experiencing itself then isn’t this any different from the Hindu concept of Brahman or Atma ? The only differences being that Hindus approach this using positive language while Buddhism approaches it using negative language (full/ the fullness vs empty/emptiness ) But ultimately referring to the same state of being ?

“What needs to be done , has been done - there is nothing further .Ignorance was banished knowledge. arose .” Next task is for me to look up ONTOLOGICAL- is that in the Pali Cannon ❤

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

😄 It's a term in metaphysics. If you want a video about early Buddhist metaphysics, see for example: kzread.info/dash/bejne/fqKuk7GFhbK7kbQ.html

@light-bringer294

Ай бұрын

It relates to the branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being. "ontological arguments" 🤔

Sir is suffering inevitable or it is optional

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

It's inevitable so long as we persist in craving and clinging to things.

I suppose nirvana would be a part of evolving, necessary senses reached in preparation for God's kingdom. Image being of water and spirit not having a body and being dependent on your senses.

Please tell me this. What is the motivation to attain Nirvana? When there is no self according to Buddhism,.. there is no individual soul or consciousness that is unique to an individual , then why do I care whether the aggregates come together in the next birth (again, you can't call it is as MY rebirth because there is no I or ME in Buddhism). If my life is alright and I am not going through a lot of dukkha (frustration) and I am for the most part, an ethical human being, then WHY should I care about going the spiritual path to attain Nirvana? If what we have in this word is NOT the ultimate reality, and I am not ME as a separate entity/soul, then why the heck should I care what happens to my aggregates? If the goal of Buddhism is to REMOVE consciousness,n the one that FEELS and is aware of dukkha, then theoretically, if all sentient beings were to evaporate because of a meteor colliding with earth or Nuclear holocaust or whatever, then that ALSO solves the problem of more sentient beings coming into Samsaara. There are simply too many illogical things I see.

@DougsDharma

17 күн бұрын

The reason for practice is to reduce the suffering in your life.

@PR-tq8yo

17 күн бұрын

@@DougsDharma Not sure you are answering the question. One's current life's suffering can be educed by making different life choices as well. My question is specific to attainment of Nirvana and how it benefits the current group of aggregates that a human being is comprised of, when those aggregates don't retain their integrity in the next birth. All human beings at the moment, are let's say, blissfully unaware of their past lives. So if the point of view is restricted to the current life at a given time, then those sufferings can be eliminated by other means too. Nirvana is not meant for the current life necessarily, it is to "blow out" of existence and thus eliminate suffering completely forever. But why should one care when a> we are only cognizant of our current life at a given point and b> we don't have a permanent identity/self that sticks with us in our future births.

My question is, if im looking at this from an empirical naturalistic point of view, nirvana seems like what happens when we die. If we die and the body and mind end, with nothing coming after and nothing being remembered before, why even bother trying to attain nirvana at all? For the most part, it seems unattainable without great focus and effort in life. It doesn't seem like a worthy goal to spend one's entire life to achieve. Wouldn't it be better to just do whatever you want and know when you die it's all over and suffering ends anyways?

@DougsDharma

15 күн бұрын

The point of all practice is to reduce suffering. Whether or not all suffering ends at death is irrelevant to the question as to whether and how we might go about reducing it during this lifetime.

@skrrskrr99

15 күн бұрын

@DougsDharma I'm there and practicing but not expecting or having any hopes of even glimpsing nibbana or enlightenment. The concept of nibbana seems far-fetched to me, but the benefits of buddhism here and now are helpful in general. I definitely love the content. Appreciate you, Doug 🙏♥️🙌

Perhaps nirvana is simply peaceful awareness... to be at rest with the flow of causality. It seems antithetical to speak of nirvana in grandiose terms.

nir vana, nir means without

In his celestial journey, Mohammed met Moses and Jesus. And when he reach the highest heaven, it is absolutely silent. Meaning, it is totally empty. Is the Abrahamic highest heaven, the selfsame buddhic Void of Nirvana, the ultimate reality?

Smells like Buddha nature

If we stop having kids then no one will suffer and no one will need Nirvana or moksha.

@incredulity

Ай бұрын

Do you believe that the self is annihilated after death?

@FactsCountdown

Ай бұрын

@@incredulity every thing comes from nothingness and goes back to nothingness.

@incredulity

Ай бұрын

@@FactsCountdown Have you seen your self appearing from nothingness?

@khayon4364

Ай бұрын

That isn't how Buddhism works - Reincarnation means "stop having kids" doesn't actually affect anything within the Buddhist worldview. Having a child in Buddhism is actually considered a blessing and a *positive* act. The Tibetan term for it is "precious human birth" given its rarity in this world of karma an reincarnation.

@FactsCountdown

Ай бұрын

@@khayon4364 Life is suffering then why you want to inflict suffering on your children by bringing them into this world.

The reality of your own self-nature, the absence of cause and effect, is what's meant by mind. Your mind is nirvana.

I deny Jesus

@corydonathan9169

Ай бұрын

Cringe

@jojoGetBack

Ай бұрын

Ok

@gendashwhy

Ай бұрын

Who?

@movewitoutmotion769

Ай бұрын

Alrighty

As a very secular-minded meditator, I believe Nibbana is a useless concept. Our practice shouldn't aim at some esoteric concept, linked to ascetic ideals. We have to try and live better lives and be better people. No such "enlightenment" ideas make sense in realistic psychology.

@DougsDharma

Ай бұрын

Maybe so. I'll deal with that question soon.

มี ไม่มี ไม่มี มี