tiltbillings wrote:In listening to the linked talk in this msg http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 80#p229904 Sujin is her own worst enemy, in that she encourages her followers in the sectarian approach of dismissing Dhamma practices that do not conform to her point of view.phil wrote: I would like to hear more acknowledgment that what she says might be wrong on some points. I think she is less likely to give the impression that she thinks she is infallible than some of her students do. Not thinking of Robert there, actually...
When she is at her best she will make it very clear why the practices represent wrong view. There are many discussions where visitors wander into the web if you will and really there is in many cases a pretty tough revelation of just where their understanding has been let astray by their gurus. But I will admit at other times and this is often the case there's just a simple "no understanding" laid down as soon as the word meditation is mentioned which is really a little bit lazy, there should always be a clear development of the explanation of where specific practices go wrong but perhaps because it is such a familiar topic there is a kind of shorthand at work, regular members are familiar with the exclamation.
If however as you say any dismissing of others' practices is a kind of unwholesome sectarianism then she can certainly be accused of it. But at her best the topic of others' practices don't come up and there is just a lot of helpful unforced guidance towards understanding reality. I would say discussing of others practices only constitutes around 10% of the total discussion time, roughly speaking, unless there is a visitor who is a proponent of some practice that will of course therefore they will be in the hot seat and there will be a lot of discussion about it and yes the visitor will certainly feel grilled... But as Mike said day almost surely know what they're getting into so shouldn't be surprised. And yes perhaps their beliefs and or understanding will be rejected in a pretty forthright way which could be called undiplomatic or inconsiderate or even intellectually lazy at times or whatever. She's in her mid 80s after all and discusses for hours on end and so she can't always be perfectly engaging I don't think.
In passing Mike thanks for your comments on the ancient commentaries I agree absolutely is it really a bit ridiculous how readily they are dismissed. Certainly they can and should be questioned but the easy dismissal is a bit absurd and indicates something really lazy about modern-day approach to Dhamma and also a failure to appreciate that it is really much much deeper and subtler then we naturally like to and want to think/believe in order to get quick comfort and solace and encouragement out of it...my opinion.
I wrote this quickly sorry for any typos caused by Siri.