Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explained) -

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6445
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by Mkoll » Mon Jan 23, 2017 10:23 pm

Twilight wrote:I understand that. What I don't understand is how your kammic boom theory is supposed to work. All people who achieved stream entry in the suttas (and there are a lot of them) did it in this way. And there was even a sadistic serial killer who did it in the same way. There is of course no mention of any other method for doing it. So only explanation you have provided so far for your views is the kammic boom theory witch has 2 problems: 1) why is such a thing as a kammic boom never mentioned in the suttas. And 2) Why did a such a thing as a kammic booming never happened to Ananda.
I don't understand what you mean by kammic boom or kammic boom theory. They are your phrases, not mine, yet you want me to explain them.

:shrug:
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 684
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by Twilight » Mon Jan 23, 2017 10:25 pm

You are the one who said people achieved stream entry in the suttas because of listening to higher teachings because the presence of the Buddha produced a sudden rippen of kamma in them. (this is why I call it the "kammic booming theory")

You have admitted yourself these is no single case of people doing it in another way in the suttas:
There's no such sutta I know of.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p410538

This leaves us with:
1)Why is there no such thing mentioned in the suttas ?
2)Why did Ananda never suffered a kammic booming despite spending probably more time with Buddha than anybody else ?
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6445
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by Mkoll » Mon Jan 23, 2017 10:42 pm

Twilight wrote:You are the one who said people achieved stream entry in the suttas because of listening to higher teachings because the presence of the Buddha produced a sudden rippen of kamma in them. (this is why I call it the "kammic booming theory")

You have admitted yourself these is no single case of people doing it in another way in the suttas:
There's no such sutta I know of.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p410538

This leaves us with:
1)Why is there no such thing mentioned in the suttas ?
2)Why did Ananda never suffered a kammic booming ?
Frankly, I'd rather not get into another debate with you. You're free to believe whatever you want.

:hello:
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 684
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by Twilight » Mon Jan 23, 2017 10:47 pm

I will never understand how a people can believe in whatever they want without caring at least the slightest bit about logic. Simply saying "I believe in this and it is my constitutional right to believe in this so I don't need to provide any logical explanation". Every time I get refuted, I change my views. People in the suttas did the same thing. Every time they were refuted, they changed their views with little problems. It is called intellectual honesty. And it is not for nothing that Buddha said honesty is the most important quality of them all.

Buddha and other ascetics of other sects were not afraid of debates. They constantly debated and when somebody was refuted, he changed his views. Even stubborn warriors changed their views eventually after been refuted. Rarely do we see people running away from debates.
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20149
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by retrofuturist » Mon Jan 23, 2017 10:59 pm

Greetings Twilight,
Twilight wrote:Every time I get refuted, I change my views. People in the suttas did the same thing. Every time they were refuted, they changed their views with little problems. It is called intellectual honesty. And it is not for nothing that Buddha said honesty is the most important quality of them all.
This much is true - it is a good attribute to have, and it is an imperative attribute on the spiritual path.

However, when debating it is also very important to listen to, and engage on equal terms with those whom we 'debate'.

When we speak, we would like what we actually say to be heard, and not misrepresented by strawmen. Therefore, when critiquing positions, it is equally imperative to listen to what is said, and not insist that one's own representation of the other's perspective is accurate.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 684
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by Twilight » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:06 pm

Therefore, when critiquing positions, it is equally imperative to listen to what is said, and not insist that one's own representation of the other's perspective is accurate.
Sorry but I am not doing that because his position was well expressed in previous pages of this topic. And when I tried debating, he just runs away. It is the second time this has happened: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 60#p410909 Is this a proper way to engage in debates ? Is this fair to your debate partner ?

It is normal to get a little annoyed when you answer so many questions to somebody and as soon as you ask the first counter-question, the person shamelessly runs away without answering your question. Simply saying "bye bye + :hello: emoticon ". What is the purpose of a forum if not to debate ?
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

User avatar
BlackBird
Posts: 1928
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by BlackBird » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:21 pm

Twilight wrote: What is the purpose of a forum if not to debate ?
I would contend it is just as much about:
- meeting kalyana mittas
- having a feeling of solidarity and community
- encouragement from others
- learning
- bettering one's own understanding and rounding off one's own sharp edges

as it is about debating.

Perhaps also those who debate you come to find that you are debating because you have assumed a position which you believe in totality and without reservation and your purpose is not to test the metal of your position and perhaps improve or change but rather to encourage others that they are wrong and you are right and that if they were sensible they should assume your view also.

It doesn't encourage people to engage with you. There is little benefit to others in doing so, except perhaps for the sake of posterity.

Regards
Jack
Last edited by BlackBird on Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6445
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by Mkoll » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:23 pm

Twilight wrote:
Therefore, when critiquing positions, it is equally imperative to listen to what is said, and not insist that one's own representation of the other's perspective is accurate.
Sorry but I am not doing that because his position was well expressed in previous pages of this topic. And when I tried debating, he just runs away. It is the second time this has happened: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 60#p410909 Is this a proper way to engage in debates ? Is this fair to your debate partner ?

It is normal to get a little annoyed when you answer so many questions to somebody and as soon as you ask the first counter-question, the person shamelessly runs away without answering your question. Simply saying "bye bye + :hello: emoticon ". What is the purpose of a forum if not to debate ?
Sorry, debate was the wrong word. You don't debate, you fight.
Twilight wrote:But when asked a question yourself, such as the green question, you had to retreat from the battlefield in shame. Joining the ranks of those who had fallen before you at the first counter-question :candle:
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 684
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by Twilight » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:25 pm

I have asked 2 questions:
This leaves us with:
1)Why is there no such thing mentioned in the suttas ?
2)2)Why did Ananda never suffered a kammic booming despite spending probably more time with the Buddha than anybody else ?
And just as before, you ran away.

If answering these questions feels like fighting to you, then feel free to wear protection equipment when debating with people on a forum. When I was asked questions I did my best to answer them and I never for a second felt like the mongols are coming.
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6445
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by Mkoll » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:32 pm

:popcorn:
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 684
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by Twilight » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:41 pm

In ancient India, Greece and Tibet, the art of argumentation was an extremely important (and prestigious) activity. To win a formal debate was to demonstrate the truth of one’s school of thought or spiritual faith. The Buddha was a potent and charismatic debater who threatened the intellectual complacency of many Brahmins. The famous consequence of losing a debate in India was to lose one’s students, who would all convert to the winning school of thought. In Buddhist Tibet, monastic universities still put heavy emphasis on training students for debate, which is an essential part of the monastery curriculum.
:anjali:
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20149
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by retrofuturist » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:51 pm

Greetings Twilight,

No one is obliged to debate, and no one is your "debate partner" simply because you take it upon yourself to assign them that position.

You are more than welcome to express your perspective on Dhamma matters, within the bounds of the Terms of Service, but no one has any obligation to engage with or respond to your expressions, nor is rail-roading or hounding them a useful means of encouraging them to engage in dialogue.

I encourage you to reflect on others you know who have engaged in such forceful practices in the past, and the fault you may have found with their behaviour in such instances.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 684
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by Twilight » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:59 pm

No one is obliged to debate, and no one is your "debate partner" simply because you take it upon yourself to assign them that position.
If I answer multiple questions from a person for a couple of pages (page 4 to 9 of this topic) I think it is fair to consider him my debate partner.
I encourage you to reflect on others you know who have engaged in such forceful practices in the past, and the fault you may have found with their behaviour in such instances.
I agree. No one is forced to answer any counter-questions just because another has answered numerous questions to you. There is no stipulation in the TOS about something like that, only that it is very annoying. You answer and answer and answer for pages and when you ask a single counter question, you just get "bye bye :hello: " That's just "not how we do it in Scotland". You can't just run away like that.

So sorry for my further pressures about answering the question. I understand nobody is required to answer counter-questions, but please understand my annoyance.
Perhaps also those who debate you come to find that you are debating because you have assumed a position which you believe in totality and without reservation and your purpose is not to test the metal of your position and perhaps improve or change but rather to encourage others that they are wrong and you are right and that if they were sensible they should assume your view also.
If you want to debate a point I have made that you feel is wrong, then feel free to do so. I am not running anywhere and am not afraid of any questions regarding the suttas. It is not good to misinterpret the suttas, especially in an age where people are doing anything other than people in the suttas did to attain right view. (fist step of the path, the forerunner of them all: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html)
If you can answer me how all people in the suttas did that through contemplating higher teachings, be it a "kamma ripen because of the presence of the Buddha" or "sudden enlightenment" explanation, then feel free to express it. I guarantee there is 100% intellectual honesty on my side and am always open to debate. All I am asking is to discuss the points, not the person making the points.

If you are arguing for something like "everybody is right and the suttas could very well be speaking about the coming of Jesus if that is what I want to believe and we both are right" - then sorry I am not into that kind of relativism. And neither was Buddha. He was a person always open to engaging in debates. He believed in right view and wrong view. And he also said it is not good to misinterpret the teachings. :anjali:
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

User avatar
BlackBird
Posts: 1928
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by BlackBird » Tue Jan 24, 2017 2:24 am

Twilight wrote: If you want to debate a point I have made that you feel is wrong, then feel free to do so.
I can see you went to some difficulty to ignore the meaning of what I was saying. If you took my post to mean I have an interest in contradicting your long treatises then you're sadly mistaken. I will engage you on the points you've made in response to me though:
I am not running anywhere and am not afraid of any questions regarding the suttas.
Are you talking to me or you? Because I didn't accuse you of running away or being afraid...
It is not good to misinterpret the suttas, especially in an age where people are doing anything other than people in the suttas did to attain right view.
I don't disagree with you, but what makes you think you're right and they're wrong?
If you can answer me how all people in the suttas did that through contemplating higher teachings, be it a "kamma ripen because of the presence of the Buddha" or "sudden enlightenment" explanation, then feel free to express it.
Total non-sequitur
If you are arguing for something like "everybody is right and the suttas could very well be speaking about the coming of Jesus if that is what I want to believe and we both are right" - then sorry I am not into that kind of relativism.
Setting up a big straw man there.
He was a person always open to engaging in debates. He believed in right view and wrong view. And he also said it is not good to misinterpret the teachings. :anjali:
He was the SammasamBuddha, he was not operating from a position of being mired in avijja like you and I, big difference. So appealing to his authority in order to justify your endless argumentation appears to me to be quite fallacious.

Be well
Jack
"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 684
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: Mahashi [and other Satipatthana/Samadhi development methods] vs sutta [and contemplating higher teachings] (explaine

Post by Twilight » Tue Jan 24, 2017 2:53 am

You say this, implying you are not a relativist:
BlackBird wrote:Setting up a big straw man there.
And then you say this:
I don't disagree with you, but what makes you think you're right and they're wrong?
My answer: Logic. Evidence.
He was the SammasamBuddha, he was not operating from a position of being mired in avijja like you and I, big difference. So appealing to his authority in order to justify your endless argumentation appears to me to be quite fallacious.
So you are holding a half relativist view that arahants can be right about something but other people can never be right or wrong about anything. I inform you that right view is not something reserved for arahants in Buddha teachings. And neither is it anywhere else in the world except US where postmodernism for some reason got to be a mainstream view. Nowhere else in the world is this view popular so do not be surprised to meet people on this international forum who are not into this kind of view.

And a counter-question: Is this forum main template green and blue, orange and purple or yellow and black ?
I can see you went to some difficulty to ignore the meaning of what I was saying. If you took my post to mean I have an interest in contradicting your long treatises then you're sadly mistaken. I will engage you on the points you've made in response to me though:
I am glad we agree on that. Cause it is quite clear from the evidence that it is so. :anjali:
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], piotr and 104 guests