That does not answer the question. Also, is Ven Analayo, in his brilliant study of satipatthana out of line in his book, SATIPATTHANA, when he refers to the "bare attention" aspect of sati (p. 60)? And one of the points being that sati is inclusive of a number of functions that are not necessarily captured by a bare dictionary rendering, but must be looked at in the context of how the word is used. Out of line, is he? Out of line as are Mahasi Saydaw and U Pandita in their teachings? Bare attention is not necessarily translated by sati.Yundi wrote:Any teacher that defines sati is awareness in the sense of being cognizant or consciousness of an object is out of line with the Pali sources.tiltbillings wrote:And do you think such teachers as Mahasi Sayadaw or U Pandita are not in line with what the Pali sources teach?
Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
I already offered the view that mindfulness is that mental function that keeps awareness 'bare'.
Awareness or consciousness is something naturally 'bare' or pure unless it is obscured by defilement.
(I trust you have read the Buddha's teaching on luminous mind in the Anguttara Ones.)
The skill of mindfulness is bringing to bear the object of meditation.
Instead of awareness bearing in mind naked dancing women, it has the skill to bear in mind the meditation object.
Thus the Buddha advised right mindfulness is awareness or contemplation of the four satipatthana rather than the four Spice Girls.
With metta
Awareness or consciousness is something naturally 'bare' or pure unless it is obscured by defilement.
(I trust you have read the Buddha's teaching on luminous mind in the Anguttara Ones.)
The skill of mindfulness is bringing to bear the object of meditation.
Instead of awareness bearing in mind naked dancing women, it has the skill to bear in mind the meditation object.
Thus the Buddha advised right mindfulness is awareness or contemplation of the four satipatthana rather than the four Spice Girls.
With metta
Last edited by Yundi on Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:21 am, edited 2 times in total.
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
Okay.Yundi wrote:I already offered the view that mindfulness is that mental function that keeps awareness 'bare'.
Awareness or consciousness is something naturally 'bare' or pure until it is obscured by defilement.
(I trust you have read the Buddha's teaching on luminous mind in the Anguttara Ones.)
With metta
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
Is it so outrageous to question certain teachings put forward by teachers, which seem to not quite be in line with the suttas. This in no way would cast any aspersions on those monks or there vinaya, but at some stage people have to decide whether they are taking refuge in a teacher (naughty naughty) or the Buddha (suttas/vinaya).tiltbillings wrote:That does not answer the question. Also, is Ven Analayo, in his brilliant study of satipatthana out of line in his book, SATIPATTHANA, when he refers to the "bare attention" aspect of sati (p. 60)? And one of the points being that sati is inclusive of a number of functions that are not necessarily captured by a bare dictionary rendering, but must be looked at in the context of how the word is used. Out of line, is he? Out of line are are Mahasi Saydaw and U Pandita in their teachings? Bare attention is not necessarily translated by sati.Yundi wrote:Any teacher that defines sati is awareness in the sense of being cognizant or consciousness of an object is out of line with the Pali sources.tiltbillings wrote:And do you think such teachers as Mahasi Sayadaw or U Pandita are not in line with what the Pali sources teach?
Last edited by Brizzy on Mon Jun 14, 2010 3:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
Who would I listen to? You? Or a monk of long standing, deep practice and study who can read the suttas in the original language?Brizzy wrote:
Is it so outrage to question certain teachings put forward by teachers, which seem to not quite be in line with the suttas.
Who determines what is line with the suttas? I have seen pretty wacky interpretations of the suttas out there, even on DhammaWheel. I have seen nothing out line with the suttas in the teachings of Mahasi Sayadaw or U Pandita.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
I would read and contemplate the suttas, then I would listen/read as many Dhamma teachers as you can. Then I would decide with my own discernment what was in line and what was'nt.tiltbillings wrote:Who would I listen to? You? Or a monk of long standing, deep practice and study who can read the suttas in the original language?Brizzy wrote:
Is it so outrage to question certain teachings put forward by teachers, which seem to not quite be in line with the suttas.
Who determine what is line with the suttas? I have seen pretty wacky interpretations of the suttas out there, even on DhammaWheel. I have seen out line with the suttas in the teachings of Mahasi Sayadaw or U Pandita.
The Dalai Lama is probably the most well known and respected Buddhist in the world, but if what he teaches is the Buddha's Dhamma then I'm a monkeys uncle.
People are so ready to take refuge in other people, its scary.
I am an ardent fan of Thanissaro Bhikkhu, but I do not take refuge in him. If I found some of his teachings did not follow the suttas I would not get my knickers in a twist, but I would use my discernment and leave those to one side.
It seems it is an offense to actually use ones own wisdom in understanding the Buddha's teachings. Even the Buddha said he could not give people release, how more so with any other teacher. If someone is to reach final release it is through other peoples "good friendship" and there own wisdom.
BTW Being able to read the suttas in the original pali does not make one a better teacher (or worse).
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
But then one who reads Pali would know one does not take refuge. This whole business of "taking" refuge in monks is a non sequitur. That is not what this thread is about.Brizzy wrote:BTW Being able to read the suttas in the original pali does not make one a better teacher (or worse).
Your nephew:
- Attachments
-
- nephew.jpg (2.87 KiB) Viewed 3288 times
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
Tilt,
Was that an example of your new found sense of humor?
I must be missing something.
To whom were you referring?
Was that an example of your new found sense of humor?
I must be missing something.
To whom were you referring?
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
See Brizzy's msg immediately above mine, second para.alan wrote: To whom were you referring?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
Ok then. That was kind of funny. Glad to see you back in a good mood!
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
My nephew does not wear glasses.tiltbillings wrote:But then one who reads Pali would know one does not take refuge. This whole business of "taking" refuge in monks is a non sequitur. That is not what this thread is about.Brizzy wrote:BTW Being able to read the suttas in the original pali does not make one a better teacher (or worse).
Your nephew:
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
It was the family resemblence I was going for.Brizzy wrote:
My nephew does not wear glasses.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
- jcsuperstar
- Posts: 1915
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:15 am
- Location: alaska
- Contact:
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ
the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat
the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
Actually now that you mention it, that monkey looks pretty cute and very wise.tiltbillings wrote:It was the family resemblence I was going for.Brizzy wrote:
My nephew does not wear glasses.
- jcsuperstar
- Posts: 1915
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:15 am
- Location: alaska
- Contact:
Re: Alan Wallace on Modern Vipassana
looks like george burns... so um kinda like god i guess
สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ
the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat
the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat