[Buddha-l] Re: What are the "joys of living"?

[Benito Carral]

On Monday, June 26, 2006, Vicente Gonzalez wrote:

VG>> In  this  way, everybody should taste the pleasure
VG>> of the world to understand impermanence of worldly
VG>> happiness. It is what Gautama life show to us.

> [VG one hour later] When you talk about smart people,
> you  mean  people who knows the effects. In this way,
> one  doesn't need to live such things because one has
> the knowledge about causes and effects.

   You're  changing your view, which is a wise thing to
do  when one has realized that he was mistaken. Now I'm
going to reply the next of your post.

> But  when  somebody  doesn't  have the knowledge that
> dancing  salsa  or  having  sex  is unwholesome, this
> person is not clever or silly.

   From a Dharma POV that person is stupid indeed.

> Knowing  attachment as a bondage in the world A being
> should train himself for its removal. - SN 4.21

   That's  precisely  why  Buddhists  use  to teach the
Dharma, even to girls who enjoy salsa.

> In  this  point, following moral rules will be a lost
> of  time  and  an  increment of dukha by means hidden
> repressions.

   Not  at  all,  moral rules are necessary, we are all
living   in  countries  under  the  "law  empire,"  and
although  there  are  some  criminals,  we  are not all
criminals.

   BTW,  do  you  know the Noble Path? Do you know what
right effort is? It will probably surprise you.

> For  this  reason,  same Buddha only established five
> precepts for lay people.

   Not  at all, the five precepts were a minimum, not a
maximum,  as the uposatha precepts can teach you. There
is  also  the  bodhisattva precepts. And lay people can
take so many vows as they want.

> If  your  view  would  be  right,  why Buddha doesn't
> taught these Vinaya rules for everybody?

   Because some people have too many attachments.


>> In  the  same  way,  one  doesn't need to betray his
>> spouse and break a family in order to understand the
>> involved suffering.

> do  you  think  breaking a family it's a pleasure for
> somebody?

   Probably  not, but what about betraying one's spouse
braking  a  family that way, there are many cases, just
ask around.


>> That's why many people like Hanshan or Xuyun started
>> to  practice  Dharma  since  an early age and become
>> great  masters  without harming others much in their
>> learning.

> again  you  are  talking  about  monks, not about lay
> people.

   Neither Hanshan nor Xuyun were born as monastics.

> Can  you  cite  in  where these masters forbid to lay
> people dance and sex?

   You  have  lost the right view on the issue, we were
talking  about  lust,  the  uposatha  precept reference
arose as an additional reflection.

> precisely,  from  Dharma  one can learn that there is
> not  any  rule for lay people to avoid salsa and sex.
> It is a rule for monks, not for lay people.

   You're  wrong  once  again.  It's  a  Dharma general
principle  to  avoid  lust,  both  for  lay  people and
monastics.  If  you  apply  such a general principle to
salsa,  you  will  discover  that  the  Dharma  teaches
everyone to avoid salsa (and some kinds of sex).

> The  state  of the world is the best proof that human
> being  cannot restraint himself of unwholesome things
> just by hearing a religious teaching.

   Quite the contrary, our world is under the influence
of  the  propaganda of the liberal consumerist religion
preached  from  Hollywood  and  other  hells around the
world.

> While there is not disenchantment, you can talk about
> avoid sex and dance for many aeons.

   Disenchantment  can be born from Dharma teachings as
I already explained you before.


>> "Trust  in  Hashem [we could say "Dharma" here] with
>> all  your  heart,  and  do  not  rely  on  your  own
>> understanding" (Proverbs 3:5).

> so  it is quite different of Buddhism, because Buddha
> taught  to use the own understanding before accepting
> the teaching of any person.

That's  all  depends  on  what  you  understand by "own
understanding,"  if  that's  our  stupid  ego  made  of
attachments, think again.

> Remember Kalamas Sutta.

   I  know  that  sutra  quite well, thank you. You can
consider reading Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary on it.

   Best wishes,

--
Benito Carral
  Asturias, Sepharad (Spain)