The causes for wisdom

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:34 am

Alex123 wrote:
robertk wrote:Please check out the quotes from the Satipatthana sutta I supplied earlier in this thread.

in defecating and in urinating, is a person practising clear comprehension(satisampajanna); in walking, in standing (in a place), in sitting (in some position), in sleeping, in waking, in speaking and in keeping silence, is a person practising clear comprehension.


Insight can arise while walking, while standing, while looking straight ahead, while looking to the back, while defacating and while urinating. And most certainly it can arise while sitting.

But it is not a method to follow, ot is rather shoing than whatever is arising now can be understood, if there are enough conditions to understand.

Note I am referring here to vipassana: some samatha is aided by seclusion and by specific posture etc. as I mentioned above.




But one has to to act intentionally to have clear comprehension while: "walking, standing, looking straight ahead, defecating, etc..."
You are correct when you say "But it is not a method to follow", because "insight can arise while..." is different from causes for the insight.

Just because someone got insight while X, it doesn't mean that X caused the insight. That person could have formally been meditating 20 hours a day 7 days a week for 20 years until insight arose at a mundane moment. The mundane activity that person could have been doing might have nothing to do with the cause for arisen insight.
One of the interesting texts is the accounting of Ananda's awakening:

    Meanwhile the time came when the venerable Ananda thought: "The meeting is tomorrow. It is not seemly for me to go to the meeting place as a mere learner." He spent much of the night in contemplation of the body. When the night was near dawn, he thought "I shall lie down"; but he kept mindful of the body. Before his head touched the pillow and after his feet left the ground, his heart was in this interval liberated from taints through not clinging. So the venerable Ananda went to the assembly as an Arahant.
Vin. Cv. Kh. 11
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19386
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:54 am

robertk wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
L: <...> I appreciate your teaching so much because it's so natural, <...>, just
read and listen and the mind finds its own way by different moments, even if
it's very slow; but some people have their particular way of developing, <...>
and observe what happens in daily life, what do you think about this?

TA: Who is doing this?

L: A self.

TA: Ok, so that is not the way to eradicate the idea of self.

L: But maybe by way of self ...

TA: No, never, the way of self is avijja, not understanding, ignorance;
otherwise there is no self, if there is no ignorance.
Where is ignorance now? Whenever there is no right understanding, whenever
akusala citta arises, there is a clinging to the idea of I or self, and vijja is
the opposite of ignorance.
Can anyone show a way to get rid of ignorance, a shortcut, a method? when it's
method it's ignorance.

J: If we choose...

TA: Actually, lobha chooses.
I would like to see sutta support for this.

I guess you are asking for evidence that satipatthana is not a mthod or technique?

as i cited from the satipatthana sutta earlier in this thread

in defecating and in urinating, is a person practising clear comprehension(satisampajanna); in walking, in standing (in a place), in sitting (in some position), in sleeping, in waking, in speaking and in keeping silence, is a person practising clear comprehension.


Insight can arise while walking, while standing, while looking straight ahead, while looking to the back, while defacating and while urinating. And most certainly it can arise while sitting.

But it is not a method to follow, ot is rather showing than whatever is arising now can be understood, if there are enough conditions to understand.

Note I am referring here to vipassana: some samatha is aided by seclusion and by specific posture etc. as I mentioned above.
Interestingly, there is no sutta support (or any real support) given here for Sujin's claim: "Actually, lobha chooses." I would like to see sutta support for this astounding claim, a claim which has been used in this thread to dismiss meditation practice as having any validity, and also we see that this dismissal comes directly from Sujin herself.

Insight can arise while walking, while standing, while looking straight ahead, while looking to the back, while defacating and while urinating. And most certainly it can arise while sitting.

But it is not a method to follow, ot is rather showing than whatever is arising now can be understood, if there are enough conditions to understand.
And here is the point: By doing a disciplined practice of meditation, as in of the Burmese vipassana traditions or in the Ajahn Chah style or any number of others, the conditions for the arising of insight are cultivated, and this has, of course, a definite carry over into one's activities of daily life. These activities themselves become part of the practice.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19386
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Fri Jul 26, 2013 5:46 am

robertk wrote:thus dhammas like hardness or boredom or pleasant feeling are real in the ultimate sense but concepts like Person or computer are not real.
in the case of say the computer the trillions of kalapas that make up what we call a computer are real, but they arise and pass away, and are immediately replaced countless times in a split second.
the concept, like computer is a shadow of the actual elements.
The Buddhist version of Plato's Cave.

The problem is that "thus dhammas like hardness or boredom or pleasant feeling are real in the ultimate sense but concepts like Person or computer are not real" has no grounding in this way in the suttas, and I rather seriously doubt that it can be tied to the actual Abhidhamma Pitaka. Reflecting that historical level of thought:

    Prof. Dr. Y. Karunadasa, THE DHAMMA THEORY, page 9 http://www.zeh-verlag.de/download/dhammatheory.pdf wrote:In the Pali tradition it is only for the sake of definition and description that each dhamma is postulated as if it were a separate entity; but in reality it is by no means a solitary phenomenon having an existence of its own. . . . If this Abhidhammic view of existence, as seen from its doctrine of dhammas, cannot be interpreted as a radical pluralism, neither can it be interpreted as an out-and-out monism. For what are called dhammas -- the component factors of the universe, both within us and outside us -- are not fractions of an absolute unity but a multiplicity of co-ordinate factors. They are not reducible to, nor do they emerge from, a single reality, the fundamental postulate of monistic metaphysics. If they are to be interpreted as phenomena, this should be done with the proviso that they are phenomena with no corresponding noumena, no hidden underlying ground. For they are not manifestations of some mysterious metaphysical substratum, but processes taking place due to the interplay of a multitude of conditions.


    Nyanaponika quotes a sub-commentary to an Abhidhamma text: "There is no other thing than the quality borne by it." (na ca dhaariyamma-sabhaavaa an~n~o dhammo naama atthi). Abhidhamma Studies, page 40. Which is to say: We simpy cannot say that 'a dharma is... (a predicate follows)', because a dharma, in fact, 'is' no thing, yet [it is] a term denoting (not being) a certain relation or type of relation to thought, consciousness or mind. That is, dharma is not a concept in the accepted terminological sense of the latter, but a purely relational notion. -- Piatigorsky, THE BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY OF THOUGHT, page 181.

    Nyanaponika ABHIDHAMMA STUDIES, page 41 BPS; page 42 Wisdom wrote:By arranging the mental factors in relational groups a subordinate synthetical element has been introduced into the mainly analytical Dhammasangani. By so doing, the danger inherent in purely analytical methods is avoided. This danger consists in erroneously taking for genuine separate entities the “parts” resulting from analysis, instead of restricting their use to sound practical method with the purpose of classifying and dissolving composite events wrongly conceived as unities. Up to the present time it has been a regular occurrence in the history of physics, metaphysics, and psychology that when the “whole” has been successfully dissolved by analysis, the resultant “parts” themselves come in turn to be regarded as little “wholes.”


    Piatigorsky (In his study of the Pitaka Abhidhamma texts, THE BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY OF THOUGHT, p 182) puts it: “From the point of view of consciousness, it can be said that, when consciousness is conscious of one’s mind, thought, or consciousness directed to their objects, then it is ‘being conscious of’ that may be named ‘a state of consciousness’ or a dharma.”

    Piatigorsky (THE BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY OF THOUGHT, p 146) explains: “the meaning of each abhidhammic term [dhamma] consists (or is the sum) of all its positional meanings and of all positional meanings of its connotations.”


robertk wrote:"thus dhammas like hardness or boredom or pleasant feeling are real in the ultimate sense but concepts like Person or computer are not real"
The dhammas of hardness or boredom are no more real or no less real than are the experience of self/person or computer. Dhammas are ways of talking about on experience.

so imho it is fundamental, the start even, (and end) to learn to see the nature of realities and how different concepts and realities are.
The commentary to the UDANA ( translation by Peter Masefield from PTS) (p71,vol1, enlightenment chapter)

QUOTE
"it is ignorance since it causes beings to dart among becomings and so on within samsara.., it is ignorance since it darts among those things which do not actually exist (i.e. men, women] and since it does not dart among those things that do exist [i.e. it cannot understand the khandas, paramattha dhammas]
"Ultimate dhammas," being dependently arisen processes, are empty of any self-ness and have no more actual reality than do any others. As I said, Dhammas are ways of talking about on experience.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19386
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby robertk » Sat Aug 10, 2013 7:46 am

Pariyatti as the Root of the Sāsanā

(From the Atthakathā to Anguttara Nikāya, Ekanipāta, Dutiyapamādādivagga, 42nd sutta)




And in that place [Maṇḍalārāma Monastery in Kallagāma] there arose a discussion among the elders as to whether the root of the Dispensation consisted in practice (paṭipatti) or in study of the Teaching (pariyatti). Those elders who were wearers of rag-robes said, “practice is the root,” and those elders who were teachers of Dhamma said, “study is the root.”

Then some elders said, “we cannot decide between your two opinions merely on the basis of your assertions. Support them by quoting a saying spoken by the Conqueror.”

“It will be no trouble to quote a saying,” replied both sides. Then the elders who were wearers of rag-robes quoted these passages:

“Subhadda, if bhikkhus in this very Dispensation were to live rightly, the world would not be empty of arahants.”

“Your majesty, the Teacher’s Dispensation is rooted in practice and has practice as its pith. While practice is maintained, the Dispensation lasts.”

After listening to these sayings, the elders who were teachers of Dhamma then quoted this saying as proof of their own claim:

“For as long the Suttantas endure, for as long as the Vinaya is taught,
For just that long will there be light, like that after the sun has risen.
But when the Suttantas are no more, and when the Vinaya is forgotten,
There will be darkness in the world, like that after the sun has set.
While the Suttantas are protected, then is practice protected too;
A sage, being grounded in practice, fails not to reach peace from the bonds.”

When this saying was quoted, the elders who were wearers of rag-robes became silent and the speech of the teachers of Dhamma prevailed.

Neither among a hundred bulls, nor among a thousand, will even a single bull ensure the continuance of his line in the absence of a cow. Even so, neither among a hundred bhikkhus intent on insight, nor among a thousand, will even a single bhikkhu penetrate the noble path in the absence of pariyatti.

Marks are engraved in rock to show the location of buried treasure; for as long as those marks endure, the treasure is not reckoned as lost. Even so, for as long as pariyatti endures, the Teacher’s Dispensation is not reckoned to have disappeared.
(Manorathapūraṇī i. 92-3, translation by dhammanando
User avatar
robertk
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby robertk » Sat Aug 10, 2013 7:47 am

why the Dhamma needs to be considered carefully
from sarha abbott
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastu ... age/121643
Here is a quote from the Paramatthadiipanii naama Udaana.t.thakathaa - The
Udaana Commentary; a discussion of the terms 'eva.m' and 'suta,m' used by
Aananda:
>
> "...And in proclaiming this utterance of eva.m, elucidating the paying of
methodical attention in the manner already stated, he elucidates the fact that
such things had been carefully considered by him in his mind; that they had been
well pierced by (right view). For the Dhamma of the texts, when carefully
considered in the mind after the manner of 'In this case it is morality that is
talked of, in this case concentration, in this case insight - to such an extent
are there sequential teachings here and so on, when pierced by thoroughly
investigating - after the manner of 'Such is form; to such extent there is form'
(cp DA 462 or D ii 35) and so forth - things formed and formless; spoken of in
this place and that, by way of (right) view either consisting of reflection
upon, and approval of, Dhamma accompanied by hearsay and the consideration of
reasons, or else reckoned as full understanding of the known, is one bringing
happiness and well-being to oneself and others. In proclaiming this utterance
suta.m, elucidating his link with hearing, he elucidates 'Abundant are the
things heard by me; learned by heart, verbally familiarised' (cp M i 213 etc.).
For texts are (all) subject to application of the ear. In the complete
fulfillment of the meaning and formulation of the Dhamma as a result of its
being well proclaimed, he generates regard (concerning same), by saying that the
one not hearing, with due regard, Dhamma with its meaning and formulation
completely fulfilled becomes one completely excluded from its benefit, that
Dhamma is to be heard with care..."
>
User avatar
robertk
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby robertk » Sat Aug 10, 2013 7:49 am

study in the present moment, study of the khandas


Sammohavinodanii:

QUOTE
2075. "...Anulomika.m khanti.m ('conformable acceptance') and so on are all synonyms for understanding. For that is in conformity since it conforms by showing non-opposition to the five reasons for the aforesaid sphere of work and so on. Likewise, it is in conformity since it conforms with behaviour beneficial to beings, it conforms to the Truth of the Path and it conforms owing to conforming to the highest meaning, nibbaana. And it accepts (khamati), bears, is able to see all these reasons, thus it is acceptance (khanti). 'It sees' is di.t.thi ('view'). 'It chooses' is ruci ('choice'). 'It perceives with the senses' is muti ('sensing'). 'It observes' is pekkho ('observance'). And all these things (dhamma) called the five aggregates on being studied (nijjhaayamaanaa) again and again in accordance with impermanence, suffering and no-self, accept (khamanti) that study (nijjhaana); thus it is dhammanijjhaanakkhanti ('acceptance of study things').
User avatar
robertk
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby Alex123 » Sat Aug 10, 2013 12:27 pm

RobertK,

Of course study is important. One studies first, then practices what one has learned. Obviously one needs to know what to practice.


As for why study monks won:
Someone needed to preserve the teaching for later generations. If all monks were reclusive ascetics who taught very little, if anything at all, then Buddhism would die out if one or few generations. This debate is NOT that only study without practice is required:

While the Suttantas are protected, then is practice protected too;
A sage, being grounded in practice, fails not to reach peace from the bonds.”


The monk's duties were not just for Arhatship, but also to preserve the teachings for later generations.
I was not; I was; I am not; I do not care."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2846
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby robertk » Sat Aug 24, 2013 2:36 pm

this is a transcript that nina made of the discussion in Bangkok today,
it talks about study in theory and directly.

Saturday, Http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastu ... age/132675


part 1.

The Buddha’s teachings are about everything that appears now. Is it you who
sees? Seeing is seeing, it is dhamma. This truth can be directly experienced,
not by me, but by understanding. Is it possible to experience the arising and
falling away of seeing? Now now. Understanding has to begin by pariyatti
(intellectual understanding), then pa.tipatti (development of satipa.t.thaana)
and pativedha (realisation of the truth).

What is real is dhamma. We need the word abhidhamma, abhi, because it is very
subtle. One knows that seeing is not hearing. At the moment of seeing there is
no hearing. It is not enough to know that seeing is not permanent. Seeing cannot
be taken for self, it is conditioned to arise and fall away, before hearing can
arise.

Dhamma is abhidhamma, because it is very deep and subtle. Apart from abhidhamma
there is the word paramattha dhamma. No one can condition the arising of seeing,
it is beyond anyone’s control. Are you now studying abhidhamma, paramattha
dhamma, or just dhamma. They are the same. Whatever is real is dhamma, but sure,
it is subtle: abhidhamma. It takes time to study and really understand. Nobody
can change the characteristic of seeing into thinking, it is paramattha dhamma.
What dhammas are there now?

Answer: cold, hardness, feeling.

T.A.: At the moment of saying cold or hardness, is there any understanding of
their characteristics? What is the understanding of it? The characteristic of
non-self is not ready to appear yet. The experience of the actual seeing is not
now, while talking about it.

Remember, seeing is not self, but understanding is not yet of the degree that it
can experience it as not self. When the Buddha pointed out the reality of
seeing, the listeners paid attention to its characteristic. Nowadays it is
different. There are different degrees of understanding.

What is eyesense, cakkhu pasada?

Answer: A kind of ruupa caused by kamma.

T.A.: Who knows cakkhu pasada? What about pariyatti, pa.tipatti and pativedha?
What is it now? Usually one is forgetful all the time. Are you forgetful? What
are you forgetful of? You forget that there are only dhammas, no one there.
Dhamma is so subtle, it is abhidhamma.

What is seen? We are forgetful again. If one is not forgetful, what is seen?
There is no one there, only visible object. At this very moment, what is seen?
There can be a condition for understanding to develop. There is only one kind of
reality that can be seen.

Study means not just listening to words, but it is understanding the nature of
realities. We think a lot of shape and form, but there is no one there. Really
understanding of what we are talking about is the development from pariyatti to
pa.tipatti. Who knows that that what is seen is just visible object, no people?
When there is no thinking there is no one. Is this abhidhamma? It is very deep
and subtle, letting go of people in this room.

What kind of citta is there at the moment of thinking of a cat? That moment is
not you, it is thinking. Thinking is real, not self.

Sukin: There is nothing wrong with thinking, thinking is not the problem, but
wrong view. What has arisen has already fallen away, we do not try to stop
thinking.

T.A.: It (thinking) is still you, not a dhamma. We are always forgetful. Who can
know what dhamma is without studying?

**********

Nina.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
User avatar
robertk
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby clw_uk » Tue Aug 27, 2013 9:18 pm

robertk wrote:HI coyote,
not sure I understand your question about common parlance?

One important issue I want to bring out is that the idea expressed in the opening post that it is by 'paying attention to our experiences' that wisdom develops, seems not really supported by sutta.



Well you can read the words anicca, dukkha and anatta and understand them intellectually, but its only when you experience them directly do you understand them

And we experience them by "paying attention to our experiences"

So wisdom develops via attention to experience
“ Your mind is likewise blocked. But the right road awaits you still. Cast out your doubts, your fears and your desires, let go of grief and of hope as well, for where these rule , then the mind is their subject." Boetius
User avatar
clw_uk
 
Posts: 3479
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby robertk » Wed Oct 02, 2013 8:31 am

A transcript I found
Questioner: How should one be aware? I know that sati is aware, but how?

Should there be profound consideration or a more superficial consideration of

the three general characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anatta? Or

should there be awareness only of softness and hardness? I have understood

what you taught about the practice, I listened for two or three years. However,

I cannot practise. I learnt about nama and rupa, but what are they? How

should I be aware of them? I feel confused about awareness of dhammas at the

present moment. There must be a special method for this. A special method is

important. Should there be profound awareness or awareness which is more

superficial, awareness for a long time or for a short time? But I take everything

for self.



Sujin: This way of acting leads to confusion. You may try to regulate sati, to

have profound awareness or a more superficial awareness, to have a great deal

of it or only a little, but, as regards the development of panna there is no

special method or technique. The development of panna begins with listening to

the Dhamma, and studying the realities sati can be aware of, so that

understanding can grow. These are conditions for the arising of sati that is

directly aware of the characteristics of nama and rupa as they naturally appear.

Since the nama and rupa that appear are real, panna can come to know their

true nature.



You should not try to regulate sati and try to make it strong or to make it

decrease so that it is weak, or to make it superficial. If one acts in that way one

clings to the concept of self and does not investigate and study the

characteristics of the dhammas that appear. What are the realities that appear?

A person who is not forgetful of realities can be aware of them as they naturally

appear, he is directly aware of their characteristics. He does not try to make sati

focus on an object so that it could consider that object more deeply, over and

over again. Sati arises and falls away, and then there may be again

forgetfulness, or sati may be aware again of another object. Thus, we can see

that satipatthana is anatta. People who understand that all realities, including

satipatthana, are anatta, will not be confused. If someone clings to the concept

of self, he is inclined to regulate and direct sati, but he does not know the right

way. If one’s practice is not natural, it is complicated and creates confusion. If

awareness is natural, if it studies and considers the realities that appear, there will

be understanding, no confusion.
User avatar
robertk
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby robertk » Wed Oct 02, 2013 8:32 am

Questioner: What is the difference between the practice that is natural and

the practice that is unnatural?



Sujin: At this moment you are sitting in a natural way and you may be aware

of realities which appear, such as softness or hardness, presenting themselves

through the bodysense, or visible object appearing through the eyesense. All

these dhammas appear naturally. However, someone’s practice is unnatural if

he believes, while he develops satipatthana, that he should sit cross-legged, in

the lotus position, and that he should concentrate on specific realities. There is

desire when a person selects realities that have not arisen yet as objects of

awareness. He neglects to be aware of realities that appear already, such as

seeing, hearing, visible object, sound, odour, flavour, cold, heat, softness or

hardness. Even if there is only a slight amount of wrong understanding, it

conditions clinging and this hides the truth. In that case panna cannot arise and

know the dhammas appearing at that moment.



People who develop satipatthana should know precisely the difference between

the moment of forgetfulness, when there is no sati, and the moment when

there is sati. Otherwise satipatthana cannot be developed. If one is usually

forgetful one is bound to be forgetful again. Someone may wish to select an

object in order to concentrate on it, but this is not the way to develop

satipatthana. We should have right understanding of the moment when there is

forgetfulness, no sati, that is, when we do not know the characteristics of

realities appearing in daily life, such as seeing or hearing. When there is sati, one

can consider, study and understand the dhammas appearing through the six

doors. When someone selects a particular object in order to focus on it, he will

not know that sati is non-self. When there is sati it can be aware of realities that

naturally appear. When odour appears there can be awareness of odour that

presents itself through the nose. It can be known as only a type of reality

that arises, which appears and then disappears. Or the nama which experiences

odour can be understood as only a type of reality that presents itself. After it

has experienced odour, it falls away. It is not a being, a person or self.
User avatar
robertk
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Oct 02, 2013 8:59 am

robertk wrote: . . . However, someone’s practice is unnatural if he believes, while he develops satipatthana, that he should sit cross-legged, in the lotus position, and that he should concentrate on specific realities. There is desire when a person selects realities that have not arisen yet as objects of awareness. He neglects to be aware of realities that appear already, such as seeing, hearing, visible object, sound, odour, flavour, cold, heat, softness or hardness. Even if there is only a slight amount of wrong understanding, it conditions clinging and this hides the truth. In that case panna cannot arise and know the dhammas appearing at that moment. . . . .
As we have seen graphically illustrated above, Sujin really does not understand either theoretically or practically meditation practice. Sad that she feels this need to disparage meditation practice in this strawman manner.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19386
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby robertk » Wed Oct 02, 2013 1:30 pm

Questioner: I do not know yet the characteristic of satipatthana. When I listen

intently to your lecture, I understand the subject matter, the theory. There is

also awareness while I have theoretical understanding, but I do not consider

nama and rupa at that moment. I am not sure whether that is satipatthana or

not.



Sujin: If we do not know that our life is only nama and rupa, we are bound to

take realities for self. We are full of the concept of self and this can only be

eradicated completely by satipatthana. Sati can be aware and begin to

investigate the characteristics of nama and rupa that appear. In the beginning,

when sati is aware, there cannot yet be clear understanding of the realities that

appear as nama and as rupa. The understanding may be so weak that it is

hardly noticeable. Understanding develops only gradually, it can eliminate

ignorance stage by stage; ignorance cannot be immediately eradicated. It is

just as in the case of the knifehandle someone holds each day and which wears

off only a little at a time.



We read in the Kindred Sayings (III, Middle Fifty, Ch V, § 101, Adze-handle)

that the Buddha, while he was in Savatthi, said to the monks that defilements

can be eradicated by realizing the arising and falling away of the five khandhas.

This cannot be achieved “by not knowing, by not seeing.” If someone would

just wish for the eradication of defilements and he would be neglectful of the

development of understanding, defilements cannot be eradicated. Only by

the development of understanding, defilements can gradually be eliminated.

We read:



Just as if, monks, when a carpenter or carpenter’s apprentice

looks upon his adze-handle

and sees thereon his thumb-mark and his finger-marks

he does not thereby know:

“Thus and thus much of my adze-handle has been worn away today,

thus much yesterday,

thus much at other times.”

But he knows the wearing away of it just by its wearing away.

Even so, monks, the monk who dwells attentive to self-training

has not this knowledge:

“Thus much and thus much of the asavas has been worn away today,

thus much yesterday,

and thus much at other times.”

But he knows the wearing away of them just by their wearing away.



Understanding has to be developed for an endlessly long time. Some people

dislike it that sati and panna develop only very gradually, but there is no other

way. If someone is impatient and tries to combine different ways of practice in

order to hasten the development of panna, he makes his life very complicated.
User avatar
robertk
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Oct 02, 2013 2:13 pm

robertk wrote: . . .
Understanding has to be developed for an endlessly long time.
Not according the Buddha.



Some people dislike it that sati and panna develop only very gradually, but there is no other

way.
Gradually is a relative word, but if one follows the Buddha's teachings, we can see/experience that mindfulness and wisdom are not somethings in some hopelessly distant future.

If someone is impatient and tries to combine different ways of practice in

order to hasten the development of panna, he makes his life very complicated.
The Sujin method described here seems to be hopelessly complicated and contrary to the Buddha's very direct teachings.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19386
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby rohana » Thu Oct 03, 2013 3:39 am

Not having read the entire thread, may be someone can summarize the answers to the following questions from Sujin-approach perspective? I'm guess some of these have already been addressed:

  • How is the Sujin position different from the position taken by the Brahmin Unnabha:

      "Brahman, the holy life is lived under the Blessed One with the aim of abandoning desire."

      "Is there a path, is there a practice, for the abandoning of that desire?"

      "Yes, there is a path, there is a practice, for the abandoning of that desire."

      "What is the path, the practice, for the abandoning of that desire?"

      "Brahman, there is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on persistence... concentration founded on intent... concentration founded on discrimination & the fabrications of exertion. This, Brahman, is the path, this is the practice for the abandoning of that desire."

      "If that's so, Master Ananda, then it's an endless path, and not one with an end, for it's impossible that one could abandon desire by means of desire."
  • When the Buddha talked about a 'gradual training' was he excluding any formal practice?
  • What about formal practice for the purpose of developing jhāna, after going to 'the foot of a tree or an empty dwelling'?
  • Similar to any idea of 'I-will-practice-meditation', how does one tackle any lōbha that can exist as 'I will follow Sujin's advice to gain awakening at some future point' or 'I will read Abhidhamma' - because even when we read a dhamma book, a subtle desire for awakening can be just as present as when we do any formal meditation. (Basically, how does even listening to a dhamma talk or reading a dhamma book not be part of a 'formal practice'?)
My understanding is that the cultivation of insight into aniccā, dukkha and anattā leads to dispassion. Once dispassion sets in, one let's go, making the breakthrough to stream entry(so the formal practice is a means to an end). However, usually the moment of release happens at an unexpected moment, outside of formal practice, since during the formal practice there can be too much clinging to the idea of the goal. So I think there's certainly a point here to be made, but it seems to me like Khun Sujin has taken this basic idea and run it into an extreme.
"Delighting in existence, O monks, are gods and men; they are attached to existence, they revel in existence. When the Dhamma for the cessation of existence is being preached to them, their minds do not leap towards it, do not get pleased with it, do not get settled in it, do not find confidence in it. That is how, monks, some lag behind."
- It. p 43
rohana
 
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:43 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby robertk » Thu Oct 03, 2013 6:28 am

rohana wrote:Not having read the entire thread, may be someone can summarize the answers to the following questions from Sujin-approach perspective? I'm guess some of these have already been addressed:


My understanding is that the cultivation of insight into aniccā, dukkha and anattā leads to dispassion. Once dispassion sets in, one let's go, making the breakthrough to stream entry(so the formal practice is a means to an end). However, usually the moment of release happens at an unexpected moment, outside of formal practice, since during the formal practice there can be too much clinging to the idea of the goal. So I think there's certainly a point here to be made, but it seems to me like Khun Sujin has taken this basic idea and run it into an extreme.


Without right view any "cultivation of insight into anicca dukkha and anatta" is likely to be self delusion.

retro said earlier in this thread:

What is needed to make those factors you mention "Right" however, is a foundation in Right View. If someone does certain exercises without Right View as the foundation, the exercise itself will not be Right, and no amount of effort or sincere dedication to that activity will make it otherwise. If someone does an exercise (whether it be selecting a sandwich, sacrificing goats, or sitting down with closed eyes) in the absence of Right View (and thereby does not understand the Dhammic causality associated with the exercise and are doing it simply out of faith that understanding will arise simply as a consequence of doing the activity) then that exercise could well be described as a ritual, to which one could become attached.

Retro. :)
User avatar
robertk
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Oct 03, 2013 6:42 am

robertk wrote:
rohana wrote:Not having read the entire thread, may be someone can summarize the answers to the following questions from Sujin-approach perspective? I'm guess some of these have already been addressed:


My understanding is that the cultivation of insight into aniccā, dukkha and anattā leads to dispassion. Once dispassion sets in, one let's go, making the breakthrough to stream entry(so the formal practice is a means to an end). However, usually the moment of release happens at an unexpected moment, outside of formal practice, since during the formal practice there can be too much clinging to the idea of the goal. So I think there's certainly a point here to be made, but it seems to me like Khun Sujin has taken this basic idea and run it into an extreme.


Without right view any "cultivation of insight into anicca dukkha and anatta" is likely to be self delusion.
The problem with that is that "Right View," until ariya status attained, is always a work in progress, and it is far more than having an intellectual/conceptual "right view," which if taken alone, is far more likely to lead one down the garden-path of assuming more for one's self than is warranted. Right View is more than just careful study of texts; it is what arises from with putting the Buddha's teaching into practice, actively doing: bhavana/meditation practice, sila, and the rest of the 8 Fold Path.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19386
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Oct 03, 2013 7:01 am

rohana wrote:
  • When the Buddha talked about a 'gradual training' was he excluding any formal practice?
  • What about formal practice for the purpose of developing jhāna, after going to 'the foot of a tree or an empty dwelling'?
  • Similar to any idea of 'I-will-practice-meditation', how does one tackle any lōbha that can exist as 'I will follow Sujin's advice to gain awakening at some future point' or 'I will read Abhidhamma' - because even when we read a dhamma book, a subtle desire for awakening can be just as present as when we do any formal meditation. (Basically, how does even listening to a dhamma talk or reading a dhamma book not be part of a 'formal practice'?)
My understanding is that the cultivation of insight into aniccā, dukkha and anattā leads to dispassion. Once dispassion sets in, one let's go, making the breakthrough to stream entry(so the formal practice is a means to an end). However, usually the moment of release happens at an unexpected moment, outside of formal practice, since during the formal practice there can be too much clinging to the idea of the goal. So I think there's certainly a point here to be made, but it seems to me like Khun Sujin has taken this basic idea and run it into an extreme.
No answer to these questions and statement.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19386
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby Virgo » Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:20 am

tiltbillings wrote:As we have seen graphically illustrated above, Sujin really does not understand either theoretically or practically meditation practice. Sad that she feels this need to disparage meditation practice in this strawman manner.

Why not keep it about dhammas, not about people?

Kevin
Virgo
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Oct 03, 2013 1:07 pm

Virgo wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:As we have seen graphically illustrated above, Sujin really does not understand either theoretically or practically meditation practice. Sad that she feels this need to disparage meditation practice in this strawman manner.

Why not keep it about dhammas, not about people?

Kevin
You tell us why Sujin, in describing her particular methodology, feels she needs to disparage meditation practice, which she clearly does not understand? This is graphically evident in the above linked Q&A with her about metta practice that you gave us above.

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=15952&start=280#p229904

http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/audio/2012-01-kk/2012-01-25-am-b-01.mp3

The disparagement of meditation practice, as we see in robertk's msgs above, comes directly from her, and this disparagement in her teachings seems to have some degree of centrality to her teachings. She is the one being quoted here as the authority on all things Dhamma. My comments about her are in terms of her teachings and the disparagement, her lack of understanding, of meditation practice, which is reflected in what her followers are saying in this thread.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19386
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 5 guests