A common misperception.

No holds barred discussion on the Buddhadharma. Argue about rebirth, karma, commentarial interpretations etc. Be nice to each other.

Re: A common misperception.

Postby Simon E. » Fri Jan 03, 2014 2:47 pm

seeker242 wrote:Stop identifying with samsara? But if "samsara is nirvana", what need is there to do that? Nirvana is free from suffering, is it not? So if you identify with Nirvana, where is the problem? :thinking:

Identifying with Nirvana is to stop identifying with Samsara...isn't it ? And that identifying isn't merely an act of will. It is to see the way that we 'do ' Samsara as an ongoing process.
.
Simon E.
 
Posts: 2138
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: A common misperception.

Postby theanarchist » Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:06 pm

seeker242 wrote:Stop identifying with samsara? But if "samsara is nirvana", what need is there to do that? Nirvana is free from suffering, is it not? So if you identify with Nirvana, where is the problem? :thinking:



Samsara is not nirvana. Samsara and nirvana are two different states of mind, ways to perceive the same reality.
theanarchist
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 7:26 pm

Re: A common misperception.

Postby smcj » Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:21 pm

theanarchist wrote:
seeker242 wrote:Stop identifying with samsara? But if "samsara is nirvana", what need is there to do that? Nirvana is free from suffering, is it not? So if you identify with Nirvana, where is the problem? :thinking:

Samsara is not nirvana. Samsara and nirvana are two different states of mind, ways to perceive the same reality...

…as seen in the Mahayana.
smcj
 
Posts: 1451
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: A common misperception.

Postby dharmagoat » Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:22 pm

theanarchist wrote:Samsara is not nirvana. Samsara and nirvana are two different states of mind, ways to perceive the same reality.

That is my understanding too, that samsara and nirvana are both perceptions, with samsara being the 'common misperception'.
User avatar
dharmagoat
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:39 pm

Re: A common misperception.

Postby PadmaVonSamba » Fri Jan 03, 2014 7:16 pm

seeker242 wrote: What's the difference? If inseparable means "cannot be treated separately" then how can you say they are different?


As has been said here, they are both ways of experiencing the same causes.
They are both awareness arising with objects of awareness
one is confused arising, the other isn't.
So, confusion is not the same thing as clarity.

"inseparable" means that the person with clear awareness
and the person with confused awareness
are both traveling on the same road.
It's not as though they are headed in opposite directions.
.
.
.
Profile Picture: "The Foaming Monk"
The Chinese characters are Fo (buddha) and Ming (bright). The image is of a student of Buddhism, who, imagining himself to be a monk, and not understanding the true meaning of the words takes the sound of the words literally. Likewise, People on web forums sometime seem to be foaming at the mouth.
Original painting by P.Volker /used by permission.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
 
Posts: 2800
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: A common misperception.

Postby seeker242 » Sat Jan 04, 2014 1:45 pm

Sorry! I'm not following. If samsara and nirvana are states of mind (or whatever you want to call it), that are inseparable, then how can you be free of suffering? Didn't the Buddha separate himself from suffering? And that is why people started calling him "The Buddha? Sorry! I'm not following!

If samsara is suffering, and nirvana is freedom from suffering, and the two can't be separated, then it would follow that it's impossible to be free from suffering, would it not? Sorry! I'm not following!

If samsara is an activity, and you stop doing the activity of samsara and start doing the activity (or non activity) of nirvana, then wouldn't samsara be replaced with nirvana? If samsara is the activity and you stop doing the activity, then where can you find that activity that you stopped doing? :shrug:
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe!
User avatar
seeker242
 
Posts: 645
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:50 pm
Location: South Florida, USA

Re: A common misperception.

Postby Simon E. » Sat Jan 04, 2014 2:23 pm

If its not useful put it to one side. Concepts are only concepts in the end.
Simon E.
 
Posts: 2138
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: A common misperception.

Postby Jesse » Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:09 pm

seeker242 wrote:Sorry! I'm not following. If samsara and nirvana are states of mind (or whatever you want to call it), that are inseparable, then how can you be free of suffering? Didn't the Buddha separate himself from suffering? And that is why people started calling him "The Buddha? Sorry! I'm not following!

If samsara is suffering, and nirvana is freedom from suffering, and the two can't be separated, then it would follow that it's impossible to be free from suffering, would it not? Sorry! I'm not following!

If samsara is an activity, and you stop doing the activity of samsara and start doing the activity (or non activity) of nirvana, then wouldn't samsara be replaced with nirvana? If samsara is the activity and you stop doing the activity, then where can you find that activity that you stopped doing? :shrug:


Samsara is to exist while clinging to phenomena, and a self as inherently existing and real, and permanent.
Nirvana is to exist while not clinging to phenomena, or a self of any kind, and to see the nature of everything as impermanent, and illusory.

I imagine they are inseparable because what is perceived is the same, its the way in which it's understood, or not understood that changes.

or so they say.
User avatar
Jesse
 
Posts: 413
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 6:54 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Previous

Return to Open Dharma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Lhug-Pa, Norwegian, Simon E. and 12 guests

>