Latest ads
-
🚀 එක පැකේජ් එකයි - මාසෙටම Unlimited Internet! 🌐- sayuru bandara
- Updated:
-
🎬 CapCut Pro 1 Month Access! LKR 600- sayuru bandara
- Updated:
-
🚀 Google One AI PRO Plan (Gemini Pro Activation) – 18 Months Access! LKR 2200- sayuru bandara
- Updated:
-
Canva Pro Lifetime Own Mail Activation LKR 500- sayuru bandara
- Updated:
-
Tele marketing executive- nuwandse
- Updated:
කර්මය පිලිබද මගේ ගැටලු Karma Questions
- Thread starter Y2K
- Start date
thawa podi deyak kiyanna one. Dharmaya gana hari awabodhayak nathi kenekuta waradi deyak mulinma oluwata watunoth serama habak thamayi! mokada hari waradda therum ganna wath danne nathi handa loku amaaruwaka watenawa. e handa Budurajaananwahansegema deshanawal witharayi recommend karanna puluwan. ethanadi mama nam onema kenekuta anumatha karanne Ape Hamuduruwo, Kiribathgoda Gnanananda Hamuduruwo witharayi!!! mama dakka Shaasthru Gawrawaya hismuduninma thiyana, Buddha Deshanaa eka akurakwath wenas nokara, Thripitaka poth wahansela asurenma Dharmaya kiyadenne Unwahanse witharayi!!! dan nam thawa Swaminwahansela godadenek innawa attha athi hatiyenma wisthara karana! eth awabodhayata sudusuma, saka sankaa nathuwama serama thamantama therum ganna hakiyawa labenna Ape Hamuduruwonge upakaaraya labuwoth puluwan weyi!! habayi mama Ape Hamuduruwo Ape Hamuduruwo kiwwata unwahanse maawa danne wath naha. mamath ahin dakalath naha! me thanikarama Wishwasaya/pahadeema matha tiyena bandeemak witharayi!!!
තව පොඩි දෙයක් කියත හැකියි! මේ කිඹුලා බනිස්, ග්රාමසේවක කියන ids වලින් එන කෙනා කාගේ කවුද, කොයි වගේ කෙනෙක්ද කියලත් මගේ thread එක බැලුවොත් තේරෙයි!! එයා, එයාගේ කැරැට්ටුව 'රෙද්ද ගලවලාම' පෙන්වල තියනවා! මෙයා, ඇත්ත කතන්දරයක් එලියට දාපු ගමන් කුලප්පු වෙලා දඟලන්න ගන්නවා!! සාමාන්ය දේවල් වලදී neutral!! අන්න ඒ විදියට මෙයාගේ response එකත් උපකාර කරගන්න පුළුවන් වෙයි බුද්ධිමත් උදවියට සත්ය, හරි දේ, මොකද්ද කියන එක තෝරා බේරා ගන්නට!
මහසෝනා කියන එකත් ඔය වගේම තමයි හැසිරුනේ . පස්සේ මොකක්දෝ උගේ වාසනාවකට මිනිහ හරි මගට වැටුන . කිබුලටත් මාර්ගය විව්ර්තයි එන නොඑන එක උගේ වැඩක් . අපිට පුළුවන් අපි යන පර පෙන්නන්න විතරයි . එකාගෙන යන්න හැකියාවක් . අපිටවත් වෙන කාටවත් නෑ. බුදුහාමුදුරුවෝ කරෙත් පර පෙන්නපු එක . එකේ යන එක අපේ වැඩක් .
මේක බුද්ධ දේශනාවේ තියෙන දෙයක්ද නැත්තන්, කිරිබත්ගොඩ-බඩවඩා දේශනාවේ තියෙන දෙයක්ද්?
මේ කියන් ගොන් කතාව ඇත්ත නම් බුදු සිද්දාර්ත කුමාරයට බුදු වෙන්නවත් ලැබෙන්නේ නැහැ. එහෙම්නං ආලාරකාලාම උද්දකාරාම පුත්ත වගේ ගුරුවරු පස්සේ ගිය කියන්නේ සොරි.කොම් නේ. එතකොට ඔය අනිත් දර්ශන පිලි අරන් ඉඳලා පසුව බුද්ද සාසනේට ආපු , පසුව නිවන් දැකපු ඔක්කොම හාමුදුරුවරු ගැන කතාත් බොරු වෙන්න ඇති.
එක නේන්නම් . කිරිබත්ගොඩ හාමුදුරුවොත් මුලින් කතෝලිකයෙක් . පස්සේ බුදුදහම වැලද ගත්තේ . එතකොට දමිතාගේ බනවලට අනුව උන්වහසේට මොකද වෙන්නේ ? දමිත අහන්නෙත් උන්වහන්සේගේ බනනේ ?
ගොන් දමිතයෝ , කිරිබත්ගොඩ හමුදුරුවන්ගේවත් උන්වහන්සේ දේශනාකරන දර්මයෙවත් නෙමෙයි වැරැද්ද තියන්නේ . උඹේ තියන අහංකාර උද්දච කම .
උඹ නිවන් දැකල කියල හිතාගෙන ඉන්න පිස්සෙක් . හමුදුරුවන්ටම කියපන් උඹ නිවන් දැකල කියල . උඹව මහමෙව්නාවේ ප්රදාන සන්ගනයක කරන්න කියල .
උඹේ තියන්නේ මානසික රෝගයක් . එකට හමුදුරුවන්ගෙන්ම විසදුමක් ඉල්ලගනින් . උඹට සනීප වෙන්න පුළුවන් වෙයි .
ගොන් දමිතයෝ , කිරිබත්ගොඩ හමුදුරුවන්ගේවත් උන්වහන්සේ දේශනාකරන දර්මයෙවත් නෙමෙයි වැරැද්ද තියන්නේ . උඹේ තියන අහංකාර උද්දච කම .
උඹ නිවන් දැකල කියල හිතාගෙන ඉන්න පිස්සෙක් . හමුදුරුවන්ටම කියපන් උඹ නිවන් දැකල කියල . උඹව මහමෙව්නාවේ ප්රදාන සන්ගනයක කරන්න කියල .
උඹේ තියන්නේ මානසික රෝගයක් . එකට හමුදුරුවන්ගෙන්ම විසදුමක් ඉල්ලගනින් . උඹට සනීප වෙන්න පුළුවන් වෙයි .
උඹ ගැන හිතාගන්න අමාරුයි බං. මේ උඹ කියල තියෙන්නේ උඹ ජීවිතේ අවබෝධ කරගන්න කියල උනන්දු වෙනවා දැකල මිනිස්සු උඹට පිස්සා කියල කිව්වා කියන එකද? ඒක එහෙම නම්, උඹ ඒ මිනිස්සුන්ගේ කතා care කරන්න යන්න එපා! මේ තනි තනියෙන් ආව, තනිතනියෙන් දුක් විඳගෙන යන්න තියන ගමනක්. ඉතින් කවුරු පිස්සෙක් කියල හංවඩු ගැහුවත් ගණන් ගන්න එපා! මෙහෙම ජීවිතේ අවබෝධකරන්න යන්තම් හරි උවමනාවක් ඇති වෙන්නේ මොලේ කල්පණා කරන්න පුළුවන් කෙනෙකුට විතරයි. ඒ අතින් උඹ great! උඹ අල්ලගන තියන විදිය, අල්ලගන තියන තැන හරිද කියන එකයි upset එක! බුදුහාමුදුරුවොම කිව්වා ධර්මය හරියට ඇල්ලුවේ නැත්නම් සර්පයෙක් නැට්ටෙන් නැත්නම් මැද්දෙන් හරි ඇල්ලුවා වගෙයි කියල! මොකද අල්ලපු කෙනාව කනවා!! උඹ බුදුහාමුදුරුවෝ කියාපුවා අමුතුවෙන් වෙන කෙනෙක්ගෙන් අහල, අමුතුවෙන් විග්රහ කරන්න යන්නේ නැතුව චුට්ටක් මෙන්න මේ විදියට කල්පණා කරලා බලපන්.
දැන් වයසට යන එක, ලෙඩ වෙන එක, අප්රිය අය - අප්රිය දේවල් එක්ක එකතුවෙන්න සිද්ධ වෙන එක, ප්රියයන්ගෙන් - ප්රිය දේවල් වලින් වෙන්වෙන්න වෙන එක, උවමනා විදියට ලබන්න/කරගන්න බලාපොරොත්තු උනාට මේවා කැමති විදියට නොවෙන එක, ආදී මෙකී නොකී දුක් සියල්ලම නේ දුක කියල ගන්න තියෙන්නේ... සංකිත්තෙන පංච උපාදානස්කන්ධා දුක්ඛා, කෙටියෙන් කියනවනම් මුළු ජීවිතයම දුකක්! කියලනේ කිව්වේ.
ඊළඟට සතරමහා ධාතුන්ගෙන් හැදිච්ච ඕනෙම දෙයක් (මේ අපි, සත්වයෝ), 'රූප' කියල හැඳින්වුයේ ඒවායේ නසී වැනසී යන ස්වභාවය නිසාමයි කියල බුදුහාමුදුරුවෝ කියල දුන්න, රුප්පතීතිකෝ භික්ඛවේ තස්මා රූපන්ති උච්චති කියල. ඒ කියන්නේ ඉපදුනොත් ජරා මරණ උරුමයි!! ඒ නිසා ඉපදුනොත් දුක automatically හම්බවෙනවා! අපට ඉපදිලා ඉවරවෙලා දෙවියන්ට වැඳුම් පිදුම් කරලා, නැත්නම් වෙන වෙන දේවල් කරලා දුකෙන් ගැලවෙන්න විදියක් නැහැ! ඒකෙන් කියවෙන්නේ, ඉපදීම තමයි දුක කියන එක! (මොකද උපත කියන්නේ කන්දානන් පාතුභාවෝ, පංච උපාදාන ස්කන්ධයේ පහළවීම) ඉතින් ඔය දුක කියන එක තමයි චතුරාර්ය සත්යයේ පලවෙනි කොටස. ඕක අපි අවබෝධ කරගත යුතුයි!!
දැන් මේ වෙනකොටත් උඹ ඒ කොටස අවබෝධ කරගත්ත නම් උඹ ජීවිතාවබෝධය පිණිස තියන කාර්යයේ 1/4 ක් ඉවරයි! ත්රිපරිවට්ටය සහිතව ද්වාදසාකාරයෙන් චතුරාර්ය සත්ය පරිපූර්ණ වශයෙන් අවබෝධ කරගැනීම! ආර්ය සත්ය 4, එකක් 3 ආකාරය බැගින් පරිපූර්ණව තේරුම් ගැනීම! ඔන්න උඹ කරන්න ඕනේ දේවල් වලින් පලවෙනි එක!!!
ඊළඟට බුදුහාමුදුරුවෝ හෙව්වා ඇයි මෙහෙම නැවත නැවත ඉපදීමක් සිද්ධ වෙන්නේ කියල! එතැනදී උන්වහන්සේ දැක්ක 'යායන් තණ්හා පෝණෝ භාවිකා', යම්කිසි තණ්හාවක් වෙතොත්, එය පුනර්භවයක් ඇති කරයි කියල. ඉතින් ඔය සෙවිල්ල සොයා ගෙන සොයාගෙන යනකොට දැනගත්තු කරුණු තමයි පටිච්ච සමුප්පාදය කියල, දුක පිණිස (නැවත නැවත ඉපදීම පිණිස) හේතු - ඵල වාදයේ සකස්වීම හැටියට බුදුහාමුදුරුවෝ එක එක ආකාරයෙන් දේශනා කලේ!!! මොකද අපිට උවමණා දුකින් මිදීමට නම්, අපි කරන්න ඕනේ දුක ඇතිවෙන්න බලපාපු හේතු සියල්ලම සහමුලින්ම නැතිකර දැමීමයි! ඒ නැතුව වෙන වෙන දේවල් වලින් ස්ථිර විසඳුමක් ලබන්නට හැකිවෙන්නේ නැහැ! ඉතින් උඹ පැහැදිලි අරමුණක් ඇතුව, මමත් මේ කරුණු නිවැරදිව අවබෝධකරගන්නවා කියල වැඩේට බහිනවානම්, අන්න ඒක තමයි උඹට කරන්න තියෙන වැඩේ!! බුදුරජාණන්වහන්සේව සරණ ගිහින්, ඒක හරියට කරගන්න හිතුවොත්, උඹට මාරයාගෙන් නැත්නම් මාරයාගේ ගෝලයන්ගෙන් ගැලවිලා වැඩේ හරියටම කරගන්න අවුලක් වෙන එකක් නැහැ!!
උඹට ඕනේ දුකෙන් නිදහස් වීමක් නෙවෙයි, වෙන කුණුහරපයක් කරන්න නම්, බුදුහාමුදුරුවෝ කිව්වේ අරමයි, මෙහෙමයි, නැත්නම් බුදුහාමුදුරුවෝ හරියටම කිව්වද දැන්නෑ? මොකුත් miss උනාද දන්නේ නැහැ!, අපි හරියට විග්රහ කරලා බලන්න ඕනේ! වෙන හාමුදුරුවරු ඕක බුදුහාමුදුරුවොන්ට වඩා දන්නවා ඇති, එයාල තමයි හරියටම මේක කියල තියෙන්නේ කියල වගේ හිතුනොත්, අන්න උඹට ඇත්තටම පිස්සු!! උඹ මාරයට අහුවෙලා!!!
බුදුහාමුදුරුවෝ දේශනා කලේ, ධර්මයයි - විණයයි කියල දෙකක් විතරයි!! ඒකෙත් ප්රධානම දේශනා තමයි සුත්ර දේශනා කියල හඳුන්වන්නේ. ඔය අභිධර්ම කතා සේරම සාසනය අනුභව කිරීම සඳහා පවතින දේවල් කියල තමයි මම නම් කියන්නේ!! මොකද බුදුරජාණන්වහන්සේගේ එකම පරමාර්ථය සතර අපා දුකින් නිදහස්වීමට නොහැකිව අසරණ වී සිටින සත්වයාට එයින් මිදීමට මාර්ගය පෙන්වා දීමයි. ඒ වැඩේ කරන විදිය එහෙම්පිටින්ම කියාදීපු සුත්ර දේශනා ගොඩක් තියනවා, ලෝක සුත්රය, පරිවීමංසන සුත්රය, බීජ සුත්රය වගේ. ඒවායින් බුදුරජාණන්වහන්සේගේ මාර්ගෝපදේශකත්වයේ ගැඹුරටම නෙවෙයි, පතුලටම යනකන් කියල දෙනවා!!! ඊට වඩා ගැඹුරුදෙයක් නැහැ!!! අපි ඒ කරුණු සියල්ල සර්ව සම්පූර්ණව දැනගෙන, අවබෝධකරගෙන, කරන්නය කියපු දේවල් සේරම කරලා ඉවර කරලා දැන් බොහොම සැනසිල්ලේ ඉන්නවා! ඉතින් පැහැදිලිවම කියන්න පුළුවන්, අභිධර්මය කියල එක එක්කෙනාගේ රූප සටහන් ගහපු, නොතේරෙන බයිලා lot එකක් බදාගත්තොත් නම් පුතේ උඹත් ඉවරෙටම ඉවරයි!!
Ok, I'm done with this rants. You say this over and over. So if we are to learn from Buddha himself, what are you doing here trying to educate us? We shouldn't learn from anyone else but buddha right? So why should we learn from you???
Has anyone seen hypocrisy at its best?? If not this is the perfect example.
ධර්මයේ නම් තියෙන්නෙ දුක්ඛ ආර්ය සත්ය අවබෝධ වෙනකොටම අනෙක් ඒවත් අවබෝධ වන බවයි .. ඒ කියන්නෙ මුළු චතුරාර්ය සත්යම එක විට අවබෝධ වීමයි.
හැමෝම එක විදිහ නැහැ... ධර්මය හොයන අයට ඒකට ඉඩ දෙන්න... කෙනෙකුට නොතේරෙන දෙයක් අනෙක් අයටත් නොතේරෙයි කියලා කියන්න බැහැ... එක එක්කෙනාගෙ ඥාණ මට්ටම වෙනස්... ආනන්ද හාමුදුරුවෝ ධර්ම භාණ්ඩාගරික වුණාට අභිධර්මය බුදුපියාණන්වහන්සේ දේශණා කලේ .. සැරියුත් මහරහතන්වහන්සේටයි... (බෙහෙත් බොන කෙනාට බෙහෙත කොහොමද හදල තියෙන්නෙ කියන එක වැදගත් නැති වුණාට වෛද්ය විශේෂඥයාට ඒක වැදගත් ... මොකද බෙහෙත් වැරදුනාම හරි බෙහෙත හොයලා දෙන්න
)
oya umbata hithichca widiya ne... oka umbata hari athi! eth umba oya wage 'gon' widyata nathuwa awadhaanayen baluwoth aththa naththa therenna one!
poddak hithapan, dan umba marenne koyi welaweda kiyala umba dannawada? ada heta neweyi, thawa sahena kalekin kiyamu. eelangata umba hithan inne aayema oya widiyata honda level ekak thiyana manussayek hatiyatama aaye ipadeyi kiyalada? nathnam sarwabaladhariya umbawa galawa ganiyi kiyalada?
okata niwaradima uththara serama Buduhamuduruwo dannawa! Unwahansegen Igena gaththu udaviyath dannawa. me inna risk eken galawenna lesiyen baha! eka echcharatama amaaruyi!! oka Budhamuduruwo karana ekak wath me api karana ekak wath neweyi. loke hati.
Buduhamuduruwo kiwwa Unwahanseta usa kandakata nagala baluwama pahala game minissu e gedarin me gedarata yanawa, me gedarin e gedarata yanawa wage, marena marena sathwayo karma wipaka anuwa niraye, peretha loka, thirisan loka wala gihin gihin upadinawa penawa kiyala! eketh bhayanaka kama kiyanne, Unwahanse kiwwa, marena marena minissungen, kakule mahapata angille niyapotthata gattha pas tikaka tharame sulu pramanayak witharayi eelanga aathme aaye manussayek hatiyata, nathnam eeta honda thanaka upathak labaa ganne kiyala! anik mulu maha polawe thiyana pas tharame pramanayak yanne niraya, peretha loka, thirisan loka walata kiyala!! habayi eka kawuruwath karana deyak neweyi! thama thaman karana kiyana dewal walata anuwa windinna wena aanisansa hatiyata wena deyak!!
oya thiyana anathuren galawennayi Buduhamuduruwo hamotama upakaara kale! upades dunne! ekath puluwan wenne mehema karanna, mehema karanna kiyala paara penwanna witharayi! ithin umba oya kathandara mokuth nodana nikam loku talks dammata umbath maha lokkek neweyi! thoth anik wadi hariyak un wagema eelanga paara anaganna hadana ekek!!
me anathuren onema kenekuta galawenna puluwan wenne, sakkhaya ditthi, wichikichcha, seelabbatha paramasa kiyala penwala deepu apita waradichcha anathurudayakama, bhayanakama kathandara tiken galaunoth witharayi! bola dan oya mahapparana talks dammata, dan anathuren galavilada inne?? thopila ohoma wena wena wikara karakara indala, welawa gewila giyama bolatayi kelawenne! apita awulak naha! umbala anagaththa kiyala api katawath paduwakuth naha! eth me dewal hondatama danagaththata passe bakan nilan inna amaaruyi! ekayi me hombata ana ana hari kerenna one de karaganilla kiya kiyaa kiyanne!!
meka mama witharak neweyi Dharmaya Hariyata Danagaththu onema kenekuta athiwena awanka hangeema! yako, aalawaka yakath Dharmaya watahunaama kiwwa 'mama meka kiya kiyaa mulu yaaya pura duwanawa!' kiyala. ekayi attha kathandaraya. mewaye loku minissu kiyala hithan inna hunga denek 'mu mehema ekak kiyanne ape hondata neda' kiyana eka wath therenne nathi maha gobba, mati mollu!! mama habaawatama dakka de ekayi! eth hamotama yanna thiyana paara nam ekayi! kanna wena paripputh ekayi!!
mama liyapu hama ekakma damme hariyatama target ekata kattiya yomu karanna misak mage lokukam penwanna neweyi gon miniho. dan wath mole kalpanaa karala balapan!! habayi mole atthema nathuwa ipadichcha ekek dennek meke thappulanawa... eka bolata prashnayak karagannath epa! issella try karala umbala ekaa denna hari goda yanna balahalla! ethakota umbalatath puluwan mehema anik gonnu wenuwen yamak karanna. dan me eka eka aathata wisi wela hitiyata gewagena aapu sansaara gamane, umbala api hamoma le naayo wela anantha waara gananak ipadila indala thiyanawa kiyana eka amathaka karanna epa!! anika umbala maawa kaalath athi, mama umbalawa kaalath athi. umbala umbalawama kaalath athi!
puluwan ikmanata me labichcha awasthawe, me paara nam waradda ganne naha kiyala adhishtana karan hariyata foundation eka wath daaganna dan indala uthsaha karapan! anna e wadeta udaw one unoth one welawaka sup eka dennam!!
මේකයි මචෝ. මේක උඹට විතරක් ඇතිවෙච්ච ප්රශ්නයක් නෙවෙයි. බෞද්ධ දර්ශනයේ මෙන්න මෙහෙම එකක් තියෙනවා. සම්මුති සත්යය සහ පරමාර්ථ සත්යය කියන දෙක තමා ලෝකෙ/විශ්වයෙ තියෙන්නේ.
සම්මුති සත්යය කියන්නේ සම්මුතියක් වශයෙන් අපි ඇත්ත විදියට ගන්නා කරුනු. රටක් තියෙනවා, මිනිස්සු ඉන්නවා, මහ රජා මහින්දය ඉන්නවා. Y2K මොරටුවේ ජීවත් වෙනවා ගුරුත්වාකර්ශනය නිසා පොල් ගෙඩි බිමට වැටෙනවා වගේ ඒවා තමා සම්මුතිමය වශයෙන් ඇත්ත කියලා ගන්නේ. මේව සාපේක්ශ සත්යයන්. මෙව්වල නිරපේක්ශ බවක් නෑ.
පරමාර්ථ සත්යය කියන්නේ නිර්වානය. ඒක තමා Absolute සත්යය. ඒක සාපේක්ශ සත්යයක් නෙවේ. පරමාර්ත වශයෙන් ගත්තම සෑබෑ ලෝකයේ ස්වභාවය.
මම ඉන්නව කියල ගන්නේ සම්මුතිය ඇතුලේ. සම්මුති සත්යය ඇතුලේ Y2K ඉන්නව කියල ගන්නේ නැතුව අපට කිසි දේයක් පහදන්න බෑ. ලෝකයේ එදිනෙදා වැඩ කරගන්න බැහැ, නීතිය, සමාජය මේව ඔක්කොම සම්මුතිය ඇතුලේ තියෙන්නේ. නමුත් පරමාර්ථ වශයෙන් ගත්තම ඇත්තටම Y2K කියල, නොවෙනස්වන-මේ යයි ගතහැකි පුද්ගලයෙක්, නොණැසී පවතින, වසඟයේ පිහිටුවාගත හැකි ආත්මයක් නැහැ
එහෙම අරන් බැලුවම කවුද නිවන් දකින්නේකියන ප්රශ්නයම සම්මුතිය ඇතුලෙ ඉඳන් අහන ප්රස්නයක්. පරමාර්ත වශයෙන් ඒක නි-ප්රශ්නයක්, හරියට හය කියන ගණිත අංකයේ උස හෝ විවාහක/ අවිවාහක බව විමසනව වගේ. එහමත් නැත්තන් මේක ක්රොස් බෝඩර් ප්රස්නයක්, සම්මුතිය සහ පරමාර්ත සත්යය අතරේ. අවිද්යාව, අනවබෝදය නිසාම පැන නගින ප්රශ්නයක් මේක.
"මම" කියල කෙනෙක් නැත්තම් කවුද හිතන්නේ? අපි දන්නව සිතුවිල්ලමයි හිතන්නේ, සිතුවිල්ල පිටිපස්සේ "හිතන්නෙක්"(ආත්මයක්) නැහැ කියල.විඳීම පමණයි තියෙන්නෙ, පුද්ගලයෙක් ආත්මයක් නැහැ. එහෙමනන් ප්රඥාවමයි (WISDOM) නිර්වානය අවබෝධ කරගන්නේ.
Seek you will find කිච්චලු මට මගෙ යාලුවෙක් දුන්නා මේ ඉ-මෙල් එක මම හිතන්නෙ දැන් මේ මමතය පැහැදිලි 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THE TRUTH OF SELF (EMPTINESS)
Dear friends:
Someone asked my why I used the word 'emptiness?in parenthesis after the word 'self?in the title of this talk. According to Buddhism, the answer is that "self is emptiness and emptiness is self." This answer, however, is too simple to comprehend. So before I explain the subject matter of this title, let me make two remarks:
1) Emptiness or void, as used in Buddhism, does not mean nothingness, as in "the room was empty after all the people left." It means, actually, that the basic nature of everything is emptiness. Even if the room is packed with people, it should still be envisioned as empty. However, human language often is not adequate to convey such precise expression. The word 'emptiness?appeared to be closest in meaning to the Sanskrit 'shunyata,?and so it was chosen by the English-speaking scholars who first came into contact with Buddhism. The word does create confusion, but there is no other suitable term in the English vocabulary.
2) Although the truth discovered by the Buddha upon his enlightenment was incomprehensible to ordinary human minds, he had to rely on the language understandable to people. Buddha's teaching was therefore delivered at two different levels: the mundane level and the enlightened level. At the mundane level, the concept of self means there is an individual. At the enlightened level, however, 'individual,?'non-individual,?'self,?'non-self,?'phenomenon,?'no phenomenon,?'name,?and 'no name?are all merely sophisms. At the enlightened level, one envisions all people, including one-self, as those seen in a dream or appearing on a television screen. Such visions are empty. Even the term 'emptiness?is unnecessary and carries no real meaning. 'Emptiness?is just arbitrarily chosen for convenience of discussion among people at the mundane level.
The concept of self at the mundane level, nevertheless, is the biggest hindrance to ordinary people in achieving enlightenment. To put it another way, one cannot achieve enlightenment and identify with basic nature without first achieving the realization that the concept of self is not only an invalid concept, but also a dangerous concept. With the concept of self the concept of 'that is mine?is also established, and thus the attachments of both self and 'that is mine?become firmly planted in one's mind. In this way one can never be in harmony with basic nature, one can never achieve enlightenment and be rid of samsara, the recurring cycle of birth and death, which is the source of suffering.
In today's talk, I would like to explain first how the concept of self is formed and strengthened. Next, I shall try to explore, using several different approaches, how this concept of self is invalid. By destruction of the concept of self, the concept of emptiness will be formed. The concept of emptiness is also an attachment. Thus we should finally destroy the concept of emptiness, to enable our true basic nature to be revealed.
The concept of self has been deeply rooted in our minds for so long that it is unrealistic to expect that it can be eliminated by the time we walk out of this room. It is my hope that after listening to this lecture your concept of self will simply not be strengthened further, and that this lecture will provide you with some leads useful for your future development.
According to Buddhism, the concept of self has two major components: one is the desire for unending life or continuous existence, and the other is the attachment to one's own view, usually expressed as 'my view.?The desire for continuous existence is present even before birth. The attachment to one's own view is gradually built up during one's lifetime, although such views are largely influenced by one's past karma.
The concept of self is first conceived through one's sensory organs. Through them one establishes oneself, even at birth, as a physical body which is separate from the so-called outside world. This concept of self becomes stronger and more important as one grows up. As a result, one finds that one has established within one's physical body a center of awareness, the self, with respect to the outside world.
Secondly, because everyone is establishing his or her own center of activity, the perception that the world is composed of different entities is further sharpened. Since each entity seeks its own satisfaction, conflicts of interest develop. The feeling of separation is further compounded when views differ and each entity asserts the importance or rightness of its own view.
Voluminous Buddhist commentaries have been written on the subject of the development of the concept of self. What I’ve just said here is comparable to a drop if water in the vast ocean. However, the ocean, as vast as it is, is basically just water. So, if we can study this drop of water thoroughly, a good foundation will be built for a more advanced study of the ocean later on.
The physical body of a person is the core upon which the concept of self is imposed. However, the concept of self is further strengthened by all sorts of identifications made in daily life which increase one's separation and isolation from others in the outside world. Some of the most common phenomena by which one identifies oneself and which distinguish one person from another are:
name
appearance
voice
fingerprint
sensation
ideology
reputation
These identifications are like the branches and leaves of a tree, with a physical human body as its root. If the root is dug out, then all the leaves and branches will automatically pass out of existence.
The above statement has, nevertheless, been challenged by a friend of mine who is a forester. He said to me, "Since you have not had the experience of taking down a big tree, you do not know that the branches should be cut off first, then the trunk cut down, and finally the root dug out or pulverized." I certainly could not argue with him; however, I told him that in Buddhism there are three major paths which teach a variety of ways for human beings to dig out the root of the concept of self. These three paths are:
Path 1 ?Vigorous practice, with the goal of destroying all the habits one has accumulated during this life and also during past lives. Such habits even include knowledge, faith, love, and hatred, and all kinds of human activities. Ch’an (pronounced Zen in Japanese) and the teachings of the Tibetan enlightened one, Milarepa, belong to this path. It is analogous to the idea of concentrating one's efforts on digging out the root without cutting off the branches first.
Path 2 ?Reliance upon the law of karma, whereby the concept of self can be gradually eliminated and basic nature revealed through the accumulation of merit gained by practicing the six perfections (paramitas). These are perfection of giving (dana paramita), perfection of moral discipline (shila paramita), perfection of patience (kshanti paramita), perfection of energetic perseverance (virya paramita), perfection of meditation (dhyana paramita), and perfection of wisdom (prajna paramita). This path is analogous to the standard forestry method of first cutting off the branches and trunk, and finally removing the root.
Paths 1 and 2 are methods of cultivation, but without a sound theoretical foundation, people can go astray on Path 1, or may lose enthusiasm after a period of time on Path 2. We therefore also need Path 3.
Path 3 ?Establishment of the theoretical foundation for Paths 1 and 2 through learning and penetrative reasoning.
In this lecture I regret that I am able to introduce to you only very little from each path. Today let us follow Path 3 to see how the concept of self can be theoretically destroyed so that our basic nature can be revealed. The next talk will be devoted to Paths 1 and 2, but also very briefly and with regard to selected topics only.
Now, let us first examine the seven means of identification that I mentioned above, to see how these branches of the "tree of self" can be removed.
1) A name is probably the most common way of identifying a person, but it is obvious that it is a poor means of doing so. Not only can a name be changed, but many people have the same name. Thus, that branch can easily be cut off. A name cannot really separate one person from the other.
2) Appearance, including the form of the body, complexion, color, etc., is also commonly used to identify a person. But not only does appearance change with age, it can also be changed by surgery. It may serve a temporary purpose, but it cannot really be used to establish the concept of self.
3) Scientific experiments demonstrate that each person has a different voice pattern. An instrument has even been devised by which a court may identify a person by his vocal pattern. But physical damage to the vocal apparatus can change that pattern, and certainly this means of identification is not applicable to mutes. Voice, therefore, also cannot permanently separate one person from another such that each person could justifiably be called a self.
4) Fingerprints are commonly used to identify a person but, like the voice, are not perfect. One does not lose one's concept of self even if one cuts off both of one's hands.
5) It is true that sensation, such as pain, delight, and the apprehension of danger, does not alert one to the existence of a self, but such alertness is usually temporary and simply affirms the concept of self which one has already.
6) Ideology is a powerful means of identification. It is, in fact, part of the premise of one's so-called view, which is one of the two main components that form the self. Historians have recorded that many religious defenders and revolutionaries put their ideas, faith, or principles even above their lives. Although in those cases the concept of self as an individual is usually surrendered to the concept of self as a group, the concept of self is, nevertheless, strengthened. But ideology can be changed, and a change in one's ideology does not mean a change in the individual. The concept of self remains. Thus it can be proven that ideology is still not the core of the concept of self.
7) Reputation is also a strong identification of self. Reputation represents one's deeds, which distinguish one from other persons. Reputation can be planted very deeply in one's mind. It is not surprising to learn that one of the presidents of the United States heard people call him "Mr. President" in his dreams. Ego is a term which represents a person's strong attachment to his identification by reputation. Pride and arrogance are usually the by-products. Just like ideology, however, fame can change overnight. The destruction of one's reputation does not, unfortunately, mean the destruction of the self. Thus this branch, one's reputation, can also be removed without affecting the concept of self.
With all branches cut off we now face the root of the tree of self, that is, the reality of the human body.
More than 2,000 years ago a famous Chinese philosopher, Lao-Tzu, remarked, "My biggest problem is that I have a body." Buddha also emphasized that the body is the source of all human suffering. So, we go to the core of the problem. Can the human body justifiably be called the self?
In a previous talk, "The Five Eyes," I have studied this important and fundamental question, by employing three analytical methods taught by Buddha. Each of these methods leads to the conclusion that the physical human body is a manifestation of emptiness (shunyata) and that the term 'self?is just a name arbitrarily chosen by human beings for the convenience of living in this world.
Since we can show that the physical human body is impermanent and is a momentarily changeable form seen by human eyes in a very narrow range of wave lengths, how is it justifiable to call it a self, an individual entity? Thus we can conclude that there is no self, only emptiness.
Once I introduced this doctrine of "no self, only emptiness" to some of my friends. One friend cried, "If I lose myself and become emptiness, how can I still be alive?" To this question I answered, "The Buddha reached the realization that there is no self, only emptiness, upon his enlightenment at the age of thirty-five, yet he lived a happy life until he was eighty years old." The destruction of the concept of self, and the understanding of emptiness, do not mean the end of life; on the contrary, these realizations mark the beginning of a happy life.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THE TRUTH OF SELF (EMPTINESS)
Dear friends:
Someone asked my why I used the word 'emptiness?in parenthesis after the word 'self?in the title of this talk. According to Buddhism, the answer is that "self is emptiness and emptiness is self." This answer, however, is too simple to comprehend. So before I explain the subject matter of this title, let me make two remarks:
1) Emptiness or void, as used in Buddhism, does not mean nothingness, as in "the room was empty after all the people left." It means, actually, that the basic nature of everything is emptiness. Even if the room is packed with people, it should still be envisioned as empty. However, human language often is not adequate to convey such precise expression. The word 'emptiness?appeared to be closest in meaning to the Sanskrit 'shunyata,?and so it was chosen by the English-speaking scholars who first came into contact with Buddhism. The word does create confusion, but there is no other suitable term in the English vocabulary.
2) Although the truth discovered by the Buddha upon his enlightenment was incomprehensible to ordinary human minds, he had to rely on the language understandable to people. Buddha's teaching was therefore delivered at two different levels: the mundane level and the enlightened level. At the mundane level, the concept of self means there is an individual. At the enlightened level, however, 'individual,?'non-individual,?'self,?'non-self,?'phenomenon,?'no phenomenon,?'name,?and 'no name?are all merely sophisms. At the enlightened level, one envisions all people, including one-self, as those seen in a dream or appearing on a television screen. Such visions are empty. Even the term 'emptiness?is unnecessary and carries no real meaning. 'Emptiness?is just arbitrarily chosen for convenience of discussion among people at the mundane level.
The concept of self at the mundane level, nevertheless, is the biggest hindrance to ordinary people in achieving enlightenment. To put it another way, one cannot achieve enlightenment and identify with basic nature without first achieving the realization that the concept of self is not only an invalid concept, but also a dangerous concept. With the concept of self the concept of 'that is mine?is also established, and thus the attachments of both self and 'that is mine?become firmly planted in one's mind. In this way one can never be in harmony with basic nature, one can never achieve enlightenment and be rid of samsara, the recurring cycle of birth and death, which is the source of suffering.
In today's talk, I would like to explain first how the concept of self is formed and strengthened. Next, I shall try to explore, using several different approaches, how this concept of self is invalid. By destruction of the concept of self, the concept of emptiness will be formed. The concept of emptiness is also an attachment. Thus we should finally destroy the concept of emptiness, to enable our true basic nature to be revealed.
The concept of self has been deeply rooted in our minds for so long that it is unrealistic to expect that it can be eliminated by the time we walk out of this room. It is my hope that after listening to this lecture your concept of self will simply not be strengthened further, and that this lecture will provide you with some leads useful for your future development.
According to Buddhism, the concept of self has two major components: one is the desire for unending life or continuous existence, and the other is the attachment to one's own view, usually expressed as 'my view.?The desire for continuous existence is present even before birth. The attachment to one's own view is gradually built up during one's lifetime, although such views are largely influenced by one's past karma.
The concept of self is first conceived through one's sensory organs. Through them one establishes oneself, even at birth, as a physical body which is separate from the so-called outside world. This concept of self becomes stronger and more important as one grows up. As a result, one finds that one has established within one's physical body a center of awareness, the self, with respect to the outside world.
Secondly, because everyone is establishing his or her own center of activity, the perception that the world is composed of different entities is further sharpened. Since each entity seeks its own satisfaction, conflicts of interest develop. The feeling of separation is further compounded when views differ and each entity asserts the importance or rightness of its own view.
Voluminous Buddhist commentaries have been written on the subject of the development of the concept of self. What I’ve just said here is comparable to a drop if water in the vast ocean. However, the ocean, as vast as it is, is basically just water. So, if we can study this drop of water thoroughly, a good foundation will be built for a more advanced study of the ocean later on.
The physical body of a person is the core upon which the concept of self is imposed. However, the concept of self is further strengthened by all sorts of identifications made in daily life which increase one's separation and isolation from others in the outside world. Some of the most common phenomena by which one identifies oneself and which distinguish one person from another are:
name
appearance
voice
fingerprint
sensation
ideology
reputation
These identifications are like the branches and leaves of a tree, with a physical human body as its root. If the root is dug out, then all the leaves and branches will automatically pass out of existence.
The above statement has, nevertheless, been challenged by a friend of mine who is a forester. He said to me, "Since you have not had the experience of taking down a big tree, you do not know that the branches should be cut off first, then the trunk cut down, and finally the root dug out or pulverized." I certainly could not argue with him; however, I told him that in Buddhism there are three major paths which teach a variety of ways for human beings to dig out the root of the concept of self. These three paths are:
Path 1 ?Vigorous practice, with the goal of destroying all the habits one has accumulated during this life and also during past lives. Such habits even include knowledge, faith, love, and hatred, and all kinds of human activities. Ch’an (pronounced Zen in Japanese) and the teachings of the Tibetan enlightened one, Milarepa, belong to this path. It is analogous to the idea of concentrating one's efforts on digging out the root without cutting off the branches first.
Path 2 ?Reliance upon the law of karma, whereby the concept of self can be gradually eliminated and basic nature revealed through the accumulation of merit gained by practicing the six perfections (paramitas). These are perfection of giving (dana paramita), perfection of moral discipline (shila paramita), perfection of patience (kshanti paramita), perfection of energetic perseverance (virya paramita), perfection of meditation (dhyana paramita), and perfection of wisdom (prajna paramita). This path is analogous to the standard forestry method of first cutting off the branches and trunk, and finally removing the root.
Paths 1 and 2 are methods of cultivation, but without a sound theoretical foundation, people can go astray on Path 1, or may lose enthusiasm after a period of time on Path 2. We therefore also need Path 3.
Path 3 ?Establishment of the theoretical foundation for Paths 1 and 2 through learning and penetrative reasoning.
In this lecture I regret that I am able to introduce to you only very little from each path. Today let us follow Path 3 to see how the concept of self can be theoretically destroyed so that our basic nature can be revealed. The next talk will be devoted to Paths 1 and 2, but also very briefly and with regard to selected topics only.
Now, let us first examine the seven means of identification that I mentioned above, to see how these branches of the "tree of self" can be removed.
1) A name is probably the most common way of identifying a person, but it is obvious that it is a poor means of doing so. Not only can a name be changed, but many people have the same name. Thus, that branch can easily be cut off. A name cannot really separate one person from the other.
2) Appearance, including the form of the body, complexion, color, etc., is also commonly used to identify a person. But not only does appearance change with age, it can also be changed by surgery. It may serve a temporary purpose, but it cannot really be used to establish the concept of self.
3) Scientific experiments demonstrate that each person has a different voice pattern. An instrument has even been devised by which a court may identify a person by his vocal pattern. But physical damage to the vocal apparatus can change that pattern, and certainly this means of identification is not applicable to mutes. Voice, therefore, also cannot permanently separate one person from another such that each person could justifiably be called a self.
4) Fingerprints are commonly used to identify a person but, like the voice, are not perfect. One does not lose one's concept of self even if one cuts off both of one's hands.
5) It is true that sensation, such as pain, delight, and the apprehension of danger, does not alert one to the existence of a self, but such alertness is usually temporary and simply affirms the concept of self which one has already.
6) Ideology is a powerful means of identification. It is, in fact, part of the premise of one's so-called view, which is one of the two main components that form the self. Historians have recorded that many religious defenders and revolutionaries put their ideas, faith, or principles even above their lives. Although in those cases the concept of self as an individual is usually surrendered to the concept of self as a group, the concept of self is, nevertheless, strengthened. But ideology can be changed, and a change in one's ideology does not mean a change in the individual. The concept of self remains. Thus it can be proven that ideology is still not the core of the concept of self.
7) Reputation is also a strong identification of self. Reputation represents one's deeds, which distinguish one from other persons. Reputation can be planted very deeply in one's mind. It is not surprising to learn that one of the presidents of the United States heard people call him "Mr. President" in his dreams. Ego is a term which represents a person's strong attachment to his identification by reputation. Pride and arrogance are usually the by-products. Just like ideology, however, fame can change overnight. The destruction of one's reputation does not, unfortunately, mean the destruction of the self. Thus this branch, one's reputation, can also be removed without affecting the concept of self.
With all branches cut off we now face the root of the tree of self, that is, the reality of the human body.
More than 2,000 years ago a famous Chinese philosopher, Lao-Tzu, remarked, "My biggest problem is that I have a body." Buddha also emphasized that the body is the source of all human suffering. So, we go to the core of the problem. Can the human body justifiably be called the self?
In a previous talk, "The Five Eyes," I have studied this important and fundamental question, by employing three analytical methods taught by Buddha. Each of these methods leads to the conclusion that the physical human body is a manifestation of emptiness (shunyata) and that the term 'self?is just a name arbitrarily chosen by human beings for the convenience of living in this world.
Since we can show that the physical human body is impermanent and is a momentarily changeable form seen by human eyes in a very narrow range of wave lengths, how is it justifiable to call it a self, an individual entity? Thus we can conclude that there is no self, only emptiness.
Once I introduced this doctrine of "no self, only emptiness" to some of my friends. One friend cried, "If I lose myself and become emptiness, how can I still be alive?" To this question I answered, "The Buddha reached the realization that there is no self, only emptiness, upon his enlightenment at the age of thirty-five, yet he lived a happy life until he was eighty years old." The destruction of the concept of self, and the understanding of emptiness, do not mean the end of life; on the contrary, these realizations mark the beginning of a happy life.
Rebirth without a self ? does no-self concept & Rebirth concept contradicted?
One of the key elements in Buddhism is the denial of a self (atman). The illusion of an existing self is generated by a mere heap of five aggregates (skandha), which suffer from constant becoming and have a functional cause-effect relationship. Human existence is characterized by impermanence (anitya), a constant process of transformation devoid of any abiding principle. But if there is no self, what reincarnates from one existence to another? Buddha stated that only karma passes from one life to the next, determining a new configuration of the five aggregates in a new existence. Therefore samsara works without the need of a self, relying only on a causal chain of determination.
However, such a view of rebirth raises potential problems. Some passages in Buddhist scriptures seem to indicate the continuity of personal existence, or at least of an impersonal self, in the rebirth process. For instance it is stated that the dead will be judged by Yama, the god of death, and afterwards sent into hell and tormented for their sins (Khuddaka-nikaya 10,1,59). There are also many verses in the Dhammapada that suggest personal post-mortem existence:
Some people are born again; evil-doers go to hell; righteous people go to heaven; those who are free from all worldly desires attain Nirvana (Dhammapada 9,126; see also 10,140; 22,306-311).
On the other hand, if there is no self, on what basis could the Buddha have said, "This is my last birth, I will have no further existence" (Majjhima-nikaya 3)? Whose last birth is it, if there is no self to be reborn? There are also the texts in Khuddaka-nikaya 10 and the Jataka tales, referring to the previous lives of Buddha and his friends, in which each one's identity is always known. Also, the very existence of the supernatural power of recollecting past lives attained in concentration (Digha Nikaya 12) suggests that a certain core of personal identity must exist and be reincarnated from one life to the next. The text in the Digha Nikaya says:
He recollects his manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two births, three births, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand, one hundred thousand, many aeons of cosmic contraction, many aeons of cosmic expansion, many aeons of cosmic contraction and expansion, [recollecting], 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose here.' Thus he recollects his manifold past lives in their modes and details.
One of the key elements in Buddhism is the denial of a self (atman). The illusion of an existing self is generated by a mere heap of five aggregates (skandha), which suffer from constant becoming and have a functional cause-effect relationship. Human existence is characterized by impermanence (anitya), a constant process of transformation devoid of any abiding principle. But if there is no self, what reincarnates from one existence to another? Buddha stated that only karma passes from one life to the next, determining a new configuration of the five aggregates in a new existence. Therefore samsara works without the need of a self, relying only on a causal chain of determination.
However, such a view of rebirth raises potential problems. Some passages in Buddhist scriptures seem to indicate the continuity of personal existence, or at least of an impersonal self, in the rebirth process. For instance it is stated that the dead will be judged by Yama, the god of death, and afterwards sent into hell and tormented for their sins (Khuddaka-nikaya 10,1,59). There are also many verses in the Dhammapada that suggest personal post-mortem existence:
Some people are born again; evil-doers go to hell; righteous people go to heaven; those who are free from all worldly desires attain Nirvana (Dhammapada 9,126; see also 10,140; 22,306-311).
On the other hand, if there is no self, on what basis could the Buddha have said, "This is my last birth, I will have no further existence" (Majjhima-nikaya 3)? Whose last birth is it, if there is no self to be reborn? There are also the texts in Khuddaka-nikaya 10 and the Jataka tales, referring to the previous lives of Buddha and his friends, in which each one's identity is always known. Also, the very existence of the supernatural power of recollecting past lives attained in concentration (Digha Nikaya 12) suggests that a certain core of personal identity must exist and be reincarnated from one life to the next. The text in the Digha Nikaya says:
He recollects his manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two births, three births, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand, one hundred thousand, many aeons of cosmic contraction, many aeons of cosmic expansion, many aeons of cosmic contraction and expansion, [recollecting], 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose here.' Thus he recollects his manifold past lives in their modes and details.