Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Meditation Doesn't Directly Increase Happiness

unreadyandwilling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 129 posts

Re: Why Meditation Doesn't Directly Increase Happiness

#91

Post by _z7iw »

Evgeny wrote: post #84
blueprint wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are huge numbers of claims, but who among the multitudes has the evidence? If any Buddhist monks or temple has Buddha's teachings, they should also have the ways of life from the problems to the resolutions. But they don't have them, and instead they use meditation to trick people into giving up the real answers. It's the same thing as giving themselves up. This is an important point and the root cause of this…

There are huge numbers of claims, but who among the multitudes has the evidence? If any Buddhist monks or temple has Buddha's teachings, they should also have the ways of life from the problems to the resolutions. But they don't have them I would really like to know how you test this - how do you approach the evaluation if someone is enlightened or just pretending?

The wall is that we first have to know what Enlightenment is very correctly to check if something meets the criteria for Enlightenment. The way to verify what something is, lies in the results it makes - just like our example of a fruit tree. Seeds and leaves may look similar across an apple, plum, and cherry, but we know instantly what it is when we see, smell, and taste the fruit.

I've reported Master Tathagata's definition that Enlightenment is 'the opening of one's eyes to the world'. He's also said that Supreme Enlightenment (that of a Tathagata) is opening eyes to reality completely. So the first thing is - ask them any questions in reality - if they are unable to give the answer that can be verified in the reality (if they cannot realize what is in reality) then they have not completed their Enlightenment.

A second thing I'll leave with you is like this. A bodhisattva cannot have attained Enlightenment completely - because if s/he had, then the one would be a Buddha.Yet it seems that a Buddha only comes to the world once every 3,000 years or so. The term of Bodhisattva means "gods who have good power and are seeking for the truth". (Sorry cannot cite as it was in yet-untranscribed audio from Tathagata) They protect Buddha, but could not remove their karma totally yet, so they are still seekers. However, sometimes some Bodhisattvas who have a power to stop their karma can get into the same dimension that the Buddhas reside in (paradise). So the second thing to check is whether they claim they are Enlightened. It's a red flag to me.

The third thing is that an Enlightened Being never lies. Instead, they bet their life every day in order to inform people of the truth - this is the proof of their love for mankind, and it is the greatest teaching. So your continuous verification of what people say (imho, according to the facts in the world) is essential whether or not the person actually has evidence that they know truth, or is telling a lie.

Hope this helps

Re: Why Meditation Doesn't Directly Increase Happiness

#92

Post by blueprint »

omarchowdhury wrote: post #50
blueprint wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are huge numbers of claims, but who among the multitudes has the evidence? If any Buddhist monks or temple has Buddha's teachings, they should also have the ways of life from the problems to the resolutions. But they don't have them, and instead they use meditation to trick people into giving up the real answers. It's the same thing as giving themselves up. This is an important point and the root cause of this…

Since when was enlightenment equal to having perfect phenomenal knowledge? You seem to be equating enlightenment with omniscience. Are you not? Please tell us what questions you are asking as a qualifier on whether or not someone is enlightened.

> Since when was enlightenment equal to having perfect phenomenal knowledge?

Yes, one of the abilities of someone who attains Enlightenment is that they become able to perceive things in the world exactly as they are, and can inform them to people exactly.

> You seem to be equating enlightenment with omniscience. Are you not?

Not exactly, but it's like that. I can say that their vision is greatly widened because they see from a much higher level. There are some things they can see which are very distant, and sometimes they can help people who are also very distant, using their power of consciousness. However, I've heard Tathagata say he doesn't use his mind very much, and that he simply sees everything that is inside an object when it is in front of him.

There are many people who claim the ability to see through walls and tell where other people are (mediums). They do that by letting their consciousness contact and receive information latent inside energy that's in the air. They call that wandering energy by terms like spirits, ghosts, dead souls, etc. However, besides the fact that it can be very unreliable and dangerous to do so, a living Buddha never keeps company with the dead, and only informs people of what he saw with his own eyes.

> Please tell us what questions you are asking as a qualifier on whether or not someone is enlightened.

Answered this in a sibling question, let me know if you're left with any unanswered questions

Re: Why Meditation Doesn't Directly Increase Happiness

#93

Post by blueprint »

kinleyd wrote: post #83
blueprint wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for having an open mind. :) It's hard to meet someone like you. I learned like this from my teacher, a man who claims Supreme Enlightenment. He says that he is a Tathagata. It's the same name that Gautama Buddha said others should call Him while he is alive. All His teachings are free and for a while before he passed away he was available for answering the public's questions. Here's one site with some decent E…

Oh come on, blueprint, that is the Tathagata[1], the only other enlightened being besides the original Tathagata to have graced earth? And the bump on his forehead is the Third Eye? You've got to be kidding me! "Therefore, being diligent, frugal and honest are just right way and law to get happiness."[2] I think someone really missed the point here - this is probably taken directly out of the Protestant work ethic; d…

You're right, it definitely did not come from Buddhism. Buddha's teaching itself does not derive from Buddhism, nor Hinduism, nor any other religions. It's derived from the world itself.

Here's a quote I was able to transcribe this from Tathagata,

"I'll speak very clearly here. Buddhism has nothing to do with all the Buddhas."

Re: Why Meditation Doesn't Directly Increase Happiness

#94

Post by blueprint »

theorique wrote: post #89
blueprint wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for having an open mind. :) It's hard to meet someone like you. I learned like this from my teacher, a man who claims Supreme Enlightenment. He says that he is a Tathagata. It's the same name that Gautama Buddha said others should call Him while he is alive. All His teachings are free and for a while before he passed away he was available for answering the public's questions. Here's one site with some decent E…

I learned like this from my teacher, a man who claims Supreme Enlightenment. No offense intended, but where's the evidence? Yes, enlightenment is a personal and subjective experience, but do you have any independent citations or accounts of your teacher's enlightenment. e.g. his name, other followers, etc. Extraordinary clams require extraordinary evidence.

Yes, I'm sometimes in touch with a few of the other members. Tathagata's teachings are available for free online, his life story is there and he was a politician in Korea as well as a self-made businessman, so that should be easily verifiable.

What he asked people to do is to verify what he says before believing. In case you didn't see it, I left a link to one of the sites made by another member, it has some decent English translations. The proof that he is Enlightened is in the content of his teaching. Nobody who is not Enlightened can say the content that he has said. He also traveled the world to visit universities and religious institutions and met so many people. You can listen for yourself. Here's some audio of him meeting with American professors http://guiadelavida.com/audios.htm

Re: Why Meditation Doesn't Directly Increase Happiness

#95

Post by blueprint »

arjn wrote: post #61
blueprint wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gautama Buddha was a special case of someone in whose past lives there was endless awakening. It was for this reason that he was able to be born with very little karma left, making him able to get enlightenment through his individual practice of asceticism. So he's the one who became a Buddha for the very first time from being a Bodhisattva. But keep in mind that his practice was very different from anyone around him…

Regarding Gautama : you know this how ? Were you there when this (allegedly) happened ?

Could you make your question more concrete? (What do you mean by "this"?)

Re: Why Meditation Doesn't Directly Increase Happiness

#96

Post by omarchowdhury »

blueprint wrote: post #92
omarchowdhury wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when was enlightenment equal to having perfect phenomenal knowledge? You seem to be equating enlightenment with omniscience. Are you not? Please tell us what questions you are asking as a qualifier on whether or not someone is enlightened.

> Since when was enlightenment equal to having perfect phenomenal knowledge? Yes, one of the abilities of someone who attains Enlightenment is that they become able to perceive things in the world exactly as they are, and can inform them to people exactly. > You seem to be equating enlightenment with omniscience. Are you not? Not exactly, but it's like that. I can say that their vision is greatly widened because they…

Look. You are not enlightened, so you cannot know what it is to be enlightened. Simple logic.

From what you just wrote, you seem to think possession of abilities or 'siddhis' means one is enlightened. Buddha stated putting those into reverence is an impediment on the way to enlightenment.

Overall, take a look at your position. You are clinging to conventional knowledge. You are speaking of things you claim knowledge of, but never experienced firsthand. You then use your incomplete, second-hand knowledge as a basis for what enlightenment is and how a being is to get there. You are spreading false knowledge and ignorance. Become enlightened beyond any doubt and then come tell people who is wrong and why you are right.

Re: Why Meditation Doesn't Directly Increase Happiness

#97

Post by gawker »

omarchowdhury wrote: post #52
blueprint wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one has attained Enlightenment through Zen nor meditation in human history. Buddha himself never claimed he was enlightened through meditation. That's a fabrication of Buddhist monks whose level of consciousness is quite a bit lower than that of Gautama. Nowadays, the misunderstanding has been passed down for thousands of years, so what I'm saying now seems unacceptable in modern society. If you accept that medita…

Why couldn't anyone be enlightened? The Buddha said the true nature of all beings is that of enlightenment.

Yes,that is true (I'm most familiar with Nichiren Buddhism so I can only speak for that). Every living being's true nature is that of enlightenment.

Re: Why Meditation Doesn't Directly Increase Happiness

#98

Post by blueprint »

zbuc wrote: post #49
blueprint wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read your message - i've heard but never learned about anatta and anicca, so I don't know what experience you had. But I'm interested so I'd like to confirm about it through simple questions if it's alright.. So, my question is, what could you know (or become to realize) through that teaching? Thanks

You could come to realize the nature of reality, in Buddhist thought. The three marks of reality in Buddhism are anatta(not-self), annica(impermanence), and dukkha(suffering/dissatisfaction). The basic teachings of Buddha say that all things share those attributes. So, in practical terms, all things will pass, and things aren't necessarily what they seem, and attachment causes suffering. Even more practically -- don'…

When describing something in reality, we have to have some substantial matter to discuss, but I couldn't find any concrete things in what you said. For the sake of discussion, I'll mention that I can also discount some of them.

* Not-self: I is myself, even though what are in myself can be changed. I tend to produce results of a certain kind, indicating some coherent originator of those results (my self). Could you elaborate on a very concrete example (something which can be verified) of not-self?

* Impermanence: Things which are not true are impermanent, but the truth itself is fixed and permanent.

* Dukkha: This is the most dangerous trap in Buddhism. It's not a fact of reality that we have to suffer. If we don't have good society, nobody can be guaranteed to be happy. There are ways in Buddha's teachings to be happy. However, Buddhist monks often use this in a bad way and teach that people can be free from all their suffering if they meditate sufficiently and properly - and that this is Nirvana. But that's absolutely wrong. Nirvana does not mean cessation of suffering. Every living creature must receive influence from the environment, and so even a man who experienced Nirvana many times still suffers from things like hunger and the cold. What is different about him is that he has no anguish and illusion about them, and so the hate disappears.

Re: Why Meditation Doesn't Directly Increase Happiness

#99

Post by theorique »

blueprint wrote: post #94
theorique wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I learned like this from my teacher, a man who claims Supreme Enlightenment. No offense intended, but where's the evidence? Yes, enlightenment is a personal and subjective experience, but do you have any independent citations or accounts of your teacher's enlightenment. e.g. his name, other followers, etc. Extraordinary clams require extraordinary evidence.

Yes, I'm sometimes in touch with a few of the other members. Tathagata's teachings are available for free online, his life story is there and he was a politician in Korea as well as a self-made businessman, so that should be easily verifiable. What he asked people to do is to verify what he says before believing. In case you didn't see it, I left a link to one of the sites made by another member, it has some decent E…

Thanks! I will take a look.

Re: Why Meditation Doesn't Directly Increase Happiness

#100

Post by KenjiCrosland »

kinleyd wrote: post #80
ChrisNorstrom wrote: post #65

Should be Titled: "Why Meditation Doesn't Directly Increase MY Happiness". For me it does but I practice a very different and rare form of meditation. I can only call it "Sleeping Awake". Which took a while to achieve. Basically, when you go to sleep at night your body slows its breathing & heart rate and you loose feeling of your limbs, while your mind looses consciousness and you black out. Your body and mind shut…

@ChrisNorstrom: I agree with you, as an hour a day of meditation for a year (which is a lot and highly commendable) didn't seem to work for KenjiCrosland. I too am a novice in pursuit of happiness, with just some basic lessons taken from teachers plus some self learning. However, like you my experience has been much more positive. My take is similar to what others have mentioned in their comments: meditation is but o…

I suppose I didn't make it clear enough in my post, but the practice over the year has led to a significant increase in well-being for me. Emotions, though they may be felt more strongly, also pass more quickly. Instead of a unsustainable happiness or Euphoria, it's more like a pervading sense of peace. I don't think I could have kept it up if this wasn't the case!
Post reply on HN