2 ms·

>Wouldn't that make these so-called negative effects an expected outcome of the process? Probably. However I would guess if the negative effects are chronic th

>Wouldn't that make these so-called negative effects an expected outcome of the process? Probably. However I would guess if the negative effects are chronic then there is something wrong with the practice. >Isn't the Buddhist path supposed to lead to the end of aversion _and_ craving (or desire or attachment)? Yes, the Buddhist path[1] is supposed to lead to the end of suffering and rebirth. Clinging and craving produces karma which leads to rebirth. Stopping karma will lead to the cessation of suffering or nirvana. >it has been sold as a panacea for everyone, including "householders", that we can just drop into our lives and continue on our former paths with the added bonus of the end of suffering. No, it is not possible[2] for a householder to attain enlightenment. As a householder you have responsibilities (house, family, work) which inherently leads to clinging. However as a householder you can improve your chances at a good rebirth through merit (good karma). The best a householder can attain is stream entry. Monastics offload the dirty work of human survival (food, protection, etc) to householders in return for merit (virtuous cycle). You have to don the robes to cross the stream. [1] The Noble Eightfold Path [2] In traditional Buddhism

kranner 7y ago
> However I would guess if the negative effects are chronic then there is something wrong with the practice. Maybe 'the practice' (as practiced by people in the Vice article) is incomplete, in the sense of lacking a better understanding of things to expect, companion meditators, ethical guidelines (Sila), and a more experienced teacher to help one understand what one is going through mentally. > No, it is not possible for a householder to attain enlightenment. I think this is incorrect. The Pali Canon mentions at least a few lay Arahants and many lay once-returners and non-returners (so beyond the stage of stream-entry). [1] I should mention that I'm not Buddhist and don't really believe in rebirth, karma, enlightenment literally. However I do believe at least karma and enlightenment can be stripped down to psychological processes and states, and I don't see a reason why a dedicated and talented householder can't achieve the psychological equivalent of enlightenment. [1] https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Lay_arahant https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Lay_arahant
- spicymaki 7y ago
  > I think this is incorrect. The Pali Canon mentions at least a few lay Arahants and many lay once-returners and non-returners (so beyond the stage of stream-entry). [1] I stand corrected. I should have limited my point to say that nirvana is out of reach for householders. >I should mention that I'm not Buddhist ... Same here. I am personally not into the unsubstantiated ideas in Buddhism (like rebirth, supernatural, etc). I just think much of the Buddhist philosophy is interesting and useful.

kranner 7y ago

> However I would guess if the negative effects are chronic then there is something wrong with the practice. Maybe 'the practice' (as practiced by people in the Vice article) is incomplete, in the sense of lacking a better understanding of things to expect, companion meditators, ethical guidelines (Sila), and a more experienced teacher to help one understand what one is going through mentally. > No, it is not possible for a householder to attain enlightenment. I think this is incorrect. The Pali Canon mentions at least a few lay Arahants and many lay once-returners and non-returners (so beyond the stage of stream-entry). [1] I should mention that I'm not Buddhist and don't really believe in rebirth, karma, enlightenment literally. However I do believe at least karma and enlightenment can be stripped down to psychological processes and states, and I don't see a reason why a dedicated and talented householder can't achieve the psychological equivalent of enlightenment. [1] https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Lay_arahant https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Lay_arahant

spicymaki 7y ago
> I think this is incorrect. The Pali Canon mentions at least a few lay Arahants and many lay once-returners and non-returners (so beyond the stage of stream-entry). [1] I stand corrected. I should have limited my point to say that nirvana is out of reach for householders. >I should mention that I'm not Buddhist ... Same here. I am personally not into the unsubstantiated ideas in Buddhism (like rebirth, supernatural, etc). I just think much of the Buddhist philosophy is interesting and useful.