Eating in a restaurant part 2

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
chownah
Posts: 7597
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by chownah » Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:47 am

The original 'eating in a restaurant' thread started with:
Hi all,

If one's relative got married perhaps all animals are suspected to have been killed on purpose for guests /other relatives. This meat is probably impure and one should not eat them.


Monks, I allow you fish and meat that are quite pure in three respects: if they are not seen, heard or suspected to have been killed on purpose for a monk. But, you should not knowingly make use of meat killed on purpose for you


But how about having meal in the restaurant, is the meat also impure since we are the guests and the the meats are obtained on the purpose for the guests?
Is this meat also impure just like meats obtained in the marriage party as described above?
....and later in the thread it was mentioned:
What would bother me about this kind of situation is feeling like a hypocrite. Personally I wouldn't want to break the first precept or do wrong livelihood ( butchery ), but by ordering or buying meat I'd be expecting somebody else to do these things on my behalf.
......to which I replied:
I think you bring up a good point about feeling like a hypocrite. To some extent the issue is an issue of what feelings arise and how one grasps those feelings. If one feels like a hypocrit this is probaby associated with aversion......one then needs to see that this feeling and this aversion are not self...not yours.....etc.
chownah
The discussion then mentioned the issue of whether a feeling was valid or invalid and whether the buddha taught about feelings being valid or invalid.

I was said to be off topic there so I started this one since the idea that feeling of remorse or of being a hypocrite are just feelings and so should be treated as feelings and that it is taught that feelings are not self, not mine, etc.

I started this topic to discuss these things (if there is interest) and similar related issues....so.....to make a statement that might raise some interest I'll say that if you feel remorse it is best to view that feeling as not mine, not self, etc.
chownah

Garrib
Posts: 487
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 8:35 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by Garrib » Tue Nov 07, 2017 5:50 am

I agree - feelings are just feelings. Here is a poem "I" wrote about it:

feeling is just feeling
it is fleeting and it flows
when it's present, one should know
'feeling comes, feeling goes'
let the mind not make a fuss
for this much the mind can trust:
wherever feeling does arise
there it dies, say the wise.

:namaste:

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by binocular » Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:58 am

chownah wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:47 am
I'll say that if you feel remorse it is best to view that feeling as not mine, not self, etc.
"I feel" , "I think", "It is my conviction that", "I believe that" etc. can be used as metacommunicative expressions.

People sometimes use metacommunicative expressions without giving much thought to them. E.g. someone might say, "I feel that this is the right pair of shoes to buy", when they actually mean, 'After having thoroughly examined my options for buying shoes, I've decided, by an analytical process of elimination, based on a cost-value comparison, that this particular pair of shoes is the most feasible for me to buy.'

In short, one shouldn't mechanically take metacommunicative expressions at face value.


Secondly, by your reasoning above, anything that one feels or thinks could be dismissed as "not me, not my self, not mine." But I feel (yes) that doing so would be to jump off the raft while still in the middle of the stream.

This is a very important topic (it ties in with the criticism of the bare attention practice), but is a bit above my paygrade, so I'll probably mostly just watch, with interest.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 4619
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by Sam Vara » Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:23 am

chownah wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:47 am

The discussion then mentioned the issue of whether a feeling was valid or invalid and whether the buddha taught about feelings being valid or invalid.

I was said to be off topic there so I started this one since the idea that feeling of remorse or of being a hypocrite are just feelings and so should be treated as feelings and that it is taught that feelings are not self, not mine, etc.

I started this topic to discuss these things (if there is interest) and similar related issues....so.....to make a statement that might raise some interest I'll say that if you feel remorse it is best to view that feeling as not mine, not self, etc.
chownah
Good topic, Chownah. My initial thoughts are that you are right about viewing feelings as not self and not mine, but only in the restricted sense of the Anatta-Lakkhana Sutta - that they are impermanent and relatively unbiddable. They are "mine" in terms of personal attribution in space and over time. Nobody else feels them, and if they are experienced at all, then they were experienced by the same being that can later reflect upon them. The fact that they are dependently arisen makes them no less real than anything else we experience, and therefore they are potentially as valid as anything else.

The issue of validity is interesting in itself. Validity is contextual, in that it refers to the relationship of an entity to some other entity. The point here is what we do when we experience those feelings; what intentions we use when they arise. We are capable of wise reflection on feelings, or we can just lurch into our habitual mode of responding when they appear. If a feeling of remorse leads to us change our thoughts, words, or actions for the better, then to that extent it has a "validity" which is positive, but it only ever was a feeling. Conversely, if the feeling overwhelms us and leads to a darker state, then it has a "validity", despite being impermanent and dependently arisen.

chownah
Posts: 7597
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by chownah » Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:41 am

binocular wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:58 am
chownah wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:47 am
I'll say that if you feel remorse it is best to view that feeling as not mine, not self, etc.
"I feel" , "I think", "It is my conviction that", "I believe that" etc. can be used as metacommunicative expressions.

People sometimes use metacommunicative expressions without giving much thought to them. E.g. someone might say, "I feel that this is the right pair of shoes to buy", when they actually mean, 'After having thoroughly examined my options for buying shoes, I've decided, by an analytical process of elimination, based on a cost-value comparison, that this particular pair of shoes is the most feasible for me to buy.'

In short, one shouldn't mechanically take metacommunicative expressions at face value.
You are correct that sometimes people use the word "feel" when they are not meaning to refer to feelings....but on the other hand there are sometimes/often/usually bodily feelings which accompany moods and analytic thought..... I think that anything which we perceive as attractive or repulsive, as pleasant or unpleasant has a feeling associated with it. For instance, to think of oneself as being hypocritical is for most people an unpleasant thought so it has a feeling component. So, for me, in the cases where there might be some ambiguity as to whether the use of the word "feel" does or does not involve a feeling component I look for whether what is being expressed is attractive or repulsive etc. I think that there is almost always a feeling component in most if not all of what we say....I guess I could be wrong.
binocular wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:58 am
Secondly, by your reasoning above, anything that one feels or thinks could be dismissed as "not me, not my self, not mine." But I feel (yes) that doing so would be to jump off the raft while still in the middle of the stream.

This is a very important topic (it ties in with the criticism of the bare attention practice), but is a bit above my paygrade, so I'll probably mostly just watch, with interest.
Yeah. I should have been more specific about the context I meant by 'not self' and 'not mine'....sam vera addressed this in his post too. I guess that people who haven't bought into anatta might take what I say as a way to justify whatever they do and to not even consider the morality issues etc. I think spiny norman was talking about this in the other thread too but I didn't understand what he was saying.

I do know that one can take feelings as not self an not mine and still not dismiss the moral issues etc. involved with them...I find that a rigorous pursuit of not self actually helps in being sensitive to the moral issues etc....but maybe this is not typical....I don't know.
chownah
chownah

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by binocular » Thu Nov 09, 2017 4:40 pm

chownah wrote:
Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:41 am
You are correct that sometimes people use the word "feel" when they are not meaning to refer to feelings....but on the other hand there are sometimes/often/usually bodily feelings which accompany moods and analytic thought.....
And the operative question is whether feelings cause thoughts, or whether thoughts cause feelings, or there's some other option, and what each answer implies.
I think that anything which we perceive as attractive or repulsive, as pleasant or unpleasant has a feeling associated with it.

Sure.
For instance, to think of oneself as being hypocritical is for most people an unpleasant thought so it has a feeling component.
Not for the considerable portion of the population that grew up in a dysfunctional family and haven't yet overcome their dysfunctional legacy. -- But that's just as an aside.
I think that there is almost always a feeling component in most if not all of what we say....I guess I could be wrong.
I agree, there appears to be some bodily sensation accompanying, preceding, or following every thought.
I guess that people who haven't bought into anatta might take what I say as a way to justify whatever they do and to not even consider the morality issues etc.
On the other hand, a possible implication of a part of the not-self teaching, when applied indiscriminately, is that not owning things (including feelings and thoughts) can be tied with anomie, and this is experienced as a hopeless predicament to be in ("If nothing is really me or mine, then why bother with anything, how to find the motivation to do anything?").
I do know that one can take feelings as not self an not mine and still not dismiss the moral issues etc. involved with them...I find that a rigorous pursuit of not self actually helps in being sensitive to the moral issues etc....but maybe this is not typical....I don't know.
Objectivity is not rarely held in high regard, and I find that people usually believe themselves to be objective most of the time. But what people usually seem to consider objectivity, is actually still just their own ever so subjective opinion, which they merely present in a manner suggesting objectivity.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

chownah
Posts: 7597
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by chownah » Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:06 pm

I did a quick look for things which support the idea that feelings should be considered to be 'not mine' etc.....here is a list....there are others:
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
I think that the idea that feelings are best userstood as being 'not mine' etc. is a very important concept.....of course any teaching can be wrongly grasped.

No talk about any sort of 'valid' vs. 'invalid' test for which feelings should be taken as 'not mine' etc. What it says in these suttas is "any feeling whatsoever".....seems pretty all inclusive to me.
chownah

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3375
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by Mr Man » Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:30 pm

chownah wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:06 pm
I think that the idea that feelings are best userstood as being 'not mine' etc. is a very important concept.....of course any teaching can be wrongly grasped.
Hi chowah
So what should be understood as being "mine"?

Dinsdale
Posts: 6135
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by Dinsdale » Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:49 pm

chownah wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:47 am
I was said to be off topic there so I started this one since the idea that feeling of remorse or of being a hypocrite are just feelings and so should be treated as feelings and that it is taught that feelings are not self, not mine, etc.
That could be used to justify all sorts of harmful behaviour.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

chownah
Posts: 7597
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by chownah » Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:22 pm

Mr Man wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:30 pm
chownah wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:06 pm
I think that the idea that feelings are best userstood as being 'not mine' etc. is a very important concept.....of course any teaching can be wrongly grasped.
Hi chowah
So what should be understood as being "mine"?
To try to answer just this question would be inadequate to reveal its real meaning.....your asking of this question seems to mean that you don't have an understanding of the anatta doctrine....so I suggest if you want this question answered do some study and do what you can to penetrate the anatta teachings.....I guess.....up to you.....
chownah

chownah
Posts: 7597
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by chownah » Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:23 pm

Spiny Norman wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:49 pm
chownah wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:47 am
I was said to be off topic there so I started this one since the idea that feeling of remorse or of being a hypocrite are just feelings and so should be treated as feelings and that it is taught that feelings are not self, not mine, etc.
That could be used to justify all sorts of harmful behaviour.
As I said a few posts up, any teaching can be wrongly grasped.
chownah

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3375
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by Mr Man » Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:37 pm

chownah wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:22 pm
Mr Man wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:30 pm
chownah wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:06 pm
I think that the idea that feelings are best userstood as being 'not mine' etc. is a very important concept.....of course any teaching can be wrongly grasped.
Hi chowah
So what should be understood as being "mine"?
To try to answer just this question would be inadequate to reveal its real meaning.....your asking of this question seems to mean that you don't have an understanding of the anatta doctrine....so I suggest if you want this question answered do some study and do what you can to penetrate the anatta teachings.....I guess.....up to you.....
chownah
Hi chownah

My (hidden) point is that to emphasize one particular khandha as being not self is imbalanced. The teaching of not self needs to be taken as a whole (relating to all of the 5 khandha).

The question was somewhat rhetorical although I was interested also to see how you would reply.

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by binocular » Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:18 am

chownah wrote:
Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:41 am
I do know that one can take feelings as not self an not mine and still not dismiss the moral issues etc. involved with them...I find that a rigorous pursuit of not self actually helps in being sensitive to the moral issues etc....but maybe this is not typical....I don't know.
Would you care to sketch out how one can take feelings (and thoughts etc.) as not self an not mine and still not dismiss the moral issues etc. involved with them?

Thanks.
Last edited by binocular on Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by binocular » Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:19 am

Spiny Norman wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:49 pm
chownah wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:47 am
I was said to be off topic there so I started this one since the idea that feeling of remorse or of being a hypocrite are just feelings and so should be treated as feelings and that it is taught that feelings are not self, not mine, etc.
That could be used to justify all sorts of harmful behaviour.
And on the other hand, lead to hopelessness and confusion.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

chownah
Posts: 7597
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by chownah » Sat Nov 11, 2017 11:55 am

binocular wrote:
Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:18 am
chownah wrote:
Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:41 am
I do know that one can take feelings as not self an not mine and still not dismiss the moral issues etc. involved with them...I find that a rigorous pursuit of not self actually helps in being sensitive to the moral issues etc....but maybe this is not typical....I don't know.
Would you care to sketch out how one can take feelings (and thoughts etc.) as not self an not mine and still not dismiss the moral issues etc. involved with them?

Thanks.
There is a very brief sketch called "The Four Noble Truths".
There is an expanded sketch called "The Eightfold Noble Path".
There is a detailed sketch called the "Tipitaka".
chownah

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Frank23, NuanceOfSuchness, Sobhana and 110 guests