freefall68 wrote:The point is that the whole debate about the issue of renouncing because someone feels that he is missing out on fun is misplaced. As long as one feels that one is losing something in "renouncing", then it is no renunciation at all. Such renunciation has no value and it is better to renounce such renunciation. Sannyasa is a natural happening when worldly pursuits become irrelevant. It is not an act of will that one can choose or not choose.
nameless wrote:I think the significance of renunciation is not just the 'not doing' of something, but also the attitude of renouncing. In the sense that, when you are not renouncing, you are clinging to the idea that "if only I do/get/avoid this, I will be happier in the future".
Bevoir wrote:I think life in society throws up far more trials than life in a monastery (not that I've lived in a monastery - I'm guessing). I'm not saying though there isn't a point where you need to go into seclusion to go further but I can imagine that it could be better to "overcome" some of the obstacles life throws up before doing so.
I think that the Buddha taught avoidance as one of the strategies to use to deal with some of the negative things we encounter.......I'm wondering if someone can provide a reference which shows this.....
If evil, unskillful thoughts continue to arise in a bhikkhu who ponders on their disadvantageousness, he should in regard to them, endeavor to be without attention and reflection. Then the evil unskillful thoughts are eliminated; they disappear. By their elimination, the mind stands firm, settles down, becomes unified and concentrated, just within (his subject of meditation).
Goofaholix wrote:Much of our modern lifestyle is about busying ourselves so that we don't have to face what's below the surface. There is so much entertainment noise and activity that bombards us every day that for many people this becomes an avoidance strategy, a way of avoiding or staying one step ahead of a sense of dissatifaction, lack, or confusion.
Goofaholix wrote:It's true that living in the "real world" throws up trials that you wouldn't get in a monastery, it's also true living in a monastery throws up trials that you wouldn't get in real life.
Kim O'Hara wrote:I have stumbled on a (partial, anyway) solution for myself which may be useful to others: as I began on the path, I became less interested in many of the distractions of modern life - from fashions in clothing and food, to 'reality' TV, to most spectator sport, to most of the rest of what is on TV, etc - and each one that I stopped pursuing gave me a bit more time and mental space for the path. It set up a 'virtuous circle' as opposed to the 'vicious circle' of dissatisfaction - greed - distraction. It wasn't something I forced and (maybe because of that) it has been very slow and is still developing, but it has been completely stress-free at every step.
Bevoir wrote:chownah wrote:Bevoir,
Could it be that you have the opinion that there are a certain number of things which must be accomplished in life and for enlightenment to happen one must conquer these things?....and that these things present themselves as obstructions which we must overcome?
Hi Chownah, yes that's right. From previous things I learnt it was taught that our live is a reflection of our thinking. The path laid out that it is important to overcome those limitations so we can regain control of our minds rather than the mind being the boss of us. Once we're supposedly in a more dominant position it's easier then to use atma vichara and go all the way.
Bevoir wrote:I'm willing to accept that this might be a mistaken view. I'm just arguing the ideas though - debating them to see if there's a reason why a Buddhist would think it's not a valid view.
Bevoir wrote:I think inspite of what you say we have to make our own decisions and judgements in the end and more generally to whether to follow a Buddhist path at all or some other path.[/color]
Additionally, that in order to quiet the mind fully, the powerful thought driving desires need to be released. That these desires, (attachments and aversions) are inherently what make up our mental limitations that are present in our life. That if we resided in a monastery these limitations may not be obvious to us.
As you have said though, and as I noted in another thread, there seems to be a notion of ultimate self in Advaita that's perhaps not pressent in Buddhism.
chownah wrote:P.S. I don't known what "Advaita" is but any concept of "ultimate self" would probably be contrary to the Buddha's teaching of "have no doctrine of self".
Registered users: Alex123, Alobha, Bing [Bot], Coyote, dharmagoat, dxm_dxm, EmptyShadow, Google [Bot], Lazy_eye, Majjhima Patipada, mikenz66, Mindstar, palchi, perkele, piotr, purple planet, reflection, Zenainder