My questions on Buddhism

last SG · 2014-07-18T22:20:41+00:00

Christianity is vague and doesn't go deep,so it's not included Are you kidding me!!?

AtlasWept SG

Sir

Why karma has result?For me it sounds like a program destined to do things.Eg: good things and good result,bad actions and bad result.Then as you said at death a reel of all these,why it is like this?Why Bardo and why the next life and so on?What is karma and where is it stored?Some energy?If so can it not be converted like others?

I find it difficult to imagine that all of this well planned system just originated from ignorance.

We share the same affinitity for a contemplative life and, yes, I wholeheartedly agree that the whole notion of karma can be quite disconcerting. Furthermore, it is particularly disconcerting in the case of someone who seems completely innocent, like a severely ill child, or someone with many admirable qualities who's nevertheless going through some terrible tragedies.

Nevertheless, whatever happens to us, it teaches, is never just by chance. We've created the causes of our present sufferings ourselves. We're a result of a complex set of causes and conditions, a mixture of actions that are sometimes unwholesome or destructive. Bit by bit, little by little, these causes ripen into results and are expressed as our successive lives unfold. From within a different metaphysical framwork, of course, it would be difficult to see how our present happiness and suffering could be the result of our distant past. But in the context of Buddhism that accepts the idea of numerous rebirths, it all makes sense. So we have no reason to rebel against what happens to us. But nor should our attitude be one of resignation, because we now have the chance to redress this situation. The idea is, therefore, to recognize what we need to do, or to avoid, in order to construct our happiness and escape from suffering. If we understand that negative actions lead to suffering both for ourselves and others, and that positive actions lead to happiness, it's up to us to act now in such a way as to build our own future by sowing 'good seeds'.

There's a saying that goes, 'As long as you keep your hand in the fire, it's no good hoping not to be burnt.' It's not that we'll be 'rewarded' or 'punished' - we're simply subject to the law of cause and effect.The Buddha gave numerous examples of karmic effects. Neverthess, there are, as you can undoutedly imagine, an infinite number of such combinations. It is said that only the omniscience of a Buddha can perceive the compexity of any individual's karma.

In his first teaching, the Buddha set out what are known as the 'Four Noble Truths' - the truth of the suffering of the conditioned world, the truth of the source of suffering (ignorance and the negative emotions that build up karma), the truth of the possibility of putting an end to suffering, and the truth of the path that leads to that cessation of suffering. Suffering here includes, of course, the suffering of birth, aging, illness, and death; of encountering adversaries, losing those dear to us, and so on. This isn't to be pessimistic about life, rather it simply stresses the need to become aware of suffering so that we can apply the proper remedy to it. Indeed, if there was no such remedy, there'd be no point in worrying about suffering.

I have heard it said that the continuity of consciousness ensures that there's a link between the moment of an action and the moment of its consequences, whether happy or unhappy. So what's the point of avoiding evil and doing good? To that challange, Buddism replies with a parable. A man drops a flaming torch from a high terrace where he'd been eating his supper. The fire catches the thatch of his own roof and soon sets the whole village ablaze, house by house. When accused of causing the fire, he replies to his judges, 'It wasn't my fault. The fire of the torch I was eating by wasn't the same as the fire that burned the village.' But, of course, he's found to be responsible for the fire. So even in the absence of an individual self seen as an independantly existing entity, what we are at present is the result of our past. Acts certainly bear their results. The most important point is therefore the continuity, not the identity. A negative act isn't translated into happiness, just as a hemlock seed doesn't grow into a lime tree. Consequently, the fact that a positive or negative action has a corresponding result, in terms of happiness or suffering, justifies our undertaking or avoiding it, even if the person who experiences the result doesn't have an eternal self.

An Eternal Now SG

Well said! Thanks for sharing

Bio-Hawk SG

Thanks for this. Makes sense in many ways.However though i still don't understand why it is so?For example every action has a reaction,why?Who made it like this?there re many realms where ghosts to gods live each seperated,how did it come?All of this by random?

Fire yp Lim SG

what is the best, easiest and fastest way to become Buddha?

ILikeHippo SG

Easy, enrol a place at the ultimate land of pure bliss and study under under AiMiTuoFo!

An Eternal Now SG

//Visuddhimagga// (Chap. XIX):

    Everywhere, in all the realms of existence, the noble disciple
    sees only mental and corporeal phenomena kept going through the
    concatenation of causes and effects. No producer of the
    volitional act or kamma does he see apart from the kamma, no
    recipient of the kamma-result apart from the result. And he is
    well aware that wise men are using merely conventional language,
    when, with regard to a kammical act, they speak of a doer, or
    with regard to a kamma-result, they speak of the recipient of the
    result.

    No doer of the deeds is found,
    No one who ever reaps their fruits;
    Empty phenomena roll on:
    This only is the correct view.

    And while the deeds and their results
    Roll on and on, conditioned all,
    There is no first beginning found,
    Just as it is with seed and tree. ...

    No god, no Brahma, can be called
    The maker of this wheel of life:
    Empty phenomena roll on,
    Dependent on conditions all.

An Eternal Now SG

For example, simple minded people may think that 'God' was the one that made almost 300 people die in the recent air crash in Ukraine. As Buddha said -- if these suffering was made by God, then that God must surely be very evil. There is no such God that controls or makes things. Nor is there a 'Self' that is acting as an agent or controller of everything. Everything manifests due to dependent origination. The very idea of a creator, or creation, or agency, or Self, is a false, naive way of thinking. The thinking that everything happened randomly is even more naive and foolish.

The air crash happened because:

1) It happened to be flying in East Ukrainian airspace
2) East Ukraine (like Crimea) population makeup is mostly Russian -- their allegiance mostly lies with the Kremlin rather than with Kiev. The rebels wish to join Russia.
3) A civil war was going on
4) There was recent efforts by Ukrainian government to increase military skirmish to retake Ukrainian lands from the rebels
5) Vladimir Putin was under pressure to give support to the pro-Russian separatists under strain in recent developments, as he has vested interests or agenda to exert control over Eastern Europe, therefore, he sent very advanced surface to air missiles to the rebels, and trained them to use it
6) His agenda was based on perceived Western nations trying to gang up against Russia and taking all its former soviet colonies into a hostile EU. Plus, he wants to regain former glory of Russia in Soviet Times as a powerful empire
7) The pro-Russian separatists mistaken the airplane for a Ukrainian airplane -- they have shot down a few other Ukrainian military aircrafts in the previous days
8) The collective karma of the passengers

This is just making the dependencies sound simple. It is actually much more complex and intricate than that. If any of these conditions were lacking, the air disaster could not have happened. There is no single creator, or origin, for the disaster.

It is very easy if we do not see dependent origination to push all the blame to one single person or origin or source, for example, Russia or Vladimir Putin. This is why the view of a 'Source', 'Origin' or 'Inherent Existence' causes affliction. For example, the view that the origin of this disaster can be pinned down to Putin or Russia causes great anger or hatred against him. If I were not a practitioner, I might be very angry at Russia or Vladimir Putin now. But because I practice the dharma and see the dharma of dependent origination, I only see impersonal processes of dependencies, there is no anger. None of it is personal, but due to dependent origination things happen.

Let us pray for all those victims of this vast chain of interdependencies. May all victims be well and happy and take a fortunate birth.

AtlasWept SG

Presumably these questions are a curious approach to the analysis of perception, discursive thought and of the phenomena of mental processes.

No object is permanent, and the subtle impermanence of things is such that an object must be changing every instant. As consciousness is triggered by the object, there are as many instants of consciousness as of states of the impermanent object. In terms of relative truth, each instant of consciousness is born from contact with an object triggering a perception. You could say that there's a subject for each object, at each moment of perception. Despite an apparent continuity, perception and discursive thought arise and cease in each instant. However, in the final analysis, even in the present moment, consciousness doesn't exist as an independent and distinct entity. Rather, consider it as a flow or a continuity made up of ephemeral instants that have no individual existence. It is said only 'awareness', which transcends discursive thoughts, never changes, because it is beyond time...

This idea of the instant-by-instant impermanence of phenomena, and the mind, goes a long way, because it shows that if there were even one single, fixed, permanent, intrinsically existing entity in the phenomenal world, consciousness would remain as if stuck to that object, and would be prolonged indefinitely. In the end, all the consciousnesses in the world would find themselves trapped by that object, and wouldn't be able to detach themselves from it. It's the presence of the subtle impermanence that leads Buddhism to compare the phenomenal world to a dream or an illusion, to an ever-changing and ungraspable flux. Even things that seem solid to us, like a table, are changing every instant. The stream of our thoughts is also made up of infinitesimally short instants triggered by each of the infinitesimally tiny changes in the world outside. It is only through the aggregation of these instants that gives one the impression of gross approximation/gross reality.

For example, when you perceive an object, even a simple one, a blue square for instance, you can distinguish the area of the square, its corners, it sides, and so on. These several elements are all perceived integrally as a sqaure. Now, is there an instantaneous overall perception of the object with all its components, or does it happen rather through a rapid succession of brief instants of awareness of each detail of the object, assembled into an integrated image - like when you swing a torch rapidly around in a circle at arm's length and see a circle of light, even though it's actually composed of mulitple perceptions of a point of light in continuous movement?

Greek philosphers, including Plato, took the view that we cannot know anything that moves or undergoes change. For them, phenomenon - the Greek word, which means 'that which appears', the world of apperances - being in a state of permanent motion, cannot be the object of any stable, certain, definite knowledge. Hence the efforts of ancient and modern Western philosphy to find behind the phenomenon some permanent and stable element that could be the object of definite knowledge. The model for such stability was supplied by mathmatics, which at the starting point of Western thought was the first model that completely satisfied conceptual thought. As such, the principles behind phenomena and governing them were sought. To escape from the chaotic motion of the phenomenal world, the structures behind it need to be identified. These are the relationships of cause and effect, which subsequently evolved into the 'laws' of cause and effect.

Towards this end, Buddhism accepts perfectly that the phenomenal world is governed inescapably by the laws of cause and effect. However, neither these 'laws' nor the phenomena they govern are permanent, autonomous entities that exist in themselves. Nothing at all exists by itself and in itself; everything appears through the play of the interdependence of causes and conditions. For instance, the law of gravity doesn't exist in itself, in the absence of objects. A rock is composed of atoms, which are themselves equivalent to energy. A rainbow is formed by the play of a shaft of sunlight falling on a cloud of raindrops. It appears, yes, but it's intangible. As soon as one of the factors contributing to it is missing, the phenomenon disappears. So the 'rainbow' has no inherent nature of its own, and you can't speak of the dissolution or annihilation of something that didn't exist in the first place. That 'something' only owed its illusory appearance to a transitory coming together of elements which aren't intrinsically existing entities themselves, either.

All phenomena are certainly the result of a combination of transitory factors. Knowledge of phenomena can only come through the mind, and it's a metaphysical choice that science makes when it states that with the help of our concepts we can discover the ultimate nature of a phenomenal world that exists independently of our concepts. Conversely, Buddhism would say, in essence, that whatever the nature of a reality independent of the mind conceiving it might be, that reality will forever be inaccessible to us. Furthermore, one could say that in the absence of human beings, reality as human beings perceive it would cease to be.

Bio-Hawk SG

The air crash happened because:

1) It happened to be flying in East Ukrainian airspace
2) East Ukraine (like Crimea) population makeup is mostly Russian -- their allegiance mostly lies with the Kremlin rather than with Kiev. The rebels wish to join Russia.
3) A civil war was going on
4) There was recent efforts by Ukrainian government to increase military skirmish to retake Ukrainian lands from the rebels
5) Vladimir Putin was under pressure to give support to the pro-Russian separatists under strain in recent developments, as he has vested interests or agenda to exert control over Eastern Europe, therefore, he sent very advanced surface to air missiles to the rebels, and trained them to use it
6) His agenda was based on perceived Western nations trying to gang up against Russia and taking all its former soviet colonies into a hostile EU. Plus, he wants to regain former glory of Russia in Soviet Times as a powerful empire
7) The pro-Russian separatists mistaken the airplane for a Ukrainian airplane -- they have shot down a few other Ukrainian military aircrafts in the previous days
8) The collective karma of the passengers

Was this not caused because of Karma?If the missile had missed would a malfunction of plane have killed them?What aboutpeople who missed this flight or shouldn't have beenbutwas on?Karma guided each of them to this very specific moment?If so none of them had the free will to change their destiny.NO?

Bio-Hawk SG

Presumably these questions are a curious approach to the analysis of perception, discursive thought and of the phenomena of mental processes.

This doesn't explain how a samsara came into existence ver well designed with different realms, cycleof re-births,possibility to escape it as a human etc. I still cannot understand what is Karma? And why it cannot be negated? IF I caused one pain and I hurt myself,would this cancel each other?If not why?

From what i learned in Buddhsim so far the purpose of life is to achieve Nirvana, which is negating myself.However this can only be acquired via meditating,living well etc. There are some levels well presented by Eternalnow of which after reaching a high level,wait for existing Karma to act on you and then one reaches Mahaparinirvana when all is finished. Very noble but also sounds a bit silly that if this is really the purpose of life one is not by default aware of this,such as need for food expressed by hunger.

An Eternal Now SG

Karma is one of the causes. Karma needs to meet secondary conditions in order to ripen. If a missile had missed I suspect their karma would ripen in some other ways in the future. People who missed the flight may not be sharing the collective karma. It is hard to say how karma has influenced their decisions to take that flight. Karma is one of the four imponderables -- it is too complex, only the Buddha can know it in all its full details.

An Eternal Now SG

If one practices dharma, then like Angulimala who killed 999 people -- still one can achieve Nirvana in that life. So yes karma is not fixed. Angulimala had to suffer some ripening karma in his life (receive little alms, feared by others, etc), but it is nothing compared to the aeons in hell he may have to spend if he did not meet with the Dharma.

AtlasWept SG

I am most grateful for your tenacity and continued dedication towards this end. I have heard it said that existence is the congruency of the human world, and that the facilitation of existence is the driving force behind the activities of the mind and body.

From a certain point of view and definement, what is called samsara, the 'vicious circle of the world of existences', which is bore, maintained and propelled by any and all measure of ignorance, is a world of suffering, distraction and confusion. Therefore, in this manner of contemplation, existence, the notion of existence through acknowledgment of dependent phenomena, the acknowledgment of ego, of I, past, present and future, is the well-spring from which all samsara manifests. Yet, samsara is no more than an illusory manfestation, an illusory aggregated effect, caused by the concatenation of wrong view, action, speech, and so forth.

It is here where we wander endlessly, impelled by the force of our actions, called karma. Actions, once they've been carried out, will eventually bring their results and propel us into other states of existence; moment by moment, life by life. Nevertheless, all living things possess within themselves the potential to become Buddha, or in other words to attain perfect liberation and wisdom, 'enlightenment'. Everything that veils that potential and prevents it expressing itself is only adventitious and ephermeral. The veils are called 'ignorance' or 'mental obscurations'.

Therefore, the spiritual path consists of freeing oneself from ignorance and, in so doing, actualizing the perfection that's already present within us. The motivation that makes us progress on the spiritual path is the idea of transforming ourselves to be able to help others be free of suffering. Through this altruistic point of view, we first acknowledge our impotence in the face of others' suffering, and then give rise to the wish to perfect ourselves in order to be able to do something about it. It's far from an indifference to the world. Invulnerability to the ravages of outer circumstances becomes the armor in which we clad ourselves for the battle to deliver others from suffering.

The goal isn't to get out of the world, it's to no longer be enslaved to it. It's not a matter of dissolving into some state of extinction, but of discovering ultimate wisdom within oneself. The world in itself isn't what's bad, it's the way we perceive it that is mistaken. I have heard it said, 'It is not appearances that will bind you, it's your attachment to appearances.'

Fire yp Lim SG

the only way to stop hatred and war or fight is to return and re-act with compassion, love, caring, forgiveness and forget...
but how to forgive our enemy from inside? this is a very big endless education...
people might not agree but this is the way we should...
hahaha just my crazy thought

Bio-Hawk SG

Thanks for the answer,on which I was reflecting on the last few days.This has led to more questions and I hope they could be answered as well.

Why is the real purpose of life to achieve wisdom within oneself from this enticing samsara where one is compelled to go in different births in realms without any knowledge? And how was this real purpose discovered?If this is indeed the real purpose, why is this not innate to beings like hunger for example?To a practical mind like mine it seems kind of punishment where un aware existences go on in their cycle.

Leaving aside the creation of Samsara as imponderable,I still don't get the Buddhist view on souls. I can imagine everything physical being nothing,if this universe originated in Big Bang from a very small'thing' and most of space in atom is empty. But for spirituality its beyond my mind.I read in a book recently Buddha didn't deny the existence of souls but taught they are too illusory. Is it the terminology(not soul but called mindstream) that doesn't exist in buddhism or the concept?Where did this mindstream which forms the basis of life come from?IS it when this leaves the body a being is dead? And according to buddhism since this is not the same when it leaves a body and goes to next, it is not the same thing.Which brings the question how does Karma gets carried on and redeemed if the same mind stream doesn't go to another body.

I read some books about journey of souls how they leave the body, go to a place where they review their past lives,make resolution for future and accept their life of learning. This was discovered by past life regression,though I can't say it's true,I have to say it makes sense if one believes in soul. In parallel I saw a video about Tibetean Buddhism speaking of Bardos after death leading to a new one. After the judgement stage a soul is shown many couples making love and it choses one of them. This to me seems like a soul as it is described in Hinduism or Sikhim or by Sufis. But then Buddhist says, soul doesn't exist.

Please explain.

Bio-Hawk SG

Any to answer the above queries?

An Eternal Now SG

"And how was this real purpose discovered?"

When people like Shakyamuni realized the suffering of birth, sickness, ageing and death, and other kinds of suffering. Have you read the story of how Buddha started out his path?

Then for his students: either due to suffering, or other reasons, or meeting with the teaching and pondering on it, etc.

"If this is indeed the real purpose, why is this not innate to beings like hunger for example?"

Sentient beings are short sighted. Hunger has a short term solution: just grab some food. Then hunger is appeased for a few hours. For human beings, we only seek short term solution to suffering: when painful, take aspirin. When bored, watch TV. When sad, drink alcohol. We drown ourselves with sensual stimulation as a means to appease our suffering. We do not know any higher way out. Buddhism offers this way... by letting us gain wisdom into the true nature of things as they are, we release suffering completely, forever, and attain the highest peace and bliss of Nirvana.

"I still don't get the Buddhist view on souls"

The Buddhist view is that there is no soul. But there is a stream of dependently originated series of moments of consciousness. This is why there is rebirth, but not the passing on of a soul from one body to another. The new moment of consciousness being born is neither the same nor different from the previous moment of consciousness conventionally labelled 'the previous lifetime', but like a candle lighting another candle, the new moment of consciousness is dependently originated based on the previous moment of rebirth-consciousness/karma/etc.

Having said that there is no soul, there is nonetheless an intermediate body which is called the antarabhava in Mahayana Buddhism or the rebirth-consciousness in Theravada Buddhism. It should be noted however, that this antarabhava is also empty of a truly existing soul or self, and is merely an aggregate of psycho-mental activities -- "Antarābhava-skandha, means the five aggregates of a being in the bardo [antarābhava]."

The Buddha rejects self-view of soul/consciousness being passed on from lifetime to lifetime. Read http://www.leighb.com/mn38.htm :

Then the Blessed One addressed a certain bhikkhu and said, "Come bhikkhu, in my name, call the bhikkhu Sati, tell him the Teacher wants him." That bhikkhu consented and approached the bhikkhu Sati and told him, "Friend, the Teacher wants you." The bhikkhu Sati said "Yes, friend" and approached the Blessed One, paid homage and sat to one side.

Then the Blessed One said: "Sati, is it true, that such an pernicious view has arisen to you. ‘As I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else’?"

"Yes, venerable sir, as I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else."

"Sati, what is that consciousness?"

"Venerable sir, it is that which feels and experiences, that which reaps the results of good and evil actions done here and there."

"Foolish man, to whom do you know me having taught the Dhamma like this. Haven’t I taught, in various ways that consciousness is dependently arisen. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness. Yet you, foolish man, on account of your wrong view, you misrepresent me, as well as destroy yourself and accumulate much demerit, for which you will suffer for a long time."

Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus: "Bhikkhus, what do you think, has this this bhikkhu Sati, son of a fisherman, learned anything from this dispensation?" "No, venerable sir."

When this was said the bhikkhu Sati became silent, unable to reply back, and sat with drooping shoulders and eyes turned down. Then the Blessed One, knowing that the bhikkhu Sati had become silent, unable to reply back, and was sitting with drooping shoulders and with eyes turned down, told him: "Foolish man, you will be known on account of this pernicious view; now I will question the bhikkhus on this."

Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus: "Bhikkhus, do you too know of this Teaching, the wrong view of the bhikkhu Sati, the son of a fisherman, on account of which he misrepresents us and also destroys himself and accumulates much suffering?"

"No, venerable sir. In various ways we have been taught that consciousness arises dependently. Without a cause there is no arising of consciousness."

"Good, bhikkhus! Good that you know the Dhamma taught by me. In various ways I have taught that consciousness arises dependently. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness. Yet, this bhikkhu Sati, son of a fisherman, by holding to this wrong view, misrepresents us and destroys himself and accumulates much demerit, and it will be for his suffering for a long time.

"Bhikkhus, consciousness is reckoned by the condition dependent upon which it arises. If consciousness arises on account of eye and forms, it is reckoned as eye consciousness. If on account of ear and sounds it arises, it is reckoned as ear consciousness. If on account of nose and smells it arises, it is reckoned as nose consciousness. If on account of tongue and tastes it arises, it is reckoned as tongue consciousness. If on account of body and touch it arises, it is reckoned as body consciousness. If on account of mind and mind-objects it arises, it is reckoned as mind consciousness. Bhikkhus, just as a fire is reckoned based on whatever that fire burns - fire ablaze on sticks is a stick fire, fire ablaze on twigs is a twig fire, fire ablaze on grass is a grass fire, fire ablaze on cowdung is a cowdung fire, fire ablaze on grain thrash is a grain thrash fire, fire ablaze on rubbish is a rubbish fire - so too is consciousness reckoned by the condition dependent upon which it arises. In the same manner consciousness arisen on account is eye and forms is eye consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of ear and sounds is ear consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of nose and smells is nose consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of tongue and tastes is taste consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of body and touch is body consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of mind and mind-objects is mind consciousness.

"Bhikkhus, do you see, This has arisen?" "Yes, venerable sir". "Do you see it arises supported by That?" "Yes, venerable sir." "Bhikkhus, Do you see if the support ceases, the arising too ceases?" "Yes, venerable sir."

Fire yp Lim SG

all is correct in ones ... all act is kind, everything is kind ... 。。。。

Bio-Hawk SG

"Yes, venerable sir, as I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else."

"Sati, what is that consciousness?"

"Venerable sir, it is that which feels and experiences, that which reaps the results of good and evil actions done here and there."

Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus: "Bhikkhus, what do you think, has this this bhikkhu Sati, son of a fisherman, learned anything from this dispensation?" "No, venerable sir."

"No, venerable sir. In various ways we have been taught that consciousness arises dependently. Without a cause there is no arising of consciousness."

Thanks for the detailed answers.

What happens to this conciousness which arises moment to moment dependently after liberation,ceases to exist? Is there no way Buddha or some one else can stop this formation of new one from old one of all beings in this Universe and bring liberation to all?Speaking of sense conciousness,which makes much sense,If one were to be devoid of these 5 senses(they destroyed) that would help in liberation then?

An Eternal Now SG

The Buddha said:

Misdeeds cannot be washed away with water,
the suffering of living beings cannot be removed with the hand,
my realization cannot transferred to another,
but by showing the true nature of things, there will be liberation.

The Buddha said:

[Alternate translation: Thanissaro]

This was said by the Lord...

"Bhikkhus, there are these two Nibbana-elements. What are the two? The Nibbana-element with residue left and the Nibbana-element with no residue left.

"What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of attachment, hate, and delusion in him that is called the Nibbana-element with residue left.

"Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with no residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant... completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbana-element with no residue left.

"These, bhikkhus, are the two Nibbana-elements."

« Previous Page Next Page »