Govt won, and majority voted prefer suffering

Aug 19, 2008
11,653
167
0
Sri Lanka
:(
Suffering will continue.
I think they deserve suffering
because most of the voters choose to suffer.

Perhaps most of Sinhalese have to suffer
for the bad karma they collectively accumulate
by supporting a war.
Like one can increase PIN -Merits
by Anumodana
papa -bad karmas too can be accumulated,
because Chethana makes karma.
No matter what we share
intentionally
A good or bad karma
results will follow.
So
suffering will be the result.

Mano pubbangama dhhmma
Mind precedes all the natural laws.


One can ignore the truth.
But nature will collect its due sooner or later.
:)
 
Last edited:

jayanthah

Member
Oct 19, 2007
5,392
18
0
Melbourne
මේක මම මීට කලිනුත් දාපු එකක්..............ආයෙත් දානව ගන්න බැරිඋන අය වෙනුවෙන්.........

මේක හරි RARE සින්දු COLLECTION එකක්.....................වැඩි ජනප්රිය වුන සින්දු නෙමෙයි................හැබැයි ලස්සන සින්දු!!!!!

සින්දු ටික........................



හද්ද පරන සින්දු



සියල්ල යථා තත්වයට පත් කල බව කරුනාවෙන් සලකන්න!!!!

enjoy
 

NiyamaSinhalaya

Well-known member
  • Jul 17, 2008
    10,907
    13,398
    113
    පෘථිවිය
    Mental disorder

    Mental disorder

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    (Redirected from Mental illness)
    Jump to: navigation, search
    Mental disorder
    Classification and external resourcesMeSHD001523A mental disorder or mental illness is a psychological or behavioral pattern that occurs in an individual and is thought to cause distress or disability that is not expected as part of normal development or culture. The recognition and understanding of mental disorders has changed over time and across cultures. Definitions, assessments, and classifications of mental disorders can vary, but guideline criteria listed in the ICD, DSM and other manuals are widely accepted by mental health professionals. Categories of diagnoses in these schemes may include dissociative disorders, mood disorders, anxiety disorders, psychotic disorders, eating disorders, developmental disorders, personality disorders, and many other categories. In many cases there is no single accepted or consistent cause of mental disorders, although they are often explained in terms of a diathesis-stress model and biopsychosocial model. Mental disorders have been found to be common, with over a third of people in most countries reporting sufficient criteria at some point in their life. Services for mental disorders may be based in hospitals or in the community. Mental health professionals diagnose individuals using different methodologies, often relying on case history and interview. Psychotherapy and psychiatric medication are two major treatment options, as well as supportive interventions and self-help. Treatment may be involuntary where legislation allows. Several movements campaign for changes to services and attitudes.
     

    jayanthah

    Member
    Oct 19, 2007
    5,392
    18
    0
    Melbourne
    CUTE HEDGEHOG

    cutehedgehog005.jpg


    cutehedgehog005.jpg

    cutehedgehog001.jpg

    cutehedgehog002.jpg

    cutehedgehog003.jpg

    cutehedgehog004.jpg


    :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love:
     

    pagani

    Active member
  • Sep 16, 2006
    1,418
    4
    38
    NiyamaSinhalaya said:
    Mental disorder

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    (Redirected from Mental illness)
    Jump to: navigation, search
    Mental disorder
    Classification and external resourcesMeSHD001523A mental disorder or mental illness is a psychological or behavioral pattern that occurs in an individual and is thought to cause distress or disability that is not expected as part of normal development or culture. The recognition and understanding of mental disorders has changed over time and across cultures. Definitions, assessments, and classifications of mental disorders can vary, but guideline criteria listed in the ICD, DSM and other manuals are widely accepted by mental health professionals. Categories of diagnoses in these schemes may include dissociative disorders, mood disorders, anxiety disorders, psychotic disorders, eating disorders, developmental disorders, personality disorders, and many other categories. In many cases there is no single accepted or consistent cause of mental disorders, although they are often explained in terms of a diathesis-stress model and biopsychosocial model. Mental disorders have been found to be common, with over a third of people in most countries reporting sufficient criteria at some point in their life. Services for mental disorders may be based in hospitals or in the community. Mental health professionals diagnose individuals using different methodologies, often relying on case history and interview. Psychotherapy and psychiatric medication are two major treatment options, as well as supportive interventions and self-help. Treatment may be involuntary where legislation allows. Several movements campaign for changes to services and attitudes.


    Ela machan tread akata niyameta gelapenawa
     

    sri_lion

    Member
    Sep 14, 2006
    12,908
    102
    0
    Kuala Lumpur
    Suffering as explained by Buddhism!

    BUDDHISM
    Alone among the world's religions, Buddhism locates suffering at the heart of the world. Indeed according to Buddhism, existence is suffering (dukkha). The main question that Guatama (c.566 BC - c.480 BC), the traditional founder of Buddhism, sought to answer was: "Why do pain and suffering exist?"

    Buddhism teaches compassion toward all sentient beings. By contrast, Christianity and its secular offshoot, Western science, cling to a very un-Darwinian form of human exceptionalism. According to the Biblical Book of Genesis, God put animals on earth purely to serve Man, who exists to serve God.

    Early in the 21st century, there are an estimated 300 million Buddhists in the world. Central to Buddhist teaching are the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eight-fold Path.

    THE FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS:

    1. All is suffering (dukkha).
    2. Suffering is caused by desire/attachment.
    3. If one can eliminate desire/attachment, one can eliminate suffering.
    4. The Noble Eight-fold Path can eliminate desire. Extremes of excessive self-indulgence (hedonism) and excessive self-mortification should be avoided.

    THE NOBLE EIGHT-FOLD PATH:

    1. Right Views.
    The true understanding of the four noble truths.
    2. Right Intent.
    Right aspiration is the true desire to free oneself from attachment, ignorance, and hatefulness.
    [These first two are referred to as prajña, or wisdom.]
    3. Right Speech.
    Right speech involves abstaining from lying, gossiping, or hurtful talk.
    4. Right Conduct.
    Right action involves abstaining from hurtful behaviours, such as killing, stealing, and careless sex.
    5. Right livelihood.
    Right livelihood means making your living in such a way as to avoid dishonesty and hurting others, including animals.
    [The above three are referred to as shila, or morality.]
    6. Right Effort.
    Right effort is a matter of exerting oneself in regulating the content of one's mind: bad qualities should be abandoned and prevented from arising again; good qualities should be enacted and nurtured.
    7. Right Mindfulness.
    Right mindfulness is the focusing of one's attention on one's body, feelings, thoughts, and consciousness in such a way as to overcome craving, hatred, and ignorance.
    8. Right Concentration.
    Right concentration is meditating in such a way as to progressively realize a true understanding of imperfection, impermanence, and non-separateness.

    The Theravada tradition of Buddhism teaches that everyone must individually seek salvation through their own efforts. To attain nirvana, one must relinquish earthly desires and live a monastic life. The Mahayana tradition teaches that salvation comes through the grace of bodhisattvas. Bodhisattvas defer their own enlightenment to help others, thus enabling many more living beings to attain salvation.

    Buddhist universalism is best represented by the Mahayana tradition, which embraces the well-being of all sentient life.

    The meaning of the term nirvana, literally "the blowing out" of existence, is not entirely clear. Nirvana is not a place like heaven, but rather an eternal state of being. It is the state in which the law of karma and the rebirth cycle come to an end - though Buddhist conceptions of personal (non-)identity make these notions problematic. Nirvana is the end of suffering; a state where there are no desires, and individual consciousness comes to an end. Attaining nirvana is to relinquish clinging, hatred, and ignorance. Its achievement entails full acceptance of imperfection, impermanence, and interconnectedness. Sometimes "nirvana" is used to refer either to Buddhist heaven or complete nothingness, but most Buddhists would not understand the term in this way.

    * * *

    UTILITARIANISM

    Ethical utilitarians share the Buddhist focus on suffering. But only "negative" utilitarians identify the minimisation of suffering as the sole ethical goal of life. "Positive" utilitarians regard the maximisation of happiness as ethically valuable no less than the minimisation of pain.

    One radical form of utilitarianism is abolitionism. Abolitionists believe that biotechnology should be used to abolish suffering altogether - though not all abolitionists are utilitarians. Given the accelerating revolution in biotechnology, the abolitionist project is the logical implication of a utilitarian ethic. Even so, the creation of a truly cruelty-free world entails a disconcertingly ambitious technological solution. To achieve a world without suffering, it will be necessary to rewrite the vertebrate genome and redesign the global ecosystem. Any cross-species enterprise of this magnitude is beyond our current technological capabilities. Yet some kind of paradise-engineering is foreseeable in the coming era of quantum supercomputing allied to nanorobotics. Critically, too, genetically-engineered vatfood can potentially deliver global veganism more effectively than appeals to compassion alone.

    These distinctions might seem academic. Most people are not avowedly utilitarians in their code of ethical values. Moreover the term "utilitarian" itself is pedestrian. It conveys no sense of moral urgency. But a rough-and-ready utilitarian ethic is widespread in contemporary secular society. Even professed anti-utilitarians normally rely on (indirectly) utilitarian arguments by appealing to the bad consequences that would allegedly follow for our well-being from the [mis-]application of a utilitarian ethic.

    * * *

    BUDDHISM VERSUS UTILITARIANISM
    Setting aside differences of metaphysic, how closely do the core values of utilitarians/abolitionists and Buddhists coincide? If suffering and its abolition are central to life on Earth, can differences between the two traditions be resolved to questions of means, not ends?

    Perhaps. But these differences of means are substantial. Most Buddhists would challenge the idea that technology offers an escape-route from the pain of earthly existence. Despite the cumulative success stories of scientific medicine, it would seem the advances of modern technology haven't left human beings any happier on average than our ancestors on the African savannah. Indeed the incidence of clinical depression, anxiety disorders, suicide, drug abuse, marital breakdown and other "objective" indices of distress is rising in Western consumer capitalist society as a whole. The track-record of technological science to date is not encouraging. Opponents of scientific utopianism envisage that its application will yield - at best - some type of "Brave New World".

    Abolitionists respond that only enlightened biotechnology can ever deliver the world from suffering. Unless the biological substrates of unpleasantness are eradicated, then suffering is genetically preordained by the biochemistry of the human brain. All Darwinian humans periodically go through periods of distress ["dukkha"]. Its intensity and duration varies. But its spectre is never absent. Endowing their vehicles with a capacity to suffer enhanced the inclusive fitness of our genes in the ancestral environment. A heritable capacity to undergo all sorts of nasty states, conditionally activated, has been genetically adaptive. So even devout Buddhists undergo pain, sorrow and malaise in the course of their lives. A Buddhist lifestyle and meditational disciplines may offer palliative relief. Yet under the yoke of a Darwinian genome, no pursuit of a "Noble Eight-fold Path" can re-set our emotional thermostats, redesign our gene expression profiles, and dismantle the "hedonic treadmill" of Darwinian life. In evolutionary history, primate mothers who weren't anxiety-ridden, "attached" to their children, and desirous of their success left less copies of their genes than their malaise-ridden, un-Buddhist-like counterparts.

    Moreover, with a traditional neural architecture, it's notable that desire-driven "hyper-dopaminergic" people, who have the greatest range and intensity of appetites, tend to be the least unhappy - though their lives can still be blighted by disappointment and loss. By contrast, the extinction of desire experienced by many contemporary humans is more akin to apathy and withdrawal than illumination - not enlightenment and consequent nirvana but instead a condition of melancholia or anhedonia: emptiness in the sense of an absence of meaning. This isn't the kind of extinction of desire Buddhists have in mind. Yet it's unclear if Buddhism offers a solution to, say, anhedonia - the incapacity to feel happiness or anticipate reward - characteristic of many depressives.

    Looking to the future, the new technologies of post-genomic healthcare promise effectively unlimited joy, meaning and motivation - or serenity. If we so desire, a rich hyper-spirituality can be awakened, too, even in the otherwise spiritually barren. Intelligence can be pharmacologically and genetically amplified, as can lifespans, perhaps indefinitely; and also, more counter-intuitively, compassion. In future, genetic engineering will allow control over archaic emotions and eventually the creation of whole new categories of experience in state-spaces of consciousness hitherto unknown.

    More prosaically, but more importantly from an ethical point of view, the reproductive revolution of "designer babies" will enable us to choose how much - or how little - suffering we bring into the world when we decide on the genetic-make-up of our children. Gradients of genetically pre-programmed well-being can be the destiny of our offspring from conception, depending on which dial-settings we favour. If we so choose, we can abolish the soul-polluting nastiness of Darwinian life altogether. Dukkha can be consigned to historical oblivion; and replaced by a post-Darwinian era of mental superhealth.

    The era of mature genomic medicine is still decades away, perhaps longer. Buddhists are surely right to stress how desire and attachment as experienced today often lead to heartbreak. But when heartbreak becomes genetically impossible, it will be safe to follow one's heart's desire without limit. More generally, an absence of desire is a recipe for personal and social stagnation, whereas an abundance of desires is a precondition of intellectual dynamism and social progress.

    Control over our emotions nonetheless strikes many bioconservatives as a frightening prospect, evoking images of enslavement rather than empowerment. So it's worth recalling how some early social commentators feared that the discovery of anaesthesia gave doctors too much power over their patient. The use of anaesthetics for painless surgery allegedly robbed the individual of his or her autonomy and the capacity to act as a rational agent, reducing the patient "to a corpse". In a contemporary context, investing a quasi-priestly caste of physicians with the sole lawful power to grant - or withhold - pleasure-giving, pain-relieving prescription drugs undoubtedly does magnify the scope for abuses of authority.

    Whatever the risks of abuse, our technologies of pain-eradication are too valuable to renounce, even if this option were sociologically realistic. Right now, of course, the vision of life without suffering still strikes many non-Buddhists (and even Buddhists) as fanciful. Life-long happiness seems no more likely than the prospect of effective "pain killers" or pain-free surgery struck our early Victorian forebears. For the most part, we are possessed by the deep unspoken feeling that "what has always been was always meant to be". Status quo bias has deep cultural roots. Even classical utilitarians may find it difficult to believe that suffering could be eradicated in the foreseeable future in the same way as, say, smallpox. Yet it is hard to underestimate the ramifications of rewriting the vertebrate genome as the millennium unfolds. The abolition of the biological substrates of suffering promises to mark a major discontinuity in the development of life on Earth. Our genetically enriched descendants may regard existence without "dukkha" - the abolition of suffering - as the ethical foundation of any civilised society.
     

    blood_brotha

    Member
    Sep 25, 2006
    6,308
    47
    0
    Nuuk, Greenland
    Internal combustion engine

    he internal combustion engine is an engine in which the combustion of a fuel occurs with an oxidiser (usually air) in a combustion chamber. In an internal combustion engine the expansion of the high temperature and pressure gases, that are produced by the combustion, directly apply force to a movable component of the engine, such as the pistons or turbine blades and by moving it over a distance, generate useful mechanical energy.[1][2][3][4]

    The term internal combustion engine usually refers to an engine in which combustion is intermittent, such as the more familiar four-stroke and two-stroke piston engines, along with variants, such as the Wankel rotary engine. A second class of internal combustion engines use continuous combustion: gas turbines, jet engines and most rocket engines, each of which are internal combustion engines on the same principle as previously described.[1][2][3][4]

    The internal combustion engine (or ICE) is quite different from external combustion engines, such as steam or Stirling engines, in which the energy is delivered to a working fluid not consisting of, mixed with or contaminated by combustion products. Working fluids can be air, hot water, pressurised water or even liquid sodium, heated in some kind of boiler by fossil fuel, wood-burning, nuclear, solar etc.

    A large number of different designs for ICEs have been developed and built, with a variety of different strengths and weaknesses. While there have been and still are many stationary applications, the real strength of internal combustion engines is in mobile applications and they completely dominate as a power supply for cars, aircraft, and boats, from the smallest to the biggest. Only for hand-held power tools do they share part of the market with battery powered devices. Powered by an energy-dense fuel (nearly always liquid, derived from fossil fuels) the ICE delivers an excellent power-to-weight ratio with very few safety or other disadvantages.
     

    nj542

    Member
    Jul 25, 2007
    3,747
    28
    0
    sri_lion said:
    Suffering as explained by Buddhism!

    "Why do pain and suffering exist?"

    THE FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS:

    1. All is suffering (dukkha).
    2. Suffering is caused by desire/attachment.
    3. If one can eliminate desire/attachment, one can eliminate suffering.
    4. The Noble Eight-fold Path can eliminate desire. Extremes of excessive self-indulgence (hedonism) and excessive self-mortification should be avoided.

    nice article thr bro...thanks....:cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool:


    sri_lion said:
    2. Suffering is caused by desire/attachment.

    Mr.Athula need to get over with desire and de-attach him self from the RANIL...
    so he may find peace with him self...........

    :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
     
    Aug 19, 2008
    11,653
    167
    0
    Sri Lanka
    sri_lion said:
    Suffering as explained by Buddhism!



    THE FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS:

    1. All is suffering (dukkha).
    2. Suffering is caused by desire/attachment.
    3. If one can eliminate desire/attachment, one can eliminate suffering.
    4. The Noble Eight-fold Path can eliminate desire. Extremes of excessive self-indulgence (hedonism) and excessive self-mortification should be avoided.

    THE NOBLE EIGHT-FOLD PATH:

    1. Right Views.
    The true understanding of the four noble truths.
    2. Right Intent.
    Right aspiration is the true desire to free oneself from attachment, ignorance, and hatefulness.
    [These first two are referred to as prajña, or wisdom.]
    3. Right Speech.
    Right speech involves abstaining from lying, gossiping, or hurtful talk.
    4. Right Conduct.
    Right action involves abstaining from hurtful behaviours, such as killing, stealing, and careless sex.
    5. Right livelihood.
    Right livelihood means making your living in such a way as to avoid dishonesty and hurting others, including animals.
    [The above three are referred to as shila, or morality.]
    6. Right Effort.
    Right effort is a matter of exerting oneself in regulating the content of one's mind: bad qualities should be abandoned and prevented from arising again; good qualities should be enacted and nurtured.
    7. Right Mindfulness.
    Right mindfulness is the focusing of one's attention on one's body, feelings, thoughts, and consciousness in such a way as to overcome craving, hatred, and ignorance.
    8. Right Concentration.
    Right concentration is meditating in such a way as to progressively realize a true understanding of imperfection, impermanence, and non-separateness.
    .

    :no:

    Suffring is based on Karma
    done with attachment.
    Attachment to race and country
    leads to kill who seem against.
    Attachment to Money and power
    leads to steal.
    :frown:
    People who support the doers
    share the Karma
    and pay along with the doers.
    :growl:

     

    sri_lion

    Member
    Sep 14, 2006
    12,908
    102
    0
    Kuala Lumpur
    AtulaSiriwardane said:
    :no:

    Suffring is based on Karma
    done with attachment.
    Attachment to race and country
    leads to kill who seem against.
    Attachment to Money and power
    leads to steal.
    :frown:
    People who support the doers
    share the Karma
    and pay along with the doers.
    :growl:


    Karma... hmmm... good topic!!! :)

    Source: http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/karma.htm

    What is Karma?

    The Pali term Karma literally means action or doing. Any kind of intentional action whether mental, verbal, or physical, is regarded as Karma. It covers all that is included in the phrase "thought, word and deed". Generally speaking, all good and bad action constitutes Karma. In its ultimate sense Karma means all moral and immoral volition. Involuntary, unintentional or unconscious actions, though technically deeds, do not constitute Karma, because volition, the most important factor in determining Karma, is absent.

    The Buddha says:

    "I declare, O Bhikkhus, that volition is Karma. Having willed one acts by body, speech, and thought." (Anguttara Nikaya)

    Every volitional action of individuals, save those of Buddhas and Arahants, is called Karma. The exception made in their case is because they are delivered from both good and evil; they have eradicated ignorance and craving, the roots of Karma.

    "Destroyed are their germinal seeds (Khina bija); selfish desires no longer grow," states the Ratana Sutta of Sutta nipata.

    This does not mean that the Buddha and Arahantas are passive. They are tirelessly active in working for the real well being and happiness of all. Their deeds ordinarily accepted as good or moral, lack creative power as regards themselves. Understanding things as they truly are, they have finally shattered their cosmic fetters – the chain of cause and effect.

    Karma does not necessarily mean past actions. It embraces both past and present deeds. Hence in one sense, we are the result of what we were; we will be the result of what we are. In another sense, it should be added, we are not totally the result of what we were; we will not absolutely be the result of what we are. The present is no doubt the offspring of the past and is the present of the future, but the present is not always a true index of either the past or the future; so complex is the working of Karma.

    It is this doctrine of Karma that the mother teaches her child when she says "Be good and you will be happy and we will love you; but if you are bad, you will be unhappy and we will not love you." In short, Karma is the law of cause and effect in the ethical realm.

    Karma and Vipaka

    Karma is action, and Vipaka, fruit or result, is its reaction.

    Just as every object is accompanied by a shadow, even so every volitional activity is inevitably accompanied by its due effect. Karma is like potential seed: Vipaka could be likened to the fruit arising from the tree – the effect or result. Anisamsa and Adinaya are the leaves, flowers and so forth that correspond to external differences such as health, sickness and poverty – these are inevitable consequences, which happen at the same time. Strictly speaking, both Karma and Vipaka pertain to the mind.

    As Karma may be good or bad, so may Vipaka, - the fruit – is good or bad. As Karma is mental so Vipaka is mental (of the mind). It is experienced as happiness, bliss, unhappiness or misery, according to the nature of the Karma seed. Anisamsa are the concomitant advantages – material things such as prosperity, health and longevity. When Vipaka’s concomitant material things are disadvantageous, they are known as Adinaya, full of wretchedness, and appear as poverty, ugliness, disease, short life-span and so forth.

    As we sow, we reap somewhere and sometime, in his life or in a future birth. What we reap today is what we have sown either in the present or in the past.

    The Samyutta Nikaya states:

    "According to the seed that’s sown,
    So is the fruit you reap there from,
    Doer of good will gather good,
    Doer of evil, evil reaps,
    Down is the seed and thou shalt taste
    The fruit thereof."

    Karma is a law in itself, which operates in its own field without the intervention of any external, independent ruling agency.

    Happiness and misery, which are the common lot of humanity, are the inevitable effects of causes. From a Buddhist point of view, they are not rewards and punishments, assigned by a supernatural, omniscient ruling power to a soul that has done good or evil. Theists, who attempt to explain everything in this and temporal life and in the eternal future life, ignoring a past, believe in a ‘postmortem’ justice, and may regard present happiness and misery as blessings and curses conferred on His creation by an omniscient and omnipotent Divine Ruler who sits in heaven above controlling the destinies of the human race. Buddhism, which emphatically denies such an Almighty, All merciful God-Creator and an arbitrarily created immortal soul, believes in natural law and justice which cannot be suspended by either an Almighty God or an All-compassionate Buddha. According to this natural law, acts bear their own rewards and punishments to the individual doer whether human justice finds out or not.

    There are some who criticise thus: "So, you Buddhists, too, administer capitalistic opium to the people, saying: "You are born poor in this life on account of your past evil karma. He is born rich on account of his good Karma. So, be satisfied with your humble lot; but do good to be rich in your next life. You are being oppressed now because of your past evil Karma. There is your destiny. Be humble and bear your sufferings patiently. Do good now. You can be certain of a better and happier life after death."

    The Buddhist doctrine of Karma does not expound such ridiculous fatalistic views. Nor does it vindicate a postmortem justice. The All-Merciful Buddha, who had no ulterior selfish motives, did not teach this law of Karma to protect the rich and comfort the poor by promising illusory happiness in an after-life.

    While we are born to a state created by ourselves, yet by our own self-directed efforts there is every possibility for us to create new, favourable environments even here and now. Not only individually, but also, collectively, we are at liberty to create fresh Karma that leads either towards our progress or downfall in this very life.

    According to the Buddhist doctrine of Karma, one is not always compelled by an ‘iron necessity’, for Karma is neither fate, nor predestination imposed upon us by some mysterious unknown power to which we must helplessly submit ourselves. It is one’s own doing reacting on oneself, and so one has the possibility to divert the course of one’s Karma to some extent. How far one diverts it depends on oneself.

    Is one bound to reap all that one has sown in just proportion?

    The Buddha provides an answer:

    "If anyone says that a man or woman must reap in this life according to his present deeds, in that case there is no religious life, nor is an opportunity afforded for the entire extinction of sorrow. But if anyone says that what a man or woman reaps in this and future lives accords with his or her deeds present and past, in that case there is a religious life, and an opportunity is afforded for the entire extinction of a sorrow." (Anguttara Nikaya)

    Although it is stated in the Dhammapada that "not in the sky, nor in mid-ocean, or entering a mountain cave is found that place on earth where one may escape from (the consequences of) an evil deed", yet one is not bound to pay all the past arrears of one’s Karma. If such were the case emancipation would be impossibility. Eternal recurrence would be the unfortunate result.

    What is the cause of Karma?

    Ignorance (avijja), or not knowing things as they truly are, is the chief cause of Karma. Dependent on ignorance arise activities (avijja paccaya samkhara) states the Buddha in the Paticca Samuppada (Dependent Origination).

    Associated with ignorance is the ally craving (tanha), the other root of Karma. Evil actions are conditioned by these two causes. All good deeds of a worldling (putthujana), though associated with the three wholesome roots of generosity (alobha), goodwill (adosa) and knowledge (amoha), are nevertheless regarded as Karma because the two roots of ignorance and craving are dormant in him. The moral types of Supramundane Path Consciousness (magga citta) are not regarded as Karma because they tend to eradicate the two root causes.

    Who is the doer of Karma?
    Who reaps the fruit of Karma?
    Does Karma mould a soul?

    In answering these subtle questions, the Venerable Buddhaghosa writes in the Visuddhi Magga:

    "No doer is there who does the deed;
    Nor is there one who feels the fruit;
    Constituent parts alone roll on;
    This indeed! Is right discernment."

    For instance, the table we see is apparent reality. In an ultimate sense the so-called table consists of forces and qualities.

    For ordinary purposes a scientist would use the term water, but in the laboratory he would say H 2 0.

    In this same way, for conventional purposes, such terms as man, woman, being, self, and so forth are used. The so-called fleeting forms consist of psychophysical phenomena, which are constantly changing not remaining the same for two consecutive moments.

    Buddhists, therefore, do not believe in an unchanging entity, in an actor apart from action, in a perceiver apart from perception, in a conscious subject behind consciousness.

    Who then, is the doer of Karma? Who experiences the effect?

    Volition, or Will (tetana), is itself the doer, Feeling (vedana) is itself the reaper of the fruits of actions. Apart from these pure mental states (suddhadhamma) there is no-one to sow and no-one to reap.
     

    coolgayathra

    Member
    Jan 18, 2009
    35,418
    61
    0
    ....Sri lanka..Land of brave lions...
    .Brooks.TELESYNC.XviD-ViSUAL
    Notes:
    A fairly nice rip by ViSUAL, this movie surely is intriguing! I will definitely have to watch it.
    Plot Summary:
    Mr. Brooks (Kevin Costner) is a relatively normal man with a wife (Marg Helgenberger) and a daughter (Danielle Panabaker). Buried beneath the ordinary façade, however, is an emotionally tortured soul of a person harboring a dark secret. Mr. Brooks’ devious alter ego Marshall (William Hurt) loves murder and mayhem and pushes Mr. Brooks to commit heinous deeds. As much as he is determined to remain disciplined and to fight the sinister urges, Mr. Brooks cannot fully resist Marshall’s influence and lives a second life as a serial killer. His rampage catches the attention of detective Attwood (Demi Moore), a tough female cop devoted to her craft and to catching the culprit. His intelligence, however, gains her respect and eventually leads to a strange symbiotic relationship between the two.
    iMDB:
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780571/
    Download:
    Rapidshare Links:


    http://rapidshare.com/files/38892057/vis-brooks.part1.rar
    http://rapidshare.com/files/38892018/vis-brooks.part2.rar
    http://rapidshare.com/files/38892027/vis-brooks.part3.rar
    http://rapidshare.com/files/38892031/vis-brooks.part4.rar
    http://rapidshare.com/files/38892038/vis-brooks.part5
     

    tharinda07

    Member
    Mar 1, 2007
    5,784
    44
    0
    sri_lion said:
    Suffering as explained by Buddhism!

    BUDDHISM
    Alone among the world's religions, Buddhism locates suffering at the heart of the world. Indeed according to Buddhism, existence is suffering (dukkha). The main question that Guatama (c.566 BC - c.480 BC), the traditional founder of Buddhism, sought to answer was: "Why do pain and suffering exist?"

    Buddhism teaches compassion toward all sentient beings. By contrast, Christianity and its secular offshoot, Western science, cling to a very un-Darwinian form of human exceptionalism. According to the Biblical Book of Genesis, God put animals on earth purely to serve Man, who exists to serve God.

    Early in the 21st century, there are an estimated 300 million Buddhists in the world. Central to Buddhist teaching are the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eight-fold Path.

    THE FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS:

    1. All is suffering (dukkha).
    2. Suffering is caused by desire/attachment.
    3. If one can eliminate desire/attachment, one can eliminate suffering.
    4. The Noble Eight-fold Path can eliminate desire. Extremes of excessive self-indulgence (hedonism) and excessive self-mortification should be avoided.

    THE NOBLE EIGHT-FOLD PATH:

    1. Right Views.
    The true understanding of the four noble truths.
    2. Right Intent.
    Right aspiration is the true desire to free oneself from attachment, ignorance, and hatefulness.
    [These first two are referred to as prajña, or wisdom.]
    3. Right Speech.
    Right speech involves abstaining from lying, gossiping, or hurtful talk.
    4. Right Conduct.
    Right action involves abstaining from hurtful behaviours, such as killing, stealing, and careless sex.
    5. Right livelihood.
    Right livelihood means making your living in such a way as to avoid dishonesty and hurting others, including animals.
    [The above three are referred to as shila, or morality.]
    6. Right Effort.
    Right effort is a matter of exerting oneself in regulating the content of one's mind: bad qualities should be abandoned and prevented from arising again; good qualities should be enacted and nurtured.
    7. Right Mindfulness.
    Right mindfulness is the focusing of one's attention on one's body, feelings, thoughts, and consciousness in such a way as to overcome craving, hatred, and ignorance.
    8. Right Concentration.
    Right concentration is meditating in such a way as to progressively realize a true understanding of imperfection, impermanence, and non-separateness.

    The Theravada tradition of Buddhism teaches that everyone must individually seek salvation through their own efforts. To attain nirvana, one must relinquish earthly desires and live a monastic life. The Mahayana tradition teaches that salvation comes through the grace of bodhisattvas. Bodhisattvas defer their own enlightenment to help others, thus enabling many more living beings to attain salvation.

    Buddhist universalism is best represented by the Mahayana tradition, which embraces the well-being of all sentient life.

    The meaning of the term nirvana, literally "the blowing out" of existence, is not entirely clear. Nirvana is not a place like heaven, but rather an eternal state of being. It is the state in which the law of karma and the rebirth cycle come to an end - though Buddhist conceptions of personal (non-)identity make these notions problematic. Nirvana is the end of suffering; a state where there are no desires, and individual consciousness comes to an end. Attaining nirvana is to relinquish clinging, hatred, and ignorance. Its achievement entails full acceptance of imperfection, impermanence, and interconnectedness. Sometimes "nirvana" is used to refer either to Buddhist heaven or complete nothingness, but most Buddhists would not understand the term in this way.

    * * *

    UTILITARIANISM

    Ethical utilitarians share the Buddhist focus on suffering. But only "negative" utilitarians identify the minimisation of suffering as the sole ethical goal of life. "Positive" utilitarians regard the maximisation of happiness as ethically valuable no less than the minimisation of pain.

    One radical form of utilitarianism is abolitionism. Abolitionists believe that biotechnology should be used to abolish suffering altogether - though not all abolitionists are utilitarians. Given the accelerating revolution in biotechnology, the abolitionist project is the logical implication of a utilitarian ethic. Even so, the creation of a truly cruelty-free world entails a disconcertingly ambitious technological solution. To achieve a world without suffering, it will be necessary to rewrite the vertebrate genome and redesign the global ecosystem. Any cross-species enterprise of this magnitude is beyond our current technological capabilities. Yet some kind of paradise-engineering is foreseeable in the coming era of quantum supercomputing allied to nanorobotics. Critically, too, genetically-engineered vatfood can potentially deliver global veganism more effectively than appeals to compassion alone.

    These distinctions might seem academic. Most people are not avowedly utilitarians in their code of ethical values. Moreover the term "utilitarian" itself is pedestrian. It conveys no sense of moral urgency. But a rough-and-ready utilitarian ethic is widespread in contemporary secular society. Even professed anti-utilitarians normally rely on (indirectly) utilitarian arguments by appealing to the bad consequences that would allegedly follow for our well-being from the [mis-]application of a utilitarian ethic.

    * * *

    BUDDHISM VERSUS UTILITARIANISM
    Setting aside differences of metaphysic, how closely do the core values of utilitarians/abolitionists and Buddhists coincide? If suffering and its abolition are central to life on Earth, can differences between the two traditions be resolved to questions of means, not ends?

    Perhaps. But these differences of means are substantial. Most Buddhists would challenge the idea that technology offers an escape-route from the pain of earthly existence. Despite the cumulative success stories of scientific medicine, it would seem the advances of modern technology haven't left human beings any happier on average than our ancestors on the African savannah. Indeed the incidence of clinical depression, anxiety disorders, suicide, drug abuse, marital breakdown and other "objective" indices of distress is rising in Western consumer capitalist society as a whole. The track-record of technological science to date is not encouraging. Opponents of scientific utopianism envisage that its application will yield - at best - some type of "Brave New World".

    Abolitionists respond that only enlightened biotechnology can ever deliver the world from suffering. Unless the biological substrates of unpleasantness are eradicated, then suffering is genetically preordained by the biochemistry of the human brain. All Darwinian humans periodically go through periods of distress ["dukkha"]. Its intensity and duration varies. But its spectre is never absent. Endowing their vehicles with a capacity to suffer enhanced the inclusive fitness of our genes in the ancestral environment. A heritable capacity to undergo all sorts of nasty states, conditionally activated, has been genetically adaptive. So even devout Buddhists undergo pain, sorrow and malaise in the course of their lives. A Buddhist lifestyle and meditational disciplines may offer palliative relief. Yet under the yoke of a Darwinian genome, no pursuit of a "Noble Eight-fold Path" can re-set our emotional thermostats, redesign our gene expression profiles, and dismantle the "hedonic treadmill" of Darwinian life. In evolutionary history, primate mothers who weren't anxiety-ridden, "attached" to their children, and desirous of their success left less copies of their genes than their malaise-ridden, un-Buddhist-like counterparts.

    Moreover, with a traditional neural architecture, it's notable that desire-driven "hyper-dopaminergic" people, who have the greatest range and intensity of appetites, tend to be the least unhappy - though their lives can still be blighted by disappointment and loss. By contrast, the extinction of desire experienced by many contemporary humans is more akin to apathy and withdrawal than illumination - not enlightenment and consequent nirvana but instead a condition of melancholia or anhedonia: emptiness in the sense of an absence of meaning. This isn't the kind of extinction of desire Buddhists have in mind. Yet it's unclear if Buddhism offers a solution to, say, anhedonia - the incapacity to feel happiness or anticipate reward - characteristic of many depressives.

    Looking to the future, the new technologies of post-genomic healthcare promise effectively unlimited joy, meaning and motivation - or serenity. If we so desire, a rich hyper-spirituality can be awakened, too, even in the otherwise spiritually barren. Intelligence can be pharmacologically and genetically amplified, as can lifespans, perhaps indefinitely; and also, more counter-intuitively, compassion. In future, genetic engineering will allow control over archaic emotions and eventually the creation of whole new categories of experience in state-spaces of consciousness hitherto unknown.

    More prosaically, but more importantly from an ethical point of view, the reproductive revolution of "designer babies" will enable us to choose how much - or how little - suffering we bring into the world when we decide on the genetic-make-up of our children. Gradients of genetically pre-programmed well-being can be the destiny of our offspring from conception, depending on which dial-settings we favour. If we so choose, we can abolish the soul-polluting nastiness of Darwinian life altogether. Dukkha can be consigned to historical oblivion; and replaced by a post-Darwinian era of mental superhealth.

    The era of mature genomic medicine is still decades away, perhaps longer. Buddhists are surely right to stress how desire and attachment as experienced today often lead to heartbreak. But when heartbreak becomes genetically impossible, it will be safe to follow one's heart's desire without limit. More generally, an absence of desire is a recipe for personal and social stagnation, whereas an abundance of desires is a precondition of intellectual dynamism and social progress.

    Control over our emotions nonetheless strikes many bioconservatives as a frightening prospect, evoking images of enslavement rather than empowerment. So it's worth recalling how some early social commentators feared that the discovery of anaesthesia gave doctors too much power over their patient. The use of anaesthetics for painless surgery allegedly robbed the individual of his or her autonomy and the capacity to act as a rational agent, reducing the patient "to a corpse". In a contemporary context, investing a quasi-priestly caste of physicians with the sole lawful power to grant - or withhold - pleasure-giving, pain-relieving prescription drugs undoubtedly does magnify the scope for abuses of authority.

    Whatever the risks of abuse, our technologies of pain-eradication are too valuable to renounce, even if this option were sociologically realistic. Right now, of course, the vision of life without suffering still strikes many non-Buddhists (and even Buddhists) as fanciful. Life-long happiness seems no more likely than the prospect of effective "pain killers" or pain-free surgery struck our early Victorian forebears. For the most part, we are possessed by the deep unspoken feeling that "what has always been was always meant to be". Status quo bias has deep cultural roots. Even classical utilitarians may find it difficult to believe that suffering could be eradicated in the foreseeable future in the same way as, say, smallpox. Yet it is hard to underestimate the ramifications of rewriting the vertebrate genome as the millennium unfolds. The abolition of the biological substrates of suffering promises to mark a major discontinuity in the development of life on Earth. Our genetically enriched descendants may regard existence without "dukkha" - the abolition of suffering - as the ethical foundation of any civilised society.
    tnks :) passe kiyawanna one :rofl:
     

    saraprobe

    Well-known member
  • Dec 27, 2006
    2,360
    217
    63
    :angry: :angry:
    AtulaSiriwardane said:
    :(
    Suffering will continue.
    I think they deserve suffering
    because most of the voters choose to suffer.

    Perhaps most of Sinhalese have to suffer
    for the bad karma they collectively accumulate
    by supporting a war.
    Like one can increase PIN -Merits
    by Anumodana
    papa -bad karmas too can be accumulated,
    because Chethana makes karma.
    No matter what we share
    intentionally
    A good or bad karma
    results will follow.
    So
    suffering will be the result.

    Mano pubbangama dhhmma
    Mind precedes all the natural laws.


    One can ignore the truth.
    But nature will collect its due sooner or later.
    :)

    Get F**ked idiot, Suck Ponils C**K:angry: :angry: :angry: Sinhala Kotiyo, munta gal gahala marannaone:lol: