What homage is owed, and to whom?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by binocular »

SDC wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 2:51 pm/.../
I read your post three times, with pauses inbetween. I'm not sure what you're saying.
Everytime I revise my understanding about your position when you say things like the above, I make a move to support that direction. Or at least, what I assume to be the direction you are referring to. At which point, you list all your roadblocks and we go right back to the beginning.
What roadblocks?
I have some arguments against the pursuit of the Path, but those are not the same as roadblocks.
I'm not obtuse to your difficulties, but your attempts to settle them before making a pursuit of freedom is akin to making a deal with Self to "be quiet" while you seek the ultimate psychological balance.
Usually, this is how it is done: an analysis of the pros and the cons, clarifying one's motivation, knowing one's Why. All these need to be resolved, settled, set before one can hope to do pretty much anything, whether it's change a bad habit or start a new career. This is the standard pattern when one is given advice on how to accomplish something.
Your seeking ultimate freedom on grounds where the stakes are not as high as you assume.
I don't understand this.
That is probably the primary reason why you slap a palm to your forehead when I matter-of-factly support something totally alien after saying that you want nibbana. You assume I'm encouraging you to stop fighting and calm down.

No, I assume you're about to slap me in the face, or the virtual equivalent thereof.
I'm not. I'm encouraging you to fight on different grounds, but since you are so sure you know stakes where you stand, you can't ever imagine why I would disregard it.
On what grounds??
The only reason we could be indebted to the world is because we are indebted to ourselves.
I don't understand this.
How can we be indebted to ourselves?
The inclination to owe is nothing but the urge to to exist.
So an acknowledging of the debt is an acknowledging of dependence, which is an acknowledging of one's existence. And it's the existence that is burdensome. It's existence that is burdensome, and via that, indebtedness is burdensome.
But you don't pay your way out by continuing to pay in. Homage and respect is orderly behavior as you essentially back out of the ultimate loan. You don't give it to lessen your debt. It's counterfeit. It's what you offer the bank so it doesn't realize you stopped paying.
You mean like this:
So finally we have what I think was taught by the Buddha and probably by nobody else—the fourth stage, which is arana. Here we think: there are those two doors marked IN and OUT; it makes not the slightest difference to me which I use to go in and out by; but if it is noticed that I don’t seem to think it is a matter of any importance, those who do think it is a matter of importance will make trouble for me; but this would be a disturbance, and would hinder my work; so, then, other things being equal, I shall go in by the door marked IN, and out by the door marked OUT, and I shall pass unnoticed and untroubled. And so I think that the Buddha has so arranged matters in the Vinaya that the Sangha is a highly respectable body of men who are losing or have lost all interest in respectability. It is at the beginning that the respectability of the Sangha is irksome, and some who are still A.Y.M. do not join it on this account (which is a good thing), and prefer to breathe fire and slaughter at the Establishment as Hindu ascetics and other odd things.

https://pathpress.wordpress.com/2010/09/05/in-out/

And I am an angry (not so) young woman, or some other odd thing, breathing fire and slaughter at the Establishment ...

Nanavira says it's a good thing that the A.Y.M. don't join the Sangha. But what are they supposed to do?
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 6308
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by SDC »

binocular wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 4:13 pm Usually, this is how it is done: an analysis of the pros and the cons, clarifying one's motivation, knowing one's Why. All these need to be resolved, settled, set before one can hope to do pretty much anything, whether it's change a bad habit or start a new career. This is the standard pattern when one is given advice on how to accomplish something.
Yes, that is "usually how it is done". Moving against the grain is unusual. Embedded mechanisms will do nothing but return you to square one over and over. According to the Buddha, the path does not start with things "resolved, settled and set". Your analytic approach is fierce and potent but if you don't reposition it to serve a different purpose, it will always end up maintaining that which is most familiar.
binocular wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 4:13 pm
Your seeking ultimate freedom on grounds where the stakes are not as high as you assume.
I don't understand this.
See above and see below. If you pursue understanding on ordinary grounds, on "your" terms, you are bound to the benefits of that ground only. Not that you won't accomplish anything, but the highest, loftiest point will be in terms of "me" and "mine". In other words, it is fleeting and bound to the existence.
binocular wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 4:13 pm No, I assume you're about to slap me in the face, or the virtual equivalent thereof.
And despite your best efforts in not holding back, I have yet to blame you for not trusting me.
binocular wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 4:13 pm
I'm not. I'm encouraging you to fight on different grounds, but since you are so sure you know stakes where you stand, you can't ever imagine why I would disregard it.
On what grounds??
The only reason we could be indebted to the world is because we are indebted to ourselves.
I don't understand this.
How can we be indebted to ourselves?
There has to be the premise that your entire experience serves the understanding that there is Self, including even the extreme case where there is an attempt to reject it. That is why it is possible to blissfully deny Self while completely remaining within the confines and stability of that understanding. Akin to a child who is disappointed with their parents and curses and rejects their family name while comfortably living under their roof and protection, i.e. the only reason they possess the capability to take such a symbolic stand is because it does not subject them to the discomfort if an actual stand.
binocular wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 4:13 pm So an acknowledging of the debt is an acknowledging of dependence, which is an acknowledging of one's existence. And it's the existence that is burdensome. It's existence that is burdensome, and via that, indebtedness is burdensome.
But you don't pay your way out by continuing to pay in. Homage and respect is orderly behavior as you essentially back out of the ultimate loan. You don't give it to lessen your debt. It's counterfeit. It's what you offer the bank so it doesn't realize you stopped paying.
You mean like this:
So finally we have what I think was taught by the Buddha and probably by nobody else—the fourth stage, which is arana. Here we think: there are those two doors marked IN and OUT; it makes not the slightest difference to me which I use to go in and out by; but if it is noticed that I don’t seem to think it is a matter of any importance, those who do think it is a matter of importance will make trouble for me; but this would be a disturbance, and would hinder my work; so, then, other things being equal, I shall go in by the door marked IN, and out by the door marked OUT, and I shall pass unnoticed and untroubled. And so I think that the Buddha has so arranged matters in the Vinaya that the Sangha is a highly respectable body of men who are losing or have lost all interest in respectability. It is at the beginning that the respectability of the Sangha is irksome, and some who are still A.Y.M. do not join it on this account (which is a good thing), and prefer to breathe fire and slaughter at the Establishment as Hindu ascetics and other odd things.

https://pathpress.wordpress.com/2010/09/05/in-out/

And I am an angry (not so) young woman, or some other odd thing, breathing fire and slaughter at the Establishment ...

Nanavira says it's a good thing that the A.Y.M. don't join the Sangha. But what are they supposed to do?
Nanavira is saying that the Sangha are respectful in their disinterest in respectability, and that the angry young men (and women) mistake it for that legitimate interest and respect for the Establishment. He is saying that to truly rebel, is to stop disrupting the Establishment, ordain and modify that understanding. Mimic the respectability so as not to be interfered with. My example was not in that societal sense, but in a personal sense. If you're going to manipulate your own wrong understanding, you have to interfere with it indirectly. If you go at it directly, you play by its rules, by Self's rules; you inherently grant the idea validity and from that position Self cannot be interfered with. By going indirect, you undermine the things Self stands upon and it will fall by losing its footing. Why? Because that footing was wrongly understood in the first place. "All determinations are impermanent" i.e. since the things that determine are all impermanent the determined thing cannot be Self, "All things are not-Self".
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by binocular »

SDC wrote: Tue Jul 02, 2019 3:10 pmIf you're going to manipulate your own wrong understanding, you have to interfere with it indirectly. If you go at it directly, you play by its rules, by Self's rules; you inherently grant the idea validity and from that position Self cannot be interfered with. By going indirect, you undermine the things Self stands upon and it will fall by losing its footing. Why? Because that footing was wrongly understood in the first place. "All determinations are impermanent" i.e. since the things that determine are all impermanent the determined thing cannot be Self, "All things are not-Self".
So we're talking about states that are essentially by-products.

I have always maintained that the destruction of the fetters is something that comes about indirectly, as a result of some other practices; and that direct, willing attempts to do something about them are ineffective.
For example, one does not overcome or destroy doubts and uncertainty about the Dhamma by willing oneself to have faith in it. One also cannot overcome sensuality with asceticism. I think that ill will cannot be overcome by somehow forcing oneself to repress it or by practicing goodwill for the sake of overcoming ill will (people who do that end up characteristically passive aggressive!). Etc.

So in this sense, I'm not concerned about overcoming self-identification views directly. I assume that self-identification views will cease as a by-product of some other activities.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 6308
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by SDC »

binocular wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:01 pm
SDC wrote: Tue Jul 02, 2019 3:10 pmIf you're going to manipulate your own wrong understanding, you have to interfere with it indirectly. If you go at it directly, you play by its rules, by Self's rules; you inherently grant the idea validity and from that position Self cannot be interfered with. By going indirect, you undermine the things Self stands upon and it will fall by losing its footing. Why? Because that footing was wrongly understood in the first place. "All determinations are impermanent" i.e. since the things that determine are all impermanent the determined thing cannot be Self, "All things are not-Self".
So we're talking about states that are essentially by-products.

I have always maintained that the destruction of the fetters is something that comes about indirectly, as a result of some other practices; and that direct, willing attempts to do something about them are ineffective.
For example, one does not overcome or destroy doubts and uncertainty about the Dhamma by willing oneself to have faith in it. One also cannot overcome sensuality with asceticism. I think that ill will cannot be overcome by somehow forcing oneself to repress it or by practicing goodwill for the sake of overcoming ill will (people who do that end up characteristically passive aggressive!). Etc.

So in this sense, I'm not concerned about overcoming self-identification views directly. I assume that self-identification views will cease as a by-product of some other activities.
It is fascinating that you can have such a profound point of view and then shift focus so quickly to residual concerns about paying homage, and owing gratitude and respect to those who would terrorize you with "information", . Everything you said is entirely within you personal situation. You're trying to hold both directs at one time.
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by binocular »

SDC wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 6:41 pmIt is fascinating that you can have such a profound point of view and then shift focus so quickly to residual concerns about paying homage, and owing gratitude and respect to those who would terrorize you with "information", . Everything you said is entirely within you personal situation.

You're trying to hold both directs at one time.
Yes, and such is necessary, in order to be able to make a decision. The propositions one is choosing from need to be clearly present in one's mind, one needs to be able to fluently switch between them before one can opt for one. Or, as the case may be, follow the dialectic method and come to an entirely new understanding.

I again refer to William James' heuristic in his Will to Believe. Please see the section under I.

In order to make a decision between propositions, one has to bring one's understanding of each proposition to the point where the situation becomes decidable. This usually requires less or more thinking, discussing, practicing, analyzing, experience.

People usually seem to function in more dogmatic terms or didactic terms, make their decisions on less support, more quickly, so they are generally averse to people who "take their time and space".
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by binocular »

SDC wrote: Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:41 pmI think another question that is being constantly addressed, yet never actually asked is, what homage is owed to the public aspects, once the access has been gained? What do the young people in SE Asia owe their elders for giving them access? What does SE Asia owe to Northern India? What do monks owe their abbots? What do westerners owe the east? What did the arahats owe the Buddha? What is required to be given back in order to develop understanding?
People interested in the Dhamma owe eachother admirable friendship.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 5113
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by cappuccino »

I admire those who take responsibility for themselves

:shrug:
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by binocular »

cappuccino wrote: Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:26 pmI admire those who take responsibility for themselves
Cain didn't want to be his brother's keeper, either.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 5113
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by cappuccino »

binocular wrote:
cappuccino wrote: Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:26 pmI admire those who take responsibility for themselves
Cain didn't want to be his brother's keeper, either.
you misunderstand
User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 7294
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by Sam Vara »

binocular wrote: Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:27 pm
cappuccino wrote: Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:26 pmI admire those who take responsibility for themselves
Cain didn't want to be his brother's keeper, either.
There are two problems with bringing the Biblical story in here. Taking responsibility for oneself does not mean that one does not in some respects take it for other people, and far less does it mean that one treats other people with disdain and cruelty. And in Buddhist terms, Cain didn't take responsibility for himself. He incurred fearful kammic consequences.
JohnK
Posts: 1158
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 11:06 pm
Location: Tetons, Wyoming, USA

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by JohnK »

Perhaps relevant (to latest issue in thread), from Sedaka Sutta:
"When watching after yourself, you watch after others. When watching after others, you watch after yourself."
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Those who grasp at perceptions & views wander the internet creating friction. [based on Sn4:9,v.847]
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by binocular »

cappuccino wrote: Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:51 pm
binocular wrote:
cappuccino wrote: Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:26 pmI admire those who take responsibility for themselves
Cain didn't want to be his brother's keeper, either.
you misunderstand
I'm pointing out that the dichotomy "Either one takes responsibility for oneself, or one expects others to take responsibility for one" is a false one.

We are interdependent by default, whether we like it or not. Denying this doesn't make one into a person who is "responsible for themselves".

- - -
Sam Vara wrote: Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:57 pmThere are two problems with bringing the Biblical story in here.
I responded in kind with Cappuccino's content and style.
Taking responsibility for oneself does not mean that one does not in some respects take it for other people, and far less does it mean that one treats other people with disdain and cruelty.
There is a tendency in Western culture to think precisely that.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 7294
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by Sam Vara »

binocular wrote: Fri Jul 19, 2019 5:32 pm I responded in kind with Cappuccino's content and style.
Blimey - is that wise?! :tongue:
Taking responsibility for oneself does not mean that one does not in some respects take it for other people, and far less does it mean that one treats other people with disdain and cruelty.
There is a tendency in Western culture to think precisely that.
True, but it's probably a universal human characteristic. Within Theravada, we have the stereotype of the committed monk who cares little for anything beyond his own liberation (which I've never met in reality). I think the best of all cultures combine self-reliance with a positive regard and care for others. It's good to see and to reflect upon examples of that.
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by binocular »

JohnK wrote: Wed Jul 17, 2019 3:38 pm Perhaps relevant (to latest issue in thread), from Sedaka Sutta:
"When watching after yourself, you watch after others. When watching after others, you watch after yourself."
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Sadly, a concept that seems foreign to, say, so many participants in (motorized) traffic. Even though traffic is, literally, a matter of life and death.

When I was growing up, we had classes where we were taught about traffic. And the teacher would often say how in traffic, we have to conduct ourselves in a such a way that we endanger neither ourselves nor others.

Some nice work safety posters:

Image

Image

Image
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
justindesilva
Posts: 1328
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: What homage is owed, and to whom?

Post by justindesilva »

As a follower of budda darma I have learnt that first and foremost it is necessary to pay homage to Buddha , secondly to damma , and thirdly to sanga. Tge reason is these are the three institutions that releases us from suffering developing us up to nirvana.
The next stage of homage is to parents giving priority to the mother , with obvious facts. It is the parents who enlightens us with examples in following the damma.
A jataka story portraits how lord budda in a prvious birth swam across the sea to save the mother in a storm.
It is with homage that lord budda teavelled to the tautisa heavens to meet his mother and preach the damma.
Present day buddhism also enlighten us in the manner of paying homage to those who deserve homage with clasped hands on the head or the chest while standing or kneeling.
Looking after the virtuous monks and or parents at their old ages are also ways of paying homage.
Last but not least a special mention is made especially to pay homage to teachers who dedicate us to make ourselves knowledgeable academically and in damma.
In fact homage has to be made to all who help us developing pragna ( wisdom).
Post Reply