User talk:Taming the hedgehog

This is Taming the hedgehog's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

The 3rd Truth

The cessation of Dukkha is the arising of Sukkha.

The 3rd Truth : That which leads to Dukkha can also be used to lead to Sukkha.

I am now re-reading the Sermon of Bernares

there must be a simple realisation ... "And when this exposition was propounded, the venerable Kondanna obtained the pure and spotless Dharma-eye [which saw that]: "Whatsoever is an arising thing, all that is a ceasing thing." ... And the venerable Vappa ... "Whatsoever is a beginning thing, all that is an ending thing." "

on reading this i thought : Whatever it is which leads to dukkha can also be used to lead to sukkha.

Allowing myself to recognise feel and remember the pleasure in not wanting and meditation motivates me to do it, and i find, at least in the short term, its true: "there the craving ceases".

Right Effort - "generates an intention"

under right effort we read: "He generates an intention, makes effort, rouses energy, applies his mind, and strives ardently to maintain the wholesome states of mind that have arisen, to prevent their lapsing, to increase them, to cause them to grow, and to completely develop them.",

we are asked to generate an intention for wholesome states ... Buddha cant have meant the same intentions for sense-objects which led to craving.

I suggest right effort and - generating an intention - is done by using the method described in the 5 skandhas in a direction which leads to peace, to enlightenment, ... instead of seeking happiness (fulfilling your perconditioning, your karma) and then always repeating the same themes.

Maybe to appreciate my connection between intention and craving one has to realise intention is written before craving in the full 10 steps of the process between corpereality and consciousness (in the Mahasatipatthana's second and third truth) ... If we isolate this process with reference to the eye and seeing, it reads like this:

"The eye .... Forms... Eye-consciousness... Eye-contact... Feeling born of eye-contact ... Perception of forms... Intention for forms ... Craving for forms... Thought directed at forms... Evaluation of forms..."(1)

The Mahasatipatthana's 2nd and 3rd truth

The 5 skandhas seem to always (often?) be an integral part of the 1st. noble truth. Is the Mahasatipatthana the only source text which develops exclusively the 5 skandhas in the 2nd and 3rd truth?

The idea of origin and cessation fits very well in the mahasatipatthana because its mentioned in every section of the 2nd third and fourth foundation of mindfulness.

my perspective

If the present interpretations and understandings of the four noble truths were adequate, there would not be a C rating on the wikipedia page....

I see the fundamental challenge of the FNT are the 2nd and 3rd truth. The first and fourth are statements, the sense is clear. In the Mahasatipatthana the wording of the second and third truth are almost identical which always led me previously to lump them together. I always imagined the third truth was renouncing (letting go of) those same pleasures which are mentioned in the 2nd truth.

Now, this doesnt make sense to me : my experience is that to be purely mindful of my beath i must also let it go, they seem to happen together, there seems to be no need for a special 3rd truth to describe that, (and i keep thinking renunciation is a hindu idea, buddha had something new.)

I am now working on the idea that Buddha intended some sort of twist or maybe a sort of joke or paradox.

previous entry june 2014 The Third Truth

3. The Third Truth is about Sukkha : the way to get life running smoothly (1). I always imagined the 3rd Truth was to do with renunciation of those same delights and pleasures which are mentioned in the 2nd. Truth, but now another interpretation occurs to me.

The text repeats 60 times for each step of the process between corporeality and consciousness that it "... has the characteristic of being delightful and pleasurable. When this craving is abandoned it is abandoned there; when it ceases, it ceases there."(2) Here I believe Buddha was originally talking about : delight in the Dharma, the pleasure of mindfulness, the pleasure of not wanting and being now.

The best argument for this in the context of the Mahasatipatthana is that in the section on Mindfulness of Feelings we are instructed to be mindful of "pleasant feeling associated with sense pleasures, ... pleasant feeling not associated with sense pleasures."(2) (Nyanaponika Thera's translation gives "worldy" and "unworldly").

It seems Buddha saw the process between corporeality and consciousness as unavoidable, even vital.

Without the vitality of pleasure, the eightfold path becomes a matter of discipline and understanding etc., which only a few people possess. I think Buddha believed he had a simple message and method which everyone could follow ... infact the idea probably only worked instantly with people who have meditated and lived in a disciplined way for years (eg. Buddha himself and the 5 ascetics in the deer park).

Now, I never even thought of recognising pleasure during meditation probably because I always thought pleasure had the consequence of suffering. I need time to experiment with this new idea and maybe I simply do not have the discipline and am thinking too much, but at present it all seems to fit.

I find also that so far there is nothing in any of the interpretations or source texts, (especially suffering, desire and renunciation), which fanatical Hindu priests would have wanted to kill him for; but finding pleasure in anything, least of all in meditation, was taboo, unthinkable, it would have been a new, revolutionary, much misunderstood idea.

There must be other depths to this interpretation. But, it seems to me : the experience of pleasure in being now and having no wants works differently to the pleasure we run after in the everlasting repetitions.

4. The 4th. Truth seems generally understood. However I would like to suggest this means simply to be guided by what is noble (pure) and true.

I only know the Mahasatipatthana and Sermon at Bernares. I know the Sermon at Bernares (and other short versions) contradicts the above idea for the 3rd truth (it strengthens the ideas for the 2nd truth).

To get deep into these texts takes years. Does anyone know any of the other source texts. (Lotus Tittha etc.), Do you find any of the above ideas reflected there.

Also I dont know the original texts on the middle way, could "finding pleasure in not wanting and meditation" be anything to do with the middle way between indulgence and abstinence?

Robin

Thanks for the recommendation "the Dharma Wheel discussion forum for Theravada Buddhism (http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewforum.php?f=13). ... Kind regards, Dorje108" I will start a thread up there ... anyone know any other www community which would be interested ...

Authenticity of the source texts

What is the official line on this? I imagine that Buddhas actual words were passed on a few times over a few years, previous to being organised in the repetitive form which came to be written. I presume the Pali texts give a rough idea with fragments of what Buddha actually said. The direct line through Bodhidharma would validify the texts in China and Japan. But I cant imagine how the sanskrit texts which went to Tibet could have anything original to add. What is the official line on this?

I think that in this first period of verbal transmission, Buddhas original teaching was adapted to Hindu thinking ... renunciation is a Hindu idea as is obvious from the amount of ascetics still practicing this way, I think Buddha had something new. ...

Other Ideas

An Experience I cant really rationalise at present

The Mahasatipatthana describes the 2nd and 3rd truth in terms of the 6 sense bases, the background idea is that the eye, body, mind etc., all work the same. I cant explain the connection but I feel for example with the eyes, craving is a fixation and focussing is a form of tension (an intention is etymologically in tension). With the eyes and ears, fixation and focussing are relatively easy to bring to cessation by being aware of the peripheries, it is a sensation very similar to emptiness of body and mind ...

The 5 Skandhas are sometimes called "The 5 aggregates of clinging". The word "clinging" is a very good example of a narrow intrepretation which emphasises only the extreme forms of life. The 5 Skandhas describe something far bigger than "clinging". These 5 aggregates, corporreality to consciousness, describe being, life, lots of things ... they describe a process, (i dont know if we can call it the process of experiencing).

RobinTaming the hedgehog (talk) 01:10, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Technical Help Themes

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

is this the simple way to get help? (by typing help me in two brackets - took me ages to see that - mindfulness?) i really find it hard work with the technology, and both Nathan2055 and Road Wizard have notes on their pages that they are not online at present --- so i e.mailed another host and waited patiently and? ... anyway ...

first i notice i have 2 talk pages ... why is there one connected to the sandbox?

secondly i am confused by the editting protocol, i made a complete text change to my own previous entry about a month ago

i noticed later that a few weeks ago my text was removed as follows : (Undid revision 612423509 by Taming the hedgehog (talk) Please do not delete discussions or comments (even your own); if you have something new to say, add new comment).

is this normal procedure for wikipedia? : i dont want people to read my old version, its a waste of their time, its been a year and a half since i wrote the last version, and i can express it far clearer and more completely now, ... surely if i just added every new version of my text it would lead to talk pages that are full of old information, and surely this is covered by the archive pages? ...

i am really not sure if it was me or who but the changed article is now back online - i wrote to the person who deleted it asking her to read the entry, but she seems to be away at present ...

the entry is at [[1]]

i would like to put a short version on the main page, also i want to make 4 word changes to my talk page entry - but dont want to be banned or accused of vandalism as i was once ...

so, i am rather confused and frightened, ... but i suppose like everyone on wikipedia i feel as though i have something important to add, but dont know the protocol or the technology. so heres hoping the help me in 2 brackets will actually help me

robinTaming the hedgehog (talk) 18:28, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Every page on Wikipedia comes with its own talk page. That's simply pre-set by the Mediawiki software. Someone might want to discuss your sandbox's content; in that case the sandbox talk page would be the appropriate place (and when the sandbox is turned into a live article, the talk page can be turned into that article's talk page, preserving the discussions).

Removing old comments is usually not a good idea, and here you even removed others' replies, which strictly speaking violates the talk page guideline. But even if it had been just your own comment that had been on the talk page for half a year, it would be better not to modify that - we like keeping histrorical records of what was said. Overly long talkk pages can be archived, and Wikipedia won't run out of disk space for a few redundant talk page comments.

If you want to add content to an article, you should provide a reliable source others can use to verify the content. What we don't accept is original research, such as your personal opinion on or interpretation of the Four Truths. Huon (talk) 19:48, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The best way to contact me is to write on my own talk page; User talk:Road Wizard. I'll then get a little alert at the top of my screen saying that someone has added a message. Road Wizard (talk) 17:04, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Taming the hedgehog (talk) 13:19, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Taming the hedgehog. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! — Bill W. (Talk) (Contrib) (User:Wtwilson3) — 17:59, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]