27 Nov 2021 Q & A with Delson Armstrong

um hello i have a question yes first of all thank you for sharing your time and knowledge with us can you can you hear me good i can hear you well yes okay well thank you um i have a question about gandaba in general if you can tell us what you know about gandaba and then a following up question to that okay so when it comes to the gandaba uh as far as i understand it and as far as i have uh read about and understood it from my own contemplation about it uh there's two understandings of gandaba gandaba is also uh related to the in sanskrit they call gandharvas

which are in the central heavens uh specifically as far as i'm aware the tavatims heavens and there is the other understanding of gandaba as being a carrier for karma so when we talk about rebirth for example from one lifetime to the next that specific word that's sometimes used in the suttas is gandaba that is the rebirth linking consciousness which transfers the formations from one lifetime to the next lifetime so it is known as also the evolving consciousness it's translated sometimes as that as well so in that second understanding um it's really only that very brief becoming of the next like the in between the last and the very first consciousness of the new being

yeah so like you what you would say is for example at that point of death the the craving arises that craving then gives rise to formations that the mind clings to the effect of that clinging gives rise to a new consciousness that new consciousness itself is gun is the gandama which then becomes the first consciousness which then dissipates as soon as it lands or takes root let's say into the new nama rupa into the into the new mind and body okay um what about the understanding of gandaba residing in paraloka netherworld um are you talking yeah yeah my current understanding uh is or was um that there is a netherworld para loka being mentioned in the suttas um and for instance if there is merit for um for being uh for for being a human being and then let's say that human being um

the life ends before the marriage for human beings over and then it returns to the paraloka until the next condition is given to become a human being so what you're talking about is like a phase where there's an interval period there's like an intermission between one life to the next and this is sort of like a like a purgatory kind of place like a waiting area yes yes yes exactly that's why that's what i read about it yes yeah okay i i don't know if i've come across it in the sutras myself but my understanding is that rebirth is spontaneous and spontaneous means not just uh spontaneous generation in the deva lokas or in the brahma lokas or in the hungry goes to hell realms but spontaneous meaning there is no under bhava under bhava is the the specific uh poly term even though there is actually a term for anta bhava parinabhiati uh which is for the anagami and uh usually the way the commentaries talk about it is that the anagami will go into this interval period uh or become an araha just before landing and all these other notions

but to clarify that particular thing of the antarabhava what they're talking about is just before the end of that previous life because even the systems of the bardos as i understand it or as i interpret it from my understanding of the suttas these are all still within the mental realm of that mind just before it passes away so the experiences that seem to be near-death experiences the experiences that seem to be bardo or interval periods or these kinds of things are still happening in the scope of that particular nama rupa of the previous life before it takes birth into a new life

okay thank you very much you're welcome hello can you yes yeah actually i have a question about near that experience like many people which are alive after like they die for a moment uh they most of the time they explain like they've seen a pa like a very big guy white beard and going to the tunnel it is very like common experience for people explain explaining near-death experience so whose are those being like that big guy and what is the like most of people go so this is going to be dependent upon the belief system of that particular individual so if a person has a specific kind of belief system then they will have an interpretation of those beings in the way that they have been brought up to think of those beings and those are dependent upon the sankharas of that mind

so some people have visions of angels or some people have visions of devas or some people have visions of animals some people have visions of half human half animals some people have visions of hungry ghosts and that's all dependent upon the formations if the quality of formations have been rooted in greed hatred or delusion there is a tendency for that mind to have remorse or a tendency for that mind to bring up fear or a tendency for that mind to bring up some kind of negative unwholesome emotion which then gives rise to further craving which gives rise to resistance and aversion and so on and when that happens that affect that fear that affected that fear it can give rise to rebirth in a lower realm because that person is fueling that experience

that's why um if you ever come across some of bante's talks bountiful ramsi's talks he talked about how when he was in the nursing home and at the hospice when people passed away they sometimes experienced uh some kind of unwholesome emotion and that gave rise to an experience of this otherworldly being that was uh maybe scary or fright frightening to them and bonte would try to get them to let go of that and start to take the precepts and then start to get more wholesome in their mindset after they took the precepts and that at least at that point in time allows them to let go of that and then deviate or incline their mind towards wholesome states of mind which lead to wholesome existences in the future so what we what you might refer to might be common among some people but not all people uh some people reports you know seeing light at the end of the tunnel some people report seeing some kind of being or some kind of angelic being and so on so

i would just say that those things uh though they seem common they're actually dependent upon formations which in itself are dependent upon previous choices and experiences so for example of somebody's brought brought up in a certain kind of belief system which is let's say a christian belief system for example and they have a certain notion of how angels look or how certain heavenly beings look and they have wholesome mindsets they might start to envision those beings as being angelic dependent upon their idea of what they look like or somebody's been brought up in a

let's say buddhist or hindu or indian belief system then they will have visions of devas if they have wholesome mindsets because that's how they equate a heavenly realm to be that's how they equate heavenly beings to be Can I ask one more question? Sure. Yeah, it's okay to mix metta and anapanna. I'm not able to hear you actually. Can you say that again? It is okay to mix anapanna and metta in one second.

No, not at all. If you want to follow the instructions that are given for the metta practice, that is basically experiencing the metta in as a feeling in the chest. It's a warm feeling in the chest and you allow the mind to rest in that feeling. But you have nothing to do with the breath. If you want to do just anapana, then you don't focus on any kind of feeling in the chest. You're just using the instructions that are there in the anapana sati sutta. uh i have a follow-up question can we use six hours for anapanasophy yeah why not you could use six hours for any object in meditation thank you you're welcome question from my side uh you talked about the precepts and that it gives that it helps the mind to be tranquil and and also we call the conversation about the relationship between taking the precepts and the hindrances which arise during one's meditation

could you elaborate a little bit in that in terms of how you know in the mind in our meditation we have hindrances coming up that actually relate back to you know in previous times where we may not have followed one of the precepts yeah yeah so let's talk about hindrances we have uh specifically five hindrances that are mentioned in some sutras but there are also upa kilesas there are other hindrances that are mentioned mentioned for example in majminikaya one two eight but the five basic hindrances that we understand are sensual craving aversion restlessness doubt and slot and torpor and they will arise because of having breaking having broken a precept uh in the past so there was some point in time whether it was in this lifetime or whether it was in a previous lifetime or many lifetimes ago where a precept was broken and the effect of that because when you break a precept the idea of breaking a precept is with intention that means that if you harm a living being or kill a living being there has to be intention

if you accidentally step on a bug because you didn't see it there was no intention in there so that's not actually breaking a precept but you see a bug and you stomp your foot with intention to kill that insect then there is intention there or any of the other precepts that we talk about if you break them with intention then in the next moment or in the next series of moments or at some future time it will arise as a form of a hindrance so you look at it from the context of formations choice and intention and karma if there was an intention to break a precept that intention was followed through and therefore that is karma in the form of activity

That activity gives rise to further formations that deviate the mind towards those hindrances. Deviate the mind towards unwholesome choices. And those hindrances that arise arise as an effect of the previous choices of breaking those precepts. So it's a snowball effect. And then when they arise, those hindrances are to be treated as old karma. Old karma is that which is to be experienced and felt. But if you react to a hindrance in the form of trying to control it, trying to suppress it, trying to push it, trying to do anything with it except for the 6R's, then you will further aggravate those hindrances from arising. You will strengthen those hindrances. You will strengthen the restlessness or the sloth and torpor, or whatever it might be.

But if you do the 6R's, what you are doing is practicing right effort, and you are practicing the Eightfold Path. And as we understand the Eightfold Path, it is also the path leading to the cessation of karma, specifically old karma. So when you act through right effort, by understanding and recognizing, here is a hindrance, not trying to push it, not trying to pull it, just seeing it, releasing your attention from it, relaxing the formations, that is to say relaxing the craving attached to that, then re-smiling, so that you come back to a wholesome object, and then returning to your object of meditation, in this case if it's metta, it's metta, or any of the brahmaviharas, and then maintaining that, and repeating. Anytime the hindrance comes again. The thing about this is, the hindrance will arise. It might arise again, but it will be weaker, because you haven't aggravated it. You haven't strengthened it with any kind of reaction outside of the scope of right effort. If you use right effort, you weaken the hindrance, and therefore it will arise but much weaker, and eventually it will fade away completely.

Now, there is a connection, as I understand it and as I put forward, the understanding of the hindrance and the precept that is taken or broken in this case. So when you kill, when you harm, or you kill with intention, that brings up aversion, that brings up ill will. When you have any kind of taking that is not given, when you steal and you take something that is not freely given, that gives rise to restlessness. When you have any kind of sensual misconduct, that includes sexual misconduct, that is to say you become attached to some kind of sensual experience

to the point of harming others or harming yourself, that gives rise to sensual craving. When you use false speech, that gives rise to, or that false speech, by the way, could include slander, could include harsh speech, could include gossip, all kinds of things. When you do any of that, that can give rise to the hindrance of doubt. And when you indulge in any kind of intoxicants, alcohol or drugs or whatever it might be, that can give rise to sloth and torpor, because it dulls the mind.

So the reason why I put forward this, put forward in this way, is because if you think about it, when you have an intention of ill will, that is liable to cause the hindrance of ill will. When you have this need to take something that is not given, whether it's possessions, whether it's credit, whether it's seeking attention where it's not given, then that's liable to cause a restless and agitated mind, a mind with remorse and anxiety, and so on.

When you have any kind of sensual misconduct, when you become attached to any kind of sensual experience and act in a way that is unbefitting of the Noble Eightfold Path, then that invariably will cause you to create or strengthen that hindrance of sensual craving. When you use false speech, when you use gossip, when you use slander, you start to doubt other people. And that also translates into doubt about yourself. And it also translates into doubt about what is wholesome or unwholesome.

And therefore, there is the hindrance of doubt that arises. And finally, when you indulge in any kind of intoxicant that could also include reading or watching the news too much or playing video games for a long time or spending too much time on the internet and so on that can dull the mind that can dull the senses that can dull the mindfulness and therefore you can have slot and twerper hello um can i ask my question yes you can thank you very much um so my question is i have heard that um para nirvana is like the if i find the definition that i heard like an annihilation it's like an extinction completely of what was this person and so um does paranirvana is like what we believe about death that is the termination of the soul and if it's the case why why one would wish to to attain or to to be in the paranirvana yeah parinirvana or parinibbana as it's known in pali parinirvana is the sanskrit that is basically the eradication of or the ending of the five aggregates when somebody becomes an arahat they are no longer a being

because they no longer attach or identify with any of the five aggregates but they are neither a non-being as well the reason i say that is because is the understanding that there was no self as we understand self to be to begin with so the notion that prairie nibbana is annihilation comes from the idea that there must be some sense of self and it's the complete annihilation of that self at prairie nibbana but the realization of nibbana in itself and specifically with the realization of awakening in the form of arahatship in full liberation is the understanding that there is no more becoming there is no more coming into being there is no more renewal of existence and what that means is the definition of a being is

that where there is an attachment, an identification of an idea of self with one or more of the five aggregates. But in the case of the arahant, they have completely let go of any kind of identification with any of the five aggregates. So parinibbana is nothing more than just a dissolution of the body, and that mind of the arahant experiences final nirvana or nibbana for the final time, and then the aggregates are dissolved. So it's not really an extinction, it's not really an annihilation. It is the cessation of the five aggregates for the final time.

And the understanding is that rebirth, as we understand rebirth in this wheel of samsara, is suffering. The reason why everybody is here is because there was craving at some point that led to a rebirth in this lifetime. And the situation is such that one doesn't recall previous lifetimes, and so there is just this idea of one life, from birth to death. But as you realize that there is rebirth happening in every moment, and there is no control over it, and it becomes tiresome, you have an intrinsic understanding of dukkha moment to moment, and that can be

extrapolated on the macro level and understood that if rebirth exists here, and if rebirth exists on the macro level, then it is suffering to having to come back to samsara in one way or another. And so the cessation of rebirth, the cessation of rebirth, is equal to the cessation of suffering. And therefore, when you talk about parinibbana, there is no more arising of any kind of new consciousness that will take further rebirth in a new life, and so continue that cycle of samsara. Really what we're talking about is the dissolution of the aggregates

and no longer having any more rebirth, in what is really the majority of samsara, is suffering. So it's a process in which there is no more coming into suffering anymore. Okay, thank you very much. You're welcome. There is also another question, if I may. I may associate it. It's about the jhana. I have heard many different definitions about jhana, about how deep meditative, meditating states must be to be a jhana. So some jhana, some first jhana, can be very light, and we can even hear things around us, and some first jhana are so deep that it's very, very hard to reach them. And I was wondering

if both definitions can be right. Is there something similar between a light first jhana and a very deep first jhana, like a similar pattern that happened? Yeah, so the way we've experienced jhana through the TWIM practice is where, if there is contact with the body or contact with any of the six sense bases, there is an awareness of that, because what we're doing is, it's not just jhana, but it's also, it's not just samatha which incorporates jhana, but it's also vipassana, which is to say it incorporates insight. That's why TWIM is called Tranquil Wisdom Insight Meditation, because there is an understanding of things as they arise in the practice, as they arise in the meditation. So the jhana that is there in which there is no contact, or there is no contact experienced, meaning there's no sensation experienced, where if somebody were to tap on the shoulder or call the person by their name, that's a very, very deep concentrated jhana. But in that process of that deep concentrated jhana

it also suppresses the mind, which includes the hindrances. So if you're suppressing the hindrances, you're not really having any kind of transformation. This process of jhana, if you want to call it light jhana, is really where you are in a collected state of mind, not a one-pointed, focused, concentrated state of mind, but a mind that has the attention on its object of meditation, but the awareness is open enough so that if hindrances arise, they can be dealt with right there and then, using right effort and the 6R's process. And at the same time it gives space for insights to arise as well. So when we talk about the sutta jhanas, really that's what we're talking about, where the jhanas aren't so deep and concentrated that they suppress the mind, but rather there is the right balance of samatha and vipassana, serenity and insight, so that you're able to be collected enough and calm enough in your mind to be able to see the hindrances and to be able to see the insights, and deal with the hindrances using right effort. Okay, thank you very much. If I may, I have a question. Yes.

It's good to see you, very nice to see you, Delson. Thank you, very nice to see everyone. This is not a question on the practice; it is more a question on a sutta that I read, and I have some questions on that. It's a story about a person who was basically a murderer, and he was in the woods, and he wore a garland of fingers.

The question is about, it was kind of interesting how the running of the Buddha and he was chasing him and all that was kind of interesting, but that's not the question. The question was when he became i guess a bhikkhu and uh or he became um either whatever attainment it was but um the the people in the neighborhood were were still throwing things at him because they considered him a murderer and there was a woman that was pregnant or something like that or had a child and the buddha told him just tell them that you're not that you didn't do that

Is, did he tell him that because he was reborn and he was no longer that person? And he could say that because it almost seemed like a lie, so to speak, right? Because he was a murderer before, right? That's the first question. Why would he say that he didn't do this thing that he used to do? I'm assuming it was because he was reborn. And then the second question is, there was a note with regards to, he was of noble birth, right? That individual who was a murderer was of noble birth. And it seemed like because of that, it was easier for this person to attain this attainment. Was that because people of noble birth had a prior life that was good, and that's why they were born into noble birth, and it was easier, I guess, to have this attainment?

So those are two questions, and I excuse myself if it was a bit confusing. No, I understand the question, but I think I'm going to need the aid of our sutta expert here. Sil, just to clarify what Umberto said in reference to the woman giving birth. I don't remember it, actually. I was a bit surprised to hear Umberto say that because I don't remember it, so I'm not going to be helpful for you today, Delson. I think it was 140 something, 140 something. It wasn't there, it wasn't there. There is an Angulimala sutta or something like that. I know there is one in the Tipitaka, but the numbering is so confusing that I can't find it currently. It's with these Roman letters. So yeah, yeah. I think it's 86 here. It says the Angulimala sutta, but I don't know if it's uh

I did read this in the Nikaya. Yeah. Let me see, and it was number, he said 86. I believe 86, 86, 86. Ah, yes. Um, yes. He saw a certain woman in difficult labor, in painful labor. When he saw this he thought, how beings are afflicted, indeed how beings are afflicted. And then he goes back to the Buddha and tells him about that woman and that thought, and the Buddha says, in that case Angulimala, go into Savatthi and say to that woman, sister, since I was born I do not recall that I have ever intentionally deprived a living being of life; by this truth may you be well and may your infant be well. And then Angulimala says, venerable sir, wouldn't I be telling a deliberate lie, for I have intentionally deprived many living beings of life? Then Angulimala goes to Savatthi and says to that woman, sister, since I was born with the noble birth I do not recall that I have ever intentionally deprived a living being of life; by this truth may you be well and may your infant be well.

So, yes, that is the part, and then he attains arahatship. Oh, he attains arahat, yes, he attains arahatship, after giving her the merit base. Okay, so noble birth as I understand it would mean that he entered the stream at the very least, since he entered the stream, because then when they use the word noble it comes from the word ariya. So when they use, for example, a noble disciple, it comes from the word noble, ariya savaka. Whenever you see the word noble in that context, it's talking about somebody who has attained nibbana at least one time, who has entered the stream at the very least. So since he entered the stream he did not, since that point onwards

he didn't kill anybody he didn't commit a murder and therefore if he's telling the truth may that person be well now the other point to understand about stream entry is it cuts off any kind of liability of entering any lower realm below the human realm because now right view has been understood the four noble truths have been seen there is an understanding of the path and there's no longer any doubt in the path there's no long so the first three fetters which can cause rebirth in lower realms has been eradicated now what's also interesting to note you mentioned before which is that the people they start throwing stones at him because they were still angry and upset of the fact that he had committed murders before which shows that even whether it's a stream enter or whether it's an arahant they still have to experience the effects of their previous actions prior to awakening prior especially prior to full awakening one prime example of this which i use often is the example of moglana moglana was one of the chief disciples of the buddha

And in one of his previous lives, it's understood that he killed his parents, and the immediate birth that he had was then in a hell realm, but the seed of that experience, the seed of that karma, was still latent in that mind, latent in that life. So even after attaining arahatship he had to experience the effect of his previous unwholesome choices. So, and just because you become fully awake doesn't mean that you eradicate any possibility of further consequences of previous choices, previous decisions and actions that you took prior to full awakening. Does that make sense? Yes, it does. Thank you.

You're welcome. I have one more question, if I may. When someone becomes a stream enterer and they see dependent origination happening, and they are in their day-to-day life and individuals may be unpolite to this individual, and you see this unpolite nature, and it may, it could provide compassion and understanding that the person is reacting to their conditions and consequences. When that happens, it's almost like an annoyance for that individual. Should they just 6R's that annoyance? Yes. Yes.

The point here is, if you notice, if somebody notices that there is an irritation at another person being impolite or being rude or being belligerent or whatever it might be, you consider that, or it is that it is in that reality, but you consider that for the mind that this is an effect or a consequence of something you did in the past to that person at some point or another, and so this is the effect of that choice, the effect of that action. Now, if the mind were to take that personally and attach onto it and then react from there, what's happening is you're continuing to strengthen that cycle of karma. But if you see it as being impersonal, and seeing that that is that person's choice to be in that way, and send them loving kindness, and you notice the irritation and you 6R's right there and then, and you don't consequently strengthen

that reaction from them, and instead maybe they'll react again, but because they've seen a different side of you, let's say, or a different way which is rooted in loving kindness, which is rooted in compassion, they may think of what they said or they may think of what they did and may react differently a second time. But regardless of how they react, that's their responsibility. One's responsibility is to see how the mind processes and reacts to that situation, and if it has any kind of aggravation, if it has any kind of irritation, then one notices that and 6R's it, then replaces it with loving kindness and compassion.

Thank you. There's one more question. Yeah. In the TWIM practice, we learn to share loving kindness and even compassion. You can also do this with equanimity. That's the question. Yes, you can. Yes, you can. Oftentimes loving kindness might be needed because you see a person is in conflict with you, or there's two people in conflict, and you radiate loving kindness to them, and you radiate compassion to them. Compassion, as we understand it, is basically giving the space to the other person who is suffering to be able to be in their suffering

because if you take that away from them, then it takes away the possibility of them to learn from it and be able to uplift themselves from that. So compassion is being there for them but not being a crutch for them, not being some kind of escape from them. You're not a, you're not a nobody, here is a savior of another person. Everybody is responsible for their own experiences and how they deal with those experiences. You can be there as a support and radiate compassion. We talk about joy in the meditation, the experience of joy in the meditation. The mudita is just this very content joy, but in day-to-day life there are people who have wholesome successes

and so you can radiate joy to them for being happy for their success. You can radiate equanimity towards a person if they are upset, or you see that they're irritated with you, or you see that there is pain that is arising in you from what they're saying, and you can radiate equanimity. First you 6R's and let go, and radiate equanimity. Equanimity is wonderful because if a person is in pain, mental or emotional or physical pain, and you start radiating equanimity, you are sort of the anchor for them, and you're able to give them advice that is rooted in the Eightfold Path, and you're starting to be able to show them a way to behave that doesn't cause further suffering for them when you have that equanimity.

There was an example given, I don't know if you recall, an example was given at the retreat while you were there and while I was there, where at a funeral, I think it was one of his relatives who passed away, and he radiated equanimity to everybody, and they were in grief but they were also feeling balance and they were feeling uplifted and elated, calm and collected. So you can radiate the brahmaviharas according to the situation. Thank you. You're welcome. I would have a question that I thought of because of the earlier question from Coon about the precepts.

You could say for creating kamma, let's say that there is an intention. I'm talking about the results of kamma, let's say for instance a beautiful or nasty rebirth. So there is the intention of kamma. There is also the amount of wholesome or unwholesome kamma that is being accumulated. But there seems to be a third factor, namely doing something to certain beings. For instance, a very positive one would be giving a gift to a Buddha. A very bad one, when one can't attain stream entry, the next life would be killing a parent, for instance. Could you explain more about that third factor? Yeah, yeah. Let's take the example of the unwholesome action of killing a parent, or any of the immediately effective actions as we could put it, and the reason is because

you think about the action itself that somebody committed, whether it was killing a parent, whether it was killing an arahant, whether it was causing a schism, whether it was drawing blood of a Buddha, with intention to harm, at that period in time when the Buddha was alive, that is liable to cause a very, very unwholesome mind state. So in that dissolution of the mind and the body in that life, the immediate thought that arises is, what have I done? I killed my parent, or I did this, and there's immediate remorse for that. That remorse is the fuel for the formations that cause

the experience into a hell realm, the lowest hell realm, which is the immediate rebirth. Likewise, when you are generous and you give to somebody, like a stream-enterer, a noble one, or an arahant, or anybody, the experience is so wholesome, the experience is so immediate, that you feel so uplifted that at the dissolution of the body the mind might think about that, and because of that last thought the feel of that can cause a more wholesome rebirth, a more positive rebirth. So that third factor is the immediately effective karma, immediately effective karma, dependent upon the strength of the formations that arise, dependent upon that choice, dependent upon that action. Okay, so let's make this a bit harder. I'm giving to a paccekabuddha and I don't know that they are a Buddha. I'm just giving a gift

that have the same result, then yes it would. Okay, yeah. The reason is because you're giving to somebody whose mind state is absolutely pure, and that purifies the gift and that purifies the other person, because that person, that being, immediately accepts it and has gratitude for it. And there is an upliftment that you might not feel in that moment, but the karma of that is still there, because your intention is to give, regardless of whether you knew that that person was a paccekabuddha or a fully enlightened Buddha or an arahant or a stream-enterer. The intention of giving itself uplifts the mind, and the extent to which you give, or the extent to whom you give, purifies the gift and purifies that mind state as well. And the reverse of that, for instance, killing a parent and you never knew they were your father, for instance. Oh, that's a good one. That's a good question

You can just say, I have no idea, but it came up. You ask good questions. So I would say even if you didn't know that that parent was your parent and you still killed, there would still be an immediately effective action because of it, because there was still an intention to kill them. There was still an intention there. And in terms of karma, remember it's impersonal, so it's not just about your personal actions. But on the ultimate reality level, let's say there is karma completely, so that karma is non-judgmental

and it doesn't make it doesn't keep track to an extent of oh i killed this person i killed that person it's the effect of that the effect in itself whether you knew it or not but there was intention behind it is what can cause the person to go into a hell realm so even if that person didn't know that they killed their father or even if that person didn't know they killed their mother The effect of that is so bad that there is that impersonal effect on that being when they die, they have remorse for it immediately comes up, it's just automatic and immediately comes up that I killed this being. And there can be in that moment, there could be knowledge that arises that this was my parent at some point in time, or this was my parent in this life.

Take it for what it's worth. Okay, so this is obviously not in the sutta. So that's a disclaimer. I have a question. Yes. And good morning, afternoon, evening to all of you. Thank you for holding this. I really appreciate it. More of a path question, if you will. I've kind of like you, not as far gone through different paths of, you know, most recently working within his Rinzai Zen lineage, you know, had interest in Kriya Yoga and Ramana Maharshi and so forth.

And I'll try to make this really specific and really succinct. I'm 26 right now, and I'm finding just sort of that classic, I don't know what to do with my life, sort of thing. And yet the more I'm following this path, and any sort of, whatever you call it, what we will, glimpses, experiences, as far as their experiences, all that sort of stuff, I'm feeling more and more called to this, whatever this is. And I've had a lot of, I mean, questions about maybe becoming a monk, and I take the commitments that come with something like that very seriously, which is why I've never taken precepts or anything with any lineage or tradition. And I feel I'm at this point where I'm having to choose between the path, whatever that means, and I might be going into real estate, for example, getting my license, maybe possibly getting my license in the next few months, and it's clear I don't want to do it at all

And I feel like I almost have to, and yet I feel like I'm sort of about to throw on the golden handcuffs, if you will. And I'm wondering, because I was really inspired by the Guru Viking interview, that definitely caught my attention, and I was really inspired by how you were able to navigate all these different things, and I felt like that was what I really wanted. I've had, maybe I go to India, maybe I go somewhere, but it's always the questions of like, what if I ruin my life by making this decision, because there's plenty of monks that you know are still miserable, and despite their attainments, they're a mess of a person still

And I just kind of wanted to get your take on that. Because I'm finding I'm just really indecisive about this, and it's kind of time passing, and I'm feeling I'm not making a decision, and that I don't know what to trust at all. Yeah. So, well, I mean, I can't speak for you in terms of what you should do or shouldn't do, but I can give you what opportunities are available. Number one, you could always try a temporary ordination and see how that works for you, and see if there's any benefit for you in doing that

Number two is you could not do a temporary ordination and do this practice and see how it works for you first. And then, when you do make some kind of progress and you get inspired and you have more clarity on what you want to do, whether you want to still be in the lay life or you want to go ahead and become a monk, you can then, at that point in time, take temporary ordination and do a step-by-step process. So take temporary ordination, see how it works, how it feels, become a samanera, and then from there become a bhikkhu, and so on. So the indecisiveness, I think what you should do is ask your intuition

This is an exercise that can be done in the form of just clearing the mind, just asking the mind, what is it that should be done in this moment, or what is it that should be done, being presented with these two choices or these series of choices? Let go of the question and go about your day, and the answer will strike your mind like an insight, like a eureka moment. And that is the intuition, or the intuitive mind, giving you the response. And then follow through from there

Got it. Okay, yeah, I'll do that. And just a really, really quick question. Have you found that with all the different lineages and stuff you've practiced, this sort of, the question of, do all... I'm sort of feeling more and more disillusioned by the things, like all paths leading to the same place. Have you found this, that there are significant degrees of finality or end, if you will, like say with this practice, and or in a yana, Theravada stuff, versus say the Kriya Yoga and all that and whatnot. Yeah. So what you have to understand is that that syncretic view that all paths lead to the same thing is one kind of view

It's one kind of notion, one kind of idea. Yeah. And it's based on whatever it might be, but you also have to see that any practice that we, that you do, whether it's Kriya Yoga or any of the other practices, starts off with a certain foundational understanding of reality. There's a claim of subjective and ontological reality, whether you talk about Vedanta, when you talk about yoga, whether you talk about Sankhya

In the case of, let's say, here, when we're talking about the Theravada view, for example, let's say Suttavada, which is right view, comes in the form of two levels: the mundane and the supermundane, the relative and the absolute, so to speak. So the relative has to do with karma, the understanding of action and consequence, the understanding of dependent origination, the understanding of rebirth at some point in your life, the understanding of having gratitude for your parents, the understanding that there are teachers out there who know this path and who can show you the way, and so on and so forth. And there is the understanding where you have the experience of nibbana or nirvana, and you come to some kind of understanding, or a clear understanding, of dependent origination, a clear understanding of how the links arise and how this process of suffering arises, and how this process of ceasing suffering is done through the eightfold path. So what I'm saying here is these other paths have their own views to start off with, which then lead them to coming back to that view, but on an experiential level

For example, in Vedanta the view is that there is the atman and there is the brahman. And so in the sutras it talks about there being a viewpoint which says that the self and the world are one and the same, and that they're immortal, or they're eternal. That's the view that you already have on a foundational, theoretical perspective in Vedanta, for example. Then you go through a process which allows you to experience that, because your view from that foundation has conditioned that experience for you. But here what we're saying is, this is the mundane right view, which has to do with morality, which has to do with ethics, which has to do with samadhi practice, and so on. And then there is a super mundane, which has to do with coming to the unconditioned, the experience of nibbana itself. So the unconditioned, that experience of the unconditioned.

The very fact that it's called the unconditioned means that there is no view conditioning it. It comes to a point where you go from wrong view, from the perspective of this path, the right view, to no attachment to any views, including no attachment to right view as well. So the experience of nibbana arises. It happens because you see how causes and conditions bring up suffering, and you cease those causes and conditions and come to the unconditioned. The other paths, let's say if I were to comment on them, have their own views, and those views are still having an experience that is tied to the conditioned mind in one way.

Got it. Okay. Yeah. And if I could ask, is it okay if I ask what, just one more brief question? Sure. Okay. Go ahead. You were speaking earlier with one other gentleman regarding people who come from different belief systems in their path, and rebirth, and all that sort of stuff. So I grew up as a sort of puritanical atheist, if you will. Is there any, like, because, you know, like the Christian view, for example, is there may be different experiences or memories of different lives, but it doesn't pertain to the individual? For example, I'm just curious how that might apply for me. Is there possibly legal, is there possibly a one go for some people and an end? Yeah, I'm just curious on that. Yeah, that's a good question, and I would say only you could answer that, because you have to go walk the path and see for yourself what happens.

But my suspicion would be that if you do walk the path, you will no longer be a hardcore atheist. Oh, I'm not anymore. That's been long gone. That was the first bit of liberation. Thank God. All right. Thank you. I really appreciate this. Pleasure to meet you. I have a follow-up question to Kyron's question, if I may. Yes, yes, go ahead. There's an understanding that if one were to take on the robes, whether they be temporarily or permanently, there should be, if one has a child or children and they are younger than and leaving the house, I would think that there is a responsibility as a parent to that child. One being financial and the other being emotional.

Yes, yes. The question is begged that, from my understanding, and I'm very ignorant, that the Buddha left his home at the age of 29 or something like that, and he had a child. Can you reconsider that for me, please? So from my understanding, and take it for what it's worth, the Buddha or the Bodhisatta at that time was disillusioned with all of the sensual pleasures that he was experiencing. And after having seen, because if you take into account the traditional story of the Buddha or the Bodhisatta, which is that his father basically blockaded him from experiencing any kind of vision of grief or death or sickness or aging or anything, this is how the traditional story goes.

And when, now, this is interesting. So the idea is that he had some kind of disillusionment, disillusionment or disenchantment with the sensual realm, or the sensual pleasures. There's a story, and I'm saying this because I was corrected before by our expert Sil in regards to the story of seeing the three or the four visions, which was actually the Vipassi Buddha. We experienced it, but the idea is that he saw these four things, a previous Buddha or one of the previous Buddhas, he became disillusioned and disenchanted, and then went on the search. Now as to whether he had a family or not, I don't know about him specifically, but to reconcile the idea that he left his house or he left his home, what I understand is that there was a very strong desire to understand suffering, and to let go of suffering, with the intention of coming back and teaching others how to let go of that suffering. So I believe the traditional story goes that he wanted to discover the path that would lead to the end of suffering.

And he experienced it. His intention was to then come back and be able to teach others. Now in that moment of enlightenment, after he had that full awakening, he had doubts about whether he could teach this, because it was so subtle and so deep and so profound. And then you had the story of the Brahma, one of the Brahmas, coming and saying that there are those with little dust in their eyes, and there are those who could possibly understand this, so please go and teach. And he did so. So when he came back, he actually then

had his son Rahula become a monk, and he had him become ordained as a bhikkhu, a fully ordained bhikkhu, and then Rahula became an arahant as well, and he attained the cessation of complete suffering. So I think that's one way of reconciling. So he did come back, and then he did help his son ultimately. And the other thing you have to see is, now, when, as far as I understand the Vinaya, and I understand it very little, so understand that I don't know much about the Vinaya, but I do know that if there are responsibilities in the lay life specifically, or if there are debts to be paid, or if you have loans and things you haven't paid off, or your parents are still alive and you don't have their permission to go ahead, you cannot go ahead. So there are certain rules and regulations before you actually ordain, and the Vinaya is an evolution of rules and regulations dependent upon situations that the Buddha and the other monks encountered in their time, and then that was laid out. And so now

In the present day, if you were to fully ordain, there are certain requirements that you need to fulfill before you— very helpful, thank you. Maybe to add, I haven't found a sutta where this story can be found about the Buddha leaving his wife and child, when he leaves his parents are saying goodbye to him with a tearful face, not his wife who was already, who was after having childbirth, of course, probably lying in bed, but I'm not sure if that story is actually true. I also have yet to encounter a sutta where Rahula is being called or acknowledged as the Buddha's son. So I mean, I'm not completely sure about certain things, right, that seem common knowledge, but when you scrutinize them, it's hard to find them in the suttas themselves, which for us is the basis, not the commentaries. Yeah, that's awful, so thank you. Yeah, that's interesting. I didn't take into account that there is no explicit mention of Rahula necessarily being the Buddha's son. That's interesting. Any last questions? I have a question

Yes, can I ask you? Volition determines the activities of mental states associated with it, because today's earlier answers, your answers, from the point of intention or anything, and from the ethical standpoint, it determines the inevitable consequences. If that volition in the super mundane level is called wisdom, as you said, that wisdom or panya or anything, all such implements having with him, how does a super mundane arahant, Moggallana, how can he get into that particular kamma? That is my doubt. Yeah, so you have to understand again this understanding of him experiencing the effects of his previous choices. So you have to understand: the arahant no longer produces new karma, the arahant no longer produces any new consequences for actions, but the arahant is still prone to experiencing the effects of previous choices. That includes even choices made in previous lifetimes. Take the example of the Buddha again. This is coming in from one of the... maybe it's a commentary, maybe it's a Jataka tale, but as far as I understand, the Buddha experienced back pain a lot in his lifetime, and the understanding is it's because

He was a wrestler in a previous lifetime, and he had this signature move, which was the backbreaker. He would, you know, hold people and then break their backs, and that's obviously intentional, and that effect of that caused him in that next life as the Bodhisatta, and then as the Buddha, with back pain. So any fully enlightened being still has to experience karma, still has to experience the effect of previous volition, but they no longer produce new volition that is rooted in a wrong way, that is rooted in a way that is liable to cause further karma or further consequences of those. So it is in the shape of some sankharas. Yeah, yeah, thank you.

I have one last question, please. Yes. I have heard the Buddha spends the morning hours in compassion meditation. Yeah. So what would be the benefit over the other three brahmaviharas? Why would you choose that? Oh, well, for one, it's a great pick-me-up. It's a great replacement for caffeine when you wake up in the morning and you do compassion meditation. I speak from my own experience. When I do compassion meditation, I don't need any caffeine. I don't need any tea or coffee. My mind is alert and ready for the day. But I would say, I know, on a more super mundane level, he was probably using compassion as a way of seeing, as they say, with his mind's eye, to see if there was anybody in need of the Dhamma, if there was anybody who was ripe for experiencing awakening. And I can say this from one's own experience and experience with other students.

or other meditators which is to say that one time we did an exercise where we actually did compassion meditation and now you could say maybe it was a placebo effect or maybe it wasn't, who knows, but the experiment was you had two different people facing each other and that person would radiate loving kindness or compassion to the second person and they would see if they felt it, and vice versa. And there was one meditator who did it, and he was radiating compassion all throughout, and he started to experience, or be able to see, that somebody in his family was in some kind of pain and some kind of suffering. And so it helped him to recognize that, it helped him to see that and be able to connect with that person. And so there are experiences where you do compassion, which is, remember,

associated with infinite space, so you're actually moving through this experience of being able to see if there are other beings suffering and then be able to help them if you can. So I would say that that would be one of the reasons why they would have done it. Absolutely makes sense. Thank you very much. You're welcome. There's no more questions, let's share some merit. May suffering once be suffering free, and the fear-struck fearless being. May the grieving shadow grief, and may all beings find relief. May all beings share this merit that we have thus acquired for the acquisition of all kinds of happiness. May beings inhabiting space and earth, devas and nagas of mighty power, share this merit of ours. May they long protect the Buddha's dispensation. Sadhu, sadhu, sadhu.