Ambition vs. the dhamma

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17187
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by DNS »

thepea wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 11:36 pm
DNS wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 9:43 pm
thepea wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 6:22 pm What is good for one is not necessarily good for another.
Sounds like far-leftist moral subjectivism. The Buddha taught moral absolutes (4NT), moral universalism. Some things are morally universal, regardless of time period, location, culture, etc.
Sounds like mealtime.
The gazelle is great meal for the tiger, not so great for the gazelle. Nothing right or left about nature.
Nature is middle ground or non political.
I'm not referring to the diet of humans or animals. I was referring to your suggesting that some things are good based on the culture, time-period, social things; whereas the Dhamma has absolute, universal morals, like not killing, the 4NT.
SarathW
Posts: 21227
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by SarathW »

thepea wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 1:04 pm Good ambition?
Bad ambition?
Where is the line between?
Good question.
Arahants do not have the good or bad ambitions.
They only have the wish to do (kiriya Citta)
However their action is always wholsome.
It appears Arahants naturally practice Brahama Viharas.

So what it is boil down to is that good and bad is determine based on your mental state.
Lower or bad mental states lead you to hell irrespective of your ambition.
It is just the natural law.
:shrug:
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by thepea »

DNS wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 11:59 pm
thepea wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 11:36 pm
DNS wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 9:43 pm

Sounds like far-leftist moral subjectivism. The Buddha taught moral absolutes (4NT), moral universalism. Some things are morally universal, regardless of time period, location, culture, etc.
Sounds like mealtime.
The gazelle is great meal for the tiger, not so great for the gazelle. Nothing right or left about nature.
Nature is middle ground or non political.
I'm not referring to the diet of humans or animals. I was referring to your suggesting that some things are good based on the culture, time-period, social things; whereas the Dhamma has absolute, universal morals, like not killing, the 4NT.
The Buddha did not teach not killing as an absolute, and you seem to ritualize this by continuously repeating this as if it is an absolute.
The dhamma is the guide within to connect with source(Nibanna). Morality is a relation of mental volition, with an absolute being full access to source consciousness.

If Buddha forbid killing he would have said this with absolute clarity. But he didn’t, he used terms to describe types of unwholesome killing.
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by thepea »

SarathW wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 12:11 am
thepea wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 1:04 pm Good ambition?
Bad ambition?
Where is the line between?
Good question.
Arahants do not have the good or bad ambitions.
They only have the wish to do (kiriya Citta)
However their action is always wholsome.
It appears Arahants naturally practice Brahama Viharas.

So what it is boil down to is that good and bad is determine based on your mental state.
Lower or bad mental states lead you to hell irrespective of your ambition.
It is just the natural law.
:shrug:
This seems to be the case. It’s the mentality one carries in relation to ones actions that is important.
For example the arahant is offered rice with animal flesh in his alms bowl. The arahant eats to sustain the body, and has gratitude for the all which provides. The vegan might find it difficult to even be in the same room with people eating animal flesh. Where others are enjoying a meal and the. IMO any of others they are in hell.
Worldly ambition only seems to be an issue if one cannot balance this with the ambition to practice.
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by asahi »

thepea wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 6:25 pm
asahi wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 3:11 pm
thepea wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 1:04 pm Good ambition?
Bad ambition?
Where is the line between?
Good ambition could means living and earning your livelihood and multiply it through right efforts and right channel which is not agaisnt unwholesome actions , jobs or businesses . Bad ambition is in contrary to the above .
How do we know what is wholesome vs unwholesome?
According to my understanding , Buddha said when one perform some action which attach with intention that is full of greed , illwill and are in a state of ignorance , that kind of actions could becomes mostly unwholesome . Conversely , the actions perform could be of something wholesome .
No bashing No gossiping
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by thepea »

asahi wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 11:40 am
thepea wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 6:25 pm
asahi wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 3:11 pm

Good ambition could means living and earning your livelihood and multiply it through right efforts and right channel which is not agaisnt unwholesome actions , jobs or businesses . Bad ambition is in contrary to the above .
How do we know what is wholesome vs unwholesome?
According to my understanding , Buddha said when one perform some action which attach with intention that is full of greed , illwill and are in a state of ignorance , that kind of actions could becomes mostly unwholesome . Conversely , the actions perform could be of something wholesome .
If we are ignorant, then are we ritualising ambitions?
The sotapanna has connected to source and as a fruit they no longer need rituals. Rituals are a practice for those who are disconnected from source to feel connected externally to one another.
So Buddha knows as Buddha is source, but knowledge of the connection cannot connect us with Buddha. Only direct experience(connection) is the way.

So is ambition to be a monk wholesome?
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by asahi »

thepea wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 12:08 pm If we are ignorant, then are we ritualising ambitions? The sotapanna has connected to source and as a fruit they no longer need rituals. Rituals are a practice for those who are disconnected from source to feel connected externally to one another. So Buddha knows as Buddha is source, but knowledge of the connection cannot connect us with Buddha. Only direct experience(connection) is the way.
So is ambition to be a monk wholesome?
No , a sotapanna as i understand still follows rules and precepts . Unbeneficial rituals that Buddha taught was about practices that doesnt leads to liberation .
No bashing No gossiping
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by thepea »

asahi wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 12:43 pm
thepea wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 12:08 pm If we are ignorant, then are we ritualising ambitions? The sotapanna has connected to source and as a fruit they no longer need rituals. Rituals are a practice for those who are disconnected from source to feel connected externally to one another. So Buddha knows as Buddha is source, but knowledge of the connection cannot connect us with Buddha. Only direct experience(connection) is the way.
So is ambition to be a monk wholesome?
No , a sotapanna as i understand still follows rules and precepts . Unbeneficial rituals that Buddha taught was about practices that doesnt leads to liberation .
What rules must a sotapanna follow?
What rituals did Buddha teach?
form
Posts: 3471
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:23 am

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by form »

thepea wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 1:04 pm Good ambition?
Bad ambition?
Where is the line between?
This is same like the Buddha teaching people to renounce and yet he also teach people to brush their teeth.

You get it?
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by thepea »

form wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 1:17 pm
thepea wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 1:04 pm Good ambition?
Bad ambition?
Where is the line between?
This is same like the Buddha teaching people to renounce and yet he also teach people to brush their teeth.

You get it?
Yes I get it.
We do things that are beneficial to us, we choose to brush out teeth, because we see when we don’t there are unpleasant effects.
Similarly we drill for oil so that we have energy to heat our homes otherwise we suffer the pain of freezing.
Similarly we fish and eat the fish, otherwise we suffer hunger pangs in our bellies.
There can be a good ambition for everything we do, where is the line between good and bad?
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17187
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by DNS »

thepea wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 1:36 pm There can be a good ambition for everything we do, where is the line between good and bad?
It is bad if it inflicts harm on another living being. It is bad if it involves killing another living being. This is permeated throughout the Suttas.
User avatar
purple planet
Posts: 728
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 6:07 am

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by purple planet »

thepea wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 7:34 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 7:21 pm
thepea wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 6:25 pm

How do we know what is wholesome vs unwholesome?
The Buddha left us some handy lists, such as the one in MN 41:

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .nymo.html
Reading that, I do not see where it says killing fish to eat them is unwholesome?
It says loosely translated
One killing living beings:(with semi colon) then goes on to give the types of killing which is unwholesome.
It’s not implying that killing itself is unwholesome but rather a particular type of killing.
Then is does the same for
Taking that which is not given:(semi colon) then describes in more detail the types of taking which are unwholesome.
If I go to the forest and take a tree, it was not given... is this unwholesome?

It says in the link :
12. "And how are there three kinds of bodily conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct? Here someone, abandoning the killing of living beings, becomes one who abstains from killing living beings; with rod and weapon laid aside, gentle and kindly, he abides compassionate to all living beings.



It is than very clear that in accordance with the dhamma and righteous conduct is not killing living beings ............... and fish=living beings so killing fish is not in accordance with the dhamma
Last edited by purple planet on Tue Oct 04, 2022 4:26 pm, edited 4 times in total.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by cappuccino »

thepea wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 1:36 pm where is the line between good and bad?
you can act normal, then have karmic consequence


such is the way it is…


people have karmic consequences
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by thepea »

DNS wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 2:49 pm
thepea wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 1:36 pm There can be a good ambition for everything we do, where is the line between good and bad?
It is bad if it inflicts harm on another living being. It is bad if it involves killing another living being. This is permeated throughout the Suttas.
What is the consequence?
This sounds like extremist view off middle.
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Ambition vs. the dhamma

Post by thepea »

cappuccino wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 4:17 pm
thepea wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 1:36 pm where is the line between good and bad?
you can act normal, then have karmic consequence


such is the way it is…


people have karmic consequences
What is the consequence?
Some future misery to fear?
Are we not to live in the here and now?
This sounds like the Christian ideology of fearing the wrath of god.
Post Reply