There is nothing in the world worth clinging to

The quote needs more context and clarification, it seems like a pretty meaningless thing to say without context imo.

Let's start with an obvious example of heroin. I think it is understood that heroin is not worth clinging to. Temporary bliss that one chases to recreate with rather awful withdrawal symptoms and dependency. It's seemingly not a very good anchor for life. I've never experienced it so maybe it's a bad example. Maybe the bliss is worth it and that is the way to live life. Chasing heroin until I overdose on purpose or catch a bag with too much Fentanyl. It doesn't sound too appealing. I lived that life with alcohol. It's not too bad until it stops working how you want it to. I think drugs and alcohol are actually one of the easiest things to understand that clinging to them is not worthwhile.

Now, let's try pornography and masturbation. It's seemingly benign. It apparently eases stress and sexual tension. Other people are not involved. It seems like low harm sexual activity. Some would say it decreases lust but I would say it increases lust and desire. Sometimes it leads to great gratification other times a somewhat sullied dissatisfaction. The point is this is not me. I can't manage satisfaction. An orgasm is impermanent meaning there will be suffering. Any sukkha (pleasure) will inherently be followed by dukkha (dissatisfaction), clinging, and grasping.

It is the same as something as seemingly benign as being comfortable in bed in the morning. Clutching the sheets and rolling over to the cool side of the bed. It creates a habit and I am sleeping extra hours and feeling drowsy during the day and disrupting meditation practice. I always thought lying in bed and looking at the sky and lingering and rolling over and going back to sleep was one of life's simple pleasures but I cling and grasp for this as well. It's not as bad of a habit as smoking crack but a good example of a hinderance that flies under the radar. Any time there is impermanence which there is ALWAYS impermanence there is dukkha. Any time there is impermanence and dukkha there is anatta (non-self). "That is not me." Sometimes there is a particular joy in cuddling up with my cat. Sometimes there is not. That is not me. The itch I feel on my temple is an impermanent phenomena. It is not me. If we put it all together we are not in reality if we feel something is permanent and we take ownership of it. This will lead to suffering. Clinging to anything is dukkha.

Now, let's look at something else. Parents. Guess what? Parents like any other sentient beings are impermanent. They will get sick and die or just die from more unnatural causes. To cling to permanence is dukka. Now, something more interesting to discuss perhaps is attachment to parents. I am attached to my parents. Also, I think it is the right thing to do to take care of ones' parents when they are old and sick.

I didn't even bring up material items like the big house, 2 car garage, car advertisements, getting married, having kids, fashionable clothing, big screen tv, etc etc etc. I feel like those are pretty obvious but decided to just re-iterate the point. These are aspects of clinging so many people almost look at as a need.

In Theravada Buddhism the Buddha himself is first identified as an arahant, as are his enlightened followers, because they are free from all defilements, without greed, hatred, delusion, ignorance and craving. Lacking "assets" which will lead to future birth, the arahant knows and sees the real here and now. This virtue shows stainless purity, true worth, and the accomplishment of the end, nibbana.

it seems by 'nothing in the world', you mean material objects, or hedonistic pleasures. So why not just cut out the ambiguity and clarify what the budha means? No examples of basic necessities like water are here. If that is the case, I think most would agree with you. (I do not think there is much value in pursuing hedonistic desires or material objects).

There are instances of arahants starving themselves to death. That is one to think about.

Pretty sure he talks about both material objects and hedonistic pleasures. Which again most people agree with, yet not really believe it so... (belief would drive to actual action and we're all sitting in front of a computer writing on the internet)

Only excessive use of the internet or using it purely as entertainment is a defilement.

"The Buddha-dhamma makes little appeal to the masses since it is diametrically opposed to their sensual desire. People do not like even an ordinary sermon, let alone a discourse on Nibbana, if it has no sensual touch. They do not seem interested in our teaching and no wonder, since it is devoid of melodious recitation, sentimental stories and hilarious jokes and other attractions. It is acceptable only to those who have practised vipassana or who seek the dhamma on which they can rely for methods of meditation and extinction of defilements."

- Mahasi Sayadaw

once you figure out how to stand for something you should be okay

Your true self is not clinging to anything and is always "okay", all your trouble stems from false identification with your mind and body. In your pornography paragraph, you mention "It is not me", you are intellectually correct there but is not yet your experience, later you say "I am attached to my parents", find out the source of that "I" because it is also false and yet you "cling" to it. When the false "I" is not connecting with sense objects/thoughts/emotions it is naturally dissolving and your real nature will emerge, or in other words realization of your true nature will dawn upon you because it is always there only obstructed by "I am this", "I am that", "I am doing this" ideas.
It is my experience and I was depressed and wanted to kill myself 10 years ago and it was all only a sad dream, good luck buddy

On October 15 2018 09:30 napalm wrote: Your true self is not clinging to anything and is always "okay", all your trouble stems from false identification with your mind and body. In your pornography paragraph, you mention "It is not me", you are intellectually correct there but is not yet your experience, later you say "I am attached to my parents", find out the source of that "I" because it is also false and yet you "cling" to it. When the false "I" is not connecting with sense objects/thoughts/emotions it is naturally dissolving and your real nature will emerge, or in other words realization of your true nature will dawn upon you because it is always there only obstructed by "I am this", "I am that", "I am doing this" ideas. It is my experience and I was depressed and wanted to kill myself 10 years ago and it was all only a sad dream, good luck buddy

This is not that. This is only this.

I am not this. I am not that. That is not me.

Who are you then?

That is not me. There are only impermanent, uncontrollable phenomena that arise and cease. "I" can seemingly incline "my" mind to do certain things. It's quite a mind fuck.

Quite right, phenomena are impermanent so why focus on them, go beyond to their source and you will find the Self, the underlying permanent reality. Apparent mind fuck is only temporary by-product of inattention.

There is no self.

Are you denying your being?

There is no soul or living entity.

Who would ever wish an itch?

You complicate, you cannot say "I am not" while saying "I am" is the only truth you can depend on. You either deny your existence, or you don't and therefore you are your self. Saying there is no self is ignorance. Truth is simple.

On October 12 2018 16:02 Stroggoz wrote: it seems by 'nothing in the world', you mean material objects, or hedonistic pleasures. So why not just cut out the ambiguity and clarify what the budha means? No examples of basic necessities like water are here. If that is the case, I think most would agree with you. (I do not think there is much value in pursuing hedonistic desires or material objects).

agreed, you are seeing past its obvious meaning looking for some cathartic deeper truth