Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
ToVincent
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by ToVincent » Thu Sep 29, 2016 12:40 pm

mikenz66 wrote:Perhaps you'd like to explain your interpretation of what that passage is telling us, rather than making vague assertions about how wrong everyone else is.
It is absolutely of no use on this forum.

It is just like red herring or silence is the motto of the "influent" people on this forum.

Why is that?

and
Why bother to give our point of view, if it is to be buttered up with the same dim commonplaces, to the point where it is not edible anymore? Why?

So my assertions are not that "vague".
My assertions are that (instead of going for "great lay teachers", like in the last post), why not going for the original, in its possibly most genuine form. Which mean that we would stick to the doctrine as it is, for instance, in the doctrinal part of the Saṃyutta Nikāya/Saṃyuktāgama texts. Making it simpler, might making it clearer, I suppose.

I will give an example of "silence", as mentioned above; now that you have served us with banality.
This example has to do with another subject on this forum; but it shows how some assertions are not that "vague", as you put it. It shows that when we get into the nitty gritty, silence is a form of avoidance; for whatever reason?.
Plus, the subject at stake in this other thread, also answers a tiny bit of what we are concerned in this thread.
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 43#p397843

There was an attempt in this post to circumscribe the dhatu to some specific sphere, and to relate the other dhatus to it. An attempt to show the global functioning of the system.
As we can see, this was not what the commentaries did. As usual, they mixed up everything into a muddled soup; for whatever reason they had.
Saying that "the sensuality element (kāmadhātu) is sensual thought, all sense-sphere phenomena in general, and in particular everything unwholesome" is another commonplace applesauce from the commentators, that brings nothing to the understanding.

What was your point of view on that:
Silence!

And I am afraid to say that, if we had had an answer to the question from you, it would have been some commonplace as usual.

So, instead of getting into wispy details, get into the specifics. Instead of the generals, get into the particulars.

As far as answering you quoted remark, I hope my direct tone has not bothered you.
As far as specifically answering the problem of this passage you have been quoted, it would be worthless to answer it straightly, before understanding the specifics that surrounds it. And they are many.
The point again is not to answer a question by generalities, but by specifics; one at a time. So the whole comes to understanding.
No generalities - just specifics. And where to get them?: in the screened out doctrinal parts of the texts.

murphythecat8 wrote:......
Instead of going for people, whose intentions are not (or will never be) that clear; why don't you just stick to what Buddha said, trying to sieve the parallels.
I am pretty sure you would be better of with that.
And before you "practice", get the theory right. You don't need monks anymore. You have the internet to provide you with the early texts. Then join the true Sangha, and practice.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

murphythecat8
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:07 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by murphythecat8 » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:31 pm

ToVincent wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:
murphythecat8 wrote:......
Instead of going for people, whose intentions are not (or will never be) that clear; why don't you just stick to what Buddha said, trying to sieve the parallels.
I am pretty sure you would be better of with that.
And before you "practice", get the theory right. You don't need monks anymore. You have the internet to provide you with the early texts. Then join the true Sangha, and practice.
what text should I read?
To me, ayya khema, ajahn brahm which are very advanced in the path or any stream enterers practitioner can be trusted 100% and have understood for themselves the buddha teaching. Sayalay Dipankara is another nun which seem to be once returner or non returner that I really recommend.

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16452
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by mikenz66 » Thu Sep 29, 2016 7:03 pm

ToVincent wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:Perhaps you'd like to explain your interpretation of what that passage is telling us, rather than making vague assertions about how wrong everyone else is.
It is absolutely of no use on this forum.
...
So why are you here? This is a forum for sharing understanding and interpretation.

:coffee:
Mike

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings » Thu Sep 29, 2016 8:12 pm

ToVincent wrote:And before you "practice", get the theory right. You don't need monks anymore. You have the internet to provide you with the early texts. Then join the true Sangha, and practice.
    • I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying at Savatthi in the Eastern Monastery, the palace of Migara's mother, together with many well-known elder disciples — with Ven. Sariputta, Ven. Maha Moggallana, Ven. Maha Kassapa, Ven. Maha Kaccana, Ven. Maha Kotthita, Ven. Maha Kappina, Ven. Maha Cunda, Ven. Revata, Ven. Ananda, and other well-known elder disciples. On that occasion the elder monks were teaching & instructing. Some elder monks were teaching & instructing ten monks, some were teaching & instructing twenty monks, some were teaching & instructing thirty monks, some were teaching & instructing forty monks. The new monks, being taught & instructed by the elder monks, were discerning grand, successive distinctions.
      -- MN 118


      As for the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, he should approach an individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment... and ask him, 'How should the mind be steadied? How should it be made to settle down? How should it be unified? How should it be concentrated? How should fabrications be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen with insight?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'The mind should be steadied in this way. The mind should be made to settle down in this way. The mind should be unified in this way. The mind should be concentrated in this way. Fabrications should be regarded in this way. Fabrications should be investigated in this way. Fabrications should be seen in this way with insight.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment.
      -- AN 04.094
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

ToVincent
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by ToVincent » Tue Oct 04, 2016 3:34 pm

tiltbillings wrote:...
I suppose these nice bolded extracts have to do with sayings in the time of Buddha.
Can they be applied now?
I recall Buddha saying that his teaching would be corrupted; and that people would rather go to listen to sweet tongues, than to his own sayings.
I recall Vajirañāṇo Bhikkhu (King Mongkut); I recall Mun & Sao; and what has it become, but posh retreats and khatha aakhom.
murphythecat8 wrote:.....
I repeat: Saṃyutta_Nikāya/Saṃyuktāgama have the doctrine. Know what is common to both. That should suffice. You should betray none of these two schools.

As a summary, everything one experiences is suffering (impermanent good or bad) - the suffering of "others"; the suffering of what is external to you.
"what arises is only suffering arising, what ceases is only suffering ceasing." (SN 12.15)
So your knowledge will be independent of the "other". (SN 12.15)
For once you have recognized that the arising comes from the "Other", then it is your turn to handle what follows; independently of the "other".
There is a "doer" and the "other" did Buddha say (AN 6.38 & SN 24.6). See Piya Tan comparative study (at page 31) http://dharmafarer.org/wordpress/wp-con ... 8-piya.pdf
What is not yours is also your matter, in a way; in your willful rejection of it (just from disgust of realizing and experiencing that this is "not yours"; if that could be one of the reason of your abandonment).
This is the door to freedom.

As long as you listen to sweet tongues, and live in the world of senses (saḷāyatana), evil will not face you with its utmost suffering. Evil will not feed you with its extreme suffering; like an ill willed, hurtful drug addict, drown in his senses; that is not willing to realize and understand that there is nothing good in his drug.

Therefore rely on giving up the attraction to senses & matter (forms) - be firm (thāma) in that, dread the slightest fault - and stand still (ṭithi) - compassionate, (but not supportive,) of the suffering of the "other".
These are the answers to ignorance, and to evil, and to suffering.
This is the gist of the Teaching in the commonalities of the Saṃyutta_Nikāya/Saṃyuktāgama.

There are lots of material on the sutta's parallels on the net. Use with caution.
mikenz66 wrote:...
"what am I doing on this forum"?
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings » Tue Oct 04, 2016 4:44 pm

ToVincent wrote: . . .
That's better.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

ToVincent
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by ToVincent » Tue Oct 04, 2016 7:41 pm

tiltbillings wrote: That's better.
Just the tip of the iceberg. Not for the coward.
murphythecat8 wrote:......
Some sources on the Āgamas in english:
https://justpaste.it/yzrn
.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings » Tue Oct 04, 2016 10:26 pm

ToVincent wrote: . . .
Thank you for sharing your opinions; however, I find nothing in them, or their delivery, that is compelling.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

ToVincent
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by ToVincent » Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:21 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
ToVincent wrote: . . .
"That's better"
...
"Thank you for sharing your opinions; however, I find nothing in them, or their delivery, that is compelling."
That overall condescending tone of yours, won't mask the hard facts.

Buddha did talk about a "doer" and an "other".
Sorry that it goes against your thirty plus years of good and loyal services to some erroneous belief and practice. But that is just fact.

As far as having you understand the nature of the possibilities of this "doer"; it will require that you first abide to these facts. And that is not a given.

I shall add "condescension" to the list of the red herring salsa's ingredients .
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings » Wed Oct 05, 2016 2:38 pm

ToVincent wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
ToVincent wrote: . . .
"That's better"
...
"Thank you for sharing your opinions; however, I find nothing in them, or their delivery, that is compelling."
That overall condescending tone of yours, won't mask the hard facts.

Buddha did talk about a "doer" and an "other".
Sorry that it goes against your thirty plus years of good and loyal services to some erroneous belief and practice. But that is just fact.

As far as having you understand the nature of the possibilities of this "doer"; it will require that you first abide to these facts. And that is not a given.

I shall add "condescension" to the list of the red herring salsa's ingredients .
Thank you for sharing your opinion on these matters.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

ToVincent
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by ToVincent » Wed Oct 05, 2016 3:54 pm

tiltbillings wrote:Thank you for sharing your opinion on these matters.
Opinion = personal belief or judgment that is not founded on proof or certainty.

Fact = statement or assertion of verified information about something.

That Buddha did talk about a "doer" and an "other" is a fact (AN 6.38 & SA 459).
Note: The only difference between AN and SA is about the dhatus. The commonality between both versions is the two dhatus, viz. the dhātu of firmness & the dhātu of standing still (thama-dhatu & ṭitthi-dhatu). No other dhatu involved, if we stick to what is common to both versions.
There is a "doer" and an "other" in both versions. And that is a fact.

Now that you read or not, into SN 12.17, that "you are responsible of your suffering" is an opinion; although it seems to be backed up by a hard fact.
SN 12.17 wrote: Kassapa, if one thinks, ‘The one who acts is the same as the one who experiences the result,’ then one asserts with reference to one existing from the beginning: ‘Suffering is created by oneself.’ When one asserts thus, this amounts to eternalism.
But, Kassapa, if one thinks, ‘The one who acts is one, the one who experiences the result is another,’ then one asserts with reference to one stricken by feeling: ‘Suffering is created by another.’ When one asserts thus, this amounts to annihilationism.
The suttas are laden with examples of "neither from this, nor apart from this".

So there are facts, and there are opinions.
There are opinions based on facts; and there are opinions based on opinions.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by tiltbillings » Wed Oct 05, 2016 4:25 pm

ToVincent wrote: . . .
Thank you for sharing your opinions about facts and such.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16452
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by mikenz66 » Wed Oct 05, 2016 6:29 pm

ToVincent wrote: Buddha did talk about a "doer" and an "other"..
I am unable to work out what the relevance of this statment is to the topic, even after reading Piya Tan's excellent article.

:coffee:
Mike

ToVincent
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by ToVincent » Wed Oct 05, 2016 6:39 pm

mikenz66 wrote:
ToVincent wrote: Buddha did talk about a "doer" and an "other"..
I am unable to work out what the relevance of this statment is to the topic
Well, "observing feeling" is observing what the "other" does - and "thought substitution" is doing what the "doer" might willfully do.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

ToVincent
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Thought substitution vs. Observing feeling

Post by ToVincent » Wed Oct 05, 2016 6:39 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
ToVincent wrote: . . .
Thank you for sharing your opinions about facts and such.
And you know Tilt, this "opinion about fact and such," is going to take you even further.
There might be myriad of truths (opinions) in this world, (the world of Mara); but there is only one truth in Buddhism; and it is that Ignorance is looking for truth - and that's about it.

So this "neither from this, nor apart from this", that is so common in the suttas, like below:
The Disciple in Higher Training:
“Bhikkhus, a bhikkhu who is in higher training, whose mind has not yet reached the goal, and who is still aspiring to the supreme security from bondage, directly knows earth as earth. Having directly known earth as earth, he should not conceive himself as earth, he should not conceive himself in earth, he should not conceive himself apart from earth, he should not conceive earth to be ‘mine,’ he should not delight in earth. Why is that? Because he must fully understand it, I say."
MN1
—“What do you think, friend Yamaka, do you regard the Tathagata as in form?”
—“No, friend.”
—“Do you regard the Tathagata as apart from form?”
—“No, friend.”
—“Do you regard the Tathagata as in feeling? As apart from feeling? As in perception? As apart from perception? As in volitional formations? As apart from volitional formations? As in consciousness? As apart from consciousness?”
—“No, friend.”
SN 22.85

And its parallel:

[Sāriputta]: "How is it, Yamaka, is bodily form the Tathāgata?"
[Yamaka] replied: "No, venerable Sāriputta."
[Sāriputta asked again]: "Is feeling … perception … formations … consciousness the Tathāgata?"
[Yamaka] replied: "No, venerable Sāriputta."
[Sāriputta] asked again: "How is it, Yamaka, is the Tathāgata distinct from bodily form? Is the Tathāgata distinct from feeling … perception … formations … consciousness?"
[Yamaka] replied: "No, venerable Sāriputta."
...
[Sāriputta said]: "In this way, Yamaka, the Tathāgata as existing truly here and now cannot be gotten at anywhere, cannot be designated anywhere.
SA 104
This "neither from this, nor apart from this", that is so common in the suttas, was I saying; is taking you to the next level.
Once you have acknowledged from AN 6.38 & SA 459, that Buddha clearly stated that there is a "doer" and an "other"; and that you have grasped where you belong (if you are not too stuborn, or buttered up with ignorance) - then you read the following sutta, that has much meaning.

It has been said in SN 35.95 (SA 312)
When, Maluṅkyaputta, regarding things seen, heard, sensed, and cognized by you, in the seen there will be merely the seen, in the heard there will be merely the heard, in the sensed there will be merely the sensed, in the cognized there will be merely the cognized, then, Maluṅkyaputta, you will not be ‘by that.’ When, Maluṅkyaputta, you are not ‘by that,’ then you will not be ‘therein. ’ When, Maluṅkyaputta, you are not ‘therein,’ then you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two.
In other words, having abandonned willfully the sphere of senses (and forms), "you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two". You will have transcended the "that" and the "therein".

Transcendence means to go beyond something.
Like when you've been hit by someone, and that you have the right to ask for justice. You can also go beyond justice; you can transcend justice, by forgetting justice and the beating.

Transcendence.
As in neither the khandhas, nor the senses. As in beyond "that" and "therein". As in abandonning both.

This is just an opinion based on hard facts, from the suttas with strict parallels. On something that the Buddha might have properly been saying.
Last edited by ToVincent on Wed Oct 05, 2016 6:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AgarikaJ, Baidu [Spider], Pseudobabble, rcteutsch and 105 guests