In his talk, he says that it doesn't even matter what religion you are, you can find the truth in the noble Eightfold Path. And you know, that is so very true, because I am Catholic and I continue to be Catholic even as I work on the Eightfold Path and focus on it. And it has deepened and strengthened my Catholicism.
Thank you for the beautiful talk. I have been listening to Ajahn Brahm fir a while and this is the first time I listen to you sir, and I found out that you are such an eloquent speaker. I am looking forward to hear your other teachings.
Try just following the Path, forget being a Buddhist. Learn Dhamma and live it as a non-Buddhist. Then you'll really be a Buddhist. Genuine Buddhism is not expressed in statues or trinkets or rituals.
The Noble Eightfold Path: - The permanence of impermanence. - Applying the lessons of The Eightfold Path can bring peace, to the fluctuation of the rising and falling of different conditions in life. - Although the "mapped path" may not be exact or perfect. The point in studying and applying The Eightfold Path is to transition the mind into understanding and thus tranquility. - You don't have to have ever done your taxes. Sadhu Sadhu! +1
Does right mindfulness mean being aware of the present moment or being aware of four foundation of mindfulness? Does right samadhi mean breathing meditation? Does right effort include right celibacy, right food, right sleep, right cloth,right entertainment, right responsibility,right loving kindness? Does right livelihood include earning money as a need but not as greed?If I only follow this eight fold path,do I need the abhidhamma or thirty seven factors of enlightenment or faith in buddha or believe in rebirth?
Well, Bhante, a short while after the talk, on reflection I could name the eightfold path, having not known it, so thanks for that. And I also thought, OK, I do some of that, it feels right, but, wow, there's so much to do, so much to let go of to do so little, however easy or hard it is. How much of that path can be walked in one lifetime by a lay person without leaving lay life and one's hair behind, I wonder? We don't just have the one lifetime, it seems, so no hurry, you might say, but I wondered nonetheless.
I think what Eddie was trying to find out is that the difference between Enlightenment and Nirvana is that enlightenment, by definition, is the wisdom of emptiness, a state in which you're mind is soo still that it is also soo very sensitive (in the sense that it is soo aware). Enlightenment was reached by the Buddha through direct personal experience with conditional and interconnected reality. He was enlightened and understood the true state of nature. Nirvana is described as an end to all suffering, where the cycle of samsara will no longer turn, where the Buddha will not suffer again in this lifetime and all future lifetimes, "I would exist and not exist at the same time. I would abide in nirvana." So enlightenment is reached in this lifetime, nirvana is the ending to suffering by not being reborn. Unless I'm wrong, would love to get another description?...
Gee Cheung Maybe in some Mahayana texts, but in Theravada, in the original teachings, they are the same. Two sides of the same coin. Too many concepts. More letting go!
