Eating in a restaurant part 2

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
chownah
Posts: 6580
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: 341
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: 4046
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.

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 2438
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm

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: 6580
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: 4046
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.

chownah
Posts: 6580
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: 3044
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"?

User avatar
Spiny Norman
Posts: 5158
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Spam, wonderful spam

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by Spiny Norman » 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.
"My religion is very simple - my religion is ice-cream."
Dairy Lama

chownah
Posts: 6580
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: 6580
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: 3044
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: 4046
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.

binocular
Posts: 4046
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.

chownah
Posts: 6580
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

User avatar
Spiny Norman
Posts: 5158
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Spam, wonderful spam

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by Spiny Norman » Sat Nov 11, 2017 4:00 pm

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?
If I felt guilt or remorse about some aspect of my behaviour, I would try to look at it honestly, reflect on the harm I had caused, and how to avoid doing harm in the future. Developing insight into not-self feels to me like a separate ( subsequent? ) activity, thinking for example of sila, samadhi and panna as a progression.
"My religion is very simple - my religion is ice-cream."
Dairy Lama

binocular
Posts: 4046
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by binocular » Sat Nov 11, 2017 6:53 pm

chownah wrote:
Sat Nov 11, 2017 11:55 am
binocular wrote:
Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:18 am
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?
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".
Well, that's what you _think_ and what you _feel_ is right. In other words, the Path is still a fabrication, a construct. It's not possible to escape one's thoughts and feelings just like that, assuming that the Path -- even in one's current understanding, and especially in one's current understanding! -- is already beyond the aggregates.
Unless one is already enlightened, one's current understanding of the Path is still condtioned, still firmly within the aggregates. Some (or all?) of which you're eager to dismiss as notself.

You're assuming the same certainty about the Path, as, for example, Christian preachers who are sure they know the truth about God. They talk about how faulty man is and how he cannot know anything for himself; but they are nevertheless sure that they are not such men when it comes to knowing the truth about God. As if knowledge of worldly things is hard to obtain and full of perils, but knowledge of the Ultimate Truth is self-evident and isn't subject to all the defects and problems as obtaining knowledge of worldly things.

When one takes the teachings in the suttas or in the Buddhist traditions as one's guideline, one is still taking one's feelings and thoughts at it seriously (e.g. "I feel/think that what this sutta is telling me is worth doing") and identifying with them.
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.
I suspect you're indeed taking some thoughts and feelings as notself, but still identify with some others.
E.g. one can dismiss feeling like a hypocrite as merely a feeling that is notself -- but perform this dismissal on the grounds of feeling (!) that it would be justified or wise to do so.

chownah
Posts: 6580
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by chownah » Sun Nov 12, 2017 2:21 am

I have not talked about dismissing feelings. Does the buddha talk about dismissing feelings?
I don't know what all is meant by 'dismissing feelings' but it sounds alot like aversion to me....I guess....don't know for sure....I could be wrong....
chownah

User avatar
L.N.
Posts: 467
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by L.N. » Sun Nov 12, 2017 4:10 am

Mr Man wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:30 pm
So what should be understood as being "mine"?
Conventionally, we have to take personal responsibility. Ultimately, anything which arises in this experience is not "mine." These two understandings are not mutually exclusive.
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.
Yes, it could be. However, when understood correctly, this orientation will lead to skillful behavior, not harmful behavior. I hope we do not lose sight of the two ways in which Right View is to be understood, as set forth in the material in the following link: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... an.html#s1
"And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: There is right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions [of becoming]; there is right view that is noble, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.

"And what is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are contemplatives & brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions.

"And what is the right view that is noble, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor for awakening, the path factor of right view in one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is noble, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.
I find, on the other hand, that those who identify moral conduct very strictly with "me," "mine," "myself" often exhibit harmful behavior toward self and others, perhaps by virtue of difficulty recognizing other valid perspectives.
Sire patitthitā Buddhā
Dhammo ca tava locane
Sangho patitthitō tuiham
uresabba gunākaro


愿众佛坐在我的头顶, 佛法在我的眼中, 僧伽,功德的根源, 端坐在我的肩上。

User avatar
L.N.
Posts: 467
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Eating in a restaurant part 2

Post by L.N. » Sun Nov 12, 2017 4:35 am

chownah wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:47 am
... if you feel remorse it is best to view that feeling as not mine, not self, etc.
Not sure this is always best. It may depend on the individual. For some, it may be important to feel the sting of remorse, recognize the consequences of one's wrong actions, and move in a more positive direction. For some (not all) the effort to view remorse as "not mine" might be a method of avoidance.

For others, recognizing these feelings as not me, not mine etc. can be a training tool, or even a deep understanding, which aligns with a general orientation toward following the 8-fold path. It depends.
Sire patitthitā Buddhā
Dhammo ca tava locane
Sangho patitthitō tuiham
uresabba gunākaro


愿众佛坐在我的头顶, 佛法在我的眼中, 僧伽,功德的根源, 端坐在我的肩上。

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Garrib, paul, Ruud, SarathW and 64 guests