Dharma Wheel

oushi wrote: So, we have a natural "being" that reacts to circumstances, and another one that comprehends reality through thoughts, projects them into the future, and tries to influence this natural "being" so his expectations can come true. This mechanism is driven by karma, and creates karma. When this natural "being" is left alone, there is unconditioned pleasure, which is a natural state.

So when in natural being an action arises, by what is it driven?

Gwenn Dana wrote:

oushi wrote: So, we have a natural "being" that reacts to circumstances, and another one that comprehends reality through thoughts, projects them into the future, and tries to influence this natural "being" so his expectations can come true. This mechanism is driven by karma, and creates karma. When this natural "being" is left alone, there is unconditioned pleasure, which is a natural state.

So when in natural being an action arises, by what is it driven?

I have an unconventional book in front of me (The Sovereign All-Creating Mind - The Motherly Buddha - A Translation of the Kun byed rgyal po'i mdo by Neumaier-Dargyay) which lists the following attributes as "drivers".
I surprised desire isn't one of the main "drivers"... but maybe I'm just ignorant

1. Anger/Hatred
2. Attachment
3. Ignorance
4. Jealously
5. Pride

Now this is the cherry on the cake!

A non Buddhist asking a Buddhist that has no formal learning and practice about "what the natural state is", receiving an answer from somebody that has barely begun their journey on the Buddhist path (mis) quoting from an apocryphal text.

Somebody drag me out and shoot me please. Put me out of my misery!

Hmm. Where did you find all those labels on the people? No wonder I cannot see them when you collected them all.

Gwenn Dana wrote:Hmm. Where did you find all those labels on the people?

Wikipedia and an online dictionary, as a descriptor for the phrase "the blind leading the blind". It's amazing what you can find on wikipedia!

Gwenn Dana wrote:

oushi wrote: So, we have a natural "being" that reacts to circumstances, and another one that comprehends reality through thoughts, projects them into the future, and tries to influence this natural "being" so his expectations can come true. This mechanism is driven by karma, and creates karma. When this natural "being" is left alone, there is unconditioned pleasure, which is a natural state.

So when in natural being an action arises, by what is it driven?

We can assume that causality is the driving force for it, whatever it may be, but this drive takes place in the present. Intention is past (because knowledge comes from the past) projected into future.

Sherab Dorje wrote:Somebody drag me out and shoot me please. Put me out of my misery!

I heard about a guy named Buddha, it is told he found the way out. You should check it out.

oushi wrote: We can assume that causality is the driving force for it, whatever it may be, but this drive takes place in the present. Intention is past (because knowledge comes from the past) projected into future.

Hm. Knowledge is past reconstructed in the present. But you could also say past experience enables the present so that the knowledge appears in the present (it could appear as an intuition, a habit, which does not need an active comparison between something remembered and what is sensed now).

But when I keep up "right intention", then that intention matters only in the now. It is only important in those moments where there is a necessity felt to keep it up. A tension, a disagreement, a defilement. Does that mean I project it into the future? I don't think so. If I do, there is bad karma.

Somebody who wants to give up smoking does best never give up smoking, or he will fold under the pain of never being allowed one cigarette again. That comes with a perceived loss, and as long as that loss is felt, it causes bad karma and there is no liberation.

But somebody could, whenever the body picks up a cigarette and lights it, intend not to smoke it, and put it back down. Then, at some time laying down the cigarette becomes a habit. And at a time later, thinking of cigarettes will cease. And if it comes back, it won't have a pull to it. It will not make you smoke that cigarette. You will probably laugh at the thought.

Best wishes
Gwenn

Gwenn Dana wrote:But when I keep up "right intention", then that intention matters only in the now. It is only important in those moments where there is a necessity felt to keep it up. A tension, a disagreement, a defilement. Does that mean I project it into the future? I don't think so. If I do, there is bad karma.

It's all karma, no point in differentiating it into good and bad. You always do what you think is good for you, but how do you know it's good? Who told you that?

Gwenn Dana wrote:But somebody could decide whenever the body picks up a cigarette and lights it, that he now does not intend to smoke it, and put it back down.

That is an inner fight that creates further karma. Instead of fighting with fire, find the arsonist.

Hmm. There is none. Sometimes there arises an impression of an observer of it. Who knows.

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

Intention is the only tool we have, and the only problem we have.

garudha wrote:"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

That is just a common saying, not a Dharma quote.

It probably originated with some Christian scholars reading Virgil and got further scrambled by Samuel Johnson. Now it's just quoted as if it means something.

Adi

oushi wrote:

moron wrote:My understanding for now is that it can not exist action without motivation.It may be that only Buddhas or Arahants can have this. What do you think?

There is a mechanism that drives the body toward goals. Evolution based survival mechanism. It is unconscious. And there is another one that takes advantage of the first one. Working with ideas it develops a way to directs this mechanism toward goals he sees as valuable. It develops motives and presents them. If those motives are sufficient, intention arises. This is the "carrot" system of hope. There is also the "stick" system of stress.
So, we have a natural "being" that reacts to circumstances, and another one that comprehends reality through thoughts, projects them into the future, and tries to influence this natural "being" so his expectations can come true. This mechanism is driven by karma, and creates karma. When this natural "being" is left alone, there is unconditioned pleasure, which is a natural state.

Thank you.

moron wrote:There is a mechanism that drives the body toward goals. Evolution based survival mechanism. It is unconscious. And there is another one that takes advantage of the first one. Working with ideas it develops a way to directs this mechanism toward goals he sees as valuable. It develops motives and presents them. If those motives are sufficient, intention arises. This is the "carrot" system of hope. There is also the "stick" system of stress.
So, we have a natural "being" that reacts to circumstances, and another one that comprehends reality through thoughts, projects them into the future, and tries to influence this natural "being" so his expectations can come true. This mechanism is driven by karma, and creates karma. When this natural "being" is left alone, there is unconditioned pleasure, which is a natural state.

This is not Buddhism. Not by a long shot. This is oushi-ism at it's finest!

Sherab Dorje wrote:This is not Buddhism. Not by a long shot. This is oushi-ism at it's finest!

I think that it was obvious, but thank you for pointing it out.

Sherab Dorje wrote:

moron wrote:There is a mechanism that drives the body toward goals. Evolution based survival mechanism. It is unconscious. And there is another one that takes advantage of the first one. Working with ideas it develops a way to directs this mechanism toward goals he sees as valuable. It develops motives and presents them. If those motives are sufficient, intention arises. This is the "carrot" system of hope. There is also the "stick" system of stress.
So, we have a natural "being" that reacts to circumstances, and another one that comprehends reality through thoughts, projects them into the future, and tries to influence this natural "being" so his expectations can come true. This mechanism is driven by karma, and creates karma. When this natural "being" is left alone, there is unconditioned pleasure, which is a natural state.

This is not Buddhism. Not by a long shot. This is oushi-ism at it's finest!

Hi Sherab Dorje,
can you point the mistakes you see in the Oushi post.I consider my self Dharma practitioner with a lot of misunderstandings
so I am here to learn..
thank you

ps.I am specifically interested of how can Intention be used for dispelling obstacles on the path.links to readable text are very welcome.

oushi wrote:I think that it was obvious, but thank you for pointing it out.

It is not obvious to a beginner like "moron" who may have come to this site in the hope of learning something about Buddhism.

moron wrote:can you point the mistakes you see in the Oushi post

It's not a matter of mistakes, the whole thing barely accords with Buddhist theory. I'm not saying his view is right or wrong per se, but it definitely does not accord with a Buddhist perspective

ps.I am specifically interested of how can Intention be used for dispelling obstacles on the path.links to readable text are very welcome.

Try this link for a heap of teachings and commentaries on intention.

Sherab Dorje wrote:definitely does not accord with a Buddhist perspective

Sorry to disagree.
"True man of no rank" is a known concept in Zen, you will find hope and fear probably in every school of Buddhism. The oppressor, appears under the name of Mara in sutras, and it was directly stated by the Buddha that intention is karma. As you can see here, different methods and parables were used to describe this issue, which I presented in this unique way. There is nothing about evolution in Dharma, that I would know of, but I think we can live with that.

PS. I was asked what I think, not what Buddhist theory says about it. I honestly answered the question. If you can point out my error, I will be grateful.