Bhante Vimalaramsi

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6490
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Dhammanando »

dhammarelax wrote:I say that what follows the fruition cannot be mistaken comparing it with the path attainment that is seeing the links of dependent origination, this links present themselves as blinks of light that can be easily mistaken for something else or for something without importance.
The links of dependent origination appear as blinks of light? Do you mean literally blinks of light, or do you mean that they resemble blinks of light in certain respects?
Rūpehi bhikkhave arūpā santatarā.
Arūpehi nirodho santataro ti.


“Bhikkhus, the formless is more peaceful than the form realms.
Cessation is more peaceful than the formless realms.”
(Santatarasutta, Iti 73)
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by tiltbillings »

The question of the Buddha making mistakes has been moved here: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=22342
>> 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
dhammarelax
Posts: 1087
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 7:59 pm

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by dhammarelax »

Dhammanando wrote:
dhammarelax wrote:I say that what follows the fruition cannot be mistaken comparing it with the path attainment that is seeing the links of dependent origination, this links present themselves as blinks of light that can be easily mistaken for something else or for something without importance.
The links of dependent origination appear as blinks of light? Do you mean literally blinks of light, or do you mean that they resemble blinks of light in certain respects?
In this case (after cessation) which is lets call it their purest form they are seen as blinks of light which I think means that literally appear as such but it doesn't mean that they are only blinks of light, they are still the links and when one of them is released you can see a strong effect, they happen fast and they happen once or more times, they are small blinks not big flashings. I had some instances in daily life that while observing the partial (not the full series) arising of dependent origination I perceived them as blinks of light without the experience of cessation coming before, in this case however the latest links eg clinging do not appear as light but for clinging as thought.

This is not the way they appear when observed in reverse order (without cessation) which is by far the practice that takes most of the practice time (four noble truths), in reverse order they appear as described eg feeling is painful pleasant or neutral.

with metta
dhammarelax
Even if the flesh & blood in my body dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, I will use all my human firmness, human persistence and human striving. There will be no relaxing my persistence until I am the first of my generation to attain full awakening in this lifetime. ed. AN 2.5
Paganpants
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 5:51 am

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Paganpants »

Different Meditation practices work for different people at different times, that's why the Buddha taught so many different methods. The criticism arises from attachment to views, as the Buddha taught, this is the strongest attachment. The Buddha even gave contradictory teachings because the teaching is designed to break attachments specific to those audiences being taught, but the core of his teachings are always the same. When I succeed in meditation, there is nothing to say, and nowhere to go. Right view is no view. All is relative, arising and passing away dependent on causes and conditions, attachment is identification with these momentary holograms. Let go of views, watch the dhammas do what they do. Right view is an attitude of calm detachment. This is the first of the noble path for a reason. So I don't understand how so much debate exists in the sanga. Right now as you read this comment, what views arise? These views arise resulting from attachment to contrary views you like. If you HOLD any views, you will suffer. Views are relative, impermanent, and impersonal like all other conditioned things. Views arise and pass away like the sound of a bell or the sounds in your space right now, but you don't try to HOLD those sounds. This is meditation in all postures, mental and physical. In short, practice the path, forget the views, they are all wrong. Peace
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by SarathW »

Technically right view is not a no view.
Right view is a view but it is called right because it benefits to the goal.
:)
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 6222
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by confusedlayman »

SarathW wrote: Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:52 am Technically right view is not a no view.
Right view is a view but it is called right because it benefits to the goal.
:)
good posting
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
whynotme
Posts: 743
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:52 am

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by whynotme »

confusedlayman wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 3:59 pm
SarathW wrote: Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:52 am Technically right view is not a no view.
Right view is a view but it is called right because it benefits to the goal.
:)
good posting
Why do you dig this, necromancer? Did you want to learn reviving the dead?
Please stop following me
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9058
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by SDC »

whynotme wrote: Sat Jul 04, 2020 3:22 am
confusedlayman wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 3:59 pm
SarathW wrote: Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:52 am Technically right view is not a no view.
Right view is a view but it is called right because it benefits to the goal.
:)
good posting
Why do you dig this, necromancer? Did you want to learn reviving the dead?
What are you talking about?
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 6222
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by confusedlayman »

SDC wrote: Sat Jul 04, 2020 3:56 am
whynotme wrote: Sat Jul 04, 2020 3:22 am
confusedlayman wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 3:59 pm

good posting
Why do you dig this, necromancer? Did you want to learn reviving the dead?
What are you talking about?
neither I understand nor others
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Ontheway »

Ven. Vimalaramsi's announcement of "Suttavada" and deemed it as "American Tradition".



So, my question...is this really allowable in term of Vinaya, for a monk to declare as such? Does it not fall under "Sanghabheda"? :shock:

What if another monk declares "Dhamma-Vinayavada", or "Ekayanavada" or "Dhammavada" or even "Buddhayana"...... Is this okay with Vinaya rules?

:?
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17169
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by DNS »

Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:50 pm So, my question...is this really allowable in term of Vinaya, for a monk to declare as such? Does it not fall under "Sanghabheda"? :shock:
If I'm not mistaken, a different interpretation of the teachings is not considered schismatic. It only becomes a schism when a monk calls for a new ordination lineage, completely separate from the Theravada line and not recognizing the lineage he came from as being valid monks.

What's sort of strange (although not impossible) is that Vimalaramsi ordained in Myanmar in that tradition, which is very Classical Theravada, honors and reveres Abhidhamma, Commentaries, yet he rejects Abhidhamma and Commentaries. Although, students don't always remain in full agreement with their teachers or preceptors.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Ceisiwr »

Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:50 pm Ven. Vimalaramsi's announcement of "Suttavada" and deemed it as "American Tradition".



So, my question...is this really allowable in term of Vinaya, for a monk to declare as such? Does it not fall under "Sanghabheda"? :shock:

What if another monk declares "Dhamma-Vinayavada", or "Ekayanavada" or "Dhammavada" or even "Buddhayana"...... Is this okay with Vinaya rules?

:?
This is just a modern version of what happened with the Sarvāstivāda-Vaibhāṣika and the Sautrāntika. The Sautrāntika never formally split away. Sujato has given interesting arguments in "Sects and Sectarianism" that there have never been any actual formal schisms in the sangha, partly because monks and nuns knew of the unwholesome kamma that would cause. There are doctrinal and Vinaya differences, yes, but no one formally split from another, according to him.

http://www.ahandfulofleaves.org/documen ... Sujato.pdf
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Ceisiwr »

DNS wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 7:06 pm
Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:50 pm So, my question...is this really allowable in term of Vinaya, for a monk to declare as such? Does it not fall under "Sanghabheda"? :shock:
If I'm not mistaken, a different interpretation of the teachings is not considered schismatic. It only becomes a schism when a monk calls for a new ordination lineage, completely separate from the Theravada line and not recognizing the lineage he came from as being valid monks.

What's sort of strange (although not impossible) is that Vimalaramsi ordained in Myanmar in that tradition, which is very Classical Theravada, honors and reveres Abhidhamma, Commentaries, yet he rejects Abhidhamma and Commentaries. Although, students don't always remain in full agreement with their teachers or preceptors.
I've watched a few of his dhamma talks and the like. From what I can tell he spent years working within the framework of the Visuddhimagga and Vipassanā type meditation and felt he was getting nowhere fast, so he went back to the suttas and saw a discrepancy in his view between what was in them and what he was being taught. Once he did that he felt his practice really took off, and he says he sees the same in others who have switched from Abhidhamma to Suttavāda.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by Ontheway »

DNS wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 7:06 pm
Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:50 pm So, my question...is this really allowable in term of Vinaya, for a monk to declare as such? Does it not fall under "Sanghabheda"? :shock:
If I'm not mistaken, a different interpretation of the teachings is not considered schismatic. It only becomes a schism when a monk calls for a new ordination lineage, completely separate from the Theravada line and not recognizing the lineage he came from as being valid monks.

What's sort of strange (although not impossible) is that Vimalaramsi ordained in Myanmar in that tradition, which is very Classical Theravada, honors and reveres Abhidhamma, Commentaries, yet he rejects Abhidhamma and Commentaries. Although, students don't always remain in full agreement with their teachers or preceptors.
Thank you for the info, DNS.

But I watched the video, he literally said "I'm not a Theravada monk." (00:57)

Coming from a Theravada lineage, then in the video he said he is not a Theravada monk. Aren't that just fit to the point underlined above?
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
BrokenBones
Posts: 1770
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Bhante Vimalaramsi

Post by BrokenBones »

Ontheway wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 8:46 am
DNS wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 7:06 pm
Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:50 pm So, my question...is this really allowable in term of Vinaya, for a monk to declare as such? Does it not fall under "Sanghabheda"? :shock:
If I'm not mistaken, a different interpretation of the teachings is not considered schismatic. It only becomes a schism when a monk calls for a new ordination lineage, completely separate from the Theravada line and not recognizing the lineage he came from as being valid monks.

What's sort of strange (although not impossible) is that Vimalaramsi ordained in Myanmar in that tradition, which is very Classical Theravada, honors and reveres Abhidhamma, Commentaries, yet he rejects Abhidhamma and Commentaries. Although, students don't always remain in full agreement with their teachers or preceptors.
Thank you for the info, DNS.

But I watched the video, he literally said "I'm not a Theravada monk." (00:57)

Coming from a Theravada lineage, then in the video he said he is not a Theravada monk. Aren't that just fit to the point underlined above?
Theravada is not THE sangha. It's a deviation from Theravada... not the sangha as a whole.

If it was a split as you seem to claim, then Theravada itself would fall into the same category of 'split'.
Post Reply