I completed reading Saddharma­smṛtyupasthāna. I’ll share some of how it went; there are some mild spoilers.

It was very lengthy, with an encyclopedic-style tour of the various realms in the Buddhist cosmology - from the hell realms, to the hungry ghosts, then animals/asuras, and finally heavens. This was interjected by many various instructional dharma talks, verses, and series of dharma-categories. The prose gets deeply nested - quotations of quotations of quotations, sections & sub-sub-sections, and contexts that keep invoking new contexts. There’s a mystique & implied recall-prowess about how the e.g. Buddha is quoting a king of a heaven realm quoting a dharma talk given to him by another buddha in a past life.

The descriptions of realms - though intriguing & informative - became redundant and were an endurance test continuing to read. Nondualism was everpresent; hells & heavens shared themes. By the last sections of the Heaven Free from Strife, I was skimming over some of the duplicated exposés of forests, play, and so forth.

The last chapter was on the mindfulness of the body, which was a refreshing return after the outward exploration of the cosmos. There’s a bulk of information enumerating the bodily winds & worms, which go beyond the Eurocentric model of medicine, and that I haven’t seen brought up before. The body in these views is more like a realm in itself, imparting to me a sense of external–internal nondualism. It also describes some of the human realms there. It was almost disappointing how little the human realm resembled our current, direct-observation knowledge of geography - offering a flat-earth view with a mountain in the center and the sun revolving around that. Being a devout follower of the Buddha, the question occurred as to whether & how much this disconfirms the Buddha. It’s possible to me the Buddha presented this view of the human realm as truth, knowing it to be non-truth, because it conformed with the beliefs of how the world were at the time in Ancient India; maybe the truth itself was too far-fetched, or somehow too unbeneficial to present. There’s also speculative potential to me that this version of the human realm is true, though on some other metaphysical level other than geographically. I skimmed over most of this section on the Saddharma­smṛtyupasthāna human-realm cosmology.

I was surprised at how suited the translation of the Tibetan text to American/Abrahamic culture, as though the Buddha - clairvoyant - was considering the present moment when speaking the sūtra. It directly, several times, denies the existing of an All-Powerful creator deity. In my Buddhist view of God qua Mahābrahmā, this text is an approach to God’s heaven realm and describes realms beneath & within that hierarchy.

I was introduced it via a quote regarding male-homosexuality and hell-rebirth. My understanding is that this applies specifically to male-homosexuals that do evil things like breaking the precepts, rather than being somewhere male-homosexuals inevitably go by having sex. Ironically, the dangers of men having sex with women (even e.g. looking at women with lust) were repeated far more than the one time male-homosexuality was mentioned.

I’m happy having finished it.

I’m reading "The Application of Mindfulness of the Sacred Dharma", from the Tibetan Buddhist canon. It’s very long, with sustained repetitive sections, like a multi-day hike. I’m close to the last chapter, and have been reading for over a year I think. It’s both extremely interesting and boring to me. I was suggested it from a quote where male-homosexuality is considered wrong in Buddhism, though overall it seems like an argument for male-homosexuality. There’s a lot of discouragement against men having any attraction in women, and it repeatedly argues in favor of the male sex over female. My favorite relationship so far is between the king of the Yāma heaven, Musulundha, and the king swan of the Yāma heaven, Auspicious Time; both give Dharma talks to the gods there.

I still don’t understand what I’m misunderstanding. The Buddha said beings need to be sustained by nutriment for intention. One reason I prefer asking online is because it’s less imposing than getting someone’s attention in-person.

Yes. I think it’s gaslighting. I’m often forced to engage with gaslighting.

I’m talking about nutriment for intention, cetanā āhāra. Forgive me, there was two Āhāra Suttas, and I accidentally linked the incorrect one.

It can even be a prayer method. Finding access to intention-nutriment has been a recurring issue, and I’ve prayed for help for it before though. So I’m wondering if there’s better methods.

I’m having difficulty with getting intention nutriment (cetanā-āhāra), and don’t know how to go about requesting help.

What do you want me to talk to a Buddhist teacher about? What misunderstanding do I have?

I received another couple assaults today with a lengthy session of being screamed at for an hour, by the same person. They assaulted me and bit my finger, drawing a small amount of blood; took my laptop & threw it on the ground.

As a Buddhist, I take refuge in the āryasaṅgha, which includes doctors. Medical care can be corrupted, and my karma can be too risky to approach an ordinary honest doctor.

Here are some reasons:
-Communication
-Intellectual/sound/joy/etc. nutriment
-Generosity/merit
-Play, work
-Practicing language
-Huēhuecoyōtl devotion
-Compressing/decorating information
-Bodhisattva activities

Later that day, in rage, the person stomped on me while I was laying down, struck me in the head again, was damaging to property, was trying to bite me, and was attempting to burn me with a lighter.

This person punched me in the head again this morning in anger.

The past few days, this person has been volatile with delirious violence. This includes hours-long sessions of him refusing to leave my personal space with abusive speech & occasional violence. He’s swung at my head with a fist a couple times and missed, and also struck me in the back of the head. I don’t engage with the angry speech; am intolerant of & displeased by this molestation.

Sometimes Coyote gives me a sound (via manovijñāna), then has me find the word/phrase that matches the sound - I think this is what’s happening.

Thank you for apologizing.

The message I shared in this Buddhist community is true, factual, & timely. Reading & discussing suttas is a Buddhist practice, including outside temples. I’m an anāgāmi & bodhisattva - please don’t assume this isn’t the case, and please don’t hate me for declaring this.

By ‘refuge in Saṅgha’, I mean āryasaṅgha - those who have attained full enlightenment or at least the first stage of enlightenment.

What basis are you saying I should go to azbuddhisttemple.org for help?

The tone is dismissive, though I’ll try giving sincere responses and address what you’re saying.

In Buddhism, we take refuge in the Triple Gem. That is, the Buddha, Dharma, & Saṅgha. It can be said the Triple Gem already functions as police - the Buddha is the chief, Dharma the law, Saṅgha those who uphold the law under the Buddha. The police already have been called by others during past assaults. They saw no issue when my apartment was broken into and I was assaulted, and contributed to the attacks themselves. I don’t view them as protectors, and it’s an affront being recommended to. I’m satisfied with refuge under the Triple Gem. I’ve just finished reading the Mahāvagga yesterday, and was surprised how much of the information directly addressed & aided my present context. I can pray to Avalokiteshvara whenever, which the Lotus Sūtra explains as ample protection.

People have been helping me on Lemmy. Even just small moral support can be like the small handhold needed to complete a rock climb. I think there’s an aversion to generosity that can be toxic, and gets encouraged by non-Buddhist traditions. Karma guarantees that generous intentions give merit to the giver that will return pleasant results (in the present and/or future). It’s more guaranteed than even money. May this view help in understanding how e.g. requesting & giving alms can be wholesome/skillful.

Pity isn’t inherently wrong. The word ‘pity’ is rooted in ‘piety’, with senses like ‘dutiful’, ‘holy’ ‘conscientious’, & ‘love’. I wrote the line “Piatus religious” in a recent poem, which alludes to this etymology. I put a lot of sincere contemplation into my writing; if anyone doubts this, I’m willing to explain a word or line in a poem.

I think some of what you’re saying is also over-ly totalistic - framing things as an all-or-nothing extremes, when the truth isn’t so.

When I was visibly homeless, I was invited by a Navajo man to visit his place on the Navajo reservation. There have been beings dependent on me staying where I am for survival - and moreso there’s basically guaranteed to be a mass-killing if I leave. Otherwise, it’s also been the case that there hasn’t been a place to sleep that isn’t against the rules, and this is being enforced by violence. As of now, the only option for me to sleep & survive is to try migrating elsewhere - to the Navajo reservation, though wandering to Buddhist monasteries/etc. along the way & maybe after. Having police in family - and based on past experience - I would continue expecting unwanted monitoring & unwanted intervention by police and likely family too, even if I’m in the Navajo reservation.

Leaving also doesn’t get to the root of the issue, which is cultural & quite widespread. I don’t see conditions for a civil, genuine, open discussion on sexual conduct. I think racial delusion, hatred, & arrogance is a blocking issue here.

I expect this to be unbeneficial.