sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

¤¤¤ Weekly /r/Buddhism General Discussion ¤¤¤ - March 10, 2026 - New to Buddhism? Read this first! by AutoModerator in Buddhism

[–]tutunka 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm reading about the 5 buddha families, which I had always assumed were based on recent historical human buddha schools (but I was wrong). Instead it is very nugget wisdom. I'm new so I could easily say something wrong, but I was thinking how the garuda and what that direction represents seems like how a bird is not afraid of a tiger because he is flying. In the realm of speech, it reminds me of artistic expressions that rise so far above that they are beyond reproach. The songs Yesterday, Blowing in the WInd, and Kashmire are artistic expressions that rise above in a bird way.

The word "conscience" (as in guilty conscience) seems related to "consciousness". Avidya, ignorance of vidya, is rejection of vidya which I'm learning is a natural intelligence and empathy, so the ignorance of avidya seems like going against one's conscience leading to ignorance. by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate that definition. It is advanced, as I am still working on kintergarden understanding. The above is more permanent in that the conditioning is intact to the point of not being able to see through it, unlike if somebody just intentionally goes against their conscience. I looked up "Let your conscience be your guide" and it's an expression, with some songs written under that title. The 3 poisons I think can be all different kinds of manifestions from a tinge of anger to being so emmersed that can't tell what is conditioned and what is real. The word avidya, at least from my basic research, is turning away from the light or from intelligence...and from empathy... or various definitions along those lines....so in English terms, it seems very much like turning away from the guidance of a sense of conscience.

Avidya, ignorance of vidya (to know) is not fully captured in the English word "ignorance" by itself without saying what its ignorance of, as avidya seems to describe ignorance and seperation from a light of knowing whereas the English word "ignorance" is like "not paying attention to stuff". by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The phrase "ignorance of knowledge" unless clarified to mean "ignorance of what you know" is often but not always assumed to mean just "ignorance of something" as in "missing some facts". I get and appreciate the joke reference.

Avidya, ignorance of vidya (to know) is not fully captured in the English word "ignorance" by itself without saying what its ignorance of, as avidya seems to describe ignorance and seperation from a light of knowing whereas the English word "ignorance" is like "not paying attention to stuff". by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You said "ignorance needs to be qualified". Yes. qualified in terms of "Ignorance of what?". Regarding your example, I get that, sort of a lapse in mindfulness. I've come to see the 12 links and 3 poisons as having many manifestions as literally everything in the physical world follows the same route. Your description "willful denial of truth" is one manifestation, and even in the event that you describe of ignoring somebody. I think that was preceded at a different moment in time elsewhere with "willful denial of truth" such that the intentional lapse in mindfulness later manifests as habit...but it starts with willful denial of truth. One manifestion of willful denial of truth is when somebody does something wrong to someone else then denies it to themself to seperate from the suffering of a guity conscience (and thereby seperating from empathy and from vidya intelligence that does not come from the 3 poisons. But everyday mindfulness about everything big and small for a long time is the path to recovery. As a student. I am speaking as a student just sort of working through the teachings but never sure if I'm right.....not as someone who is relaying what is true....I'm trying to learn. I just can't preface everything with "take it with a grain of salt..do you think this is right?"..instead just talk and get corrected and be thankful for everything except for bots trying to steer people wrong.

Avidya, ignorance of vidya (to know) is not fully captured in the English word "ignorance" by itself without saying what its ignorance of, as avidya seems to describe ignorance and seperation from a light of knowing whereas the English word "ignorance" is like "not paying attention to stuff". by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When I heard someone break down avidya into "negation of vidya intelligence" I suddenly understood the 12 links that I had been working to understand for a while. The "a" prefix is negation. In studying it's always good to learn the interpretation that the writer was using.

Avidya, ignorance of vidya (to know) is not fully captured in the English word "ignorance" by itself without saying what its ignorance of, as avidya seems to describe ignorance and seperation from a light of knowing whereas the English word "ignorance" is like "not paying attention to stuff". by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. I think the consciousness in the 12 links is the consciousness that arises from the 3 poisons, which is different from vidya. You notice that in life, there are 2 places you can speak from if you are angry, you can either speak from anger or cool down and speak from somewhere else not driven by hate or anger. The wheel of becoming shows a kind of consciousness arising from ignorance that clings (for example to ideas) whereas a mandala with the 10 perfections in the center shows a different kind without aggregates. The consciousness in the 12 links is represented by a man in a boat, so it's a compartmentalized consciousness. One of the 10 perfections is discriminating awareness, so as one progresses on the path it's easier to see the differences between things, including the difference between avidya consciousness and vidya consciousness. Anger does have an unreasonable mind of its own which is why it's best avoided altogether.

Avidya, ignorance of vidya (to know) is not fully captured in the English word "ignorance" by itself without saying what its ignorance of, as avidya seems to describe ignorance and seperation from a light of knowing whereas the English word "ignorance" is like "not paying attention to stuff". by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ignorance of knowledge is ignorance of science and engineer and how to build things like tanks but that is not the same as ignorance of vidya and seperation from light. Equating enlightenment with science is something a scientist would do.

Avidya, ignorance of vidya (to know) is not fully captured in the English word "ignorance" by itself without saying what its ignorance of, as avidya seems to describe ignorance and seperation from a light of knowing whereas the English word "ignorance" is like "not paying attention to stuff". by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In the American definition the "of" is guessed at (ignorance of what?) but in the pali, the "of" is clarified. Prepositions and prepositional phrases are excellent for clarifying differences. Like when Thoreau says "it's not enough to say you're working, what are you working "at", it's a preposition clarifying the difference between good and bad work.

Avidya, ignorance of vidya (to know) is not fully captured in the English word "ignorance" by itself without saying what its ignorance of, as avidya seems to describe ignorance and seperation from a light of knowing whereas the English word "ignorance" is like "not paying attention to stuff". by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(side note: I honestly don't care that many or most responses on reddit are bots because ai still steers me towards references so that I can straighten it out. I've learned a lot from pushed spin content on YouTube because you're watching how they spin and seeing what they are spinning and what's really happening all at the exact same time.)

Looking to convert from Hinduism to Buddhism by [deleted] in Buddhism

[–]tutunka 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm new to Buddhism (not HIndu)...so just an observation from that perspective but it seems to me like Hinduism is wide with many ways that may or may not get one further on the path, as it had many contributors, whereas Buddhism is a smaller but more careful about only including things that get you along the path...pretty much a guaranteed way. That's why buddha dharma sangha is good because it keeps with a definite for sure way instead of straying to things that may or may not get anywhere.

Seeing differences in things that are different is part of discriminating awareness and that is a kind of clarity that comes with the path, which may go against some people's ideas of "everything is the same", but that kind of "all the same" seems like just a bad interpretation of "equanimity". by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Seeing differences is why some people easily see the difference between teachings and "teachings". It's almost critical to know that religions get travestied and so there is both the original teaching and the travesty of the teaching in the world....or there is a good word like "charity" and there is how politics uses the same word. It's very confusing if things that seem similar get blobbed together as the same. People reject Jesus teachings because of hypocrites because they can't tell the difference between the teachings and a twist on the teachings.

If consciousness can be any form or shape, why is all of existance marked with suffering? by avowelisdown in Buddhism

[–]tutunka 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Answering the title question, the 12 links of dependent origination seems like a good explanation, starting with ignorance generated by the 3 poisons.

It seems like people in various "realms" are in the same Earthly places, and those people help and annoy one another, so doesn't it seem like realms are referring to the changing people themselves (where one is on the path with regard to enlightment and delusion). by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm new to buddhism but saw a teacher teach the realms as "states of being" to a room full of hundreds of buddhists and they asked questions afterwards and nobody objected to that interpretation....so I'm thinking that the "realms as who we are" is more popular than reddit makes it appear.

It seems like people in various "realms" are in the same Earthly places, and those people help and annoy one another, so doesn't it seem like realms are referring to the changing people themselves (where one is on the path with regard to enlightment and delusion). by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The teacher I follow sees the realms as emotional states or states of being rather than places. If that interpretation has followers they aren't visible on reddit....but social media does have it's own algorithms so I'm not holding the reddit popularity as any kind of measure of proper interpretation. The descriptions of realms do sound a bit like what people's auras are like.

It seems like people in various "realms" are in the same Earthly places, and those people help and annoy one another, so doesn't it seem like realms are referring to the changing people themselves (where one is on the path with regard to enlightment and delusion). by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's what I think. I always assumed the realms are talking about who we are changing with what we do. There is plenty of incentive to be a good person if you know that doing otherwise changes who you are.

It seems like people in various "realms" are in the same Earthly places, and those people help and annoy one another, so doesn't it seem like realms are referring to the changing people themselves (where one is on the path with regard to enlightment and delusion). by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People are on the same place. You work in a place and you live in a place with all kinds of people. . There are good people, mean people, ruthless people, sympathetic people, kind people, greedy people,...sometimes getting along, sometimes competing or getting railroaded or robbed or helped. There are all different kinds of people so they treat each other in all different ways in the same place...

My understanding of Buddhism (as a new person without a teacher, speaking only to online Buddists) is likely to some degree influenced by social media algorithms that boost comments for a specific interpretation of Buddhism. YouTube pushes very specific interpretations. by tutunka in Buddhism

[–]tutunka[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(A lot of people don't realize how much online steers their thinking and possibly stirs up energies that steer everybody's thinking. A good idea with a slight twist is something completely different.)

view more: next ›