taking refuge????

[genkaku]

The word "refuge" is defined by an Internet dictionary this way:

▸ noun: a shelter from danger or hardship
▸ noun: something or someone turned to for assistance or security ("Took refuge in lying")
▸ noun: a safe place
▸ noun: act of turning to for assistance

If I understand these descriptions accurately, a "refuge" is something anyone might rely on in times of uncertainty. Since I think anyone might feel uncertainty, it seems reasonable and human to seek out more reliable circumstances or surroundings.

Buddhism teaches that all things are impermanent. Most of us, given a little reflection, don't need Buddhism to tell us that, but Buddhism is a good reminder.

Buddhism also teaches people who are uncertain to take refuge in Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. Sometimes people can be pretty insistent about it. Given the other things they are insistent about, insistence on Buddha, Dharma and Sangha is probably not a bad idea.

But I would be interested in how anyone balanced the refuge they might have sought -- in Buddha, Dharma and Sangha -- with the fact that everything changes and that if everything changes, there can be no enduring refuge.

How do you see it?

[bodom]

They go to many a refuge,
to mountains, forests,
parks, trees, and shrines:
people threatened with danger.
That's not the secure refuge,
that's not the highest refuge,
that's not the refuge,
having gone to which,
you gain release
from all suffering and stress.

But when, having gone for refuge
to the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha,
you see with right discernment
the four Noble Truths —
stress,
the cause of stress,
the transcending of stress,
and the Noble Eightfold Path,
the way to the stilling of stress:
That's the secure refuge,
that, the highest refuge,
that is the refuge,
having gone to which,
you gain release
from all suffering and stress.
— Dhammapada, 188-192

Heres an article you might be interested in reading.

Refuge: An Introduction to the Buddha, Dhamma, & Sangha by Thanissaro Bhikkhu

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... e.html#goi

[Cittasanto]

The only Refuge we truly have is ourselves!
the Buddha is remembered by seeking the truth
the dhamma is remembered by seeking the truth
and the sangha is remembered by seeking the truth

[piotr]

Hi,

But I would be interested in how anyone balanced the refuge they might have sought -- in Buddha, Dharma and Sangha -- with the fact that everything changes and that if everything changes, there can be no enduring refuge.

How do you see it?

As papañca and misunderstanding. There are some patterns in life that do not change. Dependent co-arising is like that — it's timeless in the sense that whether it is 21st century A.D. or 5th century B.C. the rule that "ignorance conditions fabrications", etc. stands the same. So one should be careful with accepting the statement that "everything changes" at its face value.

[genkaku]

Dear piotr -- Thanks. From your words, I deduce that some things change and some do not; some things are impermanent and some things are not.

Am I hearing correctly?

[Dhammanando]

Hi Genkaku,

Thanks. From your words, I deduce that some things change and some do not; some things are impermanent and some things are not.

The teaching of anicca is that all conditioned phenomena are impermanent. But "conditioned phenomena" doesn't include Nibbana, nor does it include dhammatās ("laws", "regularities of nature") such as dependent arising.

That being so, the OP's statement "everything changes" is at best a crude approximation of what the Buddha taught on anicca, and at worst seriously misleading.

Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu

[genkaku]

Thanks Dhammanando. I stand corrected. Some things never change.

[piper]

If something like causality never changes then won't there always be causes & results? And if there are always causes & results then ... wait ... I've just gone cross-eyed.

[Ngawang Drolma.]

If something like causality never changes then won't there always be causes & results? And if there are always causes & results then ... wait ... I've just gone cross-eyed.

We have just lost cabin pressure.

I'll assume that it's safe to say that causality, causes, and results persist and are ever-present.

[Dhammanando]

Hi Piper,

If something like causality never changes then won't there always be causes & results? And if there are always causes & results then ... wait ... I've just gone cross-eyed.

So long as there's ignorance there'll be kammic formations; so long as there are kammic formations there'll be consciousness etc. etc. Ignorance can cease, but the dhammatā of kammic formations arising wherever there is ignorance does not cease.

Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu

[genkaku]

Hi Piper,

If something like causality never changes then won't there always be causes & results? And if there are always causes & results then ... wait ... I've just gone cross-eyed.

So long as there's ignorance there'll be kammic formations; so long as there are kammic formations there'll be consciousness etc. etc. Ignorance can cease, but the dhammatā of kammic formations arising wherever there is ignorance does not cease.

Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu

A Zen teacher of mine, Soen Nakagawa Roshi, once said, "There is birth and there is death. In between there is enlightenment." The 'challenge' he posed, I think, was for anyone to discover the so-called 'between.'

FWIW.