Unconvincing Dharma Fables

I read your question.
I haven't actually heard the Dharma, so I can't say for sure, but based on the idea of “nothing,” he's probably a Zen monk.

In the first place, Buddhism is a religion that originated in India, so it is thought that people are reincarnated and die repeatedly, and this is called reincarnation.
However, reincarnation is not an idea unique to Buddhism, and it has been regarded as common sense in countries within the Indian living area from before the outbreak of Buddhism until today.
However, as time went by, idealistic thought (consciousness) also developed in Buddhism, and groups appeared that captured stories after death, such as heaven and hell, as the state of our minds in this life.
After that, when Buddhism was introduced from India to China, it seems that Indian reincarnation was not well accepted, as we Japanese people express “we only live once,” and the ideology of wisdom was strongly inherited. Zen Buddhism was created in China, so even in Japanese Zen Buddhism, stories of reincarnation were not often mentioned in the past. Recently, it has gradually come into contact with it, but I think there are not a few people who are repelled.

Finally, if what was said is true, I feel very sorry that it promotes discrimination and prejudice, and I am personally disappointed that there are people speaking at such a low level of law today.
This is just the personal opinion of Mr. Osho who spoke the Dharma, and I would appreciate it if you could understand that Buddhism and Zen Buddhism do not hold such views.

I read your question.

We monks also learn different teachings within each denomination, and from there, we continue to experience and study various things on our own. Therefore, each monk has their own way of thinking and leading.
Of course, there are likes and dislikes about them.

Also, when it comes to “nothing,” there are various concepts.
There are probably people who use the word “nothing” to mean that when humans die, there is no next life.
Also, there are probably people who use the word “nothing” to mean that they received life from this world in the fictional form of a human being, but when they pass away, that temporary form will disappear, and they will receive the next life.

The Buddha, who opened Buddhism, was originally an ordinary person with a lot of worries, and he finally attained enlightenment through a long period of mind-boggling training while being reincarnated many times.
So, the “nothing” that the chief priest said probably meant the latter. It is also inferred from the phrase “falling into hell.”

However, regarding the statement “homeless person...”, it was probably a deeply thoughtful statement, and the expression was just a little rough. Please ask it once.
If that is the case, Riina's rut will melt, and the relationship of trust with the chief priest may deepen. When it rains, the ground solidifies, doesn't it?

I believe that a relationship of trust is essential between priests and believers. This is because faith has a huge impact on a person's life. No matter how correct the teaching is, if you can't trust the chief priest who preaches it, it will be difficult to surrender to that teaching.
Also, in Buddhism, it is called a “death sentence,” and your next life is determined by what kind of death you have. When you die, if you sincerely think, “I will have this reliable chief priest hold a funeral and be reborn into a world without suffering,” you will surely be able to die with a peaceful feeling. However, my heart is disturbed when I think “I don't want that chief priest to give me a funeral.”

Therefore, it is important to build a relationship of trust with the chief priest. Let's talk about various things, and if you're not convinced by any means, try looking for a monk you can trust. However, once you trust them and have decided to “use this person as your mentor,” please don't forget that heart.

> I want to know the truth.

Hmm, that's a bit difficult to answer. Buddhism says “the 84,000 Dharma,” and “this one is correct!” It's not a religion. The Buddha himself adjusted his partner's point of view and said, “Don't think about the next life, concentrate on your current ascetic practice!” They scolded and said, “Live honestly. Then you'll have an easier time in the next life.” They talk about it in various ways, such as referring to the afterlife. It's a style of counterpoint theory. That includes entering from denial.

Therefore (apart from whether it went well or not), you won't know if the monk made the statement because of its own intention and purpose until you listen to the person himself. There are also monks who think “it is not good to do memorial services in the direction of leaving regrets.” Most likely, you won't know until you confirm whether it was a statement that really thought that far. I don't want to deny it by listening to only one side's statement, so as a possibility.

However, I personally like to use the method of explaining “in the heart.”
https://hasunoha.jp/questions/17875
However, this is a story I only saw from one side. This is what it looks like when you preach it from the other side.
https://hasunoha.jp/questions/26445
The former is on the side where you “have yourself,” and the latter is on the side where “you don't have yourself or others in the first place,” so it's two sides of the coin. Speaking more like Buddhism, color is either the side of the sky or the sky is the side of color, so both are Buddhist.

The latter link “That is attaining Buddhism. I was the universe before I was me.” That is called “nothing,” and nothing is zero, nothing, nothing. An old master representing the Soto sect in the Meiji period wrote, “If it's not a sect, read all the characters for no.” Also, in the past, there were also monks and regular priests who answered by the Nichiren sect

> “Nothing” means fullness. The overflowing state is called “nothing.” It's not that you don't think about anything, you pay attention to everything; that is “nothing.”

Since you said that, I'm sure it's not a way of thinking unique to Zen, but rather that it's Buddhist. There are also monks who express themselves as “nothing will go away.” I heard it at a Theravada temple in Southeast Asia.

No matter what, only the person himself knows his true intentions. Please ask again and again what you are interested in. That is what gobutsuen is

I don't like “Homeless People Go to Hell” (fastball

” Do you mean Machigai Hatadasubeki? ”
You're right.
If my nephew thinks so, I think I should have encouraged him to use that as encouragement and use words so that he can finally grow up straight.

“I want to know the truth”
Now on to the main subject, but in conclusion, I don't know the end of the day.
There is no way to confirm it scientifically or physically.
To be clear, Buddhism says “to become nothing,” to people who should be explained to “become nothing,” to people who should be encouraged to “go to paradise,” they say “go to paradise,” and “you will fall to hell” to people who should admonish “you will fall to hell.” What is essential is whether those living now can live better by thinking after death.

So, that's exactly what I was talking about during the 49th memorial service. If my nephew says, “My grandmother who died is in my heart,” he said, “Yes. That's why I think the original role of monks is to encourage them to “don't be lonely, and your grandmother is watching you so hard, listen carefully to what your father and mother say, and do your best in your studies.”

　The various denominations in modern Japan may be preaching various teachings.

I'll leave that kind of thing alone and talk about the facts I saw from the Buddha's earliest Buddhism.

Only Arakan, who has attained supreme enlightenment, can perish without being reincarnated anywhere after death.

People who have realized less enlightenment will be reborn in a good place, and one day they will reach the highest level of enlightenment.
Even if you don't realize it, you'll be reborn in a good place if the results of good deeds come out,
If the result of misconduct comes out, you will be reborn in a bad place.

For details, see my book “The Four Stages of Enlightenment” (sanga).

The misunderstanding that there is nothing after death is a misunderstanding that comes from the Zen sect (I don't think the founder of the Zen sect said such an absurd thing), and at the latest, it appears in records when Frois and Xavier came to Japan.

The reason for this misunderstanding was probably that there is nothing after being enlightened, but it's not cool if a Zen bozu dies without being enlightened, so I'm going to pretend that everyone never dies... isn't that enough?

It's actually a correct way to say that when you die, it's in the heart of the bereaved family. The person himself does not move into his heart, but bereaved families and relatives have memories and memories. While that was the case, the deceased still hadn't broken their relationship with the human world. When a relative also dies, as expected, every relationship in the human world comes to an end.

Riina

This is Kawaguchi Hidetoshi. This is my humble answer to the question.

The weakest point of Japanese monks is their understanding of chukan thought.

In addition to eliminating the extremes of judgment and common opinion, the idea of moderation is an appropriate counterpoint theory, and is an important point of view for convenience, there are cases where the intention of the content may be wrong in sermons, etc., if you do not understand it clearly.

Now, with regard to “nothing,” in Buddhism, the expression “nothing” is synonymous with “sky,” and is used as “nothing” with “no substance.”

On the other hand, when it comes to the state of things, it is also necessary to understand that they can be “lucky.”

This balance of “sky and fortune” is an important key point for understanding things, so even if that understanding is still impossible, I would be grateful if you could learn while being a little aware of this when studying Buddhism in the future.

Furthermore, in Buddhism, there are two truths, Sho Yoshitaka (supreme truth) and secular (truth as convenience), as the “two truths,” so it is necessary to consider which truth exactly the Buddhist theory is being preached as.

In Buddhism, of course, what you should rely on the most is the Buddhist scripture, but unfortunately the monks themselves, who should explain the contents of that Buddhist scripture, do not accurately understand these two verses, and as a result, there are often cases where their explanations and sermons are also half-hearted...

Anyway, it's also important to thoroughly verify it yourself without being taken advantage of because it's what the monk said.

As often stated by His Holiness the Dalai Lama in his puja, “We should not accept the teacher's teachings with only respect, but we should also accept the teacher's teachings in such a way that goldsmiths carefully examine whether the money they handle is real or fake by burning, cutting, and polishing that money,” and while firmly examining each teaching critically, rationally, and logically, I want to accept each teaching with confidence It will be.

We recommend that you use Hasunoha until you are satisfied and verify it.

Kawaguchi Hidetoshi Gassho